Epphata to F.T., or, The defence of the Right Reuerend Father in God, the Lord Bishop of Elie, Lord High-Almoner and Priuie Counsellour to the Kings Most Excellent Maiestie concerning his answer to Cardinall Bellarmines apologie, against the slaunderous cauills of a namelesse adioyner, entitling his booke in euery page of it, A discouerie of many fowle absurdities, falsities, lyes, &c. : wherein these things cheifely are discussed, (besides many other incident), 1. The popes false primacie, clayming by Peter, 2. Invocation of saints, with worship of creatures, and faith in them, 3. The supremacie of kings both in temporall and ecclesiasticall matters and causes, ouer all states and persons, &c. within their realmes and dominions / by Dr. Collins ... Collins, Samuel, 1576-1651. 1617 Approx. 1634 KB of XML-encoded text transcribed from 314 1-bit group-IV TIFF page images. Text Creation Partnership, Ann Arbor, MI ; Oxford (UK) : 2007-10 (EEBO-TCP Phase 1). A19150 STC 5561 ESTC S297 22232939 ocm 22232939 25255 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. This Phase I text is available for reuse, according to the terms of Creative Commons 0 1.0 Universal . The text can be copied, modified, distributed and performed, even for commercial purposes, all without asking permission. Early English books online. (EEBO-TCP ; phase 1, no. A19150) Transcribed from: (Early English Books Online ; image set 25255) Images scanned from microfilm: (Early English books, 1475-1640 ; 1749:4) Epphata to F.T., or, The defence of the Right Reuerend Father in God, the Lord Bishop of Elie, Lord High-Almoner and Priuie Counsellour to the Kings Most Excellent Maiestie concerning his answer to Cardinall Bellarmines apologie, against the slaunderous cauills of a namelesse adioyner, entitling his booke in euery page of it, A discouerie of many fowle absurdities, falsities, lyes, &c. : wherein these things cheifely are discussed, (besides many other incident), 1. The popes false primacie, clayming by Peter, 2. Invocation of saints, with worship of creatures, and faith in them, 3. The supremacie of kings both in temporall and ecclesiasticall matters and causes, ouer all states and persons, &c. within their realmes and dominions / by Dr. Collins ... Collins, Samuel, 1576-1651. Bellarmino, Roberto Francesco Romolo, Saint, 1542-1621. Apologia. [46], 221, [3], 223-554, [19] p. Printed by Cantrell Legge, printer to the Vniversitie of Cambridge, [Cambridge, England] : [1628? i.e. 1617] "The defence of the Bishop of Elie ... The second part" has special t.p. Date of publication for pt. 1 is defaced; pt. 2 has 1617 imprint. Signatures: [pi] [par.]⁴ a-d⁴ e² A-4C⁴. Errata: p. [44]-[45]. Reproduction of original in the Union Theological Seminary (New York, N.Y.). Library. Includes bibliographical references. Created by converting TCP files to TEI P5 using tcp2tei.xsl, TEI @ Oxford. Re-processed by University of Nebraska-Lincoln and Northwestern, with changes to facilitate morpho-syntactic tagging. Gap elements of known extent have been transformed into placeholder characters or elements to simplify the filling in of gaps by user contributors. EEBO-TCP is a partnership between the Universities of Michigan and Oxford and the publisher ProQuest to create accurately transcribed and encoded texts based on the image sets published by ProQuest via their Early English Books Online (EEBO) database (http://eebo.chadwyck.com). The general aim of EEBO-TCP is to encode one copy (usually the first edition) of every monographic English-language title published between 1473 and 1700 available in EEBO. EEBO-TCP aimed to produce large quantities of textual data within the usual project restraints of time and funding, and therefore chose to create diplomatic transcriptions (as opposed to critical editions) with light-touch, mainly structural encoding based on the Text Encoding Initiative (http://www.tei-c.org). The EEBO-TCP project was divided into two phases. The 25,363 texts created during Phase 1 of the project have been released into the public domain as of 1 January 2015. Anyone can now take and use these texts for their own purposes, but we respectfully request that due credit and attribution is given to their original source. Users should be aware of the process of creating the TCP texts, and therefore of any assumptions that can be made about the data. Text selection was based on the New Cambridge Bibliography of English Literature (NCBEL). If an author (or for an anonymous work, the title) appears in NCBEL, then their works are eligible for inclusion. Selection was intended to range over a wide variety of subject areas, to reflect the true nature of the print record of the period. In general, first editions of a works in English were prioritized, although there are a number of works in other languages, notably Latin and Welsh, included and sometimes a second or later edition of a work was chosen if there was a compelling reason to do so. Image sets were sent to external keying companies for transcription and basic encoding. Quality assurance was then carried out by editorial teams in Oxford and Michigan. 5% (or 5 pages, whichever is the greater) of each text was proofread for accuracy and those which did not meet QA standards were returned to the keyers to be redone. After proofreading, the encoding was enhanced and/or corrected and characters marked as illegible were corrected where possible up to a limit of 100 instances per text. Any remaining illegibles were encoded as s. Understanding these processes should make clear that, while the overall quality of TCP data is very good, some errors will remain and some readable characters will be marked as illegible. Users should bear in mind that in all likelihood such instances will never have been looked at by a TCP editor. The texts were encoded and linked to page images in accordance with level 4 of the TEI in Libraries guidelines. Copies of the texts have been issued variously as SGML (TCP schema; ASCII text with mnemonic sdata character entities); displayable XML (TCP schema; characters represented either as UTF-8 Unicode or text strings within braces); or lossless XML (TEI P5, characters represented either as UTF-8 Unicode or TEI g elements). Keying and markup guidelines are available at the Text Creation Partnership web site . eng Fitzherbert, Thomas, 1552-1640. -- Adioynder to the Supplement of Father Robert Persons. Andrewes, Lancelot, 1555-1626. -- Responsio ad Apologiam cardinalis Bellarmini. Church of England -- Apologetic works. Catholic Church -- Controversial literature. 2006-08 TCP Assigned for keying and markup 2006-08 Apex CoVantage Keyed and coded from ProQuest page images 2006-09 Judith Siefring Sampled and proofread 2006-09 Judith Siefring Text and markup reviewed and edited 2007-02 pfs Batch review (QC) and XML conversion EPPHATA to F. T. OR , THE DEFENCE of the Right Reuerend Father in God , the Lord Bishop of ELIE , Lord High-Almoner and Priuie Counsellour to the KINGS MOST EXCELLENT MAIESTIE . CONCERNING HIS ANSWER to Cardinall BELLARMINES Apologie : Against the slaunderous cauills of a namelesse Adioyner ; entitling his Booke in euery page of it , A Discouerie of many fowle absurdities , falsities , lyes , &c. Wherein THESE THINGS CHEIFELY are discussed , ( besides many other incident . ) 1. The Popes false Primacie , clayming by Peter . 2. Invocation of Saints , with Worship of creatures , and Faith in them . 3. The Supremacie of Kings both in Temporall and Ecclesiasticall matters and causes , ouer all states and persons , &c. within their Realmes and Dominions . By Dr. Collins , chapleine to HIS MAIESTIE . Apoc. 18. 7. Giue her Torture . PRINTED BY CANTRELL LEGGE , Printer to the Vniuersitie of Cambridge . 1629 TO HIS MOST SACRED MAIESTIE , IAMES By the grace of GOD King of Great Britaine , France , & Ireland , Defendor of the Faith , our most Soueraigne Lord , of God beloued , &c. MOST GRACIOVS and DREAD SOVERAIGNE , MAY it please Your MAIESTIE , out of your Princely Clemency , which exceeding all things , yet enclaspes the least , to vouchsafe to these poore labours ( true Benoni-es , the sonnes of my sorrow , so many disasters haue annoyed them from the wombe , and some with the perill of their parents life ) the skirt of your royall cloathing , or but the shadow of your skirt , Acceptance with Patronage : Vndertaken at first by your MAIESTIES commandement , for the repulsing of the lewde slaunders of a namelesse Papist , and to redeeme the credit of a renowmed Bishop ; but continued to the confirmation of Your MAIESTIES leige people , in their Reiligion to GOD , and their Obedience to your MAIESTIE , with all subiection . In quibus duobus , vniuersa Lex pendet , & Prophetae , ( to speake it in his words , whose doctrine it was most , yea whose onely errand it was , as Hegesippus testifies ) I meane , in seeking the face of GOD , and his IACOB , as some euen Papists haue noted vpon that Psalme , that they are distinguished there not without cause , and the one is consequent , or to be consequent , to the other . But not so the Cardinall ( the more too blame he ) a maine stickler in these Controuersies ( after the Pope and the Pioners ) that encomber the world ; and I know not by what lucke , though Ceruini generis animal , yet Your MAIESTIES audacious concurrent in the cause . Who if he were younger , perhaps hee might be borne with , either fancying his superstitions , or fostering his seditions : As the Stoicke Philosopher was wont to say , that a young man at Sea , if hee abandon the Shippe to walke ashoare a while , and either digge some roote , or gather some shell which the Sea casts forth , there is no danger in it ; but in an olde man it is dangerous , whome death , and sickenesse , and sundry casualties may preuent , from euer recouering ship againe . Yet he in his deuoutest meditations of all other , his booke last set forth de Aeterna Faelicitate , will not excuse Kings from beeing murthered de iure , ( not onely de facto ) onely hee passes it ouer as a casus omissus , happily because anouched in his other Volumes more peremptorily . Of another minde was his Vnckle , of whome hee brags in one place , contesting with your MAIESTIE , ( though S. Chrysostome note , that S. Pauls sisters sonne , of whome there is mention in the Acts , was neuer a whit the blesseder for his Vnckles vertue , and as it may seeme neuer any good came of him ; saue onely that he reuealed the Iewes conspiracie against Paul , which this man would rather defend the concealing of ) but Marcellus secundus , of whome I was saying , ( witnesse the Historian that alleadges friendship ( for more faith ) and some intimitie wit●d●im ) In animo habuerat omnem militiam à se prorsus abigere , ipsos etiam corporis custodes exauctorare ( whereas Bellarmine lately vrged this Pope to draw the sword , if fame say true ; his Vnckle not admitting of necessarie Defence , if it were forcible ; ) cum illud saepe repeteret , multos principes viros , non tam armis defensos , quàm signo Crucis , &c. ( himselfe hauing been lately Cardinall Sanctae Crucis . ) And in particular of the Pope , Pontificem maximum neutiquam indigere , aut scutis , aut gladijs ( indeede Athanasius remooues all iron from the Apostles , and S. Austen will not haue them strike , though they may carrie weapons , ferre ferrum , but not ferire ) satiusque esse ipsum si res ferat occîdi , quàm tam indecorum exemplum praeberi Ecclesiae , namely as for the Pope either to handle a sword , or giue allowance to others , at his direction , so to doe . So as no maruell , if the same man , considering the practises of such as were Popes in his time , clapt his hand once vpon the table , protesting in great earnestnes , that it seemed impossible for a Pope ( as things then went ) to be saued . And another saies , it was the voice of almost all men in those daies , that a Pope could not be saued , when this Marcellus came to it . I know not what cōtentment the Cardinall may take in his new skarlet-additions , which they would make vs beleeue he accepted of so lothly ; but for my part , I should thinke one day of his Vnckles , ( as Tullie saies of Antonie , compared with his grandfather ) were more to be desired , then a whole age of the Cardinalls , lending his pen and bending his wit to the defence of such trumperies , and , which is worse , of such treacheries , as are now in vre with them ; the dislike whereof , and onely intended Reformation , cost his Vnckle his life , and that in very short space , after he came to the Popedome . Of whome , because I haue said so much , almost before I was aware , I will not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , trouble Your Royall eare ( as that Councell speakes , which forbids Clerks to disturbe Kings , not onely in their states , or liues , ( as now the fashion is , ) but so much as in their leisures : ) onely this it may please Your MAIESTIE giue me leaue to adde , That the Pope whome I speake of ( as Onu●…us testifies ) OMNEM ECCLESIASTICAM IVRISDICTIONEM , viris profanis , & nullis sacris initiatis , demandare cogitaverat ; had a purpose to translate all Ecclesiasticall Iurisdiction to meere Lay-men : he calls them profane ; but the more vehemently he expresses it , the more it makes for vs , and against themselues : the Papists all so storming at the thing this day , and the Adioynder by name ( with whome therefore I haue a dealing about this point somewhat at large ) in Your MAIESTIES high Prerogatiue , and iustest Title ; allowing You , by no meanes , Ecclesiasticall Iurisdiction : ( if happily You should euer fulfil their suspicion of owning it : ) Though KINGS were so farre from beeing counted profane , by the auncient Synods of CHRISTS Church , that their letters were holy to them , their syllables holy , their palace holy , their very bed-chamber holy , and all that was about them , or belonged to them , sacred and holy , in the style of those godly times , and Fathers . Where I cannot but obserue , the prouidence of GOD , that requites humane actions , and how euen a course it keepes with our courses . For as the intents were good , which Marcellus fostered , but no effects followed , nay rather his Nephew drawes now backe most of all , and mainly opposes his Vnckles determinations : So we read , that the Cardinalls in fauour of his person ( because reputed honest , and well be loued amongst them ) decreed to haue his charges of the direption of his house and houshold stuffe , ( a graue custome no doubt , and worthie of Christs Vicar , to haue all rifled , and ransackt , that the people can but lay hands of , when he is chosen Pope ) to be repaid him of the publique ; but it was neuer done ( saith the Historian ) till this day . But to leaue the Vnckle ( sith our question is not whether the Popes may keepe guards about their persons , but whether Kings crownes , or ( if that be more deare ) their liues are to be wholly at the Popes disposing ) and to returne to the Nephew ; He is peremptorie , as I said , in his most mortified Treatise , and the fore-runner of his ende ( as he would haue it thought at least ) that Kings are subiect to murther , at best : First , de facto ; though the Scripture as it flatters not , nor no where diuerts vs from the consideration of our mortality , so it leades vs to speake of KINGS and Princes in another straine ; as if they that ought not to be violated by any mortall hand , could not die at all , or at least not die , till God himselfe assoild them of the bands of this bodie . How was he slaine ( saies Dauid of Saul ) as if he had not beene annointed with oyle ? And , O King , liue for euer , saies the Prophet Daniel , not any courtly flatterer . The Kings soule is bound vp with God in the bundle of life , as it were Gero in sinu , nec discingor ; fast bound , and not to shedde out . The period of their gouernment , is cum Sole & Luna , as long as the Sunne and Moone endureth . And though they die like men , ( that is , quatenus homines , non quatenus Reges ) yet we are to remember , that they fall like one of the PRINCIPES , that is , one of the Angels ( saies the Cardinall himselfe , among others , vpon that Psalme ) who we know are not iudged , till GOD iudges them : though , no doubt but that aggrauates their iudgement so much the forer . And whereas the Scripture so often , entitles the constitution of Kings to GOD , it may be it is to shew , that their authoritie is inabrogable ; as the Platoniques hold opinion , that whatsoeuer is mortall , was produced by some mediation of the vile creature , as man of the dust , most things of the materia prima , &c. but that which immediatly proceedes of God himselfe , as the soules of men , and the Angells , and the heauens , they are immortall . So of Princes . Yet the Cardinall not content with a death de facto , implyes that they may be slaine de iure too , though he affirme vpon the other onely , which belike was enough to serue his turne in that place . No more Ceruinus now , nor of the mothers breed ( which was the better of the two ) but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 — as Constantine bespake Arius in the Nicene Councell , somewhat merrily ; for the one hath Mars , the other warre , and weapons , and threats in his name ; and as the one opposed the naturall , so the other the mysticall Christ , he in his person , this in his offices and principall officers ; but each of thē to the most lamentable embroyling of Chrsts Church . And as the one of them was quelled by the Imperiall Constantine , iudicially proceeding , and Synodically sentencing him , with his band of three hundred and eighteene Bishops ; So against the other , God hath excited Your most excellent MAIESTIE , but without the trouble or labour of an Ecclesiastique Synode , to ouerthrow him by YOVR pen , and the pen of one onely Bishop of Your many ; yet worth many , where all most worthy . And albeit Your MAIESTIE needes no Defender , abounding with so many continually about Your Person , guarding the bed , and girding to them the sword ( as the Spouse speakes ) ( besides Your owne inherent puissance inuincible ) yet because what I haue now vttered concerning the Cardinall and his mortified propositions ( crossing with Your MAIESTIES both State and Honour , as much as may bee ) I haue vttered it with the priuitie of many of Your leige people , ( whom I confesse , as before , that my especiall care hath been to confirme , and whereof some perhaps will not disdaine to cast their eies vpon these papers , if at least they may passe with Your MAIESTIES approbation ) it were worth the considering , what correspondence such grounds haue with the auncient doctrine , which the Cardinall and his followers would seeme so close to follow . Of Chrysostome , for one , That a Soueraigne King is accountable to none ( not onely to his Subiects , but ) not so much as to his Successor , ( as Dauid said euen now , that he is to be iudged like the Angels , that is , by God , and by God onely , and neither liuing nor dead by any other : ) The same Chrysostome againe noting in another place , that where as the Psalmist passes ouer other miracles of the wildernesse in deepe silence , he insists onely vpon the death of Og and Sehon , two mightie Monarches ; because Kings liues are so wholly in Gods hands , and the disposition of them is alway miraculous , reserued and appropriated to God himselfe . Of Basil , That a King is subiect to no Iudge : Of Ambrose , that nullis tenetur legibus , not onely the King of Israel , but not the King of Egypt : Or ( because the Papists make his case the worse of the two , that should bee the better in all reason , ) not onely the King of Egypt , but not the King of Israel ; for he saies it of both of thē , & in two seuerall places . Of that Pope in Theodoret ( Anastasius I take it ) who persecuting Flauian ( as his Predecessours had done for a long time before ) Theodosius that was their arbiter , bidde the Pope let goe Flauian ( because hee sawe there was malice ) and argue against himselfe , as if he were Flauian , giuing him good leaue to say what hee could . To whome that Pope most submissely ; We may not doe so , if please your Maiestie , it is not lawfull for vs to implead a King ; not onely in his person , but not personating another , not fictione iuris , as the Lawyers say . Yea the verie heathen Poet , and one of the wretchedest , yet he had so much grace in him , as to make seruants thēselues safe vnder a Crowne ( though worne not for Soueraignty , but for Solemnity onely , as was the fashion in their festiuals ) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . As for that which follows , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , &c. it is right the doctrine of our moderne Iesuites concerning Kings , that if first they be decrowned , then they may be vsed , no longer as Kings , but as priuate men , that is , abused at pleasure . Euen the Cardinall himselfe opens his eyes at last , ( the case is so cleare ) and acknowledges as much . The STEVVARD of a house ( saies he ) may be deposed by none , but only by the grand-master of the Family : which is God in the world , as the Steward in the State is the King , by analogie . Not but that his meaning is as trayterous as euer ( for he vnderstands it of his Pope ) but I suppose Your MAIESTIES name was partly fatall to giue him light ( which is the character of Supremacy engrauen in you by God ) and partly it confirmes my opinion of him , that if Your MAIESTES Bookes and rare trauailes in this cause ( out of which we all take , that now write any thing ) had been but read of him when he was young , and afore he was embondaged in this damnable preiudice , he would haue yeelded to the spirit and power which they are fraught with , acknowledged your proofes , submitted to your reasons , admired Your MAIESTIES & cor & linguam ; and finally thanked God for him his conuerter , whom now he is faine to endure his confuter . But , longa dies quid non captiuat ? making vs , as S. Chrysostome sayes , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , to preferre euen garlicke before Ambrosia . But although not he ( froward as he is ) yet there are others infinite both forreiners & domesticks , that profit by Your MAIESTIES peerelesse writings daily ; not onely to the enlarging of their skill and knowledge ( whereof your Works may seeme to be an Vniuersall Seminarie ) but to their redeeming from ruine ( which Vn-subiection drawes to ) and building them vp to euerlasting saluation in the world to come , with quiet mindes and content in this present , which before they wanted . And truely our hope is , that the Rights which Your MAIESTIE shall transmitt to your posteritie , as nobly cleared by Your pen , as euer they were wonne by your Auncestors swords , will both breed much peace to the Land in generall , and great security to Your royall offspring the inheritours , confusion to the aduersaries , and barkers against Soueraignty ; euen as long as either learning shall be held in price , or a man shall be left aliue to reuolue bookes . Whereof because this worke pursues the remainders , and treads the same way , though in a most improportionable distance , once againe imploring Your MAIESTIES sacred Patronage , worthie to be a Sanctuarie to a greater trespasser ) both out of Your loue to the cause , and out of Your loue to the coate , ( which is so great and so gratious , as no fame will be so niggard , but to record it to the furthest ensuing ages , ) I beseech the GOD of ALL things , euen for his deare SONNES sake , ( which is our hope , and our glorie , defending Your MAIESTIE , and by Your MAIESTIE defended ) to accōplish his rare Graces vpon Your MAIESTIES Royall Head : Or , in stead of augmenting them , to adde but this one more blessing , to the many that he hath multiplied , super virum dextrae suae , super Regem 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , eundemque Phil-ecclesiasticum , ( in whome no bodie could euer discerne any cause of doubt , saue onely whether Your zeale to the Church , or to the Clergie , were greater ) euen PERPETVITIE and AETERNITIE , the Imperiall style , and patrimonie of Kingdomes , in the most Orthodoxe language . Your MAIESTIES most humbly-bounden , and deuoted seruant , in all dutifull and gratefull subiection , S. COLLINS . TO THE READER . BEfore I come to the maine matter , I thinke it not vnfit ( Courteous Reader ) to acquaint thee a little with the conditions of the man , against whome this is intended , for intending against one so much better thē himselfe , to vse no more then Dauids phrase , about the murthering of Abner , by vnmanly violence , and butcherly force ; which base circumstances , no doubt , encreased the tragedie of that worthie Champion , in the opinion of Dauid . And surely so it is . A noble hand eases much a grieuous stroake , insomuch as Tullie bemoanes the Common-wealth of Rome in one place , that shee was not so happie as to be borne downe by valiant aduersaries , but cowards gored her , and sotts insulted ouer her , and foxes , and recreants , ran vpon the battlements of her , as the Prophet complaines ; Serui dominati sunt nostri , saies Ieremie , Slaues haue ridden ouer our heads . Not that I would haue the glorious Faith of our LORD IESVS CHRIST to be held in the partiall respect of persons , which * S. Iames forbids , ( where Baronius saies Kings are secretly nipt at , and why forsooth ? but for the description of the man with the gold ring , whereas now we may find pearles vpon the Popes shooes : S. Iames beeing so farre from nipping Kings in that Epistle , that as if he had foreseene that one of his own name should lead the field in time to come , against the impugners of Soueraigntie , he giues the onset so well , as to call that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , which he meanes 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , the Kingly , or the royall Law , vnderstāding the Diuine ; not so then . ) Nor that I would not haue all to open their mouthes , of what sort soeuer , in the cause of God , and his holy truth : it is not we that exclude Eldad from prophecie , or Medad from consultation , but Bellarmine that blesses them , with , Populus qui extra est . non nouit legem , and therefore maledictus ; The people which is without , they are accursed . But yet me thinks some decorum would be obserued in these conflicts , and though all cannot be coped with by their matches in worth , as Kings by Kings , as Alexander said , ( for the sword deuoures now one , now another ) and so Bishops by Bishops , which the auncient Canons haue a speciall care of , that euery rakeshame should not challenge a Bishop , no not a Priest , saies S. Paul , vnder some store of witnesses : yet modestie might be kept , and faire dealing maintaind , and respectiue warre of both sides nourished , that which wants in other points , to make euen the encounters , beeing supplied by humility , and courtesie , and moderation ( as the Masters of the prizes are wont to equall the weapons of the combatants , afore they begin . ) From which this man is so farre , that like the Orators in Tullie , who the worse they spake , the lowder they cried , & whom therefore he compares to lame riders , that not able to goe on foote , would needes be prauncing on horsebacke ; so he mends his stature by a false shooe , as it were , and as another Publican after Matthaeus Tortus , climbes the sycomore of his owne wild fancies , to ouerlooke the croudes : or like the painters boy , that beeing to paint Helen , cùm pulchram pingere non posset , pinxit diuitem ; so what he lacks in learning , he laies on load in lies , in taunts , in tearmes , and in abominable raylings . Which for my part , I cannot see what effect it is like to haue , with the iudicious Readers , if at least any such cast their eyes vpon these pamphlets , ( for we are not ignorant to what kind of people they are consecrated ) then to strippe them quite of all credit , and euen pitch them ouer the barre , like forlorne lawyers , for not caring what they say , nor of whome they affirme : as the Scripture prophecies of such like fellowes in one place , that their owne tongue shall make them fall . So as henceforth it will be no shame for others , to be miscalled by them , and thundered vpon with all the vile tearmes that may be , after such a Reuerence could not escape their bad vsage , and a person besides exception , was depraued and disgraced by them beyond all reason , as Hamans gallowes was the last that euer he set vp , because erected for Mordecai , a vertuous man , and the waspe ( saies Athanasius ) shooting his sting but once against a rocke , looses his power of annoying for euer after . But to doe as I promised , gentle Reader , to giue thee a tast of this fellowes conditions , not a by feigning a man in the forge of Poetrie , compounded of all vices , ( as the Orator saies , ) which perhaps if I would doe , I could lacke no matter , nor yet following the sent of euery light report , though a b Pope of theirs was so addicted to newes , as he cared not what it were , so it tickled his eare , and digested false , as well as true , ( whome the Cardinall it seemes , imitates , for all the world , beleeuing whatsoeuer our runnagates bring him concerning English affaires , hauing quite lost his common sense , and not able to distinguish between seuerall obiects , if any whit semblable ; ) I say , to giue thee a tast of this mans spirit , wee will goe no further then his owne writings , and among them , then this booke , that we presently deale with , shall affoard instruction . Whereby his Vanitie , his Virulencie , his Ignorance , and his Circumstance , beeing sufficiently discouered , though we leaue no part of the whole vnexamined , ( euen contrarie to iniunction , as our Sauiours example was not to answer Pilate to euery question , as Origen well notes , and so Ezechias to say nothing to Rabsace , but to let him goe as he came with a flea in his eare , for all his flaunting ) yet perhaps this Preface might either satisfie the cause without thy farther labour , or at least so settle thy iudgement in reading , as to conceiue hereby the better , of that which is answered in due place , to his barbarous imputations . And first , for his Vanitie : it is worth the considering , how euery where he couples himselfe with the Cardinall , and sometimes iets before him , sometimes behind him , like the fantasticke wooer that Ouid describes , Et modò praecedit , sequitur modò — Places ( saies he ) alleadged by the Cardinall and my selfe . p. 68. The Law inter Claras alleadged both by the Cardinall and by me . p. 38. Twelue Fathers alleadged by the Cardinall and me . p. 356. The like you may see , p. 112. p. 245. and diuerse more , for I spare . Another time , as diuiding the praise betweene them two , partly by the Cardinall , and partly by me , saies he , p. 304. But most ridiculous , where he goes before him , nothing ashamed , yea and enters into comparison with him too , very deftly . First , for action . Obiected ( saies he ) as well by me , as by the Cardinall , as if he could follow an argument , as well as the Cardinall . Againe a passiue . * The Bishops answer to S. Cyprian ( saies he ) makes as much against me , as against the Cardinall . And many such like feathers of his frantique ambition , euery where scattered throughout the worke . Which had beene vncouth in any , to haue associated himselfe with another writer of fame , especially the Cardinall , where no neede was , and in a treatise no way depending on his , though happily falling into diuers the same points , which he had handled before , ( as what is there in Diuinitie , which some author or other hath not forestalled ? and yet wee doe not name them , nor ranke our selues with them , when we prosecute the same argument : ) but more strange in F. T. a man no way knowne , no way heard of , much lesse bearing any such reputation , patched vp ( as they say ) lately out of father Parsons his relliques , his leaden standish , and his wodden cansticke , ( another Pseud-Epictetus ) and perhaps some olde notes of his mustie paper-booke , otherwise among a thousand the vnlikeliest that could be guest at , to beare a head with the Cardinall , or to succeede him , as his former flourishes import to be his owne conceit of himselfe . I might adde hereto his craking euery where of his Supplement , whereof this is but a ribbe , an Eue taken out of the others side , as our Prometheus intimates , As I haue noted in my Supplement , saies he , p. 15. and , As I haue shewed in my Supplement , p. 36. I haue produced in my Supplement , p. 39. Hauing occasion in my Supplement , p. 98. So 139. 415. 417. So in many other places we are told of the Supplement , that is , by himselfe of his owne worke , ( another qualitie somewhat vnusuall among writers , that are not starke madde , to beat vpon their own , especially so often ) which you may thinke how good a Supplement , or how answerable to the title , when wee should not haue knowne it to be at all , but for this frequent supplie of his owne mouth . And yet for my part I neuer saw it , I consesse , neither know I any that look after it . If it be like this , no force : here is enough to make Catullus sicke , or his horse either , and once againe to bethinke him , how he may recure his surfet with purgatiue herbes , ocymoque & vrticâ : in the meane time crying out , O librum horribilem , atque pestilentem . Et haec hactenus . I speake of his Vanitie , as you may remember , which appeares by these two points , his marching with the Cardinall in such wanton equipage , as hath beene shewed , and his calling out vpon his Supplement , though this also be a fruit of his most hateful Tediousnes to come in it with so often ; of which anon . The second is his Virulency , which you may take vp by handfulls . I will not draine the fenne , or stand casting the ponde , I meane ransacke his booke by quoting the pages ; but his Table of principall matters shall declare what I say , which himselfe hath adioyned to the end of his Adioynder ; the fourth principall in the table . I omit how he strippes the Bishop of his title ; And ( not to say how due in all other mens iudgements , the most iudicious themselues thinking that they honour their iudgments most , when they expresse the honour that they beare to him ) it was not denied to Dioscorus ( I forbeare the rest , how vnsutable a man ) yet drawing neere , ( as he best knowes that cites the Councell at large ) vpon the point of degradation , to be tearmed Reuerendissimus , & Deo charissimus , Episcopus , the most Reuerend Bishop , and most beloued of God , at euery word . But what style doth he giue him , in liew of the other , which he takes from him ? Let it be viewed , where I now quoted , ( like Tertullians Ononychites , that he tells vs of in his Apologeticus , set vp by the Heathen , in despight of the Christians , or if euer any imagination crost the originall more fowly . ) His vaine bragges , His cogging the dice , his inclining to Iudaisme , A man prodigall of his Rhetorique , &c. Yea , a wronger of his MAIESTIE , turnd plains Puritane , no friend to the Supremacie . And then ouer againe with the same notes , not onely in the booke , but in the Index twice , so well they please him . Fooles bolts , Shuttlecocks , dull head , &c. Finally , will you heare an heinous crime ? He tryes how neare he can corne to Popery , and yet misse it : that is , graunts to the Papists as much as may be graunted , though by no meanes betraying the Palladium of Gods cause , multiplyes not controuersies , where no need is , abstaines from brabbles , and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , as should the seruant of God ( if S. Paul say true ) that is , the Minister 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , keeps the depositum in precise tearmes , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , breakes not the rope with vnreasonable stretching , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , as S. Basile forewarnes ; but ioyning Charity with Piety , discretion with resolution , imitates the driuers at the Olympian games , whose praise was to come neare , and yet not to touch . Now truely hauing described to you , his description of the Bishop , wherein , besides his Virulency , ( of which I now entreat , ) both his Vanity and Tautology , and almost all appeares , that before I charged him with , euen Ignorance it selfe in the highest degree ( for what more grosse ignorance , then to be ignorant of the person ( not only of the generall , or of the cause ) whome the farthest parts know , farre other then so ? vnlesse purposely he would decypher him like Arbos inuersa , as the Philosophers say of man , or by negagations and abstractions , as we doe the Genij in Metaphysiques ) me thinks he hath giuen you a description of a Iesuite , such as a better could not be wished , that shewes you the world cleane turnd in a glasse , and presumes he can alter the very nature of things , with his poisonous breath , and partiall censure : not vnlike to their late scholler , the parricide of France , that conceited the king to be an Aethiop in a Triangle , whom all the water in the sea could not wash cleane , and so detesting him by degrees , at last intoxicated , slew him . The third is his Ignorance , and I meane onely in the Latine tongue ; for I will not search now his more hidden schollership ; I am content to be iudged by his knowledge in the entry , in the verie portall ( for so is that to learning , prima de dòtibus , or , prima de cotibus . ) ( And as for the Greeke , we were not best say much of that , though his 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is a great argument of it , p. 234. and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , accepit genua , ( for , he tooke her by the kneees , ) in the same place : Also , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for aequalis , p. 44. the verie same stone that his Reuerend Father had tript at before : It will goe well with the Bishop , if he can scape his chasticements , for spending any part of his younger dayes , in the study of that , which helps him to discouer the Cardinals fallacies , or false quotations . ) First , pag. 40. id est , cap. 2. num . 3. because the Bishop had said , Legat canone inustum , ne maiora , sed aequalia , sint priuilegia , &c. he thus ; Whereas he saies , that the Councell of Calchedon , did by that Canon giue to the Bishop of Constantinople , ne maiora , sed aequalia priuilegia , &c. Which though it be the preseruing of the word ne in both places , yet euery meane Latinist easily sees , that ne should haue been turned into non in the latter place , if he meant any sense should be in his sentence , as he began it . And therefore , I can impure it to nothing , but his lacke of skill in the rudiments . But let this goe for nothing , if I make it not appeare yet plainer , that he is minus habens , and all too light , as he speakes of the Bishop in an other place , ( for such reuerence he beares him . ) Pag. 42. that is , cap. 2. num . 6. thus we haue . It is said expressely of the Church of Constantinople , that it should be magnified and extolled as olde Rome was , secundam post illam existentem . Which is the letter , I grant , in the Councell of Calchedon , but almost killing Priscian , as hee sets it downe , for secunda post illam existens ; the Church of Constantinople ( to which that referres ) being ecclesia , not ecclesiam , in his period , and so to be translated , if it were to be put into Latine , I say nothing of his construing S. Austens words , simply God knowes , p. 149. Componit salutem membrorum in capite , which he englishes by compounded ; compounding of healths , beeing a phrase scarse fit to be vsed by Apothecaries , or their boyes , much lesse by Physitians , but least of all by him , that would seeme to know the Latine , and to english S. Austen . Neither onely can he not skill of the language himselfe , but marres the Bishops Latine with his addle corruptions , Concludit testas suos cum Augustine , sayes he , p. 145. as quoting his words , which in the booke is some what otherwise , Concludit testes suos Augustino . And so againe , cap. 9. num . 53. Scrutabitur Hierusalem cum lucernis , &c. Zeph. 1. ( for , in lucernis ; ) either adding to the Scripture , or correcting his old Translators Latine , or both . Though the one be impious , the other very ridiculous , in him especially , to confront the Translator , whose Latine is not afraid of a farre nicer teste . Chap. 7. numb . 33. representare Th●●dosium in liberis , is to giue the children grace that they may be like their father . So as here Repraesentare stands for Likenesse onely , at another time for Gouernement , for Monarchy , and for Rule . But , repraesentare defunctū , is to supply the losse of the dead Theodosius , by yeilding another in his roome ; which S. Austen wishes may be of the posteritie . Does not this also argue him a solide Latinist ? S●●blable is that , cap. 1. num . 11. where thus he 〈◊〉 the Bishops words , 〈◊〉 id loquuntur Ambrosius & Augustinus quàm vt obstrepere possint nouitij nostri : They speak it louder , or clearer , then that our nouices can contradict it . Whereas it should be , then that our nouices can drowne it . For a man may contradict that which is neuer so cleerely spoken , drowne it or suppresse it he cannot . But because he knew not the other sense of the word obstrepo , ( as in Tully pro Marcello , obstrepi videntur militum clamore & tubarum sono ) therefore he commits this solaecisme in translating . And nouitij with him , be none but newly vpstart ; for which cause hee maruells that the Papists should be so called , though neither is their petegre● so very auncient ( Gibeonites rather ) and rawnes in ones facultie makes the oldest man to go for a nouice . 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . But by this you see the cause why he answers the Latine booke with his English , because he thinkes the Bishop is not his crafts master in the Latine , and so he will take no aduantage against him , but deales with him in English , as one Englishman should with another , the vnknowne tongue beeing better for deuotion , not for disputation . Lastly , whereas the Bishop speakes of Peters disease , which S. Austen had first toucht vpon , namely of confidence in himselfe , and too much ouerweening , so as he stucke not to say , Et si omnes non ego ; to which the Bishop addes for explication sake , id est , plus ego quàm omnes , ( which is the verie thing that they attribute to S. Peter at this day , to bee the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of the Apostles , and worth them all : as also it followes out of his owne words , for , if though all not he , then he is of more worth or force then they all ) this lither fellow , this exos asinus , not so good as Issachar , an asse without bones , without proofe , without mettall , construes it thus , out of the fulnesse of his Latine , That , though all other Diuines would giue ouer attempting the Popes cure , yet so would not the Bishop ; et si omnes non ego . A likely speech to be vttered by that graue Prelate , concerning himselfe , especially with the disparagement of the rest of our Diuines , for so is his disposition , as they knowe that know him . But how doe you thinke he falls vpon this sense ? what pucke lead him out of the way ? Because the Bishop had said a little before , Praesertim cùm eundem morbum in capite vestro notârint diu iam medicorum filij ; Medicorum filij ; saies he , are Beza , and Caluin ; for the olde heretiques were the medici , as the Donatists , &c. ( whom the Papists nothing resemble , neither restraining Kings from medling with Church-matters , nor shutting vp the Church within a corner of the world , &c. ) and these their sonnes . Then followeth , Etsi omnes , non ego , ●1 . plus ego quàm omnes : which in the Bishops booke referres to the morbum before spoken of , S. Peters disease consisting in these words , a disease of pride . But what does our Gentleman ? He diuides etsi into two words , & and si , and then makes an interrogatiue at ego , construing it thus , Et si omnes , non ego ? And if all doe , shall not I ? if all physicke the Pope , shall not I ? To which you may thinke now how handsomly that suites which followes , id est , plus ego quàm omnes : as if the Bishop when he had asked that question by way of challenge , should expresse himselfe , for more perspicuitie sake , by an id est , that is to say , I am more worth then they all . These are the fopperies of this great gull . And you see howe profound an vnderstander of the Latine , that is faine to point the Bishops words anew , with his senselesse interrogatiues , before he can construe them , or misconstrue them rather ; as likewise to diuide them , and to clip them , by turning etsi into et si ; but lastly , to deuise a difference , between medici , and medicorum filij , a most palpable demonstration of his vnmatchable dunserie , and not vnlike the boyes in the Grammar schoole , that construed pullus equinus , a horsechicken . Now crie for Elleboron Sir , now prescribe Catholicon , like a Doctor in your facultie ; which if it bee the name of a Dictionarie , or of a Grammar , or some such like , may stand you in good stead , for ought I know . As for the drug Catholicon , that intoxicates the braine , and prickes on to murther , and to combustion in States , it is a drug for your selfe , and for your fellowes , if they haue not too much already . For I passe by that , that he so construes the Bishops words ( referring to S. Peter ) plus ego quàm omnes , as if S. Peter had been more scandalized then they all , cap. 4. num . 33. Yet this is his Latine , plus scandalizatus , for more scandalized . Which though by the rules of his Caetholicon , may passe for currant , not so by the touchstone of the more accurate Grāmarians , who happily would no more say plus scandalizatus , for more scandalized , then plus illiteratus , for more vnlearned . And though this bee not all that he might be shamed with in this kinde , yet come we now to the fourth , which is his Tediousnesse and his Talkatiuenes , in very truth vnsupportable . I meane his lazy , and heauie , and dull repetitions of the same thing often ; ( the very Mathematicians doe not resume their grounds , I thinke , oftener then he ) and yet all with such a confidence , or Thrasonicall boldnes , as makes it much more odious . Thou maiest remember good Reader ( saies hee , ) And , I haue done this good Reader . Then , In such a chapter this ; And , In another chapter this ; As if all were so impregnable and impossible to be reuersed forsooth , that hee had once dealt in . Is there no 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , as Demades said of Phocion ? No Spunge to wipe out a malitious crimination , as one teare of Olympias was able to deface , whatsoeuer lying tell-tales had conueyed into Alexanders eares , against her ? But especially he triumphes in that , which aboue all others should not onely dye his cheekes in graine , but make him call for his hood , or rather his 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , as Homer cals it , to protect him from rebuke ; yea almost wish the mountains to couer him , but at least not to endure euer to looke a man in the face againe ; as the Poet saies of the like , Et contra magnum potes hos attollere Solem : Hee accuses the Bishop , for corrupting the Fathers , by name S. Ambrose , and reiterates this crime againe and againe . Yea he hath neuer done with it . But what crime thinke you ? or how likely to be true ? The Bishop to turne corrupter of the Fathers ? S. Chrysostome beeing accused ( as himselfe reports in his Epistle ad Cyriacum ) of a detestable crime , and such a one as his manners abhorred from most , offred to cleare himselfe without speaking a word , by shewing of his body . The case in hand is as cleere as there , and nothing so ready as the Bishops integrity to be viewed of all men , while the Adioynder is guilty euen of his owne imputations . See Chap. 1. p. 44. where of fifteen editions that we haue perused of S. Ambrose , partly printed , and partly manuscript , ( all of them of the auncientest , and farthest from suspect ) there is not one but citeth those controuerted words , as the Bishop doth , Sixtus quintus beeing the first ( then a priuate man , after Pope ) that presumed to cut them out , and to corrupt the Copyes ; which this good fellow would faine charge now vpon the Bishop of Ely , for retayning them . And as they that tell lyes , till they beleeue them for true themselues , though at first they knew thē to be clean otherwise ; or hoping to preuaile 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 after the fashion of the heathen , or as a himselfe speakes ( the flowre of Eloquence ) after the Gentilicall fashion , thus he furbushes it ouer and ouer . b Thou mayest remember good Reader , ( saies he ) what poore stuffe he produced ( so he speakes of the Bishop ) to prooue that S. Peter had nothing peculiar to himselfe , by his pastorall commission , &c. when neuerthelesse to make good his idle conceit , he was faine to vse great fraud and corruption , in the allegation of those two Fathers ( Austen and Ambrose ) corrupting the text of S. Ambrose , as I haue amply declared in the first chapter of this Adioynder , Numb . 3. & sequent . ad 12. &c. Whereas no such corrupter on the otherside as himselfe . And indeed what maruaile if he corrupt the Fathers , and wring their noses , till he fetch out blood , as Salomon saies ( such bloody positions as they foster now in their schooles , with the danger of whole states ) when he abuses the Bishops words so before his face , as I euen now declared , cutting Etsi into Et and Si , and to shew you how punctuall he is in his recitings , marring and monstrifying anothers directest meaning , with his own most prodigious interpunctions . You would say he were a Procrustes , with his bed of tyrannies ( worse then Ogs iron bed ) to crucifie his strangers . But is this all ? doth he not corrupt the Fathers also most grossely himselfe ? Augustine , when he alleadges him vpon the 108. Psal . Cuius ecclesiae ille agnoscitur gessisse personam , pag. 6. of the Adioynder , which in S. Austen is not so , but thus rather , Cuius ecclesiae ille agnoscitur in figurâ gestâsse personam : gestâsse beeing of lesse force to serue his turne then gessisse by much , and in figura beeing left out , which serues to turne all cleane another away . Againe S. Cyprian , de vnitate ecclesiae : out of whome he thus cites , p. 101. To shew an vnity , he ordained one chaire . As if that were the chaire of the vniuersall Bishop , that is , the Pope . But in S. Cyprians words there is no mētion of chairs , either one or more . The words are onely these , Vt vnitatem manifestaret , vnitatis eiusdem originem , ab vno incipientem , suâ auctoritate disposuit . And yet professing to english them , he couches very handsomely into the heart of them , I know not what about the appointing of one chaire , belike for the Pope to sit downe in , and rest himselfe , whom S. * Cyprian had not the manners to entertain so kindly , as his sundry scufflings with him may testifie . Is not this to craue leaue , once again , to build a tabernacle more then Christ allowes ? vnum mihi , one for Peter , &c. As for the Cambron copie , and Pamelius the finder , they are too light of credit , to outface so many , so auncient , and so vncontrollable . Shall the Bishop be censured , for alleadging that which all haue saue one , and it so iustly suspected , as sauouring of Sixtus Quintus his poisonous sallet , and shall not this be called forgerie , to cleaue to one so abortiue and newfangle , & forsake the rest ? Neither doubt I , but if the Bishop had quoted Austens Epistle to Pope Coelestinus , about fustie Antonie , or Antonie of Fussula , his deposing from his Bishopricke , which in none of the old editions is extant , it would haue bin counted coggery , or what worse may be in the language of our F. T. and his fellow-Criticks : yet he may vouch it , and aske no pardon . Eudaemon-Iohannes that Reuerend Father , as the Adioynder styles him ( mulus mulum , cap. 2. ) had the Bishop in iealousie , when time was , for counterfeiting an Epistle of the first Councell of Constantinople to the Emperour Theodosius , which but that hee was starke beetle-blind at broad noone day , he might haue found and groped in more then one edition . And shall these ware goe for currant now , which neuer saw the light till yesterday , to speake of ? But as for Eudoemon ( howsoeuer he esteeme of him , ) we will say no worse for this once , then with the holy Apostle , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . He should haue kept him at Crete , and not imbrued his hands in so vnciuill peice of seruice . More thankes would haue been shared him , with lesse losse to his reputation ; the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 both avoided . Yet it seemes that the Adioynder , pricked on with his example , makes hast to follow him . Of whome because we are speaking now of his corrupting the Fathers , I see not but that also may be reckoned among his corruptions , that he defends the Cardinalls adoremus for adornemus , and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , yea orare for currere , and invocare Martyrem for festinare ad basilicam ; with many such like errours , not onely against the originall Greeke or Latine , but against any reason that can be deuised in the world . Would it not follow by this meanes that angulos for angelos is good reading ? As in the Councell of Laodicea , Ne angelos nominemus , which they read angulos for many yeeres together , and thought they had the perfect meaning of the Canon ; so little they feared to be encombred with idolatrie . But to drawe to a conclusion . These things thus considered , may we not say to the Adioynder , rudely replying vpon so reuerend a Prelate , as Chrysippus did to one that pestered Cleanthes ( and though vnmannerly enough , yet I thinke not so rustically as our Adiumbler in many points ) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , . 1. Leaue troubling the graue and auncient Father , and bestow these thy qualicums ( thou mouthy Sophister ) vpon some younger eares , or greener heads , that neither haue weightier studies to detaine them , and are lesse able to espie through the shallownesse of thy drifts or the preposterousnesse of thine endeauours . Though who so blind , but sees that of himselfe , & sine monitore ? The Iesuites scope being only this in generall , to steale away hearts ( with Absalon ) from the KING , which is the damnable Plagium inueighed against by the Apostle , 1. Tim. 1. 9. and iustly coupled with 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , of the one side ( their natiue marke ) and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , of the other ( their equiuocating new character ) like the sorcerers of Babylon , ( right so they of Rome , the graund mother of enchantments ) of whome we read in Ieremy , 27. 9. that they perswaded the people with all their Rhetorique , not to adhere to the King , but to relinquish their fidelitie , though Almighty God had expressely charged them to the contrarie . And so here . It is not the double , nor the treble bond , of oft-sworne ALLEGEANCE , that can bate their furie , or bridle their force . For in all Vowes , the Popes relaxation is excepted , saies a Medina , ( and hee speakes it of Ecclesiasticall vowes , how much more then of this , which goes but for Ciuill ? ) so as perhaps he will not excuse our very vowe in Baptisme . b Thou knowest Lord that I hate this diademe , and these robes of honour ( sayes Queene Ester of her owne , in humilitie of spirit . ) But they of the Regall , wheresoeuer they find them , out of the peeuishnesse of their sect , and the pride of their heart . Especially in his MAIESTIE , since he hath entred the lists , and vndertaken in his owne person , the defence of his owne right ( which these impugne ) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , putting his subiects in minde of their dutie by writing , as Athanasius saith euery worthie Prince is to doe , when he doubts a defection . And he addes most elegantly ( as if he had aimed at the courses lately held by his MAIESTIE ) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , . 1. least proiects without prosecution be despised and derided ; suppose the penning of the oath , without that noble iustification of it against the Cardinalls countermine , which soone followed . As for the Adioynder in particular , ( a calo of that campe , but the meanest of many , — 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ) it is not to be dissembled neither , what his ends are , or the ends of them that aduance him for their champion . ( We heare he is a married man ( though most decently he rayle against our Ministers for marrying , and carpe the Bishop that defends their doing so . ) And they haue fitted him to the full ; not onely with a heresie the woman ( as Epiphanius calls her , and a shrewd one too ) but the b womans heresie . For Idolatrie & Disloyaltie being the womans heresies ( as Epiphanius also calls the one , and * Waltramus of Naumberge the other , in particular ) his booke is composed of these two elements onely , and out of them amounts his whole summe . Also his carriage is answerable , ( that you may know what he hath been vsed to , and what schoole he hath passed through ) as partly may appeare by that which hath beene said for the Survay of the whole ) partly is to be discerned out of the Title and Superscription of euery page of his booke ; viz. Conviciare audactèr , aliquid haerebit ; Turning the speech , which the noble captaine sometime vsed to his souldier , into the cleane contrarie , Non alo te vt pugnes , sed vt latres modò atque incestes ; Onely giue thy booke a broad and a bitter title , Call it , A Discouerie of lies and leasings , of frauds and falshoods , vsed by the Bishop ; say somewhat , that so worthie a monument , and preuailing with the world , may not seeme to goe cleere away without some contradiction ; Dart disgraces , vent thy virulences , fling reproaches boldly , though thou canst fasten none . And the rather , because some Priests are said to stagger here in England , after their reading the Bishops Answer to the Cardinalls Apologie , and considering how he satisfies the very choicest proofes , that the Cardinall could bring , etiam totis cōtra veritatē viribus vtens , ( besides his * own chusing what points he would speak to ) the Adioynd . taske must be , vincta venari , ( as Cyrus was wont to say of his huntings in a garden , after the Median fashiō ) to hunt bound beasts ; namely to keepe them Popish that are alreadie Papists , to diuert olde soakers from admitting the light shining in through the loop-holes of their double captiuitie ( more preiudiced consciences , then imprisoned bodies ) for this I say the Adioynder must throw dust , and cast smoake , and rayle with him that beares a head , to confound braines onely , to disioynt iudgements , and to disturbe proceedings . And herein I report me to the consciences of those very Priests , that haue but read his booke , whether this be meet dealing for one that writes against a Bishop , or likely to perswade with Christian people . But neither could Iannes and Iambres resist Moses in his miracles , neither may the Truth of God now be outfaced with the calumnies of lewd and shameles persons , as S. Paul promises vs by Moses his example ; ( for that which Miracles were then , the Truth is now , by the tenure of S. Pauls sentence , 2. Tim. 3. 8. ) And as for the Bishops reputation , whereof none that I haue obserued lesse sollicitous then himselfe , it may well be ; For his glorie accrewes from hence most of all . Semper adventantis fuit omen dignitatis , bruta & praeter modum iniuria . As ( to persist in the storie euen now touch'd vpon ) when the people murmured , then Aaron prospered , when the assembly blustered , then his rodde flourished , then God gaue testimonie of his worthinesse from heauen , and not before , as S. Chrysostome also notes . Allway when a man is most trampled here vpon earth , then God is neerest hand to lift vp his scale . An Abstract of the chiefer points treated in the Defence ; either purposely , as drawne thether by the Adioynders method , or by incidence . And it may serue for a summarie resutation of the whole . The Contents of the first Part. CHAP. 1. 1. IN what sense S. Austen saies , that Peter represented the Churches person ; Not as Supreame Magistrate ( which sauours not of Scripture , neither for words , nor sense , of Tullies Offices rather ; ) but as a patterne purposely pickt out by our Sauiour , to instance vnitie in , and to speake to one , what he meant of all , euen such as otherwise were cleane out of hearing . This is debated by collation of diuers places out of S. Austen , from pag. 3. to pag. 31. [ Insomuch as Sylvester himselfe , V. Clavis . § . 5. Omnes Sacerdotes habent claves . Nec obstat quod dictum est Petro , Tibi dabo ; Nam hoc factum est ad ostendendū VNITATEM ECCLESIAE . Yea Bellarm , acknowledges it to be the exposition of some Diuines of Paris , quòd Dominus oravit pro Petro , vt TOTIVS Ecclesiae figuram gerebat . Meaning thereby , that Christ praied not for his person ; but for the Church , which he resembled . Or els Bellarm , neede not reiect this exposition , ( as he doth ) if they said onely , that our Sauiour Christ praied for Peter as chiefe Magistrate . For then it would descend fitly enough vpon the Pope ; which is Bellarmines drift there . But he reiecteth it as I said ; Therefore gerere personam Ecclesiae , is not to be chiefe Magistrate , in his or their opinion . De Rom. Pont. l. 4. c. 3. in initio . ] 2. How Peter arriued to the glorie of Christs sufferings , and yet suffered not for vs , though fondly he once presumed to suffer for Christ himselfe , pro liberatore liberandus , as S. Aust . saies . Against the bartring of Satisfactions between one man & an other , an vsuall and againfull trade in Poperie . p. 32. 33. 34. 3. Peter the fitter to paragon the Church , because a great sinner , and so apt to shew mercie . The Church likewise , in the dispensation of the Keyes . p. 35. 4. Peters faults expressed by S. Austen , but omitted by the Adioynder , where he complaines of omissions . Fiue in all , to the preiudice of their Primacie , not to the proofe of it , as Bellarmine would . p. 35. 36. &c. 5. The peace of the Church stands in the gratiousnes of Princes , and their wishing well to Relligion , not in Iesuiticall resistance and armes . p. 38. 39. &c. 6. The Papists pride is the same with the Luciferians , in that they will not vnderstand Petrum in petra , that is , the Church in Christ , as S. Austen construes it . p. 40. 7. The Luciferians forbid mariages , as the Papists doe : but not the Fathers , nor the Councells , though it be after vow , as is most probable . p. 41. 8. The words of S. Ambrose , which the Adioynder impudently charges the Bishop to be of his deuising , and vtterly beside the truth of all copies , are manifestly shewed first to be in eleuen printed copies very ancient , then in fowre manuscripts beyond exception . One of the KINGS MAIESTIES Librarie , a copie very faire written , and withall so auncient as before the Conquest , giuen by a Monke called Os-Ketel , to the Monasterie of Rochester . Another of Merton Colledge in Oxford . Two out of the Vniuersitie of Cambridge . Lastly , in an other edition of Paris , that retaines those words , after the late Rome Copie had presumed to leaue them out , by the partiall direction of Felice Peretto , afterwards Sixtus Quintus . pag. 44. &c. ( Whereunto may be added ( because the Adioynder makes this his capitall imputation of vntruths to the Bishop ) that Iohannes Viguerius a Papist of chiefe note for learning and iudgement , reads them iust as the Bishop quoteth them . Institut , ad Theolog. Christianam , c. 16. § 6. v. 5. De Sacramento Ordinis . ) 9. How the Friars vse the Fathers , when they are not for their turne , but especially S. Ambrose aboue all others , out of Iunius his report of his owne experience of their Presses , when he was at Lyons in France . p. 45. & 46. 10. Peter the prime , but more primes then Peter . p. 47. 11. The Vicars of Christ , are all Ministers in their degree , but specially the Bishops . p. 49. 12. Peter feeds all , and yet others feed him , as Paul and Iames , so as no superioritie follows from thence . p. 51. 13. The friuelous distinction , betweene sheepe and lambs , hissed out by Maldonate ; preiudiciall to the Pope though it were receiued , by Tolet and Turrian their expositions . p. 50. 51. &c. 14. The Leuites were subiect to the Temporall Prince , and a part of Israel , euen in that sense . The Adioynders proofes to the contrarie are answered . Arguments for the other side , which he hath not answered . p. 52. 53. &c. ( Rabanus Maurus in locū , ( praeter alios citatos in corpore Defens . ) sic . Quòd recensiti quidem & Leuitae fuerint ( inuentusque numerus ad 22000. ) sed seorsim . Non ob exemptionem ab obedientia , sed eximietatem virtutis quam prae se ferre debent . Denique . 3. Reg. 11. 38. ( secundū 70 ) dantur Salomoni . i. Regi saeculari . Nihil ergò iuvabit ad exemptionē , quòd aliàs Levitae dati sunt Aaroni ; vt pertendit F. T. ) 15. The Adioynders blasphemie confuted , That Christ by his comming abridged the soueraigntie of temporall Princes . That it remaines as ample still , as in the old Law. p. 59. &c. largè . 16. Kings are to feede the Church of God , and Peter himselfe but to feede it . Cyrus head and pastor of the Church , with some likelihood that he was saued . p. 63. &c. 17. The Papists ascribe temporall primacie to the Pope , for all the Adioynders dissembling . The KINGS MAIESTIE is not so forward to challenge spirituall primacie , as the Papists impute to him ; whatsoeuer he might . p. 67. 18. English Bishops , and among them the Bishop of Elie , no dealer in Coactions . p. 68. 19. The Swords are two , and diuided in their bearers , though linked in vse ; according to Gelasius his iudgement of that matter . p. 69. 20. Princeps , & Caput , common to others with Peter , and therefore enforce not . p. 70. 71. 21. The Papists , not we , are readie to depose Magistrates , vpon conceit of their misbehauiour . Their slaundering of Wickliff , vpon no ground , that they shew . ( So , in another matter , Wickliff is censured by Petrus Lutzemburg : to hold that which none els euer imputed to him , though they had sifted him narrowly . Witnes Alphonsus , lib. 12. contrahaereses . V. Purgatorium , in initio . Lex quaedam accusatoria , & , Consuetudo maledicendi , pricking them on , without any further euidence , to carpe at Wickliff . ) NONE but CHRIST from heauen may depriue his STEVVARD ; by BELLARMINES owne confession . p. 74. 75. 22. The Bishop said right , that Peter was restored to his Apostleship . p. 77. &c. ( Adde & de Magist . in 4. Sent. dist . 19. § ) Qualem autem &c. ex August . Saepè lapsis Sacerdotibus reddita est dignitatis potestas , Et , Petrus post lapsum restitutus fuit , &c. ) 23. S. Cyrill giues the preheminence ouer all , to Kings . p. 81. ( To which that might be added , ex eodem Cyrill . Comment . in locum Micheae citat . ( which he speakes of Kings ) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , Crowned and dignified with the MOST SVPREAME EXCELLENCIES . ) 24. S. Chrysostome no fauourer of Peters singular Primacie , but against it directly . p. 82. 25. Peter the mouth of the Apostles . And what though ? p. 83. 26. Peter gaines the checke , by asking Christ the question , which the Adioynder would draw to prooue his Monarchie by . p. 84. 27. Leoes authorities of Peters primacie are discussed . p. 86. 28. The Law Inter claras , not glossed by sundrie Lawyers ; and for that , and other reasons , iustly to be suspected , if not reiected . p. 88. &c. 29. The not erring of the Church of Rome for a certaine season , was no securitie for her perseuerance in after-times . The titles giuen to her by Iustinian , are common to other Churches ; and some greater then they . p. 91. 30. Iustinians facts of more force to prooue , then Patarensis his words . And the Adioynders instance against this , is answered . p. 93. 31. Vniust assaults proceeding from authoritie , are not to bee resisted , but from others they may . Syluerius a traytour to Iustiniau . p. 94 32. Iustinian slaundered by the Adioynder of vnlearnednesse , without ground . His saluation likewise questioned by him , very vncharitably . p. 95 33. Patarensis his words imply not Syluerius his right to vniuersall iurisdiction , and much lesse to the temporall , which the Pope challengeth . p. 96 34. Euery Minister is a Minister ouer the Church of the whole world : in what sense . p. 97 35. Liberatus his storie which the Adioynder quoteth , hath more for the preheminence of the Emperour aboue the Pope , then the Pope aboue him . p. 98 CHAP. 2. 36. AThanasius flees to Iulius for aide , not for iudgement . As any Bishop in distresse might to him that were able to rescue . p. 103 37. It was more then Pope Leo could doe , to quash the Canon of the Councell of Chalcedon , concerning the equalling of Constantinople with Rome . The Adioynders foure reasons to the contrarie are answered . p. 105 38. The Popes censures derided by godly Bishops , and himselfe censured as fast when there was occasion . p. 107 39. Other obiections dissolued against the Canon of Chalcedon , viz. 1. the Emperour Iustinus , and Iohn Bishop of Constantinople , their seeking for vnion with the See of Rome . 2. Tu es Petrus , & super hanc petram , applyed to Pope Symmachus by the Easterne Bishops . 3. Vigilius his presidentship in the Councel of Constantinople , with Eutychius his good leaue . 4. The Popes deposing of Bishops , &c. p. 108. &c. 40. Pope Leos humble and yet bootelesse intercession to the Emperour Martian , to disanull the Canon of the Councel of Chalcedon . The Adioynders childish aucupium at the word intercedere . p. 110. &c. 41. Fowre reasons brought by the Adioynder , why Pope Leo had good cause to except against the said Canon , ( though it be cleane beside the Text of the Bishops booke , which he professeth to refute , and a meere itching after occasion to be doing ) are answered in their order . As first , that Anatolius his aspiring humour was not the cause of enacting this Canon , as the Adioynder staunders him . Secondly , that the Canon was neither made in the absence of the Popes Legates , nor yet by constraint or surreption of the Fathers , but with generall willingnesse and gratulation of all sides , saue onely the partiall Agents of Pope Leo , &c. p. 112. 113. 114. &c. 42. The styles of poore suiters , and the backesides of letters , not to bee drawne into argument , as the Bishop answered . The Adioynders replyes to the contrarie confuted . p. 116. 117 43. Titles giuen to Leo by the Councell , are no more then haue been giuen to other Bishops , and some of them to Noble Lay-men . The Bishops of Alexandria and Constantinople are called Bishops of the Catholique Church . p. 118 44. Idle distinction of the Adioynder , betweene the priuiledges of Rome , graunted in respect of the seate of the Empire ( as the Councell specifies ) and others issuing from S. Peter , ( which the Fathers take no knowledge of . ) p. 121 45. Leoes excommunicating of Dioscorus ; but by the Synod , per praesentem sanctam Synodum , the very words of his Legates in the Councell . Which the Adioynder most wretchedly sticks not to construe , as if the Synode had been Leoes instrument in the Excommunication . Whereas Peter himselfe might bee his instrument by the same meanes , it following immediately , vnà cum beato Petro , &c. p. 122 46. Leo the interpreter of the voyce of blessed Peter . A sorie elogium , yet much stood vpon by the Adioynder , to prooue the Monarchie . ibid. & 123 47. Leoes presidentship in the Councell of Chalcedon , so much vrged by the Adioynder , nothing to the purpose . No wonder if he were suffered to appoint his owne Legates , after they had made choice of him to be their president . p. 124 48. Priests admitted to Councels , and sometime they that were no Priests . p. 125. CHAP. 3. 49. THe Cardinall driuen to say Mother Peter , or else to let goe S. Cyprians authoritie ; which belongs to the Church , not to Peter , nor the Pope . p. 126. &c. 50. In the great equalitie of the Apostles between themselues , yet one was singled out from the quire in general , to recommend vnitie to the followers of Christ ( which may serue to stop Mr. Saunders his fowle mouth , that cryes shame vpon vs for not hauing such a one at least , though wee admit no Pope , saith he . But neither haue wee such authoritie to frame mysteries , or mysticall significations to our selues , and vnitie is most vnitie , when it is instanced but once ; often , were to breake it . ) p. 128. 51. Caput in S. Cyprian , is not the Popes person , nor any mans whatsoeuer ; but Christs Originall Truth which he brought into the world for our direction . p. 129. 52. The Adioynders grosse corrupting of S. Cyprians text : ( though he crie out euery where against the Bishop for corruptions . ) p. 130. 53. His ignorance no lesse grosse in his rudiments of Grammar , and of the Latine tongue , ( the vsuall Cacoëthes that visits him euery where . ) p. 131. 54. How the Church is built vpon Peter . p. 132. 55. The Bishops coniecture remaines probable , that the Cardinall left out those words out of Cyprian deceitfully , wherein he saies , That it had beene an arrogant and an insolent part in Peter , to haue answered Paul when he rebuked him , by saying , That the Primacie was his , and therefore he ought not to be controlled . ibid. 56. The Adioynder neuertheles saies , that Peter might haue said so in his full right ; giuing Cyprian the lie , so . ibid. 57. Peters primacie opposed to Pauls nouellitie and iunioritie in the words of S. Cyprian . Ergò not a primacie of authoritie . p. 33. 58. The Adioynder is content to charge S. Peter with errour , dummodò imperet . Takes away veritie , to giue him primacie , very vnaduisedly . ibid. 59. The Bishops denying the sequele , à fundamento ad caput , is maintained against the trifling sophistries of the Adioynder . p. 134. 60. The testimonies out of S. Hierome for Peters primacie , are answered : for one word of eminencie , three of equalitie are found in the first of them . p. 135. 61. A head against schisme , is a head of order onely ; sufficient if it preuent disorder . p. 136. 62. The Apostles though confirmed , might neede such a head ; or though not they , yet the multitudes that might haue reference to them . And to the Adioynder , telling vs that we neede such a head as much as the Apostles , we graunt what he saies , and we admit no lesse , or rather farre more , though we acknowledge no Pope . p. 137. 63. The proudest Priest of them all , may not force a King : and , That externall coaction is denied to the Minister against whomsoeuer of the faithfull . Latè à p. 137. ad p. 144. 64. The Bishops style not subiect to reproofe : they that reprehend it , offend more grossely in the same kind themselues : and namely Cardinall Bellarmine 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 — p. 146. 65. Iovinians heresies touch not vs , ( if they were herefies ) but the Papists rather . And of the honourablenes of holy Matrimonie , which the Adioynder a married man ( perhaps repenting ) depraues , the Reuerend Bishop in his single life defends . p. 147. 66. A most ridiculous distinction , betweene three kinds of Foundations , magnified by the Adioynder , but confuted . p. 149. 67. Bellarmine and Baronius playing blind-man-buffe , about Peters primacie . That which is ordinarie to the one , is extraordinarie to the other , and that extraordinarie which is ordinarie . The same Andabata is betweene Bellarmine and himselfe , as if he loued the sport . Moses the greater Magistrate ( saies he ) because extraordinarie : And yet , Peter because ordinarie , therefore the greater . p. 150 68. S. Hierome rackt to say , Peters chaire is the rocke vpon which the Church is built ; he saies it not . p. 151. 69. Magister orbis , is not Monarcha orbis , with S. Chrysostome . p. 152. 70. Columna & firmamentum both veritatis and Ecclesiae , was their title that were no Popes . ibid. 71. S. Iames his prouince as large as Peters . p. 153. 72. What manner of Princes the Apostles of Christ were in all Lands . p. 154. 73. The Popes tyrannie is not abated by the multitudes of people that he vsurpes vpon , ( as the Adioynder would ) but rather creased , and made more odious . p. 155. 74. Rome no Sanctuarie , Succession no shield , against corruption and error . p. 156. CHAP. 4. 75. SPirituall Mens Monarchy pleaded for by the Adioynder , in ipsis terminis . p. 158 76. To be pronounced Blessed , is not to bee preferred to the gouernement of the whole Church . p. 159 77. Basil is not for the Pope to be a Monarch . He findes footesteps of reuerence towards secular Princes , euen in reasonlesse creatures ; and interprets the Word of God to bee our King. p. 160. 78. Others as well as Peter , haue prelation ( 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ) among the Apostles , out of Nazianzene . And therefore that implyes no soueraigntie . p. 161. 162. &c. ( Vide & Procop. in Esa . 17. 6. duos tresue 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , & 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , atque 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , elicientem Apostolos ; idque ex verbis Prophetae vt sibi videtur . Nominatque ( vt Nazianzenus ) Petrum , Iacobum , Iohannem . ) 79. Pastor a word of basenesse , with S. Basil . And yet alleadged out of Chrysostome , to prooue Peters supremacy , by the Adioynder . p. 164 80. The Pope alone is not entrusted with the care of conuerting infidell countries to the Faith. ibid. 81. Both the Cardinall , and the Adioynder corrupt S. Chrysostome , foysting the word caput into his Text , where there is none in the Greeke . And then beeing caught , he carps at our men for taking vpon them ( as he calls it ) to set out the Greek Fathers . A theife displeased with Candle-light . p. 165. &c. 82. The comparison that S. Chrysostome makes , betweene Peter and Ieremy , in respect of the latitude of their iurisdictions , it aduantageth not the Pope . p. 168 83. Whether Peter might create an Apostle of his owne head in the place of Iudas , without consulting the communitie . It seemes not , both by S. Chrysostome , and otherwaies ; though the Adioynder from thence would prooue the Popedome . p. 169. 84. More proofes of the Adioynders good skill in Latine . The Bishops booke pushes him away , with the very style and penning of it ( tanquam cornibus ) whiles hee offers to refute it . p. 170. 85. Sermones de Tempore , neuer so intitled by S. Austen . A doubtfull worke , and carrying small validitie in it . Full of fowle Latine , and fonder sense , is the Sermon quoted by the Cardinall . p. 172 86. Miserable shifts of the Adioynder to defend them . ibid. 87. As iust as Germans lippes , nine miles asunder . The Eue falls out three daies before the holy day ; and at another time , fourteen yeares before the Feast ; the Adioynders rauing computations . p. 173 88. Peters fall was to asswage his fiercenesse , beeing a chollericke man ; And though it were also to encline him to pitty , yet without any inference of the Popedome from thence , pittie beeing a generall vertue for all Ministers , and dealers in Soule-matters , ( besides that Paul was toucht with as deep a sence of his infirmities , and remorse for bad courses formerly vsed , as any of them all , Tit. 3. 1. Tim. 1. 15. Eph. 2. 3. & 4. ) And yet both Bellarmine and the Adioynder are not ashamed to raise such an vnlikely consequence , from the fall of Peter , ( for want of better proofe ) to conclude his Supremacy . p. 174 89. Praeferri cunctae Ecclesiae , is farre short of the Primacie , that they contend for . Common also not to the Apostles onely , but to all Bishops in generall , by Origens iudgement . p. 174 90. The Reuerend Bishop not to be taught by the Adioynder , how to censure the falls and infirmities of Gods Saints . p. 175 91. Appeales to the Pope out of Affrica , for bidden vnder paine of Excommunication , in a lawfull Synod , whereof S. Austen was one . p. 176. 177 92. The Fathers words are not supplicatorie but peremptorie against Appeales , though preseruing their reuerence as to a worthy Sea , and the parties that sate in it , otherwise godly men , and like enough to be aduised by them . p. 178 93. The Bishop forgeth not , but the Adioynder slauereth and slaundereth as he is wont . All Appeales out of Affrica are interdicted . Not only Priests but Bishops too , and the Bishops most of all . p. 180 94. The Adioynders slight exceptions against this are answered . p. 181. & 182 95. His monstrous sliding away from the state of the question , to fight with an imaginary shadow of his owne . And yet therein also he is not onely vnsound , but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , hee contradicts himselfe , in his second instance , most apparantly . p. 182. & 183. 96. Pope Zozimus his drawing of S. Austen to Caesarea , to dispatch Church-businesses , is no argument of the ones vniuersall authoritie , but rather of the others rare sufficiencie . Traxit , compulit , coegit , is for equalls , as well as for Superiours . p. 184. & 185. ( Adde ex S. Prospero Praef. lib. ad Excerpta Genuens . de Camillo & Theodoro Presbyteris ; quibus obsequium deferens , simplicitatem obedientiae sibi tribuit , [ tantus Episcopus . ] ) 97. Liberius his letters in behalfe of certaine false dissembling Arrians , to the Councell of Tyana , for their restitution , to which also the Councell yeelded , prooue not that the Bishop of Rome is of such authoritie as he must needs be obeyed , but that he is not so discerning , but he may be gulled and cheated , as he was by those hypocrites . Reasons out of S. Basil , why the Bishops of that Councell had respect to Liberius , nothing to the Supremacie . First , because the abuse springing from those parts ( in receiuing Eustathius to grace , vndeseruing ) reason it was that from thence also should come the reformation . Secondly , to auoide the suspition of emulation , and home-bred quarrells ; which is incidenter between Bishops of the same Country , then between forreiners . Thirdly , to fortisie the proceedings in the cause by the concurrence of many Bishops , &c. p. 186. & 187 ( 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , Chrysost , At Ecclesiast . 12. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . Quod referunt & huc . ) 98. The Bishops that the Adioynder saies Iulius restored , Sozomen saies plainly , they were restored by the Emperour . Yet happily Iulius was not slacke in the cause to do his best endeauours ; as becommeth euerie godly Bishop of Christendome , according to the abilities that his place affoardeth him . And so may we construe , Omnium curam gerens . Quis scandalizatur & ego non vror ? as it came not from Peter , so it belongs to all that are zealous in their rancke . The Greekes thinke much that they should come behind the Romans because of the amplitude of that Church , where as they presume for certaine , that they excell them in piety , and vertuous life . Lastly , they are so hardie , as to threaten Iulius for transgressing of the Canons , p. 188. & 189. 99. Damasus his titles , the Adioynders tattles , frothie stuffe to conclude for Monarchie . p. 189. & 190 100. Damasus his gouerning the house of God : His letters for Peter of Alexandria . ibid. 101. Damasus takes in hand , Vitalis an Antiochian heretike , to examine him ; but by the permission of Paulinus his own Bishop . So may any body . Prescribe , a proud word of the Adioynders weauing in , cleane besides the truth of the text . Damasus confesseth that Paulinus could doe as much as himselfe in the matter , but onely to shewe consent between Bishops , &c. p. 191. 102. The Adioynders buskin tearmes are opened : Flauianus his pretended restoring by Damasus , was nothing but their mutuall returning to agreement after a priche ; the manner being in those times , for two dissenting Bishops , to forbeare the communion of one another , till reconciliation and clearing of matters , &c. p. 192 103. Of Pope Siricius ; That the Councell of Capua committing to him the small hearing of acause , makes for the Councels authoritie , rather then for his ; the Councel deputing , he being deputed . And yet not with any power to controwle former iudgements , but because ( saies S. Ambrose ) they presumed that what Theophilus ( Bishop of Alexandria ) should define , the same would Siricius ( the Pope of Rome ) allowe . 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 — p. 193 104. Siricius rescript to Himerius questions , nothing to our question . ibid. 105. Anastasius and Innocentius their speciall ayde implored by the Fathers against the heretikes : but no vniuersall iurisdiction of theirs acknowledged . p. 194. 106. Vniuersall iurisdiction goes not with sedes Apostolica . Of which kind there are more then the Romane Sea. Pastorall diligence to preuent the danger of Christs weake members , is made power and authoritie ouer ALL the members of Christs bodie , as the Adioynder metamorphoses it , to claw the Pope . p. 195. 107. Innocentius either a badpen-man , or his Epistles counterfeit . Yet Rescripsit ad omnia prout fas erat &c. is of the matters then in hand , not of the bye : which notwithstanding are not so prowdas the Adioynder would frame them , paring away words to peruert the sentence : which he imputes to the Bishop , while he practiseth himselfe . p. 196. CHAP. 5. 108. PEters Summitie , or Summa potestas , excludes not the other Apostles from their fellowship in it , no not in Bellarmines mouth ; and much lesse in Origens . Therefore it inferres no Monarchie . p. 198. 109. The Papists fleete from sense to sense , in expounding of Scriptures , and at last they say , that the literall sense is not so plaine as the allegoricall . A fine fancie . p. 199. 110. Not we , but the Papists , confound Clergie and Laitie . The Pope giues leaue to lay-men to dispense spirituall matters , and some to take the Sacrament out of their own hands . p. 200. ( Womens Baptisme vsuall in Poperie : yet S. Chrysostome as astonished cries out vpon it . 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ; What saiest thou ? Does a woman baptize ? Tom. 5. Savilian . p. 480. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ) 111. Origen tasts it not , that the Church should be built vpon Peter alone , and not vpon other Apostles as well . p. 201. 112. But vpon Iohn rather ; whome he preferres wonderfully . p. 203. & 205. 113. As one , so the other , of things spoken to Peter , ( in Origens iudgement ) are to be construed . Pasce oves , like Ae dificabo super hanc , & è contra . Therefore the Bishop satisfies all most directly , answering one by the other , of the places cōcerning Peter produced out of Origen , notwithstanding the Adioynders absurd cauillation . p. 202. 114. Paul equall with Peter at least . p. 204. 115. Peter could not merit to be the rocke of the Church , as the Adioynder dreames out of S. Hilarie misunderstood . And much lesse by onely rowing in a boat at sea , ( as out of Maximus ) could he atcheiue such preferment , so incomparably distant . S. Hilarie assignes the prerogatiue to his faith , fiue-fold to nothing , aboue his person . p. 206. 207. 208. 209. 116. Maximus his Sermons , of what authoritie . p. 210. 117. The Adioynder as all Papists , would faine be at his Carters-logicke , and professes cruelties . p. 213 118. The Papists to blame ( as the Bishop most acutely told them , answering Maximus testimonie , ) to assigne Peter the charge of a particular Church ( viz. Rome ) after he was Cheife and Gouernour in their opinion of the Vniuersall . p. 211. 119. This replie of the Bishops , is defended against the Adioynders wittie follies . p. 213. & 214. 120. Continuall succssion of Bishops , one after another , in the same Sea , doth not prooue that none of them euer erred . p. 212. 121. And much lesse that Peter was at Rome , because the Succession in the Sea of Rome neuer failed . ibid. 122. Maximus his elogia of Paul and Peter so tempered , as he rather enclines to yeild Paul the preheminence . p. 214. & 215 123. The old Papists were not so violent in their conclusions against Princes , as the moderne Iesuits . p. 217. ( Iesuini in eo sapientes , quòd put ant se coelo ipsi quandoque imperaturos . Pap. Mass . in Paulo 4. [ Hem. ] ) 125. The Adioynder like a man deadly sicke , that does not feele his griefe ; so refuses to see wherin the Bishop hath hurt them , and saies that his arguments trouble the Bishop out of all measure . p. 217. &c. 126. The temporall and earthly Primacie disclaimed by the Papists , though they practise the thing it selfe ; which is vtterly forbidden them . p. 220. & 221. Faults escaped in the Printing , whereof some are alreadie mended in some Copies . Pag. lin .     20 26 cupiditate charitate . 116 vlt. these those 119 23 emprison surprize 27 surely sure 120 11 humour his humour is 129 17 called culled 131 21 primùm primum [ & emēda sic , toties quoties . Viciū fuit correctoris corrigēdi ] 135 24 What then ? [ What then ? ] 138 8 these those 141 8 truely Read freely 12 speakes vpon speaks it vpon 152 1 none but none first but 164 24 tooke Capsur to Capsur 187 33 * Iulius Iulius 34 Marcellus * Marcellus 218 2 [ post ] Ambrose hath told you , and Origen hath told you , 235 11 Num. 49. Num. 20. 242 15 Thessalonians for him Thessalonians to pray for him . 262 20 our your 275 14 Baronius writ it Baron . writing it 275 15 The Apostle S. Iohn Timothy S. Pauls scholler . [ estque locus apud Bar. T. 1. An. 60. num . 41. ] 277 23 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 279 4 flumenta fluenta 281 5 opposeth apposeth ( or paralleleth ) 286 21 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 307 34 1. Cor. 15. 1. Cor. 11. 315 25 1. Cor. 15. 1. Cor. 13. 321 1 300. yeares certen 100. yeare 24 well euict will euict . 354 8 6 7 357 25 dele also   417 6 [ post ] 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and Read that which is not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , ( or , that which is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ) may be , &c 426 29 were where 430 8 dele this   9 vrging it vrging for the promise 433 2 in Iouinian , in Iouinianum , 462 25 Virgin Nonne 463 6 [ post ] the Pope ( remaining Pope ) cannot 511 27 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 516 25 Clergie Church 520 11 Marcion Marcian Marg. 73 5. & 6 & Heracleota Mopsuestenus , Heracleota , & Mopsuestenus , 213 8 Vrbis Orbis 232 5 HEE HE 257 16 with them by them 263 1 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 278 2 in Epist . 5. Cant. in cap. 5. Cant. 279 6 cap. 8. Read cap. 9. 307 7 himselfe said to S. Iohn ? said to S. Iohn himselfe ? 486   dele , Com. in Epist , &c.   489 7 Homo nihili Testis nihili 506 1 Luc. 2. 2. Luc. 3. 2. 549 lin . 2. vnwilling vnwitting . notae quartae     CHAP. I. Of the Defence of the Bishop of ELIE his Answer to CARD . BELLARMINES Apologie , against the slaunderous Adioynder of one F. T. Wherein besides certaine other occurrents of lesser importance , two things especially are recleered : viz. The BISHOPS vnderstanding of S. Austens exposition of Pasce oves meas in the right sense ; and his most vpright quoting of S. Ambrose his words to the same purpose . § 1. AS a Eusebius describing the raigne of Constantine the Great , after the Nicene Councell , calls it a blessed time , when all things beeing established both for Religion and Gouernment , nothing was in mention but the Trinitie in heauen , and the Emperour vpon earth , with his Royall issue ; that prayed to , these prayed for , ( 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , as S. Paul couples them , 2. Thess . 2. 4 ) euen twice a day praied for , in the publike seruice , without any flatterie : witnesse b S. Chrysostome , Com. in 1. Tim. 2. So the Adioynder spends it selfe in the defacing of them both , the KINGS Supremacie , and the Invocation of the one and onely true GOD , by his Sonne Iesus Christ . And first the Supremacie , then the other ; because Kings beeing as ramparts to fortifie Religion , when they goe downe , Gods worship consequently goes to wracke . For Kings doe not minde matters of warre so much , or of the State ( saies the same Chrysostome else-where , and Leo c subscribes ) by vertue of their calling which they haue from God , as of Religion , and Pietie , and of the Church . d 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . Therefore many other particulars occurring in the Bishops Answer to Card. Bellarmine ( as indeede each of his bookes for their admirable varietie , is rather 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , then 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , rather an artificiall embroiderie , then a single monument ) this man singles out onely these two in effect , not ignorant of the relation , or the connexion that they haue betweene themselues , That it is fatall in a manner ( as the e Orator said of himselfe ) nec vinci sine Republica posse , nec vincere ; so , that f Christ should be dishonoured without the King were impeached , nor the King disparaged , vnles Christ were dishonoured . And againe , Nemo alteri bellum indicit , qui non eodem etiam tempore & alteri : no man assaults the one , but he oppugnes the other , for the most part , at the same time . § 2. FIue Chapters he spends about the first of these two points , fiue more about the second , and certaine other driblets which he g interlaces to the end of his booke . In the first , is first quarelled S. Austens exposition of Pasce oves meas , feede my sheepe ; which the Bishop alleadged out of his booke de agone Christiano , c. 30. Cùm Petro dicitur , ad omnes dicitur , Pasce oves . meas : when it is said to Peter , it is said to all , Feed my sheepe . And therfore he is not made , by vertue of those words at least , Vniuersall Gouernour of Christs Church . The strength of F. T. his replie to this authoritie ( sparing the more ample quotation of the place , which in the ende I shall quote perhaps more amply then he , though he pretend to quote it somewhat more amply then the Bishop ) lies in this ; That whereas S. Austen saies , the commission giuen to Peter , Feede my sheepe , was giuen to all ( ad omnes dicitur , ) it was because S. Peter bare the person of the Church , which with him imports as much , as to be indued with Supreame authoritie ouer the Church . And to this end Tullies Offices are quoted very freshly , Est proprium munus magistratûs , &c. It is the proper office or dutie of a Magistrate , to vnderstand , that he beareth the person of the citie . And so , saies he , Peter looses no authoritie by this authoritie , but gaines rather . § 3. Where first when S. Austen saies , that Peter bare the person of the Church , and by that expounds his ad omnes dicitur , as this man fancyeth ; I should thinke vnder correction , that he meanes the Church onely representatiue , consisting of the Apostles and Pastors , and no more ; for they onely feede : which will hardly amount to so great a summe , as the Papists would make S. Peter chiefe Magistrate of : viz. to beare authoritie ouer the whole Church militant , and euery member thereof . Yea , and in some cases of extention , not onely ouer them which are without holy orders , and so no Feeders , but ouer them also which are cleane fallen away from the Church : and which is yet more , ouer them which neuer set foote within it . For thither also reacheth their ierke , as they call it , of indirect power . And though this should be granted in S. Austens sense , that S. Peter bare the person of all the members of the Church , ( as no question but he figured the communitie in many things , as may be afterward not onely yeilded to , but declared at large , ) yet who would euer beleeue , that whē the h precept is of Feeding the flock of Christ , this precept is giuen to the flocke it selfe ? which neuerthelesse must needes be I say , if it be giuen to S. Peter , bearing the person of the flocke ; as he must needs beare that , if he beare the person of the whole Church , euen in that , that he was bid to feede the flocke . Doe you see then what a confusion you haue brought vs in already ? how you haue pulled down the partition wall betweene the Laitie and the Clergie , so as now i Theodosius may sit him downe where he will , though it be at Millan it selfe , without any scrupulositie ? how you haue vtterly remooued the inclosures about the mountaine , and made way for M. Saunders his k Aclerus , as he calls him , while you would seeme to set vp a Nauclerus in Christs Church , and to be the onely true friend to the beautie of Gods house ? Yet you are wont to l say , that this is our fault , to take away distinction betweene the sheepe and the shepheard , betweene the people and the Pastors , and to lay all open to the wild boare out of the wood . Nay , not onely you confound the Laitie and the Clergie , but you make as many Popes by this meanes as there be Christians . For placing the Popedome in Pasce oves meas , in feeding Christs sheepe , you graunt that this commission was giuen to Peter representing their persons , &c. Which is as much to say , as , they are all made Feeders of the whole flocke , by vertue of these words , no lesse then he . § 4. As for that you expound the bearing of the person by Tullies Offices , to be no other then to be made Supreame Magistrate , though it be first vncouth to expound Austen by Tullie , whose phrase for the most part is not so sutable ; yet let S. Austen deliuer his owne minde for this point , lib. de pastor . ( for wee speake of pasce , and hee handles this argument in the very place that I quote ) cap. 12. Quemadmodum loquantur authores mundi , quid ad nos ? As much to say , as , What care wee how Tully speakes ? Besides , that if S. Austen had meant to decipher Peter by those words to be cheife magistrate of the Church vnder Christ , ( for so you conceiue ) perhaps he would rather haue said that he bore Christi personam , then Ecclesiae ; the person of Christ , then of the Church . As the deputy Regent of a kingdome or territorie vnder an absolute Prince , may rather be said to beare the Princes person , then the Common-wealthes that he gouernes in his right . So here . And so speakes your Andradius , lib. 1. de Concil . Papa Christi personam gerit , the Pope beares the person of Christ : so diuerse more of the same straine . Neither lastly , does it seeme likely in reason , that a Prince should represent for his Common-wealth , the head for the bodie , which are rather distinguished still one against the other , as membra diuidentia , and two parties ; but either certaine of the Commons for the whole multitude ; or as in other cases , some one man for the King. But compare wee more narrowly S. Austen with Tully , since you will needs vrge vs to it . § 5. In Tully it is gerere , in S. Austen gestare personam Ecclesiae . Is there no difference thinke you betweene these two ? What if one be of things figuratiue , another of things essentiall ? wil you blame me as too criticall for distinguishing betweene gerere and gestare ? Gerimus magistratum , gestamus vestem , either scenicam , or some other . Gestamus & personam ; I meane not nowe personam in S. Austens sense , least S. Peter be farther off from his supremacie then you are aware . And though Austen in some place may say , gerere personam , euen of Peter in this case , yet neither in that place that you now alleadge , de Agone Christiano , cap. 30. and for one gerebat , you shal haue 5. gestabats in S. Austen , I beleeue . Gestare , portare , sustinere , sigurare , all these I may remember ; gerere , though I denie not , yet it comes so sieldom , as I may truely say , I scarce remember . § 6. Touching what you insert here , That whatsoeuer is giuen to the King as King , the same is giuen to the Common-wealth , whereof he beareth and representeth the person : and so in like manner , what was giuen to S. Peter as head of the Church , the same belongs to the Church her selfe : I will not follow you too close about your State-positions , so fauourable to Kings as we knowe of old , so inlarging their sway as you now professe , that what power the one hath , the other hath the like , King and people , ( though 1. Sam. 8. 11. we read of iudicium Regis erga populū , but none populi erga Regem , the King might iudge the people , but not the people the King ) & therefore this secret might haue rotted in your breast ; to omit this I say , It will follow out of your doctrine , that what our Sauiour may doe as Head of his Church , the same may his Church doe of her owne head . The instances are diuerse , in your practise specially , I need not faine . As to mangle the communion , to dismisse subiects from their allegiance , to restraine marriages , to dispense with vowes , with oathes , &c. In all which you set your wit against his , your authoritie against his , and namely in the question of assoyling from Obedience , how often doe we heare from you in plaine tearmes , that Ecclesia habet authoritatem Dei in terris ? No doubt , because whatsoeuer is giuen to the head , the same is giuen to the bodie , as here you tell vs. Though againe you are as rude with your owne Doctors , as before you were rash with Princes Crownes , when you say in your application , that in like sort whatsoeuer is giuen to Saint Peter as Head of the Church , the same is giuen to the Church her selfe : which you would neuer haue said , I suppose , but to defend your grammar-paradoxe about gerere personam , with a farre more desperate paradoxe in diuinitie . Discerne you no better betweene Popes and Councels , which are the Church in effect ? or shall these play quarter-masters with the Pope ? Doe you so vnderstand the Councell of Basile , or the Councell of Constance , which your fellowes would helpe you to construe more mildly ; or will you reuiue that charme of our King Henrie the 4. of famous memorie , who writing to the Pope to perswade him to conformitie , alleadged thus ( if Stow say true : ) Si non audierit Ecclesiam , &c. If he heare not the church , that is , obey not , let him be vnto thee as an heathen & a Publican ? As for S. Cyprians authoritie , which you botch into your text here , impertinēt enough , that Ecclesia est in Episcopo , the Church is in the Bishop , because the Bishop , as you say , is Head of the Church ; do you not consider why that was spoken by S. Cyprian , euen to curbe the insolencie of your Romish Hierarche , and to shew that Bishops are rather absolute in themselues , ( he of Carthage at least , Romes ancient peu-fellow ) and no way depending on forraine Tribunalls ? Rationem actûs sui Christo reddituri , as the same Father sayes elsewhere , to giue account of their doings to Christ [ onely . ] But I come to S. Austen . In whose words I affirme , that gerere personam , is to resemble the Church , or to stand for the Church ; not to bee made the cheife magistrate of the Church , as you would face vs. And that our Sauiour directing his charge to them all , instanced the willinger , as I may say , in one , which was S. Peter , and spake to him for all , to commend the loue of vnitie to them . Imò verò & in ipso Petro vnitatem commendauit : yea , and in Peter himselfe hee commended [ this ] vnitie : Multi erant Apostoli , & vni dicitur , Pasceoues meas : There were many Apostles , and it is said [ but ] to one , Feede my sheepe : Why that , but onely to commend vnitie to them ? In hoc cognoscent omnes vos esse meos : By this shall all men know you to be my disciples , if you loue one another . And , Looke you fall not out by the way : Iosephs precept that he gaue to his brethren . This was the care that our Sauiour had of vnitie . Againe , S. Austen in the same chapter , cap. 13. de pastorib . ( that you may beleeue that booke the rather in the explication of pasce , ) Nam & ipsum Petrum cui commendauit oues suas , quasi alter alteri , vnum secum facere volebat . He sought not to make him a diuerse regent , as you imagine , a deputie in his absence , but in all his speech , he droue after vnitie , that intending the vnitie of the Church with himselfe , euen as he and his father are all one , ( as he saies , ) which shal not be perfected till after this life , yet in the meane time one man might stand for his Church , and represent his Church , the better to knit vp this knot betweene them . Vt sic ei oues commendaret , saies S. Austen , vt esset ille caput , ille figuram corporis portaret , id est , Ecclesiae , & tanquam sponsus & sponsa essent duo in carne vnâ : that is , That so he might commend his sheepe vnto him , that himselfe might bee the head , the other might beare the figure of his bodie , that is the Church , and as bride and bridegroome they might be twaine in one flesh . Here , I trow , you haue Peter , not the head , but the bodie , plainely so distinguished by S. Austen , vt esset ille caput , that Christ might be the head ; Peter , shall I say , the body ? nay , not so much as the bodie , but figuram corporis portaret , saies S. Austen , that hee might carry the figure or resemblance of the bodie . And is gerere personam now , and gestare figuram all one , thinke you , because of Tullies Offices ? Yet you cry out against the Bishop for fraudulent dealing , and superscribe your boxe , A Discouerie of his absurdities , falsities , lyes : you blame him for lame quotation of places . Indeed he is as compendious in quoting the Fathers , as you are ambitious in citing your owne Supplement , and as talkatiue and full of circumstance as any pies-nest . 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . But for quoting of places against the light of conscience , was there euer any wretch so taken 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , so in the very manner , as you are in the construction of gerere personam , which S. Austen expounds by gestare figuram , or portare figuram , you would faine extend to boundlesse iurisdiction ? And if gerere and gestare were graunted you to be all one , is there no difference betweene figure and persona , as persona is put for maiestas reip . ? will you put figura in that sense too ? You imagine the Church to carrie S. Peter ; no doubt , as a beast carryeth the rider : and some of you haue allegorized it so , from Balaam and his asse , to the Pope and your Church . Here you see the Church doth not beare S. Peter , but S. Peter beares the figure of the bodie , that is , of the Church . And where you thinke the Supremacie that you attribute to your Pope was grounded vpon the infallibilitie of his iudgement in faith , and from thence proceeded that same Pasce oues meas , S. Austen tels you farther , to correct that opinion , that the ground of his commission was the strength of his loue , in these words , Proinde vt oues commendaret , quid illi priùs dicit , ne illi tanquam alteri commendaret ? Petre amas me ? Et respondet ; Amo , &c. Confirmat trinitatem , vt consolidet vnitatem : that is , Therefore that hee might commend his sheepe vnto him , what first does hee say vnto him , that he might not commend them to him as to another man ? Peter louest thou me ? And he answereth , I loue thee , &c. He confirmes trinitie , to establish vnitie . So as euery where , vnitie and loue is aimed at , which is the bond that couples Christ and his Church ; which Church as I tell you , Peter representeth here , no otherwise then a proxie doth him that he stands to be admitted for . But you doating vpon the priuiledges of your earthly God , blot out loue to bring in power , and for that which S. Austen said a little before , vt essent duo in carne vnâ , your Canonists haue not shamed to turne it thus ; vt essent duo in sede vnâ : as if Christ and the Pope had one Consistoire . This is the agreement between you and S. Austen here . § 7. You againe cite S. Austen in his commentarie vpon the 108. Psalme . Were you disposed , trow you , to doe your selfe a shrewd turne ? For from whence could you receiue a greater blow ? Yet here againe I must tell you , that your citation is wrong . Cuius ecclesiae ( say you , as quoting S. Austen ) ille agnoscitur gessisse personam , meaning of Peter . But S. Austen sayes not so . First , not gessisse but gestasse , is S. Austens . See you now that I distinguished these two , not without cause before ? For neither did you , I am sure , without cause here change them . You know that gerere is of farre more force , then gestare in these matters : so as gerere remp . is as much as regere remp . , gestare not . And if S. Austen had said gessisse personam ; yet see , I pray you , with what qualification . Not simply gessisse , but in figurâ gessisse personam ecclesiae : which you cut out : as if in figurâ were no words , or words of no sense , or sense , but not to your tooth . This is your honest dealing , that cry out against falshood . Call you this arguing in figurâ against your betters ? And would you read that to the Corinthians , or suffer to bee read , ( suppose in your Colledge hall at Rome , where as we in our Colledges here read the Bible at our ordinary meales , so Father Parsons made the schollers to reade the booke of Titles , and of claimes to Kingdomes , if your Seculars haue said true , and men say that you boast of Father Parsons his spirit ; ) would you suffer I say to be read , Omnia contingebant illis , and no more , for omnia in figurâ contingebant illis ? specially if the controuersie were how omnia contingebant illis , as here the controuersie was about gerere personam , and in what sense . But let vs heare S. Austen : Sicut quaedam dicuntur quae ad Apostolum Petrum propriè pertinere videantur , nec tamen habent illustrem intellectum , nisi cùm referuntur ad ecclesiam , cuius ille agnoscitur in sigurâ gestâsse personam , propter primatum quem in discipulis habuit , sicut est , Tibi dabo claues regni coelorum , & siqua huiusmodi : ita Iudas personam quodam modo sustinet inimicorum Christi Iudaeorum ; qui & tunc oderant Christum , &c. As some things are said which may seeme properly to belong to the Apostle Peter , and yet make no cleare sense , but when they are referred to the Church , whereof he is knowne to haue represented the person figuratiuely , for the cheifedome which he had among the disciples , as that is for one , To thee I will giue the keyes of the kingdome of heauen , and if there bee any like : so Iudas sustaines after a manner the person of the Iewes Christs enemies , who both then hated Christ , &c. Here is somewhat that you catch at , but more that we may retort vpon you . You catch verie greedily at propter primatum quem in discipulis habuit , which we neuer doubt but S. Peter had , a place of some priority in the quire Apostolike . And it may be for that , our Sauiour the rather chose him , to represent his Church . More zealous then the rest , more auncient then the rest ; whether to figure the faith , or the eternity of the Church , the one in this world , the other in the next , or for what endowment else of his you can deuise . For some no doubt . And if it be secret , is it therefore none ? will you call Christ to account for euerie thing ? and vnlesse wee can answer for him , will you condemne him ? Why not some other as well as Peter , say you , if it were onely a matter of representation ? As if I might not say the like , Why not some other as well as Peter preferred to be the cheife magistrate ? It was free , you will say , to our Sauiours choice , and but one could be to sway a monarchie : he chose Peter . And may not I say the same ? But one could be to figure vnitie : for , for that cause hee chose one : and as in diuerse other things Peter had the preheminence , but yet with others , as Iames and Iohn , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , ( more primi then Peter , where more might be vsed ) so here where but one could be employed in the businesse , the rest beeing slipt ouer , Peter was thought the meetest to be the modell of vnitie , because in some prerogatiue hee might passe those primos ; or perhaps it was the secret of our Sauiours brest . Are you so little acquainted with the libertie of Gods actions ? or reserue you nothing for our knowledge in the world to come ? This to your obiection . § 8. Now marke what we gather out of S. Austens text . First , Some things there are seeming to belong to Peter , which can make no cleare sense , but when they are construed of the Church . This is flat against you , that would haue Peter such a figure of the Church forsooth , as yet to occupy a certain place of his owne , and what is giuen to Peter should be giuen to the Church , and what to the Church , the same to Peter . But some things , saies S. Austen , are said to Peter which can haue no pregnant construction but of the Church . Secondly , amidst those some things , is , Tibi dabo claues . S. Austen vseth this very example ; which you would fain haue to be ingrossed by Peter , as if the keyes had personally beene deliuered to him , and in his owne right : which S. Austen denies . Thirdly , Si qua alia , if there be any more . There may bee more then , as , Pasce oues . No doubt this must be one ; by his owne exposition before , de Agone Christiano , c. 30. Fourthly , that he bare indeed personam ecclesiae , but in figurâ , which you had pared off . Not by power of his place , or authoritie permanent ; but culld out before the rest by our Lord for that end , to signifie vnitie . Fiftly , that primatus was not the primacie of magistracy , euen that declares ; that he saies , the keyes were promised to him propter primatum . So that first the primacie , then the keyes . And his primacie among the Apostles was a motiue-cause to promise him the keies in the name of the Church : whereas else primatus and the keies had gone together , and as soone as primatus , so soone the keies . But now they are promised him for some specialty in him . Not for office then , as you would haue it . Sixtly , as Iudas sustained the person of the wicked , ( sustinuit , a more powerfull word then gestauit , and much more then significauit , which is said here of Peter , and yet but quodam modo , so shie is S. Austen , so farre from the iurisdiction that you build vpon Tullies Offices ) so Peter of the Church . As Iudas of the one , so Peter of the other , saith S. Austen : which is no authoritatiue primacie , you may bee sure , vnlesse Iudas shall haue a generation of Successors now , as well as Peter , and ( which is more damnable ) of holy Scriptures institution . If any such were , who more likely then the Pope , that holds by the purse which Iudas carried , and troubles all the world for Supremacy in Temporalls ? But neither Iudas then , nor the Pope now . Else Peter should haue been head , vnder Iudas , his head , ( doe you like this ? ) when he went so farre as to scandalize our Sauiour , and deserued the name of Sathan at his hands . Was Peter then vnder Iudas his iurisdiction ? yet , no doubt far gone in that part , which Iudas bare the person of , by S. Austens saying . For so we read in his Alia expositio of the same Psalme : Cuius populi diximus Iudam in figurâ gessisse personam , sicut ecclesiae gessit Apostolus Petrus . Your grauitie perhaps will say , that this is reproach : for so chap. 4. num . 33. But we doe but argue , and I pray who giues the cause ? Quacunque scripta sunt , propter nos scripta sunt . Rom. 15. § 9. To omit that Prosper vpon the same Psalme ( Prosper Leo's secretarie , and S. Austens scholler ) tunes it yet in a higher key , making Iudas not onely beare the person of the wicked , which you construe so imperiously as we haue now heard ; but he saies in plaine tearmes , Iudas primatum gessit inimicorum Christi , Iudas bare the primacie of Christs enemies : which I trust you will not expound , how impudent soeuer , that Iudas was made chiefe magistrate ouer Christs enemies : no more then was Peter ouer Christs friends . § 10. YOV quote farther S. Austen in his 13. serm . de verbis Domini secundum Matth. out of which you haue these words , Petrus à Petrâ cognominatus , &c. which moreouer you thus english : Peter taking his name from a rocke , was happy , bearing the figure of the Church , hauing the principalitie of the Apostleship . Of which anon as it serues your turne . In the meane time you may see what varietie of words S. Austen hath , to set out the meaning of his gerere personam , both here and elsewhere . Though here he doth not vse so much as the word personam , but figuram onely , which is a great deale lesse , or rather makes all besides to be iust nothing . But as I began to say , see a little I pray you , his store of words , to giue you his right sense about gerere personam , that you dreame not alwaies of Magistrates in Tullies Offices . Admonet nos intelligere mare praesens saeculum esse , Petrum verò Apostolum ecclesiae vnicae typum : He giues vs to vnderstād , that the sea is this present world , and Peter the Apostle a type or instance of the onely Church . The same againe , de baptismo contra Donatist . l. 3. c. 17. In type vnitatis ( as afore of the Church , so now of charitie , but it is all one in effect ) Dominus Petro potestatem dedit , &c. In the type of vnitie , our Lord gaue Peter power , ( saies S. Austen . ) or in the type of charitie . And will you say that all that were types in the old Testament , were so many magistrates ? where some were of Christ , yea very many : were there so many gouernours of Christ , I pray you ? or the types of the Church that went before in the old Testament , were they all Church-gouernours ? And yet thus , you see , S. Austen declares his meaning about genere personam , by sigura , by typus , and such like . But you will say , it followes in S. Austens words , Ipse enim Petrus in Apostolorum ordine primus . And what then ? As if wee denied the primacie in the order of the Apostles , which are ready to graunt euen more then so , if need be . The Bishop yeelds a triple primacie to Peter , in the booke that you confute before you vnderstand . Out of which you in time may prooue the triple crowne . And had S. Auston beene so fauourable , you had done it ere this . In whome it followes , Saepe respondet pro omnibus , spoken of Peter . And will you knowe , quo mysterio ? Let himselfe shew . Vnus pro multis , vnus in multis : once againe to endeare this vnitie to them . Proceed yet : Simon anteà vocabatur : women autem Petrus à Domino ei impositum est , & hoc , vt eâ figurâ significaret ecclesiam . Doe you heare figura ? doe you heare significaret ? How will this agree with gerere personam in your maiesticall sense ? Yea the name of Peter hee sayes , was giuen him to that ende , rather to signifie for the Church , holding the wholesome confession , Tues filius Dei viui , then for his owne preheminence of place ouer others . And yet more pregnantly , Quia enim Christus petrā , Petrus populus Christianus . Are you aware what the people haue gotten by this shift , whome you are wont to cut short ? So many people , so many Peters . Vnlesse you are content that Peter do no more then represent the Church , that is , the people of God , as S. Austens meaning is . § 11. I might tell you of that between , because I would giue you good measure for complaining of lamo quotations . Petrus à petrâ , non petra à Petro , and that , as à Christo Christianus vocatur , non Christus à Christiano . Yet you would not refuse to bee called of Peter : and Bellarmine saies , Chrysostome prophecyed almost as much , Hom. 33. in Act. that you might not be ashamed if in time to come you were called of the Popes , among whom was Peter . Where you may do well to thinke how this agrees with Nazianzen , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , &c. where he is so farre from beeing called of Peter , or any other , I loue not ( saies he ) to be called after the name of men , beeing borne of God ) that vnles our Sauiour Christ were God , he would thinke it no honour to be called by him , though as a man neuer so excellent . But we are now in S. Austen , More plainly then against them that would be built vpon Peter , which ( as I said ) you blush not , but boast of at this day as your secondary foundation , Homines volenter adificari super homines , men that haue a longing to be built vpon men , ( wee vpon their doctrine , Apoc. 21. 14. and Ephes . 2. 20. you hardly vpon his person , or as shall seeme good ) [ What say they ? ] Ego sum Cephae , ipse est Petrus . Quomodo enim non in Pauli , sic nec in Petri , &c. Vt Petrus super petram , non petra super Petrum : 1. I am Cephas his , now Cephas and Peter are all one . For as wee are not [ baptised in the name of Paul , so are we not of Peter neither , &c. that Peter may [ be knowne to be built ] vpon the rocke , and not the rocke vpon Peter . But close to our purpose . Illum videre Petrum , qui tunc erat figura nostra : that is , Consider that Peter who was then our figure ; not bare our person , that is , bare rule ouer vs , we neuer liuing in Peters time , and his regencie being expired before we were born , but ( as I haue often said ) standing for the Church by way of type or figure , and so he represented for vs , and for the Church to the worlds ende , whereas hee could gouerne no more then liued in his owne dayes . Petrus TVNC erat sigura nostra . Againe , to vrge significat against this mans magnificat , which he sings to S. Peter , but afore hee know well what it meanes , In eo quòd dixit Petrus , Tues filius Dei viui , firmos significat , saies S. Austen , in eo quòd trepidat , &c. infirmos ecclesiae significat . Is this also to be construed by Tullies Offices , of gouernment ? or doth S. Austen not speake yet significantly enough , without we turne the Iesuites dictionarie ? Doth a magistrate signifie the citie that hee gouernes ? or was S. Peter at one time the gouernour of the strong , namely , when he confessed and beleeued Christ , an other time of the weake , namely , when he staggered ? How then was he euer an vniuersall gouernour ? For when hee doubted , he confessed not ; when he confessed , he doubted not . So neuer was he gouernour of the bodie altogether , neuer did he gerere personam in that sense . I thinke you see cause to repent your construction , vnlesse you be wearie of vniuersall dominion . And yet once againe S. Austen , to giue you more light . In illo ergò vno figurabatur ecclesia , & vtrumque genus significandum fuit , id est , firmi & infirmi , quia sine vtroque non est ecclesia . In him therefore alone , or in that one man therefore , the Church was figured , and each kind of men was to be signified , that is both the strong and the weake , because without both of these , the Church is not . Doe you perceiue how this fits with that which went before ? For either S. Peter was a ruler but by halfes , or gerere personam must be otherwise construed , euen as S. Austen does here , by figurare , and significare , not as you by regere , a word not once vsed by S. Austen in all this matter , nor any like it . For , as for primus & praecipuus in ordine Apostolorum , we haue cleared it before , and it is too weake a foundation to beare such stresse . Saue that as Peter of the Church , so these words of Peter , a semblable supportance and worthy your choosing . § 12. We are long vpon this place , but the reason is , discouer one of our Discouerers tricks , and discredit all . Ambulauit Petrus super aquas iussu Domeni . Hi sunt firmi ecclesiae : Peter walked vpon the waters at our Lords commandement . These are the strong in the Church , saies S. Austen . It puts me in mind of your argument for the primacie . Aquae multae , populi multi : Peters walking on the sea , was his regiment of the world : yet not all waters , I hope , were in the sea of Tiberias . Or shall we say , that this prefigured your Tyber ? though so doubtfull is as yet Peters resiance at Rome , that he hath not beene seene sitting , and much lesse walking there , vpon your Sea. Onesiphorus with much seeking found Paul at Rome , 2. Tim. 1. 17. we Peter not yet . Our Lord indeed entred Peters shippe . But what then ? I should thinke if Peter had entred his , it had been more pregnant . So might Peter haue been thought to haue succeeded in his charge ; this allegorie makes Christ succeed into Peters . No doubt Peter had a boat , as a fisherman should haue ; our Sauiour none , sanctifying another trade , as we are taught by Iustine Martyr , during the time of his minoritie , vntill it pleased him to reueale himselfe vnto the world . But Bernard sayes it ; wil you be iudged by Bernard ? Doe but tell the Pope , as he did Eugenius , he will say you speake inconsiderately to him . I wisse an easie matter for S. Bernards wit , with a flourish or so , to establish the Popedome already established . Besides that , he will tell you , S. Iames raised seede to his brother deceased , that is , succeeded into our Lords prouince . Vnlesse our Lord himselfe had not the world for his scope . And Eusebius as much , quoting Clemens for his author , l. 6. Hypotyp . that the cheife Apostles themselues , whereof Peter was one , did not once contest with Iames for that priority . But returne we to S. Austen . § 13. There are yet two more places behind in S. Austen . One , Tract . in Iohannem 124. an other de Agone Christiano cap. 30. With that we began , and with the same wee will conclude . But the first we will fetch from his Tractat. in Ioh. 123. somewhat higher . Speaking there of our Sauiours repast after his resurrection with fish & hony-combe , he ponders the very number of the disciples then present , and thus gathers : Vt omnes qui hanc spem gerimus , per illum septenarium numerum discipulorum , per quem potest hoc loco nostra vniuersitas intelligi figurata , tanto sacramento nos communicare nossemus , & eidem beatitudini sociari . That is , That all we which are indued with this hope , may know that by that seuenfold number of disciples ( by which our whole companie may here seeme to be figured ) we are both partakers of that mysterie , and fellowes in that blisse . Neither doubteth he but S. Iohn ending his Gospel with this narration , hauing many things else to report of Christ : he ends it , magnâ & magnarum rerum contemplatione , as he saies : making it as important , so mysticall , you see , by that word of contēplation . Where first we haue figurari in the sense before confirmed , not theirs , but ours . As erewhile Peter figured the Church , so now those seuen disciples figured the vniuersalitie of Gods people , that is , the Church . And yet I hope they are not made thereby regents of the Church , though the Iesuites haue a proiect , wee heare , to bring in more then one , to manage at one time the Sea Apostolick . I remember Occham in his Dialogues hath a question to that purpose , whether the Popedome may bee swayed by many at once ? And inclining to thinke it lawfull , it may be the Iesuites drew it from him , and would put it in practise . In truth our Sauiour choosing 12. Apostles , shewed he neuer meant , that one should gouern all after they were dead , as these now would haue the Pope to doe in Peters stead . But as I was saying , the 7. figurers here are not 7. gouernours : no more then is Peter figuring the Church , or bearing the figure of the Church , or whatsoeuer else soundeth that way , inuested in the authoritie that this man here dreames of , as if gerere figuram , were gerere personam ; and gerere personam , were potiri rerum . § 14. HEre also that is answered that F. T. in his wisdome asked a little before , why onely Peter should beare the person of the Church ? or , whether none was meete for that part but he ? Wee haue answered it before ; and the like might be asked of Iudas , was there none wicked in those dayes but he ? not Herod ? not the Pharisies ? not any other ? or could none but an Apostle stand for the patterne of bale and condemnation ? But S. Austen here answers it a great deale more roundly ; that seuen men at another time , and not onely Peter , figurauerunt vniuersitatem nostram , represented our whole companie , the company of the faithfull , that is , the Church of God , whom yet , I suppose , he will not allow for Popes . § 15. Againe in the same tractat , that you may see how farre Pasce oues meas surmounts the Pope , or the Popes commission , which they squeeze to the vttermost to giue him aduancement , S. Austen insists first vpon that consideration , oues meas , not , oues tuas , which is worth the poizing , not onely in the sense that the Iesuits vrge it , as if all Christs sheepe were thereby recommended to Peters charge , Apostles , Prophets , Kings and Emperours : whereas our Sauiour neuertheles hath sheepe in heauen , & 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 & 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , both Saints and Angels , which I trust are not liable to Popish iurisdiction ; no , though pasce were impera , and sarculum sceptrum , contrarie to S. Bernard . Not only thus then I say , but he addes further , and giues other cautions , a pasce meas , not pasce tuas , therefore non te pascere cogita , gloriam meam in ijs quaere , non gloriam tuam , dominium meum ( that was not ex hoc mundo ) non tuum , yea lucra mea ( let the Venetians heare this ) not lucra tua : and to conclude , b Ne sis in eorum societate qui pertinent ad tempora periculosa , perilous times : indeede times the more perilous , because all the strife is de temporalibus . § 16. Neither doubts he to extend the force of that pasce which was giuen to Peter , to the censure not of Popes onely , though of them too , but of all bad ministers through out the world . Contra hos vigilat toties inculcata ista vox Christi ( Pasce oues meas ) quos Apostolus gemit sua quaerere , non quae Iesu Christi . Against those stands vp this saying of Christ , so often repeated , [ Feede my sheepe , ] whome the Apostle laments for seeking their owne , not the things that are Iesus Christs : [ whosoeuer they are , or of what ranke soeuer . ] And a little before that , Qui hoc animo pascunt oues Christi , vt suas esse velint non Christi , se convincuntur amare non Christum , vel gloriandi , vel dominandi , vel acquirendi cupiditate , non obediends , & subueniendi , & deo placendi cupiditate . Which because our Adioynder vnderstands Latin so well , we will leaue to him for this once to English . § 17. Come we now to the 124 Tractat , out of which he vrgeth this : Hoc agit ecclesia spe beata , in hac vitâ aerumnosa , cuius Ecclesiae . Petrus , propter Apostolatûs sui primatum , gerebat figuratâ generalitate personam . Which the easier to cleare , we may sort out by parcels that which makes for them . First gerebat personam , which this man thinks to be as much as tenebat regimen ; but of that before . To omit how it is qualified with figuratâ generalitate , his bearing the person , beeing but figuring , and signifying , and representing still , with S. Austen , which is short of Magistracie . Secondly , propter Apostolatús sui primatum . Which the better to conceiue , heare we further S. Austen , heare you too good Sir , that accuse the Bishop for laming places , as if no bodie were such a legall reciter of them as your selfe . Quod enim adipsum propriè pertinet , ( speaking of Peter ) naturâ onus homo erat , gratiâ vnus Christianus , abundantiore gratiâ vnus idemque primus Apostolus . Sed &c. that is , For as concerning himselfe , Peter was by nature [ but ] one man , by grace one Christian man , by a greater measure of the same grace , one and a prime Apostle . But &c. You will say perhaps that this is a third kind of aduantage , an authoritie more then euer you were aware of , for Peter , vnus idemque primus Apostolus . But there is more in it then so . S. Austen knowes but three steps of condition here in Peter . A man , which he was by nature , a Christian , which by grace , but by height of grace , by excesse of grace , an Apostle . Yet vnus Apostolus , but one Apostle , not virtually as you would haue it , the whole quire or Colledge of them . Our Sauiour was not so poore as to haue but one Apostle , saies Irenaeus , l. 3. against them that thought Paul was the onely man. So farre off was Peter then , that scarce he was thought to be one of the number . Indeede twelue , as I shewed you before , for great cause . But concerning Peter , vnus Apostolus , saies S. Austen , but one Apostle . As for the prime , we graunt you , as you haue beene often told , and to content you the more , more then in one regard of primacie . An excellent flower he was in that garland ; what would you els ? But that this primacie was distinct from your supposed magistracie or maiestie Ecclesiasticall , as you would inferre out of gerere personam , heare what followes . S. Austen hauing recounted the three former degrees of Peters condition , he proceedes to a fourth , neither coincident with the rest , nor yet containing any such principalitie as you talke of , but meerely affoarded him of our Sauiours free bountie , in regard to his excellent worth among his fellowes . Sed quando ei dictum est , Tibi dabo claues regni coelorum , & , Quodcunque ligaueris super terram , erit ligatum & in coelis , & quodcunque solues super terram , erit solutum & in coelis , vniuersam significabat ecclesiam , saies S. Austen : he stood for the Church , it was said to him in the person of the Church , not as chiefe Magistrate , not as primus Apostolus , the first wheele in the clocke , but in a sense distinct from the former three degrees ( therefore he saies , Sed quando ) yet happily the rather for his aforesaid worthines , our Sauiour put this part vpon him , honoured him with representation of his Catholike Church , made him to signifie Ecclesiam vniuersam , ( S. Austens words ) but onely to signifie it , & that not as an Apostle , but in a fourth consideration , which helps you nothing , rather spoiles you of all . § 18. That which followes is pregnant , but I must be sparing ; though you may thinke we are afraid to enlarge quotations . Besides , it hath beene brought totidem verbis before out of his 13. serm . de verb. Dom secundum Matth. the Father hauing recorded it in two seuerall places , so farre he was from retracting it ; That , Petrus à petrâ , sicut Christianus à Christo , and not è contrà , that our boast should not be in men , but in the liuing God. And yet in truth more plainely in this place , which may serue , if any thing , to open their eyes , that dare build vpon a man as the foundation of their Church , though it were Peter himselfe , that I say not how vnworthy creatures now in his Roome . Ideo quippe ait Dominus , Super hanc petram aedificabo Ecclesiam meam , quia dixerat Petrus , Tu es Christus filius dei viui . Super hanc ergo inquit petram quam confessus es , aedificabo Ecclesiam meam . Petra enim erat Christus , super quod fundamentum ipse etiam aedificatus est Petrus . Fundamentum quippe aliud nemo potest ponere , praeter id quod positum est , quod est Christus Iesus . That is : For therfore saith our Lord , Vpon this rocke I will build my Church , because Peter had said , Thou art Christ , the Sonne of the liuing God. I will therefore build , saies he , my Church vpon this rocke which thou hast confessed . For the rocke was Christ , vpon which foundation euen Peter himselfe was faine to be built . For another foundation can no man lay , besides that which is laid , which is Iesus Christ . Then , Ecclesia quae fundatur in Christo , claues ab eo regni coelorum accepit in Petro , id est , potestatem ligandi soluendique peccata . How so ? Quod enim est per proprietatem in Christo ecclesia , hoc est per significationem Petrus in petrâ , qua significatione intelligitur Christus petra , Petrus ecclesia . Haec igitur ecclesia quam significabat Petrus , &c. that is to say , The Church which is founded in Christ , receiued of him the keyes of the kingdome of heauen in Peter , that is , the power of binding and loosing sinnes . For that which properly the Church is in Christ , the very same by signification is Peter in the rocke . By which signification Christ is vnderstood to be the rock , Peter to be the Church . This Church therefore which Peter signified , &c. I say nothing of signification , whereof enough before , and euery line in S. Austen is fraught with it . But is not this strange , that Peter whome they euery where aduance for the head , S. Austen should still take for the bodie ? In the person of the bodie , of the multitude of the faithfull , did our Sauiour heape those priuiledges vpon Peter . And whereas some of you are not ashamed to vrge Sequere me , for a document of his primacie , as if it were , Sequere me in gubernatione ecclesiae ( a strange probleme of desperate pleaders , ) euen there Peter differs not from the communitie , but still stands for a figure of the bodie . Heare S. Austen : Vniuersitati dicitur , Sequere me , pro quâ vniuersitate passus est Christus . It is saide to the whole multitude , Follow me , for which whole multitude Christ suffered . For to construe , Follow me , in so ambitious a sense , that is , be Lord as I am Lord , be Regent as I am Regent , Christian people will soone abhorre , though meanely instructed , who know we are to follow our Sauiour Christ by imitation of his vertues , not by affectation of his place , and Peter to follow him no otherwise then we Peter : euen as Paul for the agreement of his spirit with them both , is not nice to call vs to the imitation of himselfe , but yet subordinately to Christ , Bee ye followers of me , euen as I am of Christ , 1. Cor. 11. 1. And so absurd is this argument for Peters Monarchy from Sequere me , that S. Austen in his commentarie vpon the 62. Psalme , construes Sequere me , by vade post me : follow me , by get thee behind me . His words are , Redi post me Satanas , non enim sapis quae Dei sunt , sed quae hominum . Then , Quia antecedere me vis , redi post me , vt sequaris me , vt iam sequens Christum diceret , Agglutinata est anima mea post te : Because thou wilt needs goe before me , get thee rather behind me , that so thou maiest follow me . Though it be true also , that Sequere me , was a common word with our Sauiour , and spoken both to S. Matthew , when he called him to the Apostleship from the receipt of custome , Matth. 9. and to him that preferred to goe and burie his father , before the following of his Master , Matth. 8. And if Peter obeyed the Sequere with the first of these two , in performing his ministerie , his successors with the second , while they leaue Christ to snatch at a mortuarie . § 19. I am afraid of giuing the Reader a surfet in a case so euident : but yet I must not omit this one passage , that followes in the forenamed Tractate of the Father vpon S. Iohn , because our aduersarie hath quoted it . § 20. He saies then , That as there is a two fold state of the Church , one in misery and in exile , another in glorie , in royaltie , and in blisse ; so Peter was made a figure of the former , Iohn of the latter , by our Sauiour Christ . So as not onely Iohannes anteponitur Petro , Iohn in the one of these is preferred before Peter , ( as S. Austens words are ) but simply Iohn surpasseth Peter , as much as the life that we shall lead in blisse , excels this miserable that here we liue . For thereafter as the liues are , so are the figures of them both , which are here said to be these two Apostles , Peter of the militant Church , Iohn of the triumphaut , as hath beene shewed . But shall wee say , trow you , that Iohn is a monarch in the triumphant , or beares any rule or regiment among the blessed , where the Sonne himselfe resignes his Kingdome , or submits it at least to God the Father , 1. Cor. 15. ? Or if Iohn haue no such monarchie by vertue of his figuring and representing that state , why then should Peter claime any in earth , because he stands for a figure of the militant ? The words are somewhat long , but I will onely set downe as many as shall serue to giue the Reader light , the rest may be viewed and dwelt on by leasure . Duas vitas sibi diuinitùs praedicatas & commendat as nouit ecclesia : quarum est vna in fide , altera in specie : vna in tempore peregrinationis , altera in aeternitate mansionis : vna in labore , altera in requie vna in viâ , altera in patriâ : vna in opere actionis , altera in mercede contemplationis : vna declinat à malo & facit bonum , altera nullum habet , à quo declinet , malum , & magnum habet quo fruatur bonum : vna cum hoste pugnat , altera sine hoste regnat : vna fortis est in aduersis , altera nihil sentit aduersi : vna carnales libidines fraenat , altera spiritalibus delectationibus vacat : vna est vincendi curâ sollicita , altera victoriae pace secura : vna in tentationibus adiuuatur , altera sine vllâ tentatione in ipso adiutore laetatur : vna subuenit indigenti , altera ibi est vbi nullum inuenit indigentem : vna aliena peccata vt sua sibi ignoscantur , ignoscit , altera nec patitur quod ignoscat , nec facit quod sibi poscat ignosci : vnaflagellatur malis , ne extollatur in bonis , altera tantâ plenitudine gratiae caret omni malo , vt sine vllâ tentatione superbiae cohaereat summo bono : vna bona & mala discernit , altera quae sola bona sunt cernit . Ergo vna bona est , sed adhuc misera , altera melior & beata . That is , Two sorts of liues doth the Church of Christ know , intimated and recommended to her from God : whereof the one consists in faith , the other in sight : one in toyle and pilgrimage temporall , the other in rest and ease eternall : one is of the way , the other of the countrey : one hath the taske of tedious action , the other the reward of blissefull contemplation : one flees from euill and does onely good , the other hath no euill to shunne at all , but enioyes a good past all expressing . One continually copes with her enemies , the other triumphs without any enemie : one maintaines courage in the midst of tribulation , the other is past sense of any more trouble : one restraines carnall lusts and pleasures , the other attends delights spirituall : one is carefull out of the desire it hath to conquer , the other is at peace & secure like a conqueresse : one finds helpe of God in temptation , the other reioyces in her helper God , scorning the tempter : one releeues the poore with her charitie , the other is there where there is no pouertie : one forgiues other mens sinnes , that her owne may be pardoned , the other neither commits what shee should wish to be forgiuen her , nor suffers ought of that which we pardon in another : one is chastened with ouils , least shee be proud of the good , the other is so freed from all kind of euill by the fulnesse of grace , that shee adheres to the cheife good without any danger of pride : one discerns the good from the euill , but the other sees nothing but that which is good . So as the one is good , but as yet in miseries , the other is better and in most perfect ioyes . Then followes . Ista significata est per Apostolum Petrum , illa per Iohannem . Ideo dicitur huic , Sequere me ; de illo autem , si eum volo manore donec veniam , quid ad te ? Tu me sequere . Quid enim est hoc ? Quantum sapio , quantum capio , quid est hoc , nisi , Tu me sequere per imitationem perferendi temporalia mala , ille maneat donec sempiterna venio redditurus bona ? That is , That life was signified by the Apostle Peter , this by Iohn . Therefore it was said to him , Follow me . But of him thus , If I will haue him rarrie till I come , what is that to thee ? Follow thou me . For what means that ? As much as I conceiue , as much as I vnderstand , what is it but euen this , Followe thou me by conformitie of suffering euils temporatie , & let him tarrie till I come , to repay the euerlasting good . Do you see what a Sequere Peter is called to ? Euen as much as S. Austen either capit or sapit , onely to the toleration of temporall iniuries , out of which you would frame temporall Monarchies . To which purpose he had also saide a little before , setting a marke vpon it , Ecce propter quod ei dictum est , Sequere me . Namely because Christ hauing suffered for mankind , left vs an example that we might follow his steps , S. Peter so expounding Sequere me , by , Vt sequamur vestigia eius , 1. Pet. 2. 21. But go we forward as we began , in comparing the cōtemplatiue life with the actiue , Iohn with Peter , this world with the next . Amet ergo cum Petrus , vt ab istà mortalitate liberemur , and , ametur ab eo Iohannes , vt in illà immortalitate seruemur . That is , Let Peter therefore loue him , to the ende we may be deliuered from this present mortalitie , and let Iohn be loued of him , that we may be saued by him in the immortall glorie . Againe , Hoc per Petrum significatum est , plus amantem , sed minùs amatum , quia minùs nos amat Christus miseros quàm beatos . Veritatis autem contemplationem qualis tunc futura est minùs amamus , quia nondum nouimus , nec habemus . Haec ergo per Iohannem significata est minùs amantem , atque ideo & ad ipsam , & ad eius in nobis amorem , qualis ei debetur , implendum , donec veniat Dominus , expectantem : sed plus amatum , quia id quod per illum figuratum est , hoc efficit beatum . That is , That was signified by Peter who loued Christ more , but was loued of him lesse : because Christ loues vs lesse in the state of miserie , then he wil doe vs one day in the kingdome of glorie . We also lesse loue the view of truth [ and of the face of God ] whiles we are as we are , because we neither haue it yet , nor know it , as we shall doe . This life therefore of ours is signified by Iohn , who loued Christ lesse , and therefore waits for his comming , til the other life may be reuealed , and the loue of it perfited as it should be in vs : but the same Iohn was more loued of Christ , because that [ life ] makes vs blessed , which in him was instanced ; [ or , figured . ] Then , Nemo tamen istos insignes Apostolos separet . Yet let no man seuer these two excellent Apostles . So then , as one figures , so the other figures : as the one represents , so the other represents , and represents onely . Iohn was not hereby installed Monarch of heauen , no nor yet free denison thereof by actuall possession . ( It was long after that , that S. Iohn went to heauē . ) No more was Peter , then , of earth , or any earthly prerogatiue : for they must not be separated , but as one , so the other . Nemo separet , saith S. Austen . Et in eo ( saith the same Father ) quod significabat Petrus , ambo erant , & in eo quod significabat Iohannes , ambo futuri erant : significando sequebatur iste , manebat ille &c. That is , Both in that [ life ] which Peter signified , they were both of them , and in that which Iohn signified , they were both of them to be . He followed , this staied , for signification sake , &c. Doe you see that if Peter be a Monarch of the Church , Iohn must needes be too , which is a thing impossible ? For , in eo quod significabat Petrus , ambo erant , saith S. Austen . That is , In that which Peter signified they were both of them . In whome yet it follows plainer , Nec ipsi soli , ( Peter and Iohn forenamed ) sed vniuersa hoc facit sancta Ecclesia sponsa Christi : ab istis tentationibus eruenda , in illa foelicitate seruanda . Neither Peter onely & Iohn , that is , two of the Apostles , but the whole Church of God , the spouse of Christ , doth the very same : auoiding the tentation , which is here present , creeping on to the saluation , which is laide vp for vs in heauen . Quas duas vitas Petrus & Iohannes figurauerunt ( as before significabant , so now figurauerunt ) singuli singulas &c. That is , Which two liues Peter and Iohn figured , the one the one , the other the other , &c. Lastly , Omnibus igitur sanctis ad Christi corpus inseparabiliter pertinentibus , propter huius vitae procellosissimae gubernaculum , ad liganda & soluenda peccata , claues regni coelorum primus Apostolorum Petrus accepit : ijsdemque omnibus sanctis propter vitae illius secretissimae quietissimum sinum , super pectus Christi Iohannes Euangelista discubuit . Quoniam nec iste solus , sed vniuersa Ecclesia , nec ille in principio , &c. That is , In lieu therefore of all the Saints of Christ , which are inseparably grafted into his mysticall bodie , as concerning their steerage , & the direction of their course , in this most troublesome and tempestuous world , the prime Apostle Peter receiued the Keies of the kingdome of heauen , for the binding and loosing of their offences . And againe in lieu of all the same Saints , with respect to that most quiet either bosome of secresie , or harborough of blisse , the Euangelist Iohn leaned vpon the breast of our blessed Sauiour . Because neither he alone , but the whole Church , nor the other in the beginning , &c. § 20. Against this I know what Mr. F. T. will say ( for he sayes no more then out of the mouth of his best masters ) As Iohn really , so Peter really : as the one lay vpon our Sauiours breast , and it was no fiction , so the other receiued the keies of heauens kingdome , and it was more then a bare representation . Who doubts but S. Peter receiued the keies , as well as Iohn leaned on Christs bosome ? But Peter receiued the keies in the person of the Church militant , because our Lord would honour vnitie : & Iohn rested and repasted himselfe on his sacred bosome as a figure of the triumphant , to shadow out vnto vs the estate of glory and blissefull immortalitie . Each did as wee read they did , but with a drift to intimate some farther thing vnto vs. Non tibi sed vnitati , may we say to S. Peter : and , Non tibi sed aeteruitati , may we say to S. Iohn . Omnibus a Sanctis ad Christi corpus pertinentibus , saies S. Austen . And , b Quoniam nec iste solus , nec ille solus , sed vniuersa Ecclesia . In this stands the answer , that both Peter receiued , and receiued for himselfe , ( for he had a part in the keyes as well as others , wee denie it not ) but c 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , portionally and particularly , not wholly and entirely , saue onely as hee stood in the Churches roome , to grace vnitie . And this prooues no vniuersall authoritie . As not Iohn in the triumphant , as not Iudas in the malignant , so neither Peter in the militant . But so much may suffice to haue spoken herof . § 21. THE last place of S. Austen that is cited for this purpose , is that which I first began with , de Agone Christ . c. 30. which because this hobby-horse cryes out vpon the Bishop so , for alleadging fraudulently and lamely , as hath bin said , I will keepe my promise to report it euen at large . Though in the 20. chapter of that booke , before we come to the place that is now to bee scanned , S. Austen sufficiently shewes what he meanes , by his wonted phrase of gerere personam . Where he doubts not to say , speaking of the head in a mans bodie , wherin all the senses are lodged and recollected , that Caput ipsius animae quodam modo personam sustinet : not as if the head did rule the soule , which were very vnreasonable ( as they would make Peter to bee gouernour of the Church , they care not how ) but happily for resembling the invisible soule in visible forme most liuely , and most apparantly , euen as Peter did the Church , one for many . And so it followes in S. Austen , Ibi enim omnes sensus apparent . But speake we to the 30. chapter , which is the thing in question . Intreating there how the Church ought to shew compassion to her children , conuerting by repentance , he thus saies : Non enim sine causâ inter omnes Apostolos , huius ecclesiae catholicae personam sustinet Petrus . That is , For not without cause doth Peter among all the Apostles sustaine the person of this Catholicke Church . Huic enim ecclesiae Claues regni coelorum datae sunt : For to this Church , the keies of the Kingdome of heauen were giuen . Which latter FOR , is not to show that Peter was chosen to beare the person of the Church , non sine causâ , not without cause , as he had said before , but to prooue what hee had supposed , that Peter did beare the Churches person ; since the keyes are too great a depositum for Peter , to be receiued in his owne name , but in the Churches . And so much he had deliuered before vpon the 108. Psalm . I will not now trouble the Reader to repeat it . Onely this may bee remembred , that there he saies , Tibi dabo claues , is among those sayings , which howsoeuer videntur pertinere ad Petrum , non tamen habent illustrem intellectum , nisi cum referuntur ad ecclesiam , &c. which howsoeuer they may seeme to belong to Peter , yet cannot clearely be construed , but when they are referred to the Church . This there . But now in this place he addes another example , to shew that Peter did beare the Churches person , and not his owne : As when , Pasce oues , is said to him . Et cum ei dicitur , ad omnes dicitur , Amas me ? Pasce oues meas . Where I cannot demaund without some passion , what can bee said more pregnantly to the Bishops purpose , that , Pasce oues , was not said to Peter onely , when S. Austen makes it common to all ( all of the ranke at least ) and vouches it as an instance , that Peter did beare the person of the Church , and not his own only , in diuers things that passed vpon him ? Me thinks vpon the alledging but of thus much out of S. Aust . if truly , if in his sense , the question should be at an end . Yet because this man cries out against maimed allegations , I will keepe promise , as I said , to set downe so much of S. Austens text , as no man comming after shall neede more : and that by the way it may be seene , whether this fellow can clip a text or no , for his aduātage , & leaue out that which is too hoat for him to meddle with ; practising that impudently at the very same time , which he traduces the Bishop for most wrongfully . Thus then S. Austen : Debet ergò Ecclesia Catholica correctis & pietate firmatis filijs libenter ignoscere , cùm ipsi Petro personam eius gestanti , & cùm in mari titubâsset , & cùm Dominum carnaliter à passione reuocâsset , & cùm aurem serui gladio praecidisset , & cùm ipsum Dominum ter negâsset , & cùm in simulationem posteà superstitiosam lapsus esset , videamus veniam esse concessam , eumque correctum atque firmatum , vsque ad dominicae passionis gloriam pervenisse . That is to say : The Church Catholicke therfore ought to pardon her children amending their faults , and established in godlines , sith we see pardon affoarded to Peter himselfe , sustaining the person of the church , both after that he had wauered in the sea , & carnally dehorted our Sauiour frō suffering , and with a sword cut off the high Priests seruants eare , and finally fallen into his superstitious hypocrisie ; [ yet pardon I say affoarded him , notwithstanding all these faults , ] in so much as amended now and confirmed , he came in the ende to partake of the glorie of our Sauiours suffering . Here is nothing against vs , for ought I can perceiue , vnlesse Peter to haue come to the glorie of our Lords suffering , may seeme to any to make against vs. Which yet I hope they will not construe , as if Peter had died for the sinnes of the world , and so equalled our Sauiours glorie . Wicked though they are , yet not so wicked , as to diuide that praise between Christ and Peter . Howsoeuer S. Austen in his tractat vpon S. Iohn 123. makes this to be one of S. Peters errors , to haue offered to die for Christ in all hast , pro liberatore liberandus &c. Wherein he might seeme to haue aspired to a glorie more then our Sauiours , that he dying to saue the world , Peter should die for him that died for the world , which is a point aboue the other . But howsoeuer they magnifie Peters authoritie , I hope they will attribute to him no such vertue as this , although he may seeme , I say , to haue said as much himselfe when time was , by S. Austens collection ; but rather repent with him repenting , as afterwards we know he changed his minde , and no doubt cried out as Iob doth , his eyes beeing opened , and his weaknes discouered , I bewaile my selfe in dust and ashes , I haue said once , but I will say it no more . As for the wordes of S. Austen , that Peter attained to the honour of our Lords suffering , it is a storie in Eusebius worth the considering , how for the exceeding honour that he bare to his Master , a though he were nailed to a crosse of wood like his , yet he refused to dic with his head vpward . Which we may beleeue the rather , because we read euen in heathen stories of that time , of diuers that were crucified with their heads downeward . And as Peter for humilitie , b begd that boone of the tormentors , so it is like they were not nice to graunt it to him , as the more disgracefull . This was the reuerence that our Sauiours conuersation begat in his Disciples . In figure where of Iob , whome I named euen now , to shew the authoritie that he bare in his house , with semblable loue of all sides , My seruants , said he , thought themselues happie in my presence ; if I smiled vpon them they did not beleeue me , yea they cryed , Who vvill giue vs to eate of his flesh ? for the vnspeakable sweetnes they found by me . See S. Chrysost . in his 2. Epist . to Olympias . Who can write of these things without melting passion ? To consider the strange conflict betweene our Sauiour and S. Peter : a conflict of humilitie , not of pride , of loue , not of anger , like that betweene our Lord and the Baptist erst , refusing to thinke himselfe worthie to baptize him . Which yet in Peter is more , to thinke himselfe not worthie to die like him . Besides , that Iohn was faine to yeild in the ende , but herin Peter had his desire . And which is more singular , not onely the kind of strife , to striue for loue , but against the nature of loue , which delights in likenesse , that he should choose a contrarie positure of bodie , to testifie his loue to his Lord and master . Indeede we haue those now a daies in the Popedome , that loue to beare themselues 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , contrarie to Christ , both liuing and dying , true Torti as the Bishop hath prooued them : but S. Peter affected this of meere modestie , which is able to make impression into a marble heart : These whither not climbing and soaring in the meane time , with the wings of such ambition , as not I , but F. T. euen now described , ( where it is thought T should stand before F , but for crookednes sake , ) not onely to controll Kings and Countries with their Vniuersall dominion , but to challenge as much power as Christ himselfe , the Head of the Church ? And yet they make as if it were doubtfull , whether Anti-Christ be come yea or no , whether he sit in the Church of God , shewing himselfe for God , or no. But we haue strayed out of the way , by occasion of this mention , that S. Peter was exalted to the likenes or fellowship of our Sauiours martyrdome . Which the Bishop hauing abated them in his citation of S. Austen , I confesse also they should neuer haue heard from me , but that this man complained of lame allegations . As for the force it might seeme to carry , against our Sauiours single and soueraigne sacrifice , I shall neede to say no more then in the Apostles words , If one member suffers , all suffer with it ; euen the head and all , but then especially I trow , when they suffer for the head , as S. Peter did suffer for the honour of his Master , in some likenes with his Master , and yet not daring to die too like his Master . And our Sauiour though in glorie , yet he cried from heauen , ( that you may knowe hee is the true Dauid , whome Saul annoyeth , ) Saul , Saul , Why persecutest thou me ? Which words , as if they had taught S. Paul what to thinke of the fellowship of sufferings of the bodie mysticall , he is bold to say afterwards in his owne case , Adimpleo in corpore meo relliquias . passionum Christi , pro corpore eius quod est Ecclesia : I fulfill in my bodie the remainder of Christs sufferings , for his bodie which is the Church . Where pro is exemplarie , not satisfactorie , against the Rhemists that dreame of a masse of passions , vpon that place . So doth the Masse forsooth runne in their mindes . But we speake of his calling them passiones Christi , for sympathie , and for proportion ; of which enough . § 22. To returne to S. Austen , and to conclude this whole matter with relating his text as largely as you can desire . The summe is , that the Church must bee gratious toward her children , conuerting and returning by repentance , as our Sauiour was to Peter , the image of the Church , or the proxie of the Church ( for I feare not to vouch that name by him , which hath euery where so good grounds in S. Austen , as you haue heard ) and bearing her person not without cause . For euen Peter ( quoth he ) found fauour after many defaults . Let her shew her selfe like Peter then , whome Peter figured , and the rather figured , because himselfe was a sinner , yea a great sinner , as the Church containes many offenders in her . That here also you may see another reason , Sir , though you haue beene twice answered to this question before , why Peter rather then another figured the Church , namely , because Peter beeing a great sinner , and yet after his sinnes finding greater grace , was so much the apter to represent her , which in both these kinds is verie notorious , both abundantis peccati , and super-abundantis gratiae , of surpassing grace after exceeding guiltinesse , Rom. 5. Our Sauiours Parable is not vnknowne to this purpose , Luk. 7. ( propounded to a Simon , though not this Simon ) which of the two debters ought more ? The case was Peters owne , both a great debter , and released of much , and perhaps our Sauiour deliuered it as in his hearing , so not without some reference to him standing by . But at least for this cause he bare the person of the Church . And so Petri lapsus potiùs confirmat primatum Pap● , as Bellarmine saies ; Peters fall rather confirmes the primacie of the Pope . But you see what primatum , what kind of primacie , not to be vniuersall Lord or rector , but the Churches type , or the Churches figure , to teach the Church as you would say , by way of liuely instance , to shew grace , as hee had found grace , and shee both in her owne , and his person . This was his masterie that he had ouer the Church , to be master of mildnesse , and we denie not but aboue the rest of the Apostles . Doest thou loue mee more then these ? Alas , how could he choose , to whome so much was forgiuen ? then shew compassion . § 23. Now the faults of S. Peter , that S. Aust . had set down , but not so F. T. no more then he durst set downe his owne name aright , nay which purposely he leapes ouer , though they were incident to his allegation , as you may see in his first chap. num . 3. and yet blames the Bishop for maimed quotations , they are these insuing . First , his doubting vpon the sea . And if the sea be his seat , or the whole Church , as they imagine , you see in what danger the Church is to haue a staggering gouernour , I say staggering euen in faith . Secondly , his disswading our Lord from death : You will say , that was no great matter : of which neuerthelesse you may be pleased to remember what our Sauiours censure was , heauie no doubt . He called him Satan . Thirdly , the snipping off of Malchus his care with a sword , wherein his pretended Successors imitate him but too truely . What though they strike no blow themselues ? Executio ( saies Bellarmine ) ad alios spectat . Let Seneca be heard . It is thou , saith Seneca , speaking to Alexander , ( who transported by anger , commanded Lysimachus to be cast to a lyon , and so torne in peeces , and deuoured ) it is thou that openest thy iawes vpon him , it is thou that tearest him in peices with thy teeth : Tuum illud os est , tua illa feritas . O quàm cuperes , &c. The like may be said of Daniel and his enemies . But this , F. T. durst not so much as once to mention , he knowes it makes so harsh a sound . And therefore he fetches a leap from Peters doubting , to his denying , and pares away three of his errors with an & caetera , which S. Austen had comprehended , and set downe in specie . I haue heard of some , that thinke for Peter to drawe his sword at Malchus , because Malchus in Hebrew signifies a King , as we are taught by S. Ierome , de vitâ Malchi , was either a presage , or a iustification of the Popes practises at this day . A presage it might well be . But as for iustification , they may call to mind how our Sauiour approoued it , threatning the sword to them that tooke the sword , though it were Peter himselfe : for euen to Peter were those words directed . Not to them that beare the sword , as committed to them by God , which is the right and the duty of the ciuill magistrate , but to them that a take it , that is , manage it without cōmission either by themselues or others , as the Popes at this day . Therefore b Tertull. most wittily , Patientia Domini in Malcho vulnerata est : Our Lords patience was wounded in Malchus : or , That which Malchus felt in his care , our Lord felt at his very heart . It displeased him so much , that a Churchman should strike . Therefore also hee healed the wound by miracle , and restored his care vnto him againe . Which was not ordinarie , to doe miracles , for the cure of vnbeleeuers , specially oppressours and impugners of his person ; but that the importance of the cause so required it , and to shew how iniurious he accounted such curtesie , when those which are Church-men will draw the sword , though it be in defence of his truth or person . § 24. The fourth error there named , was his ter negâsse Dominu , triple deniall of his Lord and Sauiour . To which answers , as you haue beene told , his triple confession , which makes way to the mandate of Pasce oues meas , exciting care , and studie , and diligence , but importing nothing lesse then Monarchicall iurisdiction . Though S. Austen also finde an other mysterie there , namely of Trinitie in vnitie , in the threefold confession exhibited by one man , in the name of the Church , as we heard before out of his Tractate vpon S. Iohn : Confirmat Trinitatem , vt consolidet vnitatem . § 25. The fift & last , is his superstitious simulation , as S. Aust . calls it , that at Antioch , no doubt , of which Gal. 2. This also the Adioyner thought good to leaue out , celans peccata sicut Adam , either because it drawes so neare an error in faith , or at least for subiecting the Monarch of the whole world , to the open resistance and reproofe of an abortiue ; though S. Chrysostome be so farre from vnderualuing Paul therefore , that he doubts not to call him 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , him that of last was made first : ( where is primus Apostolus now ? ) and Petrus Damiani , that he was antepositus omnibus fratribus , preferred before all his brethren , like little Beniamin ( saith he ) of whose tribe he came . And againe S. Chrysost . 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , nay , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , no bodie comes neere Paul , no not any thing neere . Vpon the first to the Coloss . 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . Ethico . And Aquinas in his commentarie on the first to the Galatians , saies Paul is wont to be painted on the right hand , and Peter on the left , ( for euen your Schoolemen are miserably troubled with arguments drawne from pictures ) because Christ from heauen called the one to the Apostleship , from earth the other . But so much of these . I might adde more . § 26. For so it followes in S. Austen , Pax in Domino reddita Ecclesiae à Principibus saeculi : peace in the Lord was afforded to the Church by the secular Princes . Which is as pleasant to a Iesuits eare to heare , as vineger to the teeth , or smoake to the eyes , as Salomon saies , to thinke that the outward welfare of the Church should depēd on the Princes gratious aspect , who if they be auerse , they knowe a meanes worth two of S. Pauls , to reduce them to order , not by prayer or supplication to God for them , 1. Tim. 2. 1. for either they will inforce them , or make them rue it , either bow or breake , as the prouerb is . But S. Austen euery where acknowledges Kings to be those kind nursing fathers , from whose gouernment flowes the Churches peace . And it is well knowne how he deriues it out of the second Psalme , Et nunc Reges intelligite , ver . 10. as if the meanes to order well the Church , and to promote the kingdome , of which it is said a little before , in the same Psalme , Yet haue I set my King vpon my holy hill of Sion , were the right perswasion of Princes concerning the faith . So as against Faustus the Manichee , lib. 12. cap. 32. he saies , the Emperours raging were the lyons deuouring , ( S. Paul himselfe calls Nero the lyon , not for nothing , but because king of beasts : ) but againe when they conuerted and embraced the faith , and gaue succour and supportance to such as professed relligion , then was Sampsons riddle verefied , then was honie foūd in the lyons mouth , then exforti exiuit dulce , and the mouth that afore roared against God , and his truth , ( Quare fremuerunt is the lyons propertie in the Psalme aforesaid ) then , munimenta latebrasque dabat dulcedini verbi Euangelici , became a refuge , or a couering to the honie-combe of the Gospel . And because we speake of lyons , which are soueraigne in their kind , kings of beasts , saies Epiphan . haer . 77. it may not be forgotten how the same S. Austen , more then once or twice , compares the enemies of Christian religion , Kings and Emperours , to the lyons that Daniel was cast vnto , amōgst whose hands neuerthelesse God preserued his Saints , for they that hurt the bodie could not hurt the soule , by our Sauiours saying ; but when once they turned Christians , and enacted Lawes , and decreed punishments , for the suppressing of Atheisme , or heresie , or Paganisme , or whatsoeuer is contrarie to the glorious Gospel of our Lord Iesus Christ , then they were like the lyons , which deuoured , not Deniel , but Daniels accusers , and reuenged vpon them the wrong that they had done to him before . I see I should be long , if I would bring , not all , but the least part of the store that is found here of in S. Austens workes . I will point onely to that in another place of his of the like argument , where , as here he ascribes the temporall peace and prosperity of the Church , to the fauourable countenance of Christian Kings ; so , there to shew what authoritie they haue in the matters of God , he doubts not to set out their suppressing of heresies , and Atheisme , and schismes , in such a peremptory sort , as to say * that they haue whipped & scourged the very deuills ( the authors of the aforesaid ) both by sea and land , both out of towne and countrey . It is well knowne , what enemies the Iesuits are to the Kings entermedling with matters of this nature , to his handling the whip to lash the deuill , for his sowing of cockle amongst good corne ; whome they perhaps would exempt , as a spirituall person , from the Kings iurisdiction , besides that the cause is a cause of faith . But S. Austen , though he knewe well that the deuill is not onely spirituall , but euen one of the spiritualia nequitiae in coelestibus , as S. Paul styles him , Eph . 6. 12. one of the spirituall wickednesses in heauenly places , and so in regard euen of his place to be priuiledged , yet doubts not to put a whip into the Emperours hand , I say , nor cares not though he crie out , or the Iesuits for him , Who art thou that torments vs thus without a calling ? But we stray too farre . Howsoeuer it be , as I promised our gentleman to giue him good measure , so S. Austens ending must by no meanes be passed ouer , for the elegancie of it . § 27. Speaking then against the Hereticks , descended of one Lucifer , that denied pardon to the conuerts of the Church , from which occasion sprang all this treatie about S. Peter , he thus saies ; Hanc illi matris charitatem superbè accipientes , & impièrepudiantes , quia Petro post galli cantum surgentinon gratulatisunt , cum Lucifero qui mane oriebatur , cadere meruerunt . That is : These men , either proudly and scornfully receiuing , or wickedly reiecting the charitie of their mother , because they reioyced not with Peter rising after the cock-crow , they iustly fell with Lucifer that earely-rising starre . § 28. We haue gone thorough the Chapter , which the Adioyner condemnes the Bishop for lamely quoting . Yet I can hardly abstaine from yeilding him somewhat , out of the next Chapter too , to fulfill his measure , to mingle him double in the cup , whereofhe complaines of the scantnes . Itaque miseri ( saies S. Austen , speaking stil of the Luciferians , but it fits but euen too wel with out stout-hearted Iesuits ) dum in Petro petram non intelligunt , & nolunt credere datas ecclesiae claues regni coelorum , ipsi eas de manibus amiserunt . They haue lost the keyes whilst they talke so much of them , and all because they vnderstand not , or will not vnderstand , Petrum in petrâ , that is , Ecclesiam in Christo , as S. Austen before expounded it in his 13. Serm. de verb. Dom. secundum Matth. that is , the Church in Christ . So neither Peter the petra , as they would faine make him , nor Peter at all , but Petrus in petra , that is , Ecclesia in Christo , or populus Christianus , and fidelis in Christo , the Church in Christ , or the number of the faithfull , as they are recollected in Christ , is it to whome the keyes are here giues . But F. T. and his fellows , nolunt credere datas Ecclesiae claues regni coelorum , will not beleeue that the keyes of the kingdome of heauen were giuen to the Church , and why , but quia Petrum in petrá non intelligunt , they will not vnderstand the mysterie of Peter , not in himselfe , but in the rocke , that is , in Christ : S. Austens prophesie , their propertie at this day . § 29. It followes in him yet , against such as forbid second marriages . Qui * cum super Apostolicam doctrinam se mundiores praedicent , sinomen suum vellent agnoscere , mundanos se , potiùs quàm mundos , vocarēt . Who pretending themselues cleaner farre then the Apostles doctrine , are found to be cleane besides all praise of cleannes . If you aske , why so ? the reason is rendered in the next words ; Cogunt viduas suas vri , quas nubere non premittunt . Non enim prudentiores habendi sunt quàm Apostolus Paulus , qui ait , Malo eas nubere quàm vri . They compell , saies he , their widowes to burne , whome they forbid to marrie , whereas they should not be coūted wiser then the Apostle Paul , who saies , I had rather they should marrie then burne . But no doubt while they affect a purity aboue the Apostles doctrine , they might giue themselues , if so it pleased them , a name more agreeable to their filthie sect . The world hath not yet forgotten , how roundly Bellarmine replies vpon his MAIESTIE , moderately censuring their restraint of mariages , which yet they would haue to be so many Sacraments , that marriages before the vow indeede are Sacraments , but after that , sacriledges . S. Austen makes it free here for all to marrie , that find themselues to be a in daunger of burning , windowes and all , and who knowes but vowed and professed widowes ? The rule is generall , and he applies it generally , without any limitation , Malo eas nubere quàm vri : I had rather they should marrie then burne : frō which it is not to be thought he would excuse any . S. Paul himselfe , 1. Tim. 5. 12. though he speake of widowes , that had giuen their first faith , suppose , as you construe it , their faith and vow to remaine widowes , yet afterward in the 14 , he giues them leaue to marrie , since they could keepe it no better ; I will haue younger widowes marrie . Where it were hard to construe yonger widowes twice named , v. 12. and 14. and one time condemned for their wantonnesse after vow , desiring to marrie , another time licensed to marrie , as for remedie , ( They will marrie , v. 12. and S. Paul , I will haue them marrie , v. 14. ) I say it were hard to construe these two , of two sundrie kinds of widows , the one vowed , the other not vowed , whereas then the remedie were no remedie , if it be not a remedie against such as made default : and if Paul allowed the vowed widowes to marrie , though not without checke for breaking their vow , then Bellarmines sacriledge is no sacriledge , but rather his doctrine sacrilegious . I might shew the same out of a Cyprian , b Austen , c Ierome : I might shew it out of some of the auncientest d Councels . I might alleadge Medina obseruing as much , though he ouerthrow it againe , like a cow that hath giuen a good soope of milke , so with the dash of his heele : In contrarium est D. Thomas . What maruell if Thomas be of such authoritie , when e some of you haue recorded , that in conclusion of your famous Coūcell of Trent , the Fathers cried out there , as if they had done a great act , vpon the name of S. Thomas , ascribing the winning of the day to him . Iust as Plato in his Timaeus , makes the maker of the world to congratulate his owne paines in the assembly of his pettie-gods , after the creation . And yet some thinke that Thomas is not so firme for vowes , but when they proue inconuenient , he giues leaue to break them . But so much of S. Aust . and his authority , cited out of de Agon . Christ . c. 30. where F. T. complaines the Bishop to haue left out so much . Are these , trow you , the things that the Bishop left out ? § 30. ANOTHER testimonie conforme to that of S. Austens , to shewe either the force , or the extent of the commission giuen to Peter in Pasce oues meas , the Bishop produced out of S. Ambrose , another of the fowre Doctors of the Church , of their owne registring , that it may satisfie the more . In ore duorum , praesertim tanti , testium . De sacerdotali dignitate , as now the title runnes , though it hath runne otherwise in times past , cap. 2. not as F. T. wrongly cites , the first . Quas oues , & quem gregem , non solùm tunc B. suscepit Petrus , sed & nobiscum eas suscepit , & cum illo eas nos suscepimus omnes . That is , Which sheep , and which flocke , not onely Blessed Peter then receiued , but both he receiued them with vs , and with him we all haue receiued them . As for the pregnancy of this testimonie , and that it toucheth to the quicke , what need we say more , when we haue our aduersary confessing , that this manner of speech doth indeede inforce a greater equalitie betwixt S. Peter and other Pastors , then euer S. Ambrose did imagine , he meanes then can subsist with their supposed primacie or Papacie of Peter . But how does he answer it ? Forsooth they are said not to bee Ambrose his words , not those at least , & nobiscum eas suscepit , both he receiued them with vs , &c. And why so ? Because first they are contrarie to Ambrose his iudgement in other places , but specially because they are not extant in the printed copies , and in a word are meerely of the Bishops forging . A great fault , if it can be prooued ; if not , a great slaunder , as all men may see , and sufficient to cracke the Adioyners credit , through out the rest of his whole booke . It may please the Reader then to vnderstand ; that of sundry editions of S. Ambrose which haue been set forth , though we could not come by all to consult them ; yet so many are foūd to haue those words , which he quarrels to be foisted , as may easily shew , on which side the corruption lyeth , ours for adding , or theirs for defacing and with-drawing . Fiue editions at Basile , and all in seuerall yeares are found to haue them : Ann. 1506. 