A Retentive to Stay Good Christians, Chapter 15
The 15. Chapter.
THat the Bishop of Rome is that one ordinarie pastor who Sander.succeedeth in S. Peters chaire, and is aboue all Bishoppes according to the meaning of Gods worde. VVhy S. Peter dyed at Rome. S. Augustines minde touching the supremacy of the Pope of Rome.
THe first reason is, that although Peter at the first Fulke.was rather high Bishoppe of the circumcision, thē of the Gentiles, yet because he did at length settle him selfe at Rome by Gods appointment, and left a successor there, he sayeth he may well affirme, that the Bishop of Romes primacy is warranted by Gods word. A straūge kind of warantise, for to omit that the primacy ouer the Gentils by Gods worde, is giuen to another, namely to Paule, from whom he can neuer proue, that it was taken afterward. Where hath he any worde of God to proue, that by his appointment, Peter setled him self at Rome, and appoynted there a successor? He quoteth Irenaeus lib. 3. cap. 3. who reporteth that Linus the first Bishop of Rome was ordayned not by Peter onelyonly, but by Peter & Paule the Apostles, who founded the Church there, euen as Polycarpus by the Apostles in Asia, was made bishop in Smyrna, which Church with the Church of Ephesus founded by Paule, and continued by Iohn the Apostles, he citeth as witnesses alike, with the Church of Rome, of the tradition of the Apostles, against Valentinus and Marcion which being voyd of Scriptures, bragged of the tradition of the Apostles. But of Peters primacie, or his successors ouer all Bishops, Irenaeus sayth not a word. No more doth Tertullian, whom likewise he quoteth, de praescrip. but euen as Ireneus would hauehave the tradition of the Apostles, against those heretikes that boasted of it, to be tryed by the cōfession of those Churches that were founded by the Apostles.
His second reason is, vponupon a false supposition, that he hath already proued, Peter alone to be the rocke, to hauehave chiefe authoritie in feeding &c. all which thinges are vntrue.
That Peter came to Rome, he is not content that it be testified by all auncient Ecclesiasticall writers. But he sayth it is witnessed by the expresse word of God. 1. Pet. 5. The Church which is gathered together in Babylon saluteth you. Although the history of Peters comming to Rome, and sitting there 25. yeares, testified by so many writers, is proued false, in many circumstances, by the playne worde of God, yet I am content to admitte, that he came thither, towarde the later ende of Ne roes raigne. But that in his Epistle, he sent salutations from Rome, I can not admitte: seeing that in such manner of salutations, men vse not to write allegorically, albeit, that in the reuelation of Saint Iohn Rome the sea of Antichrist is mystically called Babylō. But Babylon from whence S. Peter did write, is more probably to be taken, for a citye of that name in Egypt, where Marke was with him, whō the consent of antiquitie affirmeth, to hauehave bene Bishop of Alexandria a citie of Egypt also, who coulde not hauehave bene with him at Rome. Seeing it is manifest by the first and seconde of the Epistle to the Galathians, and by diuerse of Saint Paules Epistles, that if euer Peter was at Rome, it was but a short tyme in the later ende of Nero his Empire. Whereas Marke dyed in the eyght yeare of his raigne, before Peter coulde be at Rome. For in the tenth yeare Paule was brought prisoner to Rome, Saint Luke accompanying him, who would not hauehave omitted to shewe, that Peter was there to hauehave mette him, as the rest of the brethren did, if he had then bene at Rome. Agayne Paule in so many Epistles as he writeth from Rome, sending salutations from meane personages, would not hauehave omitted mention of Peter, if he had bene there. Saint Luke then affirming that he taryed two yeares in prison at Rome, which must be vntil the twelfe yeare of Nero, it followeth that if Peter came, he came very late to Rome within two yeare before his death, at which tyme it was not possible, that Marke which was dead foure yeares before, could be at Rome with him, wherefore Babylon in that text can not be taken for Rome.
