Conference Between Rainolds and Hart, Chapter 4

Conference Between Rainolds and Hart · Chapter 4

p. 151The fourth Chapter. The practise of the Supremacie (which Peter is intitled to) imag… to be proued, 1 by the election of Matthias to the Apostleship: 2 … by the presidentship of the Councell held at Ierusalem: 3 and by Paules iourney taken to see Peter, and his abode with him. Wherein, as in other of the actes of the Apostles, the equalitie of them all not the supremacie of one, is shewed.

HART.

Examples of the practise of Peters supreme-headship in the gouernment of the Church.The first Diuisiō. Whereof we hauehave records in the holy scriptures: euen in the Actes of the Apostles, which are a paterne of Church-gouernment.

Rainoldes.

The reasons in deede, which you gather thence, are brethren to the former. But they are no stronger, then the former were. If you bring them forth into the field: you shall perceiue it.

Hart.

There are many places, but specially, two: by which Peters soueraintie ouer the Apostles is manifestly shewed. For in aaAct. 1.15.Acts 1:15the one, he proposeth an election to bee made of a new Apostle into the roome of Iudas. In bbAct. 15.7.Acts 15:7the other, he is President of the Councell of the Apostles, which was held at Ierusalem: he speaketh first, and concludeth in it. Out of both the which I gather this reason. S. Peter did practise the power and authoritie of a supreme head ouer the Apostles. Therefore hee was their supreme head.

Rainoldes.

Now are you come to that, which I had an eye too, when I desired you (in ccChap. 1. Diuis. 2.the beginning of our conference) to tell me what power you gaue vntounto the Pope by calling him supreme head. For, in this grasse there lurketh a snake. Which that you may see, and (if it be the gratious will of God) auoide, least that you perish through his venoom: I will aske you a question. When you say, ddStaplet. prin. doctr. lib. 6. in praefat.the Pope is **Primarium & supremum ecclesiastici iudicii caput.chiefe and supreme p. 152head of ecclesiasticall iudgement, and President of Councels: doo you meane that the Pope in assemblies of Bishops, is, as the Speaker (with vsus) in the Parlament, to propose matters to them, and aske their iudgementes, and gather their voices, that thinges may bee orderly handled and enacted by common consent?

Hart.

As the Speaker? No. But as the Prince rather.

Rainoldes.

Yea, I say to you, and more then the Prince. For as thinges in Parlament cannot bee enacted without the Princes consent: so neither can the Prince make actes without consent of the Lordes and Commons. And when they are made by consent of them all▪ they cannot be repealed by the Prince alone, without the like consent by which they were made. But with the Pope it is not so. For such is the power of his Princely prerogatiue, that not onelyonly Councels may not make decrées for the Church-gouernment without his consent: but hee may also make decrées without them, as good as they with him. Yea, that he may adde too, and take from, and alter what hee shall thinke good in the decrées of Councels▪ and set them out for theirs, eeIohannes Andreas in principio Clementina …um, de constitut. concil. Vi…ens.as Pope Clemens played with the Councell of Vienna. Yea, that being made with their consent and his both: **As it is shewed by the whole course ofthe Canon law: specially the Decretals, as they are called.hee maye breake them when he will, and repeale them, if he list, for no lawe doth hold him. Now, sith that the power which you giuegive the Pope by the name of supreme head, you giuegive it Peter too, from whom you fetch the Popes conueiance; and Peter in the assemblies of the Apostles, was but as the Speaker, and therefore not as the Prince, and therefore not as more then the Prince in our Parlament: hereof I conclude, that Peter was not the supreme head of the Apostles. And so hauehave you the third point, ffChap. 3. Diuis. 1.which I promised to proue, that if somewhat more were giuē to Peter thē to the rest of the Apostles, yet was it not so much as should make him their supreme head. You may discharge now the Actes of the Apostles, out of your Campe. For, drawe what reasons thence you list, you shal find thē (as I told you) no stronger thē y^e former.

Hart.

You are too hasty: your conclusion runneth away before your proofe.

Rainoldes.

I hauehave proued as much as may conclude your Pope to be an vsurper.

p. 153Hart.

You hauehave not proued that Peter in the assemblies of the Apostles, was but as the Speaker is in our Parlament.

Rainoldes.