1516. 1527. the first of Iohannes Petri à Langendorfe his setting forth , the third is Erasmus first edition . Adde another at Basile , ann . 1538. And yet a fift of Costerius his edition , ann . 1567. all which haue them . Of Paris likewise fiue : one , ann . 1529. another , 1539. a third , 1549. a fourth , 1569. a fift , 1586. And so we might goe ouer a great many more , but here is tenne for any one that can be shewed yet to haue them not . Though as wee daily seeke , we find more daily : as a sixt edition at Basile , ann . 1492. ancienter then any that hath been cited yet , and further off from any likelihood to be corrupted by the Bishop . Adde hither foure manuscripts , which haue them all . One which is now in his Maiesties librarie , sometimes belonging to the Monasterie of Rochester , giuen by Os-Ketel a monke before the conquest , faire written , and without all exception . True it is that S. Ambrose his booke is entituled there , Sermo de obseruantiâ Episcoporum ; but it is the same word for word , with De dignitate sacerdotali , the booke which we now treat of . An other is of Merton colledge in Oxford , which hath also those words ; though the title of the booke be changed , as in the former , yet vtterly the same it is for substance . It is there intituled , De obseruantijs Episcoporum , qui inscribitur Pastorale ; but the same , as I said . The third is of Peter-house librarie in Cambridge , which they that will consult may finde the words in , and see the slaunder confuted with their eies . A fourth in Sidney Colledge librarie , of the same Vniuersitie , giuen by Mr. Mascall , which to this purpose hath been consulted , and is found to haue them . We will neuer denie but Sixtus quintus his edition , which he set out at Rome , before hee was Pope , and so the lesse irrefragable forsooth , hath them not . And accordingly an other edition of Paris , ann . 1603. which professes to goe step by step with that of Rome , leaueth them out . But what is that to controule so many auncient editions ? Or does it not shew , that those words are so effectuall against your primacie ( as your selfe at a blush confessed ere-while , saying that S. Ambrose neuer meant to bee so liberall ) that because you could not wrest them with any forged interpretation , you had rather cut them out then abide the hazard ? And yet it is found , that between the Rome edition , of which I spake euen now , and that of Paris , ann . 1603. professing to followe it in euery point , there is an other of Paris , ann . 1586. which retaines the said words in spight of Rome . Concerning the Lyons , or rather the lyars edition of ann . 1559. by Frellonius , you may please to read what Iunius reports of his owne knowledge , in his preface to the Index expurgatorius ; you will not onely quit the Bishop from such blame , as now you cast vpon him most vnworthily , but acknowledge to your shame , that as you haue vsed small conscience towards any of the Fathers , so least to Ambrose , of all other , for abusing him . I will set downe a little of the storie that hee tells there , and so passe on to your next argument . When I was at Lyons , saith he , in the yeare 1559. I was acquainted with a certaine corrector of the Presse , whose name was Ludouicus Saurius . And comming one day to visit him , I found him by chance , or rather by the speciall prouidence of God , reuising S. Ambrose's works , which then Frellonius was in printing . And after much talke on both sides , when I had told him I would not hinder his worke , he reading afresh a page of that worke , Do you see ( quoth he ) the fashion of this our edition of Ambrose , how neat , how accurate , and if you regard the sight , to bee preferred before all that haue been yet printed ? Afterward as I considered and applauded the goodnes of it ; Well , for all that ( quoth he ) if I were to buy me a copy of Ambrose , I would buy any rather then this that you see . And demanding of him the reason of his so saying , he brought out certaine pages out of the decks vnder his table , in which pages there were two rowes one against the other , such as they call cancellatioperis , and thus added : Looke you ( quoth he ) this is the first forme of our pages , which within these few dayes we printed after a copy of verie good credit . But two Franciscan Friers by their authoritie dashed all this good work , and in place of the first sheets , made vs print these that you saw euen now , cleane besides all the direction of our copies , with no small hinderance and trouble to Frellonius , &c. This reports Iunius of his owne experience , touching your corrupting of Saint Ambrose ; And so much of that point . § 31. Your other argument is drawne from certaine places of that Father , which seeme contrarie to this , you say , and so this not to be admitted for his . The first is vpon the 12. of the second to the Corinth . Primatum non accepit Andreas sed Petrus : Not Andrew , but Peter , receiued the primacie . The other , lib. 10. comment , in Luc. cap. 24. Quia solus profitetur ex omnibus Petrus , ideò omnibus antefertur . Because Peter onely professes emong them all , therefore he is honoured or preserred before all . Which the Bishop had assoyled euen before they were alleadged , acknowledging , as I haue said , two such primacies in Peter , as no way crossing with S. Ambrose , no way aduantage your cause . The first is ordinis , the second praestantiae . The one of order , the other of eminencie . And the one in one , the other in the other testimonie of S. Ambrose may be conceiued . Accepit primatum , you say . A primacie of order beeing to be giuen to some , to auoide confusion , as we shall afterward shew , the Lord that diuideth inter flammas ignium , and much more betweene one brother and another , which comes saliens & transiliens , as it is in the Cant. and of two bedfellowes , of two grinders at the mill , receiues one , refuses the other , preferd Peter before Andrew his brother . What is this to the Popedome ? what to a Monarchie ? what , I say not to their stately , but euen statarie and ordinarie supremacie in the Church ? Was this to descend from S. Peter to his heires ? which we are told here is so aliene from carnall prerogatiue , that therefore it was giuen to Peter before Andrew , to shew it is meerely of diuine disposition . Though the more I consider S. Ambrose his words , the more me thinkes they fall vpon another answer of the Bishops , and that proper enough . He speakes in one word of primatus communis , not primatus proprius . So Clemens in Eusebius before quoted , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , so Gal. 2. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 : so here in this very place that S. Ambrose comments vpon , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . Which was a primacie of many , and S. Paul himselfe had a place in it , though called after Peter was made a Monarch , if euer he was made , euen as Ambrose here confesses ; Hoc erant quod & Apostolus Paulus : They were the same that Paul , and Paul that they . The wonder then lies here . Andrew that followed first ( that by the way you may see how little senioritie preuailes in Gods school , which yet you so trust vnto ) receiued not the primacie that Peter did , that is , was none of those three primi wherof Peter was . Neither say ye , that because Peter onely is mentioned here , onely opposed to Andrew , therefore only Peter receiued the primacie in S. Ambroses meaning . For Peter is opposed to Andrew , as one brother to another , and the iunior to him which is knowne to haue resorted more carely to Christ , which comparison betweene him and others were not so cleare . For euen Andrew brought Peter to Christ , Ioh. 1. Now the other primatus , which is primatus praestantiae , as the Bishop had called it , and so foyled this fellowes friuolous obiections , euen before they were hatched , belongs to the other place . Quia solus profitetur , solus antefertur . But anteferri is one thing , praeponi another . The latter may be of authoritie , the first of any excellencie . Doe I seeme once againe too grammaticall to you ? To you perhaps : but how doe you gainsay me ? Anteferri , I say , is one thing , as to be esteemed before another , to be graced before another , like anteire , antecellere , and if you haue any more like . For it was not no grace for S. Peter here , to be bid to feede , as a common man , an vniuersall man , as one in whose person the others were exhorted , and as S. Austen saies , the Church represented . Thus , quia solus profitetur ex omnibus , omnibus antefertur . And lastly , martyrij corona decernitur , as S. Ambrose here saies , he is promised martyrdome in those words , Cum senueris &c. which is no small glorie . In which place also by the way , you may see the libertie of Ecclesiasticall men , that you so stand vpon . When Peter was yong , that is , before he was Apostle , he might go whither he would . Afterward he was to follow against his will. Is this exemption ? But because you conferre place with place , to perswade vs that we construe S. Ambrose amisse , I hope you will giue vs the like leaue hereafter , to conferre diuerse places of the Fathers with themselues , before wee assent to that which you produce out of them . And yet it followes in S. Ambrose , after , omnibus antefertur , as it were by way of reason , Maior enim omnibus charitas est : for charity is greater then all . So as Peters anteferri , is neither grounded vpon his priuiledge of retaining the faith , as you would make it , of his loue rather , which you confesse often to haue failed in your Popes , ( as if the after-name Peter had abolished Simon , qui interpretatur obediens , as Beda notes ) and the prioritie , if he had any assigned him ouer others , is onely like Charities among other virtues , which is to be principall indeede , but not to rule . The virtues of the prosequutiue part rule not the intellectuall , but are ruled rather . So Faith and Loue. § 33. As for vicarium amoris , which is another thing that you vrge out of his Comment vpon Luke , that Christ left Peter the Vicar of his loue , or the deputie of his loue , as if therefore he were that Vicar of his power , or iurisdiction that you imagine , what so vnlikely ? Of the Vicar of our Sauiour you may read in S. Iohn , cap. 16. Alium paracletum dabit vobis : and Tertullian hath been told you to giue that to the holy Ghost . He is the Paraclete . Though you haue Cletus and Anacletus , yet neuer a Paracletus , the Vicar of our Lord , properly so called , in all the ranke of your Popes . For we must desire you now , that we may haue no Montanizing . Though , I suppose , you are not ignorant , what an ornament of yours had like to haue been transported , with the enticing prophecyes and Siren-songs of Mistresse Maximilla , when time was . S. Austen also answerably in his sermon vpon the Epiphanie , 185. Datur vicarius Redemptoris , meaning the holy Ghost : and yet he addes , Vt quod ille redemit , iste sanctificet , quod ille inchoauit , iste consummet . Is this Peter ? Does he sanctifie those whom Christ redeemed ? or does hee perfect that which Christ began ? But Ambrose cals Peter vicarium amoris , the deputy of Christs loue . And who doubts , but as Christ hath no proper deputie in the course of his gouernement , vnlesse you wil admit the holy Ghost before named , which Bellarmine denies to doe , so , in a modified sense , the Vicars of his loue were as many as loued her in his absence , whom he loued , and imployed all their care to benefit his Church ? which was not one mans charge , but all the Apostles , and not onely the Apostles , but all ministers , to the ende of the world . Alij pastores vicarij sunt illius pastoris , saies Lyra vpon Ioh. 10. 16. Yea Ambrose himselfe ; Omnes Episcopi ( if not Presbyteri ) sunt vicarij Christi , vpon 1. Tim. 5. 19. And you may adde the two Eusebij , one of Rome in his Epist . ad Episc . Tusciae & Campaniae , if it be not forged by you , Caput Ecclesiae Christus est , Christi autem vicarij sacerdotes sunt . The head of the Church is Christ , and Christs Vicars art the Priests . The other the Emesene , in his sermon vpon Ioh. 20. Dominicâ primâ post pascha ; making it common to the Disciples all to be Christs deputies , Meos Vicarios vos constituo , meâ vice vos mando , I make you my Vicars , I appoint you in my stead . In a Goffridus Vindocinensis thus we read : Episcopus [ omnis ] Dominus est & Imperat on Christianorum , qui etiam Christi vices agere creditur . And not onely Bishops , or Ministers ; but as Christ loued vs , so for vs to loue one another , and in that sense to be the deputies of his loue ( in which onely sense S. Ambrose meant it of S. Peter , sauing that he was to doe the workes of loue as an Apostle ) is no more then is inioyned to euery Christian . Though S. Ambrose say onely velut vioarium amoris , not daring to say vicarium cleane out , as the nature of his office , as you would make it , but shewing that he speaks in a borrowed phrase , and as it is proper to none , so in that extent perhaps befitting many . Therefore Bellarmine leaues the velut clean out , citing this authoritie , de Pont. Rom. l. 1. c. 25. § 34. THERE is yet behind another graue obseruation out of S. Ambrose , that Peter is not bid now to feede the lambes , or little sheepe , but ones ipsas , that is , the more perfect . I might send this noddie to M. Casaubones late monument , or rather mirrour of * Exercitations to Baronius his Annales , to be informed of S. Ambrose his reading this text , and the vprightnes of it . Woe is me for that diuine man M. Casaubone , that speaking of his monument , I should speake ambiguously , of his tombe , or of his writings . But what that hath deuoured , these shall eternize , and now is no time to bewaile our losse . Because Peter had lambkins , and lambs , and sheepe , committed to his charge , to be fed by him , suppose incipientes , prosicientes , & perfectos , the leafe , the blossome , and the ripe almond in Aarons rod , suppose all the steps in Iacobs ladder , at least as it signifies the Church here militant , suppose Prophets and Apostles , Kings and Emperors , the boundlesse latitude of the Church Christian , Ergò quid ? who can replie with patience to such emptie stuffe ? Doe we looke it should haue beene said , Feede all saue the Apostles ? or , all saue Princes ? why should Princes and Apostles not profit by Peter ? why should they be denied the benefit of his feeding ? why should not all the Apostles feede all the world ? why should not one Apostle feede another , Peter his fellowes , and they Peter ? As I thinke Paul fed him , and that with his staffe too , tipt with iron , ( I haue heard some construe virgam ferream so , Apoc. 2. and Psal . 2. as alluding to the sheepehooke ) I meane with his reproofe , and that at Antioch his owne seat , not onely with fodder , or with greene bowes . As againe , Iames fed him with , viri fratres audite me , Act. 15. 14. you would thinke this were rather the successor of Christ , of whome that was said , Heare you him . And againe ver . 19. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . To say nothing of , Simeon narrauit , in the 14. ver . Not Peter now , but bare Simeon . Doth this prooue a Monarchie ouer the Apostles ? Or , if Kings be content to lend an eare to his pipe , and to graze vpon such leaues as he shall cast before them , the word and the Sacraments , that refection of immortalitie , quorum vis inenarrabiliter valet plurimùm , what is this to your moderne frighting omnipotencie ? Me thinks I heare Constantine rauished with his note , to yeild thus much , Be you Bishops in the Church , and I without . Me thinks I heare Valentinian call for such a Prelate , as he may safely lay his head in his lappe , but safely , beeing the head , which is the head of the world , as euen the heathen Poet could say . But doth this prooue the terrible power that you striue for , which is neither of kin to Peters feeding , and the daungerousest resort for a Kings head that may be ? Nay , how if the Iesuit haue so mistaken himselfe , in his curious distinction betweene lambs and sheepe , that he hath cleane exempted both Apostles and Kings from Peters iurisdiction , to bring whome in , and to range them within the compasse of that supreme power , the distinction onely was at first deuised ? For if oves and agni onely , be S. Peters walke , and he the sheepeheard , where are arietes , where are the rams ? The rams beeing the Apostles , by Turrian his exposition , or the successors of the Apostles , that is the Bishops . And againe , the rams beeing meant by Kings , as Tolet will haue it , vpon the 15. of S. Iohn , Annot. 3. Two Iesuits you see I bring him , and the one a Cardinall made for his learning , which I thinke will neuer be his lot . But hath not he spun a faire thread I say , shutting them out , both Apostles and Kings , whome by that very tricke he would haue shut in ? § 35. And so much of his answer to the first exception , that the Bishop makes against their argument drawne from Pasce oues meas , consisting in the authorities of Austen and Ambrose . § 36. IN his second ( saith he ) he seekes to retort the Cardinals argument vpon himselfe , & to prooue the Kings supremacie by the word Pasce , for so much as God said also to Dauid , Tu pasces populum meum Israel , Thou shalt feede my people Israel . * Where no man can denie ( saies the Bishop ) but that a King was made the Pastor of all Israel , yea of the Priests themselues , except he will deny them to be part of Israel . But what faies F. T. thinke you , to this ? Thus argueth this learned and sharpe Doctor ; ouerthrowing his owne argument sufficiently by his owne conclusion , graunting in effect , that if the Priests were not a part of the people Israel , the King was not their Pastor . These are his prefaces , if wee had time to ponder them . And yet it is almost the modestest clause in the Book , of them wherein he bespeakes the Bishop , that the Reader may pardon me , if now and then I be mooued , euen more then he is aware , or pitie me when I am compelled ( as often I am for want of leisure ) to swallow such curteous girds in silence . The summe is , that in answering to the Bishops retortion , hee would haue the Priests to bee no part of Israel . And once againe you shall discerne the spirit of the man , who thus sets forward . To this purpose then it is to be considered , what I haue amply debated in the first Chapter of my Supplement , concerning the exemption and separation of the Priests and Leuites from the temporall estate , by the expresse words of Almightie God , Numb . 8. who gaue the Leuites to Aaron , and his children , not to the temporall Prince : Tradidi eos dono Aaron , & filijs eius , de medio populi . And againe , Num. 1. The tribe of Leui shall not be numbred , nor haue any part with the rest of Israel , but the Lord must be their possession , portion , and inheritance . I must bee short . And so shaking off the Supplement , with other idle complements , though he is not ashamed to set a trūpet to his Pharisaicall cheeks , and euerie where to display his owne worke , as if there were no other storehouse of learning in the world , no file but this Philistines to whet a witte vpon , consider we as well as we can , what is to bee said to this point , of the exemption of Leuites from the state politick , that is , from their subiection to ciuill Magistrates : for else he saies nothing , sith we knowe the Leuites were not lay-men , and the Priests Priests , not populars . Yet he implyes such a thing , when hauing quoted the text , and not daring to vtter that audacious proposition , that Priests were not subiect to the ciuill Magistrate , he saies onely this , that God reserued them for his owne seruice : which no doubt is the true meaning of the place , but how doth this ouerthrow ciuill obedience ? § 37. To speake particularly to the places . As for Num. 1. ( to beginne with that ) Non numerabitur tribus Leui , I could send him to a place , as he does vs , where hee should finde his answer , if Datin be no eie-fore to him , alreadie shaped to a man of his coate ; and as it seemes verie reuerently esteemed by him ; I meane Iohn Eudoemon of Crete : but the summe is this . A viewe of the people was to be taken there , either as landed men , or sufficient for the wars . From both which the Leuites beeing exempt by calling , what maruell if with the rest they are not to bee leuied ? Therefore children are not numbred , nor yet women , but as it is in the second and third verses , though often repeated throughout the Chapter , the more to condemne the blindnesse of this beetle-head : Quicquid sexús est masculini à vicesimo anno & suprà , omnium virorum fortium ex Israel : Whatsoeuer is of the male-sexe , from the twentieth yeare and vpward , of all the valiant men of Israel . Are women and children therefore , nay all vnder twentie , exempt from authoritie ? Also Origen hom . 1. in Num. finds no such mysterie , but makes it a token of perfection , to be numbred cum populo Dei , as the Apostles and Disciples ( saith he ) whose very haires of their head were numbred , &c. And so likewise in the resurrection , Alius ( saith he ) numerabitur in tribu Levi , credo qui benè praefuit sacerdotio , alius in aliâ tribu . So that he makes Levi to be numbred too . Lastly , Ruport in his Comment . vpon the place , sees no other mysterie in these words , saue that Clergie men should by all meanes withdraw themselues from secular affaires , as the holy Canons ( saies he ) haue decreed . Now , that God is their portion , & that they may haue no foote of land in the land , which is another thing that F. T. here amplifies the separation of the Leuites by , though it is not vnknowne what cities the Leuites enioyed by assignement afterward , yet what is that to the purpose ? Onely I confesse they are so much the fitter to be exempted from subiection , if , their lands being taken from them , they haue the lesser meanes now to nourish sedition . But what saies Mariana de Institit . Prino . l. 1 ? Ego volo Episcopis firmissimas arces tradi : I will haue Bishops to be masters of the strongest or stateliest castles . There 's a Leuite of the Iesuits , or a prettie leuorite rather , to sucke a Kings heart-blood in time . Concerning Num. 8. I haue giuen them to Aaron and his sonnes for a gift , from the midsts of the people , they are giuen for seruice in the holy calling vnder Aaron , not for any such dependance and obligation towards him , as if thereby they were exempt from the authoritie of the Magistrate . Though the Iesuite crie out here , as hauing attained a conquest , Not to the temporall Prince , but to Aaron . As if the temporall Prince had lost the Leuite , after once God had giuen them to Aaron . Where first I might aske him , whether Aaron were exempt himselfe or no ? If not , why the Leuites , and he not ? if so , by what gift , by what donation of God ? For giuing them to Aaron , hee left Aaron as he was , for ought we read . He will say , Aaron was his before ; which I graunt , for seruice , but where by exemption from the ciuill Magistrate ? What text , what euidence hath he for that ? And will he hold that course in making free of apprentises , as to cancell the indenture , or get the Masters release afore he thinke them free , and not the same in disanulling subiection to a Prince ? Now , we know how Aaron was taunted by Moses , for making the calfe . Which is a signe that this discharge from obedience is a fiction . Neither challenge we any other supremacie of Princes ouer the Clergie , saue in the like case to punish the exorbitant . Besides , God here giues the Leuite to Aaron , as giuen to him freely by the people . Quos dedistis mihi , dono Aaroni , v. 16. & 18. See you then what the people may doe in the choice of their Minister ? which Bellarmine by no means can be brought to digest at his MAIESTIES hāds , alledging it out of Cyprian , as anciently practised : here you see allowed by God himselfe in a sort , that the people should offer and set apart to him their Priests . And if the peoples giuing of the Leuite to God , did not set them free , why should Gods deliuering them backe to Aaron ? Is Aarons protection more soueraigne then Gods , to priuiledge the Leuite ? Yea you inthrall the Priests to the people vnaware , whiles you labour to exempt them from the Princes authoritie . For you make the people the first author of their infranchizoment , as giuing them to God , and God to Aaron , by which they hold . Lastly , the Leuites were giuen to Aaron , as is manifest by this place , onely in lieu of the first borne of the children of Israel , because they by their default and odious idolatry , had made themselues vnworthie to doe God seruice . I demand then : were the first borne exempted before , or no ? if so , by what charter ? for you bring no euidence but this of the Leuites , Num. 8. If not , how could the single putting of others in their roome , to supplie for them in diuine offices , affoard such priuiledge to the deputies , as the originall ministers neuer enioyed ? But to perswade you yet more fully , that no more is implied in these words , then onely to put in one for the other , the Leuites for the first borne , that Aaron and his sonnes might not be destitute of some to serue them , in their religious performances , ( besides that the 20. verse specifies so much , where the execution is described of all that is here commanded , and yet it reaches no further then onely to the application of Aaron and his sons to diuine seruice , together with the Leuites , as Lyra well obserues , without any speech of the least exemption from ciuill authoritie ) please you to heare your owne Doctors speake . First Tostatus as the more worthie . I haue read that this Tostatus emulated Turrecremata , another prop of your primacie , both contending at one time who should doe the Pope most seruice . Though he got the Cardinalship , yet you are not wont to despise the Bishop for his learning . Thus he saies . [ Tradidi eos dono Aaron & filijs eius . I haue giuen them for a gift to Aaron and his sonnes . ] Id est , Leuitas acceptos pro primogenitis Deus tradidit Aaron & filijs suis . That is , God hath deliuered to Aaron and his sonnes , the Leuites , whome he tooke in liewe of the first borne . And after more plainely : Et dicitur quòd tradidit ijs dono , id est , donando , quia deus imposuerat onus totius ministerij super Aaron & filios eius . Cum enim dedit ijs Leuitas vt adiuuarent ipsos , dicobatur dono dare . And it is said that he gaue them for a gift , that is , by way of gift , because God laide the burden of the whole ministerie vpon Aaron and his sonnes . For when hee gaue them the Leuites to helpe them , he is said to giue them for a gift . So againe , [ De medio populi , from the midst of the people , ] id est , dedit Leuitas Aaroni , educendo cos de medio populi , quasi dicat ; Priùs erant Leuitae , sicut populares , non habentes aliquam specialem dei ministrationem . Posteà cùm deus fecit illos esse suos ministros , dicitur separâsse illos de medio populi , id est , ab alijs popularibus distinguendo eos , in diuersitate ministrationis ijs traditae , quam non habebant alij Israelitae . That is , Hee gaue the Leuites to Aaron , by bringing them forth from the midst of the people . As who would say : Before the Leuites were as the common people , not hauing any speciall seruice of God [ inioyned them . ] Afterward when God made them to be his ministers , he is said to haue separated them from the middest of the people , that is , by distinguishing them from other of the popular sort , in the diuersitie of the ministration committed to them , which the other Israelites had not . Againe , [ Vt seruiant mihi pro Israel , that they may serue me for Israel ] id est , vt seruiant loco primogenitorum Israel , &c. That is , That they may serue me in liewe of the first borne of Israel , &c. And indeed these words shew as much as was said before , that , Tradidi dono , was only for seruice . Now heare Lyra. [ Statues Leuitas in conspectu Aaron , & filiorum eius , & consecrabis oblatos Domino , ac separabis de medio filiorum Israel , vt sint mei . Thou shalt set the Leuites in the sight of Aaron , and of his sonnes , and shalt consecrate them , hauing offred them to the Lord , and shalt separate them from the midst of the children of Israel , that they may be mine . ] Hic subditur ratio dicti mandati . Ad hoc enim de mandato Domini ordinabantur , vt seruirent sacerdotibus in cultu diuino , quia cultus ante legem datam pertinebat ad primogenitos Israel . Sed quòd illi facti sunt inepti ad cultum dei , ideò Dominus loco illorum , voluit Leuitas ordinari ad cultum suum . Et hoc est quod dicitur [ Et tuli Leuitas ] deputando mihi pro cunctis primogenitis filiorum Israel . That is : Here the reason of the aforesaid commandement is set downe . For to that end were they ordained according to Gods commandement , that they might serue his Priests in diuine worship , which worship before the giuing of the Law belonged to the first borne of the children of Israel . But because they became vnfit for Gods worship , therefore the Lord would haue the Leuites to be ordained for his worship in stead of them . And this is that which is said [ And I tooke the Leuites ] deputing them to me for all the first borne of the children of Israel . To conclude , the Chaldee Paraphrast thus expounds the text , of gift for seruice , not , for exemption , which men see none , in these words , that so bewitch you , except they are Iesuited . Offeret Aaron Leuitas munus in conspectu Domini à filijs Israel , VT SERVIANT IN MINISTERIO EIVS . That is : Aaron shall offer the Leuites for a gift before the Lord from the children of Israel , THAT THEY MAY SERVE IN HIS MINISTERIE . But so much , and too much , hereof be said . Sauing that not to F. T. this , whose argument deserues it not , but to others from whome he filcht it , that stand much vpon it . § 38. ANOTHER of this wise-acres worthie exceptions to the Bishops retortion vpon Peters pasce from Dauids pasce , a which they vouchsafe not to regard ; they are so swallowed vp of Peters , is this ; That , suppose Dauid had had supreame gouernment ouer the Church in the old Law , yet no Prince temporall may now claime the like , no more then the ceremonies may be said to stand in force , as the keeping of the Sabbath day , as polygamie , abstinence from puddings , and the like meates , ( saies he that is afraid of loosing his dish belike ) and with such good stuffe are his pages fraught . Yea because the Bishop insists more then once vpon Moses law , and the precedents of the old : Testament , to shew that primacie belongs to Kings , therefore he is a Iew rather then a Christian , &c. So that now obedience is become among the ceremonies , and the honouring of our parents , that is , in truth of our Princes , Patres patriae by auncient style , ( and so Ezechias call'd the Priests his children , filij mei , 2. Chron. 29. 11. ) is as subiect to alteration as the Sabbath day . 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , may the ceremonies say ; insulting vpon the moralls , as the other Kings doe vpon Lucifer , the king of Tyrus , in Ezekiel . And because the ceremonies not onely may be omitted , but may not be retained without heinous crime , therefore it shall be conscience to waxe wanton against Princes , to shake off their yoke , yoa merit , vertue , and what not ? Let vs beleeue , that when Christ , witnes S. Paul , Coloss . 2. nayled the ordinances which were against vs to his crosse , he nayled the law of our subiection to Magistrats , though he died vpon that crosse to establish the authoritie euen of Pilate himselfe , as both S. Paul else-where , and the Gospels witnesse . Though , when S. Paul saies , such ordinances were nayled to the crosse as were against vs , he sufficiently shewes that this was none , concerning Magistracie , then which nothing is more beneficiall to mankind , as S. Chrysostome often deduces out of his Epistles , namely Rom. 13. v. 4. & the 1. of Tim. 6. 2. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 saies Chrysostome , and so likewise Oecumenius , is conditio seruitutis sub Domino , which is more beneficiall to the seruant , then the seruant possibly can be to his master . For , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ; he takes care for all . But , if this be good Diuinitie , that the soueraigntie of Princes is to be reckoned but a ceremonie , and to be blowne away among the shadowes of the olde Law , as if the precept of honouring Parents , which is primum in promissione , Eph. 6. were now secundum in omissione , after that against images , which is vsually cancelled in the Popish Catechismes , let him tell me what he saies to S. Austens sicuts in his * Epistle ad Bonifacium , where he parallels the Christian Kings with the Hebrewes , thus ; Sicut seruiuit Iosias , sicut Ezechias &c. How absurd is his sicut , if their authoritie were ceremoniall , yea or iudiciall either , and to expire with the comming in of the new Testament ? How does a Charles the great assume as much to himselfe from the example of the said Kings , praefat , in leges Galliae apud Ansegisum ? Neither say as the Adioynder does here , that Dauid was a Prophet , and so Iosias , or Ezechias , and the like . b For the Councell of Chalcedon finds as much in Constantine ; Constantinus magnus , vt Dauid , & Rex & Propheta . Which they would not haue appropriated to Constantine neither , but haue giuen , you may be sure , to any other Christian King , that should haue carried himselfe with the like valiant resolution . And no maruell , when Salomon makes it common to them all , to haue an oracle in their lips , Prou. 16. and in an other place , their hearts so set in Gods hands , as extraordinarily subiect to his directions . Where because I haue named Salomon , what thinke you of his Prouerbs ? are they replenished with ceremonials , or with iudicialls , or with what ? yet he talkes of a King , if you be remembred , one time as chasing away all wickednesse with his eye , suppose heresies and all : another time enacting and decreeing righteousnesse , sculpens iustitiam , c. 8. which cannot be without the cheife part of it , that is , relligion : ( as we read in Theodoret. l. 4. c. 5. that Valentinian taught all 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 beginning with 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , all equitie , as Salomon here saies , beginning with piety : ) another time as one against whom there is no rising vp , and with many such like elogiums , he aduances him as supreame in each kinde . Neither Salomon onely , but Aristotle himselfe , as if it were the lawe of nature , in the third of his politicks . Assuerus , Cyrus d , the King of Nineue , were they not all supreame ordainers in relligion , who neuerthelesse were strangers to the law of Moses ? This , e Eudoemon might haue told you , who twits the Bishop for ioining those aforesaid with the kings of Israel . Belike then they are distinct . Therefore not onely Israel , or they that were guided by the law of Moses , but meere Naturalists haue acknowledged thus much , that supremacie is the kings by originall right , and not of ceremony . So , as our Sauiour said once about circumcision , Non ex Mose , sed ex Patribus , in like sort here . It is neither ceremonie , nor iudiciall , neither from 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , nor 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , Rom. 9. this authoritie of Kings in all causes , and ouer all persons , which you so carpe . And if it be lawfull as you tell vs to argue from the old Testament to the newe , by way of signe to the thing signified , we haue enough in that kind to maintain our assertion , though wee had no other argument . For who found a type in Nabuchodonosor euen now , first fierce against Daniel , and Daniels God , afterward making lawes as zealously in his behalfe ? The ouen that was heated to consume the three children , consumed their aduersaries . And so Daniels Lyons prepared against him , deuoured his accusers . These are types , if you beleeue S. Austen , of heathen Emperours turning Christian , and countenancing religion with all their might , as before they vsed the aduantage of their place , onely to suppresse it and destroy it . I might tell you of other types , that haue gone before in the old testament , touching the supremacie of Kings , appertaining to the newe . As Abrahams harnessing 318. houshold seruants against Kedar-Laomer for the redeeming of Lot ; which is a type of Constantine ( say the Fathers of a certain Councell ) managing and mustering iust so many Bishops in the Nicene Synode , to the confusion of Arius . The lyon that slew the transgressing Prophet , is a figure of Leo the Christian Emperour suppressing heresies , &c. as Varadatus , whome they call excellentissimus Monachus , in his Epistle to Leo aforesaid , construes it . In a word , though you be impudent , and your fore-head full of blasphemies ; yet mee thinks you should bee ashamed to bewray your selues so much , as to affirme that Kings lost any part of their stroke , by our Sauiours appearing in the new Testament , as needs they must , if the authoritie was but ceremoniall , or iudiciall either , which they exercised before . And therefore I spare from further confutation . § . 39. As for that the Emperours in the new Testament were heathen , and so neither by Christ , nor his Apostles obeyed , I hope , Sir , it is enough they were not resisted . And if they made no good lawes , yet they might haue made them , and the Church in such case had beene bound to obey them . Neither do the Bishops , I trow , alwaies preach the truth , in which case a S. Austen , and b S. Cyprian , giue vs leaue to abandon them . So is it when Kings , transported by error , forsake their dutie , & yet forfeit not their supremacy . Though our Sauiour and his Apostles did no more turne away frō the edicts of Princes cōcerning relligion , then from the Scribe and the Pharisee , and the chaire of Moses it selfe , which you perhaps would haue heard and obeyed in all things . Will you say therefore that the chaire was not supreame in those matters ? To omit , that if Princes had been neuer so impious for the time present , yet 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , Gal. 3. the Scripture that foresees might haue confirmed the type that went of their authoritie in spirituall matters , euen in the old Testament , against such time as God should raise vp better in the new . Yet you say that in the new Testament there is not the least syllable to that purpose . Not Rom. 13. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , Gods Minister , v. 4. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , v. 6. which is rather more then the other , but still Gods , or to God belonging . And not in Gods matters , trow you ? In terrorem malis , that is , to hereticks and all . In laudem bonis ; yet no goodnesse without true relligion , in S. Pauls estimation , who saies soone after , that whatsoeuer is without faith is sinne : the last verse of the next chapter . So , Coge intrare , Luk. 14. to the spirituall banquet , that is , Kings in speciall haue this compelling power , saies S. Austen often . So Gal. 5. where heresies are reckoned among the works of the flesh , which flesh at least the kings authoritie stretches to , according to the similitude that you are wont to quote out of Gregorie Nazianzene , of the flesh and the spirit , though Athanasius Orat. de incarnat . verbi , makes the King to be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the vnderstanding part , that sets all on worke . Lastly , 1. Tim. 2. 1. where shewing that God would haue all men saued , the Apostle from thence argues to prayers for Kings , knowing Kings , if they be Christian , are the notablest instruments to worke the worlds saluation . Can this be , if Kings be not supreame in relligion , and the causes thereof , as wel in the new , as in the old Testament ? For least you say , they are to doe these things indeed , but at the Clergies becke , and subordinate to them , they are called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , supreame Magistrates , in the places that assigne them what to doe : Rom. 13. 1. 1. Pet. 2. 13. &c. But now if a man should aske you , where your Pontificall supremacie is established in the new ( besides that you may fetch it , by authoritie , frō Moses , which we may not , and so from Aaron & his sonnes , nay , à maiori saies Bell. de Pontif. Rom. l. 4. c. 16. though Moses figured not the Pope , but Christ , Heb. 3. 2. and so likewise Aaron , Heb. 5. 4. yet ) perhaps you would quote Luk. 22. Vos autem non sic , for that is more pregnant , then Duo gladij in the same chapter ; or , Qui maior vestrum est , fiat sicut minimus , or , Regnum meum non est de hoc mundo , or for loue to Peter , Non dominantes Cleris , 1. Pet. 5. 3. Doe not these shew the meaning of Pasce oues meas ? § 40 You say againe the Bishop equiuocates in this , that though Dauid and Peter were both called to feeding , yet Peter to one kind of feeding , Dauid to another , Peter to spirituall , Dauid to temporall . As if the Bishop could not discerne the difference of their feedings , vnlesse you taught him . But , Sir , thus it is . For so much as you Iesuits would picke a * feeding of state , that is , of regiment and Monarchy out of Peters feeding , we demand whether it be not likely , that , if any gouernment be implied in the word Pasce , it is rather in Dauids , whom you confesse to haue bin a King , then in Peters , whome we neuer acknowledged to be a Monarch ? And therefore we say your argument for the Popes supremacie followes not well from Pasce oues meas . Rather Dauids Pasce giues him some interest euen in matters of religion , to which Pasce belongs after a special sort , as it is vsed in Scriptures , and Peter is bidde to feed , rather then to rule , to shew his authority is not temporall , nor coactiue , but of a milder kind . That you say Cyrus was no head of Gods Church , though styled Pastor , and Pastor meus , by Gods owne mouth , how do you prooue it ? No member you say , therefore no head . But this Eudoemon will help you to vnriddle . Though neither hee was ingrafted into the bodie mysticall , nor yet linked in the bond of outward profession , yet a head he might bee of Gods people by a certaine deputation or assignement outward , that is , by bearing authority ouer the multitude of subiects , committed to his charge , of what relligion soeuer , which is the onely headshippe that we attribute to Kings . I haue read some both Fathers and moderne writers , that thinke Cyrus was illuminate , and faithfull , and perhaps saued . Who knowes what the reading of that prophesie might preuaile vpon him , Esa . 44. ( as Iosephus witnesses in the 11. of his Antiq. cap. 1. quoted by S. Hierome vpon Esa . 45. ) wherein he was called by his name * certaine hundred of yeares before he was borne ? If this be so , then he might bee both member and head in your sense , but howsoeuer , a Pastor by office and vocation , as God intitles him . Shall wee see what followes ? § 41. Whereas the Bishop in like sort had instanced from Ioshua , Numb . 27. whome God called to feed his people after Moses , one temporall magistrate after another , least they should be as sheep which haue no shepheard , he answers that Iosua was to be directed by the high Priest , not è contrà . As if direction were not one thing , and commaundement another . For the Priest may direct , though the King command . And we speake of authoritie now , not of abilitie to counsell . Though Dauid is so little affixed to the Priests , that he sayes , Gods statutes are the men of his counsell , that is , his priuie counsellors . The Common-wealth no doubt is happie , where Heman the Kings Seer is admitted neere vnto him , vt exaltet cornu , 1. Chron. 25. or Benaiah placed ad auriculam Dauid , 2. Chron. 11. I meane where Bishops are of the consultation of estate . In multitudine boum implentur praesepia , and where such labourers are , all goes well . But yet Eleazar shall onely runne betweene Iosua and the Lord , while we neither denie the Lord to be supreme , nor yet suffer the messenger to turne the Kings master . To the place quoted out of Theodoret. quaest . 48. in lib. Num. that Moses diuided his double glorie betweene Iosua and Eleazar , as giuing his supremacie in spirituals to one , in temporals to another , as the Adioynder would haue it : we finde no such thing in the Scripture it selfe , Num. 27. but only that God appointed Moses , to giue Iosua of his glory , ver . 20. without naming Eleazar . And Theodoret meanes no more , but that Moses gaue of his Prophesie to Eleazar , which was aureola gloriae , as your Schoolemen would call it , or an additament to the maine , not any branch of dignitie , or of authoritie . His words are , Ex rationali iudicij humeris Eleazari adiacente , discat Iosua quid sit agendum : Let Iosua learne what to doe from the Iudgement plate that rests vpon Eleazars shoulders . A great prerogatiue , beleeue me , and to top Kings . Is it not rather to waite vpon them , and to serue their vses ? Lastly thus , Ex quo discimus quomodo qui à sacerdotibus ordinantur , gratiam consequuntur spiritualem : that is , Whereby we learne , how , they that are ordained of Priests , attaine spirituall grace . We call not the Kings primacie spirituall , howsoeuer it extends to spirituall matters : though you imputing such a thing vnto vs , as you doe afterwards , you may see what a hint Theodoret giues vs here , if we list to vse it . And before , he had told vs , that Iosua was consecrated by imposition of hands . Does not that sauour of somewhat spirituall ? And how does Moses pray here , when he praies for a man to be set ouer the Congregation , namely Iosua ? Lord God of the spirits of all flesh . As if spirit and flesh , temporall and Ecclesiasticall , were the gouernours charge . And straight after , ver . 18. God saies to Moses , Take Iosua , in whome is the spirit . So Platina in the life of Clement the seauenth , Corona & caeremoniae , per quas inauguratur Imperator , testimonium sunt diuini spiritus accepti : The crowne and the ceremonies , saies he , whereby the Emperour is installed , are a token of the diuine spirit receiued . And he addes , Qui animum Imperatoris iam augustum , augustiorem diuinioremque reddat : Which makes the Emperours mind , alreadie royall of it selfe , more royall and more diuine . Was not Saul changed into another man , vpon his attaining the kingdome ? And how , but by , the grace which he receiued in his inauguration ? Salmeron your fellow-Iesuit , but too learned I feare to be your fellow throughout , saies , Kingdomes themselues turne spirituall , in a manner , vnder Christian Kings . The same saies Rossaeus , with more store of words , Sacrum , Ecclesiasticum , spirituale , sacerdotale , pag. 526. I might giue you more , but this shall suffice in this place . § 42. THE third exception ( saies he ) that the Bishop takes to the argument , drawne from Pasce oues meas , is this : That albeit S. Austen , and S. Cyrill , haue amply commented vpon the Gospel of S. Iohn , and vpon those very words of our Sauiour to S. Peter , Pasce oues meas , yet neither of them saw , illustrem hunc fidei articulum , de prematu Petri temporali , This notable ( as he construes it ) article of faith , concerning the temporall primacie of Peter , &c. What saies Father Thomas to this ? For some thinke F. T. to haue that mysticall signification , to note vnto vs his Fatherhood , which euery hedge-priest and beardlesse boy vsurps now a daies among the Iesuits , to beard Bishops with , and what Bishops ? As if the Cardinall ( saies he ) did teach that S. Peters primucie is a tēporall primacie , because in some cases it extends it self to temporall matters . As for the spirituall primacie ( saies he ) the Bishop himselfe grants that sometimes , as far forth in effect as we demand . What the Bishop graunts , we shall see hereafter , when we come to the place , which is Chap. 3. num . 36. as we are told by you . In the meane time , you recken without your host , the Bishop graunts nothing that he will not stand to . Be you but content with that which he pitches , and the controuersie will soone be at an ende . But did you euer heare such an impudent varlet , that plaies vpon the word temporall primacie , and denies they giue any such to the Pope ? What is their primacie , but a primacie of power ? and if the power then be temporall , is not the primacie so ? Now for that , let but Bellarmine declare his opinion , who intitles his 5. booke de Pontif. Rom. De potestate Pontificis temporali : Of the temporall power of the Pope . This is plaine , but in the argument of the sixt chapter of the same booke , more plainly , Papam habere temporalem potestatem indirectè : That the Pope hath temporall power , [ at least ] indirectly . Whereas we neither ascribe to the King spirituall primacie ouerhastily , nor are wont to call his power spirituall . If the Bishop haue so done , let the place be named , and the imputation verified , wherewith F. T. chargeth vs , Num. 15. though very wrongfully , as if we nourished a doctrine of the Kings spirituall primacie . Yet they say , Sixtus Quintus would haue had those works of Bellarmine to be burnt , perhaps for giuing him temporall power onely , and not temporall primacy , totidem verbis . a And here our lepus pulpamentum quaerit , a wretch and most obnoxious to all manner of scorne , flourishes and descants with his leaden wit , vpon a corporall Bishop , as he calls him , Bonner I trow , who excused his corpulencie , wherewith hee was wont to be painted , with saying he had but one doublet too little for him , and the knaue hereticks alway painted him in that . If you talke of a punisher of bodies , he was one . We doe not know , God be thanked , that our Bishops haue any such power in these daies , by the examples we see , but that you tell vs so . And there was a time , when your Popes themselues could inflict no punishments of this nature , saies Papirius Massonius in the life of Leo the second . Now all their strength stands that way . And so I might say of the punishing of the purse , and the gaines of the Bishops court , which you so enuie , wheras not onely he is not forward to deale punishments , and much lesse to gain by the parties punished , but I haue heard his Chancellour , whom certenly you meant when you taxed the Courts , vtterly disanow , that their Courts condemne any body in mony , howsoeuer offending . How beit if Kings , to whome all the power of the sword is cōmitted , that is all kind of coactiue punishment , should giue the Bishops leaue to mulct the purse , rather then their censures should be contēned , what is that to the Popes either exercising or challenging to himself , I know not what tēporal power , by vertue of his Apostleship , and originall calling , without donation or delegation from Princes ? Though againe if this be graunted , which I beleeue not as yet , because I haue beene otherwise informed , as I said , that the Bishops are so licensed by authoritie from his MAIESTIE here in England , yet the Bishop whome you shoot at , is so farre from delighting in any such markets , that he had rather redeeme offences with his losse , then raise profit to himselfe out of punishments . Imperatorem me peperit mater , said Scipio , non bellatorem , when one chidde him as too remisse and loath to fight . So he . S. Theodoret saith sweetly , that there are no punishments in heauen , in regione hyacinthina , of which farther you may heare in his due place . And the Bishops calling is a kind of heauen . How much more when it is ioyned with conscience and clemencie ? Which is so proper to the Prelate of whome we speake , as you may wonder : both his Office and Sea sauouring of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , of mercie and compassion , rather then of rigour , but his nature much more . And if S. Chrysostomes argument for Kings be good , that they are called to 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , because unnointed 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , that is , called to mercy , because annointed with oyle , it may guide you to conceiue aright herein , of the Bishop , whose practise acquites him without hidden emblemes , or forced hieroglyphicks , Vnlesse you thinke that because he handled Tortus somewhat roughly , or the Cardinall either , therefore he is more vindicatiue out of his disposition . But for that you may remember , that he was the Kings Almoner , and dealt his liberalities as they had beene best deserued . Now leauing the digression that this mans malepertnes hath driuen vs vnto , what saies he for substance to the Bishops third exception , as himselfe branches it ? § 43. IT is enough ( saies he ) that Cyrill and Austen denie not the temporall power of Peter , though they auerre it not , in their commentaries . Forsooth they expound not Pasce halfe perfectly , wherein surely they are to blame , in so large a Commentarie , as few haue written vpon that Scripture , to say nothing of a thing so materiall as that , or so principall rather , and yet so obuious , when the text lies naked before their eyes . For it is a necessarie consequent , the temporall power ( saies our Iesuit here ) of the spirituall . Which yet Mr. * Blackwell will neuer beleeue , nor those a authors whom he quotes to the contrarie , that make it a point like the new-found lands , or vnfound rather , so wholly vndefined and vnresolued , whether the Pope haue any such peece of dominion yea or no. Besides , he should haue shewed the necessarie consequence betweene the two powers , which because he does not , I thinke he either saw it not , or lacked abilitie to expresse his minde . Me thinkes nothing easier then to conceiue so of them , that though linked in vse , yet diuided in nature , and so likewise in subiect , as Gelasius gaue caution long agoe very well , of not confounding them , like the two armes in a mans bodie , or the two lights in the firmament , ( so farre I am content to goe with Bonifacius ) yea or the two swords themselues , ecce duo gladij , whereof one questionlesse depended not of another , though your exposition be so good , that Stella is ashamed of it , and diuerse more of your owne men . § 44. That S. Austen acknowledged the Popes temporall primacie , implyed in those words , Pasce oues meas , you bring no other places then we haue hitherto answered , and it might be thought too largely , but that you bring them againe , as primus Apostolorum , and propter primatum Apostolatús , of which no more . Let them preuaile as they can . So likewise I say of representare personam , which you inforce here againe to be supreame gouernour ouer the Church . This is your riches , that runne round in a ring , and choake the children of the Prophets with your crambe , and yet cry out of the Bishop for his nakednesse and pouertie in proouing the cause , Numb . 15. As for that you here adde , that no other Apostle is said to represent the Churches person besides Peter , S. Austen hath made you to swallow it before ; yet perusing your booke , I find it to be no more then your selfe attribute to Mr. Thomas Rogers , of whome you say in your ninth chapter , Num. 78. that he represents the authoritie of all the Clergie of England : not only the Clergie , but the authoritie of them all ; and yet I thinke you neuer held him for our supreame gouernour . To that of S. Cyrill , Vt Princeps caputque caeterorum primus exclamauit : I wonder first , why you should construe it exclaimed , vnlesse your argument stand in that , as if Peter should get the primacie by roaring . So hee in Plutarch , when he saw a tall man come in to try masteries , but otherwise vnweildy , This were a likely man , saies he , if the garland hung aloft , & he that could reach it with his hands , were to haue it for his paines . You know that we Englishmen call that exclaiming , when a man cries out by discontent , or passion . Was Peter offended , when you make him to exclaime ? As for princeps & caput , it is waighed in the ballance , and found too light . S. Ierome , Dial. 1. contra Pelag. Vt Plato princeps Philosophorum , it a Petrus Apostolorum : as Plato was cheife among the Philosophers , so Peter of the Apostles . Doth that please you ? For Plato though he liued in Dionysius his Court , yet he was no Monarch . No more was Peter . And if you would but turne Tullies Offices againe , or almost any other of his works , you should see Princeps , in quacunque facultate . In medicinâ , in re bellicâ , in scenâ it selfe , & where not ? Illaerat vita , illa secunda fortuna , ( saies he ) libertate parem esse caeteris , principem dignitate . Therefore princeps is no word of soueraigntie . And was no bodie euer call'd caput but Peter ? For that is another thing which you stand vpon . I could tell you a distichon out of Baronius , made neither by Peter , nor by any of his successors , as you interpret his successors , wherein neuerthelesse the man is called after other titles , — Pontificumque caput : which is , the head of Bishops , and Popes , and all . And if a man should call Eudaemon-Iohannes iustly deseruing it , as it may be some haue called him , caput furiarū , would you plead frō thence , if need were , that he had any authority ouer the deuils , or were a yong Belzebub ? Further , I beleeue , when all comes to all , it is but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the Greek , if we could see it . Of which we shal say more when we answer to the other Cyrill , namely he of Ierusalem , a little after . For 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , as we are taught by S. Chrysostome , where yet there is no authoritie of one actor ouer the other . Generally , this arguing from titles of cōmendation is very vnsound . Who knowes not that S. Iames was called Episcopus Episcoporum , as Nilus testifies ? yet S. Ambrose serm . 83. giues that to Christ , to be Episcopus Episcoporū , as his priuiledge . Though Sidonius , an author not iustly to be excepted against , affirmes no lesse of one Lupus a particular Bishop , that he was Episcopus Episcoporū , & Pater Patrum , & alter saeculi sui Iacobus : that is , a Bishop of Bishops , and a Father of Fathers , & another Iames [ the Apostle ] of his age . Which in the end wil proue as much as caput caeterorum , though you bring that to magnifie Peter by . As if caput caeterorū , might not be one set vp by speciall prouiso , to keepe good order in the Colledge , I meane the Colledge of the Apostles , though without any commission to deriue it to his successors , or extrauagant power ouer the rest for the present . Lastly , I might aske you , how Peter could be caput caeterorum here , that is , Monarch installed in your sense , when you tell vs a little after , Num. 31. out of S. Chrysostome , that Peter durst not aske our Sauiour the question , who should betray him , till such time as he had receiued the fulnes of authoritie , and after that time he grew confident . Which time was not till after our Sauiours resurrection , and therefore farre from this . So if you trust to Chrysostome , you haue lost Cyrill , if to Cyrill , Chrysostome ; you cannot possibly hold them both , if you vrge caput in so rigorous sense . I might adde out of S. Cyrill once againe , to stop your mouth , crying out so mainely against lame quotations , that princeps as it may be taken , is expounded there by ferventissimus Apostolorum , so feruent saith S. Cyrill , that hee leapt naked into the sea , out of the ship , for zeale . Where if the ship be the Church , then wee haue Peter leaping out of the Church . You will say perhaps , from Antioch to Rome . Then Antioch is the ship , and Rome the sea . What vantage haue you now of all that is said of Peters ship to countenance Rome ? Doe you see how one iumpe hath marred your allegorie , and almost your Monarchie ? Now S. Cyrill saies farther in the place you quote , lib. 12. cap. 64. in Ioh. Petrus alios praeveniebat , how ? Ardore namque Christi praecipuo feruens , & ad faciendum & ad respondendum paratissimus erat . That is : Peter preuented others . For boyling with an especiall zeale to our Sauiour Christ , he was most readie and forward , either to doe , or say . This was the cause why he exclaimed first . Primus , saies S. Cyrill , but not solus . Hic Malchi etiam aurem amputauit ( that you cannot abide to heare of ) putans hoc modo Magistro semper se inhaesurum . So little did he couet the primacie that you striue for , that he wisht neuer to be absent from his Master , which if he had not beene , he could neuer haue ruled in his roome . Then , in euery confession that he made ( saies S. Cyrill ) rationalium ouium curam sibi habendam esse audiuit . Is cura nothing ? which with you praefectura hath cleane deuoured . And if you but remembred , that they were oues rationales , you would tyrannize lesse , and stand lesse for tyrannie . There There are other things betweene , which I passe ouer here , because you shall heare them anon . Take this for farwell . Doctores hinc Ecclesiae discunt ( saith S. Cyrill ) non aliter se Christo posse coniungi , nisi omni curâ & operâ studeant , vt rationales oues rectè pascantur , & rectè valeant . Talis erat Paulus ille , &c. That is : The Doctors of the Church learne from hence , that they can no otherwise be ioyned vnto Christ , vnlesse they endeauour with all their paine and diligence , that his reasonable sheepe be well fed , and well liking . Such a one was Paul , &c. By which you see what a sense he giues vs of Pasce , of feeding Christs sheepe , namely with labour and diligence , which the Pope cannot skill of , and Paul ( not onely Peter ) a prime instance of it . Neither doubt I , but when Paul saies of himselfe , I haue laboured more then they all , S. Cyrill would construe it , according to this rule , I haue fedde more then they all . § 45. YOv farther accuse the Bishop , as speaking euidently false , when he saies of the holy Fathers Cyrill and Austen before named , that concerning Peters triple acknoweledgement , id tantum vident , nec praeterea quid , they see this onely and nothing els , that he abolished his triple negation by triple confession , & was restored to the place or degree of Apostleship , from the which hee was fallen : for touching the primacie they are altogether silent . This you say is false in two respects . The one , for that they saw more then so , namely the primacie of Peter , As I haue shewed ( say you ) out of them both : and , I thinke , we haue answered you , to them both . The other , because they saw not that , which he affirmeth in their behalfe : I meane ( say you ) that S. Peter was , by those words of our Sauiour , restored to his place in the Apostleship , which he had lost . For if they should haue said so , they should seeme to hold ( or fauour at least ) the pernitious heresie of Wickliffe , that Magistrates loose their dignitie and authoritie by mortall sinne ; which pestiferous opinion , those holy Fathers , no doubt , would haue abhorred , if it had beene set abroach , or taught by any in their time : seeing that it shaketh the very foundation of all obedience , either to Ciuill , or Ecclesiasticall Magistrates , because it does not onely make all obedience vncertaine ( for no man knowes who is in the state of grace ) but also giueth occasion to subiects , vpon euery offence of their Prince , to cal his authority into question . This is the circumstance of this tedious Thom. But that Wickliffe was in this heresie , you must bring better proofes before wee beleeue it , it is long since that your words are no slaunders . The damnable enormities vsed in those times , your very houre and power of darkenesse , might driue some to opinion , that the office ceased when the Officer was incorrigible , because they saw no other remedie . But this , as I beleeue not to haue beene Wickliffes iudgement , till you shewe better euidence , so whose-soeuer it was , you haue rather followed him in your Iesuiticall principles , that , the mightie are to be pul'd downe from their seats by you , though Marie and Anna make it Gods proper worke , Luk. 2. and 1. Sam. 2. one the pearle of the new , the other of the old Testament , then that we should feare to be enwrapped in his danger . Our doctrine you know , Reges in saeculum , as Iob saies , & , Coronamentum in generationem & generationem , with Salomon , though Caietane read it interrogatiuely , Nunquid coronamentum ? Againe , Deus perpetua regni sceptra donauit Principibus , saies he in the Councell of Chalcedon : and , Aeternum imperium , saies another in the same . Whether eternitie then , or perpetuitie , which Philosophie distinguishes , you see sound diuinitie giues them both to the Crowne . Neither are we slacke to subscribe to Optatus , lib. 2. cont . Parm. Deus defendit oleum suum , quia si peccatum est hominis , vnctio tamen est diuinitatis . God protects his oyle , because though the sinne be the mans , yet the annointing is his owne . And not onely Princes , but by iust iudgement of God , in lieu of your other error , you turne out your very Popes for heresie ; Canus , and Bellarmine , and some other hold so , that he is gone ipso facto : we yeilding to no such abdication of our King , no though his fault were heresie , remembring that Deus defendit oleum suum , as euen now I told you out of Optatus : and , Caesar non desinit esse Caesar , euen in alto gentilismo , as our Sauiour acknowledged of him , Matth. 22. Insomuch as Dauid seemes to wonder , 2. Sam. 1. that Saul could die at all , because he was annointed with oyle . He was slaine ( saith he ) as if he had not been annointed . Qui propter ingenium videbatur omninò mori non debuisse , quoth Tullie of Roscius . Nor he , propter imperij Maiestatem . Therefore the wickednes lies on your side , whatsoeuer Wickliffe thought , whome you slaunder . But so hainous is the heresie of deposing Magistrates for morall misdemeanours , that they are iustly scourged , euen with your owne whip . A bad head , I should thinke , which the bodie will be the better for the cutting off . So as * Bellarmine vnawares betraies his cause in my opinion , taking pro concesso , that the Steward of a house , cannot be deposed from his office , but onely by the grand master of the familie , which he construes to be Christ , by analogie , in the state . What can be saide more for his MAIESTIES securitie that now is , ( setting aside his princely vertues , which might arme him against all triall ) and that out of the mouth of the very old-one , his aduersarie ? Though the holy Ghost in Esay calls all Kings by that name , designing them Stewards , not onely of the state and weale publick , but of the Church it selfe , Erunt Reges dispensatores tui . As euen your owne Forerius , and he a learned Portaguise , expounds it in his commentaries vpon that place , deducing it from the Rabbins . ( To say nothing of the claime that Kings might make to Dispensations henceforth , which now the Pope only in grosseth . ) But his MAIESTIES cause is yet more pregnant then so , in whose name , not onely in his person , God and nature haue engraued this character , not onely in femore , but in vestimento , as it were to marke him out for sacred , against your furious designes . § 46. By the way I might aske you , what you meane by that , that no man knowes who is in the state of grace ? Does that confute Wicliffe , or them that hold Magistrates are no longer Magistrates , after mortall sinnes ? As if a man could not be out of the state of grace , & yet not all his actions be mortall sinnes . Such a babe you are in your owne doctrines . § 47. And if the Bishop should hold this , which you impute vnto him , hote iudges of his holdings , that make him a Polygamist , a Iew , as of late , and now a broacher forsooth of treasonable positions , yet with what face can you cry out against him as you doe , num . 28. Why should Peter rather then any other loose his Apostleship ? seeing your selues are forwardest to censure your Pope with depriuation , ipso facto , whereas another Bishop , I suppose , may come to his tryall . Is this that which the Pope gets by , A nemine iudicabitur ? Vnlesse the crime were smal to denie Christ , whom he had seene and conuersed with so familiarly , which Optatus so exaggerates against S. Peter , lib. 7. as if he had no fellowe , Quisquis in persecutione negauit Christum , ( imagine Marcellinus , or the like ) leuiùs Petro deliquisse videtur . The sinne of denying Christ in persecution , seemes lesse then . Peters : or as if any religion can be maintained there , where the sonne of God is abiured and cast off , and therfore once no heresie more pernicious then this . § 48. But now what if the Bishop do not hold that Peter lost his Apostleship ? or , what if hee doe ? Shall it not bee lawfull for our Sauiour Christ to put out his Apostle , ( Abi Satan , that is , Get thee gone , saith the Arabian translator , not , Recede , depart , or goe aside a while ) and yet take him in againe , for so enormious a crime , but euery varlet and rascall companion shall presume to do the same against his Soueraigne , and sawcily shake off his Superiours at pleasure ? And yet these are the seedes of that good discipline which here you sowe , and you thinke S. Peters case is ā confirmation of treason , as if hee could not loose his office by censure from our Sauiour , but subiects may lay down their fealtie to Magistrates , when they fall into offence . Or , doe you thinke that no Apostle could loose his place ? If you do , you may read S. Hierome ad Rusticum , affirming of Iudas , that he fell de fastigio Apostolatûs , &c. to a place vnrecouerable . Wherein our Sauiour dealt more mildly with Peter , whom he tooke in againe . Curans verbis , quod verbis offensum erat , saith S. Cyrill : healing with words , his fault of words , that is , triple negation by proportionable confession . And remember you not what the holy Ghost saith of Iudas , Episcopatum cius accipiat alter ? which was not practised against S. Peter , our Lord dealing graciously with him , as I said , as if he had suspended him , not depriued him . But for my part , I take not vpon me to define this question ; and the Bishop , as most able , so I dare say was farther of from medling with it . He lookes not to by-matters , but when dignus vindice nodus offers it selfe , then he lendes a hand ; whereas you patch , and pelt , and clowt euery thing into euery place that you can , like a beggers coate , or a Sturbridge-faire booth , or a cypresse tree in the midst of the sea . The Bishops purpose was onely to signifie in S. Cyrils words , that dignitas Apostolatûs renouata est S. Petro , that the honour of the Apostleship was renewed to S. Peter . Fatemur ( saies he ) as assenting to S. Cyrill , not iangling nor determining , as you would haue it . And I pray Sir , how does that differ from S. Cyrils own words , which you traduce in the Bishop , ne propter negationem labefactata videretur ? Concussa therefore it was , shaken and enfeebled , but not vtterly dasht nor vndermin'd . And where you prattle not a little , a little before , But perhaps some will say , that the Bishop does not plainely affirme this , but relateth the doctrine of S. Austen and S. Cyrill , which you infringe by those words , that you bring out of the Bishop , restitutus muneri , restored to his charge , as if therefore he had lost it in the Bishops opinion : what more is in restitution , then was afore in renouation ? And if the Apostleship be renouatus , how is not the Apostle restitutus ? If S. Cyrill be right , how is the Bishop wrong ? May I not truely aske , what does this dog lacke but a bone ? And yet soone after , hee can giue the Bishop that tearme , and another too with vantage . Verbum in corde stulti , sicut sagitta in femore canis . But the crown of reuerence is thicke set with such precious stones . Neither does onely Cyrill say as much , but Euthymius vseth the very word restitutus . Conuersus , ( saies he ) id est , in pristinum locum denuò restitutus . See Chrysost . Hom. 2. in Psal . 50. where he saies no lesse : that he lost his Apostleship by denying , and recouered it by repenting and confessing . Theophyl . in Luc. 22. Cum negaueris , iterumque receperis , viz. Apostolatum , of which before . He recouered his Apostleship , ergo he lost it . Arnobius also in Psal . 138. Maior gradus redditur ploranti , quàm sublatus est deneganti . A greater degree is restored to him weeping , then was taken from him denying . Therefore doubtlesse his deniall depriued him of some degree . Victor Antiochenus , Denuò assumptus , & inter caeteros Apostolos rursus numeratus , taken home againe , and reckoned among the Apostles . And if S. Austen said by one , not of the best life , Aut assumat obedientiam , aut deponat praedicationem , you may thinke what was fit to be done by Peter here . Quare accipis verba mea in os tuum ? said God to the vngodly . Cùm vidisti ancillam , eiurabas me apud eam : for euen the falling of those drops , made a hole into our rocke . What maruell if the Fathers put Peter beside the Apostleship for his greiuous crime , when Pacianus saies , such put quite out of the Church ? May he be an Apostle , nay the Prince of the Apostles , in your opinion , that is no member of the Church ? Indeed Bellarmine construes those words of heresie . But first fondly , and without any ground , then Peters is no lesse , if it come to be weighed , as we haue shewed out of Optatus . § 49. As for the proofes that you bring in defence of Peter , how easily might he loose his Apostleship for all them , if a man were disposed to enter into argument ? Cyrill of Ierusalem , Catech. Mystag . 2. is brought saying , Petrus dignitatem Apostolicam retinuit non ablatam : that is , finally , and retinuit ex intervallo , that is , recuperauit : non ablatam , and yet suspensam . In the Greeke thus , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , not that he kept it without euer loosing , but rather that the Apostleship , of it owne nature , is such if nothing hinder . But of that I contend not , neither do you for modestie quote the Greeke . The same to Optatus , lib. 7. He deserued not to be separated from the number of the Apostles . That is , not finally . Else we know , he went out , and wept bitterly . He went out in a mysterie , and perhaps to shew his deserued separation . As when Christ lookt vpon him , I graunt sensibly , and yet in a mysterie , to shew the power of his grace , and irradiation vpon his heart . That Optatus saies , bono vnitatis separari non meruit , it is not , least the Disciples should want a head , and yet there may be a head , only to keep out confusion , as the President of Councels , and other ordinarie assemblies , without any great authoritie ouer the congregation , I wisse ; but in regard to his patience , which hee had learnt by his owne fal , to shew to other offenders . This is bonum vnitatis , this is pax publica , that keepes all in tune . Ne & tu tenteris , Gal. 2. how much more , post quam & tentatus , & elisus es ? 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , Hebr. 7. Howbeit besides the Fathers afore-named , Optatus me thinkes is plaine enough , that Peters Apostleship was not a little endangered . Thus he saies , Cui satis erat , si postquam negauit , solam veniam consequeretur . For whom it had been enough , if he had obtained pardon onely , after his denyall . Not the keeping of his place , but pardon onely . Therefore at least he forfeited it . And by the way you see , what non meruit is , no more then assecutus est , I warrant you . § 50. Now whereas you come vpon vs in your num . 27. and num . 29. with an ouer-plus of valour , that the Fathers alleadged doe not onely teach in expresse words , that S. Peter did not loose his Apostleship by his fall , but doe withall acknowledge a certaine increase thereof , and preheminent authoritie ouer the rest of the Apostles , what increase could there be , if he was made their Head and gouernour before , and not onely theirs , but the whole worlds ? Was it so , that more notice was taken thereof ? For I see not what actuall exaltation could accrew . Therefore , you doe well to expound your selfe , by saying that he was made more eminent , then before . Yet if you will goe thus farre , Arnobius would teach you to maintaine that which you call increase , in a more literall sense . For that which before was promised Peter , was now giuen and exhibited , and so plus redditum quàm sublatum , as Arnobius speakes . Yet no more to Peter , then to all the rest , as Matth. 28. 19. and Ioh. 20. 23. To all as much as to Peter was giuen . Saue onely , as the Bishop excellently distinguishes , the res or the substance to all , the solemnitie to Peter , with demand of loue , and triple acknowledgement , Ioh. 21. 15. As for the place out of Matthew , if you compare the coherence , you shall see if our Sauiour made any Pope , he made more then one without all question . For who is the Pope , but he to whome the power of Christ is communicated ? Now he saies thus ; All power is giuen me , both in heauen and in earth . And what then ? 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , Goe YOV therefore and teach : not , Goe THOV therefore . This power therefore of Christ is communicated to them all , by vertue of this therefore , as much as he thought good to communicate it at all . Either many Popes then , that you must giue vs , or we you none . This by the way . That Cyrill of Ierusalem calls Peter , princeps Apostolorum excellontissimus , I haue answered you before to the word princeps , in Cyrill of Alexandria , a man of more authoritie , then he of Ierusalem , ( as one Sea exceedes the t'other ) who writ what hee writ , when he was yong , saies S. Hierome . But the Greeke is otherwise , then you quote . First 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , that is , the most verticall . Therefore many 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , many vertices , that is , either heads , or crownes of heads , more eminent thē heads . What if Peter among these excelled ? Euen the Sunne is sometime more verticall then another , yet he acquires no authoritie among the starres , though more opportunitie to worke vpon our bodies . So Peter to edifie with the rest that excelled . But if you stand vpon 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , Basil saies of Athanasius , Wee runne to thee , or to thy persection , ( so he styles him ) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , as to the vertex of the whole world . And Cyrill of Alexandria will tell you , that secular Princes are the heights of the earth , and so the Scripture Mich. 1. 3. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , whom God treads vpon , not your Pope . Againe , Amos 4. Calcans altitudines , God treads vpon the altitudes of the earth : that is Kings , by Cyrills interpretation . What is Peters altitude to this altitude ? 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , another word that S. Cyrill vses , ( whome you alleadge ) is no more then was giuen to S. Paul in the Acts , and that by vnpartiall iudges of primacie , ( I meane such as went by meere obseruation ) to be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , as they call him , or the prime man , of the sect of the Nazarites , that is , of the Christian Church , not onely of the twelue . To the place of Opratus : Solus accepit claues caeteris communicandas : Onely Peter receiued the Keyes to be imparted to others ; What more to our purpose , what lesse to yours ? Does not this confirme all that we haue said before , and ouerthrow you ? Onely Peter tooke them , as an instance of vnitie , as a pledge of the body , as you haue often heard out of S. Austen before , but neither in his owne name , nor to be kept by him , or swaied by him , but communicandas caeteris , to be imparted to the rest , and made common to all . Eucherius wittily , Peter receiued the keyes , but Paul was rapt to the third heauen . How could that be , if he had not the keyes ? And Clemens in Eusebius before quoted , lib. 2. cap. 1. saies generally of the three , that they cōmunicated it to others , what they had heard of Christ . These were Peter , Iames , and Iohn . But that was doctrine that Clemens spake of ; yet the like no doubt holds in the Keyes after a sort , at least de possibili , without any disparagement to the communitie of the Apostles . § 51. Chrysostomes authoritie mooues lesse then any other , who in his Commentaries vpon S. Iohn , at that very place where of all the strife is , viz. Pasce oues meas , saies that Iohn as well as Peter , receiued the * gouernment of the whole world from Christ , which is enough to ouerthrow Peters monarchie , euen when Chrysoft , shall say , that he was made gouernour of the whole world , by pasce oues meas . For how can that now be speciall to Peter ? I could affoard you better places out of Chrysostome my selfe , as that Christ gaue power to Peter , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , to carry all afore him , This , no doubt , would serue the Popes turne right finely , to tosse the ball whither he list , to raigne and to ruffle in the Church at his pleasure . But is any so madde , as to thinke that Chrysostome meant any such thing ? And yet suppose he did , he saies the same of Paul , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in Epist . ad Coloss . id est , cap. 4. v. 9. adding 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , euen as Paul thought good . For that you bring out of his 2. booke de Sacerdot . you should haue specified the chapter , and we would haue closed with you better . In the Greeke I finde nothing but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , of which before out of S. Cyrill , in the very superlatiue 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . But in the same chap. he saies ( which is the first of that booke , ) that Christ committed his flocke by Pasce oues meas , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , to Peter , and them after him . And least you thinke he meanes onely the Popes , he applies it to * himselfe , not yet so much as Bishop , but onely called to single priesthood , that he should 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , suppose you like a Peter , . i. be set ouer all the substance of Gods house . And farther he saies he is to doe those things , which Peter if he did , should 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . i. goe beyond the rest of the Apostles . Doe you see then how all the prerogatiue of Peter , is built vpon his practise , and good desert ; not absolutely cleauing to him , and his ? Nay , no more ( saies Chrysost . ) then extends to euery good Pastor . I might contemne your Latine now , to which nothing is answerable in the Greeke . Yet suppose it were so , as you auouch . AVTHORITATE praeditum , ac reliquis item Apostolis longè praecellere . Is this arguing for a Iesuit ? Which all put together doth not shew so much , as that Peter had any authoritie ouer the Apostles . Vnlesse you thinke because he had authoritie , therfore they had none . This were prettie , if you could worke it , but neuer out of Chrysostome . And yet longè praecellere , is worse then so , of gifts , of qualities , not of iurisdiction . And I beleeue , if the truth were knowne , that same very 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , which I quoted euen now , nothing to their purpose . In summe , if S. Peter had all the authoritie that Chrysost . giues the Priest in his book of priesthood , it would not serue the Pope , who is for temporall and coactiue , which Chrysost . denies tooth and nayle , cap. 2. 3. &c. of the afore-said . Another place you bring out of Chrysost . cap. vlt. in Euang. Ioh. that Peter was the mouth of the Apostles . And you might haue added that of Dauid , I will giue praise with the best member that I haue , meaning the mouth , or the tongue : for els what gaine you by this bargaine ? And againe , Awake my glorie , that is my tongue , say the Interpreters , because the tongue is the glorie of a man , Psalm . 56. Casaubone will shew you , and that most excellently , that the mouth is put in a diminutiue sense , and notes ministerie , not supremacie , office and paines , not authoritie . And so we might say of the head ; which Peter was , as the forwardest to resolue ; ad respondendum & faciendum paratissimus , saies S. Cyrill , as including both . This was his disposition , not his commission . Of late the Pope hath left both the head , and the mouth , and betakes him to the hands . S. Bernard had challenged him for it long agoe , for liuing by his hands : not as S. Paul and the olde Monkes , which is tedious to you to heare of , but he meant of bribes , we of forcible and coactiue execution . Brachia mea iudicabunt populos , as if he tooke it literally , and to himselfe . And could you not for a neede , finde in your heart to construe , caput congregationis , after S. Austens meaning , as a figure of generalitie , and representing the whole bodie ? What a scandall will it be for Iesuits to encounter such a worke , and of so reuerend a Prelate , with no better speares , then one might make of fennell stalks , breaking into fitters with the least crush , and which if a man should answer but as many waies as he might , it would be intolerable ? § 52. That which followes is as idle , that Christ did not vpbraid S. Peter for his sinne ; as if he doth any , Iam. 1. 5. either for grace affoarded , or faults pardoned . That Peter had the care of his brethren committed to him ; as if we imagined Peter such a Cain , that cryed , What haue I to looke to my brother ? But , he is confident now , that was fearefull afore , to aske 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . Why not then rather superiour , when he might set Iohn a work to doe as he directed ? Besides , great charges make not confident , but carefull rather , and solicitous surely , as extraordinarie fauours binde to awe , flesh not in pride , vnlesse it be fooles . The approoued loue of our Sauiour Christ , in receiuing him to grace , and setling him in his Apostleship , or ( if you would suffer me to speake so ) in restoring him , might adde spirit to him , which is S. Chrysostomes meaning , not as you construe him . But , alas , what did Peter get by asking that question ? What , not secret censure , but open check , at our Sauiours hands ? Quid ad te ? what preiudice to his discretion , let S. Cyrill shew you . But two faults onely , Curiositie , and Desire to haue other men partakers of his miseries . This is the inbred corruption of our nature . Communiter insitum hominibus ( saith S. Cyrill ) vt optent , si quid periculi subituri sint , non se esse solos , sed caeteros etiam aut videre pati , aut passos audire , aut passuros esse . It is the nature of men , if they be to slide into any daunger , to wish not to be alone , but either to see others to suffer , or to heare of them that haue suffered , or that they shall , and must , at least , suffer the same . So Peter . Hearing that he must suffer , he asked whether Iohn should escape ; or no. As for , Si me amas ; fratrum curam suscipe , if cura fratrum be the boundlesse Monarchie , little neede he wooe Popes to that place , by so stiffe a coniuration , as Si amas me . Aske Iulius the second , who when his friends were offended with him , for offering too largely for the Popedome , he said , None that knew the worth of that place , would stick at any gifts , whereby to compasse it . Aske Praetextatus the heathen , Make me Pope , saies he , and I will be a Christian. Yet , this is your , Si amas me , suscipe curam fratrum . It were infinit to go through all . I will conclude with Mr. Casaubones most worthie obseruation , that if Peter were the Head and Rector intended , as you imagine , what neede S. Chrysostome make the question , Quare Petrum omissis caeteris affatur de his rebus ? why does our Sauiour conferre with Peter about these matters , skipping by the rest ? For euery man might see it were the due of his place . And so much of S. Chrysostome . § 53. THE last of them whose authoritie you alleadge , is S. Leo , your owne Pope , and not a little addicted to the amplyfying of the Phylacteries of his owne sea , as his MAIESTIE hath told you in his Apology most plentifully ; but all , as it seemes , vpon the deafe side . For you will not heare , nor bee charmed . Yet what sayes Leo ? The charge of feeding the sheepe of Christ , was more specially commended to Peter , Ep. 89. A most true word . But the Bishop tels you how , Praeceptum ad omnes , Solennit as ad illum . So Peter more specially receiued the keies : for hee receiued them , saies S. Austen , as the Churches proxey ; but communicandas cum omnibus , to bee imparted to all , as Optatus told you but verie lately . But in an other place , Ser. 3. de Assump . ad Pontif. what brings he ? That Peter was chosen out of the whole world , to haue the cheife charge of the vocation of the Gentiles , and of all the Apostles , and of all the Fathers of the Church . Here is nothing for your turne , saue that Peter was chosen to haue the charge of the Apostles . But to the calling of the Gentiles , though all helped , yet none might compare with S. Paul , for that matter , who therefore calls himselfe the Apostle of the Gentiles : and least you thinke he gloses , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , in faith and veritie , 1. Tim. 2. 7. Neither doe wee denie , that Peter might haue the charge of the Apostles , yet no commaunding charge ; but either as ferrum acuit ferrum , as Salomon saies , one iron whets and sharpens another , so the face of one brother , to quicken another by his encouragements , Confirma fratres : or , bono vnitatis , preferred for his maturitie , to preuent schisme and disorder , as hath beene told you . Though the name Apostles is common to some without the companie of the twelue , and the Scripture vseth it so , Phil. 2. 25. whom Peter might be charged with , and with the other Fathers of the Church , as Leo here calls the Bishops of their making , without derogating from the Colledge of them , properly so called . Therefore heare how S. Leo qualifies this saying in the same Sermon , a little after . Transiuit quidem etiam in alios Apostolos vis potestatis istius , & ad omnes Ecclesiae principes decreti huius institutio commeauit : sed non frustrà vni commendatur , quod omnibus intimatur . It cannot be denyed , but the force of this authoritie passed also vnto the other Apostles , and the same ordinance comprehends all the peeres of the Church . But not without cause is that deliuered to one , which concernes all . Why so ? Petro enim ideò hoc singulariter creditur , quia cunctis Ecclesiae rectoribus Petri forma proponitur . That is : For therefore is this particularly recommended to Peter , because Peter is made a patterne of all Church-gouernours . And S. Austen de verbis Domini secundum Iohannem , Serm. 49. Dominus in vno Petro format Ecclesiam : Our Lord still fashions his Church in Peter . Leo saies , the gouernours ; Austen , the whole Church , is exemplified in Peter . So that Peter , you see , still stood for a generall man , and not for a particular ; and as S. Austen said afore , to commend vnitie : so Leo both takes in that , vni commendatur , and giues the reason withall , because Peters example was most worthy the imitating . Cunctis Petri forma proponitur , and , Ecclesiae rectoribus , to all rulers of the Church , to shewe that Peter was not ruler alone . I might oppose you with other sentences in that Sermon , which you could hardly salue , that wrest all so violently to your turne : as , Vt cum Petrus multa solus acceperit , nihil in quenquam sine illius participatione transierit : yet the Scripture neuer sayes , that of Peters fulnesse we haue all receiued . And againe Leo , Nunquum nisi per ipsum dedit , quicquid alijs non negauit . Yet S. Austen de verb. Dom. secundum Matth. Serm. 13. Quod nemo potest in Petro , hoc potest in Domino . But his MAIESTIE in his Apologie , hauing preuented all that might be alleadged in this kind , your silence shewes , you haue not what to answer . Neither will I therefore trouble my selfe with the rest of your citations , till you haue qualified these . Facile est Athenienses laudare Athenis : so it was easie for Leo , to rhetoricate at Rome , in the praise of Peter . Let vs passe , say you , to some other matter . And let vs see , say I , if you bring any better . § 54. AS for the law in the Code ( the next thing in your booke ) it is a signe you lacke proofes for Popedome : else you would neuer bring so cast a law , first controuert , and then counterfeit , besides importing so little for your side . Yet you say , this lawe is brought by you , in your Supplement , to prooue the dutifull respect and obedience of the auncient Emperours to the Romane Sea. The respect we graunt you , as long as it was Catholicke . For what good man would not respect both Church and Bishop Christian ? I except not him that weares the diademe , as S. Chrysost . speakes in another case : but , as for dutie and obedience , certes neither any that we find in this law greatly , and the clearer monuments , as Gregorie , as Agatho , as diuerse others , often brought you , and often told you , will shew it rests on the Popes side . And what if Iustinian writing to the Pope , had followed the veine of an Epistle so far , as to besmeare him with all the kind tearmes that might bee ? All that you bring , is , that the Romane Church is caput Ecelesiarum , which no way derogates from the Emperours authority , nor inioynes him no such durie or obedience as now is vrged , and when all is done , caput is nothing , but ecclesia prima in ordine , not , tanquam habens authoritatem in cateras ; which is no more then was determined in the Councel of Chalcedon . Can. 28. that the highest Church in Christendome after Rome , should neuertheles be magnified in Ecclesiasticall menages , no lesse themshee . And this hath been told you , and rung into you , of the difference of order , in the equalitie of power , and yet you stand vrging a stale phrase , out of a law of the Code , no sounder then it should bee , and adde no strength to your blunt yron . So , still might the Bishop say , Poterat abstinere Cardinalis à criando , the Cardinall might haue abstained from quoting this law , and the law inter claras , is scarce a cleare law . Yet Baldus ( you say ) calls it , Clarissimam legem . And yet he vouchsafes not to glosse it , scarce in three words , you know . His calling of it Clarissima , with an allusion to Inter Claras , is nothing , but as euery pettie Master is wont to praise the author that he expounds to his schollers , as Persius notes , — ab insano multùm laudanda magistro . As for Accursius his glossing of it , and some one or two more , of how much lesse force is that to proue the soundnes of it , then the silence of so many , that thinke it not worthy a glosse , to condemne it ? Of whom you may presently reckon these , more afterward , if they come to your mind : Bartholomeus de Saliceto , Cynus , Iacobus de Arena , Iason , Antonius also de Rosellis , if I mistake not , Franciscus Aretinus , Paulus Castrensis , Butrigarius . And this last saies , It is neither ordinarily nor extraordinarily read , when he wrote , who wrote when the Pope was at the highest . Adde to them , Bartholus , and Angelus Perusinus . By which you see , what is to be attributed to Alciates coniecture , that , some later heretikes , and wishing ill to the Pope , haue rased it out of the bookes . Is the Pope such a Dionysius , that he dares not trust the razors ? Yet consider how long those Lawyers flourished afore Luthers time , which is the time , no doubt , that Alciat glances at . Iacobus de Arena , ann . 1300. Butrigarius , who was Bartholus his Master , ann . 1320. Cynus ann . 1330. Salicet 1390. Aretine 1425. which beeing the last of all that I haue now named , is iust a hundred yeares afore Luther . Castrensis later , and Iason later then he , yet both short of the 500 yeere . Sichardus , whome before I named not , ann . 1540. yet he also passes it ouer without a Glosse . Since Alciat it hath been censured by other Papists in like sort , whose iudgement Alciat could not turne , as Gregorie Haloander , and Antonius Contius , the setter out of the law , in his Praetermissa . I passe by Hotoman , because he was ours , otherwise no obscure Father of the law , and hath written the largest of all in the cause . Whome he that hath vndertaken of late to answer , Andreas Fachineus Count of Lateran , in his eight booke of Controuersies , hath not satisfied so fully in all points , as is thought . Neither about the contradiction of the Dates , nor especially to the contradictions between Iustinian and himselfe , one time not consulting with the Pope of Rome , about Ecclesiasticall matters ( as he professes to doe here notwithstanding ) namely in his so many Nouell Constitutions : another time making the Church of Constantinople , to be Head of all Churches : ( lib. 24. c. de Sacrosancta Ecclesia , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 : and the same againe , L. Decernimus 16. eodem titulo , ) which here you would haue him seeme to giue to Rome . So as still the law is no law de claris . Your oppositions to the contrarie are little worth , vnlesse because Hypatius and Demetrius were the messengers , no letter could be cog'd with their names , or that this must needes be the true Epistle , because Pope Nicholas quotes a shred out of it , or that Iustinian confesseth he wrote to Pope Iohn , in a letter to Agapetus , which letter of Iustinians , you referring vs onely to Binnius for , some would sooner question for Binnius his sake , then for the credit of it embrace the other . Though for my part , I like well of what I finde there , that Iustinian calls it the faith , quam sequendam DVXIMVS , which shewes he depended not vpon the Popes approbation , no not for his faith . And the Pope receiuing it with willing gratulation , as he also there signifies , not his assent onely , but the whole Church of Romes was added to it : which if the Pope were infallible , what needed it ? But the truth is , that you haue not yet resolued , whether it be the Pope of Rome , or the Church of Rome , that cānot erre . Enough belike , if either of thē keepe vp the ball . Lastly , to returne to the Epistle to Pope Iohn , let me aske you , what you thinke of the good Latin in it ? ( I speake to a Priscian , to a Latine Aristarchus . ) Which not onely Iustinian , but perhaps Bellisarius himselfe would not haue vttered in those daies . As , Properamus crescere honorem sedis vestrae , for , We make hast to increase the honour of your seat . They did indeed , that meant to doe it by faining . To omit , that if Iustinian gaue aduancement to the seate , it is beholding to the Empire , not the Empire to it , and so we know from whence the worship of it flowed . I haue heard of some , that this was the cause , why certain would not glosse it , because it fauours the opinion , that the primacie of Rome is iuris humani , or Imperatorij , not diuini . And yet doe you bring this law against vs ? As if our selues could more despight the Pope , then by so saying . But proceed in your eloquence . Alieni Catholicae Dei Ecclesiae ; which sounds well in Greeke , not so in Latin : and no better that , Quae ad vos est vnitas sanctarum ecclesiarum . Lastly , Petimus vos orare pro nobis , & prouidentiam Dei nobis acquirere . All which , your elegancie would neuer digest for good Latine , nor worthy of Iustinian , if you are the man that you are taken for . The testimonie that you insist vpon , of the perpetuall integritie of your Romane Sea , that as often as any heretikes had risen in those parts , they had still beene corrected by the sentence thereof , was no warrant for the times to come . You did runne well , but who hath set you backe ? Thou knowest not , saith Salomon , what a day brings forth . And if we be forbidden to boast of to morrow , how much lesse of the consequence of all times and ages , for the blessing of God hitherto affoarded ? Yet these are your goodly proofes that the Chaire of Rome neuer tottered * since , because it corrected heresies in Iustinians dayes . As if more hath not been said of priuate men , as * Prosper of S. Austen , that where he was present , it was impossible for the Councell to goe awry , and yet no man would hold him thereupon excused from possibilitie of error , much lesse perhaps promise for a whole Church . S. Chrysostome saies , that diuerse Bishops came to learne of Antioch , and went away instructed , euen of the people there . Neither say , saies he , that Rome is famous for her greatnesse , but shew me a people if you can for your life , as diligent at hearing Gods word in Rome . a 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . For Sodome had the stately buildings , saies he , whiles Abraham remained in an obscure tent . And he sticks not to call Antioch , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , in the same place , the mother citie of the whole world . What greater style doth Iustinian giue to Rome , though there were no question of the sinceritie of his style ? Whereas Antioch otherwise was called b Theopolis , Gods owne citie , which must needs be the largest , I trow , for regiment . And afore , Hierusalem inherited that title , Ciuitas magni Regis , Gods citie , or , the citie of the great King , by our Sauiours own acknowledgement , Matth. 5. 35. Againe , Nazianz. Ser. Epitaph . in Caesarium , cals Byzantium that then was , the nowe Constantinople , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , the first city , & 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . Are you not afraid least that be more then order , euen a presidence of authoritie ouer all Europe ? Whereas * Hierome speaking of Rome , cals it quondam caput , the sometime head of the world . No doubt , because it was head in the right of the Empire , and that changing , the spirituall preheminēce of it changed also . So vncertaine are these things , and not built as you would haue it , vpon diuine ordinance , but either following the fauour & good liking of the Emperours , or the other variable streame of causes . To conclude your Law , about the Vniuersall authority of the Romane Sea : for so much as you quote Accursius his glosse , heare what a stout obseruation hee hath mode on both sides of that cause . Iustinian cals the Bishop of Constantinople , fratrem vestrum , the Popes brother . Parificat ergo , therefore he equalls them , sayes Accursius . But straight againe , and with the turning of a hand , because the Emperour saies , sequi festinans sedem vestram , that the Bishop aforesaid labours to follow the iudgement of your seat , Minor est ergo , therefore he is vnder him . Is not this well shot now ? As if sequi were to come behind in place , not to accord in opinion . And whereas the Pope , sets the Emperours name before his owne , in the beginning of his Epistle , Iustiniano Iohannes , &c. Note , saies Accursius , Papa praemittit Imperatorem , quod hodie non faceret , the Pope sets the Emperours name before his owne , which at this day he would not ; belike because prouder . So much of this Lawe . § 55. THE labell , and the last of your first chapter , is this : The Bishop to the Cardinall alleadging the words of the Pataran Bishop , suing to Iustinian to restore Sylverius , whom he had condemned to banishment , which words seeme to spread the Popes authoritie verie farre , answered briefly , and in his wonted style , the style of wisedome , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , or as the auncient Diuines say of taking the Sacrament , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ; What should we heare Patarensis his words , as long as we see Iustinians deedes ? Iustinian banisheth , Sylverius is banished , Patarensis pleads for him : Who is the Superiour ? Not because the words , that this pleader vsed in Sylverius his behalfe , to magnifie his reputation , could not otherwise be answered , as shall appeare anon , but beeing a namelesse person , and no where else mentioned ( which is worthy your marking ) the Bishop shooke off both him and the Cardinall , in the aforesaid fashion . So the valiant beast , little mooued with the dog , or the hunters staffe , goes on his iourney , minding other matters , as we read in the Poet , — Et tergo decutit hastas . By this reason , say you , neuer any thing in the world was so wickedly done , but it may be iustified . For , howsoeuer it bee reprehended by holy , graue , or learned men , those that list to iustifie the fact , may say , Facta cum videamus , verba quid audiamus ? When we see the deed , what should we heare words , &c. As though it were not one thing to iustifie a thing done , by the simple doing of it , against all that might be excepted , or controlled in it , concerning the wickednesse , and another thing to auouch the power of the doer , or the authority of the doer , who howsoeuer abusing the aduantage of his place , yet he doth no more then in that right he may , and his deeds passe for vncontrolled . As Nero , as Herod , as Pilate , whome you alleadge . Meritum criminis , not alwaies going with ordo potestatis ; and ordo potestatis , often hauing his course , where there is no meritum criminis . For neither , when Syluerius was banished by Iustinian , doe we iustifie Iustinian , as hauing done well , though we bid you marke what Iustinian did , but rather point at his authoritie , euidenced by such actions : nor if we would prooue the power of heathen Caesar ouer our Sauiour Christ , condemned by his deputy , and at length crucified , are wee therefore to be thought to approoue his deed , or the vse of his iurisdiction . And yet I hope , it shewes where the authoritie rested , and how true it was that our Sauiour said , Non haberes potestatem in me , nisi desuper datam , for so much as our Sauiour neuer excepted against him as an incompetent Magistrate , but willingly submitted himselfe to the very death . According as S. Andrew , of whome we read in the a Decrees , that beeing condemned to die by the Lieftenant of Achaia , when some would haue reskued him , he desired them , not ; Quaeso , ne impedite martyrium meum : I pray , good people , disturbe not my martyrdome . Who if pyrats , or theeues , had offered him this violence , without any lawfull calling of Magistracie , I suppose he would not haue refused to haue saued himselfe by all honest meanes . As S. Paul did against whipping , Act. 22. He opposed , saies S. Austen , his ciuill priuiledge , to defend him , in the assault of his sacred faith , as the left hand holds out it selfe to protect the right . What so naturall ? Cùm percuteretur dextra , opponeb at sinistram : in Psal . 120. And most excellently to our purpose , the same Father againe , Epist . 48. to shew , that power howsoeuer vsed , is from God. * Terror temporalium potestatum , saies he , quando veritatem oppugnat , iustis fortibus gloriosa probatio est , infirmis periculosa tentatio . Quando autē VERITATEM PRAEDICAT , errantibus cordatis vtilis admonitio est , & insensatis invtilis afflictio . NON EST TAMEN POTESTAS NISI A DEO , &c. No iniquitie can abolish authoritie . And yet by your leaue , Sir , howsoeuer you excuse Sylvenius , in your relation how the matter passed , ( as I can not blame you , if you be loath to haue more traytours registred in the beadroll of your Popes , then needes you must , ) both Procopius and Euagrius , lib. 4. cap. 19. shew , that he was held in suspition of high treason , as drawing the Gothes to besiege the citie , and an author of your owne , Papyr . Masson . can hardly acquit him , as in all likelihood sauouring of olde rellikes , and hauing a Goth in his bellie , since his first education . Fortè enim amantior Gothicarum partium erat Sylverius Frusinone genitus , and , as Pope , now able to giue countenance among the citizens , to trayterous attempts . Neither was this any cause , that Euagrius mentions , or in the least sort points at , why Iustinian afterward was stricken of God , but rather his hereticall declining from the faith . Now we neuer denied but Emperours , if they be men , may fall into heresie , but euen in heresie we so free them from the feare of earthly controll , as tremblingly we referre them to the heauenly censure . Neither yet for lacke of learning was Iustinian punished , nor it may be for want of that so much as seduced to heresie ( though you would gladly insinuate so much out of Suidas ) sith many wanting learning , haue both knowne the right faith , and kept it to the ende . I am sure Pope Iohn , in the Epistle that begins Inter claras , of which before , cals him edoctum Ecclesiasticis disciplinis , taught in Church-learning , or Church-disciplines . Suidas also , at the place that you quote out of him , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , a most orthodoxe Emperour . And yet had it bin otherwise , neither you Mr. F. T. nor any of your side , remembring your Popes ; neede greatly to obiect the defects of learning to a secular Emperour ; many of the Popes comming to their preferment , as if it were by that rule which Aquinas cites out of the 70. Psal . when he would defend such proceedings , but not from his heart , Propterea quòd non cognovi literaturam , ideo introibo in potentias Domini . And was it learning , or charitie , that you lacked trow , when you said , that Euagrius places Iustinian in hell , to endure penalties : whereas he onely saies , he was taken from hence , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , to abide the triall of the places beneath . Which not onely your owne Popish relligion , holding more vnderground places then hell , but the right faith would teach you so to constiue , as should be no preiudice to Iustinians salvation . You cite also Euagrius about the suddenesse of his death , as a punishment of God , which Euagrius mentions not in the least word , but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , invisibly stricken ; vnlesse you will say suddenly , because hee fore-sawe not his death comming : which who does ? Else he raigned in all about 39. yeares . As for the words of Paterensis , whome you call from Patera , as if your mind were in pateris , or your selfe dignum patellâ operculum , a worthy champion for such a wooden Bishop , whome no bodie vouchsafes to knowe ( like another Democritus comming to Athens ) saue onely Liberatus , and that in the very place , which Surius your owne author finds euident footsteps of egregious forgerie in , ab improbo nebulone quodam conficta videntur : and , nescio quid monstri parturire : which if any such bee , I see not but it may reach to this storie of your man of Patara , being both in the same page , and within halfe a score lines one of the other ; but howsoeuer it be , the authoritie is not worth a rush . For first , what is this to the temporall primacie ? which we descry here to be the Emperours , and not the Popes , by Iustinians driuing him into banishment ; they call it , I know , Bellisarius his act , but in the power of Iustinian , no doubt , and for a secular matter , viz. for treason . So as the Pope is subiect to the Emperours censure for ciuill faults . Secondly , let him bee Pope ouer the Church of the whole world , that is , in order of preheminence ( not in right of gouernment , or confirmed iurisdiction ) as the cheife Patriarch ; which is euident by the comparison , or disparison rather , of earthly Kings there vsed , whereof one hath no such reference of order to an other , but the Patriarchall Seas are fixed , saith S. Leo , by inviolable Canon , legibus ad finem mundi mansuris , and admit no confusion . Thirdly , there is this difference betweene Kings and Priests , that Kings are confined to their owne dominions , and if they be taken without them , they loose their priuiledge , and stand but for little better then subiects in those parts : whereas the Priest may exercise his acts of office , in euery part of the Christian world , as bind , or loose , or preach , or administer , or ordaine also , if he be therevnto called . And if he be restrained from any of these , it is Ecclesiâligante , as your Tapper telleth vs , and Viguerius , and diuerse more , quae ligat & ligare , which euen binds out binding , and for orders sake confines that but to certaine places , which is indifferent to all by primitiue ordination . See your selfe of this point , cap. 2. numb . 50. & 52. Whosoeuer is Pastor in any one part of the Church , is capable of Pastorall iurisdiction in any other , though he be restrained to auoid confusion . And Basil saies of Athanasius , pag. 304. of the Greeke by Frobenius ( for the Epistles are not numbred ) That hee takes no lesse care for the whole Church , or rather all the Churches , then that which was specially committed to him by our Lord. So Chrysostome sayes of the Priest , that he is , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , the father of the whole world . Where by the way also , you may see the vanitie of your reason , which you magnifie so much , when the Councell of Chalcedon calls the Pope their father . Which is no more then Chrysostome giues to euery Minister , to be father of the whole Church , though not in authoritie , yet in louing care , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , which is all that the Councell sayes there of Leo , and explaines it selfe by beneuolentiam praeferens ; of which happily hereafter . The same Chrysostome againe , Epist . 176. ad Paeanium , twice attributes as much to him , to be rector or rectifyer , as he there speakes , of the whole world . And doth not S. Hierome beginne his Epistle ad Salvinianam so , that the care of euery Christian belongs vnto him , as he is a minister of Gods Church , pro officio Sacerdotij , & that their good proceeding is his glory ? S. Salvian also ad Salon . l. 1. adv . Avar. Ad fidei meae curā . pertinet ( as if not his Charities onely ) nequid ecclesiastici operis vacillare permittā . When S. Chrysost . went into banishmēt , you may please to remēber how the Monks saluted him , that the sun might sooner loose his light , thē his vertue be eclipsed : & yet I hope his iurisdiction did not stretch , in your opiniō , as farre as the sunne , which if Patareus Apollo had but said of Sylverius , you would presently haue concluded in fauour of him . I omit many things , to come to an ende . Of Iustinians Constitutions , about matter of faith , directed to the Bishops , sometime of Rome , sometime of Constantinople , which you so often tell vs of . Doe you see therefore , what power the Emperour had in spirituall causes , to giue forth Constitutions ? That Agapetus deposed Anthimus , and set vp Menas , but causa perorata apud Iustinianum , Iustinian hauing first the hearing of the cause , & by his authoritie , no doubt , though a Bishop was vsed to sentence a Bishop , as was most meete far forme ; Like as Menas was preferred to Anthimus his place , but how ? as a speciall fauorite of Iustinian , saith the storie , and so you may be sure by his direction . That Agapetus his iudgement of Anthimus was faine to be scanned in a Councell of Constantinople , gathered for that purpose by the Emperor , before the proceedings of a Pope could giue satisfaction to the Church . That Patarensis doth not excuse Bishops in generall from the Emperours censure , as you would haue it , but onely mooues him to shew respect to Sylverius , for the amplitude of his place . And lastly , the Emperour as he binds him ouer to triall , to see whether he were guiltie of treason or no , so if he were found guiltie , he forbids him Rome ; which shewes that the Pope and Rome may be two , and bodes but ill , as if some Emperour one day , or Imperiall man , should make the diuorce . On the other fide , it sets out Iustinians praise , that was content to punish treason so moderately , as not vtterly to take his Bishopricke from him , but onely to send him packing to Palmaria , or Fonicusa , as now they call it . Lastly , whereas he reuerenced , you say , the Sea Apostolick , let them perish hardly that reuerence not the very place , where the doue hath troad , fleeing to the windowes , but with meete proportion , because corrupted since . To the second Chapter , about sundrie passages in the Councell of Chalcedon . IN the Romane discipline when of fendours were many , they vsed a course call'd Decimation , to chastise euery tenth person onely , for the misdemeanour of a multitude : So must I herafter , but point as it were at euery tenth soloecisme , which occurres in the perusing of the Adioynder ; it beeing hard I graunt , for any to auoid faults in multiloquio , as the wise man tells vs , but specially for him , as I should thinke , who so purposely studieth it , as if he meant to oppresse vs with a flood of tearmes , and wearie the Reader whome he cannot perswade . Wherein he could not shew himselfe more aduerse to his aduersarie , whose praise is compendiousnes , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , like the gold coynes , that include great worth in small compasse , and Timantus pictures , presenting more to the minde then to the eye . § 2. And for so much as I haue professed , as the truth is , that my taske now was to iustifie the allegations onely of the Bishops booke , against such idle scruples , as this man casts in euery where , hauing shewed , as I may say , by the blow in the forehead , so by this first encounter , that if neede were , I could take more aduantage , and rippe vp this Golias , this bulke of paper , as the other was of flesh , to his greater shame , I will now proceede with all possible breuitie . § 3. About the Bishops allegation of the Councell of Chalcedon , the 28. Canon , partly he struggles to shift it off , partly he cauills with him , about the quoting of it . In which respect , I haue thought good , first of all to set it downe , as it lies in our bookes . In all points following the Decrees of the holy Fathers , and admitting the Canon lately read , of the 150 most blessed Bishops , assembled together vnder the great Emperour Theodosius , of pious memorie , in the Imperiall Constantinople , new Rome , we also decree and determine the same things , concerning the priuiledges of the most holy Church of Constantinople afore-said , the new Rome . For iustly did the Fathers giue priuiledges to the throne of old Rome , because that Citie was then regent . And the 150 most blessed Bishops , mooued with the same consideration , gaue equall priuiledges to the most holy throne of new Rome : wisely iudging it meete and reasonable , that the Citie which enioyed both Empire and Senate , and was endued with the like priuiledges ( or equall priuiledges ) that old Rome was , should in matters Ecclesiasticall be aduanced and magnified , euen as shee ( or no lesse then shee ) beeing second after her , ( not subiect to her , but , second after her : yet F. T. saies the Bishop left out those words of set purpose . Rather indeede because nothing to the purpose . ) And that &c. Euen as , if I breake off now , and English not the rest , no wise man nor learned , that hath but read the Canon , will deeme I breake off fraudulently , or for aduantage , but onely because that which followes is not materiall . Now see what exceptions the gentleman takes to the Bishops allegation . As first , that he should say , that the Canon makes the two Seas , the one of Rome , the other of Constantinople , equall in all things . What is here amisse ? Equall , saies the text , sicut illam , euen as the other : and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 equall priuiledges . But where is that in all things , saies the wrangler ? The words perhaps not , but the sense so cleere , that without that , the Canon were no Canon , and the rest of the words to no purpose at all . Haue you not heard , that indefinites are equiualent to vniuersalls , especially where one exception beeing made , it is plaine that all others are thereby cut off , according to the rule , Exceptio figit regulam in non exceptis ? And therefore the ranke , or the prioritie in order , beeing onely reserued to Rome in that place , as it followes about Constantinople , that shee should secunda post illā existere , be second in rew , as the new Rome to the old Rome , the old beeing first , and the new second , is it not cleere , that there is equalitie in all things else graunted to Constantinople , and the magnifying or aduancing of her in Ecclesiasticall matters , sicut illa , as shee , or , no lesse then shee , generally to be extended as farre as Romes ? Sozomene saies expressely , for ciuill matters , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , shee was equalled in all things , Constantinople with Rome , lib. 7. cap. 9. and the ground of the Canon is , the equalitie of the two cities in ciuill affaires . Therefore , either the Fathers conclude not well , out of their owne premisses , or els the equalitie of the two Seas , euen in Ecclesiasticall matters , is to be vnderstood secundum omnia , in euery respect . For as in the one , so in the others , let it be , say the Fathers . To omit that as Error is subiect to Inconstancie , you answer this afterward another way your selfe , that there might be equalitie , seruatâ proportione , and onely in comparison with inferiour Seas , where you will not denie , but per omnia , may be borne in that sense , in the alleadging of the Canon , though the text hath it not . The Bishop therefore might adde it without iniurie to the Text , though it be not in the letter . Yea in your 47 numb . of this present Chap. you giue the Cardinall leaue to adde Totius , where there is none in the Text , but vineae only without totius , saying he doth it for explication sake . And may not we then , vpon so good grounds , as you haue not for Totius out of all that Epistle , but we haue for per omnia , out of the circumstances of the Canon , as hath beene shewed ? I suppose if two Consulls should striue for preheminence , or two States of Venice ( to vse your owne comparison in another place of this brooke , ) and the Iudge should so order it , that they should both haue equall allowance of honour , the paria priuilegia that you are so stumbled at , ( for so I construe them , and I thinke the righter ) one to be aduanced in matters of gouernment , as well as the other , onely that one should hold the second place , and the other the first , were it not euident that they were equalled in all points , though the word all were not by him expressed , saue onely in paritie of ranke and order ? So the case was here . The Bishop of Rome was to sit afore the other in assemblies and meetings , to be mentioned before him in the praiers of the Church , to deliuer his opinion and iudgement first , and yet for matter of authoritie or iurisdiction , one Sea to be magnified sicut altera , euen as much as the other , and that per omnia , in all respects , whatsoeuer F. T. grinne to the contrarie . § 4. And by this we answer to his other wise obiection , that if preheminence of order bee reserued to Rome , how then does the Canon make them equall in all things ? In all things else , this onely excepted , which the Canon excepts , and nothing else , to shew , that as for other things , they are to be equalled in all . § 5. Yet you cauill the Bishop , for leauing out that clause of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , the second after the other , namely , Constantinople after Rome , as if the Bishop had left it out , because making against himselfe , which was nothing to the purpose to haue inserted , because it concernes not the primacy of authoritie , but of order onely , about which wee striue not . § 6. As for the printing of those words , in all things , in a different letter , which according to the measure of your accustomed franknes , you call corrupt and fraudulent dealing , how often shal we tell you , that the Bishop followed the differēce of the letter , as diuerse others haue done , and daily doe , to specifie the thing it selfe intended by the Canon , and to imprint it the deeper in the Readers mind , not as alleadging the letter of it , and so counterfeiting , as you please to call it . From which in truth he was so farre , that you make it his fault in this very Chapter , num . 3. not to offer to lay it down , or the words of it , but onely to argue , and to drawe consequences therefrom , as his occasion serued . § 7. Now whereas you would explicate the Canons meaning , by the words following , about the ordaining of certaine Bishops by the Patriarch of Constantinople , as Pontus , Asia , Thracia , &c. and by exempting that Sea , from standing subiect any longer to the Bishopricke of Heraclea , of which it was once but a parcell ; it is true , that from thence , euen from so low estate , it was exalted by consent , to be a patriarchall Sea , and not euery such neither , but the second in order , and setting that aside , equall to Rome in all respects . Else neither should this Canon haue suffered such opposition , you may bee sure , at the Bishop of Romes hands , nor needed the Fathers to name this so distastfull equalitie with Rome , in the bodie of the Canon , if nothing but the ordaining of Bishops had been assigned him , which other Patriarches exercise in their diocesse , as well as the Bishop of Rome , without his repining . And yet lastly , you may remember , that the Canon of Nice , describing the preheminence of the Bishop of Rome , as a patterne of Patriarchship , vtters it in those words of Ruffinus translation , quòd Ecclesiarum suburbicariarum curam habeat , that he hath care of the Churches that are abutting vpon the citie ; to which Canon of Nice , spreading so the iurisdiction of the Church of Rome , this Canon of Chalcedon may seeme to allude , mentioning so many Churches as you here recite , and all of them subiect to the Sea of Constantinople . § 8. As for that you thrust in here , vpon verie small occasion , of Athanasius of Alexandria appealing to Iulius Bishoppe of Rome , to shewe that Alexandria was subiect to Rome , if you meane the subiection of order and ranke , it is nothing to the matter , and yet it followeth not , by your leaue , out of your example . The subiection of authoritie is that which we contend about , and yet that much lesse may be gathered from hence . For neither did Athanasius flee to Iulius alone , but with his companie of Bishops , as his letters shew , that he brought in his behalfe , Omnibus vbique Catholicae Ecclesiae Episcopis , . i. To all the Bishops of the Catholicke Church : and againe , Hac quidem & ad omnes , & ad Iulium scripsere : . i. This they wrote to Iulius , and to all . And the Church that enioies more flourishing fortunes , or whose arme God hath strengthened with temporall prosperitie , may bee sought vnto of the distressed , though not subiect to it , by any dutie of obedience , as one King ( sayes the Orator ) easily rescues and succors another , though not referring to him by subiection , no more then Mithridates did to Tigranes ; as also I doubt not , but if Iulius had suffered wrong , and Athanasius could haue holpe him , neither would Iulius haue disdained to craue his assistance , nor Athanasius haue refused him ; no more then the aforesaid Bishop of Patara did to sue for Syluerius , and to sheild him all he could , against the rage of Iustinian , as euen now you told vs ; and yet he of Patara , much inferiour to the other without question . § 9. But , to deale more liberally with the Bishop in this point , put case ( say you ) that the Councell of Chalcedon did meane to giue to the Church of Constantinople that equality with the Sea of Rome , which he affirmeth ; yet he should nothing gaine by it , but rather it confirmes the primacie of Pope Leo , whose onely authority was able to quash it . How is that prooued ? First , because the Canon tooke not place presently . Which is no more then happens , for the most part , to any lawe , to haue slower execution then it hath making . But does it follow from hence , that either the Bishop alleages a counterfeit Canon , ( for by this reason you may cauill any Canon in the booke ) or that Leo's authority was of force to disanull it ? Let vs breifly looke into it , as not much to our purpose . For in truth , what ende may we looke for of dispute , if so pregnant allegations be reckoned for counterfeit ? By a few heads we may iudge of all the rest . You obserue 4. things out of Gelasius his Epistle to the Bishops of Dardania , to disprooue the Canon . § 10. One , that Martian praysed Leo for not suffering the old Canons to be violated in that point , and yet himselfe zealous for the aduancement of Constantinople . The answer is most easie , He might take Leo's excuse in good part , as grounded vpon pretence of conscience , not to crosse the Canons , though it was so farre from beeing sound , that both Leo might haue altered them as your selfe confesse , ( positiue Canons ) and afterward it was altered euen by a generall Councell , ( if that of Lateran at least was general ) as you acknowledge . And I hope , Sir , I may praise Constancy , euen in mine aduersary , and in a wrong matter , though I could wish his constancy were better imployed . So might Martian with Leo ; and somewhat the rather , to induce him by addoulcings ; for direct thwarting alienates rather . Is this a good reason now , why the Canon should be no Canon , or this also scored among the Bishops forgeries ? § 11. You say secondly , that Anatolius , in fauour of whom the Canon was made , beeing rebuked by Leo for his forwardnes to preferre it , deriued the fault vpon the Clergy of Constantinople , and said it was positum in ipsius potestate ; Leo might chuse whether he would grant it or no. Answer . That the Clergie of Constantinople concurred to the making of it , I hope , good Sir , derogates not from the Canon , but rather fortifies it , as likewise the consent of so many other Bishops ; and if Leo's shake , bestriding his praye ( that is , the honour of his seate , the singularity rather ) affrighted Anatolius , and startled lentum illum Heli , as he calls him , that timorous old man , what is that to the antiquating of the Decree of a Synode , and so populous a Synode as this was ? For I hope the Canon was not so in fauour of Anatolius , ( whatsoeuer you prattle ) but that much rather of his Sea , then of his person , as both the reason shewes which the Canon contaynes , drawne , as you may remember , from the Imperiall city , and Martians loue was to the city , not to the man. Yea it rather tooke place , you say , after his death . What then doe you tell vs of Anatolius ? § 12. Your third obseruation , that Pope Simplicius was as loath to yeild to Leo the Emperour , for the aduancement of Constantinople , as Leo the Pope had beene to the Emperour Martian in the same cause , prooues nothing against the Canon , vnlesse it be graunted , that the Pope hath a negatiue voice in the making of them , which is the thing in question betweene you and vs , & therefore to be prooued , not to be presumed . But if you meane , that it took not place so soone , you haue your answer before , it brake out at last like fire in the bones , and that 's enough . § 13. With like facility to your Quartum Notabile , that Acacius obtained the censures of Pope Felix , and executed them vpon the Bishops of Alexandria and Antioch . What then ? As if one Bishop may not craue aide of another , to represse abuses , when he cannot doe it himselfe , euen as they in Peters boate , beckened to the next to come and helpe them , ( for your primacie is that Moses taken out of the waters by your owne description ) so here Acacius becken to Peter , that is , to the Pope himselfe , as you dreame . Neither thinke you that Acacius was the Popes mā , to execute his pleasure , but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , as Homer sayes . And , congregatis vobiscum vnà cum meospiritu , as in all excommunications , so specially , I suppose , when Patriarches are to be censured . Does not Gelasius say so , in the Epistle that you quote , Ipso quoque Acacio postulante , vel exequente . Where you see what execution Acacius performed , namely , with which Postulation might well stand , which is not the ministers , or the vnder-officers part , to demand censure against offenders , but only to lay it on as is enioyned . We read in the same Epistle , that Acacius proceeded against other two Patriarches of the aforesaid Seas , whereof one was Calendion , whome Gelasius names , the other vnnamed , onely qualiscunque Catholicus , as Gelasius styles him , and that neither with a Synods , as Gelasius there sayes , nor by censure obtained from the Sea of Rome , for ought that hee implyes , but belike of his owne head ; yet Acacius had no authoritie ouer the aforesaid Patriarches . No more then hath the Pope ordinary ouer them , whome in casu , and quantum fas est , he may offer to excommunicate , when they are otherwise incorrigible . And therfore this prooues no Supremacie neither , of the Pope aboue other Patriarches , that Acacius as you say executed his censures . § 14. What should I say of them that withstood these censures of the Pope , and despised them ? and yet godly men , and allowed by the Church . Which shewes , that they breath from no such power , as you imagine . See Austen contra Donatist . l. 5. c. 25. of Cyprian , not forfeiting his freehold in the Church , though he were one of them , quos Stephanus Papa abstinendos putauerat , whome Stephen Pope doomed with excommunication . Irenaeus censured Victors censuring of the Churches of Asia , where Baronius would triumph vpon the name of Victor , as if straightway victorie went with Rome , but giue me Irenaeus for the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , in choro nostro , the supremacie will goe rather on his side . Blessed are the peacemakers . So likewise did Polycrates , if you regard names so much , a man compounded of multitudes and power , which two endowments your Church much delights in . Anicetus , a pretie name too , to guggle Baronius , yet resisted by Polycarpus , not abhorring in his nomenclature frō the Churches propertie , Esa . 54. Paulinus in his Epistle ad Sulpitium Seuerum , calls the buzze of the Pope , or the bull , as you tearm it , vacui murmur culicis , the trumpeting , or the wheesing of a silly gnat , that was all he set by it . Tertullian hath many flings at him , as Pamelius will tell you , and no maruell for the rigour he sustained among them . S. Hilarie to Liberius , Quotapars orbis es tu ? as much to say , as , what are you , sir , that you should so take on ? And sometime other Bishops did as much for the Pope , I meane , they excommunicated him , no bodie controlling them . For it is ius commeabile , or , ius reciprocum , passing and walking from the one to the other . In the Councel of Ephesus , the Bishops that held with Cyrill and Memnon , Scire autem volumus vestram sanctitatem , &c. We doe you to wit , ( euen you the Popes Legates representing his person ) that if you despise ought of these things , you are thereby shut out from our Communion . what was that in effect but excommunication ? Lastly , you tell vs , that Acacius obeyed the Pope for a time , as much to say , as , while hee listed himselfe . And euen Gelasius , when he affirmes him to stand excommunicate , by vertue of the excommunications that he procured against others , he meanes iure meriti , not , iure fori , desert beeing one thing , sentence another . Vnlesse you will say , that Nathan censured Dauid , in , Tues homo , which was rather Dauids act against himselfe , like that in the Gospell , Ex ore tuo iudico te , which in Conc. Sinuessano was made you knowe whose priuiledge , not the Bishops of Constantinople , but the Bishop of Romes , ( though very ridiculously ) that no bodie should proceed against him , but onely himselfe . And so much of your foure reasons out of Gelasius his Epistle , why this canon should be insufficient . § 15. In the examples that you bring vs , of such Bishops of Constantinople , as sought for vnion with the sea of Rome , what a childish ignorance is it , not to be able to discerne betweene the vnion of consent in matters of faith , and vnion of subiection , which implies superiority , that they neuer acknowledged in the Popes ouer them ? Was there no vnion sought for but with Rome ? Or , doe not all the members of the great bodie pant for it , each string of that harpe endeauour after accordance , to make vp the perfect harmony of Christianity ? No doubt this is that which the Apostle saith , Did the word of God come out from you alone ? or to you alone ? which was the case of Corinth , not of Rome , in those daies . It were long to trace all your absurdities . The like you bring vs out of the Epistle of the Easterne Bishops to Symmachus , that the soundnes of the true faith was alway preserued in the Romane church , because of Tues Petrus , & super hanc petram . Loe the primacie of the Sea of Rome , say you , grounded vpon our Sauiours expresse words , with little regard to the equality of priuiledges in the Councell of Chalcedon , which the Bishop so much standeth vpon . Thus you will neither giue leaue to the learned Fathers , to deflect those words after a witty manner , to their innocent purpose , as Pighius saies of some of them , that scripturae ijs nascuntur sub manu , for their dexterity that way , and Andradius dares no otherwise defend your detortion of Ecce duo gladij , to establish the temporall iurisdiction in the spirituall , ( one monster in another : ) nor againe can you distinguish betweene primacy of power , and infallibilitie of iudgement , which though Rome cannot be said to haue preserued alwaies , in rigore , as S. Basil and diuerse others will testify , and somewhat we haue spoken thereto afore , yet without doubt this place so glaunces at the one , as it hath no word so much as tending to the other . For if exemption from error entitles to soueraignty , then how could Peter be the gouernour of the Apostles , who all of them had this priuiledge of not erring ? So fowly you fall vnder your owne instance . Lastly , Chrysost . Tom. 4. pag. 942. in Lat. concion , applyes these words , Tues Petrus , &c. to demonstrate the steadfastnes of the Church of Constantinople , other some to Leo the lay Emperour , &c. § 16. The like also I might say of Vigilius his presidentship in the Councell of Constantinople , which what if Eutychius did of courtesie offer him ? Praesidente nobis Beatitudine tuâ . Who knows not that the Presidents of generall Coūcels , are not alwaies the chiefest Bishops in Christendome ? As Cyrill , as Hosius , as diuers more . Cui non concilio praefuit Hosius ? and yet Hosius a Cordevant , not a Romane Bishop . § 17. The like of the deposition of diuers Bishops of Constantinople , by the Popes , as you say , and namely that Agapetus deposed Anthimus , with many more . Shall I tell you what wise men are wont to say in this case ? Agapetus did depose Anthimus ; but was Anthimus deposed ? as much to say , They did their best , but de bene esse onely , and , valeat vt valere potest , for , authoritie they had none . And therefore all this while , the Canon is not impeached but remains good . § 18. What should I tell you of Euagrius , l. 2. hist . c. 4. that this Canon was enacted in that Councell by the Fathers , not forged by the Bishop ? 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , you may read the rest in the very end of the chapter , that Constātinople had * 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , onely short of Rome , and short but in 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , as hath beene said , in order , or , in number , as the Logicians are wont to discerne things of the same species . I might adde Iustinian , Balsamon , Zonaras , the Councell quinisextum at Constantinople in Trullo , c. 36. which both deduces it from the first generall Councell in Constantinop . c. 3. which you quarrell , and recites the words that offend you most in this of Chalcedon , about aequalia priuilegia , and , Magnificari sicut illam , equall priuiledges , or equal prerogatiues , and to be aduanced like as the other . But I goe forward . Indeed nothing is more absurd , or rather can be , then your descanting vpon intercedere , in a double sense , that you bring , to shew you haue some smacke of the Latin yet , at least when your masters and monitors helpe you . Because the Bishop had said , Leone frustrà intercedente per literas suas apud Augustum , Augustam , & Anatolium ; that the Canon tooke place for all that Leo could doe by his letters to the Emperour , to the Empresse , and to Anatolius : you dreame of intercession like that to the Saints , which you build out of places as well construed as this . And because in other places , the Bishop happily so vseth the word , following your owne tearmes , for your better capacitie , therefore you conclude he vses it so here , but especially because else , Leo should haue beene so potent as to resist the Emperour . As if intercedere per literas , did not a little mollifie the matter , which is to hinder and to disswade , but by his writing onely , and how humble that ? Or to shew that Leo did all he could , yet to no purpose ; which frustrà giues you to vnderstand , added by the Bishop in the same sentence , non frustrà . But if you will needes make Leo so sawcie a Prelate , you may doe as you please , your iudgement is free concerning the Popes whom you pretend to honour : we find his letters to be of another straine , very humble & supplicatorie , towards the great ones especially , and had rather construe more gently of him . Sciens gloriosam Clementiam vestram Ecclesiasticae studere concordiae &c. precor & sedulâ suggestione vos obsecro . Epist . 54. ad Martianum Augustum . That is : Knowing your royall grace to be zealous of Church vnitie , I pray and beseech you by diligent suggestion , &c. Neither any command shall you finde giuen by him to the Emperour , nor resistance of authoritie , though he professe much zeale to maintaine the Canons , thinking he might not breake them , as was said before . Wherein neuerthelesse , you dissent from him , and say he might . So as , if you had beene his counsellor , not onely this had bin a Canon , but euen a Canon by Leo's owne consent , which you so much oppose , vnder colour of his name at this day . § 19. But are the Iesuits so idle , or so adle rather , as to thinke that they may put such tricks , I will not say vpon the Bishop , cui nulla ciconia pinsit , but vpon the yongest scholler in our Vniuersities , as because intercedere hath a double sense , either to withstand , or to entreat , they may pin which they list of the twaine vpon vs ? Was not the word rather chose by the Bishop of purpose , to shew what a withstanding Leo vsed , namely ioyned with entreatie , as if all his resistance could not goe beyond praiers ? which another that had waighed the double meaning of the word , and with single eye lookt into the matter , would rather haue beleeued to be the Bishops very drift and especiall aime . But how should then the Adioynder haue blurred so much paper , to shew that Leo did make no suit ? Sure those words before alleadged out of his Epistle to Marcian , put it out of doubt , that he did make suit , whatsoeuer this iangler mumble to the contrarie . Et precor & sedulâ suggestione vos obsecro , I both pray and beseech you , dutifully aduising , or informing . What can be plainer ? As for that he saies , non frustrà , not in vaine , because the Emperour praised Leo for his constancie , we haue refuted it before , and the very euent proclaimes as much , that it was frustrà , or in vaine , the Canon hauing gotten the credit , which they in vaine maligne . § 20. Now for that which he cites out of his Epistle to Pulcheria , the 55. in number , Consensiones Episcoporum repugnantes regulis apud Niceam conditis , in irritū mittimus , if it had beene onely so , it might haue shewed Leoes resolution against the Canon , and his stoutnes to deny it for his part , not but all this while he was suppliant to the Emperesse . But when he addes moreouer , vnitâ nobiscum vestrae fidei pietate , and , per authoritatem B. Petri Apostols , what a vantage does this giue , euen to Pulcheria her selfe , to interpose in determination of Church-businesses , and as it seemes , a kind of fellowship in S. Peters authority ? Yet this is our lay-Iesuites dish aboue Commons , which before he called liberall dealing . § 21. Concerning Anatolius his receauing to fauour , and I know not what submission , that he would faine bring him to , as it were to aske Leo pardon , I must tell him as before , that Anatolius his cause , and the Canon are two . If either weakenes , or dissimulation , made him to shrink , yet the Canon prospered and thriued daily : neither did the Bishop say , frustrà , contra ingenium personae , but contra Canonē only , in that Leo made head in vaine against the Canon , not against Anatolius his disposition , which is nothing to our matter . § 22. Neither are his reasons sound , which he brings , why Leo should be against the Canon , though as I sayd , neither this touches at all the Bishop , as beeing no refutation of any part of his booke , neither is it ought worthy our consideration , since we hold the Canon might be good without Leo. Indeede they hold that Leoes consent was requisite to the enacting of it , but that they prooue not . His reasons for Leo are these 4. First because it sprang from Anatolius proud humour , to aduance himselfe inordinately . But this is a flat slaunder of Anatolius , not a iustification of Leo : or , though it were true of Anatolius priuate part , that he had a touch of the Luciferian spirit , to exalt his nest , and climbe higher , which is not so likely , yet the concurrers with Anatolius in his desire for Constantinople , were led , as is apparant , with farre diuerse respects . In their Epistle to Leo , the Fathers of that Councell mention these : 1. To gratifie the Emperours , who reioyced in it : 2. to shew their zeale to the Senate : 3. their honour to the citie of Constantinople it selfe : and 4. lastly , not onely from the good liking of persons , but à naturâ rei , to establish order , and to abandon confusion out of the Church of God. You see all was not for Anatolius his sake , whom you so much talke of . § 23. Secondly , because it was made you say in the absence of his Legates , and by surreption . Answer . That it was made in their absence , it was their owne default , who would not stay : but that it was made by surreption , it is your vntruth : for they all gaue consent to it againe the next day , and protested strongly against this imputation . You shall heare the Councell it selfe for the first of these ; Act. 16. so wee read . Paschasinus & Lucentius vicegerents to the Sea Apostolick said : If it please your highnes we haue somewhat to say to you . The most glorious Iudges answered , Say what you will. Paschasinus and Lucentius said , Yesterday after your Highnes were risen , and we followed your steps , there were certaine things decreed as we heare , which we thinke were done besides the order and Canons of the Church . We beseech you therefore that your excellencies would command the same to be read againe , that the whole company may see whether it were rightly or disorderly done . The most glorious Iudge answered , If any thing were decreed after our departures , let it be read againe . And before the reading , Aetius Archdeacon of Constantinople ( after a few other words premised ) said thus . We had somewhat to doe for the Church of Constantinople . We prayed the Bishops that came from Rome , that they would [ stay and ] communicate with vs. They refused , saying , we may not , we are otherwise charged . We acquainted your Honours with it , and you willed that this holy Councell should consider of it . Your highnes then departing , the Bishops that are here , conferring of a common cause , required this to be done . And here they are . It was not done in secret , nor by stealth , but orderly and lawfully . This for the First . § 24. Heare also for the second , what we read in the same Action . Lucentius reuerend Bishop , and Vicegerent of the Sea Apostolick , said : First , let your Highnes consider , how guilefully the Bishops were dealt with , and how hastily the matter was handled , that they should be constrained to subscribe , contrary to the holy Canons . And Beronicianus , most relligious Secretarie of the sacred Consistorie , interpreting the former saying , the Reuerend Bishops cryed out , None of vs was constrained . And after many things between , againe we read : The most glorious Iudges said : These , the most holy Bishops of Asia , and Pontus , that subscribed to the book , as it was read vnto them , let them say whether they subscribed of their owne accord , and with full consent , or compelled by some necessitie laid vpon them . And the aforesaid Bishops of Asia , and Pontus , that had subscribed , comming foorth into the midst , Diogenes reuerend Bishop Cyzici , said , Before God I subscribed willingly . Florentius reuerend Bishop Sardeorū Lydiae , said , No necessitie was laid vpon me , but I subscribed of mine own accord . Romanus reuerend Bishop Myrorum , said , I was not constrained : It seemes iust to me , and I subscribed willingly . Calogerus reuerend Bishop Claudiopolis Honoriadis , said , I subscribed with my will , not constrained , and according to the determination of the hundred and fiftie holy Fathers [ in the first Councell of Constantinople . ] Seleucus Bishop of Amasia , said , I did it by mine owne will , desirous to be vnder this Sea ( of Constantinople , ) because to me it seemes good wisedome . Eleutherius Bishop of Chalcedon , said , I subscribed by my will , knowing that both by the Canons , and by custome aforegoing , the Sea of Constantinople hath these priuiledges . Where , by the way , you may see how fond the obiection is , that Lucentius then made , and some since him , that the Canon of Constantinople was neuer put in vse , whereas the Bishop of the place here , where the Councell was held , alleadges both Canon and Custome for it . Nunechius reuerend Bishop of Laodicea of Phrygia , I subscribed of mine owne accord . Marinianus , Pergamius , Critonianus , Eusebius , Antiochus , with diuerse more , too long to be reckoned , professed in the same sort , Sponte subscripsimus , we subscribed willingly , on of our owne accord . What can the Adioyndrer reply to this ? And yet afterward more effectually , if it may be , When the glorious Iudges had so pronounced , Oportere sanctissimum Archiepiscopum regiae Constantinopolis nouae Romae , oisdem primatibus honoris & ipsum dignum esse , &c. that the most holy Archbishop of the royall citie of Constantinople , which is new Rome , must be allowed the same primacies or preheminences of honour , that the Archbishop of olde Rome is : and when they desired the holy and vniuersall Councell , to declare what they thought , ( for so are their words in the said Action , ) Reuerendi Episcopi dixerunt , Haec iusta sententia , haec omnes dicimus , haec omnibus placent , &c. The Reuerend Bishops said , This is a iust sentence , we all say so , these things like vs all , we all say so ( once againe ) the decree is iust , — and much more to that purpose , which I omit . § 25. His third reason is , because the other Canon of Constantinople , vpon which this was grounded , was neuer put in practise till that time . But how happily haue we refuted that euen now , out of the mouth of one of the Bishops that subscribed , Eleutherius Bishop of Chalcedon ? Besides , Baronius confutes him , that acknowledges Chrysostome ( talem patrem , as he saies , such a Father , . i. so reuerend ) to haue practised this Canon , in deposing no lesse then 13. Bishops of Asia , as you may reade in Sozom. l. 8. c. 16. Likewise the Clergie of Constantinople , that in this verie Councell , Act. 11. relying on this Canon , challenged to themselues the ordination of the Bishop of Ephesus , metropolitane of Asia minor , and called it Custome , as well as right . So that belike they had knowne it practised by others . Lastly , why did Anatolius subscribe his name in this Councell , the Councel of Chalcedon , before Maximus and Iuuenalis , one Bishop of Antioch , the other Bishop of Hierusalem , but onely because the Canon that was made at Constantinople , in fauour of that Sea , was and might be practised ? And when you quote Leo , Ep. 53. that the Canon of Constantinople lacked authoritie , because it was neuer sent to the Bishop of Rome , neither does Leo say any such thing , that I can finde in all that Epistle , nor shall you prooue that the Popes consent is necessarie to enact Canons , though most childishly you presume it : and lastly , he rather yeeldeth in the said Epistle , as I conceiue him , quandam transmissam huius rei noticiam ad Apostolicam sedem à praedecessoribus Anatolij , that Anatolius his predecessors sent knowledge hereof to the Romane Sea , and in the Epist . 55. he graunts that some might haue attempted is , ( which without Canon surely they would not in all likelihood ) but could not obtaine it , he meanes perhaps , not so fully as afterward . Else wee prooued you know euen nowe , that the Canon was not buried for want of practise , some while afore . Neither can I tell , what those words of Eusebius meane , in the 16. Act of this Councel : a Et hanc regulā Sanctissimo Papae in vrbe Româ ego relegi , praesentibus Clericis Constantinopolitanis , eamque , suscepit : I say , I know not what they meane , but that notice hereof was sent to the Pope ; which makes Surius in the margent to note it thus , * Aut Eusebius mentitur , aut Leonem fefellit : you may doe well to helpe me , if I be amisse . § 26. Your fourth and last reason why Leo should disallow this , because it was repugnant to the Canons of Nice , is a very trifling one , and you answer it your selfe , in the 28. and 70. Numb . of this Chapter , graunting that he might haue ratified it for all that . And I hope , if the Canons of Nice had beene so inviolable , it concerned Maximus , and Iuuenalis , the two Patriarks , one of Antioch , the other of Hierusalem , to looke to the keeping of them , as well as Leo. Yet they yeelded . So much of this . § 27. Is there any thing else to be sifted in this chapter ? It sticks sore in his stomack , that the Bishop finds a difference betweene the back-sides of letters , and the decrees of generall Councels . Because I know not who , some miserable suiters , had magnified Leo with glorious titles to mooue compassion . Mr. F. T. demands , why did not those suiters , that indorsed their supplications after such a fashion to Leo , rather magnify the Councell , and flatter that , if the Councels authority was greater then Leos ? As if he neuer had heard , how the man tooke his intertainment , when he saw others vsed as well as himselfe ; greatly scorning it which before he accepted , and breaking out into these words , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . And so Alexander refused to be enrolled free denizon of a certaine citie that offered him that honour , till he heard them say they neuer affoarded it to any but Hercules . For the respects are nothing which are shared among a multitude , to those which are throwne into the bosome of some one man , and perhaps like Leo here , ambitious enough aboue his fellows . Besides that who so honoureth the President of a Councell , in the place that he holdeth , his honour redoundeth to the whole assemblie , and yet it delighteth the ringleader of that daunce , after a speciall manner , beeing applied to himselfe . § 28. These titles ( saith he ) were taken by the Notaries , and contradicted by none . They were taken , as the deuotions of poore suiters , who giue somewhat to gaine more , and speake faire where they looke for releefe . — Liberalis est pauper Quoties amico diuiti nihil donat , could the Poet say , which when it wants in substance , must be supplied with language . Contradiction needed not , where the style of beggars carried no validitie , and the Councell eft-soones controuled those tearms , in the Canon that we speak of , vnlesse well construed and dextrously vnderstood . So the Patriarko Alexandrine at this day , in his lowest ebbes , writes himselfe the Iudge of the world , which some say S. Cyrill deserued for himselfe , and his successors in that throne , for playing the President so well in the Ephesine Councell : and the rule is not vnknowne , which teaches vs how to interpret such manner of phrases , Loquendum vt vulgus , sentiendum vt pauci , or , vt sapientes ; the one like Ischyrion , and his distressed mates , the other after the ordinance of the sacred Councell . § 29. He thinks the Bishop hath not satisfied such places , as were alleadged out of the Epistle of the Synod , wherin Leo's authoritie is so greatly extolled . Alas how greatly ? Head of the members , that is to say , President of the Councell , and therefore they adde , Quibus tu sicut membris caput praeeras , not praees , which is continuall , as by vertue of his Popedome , but praeer as for the time onely , and as President of the Councell . Againe , sicut pater , as a father , for many causes God wot , whereof the Popedome is none , for his age , for his grauitie , for his learning , for his Praesidentship , for his great eminencie in the Church of God , as we our selues confesse , and yet drawing no taile of vniuersall iurisdiction after it . So Cyrill , so Atticus , call them their sonnes , whom the African Councell sent for copies of the Nicene Canons to them ; Innocentius the Priest , and Marcellus the subdeacon , though they were not of their Diocesse , but toto diuisi orbe rather . And , I pray you , does not Marcian call Palladius father , Palladi Pater ? ( See Sacra Marciani , post Concil . Chalced . ) which Palladius was onely Praefectus praetorio , and no way superiour to the Emperour Marcian . Not farre off from the same place , the Bishops of Aegypt writing to Anatolius , entitle him thus , Archiepiscopo Constantinopolitanae & Catholicae Ecclesiae Anatolio , as if besides his Archbishopricke of Constantinople , he had beene Bishop of the Vniuersall Church of Christ , as you wildly faine of the Pope , that he hath the whole Church put into his hands , together with the Bishopricke of the citie of Rome ; as if the skuller of Rome , forsooth , or the herring-boat rather , cymba Petri , had the ship of the whole world appendant to it . Proterius in the same Epistle , Bishop of Alexandria , is thus styled by them : Archiepiscopus , & Catholicae pastor Ecclesiae , which insinuates as much , too much I know for a Iesuit to graunt , without discreeter interpretation , Gregorie Nazianzenes father , though a very meane Bishop , and not to be spoke of , but for his sonne , was cleped the father of the Popes themselues , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , father of all the high Priests of God. Of him in Baronius I told you before , Pontificumque caput , the head of Bishops , yea of Popes verily . That our Sauiour committed the charge of the vineyard to Leo , as is there said , as if therefore his supremacie were de iure diuine , is no more then Palladius , ( another Christian Magistrate of that name ) bestowes vpon Epiphanius in his Epistle to him , before the Anchoratus , Dignare ad hoc à Saluatore ordinatus , vouchsafe O thou appointed for this ende by our Sauiour , and what to doe , trow you ? to prescribe rules of the right faith in the Trinitie , which yet was not Epiphanius his taske , de iure diuino , the Popes rather , as they I am sure would haue it , Aquinas by name , in his 2. 2. to giue Creedes to the church ; And a little before that , in a stranger tune , as speaking to our blessed Sauiour , Praeceptor serua , Master saue vs. Is not this rather a pylot of the vniuersall ship ? § 30. Whereas Dioscorus fault is amplified by the Fathers , to haue wronged Leo after Flauianus and Eusebius , with a post haec omnia , as if therfore Leo were aboue them all , though we deny not but in order of place he was aboue thē , and specially then , when he was President of the Councell , ( of which neuertheles we may say with S. Chrysostome vpon the Acts , homil . 3. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , a matter of presidence rather then of precedence ) yet he might as well argue , that to imprison Peter was a greater fault in Herod , then to slay Iames , ( and indeede that 's the reckening that the Papists make of these names now a daies , I meane Kings and Popes , the one in Iames , the other in Peter , yea though they flay the one , and but emprison the other ) because the scripture saies 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , he added moreouer , or , he proceeded also , to attach Peter . Though F. T. perhaps , drunken with Iesuitisme , would argue from hence for Peters primacie , as catching at euery thing , and surely as wisely as Turrian his fellow Iesuite , from the 4. quaternions of souldiers that were set to guard him , in the same Chapter , an vniuersall man no doubt , and spreading into the foure corners of the world . Another time , quia vas pertigit ad Petrum , the vessell came iust as farre as Peter , that is , the Church and the Pope are coextending . § 31. But his greatest stick , is at the Bishops answer , about the charge of the vineyard , committed to Leo , that ad curam omnium ex aquo pertinet , the care of the vineyard belongs to all alike , not to Leo onely . And here he plunges into a discourse ouer head and eares , that all are not equally obliged in conscience , to take care for the Church . As if the Bishop had said , aequaliter pertinet , or aequè pertinet , that all are bound in like degree , who onely saies , ad omnes pertinet ex aequo , that is , that all are bound and none exempt , to take care for the Church ; ex aequo pointing there to the indifferency of the care , the generality of the parties , not to the degrees of caring . § 32. Yet he argues from hence ( that you may know the man , and what his humour his ) that if this be true , then coblers and tinkers shall haue as good right of suffrage in generall Councels , as any Bishop of them all . Yea nothing but confusion and Chaos will ouerflow , the difference of vocations beeing extinguished in the Church , &c. As if first the Bishop meant this of the Laity , such as coblers and tinkers , and not of Bishops only and other Clergie-men , which afterwards himselfe is faine to acknowledge , num , 86. with shame enough , hauing beaten the aire so long before to no purpose . Or , if the Bishop should extend it to the Laity , and all , ( for disputation sake , and to chafe this snarling mastiffe a little , ) yet it were not easie to put off all that he brings , by this distinctiō , that howsoeuer the care as exiens in actum , breaking forth into this or some other duty , is not common to all , as the nurse onely cares so for the childe as to suckle it , yet the care in fonte , or in radice , the originall sollicitude and indistinct care , is common to all , as they say in the Psalmes , Wee haue wished you good lucke , you that be of the house of the Lord : euen as they may wish wel to the childe , that are not particularly put in trust to battle it , and to giue it suck , but custod●●o ordine maternorum membrorum , as S. Austen saies in the like ease , or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , euery man in his owne order , 1. Cor. 15. § 34. At last , the Bishop is set to schoole euen in plaine tearmes . Whereto I answer ( saith he ) he must learne to distinguish , &c. Betweene what thinke you ? Betweene the primacy of Peter , and the priuiledges of the Sea of Rome . So he . And what of this ? Therefore the Fathers might giue the priuiledges indeed , as the Canon speakes , but still the primacie is of Christ . What primacie , Sir , what primacie , I pray you , but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ▪ to be aduanced and magnified in Church-matters , to be Ladie-regent and gouernresse in that quarter ? What primacie did our Sauiour els giue to your Church , when he gaue most , as you feigne in Peter ? Vnlesse you speake of the Temporall , which neuerthelesse you make a 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of the other , an vndiuided consequent , and so both as it were but one . Neuerthelesse this 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is called here priuiledges , by the Fathers of this Councell , and it is saide , the Fathers gaue it afore to Rome , and now to Constantinople , by the tenour of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , vnlesse you will teach the Fathers how to speake . Which deuise of yours , when I thinke of it , is as good as that before , numb . 59. that the Fathers gaue not all priuiledges to Rome , but some onely , and therefore the Bishop offended in his si qua , that is , all in generall , or whatsoeuer . Which you correct thus , The Canon speakes only of priuiledges giuen to the Church of Rome , in respect of the Imperiall seat . So that whereas the Fathers of Calchedon bring this for an argument , why their fathers and predecessors gaue priuiledges to Rome , namely because Rome was the Imperiall seat , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , the construction must be thus , by your grand Logick , The Fathers gaue not all priuiledges to Rome , for the seat Imperiall , but the priuiledges giuen thereto , in respect of the Imperiall seat , were giuen thereto in respect of the Imperiall seat , and none others . Is not this sweete art now , and worthie of a Iesuit ? § 35. The reasons that you bring , why the Councell should not mention the prerogatiue of Peter , because it would hinder Anatolius his cause , and the preferment of Constantinople , which was then intended , doe they not shew , that either the Fathers were damnably partiall , to obscure the true cause of Romes aduancement , or else that Peter was no cause thereof at all ? For say not , it helped not to the cause in hand . The Fathers were not so blind , as not to see it ; much lesse so grosse , as seeing to smother it , or for desire to winne their cause , to translate it cleane another way . And suppose they would haue done so , why did no bodie contradict them , as you said a little before , about the titles of Supplications ? When there were negatiues in the Councell , qui non subscripserunt , as we read in the 16. Action : why did no bodie lay forth the lamenesse of their reason , and drawe Peter from vnder the stuffe ? Once againe , me thinkes , an Angel should haue smote him on the side , and bid him stand vp now if euer . For the Fathers had buried his prerogatiue cleane , and entitled the dignitie of Rome to the Empire , as if the Empire authorised the Church , not the Church the Empire . No reply was made , none found fault with the reason . Therefore wee take you at your word , num . 67. That the mention of Peters primacie , does not onely not helpe , but euen crosse this Canon . If the Canon then be good , Peters primacie is none . § 36. That Leo excommunicated Dioscorus by the Synode , restraines his power of excommunicating Patriarchs , rather then establishes it . You know it was a question , whether the Pope might inflict censures promiscue , without a Synod , yea or no. Of which more Gelasius in his Epistle before cited , ad Episcopos Dardaniae . And yet Leo does nothing here , but by the Synod , & re , & stylo , directly mentioning it , ( his Legates I meane for him , ) fetching assistance from it . And Peter is put in the last place , after Leo and the Synode , as whose authoritie the Synode as well as hee participated . Might not this therefore haue beene better left out ? § 37. You omit not so much , as that Leo is said to be ordained to be the interpretour of the voice of blessed Peter to all men . I wonder what you would say , if what Nazianzen ascribes to Athanasius , had beene said of your Leo in that Councel ? One time that he was the fanne that cleansed the floare , suppose you the fanne in our Lords hand , to separate as it were betweene the wheat and the chaffe , so betweene true opinions , or erroneous in the faith , yea you would say , iudging betweene the nations of the world , and diuiding the good from the bad by sentence . Behold 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in Alexandria , euen before Cyrill . Another time , that as our Lord ridde the asse , so Athanasius managed 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , the people of the Gentiles , as farre spread as they were throughout the world . Another time , that he was the two tables of Moses , and his verdict 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , the very law of veritie : another time , the tuft of Sampsons head , which , as we know , appropriated the holy Ghost to him . Yet Leo was the rather praised , because President of the assembly , and to his face , also enioying the grace that accompanieth Councells : Athanasius in his particular , and after death , and not onely at one time , but continuedly . And , I pray you , what saies the same Coūcell of the Emperours , Leo by name , but not your Leo ? Leo Imperator inexpugnabilis palma , & honor fidei , accepit a Deo super omnes homines sine prohibitione aliquâ potestatem . What is this to beeing the interpretour of Peters voice , whereas S. Peter would haue euery bodie to be to God , as they , that you speak of , make Leo to be to Peter , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , as the oracles of God , so let-euery man speak , 1. Pet. 4. 11. But there is more in that authoritie , for which cause I must english it . Leo our Emperor , the impregnable garlād & honour of the faith , hath receiued of him ( that is , of God ) power ouer all men , without any controule . We see here for matters of faith , and of relligion , what the Emperour might challenge , beeing called the garland of it , and impregnable , or inuincible . 2. He hath command ouer all men , Clerks and all . 3. from God. 4. without any checke or controule , which would haue made great titles in the Popes style . Againe , Nerui , & arma , & virtus Ecclesiarum vos est is Christianissimi Imperatores , &c. You most Christian Emperours are the sinewes , the weapons , and the puissance of the Churches , &c. This out of the Councell that your selfe quote . And of the difference of the testimonies , giuen to the two Leo's , let the Reader iudge . § 38. The last thing that I will note in your second chapter , shall be this , remembring my promise to obserue breuity , from which I am but too easily blowne awry , with the storme of your fopperies . You make it an argument of Leos supremacie , ( you call it Monarchie very roundly a little after , and are not ashamed at it , chap. 4. num . 3. ) that , first Leo was admitted President of the Councell held in Greece : then , that Leo beeing absent , Anatolius kept not his place , but Legates of his owne sending , whereof one was a Priest . The answer is most easie . Leo beeing denied one part of his will , to haue the Councell in Italy , it was a poore recompence ( I meane for his monarchie , and in regard to that ) to be employed to be their President , as a wise man , a learned man , and a stout man , likewise also in order surmounting them all , as hath beene acknowledged , whereas diuerse Presidents had beene in Councels , that were inferiour to Leo in these points , and therefore much more remooued from the stately Monarchy , that you from hence gather . § 39. But , Why not Anatolius ? say you . Was not hee fit to be President , whome the Councell thought fit to be so aduanced in their Canon , as to haue the like stroke in Ecclesiasticall affaires , that the verie first of the ranke had ? Once againe I must tell you belike , that the Canon aduances not Anatolius , but Constantinople . And it was the parting of stakes betweene Leo and him , that though the Councell were in Greece , yet Leo should be the President . As for his Legates , it was no matter , ( after once they had concurred vpon Leo to bee the man ) whome he sent in his place , so long as they were sufficient , since himselfe could not be there . And I hope they brought instructions From Leo , as themselues say often , and might haue reference to him , if any doubt should arise . Also it was the fitter , that Italian Bishops should be Presidents , and not Grecian , that the Canon might be the authenticaller , which was enacted for Constantinople , as farther from partialitie of the lawmakers . To which purpose they say , in their Epistle to Leo , ( the Fathers of that Councell ) that the Emperours affecting the exaltation of Constantinople , Volebant celebrari & ab vniuersali Concilio , for more authoritie sake no doubt , and so likewise by forraine Bishops , as Leo and his Legates . But if you thinke his Legates had any such stroke , that Anatolius should enuy them for their greatnesse , you may remember , how boldly the Councell dissented from them , and the Canon was confirmed , notwithstanding their demurres . § 40. Neither despise you Priests , to come into Councells , gentle friend . This shewes how vaine your discourse was before , num . 52. that Concilium Episcoporum est , the Councell consists of Bishops onely . Doe you not knowe the difference betweene suffrages , some decisiue , some deliberatiue ; definitine , or consultiue ? Hath Ego definiens subscripsi , so often repeated in this Councell , no better setled into you ? Or wil the Iesuites be content , to refraine from Councels , as many as are not Bishops ? Perhaps because they are loath to bee called away from Princes Courts . But that you may know , Priests haue their interest in Councels , at least , Sir , by conniuence of Bishops , ( as * in diuerse other things , as we read in the Canons ) Athanasius a Deacon stood the b church in good stead in the Nicen Councel : yea an idiot , & a man wholly illiterate , confuted a Philosopher , one of the Princes of the world , as S. Paul calls them . In Conc. c Moguntino , three turmae were set apart , Episcoporum one , Abbatum another ; and the d third of Laymen , that is lesse then Priests , as you are wont to reckon . I say nothing of S. Ambrose , made a Bishop before baptized , and Nectarius an Archbishop , Sozom . lib. 7. cap. 8. So much shall suffice to your second Chapter . To his third Chapter . 1. Places of the Fathers , S. Cyprian and S. Hierome . 2. The Bishop farre from Ievinianizing . 3. Nothing is deducible out of his doctrine , which fauours the Popedome . § 1. THe Fathers follow . First S. Cyprian , de vnitate Ecclesiae . Whereas the Cardinall had said , that Cyprian makes Peter the head , the roote , and the fountaine of the Church , the Bishop most truly and soundly answered , not Peter of the Church , but the Church her selfe head of the members belonging to her , roote of the branches shooting out of her , fountaine of the waters issuing forth from her , &c. one in substance , but many in propagation , which is no new thing in this mysterie , or in any such bodie , as the Philosophers call deiuncta corpora , rising of many moities into one summe . Nay lastly , S. Cyprian , to shew whome he speakes of , calls her matrem , mother , in plaine tearmes , which is not mother Peter , but the Church saies the Bishop . And this so vexes the gall of our Iesuit , as you would not thinke . For indeede what more compendious victorie could there be , insomuch as F. T. is faine to say , that Cyprian had no occasion to name Peter there , but the Church onely ; like the Rhemists annotation vpon 16. to the Rom. that Peter was out of towne , when he should haue beene saluted by Paul ; so we must beleeue , iust there the occasion failed of naming Peter , whereas in all the other current he onely is meant . 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , as S. Chrysostome saies most excellently , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , Epist . 