Another reason of the Popes supremacy he maketh, that Peter not onelyonly came thither, but also dyed there. A simple reason, why the city of Rome should hauehave that prerogatiue, because she murthered ye Apostles. Rather might Ierusalē clayme it, in which Christ the head of all dyed. After this he telleth the fable out of the counterfait Egesippus, of Simon Magus flying in the ayer, & the Emperour Nero his great delight in his sorcerye. The credit of Egesippus he desendeth, by blaming his translatour for adding names of cities, which had none such when Egesippus liued. But that Simon Magus shewed no experiment ofsorcerye before Nero, as this counterfait Egesippus reporteth it is plaine, by Plinius lib. 30. cap. 2. natur. Histor. who shewing how desirous Nero was, and what meanes he had to hauehave triall thereof, yet neuer could come by any. It was a practise of old time, to fayne such fables, for louelove of the Apostles, as Tertullian witnesseth, de baptis. of a Priest of Asia, that was conuicted & confessed, that he fained for the louelove of Paule, a writing vntounto Tecla, in which many absurd things were contayned. Againe so many Apocriphall gospells, epistles, itineraryes and passions, as are counterfaited vnderunder the name of Apostles, and auncient fathers, who knoweth not to be fables and false inuentions. Amonge which this fable of Simon Magus and Peter is one. That S. Luke maketh no mention of Peters death, he preuenteth the objection, because he continued not his storye so farre: which doubt (sayth he) he woulde not hauehave omitted, if he had gone so farre fo…ward in his story. But seeing he brought Paule to Rome, both in his iorney, and in his history, why maketh he no mention of Peters being there? which if their story were true, must hauehave sit there twenty yeares before. To omit therefore the foure causes, why Peter should dye at Rome, whereof three are taken out of a counterfait, August. de sa ctis, hom. 27. the 4. out of Leo & Gregory Bishops of Rome: he commeth to decyde the controuersie betwene the Greekes & Latines, who was first successor of Peter, Linus or Clemens, taking parte with them that affirme, Clemens although Irenaeus the most auncient writer of any that is extant, name Linus who was not a Grecian farre of, but a Frenchmam at Lyons neare hand to Italy, whose authority although he reiect, in naming Linus to be ordayned Bishop by both the Apostles, yet he glorieth much that he calleth the Churche of Rome. Maximam & antiquissimam, &c. The greatest and the most auncient, & knowen to all men, founded and setled by two most glorious Apostles, Peter and Paule. And agayne, Adhanc Ecclesiam &c. To this Church by reason of the mightier principalitie, eueryevery Church, that is, the faithful that are eueryevery where must needes agree. But he proceedeth and sheweth the cause why. In qua semper ab hys qui sunt vndique conser…ata est ca quae est ab Apostolis traditio. In which alwayes that tradition which is from the Apostles hath bene alwaies kept, of them that are round about. M. Sander calleth it willful ignorance, in M. Iewel, that sayth the mightier principalitie spoken of in Irenaeus, is ment of the ciuill dominion, and Romane Empire, whereas it hath relation to the former titles of commendation, that it was the greatest and the most auncient: the greatest he sayth, because it was fownded by Peter the greatest Apostle, but so sayth not Irenaeus, for he sayth it was founded by two most glorious Apostles, and not by Peter alone. It was then greatest, because the greatest number of Christians were in Rome, as the greatest citie. But howe is it the most auncient? but in respect of Peters senioritie, for otherwise Ierusalem and Antioche were auncienter in tyme. I aunswer two wayes, first it is sophisticall to vrge the superlatiue degree grammatically, as when we saye, potentissimo principi, to the most mightye prince, doctissimo viro, to the best learned man, &c. We doe not meane, that no Prince is equall or superiour in power, nor that no mā is equall or superiour in learning, to him whome we so commende, but to shewe the power and learning of those persons to be excellent great.
Secondly I aunswer, that Irenaeus speaketh coniunctly, it is sophisticall to vnderstande seuerally. He saith there is no Church of such greatnes, so auncient, and so well knowen, as the Church of Rome.
From this blinde collection out of Irenaeus, he commeth downe groping to Cyprian, who speaking of certayne factious heretikes, that sayled from Carthage to Rome, to complayne of Saint Cyprian and other Bishops of Afrike to Pope Cornelius. Lib. 1. Ep. 3. ad Cor. Audent & ad Petri, &c. They dare cary letters from sch…smaticall and prophane men vntounto the chayer of Peter, and the principall Churche, from whence the priestly vnitie beganne, Nether consider that they are Romanes, whose fayth is pray sed by the report of the Apostle vntounto whom falshod can hauehave none accesse.