What néede I? When your selfe gaue no more vntounto him, then as the Speakers office, in the former assembly: wherein yet he did most. For you said, ggPetrus proponit faciendam furrogationem noui Apostoli. Staplet. lib. 6. cap. 13.that he proposed an election to be made of a new Apostle into the roome of Iudas. And this was all that you might say, and say truely, by the story of the Actes. Which sheweth, that not he, but hhAct. 1.23.Acts 1:23they mad… the election: so farre as it was lawfull for them to deale with that which God was to order extraordinarilie. As for the other assembly, when the Councel was held at Ierusalem: you cannot proue that he had so much as the office of a Speaker therein. Your iiStaplet. lib. 6. cap. 13.Doctor infeoffeth him (I graunt) with more: namely, that **Primus ex omnibus loquitur, concludit, & praesidet.hee speaketh first of all, concludeth, yea, and is President too. But what will not he dare to affirme? who, in so great light of the Scriptures, affirmeth in writing that which is flat against them. For he saith that Peter not only speaketh first, but concludeth also. And they shewe that both kkAct. 15. ver. 7. foreign.Acts 15:7there had beene much debating and reasoning of the matter, before Peter spake: and after he had spoken, llver. 12.Barnabas, and Paule and mmver. 13.Iames spake, and so nnver. …2.the Councell did conclude the matter. Yea they did conclude it according to the very wordes that Iames spake, and oover. 29.a speciall point of his, which Peter touched not. So that, if we would striue but lawfully against y^t, for which you striue vnlawfully:ppver. 20. the likely-hood is rather that Iames sat as President in the Coū cell, then Peter, sith both he spake last and the whole Councell did conclude with him. But, to yéeld vntounto you (for your most aduantage) as much or more then any likely-hood may afford you, y^t Peter was not only the Speaker but y^e President in both y^e assemblies: yet are you no néerer vntounto y^t supremacy which you shoote at. For, such a Presidentship as Peter had amongst y^e Apostles, is so farre from the Prelatship which the Pope seeketh to hauehave amongst Bishops: that, if we should offer him all that Peter had (at your request) vponupon condition that he would accept it and aske no more then it: he would thinke we mocked him, and giuegive you litle thankes who take vponupon you to be his aduocate, & make so poore a plea for him. This you may perceiue by an other aduocate, who made y^e same plea for him out of this storie, a learned p. 138Lawier, Francis Duaren. He (in qqDe sacr. eccle minister. ac benefic. lib. 3. cap. 2.his Abridgement of the Canon lawe) falling into the question of the Pope and the Councell, whither of them is soueraine, and hath the chiefest power, whereto the other should be subiect in matters of the Church: doth thus set downe his iudgement of it. It seemeth most agreeable to the law of God, that the Church (which the Councell doth represent) should hauehave the chiefest power, and the Pope should acknowledge himselfe subiect to it. For the power of binding and loosing was giuen by Christ not to Peter alone (whose successour the Pope is said to be) but aaMatt. 18. c. Quodcunque. 24. q. 1.Matt 18to the whole Church. Howbeit, I deny not, but Peter was set ouer the rest of the Apostles. Hereof it commeth that in the time of the Apostles bbAct. 1. & 6. & 15.Acts 1as often as any was to be ordeined either Bishop or Deacon, or any thing to bee decreed which appertained to the Church: Peter neuer tooke that vponupon himselfe, but permited it to the whole Church. This was in him aboue the rest, that he was wont, 11Tanquam princeps Apostolorum.as chiefe of the Apostles, to call them togither, and propose to them the thinges, which were to bee doone. Euen as now **He meaneth, in Fraunce. Where the courts of Parlament are assemblies of iudges: of whome the Lord-chiefe-iustice (as it were) is called President.with vsus, hee that is the President of a court of Parlament, doth call togither the Senate: in the Senate he speaketh first, when it is needfull; and doth many other things, which argue a certaine prerogatiue and preeminence of the person that he beareth. Yet is he not therefore greater or higher then is the whole court: neither hath hee power ouer all the Senatours; neyther may hee decree any thing against their iudgements: nay the iudgement of all controuersies belongeth to the court ( 22Cuius caput esse praeses dicitur.whose head the President is said to bee,) and not to the President. Yea, if neede bee, the court dooth minister iustice and execute iudgement as well against him, as against anye other, and punisheth him also. And this was the state of these thinges 33Olim, olim.in olde time. But in processe of time, (I know not how) it came to passe, that the highest power ouer all Christians was giuen vntounto one man: and he was 44Legibus omnibus canonibusque synodalibus (imperatorum exemplo) solutus.set at libertie from being bound to any lawes (after the maner of **Princeps legibus solu…us est. l. Princeps. D. de legib. senatusqué consult.Emperours) or to the Canons & decrees of any Councels. For cccap. Significasti. de election.Pope Paschalis prouided and ordered by a decretall Epistle; 55Nulla concilia Romanae ecclesiae legem praefigere posse.that no Councels may prescribe a lawe to be kept of the church of Rome: & the authoritie of the Bishop of Rome is excepted expresly ddc ideo. 25. q. 1.in the decrees of certaine Councels. And thus he goeth p. 139forward in shewing the prerogatiue of the Pope aboue the Councell: whereof he maketh him President. But so, that (you sée) he acknowledgeth it is not in **Their gouernment by their Ca… law.the Actes of the Popes, as it was of old in the Actes of the Apostles: no not in those very places of the Actes, whereon you grounde the chiefest proofe of your supremacy. Which, and all the rest that you can bring with any shew out of the scriptures, giuegive Peter such supremacy, if you will call it so: that I am persuaded, Pope Gregory the thirtéenth, as he hath alreadie spent qqAllens Apologie of the Seminaries▪ chapt. 2.much vponupon Scholers, and rrGenebrard. Chronograph. lib. 4.somewhat vponupon Souldiours for maintenance of his State: so he will rather spend his triple crowne, and all, vponupon them, then heretikes shall force him to come out of his throne of maiestie, and submit his head to such a supremacy.