190. ad Pentadiam Diaconissam . Such a thing is truth , in one short word shee confutes the cauiller , and stops his mouth . For the words , lying thus as they doe in Cyprian , Vnum tamen caput est , & origo vna , & vna mater foecunditatis successibus copiosa , yet the head is but one , the spring but one , the mother but one , plenteous in her blessed and happie fruitfulnesse , who can imagine , that Peter is the head here , and the church the mother , and not rather that the whole sentence belongs but to one , whether that be Peter , or the Church , or whosoeuer ? For as the sentence runnes on in an euen line , so doubtlesse it comprehends but one and the same subiect . But Peter is not the mother , as F. T. confesses . Therefore neither the head , nor the spring ; nor any thing els . And indeede so it followes in S. Cyprian , Illius foetu nascimur , illius lacto nutrimur , illius spiritu animamur , shee breeds vs , feedes vs , and enliues vs , which may well be vnderstood of the Church our mother , but of whome else , whether Peter , or any other , I see not , I confesse , I ; S. Austen so , lib. 2. contra Crescon . Grammat . c. 35. & 36. and againe , l. 3. contra eundem , c. 58. & 65. vnderstands these words , quoting S. Cyprian , not of Peter , but of the Church . And I meane the words de fonte & riuo , de sole & radio , that I may fetch it as high as F. T. himselfe , euen from the place where , if any where , S. Cyprian speakes of Peter , by his owne acknowledgement . And Pamelius , their owne author , commenting vpon S. Cyprian , though he greedily drawe all aduantages that may be , from other places of this Father , to establish the Popedome , yet passes this ouer in deepe silence , as nothing fauouring their desired Headship , nay crossing it rather . For he had read immediately before , in the same place , Hoc erant vtique & eaeteri Apostoli quod fuit Petrus , pari consortio praediti & honoris & potestatis . i. The rest of the Apostles were vtterly the same that Peter was , endewed with equall fellowship both of honour and power . Where by the way we may note S. Ambrose and S. Cyprian their agreement about this point , not onely for matter , but for words . For so Ambrose before quoted , Hoc erant quod Paulus : and here Cyprian , Hoc erant quod Petrus . As if there were no diffe●… neither betweene Peter and Paul , nor betweene the other Apostles and them both . For quae alicui tertio vna sunt , inter se quoque vna , or aequalia , saies the light of nature . Will you know then , why he makes mention of Peter in singular ? Sed exordium ab vnitate proficiscitur , vt ecclesia Christi vna monstretur . But the beginning proceedes from vnity , or from one man , to shew that the Church of Christ is but one . How does the beginning proceede from one , but as S. Austen shewes in the place before quoted , Onely Peter was spoken to , that others beeing not excluded , yet this pretious vnitie might be commended in one ? As we read vnder Salomon , that the people were all like one man , and Act. 2. in the first times of the new Testament , the people were all of one heart and one minde . Where by the way you see , how Salomon prefigured Christ , and those times these latter with strange accordance . And if this become the people , how much more the pastors , or the master builders , that they should all set to their worke like one man ? To which nothing can be more contrary then the Popish vsurpation , ouer-bearing other pastors , which neuertheles they would ground vpon these places for vnity . S. Cyprian also declares his owne meaning in the same place , to be as I haue said , in these words . Quamnis omnibus Apostolis parem tribuit potestatem , though our Sauiour gaue equall power to all his Apostles , tamen vt manifestaret vnitatem , disposuit originem eius ab vno incipientem , yet to shew the vnity ( so he construes monstretur , not as if that Church could be pointed to with the finger ; from whence other Churches receiue their vnity , as F. T. may imagine ) but , vt manifestaret vnitatem , to make knowne the vnity of the Catholicke body , and that the Church is but one congregation of the faithfull , though branched and billetted out into sundry parcells , he tooke order that her originals should beginne at one , which is short of authority , and much more of supremacie , but most of all of the monarchy , that the Iesuites would crowne Peter with , by vertue of this place . And when the same Cyprian , a very few lines afore the words last alleaged , makes this to be the cause of abuses in the Church , quòd ad veritatis originem non reditur , nec caput quaeritur , nec magistricoele stis doctrina seruatur , what is plainer , then that by caput ( which they so catch at ) he meanes nothing else but the originall verity , which our Sauiour Christ first deliuered , euen that same Sic ab initio , as both origo veritatis , & doctrina coelestis magistri declares , which encompasse the word Caput like two torches of both sides of it , to giue light vnto it , that we mistake it not . Then followes his commendation of Church-vnity , the onely remedy in Cyprians iudgement against the aforesaid maladies , which hauing taught to be figured by our Sauiour in S. Peter , whome in equall priuiledges of power with the rest , he called from the rest , to patterne that vertue , he amplifies from other places the authority of the Church , as vna est columba mea , Cant. 6. vnum corpus , and vnus spiritus , vna fides , Ephes . 4. with , Qui ecclesiae resistit , quomodo se in ecclesiâ esse confidit ? and after a notable enforcement to the preseruing of vnity from vnus Episcopatus est , there is but one Bishoprick throughout the whole Church , which euery Bishop hath his solide share in , and , Qui in ecclesiâ praesident , which are chiefe in the Church , shewing that many Bishops gouerne the Church , and not one Bishop alone , as the Papists would haue it , he returnes to ecclesia , Ecclesia vna est , quae in multitudine latiùs incremento faecunditatis extenditur , &c. and yet againe more closely , after certaine protases of similitudes , which F. T. saies the Bishop durst not lay downe for fraud , but himselfe laying downe gets nothing but hatred for his abominable tediousnesse , Ecclesia Domini luce perfusa ( saies he ) per orbem totum radios suos porrigit , vnum tamen lumen est , ramos suos extendit , riuos expandit , vnum tamen caput est , & origo vna , & vna mater , &c. That is : The Church replenished with the light of our Lord , stretches her beames through all the world , yet the light is but one , ( F. T. would haue Peter to be this light , as if the Church were but rayes , and he the body of the sun , which S. Cyprian neuer meant , but for more perspicuity sake calls it Domini lucem , our Lords light , vnlesse Peter be that Lord too ) reaches out her branches , spreads her riuers ; yet the head is but one , the spring but one , and the mother ( her selfe ) but one , abounding in fruitfulnesse , &c. So as one may wonder that F. T. after so manifest conuiction , would persist to force this clause vpon Peter , which so properly and so immediately belongs to the Church , but that it fretted both him and the Cardinall too , not a little , to be taken tripping so fowly , as to make Peter a mother , or the Pope a woman once againe : and he hath no shift but to say , that S. Cyprian in one and the same tenure of vndiuided connexion , meanes the first part of Peter , and the latter part of the Church , like Virgils monster : — in Pristin ' desinit aluus . § 2. Here is also to be noted , that F. T. citing that sentence of S. Cyprian , tamen vt vnitatem manifestaret , &c. foists in those words , which are not to be found in the printed copies , vt vna cathedra monstretur , at least not in * Morelius , yet a Popish edition , which I now vsed , anni 1564 at Paris , not of Frobenius at Basil , anni 1530. not of Gryphius , not diuers more . And yet this is the man , that challenges the Bishop for corrupting of Fathers . And farther he prints those words , one Chayre , in an eminent letter , to giue credit to his cosenage , one Church in an ordinarie , because though that be Cyprians , yet nothing to his purpose , num . 5. of this third chap. How beit , if vna cathedra were read in Cyprian , it is not the Popes chaire , but answerable to that of which he said a little before , Episcopatus vnus est , &c. there is but one Bishoprick in the Church , and yet such a one , as euery Bishop hath his full share therein . For as the Bishoprick , so the Chayre . With like honestie he peruerts the words of Cyprian , exordium ab vnitate proficiscitur , by either adding to them , or translating them in this frantick fashion , num . 4. The primacie is giuen to Peter , whereof not a word that we find here in Cyprian . And he tells vs , we heard before that Cyprian saies our Sauiour built his Church vpon Peter ; which for my part , I neither heard nor read yet in S. Cyprian de vnitate Ecclesiae , of which worke now the question onely is . What he saies ad Quintum , comes not to be examined till his 12. numb . But thus he must patch one thing with another , that cries out against falshood in all men els , as the onely Doue . And the toyle is more to recken vp his leud corruptions , then the taske to cleere the Bishop from those things , which he imputes to him in that very kind . Lastly , for a tast of his learning , as well as his sinceritie , he construes robur vnum , in S. Cyprians comparison , one strength . Multi rami , sed robur vnum : Many boughes , but one strength . Neither giuing vs the sense of S. Cyprians similitude , but vtterly smothering it , like a faithfull alleadger , and forgetting Virgil , Aeneid . 2. — Roboribus textis — . yea , his very Accidents , Pectora percussit , pectus quoque robora fiunt . § 3. Now in the epistle ad Quintum , what find we ? Petrus quem primùm Dominus elegit , & , super quem aedificauit ecclesiam suam . As if one of these did not expound the other . For our Sauiour is said to haue built his Church vpon Peter , in that he chose him first , not chose him to be first , primùm elegit , not elegit in primatem , as preuenting him with the promise , and honouring him with the exhibition of the keyes before the rest . For they were deliuered to him in the generall name , as signifying vnitie , as both S. Austen , and S. Cyprian haue taught before , so as the rest notwithstanding had as full right in them as euer Peter had ; which S. Cyprian declares , when he saies , Pariconsortio praediti potestatis , endued with like fellowship of power ; and , Hoc erant caeteri quod Petrus , the rest were the same that Peter was . S. Austen also in those words of his cited before , but of necessitie to be brought to your remembrance , I see , euer and anon , There are some things , which though they were spoken to Peter , yet can make no good construction , vnlesse they be referred to the Church in generall , and he instances in that , Tibi dabo claues . As for the building of the Church vpon Peter , howsoeuer some writer may say so in his sense , yet you neede not be ignorant , how the most sort construe it , to be a building vpon his faith , not vpon his person : Super petram quam confessus es , . i. super meipsum . August de verb. Dom. secund . Matth. serm . 13. Hilar. de Trin. l. 2. item l. 6. to the same purpose , ( for I couple his faith with the obiect for this time , that is to say , Christ , ) Chrysost . hom . 55. in Matth. Ambrosin Eph. c. 2. & de Sacram. Incarn . Domin . c. 3. Beda in cap. 21. Iohan. I sidor . in Exod. c. 42. Dt quâ soliditate ( fidei ) Dominus dicit , Super hanc petram aedificabo ecclesiam meam : . i. of which soundnesse ( of faith ) our Lord sayes , Vpon this rocke I will build my Church . Euagrius may seeme to imply as much , lib. 4. c. 40. speaking of Anastasius Bishop of Antioch , where Peter first sat . To which Bishop the assaults were so fiercely giuen , as if his ouerthrow would haue been the Captiuitie of the right faith ( they are the Historians words ) and in him were all . But he manfully withstood , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . For he remained vpon the impregnable rocke of faith , Iuvenalis Bishop of Hierusalem , with fiue more Bishops , in Rescripto Synodico , in Concil Calched , ad presbyteros & monachos Palestina Prouincia , hauing quoted the words of the Gospel aforesaid , inferres thus , * Super hanc confessionem roborata est ecclesia Dei. Where by the way you may see , what the opinion was of the Fathers of that Councell , concerning those words , Super hanc petram , to settle the cheifedome in Rome , as before you would beare vs downe , though they deriue the priuiledges of it meerely from the Empire , and the graunt of their auncestors . Also the Bishops surmise remaines good , that the Cardinall left out those other words in Cyprian , as preiudiciall to his cause , that Peter did not challenge to himselfe any thing insolently or arrogantly , as to say he had the primacie . You say , he might haue said so , in his full right , but S. Cyprian calls it , an insolent , and an arrogant challenge , by which you see , that primacie whatsoeuer it was , was not of authoritie , but of meere senioritie , like primùm elegit , a little before ( euen Andrewes first resorting to our Sauiours schoole hinders not this , sith there was duplex vocatio , as Maldonate will shew you , before quoted ) which the words following shew too , Et obtemperari à nouellis ac posteris sibi potiùs oportere , comparing Paul the later called , with Peter aunciently designed to the Apostleship . In one respect an 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , or an abortiue , as himselfe confesses , and yet in other respects nothing short of the cheife . S. Austen also , though hee alter S. Cyprians words , lib. 2. de bap . c. 1. as is soone done in allegations of memorie , yet he keeps the sense , and fauours you nothing ; the primatus Apostolorum excellenti gratiâ praeeminens , standing in dignity or qualitie , ( let the word gratia helpe to perswade you ) not in authoritie . Yet wee haue principes Apostolorum , Paul and Peter , nothing so common in your owne mens mouthes : yea Cardinal Pole sayes , both their Apostleships grewe into one : Amborum Apostolatus in vnum coaluit : lib. 3. ad Henrie . 8. &c. So as either no monarchie nowe , or of more then one , a thing meerely impossible . § 4. That you quote out of S. Austen concerning Peter , Peter did otherwise then the truth required , yea and in so great a point as was Circumcisiō , also afterward more plainly in the same num . 14. that he erred : would you euer write thus , if you were well in your wits , striuing for Peters primacie , to impute errour to him , and errour in faith , which you know cannot be , without the grand perill of the vniuersall Church ? As S. Gregorie sayes , that all fall , if vnus vniuersalis fall , one in whome are all , as you in your Pope , euen as the moile stumbling , all goes to wracke that the beast caries , and the greater the beast , the fouler the wrack , whether it be gold or siluer , or what other fraight foeuer . And I pray you , what does your primacie serue for , vnles it be ioyned with infallibity ? Yet you forfeit the one here , to winne the other . § 5. I might likewise aske you what manner of primacy you call that , which excuses not the superiour from the iust and lawfull rebuke of his inferiour , but so as if S. Peter should haue refused to follow , and to obey S. Paul , ( they are your owne words , num . 16. ) he should haue done insolently . Call you that a primacy , specially a Popish one , which must be patient of controule , liable to the obedience , euen of his vnderling , if it will avoyd pride ? § 6. And therefore thought the Bishop in his vsuall modesty , say , as you note ( numb . 16. ) videtur mens Cypriano fuisse , it seemes Cyprian was of the minde , it is not for diffidence Sir , but as I told you . Videtur and est is all one with the Philosopher , saies Zimaras in his Table , quoting the Commentor for it , And so the Lawyers . If there be fraud in videtur , it is rather in Bellarmines , De Pontif. Rom. l. 1. c. 9. Indicare videtur Apostolus ad Heb. 8. What ? that the Church triumphant is a patterne of the militant ; where there may be videtur , but no est certenly , because there is no such thing in the Apostles text . You might rather haue thought of that , Luke , 22. 24. Quis videretur esse maior , where if videretur be not better construed , your primacy is but a 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , a very fancie . § 7. I am ashamed of thus digressing : but your dealing forces me , I cannot forbeare ; yet with this I will end concerning Cyprian . To your 17. numb . whereas the Bishop saies , Fundamentum , sed non vnicum , what more confonant to Scripture ? not Apoc. 24. as you quote it , but 21. v. 14. where there are 12. specified . But againe , whereas he saies , There is caput vnicum , and therefore non sequitur à fundamento ad caput ; what more agreeable to sense ? For , as for that you adde 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , and with a mouth speaking bigge , which Anna forbids , 1. Sam. 2. 3. that as the 12. to Christ , so the eleuen to Peter , were enterchangeably subordinate , you should shew this written humano stylo , either in Scripture , or in Father , that we might runne and read it . But though you sweat your heart out , it growes not there . Yet you seeme to your selfe wise , when you shew the Bishop as well many heads vpon one body , as many foundations of one building . Videlicet , say you , the states of Venice , so many states , so many heads of that commonwealth . Which first is harsh in Aristocraty , to make euery gouernour a seuerall head ( more then the Amphisbaena hath ) the whole company rather , and many men if you will , but one head . Yet this fonder , that the Bishop arguing from a materiall house , not a metaphoricall , and from a naturall bodie not a proportionall , to demonstrate what is meet to bee expected in the mysticall , you shew him a politicall , which is nothing to his demand . § 8. NExt of S. Hierome . And why might not the Bishop taxe the Cardinall , for suppressing S. Hieromes words , as well as before S. Cyprians ? As well ( say you ) the one as the other , that is iust neither , or neither iustly . But of Cyprian we haue seene , see we now of Hierome . Inter duodecim vnus eligitur , vt capite constituto , schismatis tolleretur occasio . Amongst twelue , one is chosen , that a Head beeing appointed , occasion of schisme might be taken away . lib. 1. in Iovin . But in the same booke ( saies the Bishop ) Hierome thus , which the Cardinall would take no notice of . But thou wilt say , that the Church is built vpon Peter . ( What then ? ) though the same in another place be done vpon all , [ that is , the Church is said to be built vpon all the Apostles , ] and all to receiue the Keyes of the kingdome of heauen , and the strength of the Church to be equally grounded vpon them all . Yet indeede one is chosen among the twelue , that a Head beeing appointed , occasion of schisme might be cut off . Is this no cooling card to the other authoritie ? For you that tell vs of dice , I may doe well to speake to you in a sutable metaphore , and not abhorring from your trade . As the Philosophers say , the braine in a mans bodie , tempers the heat of the heart beneath ; so doe not the words precedent allay the force of these latter , which yet the Cardinall onely set before vs ? For the threefold equalitie , which S. Hierome before ascribed to all the Apostles , one of their equall interest in the foundation , another in the keyes of the kingdome of heauen , and the third , which is reiterated for deeper impression , of bearing the whole strength , or stresse of the Church , leaues onely now this sense of caput , that Peter was chosen to haue such a kind of Headship , that is , of prioritie among the twelue , as should not derogate from paritie , and yet exclude schisme or garboyle , or confusion . Which is the primacie of order that we haue often told you of , and you would faine diuert to a primacie of Maiestie . I could not answer your fallacie in a directer fashion , yet I know you haue replies , as that caput in the last place , addes great force , to , super quem fundata est , in the first . Which we remit to the iudgement of the indifferent Reader , whether so many equalities yeelded to the Apostles , in the words afore , doe not rather force vs , to construe caput as hath beene sayd , not derogating from the equality of their power in the keyes , nor from bearing the groundworke of the Church ioyntly : that is , as you construe it , from beeing gouernours thereof . Besides that Caput is onely a borrowed word , and signifies primum , or the first in that kinde , ( which we grant to Peter with all readines ) and lastly tempered with such a modest clause , to keepe out schisme or disorder onely . § 9. You say , there is more daunger of schisme nowe , then among the twelue . For they were confirmed by speciall grace , we not so . And therefore they were not so likely to runne into schisme , for which they should haue a head . As though Paul and Barnabas were not running into a schisme , a paroxysme at least , that is the first grudging of the other ague ; as though when Peter confirmed his brethren , & tu confirma , Luk. 22. 32. they had the lesse vse of him , as their head , against a schisme . And though the will of God be to confirme some here , yet not without meanes , neither at first to rectifie them , nor afterward to continue them in their good course , to the ende . Of which meanes this might be one , of which S. Hierome speakes . Was any man more confirmed then S. Paul ? rapt into the third heauen , &c. yet he struggles with his nature , least preaching to others , he should be a reprobate himselfe . So here . Besides that this schisme , which our Sauiour preuented , by appointing an Head , as S. Hierome saies , might be schisma populorum , not Apostolorum , and therefore he saies , vt occasio schismat is tolleretur ; that the Christian people seeing who was eminent in the Colledge of the Apostles , might not euery one rashly set vp their principall , and so fall into schisme . § 10. But at least we neede a Head now a daies , as much as they . As if we haue not our Head in our manifold regiments , Dedit quosdam pastores , Eph. 4. & , Obedite praepositis . Hebr. 13. & , Terribilis sicut castrorum acies ordinata , and so forth . Is there no Head but of an vniuersall Bishop ? yea , theirs was of order onely , and to shun confusion , ours of power , and commands subiection . Besides Kings and Princes , which God hath giuen to our times , as to feede his Church , and to giue them milke ( which very milke is Discipline , ) so to bring home wanderers from the high waies and the hedges , to the feast of the great King ; that 's to suppresse schismes , as S. Austen often , but namely contra Gaudent . l. 1. c. 25. § 11. For where you tell vs that Princes may cause these schismes themselues , and so contemning spirituall censure and proceedings , must either be hampered with another coerciue power , extending to bodies , and to estates , or els all runne to nothing , and the Church be cleane extinguished , you bewray your spirit sufficiently , and a man may read your drifts in your forehead , which at another time you would so faine couer and smooth ouer ; Sermo tuus indicat te , may be our speech to the Pseudo-Peter , as was once to the true . Doe you thinke then , that S. Hierome would giue this leaue to Priests , or the Prince of Priests , as you would haue him , to bind Kings in materiall chaynes , and to load their Senators with such iron fetters , as no metaphore hath mollified , & to vse such other violence as commonly goes herewith ? Though of you I lesse wonder , if you giue them iron in their chaynes , to whome you haue giuen it in their crownes , as Clement to Charles , if Platina say true , in Clem. 7. But to S. Hierome . How then does he construe these words of Dauid , Against thee onely haue I sinned , to haue been spoken in that sense , because Dauid was a King , and not to be proceeded against by any temporall punishment , or coactiue hand , of a mortall man ? How does he say in his Epistle to Heliodore , de obitu Nepotiani , that a King rules men against their wills , a Bishop no farther then they will themselues ? They subdue by feare , these are giuen vs for seruice ; and many the like . How does Basil vpon the 37. Psalme , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , ( and he knew his power as he bore his name , ) A King is subiect to no iudge ? How does Chrysostome professe so often , that he can goe no further then words , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ? Shepheard though he be , yet he may not fling a stone at a wolfe , but rate him onely , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , &c. Again in his 2. de Sacerd. c. 2. & 3. at large ; againe in the Homil. which is not extant in Greeke , but in Latin onely , Cum ageretur de expulsione S. Iohannis ; Statis omnes non ferro sed fide deuincti . Tom. 5. And in Act. Apost . hom . 3. in Morali , the people to the Minister are not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , [ not subiect to him , or in his hands , but hauing their obedience free in their owne power . ] Againe in the same place , within a fewe lines , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . [ Magistrates rule by feare , so doe not these , viz. the Ministers . ] And yet more frankly , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . [ There things are caried by order , and by appointment : here , no such thing , neither may wee commaund any thing as by authoritie . ] Againe , Comment . in ad Hebr. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . The Minister is a teacher ( quoth he ) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . And 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , &c. The same at large , Homil. 11. in 4. ad Ephes . in Ethico . 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . A Minister and a Counseller leaue euery man to himselfe , they enforce nothing . What more can be said for vs ? See Orat. 5. in Oziam , toward the latter ende . He saies the course that God takes with Kings , if they offend , is not to deliuer them ouer to any man to chastize , but , Adduc ad me , as the father bid thē carrie the child to his mother , and our Sauiour the Apostles to bring the partie to him whome they could not cure . Let me alone with him , I shal deale with him . Orat. 1. in Babylam , he commends him more for moderating his hand , after he had once put the tyrant backe , and that he fell not to flat striking ( which is not lawfull for a Priest ) then for debarring him entrance into the Church at first . For , the one , euery bodie would haue done , that is , execute his anger , beeing enraged , but onely Babylas , or one like him , keepe a meane in performing his office after prouocation . And because we spake of chaines a little before , it may be for this cause , Babylas desired to be buried with his chaines , as S. Chrysostome relates , in one of his Orations vpon him , and againe , Hom. 9. in 4. ad Ephes . to shew what he endured , not what he administred ; and so likewise of the sword that was buried with him , after it had struck off his head . S. Hilarie giues the reason , why Rachel ( that is , the Church ) would not be comforted for her children , whome Herod had butchered , ( that is , the persecutor martyred ) Consolatio enim rei amissae praestanda est , non auctae : [ For we comfort loosers , not gainers . ] Now the Church gaines by patience in persecution . Therefore shee looses by resistance , and opposition . Of which thing S. Cyprian also , in application to the Church , and how shee may not resist , nor wreake her wrongs , lib. de bono patient . at large . Et quoniam plurimos scio , vel pondere iniuriarum , vel dolore , vindicare velociter cupere &c. nec illud reticondum est quod dicit Dominus , Soph. 3. Expecta me , quoniam iudicium meum est , vt excipiam Reges ; Onely God is to deale with Kings . And soone after , Hunc expectemus iudicem & vindicem nostrum , omnium iustorum numerum ab initio mundi secum pariter vindicaturum . And lastly , Qui ad vindictam suam nimium festinat , & properat , consideret , quia needum vindicatus est ipse qui vindicat . And in his booke contra Dometrianum , he alludes to Virgils verse , ●●f●l●● lolium & steriles DOMINANTVR ave●● : Implying , that wicked and profane men may obtaine domination ouer the Church in this world ( though the Iesuite cannot abide to heare it , ) and yet still remaine but infoelix lolium , in all their iollitie and worldly ruffe . Theodoret . quaest . 6. in Numer . 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . By purple the Kingly office is declared , & with that goeth punishing , or coertion . Of what then is the Hyacinth a resemblance , which was another couering of the holy vessels ? belike of heauen . 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , saith Theodoret. And in heauen there is no punishment . The Minister , as a heauenly Magistrate , not an earthly Soueraigne , he afflicteth none . Gregorie Nazianzene in his 2. Steliteut . against Iulian , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . Doe you see what a course he prescribes for reformatiō ? Not by violence , as you dispute , to represse tyrants ; by musike , not by blowes ; by perswasion not cōpulsion , &c. And a little after , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ; To which he opposes onely , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , by word and by praier . You may remember Ambrose , Pugnare non debeo , I may not fight : & Arma nostra lachrymae , our weapons are teares ; and , Multi Iobi , many Iobs for one , that is , many patient Christians . And , lib. 3. de officijs cap. 9. Nulli noceat sacerdos , ne lacessitus quidem , & iniuriâ offensus : A Priest must hurt no man , ( viz. forcibly and violently ) though prouoked and wronged . Whereas you thinke you may doe any thing for bonum spirituale , and in ordine ad ecclesiam , to preserue that . Primasius in 2. ad Rom. Lex Christi iam non minatur gladium peccantibus , sed promittit praemium liberè seruientibus : that is , The law of Christ now threatneth no sword to offenders , but promises reward to them which truely serue him . Which you must construe in such a sense , as not to bring in Anabaptisme , nor destroy all Magistracie , but to curbe your Priests , in comparison of the Priests of the old lawe , from attempting violence , because Primasius speakes vpon those words , Litera occidit ( that is , They ) but spiritus vinificat , ( which you would fain be accounted , calling your selues to that end the spirituall men . ) See the same Primasius againe , against Ministers coactions , in 2. Cor. 1. Non quia ideò credidistis vt vobis dominemur , sicut in lege sacerdotes , &c. And , Non quòd metu cogamini , not that you are cōstrained , not so much as with feare , much lesse by force . Yet with you it is apparent , that folks beleeue in Christ , that you may censure thē the more freely , euen Kings and all , ouer whom beeing infidels , you had no such confessed power . Qui laesi non essent nisi CREDIDISSENT , as he saith . And therefore see how you will answer Primasius . Tertullian in Apologet. giues no leaue to redresse inconueniences with force , no not with the death of a man , much lesse with the perill of a Soueraigne Prince or State. Christianus etiam damnatus gratias agit . And , Christianus nec inimicum suum laedit . And , Paratus est ad omne supplicium ipse habitus oris Christiani . Hoc agite boni Praesides , extorquete animam Deo supplicem pro Imperatore . And againe in the same booke , Hippias , dum ciuitati insidias disponit , occiditur . Hoc pro suis omni atrocitate dissipatis nemo vnquam Christianus tentauit . Yet nimius & copiosus noster populus , saith S. Cyprian , speaking to the same purpose ; contra Demetrianum , whom you may do well to read . And to make short , see Eusebius Emesenus , sermon . in dominic . 4. Aduentûs , vpon Ioh. 1. Ego vox clamantis , ( that is a ministers calling ) not manus percutientis . If he write vpon the wall a sentence against Baltazar by Gods direction , that is all . Adde Concil . Tolet. 4. c. 31. where , whome the Minister cannot amend , he deliuers ouer to the King and his iustice , to bee accordingly censured , but who shall censure the King himselfe ? Neither may I omit Origen , both in 13. ad Rom. and Tract . 12. in Euang. Matth. vpon those words of our Sauiour , Matth. 20. Reges gentium , &c. Sicut omnia carnalia in necessitate sunt posita , non in voluntate ; spiritualia autem in voluntate , non in necessitate , sic & Principes spirituales . Principatus corū in dilectione subditorum debet esse positus , non in timore corporali . Which last authoritie is cited by Bellarmine , lib. 4. c. 21. de Pontif. Rom. you may wonder how he can digest it . In English thus . [ For as all carnall matters are subiect to force , not to free liking , and all spirituall matters to free liking , not to force ; so are also spiritual superiours . Their cheifdom or princehood ought to stand in the loue of such as are vnder thē , not in their bodily feare , &c. ] Which bodily feare , the Pope is wholly for driuing his subiects into , and without that he is nothing . But thus farre the Fathers , because I spare the rest . § 12. The Scriptures also banish vs from like forcible dealing , in more thē one place , if we had leisure to produce them . The minister must be no striker . The seruant of the Lord must be patient and long suffering , expecting men till God giue thē a mind to returne home . We wrastle not with flesh & blood , that is , with materiall enemies . No maruell then if the weapons of our warfare be not carnall , nor materiall , but spirituall . Armastulti pastoris sunt gladius & baculus . Our commission is in our tongue . 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , that is , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , that I may explaine that by the way . We beare no rule ouer your faith , that is ouer you the faithfull people of God ( like vestra Sanctitas ) limiting his power , and preseruing his reuerence to the Christian people , both in one . Lastly , we beseech you in Christs stead , be reconciled vnto God. Yet with you if there be no coaction , all is marred . § 13. You say [ that Bishops in their Courts mulct the purse , and sometime imprison the bodies &c. ] Though I thinke you are scarce perfect in this part of your lesson ( for I haue heard otherwise of a very sufficient Doctor ) yet suppose it were so ; This leaue comes of the King , strengthning the arme of spirituall censure by that meanes , least the prophane and wanton of the world should contemne it . Originally there is no such power in a Bishop . Will you then retort vpon the King with his owne license , or vnnaturally gall him with his owne quils ? Is not this the way rather to spoile all , and to disarme the Church of the royall protection ? § 14. You say [ that he which hath command of the soule , hath also of the bodie . And therefore the spirituall power which is acknowledged to be in the Minister , drawes the temporall with it as a consequent . ] Truely I graunt , that he which can commaund the soule out of an absolute power , it is likely the body is also subiect to him . But neither the ministers power commaunds the soule , by any forcible impression , ( for as we cannot make one haire white or blacke , so no more can we make one soule merrie or sad , further then as God shall cooperate with our endeauours ) and the perswasions that we vse , they are directed no lesse to the sauing of the bodie , then to the gaining of the soule . Both the Magistrate and the Minister , deale both with the soule and the bodie . But the Magistrate violently applies himselfe to the bodie , to reclaime the soule , if neede be ; and the Minister perswasiuely carries himselfe to the soule , to the ende the bodie may be made pliant to righteousnesse , Rom. 6. The proceeding , not the subiect , then , is that which makes the difference betweene the two powers ; and howsoeuer your Casuists say , a lame-handed man cannot regularly be made a Minister , yet that is for Pashurs turning Magor-mishabibs , Ier. 20. the kingdome that we send to , as it is not built with hands , so it requires no violence to conuey thither . § 15. If in the nonage of the Church , the Apostles were endued with power of punishing men corporally , to the ende the Gospel should not be trampled vnderfoote , by vnreuenged scornes , yet now the Magistrate supplies that place , beeing himselfe turned Christian , and suppose that should faile , and all things revolue to barbarous Heathenisme , as in former time , ( which God forbid ) yet we are to thinke , that the like extraordinarie prouidence would still attend the Church ; but howsoeuer it were , no priuate man might be too forward , and much lesse a Minister , which seemed then so inconuenient , that the opposers were deliuered to the deuill to be tormented , in defect of Magistrates , rather then the Iesuiticall mutinies , which F. T. here pleads for , should take place . § 16. THe substance of your Discourse beeing thus disprooued , it were no hard matter to gather vp the spoyles , and note certaine scapes of smaller importance . In translating the Bishops words , numb . 22. Quod toties iam nobis seriò inculcat Cardinalis , you handle it thus : Which the Cardinall doth now so often and earnestly inculcate vnto vs. What thinke you of inculcate first ? you that muster the tearmes of the Bishop of Lincolnes booke ( for so hares may plucke dead lyons by the beard ) though nothing so vncouth as your Rhemish Testament hath , Praepuce , Sindon , to Euangelize , the orient , &c. But to omit that , Does the Bishop meane , that Bellarmine pleades earnestly in the case , or rather maruell , that hee is in earnest at all , the argument beeing trifling , and not worth the naming ? yet thus you say , [ so often and earnestly , ] as if SO might augment his earnestnes too . Did you vnderstand the booke that you tooke in hand to confute ? And as this is your eloquence , so view your conscience . numb . 27. you say , the Bishops haue their proper talent of calumniating Bellarmine . Againe calumniate as good a word as inculcate before . And if common to both , how proper to either ? yet you say both haue their proper talent . Be like not quarto modo . But , Sir , who taught you to call vices talents ? Is this your reuerence that you beare to Scripture ? or doe you so confound God with the deuill ? What remaines but you call grace chaffe , and vertue cockle , and the rest as your vngodly Rhetorique shall inspire you ? But well doe you fulfill the measures of your fathers , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , and the thunder bolts walke not , as Nazianzen saies of them that abused S. Basil . So Campian in the tower ieasting at his aduersaries , for the weakenes of their argument , said he could make as good sport about the Incarnation . Another ( I thinke Rastall ) ( or but a letters difference at least ) paints his margent thus , Luthers lying with a Nunne in the Lord. What vengeance remaines for such gracelesse companions ? And are these Diuines , and handlers of Gods cause , foming out such shame , which were intollerable in him that followed the plowtaile ? Yet you haue vp with the Bishop ( and Eudaemon before you , ) for his pleasant veyne forsooth in writing . You may remember your iolly preface to Parsons Discussion , which I touched at before . If you had your will , you would make vs daunce about another maypole without hose or doublet , as you did our forefathers , while your power lasted . Thanks be vnto God , that hath shortned those dayes , abridged your malice . Yet Elias confounded Baals priests with a ieast , and S. Chrysostome commenting vpon the 140. Psal . bids vs make much of the frumpes of the godly ; which is your fault , to haue profited no more by the Bishops kinde reproofes . Yet in all the passages of that Reuerend man , there is no one word contumelious to pietie , or disgracefull to relligion , or preiudiciall to grauity and good manners . Whereas Sir Thomas More , the champion for your Clergie , ( as it were vicarius in spiritualibus , he was such a buckler to the Bishops , as Stapleton saies the common voyce was in those dayes ; ) yet he , I say , vndertaking the Churches cause , wrote a booke so gamesome , and so idly idle , that dissembling his owne name , he was faine to father it vpon Gulielmus Rossaeus ; a title that one of your fellowes hath taken vpon him of late , to shroud his virulences vnder , as he did his vanityes , and lastly the great Philosopher kept a foole at home , as the same Stapleton records , to make him merry no doubt , though his wit was able to prouoke laughter in others , as full often it did . And if More be of no more authority with you , you may looke backe to your owne Cardinall , that dry Child , that sage Sobrino : yet he excuses himselfe in one place of his controuersies ( a worke a man would thinke that did not fit so with mirth ) Ignoscat Lector quòd temridiculè Tilemannum exceperim . Let the Reader pardon me for beeing so merrie , or so pleasant with Tilemanne . This he . Yet because you haue descried such a veine in the Bishop , as you thinke at least , might you not haue answered your selfe , touching that which you obiect to him here about Iouinian , that it sauoured but of Ironie ? For what more fit to be hit in your teeth , who euery where crake to vs of Iouinians heresies , then when you bring that in earnest , to countenance your Poperie , which S. Hierome puts vpon Iouinian , by supposall ? At dices , tu ; Iouiniane scilicet . Though the Bishop doth not challenge him for such an absolute Iouinianist , but onely saies , Probè in to secutus Iouinianum , the Cardinall therein following Iouinian very handsomely . Which words are enough to dissolue your cauill , that the Bishop should lay absolute Iouinianisme to his charge , which , you say , surpasses all impudencie . Such a rustique you are , an arrant clowne , not discerning what is ieast , and what is earnest . Howbeit , it will be hard for you , to prooue Iouinian to haue beene an hereticke , ( Epiphanius and Philastrius doe not recken him among the catalogue ) . and they that may conclude him to haue held a falshood , will finde some a doe to condemne him for an hereticks . Neither . is the meaning of that word by all agreed vpon , neither doe all take it in euery place alike : Yet because this scandall rests vpon Iouinian for the most part , you may be pleased to remember , Sir , out of S. Austen , what other monsters Iouinian fostered , and therein , if you thinke good , compare his doctrine with ours . As , that all sinnes are in like degree heinous , which is the Stoicall paradoxe , no way cleauing to vs , though you slaunder vs so vniustly , for not holding veniall sinnes , which * Roffensis himselfe held not . That fasting and abstinence profits nothing . Can you charge vs with any such impietie ? That the regenerate man cannot sinne after baptisme ; wherein he comes neerer to you then to vs. As for your merits , you may keepe them , the badges of your insolencie , and in you , Sir , of your ignorance , not to know what merit meanes all this while . Yet beware how you magnifie the Virgin against the married , least the Councell of Gangra condemne you , not for an hereticke now , but a cursed hereticke , Can. 20. giuing you 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , if you doe but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , though you condemne not marriage ; if you but swell out of the conceit of your single life . And so Minutius Foelix most diuinely , Inuiolati corporis virginitate fruimur potiùs quàm gloriamur : After that he had said , Vnius matrimonij vinculo libenter inhaeremus . S. Chrysostome goes further , If the perfection of Monkerie it selfe may not stand with marriage , all is spoil'd . See Comm. in ad Hebr. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . in ipso fine . And why should Virginitie then be exalted aboue marriage , if the perfection of the strictest Monks themselues be compatible therewith ? And he closes his discourse , with that diuine 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , as Pindar saies should be taken 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ; ( a iunket alwaies in the ende of a feast ) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 &c. Vse marriage moderately , and thou shalt be the very first in the kingdome of heauen . Indeede therefore all the Saints are lodged in Abrahams bosome , in the married mans bosome , as the same Father cannot denie , lib. de Virg. in extremo . Once the Trinitie in his tent , and now the Saints in his bosome . Yet still the married man , and not the worse for his marriage . As for the rewards of the faithfull , that they are not equall in the heauen that we looke for , and that the sacred Virgin suffered no decay of her maidenly honour , by the stainlesse and immaculate birth of our Sauiour , let Iouinian thinke what he will , ( though S. Hierome neuer imputes this latter to Iouinian , in the 2. books that he wrote against him , ) yet , not onely you , but troupes in the English Church so teach . And , would the time giue leaue , is there not a Montane , and a Tatian , to make you blush , for your abhominable heresies , about meates and marriages , as well as you haue a Iouinian to twitt vs withall ? But because , I now onely assoyle the Bishop from your wicked slaunders , it is well his integritie hath so acquitted him without me , that your selfe dare not speake of him , but with , It may be , and , Except ; such a hooke his fame hath put in your nostrills , who onely in this may be resembled to Iouinian ( to Paphnutius rather ) that in single life , he defends the libertie of other folkes marriages . But hast we to an ende . § 17. To the other places of S. Hierome , as Matth. 16. which in great good will you aduise the Bishop to read ouer forsooth , what saith S. Hierome there ? That our Sauiours dicere is facere , his . saying is doing , therefore calling Peter a rocke , he made him so . But I hope , good Sir , as doing and saying went together in our Lord , so both of them in his owne meaning , not in your mistaking . What is this then to prooue Peters Monarchie , or smaller regencie either , if such could content you ? And if it could , yet it were hard , I say , to boult it out of this place of S. Hierome , where ( no syllable of authoritie or power once appearing , for explanation sake , as reason was , if you meant to speede , ) he saies onely , that Peter for beleeuing in the rocke , our Sauiour bespake him , and yet not properly , but in a metaphore , saying he would build vpon him . § 18. The like ad Marcellam , Epist . 54. vpon whome our Lord built his Church , namely Peter . But can we answer S. Hierome better then by S. Hierome ? The fortitude of the Church , or the puissance of the Church , was equally built , or grounded vpon them all . Super omnes ex aequo . You heard it before out of his 1. lib. against Iouinian . How does this then prooue Peters priuiledge , in the matter of authoritie , though building were graunted to found that way , as it doth not ? And when S. Paul sundrie times , as Coloss . 1. 23. and Eph. 2. 20. speakes of grounding , and building the Church , either vpon faith , as in the first place , or vpon the Prophets and Apostles , as in the second , shall we thinke he was enuious , that said nothing of Peter , and that extraordinarie manner of the Churches building vpon him , that you dreame of ? § 19. Here you tell vs of three waies , by which the Apostles might be saide to be foundations of the Church , in hope that Peter may be so in singular . And quoting Bellarmine for it , not your owne inuention , you counsell the Bishop to learne it of him . Shall wee first see how good it is ? One way , for that they first conuerted nations , perswaded people , and founded Churches , not Peter alone , but ioyntly all of them . In this sense belike they are all foundations . But what is this , to , beeing the foundation of the Catholicke Church , and to lie like a rocke vnder that great building , because they were planters of particular Churches ? Also you argue fallaciously , from the diligence of preaching , to the power of supporting , and that by authoritie , as now the question is . Besides , a founder and a foundation , is not all one . And did none plant Churches , good Sir , but the Apostles ? Shall your Iesuites in Iaponia be foundations too ? And shall we say of them , super quos aedificaeta est Ecclesia dei ? You see the absurditie . Yet you quote proofes , Rom. 15. I haue preached the Gospell where Christ was not named , least I should build vpon another mans foundation . Does this prooue that men are foundations of the Church ? or rather , that the man and the foundation are two ? Againe , 1. Cor. 3. I haue laid the foundation like a wise architect ( so speakes your Vitruvius-ship ) but would you call him a wise Logician , that should argue from hence , that S. Paul meant himselfe to be the foundation ? Yea , though he said not in the same place , Iesus Christ , and no other foundation . § 20. Secondly , you say the Apostles were all foundations , because the Christian doctrine was first imparted to them , and the present faith is groūded vpon that , which was deliuered at the first . And new articles of faith ( you say ) are not alway reuealed . Is not this accurate , trow you , as well for order as for substance ? For had this been a reason , ought it not to haue been set , in all reason , before the other ? Can a thing bee preached , afore it be vnderstood ? or made knowne to others , afore it selfe be knowne ? Your argument therefore from preaching , should by all meanes , I say , haue followed this from reuealing ; and this from reuealing , haue gone before the other . But pardon your order , looke into your substance . Were not some things reuealed to others afore the Apostles ? Did not our Lord first manifest his resurrection to women ? Did not the Angel say to them , Goe and tell Peter ? Will you haue women and all to be the foundations of the Church ? But we are much beholden to you , that you coyne not newe articles of faith euerie day . Articles therefore , and new articles you graunt , and of frequent reuelation , but not euery day . We long for your last kinde of foundation , wherein Peter is so entire . § 21. Thirdly then , you say , in respect of gouernement and authoritie . For Peters was ordinarie , their 's Legatine ; his originall , theirs depending from him . You should shewe what Father sayes so , besides your selues , for of Scripture you despaire . And yet you agree so ill emong your owne selues of this point , that you iumpe not about the very termes . For * Baronius cals Peters power extraordinarie , the other Apostles ordinarie : you make his ordinary , and theirs extraordinary . Is it possible that kingdome should long hold out , which is so at ods ? Yet behold another leake in this obseruation . For though the Apostles had deriued their authoritie from Peter ; yet they might all haue beene foundations of the Church , as well as he , euen in regard of gouernment ; no lesse then some receiuing the doctrine immediatly from Christ , as Peter , Iames , and Iohn , ( witnes Clemens in Eusebius before quoted ) the others from them , yet you make them all , in regard of doctrine , to be foundations alike , num . 25. § 22. Another authoritie of S. Hieromes is out of his Epist . ad Damas . 57. I following no first , or chiefe but Christ , doe communicate with thy blessednes , [ or am linked in fellowship with it , ] that is to say , with the chayre of Peter , vpon that rocke I know the Church is built . You see Hierome followes no first but Christ . Nullum primum . Where is then the primacie that you challenge to Peter , if none of the Apostles be afore another , but Christ ? Indeede Bellarmine saies , he meanes , he preferres none but Christ before Damasus ; which is an vtter peruerting of S. Hieromes words , who , as he saies , he followes no chiefe but Christ , or none prime but Christ , so he shewes after what sort he is affected to Damasus , communione not subiectione , by communion , not by subiection , ( communico tibi ) as to Theophilus , to Cyrill , to Athanasius , to who not ? the auncient orthodoxe professe of themselues in diuers places . But the edge of the place , as it serues your turne , lies in those words , I know the Church is built vpon that rocke . Which rocke is Christ , not so long before mentioned but this may referre to it ; and to build vpon a chayre , is no such cleane pickt metaphore , that we should be forced to take it so , though vpon a rocke be . Besides the scio that he giues it , a word of certentie , makes vs thinke he would neuer be so peremptorie for Peter , sith diuers haue construed the rocke another way , whome S. Hierome would not crosse ouer hastily with his Solo ; and lastly his owne modestie declared a little before , professing to follow none but Christ . Therefore he tooke Peter for no such foundation . § 23. The last , and the least , is out of his first against Iovinian , O vox digna petrâ Christi , â speech worthie the rocke of Christ ! But you may as well build Christ himselfe by this deuise vpon Peter , as the Church of Christ . For as Saunders writes of the rock of the Church , so Hierome calls Peter here , the rocke of Christ . That is , the fortresse , and champion of the Christian faith , as S. Ambrose was called columna Ecclesiae , S. Iames 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , which is the title of the Church of Ephesus , wherein Timothie was to conuerse , rather then of Rome , as the Apostle bestowes it , and the * Archbishop of Ravenna , in one of the Councells , was honoured by the same style . So cleane is petra Christi beside your purpose , either as too little , or too much . § 24. Of S. Chrysostomes testimonie we haue said enough before to your first chapter . Vertex and Princeps is found too light . Magister orbis is not Monarchae orbis . And for all S. Iames his , Be not many masters , in this case many Masters were sent out into the world , whereof Iames was one . Yea Chrysostome himselfe , as a Theodorus entitles him . Nothing cleerer with Chrysostome in the place you quote , then that all the Apostles had the charge of the whole world , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . You will tell vs , I know , of Peters ordinarie power . But in all antiquitie we finde no such difference . And yet another testimonie of Chrysostome we haue cited to you els-where , out of his Comment . vpon the Acts , affirming that Peter did nothing , by way of authoritie , in ordering Church-businesse . What can be plainer ? § 25. As for Iames his beeing onely Bishop of Hierusalem , as if that might disparage him in comparison of Peter , it was not because his power was narrower then Peters , ( for our Sauiour confined not Iames to Hierusalem , but priuate election ) but to shew that S. Iames abode there , as thinking his paines best employed in that place , Peter in the meane while trauelling farther into the world . In the 3. of ler. 17. v. one would thinke Hierusalem the higher seat thē Rome , besides that it was our Sauiours prouince , as I told you , and so perhaps to be preferred in that respect . So farre is Peter from any excellence aboue Iames. § 26. I might passe by your argument out of the 44. Psalme , In stead of fathers thou shalt haue children , whome thou maist make Princes in all lands . Suppose first , that this were Monarchicall princehood , or a princehood of power , of maiestie , and of authoritie , which is nothing lesse : for Ite praedicate carries no such commission . Yet then they were sent into all the world , then they were made Princes in all lands . But whatsoeuer it be , what is this to Peter ? Is it not common to all , does it not extend to all ? And not onely Peter is not designed to be he , but no one Prince magnified before another , though we should graunt the singularitie to be his , if anies . And shall all the Apostles now haue their successors ? shall all their authorities be conueied to after-commers ? I had thought Peters onely had beene permanent . Yet here , of all , Pro patribus tuis nascentur filij ; euery Apostle hath his sonne , his successor , and euery ones sonne is made a Prince throughout all the world . You will say perhaps it makes for temporall power in the Episcopall calling , though not for Peters successors in speciall . But to omit , that Princehood here is regnare verbo , and regnare praconio , in which sense Virgil saies , a diligent husbandman — imperat aruis , as a King at his worke , and in his calling , though homely ; You may remember that Chrysostome and Theodoret turne it another way , to the Apostles succeeding the Patriarkes , not to the Bishops succeeding the Apostles . Though he that considers the tenure of the place , and how the holy Ghost speakes to the Church there in the person of her husband the Lord Iesus , will soone resolue it to beare this sense ( vnder correction ) that as young brides that are loath to leaue their parents , yet for loue of their husband , and hope of issue , are content to abandon their owne natiue home , &c. So should shee . Hespere , qui coelo lucet crudelior ignis , Qui natam poscas complexu avellere matris ! Yet this for Christs sake , and for the great reward . Therefore it followes , Then shall the King haue pleasure in thy beautie , and in stead of thy parents thou shalt haue children , euen royall children , whome thou maist make Princes in all lands . Whome we may construe to be the faithfull , and beleeuers in generall , who are Kings & Priests , apoc . 1. a royall priesthood , ( S. Peter himselfe calling them so ) not the Apostles onely , or their proper heires , the Ministers . And to recall you to a place , Sir , of your owne citing before , Esa . 32. Princeps digna Principe eogitabit , a Prince will deuise of things worthie of a Prince . Their princehood then beeing thus , as I haue described , you must looke they should content themselues therewith , not moyle with temporall matters impertinent . Whereunto euen that perswades which you touch vpon soone after , in the same number , viz. 43. that Dauid faies of them in the 19. Psalme , Sonus eorum , their sound is gone out into all worlds , and their words ( as you read it ) into the boundes of the earth . For by them they rule , by words and by sound , not by forcible engines . Whereas happily if the Pope should domineer no farther then his voice were heard , or his sound went out , preaching especially , not onely a bulls hide might measure out his territories , as they say of Carthage , but ere a taper were cleane burnt out , wee might get forth of his cōfines , with greater ease , I suppose , then Pius quintus his nephew did , when his Vnkle once discharged him , in such a sort , vpon displeasure . § 27. Nought remaines that I know of , to be cleared in this Chapter , but your doubtie collection vpon the Bishops words : If the twelue had a head to preuent schisme , as S. Hierome saies , or if a head may be appointed ouer a competent number , that he can conueniently prouide for , and the same endued with a power proportionable , as the Bishop graunts ; much more had we neede of one , after the Church is so multiplied &c. to exclude the disorders which are likelier to arise betweene many then few . To which I answer : That we are not so destitute of a Head , as F. T. imagines , nay of many subordinations of heads and gouernours , not without reference to a Principall , though we intertaine no Pope . The Deacons to the Priests , the Priests to the Bishop , the Bishop must be subiect to Christ , saies Ignatius , euen as he is to his father , and Pope he knowes none . Dionysius also will shew you how the Church is raunged , in his Epistle ad Demophilum , where he makes the scala thus : from 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , from 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , and so 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , and the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , as they call it , or the last pitch , is in 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , the coordinate faithfull , not one but many . So the prime in Christendome ( for we denie not a prime ) with his Synode of Bishops , as the Councells both of Basil and Constance would haue it , though the Iesuites repugne , may serue for that vse in the Church of God ( not to call for Constantine . ) which Peter emong the twelue . Though Peter was the apter to be trusted with that place ( principium actionis onely , and the giuer of the onset ) because a man 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , and so likewise the whole Colledge which he ouersaw , neither that seditious , nor he tyrānous . But the Popes authoritie being extrauagant in it selfe , and no way lawfull , his tyrannie is not abated by the encrease of the Church , or multitude of people , as the Adioyndrer disputes out of his hidden Politiques , but the more he curbes with it , the more cruelly he vsurps . And indeede whereas the Bishop made two exceptions against the argument from Peter , one from the number of the people to be gouerned , the other from the nature of the authoritie to be exercised , he onely smothers the one with the other , ( saying , Tyrannies are sooner practised vpon smaller states , ) but answers neither . § 28. One thing more , and so an ende . Whereas our Aduersarie would bind the first place to Rome , by vertue , as he saies , of succeeding Peter , the chiefe of the Apostles , num . 38. to omit of Peters non comparuit at Rome , of which before , & sure the Scriptures take no knowledge of his arriuing there , whereas S. Paul ( saies * Chrysostome ) entred Rome like a King , or a Generall after sea-fight , quasi Rex post naualem pugnam at que victoriam , in regalissimam aulam istam ascendit ; nay , as he speakes in another place , the very a fame of Pauls comming to Rome , composed matters , and put the citie in order . The like whereof Tullie rhetoricates of Pompey , and Plutarke reports as a truth of Philopoemen , that the opinion of his drawing neere , caused the enemies to raise their siege : ( to omit this , ) b Nazianzō wil tell him , that no promise of grace goes currant with succession simply considered , and we are so farre from acknowledging the Prouidence , which he speakes of , in preseruing that Sea , that , to say nothing what wee haue groped with our owne experience , cōcerning the Apostasie , not onely Sedulius an auncient writer obserues vpon those words , Rom. 1. Obedientia vestra divulgata est pertotum mundum , that the Romanes obedience was divulged throughout the world , divulgata magis quàm laudata , rather divulged then praised , but the Apostle himselfe is thought to point at as much , both Rom. 11. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , els thou shalt be cut off , euen thou for all thy priuiledge , and Rom. 12. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , that is , to the Bishop and all of that Sea , from time to time , viz. not to arrogate too much vnto himselfe , not to be wise in his owne conceit , as if he were that infallible one , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . To his fourth Chapter . Basil , Nazianzen , Chrysostome , Austen , their authorities ; The BISHOPS Answer stands good against his friuolous exceptions . And of the eight Popes , who liuing in S. Austens time , exercised ( as the Adioynder dreames ) an Vniuersall and supreame authoritie . § 1. NExt are Basil , Nazianzen , Chrysostome , and Austen . To the place of S. Basil , De iudicio Dei , Ille beatus qui caeteris praelatus discipulis fuit , cui claues regni coelestis commissae ; . i. that blessed man ( Peter ) who was preferred before the rest of the Disciples , to whome the keyes of the heauenly kingdome were committed , &c. he saies the Bishop hath answered nothing to any purpose . num . 5. in the ende . These are the crakes of this insolent patch ; the very impatience whereof , were able to diuert any man from his busines . But how does he take away the Bishops answer , who yeilds him euen more then S. Basil saies in fauour of Peter , and yet still forsooth no Monarch , to returne his owne words , scoffing though he vse them , not ashamed now in plaine tearmes to plead for the Monarchie of spirituall men . I know Bishopricks haue beene called so , as by Hilarie , Pope , in his Epistle ad Leontium , but neuer in this sense . And so Paschasinus ( emong Leo's Epistles it is ) finds a Corona in his great Patron , to wish honour and good successe to . But these are baubles . To the point in hand then . If the argument stand in BLESSED , that Peter was a Monarch , because called blessed , either by our Sauiour , or S. Basil , to omit how many others haue beene called blessed , both men and women , in holy Scripture , ( they recken some seauen in all , I trow , of the feminine kinde ) to whome no Monarchie was decreed ; Et nos cum Petro beati , saies Epiphanius , and we are blessed with Peter , if we hold fast his confession . Nay , they say when Bellarmines vncle came to the Popedome , the times were so bad , that it was thought a man could not be Pope and saued , that is , Pope and blessed . Therefore what doth this argument from beatus on Gods name ? But to omit this I say , the Bishop scanning S. Basils words , finds Basil the best opener of his owne meaning , both concerning the blessednes of Peter , and his beeing preferred before the rest , which is the firmer hold of the two , for you to trust to , if you be wise . For immediatly thus it followes in S. Basil , after 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , preferred before all , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , that is , who onely was witnessed of more then others , and was pronounced blessed before others . Does not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 now , limit 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , as the Bishop had said ? Does not the honour that he receiued , to be witnessed of by Christ , as a little before he had witnessed of Christ , and our Sauiours pronouncing him blessed in plaine termes , ( which imports no iurisdiction , whatsoeuer you fancie ) limit his preferment in S. Basils style ? And though no such thing were in S. Basil , yet how many waies are there of preferment , besides making Monarch , or installing one supreame Prince of the world ? Your selfe , Sir , can tell vs soone after very sawcily , num . 10. of this Chapt. that the King can shewe fauour to some one subiect , and yet not make him Primate of the prouince . So might Peter be preferred , and yet not made a Soueraigne prince , much more . Though the more I consider it , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is lesse then our PREFERRED in English . For he meanes , hee preferred him in voice & verdict , not in real exaltation , as they commonly take it . And that is it which the Bishop answered out of S. Basils owne words : preferred , but how , quoth he ? 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , &c. Let vs looke into the third title of Peters style , as it runnes in S. Basil , Cui claues , &c. to whome the keyes of the heauenly Kingdome were committed . But do you see how ? Not onely the kingdome is described here , to be heauenly , not earthly , which Peter receiued the keyes of , ( what is this then , I wonder , to temporall Monarchies , which the very place so counterbuffes , and yet they would faine establish , and establish from hence ? ) but how does it make for Peters soueraigntie , since as the Bishop hath most pregnantly answered before , he receiued the keies indeed as Basil sayes , but whether for himselfe , or for the Church , Basil shewes not , Austen does . You say , you haue refuted this , and I thinke we haue answered you . Cum caeteris communicandas claues accepit , sayes Optatus himselfe . Will you haue so many Monarchs , as receiued the keyes , that are afraid of two a little after ? § 2. Your impudent putting of a Monarchie vpon the Pope , by your queint definition , as you think at least , holds no water , and much lesse fire . A Monarch is he ( say you ) that gouernes for the common good , not for his owne . Let vs beleeue the Pope to be that single-hearted Charitie , quaerens non quae sua sunt sed aliorum ( aliorum indeede too often , for the deuill himselfe giues ouer seeking his owne , if S. Bernard say true ) is this all that is required to make a Monarch ? Is there no difference betweene gouernment and gouernement ? Let Gelasius tell you , de vinculo Anathematis , to say nothing of Chrysost . a little before quoted , or hath not our Sauiour himselfe , a Vos autem non sic , to spoile your definition , and to marre his Monarchie ? § 3. I might tell you of S. Basil in this very worke , what respect God hath planted in vs to Kings , by the hand of nature , which respect you would so wickedly purloyne from them , and carrie cleane away to the Popes , by peruerting the Fathers words about S. Peter . I haue scene a swarme of bees , saies he , &c. But when he shewes what is answerable in the Church of God , to that which a King is in humane societies , he dreames not of a Pope to supplie the analogie , but of the word of God ; that is our King ( saies he ) and the fall from that makes way to Antichrist : iust as S. Paul saies of the dissolution of the Empire , Donec tollatur è medio 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . That you may see by what meanes the Popedome thriueth , b namely by the fall of Princes , and what thriues with the Popedome , namely Antichrist , and the extinguishing of Gods word , which is our King , saies S. Basil . But I come to Nazianzene . § 4. And though I affect breuitie , yet Nazianzenes place I will set downe somewhat more fully , the rather because our man saies , the Bishop thought some words as sore as a bile , and therefore set them downe in his margent indeede , but durst not touch them in his text ; those sore words . As if any would doe the one , I meane print them in the margent , that was afraid of the other , that is to speake to them in the text . For why might he not better haue left them cleane out ? But heare we Nazianzene , & those words at length . See if any thing could be brought to check them more . De moderat . in disput . seruandâ , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , &c. Seest thou of the Disciples of Christ , all high and worthy to be chosen , one is called a rocke , and hath the foundations of the Church entrusted to him , another is more loued , and leanes vpon the breast of Iesus , and the rest brooke this praelation , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . So that , whereas afore he argued out of S. Basil from praelatus est , we haue now prelation first of more then one . But proceed . When they must goe vp to the mountaine , that he might glister in his shape , and shew his godhead , and discouer him that lay hid in the flesh , who go vp with him ? For all are not beholders of the miracle . Peter , and Iames , and Iohn , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , which both were , and were reputed to be afore the others . Afore we had two 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , preferred ; nowe we haue three , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , that were , and were reckoned to be afore the rest . But who were with him in his agonie , and a little before his death , when he went aside and prayed ? the same againe . 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . This is the order that our Sauiour tooke in preferring . It followes . The rest of their comlinesse , and orderlinesse , how great ? Peter asks this question , Philip that , Iudas that , Thomas that , another that , and neither all the same , nor one man all , but euery man particularly , and one by one ; and as you would say , euery one thereafter as he needed . But of that what thinke you ? Philip would say a thing , and dares not alone , but takes Andrew to him . Peter hath a question to aske , and sets on Iohn by a nodde . Where is surlinesse here ? where is ambition ? How could they more shew themselues the disciples of Christ , that meeke and humble hearted one for vs , a seruant for vs his seruants , and who in all things returned all the glorie to his Father , that he might shew vs an example of orderlinesse and modestie , which we are so farre from obseruing , that I would think it were well with vs , if we were not bold-hardier then all besides , &c. Now let F. T. plead for primacie from hence , and the pride that our Sauiour suppressed in his disciples so long agoe . You see , that if our Sauiour preferred one , he preferred more , and the name of preferment , serues them all alike , no better of Peter , no worse of Iames , of Iohn , &c. So true it is , that the Bishop answered , of many monarchs , to bee pickt from hence , if any at all . But what say we to the words , as sore as a bile , That Peter had sibi credita Ecclesiae fundamenta , the foundations of the Church entrusted to him ? Neither does this prooue monarchy , nor supreame magistracie . It is nothing but an exegesis of what went before , that Peter was a rock & not a rocke for nothing , but to build vpon , and to carry ( as the rest doc , Apoc. 21. for I must not leaue vrging him with the Bishops answer , though I see it anger him ) the foundations of the Church , though to him , more particularly confessing Christ , it was said also more particularly . But if this was the reward of his constant profession , as no man doubts , and the text most clearely shewes , to bee tearmed rocke , and withall hee confest in the name of the rest , as Bellarmine graunts , and the Fathers affirme , who sees not that this title must belong to the rest , to be rocks all , as well as he ? and therefore the Bishops answer remaines most sound , that he is a rocke indeede , and beares the foundations , but with others . And so his instance vanishes , that a King may beare one more fauour then another , though he make him not so great an officer or prelate . For , as we graunt , the preheminence that Nazian . speakes , to haue beene yeelded S. Iohn , to leane vpon Christs brest , did come from greater loue then to Peter ; so we denie , that Peters was a prerogatiue of iurisdiction , though it was the honouring of him in an other meet kind , answerable to the confession , wherein he out-stript his fellowes . For as he spake first , so the tearmes of honour first lighted vpon him , no authoritie , Sir. And to bee graced with those tearmes directed to him , was the particular preheminence that Nazianzene speakes of , answerable to S. Iohns leaning vpon Christs bosome in particular . Though it is true , that Iohn also signified for others , as wee shewed before out of S. Austen , as well as in Peter the others were included , that allowed his confession . And truely if it be good arguing from the prerogatiues of Peter and Iohn in Nazianzene , the one to be called a rocke , another to leane vpon our Sauiours bosome , I see not but Iohn excelled Peter herein . For his honour was reall , Peters verball ( hitherto ) though I knowe that Christ makes all good in the ende which he promises . Peters doubtfull , and subiect to expositions ; Iohns cleare , euident , and ocular . Peter , you say , was the first stone in the foundation after Christ , but Iohn wee see , immediately leaned vpon his breast ; which breast , if it be , ( as certenly it is ) the foundation of the Church , is not this a type , who hath the greater interest therein of the twaine ? But your way should haue beene , if you had not been that fumbler , to haue argued thus out of our graunts ; That all the Apostles were the foundations of the Church , and Peter had the foundations committed to his charge , as Nazianzene saies , therefore Peter was made gouernour of the Apostles . As if 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , were any thing but the exegesis of a rocke , as I said , ordained for building , it selfe the foundation , and carrying the foundations as you would say ; 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , an vsuall scheme . Which was the cause that the Bishop medled not with that bile , hauing said enough to it in the word Rocke before . But suppose 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 made a distinct sense , wil you say they were committed to him to bee gouerned ? Does the earth gouerne the heauens and all , because they are in a manner founded vpon it ? What preposterousnesse is this ? or what faith is there in him , that would so falsifie the very word of faithfulnesse it selfe , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 I meane , in his 8. numb . where he deflects it to gouernement , all too vnseasonably ? § 5. As for Chrysostome , which is the next , neuer any thing so ridiculous , as he shewes himselfe there , in defending the Cardinall . Onely the Cardinall owes him so much the more , for doing him seruice , in so desperate a cause . Tantò plus debes , Sexte , quòd erubui . Homil. in Matth. 55. Cuius pastor & caput homo piscator , speaking belike of Peter and the Church ; that is to say , whose Pastor and Head a fisherman is . Though to be a Pastor of the Church , is a small title in S. Peters style . For first , a pastor is a word of reproach , and basenes , if we beleeue S. Basil . Orat. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , and yet transferred to Church-vses , it is nothing singular , but comprehends , whome not ? both Apostles , and others . Dedit quosdam pastores , Eph. 4. He gaue some to be Pastors , and to what ende ? Not onely 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , to keepe them right that are once conuerted to the faith , but also 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , to gaine them that are without , ( Aquinas so distinguishes them vpon the place ) which the Papists would make to be the Popes proper care , to set men on worke to conuert the infidels and vnbeleeuers . But here we see it is common to collegium pastorum , to the many pastors , not to vnus pastor onely , Eccl. 13. or to the master of the assemblies . Euen as Demetrianus of Alex. sent Pantaenus into India , to conuert the Brachmanes , into India Athanasius sent Frumentius , Sozom. l. 2. c. 23. * Meletius sent Stephanus into Germanicia : S. Austen of his owne head writes to the Madaurenses , to conuert them from Paganisme , Epist . 42. Victor Vticensis yields vs another example hereof , lib. 1. de persecut . Vandal . which I will set downe somewhat at large , because I am fallen into this argument . Martinianus ( saith he ) Saturianus , and two more brothers of them , beeing sold by Gensericus that cruell tyrant , tooke Capsur King of Mauritania , keeping his Court in that place of the wildernes , which is called Caprapicti , what by their preaching , what by their liuing , ( and yet but * lay-folke , for so much as appeares by the storie , and moreouer sold for bondslaues , whereas the Iesuites thinke that pietie can finde no worke to doe in captiuitie , but hath her armes and her legges chopt off , as Salomon saies in another matter , onely exercising her selfe in a pleasurable estate ) tali modo ingentem multitudinem gentilium barbarorum Christo Domino lucrauerunt ( so speakes Victor ) vbi anteà nulla fama Christiani nominis erat divulgata : i. gained a great multitude of Gentiles and Barbarians to the Lord Christ , where before the Christian name was not heard by fame . And all this they effected , afore they had helpe from Rome ; afterward they sought , and found there , as reason was . TVNC DEINDE COGITATVR quid fieret &c. So as Rome it selfe did not presently come into their minds for this matter , but that other places might haue affoarded the same aide at neede , and like enough vsually so they did . This Victor . But now , as I was saying , and to returne to the authoritie quoted out of S. Chrysostome : Whatsoeuer become of pastour , which though we finde not where he quotes it in S. Chrys . yet with all our hearts we ascribe to Peter , ( I would he could keepe there ; God appeared to Moses , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , not contending , but keeping sheep , saies S. Basil where before , but the Pope he hath left the one for the other ) yea and ecclesiae pastor , pastour of the Church , of the Catholique Church . ( So Clemens makes all Bishops , Constitut . lib. 6. cap. 14. much more then , an Apostle . ) What saies he to caput , that Peter is head of the Church , which we finde not in the Greeke ? You shall heare his answer , & cum riseritis ineptias hominis , then thinke as you list , for my discourse will soone be at an ende . I answer ( saies he ) that though they be not now in the Greeke copies , which the Bishop hath seene , yet it little importeth , seeing that the Latin translatour found them , as it is most probable in the Greeke copie , which he followed , and S. Chrysost . saies as much in effect , both there , and in other places . Number the absurdities . First , not now . Belike then heretofore they were in . Who tooke them out ? you shall heare his owne guesse , num . 18. Either the Grecians themselues in the time of their schisme from the Romane Church , or perhaps some of our late hereticks , who haue taken vpon them ( TAKEN VPON THEM ) to print the Greeke in these daies . Perhaps , saies he , so doubtfully he speakes , and perhaps neither . But if the Printers of these daies haue pickt them out , why shew ye not some ancienter copies at least ; that haue them ? Not any ( say you ) which the Bishop hath seene . Hath any then , trow , that your selfe hath seene ? or that the Cardinall hath seene , or any other ? If they haue , why doe they not name them , why not produce them ? Not onely none hath them , that the Bishop hath seene , but shew you which of all hath not beene seene by the Bishop , that we may beleeue they are yet extant in some other copies . The rather , because the Cardinall alleadging the same place in his controuersies , de Rom. Pontif. lib. 1. c. 25. cries out by parenthesis , as if he had cause to triumph , Ecce nomen capitis Calvino inauditum , behold the name of Head which Calvin neuer heard of . And the Gentleman by the way , as offended with our mens ambitious forwardnesse forsooth , calls it taking vpon them , to print the Greeke Fathers . * You take too much vpon you , Moses and Aaron , said they of old , or as Dauids brethren , a We know thy pride . For our defence would not be taken , although we should say with Dauid , Was there not a cause ? Belike they should haue tarried till F. T. would haue giuen the onset , the signall to the battell : as no man among the b Persians might shoote the deare , till the King had begun . But how if the man be so modest , that we should haue staied , God knowes how long , to our no small disaduantage , ere he had presumed to venture vpon the worke ? Shall it notwithstanding be called arrogance , or precipitation , in our men , or taking vpon them ? Crasse pudet me tui , ô stultos Cottas &c. I am sorie for Eton Colledge , and my honourable and worthy friend Sr Henrie Savile , that he vsed no more aduise afore his setting forth of Chrysostome , but rashly so precipitated into a worke , not for his mowing , without the Popes leaue . But this complaint comes all too late nowe . And no force . Yet the Latine translatour found them there , as it is most probable ( you say ) in the auncient Greeke copies . Why not you rather foisted them into his translation ? or , what if he were false and partial to your side , as you said euen now , the Grecians were to theirs , and so put them in where he found them not ? Shall we not therefore be iudged by the authenticall Greeke copies ? And yet , alas , poore Grecians , well may I pitie them ; vpon whome ( as gardeners set rue by roses , for these to purge all their venomous qualities vpon the other , to whome such noysomnes is but naturall ; so now ) as if they serued for nothing else , other mens faults and scapes must be deriued . And shall that be called Chrysostome , in the trying of the question betweene the King and the Cardinall , which is no where to be seene now but in the Translatour of Chrysostome ? But the last excells . Though it be not extant totidem verbis , in the place quoted by the Cardinall , yet in effect and substance it is to be found , you say , both in that Homilie and else-where . Who euer heard such paltring as this ? The words must be brought , and when they are not to be found , the sense must serue . So a man may say , that the deposition of Kings , and worse too , is authorised by the Apostle , Hebr. 7. 7. not that he speakes a word to that purpose , but , minor à maiori benedicitur , this prooues the superioritie of Priests to Kings , in a Iesuits construction , and therefore interficitur , or deturbatur , and what not ? Is this to giue vs the sēse for the words ? the spirit for the letter , quoth you ? or do you so maintaine godlines in the power of it , Tit. 1 ? And yet supoose this were right , where is the sense , or the substance that you talke of ? If in other places of Chrysostome , why are not those places quoted at the first ? why doe you choose to dwell vpon a counterfeit one ? Are you not ashamed to runne gadding thus vp and downe , first from words to sense , then from one place to another , to make your lamps to shine with borrowed oile , beg'd rather , nay stolne apparantly , after the thrones are set , and the Iudge is come ? On the other side , how direct is the Bishop in his proceedings ? how square , as I may say , and exact euerie way ? Hath hee not satisfied the Cardinall to the very last farthing , and paied the score which he brought to conuince the King withall ? His MAIESTIE calls for the Fathers of such a compasse , to disprooue him . And you see howe they are brought , not onely speaking by an interpretor , and not the faithfullest neither , whereas there should be no compromitting at all in so serious a canvase : but no tinker in his kettleworke was euer more fowly foyled , then he in avouching the Cardinals quotations . Lysanders two skins to patch the one the other , so he his words with senses , nay one text with another , is the most naturall representation of his dodging here . In so much , as if I should not answer a word more in the behalfe of the Bishop , yet you see how he hath performed as much as he vndertooke , namely , to maintain the kings challēge against the Cardinal , about the iudgement of the Fathers within such a space , and this fellow cannot refute him without such shamefull shifts , as lay him open to more disgrace . Yet to two places I will say somewhat , for the other are not worth the while . § 6. Out of the Homily aforesaid , Peter was a diamond , Ieremy a brasen pillar , or an iron wall . And which meant Chrysost . for the stronger of the two ? or did he meane to magnify one aboue the other at all ? yet you should speake to their authoritie , and let their constancie alone . Their vertue is one thing , their place another , howsoeuer how confound them . Vnlesse you thinke , that because with you place goes for vertue , ( witnesse Hildebrande in Dictatis ) therefore with them vertue may inferre place too , which is nothing so . But let vs heare the rest . Ieremy was set ouer one nation , Peter ouer the whole world . And what is this , but the difference of the old testament and the new ? the field and the garden ? fons signatus Cant. 4. and fons patens or reclusus Zach. 13. the breaking downe of the partition-wall , Eph. 2. the rending of the vaile , &c. I hope euery minister in the new testament , not Peter onely , hath not the land of Palaestine , which might be Ieremies limitation , but the latitude of the whole world , to deale with . Yea it is your owne doctrine , c. 2. numb . 50. and 52. that as farre as the Church reaches , ( which at this day reaches through out the whole world , ) the office and function of euery minister may extend . But the Apostles specially , betweene whome and Peter , herein , there was no ods , whatsoeuer difference there might be in their prouinces , as they parted them among themselues . Yea , but Peter might haue chosen Matthias Apostle without communicating with the rest , for which you quote Chrysostome hom . 3. in Acta . Quid ? annon licebat ipsi eligere ? Licebat , & quidem maximè , &c. And againe in the same place , Quàm est feruidus ? quàm agnoscit creditum à Christo gregem ? Might not he chuse ? yea verily he might . Then : How feruent is he ? how doth he acknowledge the slocke of Christ committed to his charge ? No doubt he regards the flocke of Christ , in speaking first in the congregation , about the choice of an Apostle , which much concerned the Church at that time , not to be destitute of a pastor , in the defect of Iudas . And this was grex creditus , which S. Peter so regarded , not the Apostles his flocke , as you would faine haue it : as if he were their Tutor , and they his pupills , ( as you were wont to appoint our King his Tutor , Nos tutores Regibus misimus , right Romanes : ) but the flocke which he regarded ioyntly with the Apostles , was the Church in generall , whose benefit he prouided for , in calling the company together , for the choice of an Apostle , Iudas beeing remooued . And S. Chrysost . saies but so , as your selfe English him . How doth he euery where speake first ? 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , Euseb . l. 2. c. 13. Not for any authoritie then , but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for his vertues sake . And what order can you imagine , where many meete , vnlesse one speake first ? then , why not Peter he , and yet not superiour to the rest ? As for Peters power to chuse an Apostle of his owne head , it is maruaile it should so be , since Bellarmine giues him not power to chuse the Deacons , ( much lesse then the Apostles ) without consent of the multitude , holding it to be enough that they were not chosen against his will , nor without his assent . de Pontif. Rom. l. 1. c. 16. In the chusing of Matthias , we finde no lesse then an hundred and twenty to haue come together . Act. 1. 15. whereof some were women , v. 14. of the same : and not Peter , but the lott settled it vpon Matthias , v. 26. What then saies Chrysostome , whome you quote , that Peter might haue done this alone , and of his owne authority ? You quote him lamely , which you obiect to the Bishop about Cyrill and Austen , but how falsly , we haue shewed . The next words in Chrysost . confute you plainly , if you had durst to alleadge them . 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . And besides ( saies he ) he had not yet receiued the holy Ghost . Doe you thinke then , that Peter might haue chose the Apostle by authoritie giuen him from our Sauiour Christ , to whome Christ had not yet giuen the gift of discerning , or the holy Ghost to direct him ? where is your axiome , that you can braue vs with elsewhere , Qui dat formam , dat omnia consequentia formam ? or where doe you finde God to allow the ende , without meanes sufficient to atchieue that ende ? We are therefore to vnderstand , that if Chrysost . say ( as he saies but at vncertaine ) that Peter might haue made the Apostle himselfe , he might vpon presumption of the multitudes good will , who would not haue contested with him in such a case likely , as honouring him for his vertue , &c. In which regard he commends to vs the meeknes of those times , for our imitation , and as he saies , that Peter did nothing 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 nor 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , so he maruels that S. Iames would not interpose a word , beeing at home as we would say , and Bishop of Hierusalem , where this assemblie was held . Neither lastly doe I see , how , ius constituendi par omnibus habebat , can so handsomly be drawne out of Chrysostomes text , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , which is the commoner reading in the greeke copies , and denies it rather . Thus much of Chrysostome . § . 7. About the place of S. Austen , serm . 1. 24. de Temp. I haue touched before in a word or two , your notable ignorances , with no lesse malice , which you bewray in the misconstruing of the Bishops words . Componit salutem , & , medicorum filij , & , Etsi omnes , non ego . You complaine in your 10. Chap. of the obscurenesse of the Bishops style , and he seemes to you 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 at noone day . I beleeue it verily , your apprehension is so good . Senecaes foole said , the house was dark after her selfe was fallen blind : And S. Paul afore his conuersion , was dazeled with the exceeding lightsomnesse , as S. Chrysostome notes most excellently : but soone after hee saw cleerest vpon his eye-sights taking from him . An image of the Papists ( specially our English ) that are offended with nothing more then the abundance of that light , that shines in their country at this day , whom a little of the old darknes perhaps would reduce to their right mindes ; as mad folks are tamed ( they say ) with withdrawing of the light from them . But omitting complaints , quae ne tum quidem gratae , tùm necessariae , what say you to the answers to S. Austens place ? Three exceptions did the Bishop take vnto it . First , that it was cited out of a doubtfull worke . Secondly , that it mentioned but a crazed head , and therefore not to be brought for honesty sake , to prooue Peters primacie , which another would disprooue it by rather . Thirdly , that S. Austen , not in asermon de Tempore , but in a lawfull Synod , cures this head , by confining him to his bounds , and restraining appeales from beyond the sea , which you brooke not . The first of these is confirmed diuers wayes . One , that the title of those Sermons is not sincere , neither giuen by S. Austen at the first , nor yet knowne by that name diuerse hundreds of yeares , after his death . And if S. Austen wrote no Sermones de tempore , why should we yeeld , as to S. Austens authoritie , to that which is quoted by the name of de Tempore ? Yet you say , they are taken out of other his works . Let those workes then bee quoted by their owne names : let euery witnesse appeare in his owne likenesse . The Emperour would not trust the man that had dyed his owne beard , hee suspected salshood by such small tokens . And where the name is counterfeit , what credit can there be either in the man , or in his verdict ? Does not such an one rather professe that he meanes craft ? Innominatus habetur pro nullo , is the axiome of the law . And why not then peruersè nominatus , much more ? Besides , you haue so chopt the number of these Sermons , yea the substance too , now adding , then diminishing , sometime amplifying , and then againe withdrawing , in your diuers editions , that no Euripus more vncertaine to build faith vpon . And yet these you bring forsooth to confute his MAIESTIE , and to disprooue his challenge . For where you say , they were so called and culled out from the rest , for the ease and commoditie of the Readers : I see not what more ease can be in giuing them a false name then a true , or what commoditie can arise from hence to the Reader , vnlesse to be abused and deceiued , be a commoditie . Yet such are the commodities , Egraunt , that you Iesuites deale in , when you set forth Authors . But lastly , the Sermon it selfe , bewrayes it selfe , to be none of S. Austens . As what thinke you of that clause in the latter ende of it ? Agnouit enim sibi vt homini peccati irrepsisse perniciem , quod totum hactenus vt memini diuinitùs procuratum est . Haue you so lost your smell , as not to difcerne betweene this , and the true S. Austen ? I say nothing of that which followes , which no wise man but would abiure for S. Austens , Videte quemadmodum exiguae culpae permittitur subiacere tantus Apostolus : ( first , who euer called this exigua cupla , to denie our Sauiour ? which Bellarmine himselfe , when he excuses all that may bee , cannot denie to haue been a most horrible trespasse . ) And againe , vt emendatus elationis vicio atque correctus . Did S. Austen euer say , emendatus vicio ? The rest is as good , but I spare . Yet , Quemadmodum eum dominus tui causâ patitur circumscribi delicto , would not bee passed ouer . I leaue it to your thinking . In the same sermon , hee makes Peter to haue been a starke Pelagian ; Per solum liberum arbitrium , non addito dei adiutorio , promiserat se pro. Domino moriturum . And yet you bring this to prooue Peters primacie , and Lordship paramount , ouer the whole Church , for direction sake . As for your sleeuelesse shift , that S. Austen wrote Sermons of the solemne tunes of the yeare , of Saints dayes also , &c. so hath the Bishop preached as much as any , of the yearely festiualls , ( and long may he I pray God ) yet he neuer thought he had made sermons de Tempore , till you told him so . The thing no doubt is auncient , for the substantiall obiect , to solemnize the appointed times of the yeare , as the Quadragesima , or the Ascension , or the Natalitia , and the like , which you instance in , with sutable sermons : but Sermones de Tempore , is too short a name , though we take in de Sanctis too , to comprehēd all , sith there were many more Sermons made , both by Austen , and others , vpon ordinarie Sundayes , which are reducible to neither part of the afore-said diuision . As for that you alledge out of Possidius , that S. Austen made sermons in vigilijs paschae , vpon Easter eue , whereof this , you say , was one in all likelihood , beeing made on the Wednesday before Easter , is it not as mad as all the rest , or shall we thinke it likely , that Easter eue fell vpon the wednesday before Easter ? What confidence hath the Iesuite , that would bore such holes in his Readers nose , and paint his face , while he lies broad awake ? Yet numb . 56. of this Chapter , you find that which vvas 14. yeare after the time , as fit as the Eue , you say , to the holy day , belike that we may beleeue you the rather here , of three daies distance between the Eue and the Feast , vvhen at another time the Eue sell out iust 14. yeere , you say , afore the holy day . And so much to instifie the Bishops first exception . § . 8. To the second you answer , that Bellarmine had no reason to be greatly ashamed of the place that mentions Peters frailty , for euen that confirmes his primacy most wonderfully . How so ? For hauing had tryall of infirmities , he was so much the apter to succour others , or to shew compassion to others . Truely I doubt not , but Peters fall made him the tendererhearted to repenting sinners , yet not so much in his particular , or for any primacie , as representing the Church , and the whole bodie of the ministery , as you were told out of S. Austen , de Agone Christiano . c. 30. Else onely Popes should bee tender hearted . Though S. Austen also in the place , that you newly quoted , Serm. de Temp. 124. saies it fell the rather vpon Peter , because he was a fierce and a cholericke man , ( not onely feruent as others call him ) as his practise shewed vpon poore Malchus , and therefore it was meete he should be abated so . Howsoeuer it be , the Bishops exception to the Cardinal is very good , that a better place would haue beene brought in all reason out of S. Austen , so copious an author , to prooue Peters headship by , then that which implyes the crazines of it , euen before we are shewed to what vse the soundnes of it serues . Neither does the Bishop argue , as you wickedly slaunder him , that Peter by frailty denyed our Sauiour , ergò he is not head of the Church . And yet it were as good as Bellarmines argument , and better too , which you vse in this place , that his headship is confirmed , or established by his fall . As if none could fall any whit fowly , but from the height of supremacy ouer the Church . Was it nothing to fall after his exaltation to the Apostleship , after other graces which he enioyed not a few ? Did not this make our Eutychus his fal the more dangerous , that he tumbled downe euen from such a window ? That you may see how many primacies were in Peter , as it were stories in a building , though no such monarchicall preheminence ensue : which primacies the Bishop neuer denied . And if Peters gentlenes , which he learned by his fall , reach no further , then to assoile offenders vpon their repentance , as I see not what other you here ayme at , you know that office belongs to all Priests in generall , as well as to the head of Priests , and therefore no Popedome followes fromhence any way at all . § 9. To your place of S. Gregory , hom . 22. in Euang. that our Lord intended Petrum praeferre cunctae Ecclesiae , we returne S. Greg. l. 4. in 1. Reg. cap. vltimum , that Paul was made caput nationum , where caput is more then praeferri ecclesiae , sith euery minister is set ouer the Church , as we haue often told you , Qui vocatur ad Episcopatum , vocatur ad seruitutem ●●tius ecclesiae , saies Origen . hom . 6. in Esaeiam , each Bishop is seruant to the whole Church : as otherwhere , Ad imperium vocantur totius ecclesiae , qui Episcopi creantur . Goffrid . Tract . de Ordin . &c. for the sense is all one , and euery where you see the latitude of their bounds ; and in a word , they are nothing but circūlocutions of their Apostleships both Pauls and Peters . Lastly , you abuse the Bishop intolerably , in saying he taunts at Peters fal , who is of another spirit , and knowes that Saints can , pugnare de genu , or as S. Chrysostome saies , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , The Saints are gloririous euen in their falls : but he refutes Peters proud vaunt , Etsi omnes non tamen ego , by his owne experience , which is lawfull to doe , I meane to take downe the confident and the ouerweener with a sober gleeke , as euen Aristotle can teach you , Eth. 4. and elsewhere . So much also of his second exception . § 10. It is long before he will vnderstand the third , as hauing no mind to it , loath to come at it . It stands in this . That S. Austen , not a counterfeit Sermon of Austens , but himselfe in person , and sitting in Councell , neither flourishing before the people in a bastard homily , about Peters prerogatiues ( which we must tell you again & again , are not straight the Popes , though you presume so , ) but consulting most aduisedly in an assembly of Fathers about the Bishop of Rome , ( which is the man in controuersie , and against whome our plea lies , not against Peter , ) I say , that S. Austen consulting about the Pope , and his authority to heare appeales , in a councell of Africa , is not fearefull to censure them with excommunication , as many as shall appeale beyond the sea , that is to Rome , saies Balsamon , that is to the Pope say we , and you will not denie . Which how could S. Austen and others haue done , I would faine know of you , if they had beene perswaded of his vniuersall power ouer the Christian world ! § 11. Here you cast mysts , and fogs , and raylings . But passing by them , as the Moone does by the barking of a curre-dogge , let vs take you as you lie . You deduct three points from the Bishops words , as you say , and you call them three lies of his , in little more then three lines . Vsuall modestie , but let vs view your parts . The first , That the Pope had no further authoritie , but ouer the Church of Rome in S. Austens time . The second , That no man might appeale to Rome , out of Africk , in those daies . The third , That S. Austen neuer acknowledged those three Popes , Zozimus , Bonifacius , and Celestinus , to be heads of the Church , and yet cured S. Peters disease in them . The first , say you , will be cleare by the discussing of the second and the third . But how if the Bishop neuer affirmed the first ? neither is any such thing to be gathered out of his wordes ? What needes your second and third to refute this ? Why rather doe you not bend against the second , and third , for their owne sakes , to shew that all Appeales were not cut off , by the Fathers , out of Africk to Rome , or that S. Austen cured the swelling disease in the Popes aforesaid ? Does not this shew , that you neither want impudence , and yet want matter ? since the Bishops words , that may sound that way to your first propositiō , are only these , If euer he be healed ( viz. the Pope ) let him be head of the Church of Rome , as he was in S. Austens time , but let no man appeale , &c. And is this as much as that the Pope had no authoritie ouer more then Rome ? whereas the Bishop neither denies his Westerne Patriarkship , nor otherwise the great sway that he might iustly carrie throughout the rest of Christendome , out of the eminencie of his place , especially if ioyned with vertues answerable , though still his Diocesse were but particular . But as for Appeales , what more plaine , for the proouing that S. Austen censured all such Appellants out of Africk to the sea of Rome , with excommunication , then that which we read in the Councel of Milevitum , Can. 22. enacted both by him , and diuers other Bishops there ? Whosoeuer shall think fit to appeale beyond the Sea , let no person within Africk receiue him to fellowship , or to communion . First therefore you turne away , and will not vnderstand , till diuers sections after , any such Canon or Councell , but tell vs of a letter written to Pope Celestine by the African Bishops , which , you say , was petitorie , but containing no Decree nor demand , as altogether resting in Celestines pleasure , whether he would graunt it , or no. I will set downe the words , that the truth may be seene . Though this I must premise , that it was nothing vnbeseeming the holy Fathers , to vse reuerēt termes , euen of petition and request to Pope Celestine , when they sued for no more then their owne right , as the Apostle S. Peter , and diuers others in the like cases , I beseech you brethren , abstaine &c. Sapientem omnia priùs quàm armis experiri decet ; it is the old saying : and , Responsio mollis frang it iram . So here . Strictè exigo , & strictè praecipio , is for the Pope to his Catholiques , whome he makes conies . But the words are these : Our due salutations remembred , and done : We entreat , and earnestly pray you , that hereafter you will not lightly giue audience to those that come from hence to you , neither any more receiue such to the communion , as we excommunicate : because your Reuerence shall easily perceiue that order taken by the Nicene Councell . For if there appeare a prouiso for inferiour Clerkes and lay-men , how much more would the Synode haue the same obserued in Bishops , that beeing excommunicated in their owne Province , they should not be suddenly , hastily , or vnduly restored to the communion by your holinesse ? And likewise your holines must repell these wicked refuges of Priests , and other Clergie men [ to Rome , ] as becommeth you : for that by no determination of the Fathers , this is derogated from the Church of Africa : and the Nicene Canons doe most euidently commit both inferiour Clergie-men , and the Bishops themselues , to their owne Metropolitans . No doubt they most wisely and rightly prouide , that all matters should be ended in the places where they first arose : neither shall the grace of the holy Ghost be wanting to any Prouince , by the which equitie may be grauely weighed , and stoutly followed , by the Priests of Christ , especially whereas euery man hath libertie , if he mislike the iudgement of those that heare his cause , to appeale to the Councells of his owne Prouince , or to a generall Councell . Or how shall the iudgement ouer the Seas [ at Rome ] be good , whereto the necessarie persons of the witnesses , either for sexe , or for age , or sundrie other impediments , cannot be brought ? FOR THAT ANY SHOVLD BE SENT [ as Legates ] FROM YOVR HOLINES SIDE , VVEE FINDE DECREED BY NO SYNOD OF THE FATHERS . § 12. And be here no words , but supplicatorie , wil you say ? When they vrge so vehemently , that the Nicene Councel tooke order to the same purpose , that causes should not be remooued from place to place , alluding to the 5. Canon of that Councell , and to the latter end of the fourth , doe these men thinke it is a matter of meere graunt , or wholly depending of the Popes pleasure ? when they cal such a refuge , a wicked refuge , of them that runne to Rome , doe they not shew what opinion they conceiue of it ? Is it in the Popes power to license wickednesse , or if it bee nowe , was it so then ? Nay , when they say hee must repulse such stragling clients , is must a word for suters and suppliants ? when they tell him in the same passage , that it becomes him to stop such holes , that wretched men would creepe out at , doe they not plainely declare , that they haue more confidence in it , then in a meere sute or petition onely ? yea , when they vrge againe , that the Nicene Councell so ordered , and no derogation was euer made to that Canon , by any contrary constitution , doe they leaue it free to the Pope to yeeld to , yea or no ? No doubt , say they , they most wisely and rightly prouided , that all matters should bee ended in the places where they first arose . And would these men haue confest , that the Pope might with iustice doe to the contrarie ? When they tell him , That the grace of the holy Ghost is not so fastened to Rome , but that it is to be foūd in other Prouinces too , by the which equitie may be grauely waighed , and stoutly followed by the Priests of Christ ; doe they not priuily taxe him for fondly ouerweening his owne sea , if he thinke matters cannot bee ended at home , without his interposing ? When they alledge , that witnesses cannot bee present at Rome , whom either age , or sexe , or diuerse other infirmities and casualties hinder , and yet so necessarie many times , as that the causes cannot bee tryed without them , doe they not rather shew , what is meet in reason , and iust in conscience , then leaue it wholly in the Popes hands , to graunt or no ? Lastly , what opinion had they of the Popes agents in forraine countries , that sticke not to auouch this to his head , That any from his Holinesse should be sent as Legates , we finde decreed by no Synode of the Fathers ? Where , because you dare talke of the Nicene copies , as allowing appeales , which were pretended then with shame enough , but none such found vpon most diligēt enquiry , take you in that also which followeth , in Gods name . That which you sent vs hither by Faustinus , as a part of the Nicene Councell , in the truer copies which wee haue receiued from holy Cyrill Bishop of Alexandria , and reuerend Atticus Bishop of Constantinople , taken out of the originals themselues ( which also we sent to Bonifacius your predecessor ) in them , we say , wee could finde no such thing . Let Baronius , or Bellarmine , salue this now , as well as they can . Finally thus . And as for your agents or messengers , send them not , graunt them not at , euerie mans request ( doe you see how faintly these men speake , as remembring they sued onely to the Pope for that which was in his power to graunt or no ; and which if he did grant , he did but depart with his owne right ? ) To which , this that followes , may be a notable confirmation ? Least wee seeme to bring the smokie pride of the world , into the Church of Christ , which proposeth the light of simplicitie and humilitie to those that desire to see God , &c. This of the Epistle of the African Fathers to Pope Caelestine . § 13. But now what saies he to the Mileuitan Canon ? Sith that was it , which the Bishop aymed at ; as at last he awakes , and acknowledges himselfe . It excludes not all from appealing ( quoth he ) but Priests and Deacons onely , and such inferiour Clergie men . So as still the Bishops might appeale to Rome . And , transmarinus nemo , is of the Bishops forging , too too generall . Is it euen so ? Whose forging then is that , Ad transmarina autem qui putauer it appellandum , whosoeuer shall thinke good to appeale beyond the sea , let him be renounced from the communion of all in Africa , the very words of the Canon ? Is not , nemo transmarinus appellet , all one with quicunque transmarinus appellandum putauerit , or , quicunque appellauerit ad transmarina , puniatur , & c ? What difference is here , but that the one is comminatory , the other prohibitiue , both vniuersall and peremptory ? Yea , but Bishops are excepted , because not named . How if Bishops most of all included ? As not onely reason leads vs to thinke , because Bishops might not so well be spared out of the prouince , as Priests might , they few to these many , ( see Euseb . l. 6. hist . ) and therefore no such detriment in the Priests absence , as in the Bishops : but the Fathers of the aforesaid African councell , in their epistle to Coelestine , intimate as much , not onely that Bishops are comprehended as well as Priests , but euen much more . For if ( say they ) there appeare a prouiso for inferiour Clerks and laymen , how much more would the Synode haue the same to be obserued in Bishops , that beeing excommunicated in their owne prouince , they should not be suddenly , hastily , or vnduly , restored to the Communion , no not by your holines ? And as the Councell of Nice , meaning to forbid both Clerks and Lay , to forsake the iudgement of their owne prouince , and betake themselues to another , named not the Bishops , and yet in the generall comprehended them too , quoting an auncienter Canon for their purpose , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , that whome one casts out ( whosoeuer he be ) another should not receiue : so here the Fathers : for whome it was enough to instance in certaine inferiour degrees of Clergie , though their intent was doubtlesse to comprehend all : either as ayming at the Nicene Canon it selfe , and so labouring to come as neere it as possibly they could , or because Canons are applied to the present vse , ( as the saying is ) and the rashnes of a Priest , one Apiarius by name , gaue occasion to Africk thus to decree . I might further aske , whether lay-men might appeale , notwithstanding this Canon , yea or no ? Sith onely Clerks are mentioned in it , and F. T. will haue none but those to be prohibited , who are directly named . If he say they might , what a wide gate is left open to tumult and disorder , notwithstanding the Canon , for lay-men to doe that which Clerks might not ? Nay how does the Clerke auoid committing himselfe to forreine tribunals , sith a lay-man , in case of controuersie with a Clerke , complaining to a forreiner , drawes the Clerke happily after him , to his no small molestation ? If he say , he might not ; but that he is forbidden , though he be not specified , so might the Bishops likewise , which is our question . Lastly , if those Fathers might forbid Clergi-men to appeale to Rome , though Clergi-men onely of the inferiour sort , it shewes that the Popes iurisdiction is not vniuersall , and in the ende Bishops might be forbid and all . § 14. As for your fustïe Epistle to Antonie of Fussula , it is out of the number of S. Austens Epistles , which Possidius recounts , a faithfull witnesse of S. Austens desks and papers . One Grauius , a Dutchman , brought it first from Rome , and set it out as a neweltie , which your selues durst not auow , from whome it sprang . And though nothing is in the Epistle preiudiciall to our cause , which may not easily be answered , yet this shall suffice in this place . § 15. Innocentius , you say , allowed the Canon of the Milevitan Councell . Therefore it makes not against the Pope . Nay , therefore Innocentius was content with that proportion , which the later Popes are not satisfied with . As Boniface himselfe in his Epistle to Eulalius Bishop of Carthage , is so impatient of this restraint , that he makes the deuill to be the author of that , which S. Austen and the rest deuised , for the barring of Appeales to Rome . Behold , what kin the deuill is to S. Austen , as Boniface would perswade . And yet others succeeding , lesse moderate then he . You tell vs that the Sardican Councell allowed these appeales . What then ? Therefore this in all likelihoode contradicts them not . As if that which was lawfully ordained at first , might not afterward be changed vpon apparant inconuenience , as your selfe here insinuate of the Popes Legates , and their outrages : of whome you know what * one said , that they were as Satanas emissus à facie Domini ad vexandum orbem terrarum , like the deuill let loose to scourge the world . Yet , you like a good fellow , would prooue the lawfulnesse of appeales , by their pranks and practises , though neuer so irregular , as he that would iustifie false titles by possession . Albeit neither was the Sardican Councell generall , and so of no force to bind all in all places : and if it had so beene , yet you may remember , how many Sanctions euen of the Nicene Councell , are out of vse with you , cancel'd , abrogate , as the Bishop shewes in one part of that booke of his , which you now fumble about the refuting of . To omit that the constitution runnes but thus , though it were neuer so authenticall , euen by Placet vobis ? May you please to allow ; and rather for Iulius his vertue , then the seats priuiledge , and so to last no longer then men endued with the like integritie that Iulius was , should occupie the roome , but no way descending of such originall right , as you pretend . Else what neede the Canon either the Fathers consent , or the scrutiner to begin with placet vobis ? As for Petri memoriam , that they would vouchsafe to honour Peters , memorie , euen that shewes it was arbitrarie , and rather not to be denied to his blessed memorie , then due to his successor by right of inheritance . Though Optatus leads vs to more memories then one , as there were more Apostles and Saints then one : of whome he construes that , euen in the Sardican sense , memorijs Sanctorū cōmunicantes ( 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ) lib. 2. contra Parmenianum , and againe , memorijs Apostolorum , lib. 4. § 16. Now to backe your fancie , that appeales were not forbid by the Mileuitan Canon , in S. Austens time , you descend to Leos time , short of S. Austens , so as you refute not the Bishop , nor say nothing to the purpose , but that you long to be vntrussing your pedlerly fardles . As if Leo were not like enough to encroach vpon the Canon , to gaine aduantage to his Sea ; a sea indeed , which eares out the earth though neuer so well fenced : and the distressed estate of the Churches of Africa , encreasing with the times , might driue them to admit of more then was reason , but that they were glad to make their peace , at any hand , though with hard conditions . Concerning Gregories times , you fall a great deale lower , though you are clean besides the cushion there too . For whereas you granted before , that the Canon forbad the appeales of Deacons , though not of Bishops ; now you bring vs an instance of two Deacons appealing , so as the Canon is trampled downe by your owne confession , and yet the Bishops allegation was of the Canon onely . Shall law , or practise be our Iudge ? And yet when Gregory , refers the plaintiue Deacons ouer to a Synode , hee does but as the Canons had enacted before in that behalfe , namely , Nicen. can . 3. Antioch . can . 9. Constantinop . can . 2. What proofe then is this of Gregories authoritie to heare appeals , which rather he commits to the triall of Synods , as equitie would ? § 17. And the same fault is in your next example . Certaine Priests of Africa complained against Paulinus , Donadeus a Deacon against Victor his Bishop . Yet you graunted euen now , that Priests and Deacons were barred Appeales , by the Canon , most euidently . What is this then to the matter , but that you want worke , and are faine to sucke occasion out of your fingers ends , that you may be doing ? And in one word , when Gregorie so orders the matter vpon these fellowes complaints , that he refers the hearing to an assembly of Bishops , with the primate of the Prouince , as you alleadge , either Victor , or Columbus , or whome you will , he shewes no authority , but onely does as the Canons had appointed to be done , whether he would or no. Indeed Gregorie professes his respect to the Canons in diuerse places , and herein he keepes it . § . 18. It followes , of certaine Popes , who exercised ( he saith ) vniuersall authoritie in S. Austens dayes . Though I shewed that this neede not , because no way thwarting the Bishops words , yet briefly to his obiections , that he seeme not ouer wise in his owne conceit . S. Austen saies of Zozim . Ep. 157. ad Opt. Iniuncta nobis à venerabili Papâ Zozimo Apostolicae sedis Episcopo Ecclesiastica necessitas nos Caesaream traxerat . The necessarie occasions of the Church imposed vpon me by Pope Zozimus drew me to Caesarea . And out of Possidius , Literae sedis Apostolicae compulerunt . This may prooue violence , as well as authority , because of trahere and compellere : Which surely Zozimus vsed not to S. Austen . He lackt a learned man , and cald for S. Austen , vsing his best interest to perswade him . What is this to the Popedome ? How many such compellers could I shew you out of S. Austen ? Marcellinus for one , a temporall Earle , but an exceeding good man , and afterward Martyr , as we are told by S. Hierome . Sic me compulit vel ipsa charitas tui Marcelline Comes , sic inquam me compulit , sic duxit , & traxit , &c. De peccat . meritis & remiss . l. 1. c. 1. Iust as the Apostle acknowledges of himselfe , and all Christians , Charitas Christi cogit nos , the loue of Christ constraines vs. So here the necessities of the Church did S. Austen , recōmended to him by Pope Zozimus ; yet with no more iurisdiction perhaps , then Marcellinus had ouer him , which I thinke was but small . The examples of this kind of phrase , are rife euery where . We read in the booke of Samuel , that the witch constrained king Saul to eate meate . 1. Sam. 28. And Luk. 24. coegerunt eum , the two Disciples that went into Emaus , constrained our Sauiour to tarry with them . Howbeit doubtlesse not superiour to him , specially after his resurrection . Abraham and Lot constrained their guests , as we may read in Genesis , yet not giuing lawes I suppose to strangers , which is condemned in another place of that booke , Peregrinus est , & vult dare leges , but to teach vs to enforce our liberalities and our courtesies , where modesty reiects them , though neede craue them . And these guests were Angels . Which it were fine if you could bring vnder the Popes compulsion , as some of your men haue seriously laboured , to make the Pope paramount to the Angels themselues ; once , Abraham and Lot though no spirituall men , here constrained them for certaine . What speake I of Scriptures ? Euen Tully de Amicitiâ , Cogitis certè , quid enim refert quâ ratione cogatis ? You constraine me ( quoth Lelius ) no matter how . And againe S. Austen , Praef. librorum ad Simplicianum , Quaestiunculas quas mihi enodandas iubere dignatus es . He sayes , Simplician commaunded him to dissolue questions . And yet , I take it , Simplician had no such regular power ouer S. Austen , as to command him . This iubere would haue troubled Pope Nicholas wonderfully . I neuer reade his Epistle ad Michaelem Imperatorem , but I pitty his passions , to see him so stormed with a poore iubere of the Emperour . Whereas the Emperour writing in all likelihood in Greek , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 might be construed , wishing or exhorting , if either he or his interpretour had not been afraid of a blew spider , a dread where none was . But againe S. Austen in the forenamed place , Cùm tibi placet quod scribo , noui cui placeat , quoniam qui te inhabitet noui . Hee meanes , that the holy Ghost dwels in Simplicianus , which would haue made a faire shew in a Popes style . Largitor enim omnium munerum per tuam sententiam confirmauit obedientiam meam , &c. He speakes of obedience yeelded to Simplician , who yet was not his superiour . Againe , In meo ministerio , dixit Deus fiat & factum est . ( Hee calls it his ministerie , or his seruice , and sets him almost in the place of God. ) In tuâ verò approbatione , vidit deus quia bonum est . At least , there he makes him his God , or his superiour directly . Generally of all Bishops , thus wee read in S. Austen , Epist . 168. In alijs ciuitatibus tantum agimus , quod ad ecclesiam dei pertinet , quaentum vel nos permittunt , vel NOBIS IMPONVNT earundem ciuitatum Episcopi , fratres & consacerdotes nostri . What is lesse in imponunt , then in the iniungunt that you vrge ? Iniuncta nobis à Zozimo necessitas . Yet here you see , imponunt is an act that any Bishop might exercise towards S. Austen , euen his brothers and fellow-priests , [ fratres & consacerdotes , ) not onely Zozimus . So Ruffinus in exposit . symbol . ad Laurent . which Laurence was no Pope , though he be called Papa there , . i. a reuerent personage . One Laurentius stood with Symmachus for the Popedome , I graunt , but hee lost it , as you knowe . Well , what saies Ruffinus ? He calls it , pondus praecepti , because Laurentius desired him to put his exposition which he had preacht vpon the Creede , in writing ; the weight of his charge , or the charge of his commandement . Againe , Astringis me vt aliquid tibi de side , &c. Yet Laurence had no power , that I know , of binding Ruffinus . Lastly , expositionis à te impositae necessitatem , sayes he , which answers word for word almost to that which you bring out of S. Austen , Iniuncta nobis à Zozimo necessitas . But of Zozimus ( saith hee ) hereafter , wherein we will attend him . § 19. First therefore of Liberius , a most wretched proofe . Certaine Arian hereticks obtained his letters for their restitution , to the assemblie of Tyana , and by vertue of them they were restored , though they did but dissemble , in that they feigned their conformitie with the Church of God , inwardly remaining deepe Arians . Is not this fit to be brought in behalfe of the Pope , to shew how wel he stands vpon his watch , how meete a man he is to inherit the trust of all Christian soules , that suffers such knaues to beguile him in this sort ? As for that , that Liberius letters were of force ; so should any other graue and worthie Prelates haue been , vpon whose testimonie the Synod might relie ; especially when , if there had beene no doubt of their repentance , they should haue needed no other mediatour happily then themselues . But because he hath quoted S. Basil in the margent , let vs heare his words , and see what confidence he puts in Rome , or in the Bishop thereof . Epist . 74. thus he saies of Liberius , and his restoring of Eustathius that Arian heretick , which suspition , to say truth , Liberius was not free from , enclining thither himselfe when time was . The rather might he write in the behalfe of an Arian . 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , &c. Since therefore from thence ( he meanes from Rome , and from the Westerne Churches , this Epistle bearing inscription to the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , the Bishops of the West ) since from thence he hath receiued power to hurt the Churches , and the libertie that you gaue him ( Liberius with the rest ) he to the subuersion of many hath abused , it is necessarie that reformation should spring from the same place , and that you should send word to the Churches , for what cause he was receiued , and how beeing changed since in his opinion , he makes void the grace that was then giuen him ( not by Liberius so much as by the Fathers , that is , they of the Councell of Tyana ) of which before . And in the same Epistle , a little afore this place , S. Basil giues two reasons , why he implores the aide of the Italian Bishops , in these words , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , &c. The first is , because if onely the Easterne Bishops appeare against Eustathius , it may be thought to come of emulation and partialitie , one Bishop of the same countrey opposing another . 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . But you the farther of , the better beleeued . Which , to say truth , hath alwaies bin the Popes felicitie . But you see he flies not to them for any vniuersal authoritie or prerogatiue ( as they imagin ) frō Peter deriued , but for the distāce of the place , which makes them seeme to be more incorrupt . The second reason is , from the consenting of many Bishops together , and the power of that to preuaile with peoples minds , when there shall be a concurrence , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . That is ; But of with ioynt consent many shall auerre the same thing , the very multitude of them that are of one minde , will make it to be entertained without contradiction . By which , you see , the Pope can doe little alone . And so speakes Basil in his greatest extremitie , euen when he needes the Pope most . Else we know , how sharply he can taxe Rome , and giue the Popes their owne , when occasion serues . 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , the Westerne pride , saith he , & , haereses propagant , they spread heresies , or , multiplie heresies . Epist . 8. ad Euseb . Samosat . § 20. Of * Iulius and Athanasius I spake before . The same was the cause of Marcellus , and Asclepas , Paulus , and Lucian and the rest , restored , as you say , by Iulius Pope , tanquam omnium curam gerentem , as bearing care of all . Tripart . l. 4. c. 15. As if euery Bishop were not obliged to doe his seruice to the whole Church , as farre as he can , which were easie to demonstrate , but that I haue done it before , and quoted Origen very lately for the same ; yet Iulius the rather , because the prime Bishop , but prime in order onely , and in a certaine excellencie , propter sedis dignitatem , as the Tripartite here speakes , in the very words that this man quotes , not propter auctoritatem . S. Austen calls it Speculam , his watchtower . Besides that this same Iulius is many yeeres before S. Austen , and yet he professes to reckon vp onely such as liued in S. Austens time . Doe you not see how he labours to vtter his prouision ? Finally in Sozomene , who reports the same matter , and is quoted by this man , to that very purpose , cap. 2. num . 8. In Sozomene I say , lib. 3. c. 7. thus we read . That the persons , to whome Iulius wrote , in behalfe of the aforesaid catholicke Bishops , though they acknowledged the Church of Rome , primas ferre apud omnes , to be the chiefe Church in euerie bodies estimation , as 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , the schoole of the Apostles , and the mother citty of piety , ( not for any succession into the authoritie of S. Peter in particular ) and yet deny ( they say ) they cannot , but the first authors of Christian relligion sprang from the East ( not from Rome ) neuertheles indignati sunt se posteriores ide●ferre , quòd magnitudine ecclesiae superarentur , idque cū virtute , & pio viuendi instituto , longè superiores essent : they thought much that they should be set any whit behind the others , because their Church was not so great or so ample as theirs , specially when in vertue , and godly life , they farre excelled them . Thus they . I compare not now the opinions of Arians with Catholiques , in that point of their dissention , which the Scripture hath determined , and right faith compounded , but as for East and West , you see what estimation one had of the other , and how little our Grecians thought themselues short of Rome . Therefore they are so confident a little after , as to challenge Iulius for doing against the Councell , and their owne definition ; Insimulàrunt Iulium ceu transgredientem ecclesiae leges . And whereas Iulius a little before had threatned them , they threaten him againe : and Sozomene calls the letter that they sent to Iulius , plenam minarum atque ironiae , full not onely of threates , but mocks and taunts , vnlesse you will otherwise construe it ; So miserably were they afraid of the Popes authoritie in those daies , diuided from equity . Pollicentur pacē & communionem Iulio , si approbaret abdicationem factam , sin resisteret decretis eorum , &c. They promise Iulius to be of his communion , if he will doe as they would haue him , if not , to leaue [ that is , to disclaime ] him , you would say to excommunicate him , if it made for you . And indeede in the 10. Chap. of Sozomene , soone after , they doe so in good earnest . § 21. The next is Damasus . In whom I must bee short . What tell you vs of titles , and tearmes , and styles ? what though they called him most blessed Lord , raised to the height of Apostolique dignitie , holy father of fathers , Damasus Pope , &c. Thinke you , that the boyes would forbeare laughter , hearing this argument ? That the Bishops of Africa call him Damasum Papam , Pope Damasus , &c. therefore Damasus Pope might receiue appeales out of Africa . If that be not in their style , the rest is vulgar , and nothing to the matter . Who was not Papa in those dayes ? which you engrossing , bewray your selues . Yea , but nothing might goe for currant concerning important affaires , as deposition of Bishops , say you , nisi ad noticiam vestrae sedis delatum fuerit , vnlesse your Sea knew of it . To which , I answer , noticia is one thing , consensus another . Men may seek for resolution , and yet not be subiect to authoritie , vnlesse themselues please . 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , that the soueraigne stroke in euery businesse should be the Metropolitanes of the Prouince , the Councell of Nice determined verie cleerely , Can. 4. of more authoritie then your Damasus his epistles , or to Damasus . § 22. But is not that a braue confuting of the Mileuitan Canon , alleadged by the Bishop against appeales beyond the sea , that S. Hierome sought to Damasus for his iudgement about Hypostasis ? This also may prooue an appeale in time , when appeales grow scant . It hath been answered by our Diuines , ouer and ouer : it is nothing to our question , therfore I insist not vpon it . Neither yet that of Ambrose ( if it be Ambrose ) who liuing within Italy , that is Damasus his prouince , saies , Damasus gouerned the house of God , the house no doubt , wherein hee liued , and wrote at that day . But how if he had called it , as it followes in S. Paul , columnam & firmamentum veritatis , which S. Paul does Ephesus , wherein Timothy liued ? yet neither Ephesus that infallible one , that you imagine Rome to be , for truth of doctrine , nor Timothy a monarch or vniuersall Bishop . § 23. That Peter of Alexandria was restored to his Bishopricke vpon Damasus his letters : you shewe not they were mandatorie , we thinke rather commendatorie . Damasus certified good things of Peter , and the people receiued him , illis confisus , trusting they might be true ; or , they did what they desired and longed to doe , vpon so good a hint . The Pope gaue not Patriarkships in * those dayes : yea had any so challenged , the Alexandrines would haue torne him in peices , they were so violent . § 24. Vitalis an heretique , and an Antiochian , was examined , and censured by Pope Damasus . But you dissemble not that Paulinus their Bishop permitted it . The wonder had beene , if Damasus had intermedied against his consent . One Bishop may referre his Priest , to be examined by another whome he will. Things were not so well setled with Paulinus at this time in Antioch , as it should seeme , through intestine discords , which long continued . So Damasus might prescribe a forme of abiuration to Vitalis the heretique , though otherwise prescribe is but an imperious word of your owne deuising , and to draw him a forme , which he meant should be vsed by him vpon his returne to Antioch , had beene enough . Your author whome you quote , in Ep. 2. ad Cledon . saies onely thus ; Damaso postulante edidit , or , literis consignauit fidem : at Damasus his instāce he pen'd a forme of his beleife : not Damasus for him , but he to Damasus . Which Athanasius also did at the Emp. Iouians request , not to purge suspicion , but to instruct him in the truth . Of prescribing to Paulinus , I read nothing in that place . In Damasus his Epistle I finde this qualification , both that tuae voluntati & tuo iudicto omnia derelinquimus , we leaue all to your will , and your iudgement : and in the ende this , Non quòd haec ipsa quae scribimus , non potueris conuertentium susceptioni proponere , sed quò noster consensus liberum in suscipiendo tibi tribuat exemplū : Not that you could not of your owne selfe haue propounded these things to conuerts , ere they were receiued , but that our concurrence might yeeld you freedome of example to receiue them . And if freedome , how prescription ? § 25. It is a wonder , how you dare mention the name of Flauianus , who by the Emperors fauour kept his seat against so many Popes one after another , striuing to vnhorse him , and all in vaine . The paines that Chrysostome and Theophilus tooke , to make a peace betweene him and Damasus , shewed their good care of the Churches vnity , and worthily entitles them to the blessing of peacemakers . But that which you call pardoning Flauianus offence , and restoring him to the communion of the Church againe , was no more then was vsuall in those dayes , between Bishop and Bishop , if they misliked one another , to forbeare communicating mutually ; if satisfaction were giuen , to returne to fellowship and communion againe , which you perhaps , to amplifie the Popes power , would haue vs think to be excommunication and absolution . Where you say , that the people of Antioch , were IN TIME REDVCED to concord and vnitie , with Flavianus their Bishop , through this act of Damasus , it shewes it was rather the relenting of their mindes , and appeasing their stomacks , out of Flavianus good demeanure , and other such considerations , then the Popes sentence , or bare definition . For then what neede long time to worke it ? Neither was that a signe of Damasus his supremacie , that Flavianus sent his embassage to Rome . For when two are to meete , why should not the inferiour come to the superiour , rather then otherwise ? I meane inferiour in order , as Flavianus here to Damasus , Antioch to Rome , but not in authoritie . Though the embassage was not intended so much to Damasus , as to cleere the scandall that went of Flavian , and to satisfie the whole Church of God in those parts , that East and West might no longer continue in iealousie and alienation . § 26. And now to come to his successor Syricius , as your owne words are , how doe you prooue his vniuersall iurisdiction ? I know it wrings you to be held to this point , but there is no remedy , to that you must speake . Forsooth the Councell of Capua , committed the hearing of Flauianus his cause to the Bishop of Alexandria and the Bishop of Egypt , with this limitation , as S. Ambrose witnesses ( I report your owne words ) that the approbation and confirmation of their sentence should be reserued to the Roman sea , and the Bishop thereof , who was then Syricius . Suppose this were so , how farre is it from arguing vniuersall iurisdiction ? For as the Councell might make choice of the Bishop of Alexandria , and the Bishops of Egypt , to take the first knowledge of Flavianus his cause into their hands , so , out of the same authoritie , might it reserue the after iudgement , and the vp shot of all , to the Bishop of Rome : it might doe this , I say , out of it owne libertie , and for the personall worth of Syricius Pope , not for any prerogatiue of his Sea. And rather it shewes the preheminence of the Councell , that might depute the Pope to such a busines , as likewise the Bishop of Alexandria and Egypt . The Eusebians made an offer ( witnes Athanasius in his Apologie ) to Iulius Pope of Rome , to be their iudge , if he thought good ; Iulio si vellet arbitrium causae detulerunt . But if Iulius had no other hold , it was a poore supremacie that might content him . Yet Ambrose , in the Epistle 78. which you quote , saies not so much . Rather of Theophilus somewhat magnificently , Vt duobus istis tuae sanctitatis examen impartiretur , confidentibus Aegyptijs , that your Holines might haue the scanning of these mens cause , while the Bishops of Egypt were your assessors . And againe , Sancta Synodus , cognitionis ius unanimitati tuae , caeterisque ex Aegypto consacerdotibus nostris commisit . The holy Synod ( of Capua ) committed the power of iudging this matter to your agreement , and the Egyptian Bishops . What then of the Pope ? Sanè referendum arbitramur ad sanctum fratrem nostrum Romanae sacerdotem Ecclesiae . Sure , we are of the minde , that it were good it were referred to our holy brother the Priest of Rome . First brother , then Priest of Rome , lastly arbitramur . The Synod belike not ordering so , but Ambrose giuing his opinion thus . And , Quoniam praesumimus te ea iudicaturum quae etiam illi displicere nequeant , because we presume you will resolue in such manner , as shall not be displeasing to him . See you , how one of them is as free from error , as the other , in S. Ambrose minde ? And he is content , that Syricius should haue the cognusance of the cause after Theophilus , not that Theophilus errour might be corrected by Syricius , but that ones concurrence might strengthen the other . § 27. Doe you looke I should answer to Syricius Decretall sent to Himerius ? or does the conueying of it , to France and Portugall , prooue vniuersall iurisdiction , exercised by the Popes in S. Austens time ? But with such baggage you make vp your measure . Himerius askt , and Syricius answers . What then ? And Himerius was within the Romane Patriarchship , caput corporis tai , not caput corporis vniuersalis , saies Syricius himselfe , in the ende of his Rescript . But proceede . Optatus ( say you ) calls Peter principem nostrum , our Prince . Now he could not meane Peter to be that Prince , for he was dead and gone , and so nothing worth . Therefore Siricius who then liued , and was his successor in the Popedome . Brauely shott , and like a Sadducee . Yet in the same booke , Optatus calls Siricius in plaine tearmes , not princeps noster , but socius noster , our frend and fellow , as S. Ambrose a little before , his brother and priest . § 28. That , in the African Councell , Can. 35. the Fathers decreed , that letters should be sent to their brethren and fellow-Bishops abroad , but especially to Anastasius , to informe them , how necessary their latter decree was , in fauour of the Donatists , contradicting a former Canon made against them , what is that to Anastasius his vniuersall iurisdiction ? Doe you see how you are choaked , if you be but held to the point ? yet they sent to others , no lesse then to Anastasius . But to him especially , you say . It might be so ; for the eminencie of his Sea , as we haue often told you . And the Donatists beeing too strong for them , as appeares by that decree , which controules the former , they were glad to take any aduantage , I warrant you , to countenance their proceedings . Durum telum necessitas est . § 29. That , the Bishops of Africa requested Innocentius to vse his authoritie , to the confirmation of their statutes against the Pelagian heretiques ; it was not because the ordinances of prouinciall Synods , are not good in their precincts , without the Pope , as I thinke your selues will not denie , but that the Pelagian heresie beeing farre spread throughout the world , might be curbed within the places that Innocentius had to doe in , as well as in Africk , where the Councel was held . Which taking so good effect , as it seems it did , S. Austen cries out that they were * toto Christiano orbe damnati , condemned ouer all the Christian world : not that Innocentius authoritie was irrefragable , but the concurrence of so many Pastors in the cause of Gods truth , was of force at that time to rectifie the consciences of such as wauered before . In this sense Possidius might well call it , iudicium catholicae dei Ecclesie , the iudgement of the Catholique Church of God , when Innocentius & Zo●●mus accursed the Pelagians , because it sprang from the consent of so many godly Fathers , as incited those Popes to that act of iustice , and lead them the way in this daunce of zeale , as I may so call it . Not that the Church stood in them two , or as if they had the vniuersall iurisdiction that he talkes of , or rather dares not talke of , but captiously and crookedly inuolues onely in impertinent allegations . § 30. I might spend time , about S. Austens authoritie , Epist . 92. writing thus to Innocentius ; That the Lord hath placed thee * in sede Apostolicâ . And doth this prooue vniuersall iurisdiction ? or is there no Apostolique sea but the Romane ? By which reason wee shall haue many vniuersall iurisdictions . Or , that it were negligence to cōceale ought from his Reuerence , which concerned the Church ? But if it were , as they pretend , it were more then negligence , euen flat rebellion , not to communicate with him about all such affaires . But making it but negligence , he shewes they sought for aduice onely , or countenance , not for leaue and grace , when they referred to him . Whereas S. Austen had spoke , of the Popes applying his pastorall diligence , to preuent the daungers of Christs weake members , F. T. interprets it , his power and authoritie , ouer all the members of Christ ; which if the Bishop had so done , to put in ALL , where it was not in S. Austen , to enforce an argument , had beene cheating , and coosenage , and to be proclaimed in markets . See chap. 2. § 31. Innocentius his testimonie of his owne precedencie , carries small force with it , and * Erasmus hath found some cause to suspect this Epistle for counterfeit , or at least censured it for one not worthie of Innocentius . Whereas the Apostle Paul had said of himselfe , Praeter ea quae extrinsecùs sunt , cura omnium Ecclesiarum , this man imitating him ( * for you hold of Paul too as well as Peter ) reads it cleane contrarie , Praeter ea quae intrinsecus sunt , &c. that you may see his Clerkship . And yet you make him worse , then in truth he is . For whereas he more modestly , Arbitramur referri debere &c. you leauing out arbitramur , auouch it peremptorily , that about matters of faith , all Bishops ought tareferre , &c. Is this good dealing ? Lastly , if S. Austen and Alipius say of him , concerning his rescript , Rescripsit ad omnia eo modo quo fas erat , &c. he hath written backe to all , as meete was ; they meane for matter , and for the points in controuersie , betweene Pelagius and the Church , not for ought that he enterlaces of the ambition of his owne Sea. And of these things hitherto . To his fifth Chapter : Of Origen , Hilarie , and Maximus , their authorities . § . 1. AS I haue often complained of the tediousnes of this mate , the onely : inuincible armour that he fights with , as certaine beasts make their parts good against the hunter , by the euill sauour and sent they cast forth to annoy him , beeing otherwise vnable to resist him in the encounter : So he shewes it in this chapter more then any where els , referring vs ( besides his prattle ) to former places of his booke , for confutation of such points , as he mislikes in the Bishops Answer . As if no bodie had confuted his confutation of those Answers , which the Reader of himselfe is able to doe , I dare say , if he haue perused but the former part of this booke , without any further paines to be taken in that behalfe . And yet euery where he remits vs to what hee hath done , and said , as altogether vnconquerable . Now for that which is so firme in the Bishops Answer , as not to be remooued by any meanes , that he railes at and calls stale : else why cannot he iterate his refutation againe , as well as the Bishop repeat his Answer ? but it shames him , that so many Arguments should stumble at one stone , b like the sonnes of Gedeon , beheaded by Abimelech all at one blocke : and therfore he falls to carping and deprauing . Etiamne antidotum contra Caesarem ? said he . So here , the Bishops fault is to haue shewed the errour , and not let the Cardinals fallacies to passe for currant . § 2. That Origen and S. Hilarie , in allowing the Church to be built vpon Peter , with certaine other preheminences which they affoard him , denie not but the rest had their fellowshippe in the same , this is a stale to F. T. and for that onely reason deserues to be misprized . As if the fault were , not so much in the weakenes of the answer , as in the frequencie of repeating it , to which his Battismes neuerthelesse , and his abhominable Crambes , giue the only occasion . Whereas , I thinke , a bad answer is to bee accounted bad , though but b once giuen ; and a good , the oftner it serues the purpose , the more it bewrayes its owne strength , and the aduersaries exigent , that hath but one kind of way to assault the truth , and therefore is still beat backe at the same doore . Where , what meruaile if the Bishop rest not satisfyed with this inference , that those Fathers c when they ascribe certaine excellencies to S. Peter , and yet perhaps , short of the supposed Monarchy , by that meanes , debarre the rest of the Apostles from their part therein , whereas the Cardinall himselfe saies as much of S. Peter , as you would thinke a man could possibly say , to aduance his dignitie , and yet meanes not but the Twelue were equall with him , in the same ? Which were hard to alleadge now , for the proouing of Peters excellencie aboue the other Apostles , though we would argue for the Cardinall out of the Cardinals owne workes . For example , what can be more for Peters Monarchy ouer the Church , then to say , that he onely was made cheife Regent therof ? And yet summa potestas , is by the Cardinall made common to all the Apostles , not once , but twice , within fewe lines , cap. 9. l. 1. de Rom. Pont. and againe in the same chapter , Vnusquisque Apostolorum it a cur am gerebat totius Ecclesiae , ac si ad SE SOLVM ea cura pertineret . Euery one of the Apostles so managed the Church , as if that care had onely belonged to him . And , cap. 11. Summa atque amplissima potestas , is giuen to them all . Shall we not ponder these words then , henceforth in Authors , if at any time they giue as much as this to Peter , and be readie to acknowledge by the Cardinall his owne confession , that Peter had no more then the rest of the Apostles in all this prerogatiue , and therefore no Monarch ? § 3. Now that Origen followes an Allegoricall sense like to a Preacher , as you say , ( whereas the Preacher , if any bodie should tell the plaine truth ) leauing the literall altogether , it may shew his modesty ; and check your rashnesse , that build so boldly vpon the literall sense , if it bee true which the Cardinall in another place obserueth , that the literal sense of things spoken to Peter , is obscurer then the allegorical , though that be hard to be beleeued too , and is commonly found contrary , by his leaue . Yet thus he writes , lib. 1. de Pont. Rom. cap. 12. Non negat Augustinus ad literam posse & debere intelligi quae dicuntur de Iudâ , Petro , & Iohanne : Sed tantùm dicit literalem sensum saepe esse obscurum , & non facilè inueniri , sensum autem mysticum esse multò illustriorem & clariorem , & proptereà se omisso literali figuratè ea exponere loca voluisse . That is , S. Augustine denieth not , ( so as hee would bring S. August . too within the compasse of this dotage ) that things said of Peter , Iudas , and Iohn , both may and ought to be literally vnderstood , but onely he saies , that the literall sense is ofttimes obscure , and hard to sinde out ( where I wonder saies S. August . so ? ) but that the mysticall sense is farre more cleere and euident , and therefore that he omitting the literall exposition , would expound those places figuratiuely , forsooth . This is the constancie of these men , that as Benhadad for feare and guilty conscience , ran from chamber to chamber , so they to avoide what makes against them , change sense for sense , sometime literall for allegoricall , then allegoricall for the literall , about the words spoken to Peter by our Sauiour . The former they thinke they may doe with S. August . and avouch him for it ; there the allegory is the cleerer ; As for the latter , they will not endure that Origen should doe so , by any meanes . Here all is spoild , vnlesse you stick to the Letter : And a Chaos , a confusion is brought in by vs , Lay folk and Clerks , Men and Women , promiscuously inuading both the keyes and the office , no difference left , nor signe of difference , if we allowe of this . Thus he . But howsoeuer you rowle and ruffle in your Rhetorique , declaiming against the supposed Anarchy of our Church , and not discerning ( which euen Balaam did ) the beauty of those tents , to which you are a professed enemy , ( so thicke is the fogge of your malitious ignorance , that stuffes vp your senses ; ) I beleeue Sir , the keyes are conueighed to the commonalty rather by you then vs , and to the worser sexe too ( not so to be honoured ) as in your Abbesses to be gouernours , in your gossips to be dippers and baptisers , and I knowe not what . And doubtles you would haue admitted them to be Preachers too by this time , if you had not thought it fitter to discharge your men , then to licence your Women . Neither if Origen extend this to more then Peter , must it therefore presently be communicated to all ; There are Apostles besides Peter , there are Pastors besides the Apostles , there are the iust and faithfull of all sorts , besides diuers that belong to the bodie of the Church in shew . It is not necessary we should open so great a gappe as you thinke , though wee take Origen litterally . Though this I must tell you , that Origen in all likelihood would not haue applied it so by allegory , vnlesse he had stretched it beyond Peter , in the very property . For assurance whereof consider his words . Si super vnum illum Petrum existimas aedificari totam ecclesiam , quid dicturus es de Iohanne filio tonitrui , & Apostolorum vnoquoque ? If thou thinkest the whole Church is built onely vpon Peter , what wilt thou say of Iohn the sonne of thunder , what of euerie one of the Apostles besides ? It seemes incredible first to Origen , that the whole Church should bee built vpon one man onely , though it were Peter himselfe . Therefore he insists vpon totam Ecclesiam , and considerately opposeth vnum illum . And makes the one but existimas , or si existimas , If thou thinkest so ( saith he ) by Peter , but the other is , quid dicturus es , how wilt thou answer it , how wilt thou defend it , against Iohn , and against the rest ? And sure as Origen was of the minde , that no Apostle of the Twelue , sate out from beeing a foundation of the Church , in the sense that Peter was , so hee names Iohn you see in particular , of whome afterwards you shall see how great opinion he conceiued , and how ful of reuerence , not inferiour to Peter . In the meane while it is euident how he pleades for the Apostles all in generall , whom he cannot digest to be denied this priuiledge , of supporting the frame equally with Peter . For which cause he deales so peremptorily , and takes vp his aduersarie , as we noted before , Si existimas Petrum , quid dicturus es de caeteris , &c. Which differs from his moral collection , as you call it , which is a great deale more mawdlen , where he affirmes by fortasse , Fortasse autem quod Petrus respondens dixit , &c. Perhaps if we say the same that Peter said , wee shall be priuiledged like him : this is but perhaps . Yea , the practise of the Church implyes no lesse , then we now stand for , which Origen there declares towards the ende of his discourse . Quoniam ij qui Episcoporum locum sibi vindicant , vtuntur eo dicto sicut Petrus , & claues regni coelorum acceperunt , &c. Because they that are Bishops , take this to themselues , euen as Peter , and haue receiued the keies of the kingdome of heauen . Heare you ? not euerie Christian now , nor predestinate man , which is his morall doctrine , and offends you so mainly , but the Bishops , good Sir , the Bishops in speciall take this to belong to them , and claime the keyes . Is not this a signe the keyes were committed to all the Apostles ? For the communitie of Bishops descendes from all the Apostles ; If the Keies had been Peters onely , onely the Pope should claime them , pretending to come of him , as now he doth . But Origen saith , the Bishops doe this in plural , Episcopi vtuntur eo dicto sicut Petrus . The Bishops make vse of this saying , euen as Peter did . And they haue receiued the Keies , &c. § 4. Now when you tell vs , that Origen neuer mentions in this place the commission of feeding , pasce oues meas , ( though the Bishop brings this place to answer the other by , about Summa rerum de ouibus pascendis , out of his Commentary vpon Rom. 6. ) and so the Bishops answer fits not with the obiection : You are to know , that as the one , so the other is to be construed , either of Peter or of all . If , Tibi dabo claues , belong to them all , and specially , if , Super te aedificabo ecclesiam meam , so doth Pasce oues too , by proportion , either equall , or maioris virtutis , as they call it . For what so singular and so individuate , as Super te aedificabo ? Sure , pasce oues , is not so much . The one a promise , the other a precept , and precept is not broken , if it extend to many , promise either is , or is the weaker for it , without all doubt . And yet Origen himselfe teacheth you as much in this tractate , as it were preuenting your obiection , when thus he saith towards the middle of it : Si dictum hoc commune est caeteris , cur non simul omnia velut dicta ad Petrum tamēsunt omnium communia ? That is , If this belong to all , though spoken to Peter , ( as he doubts not but it does ) why not all the rest then , though directed to him , yet are to be meant of all ? § 5. Another place you quote out of the same Origen , vnquoted by the Cardinall , but belike to help him , post aciem inclinatam , out of Hom. 2. in diuersa Euang. namely that Peter was Vertex , which is no more then 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , of which before , giuen by S. Baesil to the great Athanasius . Yea , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , no bare toppe , nor no bald vertex , as your Popes is , at this day . Martial hath an Epigram , against one that had three sculls , and when almes were distributed came for three mens parts . Si te viderit Hercules , peristi . We are not they that make more 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , or more Coryphaeos , then needs we must in the senate Apostolike . The number of such worthies , whereof euery one was so sufficient as to be a 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ( as they say of the Argosey , that euery mariner in it might haue beene a pilot ) commends the wisedome of Christ the chooser , and makes much for the Churches safety and prosperity , to whome they were appointed guardians . But as for the man of three sculis , or the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , in Martial , let your Pope in good earnest take heed of Hercules , wearing three Crownes , and not content with more then three mens parts . Of vertex too much , whether in iest or earnest , vnlesse the argument were better . We are speaking of Origen , and his second Hom. in diuersa . Are ye aduised therefore what priuiledges he heapes vpon S. Iohn there , not inferiour to Peter , not to any ? for it is not for nothing , that Iohn still crosses Peter , though the one set out former , yet the other arriuing first at his iournies end , Ioh. 20. Cui donatum est ( saies Origen ) quod tibi donatum est , ô beate ? To whome was it euer giuen , that which to thee hath been giuen , O thou blessed creature ? Dic quaeso , cui talis ac tanta donata est gratia ? I pray thee tell me ; To whom euer was such and so great grace conferred ? Feare you not least hee deface the Virgins garland , not onely Peters ? And as Peter is a rocke , by interpretation , as you tell vs , so Iohn ( if wee beleeue Origen ) Latinè , quod donatum est , as if a packe of gifts were couched in him , and the speciallest gift , that euer befell a man , ( either the Monarchy then belike , or aboue the Monarchy , ) another one in degree , to whom that may befit , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , you know the place . And indeed no writer speakes of Peter , as if he had all gifts in him . S. Ambrose diuides them between Peter and Paul , serm . 66. One had one key , another another . Ille scientiae , iste potentiae . And iste erudit ad salutem , ille suscipit ad quietem . Paul in this life , Peter in the next . Neither doth this much make for the Popes preheminencies , who is not so simple , as to reserue himselfe for Paradise , rather all for the world present , which was made ( they say ) for the presumptuous . Yea , most plainely in the same Sermon , Quis cui praeponatur incertum est . S. Ambrose knowes not which to preferre . Wherein Bellarmine is more happie ; for he saies , Paulus plus profuit Ecclesiae , Paul did the Church more good then Peter . And he would haue him more honoured of vs at this day , then Peter . As Stephen a Deacon is more honoured in his memorie , ( saith hee ) then S. Iames an Apostle ( why should hee strike at Iames aboue all the rest ? ) Laurence then Sixtus , &c. Neither is this peculiar to Bellarmine , but all the Iesuites ought to be of this mind . For they propounded S. Paul of all other the Apostles , whome they would most willingly imitate , witnesse Maffaeus , de vitâ Ignatij , l. 2. c. 13. And yet the Iesuites , men archicall enough , or giuen to sway . Which is an argument , that may make for Pauls supremacie in time , aboue Peter ; not onely for preaching , but for gouernement too , vnlesse they abate . And the other Fathers are of the same iudgement . S. Leo serm . 1. de Natali Apostolorum . In the bodie of the Church , whose Head is Christ ( not Peter nor the Pope ) the two Apostles Peter and Paul are set like geminum lumen oculorum , like the two eyes in a mans head . Therefore no such difference . S. Gregorie , l. 1. dial . c. vlt. * Paulus Apostolus Petro [ etsi ] Apostolorum primo , in principatu Apostolico frater est . What is this but equalitie , in principatu , in the cheifedom it selfe ? Eucher . in Natal . Apost . Petri & Pauli , calls them aequali per terram luce fulgentes , shining all ouer the world with equall brightnes . Lastly , all the solution that S. Ambr. can finde of his doubt , is this , by reducing it to their titles ; that one is Petra , the other Vasculum , both of them necessaria domni saluatoris , each necessarie to our Lords house . Paul feeds and releeues the houshold , whiles Peters vertue is buried vnder ground , like the foundation of an house , & as it were least in sight . Though for my part , I confesse , I can hardly conceiue how this holds , or how Peter stands the Church in such stead , to lie vnder it , as you would say , to this very time . In a house , I graunt , the foundation is of most vse . But such a Foundation , who can lay but Christ ? 1. Cor. 3. 11. S. Pauls benefit of feeding vs , that is of instructing vs , is daily , and obuious , and intelligible . Therefore by my consent , the prerogatiue shall rest with him still . But leauing Ambrose , to whom we haue digressed , returne we to Origen , and conclude of him in a word . Concerning Iohn he addes ; Fortasse quis dicet , tantundem Petro collatum . Happily a man may say , S. Peter had as much bestowed on him ; but he denies it in the next words , and more plainely soone after ; Sed non temerè quis dixerit , &c. yea , how high he rises ? Non ergò Iohannes erat homo , sed plusquam homo . Therefore Iohn was no man , but more then a man. How would this serue the Popes turne , had it been said of Peter , and if the Canonists had the handling of it ? Who not onely salute him with Dominus Deus Papa , euen in their late editions of such slattering Glosses , as they haue deckt their Law with , which perhaps might be excused , either by Dij sunt multi , Dominique multi , 1. Cor. 8. 5. or the style of Rome vnder Domitian , full of basenesse ; but euen in their studies , and closets , and most retired contemplations , define him to be , * Ens conflatum ex Deo & homine , a certaine medley of God and man. But beeing affirmed of Iohn , as it is by Origen , I hope here Mr. F. T. will giue way to allegories , to quench the fire , which else these words might kindle verie dangerous , and not vrge him to maintaine the letter too precisely . Lastly , thus : Whiles Iohn was leaning vpon our Sauiours breast , and so safe , and well appaid , Peter often tripped , saepe titubabat , quasi trepidae actionis symbolum , sayes Origen ; not the rocke of faith nowe , immooueable , impregnable , but the picture of the actiue part of our life , weake , and fraile , and faint , and tottering . This of Origen . § 6. In S. Hilaries words , and your exception to the Bishops answer to them , there remaines onely these two points to be cleered . One , that you say S. Hilary so ascribes it to the faith of Peter , to be petra digna aedificatione Christi , a rock worthie of Christs building vpon , as yet withall he denyes it not to his very person . Another , that you affirme in plaine termes , it was the merit of his faith which purchased him this . Which is first very insolent ( for I beginne with your later ) that faith should be a meritour at Gods hands , or a meritresse , if you will haue it so ( I pray correct me , if I speake amisse , for you see whether your absurdities lead me ) wheras Charity not faith is the fons meriti , the actuall deseruer , by condignity at least , as your selues hold ; for ex longinquo is another thing , and expraeuiâ dispositione , &c. Where in truth you are so dazeled about this merit of Peters , that you say you know not what , ascribing that to his charity which is more proper to his faith , and againe that to his faith which belongs to his charitie . To be cheife in feeding you ascribe to his Loue , to Amas me plus his ? Which is true in our Sauiours sense , for exciting his care , not in yours to inuest him in the supreame iurisdiction , which rather requires the priuiledge of freedome from errour . And here , his deseruing to be the rock , or the principall , for bearing sway , you impute it to his faith , which is too yong to be a deseruer , if it be not otherwise accommodated , euen by your own doctrine . This is one absurdity therefore . Secondly , that he should merit to be the rocke of the Church , whereas a man canot merit , that is not first in the Church , ( as yourselues will not deny ) and so presupposeth the foundation is laid . But in no sort , can one merit to be the foundation thereof himselfe . As * S. August . often shewes , that the Redeemer of the world , did not merit the coniunction of his flesh with the deity , but beeing inuested once therewith , then merited for vs , and wrought saluation . Whom , although we should grant , to haue merited to be the foundation of the Church , the Iudge of the world , &c. yet you are not ignorant , how it is held by your owne diuines , namely per titulum secundarium , hauing right to it before , out of the worth of his hypostasis , which in S. Peter is nothing so . But especially , if you will take to that of Maximus , whom you quote a little after , that S. Peter for rowing in a frigot or small boate , was made Master and gouernour of the Vniuersall Church . for what merit could there be , of that in this ? And suppose that there is an orderly promotion among shipmen , from the Lower roomes to the higher , till they be Pilots , and Admiralls , &c. or in like sort , that the good Deacon gets himself a faire degree , ( as S. Paul speaks , ) to be made Priest , Priest a Bishop , Bishop a metropolitan , &c. yet you speake of a promotion in diuersissimo genere ; which is too too vncouth , that S. Peter for steering his materiall vessell at the sea , should be preferred to sit in the highest place of the Church , and congregation of God. Thirdly , if this were true that you auouch of his merits , S. Peter should not only haue merited for himselfe , but for as many monsters & miscreants , as euer sate after him in that sea ; Which you doe well to shroud vnder the merits of S. Peter , least they appeare too too vgly naked in themselues ; sauing that pallium breue as the Prophet Esay speaks , their couering is too short , and non est satis nobis & vobis : Matth. 25. What ? For them that beleeue not , for them that apprehend not , that concurre not in the least sort , yea for them that were not borne when S. Peter liued , could S. Peter merit ? As for * Hildebrands dictates , they are no gospel . His words are neither slanders , whē they are directed against vs , nor testimonies of any force , when they are produced for you . And will you allowe no qualification of S. Hilaries word ? Whereas they that haue but tasted the auncient writers , know that to merite , is to obtaine and procure , though by grace and fauour , and no further to be vrged . He attained then ( saith S. Hilary ) a supereminent glory . Which glory may be in many things , beside his primacie , as the Bishop answered you of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , in S. Basils authority ; and calling it gloriam , it seemes he rather points to our Sauiours approbation , then to any reall preferment collated vpon Peter . Gloria is in fame , in predication , and report , as euen Tully will teach you , Orat. pro Marcello , which is nothing to office , and to installment . § 7. As for the coupling of S. Peters person with his faith , & his faith with his person , which is the second point of the twaine , about which you sweat , and trauell sore , casting vp mole-hils , and mustering your Metaphysicks long vnskoured , the Bishop neuer dreamt , as you fantastically imagine , that S. Hilary should giue this to a fleeting shadow , or to faith without a subiect , like your Accidents in the Eucharist , which you welcome as well , as S. Iames his hoste doth his guests , that biddes them warme themselues without a fire , feede without victualls , and so you them to sit down without a chaire , or a stoole : Not so : But if faith be the proper foundation of the Church , as S. Hilary implies by his fiue-fold repetition , Haec fides , haec fides , &c. then was Peter , in behalfe of his faith onely , pronounced by our Sauiour the foundation of the Church . Which is another thing then to be preferred , for the merit of his faith , to be the Churches foundation , as you fondly dreame . For so it might fall out , that he should still remaine the foundation of the Church , though he had cast of his faith , wherewith he beganne , which will not stand with S. Hylaries conceit of it , and accordingly , none other are at any time to bee reckoned the foundations of the Church , but they that shall tread in the steps of faithfull Peter , howsoeuer otherwise they may come neere him in calling . For where is more promised to Peters successors , by vertue of meere succession , then to Abrahams children ? Rom. 4. Nay , the adoptiue branch may not challenge so much to it selfe , as the naturall , Rom. 11. Succession ( saith Greg. Nazianzen ) is oft-times between contraries . Sickenesse succeeds health , night succeeds day , so an vnworthy Bishop succeeds a worthy , as Nazianzen instanceth . So your Popes may Peter . Irenaeus saith warily , that we must obey those Priests in the Church of God , which deriuing their succession from the Apostles , together with their succession in Office , haue receiued the certain gift of truth , lib. 4. cap. 43. § 8. By this also the other places of S. Hilary are declared , where he proceeds to call Peter the foundation of the Church , as you expound them ; his person , I graunt , if ought at all , as the Bishop also meant , ( not a qualitie without a subiect , which is your chimaera ) but in respect of his vertue , not of his authoritie singular . And as all the faithfull may come more or lesse , neere to Peters faith , so they haue all more or lesse a part in this prerogatiue , as you heard lately out of Origen , yet still without disturbing the Churches aray . Neither perhaps should Peter haue been the rocke , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , if so precise regard had been had to his faith , as to value it with his primacie , so much for so much , by way of meed and merit , as you pretend ( and yet no Simonists ) but either all the Christians , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , 1. Pet. 2. 1. which are dignifyed with a faith nothing inferiour to ours , euen to Peters selfe , or the poore woman in the Gospel , of whome our Sauiour affirmed , O woman , great is thy faith : or lastly the Centurion , Verily , I haue not found so great faith in Israel . § 9. But in silentio reliquorum , while others held their peace , and primum cognoscere , & eloqui illud quod nondum vox humana protulerat , that was it that made S. Peters confession so glorious , and so remarkeable , witnes Hilary , witnes diuers more , whome I forbeare to name . And in that sense , he might instly be tearmed a foundation , or a prime workman ; not but that others followed or consented with him , and so foundations too , Apocal. 21. but his zeale was such , he spake first , for which hast it is not like he was made cheife gouernour . § 10. There remaines S. Maximus , and first , whether he were that same Bishop of Turin , or no. Which the Bishop denyed not , as not hasty that way ( although the case were plainer ) to be so peremptory , ( it is enough for you to determine magistraliter ) but left vnder doubt , the rather because the Sermons that are attributed to Maximus , haue beene printed with S. Ambroses in times past , and so vncertaine to whom to be adiudged , as in many other fathers it fareth at this day . And if your obseruatiō be good , which you bring out of Gennadius , you see what profit the Bishops doubting hath brought with it , I would say praise and commendation to you , if it were thought to be your owne , which you will hardly perswade them that know you here , not to haue dropt out of the Note-booke of some of your good Masters . As for the Sermons de tempore , not made as the Bishop said in S. August . time , which you call a scaepe or a not able ouersight of his , and you thinke you might call it a flat lie , according to the rest of your maydenly modesty ; you are answered before ; yea your selfe haue answered your selfe in that point , as Siseraes mother did , that at least S. August . gaue no such titles to his sermons , whatsoeuer they did that came after . Yet in producing Witnesses , is it not reason that you should call them by their proper and right names , or else they loose the force of their credite for deposition ? And this was all , that the Bishop made sticke at , concerning that point . § 11. Now to the authority it selfe , & the Bishops answer thereto ; Quanti igitur merits apud Deum suum Petrus , which you persist to construe , Of how great merit was Peter with his God , ( so hardly are you driuen with the dogge from his licourment ) as if Peters merit had beene to rowe the boat , and his reward to be made the gouernour of the world , whereas the indifferent translator would rather haue construed it thus , Of how great interest , or how great account , therefore , was Peter with his God , ( antecedens pro consequente , which your Rhetorique cannot be ignorant of , that quote Quintilian afterward , about the trope Catachresis ) who after the rowing of a little boate , had the gouernement of the whole Church committed to him ? Thus Maximus . And the more to blame you then , as the Bishop well answers you , to assigne him the gouernment of a particular Church ( Peter I meane ) & so in effect to rob him of the Vniuersall . For we deny not , but that both he , and his fellow Apostles , had the whole Church committed to their care , ioyntly and seuerally , without any limitation . And surely Maximus his words import no more . As for that the Bishop saies , that Y O V haue giuen him the gouernment of a particular Church , after the gouernment of the whole , haue not You , I pray , giuen it him , in that You allow it him , & that You stand for it to be his , against them that make question of it ? Will you neuer leaue this dissembling of your skill , to take all things in so wrong a sense , and by the left handle , as Epictetus calls it ? Isay , You haue giuen it him . Not wee but Christ , you will say . You meane perhaps of his Vniuersall gouernment of the whole Church , which in a sense we grant you , as common to the rest , and not to be transmitted to posterity . In your sense you are as farre from euicting any such thing , for ought I see , as if you had neuer gone about it , that he should be the ordinary pastor onely , and the rest the extraordinaries . But to the particular Church of Rome , you will not say your selues that Christ designed him , no more then to Antioch which he abandoned after possession , but rather his owne choice , if not your fiction . For you haue giuen him leaue to sleet , and to chop , and to fixe his seate else where then at Rome , when so seemes good . Only , piè wee must beleeue , that hee will not doe so in hast . Howbeit if wee should deny that he was euer at Rome , as some haue bin mooued by no weak grounds to do , as both collections out of Scripture , and supputations of the time when he should arriue there , yet your argument is strange whereby you would approoue it here , in your num . 