A Retentive to Stay Good Christians, Title page · Motive 23
The 23. motiue is the 44. demaund.
Apostolike Church. The Communion of the Bishop of Rome to be kept of all Christians. Apostolike Church is the Romane Bristow.Church. Apostolike Church as the Romane is S. Augustines motiue. Succession of the Bishops of Rome, the motiue of Optatus, S. Augustine and S. Irenaeus.
This motiue in effect, is all one with the former, and in a maner so confessed by Bristow him selfe. But thus he tak…th his principle of their singing in the Masse, & our saying in the communion, of the creede, in which we confesse that we beleue one onelyonly Catholike and Apostolike Church. This one Catholike Church sayth Bristow is our Church that is Apostolike, because it agreeth with the faith of the Church of Rome, which is the sea of an Apostle, holding on to this day by succession, and to which was written an Epistle by an Apostle. I aunswer, it is not the popish Romane Church, because that Church is departed from the vniuersal Church of Christ, planted by the Apostles through out the worlde, and holdeth not on in succession of the doctrine of the Apostle, which did write that epistle to the Romanes. But Bristowes wise reasoning, is to be noted. S. Peter was an Apostle. That is true. he was the first Bishop of Rome. It is a great doubt, whether he euer came at Rome, and it is out of doubt by the Scriptures, that he taried not there so longe as the histories affirme, and last it is false that he was a Bishop of a particular Church, which was an Apostle ouer all the world, and specially ouer the circumcision. There is a citye in the worlde named Rome. And that citye by the Scripture is the seat of Antichrist and the whore of Babylon. Apoc. 17. vers. 18. S. Paules epistle to the Romaines is extant. and euen that epistle will proue the Church of Rome at this day, to be not apostolicall but apostatical, as in many articles, so in the article of iustification. Rom. 3. vers. 28. Are not those causes why a Church is called Apostolike, sayth Bristow? No verily but onelyonly because it holdeth and mayntayneth the Apostolike doctrine, which if it doe in all necessary articles, then is it Apostolike, & hath succession and plantation of the Apostles, or els not, although it be gathered in such cities in which the Apostles hauehave preached, planted, and to whome they hauehave written. But Tertullian doth so define Apostolike Churches, sayth Bristow. I say it is vntrue, for Tertullian against newe heretikes, sendeth vsus not to the emptye chayres of the Apostles, which had written to such cities, but vntounto the the testimony of their doctrine, receyued from the Apostles, and continued vntill that time.
So he sendeth them that are in Achaia, to Corinthe. such as are in Macedonia to Philippi, those that are in Asia to Ephesus, & them which be neare Italy to Rome, from whence they of Africa had their authoritie, not by excellency of that Church aboue other Apostolike Churches, but by nearenes of place: Therfore he saith, Proxima est tibi Achaia? habes Corinthum. Si non longè es à Macedonia, habes Philippos. Si potes in Asiam tendere, habes Ephesum, si autem Italiae adieceris, habes Romam, vnde nobis quae que auctoritas presto est statuta. Is Achaia nearest vntounto thee? thou hast Corinthe. If thou be not farre from Macedonia, thou hast Philippi. If thou canst goe into Asia, thou hast Ephesus. If thoulye neare to Italy, thou hast the Church of Rome from whence vntounto vsus also (in Africa) authoritie is setled nearer at hand. Tertul. de praeser. But Bristow sayth that the auncient fathers when there were many Apostolike Churches standing, they did principally and singularly direct men alwayes to the Church of Rome. This you see to be false, by the place of Tertullian last ci…ed. But that they did more often direct men to the testimony of the Church of Rome, it was for that by meanes of the Imperiall citie, it was more notorious and best knowne. Otherwise it is a very lye of Bristow, where he sayth, that when the fathers name the Apostolike church, they do meane the Romane church by excellency, as the Poet signifieth Vergil and the Philosopher Aristotle. A like lye it is, that no Church remayneth in the world founded by any of the Apostles, but onelyonly Rome. For many Churches remayne to this day, that were planted by the Apostle Paule, who from Hierusalem to Illyricum filled all the contryes with the doctrine of the Gospell: of which many vntounto this day continue in profession of Christianitie, beside all the Churches of India & AEthiopia, which were also planted by the Apostles Thomas and other. The more beastly is the blundering of this Bristow, who dreameth, that the councell of Constantinople the 1. which made this confession by the Apostolike Church, did not onelyonly meane the Romane Church, but also none other but the Romane Church.
As though that councell could not distinguish the Catholike Apostolike Church, dispersed ouer all … face of the earth, from the particular Apostolike Church of Rome, which was but a member therereof: when the same councel gaue the like priuiledges of honor to the Church of Constantinople, which the Church of Rome had, reseruing but the senioritie to ye Church of Rome. And being called to a councel at Rome by the Princes letters, procured by Damasus Bishop of Rome, & other Bishops of Italy & the West, they refused to come, as hauing already by the Emperour of the East being gathered to Constantinople, …oncluded what they thought good to be decreed, Histor. trip. lib. 9, cap. 13. And in their epistle written to their fellow ministers Damasus, Ambrose &c. gathered in councell at Rome, wherein they excused their refusall to come, they call the Church of Antiochia, seniorem & vere apostolicam Ecclesiam, the elder, & truly an Apostolike Church. The church of Ierusalem they call the mother of all Churches. Ep. Concil. Constanti. Hist. trip. lib. 9. cap. 14. Nether was it euer in their mind, to make the particular Church of Rome, the only Apostolike Church of the world, but onelyonly a principall member consenting with the same. The succession of bishops of Rome alledged by Irenaeus, Tertullian, Augustine, Optatus doth nothing in the world defend the popish bishops in their successiō vntounto this day, for so much as they succeede not in doctrine, as well as in place. Nether doe we make any leape from Luther vntounto the Apostles, but prouing our doctrine to be the doctrine of the Apostles, we doubt no more of perpetuall succession thereof, then knowing our selues to be descended from Adam, we doubt whether we hauehave had a line all discent of progenitors vntounto this time, that I may vse Bristowes owne example, to declare that numbring of Bishops is no more necessary in the one, thē shewing our pedegrie in the other. Seing the question is not how many men, & in what places were professed this doctrine, but whether it be the same which … Apostles taught: but that can not better be proued, then by the writings of … Apostles.
The places cited by Bristow for succession out of Irenaeus Tertullian Optatus, Augustine you shall sinde answered in my confutation of Stapletons fortres part. 2. cap. 1. & of Sanders rocke cap. 15. where also is answered the place of S. Luke cap. 22. of Christ praying that Peters faith might not faile.