Hart.

What tell you me of Francis Duaren, whose authoritie I regard not, nor am to be pressed with it? Chiefly, sith hée was a Lawier, not a Diuine: and whither he were a Catholike or no, I know not. I will proue by the ancient and holy learned fathers, that Peter had a full and perfit supremacy ouer the Apostles, in those two places of the Actes.

Rainoldes.

I did not take Duaren for the strength of mine answere, but the holy scriptures, the same that you alleaged. By the text and circumstances whereof, I made it plaine, that Peter had no higher power in the assemblies of the Apostles: thē hath either the Speaker of our English Parlament, or, (to make the most of it) the President of a court of Parlament in France, which is Duarenes similitude. Howbeit, if I should hauehave vsed his authoritie to confirme it, as well as I alleaged his wordes to open it: you might not reiect such a man so lightly. For ssforeign.a gardiner (as the prouerbe is) hath spoken oft to very good purpose: & ttExod. 18.17.Exod 18:17Iethro saw more in somewhat then Moses. And Duaren, though a Lawier, yet was not onelyonly skilfull of the ciuil law (which is a great helpe notwithstanding of wisedome in matters touching gouernment:) but also of the Canon, whereof you may vouchsafe to count as of Diuinitie; doubtlesse your Diuinitie will be cold without it. Beside, he wrote that treatise to instruct students in the Canon law, which is the fortresse of the Papacy: and he so deliuereth the chiefest pointes of it, that Lawiers amongst y^e Protestants were offended & uuResponsio Christianorum iurisconsultorū ad Duareni commentarios de ministerijs ecclesiae atque beneficijs: Argentoruti.wrote against him for it. But now (thus you rewarde men) it is called in questiō, whether p. 156that he were a Catholike or no. I assure you, if you beware not, you will make honest and well affected hartes afraid to bee Catholikes; such, as you meane by that word. For if a man kéepe within any bounds of modestie and truth, & will not runne headlong with you through thicke & thin: you will account of him, either as an Hereticke, or as one that sauoureth of heresie at least. But who are the Fathers, whom you pretend against Duaren, to proue your supremacy out of those places of the Actes?

Hart.

**Staplet. princip. doctr. li. 6. cap. 13.S. Chrysostome, for the one: S. Ierome, for the other.

Rainoldes.

And what doo they say?

Hart.

S. xxIn act. Apostolor. hom. 3.Chrysostome, entreating of the fact of Peter how he proposed the election of a new Apostle into the roome of Iudas: Beholde, saith he, the zeale of Peter. How hee doth acknowledge the flocke committed to him by Christ? How he is the chiefe in this assembly: and eueryevery where beginneth to speake first of all? Afterward he prayseth Peter for dooing all thinges by the common aduise and iudgement of the Disciples, nothing by his owne authoritie. Yet that Peter might hauehave chosen an Apostle, yea, alone, without them, he affirmeth plainely. What, saith he, was it not lawfull for Peter himselfe to choose him? yes, it was lawfull, no doubt. But he dooth it not, least that he should seeme to gratifie any man. Then he praiseth the modestie of the rest of the Disciples: Consider, saith hee, how they graunt the seate to him (that is, the primacy, as yyIn Matthaeum homil. 51.otherwhere he calleth it,) neither doubt they any longer, debating amongest themselues, (to wit as they did once, when Christ conuersed with them) which of them should bee the greatest. This is S. Chrysostomes iudgement of that place, which I alleaged out of the first chapter of the Actes of the Apostles for the supremacy of Peter.

Rainoldes.

This testimonie of Chrysostome dooth stand on two branches: the one, what Peter doth, as the Scripture sheweth; the other, what he might hauehave done, as Chrysostome supposeth. That which Peter dooth, is granted. But it proueth not the supremacy. He remembreth his duetie; hee speaketh first of all; he doth all things by the common aduise and iudgement of the Disciples, and nothing by his owne authoritie. Thus much I saide of Peter, and did explane it out of Duaren. p. 157In Duaren you thought that it made against you, and therefore refused him. Dooth it make for you, when it is in Chrysostome, that you bring him against Duaren? Or, is this the reason, why you accept the one and refuse the other, because the wordes of Chrysostome yelding a certaine primacy to Peter, may deceiue the simple, as though he meant that primacy which you call the supremacy: but the wordes of Duaren put so plaine a difference betwéene the two primacies, that, which Peter had; and the other which the Pope hath, or would hauehave; that a blinde man may sée that Peters primacy was not a Popes supremacy. Which shall appeare zzChapt. 5. Diuision 3.farther (if God will) by those thinges, that the Fathers speake touching Peters primacy. And thus your proofe faileth in that which the scripture sheweth that Peter doth. Now that, which Peter might hauehave done, as Chrysostome supposeth, woulde inferre a greater primacy then Peter had, if it were true. But the scripture saith it not. Wherfore as the aaBasil. de Gregor. Neocaes. ep. 64. Athanas. de Origene, libell. de decret. Nicaen. Synod.Fathers report one of an other, (by bbStaplet. princ. doctr. li. 7. cap. 6.your owne confession) that they write some things foreign, to confute the aduersaries with whom they had to deale, & in these they erre sometimes and gather amisse: likewise may I say that they write some thinges, foreign, to praise the Saintes of God, and stirre vp others to their vertue, **Hallacinantur interdum & ma…le colligunt.wherein if their wordes should be rigorously sifted, the truth is sometimes ouerlashed. So ccIn Act. cap. 15. homil. 33.Acts 15Chrysostome (in the other place which you alleage out of the Actes) to commend the mildnesse and wisedome of Iames, who left the sharper speeches to be vsed of Peter, and vsed himselfe the gentler, doth speake of him as being aboue Peter in power: and here to commend the modestie of Peter, because that hee did all things by the common aduise and iudgement of his brethren, hée saith (by the way of amplification) that Peter might himselfe hauehave chosen an Apostle, which yet he did not.