15. where you say , it is demonstrated , and as it were proclaimed , by the continuall successions of Bishops in that Sea , to this very day . Call you this a demonstration of Peters being at Rome , that Bishops neuer failed in that Sea , to this day , ergò S. Peter was the first that sate there ? Though againe it were no hard matter , to disprooue the continuance of your Bishops in that Sea , euen at sundry seasons , if it were pertinent to this place . But howsoeuer that be , you ought to bring a more colourable argument of Peters sitting there as I take it . For of many that I haue heard , this is simply the simplest . Neither is that much better , which you vaunt farre more in , if it be possible , writing thus in the same numb . And withall he addes a strange Parenthesis [ quasi ea totius pars non esset ] as though the same particular Church of Rome were not a part of the whole . As who would say , that S. Peter could not be gouernour , both of the whole Church , and of a particular Church . Wherein , he argueth as wisely , as if he should say , that a Bishop of Ely could not be gouernour of the particular Church of Ely , and of the whole Diocese ; or that a Bishop of Canterbury could not be gouernour of that Bishopricke , and primate of England ; or that a generall of an army could not gouerne a particular company , and yet be generall of the whole army . And here , though you would seeme to haue triumphed ouer the Bishop , in your impregnable instances , yet you shew , it wrings you at the very heart , to bee so met with about Maximus his authoritie , when in your numb . following you set him downe both in Text , and Margent , for a man whose head should be confounded with blowes , rather then confuted with arguments . So notable a champion you are at your Ismaels Logicke , whose fist was against euery body , and euerie bodies against his , which Philo interprets to be the image of a disputer , but like none so much as the Popish disputants ( you may say they dispute in Schola Tyranni , Act. 19. ) from whose butcherly hands , I pray God deliuer vs , that euen thus declare their fingers to be itching , till they may deale with vs. § 12. As for the Bishoprick of Rome , ioyned or adioyned to the Bishopricke of the whole Church , which you would patterne with the Diocesse and Church of Ely , recommended to the gouernment of one man , or the gouernment of a whole army , and one company in that army , entrusted to the care of the same generall , and such like ; how vnlike are these comparisons , I report me to your conscience ! For the gouernment of that company , which is a limbe of the maine army , while it remaines so , is impossible to be diuided from the gouernment of the whole , and so Ely Church from Ely Diocesse is not so easily separated , in ordine currente , as now things goe ; but he that hath the one must needes haue the other . But your selues hold , that the Bishopricke of the whole world , hath beene actually diuided from the Bishopricke of Rome , as namely while Peter sate at Antioch , before he came to Rome , to say nothing of your later Popes , that lay soaking at Auenion seuenty yeares together : wherupon Bellarmine graunts , as you heard euen now , that they may be diuided againe , if occasion so require , and yet hopes that God will not easily permit it ; by which you see , your comparison halts of one foote . But the maine point lyes in this : That the Bishop of Ely , hath no new induction to his Church of Ely , more then was giuen him at first entrance vpon the entire Bishopricke , and so the generall of an army , hath no newe constitution ouer a part of his army , after hee is admitted Generall ouer the whole . Whereas you giuing to S. Peter the whole Church for his Bishopricke , if afterwards he take vp his seate in Rome , by a more peculiar title , what doth he but extinguish his former cleane ? which , I thinke , will hold euen in Fitzherberts Law. § 13. Neither say that S. Iames was Bishop of Hierusalem , and yet gouernour of the whole Church , with the rest of his colleagues : for Iames was extraordinarie as you also confesse : but shew that one man may be ordinarie Pastor of the whole Church , and yet ordinarie Pastor of a part too , by a second title distinct from the former ; or else you say nothing , but palter about the Bishops answer to Maximus , and bewray a manifest contradiction in your doctrine . § 14. I labour to be briefe , and I need not to adde any thing to the Bishops answers , which you see how pregnant they are against all reproofe . Onely , because the Bishop is so exceedingly compendious , in his Answer to the Apologie , and occasion hath beene giuen me to peruse the Sermons newly quoted of S. Maximus , I will set downe , in a word or two , mine owne obseruations , out of the said Sermons lately set forth , for F. T. to consider , if they make not more for S. Paul , then that doth for Peter , which the Cardinall alleadged . In his second Sermon therefore , de eodem festo , viz. Natali B B. Petri & Pauli , speaking of Paul , after he had commended Peter for his great faith , Cuius tanta est nihilominùs plenitudo sidei : Whose fulnesse of faith is so great notwithstanding . First , fulnesse of faith , like plenitudo spiritús , which they attribute to the Pope . And , notwithstanding Peters , as deseruing a reward no lesse thē his , if there were place for deserts , vnlesse you will say , that Peter had engrossed all before , and nothing was left for Paul though deseruing . Yea he addes , that our Sauiour in his prouidence chose him , peculiarem quodam modo ducem , a captaine ( of his Church ) in a manner singular , and without fellow . Erat enim tam praecipuus , &c. vt ad ecclesiae solatium , & ad firmamentum omnium credentium , Christus eum vocaret è caelo . Hee was so singular ( in his gift ) that to the comfort of his Church , and the support of all the faithfull , ( firmamentum credentium not inferiour to petra ) our Lord directly called him from heauen . Lastly , Vt aduerteret princeps futurus nominis Christiani , that he which was to bee the prince of the name Christian , that is , the most eminent in all the Christian congregation , might marke , &c. As for the third Sermon of that argument , which is that from whence the words , Quanti meriti , are quoted , whereunto the Bishop answers : it followes immediately after them in the praise of Peter , thus of Paul : That Paul in his Apostleship , how highly did he please Christ ? ( where you see meritum is counterpoized by placere , indeed all one ) who is his owne witnesse , sidelissimus sibi testis : who shunning to reueale his owne praise , and yet seeking to make knowne the power of his Christ , wraps vp in modestie , &c. Alluding , no doubt , to those places of his Epistles , wherein hee euidently challengeth equalitie with the best , and reporteth such things as is wonderfull by himselfe , though not tickled thereto by any priuate vain-glorie , but meerly enforced by his aduersaries importunitie . In the first Sermon of that argument , they are ioyntly called , both Paul and Peter , Ecclesiarum omnium principes , Princes of all the Churches : and againe , reuerendissimi Principes omnium Ecclesiarum , the most reuerend Princes of all the Churches . § 15. I omit your railing in your num . 18. where you say the Bishop hath beene puzled with places , and faine to trisle , wrangle , cogge , and lye , &c. I account it my ill happe , to be matcht with such a rakeshame , that obserues no reuerence , and is onely good at proouing our patience . Onely my comfort is , as Demosthenes is said , to haue said in the like , that I shall ouercome in beeing put downe , and you loose in conquering , in so damned an encounter . The Bishop had said of the Cardinalls testimonies , cited out of the fathers , vnum hoc peccant omnia . All the places brought for Peters primacie , trip in this , that they haue nothing , in truth , which may not straight be granted , except some petty word , about which I meane not to iangle . And what more excellent 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 could there be then this ? a premunition , or an amulet , against the errors , that might arise in vnstable minds , by mistaking the fathers , while they vse such speaches . For as Epiphanius saies , that such cautions must be vsed sometimes , euen towards the writings of holy Scripture , least the Reader be peruerted , rather then edified ; so , in the fathers much more , who neither write so plaine for vnderstanding as the Scriptures , nor yet so currant for beleife . It followes in the Bishop ; Nam nec primatum negamus Petri &c. for wee deny not the primacy of Peter , nor the names which doe signifie it , but wee demand the thing , or the matter it selfe now in question , to wit , his earthly Monarchy . Thus he . And to this what say you ? You say , he grants the primacy of Peter , and yet labours to ouerthrow it , when it is prooued out of the fathers . As how , trow you ? When they teach that Peter had the primacie , because he was the foundation of the Church , and that he had a speciall commission giuen him to feede Christs sheepe , he goeth about to prooue that Peter was no more the foundation of the Church , then the rest of the Apostles were , nor otherwise Pastor thereof , then they . And what of that ? Wherein then consisted this primacy , which the fathers teach , and deduce , from the power giuen him by the keyes , and by his pastorall commission , which doe import authority , power , iurisdiction , and gouernment ? This you . It hath bin told you , Sir , sufficiently , ouer and ouer , wherein the primacy of Peter consisted , though it draw no soueraignty or Iurisdiction with it , and much lesse so great , as you are in loue with , I meane the temporal and the terrible ; quae & spiritum concutit saecularis rei gratiâ , as Tertullian saies , or saeculum concutit praetextu Spiritûs , as yours apparantly doth . It is * neither keyes not crooke , that will content you , but onely a glaiue , and a staffe , the armour of the foolish shepheard , whereof Zacharie speakes , describing your Pope , that idoll in sede meâ , as Christ from heauen bespake him long agoe , if the stories say true . And yet why should we tell you , wherein this primacie consists , that the Fathers deduce out of the words of Scripture , rather then you conclude it out of the words themselues , or the Fathers words vpon those words , and so force it vpon our consciences , that we may haue nothing to answer , but by yeelding to your desire ? Nowe you are faine to raue , and chase , and cry , after all is done , what is it , if it be not this ? What is pasce oues , and super hanc petram , but onely the making Peter cheife Magistrate of the Church , so as all Iurisdiction may flow from him ? Whereas we may say more truely , and aske of you , what so vnlikely foundation hath this exorbitant power , as either the keies of the Church , or the feeding of Christs sheepe ? And doth the Bishop , good Sir , only goe about to prooue that other Apostles are ioyned with Peter , either in the feeding of Christs flocke , or in the receiuing of the keyes ? Which hee hath euidently conuinced , and demonstrated to your eye , both by the sequele of the text , and the authorities of the Fathers . The Fathers argument then , ( say you ) is nothing worth , whereby they would establish the primacie of Peter , from such places . As though Peters primacy might not be prooued from the places , and yet that primacie bee no such primacie as you conceit . For the verie promising of the keyes , though with intention to them all , yet to him onely formally , & the feeding of Christs lambes , which was the charge of them all , yet three seuerall times enioyned to him , because of his threefold deniall of his Lord , giues him a kind of prerogatiue or primacie , if you call it so , which we enuie him not , and yet still falls short of your Monstrous Monarchie . S. August . hath told you , and S. Ambrose hath told you , the first two that Pasce oues , belongs to all , yea to all vs , not only to all them ; but the last , that not those words onely , but whatsoeuer else was said to Peter , ( by way of such honour no doubt ) is commune omnium , common to all , at least common to all the Apostles . Neither pittie the fathers , as most idlely you would seeme to doe , in your 19. numb . for inferring the primacie from such places as those ; but rather condemne your owne foolish fancie , for misinterpreting so grossely , both the Fathers and the places . When you say , The Bishop is miserably troubled with certaine petty words , with voculae quaedam , as Caput , and Primatus , and sometimes hee graunts them , sometimes denies them : What more iust , or more reasonable course can bee held , then both to graunt them , and denie them , the one in the Fathers sense , that they alledge them in ; the other in yours , as you peruert them ? As for troubling the Bishop , they are so farre frō that , those small words , & as you say , petty voculae ; that by his accurate explaining them , I verily beleeue , he hath prouided so well , as they shall neuer trouble any man more hereafter . § 16. In fine you carp him , for calling the Popes supremacy , an earthly Monarchy , or temporall primacy ; of which before . Yet you repeat it againe . And wherefore then did you , in reporting Origens words , num . 2. of this Chap. concerning the founding of the Church vpon Peter , veluti super terram , as vpon the earth , breake off the English , to print those words aswell in Latine as in English , veluti super terram , which is more then you affoarded to certaine other of the same sentence , to expresse them twice ? Was it not to perswade vs , that his primacie was earthly , or his Monarchy temporall , which here you abhorre ? But let vs heare you in good earnest . The place , say you , is temporall , or earthly , where it is exercised , that is this present world , the power heauenly , both by institution from aboue , and because he is guided , by Gods spirit , in the vse of it . Which , I pray you , may we not say , of the power of Kings , as well ? Vnles either you haue forgotten Rom. 13. That , there is no power but of God , or the Emperours style , which the Fathers giue them , Non ex hominibus neque per homines , or in the Councell of Calchedon , Desuper regni sceptra suscipiens Imperator , &c. Or , Per me reges regnant , Pro. 8. 15. Or , Inde potestas , vnde spiritus , Tertullian in Apologet. Or Gregory Nazianzene in orat . ad Praesidem irascentem , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , ab illo sceptrum habes , &c. Thou raignest with Christ , thou hast thy scepter from him . Or that happily yee are perswaded , that the Pope is better assisted , then the King , by God , in his Consultations . What meanes that then , Prov. 16. 10 ? Oraculum in labijs : and , In iudicio non errabit os eius . What that , Prou. 21. 1 ? The heart of the King is in the hand of God , & quocunque volet flectet illud . Which S. August . so stands vpon , that he doubts not to say , per cor Regis ipsa veritas iussit , Truth it selfe commands by the heart of the King ; and againe , Emperours commaund the selfe same that Christ , for when they commaund what good is , no man commandeth by them , but Christ . Epist . 166. To make short , what thinke you of that , Rom. 13. Rulers are no terrour to good works , but to the euill . No nor to workers neither . Doe what is good , and he will praise thee not punish thee . The ruler is the Minister of God , for thy good , but if thou doe that which is euill , be afraid , for he is the Minister of God , a reuenger to execute wrath vpon all them , that doe euill . Yea , they are all Gods Ministers , attending vpon this very thing continually . Doth not this rather shew , that the King is assisted by God , then the Pope , to preserue him as well from scandall of action , as from errour in iudgment ? Though for the Pope , you are not wont to deny your selues , that he may erre in action , and that very fowly : all your care is to vphold the credite of his Iudgement , wherein you see the King enioyes Gods directions , no lesse then hee . But why should you bee so loath , to admit of the terme of temporall Monarchy , or earthly primacy ? May we not say with the Poet , as he doth of Dido ? — hoc praetexit nomine culpā , cladem rather : or with the same author elsewhere , — Quid si quod voce negatis , Mente datis , or vendicatis ? What is this , but to cut the throat with a woodē knife , pretending gentlenes to the acts of fiercenes , Iacobs voice , and Esaus hands ? Or like the Axe , in Aesops fables , which Bishop Fisher tould of , that came a begging vpon a time to a certaine goodly wood , or tuft of trees , for a helue or a handle , promising to trim it , and prune it , and keepe it neat , but ended in felling , quelling , and destroying . So the Pope challengeth nothing , but a spirituall primacie , to keep Kings in order and in awe , who else would be extrauagant , he saies ; which if once you graunt him , you shall see what feats of mischeife he will worke you , as Balaam said , I would kill the outright , if I had but a sword , or as Dauid of Golias his , so he of the spirituall , Giue me but that , there is none to that . Let him alone , if once he can get but to graspe the sword , be it what it will be , sword , or swithe ; Monarchy , or Primacie , and of what kinde soeuer . § 17. Why , but S. Peter exercised a corporall power , and S. Paul likewise , for so much as they both ended in corporall effects , as in striking Elymas the sorcerer blinde , as in punishing Ananias , and Sapphira , with bodily death . As if this were the power , either of Peter or Paul , beeing miraculous in them both ; wheras Miracles come from no inhaerent power , as your School-men teach , from a circumstant rather , or an attendant ; almighty God , by meanes vnknowne , being ready to execute the determinations of his seruants . But wee speake of a power inherent in the magistrate , which is denominated by the effects , as the effects are sorted and qualified by their obiects , goods , bodies , limmes , and liberty . For about them are conuersant the acts of magistracy , depriuations , imprisonments , maymes , or deathes . Which the doer of miracles hath no hand in the inflicting of , but at his request Omnipotencie effecteth . Euen as you read of Iosua commanding the sunne , Obediuit Deus voci hominis , but voci onely , &c. S. Ambr. confutes this argument of yours , lib. 3. Offic. cap. 14. speaking of Elizeus & the Syrians whom he took prisoners , that , Non erant manu percutiendi , quos supernaturali virtute subiugâsset . They might not be stricken with hand , whom God had extraordinarily put into his hands . So as S. Peter himself might not exercise any bodily force vpon those , whom the holy Ghost by miracle had subiected to him . Much lesse then may we , by his example . § 18. Neither is it to be wondred , that the primitiue Church might haue temporall power , or corporall power in defect of Christian Magistrates , to punish offendors , which since hath ceased in the ordinary gouernment , the Church hauing returned to her Channells , as I may say , and the Magistrate being at hand to take her part . To omit that as I noted to you before , the deuill was appointed to be the executioner , rather then once the Apostles should defile themselues , with that worke , or handle the sword ; to which now the Popes hand euen cleaues for eagernesse , as did that Captaines , 2. Sam. 23. 10. THE DEFENCE OF the Bishop of ELIE his Answer to Card. BELLARMINES Apologie , against the slaunderous Adioynder of F. T. The second Part. EPHREM . ¶ To thee , and but to thee to none , I make my prayer . PRINTED BY CANTRELL LEGGE , Printer to the Vniuersitie of Cambridge . 1617. To the sixt Chapter of the Adioynder , about Inuocation of Saints . The auctorities of the Fathers , of the first and second ranke ( according to the BISHOPS most accurate diuision of the confused huddle brought by the Cardinal ) are re-examined in this Chapter ; AND HIS ANSWERS TO THEM found to be such , as maintaine themselues against all exception . § . 1. TVllie would not vouchsafe to accuse Vatinius , but onely presseth him with certaine questions , to disgrace him the more . I haue hitherto done nothing , vnbeseeming the reputation of a far greater aduersarie , and indeede affoarded him somewhat too large answers , making bold with the Reader , and his gentle patience , rather then I would come behind in any sort of satisfaction . Henceforth I I must craue leaue to bee a great deale rounder and stricter with him , as drawing towards the Center . It a feriendus est homo , vt ne sentiat quidem perirese : for his comfort . § 2. Num. 3. then . He acknowledgeth inuocation of Saints ( though not of God ) to be possible without faith in them . This is first against the generality of the Apostles text , Quomodò inuocabunt in quem , that is , in quēcunque non crediderūt ? Rom. 10 , How shal they call vpon him , in whō [ soeuer ] they haue not beleeued ? And at least a man might inuocate God , though not as the a creator of heauen and earth , yet 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , as some Saint , or demy-god , by this distinction ; not ex asse but ex semunciâ , ( as b Iulian the Pelagian cauilled with S. Austen de senis vncijs ) albeit wee did not put affiance in him . Which were against the Apostles , Quomodò inuocabunt ? How shall they call ? As who would say , Nullo pacto , not at all . Therefore , num . 9. he eates his word , and allowes faith in Saints themselues , as necessary for the inuocation of them too . In some sort , saies hee . An egregious blasphemy , and by which one Chosroes onely , a Persian , is knowne , none els that euer I read of , c ( Nicephorus reporting it , ) to allow faith in Saints , or in creatures , to be lawfull . d You beleeue in God , beleeue also in mee . Who might say this , but he that was more then a bare creature ? Quis dicat Sanctorum , Crede in me , nisi Sanctus Sanctorum , saith S. Austen , de peccatorum meritis & remiss . lib. 1. cap. 14. And Origen to the same purpose , e Non est dictum , Qui credit in vos , credit in me ; etsi dictum est , Qui recipit vos , recipit me . It is not said , He that beleeueth in you , beleeueth in me , though it be said , He that receiueth you receiueth mee . And the one of these , is for the Sermo , in Origens declaration of it , the other for them qui à sermone , that is for the Apostles . The very same hath S. Austen , almost totidem verbis , vpon the same place of S. Iohn , Tract . 44. that you may know one Father borrowed of another , specially the Latine of the Greeke . Each of them shewing this , that the Saints though they are to be receiued by vs , yet not receiued by faith , but Christ onely , who is the word of his father . And againe Origen more pithily , Hom. 4. in Ezech. Ad eos qui in Sanctis fiduciam habent , non incongruè proferimus exemplum , Maledictus homo qui spem habet in homine . Against them that put their trust in Saints , wee alleadge that Scripture not without good cause , Cursed is the man that makes man his trust . And a little after , Si necesse est in aliquo sperare , omnibus derelictis speremus in Domino . If wee must needes hope in some bodie , leauing all let vs hope in the Lord. Like those godly Burgundions , whome Socrates reports of , lib. 7. hist . cap. 30. that weary of seeking ayde any more of man , they determined to commit themselues henceforth wholy to God , and guided by the prouidence that neuer forsakes , chose the Christians God , who was then worshipped throughout the Romane Empire ; And their reason was , because he was neuer knowne to faile any such as trusted in him . A most true Elogium , and a worthy ground of comming to God , accedendi ad Deum , that I may speake with the Apostle , Heb. 11. Which soone after was verefyed vpon them , by a most ioyfull experience ; and a Bishop of France ( no neede of the Pope to such worke , I wisse , whatsoeuer you dreame ) baptised them , and incorporated them , after he had humbled them with fasting ( a most worthie practise ) seuen dayes together , & instructed them in the faith . But this by the way . Returne we to putting confidence in God onely . How often doth the Scripture particularly so appropriate it ? Faith in God , Act. 20. Hebr. 6. Ierem. 17. Psal . 117. Psal . 146. &c. As who would say , It is the priuiledge wherein God and the creature communicate not , ( like gloria mea not to be giuen to another , like Achilles f his speare , which only himselfe could brandish ) no more then Ioseph and Putiphar , or Ioseph and Pharaoh , the one in the gouernment of his priuate house , the other of his Kingdome , might bee consorted . Yet nothing reserued from Ioseph by either of them , but onely the one his wife , and the other his crowne . So is faith in God , one of Gods peculiars . Yea S. Chrysostome obserues , Hom. 3. in Act. that the Apostles durst not say when time was , Fides in eum , that is , in Christum , but onely , fides per nomen eius , faith by his name . So tender a point this is . Which he repeates elsewhere . S. Cyrill also ; of whom anone . In the meane while proceed . § 3. Numb . 4. He belyes S. Hieromes Commentary g vpon the Epistle to Philemon , who speakes of no faith to be reposed in Saints , but credence giuen to their doctrine onely . S. Paules text then must thus be vnderstood , fidem in Deum , and charitatem in Sanctos , faith in God , and loue to the Saints , specially such Saints as there he speakes of , whose bowells must be refreshed , which are neither fit to be praied to , because they stand in want ; how much lesse to be the obiects of our Christian faith , if it be but because they are the subiects of our sight ? According as to the Coloss . 1. 4. he vtters the same more distinctly , thus ; faith in Christ ; and loue to the Saints , though here he deliuer it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , or vpon a heape . So likewise againe 2. Thessal . 1. 3. albeit when he saies , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , of euery one of you towards another , he shewes plainly enough , that loue goes further then faith may , vnles euery Christian may beleeue in euery one , and then where shall we stay ? Gregory Nazianzen : orat . 5. de Theolog : saies well , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , It is one thing to beleeue in a thing , another to beleeue what is reported of it . Which S. Hierome onely meant of the Saints in that place , that the histories that went of them in Scripture , were to be beleeued , and credited . Nazianzene adds , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , for this belongs to God [ onely , ] namely to be beleeued in . And againe , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ; If he be a creature , how doe we beleeue in him ? making it an euident argument of the diuinity of the holy Ghost , that we beleeue in him . Also the Creed knowes no faith in Saints , yet a compleat forme of our beleeuing no doubt . As for Credo in ecclesiam , if some haue read it so , though there are other answers , yet it is enough that the Church consists of farre more then they will allow vs to put our trust in . And indeede it is a strange huddle and confusion of things , when the Church which was wont to conteyne the faithfull , shall haue them in it now , vpon whome we must relye by faith . § 4. Numb . 5. Almost senceles shift . As there is , Soli Deo gloria , saies he , and yet , honor & gloria omni operanti bonum . Rom. 2. so there is a double inuocation , one of Saints , another of God. As if glory in the first place , bee not glory which we ascribe to God , in the second that which God vouchsafes to vs. Is inuocation so ? Doth God inuocate ? And why does our Sauiour conclude his prayer , the exemplary platforme of all praying , with Quia tua est gloria , &c. but that Saints haue no such glory ; and yet pray wee must not , but onely to them , to whome wee may ascribe the like glory . As the causall particle in that prayer implyes , QVIA tuum est regnum , & potentia , & gloria , &c. FOR thine is the kingdome , the power , and the glory . Here they are gone in the Pater noster , as before they were confuted by the Creed , for Primacy . Passus est sub Pontio Pilato , &c. § 5. Out of Gen. 48. Inuocetur nomen meum super pueros , he is not ashamed to renew such motheaten stalenesses . For what does that meane ? Let them be called by my name , or let it be their title and style to haue Abraham , and Isaac , and Iacob , to their Fathers . For it is no small prerogatiue , Quorum sunt patres , Rom. 9. Did they giue commaundement to be inuocated as Gods , when they lay a dying ( as he belike would haue it ) like Cyrus in Xenophon , Sic me colitote vt Deum ? And in Limbo this ? See Psal , 48. as the seuenty read it . 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . That is , vpon their houses and lands . Which we in English read thus , They call their lands after their owne names , an vsuall phrase throughout the scripture . So Iam. 2. 7. They slaunder the worthy name which is called vpon you , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , that is , as our late English excellently well hath it , by which you are called . And Esay . 4. Seuen women shall say to one man , let thy name be called vpon vs ; in the very same sense : that is , let vs be reckoned and accounted thine . Salomon a little otherwise , in the dedication of his temple , desires that Gods name may be called vpon it , yet not as if the temple should pray to God , &c. But the rather did the Patriarch here desire this , concerning Ephraim and Manasseh , least the disparity of their birth hauing an Egyptian to their mother , might quaile their confidence in Gods promises to their Fathers , and that they might know they had as good interest in them , as the rest of their kindred . § 6. As for S. Austens place , Locutinoum de Genesi , num . 200. Hee determines not whether the Patriarks were inuocated by their children , as F. T. would beare vs in hand , or vpon them rather as we say , but onely biddes vs note , that the word inuocation is sometime veryfied vpon men , aswell as vpon God , and so exaudition likewise . What of that ? § 7. Numb . 7. Let him prooue and not say , or not say till he prooue , that intercession to Saints by our seeking to them , and intercession of Saints to God for vs , is all one . Negamus & pernegamus . In all Chrysostomes Liturgy , ( * I meane that which beares his name ) where there is mention of the intercession of Saints for vs so many and so a sundry times , there is not the least praying on the b faithfulls part , so much as once , to the greatest Saint . § 8. To the. 9. Numb . It will neuer be disprooued what the Bishop answers to S. Basils authority , that aliud est faceré , aliud statuere ; and Legibus non exemplis viuen dum est . Gregory Nazianz. saying is , as I remember , Priuilegia paucorum non faciunt legem Ecclesiae . Seneca himselfe , Permittit sibi quaedam , & contra bonum morem , magna pietas . And what though S. Basil should draw an argument from thence , which he doth not ? Does not S. Paul so from a corrupt fashion of baptising ouer the dead , in some Writers opinions ? 1. Cor. 15. See Bellar. de Purgat . lib. 1. cap. 6. confessing as much . Likewise Chrysostome giues folke leaue to sweare by themselues , that the name of God might be lesse dishonoured by them in their daily mention . Is it lawful therefore to sweare by ones selfe ? Himselfe denyes it in the same place . § 9. Numb . 25. He saies there is no ordinance , or no decree , but in Councells . Let him bring them hardly then , let him cite the Councells . Are not they Fathers , and multiplyed Fathers ? Will his MAIESTIE refuse the Councells , wherein so many speake as one man , that is content to be ordered by the Fathers in singular , if the authority be pregnant , and the antiquity sufficient ? But how shamefully does he belye the Councell of Gangra ? Neither is any such thing in the Proeme there , nor yet in the Canons . Onely a corruption is crept into the Proeme , which is nothing materiall neither , though it were graunted . See the Greeke at Paris , of Tilius his edition , see other Greeke copies . And , is to meet at Churches , or not to shun assemblyes in Basilicis martyrum , all one with the inuocation of Saints now become ? Why rather should we not thinke their priuate masse condemned vnder a Priest and his boy , in the 6. Canon of that Councell , contra 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , against them that assemble without a lawful assembly ? as likewise their Gossip-baptizers taxed in that which followes , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , that is , against the performers of Churchbusinesses , without Priestly assistance , &c. On the other side , how mainely are the Popish practises in that Preface confuted ? About a the honour of the married life , the b indifferency of celebrating with Priests married or vnmarried , c against women leauing their proper husbands , to obserue the profession of I know not what continencie , but like theirs certainly . Against d affectation of apparell , as in the Nuns and Fryars now of all colours . Yea , e for the authority of Masters ouer their seruants ( the very case of Supremacy this day in question ) though the one be Christian , the other an infidell : of which point Epiphanius most sweetly in a certaine place , Nauis ecclesiae non recipit fugitivum , neque qui à proprijs Dominis discedit . The ship of God , or of his Church , admits no run-away , nor for saker of his owne masters . Against departing with riches vnder hope of more holynes , which is their vow of pouerty , so magnifyed at this day . I might adde , out of comparison of the 19. Canon with the second in that Councell , that although fastings , such as the Church appoints , are to be kept , which we deny not , yet without preferring of fish before flesh , as the more holy , which is their error . And doe they tell vs of the Councell of Gangra ? In which there is not one syllable , neither in preface nor bulke , of praying to Saints . Yea , in the 20. Canon , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , beeing distinctly so mentioned , and attributed to the Martyrs , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 are put absolutely as onely 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , as Gods onely . Yet we haue Councells against them , euen auncient Councells , prayer to Angells beeing condemned in the Laodicean Councell , and called a close Idolatry , of which hereafter . Now if to Angels , how much more to Saints , as Epiphanius his argument is , Ne Angeli quidem , nedum silia Annae ; No not the Angels , much lesse the daughter of Anna , which is their highest Saint . See the Councell of Nice , Can. 20. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , prayers to God , and to God onely : as S. Paul in the Acts. 26. 29. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , and , 2. Cor. 13. 7. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , which is not Pauls speach more then vox ipsius naturae , the voice of Nature ; Men praying still to God , and to God onely , by the instinct of nature . As Tertullian obserues somewhat not vnlike in his Apologet . O testimonium animae naturaliter Christianae . Nature her selfe teacheth men this point of relligion . But passe wee to more . § 10. S. Hierome against Vigilantius , neuer patronizes in one word praying to Saints . Yet F. T. is not ashamed to confound the questions still , of their praying for vs , with ours to them . Whereas if they pray for vs , they pray to God , and all our question tends onely to the end , that God be not intermedled with , in his right to heare prayers . For so in the Psalm . 64. I ween , Thou that hearest the prayer ; and , To thee shall all flesh come . Well may they goe together ; The hearer of the prayer is the receiuer of all , to him . But no particular Saint receiues all flesh to him , Ergò . Againe , Psal . 5. v. 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5. many reasons are giuen of his praying to God ( vnto thee doe I pray , saith he ) which vtterly abolish all praying to Saints . As namely , the absolute puritie of the diuine essence : For thou art a God with whom dwells no wickednes : wheras , in his Angels themselues hee hath found folly , as Iob saies , And many the like . But returning to our Adioynder , how grosse is his ignorance numb . 19. that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , is to pray , or to runne to pray , as if there were no other running ? Does not S. Austen speake of the fashions of his time , curritur cum infantulis , for baptisme , no doubt , to be had of the Priest , not for praiers to the Priest ; and so for many other causes , besides intercession ? Likewise Denys of Mars-street , in his Epistle ad Demophilum , not vnfit to be tung into a Iesuites eare , to expell the deuill of rebellion that is in them ( as they hold opinion of bells , that they are to be dis-enchaunted : ) Si famulum in Dominum , si adolescentem in Seniorem , si filium in Patrem dicere videremus , &c. flagitiosè facere videremur , nisi CVRRENTES superioribus epem ferremus , etiamsi for sitan illi priores iniuriam acceperint . Here is CVRRENTES , and yet in no such sense . But I will English the whole , for the good that may come of it . If we should see ones seruant giue his Master bad words , the yonger to his elder , the sonne to the father , we might seeme to bee guiltie of no lesse then villanie , if we did not R V N and succour them , yea & that though the iniurie sprang first from them ( viz. ) the superiours . R V N saith Denys , and succour the Magistrate . Yet with this man , currere is nothing but inuocare ; to runne is to pray vnto . I might aske him here , whom hee went to inuocate , which of all the Saints , that same aliquem Sanctorum , as most fondly they construe , Iob. 5. that he could not come to in England , when he ranne beyond Sea. Besides that , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , is , to the monuments of the Martyrs , not to the Martyrs themselues , whom we need not to runne vnto , if it bee as they say , that they heare our prayers , but may speake vnto them in euery place , and from euerie place , as shut vp no where . Let them remember their owne principles , Non inijcimus Christo compedes : We doe not fetter Christ . And surely , where the Lambe is , there are they . Apoc. 14. 4. & Euang. Ioh. 17. 24. § 11. In his 16. numb . ( for I goe ouer them thus cursorily , not curious of a method ) when he thinkes hee hath greatest aduantage against the Bishop , and talkes so like a noddie , of a new Grammer ; what sayes he ? 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ( sayes he ) cannot signifie memorias martyrum , or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , because that is masculine , and these are feminine , or neuter . I might tell him of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , or the like ; which in effect are all one with 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or memoriae . But let them stand aside . Euripides in Medeâ , speaking of the children newly returned from play , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , that is , ex gymnasio ad eum vsum : not frō the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 themselues , though the one be masculine and the other neuter . So here . 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , per metonymiam , is put for the place to which they belong , of what gender soeuer they are , that resort to the place . See Casaubone of this in Theophrasti characteres . And withall heare , what the oracle of our parts , for Greeke and all good learning , Mr. Andrewe Downes , ( whome I name by way of reuerence , and singular honour ) hath taught vs of this matter , euen ludibundus , sometimes . In orat . Demosthen . contr . Androtionem . 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , pro , in comitio , vbi congregatur 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , in the same oration , pro 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . Theophrast . in Charact. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 .. i. in loco vbi praestigiae spectantur . I suppose , this is the place that giues occasion to Mr. Casaubone , whom I lately named , to make the like obseruation ; but remembring the generall , I had forgotten the particular , I confesse . At Athens in the Piraeum , not farre from the hauen , there was a place called the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , viz. where proofe was made of wares and merchandize . Homer . Odyss . 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . ( in answer to your quotations out of Homer about Thetis and the rest ) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 : there is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , for locus saltandi , and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for locus certandi . Plautus himselfe , if his mention offend you not , ( though why should it , when you can front vs with your Ouid ? ) In iure , pro eo quod est , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , vbi ius dicitur . So , in ius vocare , in ius ambulare , pergere , &c. that is , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . In one of the Apocryphaes , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , pro , in loco vbi discuntur & docentur parabolae . 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , apud Aristoph . pro , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . Sexcenta sunt eiusmodi . I must bring you home . How often in S. Leo , or S. Gregorie , crastino apud sanctum Petrum , for , in Basilica S. Petri , or the like ? Your owne Maldonate in 4. Matth. v. 23. hath the like obseruation , of the word ecclesiae , both from the Hebrews and the Greeks , as he saies . The persons giue name to the place that they vse . Chrysost . orat . 1. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , to the same purpose . 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . It is the Scriptures fashion , when a thing is done at such a place , or at such a time , to call both time and place by the name of the thing . So also of the persons . Why not ? And yet 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , shall not be cum memorijs , but cum Sanctis ipsis . For 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is the place , I say , when words of moouing to it , or remoouing from it , are vsed , as 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 before . But 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , implyes no such thing , and may therefore be vnderstood of the Martyrs themselues . Do you now see the reason , good Sir , to varie the construction , without any inconstancie in the Bishop as you imagine ? § 12. Likewise once againe , I must tell you , to your num . 17. the Cardinals argument is most ridiculously miserable , from veneration of relliques , to intercession of Saints . Quo ferrumine tandem ista ? What sother hath he to make these hold ? Though we deny relliques to haue been euer venerated in the primitiue Church with your manner of venerations . S. Austen indeede sayes , veneramur baptismum Epist . 145. and , Hortatio haec quae vbique iam praedicatur , quae vbique veneratur , de Agon : Christ . cap. 11. Baptisme , and the word preached , are venerable to a S. Austen . So happily relliques . They were venerabiliter habitae , respectfully kept , or regardfully preserued , not worshipped , nor adored . You may read S. Gregory about this point , Epist . ad Constant . August . where he mislikes the taking vp of dead bodies , to make relliques of them ; the worshipping much more . They neither sought the liuing among the dead , which the Angell condemnes , nor à viuentibus ad mortuos , which Esay forbids , and hee purged as you know by an Angell , and a coale . But what neede wee more words , when your selfe say , that the Bishop graunts as much as you desire in this point ? Doe then as he . § 13. Now to your numb . 17. and 18. Not hae , but hi , protect Countries without all doubt . Not the relliques of Martyrs , but the Martyrs themselues ( if ought at all ) vnder God. S. Basil meant no otherwise . Therefore Bellarmine is most idle , when he drawes such consequences , from the vertue of Martyrs , to the veneration of their relliques . Are not relliques subiect to diuers casualties ? to warres , to fires , to consumption , &c. And shall they keepe Countries , that not themselues ? S. Chrysost . in Lazarum , saies , that the very houses wherein Bibles are , are the more defenced against Deuills and sundry calamities . Yet the Bible is not worshipped , by you especially . But for their loue to the Bibles , God doth this . So for them that honour his Saints without idolatry . § 14. To Numb . 29. Mamas was but vocatus , not inuocatus , nor aduocatus neither , as you translate it . 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , saith S. Basil . And that might bee by Apostrophe . Or , as if we should say , Daniels God , not inuoking Daniel ; so Mamas his god ; wee name his name , but wee doe not inuocate him as our patrone . Onely we shew we consent in religion with him , and in our ioynt seruice to the common Lord. As he that commaunded all men to worship Daniels God. Dan. 6. 26. Does S. Basil say that Mamas euer helpt him ? I warrant you not . What then does he els , but euen take aduantage of the honest peoples affection , towards the deceased champion , to establish them in the zeale of the true God , whome he serued and suffered for ? In this sense it may be true , what you say out of Theodoret , cap. 8. num . 45. That , prayer to Saints ( such praier as I haue now described ) confirmes Christs Diuinity . Which els it disables rather , but surely dishonours . And so I answer to your 22. and 23. numb . of this Chap. that by this meanes they might know the same God to haue holpen them , whose Martyr Mamas was , though they made no petitions to the Martyr himselfe . § 15. The defence of your translation of S. Basils text , against so cleare a light as is the originall greeke , is more then impudent . Therefore I passe by that , and come to Eusebius , the Cardinalls next author , in your Numb . 29. § 16. Though that also about Eusebius , is of the same straine , for matter of translation . Quid tandem ? You defend Christophorsons false glosse against Eusebius his originall greeke text . Whom shal we beleeue in this case ? Neither say , it is gathered out of the circumstances of the text . His MAIESTIE lookes for Fathers , in suo puro & natiuo , without your dashings , or interlacings . Nay verily it is an argument , that no such seruice of Saints was euer vsed in the primitiue Church , because Eusebius here hath no such words . Who els would haue beene forward , you may be , sure to haue paralleled herein the Christian fashion with Platoes deuices . But he mentions not praying to them in the least word ; the Translator onely . Therefore as I said . § 17. You plead , that the Cardinall is guiltles of this fraud , and deales vprightly , though the Translator lead him aside into error . It is hard to beleeue you , when the Greek was at his hand . But in the meane time , you see his proofes are answered , which is all we stand vpon . § 18. Numb . 31. Out of Chrysostomes Orat. in Iuventinum & Maximinum . I would I had the leisure to compare your relligion , with the relligion of those two . They complained of smoake , of sacrifice , &c. while Iulian domineered . Vnder you the sunne is darkened with such vapours , with your censing , perfuming , and the like . They offered to die in obedience to the Emperour , and so they did , though martiall men and well able to resist . With you , against the King , if the Pope proscribe him , Omnis homo miles est , as Tertullian speakes , euen Church-men and all . But to the purpose . Adoremus for adornemus . How can you defend this ? Are you not ashamed to reiterate it ? What though your Venetian Editions haue it ? the Iuntae , and the Sessae , and such like ? Is that enough to make it authentical , because it came from Venice ? So you read angulos for angelos , in the Laodicean Councell , as if that were the way to decline it . But it is well , that the Councell is so forcible against you , that it driues you into corners . As for 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , which is to touch , that it should signifie to worship , as you beare vs in hand , who beleeues it ? Yet it is maruaile you inferre not faith in relliques , because S. Chrysostome sayes , Let vs imbrace them , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , with faith . Which rather , I should thinke , checks your vse of relliques , as now adayes they are vsed , and lifts vp the mind à mortuis ad viuentem , or à spolijs mortuorum , from shirts and hand-kercheffs , to the liuing God. § 19. You quote Plutarch , Othone , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . If your quotation be right ( for I promise you I cannot find it ) it prooues not , that touching is worshipping , with Plutarch , but that hands supplicate , or make request , which they performed then , of whome Plutarch speaks , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , viz. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , aggressi sunt , they set forward to supplicate and make prayer by hands , as I construe it . Else I knowe not what the meaning of your quotation is , and whence you had it , see you . You quote Crispinus his Dictionary , cōpiled out of another of Budaeus his , as you imply . But in Crispins Dictionary of 1595. which is said to bee recèns restitutum & auctum , I finde not one word sounding that way . Therefore I thinke it is not in Budaeus neither , yet hee reckons vp many significations ( I meane Crispine doth ) as capessere Rempublicam , laedere ' , haerere & conglutinari , gustare , comedere , perstringere etiam & taxare . Maruaile , how hee should leaue out onely this , if any such were . Sure you neuer turned the booke , but either beleeued your Monitors , or thought it was so , because you wished and strongly imagined it to be so indeed . Hesychius , and Suidas , are as dumb the same way about the sense of the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . Stephen and Scapula , who both quote Budaeus for the senses of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , yet haue none such neither . In the end of Plutarchs Otho , I finde onely this , speaking of the loue which the souldiers bare to Otho euen dead , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , that is , some touched his hands , Which , I pray you , may not a man doe towards a dead bodie , for the loue he bore to the person in his life time , vnles hee worshippe it ? Remember the story of Artemisia and Mausolus . That was more then touching , when shee eate and dranke the ashes of her dead husband , for very loue . Some kissed ( saies Plutarch ) the wound of the dead bodie , some touched his hands , some made obeysance a farre off . What is this to the matter ? And one of the Dictionarists aforenamed , quotes the place of the Gospel , of many that touched the hemme of our Sauiours garment . Yet of worshipping it , not a word . I should thinke that were a fine place to ground worshipping of relliques vpon , ( if touching be worshipping ) our Sauiour beeing as sacred and soueraigne in his life time , as any Saint is after his death . But the story of his interring by Ioseph and Nicodemus , ( where there is no mention to this purpose ) consutes relliques more then this can possibly helpe them . And yet least you thinke it holds onely in Christ , who was to rise againe the third day ; heare how your Maldonate construes that of S. Iohn , Volo eum manere donec veniam . This may bee ( saith hee ) though S. Iohn dyed , well enough . For manere is to tarry , non concisum neque dilaceratum , sed sanum atque integrum , quamvis mortuum . Which could not bee if he were to be cut out into mammocks , such as your Relliques are . Not Christ therefore , nor Iohn , were to be carued into Relliques . And were any worthier to be preserued , trowe you , then they ? § 20. As for tangere genua , a circumstance which they were wont to vse that prayed , it shewes not that tangere signifies to pray , nor yet to worship , vnles genua bee put to it , or some such rite expressed , which in Relliques holds not . S. Chrysostome does not say , Let vs touch their knees , but them howsoeuer . Which some body perhappes would construe without any great anagogy , of not abhorring either the death of Gods Saints , which is pretious in his eyes , as Dauid witnesseth ( in his , whatsoeuer it be in the worlds ) or the memorialls of the deceased , lately temples of the holy Ghost . But vpon that I stand not . So 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , in Homer ; so Thet is elsewhere ; so Hecuba in Euripides . What is this to touching in an absolute sense , to signifie worshipping ? Is it not one thing what touching simply signifies , another what touching with such particular circumstance , as the beard , the knee , the hand ? &c. Our Sauiour himselfe touched the leper , and cured him , Mat. 8. 3. And , Mar. 10. 13. for the like cause they brought young children to him , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , that he should touch them , . i. blesse them , not worship them . You say , Iob professeth that hee kissed not his hand at the Sunne rising , which with you imports , that he worshipped not the Sunne . If you would persist in your first principle , that touching is worshipping , Iob should rather haue said , that he touched not the Sun with his hand , when it rises , which who doth ? And S. Chrysostom does not bid vs touch our hands , or kisse our hands , at the sight of the Relliques , but touch them . Let Chrysostome expound himselfe in another place . In his Comment . vpon 2. Cor. the last chapter , Hom. 30. he mentions not onely touching , but kissing one another ( and that expressely in osculo sancto , with the holy kisse , or the relligious kisse ; ) yea he saies , they kissed the Church so , and the Church-porch so . Which , I suppose , your selues would not admit , that we should worship one another , or worship the Church , and much lesse the Church-porch , with relligious adoration . Therefore touching is no adoring ; no nor kissing neither , which is a touching in specie , as your Martiall , no doubt , hath told you long ere this time . And now to Mr. Marshall therefore . § 21. Roma salutauit voce manuque Ducem . What is this to worshipping , and not rather to saluting , but that with you , to salute the Virgine , is to pray to her ? We worship the God , whom we confesse we cannot touch . But , Otho protendens manum , adorauit vulgum , in Tacitus . By that reason , S. Paul adored the assembly when he stretched out his hand , speaking to them , Act. 26. 2. Which Athanasius sayes of himselfe , that he does too , as much as he may in absence , to the Emperour Constantius . See Apolog. ad Constant . in the beginning . Did he worship him in so doing , trowe you ? or rather make audience ? Neither did Otho touch the people whome he worshipt , and yet you bring this , to prooue , that touching is worshipping . Venerantes Deum tangimus frontem , saies Seruius ; but nostram , not deorum . What is this to tangamus relliquias , for adoremus ? So the rest that you produce out of Paynim-idolatry , as your selfe confesse to your great glorie . And lastly , out of Ouid his good stuffe , Tange manu mensam , as we doe the booke when wee take an oath . What of that ? Or would you euer reason so , if you had either conscience , or reason in you ? We touch the booke when we sweare vpon it : Ergò , the touching of relliques is the worshipping of them . Well , Basil saies , that relliques helpe by contact , and so Nazianzen . And , 4. Reg. 13. the touch of Elizeus bones , reuiued the dead . Belike , the dead bodie worshipt Elizeus , whome it touched ; for that you must say , or els you say nothing . We will soone grant , that God may dispence blessings by dead bones , but not to the worshippers , no not of the liuing Prophets , but of God onely . Him worship , Apoc. 19. and 22. Yea , S. Ambrose would not say , Tactu ipso medicabiles esse relliquias , if Tactus ipse were adoration . For why should he extenuate adoration so ? I touch a wholesome hearbe , and it abates anguish ; I worshippe it not . Nay , the woman that found health by touching our Sauiours hemme of his garment , though he was the proper obiect of worship , which Saints are not , yet her touching was no symbolum of her adoration of him , albeit by Gods blessing a meanes of health to her . Therefore we denie your conclusion , numb . 42. that touching includes veneration of the thing touched . Yea , sometime the healer touched the party grieued , ( whom he worshipped not you may be sure ) as 2. Kin. 5. 11. Naaman lookt for it . But in the 4. of the same booke , v. 34. Elizeus practiseth it farre more strangely , vpon the Sunamites dead child , whō he raiseth to life . Of our Sauiour before , who toucht the leper , another time the beere that carried the dead , Luk. 7. 14. but worshipt neither . § 22. Numb . 46. you say , a fewe sermons of Ephrem cannot deserue the name of a Tome . Yet 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , and resoluit tomum , or scidit tomum , often in the Councels , not for a huge volume , but what scrowle soeuer . Why may not the Bishop speake after that manner ? Though you cannot deny , that Ephrems edition is distinguished by Tomes , as they are properly so called , vnlesse you bee verie stranger to the matter . And giue vs leaue to suspect your Crypticke authors of your owne editions , and but late editions , when we call for Fathers , that is no bastard Fathers , to determine controuersies . The Bishoppe was not onely true in quoting Ephrem , but quoted him out of the originall Arabique , that he wrote in . Not in coggerie therefore , as you call it , but so much the more to bee respected and credited , afore your grottae , or your Cryptae . As for Vossius the Translator and Prefacer , and setter forth , with whose authoritie , poore man , you are so much delighted , as his name in Dutch , which was his naturall language , signifies a Foxe , so you are but the Goose for your labour , if you credit him too far . And this as I was wisht from him that vnderstands these things best , so I tell it you . § 23. Now Numb . 46. Wee may pray to God alone , you say , and yet to Saints too . Fine phoolosophyes . Tibi soli peccaui , and yet he sinned against men . Let S. Ambrose teach you , or S. Hierome either , the meaning of those words , to establish in you at once , as well loyaltie to Princes , as pietie to God : that he sinned against God onely , as his competent Iudge , beeing vtterly exempt from flagella hominum , from humane punishments . And in that sense hee sinned not against any man. § 24. Numb . 47. S. Pauls stirring vp the Thessalonians to pray for him , is compared with prayers made to Saints deceased . Quàm nihil simile ? Did S. Paul desire them to pray to Saints for him , or to Angels ? &c. That were somewhat . In the meane while , our requesting of good men to pray for vs , that yet liue , is no cultus , no Church-seruice , or els we might haue a lyturgie in the Church to liuing Saints , to mediate for vs to God. a But that were very absurd . Therfore your comparison is not fit , and your consequence does not hold . Fraternall and lyturgicall , or brotherly and Churchly , officious and relligious mediations , I say , are diuerse . To the Saint it is worship , to one another of vs it is not . As appeares by the example which your selfe bring , of S. Pauls requesting the Thessalonians for him , whō doubtles he worshipped not , beeing so much his inferiours , though the Thessalonians like the Lystrians might seeme to doe so to him , ( in your madde fancie at least ) if they had requested the like charity of him . § 25. You aske the Bishop , who published Ephrem , how many Tomes of him , &c. In which matter we are not scrupulous to shape you answer to the full , though it were more that you asked . Of Tomes before . The words are these , which willingly I would set downe , both in the Arabique and the Hebrew , as I haue receiued them of the Bishop , if we had such characters at hand . But in the Latine thus , both for forme & meaning . Illaica we shaueca lam atlabu .. i. Ad te & praeterquam ad te , non facio orationem . In English thus , for the satisfaction of euery Reader , your selfe and all , good Mr. F. T. To thee , and but to thee to none , I make my prayer . The Bishop cited them out of a manuscript which hee keepeth yet to be seene , vpon any occasion , called the Diuruall of the Maronites , a certaine kinde of Monks , in a Monastery on Mount Sinah . Which booke was printed at Rome , anno 1584. at the commaundement of Gregory 13. by Dominicus Basa in Syriaque characters , though it be the Arabique tongue , vnder the name of the prayer of S. Ephrem . The words also before and after , are these ; Accipe deprecationem meam ô Domine , non propter iustitiam meam , sed propter misericordiam tuam , & in multitudine benignitatum tuarum , & miserationum tuarum , salua animam meam , quae captiuata est à morte . Memor esto mei ô Domine , & etiamsi peccaui & vulneratus sim vulneribus laethalibus , tamen NON PRECOR QVENQVAM PRAETERTE . Sed ad misericordiam tuam & bonitatem me recipio , quoniam tu es ille Dominus Deus omnia cōprehendens , & potestas tua super omne vitam trahens , &c. That is ; Receiue my prayer O Lord , not for my righteousnes , but for thy mercyes sake , and in the multitude of thy bountyes and of thy compassions , saue my soule which is taken prisoner of death . Remember mee O Lord , and although I haue sinned , and am wounded with deadly wounds , YET DOE I NOT PRAY TO ANY BESIDES THY SELFE . Looke you ; The Papists would haue them that are oppressed with the conscience of grieuous sinnes , fly to the Saints as fittest to deale with , or to deale by , for desperate offendors ; they beeing too vnworthy to appeare immediately before God. Yet S. Ephrem saith , that although hee haue sinned , and be deadly wounded , yet to God , and to God onely , doth he commend himselfe by prayer . It followes . But to thy mercy and bounty doe I betake my selfe , because thou art that Lord God , which comprisest all things , ( or embracest all things ) no doubt the most recreant sinners of all ) and thy power is ouer all that liueth and breatheth , &c. Besides this , which yet is pregnant enough to iustify the Bishop from beeing such a falsary , as this man would make him , ( who may rather feare the imputation of it himselfe , as if his two letters were as many marks in his forehead to know a False Theefe by ) besides this I say , though S. Ephrem ( as he is now printed ) haue not these words verbatim , yet in all the procationes and orationes of his ( which of purpose haue been perused and read ouer for this ende ) in the first Tome ( for if any of it bee Ephrems , that is ; as for the rest , the Bishop will avouch it , that they are no more Ephrems workes , then his owne ) there is neuer any the least mention of praying to any Saint . And so much also of Ephrem and his authority bee spoken . § 26. Numb . 47. Ambiguously , if not fraudulently , or fraudulently if not falsly , you translate , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , prayeth vnto them , for standeth in neede of them . Who euer denyed but wee need the Angels , and the heauenly messengers , as 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Hebr. 1. yea the Sunne , and the Moone too , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , made and appointed for the common good by God ? Yet I pray you , let vs haue no praying to them . And is this the place that you would needes helpe the Cardinall with , out of S. Chrysostome , after the Bishops answer so pregnant to those authorities which hee brought before ? For let me tell you in a word , you dash against that rocke , all your foming waues 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , the rocke I say of the Bishops double caueat . First , de rebus necessarijs ad salutem , which Chrysostome neuer held prayer to Saints to be . Nay hee sayes that our Sauiour yeilded to the poore woman Matth. 12. suing for herselfe , and denyed her when shee vsed the Apostles for her mediators , and generally , that he respects our prayers for our selues , more then others for vs. Yea Tom. 1. in Genesin . pag. 345. he sayes God neuer heares the prayers of the dead for vs , but onely when there are none left aliue to make intercession in our behalfe . And hee whets it with that place 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , not onely 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 sayes hee , but if there were none els , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , God will doe it for his owne sake . See ibid. pag. 49. of Iob , Daniel , and Noe , who he sayes benefitted others in their life time by praying for them . But euen they being dead shall not be heard , sayes God : To shew , that the most potent for mediation in their life time , are not to bee sought vnto after death . See pag. 360. and 361. to the same purpose . Yet most absurdly you prate numb . 55. that prayer to Saints is a necessary duty , and may not be spared , nor bated vs at any hand , because the Catholicke Church hath practised it . Does not this bewray your beggarly proofes for prayer to Saints , together with your base conceit of the articles of faith , and things necessary to saluation ? I remember Bonauenture ( and hee not the worst of your schoole-men ) hauing alleadged many reasons against prayer to Saints , and surely not to be despised , howsoeuer hee thought of them , determines thus in the ende , as in very good earnest , that those reasons are no reasons , because facit hoc communiter ecclesia , & constat quòd non errat , &c. that is his last resolution . The Church doth otherwise , and shee for certaine cannot erre . So you . But what saies the spirit , Psal . 93. v. 6. Eleuauerunt flumina vocem suam , the floods O God haue lift vp their voice . That is the noyse and the dinne which your Church makes . But. v. 8. testimonia tua credibilia nimis , &c. This drownes the other , not the other this , as Bonauenture fancyeth . The Sonne of Sirach sayes right well , cap. 16. v. 3. Better is one that doth the will of God , then a thousand transgressors . The like sentence ●is cited out of your owne Panormitane . See Chrysostome at large following the same point , and quoting that very place of the Son of Sirach , Hom. 8. in Acta Apostolor . where among other things he thus sayes ; That a multitude not agreeing in the will of God , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , is as good as no bodie , &c. And yet when did you bring vs the consent of the Church , ( vnlesse it be your owne late faction , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , but not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , as S. Chrysostome there distinguishes ) that alleadge no Councell , no Canon , nor no ordinance , within the compasse assigned for sound antiquity , but priuate men onely , voluntary deuotions , popular multitudes , which is the other head , or the other horne , as I may so call it of the Bishops answer , and that impregnable ? § 27. So Numb . 51. You adde to the authority that the Cardinall cited out of S. Chrysostome , certaine words next following , wherein there is not one dram of matter to your purpose , though they were squeezed to the proofe . Howbeit I make hast , yet I will set them downe . Thus he sayes . Therefore darest thou be so bold to say , that their Lord or Master is dead , whose seruants euen when they are dead , are the protectors of the world ? ( This may prooue perhaps their intercession for vs , though in strict Logicke it prooues not that neither , but ours to them no way , no colour . ) Then hee goes forward . And this is not onely seen at Rome , but also at Constantinople . For euen here the sonne of Constantine the great , thought his Father to be much honoured , if his bodie were layd before the gates of the Fisherman . Thus Chrysostome . And what is this to the matter ? Though I remember the same Father speaking of Constantinople in another place , sayes , the common voyce was , that they were a people that would entertayne any relligion , euen the Christians among them , and professed . The rather this perhaps vnder a semblant of deuotion , but the place shewes not so much as that . Vnlesse you please your selfe therein , that S. Peter is called the fisherman . Of whom I remember what Arator , lib. 1. — Petrus omnia prendens ( the Pope iust , ) Bethsaidá satus vrbe fuit . Then , — Quo nomine Hebraeo Venatorum est dicta domus , quia verus ab illà Ecclesiae venator adest , &c. You haue succeeded the hunter , and Abac. 1. 15. the fisher too . Specially in troubled waters . § 28. In the 53. Numb . You say somewhat , if you could prooue it , that they that oppugne prayer to Saints , oppugne a notable argument of Christs diuinity . Which is so contrary to all truth , that Athanasius , and Cyrill , and as many as prooue the diuinity of our Sauiour , against the Arrian heresie , prooue it by this argument among the first , sometime that he is prayed to , sometime beleeued in , sometime worshipped . So Domine Iosu suscipe spiritum meum ; Stephen at his death . And it is Bellarmines owne argument against the Transyluanian Arrians , to maintaine the diuinity of our Sauiour Christ by . So Psal . 72. Prayer shal be made euer vnto him . — vocabitur hic quoque votis . And because you quoted Martiall euen now , take Martiall ; Qui fingit sacros auro vel marmore vultus , Non facit ille deos , qui ROGAT ille facit . Doe you see how gods are made , not as Michael Angelus , or other Statuaries in your Church are wont , whose diuine hand most ridiculously you magnifie ? Of our Sauiours quia , I spake before , quia tuum est regnum potentia & gloria . As who would say , therefore we pray to him , and but to him that stands inuested with these prerogatiues , wee pray to none , as Ephrem said euen now . Yet you will cauill perhaps , as you insinuated before , or rather more then insinuated , in the beginning of this Chapter , that honour and glory is to euery well doer , Rom. 2. Therefore to the Saints . But it followes in the Lords prayer , in saeculum saeculi , for euer and euer . Gods eternity confutes you , which the Saints doe not communicate in , neither ab antè at all , nor à retrò in the sense that the Lords prayer hath it . For the Saints continuance hath fluxe and succession , so hath not Gods , but is tota simul , as Bo●thius hath explained , and diuers others . Of Athanasius see answer to your 8. Chapter . Of Cyrill thus briefly , out of one onely booke of his , De rectâ Fide ad Theodosium . The Angels ( saies he ) were bidden to worship the Son ; poterant enim ; & valde meritò , humanitatis videntes paruitatem , tardiores ad colendum & adorandum esse , & ad glorisicandum eum quem nobis similem cognoscebant ; vt quàm longissimè discedere viderentur ab errore . That is : For they might , and that very iustly , considering the stendernes of his humane-nature , be the lo●ther to worship and to adore him , and to glorifie one whome they knew to be like vnto our selues , auoiding so , the very shew of committing the error ( of idolatry ) as carefully as was possible . Doe you see how dangerous it is to worship a man ? and how carefully the Angels fled of from that error ? Themselues forbid themselues to be worshipped , Reuel . 18. and here they are faine to be commaunded to it , afore they can be brought to worship a Man. Yet what man ? Adoratur , quidem vt vnigenitus , et si vocetur primogenitus , id quod manifestissimae humanitatis mensuras maximè decet . As the first begotten he worships , as the onely begotten he is worshipped . For he consists , ex natur a adorabili , & adorante , saies the same Cyrill there . According as his owne words are , Ioh. 4. Nos adoramus quod scimus . Yet playner . Num igitur tanquam hominem adoramus Immanuelem ? Absit . Deliramentum enim hoc esset , & deceptio , ac error . That is . Do we therefore worship the Immanuel as a man ? God forbid . For that were to doate , to erre , and to be deceiued . And , In hoc enim nihil differremus ab his qui creaturam colunt vltrá conditorem . That is , For in so doing we should , differ nothing from them that worship the creature aboue the Creator . Not that any worshipt the creature more then the creator , ( who so madde ? ) but euery iuxtà is vltrà with S. Paul , when any thing comes to be worshipped besides God , Rom. 1. Many the like clauses are in that booke , but with this I will ende , to shew Cyrills iudgement of faith in Saints , which was the thing that wee beganne with . Alioqui quemodè in illum credamus ? Else how should we beleeue in him ? namely if Christ bee not God. Againe , Non enim tanquam in vnum nobis similem ( yet the Saints are like vs , I am . 5. 17. ) neque etiam in hominem fides , sed in Deum tendit naturalem & verum ( for we are 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 too , but not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , Gal. 4. 8. whome we must not so much as 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , not giue dulia to , vnlesse it be naturalis deus ) in personâ Christi . That is . For our faith is grounded , not vpon one like vs , ( as the Saints for certaine are ; no ) nor vpon any MAN ; but vpon the naturall and true God in the Person of Christ . And wot you what he addes yet , for assurance sake ? Hinc quidam curabant , ne fides in Christum reciperetur , namely , quia eum simplicem hominem minimeque deum esse putabant . That is . For this cause some endeauoured to hinder the enterteyning of faith in Christ , because they were perswaded he was a meere man , and not God. Would the Church at that time allow faith in Saints thinke you ? Ergò necessariò ad periculum & metum illum tollendum , sidem referebat in Deitatis naturam ( Christus viz , ) & quidem in persona patris , & non nostra humilitate , dicebat , Qui credit in me , non credit in me , sed in eum qui misit me . That is . Therefore of necessity to preuent that feare , and that daunger , ( Christ ) reduced our faith in him vnto the nature of his Godhead , and said in the person of his father , and not in our [ natures ] meannesse , He that beleeueth in mee , beleeueth not in mee , but in him that sent mee . This agrees with S. Chrysostome , who , as I told you before , obserues that the Apostle durst not so much as name sidem in Christum , faith in Christ , a good while after his resurrection , till the world was better seasoned with the beleefe of his Godhead . But hereof so much . § 29. Numb . 58. Certaine bookes of Scripture , you say , are not known by what authors they were penned , and yet they carrie the force of authoritie notwithstanding . Therefore Homilyes falsly or vncertainely attributed to these and these Fathers , are auaileable against the King , in the trying of this controuersie . ] Negatur consequentia . There we know the inditer , though we doubt of the penman . Here all rests vpon the credit of the writer . a Diuine authoritie goes not with true Fathers , saies Gelasius , S. Austen , and your owne b Driedo , with many more , much lesse with the suspected or questioned . Though suppose it were otherwise , what sayes Maximus , or Ambrose , or whosoeuer he is , when you haue done all you can ? For I spare to tell you that this Oration is not in Ambrose , where diuers others are of them which are found of late to be Maximus his broode . So as this also may seeme to smell of a grotte . I will take the words , as they lie in your booke , and of your owne translating : We beseech thee , O Virgine , with as feruent prayers as wee may . Which wee our selues are ready to doe , I meane to pray to any that wee may . But hee that sayes so , doubts of the lawfulnes of his owne act . How thinke you ? or if this like you not , you may do well next time to set downe Maximus his owne words in Latine , and sparing yours , to leaue the Reader to his owne interpretation of them , vnlesse you could better . And why I pray you does Maximus pray onely to Agnes among so many Saints , as he Panegyrizeth in those Orations , both men and women ? Or how did he say a little before , Veni iam Virgo ad Thalamum , &c. Is not your owne note , in the Margent there , this , IMITATIO ? to shew that it is not reall but figuratiue . And yet you are hee , that will allow no tropes forsooth , in the fathers compellation of Saints deceased . § 30. Numb . 63. You say , Nazianzene exhorted others , to imitate the example of her , that prayed to the blessed Virgine . Yet in Nazianzenes words , euen as you cite them your selfe , there is no such thing but only that they should reioyce , and giue eare , both sorts of them , both married and vnmarried : for to both ( he sayes ) his narration may serue for an ornament . This is all . What shall wee say to him , that so shamefully belyes his owne tale , and corrupts Nazianzene ? Neither doe you wipe away the staine of inconsequence and contradiction about a double Cyprian in that Oration of Nazianzene , which the Bishoppe had charged you with . In so much as Billius your owne man , confesseth , that Nazianzenus hîc caecutijt , Nazianzene was dazled here . Lastly , suppose the damosell made such prayer , as you speake of , it will alway be true , what I told you out of Seneca , Permittit sibi quaedam & contra bonum morem magna pietas . Deuotion transports , if it bee feruent , commonly . Gorgonia , Nazianzenes sister , abandoned her chamber , in her fit of sickenes , but a little slaking , & went to the Altar to pray to God , threatning not to depart ( 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 saith Nazianzene ) till she had her desire . Was that well done ? And yet her fit . cleane left her , and shee came home well . For she prayed to God , not to the Saints . But I speake of the aberrations of mindes , that are otherwise godly , euen in prayer . Therefore when Abraham was to doe that great worke ( saies S. Chrysostome ) of sacrificing his son , God called him by his name , Abraham , Abraham , and he answered , Here I am . Not to shew in what place he was , which God doubted not , but that he knew what he did , and was not transported with any violent pang of passion . 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , saies the famous Apostle , 2. Cor. 5. 13. Wee are madde to God. Els Ignatius giues to maydens this precept in speciall : That , when they pray , at any time , they should 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ; . i. haue onely Christ and his father before their eyes , being illuminated by the holy Ghost . How sweetly hath he comprehended the blessed Trinity alone , and shut out al others , from communicating with them in prayer ? Now breifly to your seuenth Chapter : Of your sixth thus much . To the seauenth Chapter of the Adioynder : Chap. 7. of the Defence , &c. Wherein ( answerably to the Title that he giues to his ) the Fathers of the third ranke , their testimonies brought for Inuocation of Saints , are shewed to bee most plentifully assoyled by the Bishop , and S. Ambrose by name to haue receiued no iniurie , nor disgust from him , no not the least : ( could they as wel iustifie their false printing of him , a most inexpiable abuse : ) As also , That what he talkes of a generall practise of Inuocation of Saints in the Primitiue Church , both by the Fathers and the Faithfull , is a meere iest , and a Iesuiticall crake : Epiphanius besides others prophesying euen then , ( and in this very matter ) that Haeresis est sicut mala mulier , Heresie is like a shrew , getting groūd vnsensibly by the conniuence of people , vnles snebd at first , ( which our age hath found true ) as also ( which F. T. here brings to our mindes , in not resting satisfyed with the Bishops answers , though neuer so absolute ) that shee will be sure to haue the last word . § 1. NOthing is more accurate then that diuision of the Bishops , of the confused rout of the Cardinals witnesses into three classes . Some true Fathers , but not truely alleadged : Some truely alleadged , but not true Fathers : Some true and truely alleadged , but nothing to the purpose . Yet this man derides it , counts it not worth three chips . What should one stand tugging with such a sowterly fellow , qui neque literas neque nare , that knowes not art , when it is brought before him , and laid on his trencher ? To the third of these ranks , belong those Fathers , sayes he , whome we must now intreat of , Nyssen , Nazianzen , Hierome , Maximus , &c. We must see whether Apostrophes , or Rhetoricall compellations may bee discouered in these mens prayers to Saints . Which the Bishop had both answered , and backed with sundry reasons : as that they speake to other things in like phrase of speech , whome neuerthelesse they would neuer speake to , but in a figure of Rhetorique : Eusebius to Pietie , de vitâ Constant . lib. 5. Ambrose to the water of Baptisme , lib. 10. in Luc. cap. 22. Nazianzene to the feast of Easter , Orat. 2. in Pasch . Of which sort wee haue many in Scripture too , and namely that , Numb . 21. 17. Rise vp well . Cantic . 4. 16. Arise O North , and come O South , and blowe , &c. Besides that they professe , they are vncertain whether they are heard by the partyes they speake to , yea or no. Nazianzen of Constantius , or rather of Constantine , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , if thou discernest any thing that is here done . So of his sister Gorgonia . So Nyssen of Theodorus , Hierome of Nepotian , &c. § 2. We are admonished of 4. things by this man in his third numb , to disprooue the Bishops answer in this behalfe . First , that the doubt of some mens estates , as not deliuered from Purgatorie , nor hauing payd their last farthing ( though Tertullian call inferos nouissimi quadrantis exactores , hell ( not Purgatory ) the exactor of the last farthing ) might make them to be vncertaine whether they were heard or no , by such as they spake vnto . Wherefore is this ? That one errour may support another , whereas rather each destroyes the other , as Cadmus children , or as they their brethren , whome Moses set on worke to mutuall slaughter , Exod. 32. For if they held them to be in paines , and not in glory , how would they pray to them ? were they not afraid of that , Thou which hearest others , help thy selfe ? Or if they pray vnto them , afore they are certified of their estate , either they are rash in praying ( for there must be no wauering Iames 1. 6. ) or else it appeares they dreamt not of Purgatory . Would you haue them to mammer , as Elias said merrily once of Baal , Perhaps he is gone to warre , or perhaps in his iourney , so perhaps he is gone to Purgatory ? You say , they made no question of their hearing , that were Saints declared and acknowledged , and you name Theodorus in Nyssen for one . Yet of him , Nyssenus in the Orat. you quote , Vbicunque tandem fueris , wheresoeuer thou art . Hee doubted therefore . Certenly Abraham hath not knowne vs , nor Israel acknowledged vs , meum say you , though erroneously , and Deus Abraham , Deus Isaac , confirmes no lesse by our Sauiours exposition . This was your first exception . § 3. Another , that when Nazianzen saies to Constantius , and so others to others , If thou hearest , or if thou discernest , it is not of doubting , but of adiuration , as when a friend to a friend , If you loue me : and S. Paul to Philemon , If thou account me as thy partner : that is , because I know thou accountest me . That Nazianzenes meaning may be this , Because ô Constantius I know thou discernest , &c. Which I list not to refute , but referre to the Readers indifferent iudgement , whether Nazianzen in bespeaking Constantius so , should meane to adiure him , and all other soules of Christian Kings , whom there he calls vnto , no lesse then his . The Greeke Scholiast saies plainly , vpon that place , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , this is taken from Isocrates , who perhaps held not that the Saints see all cleerly afore the day of iudgement . And he construes it in other words 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ( for he was absent ) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . Now , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , is no forme of adiuration , but of doubting still . Else it should be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , like S. Pauls 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . And by the way , you may see how true it is , that the Bishop obserues , of the Fathers falling into Rhetoricall acclamations , whereof this was one , taken from Isocrates , a Mr. in that faculty . But more cleerely of Gorgonia , Si Sancta animae haec talia persentiscant . If the holy soules vnderstand such things as these . This is no adiuring of Gorgonia , I trowe , but his doubt in generall , euen of them he spoke not to , but onely of . § 4. A third is , That it is dangerous to say the Fathers carried themselues like Orators . Not a whit I warrant you , though it be your shame to mistake them so grossely , as from thence to patch vp your damnable idolatryes . So wings , and armes , and eyes , and other members are attributed to God in holy Scripture . A stumbling blocke to the Anthropomorphites , or such shallow wits , but no fault of the holy Ghostes , qui scribit vigilantibus , as lawes are made . Wee imagine not , saies S. Austen , our God to be a Cupid , because he is described to haue wings and arrowes , lib. 3. contra Crescon . c. 78. You heard before , what Nazianzenes commentor sayes , of his borrowing from Isocrates . Though the Bishop sayes no where in plaine tearmes , that the Fathers did as Orators , not as Christians . But , Theologiamne docore , an rhetoricari putes ? Would you thinke these men meant to read a lecture of Diuinitie , or to practise their Rhetorique ? And , Oratorum encomia , quae nihil habent enucleatae Theologiae : Orators prayses , which containe no perfect substance of Diuinitie : suppose you , like that which your Schoolemen deliuer . So Hierome ( saies the Bishop ) speaks with Paula and Nepotian : how ? With both as an Orator , with neither as a Christian , that is , according to the rules of strict catechisme . What of this ? § 5. Your fourth obseruation in the 8. numb . is petitio principij , and the turning of the wheele . Therefore I will not meddle with it . Let the Bishops answer be but applyed to your obiection , and it will salue it as before . § 6. You praise pictures by the way , and say that they greatly edifie the people . Which shewes to what kind of creatures your booke is dedicated , namely those , whome an Idol may hold in awe for their simplicitie , and though it bee not good at teaching any thing , saue only lyes , as the holy Ghost saies , in Abac. 1. 18. yet it may serue well enough to bee their Master . You doe but vtter your ware , when you enterlace here about pictures : for else you know it is nothing to that place in the Bishops booke , which you pretend to confute . And I might seeme to doe the like , if I should be so madde as to follow you . Onely thus in briefe . S. Chrysostome of them that would haue pictures of the Seraphim , because they appeared in such and such forme , Esa . 6. which is your verie pretence at this day , why God should be painted , ( not the Seraphim onely , but God ; a monstrous shame . ) Non te defodis ? Art thou not ashamed , O thou wretch , ( sayes he ) of such a grosse collection ? Why doest thou not rather runne vnder ground , burie thy selfe aliue ? And he addes in the same place , that the Seraphim are said to couer their faces with wings at the appearance of God , onely to shewe that God is incomprehensible . Yet you paint them for their wings , whereas their wings are giuen them by the holy Ghost , sayes Chrysostome , to shew the secresie , and that it must not be painted , which cannot so much as be comprehended . I say nothing of the forbidding of the Lambe to be painted , in the Councel of Constantinople , which Mald. your fellow Iesuite in his Comment vpon Daniel answers thus . That the Fathers in that Councell were not rightly instructed , and the Church sawe more vpon better consideration in after times . Yet you make vs beleeue that you reuerence the Fathers , and we censure them . As for the fruit you talke of to come by pictures , it is one thing , I should think , what constant and staied minds may gather therefrom ; another whether they are fit to bee set vp in Churches , to nourish the deuotion of simple people by . Least they plant error while they would induce to pietie , seduce I should say , as they that pulling vp the weedes , in the parable , plucke vp the wheat with all , peruersâ diligentiâ . You may remember what S. Austen sayes de consensu Euangel . l. 1. c. 10. Sic errare meruerunt qui Christum non in codicibus , sed in pictis parietibus quaesiuerunt . So they deserued to be mockt that sought for Christ not in written books , but in painted walls . Neither are muri depicti , your images , or your pictures , though such are promised vnto the Church , Esa . 49. 16. nor portae sculptae , 54. 12. of the same booke . Of the Councell Eliberitan . Can. 20. of Epiphanius , and his rending the vaile of Anablath , of S. Chrysostomes exiling painters cleane out of the citie , and out of the world too , as men of no vse , no seruice in life , much more out of the Church , I might spend much paper . See his hom . 50. in Matth. Yet with you it is one of the three gainefull trades now at Rome , as we are informed , euen as the making of shrines was to Demetrius , or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , in the same booke . Nyssen speakes of pictures for ornament cheifly , for instruction either verie faintly , or not at all . And yet that also for grounded Christians , rather then for nouices , ( for S. Austen is iealous what may betide to such ) but of worshipping them not a word . Lastly , as the Martyr , so also the persecutor was painted in the worke that Nyssen speaks of , and vpon the pauement to be trode on , as well as vpon the walls to be gazd on . Par opus historiae in pauimento quod pedibus calcatur effecit pictor . What doth this helpe you ? § 7. You mislike the Bishops answer , of Vbicunque fueris , to shew the vncertentie of their perswasion . He might be high ( say you ) in Gods fauour , wheresoeuer he was . What ? if in the punishments of his owne sinnes ? ( for such a place you haue for the Elect after this life . ) Might he be so high in fauour for all that , as to succour others , and be praied vnto ? Therfore this is not Nyssens belying the people to their faces , as you fondly fancie , but your owne want of vnderstanding Nyssens meaning , and the peoples practise . Which though vnwarranted by Scripture , or Church-law , as we haue often told you , yet was not so bad as you would make it . In such case we may be bold to say with Tertudian , Meminero cor populi cinerem dictum , and with Chrysostome , Hom. 4. in Epist . ad Rom. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 : Not euery bodies voice , but wise mens , must be attended , to decide controuersies . Ne me curavt bubulcum , said he . Now when they pray to him in Nyssen , as entire and present , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , who was mangled and disparent , is there no Rhetorique in this neither ? or should that be a good ground to build faith vpon ? Yet this is that gemme , for which you haue searcht the Vatican , as you tell vs. As for degrees of glorie , though we doubt not but there be such , for stella à stella , &c. and he that sowes sparingly shall reape sparingly , and many the like , yet I hope one heauen containes them all . Would you say of Paul , vbicunque fueris , or of the blessed Virgin , & c ? yet you know not their punctuall degrees of glorie . Yea , and of Christ himselfe ? yet we know not the particulars of his aduancement ; ouely nomen dedit supra omne nomen . Philip. 2. and 1. Pet. 3. 22. § 8. To colour your imposture , you construe Greg. Nyssens , wheresoeuer thou art , by , howsoeuer thou art imployed in Gods seruice . Which is not Nyssens meaning , but your owne vision . For the Saints haue serued their age , seruierunt saculo suo , Act. 13. 36. and henceforth they are occupied about vs no more . Mortui non miscentur actibus viuorum , neque adiuvandis , neque cognoscendis , saies S. Austen , de Curâ pro mortuis , c. 13. Doe they not rest from their labours , Apoc. 14. 13 ? And actiue at least , if not passiue , to preserue your purgatorie , as Denys answers it . Neither say it seemes not labour to them , though it be laborious , for no more it here seemes to godly men . Lastly , it is wonder you should stand so stiffely vpon that point , that the godly Fathers , and by name S. Hierome , ( for you name him among the rest ) should not sometime flourish with a figure of Rhetorique , since not onely diuers of them haunted that schoole , as Austen , as Basil , as Nazianzen , and the like , Chrysostome especially ( who would not ride to schoole , beeing a rich mans child borne , but prefer'd to goe on foote , for his loue to learning , ) but S. Hierome professes of himselfe so much in plaine tearmes , where speaking of his Epist . ad Heliodorum , de laude vitae solitariae , he calls it Iusus , his play . Epist . proximè sequent . quae est ad Nepotianum , de vitâ Ctericorum . § 9. To your 16. 17. &c. Numb . The Bishop said not , that Ambrose was blasphemous , as you blaspheme him , but that the Cardinall citing that place of Ambrose , which you might better haue abstained frō , shewes he had rather bring Christs blood into contempt , then let goe his Dalila . Is this against S. Ambrose ? or the Cardinall rather ? Whome Ambrose his speech , not so warie as to be wisht perhaps , yet excusable by his beeing a nouice , as then for certaine he was , might trip as it does , and hath done but euen too often . What virulencie , good Sir , is this against S. Ambrose ? Though if neede were , as there is none , and yet if there were , I were not worthie , beeing more nouice to the most worthie Bishop , then euer S. Ambrose was to himselfe , yet I say , if occasion so required , to shew what my conceit was once hereof at a blush , and a little to choake you the more about the place that you so ruffle in , how if graunting it in rigore , that obsecrandi sunt Angeli , &c. yet we should denie that Ambrose allowes prayers to Saints , or to Angels either ? Are not Ministers called Angels ? Apoc. 1. Euen as Angels are called Ministers , Heb. 1. Who if euer they be to be sought vnto by supplication , I suppose in such case as Ambrose there speakes of , that is , in the houre of temptation , and amidst the violent assaults of youthfull lusts , and fancies . To say nothing of repayring to them in distresse of conscience , in which sense S. Chrysostome saies , he will rise at midnight for the releefe of any poore soule , and Minutius Foelix in Octauio , reports the ieere of wicked Pagans , in those tearmes , Adorata sacerdotum virilia , &c. Not that it was so , but for seeking to them for aide , in the aforesaid fitts and pangs of mind , most submissely . But what then shall we say of Martyrs , which is another thing in S. Ambrose ? As if the auncient Christians were not wont to craue pacem à Martyribus designatis , afore they went to execution . See Tertullian in his booke of that argument , see others . I doe but oppose you , I leaue it so . Cyrill vpon the 1. of Michea , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . The Angels leaue vs , they play the fugitiues . And the same he gathers out of Esa . 1. 8. that the daughter of Sion shall be like a cottage in a vineyard , like a lodge in a garden of cucumbers , namely , because waited vpon no longer by the Angells . And how are they fit to be praied vnto that leaue vs ? Neither say that after sinne , for after sinne we haue most neede to pray of all . The Apostle is confident , that Angels shall not separate vs , Rom. 8. 38. but no talke of vniting vs , or approaching vs to Christ . Sure S. Ambrose his ground was from intercessio viuorum , namely Andrewes and Peters , for Peters mother in law , Luk. 4. which we allow . And Ministers are praesidia nobis , ( as S. Ambrose speakes ) not onely Angels ; while that which is said of martyrs may be vnderstood per Proterosin , of them that are not yet martyred , but onely appointed to the blocke : whome we haue more then pignore corporis with vs , and yet that too . True praesules , true speculatores , as S. Ambrose calls them . § 10. Yet loe you will prooue , though cleane besides our scope , besides your owne , ( but that , as they say , a beggar is neuer out of his way ) that we may satisfie for our sinnes . And you lay your ground , numb . 18. that Christs passion giues life to all . That 's the blindation . But as well wood and clay , or other base ingredients in Nabuchodonosors image , with sounder mettals , eagles feathers , and other birds , may be mixed and compounded , yea the iarring ashes of the two Thebane brethren reconciled , as our wretched works and sorry sufferings with our Sauiours righteousnesse , which is righteousnesse it selfe . Doe you not conceaue how one is incompatible with the other , almost crying out with S. Peter , Depart Lord , for I am a sinnefull man , so , depart Lord , for I am a sinnefull worke ; while you boldly blend , and play the Vinteners , mingling guilty blood , with the blood of his sacrifice , innocent and immaculate , most preposterous Pilates ? § 11. Nazianzen is quoted Orat. 1. in Iulian. vt satisfacerent Christo sanguine suo . In Nazianz. it is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , which may as well be the iustifying of Christs cause by the effusion of their blood , hauing newly dishonoured it by stooping to the Emperours poisonous baits , as to satisfie for their fault to the iudge of the world ; which no man can doe , though in shadow and proportion one may come nearer perhaps then another : As he that spares not his life in his Lords cause , after he hath offended him , before him that languishes still , and playes the lazy Christian . So Nazianzen might meane , I see no cause to the contrary . Does not S. Peter take the word so ? 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , &c. The same is to be said to your other authorities , if time would serue , which you fondly here multiply , cleane besides the marke , but that you long'd I dare say to vent your commodities , and were glad no doubt of this occasion . In so much as you haue not spared Dan. 4. Peccatum tuum eleemosynis redime . Which in Hebrew is abrumpe , as hath been often answered you , and so in other places . Yea , we are saued by hope , and he hath saued vs , by the lauer of regeneration , comes in to shew , that a man may wash away his owne sinnes , either with teares , or with blood . Is this good handling of Scriptures , trow you ? If we are saued by hope , is it by hope in our selues , or our owne arme ? If baptisme purges vs , and the Sacrament of our Lord , shall there be the same vertue in our corrupt selues , who but for grace should rather staine the font , staine our baptisme , true Coprony●… ? § 12. To S. Ambroses place in 1. ad Rom. Ad deum non est opus suffragatore , that is , To god wee neede no spokes-man : He sayes , S. Ambrose speakes against them onely , that were deuoted to the Sunne , and Moone , and the Planets . But did euer any man make them his suffragators or spokes-men to god ? And if as numb . 18. you suggest to vs , it was the Paynims fault to hold that God gouerned the world by vnder officers , what is yours lesse , that apply that so , indeauouring to make way to inuocation of Saints , Take thou power ouer fiue cityes , thou ouer ten , & c ? Shall Paynims faults be onely taxed in Paynims , and not in them that reuiue the errors of Paynims , which they call Catholique ? You wish the Bishop to marke those words , Ad deum promerendum in S. Ambroses mouth , and so in other Fathers , nothing to your merit god wot . Multanos à deo bona meruisse cognouimus quibus nequaquam digni fuimus , saies Theodosius the Emperour ( among the lawes I trow it is ) and many the like . Ad promerendum deum , that is , ad conciliandum . 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is so translated by our old interpreter , Heb. 13. By which you may see that to promerite is nothing , but to gratify , or to please . But of merit heretofore , and more hereafter . § 13. You say , no sacrifice might be offered but to God. And is not prayer a sacrifice ? Indeede what richer ? Is not all almost turned thereinto ? Into puram precem , as * Tertullian saies . And what salt is in sacrifice , without prayer ? Yet sale salietur , you know the place . Euery sacrifice shall be salted with salt ; which you applie to purgatorie , wisely no doubt . You say , that to God all hearts are manifest , and he needes no relator . Indeede because he onely is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , therefore onely he is fit to be prayed vnto , sith praier is of the heart , not a calfe of the lips , though of them too , when occasion serues , but the life thereof is from the heart , as Salomon saies truly , that from the heart proceede the issues of life . And I see not but it may be verified , euen in this sense too . To whome of the Saints then dare you pray thus , either as they in the Acts , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , 1. 24. or as the Church in her seruice , O God to whome all hearts are open , all desires knowne , &c. But that passes , that by this reason S. Ambrose may seeme to take away our Sauiour Christs mediation and all , if he be not limited by your interpretation . Read but the Fathers , Primasius , Chrysostome , Theodoret , and Theophylact , vpon Rom. 8. 34. Interpellat pro nobis . You shall finde , his intercession stands , in offering vp the memorie of his death and passion to his father , for vs. As a soldier which shewes his skars to his Prince , though he say nothing , yet he begs fauour . Which makes our prayers at the Eucharist , so much the more effectuall , because therein we renew the memorie of his death and blood-shed so liuely . According as himselfe said at the institution , who best knew the vertue of his owne Sacrament , Doe this as oft as you shall doe it , in remembrance of me . Our minds therefore beeing possessed with the remembrance of that his death , wholly taken vp with that recogitation , our prayers haue so much the more easie speeding towards the throne of grace , to whome that giues force . And can the Saints doe so of theirs ? Which of them all was crucified for you ? 1. Cor. 1. 13. yet you compare their intercession , with Christs for vs. Of whome some died not at all , most of them not violently , but none at all to make atonement to God , for vs. And because I haue vouched the Fathers exposition vpon Rom. 8. to be as I said , I will set downe their authorities in no other words then their owne . Theophylact saies , Intuens namque Christi corpus pater , recordatur dilectionis suae erga genus humanum , quâ de causâ scilicet filius olim corpus gessit , at que inde ad misericordiam & miserationem inflectitur . This sense renders Theophylact of interpellat pro nobis . The like hath S. Hierome , Comm. huius loci . Interpellare pro nobis dicitur [ Christus ] dum hominem quem suscepit , patri pro nobis pignus ostendit & offert . The very words of S. Hierome , hath Primasius in his commentarie , and Sedulius in his . Remigius hath the sense in somewhat otherwords . Interpellat pro nobis patrem , saith he , non voce sedmiseratione ; dum quotidie hominem quem assumpsit , & grauissimum genus mortis quod pro nobis sustinuit , vultui paterno offert , vt nostri misereatur . Haymoes words , in his commentarie , are the very same with Remigius his , now set downe . Sauing that Remigius ends in this most sweete close ; Qui qualemc unque habet tribulationem , hanc audiat Pauliexhortationem . Into whatsoeuer tribulation any man is sunke , let him giue eare to this exhortation of S. Paul. Whereas the Papists thinke , that some may be buried vnder so deepe oppressions for the conscience of their sinnes , as they may not presume to come immediatly to Christ , [ whose intercession , saies Euthymius , is semper essicax , alwaies effectuall for vs : in comm . huius loci ] but they must runne circuiting and fetching a compasse about by the Saints . Of what iudgement Chrysostome and Theodoret are , may be seene by Theophylact before alleadged , who sieldome dissent either for opinion or words . Of Lyra , and of Aquine , the like might be promised . But Sylvester in Summâ shall determine all , though he expressely quote Aquine , Part. 2. V. Oratio , § secundo : Filius orat patrem ( saies he ) ostendendo patri humanitatem cum mysterijs eius , vt dicit S. Tho. Rom. 8. Let this susfice for this matter . § 14. Neither does S. Ambrose say , Declaratore non opus est ; but , suffragatore non opus est . You peruert him therefore when you say , he meant no more then so , that the Angels and Saints neede not informe God. § 15. I will conclude with that , that S. Ambrose forbidding to adore our fellow-seruants ( for prayer and adoration goe together with him , as I told you of S. Cyrill euen now the saine ) saies , we can reserue nothing more to God. But you haue found out certaine distinctions and kinds of it , which the Saints may partake , without Gods iniutie . Adoro te , but thus farre , intra Canonem , intra mensuram , 1. Cor. 10. 13. Huc vsque venies , & franges furentes fluctus tuos . Dulicè , not latricè . Gloriam meam dabo , but not totam dabo . The strumpets diuidatur . § 16. Numb . 32. and 33. Tu solus innocandus , is rather strengthened and fortified , by , Tu solus rogandus , but surely not enseebled . Though you cast this , as cold water , in the face of the other . For S. Ambr. ( say you ) might rogare the people to pray for another Theodosius . Is this comparable with our rogare Deū , with our making requests to God ? Is God & the people sued vnto alike ? Why then do you ioyne such vnsutable matches , whē you pretēd earnest ? But hircum qui mulgent , & vulpes iungant . As for your sweet distinction , and subtill one no doubt , that only God is to be sued vnto for grace , but Saints for other things , and that this is the reason , why S. Ambrose said , that God indeede onely was to be requested , to giue a supply of more Theodosij , which without his grace could not be done , I might aske you , first , what one thing wee haue by vertue of prayer , which may not be tearmed grace ? I meane as descending of free gift , and bounty . In which sense , perhaps , the fathers of that Councell defined so long agoe , that if any body , bearing the minde to commit leudnesse , should be hindred of his purpose [ howsoeuer , ] we were to knowe that such a one was deliuered by grace . Therefore if grace come from God , not from the Saint , from God not from the Saint must come all that we stand in neede of . And so prayer be made , not to the Saint , but to God onely . But secondly , Saints may representare Theodosios , supply good men as fast as they decay , if not by their owne strength & inherent vertue , which reacheth neither to grace I confesse , nor to one crum of bread , yet by their potency with God , and by procuring his ayde through their mediation , if at least your doctrine be true on this part . And therefore the qualification that you vse towards S. Ambrose , about Tu solus inriocandus , or rogandus either , is most ridiculous and childish . For euen the Saints power , may stretch to Grace at second hand , as you imagine . To omit , that , tu solus rogandus es vt Theodosios repraesentes , is particularly determined , and if you will to grace , because without that a Theodosius could not bee : but , Tu solus inuocandus es , is as generall as any thing , euen as the obiects of praier themselues in their largest extention ; and therefore this last must not be limited by the former , howsoeuer construed , but all inuocation is to bee confined to God by the iudgement of S. Ambrose , saying , Tu solus inuocandus es ; scilicet ad omnia , or , in quacunque causa . § 17. The most Reuerend Bishop neuer said of himselfe , that he could not slip in matter of memory . Si sciens fallo , is his imprecation . So Ieremy for Zachary , Matth. 27. 9. so diuerse like . For what should I say of the Fathers quoting Scripture , as they doe often , rather as it was in their memories , then as we read it in the text ? And yet no honest learned man , but would hold such scapes for very veniall I imagine . S. Austen a little before was found to haue reported S. Cyprian somewhat wrongly , citing words out of his booke de vnitate Ecclesiae . Sunt quidam eruditi errores & obliuiones , saies Rodolphus Agricola , Certaine learned errors or obliuious confusions euen in the best authors . And Turrian saies of Cicero , Praefat. in Constitut . Clementis , that he was minè immemoris ingenij : very forgetfull touching quotations . Though there are more in this kind to be obserued in Tully , then euer Turrian tooke note of I beleeue , as hypercriticall as he was . And thinke you not that we may with better reason avow , if we had not rather be ingenuous , then obstinately contentious , as you are in defending your grosse errors when they are espyed , that S. Ambrose wrot not only one booke , but euen many de Oratione , then you can avow the Cardinalls allegations , either by the circumstance of the text when the letter fayles you , or by the Italian presses of the Iuntae or the Sessae ? Call to minde a little , if you thinke good , De interpellatione three books , De interpellatione Dauid one booke , that is , all of them in effect de Oratione . Againe in his bookes de Sacramentis , also vpon the Lords prayer &c. All these wrote S. Ambrose in effect of prayer , I say , or de Oratione , as the Bishop calld it , and mentions not any where praying to Saints . Is this now of no force with you ? And finally , so many Fathers haue defined prayer by our reference to God onely , ( as indeede the Pater noster does , which I must alwayes tell you of ) that neither shall you be euer able to claw of that argument , neither if we now and then name one of them for another , ought you so much to blame vs for defect of memory , as forcibly subscribe to so great varietie of consent , as is able to confound the best memory . § 18. But what if S. Ambrose mention not praying to Saints ? No more he does ( say you ) of our mutuall praying for our enemies and the like . As if these were not the obiects and materials of our prayers , which are infinite in number , as Aristotle tels vs , that all particulars are , and therefore not to be comprehended . We speake of him to whome we are to direct them , which is soone learned , and most meet to be told , as Pater noster , and nomen TVVM , and regnum TVVM , and the conclusion of all , quia TVVM , thrice repeated , of which I told you before . Euery clause , euery syllable in the pater noster , shewes to whom we must pray . So no doubt would Ambrose , commenting of prayer , haue directed vs to the Saints , if God had not sufficed . But he is Shaddai so too . § 19. Yea but Numb . 36. you tell vs , that S. Ambrose makes no mention of the Saints interceding for vs , which the Bishop neuer thelesse graunts . Is it therefore none ? 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , and an oxe with an asse . Good Lord how vnlike ? For the one of these is free to thinke or not , the other of faith , that God must be prayed to . If he be on our side , Rom. 8. you know what followes , all other may be spared . Euen the Angels themselues , euen then when they come ad denarium numenum , to the number of perfection , ( decem principes eiuitatis , Eccles. 7. 20. ) yet wisedome is better then they , that is Christ , sayes Albinus , vpon the place before named . No doubt our Lord is all sufficient to releeue vs. And , not praying to God , we can receaue no benefit from him ; the Saints intercession which they make for vs , whether we sleepe or wake , whether we know of it or not , is alike beneficiall to all . No such reason therefore to determine this . § 20. S. Ambrose himselfe , of whome we speake , vpon the words now quoted , Rom. 8. Semper causas nostras agit apud patrem [ Christus . ] Our Sauiour alwayes pleads our causes before his Father . And shall the Saints put in , where he is alway agent ? This is worse then spectante Roscio gestum agere , to interpose our Sauiour at pleading for vs , as if he were not either cunning or gracefull enough at it . Againe , Cuius postulatio contemni non potest ( nor therefore , adiavari opus habet aduentitiâ aliquâ aduocatione ) quia in dextra Dei est . Whose request cannot be despised , because he sits at the right hand of God. Like vnto which Tertullian , Facilè impetratur semper quod filius postulat . That suite hath euermore easie speeding which the sonne makes , ( Christ , to wit. ) Neither does S. Ambrose mention without cause , the sitting of Christ at the right hand of his Father , to whet his mediation . Which S. Paul had mentioned , for the very same cause , in the place that hee comments vpon , Rom. 8. 34. And indeed but to Christ , it was neuer said to any , Sede à dexteris meis , sit on my right hand , Hebr. 1. 13. Which by collation of places , shewes , that there is none other intercessor for vs , but he . Lastly , thus S. Ambrose , Vt de Deo patre securi , & Christo filio eius , in eorum fide laetemur . That beeing confident of God the Father , and Christ his Sonne , we may reioyce in the faith that we haue in them . So as you see , faith and aduocation goes onely still with Christ , not with the Saints . § 21. NExt is Ruffinus lib. 2. historiae c. 33. who sayes not , that Theodosius did inuoke the Saints , but as the Bishop answered you , and you cannot take away , that at the tombes of Martyrs he craued helpe of God , by the Saints intercossion . Which although it suppose their suing for vs , yet it is not coupled with our praying to them . What you bring out of Chrysostome , who names not Theodosius , much lesse points at this fact of his , as you dreame both here , and numb . 50. but onely speakes vniuersally of the Emperours , hath been replyed to before . We dresse no Crambe . Hee names Constantine . And if he meant Theodosius , why does he not name him ? But whomsoeuer he meanes , they may be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , need the holy ones ( suppose the Angels ) and yet not pray to them , nor to Saints neither ; and yet whether they doe or no , it makes no lawe . Heare S. Cyprian orat . de lapsis . Mandant aliquid Martyres fieri ? Sed si scripta non sunt in Domini lege quae mandant , antè est vt sciamus illos de Deo impetrâsse quod postulant , tunc facere quod mandant . That is , Doe the Martyrs commaund a thing to be done ? But if that which they commaund be not written in Gods lawe , it is reason we should first know , that God allowes what they aske , before we doe what they command . So as not onely the actions of mortall men , though neuer so godly , but the commands of Martyrs , appearing from heauen , must be examined by the law of God , ere they may be accomplished by S. Cypr. iudgement . Antè est vt sciamus , &c. Yet you back it by Sozomen . lib. 7. histor . cap. 24. out of whom that which you bring is but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , in Sozomene , it is said , or reported , though you amplifie it , by , commonly reported . Well what is it ? First you leaue out Theodosius his going into the Church to pray to God , and to none else , that he names in that part of the sentence . This you dissemble , and leaue out , as not concerning the matter , though nothing more , who charge the Bishop so causlesly and sencelesly else where for the same fault ; yea , when it is no fault . Secondly , as for the Temple which Theodosius built in the honor of S. I. Baptist , we might aske you , how that agrees with S. Austens , Templum Martyribus non ponimus ? You will say , it was called by the Baptists name onely , and in memory of him . So , it may be , he but named or remembred the Baptist in his prayer , as he had good occasion , conuersing in the Church that might put him in minde of him . You haue both built Churches , and offered sacrifice ( though you cloake it neuer so much ) to him and to Martyrs , contrary to S. Austen . For doe you not offer sacrifice in the honour of the Virgin ? You will not deny it . How then does this differ from the Collyridian heresie ? To omit howe much more hainous a matter it is to offer Christ our Lord , in honour of his Mother , then a cake as they . The like I might say of vowes which you make to Saints by way of special honour , which the aforesaid Valentia , seeking fowre wayes to iustifie , is most fowle in all . One time he saies , that the Saints are called for witnesses of what we vow to God. A small prerogatiue , and yet more then need too , euen this . Another time , that wee vowe to God indeed , but for loue to the Saints . As if God were not louely enough , or had not right enough to our vowes , but for the Saints sake . A third time , that we doe this , because we thinke the Saints are well pleased with such seruice , when it is performed to God. But by this reason we may as well vowe to Saints in earth , and in mortalitie . Lastly ' , he denies it to be an act of relligion , if it be done to the Saints ; of which hereafter . As for Theodosius , his calling S. Iohn Baptist to be his 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , it might be materialiter , that the pietie which hee had shewed in decking the Temple , with the name of the Baptist , for distinction sake , might bee mentioned by him to God , to mooue him to fauour , as Ezechias and * Nehemias and diuerse more haue done the like . And yet not trusting in their owne righteousnesse neither , but by some proportion of their indeauour , and his good acceptance . In this sense , S. Iohn Baptist might be called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , and as our workes are saide to pray for vs , ( vitalis oratio , Bellarmine acknowledges ; another , that eleemosyna orabit pro te ) so this an imploration of S. Iohn Baptist , renuing the memorie of the Temple that bore his name , before God in his prayer . The starres , are said , to fight against Sisera . Heauen is called to reioyce ouer Babylon . So all the Saints out of their brotherly sympathie , are our 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 at all times ; vocati nec vocati ; and yet when wee call for them , we may call for them of God , without praying to them . Ille educit thesauros ex abyssis . This therefore , though there were no 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , prooues no praying to Saints . Whereas you say , that if we pray to S. Iohn Baptist , why not to others ? We make no question , but the reason is alike ; but you haue heard our answer to Sozomens storie , which at another time no man disclaimes more then your selues , ( Sozomenus multa mentitur in historia , Greg. de Val . Tom. 4. Comm. Theol. p. 1952. The like iudgement giues Bellarmine both of him and Socrates , T. 2. edit . Ingolstad . anni 1605. p. 487. ) and remember , I pray you , that he saies , Theodosius went in to pray to God , so as if he prayed to the Baptist , it was besides his purpose . § 22. The Bishops reasons against prayer to Saints , because we haue no such warrant in the holy Scripture , and we know not if they heare vs or no , &c. how doe you refute ? The Church of God , say you , the spouse of Christ , the pillar of truth , hath done it before vs , with whome our Sauiour hath promised to be continually assistant . What then ? And this is in stead of Scripture . To you it may be . But first you haue brought vs no such testimonie of the Church , vnlesse you think , that all that meete in a Church to heare a Sermon , or a Homilie , as they did Nyssens , of whome we spake a little before , are a sufficient assembly to counteruaile a Synode , which is the Church , without question , from whome we should looke for determination in such causes , euen by your owne confession . Yet now you are offended with vs , when we call for Synods . As for , our Sauiours assistance with vs , to the end of the world , I see not how that prooues praying to Saints , but rather sends vs from them to him , as to whome we haue not onely easie accesse , but himselfe continually watching about vs. Doe you not read in the Cantic . how dangerous it is for the spouse of Christ , to run a gadding after the flocks of the shepheards , though they be called his fellowes , or companions , but not fellowes in this . And againe in the same booke , Paululùm cum pertransissem , when I had past a little farther ; that is , as both S. Bernard and Guarricus expound it , when I had passed the Angels , and soared aboue the creatures , then I found where to rest , vpon God and Christ , no doubt , and not before . And it prooues not , first , that the Church cannot erre , though shee were the pillar of truth , that you speake of , 1. Tim. 3. 15. Where , if it were lawfull to adde any thing to that which hath beene answered to that place of the Apostle , ouer and ouer by our writers , I would say that he alluded to the two pillars , which the posteritie of Seth are saide to haue erected after the flood , containing diuers verities both physicall and Theologicall , most memorable in them , but not authorizing them at all . So happily the Church . For to her the depositum was committed coram testibus , as the Apostle saies in the next Epistle , 2. Tim. 2. 2. the truth , as I may say , engrauen in her , as it were in a marble pillar . But secondly , though the Church were neuer so infallible for her doctrines , yet shee might erre in her practise , as you confesse of the Pope . For euen the Church her selfe , is not more priuiledged with you , then the Pope , from error . Though we neuer read him called the pillar of truth , as we doe of others , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , . i. O most diuine father , the pillar and ground of truth ; saith Damascen to Iordanes the Archimandrite in his Epistle de Trisagio ad eundem . And yet he not infallible neither , because no Pope . Thirdly , your examples , put them altogether , make no Church . Which hole shall we stoppe first in your sieue , in your argument ? § 23. Theodorets beginning is very laudable , that they often meete to sing hymnes and praise to the Lord of Martyrs . If they went any further , I can but say with Epiphanius , Haeresis est tanquam mala mulier , heresie is like a shrewd woman , giue her no aduantage , no more then to the water , no not a little , let her not haue her will. If shee had beene curbed at the first , it had not come to those riots , and extremities , that since we labour of . Though when I cast mine eye vpon Theodorets owne text , not as you trenlace and translate it at pleasure , I see very little to make for you , if ought at all . First , he reports onely fashion or vse , and that not generall , which you promise in your title of this seauenth Chapter . Doe you see then how quickly you are fallen away from your tearmes , which very tearmes were not answerable to the primitiue challenge , although you had kept them ; which called for sanction not for practise , for rules of Fathers , not routs of people , &c. Neither does Theodoret say that the people made their prayers to Martyrs , but hauing spoken in the last words of the God of Martyrs , he addes immediatly of their praying , for all such things as they stand in neede of , but specifies not to whome they prayed for them , whether to God , or to the Martyrs . To whome then rather , then to the God of Martyrs ? His words are , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , &c. Thirdly , if there prayers were made at first to the Martyrs , to them also should their thanks for speeding be returned . Of which thankes he speakes in these words , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . But your selues in your Liturgyes , sieldome returne thankes to the Saints or Martyrs , of which I am to speake in another place . And indeede , if thankes are to be returned to the Saints , can it be but that God is in exceeding great danger of loosing his honour , with whome such partners shall communicate ? And as for 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , it does not force that they prayed to the Martyrs to accompanie them , whose companie they might begge as well of God , and he licence them . Which neuertheles would be thought of , how possibly it can stand with another clause of Theodorets in that very chapter , viz. the soules of Saints , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , raunge about heauen , and their bodies are dispersed into diuers townes and countries . How then could they accompanie the poore way-faring man , but that Theodoret turnes rhetoricall , and meant no other , then onely to oppose to the Gentile gods lately by him named , or such as intruded vpon the honour of God , Antiochus , Hadrian , Vespasian , &c. the exaltation of Christian Saints , so farre as was compatible with Christs true Relligion ? And therefore correcting himselfe , he is faine to say , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ; not absurdly distinguishing betweene dulia and latria , as your braines crowe , but deprecating the scandall which his former words might seeme to imply . Where we haue also the gifts and donaries before spoken of , offered to God in plaine and direct tearmes , not to the Martyrs . 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 : For their Master accepts them , saies he , [ not they , ] As for 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , let the Saints pray for vs as much as you will , that is nothing to our question of praying to them . And yet Theodoret addes , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . This shewet , that their God is the true God. Which confirmes what I said , in the former Chapter , of Mamas spoken of in S. Basil , that Deus Mamantis , Mamas his God , and so here , the Martyrs God , they are mentioned to this end , to shew that the peoples recourse vnto them , was not as to certaine fauourites , and vnder-officers of the great King , to dispence largesses , but as worshippers of the same God , ( euen with losse of their dearest blood lately in their life time , ) in whose honourable seruice themselues reioyced , and the rather because dignified by such noble partners , and fellow-seruants . Lastly , shewing of what trades and occupations of life , diuerse of those Martyrs were while they liued , he reckons vp very meane ones , not to call them base , and concludes thus ; 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 : That is , Of such men and women consists the Quire of Martyrs . Yet Parsons that hell-hound ( your worthy predecessor , or if you will , progenitor , into your world of Anticks ) scoffs at shoomakers , and beere-brewers , and such kind of people , that they should be thought Martyrs fit for a Calender , or able to discern what faith they died for . You heare what Theodoret here not onely confesses , but vaunts of . Of such men and women consists the Quire of Martyrs . And what saies the Apostle ? Non multi nobiles , &c. Or what kind of trade is contemned in Scripture , towards the advancing of Christs Gospel , fishing , tanning , weauing , tent-making , and such like ? Ecclesia Christi de vili plebecula congregata est , sayes S. Hierome lib. 3. Comm. in Epist . ad Gal. And Onesimus the fugitiue ( Baronius writ it , if I remember ) succeeded the Apostle S. Iohn in his Bishopricke of Ephesus . But Parsons hath answered this by this time , and many other matters ; I vrge him no farther . § 24. Onely take you heede , how you beleeue the Saints ( as here you seeme to doe ) to vnderstand the praiers that are made vnto them , because now and then the desire is graunted . Consider yee not what collusions may be among deuills ? And , Audit ad voluntatem , cùm non ad salutem , euen God himselfe as S. Austen teaches , which your Syluester with others obserue out of him , v. Oratio . He heares vs to our will , when not to our weale . Conceditque iratus quae negaret propitius , saith the same father . And grants in anger what he would deny in loue . Neither is the deuill the better loued for speeding in his suite , to goe into the swine , you may be sure . Yet the deuill begd rightly , you worse then he , at a wrong dore . Neither is the Bishop to bee blamed for searching this question of Inuocation by reasons ( as S. Hierome saies of Quadratus that he wrote a booke in defence of our relligiō , * plenum fidei & rationis ) since you confesse your selfe that it is persuadeable , but by inducements , namely what others haue obserued , found , and experienced , and is not necessary to saluation , * numb . 29. Why then should you shunne the tryall of reason ? To omit that as S. a Austen , and your Schoole hath it , In faith are many things aboue reason , but none against it . § 25. The reuelation of vicissitude or per interualla that Saints may haue , as Elizeus of Naaman and Gehezi , and the like , is not enough to auouch praying to them . It must be permanentiae , it must be spiritus manens & non transiens . Else we may pray to them , when they heare vs not , and when nothing is reuealed . This man hath prayed to me , and I was not aware , or Dominus abscondidit à me , as the Prophet said . So shall we be sure that they doe not euer heare vs , but whether they doe euer heare vs or no , we shall not be sure . Can there be any thing more disparageable to a poore suiter then this ? This to your numb . 46. § 26. Whereas you say in the 47. that they know our prayers , by the relation of Angels . First , how shall the Angels know them to relate ? By reuelation from God , you will say . But he that reueales to the Angels , might reueale to the Saints eâdem operâ . What needs this reuelation then ? Sic fieri per plura , quod potuit per pauciora ? Secondly , who makes that the Angels worke , to be offerers of our prayers to the Saints in heauen ? Is this worthy of them ? Is this a fit worke to imploy Angels about ? Why not rather to my selfe , saies the Angel ? And surely if this be once entertained , that the Angels acquaint the Saints with our prayers , which else they should not know but for them , will not the Pagan opinion which S. Ambrose hissed out , and you with him , euen now , returne , that God also should be ignorant of our affaires , vnlesse the Angels reuealed them ? For you make the Angels , to offer our prayers to God too . A iust reward of your peruerting so the Apocalyps , c. 5. v. 8. § 27. To your 48. 49. &c. Numbers . * That Church-custome determines diuerse things without Scripture : I answer breifly , they must be things of a lighter nature , then the substantialls of Gods seruice , as is our prayer to him , or whomsoeuer you will thrust into his roome . No praescription can robbe him of his honour . Homines nihil vsu capere possunt à dijs immortalibus . And againe , among the same Laws , as I rememember , Aduersus hostem aeternae authoritas , but maximè Dei , & Diuina sibi vendicantem . Your owne Genebrard vpon that verse of the 119. Psal . LEGEM tuam dilexi , INIQVOS odio habui , that is , haereticos saith he , or such as departing from the lawe of God , either fall into heresie , or are not farre from it . So much it concernes vs to sticke close to the Law ; 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , as S. Basil wills : and in another place he makes a Law to himselfe , to endure all 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , all formes of death , rather then to forfeit one syllable of diuine writ , beeing tempted to dispense at the small things of Gods Law , ( as was pretended at least by the wily Courtier ) with no small offers . The very place of Esay , that sends vs ad legem & ad testimonium , barres vs from looking towards the departed , though they be Saints . It were endles to reckon vp all the fathers authorities , in detestation of such traditions , as accrue besides the word of God , and how they reduce all controuersies of this nature , to no other touch-stone , then the holy Scriptures decision . Out of THESE BOOKES , saith Constantine , let vs try the Question , meaning the Bibles . 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , let the Scripture be Vmpire , saith Basil ad Eustathium . S. Chrysostome , Tom. 4. edit . Eton . per D. H. Savile , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . The doctrine of holy Scriptures is the inheritance of our Fathers . Euen as we say , that the Common Law is euery mans inheritance , because it tries titles , & by that we hold . Dionysius therfore most properly cals it substantiam fidei , the substance or liuelihood of our faith , suppose that by which it is fedde , as you would say , and nourished , and maintained . Likewise , Thy testimonies haue I claimed as mine HERITAGE for euer , saies the Prophet Dauid , in the Psalme before named . So as the King you see , consists by the tillage of this field , and they are his for euer , euen as in the nature of an inheritance , as was before said . Apollinaris ( in Eusebius . l. 5. c. 1. ) Bishop of Hierapolis , writing to a friend of his , Avircius Marcellus , about the heresie of the Cataphrygians , alleadges this as a cause of his slow setting forward to write ( euen against those heretiques , ) ne quicquam apponere viderer Euangelico verbo noui testamenti : least writing so much as one line after the Canon of holy Scripture , he might seem to haue a mind to adde to her most compleat sufficiencie . S. Gregorie also the great , lib. 1. Epist . 24. ad quatuer Patriarchas , saith , that as the Priest in old times was wont to consult God in doubtfull cases , apud arcam testamenti , at the Arke of the Couenant , or of the testimony , so Ecclesiasticall rulers are to performe the same now , [ apud arcam testamenti Dominum consulunt ] si de his in quibus dubitant intus apud semetipsos sacri Eloquij paginas requirant . The Pastors then consult the Arke of the Testament , when concerning those things that they make doubt of in their minds , they haue recourse to the pages of the word of God in their brests . For which cause you shall finde , that a Diuine of yours , Antonius de Pad●a , was called Arca testamenti , the Arke of the Testament , by them that admired his cunning in the Scriptures . Which studie is not so honourable , if we read them but to read them , or to waxe cunning in them onely , vnlesse we resort vnto them as to the law of our life , and countenance of our whole proceedings . Wherefore againe the same Gregorie , whereas the Church in the Canticles is called a Doue , he giues this reason of it , because the Doues propertie is to gaze vpon the riuers , and so the Churches studie is wholly in the Scriptures . His words are , Doues also for this cause are wont to sit by the full riuers of waters , that they may discerne the shadowes of birds flying ouer them , and casting themselues vpon the waters , eschew the clawes of such foule as are too feirce for them . Euen so godly men discerne by holy Scriptures the deceits of the deuill , ( suppose such as F. T. would faine put vpon vs here vnder the colour of the Church ) and by the platforme therein contained they discry the fiend , as the birds do the hawke by her shadow in the water . Then follows , Dūque se consilijs Scripturae addicunt , vt videlicet NIHIL AGANT nisi quod ex RESPONSO SCRIPTVRARVM audiunt , quasi in aquam se proijcientes , hosti illudunt . Quae flumenta PLENISSIMA dicuntur , quòd de QVIBVSCVNQVE SCRVPVLIS , in Scripturis consilium quaeritur , sine minoratione de OMNIBVS ad plenū inuenitur . What can be said more for the perfection of Scriptures ? It is well that Canus saies a Pope may erre if he write a booke , as here Gregory doth ; not if he determine in the chaire . Yea and Anselme , your owne Doctor , no lesse then Greg. vpon Col. 3. Habitet in vobis verbum Christi copiosè in omni sapientia , &c. is not nice to affirme , that omnis sapientia is where Christi verbum is , all wisdome is there where Christs word and warrant is . And reckoning but those fower braunches of wisedome , first , to know the holy Trinity , then the manner of worship belonging vnto it , thirdly , godly coueting after the Kingdome of heauen , fourthly , good works and honest life in this world , he concludes thus , In huiusmodi rebus est omnis sapientia quam Christianus habere debet in hac vitâ , that is , In such things as these , stands all the wisedome , that a Christian man needs to haue in this life . What then should we doe with Saints and Angels , and the worshipping of them , after the holy Trinity religiously serued by vs , vnto which S. a Cyprian saies , that all our deuotion and obseruance ought to be confined ? Yea and b Aquine himselfe , more yours perhaps then Anselme ( as was Anselme then Gregorie ) yet cōmenting vpon the same words , acknowledgeth such perfection in the holy Scripture , that saying the Apostle exhorts , vs there to wisedome , he addes more ouer , that he beginneth that exhortation , with shewing them where wisedome is , and calls the word of God , ( to the study whereof the Apostle there incites ) fontem sapientiae , the FOVNTAINE of wisedome . Vnles your thirst be so preposterous , as the very fountaine cannot quench it . And indeede in old times , the Bible was laid forth in the midst of Synods , as Constantines words insinuated euen now , quoted out of Gelasius , to shewe , that their determinations of matters of importance , should come onely from thence . Sexta Synod . Constant . sub Agath . Propositis in medio sacrosanctis Euangelijs Christi Dei nostri : The holy Gospells of our Lord Iesus Christ , beeing laide forth in the midst . And S. Cyprian . l. 4. Ep. 2. Copiosus numerus Episcoporum in vnum convenimus , & Scripturis diu ex vtrâque parte prolatis , &c. § 28. To the 51. numb . What maruaile if Paulinus be poeticall in verse , when the Fathers , as hath beene shewed , haue their flourishes in prose ? And yet not to the derogation of Christian relligion , saue onely as you flies , or beetles rather , corrupt good oyntment with your abusiue breath . The custome and practise of the vvhole . Church , is a bauble which the foole hath gotten by the ende , and brandisheth it as gloriously as if it were Hercules his clubbe . We haue seene no such , I tell you . Ecclesia Dei non habet talem consuetudinem , vix vel simplicem praxin . And yet if you thinke to facere populum , and carrie the cause by many voices , I must tell you with the same S. Hierome , whome you quote so rise , lib. 3. contra Pelag . prope finem , that , Multitudo sociorum nequaquam te Catholicum sed haereticum demonstrabit . To alleadge multitudes on your side , will make you thought to be an hereticke , not a Catholicke . The like I haue quoted to you out of S. Chrysostome before , Hom. 8. in Act. Apost . And in briefe , what custome can doe , you may learne of your fellow Sa , in Apharismis , v. festum . namely , that faires may be kept , and the mill driuen vpon the holy-day , with some other things , which certaine of you wil scarce excuse frō mortal sinnes , ( as he saies ; ) but the salue of all is , Licet , concedente id consuetudine : It is lawfull , because custome permits it . Is it not reason that wee should be guided by such a wandring starre ? § 29. What can be more absolute , or more powdred with that salt , which our Sauiour cōmends , then the Bishops answer to S. Austens authoritie , out of Serm. 17. de verb. Apostoli ? that , for a man to be recommended to the prayers of the Martyrs , is to be interessed in the intercession of the mysticall bodie , &c. Christ onely beeing praied to , and yet God hearing both him and vs , while each is sollicitous for the neede of others , no lesse then of himselfe . Neither doth the comparison , wherein the gentleman so pleaseth himselfe , numb . 60. to disprooue this , any whit preiudice the Bishops interpretation . Nay , if a subiects wishes were so fauoured by a King , as whatsoeuer he wished , the King would accomplish , might I not sue euen to the King to haue my part among them that the fauourite should recommend , without making particular meanes to himselfe ? So Christ and the Martyrs . What they wish we haue , what he inspires they wish ; and yet we seeke not to the Martyrs , but to God onely . § 30. His vnsauourie scorne of his MOST SACRED MAIESTIE , to be Head of the Church of England , I might well reckon with him for , but I passe by . God be thanked at what time I was writing these things , the news was ( and true he graunt , as wee doubt not but he will of his grace , in the ende ) that the King of France had acknowledged this title by proclamation in his Dominions , & seuerely threatned the contradictors . There is hope that this leauen which his MAIESTIE hath prepared , like the good house-wife in the Gospell , by his most skilfull hand , will leauen more then one pecke in time , euen the other parts of the Christian world . § 31. Espencaeus ( and he a French Papist ) saies , that Reges are prima & maxima capita populorum ( euen Christianorum , and therefore Ecclesiae . For what is the Church but Christian people ? ) How then doth this differ from our KINGS style in English ? Espenc . in Ep. ad Tit. cap. 3. initio ipso . And soone after , he construes columbam Domini , spoken of by Ieremie 25. 27. 46. 50. to be Nabuchodonosor , though a prophane King ; whome the Iesuiticall spirit would haue tearmed corvum diaboli , the deuills crow , rather then Gods doue . The like he hath often in his foresaid Digressions . § 32. Numb . 56. you say , S. Austen denies no inuocation to the Martyrs , but sacrificall and Priestly onely . For he addes , you say , whose Priest he is , namely Gods : and you construe it thus , that because the Priest is Gods Priest , & ought to sacrifice to God alone , therefore he doth not inuocate the Martyrs in his sacrifice . But the Bishops questions will neuer be answered , If at Mattens , why not at masse ? If not the Priest , why others ? Might a layman , at the time when he communicates in the masse , priuately inuoke a Martyr , or no ? If he may , what a foile is this , to S. Austens , Non inuocantur apud sacrificium ? If not , what difference is there , betweene Priest and lay-men then , in this point ? For I hope it is lawfull , euen for a priuate man , not to participate your masse , without a priuate inuocation , euen in the act of that seruice . And are Priests set onely to offer sacrifice ? Is not blessing and praying a Priestly function , as it is exercised in the Church ? or does not the force of the sacrifice stand in inuocation ? The Saints therefore , and the Martyrs , being remooued from the one , they are remooued from the other , by S. Austen . But if you admit them to the one , as you doe to Inuocation , you cannot repell them from Sacrifice neither . It comes here to my minde , that as S. Chrysostome notes lib. 1. contra Indaees , that God gaue the Iewes leaue to sacrifice to himselfe ( though he delight not in sacrifice ) rather then to deuills : so , if the fathers could be conuinced to haue winked at this error , not weighing the consequence of it , yet it was rather to alienate the peoples mindes from Idolls , then that they thought it good relligion to pray to Saints . Sure I am , that in the third councell of Carthage ( which is both auncient in it selfe , and confirmed by the sixt generall Councell in Trullo ) there was prouiso made , that no man should presume to vse a forme of prayer , dissident from the common , till he had consulted with certaine brethren of the better instructed sort ( so speakes the Councell ) and that alwaies at the Altar , the praier should be directed ad patrem , to the Father , not excluding thereby the other two persons of the Trinity ( * as all diuines agree ) but yet Saints , and creatures , whatsoeuer . § 33. You referre vs to S. Austen de cura pro mortuis , c. 4. which the Cardinal brought not : but still you may helpe him , suc Mineruam . What saies S. Austen there ? I see not what helpe the dead may receiue ( belike by beeing buried in Churches ) but onely that whiles the liuing remēber where their bodies lie , they may by prayer recommend them to the same Saints , as to their patrons , who haue receiued them into their protection . Where , a man might aske you , if alreadie they are receiued into the Saints protection , what further neede of recommendation ? But the burying in Churches , is but a cold recommending to the mercies of Saints , howsoeuer you magnifie it . By the way you construe , apud dominum adiuvandos commendent , they may commend them to be holpen with Almightie God , as if apud dominum depended of adiuvandos , and not of commendent . With such prettie bosses of exquisite learning , is your worke embellished , that write against Bishops . And may we not stomacke with Synesius , in such a case ? 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . But in a word to S. Austen . Doe you see how little this makes for praying to Saints ? I see no other cause ( saies he ) but this . He affirmes not this cause then , but seeking the cause of a causelesse zeale that men haue one way , he lights vpon this , which eftsoones he refutes . But they might do that ( saies he ) as well , though they were not buried there , &c. And yet shall this be brought for S. Austens iudgement about prayer to Saints ? which perhaps the very multitudes would not bring for themselues . Of affectus recordantis , and precantis , I there read : but affection is no good rule to rectifie the conscience by , specially popular , and of them that wee know not what they were . And , issdem sanctis , or eidem Martyri , excludes not the generall , howsoeuer you presse it , though it endeares perhaps to him the partie buried , to whose protection , you say , he was recommended . § 34. By the way , you wish vs , to marke the fashion of praying for the dead . Which although it be nothing to our question , yet it neither followes halfe currantly out of the wordes that you here quote , nor aduantageth you one whit , albeit it were graunted . For all your striuing about prayer for the dead , is for Purgatorie , as we knowe , whose walls rise not at the others rising . Neither is euery Purgatorie , that hath beene fancied , alike . S. Hierome reports vpon Ephes . 6. the opinion of some that should thinke , that no mans conflicts end with death , and that there are tentations expecting vs after our deliuerance from the bodie . Which they would also ground vpon the Apostles words in that place . Non omne aduersus diabolum praelium morte finitur . Sed cùm de isto saculo exierimus , tunc nobis fortius & apertius praesentibus contra praesentes est futurum certamen . And , Non potest aliquis omnia in praesenti vitâ operari . Sed 2. Cor. 5. siue in praesenti , siue in futuro , studendum est placere Domino . For thither also they would drawe those words of the Apostle , in his Epistle to the Corinthians . S. Hierome deliuers not his iudgement hereof , one way nor another , much lesse shal I needmine . Onely we may wel lament our case , me thinks , if there be new temptations accosting vs after this life , and that it is not enough to haue beene faithfull vnto the death . For my part , I hope for a farre better condition , when wee haue quitted this . Or else , what get we by the exchange so much desired ? Yet your Purgatorie gets as little by this new purgation . For first , this is generall , and encloseth all , Non potest aliquis omnia in praesenti vitâ operari . Then necessary , not subiect to be diminished or released by the prayers of the liuing . Vpon which foundation neuerthelesse , your market-house is erected . And lastly , not torments , but tentations remaine for vs , and fresh combates , if these say true . Your pots may freeze then for all this Purgatorie . But at least it followes from prayers for the dead ; which you bid vs marke here . As if in the auncient Liturgies , the Virgin Mary were not prayed for , whom you so quit from Purgatorie , that you excuse from death : in other some the Martyrs , who goe not thither by your doctrine , but are glorified immediately : yea , all soules , and all departed , are prayed for by others . Yet not onely S. Bernards soule flow immediately to heauen , as your Authors informe vs. , but euen Father Hozius the Iesuite , and I know not who of that crew , their soules were seene fleeting thither as fast , by some of their owne consederacy forsooth , that we may beleeue it the rather . S. Cyrill in his Catechis . quotes the words of the Greeke seruice thus ; Offerimus & pro omnibus qui●… saculo tibi placuerunt Sanctis : We offer for all Saints and righteous persons , that haue beene pleasing to thee , O Lord , from the beginning of the world . And more peremptorily afterward , to shew that euen profit accrueth here of the soules departed ; but what profit you may thinke , sith he makes it common to the soules of the most righteous & iust themselues , euen all of thē . Magnam vtilitatem credentes accessuram eorum animabus pro quibus offertur , which puzles your Pamelius , who quotes that , to prooue the cleane contrarie of it , which it importeth . Gregorie Nazianz , Orat. in Caesarium sratrem , though hee had laid downe his ground , that Caesari●… was saued , and his soule enriched with competent honours , ( dignum fructificaret honorem ) yet he prayes thus to God in the sequele for him , Nunc , O Domine , Caesarium suscipe . Tuis eum 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . That is , Receiue him , Lord , we giue thee him whome thou hast alreadie taken . Of which manner of prayer I shall speake a little after . S. Ambrose is not slack to pray for Valentinian : * S. Austen for his mother Monica , though they assure themselues of their exemption frō all manner of paine : Et credo iamfeceris quod te rogo , saith S. Austen , sed tamen voluntaria or is mei approba Domine : And I beleeue Lord , thou hast alreadie done this ; but yet Lord , accept the free-will offerings of my mouth . But let Gregorie de Valentia cast it hardly . Tom. 4. Com. Theolog. Disput . 6. Quaest . 6. Punct . 1. De forma Eucharistiae , thus hee sayes ; Facit saepe magnitudo affectûs in Sanctis , vt illud tanquam in excasi quadam petant à Deo , quodtamen iam factum est . [ The Saints in transportation , many times pray for things alreadie graunted . ] The same saith S. Chrysostome of S. Paul , Hom. 10. in 4. ad Coloss . 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 : He begs for what he hath alreadie . Holy Iob also concurring , cap. 9. Cùm vocantem me exaudierit , non tamen credo quòd audier it vocem meam : [ When he heares me calling vpon him , yet I scarce beleeue that he hath heard my voice ; and therefore importune him with fresh suite for the same thing . ] Yea , Maldonate the Iesuite giues as much ( out of the Author Imperfecti ) commenting vpon Matt. 6. 11. Vocari volunt panem nostrum illum etiam ipsum quem iam habemus , quem nihilominùs à Deo petere iubemur . Quod verum quidem & pium est , &c. So as not onely in extasie and transportation , as Valentia would , but in the daily forme of prayer , prescribed by our Sauiour to the whole Church , the Saints are to pray for things alreadie had . But returne we where we left . § 35. The last is of Florentius , apoore old man of Hippo , who hauing lost his cloake , S. Austen saies , he praied at the monuments of certaine Martyrs ; but not to them . The young men scoft him , say you , for praying to the Martyrs . It seemes then , it was no such vse to doe so . For they were not Pagan young men , but more likely Christian . And though they mocked him eo ipso nomine , for praying to the Martyrs , yet it followes not that he did so : for euen our Sauiour was mockt as praying to Elias , when he praied to his Father onely . So it might be that neither Florentius praied to any but to God , and the young men mocking him as praying to the Martyrs , declared the iudgement of those times and those parts , which was , that Martyrs were not to be prayed to . You say , they mockt him not for praying to the Martyrs , but for requesting of them , quinquagenos folles ( so many pieces of money ) towardes his cloake . Which is not likely , he would capitulate so precisely with Saints , for the buying of a new cloake : but if he did , you may weigh his wisdom , and thinke how fit a man to square the faith of Gods Church by his actions . Cartosus the cooke might say , Ecce quomodò Martyres te vestierunt ; behold how the Martyrs haue clothed thee , though neither Florentius praied to them , nor Cartosus allowed such praier to be lawfull , but onely comforting him against the taunts of the young men , who had impured that to him , to pray to Martyrs . S. Austens epiphonema , Cui nisi huic fidei attestantur ista miracula , to what faith doe these miracles beare witnes , &c. hurts not vs , who denie not miracles , ( though they that call for them vntimely , driue our Sauiour to groanes againe , Mark. 8. 12. ) nor wish ill to Martyrs , and least of all to Faith , but say , that faith in Saints , and prayer to the dead , are both of them repugnant to the right faith of our Lord Iesus Christ. To the eight Chapter , The Bishops arguments against Praying to Saints are maintained ( which the Adioynder saith , may be expected in all likelihood , that he should satisfie , and therefore addresseth himselfe thereunto in this chapter . ) The Canon of the Church of England about the Crosse in Baptisme , neither guiltie of imposture , nor any otherwaies to blame . Wrangling , iuggling , trifling , and the rest of his braue Rhetorique wherewith he fronts the Bishop , returned vpon himselfe rather in proofe then words . § 1. YOV call it the Bishops abusing of Theoderet , to quote as much of the text onely , as was most pregnant to the matter in hand , besides that you know his accustomed breuity : And yet professing to lay downe Theodonets place , you dare not your selfe lay it downe at large . I will adde what you left out . The question betweene vs arises of the 35. Canon of the Councell of Laodicea . Of that Theodoret in his Comment , vpon the 2. to the Coloss . thus . They which defended the law , did prouoke them also to the worship of Angels , saying that the law was giuen by them . Now this fault remained in Phrygia and Pisidia a long time . Wherefore the Councell which mett at Laodicea , which is the Metropolis of Phrygia , by decree forbad praying to Angels . And to this day we may see , emong them , and their neighbours , Churches , or Oratories , to S. Michael . Most of this , good Sir , you left out , you I say , that blame the Bishop for not putting in all . I imagine you were ashamed of S. Michaels Oratories , which you haue multiplied , in ipsâ formâ , or that the idolatry to Angels , which the Councell forbids , is construed by Theodoret cultus Angelorum , the worship of Angels , which worship of them at least your selues defend . He goes forward , They therefore gaue this counsell in humblenes of mind , saying , the God of all things could not be seene nor comprehended , nor that we could come to him , and that we must procure Gods good will by Angels . This S. Theodoret calls basenesse of minde , and the worshipping of Angels . He calls it worshipping of Angels I say , our seeking to procure Gods fauour to vs , by their mediation . Yet you doe so . And further , the Councell calls it Idolatry . You are idolaters therefore in so doing . Lastly , it reformes that whole fault by forbidding prayer to Angels . Now thinke you therefore , whether Theodoret be against you , and the Councell of Laodicea , and whether you be idolaters , yea or no , for your resorting to Angels , praying to them , single worshipping of them , though you went no further . And least you thinke Theodoret construes the Councell amisse , by saying it forbids prayer to Angels , when it forbids idolatry , ( though the Councell be plaine , Ne nominemus Angelos , which is the Inuocation of them , or calling vpon their names , and it were hard to entertaine such a thought of Theodoret , yet ) heare Theodoret repeating the same againe , vpon the third Chap. to the Coloss . The Synode of Laodicea also following this rule , and desirous to remedie that old disease , by statute decreed , that none should pray to Angels , nor forsake our Lord Iesus Christ . What more euident , then that prayer to Angels was forbid by the Laodicean Councell , in Theodorets iudgement ? No , say you , but the forsaking of our Lord Iesus Christ . Pray to him , pray to Angels , pray to both . Which the Councell saies not , as distinguishing betweene them that prayed to Angels alone , and them that pray to our Lord Iesus Christ too , but they as I shall set downe in their owne wordes ; That Christians must not forsake the Church of God ( by this you see that praier to Angels was not then receiued publiquely in the Church , ) and depart aside , ( either as into corners , or from the tracke of the Church-fashion and obseruation ) and name the Angels , ( or call vpon them by way of prayer , as Theodoret construed it ) and make meetings , which is a thing forbidden , ( viz. all the forenamed . ) If any man therefore be found to vse such priuie idolatrie ( they call it idolatrie , praying to Angels ) let him be accursed . Because he hath forsaken our Lord Iesus Christ the Sonne of God , and betaken himselfe to idolatrie . Now , say there are two kindes of worshipping of Angels , one with Christ , another without , as your Valentia distinguishes of two kinde of idolatries , one lawfull , the other vnlawfull ; out of S. Peter . The Councell yeilds it as a perpetuall reason , why we should not pray to Angels , because that is to forsake our Lord Iesus Christ the Sonne of God. Two euills ( saies the Prophet ) hath my people committed , digging false pitts that hold no water , and leauing mee the fountaine of life . So here . § 2. You say , Theodoret alleadges not any one word of the Canon , numb . 3. It is enough that Theodoret vnderstood the Canon , and construes that which they there forbid , to be praying to Angels . Either say that Theodoret mistakes the sense of the Canon , if you dare for your eares , or confesse you are concluded vnder the Councels curse , for praying to Angels . And yet Angels , I hope , is one word of the Canon , which Theodoret vses . And is not relinquere dominum nostrum Iesum Christum , another clause of the same ? which Theodoret hath in his Comment . vpon the 3. to the Coloss . But what talke you of words , when he giues you the sense ? § 3. You say , the heresie which the Councell forbid , was of such , as thought we could not come to God , otherwise then by Angels , which you doe not . But the Councell first hath no such words , but forbids the inuocating of Angels barely , without shewing their reason that were wont to vse it , and Theodoret himselfe doth not say otherwise , but only non posse perueniri , that is , that God was hid , and retired , and incomprehensible , not to be come at , ( viz. of himselfe ) and therfore that we must vse the mediation of Angels ; Which your selues would not sticke to alleadge , to him that you would perswade to worship Angels , and draw an argument from the remotenesse of Almighty God , to craue helpe of such proctors , though you dare not deny the mediation of Christ . Meane while , herein you are worse then they , for they say , God cannot be approached to without Angels , you say , Christ himselfe must be approached to by the Angels , as if he did not offer himselfe vnto vs , and so lead vs to God ; for by him we haue entrance , &c. Ipse via , ipse vita . Leo de passione Domini , Serm. 16. Meritò Dominus ipse nobis factus est via , quia nisi per Christum non itur ad Christum . Well is our Lord made our way , because by Christ onely we come to Christ . S. Austen also in Psalm . 123. Praefat. Ipse Rex patriae factus est via . Quo imus ? ad Christum : quâ imus ? per Christum , &c. The king of the Countrey is made our way to the Countrey . Whether goe we ? to Christ : which way goe we ? by Christ , &c. To whome adde that of Theophylact , in his Comment vpon the 3. to the Coloss . at those words , verse 17. Whatsoeuer you doe in word or in deede , doe all in the name of the Lord Iesus , giuing thankes to God , and the Father , by him . By him ( saith Theophylact ) we must thanke the Father , by him pray to the Father , in his name doe all things . For as hee is our mediatour , to bring our persons to his Father , at the first ; so also to conuay our praiers to him for euer after . Where is your distinction become , between mediatour of redemption , and mediatour of intercession , if this may take place ? Hee that brings our persons , brings our praiers to the Father . And that you may know , that not only Christ is to be embraced , & laid hold of , but the Angels to be quite casheered in this worke of recommendation to almighty God , S. Chrysostome and S. Theodoret , both , thus proceed . If by Christ , then not by Angels . Theodoret as you quote him , vpon the 3. to the Col. in your 4. Numb . Vtter your thanks to God by Christ , and not by Angels . And as thanks , so praiers questionlesse , 1. Tim. 2. 1. for thanks are a kind of prayers . Chrysostome so likewise , hom . 6. in 2. ad Coloss . Walke in him ( saies he ) ( for he is the way that leads to the Father ) not in the Angels . That way ( viz. the Angels ) leads vs not thither : that is , the Angels haue no part at all in mediation to God for vs. And yet more pregnantly , if more may be , Hom. 9. in 3. ad Coloss . ver . 16. &c. Whether thou eate , or drinke , or marrie , or trauell , doe all in the name of God ; that is , calling him for thine assistant , praying to him before all , and so set vpon thy businesse . Wilt thou say any thing ? set him first . For this cause wee ( or as others read Paul ) set the name of the Lord foremost in our ( or as other his ) Epistles . Where the name of the Lord is , there all things are prosperous . For if the names of the Consuls make their writings to bee of force , much more shall the name of Christ doe the same . This also may bee the Apostles meaning here , that we should say and doe all in the name of God , as hath been shewed , or in affiance towards God , not bringing the Angels . Doest thou eate ? thanke God both afore thou eate , and afterward . Doest thou sleepe ? Thanke God both afore thou sleepe , and afterward . Doest thou goe to the market place ? Doe the same . Doe all in the name of the Lord , and all things shall goe well with thee . Wheresoeuer the name of God is set , there all things are prosperous . If it expell deuills , if it driue away diseases , much more wil it giue easie riddance to thy busines . And what is that that the Apostle sayes , Whether in word or deed ? That is , either praying , or doing any thing else . Hearken how Abraham dismissed his seruant , in the name of God ; how in the name God Dauid ouercame Goliah . Maruellous is his name , and very great . Againe , Iacob sending away his sonnes , saith , My God giue you grace in that mans sight . For hee that doth so , hath God for his aide , without whome he durst doe nothing . God therefore in recompence of the honour , wherwith a man honoureth him , by calling vpon him , will honour him againe , by giuing good successe vnto his businesse . Call vpon the Sonne , giue thankes to the Father . For when the Sonne is called vpon , the Father is called vpon : and when we giue thankes to the Son , we thanke also the Father . Let vs learne to performe these things ( let the Iesuites learne , if they loue their saluation ) not onely in words but in deeds . Nothing is of like force to this name , ( the name of God ) this name is wonderfull in all places . For thy name ( saith hee ) is like vnto oyntment powred out . Whosoeuer names this name , he is straight-waies filled with most sweet sauour . No man can call Iesus the Lord , but in the holy Ghost . This name workes so great things . If thou sayest by faith , IN THE NAME OF THE FATHER , AND OF THE SONNE , AND OF THE HOLY GHOST , thou hast effected all . See how great things thou hast done . Thou hast created a man , and done all else that is wont to be done by baptisme . This is that fearefull name , that commaunds sickenesses . For this cause THE DEVILL BROVGHT IN ANGELS , ( their seruice or worship ) envying vs the honour ( of hauing to doe with God onely . ) These are the enchantments of the deuills . Though he be Angel , though Archangel , though a Cherubim , endure it not . For indeede the verie ( heauenly ) powers themselues , will not endure it , nor admit it , but will repulse and reiect it , when they see their Master dishonoured . I haue honoured thee , saith hee , and I haue said , Call vpon me . And doest thou dishonour him ? If thou but faithfully apply this charme , thou shalt driue away both deuils and diseases ( & all . ) And if happily thou shalt not be able to conquer the disease , yet know that it is for the good of the partie , not for the weakenesse of thy charme . According to thy greatnesse , saith hee , so is thy praise . By the vertue of this name , the world was conuerted , the tyrannie dissolued , the deuill trampled , the heauens opened . And what say I the heauens ? Wee our selues by this meanes are begotten a new . If wee haue this name , then we flourish and shine . This name makes Martyrs , this name makes Confessors . Let vs hold fast this name for a great gift , &c. Or if you will , let vs change this name for a newe , the Name of God , and of Christ , and of the Holy Trinitie , by Paul , and by Chrysostome so highly commended to vs , for new names of I wote not whome , foysted in by the Iesuites . I speake to our Countrymen , weary of their wellfare , and itching after nouelties , hasting out of Gods blessing into the Saints warme sunne , as they suppose at least . To whome I adde , but this one thing , by way of remembrance , because they would seeme zealous of their Countrey , and the auncient honours thereof . The famous victory , that our nation atcheiued , against the French , at Agen-Court , so few against so many , was consecrated by the praiers of King Henry the fift , of worthy memory , exhorting thus his souldiers , partly sanctifying their mouthes with the participation of Christs sacrament , partly kissing a mould of earth in rememembrance of their mortality , IN THE NAME OF THE HOLY TRINIIE , AND IN THE BEST HOVRE OF THE YEARE . But goe we onward as I said . § 4. Numb . 5. You quote the Councell false , accessit ad idola , for , ad idololatriam . Be like you thinke the Angels are no way idola , though we pray vnto them , and therefore the Councell cannot be meant of that . But besides that it is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , in the greeke , peruerse worship and rash prayer turnes an Angel into an idoll . And here your idolls are 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , things essentiall , or subsistent , not Chimeraes onely , as you peruert S. Paul , 1. Cor. 8. § 5. But , O noble argument , Numb . 6. That this cannot be the abominable idolatry , which the Councell forbids , ( the Councell calls it priuie idolatrie , as taxing the faire gloses , wherewith you guild ouer your idolatrie , abominable though it be , yet perhaps not outwardly , and therefore not so called by the Councell ) but it cannot be the same you say , because then S. Paul should be an idolater , exciting the Corinthians , the Romanes , and Thessalonians , to pray for him , &c. For he hath for saken the Church of God , ( mutuall prayers agree not with Church-discipline ) and renounced Christ , &c. Will this balductum neuer be left ? Also Iacob should be an idolater , because of , Angelus qui eruit me , the Angel that deliuered me , blesse these children . Did you neuer heare of Angelus magniconsilij , Esa . 9 ? or Angelus foederis , Malach. 3 ? The Angel of his Counsell , and the Angel of the Couenant , that is Christ , and none other Angel ? a word of office , not of nature . Or , that the Mediatour preluded to his future incarnation , by appearing familiarly many times to men , and exercising the part of a gratious Angel ? S. Austen cont . Faust . lib. 16. c. 20. Quis , nisi nec tenuiter Graecis tinctus , ignorat , Angelum nuncium dioi ? To be sent about a message therefore , is enough to make one be called an Angel. § 6. Iosue fell downe before an Angel , you say , and called him Lord. Why not as before ? Yet some say representing the person of God , like honos Regis legato delatus , the honour of the King giuen to his Embassadour . Gregorie obserues , that in the old Testament this was sometimes in vse , afore our nature was exalted by our Lords taking part of it , but not in the New. Neither did the Virgin worship Gabriel , Luk. 1. ( rather Gabriel may seeme to pray to the Virgin , in his Ave Maria , if that be a prayer , as with you it is ) nor the Disciples those Angels that appeared at the sepulchre , Ioh. 20. and you know in the Revelation it is absolutely forbidden . Vide ne . Yea the Fathers say , Christ should not haue beene adored by the Mage , by the Centurion , and others , but that he was acknowledged to be the Word , and the second person in Trinitie . § 7. Assistance of Angels prooues not prayer vnto them ; not presence , not helpe , nor benefits through them . Such Diuinitie is for parasites , or them that labour in the kitchin , like Ignatius and Borgias , the two first stones in your foundation , that are enrolled Iesuits : 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . My oyle and my wine , saith shee in the Prophet , nay , my flesh pots and my garlicke , more shamefully , if it may be . If we should construe S. Paul so ( as some doe ) Eph. 3. 10. that the Angels receiue benefit and encrease of knowledge by our preaching ( which is another-gates aduantage , then your temporal reuersions that you are so madded with ) would it inferre any dutie from them to vs ? I thinke not . No nor yet , that we haue all , our particular Angel ; which is another thing that you stand vpon . By this reason , we should pray but to one among them all ; and how shall we know him , or how distinguish him from the rest of the companie , that we be not vnthankfull to him , that wee may speake properly , when we pray vnto him ? Though from thence it is come to that passe now ( the mala mulier is ) that euery particular Monasterie and congregation of Fryars , hath his particular Angel , or Angels , ouer it . So saies Molina in 1. part . Thom. Quaest . 113. Disp. vnic . And , they mooue , singulos communitatis , to such or such enterprises , as are for the good of the whole fraternitie . To the murthering of Kings , to the embroyling of States , &c. that that may be called an Angelicall worke now , as Guadalupa vpon Hoseah saies , the Inquisition is rather an Angelicall institution then humane . So hath Satan forgot his qualities and old cunning , of transforming himselfe into an Angel of light . And dare you talke of imperium Angelorum ouer men , Angels gouernment or command , which though it were currant once , yet is not now ? as Hebr. 2. Non subiecit Angelis orbem de quo loquimur : The world that we now speake of , is not gouerned by the Angels , that is , the world of the new Testament . And againe in the Revel . conservus tuus sum ; I am thy fellow seruant , Not , — dominum cognoscite vestrum : but one of the many that depend of the maine , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , Coloss . 2. 19. holding by the head , no lesse then thou , which is our best securitie . Yet you quote also Theodorets Questions vpon Genesis , nothing to this time . Besides , imperium might be the gouernment , that any principall in his facultie hath ouer the nouice , without such authoritie , or superioritie , as you fondly amplifie in ministring spirits , Heb. 1. ( how then commanding ? ) specially so great , as to make va aske them blessing . § 8. But how he sweates in the 9. Num. to shew what this idolatrie was , which the Councell forbids , that it bee not praier to Angels , as Theodoret hath defined twice ouer ? Some Magicall worship , saith hee , of Simon Magus . But is sorcerie , and idolatrie all one ? Why no word of magique then , in all the Canon ? in Chrysostomes Comment ? in Theodorets ? in the rest ? Oratoria Michaelis were the sorcerie , or the magique that Theodoret described , none other . And the idolatrie is forbid to Angels by name , magique neither to Angels nor without Angels is allowed . S. Paul distinguishes 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 from 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , Gal. 5. 20. you confound them . It might be Cerinthus heresie , say you , ( but him Iohn confutes , ) Or certaine Phrygians . Well may it be called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , which seeing you will not see , but hood-winke your selfe wilfully , as if partnership in offences might quit the guilty . Whosoeuer build Oratories , or places of prayers to Angels , whether they be Michael , or Gabriel , or whomso you list , if to created Angels , they haue abandoned Christ , as the Councell tells you ( 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , at least priuily , though not so openly as Cerinthus ) & are become anathema . And to conclude this matter ; I must tell you to your 11. numb . that the prayer to Angels was sooner banished , then to Saints . For that was stale idolatry , vetus morbus , saies Theodoret , and so the easier discerned : this came vp secretly , closely , imperceiueably , while men were both zealous to honour the Martyrs , that had been so vallant as to die for relligion , and yet suspected no intrusion into Gods priuiledges , because their mortalitie had declared them to be but men . Neither of which was incident to the Angels . As withall also to cōfirme the Christians beleife , touching the immortalitie of the soule , euen in them that had lately died before their eyes , which in the Angels needed not . And yet Theodorets 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , or taking his leaue of them , whose liues he had wrote , with a praier at the end ; some would thinke to be no prayer , howsoeuer you account of it , but a flourish of his pen , by way of an Apostrophe , in the conclusion of his worke ; or to make the most of it , like the subscription of the Nicene Canons in the Arabique copie , which your Turrian tells vs of , in his translation of them . Orationes sanctorum patrum Nicaenorum , sint cum eo qui descripsit hos canones ; which is not to pray to them , but to bee prayed for by them , to bee comprehended in their good wishes . Which is the grace that Theodoret may here seem to long for , notwithstanding his 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . And so much to these Numbers . § 9. As for Numb . 12. the next in your bill ; Whereas , the Bishop ( you say ) argues against praying to Saints , out of Reason and Discourse ; why not rather then you , ( for as well is too little , considering the cause in hand ) that bring your inducements of praying to them , from the like heads many times ? As twice in this chapter , from the practise of people , from the sense of their benefits , from conformities & congruities with other Scriptures , though testimonies of Scripture you are able to shew none direct , neither indeede endeauour you . Aboue all , that if charitie remaine in them , they will helpe vs , and beeing potent they can ; and , that they know our case , and behold our estate , or else they were not compleatly blessed , if they should wish vs well , and yet not know how we did . With a great deale more of such fiddle-faddle-stuffe which S. Paul condemnes in one word , in the place before named , Coloss . 2. Instatus sensu carnis sua , puffed vp with his owne carnall reason , or carnal sense ; and , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , strutting and pacing in things that he hath not seene . Not seene indeed , but yet picked out , by F. T. his occulta philosophia● . § 10. You knowe not ( saies he ) how the sea ●●s and flowes , how the load-stone drawes iron , how the eye sees , whether extramittendo , or intromittendo , &c. And surely though we doubt of them , we are in no great danger . Simple may we be , but not sacrilegious . Quae sine periculo ignorantur , oppugnantur etiam quandoque cum laude . Faith hath her assurance , and sense hers . That Saints should be praied to , is accompanyed with neither . Were it as euident as the former , though we might sift it happily , with an argument or two , for discourse sake , yet we would not persist in the denyall of it , as now , when neither Scripture abets it , and sounder antiquitie makes against it . He saies , We know not how the Saints , pray for vs : Suppose we doe not , the matter is not great . Yet we must be sure they heare vs , and perhaps know how , before we pray to them . For they may doe vs good , though we be not aware of it ; haue reference to them we may not , vnlesse we haue good ground for it . Howbeit , whereas he sayes , wee cannot conceiue how the Saints pray for vs , if the Saints haue reason and affection remaining with them , as doubtlesse they haue , what difficultie is it to conceiue howe they should pray for vs ? § 11. And dare you question of our Sauiour , how hee sees our praiers ? Doe you not rather wonder how he should bee ignorant of any thing ? haue you forgot what flowes from the hypostaticall vnion ? Which Saints haue not , Angels haue not . You are wont to taxe vs with the Agnoites heresy : who is the Agnoite now , but he that doubts how Christ should know all things , and that not in pilgramage , but in blisse ? § 12. To your 15. and 16. numb . out of S. Austens lib. 22. de Ciuit. Dei. That God workes wonders at the Tombes of Saints , and yet we know not how : Therefore we may pray to Saints , though we discerne not how they heare vs. Resp . Nothing like : For neither does the Scripture euer say , that God shewes no miracles at the tombes of Martyrs , that we should question this so nicely before wee beleeue it , by the Virgins Quomodo , Luc. 1. Rather it most often witnesses of Almighty God , qui facit mirabilia magna solus , indeed solus , so as no bodie cooperating with him , none suffered to see and to inquire how he does them . Quis consiliarius fuit ei ? Rom. 11. 