In this saying we must note the priuiledges of S. Peters supremacie, to be at Rome. 1. This is S. Peters chayer, that is his ordinary power of teaching, &c. Nay rather the Bishops seate, which he and Paule did set vp there as Irenaeus sheweth, li. 3. ca. 3. 2. There is the principal Church, because the Bishop of Rome succeedeth the prince of the Apostles. Nay rather, because it is the greatest Church, being gathered in the greatest citie of the world, as Irenęus also calleth it. 3. The priestly vnitie beganne not in Rome but in Peter, therefore there is the whole authoritie of Peter. The argument is nought, the beginning of vnitie proueth not authoritie. 4. this worde vnitie doth import, that as Peter alone had in him the whole power of the cbiefe sheepeheard, so Cornelius his successor hath in him the same power. This argument is of small importance, for nether had Peter alone such power, nor any of his successors. 5. where he sayth infidelitie can hauehave no accesse to the Romanes, what other thinge is it, then to saye in the Church of Rome he vuleth for whose faith Christ prayed. Luc. 22.
Christ prayed for the faith of all his Apostles, and of all his Disciples, to the ende of the worlde. Ioan. 17. Beside this, Maister Sander translateth perfidia which signifieth falshood or false dealing, infidelitie, secondly that which Cyprian sayth of all the faythfull Romanes, he draweth to his Pope, thirdly where Cyprian sheweth howe longe they shall continue without falshoode, namely so long as they retayne the fayth praysed by the Apostle, he maketh it perpetuall to the sea of Rome: whereas the Romanes them selues write to Cyprian of those prayses of the Apostle, quarum laudum & gloriae degenerem fuisse, maximum crimen est. Of which prayses and glorye to be growne out of kinde, it is the greatest cryme. Finally if Cyprian had thought the Pope and Churche of Rome coulde not erre, he woulde neuer hauehave mayntayned an opinion against them, as he did in rebaptisinge them that were baptised by heretikes.
The 6. We must adde heareto, that Cyprian calleth Rome Ecclesiae Catholicae matricem & radicem, the mother & roote of the Catholike church. lib 4. Epist. 8. we find not Rome so called there, we find that Cyprian & his fellowes, exhorted all such troublesome persons, as went ouer sea, & caried false tales, Vt Ecclesiae Catholicae matricē & radi…em agnoscerent & tenerent, that they woulde acknowledg & holde the mother and roote of the Catholike Church, by which wordes, they disswaded them from ioygninge with schismatikes, who being condemned in one Church, would gad vp and downe for absolution in an other.
The 7. did not S. Cyp. confesse Cornelius to hauehave receiued the appellation of Rasilides lawfully, out of Spaine… li. 1 Ep. 4, There is no word of any such confession or appellation, in that epistle. But rather, if you suppose an appellation & a restitution by the Byshop of Rome, Cyprian & 36. bishops with him, determine the same restitution to be voide & of none effect: Neque rescindere ordinationem i… re perfectam potest, quod Basilides post crimina sua detecta, & conscientiam propria confessione nudatam, Romam pergens, Stephanum collegam nostrum longe positum & gestae rei ac veritatis ignarum fefellit, vt ambiret reponi se miustè in episcopatum, de quo fucrat iustè depositus. Haec eò pertinent vt Basilidis, non tam abolita sint quam cumulata delicta, vt ad superiora peccata eius, etiam fallaciae & circumuentionis crimen accesseris. Neque enim tam culpandus est ille cui negligenter obreptū, quam hic execrādus qui fraudulenter obrepsit. Obrepere autē hominibus Basilides potuit, Deo nō potest, cū script… sit, Deus non irridetur: Neither can it make frustrate the ordination lawfully made, y Basilides after his crimes were detected, & his cōsciēce opened by his owne confession, going to Rome, hath deceiued our fellow bishop Stephan, being farre of & ignorāt of … matter & of … truth, … he might ābitiously seeke to be vniustlye restored into his bishoprick frō w̄ he was iustly deposed These things tend to this ende, that the offences of Basilides, are not so much abolished as increased, so that to his former sinnes the cryme of deceifulnesse and circumuention is added. For neither is he so much to be blamed who was negligently deceiued, as he is to bee abhorred, which did craftely deceiue him. But if Basilides could deceiue men, he coulde not deceiue God, seeing it is written, God is not mocked.