Hart.

By waye of amplification: foreign, to praise the saintes of God. Such colours you cast vponupon it. But Chrysostome saith expressely, that Peter himselfe (that is to say, alone) might hauehave chosen him, if he would. And you (with smoother wordes, but in plaine effect) replie, that he lyeth. Doo Fathers praise the Saintes so?

Rainoldes.

It is a rule ddChapt. 2. Diuision. 2.of your owne and eeHieron. Torrens. in confession. Augustin. li. 1. ca. 11. tit. 1.giuen by your Iesuit, that a man may lawfully dissent from the Fathers, p. 159so that he do it with modestie. If any kéepe not this, you say he raileth at the Fathers. Of me, who would kéepe it, you say I cast colours. What shall I do to please you?

Hart.

You shall please me, if you dissent not from them, but onelyonly in such thinges as be knowne truthes. Which is another rule of ours, if you remember it.

Rainoldes.

I remember it well: and herein I hauehave kept it. For it is a truth and a knowne truth, that the Fathers write, in fauour of the Saintes, some thinges which ouerlash the truth, if a man examine and trie them by the touch-stone. Peter himselfe shall be the Saint, in whose example I will shew it. ffIn Matthaeum canon. 16.Hilarie, vponupon the wordes of Christ vntounto Peter, **Mat. 16.23Matt 16:23Get thee behinde me Satan, thou art an offense to me; saith, it is not meete we should thinke, that Christ did call Peter Satan; but Christ said to him, get thee behind me, and no more; the rest to the Deuill, not to him, Satan thou art an offense to me. The same ggIn Matthaeum canon. 32.Hilarie, 11paené, sine pia …lo.almost but hhCommentar. in Luc. lib. 10.Ambrose quite & cleane excuseth Peter from all fault in that he denied Christ, nay Ambrose commendeth him. Peter answered, saith he, **Mat. 26.72.Matt 26:72I know not the man, 22Denegauit hominem, quem sciebat Deum.He well denied him a man, whom he knewe to be God. iiClem. Alexan…r. hypotypos. lib. 5.Clemens and kkEuseb. histor. ecc…es. lib. 1. cap. 13.Eusebius, whom llIn epist. ad Galat. cap. 2.Gal 2Oecumenius foloweth, do write that that Peter whome Paule did withstand and reproue at Antioch, was not Peter the Apostle, but an other, I know not who, of the same name, one of the seuentie disciples. Wherefore sith it is known by the word of truth, that Christ called Peter Satan, that Peter denyed Christ, that Paule withstood and reproued Peter; and it may be knowne by the writtnges of the Fathers, how they vary from this truth in fauour of S. Peter, that, by washing out the spottes which seeme to staine him, his praise may be the more glorious: I hope, I might take it for a knowne truth, that the Fathers write some thinges foreign, to praise the Saintes of God: wherein, if their wordes be sifted precisely, they ouerlash the truth sometimes. In saying whereof if you thinke I cast colours, and vse wordes too smooth: I can amend that faulte with speaking more roughly, as mmIn Matthaeum cap. 26.Ierom doth, who saith y^t the sense which Hilarie and Ambrose giuegive of Peters words, I know not the man; as though denying Christ he had denied him man, because he knewe him God: they gaue it of a reuerent affection to Peter; but 11Hoc quam friuolum sit, prudens lector intellig…t.wise readers see howe friuolous p. 158it is, if they so defend Peter that they make God a lyer. For, if Peter denied not, then did the Lord lye, who said, **Mat. 26.34.Matt 26:34Verely, I say to thee, this night before the cocke crow, thou shalt denye me thrise. Behold what he saith, thou shalt denye me, not, the man. Or if S. Ieroms words be too smooth also, I can speake more roughly yet with nnIn Luc. cap. 22▪Luke 22Theophylact: who saith that they who make that defense of Peter, doo make **foreign.a foolish defense. Thus if you compare my words with Theophylacts, & Ieroms, I vsed modestie: if with that which other of the Fathers write, I did it in a knowne truth, when I dissented from Chrysostom. Doo I please you now?