34. But forsomuch as it denies that the dead know any thing of our condition here , and such a gulfe ( as I may so say ) is pight betweene vs & them , as all entercourse and commerce is debarred , ( the places are too common to be here recited ) therefore first shewe vs how , or worthily wee beleeue you not . § 13. The Angels may reioyce , vpon the rising of a sinner , when they conduct him into heauen , as they did Lazarus his soule , though they be not priuie to his passages here in earth . And yet in earth , they may see , by outward demonstrations , such signes of repentance , as they cannot alwaies trace our supplications by : which for the most part are cordiall , and within the vaile . The heart is deceitfull , and who shall search it , who gage it ? saies Ieremie . For which cause , S. Iohn saies , God is greater then our heart : onely God. We are strangers to it our selues , and shall they be no strangers , which are so much estranged from vs , both in place and qualitie ? In Cassians Collations , a godly Abbot , vseth this similitude . As certaine the eues when they would know what store of gold is hidden in a house , that they beset , they fling in some handfulls of smaller sands , at the windowes , that by the sound of that in the fall , they may iudge whether any treasure be within or no , and not loose their labour ; so the thoughts of the heart are subiect to knowledge , by such or such signes , vpon prouocation . Which may hold well enough in matter of repentance , to see whether the sinner will returne to his old courses or no , but is no way to know what he begs in prayer . To omit , that our Sauiours words might be construed by supposition , that so great is the ioy for repenting sinners , as Angels would haue their part in it , if they knew it , and when they know it , then they haue de facto . Heauen and earth in another place are inuited to reioyce ouer Babylon , your Babylon , by a figure of hyperbole , for the wrongs that you haue done them . Lastly , Revelatio vicissitudinis , or intervalli , is one thing , as I told you before , statae permanentiae another . The first may suffice to verifie the saying , Luk. 15. of the ioy of Angels ouer repenting sinners , but that they should know our prayers whensoeuer we make them , more is required . § 14. The like I might say to your instance of Samuel , who told Saul all that was in his heart , namely concerning the matter then in hand . Of Elizeus , that saw Gehezi by transitory reuelation , and discouered what the king of Syria did in his priuy chamber . The presenting of our Sauiours glorious body to S. Steuens eyes , is not comparable with an intuitiue speculation of the thoughts , though this also was at a glimpse , and not ordinary , whereas the Saints must haue ordinary to heare vs at all times , if they will be called vpon . § 15. Athanasius is counterfeit ; yet he meanes but of things belonging to their beatitude . Sine his autem satis beati esse possumus . Both we and they too may be happy enough without this . Then , post mortem & in die Iudicij . After death and in the day of iudgement . Time enough therefore if they know all things in the last iudgement . What is that to prayer to them , which must be in the meane while , if it be at all ? § 16. As for S. Basil , he meanes intra sphaeram onely , within their quarter . For though they are quicker sighted then wee , yet they haue a limitation both of act and vertue . The Custodia hominum , which S. Basil ascribes to them , may be with knowledge of our outward wayes , without knowledge of the inward , to which our prayers belong . And yet againe he may be custos or protector of vs , that watches ouer our safetie with prayers , and with good wishes , though he know not so much as our outward estate . As Iob , when he praied for his children , vnknowing to them ; as S. Paul when he said , absens corpore , prasens spiritu , and yet knew not what they did , but loue linked him ; nor might they petition to him in such absence . Spectator actuum an Angell may be , as you quote out of S. Ambrose , and yet not cogitatuum , which is prayers cheife seat , as hath been often told you . § 17. Wee say not , that Saints are shut vp in a coffer , as you malitiously slaunder vs , with Vigilantius . Wee graunt they follow the Lambe whethersoeuer hee goes , but signanter dictum , sequuntur non praeeunt , they follow him , not goe before him , that is , they applaude his resolutions of shewing mercy to his Church , not importune him alwaies with fresh demaunds , only sighing for our saluation in generall . The blessed Martyr Fructuosus , as you may read in Baronius , Tom. 2. Anno. 262. when he was hasting to his martyrdome , and now come to the stage of his execution , one Felix requested him to haue him in minde , [ belike after death ] To whom the holy Martyr and Bishop answered , clarâ voce & audientibus cunctis ; In mente me habere necesse est ecclesiam Catholicam ab oriente vsque in Occidentem . That is , I must needes haue in minde the Vniuersall Church of Christ , euen from the East to West . Limiting thereby his prayers , to the Vniuersall estate of Christs Church here vpon earth , and no longer owning particular suits , after his departure out of the body . As he that giues vs the Contents of the second Tome of Baronius , in the ende of the booke , vnderstands those wordes more peremptorily yet then so . Non esse orandum sibi nisi pro Ecclesiâ Catholicâ , that he may not pray for any but onely for the Church . Whereas what if they should pray for the generall of mankind ? But I must further follow you . § 18. S. Gregories speculum , is reiected by your selues . Is it like the Saints see as much as God ? Doe they see him as much as he is to be seene ? Doe they comprehend him , in quantum comprehensitilis est ? Yet himselfe does so ; And if by seeing him , they see as farre into him , as the nature of things is resplendent in him , they should doe this , and all . He meanes , the presence and contemplation of God excludes all wretched and woefull ignorance from them , and fills them full of happines , but after the measure of their capacity . And though they could discerne all that is in God , yet it is a question whether he would not restraine them from some things purposely , speculum voluntarium , not naturale . Though they affect vs well , as wee confesse , yet their felicity stands not in the knowledge of our welfare , but in submitting themselues and all their desires to the pleasure of God , of whome wee read , that he shall be all in all in them , but not that they shall be all in all in him . I meane , to see all that is to be seen by him . § 19. I haue omitted one thing in the 17. Numb . that the Saints offer vp our prayers vnto God , Apoc. 5. for so you quote . In all which chapter neuerthelesse , there is no mention of offering at all . The 24 Elders are said to haue harpes , that is , the instruments of praise , and vialls full of sweete odors , which the holy Ghost expounds , to be the prayers of the Saints . But their owne as well as others , for ought I know . Either their thanksgiuing to God , for their wonderfull redemption , as v. 12. ( for thanksgiuing is reckoned a kinde of prayer : ) or , because you are so delighted with the Bishops graunt , the intercessions which they continually make for vs. As for the 8. chapter of the same booke , where you read thus , Another Angel came , and much incense was giuen him , to the ende that he might , dare de orationibus Sanctorum , offer , as you conceiue it , of the prayers of the Saints , the originall Greeke reads , dare orationibus , that he might giue of that incense to the prayers of the Saints , not offer them himselfe . Which Angel , S. Primasius expounds to be Christ , so Beda , so Ausbertus , ( our Rhemists insinuating though not expressing so much ) S. Austen before them all , Hom. 6. in Apocal. and therefore he is called another Angell , as eminent aboue the former ; and he indeede graces our prayers with his merits , as it were with sweete odours , to make them acceptable to God ; Or if you will needes take it of the created Angels , you see they adde no merits of their owne to countenance our prayers with , but borrow incense from the Altar , that is , Christs merits from him , for he is our Altar , Hebr. 13. Data sunt ei thymiamata multa , as hauing none of his owne . Which is enough to ouerthrow the mediation of Angels , though there were no more . For by a scheme of speach , they are made to be casters on of the perfume , though it be Christ alone that can dispence his owne merits , and the Angels are strangers to them . As when it is said in Mulachie , that a booke of remembrance was written before the Lord , another is made to supply his memorie , as it were , though his singular sufficiency need no such helpe . Lastly , if we should read , as we no where read , that the Angels offered vp our praiers to God , or carried them to God , I would say that their carrying or offering them to God , were nought els but their vnderstanding his gracious will and pleasure , for the graunting of our praiers commēced in Christs name , beautified with those incense , whereof the text speakes ; and their returne to vs , the execution or performance of them on their parts , wherein we needed their succour ; as Tob. 12. Act. 10. and sundrie places in the Psalmes , as , Mandabit angelis suis de te : againe , Mittet de coelis & cruet me : He shall commaund his Angels , hee shall send from on high and saue me . &c. § 20. It is not worth the ripping vp now , how the Rhemists haue expressed their dotage vpon this place , Apoc. 8. that because it is said , vers . 3. the prayers of all Saints , &c. or because the title of Saints they are but slowely belike brought to extend to holy persons liuing vpon the earth , therefore they haue deuised mediations of mediators between themselues , Saints for Saints , and Angels for Angels , making intercession in heauen , the superiour for the inferior as they tearme it . What greater victory could we wish to the Truth , or where shall we stay if this be once admitted ? § 21. NVm . 24. Hee comes to another head of the Bishops plea , why wee should not pray to Saints , because there is no precept for it , and all addition to the Law , in matter of Gods seruice , is Leuiathan , a bugge . But he insists vpon the place , Deuter. 12. alleadged by the Bishop . Quod ●●bi praecepero hoc tantùm facies . Thou shalt onely doe that which I commaund thee . It extends no further , ( saies F. T. ) then to the things in that Chapter , namely to the not offering of such sacrifices as the heathen . As if God could be offended onely one manner of way , viz. by sacrifice , or , as if in sacrifices themselues , some rites were not arbitrary , as he instances himselfe , about feasts , and holy daies , in his numb . 26. ) so the substance be vncorrupted ; or , as if other things being precisely ordered by Gods mouth , this were not a generall recapitulation of all the rest , as too long to be repeated in particular , that nothing in Gods worship must be done besides his word , I meane for the substantialls . And , Quod de vno dico , de omnibus intelligite , as our Sauiour to his Disciples , what I say to you , I say to all . So what of one , that of all . The Scripture is full of the like caueats euery where , against your patchings to the word . Turne neither to the right hand , nor to the left hand . Which Bellarmine saith , is all one with the former . To the Law and the Testimonie , Esay . 8. 20. Gods workes are perfect : adde not to them , nor detract not from them , no more then from Lysias his Orations , ( nay much lesse ) where one syllable being peruerted , all the whole frame falls to ground . His law is the truth , yea and the whole truth . Whatsoeuer is without that , is but meere fables . Iniqui narrauerunt mihi fabulas , The vngodly told me fables , but not according to thy Law. Therefore fables , because not according to thy Law. And a hundreth such like , which no doubt bind vs , to a precise adherence to Gods will and sure , reuealed in his word , euen vs I say of the new Testament , not onely them of the old ( see Apocal. 22. 18. ) yet , for this the Bishop is a Iew with this gentleman , a reuiuer of Moses ordinances , and I know not what . § 22. Though more particularly I might reply to his fond exception , vnto the place aforenamed out of Deuter. 12. ( which he saith was only a rule for sacrifice ) that the same precept was giuen afore , euen Deut. 4. and without any mention of sacrifices , sometimes applyed to all the commandements ver . 2. againe , ver . 5. againe , ver . 8. particularly against idolatry ver . 15. to which this , of praying to Saints , is thought to be reducible . Therefore Bellarmine answers that place another way , lib. 4. De verbo . Dei cap. 10. Not that we must doe no more then is commanded vs , but in a thing commaunded , no more for substance , then the commaundement importeth . Which is enough for vs , as I haue often said , that God therefore is not to be prayed vnto , by the mediation of Saints , vnles he had commaunded it ; because that is not so much an appertinence , or a bare forme , as a wrong seruice , a substance by it selfe . § 23. Absurdly in his 26. number , is the multiplication of certaine festiualls , in which no new worship of God was erected , compared with the setting vp of tutelary Saints now a daies , and praying to them , that of Ieremie beeing verified of the Popish Church , Numerus divorum secundum numerum civitatum , yea capitum . The number of their Saints is after the number of their cities , yea verily their persons . § 24. A new deuice in the 28. number ; that though it were true as the Bishop affirmeth , that we may not depart one inch , from Gods prescript and will , yet the will of God reacheth further then his written word . Let him shew , that this holds concerning the substance of Gods seruice , we contend not with him for minutiae , for such accidents as may adesse and abesse ( saith Porphyrie ) without corruption of the maine . To place a Saint in Gods throne , to addresse our worship to him , to poure out our heart and conscience into his lap , to submit vnto him by prayer and deuotion , is no such pettie thing , whatsoeuer hee imagines , but toucheth the foundations . Where this is offered , strange fire is offred , vnles God authorize it . § 25. To the place of Chrysostome , vpon that text of the Apostle , Tenete traditiones , 2. Thess . 2. eâdem fide digna sunt , tam illa quàm ista . No doubt whatsoeuer the Apostles deliuered , either by word , or writing ( and they might deliuer by word , what they did not by writing , as long as they were points of meaner nature , especially some of them , that wrote nothing at all ) I say , whatsoeuer the Apostles deliuered , no doubt but all deserued credit , and credit alike , ratione annuntiantium , in regard of their persons , which were farre from lying , but not as to force vs to the like obligation of beleeuing and crediting them , in the way of saluation , or to eternall life . And doe ye thinke , we could muster no authorities of Fathers , if the time would permit , or we were so disposed , to shew that all is contained in Scripture , which we are either to practise , or beleeue , as by necessitie of commandement , and how that entring into that Sanctuarie ( the Sanctuarie of Scripture , and reuelation from aboue ) we may be instructed and certified about any points sufficiently ? As Rebecca to the Oracle , when there was strife in her wombe ; so we in controuersies . The Scriptures are called Oracles , Rom. 3. I am wiser then my teachers ( saith he , ) but how ? by studying thy Law. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , which are able to make thee wise , and wise to saluation , spoken of Scripture : againe , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , that the man of God may be perfect in all things . Perfect , without traditions . 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , I deliuered what I receiued . S. Paul goes no farther , 1. Cor. 15. And there , a point recorded and written in Scripture , as the doctrine of the Lords Supper , is comprehended vnder 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , and made a Tradition . All Traditions therefore , you see , are not vnwritten : but the tradition is to be spurned at , that descendeth not from Christ ; 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . Athanasius , one for many , Oratione contra Gentes , about the very beginning , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . To the declaration of truth ( vnlesse your Traditions be not of truth , the guise of some is to delight in lies , a iust reward for abhorring Scripture the rule of truth . 2. Thess . 2. ) to the declaration of truth ( saith Athanasius , ) the holy Scriptures are sufficient and compleat . And are the Scriptures so sufficient to beat downe Ethniques , whome Athanasius there writes against , and who care not for Scripture , as is commonly seene , and yet shall they not be sufficient to compound controuersies arising in the Church , betweene Christian and Christian ? § 26. Theophylact makes them to be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , in 10. Iohan. The Scriptures ( saith he ) giue resolution of all points . Tertullian most excellently , Apologetice contra Gentes : Quò pleniùs & impressiùs dispositiones eius & voluntates adiremus , instrumentum adiecit literaturae , si quid velit de Deo inquirere , & inquisitum inuenire , & inuentum credere , & credito deseruire . Search , truth , faith , seruice , all comes of Scripture . And to the ende we might conferre with God more fully , and more effectually , or piercingly , knowe his courses , know his will , instrumentum adiecit literaturae , he hath giuen it vs in writing , in blacke and in white , as you would say , he hath recommended to vs the Scriptures . Adde Hilarie in Psal . 118. Octon . Nun. Vt qui nocte egressus lucernam antefert , & quò pedem inferat contuetur , atque ad singulos gressus lumine praeeunte sollicitus ; ita vnusquisque nostrum manens in se , verbum dei in omnes operum processus tanquam lucernam praetendit . And againe , Vt eâ in omnem progressum cuiuscunque operationis vtamur . Yea not onely operationis , but cum aut agimus , aut cogitamus , aut loquimur . And lastly , Ad omnem animae nostrae pedem . The summe is . As a man will not set foote to ground in a darke night , but hee will haue a candle borne before him , so Gods word must be the direction to all our deeds ; yea deedes , words , and thoughts . S. Chrysostome , I graunt , obserues in a cértaine place , that it is a signe that God is not so well pleased with vs , as of old , because now he writes to vs , rather then speakes and confers as he was wont . Mittit 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , tanquam alienioribus , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , &c. Tom. 5. And yet Orlandine the Iesuite in his Historia societatis Iesu , lib. 1. num . 27. saies of Ignatius their founder , that he , quamvis nulla extarent sacrarum monumenta ac testimonia literarum , tamen fidei dogmata , & tenere rectè posset , & tradere , &c. Hee could deliuer points of faith , though there were no Scripture , well enough . Doe you see the Iesuites drift , to ease vs of Scripture by all meanes they can , and they care not how ? either by dreaming of such a perfection , and entirenes with God , as needs no Scripture ( as hee said of Ignatius ) which is their pride ; or taking away that verie remaining token of Gods loue , and manner of communicating himselfe vnto vs , which is by writing ( as S. Chrysostome had said ) and argues nothing but their detestable crueltie , and regardlesse behauiour towards the soules of Christian people . But let vs heare you farther . § 27. You say , That Christ gaue no commaundement of writing . No more hee doth of fasting perhaps , of feeding our parents , of waging warre for our countrie , not literally , not expressely , but yet insinuatiuely and intentionally , euen of lifting vp our enemies beast out of the ditch . Wherof none is prescribed totidem verbis , in our Sauiours doctrine , yet all of force issuing and flowing from the same . The word Honour in the 5. Commaundement , how much doth it comprehend , sustenance , seruices , reuerence ? &c. So , Preach the Gospel : Predicate euerie way , vijs & modis , by writing too ; by printing and publishing , though long since deuised . S. Gregory saith vpon the 9. of Ezech. as I take it , that our Sauiour appeared with a writers Inke-horne at his backe , cum atramentario adrenes , because though hee writ nothing himselfe , whilest he liued , yet when his backe was turned , and after his ascension into heauen , the Apostles did for him ; by his appointment no doubt . Yet to S. Iohn in the Reu. the spirit saith directly , Scribe , write . Hee is bidden to write . And if no prophecy ( S. Peter telling vs. 2. Pet. 1. 21. ) came at any time by the will of man , but the men of God spake as they were lead by the Holy Ghost , then were not written prophecies neither meerely depending of the will of men , and of the election of the writers , but they did as men of God , that is seruants of God , homines Dei , euen herein also obeying his will , and as the spirit carried them , that is , enioyned them . Whosoeuer therfore wrote the Scriptures , had a commaundement for writing them . 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , I was necessitated to write , Iude the 3. ver . In the 4. to the Ephes . Dedit quosdam Euangelistas , quosdam pastores , &c. Some thinke Euangelistae are scriptores sacri codicis ; that the Euangelists there , are the pen-men of holy writ , and by that differ from others there mentioned . It is said , dedit , Christ gaue them to the Church , therefore he set them on worke . For no man would take this honour to himselfe , Heb. 5. No wise man at least : not a lesser then this , and therefore this much lesse , to indite Scriptures , which is one of the greatest of all . The place to the Ephesians , Aquine , and certaine others , so interpret , as I haue said , viz. Anselme , Lyra , yea and Canus himselfe , l. 7. Locorum : which is de Sanctorum authoritate . c. 3. § 28. Now to Numb . 32. Of the Baptisme of infants . Haue we no Scripture for that ? Origen ( you say ) calls it an Apostolike tradition , Yea , he meanes , that at least , though it bee of Scripture too . And there are scriptae traditiones , as your owne place teacheth you , 2. Thessal . 2. Retinete traditiones , hold fast the traditions , siue per sermonem , siue per epistolam , whether by word , or by writing , commended to you . Therefore traditions might be both . S. Austen you alleadge , de Genesi ad literam . lib. 10. c. 23. that the baptisme of infants were not to be beleeued vnlesse it were an Apostolike tradition . That is , I suppose , incident to one of the two kindes aforenamed , and in a word if it disagreed from the Doctrine of the Apostles . We haue the figure of the Law , with some aduantage on our side . There the knife , here the water . There within eight daies , here within a competent space onely . And yet they are no Iewes that obserue this analogie . We read of whole houses baptized by the Apostles , Lydiaes , Stephanaes , the Taylors , &c. Maruaile but some infants . We haue Sinite parvulos venire ad me , a modell , and an idea of baptisme , at the least . For what doth Christ in baptisme , but blesse them , and release them from their sinnes ? For , hic est qui baptizat , it is Christ still that baptizeth : and , Eph. 5. he cleanseth the Church . If regnum coelorum belong to such , why not baptisme , which is the doore of the kingdome of heauen ? If they be in foedere , why not in tesserâ ? If they be borne holy , no doubt in the right that they haue to baptisme . For els holines proceedeth not from the wombe , corruption rather . Psal . 51. Eph. 2. 3. Rom. 5. In quo omnes peccauerunt , &c. What should I say of that , Baptizantes omnes nationes , Matth. 28 ? among whome were infants . We haue diuers other grounds , if this were a time to open them . But these are enough , to shewe that we haue more then bare president , and practise , for our warrant , in affoarding baptisme to Infants . And if S. Austen against Cresconius saith , that the determination of the Church is enough to stop the mouthes of such clamorous hereticks , as the Donatists were , about their rebaptization , though Scripture were silent , because the Church abhorreth it , yet prayer to Saints is of another nature , neither are you the Church , and much lesse the Church , sine vllâ ambiguitate , as he there speakes , nor can you shew this descending of the practise of the church , from the first times , fili ductu , which was Austens triumph , to confound them with the Church , after he had conquered them with the Scriptures . Nay , in his second booke against Cresconius , c. 31. he allowes such a supremacie to holy Scriptures , that by direction of them , do caeteris literis fidelium ( not onely infidelium ) liberè iudicemus . We may freely iudge of ought other writings , of faithfull men ( therefore of Fathers themselues ) by collation of Scriptures . And , de vnit . Eccl. c. 16. Non dicimus nos nobis ideo credi oportere , quòd in Ecclesiâ Christi sumus . [ We say not , we must be credited , because we are in the Church . ] § 29. As for that other place of his , out of the 4. de baptism . cont . Denatist . cap. 24. What neither Councells haue determined , nor Scripture defined , &c. one part is for you , that no Councells haue decreed your prayers to Saints , no Scriptures ordained them , but in the other ye are farre short , Quod vniuersa tenet Ecclesia , whereas you shew nothing afore the fourth age . And God wot how weake , Martyr pro nobis oret , Let the Martyr pray for vs ? § 30. Numb . 33. Are Godfathers and Godmothers of the substance of baptisme ? And yet suppose they were , I hope there is a print of this very thing in Scripture . See Esa . 8. v. 2. I tooke vnto me faithfull witnesses , Vriah the Priest , and Zachariah the sonne of Ieberechiah . This was at the naming of the sonne of the Prophetesse , Maher-shalal-hash-baz . But you answer your selfe by the words of the Canon , in the same number , that these rules are rules of doctrine , concerning indifferent things . And is our strife with you about such ? § 31. Mr. Rogers might well say , that we are not commanded by expresse tearmes to baptize infants . Yet warranted , as I haue shewed you , yea cōmanded , but not in expresse termes , which you would smother . Your fopperies are neither expressely , nor implicitely , Scripturall . § 32. To your 34. Numb . where you professe to lay open a notable piece of trumpery , of the Bishops of England , ( for with such reuerence you speake , when you speake of them all ) I pray you see how notable . First , the Canon neuer saies expressely , nor by consequence , that the Papists hold that the signe of the Crosse is of the substance of the Sacrament . And yet herein you would faine obserue a contradiction betweene his ROYALL MATESTIES gratious censure of you , acquiting you from that error , and the words of the Canon , as they may seeme to glaunce at you for so holding . Such encouragement you giue his MOST EXCELLENT MAIESTIE , to make the best of your errors , to which his princely nature easily enclineth him , and more easily might , for the great benefit of Gods Church , and the compounding of discords , if you had the grace not to deprane him . But as I was saying ; The Canon onely affirmes , that the signe of the Crosse hath euer been accompanied , of late times , in the Church of England , with sufficient cautions , and exceptions , against all popish superstition and error , and againe , That since the abolishing of Popery , the Church of England hath euer held and taught , that the signe of the Crosse is no part of the substance of that Sacrament ; and that the infant baptized , is , by vertue of baptisme , receiued into the Congregation of Christs flocke , as a perfect member thereof , euen before it be signed with the signe of the Crosse . Whereas all this while there may be other errors about the signe of the Crosse , then holding it to be a part of the substance of Baptisme . And from them we haue purged it . Bellarmine , I am sure , de effectu sacram : lib. 2. cap. 31. ascribes spirituall vertue to this ceremony , and quotes to that ende , a number of authors , but wrested , as his manner is . Yea hee would haue it to worke wholesome effects ex opere operato . What thinke you of that ? And how if Bellarmine either straggle and wander , now , from your Church herein , or , conuince you to be vnworthy of his MAIESTIES milde censure , in attributing grace and power to this signe ? Lastly , though your Church neuer held any such thing , that is , your congregatio Aquilarum , as Pighius calls it , your quickesighted clarkes , and in that respect the Prelates might truely enforme his MAIESTIE , that you your selues were neuer so grosse , as to impute vertue , or efficacie thereunto , yet diuers simple soules , lurking in the promiscuous body of popery , might be tainted with this infection , and in that respect it might be called a popish error , though still I must tell you , that the Canon doth not call it so , there are errors enough besides that which the Canon might refer vnto . Yea the fond perswasion of lay-Papists , calling for it as violently , and as importunely , as for the water in baptisme , which hath been knowne in this land , ( I will not say where , nor how lately ) because it is an error springing from Popery , & fostered in your bosomes , though not proclaimed by your Church , might well be accounted among the Popish errors , from which we haue refined the signe of the Crosse , by neither ascribing vertue to it , holines , grace , nor yet necessary obseruation , but onely by way of obedience where the Canon appoints , and conueniencie withstandeth not , for some aduertisements sake . Can you doubt that there are errors , and errors in Popery , about the signe of the Crosse , besides making it to be a part of the Sacramēt of baptisme , that alleadge Nauarrus here , your grand Casuist , affirming that if baptisme be administred without the Crosse , wee ought to supply it afterwards ? whereas either baptisme must then be renewed and readministred to the party , which cannot be without horrible sacriledge , Heb. 6. and Ephes . 4. or the signing with the Crosse there , is not the Crosse in baptisme , if it come so long after . But we treat of the Crosse in Baptisme , and that is it which hath ministred all the offence . Finally , you say , if the midwife baptize , then the child must be crossed afterward . So that the midwife may baptize belike , not crosse . A high point in your low Diuinity , vnles you will haue the midwife to baptize the vnborne , another worthy practise no doubt , and yet then they might crosse too , one as well as the other , in aerem both , as the Apostle speakes . 1. Cor. 14. But we goe forward . § 33. Numb . 41. The Bishop cannot answer , you say , in defence of himselfe , that in things indifferent it is lawfull to adde besides the written word ; though not otherwise : for his saying is , id tantùm audemus facere : Wee dare onely doe that ; &c. But be you answered , That facere with the Bishop , as with Moses before , concerneth the maine action ; not the ceremonie appertaining , and vesting , such as praier to Saints cannot be reputed , but is a seruice of it selfe , and of a proper erection . Though if it were a ceremonie , ceremonies are like your glosses , which if they deface the text , they are accursed , so these when they destroy the substance . § 34. Num. 43. Beyond the degree of ridiculous . The Bishop seemes to graunt , that to pray vnto Saints , is either good of it selfe , or at least indifferent . Why so ? For if it were absolutely bad , saith he , it were in vaine to demaund a precept of it , which notwithstanding he doth . What ? and if he demaund of them , that thinke they doe well in so doing ? Yet the Bedlam addes , So as either this his demaund is verie idle and absurd , or else he must acknowledge it at least to be indifferent , and consequently no lesse lawfull , then the Crosse in Baptisme . Time and paper , how are you cast away ? § 35. Num. 45. If we cannot pray to Saints without iniury to Christ , how doe we craue one anothers prayers here in earth ? If of sinners , why not of Saints ? If of men , why not of Angels ? Thus he . And why might Adoniah marry lower , and yet not match with Abishac his fathers concubine , without high treason ? Of deepe prouidence hath almightie God enlarged charitie amongst Saints on earth , and ratified the exhibitions therof by law . But where there is no feare of decaying it any more , as in the heauenly Kingdome , where 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , 1. Cor. 15. the offices are superfluous that tend thereunto , and all reference to the glorified spirits , so complete of themselues , that wee cannot requite their fauours with the like , is construed to be preiudiciall to our common King. By which we answer also to your retortion of the Bishops text , in your numb . 47. Is the desiring the prayers of liuing Saints , as much as Venite ad me ? Doe not they come to vs , as well as we to them in this sort ? Venite ad me therefore , is a farre other matter , and to bee shunned towards Angels , towards heauenly Saints ; not so the borrowing of aide , the imploring of help of men , and pilgrimes , such as our selues are . § 36. Numb . 49. You acknowledge like a man , that Christ is our onely Mediatour by way of prayer , as well as of redemption . Accedens per semetipsum , Heb. 7. and many such like . Hold you to that then . Your foote stands right if you can keepe it so . And when S. Iohn saith , whome you also quote , 1. Ioh. 2. We haue an aduocate , and he is the propitiation : doth he not shewe that propitiation goes to make an aduocate ? So , Vnus est Mediator , but , qui dedit se pro omnibus , that is , by redemption , 1. Tim. 2. they goe still together . Now the Angels are not for the one : therefore , not for the other . § 37 You answer vs , as you thinke , Num. 52. That the Angels are not excluded as Mediators to God for vs , but that by way of Christs merits they may mediate well enough : and so you construe that of Austen , contra Epist . Parmen . cap. 8. lib. 2. that onely Christ prayes for all , he whets the prayers that others offer for vs. But what are Christs merits to the Angels , good Sir ? what interest haue they in them ? Doe you thinke they were directed to the vse of Angels , that they should lay hold on them ? And if not so , with what confidence shall they pray to God through them ? how shal they desire to be heard of God , whether they pray for vs or for themselues , ( for that skils not ) by the merits of Christ , as you fancie ? We haue heard that prayer presupposeth faith . Shall the Angels repose trust in the merits of Christ , which belong not to them ? So are you tossed in your vanity , like a boate in a storme , that you forget the verie principles of Christian relligion , namely , that Christ neuer tooke the Angels vpon him , but the seed of Abraham , Heb. 2. and for vs hee suffered , not for them ; and by him , not by them , are we to be brought to God , as Theodoret , as Chrysost . as Theophylact , as Photius told you before , as the Scripture euery where , per quem habemus accessum , Eph. 2. 18. § 38. Yet , you say , the Church concludeth her prayers to Saints and Angels , per Christum Dominum nostrum , adiuring belike the Saint , to be gratious vnto vs for Christs sake , ( for what els is the meaning of that clause ? ) As if Christ were now our Mediatour to the Saint , not the Saint to Christ . So are you gyddied and hurled vp and downe , with euery blast of vaine doctrine , euerie puffe of temeritie . The like I read in Maffaeus his life of Ignatius the Iesuite-maker , lib. 2. c. 5. that God the Father commended the Iesuites to his Sonne , whom the Scripture speakes of as our commender to the Father , and no otherwise . A voice was heard from heauen , saying to Salmeron , and Laynez , and those good fellowes , Ego vos commendaui , or conciliaui , filio meo . These were the trances , and the windlaces of the first Iesuites . § 39. But least you thinke , you can wrest that club of S. Austen , contra Epist . Parmen . before quoted , out of the Bishops hands , viz. that Christ is hee alone , pro quo nemo interpellat , sed ipse pro omnibus , for whome no bodie makes request , but he for all ; you may please to consider , that if this be so , then must the Angels of force giue ouer beeing Mediatours . For if they mediate at all , they must mediate for all , and none for them , which , S. Austen saith , is proper to Christ . None for them , because they are in no want , as other folkes are , all teares beeing wiped from their eyes , or rather neuer any teare hauing bedewed their cheekes . Againe , they for all ; because burning with charitie , they neglect none , but compassionate the cause of all them that are in distresse . And from hence it will follow , that either Christ must needes giue ouer this specialtie , which S. Austen inuests him with , or the Angels their mediation . Doe you see now , how fitly the Bishop vrgeth this place against you , and how you haue inuerted that of Daniel , in stead of millia millium ministrabant ei , setting vp so many Angels , qui depraedentur eum , to supplant God , and robbe him of his honour ? § 40. But let vs heare you out of Daniel , what you alleadge for your selfe . Num. 57. out of Dan. 3. that militant Christians fare the better , for the prayers of the Saints in glorie , because Daniel belike vrgeth God , with his promise , to Abraham , and Isaac , &c. This I finde not in the 3. of Dan. and the question is not , whether Saints benefit vs , or no , but whether we may pray to them . In this place Daniel onely mentions them to God , but makes no petition to them himselfe . Yet because it is a phrase that occurres in Scripture , and may stumble the heedelesse , I answer briefly . For Abraham , and Isaac , and Israels sake , that is , not for the merits of the men , as you construe it , whereas they neuer entreated by their owne merits , much lesse others by theirs : ( see Dan. 9. 8. ) but for the tenure of Gods promise , running vpon Abraham , vpon Isaac , and their seede . So our Sauiour in S. Iohn , Adhuc nihil rogâstis in nomine meo ; As yet you haue asked nothing in my name . In my name , that is , in expresse knowledge of me , since I was reuealed to the world . For , Deus Abraham , & Isaac , was then all in all . Henceforth we pray , per Christum Dominum , or per Christum filium , and obtaine our suit in that forme of style . As was prophesied long before , Psal . 60. 16. Adorabunt per eum , they shall worship by him , or pray by him , which then was not performed , now is . Howbeit Origen not amisse , puts them both together , hom . 7. in Ezech. vpon those words , Incensum meum posuistis ante faciem eorum , that is , idolorum ; and , incensum , saies he , is Orationes sanctorum , out of the Apocal. Incense is prayer . Si ergo instituti ad Orationem , cum illam Deo debeamus offerre , Deo Abraham , Deo Isaac , Deo Iacob , & Patri Iesu Christi , ijs offerimus quae ipsi confinximus , in tantum vt idolis incensum Dei proponamus , &c. that is , [ If therefore whereas we are taught and trained how to pray , we when as we should offer our praiers to God , the God of Abraham , the God of Isaac , the God of Iacob , and the Father of Iesus Christ , shall offer them to such things as our selues haue deuised , insomuch as we set the incense of God before idolls , &c. ] Note here three things . First , prayer is Gods incense , as belonging to God onely . Incensum Dei est oratio . And to that we are trained , nurtured , and taught . Instituti ad hoc . And what else saies Origen ? Quòd debeamus orationem Deo offerre : that we must offer our praiers to God ; not ante faciem eorum , not to others . Secondly , he that offers it to any but God , offers it to idolls : quae confinximus ipsi , which our selues haue deuised . Vnlesse we haue warrant for so doing ; but warrant we haue none , God neither giuing vs , nor meaning to giue vs any . As Tiberius forbad the Romanes , to erect any Temple or image to him , Nisi ego permittam : adding immediatly , Atqui ego non permittam : [ that is , vnlesse I licence you : now I neuer meane to licence you . ] You are Idolaters therefore , you cannot auoide it , though they bee Saints that you pray to , vnlesse you can shewe a reuocation of Gods minde in this behalfe vnder his owne hand . Thirdly , the coniunction of Deus Abraham , with Pater Christi , the new Testament with the old . Though now the former of these two , resolues into the latter ; the God of Abraham into the Father of our Lord Iesus Christ , in whome alone we must put our trust , concerning the graunting of our praiers . Your selues doe not much mention Abraham amongst the Saints , nor Isaac , nor Iacob , which shewes their names were not put for meritorious , but onely formall , or legall , as vpon whom went the promise , which now in Christ alone is yea and amen , that is , perfectly perfect . § 41. To returne to your method . So for Dauids sake , 1. King. 11. God abated his wrath towards Salomon , you say . But Salomon neuer prayed to his Father Dauid , in such a manner , after he was dead . How then ? God hauing promised in Dauids life time , that he would not destroy his children , though they transgressed his Lawes , but onely chastice them with the scourge of men , verifies this vpon Salomon now , by force of his promise so made to Dauid . What gather ye from hence ? Is it not lawfull to vrge God with his promise , vnlesse we pray to the Saints ? As for Dauids diuinitie , it was cleane otherwise . No man may deliuer his brothers soule , Psal . 49. and Psal . 6. In inferno quis confitebitur tibi ? Besides that , Christ is often called Dauid , in the old Testament : as , Suscitabo eis Dauid Regem ipsorum , Ierem. 30. id est , Christum , saith Theodoret vpon that place ; and , the holy things of Dauid , Act. 13. And the Keyes of Dauid , Apocal. 3. 7. who is that but Christ ? § 42. Moses , and Paul , their sauing diuers hundreths , or one of them hundred thousands , by their intercessions , in their life time ; neither argues their particular intercession for vs , now they are dead , ( servierunt enim saeculo suo to speake with S. Peter ) and much lesse the lawfulnes of our recourse to them . The like of Iob , of others that you bring , may be said . Baruch , me thinkes , properly , Bar. 4. 21. Clamabo ad altissimum in diebus meis , I will crie to the most high , in my dayes , that is , whiles I liue . Meaning , he should haue no place of doing so after death . As S. Peter saies of preaching , 2. Pet. 1. 13. and S. Paul also , Phil. 1. 23. who else needed not to haue been in a strayte , if after death he might haue succoured his people . § 43. In your 59. Num. you bewray your selfe . The ability of Saints to help men ( say you ) is to be ascribed not onely to the effect of their prayers , but also to their power , authority , and dignity . You fly then to the Saints , as to the giuers of those things ( out of their power and authority ) which you aske in prayer , not onely as suters to God for them in your behalfe . What more grosse idolatry can there be then this ? Is not this that , that you were wont to disclaime ? Where is now per Christum Dominum nostrum ? § 44. Well ; Num. 61. hauing talked your pleasure of the practise of Christs Church , of the consent of antiquity , of the custome of all ages , &c. at last you bethinke your selfe , how all this will goe for currant , when you shall come to a reckoning . The Bishop say you , will oppose to this effect , that the authorities brought , faile both in time , as being later by 300 yeares , then the challenge was , and in vniforme consent , for others also must be heard to speake as well as they , if any thing will be done . Yet you comfort your selfe thus , that his MAIESTIE professeth to reuerence the Fathers , more then euer the Iesuites did , and yet they reuerence them all , after the three first , to many ages downward . Who doubts but his MAIESTIE reuerences the Fathers , both for infinite good that may be gotten by the reading of them , and namely towards the discerning of the truth of points , euen now controuerted in relligion , though still with submission of his iudgement to holy Scripture , and also reuerenceth them more by much then the Iesuits doe , though the Iesuits happily reuerence more fathers then he ? For what pedaneous author haue not they made a father of ? Ye may say with him , cōsidering their falsifications in this kinde , Mutauit calceos , pater conscriptus repentè factus est . Nay , now euerie Iesuite is a Father at first dash , whether he write or no. And though his MAIESTIE hath dispensed so much with his height , as by writing his Apology to encounter with them that are no Kings , yet he will neuer be tried by them that are no Fathers . And therefore you guesse well , when you thinke you shall bee forced to looke farther backeward , then you haue done yet , if you well euict any thing . It is true also , that the Bishop saies , ( although it anger you ) of the Cardinall , that hee hath done nothing in his Apologie , in doing no more then so . 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , he had as good made no Apologie at all . By the way it is pretty , and worth the noting , how you report the Bishops words , Rex expectat in quadringentis annis , &c. though de quadringentis would haue fitted you better ; which you quote in the margent , as the Bishops owne words , and like enough to be so ; not , in quadringentis . But this is your Latine , when you list to speake like your selfe , and reforme Bishops for theirs . If it be true , as you say , that the Fathers of the three first hundred yeares after Christ , are so few and so scantie remaining to our daies , ( you reckon but 7. or 8. though , I suppose , there are diuers more ) yet what ill luck haue you with them , that can finde no footing of all your new-fangled superstition , in any of their workes ? Not in Tertullian , not in Origen , not in Irena , Ignace , Lactance , Melito , Cyprian , Iustine , Clemens , Arnobius , Methodius , Minutius , the Cyrills , Dionysius , Athenagoras , Theophilus , &c. not in Eusebius himselfe , who liued there anewst , and enclined to the Platonicks , as did some others of the forenamed ranke . Which Platonicks are thought to be somewhat fauourable to your fancie of worshipping Saints , aboue the rest of the Philosophers . And if the Fathers , as you say , write so few in an age , does not this shew that the square of our faith is the Scripture , not the Fathers ? for how if the Fathers had wrote nothing at all ? As , of diuerse points , you confesse your selfe , they did not , Num. 63. and , Num. 66. And in the beginning of this Chapter , you would make vs beleeue , that the Apostles themselues had no commaundement for writing . Might not the Fathers pennes much more haue stood still ? Yet you adde that the after-ages abounded with writers , when persecution ceased , and many worthy Volumes were spread abroad into the world . It may well bee ; but as heresie is confounded many times by writing , so some errours will creepe in withall , and hardly can it be eschewed . Abundabit scientia , but abundabit iniquitas too . Daniel the one , our Sauiour Christ the other , each of the same times of the world , & of the Church . The Elephant oppresseth Eleazar in the fall . So falshood gets some ground of truth , euen in seeming to be foyled . 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , was our Sauiours depositum , which he left to the Church ; witnesse he in the Nicene Councell , Apud Socr. lib. 1. cap. 8. not ventilation , not disputation . Wherein , I may boldly say , that truth of relligion comes in as much hazard to bee lost , as our Sauiour was in the crowde , and concourse at Ierusalem . As in the ouerflowes of Nilus , the corne feilds are the better , and the fatter for it , but serpents and Crocodyles come in amaine ; so whiles many pennes walke , the originall puritie is lesse preserued . It will be alwayes true which Tully saith , Quò propiùs aberant à diuina progenie , &c. ( so from the Primitiue times ) eò acutiùs , cautiùsque & vena videbant , & recta tenebant , which posteritie fayled in . § 45. When you aske , if we would not receiue the signe of the Crosse , as proceeding from antiquitie , vnles all the Fathers had stood for it , why should we hold you long in suspence ? It is the vniforme consent of the godly Fathers , that endeares the vse of that memorial to vs , and had onely certaine singulars , like starres in a darke night , deliuered their opinion of it , it should neuer haue found such entertainment at our hands , for the antiquities sake . And therefore you must muster a squadron of Fathers ( though I see it be troublesome vnto you ) for prayer to Saints : not come in with your snatches , and your 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , here and there , if you will carrie it by the Fathers . Where it may please you , to remember , that in the Conference at Hampton Court , which you quoted so lately , the Bishop that you now write against , brought Tertullian for the Crosse , and the vse therof in baptisme , in immortali lauacro ; you haue neither author , for Inuocation of Saints so auncient , nor piece of an author . Yet you compare this with the signe of the crosse . How vnfitly ? § 46. The Bishops , ( you say ) are giuen to teach the Church ; if they may erre therein , the Church may be deceiued , and so all is marred . As if 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . Austen doth not tell you of erring Bishops , of deceiuing Bishops , which the people fondly relyed vpon , he in vaine recalling them , and denouncing that the Bishops authority is no sanctuary to the erroneous . See lib. de pastor . cap. 10. Saepe hoc dicunt heretici , securi sequimur Episcopos . The heretikes haue this often in their mouthes , 〈◊〉 are safe so long as we follow our Bishops . It is a signe of heresie , with S. Austen , to follow the Bishops , and their iudgement , securely , viz. without looking any further . And in the 7. Chapter of the said booke , hee applyes that to the Bishops of his time out of Ezek. 34. Quod errabat non reuocastis , the wandring sheepe ye haue not called backe . What remedy are the Bishops now against error ? And , Si Episcopus constitutus in ecclesia catholica non bonam rationem reddit de oue , quam non quaesierit errantem de grege Dei , qualem rationem redditurus est haereticus ( viz. Episcopus ) qui non solùm non reuocauit ab errore , sed etiam impulit in errorem ? Doe you see , that Bishops doe not onely not bring from errour , but lead into error , yea thrust , impell ? cap. 10. of the aforesaid . And yet you thinke , the onely antidote of Church errors , lyes in the Bishops . How much better , S. Peter , Habemus firmiorem sermonem propheticum ? We haue a surer testimony , namely the holy Scripture , not onely then the authority of any Bishops can be to preserue from error , but then a voyce from heauen , ( for of that speaks S. Peter ) which Satan may counterfeit , and so likewise fayne himselfe a Bishop , as well as change himselfe into an Angel of light . Therefore S. Hilary saies , that Christ would not let his Disciples beare witnes of him , ( and yet no meane persons ) because he was to be approoued by other manner of witnesses , namely the Law and the Prophets , that is , the Scriptures . And S. Chrysostome , Hom. 9. in cap. 3. ad Coloss . Exhorting the lay-men to prouide them bookes , the medicines of their soules , as he calls them , bids them 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 not to tarrie for another Master ( not the Prelate himselfe ) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , for he hides many things , many times , from them , for enuie , or for vain-glory . Whereas the Scripture layes all open sincerely . Is this a small prerogatiue of Scriptures aboue the Doctors ? S. Austen also cap. 11. of the booke aforequoted , after he had lodg'd his sheepe , like a good pastor , in the mountaines of Israel , that is , as he interprets it , in the authority of the diuine Scriptures , he thus bespeakes them . Ibi pascite , vt securè pascatis . Quicquid inde audieritis , hoc vobis bene sapiat , quicquid extra est , respuite . And againe , Audite vocem pastoris , colligite vos ad montes Scripturae sanctae . No doubt , these are the mountaines that our Sauiour bids vs flie vnto , vnder Antichrists persecution , that is , yours . Ibi sunt deliciae cordis vestri , ( addes S. Austen ) ibi nihil venenosum , nihil alienum . And lastly , when he hath shut them into that sheepcoat , and pend them vp in that fold , for he vrgeth the word , [ Erunt stabula earum illic , ] he giues them leaue to triumph , and say in this wise : Bene est , verum est , manifestum est , non fallimur . This he calls , requiescere in stabulis illic , to rely vpon Scripture , not vpon the Bishops authoritie . Now it is well with vs , now we are right , now the case is plaine , now we are not deceiued , when the Scripture first saies it . What should I tell you here either of Cyprians licensing the people of God , the flocke of Christ , to renounce their wicked Bishop , not partake with his seruices , lib. 1. Ep. 4. or of the third Canon of that famous Councell of Ephesus , which enioynes thus , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . The Councell giues charge , Not to submit to the authoritie of any backe-slided Bishops , or Bishops departed , that is departed from the truth . There may bee Apostaticall Bishops then , departers from the truth , ( had you no such Popes ? aske Lyra , aske Genebrard ) and they are not to be regarded . And euen in those which deserue not to be called Apostatae , by so heauie name , because they fell not so fowly , simpliciter errantes , as S. Austen calls them , de Bap. l. 4. c. 5. yet their lighter errors , their moales , as I may terme them , like that in Cyprians owne breast , which S. Austen saith , was couered with the dugges of his charitie , they make no authoritie for others to follow them , least Vincentius Lerinensis pronounce his doome vpon them thus , though wondring at it himselfe , O mira conuersio : absoluuntur Magistri , condemnantur discipuli : O strange passe : The thiefe scapes , and the receiuer is hangd , the inuentor goes away scotfree , and the scholler perisheth in his prone credulity . Which you may doe well to take heed of , in the present question , of praying to Saints , if any passion from a multitude , or a single Christian , hath drawne forth a vowe , a prayer , or such like , if any suddaine motion hath transported further then should , yet to beware how you make an article of it . § 47. As for that you say , the Fathers whome you quote about this point , were agents in the Councells , which the King and the Bishop professe to reuerenee ; it is one thing what the Fathers say in seuerall , as it were solitarij in tecto , another when they meet Synodically in a Councell . Is there no grace belonging to Councells ? Why is it not said then , vbi vnus , but , vbi duo aut tres in nomine meo , naming the first multitudes , to shew the vertue of an assembly , where farre more meet then two or three ? You haue first no Councells , for your supplication to Saints ; for miserable are your proofes of Flauianus and Proterius : they haue toucht the Diamond , but they cannot draw like the Diamond , they are of kin to the Councell , but they are not brought within the Canon . Neither againe haue you all the Fathers , no not of one whole age among the fiue , no not of the later and weaker in authority , neerer the bottom , and those that you haue they write dispersedly , neuer so much as ioyned in domesticall conference , which is a great derogation in regard of the credit that goes with lawfull Synods , although lesse generall . And lastly though you neuer lyn vaunting , and prating , what you haue produced out of the Fathers , as if it were so peremptory , yet wee hauing examined and perused them before , finde not one of them to depose so pregnantly on your side , but that he may be avoided . If the streame of the Fathers , not onely of one age , as you idly crake , but sundry ages together could preuaile any thing with you , you would neuer haue defined so proudly and so irreligiously of the conception of the Blessed Virgin , without sinne : ( of which see Canus your owne author , with his legion of Fathers ) nor giuen sentence against the Dominican for the Franciscan . As for the place to the Ephes . which you quote , to shew that God hath placed Pastors in the Church , to defend it from errour , Dedit quosdam pastores , &c. Eph. 4. It is by way of industrie , in dispensing Gods word , not of infallibilitie , that they cannot possibly erre . Where vision ceases , though the Pastors be neuer so many , yet the people perish ; yea , many Pastors are the cause , saith God , why my vine is destroyed . I made indeede my Couenant with Levi , and , the Priests lips should preserue knowledge , Mal. 2. but the Priests oft times depart out of the way , and they cause many to stūble in the Law ; IN THE LAVV , saith God , by misinterpreting it , no doubt ; they haue corrupted the Couenant of Levi , saith the Lord of hoasts . This in the old Testamēt . In the new , what ? If the salt be vnsauoury , to the dunghil with it , saith our blessed Sauiour , of his times . Out of you shall come fierce wolues , saies S. Paul , Act. 20. speaking of thē soone after , that is , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , Bishops and Priests , as S. Chrysost . construes it , Tom. 7. D. H. Savile . p. 219. There shall be false teachers among you , as well as in that people , saies Peter , whome you build vpon , 1. Pet. 2. 1. And he addes moreouer , bringing in priuily damnable heresies . This of yours is priuie ( 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ) take heede it be not damnable . I haue acquitted the Fathers in my former speech ; I applie this to you . § 48 But S. Austen , you say , thought the testimonie of sixe Bishops , sufficient to conuince Iulian the Pelagian about originall sinne , and the baptisme of young infants . He meanes sufficient to tame Iulians pride , and haughtie humor , after he had laid him on his backe , with Scripture-arguments , which is not all one with deciding the question by the Fathers authoritie . Iulian had called Originall sinne , Manichaismum . S. Austen alleadges those Fathers for it , that were knowne to be no Manichees . It●●e tibi , fili Iuliane , nos omnes Manichai esse videmur ? l. 1. c. 4. not 2. as you quote it . So is it one thing ad hominem , and another adrem , disputare . As likewise it is one thing vincere , and another thing triumphare , as that memorable Dr. Whitakers , was wont to say in this case . The Fathers and all come in at the triumph , like those that waited on our Sauiour into Hierusalem , but it is the Scripture that strikes the stroke . Neither doth S. Austen mislike that saying of Iulian , l. 1. c. 7. that Scripturarum authoritas , goes before eruditio Sanctorum . In the establishing of a truth , the authoritie of Scripture , goes before the learning of holy men . Qui tamen sancti non authoritatem veritati suo tribuêre consensu , sed testimonium & gloriam de ei●… suscepere consortio , [ Which Saints neuertheles , or godly men , authorize not the truth by their concurring in one , but winne praise and estimation by their generall submitting of their iudgements thereunto . ] Or , is not originall sinne to be prooued by Scripture , without a Iurie of Fathers , thinke you ? As for the baptisme of infants , I haue spoken before . And Iulian himselfe was baptized in his infancie , as S. Austen tells him , l. 1. c. 4. What compasse will hold the authorities of Scripture , that proclaime our infection from the very wombe ? Iob saith , the infant of one night is not cleane , &c. Nay , he would neuer haue cursed the day of his birth , c. 3. but that he was borne in sinne . For nothing can subiect a man to the curse , but sinne . The Psalme saith , Behold , I was shapen in iniquitie , and made warme in my mothers sinnes . Againe , The vngodly are froward from the wombe . And , The iniquitie of my heeles , ( that 's the originall sinne , which sticketh so fast , ) encounters him still , euen-after regeneration . For the serpene wounds vs in the heele , the womans seede him in the head . Illusiones lumborum , and , Ab occultis meis munda me , is thought to be the same . Moses saith , euery figmentum of the heart of man , is onely euill continually . What was Esaies vncleannes of his lipps , Esa . 6. but this Originall pollution , that he had not discarded from him ? For we must not thinke that the Prophet was ribauld in his talke , or that-waies obnoxious , as a filthie speaker . God forbid . And infinite the like , throughout all the old Testament . Besides diuers other proofes out of Salomons Proverbs , he would neuer haue said , that the day of death is better then the day of birth , but that we are borne in sinne , and neuer set free from this graue iugum , of the sonnes of Adam , as another calls it , till our very death . It is primum vivens , & vltimum moriens . But my purpose was not to recken vp places of Scripture , for confirmation of Originall sinne , though you see how farre your prouocation carrieth me , that say , that this could not be prooued against young Iulian , but by the Fathers . If I should speake of the new Testament , what ende would there be ? I will name but one place ( omitting 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , Eph. 4. and , Eramus quondam , Tit. 3. and many the like ) namely , that which S. Aust . choaks the gallant with , after he had ruffled in his rhetorike , and so sprusely vrged him to shew but a crannie , or a little hole , by which this originall sinne hath crept into the world . Ostendo tibi , saith S. Austen , non angustam rimam , sed latissimam ianuam , IN QVO OMNES PECCAVERVNT . Rom. 5. Looke you , Sir , ( saith S. Aust . ) not a litle hole ; but a broad gate that I shew you , or rather the Apostle sheweth you , by which sin entred into the world ; viz. the first man , in whose fall we were bruised , as the Platonikes are wont to say of the wing of the soule , and they alluding perhappes hether . So notorious is the originall corruption of mankinde , that sense gropes it , and nature feeles it , and the world complaines of it , that though the Scriptures did not testifie it , the Fathers need not be cited , where the Platoniks proclaime it . As for S. Austens iudgement of Councells , where the lis is dependens , and Scripture hath been produced as yet on neither side , that one saying of his is sufficient , to shew the insufficiencie of them , which is extant in his booke against Maximinus the Arrian , l. 3. c. 14. Nec ego tibi Nicenum , nec tu mihi Ariminense debes concilium obijcere . He remits his aduersary the Nicene Councell , rather then he will stand to any tryall but Scriptures , about a point of faith . In which Nicene there were more then sixe Fathers , which you talke of here ; no lesse then 318. if you remember . § 49. And is not that goodly proofe now , for inuocation of Saints , that it hath been beneficiall to the world , and graced with miracles , & c ? As if it were for nothing , that the spirit saith , Si surrexerit in medio tui propheta , yea and etiamsi euenerit secundum verbum eius , although it come to passe according to his word . For God doth all this to try vs. A shipman is seen saith Pliny , in a tempest , when the cables are stretcht , when the winds beat , the waters swell , cum gemit arbor , when the ship-board groanes , yea when the blood commeth out at the marryners fingers ends . So faith is no faith till it be soundly tryed . Now let me see saith Hercules to his son , ( in Sophocles his Trachiniae ) Mene an illam potiorem putes , whether thou louest thy mother ( the Papists are 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ) or me better . So God of vs. § 50. As for Deut. 17. that two witnesses are to be heard , I answer in matter of fact , not of faith : where Angels are not to be heard , if they crosse the Gospel , though comming from heauen , nay Anathema must be said to them ; which the Councell of Laodicea precisely obserues , in this very cause of adoring Angells , Can. 35. to giue Anathema to all such ( belike Angells and all ) of which before . Yea , not onely Angels , but Christ himselfe , if he be counterfeited , is to be reiected , Ecce hîc , & ecce illic , as in the Cooke Cartosus , in the zeale of the multitudes madde vpon Mamas , and the like . For to speake of Peter now , were superfluous after these , though he be your Pope , whom you preferre before all , in your partiall fancy ; of whome Remigius construes those words of the Apostle , Gal. 2. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , though any other , though the Pope himselfe ; yea , if himselfe corrupt the Gospel , let him be accursed . § 51. But that surpasses , in your 70. Num. that because the Bishop shewes by his quotation of Bellarmine , that he had read his booke , de Beatitud . Sanct. lib. 1. cap. 20. and refutes not the answer that he there makes to our mens obiections , about praying to Saints , therefore he is guilty of wilfull malice , and goes against his conscience , in not taking away the solutions , as there they stand . As if the Bishop lackt worke for sooth , or his taske had been to refute the Cardinalls Controuersies , and not the Apology onely . With such crimes you patch vp , when you lacke matter . § 52. You thinke much , that the Bishop calls you to such authors , as Origen against Celsus , as Athanasius , and Cyrill , and the like Fathers , auncienter then those that you delight in , by which time a leake was made in relligion ; and corruption , ( which can hardly be kept out for a hundred yeares , as Luther was wont to say ) in processe of time had gotten no small aduantage . * Polycrates Bishop of Ephesus , his speach is very obseruable , concerning the Church , that being left as a chast virgine , & spouse of Christ , to the Apostles tuition , they indeed kept her so , but so did not they that came after , but stained that praise of hers by sundry deuises of their owne bringing in , which was a thing that S. Paul feared in his owne life time , about the Church of Corinth , 2. Cor. 11. 2. 3. least Satan had played the wily serpent with them , and seduced them from the original simplicity of Christ , which they once enioyed . In Origen and the aforenamed Authors , we finde no such Diuinitie , as praying to Saints , though much occasion was giuen them not to haue dissembled it , if any such had been . As when with their conformitie , they might haue gained the heathen , by enclining to them , which is a thing that Eusebius hunteth after not a little , to paralell vs together . Origen refuteth the argument drawne from Courtly mediations , as Ambrose after him ; and though he whisper as if the Saints spake certaine good words for vs after they are in heauen , yet he makes it no consequent that we should pray to them , nay he saith , as iealous of his owne iudgement , in Epist . ad Rom. lib. 2. Maneatinter occulta , nec chartis committatur , [ Let it remaine as secret , and not be deliuered in writing , ] acknowledging it Apocryphall , and not Canonicall doctrine , by the very tenure of his words . And this he speaks of their praying for vs : not acknowledging so much as the Bishop graunts , ( as you often tell vs ) though when that is graunted , that they pray for vs , it followes not that we must pray to them . See Origen contr . Celsum lib. 8. at large . One time he reiects Celsus his Popish inference , that God is not displeased with such inferiour patrones , as the Angels , and spirits , to mediate for vs. He graunts that the Angels are Gods Ministers indeed , and his honourable friends , but he saith , that when God is made our friend , all his friends are straight at friendship with vs. And because the places are many , I will relate them in order , beginning with the first , though alleadging many , I may seeme to leaue out more . He begins his aforesaid booke then , viz. the eight against Celsus , with praying to Christ , and to Christ onely , to be his good speed . Octavum aggressurus volumen , precor Deum & verbum eius vnigenitum : the rather to confute Celsus his praying to sundry demy-gods , which in the proces he challengeth him for more openly . Iamque ad sequentem Celsi contextum pergendum est , vbi scitatur , quâ de causâ grauemur daemonas colere . That is , [ And now we must proceed to Celsus his next words , wherin he askes , why we should beloath to worship Angels . ] And when we say , Impossibile est pluribus Dominis simul seruire , [ It is impossible to serue more then one Master : ] Celsus reiects this , which neuerthelesse was our Sauiours rule at first , and agrees verie well with our worshipping the holy Trinitie , wherein there is but one Dominus , but one Lord or Master , though distinguished into many persons ; and excludes all dependance vpon Saints and Angels , for so much as they are not interessed in the mysterie of the Trinitie , how glorious otherwise soeuer . Celsus proceedes . Qui enim plures deos venerantur , hoc ipso rē gratam faciunt summo Deo , quòd nemini honor contingat nisi quem ille honorari vult . Quapropter qui veneratur eius subditos , non offendit illum , cuius omnes sunt : that is , [ For he that worships many gods , does good seruice therin to the supreame God , because he honours none but whome he would haue to be honoured . And therefore he that honours his subiects , doth in no wise offend him whose subiects we are all . ] But by this reason , we were to honour all men in the world , because they are all Gods subiects . In the meane time , this defence of Celsus . his idolatrie , is the very same with the Papists , who are not ashamed to say , that we must honour God for his owne sake , and the Saints for Gods sake . It followes in Origen . Nobis autem vnus Deus Pater , ex quo omnia . That is , But we haue one God the Father , to our Father , of whom are all things . This NOBIS , saith he , he speakes of himselfe , and all that haue ascended to the God of Gods , as I told you before out of the booke of the Canticles , according to S. Bernards exposition , Paululum cum pertransissem● , &c. Ascendit autem in summum Deum is , qui eum inseparabiliter & indiuisibiliter colit per Iesum Dei filium , cuius solius ductu pervenitur ad patrem , per cuius verbi ac sapientiae contemplationem , modis omnibus conciliamur Deo conditori omnium . That is , [ Nowe he ascends to the God of Gods ( fleeing ouer other petty gods ) who inseparably and vndiuidedly worships him , through Iesus the Sonne of God , by whose conduct alone we approach to the Father ; by the consideration of whose word and wisedome , we are euery way reconciled to God the maker of al things . ] And a little after , Laudat creaturam beneque ei precatur : He praises the creature ( but that is all ) and wishes well to it , ( not precatur sibi ab eâ , not prayes vnto it , ) nec distrahitur ipse à Deo , vt liud colat simul cum eo , nec sustinet seruire duobus Dominis . That is , [ Neither is he rent a pieces from God , to worship some other thing with him , neither does he endure to serue many Lords or Masters . ] Then , Non est igitur seditiosa vox sic sentientium , & nolentium seruire dominis pluribus , contentorum vno Domino Iesu Christo . Celsus had called this a seditious speech , to worship none but God , neither Saints , nor Angells , &c. Therefore Origen answers him ; [ And this is no seditious speech of them that are thus minded , and that refuse to serue many Masters , being content with the Lord Iesus Christ alone . ] Cui seruientes erudiuntur ab eo , vt eruditi reddantur digni regno Dei & patris , &c. Whome they which serue , are instructed of him , that beeing sufficiently learned , they may become fit or worthy of the Kingdome of God , and the Father , &c. Christ , you see , is able to bring to heauen the worshippers of him , though they worship none besides him . Nec ideo cauemus ne cui praeter Deum seruiamus , ne laedatur Deus , sicut home laeditur , si seruus eius seruiat alteri : sed ideo illi seruimus ne nos ipsi laedamur , separantes nos a portione Dei , &c. Celsus belike had said , that God was not hurt , though more were serued besides him , as men thinke themselues hurt , when their seruants serue any other besides themselues . But wee are loath , saies Origen , to hurt our selues , rending and separating vs from the inheritance of God , if wee looke to any other then God alone , to worship them . Olim Lacedaemoniorum legati Persarum regem adorare noluerunt timentes vnicum suum Dominum . The Lacedemonian Embassadours in old time , would not worship the King of Persia , though greatly prickt on thereunto by his Courtiers , because they feared their onely Lord. So should wee ( thinkes Origen ) and with farre greater reason , refuse to giue worship to any other then our Lord God onely , etiamsi satellites horum principum daemones atque Angeli , &c. though Angels or deuills ( indeede the deuills angels ) draw vs neuer so much aside into error . I passe by many things , because I haue many to goe thorough . Whereas Celsus had said , that if they will needes worship but one God , by that reason they must not adore Christ neither , &c. Origen thus answers : Si Celsus intellexisset illud , Ego & Pater vnum sumus , & iterum , Sicut Ego & Tu vnum sumus , non putasset nos alium colere Deum . That is : If Celsus had knowne the force of those words , I and my Father are one , or , As thou , O Father , and I are all one , hee would neuer haue thought vs to haue worshipt another God , though we worshippe Christ together with the Father . By which we see , that worship belongs onely to God , and to Christ , no otherwise then as he is God , euen one God with the Father , and that they onely are to be worshipped , who are so subsisting in that vnitie of Godhead , and trinitie of Persons , as the honour done to one , necessarily reflects vpon them all . Which , as I haue often saide , is not the Saints lot , because they are infinitely short of that diuine prerogatiue , though neuer so eminent in the ranke of creatures . Where , I cannot but insert , as it were into Origens ring , this gemme of Athanasius , it is so sutable , though I shall haue occasion to speake of him more particularly anon . In his booke de Incarnat . verbi , thus he saies ; Si adoras hominem Christum , eò quòd inhabitet in eo dei verbum , eâdem operâ adora Sanctos quoque , ob Deum , qui domicilium in ijs habet . That is : If thou worship Christ , because the word dwells in him , ( to wit , dwels in him by grace , and not by personall vnion ) worship the Saints too , in whome God also dwells . As who would say , that neither the Saints are to be worshipped , though God dwell in them , nor any thing which is lesse then the Deitie it selfe . Whereas , doubtlesse , if there had beene a worship proper to Saints , neither Origen , nor Athanasius might haue done them this wrong , to depriue them of all worship , vnder colour of the Diuine ; but here , if euer , the distinction should haue shewed it selfe , either of latria and dulia , or cultus maior & minor , as Bellarmine neatly calls it , or minimus & maximus , or minor minimo , or maior maximo , or what you please . § 53. I see I should be long , if I would lay forth all the treasure , which the aforesaid booke of Origens against Celsus containes , condemning the idolatrie that raignes now in Poperie . That which hath hitherto beene alleadged , may seeme to make against the worship of Angells , somewhat generally . Heare we now a word or two of prayer and Inuocation of them in particular , how that is rellished by Origen , and so conclude . Pag. 406. of the Greeke by Haeschelius , 1605 at Augusta . 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . That is : Away with Celsus his counsell , saying , that we must pray to Angells : let vs not so much as once heare of it . FOR VVE MVST PRAY ONELY TO GOD , which is aboue all , and we must pray to the word of God his onely begotten Sonne , the first borne of all creatures , and we must beseech him , that he as high Priest would offer vp our prayers to his God and our God , after himselfe hath receiued them . And though nothing can be either more pregnant or more perspicuous thē this , which Origen hath both deliuered , & by reason confirmed , yet adde we , as it follows , in the very same place . Onely thus premising . It seemes Celsus , besides all other honours and prerogatiues , which willingly he garnished his Angels with , ( whose fauour and good affection he magnified no lesse mightily , then the Adioynder doth the Saints , when he dilates their happinesse who haue them for their patrons , ) yet farther allowed them saith , and prayer , in particular ; the two things now in question , betweene the Bishop and the Adioynder . Celsus words were , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 : and , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . That is : That we must both pray to them , and put our trust in them , that they may be gratious vnto vs. And because , though they are no Gods , yet they belong to God , ( as chiefe Ministers no doubt , &c. ) What saies Origen of this ? How does he value the Angels fauour ? 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , &c. That is : What talke ye of the fauour , or patronage of Angels ? ) He that hath the God which is aboue all things , gratious vnto him , for his pietie towards him , and because he hath entertained [ in his heart by faith ] that same Angell of the Great Counsell of God , the Lord Iesus , if he [ can ] content himselfe with the fauour of God , through Iesus Christ , he may boldly say , as one whom all the whole armie of the deuills cannot hurt , The Lord is my light , and my saluation , whome then shall I feare ? The Lord is the defendour and protector of my life , of whome then shall I be afraid ? Yea , and he shall say , Though a legion of men were set in battell array against me , yet shall not my heart be troubled nor dismaied . Againe , in the same booke ; 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , &c. That is : But we to whome we giue our first fruits , to him [ and to him onely ] we send vp our prayers : ( now first fruits are Gods , in signum , & in recognitionem , vniuersalis dominij , as your Schoolemen teach vs , which the Saints , I hope , haue no right in , vnlesse you will make many Gods ) hauing A GREAT HIGH PRIEST that hath entred the Heauens , Iesus the Sonne of God. And we hold fast this confession whiles we liue , hauing God fauourable to vs , and his onely begotten Sonne Iesus Christ , beeing reuealed amongst vs. But if we be in loue with any multitude , whose fauour we would gladly purchase , [ suppose Angells and Spirits ] we learne [ out of Dan. 7. and 10. ] that thousand thousands stand by him , and millions of millions minister vnto him . Who beholding them that imitate their pietie towards God ( with the very same countenance , that one would looke vpon his friends and his kinsfolkes , ) helpe towards their saluation , for somuch as they call vpon God , and sincerely call vpon him : appearing [ also ] vnto them , and thinking that they are bound to yield obedience , and as it were at the hearing of the watchword , or signall , march forth for the benefit and saluation of [ all ] such as PRAY TO GOD ; to whome themselues also pray . See yee now that the Angels their praying to God , does not enforce our praying to them ? Nay , because they pray to the same God with vs , therefore we are taught by that , not to pray to them , but to God with them , as Origen tells you . In whome it followes . For they are all [ but ] ministring spirits , [ and ] sent forth to minister for them that shall receiue the inheritance of saluation . And yet it followes againe , a little after , to refute Celsus his fonde distinction , of satrapae aulici , and satrapae coelestes , or elementares , which is the Papists distinction at this day , and likewise their comparison of earthly fauourites in Princes Courts , with celestiall spokesmen , and mediators for vs , in the kingdome of heauen : 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , &c. Looke you ( saies he ) how Celsus hath deuised his Satrapae , and Consuls , and Praefecti , vnder-officers of the great God , after the fashion of silly mortallmen , &c. But this beeing formerly refuted by Ambrose , we shall need no longer to insist vpon it here . Pag. 430. thus we read , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , &c. that is , How much better is it , to entrust our selues with the God which is aboue all things , [ hee would haue trust to bee put in none but in God , ] through Iesus Christ which hath taught vs this lesson , and to craue of him all aide , and preseruation , euen that which the holy Angels and righteous spirits may afford vs : that they may rescue vs from the naughtie deuills which hover about the earth , & are plunged in sensualitie , &c. [ The preseruation through Angels , is to bee sought for from God , not from Angels themselues . ] What then shall we pray to them for , if wee may not pray to them for that , which themselues immediately and of themselues may afford ? But I will conclude for Origen , and his opinion of this matter , with that one famous sentence of his , and reiection of Celsus , which is extent in the foresaid booke , pag. 432. of the Greeke . Celsus therefore hauing endeauoured diuers manner of waies , ( as is the fashion of all such ) to diuert the minde from her dependance vpon God alone , insomuch as after he had sought to enfeoffe them to Angels , at last hee was not ashamed to enthrall them to mightie Princes & Potentates here in earth , not caring which way , so he discouraged pietie , and decayed relligion , ( like that vngodly Law-giuer , which forbad Daniel , and all his subiects to aske any thing of God , for the space of certaine dayes , but onely of himselfe . ) To this subtill deuice of Celsus , I say , thus Origen replyes ; 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , &c. that is , Wee must endeauour to please onely God alone , who is aboue all things : AND VVEE MVST PRAY TO HIM ALONE , THAT HE VVOVLD BE MERCIFVLL TO VS , procuring his fauour with godly pietie , and all manner vertue . And yet if Celsus would needs haue vs , to insinuate into the fauour of any more besides the most high and supreame God , let him consider , that as when the bodie is mooued , the motion of the shadow doth infallibly accompanie it : In like sort if Almightie God be but propitious vnto vs , it followes that all his friends , both Angels , and spirits , and soules of the righteous , will be freindly to vs , and take our parts . For they are priuy vnto such , as are thought worthy to finde fauour in the eies of Almightie God. And not onely they meane well to such as are found worthy , but they assist all such as are forward at the worshipping of God Almighty , and they pray together with them , and they entreat together with them , and together with them they encline him to fauour . Insomuch as wee may boldly say , that with godly vertuous men praying to God , an innumerable companie of heauenly powers pray together with them VNPRAYED VNTO , or vnspoken to , * succouring with ioynt consent our mortall and fraile nature , whom they see so many deuills to make head against , and to seeke by all meanes to subuert their saluation , specially such as haue committed themselues to God , [ forsaking and abandoning all other created patronages . ] Of Origen thus much . Is there yet any more ? § 54. You say , the Saints were neuer honoured in like manner , as the heroes of the heathen . Yet you may remember what Mantuan saith , Vt Latij Martem , sic nos te sancte Georgi . And many such like testimonies out of your owne mouths might be alleadged to conuince your idolatries , if we list to obserue them . Or , if the Saints are not honoured like the heroes of the heathen , when as questionlesse they stand in like proportion to God , in your opinion , it must needs be , because you are borne downe with that truth , that none are to be honoured with relligious worship , but onely GOD , in what proportion or distance soeuer they stand vnto him . Culius relligionis , or the relligious worship , is not to be giuen to any creature , but to God onely , saith S. Austen , no meane Father , and in no meane worke of his , but another palmare , if I may say it without offending you , which the Bishop cannot doe of his de ciuit . Dei , but you will be euer touching vpon that string . And I meane , contr . Faustum , lib. 14. c. 11. Apostolus vetat culium relligionis exhiberi creaturae : The Apostle forbids relligious worship to be giuen to the creature . If the Apostles authoritie may mooue with you , forbidding it ; let S. Austen be beleeued deliuering the message , and telling you that he forbids it . S. Chrysostome had said vpon Matth. 26. in the homily quoted not long before to the like purpose , that when the Apostles disswaded our Sauiour from suffering , he referred them to the Scriptures : Else , saith he , how shall the Scriptures be fulfilled ? And so , repugnantibus quamvis Apostolis , vicit sententia Scripturarum . But this is two in one , that we bring you now , not an Apostle without Scripture , but an Apostle in his writing , or the Apostolicke Scripture . And for interpretation of it , you haue the iudgement of S. Austen . The Apostle ( quoth he ) forbids relligious worship to be giuen to the creature . And there the Scripture preuailed against the Apostles , to the destroying of our Sauiour . How much more shall Scripture , and Apostolicke Scripture , preuaile against all such pitiful deponents as you rely vpon , to the maintenance of Christs honour , which is dearer to him then his life ? So as these things are more , if they be laid together , then arguments ab authoritate merè negatiuâ , which you so scoff at , numb . 73. as if that were the only argument that the Bishop brought , or not sufficient to beat you down , as he vrges it . And now to shew what a Clerke you are , you charge the Bishop in the last place , with false quoting of Athanasius . You graunt , that in his third oration , contra Arianos , he prooues the diuinitie of our Sauiour Christ , from our adoration of him . Of which it is consequent , that no meere creatures are at all to be adored , neither Saints nor Angels . We take this grant of yours , concerning Athanasius his authoritie . As for your trifling distinctions wherewith you would elude it , they haue beene huffed out before . And yet more may be said in the next chapter , where you shal heare your owne Doctor , Dr. Gregor . de Valent. to renounce this distinction , and cleane wash his hands of it . Meane while , S. Austens testimonie so lately quoted , is a choake-peare that you cannot swallow , that relligious worship is not to be giuen to any creature : Therefore to God onely . Though Athanasius hath the same againe , in another booke of his , viz. De incarnatione verbi , that you may know how familiar this kind of arguing was with Athanasius . And S. Ambrose the same in 8. ad Rom. Nec Dominus vbique , se adorari pateretur , nisi quia Deus : Our Lord would not suffer himselfe to be so commonly worshipped , but that he was God. S. Leo likewise if you haue not heard of it before , de passione Domini . serm . 12. Sine verbi potentia , magi puerum non adorarent : that is , But for the power of the word , the wisemen would neuer haue worshipt the child . As much to say , Vnlesse the Child had been the word , that is verie God with vs , and the second person in Trinitie . Answerable to that in the parable , Matth. 18. of the two debters , whereof one owed his Master , the other his fellow-seruant , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , v. 6. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , v. 29. The former worshipt , as a seruant should his Master , the latter entreated only , as a seruant to his fellow-seruant , to forgiue the offence , as it was committed against him . Neither yet are there wanting other places of Athanasius , to the same effect . In Epist . ad Adelph . contra Arianos , one time thus . 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . That is , We worship not any creature , God forbid we should . ( No not so much as the humanitie of our Sauiour Christ , if it were diuided from the God-head : for of that he speakes there : how much lesse the Saints ? ) Another time thus , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , &c. Let them know at last , that when we worship our Lord in the flesh , we worship no creature . Another time thus most diuinely , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 : that is , The creature did not worship the creature , when the Sea , and other elements adored our Sauiour , &c. And truely , if worship were due from creatures to creatures , there should bee a Dulia of the Sea , and of the winds , &c. to the Saints belonging , as well as Latria to God , and to Christ . But you denie that in the second Oration of Athanasius , contr . Arian . any such thing is to be found , as the Bishop quotes , namely , that he concludes Christ to be God because he is inuocated or prayed vnto . Now truely I might haue beleeued the Bishops quotation , without farther searching , because it was his ; yet I conne you thanks for giuing me the occasion , to read ouer that long , but most excellent , Oration . In the end therof ( you were wearie belike ere you could turne so farre ) we thus finde . 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . Let them know , saith he , that the Saints do not request him to be their helper , that is a meere creature . And not onely there so , but he hath the like againe , Oratione contra Gentes ; 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . He speakes of images , which the heathen worship as Gods , and thus he saith : They pray vnto them as Gods ( belike Athanasius would haue none praied vnto but God ) and they inuest them with this honour of the true God. So as praying to , is for God , and the true God , onely . Againe in the same booke , he coupleth prayer and the Godhead , thus : 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ; That is , How then should these be Gods , or how may it beseeme vs to request any thing of them ? The grand master of Requests is God onely , with Athanasius . And yet if you lacke a mediatour , heare him once againe in his booke De Incarnat . verbi : 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . That is : The word of God alone ( to wit , Christ , his Sonne ) is sufficient to mediate , or to be our embassadour to the Father , in what cause so euer . The reason whereof he giues in his Epistle ad Adelph . 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . That is : For one creature can neuer be of force to saue another . And therefore not to mediate betweene God and it selfe . Yea , if this had beene possible , I meane for one creature to vndertake for another , in any sort or fashion , the Redeemer of the world might haue been some meere man of Gods making , and yet diuided from the Godhead , though a principall Man. Shall I speake yet plainer to you , or doe you vnderstand me sufficiently ? As you make the Saint to intercede but for shew , and pretend that all the a vertue comes from Christ : so God of his free mercie might haue b pardoned vs the fault , and yet chastised it for certain exemplarie satisfaction sake , in the person of that elect creature , man or woman . But this conceit is abhominable , and the worke too weightie for any but the Immanuell , the Sonne of God , to trauaile in , as Athanasius implies throughout his whole worke , or works rather , quelling you . And so much of Athanasius , and this eight Chapter of yours . For when you tell vs in the ende , Num. 76. that the Deuill enuies the honour of Saints and Angells , and vseth the Bishop as an instrument to deface them , it may please you to remember , that the Deuills malice is auncienter to God , then to his Saints ; and his intrusion into the titles of the one , much more vsuall then of the other . Ero similis ALTISSIMO , not subordinatis . And when he cannot aspire thether himselfe , he ingests in other partners and compossessioners , he cares not whome . By which your wisdome may weigh , who is more like to be the Deuills proctor , that you talke of so queintly , and take heede it be not your selfe , euen while you plead for Saints . To his 9. Chapter . The Adioynders small droppes in this and the next Chapter , after his greater storme . Earthly Monarchie , Supererogation , Relliques , Merits , Hierome of Adoration , Gregorie of Councells , Supremacie , English Puritans , Mr. Thomas Rogers , &c. In all which , the Reuerend Bishop , out of the warines of his owne writing , ( which is the Adioynders stumbling-blocke ) acquites himselfe from the others most vniust slaunders , and vnciuill reproaches . § 1. THE Bishops faults , and herein his changing the state of the question , are the subiect of his ninth Chapter . And how first doth he change the state of the question ? In confounding Peters primacie , with his earthly Monarchie . And of this ( saith he ) before . And , I thinke , you are answered to it before . The summe is , that not onely Primacie and Monarchie , but euen spirituall and temporall , as you haue tied them together , like Sampsons foxes , are in effect all one . Change of words is no change of the state of the question , but an opening rather , which is necessarie many times , if but for this one cause , that men would smooth ouer their dangerous and desperate assertions , with plausible and colourable tearmes , and when those tearmes are once remooued , themselues grow ashamed of what they thought to perswade others before . Like as when some old witch is turned out of her dresse , wherewith shee besotted as many as saw her , and afterward is confounded at the sight of her owne vglines . In this sense , say you hardly , that the Bishop hath changed the state of the question , for other aime or sinister drift in varying the words he had none . And yet , doe not you , good Sir , graunt at another time , that it is a plaine Monarchie , viz. chap. 5. num . 21. of your Adioynder ? Or why doth Sanders entitle his booke , de Monarchia Ecclesiae , but to addoube the Pope a Monarch at least ? Or what are the effects of it , but to dispose Monarchies ? Is not that it we contend about ? Lastly , how many clauses are there , in your Cardinalls bookes de Pontif. Rom. that sound this way , and that not hoarsly , but very shrilly ? euen besides that in his first book , cap. 9. whose plaine title is , Quòd Regimen Ecclesiasticum praecipuè Monarchicum esse debeat : That the gouernment of the Church , ought especially to be Monarchicall . Wherein his minde doth not so wholly runne vpon Christ , to be the chiefe Monarch , but iust in the next Chapter , cap. 10. the title is , Probatur PETRI Monarchia , &c. The Monarchie of Peter is here prooued . And that after he had pleased himselfe in his former paines so well , about the Church-Monarchie in generall , that he saith , Explicatum est , & , nisi fallor , satis diligenter : We haue shewed it , and I beleeue diligently enough . But the word earthly , that offends you . It is no earthly Monarchy . As if the obiects of this power , & the origen from whence it flowes , comming into comparison , ( which are the two waies to iudge of the temporaltie or secularitie thereof ) it be not plainer which we alleadge , that the obiects thereof are earthly to make it earthly , then that which you pretend , that the institution is from heauen , to call it he auenly . As for temporall power , we haue before shewed you , where Bellarmine calls it so , and writes a whole booke of it vnder that name . How much doth that differ from earthly then ? § 2. A second is about Supererogation . I will neither hold you , nor the Reader long . The defence of the Bishop is compendious , and stands in this , that either you must mend your meaning , or change your word . For Supererogation there is none , where first all is not done that ought to be done , and then a vantage too , or surplus ouer . Now , for so much as there is no man but labours of his defects , and all come short of the glorie of God , and all haue neede to crie , Dimitte nobis debita nostra , forgiue vs our trespasses , which is the Bishops owne allegation , and yet by you called an impertinent arguing : I say , for somuch as there is no man liuing , but stands charged in the former of these two kinds , to be somewhat short with God in his reckonings about obedience , therefore it is certaine that Supererogation there can be none , though praetererogation we should graunt you , howbeit subtererogation were the fitter word , as the Bishop hath most godlily and acutely told you , wishing you to mend the other by this . What you tattle of S. Austen , is nothing to the purpose . As if we could not tell you the like of S. Hilarie , in Psal . 118. as also of Greg. Nazianz. in his first Steliteutike against Iulian : S. Hierome in many places , and namely ad Pammachium de obitu Paulinae , &c. Whereas , if you looke to the scope of that Parable , Luk. 10. no question but that driues cleane another way , namely , that the Lord Iesus left no part of our score vnsatisfyed to the Father , not to shew what we doe in recompence to him ; who for certaine are the traueller wounded , and halfe dead in the way , not the host of the house , as we are there figured . Nay , the host beeing S. Paul , as both S. Austen , and S. Hilarie , and the author of the Hypognostique , l. 3. c. 9. doe consent , how doth not that shake S. Peters primacy , that the chiefe of the house whither the wounded man was carried , should be Paul , not Peter ? ( for the Church is the Inne , and therefore the host of the Inne , must be the cheife in the Church . ) Or if you say , that he is the stabularius , because of his Doctrine , why should S. Paul giue higher rules of perfection , then are to be found either in S. Peter , or any other Apostles writing , but for some * cause of eminencie of degree , aboue the rest ? Yet they all make him onely to be the stabularius , and the Scriptures , to say truth , shew no lesse . As for the word supererogate , which makes all the stirre ( yet no such dangerous word in the good Samaritans meaning ) S. Austen he tooke it as it lay in the Text of the old translation , and applying it to vs , though not without a wrest , as euen now I said , yet gaue the most consonant sense to the faith , that he could then find of it , without building an article , a dogma vpon it , as you fondly doe : whereas , if a man should haue told him , that erogare with super , to pay ouer and aboue , presupposeth the payment of the principall debt , hee would neither haue denied the truth of that suggestion , nor blushed at the humility of our confession , crying all with one consent , Dimitte nobis debita nostra , and that the whole world is obnoxious to God , and that , if he should enter into iudgement with his seruants , or marke what is done amisse , no man would be able to abide it , &c. Neither tell you me , that you also are of this opinion , and confesse with the forwardest , your many scapes , and halting obedience . For why then doe you not reforme so monstrous a tearme , especially since you peruert it to a more vncouth sense , then euer came in S. Austens head , from whome neuer thelesse you would seeme to borrow it ? Is it not pitie , that you should talke prowder then you thinke , and speake loftier then you are affected ? For if you meane no more then so , that a man may doe somewhat , which may bee pleasing to God , and yet not descending of his rigorous iniunction or taxation , as Tertullian saies wittily ( though considering the cause he then maintained , scarce Catholikely , as your selues will not denie , ) Non tantum obedire debeo Deo , sed adulari , We must not only obey God , but addoulce him and flatter him ; I say , if this be all , we differ not much from you , neither about refraining marriage , nor refusing hyre for preaching the Gospel , ( as for an Apostles labouring with his own hands , look you to that , how you will censure it . ) Though you shall do well to consider , what S. Chrysostome writes , Hom. 5. in 1. Rom. alluding to that of our Sauiour no doubt , When ye haue done all that ye should , say ye are vnprofitable seruants , & therefore bee far from craking of supererogations . His words are , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . That is , It was a debt that which the seruant did , if he did ought at all . For whatsoeuer things we doe , we doe but fulfill a duty in so doing . Wherefore Christ himselfe said , When you haue done all things , &c. say , Wee are but vnprofitable seruants , for what we should doe , that we haue done , [ and no more . ) You will say , that at another time , S. Chrysostome saith , S. Paul flew ouer the line of the Law , and did more then was commaunded him . Therefore you must construe that place by this ; and aboue all things mollifie the hard word Supererogate , learning rather of the Bishop how to change your rough and ill chosen tearmes , then carping him for changing the question , which he changeth not . § 3. The third is ridiculous . Call you that also changing the state of the question , that when the Cardinall saies , Christ is to be adored in the Sacrament , the Bishop takes exception to his limitation , and saies , Apage verò , Away for shame , & why not out of the Sacrament too ? Rather the Cardinall changeth Christ , a thing of greater importance then the state of the question , expounding himselfe thus , The Sacrament , that is , Christ in the Sacrament . Is Christ the Sacrament ? Is the author and the institution all one ? doth the substance and the symbolum differ nothing ? Doth not Bellarmine say , that the Sacraments of both Lawes , viz. Baptisme & Circumcision , are neither good nor bad of themselues , but indifferent ? And is Christ so ? Are you so indifferent what you thinke or say of Christ ? What a change then make you here , that cry out vpon changing ? Wee deny not that the flesh of Christ is to be adored , whether we eate , or eate not . Yea , with Austen and Ambrose , we adore it the rather , when we partake the Sacrament . For when haue we greater cause of so doing , I meane of adoring , and falling downe , and thanking God , then when that businesse awakes our consideration ? Then , I thinke , is the time exultandi spiritu , and yet procidendi corpore . Adorauerunt , & manducauerunt , sayes the Psalme . Which S. Austen turnes hither , I say not how rightly . But , Nemo manducat panem illum , nisi priùs adorauerit . No man eates of that bread , vnlesse he first worship . Let-it be granted . He doth not say , vnlesse he worship the bread first , for which you striue . Solum contemptum non vult cibus ille , saith he elswhere , That foode askes no more of vs , but that we contemne it not : that we honour it as a Sacrament , not as the Lord of the Sacrament ; as Panis Domini , not as Panis Dominus , to speak with the same Austen , Tract . 59. in Iohan. whom wee more then honour , we adore and worship at that time , at other times , in the Sacrament , without the Sacrament , when , where not ? Why should this dislike you ? And yet , this is the effect , of all that which you cauill at , in the Bishops doctrine , in this place . Where you might doe better to correct your owne manner of speaking , then traduce his . For in your 8. Num. here , speaking of the Elements going with Christ , which is the substance of the Sacrament , or as you call it the thing , and how we ought not to make diuorce betweene them two , you bring for example , the humanitie of our Sauiour Christ accompanying his diuinitie , so as worshipping the one , we worship the other , in the vnitie of his person , &c. And to enforce this comparison , you begin your sentence with , As well might he say , which is very inconsiderate , that I censure it no harder , to thinke that the Elements or formes of the Sacrament , are linked to Christ in as straight a band , as his diuinitie and humanitie are betweene themselues ; or that the one of these couples , may be diuorced with equall facilitie , as the other . The formes without Christ , is no impossible matter , Christ without the formes , how vsuall , how necessarie ? and yet you would haue these , to goe as well together , as Nature with Nature doth in his sacred person . Who though they should not be diuided in ordinarie euent , I meane the species from Christ , no more then his Natures may be parted asunder , yet still the vnion is very different of the two couples , this hypostaticall , that but institutionall , and arbitrarie , and Sacramentall , and therefore you were more hoat then iudicious in your As well , which is full ill rather , and nothing at all to the purpose . And albeit the Bishop did not meane , to put that blame vpon you , which you are suspicious guiltie of ( as it seemes ) in this place , that the bare Sacrament , or formes of bread and wine , are to be adored : yet you may remēber , what a certaine writer of your owne , and he not of the worst note for such argument , as he hath handled , one Didacus Yanguas a Spaniard , writes of this matter , in his 2. booke of Sermons , Serm. 1. de Sacram. Eucharist . to this purpose ; Neque solum terra carnis eius , sed & species ipsae Sacramentales , ex vnione a● carnem Christi , ita elevantur , & excelsa terra fiunt , vt etiam virtutem effectivam habeant conferendi hominibus gratiam , & alios spirituales effectus , sicut non paucis Theologis visum est . That is : And not onely the earth of his flesh , ( viz. Christs ) but the species also , or the formes , of the Sacrament , themselues , are by their vnion to the flesh of Christ , so eleuated , and exalted , that they haue power effectuall , to conferre grace , and other spirituall effects , vpon men , as no fewe Diuines haue thought . Can ye be long from adoring them , if ye attribute this to them ? § 4. Num. 10. You would charge the Bishop with changing the state of the question , about the adoring of Relliques , and yet you confesse , that for his refuge , he tooke hold of the word Adoration , vsed by the Apologie , and exacteth of the Cardinall some proofe of adoration due to relliques , taking adoration in the stricter sense , as due to God. Where you see , you cannot charge the Bishop with this fault , vnlesse you lay it vpon the Apologie first , or rather because the Bishop was to follow the Apologie 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , he is so farre from changing the substāce of any question betweene you and vs , that he sticks close to the very words which the Apologie vseth , whose defence he vndertooke , and for that full wisely here you peach him . But neither doth the Apologie mistake the question , and when the Bishop calls for the word adorare , it was partly because the Cardinall had fronted him with one such false place out of Chrysostome [ adoremus for adornemus ] partly because venerari implies no worship at all , in the Fathers sense , neither a diuine nor humane , but onely reuerent esteeming , or preseruing ; ( as to omit other places , S. Austen twice together saies it of the Bible , b veneramur codicem , we worship the booke , de vnit . Eccles . c. 12. and yet neither by dulia nor latria ; ) partly because whatsoeuer be the doctrine of your Schooles in this point , which is commonly subiect to great inconstancie , the practise of your idiots must so be defended , or else left for desperate . § 5. In the meane time it is worth the noting , in your 12. Numb . how you confute the Bishop , about the Angel forbidding S. Iohn to adore him ( which the Bishop had alleadged ) to prooue , that other straunge peruersitie of his , or change of the question , as no lesse textually , then marginally , both waies , you blaze it , that no adoration of creatures is lawfull . First , say you , he makes S. Iohn ignorant , vntill the Angell instructed him . Novum crimen , &c. No c doubt a great scandall , and vnworthie of S. Iohn , either to offer for his ignorances , with the high Priest in the old law , Heb. 9. 7. ( and yet S. Iohn no high Priest , nor proportionall to him , but onely Peter to be so paragoned ) especially when the ignorance was not iuris , but facti , or to haue an Angel to be his schoolemaster . We may call for the oxe and the asse to be yours , Esay 1. which forget neither their Master , nor their masters cribbe , whiles you runne a gaddng post greges sodalium , not content with one or two , vnlesse you heape vp deities to your selues , as they doe doctors , 1. Tim. 4. 3. But this is one exception which you take to the Bishop . Another , that he reasoneth ( you say ) as substantially , as if some holy man of modestie and humilitie , refusing some extraordinarie honour done vnto him , saying it were to be done , not to him , but to God , one should inferre , that no such reuerence should be done to men . For such no doubt was the case betwixt S. Iohn and the Angell , either of them shewing their humilitie , and their respect they bare the one to the other , &c. Thus you : changing very handsomly the law of relligion , and those absolute and peremptory words of the Angel , vide ne , into meere complements , and courtings , betweene S. Iohn and the Angel : as who would say , Remember your selfe , Be not so courteous , a shadow whereof there was betweene our Sauiour Christ and S. Iohn Baptist , I graunt , Matth. 3. but betweene the Angel , and the Euangelist here , for certaine , none at all . Is adora Deum , and vide ne feceris , of no more force with you , thē so ? And to your noble instāce , of a godly man , putting off a great honour done vnto him , &c. If that godly man were wel learned withall , & seene in points of faith , aboue the other , whom he should charge to keepe such honour for God , & not to cast away vpon him , would you doubt but he were to be listened to , and obeyed in his good counsell , not idle complement , as you madly decipher it ? So did they in the Acts , I meane Paul and Barnabas , refusing the Lycaonians , and their wild honours ; so Peter to the Centurion , so Gregorie , so your Vincentius , so many more , not by complement or courtship , but by horror of the fact , and straight cōmandement to desist . You quote in the same Numb . * S. Gregorie , S. Bede , Anselme , Rupert , Richardus de Victore , to this effect , that the Angell refused S. Iohns adoration , in regard of the incarnation of our Sauiour Christ , since which our nature is reuerenced and respected by the Angells , and they presume not to take such obeisance at our hands . Does not this confute you then , for worshipping them still , and ascribing soueraignty to them ( as your relligious submissions to them can import no lesse ) who not onely are our conservi , by right of creation , but inferiour to vs , in so much as our nature is vnited vnto the god-head , which theirs is not ? § 6. You tell vs in your 13. Numb . of three kinds of adoration , and say , it is instruction for ignorant readers . Wee know but two , Sacred , and Ciuill . You would faine cogge a third , as it were semi-sacred . Whereas , secunda relligio , or relligio secundae maiestatis , as Tertullian calls it , is for earthly Kings , not for heauenly Saints , who by your distinction should inherit it before the other , if it were properly so called . But God hauing the first relligion , the Emperour the second ( as wee speake at least ) the Saints is none now , because it must not be the third . Therefore they are banished from relligious adoration . To your authorities that you bring out of Gen. 8. Gen. 19. &c. where Angels appeared in visible formes , and corporall shape ( for 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , Hebr. 13. 2. they that entertained them , knew not whome they entertained ) what maruaile if they receiued ciuill adoration , going for men , and not knowne to be other ? Or why should we thinke that that was relligious ? The same I might say of Abrahams , the same of Lots respect , which they shewed to Angels . And so likewise of Iosuahs , Ios . 5. Though , as I signified before , sometimes Christ is called the Angel , when he makes apparition , ( Athanas . cont . Gent. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , The Word , that is Christ , is iustly tearmed his Fathers Angel , or Messenger ) and sometimes also God is honoured in his ambassadour . Which aduantageth you nothing , that vendicate a proper and a standing worship to the Angels , due by kind , or by excellencie of their order , not onely to the person which they casually sustaine . You say , Saul adored Samuels soule . Though I beleeue it not of Saul , and there is no reason to load him with more infirmities then his owne , yet if you will needes haue it so , let him be your example hardly , as also of going to a witch , and consulting with the deuill . How well did you transforme idolatrie into sorcerie , in your 6. Chapt. where you laboured to put off the Laodicean Councell , who now so confound sorcerie with idolatrie , that by the example you bring of Saul , you may defend the one as well as the other , if at least any such euer were ? Abdias , you say , was a man in temporall dignitie farre greater then Elias , yet Abdias fell on his face before him , and therein did an act of relligion to Elias . Beleeue it who list . And did the Emperours performe acts of relligion to the Pope , whē they vsed the like reuerent demeanour towards him ? or perhaps the Popes were not so relligious of late daies , that the honour done to them should be an honour of relligion . For you would haue it to be relligious , when it is done to relligious men , and for relligions sake , and so to differ from the Ciuill forsooth . Likewise , the children of the Prophets , worshipt Elizeus , with relligious adoration , because they saw him passe the riuer by miracle : a thing which euery damned wretch might haue done , to haue wrought a miracle , & yet this must challenge relligious adoration . But , if S. Austens notation of the word relligion be true , de verâ rell . c. 54. quòd vni deo religet animas nostras , because it binds our souls to God onely , then sure though S. Austen had not put in vni Deo , but onely told vs of religation , or of binding , it had been enough to shew that S. Austens meaning was , that relligious worship belonged onely to God , as to whom only we are bound in knots of soules-seruice , otherwise free , beeing fellow-seruants betweene our selues , as you heard the Angel say but lately to S. Iohn . What else is there ? The children of the Prophets , adorauerunt Eliam proni in terram , worshipt Elias falling flat vpon the ground , which you persist to construe of relligious adoration , we see no cause why it should be so , no more then Ruthes to Booz , or Mephibosheths to Dauid , or the rest , whome you sequester from this kind your selfe , though the Scripture speake of them in the same phrase , as your selfe also acknowledge , numb . 15. But what meruaile if ye hale in these into your muster , when as Nabuchodonosor adored Daniel , you say , with a relligious adoration , and Iacob worshipt the top of Iosephs rodde , which you would make a rood of , a puppet , or what you please , like the worshipping of the footestoole , of which anone ? For as they that run a whoring once after the creature , forsaking the one and onely true God , Rom. 1. change him into the vilest and lewdest shapes that may be , of calues , of creeping things , &c. so it was meete that when you would bring downe once your relligious adorations , from that diuine sublimitie , to such pelting trash , as in respect of God is whatsoeuer the world containes , you should stay no where , but euen bequeath it to roddes , to foot-stooles , and to what not ? Was it all one for Iacob in his feeble and accrazed state , to worship God vpon the top of his staffe , being vnable without that to sit vp in his bed , ( an act , without all doubt , of most absolute deuotion ; for where would not hee worship God , that worshipt him so ? ) is it all one , I say , for an old man to worship God , raising himselfe vpon his staffe in his bed ; and to worship the staffe it selfe with relligious worship ? Are you not afraid least this staffe prooue a scorpion to chastize you , while you argue so wantonly , so wickedly , and yet so weakely : or that your hearers hardly hold their hands from you , to be mockt so grossely ? Or if Ioseph be this rodde , as other some construe it , like that phrase in Esay , Egredietur virga de radice Iesse , will you perswade vs that Iacob worshipt his staffe , because he worshipt God in the hopes of his sonne Ioseph , shooting vp like a plant out of a pleasant ground , as they that came of the stocke of Iesse before named ? But let vs heare the Fathers , and how they interpret it . S. Primasius two wayes vpon this place , but in neither of them dauncing after your pipe . One while hee sayes , that Iacob worshipt his sonne Ioseph as a temporall Prince ouer all the land of Egypt . But if you take it of a spirituall and relligious worship , then worshipt hee Christ ( saies hee ) and his mysticall Kingdome , ouer all creatures , both in heauen and earth , not any materiall rodde , which is heathenish to Primasius . His words are . Iacob cognouit per illam virgam Ioseph , designari regnum Christi . Non ergo virgā adorauit pro Deo , secundum ritum gentilium , &c. The same words hath Remigius , as it were borrowed of Primasius . But hee proceedes ; Vel quantum ad literam , fortassis secundum consuetudinem illius temporis adorauit virgam Ioseph , quem videbat Dominum esse totius regni terrae Aegypti ; quâ scilicet ratione , Hester legitur adorâsse virgam Assueri . That is , Iacob vnderstood that the Kingdome of Christ was resembled and figured by that rod of Ioseph . Hee did not therefore worship the rodde for God [ or , with diuine worship ] which is the manner of heathens and gentiles , &c. Or happily to vnderstand this text literally , it may be that according to the custome of those times , hee proceeded to worship Iosephs rodde or scepter , whome he saw to be Lord ouer all the land of the Kingdome of Aegypt . In like sort as Ester is recorded to haue worshipped Assuerus his scepter . This is Primasius his iudgement . Anselme vpon the place saith , Nos in nouâ translatione legimus , Adorauit Israel Deum . Iacob worshipt God , ( not the rodde but God. ) Which in our English translation , the Rhemists so mislike , that they call it an intollerable corruption . And againe : Si adorâsset fastigium virgae illius , non esset dicenda sides . To worship the toppe of a staffe , had beene no faith ( Infidelity rather , and Idolatry , I suppose ) whereas the Apostle brings in this for an example of his faith . But he adored ( saies Anselme ) sublime imperium Christi , the lofty kingdome and gouernment of Christ , to which he submitted himselfe with all his heart . And whereas some read , Adorauit ad caput lectuli ( which the Hebrew is not against ) hee sayes , the holy man had his bedde stand so , that he might compose himselfe to prayer in it , vpon any occasion , ( but to prayer to God onely ) and that was his worshippe here spoken of by the Apostle . As for Austen , our Rhemists confesse no lesse of him , and in one word they are so bare vpon this place , as they haue not one Father so much as to pretend for them , by way of colour . And this may suffice about the worshipping of the staffe , which Erasmus makes so light of , that he thinkes , to deride it , is to refute it . They haue found out ( sayes hee ) a new fangle worship , the worship of the staffe , by their quaint Metaphysicks , and their rare deuises . Thus hee . § 7. As for the worshipping of the footstoole , adorate scabellum , for adorate ad scabellum , per ellipsin praepositionis alioqui bis inculcandae , and somewhat like also in the Hebrew , though not altogether the same , the Bishop hath so plentifully cleered it in his answer , that it is more then wondrous how you dare meddle with it , but that you are more then impudent in outfacing vs with any thing . And by this also may be seene , to what simple animals your worke is dedicated , that dare offer to feede them with such dirt for diet-bread . § 8. Nabuchodonosors also adoring of Daniel , is as friuolous , which you will needes haue to be with a relligious adoration . But you may remember , that incense also and sacrifice was offered to Daniel by Nabuchodonosor , and to be short , he worshipt him in all points as a God. Will you by this then prooue your worshipping of Saints ? Ioseph . l. 10. e. 11. Antiq. Iud. Nabuchodonosor non aliter Danielem quàm Deum adoravit , divinis iuvenem dignatus honoribus : that is , Nabuchodonosor worshipt Daniel no otherwise then God himselfe , yeelding diuine honour to the young man. S. Hierome resolues it , at last , thus . Regem stupore confusum ignorâsse quid faceret . That the King amazed at the wonderfull effects of Daniel , knew not what he did , and so discerned not inter servum & Dominum , betweene the seruant and the master , in giuing honour . Hieron . Com. in 2. Dan. And Theod. Com. in eundem loc . saith , he giues the Priests charge to offer incense to Daniel , not presuming himselfe vpon that seruice , as too sacred for him . Whereas the honour due to Saints , is such , as any bodie , not onely the Priests , may performe vnto them , in the Papists opinion . Yea , I beleeue , they had rather trust the poore ignorant people with this kind of duties , then their more intelligent Clergie-men . And Bellarmine does as good as confesse this one where , telling vs how dangerous it is , to vnfold their mysteries , of Saints , and Images , in a popular assembly . But Theodoret brings yet another thing to our mind . Cōsydera quanti sit , illū arrogantem & insaniae morbo correptum , adorare captivum Iudaeorum , in ordinē mancipiorum redactum , &c. That is ; [ Consider what a thing it was for that proud and haughtie Tyrant , almost madde with pride , to adore a Iewish prisoner , one no better then a slaue , &c. ] Which may teach the Iesuites , those stormers against the authoritie of heathen Magistrates ouer beleeuers , that seruitude vnder Infidels , is no disparagement to true vertue , wheresoeuer to be found . S. Chrysostome also , though he may seeme to wauer through vncertenties , as one that does not greatly care to assoyle the question , ( professing that he had rather giue his auditors occasion to search it by themselues ) yet once or twice hee enclines this way ; and with more reason . 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . That is , Hee whome all the earth honoured as God , reckoned of Daniel euen as of a God. And afterward comparing him with Herod , or rather more , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . That is , But Daniel accepted of diuine honour , not of words onely tending that way ( as Herod did . ) Which how it may stand with Daniels pietie , it were good that you would consider a while . For Chrysostome meant not to leaue him with that aspersion , and yet thus you see hee declares the nature of that honour , which the Tyrant affoarded him . Lastly , his reason is , that the King called him Beltazzar , which was the name of his God. Therefore it is likely he honoured him as God. Neither does Chrysostome neglect the note , formerly made by Theodoret vpon this place , that captiuitie vnder infidels , is no abatement to true vertue . For here the conquerour adores the prisoner , &c. § 9. As for the signification of the word adoro , if to that end onely you alleadge the place , to shew what the word may sometimes signifie concerning the adoring of one man by another , & that not ciuilly only , but relligiously , it followes not that it is euery where to be so taken and construed of a relligious worship , if in this monstrous and exoticall one act of Nabuchodonosor towards the Prophet Daniel , it imports so . Your selfe bring many places , and many examples , of Scripture , and holy men there recorded , by whome you confesse it is to be taken onely of eiuill adoration , num . 15. of this Chapter . As of Iudith to Holophernes , of Abigail to Dauid , &c. And Gregorie de Valentia , your champion for Idolatries , yet in the place that I shall quote by and by out of him , is not afraid to graunt as much , euen in this very cause , that Vno eodemque communi vocabulo res etiam diuersissimae significantur ; that is , that Vnitie of tearmes makes no identitie of things : or , diuerse things are sometimes signified by the same words . Lastly also , to your other quidditie , that The worship of Saints is relligious worship , because yeilded to Saints for their relligion sake : I denie your reason . As well might you say , that the worshipping of a woodden image is blockish worship , because done to a blocke ; or to releeue a souldier in case of necessity , is an act of souldierie , because done for consideration of his souldierlike exploits in former times . Rather say , because it springs from the vertue of relligion in the mind of him that yeilds it , as the original of his act , & yet imperāt only , not elicient , dirigent , not exequent , as your School-men loue to speak . But so are many acts besides , neither done to relligious persons , or done to them , and yet not for the relligions sake , which neuerthelesse are accounted relligious actions , because they proceed from the vertue of relligion in the doers . As euen your owne man acknowledges , Greg. de Val. Tom. 3. Disput . 6. Quaest . 11. &c. denying flatly that the worship of Saints is properly or immediately relligious worship , yet he addes in this wise : Quanquam non est negandum , quin ipsd virtute relligionis erga Deum , vt ad VIRTVTVM ALIARVM officia , sic etiam ad exhibendum sanctis honorem OBSERVANTIAE , ( not relligionis ) induci possimus . That is , [ Though it is not to be denyed , that we may be mooued , as to other offices of sundry vertues , so to yeeld the Saints the honour of obseruancie , out of the vertue of relligion towards God in our hearts . ] So as both he would haue relligion to be onely towards God , and yet an exciter or setter on of our reuerence to Saints , per modum imperantis , as I said before . And should we rest in your deuise of relligious worship , because giuen to certaine men for their relligions sake , weigh the consequence , and tell me how you like it . For by this meanes it might come to passe , that two men at one time should both giue and take relligious worship of one another , and that equall in measure , if they equall in merits , which were very vncouth ( to say no more ) that you should worship him that worshipt you , & that iust so much , & at the very same time . Finally , whereas the Bishop denyes , that creatures may be adored , and yet both you and we grant , that there may be a ciuill adoration , you must vnderstand the Bishop to speake of the sacred or relligious adoration , in which fense S. * Chrysostome goes further thē so , to deny euen 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ( which is lesse thē adoration , & but Valentiaes obseruancy ) to Angels , to Archangels , or to any creature whatsoeuer ; but he means the sacred , or the relligious 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , euen as the Bishop doth . § 10. You brooke not that S. Hieromes adorare ciueres Abdiae , in his Epistle ad Marcella●i , should be expounded by the same S. Hierome , writing to Vigilantius , and that not pauso vigilantiùs perhaps , by non ador●… ; we worship not onely not relliques , but neither Cherubim , nor Seraphim , nor any such like . Yet if it be true which we are often taught by S. Austen , that Ecclesiasticall writers are not so absolute in their writings , but that they may fall into errour now and then , and be reformed by the iudgment of aftercomers , much more may they be corrected by their owne selues in other places , and their suddenner or lesse aduised phrase of speech one while , be qualified and tempered by their more deliberate resolutions , at another . As here S. Hierome . In the full source of his Rhetorique , and where he spake without an aduersary , or to one that could vnderstand him inoffensiuely , and with discretion sufficient , he speakes for adoring of Abdias his ashes , that is zealous resorting to the place of his buriall ( for that is all : ) but where he spake before his aduersary , before Vigilantius , like the bird that sleepes with the thorne at her breast , then more vigilantly , more accurately , and more circumspectly , he denies it vtterly , that they adore either relliques , or things better then relliques , euen those for whose sakes the relliques are made much of . There , error iuuenum , and culpa muliercularum , non est imputanda relligiosis hominibus ; the error of young men , and the default of light giddie women is not to be imputed to Relligious persons . There , paucorum culpa non praeiudicat relligioni , the aberration of some fewe is no preiudice to relligion . Lastly , there , Non adoramus , &c. we worship neither relliques , nor Martyrs , nor Angels , nor any name that is named either in this world , or in the world to come , but God onely . § 11. Here also we haue another cast of your sweet Latinity , numb . 22. Ais Vigilantius , &c. Which , breaking of , you construe thus , you say that Vigilantius , how fitly for Grammar , let the Grammarians iudge . It pleaseth you not , that the Bishop in the conclusion of his answers , inclines to that , that S. Hieromes adoration is adoratio per 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , and not properly so called . For 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , you say , is neuer vsed , but when there wants a proper word , witnes Quintilian , &c. You meane , neuer el● , but when the speaker wants a proper word to expresse his minde by , as namely when he would either fall so low , or soare so high , as no ordinarie word occurreth to him to equall his conceits , though the language hath store enough besides . So here S. Hierome . Therefore he expounds his adorare in one place , by non adorare , sed honorare , in another ; when the passion was cooled , and the iudgement awaked . Non colimus & adoramus , sed honoramus , &c. lib. 1. contra Vigil . The Grammarians will tell you , because you send vs to the Grammarians , that there is a 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in this verse of Vergil , and least happily you find it not , in the word sperare . Hunc ego si potui tantum sperare dolorem ; though the language haue diuerse more to supply the sense of it , as timere , prouidere , metuere , &c. S. Austen also aduertising vs contra Faustum , lib. 22. c. 18. that Abusio verborum in omnibus linguis latè patet , which is in effect , that Catachresis spreads further then want of words by much , in any language . § 12. But I may not omit numb . 18. where you thinke you haue spoyled a iest of the Bishops . But one could you ? Though you shall find earnest where you looke for iest , at those hands ; woollen pace and iron vengeance ; seuerity loues to maske in smiles . I quoted S. Chrysostome to you before , that the Saints merriments are holy earnest , and S. Austen contra Faustum lib. 15. c. 9. speaking to the Church , bids her misericorditer irridere , deride and pitty , or , compassionately deride , the madnes of the Manichees , her transported aduersaries . At other times you are wont to charge the Bishope with the cleane contrary , as harsh and crabbed in the Genius of his style , not propense to iesting , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 — 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 — as Homer saies of the champions in their deathfull combat ; so hard a thing it is to giue you content . But what is it you bring ? That , puluerem lingere , is not in all that Epistle of S. Hierome ad Marcellam , but onely lambere lignum crucis , not to licke the dust , but to licke the wood of the crosse . A great mistake surely , to put the one for the other . And yet puluerem lingere , to licke the dust , is the honester of the twaine , as S. Austen describing the idolatry of the Gentiles , whome our Sauiour calleth dogges , in his speech with the poore caytiffe , Matth. 15. ( the image of vs all ) It is true ( saith S. Austen ) the Gentiles are dogges , for canum est lingere saxa , it is a dogges property to licke stones , and so ligna too , so statuas , and the rest ; whereas the other the Psalme directly leads vs to , speaking of the conuersion of the Gentiles to God , that they shall licke the dust of his feete , or foot-stoole . If you are not ashamed of the first , why should you be of the second , which is so much more countenanced , as you see , then the other ? Or , to speake in your owne words which you delight in , as it were your darling , if ye be cruci-ligni-lambi , why should you bee afraide to be pulueri-lingi ? But if not this , how the other ? So that you see in effect it comes all to one . But for so much as the Bishops drift was , onely to shew that S. Hierome speakes figuratiuely in that discourse , and you haue no way to resist him , but onely by saying , that all the Epistle is not figuratiue , as if some might not be , though all were not , let vs see if you thinke good , not how many elegant metaphores and allegories , as you confesse , are scattered throughout the context of that Epistle , but whole periods of speech , tending to the same purpose of deuotion , can be construed no otherwise then onely figuratiuely . First , Sepulchrum Domini quotiescunque ingredimur , toties iacere in syndone cernimus saluatorem . That is , As oft as we goe into the sepulchre of our Lord , so often we see our Sauiour wrapt in a linnen cloth to lie before vs. Is this true properly ? Is it true without a figure ? Yet adde againe , Et paululum ibidem commorantes , rursum videmus Angelum sedere ad pedes eius , & ad caput sudarium conuolutum . That is , And staying there but a while , againe we see thee Angell to sit at his feet , and his clothes wrapt or folded towards his head . Can ye vnderstand this to be true without a figure ? But come to the ende , and to the place that you now touch vpon , see whether there be any scanty of figures . In Oliueti montem , cum ascendente Domino , voto & animo subleuemur . Let vs be lifted vp in heart and wishes into the mount of Oliuet , together with our Lord ascēding . Yet our Lords ascent is long since past , and we come too late to ascend with him now . Againe , Videre exire Lazarum fascijs colligatum , & fluenta Iordanis ad lauacrum Domini puriora , &c. To see Lazarus come forth bound about with his partlets , and the riuer of Iordan waxing the purer for our Sauiours bathing in it . Inde ad mare veniemus Genezareth , & de quinque & septem panibus videbimus in deserto quinque & quatuor hominum miillia saturata ; That is , From thence we will come to the sea of Genezareth , and of fiue loaues and seauen , we will see fiue and foure thousand men satisfyed in the wildernes . Is this also true properly ? or could Marcella , and her inuitresses , see these things without a figure ? But what a shake doth he giue to your superstition of Saints , when he concludes thus ? Pergemus ad Itabyrium , & tabernacula salnatoris , non vt Petrus voluit cum Mose aut cum Elia , sed cum patre cernemus & spiritu sancto . Wee will goe to the mount Taber , and we will there behold the tabernacle of our Sauiour , not as Peter would with Moses and Elias , but with the Father and the holy Ghost . Doe you see whome he leads vs to , and from whom he weanes vs ? From Moses , and Elias , that is , the Saints , to our Sauiour and his company , to wit , the Father and the holy Ghost . Vnlesse happily it delight you to erre with Peter , because Petrus aliter voluit , Peter seemed to be of another minde . I beleeue your selues will be glad here to acknowledge a figure . § 13. To conclude about relliques , and their adoration , how may they be beleeued to haue adored relliques , that were no friends to the keeping of them , as we may gather diuerse wayes ? For though relliques may be kept , and not adored ; yet no adoration , if no keeping . S. Ambrose lib. 1. de Abraham . cap. 9. bids vs , non diutiùs inhaetere ●●rtuis , but onely officij quantum satis est deferre . That is in effect , to bury the departed , but not to dwell long vpon dead coarses ; which how it can stand with the preseruing of relliques , I say not honouring , obseruing , worshipping them ? And againe the same Father , l. 2. de officijs , c. 28. In sepulturis Christianorum requies defunctorum est : In the buriall of Christians , is the repose of the dead : which stands not with relliques , either to be preserued , or digged vp . And in the same place againe , Nemo potest indignari humandis fideliū relliquijs spacia esse laxata : that is , It is no fault , nor thing to be grudged at ( vnlesse then by the Arians , who carpt S. Ambrose without cause , and so now by the Iesuites ) that the ground is enlarged to bury the remnants of faithfull bodies massacred . ) Is this man likely to countenance relliques , or the worshipping thereof ? Sozomen , lib. 4. c. 20. sayes , that when there was consultation about remoouing the bodie of Constantine the great , out of the Church of Constantinople , ( where it was first interred , ) because they feared the fall of that Church , this purpose was resisted by such as tooke part with the Nicene Councell , that is , the godly and the Orthodoxe , who held it , saith Sozomen , for no lesse a sacriledge , to translate dead bodies , then to breake open tombes violently and felloniously . And do not these condemne the vse of relliques , which in you is accompanied with translation , with circumgestation , and such like pompes ? Yet behold , when the Church was like to fall , they refused to be of partie with the preseruers of the bones of that diuine Emperour , by translating them , not but that they were worthy the preseruing with the best . When Babylas his bodie was translated from Daphne to Antioch , by Iulians appointment , and the deuills instigation ( not by any seeking of the Christian people ) they cried that accompanied it , all the way as they went , Confundātur omnes qui adorant sculptilia , Confounded be al they that worship carued images . Doth this please you ? Optatus will tell you his opinion of Lucilla , that factious dame , and employer of her wealth to support mutinies against the Church of God , as S. Austen reports of her in more then one place : I say , Optatus will tell you how wicked she was , in not receiuing the Sacrament of the Lords body and blood , vnlesse shee had kissed the relliques of a certaine Martyr that morning , if at least a Martyr , saith Optatus . Yet you are for kissing them , in your numb . 24. very definitiuely . And if it bee godly to kisse them , why not also to begin the communion with such a seruice ? And may not we say of your Martyrs , as Optatus doth of hers , of Lucillaes I meane , si tamen Martyris , if at least they be Martyrs , either your auncient , or your moderne ? But Optatus mislikes this doting vpon Martyrs relliques , though true Martyrs , as the place sheweth . Of Ioseph and Nicodemus , no snatchers after relliques , not so much as clothes , though they had as faire opportunitie as euer any , I told you before . Yet doubtlesse their behauiour was a lesson to posteritie , how to be affected towards the dead bodies of Saints . They committed it to the ground , and that was all , though the rather to a garden , in the hope of reuiuing & reflourishing the third day , as from a fertile soile , as S. Ambrose sweetly gathers , alluding to our Sauiours speedie resurrection . So likewise of S. Gregory l. 3. Registri , Epist . 30. ad Constant . August . It amazed him to heare the dead bodies should be digged vp againe , or as the fashion before had beene , ( S. August . so witnessing , S. Hierome , and diuerse more ) that the fragments of Martyrs should be carried vp and downe , vnder pretence of deuotion , but indeede for sale , or for gaze of idle people . It beeing one thing not to neglect either the bodie of a Martyr , after he had giuen vp his soule in the defence of the Christian faith , or some limbe of his bodie casually brought to hand , to preserue it from vnseemly and vnmanly disparagements , who but for his constancie in Christs cause , might happily haue been buried in his auncestors tombes ; another thing to conuert it to prophane idolatrie . I haue omitted Origen , lib. 8. contra Celsum , who thus professes of his time , and of the doctrine they had learnt . Organa rationalis animae sepulchro honorificè demand are didicimus : Wee haue learned to recommend honourably to the graue , the instruments of the soule reasonable , that is , the bodies of men , and the members thereof . Therefore not to make relliques of them . In Victor Vticensis , lib. 1. de Persecut . Vandal . we haue two examples hereof . One of Armogastes , a godly Christian , who desired Felix ( another of the profession ) sepeliri sub arbore siliquae , . i. that being dead he might be buried vnder a homely tree ( if a tree , ) non cum triumpho & gratiâ , not with triumph , and fauour , or solemnitie . As for the Sarcophagus , which appeared , as it were by miracle , in the place by him allotted for his buriall , I impute that to the satisfaction of his godly desire , about a quicke consumption , or turning into nothing , then which nothing can be more repugnant to your ceremonie of Relliques . Another in the same booke a little before , of Deogratias , Bishop of Carthage , whose worthy members ( so speakes the Historian ) the people out of their zeale might haue violently snatcht away , or pulled a sunder , nisi CONSILIO PRVDENTVM nesciente multitudine sepeliretur : . 1. vnlesse he had been buried whiles the people did not know of it , at the suggestion or directiō of wise men . So as to resist your Relliquations ( the true bankruptures of relligion ) is wisdome to Victor , and to the auncient Christians that liued before him . But let S. Hierome end this matter , in De vitâ Hilarionis , where he wil tell you , that S. Hilarion gaue order before his death , to be buried in his clothes , in tunicâ cilicinâ , in his coate of sacke-cloath , & sago rustico , and his homely cloake , or of the country fashion , cum cucullâ , with his hood , & ne puncto quidem horae post mortem reseruari , and not to be kept aboue ground , no not an instant of an houre , after his departure . Would he haue beene content to haue been pickled vp in Relliques ? And in the same booke , Anthony charged them that were about him , to burie him priuily , where no man might know of it , least one Pergamius , as he said , a very rich man of that country , & belike deùout in his kind , should steale away his bodie , and enclose it in a shrine . The like was done to Moses bodie for the same cause , God euery where forbidding to seek the liuing among the dead , as you doe plainly in your relliques , worshipping not them , but Christ in them , as you sticke not to triumph , numb . 25. of this chapter . But so much shall suffice to haue spoken hereof . § 14. Yet you thinke to mend the matter , with your moath-eaten distinction of adoratio latriae , quoting S. Austen for it , num . 28. But S. Austen neuer said , that we may adore a creature , whether Saint or Saints rellique , with a relligious adoration , no not vnder latria , or neuer so dulically . He saith , the word adoration is equiuocall , which is very true , I graunt , and transferred to men , whome we adore ciuilly : for he speaks of Abraham adoring the Gentiles , that is , the children of Heth , which for certaine was but ciuill . But taking it in the sense of relligious adoration , as wee now doe in our question with you , he neuer denies but that it is proper to God. I will obserue a fewe clauses , out of his de Ciuit. Dei , which you quote , lib. 10. c. 1. He expounds relligionem seruare erga Angelos , by sacrificare , and sacra facere . But you will haue no sacrificing to them , nor S. Austen neither . Therefore no relligion is due to them . His words are ; Nunc videndum ac disserendum est , quomodò credendi sint Angeli velle à nobis pietatem relligionemque seruari , hoc est vt apertiùs dicam , vtrum etiam sibi , an tantùm Deo suo , qui & noster est , placeat eis vt sacra faciamus , & sacrificemus , vel aliqua nostra , seu nosipsos , RELLIGIONIS ritibus consecremus . Againe , Seruitus duliae quae debetur hominibus , is such a seruitude , according to which the Apostle cōmands seruants to be subiect to their masters . Onely this , is due hominibus , to men , saith S. Austen , or of this kind onely . And will this kind of seruice content your Saints ? It will not certainly . Therefore S. Austen patronizeth not your dulia to Saints . Meane while , you may well blush reading this place of S. Austen , or of the Apostle either , concerning the dulia due to masters from their seruants , that haue extinguished all allegiance and subiection vpon earth , what by your treasons , and what by your releases , to erect an * odious seruice to Saints in heauen . S. Austen goes forward , to shew , that not onely these things , quibus nos relligiosà humilitate submittimus , to which we submit our selues by a conscionable humilitie , or a relligious humilitie , are said coli ; but etiam subiecta nobis , diuerse things vnder vs : so that the cultus of creatures , is of that kind , by which , things that are inferiour to vs , may be honoured , and therefore surely not relligious . Yea , but S. Austen saies , that we submit our selues to the creature , relligiosâ humilitate , by relligious humilitie . What maruell , when hee acknowledges in the same place , that not onely adoratio , but relligio , and pietas , are words aequiuocall , or of diuerse significations ? For we are pij in parentes , ( which euen S. Paul shewes to Timothy ) and exhibemus relligionem , sayes hee , quibuscunque necessitudinibus , to affinities , and kinreds , not onely doctissimorum , but also imperitorum . To all these , we performe a reuerence of relligion . But relligion , as it stands for holy , for sacred , and spirituall , you are not able to shew , where S. Austen euer alloweth to the creatures . Therefore your distinction of dulia is impertinent , and neuer owned by S. Austen in this sense . Yea Gregorie himselfe de Valentia , Tom. 3. Disp. 6. Quaest . 11. de Idol . puncto 5. at last awakes , and recants the old error of his consorts , about relligious worship , to be giuen to any but God. Sequitur ex dictis actionem illam , quâ Sanctis honorem damus , proximè non pertinere ad virtutem relligionis , sed ad aliam longè diuersam , quae species quaedam obseruantiae erga rationales ( no talke of SANCTAS ) creaturas sit . And he addes , Quae doctrina est Divi Augustini , quoting lib. 10. de Ciuit. dei , c. 1. ( the very place that we ground vpon ) & explicatur ( saies he ) à D. Thomâ 2. 2. q. * 103. art . 3. & 4. Againe , ( that you may know it slipt not from him vnawares ) Actus proprius virtutis relligionis diuinam gloriam spectat proximè , & indirco ad deum tantummodò proximè pertinet : Actio verò quâ veneramur Sanctos , non nisi &c. And , Hoc discrimen inter vtrumque cultum , dei scilicet & Sanctorum , quod profectò LONGE MAXIMVM EST & ADMODVM REALE , indicare volunt Orthodoxi Doctores , cùm &c. Then , Quâ sanè ratione illi non differentiam verbalem tantùm assignant , sed eo diuerso loquendi modo differentiam illam realem inter vtramque colendirationem significant , quam exposuimus iam esse MAXIMAM , inter duas illas virtutes dictas , relligionem nempe erga deum , & peculiarem erga creaturas praestantes ( not yet SANCTAS ) obseruantiā . And repeating the same againe , Exposuimus quemadmodum honor Sanctis , non per virtutem relligionis proximè , sed per aliam LONGE DIVERSAM exhibeatur . So ashamed is the late Iesuite , and ponderer of all the circumstances of this cause , to stand to relligious worshipping of creatures , in any sense , though neuer so diminutiue . Yet he proceedes in his rage against Calvin , to contradict himselfe after so many declarations of his minde . Quanquam si maximè vnâ eademque relligionis virtute alium deo , alium Sanctis honorem tribueremus , non equidem satis intelligo quidnam iccirco de diuino honore detraheretur , vti fingit Calvinus . Vt enim eâdem virtute charitatis &c. An euident contradiction out of meere malice to Calvine , not that he repents of his former doctrine . For if there is to be maximum & reale discrimen , between our worship of God , and of the creatures , and , LONGE DIVERSA VIRTVS , which applies vs to them both , &c. how can it be without Gods great dishonour , to giue the creature his worship , or the creatures to him ? But what maruaile , when he will haue vs loue God and our neighbour with the like , yea the SAME charitie ? Which is not to be graunted , saue so farre forth as the name is the same , but the thing most diuers . Yet this is his doubtie instance of this matter . Will you heare what S. Austen saies in other places hereof ? Lib. 20. contra Faustum , c. 5. Solus ille colendus , quo solo fruens beatus fit cultor eius , & quo solo non fruens omnis mens misera est , etsi qualibet re aliâ perfruatur . That is , He onely is to be worshipped , ( namely relligiously , ) in the fruition of whome stands the blessednes of the worshipper , and by want of whome alone , each soule turnes miserable , though it plentifully enioy all things besides . Are Saints such ? Are Angels such ? or is any creature in the world such ? Yet you tell vs most absurdly of a diuine cult , Numb . 26. ( for so cult you are , or so quilted in your tearmes ) as if there were an inferiour and humane answering to it . S. Austen knowes no colere here , and therefore no adorare , of ought else saue God onely , in whose fruition alone consists our blessednes , and not in the fruition of one another . And of Martyrs more plainly in the same booke , cap. 21. ( for Faustus it seemes vrged him with the Christian practise , which might be stragling in some few , but surely Catholique in the maine , as he complaines in the same place , that the godly of his age are compeld to beare with many things , which they liked not , and yet could not redresse , Aliud est quod docemus , aliud quod sustinemus ) I say , of Martyrs , he thus professeth : Colimus Martyres , sed eo cultu quo in hac vitâ coluntur Sancti homines . That is , We worship Martyrs , but with such a kind of worship , as holy men are worshipped with , during this life , that is , during their mortalitie , during their corruption , and that same fast-cleauing sinnefulnes ; which is wonder if it should stretch so farre , as to relligious adoration of men , not onely frayle , but also faultie , and obnoxious . Finally , to omit how 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is more thē 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , if at least there be any difference , whereas you would haue vs serue the creature more submissiuely , and more basely , namely per 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , God more remissely , by your latria , as you call it , ( which is exceeding preposterous , that we should submit to men lower then to God. ) as also that the 70. put the one for the other , opus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , not for a worke of relligion , but of ordinarie houshold seruice : Yea the new Testament doth the fame , sometime confounding them , as Apoc. 22. 13. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , sometimes complaining of the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of the creatures ( which you are not offended at ) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , Gal. 4. 8. sometime extending euen latria to the creature , or seeming to extend it , as 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , Heb. 13. 10. To omit these , I say , S. Austen cuts the throat of this bastardly distinction , whom you very friuolously entitle the father to it . Quaest . in Exod. 94. he appropriates latria to God as God , dulia to him as Lord. So as , first , worshipping God , we shall worship him in disparitie , and in inequalitie , as if there were any thing in God to be worshipt lesse then another , and not all to be worshipt after the most excellent fashion that we can . Yea by this meanes , we shall worship God with the worship of the creature , namely by dulia , if your distinction say true , which how can you thinke conuenient , I pray you ? For if God , as the creature , then the creature as God. Why not ? Though it is worse to abase God , then to exalt the creature , and yet both most dangerous . Lastly , we must either bring in many Lords into the world , contrarie to that , Eph. 4. 5. vnus Dominus , likewise Isa . 42. 8. 1. Cor. 8. 6. or else your dulia must come to nothing . I hast to an ende . § 15. You rest not satisfied with the Bishops answer , to those words of S. Ambrose , Crux Christi in regibus adoratur , the crosse of Christ is adored in Kings : that , if the crosse of Christ be adored in Kings , then with the same adoration that Kings are , which is not spirituall , nor relligious . What can you find fault with in this answer ? For if the crosse with one adoration , and the King with another , be to be adored , it had beene more for the commendation of the crosse , to haue saide , we worship it wheresoeuer , euen in the beggarliest creatures , where no cause els appeares of worshipping . But because it is true , that when we giue honour to the King , we honour per accidens all that he is adorned with , for so much as the Emperours abhorred not the monument of the crosse in their attires , S. Ambrose shewes how much it hath gained by their conuersion , namely to be honoured alike with thē , yet ciuilly still , and not relligiously . So S. Austen , as I remember , saith , the Sacrament either of Baptisme , or Circumcision , is worshipt in the partaker , adoratur in gestante ; there the man for the sacrament , here the thing for the mans sake that carried it about him , winnes honour and respect : but how ? Sicut ipsa incircumcisio in allophylo spernebatur , as the want of the sacrament was despised in a forrreyner . Yet none euer worshipt the sacrament of Baptisme relligiously ( and much lesse circumcision ) as you would haue vs to doe your crosse , or your woodden images , though we acknowledge the worth of Gods institution , wheresoeuer we finde it . So as neither ciuill is relligious first , nor all adoration the adoration that you striue for , but an honourable esteeme , nor the crosse the crosse , by S. Hieroms exposition , as you shall heare anone . As for deferre redemptioni , which you say followes immediately in S. Ambrose , to honour our redemption , that is it that we pleade for , and we doe that without adoring either wood or picture , yet excited happily by occurring memorialls and aduertisements whatsoeuer . As S. Austen acknowledgeth , that ab admonitu locorum we thinke of the Saints , and endeauour the imitation of them so much the more zealously , when we but come into their Churches ( I meane Churches called by their names , not otherwise ) lib. 20. contra Faust . c. 21. How much more then , are we rauished with the admiration of our Sauiour , considering the very instrument vpon which he dyed for vs ? So Helen , when shee had found , not the signe of the crosse , but the very crosse it selfe , or the remainders thereof , S. Ambrose carefully prouides his spell , as I may say , to exempt her from blame , that , non vtique lignum , she adored not the wood , which is a heathenish passion , and the vanity of the wicked , saith he . And if she worshipt not the wood , she worshipt nothing of the crosse that she found in Palestine , which was all of wood , but her Sauiour , and her redeemer , by that occasion liuely brought to her remembrance , him she worshipped . Euen so they that approached the Emperour in his Court , with the crosse in his garments , from thence they rose to thinke of their redemption . In other cases you may distinguish betweene lignum ( as you are wont ) and forma Sancti , or Sanctae , in ligno , but here if not lignum , nothing but redemptorem , and seruatorem , without question . But not lignum , saith S. Ambrose , that is the Pagans errour , therefore not ferrum they , nor any such materiall , whether in bosse , or bridle , or in the kings crowne . Ego crucem dico , non lignum , sed passionem , saith S. Hierome , in Psal . 46. I by the crosse vnderstand Christs suffering . And when I professe to worship the one , I meane my affection and deuotion to the other . And yet you quote a fresh testimony of S. Hierome , vncited by the Cardinall , saying that he adored the cradle and the cratch , comming to Bethleem . No doubt as he did the ashes of Abdias before , in his visitation of the holy places , or as they did in whose person he there speakes . Was our Sauiours cratch ( for cradle he had none ) or Abdias ashes , remaining , thinke you , till then ? As for admonitus locorum , as S. Austen speaks , the place was not so ruinous , but it might put him in minde of who had beene there sometime . Yet you neuer so much as mention this explanation of S. Hieroms , concerning the crosse , to vnderstand the passion by it , which the Bishop alleadgeth , whom neuertheles you may accuse for leauing out whole periods , and taking no notice of principall arguments , of which we are now to consider in the second place . § 16. A Second kinde of challenge then , you make to the Bishop , for not printing all his aduersaries words , but suppressing somewhat of that which was forcible . And you descant merrily , that happily it might be for lacke of roome in the margent , or some such cause . But what would you say , if he printed none at all , as few doe , and as the fashion is , or but very sieldome , now adayes ? though I haue scarcely seene a booke that hath so much printed of his aduersaries text , especially in the margent , vnlesse it contained all , without any contractions . Is there no refutation vnlesse all be spoken to ? what end may we then looke for ? But at least you should haue performed this your selfe , afore you taxed others , who of all writers are simply the farthest off from it , not excepting your collegue that lately raged against the Bishop in like sort , as you doe now . And if no body had flewen vpon the Bishops booke , but he which had perused and confuted it , by peecemeale , omitting nothing , the first stone had not yet beene cast at it , nor I thinke euer would be cast , the most of it being such stone-worke , as no lesse impregnable to your confutation , then rocke and flint to your digestion . But I pray let vs heare this same notable argument , which dropt thorough the sieue , when his fellowes stayd behind . You say the Bishops argument , about the couering of sinnes , hath beene an hundred times answered , ( in your Numb . 25. ) I beleeue , this no lesse then a thousand . And indeede how little pertinent was it to the grand question , viz. his Maiesties challenge of fiue hundred yeares ? and then how loosely , how wretchedly doth it hang together ? As thus , That because Adam fills vs full of sinnes , as soone as we are borne , therefore the gift of regeneration , which we haue by Christ , replenishes vs as suddenly with all manner of righteousnesse , and euacuates in vs the bodie of sinne . Is it not pitty this Achilles should haue beene past ouer in silence ? Which the eares of our Sophisters euery day ring with , and the schooles , Churches , streets , with the answer of it . Againe , that Adam conueied inherent corruption to vs , therefore the righteousnesse that we haue by Christ is more then imputatiue . As if first we denied the riches of Christs grace , to be plentifully inherent in the soules of his Saints , as faith , as temperance , as patience , as charitablenes , &c. Ibunt de virtute in virtutem : though the maine by which we hold , and by which we are saued , is not our owne strength , or our owne vertue , but the sufficiency onely inherent in the person of our Redeemer , which questionlesse is made ours , because interpreted to be ours , by the fathers gracious acceptance , as if our selues were possessed of it , which is that terrible imputation , that you are so startled with . As if our Lord had not plainely said in S. Iohns Gospel , drawing towards his death , Ego pro ijs Sanctifico me ; I sanctifie my selfe for them , shewing that both in life and death he wrought for vs , he serued our turne , and not his owne . For euen in this sense also , he came to serue and not to be serued . But if this be your skill in the principles of Diuinity , as not to vnderstand how Christ both saues vs by * imputation , and yet powres vpon vs the gifts of his holy spirit really , howsoeuer abated by our in-dwelling corruption , and therefore not of ability to protect vs in the day of iudgement , I may doubt also whether you be perfect in Adams case , vpon which you ground your argument , whose very act of eating the forbidden fruit , is so ours , ( saith S. Gregory Nazianzen ) ( 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , ) that it were enough to condemne vs , though no other imperfection had been conueyed from him vnto vs. And so the merits of our Lord , which are without vs , saue vs , his fasting , his praying , his weeping , his bleeding ( like Adams reaching , eating , and presuming ) though each of them conuey a certaine positiue store vnto vs , the second Adam of holines , as the first doth of viciousnes . But I haue stood too lōg vpon so trifling an obiection , specially since the Apostle neuer compares them in this point , in his 5. to the Rom. which you here quote , I meane the one in ministring righteousnesse , as much as the other doth sinne , and that presently , but either grace answerable to former trespasses , which grace is in remitting , not onely in replenishing ; in forgiuing , not onely in infusing ; or the number of the one people , with the number of the other , that belong to each roote , viz. Adam and Christ , ( where by the way you tell vs , numb . 39. your Latine translation saith , Plures per Christum quàm per Adamum , more are restored by Christ , then are perished in Adam , which were worth the knowing how : ) or lastly , that in the substance of their gift they may be equalled , though the remedie come halting after the offence in time , like Lite after Ate. Regnabunt iusti , v. 17. & , constituentur , v. 19. ( both future . ) And so to the Cor. Primò quod animale , deinde quod spirituale , and as the Psalme saies , Which day by day were fashioned , when as yet there was none of them , but in thy booke they were all written , viz. the members of the inward man and all . And , vt sit sine maculâ & rugâ , that she may be without spot and wrinckle , not that now she is so , ( S. Austen so construing it ) Eph. 5. And , Iustorum lux sicut aurora , crescens paulatim vsque ad perfectum diem : The light of the righteous is like the morning ( saith Salomon ) which flasheth not forth all at once , but by little and little creepeth on to perfect day . By which also you are answered , to your first cauill of the two aboue propounded , concerning our first birth from Adam , and our second regeneration by Christ . Whereas we are regenerating here all the time of our life , ( you happily think it is done in a moment ) for which cause it is called , the Regeneration by our Sauiour , euen the resurrection of the dead is , Matth. 19. 28. A most true saying , Non moritur hostis , nisi in resurrectione mortuorum . August , in Psal . and , Moriendo nascimur , it must cost vs our life , in this sense most of all . Hence it is , that S. Paul , Phil. 4. Non quòd peruenerim ad resurrectionem mortuorum , not that as yet I haue attained ( saith he ) to the resurrection of the dead . Alas , who had ? But hee meanes of his slow creeping to perfection daily , I suppose like that of Ionathans armour-bearer , towards the top of an high mountain , vpon his hands and his knees , so between hūble prayer & feruent endeauour . Contrarie to which opinion of S. Paul , touching himselfe , Hymenaeus & Philetus proudly gaue out that the resurrectiō was alreadie past , viz. on their sides , as if they had been at the top of the ladder of perfection , much like to that which the Iesuites dreame of now a dayes emong themselues . See , 2. Tim. 2. 17. And Canus expounding it in the afore-said sense , ( which I report for his commendation ) lib. 4. locorum , cap. 6. § 17. To Numb . 35. That , Iustin Martyr , Origen , Hierome , Austen , Gregorie the great , and collation ( as you say ) of the Scriptures themselues teach , that couering of sinnes is a full remission of them , may wel make against you , that hold punishments of sinnes to remaine to be abidden after remission , as if God would punish what he had once pardoned , yea truly and fully pardoned , as saith the Cardinall : against vs nothing at all , who teach , that our sinnes are so pardoned , when they are pardoned , as we shall neuer come into condemnation for them , Rom. 8. though the spring of old corruption be not cleane dried vp in vs. The Apostle saying there , not that there is no crime in vs , but no 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , after we are engraffed into Christ , and , non ne insit , sed ne obsit , as S. Austen speaks , peccatum regnans beeing one thing , and peccatum inhabitans another , and the Iebusite not so easily turned out of dores , to vse S. Bernards allegorie . Yet most pittifully you quote the Cardinall , saying , that it is Christs disgrace , if he could not truly and properly purge , or make cleane those , that are borne againe in him . As if it were for want of power in Christ , that wee are not suddenly perfited , that the Iebusite is not cast out vpon the suddaine . Whereas rather his power is perfected in weaknes , and , his Grace is sufficient for vs : and as God would not suddenly cast out all the inhabitants of the land of Canaan before the children of Israel , because they were not enow to empeople the Countrey , thinking it the more easie affliction of the two , that they should be encombred with enemies , then ouer-run with wild beasts ; so here to keepe out pride , like a wild beast , and to exercise vs with daily strugling against concupiscence our enemie , ( our foe , the fomes ) Almightie God hath deferred to worke a perfect regeneration of vs , though he hath granted from the beginning a perfect remissiō , which is your monstrous error , not to distinguish betweene remitting and remoouing faults , betweene releasing them and rooting them cleane out . § 18. The like I say to your quotations out of Esay , and diuers other Prophets , Numb . 36. namely , that the iniquitie of Gods people shall be taken away , wiped , or blotted out , abolished like a cloud , like a dew , like a myst , that our sinnes shall be buried in the bottome of the sea , that he hath remooued them as farre from vs as the East is from the West , that our sinne shall be sought and not be found , with many the like : Quoad reatum nimirum , not quoad vitium , in regard of the guilt , not in regard of the fault , of the staine , of the corruption , which hath taken deepe rooting in mortalitie , and is not pulled out , but with our very heart . We reuolue all these sentences , with vnspeakable comfort , for securing of our conscience against the houre of tentation , though we dare not waxe insolent , because of the sense of our infirmitie , continuing in vs , that we can not doe as we would , Gal. 5. 17. and for that no good thing dwelleth in our flesh , and , we see a law of sinne in our members , rebelling against the law of our minde , yea and leading vs captiue to the law of sinne , Rom. 7. But , cùm venerit quod perfectum est , abolebitur quod imperfectum , and when this mortalitie shall put on immortalitie , and our corruptible be cloathed with incorruption , when we shall see him as he is , and be satisfied with his likenes , then it will be otherwise with vs. You in the meane time are all for the present , as if the Hierusalem were on earth which comes downe from heauen , and is not readie for her husband yet , but yet is making readie daily . For when you bring in that among the rest , that sinnes like skarlet shall be made as white as snow , you must beware how you stretch it too farre , beyond the sense , though you are a partiall friend to the Cardinalls skarlet , whose cause you plead , and which perhaps you looke to inherit one day : neither thinke that sinnes shall euer turne so white , as to become vertues , but the indulgence of a father , forgiuing all that is amisse , turnes skarlet to snow , into innocence guiltines . And that is by not imputing , not by cleane abolishing . So Dauids , Wash , yea wash me more and more , makes more and more against your selfe , when you quote it most : for this shewes , that we are neuer washed cleane enough whiles we liue here , but though God hath begun to make a renouation in vs , yet still we crie , and haue cause to crie with Dauid , O Lord wash me yet more and more . Whereunto if one should obiect , as you are not very forward , that , Qui Iotus est , non habet opus nisi vt pedes lauet , &c. although that may seeme to set out the singlenes of the Sacrament of Baptisme , which without horrible sacriledge cannot be reiterated , yet applying it to the daily defunctions of our penitence , we may answer briefly , that we are totipedes , more feet and more soyle then a man would thinke . As for your numb . 37. where you heape as many places out of the new Testament ( as before out of the old , ) testifying that Christ hath purged our sinnes , purified our hearts , cancelled our debts , killed enmities , exhausted corruptions , that we might be holy , immaculate , and irreprehensible before him , &c. This is first true in the Saints that are in heauen , who haue shaken of this yoke of woefull bondage , and in regard of our Sauiour it is true de merito , concerning vs too , their vnhappy suruiuers , though our indisposition delay the complementum of it , for which we sigh , and groane , and waite , and attend , though our eyes wast with looking for his saluation . O Lord I haue looked for thy saluation , saith the Patriarch , euen when he was ready to dye . So happy are they , to whome , I say not in senectute , but in morte contigerit huc aspirare , as he saies ; Cui suspiramus semper . Where you say that no guile must be in the spirit , Psal . 32. 2. and therefore sinne is cleane purged in the iust , you are to know that all sinne is not guile , but the sinne of hypocrisie , dissembling our sinnefulnesse , and reioycing sinisterly in our supposed perfection , of which let them take heede that dance to your pipe , and delight in your doctrine . The Psalme opposeth it there to dum tacui in the next verse , v. 3. for where there is tacui , there is guile , where no guile no tacui . And the Saints in the Reuelation had no guile found in their mouthes , because they confessed they were sinners , sath S. Austen . § 19. ANother fault of the Bishops , is here complained of , that he hath not layd downe at full the Cardinals argument , out of the Epistle of Theodosius to the Councell of Ephesus , by which is shewed who should be present at generall Councells . And I hope it is no matter , whether he lay it downe at length or no , so he answer it . But you that vndertake the refutation of the Bishops answer to the Cardinalls Apologie , why doe you mention but one part of his answer to this very argument ? Is not this a worse fault , and yet in the same kinde ? As for example , one part of the Bishops answer was this , that a Count and a King be not all one , and when Theodosius forbad the Count to meddle , he precluded not himselfe . This you mention , but the rest you leaue out . First , that it appeares Theodosius did not set this law to himselfe , to be no medler in Councels , because he assembled it , yea confirmed it , and ratified the Acts of it , which Count Candidian might not doe . Secondly , that the Emperour exhorted this noble Courtier and Count Candidian , to suppresse them that were at oddes , and to curbe the humour of such as loued iangling . Could this be without his interposing in their tractate , which are the words that you stand vpon ? And you shall finde in the Trullan Councell , that other lay-men are forbidden that thing , the libertie whereof is reserued to the Emperour notwithstanding . So might it be here . And indeede who would euer retort vpon a King out of his owne words , or bind Theodosius as it were with his owne girdle , so with his owne Epistle , which he neuer meant should yoke himselfe ? To omit , that Constantine carried himselfe like a Bishop , witnesse * Eusebius , nay Bishop ouer Bishops , that is the oecumenicall Bishop , which you would be glad if your Pope had the like plea for himselfe , to intermeddle with the matters of Constantine , and of the Empire . Why then might not Theodosius ? Or though onely Bishops , as you would faine force , may haue to doe in Councels , yet why should Theodosius or Constantine sit out , that are Bishops without the Church , as others are within , and during diuine seruice ? See Sozom. l. 4. c. 21. of Leonas and Laritius , two lay-Courtiers , one satelles aulae , another praefectus militum , as the author styles them , sent to the Councell of Seleucia in Isauria , de mandato Constantij , by Constantius his commandement , that in their presence de fide accuratè inquireretur , strict enquiry might be made of Faith. And when some Bishops would not enter into disputation about things controuerted , because of the absence of other , Leonas tamen iussit de fide disceptari , Leonas neuerthelesse commanded them to conferre about relligion . In the Councell of Syrmium , the Emperour likewise appointed Iudges president of his owne pallace , doctrinâ & auctoritate caeteris praestantes , in all likelihood but lay-men . Idem Sozom. lib. 4. c. 5. And cap. 13. of the same booke , Constantius letter to the Church of Antioch , and the Bishops there assembled , conteines thus ; Placet prohibere à conventibus Ecclesiasticis , It is our pleasure to forbid certaine from Ecclesiasticall assemblies . You may say now , if you will after all this , that Emperours haue nothing to doe in Councels , and that Theodosius meant to barre himselfe by his owne letter , or else that he knewe not the right which Constantius exercised , and was descended to him by succession euen from Constantine . But there is a letter of Theodos . and Valentinian , ioyntly extant in the Acts of the Ephesine Councell , the 3. in number , in Surius his edition , beginning thus , Praeclarissimo Comiti , &c. Which you may doe well to read , to see what lay Emperours may doe in Councells . You shall see how he checks the whole Councell there , for there partiality and part-taking , for their tumults and sicut non conueniebat , and how he concludes the matter , Quapropter Maiestati nostrae visum est , vt huiusmodi authoritas nullo pacto locum habeat , & quae inordinatè sunt gesta cassentur . Wherefore it seemed good to our Maiestie , that such authority should by no meanes take place , and that those things be abrogated or disanulled , which were disorderly done . Yea how he tyes the Bishops to their residence at the Councell , forbidding any to depart , and how he sets an Oportet vpon omnia corroboranda sunt à nostrâ pietate , and lastly how he ends most imperially and worthily , Maiestas nostra nō hominum aliquorum , sed ipsius doctrinae ac veritatis curam gerit ! Our Maiestie takes not care of mens persons , but of ( Gods ) truth , and the [ heauenly ] doctrine . The like he doth in the Epistle that you quote , and namely chargeth them to heare no accusations , but proceede to discussion of faith onely . § 20. TO your numb . 42. and 43. what we heare from witnesses , though sure and certaine witnesses , yet we doe but heare , when you haue made the most of it . So as the Bishop might well say , Augustinus nihil praeter auditum habet , Austen hath nothing more then heare-say , meaning he reports not this of his own knowledge , though he would not seem to deny credit to those witnesses . Which many a man ( to say truth ) is loath to doe , I meane to detract any thing from the credit of the reporter , euen then when he scarce beleeues that which is told . As for the assistance of Angels , or apparition of Saints , it prooues not that it is lawfull for vs to pray to them ( as hath been shewed before ) and therefore it matters not greatly whether that of Felix be true or no. Sure it is , that S. Austen in the same booke where he tells this , de curâ promortuis , argues from the saying of holy Scripture , Abraham hath not knowne vs , nor Israel , &c. that Saints departed are ignorant , if not carelesse , or forgetfull , of our state here . A figure whereof there may seeme to be in the story of Ioseph , whome the butler forgot as soone as himselfe was escaped out of prison , ( as it were the Saint newly departed out of the body , and * forgetting his late fellowes in pilgrimage ) the rather , because both a Philo and the Rabbines say , that God ordained this of speciall purpose , that onely himselfe might be seen in Iosephs exaltation , without the cooperation of any man : euen as now he would haue vs to begge of him , not of Saint or Angel. But is not that prettie , numb . 44. that though the Saints appeare not in their owne persons , yet the apparition may well be called theirs , viz. because Angels appeare for them , in their name and likenes ? as if the Deuill did not counterfeit their name and likenes too , and therefore he appearing , they may be said to appeare , as well as when the Angels , by this reason . Yet most ridiculously you adde , that Angels appeare for the Saints merits , and so the Angels apparition is the Saints apparition . But first , we haue told you our mind about merits , in the former part of this booke , which if any were in this life , yet none in the other , none in patriâ , where the Saints are . They haue done meriting , and yet to merit for others , is more abominable then for ones selfe ; but for men to merit , that Angels should come , and doe offices in their name , is most absurd of all , and therefore worthie of F. T. whatsoeuer he is . At last , you graunt in the same Numb . that not onely Saints may appeare in the shape of Angels , but God himselfe hath done so de facto , as Gen. 18. Exod. 3. to Abraham , and to Moses . Yet , afore you saide , that the Angel whome Abraham worshipt , was a created Angel , numb . 14. How does this hang together ? As for that you enterlace , that no shape can represent God , it is so true , that S. Isidore , vpon Exod. 3. saies , God appeared to Moses , in rubo , in a bush , because the bush is vnfittest of all shrubs to be grauen or made an image of . But then , how doe you not tremble , to haue images in your Churches , and images of God ? Whereas the Councell in Trullo , Canone 83. forbids Christ to be painted in the forme of a lambe , which is farre more tolerable then the holy Ghost like a doue . § 21. WELL , num . 