Heere is no lawefull appellation spoken of, but the Bishope of Romes sentence pronounced voyde, and he blamed for his negligence and rashnesse, to medle with matters whereof he coulde hauehave no knowledge, by meanes of distance of place. But if M. San. reply, that he is not reproued for taking such appellations, he must heare what Cyprian sayth of such appellations which began to be vsed in his daies, vntounto Cornelius B. of Rome immediatly after the woordes cyted by him. lib. 1 epi. 3. of those schismatikes that were so bolde as to sayle to Rome, and carry letters as aboue. Quae autem causa veniendi & pseudoepiscopum contra episcopos factum nunciandi? Aut enim placet illis quod fecerunt & in suo scelere perseuerant, aut si displicet & recedunt, sciunt quo reuertantur. Nam cum statutū sit omnibus nobis, & aequum sit pariter & iustū, vt vnius…uius que causa illic audiatur, vbi est crimen admissum, & singulis pastoribus portio gregis sit ascripta, quam regat vnusquis que & gubernet, rationem sui actus Domino redditurus, oportet vtique eos quibus presumus non circumc…rsare, nec episcoporum concordiam coherentem sua subdola & fallaci …emeritate collidere. Sed agere illic causam suam, vbi & accusatores habere & testes sui criminis possint, nisi paucit desperatis & perditis, minor videtur esse auctoritas episcoporum in Africa constitutorum, qui iam de illis iudicauerunt & eorum conscientiam multis delictorum laqueis vinctā iudicij sui nuper grauitate damnarūt: But what cause had they to come and to report that a false Byshop was made against the Byshops: For either that which they hauehave done pleaseth them, & they continew in their wickednesse, or if it displease thē, and they goe back from it, they knowe whether they shoulde returne. For wheras it is decreed of vsus all, & is also meete and right, that eueryevery mans cause should be hard there, where the crime was committed, and a portion of the flocke is committo eueryevery Pastor, which eueryevery one ought to rule and gouerne, as he that shall yeelde an account of his doings to the Lord: verily it behoueth them ouer whome wee hauehave rule, not to runne about, neither by their craftie & deceitful rashnes to crase the concord of Byshops agreing togither: but there to plead their matter wher they may hauehave both accusers and witnesses of their crime, except the authoryty of the Byshops ordeined in Africa seemeth to a few desperate and wicked fellowes to bee lesse, which hauehave already iudged of them, and condemned their consciences, bounde with the waight of their iudgement in many cordes of their offences. This place of Cyprian declareth not onelyonly that the Byshopps of Africa, had decreede against such appellations, but also that they thought theyr authoritie nothing inferior to the Byshops of Italy, nor to the byshop of Rome him self.
The 8. note out of Cyprian is, That he required Stephanus the Pope, to depose Marcianus the Byshop of Arles in Fraunce, which to dee in an other prouince is a signe that the Pope of Rome is aboue other Bishops. If it were true that M. Sander sheweth, it might proue the Bishop of Rome, to be a Primate or Metropolitane, it coulde not proue him to be a Byshop ouer all the world. But it is vtterly false, that he saith, Cyprian required the Pope Stephan to depose him, for he was deposed by the iudgement of all the Byshops of the Weste Churche: Ab v…iuersis sacerdotibus iudicatus, condemned of all the Priestes, onelyonly hee exhorteth Stephan of Rome, which was negligēt in this behalfe, to ioyne with the reste of the Byshoppes of Fraunce in ordering of another Byshopp in his steade, who long since hath beene excommunicated and deposed from his place, for taking parte with Nouatiane the Heretike. And lest you should think the whole m…tter to be referred to the Byshop of Rome, these are is words in the same Epistle. li, 3. Ep. 13. Id circo enim frater charissime, copiosum corpus est sacerdotum concordiae mutuae glutine at que vnitatis vinculo copulatum vt si quis ex collegio nostro haeres…m facere & gregem Christi lacerare & vastare tentauerit, subueniant caeteri & quasi pastores vtiles & misericordes, oues dominicas in gregem col…igant: For therfore most welbeloued brother, the bodie or fellowshippe of priestes is plentifull, beeing coupled togither by the Glewe of mutuall concorde, and the bande of Amitie, so that if any of our company shall assay to make an heresie, or to rente or waste the flocke of Christ, the reste should giuegive ayde, and as profitable and mercifull shepheards gather againe the Lords sheepe into his folde.