Hart.

I wonder that you set your selfe against S. Chrysostome, a Father so auncient, so learned, so godly, so skilfull in the Scriptures.

Rainoldes.

Let me aske you a question. What thinke you of Christ? Was he alone frée from all spotte of sinne, both original, and actuall? or was the blessed virgin frée from it also?

Hart.

You know ooConc. Tridēt. Sess. 5. Decreto de peccat. orig. & Sess. 6. de …ustif. can. 23.our minde thereof. She was frée from it also.

Rainoldes.

S. ppIn Matth. hom. 45. & in Iohan. hom. 20.Chrysostom saithe the contrary: a Father so ancient, so learned, so godly, so skilfull, in the scriptures. Yea, and he groundeth therin vponupon qqMat. 12.48. Ioh. 2.4.Matt 12:48John 2:4the scriptures: which he doth not, in yours of Peter.

Hart.

But other of the Fathers say the same, that wee say: with whom we do dissent from Chrysostome.

Rainoldes.

If I shold aske what Fathers say it of actuall sin: hard for you to name them. As for originall: your own rrLocor. Theolog. lib. 7. cap. 1. & 3.Canus sheweth **Ambros. August. Chrysost. Eus. Emis. Remig. Maxim. Bed. Anselm. Bernard. Erard. Anton. Pad. Bernardin. Bonauent. Thom. Vin̄ cent. Antonin. Damas. Hug. de S. Vict.they all say the contrary. But if many said it: yet you may sée by this, which I hauehave shewed of Chrysostom, what brokē réeds you leane on, whē you leane on such reasons: Chrysostome doth say so; therfore it is so. And, if [other fathers] be of as good credit to win you from others, vntounto a point of truth, as to a point of error: then wil you be as readie to leaue his opinion in this point of Peter, as you hauehave bene to leaue it in y^t of the virgin. For a number of Fathers, euē a whole 55Epist. Synod. African. ad ecclesias Legion. Astur. Emerit. apud Cyp…ian. ep. 68.Councell of Bishops of Africa (togither with S Cyprian) doo write that Peter did 11Secundum magisteria diuina.according to the les…ons and preceptes of God, in that he proposed vntounto the disciples the ordeining of an Apostle in the roome of Iudas, to the end they might deale 22Omnium … fragio & ….by common aduise and p. 160voice therin. Wherefore, if you hauehave Fathers in such regard, as you pretend, and do rather follow the consent of many, then the mind of one (which is **Chap. 2. Diuis. 2.your owne rule) in exposition of scriptures: you must yéeld that Peter might not hauehave done that which Chrysostom saith, he might; vnlesse, you will say, that he might do that, whereof he was commanded and taught the contrary by God. But, if this opinion be so rooted in you, that reason cannot wéede it out: wonder not at me who, beside the scripture, hauehave Fathers more then you hauehave, and therefore (by your iudgement) the exposition of the Fathers. Wonder at your selfe: who hauing neither of them stand against them both. Wonder at your Doctor: who hauing vndertaken to proue the Supremacie by that, which Peter did in the Actes of the Apostles, telleth what he might hauehave done by Chrysostomes supposall. Wonder at your Pope: who building on the word, not of God, but of man, and finding mans foundation ouer-weake too, doth not practise that which Chrysostome commendeth in the fact of Peter, but doth chalenge that which Chrysostome imagineth of the right of Peter.

Hart.

If Peter would not vse his owne right, of modestie: his fact doth not bind the Pope (his successor) but that he may vse it.

Rainoldes.

That refuge will not serue, vnlesse you proue two things, whereof neither is true. One, that this soueraintie was the right of Peter: an other, that the Pope succeedeth him in all his right. By the way, what soeuer you déeme of his right: you graunt that he doth not succéed him in modestie.

Hart.

It is not expedient for him to doo in eueryevery thing as Peter did.The second Diuision. But, that he succeedeth Peter in all his right: I will proue then, when I hauehave proued Peters right. Now, that this soueraintie was the right of Peter, and that he had as full power in the assemblies of the Apostles, as the Prince hath in a Parlament, or the Pope in a Councell: S. Chrysostomes wordes were not all so pregnant vponupon the first of the Actes **Staplet. princ. doctr. l. 6. c. 14.as S. Ieroms are vponupon the fiftéenth, to proue it inuincibly. For ttEpist. 11. inter epist. August.he teacheth plainly that Peter was the first man who gaue the sentence: which sentence being followed and approued by the rest, was concluded and published in the name of the whole Councel, both of the head and of the bodie. 11Audito Petro tacuit omnis multitudo.When they, saith he, had heard Peter, al the p. 161multitude held their peace: & Iames & all the Elders togither did agree vntounto Peters sentence.

Rainoldes.

What is this to the purpose? Doth [all the multitude held their peace] proue the supremacy of Peter?

Hart.

You are disposed to toy. My proofe is in the rest of S. Ieroms wordes: and you can sée it, if you list. 22In sen…entiam Petr… Iacobu. & om…es …imul Pres…yteri transierunt.Iames, and all the Elders togither did agree vntounto Peters sentence: therefore Peter was supreme head.