45. you fall to a third kind of accusation of the Bishop . But there you commit that very fault , which was the last that you blamed him for , though without cause , as I haue shewed . Quoting Calvins words , lib. 3. Institut . c. 14. as they lie in Bellarmine , your other selfe ( I and the Cardinall , or els it is no bargaine ) where you leaue out the Paragraph , or the section of the chapter , to hide your craft the more , you clippe off those words also ( words of moment ) si in se censeantur : and onely say , that , no worke can passe from holy men , by Calvins verdict , which doth not deserue the iust reward of shame . True , Sir , if you take in all that Calvine saies , namely , if it be weighed strictly , rigorously , and in it selfe , without any ouershadowing of the diuine pittie . Si in se censeantur . Refute this , if you can . In the meane time you alleadge the author corruptly , which is the thing that you declaime against ; stealing , and crying out against theft both at one time . § 22. What mislikes you in the Bishops antithesis , that he makes to the Cardinals disputation about the iustice of workes ? I beleeue nothing more then that you cannot brooke it , and yet know not how to put it off . Opponi potuisse , ast non potuisse refelli . I haue heard some praise this one passage , as the flower of the Bishops booke , although they thought honourably of all . Vulnerasti me vno crine tuo , or , vno oculo tuo , may we say with the Spouse , though Tota pulchra , by his confession elswhere . But you must be allowed so much the rather to carpe at it . Fortuna attonat summa ( as Mecaenas was woont to say , ) and no lesse , Procacitas rodit . For the Cardinals modestie , as he is a priuate man , it is nothing to the purpose , whatsoeuer you prate , vnlesse you will weigh by that the dangerousnes of your doctrine , fraught with such insolencies , that it may make euen a modest man to turne proud . And if that be true , which here you pretend , that when we teach that the forme of our iustification before God , stands in his free mercie , not imputing our sinnes to vs , we take away all vse of a future iudgement , by consequence of that doctrine , doth not the Bishop as truly , and most pithily , retort , that if you can be iustified by your workes here , you may as well also forbeare any other iudgement ? Howe does the first of these , euacuate the iudgement , which wee beleeue in the Creede , more then the second ? Or why should not a iudgement be held for this cause , as well that it may be seene and made knowne to the whole world , whome God hath acquitted and whom not , to whom he imputes their sinnes , and to whom not , who haue layd hold vpon him by faith & who not , as who haue kept the law , wrought righteousnes , fulfilled the commandements , and who not ? Besides , that if our actions be partly pure , and partly impure , as both Bernard and Gregory acknowledg , in those sentences which the Bishop quoted , and you suppresse , the iudgement may be for the notifying of them both , the one to acceptation , the other to remission and pardon , why not ? And the good that is in them , the cleaner part as I may so call it , though not published nor accepted ad meritum salutis , to the merit of saluation , which is your blasphemy , as if we might be saued by our well doings , yet ad cumulum gloriae , to the improouement of our reward , and to acquire a degree of preheminence in the kingdome , which both you acknowledge , and our selues deny not , as hath been told you heretofore . And yet againe , for so much as faith is that by which we attayne saluation , not onely the cumulum , or degree of glorie , but the very first interest in our saluation , I say , which faith is coūterfeited by diuerse hypocrites that haue it not , why should not works come to be examined in the iudgment , as the cognizances of our faith , the obrussa , or the touchstone , according to the saying , Ex fructibus eorum cognoscetis eos , and Gal. 5. Faith profiteth indeede , but , if it worke by loue ? Agreeable whereunto our Sauiour Matth. 25. though he pronounce the blessing vpon such onely as haue fedde himselfe , cloathed him , and visited him , which is faiths proper obiect , to be conuersant about * CHRIST , and to make all towards him , yet he descryes it by our workes done to our neighbours , In quantū minimis hisce fecistis , mihi . Insomuch as you haue done it to one of these little ones , you haue done it to me : that is to say , your workes haue approoued your faith , and your respect to mine , showes your trust in me . Lastly , the last iudgement may by no meanes be spared , though onely faith , and not imputation of sinnes , be there predominant ( as not onely S. Basile , of whome you haue often heard , but S. Chrysostome also could say , long before Luther was borne , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , that is , by faith only without any of these workings ) I say , the last iudgement may by no means be spared , though faith onely should there raigne , if it be but to make manifest to the mundus circumfusus , to the nations round about vs , what the riches of Gods grace is in pardoning our offences , in receauing to fauour such recreant sinners , without any deserts of ours either afore or after , how his mercie waighes downe all his works . Is this a smal cause of erecting the throne , or exercising the iudgement , the manifestation of Gods glory ? But because you ayme onely at your owne glory , therfore that being taken away , you would take away the iudgement too , and the thrones and all . And loe , you are not ashamed to vrge that place of the Apostle , 2. Tim. 4. 8. Quam reddet mihi iustus iudex , as if iustus were not as much as clemens and misericors , in the scripture phrase , as Matth. 1. 19. Ioseph beeing a iust man , would not shame his wife , nor expose her to censure , no more will God vs for his iustice-sake , that he wil exercise in that day , that is , his clemencie and his pitty . Euen as it followes in the Apostle , omnibus diligentibus aduentum eius : yet , to all that loue and desire his comming ; which we should dread and feare , and not loue nor long after , if iustice were so rife , or so bestird herselfe , as you would make , and the account that we were to render , of our life , and actions , to be none other then so , that we must answer Almighty God for our carriage to a hayre , or else cleane perish , as the Cardinall fancieth . Can any better account be made to God , of our actions , then by opposing the death and passion of his son , to the rigour of his iustice , for whatsoeuer we haue done amisse , and been faulty in ? But so much may suffice to haue spoken hereof . § 23. Numb . 55. and so 56. and 57. you doe nothing but sing your Cuckowes song , what corruptions of the Bishop you haue formerly discouered , about S. Ambrose , S. Austen , and S. Cyrill , as also the Councell of Calchedon , and the African Synode , with Theodorets commentarie . All which haue been cleered by me before . And though you haue this trick by your selfe , cleane differing from the fashion of all other writers , that euer I read , to repeat , and reiterate , and resing your owne glories ; yet we , non habentes talem consuetudinem , thus passe on . § 24. Epiphanius , you say , neuer reprehended praying to the Virgin Marie , but sacrifice onely in the Collyridian gossips . And was their sacrifice without prayer ? or could it well bee ? Remember I pray , your owne principles : then shew where Epiphanius , reproouing the sacrifice , excepts praying , and condemnes not all their fopperie in grosse . Yet he scannes the point nicely , and shewes what we may giue to the Virgin without offence , what we may not , in all which , of prayer not a word that he vouchsafes her . What maruaile , when he acknowledges such vertue in prayer , in comparison of sacrifice , that he saies elsewhere , the sacrifice of prayer , turned the old Testament into the new , euen before the Gospel . At least therefore now , prayer and praise , is our best sacrifice , vnder the new Testament , and not to bee affoarded to any but God. But because when you stand for the inuocation of Saints , you denie not but it is an act of the adoration belonging to them , and referre it to the cult that you so foolishly talked of not long before , you shall heare how often Epiphanius debarreth all adoration from the Virgin , in the treatise afore-named , against the womans heresie ( for so also he tearmeth it ) neuer adiudging any adoration to her , of what kind soeuer , neuer prayers , and much lesse praying to her there himself , though he shut vp that discourse * with a praier to God , not so much as mentioning her . First , condemning the worshipping of Saints , & the vse of images , both in one , and making the deuil to be the author of both . Vnde non est simulachrificū hoc studium , & diabolicus conatus ? [ How can this be but an idolous peice of work , or a deuillish attempt ? ] Praetextu enim iustitiae semper subiens hominum mentem diabolus , mortalem naturam in hominum oculis deificans , statuas humanas imagines prae se ferentes per artium varietatem expressit : [ For the deuill alway creeping into mens minds , vnder the colour of righteousnes , deifying the frayle nature in the eyes of men , hath framed images resembling mens countenances , by diuersitie of skill , &c. ] Et mortui quidem sunt qui adorantur , ipsorum verò imagines quae nunquam vixerunt adorandas introducunt , adulterante mente ab vno & solo deo , velut commune scortum , &c. [ And ( first ) they are dead men whome they worship ( which should not be : ) ( secondly ) they bring in their images ( inferiour to the dead parties themselues ) which are not dead indeede , and good cause why , because they neuer were aliue , and nothing can die , but that which once liued . ] By which we see , that Epiphanius would haue that onely to be adored , which ( first ) liueth , and ( secondly ) dieth not , or cannot die againe . Such as onely God is , as the Apostle speakes , who onely hath immortalitie ; neither Saint , nor Angel , in that sort . Then follow his tearmes of detestation of this practise , that the mind by so doing , runnes a whoring from the one and onely God ( onely God therfore is the obiect of chast worshippers ) like a common harlot , that hath out-liued all honestie , and keeping of trust in wedlocke , itching and tickling after innumerable enormities of diuers lustfulnes , &c. ( which is notably to be seene in the Romish Church this day , who leauing God , and declining to creatures , could keepe no hoe , no measure , in their misdemeanours . ) But ( as if one had obiected , what is this to the Virgin Marie , and the worshipping of her ? for she is not euery bodie ; Is adoration proper to none but God ? ) Epiphanius therefore addes , confirming our assertion ; Reverà , Sanctum erat corpus Mariae , non tamen deus , Revera virgo erat ipsa virgo , & honorata , sed non ad adorationem nobis data , sed ipsa adorans , &c. That is , No doubt the bodie of Marie was holy ( he calls her Marie still , as * S. Hierome in the like case , Let them know , saith he , Mariam Mariam , that Marie is but Marie ) her bodie was holy , but [ shee was ] no god : no doubt the a Virgin was a virgin , and [ also ] * honourable , but she was not giuen vs to worship , but her selfe worshipped him , who sprang of her according to the flesh ( Christ ) &c. Et proptereà , Euangelium munit nos dicens , quòd ipse Dominus dixerit , Quid mihi & tibi est mulier ? nondum venit hora mea . Quò non putarent aliqui magis eximiam esse sanctam Virginem , mulierem eam appellauit , velut prophetans quae futura esset in terrâ , sectarum ac haerese●n gratiâ , vt ne aliqui NIMIVM ADMIRATI SANCTAM , in hanc haeresim eiusque deliramenta dilabantur . Est enim ludibrium tota res , & anicularum fabula , vt ita dicam , tota haeresis tractatio . That is , [ And therefore the Gospel armeth vs , saying , that our Lord himselfe said , What haue I to doe with thee woman ? mine houre is not yet come . To the end that some might not thinke that the holy Virgin was more excellent , he called her [ barely ] woman , as it were foreshewing what should happen in the world by way of sects and heresies [ concerning her ] that some through too great admiration of that holy [ woman ] might not slide into this heresie , and the dotage thereof . For in very truth , all this whole passage , is nothing but a meere mockerie , and a toy , and an old wiues tale , &c. ] Then , Quae verò scriptura de hoc narravit ? Quis Prophetarum praecepit hominem adorari , nedum mulierem ? That is , [ And I pray what Scripture informeth vs hereof ? Which of the Prophets commanded any man to be worshipped , and if not a man , much lesse a woman ? ] See you how he reduceth this controuersie to Scripture ? yet the Adioynd . makes no reckning of scripture in this question , so we haue miracles & traditions , and other obseruations . Well ; it was lawfull for Epiphanius to flie to that , Quae verò Scriptura ? And , Quis Prophetarum praecepit , & c ? See you also how he preferres not a few before the Virgin ? For , we must not worship man , saith he , and much lesse a woman , belike though it be the Virgin her selfe . Eximium quidem est vas , sed mulier , & nihil à naturâ immutata . That is ; [ An excellent vessell she is no doubt , but yet a woman , and not a whit changed in regard of her nature . ] Further , Honoured she is , but as the bodies are of the Saints , and if I may say any more towards the magnifying of her , sicut Elias , sicut Iohannes , sicut Thecla , Like Elias , like Iohn , like Thecla . Onely herein ( saith Epiphan . ) more honourable then Thecla , that she was employed to be the instrument of the mysterious birth of our Lord. But suppose she be like onely to other Saints , may not they be worshipped ? Epiphanius proceedes . Sed neque Elias adorandus est , etiamsi in vivis sit , neque Iohannes adorandus , neque Thecla , neque quisquam Sanctus adoratur . Not onely no dead Saint , but not so much as they that neuer died , may be adored . ( This , though we should graunt that the Virgine was assumed ; though Epiph. seeme rather to argue à maiori , and to count her among the dead . ) Neither Elias is to be adored , nor Iohn to be adored , nor Thecla , nor any Saint is to be adored . Was it not possible , that Epiph. should light vpon your distinction of diminutiue adoration , that so often , so peremptorie , denies it to the Saints , that it is lawfull to adore them , and neuer comes in and expounds himselfe ? Non enim dominabitur nobis antiquus error , vt relinquamus viuentē , & adoremus ea quae ab ipso facto sunt . [ For we will not be ouerruled with the auncient error , that we should leaue the liuing [ God , ] and worship the things which he hath made . ] First , errors though auncient , shall not ouerrule Epiphanius ; nor antiquitie therefore if it be erroneous . Secondly , olde errors are olde errors still , with Epiphanius , though new scoured , and new whetted , as this by the Iesuits . Lastly , he will not adore any thing that is factum , that is , any creature , and if he should doe so , he thinkes he should relinquere viventem , leaue the liuing God : which consequence the Iesuits wil not yeild to at this day , nor no doubt would the Gossips then in their madde seruice , but say that they stucke constant to the liuing God , and yet worshipt the Virgine , as his notable instrument , by a subordinate kind of deuotion . And though the margent of the booke , translated by a Papist , by a Papist corrected , and printed by Papists , with an epistle before it , thus superscribed , Omnibus Ecclesiae Catholicae Romanae filijs , &c. To all the sonnes of the Romane Catholike Church : I say though the margent of the booke , thus by many interests Popish , in the edition , may seeme to haue acknowledged no lesse , then we plead for , by noting as it doth in the side of it , Imagines damnatae , that is , Images are here condemned ; and againe , Sancti non adorandi , Saints are not to be adored , or worshipped , Yet let vs goe on with Epiphanius a steppe further . Coluerunt enim & adorarunt creaturam praeter creatorem , &c. It is a trespasse with Epiphanius to worship the creature , or to adore the creature , ( for he puts both ) praeter creatorem , beside the creator ; that is , though you exclude not the worship of the Creator , but onely take in the worship of the creature . Si enim Angelos adorari non vult , quanto magis eam quae genita est ab Anna , &c. non tamen aliter genita est praeter hominum naturam , sed sicut omnes , ex semine viri , & vtero mulieris . Here , here , arrige aures Pamphile . Here you should doe well to list a while , you Polyphilus , or rather Pamphilus , of all bastard Deities . For if ( saith he ) God will not haue the Angels to be worshipped , how much more wil he not haue her which was borne of Anna , and yet not borne otherwise , then the fashion is , & nature of all mankind , but &c. Two great points assoyled by Epiph. in these fewe words . One , that the Virgin Marie was not conceiued , nor borne , after extraordinarie manner , as the Iesuites affirme , but euen as others are , which must needes be in sinne , and in corruption . Another , that shee is not so exalted in heauen , but inferiour to the Angels , or else the consequence were not good , If not the Angels , much lesse Mary , or the daughter of Anna. There are yet more clauses against the adoration of the Virgin , in this tract of Epiph. Non tamen vt adoretur virgo . And , Sit in honore Maria , but Pater , & filius , & spiritus Sanctus adorentur . Againe , Mariam nemo adoret , non dico mulierem , immo neque virum . And , Deo debetur hoc mysterium . Deleantur quae malè scripta sunt in corde deceptorum . Tollatur ex oculis cupiditas ligni . Conuertatur rursus figmentum ad Dominum . Ne quis comedat de errore qui est propter Mariam : nam & lignum non erat error , sed per lignum , &c. So by abuse of the blessed Virgin , creepes in error into the Church . And , Etsi pulchrum est lignum , sed tamen non ad cibum . So , Etsi pulcherrima est Maria , & Sancta , & honorata , at non ad adorationem . There are these , I say , and more sentences yet , tending that way , but aut hoc satis est testimoniorum ( as he was wont to say testium , ) aut ego nescio quid sit satis . Epiphanius himselfe seemes to be wearie of his owne prolixities . Therefore I will conclude with him . Quò verò non longiùs extendam sermonem , sufficiant nobis relata . Maria in honore sit , Dominus adoretur . Iusti enim nemini exhibent errorem . Neque tentat Deus aliquem , neque serui ipsius ad deceptionem . That is , [ And that I may prolong my discourse no farther , it shall suffice to haue said thus much . Let Mary be honoured , but let God be worshipped or adored . The Saints lead none into errour . God tempts none , nor his seruants tempt none to deceiue them . ] Meaning , that if visions or apparitions of Saints , bee brought to prooue the lawfull worshipping of them , wee should not beleeue them . What bring you next ? § 26. Num. 58. You challenge the Bishop , for saying that Gregorie siluit de quinto generali Concilio , said nothing of the fift generall Councell , viz. when he professed his deuotion to the other fowre . And though you might answer your self by his words in the same place , Quatuor prima tantum honore HOC dignatus est , he honoured onely the fowre first , with THIS honour , or with so much honour , so as his meaner commendations of the fift generall Councell , may seem to be a certaine comparatiue silence thereof ; I say , though you might answer your selfe thus , out of the place which you quote , pag. 160. Respons . ad Apolog. yet suppose that all this did but goe to the obiection , as I see you take it in to no other purpose , neuerthelesse you might haue found the plaine solution thereof , if you had turned but a little further , viz. pag. 182. in summo paginae , where the Bishop both acknowledgeth that which you here oppose him with , out of S. Gregories words , Quintum quoque pariter veneror , &c. and giues you answer , euen afore your obiection was hatched , by explaining his meaning , to this effect ; Gregorius quatuor prima Concilia sicut quatuor Euangelia , veneratur & suscipit . Quatuor prima Concilia quadratus lapis ei sunt , in quo fidei vitaeque structura consurgit . Qui etsi veneratur , & quintum , non de eo tamen tam sensit honorificè . That is , Gregorie reuerenceth and receiueth the 4. first Councells , like the fowre Gospels . The fowre first Councells are to him , that fouresquare stone , vpon which the building of faith and manners ariseth . Who although he reuerenceth the fift Councell too [ in proportion ] yet holds it not in so great estimation as the others . These are the Bishops words , are they not ? What then haue you brought to confute him by , more then is answered in his owne writings ? Let me speake vnto you in your owne words here , Num. 63. What more palpable fraud or foolerie can there be , thē to take the obiection out of ones aduersaries books , and to dissemble the solution , though it be to be found there ? And if S. Gregories meaning had beene to auouch that infallibilitie of generall Councells , which you dreame of , as if all that were ordained by an vniuersall consent , did for certaine descend of the Holy Ghost , he would not haue professed this reuerence onely to those Councels , which himselfe had seene and knowne , but to all those which should bee held with like order and solemnitie in after times , euen to the worlds ende . But now if you marke him , hee speakes onely de praeterito , nothing of the time to come , which he knew hee might well doubt . § 26. The Kings Supremacy , is not well prooued ( you thinke ) out of Deut. 17. nor his authority to interpose in matters of relligion . I knew you could not be so swallowed vp of your zeale to the Saints , but that you would now and then , haue a rush at the Supremacy , though it lay not in your way . But wherein failes the proofe out of Deuteronomie ? First Moses gaue no copy of the law to any King in his time , for there were no Kings diuers yeares after . Resp . Though summus Magistratus be equiualent to a King , in the Politie that he gouernes whatsoeuer it be , and of Moses it be said , Erat Rex in iustitia , and not onely Iustine the Historian , and a heathen man , reckons Moses among the Kings of the people of Israel , lib. 36. Hist . but the Cardinall himselfe , de Pontif. Rom. lib. 1. cap. 2. saies the same , quoting Exod. 32. that , as verus & summus princept populi Iudaici , as a true and soueraigne prince of the people of the Iewes , he commaunded many thousands to be put to death in one daie , for the golden calfe , &c. yet what then ? Does it not shew what right belongs to Kings , when Kings at least should be established in time to come ? Will you allow nothing to Scriptures prouidence , or to Gods fore-sight ? Does not this shew rather , that the precept which was giuen for to be obserued by the Israelites diuerse yeares after came of God , and not of man ? And doe not your selues argue , out of the same bookes of Moses , that a king is not to be chosen but onely exfratribus , which you are carefull to haue obserued , as you would seeme at least , euen till this day , though Kings ( as you say ) there were none in Moses time ? What then doe you tell vs , that there were then no Kings ? Yea , but this is no more then euery priuate man and woman might be allowed , to haue the copy of the Law at home with them . I am glad to heare you say so , I pray God you hold you to your word , and suffer Christian people hereafter , both men and women , to haue the copies of the Bible , of the old and new Testament , in their priuate houses . Which you must needes doe according to your word here , vnlesse you will make vs more Iewes , then the Iewes themselues , and bring a slauery vpon Christians , more then euer they were put to that liued vnder the letter , to take both letter and spirit from vs , which will least of all befit you in your encounter with the Bishop , that charge him with no fault more , nor more often , then that he enclines to Iudaisme , and holds Iewish conclusions about ceremonies , and Circumcision , and a great deale more of such idle stuffe that you trauaile with . I am sure S. Chrysostome vpon the 3. to the Coloss . exhorts his people , those of the lay-fort , thus : For I speake ( saies he ) to you of the lay : 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , that is , buie you bookes [ particularly the Bibles ] which are the medicines of your soules : 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 : No master like them . And Thomas Aquinas your iolly Schoole-man , handling the same words , by occasion whereof S. Chrysostome was lead to say this , namely , That the word of Christ should dwell richly , or plentifully in vs , resolues thus . Aliquibus sufficit modicum quid de verbo Christi , sed Apostolus vult quòd habeamus multum . Ideò dicit , Abundanter . That is , Some men are content with a small portion or pittance , God wot , of the word of Christ , ( this is not you , nor your church at this day , and that is pittie ) but the Apostle will haue vs to haue much of it , or a great deale of it . Therefore he saith , PLENTIFVLLY . S. Hierom and S. Primasius , inferre out of the same words , that lay-folkes ought to haue the word of God among them , and that non solùm sufficienter , sed etiam abundanter , not onely sufficiently , but also abundantly , or as the Rhemists translate it , as if zealous of good measure , to be dealt to these poore folkes , ( though they meane nothing lesse ) euen aboundantly . So Anselme vpon certaine other words of the same Apostle , Eph. 2. 19. You are no more strangers or pilgrimes , but of the houshold of God , &c. gathers both wittily and godlily , that ideò non erant hospites testamentorum , ( as some others had beene , of whome he spake before ) quia non in transitu & recessu videbant ipsa testamenta , sed assiduè morabantur & exercebantur in ijs ; that is , that therefore they were no strangers ( to God , and his Testaments ) because they saw not his testaments onely at a blush , or passing by , as you would say , but daily they staid vpon them , and were exercised in them , &c. This is with Anselme to be no stranger to God , but one of his houshold , &c. Whereas that vnconscionable Cardinall of yours , in his Controuersie about this matter , whether lay-folke should read Scripture , or no , quotes Ioh. 6. to prooue that lay-men haue no right to Scriptures , because the wicked Priests said , Populus qui extra est , The people which is without , knowes not the law , as if still without , and not yet taken into house . 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . But this by the way onely , because you say it is no more then euery priuate man was allowed among the Iewes , to haue the Bible in his house . This at least is more on the Kings side , then on the priuate mans , that the King in particular is appointed to haue it , by order from Gods owne mouth , and the Priest to yeild it him , yea the King himselfe to write it out for his owne vse . It shall be ( saies the text ) when he sitteth vpon the throne of his kingdome , that he shall write him a copie of this Law in a booke , out of that which is before the Priests , the Leuites . WHEN HE SITTETH VPON HIS THRONE . Doth not this make a distinction betweene the Kings , and the lay-mans hauing of the booke , though neither be forbidden it ? Or doth it not shew , that the King is entrusted with the book , in reference to his gouernment ouer the whole kingdome ? For the booke must be offered him , when he sitteth vpon the throne of his kingdome ( saith the text , ) no doubt to distinguish betweene the ende , for which he , and for which ordinarie men , must read the booke , if they read it at all . And what thinke you of that , that the King must write himselfe a copie ? Is not this too great paines for a King ? Which though I doubt not but we may construe , that the King must procure one to write it out for him , as Salomon is said to sacrifice when the Priests sacrificed by his appointment , and our Sauiour Christ to baptize , though he baptized none himselfe , but onely through his Disciples , yet first it argues a great entrusting of the King with diuine matters , to let him haue the Bible so much at his disposing , as to copie it out by such as he shall set a worke . Secondly , it giues him a secret item to diligence , and to studying of this book , with more then ordinarie carefulnes . And lastly , as oft as the King changeth , so oft ( as it may seeme ) should the Bible be transcribed , for the vse of the Crowne , while the Priests and the Leuites are enioyned no such taske , for the making of them perfect . Oleaster complaines vpon this place , that it is a wonder to see how dissolute Kings are , touching the studie of lawes , not onely Gods lawes , but their owne ; whereas your doctrine , if they are prone of themselues , as wee are all by nature to such recklesnesse , driues them headlong , and sets them going by authoritie . Yea , you threaten them with great penalties , if at any time they doe but presume the contrarie , as if they passed the bounds of their commission , in so doing . But I suppose Oleaster , when he tooke vp that complaint , was not much acquainted with forreine Kings and Queenes , such as God hath blessed our land with since , of whome I will say nothing in this place , least I should seeme to affect flatterie , though it be hard to passe ouer in silence such an incomparable mirrour as we enioy in this kind at this day , God be thanked , and long , most long , may we enioy I pray God. Yet I meruaile that beeing a Portaguise , if not originally Spanish , Alphonsus King of Arragon , one of his countrey-men , should not come into his minde , who is said to haue writ out the Bible once with his owne hand , in Hebrew ( as I take it , ) and to haue read it , as I remember , no lesse then sixteene times ouer . I think few Kings haue come neerer to this precept of copying the Law , for the literall sense of it , then Alphonsus did , though certenly we are to presume he was no babe in the vnderstanding of it neither . But Oleaster notes further , that from hence in all likelihood that custome tooke his beginning , that the Kings of Israel should be crowned with the booke of the Law in their hand , 1. Chr. 24. which is very remarkeable ; and no lesse then for the King of France to be inuested in a Deacons habit at his coronation , as we are told by Rossaeus . A third exception . Vt discat ( say you ) Deum timere , that hee may learne onely to feare God , and for his priuate instruction . As if first any thing might well be called priuate in so great a Maiesty , or as if the King learning his dutie from the booke of the law , could learne it for himselfe only , and not for others , his dutie beeing to see that others doe their duties , as euery magistrates is , and his fearing of God beeing to feare him not only in the course of his owne life , but of his whole gouernement . Yet you please your selfe in your queint language , that the priest was to be possessed of a copy of the law , that he might obserue it punctually for his owne selfe . Not onely so , Sir , but pungitiuely for others ; he was to make others , euen Priests and all , to keepe the law , to enforce them , and to constraine them , to pricke them and to driue them onward by the edge of his sword , which he carried neither edgeles , nor in vaine , Rom. 13. no not then ; as Ezechias did the Leuits , til he made them offer . Obtulerunt tandem , as it is in the Chronicles , by the Kings instigation . S. Austen warranteth this in diuerse places , as hath beene told you , but I will alleadge S. Gregory to you now , l. 9. Registri . Epist . 60. ad Aldiberium , one of the kings of our Country . Regni sui vos ipse faciat esse participes , cuius vos fidem in regno recipitis & facitis custodiri : that is , Euen he make you partakers of his kingdome , whose faith in yours you both entertaine , and MAKE to be obserued . The Kings office is not onely custodire , but facere custodiri , as the Bishop told you , if you had the grace to heare him . The Kings keeping is keeping in Hiphil , like spiritus interpellat , for facit interpellare , Rom. 8. Euen as God saith in Ezechiel , Faciam vt faciatis ; but God by aide , and by diuine inspiration , the King by terrour , by censure , and by feare ; yet thus also is that fulfilled , Dij estis , whereas our part is Obsecramus vos loco Christi , &c. 2. Cor. 5. See Rom. 13. where all the good that is done in a common wealth , is attributed to the King , all the euill is auenged by him . And 1. Tim. 2. 2. exhorting that praiers and supplications be made for all men , he instanceth onely in Kings , because the Kings courses haue an vniuersall influence , and not onely for a quiet and peaceable estate , but for a godly and an honest , which refutes the Iesuites , that thinke a Kings care is to extend no farther then bonum politicum , or bonum reip . to preserue the common-wealth from running to confusion , from want , from plague , from hostility , or seditions , not regarding piety . But most notably of all , Psal . 2. not onely the relligion of a priuate common-wealth , but the conuersion of the whole bodie of the Gentiles , is linked inseparably with the relligiousnesse of Kings . For hauing said in the 8. verse , I will giue thee the Gentiles , for thine inheritance , he points to the meanes in the 10. and 11. Be wise now therefore ô ye Kings , & nunc Reges intelligite . Where & nunc is pregnant to confute the Iesuites , that thinke the care of Relligion , as it should be in Kings , is expired with the Kings of the old Testament . But the Psal . saith , & nunc , prophesying of the conuersion of the Gentiles vnder the new . And further he bids them serue the Lord , whereas Kings ( saith S. August . ) then serue the Lord , when they doe that for the Lord , which none can doe but they that are Kings . But priuate honesty , or priuate integritie , is that which euery body may looke to and performe for themselues . Therefore the Kings Office , which Deuteronomy calls him to , is an vniuersall inspection . And as the piety of kingdomes dependes of their Kings , as the latter end of the Psal . shewes , that I now quoted , so the impiety , and the irreligion of them , is to be referred to none other , as appeares by the beginning of it . For whereas he had askt the question , why doe the heathen and the people rage , presently he addes , or rather answers , and giues the cause himselfe , The Kings of the earth haue conspired together , and the Rulers taken counsell , &c. § 27. What now though the Originall copy of the Bible was to remaine with the Priest ? is it not enough that the King was to haue a true copy , and answerable to the Originall in all points ? For therefore he was bidde to prouide him a copy , to be written out of the Leuites Originall . But let it be that this makes the Priest to be Superiour , since you will needes haue it so , yet Superiour as Expositor , or as Interpreter , if you please , not as guardian , not as custos . § 28. Lastly , the King is bid to be obediēt vnto the Priest , euen by the lawe it selfe , which he was to copy out , as appeares in the same chap. v. 10. ] I might say that the King is not named among those that are enioyned this obedience , and therefore not comprehended . For it must be liquidum ius that shall binde princes . The Soueraigne is wont to be exempted in such cases . Let one be free that all the rest may bee the better ordered . As iura Maiestatis non sunt communicanda cum ciuibus , both by Bodines rule and other Polititians , so necessitates subditorū , the taxations of subiects must not bee enforced vpon Princes , Vnlesse the King were named therefore , no reason to bring him in within the compasse of this statute . And yet secondly , there is an obedience to counsell , and to aduice , to resolution , and instruction , — 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , not onely to authority . The first way the King may bee subiect to his subiects , and obedient to the Priests , if you will needes haue it so , but the second way the Priest is subiect to the King , without all question , and that is it with which Supremacy goes . The Cardinall himselfe can tell vs so , when his fit is ouer , when it is his good day , lib. 1. de Pontif. cap. 6. Ne Assuerus quidem Rex sapientibus illis viris subiectus erat , quorum tamen faciebat cuncta consilio . Ester . 1. that is , King Assuerus was not subiect to those wise men , by whose aduice notwithstanding he managed all affaires . As for matter of execution , or coactiue iustice , the Iudge is ioyned in commission with the Priest here , v. 12. And is it possible that the King should be an vnderling to the Iudge ? § 29. That the Bishop should call Bellarmine dotard , for mistaking our English affaires so much , seemes a matter to you very abusiue , and intolerable . So as curiositie is but a light fault with you , though in strange Common-wealths , nor does it yrke you any thing to heare your nation accused , which neither hath deserued ill at your hands , nor is culpable of that which the erring Cardinall laies to her charge . Though S. Paul would not accuse his owne nation , albeit deseruing , Act. 28. 19. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 : Not as if I had any thing ( saies he ) to accuse my nation of . Where S. Chrysostome notes most excellently , that not onely he accused them not , though no doubt he had great cause , hauing conspired to kill him before they either ate or dranke ; but insinuated to the companie , and yet without a lie , that he had nothing at all to accuse them of . For so are his words , Not as if I had any thing to accuse mine owne nation of . But you renegates , and runnagates , forsakers of the Land , make a trade of slaundering your owne natiue countrey , and patronizing the slaunderours , as here the Cardinall , and whereas S. Paul with great dexteritie shunned the lie , to saue his countrymens reputation , you make no conscience of lying and slaundering , to defame yours . And why may not the Cardinall be said to doate ? Doth not the Poet say , dulce est desipere in loco ? Which he did , I trow , when he accepted at last the Cardinal-ship against his will , and after much refusall , as Eudaemon tells vs. — Cunctantem & multa parantem Dicere . To whome we may say in the same Poets words , — Quid si quod voce grauaris Mente dares ? And at last you see he yeilded indeede . But to the point . Doe not the English Puritanes pray dayly for his Maiesty by the title of supreame head and gouernour ? Doe they not set their hand to it , and subscribe their name ? Et voce & mann attesting to it , least happily you should say , vox quidem Iacob , manus autem Esau . And who are you then to gage hearts , which Hieremy sayes are vnfaddomable , or to search after secrets , which the Deuteronomy bids vs to reserue to God , and leaues to man onely such things as are manifest . Whence is it that you can reckon but of one example among vs all of the English Clergie , that was censured for omitting the aforesaid title in his prayer , as you enforme ? Does it not shew that others are of another mind , though this were graunted you to be so ? And yet there may be cause not to mention it in prayer , besides the want of perswasion of the truth of it at the heart . Though for my part I will not beleeue you in this report , which otherwise perhaps I should not greatly sticke at , yet if it be but because it is of your suggesting . That of the Philosopher beeing verified vpon such Tribades mendaciorum , such hackney-lyars as you are , that with telling so many vntruthes , you haue lost your credit for euer , euen then when you shal perchance speake the truth . And as Lucian sayes in his Phalaris , of such a kinde of people as our English run-awayes and malecontents are , that exaggerate the seuerity of our lawes with their lyes , Beleeue them not , though they say they saw it , beleeue them not though they say they felt it , meaning the torments which they most falsly amplified , as these also haue done , and set out in print , of whome I speake . But behold another argument to conuince the Puritanes , and that we are cumbred with such cattell yet , as deny the Supremacie , whatsoeuer the Bishop sayes to the contrarie . There were such spirits certaine yeares agoe . Are they therefore now ? Or , All haue not disclaymed the former error . Therefore none ? or a fewe onely ? or not the most ? nay , why not all ? For my part , if no other Puritanes were to be found , then such as acknowledge not the kings supremacie , euen in terminis , I thinke they would be a very geason people to meet with , like pretiosa visio . 1. Sam. 3. Yet you say , they choake conscience to swallow benefices , &c. Mala mens , malus animus . And , vt quisque animo optimè affectus est , it a difficillimè alios esse improbos suspicatur . Open suspecting of others , comes of secret condēning your selfe . But Bishop Barlow , & Mr. Rogers , lay this to the Puritanes that they digest not the supremacie . The word is one , the kind is diuerse : as all Papists are not powder-Papists : vsus flectit , dies lenit , tempus mitigat : Some are boysterous in their beginnings , like Ruben the first borne , ( whome Iacob calls his strength ) that in processe of time are not so violent . Mr. Rogers exemplifies it by forraine Puritanes , not by domesticall , or by the old , not by the modern , if you alleadge him right . And Bishop Barlow speakes of the Puritanes , as they were in the Auge , or in the Zenith , in their first loue , when their appetites were sharpest , their proceedings hottest , not as it hath pleased God to qualifie them since , and to temper them , qui reuelat etiam si quis aliter sapit , as the Apostle sayes . You say , * The Cardinall doth not know this , though they haue altered their iugdement , and therefore he must haue leaue , forsooth , to slaunder our Nation , or to say he doates is hard language . Yet why might hee not haue heard of it , if he had been so disposed ? Shall wee say , that ill newes flyes apace , the Ate still out-running the Latae , and his cares are open to no other talke , as the flie that hasts to sore places in the bodie , taking no delight in the sound ? Or as Theodorus the stage-plaier in Aristot . Politickes , would neuer be brought to play any part vpon a stage , vnlesse he might enter first , because the first things are most noted ( he said ) and make the deepest impression , ( the man belike hauing a good conceit of himselfe ) so the Cardinall keepes that fast which he hath heard first , either for fame , or for faith , and it is true as the Kings MAIESTIE sayes in his booke of him , that the English fugitiues ( your selfe for one M. F. T. ) haue so ramd in certen formes and apprehensions into his head , that they will not out againe with any force . But though he be onely for the first , let vs hast to your last . § 30. The last are these . One about the Iesuits , that should say they had committed no sinne in diuers yeares . Another about three Bulls of Excommunication from the Pope , readie to be published in three especiall parts of the Kingdome , if the powder-plot had taken effect . A third , about F. Garnet , and his beeing priuie to the said treason , as by his often confessions both before and at his death may appeare yet , whereof some are vnder his hand . As for the first of these , the Adioynder may doe well to haue recourse to Father Cotton , and to know of him what he thinkes , whether it be possible or no to attaine to such a perfection , of not sinning , in this life . Not onely as to auoid singula peccata , each sinne in the particular , but euen omnia peccata , all altogether . The first of which Friar Soto saies is possible to all men ( not onely to Iesuits , or such sublimated creatures ) and pro toto vitae cursu , as long as we here liue , not onely for certaine yeares , which is the case in the obiection . Neither is Soto onely of that opinion , among the Papists . Though the Bishop doth not say , that any Iesuite hath written so of himselfe , as the Adioynder either rashly or malitiously implies , to augment the slaunder . It is enough that they affirme it , though they put it not in print , as Orlandinus doth of Ignatius , the Protoplast Iesuite , that he should say he had no vaine-glorie to accuse himselfe of , in confession , full twentie yeares before he died . Whereas vain-glorie notwithstanding , is one of the last sinnes that we shake off , ( as appeares by S. Paul , who was faine to be buffetted by an angel of Satan for the repressing of that vice in him ) especially in such a life as Ignatius his was , daily meriting , and rising vp in merits . And yet as he , that beeing reuiled , and for a great while together said nothing againe , at last when he cried out , See how patient I am , he lost the praise which els he might haue wonne , if he had continued silent : So I would faine know , either of Ignatius , or his followers , how he that professes his freedome from the ticklings of vaine-glorie , doth not thereby bewray , that he hath yet some spice of the old corruption in him , whereof he will not be aknowne . § 31. Concerning his second Quaere : Strange , if Father Baldwine cannot resolue him of that point , with all the circumstances thereto belonging , insomuch as one of them saw , or saide he saw , the very boxes or caskets , which contained those Bulls , readie for the baiting . Neither is this so vnusuall a practise in Poperie , that he should beleeue it so slowly ; either to minde ill to a whole State , especially our English , which Eudaemon would haue vs thinke , that there is no good man , but would spoile it if he could , and set fire to it , or againe to awaite a time , of easing their malice , and powring forth of mischiefe at the best occasion . Howbeit herein he mistakes , whether wilfully , or no , let the reader iudge . For the Bishop did not say , that the Iesuit beeing in prison , reuealed this concerning the Bulls , mooued meerely thereunto by remorse of conscience , though well he might say , that he confessed it of his own accord , without feare , or compulsion , or examination any at all . Quid si in iurgio ? what if in a pet ? As the French prouerb is , that the boyling pot discouers the little pea that is in the very bottome of it . So enraged mindes disclose all . But Mr. Adioynder thinks all is so holy among the Iesuits , that if our compulsions and examinations be away , nothing is done by them forsooth , but of meere conscience . § 32. The third and last , about Father Garnet , is otherwise sufficiently testified to the world , though I say nothing : both by the most reuerend Bishop in sundrie places of each his bookes , out of the authenticall Records of this Kingdome , and Father Garnets hand-writing yet to be seen . Against all which Father Thomas opposes the credit of a certaine namelesse Gentleman , that stood by Garnet ( as himselfe saies ) whiles he was executed , and told him cleane otherwise , viz. that he neuer confessed any such thing . Is it not reason that he should be beleeued , though he brought no more then euen so to refell the Bishop ? And indeede no more he brings to conuince our Acts by , yea our eares and our eyes , our knowledge and our senses that here liue , and were present at the whole passage . Yet he addes , that false bruits were spread against Garnet ouer all Christendome . As much to say belike , as the whole Church was in an errour for censuring the Traytor . But to his notable impudence , brauing thus the Bishop , that mirrour of grauitie , of conscience , and sinceritie , himselfe a shadow , and one of Homers sneakes , — 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , as to vpbraid him with the lie , and the impudent lie , as the margent hath it , Numb . 82. or as the text riseth afterward , Numb . 83. an egregious lie , I will say no more , but euen gently leading him by the hand , and bringing him home to his owne doore , remember him what libertie they in all likelihood take to themselues of lying farre beyond vs , who thus dogmatize , That a lie in a Sermon is no mortall sinne , I suppose if it be to a good ende . And from hence it is that we haue so many lies in Poperie , prophecied of by S. Paul , 2. Tim. 4. 5. vt si vult decipi populus , decipiatur , that if the people will be deceiued , they may be deceiued , their owne common saying . Perhaps not thinking of that which they fit to their peoples backes , but euen too handsomely , by this meanes , Qui non susceperunt amorem veritatis , sed complacuerunt sibi in iniquitate , 2. Thess . 2. 11. 12. who refused to entertaine the loue of truth , and delighted in falshood and in iniustice , ( voluerunt decipi , they would needes be deceiued ; ) the very marke of the beast , and the character of them that are to liue vnder Antichrist . But my wonder is not , that Papists lie , but that they lie in Sermons , and then excuse it from crime , or from mortall blame : First lying in their very doctrines , and in the course of their preaching , then raising a doctrine of the lawfulnes of lies . To the 10. Chapter . The Reuerend Bishop , most vpright and vniforme in his proceedings , throughout the whole cause . Concerning the Sacrament , the Reward of good workes , the name Catholike , Monkerie , Succession of Bishops , Kingly Supremacie , and the rest . The Adioynder laying preuarication to his charge , is found to fulfill the slaunder himselfe . § 1. BEeing to speake to your tenth and last Chapter , I think good to begin with setting downe the Title of it , as it lies in your booke , which is this : That the Bishop ouerthroweth his owne cause , and fortifieth the Popish , graunting many important points of Catholike relligion . That he is turned Puritan in the Kings Ecclesiasticall Supremacie , and betrayeth his Maiesties cause vnder hand , pretending to defend it : and therefore is neither good English Protestant , nor yet good subiect . Lastly , what is the opinion of learned straungers , concerning him , and his booke ; with a good aduise for a friendly farewell . § . 2. Doe you expect what I reply to this frantike inscription ? Spectatum admissi ? Or rather , we will wish you some warme brothes to comfort your braine , then either confound it with blowes , as you euen now sentenced ( you may remember whom ) pro ingenitâ modestiâ tuâ , or distresse it with gibings ( though neuer so iust ) already troubled . And yet before you come to execute your late glorious title and denunciation of this your tenth Chapter , you must doe as the Comoedians doe , that in their last act , bring in all the Actors vpon the stage afresh , for pompe sake : So you tell vs here , what feates you haue wrought , in the precedent part of your booke , as if they had neuer beene dashed by any confutation , nor your enterlude disturbed in the least sort . In the first Chapter I haue done this , ( say you ; ) and in the second Chapter this , in the third Chapter the like : and so you goe on , blazing your trophees , both in Text and Margent , as if no bodie could reply to you , none stand in your hands , but you had carried all afore you , wheresoeuer you came , like a yong Alexander . And yet more definitiuely , as it were from your iudgement-seat , thus you pronounce , an other Herod , that the world may take notice of your great equitie and vnpartialitie , ioyned with like gift of discerning spirits : Thou mayest remember ( good Reader ) that among many things , which I censured and reprooued in Ms. Barlow , I greatly allowed and approoued one , &c. No doubt , terrible is your censure , your reproofes dangerous , and woe be to them vpon whome they light . Yet the Prelate that you speake of , were he aliue againe , he would rest so little satisfied with your approbation of him , in that one point , whatsoeuer it is , among the many that you disallowe in him , that he would coniure you into a boote , or into a bench-hole for your labour , like a sawcy Sinckanter , and make you an example for euer censuring him againe , or any of his ranke . But his vntimely death preuenting his paines , the want of the like spirits nourishes insolencie , and fleshes importunity , in such bold companions as you and yours . As for that you tell the Reader , he may remember , &c. I assure you , it is more then I can doe , to remember that which I neuer read , neuer heard of . I guesse by the Margent you should meane your Supplement , from which God excuse me , for I would not read it if it were brought to me , or I hyred to peruse it , specially if it be like this that here you offer vs , the most woodden com-patchment , in such tediousnesse of repetitions , that euer I hit on . § 3. Now there resteth onely one point to be handled ( say you ) which is of farre different qualitie from the former . And that is , as you explane your selfe shortly after , of such places in the Bishops booke , as hee ouerthroweth his owne cause by , and fortifieth yours , euen more then euer Mr. Barlowe did . A prettie imagination : shall we see how trow ? First , because he acknowledges , that Christ is to be adored , in & cum Sacramento , in and with the Sacrament . Why not ? sith wheresoeuer he is , he is to be adored , and we denie him not to be in the Sacrament , ( howsoeuer you slaunder vs ) though wee define not the manner , but leaue that to him , who both can and will verifie his promise , though we be neither conscious nor concurrent . I may say vnto you here , as Dionysius to Sopater , Epist . 6. Non si quid non rubrum est , proptereà candidum ; nec si quis non est equus , is homo sit necesse est : Euerie thing is not white that is not redde , neither if we denie a thing to be a horse , do we therefore straight conclude that it is a man. The Bishop grants that Christ is to be worshipped , and that he is to be worshipped in the Sacrament , which he infallibly accompanieth , and effectually assisteth : Ergò , with you he is a Pontifician , and maintaineth your cause , and betrayeth his owne . No such thing , gentle Sir. To make him yours , more goes to it then so . Especially these two , Corporall presence , and Transubstantiation or conuersion . These are the two maine badges , or rather buttresses , of your Cyclops , neither of which is be found in the Bishops writing , and God knowes is farre off from his beleefe . Howbeit , thinke you not that Christ is so to be worshipped in the Sacrament , or with the Sacrament , by our doctrine , as the Father with the Sonne , and the Sonne with the Father , or each of them in the other , where each partakes alike worship with the other : but as if I should say , that the King is to be worshipped , whether naked or in his cloathes ; whether bare-headed , or with his crowne & diademe on ; so Christ is to be worshipped in the Sacrament , and with the Sacrament , euery where no doubt , but more specially there , where so incomparable a benefit exhibited to our eyes , and presented to our hands , iustly challengeth the greatest zeale that may be . § 4. Though againe , when we say that Christ is in the Sacrament ( because we would not be mistaken ) we say not that he is there after a corporall manner : nay , that your own Captaine and Cardinall disclaimeth , Corporaliter esse Christum in Sacramento : but we say not so much as that his flesh is there , or his * bodie there at all , not onely after a bodily or fleshly manner . Christus ( saith S. Leo ) quadragesimo post resurrectionem die , coram discipulis eleuatus in coelum , corporalis praesentiae modum fecit , &c. Christ made a period of his bodily presence , beeing lifted vp into heauen , before the face of his Disciples the fortieth day after his resurrection . And S. Austen out of those words , Matth. 26. Non semper habebitis me vobiscum , with other like in S. Iohn , chap. 12. resolues it plainely , that secundum carnem non semper , according to the flesh , he is not alwayes with vs. Tract . 109. in Ioh. It were not hard to produce diuers more to the same purpose . Yea , Si esset in terra , non esset sacerdos , Heb. 8. If Christ were on the earth , he could be no Priest . So as you destroy his Priesthood , while you stand for such presence , to commend your Sacrifice . I say therefore neither bodily , nor in bodie at all . For though the flesh and the deitie of our Sauiour Christ neuer were separated , nor neuer may be , since the first instant of his sacred conception , if you attend the knot of personall vnion , yet the Godhead is spread through diuerse places and spaces , which the bodie and flesh approacheth not in any distance . Vnles you wil be so wood now , as to adde brutish Vbiquitisme , to your barbarous Cyclopisme . So as Christ may be in the Sacrament , and there adored , yet his bodie be neither there , or not after bodily manner at least ; but howsoeuer it be there , not transformed , nor transubstantiated out of the bread , as your conceit is . And thus therefore there is not paries , or maceries onely , but murus still , or valtum , betweene yours and the reuerend Bishops assertion . The profoundnesse of this mysterie , leads vs to wade thus softly and suspensiuely , knowing that Gods wayes are in many waters , and his footsteps vnknowne , his pathes vnsearchable . Wee can scarce discerne the print of his chariot-wheeles , as he rides along before our eyes , onely wee heare a noyse in the tops of the mulberrie trees , as Dauid did sometime , 2. Sam. 5. 24. The bones of the Passeouer must be burnt with fire , saith S. Chrysostome , and S. Theophylact , that is , Diuine mysteries not ripped vp , nor ransacked , but adored and couered by deuout respect . And with good Mr. Hooker , we conclude our enquiries about the Sacrament of the Lords Supper , with this modest Epiphonema , O my God , thou art true , O my soule thou art happie , sollicitous for no more . § 5. I had thought I had beene at an ende of this intricate question , or neere an ende , when I was crossed in my conceits by the author of the Manna . Whose intents as I cannot but praise for auouching the honour , and expressing the fruit of this diuine mysterie , so , what weight there is in his remonstrances for their Transubstantiation , that one sentence of his may shew , which he quotes out of S. Cyrill of Hierusalem , Catechesi 4. Mystagogica , and he is content to seeme to put such affiance in , as in that shippe to venture all his ware , which the wise forbid . For which cause also , he hath not onely singled it out from the rest , but set it in the front of his following Discourse , while he inserts it into his Epistle to his most Excellent MAIESTIE , as the motiue most of might , in all his Mount of Testimonies ( so he calls them ; ) belike mons caseatus according well with coelum mellifluum , or nubes escatilis , as Tertullian describes it . Well , what saies S. Cyrill ? I will translate it out of the Latine , as the Author renders it , though the Latine be not so exact with the Greeke in all points . Knowing this , and beleeuing it for certaine , that this bread which we see is not bread , although the tast discernes it to be bread , but that it is the bodie of Christ . And the wine which we see , although it seeme to be wine to our sense of tast , yet is not wine , but the blood of Christ . This S. Cyrill . In all which wordes , of Transubstantiation not a word ; or conuersion any . And yet this sentence must carrie the world , by the iudgement of our Author , speaking from the clowdes , and distilling influences . But he that does not acknowledge the phrase of the holy Fathers , speaking of Christs Sacraments , to magnifie the vertue of the hidden grace , with a certaine contempt of the externall signe , or abolishment rather , that the other may be most eminent , he may sooner bewray his rawnes in Diuinitie , then hurt the cause by his profound arguing . Zelus domus tuae comedit me , saies the Prophet Dauid : And , Zelus mensae tuae nos , may they say . I meane the supernall and mysticall table , ( which themselues oft speake of , as prepared in heauen , whereas if the Christ were on earth , on earth should be our table too , as well as our dish ) but , the zeale , I say , which they carried to that intelligible table , and the grace that the great feast-maker distributes therefrom , makes them to make no reckoning of the visible elements , as they are hammered in natures forge . For what prophane eye cannot discerne of them so ? Who so ill nurtured , or so new-illuminate , such as those were to whome S. Cyrill speakes here ? But to lift vp the minde higher , to bring the spouse into the wine-cellar , ( as the holy Ghost speakes in the Canticles ) and to acquaint them with the treasure which those homely vessells containe , that was here S. Cyrills studie , and about that the holy Fathers spend their strengths most willingly , when they treat of this argument . The Cardinall saies , ( I graunt ) that in a Catechisme , all things should be laid out most literally , and most plainly . And therefore S. Cyrill calling his workes here Catechizings , wee should looke for no figures , but all direct . In Catechesi omnia propriè & simpliciter explic antur , saies he . Lib. 2. de Eucharist . cap. 13. Forgetting that these , though they are called Catechizings , yet not so much of instruction , as ours are wont to be , when we teach in Churches , as of spurre and exhortation to the new-illuminate , ( they are called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 here by S. Cyrill , ) to inflame their minds , to kindle their affections , rather then to inlighten their iudgements , ( Seraph-like , not Cherub-like , if I may be suffered so to speake , ) that they would consider of their profession , and adorne their calling , keepe pure their garments , and henceforth construe of occurrents in relligion , rather Christianly then popularly , which is the cause that S. Cyrill lifts vp his voice , and bespeakes them in the language of vehemence new laid downe . Not onely to preserue the primitiue phrase of the institution , though that preuaile we see so farre with the Apostle Paul , as to call it the bodie , when he calls it the bread ( euen with one breath both , ) but to eleuate folkes minds also to the consideration of the right worth and valew of it . As another of them , beeing to expresse the benefit of Baptisme ( a Sacrament lesse admired , though of most principall operation ) is not afraide to say as much for our transubstantiation into Christ , as they can alleadge for the breads , out of any writer . And yet I hope they will not say , that we are really metamorphosed , or substantially transformed , into Christs bodie , by Baptisme . Leo Ser. 14. de Pass . Dom. In Baptisme ( saith he ) while we lay downe the old man , and take vp the new , there is a semblant of our dying , as well as of our rising againe ; both in one . Vt susceptus à Christo Christūque suscipiens , non idē sit post lavacrū qui fuit ante Baptismum , sed corpus regeniti sit caro crucifixi . That is , [ The bodie of the partie Christened , is the flesh of our Lord , crucified . ] This S. Leo. And to helpe you to Transubstantiation , he enclines almost to vtter abolition , or annihilation , if that may gratifie you . For he saies , Non idem post qui ante lavacrum . That is , [ The baptized partie is not the same after , that he was before his baptisme . ] What more daungerous word could S. Cyrill let fall , or any Father of them all , to sound for your supposalls about Transubstantiation , while they meant no such thing ( your selues will confesse that they neuer meant it in baptisme ) but onely sought to endeare the Sacrament to vs , and to auerre the soueraigne vertue of it ? But let S. Cyrill be iudge , as we read him in the same place , which our Druggist quotes : specially because we finde him so well minded in relligion , ( Cyrill I meane ) as to make the Scripture iudge of all that he shall say , commanding his schollers to beleeue him no otherwise , then as he shall be able to iustifie , all that he brings , by Scripture . § 6. First , in his first Catechese , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , out of which the aforesaid authoritie is quoted . He makes 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , not simply 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , nor simply 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , to be opposed to the body and blood of Christ . Which shews , that he enclines not to Transubstantiation , but a change of the vse , and an encrease of the grace , or benediction , that goes with them . For 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is not repugnant to 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , but to 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , and may be wine still . Againe , he imputes this to the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ouer them , the invocation of Gods grace , and holy Spirits assistance , ( which likewise he repeats in his sift Cateches : soone after ) not to demurmuratorie words , which they vse in Poperie , and call Consecration . Yea doubtles , comparing this our Christian seruice , with the seruice of deuills , ( to giue a little light by way of contrarietie ) wherein things offered to deuills , are made prophane by such offering , ( 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ) though afore they were sacred , or indifferent , he giues vs to vnderstand , that he meanes no more , but that the elements by prayer acquire a degree of sanctification ( not of nature , ) ( I meane relatiue and collatiue , not essentiall sanctification ) though they are called by him the bodie and blood of Christ , in the same place , as they are also by S. Paul in the chapters before noted , either to keepe the phrase of Christs primitiue institution ( as I saide ) or to augment their reuerence , and to proclaime their worth , for effectuall operation . § 7. Another place is in the Catechese which the obiection is taken out of , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . You shall heare what words lie round about it , to direct vs in the vnderstanding . First , he saies we haue the bodie of Christ reached to vs , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , in the type of bread , and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , his blood in the type of wine , not in the Accidents of either . 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 beeing put so constantly for a substantiall simile , as I thinke they will not easily shew example to the contrarie . And therefore no Transubstantiation with S. Cyrill . But he promises vs to be concorporate , and of one blood with Christ , adding that wee shall be made partakers of the diuine nature by the same meanes , as S. Peter had said . ] Which sure is not their lot that receiue at all-aduentures , as it should be , if Christs flesh were really in the Sacrament , but according to the faith of each godly receiuer , so it happens vnto him to be vnited to Christ , and that is the transformation which S. Cyrill here driues at . In so much as he condemnes Sarcophagie in plain tearms , which is the opiniō that some haue , as if they should eate Christs naturall flesh in the Sacrament , ( the very Popish Canniball at this day . ) And he counts them Capernaites , for their grosse conceit of that Diuine mysterie , saying that no meruaile if they went back from Christ , Ioh. 6. v. 66. ( euen as this driues many backe now , in Poperie ) onely for want of spirituall vnderstanding . Yet what spirituall vnderstanding I pray , if Christs flesh be eaten properly , properly betweene our teeth , digested properly into the members of our bodie , as he had said before , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , except onely that he saies not properly , because he meanes mystically , and no otherwise . § 8. Then comes in the distinction , betweene 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , and themselues as they are sanctified . 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . Consider not the bread and wine , as single bread and wine . For why ? they are sanctified . And in our Sauiours phrase they are his bodie and his blood , but in our Sauiours phrase onely , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , saies S. Cyrill . What more true ? And now we are not to thinke , that no more vertue goes with them , then the eye can perceiue , or the tast discerne , but wee must rest our selues vpon our Sauiours words , vpon faith , not vpon sense . This is all the appeale from sense to faith , that S. Cyrill allows , not for quelling the natures , but extolling the powers , of the consecrated elements . As he saies in the conclusion of his fourth Catechese , as it were taunting at the senses , if they contest with faith , or intrude themselues vnmannerly into Gods mysteries , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , though sense be frampoll , though sense will needes haue it so , ( Hagar against Sarah ) that is raw sense , and vncontrolled by the Spirit , which els is so gouerned & trained from aboue , as ( not renouncing the tast , or digging out the eyes , with the heathenish Democritus , but onely washing and cleansing them in the poole Siloam , ) in a rugged shell it sees a pearle most pretious . § 9. The like in his fift Catechese , and vpon the like grounds . 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , &c. That is , Commit not the iudgement of this matter to your throate ( your bodily throate ) but to stedfast faith , &c. And good reason . For which he addes , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . That is , For no bodie is willed to eate bread , or to tast wine , ( when the Sacrament is to be receiued : ) But as the semblants or memorialls of Christs body and blood , so are they reached to vs , and so receiued of vs. Most truely , and most diuinely . Which hinders not their persisting in the same nature that they were , though they are deliuered to vs , as instruments now of another worke , or as monuments , or pledges , of a greater grace . Nay , because he makes them 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , figures onely of his blood , and figures of his bodie , he denies the essentiall in the Papists rawe sense at least , to all that are not preiudicate . § 10. But because I am stept into his fift Catechese ere I was aware , I will conclude with that . One time we read thus there . 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . He had said that we inuoke or call for the holy Ghost , to be sent downe vpon the elements as they lie before vs : 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . Then he addes , as the Greek imports , newly set downe ; For wheresoeuer the holy Spirit of God doth but touch , immediately the thing is sanctified , and also changed . Loe what transmutation S. Cyrill meanes , namely , that which stands onely in sanctification . And he saies , whersoeuer the holy Ghost but toucheth , the like transmutation is instantly wrought . Yet how often doe we change by the operation of the holy Ghost , and not in substance ? As , à gloria in gloriam , tanquam à Domini spiritu : which words were the conclusion of his last Catechese before this ; and many the like changes that might be brought for instance . Finally , thus : 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . And againe bringing them together , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . That is , Holy is that before vs , Holy you whome the holy Ghost hath inspired . Holy things with holy things beare good proportion . Yet what 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 betweene Christ and vs , in the matter of holinesse ? what proportion or correspondence betweene our holinesse and his ? As S. Chrysostome sweetly saies vpon Matth. 5. p. 96. edit . Etonen . Betweene Gods mercie , and humane pitty , there is as much difference , as betweene the very goodnes and naughtinesse that is incident to men . And so also betweene our holinesse and Christs holinesse . Therefore S. Cyrill concludes , looking vp to Christ ; 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . There is but one holy , there is but one Lord , which is Iesus Christ . Rising from the elements , passing by themselues which were of the audience , pitching in Christ . Whom he knewe to be farre aboue , and in an other region , not in altars made with hands , but in the Kingdome euerlasting , where righteousnesse dwels , that is , where himselfe . So as we haue the Pharisee as well as the Capernaite , Popish Iustification together with Transubstantiation , here cōfuted . But this purposely , that by the way . § 11. As for Bellarmines addition to the other testimonies of S. Cyrill ( which the Manna pretermits , or at least makes no vaunt of it in his Dedicatorie ) that S. Cyrill should forbid vs in his fift Catechese , to spill the crummes of the holy Eucharist , Ergò , he presupposeth bodily presence ; I answer in one word : we doe the like with them , ( I meane with the crummes , which our Lord forbad to be spilt , when they ministred no grace , but onely manifested his power , Ioh. 6. 12. ) And not onely with them , but with things much lesse holy . We beare a meete respect towards them , Propter connexionem cum Sancto ; as the nature of mankind is , ( euen without a Schoole-master ) to be mooued with the bye , and where we honour the principall , not to contemne the appertinances . Yet no Transformators , no such sauage Sarcophagi , as S. Cyrill bends his penne against , in the place before shewed . And thus much of S. Cyrill . I returne into my way , and from Manna to Marah , to the Adioynders cauills . § 12. Two more he vses yet about this matter of the Sacrament , which I will ende with them , them with it . One , that Caluine and diuerse other Protestant Diuines , denie that Christ is to bee worshipped in the Sacrament , or with the Sacrament , that so he may make the Bishop to be irregular and paradoxicall , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . Though it bee allowed to Eagles to flie alone , and they are said to be but sheepe that alwaies heard together , yet he shall neuer put this scandall vpon the Reuerend Bishop , nor diuide in him the eminence of a Pastor most conspicuous , from the meekenesse and the conformablenesse of the quietest lambe in the flocke . Therfore shore vp your eyes , good Mr Adioynder , and looke once again vpon your Bellarmine , from whom you stole these quotations , wherewith your Margent is be-painted , in this place , of Calvine , and Melancthon , denying , as you pretend , the worship of the Sacrament , in the sense aforesaid : though still I must tell you , that the Bishop neuer auouched the worship of the Sacrament , ( which some of your owne Diuines denie , if * Bellarmine say true ) but onely of the Lord , either accōpanying his Sacrament , or wheresoeuer else present . You shall finde in Bellarmine , that all the questiō between our Diuines about the worshipping of the Sacrament , is twofold : The one during the vse and the act of the Lords Supper , the other for the time following , and vpon the reseruation of the elements . And though this may finde but small friendship among our writers , which , if your opinion be not disclaimed , exposes Christ to the most abhominable iniuries that may be , ( as namely , to be worried or wasted of beasts , while you pretend to keepe him to be worshipped of men , ) yet in the act of participation , Contendunt Christi corpus esse adorandum , ( saith he ) they are earnest to auouch the worshipping of Christs bodie , namely , a Luther , b Bucer , c Brentius , & d Chemnitius . But it may bee you will say , that these are such as hold the corporall presence and coexistence . You shall heare Calvine therefore , whom your selfe quote , as a condemner of this worship , how modestly and how mildly hee discusses the whole question hereabout . Institut . l. 4. c. 17. Parag. 35. Quomodò ex re ambiguâ ceriò conficient quod volunt ? Nempe vbi certo Dei verbo desicise videbunt , quo vno consistunt animae nostrae , vbi Apostolorum doctrinam & exempla sibi aduersari , se verò solos sibi authores esse cogitabunt , &c. Accedent etiam alia . Quid ? an res erat nullius momenti Deum hac forma adorare , vt nihil nobis praescriberetur ? An cum de vero Dei cultu ageretur , tantâ leuitate fuerat tentandum , de quo nullum vsquam verbum legebatur ? That is ; How will they conclude certenly , out of a thing vncertaine ? For when they shall see they are destitute of Gods most pregnant word , vpon which alone our soules rely , when they shall see that both the doctrine , and examples of the Apostles are wanting to them , and that themselues are the onely authors of this deuise , namely then they will be to seeke for their adoration . So that Calvine , you see , argues from the want of ground in Scriptures for this controuerted worship , rather then oppugnes it in any odious or offensiue fashion . As also that shewes which followes in him . [ Is it a small matter , saith he , to adore God in such a manner as he neuer prescribed , or should that be so lightly or rashly attempted in the matter of Gods worship , of which we neuer read any word any where extant ? ] At si quâ decet humilitate , &c. auscultassent certè quod ipse dixit , Accipite , manducate , bibite , huicque mandato paruissent , quo accipi Sacramentum , non adorari iubet . That is , But if they had submitted themselues to Gods word , as they ought , they would haue hearkened to that which himselfe said , Take , eate , drinke , and they would haue obeyed that Commandement , whereby he bad them receiue , not adore , the Sacrament . I know , that both Bellarm. and Valentia , and the rest of you , are wont to scoffe at this argument . [ He bids vs receiue it , but not adore it . ] This ( say you ) follows not . But you shall see that Epiphanius argues so altogether in his Tractate against the Collyridian heretikes , of which before . Marie was holy , saies he , Marie was created for good vse , and for the benefit of mankind , but not to be worshipped . This is his manner of arguing . If you deride vs , deride him too , for our methode is the same . I returne to Calvine . Habemus Apostolorum exemplum , quos non legimus prostratos adorâsse , sed vt erant discumbentes accepisse & manducâsse . Habemus Apostolicae Ecclesiae vsum , vbi fideles non in adoratione , &c. That is ; We haue the practise of the Apostles for vs , of whome we doe not read , that they fell prostrate and adored , but as they sate at table they tooke and eate . We haue the obseruation of the Church , in the Apostles time , of whome S. Luke reports , that the faithfull communicated , not in worshipping , but breaking of the bread . We haue lastly the doctrine of the Apostles on our side , namely that in which Paul instructed the Corinthians [ not mentioning the adoration of the Sacrament in least wise , and yet ] professing that what he deliuered to them he receiued of the Lord. In fine he concludes : Atque haec quidem eò tendunt , vt expendant pij lectores , quàm non tutum sit in rebus tam arduis , &c. Calvine would haue vs to refraine from worshipping the Sacrament of the Eucharist for safetie sake . Quia non tutum . Nam vt Christum illic ritè apprehendant piae animae , in coelum erigantur necesse est . For the soule that will apprehend Christ rightly in the Sacrament , must be lifted vp into heauen , there is no remedie . Can you denie this to be most true ? He addes yet . Quid ergo ? superstitiosum esse cultum negabimus , cum sese homines coram pane prosternunt , vt Christum illic adorent ? Huic malo proculdubio obuiare voluit Nicaena Synodus &c. That is ; What then ? shall we denie that to be a superstitious kind of worship , when men cast downe themselues before a piece of bread , to the end they may worship Christ there ? No doubt the Nicene Councell intended to preuent this mischiefe , when it forbad vs to be too basely or sollicitously attentiue about the elements set before vs. And for this cause the people were wont to be aduertised by some one speaking in a loud voice , sursum corda , that they should lift vp their hearts . The Scripture also shewing vs where to seeke Christ , bids vs seeke him in heauen , at the right hand of his Father , Col. 3. 1. Secundum hanc regulam erat potiùs spiritualiter in coelesti gloria adorandus Christus , quàm excogitandum istud tam periculosum adorationis genus , &c. According to this rule we ought rather to worship Christ spiritually , and as he is placed in the heauenly glorie , then deuise this so daungerous kind of adoration . Daungerous he calls it , because it may haue euill consequence , and be of kindred to grosse and carnall opinions , concerning God , as are his words following in the same place ; also he preferres the other before it by a potiùs , or by a rather onely , as sparing the rest . Lastly , he thus disputes , or concludes shall I say , in his 37. Parag. not farre from the former place . Christo inquiunt hanc venerationem deferimus . Primùm si in caena hoc fieret , dicerem adorationem eam demum esse legitimam , qua non in signo residet , sed ad Christum in coelo sedentem dirigitur . The question is there about the carrying of the host vp and downe in pompe . And they alleadge for themselues , saith he , that they giue this worship to Christ . But how does Calvine answer them ? I am first to say , quoth he , that if this were done of them , at the time of the Sacrament of the Lords Supper , neuerthelesse that worship onely were to be counted lawfull , which did not rest in the element , but rose vp higher , and were directed to Christ sitting in heauen . Where you see he resists the circumgestation of the host , rather then the reuerence that belongs to the Lords Supper , and graunts directly , that in cana si hoc fieret , in the Lords Supper if this were done ( namely that Christ were adored there ) he would not greatly mislike it , so we soared aboue the signe , and confined him not to the element , but rose vp in our cogitations to him , as he is sitting in heauen . The Bishop therefore reuolts not from the current of our Diuines , about the worshipping of the Sacrament , but worshipping Christ wheresoeuer he findes him ( for euen Bellarmine can tell vs here , that we are not tied to any place , Ioh. 4. since the times of the new Testament , but that they admit of all alike , ) yet willingliest rises aboue the sphere of the Creation , & considers him as apparelled with celestiall glorie . This was one . § 13. Another thing that I am to note , of kin to the former , and entangled with the argument of the adoration of the Sacrament , is this . In summe , a grosse vntruth of the Adioynders , Numb . 4. In that quoting the Bishops booke , pag. 201. lin . 8. he saies he treats of the same matter there , viz. of the worshipping of Christ in the Sacrament . Of which not a word , on my word , in that place , but by occasion of another question about worshipping Gods footestoole , which S. Augustine and S. Ambrose construe to be the flesh of our Sauiour Christ , not any materiall footestoole , as the Papists would haue it , he shews how the flesh and humane nature of Christ may be worshipped , by the priuiledge of their assumption into his Godhead . And he explicates it by the similitude of a King , and his roabe , which participates in a manner of the reuerence done to the King himselfe . This doe both S. Augustine and the Bishop manifestly in that place ; I say , they shew how Christs flesh may be worshipped with the Godhead , whereas the Adioynder saies the Bishop teaches by this comparison , that the flesh of Christ may be adored with the Sacrament , and the Sacrament with it , by vertue of such coniunction . Which is a notable vntruth , as I said before , the Bishop neither insinuating any thing to that purpose in all that place , and vtterly denying it elswhere , viz. pag. 195. of the same booke . The Sacrament no where , saies he , the earthly part , as Irenaeus calls it , but Christ euery where is to be worshipped . And his flesh too : but as he declares afterward out of S. Austen , p. 201. lin . 8. as euen now I noted . Such conscience in his reporting , or such diligence in his reading , heed in his obseruing , vseth the Adioynder . But so much of the first branch of this chapters accusation , concerning the Sacrament . I am to be short in the rest . § 14. ANother is , about the Reward of good works . He saies , the Bishop fauours their opinion in that too . As if we , when we denie either iustification by workes , or the merit of good workes after iustification , denyed reward , recompence , retribution . We acknowledge with S. Gregorie in his Commentarie vpon the Canticles , that the hands of the Bridegroom are set with Chrysolites , that is , that he hath many gemmes and precious iewels which he carries alwaies about him , as it were the rings of his fingers , to reward his fauourites with , now one , then another . But yet againe , we cannot but ioyne with S. Hilarie , saying , That for so much as we are called to be like the lillies , which neither spinne nor sowe , and yet equall Salomon in all his royaltie , it is a similitude of the righteousnesse which we haue by faith , and the possession of eternall glorie , without the merit of good workes . Quibus ( saies he ) nec laborantibus nec nentibus , extra operis mercedem gloriae candor a Deo indultus est , &c. And thus , he supposeth wee are made like the Angels , which condition you knowe we are promised , totidem verbis , elsewhere , namely , Luk. 20. 36. And yet the Angels merits are little spoken of in Scripture , mans rather ( though no were avouched , yet the rather I say , of the two ) that man may be stirred vp , to the working of good workes , with no lesse zeale , and feruencie , then if the obtaining of the crowne depended meerly therupon . But the Angels hazard and probation-time beeing past , nothing is pronounced but ●xactly concerning them , to whom the glorie of meriting must neuerthelesse belong in all reason , before we men may challenge it . Yea , but meritum and merces ( saith the Adioynder ) are correlatiues , and if reward be graunted , merit may by no meanes be denyed . It followes not , good Sir. There is a reward of free mercie , as well as of due desert , a reward of liberalitie , as S. Ambrose distinguishes , as well as issuing from the rigour of absolute iustice , which is the hirelings reward , whereas we hold by inheritance , and call him Father , as S. Peter puts vs in mind , 1. Pet. 1. 17. or , are children and heires , as * S. Paul often . § 15. The Hebrew word for wages , ( the Adioynders Merces , that he argues from ) signifies ( as I haue heard ) but as much as the calx , the heele in a mans body . Because as the heele is the finall , the bottome of Gods workemanship , so the worke ceaseth when the wages is paid . As Salomon can tell vs , that he that payeth afore-hand , cuts off the hands , and the legges , meaning that the wages is the period of the worke , and that beeing paid , all paines are at an ende ; no bodie workes when he hath receiued his pay , no more then if his armes , or his legges were cut off . And the Latine calx , the goale after a race , may perchance come from thence , ( but I define nothing ) as the finall of that exercise , in which they rest and breath themselues , that ranne before . Consummaui cursum , 2. Tim. 4. 7. The Greeke word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 therefore must be no otherwise construed in the New Testament ; for the New loues to speake in the tearmes of the Old , as they know that know any thing . And so Merces is not so proud as to inferre merit , ( as the Adioynder would ) but onely the reward which the worke precedeth , and the worke is concluded by that reward . They haue receiued their reward , their 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , their wages , Matth. 6. It is three times there in one Chapter . Doe the hypocrites therefore merit in their damnable hypocrisies ? It were a shame to thinke so . How much better Bellarmine , that awakes at last , and expounds mereri by impetrare meere ? De Rom. Pont. l. 3. c. 23. So as no maruell if our writers abhorre from the word merit ( as the Adioynder notes ) wishing rather it had neuer been in vse : which is no more then S. Austen of the word Fortune , and yet that the Scripture vseth in diuers places , as in S. Luke , and Ecclesiastes , and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , 1. Cor. 12. 10. Much more therefore that which the Scripture neuer vseth , as the word merit , though they translate 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 so , Heb , 13. most vnfittly ; vnlesse you will abate from the sense of merit , ( as Bellarmine euen now ) rather then racke 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to so abominable insolence . S. Hierome in his Comm. in Matth. 10. sayes that Issachar by interpretation signifies merces , that is to say wages , a brand for them that hold by merit , as it is correlatiue to wages , as the Adioynder teacheth ; there beeing 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , the wages of wickednesse , or of vnrighteousnesse ( no lesse then of good workes ) which who will say we properly merit , vnlesse it be the wages of woe and condemnation for siune ? 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , is still put in Scripture in the bad sense , as might be shewed more at large if it were pertinent . Ioh. 10. twice together , Luk. 15. likewise twice , &c. So as well might S. Chrysostome say , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , that wee must not serue God for pay , but for his owne sake . Though it is true , that Ipse est merces nostra magna nimis , Genes . 15. And does the Adioynder thinke that he can merit God ? Of merit hitherto . § 16. As for the iustice , that is incident to the keeping of promise , that there may be a iustice in our rewards whatsoeuer ; such a iustice we graunt you , we contend not about it . God ; way of rewarding vs ( when he accepts our pains , rests wel pleased with our endeauours ) is full of this iustice . Yea , all the wayes of God are iust and true , so : God is questionlesse iust in all his courses . In the creation of the world , in the giuing of the first grace , in the sending of his Sonne to bee our Redeemer ; but so as merit creepe in neuer the more for all that , and much lesse the Bishop turne praeuaricator , the cleerest confessor , and the directest champion , ( let the triall bee his carriage euen in this verie controuersie ) that euer yet encountred you in the cause . Shall I say , that as Annibal would perswade the Romans that Fabius was for Carthage , and therefore burnt not his gardens , when he burnt all the rest , threaping kindnesse vpon him ? Or rather as I haue heard some Sophisters in the Schooles , when they were puzled with an argument , which they could not tell how to answer , they would fall to trifling and shifting , Haec omnia verissima sunt , concedo tibi cuncta , iam meas partes agis , &c. but were neuer a whit the neerer to the assoyling of the obiection , in wise mens iudgements : so the Adioynder doth here , and in this whole Chapter . He saies the Bishop is turned Popish , and closes with the Cardinall , because he confutes the Cardinall , ( as it were getting within him ) either by his owne authorities , or at least by his owne Authors , as Gregorie de Valent. here for one . And though I could wish from my heart , that it were true which you say , that the Bishop were of your minde , that so you might be of the Bishops , Vellem omnes esse sicut memetipsum , 1. Cor. 7. 7. and Act. 26. 29. I would to God that all were answerable , and in all points , exceptis ijs quae aut optare aut sperare dementis est , yet hearken you in a word how much farther both the Cardinall and certaine others haue gone in challenging to themselues the heauenly fauour ( which is better then the life , then the Kingdome it selfe , if we beleeue Dauid : Psal . 62. 4. ) out of their inherent worthinesse , then euer the Bishop 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , for his diuine pietie sake , then diuerse vnder him , not onely with your elenches , but with your more forcible engines , I meane your rackes and your strappadoes , would euer be brought to do . And first the Cardinal , the card that you saile by , de iustif . l. 2. c. 16. Effectus infusae charitatis est , reconciliare hominem Deo , & hic effectus consequitur ex naturâ rei absolutè . That is : The effect of the loue of God , dwelling in our soules , is such , as to make our peace betweene God and vs. And this effect followes absolutely ex naturâ rei , out of the nature of that qualitie , viz. the loue of God , as it is shedde abroad in our hearts . The question is , betweene the Adioynder and vs , whether the fauour of God follow vpon our good works , or vertuous habits , seclusâ promissione , without the promise of God , yea or no ? Or rather in truth , this is not the question . But the Bishop not onely graunting this , but mainely vrging it , and thereby either extenuating , or cleane ouerthrowing their supposed merit , the Adioynder saies , that herein the Bishop saies no more then the ranckest Papist of them all : viz. that all merit presupposes Gods promise . And yet here wee haue the Cardinall ascribing our friendship with Almightie God , our peace and our reconciliation with the Lord of all things , ( which is our most immediate title to the kingdome of heauen , and the remoouing of the mainest barre that keepes vs out from thence , or can possibly keep vs , ) to the effect of such poore charitie as is found inherent in vs , ex naturâ rei absolutè : the promise , either supprest , or at least silenced ; yea so silenced , as supprest for certaine , renounced plainely . But Vasquez more audaciously and presumptuously yet , then Bellarmine , ( the beast belike waxing prowder and prowder ) in I á secundae , Disput. 204. cap. 4. Deus ipse efficere non potest , quin per inhaerentem iustitiam sit dignus quisque aternâ vitâ , et si per absolutam potentiam possit non dare . That is : God himselfe cannot hinder , but that euery man is worthie of eternall life , out of his inherent righteousnes , though out of his absolute power he may refuse to giue it him . I examine not this Diuinitie , how God may be vniust by his absolute power , whereas his absolute power doth not giue him that leaue , to denie his iustice , that is himselfe , which I suppose he should doe , if he denied rewards to them that haue deserued them , and are worthie of them . But by this may be seene , whether the Bishop be turned Papist yea or no , for standing for Gods promise to ground our hope of heauen vpon , or rather whether Valentia be not turned Protestant , for holding so precisely , that secluso promisso , we haue no cause of confidence . Or , if that be Poperie , which Valentia holdeth , and the Bishop laies hold on , that we haue no right to heauen but for the promise , whether Vasquez and Bellarmine sauour not of a rancker contagion then so , that aduance vs to heauen , and to the highest fauour of God , out of the worth of what is within vs , though his promise were no where , though his pactum salis were cleane plowed downe . Can there be any thing more contrarie then the aforesaid opinions are betweene themselues ? Or is not the Bishop most constant , while the Iesuites are thus at oddes , like the Armites , among themselues ? One of them beeing so humble , and so humbly conceiting of his owne sufficiencies , as it seemes at least , that you would thinke he might enter in euen through the needles eye ; the others so swelling , as heauen it selfe , large though it be , is scarce able to containe them . But if this be their speculation , about infused righteousnes , which is Gods entire worke , what doe they thinke of their owne workes , trow you , which for certaine they will challenge more reward vnto , because they are more voluntarie , and of their freer concurrence ? And indeede the question was betweene the Bishop and the Cardinall , about the merit of works , not of habits . These , make habits and all to be meritorious , one absolutely ex naturâ rei , the other so as God cannot hinder condignitie , though he denie pay . Yet S. Paul not onely vilifies his habite of righteousnes , Phil. 3. that I may be found in him , not hauing mine owne righteousnes , but his workes of righteousnes , Tit. 3. and which is more then both these , his sufferings for righteousnes , Rom. 8. He had plaied the Auditour , he had cast vp his accounts , and his totall is what thinke you ? 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , &c. I find ( saies he ) by computation , or by exact casting , that the present sufferings of this transitorie life ( 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , they are so short ) they are not worthie of the glorie that shall be reuealed . He keepes the word , you see , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , they are not worthie . Yet Vasquez saies , God cannot hinder their worthines , no not onely by his ordinarie power , but not by his absolute , ( though he may denie the wages by the later of these two , that is scarce iustly , or very vniustly onely , as I conceiue it . ) But what saies Bellarmine ? The Apostle ( saies he ) meanes , that the sufferings here are temporall , the blisse to come eternall , and that betweene them there is no proportion . Now surely a worshipfull solution , of an insoluble authoritie . Whereas the Apostle does not say , they are not proportionable ratione durationis , but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , that they are not worthie , which is the very question . And was this a sentence worthie of S. Pauls wisdome , to tell vs that there is no proportion betweene finite and infinite ? Who does not know that ? We may say vnto him , as he does to Calvine in another place , about the wisdome of Vlysses , pronouncing for Monarchies ; Ad hoc certè pronunciandum non fuit opus sapientiâ vel Pauli , vel Apostoli : De Pontif. Rom. l. 1. c. 2. The very Centurion , to whome the Iewes had giuen that testimonie , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , he is worthie , yet he ouerthroweth it in the same place againe , with 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , I did not count my selfe worthie , Luc. 7. 7. They thought him worthie that Christ should come to him , when he does not thinke himselfe worthie so much as to come to Christ . And not to come to him in earth , I say ; yet into heauen trow you ? to finde him out there too ? As he must , if he meane to be saued by his works . But so is merit and worthines euery way hissed out , so is it one thing for the Iewes to ponder other bodies merits , another thing for the conscience to weigh it selfe in vnpartiall ballance . The builder of the Synagogue is modester then the Iewes that enioy his buildings . § 17. Many things might be noted in the Adioynders discourse , wherein he choakes himselfe , though he indite the Bishop of preuarisation . Num. 7. he saies , the Bishop alludes to the pennie in the Gospells , that was giuen to the labourers , by which the Fathers ( as he confesseth ) vnderstand eternall life and saluation . He quotes Hierome in Iovinian , lib. 2. Aug. de Virgin. c. 26. Greg. in Iob. l. 4. c. 31. also the Commentaries vpon S. Matth. cap. 20. But if this be so , what more aduerse to himselfe ? For if the pennie be but one , and all receiue that common pennie , then are we not saued by our works , which all that are saued are not furnished with alike , but some more , some lesse , as is euident . It comes therefore of the goodnes of Almightie God alone , giuing mercedem diei horario operi , awhole daies wages for an houres worke , as the Bishop most godlily . Can this be but of the free mercy of God , without respect to our merits , yea to our workes themselues , though we entitle no merit to them ? § 18. Numb . 11. he brings that for an example of meriting by workes , Centuplum &c. Matth. 19. a hundreth fold in this life . And if God doe not giue vs an hundreth fold in this life , I meane them that serue him in most deuout fashion , doth he not reward merits , or doth he therefore come short of paying the score ? Yet the Adioynder saies , we merit the centuplum to be paid vs in this life , because our Sauiour promiseth so . Whereas how many depart this life daily , without the receiuing of such a pay , the hundreth fold pay , in temporall commodities ? And are merits vnrewarded , shall we say , in all these ? What is this but to doe as the Apostle complaines , Rom. 10. statuentes suam iusticiam , iusticiae Dei non sunt subiecti ? [ Seeking by all meanes to establish their owne righteousnes , they were not subiected to the righteousnes of God. ] We slander God , to flatter men , and wrong his scale to aduance ours . Saue that all is Centuplū , I grant , which we receiue here , though neuer so little , if we compare it with our merits . Whether it be so then or not , that the Centuplum is here paid , merit is dasht . § 19. In his 9. numb . he brings that out of Rom. 4. To him that worketh , the reward is imputed not according to grace , but according to debt . Why this ? Because the Bishop had answered his other authoritie of vnusquisque accipiet , Euery one shall receiue reward according to his labour ; I say , the Bishop had answered it most pithily , and most properly , According to his labour , but not for his labour . It is the square of the reward , but not the formall cause whereby . In genere comparatorum , non efficientium , as the worthy Bishop most worthily had explained . By all which their inference of merit is confounded . To this then he opposes , that wages is of debt , not of grace , to him that worketh , Rom. 4. 4. Yet they are wont to say , both of grace and of debt : as they haue many more such vntempered morterings , and mungrel daubings . Cornelius Muss . in his Comment . in 6. ad Rom. in the very end thus , speaking of life eternall : Si deum respicias , semper est donum , nunquam stipendium , nunquam merces . In quantum enim redditur à Deo qui nullatenus debet , omnem meriti rationem excedit : that is , Eternall life if you respect God , is alwaies a gift , neuer wages , nor hire . For in somuch as God giues it , who is no way debter , it exceedes all proportion of desert or merit . ] Yet they haue found out a debet on Gods part ; & who sees not that all merit is dasht by Muss . his words , vnles they come in , and shew somewhat else , by which they may claime on their owne parts ? sith God is by no meanes to bee challenged , as he sayes . Here the Adioynder would haue all to be of debt , and none of grace . Or else what doth that authoritie auaile him out of Rom. 4. Wages to the workeman , not of grace , but of debt . He kicks out grace , and casheers it cleane , that there may be both debt , and a pure debt , and so merit . And doth not the Apostle force him to doe no lesse , vnlesse he let go merit ? Doth he not say in effect , If of grace , not of debt , if of debt , not of grace ; as in an other place hee affirmes , and that very formally , If of grace , not of workes , else grace were no grace ; which is another place which ouerthroweth their merit cleane , because the Adioynder will haue it not to be without grace at any hand , in his 12 , numb . But euery bodie may see that S. Paul doth not apply this Rom. 4. to our state as we are iustified , but to the naturall man that should worke wonders , and winne heauen by his exact righteousnesse , if any such were . Therefore he diuides the worker from the beleeuer , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , &c. But to him that beleeueth on him which iustifieth the vngodly , his faith is reputed for righteousnesse . By which we see the former words do not belong to vs , vnlesse he will haue vs so to worke merits , as not to beleeue in God , nor to trust in him which iustifieth the wicked . And behold what followes , in S. Paul , howe fauourable to merits , if we had leasure to stand vpon it ? God impures righteousnesse without workes , sayes he , v. 6. And , Blessed are they whose iniquities are forgiuen , and whose sinnes are couered . It is a tale , that they would tell vs here , of the first and second iustification . For where there is blessednesse , where this 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , whatsoeuer is secondarie , is frustrate and superfluous . We cannot be better then happy . As all the world added to God doth not make him better , no more doth any addition encrease felicitie . Therefore once iustified , and iustified for good and all , perfectly iustified , there is no entitling of vs to any higher good . And so falls their distinction , which was coyned at first , to vphold their other rotten buildings from falling . § 20. The summe is . Wages to the worker without grace , saies the Apostle , or without fauour . Let it be so hardly . But that is pure merces then , strict wages , wages of rigour , nothing strayned , but properly so called . To shew that at other times when the Scripture vseth the word wages , it speakes not properly , nor would be thought to speake so , but in a modified notion onely , imitating wages , because wages comes last , and so the reward to vs after 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , Ephes . 6. 13. the true Gnekeb of which before . And you shall obserue that the Scripture keepes the phrase , for the most part , whereof the Apostle speakes , Heb. 12. v. 5. 7. the one in dealing by vs , the other in censuring and pronouncing of vs. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , and , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . First , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , rewarding our obedience farre aboue our deserts . For he deales with vs as with Sonnes . Now inheritances are not purchased , but freely giuen to them of the blood , IT IS YOVR FATHERS PLEASVRE , Luk. 12. And againe , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , he calls strabones paetos , looking vpon vs through the spectacles of loue , and commends our worke aboue the worth . He may say , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , they are worthy ; but we with the Centurion , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , I did not count my selfe worthy ; non minùs veraciter quàm humiliter , not of lying humilitie , but godly sinceritie , ( the distinction that the holy Fathers haue vsed long agoe to preuent cauill , in this verie question . ) Though 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , Luk. 20. 35. and againe , 21. 36. and 2. Thess . 1. 5. expounds 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , not of dignitie , but of dignation , not of them that are worthy , but are reputed to be worthy . § 21. I hast to his last , and yet loe I am crossed with another obiection creeping forth like a gloe-worme out of a hedge . Dignus est operarius mercede suâ , the labourer is worthie of his hire . Therefore merit . But this is spoken of Ministers deseruing maintenance at their peoples hands , whome they attend and serue , Matth. 10. 10. Luk. 10. 7. 1. Tim. 5. 18. not of God who is debter to none , nemini debitor , rather all the world obnoxious to him . Are not these stout probates of the Adioynder for Merits ? § 22. But now , num . 12. ( with which I will end ) when he seemes to be most acute , then he is foulest of all other . Because God by his grace helpes vs to worke , and we cannot worke as we are of our selues , therefore wee merit by reason of Gods concurrence . This is more then Pelagius euer meant to dishonour God by , when he denyed grace , and pleaded so strongly for naturall abilities . For it is worse to shoot at God with his owne arrowes , and to raise merit out of grace , then out of free will. Shall we see how many reasons fight against this conclusion ? First , wee doe but little good , rarius exit , scarce one in a thousand , * as Iob speaketh . Then spotted and imperfect , si fortè quid , when it comes at last , like Iacobs lambs . Sicut pannus menstruatae , sic iustitiae ipsae nostrae . Thirdly due , though it were neuer so excellent or exact . Due to our Creator , due to our Redeemer , euery way due , as one that hath the dominion ouer all that wee either haue or are . Who of you will thanke his seruant ? sayes our Sauiour . Inter Dominum & seruum non est iustitia , sayes Aristotle , much lesse merit , and merit de rigore . Fourthly , though they were not due , yet because God helpes vs , and God assists vs , orels they can be none ( omnia opera nostra operatus es in nobis Domine ) therefore merit is turned out at that gate too . And yet the Adioynders reason for merit is grace , but very reasonlesse . Lastly , Improportionable to that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , that downe waighing reward , 2. Cor. 4. 17. and Luk. 6. 38. mensura superefluēs , exceeding ( merit . ) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , they are not worthy , as before was shewed out of Rom. 8. § 23. After all this , it will be said perhaps , nay after all this it is sayd , num . 12. in the latter ende , that the Bishop neuerthelesse graunts the Adioynders doctrine about Merits of works , & diuers other important points of their catholique relligion . Why then doe they carpe his writings so bitterly , I would faine knowe , and the Adioynder among the first ? They haue rayled against many , they haue traduced all that came in their way , the champions specially , the Iew●lls , the Whitakers , the Casaubones , and who not ? Yet neuer any like the Reuerend Bishop . Patientia tua supergressa est vniuersos . Is this a signe that he is so wholly of their minde ? § 24. And though this might serue , for a cōfutation of the whole chapter , whose scope is onely to prooue , the Bishop to be theirs , or turned from vs , and yet mixed with such ta●t inuectiues euery where against his person , which they would neuer vse to a new-reclaymed friend ( 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ) but that they suspect he is not perfectly reconciled to them , yet let vs view the rest , with all expedition . To some of them speaking , though perhaps very little , leauing other things and remitting them wholy to the readers iudgement , as content to haue descryed them . § 25. IN his foureteenth Numb . he belches forth a fresh that fame stale crapula of his , ( it deserues no better ) that God is honoured in his seruants honour . As if therefore we might adore them too , and keep no measure , or at least deferre relligious worshippe . Honos seruorum redundat ad Dominum , saith S. Hierome ; it is true , but not adoratio . There may be therfore a nimis , in honouring those whom God most dearly loues . Euen the Asse in Aesop kissed his owner , thinking hee did well , but was iustly reputed a lowt for his paines . Yet the Adioynder is earnest for our kissing of relliques in most deuout fashion , Numb . 16. Origen refutes this obiection of the Papists , in the Paynim Celsus , ( lib. 8. quoted by me before ) that we must worship creatures to please God , glorifie them , to gratifie him ; the Church which is Christs spouse lying with Christs friends , ( the Sodales in the Canticles ) for Christs sake , as the Bishop most wittily , and no lesse godlyly retorted after the Scripture phrase , that makes idolatrizing , whoring , and our Faith to God the flower of our Chastity . Why doth not the Adioynder refute that comparison ? For the wife , though she giue entertainement to her husbands friends , yet she must beware how she giue them her husbands honour , which is worship and veneration betweene Christ and his Church . Cui gloriam , ei omnia , saies Euthymius . And God by Esay , had said as much before . § 26. But the 15. num . salues this sweetly ; I will set downe his wordes . Relligious honour hath beene often exhibited to Angells and holy Men , with the tearme of adoration , and with the exhibition of a corporall reuerence . ( So as he abhors not from relligious adoration of Angells and holy men : But he goes forward . ) Which may be more or lesse according to the deuotion of the exhibiters thereof ( belike he leaues the matter to euery mans discretion ) to giue more or lesse thereafter as they are disposed , so that it be in their minde and intention distinguished from diuine honour , due to God alone . In which intention , consisteth &c. See we to what this doctrine leadeth ? That we may giue any honour , and to any one , alike ; God or man , Saint or Angell , pilgrim or triumphant , ( it is well that the reprobates and the deuills come not in too ) onely prouided , that our intentions be right . They must be varied , though the act be all one , and then it is well enough , for the rest the Adioynder will carrie you out . For the intention is that which differeth and distinguisheth all . And in his 6. Num. he is content to take in the adoration of the Kings of Persia too , either to iustifie , or to exemplifie this conceit of his ; which Mardocheus is thought to haue denied to Haman out of a godly zeale , and Origen condemnes in his 8. against Celsus very directly ( as I haue quoted before ) and a certaine Embassadour , wiser then his fellowes , let fall his ring , and tooke it vp againe , with such a bending of the bodie as is meete in the like case , when he came in the presence of the Persian King , pretending worship so , but doing none . So much more tender are the heathen sometimes , of the diuine honour , then the Adioynder Christian , and Catholike , as he would be thought , confounding all actions of honour and reuerence both towards God and man , so the intention doe but turne as it were vpon a pinne , which way it should . May I not say , as the Bishop most acutely vrgeth them ( when he examines their position , that there is no peculiar honour to God reserued , but onely sacrifice , ) that by this meanes we may offer the Masse to the Masse , not onely to God , nay nor onely to the Virgin , or to Saints and Angels , so our intentions be sound ? But he saies in the conclusion of his 15. Num. that for so much as the Bishop confesseth a certaine honour to be due to holy relliques ( meaning they should be honourably laid vp in the ground , not ventis & solibus , much lesse feris atque alitibus , to be left at random ) he cannot with reason exclude from the same , corporall reuerence . And yet the Apostle saies , we put more honour vpon our vncomely parts , 1. Cor. 12. 23. euen as relliques are buried 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , that they would haue , vnlesse they were hid out of sight . And does corporall reuerence follow to be giuen , from S. Pauls honour which he allots to these parts ? But the Adioynder is not content with corporall reuerence , but he saies we cannot exclude from them ANY corporall reuerence ( be it what it will be ) so the intention be to doe a relligious worship , and not a diuine , to them . He that robbeth his father or his mother , and saith it is no transgression , ( viz. because he hath a good intention ) is the companion of murtherers . I say no more ; I leaue the rest to the Readers iudgement . § 27. In his 16. Num. he tells vs certaine tales of processions , but by the way implies , that the word procession , is but very late . As now we tearme it , saith he ; I beleeue the thing then is not very auncient . I shewed before out of Theoderets historie , with what manner of procession , Babylas bodie was remooued by the Christians from Daphne to Antioch . The people cried , all the way as they went , Confounded be all they that worship carued images . And would this sentence agree with the Popish processions ? But the question was not , betweene the Bishop and the Cardinall , about procession , but adoration of relliques . Did he want matter , trow you , that he stuffes in this , or is the consequence good from the one to the other ? May not I aske him , who is the preuaricator now , or , how it comes to passe , that he hath lost his way ? § 28. THE Miracles at Sichem affect him much . Stultus populus Sichem , the foolish people of Sichem , and not worthie to be called a nation , saith the wise Ecclesiasticus , c. 50. v. 25. and 26. Whome he professes also to hate before all the world . And in Sicima , not the cakeseruice performed by the dames , but the next in order that Epiphanius speakes of , was accomplished by the Samaritans , in a place like a theater , a mixt superstition , and like this of the Papists . But this is Ladie Aspricoll , that the Adioynder meaneth of : yet the name you see how ominous , to delusions and fooleries , euen of old . Others at Minich for sooth , and in Valentia of Spaine , straunge feats wrought at a Priests bodie ( notable saies the margent ) that died in Aprill last . For as in Madrigalls , so in miracles , alwaies the last mocke the vulgar most . — 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 — Thus the whores factors would faine drawe customers to her burse of bawderies . And F. T. that he may be the man , offers his seruice , like Ticelius vnder Pope Leo , whome Luther scared . Nay , we are all of vs gone at common Law ( he thinks ) that can shew no miracles so long together in our Church , not so much as a lame dogge , or a sicke cat healed in all our Congregations , notwithstanding our liuely and strong faith , that we are wont so much to vaunt of . Thus he . And specially , since the Bishop grants miracles to haue beene done at S. Stephens bodie in S. Austens time ( the Bishop meant he would not reiect S. Austens report , and yet he repelleth their idolatries about the worshipping of relliques sufficiently otherwaies : for , non sequitur consequentia à miraculis ad cultum , witnes Bellarmine himselfe , lib. 4. c. 14. de Not is Eccl. ) but , if he graunt that miracles were done then , he must either shew why they haue ceased since , ( saith the Adioynder ) or at least prooue that all the Popish miracles whereof their Church boasteth , are no better then spectra , and diabolicall illusions . A taske not so difficult perhaps , but that the number is so infinite . Though why should not himselfe , or one of his fellowes , approoue the soundnes of them , rather then wee disprooue them , since they bring those miracles for so many argumēts of their doughtie relligion , which they call Catholike , we know to be counterfeit ? The law of disputation beeing , as I remember , for the opponent to prooue , the defendant to answer onely , and to resist . But the Adioynders discontinuance so long from the Vniuersities , hath dispossessed him of these and all other good notions . Neither doe I see any reason , why the Bishop granting that there were miracles don in S. Austens time , should be bound to acknowledge their continuance till now , or shew a reason of their ceasing ( as the Adioynder would faine charge vpon him , ) vnlesse they likewise prooue , that those miracles beginning with the Apostles time , cōtinued in the Church without any intermission , from the primitiue till S. Austens daies ; which as yet they haue not done . For Bellarmine attempting it , Lib. 4. cap. 14. de Notis Eccl. is both otherwise at a losse , and failes most grossely in the second hundreth of yeares . In all which time , he hath but one miracle , viz. that of the Christiā souldiers vnder Marcus Aurelius , obtaining raine at the instance of their prayers , after a long and great drought . Which some would doubt , whether to call a miracle or no , ( a mirandum rather ) or if it be miracle , yet we want not diuers such , nor I thinke no Church vnder heauen , according to that of S. Iames , 5. 16. The prayer of a righteous man , auaileth much . How much more , whō so many are combined together ? And yet Bellar. calling it miracula , in the plurall number , as it were many miracles , presently addes , De quo vide , &c. falling into the singular number with shame enough ; like him that would call for his men Iohn , hauing but one in all , and yet making shew of great attendance . Well , omitting Bellarmine , who makes it a miracle if our relligion last any thing long , which God be thanked , he hath not liued to see extinguished , S. Austen thus deliuers his opinion of miracles , de ciuit . Dei , lib. 22. cap. 8. the verie place which the Adioynder quoteth . Quisquis adhuc prodigia vt credat inquirit , magnum ipse prodigium est , quia mundo credente non credit . That is , [ Whosoeuer calls for miracles in these dayes , himselfe is a great monster , that beleeues not , when the world round about him hath beleeued . ] Meaning , that after the confirmation of Christs doctrine by signes & miracles , such as we read of in the new Testament , Heb. 2. 4. we are to seeke no further , but to rest in that , which being taught vs once , or brought vs once , ( as S. Iud● saies , ) that is , confirmed once for good and all , needs no other daily demonstrations . What saies the Scripture ? Signes are for the infidels , not for the beleeuers , 1. Cor. 14. If faith were currant therefore in the Church of Rome , they would call for no miracles to commend it . And the same S. Austen again , Tract . 13. in Ioh. insults ouer the Donatists , and their pretending to doe miracles , and calls them , mirabiliarij , or miracle-mongers , by contempt . De vnitate , also , Eccles . c. 16. he reiects not the Donatists onely , and their miracles , but such as are said to be done in the Catholike Church , from hauing any force to demonstrate the Church , as the Adioynder would . Non ideò manifestatur Ecclesia , saith hee , quia haec talia [ miracula ] in ea fiunt . [ The doing of miracles , though they be true miracles , is no note of the Church . ] This is a flint that Bellarmine mumps at , and cannot get downe with any chewing . To which finally may be added , another testimonie of the same S. Austen , contra Faust . Manich. lib. 12. c. 45. where he preferres the prophecies that went of Christ in Scripture , before miracles , though neuer so illustrious , as which are more subiect to cauillation , then Scripture Oracles . His words are : Etsi attestabantur miracula doctrinae Apostolicae , attamen non defuissent , sicut etiam nunc adhuc quidam mussitant , qui magicae potentiae cuncta illa tribuerent , nisi talis eorum cogitatio contestatione prophetica vinceretur . Magicis enim artibus longè antequam nascerentur , prophetas sibi constituere à quibus praenunciarentur , nemo vtique diceret . That is , [ Although there were miracles which bare witnes to the truth of the Apostles doctrine , yet there would haue been some ( as there are also now ) who would haue ascribed those things to certaine Magicall arts or feates , vnlesse that wicked surmise of theirs had been beaten and battered downe , with the testimonies of the holy Prophets : for no man could say ( though disposed to cauill ) that Christ by Magicke , could appoint himselfe certaine Prophets long before hee was borne , who should foretell of him , &c. ] S. Chrysostome sayes euidently , in 1. ad Cor. cap. 2. hom . 6. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , Miracles are forbidden in these dayes , or , miracles are at a stay now , choose you whether : for the authoritie is pregnant against you both waies . And he affirmes , that the Church is the better for beeing without them , without sicke dogges healed , and lame cattes cured by your minikin-miracles , done at Minich , and Sichem , Sir. Make your peace with Chrysostome first , and then come and wrangle with vs hardly . The same Father remembring , that S. Paul had said , that Anti-christ should come in lying wonders and miracles ( not yours I warrant you ) he notes vpon the place before quoted , that the Apostle speaking of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , the power of miracles , sets 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 before it , that is , the spirit , to distinguish the miracles of sorcerers and witches , ( 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ) who can cure cattes and dogges , I warrant you , with a wet finger , from such as proceed from the operation of the holy Ghost . But what can be more powerfull , then the obseruation of the same Chrysostome vpon Tit. 1. that , if wee marke well the storie of the Acts of the Apostles , we shall see most men were conuerted by their doctrine and preaching , before euer they came to the working of miracles . So Iohn did no miracle , as they confesse in the Gospel , and yet drew the multitudes forcibly after him . Neuerthelesse Iohn came with a newe doctrine . In his last Homely vpon the Acts , the same Chrysostome thus , ( that ye may see what a friend he was to miracles . ) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , &c. This is a great miracle , saies he , to bring an argument from the writings of the Prophets and Apostles . By which reason , I beleeue , wee shall haue more miracles in our Church , then are stirring in the Popish , whatsoeuer store of lame dogges are healed there , or sicke cats , as this wretch scoffeth from his chaire of scorners . S. Gregorie the great , as he is quoted by Immanuel Sa. in 4. Matth. notes most excellently , that our Sauiour when he fasted forty dayes together , not without a great miracle , yet beeing oppugned by the deuill , repelled him by Scripture , and not by miracle . Yet then if euer , were miracles to be brought for the auouching of the truth . Specially since the deuill went to tempt him with hunger , our Sauiour was to foile him with his miracle of fasting . Neuerthelesse , Scriptum est , there carried it , though the deuill craftily had begunne with it , to diuert our Sauiour from the vse of that which he had profaned . And the same S. Gregorie againe , Hom. 29. in Euang. makes it a signe of the Churches infancie , to be tittled with miracles ; as S. Chrysostome had also said in another place , that the Apostles were not alwaies to be conuersant with Christ , like the nurse-child with his nurse , nor fed with pappe , but to trie their fortunes , and to goe abroad into the world , and to shift for themselues . S. Gregories words are , Nunquidnā fratres mei , quòd ista signa non facitis , minime creditis ? Sed haec necessaria in exordio Ecclesiae fuerunt . Vt enim fides cresceret , miraculis fuerat nutrienda . Quià & nos cum arbusta plantamus , tamdiu eis aquam fundimus , quousque ea in terrâ iam convaluisse videamus . At si semel radicem fixerint , irrigatio cessabit . Hinc est enim quòd Paulus dicit , 1. Cor. 14. Linguae in signum sunt , non fidelibus , sed infidelibus . That is , [ Shall I say you beleeue not now , my deare brethren , because you do none of these miracles ? But miracles were needefull in the beginnings of the Church . To the ende that faith might growe vp , it was to be fed with miracles . For euen we , when we set trees , we water them no longer , then till they haue taken roote . And when once they are rooted , our watring of them is at an end . Hence saith S. Paul , Tongues are for a token , ( or for a signe , or monument ) not to the beleeuers , but to the vnbeleeuers . ] Thus Gregorie . And hee might haue added that out of 1. Cor. 13. 8. Whether they be tongues , they shall cease , &c. meaning miracles ; and cease , not in heauen onely , but in the state of the new Testamēt ( for I willingly ioyne with them that construe it so ) that by tongues , we may vnderstād , omne prodigiosum , euen all miracles , the genus by the species , no vnusuall schematisme . And whereas I quoted Sa the Iesuite so lately , a man of your function ( and no lesse of your faction ) I think it not amisse to bring to your remembrance another saying of his . Among his Aphorismes , V. Revelatio , thus he hath ; that Revelations ( which you abound with , witnesse Bridget , and Catharine , and diuers more ) are not rashly to be credited or entertained , but submitted to iudgement , and tried by their conformitie with the Catholike doctrine . Shall not miracles then abide the touch stone much more ? Which if they doe , then is not the doctrine to be grounded vpon miracles , but miracles to preuaile as farre as the doctrine shall giue leaue . For who knowes but God does many things to trie vs , Deuter. 13. and such assaults are giuen oft-times to the Church , out of Gods deepe prouidence , ( vt cognoscantur probati , that the approoued may be knowne , 1. Cor. 11. 19. ) as it indangers the very faith of the elect ? By all which , and much more that here I omit , you may see what reason the worthy Bishop had , not to stand vpon those words ( which you quarrell him for not setting downe ) of the Cardinals text , ( as if they were ought to the question , or as if hee were to busie himselfe with impertinent matters for lacke of employment . ) For my part , I am content to insert those words here , as much as they are extant in your booke . Respondes : Miracula diuina , &c. In English thus , that all may take knowledge of them . I answer , saith the Cardinall , that diuine miracles are seen onely among the Catholiques . And because the Bishop would not rush into this new branglement , therefore you thinke he left out those words fraudulently . And yet Simon Magus made a dead man to wagge his head , when he stroue with S. Peter , ( as we read in Eusebius ) which is more then to cure a lame dogge . Another heretique remooued an oliue tree by vertue of his praiers , tainted with the damnable heresie of Macedonius , God forbid that any such should cleaue to vs , though malice her selfe were to censure . Eutychianus the Novatiā , did a famous miracle vnder Constantine , whome he drew to fauour him , and to owne his acquaintance , by healing certaine sicknesses , and by other rare acts ( they call them miracles ) which he performed . Namely , that beeing to sue to the aforesaid Constantine , for the release of a prisoner ( who was in daunger to die , by reason of the many irons that he was laden with , euen before he could make suit for him to the Emperour ) he procured his chaines to fall off from him of their owne accord , ( not without miracle ) and afterward obtained his pardon of Constantine . Witnesse here of Sozom. lib. 1. cap. 14. And Paulus another Bishop of the Novatian sect , did another miracle no lesse strange , ( witnesse Socrat. lib. 7. cap. 17. ) conuincing a certaine Iew ( who wickedly and craftily had often procured himselfe to be baptized ) by a miraculous annihilation , or disparence at least , of the water in the font , euen readie for the baptisme . Now beleeue false teachers the rather for miracles , whether in straw or in stone ; or our doctrine the lesse , because we bragge of no such , though it lacke not this seale , oftentimes , set vpon it , by Gods owne hand , but that we haue a firmer euidence . S. Austen in his whole chapter de Civit. Dei , which here you quote , viz. l. 22. cap. 8. neuer stands for miracles to prooue new doctrines by , but onely the old ( as was declared before , ) and therefore you shall gaine nothing from thence , who alleadge new miracles to authorize new articles , as praying to Saints , worshipping of Relliques , and such like conceits , though we should subscribe to all that S. Austen reports , with no lesse promptnes , then your selues , that is more then himselfe may be well thought to doe . For one time he confesseth of the aforesaid wonders , that non sunt tanta authoritate commendata &c. They are not of such authoritie as straitwaies to be beleeued , though betweene one faithfull man and another . Another time he saies , that as soone as they are told they are cleane forgotten , and no bodie relates them to them that did not heare them , as they were rehearsed de libello , nor no bodie remembers them any long time himselfe . His words are : Nec [ admodum ] innotescunt , neque vt non excidant animo , quasi glarea memoriae erebra lectione tunduntur . Whereas if they were diuine miracles , why should they not be divulged throughout the whole world , euen where soeuer the Gospell it selfe is preached , as our Sauiour said of the charitie of that good woman , which annointed his feete ? Againe , Semel hoc audiunt qui adsunt , pluresque non adsunt , vt nec illi qui affuerunt post aliquot dies mente retineant , & vix quisquam reperiatur illorum , qui ei quem non affuisse cognouerit , indicet quod audiuit . Lastly , as for the flowres which were wont to be applied to Relliques ( as you tell vs ) and from thence drew meruailous curing vertue , let S. Austen himselfe iudge what you say , or though himselfe said it . In the 8. booke of the aforesaid worke , cap. 27. he allowes not of meates to be set vpon Martyrs tombes , for obtaining of blessing . A Christianis melioribus ( saith he ) hoc non fit . He denies not but it is done , but he saies the better sort of Christians doe it not . Much lesse flowres to be laid vpon their bodies , and taken off againe , with hope of vertue to proceede from them in application to sicke folks . For of sanctifying meates to necessarie vse , we read in the Apostle , ( and the Martyrs might concurre to it , if they were conscious : ) but of flowres no where , nor to no such purpose , specially from the dead . The Christians then might doe this in S. Austens time , but not the better sort of Christians , as he most aduisedly speakes ; not Meliores Christiani . Whome you list not to imitate , but chuse the worser part , and clowt a Relligion out of fond customes , which the iudicious of those times neither allowed then , and much lesse would now . § 29. Now to Num. 19. what shall we doe , but take you at your word , that the Bishop graunts as much concerning holy Relliques , as your selues desire ? I will set downe your words , that after them we may aske you , who is the praevaricator ? That they are to be decked , and adorned , laid vp with honour and solemnitie , reserued and kept in honourable and holy places , and finally that they are to be honoured , yea and that God doth sometimes worke miracles by them , which he cannot denie ( say you ) to be a notable and diuine confirmation of the honour that is done vnto them . Though this last be starke false , that miracles done at Saints bodies , inferre the honour which you challenge to them , by any probable consequence , as Bellarmine denies about Ieremies bodie , and was quoted to you a little before out of his de Notis Ecclesiae , yet insisting vpon the words that you bring out of the Bishop , let me aske you in good earnest , what makes so much for you in all that enumeration , that you should say , you desire no more then he graunteth ? Adorning , decking , laying vp with honour , laying vp with solemnitie , reseruing , keeping , in honourable and holy places , and finally in one word , that they are to be honoured : suppose all this , what is become of your Adoration now ? what of Worship it selfe ? The rest are readie hand ; but these 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . The Mountaines swell , and a mouse creepes forth . Scias ( saies S. Austen , Epist . 44. in the very ende ) à Christianis Catholicis nullum coli mortuorum : Be it knowne to you ( saies S. Austen ) that Christian Catholikes ( what you are we know not ) worship no dead men . Si nullum mortuorum , nedum quicquam mortui : Neither parts nor partlets , limbs , nor linnen cloths , or what els of theirs soeuer . Besides that your Valentia told you but lately , Cultus ne angelorum quidem , obserudnce onely . And will you obserue Relliques ? § 30. As for that you thinke , that that kind of honour must needs be relligious honour , which is not done for ciuill respects , but proceedes out of deuotion , and tendes directly to the honouring of God , though we honour in this fashion euen liuing men , and earthly Saints , whose holines may be counterfeit , for ought we know , and whose ende may be damnation , whereas the relligious honour should not goe but with beatitude , as Bellarmine therefore entitles his maine controuersie about that point , De Beatitudine Sanctorum ; yet what is this , I say , to adoration ? You honour pietie it selfe , iustice , mercie , when you heare or reade any thing vertuously done in any of these kinds , yet not with cappe and knee , as you speake , not with ciuill honour , like the Burgesse of some towne , I hope . Doe you adore it therefore ? § 31. IN your Numb . 20. and diuers following of the same rellish , about the Monkish profession , you say that therein also the Bishop preuaricates . Because he affirmes , that his MAIESTIE reprehends the persons of your Monks , and their personall vices , their Order or foundation not so much . Non institutionem , sed instituta . He allowes then ( say you ) the institution . And what if he should ? Though Philo doth not speake of Christian Monks ( in the place that you quote of him , to shew their antiquitie ) how soeuer it hath so seemed to certaine learned men , but is detected both by Scaliger , and diuers others to be a mistaking , ( the description rather falling vpon the Esseni ; ) yet suppose he should allow it as descending of the Law positiue and agreement of parties , not from diuine ordinance , what then ? For what can be more plaine , then that fame graunt of Chrysostome ( where in all reason he was to graunt as little as might be of this kinde ) that the Monkish profession is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , neither belonging to the faith and Relligion Christian , nor doctrine and preaching . 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . Tom. 6. Savilian . p. 167. Therefore without question not appointed of God. And in another place he will tell you , Hom. 25. in Epist . ad Hebr. that what S. Paul writes to the Corinthians , when he exhorts them to the highest virginitie that may be ( and in Christian virginitie , Sir , all is contained , you neede not be sollicitous for the other two vowes : 1. Cor. 7. 34. the Christian virgin takes care onely how to please the Lord , and that shee may be holy both in bodie and spirit , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , and , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , going with her 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ) he speakes not to Monks , whereof there was none then , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , not the print of a Monks foot in all the church , but to lay-men and lay-women . As who would say , he prescribes no stricter rules in all that Epistle ( where neuerthelesse he sheweth them the more excellent way , and exhorts to virginitie , and to an vndiuided connexion with the Lord Christ alwaies , such as no Monke of them all can come neerer to him ) yet stricter rules , I say , he giues not to any , ( by S. Chrys . verdict ) then are obserued de facto , & meet to be obserued , in the generall of Christianitie , emongst all that belong to the mysticall bodie , Men or women , Clerks , or lay , though your Monks like mungrells are neither of them both , but Minotaures , and mixtum genus , many times , — proleque biformis , like Don Iohn of Crete . And in another place he saies , that there is not a maid left this day in all the Church . 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 : in 1. Tim. c. 2. Hom. 8. in extremo . The honourable state of maidenhead , is quite decaied in the Church . And , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . The world abroad laughes at vs [ Virgins . ] Vniustly , trow you ? No. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . For the maides ( that are called maides ) haue brought this contempt vpon themselues . a Yet , you thinke we haue no Church , because we haue no maidenhead forsooth , with your many more god-morrowes , formally vowed now and professed amongst vs. Yea , he tells vs of Christ , b 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , expelling halfe the virgins , that is fiue of ten , in the parable of the c Gospel ; as who would say , he would happily doe the like , if in strict visitation , he should come among the Nonneries , now a daies . Once , he doubteth not to affirme , that , the Virgins beeing reiected by our Sauiour Christ , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , they that came without virginitie ( if fraught and flourishing with other fruits of righteousnes ) were most honourably and most comfortably receiued by him . And are receiued no doubt daily . Where , because I spake of the visitations of Nonneries a little before , you may call to minde , what happened here in England , long before King Henrie the eights daies , whome you haue not yet forgiuen his dismissing of your sisters , and demolishing their cloisters , though God knowes it was high time : But I meane , vnder the raigne of King Henry the third ( as Matthew Paris , with other historians recordeth ) that the virginitie of your Nonnes was faine to be explored , by certain visitors in Commission ( for repressing the scandall ) euen by nipping of their dugges , to see if any milke would come out , to detect their incontinencies . Such vnnaturall remedies , did the vnreasonable courses , then held by your sister-hoods , driue the Magistrate vnto . But it is enough forvs , that Chrysostome not onely censures the professed of his time , which neuerthelesse were not halfe so rancke and so degenerate , as haue yours been since , but denyes Monkerie to come of God , or of diuine institution , when it is at the best . There was not then ( saies he ) a footesprint of a Monke in all the Church . And againe , Monkerie is no matter of Christian faith or doctrine . What meruaile then , if a plant not planted by God ( the heauenly husbandman ) be afterwards rooted out , when it turnes intollerable ? And I insist the willing lier vpon Chrysostomes authoritie , ( though I might alleadge many others , if I were disposed ) because your Cardinal in his Preface to his Defence of Monkerie , ( where he reuells in his kingdome of Rhetorique most gloriously ) hath no greater authority then S. Chrysostomes to confute vs , or to countenance the honour of the Monkish profession . You shall heare his words ; Probat hoc i●primis totius Graeciae eximium decus S. Iohan. Chrysostomus . Is & alibi , & Homilia 8. in Matthaeum , sic . Si quis nunc ad Aegypti veniat solitudines , paradiso prorsus omnem illam eremum videbit digniorem , & innumerabiles Angelorum caetus in corporibus fulgere mortalibus , &c. Suppose all this , Sir , but how long to last ? Did not Monkes warpe euen in Chrysostomes dayes ? Does not the Councell of Chalcedon ( not farre off from his time ) finde a difference in Monkes , as if all were not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , pure Monks , or , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , but some mungrell , counterfeit , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , hauing Monkerie for a cloake or a vizard , as S. Paul hath his 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , his true Nonne , as you would call her , not a false sister , 1. Tim. 5. 3. As for 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , they 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , the Monke that liues in pleasure , and delicacie , and idlenesse , is dead aliue . What meruaile then , if King Henry turned them out of doores ? Are we not wont to doe so by dead men ? And Remigius most excellently , vpon those words of the Apostle , Ephes . 6. 14. State succincti lumbos in veritate , hauing your loines girt about with truth : With truth ( saies he ) because nothing does so encroach vpon the professions of strictnes , ( to their vtter disgrace ) as dissimulation and hypocrisie , contrary to truth . Yet your Cordeleirs weare restem pro veritate , a rope about their loines , ( the very habite of hypocrisie and extreame disguisement ) in stead of that sinceritie , which the Apostle here prescribeth as the comeliest ornament for a Monks backe . Before S. Chrysostomes time also , the Councell of Gangra ( an auncient Councell ) finds wefts in Monks , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , pretending holinesse to their deeds of slothfulnesse , or of cruell vnnaturalnesse , in abandoning their owne parents , vnder colour of conscience , and freedome of contemplation , Can. 16. or else neglecting their children , as it is Can. 15. And S. Cyprian , auncienter then any yet named , de Duplici Martyrio ( if at least that be his booke ) he continues the same distinction , as it were of Ieremies two baskets , the one full of good and holesom figs , the other most sowre and most distastfull ( as commonly it comes to passe , that the corruption of the best prooues the dismallest ) so of Monachi , qui verè Monachi sunt , & Virgines , quae verè Virgines sunt ; that is , of Monks which are Monkes indeed , and Virgins which are chast and Virgins indeede . Neque enim locus desertus , saccus pro veste , &c. sed caeteris omnibus perditiores se produnt . And , His tectus involucris sublitet animus valde mundanus . And he expounds to the same sense , Saint Pauls words euen as we doe , Bodily exercise profiteth little , viz. that of the Monasteries : and that Satan transformed into an Angel of light , deceiues the simple , with lying gloses , and shewes of sanctimonie , quum intus madeant spiritualibus vitijs , whiles inwardly they lie soaking in spirituall corruptions . Sibi tamen atque alijs habentur pij : Yet they beare a name , as if they were holy , as they did in Poperie . Then , Talis erat iustitia Pharisaeorum . And , Itasunt & Virgines fatuae , foolish Virgins , or stinking Nonnes ; which was the place that we set out from , alleadging Chrysostome . And doe wee meruaile now , if King Henry voyded such a Camarine ? Or shall wee say they were Monks whom he dislodged , vnlesse Monks indeed ? Nonnes and Virgins , vnlesse Virgins indeede ? Was this to dissolue Monasteries , or to disperse brothel-houses ? Yea , would the Fathers formerly cited , haue been offended at such proceedings , though themselues had sat by , and looked on ? But let vs heare S. Chrysostome , and how hee finishes his tale , where the Cardinall makes vs beleeue that he praises Monasteries so monstrously . Hom. 8. in Matth. is the place . How many things hath he there , which Bellarmine durst not mention , for feare of spoyling his Monks , whiles he sought to grace them all he could , with a detorted testimonie ? Of their labouring with their owne hands , and of S. Pauls labouring with his , that we may much more expect that from a Monke , which the Apostle blushed not , and so great an Apostle , in his owne person to practise . And indeed the olde saying was , that a Monke which worketh not with his owne hands , is no better then one that robbes by the high-way side . Epiphanius compares the godly Monks , labouring with their hands , to bees that humme and make honny both together : so they at one and the same time , worke and toyle for the vse of men , and withall sing Psalmes and praises to God. A flower in their hands , and a song in their mouthes both at once . He that will not worke , let him not eat , sayes the Apostle . Yours were all for eating , no bodie at working , not so much as the easiest workes or taskes . And the Egyptians , saies S. Chrysostome , that in former times were of all men most giuen to gluttonie , ( whereupon I suppose it is , that Orus Apollo Niliacus thus reports , that at the burial of their dead , they teare in peices the belly or the maw , of the partie deceased , and crie ouer it with great detestation , Thou art he that cast this man away , thou hast vndone him , &c. ) but as I was saying out of Chrysostome , it is his obseruation of the Monks that liued in Egypt , that the nation which was formerly most infamous for intemperancies , was now become the most abstinent of all other . Doe we maruell , if the Cardinall left out this ? Or would this agree with Popish Monks ? He saies againe , that Palaestine had the prerogatiue of senioritie touching true relligion , and the worshipping of God , but that the Egyptians haue gone beyond them for all that , though their punies in time . And would this make for Captaine Bellarmines turne , that stands so much vpon his 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , as S. Chrysostome here calls it , that is , vaunts of his antiquitie , and the matrix Ecclesia ? T hat the Egyptians reioycing in the faith of Christ , pittie their forefathers , that liued and died vnder errour , and preferre the truth , though but lately reuealed to them , before the damnable impieties that they were bred and brought vp in . Would this become a Iesuits mouth ? Lastly , that where Pharaoh once ruffled in his tyrannies , there the Monke Antonie now flourishes in holines , and in all manner of Christian and diuine vertues , prophecying also of Arius , and his execrable heresie to ouerspread the Church , which came to passe but euen too truly . Does not this shew the force of Popish Succession ? But omitting by-matters , hold we close to the point : that Bellarmines Monks , and Chrysostomes Monks , are no more like one another , then Ieremies two baskets were betweene themselues , in regard of the fruit that they contained . Which alteration also came to passe , I say , in S. Chrysostomes time , though afterwards it grew to more intolerable excesse , during the Popish superstition , as if hell had broke loose , and the channells of the round world had beene discouered , the Catarractes broken open , or the Angel of the pit had done his office , as it is in the Revelation , casting smoake , and sending forth Locusts . These things beeing so , what maruell now , if he that had formerly so admired the Monks , ( whiles they kept their first standing ) turned his style , and changed his iudgement , vpon their so base and dishonourable turning ? When the gold became dross● , and the wine was mixt with water , and they that were clad but euen now with skarlet , embraced the doung ; that is , vicious beastlines . I meane the Nazarite , and the Eremite , whiter then the snow , purer then the Sapphires , in times past ; but now scarce to be knowne as they goe in the streetes , the most recreant of all men , no marke , no note of their auncient continence , which made them venerable . And were they not Monks , trow you , that would haue burnt S. Iohn Chrysostom himselfe ( to fil vp the measure of his other miseries in banishment ) as himselfe declares in his Epistle ad Olympiadem of that matter ? 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ( saith he , ) a fitte name for such a rude rabble . Many bulls ( might he say ) haue compassed me about , and would see fire to me aliue . Not vniustly this I graunt , if there may be any iust cause of their persecution and vexation of so righteous a man. Whome he had stung both otherwise , more then in one place , and especially in his bookes ad Demetrium , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , where he thus writes . All Monks ( saith he ) now a daies , haue this song in their mouthes , and nothing but this ; 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 : That is , A place of rest , a place of rest , or sweete repose , ( the blessing of Issachar ) this is the first and the last of the Monks wishes , the totall of their desires , &c. And if then so , what since shall we thinke ? How hath the Locust fallied to and fro , with his heauie-gated bodie , deuouring the fruit , corrupting the pastures ? As I doubt not but diuers countries vnder heauen haue felt ( for the noise of them it gone out into all worlds ) but ours without compare , in each coast of which , you may trace the Monks , and the impression of their feete , or rather the wallowing of their carkasses , vnto this very day , both by the freshnes of the ayre , and the fatnes of the soyle ; though it hath beene obserued by some , that in the choice of their seates , like egregious belli-gods , and fulfillers of that verse , Let vs eate and drinke , for to morrow we shall die ; they preferred rich soyle euen before good ayre , and the satisfaction of their lusts ( 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ) before the prolonging of their liues . § 32. Sed facilis materia ( as Tullie saies to Antonie ) in te & in tuos dicere . And these are Antonians , but rather like that gorbelly , then the godly Monke knowne by that name . Or howsoeuer that be , yet it is easie declaming I say , against such viperous companions , whose very sent , though they be gone from vs , like the vermine of Egypt after they were dead and laid , infects our minds as it did once our coasts . The Adioynder neuertheles wants not his Apology , I know : Ad haec omnia opponitur praeclara defensio . They should not haue beene dissolued ( saies he ) for all that . What then ? Reformed , and let stand . Shall we heare S. Chrysostome once more ? 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . And , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . in Gen. c. 18. hom . 42. Desperate diseases admit no cure ( Hippocrates himselfe forbids it . ) An vnredresseable euill is the harbinger of destruction , without any hope of recouerie . What sayes our Chawcer ? When physicke will not worch , Carrie the coarse to Church . This was as much as I told you before , that King Henrie the eight , did but as he should , not onely when he turned begging Fryars a begging , but dead men out of doores , dead in floth , dead in pleasures , a very burthen to their biding-places . And least you thinke I haue misapplied those sentences of Chrysostome , they are spoken by him of the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah . Whose case for ought I see , might stirre as much pittie in passionate minds , as the Abbies and the Monasteries doth in some women and fooles , euen to this day . For can we imagine them to haue beene any better , then as the paradises of God , when we lament their desolation and vastation most ? Yet desperate diseases and vncurable maladies , were the causes ( sayes S. Chrysostome ) that Sodom and Gomorrah were destroied , which cities ( saies the Scripture ) were as the paradise of God. So happily the Monasteries for their surpassing pleasantnes , and delightfulnes . The Councell also of Ephesus implying as much in those words , Can. 8. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , vniuersall diseases neede the more [ effectuall ) remediés . There was nothing left now , but to pull downe the house , whose very walls and posts the leprosie had infected . A violent mischiefe , a violent medicine ; and an vniuersall canker , an vniuersall caustique , which King Henrie applied , and Queene Marie her selfe was not able to take off . So the Pardon-mongers , and Indulgentiaries , were not reformed , but extinguished , in your late Councell of Trent , as the Reuerend Bishop here most effectually telleth you : because the abuse was such as was thought to be incorrigible . Nulla amplius spes relicta● Sess . 21. cap. 9. What saies the Scripture ? Faciam huic loco sicut Silo , Ier. 26. Should your priuiledges be more , when your enormities were no lesse ? Nay , alas , what comparison ? And S. Hierome Epist . ad Sabinian . Diaconum , Propter peccatum filiorum Heli constuprantium matronas , locus tabernaculi ipse subuersus est , propter vitia sacerdotum , dei sanctuarium destitutum . I looked , saies the Psalme , and his place was no where to be found , not onely himselfe ( the notorious sinner ) but his very place was gone . Which Livie himselfe reports to haue beene the fashion in those times , to abolish the very monuments of place and seat , where treason was contriued , ( why not then , where treason with diuers more abhominations ? ) as Iericho might not be built againe ( and no more may the Monasteries ) like Abimelechs sowing the corne-fields with salt , to keepe out inhabitants , and to doome the grounds to euerlasting barrennes . But let the Popes owne practise hardly decide it , and no meane Popes , but euen Pius quintus himselfe , that mirrour of pietie . He dissolued the order of Fratres Humiliati , and extinguisht it cleane , for the treasonable conspiracie of one Hieronymus Farina a priest , ( you haue many Priests eiusdem farinae , ) though Bellarmine would excuse your Antistites from murthers , whereas Queene Maries Chaplaine laid wait for her life , ( if we beleeue Florimundus ) a priest in all likelihood he , and a Popish priest . But Pius quintus , I say , extinguisht the whole Order vtterly , ( humbled those Brethren , not yet HVMBLED enough ) for ones mans fact , for discharging a dagge at Cardinall Borromees backe , as he was praying in his Oratorie . And the reason that prickt forward this miscreant to such a wickednes , was nothing but the Cardinals too great seueritie , in reforming certaine vices of a loose Brother-hood , which this wretch could not endure , with three more of the principall , that set him on worke , and hired him , ( as the Storie saies , ) quadraginta argenteis , with fourtie siluerlings , as if so much preciouser then our Sauiour Christ . For this cause Pius quintus plaied King Henrie the eight , and reformed them after the sort that you cannot heare of with patience , pluckt them cleane vp . We read in the same booke of no lesse then twelue Abbies at this Cardinalls deuotion , and one of them at Arona , which was hereditarie to his house , propria familiae Borromeorum . So as Cardinals can engrosse monasteries , we see , as well as Kings ; and the first that laid the axe to the hewing downe of those trees , was our Cardinall Wolsey , if Polydore say true . Which King Henry finding to haue a good sound , went on with the work . Whom shall we blame ? § 33. But , if the Bishop graunt that the profession of Monks was euer lawfull , though it were but for an instant , he graunts that which all our Diuines denie , viz. vowes of pouertie , chastitie , and of obedience . Also Counsels Euangelioall , &c. So you thinke ; but it followes not . For vowes may bee without Monkerie , and Monkerie without vowes ; and pouertie , chastitie , obedience , constantly kept without them both . As for Counsels , they are yet further off then so : viz. although all the foresaid were admitted , yet Counsels distinct from precepts no way follow from thence , which diuerse of the very Papists ( not onely of the Fathers ) haue disclaimed . See Gerson , de Consil . Euang. Tractat. toto . See him againe , in Propositionibus oblatis Cardinali Veronensi , p. 1. Anselme , de Concep . Virg. cap. 1. No man can giue God as much as he oweth him , ( much lesse supererogate , vnlesse it be in sinnes : ) or flying light aboue the Commandements , towre aloft in Counsels . Gulielmus Parisiensis , lib. Cur Deus homo , cap. 7. Creatura nihil portare potest praeter ipsa onera mandatorum , &c. The Creature can doe no more then beare the burthen of the Commandements , ( if at least of them , which S. Peter saies are importable ) but not exceed in Counsels . Alexander Hal. part . 3. Quaest . 56. membr . 7. Lex est vniuersalis , ( quoth he ) & perfectae iustitiae regula . That is , The Law comprehends all , the Law is a rule of absolute righteousnesse , or , of all that may be well and lawfully done . As we read to the Philippians , chap. 4. v. 8. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , and , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , all vertue , and all praise , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , we are bid to doe them , therefore they belong to the obseruation of the Law , the Law being 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , lex factorum , the lawe of deedes , as it is often called . Can any flie ouer this , not a mud wall , but a wall of diamond , with his wings of Counsels , and voluntary obseruations , though neuer so nimble and swift otherwise ? Gregorie Nazianzen , is of the same minde , ( to omit other Fathers ) Orat. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . that is , Let no man beare himselfe more legall then the Law , more lofty then the commaundement , more straight then the leuell or rule it selfe . Therefore let there be no Counsels , as additaments to the Lawe . No , though vowes and Monkerie , in suo totali , were graunted , in all the whole substance of it , in pouerty , chastitie , and obedience . For as here we heare , all is comprehended vnder due : whatsoeuer it be , all is no more then our debt to the law , Monkerie it selfe with the appertenances . But againe , many obserue chastitie , pouerty , and obedience , without the Vow : which , perhaps , makes Chrysostome , finde Monasticall accuratenesse a and strictnesse so often , euen in populous Cities , villages , and townes . b This is not ( saies he one time ) a doctrine only for them that lodge abroad in the fields , or in the toppes of hils , and steep mountaines , &c. as the people supposed , fondly crying out ( as the Adioynder doth here ) that such perfection as he exhorted them to in his Sermon , was for Monks onely . In another place ; Abraham had wife and children , saies he , yet perfecter then any Monke , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , more accurate of his wayes , more exact in his courses , then 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , they which at this day haue taken vp their lodging in the tops of the hils : at this day , saies he , and yet we heard before , how resplendent the Monks were in his time , like Angels incarnate , ex hom . 8. in Matth. Of another manner of stampe , I wisse , then the Abby-coynes in Poperie , I meane their Friers , longè diuersi commatis : of whom we read notwithstading , that they had vera monetaria , true mints , to coyne money in . Had Chrysostomes so ? or could this haue beene heard of without horror then ? Lastly , that Monks may be without these three , viz. pouertie ; chastitie , and obedience , I will not say as I might , for that yours haue been so ; Famous for faction first ; so as Contention , if she were lost , must be found in the Monastery , ( Ariosto'es deuice ) where was obedience all this while ? For pouertie , so as you heard euen now , insomuch as they had * mints , and are they for poore folkes ? As for chastity , I will spare my pen , and not triumph in your shame , as I might at large , nor vnkindly gall the Readers modestie : suffice it that true Monkerie , vnreprooueable Monkerie , may bee without these , not onely your counterfeit ( 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , ) as the ensuing shew . § 34. Athanasius ad Dracontium , of his times . Multi Monachi sunt parentes liberorum . And , Quisque vbi volet decertet . That is : Many Monks are fathers of children . Let euery man trie masteries , as his owne mind serues him . Making it first free to professe Monkerie , or no , and in that profession allowing the libertie euen of getting children . S. August . de Haeres . cap. 40. Catholica Ecclesia plurimos Monachos clericosque habet vtentes vxoribus , ( that is more then eoniugatos , that by the way I may note somewhat for Ministers marriages ) & propria possidentes . In English thus : The Catholike Church hath many Monks and Clerks in it , ( meaning Ministers ) that both vse their wiues , and possesse goods in proper . Of Chrysostome I told you before , Hom. 8. in ad Hebr. that if marriage and Monkerie may not stand together , all is spoild . Therefore your Church hath spoild all , or there is nothing left vn-spoild in your Church , that hath diuided these . As for the Canon that forbids Monks to marrie , Calched . Concil . can . 16. it is a great deale younger , and we search truth by the originall times . Besides , how gently doth that Canon censure them ? And so likewise the Virgins that marrie after profession or dedicatiō . 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , is kept for 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . The libertie of courtesie or relaxation is reserued for the Bishop of the place . So as still the Monke may keepe his wife , and the Virgin her husband . As for Pouertie ; Alvarus Pelagius de planctu Eccl. lib. 1. cap. 46. Abdication of proprietie is not essentiall to Monkerie . For in Egypt and Palaestine , the Monks there vsually both bought and sold . Yea , Paulus ille summus Monachus , proprium habuit & testamentum fecit : Paul the Arch-Monke , had somewhat proper , and made a will. This speakes Alvarus of the Monks of Egypt , which were those whome Chrysostome so praised euen now , and from whome Bellarmine would commend his owne . And for Obedience , which is the third , Caietane makes such a diuorce betweene perfection , and that , in 2. 2. Quaest . 86. art . 5. that he preferres the Bishop there afore the Monke , though the Monke liues in farre more obedience then the Bishop , as we all know . Finally , cannot the Pope dispence with his owne selfe for continence , pouertie , and obedience ? Hostiensis will tell you so , no man disagreeing from him . Nay , how rare a thing is it for the Pope to obey ? Yet you knowe the Pope cannot cast away the height of his Pontificall perfection by any meanes . Yea , he dispences with others too , as well as with himselfe ; and you approoue the practise . Therfore these are not linked in so neere a band , as you would make folkes beleeue ; but are separable from one another , the vowe from Monkerie , ( aske but Salomon of this , Ecclesiast . 5. or Dauid , Psal . 119. ) and Monkery from the vowe , and Perfection from them all , while your Euangelicall Counsels appeare no where . § 35. Which things beeing so , why should you traduce our men so bitterly , in your numb . 26. for abandoning the Monasteries , ( that coope of infamies ) and taking to them wiues ? May the Pope doe this out of the libertie of his fanci● , though materia voti be the same it was at first ; and shall not these be borne with , whome the dangerousnes of the times , and the reformation of their iudgements , and the exigence of the cause acquireth from your slaunder ? Reade Theodoret l. 4. c. 26. Ecclesiast . histor . of Aphraates the Monke , abandoning his cell , and going abroad into the world , to intend preaching . Whose answer to the Emperour challenging him for it , may be ours to your selfe , in defence of those men , whom you carpe so virulently . But you alleadge Dionysius vnto vs , de Ecclesiast . Hierarch . c. 10. and you say , he liued in the Apostles times , and boldly you call him S. Pauls disciple . Thus you thinke you may perswade your schollers within the grate , doubly captiued , ( that haue neither mind to study , nor opportunity to search , nor yet iudgement to discerne ) that the doubtfull Dionysius is a man of such authoritie . Who suppose he were most absolute and most authenticall , what sayes he euen as you relate him ? That the Monks of his time , made a solemne promise and couenant before the altar , to renounce the world , and to embrace the monastique life . For these are your words . And suppose all this . Doth this prooue that Monks may not marry wiues , or possesse goods , or decline your doating-moaping obedience ? For we renounce the world in Baptisme all of vs , and yet all doe not bind themselues in these three vowes ; not onely ours , but not yours . Haue you not many that are baptized among you , and yet no Votaries ? It rema●●es then you prooue it , by those other words , that the Monks of that time made a solemne promise to embrace , as you say , a Monasticall life : Ergo , Monkery includes the three vowes , of pouertie , chastitie , and obedience . But is this a sound sequele ? Or is it any thing but the Elench of Petitio principij ? For shame E. T. bind your broom-stickes together better , or be aduised that you are not for this trade of syllogizing . When I look in Dionysius , I finde there onely a promise to forsake vitam diuiduam , or vitam distinctam , vnà cum visionibus ; which some would rather construe of a vowing for marriage , & against the single contēplatiue life ; specially they that were troubled with no more learning or Latin thē your self . But whatsoeuer it be , there is no vow in Dionys . no not of that which we vow in Baptisme , nor againe of Monkerie in him that turns Monk. And yet how smal a thing were that , if it could be euicted ? or what would that make for the three vowes , which you say Monkery necessarily importeth , we deny ? Doth this shew at all wherein Monkery consists , if the initiate vowe , at the time of his admission , to obserue and embrace a Monasticall life ? For that he will turne Monke , that he vowes perhaps , and yet but perhaps : but after what fashion he is to obserue his Monkerie vndertaken , that hee mentions not , that is as questionable yet , as if nothing had been said . Are you not ashamed then to bewray your dulnesse so grossely ? For these are not things of any deep mysterie , but the blockishnesse of your braine lets you from conceiuing them . I say finally , Dionysius mentions no vow at all . 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is one thing , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 another ; and your selfe dare not expound it by any other name , then promise or couenant , which comes short of Vowe , when you haue don all you can . Vowes are to God , promise and couenant may be to man. And so is that to be vnderstood , of prima fides , 1. Tim. 5. which here you clap on too , onely to make vp measure . What if I should say , it were like primus amor , Reuel . 2. 4. or prima opera , ibid. 5 ? The first faith , like the first works ; or the first faith , like the first loue . Is it not meet expounding one of these by the other , that are so neere in nature , and to be neere in subiect ? But I stand not vpon that , I admit the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , or the prima fides , to be an obligation , or profession , before the companie , to attend vpon such an office , without vowing to God. But our questiō is of vowing chastities . And there the widow must be threescore yeares old , that was to giue her fidem , or to make professiō , also to haue been married first , to some husband or other . You stand for the vowes of young striplings and young damosels , neither formerly married , and God wot farre off from threescore yeares of age . And will you censure these with the same damnation ? But so much may suffice to haue answered of this matter . § 36. As for the sentences of Luther that you quote out of him ( a nose-gay , as you thinke , of somewhat vnsauoury flowers ) they haue been explained ouer and ouer by our Diuines ; they import no such beastlinesse as you would wrest them to . Who knowes not Luthers manner of deliuering his conceits ? As Socrates is said to haue had his pi●gues similitudines . And S. Paul , beeing to make opposition against the Law , which the Iewes so magnified , turnes euery thing into a Law : Lex peccati , Lex mortis , &c. sparing no words , giuing the raines to his libertie . So Luther . Whereupon Harding charges him , with denying magistracie among Christians , because he saies in one place , Inter Christianos magistratus nullus est , or some such thing . Which is no more then Chrysostome hath , Rex & subditus apud Christianos nomina mera sunt , Orat. 2. in Babylam : King and subiect are but meere names among Christians ; namely , in matters between God and the conscience . For , I pray , what difference is there when once it comes thither ? Does not the King as well as the subiect begge pardon of God ? And I haue obserued euen the Fathers , to couple marriage with other naturall necessities , which here you carpe Luther for . I hope the Physitians will not greatly be against this , whom your Medina appeales to , in the triall of this question , lib. 4. de Continentia sacrorum hominum , controu . 4. and we are not afraid to follow him . But these flim-flammes would soone vanish of their owne accord , if you would but leaue cauilling to disgrace the person , and indifferently looke into the interpretation of our meanings . I haue reade another of you that exclaimes against Luther for those words , wherein he confesses of himselfe in the bitternesse of his soule , that he takes more delight in eating , drinking , and sleeping , then in the passion and resurrection of our Sauiour Christ : Behold an Epicure , saith he , by his owne confession , a belly-god , &c. And I remember a good Gentleman , that was stumbled with these words ( cited as it seemes in one of your Pampheleters ) and thought the collection to bee verie sound . No , God knowes : but as Anna said to Eli , Ego foemina tristis corde ; so he , I am a man sad at the heart , deploring his sinfulnesse , and agast at his owne wretchednesse , which the Papists are none troubled with , specially the Iesuites , that view their face in the glasse of flatteries . As we read in another place also of the same Luther , where speaking of the good theife , and his noble confession of Christ vpon the crosse , he sticks not to say , Certe ego non facerem , Surely this is more then I should haue done , if I had beene in his place : Loe , new matter for you to cauill at in Luther . § 37. Now to drawe to a conclusion . As for Bucer , he is so farre from denying that we may pray to God for chastitie , yea maidenly chastitie ( though you quote his Commentarie vpon Matth. 1. and Matth. 19. as containing such conceits , but most iniuriously ) as you shall now heare . Vpon the 1. of Matth. his words , ( if any to that purpose there at all ) are but these : Discendum nobis est , ne priuati quicquam nobis in vita deligamus . Praecipuè autem ne calibatum arripiamus temerè , hoc est , ad istud viuendi genus non certo Dei iussu vocati , &c. That is , [ We must learne to choose no priuate [ vocation ] to our selues in this life , and especially that we doe not betake our selues to the state of single life rashly , that is , not called thither by the certaine appointment of God. ] Does Bucer say here , that we may not pray for continencie , or rather that we must not rush vpon it against Gods appointment and command ? As the wise man saies , Wisedom . 8. Desirous to be continent ( not onely as they that obserue perpetuall maidenhead , but in any degree ) I besought God , and it was a piece of Wisedome , that I knewe euen that , that I could not be continent , vnlesse God gaue it me [ by speciall gift . ] Which if Bucer had but said , F. T. would haue cauilled him , for saying we might not pray to God for continence , though that be the very thing , which he professes here he prayed for . And does not Bucer adde , Vt nihil priuati deligamus nobis ? sc . inuito Deo : We must choose no priuate course at all . By this reason then he forbids vs to pray to God for schollership , for skill in musicke , in nauigation , and the like ; which who would collect , but such a Huddibrasse as this Adioynder ? § 38. Now vpon Matth. 19. he repeats the same againe . Diligenter perpendendum quod Dominus ait , Non omnes dicti huius capaces sunt , sed quibus datum est . And after a fewe words between , thus : Non igitur nostri arbitrij erit caelibes viuere , ac non stulc●… modò caelibatum vouere sed & impium . Debet enim quisque sua vocatione suoque dono esse contentus , &c. But the core is at that , where answering the Papists fond obiection , Quòd autem pontificiae castitatis assertores , aiunt , precibus posse impetrari vt detur vnicuique caelibi viuere , Christo contradicunt , qui ita pronuntiat , Non omnes sunt capaces huius dicti , &c. Note that same cuique . But I will English the whole . [ Where the Papists say , that by prayer euery man may obtaine the gift of single life ; they contradict Christ , who thus affirmeth , That all cannot receiue this saying . ] And he shewes there are many things which we may well striue for , and wish , and welcome if we haue obtained them ; but not formally pray for them ; as immunity from sinne , the possession of heauen before our time , &c. Fidelis enim oratio pro eo tantum est de quo animus orantis certus , &c. I am Deus non vult omnes calibes viuere . Non igitur CVIVSque caelibatus ad gloriam Dei faciet : Quare neque OMNIBVS pro eo orandum est . That is , It makes not for Gods glorie , that all should be continent ( I thinke a Papist will scarce deny this , vnles he meanes such glorie as belongs to the world to come , when generations shall cease , and nature be at an end , &c. ) Then , Wherefore all are not to pray for it , or , none is to pray that all may be continent . What will they mislike in this speach of Bueers ? Or does not the word all sufficiently acquit him ? Insomuch as if I might defend Bucer , from one exception of theirs by endangering him in another , I would say that he encouraged vs to prayer but euen a little too much , and that pro externis , for outward things , among which it is apparent that he reckons virginitie ( viz. as diuided from the essence of saluation : ) yea , and lastly , for others as well as for ones selfe . You shall heare his words vpon Matth. 8. a place which he referres vs to in his before quoted vpon Matth. 19. An antidote belike , that he fore●aw would be of vse against a Sycophants tooth , though it were F. T. himselfe . In omnibus precationibus pro rebus externis pius addet , Veruntamen non mea sed tua voluntas fiat . Si ad gloriam tuam facturum noueris , sana me , pelle hoc aut illud malum , & nequaquam absolutè , Libera , sana , &c. Quòd si spiritus huc impellat , ac velut incogitantem rapiat , vt certâ fiduciâ exorandi quid externi vel tibi vel alijs ores , sicut Apostoli multis alijs dona certa spiritus sancti orarunt ( maruell it is if Bucer would denie continencie to be one of these dona , at least Medina so reckons of vs , de continent , sacror , hominum , l. 4. controuers . 3. cap. 14. ) indubiè exorabis quicquid id fuerit , quia fide orabis indubia . Credenti autem omnia possibilia , Marc. 9. 23. And againe a little after : Sic sese habebit quaecunque ex Dei spiritu profecta fuerit pro re aliquâ externâ precatio , ne de orando quidem deliberabitur , nedum de exorando aliquid haesitabitur , sed spiritus certus , &c. Quacunque autem de re id exploratum non habuerit , absolutè eam nullus petet , sed adijciet , si ita Domino fuerit probatum , & ad ipsius gloriam momentum aliquod habuerit , &c. To me this doctrine seemes stranger then the other ; I meane about the Spirits instigation of vs to prayer , then that which the Adioynder falsly imputes to him . If Bucer be no more amisse in his opinion of prayers infallibly speeding vpon such an instigation of the Spirit , then for certaine he forbiddeth not our praying for continency in this place , he is right euery way . And so much of him , and of the matter of Monkerie . § 39. THE next point is about the name Catholike : In which I might be short , and shewe the invalidity of the argument that they vse , to prooue themselues Catholikes , because they are called so , or rather because they call themselues so ; as the Scripture saith of the name Christian , ( another kinde of name then the name Catholike ) that not the Christians called themselues so , but were called , yea , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , Act. 11. 26. they were called as from God , or by diuine oracle ; but no way by themselues , &c. the name that notes vs , beeing to come from him , of whome we hold by dependance . As S. Chrysostome notes most excellently , both otherwise in God , changing names vnto diuers , and namely , that the King of Babylon bestowed new names vpon the three children his captiues and seruants , in token of their reference hereafter to him , and his dominion ouer them onely . So vnlesse the Papists would bee owned by themselues , & not by God , their denomination must come from God , and not from themselues . It is he that calls the starres all by their names , suppose you the generation of Gods children , ( which shine as starres in a peruerse nation ) that is in effect , the Church of God. And so once againe , the Papists should not be called by themselues , after the name that they would bee knowne by ; but as we are bidden , to neglect what men say of vs , or by what name they call vs , Matth. 5. so not to trust to the title that our selues shall giue to our selues neither , though with generall consent , and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , as Aristotle saies , by compact , or couenant , which is the greatest strength that names hold by , beeing but arbitrary when they are at best , and subiect to variation . They shall cast out your name , Luk. 6. 22. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , as euill ; but neuer a whit the more euill for that I warrant you . For Christ still calls his sheepe by their names , Ioh. 10. 3. ( as he did the starres before ) whatsoeuer nick-names the lewd world giues them ; either to their persons or their profession , calling that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , Act. 24. 