The 9. note is, That notwithstanding Cyprian dissented from Pope Stephanus in opinion concerning the baptizing of suchas had ben baptised by here…kes, yet hee denyed not his prerogatiue. but kept still the vnitie of the militant Church, in acknowledging the visible head thereof. He quoteth his ep. Contra Stephan, wherin is no word of acknowledging the Popes prerogatiue, but contrary wise eueryevery childe may see, that seeing he did boldly dissent in opinon frō the B. of Rome, & wrote against him, he helde no such prerogatiue of that sea, as the Papists now maintaine, that the bishop of Rome cannot erre. In deede Cyprian professeth, that notwithstanding he differed from him in opinion, yet he would not depar…e from the vnitie of the Church, but what is this for acknowledging of a visible head, wherof M. S. speaketh much, but Cyprian neuer a word, neither in that place, nor in any of all his workes.
The next authoritie is Hippolitus whose words Prud rehearseth: Peristeph in passion Hip. Respondetfugite &c.
H…s aunsvvere vvas O flee the s…smes of cursed Nouates l…re:
And to the Catholike f…lke and stocke, your selues againe restore.
Let onelyonly one faith rule and ra…gne, kept in the Church of olde:
VVhichWhich faith both Paule doth s…l retaine & Peters chair doth hold…
No dout this was a good exhortation, so longe as the temple of Peter a…d Paule at Rome did holde the olde catholike faith: from which seeing the Pope is now fled, we may not honor the emptie chaire of Peter, to think there is his faith, where his doctrine is not.
After Hippolitus, followeth Sozomenus, who reporteth that Athanasius and certaine other Byshops of the Greeke Church came to Rome to Iulius the byshopp there, to complaine that they were vniustly deposed by the Arians. Wherevpon the Byshop of Rome finding them vponupon examination to agree with the Nicene coū cel did re…eiue them into the communion as one that had care of them all, for the worthynes of his owne See, and did restore to eueryevery of them their owne Churches. &c. Heere M. Sander hath his 9 obseruations, he delighteth much in that number. But it shall not neede to stand vponupon them, it is cōfessed that in Sozomenus time, the writer of this story, who iudgeth of things done according to the present state in which he lyued, the sea of Rome was growne into great estimation, and counted the first See or principall in dignitie of all Byshops Seas in the worlde. Yea, it is true that Socrates a writer of Historyes as well as he sayeth, That long before his time, the Byshops Sea of Rome aswel as of Alexandria, was growne beyonde the bands of Pr…esthood, into a forraine Lordship & dominion. Soc. lib. 7. cap. 11. But if we consider the recordes of the very time in which Iulius lyued, we shall not finde that the dignitie of his Sea was such, as that he hadde such authoritie as Sozomenus aseribeth to him, and much lesse such as M. Sander imagineth of him.
In Epiphanius there is an Epistle of one Marcellus, which beside that he called him his fellow minister, acknowledgeth no such dignitie of his Sea lib. 3. to. 1. And Sozomenus himselfe testifyeth that the Bishops of the East, derided & contemned his commandementes. lib. 3. Cap. 8. & cap. 11. they were as bolde to depose him with the byshops of the West, as he was to check them, that they called not him to their councel. Wherein as I confesse, they did euell, yet thereby they shewed euidently, that the Christian worlde in those dayes, did not acknowledge the vsurpation of the bishop of Rome, as M. Sander saith they did. Neither durst they eaer to dissent from him, if it had beene a Catholike doctrine receiued in the Church, that the Byshopp of Rome is head of the Church, Byshop of all Byshops, Iudge of all causes, and one which cannot erre. As for Athanasius, Paulus, &c. and other Byshops beeing tossed to and fro, by their enemyes, no maruaile if they were glad to finde any comfort at the Byshop of Romes hands, hauing first sought to the Emperors for refuge, of whome sometime they were holpē, sometime they wer hindred as informatiō was giuen either for them or against thē.