Rainoldes.

In déede I saw not whence you could frame a proofe. Beare with mine ouersight. The silence of the multitude was fitter stuffe for it. For all sortes of men do know by experience, Princes and Counsailours in matters of State, Nobles and Commons in the houses of Parlament, Citizens and Townsmen in their common assemblies, our Students of vniuersities, both publikely in conuocations, and priuately in their colleges: that he is not alwaies aboue the rest in power, whose sentence al the rest agrée vntounto in consultation. But if your frends M. Hart, hauehave done you such iniury, that (by meanes they sent you vntimely beyond sea) you are become a straunger in things of common sense, & humanity, at home: yet you hauehave read (I trust) the story of the Actes, out of the which you reason; and God hath furnished you with giftes of witte and memory to vnderstand it, and remember it. Tell me, do you thinke, that uuAct. 3. ver. 34.Acts 3:34Gamaliel the Pharise, the Doctor of the law, whom all the people honored, was superiour in power to the hie Priest, and Councell of the Iewes.

Hart.

No.

Rainoldes.

Yet when xxver. 33.the hie Priest, and Councell did consult to kil the Apostles: yyver. 35.he aduised them, y^t they should not do it, and zzver. 40.hauing heard him, **foreign.they agreed to him. If a Supremacie grow not hereof to Gamaliel: why should it to Peter? If it do to Peter: why not to Gamaliel? Is this the inuincible proofe that you did promise? When they had heard Peter, they all agreed to him: therefore he was their supreme head?

Hart.

But S. aaEpist. 11. inter epist. August.Ierom addeth farther of Peter, that hee was princeps decreti, prince of the decree which the Apostles made. And sure (as it is well noted by Waldensis) bbDoctrinalis Fidei lib. 2. cap. 4.if Peter had not bene the chiefe and President there: he were **procax es…t.a malapert fellow to preuent them al in taking vp the controuersie and giuing p. 162the definitiue sentence. Thus saith Waldensis.

Rainoldes.

Before you promised Scripture, and performed Chrysostom. Now you claime by Ierome, & proue by Waldensis. This is your fashion. Treasures we looke for: and wee finde coales.

Hart.

I bring not Waldensis for his owne credit: but, as interpreter of S. Ieroms meaning. Howbeit, though he were not himselfe an auncient writer: he was a great Clerke in the time he liued.

Rainoldes.

It may bée: such a one as gaue occasion to the prouerbe, that the greatest Clerkes are not the wisest men. He did neuer enter into the Romane Senate-house: or els he might hauehave learned, both, that 11Princeps Senatus. Varro in epist. ad Oppiā. apud Gell. Noct. Atti…ar. l. 14. c. 7.the prince of the Senate (as he was termed) gaue his sentence first, yet was not President of the Senate: neither was his sentence the definitiue sentence, but hée spake his minde of the matter, (as others after him,) & the whole 22Senatus consultum.Senate defined it. Though oftentimes the Senate agreed to the sentence of some one Senatour, & him they did call 33Princeps sententiae.prince of the sentence, that is to say, the first authour: as Ierom calleth Peter 44Princeps decreti.prince of the decree; which himselfe expoundeth, 55Primus autor …ius sententiae. Hieron. epist. 11. inter epist. August.the first authour of the sentence. Wherefore it was not malapertnesse in Peter to speake before others, although he were not the President of the Councell: but indéede Waldensis was a malapert fellow to vouch that of Peter, and vse S. Ieroms words thereto. For, that they proue not a Presidentship of Peter, by entitling Peter prince of the decree, you may learne of 66Cic. pro Corn. …albo, Harum ego sententiarū princeps & autor fui.Tully: who sheweth that himselfe was prince of decrees, when he was neither President nor prince of the Senate. Beside, (to let you sée the pouertie of this princehood farther) Ierome doth not meane the whole decree of the Councell; when he saith that Peter was the prince of it; (for thē he should deny y^e ccAct. 15. ver. 10.Acts 15:10scripture it selfe which maketh Iames the prince of part:) but hée meaneth so much thereof, as touched his purpose, which Peter is mentioned first to hauehave set downe; namely, that ddver. 10.Gentiles being turned to the faith of Christ, should not be constrained to keepe the lawe of Moses. Whereon, they, who know what the Romanes meant by [77Diuidere sententiam. Cic. pro Mil…n. Ascon. Paedian. in Cicor. to diuide a sentence,] may easily consider, how Iames though he agreed to Peters sentence in generall, yet excepted (as it were) from it this particular, that eeAct. 15.20.Acts 15:20the p. 163beleeuing Gentiles should be admonished to keepe certaine pointes of the lawe of Moses, perteining to 11To abstaine from the filthinesse of idole…, and fornication:holinesse and 22and from that which is strangled, and from blood.peace with their **The Iewes.brethren, ffHebr. 1….14.Heb 1:14both dueties necessary for the faithfull. The wordes of whose sentence ggAct. 15.29.Acts 15:29the Councell folowed so precisely: that hhIn Act. Apost. homil. 33.Chrysostome (if I would stand on men, as you doo) speaketh of the sentence giuen by Iames as the definitiue sentence, and saith that 11foreign.he pronounced his iudgement with power, and that 22foreign.the principalitie was committed to him.