5. and this 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , ver . 14. of the same chapter . But , quam dicunt isti , which these men call so , ( whose tongue is their owne , as they say in the Psalme , with it they will preuaile , ) and no otherwise . And that with wise men waighes but little . § 40. S. Leo Epist . 83. Ecclesiae nomine armatiestis , & contra Ecclesiam dimicatis . You may thinke he spoke it of the Papists themselues , and of these times . You arme your selues ( quoth hee ) with the name of the Church , and therewith fight against the true Church . Mutemus clypeos , say they in Virgil , and then , — Dolus , an Virtus , quis in hoste requirat ? Frustra nobis plaudimus ( said S. Salvian aunciently ) communione nominis catholici : In vaine doe we flatter our selues with our part , or fellowship , in the name CATHOLIKE . Which with the Papists preuailes so much , as if they would keep possession with that , when they are otherwise lawfully eiected out of all . Like Hesiods bird , that onely staied behind , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 — or lobs seruant , Onely I am left to tell thee : or as we say at sea , a floating vessell and abandoned by her marriners , comes not into the Admirals power to be seazed on , as long as there is any quicke thing in it . So the name Catholike preserues from wracke and finall vastation , — si credere dignum est . S. Austen saies of the heretikes , that they make birdlime to themselues , and gummy compositions , out of the sweet names of our Lord Iesus Christ , to catch simple and vnstaied soules : Viscum sibi faciunt , ex commixtione syllabarum nominis Domininostri Iesu Christi , ad decipiendas animas simplices , &c. And * Irenaeus sayes , that the heretikes , they oppose the name of Christ to such as they are offended with , by way of prouocation onely , as it were to anger them , and to vexe them . Whereas the Papists , they practise the like subtiltie vpon such as they haue to deale with , by mentioning or opposing to them not the name of Christ so much , ( whome they are not so interessed in , euen by their owne confession ) as of the Church , the Church : as the foolish Iewes were wont to cry out of the materiall Temple , Templum Domini , Templum Domini , ( but no regard to Dominus Templi ) so these of the mysticall , and the name Catholike appertaining thereunto , by vsucapion forsooth , by plaine prescription , as Campian dreameth . But what are names ? or where does the Scripture lead vs to build our faith vpon names , or to direct our iudgements by the breath and talke of fantastique people ? O thou that art named the house of Iacob , Mich. 2. 7. Named , he saies , but belike meanes not that they are so indeed , but degenerated from Iacob ; from the seed of Iudah , into the seed of Canaan ; or Iacobs in claudicatione , but not Iacobs in benedictione , as S. Austen distinguishes of the counterfetters in relligion , which is the Papists guise , that can halt with the Fathers , but will not go right with them . And Esa . 47. 1. Thou shalt no more be called tender and delicate , spoken ( as Forerius notes vpon that place ) because courtly parasites flatter young ladies , with pleasant words and honny titles , perswading them that they are delicate , and soft , and tender , and not fit to tire themselues with too much labour or paines-taking . But the principall partie that they are there intended to , is Babylon ; or rather , as S. Hierome well obserues vpon that place , not so much Babylon as Babylons daughter , daughter Babel , as the texe hath it , that is , young Babel . Which besides the Papists , catching at the word with all eagernesse elswhere , to range their Peter within the gates of Rome , S. Hierome also himselfe interpreteth to be Rome , and none rather then the Rome that now is ; who as in many other points she resembleth the auncient Babylon not vnfitly , so herein most sutable , that she hath Iesuites and parasites in her , which call her Catholike , call her Apostolike , though shee be neuer so bastard and degenerate . But what sayes the Scripture before alleadged ? Thou shalt no more bee called tender and delicate . Ecce tu cognominaris Iudaeus , saith S. Paul , Rom. 2. Thou art called a Iewe. And so we to the Papists , Ecce tu cognominaris Catholicus . But is he a Catholike that is called so ? Or does not sound faith rather , especially if it be conioyned with vertuous life , characterize a Catholike , as S. Austen tels vs , Quaest . in Matth. c. 11. not euery correspondence with the Church of Rome , as F. T. would perswade vs in his num . 29. or the idle taking on of the name Catholique vpon them , which none so recreant and hereticall but may doe ? Innaserat in nomen Caij Marij , saies . Tully in his 2. Philippie . of a certaine runagate varlet , cuiproinde etiam vncus meritò impactus est : and diuerse other rebells both here and abroad , that haue counterfeited the names , and withall the persons of their deceased Soueraignes , to win authoritie among the multitudes . Euen Barabas was called by the name of Iesus , if we beleeue Origen , gathering it out of the Gospels , not without some probability . Which not only touches the questiō now in hand , about the name Catholique in generall , but is a faire warning to our gentlemen Iesuites , not to trust too much to their vsurped denomination , though they were called , not from the name ( as they are ) but by the name it selfe , and title of the Lord Iesus . Who hath not heard what glorious titles the heretiques of old times haue vsurped to themselues ? Were they euer a whit the better accounted of for that ? Or did they prosper the more in their damnable heresies ? Gregorius Presbyter in the life of Gregory Nazianzen , of some that would needes be called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , from the height , or magnificence , that they arrogated to themselues ( not vnlike the Adioynder that contemnes our Church , and calls it abeggarly Church , num . 36. his owne no doubt so rich , no lesse then the Merchants , that are confederate with it , Reuel . 18. ) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , saies S. Gregory . The vile wretches call themselues the Loftyes or the Magnificoes . The Phrygians , or Montanists had their 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , their Perfect men and greatest of all , Concil . Laod. c. 8. the Nouatians their 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , the very best of all , Concil . 1. Constantinop . can . 7. Of the Angelicall and Apostolicall , ( so entitled , ) heretiques , who hath not likewise heard ? The Manichees had their Perfecti , and one a father of that sect interpreted his name , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , as dropping pure Manna , ( a kinsman of the Author mentioned by me before , num . 5. of this chapter . ) At ille ( sayes S. Austen ) fundebat insanias , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 meram : The Manna was meere madnesse , which came from the Manichee : contrà Faust . l. 19. cap. 22. The same heretique was so insolent , that when he wrote but a letter , or an Epistle to his friends ( wherein the Pope now imitates him in his Breues to his followers ) his inscription was wont to be , Manichaus Apostolus Iesu Christi , Manichaus the Apostle of Iesus Christ ( like Apostolicam benedictionem in the Breues aforenamed ) witnesse S. Austen in the afore-quoted worke . S. Peter himselfe 2. Pet. 2. 1. foretells of false Prophets , that should arise in the newe Testament , to whome he ascribes 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , fained speeches , or forged speeches , framed no doubt at their own will and pleasure ; and what rather then the names of holynes that they pretend , whereof we are now speaking ? though their cunning I graunt reaches a great deale further ; but by those they shall buy and sell soules , saies S. Peter , or make merchandise of them , as now with the Papists , it is not their meanest inducement they haue to their error , that they are called Catholikes . Yea our Sauiour himselfe , Matth. 7. 15. forewarnes vs of Wolues , that should come in sheepes cloathing , which how if wee should extend to the apparelling euen of names , especially if wee ioyne with it S. Pauls like prophecy , of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , Act. 20. 29. that is , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , as he speakes else where , 1. Thess . 2. 7. Mighty Wolues , or Wolues in power , or in authority , which fieldome want in the Popish prelacy ; and those 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , rising by succession out of your owne selues , v. 30. And yet for these and many more now , no such couering as the fleece taken from the sheepes backe , the name Catholike . I haue said nothing of the Cathari ( a name neere to the Catholikes ) yet voluntarily taken by some heretiques vpon themselues , ( as may appeare by the Canon of Constantinople last quoted ) wherein they iumpe with the Papists , whome we call not Catholikes as of our owne head , whatsoeuer Bellarmine & the Adioynder retort vpon vs , but apply our speech to their vsuall fashion , and speake as we would be vnderstood by them . On the other side , did not the heretickes miscall the Catholikes , and strippe them , as much as in them lay , of that glorious name ? The Pelagians , saies S. Austen , they called vs Traducians ; the Arians , Homousians ; the Donatists , Macarians ; the Manichees , called vs Pharisees ; and diuers other heresies diuersly nicknamed vs. Lib. 1. poster . contra Iulian Pelag. And was the Catholike cause euer a whit the worse for that ? No verily . For as Theodoret notes most excellently , lib. 3. Histor . cap. 21. of Iulians madnesse ( I meane Iulian the Apostate ) going about to change the name Christians , into the name of Galileans , most preposteiously , sith the name Christian cannot be abolished , ( 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , saies S. Luke , which we read not yet of the name Catholike , ) that nothing could be more frantique then such a proiect , cōsidering that if he effected it ( as there was smal hope ) yet there could grow no disparagement to the Christian sect by the change of their name , no more then if Nireus were called Thersites , or Thersites Nireus , the one should be the fayrer , or the other more deformed , then he was before : or as if Homer were called Chaerilus , or Chaerilus were called Homer , there would follow any change of their veynes in Poetry : so here . But as Eucherius sayes of the honours and preferments of this world ( in his Epistle Paraeneticall , ad Valerian . fratrem ) when they are crossely and vnworthily ( as often ) bestowed , that the thing which was inuented to distinguish desert , is made to shrowd it & to confound it : so fares it in this Metaplasme of names many times : Dignos & indignos non iam discernit dignitas , sed confundit . And as he had said before in the same booke , Alij nomen vsurpant , nos vitam . Where , the height of the title without substance answerable in the party owning it , is but as the light of a candle ( as Marius saies in Salust ) that discouers blemishes , but creates no beauty , in an ill fauoured visage , presented to it . Shall we heare what the holy Ghost saies , prophecying of the times which were then to come , and which now haue ouertaken vs in all liklyhood , ( of which I may say with S. Hilary , changing but a word , Malè ves nominum amor cepit , or malè partium , ( as he sayes parietum ) malè Ecclesiam in vocabulis veneramini . ) Thou hast a name that thou art aliue , but indeede art dead , spoken of the Church of Sardis , Reuel . 3. ver . 1. And Reuel . 2. ver . 9. they say they are Iewes ( spoken of certaine miscreants ) but are not , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , that is , descended from Abraham , Isaac , and Iacob , as they alledge , but representing nothing lesse in their formes of life . What els doe the Papists , I wonder , at this day , entitling themselues Catholikes , & non sunt , though they are nothing lesse , either in their life , or doctrine , specially if we hold to Lirinensis his touch-stone , of , Vbique , Semper , & ab omnibus receptum : Whereas they now would confound Catholike and Romane , because they haue much Romane which they cannot prooue Catholike . But we haue also further mention in the place aforesaid , of the Throne of Satan , erected among the faithfull ; a Metaphor belike taken from the Episcopall throne , as if Satan might get into that too , ver . 13. concerning Pergamus . And ver . 9. concerning the Church of Smyrna , hauing spoken of some that called themselues Iewes , that is , true worshippers of God , and are not ( as was said before ) the holy Ghost opposeth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , but the Synagogue of Satan . As who would say , They goe for Ecclesia , but are indeed Synagoga , and pretend Christ , but belong to Satan , which is the reproofe that wee charge our aduersaries with , and I thinke not causelesse . Yea in the second verse of the same chapter ( because the Pope in all hast would be Apostle or Apostolike , for hee claimes the tearme , and counts it his inheritance ) you shall read that some said they were Apostles , and were not , ( whom the Church of Ephesus is commended for trying , afore shee would trust , as S. Iohn also biddes vs to try the Spirits , 1. Ioh. 4. 1. and soone after he censures the prating Dietrephes , and brings him to his tryall , He that doth euill hath not seene God , 3. Epistle , ver . 11. ) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . How fit was this to be premised before the rest of S. Iohns doctrine , throughout the whole mysticall booke of the Apocalyps , describing Antichrist such as now he appeares ? Lastly ver . 23. of the said chapter of the Reu. The Churches are to know , that it is God , which searcheth the hearts and the reynes , ( as not caryed away with names or glorious titles ) vnles it be nomen cum fide , the holding of his name with the not denying of his faith , ver . 13. of the same Chapter . Whereas the Papists leauing to be called by his name , ( the name Christians , which the Scripture onely recordeth ) may well be suspected to haue renounced his faith too , giuen him ouer cleane . For the holy Ghost wee see couples them both together . § 41. Yet the Adioynder is peremptory , num . 32. that the name Catholique cānot be vsurped by heretikes , but , is a most true and proper note of the true Church , and num . 33. that the name and the thing expressed by the name , doe alwaies so concurre , that they are neuer separated . And againe , num . 34. that heretikes , or hereticall congregations , neuer did or could vsurpe the name Catholique , but the same hath alwayes beene and euer shall bee peculiar to the true Church , and that the name and the thing signified by the name , doe euer concurre . Thus he . But what such priuiledge I wonder hath the name Catholique , supra omne nomen , aboue all names els , or why should that only cleaue to truth , and the truth to it , whereas all other names may be diuorced from it ? May the name Christian be rent from the Church , by the furiousnes of Iulian labouring to extinguish the whole body of Christians , and yet Christianity suffer no disparagement thereby , as Theodoret witnessed in most plentifull manner a little before , and cannot the name Catholique be borrowed of the Church , by the hand of some crafty intruder or other , but the Church shall no longer be her selfe ? Yet the name Christian implyes Christ in it , which is the head that we hold by , and the Prince of our Congregation . Secondly , Scripture recordeth it : and thirdly , it seemes giuen by diuine inspiration , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ; Neither of which agrees to the name Catholique . No , nor yet to the Gnostiques , a high name too , and from the abundance of knowledge , which they attributed to themselues . Whom S. Paul is thought to twit , 1. Tim. 6. 12. giuing vs withall to vnderstand , that there may be falshood in names , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , that is , the falsly called Gnostiques . Of Apostolike , Angelike , and if there bee any other , I might say the same . Why should the name Catholique be more sacred then they , why lesse exposed to hereticall vsurpation ? For Catholique and Apostolike , either draw in an equalitie , or at least Apostolike is not inferiour to Catholique : Angelike one would thinke were aboue them both . And if the name Catholique still goes where the true Church goes , how are the Catholiques themselues not Catholiques , or not knowne by that name , as sometimes it fared , witnesse S. Austen , but transformed into the titles of certain newfangled sectaries , the Traducians , the Macarians , & the rest of that rabble before rehearsed ? Is it like that the heretikes wil not call thēselues Catholiques , as the Adioynder pretends , whē they take from Catholiques the very name Catholike , and cloth them with other of their own deuising ? Though S. Austen most directly , contra Epistol . Fundamenti , cap. 4. ( the booke that the Adioynder himselfe here quotes ) sayes , that omnes haeretici se Catholicos dicivolunt , all heretikes would be called Catholiques , and Lactantius Institution . lib. 4. cap. 30. that all heretikes suam esse potissimùm Catholicam putant Ecclesiam , they thinke themselues Catholiques , and the Catholique Church theirs , in a prime degree . How then shall we beleeue that of Cyrill of Hierusalem , ( for wee will suppose it to be Cyrills for this once ) which Bellarmine first alleadged , and the Adioynder here referres vs to , that no heretake will presume to call his sect Catholique , or to point to his own faction , if the question be askt of the Catholique Church , as if that word were such a scare to him ? Does not this shew , that the Bishop most aduisedly answered to those authorities , when hee answered in the words which the Adioynder carps here , that De nomine lis nulla inter nos intercedit , sed vtripotiùs è re nomen habeant ? We stand not vpon the name ( it hath beene shewed in the precedents , that there is no cause to stand vpon names , ) but which of vs hath the most right to inherite the name , the glorious name ( as S. Iames sayes ) quod inuocatur super nos , by which we are called ? As for S. Austen , he might say , that tenet me postremò ipsum nomen Catholicae , reckoning the name Catholique among the last arguments , which perswaded him to continue in the vnity of the Church , and preferring like enough diuerse forcibler before it , or els this would haue mooued him but little . Nay , when the Bishop tells you that in case it were graunted , ( for he doth but graunt it , wee beleeue it not ) that it is true as you say , when search is made after the Catholique Church , wee point to your Church ; yet you cannot deny on the other side , but if the Catholique Reformed be asked after , a man will point to ours , and not thinke of yours for any such mention : does not this abate your lofty swell , as much as the other sond supposall serued to pricke you vp in pride ? For Catholique reformed is a more tollerable addition , and more agreeable to all good rules of reason , and of faith , then Catholique Romane is at any hand ; which is your monstrous contradiction in adiecto ( as I may so call it ) euen within two words . And as Catholique to Christian , by the verdict of Pacian ( which you are wont so to stand vpon , ) or Apostolike to Catholique , in the most Orthodox style , and some auncient Creeds , Credo sanctam Catholicam Apostolicam : So Catholique to be determined by Reformed Catholique , after that such a sea of corruptions hath flowed in ( euen by your owne confessions , ) I pray what repugnance hath it either to sound reason , or to auncient custome , or to any good ground and principle of the Church , or how doth it not iustifie our Church , aboue yours , to be that Vbi cubas , which wee so seeke for ? § 42. But Satyrus beeing cast a shore ( you say ) amongst a company of schismatikes , askt if they agreed , with the Catholique Bishops , expounding himselfe to meane , the Church of Rome . Where , first you see the prerogatiue is not the Bishops of Rome , but the Churches of Rome , if any be . Else why doth he fall so suddenly , from the mention of Bishops , to the mention of a Church , but that he meanes a Church containing in it many Bishops , and therefore not the Sea of Rome precisely , as now it is taken ? But as for the point in hand , whether the Romane faith , and the Catholique bee all one , because Satyrus interpreted his meaning in that sort , me thinks the Bishop most compleatly answereth him , and so vntieth the knot that you would faine tie vs in , as he yet tieth you fast enough in a farre tougher knot , at the same instant . Sciebat enim , &c. For hee knewe ( saies the Bishop ) that the Bishop of Rome was then a Catholique , a Catholique , protunc , and at that time punctually ; but neither afore , nor after , very immediately . Will you heare what our Adioynders reply is to this ? Hauing repeated the Bishops words to the effect aforesaid , he thus commenteth , Num. 29. So hee . Wherein he graunteth consequently , that the Pope is supreame and vniuersall Pastor of the whole Church ; for that must needes follow of his graunt , seeing it is euident , that he who then was Bishop of Rome , and whom he alloweth for Catholique , had , and exercised , a supreame and vniuersall authoritie : To which purpose it is to be considered , who was Bishop of Rome at that time : Whereto the Bishop himselfe giueth vs no small light , signifying presently after , that Liberius was Bishop a little before him ; and sure it is , that Damasus succeeded Liberius , and raigned many years , who therefore must needs be the Catholique Bishop that the Bishop meaneth . Perge porrò . Num. 30. Now then what authority Damasus had , and exercised during his raigne , ( I pray you , let it be obserued here , the raigne of King Damasus . For all Iesuites thinke so in their hearts ; but some onely speake it with their mouthes , as the Adioynder here twice in his inconsiderate zeale . And yet by this they exalt the King aboue the Pope , though it be against their wils ; because purposely amplifying the Papall style , they call it Kingdom , as ashamed of Popedome , and Priesthood , the inferiours to it . So as Baronius in his Annales , reckons the years of the world by the Annus of such a Pope , as Pius , or Clemens , or Anacletus , or the like . Which , in other Chronicles , were wont to be reckoned by the Emperours onely ; by the Popes either not at all , or but accidentally . Insomuch as the Holy Ghost himselfe , Act. 11. 28. describing the famine that was ouer all the world , calculated the time by the Emperour , thus , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , vnder Claudius Caesar . But perhaps Peter was not then come to Rome . I goe forward with the Adioynder . ) Now then what authoritie Damasus had , &c. it appeareth , saith he , sufficiently by that which I signified before , concerning him & his supremacie , in the fourth Chapter , where I shewed that the same was acknowledged , not onely in Affricke , by the Bishops of three Affrican Synods , who in a common Epistle to him , gaue cleare and euident testimonie thereof , but also in the East Church , euen by the chiefe Patriarches thereof , to wit , by Peter the holy Bishop of Alexandria , who immediately succeeded Athanasius , and beeing expelled from his Church by the Arrians , fled to Pope Damasus , and by the vertue and authority of his letters , was restored to his seat , as the Magdeburgians themselues doe relate , out of the Ecclesiasticall histories . And in the Church of Antioch , his authoritie was acknowledged , by Paulinus the Bishop thereof , receiuing instructions and orders from him for the absolution of Vitalis the Heretike . Also afterwards , Theophilus Bishop of Alexandria , and S. Chrysostome Bishop of Constantinople , were suiers to him , to obtaine pardon for Flauianus Bishop of Antioch , as may be seene more particularly in the fourth Chapter of this Adioynder , where I haue also set downe the cleare testimonies of some Fathers , who liued at the same time , and euidently acknowledged his supremacie . § 43. Numb . 31. So that the Bishop graunting that Pope Damasus was a Catholique Bishop , and that the Church of Rome was in such integritie vnder him , that S. Ambrose had reason to hold none for Catholiques , but such as held vnion therewith , it must needs followe , that the supreame and vniuersall authoritie , which Pope Damasus had , and vsed , was not vsurped , but due to him , and his Sea , and consequently to his successours . And whereas the Bishop signifieth , that the Romane Church , and Bishops , were not alwaies in the like integritie , that they were at that time , to wit , neither a little before in the time of Liberius , nor shortly after in the time of Honorius , because both of them subscribed to Heresie ( as hee saith ) I will not now stand to debate , &c. § 44. This is the Laconicall breuity of this Thom : To whome wee answer in a word ( as for the repeating of his braue feates exployted in the fourth Chapter , we remit him to our answer thereunto in the precedents , touching euery particular ; ) That , if Damasus had exercised such an exoticall iurisdiction , as he fondly dreameth , ( and the allegations doe nothing prooue , ) yet this could not preiudice his beeing Catholique , or he might be an vsurper notwithstanding Satyrus his iudgement of him . First , because Satyrus meant onely in opposition to the Luciferian schismatikes , whose cause was not the cause of Ecclesiasticall Supremacy . Secondly , Satyrus perhaps might not discerne the error , though the Pope had laboured of it , as diuerse other good men also gaue way to it , vnwittingly . Thirdly , a Pope may be right in his beleefe , though he be erroneous in his practise , and so may any body els . For the theife himselfe doth not thinke it lawfull to steale , nor the man-queller to murther , and yet they both commit the wickednes . Euen so the Pope may be Catholique , though he should turne cut-throate , I meane Catholique for his faith , as the Papists take it , and speculations only . Else we know , that S. Austen requires more then faith , to make one Catholique , & giues bad liuers but a censerivolunt , they would be accounted Catholique , but are not . By which also wee may collect the Apostacie of the Church of Rome , her falling away from the faith Catholique , by the contagion of euill manners that swarme in her , & non secundum Euangelium , 1. Tim. 1. 11. As Nilus his argument is out of the same chapter , ver . 19. that they that put away good conscience from them , quickely also make shipwracke of their faith . Though the Adioynder holds , that the Church and her title cannot be seuered , but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , ( which the Fathers so couple ) the Papists thinke it no disparagement to their Church , to haue them parted . Fourthly and lastly , I say , Damasus exercised no vniuersall iurisdiction , nor coueted after it , for ought the Adioynder hath demonstrated . The lesse Catholique therefore , the more Catholique Pope Damasus , whatsoeuer become of Liberius and Honorius , the one afore him , the other after him , not so currant both . § 45. There followeth presently after ( saith the Adioynder Num. 32. ) a large and liberall grant of the Bishop right worth the noting . In fine , what trow you ? That the Bishop saying , Fatemur omnia , nec de nomine lis , sed utri è re nomen habcant , he by that confesseth , that they haue the true signe and note of the Church , and we not hauing it are heretikes or schismatikes . As if we forsooth refused the name Catholike , or the Bishop implyed any such thing in all his speech , which not the desperatest wretches but censeri volunt , witnes S. Aust . et si sanari nolunt , they would be called Catholiques . As Dioscorus said in the Councell of Chalcedon , Eijcior cum Patribus , Catholicis no doubt , I am cast out with the Fathers ( saith he ) he meanes Catholique Fathers you may be sure . And , Qui profitentur fidem Catholicam , saies S. Austen , homil . 10. in Apocal. speaking of Antichrist and his leud company . Of whom also he addes , that , Imago eius ( the Image of the beast ) simulatio eorum est ( is their counterfetting and hypocrisie ) qui fingunt se esse quod non sunt , &c. Loe , the marke of the Church , as the Adioynder counts it , is the Image of the beast , as S. Austen construes it , when it is falsly pretended , namely the name Catholique . Shall we not rest then in the Bishops most graue ponderation , Vtriè re magis nomen habeant , which of vs two best deserue the title ? And turne the Adioynders witty descant wherein he doubles vpon the Bishop , with , Ex ore tuo te iudico ( because we call them Catholiques ) to , Non ex ore tuote , because his neighbours word , is to be heard , before-his owne , iustifying himselfe ? But of these things hitherto . The shippe Euplaea retaines her name , though encountred with all crosse lucke at Sea , to the laughter of the beholders , standing vpon the shore . And notwithstanding the name , yet she is the game of the tempests . Right so is the case , when Petri celox ( as Bembus calls it ) iets in her titles of magnificence vp and downe , after her other scandalls so palpably layd open . Not the badge 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , ( though prognosticating a calme ) but S. Pauls piety , preserued the shippe , sayling to Rome , Acts , 28. as it had the marriners before , Acts. 27. in despite of the sea . In like sort here : Badges and ensignes , titles and tearmes , protect not Churches , but inward worth and diuine grace . § 46. IT followes in the Adioynder , Num. 35. And the like I may also say concerning his graūt in another matter , to wit , that our Bishops are true Bishops , and that the Protestant Bishops of England had their Ordination from ours , yea from * 3. of ours ( for so he giueth to vnderstand ) whereupon he also inferreth that he and his fellow Superintendents haue a true ordination and succession from the Catholique Church , whereas the quite contrary followeth vpon his graunt . For if our Bishops be true Bishops ( as hauing a true succession from the Apostles , ) and that the Protestant Bishops haue no other lawfull ordination but from ours , two consequents doe directly follow thereon ; the ore , that we haue the true Church and doctrine , if the Bishop his fellow and friend M. Barlow say true , who in his famous Sermon ( mentioned by me elsewhere ) affirmeth the successiue propagation of Bishops from the Apostles , to be the maine root of Christian society ( according to S. Augustine ) and the maine proofe of Christian doctrine ( according to Tertullian ) as I haue shewed amply in my Supplement ; and prooued thereby , that M. Barlow and his fellowes are heretikes and schismatikes . The other consequent is , that if the English Protestant Bishops had no other lawfull ordination then from the Catholiques , they had none at all ; for that at the change of Religion in Queene Elizabeths time , they were not ordained by any one Catholique Bishop , and much lesse by three ( as the Bishop saith they were ) but by themselues , and by the authority of the Parliament , as I haue also declared at large in my Supplement . Then , Num. 37. Wherupon I inferre two things ; one that they haue no Clergie nor Church ; for hauing no Bishops they haue no Priests ( because none can make Priests but Bishops ) and hauing neither Bishops nor Priests , they haue no Clergie , and consequently no Church , as I haue shewed in my Supplement out of S. Hierome . The other is , that the Bishop and his fellowes are neither true Bishops , nor haue any succession from the Catholique Church ( as he saith they haue ) nor yet any lawfull mission , or vocation ; & that therefore they are not those good shepheards which ( as our Sauiour saith ) enter into the fold by the doore , &c. § 47. I answer in one word to his redoubled collections , & multiplied obseruations , beginning with the first of his two inferences , & concluding with his ground from which he sets out , as false as they , and more too . No Bishops no Priests , saies he , because only Bishops can make Priests , & without both them , without all Clergy , & consequently without a Church , as I haue shewed in my Supplement out of S. Hierome . For still we must heare of the Supplement in any case , or els it is no bargain . But as for Hierome , we may oppose Tertulliā to him , that , Quod quis accepit & dare potest , whatsoeuer a man hath receiued , he may giue again ( if occasion be offred ) in Ecclesiasticall passages . And so our Sauiour sets the Date , against the accepistis , instructing his Apostles about the vse of their gifts , which they had receiued of him . 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , saith S. Peter . And , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . Let euerie body communicate a gift as hee hath receiued : and , As good stewards of the manifold grace of God. Though ordinarily it is reason , that the treasure should be onely in the Bishop , keeping , as the faithfullest depositarie , to auoid euill dealing . 1. Tim. 5. 22. Nemini citò manus imposueris . And we know iurisdiction is so restrained in Bishops , by the Adioynders owne confession , in diuerse places of this booke ; yea in Priests too , who are limited to their quarter for their ordinarie seruice , though their power conferred vpon them originally in their ordination , extend to euerie member of the Church . But I speake what may be done in casu , as I said , and vpon an exigent only . Which if euer it was presented , then for certaine when all was so out of frame in the Romane Church . Though I might quarrell him also for that , where he inferres againe thus ; No Priests , no Church . Their * Rhemists note , that our Sauiour Christ made not the Apostles Priests till his last Supper . And yet , I hope , Christ and his companie were a Church before that time , and a Church of the new Testament ; or else more incongruities will follow , I beleeue , then the Adioynder will salue vp in hast . S. Paul calls Philemons house a Church . Yet himselfe was a lay man , as the Fathers hold ; which perhaps would not haue been , but that a Church figuratiue may be without a Minister . Why not then a true ? I would but fish their iudgements , I am to sift some things for disputation sake . For though Archippus was a Minister , and Philemons sonne , ( as some thinke ) yet their houses were distinct , as appeares by S. Hieromes Commentarie vpon this place . Ambiguum est , vtrum Ecclesiam quae in domo Archippi sit , an eam quae in domo Philemonis significare velit Apostolus , cum dicit se scribere Ecclesiae quae in domo eius est : sed mihi videtur non ad Archippi , sed ad Philemonis referendum esse personam , &c. Yea Haymo saies directly , asking why S. Paul salutes no Bishops , Priests , or other Clergy-men , writing to the Galatians , as he does whē he writes to other Churches , Quia nondum habebant neque Episcopum neque Rectorem aliquem , ideoque facilius sedici potuerunt . And yet Galatia a Church ; or many Churches in Galatia ; as it is , cap. 1. v. 2. But so much may suffice to his first collection . § 48. Now to his second . That the Bishop himselfe and other his colleagues here of the Church of England , are neither true Bishops , nor of any succession , mission , or vocation , viz. because they enter not in by the doore , that is , are not ordained by Popish Bishops , in whom alone the streame of succession runs along , as he surmiseth ; though to this last I shall speak more distinctly by and by : Yet in the meane while to answer to his wise illation , iuxta prudentiam hominis , as Salomon biddes vs : Pope Nicholas their first was of another minde , as it may seeme at least , by his answer ad Consulta Bulgarorū , c. 14. where , when the people of that place would haue had a certaine Grecian to haue lost his eares , to haue his nose slit , and other such disgraces , for preaching Christ , though to the benefit of the people , yet without any lawfull ordination ; the Pope dissents from them , and qualifies the matter by these words of the Apostle ; Siue occasione , siue QVOCVNQVE MODO Christus praedicetur , non laboro : yea hee concludes thus , euen of the generall question , out of another Popes mouth his predecessor , ( a Pope you see quoting his predecessor Pope , and the Apostle S. Paul too : ) Non quaerite quis vel qualis praedicet , sed quem praedicet : It is no matter , who , nor what kind of man it is that preacheth , but whom hee preacheth , viz. whether hee preach Christ or no. Which last words are as strange to me , as contrarie to the Adioynder in this place . And so perhaps is that peruerting of the Apostles sentence before cited . For when wee say , Non interest quis praedicet , vel qualis ; we are not to meane it of morall idoneity , or morall sufficiencie , but of Ecclesiasticall , as the Schoole teaches . So is the Pope to the Adioynder , and the Schoole to the Pope , and hard but the truth to them all , contrarie . In the 16. chapter of the said Responsa , it seemes the people had executed their wrath vpon that poore caityfe that had fained himselfe Priest , and cropt his eares , and done him the despight which afore they trauailed with , but questioned whether they might doe it lawfully or no. Belike the Popes answer had not come to their hands , or else passion was deafe to milder aduise . Whereupon in reproouing their hard vsage of him , hee proceeds thus , to excuse the matter : Si Dauid esse se furiosum finxit , vt suam tantum salutem operari posset , quam noxam contraxit , qui tot hominum multitudinem QV OQV O MODO de potestate Diaboli & aternae perditionis abstraxit ? In English thus , [ If Dauid fained himselfe mad , onely to saue his life ; what fault was he in , that pluckt so many men out of the power of the deuill , and from eternall perdition , IT IS NO MATTER HOVV ? ] Is this good diuinitie ? Or may you plead so , and not wee ? § 49. As for that which he produceth out of Bishop Barlowes Sermon to fortifie this point yet a little better against vs , it is meerely ridiculous ; because when Bishop Barlowe speaks of the succession of Bishops to be the root of Christian fellowship , and the proofe of Christian doctrine , he meanes as Irenaeus takes succession , cum charismate veritatis , with the gift of truth , which in you is wanting ; in your hands , in your mouthes , is found nothing , as the Psalmist speakes . Doe we not read in S. Austen , that Iudas Iudae succedit aliquoties , Com. in Psal . 141. and , lupi agnis , id est , Apostolis , Act. 20. 29. or nox dici , as Gregory Nazianzene speakes , and , morbus sanitati , that is , one bad man suceedes another , and good men are succeeded by the bad many times , neither of which successions auaile you any thing , or are to be gloried in ? Neither againe are we heretikes , for dissenting from them of whome we tooke our ordination , as you rashly imply in your numb . 35. For the power of ordination is not taken away , de facto , from an heretical Bishop , vnles he be sentenced and inhibited by authoritie . And after that too perhaps , the orders are good that he conferres , though himselfe doe amisse in peruerting discipline , and violating the commission of his superiours . Fieri non debuit , factum valuit , as the common saying is . § 50. But to come at last to the third point , which is the ground and bottome of the other twaine , and so an ende of this matter , and in the next of the whole , if God say Amen . You say , Our Bishops in the beginning of the raigne of Queene Elizabeth , ordained themselues by mutuall compact , beeing destitute of other helpe from Welsh and Irish , which in vaine they sollicited . And you produce your author , one * Thomas Neale , a worthy wight , no doubt , though no more be said in conmendation of him . Yet you adde , that he was Reader of the Hebrew Lecture in Oxford afterward ; it may well be . And thus you haue approoued ( as you thinke at least ) that our men were not consecrated by lawfull Bishops and lawfully called , I meane ordained of them that your selues call Catholiques . From whence what flowes ? That Clergy wee haue none , nor Church none , and the Bishop is no Bishop against whom you write , &c. But these two inferences we haue discussed before : how well they follow out of the premisses , though they were graunted . As for the Bishop in particular , that reuerend Prelate , the obiect of your enuy , and the subiect of our controuersie , I might say much , and yet conuince in short ; that the defect of oyle , cannot hinder his 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , as the Philosopher said wittily , that it was not possible that Hercules should be debarred heauen , because he was not initiate ; so , that the Bishop should be no Bishop for lacke of Ordainers . But the greater his worth , the more my silence ; and his scorne of these reproaches , à magnitudine animi , non à superbia , as Tully saics of Socrates , ) bridles me , euen dumbe . The summe is ; that when we say , our Bishops were ordained by yours , we meane by such as were first ordained by your Bishops , though not persisting in their Relligion happily . They were yours by Primitiue ordination , not yours by constance of profession . And this was enough to make good their act . For the power by them receiued through imposition of hands , makes them fit ordainers , not the stedfastnesse of their faith , or keeping close to the doctrine : or else euery faithfull man might be a lawfull ordainer , which you are loath to grant to euery faithfull Priest , and much more to Lay-men . It were not hard to shewe who consecrated the first Bishop in Queen Elizabeths time , which was Archbishop Parker . Bishop Barlow ( I trow ) was one , first Bishop of Bath and Wells , then of Chichester , who was made both Priest and Bishop in the time of King Henry the 8. And therefore you may be sure , by men of your Relligion , and by Popish Bishops . Bishop Scory Bishop of Chichester first , and after of Hereford , was another , who was made Priest in King Henries time , and Bishop in King Edwards . Bishop Hodgkin Suffragan of Bedford , made Bishop in Queene Maries time . Miles Couerdale Bishop in King Edwards time , &c. So as neither did our Bishops consecrate themselues , by compact or playing booty , as you malitiously slaunder them , and the other Bishops that were vsed in their consecration , were partly made Priests , partly Bishops , in former Princes raignes , & those Popish , but all before the raigne of Queene Elizabeth . I might adde much more here , as I haue read it taken out of the originall Archiues of the Church of Canterbury , about the iudgment of 6. Doctors of the Ciuill Law , who all subscribed , that the Commission for their consecration graunted by the Queenes Maiesty to the persons abouenamed , was iustifiable and lawfull : viz. William Maye , Robert Weston , Edward Leeds , Henry Haruey , Thomas Yale , Nicholas Bullingham . I thinke , your Neale himselfe , if he had been of the profession , and not reading his Ebria , or addicted to lyes , rather then to the lawes , would not haue dissented from the opinion of so many sages . Marry , if you meane of Bishop Cranmer ; his consecration is more pregnant yet , and confirmed by sundry Buls of Pope Clement the seuenth , as if need were might be specified at large . The first whereof was to King Henry the 8. two other to the elect himselfe Thomas Cant. the fourth to all the brethren and suffragans of the Church of Canterbury : the fifth to the Clergy of the Citie and Diocesse of Canterbury . And so diuers more which here I omit for breuitie sake . He was consecrated , 1533. ann . Reg. Henrici 8. 24. March. 30. by Iohn Bishop of Lincoln , and Iohn Bishop of Exceter , and Henry Bishop of Asaph . The same day also , accepit pallium . Yea he paid the Pope 900. duckets in gold for his Bulls . But as far as I perceiue , you cauil not the consecration of Archbishop Cranmer , but onely them that were made in Queene Elizabeths dayes , viz. Archbishop Parker , and the rest . And the reason to me seemes to be this , because the Pope had a fleece out of the ones consecration , & none out of the others , nor neuer since . Certamen mouistis opes . All your stirres are for Peter-pence , and smoak-pence , and golden duckats , and such were , — irritamenta malorum . § 51. This which I haue assirmed of the consecration of these two Archbishops , not onely Mr. Mason , of his exact knowledge , will iustifie to your head , or any of you all , notwithstanding your braue Appendix at the ende of your Adioynder ( then which I neuer saw a more filly plea ) but almost any nouice in the Church of England . And if my leasure would permit , or that were now my taske , how easily might I detect the sundry absurdities that your Appendix containeth ? First , Num. 4. you alleadge a statute of Ann. 1. Eliz. cap. 1. and Dr. Stapleton vrging it against Bishop Horne , That no Bishop should be held for a Bishophere in England , without due consecration before had , &c. Yet you argue in the same place , but more importunately soone after , Num. 9. that both Stapleton and Harding would neuer haue pressed Bishop Iewel , and the rest , with want of due consecration , if this Register had been true , or any such thing to haue beene shewed in those times . But if Stapleton and Harding bee so authenticall with you , that whatsoeuer they once vrge vs with , is straight vnanswerable , then I confesse we are in a wofull case . And yet to say somewhat in defence of them too , without graunting your slaunder of our first Bishops in the Queenes time , what if the mislike that they had to those consecrations , was because they were not consecrated by Popish Bishops , ( for Protestant Bishops is of your putting in into Mr. Hardings words , num . 11. ) and not such as were ordained by the Popish ? Are you not ashamed to confound these things so grossely , and vtterly to mistake the state of the question ? If Harding and Stapleton therefore were so considerate men , that a false imputation could not proceed from them , their meaning was this , What Bishop consecrated you , that is , what Popish Bishop or Catholique Bishop in your sense ? But if they meant that they rusht in , either without any consecration , or basely agreed to consecrate one another ( a deuise meeter for boy-Bishops , such as Popery aboundeth with , then for godly and graue Prelates of the Church of England ) they were doubtlesse inconsiderate ; and if neuer before this time , or neuer in any any other matter , ( which is more then the fame that goes of them ) yet for this one part iustly to be so censured . Vnlesse their absence from their country , and not consulting of the Register , might plead their pardon ; in tanto , I graunt , not in toto ; but howsoeuer it be , this is a strange argument of yours to confront a Register with , the life of things past , the image of truth , the memory of times , the light of memory , that Harding and Stapleton would neuer haue been so bold , as to contradict it , if it had beene so . Nay then , why should Queene Elizabeth prouide by Statute ( as your selfe here tell vs ) and her graue Counsellors deuise vnder her ( which Counsellours you may bee sure neither wanted foresight , and were most faithfull to her in all her proceedings , ) That no Bishops should goe for Bishops here in the Church of England , which wanted due consecration , if she meant shortly after to set vp and authorize , a generation of Pseudo-Bishops in the same Church , her selfe ? Had not this been to kill the very life of her intents , and to alienate the people from embracing the Relligion , that she was minded to promote with all her power ? For this Act of Parliament you say was , Ann. 1. of Q Elizabeth . But both the Arch-bishop , & the other Bishops , were not consecrated , till about the beginning of the second yeare of the Queenes raigne . Bishop Parker in December , Bishop Iewel in Ianuary , &c. Now then let me aske you ( a ratte trackt to death , by the apparant euidence & impression of your owne marks : for I assure you , but for your owne text here , I had neuer considered of this statute of Queene Elizabeth ) let me aske you , I say , Is this good Logicke ? Harding and Stapleton ( though prickt with passion , and enuying other folkes good fortunes ) would neuer haue accused Bishop Iewell their aduersary , if the case had not been cleere ; And is not this much more forcible , Queene Elizabeth , and her sage Counsellors would not haue forbid that thing by act of Parliament , which shortly after she meant to licence , and to put in practise , in the open view of the whole world ? But what should I stand arguing with such a beastly iangler , that calls Bishop Iewells answer to Hardings question , concerning his consecration , ambiguous and irresolute , &c. ( Numb . 10. of his Appendix ) because he saies , OVR Bishops are made as they haue been euer : Not , VVE were made , or I was made ? Does he not shew that there was no difference between his making and others , when hee saies , they were made as they haue been EVER , and so defend himselfe , as withall to defend all , because the quarrell was not his ( blessed man that he was ) but the whole Churches of England , which he maintained as zealously , as any champion would his owne ? Neuertheles you tell vs againe , Num. 11. ( as if you could neuer say it enough , because indeed you haue nothing els to say ) That it is not to be imagined , D. Harding would be so inconsiderate , as to demand expressely of M. Iewell , what three Bishops in the Realme laid hands vpon him , if there were fowre , as M. Masons Register hath it ? Send ouer your Page then , or your Squire at armes , or if you will your Desk-creeper , as it is Num. 13. to peruse and search the Register of the Office , which M. Mason auoucheth . You shall finde Bishop Iewell was consecrated by these fowre , Matthew Archbishop of Canterbury , Edmund London , Richard Ely , Iohn Bedford ; and the consequents and the antecedents ( which you are so doubty iealous of in your Num. 14. ) will prooue M. Masons Register , to be a true Register , not disprooue it . Though I doubt not but these things are known to many , before M. Masons booke saw light . And I confesse for mine owne part , I had my instructions long since , ex alio capite ; albeit I derogate nothing from his worthy paines . § 52. I See I must end as I began . The Supremacie of Princes , and namely of His Maiestie , is the thing that the Adioynder most maligneth . That is their first , that their last , if they be well lookt into . I am well content with it for my part , Sis T V militiae causa , modusque meae . I know not how my penne can be employed better . And it were hard if our pennes should be slacke to plead his right , ( his most due right , Deo , & Angelis , hominibusque plaudentibus ) that beares the sword ( with the ieopardy of his life , & the enuy of Nations round about ) to preserue our liues , and whatsoeuer wee hold deare or precious in this world . A word therefore or two that wee haue prepared for the KING . § 53. Though in truth the Adioynder here playes two in one . Not onely his Rebels part , but the plagiaries . Hee would both steale the Crowne of independant Supremacie from the Kings head , and withall rob him of one of his best Subiects ; his faithfull Counsellour , his diligent watchman , his vnweariable champion , the B. of Elie. No maruell if hee giue his assaults there ( meaning ill to his Maiestie , ) where he knowes a great part of the strength lyes ( like that Worthyes in his locks ) which he endeauours to purloin and divert another way . § 54. The recriminations are diuerse , which I will answer briefly , setting them downe in their order , and so conclude . For there is no moment in any of them ; but hungry malice sets the pen on worke , which were better quiet , if it knew his owne good : I fuge , sed poteras tutior esse latens . Yet the Adioynder is so absurd , as ( to deface the Bishop , and croppe his garland , cheuvt frustrà ? ) to censure , after all , his very manner of writing ( himselfe such a writer no doubt : ) but wot you what 's the cause ? 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 — The Bishops book scorches them without a firebrand , to the very bones ; torments them in an inuisible mysticall racke ; his words , his matter , his forme , his substance , all vexes them , and wrings them , and they dare not say how , but the teares stand in their eies , and they pretend by-matters ; they cauill with his style . I come to particulars . § 55. The first instance : Because Supremacie is said to be no article of faith . I answer in one word . The perswasion of it is most wholesome , but the raunge is not properly within the raunge of the Creeds , or the pale of faith . Whereas , articulus ab arctatione , quasi quid arctatum , sayes their owne Altenstag . Lexico Theolog. V. articul . And the word of faith , is both propè , and breue ; that , Rom. 10. 8. this , Rom. 9. 28. Yea , 2. Tim. 1. 13. we haue 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , doubly distinguished , in ip sit terminis ; not onely 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , not onely of faith , but of loue , and charitie , or dutifull obseruance . Such is the Supremary . S. Paul himselfe may witnesse for vs ; who , 1. Tim. 6. 2. calls obedience to infidels , ( euen to infidell masters , how much more to Princes ? ) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 one of the wholesome words of our Sauiour Christ , ( the Commenters thinke he respects to that word , Date Casari quae Caesaris sunt ) yet 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . For if it be Christs , it binds howsoeuer , whether it be of faith , or of loue ; and in Christo Iesu , saies the Apostle in both places ; both 2. Tim. 1. 13. and the 1. Tim. 6. 2 ; he fetches it from Christ . Yet the Adioynder thinks that we are free to all things , if they be not of faith ; that we may choose whether we will conforme to them or no , though the morality that they imply , be neuer so ghostly . What then saies he of not stealing , of not committing adultery , of doing no murther , and diuerse such like ? For Idolatry , I thinke , they acknowledge none , it is so promiscuous in Popery . Are not these things morum , and not fidei ? Themselues so distinguish them , at other times . Bellarmine by name , de Port. Rom. lib. 4. cap. 5. Decreta fidei , and Praecepta morum , are two with him . Also Valentia ( quoting Thomas for it ) will haue haeresie it selfe , to be in certaine propositions , which crosse not with the Creed , but with other truthes of Diuinity notwithstanding . How then if the subiection that we owe to Princes , be but as safe and sacred , as one of these ? and grounded vpon the Law first , either morall or iudiciall ; as Honorapatrem , Honour thy father ; much more patrem patriae , the father of the whole Countrey . ( My children , saith Ezekias , speaking to his subiects , and not the worst of them , but to the Priests themselues , 2. Chron. 29. 11. ) though it appeares not among the articles of the Apostles Creed ? Doubtlesse we may say , Non est omnium fides , 2. Thess . 2. 3. and not onely subiectiuely , but obiectiuely : it beeing one thing 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , another thing 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , as the Bishop most accurately , and most profoundly distinguished , howsoeuer our shuttle-pated Adioynder thinke of it . 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , are not al one , with 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , in our Church . I say in ours ; for with the Papists euery thing is come now to be b de fide ; either what their Church once ventes , that same * cymbalum alarū , ( si c declarat Ecclesia , ) or some addle-headed Fryer and Sophister doth but dreame . § 56. Neuerthelesse the Adioynder turnes merry with vs ; and saies if it be so , it may well come into our Pater noster , but neuer into our Creed , this doctrine of the Supremacie . As if first there were nothing betweene the Creed and the Pater noster , that if it lodge not in the one , it must needs be thrown off to the other . How if it pitch vpon Moses his Law ( as I said euen-now ) either the iudiciall , or the morall , part thereof ? Did not the Adioynder complaine very lately himselfe , that the Bishop was to blame for deriuing it from thence ? As who would say , It appeares there indeed , & there is no denying ; but the Bishop was not to take the aduantage of that place ; of none , I trow , but onely the Creed . Else , this is not a matter of bare speculation , or naked apprehension , as the points of faith may seeme to be ; but ends in action , and in obseruation . The more likely therefore to come of the Law. And is Moses Ordinances of no force with him , in good earnest ? Or is not that of validitie , that descends of the Law ? Of the Law , I say , whereof one iot or tittle is not to fall to ground ( as he said truest , that kept it best , and in the point of subiection , aboue all other : ) no , though heauen and earth should passe away , and the whole frame of nature be dissolued . But in truth it results out of euery part of the Catechisme , as I shall briefly shew , occasioned by the Adioynder , and his iolly descant here , that would make it a point not of our Creed any longer , but onely of our Pater noster . And first out of the Creed , ( I meane onely consequentially , but sure effectually enough ) both in Natus de Maria , and Passus sub Pontio , as hath been shewed heretofore , and may quickly be conuinced againe . See pag. 94. huius , in marg . and againe , pag. 481. It was Christs first and last theame that euer he established , and much also in the middle of his gyant race , ( as the Psalmist calls it , Psal . 19. ) yet not like a gyant , be ●lando cum dijs , that is , cum Regibus . For he neuer declaimed against King in his preachings ; though no doubt , it would haue been passing popular with the Iewes ; but refused the Kingdome when it was offered him , paid tribute to Caesar for Peter and himselfe , exhorted others to doe the like of duty ; Reddite Caesari , not Date ; and not vestra , or gratuita ; but qua Caesaris sunt . So in many other things he allowed the heathen Princes to dominari eorum , to lord it among their subiects ( onely he set a barre in his Apostles way , Vos autem non sic : ) he allowed them that wait vpon Princes , to goe in mollibus , in soft cloathing ; he called his Church by the name of a Kingdome , himselfe often by the name of a King , implying his Supremacie ; which he would neuer haue done , but that he was most loyally and reuerently affected to regiments , and a great fauourer of the Royall estate . But this was in the middle of his course , as I said . Of life and death , beginning and ending , we shall see anon . In the meane while , to conclude out of the Creed against him , and to enforce the argument last proposed ; I demand of the nimblest Iesuit of them all : Forsomuch as the Creed recordeth the suffering of our Sauiour Christ , vnder Pontius Pilate ( an infidell Magistrate ) and by his authority ; whether it was wel and wisely done of Christ , to yeeld to such tyrannie proceeding from an heathen ; and whether it containe our instruction or no ? And although they dare not for horrour say , that our Sauiour did vnwisely , or any way vnbeseemingly , in submitting himselfe to the authority of an infidell , from whose power he was doubly protected , as they conceit ; both by the sanctity of his relligion , and ( which we deny not ) by the dignity of his person ( if he had been pleased to vse it : ) yet it is plain that they think so , vnles they will allow vs to practise the imitation ; which they will not , they spit at , they endure not at any hand . For wherein are we better then Christ ? Thou art no better then Israel , saies God in Esay , Esa . 17. And are we better then he , qui venit ex Israel , & factus est Immanuel , as S. Austen saies ? Why should not that become vs which mis-became not him ? Quod decuit tantum , quid tibi turpe putes ? Does not S. Peter call vs directly to the imitation of him , in this point , 1. Pet. 2. 21. 22 ? But they will say hee was forced , and then they giue vs leaue to doe the like , viz. to obey when wee cannot choose . A sweet kinde of obedience , no doubt ; which the Reuerend Bishop hath most diuinely refuted in his Tortura Torti ; but in the mean while , what a blasphemy against our Sauiour Christ , that hee would not haue suffered , if hee could haue resisted ? Yet S. Peter saies , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . And , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , hee threatned not , he reuiled not . Yet , that he might haue done , although he was destitute of vires temporales , which are the Iesuites god . The most forlorne may threaten and reuile , we know . But , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , dedit locum irae , he gaue place to wrath , he confronted not the Magistrate , but recommended the issue of his cause to God. Monstrous are the blasphemies which the Iesuites are driuen to in this cause . Could not he haue resisted ? Who first had whole legions of Angels to rescue him ; who ouerthrewe them that came to take him with a single word , with Egosum ; and lastly promiseth in plaine tearmes of himselfe , that he layes down his life in whose hands he pleases ( he made choise of an infidell : ) and no body takes it away from him perforce . But of this enough ; let them looke to their answer . In the life of Campian , set out by a Iesuite , ( one Robert Turner as I take it ) we read , that he desired to haue the Creed rehearsed by the people at his death . But why so I wonder ? For what article of the Creed did Campian die , when they would charge vs most ? Where is Rome in the Creed , where Peter , where the Pope , where any of those things about which they iangle now , and keepe a stirre ? Rather as we read in another place of the same booke , that their Priests beeing suddenly discouered in a bay-mow , and eft-soones to be surprized , they confessed to one another ( as their manner is ) and enioyned a very gentle satisfaction , to say thrice ouer with greatest zeale , that petition of the Pater noster , Fiat voluntas tua , Thy will bee done ; referring now all their fortunes to God , and resigning the summe of their desires to his will , when they could auoid the force of ciuill authoritie no longer . May not we rather fetch Supremacie from hence ( which those wretches in extremitie could not but acknowledge , that we are not to prouide for the safetie of the Church , vijs & modis , as they traiterously reach , and vpon that ground disclaime the authority of infidels , but to cōmit our cause to him , that iudges iustly , &c. ) Does not the point , I say , in hand about the Princes Supremacie , spring a great deale clearer from these words ; especially beeing exemplified by our Sauiours practise , and explained , as of late , by S. Peters commentarie , ( that we must not repugne the infidel Magistrate , nor flie to any higher tribunal in earth , but commit our cause to God onely ) then Campians rebellion can be patronized by the Creed , which he so vainly desired to haue rehearsed at his death ? That so we may fetch it not onely out of the Creed , which you see how well we may , without crossing the Bishop , and yet wringing the Adioynder when he thinks hee is safest , but out of the Pater noster too , which is the second part of Catechisme , wherein now we are . As for the Commaundements and the Law of Moses , to them I haue spoken sufficiently already , and the Adioynder denies it not . Also he seemes to graunt it of the Pater-noster , though we should not euict it , as we haue . The Sacraments onely remaine , which are the fourth part of Catechisme : shall we see how this truth appeares from them too , that the scoffing Adioynder may bee concluded euery way for all his descants ? First then , as we are not baptized into the name of the Apostles , Paul or Cephas , 1. Cor. 1. 13. nor any of their successors , but into the name of Christ , and the obedience of the doctrine which he brought , Math. 28. 20. which we haue shewed already how fauourable it was to Princes ; and therefore Baptisme speakes for their supremacy , not for the Popes : So in the other Sacrament , which is the Sacrament of the Lords Supper , in which we are to preach the Lords death vntill he come , 1. Cor. 11. 26. we haue a farre clearer glasse of the aforesaid assertion ; for so much as his death was nothing but his submission to the Ciuill Magistrate , who vniustly persecuted him to the very death . Which Saint Paul thinks worth the noting , when he fashions his scholler Timothy , least he should turne aside to faction , and to Iesuiticall garboyles , 1. Tim. 6. 13. Or else what needed S. Paul to name Pilate in that place ? But it is reason that the Supremacy should be confirmed from euery place . Yet our Sauiours obedience ended not in death , no not the death of the crosse , mortem autem , Phil. 2. but there is a step after death , wherein also it was most eminent . In that Ioseph of Arimaethea begd his body of the Magistrate , ( by his inspiration no doubt ) and aduentured not to vsurpe vpon it , no not for the vse of buriall when he was dead , without leaue . See we what a subiect we haue of our Sauiour ? what a proclaimer of the Supremacie belonging to Princes ? Both in wombe and tombe , both an embryo and a corps ; both afore birth , and after death ; and straight afore death , and straight after birth ; an early beginner , and a most constant perseuerer , euen somewhat beyond the tearm prefixed ; for vsque ad mortem , was wont to be the last , Reuel . 2. 10. if any man can goe further , let him . Shall we see what followes now in the Adioynder ? § 57. Marry Sir , if the Supremacy be not a matter of faith , ( and yet we haue seen how neer of kin to the Creed , though nothing is truer then the Bishops saying , that it is not an article , nor de fide , properly ) but what then does the Adioynder infer , thinke you ? First , that we may not sweare to it ; then that it is not to be gathered out of Scripture , neither expressely , nor by consequence ; also that we may choose whether wee will beleeue it or no : and a great many more such idle collections , for want of setting out from a right ground . 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , saies the Poet in Suidas : that is , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . So here ; All falls to ground , because his ground failes . For , shall we sweare to nothing , but to the articles of faith ? How many oaths are taken in Courts daily , both assertory and promissory ; yea and without the Courts too , that are no way so much as bordering vpon the Articles of faith , and much lesse of the ranke of them properly so called ? Insomuch as this one place , if there were none other in the booke , is of force to shew the toyishnesse of our Adioynder ; or else his sottishnesse , or for certaine his egregious impudence and boldnesse , that dares abuse his Readers in such vile sort , as to perswade them that they may not sweare to the Kings Supremacy ; because the Bishop said it is no article of faith . Does not the Bishop say , it is a point of perswasion ( though it be short of faith , ) and that not waueting , but firme , & stedfast , and vndoubted ? Therefore also he prooues it by places of Scripture ; though we may swear to many things which are not euident by the Scriptures , and we sweare so daily . Shall I not sweare that King Iames is lawfull King in his Dominions , and also Supreame to all persons of the same , as it followes in the oathes both of Supremacie , and of Allegeance , vnlesse I read it in the Creed , or else in Scriptures ? But , the Diuines and the Canonists hold him guiltie of sinne , that sweares to a thing which hee doth not certainely beleeue . What ? vnles he beleeue it by the Christian faith , or the Christian beleefe , properly so called ? Like as the Incarnation of Christ , his passion , his resurrection , his ascension into heauen , with the rest of those mysteries , which either the Godhead in Trinitie , or his blessed person containeth in it selfe ? You see what a dizzard either the Adioynder is himselfe , or forswearing all shame , chasing away the blood , he would make his Readers . For faith being a word of diuerse significations , as Canus and Valentia , and the whole crew of them can tell him , he distinguishes not the faith of intellectuall verities touching the mysterie of saluation reuealed by God , from that which is a certaine perswasion of the mind , either 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , of the truth of things , ( which * S. Gregorie can tell him , that we haue of many more then come into the Creed , yea or the main Scripture either ) or , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , of the lawfulnesse of any action which we are to performe ; Of which kind it is said , Whatsoeuer * is not of faith , is sinne ; that is , whatsoeuer we doe with a perplexed conscience , wanting full resolution ; but not , Whatsoeuer falls not within the compasse of those principles , by which the Christian religion differs from the heathen , and are comprised in the Creede . By that meanes we might not sweare vpon the Pater noster neither , ( if we may sweare to nothing , but that which is Creede ) which the Adioynder meant to leaue vs , I dare say , of his honestie , when he had taken away the other . And yet oathes de credulitate also , are daily taken in Courts , notwithstanding his mustering here of his Canonists to little purpose ; but the oaths de credulitate perhaps in matters of fact , when the case is doubtfull ; to the oath of Supremacie we haue euidence enough , which respects not fact , but is the auerring of our iudgements , concerning his MAIESTIES iustest title to the Imperiall Crowne , and the rights thereof ; with promise on our parts , not onely not to oppose , but to assist him and to abet him to the vtmost of our abilities . § 58. As for that he addes moreouer , that if it bee not of faith , the Scriptures no where containe it , neither expressely , nor by implication , &c. what more rude and more vnlearned , iust like all the rest ? Would the Bishop be so contradictory , doth he thinke , to himselfe , ( from whome I hope they will not derogate the praise of so much iudgement as to heede his owne methodes , though most maliciously they depraue him otherwise at pleasure , ) as to alleadge diuerse Scriptures for the Kings Supremacy ( and yet not impertinently , as he here crakes , and saies he hath answered them , but most soundly and most seasonably , as we before haue shewed ) and then conclude it is no point of faith properly so called , but of perswasion onely ( yet most grounded perswasion ) if he had not well perceiued the vnrepugnancie of these two , and how compatible they are betweene themselues , which the Adioynder cannot skill of ? But so I haue heard of an old plodder in Logicke , that to his dying day could neuer conceiue , how the accident of blacknes might be separated from a Crow , so much as in cogitation : and another that was as hardly brought to digest , that euery thing either is , or is not . So here the Adioynder , as if his wits were be-breecht ; If it be not of faith ( saies he ) then it is not in Scripture ; neither directly , nor yet implicitely . Belike not Pauls cloake , or Peters scabberd , both reuealed in Scripture , and yet neither of thē of faith . And to defcēd a little lower to their other kinds of Scriptures , Tobyes dogge , I ween , or rather his dogs tayle , which the Text saies he wagged , and Campian your Martyr made such mirth with in the Tower , proouing thence the verie point which you now deny , that all is not de fide which is comprehended in Scripture . But he petulantly and profanely enough , as his guise was ; yet with you a graue disputant in matters of religion , or a mortified man drawing on to martyrdome . For though nothing be of faith which is not reuealed in Scripture , ( as we hold , though you deny ; ) yet there are many things in Scripture which are not of faith , as neither we deny , and your selues hold , at least when you are not captious , as now it seemes you are , to crosse your selfe , rather then you will not carpe another . I say , some things are not de fide , which are contained in Scripture ; not but that we must beleeue all to be most true which the holy Scripture containeth : but some things are so without the circuit of our faith , as it is no preiudice to vs , though we take no notice of them ; as Pauls cloake perhaps , as Peters net and sword-sheath ; or if you will , as Tobies dogge , and the like : others most necessary and most wholesome to be receiued , as our dutie to Superiours , our deportment to Ethnicks , and them that are without , our discreet and laudable conuersation towards all , which the Creed is no rule of ( that narrow verge ) though the Scripture in her latitude , thinke no scorne to be . It remaines therefore , that the Bishoppe might argue for the Supremacy either from Moses Law , or Moses his practise ; though it bee not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 only , not a matter of faith , but of firme perswasion ; which yet is more then Bellarmines Pie credimus . § 59. Neuerthelesse to infringe the Bishops argument , you say , Moses did not lay aside his Priesthood , but Aaron and he remained Priests together . So as from thence we can draw no proofe for the Temporalties preheminence aboue the Clergy , in what degree soeuer Moses stood to Aaron . But who euer heard of two high Priests together ? viz. Moses and Aaron , both at one time ? Or how could they both be the High Priests , that is , each of them supreame to all Priests ? What greater corruption was in those declining times , when Anna● and Caiphas both possest the seate , if at least such corruption then were ? But when couetousnesse and ambition preuailed most , and drew them most aside into degeneration , what greater deflexion , I say , could there be then this , from the originall institution ? Yea , how could the Priesthood of our Sauiour Christ be typically shaddowed and prefigured by two , whereas he is our one and onely High Priest , without copartner ? How the Popes sole-regencie be deduced from thence , as Bellarmine would , and diuerse more ? Vnlesse they meane to admit multitudes into the chaire ; and then where is Monarchy ? Sure , Theodoret in Numer . Quaest . 23. calls Aaron the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , and the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , the roote and fountaine of Priest and Priesthood ; which how could he be , if Moses were equally participating with him in that preferment , and the Priestly of spring of succeeding ages , to deriue their pettigree as well from the one as from the other ? Where is the vnitie now that the Papists so hunt after ? Where the reducing of all particular propagations , & spreadings Ecclesiasticall ( as they speak ) to one originall and primitiue head ? May we not say that the Adioynder was dreaming all this while , in bicipiti Par●●sso , of a double head of Priesthood , in Moses and Aaron ? For as for the word Cohen , Psalm . 1. 18. it signifies not the Priest onely , but a principall man , such as Moses and Aaron might be both at once , though in diuerse kinds . So as Caietan in his exposition of Psal . 100. sayes onely thus , Aaron fuit summus Sacerdos , & Moses fons sacerdotij inuenitur , dum ipse consecrauit Aaron . Where we may note three things . First , that he does not giue the name of summus sacerdos , the [ standing ] high Priest , to Moses at all , but to Aaron only . Secondly , that Moses was fons sacerdotij . Yet not to crosse with Theodoret , who said a little before , that Aaron was the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ; but rather that we may hold Ecclesiasticall Iurisdictions to be deriued after a sort from the temporall Prince ; of which hereafter . For it should seeme he esteems Moses here as a temporall gouernour , hauing giuen away the name of high Priest to Aaron . Thirdly and lastly , he makes Moses priesthood to be resigned againe , and laid downe , in that he vses the word dum , Dum consecrauit Aaron ; which the Adioynder saies , is to make it like a ierkin , or a iacket , Numb . 41. this is his merriment ; but wee proceede . § 60. To the authoritie of S. Austen , lib. 3. in Leuit. Quaest . 23. I see not what S. Austen could say more for vs , if hee meant to plead our cause most , but that the Adioynder presumes all to make for him , which he can but finger with Midas . S. Austens words are , Caepisse ab Aaron videatur summum sacerdotium , the high-priesthood may seem to haue begun in Aaron . Therefore if Moses be high Priest in ordinary , he is Aarons juniour , and so subiect to him . Yet the Adioynder would haue Aaron to bee vnder Moses , as High Priest , I trow , vnder the higher High Priest . Once , there is no difficulty in my opinion , neither in S. Austens words , nor at all in the question about Moses priesthood , if wee will be ruled by S. Austen . Quid putamus ( saies S. Austen ) fuisse Moysen ? si non fuit sacerdos , quomodo per illum omnia illa gerebantur ? si autem fuit , quomodo summum sacerdotium ab eius fratre coepisse definimus ? So that you see it is definimus with him , not onely videatur . S. Austen hath laid it downe for a sure ground , that the high-priesthood began in Aaron . And as for Moses his priesthood , it is a matter of question with him , Fuit , an non fuit ? was he a Priest or no ? As for that which followes ; Ambo ergò tunc summi sacerdotes erant , Moses & Aaron , . i. Both of them were high Priests , both Moses and Aaron ; I haue answered it before , that they were both Cohenim , that is , both excellent , but in a distinct kind ; the word sacerdos agreeing to them both , but not vniuocally . Concerning the next clause ( which the Adioynder vaunts in ) Aaron vero sub illo , Aaron was vnder Moses , it makes for vs , who hold the High Priest to be subiect to the authority of the Temporall Magistrate ; S. Austen guiding vs as it were by the hand , to that opinion , in the words immediately following , Aaron quidem summus [ fortè ] propter vestem Pontificalem , ille verò propter excellentius ministerium . That is , Or was not Aaron the higher for the garment that he wore [ that is , by way of Priesthood , ] but Moses his better in regard of a more excellent function that he discharged ? correspondent no doubt to the Regall with vs. For he is called a King without any more circumstance , Deut. 33. 5. And indeed what higher calling after the Priesthood then that ? The Kingdome then to S. Austen is excellentius ministerium , if we compare it with the Priesthood . So as neither Moses was Priest , and yet superiour to the High-priest , by the doctrine of S. Austen ; which is the doctrine of our Church , concerning Supremacie . § 61. The Adioynder hath almost brought his tale to an ende . There are but two more accusations of the Reuerend Bishop , and those very ridiculous ; yet sutable to the shoppe that the rest were forged in ; we will dispatch them in a word . One , that he dissents from the doctrine of Protestants ; the other , that he agrees not with our acts of Parlament , describing the Supremacie . § 62. For his bragges betweene , I hold not worth the replying to . A Thraso and the Supplement must be in euery leafe of him , or else he is not himselfe . In his Numb . 42. The place in Deuteronomie for sooth , is nothing to our purpose . Nay , all cleane contrarie , and that he hath shewed in his ninth Chap. Let the gentle Reader resort to the Answer , if he thinke so meet , in the 9. of this , § 26. 27. &c. § 63. Num. 43. Once againe you would sweare he were a Master of the fence , an only Myrmillo . What wonderfull prizes hath he played in his Supplement ? But heare you sir ? Ad populum phaleras — If you be ready with your daunce , behold your stage : Ecce Rhodus , ecce saltus , begin when you will. Does your skill faile you as Adioynder , that you runne to your Supplement , to shrowde you vnder the talke of what you haue done there ? If the examples of Salomon , Ezechias , and Iosias , be nothing to the purpose with you , then S. Austens arguments be nothing to the purpose , nor Charles the great , nor diuerse more . By name S. Cyrills of Alexandria : See 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . ad Theodos . in Concil . Ephes . pag. 229. editionis per Commelinum , 1591. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , &c. a It was also profitable and necessarie in certaine other respects to your royall Maiestie , that he should be banished from the holy altars that had prophaned them . And how banished ? I will tell your Maiestie , alleadging what is recorded in holy b Scripture , for your more assurance sake . 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , &c. The Israelites vpon a time contemning the Ordinances of that wisest Law-giuer Moses , &c. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , &c. But after that Ezekias , a holy man and a good , came to raigne ouer them , hee c reformed things which were amisse , and after that hee had purged the Temple of God , consequently offered such oblations to God as were due by Lawe , and belonging to him . Furthermore it is thus written of him : And Ezekias raigned , and bespake the Leuites , saying : d Hearken to meye Leuites , make you now cleane , and hallow the Temple of the Lord your God , and cast forth all vncleanenesse out of the holy places , &c. And the Leuites rose vp and gathered together their brethren , and purified themselues , e ACCORDING TO THE COMMAVNDEMENT OF THE KING , to the ende that they might cleanse the house of the Lord , &c. And in the sixteenth day of the first moneth they made an ende of all , and they went in to King Ezechias , and said vnto him ; We haue made clean all things in the house of the Lord , &c. But what is this to Theodosius , or to Christian Kings liuing vnder the new Testament ? Nothing at all , saies the Adioynder ; their date is our . Let S. Cyrill be iudge : f 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 &c. g 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 h 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , &c. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , &c. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . i 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , &c. k 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , &c. That is : Consider from hence , O godly king , &c. Yea , your sacred Maiestie hath alreadie done the like thing to the glorie of Christ . For it is your custome and fashion to offer sacrifice in the Churches , and with plentifull hand to contribute alwaies something to the glory of God. But it was necessary they should first purge the Temple , and cleare it from all scandall and filth , and so you to sacrifice at your due time . Now the dishonour that is offered to our Sauiour Christ , is a slaunder more hainous then any pollution whatsoeuer . But you commaunded your Priests l as I lately said , and loe , they haue purged the Church of such filth against your entrance , that you might inherit the more glorie , both with God , with Angels , and with all mankind . Now let the Adioynder expostulate with S. Cyrill , for vrging Theodosius with the example of King Ezechias , nothing to the purpose . § 64. To his Numb . 44. He bids vs shew by what Commission ( as he calls it ) the Supremacie of authority in Ecclesiasticall affaires was translated to the Kings of the Newe Testament , &c. But why should he taske vs , to shew when this Translation ( as he calls it ) was made ( vnlesse first hee shew a Commission for himselfe , to enioyne vs such trifling peice of worke ) rather then he or his fellowes prooue , if they can for their blood , that the old authority was euer taken from Kings , and giuen to Church-men : hee calls them Apostles here , but his meaning is , Popes , and Termagaunts , and Hildebrands . Yet the new Testament , I can tell him , is no backe-friend to Kings , whatsoeuer he thinke of it . This hath partly appeared out of that which hath been said . And if Kings be Soueraigne by the right of their place , Constantine shall not lacke it because Nero hath abused it , but Nero shall haue it , though Constantine onely employ it as hee should ; m leauing the other to his iudge . 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . And , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , 1. Cor. 5. 13. God iudges those whome man may not iudge ; which is so much the terribler , as S. Chrysostome notes well vpon that place . § 65. The more excellent priesthood , that he would faine coine , and setvp in the new Testament , to defie Kings with , is a most excellent fancy ( as he aboundeth with many of them ) vulesse he measure excellencie by no vulgar ell . Which the Iesuites will not ; Dextra mihi Deus est , & telum — They call the Church indeed a spirituall body ( as this prater doth soone after , Numb . 50. ) but their cubite * is not Christian , nor their sicle of the Sanctuary ; their arme is meere flesh that they trust to finally . So was not the Apostles , ( vnder whose name they march ; ) of whome he that said , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ; 2. Cor. 3. 8. sayes soone after in the same Epistle ( vnderstanding his calling , which these are strangers to ) c. 10. v. 3 , 4. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ; and , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , &c. If they hold to the first , let them take in the second . The spirit ioynes them , who shall separate them ? And now lastly to his Numb . 45. & 46. where he * dares do nothing without a precept of Scripture for it ( so tender conscienced he is wax'd of late ; ) Scripture wants no precepts of submission to Princes , euen in the highest Clergy-man , & that ( a ) concerning the most sacred duties ; but Malchus & venter amiseruns aures , Sloth and Surlynesse haue no eares to heare with ; they will not suffer them to heare what the Spirit saith vnto the Churches . Returning into our way , I thinke it long till I dissolue his last cauils . § 66. Where , seeking to make the Bishop to contradict our Diuines about the extent of Supremacie , he yeelds him such testimony of consent with them all ( in his very first words ) euen those that seem to be furthest off , as none greater shall need for this time , to shew how much at ods he is with himselfe , that would faine set enmitie between the Bishop and others . I make no doubt ( saies he ) but all the Puritanes of England and Scotland , will subscribe to this , &c. To what trow you ? To the Bishops declaration and defence of Supremacie , God grant it I beseech him , if our sinnes hinder not . Wherin is it short then ? what halteth , or what faulteth , the Bishops iudgement about Supremacie ? First , he makes it externall ; then , tantum vt nutritis , onely as a foster-father , a tutour to the Church ; to cherish it and to defend it . But more then externall gouernment who hath of it , sauing God alone , and his holy Spirit ? Who can worke vpon our inward man ? The very Minister & Bishops pierce not hither , with their Sermons , their Censures , their Sacraments , or what you will. The well is deep , and they cannot reach it , without another manner of plummet then their owne . Ego vox , saith he , and that is all ; euen the Baptist himselfe , the most stout in his generation . Till Christ came , they caught nothing , though they fisht all night . Nemo pugnauis in valle Terebinthi , donee Dauidveniret ad praelium . What is Paul , or what is Apollos ? 1. Cor. 3. 5. and they are made to be iust nothing there , ver . 7. that is , Nothing but Ministers and externall instruments , working so farre as God shall giue leaue , nay grace rather , and concurrence with their labours ; else they are but blunt , and nothing can bee effected . On the other side , if God concurre with the Magistrate , and ioyne the internall hand to the externall , ( the sword of the Lord to the sword of Gedeon ) no lesse is done then by the ministers tongue , or whatsoeuer more wholesome seruice he may performe ; yea that which the Minister cannot doe with his tongue , the Magistrate ofttimes with his hand brings to passe . Os gladij , enters farther then gladius oris , with the wantons of this world , that haue set shame farre from them ; Ebal , then Gerizim , preuailes more ; if that mortifie thousands , this ten times as many . Quia meliores quidem sunt quos dirigit amor , sed tamen plures quos timor corrigit . See S. Austens report of this , found true by experiment ( to spare the enlarging of farther doctrines ) and S. Chrysostome in the Appendix at the end of this Chapter : 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ; as the needle is said to make way for the silke . So that hitherto the Magistrate is not excelled by the Minister in that which they call internall gouernement . The Adioynder saies , God hath communicated this to man , but I rather thinke he hath reserued it for himselfe , to be the Lord of hearts , and Bishop of soules , fingens sigillatim cordaeorum . But if he meane by the internall gouernement of the Church , the administring of Sacraments , the preaching of the word , the inflicting of censures , &c. herein I graunt the Minister is sole conuersant , the Prince meddles not with the execution ; but what derogation is this to the Supremacie , or who euer of our Diuines went farther then so , in this point ? So as hitherto there is neither errour ( against the truth of God ) nor yet singularitie ( against the iudgements of men ) in the Bishops doctrine about the Supremacy . § 67. Now for that , that he calls him ●…itium , a foster-father , or intorem , a guardian , or whatsoeuer of the same kind ; why , he calls him as the holy Prophet before had called him , and entitled him by that name , when he promiseth the greatest benefit that euer befell the Church ( I meane of mediate and externall benefits still ) Erunt Reges nutritij tui , & Reginae nutrices tuae , Esa . 49. Kings shall be thy nursing fathers , and Queenes ( whom you contemne ; what meruaile when Kings ? ) thy nursing mothers , &c. Is this a small authoritie ouer the Church , thinke you , which the Apostle S. Paul borrowes of the Prophet Esay , to notifie his affection towards the Thessalonians by , 1. Thess . 2. 7 ? affection , and yet not void of authoritie and ruie ; rule and authoritie , and yet louing and fatherly , not tyrannous , not insulting . What is more in the Pastor , then in the Nutritius ; in , Feed my lambes , then , in Nourish my children ? And yet , Pasce implyes such a Supremacy with you , as there needs none greater ; Nutricare is nothing , because the Bishop vses it . Vnles you thinke that Peter may rule them like beasts , because of Pasce oues meas , the Kings gouernement beeing more ciuill and humane , because Erunt Reges nutritij tui , ( for you cauill the Bishop here , for praesidium bumanum , as well as externum : ) Which should prouoke our men , me thinkes , to embrace the Kings gouernment rather then the Popes , if they be men indeed ; sith the one professes violence and borishnesse of himselfe , the others milde proceedings are acknowledged by his aduersarie . Though againe we might say , that our Sauiour neuer meant so vilely , or so basely , as to set his Prelates ouer vs , like keepers ouer beasts , whom he would not haue to gouerne , as common Princes doe their subiects , Vo● autem non sie , but rather more gently . And yet if any list to straine the metaphor to these rigors ; perhaps Nutri ( when we haue done all ) is as much as Pasce , and enforces as absolute a gouernment as that : a child at those yeares not much differing from a beast , nay verily short of it ; both for want of iudgement , and so easie to be ouer-ruled ; and out of lacke of force , or bodily strength , to defend assaults , and so as easily curbed and subdued . § 68. Lastly , I dare affirme , that if the Adioynders malice had but laine that way , he would as soone haue cauilled the Bishop for amplifying , as now he does for depressing beyond due , the Supremacie of Kings , by the consequence of those words . Hee makes but a pupill , nay a perpetuall babe ( would he haue said ) of the Church . And , He will haue Kings to take vpon them , like gouernours or foster-fathers , ouer a yong child in the cradle . Though we haue shewed before , that for so much as some read , Erunt Reges dispensatores tui , in that place of Esay , the Dispensator though he were no King , is of singular authoritie ouer the pupill whosoeuer , though happily he be of the Royall breed , ( as Ausonius boasts in a certaine Epigramme , that the Princely imps were subiect to his seruler ) the Apostle testifying as much , Gal. 4. 1. 2. that the heire himselfe differs not from a seruant ( though he bee Lord of all , ) whiles he is in his nonage ; but is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ( that is , vnder dispensators ( 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , vntill the time appointed by his father . ) This is that which S. Chrysostome sayes , in 13. ad Rom. ( and yet not meaning to mocke ) that the Priest hath a primacy indeed , but in altero saeculo , in the other world ; if the Pope could be content to tarry for it so long . But howsoeuer that be , I hope the Nurse her selfe may waken the child as well as lull it asteepe ; chide it and sneb it , as well as giue it the dugge ; yea correct and chastize it , as well as dandle and hugge it ; which is all that we striue for in this question , that the Prince may censure the offending Church-man , and reduce him into order ; a thing that F. T. cannot abide to heare of , and yet complaines that the Bishop minceth the Supremacie . Whereas Supremacy without this cannot stand for certaine , nor yet Defence of the Church , which he allowes to Kings , Numb . 48. but this graunted , they are both safe , as much as we desire . § 69. Yea , but the Parlament goes further ( saith the Adioynder ) & yeelds much more to King Henry the * eight , then this comes to . To whome , marke I pray , what I answer briefly . Suppose it did . Let the Lawyers be consulted that were the authors . We studie not States-matters , as the youth of Rome may doe , vnder the famous conduct of P. R. and F. T. their leaders ; seasoning their lyonets with such morsels euen betimes , and swearing their Anniballs , scarce twelue yeares old , at the Altars , to disturbe their countries peace in time . Besides , the Papists contest against the gracious gouernement of the KINGS MAIESTIE that now is , and exclaime vpon the Supremacie that he now challengeth ; which we also defend . What is that to the times of King Henry the eight ? or what are King Henries times to vs ? § 70. And yet to answer him a little more strictly , in ipsis terminis : It was ordained ( saies he ) ann . 26. Hen. 8. c. 1. in these words . Bee it enacted , &c. that the King our Soueraigne Lord , his heires , and Successors , Kings of this Realme , shall bee taken , accepted , and reputed , the onely Supreame Head of the Church of England , called Anglicana Ecclesia , and shall haue and enioy annexed and vnited to the Imperiall Crowne of this Realme , as well the title and style thereof , as all Honiars , Dignities , Preheminencies , Iurisdictions , Priuiledges , Authorities , Immunities , Profits , and Commodities to the said Dignitie of Supreame Head of the same Church belonging . Thus farre belike the Statute . And what from hence gathereth Mr. Adioynder ? I will set downe his words . So saith the Statute ( quoth hee ) which must needes bee vnderstood to giue spirituall authority , when it giueth all that power , Dignity , and Iurisdiction , which belongeth to the Head of the Church , &c. Much for sooth . This spirituall Iurisdiction haunts them terribly , you see , euerie where scares them . But why so good now ? For seeing that the Church is a spirituall and Ecclesiasticall body , it must needs be gouerned by a spirituall and Ecclesiasticall power , residing in the Head thereof , &c. Obserue his elegancies : Ecclesia est corpus Ecclesiasticum , The Church is a Church-bodie first . Is not this delicate ? But then againe , The same Church is abodie , and yet a spirituall bodie , to Mr. Adioynder , in his most curious descriptions . And yet , I hope , not like S. Paule spirituall body , after the Resurrection , 1. Cor. 15. which is called spirituall , because it is plyable and obedient to the motions of the Spirit , ( as we are taught by S. Austen in his Enthiridion ) but as it shall please his wisedome at more leisure to interpret . In the meane while , if the Church because it is a spirituall body ( as he speaks at least ) must therefore haue no Head , but one that is endued with like spirituall authoritie , consider the consequents , and marke what a confusion they would bring vpon life , while they wilfully peruert our meaning in the question . For how many are heads and principalls to others , which yet partake not of the faculty that they deale in ? And good reason . For the persons of men liuing and conuersing in such or such a Commonwealth , are subiect to the gouernour thereof , and he the Head of them ; without any reference to their particular trades or professions that they follow . Else how shall a woman be Queene ouer souldiers ( as the Papists will not deny but in temporalibus shee is ) and yet no souldier , nor fit to beare armes ? How is a King the Head of Philosophers , liuing within his Dominions , whether Platonickes , or Peripatetickes , or whome you will , though he be neither Master nor Disciple of their sect , no way ingraffed into their societie ? How is the Pope himselfe head of hereticall and Apostaticall Priests , and yet not combined with them in their heresie or Apostasie ? How of the Iewes in his Dominions , of whome he is Head , at least as Temporall Prince , as you conceiue ? Are there not diuers Superintendents of whole Vniuersities , and Scholasticall congregations throughout the world , which neuer were trained in the schollership or learning of those places ? And yet they may proceede against the Diuines that are therein , in matters of Christianitie ; as for omitting of Sermons , of Theologicall Disputations , also false doctrine in them , &c. though they themselues be no Priests , and the others are . Yea , why may not KINGS beare authoritie ouer Priests , and Spirituall persons , though themselues be none , as well as there be diuers Rectors and Gouernours of particular Colledges throughout the Realme ( and that also perhaps according to the auncient Statutes ) who beeing no Priests , nor Spirituall men themselues , haue authoritie neuertheles ouer the whole companie , and among the rest ouer the Priests too ? So as first , the King by vertue of his place , may exercise power ouer them that are Spirituall or Priestly persons , though himselfe be none , ( and yet the sounder Antiquitie hath seemed to descrie some such thing in Kings ) but then the law of God ordaining him moreouer a Nursing-father to his Church , that is , a defender and prouider in all points for the blessed and happie estate therof , ( as the Reuerend Bishop here most godlily argueth , and most stoutly auerreth , though the Adioynder thinke him cold in the cause ; ) he is not onely a Head , but a kind and louing Head , one that knowes Ioseph . And practising this , Almightie God will reward him accordingly ; if otherwise , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , let him thank himselfe , as the Canons speake . For God will not hold him guiltlesse in iudgement , though the impatience of men may not wreake their quarrell . The Adioynder saies , the Catholikes ( meaning the Papists ) will not deny this , but that they affirme and teach that Kings are for the nourishment and defence of the Church , as much as either the Prophet Esay , or the Bishop of Ely himselfe , &c. Which if it be so , I see not but the question , ( euen by that which hath been said ) may be alreadie at an ende . § 71. But so is not our labour , thanke the Adioynder for it , who mingling his Parlaments here together with his Paralogismes , thus goes forward . It is further yet enacted ( saies he ) by our Parlaments , that King Henry the eight , might not only visit all Ecclesiasticall persons , and reforme all kind of errors , heresies , and abuses , in the Church of England ; but also assigne 32. persons to examine all manner of Canons , Constitutions , and Ordinances , Prouinciall and Synodicall . And further , to set in order and establish all such Laws Ecclesiasticall , as should be thought by him and them conuenient to be vsed and set forth within his Realmes and Dominions , in all spirituall Courts and Conuentions , and that such Lawes and Ordinances Ecclesiasticall as should be deuised and made by the Kings Maiestie , and these 32. persons , and declared by his Maiesties Proclamation vnder his great Seale , should be onely taken , reputed , and vsed , as the Kings Laws Ecclesiasticall , &c. § 72. Then , Numb . 51. Furthermore , King Henrie made the Lord Cromwell his Vicar generall for the exercise of his Spirituall and Ecclesiasticall iurisdiction , by vertue whereof the said Lord Cromwell ordained Ecclesiasticall Lawes and Iniunctions , and published them vnder the Seale of his Vicariate , directing them to all Archbishops , Abbots , and the rest of the Clergie . And albeit Queene Elizabeth did not vse in her style , &c. Thus he . § 73. And what of this ? Or how does this shew that King Henry the eight assumed vnto himselfe any Ecclesiasticall authoritie , or Iurisdiction Ecclesiasticall , which is the summe of the Question betweene you and vs ? For as for the assigning of persons to examine Canons , and Constitutions , Prouinciall or Synodicall , and to set in order and establesh all such Lawes Ecclesiasticall as should be thought meete , &c. I redemaund in one word ; What if those persons were Ecclesiasticall men ? What inconuenience was in that ? Sure nothing to the contrarie appeares by your writing , and much lesse by the Act of Parlament here quoted . Nam a & quibus non licet cognoscere per se , licet tamen cognitores dare , saith the Law. It might be so here then . Though suppose it were otherwise : Did you neuer heare of b Constantine , threatning the Bishops in his own persō , & that about their courses in Eclesiasticall affaires ? What he did by himselfe , why might not others from him , by his appointing ? direct Iniunctions to the Archbishops & Abbots & the rest of the Clergie , which you take in so ill . part here at my Lord Cromwells hands , that he should presume to doe , though King Henrie deputed him , and the Act of Parlament , which you quote , allowed him ? Did not Emperours ordinarily commaund Bishops ? Remember Mauritius c to your great S. Gregorie , remember Marcian , and diuerse more . You heard but euen now what Cyrill saies to Theodosius , that he commanded the Priests , and in an Ecclesiasticall matter , to purge the Church from impieties and blasphemies , and till that was done he would not enter . And if they by themselues thus , why not by others , such as they please to appoint for them ? Neither was that the meaning of the Act of Parlament , that no Canons should be Canons . without the Kings . authoritie ( as yo would faine wrest it , to augment your cauills ) but that * Canons should not bee forcible in the nature of Lawes , without the Kings consent , as reason is , and practise hath euer beene , and the words themselues import as they are quoted by you , viz. that such Laws and Ordinances Ecclesiasticall , should only be reputed as the KINGS LAVVS , which himselfe , or they for him , had ratified and approoued , &c. What more equall ? § 74. And what maruell now if Queene Elizabeth claimed as much as her father King Henrie did before her , and the Parlament was not nice to assent to her in that behalfe ? For of all the graunts that were made to that Queene , there is nothing vnnaturall , nothing vnciuill , nothing that wee should blush for at this day . Yes , power ( say you ) to reform , correct , &c. * That is , in foro externo , or power coactiue , vindicatiue power , which is onely the Princes , not the Spirituall mans . For so it followes , Any authoritie that hath heretofore been , or may lawfully be exercised or vsed , for the Visitation of the Ecclesiasticall state , for ORDER , reformation , correction , &c. Here is nothing but the obiect Ecclesiasticall persons , that you should bee so scandalized with in this period ; ( for that same any , is any compulsiue Power , which is propriagladij , witnesse Bonauenture , * and not clauium , in 4. Dist . 18. qu. 3. Resp . ad penult . ) whom neuerthelesse we haue prooued , and are readie to prooue , that they are censurable by Princes and their subordinate officers , though the beast gnaw her tongue for anger . § 75. The same I say to the Statute of King Edward the 6. ( mentioned by the Adioynder Numb . 53. ) Ann. 1. cap. 2. that the meaning is , de foro externo , wherein the Priest can doe no more then the King will permit him ; though it is true , that any act which the Priest exerciseth , whether externall or internall , it descends altogether of the Kings iurisdiction , in regard of patronage and protection , who els might trouble him and molest him for it , if he were disposed , ( though vniustly . ) § 76. As for giuing lycence that Bishops may bee consecrated , that is not all one with consecrating Bishops . The first of these is Imperial , and Christian Kings haue practized it , euen in the best times : the other ours neuer did , neuer mean to doe . § 77. Now for graunting of Dispensations , Lycences , Faculties , and the rest of that good ware , which was wont to be set at the Court of Rome , ( as the Statute here insinuates , or rather plainely tells vs ) may we not be glad that we may haue it somewhat neerer hand , and at a cheaper rate , if we should chance to neede them , and saue our labour of trudging to her , whome the voice from heauen bids vs to goe forth of , if we belong to God ? And why may not Dispensatores giue dispensations , by which title the Prophet Esay called Kings ( as you may remember ) but a little before , and they that vnderstand the Hebrew text , acknowledge as much , euen your owne men ? Or where is Peter made the vnicus Dispensator , that all these things should come from him , or by his meanes only , ( though the Pope were Peter ) ? Are not all Gods ministers called Dispensators alike , 1. Cor. 4. 1 ? And what if the King be one of them Transcendent ( in his Kingdome at least ) whom the Scripture is not wont to style so basely ( whatsoeuer you doe ) but that it calls him Gods Minister , both 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , euen as Constantine of himselfe almost at euery word , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , the man of God ? Besides that if the Parlament gaue the King this right , and the Clergy among others belong to the a Parlament , what thinke you ? may hee not exercise it euen by vertue of such a graunt at least , and againe delegate it to whom he please ? I wisse , better then your Besses , or Abbesses in their Cloysters , to whom you haue made ouer the spirituall iurisdiction now in ordinarie . And Baldus saies , the like may be done by the Pope to any Layman whatsoeuer , as I haue quoted before out of the Catholique Diuine in his Answer to the Reports of my L. Cooke . Sometime also to Knights that wear the spurre , as the b Templars of Balshall ( a commanderie of theirs in Warwickshire ) gaue to Roger Mowbray ( a temporall Knight , but their bountifull benefactor ) power of pardoning whomsoeuer of the brotherhood ( belike spirituall men and all ) in case they had offended against the Statutes of that Order . Whereas pardoning of faults , ( which are , if any thing , de fore interno ) is more then giuing c Lycenses or Faculties ad extra , either for eating of flesh , or marrying out of season , or neglecting residence , or if there be any such like . But we ground not the Supremacie vpon the Acts of Parlament , which belongs to the Prince by more originall right : It is enough for vs , that you can neither foile it by them ; and that you are foyled there , where not withstanding you thinke to foyle vs most . § 78. You againe deny , with like boldnesse as before , that Saul was head of the tribe of Leui , though the text say plainely , he was caput tribuum Israel , head of the tribes of Israel ; vnlesse Leui be no tribe . But , Non omnes Israel qui ex Israel , with you perhaps , Rom. 9. 6. All are not Israel that are of Israel . Not as with the Apostle , according to the mysterie of diuine election , but according to your absurd conceit of exemption ; as if Saul had had no power ouer the tribe of Leui , whom you heard Ezechias coniuring so lately , and commanding them , and setting them about their worke . Is not all Israel giuen to Salomon , 1. King. 11. 38 ? Yet your reason for exemption is , because the Leuites were giuen to Aaron . By the same reason therefore they are exempt from Aaron , and onely subiect henceforth to Salomon . As for the title of Headship , what can be more pregnant then Esay , 9. 15. that the prime in honour beeing the head ( which is the King without all question , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ) the Leuite is so farre from the Supremacy , which you talke of , yea or from immunitie either and exemption , that the false Prophet ( the vnworthy Clergie-man ) is made to bee the tayle , by Gods owne exposition of those termes in that place . In this sense therfore Caluin would not haue abhorred the name of Head to be attributed to Kings ; ( as the Bishop most truely and most directly answereth you ) no not in Ecclesiasticall matters themselues ; of whose iudgement in that point I shall speake soon after , God willing , and auouch his credit ( with many more of them , whom you maliciously call Puritanes ) confuting your lies and flaunders against him . § 79. * For as for d Sauls commandement to slay Abimelech the High-priest , wherein his subiects refused to obey his wil ; It was because the commandement was cruell and vngodly , in which case we must rather obey God then man , and spare the liues of innocent persons , though we hazard our owne ; as the Matrones e did the young brats of the Israelites , not fearing ( saies the Text ) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , Hebr. 11. and for that their name remaines vpon euerlasting record . But whereas Doeg did that which the others would not doe , I meane , slay Abimelech , whom S. Austen ( you say ) calls the representer of the earthly Kingdome and societie of wicked men , Com. in Psal . 51 ; I hope , first you see by this , what Representing meanes in S. Austens language , of which I haue debated with you in the first Chapter more at large ; not authoritie , but mysterie ; not standing for the Soueraigne , but for the semblant onely . To omit that in the same place he saies also of Dauid , Dauid figurauit non Regis solum personam , fed Sacerdotis : Dauid bore the person not onely of the King , f but also of the Priest , because hee eate of the shewe-bread , which was lawfull onely for the Priests to eat of . This may make for spirituall iurisdiction in Kings then , if you look not better to it . Finally , you must not thinke that S. Austen here means by Imperium terrenum , the gouernment of Kings simply in it selfe , as if no Ciuil Magistrat might punish a Priest ( though neuer so high ) if he be a malefactour , but ( as your selfe expound it , in the words of your text , by Societas impiorum , that is , the wicked of the world ; S. Austen also saying there , g Vnus homo est Doeg , sed & genus hominum est Doeg ) of degenerating Tyrannies , where base flatterers lend their hand to vnmanly butcheries vpon euery hope of Quid mihi dabis , and good men are promiscuously massacred and made away . Wherefore S. Austen saies more particularly in the same place , that h Doeg signified Iudas the betrayer of our Lord , who was a spirituall man , not a temporall , as you know . And yet the original of Christs death proceeded from him , not from Kings , nor from Ciuill Magistrates , which is worth your noting . Though accomplished it could not be without Pilates faint concurrence , and the rather that our Sauiour might shew his subiection to such a silly one , onely for authorities sake . In this sense the same Father , Com. in Psal . 1. makes earthly Kingdomes to be Cathedra pestilentiae , the chaire of Pestilence , ( though afterward he accommodate it to False Teachers rather , that is , to Churchmen . ) Not that Ciuill princedome is so in it owne nature , ( as Mr. Sanders would gladly haue it , de Clave Dauid , lib. 1. cap. 2. Quòd saecularis potest as non potissimum in laudando & praemijs afficiendo , sed in occidendo & vitam auferendo vim suam ostentet , which is starke false and trayterous ) but when abused to tyrannie and to iniquitie . It is called the Chaire of Pestilence ( saies he , ) because the pestilence is a disease that rages generally , and sweepes away whole multitudes with it , where it comes . And so this is a vice that euery bodie is sicke of , desire of preheminence , ambition , and vaine glorie , ( Regis b quisque animum habet , as the Poet could say ) more Kinging & stinging then Kings themselues , if they might be let alone , though they complain of Kings . Els we are not to doubt but S. Austen is of the same minde that Seneca seemes to be of , lib. 2. de Benef. cap. 20. Quòd optimus civitatis status sit sub rege iusto , and that Brutus was to blame for beeing wearie of Monarchies ( who was iustly therfore frighted with the apparition of a c blacke dogge for his abhominable assasinate . ) Yea S. Austen himselfe acknowledges as much in plaine tearmes , lib. 20. contra Faust . cap. 14. Ibi d regna foelicia esse vbi omnium pleno consensu regibus obeditur ; That Kingdomes are there happie , where all men obey the King with full consent . § 80. To your mistaking of our Act of Parlament in your Num. 57. as if that gaue more power of censure to Kings , thē the Reuerend Bishop in his grauest ponderation of these matters alloweth , and so the King might excommunicate , suspend , &c. I answer as before , ( for you doe but goe ouer the same thing again as if we had neuer heard of it , though nothing be more triuiall : ) Excommunications are not coactions , ( sauing onely as they are inflicted contra voluntatem personae ; ) And the Parlament giues power onely coactiue to the King ; though true it is , that without his countenance , their very Spirituall proceedings cannot well take place , in a wanton age , and a contemning nation . And if the Kings of our Land may excommunicate by Parlament , why neuer doe they so ? Why doe they let that sword to rust for lacke of vse ? If they may administer any Spirituall Iurisdiction whatsoeuer ( as you thinke they may by Act of Parlament ) why doe they neuer practise some specialties of it , at one time or another ? neuer preach , neuer baptize , neuer consecrate Bishops , & c ? For you cannot say it is for lacke of leisure ; for leisure they haue as little to many Temporall businesses , in their world of employments . And some time at least would be set apart for these , if it were but to keep their title in vre . As for skill and sufficiencie , you will neither disparage I hope the times past , so much , but that skill there was enough to indite a Censure , ( though who knows not how many that might be borrowed of ? ) and for the fulnesse of perfection in all manner of faculties that are incident to the wit of man , but especially of the Booke which is deliuered him vpon his Throne , you may remember who gouernes at this day . But no doubt , Praxis & Consuetudo est optima legū interpres , & they practise none of this , no not in all their life time ; It is a signe therefore they challenge none by vertue of their Lawes , though Parsons , and Saunders , and the Adioynder cry out neuer so loud , that they doe , for want of better matter , to stuffe their pages , and to abuse their Auditours . § 81. THE last point of all is about the Bishops defending of those whome we call Puritanes , against the scandalous imputation that Bellarmine chargeth them with , of dissenting from the Supremacie . Whereunto I haue spoken once before . What can be more godly thē the Bishops practise , to defend all that may be defended , euen in the aduersaries themselues , euen in them that gather with vs but in halfe , to cherish if need be the dimme light , and the drooping candle , and the smoking flaxe , after the example of our Sauiour ? As we read of Atticus Archbishop of Constantinople , that he excused Nouatus , and praised Asclepiades an old Bishop of the Nouatians , not for loue of the sect , I thinke , but either to gaine the parties , or as not turning from the truth , though with aduantage to his aduersaries , Socrat. l. 7. c. 25. But this part is handled somewhat crookedly by the Adioynder , with cringings and wrenchings , now for the Puritanes , then against thē , but all to bring preiudice to the good Bishop & the Truth . Howbeit , nothing is more easie , then the Answer to all . The Puritanes ( saies he ) defend as good a Supremacy as the Bishop . What then ? It may be , that was the very ground of the Bishops assertion , that the Reformed Churches maintaine the same opinion about the Supremacie , all of them , that we doe . What shame then can arise to the Bishop from hence ? Is it not matter of praise and felicitie rather , that we are all of vs of one mind , in auouching the right that belongs to Kings , and oppugning the Papists the opposers thereof ? But let vs heare his reason : a For they also say ( saies he ) that the King is to gouern and preserue the Church , in externis , &c. And haue we not shewed before , that as no bodie can reach to the interna properly , by his immediat action , not the Priest himselfe , but only the holy Spirit of God , so the b Kings sword is as piercing as anothers to wound the soule , and to mortifie vice and corruption in vs , and to reforme vs to all pietie and newnesse of life , the most part beeing readier to yeeld for feare , then either to amend for conscience , or for loue of vertue ? § 82. Neither is that so small a matter as the Adioynder would make of it , where he saies the Bishop ioynes with the Puritanes , that allow the King c no more power ouer the Church , then onely to maintaine it , and to defend it . For whatsoeuer the Puritanes opinion be of this matter , which they may abridge in conceit , after they haue enlarged in style , no bodie discouering them , ( at least I am not he that can diue into their secrets ) the word Defender and Maintainer of the Church , will stretch to as much Supremacie as either his Maiestie now assumeth , or we avow ; & more by much then the Papists will graunt him : yea it is that which they oppose with might and maine , that results from these very words of Defence and Maintenance . For how can a King defend the Church , maintaine the vnity , preserue the beauty , vnlesse he haue power to reforme both spirituall faults , ( let me call them so for this once ) . I meane c heresies , blasphemies , schismes , & the like , and that in spirituall persons too , euen in the loftiest of the crew , who sting their nurse as dāgerously as another , nay farre more dangerously many times , both by their scandalous liuing , & especially by their broaching of pernicious doctrins , * Quia omne malum ex Sanctuario ; and the thundrings and lightenings came out of the Temple , Reu. 16. 18. to signifie that the Churchmen are the cause of all plagues , as Ribera notes well vpon that place . In scelere Israel omne hoc . But the Papists think that Kings are blocks and stocks , like the Heathens images , that Baruch , speakes of , not to stirre but as they are lifted , Ducitur vt neruis alienis mobile lignum : Nay not able so much as to wipe off the dung from their faces , that the little birds let fal vpon them ; they allow them no actiuitie , no d pricking censure , which is the very nerve of Defence & Church-maintenance . Might this conceit stand , it were somewhat that the Adioynder replyes to our argument ; but it is so stale and so grosse , that the little boyes here laugh at it , though old gray-bearded Papists , and the Adioynder for one , are not ashamed to reiterate it . § 83. But will you heare an elegancie , a queint deuise ? In his Numb . 63. Though the Puritanes are defectiue in their opinion of Supremacie , yet both they and the Papists are better subiects then the Bishop , ( for you are to know , that still he is the Bishops good friend ) because all of vs yeelding the title of Defender and Maintainer of the Church to the Kings Maiesty , ( the title they , if he will , but not the Thing , as I haue shewed before , not in due extension at least , for then there would remaine no controuersie between vs ) yet they beleeue it as a matter of faith , the Bishop but onely as a matter of perswasion , &c. Thus does he ruminate and re-ruminate his cud againe , and goe ouer his abolita atque transacta , as S. Austen speaks . But for the Puritanes of Scotland , whom he quotes in his margent , I finde no such thing in the words alleadged by him , that they hold the Supremacie to bee a matter of faith , ( * the Papists Creed I know is not yet perfected , and they may take in what they list . ) Nay , I thinke , it neuer came into their minds ( good men ) to trouble their braines with such a nice speculation , whether the case of Supremacie be de fide or no ; but howsoeuer it be , I haue answered it before , that our perswasion thereof is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ; we will neuer be driuen from it , neither by force , nor by fine words , Errore , nec Terrore , ( though the Adioynder thinke we will not loose sixpence for the defence of it ) our liues ( not onely our liuelihoods ) beeing not deare vnto vs in the contestation of this iustest quarrell , That the KINGS MAIESTIE is the cheife maintainer , cheife head of the Church , chiefe gouernour and cheife defender of it , in all causes , and ouer all persons , next vnder God , and his Sonne Christ . § 84. Yea , But what the Puritanes teach concerning this point , you haue heard in the last Chapter by the testimonie of Mr. Rogers , approoued and warranted by all the Clergie of England , to wit , g that Princes must be seruants to the Church , subiect to the Church , submit their scepters to the Church , and throwe downe their crownes before the Church , &c. Whereupon I gather ( saith the Adioynder ) two things ; The one , that the Supremacie which ( as the Bishop saith ) the Puritanes doe acknowledge in the King , is to be vnderstood onely in temporall matters : The other , that all reformed churches are also of the fame mind , seeing that they professe the same doctrine concerning the Kings Ecclesiasticall Supremacie that the Puritanes doe , as the Bishop himselfe confesseth , &c. § 85. Then Numb . 66. ( for I would gladly take in all : ) Besides that albeit we should graunt that the Puritanes and Reformed Churches doe allow the Teporall Magistrate to haue some power and authoritie in Ecclesiasticall matters , yet it is euident that they doe not allow them that spirituall iurisdiction and authoritie , which our Parlaments haue granted to our Kings , that they may giue dispensations , licenses , make Ecclesiasticall Lawes , giue commissions to consecrate Bishops , to excommunicate , suspend , censure , visit , and correct all Ecclesiasticall persons , Reforme heresies and abuses , &c. and with this the beast breathes out his last , or almost his last . To whome I answer in order , and as briefly as the nature of such obiections will permit ; Princes may serue the Church and submit their scepters , subiect their Crownes before the Church , ( though all supreame Magistrates doe not weare Crownes , that I may tell him that by the way , and we now by Prince vnderstand all ) yea , and h licke the dust of the Churches feete , as the Prophet Esay speakes , and yet retaine their Supremacie firme and inuiolable . How so ? Marry it is a shame for the Adioynder not to see it of himself , without a guide , remembring who calls himselfe the seruant of seruants , and yet pleades for a Lordship limitlesse ouer the Church , ( at least the Adioynder will agnise him for his good Master , though he goe for a Seruant ) but neuerthelesse we will helpe him . The one by loue , by zeale , by care ; by filiall respect and duties of all sorts , to the great mother the Church of God , teeming and trauailing here vpon earth , whether the generall to his power , or the particular within the territories where he raigneth and swayeth . The other by vnderstanding the right of his place , and accordingly also executing and exercising of it , to the controll of all that stands in his way , and to the purging of all scandals out of Gods floare , to the banishing of sin , to the chasing away of all wickednesse with his very looke and browe , as Salomon speakes , or whatsoeuer may be said in the loftiest style , for the aduancing this high authoritie , principally destinated to the benefit of Gods Church , and setting forth of his glorie . Doe I speake riddles ? or are others of the same minde ? Dominotur sacerdotibus Imperator ( saies S. Gregorie , l. 4. Regist . ep . 15. ) ita tamen vt etiam debitam reuerentiam impendat : [ Let the Emperour , on Gods name , beare sway ouer Priests , but so that he reuerence them as meet is . ] And he addes withall , Atque hoc excellenti consideratione faciat : [ And let him so doe vpon excellent consideration . ] But though the examples be obuious , ( for euen Ioseph was a father to Pharaoh his King , that is , reuerenced by him , or much esteemed by him , and neuertheles comprehended vnder Pharaohs grand authoritie , as a Subiect in the Commonwealth ) yet the Adioynder hath no place left for this consideration , as excellent as it is in S. Gregories iudgement . § 86. As for submitting to the Presbyterie ; Though the Presbyterie be scarce in vse , where the Monarchies are of force , at least not with vs , against whom this malice is principally ●…elled , ( and indeede how can the Presbyters excommunicate a King , yea or the Popes either , sith a multitude is inexcommunicable , by the verdict of the Schoole , and euery Prince is virtually a whole Kingdome , so many are agglewed to him in necessarie offices , in deerest respects , in the most enthralling bands of receiued curtesies and fauours , and so many to take his part of all sides ? ) Yet suppose this were possible ; I answer two waies : First , that the Supremacie might stand with such Subiection ; That , in the coactiue and externall forcible Court ; This , in the internall , spirituall , and conscionable : as the example of S. Ambrose and Theodosius may shewe , though not rashly to be imitated , no more then Ambrose himselfe did hastily proceed to such a heauie censure , but prouoked by Theodosius his most sauage slaughter of so many thousand Christians ( graui fateor de culpa , sed tamen humana ) all at one blowe , as they were assembled in the Theater . Iurisdiction crosses not with iurisdiction , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , as Aristotle alludes it , between reason and appetite , or one appetite and another , l. 3. de Anima c. 11. And albeit Theodosius was excommunicated by Ambrose , yet Ambrose remained Theodosius his dutifull subiect at the same time . He that renounced not Valentinian erring in the faith , & maintaining Arianisme , would much lesse cast off Theodosius sinning a sinne of fact , though exceeding haynous as I said before . But secondly , if the Puritanes admit Lay-presbyters to inflict excommunications , and such like censures , is it likely that they will exclude the Kings highnesse altogether from spirituall gouernement , when they take in such meane men of the lay , and not rather acknowledge his excellent prerogatiue ? § 86. And therefore , though I am vnwilling ( as Tully said once in another case , cuiusquam summi viri vel minimum erratum , cum maxima sua laude atque honore coniungere , ) yet because I know you reckon Mr. Caluin and Mr. Brightman among the mainest Puritanes , whom here you so chase and hunt vp and downe , ( Eudoemon-Iohannes hauing said so much of Caluin by name , that he is Pater Puritanorum , the very Father of the Puritanes ) omitting other testimonies that I haue cited elsewhere , for the auouching of Caluins integrity in that point , and no way derogating from the royall Supremacie , no not in Ecclesiasticall matters themselues , I will set downe onely one or two to acquite each of them whom I last named , and in them the whole nation ( if any such there be ) of the Puritanes , because you commonly repute of these two as the violentest ; and withall to cleare our cause from that absurd scandall , which you would willingly raise of vs , for the discouragement of simple soules , as if our owne Diuines abhorred from the oath which is ministred among vs , ( though still you are to know it is no matter de Eide ) and aboue all to stoppe your lewde mouthes , that would sowe bate , and throw bones , between brethren and friends . § 87. Caluin therefore thus , to Francis the first , King of France , in that incomparable Preface to his famous * Institutions . Dignares auribus tuis , digna tua cognitione , digna tuo tribunali . He subiects the whole cause , that was then in controuersie betweene vs and the Papists , to the Kings iudgement and iudgement-seat . For hee had said iust before , describing the weight of the businesse then in hand , Quomodo regnum Christi inter nos sartum tectūque maneat . Vnlesse that be no Ecclesiasticall cause or consideration , which concernes the preseruation of Christs Kingdome here on earth . And yet these tall fellowes would faine perswade , that Caluin would not haue Kings to be gouernours and superuisors in Ecclesiasticis . See the rest of the iudgement of that learned man ( * learned in the iudgement of his very aduersaries ) lib. 4. Institut . c. 11. where he handles it purposely , and plentifully enough ; Non improbabant sancti Patres siquando Principes interponerent suam authoritatem in rebus Ecclesiasticis , &c. For I take vp this testimonie now out of his Preface , onely because not markt perhaps , nor regarded by others . The like he hath againe ( to name one more then I thought ) Praefat. Com. in Epist . Canon . ad Edward . 6 Regem nostrū . Memineris has Maiestatis tuae proprias esse partes , quò integra vigeat relligio , sinceram ac germanam Scripturae interpretationem ab indignis calumnijs vindicare . Yet Bellarm. saies , Rex est accidentalis Ecclesiae , l. 3. de verb. Dei. c. 9. verb. vlt. & therefore interpretations not to be lookt for from him . It followes in Mr. Caluin , Non enim temerè per Mosem Deus mandal , simulatque Rex populi sui inauguratus fuerit , vt sibi describendum curet legis volumen ( where we see he grounds himselfe vpon that argument , which our Diuines , that defend the supremacie of Princes in causes Ecclesiasticall , most rely vpon . ) And a little after , In Regio Palatio sacrum domicilium assignat Legisuae Dominus , &c. [ The Bibles lodging is in the Kings Palace , Almighty God so appointing . ] This of M. Caluin . § 88. And now next for Mr. Brightman . Hee in Cap. 8. Apocal. ver . 3. makes Constantine the great ( a temporall Prince you know , and as Mr. Sanders would exaggerate , not so much as baptized , ( that by the way I may tell you Sir , to your Numb . 68. & 69. in defence of Bishop Barlow , whom there you bite at , and saue my labour of answering more particularly , as at first I had intended , to those your discoursings : That Princes not baptized , nay nor so much as godly minded ( which Constantine then was , whether baptized or no , when Mr. Saunders takes the exception to him for want of baptisme ) haue the same supreame right to gouern the Church that Christian Kings and professing the faith haue , though by error and transportation they either neglect it and perish it , or perhaps euill employ it , to the afflicting of her whom they ought to haue aduanced and promoted most . ) As for their beeing beads , that are no members ( which is another thing that troubles you ) though I haue answered it before , and you haue ueuer done with it , yet briefly thus once againe ; Why not so , I pray you , as well as a King the head of that companie of his Commonwealth , which either professes some art that he cannot skill of ( suppose Surgeons , Marriners , Musitians , and the like ) or practiseth the wickednesse that hee abhorreth from his soule , ( suppose Atheists , Heretiques , Drunkards , and Adulterers . ) For first , he is no member neither of these damned societies last named ; nor of those before , which he is a meere stranger to ; and yet a head of his whole Realme , I hope , and of all the companies thereto belonging , temporall at least , and in temporalibus , euen by your owne confession . Therefore an insidell King may as well be head of the Church , as a Christian King may be head ouer them , with whome he participates not in their sinnes and vngodlinesse . But now to come to Mr. Brightman , as I said . He makes Constantine to be that Angell that stands before the altar , Apoc. 8. hauing the golden censer of perfumes in his hand , and casting them vpon the prayers of the Saints and righteous , which ascend vp before God. Would this man , thinke you , disdaine , that Princes should be interposers in Ecclesiasticall affaires , or challenge the cheife conuzance and arbittement of them to thēselues ? But I will set downe his owne words , because they are pregnant to this purpose . Quid ni ille INPRIMIS imaginem SACERDOTIS praeferret , in quo maximè lucebat effigies Regalis dignitatis ? Rectè ipse de se in coetu Episcoporum , Et ego , inquit , tanquam vnus è vobis adsum : 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . Nec enim negarim me vestrum conseruum esse , quo nomine ego maxime gaudeo : Socrates lib. primo cap. sep . This he . Where I subscribe not to Mr. Brightmans interpretation of the Apocalyps , but I alleadge it to shew what it is like his opinion was of the Supremacie of Kings . § 89. Now concerning other States and Kingdomes not enlarging the Supremacie so farre as we doe here in England , viz. to giue Lyceuses , Dispensations , Commissions , Faculties , to consecrate Bishops , to excommunicate , to interdict , suspend , censure , &c. Let the Reader be carefull of reading these last words as they lie in the Adioynder , with due punctation of them , or els hee may chance to fall into the Adioynders pit-fold , which will be his great pleasure to looke on and laugh . For though it runne thus , to giue Commissions to consecrate , to excommunicate , censure , &c. yet he meanes not , I trust , that our Kings do either excommunicate , censure , or suspend in their owne persons , but giue Commissions to Bishops , to consecrate other Bishops , and so perhaps to execute the other ensuing acts of censure there recounted , as excommunication , suspension , &c. And yet this is not auouched out of any of our records , but onely nakedly imputed to vs by the Adioynder ; which if it be true , as I confesse I am not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , not so studied in the Lawes ( my profession beeing cleane another waies ) it is to be vnderstood of * patronage and Princely protection , that their acts may goe for currant and vncontemned of Christian people , not but that in themselues they are of validitie before God , out of the spirituall power , which he hath entrusted his Priests and Ministers with , though there be no confirmation of the secular arme . § 90. Though it might be referred also to the commandements and iniunctions of Christian Kings , whereby they vrge Clergy-men to doe their duties , if happily they be stacke or vnwilling of themselues . For which cause Mr. Sanders saies , that Kings can command nothing which they may not execute , De claue Dauid . lib. 5. cap. 5. & 6. That because we denie to Princes the execution of Priestly duties , they may take away Gouernement too , in causes , and ouer persons , Ecclesiasticall . Yet we heard S. Cyrill speaking plainely a little before , for Theodosius his commanding of Bishops , &c. altogether as Ezechias did the Leuites , who yet might not execute a Leuites charge . So Salomon sacrificed saies the Scripture , that is , the Priests at Salomons commaundement ; not as Oziah with his owne hands , nay not as Vzzah , so much as to handle a holy thing forbidden . And because Mr. Sanders makes such a piece of worke hereof , and saies , there is no instance to be giuen in all the world , of a person commannding that which hee may not execute ( sauing onely when there is disparagement in the doing of it , as for a Captaine to descend to the meane offices of the Campe , which Plato forbids ; but as for the Ministerie , there is no disparagement in it , no not to Kings themselues ( saith he ) which we are contēt to admit ) I will reckon therfore some few instances to choke him withal , and to defend our distinction between Execution and Gouernement , which is the maine thing to be heeded in the question of Supremacie . How is it els , that the Pope may command swords to be drawne in casu , and yet himselfe may not handle the sword , as * Mr. Sanders confesseth in this booke ? Though it is next to a wonder to see a Temporall Prince , in his own territorie at least , who at no hand may handle a sword , or strike a blow . Yet they giue the Pope this authoritie to set other folks swords a worke , not onely in his Territorie , but throughout Christendome . And I might haue set it yet somewhat higher . How was the Iudge in the old Law to put to death malefactors by the appointment of the Priest , ( as the Papists would haue it , ) Deuter. 17. 9. who yet was not to strike , ( for that was the Iudges office , ) if no body may prescribe that which he may not execute ? Neither let M. Sanders say , that to strike a blow , or to slay a malefactour , is disgrace or disparagement ; which is rather the sanctifying of a good subiects hands , to kill a rebell ( yea and that somtimes vniudged ) if necessitie so require ; to omit that this conceit driues fast vpon Anabaptisme , to thinke that carrying the sword is disparageable or disgracefull , which the b Scripture speakes of with all honour . As for a Prince in his own Territorie , and therefore bearing the sword , to whō notwithstanding it is a disgrace to vse the sword , it is a monster as I said , and if he be ashamed of the one , let him renounce the other ; as the poore woman said to King Philip , Si non vacat andire , nec regnare vacet : So here , Si percutere dedecori est , principari magis . But how much more will the Pope now thinke that disparageable to him , to sweepe Churches , to ring the Saints-bell , to waite vpon the chalice , yea to baptize , to preach ( for this offends him more then any thing els ) and yet , I trust , hee may command all these things to others , to his inferiour Clerkes , and Leuites , and demie-Clerkes . Yea how may he c exhort euerie member of the Common-wealth , euery petty artisan , to follow his trade , ( which he may do for certaine , if he may but preach , for what more necessary argument then this for the pulpits ? ) May he therfore moyle * himselfe in those dusty affaires ? tanne , weaue , make tents , & c ? And yet it is not disparageable ; for S. Paul. and S. Peter , as good men as he , and better too by his leaue , haue done it before him , and that after their Apostleship , which is his false feather , and vsurped flower of title , at this day . Nay verily , by the same reason Ministers might not exhort either Kings and Princes , or other ciuill Magistrates , to doe their duties , to gouerne well , to administer iustice , to heare causes vnpartially , to cut off malefactors , to root out traitors , to suppresse sinne by dint of sword , because all these things are vnlawfull to them , repugnant to their vocation ; and yet the Ministers voice is a kind of commandement , speaking from the pulpit , d & in Gods stead , as was noted before . ( 6. ) What should I say of calling of Bishops to e Synods , of setting them on worke to explaine the faith , and to confute heresies ? May Christian Princes either not doe the first ( which the stories are so full of in the best times ) or shall they practise and beare a part in the second , ( which the Papists neuer will admit ? ) How did Theodosius dismisse Flauianus ( after so many Popes had in vaine assaulted him ) * commaunding him to depart and doe his dutie vpon his Bishopricke , if no body may enioyne but that which he may execute ? ( 7. ) Lastly , if a Priest should denie to baptize a young infant that were sicke ( whose saluation therefore were emperilled , and as we graunt , in the ordinarie , but as the Papists thinke , in the extraordinary way and all , without any hope of future recouerie ) if a Priest were so frampoll , I say , as to refuse to baptize a poore infant in that case , shall not the King compell him by force ; and punishment , and terrour of his Lawes ? We read in the booke of Martyrs , of a certaine Knight in Poperie , that put a Priest into the graue aliue , because he refused to burie a corps that was brought to Church , where there was no mortuarie to be had : such was their couetousnesse , Yet alas what comparison between burying of the dead ( which our Sauiour makes so sleight of , Suffer the dead to bury their dead ) and the administring of Christs Sacrament , for the sauing of a poore soule from euerlasting destruction ? It is therefore not the vnworthinesse of the ministeriall duties , ( as Mr. Sanders by his Syllogismes would faine driue vs to say , or else to let goe our distinction betweene Iniunction and Execution ) not the basenesse of our office ( for we magnifie our Ministerie , and the Angels are thought to tremble at the weight of it : Quis ad haec idoneus ? said he : viz. neither heauenly nor earthly abilities put in one ; ) but the meere distance and disunion of the two callings ( I am loath to say repugnance , though that also after a sort ) which will not permit a Prince to do Priestly offices , though his power extend to the commaunding of them to be done ; yea punishing and correcting if they be not done . Cursed be hee that does the Lords worke negligently , said the Prophet of old . And the heathen Poet assumes , Pectora nostra duas non admittentia curas . we cannot do Gods worke and the worlds too . Therefore God will haue his worke done by such onely , as shall intend nor doe no other worke then that . For this cause , gouernement remaines with the King , without any entermedling in the execution of our offices ; the execution is ours without any right in * Gouerning or Compelling . And so much to Mr. Sanders why the King should haue a Iurisdictiō ( as the Parlament here speaks ) or Superinspection , without administration or execution ; which it seemes the Adioynder is no lesse troubled with then Mr. Sanders , though he prosecute it not so vehemently . I returne to him ; who is now at his last casts . § 91. COncerning then our extending the priuiledges of Supremacie beyond the custome and fashion of other nations , he brings no proofe of it , and therefore I might contemne it with the same facilitie that he obiects it . But first he is to know , that the grounds which they hold by ( either from Scriptures or from Fathers ) in the auouching of their Supremacy , are the same that ours , and import as much , and extend as farre , including the same priuiledges , if they be throughly scanned , though happily so much appeare not vnto them all at first . Or it is the wisedome of Kings , to temper their gouernement with such moderation , as the condition of their people will best beare for the present , more as there shall bee more opportunitie afterward , — sic fortis Hetruria creuit . To omit , that for so much as others exercise these acts in those Kingdomes , though they deriue not their authoritie so literally from the King , yet the Kings permission is their deputation , and so the Supremacie still remaines in himselfe . Euen the Popes Supremacie is not the like with all , nor of the like extension . We knowe what narrowe bounds the French haue set to it , with their Pragmaticall Sanction . And the Sorbone of Paris hath euermore curtailed it . Few that amplifie it as fully as the Canonists . Bellarmine himself goes not so farre as Carerius . The a Bishops of some places were freer then others ; in b some the Deacons stept afore the Priests . And c diuerse things belonging to the qualitie of each order , are determined by Councels in processe of time , rather then acknowledged by all at first . Doth this therefore preiudice either Bishops , or Priests ? No verily . And so all that dissent about the bounds of Supremacy , are not straight to be reckoned for enemies to the Supremacie . God forbid . For I will not say as I might , ( and yet without flatterie ) that wee of the ENGLISH may the better enlarge the KINGS MAIESTIES priuiledges , as farre as possibly may stand with Gods word , because we are more sensible of his HIGHNES liberalities then any others , and his extraordinary fauour hath abounded towards vs. We may say as the Iewes did to the Apostle S. Iames , ( witnesse Eusebius lib. 2. hist . cap. 23. ) Obsecramus te ; Obtemperamus tibi ; Tibi omnes obedimus . Etenim omnis populus testificatur de te , quòd iustus sis , nec personā accipis . And , which neuer any of Peter , Quot quot credebant , propter IACOBVM credebant ( Propagatorem fidei , Malleum haeresum . ) As for that which followes , Sta ergò super pinnam templi , vt conspiciaris ab vniuersis , & verba tua omnes exaudiant ; I need not adde it , since God hath done it ; I meane exalted his MAIESTIE to the top of Soueraigntie , euen of Temple and all ; from whence the Nations farthest off attend his answers , and the world round about craues his resolution in greatest matters . § 92. AND so beseeching ALMIGHTIE GOD , to giue vs as large a heart to vnderstand our owne good , and his MAIESTIES rare fauours and charities towards vs , as he hath enlarged the heart of his most EXCELLENT MAIESTIE to all Princely wisedome , and possible vertue ; but especially to ouer-cherish his deare spouse the CHVRCH : Let vs thanke him also for the occasion of these two labours of the right worthy Bishop ( though in it selfe it was not so expetible ) and make much of the two pignora that the Church hath from him ; two radiant lights , two lasting pillars ; 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , ( as S. Chrysostome sayes of the mother of the Maccabees , ) or * 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , the two doores of the Sunne , ( as the Philosopher calls a mans eies in his bodie ) to let in knowledge and erudition to vs ; concluding of them , either with Iustine Martyr , ( 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , ) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 : or with Clemens Alexandr . ( fine Protreptici , ) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , &c. To GOD onely wise , immortall , inuisible , be all praise and glorie , through IESVS CHRIST our Lord , for euermore . AMEN . The thirteenth to the ROMANES expounded by S. CHRYSOSTOME , so farre foorth as it concerneth the SVPREMACY OF KINGS , and the Subiection of all persons to their authoritie , of what sort soeuer ; remaining in their Dominions ; Which I thought good to annexe here , not onely as a strengthening to diuers passages of this Booke , and namely to the last of all , consisting in the defence of his MAIESTIES ROYALL SVPREMACIE , against the Adioynders peeuish cauills ; but as an opening of the main controuersie about the oath of Allegeance ( which hath giuen the occasion to all these labours , as the Powder-plot gaue iust cause to that ) viz. that we are to obserue it by the Laws of CHRIST , and his Apostles , towards our King and Prince , of whatsoeuer relligion , or profession , they shall bee . VER . 1. Let euerie soule be subiect to the higher Powers . THe Apostle insists much vpon this matter , not onely in this ; but in other Epistles , planting subiection in Subiects towards their Princes , as wel as in Seruants towards their Masters . And this he does , by shewing that Christ gaue no Lawes with the intent to subuert Common-wealths or States , but directed all to their better gouernement , and taught vs not to rush into superfluous garboyles , and vnprofitable attempts . For in very truth , the traines that are laid for godly men , and the dangers that await vs for the truths sake , they are enough of themselues , and we ought not to augment them by superfluous tribulations , contriued by our owne ill-deseruings . Consider also how seasonably the Apostle makes his mention hereof in this place . For hee exhorts to this , when ? After he had required passing accuratenesse and strictnesse at their hands , after he had made them tractable both to friends and foes , both to them in prosperity , and them in aduersitie , to them in want and them that felt no want , to all in generall ; after he had setled a kind of life among them more fit for Angels then for men ; after hee had purged choller , and rebated pride , and euery way smoothed ouer their dispositions most handsomely ; then , I say , hee brings in this exhortation . For it stands to reason , that if we may not requite them with crosse dealing and euill turnes , that haue iniutied vs first , much more ought we to yeeld obedience to them that are beneficiall and kinde towards vs. But this string the Apostle touches not vpon as yet , till towards the latter end of his exhortation . In the meane while , he stands onely vpon such reasons and arguments as may seem to claime it for a dutie at our hands . And insinuating that he giues this precept to all , not onely to temporall men , but to Priests and to Monks , his very first words import as much , saying , Let euerie soule bee subiect to the higher powers , [ viz. ] * Though thou beest an APOSTLE , though an EVANGELIST , though a PROPHET , or whosoeuer thou beest . For this subiection b is not repugnant to relligion , [ whatsoeuer they talke . ] Neither saies hee barely , Let them obey ; but , let them be subiect . And the first iustification of this his precept , and that which worketh most vpon godly mindes , is because God hath so commanded it . For there is no power ( saith he ) but from God. What sayest thou Paul ? Is euery Ruler and Magistrate appointed of God ? I say not so ( quoth he , ) neither speake I now of particular Magistrates , but onely of the matter of gouernement in generall . For that there should be a Magistracy , and that some should beare rule , & others be subiect , and that all things should not be hurried at aduenture vp and downe , people raging like waues rolling in the broad Sea , to and fro ; this , I say , is a worke particularly proceeding from Gods high wisedome . And for this cause he said not , * For there is no Magistrate but from God ; but he speakes of the generall , and frames his speach thus , For there is no authoritie , or no power , but from God. And the Powers that are , are ordained of God. So , when the wiseman sayes , [ Prou. 19. ] That a wife is prepared for a man of the Lord : he meanes thus , that God appointed marriage in generall , and not that hee is the author of each particular copulation between man and woman . For we see many that marrie nothing auspiciously , many also that come together against the Lawes of marriage , and we must not lay the fault hereof vpon God. But that which Christ pronounced , Matth. 19. Hee that made them at first , created them male and female , and said ; for this shall a man leaue father and mother , and shall cleaue to his wife , this and no other did Salomon meane in that place of the Prouerbs . For , for so much as paritie induceth to strife and dissension oft-times , God therefore hath ordained many relations of gouernements & of subiections , as between the man & the wife , between the parent and the child , between the auncient and the nouice , betweene the seruant and the freeman , between the Magistrate and the subiect : and [ lastly also ] betweene the Scholler and the Master . And why shouldest thou wonder , that it is so in men , when thou maiest obserue the same in the creation of thine owne body ? For God hath not made all the members of it equall between themselues , but one meaner , another better ; and this member to gouerne , and that to be gouerned . Likewise , a man may discerne the same , in the very bruit beasts and vnreasonable creatures . As not onely in Bees first , but also in Cranes , and in flocks or heards of wilde cattell . Neither is the Sea a stranger to this good order , but euen there also diuers kinds of fishes are ranked and regimented vnder the conduct of some one fish , and so make their long voyages . For , want of gouernment brings inconuenience euery where , euery where confusion [ both at sea and land ] . The Apostle therefore hauing shewed of whome gouernement comes , inferres in this wise , VER . 2. Wherefore he that resisteth the power , resisteth the ordinance of God. Loe , how high he fetches this matter , and with what he feares them , and how he shewes that subiection is meere debt and dutie . For least the faithfull should say , Why Paul , thou debasest vs , and makest vs vile & contemptible ; doest thou subiect them to ciuill Magistrates , that are in the way to enioy the Kingdome of heauen , and eternall saluation ? [ least any one should reply thus , I say ] he shewes that in exhorting vs to be subiect to Magistrates , he subiects vs to God himselfe , and not to men onely . For he that is subiect to the Magistrates , obeyes God therein . Neuerthelesse the Apostle sayes not in plaine tearmes , that hee that obeyeth the Magistrate , obeyeth God in so doing , but he terrifies them with the danger of the contrarie practise couertly insinuated , and frames his argument much more artificially , saying , that he that obeyes not the Magistrate , confronts God , who hath ordained the Magistrate . And indeed this is his proiect euery where , to shew that we yeeld not obedience to Magistrates , as a matter of beneuolence , but of meere duty . For he knew that by this meanes , he should the rather tole both infidell Magistrates to embrace relligion , and Christians to yeeld their obedience to those Magistrates . e For there was much bruit then , and many rumours were spread , as if the Apostles had been guilty of sedition and treason , and as if all their doings , and all their sayings , had tended but to the subuersion of the Lawes , and weales-publike . When the Apostle therefore could shew them , that Christ their common Master , gaue all his followers this in charge [ that they should establish Magistracie , and encourage to subiection ] it was both the easier stopping of slanderous mouthes that f exclaimed against them , as traytors to the State , and himselfe might proceed in his course of preaching , and deliuering to his auditors , the other doctrines of Christianity , with so much the more confidence and liberty . Be not therfore ( saith he ) ashamed of this subiectiō [ whosoeuer thou art ] . For God hath appointed it , God hath ordained it ; and he is a sharpe reuenger of them that despise it . Neither will hee content himselfe to take a meane punishment , or [ small ] reuenge of thee , but an exceeding sore one ; neither shall any thing be of force to rescue thee striuing against it , but both thou shalt endure most grieuous penalties among men , and none shall once so much as take thy part ; and thou shalt be sure to haue God thy heauier enemie then whosoeuer else . All which things the Apostle implying , addes thus , and sayes , But they that resist , shall receive to themselues damnation . After this he shewes what benefit comes by preseruing obedience , as formerly he had shewed them the danger of resisting , and perswades them by discourse in this wise , VER . 3. For Magistrates are not a terrour too good works , but to the euill . For because he had terrified them , & gone deep with the knife , [ in launcing their dead flesh , ] he refreshes them againe like a discrete Surgeon , applying lenitiues , and he comforts them , saying , Why art thou afraid man ? how haue I scared thee ? will the Magistrate thinkest thou chide thee , if thou doe well ? Is he a fright to them that are vertuously minded ? Wherefore it followes , With thou not then be afraid of the Magistrate ? [ or of the power ? ] doe that which is good , and thou shalt haue praise of the same . See wee how finely he hath made them friends ? how he hath accorded the matter betweene the Magistrate and the Subiect ? Instead of a terrifier , he hath brought him about now , to be a praiser and a commender . How hath he disperst the former clowds , and rectified conceits that were amisse ? VER . 4. For hee is the Minister of God to thee for good . He is so farre from scaring thee , that he praises and commends thee ; he is so farre from opposing thee , that he aids thee , and forwards thee , in thy intended pursuits . Sith therfore thou hast a commender , and an assistant of him , why art thou not subiect to him ? For whereas thou art well inclined to vertue of thy selfe , he will speed thee in thy courses , minister much facilitie to thee , both punishing wicked men [ that might haue been thy hinderers : ] and againe , by honouring and rewarding the good , [ which are thy guides , or thy companions , ] and generally abetting thee towards the doing of that which thou desirest , and God would haue done . Wherefore also he calls him , * the Minister of God. Consider , I pray thee : * I out of the pulpit here aduise thee to continencie , to refraine from wicked lusts , and vnlawfull pleasures ; that which I aduise thee , he enioynes thee ; that which I say in my Sermons , he commands thee by his Lawes . I exhort thee to abandon couetousnesse , and not to invade thy neighbours goods , and he sits in iudgement only to sentence them that are faultie in these kinds . So as the Magistrate y is our worke-fellow , our helper and coadiutor , and is sent to vs z of God , for this very purpose . In both regards therefore , he is iustly to be reuerenced , both because sent of God , and sent ( as I said ) for this very purpose . But , if thou doe that which is euil , be afraid . It is not therefore the Magistrate , we seee , that occasions this feare , but our owne wickednesse , our owne naughtinesse . For he beareth not the sword in vaine . Seest thou what manner of person he deciphers the Magistrate , how hee armes him , and harnesses him , as it were a souldier , against wicked persons , making him terrible to the offenders ? For he is the Minister of God , a reuenger to execute wrath vpon him that doth euil . For least hearing of punishments , & execution of the Sword , thou shouldest fall backe againe , through faint heart , from thy lately receiued rule of obedience , he tells thee once againe , that the Magistrate does no more then God giues him charge , he fulfills Gods Law , he is the Minister of God to punish euill doers . c For what though he doth not know himselfe what he does ? Yet God hath appointed & set it down to be so . If therefore both in punishing and likewise in rewarding , the Magistrate is onely the Minister of God , patronizing vertue , banishing vice ( which is the thing for certaine that God would haue done ) why shouldst thou contest with him [ about subiection ] who both brings such a many blessings with him ( as hath beene lately rehearsed ) and strangely promotes thine owne desires ? d For there are diuers men , that beginning to practise vertue for dread of the Magistrate , afterward embraced it for the feare of God. For dull-witted folks are not so much mooued with things to come , as with matters present . In summe therefore , hee that can so frame and fashion the soules of men [ committed to his charge ] what by feare on the one side , what by rewards on the other , that they may bee the more capable of the heauenly nurture , he may iustly [ I trow ] be called the Minister of God. VER . 5. Wherefore you must needs be subiect , not onely for wrath , but also for conscience sake . What meane those words , Not onely for wrath ? Not only ( saith he ) because thou resistest God , vnlesse thou beest subiect , neither onely because thou drawest diuers plagues vpon thine owne head , both from God and men [ as assuredly thou doest , vnles thou obey ] but also because he is thy gracious benefactour in matters of greatest consequence , hauing prouided for thy peace , and to that ende established the ciuill gouernement . For infinite many blessings befall communities , by these manner of Magistracies . Take away them , and take away all ; neither city , nor countrey , nor house , nor court , nor nothing els will stand , but all will be ouerturned , all goe to wracke ; the mightier [ like fishes ] deuouring the weaker , and them that are vnable to resist . So that if there were no anger , or temporall plague , following the disobedient , neuertheles thou oughtest to be subiect , euen so ; I meane , least thou shouldest seeme rude and vngratefull to thy benefactour . [ The Apostle proceedes , ] VER . 6. For , for this cause ( quoth he ) you pay tribute also : for they are Gods ministers , attending continually vpon this very thing . The Apostle here , omitting the mention of diuerse other more particular benefits , which accrew to common-wealths , from their rulers and gouernours , as orderlinesse , peaceablenesse , and also those other seruices , which both of pike and penne , peace and warre , they continually attend for the good of the whole , demonstrates all by this one thing . For , saith he , thy selfe bearest him witnesse , that thou receiuest benefit by him , in so much as thou art content to pay him wages . See the wisedome and prudence of the Apostle . For whereas their taxes were so tedious , and intolerable to them , as they were startled with the very mention of them , he brings them both for an argument of his cause in hand , and a demonstration of their wisdome , ready to yeeld afore he perswade , [ viz. as conuinced by their own voluntarie practise . ] For why , quoth he , pay we tribute to the King , what is our scope , what our drift ? Doe wee not pay it him as the wages of his carefulnes ouer vs , watching for vs , & protecting vs [ with all his might ? ] Whereas certenly we would not haue paid thē this fee from the beginning , had we not knowne that we were gainers by their gouernment ouer vs , [ and receiued benefit . ] But therefore it seemed good to our auncestors long agoe , and enacted it was by commō consent , that we should supply the necessities of Kings with our purses , because neglecting their own matters , they mind the publike , and employ all their leasure and time , to such ende , as may be most for the preseruation of our particular estates . Hauing thus then argued from matter of commoditie , he brings backe his speach againe to the former head ( for this was the way , to worke most vpon the Christians , and their consciences ) and againe he shewes them , that this is also well pleasing to almighty God ; and in that he concludes his exhortation , saying , For they are the Ministers of God. And yet to note vnto vs their continuall trauell and pensiuenesse for our sakes , he addes moreouer , attending continually vpon this very thing . For this is their life , this their occupation , that thou [ euen thou ] maiest liue and die in peace . Wherefore in another Epistle , he not onely exhorteth vs to bee subiect to Magistrates , but also to pray for them . And yet there also he insinuates the common benefit that all men receiue by them , in that he concludes thus , that we may liue a quiet and a peaceable life . For they aduantage vs not a little towards the constant establishment of our estates , in so much as they prouide furniture for the common defence , repulse enemies , suppresse mutinies , and decide and determine ciuill controuersies . For neuer tell me , that this or that man abuses his place , but consider the beautie of this diuine ordinance , and thou shalt quickely espie the wonderfull wisedome of the prime ordainer of all these things . VER . 7. Feeld therefore to all men their dues , tribute to whome tribute is due ; custome to whom custome , feare to whom feare , honour to whom honour [ belongeth . ] 8. Owe nothing to any man , but to loue one another , &c. Still he insists vpon the same point , and bids vs not onely yeeld them money and coyne [ that haue the gouernment of vs ] but also honour and feare . But how hangs this together , that hauing said before , Wouldst thou not feare the power ? doe that which is good ; here he sayes , yeeld feare to whom feare belongeth ? I answer in one word ; He meanes the feare of displeasing , or the carefull and industrious feare , not that which ariseth out of a bad conscience , which in the former words he labours to preuent . Neither saith he 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , not giue yee , but yeeld yee ; not of curtesie , but of due ; and he expresses eftsoones , the very word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , debt . For thou doest not gratisie him in so doing ; for it is debt and due that thou doest . And if thou doest it not , thou shalt be censured for a cullian and a wretch . Neither thinke thou in thy pride , that it is any disparagement to thee , in regard of thy profession Christian , ( though it be of the strictest ) to rise vp in the presence of the ciuill Magistrate , or to put off thy cappe , when the officer comes by . For if S. Paul gaue these Lawes , when the Emperours were Pagans , how much more should we obserue them , now they be Christians ? And if thou saiest , that thou dispenfest greater matters , then hee , [ suppose the word and the Sacraments , or other Priestly functions ] know thou , that thy time is not yet come . Thou art a stranger and a pilgrime for the present . The time shall be , when thou shalt appeare more glorious then they all . In the meane while , thy life is hidde with Christ in God. When Christ shall appeare , then shalt thou also appeare with him in glorie . Seek not therefore thou thy recompence in this transitorie life . But although thou beest to appeare before the Magistrate perforce , and that with great horror , and dread , and appallment of all sides , yet think it no disparagement to thy high nobilitie . For God will haue it so , and it is his pleasure , that the Magistrate of his own constituting , should be also inuested with his proper rights and honours . Markest thou also another thing that ensues hereof ? When an honest man like thy selfe , and guiltie of no crime , shall appeare before the Magistrate , humbly , and submissiuely ; much more will the malefactor stand in awe of authoritie , and thou by this shalt winne credit and reputation to thy selfe . For they are not a subiect to contempt , that honour such as are to be honoured , but they that dishonour and contemne them rather . Yea the Magistrate [ though he be infidell ] b will admire thee so much the more , and will glorifie thy heauenly Master , whom thou seruest , &c. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . De Talibus Patrum Expositionibus , sanctarum Scripturarum , intellige Canonem illum . 19. Concil . 6. Constantinop . in Trullo , ( vt obiter discat & F. T. noster , Regum palatia ( eiusmodi enim Trullus ) locum esse non inopportunum Ecclesiastico vel Concilio de rebus grauissimis habendo : ) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , &c. diuinissimè . The Abstract of the Contents of the second Part. CHAP. 6. 1. FAith to bee reposed in God onely ; not in Saints or Creatures . Pag. 224. & 225. 2. S. Hierome peruerted to speake for faith in Saints ; Of credo in Ecclesiam . Pag. 226. & 227. 3. Honour and glorie to God and to the Saints , but in a most infinite disproportion , and therefore inferring no faith in them , no prayers to them . p. 227. 4. The place in Genesis , Invocetur nomen meum super pueros hosce , makes nothing lesse then for innocation of Saints departed . p. 227. & 228. 5. S. Chrysostomes Liturgie hath no praying to Saints in it . p. 228. 6. Popular practise is no common place of proofe . p. 229. 7. The Adioynder quoting the Councell of Gangra for one point in hand , viz. prayer to Saints , neither obtaineth that , and is foyled in diuers others by the said Councell . p. 229. & 230. 8. Prayer to God onely , is de luce or de lege ipsius naturae . p. 230. & 231. 9. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , or Currere , is not alway to runne with the mind to pray vnto , as the Adioynder would . p. 231. 10. Wee must runne to succour Magistrates , not onely against wrong , but though themselues doe the wrong to priuate persons , if they againe turne vpon them . p. 232. 11. One thing to pray to Saints , an other at the memories and Oratories of Saints . Which 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 will beare well enough in S. Chrysostomes text , according to the learned Bishops interpretation . p. 232. & 233. 12. Hauing relliques , and worshipping relliques , is not all one . p. 234. 13. Mamas his God , worshipped by the Christians , is not Mamas himselfe the godly Martyr . Impudent defence of a corrupt Translation against the originall greeke text of S. Basil , by the Adioynder . p. 235. 14. The like concerning Eusebius ; and the Cardinalls best excuse is , Non putaram : that the Translator deceiued him . p. 236. 15. Adoremus for adornemus , iustified by the Adioynder to be good , because the Italian prints so haue it . ibid. 16. To embrace relliques with faith , is not to worshippe them . p. 237. 17. To touch them ( 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ) is not to worship them . The Adioynders Pseudo-Criticks about this answered . p. 238. 239. & 240. 18. Wee may pray to God onely , and yet to Saints too : The Adioynders 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , or pretty iugling . p. 241. 19. Ephrems Tomes and Vossius his Grott . ibid. 20. Calling vpon Saints militant to pray for vs , is not all one with praying to the Saints triumphant . Priests and Prayers are for God onely , and not for any creature , by Tolets confession . p. 242. 21. Ephrems diuine testimonie against praying to Creatures . His humble confession of inherent sinnefulnes , and that mortall , remaining in himselfe after regeneration . p. 243. ( Note , that whereas the Adioynder auouches Ephrems works ( quoted by Card. Bellarm. ) to be sincere , which the reuerend Bishop notwithstanding excepts against as counterfeit ; the Card. in his Suruay of Ecclesiasticall writers , confesses of himselfe that hee neuer read Ephrem . It seemes therefore not so worthy ; else , why should hee contemne him ? And yet hee quotes him . May wee not aske him now , Quis ei laborat ? his owne words of the King ; but better applyed . ) 22. The Bishops two golden Caueats in this Question of Inuocation , as it is maintained by the Fathers ; One , that they bee brought to speake thereof as de re ad salutem necessaria , or else not to be regarded ( for such is the Papists imagination of it now ) The other to respect not so much practise as sanction . p. 244. & 245. 23. God heares one prayer of our own making , and for our selues , sooner then an hundreth of other intercessors for vs , &c. ex Chrysost . latè . p. 244. 24. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is nothing without 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . p. 245. 25. The Cardinalls quotation of Chrysostome , for Prayer to Saints , enlarged by the Adioynder ; which though all be granted , nothing is prooued . p. 246. 26. It is a cleere argument of the Deity , to be prayed vnto . p. 247. 27. S. Cyrills weighty verdict , against the worshipping of Creatures ; yea and of the LORD CHRIST himselfe , but that hee is IMMANVEL , very GOD. p. 248. & 249. 28. Maximus , prayeth not to Agnes , in his Panegyricke . p. 250. 29. And much lesse Nazianzene to the blessed Virgin ; nor yet exhorteth others . 250. & 251. CHAP. 7. 30. THe Fathers Apostrophes conuince not for the hearing os Soules departed ; Vsed by them , vsed by the holy Scripture , to creatures deuoyd both of sense and vnderstanding . p. 253. 31. No praying to those Saints , whose condition is vncertaine : Therefore Prayers conditionall are but Rhetoricall flourishes ; and not to be salued by Purgatory ( as the Adioynder would ) a fitten by a fancy . p. 254. 32. No daunger to say the Fathers played the Orators . p. 255. 33. And namely Nyssen ( of whom see Baronius for this matter ( Tom. 4. Anno. Dom. 369. Num. 65. citaritem Epist . obiurgator . Greg. Naz. ad ipsum . p. 257. 34. Against pictures and puppets , vnmeet for Churches . p. 256. & 257. S. Austens authority there to be enlarged ex l. 1. cap. 10. de consensu Euangel . Non mirum si à pingentibus fingentes decepti sunt . Hee speakes to the Papists . 35. Vbicunque fueris , poruerted by the Adioynder , restored to his true sense , and the Bishops collection vpon these words maintained . p. 258. 36. The Fathers were professed Rhetoricians . p. 259. 37. The Bishop answering S. Ambrose by S. Ambrose , vseth no derogation to the holy Father . Coniecture , vnder correction , of the same place . p. 259. & 260. 38. The Adioynders blasphemies boldly blending our workes with Christs , botching and peicing his most perfect righteousnes with our imperfect . p. 261. 39. S. Ambrose not for Merits , though hee plainely condemne Motions to Saints . p. 262. 40. God needing no relator , will haue no Mediatour , but onely Christ . ibid. 41. Prayer is sacrifice ; therefore Gods due alone . ibid. 42. S. Ambrose excluding all created Mediators , excludes not Christ , as the Adioynder feareth . p. 263. 43. The Saints not onely doe not , or may not , but cannot make request for vs to God , as Christ doth . And wherein standeth Christs intercession . p. 263. & 264. 44. Adoration and prayer , the highest offices that wee can performe to God himselfe , by S. Ambroses iudgement . p. 264. 45. The Adioynder hunted out of his eluish shifts , wherewith he would elude S. Ambroses place brought by the Bishop . p. 265. 46. Mistakes of memorie not sonticall . p. 266. 47. The Fathers with ioynt consent , define Prayer by our reference to God onely ; as likewise the Pater noster doth , our Sauiours deare depositum , which he bequeathed to his Church at the request of his Disciples , Luke 11. and is our safest platforme still to follow . p. 267 48. S. Ambrose might haue cause to omit the mention of Saints praying for vs , though he denie it not ; but not ours to Saints , if it did concerne vs. p. 267 49. Paul , Tertullian , Ambrose , against Prayer to Saints . p. 268 50. Theodosius praied to God onely . p. 269. ( Ruffinus his words of him are , lib. 2. cap. 33. Quam supplicationem pij principis , certi [ milites ] à Deo esse susceptam . And againe , Imperatoris illam precem quam Deo fuderat . And least we think he might pray to God at one time , & to the Saints at another , Ruffinus shewes what his custome was : Proiectis armis , ad SOLITA se vertit auxilia , & prostratus in conspectu Dei , Tu ( inquit ) Omnipotens Deus nosti , quia in nomine CHRISTI filij tui , &c. ) 51. Churches to Saints , and Sacrifices to Saints , in the Popish relligion , though they professe against it , and so condemne themselues with their owne mouthes for Idolaters . Gregorius de Valentia his friuolous excuses of this matter . p. 270 52. The Papists bring no Church-decree for their prayer to Saints , when they crake of the Church most . What the authoritie of the Church is , presuming beyond Scripture . p. 271. & 272 53. The pillar of truth . ibid. ( vpon which place S. Chrysost . saies ; that , Truth is the pillar of the Church . ) 54. Epiphanius compares heresie to a shrew ; To be curbed at first , not let haue her will. Most true in this matter about praying to Saints . The people once attempting it out of a semblance of zeale , the contagion multiplies to such an intolerable height , as the Papists themselues cannot chuse but rue it . p. 273 55. And yet Theodoret is not absolute for praying to Martyrs . ibid. largè . 56. Parsons scoffing , at some Martyrs of our Church , of meane occupations . But not Theodoret so , nor the holy Scripture . p. 275 57. Speeding vpon Supplication to Saints and Angells , no good argument of the lawfulnes of that practise . ibid. 58. The Bishop not to blame about searching this question both by Scripture and Reason , which the Adioynder himselfe doth by deceit ; ill experiments . p. 276 59. Prayer to Saints necessarie to saluation , and againe not necessarie ; The Adioynders giddines . p. 276 60. Neither relation of Angells , nor reuelation from God , such as the Adioynder conceiteth , are of force to make the Saints alway fit to be praied to . ibid. 61. The Scripture is the touch-stone in all controuersies . And it it an idle thing to prate of the Church in any such comparison . But specially for the triall of matters of this nature . p. 277. 278 62. Practise , Custome , Multitude , how to be valued against Scripture . p. 280. ( 1. King. 28. Elias to Baals Priests , Quia vos plures estis . Idem de se ipso , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , secundum 70. Sed & Esa . 41. 14. Ne time 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . Cui respondet Luc. 12. 32. ) 63. The Bishops exposition of S. Austen , is defended against the Adioynders iutricate Morosophies . p. 281 64. Euery King is SVPREAME HEAD in his Dominions , ( though the Adioynder gnash his teeth at it ) and that not only to English Protestants , but to French Papists . p. 282 65. Inuocation of Saints , if repelled from Sacrifice , repelled from Seruice , and so not to be vsed . p. 282 66. Slender aduantage of the buriall place after death . p. 283 67. More experiments of the Adioynders skill in Latine . ibid. 68. Whatsoeuer the burying place aduantage the dead , no consequence from thence of praying to Saints , out of S. Austens words . p. 284 69. No Popish Purgatorie . p. 284. 