But Arnobius he sayeth giueth a maruailous witnes for the church of Rome in Psa. 106. Petrus in deserto. &c Peter wandering in the desert of this worlde, vntill he came to Rome, preached the baptisme of Iesus Christ in whome all floods are blessed from Peter vntounto this day. He hath made the going forth of the waters into thirst, so that he which shall goe forth of the Church of Peter shal perish for thirst. It is a maruelous witte of M. Sander, that can find such maruelous prerogatiue of Peter, in this place which Arnobius would hauehave in the example of Peter to be vnderstoode of all men. Quid est ascendunt? Disce in Petro, vt quod in ipso inueneris, in omnibus cernas. Ascendit Petrus &c. What meaneth this they goe vp as highe as heauen? Learne in Peter, to thend that yt which thou shalt find in Peter, thou mayst see in all men. Peter went vp as high as heauen, when he sayd: Although I should dye with thee, yet will I not deny thee &c. and so applying the vnderstanding of the Psalme to Peter, and in him to all Christiās, he cōmeth to that maruelous testimony of the church of Rome, which M. Sander reporteth, shewing how after his repentance God exalted him to be a preacher of that baptisme of Iesus Christ in whome all floodes are blessed from Peter to this day. Where M. Sander vseth a false translation, saying the floodes are blessed of Peter, and expoundeth the floodes to be the churches, whereas Arnobius speaketh of all waters, which in Christ are sanctified to the vse of baptisme, from the Apostles time vntill this day. But it is a Catholike argument that whosoeuer goeth out of the Church of Peter, goeth out of the Church of Christe, therefore Rome is the mother Church and Peter the heade thereof. Euen lyke this, whosoeuer goeth out of the Church of Paule, or of any of the Apostles wheresoeuer they planted it, doth perish therefore Corinth and Paule, or any other Citie & the Apostle that preached there, may be taken for the head and Pastor, and mother Church of all other, yet is this with M. Sander a meruailous testimony.
Optatus succeeded Arnobius. Cont. Pamen de nat: lib. 2. Negare nonpotes. &c. Thou canst not deny, but that thou knowest that to Peter first the bishops chaire was giuen in the citie of Rome, in which Peter the head of al the apostles hath sit: wherofhe was also called Cephas, in which chair vnitie might be kept of al men, so that he should be a scismatike wc should place any other chaire against the singular chaire. VntoUnto Peter succeeded Linus, vntounto Linus succeded Clemens, & so nameth all the Byshops vntil Siricius which liued in his time, of whom he saith, Qui noster est socius, which is our fellow. In this sentence Optatus laboreth to proue against the Donatists which were scismatikes, that ther is but one Catholike church frō which they were departed. He vseth the argumēt of vnitie commended in Peters chaire whom he calleth head of the Apostles in respecte of vnitie, & not of authority, which appeareth by this that in the end he accounteth Syricius bishop of Rome and Peters successor, not head of all Churches nor vniuersall Bishop of al Bishops, but Socius noster, our fellowe or companion, as one consenting with him in the vnitie of that Church, which was first planted by the Apostles, and not as a generall gouernor of the vniuersall Church of Christe. Wherefore although Optatus doe more thē was necessary vrge this argument of the vnitie of Peters Chaire, yet his meanining was not to set foorth an vnrepr ouable authoritie thereof, such as the Pope nowe challengeth, but onelyonly to make it tbe beginning of vnitie.