Hart.

He speaketh so of Iames, **Staplet. princ. doctr. li. 6. ca. 14.because he was Bishop of the Citie of Ierusalem, where the Councell was holden.

Rainoldes.

Beware of that answere.

Hart.

Why? It is S. iiIn Act. Apost. homil. 33.Chrysostomes.

Rainoldes.

Be it whose soeuer. Sée you not what foloweth thereof, that eueryevery Bishop in his owne diocese is aboue y^e Pope? For, if aboue Peter, aboue an Apostle, aboue a chiefe Apostle: much more aboue a Bishop of Rome, or any other. You were better say that Chrysostome did erre, then fall into this perill. And in déede, (to helpe you in a point of truth) hée that maketh Iames a Bishop of one Citie, whom Christ made an Apostle to all the Nations of the earth: dooth bring him out of the hall (as they say) into the kitchin. It séemeth that Chrysostome spake it vponupon the word of Clemens: kkHypotypos. lib. 7. apud Eusebium, histor. ecclesiast. lib. 1. cap. 1.who when he reported it, reported this withall, that Christ 11foreign.did giuegive knowledge after his resurrection to Iames, Iohn, and Peter: and they 22foreign.did giuegive it to the rest of the Apostles. Which tale is flat repugnant to the worde of truth: wherein wee reade that llLuc. 24.45.Luke 24:45knowledge and mmAct. 2.4.Acts 2:4the holy Ghost was giuen by Christ to the Apostles all ioyntly.

Hart.

You shall not helpe me with such shifts against the Fathers. For other of them consent herein with Chrysostome, that Iames was Bishop of Ierusalem.

Rainoldes.

Neither shifts, nor against the Fathers: but true defenses in fauour of them. For the Apostles, being sent to preach the Gospell to all Nations, made their chiefe abode in greatest cities of most resort, as at nnAct. ….1.Ierusalem, at ooAct. 11.26Acts 11:26Antioche, at ppAct▪ 19.10.Acts 19:10Ephesus, at qqAct. 28.30.Acts 28:30Rome: that from the **foreignmother cities (as they were called) religiō might be spread abroad vntounto the daughters. Now, because this residence in the mother-cities was afterward supplied by the Bishops of them: therefore the Fathers are wont often-times to call the Apostles Bishops of those cities, p. 164wherin they did abide most. Which they might y^e rather, for that 11foreign. …sebius, and Clemens, foreign.the word (in their spéech) betokeneth (in a generall meaning) any charge & ouersight of others: in so much y^t the 22Act. 2. vers. 20. foreign. vers. 25. foreign.Acts 2:20scripture applieth it to the ministery of the Apostles also. And in this sort it seemeth to be said, as by rrEp. 68. De ordinando in locum Iudae episcopo.Cyprian, y^t a Bishop was to be ordeined in the roome of Iudas; so by ssComment. in epist. ad Calat. cap. 2.Ierome, y^t Peter was Bishop of Antioch; & by Chrysostom y^t Iames was Bishop of Ierusalē. Though whither it wer or no: yet that which I spake in defense of Chrysostō is cléered by himself frō your reproch of a shift. For he saith y^t Iames 33foreign.was Bishop, as they say. Which words [as they say] import that he spake it on the words of others: most likely, of Clemēs, frō whom 44foreign, Histor. eccles. lib. 2. cap. 1.Eusebius fetcheth it. But if notwithstanding you reply y^t Chrysostom allowed that [they say,] and supposed Iames to be a Bishop properly: then his words hauehave so much the greater importance against your supremacy; séeing that they giuegive the principalitie to Iames in his owne dioces, and that aboue Peter. Howbeit, I will not take this aduantage: because I know that neither Peter, nor Iames gaue the definitiue sentence; but when they had spoken their mindes of the matter, Act 15. vers. 23. & 23. & 28.Acts 15:23Acts 15:28the Councell did define it and decrée it with common iudgement.

Hart.

They did it with common iudgement, I deny not. But Theodoret sheweth, that Peter as a Prince had a great prerogatiue therein aboue the rest: yea, gaue definitiue sentence, to which the rest consented, and as it were, subscribed. For he (in an epistle which he wrote to Leo) affirmeth that Paul did runne to great Peter, to bring a resolution from him vntounto them, who contended at Antioche about the obseruation of the lawe of Moses.

Rainoldes.