285. & 286 70. Lawfull to pray for things alreadie obtained . p. 286. ( Alphons . de Castro contra Haeres . V. Purgator . p. 895. Melius respondemus , non semper dubitari de illis quae potuntur , &c. in eandem sententiam , largè : where he graunts we may pray for deliuerance from Hell ; ( viz. from the iawes of the Lyon , and the Tartarean lake ) although we be perswaded that they are deliuered already , whome we pray for . ) 71. Prayer to Saints for the iust price of a newe cloake : The Adioynders needy proofes from the practise of a poore Cooke . p. 287. CHAP. 8. 72. THe Councell of Laodicea is against praying to Angells . Accurseth them that vse it . Brandeth them as for sakers of the L. Christ . And all this by Theodorets construction of it , in his Comm. vpon the Epistle to the Colossians . In which Colossians S. Paul first reprooued that vice , and it remained there till the time of the Councell of Laodicea , ( saith Theodoret ) which was held not farre from the Citie Colossi . p. 289. 290. 291. 73. S. Chrysostomes notable enforcing of the Apostles text for praying to God onely , and neither to Saints nor Angels , whome he excludes directly . p. 292 , 293 , 294 74. The Angel is Christ . ( So Bellarm. himselfe , de Mal. 3. lib. 5. c. 1. de Christo Mediatore . ) Other Angels reuerence godly men , so farre they are from receiuing worshippe of them . And this by Gregorie , and their owne writers testimonie . p. 295 75. The good offices and attendance that Angels performe to vs by Gods appointment , prooue not that wee may pray to them , but to God that sends them , and sets them on worke . p. 296 76. Of euery mans particular Angell ; ( Chrysost . apud Melissam lib. 2. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . facit malos mortales non habere custodem Angelum , nisi tenebrarū ; & quòd quidam angeli natales 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 à nobis , nosve ab illis . ) Molina's smart deuise that seuerall brotherhoods of Fryers , haue seuerall Angels forsooth to attend them , &c. ibid. 77. Haeresie a shrew , by Epiphanius description of her ; To be yoakt at first , and not let haue her will. She will haue the last word , whatsoeuer come of it . ibid. 78. Angels not our gouernours , specially in the new Testament . Themselues ministring spirits to S. Paul ; Therefore not our Masters . p. ead . & 297 79. The Adioynders wriglings to shift off the Canon of the Councell of Laodicea , but all in vaine . ibid. & 298 80. Worship of Angels more directly condemned by the Auncient Fathers , then of the Saints . The cause why . Yet that falling , this cannot stand , euen à maiori . ibid. 81. Theodoret violates not the Canon of Laodicea , nor his own doctrine deliuered in his Commentaries . Hee prayes not to Saints . And yet if he did , his rule were to bee aboue his practise . p. 298 82. The Adioynder cauills the Bishop for oppugning their praying to Saints , by Reasons ; yet himselfe brings most pitifull ones why we should doe so . p. 288. & 289 83. The Adioynder so impious , as , if the Saints cannot heare vs , to question how Christ himselfe can in his manhood . Esa . 59. 1. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ; The Adioynder saith , Yea. ibid. 84. Vnlike comparisons vsed by the Adioynder . p. 300 85. The Angels discerne not the secrets of hearts . ibid. 86. The Adioynders examples slow to prooue his intents . His authorities rather more ; ( quoting that for Athanasius , which quotes Athanasius , quaest . 23. And yet against himselfe : Cordium cognitor solus est Deus . Nec enim vel Angeli cordis abscondita videre possunt . quaest . 27. ad Antiochum . ) p. 301 87. Martyrs pray onely for the Church in generall . p. 302 88. S. Gregories speculum , and how the Saints see all things in God. p. 303 89. The Angels are not said to offer our prayers to God. ibid. & 304. 90. The Rhemists make one Angell to mediate for another , and one heauenly Saint for another , because else they cannot construe that in the Apocalyps , cap. 8. v. 3. after their Popish sense , There were giuen vnto him many incenses , that he should offer of the prayers of ALL Saints . p. 304 91. Substantiall seruice of God there must bee none besides his word , though decent ceremonies be left to discretion . Caetera disponam . The Adioynders instats to the contrary are answered . à pag. 305. ad 309 92. The inditers of holy writ had commaundement for their doing . p. 309. & 310. [ vide & Irenaeum , lib. 3. c. 1. Per Dei voluntatem Euangelium nobis in Scripturis tradiderunt , primò qui illud ipsum praeconiauerunt , &c. Sed & Aug. de consensu Euangelist . l. 2. c. extremo . Deus ipse scripsit quae Apostoli & Euangelistae scripserunt ; Quia scribenda illis tanquam SVIS MANIBVS imperauit . ] Certè autem manus si consultò agunt , nihil admodum agunt sine imperio animae ; Ergò . ) 93. Baptisme of young children hath sufficient grounds in Scripture . p. 310. & 311 94. How the Churches determination stoppes heretikes mouthes , though the Scriptures are silent . p. 311. & 312 95. The Canon of the Church of England , about the Crosse in Baptisme , no way guilty of the Adioynders malepert slaunder . p. 312. 313. 314. 96. A viuis ad Diuos non sequitur consequentia . And what the reason is . p. 315 97. Onely Christ is mediator as well of intercession , as of redemption . p. 316. & 317 98. The absurd blasphemy of the Iesuites , as if God the Father commended vs to Christ his sonne ; 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . p. 317 99. The booke of Daniel makes not for praying to Saints , or putting confidence in them . Origen against it . What is done for the Saints sake , is not done for their merits sake , nor to bee drawne to Inuocation . p. 318. 319. 320 100. Bigge words of the Adioynder , that the graunting of our prayers is to be ascribed to the authority that the Saints haue , not onely to their suite . Aptissima muscipula ad idololatriam . p. 320. 101. The Papists faile in their probations by the Fathers touching prayer to Saints , for all their iolly crakes . More good Latine of the Adioynders . p. 321 102. The Adioynders water will seeth no beefe . He should haue testimonies enough ( he saies ) for praying to Saints , out of the Fathers writings , but that in such and such ages very few Fathers wrote at all . p. 322 103. The signe of the Crosse hath antiquitie to commend it , besides authoritie to commaund it : Praying to Saints hath neither the one to be respected , nor the other to be obeyed . p. 323 104. Bishops may erre . ( Chrys . 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . Episcopi vexant ecclesiam , sicut Iobum vxor , & amici sui . ) The safest relying ( when all is done ) is vpon Scripture . Erunt stabula [ fidelium ] illic . à pag. 323. ad 326 105. Fathers scattered , misse of the validitie that they haue in Synods , ( Vide Bell. de auct . Concil . l. 2. c. 2. Episcopos SEORSVM existentes spiritus sanctus non docet omnem veritatem ; & ibid. in fine , Sine dubio SINGVLI Episcopi errare possunt , &c. Vide eundem , c. 6. Alia ratio est Pastorum in Concilio congregatorum , alia vero dispersorum , &c. ) p. 326 106. Malum ex sanctuario . Sal fatuum . The Church-men broach error . p. 327 107. The Scripture winnes the field , though the Fathers come in at triumph . And so meant S. Austen , when he charges vpon Iulian , with the authoritie of sixe Bishops , as sufficient to conuict him . Els we know sixe Bishops are nothing to weigh with the world of faithfull besides . Originall sinne plaine by Scripture , though the Adioynder stone-blind cannot see it . p. 328. & 329. 108. Once againe the Adioynders stale trumperies ; from Benefits , and Miracles , to conclude for Inuocation of Saints in blisse . But , Ter si resurgat , &c. p. 330 109. Two witnesses not to be heard against Christ or his word : nor yet 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . Peters priuie nippe in Galat. 2. as Remigius conceiues of it . But the Popes for certaine , or whosoeuer is the prime . ibid. 110. Corruption easily creepes into the Church . p. 331 111. Origens wauering about Saints praying for vs : & , Audivi quendam ità dicentem , &c. But peremptorie that we must not pray to Saints , or heauenly Angells , but to God onely through Iesus Christ . à pag. 332. ad 339. latè . 112. The Bishops testimonies against praying to Saints , which he produces out of the Fathers , are farre more pregnant then ab authoritate negativè , as the Adioynder slaunders him . p. 340. & 341. 113. The Bishops quotation of Athanasius most vpright , and most authenticall , though it please Mr. Adioynder , either of blindnes , or boldnes , to denie that there is any such text in the booke . By occasion of search , not onely that , but seuen more places of Athanasius are alleadged , all of them neere hand , and to the same effect , viz. that God onely is to be adored , and prayed vnto , not Creatures . p. 342. & 343 CHAP. 9. 114. THe Bishop changes wordes , without changing the question , giuing more light to it . He is not tied to tearmes , as the Adioynder and they that haue no great store of Latine beforehand . Earthly Monarchie disctaimed in shew , but challenged in substance by the Adioynder and his copes-mates . p. 345 115. Supererogation . The Bishop swarueth not from the state of the question . p. 346. 347. & 348 116. The Sacrament not at all , Christ euery where to be adored . p. 348. 349. & 350 117. Adoration of relliques . The Bishop constant to the question , though they cauill him for the cōtrarie . Yea , so constant , that they carpe him for his very constancie to the Kings Apologie , with the same breath . p. 350. & 351 118. S. Iohn was at a fault , worshipping the Angell . p. 351 119. The Adioynder turnes all , into courting and complement , betweene the Angell and S. Iohn . p. 352 120. The very Popish authors will not permit vs to worship Angells , since the Incarnation of Christ . So as the Adioynder pleading for it , shewes who is the Iew , and the digger vp of ceremonies , ( like Sara vnder the Oke : ) as he reniles the Bishop , but most senselesly , euery where . p. 353 121. No third kind of adoration . Therefore no relligious to creatures . ibid. & p. 354 122. Iosephs rodde how worshipped by Iacob . p. 355. 356. & 357. 123. The worshipping of the footestoole . Nabuchodonosors adoring of Daniel . Subiection to Infidells , is no disparagement to true vertue . p. 357. & 358 124. Awodden reason and a wicked yeelded by the Adioynder , why it is called relligious worship , viz. because done to relligious persons , ( But by that reason God himselfe should haue no part in it , who beares relligion to none . The Saints so let in , as God himselfe is shut out by our deuout Iesuits . ) p. 359. & 360 125. No adoration , and yet a ciuill adoration , makes no contradiction in the sense . ibid. 126. Gregorie de Valentia flatly denying relligious worship to Creatures . p. 360 127. The Bishop not to blame for expounding S. Hierome by S. Hierome . The Fathers more circumspect when they deale with aduersaries , then when they write at large . p. 361 128. More good Latine of the Adioynder . Of the figure Catachresis out of Quintilian . His Rhetorique before he be perfect in Grammar . ibid. & 362 129. Lingere pulverem is the same in effect with lambere lignum . They both signifie humiliation with reuerence . Saue that lingere pulverem may seeme to beseeme Christians better . The smaller errour therefore to put that for the other . S. Hieromes Epistle full of figuratiue speeches , which was the onely intent of the Reuerend Bishop in that place , and is iustified abundantly . p. 363. & 364 130. The Fathers against keeping relliques , much more against worshipping of them . p. 365 , 366 , 367 , 368 131. The wordes of Gregorie de Valentia more at large , condemning the relligious adoration of Creatures , not onely in degree , but in ipsa specie . The distinction of Dulia and Latria ouerthrowne , and that both by the Scriptures , and by S. Austen himselfe , ( though reputed the father of it ) as touching the Popish sense . à pag. 368. ad 372 132. Relligious adoration graunted and not graunted to Creatures by S. Austen : not fauouring the Papists , but because the word relligious is equiuocall . p. 369 133. S. Ambrose is not for worshipping the Crosse relligiously . In Kings it is worshipped ciuilly , as Kings themselues are : yet but per accidens onely . Els Helenaes practise is against it , recorded and explained by S. Ambrose . Howbeit the consideration of it may [ happily ] excite vs by way of remembrance to worship CHRISTRELLIGIOVSLY , as the Author of our redemption . p. 373 134. The crosse is not the crosse , but Christs suffering to S. Hierome , by his owne explication . p. 374 135. The Bishop answered all that was worth the answering , of the Cardinalls . The Adioynders stout arguing from Adam to Christ , for inherent righteousnes and hastie perfection . p. 375. ad 378. 136. The Adioynder tangled in his owne threads . Perfect remission of sinne , without perfect exhausting of corruptions . The places of Esay and other scriptures so to be vnderstood . p. 378. ad 381. 137. The Adioynder faultie of that which he finds fault with in the Bishop , though most faultlesse , as appeareth . Kings graunts are not to be interpreted against themselues . Constantine Episcopus Episcoporum to Eusebius . Neither King , nor Count , are precluded from Councells , by auncient practise . p. 381. 382. 383. 138. S. Austen hath but heare-say . Apparition prooues not inuocation . ( Yet Athanas . ad Antioch . ( the Adioynders owne author ) against apparition of soules departed , for great reasons . Quaest . 13. ) No trusting to Saints departed , by S. Austens owne rule , and that out of Scripture . They forget vs when they are gone hence ; as the Butler did Ioseph . His case a figure of ours . Saints merit that Angells may appeare for them , if we beleeue the Adioynder , and his grosse conceits . p. 383. & 384. 139. God appeares in a bush rather then any other plant , because not capable of caruing to make an image of , saith S. Isidore . p. 385. 140. Calvin clipped by the Adioynder most shamefully , euen there where he cries out against false dealing . ibid. 141. In the Bishops booke — placuisse nocet . And the best passage most spitefully depraued . p. 385. 142. The last iudgement not defeated , though merits were disclaimed . p. 386. & 387 143. Iustus iudex , is as much as clemens iudex , in the Scripture-phrase . p. 388. ( Certè Rom. 3. 25 , 26. prima iustificatio peccatoris ( in qua nullum meritum intercedit , fatentibus vel Pontificijs ) ter attribuitur iustitiae Dei. Et sic fortè Psal . 62. 12. And thou , O Lord , art mercifull : for thou rewardest euery man according to his worke . Whereas to reward according to works , comes rather of iustice then of mercie . But there iust for mercifull , here mercifull for iust . Alternant enim vsu Scripturae . Denique Genebrardus ipse in v. 6. Psal . 23. Sol iustitiae ( inquit ) id est , Benignitatis . ) 144. Epiphanius worthily alleadged by the Bishop . He remains peremptorie against praying to Saints : also against images ; and against the Excessiue honour of the Blessed Virgin. Shee is inferiour to Angells by Epiphanius account of her . Like Thecla , or like Iohn , and no better . Epiphanius calls for Scripture , to be guided in this question . He renounces errors , though they be neuer so old . à p. 389. ad 394. latè . 145. The Bishop is right in reporting the iudgement of S. Gregorie the great , about the fift generall Councell . p. 394. & 395. 146. The KINGS SVPREMACIE sufficiently prooued out of the 17. of Deuter by the Bishop . Fine foolish exceptions of the Adioynder against it , are repulsed . à p. 396. ad 403. 147. English fugitiues to blame for deprauing their countrey , which they should hardly discouer ( by the examples of Paul and Ioseph ) though it were blame-worthie . p. 403 148. The Cardinall called Dotard . And , iustly . ibid. 149. More iustly yet ; because made to beleeue wrong tales about English Puritanes , and then reports them to all the world . p. 404. & 405. ( For my part I haue kept the S. Maries Church in Cambridge as diligently as another aboue this 20. yeares , and haue obserued so few omitting to pray for the Kings Maiestie in his Title , as if I should say , one , I should say more then I remember . Yet the Vniuer sitie fashions the Church abroad ; and one of them is glasse to view the others face in . ) 150. Three Quaeres of the Adioynder answered . p. 306. 307. 308. 151. The Adioynders ciuilitie towards the Bishop . The Papists hold lying in Sermons , to be lawfull . p. 408. & 409. CHAP. 10. 152. THe Adioynders pageants . Poly-bombo-machides in campis Gurgustidonijs . p. 410 153. The Bishop graunting that Christ is to be worshipped in the Eucharist , is neuer a whit the neerer to the Popish prodigious conceits about their Masse . p 412. & 413 154. Suspensiue wading in the matter of the Sacrament . Bellarmine himselfe forbids all to be spoken . Nothing surer then that Transubstantiation is reiected of all hands . ibid. 155. To the Author of the Manna . Of S. Cyrill of Hierusalem . Nothing brought out of him , neither for Transubstantiation , nor yet for the reall presence . Hee condemnes Sarcophagy , or the conceit of flesh-eating in the Sacrament , in plaine tearmes . à pag. 414. ad 420 156. As much Transubstantiation in Baptisme , as in the Lords Supper , acknowledged by S. Leo. [ Adde thereunto S. Prosper in Epist . ad Demetriadem . His words are , Fit noua creatura de veteri , & in corpus Christi CONVERTITVR caro peccati . ] S. Cyrill will not haue his schollers to beleeue him , whatsoeuer he saies of a point , vnles the Scriptures affirme it . p. 416 157. The Sacrament to be worshipped , neither during the act , nor yet after celebration . And yet Christ , in it . Caluin sober and deliberate in that point . The Bishop dissents not from the rest of our Diuines , about the worshipping of Christ , and the rather in his Sacrament . à pag. 421. ad 425 158. Christ is to bee worshipt with the Sacrament , in a good sense ; The Sacrament not in any sense with Christ . The Adioynder throwes dirt , but it will not sticke . pag. 425. & 426. 159. About the Reward , and against the Merit of good works . The reuerend Bishop farre from praeuaricating . Their rage against him shewes his integrity and sincerity in the cause . They that hold of merit , hold of [ Iudas ] Iscariot , by S. Hieromes Etymologie of the name ; to whome the Scripture allots 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , but , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 prooues not merit . Iustice prooues not merit . Vasquez and others , how farre they goe in auouching merits , beyond that which the Adioynder pretends to bee the vltimum in the doctrine of Poperie . à pag. 426. ad 438 160. God is honoured in his seruants , if they be honoured intra praescriptum . Els not honoured , but dishonoured in them . The Adioynder is earnest for his kissing-deuotion ; and namely , towards Relliques ( where as kissing Baal is worshipping of Baal , in the language of the holy Ghost , 1. Reg. 19. 18. ) Origen against this fancie : Christs spouse must not be too franke in entertaining his mates , though we should allow him sodales , Cant. 1. 7. ( as the Iesuites doe socios , and socias , very promiscuously ) or participes , Psal . 45. 7. but , prae quibus incomparabiliter ipse vnctus est . p. 438 161. The Adioynder allowes the same relligious worship to God and to the Saint in all respects ; so the intention doe but make the oddes . ( By which reason we may also sacrifice , and build Temples to Saints ; two things which themselues reserue as proper to God at other times . ) p. 429 162. From the Bishops most aduised graunt , that Relliques may finde honour with vs , the Adioynder rashly reasons , that we may therefore yeeld them corporall reuerence , yea any corporall reuerence . p. 440 163. Processions . ibid. 164. Of Miracles , latè , a pag. 440. ad 447. ( The summe is ; 1. That neither are Miracles requisite now ( of which point see M. Sand. l. 1. c. 12. de claue Dauid , that SIGNA CESSARVNT ; alledging it for areasō , why the Pope cānot destroy with bare word of mouth ( but onely with sword ) as Peter did Ananias and Sapphira ( though fondly they fain that his authority is the same ) viz. because miracles are now no more stirring in the Church : ) 2. And that if they were needefull , wee haue our part in them ; Insomuch as certaine Iesuites in the time of Queen Elizab. beeing boarded at Sea by one of the Queenes shippes , ( set out for that purpose ) and they hauing letters of treason about them , they tare them into peices as small as they could , and flung them into the Sea ( the wind also then beeing very high ) purposely to abolish them . Which afterwards beeing recollected , and set in order againe ( by the industry of the Queenes agents ) disclosed their designes ; So as finally one of the principall of that confederacie , confessed to the Lords at his Examination , that it was not without miracle , non sine miraculo , &c. See Mr. Cambden hac dere ; Annal. rerum Anglic. & Hibernic . regnante Elizab. ) 165. S. Austens miracles done at the Tombs of Martyrs ( if they were any ) yet inferre no worshipping of them ; neither in the nature of the thing , nor in S. Austens iudgement . Also meliores Christiani did not then , as the many . p. 448 166. The Adioynders Poperio no way consequent to the Bishops principles . p. 449. & 450 167. Of Monkes , and Monasteries : from p. 450. to 459. ( To whome because the Adioynder challengeth such perfection , adde we to the rest , the testimonie of Gelasius , Aduersus * Andromachum Senatorem , & caeteros qui Lupercalia retinebant ( prout extat apud Binnium , Tom. 2. Concil . ) Age modò , quid vis dete ? Numquid , quià in Monasterio sacro non es , in plebe sacra non es ? ( The Plebs is sacra , to Gelasius ; Yet he addes ) An ignoras totam Ecclesiam SACERDOTVM vocitatam ? All the faithfull are Priests . ) 168. Euangelicall Counsells , Vowes , Monkish perfection , &c. à pag. 460. ad 469. 169. The name Catholike . What vertue is in names . The Adioynders obiections and authorities answered , à p. 470. ad 484. ( Oppone & Athenag . Apolog. ( pag. 6. ) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ; vbi scil . non respondet 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . Et ( pag. 5. ) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . Euseb . etiam ( vt citatur antè opera Iustini Martyris , ) citans ipse Iustinum , lib. contrà Marcionem ( qui iam quidem non extat ) Quòd à Marcione 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , invasere nomen & Christianorum . Sed quomodo ? 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . ( Vt scil . videas quatenus nominibus fidendum , cum Pontificijs nostris . ) 170. The English Clergie wants no lawfull Ordination . à pag. 484. ad 494. 171. The SVPREMACIE of KINGS , both in Temporall matters and Ecclesiasticall . Defence of our Acts of Parlament , as not exceeding the due proportion in their allotting of Supremacie ; of the reuerend Bishop also , as not defectiue therein ; à pag. 494. ad finem vsque . ( For CONCLVSION of this point , and in behalfe of both Nations , ( now blessedly VNITED ) whō the Adioynder here seuerally and surly taskes , for their iudgement about the Supremacie , hearken what Mr. Cambden in his Annales reports , ( a sufficient Author against them , though he be ours ) first for the Scotchmen anno 84. ( which is three yeares later , then that which the Adioynder here cauilleth them by ; that we may not doubt with the reuerend Bishop , but they waxed , and waxe daily yet , more and more conformable , &c. ) Regia authoritas hoc anno in omnes subditos tam Ecclesiasticos , quàm Laicos , in perpetuum confirmata : Regem sc . & consiliarios idoneos esse iudices in omnibus causis ; qui autem iudicium declinarent , laesae Maiestatis teneri , &c. And for the English ( whome he challenges as enlargers of the Supremacie too far , the Scotchmen too little in comparison of them ) Anno 59. ( p. 39. edit . Lond. in fol. ) Cum calumniantia ingenia Reginam sugillarent , quasi titulum SVPREMT CAPITIS ECCLESIAE ANGLICANAE , & authoritatē sacra in Ecclesia celebrandi arrogarit : illa edito scripto declarat , se nihil aliud arrogare , quàm quod ad Coronam Angliae iam olim iure spectavit : scilicet , se , sub Deo , summam & supremam gubernationem & potestatem in omnes regni Anglici ordines , siue illi sint Ecclesiastici , siue Laici , habere ; quòdque nulla extranea potestas , vllam in eos iurisdictionem , vel authoritatē , habeat , aut habere debeat . And this is , either that which Socrates saith , Praefat. lib. 5. histor . 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , ( adeòque Synodi , atque eae vel maximae ) or which , Concil . 6. Gen. Constantinop . Alloc . ad Iustin . Imper. Quòd POST SVPERNVM MOMENTVM , ( as Hervetus translates it ) [ summum ] humani generis suscepisset gubernaculum . Sed manum de tabula . Πάντοτε δόξα Θεῷ . Notes, typically marginal, from the original text Notes for div A19150-e2510 1. King. 2. Hoc etiam turpiùs a●… ctatur Respub . quòd ne ab co quidè vexatur , vt tanquam fortis in pugna vir , acceptis à forti aduersario vulneribus , &c. Lament . 5. 〈◊〉 . * Iam. 2. 1. Baron . tom . 1. ad annum 34. num . 79. Et tamen alibi , multus est in co , vt aureas bracteas quasdā , siue bullas , & Iacobo ipsi , & Apostolis ommibus ; ad colla circundet . Ex Eu●●b . Clem Epiph. & alijs . Satin ' vt sibi conste●● Eodem Tom num . : 93. vbi suprà . v. 8. De verb. Dei. l. 2. c. 15. 1. Tim. 5. 19. Citatur à Dadraeo . a Etenim si vnū hominem deterrimū poeta praestanti aliquis ingenio fictis conquisitisque vicijs deformatū vellet inducere , &c. de Arusp . Resp . b Iohannes 21. apud Papyr . Masson . Contra Celsum in initio . 2. King. 18. Pag. 1. And in the very front and title-page of his booke , Pl●… & authorities alledged as well by him , as by the Cardinall , &c. * Pag. 39. The Cardinall himselfe , hath taken as much into his Controuersies , out of other mens writings , as any : and yet is wiser then to appeale them , or to make words of thē . But no doubt the Adioynder would haue vs thinke that good wits iumpt , the Cardinall , and his , about the inuention of the same argument . Yet F. Parsons bought skarlet in hope to be a Cardinall , as the Seculars write of him . And this man would bee knowne to succeede F. Parsons . 1 2 Adioynd . cap. 2. toto . Act 3. Concil . Calched . 2. Tim. 2. 23. Peter Mathieu . in the life of Henrie 4. Reg. Gall. Hudaem . Parall . p. 151. pag. 404. Adioynd . Vbi suprà . The Adioynders prescript of Receipts to the Bishop . Cruditando ortygometram , vsque ad nauscam . Tertull. Vide cap. 10. numb . 30. item Numb . 47. & 43. maxin 〈◊〉 per totum libium . 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . inter Sau●… . Also Ioh. Viguerius ( a notable Papist ) rehearses them for S. Ambroses . Vide Tabul . a Cap. 9. num . 30. p. 384. Adioynd . Matth. 6. b Adioyn . p 418. & similia 419. id est , cap. 9. num . 71. 72. 73. &c. Morel . edit Paris . 1564. sed & aliae editiones Pontificiae non dissentiunt , praeter Pamel . * Vide Cypr. l. 1. Ep. 3. & Ep. 4. Nisi pancis desperatis & perditis , minor videtur esse authoritas Episco porum Africae [ quàm Romae . ] Item ad Pomp. contra Epist . Stephani . Stephanus ( saith he ) maintaines the cause of heretiques against the Church of God. Haeresin contrà Ecclesiam vindicat &c. Act. 27. 11. Can. 35. in summâ Concil . per Garanzam Mirand . Apud Diog. La●●● . lib. 7. a Iuxta saniorem sententiam , subijcimus vota nostra summo ecclesi . e pastori , vt soluat votis quae quis vel absolutissimè praestitit , &c. Medina de cont . 〈◊〉 . hom . l. 4. cont . 6. c. 2. pag. ( Edit . Venet. ) 310. B. b Chap. 14. v. 16. De Incannat . verbi . Idem habet & Dionys . Epist . ad Demophilum . Sed Athan. incurrit & in Pauli verba ( quanquam de Regibus cum maximè loquens ) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 &c. Tit. 3. Certè , si alij : illis , quidni ipsi sibi hanc operam locent ? Adioynd . cap. 3. & iterū cap. 10. a Haeresis est mala mulier . b Totum hoc ●●●lieris opinio est , &c. De adorantibus Virg. * In Epist . ad Ludovicum Comitem Imperij . Quidam inter MYLIERCVLAS & vulgum suum mussitant , quòd non oporteat nos subijci superioribus potestatibus , &c. * Accipiam intercessionē sanctorum , &c. c. 1. p. 10. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . Xen. Cyropaed . Exod. 7. 11. 11. Exod. c. 16. v. 41. &c. 17. Notes for div A19150-e7670 The Iesuites would make a generall Councell the Popes instrument . Yet at an other time , the Pope was as much instrument to the Italian Bishops , and to the Synode of Rome ; for so much as they wrote by Iulius Bishop of Rome , saith Ath●… . Apol 2. Per Iulium scripsere . Pamelius his owne Annotation there is , Est insignis hic locut contra cos qui ECCLESIAM contemnunt . De claue Dauid . l. 3. c. 1. Neither had S. Cyprian , and S. Austen , ( that obserue this mysterie most ) any such ONE . And how farre are they from it ( for all their crying out vpon vs ) that would turne their one into twelue ? Though S. Austen say , Multi 〈◊〉 , & vn● dicitur , ( wherein hee supposes it belonged to all , or else he saies nothing ) Pasce o●es 〈◊〉 . Therefore no Monarchy in those words . But the Iesuits calling for Twelue to sway the Popedome , doe they not proclaime that it was intended to be the Cōmission of all Twelue , though for vnitie sake it was confined to ONE ? The place of S. Austen is , De Pastor . c. 13. Item Aristot . pol. 1. Musae surcillis praecipitem cijci 〈◊〉 . Cat. Loco quidem ibi citato , de Constantio satis clarè . Sed longè clarius de Constante , circa Athanasium , cum Iulij literae nibil proficerent● Verba ciusdem Sozom. Quem vide l. 3. c. 10. Their owne Genebrard in Psal . 67. r. 37. expounding that prophecie there of the vocation of the Gentiles , and what degree of honour they shall hold vnder Christ , saies plainly , that the holy Ghost Aequat Orientales Occidentalsbus , preferres neither before the other . Which is a most true word ; saue onely as inward worth shall commend thē to God. Notes for div A19150-e18330 a Lib. 10. hist . apud Gelasium Cyzicenu● , de a●… Concil . Nicaen . l. 2. c. 1. b 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . 5. c Leo epist . 78. ad Le●● . Aug. O●ta●●um ●st vt in ●●nnem gloria 〈◊〉 vestrū c●t●ndatur imp●r●um , qui SVPRA CVRAM RE●●M TEMPORALIVM Religiolae prouiden●… famulatun divinis & aeternis dispositionibus impe●●itis Also long after his time , Eulb . Carn . Epist . 13. vt vetus m. s. habet : Henticus Imper & Rob. Rex Franciae super Cha●um ●luv ū convenerunt de statu Ecclesiae amicabiliter tractaturi . d Georg. Alexandrin . vitae Chrysost . in extremo . e 2. Philippie . f Ne veniat anima mea in consilium co●ū qui dicunt vel imperio pacem & libertatem ecclesiarum , vel ecclesijs prosperitatem & exaltationem Imperij nocituram . Non enim vtriusque institutor Deus in destructionem ea connexuit , sed in aedificationem . Bernard . ad Conradum Regem Romanor . Epist . 24● . g There f●re ( though he fall to other matter ) yee he calls his 9. and 10. Chap. the Conclusion of the Adioynder , as if he had spent his spight with the former . See cap. 9. in Titulo . h Feeders of thēselues , is put in the euill sense , by S. Iude v. 12. taking many things from S. Peter himselfe . 2. Pet. 2. i Theodor. hist . 5. 1● . k Lib. de claue David . l Adioynd . c. 2. n. 19 & sequen . Item c. 5. n. 6. Thom. Aquin. 2. 2. q. 12. art . 2. Valentian , in illum locum , & alij . Stow annal . Angl. ann . 10. Hen. 4. p. 546. Ecclesia Carthag . 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 anne 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Ep. 52. aliàs 55. ad Cor. & ad Steph. l. 2. Ep. 1. In Ecclesiae administratione vnusquisque praepositus liberum habet voluntatis suae arbitrium . Quae verba repetit & in Ep. ad Magnum . l. 4. Ep. 7. Nemini praescribamus quò minus statuat quod putat vnusquisque Praepositus , &c. De Pastor , c. 13. Ioh. 13. 35. Gen. 45. 24. Quasi alter alteri . Ioh. 17. 22. Ne illi tanquam alteri . 1. Cor. 10. Gal. 2. Cypr● de bono Patient . Inuenim●● insto● omnes qui figuram Christi imagine prae●unte portabant . Or●… 〈◊〉 , loci , 〈◊〉 ▪ p. 15 De notis eccl . lib. 4. c. 4. See Adioynd . num . 18. c. 3. De consid l. 2 Lib. 2. hist . cap. 1. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . 〈◊〉 . a 1. Feede my sheep , not , feed thy sheep . Seek my glory in [ feeding ] them , not thine owne glory ; my soueraig●●●e not thine ; yea my aduantage , not thine owne gaines . b 1. Be not of their company that belong to the dangerous times : Alluding no doubt to that of 2. Tim. 3. where it is said , men shal be couetous , and proud , and lo●e●● of pleasures , more thē●…ers of God. 1. But when it was said vnto him , To thee will I giue the keyes of the kingdome of heauē , & whatsoeuer thou shalt bind vpon earth , shall be bound also in heauē , & whatsoeuer thou shalt loose vpō earth , shall be loosed also in heauen , he represented the Vniuersall Church . Euseb . Emes . in Hom. de Iohan. Euang. Quod Petro dicitur , omnibus dicitur , Sequere ●nc . Bell , l. 1. de Pontif . Rom. c. 12. a In liew of all the Saints belonging to the bodie of Christ . b Neither Peter alone , nor Iohn alone , but the whole Church . c Beda in Concion , hyemal . in 16. Matth. Potestas ligandi & soluendi [ per claues ] quamvis soli Petro videatur à Domino data , absque vllá tamen dubietate noscendum est , quia & caeteris Apostolis datur , ipso teste , &c. Et , Nunc etiam in Episcopis & Presbyteris omni Ecclesie essicium idem committitur . Et , Omni igitur electorum ecclesie ligandi ac soluendi datur áuctoritas , iuxta modum culparum vel poenitentiae . Et paulò antè , Meritò tamen prae caeteris ei qiu maiori deuotione confessus erat Christum , vt constaret omnibus , quiae absque eà confessione , & fide , regnum coelorum nullus posset intrare . An other manner of reason why the keyes are giuen to Peter , then the Iesuites fancie . Oculos quasi ipsam 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . Et , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 sunt 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . Chrvs . in 4. ad Col. Ethico fe●è extremo . Iob 42. hist . 3. 1. a 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . Bernard . epist . 25● . Petrus & Paulus , alter amisso , alter submisso in cruce canite &c. b 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . Hegesip . etiam lib. 3. c. 2. Indulgebat persecutor non invitus incrementa poenarum . Iob 29. 24. Iob 31. 31. Euseb . vbi su prà . Adioynd . c. 1. num . 4. 1. Cor. 12. 26. Act 9. 4. Coloss . 1. De Pont. Rom. l. 1. c. 28. The Adioyndet also cap. 〈◊〉 . Contr. Barcl . De Clem. lib. 1. cap. 25. Matth. 26. 52. a Rom. 13. 2. Accipient iudiciun ( 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ) ●cilicet qu●a accipiunt gladium non sibi commissum . b lib. de Patient . Tom. 5. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . In Epist . ad Desyder . Epist . 50 & lib. 1. contr . Gaudent . c. 39. * Post subuersa idola , post flagellatum diabolum &c. Cuius simile habes apud S. Cypr. contra Demetrian . Torquentur spiritualibus flagris &c. Itē , de Idolot . van . Item , de bono Patient . Zabulus flagellatur cum Angelis suis . Vide Bedam , vt suptà . * S. Hierome was of another minde , for the puritie of Marriage ; ( though reputed somewhat partiall ) then either these hereticks , or the Papists . Com. in Tit. 2. Credant coniugati se opera libirorum perpetrare ante oculos Dei & Angelorum . Therefore not reprehensible . S. Chrysostome saies , that yong men go crowned to their marriage , in the places of Greece , where he liued , to shew they haue triumphed ouer the lusts of youth , and are now past daunger of temptation . Com. in 1. Tim. 3. Serm. 9. in Ethico . And againe , that our Saniour turned water into wine , at a marriage , to shew the power and the effect of marriage , which is to restrain the frailties of nature , as wine hath a binding quality ouer water , Ipso fine Com. in Epist . ad Coloss . Origen in 17. Gen. hom . 3 saies that Abraham and his wife deserued to be called Pretbyteri , and were so indeede , that is to say Priests : for he construes himselfe to meane , not age , but ripenesse of vnderstanding . See you to what dignitie married women may come , not onely men ? See lastly S. Ausien cont . Faust . l. 5. c. 9. where he iustifies holy marriage against Faustus and his inpure litter , by those places of the Apostle , where in he giues rules to families ; as husbands , wiues , fathers , children , masters , seruants , as carefully as Ignatius , or Frances , euer did to their Fraternities . Which is a signe of the reuerent estimation that he had of them . Quid dicemus de illis , quorum domoi tam solerti & diligenti curá componit Apostolus ? &c. a They compell to burn : whō they forbid to marrie , saith S. Austen , implying , continence is not so cheape or vulgar as the Papists giue out . For then , what compulsion to burne , I pray you , though marriage were forbidden ? 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ▪ 〈◊〉 . 〈◊〉 . in ad Tim. Volo quia volunt . Also Chrysost . hom . 〈◊〉 . in 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ( not sparing belike the Vow and all ) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 : that is , Runne as much as thou please ( the way of continence ) but when thou art aweary , and canst go no farther , take the remedy of marriage to thee . Whereto he addes the reason , Because the higher pitch , the greater fall . a Lib. 1. Ep. 11. ad Pompon . S. Cyprians words are these : Si se ex fide Christo dicauerunt , pudirè & castè perseverent : si perseverare nolunt , vel non possunt , melius est vt nubant , &c. And Epiphanius himselfe may seeme to say as much , where he is thought to say the contrarie : viz haeresi 61. qua Apostolicorum est . Melius est lapsum à cursu , palàm sibi vxorem sumere secundum legē , &c. It is better for him that is stūbled in his course [ of intended continence ] to marry a wife in the sight of the world according to law , then &c. As for that , Peccatum est converti ad nuptias post virginitatem decretam : First , a light name , Peccatum , not Sacrilegium . Secondly , Peccatum , id est , non sine peccato , by reason of the rash vow . And Epiphanius allowes soone after , that melius est vnum peccatum habere quim plurae , which concernes this case very neerly . Besides that those Councells which cōdemne this inconstancie , punish it but lightly , and command not the marriage to be dissolued , as in other cases . See Concil . Neocaesar . Can. 2. Matrimonio soluto admittatur ad p●nitentiam . Not so here . b de S. Virg. cap. 34. c ad Demetr . d Concil . Calched . Can. 16. censures them very gently , though it reprooue them . The like doth Con. Aneyr. Can. 19. And E●a● ▪ Sa , verb. Ornatus , makes it veniall for a Nun to decke & beutifie her selfe , though it be with danger of pleasing a yong mans fancie . Yet inducens in periculum contrahendi mortalis mortale est , saith the same Sa , verb. Curiositas Therefore Nuns marriages are not so damnable . How much lesse then are others ▪ sith these are counted among the most dangerous . e Baron . in Martyrolog . Rom. Martij 7. Seconda 〈◊〉 . qu. 88. art . 10. Cap. 1. num . 7. Adioynd . The fellonious Edition of S. Ambrose at Lyons . Hieron . ad Pammach . de obitu Paulin. Primus erat , sed inter primos . So , Decem-primi apud Ci●er . And , Multiori●● ( in Euang . ) multi● postremi . Ioh. 11. Serm. In Cath. Petri. & cap. 14. De praescrip . Heb. 7. 24. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . Bellarm. calls it blasphemie , to say the holy Ghost is Christs vicarius . a Tractatu de ordin . Epil . & investituta Laic . Edit . lat . Sirm. Iesuita , p 418. Sed & Aquinas co●●n Heb. 13. Dicit a●tē Christum Pastorem magnum , quod omnes alq sunt ●…arij eius , &c. Vnde 1. Pet. 5. PRINCIPS PACTORVM vocatur . M●…n Iob. 21. Qui disputat cui agnos potius quàm ones Christus vocet suos [ quasi distinguens inter haec duo ] videat ne doctis hominibus risum praebeat . Nihil discriminis est in re , sed in voce tantùm . * Exercit. 16. c. 133. ad Annal. Baron . August . contr . Faust . l. 19. c. 11. Caesareum caput — quod caput orbis erat . Ovid. de Trist . 2 Adioynd . c. 1. num . 12. &c. * In retortió to the Cardinalls words , Vbi nemo negare potest S. Petrum factū esse pastorem omnium fi lolium , & ipsorum etiam . Apostolorum , nisi 〈◊〉 has vtros●●…sse 〈◊〉 Christi . 〈◊〉 The Archbishop of Roane was of another minde for Bishops castles . Chron. Angl nostrae sub Rege Stephano . Exod. 32. 21. v. 18. Opinio haec est Rabbi Moysis , & laudatur à Lyrano in locum . In 8. Num. quaest . 21. a Hector Pintus comment . in cap. 3. Nalium , ad illa verba , Do●●it auerunt pastores tui Rex Assur ; exponit pastores per confiliarios , duces , iudices , & omnes qui temp . gubernandam sui cipiunt . Citansque aliqunt loca in eam sententiam , vt Esa . 63. Esa . 44. Ier 10. item Ier. 22. concludit , inquiens , Vides , principes , gubernatores , & consiliarios appellari PASTORES Videant hi. Hegesip . de ex●id . Hieros . l. 2. c. 5. Pilatus Christum nihil aliud docentem , nisi quo primum deo , deinde Imperatoribus , populos faceret obedientes , cruci suffixit . * Epist . 50. a His wordes are : For in the booke of Kings we read , what pains godly Iosias tooke to bring the kingdome giuen him of God , to the true worship of God , &c. Not that we compare our selues with his holines , but that WE SHOVLD ALVVAIES IMITATE SVCH EXAMPLES OF THE GODLY . Alwaies , saies he , as if the force neuer expired . b Vide Acta Concilij . Sozom. l. 7. c. 8. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 : that is , God by aracle instructing the King. Of Theodosius choosing Nectarius to be Archbishop of Constantinople . Prov. 30. 31. d S Maximus Hom , in Litanijs , & de Ieiun . Ninivit . Mira res , dum se Regem hominum non meminit , incipit Rex es 〈◊〉 Iusticiae . Et , Siue ferro , siue iusticiâ , pro ciuium salute primus invigilat . Et , Non perdidit imperium , sed mutauit . Obtinet nunc coelestium disciplinarū principatum . e Parallel . part . 4. de Paradoxis . Chalcedon . in Actis . Ibid. in Actis . Herods panick feare , Non eripit mortalia , qui regna dat coelestia . Sedul . a Lib. de pastor . c. 10. b Lib. 1. epist . 4. S. Chrysost . Homil. de Pseudoproph . Ne mirere etsi Pastores transcāt in lupos . Item Serm. apud Georg. Alexan. in vitâ Chrysost . Crucifigit Caiphas , & cōfitetur Latro. Denique , Occidêre Sacerdotes , adorauere Magi. See his Epistles , for it was his owne case . He professes that the Bishops were his heauiest enemies in the cause of God and his truth . ●…ues timore 〈◊〉 . So Psal . 2. Dabotibi gentes hare ditatem tuam , & possessionem tuim terminos terrae , is ioyned with , Et nunc reges intelligite &c. as the ende with the meanes . Deut. 17. Iste locus , vel à simili vel à maiori , debet etiam intelligi de PP . Christianis . * Vrbanus 7. may seeme to haue been of another mind , whose chiefe care , after he came to be Pope , was to prouide victualls good store : & his ground was , because he was called to Pas●e o●●s meas , as he said , Cicarella in vitâ Vib. 7. Head of the Church is said in a threefold respect . 1 2 3 Theodor. de eurand . Graec. affect . Chemnic . in locis com . part 2. de Paupert . Espenc in c. 3. Ep. ad Titum opponit eum impio . Quasi reputet pium . Et , Diuinitùs seruatum discimus . Nisi referat hoc ad salutem modò corporis . * Multo antequā nascereris . Hieron . Annis 210. ante impletam prophetiam . Espenc . Prov. 14. 4. Tom. 12. in Ep. Pauli . p. 251. De iustā Ecclesiae author . 3. Num 20. Adioynd . a Adioyn . Num. 21. If the Pope's primacie may be called a temporall primacie for this cause , &c. then may the Bishop or Pastor be iustly called a corporall B shop , and a pecuniarie Pastor , because he doth punish men sometimes in his spirituall court , not only in their bodies , but also in their purses , &c. I●l Front. lib. 4. stratagem . c. 7. Cap. 3. huius . Comm. in c 1. ad Philip. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . Ethico . Num. 21. * Epist . ad Cardinal . Bellarm. a Covar . part . 2. p. 504. Navar. & alibi , & citat . ibid . à Covar . Binsfield . Alan . De vinc . Anathem . Comment . in Luc 22. Phil. 〈◊〉 . Venantius F●…natus de Niceta Treuerensi , a pud Baron . tom 7. anno 529 XVII . Col. 181. Orat. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , &c. Lib 6. Ep. 1. Hilat. can . 30. in Matth. Petrus pro fidei suae calore , — Quasi Christs dicta efficienda non essent . So ●●oate that he thought Christ might be in the wrong , himselfe in the right . Petrus alios praevenicbat . Petrus feruens ardore . Isidorus Pelusiota Ep. 103. l. 1. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . Idem habent Cirillus , duo Theodori , & Hera● leota , Mopsuestenus , Leontius , Theophylactus , Maximus , August . Beda , Nic phoru●… Ambrosius . So as Maldonat . in Ioh. 21. Vi● author vllus est qui non dicat , &c. Iob. 36. 7. Prou. 27. 24. Edit . Concil . ●…ian p. 251. * De auctor . Concil . l. 2. c. 17 V●des Dominum reseruare oeconomum , suo sol ●…dicio : ex Luc. 12. Idem etiam docet vsu , omnium ●a●…rum . Et , Serut hoc nec sol● possunt , nec congregati . S●il . punire vel expell●re ●…conomum . Id enim ad solum Dominum 〈◊〉 ●tus familiae pertinet . Esa 49. Kirsten . Not. Matth. 16. Anton. Fussul . quoted by F. T. ●p . 1. ad Sympt . Bono vnitatis . A foolish tricke that the Papists haue got , to raise English merit out of the Latin mereo and mereos , which sounds to a far other sense with the holy Fathers , God knowes . Epist . Basil gr . Froben . p 304. Est alijs cp . 5● . Act. 24 5. Hom. in Natal . Apost . Petri , & Pauli . The Word and Keyes , two de ▪ positums of like nature . * 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 And , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . And that the reasō why Christ so ●…bd Peter in his curiosities concerning Iohn , Hic autē quid , was because 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , beeing ioynt-gouernours of the world , they were to be dispersed henceforth , & old amities to cease . For Iohn & Peter had loued together more thē ordinary . But most pregnātlv the same Chry. Hom 2. in c. 1. ad Tit. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , &c The Apostles diuiding the whole world between themselues , euen as if it had beene but one house , so discharged euery thing , and tooke care for euery thing , one taking this part , another that part to looke vnto . b Tom. 4. edit . D. Sav. p. 501. * Euen so is that to be taken which Bellar. notes out of Chrysoft in Acta ( see pag. 15. 〈◊〉 ) that the Christians are not to be ashamed , if they be miscalled after the name of some eminent Pastor or Prelate of the Church . For he meanes not the Pope there , rather then himselfe . For first , why should Constantinople , or Antioch either , gratifie Rome so much : considering the emulations . 2. Though we should grant Chrysoft to speake by prophesie . 3. But besides it appeares , that Chrysostomes followers were called Iohann●… , of his name . Zonar . & alij . 4. And yet we call not the Papists from the name of this or that Pope among them , as Chrysoft . meaning is , but from a generall one to all that occupie the Sca. 5. Which til the Pope ingrossed it , was yet more generall . Exercit. ad Baron . pag. 726. De consid ad Eugen. l 4. c 2. Voss . edit . Esa . 51. 15. Chrysost in Ioh 21. a question . 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 : that is , Peter askes for 〈◊〉 now , as afore Iohn askt at Peters●etting ●etting on . So it is no great preroga●i●● , but onely one for another . Papyr . Mass . Ibid ex Amm. Marcel . Prou. 17. 17. Plato , Menexeno . Hom. 83. in Matth. iterumque comm . in Acta . Cicer. pro Muraenâ . Neminem vestrum fugit , cū multi pares dignitate fiant , vnus autem primū solut possit obtinere , non eundem , & ● . Proptereit quod renunciatio gradus habeat , dignitas autem sit per●●pè ead●… omnium . Vid ▪ 〈◊〉 ▪ Ge●…d G●sner . Heg●… . &c. * In the same booke of the Code , Lege Cunctos , Th odosius , Gratianus , and Valentinian , ( Edicto ad Constantinopol . C●… ) wish all men to followe the same faith , quam sequi hodie claret Damasum , Pontificem Romanum , & Petrum Alexandria Episcopum : that is , which Damasus Bishop of Rome , and Peter of Alexandria embracet , the which Peter he calls more ouer , Virum Apostolica sanctitatis , an an of Apostolike holinesse : ascribing to Damasus neither Apostolicke , nor any other title . But I note it for this ; If the Popes authoritie be not sufficient for our direction in matters of faith , except the Bishop of Alexandria his name be ioyned with him for illustration sake , what infallibilitie hath the one aboue the other ? * Carm. de ingratis . Anne alium in finèm posset procedere sanctū Concilium , cui dux Aurelius , ingentumque , Augustinus erat , quem Christi gratia corn● Vberiore rigans , nostro lumen uedit aeuo Accensum vero de lumine ? S. Austen was light of verie light in S. Prospers eye . a Serm. 4. in Hoseam . b Euagr. l. 4. c. 38. & alij complures . Ecclesia praesidens in regione Romanorum . Ignat. Epist . which the Papists catch at : this per Europa●● . * Et l. 1. cp . 3. quae est ad 〈◊〉 sub nomine Paulae & E●… , Quantò Iudea caeteris Prouincijs , tantò hae : V●●S cunctà s●bl●…or est Iudea . Et cum totius prouinciae gloria metropoli vindi catur , quicq ud in membus ●●udis est , omne refertur ad caput . Making by that meanes H●…salem the prime seat , and as it were metropolis of the world . Passus est sub Pontio Pilato . This it a maine cause of Pilates coming into the Creede . And the Papists doctrine opposing Magistracie , opposes so the Creed , & gathers fast vpon heresie . a Decret . part . 2. caus . 23. qu. 1. * 1. The countermine of Powers temporall op pugning the truth , is to the godly couragious a glorious triall , to the faint of courage a dangerous assault . But the same powers , whē they stand for the auouching of truth , to the honest-hearted that are in errour , they are profitable aduertisers : but to the foolish and besotted , bootlesse ●●ourges . Yet still there is no power but of GOD. In vit● Sylver . Such Popes , no maruell if S. Cyprian say , the Emperour was lesse offended with a rebels insurrection , then their creation . Aequior audiebat imperij amulum in se coniurare , quàm Dei fieri Sacerdotem . Geburoth and Sopheroth no friēds in Poperie . 2. 2. quaest . 188. art . 3. Ve●● Athenas neque me quisquam ibi agnouit . Tusc . Quaest . 5. Epist . 33 ad Anatolium . 3 In 1 ad Tim. c 1. orat . 6. initio ipso . In this sense Sidonius , l. 6. Fp. 6. ad Eut●●p●… Bonitas conditoris , habitationem po●… hominum , quàm charitatem , finalibus claudit angustij● . And againe , S. Chrysost . hom . 3. in Acta Apost . Ethico . calls euery Bishop in generall 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , the Bishop ouer all men , and yet in the same place sayes , That no Bishop in Bishop ouer more then one Citie . Both of which make for vs against you , and seeming contrary include no contradiction . Yea Hom. 8. in Acta , hee saies twice together , that his Lay-auditors shal be Occumenicall Masters , if they do this & this , of his prescribing . Also 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 : They shal be to all , that which he is to them . Chrysost . in quadam epist . Principis fauore Liberat. c. 21. Barlaam . Can. 6. Athanasiapol . conera Arian . Pro lege Manil. Regum afflictae opes facise alliciunt misericordiam . Num 70. huius & num . 28. Euseb . l. 5. c. 25. Ibid. c 26. Ibid. De liturgicis Fragment . Hilarij . Apolog. Cyrilli Mandat . Synod . Ephes . 〈◊〉 . Cor. 〈◊〉 . 36. Defens . Trid. l. 2. Haere ses propagāt , Epist . 8. ad Euseb . Sam. Edit . D. H. Sauil. Epist . episcop . secundae Syriae ad Leon. Habetur int●… Act ? Concil . Chalced. * The prerogatiues before other Churches Nouel . Constit . 131. Com. in Photij Nomocanon . tit . p. c. 5. Com. in Can. a And I my selfe read ouer this Canon , to the most 〈◊〉 Pope , in the Citie of Rome , in the presence of the Clergie of Constantinople ; and he receiued it . * Either Eusebius 〈◊〉 , or Leo wa●… deceiued . ●lspan● . A wood 〈◊〉 in stead of a doue . Non est admirations vna arbor , cum tota in eandem altitudinem sylua su● exit . Seneca . 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈…〉 . 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . findes a Head in euery Congregation ; but , Popes are not so frequent . Epistad Concil . 1. Sam. 25. 8. Dauid eals himself Nabals son , yet so far from acknowledging any authoritie that the churle had ouer him , as he threatens him the sword soone after , in the same chap. Epitaph . in Patrem . quaest . 1. art . 10. Leo before all , because reckoned after all . Act. 12. 2. 3. Leo 〈◊〉 & 〈◊〉 S. Sy●… cum 〈◊〉 Apost . ●anegyr , in Athan . Edit . Venet. p. 389. Ibid. p. 390. Ad num . 78. Specially one of Leos legates being but a Priest , saith the Adioyn . * Concil 1. Nicen. Can. 8. A●●●r . c. 2. itemque Can. 10. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . Sed praecipuè Can. 13. eiusdem . Sa verbo Praedicare . Nullus Episcopo contradicente praedicare praesumat . Ex Concil . Trid. Et Triumph . Ancon . Licere quidem presbyteris praedicare ; sed de lice●… Episcopi . Quia actus est iurisdictionis . Etsi Pi●s 5. Mendicantibus liberum voluit , & repugnante Episcopo , nisi praedicare velletipse . Sa vbi priùs . b Sozom. l 1. c. 17. c Ann. 813. d S. Cypr. lib. 4. cp . 2. mentions a kind of Synode , where vnà cum Episcopis , Presbyt . &c. etiam Laici stantes super lapsis tractauere rationem . The Araus●an Councell was subscribed by certaine honourable personages of the Laity Garanza in fine Conc. Araus . And , in Conc. Syrmiensi , Iudices ex palatio , doctrinâ praestantes , ( learned Courtiers ) praesidebant . Soz. l. 4. c. 5. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . Plut. Numb . 7. hulus . De verb. Dom. 13. * Morel . edit . of Cyprian praised before all other by Alan . 〈◊〉 . Ad●… . ad Lector ante Dialogos . Constar ex Mat. 4. 18. Nec obstat , Iohan. 1. 41. vt periti explicant Vide Maldonat . In Psal . 108. ●t iterū Chrysost . 〈◊〉 7 pag. 〈◊〉 . & iterum Beda ●erm in Cathed . Petri. * . i. Vpon this confession the Church of God is established . l. 2. de Bapt. c. 1. Lib. 6. cp . 24. Act. 15. 39. What a sweete suppressor of schismes the Pope is , may appeare by that of Innocent . 7. who slew eleuen persons , endeauouring to succour the state of their country , running to decay , and cast their bodies out at a window , saying , That was the way to suppresse schismes , and no other . Plat. Innocent 7. Catilines quenching of fire , non aqua , sed rui●● . Ad Eustochium . Hortantur affectione non potestate . Cypr. de habitu virgin . Idem habet Comment . in Epist . ad Tit. c. 1. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . Et , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . Et , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , &c. p. 285. & 387. Edit . Eton. per D. H. Savile . Can. 1. in Matth. Let all write for God our iudge & our reuenger , and not onely ours , but all the Saints 〈◊〉 the beginning . &c A●d , The reuenger him ( e●●e hath not yet reuenged himselfe . 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . Amb● . Ep 32. 33. ●o●at contra Au●ent . &c. Cypr to the very same effect , Epist 11. l 1. ad Pompon . Tune gladio o●…e●●●tur , quando circumcisio carnalis & . nunc quia circumcisio spiritualis , sp●● . gladio necantur . So as the Adioyner is the Iew , that stands for bloody sorce , not the Bishop , as he tayles & raues . Cic. pro Quint. And so also Tertul. de multitud . Christian . satis cre●iò . So , captiua captiuitas , for captiui . Eph. 4. So electio for electi , Rom. 11. 7. Vide S. August . de Praedest . Sanct cap. 6. & 〈◊〉 . Nemo presumitur tulisse contra seipsum : & , Preuilegia non sunt interpretanda in praeiuduium concedentis . Sa. Aphorism . 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . 2. Cor. 5. 1. Orig hom . 14 in Levit. 24. Hur. in 1. Cor. c. 5. Chrys in 1. Cor. hum . 15. 1. Corinth . 5. 5. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . 1. ●im . 1. 20. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . He sayes there , that the Bishops style becomes him as well , as to daunce about a may-pole in his hole and doublet . Et in epist . ad Philemon 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . De tribus Thomis . lib. 3. de Rom. Pont. c. 22. * Advers . Luther . And Andradius , Venialia qua dicuntur peccata , tamen sempiternis poen● ( interdu● ) ●…untur apud inferes . De pecc . orig . lib. 5. which vtterly ouerthrowes the nature of veniall sinnes , insomuch as Rada ( in Conciliat Thomae & Scot● ) saies , that God in strict iustice , can not punish such kinde of sinnes in that sort , though all grace of pardon be away . Tertull. de carne Christ Quis conspueret Christi faciem nisi merentem : Horribile dictu : Sed vult dicere , aptam conspui ex vestigijs infirmitatum in suscepta mortalitate , &c. Sic est illud , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , Apoc . 3. Apud Clem. Alexandr . 〈◊〉 Apostoli lu●… ex Christo lumine vocati s●…t , & caetera ab codē sortiti v●…bula : s●… Simo●… qui credebat in petrā Christum , Petri ●…gitus est nomē , Ac secundum metaphoram rectè ei dicitur &c. Hier. * See Casaub . 〈◊〉 . 16. cap. 138. ad Annal. liaron . with the like contradict ō between Baron . & Bellarm. as is between Bellar. & himself in this very matter , l. 3. de Interp. verbi dei , cap. 4. where he makes Moses extraordinarie , and so greater then Aaron , as Peter greater then the rest of the Apostles , because hee onely was ordinarie , &c. yet he sayes he mentions Peter , comparationis causá cum Mose , for comparison sake with Moses . What so vnlike ? Besides , Aquine will tell him , that Paul rather answered to Moses , then Peter ; each of them beeing admitted to the Vision of Gods essence ; the one as principall of the Old Test , the other of the New , ( for so he cōpares them ) Neque enim probabile est vt minister veteris Testamenti , &c. Quaest . disp . de Raptu . Art. 1. in Conclus . As for Peters being in mentis excessu , Act. 11. he makes nothing of that , to this of Pauls . Ibid. resp . ad 9. * Vide citatos paulò ante auctores in hoc capit . p. 132. Quibus adde aliud S. August . tèstimonium ex Tract . 10 in 1. Epist . Ioh c. 5. Super hanc petram , edificabo Ecclesiam meam . Quid est super hanc petram ? Super hanc fidē , super id quod dictum est , Tu es Christus , &c. There is Fides , and obiectum fidei , id quod dictum est , &c. But by no meanes doth it long to Peters person . Riuallouus Archidiac . Redonensis , de Marbodo Episcopo , Hic basis Eccelesia po●du● portabat , — apud Iacob . Sirm. in notis ad lib. 3. & epist . 14. Goff . Abb. Vind. * Petrus Chrysologus . vide cap. 8. huius , ex Damas● . eadem verba , de Iordane Archimandr●●a Quid quòd idem Damas● . serm . de Defunctis , vocac Athanasium , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , . i. the foundation of the Church of God ? Among communities , the Vniuersity of Oxford was calle● Ecclesiae fundamentum , in the hearing of the King , and he disliked it not . Paris Anno 38. Hen. 3. Quidam Magistri Oxoniae , circiter nouem artistae , &c. a Theod. lapsus Rescrip . ad Chrysost . b Hom. 87. in Iohan. Adioynd . num . 44. Col. S. Chrysostome ( saies he ) giues vs to vnderstand , that whereas S. Iames was onely Bishop of Hierusalem , and the countries adioyning &c. S. Peter had the charge of the whole But if we heare Bellarm. de Pontif. Rom. l. 1 c. 27. Caeteri Apostoli missi sunt ad certas prouincias , Paulus ad omnes Gentes , sine cortae provinciae determinatione . Et ipse de se ait , Plus omnibus laboraui . At least , as Eutalius Diaconus ( for so they write him ) praesat . in Epist . Pauli , Petrus & Paulus inter se partili sunt vniuersum orbem : in which diuision Paul had the better euery way . Conim . in locum . Genebeard construes this both of all the Apostles , citing Arnobius , Pro 12 Patriarchis 〈◊〉 12 Apostoli . and also of all the faithfull , who are called sonnes ( saies he ) because begotten through the Gospel . And he addes , that they doe gerere vices Christi , ( how will the Pope like this ? ) and that their Soueraigntie here mentioned , stands in the i●●tation of the vertues and worthines of their auncestors . And lastly , this he calls the eternall succession . Genebrard . in Psalm . 1. Pet 2. 5. 〈◊〉 liny●d c. 〈◊〉 . num 56. Masson in vitâ P●● V. Epist . 7 quae ad Smymeni●s . Apud Gelas . Cyzic . p. 172. ex edit . Morel . per Sal●oreum Iesuitam ; Episcopus habet locum capitis ecclesiae post Christum , preshyter Seraphicum . D aconus Cherubicum No Pope then but Anti-christ . See him ad longum , num . 40. &c Moses and Salomo , two famous patternes of gouernment in Scripture , each of them complaining of the great multitudes of people committed to their charge , ( and yet but a handfull to the now Christian ) maruell that Peter neuer did of his , if all was so entirely recommended to him , as they fable . See 1. King. 3. and Numb 11. 14. As for Quu ad baec idoneus , that is Pauls , not Peters . Adioyn Seeing that Peter was made head of the Apostles , 〈◊〉 . of the Church , the Bishop cannot denie the same authoritie to . S. Peters successors , for the same reason , especially since the succession of all the Apostles is failed in other Churches , sauing onely in the Church of Rome by our Sauiours prouidence , &c. * Homil 55. in Act 2. a Praefat. in Epist . Pauli . 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . Pro Lege Manil. b In Athanas . 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . And Pertinax himselfe in Herodian , lib. 2. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . Much more true in the Episcopall throne , then the Imperiall . Primas . 〈◊〉 in Epist . Paul. giues this reason why the Epistle to the Romanes is set first . quiae scripta erat ad inferiores . I suppose it should be infirmiores , by that which followes . But that helps but little . And comparing all the churches to which the Apostle wrote , he makes Rome simply the worst And wheras now a daies they conceit it to be such an armorie of faith against all defects , he makes them so simple , that he saies , nihil intelligebant , They vnderstood nothing at all . As for their morall perfections , see Salvian de gubernat . dei . l. b. 7. Viciositas & impuritas quasi germanitas quaedam est Romanorum hominum , & quasi mens atque natura ; quia thi praecipuè vicia , vbicunque Romani . Et ibid. Omne impuritatis scelus , omnis impudicitiae tur pitudo , à Romanu admittitur , a barbaris vindicatur . Et , Auaritiae inhumanitas proprium est Romanorum penè omnium malum . Et , Indurauerunt facies suas SVPER PETRAM . This is the super petram that he acknowledges in Rome . And least you thinke he excuses them from peruerse faith in the midst of so many morall corruptions , lib. 5. he saies , Ipsae haereses barbarorum de ROMANI MAGISTERII prauitate fluxerunt . See Bernard . de Consyd . ad Eugen . lib. 4 c. 1 & 2. Quid tam notum seculis quàm proteruia & fastus Romanorum &c at large . Yet of late a French parasite , Flor. Rem . praises that sinke , ( which is the worse for continuance without all question ) as the Paradise of God , and the dugge of heauen . For he saies it signifies mamilla in the Hebrew , childishly enough . De orig . haer . l. 5. c. 4. num . 5. 6. &c. One thing I allow that he obserues , that it was ab initio obnoxia incendijs , alway in danger of fire since first it was a citic : that we may beleeue that one day it shal be burnt cleane downe , as it is in the Reuelation . numb . 2 ipso fine . Praefat. Anchor . Idem Origen . in Matth. vide c. 5. huius . Masson . in Marcello 2. Cap. 1. Idem habet S. Cyprian . tract . de idolorum vanit . Rex vnus est apibus , dux vnus ingregibut . Vide & Hieron . in epist . ad Rustuum , Grues vnum scquuntur ordine literato . It is a scholler-like order to be subiect to Monarchy in the politicke estate . Also Chrysost . most excellently , Com in 13. ad Rom. ( which comment . vpon all that discourse of the Apostle , for obedience to Magistrates , though they be infidels , the Iesuites are so confronted with , as if it had beene purposely written against their new-fangle deuises ) finds the like euident prints of soueraigntie in Bees , in Cranes , in flocks of sheepe , &c. yea , in the bottome of the sea , emong the fishes , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . Hence Seneca perhaps , l. 1. de Clemen . c. 19. Natura Regem commenta est . b On the other side , our Sauiour Christ came into the world , when intrusion and vsurpation of Kingdomes was ●ifest : as if his errand had been emong others , to giue Monarchies their right , and to cut short the encroachers , sayes Haymo . Halberstat . conc . hyem , in Epiphan . Dom. Quia enim deficienti●… principibus ex Iudi , alienus & extraneus atque falsus &c. De Rom. Pontif. l●b 1 c 12. ex Chrysost . Hieron . & Aug. Petrus pro omnibus locutus est . Adde Cyprian . l. 1. ep . 3. ad Co●… . Petrus vnus pro omnibus loquent , & ecclesie v●● respondent . Cap●…ag . 25. 26. &c. Mart. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , captivut pastor : non Rec pastor : as the Papists would . Vide Ioseph . l. 1. contra 〈◊〉 . Hierom. epist . ad Magnum . * A pud Theod in Eccl. lust . l. 5. c. 4. * At least Martinianus consented to marrie a maid called Maxima , which you may do well to see Mr F. T. whether you will allow to Church-men , or no●… though we heare you haue taken this libertie to your selfe , whatsoeuer you are . num . 12. So cap. 1. hu●us , Al●●ate not finding the vncertaine Epistle of Pope Iohn in some auncient copyes , suspects the heretiques ( as he cals thē ) to haue raced ▪ it out . In like sort Florimund . Remund . 〈◊〉 orig haeres . part . 1. shews himself very much offended with those of our Diuines , that trāslated Greek authors , either historians , or dogmatists , &c. * Numb . 16. 3. a 1. Sam. 17. 28. b Brisson . in Persicis . Cic. in Pis . Plut. And indeede Pope Nicholas argues so in gond earnest , out of that place , from Benedicitur to M● ▪ l●d●●ur . Epist . ad Michael Impor . Tom. 3. Com. Sur. Polydor. Virgil. Anglic. hist . l. 21. in Hen 7. Cic. de si●●b . 5. Cap. 3. num . 40. Qui dat esse . &c. 〈◊〉 . Ser 4. in Apost Paul. tom . 8. Nemo benè v●d●● , nisi qui priùs 〈◊〉 , exeundo Pauli . Chrysost . 1 2 I 1 Quia barbam caputque tinxerat , iccirco rem●… eum de coll egio ●udicum P●ut . in apotheg● . at Philip. De Rom. Pont. 〈◊〉 . 〈◊〉 . c , 28. The Pope an 〈…〉 . 4 II As the seruice of God is the truest libertie , so the ministers regiment is but seruice . Seneca . Arist . Rhetor. Cic. de orat . 2. Ci●… saies of one , Quod nondū potestate poterat , ob●i●u●t authoritate . So as power & authority go not alway together , though the Iesuit confound them . The holy Ghost 〈◊〉 other prouinces as well as in Rome . Numb . 36. Carnel . apud Euseb lib 6. histor . c. 33. d●●●t Rome vnum 〈◊〉 Episcopum , presby : erot autem ●6 . Vide B●ll●r . de Rom Po●t●f . lib. 2. c. 7. Can. 5. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . ●… . * Salisb . Polycrat . Vide & Bernard . de consid . ad Eugen. l. 4. The words of Charles Brandon Earle of Suffolke , that England neuer receiued any good by the Popes Legates . Vide & Sadolet . Epist . Cap. 7. p. 168. Can. 3. Sard. Concil . 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , non res 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ergò . Rom. 12. 13. Leo Epist . 87. ad Episcop . Maucitaniae . Greg. Regist . l. 1. epist . 82. Felicissimus & Vincentius . Contra Pelag. lib. vlt. Chrys . in locum . See the same phrase , Cura scripturarum in●posita , Epist 110. of the Bishops of Carth. & Numidia : that enioyned him to write a booke . Which he did . Basil . epist . 74. & 32. * Yet Sozomene l. 3. hist . c. 23. Pa●lus , Marcellus , Asclepas , & Lu●ius , suas sedes recuperarunt , quandoquidē ex literis Imperatoris facta est his potestas ad sua redeundi . The Emperour ( ●ot Iulius , saith he ) restored them . Bellarm. de Rom. Pont. l. 1. c. 6. Assuerus Rex non erat subiectus sapientibus illis vi●●● , quorum faciebat cuncta consilio : Hest . 1. And yet that was consilium statum , or permanentiae ; this lesse then so . Nay there was to be consensut ( cuncta faciebat de illorum consilio ) here relatio at the most , or noticiae , but intimation . 1. Tim. 3. * And long after that time , Fulbert . Carnoten . ( I thought good to note it ) calls himselfe , Dei gratiâ Episcop●● , & Regis sui Rob●… , i. Bishop by the grace of God and the King. Epist 4. quae ad ipsum . Elias Cretens . Theod. histor . lib. 4. cap. 2. Tom. 1. Concil . Ep. 1. Damas . Theod. l. 5. c. 23. * So likewise . Alexander Bishop of Alexand●… , wrote to all Bishops wheresoeuer d●… , warning th●m to r●s●aine from t●e communion of 〈◊〉 . Sozom lib. 1 c. 14. whi●h i● more then to define dogmatically . Yet they will not allow him vniuersall 〈◊〉 . * Sozom. l. 1. c. 1. Episiopt Nicaeni dignum 〈◊〉 dicauere Eustath●…m , qui capesseret sedem , Apostolicam . Est vule dicere , 〈◊〉 ex Be●…ensi . Idem Sozom l. end . e. 10 Alexand●…m quoque & 〈◊〉 Ecclesiam . Apostol●… accipit , sub Ma●… & Alexandro . Iterum apud eundem Sozom. lib. 4. c. ●4 . Cy●llu● Aposto●… sedis antistes , quia ●cil . Episcopus Hi●rosolym●… Sido● . Epist . 1. l. 6 de Lupo , Post nouem dec●● sa quinque●… 〈◊〉 Sede . Apostol●● . Et paulò antè de codem , To●a Ecclesiae dei membra super 〈◊〉 . Et , Dig●● q●● ab omnibus consula●… . Howbeit Bishop onely of 〈◊〉 in France Yet Bellar. most impudently l. 4. c. 8. de Not. Eccl. wil haue the whol Church of God to be called Apostolique , onely because the succession from the Apostles neuer failed in the Church of Rome , as he idly doates , whereas in other ( he thinke ) it hath , and so onely that Apostolique for ●ooth . But besides that alreadie brought out of Sozomene and other● , Baronius checks him , acknowledging more Churches then the Romane to be Apostolique . See Tertull. de Praescript . c. 36. Per●… Ecclesias . Apostolicas , apud qu●… adhuc Cathe dr●● Apostolorum , &c. Lastly , Euseb l. t. hist. c. 1. * I confess I was once of A●… his mind ; but since I 〈◊〉 by perusal of more , that this Epistle , bad though it be , yet i● like all the rest of Innocenti●sse● , as to 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , to Aureliu● , to Iohannes Hierosolym . &c. Neuer worse Secretarie , I thinke , or that kept 〈◊〉 . * Bellar. de Pont Rom. lib. 1. c. 17. 〈◊〉 Quod autem . Adomnia , and per omnia , differ . Cic 2. de 〈◊〉 . Deorum . S. Hilarie professes of himselfe to doe so , vt recens lectio & collata responsis invitis etiam & cōtradicentibus sensum veritatis eliciat . De Trin. lib 6. b Iudg. 9. a Adioynd . num . 3 He flieth to his common and s●…e shift . All which I haue fully confuted to his sh●… in the 1. Chap. where I haue de●lared how he abuseth SS . August . Ambrose , Cyrill , &c. b As Menanders saying is , That Hunter is short to him , though his tale be neuer so long , because he telles it well ; Chaerilus tedious in three words speaking . c Num. 〈◊〉 . [ Card. ] Origen . in 6 ad Rom. Petro cum summa rerum de pascendus ●…bus traderetur . & ● . ] To which the ●ish answer , Summa rerum , The chiefe pastorall charge was giu● to Peter , but it was giuen others also . Ex Origene ipso in Matth. 16. Tract 1. Adiovnd . It is to be obserued , that Origen in that Homilie followeth altogether an Allegoricall sense , & seeking to draw from thence some morall doctrine , ( as Preachers vse to doe ) applieth the same , not onely to all the Apostles , as well as to Peter , but also to all perfect Christians , teaching , that whosoeuer doth confesse Christ as Peter did , he shall haue the same beatitude that Peter had , and be a Ra●ke as he was , &c. So also ( N●m . 〈◊〉 ) he applies the giuing of the Keyes as well to euery ●a●●…ll Christian as Peter , or the rest of the Apostles . But then ( Num. 5. ) euery iust man and wom●n , should haue as much Eccles●●sticall power and Iurisdiction as Peter , to bind , loose , ex ●ommunicate , & ● . Then ( Num 〈◊〉 . ) euery Priest as much as his Bishop , Bishop as Metropolitan , &c. ouerthrowing thereby all subordination in the Church , and confounding the Eccles●●sti all with the Se●ular , the La●●●e with the Clergie , head with members , shepheard with sheepe , &c. He quotes Trac . vl● in Iohan. but all too wide . Catholique Diuine in Answer to the Reports , &c c 8 sect . 16. quotes out of Baldus , that the Pope in some case may commit spirituall things to a meere lay-man And that de facto he gaue a noble Ladie leaue to take the communion out of her owne hands , Vide Florim . Rae●… de ortu haeres huius saeculi . lib. 6. c. 19. sect . 4. in Matth. 16. Tract . 1. Hierm. ad Euag. Omnes Ep●s●opi Apostolo●um successores sunt . S. Cyprian puts the● both in one , speaking thus , De habitu V●rg . Petrus etiam cui oues suas dominus p●scendas 〈◊〉 commendat , super quem posuit & fund●uit ecclesiam . De Rom. Pont. l. 1. c. 27. versus finem . The Pope a Poly-Stephen for his triple crown sake . Cuiut maximè ve●… sequerentur . Therefore they went to his Church potissi 〈◊〉 , and there s●s●…ere votum relligionis suae , profession● solenn● : sayes Massaeus ibid. * Adde E●…tius com in Ep a l Rom c. 1. Ne vel ipso Coryphaeo Petro inferior videretur Paulus , aut 〈◊〉 aliquid ha●…re . Not minus 〈◊〉 in grace and in gifts ; not ●…ior in gouernment , and such like pr●heminence . By which we see what a Coryphaeos Peter . S. Gregor . sayes , l. 28. in Iob c. 6. that , In sacriloquio , &c. he neuer finds the word foundatiō put in the singular , throughout al Scripture , but onely for Christ . Yet the Papists make Peter a singular foundation , and by himselfe . See Haymo com . in Eph. 2. where he will not so much as construe that , Fundati super fund . Proph. & Apost . otherwise thē thus , That Christ alone is the foundation of Praphets , of Apostles , and all : and he addes out of Matth. 16. Super hanc petram , i. super me aedificabo Ecclesiam . Though Augustus himselfe refused the title Dominus ; which Orosius construes to haue beene done in honour of Christ then borne . l. 6. c 22. * Ioh. Capistranus . Of S. Hilar. testimonie . Ioh. 21. Absolute Pelagianisme . See S. Austen , &c. * De praedestin . Sanct. ad Prosper . & Hilar. lib. 1. Cap. 15. Est etiam praeclarissimum lumen praedestinationis & gratiae , ipse saluitor , ipse mediator . Respendeatur quaeso , vnde haee merunt ? Quod etus bonum qualecunque pracessit , &c. Vide Epist . Anaclet . 1. & . 2 itē Clement ad Iacob . fratrem domini , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . 1. Tim. 3. 13. * Hild. Dict. Sent. 2● . Pontifex Romanus , sicanoni●● mod● ordinatus suerit , meritis B. Petri indubitanter efficitur sanctus . Lib. 6. de trin . Si quidem gloria est peruagata , &c. Adioynd . num . 9. Thus saith the Bishop seeking by a lying glosse of his owne to make his Reader beleeue , that S. Hilarie doth so admit S. Peters faith to he the foundation of the Church that he excludeth his person , &c. Neuerthelesse I would not haue him to thinke , that in affirming with S. Hilarie , that Peter was the foundation of the Church , I doe exclude his faith frō his person , as though S. Hilar. should say , or any Catholike man meane , that the Church was built vpon Peters person , and not vpon his faith , &c. Fearing least another should depraue him as he hath done the Bishop . Haec fides Ecclesiae fundamentum est , per han● fidē infirma sunt aduersus eam po●● inferorum . Haec fides Regni coelestis , &c Hilar. vbi prius . Paneg. in Athanas . Beatus Simon subiacens aedificationi ecclesiae : ( scil ) post sacramenti confessionens . Idem Hilar. eodem libro , tres columnas ecclesiarum facit , Petrum , Iohannem , & Iacobum . In the same place S. Hilary thus bespeaks the Apostles ( not Peter alone ) Vos O sancti & beate viri , ob FIDEI VESTRAE MERIT●● , claues regni coelorum sortiti , & ligandi atque soluendi in caelo & in terrā i●● , &c. Hilar. vbi . priu● . Vide Bellar. de Rom. Pont. lib. 1. cap. 12. ●●antem globum testiū in hanc sentent . Leo ●●rm . 11. de past . D●… Omnium 〈◊〉 ●ra pr●…m . Chrysost 〈◊〉 . 55. in M●t. Confe●… pr●…t , ac praeue●… ait . Of 〈◊〉 Ma●…m . testimonie . The Adioynd . p●…fes , that S. Maximu● made certain ●ermons of this kind . See afore cap. 〈…〉 . Adioynd . cap. 9. Numb . 14. Hee supposes h●re that not Christ but 〈◊〉 haue giue it him , and that S. Peter ●…s not Bishop of Rome , otherwise thē in our concert , and by our gift . Eud●… . Patal . p. 137 Non du●… qu●… tot●… 〈◊〉 sa●lo ho●…m ●…deat , ●…m P●… 〈◊〉 , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ●…re . Bellar. de Pont. Rom. lib. 4. c. 4. By schismes , by simonies , by transmigrations , sometime also by pluralitie of incūbents . As Felix and Liberius , Sozom. l. 4. c. 14. But cheifly whereas the Papists challenge other Seas to haue fayled in their succession of Bishops , we may truely answer them , that it had beene more for their credit to haue had none at all , then diuerse such as they are faine to shew to vphold theirs , of late times . Idem Bellarm. alibi , nimirum de Roman . Pont. l. 2. c. 12. Si transferatur etiamnum sede● , Romani Episcopi non erunt 〈◊〉 totius ecclesiae Episcopi . And , Francisc Vellosillus , Bishop of Luca , in Aduertentijs . in 4. tomum B. Chrysost . Quaesit . 17. prooues this conclusion of his , by diuerse reasons , Quid constitutione ecclesiae sieri posset , vt Episcopus vrbis non modò sedem suam ab vrbe demutaret ( as he speakes ) sed vt nullam omnino particularem ecclesiam sibi applicaret , &c. Ann. 1614. Pa●is . Nothing left for . ●●sopt . because his fellowes professed to know all things first . 〈◊〉 . viz. 2. Cor. 11. 23. &c. S. Hieron Praef. comm . in epist . ad Gal. calls them twice , principes , within a few lines , once Apostolor●● , againe Ecclesia●… . De patientia . * The ancienter Papists were not so immoderate . Ioh. Slotanus contr . V●●sium , &c. after he had allowed the Pope ●aculum , as well as ●eram , one for doctrine , the other for discipline , expounds himselfe in this manner . Habet summus ecclesiae Antistes super omnes potentiorem potestatem coactiuam ; quā etiam Principes sil● subi●●ere potest . SENE CAEDE TAMEN . Hic est autem spiritualis gladius ●lle , per quem interdicere potest ingressu ecclesiae , & coelum claudere , &c. Thus he limits the Popes coactiue power . And Espencaeus Digress●n Epist . ad Titum , c. 1. p 172. En Episcopalem duritiem , in VFRRIS tamen , non in VERBERIBVS sitam . Nam carceres , & huiusmodi corporum coerctiones , cum dominij● temporalibus , BENEFICIO ET DEVOTIONE PRINCIPVM accessisse puto . Grauissima TVM poena erat excommunicatio , non MORTALIS●a●… ●a●… , sed medicinalis . Also , Card. Pole , lib. de summ . Pont. c. 49. praising the Popes forme of gouernement , None to that ( saith he ) quae — volentes Per populordat iura . And , c. 44. The Pope , if he will bee good , must neuer descendere de Cruce , i. interpose in worldly affaires . The Papists deuice is ouerthrowne by themselues ; so farre are the Fathers from abetting it . For Maldonate vpon Ioh. 21. notes it for a principall circumstance , that Pasce oues meas was said to Peter , post prandium , after dinner : and yet the rule of their law is , that Ordines non dantur post prandium , Sa. ex Syluest . v. Ordines . § 14 How much lesse the Pop●dome , which so infinitly surmounteth all order ▪ Though Mald. most absurdly note in the afor●said place , that our Sauiour Christ did almost all his extraordinarie works , either after dinner , or after supper . These are the grauities and godlines of our Iesuites . To our Sauiour , no doubt , all times were one . Bellarmine himselfe confesses , that Pasce oues meas , feed my sheep , is said omnibus pastoribus , to all ministers & past●● . De Rom. Pont. l. 1. e. 12. resp . ad 5. and moreouer , whatsoeuer is said to him , ratione off●… pastoralis , in regard of his ministerie , is common to all . Vid● supra in hoe cap. Super terram . Mo●●●chia terrestris . Adi●yn . Num. 22. cap. 5. Theodor. de Constantin . Magno , in principio historiae : & , Concal . Triburiens . de Arnulpho , anno Dom. ●95 . vide edit . Venet. tom . 4. p. 27. A●apet . Epist . Praise comprehends all the meanes that Kings haue to reward , though they are mary . Because it is s●●um humano●… , as Aristot●aves ●aves . 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . Numb 22. ●9 . 1. Sam 21. 9. Adioyn Num. 22 Expellit dictis , non armis , saies Lucret. lib. 5. Cap. 3. huiu● . Notes for div A19150-e82480 a Aqui● part . 〈◊〉 . summae , quest . 25. Artic. 3. in resp . citans glossam . Deus per creationem , cui debetur Latria . Dominus per po●…am , cui Dulia . Such are their fooleriet , that in one respect now , God and the Saint shall bee worshipped alike , yea with equall worship , with Dulia both . Whereas , 〈◊〉 Deo nihil mi 〈◊〉 est , or els , Non esset omne Deu● quod in Deo est , contrarie to the Axiome . See S. Leo sweetly pronouncing of this point , serm . 8. in N●t . Domini . b Contra Iul. lib. 3. cap. 2. c 〈◊〉 Call●st . lib. 18. cap. 22. Hist Ecclesiast . d Ioh 24. e In Euang. Iohann . Tom. 32. f 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . In fine huius . g Emong S. Hieromes workes , the Com. vpon this Epistle is twofold . In one , hee extends charitatem to the Sanct● , but not fidem , ●…ing , Qu● enim diligit caput , diligat oportet & membra , not so , Qui credit ; In the other , thus he explaines himselfe . Quod autem dico●ale est . Cre●… quispiam in con●… Deum : Non potest credere ●…si prius crediderit de Sanctis 〈◊〉 vera esse que scripta sunt : Adam à D●e plasm●…m , Eu●m , &c. Where is conscience now , Mr. F. T ? 〈◊〉 in Ep. ad 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 habutt Phil. 〈…〉 , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ●…lloru● ex●…tendo . Or , 〈…〉 , pro communone 〈◊〉 , as the 〈◊〉 words are , explaining these , that is , d●●ds of mercie , to which he was 〈◊〉 to ●…ort him ; not to beleeue in Saints . The Co●… of Cal●… in Al●… ad 〈◊〉 . pag. 21● . Sur. call● this , a ma●…●●ference . 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . Symb. Nicen. Quanquam idem symbolum , vt exprimit●… a Basi●o , in Epist . ad Antiochen , pag. 308. edit . Graec. Froben . Omnem fidem perspicuè reuocat ad tres personas Trinitatis , ne nomin●… quidem Ecclesiā , nisi in diuersissimum sensum , sati●… di●● post . pag. 94 〈◊〉 . Iacob is made to Canonize himselfe , yet aliue . * Our Church seemes to reckon it for Chrysostomes , calling one of the praiers in it Chrysostomes praier . a Nothing but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . And as for Marie , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . Not to her , not to them , but to Christ onely . b Vnderstand this of the originall Greeke , not of Leo Tuscus his translation . Consol . ad Marcian . Hom. 10. in Acta Apost . Non tamen ( inquit ) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . Our demaund of a decree for prayer to Saints . a Can. 1. b Can. 4. c Can. 14. d Can. 12. & 13. e Can. 3. lib. 2. Tom. 1. haer . 61. quae . Apostolicorum est . Vide Praefat. Concil . Martres memories , but Gods seruice . Hzres . Collyrid . Idem ferè Cyprian l. de vanitat . idol Nam & vulgus in multis Deum natural ter consitetur . Item , Quae haec summa'delicts est , nolle agnoscere quē ignorare non poss●… Yet the Papists so . Adioynd . Numb . 19. The Latine Translator doubted not to translate , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , hos oret , ( the more wretch he ) expresting also the Indicatiue moode in the Greeke by an Imparatiue in the Latine : ( so prates the parret , and so he writes it ) how boldly both ? Doctrine of peace & good order out of Mars-street . Would this stand with Card. Allens proiect against Q Eliz● Superiours must be holpen against their subiect , with all speed , euen RVNNING , though abused but in tongue onely , yea though themselues haue done the wrong . 〈◊〉 de Eucha●… Truely he must either make a new Grammer to 〈…〉 his construction , or els retract his exposition , & and , Num. 15. But will you further yet beare him confute his own glosse , & see him tript , as I may say , in his 〈◊〉 play ? The word HEE ( saith the Bishop ) cannot be referred to relliques . For the gender doth not suffer it . Why doth he then in the former place , make hos to signifie memorias martyrum ? Doth the gender trowe you suffer it , either in the Latine or the Greeke ? Can he make hi or ho , to agree wish memorias 〈◊〉 monumenta , &c. Ad●…ynd . Apud Lucian . 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , pro loco habendi symposy . a S. Austen would haue Baptisme and the word preached to bee had in worship of vs. Which the Papists making slight of , diuert their veneration now to the Sacrament of the Altar , as if none but that . S. Chrysostome hom . 8. in epist . ad Ephes . Angeli venerantur 〈◊〉 Pauli , which were too much for an Angel , to worship Paul himselfe , much more his chaines . But , Estimation with 〈◊〉 , is called worship , if F. T. would vnderstand this . Cap. 10. Numb . 19. of the Adioynd . Adloynd . Although the Cardinall citeth those words of S. Bisil , for the veneration of rellique● , [ Hi martvres , &c. ] yet the intercession of Saint , is also CLEERFLY prooued thereby , and againe the vse and veneration of holy relliques , by the helpe & protection 〈◊〉 we receiue from 〈◊〉 and Marty● . Vocatus straight●…catus ●…catus , or aduocatus . Deus Christianorum , often in the Church . historians . Does that inferre praying to Christians 〈◊〉 or not rather to the God of Christians only ? De praep . Euan. l. 13. cap. 7. The Bishop chargeth the Cardinall with fraud in p●…ting the Greeke text , because the words in the Greeke are somewhat otherwise , making no expresse mention of praying to Martyrs , but onely at their tombes . Whereto I answer , that the Latine translator followed the sense of Eusebius , gathering the same out of the circumstance of the place . For Eusebius shewing the conformitie of Platoes doctrine to our Christian relligion , &c : Numb . 29. A dioynd . Apud Th●…t . Apologet. Can. 35. apud Garanzam in ●…ma . Cone . Some thinke it should bee 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , 〈◊〉 . per modum supplicationis tetigere manus . But in Plut. Otho I find neither , and both come to one ende . Mark. 15. 46. Com. in 21. Ioh. Nemo distrahat Martyres , etiam 〈◊〉 sensu . Vide August . de oper . Monach. c. 28. Alij membra Martyrum ( si tamen Martyrum ) venditant , &c. In Greg. Turon . lib. 9. c. 6. A sachel of mice-bones , moales-teeth , beares-clawes , &c. were found with a Mountibanke , in steade of true Relliques . Sure in S. Gregories time it was impious and sacrilegious but euen to touch the bodies of Saints dead in the Westerne parts ; with whom we haue now to deale . Intolerabile est atque sacrilegum . Vide Epist . 30. lib. 3. Regist . indict . 12. S. Chrysost . construes those words of Iob , Iob 31. ( the Adioynd . notes no place ) of the frailtie of all things , which appeares euen in the sunne and moones decayes ; nothing to Adoration . Orat de Auarit . l. a●… . Tom. 7. Edit . Eton. Touching & kissing of holy things , is from a reuerent assection , not a relligious adoration . Matt. lib. 8. Com. in Ps . 115. Orat. 1. in ●uliā . The bodies of Saints departed profit 〈◊〉 lesse 〈◊〉 the●● s●ules . 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . Conc. Constantinop . Can 5. & Calched . Conc. in Act. Ambr. in Psal . Hieron . ad Eusto●h . a And not onely to the nowe liuing , but to the veroe Saints in glory . Witnes their owme Cardinal Tolet in Sūma C●●uum l. 1. c. 1. Qui prec●s pe●●● à sa●●●do●e , De●… se ●●cere prae●…s●mit . viz. Sae●e●dotaliter , & 〈◊〉 a part of Church-seruice . Now , if we may offer them to the Saints , the Saints may peter● , aske the n. Why not ▪ So as Tullie Philip. 2. ( guided by the light of nature ) ●rves out against . 〈◊〉 . O h●…inem dete●…lem , for being Cae●…sar . Priest , after his death ; that is , honouring him in publique and Preistly●●shion ●●shion . Hom. in ea verb. Edit . D. Hen. Sauile . Esa . 48. 11. Idest in Gen. c. 19. serm . 43. Item in Acta Apost . c. 16. Hom. 36. in Ethic. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 : God takes it vnkindly at our hands , when we dare not trust him so farre , as to speake for our selues , but set vp other mediators to him in our roome . In 4. senten . Dist . 45. art . 3. quaest . 3. Chrysoft . adds there , Multi in gehēna , pauci in regno . And , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . As he of children , so we of Fathers and authors themselues , vnlesse they be very approoued . 2 Ex Hom. 66. 2d Pop Antioch . vel 26. Hom. in 2. Cor. How. 11. in 4. ad Ephes . If a man 〈◊〉 lost 〈◊〉 relligion , he might finde et at Co●●tant●nople . Act. 7. 5 p. Aeneid . 1. D●●ina 〈◊〉 M● h●… & Ti●…ani . Flor. Rem . l. 8. de orig●…r●s . 〈◊〉 . 3. Who onely hath immortalitit . 〈◊〉 . Tim. 6. Adorate e●…m o●…nes Ang●l● Dei. Heb. 1. Abstinete ab omnis spe●ie ●●●li . 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . a See S. Austen of thi● , lib. 3. de Trinit . in prooem . Item lib. 2. ad Vincent . Vict. Epist . 1● ad Hieron . Epist . 7. ad Marcel . Epist . 48. ad Vinc. Ep. ad Fort. 111. Item lib. 2. de Baptis . contra Donat. cap. 3. S. Hieron . in Ep ad Theoph . aduers . Ioh Hierosolym . Quae omnia apud Grat. 9. Dist . Decret . b Who also distinguishes between Canonita veritas , & Ca●…ca authoritas . In natoli D Agnetis . The very Latine words are these . Quibus 〈◊〉 precibus exo●amus . Not as hee falsely translates them , as seruently as wee may , ( there is no word of feruencie there , or any such thing : ) but doubting belike that shee was cleane out of the hearing of prayers ; which we also thinke . Apud Nazianz. Epitaph . Gorg. Orat. in eam rem . Epist 6. quae ad Philadelph . So Luk. 1. 76. Et tu puer . Yet the child vnderstood not Zacharie prophecying . Vnles we will continue the miracle , as I graunt some of the Fathers do , Origen , Theophylact , &c. but sure it needs not . And againe , 1. Cor. 15. O death , O hell , where is thy sting , or thy victorie ? De resurrect , carnis . S. Cyprian , Orat. de lapsis . will not allowe Martyrs to helpe vs afore the day of iudgement : much lesse I should thinke those , whose state is either miserable , or at the best but vncertaine . Credimus quidem posse apud indicem plurimum 〈◊〉 martyrum , &c. sed cum iudicij dies venerit , post occasuns saeculi , &c. And soone after , Putemusne quenquam priùs quàm vindicetur ipse , alios posse desendere ? Shall any helpe another , that is yet vnreuenged himselfe ? Yet so are all the Saints & Martyrs , Apoc 〈◊〉 . 10. Howbeit Emanuel Sain Aphor . 〈◊〉 . O●atio , is for soules in purgatorie to be praved to and all . Possu●● 〈◊〉 & an●… quae sunt in Purgatorio , sayes he . So crosse he is to Cyprian , and in the other extremitie cleane . But to which side soeuer of the two you encline , they both consute the Adioynders fiction here , that the Fathers would pray more confidently to Saints departed , but for feare of purgatorie . Nune cognoui , . i. s●re & ipsum , & a●… fect de Abrahem . Gen. 22. 12. Therefore Abraham a Saint declared . 2 If thou hast any 〈◊〉 to discerne and heare things here done . Ne●… cognoscit Deum ex simulachro . A●…tisthenes apud Theodor . contr . Graec. 1. Tom. 7. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . A●… speakes to his waxen image of Cupid , saying he will fire it , vnlesse it en●…e him . A iust reason to burne Popish idols ( euen out of the mouth of an idolater ) because they kindle to no good . The same S. Austen lib. 5. contra Iulian. c. 2. when Iulian had said , that he borrowed his arguments from the pictures of Adam and Eue , repels that slaunder with this peremptorie deniall , that , Non à pictore inanium sigurarum , sed à doctore diuinarum literarum ; shewing vs what we should trust to . And yet both Aquine and Bellarm argue from pictures in the question of Peters primacie , and againe sarre worse about the dolours of Christs soule . If it were so ( sayes Bellar. ) we should haue seen him painted in Churches tormented by the Deuils , &c. De anima Christi . l. 4. c. 8. Is not this a graue handling of controuersies , trow you , especially with them that find fault with our lightnes ? Act. Apost . Ad curuādam infoelicem animam . In Psal . 113. De resurrect . carn . c. 3. The peoples heart is but ashes . Vide supr . c. 3. Resolut . Theolog . Item Francis . Mayron . Vita Chrysost . per Anonymum . To seeke to Angels , may be construed , to resort to the Ministers for helpe , who are our Angels . Simile apud Dionys . ●●copin epist . ad Demophilum . Exhort . ad Martyres . Di●●ys . in epist . praecita●… ad D●… : Deut haeret ●…ter & cum 〈◊〉 qui cum deserunt . God sticks l●…gly euen to them that forsake him . It is enough that Angels cannot diuide vs ●tó Christ , but they mediate not for vs , Rom. 8. where ver 26. and v. 34. we haue two persons in the very Trinitie , one 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , another 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for vs. As many as the mysterie of their relations would permit . And need we more ? Ibi habitat iustitia , . i. Christus . Pet 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . 1. Pet 3. 15. Coster . Enchirid. Felix culps quae talem MERVIT redemptorem . The Papists make the Iewes to haue had a worship of God incōmunicable to creatures , namely sacrifice , vs none , since now sacrifices are ceased . So much are the Iewes perfecter thē the Christians by their reckoning . * Apologet. Thou that hearest the prayer , ( viz & beside whome none els ; i● is made Gods property ) to thee shall all flesh ●ome . Psal . 64 ●●cumdum vulga● . 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , i ( say some which are no raw Grecians ) ad refricandam apud patrem memoriam mei , to bring the father in ren ēbrance of me , and my pretious and powerfull sacrifice . S. Chrysostome also saying to this purpose , that the time of praying is while the King is set , . i. during the communion , and so long he graunts any thing . I thinke the Bishop will not diuie , her that 〈◊〉 . Ambrose might very lawfully haue d●sired the people to pray to God to represent Theodosius in his children , though S. Ambrose say , Tu solu● 〈◊〉 gandu●… , 〈◊〉 , &c Therefore , Tu solu● 〈◊〉 du● , may stand with prayer to Saints . Adioyned . Another shift of the Adioynd . Consuted three wayes . 1 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . Con● . Neocaesar . Can. 4. Adioynd . num . 34. Cap. 3. hulus . Basil . Orat. in Iulittam . Nyssen Orat. 1. itemque 2. de Orat. dom . Chrysost hom . 3. in Gen. Damase . l. 3. de side Orthod . c. 24. And Clichtoueus in his Cōment . vpon Damas . calls it completam definitionem orationis , a perfect de sinition of prayer . Sylvester , Nauarrus , diuers other Papists retaine the same . Indiuidua sunt insimta . Christ is better then tenne Angels , that is , then all , saith Albinus Alcuin . De peenitent . Christ fits at the right hand of God to make request for vs. De ciuit . dei . lib. 8. c. 27. Sic Greg. de Val. T. 3. Comm. Disp . 6. q 11. puncto 5. de Idololatria . Vide eundem Greg. vbi suprà , frigidissimè & hoc & alia defendentem . Atque iterum in libris de rebus fidei controuerfis , lib. singulari de Idolol . eadem ad verbum repetentem . * Nehem. 15. 14. Remember me , O my God , con●●r●…g what I haue done for the house of God , &c. & in fine . Remember me , O my God , for good . Cant. 1. 7. Cant. 3. 5. If the Church be of such authoritie for beeing the p●ll●r of truth , what shall we say of him that beares the Church it selfe , not the Pope , but Chrysostome● 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . In concione apud Georg. Alex. in vita cius . Ioseph . Antiq. l. c. 3. Ex 8. lib. de Graec. morbis curandis . Contr. Collyrid . In his Three Conversions of England , but namely part . 3. in the moneth of March. Chap. 7. It followes , not-onely that , &c. but that Saintsheare the prayers that are made vnto them , seeing that they obtaine the graunt therof , and giue succour to their suppliants . Adioynd . numb . 45. De scriptor . Ecclesias● . * Full of faith and reason . * A fitof contradiction between the Adioynd . & himselfe , in num 29. and num . 55. where he calls it a necessarie duty , vnlesse he mean necessarie , but not to saluation , to destruction rather . a De ciuit . dei . * Concil . Tolet. 3. can . 11. Irreligi●sa Consuetudo est , quam vulgut agere consu●…t in se●●i●●tatibus Sanctorum : Both Custome and Multitude are to be condemned , if they be wrong . Cic. de leg . ex . 12. tab . To balke the Law of God , is to decline to heresie . Apud Theodoret. hist . l. 4. c. 1● . Apud Gelas . Cyzic Apud Lip●… . In Epist . 5. Cant Can. loc . com . de Pont. Rom. autho rit . a De Orat. dominic . Obserue that word Obseruance , For by that , Greg. de Val. his distinction is taken away , that denyes the worship of relligion to Saints , but graunts the worship of Obseruance . See hereafter , Cap. 8. b Aquine further quotes Deut. 4. Haec est sapientia vestra , &c. and Act. 20. Non sub erfugi annunciare vobis OMNE consilium Dei. Euen as we doe against the Papists , denying the Scriptures sufficiencie . Adiovnd . ex Hi●… . contia Lucifer . cap. 4. & alijs . To●ius orbis in hanc partem consens●● insta● praecepti obtin●ret . But euery bodie may see that he speakes not this dogmatically , but insultingly ouer his aduersaries , after he had foyled them otherwise sufficiently , by Scripture . Adioynd . Numb . 60. As if a man should say that for a man to be recommended to the prayers of the Bishop of Ely , is not to ●raue the help of his prayers in particular , but to wish that the Kings MAIESTIN , and all English Protestants , may pray for 〈◊〉 . * S. Hieron . in Ep. Pauli . item Chrysost . & Aug. in varijs locis . & S. Athan. in Epist , ad Serapion . Baronius Annal. Tom. 2. Anno 226. sect . 12. brings another reason out of Maximus , as if the very neighbourhood of the Saints bodies auailed the soules of them that lie buried by them , against damnation : so does superstition encrease in despight of S. Austen here , after once it hath broken loose : yet Maximus hauing ascribed somewhat to the Saints , dares not rest there , but brings vs home to our selues againe , as time was , saying , Attamen consocij sanctitate . Hymn . Adioynd . Numb . 62. The prayer whereof S. Austen speaketh here , cannot be said to be made generally to Christ , and to all his mysticall bodie , ●ccording to the Bishops glosse , but particularly 〈◊〉 Sanctis tanquam 〈◊〉 , to the s●… Saints as to their patrones , and eidens Maytyri , to the same Martyr , by whose tombe the b●dies of the dead are buried . S. Cyprian lib. 3. Epist . 6. & lib. 4. Ep. 5. Meminit oblationum pro marlyribus . Sacrificia proijs ( inquit ) somper offerimu● . Whereas one cannot offer praiers for a Martyr , without doing him in●…ie , faith S. Austen . Those oblations therefore neither were prayers , nor went with praiers . S. Epiphan , also●…resi ●…resi A●… , thus hath , reciting whom they pray for . Proi●stis , & Patribus , & Patriarchis , & Prophetis , Apostolit , Euangelstis , Martyribus , Confessoribus , Episcop●… , Ana. horet●… , ac ▪ pro ●…iuer so ord●… . Massaeus in de vita Ignat. l. 2. c. 6. S. Ambrose saith of Valentinian , that hee is in luce perpetua , in tranquillitate diuturna , in detectatione florenti● in light never sayling , in rest a●xaies lasting , and in flourishing delectation . How much short of heauen then , I would faine knowes * Confess . l 9. c. 13. Aug. de cluit . dei , l. 22. c. 8. The Councell forbids praying to Angels . The Papists maintaine cultū Angelorum , Angels worship , which is idolatry , by Theodorets exposition of the Councell of Laodicek . Not vnlike to Qu●… Mambre in Sozom. lib. 1. c. 3. at which Pars pieces deo omnium mederatori fundunt , pars ●bi Angel●s invo●ant . Quisque prout singulorum poscit relligio , &c. So that one and the same relligion calls not vpon God & Angels ; yet F. T. would haue it so ; which is the worse . Vbi supra . 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . 1. Pet. 4. 3. Ierem. 2. 13. Rom. 5. 2. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . v. 6. Christian inuocation hath this property ' that one person beeing praied to , all are praied to . Which is not so in prater to Saints . For neither , if one Saint be called vpon , another is , nor if the Saint be praied to , therefore is God called on . And this latter much lesse . Because God and the Saints are farther off in nature , then the Saints betweene themselues . Which shews how repugnant praier to Saints is to the Christian inuocation . Eph. 2. 18 We haue accesse to the father , through Christ , in one Spirit . The whole Trinitie is named ; but no Saint needfull to the procuring of our accesse . Note this consequence of S. Chrysost . which the Iesuits deride . Call vpon me , saith God : Ergò not vpon creatures , though they be Saints or Angels . Adde hereunto another excellent declaration of S. Chrisost . iudgement touching prayer to S●… C●… . in 1. Cor. 〈◊〉 . at those words , With all that call vpon the name of our Lord Iesus Christ ; 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ( saith he ) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . Not this 〈◊〉 and that man● name , but onely Christ● . Card. Al●●s Answer to the Apolog . of Engl. Iust . See Speed in He● . 〈◊〉 . Idem habet Greg hom . 6. in Evang. & hom . ●5 . Quid est quòd duo Angeli videntur in loco dominici corporis , nisi quia Latinâ linguâ Angelus nuncius dicitur , & ille ex passione sua nunciandus erat qui est Deus , &c. Hom. 8. in Euang. Non habere dedignantur hominem socium , qui super se adorant hominem deum . Of the same minde are Beda , Ruportu● , Anselm●● , Richardus , &c. all quoted by the Adioynder himselfe , cap. 9. to this very purpose . Leo serm . 12. de Passione Dom. Adioynd . vbi suprà . Rib●…ra de vitâ ●gnat . l. 3. c. 2. Scho. Ios . de vitâ B●rg . l. 2. c. 12. Quaest . 30. Photius in Comm. hulus loci . makes the error to haue beene this . Quod obsecrandi essent Angeli , ( that by this we may know how to weigh S. Ambroses , Obsecrandi sunt Angeli , totidem verbi● ) and all because we are not worthy to come to God of our selues , not yet to be brought on by Christ : The very Poperie that we protest against at this day . Item Iohan. A. poc . 22. 15. In Poperie it is now turned , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , Lawfull Idolatrie , according to Valent . his distinct . In Coloss●… . 〈◊〉 . Adioynd . num . 13. Adioynd . Num. 14 Let him tell me how the Angels and Saints in heauen pray for vs , or how the humanitie of Christ heareth our praiers , and knoweth our actions , &c. Psal . 6. Esa . 65. vpon which words S. Austen , de cura pro mort . cap. 13. St tanti Patriarcha nescisbant populum ex se procreatum , & di●…tùs promissum , &c. Psal . 27. 12. Ecclesiast . 9. 5. Iosias subtractus ne videret malumiquod & Aug. adducit vbi priùs . Adioynd . num . 17. Abbas Serenus . apud Cass . Coll. lib. 7. c. 16. Velut quodam de intimis concl●…b us prode●… tinnit●s , quid sit reconditum in abdi●is interioris hominis recognoscunt . And , vt the saurum corporis nostri explorent , noxias suggestiones quasi arenas inspergunt . Apocal. Quaest . 11. ad Antiochum . Lib. de vera virginit . Nullus est ex his qui non singula vbique consideret . De viduit . Adioynd . Num. 21. In eadem opinione est Viega in hunc locu●n , nec Ribera negat multos sentire . 〈…〉 worse then that in Te●… Per●… 〈◊〉 ipsi 〈◊〉 est ●…tro●● quem d●f●●so●… 〈◊〉 . Deut. 5. 3. & 17. 20. &c. D●…verbo Dei , vb 〈◊〉 . D●uter . ●2 . 〈◊〉 . 〈◊〉 2● . 〈◊〉 . Prou 30. 6. Deuter. 4●… & D●ut●● ▪ 〈◊〉 . 〈◊〉 Psalm . 119. Numb . 26. c. 8. Adioyr . Put case that this commandement was generall in the o●dlaw , will the Bishop inferre that it is to be extended to the new Law ? &c. If these wor●… shall be vnderstood as the Bishop taketh them , then the solemne feasts ordained by Mard●che●s , I●…h , and the Macchabees , to wit , that of the Dedication which our Sauiour honoured with his presence , Ioh. 10. had been vnlawfull , &c. Adioynd . Ier. 2. 28. & 11. ●3 . S. Iohn thought this a sufficient restraint of superfluous prayer , 1. Ioh. 5. 16. Non dico , I doe not say , insinuating , that in praier we must hold no other course , then Scripture leads to , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ; how much more then , whē the Scripture shall say , No , or Vide ne , as the Angel himselfe said to S. Iohn ? Apoc. 22. Simulac introiut in Sanctuarium , tunc cognoui Psa . Timothy taught in the Scriptures frō a child , which were able to consummate him a MAN a man of God , 2. Tim. 3. 15 , 16 , 17. Adioynd . numb . 28. It is euident that our Sauiour did not command any thing at all to be written , &c. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . The Adioynders absurd slaunder of the Bishop throughout both questions , both of Princely supremacie , and Scriptures sufficiencie , concerning Gods worship , that he is Iewish . But onely in not casting such a hogge as he . 4 1. Cor. 7. 14. The worme our sister , and corruptió our mother . Iob. & ex eo Greg hoc sensu . cap●3 ●3 . Places alleadged by the Adioy●d Num. 〈◊〉 . &c. Can Ecclesiast . 30 in the Synod at London Anno . 1603. Can. qui ptiùs . Conference at 〈◊〉 . An Owle at C●●stance in the Councel . Manual . c. 22. num . 6. Male●●cta glossae , quae corrumpat textum . S. Greg lib. 1. Regist . Ep. 24. sheweth this sweetly , by a comparison of two men , that walke together in a slippery place , & each holds vp the other from falling . Impendo quod peto , sed recipiam quod impendo . No such exchange between Saints in heauen & vs. See cap. 8. huius . It is to bee noted , that notwithstanding this clause , per Christum Dominum nostrum , the Papists haue other prayers to Saints in which there is no such . Which Greg. de Val. beeing to answer to , hath no refuge but this ; Quaererem ab ijs qui tantâ diligentiā eiusmodi praecandi formulas in obsoletis & corrosis voluminibus venantur , our illis magis qu●…n alijs mouentur , &c. A pitifull defence . Tom. 3. Comment . Theol. Disp . 6. Qu. 11. punct . 5. § At interdum . Dio in Tiberio . So 2. King. 13. 23. thus we read ( which cleeres this point ) And the Lord was grations vnto them , and had compassion on them , and had respect vnto them , because of HIS COVENANT with Abraham , Isaac , and Iacob , &c. Cic. Philipp . R. P. the Iesuits style . The Adioynder chargeth vs wi●h Vigilantius his heresie . And yet he would haue the questiō det●rmined by verdict of Bishops . Whereas Hierome reports ●…ripto prime cont . Vigilant . that the Bishop of the place , and he a holy man , winkt at Vigilantius . Miror sanctum Episcopum , in cuin● parochia esse Presbyter dicitur , acquiesiere 〈◊〉 eius . Yea , he speaks of him , as if he had runne the same course with him ; Videbat furem , & curreba● cum eo , &c. How then shall the Bishops direct , our iudgement ? Also Iulian ( apud August in lib. 1. è posterior . 〈◊〉 . ) acknowledges , that there were 650. Bishops , who tooke part with Arius ; scarse 7. remaining Catholique , in the whole world . Hilar. in Matth. can . 16. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . Aug. de Vnit. eccl . c. 10. saies Christ prooued his bodies resurrection , not by his body , though hee had it to shew , but by Scrip. And S. Chrys . saies , that Christ lost his head ( or his life ) onely to fulfill the Scrip. [ So as Script . is preferred by Christ himselfe , both before his head and his body . ] Heman Matth. 84. Stabula earum illic . Ezech. 34. Ne sibi plebi blandiatur , quasi immunis à contagione delicto esse possit , cum sacerdote peccatore communicans , & ad iniustum atque illicitum praepositi sui Episcopatum , consensum suum accommodans , cum per Oseam deus doceat omnes omnino ad peccatum constringi , qui fuerint profuni & iniusti sacerdotis sacrificio cotaminati . Apostatare à side , Lyr. in Matt. Apostatici , saltem apotastici , PP . Geneb . August . cp . 48. Commonitorio . 〈◊〉 Actis . Lib 7. loc . c. 1. Omnes Sancti vno ore , asseverarunt B. Vrginem in peccata conceptā . Vnlesse you will admit of the rotten glosse of Pa●… de Palacio , in his Comm. vpon S. Matth. cap. 5. that the Si indeede is put vpon the salt degenerating , because Salt stands for life and good manners , and Popes and Prelates may faile in them , but not vpon the Light. It is not said , if the light be darkned , to shew that Prelates cannot faile in truth of Doctrine . This he . Why then does he call the Pope , Sal salium , in the same place ? Is it because his manners cannot be tainted neither ? Or , why does he say , that Praelatus satuus mittendus est foras ? Shall the Pope be deposed for euill life ? It is not the fashion . Or lastly , why does he argue from , In quo salietur ? co prooue that the Pope hath no superiour to salt him , and therfore concludes , that he cannot turne foolish , because Christ ( saies he ) left nothing without remedie . Is not the dunghill his remedie ? And yet in another place , he allowes the Pope to be Pope , though his light turne darknes , as well as his salt follie . Papa tenet cathedram etsi ignirantissimus : in 16. Matth. How doe these things hang together ? The same he hath often , in libr●… posterioribus contra Iulian. hac anno primùm ed●… . per Claud. Menardum . p. 170. 172. & 194. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . ●…r . 12. Os & labia ponuntur pro toto homine . Espencaei obseruatio in ad Tit & est ve●issima . Ecclesiast . Deut. 13. 1. &c. Gal 1. 8. Com. in locum . * 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ( idolatry at lest ) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 apud Euseb . lib. 3. c. 32. Vide & Euseb . lib. 4. c. 7. & c. 21. Clem. Alex. Strom. lib. 7. Tertul. de Praescrip . Ammian . Marcellin . l. 21. Christianā relligionem absolutam & simplicem anili superstitione confundens . De Constan . Hegesippus , Tum quidem ecclesiam virginem fuisse , idque antonomasticè , vt declarat Baro. tom . 2. Ann. 120. At deinde faciem eius nec decoram , nec spectātibus dignoscibilem , sed instar solis densis obtecti nubibus ; atque errores aperto capite in eam irruisse . De praep . Euan. lib. 12. & 13. Item in Cant. hom . 3. Non erit inconueniens sic putare . In Ios . c. 3. Ego sic arbitror . And , Audiui quendam ita dicentem . This is great certaintie , no doubt . So Euseb . of Potamiaena , lib. 6. c. 5. that vndertooke to intercede for Basilides after her death : 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . Bee it as it may be , as not greatly beleeuing it . Valeat vt valere potest . Coster . Enchir. de venerat . Sanct. We approach by Christ to worship the Father , because by him we are reconciled to the Father . Christ a sufficient bringer to the Father , because a sufficient teacher of him . De Satr . Euchar. lib. 4. cap. 〈◊〉 As OVR RIGH PRIEST . But the Saints are not so . Yet this is Origens appropriating reason here . And if the Schoolemen denie that an Angel may minister the cōmunion , what more right haue they to of●… our praiers ? Is it not a priestly action ? Angels obedient to godly men . * 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . If 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , bee M●… praied vnto , ( see cap. 〈◊〉 . h●… ) thē here Angels helpe vs , though they be not praied vnto . But whether it be so , or not , Origen is direct against praying to them . For if we may not vocare , how much lesse invocare ? Matth. 25. 54. Luk. 24. 26. item ibid. 44. Idem habet Chrys . hom . 8. in Matth. Let them know . Creatures worship not creatures . Let them know . a Per Christum Dom. nostrum , vsed to the Saints . b A new way of redemption out of the Papists new-fangle intercessions ; and like that of the Persians , beating the robe , for the noble mans offence . S. Chrysost . contrariwise , ( before quoted in 3. ad Coloss . ) saith , the honouring of Angells canie from the Deuills enuying of vs and our honuor : which in all likelihood he more malignes . See also Epiphan . quoted in the 9. cap. & how often he puts all this idolatrie to Saints and Images , vpon the Deuill . 1. Earthly Monarchie . Lib. 5. de Pont. Rom. See c. 1. h●…s . § 42. 2 Supererogation . We cannot answer him one of a thousands Iob. And S. Chrys . The most righteous of all need mercye in Ep. ad Philip. c. 1. Serm. 4. at large . Idem habet D●…s . Ep ad Demoph . Idem Epiph haeresi A●… discrimen hoc assignans , inter Christum , & alius Sanctos : quod & apparere vult in funcribus mortuorum . Aug. lib. 9. confess . c. 13. Neque enim responde bit illa nihil se debere , ne convincatur &c. praeclarè . In the places quoted by the Adioynder . 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , a fit resemblāce for an oecumenicall Pastor . * S. Aug. ad Bonifac . l. 3. c. 3. If you say the Apostle , and name not which Apostle , we vnderstand Paul. contra Psych . The Adioynders examples . T. 8. D. Savile . Ser 〈◊〉 . 1. in S. Apost Paulum , & saepiculè aliàs . 3 Adoration of Christ . De Rom. Pont. l. 4. c. 16. Ambros . lib. 3. de Sp. Sanct. c. 12. Aug. in Psal . 98. In Psal . 118. Nunquam deposuit quod semel assumpsit Axiom . Theol. Also Cornel. Mus . com . in Rom. 8. Sacramentum Eucharistiae est Ipsa Gratia : which is Christs title , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . Tit. 2. 11. 4 Adoration of Relliques . a As S. Chrysost . in vlt. ad Coloss . at those words , Salutatio mea Pauli , manu meâ . 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , &c. It was like they would find themselues somewhat affected , at the sight of Pauls hand . Yet not to worship the paper . So we at relliques . Yet S. Pauls hand-writing not inferiour perhaps to relliques . b The same saies Constantius apud Athan. Graecol . p. 716. in epist . ad Episc . Arimini congregatos , de doctrinâ & verbo , which S. Austen saies de codice . 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . Behold the booke and doctrine venerable , or worthie to be worshipped . What more of the Sacrament , or where the like of the species ? c S. Austen is of another minde , quaest . in Gen. 23. Corrigendus fuerat adorator Angeli . The worshipper of the Angell , ( viz. S. Iohn ) was to be reformed . Therefore he might erre . Yea therefore he did erre . Act. 14. * S. Greg. idē repetit , in Com. Cant. 8. praeter locos alibi citatos . Now Reader iudge , who comes neerer to Iudaesme , the Bishop , and the Church of England , as F. T. obiects in diuers places , or they that reuiue the worshipping of Angels vnder the new , which these Authors confiue to the old Testament . Apolog contra Gentes . When the late king of France Henrie 4. did M. Beza such like honour , dismounting from his horse , and running to embrace him , maruaile but this was relligious adoration , in our Adioynders fancie . Adioynd . cap 9. Numb . 14. Greg. Hom. 29. in Huang Corporali● miracula , ost●●dunt aliqu●●de sanctitatem , no● 〈◊〉 . Haymo hath the same word●s with Primasius . Respons . ad Apolog . pag. 201. Dan. 2. Com. in 11. ad Hebr. Homil. 26. in Ethico . The Adioynder sinds a knot in a bulrush , a contradiction in the Bishop where none is . * Chrysost in Epist ad Coloss . p 114. lin 20. edit . D. H. Sauile . Vide pag. 249. h●ius c. 6. & adde eundem August . de vnitat . Eccl. pluribu● locis . Hieron . aduersus Vigilant . Aeneid . 4. Chap. 10. Adioynd , sub finé . 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . Serm. de Temp. Psalm . Chrysost . &c. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , &c. Theod. lib. 3. histor . cap. 10. Contr. Petili . 〈◊〉 . &c. Contr. Parmen . lib. 〈◊〉 . In Lucam . Noui multos sepulchrorum adoratores , &c. Et in Epist . Hieron . quoque . Vid. Epist . eius . Imper●tores Honori●s & Theodosi●● Augg. legē tulerunt , Nemo martyres distrahat , ( this was to put the Martyrs to a second death , I am ●os secunda 〈◊〉 ma●et , to speake with Bo●thi●● ) nemo mercetur . By the way , note the power of Kings commanding about matters of relligion . But more fully , read Gregor . T●● . l. 9. c. 6. and that hideous historie of a Rellique-monging impostor , with his sachel full of rats-bones , and roots , and the teeth of moales , and the fat of beares , &c. Yet hee concludes , Multi sunt qui 〈◊〉 s●…ctiones exercent , & populum rusticum in errorem mittere non desinunt . De quibus opinor Dominus in Euangelio , Surrecturos in novissimis qui etiam electos in errorem inducant , &c. Is it not pitie that we Englishmen , will not traffike with the Iesuits , for such ghostly commodities ? De Civit. Dei. l. 10 , c. 1. & quaest . in Genes . Quaest , in Gen. 23. The two questions still crosse , or rather kisse one another , of our subiection to Princes , and deuotion to God. * I meane odious euen to the Saints thēselues . Witnesse Chrysost . Homil. 9. in 3. ad Coloss . See pag. 293 huius . 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . 1. Tim. 5. 〈◊〉 . * Falsly printed in Valentia , 10. 3. Sic de moritus Eccl. c. 34. &c. Heb. 12. 1. Aug. de Morib . Eccl. Cath. c. 30. Meritò ecclesia Catholiea nullam nobis creaturam adorandam inducit , cui servire iubeamur . Remouet à creaturâ adorationem etiam eam quae cum simplici seruitute coniunctaest . Quorsum ergò de Dulia ? S. Austen would haue both duliae and latria giuen to God , not to Saints . 1 〈◊〉 Lao Serm 8. de Nat. Dom. Ne● sunt gradus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , ●c . 2 De obit . Theodos . Contra Faust . Manich. Sed & contrà Crese . Grammat . Grammat . 2. c. 15. Honoramus Sacramenta in gestante . The Adioynd . of Helen , numb . 29. Vbi priùs . Apolog 2. advers . Ruff. The Card , inferreth with the blessed Apostle , that seeing the sinne of Adam was of force to make vs truly sinners , the merits and grace of Christ are of farre greater force , to purge and cleanse vs from our sinnes , and to make vs truly iust : otherwise our helpe is not equiualent to our harme , our remedy to our disease , our rising to our fall , nor our gaine to our losse , nor consequently Christ to Adam , &c. The Adioynders clo quence , numb . 40. To the 2. Pronihilo salvos facies eos ; which construction of the Fathers in this sense , ( though deflected ) Andradius himselfe mislikes not , but erounds a rule vpon it for the like expositions . Defens . Concil . Trid. calling it , expositio per accommodationem : ( belike , though praeter scopum . ) * S Hierom Co●… . in Epist . ad Philem , at those words , Mihi imputa , acknowledges the like betweene Christ and vs ( for matter of Imputation ) is was betweene Paul and Philemon : saying immediatly , Imitator domini sui , & Christū in se loquentem habens , ea debet sacere quae Christus , &c. ●rat in S. Baptis●… . 1. 15. Aug. l. 2. Ré●r . & , lib. de perfect . iusticiae . Hieron . etiam in Hier. 31. Bernard . in fest . omn. Sanct. homil . 3. Thom. part . 3. q. 8. art . 3. ad 1. To the I. Ista decē menses non peperere bona . Prop. Card. in Apol. c. 7. p. 84. l. 19. as the Adioynder quoteth him in this 9 cap. numb . 33. pag. 387. Vbi priùs . Iosh . 17. Cor ipsum eum cupiditatibus evellendum . Sen. Can 69. of approching the Altar . This is like the woman-philosophers elench , apud Laert. l. 8. in Hipparch . 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . Non sequitur 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . * De vit . Constant . l. 1. c. 37. see ibid. l. 3. c. 13. item c. 22. 23. &c. Of Felix his apparition after death , ex Aug. de cutâ pro mortu●… . c. 1● . 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , & , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 sunt Apostolo , Heb. 13. * I meane not a culpable obliuion in the Saints , as was in the Butler , but as they cōplaine in Esay , Israel nesciuit nos , or , Terra obliuionis , in Iob ; and , All his thoughts perish . In sepulchre quis meminit tu●… Pl. 6. a Iosephs . 2. Cor. 4. 4. Christ is the image of the inuisible God. As who would say , No image of God ( because inuisible ) but onely Christ . In him we see God. This fault is called by the Adioynder , The Bishops abuse of Authors , partly in wresting their sense , partly in fraudulent citation of them . And I will beginne , saith he , with his abuse of the Cardinall . Adioynd . Num. 54. Ostentation of merits so farre from the Cardinals humilitie and 〈◊〉 , 〈◊〉 . And this not secundum exigentiam operis , but either proportionem studierum , or condecentiam b●… d●… . They are the words of your owne shop . Cap. 3. ●…s . Faith in essentiali , and as it is habitus . For augmentum and intensio , belong ad grad●… gloriae , or ad cumulum praem●… , as other v●…tues doe in their totall . * Maria autem assidebat Christo , while Martha attends other necessarie prouisions , A semblant perhaps of Faith and her sister Charitie . De Humilitate . Com. in Epi●… ad Colos p. 114. Edit . Etonensis , Nobilissi●… D. Sauilij . Stella , Suarez , with Bellarm , and diuerse others , plead for an honourable saluation , which they thinke is by our works . As if we were to God , as Tully to Caesar , Minus me debere tibi putarem , si vt sceleratum me à te conseruatum existimarem . Pro Marcell . Which is nothing so . But , cum adhuc inim●ci essemus . Rom 5. Mercy reioyceth against iudgement . Iac. 2. 13. specially in that day , and in altero saeculo saith S. Austen For he had said a little before , as of the time to come 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Born. in Cant. serm . 71. Ego fidenter mihi vsurpo ex visceribus domini mei , &c. Anselme exhort . al fratrem moriturum : Obijcio mortent filij tui inter te & me , aliter tecum non contendo . Idem in meditat . Conscientia mea meruit damnationeni , poenitentia mea non sufficit ad satisfactionem , sed misericordia tua super omne opus meum . What maruell , cum super omne opus suum ? Haeres 77. apud Epiph. quae Collyridian . Anchorato . Totum hoc mulieris opinio est . And Hi enim qui hoc docent , quinam sunt praeterquam multeres ? * Pergamus deum inuocantes vt opituletur , quò veritatis partes investigemus , &c. And in like sort he had begun , Pro viribus deum inuocantes contra hanc haeresim dicemus . And , Vt quorundam rabiem in Deo exoluere possimus , &c. The dead not to be worshipped . Much lesse images either of dead or liuing . Whereas Epiphan . in all this tract , dwelleth so much vpon those words , speaking of B. Marie , Non est Deus , she is no God , it is a greater abatement of her honour , then perhaps the Pap. will graunt , who will easily say , that they hold her not for God , ( thongh some of them haue called her so , euen lately ) and it may be expounded by that of Dionys . in Epist . 4. ad Caium Monachum , Iesus ne homo quidem erat , non quòd non esset homo , sed quòd homines longè superaret . The Virgin is denied to be God therfore , as not so highly Superiour , no not to men . * Hieron . ad Theodoram v. duam de morte Lucini Betici mariti sui : & addit , Confundatur haresti quae ideo incerta & magna promittit ( to the Saints no doubt ) vt quae certa & moderata sunt auferat . a Virgo , virgo , like S. Hieromes Maria , Maria. * Not so much as magis eximia , But with the Papists no superlatiues are enough in their Hyperduliae● Epiphan . remooues from her the comparatiue degree here . 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . ad Timoth. This day rife in Poperie , and specially about the Virgin. See Don● . Eliens . Resp ad Apol. p. 175. So Concil . Eliber . ( a verie auncient Councell of Spaine ) can . 60. condemnes a practise ( seeming most relligious ) Quia in Euangelio non est scriptum , neque inuenitur ab Apostolis vnquam factitatum : Because the Apostles did it not , and the Gospels haue it not . The Virgin not assumed in Epiphan . opinion . Where I cannot but exemplifit the ●…regious fondnesse of him that compiled the Index to Epipha● . latine , of the Paris edition , 1564. that scores the pag. 107. l. t. to n. 3. to prooue that Epiphan held the virgins bodie to be assumed . For what words thinke you ? By which onely hee would shew that the flesh is not simply euill , because the Virgin cum suá 〈◊〉 p●ssideb●t regn●m c●… , &c. The assumption of the Virgin , is left in dulio , by Charles . Legum F●… . l. 1. c. 158. Epi●h . interprete Iano Cornario , cum repurgatione ind●●●s , & praefatione totius libri per Iacobum Fabrum , Doctorem Sorbonicum , i●pressus Par. sijs . 1564. The Papists notes vpon Epiphanius concerning Poperie . The Bish . words are in the same place , Magnificè de quatuor pri●… , &c. Pariter is not aequaliter with S. Gregorie , but as the Adioynder truly Englishes it ( for lacke of too much Latine perhaps ) together with . And it is to be noted , that S. Greg. lib. 3. cp . 37. is easily perswaded by Constantius Bishop of Millan , to passe ouer the fift Councell , & quatuor solummodo synodos laudare . Whereas it had been hard to leaue out one of the 4. Gospels , for scandals sake . Ergo he held it not in the account , which he doth the other . The Bishop alleadgeth not onely Gregorie , but Isidore , who names quatuor Synodos principales , and no more . But of him not a word frō F. T. because he was not for his carping . Adioynd . numb . 60. And doth hee not ( Greg ) acknowledge the infallible veritie of the 5. Councel , as wel as of the other , holding him for accursed , who doth reiect any thing determined by any of the 5. & c ? And what other reason doth he alleadge , but because they were all 5. held by generall consent , giuing euidently to vnderstand , that a generall Councell lawfully assembled , representeth the whole Church of God , and is infallibly guided by the holy Ghost . Yet B●llarm . being to auouch the iner●ablenes of Councels , quotes for proofe thereof , S. Gregories iudgement onely of the fowre first , and not a word of the fift . De Concil . author . l. 2. c. 3. quoting Greg. l. 1. cp . 24. The 1. Exception of the Adioynder . Deut. 33. ver . 5. Deut. 17. 15. Coloss . 3. 16. Vide Lipsium in Quaest . Epistolic . l. 2. cp . 23. ad Turconium & Maldechemium , Vix est v●●…sum teneam , &c. Sed melius magnus ille Rex , ( Alphons . scil . ) &c. Apud Anton. Panormit . in vita . Alphons . S. Hierom. reports a faire lesse matter of Hilarion , vet not vnworthy to bee taken notice of , that in ●…u su●… descripsit adolescens Euangeliorum cod cē , which afterward he sold to pay the boa●man for his fare in necessitie . Yet Hilarion no Clearke . In vitâ Hilar. De iust . &c. p. 433. 3. F. T. is full of this diuinitie in his first chapter of the Adioynd . Epist . 50. The people rage , because the Princes stand vp , and take part against Christ . 4. Exception of the Adioynder to the place in Deut. 5. Exception of the Adioynd . Hesiod . The Adioynder finds in the Bishop , ●ucul● interualla . Comman vlt. Actor . The same Chrysost . notes the like of Ioseph , that being cast into prison , &c. he neuer told the Butler , and such others as he found there , of his brethrens malice and crueltie towards him , but concealed domesticall scandals . ●●pr . l. 4 epist . 2. ad Antonianum . Neque enim possunt laudare no● qui recedunt a nobis , ●ut expectare deber●… vt placeamu● illis qui nobis displi●… , &c. E●…on-Iohan . confesseth as much , that the English Traytors , Sermonibus su●●●…ora 〈◊〉 ●ala 〈◊〉 , i. aggrauated ●…ir euils with talking . Apolog. Pro. ●e● . Gar● . cap. 9. pag. ●38 . V●●●●●gan . Thea●crudel . haeret . nostri temporis . Adioynd . numb . 76. 76. &c. It seemes strange to the Adioynd●r , that the Puritanes sect should vanish in England , whereas not only the wiseman sayes , Spuria vitulamina non agunt altas radices , &c. but S Cyprian of schisme in particular , S●hismatici semper inter initia seruent , increment● verò habere non possunt , lib. 4. cp . 2. and Epiphan . more particularly yet , of certaine heretiques , called the Ange●… ( for their Purities like enough ) that there was little to be found of their Tenets in his dayes , quiae ad tempus modò durarunt , & illi●ò d●sicrunt ac deleti sunt . Haer. 60. Adioynd . numb . 8● . Adi●ynd . numb . 82. 83. 84. De Naturi & Grat. l. 1. Also Bellarm l. 2. de Grat. & lib. a●b . cap. 7. Hist . Societ . Ies . lib. 〈◊〉 . pag. 10. Notab . 30. Apolog. pro Henr. Garnetto . cap. 4. ipso fine . id est , pag. 112. See the place in the Bishops Answer to the Apologie , cap. 5. in initio . Id est , pag. 113. Which the Adioynder quoteth not ( as his fashion is in all other places ) least his wilfull forgerie and deprauation might be espied , making that to come of conscience , Numb . 84. in two seuerall periods , which the Bishop neuer so much as in the least word insinuateth , to haue proceeded therof . And yet it might be a truth , though reuealed in passion . Sa Iesuita in Aphorism . v. Men●… . Cap. 6. of the Adioynder . About the adoration of Christ in the Sacrament of the Eucharist . Adioynd . cap. 10. num . 4. Athanas . ad Serap . Quòd Spiritus S. non sit creatura . Cyrill . Cateches . 5. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . Bellarm. de Sacr. Eucharist . l. 1. c. 2. where he addes out of S. Bernard , Serm de S. Martino ; that , In Sacramento exhibetur nobis vera carnis ( Christi ) substantia , sed spiritualiter non carnaliter : that is , that the true flesh of Christ is communicated to vs in the Sacrament , yet not carnally , but spiritually . What other doe we teach at this day ? Therefore Bellarm , in the wordes following , puts his finger to his mouth , and giues vs an item , not to talke too much of this point . Non videtur haec vex multùm frequentanda . And , Periculum est ne trahatur ab aduersarijs , &c. * The Rhemists are so confounded in their bodily presen●e , that they make Christs bodie to be a figure of it selfe , in the Sacrament . Rhem. vpon Luk. 12. adding , that Christ is the image of his father , and yet of the same substance with him . But who knowes not , that the Father and the Sonne are two distinct persons , or supposita , so as well may one be image of the other ? But Christs bodie is onely one , and the same . I would they had brought no other images into the church , but such as are the same with the primitiue or prototypon . S. Hierome in Mark. c. 12. saies of Christ , Coniungens in coenā purâ agnum cum pane : finiens vetus , novum inch●ans testamentum . So as the bread remaines . For as the passeouer in the lambe , so the Eucharist in bread : or else the new Testament is not yet begun . And the same Hierome soone after in Mark. 14. Transfigurans corpus suum in panem , formās sanguinem suum in calicem : that Christ be transubstantiated into the elements , not the elements into Christ , by S. Hieromes manner of speaking . But by this , we see , the Fathers were farre from beeing so strict for Trāsubstantiation of the bread ( as the Papists are now adaies ) onely labouring to fulfill the veritie of the Sacrament , and to bring Christ , and his ordinance , together . Comm. in Iohan 19. Church Politie ; vbi de Euchar. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . The rather perhaps , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . Cyrill ipse , Catech. 4. quae est illa quam citat Author . For whereas he addes farther in the same place , that Cyrill was neuer suspected of error about the Sacrament , though he speake so ; it is a meere bauble . As if we dissented from Cyrill , and not from them about the meaning of his words . 1. Cor. 10. cap. itemque●1 . varijs locis & versibu● . Cateches . 4. generali , quae prima in Graeca editione Morel . Anni 1564. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . And , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , &c. Creatura sanctificatur per orationem & verbum dei . 1. Tim. 4. 5. Yet the Author of the Manna , quotes Mr. Casaubone , as if he were astounded with the word . Transmutation , so often occurring in the Greek Fathers . No cause why . * Lib. 4. de Sacram. Eucharist . c. 29. § De modo autem , &c. Nempe [ ipsi Catho●ici ] qui docent Sacramentum Eucharistiae formaliter esse species panis & vini , illi negant Sacramentum hoc , [ nisi materialiter ] esse adorandum . That is to say , that Christ onely is to bee worshipped , and not the Sacrament , vnles we will confound them . a Luther . in formula Missae . & in lib. de verb . s , Hoc est corpus meum , & alihi . b Bucer . in actis colloq . Ratisbon . c Ioh. Brentius in Apolog. pro confess . Wittemberg . Pericop 2. d Chemnit . in 2. part . exam . Trid. Concil . sessione 13. cap 5. Bell. vbi prius , itemque Valent. ijsdem propè verbis , sed ista friuola sunt : Nam Christus non quondam in praesepi vt adoraretur , sed vt ibi requiesceret , & tamen illū Magi in praesepi adorarunt : & cum ambularet in terris , non ambulabat vt adoraretur , & tamen passim adorabatur . Et quando hic in terris Principes aliquò proficiscuntur , non eunt ad eum finem , vt ab occurrentibus salutentur , & tamèn , &c. Quare aduersarij pluris faciunt printipem terrenum , quàm Christum . Vide Greg. de Valent. Tom. 3. Comm. Theol. Disput . 6. quaest . 11. de Idololatria . punct . 4. Expendant Loctores . Bell. vbi priùs , ex Ioh. 4. Non in hoc monte , &c. lib. 4. c. 34. Numb . 6. In cap. 5. M●… spo●si pl●●● hyacinth●● . Iuxta illud , Vbi ego sum , ibi minister mens erit . Greg. I● Mat. can . 5. Merces gratuita , & merces debitae . S. Ambr distinct . 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . Rewarding vs aboue our desert . Geometricall proportion , not arithmeticall . * Rom. 8. 10 , 17 , 1● . Rom. 9. 7 , 8 , Eph. 5. 1. & 5. 8. Phil. 2. 15. And , 1. Pet. 1. 14. 1. Ioh. 3. 1. 2. 10. & saepiùs . ver 2. 5. 15. Chap. 10. num . 6. Luther , and 〈◊〉 , & their fellowes , howsoeuer they teach that good workes may haue some reward ( yea , 〈◊〉 most rich reward ) euen in the next life , yet they denie that they merit eternall saluation , &c. & num . 11. apertiùs . Adioynd . Retract . in Rom. Frontinus stratag . Seclusâ promissione diuinâ non suppetit aliquis sufficiens titulus propter quem Deus debeat compensare tale opus vitâ aeterná . Valent. 8. 6. 4. The Adiovnder quoting it twice , and still false , one time 9. for 6. another , 14. for 4. consundent vestigia circa specum ne capiatur . Misericordia tu● super vitam . Charitas more . The Adioynders words , cap. 10. num . 8. & 9. We are so far from reiecting the consideration of Gods promise , that wee ground the merit of euerlasting life specially thereupon . The monstrous giddinesse of Vasque● , in contradicting ; God may denie reward , but not our desert , saith he , whereas our desert is none , but Gods reward most certain . And to be claimed too , eâ quae par est humilitate , as the Bishop most excellently . That to be disclaymed altogether . Rom. 11. 6. * S. Cyrill ( of whom before ) Catech . 5. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , . i. Most things we do are worthy of condemnation . ( This is more then Venial sinnes . ) And describing the forme of their seruice at Communion , hee sayes of God , ' 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . ibid. . i. God in benefitting vs doth not a iustice , but a thing aboue all iustice , viz. because aboue all desert . Indeed , if we be in hell , then Iustè nos hîc , as the good theefe said ; but if , in bonis , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , More then our right . Chrys . in Matth. 5. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , &c. God euermore giues rewards aboue our designes ( for S. Chrysostome knew no Popish deserts . ) Act. 28. Quoted by the Adioynd . here . In Matth. Non dabo alteri . Why not Sacrifice too , with different intent●… ? Plutarch . Resp . ad Apol. p. 290. c. 12. Mis . sa non fit Eucharistiae ne bis fiat . vt quae per Miss● fiat . Euge , Eugepae . Prou 28. ●4 . Numb . 17. Haeres . Massal . Of this kind see , both others , and Olympia Fu●… 〈◊〉 , Epist . lib. 1. ad Caelium Sec. Curio●em . Fraterculus mens è fenestra excel●a supra saxa decidit . Sed non plus mali habuit , quà●… si in molli humo cecidisset . Vide ibid. lib. 2. Epist Andreae G●…leri de obitu divinissi nae feminae , paulò antē nominatae , & à Pontificijs persecutionem passae , eni mo●ienti omnia plena v●debantur esse pulch●…imis floribus , &c. Illud vt ad miracula , hoc visiones pertineat ; etsi non est opus . Do notis Eccl. lib. 〈◊〉 c. 10. Therefore S. Aust●● in the ende of the foresaid chap. de Civ . dei , thus : Quid erat in cordibus exultantium [ super patrato miraculo ] nisi fides illa Christi , pro qua Stephani sanguis effusus est ? Which was neither for praying to Saints , nor for worshipping of relliques , Rather the storie of S. Stephens death confutes them both most pregnantly , if the Euangelist be not imperfect in his relation . Act. 8. And , ibid. c. 9. in the very beginning , Cui nisi huic sidei attestantur ista miracula , in qua praedicatur Christus resurrexisse in carne , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 So as , new miracles must confirme old faith onely , or els not be regarded . 2. Cor. 2. 4. Ioh. 10. 41. Sa , Scholijs in Euang. Matth. Comm in Epist . Rom. & Cor. Bellarm. in Apo●… saies the church is too olde now , to expect new encrease of light , for doctrine . Why miracles then , which are for a young Church ? Num. 18. Adioynd . Apud B●… ann . 360. num 21. cx Anastasi● Ni●e● . Deter●… sequo● , is the Papists motto . S. Austens Nouerint vniuersi . Eodem Numero . ●c Emea . Tem. a Numb . 24. The Bishop vtterly condemneth his owne relligion . He confesses it is voide of all Christian perfection , &c. b Epist . 2. ad Olympiadem . c Matth. 25. Matth. 15. 13. Vnder Chrysostome also , and Nect●… , Confession auricular was 〈◊〉 extrusa , ( Medi●… words , de continent l. 1. c. ●7 ) vtterly abolished , by occasion of the abust . How much more may Monkerie , which is lesse de Iure diuine , then Consession , to Papists ? Can. 4 in initio Lumbi in veritate Tripart . hist . lib 8. cap. 1. V●●●ento aequali● . Pa●ario . Thymum & hym●…m . In Hieroglyph . Epist . 13. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . Beeing their owne chusers ( which beggers should not be ) for constitutions of Monasteries ; and is forbidden by the Councell of Calchedon aforenamed , Can. 4. 2. Philipp●… . numb . 25. 26. — Immedicabile vulnus Ense recidendum est &c. And , Mittendum 〈…〉 ras . Good for nothing but the dunghill . There is but one place of obiection more against our State , concerning the dissolution of Monasteries ( which the Adioynder 〈◊〉 seemes thought not of ) viz. the seazing of the goods of the Abbies , &c. into their hands . But we answer with S. Austen , & aliàs saepè , & lib. 1. contra Gaud. c. 38. Labores impiorum iusti edent Sap. 10. Also , Non rapina concupis●…tur , sed error eve●titur . And in one word , Verùm de his pecuniarijs laboribus further causae est . Yet that with the malecontents weighs more then all . De● . 1. De vita & Gestis S. Caroli Borr l 1. c. 18. per Franciscum Reniam Decanū●…ae . Apolog. Lib. 6. de orig . haeres . c. 10. § 3. c. 24. c. 11. News potest red . dere Deo quantū debet , praeter solum Christu n. Act. 15. 10. Rom. &c. Ibid. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . Indeede the Papists doe so . And , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . Against Counsels likewise . a Comment . in Epist . Pauli saepius . b Tom. 7. Orat. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . c. 13. initio ipso . Idem habet in Gen. hom . 43. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . Nec opus passeri fugere ad montes . Idem Nazianz. ad Heronem philosophum . Quòd solitaria vita , & 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , & 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , &c. Two great faults . Rog. Hoved &c. Item Rossaeus concl . ad ordines Reip. Gall. de 26. curribus plenis auro ex vno Monast . ( Cantuar. ) aggestis : nec tamen opulentissimo , nec vel sic expoliato . Pro quo citat & Sanderum de Schisin . Inter superbos semper sunt iurgia . Sal. * Which Rossaeus counts inter potiora Regalia . p. 342. de Iusta . &c. So as now a King & a Monk all one . De voto & redemptione voti . And another , The Pope may renounce his cal●ing , though he haue sworne o● vowed to the con●… Sylv. V●…apa . § TERTIÒ . ex Archidiac . & Aug. de Anchat . Bruno Carthus . serm . 9. de Ornatu Ecclesiae . Eunuchi qui fiunt ab hominibus sunt qui custodiuntur in monasterij̄s , &c. ( so as this comes but ab hominibus , and is not of Gods ordinance . I meane , the discipline of Monasteries , for sub disciplina is his word ) ●hen he addes , Talis castitas quiae non est spontanea , non habet magnam retributionem . The secular mans chastitie may bee mere rewardable then the Monks . Yet Bruno called the Paetriarke of Monks . Numb . 22. Ne dederis os tuum ( ●c . per votū , vt exp . Hieron . & Gloss . ) vt peccare facias ca●… tuam . ( sc . per incontinentiam , cum contrarium pron●iseris ) Eccl. 5. Greg. Nazianz. in Carmin . seemes to condemn all vowing , and supererogating , yea meriting , in one . 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , &c. The one against one , the other against the other . Dionys . Carth. in locum Apost . ad Tim. Ne requira● votum continentiae à talibus ( n● à viduis quidem , nisi admodum vetulis ) Talium enim sanguis feruet , nec lubricae aetati facilè est credendum . This lawe was first a little stretcht in Conc. Trull . c. 40. But since that , the Papists haue kept no measure . Also Dionys . ibid. expounds Fidem , by promissionem , not by Votum . 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . Phys . 2. c. 1. Et mundus absoluitur 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 De Gen. & Corr. 2. c. 10. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 lib. 2. de Gener. c. vlt. &c. Hom. 19. in Ioh. 1. & alias , Rom. 5. Sawl . Inde● Adam nomina impos●…ris , quia domin abatur ijs . Psal . 145. 4. Stelleaerationales . Philip. 〈◊〉 . 25. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 — Si votet v●… , Quem pen●s est , &c. Horat. Psal . 12. 4. Magnificabimus linguam . De Gubernat Dei. l. 7. & dicit bis codem ferè ●oco , Quid prodesse nobis praerogati●… relligiosi nominu potest . quòd nos Cathol●… dicim●… &c. The [ very ] name Catholike hath alwaies been peculiar to the true Church : If we beleeue the Adioynder here , numb . 34. Aug. de Manich. l 3. confes . c. 6. * lib. 1. c. 30. Pro irritament● nomen Christi . Nisi velit dicere illectamentum ; ve qui Graecè for●… 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Ad●…candos s● . simplices . Quod & sic quadiat vel magis . Ier. 7. 7. Rat. 5. De praedest . sanct . c. 16. Vide & Esa . 48. 1. ex tralat . 70. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . Quod per exprobrationem dicitur . Rhem. in 1. Pet 5. 13. & alij passim . Comm. loci . 2. Tim. 2. 19. Discedat ab iniquitate , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , much more 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , as the Iesuites . The characters of Christianity , beeing not names , and notions , but as it is in the same Epistles , 1. Tim. 1. 19. Faith and good conscience : or , Faith and loue , 2. Tim. 1. 13. Origen Tract . 2● . in Matth. 24. Di. cebatur & Iesus : sed erat latre , ●…bil habens Iesu praeter nomen . Baraba● the first Iesuite , for whō the people refused Christ . So now . vers . 3. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . Cassand . Consult . ad Art. 7. pag 56. Proprium est schismatis , sibi sole nomen & proprietatem Ecclesiae arrogare . Yet the Iesuites are so confident there , that . Audito Ecclesiae nomine hostis expalluit . Camp. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , &c. Idem Theod . Com. in Philip. 4. Non quicunque se sanctum nominat , sanctus est , sed qui credit Domino Iesu , quique vitam ex eius legibus instituit . Lib contra Auxent . We haue Abraham to our Father , Ioh. 8. Euill life euill doctrine : which is Nilus his argument too , against the Pope . cx 1. ad Tim. c. 1. Vnlesse they meane , that Catholique implies multitude , and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , as the scripture speaks when it would expresse 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Sic. lib. Iudith . But that is refuted elsewhere . Suprà allegat . 2. 7. Note that S. Austens last is Bellarmines first . de not . Ecc. c. 4. Cathelica Catapolica , vt praeclarè Episcop . Ad●… in Institut Cheregati Legati sui ad Comit Norimberg . Vide Fai●… . ●…m , &c. S●… in hac sede ( non s●… Ecclesia ) aliquot tam annis , multa abominanda fuisse , abusus in spirituali●… , excessus in mandat● , & OMNIA denique in peruers●m mutata . The Church of Rome was mentioned by S●…rus 〈◊〉 for 〈◊〉 inf●ll b●●nesse , but for her ●●t●…sne● . Must needs follow . Damasus raigneth . Damasus his raigne . So , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , vnder Pontius ( Caesars deputy ) 1. Tim. c. 13. 10 as not onely the yeares are counted by the Caesars , but Christ himselfe is subiect to Caesars deputie . For the Rhemist , themselu●s 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , vnder , in this place . And it appeares by his mothers being taxed , Luk. ● . ( for Partus sequitur vent●● ) that Christ was vnder Caesar in the verie wombe . The least and the greatest subiect that Caesar had . Iesus inter omnes scriptur sanctificat omnes . Orig. hom . 11. in cap. 1 & 2. Lucae . It must needs follow . Honorius and Liberius , not their raigue , but their time . See Answ to his 4. chap. before . lib. 20. contra Faust . c. 23. Num. 34. & Num. 37. Athenaeus . De Guido V. baldo , &c. H●…our [ her ] before the people . * He that saies three , dent's not they were ●●ure , but shewes that he loues to speake within compasse . Euthymius and Theophylact. vpon Ioh. 10. con strue this doore to be the Scriptures . For by them ( saith Theop● . ) we are brought to God , as through a doore he is brought to speak with a man , that hath an errand to him . To the same purpose Euthym adding , that Christ was the true shepheard , and entred by the doore , quia vtens Scripturis , & secundum eas gubernam . Whereas , the clamberer vp another way , who but the Pope ? Lib de Baptism . Matth 10. 8. 1. Pet. 4. 10. Adioynd c. 2. Num. 50. Euery Pastor ought to haue , not only as much care of the whole Church , as euery other man , but also much more then others , by reason of his function and office , which doth extend it selfe to the whole Church , it beeing euident , that what authoritie soeuer any man hath in any part of the Church , it is giuen him for the good of the whole , and finally tendeth thereto . Againe . Numb . 52. Whosoeuer is Pastor in any one part of the Church , is capable of Pastorall inrisdiction in any other , though he be restrained & limited to a certaine part , to avoid confusion : in which respect the Priests in euery Diocesse are Priests throughout the whole Church , and may minister Sacraments any where in cases of necessitie ; and a Bishop in any place is euerie where a Bishop , and one of the Magistrates and Pastors of the Church , and therefore hath a voice & right of suffrage in all Generall Councels , though they be held out of his Diocesse , &c. * Rhem. Test Annot. in Luc. 22. v. 19. & Mat. 26. ver . 20. Ambnin locum , & alij qui cum sequuntur . Com. in Epist . ad Gal. cap. 1. Com. in Epist . ad Gal. cap. 1. Philip. 1. 18. Iren. l 4. c. 43. Charisma veritatis certum . Panegy● , in Athanas . 〈◊〉 Single succession is a simple thing . Huge Card. in 2. Thess . 2. Deficient à fide ; Non successions locali , sed tamen mentali , & corruptions doctrinae . Vide Sylu. V. Ordo , & alios . Others reckon of a Grecian Bishop vsed in this consecration , Eudoem . Parall . p. 243. But so doe lyers agree betweene themselues . Doth not this also encrease the credit of our Register : For that is constant , while the impugners of it are at variance . * Homo nihili . Laert. N●te that in the Register there is mention of two more Bishops , to whome the Commission was directed , then were present at the cons●cration . Which to me seemes to argue the sincerity of the Register , against the Adioynders ●●al●…s exceptions . For el● , why might not this ods haue beene silenced ? And yet the absence of two doth not invalidate the busines , sith the Commission is content with any foure . Lucan . Adioynd . in Append. num . 4. Citing Stapleton● Counterblast against Bishop Horne , fol. 301. And therefore you are indeed no true Bishops , neither by the Law of the Church , neither yet by the Lawer of the Realme , for want of due consecration , expressely required by an act of Parliament renewed in this Queenes dayes , in Suffiagan Bishops , much more in you . Who is the scorpion now that carries the remedy against his own poison about him ? The Adioynders sweet compatison , cap. 10. num . 70. The Bishops preuaricating about the Supremacie , yea his extenuating , abasing of it , as the Adioynder doates now in the latter ende of his Booke . Numb 71. The opinion of learned strangers concerning the Bishops &c. Adioynd . Hesiod . Sic Anselm . & Dionys . Carth. in locur . Bruno etiam , & Glossa , apud Lyran & L●●ich . Had●mer : Papist . Theophylact , refert ad Discite à me quia mitis & humilis , item ad lotion em pedú Diseipulorum . Euthymius , fire is est Oecumenius , vocat quide in doctrinam fidei . Sed intellige vel lato nomine fidem , repote reuelationem omnem diuinae voluntatis , vel in reductione ad fidem . Tom. 3. Disp . 1. Q. 11. punct . 2. To confirme this argument ; We are to thinke that when Salomon censures the despisers of their Father and Mother , Prov. 30. 17. he meanes the ciuill Magistrate by those names , because he awards death and eradication to the offendor : ( for the birds picke out the eves of none but carcasses ) which is somewhat too heauie for priuate faults , and childrens errors , though authoritie of Parents did stretch thither ; as with with vs it doth not . Also that when S. Paul in the new Testament , composes houses & families so carefully ( componi● 〈◊〉 Iam solerti cura , saies S. Austen , contra Faust . l. 5. 〈◊〉 9. ) which is euident to obserue in sundrie his Epistles , he doth it as a well-willer to the good ordering of Common-wealths too , and gouernments of State : ( for the house is a little Kingdome , and the whole Kingdome is but a great house , &c. ) As for his pressing the duties of Seruants to Masters , whether carnall , or converts , that enforces for Supremacie euen of Infidell-Princes , a great deale more ; à Potiori . b Suarez would haue the very moment of time , wherein he imagines that Christ was borne , to be de fide : Com. in Thom. &c. The point now in hand about the Popes ptimacie , and his succeeding of Peter in the gouernment of the Church , what more de fide now a daies then that ? Yea to Bellarm. it is caput fidei , Epist . ad Blacuel . Yet Canus acknowledges , that quidam viri & docti & pij , haue contradicted it . And againe , Quidam fideles malunt favere hareticorum opinionibus quàm Catholicorum , about that point : lib. 6. loc . com cap. 7. Cardinall Contarene also , lib. ad Nic Theupolum De Potestate Papae : Non sunt veriti viri quidans in omni disciplinarum genere celebres , ac in Christianae Theologiae studijs illustres , in magno hominum conventu asserere , ius hoc Pontificis humanum esse , &c. Great men , and in a great assembly . * Esa . 18. c None but knowes the Popish Churches presumption in this kind , which was not wont to be so . The Church ( saith Vincentius Lerinensis , cap. 32. ) does no more then make , vt quod anteà simplicitor credebatur , hoc idem posteà diligentius credatur , &c. Not new articles , as the Adioynder would , cap. 3. See cap. 1. Matth. 5. 18. Luk. 16. 17. The Supreame authoritie of Princes results out of euery part of the Catachisme 1 The Wisdome of his Father : And , In whome are all the treasures of wisdome , Coloss . 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . Homil. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , &c. Pag. 160. Adde S. Prosperum de vita contemplat . l. 2. c. 〈◊〉 . Servi dominis it a deserviant , vt voluntatem non dominorum solum , sed etiam dei , hoc ipsum iubentis , efficiant . Non ergò recte servitur , si ingratijs servias . Quod Papistarum dogmaest . Rom. 12. 19. Vndè sequuntur illa divina . Rom. 13. At one Yates his , in Warwick shire . Vita Camp per Turner . Vide & S. Cyprian ex eodem capite praeclarè argumentantem in eandem sententiam , tum in Tract contra Demetrian pag 27● . & 272. Gryphian . tum p. 366. 367. & 368. eiusd . edit . de Bono Patientiae . 〈◊〉 Streight after birth , he fled from Herod conspiring his destruction , not resisted , but fled ; which was another token of his submission . And immediately afore death , he acknowledged Pilates power to be giuen him from heauen , Ioh. 19. All the parts , all the acts of our Sauiours life and death , were full of this practise ; full of Reuerence to Princes : whom the Iesuites vnder . value ; yea , vndermine when they can . Adioynd . Num. 39. yet he repeats it againe ( sick of follies ) Num. 4● . and that twice together . How can he approoue that men should be compelled to s●… vnto it , when neuertheles by his owne confession it is no matter of faith ? Also soone after , It is not to be ratified by solemn oath , as if it were one of the A●… of our Creede . Adioynd Numb . 39. Valen. Yom. 〈◊〉 . initio ipso . citans Setum , Haelensem , Gabriesé , Vegam , Medinā , &c. super Polysemo fidei . Can l. 12. Loc. Hebr. 11. 1. * Greg. l. 4 Dialic . 1. & 7. Sinefide [ sc . humana , satis tamen stab li ] nec infidelu vivit . Et adducit exemplum de muliere praegnante atque in carcere enixa &c. Quo eodem modo , nos quoque de parentibus nostris credere diet pössumus : fide quidem vel firmissima , extrà revelationem tamen , extràque Scripturam . Item de alijs q●àm multis , quos nunquam novimus — T is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ; Odyss . * Rom. 14. 23. Both assertion & promise in the oath of Allegi 〈◊〉 , which admits not of credulities , but is euery way of assurance , & stedfast resolution . See Chap. 1. frō Sect. , 6. &c. Converte gladium in vaginam . For it may be they will say it is de fide that he had a sword . But the truth is , that Peters sword had a scabberd . Whereas S. Paul talkes of the Kings sword as alway naked , neuer couchant . Rom. 13. &c. Tob. 6. 11. See Rom. 12. Eph. 5. item 〈◊〉 . Coloss . Tit. Timoth . stuft with such like theoremes , sanae doctrinae , but yet not fidei . So is solutio decimarum , so pensitatio tributi , and diuers more . S. Paul himselfe enforcing Supremacie by this last , Rom. 13. yet not as of faith , but of godly moralitie . For the Infidels did it as wel as the Christians . To the Adioynd . Numb . 41. Luc. 3. 2. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . Vide Comm. & Ios . Mor●e . & A●… in Sacerd●… 〈◊〉 . 〈◊〉 . Adioynd . vbi priùs . S Austen stil dispute● Moyses his Priesthood . Resoluts not of it , but in an equiuocall sense . Bellarm. idem docet ( p●aeter locum ante citatū ) l. 5. c. 9. de Pont. Rom. Moses fint summu● Princep● temperalis , that is in effect , King. As for that he quotes out of Greg. Nazian . Orat. ad Greg. Nyssen ( quoted also by Genebrard in Psal . 98 ) that Moses was Principum princeps , & Sacerdotum sacerdos : ( though Genebrard leaue out the Principum princeps , which is most materiall , and only insists vpon Cohen Hacconehim , out of Aben Ezra : ) I answer two waies , that either the latter is but coincident to the former , and by that to be interpreted , ( two words and one thing ) or Sacerdos sacerdatum in regard of his Regall inspection and chiefe-dome ; which is the thing that we now attribute to Temporall Princes ; as Constantine is tearmed Episcopus Episcop●…um by Eusebius . The pitifull suite of the Adioynder to the Reader . I haue charged both the Bishops with euident abuse of this place of holy Scripture in diuers respects . And therfore I beseech thee good Reader , to take paines to review what I haue said there , if thou dest not well remember it , &c. Epist . 50. Item vide supra Cap. 1. Sect. 38. To the Adioynd , Sect. 44. a Kings to remoue prophane Church-men , is a matter of necessitie , ( that is , of dutie ) and brings aduantage , not danger to them . b The Scripture is to determine this Controuersie . c Reformation of Church-abuses , will stand with the office of godly & vertuous Princes , without vsurpation of others right . 2. Chron. 29. 5. d Godly Kings lay their commandement vpon Ecclesiasticall persons , to doe the duties of their holy calling . e Sic & paulò post Cyrillus . Ezechias recusavit templum ingredi , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , &c. f Cyrill . ( like Dauids Psa . 2. ) Et nuoc Reger intelligite The Adioynder saies , Non nunc ( whatsoeuer they d. d of old ) as if grosser now then then g Kings Christian , & louing Chrill , are called to the same worke of reforming their Clergie , that Ezechias was . h The Christian sacrifice is offred by Kings as well as Priests . See Heb. 13. 1● . i Kings represse the slanders fastened vpon Christ by pernicious heretiques , while they enioyne Bishops and Priests their duties . k No dishonour to Kings , to meddle in Church affairs ; but a tripple crowne of honour belongs to them therefore , with God , with men , with An●ets . l Cyrill saies twice that the Emperour cō●… d●… Priests . The Adioynders obiection answered . m Petrut per abusum gladij sui , ius eiusdem gladij non anusit . [ Nec Caesar egitur ] Sāder . lib. 3. cap. 11. de clave David . Adioynd . Num. 43. * Vide Sòzom . l. 1. c. 8. Vide patres suprà citatos ad longū , Car. 3. huius . Sect. 11. &c. p. 138. &c. Quibus adde . S. Prosperum , lib. 1. de Vita Contemplativa , cap. 25. Sacerdos Sanctus nihil gerat ex imperio , &c. Item , Si infirmitates fratrum viventium carnaliter , curare non polest verborum medicaminibus , sastineat virtute patientiae . So that a Minister may not goe vltrà verbum . Vide cundem . lib. codem , cap. 21. complaining of the Clergie , quòd perverso ordine non tam pascunt quàm pasci volunt à grege suo . Et , Vendicamus nobis dominationem tyrannicam in subiectos , &c. Item , Tam à nobis nonnulli graviter fatigati depereunt , quàm à potentibus huius mundi . Ibid. The true effects of Popish insolencie . * The Crocodile quotes the Bishop for it : Id tātum audemus facere ( circà Invocationem scil . Sanctorum ) &c. ( a ) See in fine bu●… ex Chrysan 13. ad Rom. Sed & Cyrill . sic nuperrimè Adioynd Num. 48. Cap. 10. S. Austens obseruation against mans industrie , if God be away . Ex 1. Sam. 17. Epist . 48. ad Vincentium , Quens multi ex ipsis n●… nobiscum , &c. Et Epist . 167. ad Festum . Not but that Pasce belongs to temporall Princes too , ( is Piulus hath confessed , and the Bishop conuinced Wide supra Cap. 1. Sect. 36. id est pag 32. &c. To whome adde 〈◊〉 , lib. 6. cap 3. acknowledging them to be capita , heads of their people , ex A nos 6 & 〈◊〉 . King 15. A. lib. 4. cap. 2. He denies not but bare authoritie makes a member of the Church : by which claime an infidelt King may challenge headship , though the Adioynder storme at it . Quàm diu aliquit Reipublicae minister est , eiusque authoritate & potestate fungitur , tam diuillius pars dici & potest & debet , Can. See S. Chrysost . his words at the ende of this Chap. * Patres ipsi Niceni can 7. excusāt 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 patrata . Vide & Can. 11. vbi excusant de temporibus Licinij . Ezech. 19. 6. Patres 6. Synodi , Epist . ad Iustinian . Imp. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . Et Irenaeus apud Antonium in Melissa . l. 2. orat . 1. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . Sed & Ambros . Valentiniano iuniori ( apud Theodoret . Hist . lib. 5. c. 13. ) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 suadet . ⸫ ⸫ Hugo etiam Cardin , in 1. Ioh. 5. Spiritus est potentia saecularis . Vim quidem haec Hugo afferens Textui non vni , sed ne putent Pontificij , Equos nostros esse CARNEM tantùm . Adde Cornel. à Lap. Iesuit . in 1. Tim. 3. Salimon fecit duas columnas in Templo , quarum illa Iachin , id est , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , siue direction vt declararet & alia , & imperium regum Israel circa regimen populi secundum pietatem , purūque Dei cultum . Altera vo abatur Bosz . i. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . Latine executio . Quorum vtrumque Regibus ad divina necessarium . Et fuit vtraque columna coronata . Denique huc alludit Apostolus ( autumante Cornel ) verbis ijs , Ecclesia est columna & firmamentum veritatis , &c. Notes for div A19150-e135750 Numb . 47. 48. & 49. Adioynd . Num 50. A fable of the Adioynd . that Q. Eliz. refused the title of Head , and retained of Governresse As if they are not all one . Neither was Governresse the title that she delighted in . In the Records of the Kings Coll. in Cambr. I finde Q Marie styled Head of the Church , &c. So farre was Q. Eliz from reiecting it . a Of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , that is , the Kings conusance in a Church-mans matters , and those matters of the Church , see Act. 25. 21. Item Psal . 72. Domine da IUDICIUM tuum Regi . Which Procopius quotes vpon Esa 49. in this sense . b Epist . ad Nicomedient . Vide Gelas . Cyzie . Siquis Episcoporum tum●…tuatus fuerit , ministri Dei , hoc est , mea executione , illius coercehitur audacia , &c. Item Hieron . in 49. Eta Reges & Principes , quicquid in pedibus Ecclesiae terreni operis adhaeserit , suo sermone ( let the Adioynder chuse whether censorio , or concionatorie , but one of them it must be ) tergunt atque delingunt . Where I would take sermo , for Iuridicus processus ; as verbum it res , or negatium , to the Hebrewes . But by this the King hath coerciue power ouer the Church . Also Canutus King of this I●and ( apud I●gulphum f. 508 ) minatur Episcopis severissimam ●…m , ni pareant mandatis su●… . Cath Divine . f. 146. c Epist . 32. In Serenissimis Iussionibus suis Dominorum Pietas . Et , ego qui in Serenissimis Dominorum Iussionibus . Adde quòd & legem , quamvis fibi displiceret , de mandato tamen Imperatoris promulgavit , &c. lib. 2. epist . 61. Indict . 11. * Iustinian . Nouell . constitut . 131. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . Et paulò post , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . But without Iustinian , they are not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . * Visitation is restrained to Coactiva by the ●…ewing . S. Austen grants Censure to Kings against stubborne heretiques in the externall Court. Non enim poterat victor & resistentes Regia censura contemnere , &c. Epist . 167. ad Fest . * Vbi nota quòd cum Bellarm. faciat potestatem coactivam inseparabilem à Iudice controversiarum , ( De Interpret . verb. Dei l. 3. c. 9 ) & nos ante à probaverimus ad longum , non esse vim coactivam nisi penes Civilem Magistratum , omne iudicium controversiarum nullo modo restringendum est ad Clericos , excluso Magistratu Civili . The words of the Stat. That all authoritie of Iurisdiction is deriued and deduced from the Kings Maiestie , &c. And sometime iustly ; if the Priest be male , pert or erroneous . Reuel . 18. 4. Ferer . Lusti . antè citat . Apud Gelas . Cyzic . in Act. Concil . Nicen. a The Adioynd . confuted by his owne allegation , out of the Acts of Parlament . See pag. 100. huius . b Register of the Templats , and Order of S. Iohn of Hierusalem : quoted by M. IV Cambden in his Britannia , Cornavijs . c He that hath licence for doing , incurres no fault at all : but the breach euē of humane laws ( vndispensed ) is a sinne in conscience ; by the Papists doctrin . Adioynd . Num. 54. & 55. 2. Sam. 15. 17. Rom. 13. Tit. 3. & 1. Pet. 2. * Adioynd . vbi priùs . d Sauls guard refuse to doe a wicked act at their masters commaundement : yet the Guard was not exempt from Sauls authoritie : neither will the Adioynder haue it so . This disobedience therefore prooues not but Saul was King as well ouer the Priests as others . e Exod. 1. f Dauid represents the Priesthood , not onely the Kingdome . g One Doeg & many Doegs . h Doeg a figure of Iudas . a The sword rewardes no lesse then punishes . b 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . In burro panno purpureus animu● : as Calvin him selfe most excellently notes , ( whome they slaunder notwithstanding as vnkind to Kings . ) Instit . l. 3 c. 19. Sect 9. c Dio & alis . d The happines of Kingdomes is in obedience to Kings without contradiction . Gerson , &c. Adioynd . Num. 62. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . a Quoniam percepimus Ecclesiae & relligionis nostrae tranquillitatens , &c. Iuram . Scot. Edit . an . 1581. quoted by the Adioynder . Though this be somewhat auncient to prooue the iudgement of these times by , especially for one that takes notice of the Bishops iust exception , Dies diem docuit , &c. See Adioynd . Num. 68. b Vide Chrysost . in fine huius . Quanquam loquitur it à & Synodus sexta Constantinop . in Epist . Concilij ad Iustinian . Imper. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , Seiromaste . c No more power then Defensiue , & yet Sanders saies the Sword is Avenger rather . But these two numina , Praemium , & Poena , conteine the Church , and consummate the Suprematie . c Though S. Austen make heresies vicia carnis , as the Apostle also doth , Gal. 5. By how much more they shall belong to the Kings correction * Aug. Triumph . p. 9. citat Chrys . in Matth. in eandem sent . d 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Paulo ante ex Concil 6. e De Merit . & remiss . pecc . initio lib. * Papa potest condere novū Symbolum , & novos articulos , &c. Triumph . Ancon . p. 310. f Nec auro Pyrrhe tuo , nec elephantis . Fabricius apud Plut. Adioynd . Num. 63. g The Adioynder addes further here ( out of Beza as it seemes ) that Kings cannot be exempted from the diuine domination of the Presbyterie , &c. Forsooth , nor from Confession vnder a shauen Priest , with the Papists But who knows not that we haue banished the Presbyterie here in England , or rather neuer receiued it , not onely in extention ( as it reflects vpon Kings , ) but not so much as in single essence ? And yet in France ( which was Bezaes owne countrey ) Rex causam dixit aliquando in iudicio , si vera Bodinus . Was hee not therfore supreame ? So here perhaps . h Of the licking the dust of the Churches feet , see S. Hierome before , pag. 519. It imports small subiection ; superioritie rather . And yet here the Church doth not signifie the Clergie ; yea as some thinke , it is no where so taken at all in Scripture . Lastly ( if it were ) yee the word Church is not once named by the Prophet Esay , but he directs his speech to them that are of the Church ; the beleeuers in generall . Gen. 41. 43. Adioynd . vbi priùs . Bonavent . in 4. Sentent . Dist . 18. quaest . 3. Resp . ad vltimum . Sed praecipuè August de parcendo multitudini , ne eradicetur triticum . Totis tract . contrà Donatist . T. 7. Denique & Epist . Leodiens . Apologet. ann . 1106. apud Schard . Pro M. Celio . Paral. p. 383. and 384. * Which Flor. Rem . saies he may call the Talmud or Alcoran of heretiques . Franciscus Horantius saies , he wrote it by the instinct , not of man , but some foule spirit , &c. Both shewing in what account they haue the worke , though they abliorre from his opinion . * Flor. Rem de Origine haeres . l. 7. c. 10. Sect. 1. Calvinus in conclavi quodam ( Engolismae apud Tilium ) plus quatuor millibus librotum tum manuscriptorum tum typis excusorū instructo , ita se continuit ( triennio ) vt vel intimi amicorum aegrè ad ipsum admitterentur , &c. What maruell , when Tullie saies , de Arusp . Resp . ( led by the light of nature ) Nihil praclarius quàm eosdem & relligionibus decrum immortalium , & summe Repub. praeesse voluisse maiores nostros , Sub init Orat. Prefat . lib. de clave David . Acberat , cum Constantinum delegantem Melciadi , cum alijs Episcopis , causam Caecilij & Donati , caput Ecclesiae vocat , donat cum titulum homini non Christiano ( here . ) Nondum enim baptizatus cum suit Constantinus , vt patet ex Euseb . alijsque . Christianus verò esse non potest , qui Christū quando potest per baptismum non induit . Eia . Pergite in maledicta ; Quid mirum iam si Rex Iacabus non Christianus Bellarmino , quamvis baptizatus ? In the rest of the words that the Adioynder quotes out of Bishop Barlowe Sermon , it seemes he saies , that the Puritanes allow the King to be onely an honourable member of the Church . And yet the Adioynder would perswade vs but a little before , that the Papists goe as farre as the Puritanes about the Supremicie , &c. Whereas his owne argument is here against certaine Kings , No members . Therefore no heads But the Puritans acknowledge their King a member , in the very words that he citeth out of B. Barlow , and an honourable member , that is happily Supreame . He contradicts himselfe therefore . As for their denying him to be Gouernour , ( though it appeare not in their words ) yet either their meaning is , he is not to gouerne after his owne lust and fancie , against the booke of God , put into his hands : or Bishop Barlow describes the Puritans by their old Problemes , which they disclaime daily , as the Bishop of Ely exceeding well notes . Though not so 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by reuerence and humilitie , but at another time Episcopus Episcoporum . And , Ego Episcopus sum ( etiam ) extrà Ecclesia●● . i. vbique . * And this is euen the worst that can be boulted out of those wordes of the B. so spightfully insisted vpon by the Adioynd . Numb . 67. that the Kings gouernment of the Church is externall , so farre forth as it requires and admitteth and authoritie For so farre he is from extenuating the Kings Supremacie therby , that his meaning is , We are to looke for as much helpe and aid frō him , and consequently to acknowledge as much authoritie in him , as is humans , that is incident to the power or place of any man whatsoeuer , and therefore Supreame without question in his Kingdome . Though he denies not , but the Church may stand without such helpe or countenance of authoritie ( as in the times of persecution ) God supporting it , &c which is most true . Therfore he saies , So fore forth as it requires , &c. In Politico . * Lib. 2. c. 11. Sand. bis hoc agnoseit , & repetit idem c. 12. in initio . Negavimus cum Augustino licuisse Petro , &c. Fatente & Tullio , Cat. 1. Non modo non contamtuarunt , sed etiam honestarunt . b Et Rom. 13. & alibi sape , describens 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ab insigni gladij . Et , Dei minister 〈◊〉 , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . Nisi divina ministeria cui qua sordeant ; quod ne de Pontific● quidem concedendum est , quamvis excelso . ( Nec sibi adeò placeat ) Sander●● tamen in haue sententiam multa stultissimè , quasi ex Augustino , & de omnibus Apostolis 〈◊〉 ferre glad●●● , nee tamen permissis educere . Lib 2. de clave David cap. 11. 3. 4. c For Preaching is actus Iurisdictionis to the Canonists . And the Scripture giues it so 11. Tim. 2. 12. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . Connexa sunt . Doctrin● genus 〈…〉 . Med. * 2. Tim. 2. 4. 5. d 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . Chrysost . Orat. 5. in Oziam . Et. 2. Cor. 5. 20. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . Et. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Et tertiùm , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . Planissimè tamen ad Philem. 8. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . Yea , Mr. Sanders himselfe might not exhort his Irish souldiers to fight against Queen Elizabeth by this reason , and yet for what other cause came hee thither ? e We must be readie to 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ( euen Churchmen and all ) at the Princes commandement . T it 3. 1. Therefore Priestly functions are either not good ( let M. Sanders chuse ) or the King may commaund and enforce to them . * 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . Theodoret. l. 5. hist . c. 23. Invenal . * Vide cap. 4. Sed & Chrys . 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . Tom. 6. D. H. Sauilij . 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ; . i. If I should say to thee , Goe and reforme a King offending , wouldst thou not say I were madde ? viz. reforme him in the coerciue kinde . Els , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , as there it followes . A minister may doe it concionatoriè . But a priuate man , not so much as in words . a S. Austen acknowledges Iurisdiction in the Kings Sword ; namely in regard of Gouernment and compulsion . Adversus Epist . Parmen . 1. c. 8. a As , Bulgaria , Cy●…s , Carthage , Iustinianea , &c. b Hieron . ad Huagr . & Aug. in Quaest . vet . & Novi Test . Quaest . 10● . Quidam Falcidius , duce stultitia , & Romanae civitatis iactantia , &c. c Concil . Nicen. c 18. Concil . Ancyr . c. 13. item c. 18. Concil . Neocaesar . c. 13. &c. Tom. 5. Edit . Eton. * Pythag. apud Laert. l. 〈◊〉 . Notes for div A19150-e176550 Chrys . Hom. 23. in 13. ad Rom. Heare this yee Iesuits , complainers of persecution & molestation . * Yet the Pope is not aboue an Apostle , I hope , at the highest . b The cause of relligion doth not acquit frō subiection . This is against Vsurpers & intruders onely . * 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Vt hae● sit legitemè succedentium in regnum : ille autem & invasor esse alieni iuru queat . Gouernment is necessarie . Paritie begets contention . Gouernment is naturall . Monarchie is naturall , that is , most agreeable to Nature . The Iesuites obiection against Pauls subiectiō , Answered by himselfe . Subiection is dutie in the very best , not curtesie . e The Apostles called traytors ; but their doctrine refutes it , not onely their practise : whereas the Iesuites both practise and doctrine confirmes it . f A true Apostle need not feare to preach the mysteries of his Message , before any Infidel-Gouernour : but a Iesuite may , least there be LVPVS in fabula , as they sticke not to call him . Heauie disasters fall vpon Traytors . God and men take part against the Traytor . Other argumēts [ ab vtili ] of beeing subiect to Magistrates . The Romanes alwaies noted of pride & contumacie to Magistrates . Bern. & alij . Euen Nero this . Harken you Iesuites ; you that think the bands of all goodnesse are dissolued , if an infidell Prince be but endured or obeyed . * Monarchs are the Ministers of God for our saluation . * The Minister is perswasiue , the Magistrate may be coactiue , but both of them deale in the same matters ; viz. matters of the conscience . Quare idem alibi Chrysost . ( vide locum paulo infra ) 〈◊〉 deum tractidisse nos 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . Et quidem non paulo magis 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , vt cum sic obiter effingam . y Where are they that see nothing but a sheepe in the Lay sore , of what condition soeuer ? What lacks he of a Pastor , that is a Pastors worke-fellow , an ayder and assister of him , sent of God for that end ? Nay , the one by his sawes , the other by his Laws . Witnesse S. Chrysost . z Where are they also that say , earthly Princes are not of God , but humane creatures ? crept out of the dust I ween ; Whom Plato makes the prime sonnes of God , and of the golden choicest generation . 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . Sed & alibi in sua verba constās . Tom. 5. D. H. Sauile . 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , &c. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . Et , Non dicit , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , sed 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . Bonauent . quidem in 4. Dist . 4. Qu. 3. respon . ad obiecta , notat quòd nemo vnquam effûgit poenam gladij sub indicecum caetera poenarum genera miraculo effugeret . That we may see what a preheminēce goes with the sword , & how God assists his owne depositum , entrusted to the Kings hands . c Nero nesciens sustentat omnia . Wicked Magistrates vnwilling holde vp the state . Where is the assistance that they challenge to the Pope , to ouerrule his tongue against his wit , least he pronounce false , defining in his Consistorie ? Or what prerogatiue is that to this ? d See S. Prosper de vita coutēpl . l. 3. c. 7. In virtutem plerumque de necessitate proficitur , &c. e The Magistrate prepares the soules of his subiects , saith S. Chrysost . Yet the Iesuites say he must be no dealer in soule-matters . f Magistrates iustly tearmed the Ministers of God. g The conscience of a good turne , viz. receiued of God in his institution of Commonwealths , is that which should mooue vs to be subiect to the ciuil Magistrate , for conscience sake , as S. Chrysost . here expounds it . 2. Tim. 2. 1 , 3. &c. Dispossession follows not frō abuse of place . Subiection is ●●e , and not to be denied ; but paid with all ●…e . 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . Harken Iesuites that stand vpon your nobilitie , either of Priesthood , or Christianitie . Hora tua nondum venit . The Priests Su premacie , is in altero saeculo . a The more we honour Magistrates , the more honourable wee show our selues ; but scorning them , wee are base . b Subiection of Christians is a meane to draw Infidels to the Faith ; resistance alienates . How crosse is Chrysost . ( and Christ first of all ) to the Iesuites doctrines , in euery point ? For they say , if we obey , the faith goes downe , our profession is disparaged , the Infidells will insult , &c. Chrysost . omnia contra . Notes for div A19150-e179020 Medina tamen l. 4. contr . 6. pag. 310. edit . Venet. Vetus pictura ingentem habet auctoritatem , ( viz. ad probandas conclusiones Theologicas . ) Like columna Simeonis , first 12. degrees high , then 22. then 36 and more . Vide Cedren . p. 279. Cassander , Wicelius , Tilman : Eredenbach . &c. The whoore growes bolder . The first Iesuites called suij Christi , Christs fellowes , ( that you may know their humblenesse from their very cradle ) Massaus , & alij . Certè 2. Tim. 3. 8. Resistentes doctrinae , comparantur cum ijs , qui restitere miraculis , quasi ipse iam successerit in corum locum , sibi● probatio maxima sit . Porro ostenditur inuicta esse absque alio adminiculo , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . At fortè parùm apertè ; Imò 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 , oppugnantium ; idque velut olim sub Mose . 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . Denique Chrylost in 3. Tim cap. 1. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 . notat Christum non statim vt natus est operatum esse miracula : Serò qs●ippè post in Cana Galil . Ioh. 2. Et tamen sermones eius obtinebant pondus iam pueri , vide●anturque digni quos Maria corde conseruaret . Inter quos porrò fuerat , & de Patre eius Deo. Quod dogma maximum . Valet ergò Doctrina & sine Miraculis . A Iesuite-Priest acknowledges a miracle in the detection of his Treasons . Sed quem alij ( vt video ) Andronicum . Quod hic obiter tractatur de Mose quòd Rex , aut Regis instar , ( p. 508 in marg vt & antè p. 396. ) quamuis nondum introductâ Regni formâ in populum ; ( etsi olim vellicatum est in Reuerendo Episcopo à vesanientibus Papistis , ) tamen recipit confirmationem & à S. Hieron . com . in Esa . 51. qui de Abrahamo ipso sic scribere non dubitat . Nos sumus genus domini regale & sacerdotale , qualis fuit & Abraham , qui rex appellatus est , & caeteri sancti de quibus scriptum est , NOLITETANGERE CHRISTO●MEOS