At length he commeth to S. Hierome in an Epistle to Damasus, out of whiche he gathereth diuers sentences. M…hi cathedram &c. I thought it beste to aske councel of the Chaire of Peter, & of the saith praysed by the mouth of the Apostle. I speake with the successor of a fisher, and with a difciple of the crosse. I following none first but Christe, am ioyned in communion with thy blessednesse, that is with the Chaire of Peter. VponUpon that Rocke, I knowe the Church to be builded. VVhosoeuer shall eate the Lambe out of this house he is vnholy. If any man l…e out of the Arke of Noe during the time of the Floude, hee shall perishe. I knowe not V…atis, I despise Melitius, I hauehave no acquaintance with Paulinus, whosoeuer doth not gather with thee, he doth scatter abrode, that is, he that is not of Christe, is of Antichriste. The conclusion openeth all the matter as longe as Damasus Byshop of Rome, gathereth with Christe, that is mayntameth true doctrine, Hierome will gather with him, who professed before that he woulde followe none as first, but Christe, For he woulde not hauehave gathered with Liberius Byshoppe of Rome, whome hee confesseth to hauehave subscrybed to the Arians that were Hereukes in Catal. Script. ecclesi. What mockery is it then to drawe the commendations of a good Catholike Byshop maintaining true Doctrine, to eueryevery Byshoppe sitting in that seate, agreeing neither in doctrine nor manners with that Christian predecessor.
Augustine must succeede Hierome, who in his 166. Epistle giueth vsus this rule. Caelestis magister. &c. The Heauenly maister maketh the people secure, concerning euil ouerseers, lest for their sakes the Chaire of healthfu…l doctrine shoulde be sorsaken, in whiche Chaire euill men are euer constrayned to say good thinges, for the thinges whiche they speake are not their owne. But they are the thinges of God.
Heere sayeth Maister Sander wee hauehave a Chaire of healthfull doctrine, and that is afterwarde called the Chaire of vnitie, therefore it is not the Chayre of eueryevery Byshop, which are many, and of which many hauehave beene Heretikes, but the only chayre of the bishop of Rome, in which Chaire the Pope be he neuer so euill, is constrayned to say good thinges and cannot erre. But seeing I hauehave often proued that many Byshops sitting in that Chayre of Rome hauehave spoken euill thinges, and were fylthy Heretikes, it followeth, that this is not a wodden Chayre that Augustine speaketh of, but the Chayre of true doctrine, such as the Chayre of Moses was, in which not onelyonly Aaron and his successors, but euen the Scrybes and Pharisees did sit, hauing the authoritie of Moses, while they vttered nothing but that which God deliuered by Moses. But when they preached false doctrine they did not sit in the chaire of Moses, but in the chayre of pestilence, as the Pope & all other heretikes doe. He talketh much of vnitie in S, Peter, in his chaire, sea…e and succession, as though any of these, were worth a straw, without vnitie in S. Peters doctrine, which was the doctrine of Christ.
But Sainct Augustine Contr epist fundament confesseth that the successiō of priestes from Saint Peter vntounto this present time stayed him in the Catholike Church. It is true, he confesseth that this succession amonge many thinges was one that stayed him. And yet he acknowledgeth that the manifest trueth, Praeponenda est omnibus illis rebus quibus in Catholica tene…r, is to be preferred before all thinges by which I am stayed in the Catholike Church, namely before antiquitie, consent of nations, miracles, succession of Byshops and the name of Catholikes.
Likewise rehearsing the same things in a manner against the Donatistes which Maister Sander hath not omitted. Epist. 165. Hee sayeth, Quamuis non tam de istis documentis presumanus quam de Scripturis sanctis. Although we presume not so much of these documents as of the holy spriptures. Wherefore as the argument of sucessiō, was wel vsed against heretikes, so long as there was succession of doctrine with succession of persons: so now to alleadge the onelyonly succession of persons where the doctrin is cleane changed, is as folish & ridiculous, as by shewing of emptie dishes, to proue abundance of victuals, or showing vessels ful of filthy waters, to proue that they are full of good wine, because meate of olde time, hath beene serued in such dishes, and wine preserued in such vessels.
But if the authoritie of one man as Saint Augustine was, seeme little M. San. bringeth the two councels gatheredin Africa & Numidia, against the Pelagiās which sent their decrees to the Sea of Rome, That the authoriof the Apostol…ke Sea might be giuen to them Epi. 19. if they required the B. of Rome to agree with thē in the truth, what pretog…tiue of supremacie do they graūt vntounto him? Nay rather they do p…iu…ly reprehend him, that he had so long suffred the Pelagian poyson to be spread vnderunder his nose in Europe, and the doctriue neither called to examination, nor confuted, yea rather seemed to cōsent to the den of the bishops of the East, that Pelagius was iustly absolued. But Pope Innocentius himselfe praiseth them Ep 91. that they had kept the customs of the olde tradition, in referring the matter to his Sea and sayth, That the sathers not by humaine but by diuine sentence hauehave decreed that what soeuer was done in the prouinces a farre of, they should not account it before to be ended, except it came to the knhwledge of this sea, where whatsoeuer had beene iustly pronounced should be coufirmed by the authoritie of this sea, and those other churches should take it as it were waters which should flow from their owne natiue fountain. We know the ambitious Ep. of Innocentius if it be not counterfeted, because many patches therof are found in other decretal epistles but we deny that ye authoritie which he pretended, was acknowledged by these two councels, yes saith M. S. the fathers of the Mileuitan councel say: Arbitramur &c. VVe think these men that hauehave so pernitious and froward opinions will giuegive pla…e more easily to the authority of your holines, beeing taken out of the authoritie of the holy Scriptures, by help of the mercy of our lord Iesus Christ which …ouch…feth to rule you when you consult & to heare you whē you pray by these words they shew, that they hope ye here tikes being reproued by the B. of Rome out of the wo…d of God, wil the rather giuegive place, wt out imagining, that the B. of Romes authoritie is so stablished by the scriptures that whatsoeuer he decre cōtrary to thescriptures the same should be imbraced But a farther confirmatiō of the epistle of Innoce. he bringeih out of Aug. Ep. 106. Where he saith, Pope Innocent did write an answere to the Bishops in althings, as it became the prelate of the Apostolike sea. But these words neither proue that epistle to be written by Innocent, nor if it were, do allowe his pretended auth ority, because that was no matter whereof they required his answere. But to put it out of dout. Both these Councels hauehave decreed against the vsurpation of the Romish sea. As the councel Mileuitan cap. 22. decreed that no man should appeele out of Africa, vnderunder paine of excommunication.
The laste authoritie cited out of Augustine, is, Epistle 162. speaking of the Churche of Rome. In qua semper Apostolicae cathedrae viguit principatus. In which alwayes the principalitie of the Apostolike chaire hath flourished. A matter often confessed that the fathers especially of the later times since Constantine aduanced the Church in wealth & dignitie, esteemed the church of Rome as the principall Sea in dignitie, but not in absolute authoritie, such as in processe of time the Byshops of Rome claymed and vsurped. For euen the same Augustine with 216. Bishops refused to yeelde to the Bishop of Rome, clayming by a counterfaire Canon of the Councell of Nice, to hauehave authortie to receaue appeales out of Africa. Epi. con. Aphr. ad Bonifac. whiche they cou…pte an intollerable pride and presumption, and in Epist. cont. Aphri. ad Coelesti…m fumosum typum seculi, A smokey pride of the worlde which the Pope claymed and an absurde authoritie, that one mā should be better able to examine such causes, then so many Byshops, of the prouince where the controuersie began, and by the olde Cannons shoulde be ended.
To Augustine he ioyneth Prosper Bishop of Rhegiū in Italie which affirmeth in lib de ingrat. that Rome the see of Peter was the first that did cut of the pestilence of Pelagius, which Rome being made head vntounto the worlde of pastorall honor holdeth by religion whatsoeuer it doth not possesse by warre. And againe. Rome through the primacie of the Apostolike Priesthoode, is made greater by the castell of religion, then by the throne of power. First how vntruly he boasteth that the see of Peter, was the first that did cut of the heresie of Pelagius you may ease y see, by that the councel of Africa did before condemne it, & had somwhat a doe to perswade Innocentius Bishop of Rome to it. Whereby you see, that Prosper was ouer partiall to the see of Rome, to whome yet he ascribeth a principallity or primacy of honor, not of power or auctority.
The testimonies of Leo & Gregory B…shops of Rome as alwaies, so now I deeme to be vnmeete to be heard in their owne cause, though otherwise they were not the worst men, yet great furtherers of the auctoritie of Antichrist, which soone after their dayes, tooke possessiō of the chaire, which they had helped to prepare for him. The last testimonie out of Beda which liued vnderunder the tyranny of Antichrist, I will not stande vponupon, M. Sander may hauehave great store of such late writers to affirme the Popes supremacie.