You may cite (if you list) S. uuDe o…icijs ecclesiast. li. 1. ca. 1.Isidore too, for an other speciall prerogatiue of Peter, as good as this, and grounded likewise on the Actes, (which he alleageth to proue it:) to wit, **Antiochiae pri…um nomen Chistianorū per Petri praedicationem est exortum, sicut actus A…stolorum te…tantur.that the name of Christians arose at Antioche first, through the preaching of Peter. For though hee bée more direct against y^e scripture, which sheweth that xxAct. 11.…6.Acts 11:6the name of Christians arose vponupon the preaching, not of Peter, but of Paul and Barnabas: yet is Theodoret direct against it too, by giuing as proper & peculiar to Peter, y^t, which was cōmon to the Apostles and Elders, yyAct. 15.22. & 26.4.Acts 15:22Acts 26:4whose resolution zzAct. 15.2.Acts 15:2he was sent for. And as Isidore séemeth to hauehave ouershot him selfe by flip of memorie, on too great p. 165a fansie (perhaps) towardes Peter: in like sort Theodoret, séeking to get the fauour of Leo bishop of Rome (whose help he stode in neede of,) did serue his owne cause, in saying, that Paul ranne to great Peter, that so he might run much more to great Leo. Which words to hauehave issued out from that humor: his commentaries on the Scriptures (where he sought the trueth, and folowed the text) shewe. For therein he saith of Barnabas and Paul, aaIn epist. ad …alat. cap. 2.that they ran [not to great Peter] but to the great Apostles, and bbIn argumento epist. ad Ephes.had a resolution from them of the question about the keping of the law. Howbeit if Theodorets words vntounto Leo suffered no exceptiō: the most were, that Peter pronounced the definitiue sentence, as President; not gaue it, as Prince. But the Scripture it selfe (by the rule whereof his wordes must be tryed) maketh no more for Peters Presidentshippe then for Iames: and whosoeuer were President, it sheweth that neither Iames, nor Peter, but the Councel gaue the definitiue sentence. So well it proueth that, which you vndertooke to proue concerning Peter: that he had as ful power in the assemblies of the Apostles, as the Prince hath in a parlament, yea, or the pope in a Councell.

Harte,

It proueth that wel-inough, (though not to you:) chiefly if other places thereof be waied withall.The third Diuision. For the singular power of Peter is declared also by S. Paul in that he saith to the Galatians, ccGal. 1.18.Gal 1:18Then after three yeares I came to Ierusalem to see Peter, and taried with him fifteene dayes.

Rainoldes.

The singular power of Peter? In which words? By what reason? Because hee went to Ierusalem to see him? Or because he went after three yeares? Or because hee stayed with him fifteene dayes?

Hart.

The reason consisteth **Stap. princ. doctr. li. 6. ca. 13.in that which Paule did, & the cause for which he did it. For he went to Ierusalē to see Peter. Why? but to do him honour, as ddIn epist. ad Gal. cap. 1.Gal 1Ierom saith in his Commentaries: and in an epistle to Austin, Peter was, (saith he) of so great authoritie, that Paule wrote, Then after three yeares, and so forth.eeEpist. 11. int… epist. August. And ffIn Iohann. homil. 87.Chrysostome; Because Peter (saith he) was the mouth of the Apostles, the chiefe, and top of the company: therefore Paule went vp to see him aboue the rest. Because it was meet, saith ggComment. in ep. a… Gal. …a. … ▪Ambrose, that he should desire to see Peter, vntounto whom our Sauiour had committed the charge of Churches. p. 166Which also hhDe praescript. contra haeret.Tertullian affirmeth, that he did of duetie and right. Nor otherwise iiComment. in epist ad Gal.Theodoret: he gaue, saith he, that honour to the prince of the Apostles, which it was fitte hee should. Hence it is, that, S. kkIn Ezechiel. hom. 18.Gregory doubteth not to say, that, Paule the Apostle was the yonger brother: And S. llDe baptism. contr. Donatist. l. 2. c. 1.Austin, an Apostle made after Peter: who saith moreouer, that the primacie of the Apostles is conspicuous and preeminent, with excellent grace in Peter.

Rainoldes.

You bring in witnesses not necessarie, to proue a thing not denied. For, that Paule was as Apostle, in time after Peter, and so his yonger brother, as Gregory, Austin, and **Quia primus erat inter Apostolos, cui Saluator delegauerat curam ecclesiarum. As Ierom, Honoris priori apostolo deferendi.Ambrose say: that he went to see Peter for honor and reuerence which he bare to him, as it is in Ierom, Chrysostome and Theodoret; that he did this of duetie and right; what right and duetie? nnEx officio & iur…: scilicet eius dem fidei & praedicationis &c. Tert.of the same faith and preaching of the gospell, to shew his concord with him, which is the meaning of Tertullian: all this will I graunt you; mmGal. 1.17. & 2.2.Gal 1:17Gal 2:2the scriptures teach as much; what néede the Fathers to proue it?

Hart.

Will you graunt all that, which I alleaged out of the Fathers? then will you grant that Protestants are in an error: and the truth is ours. For they auouch plainely the primacie of Peter, and call him, the mouth, the prince, the toppe of the Apostles.

Rainoldes.

Alas, you were agreed (me thought) to go through with the scripture first, & afterward come to the Fathers. I wisse they will giuegive you small cause of triumphing ouer the Protestants, when you shall bring their forces out into the field, and see with whom they ioine, with you, or with vsus. But of the rest then. Now I graunt you so much, as doth concerne the point, for proofe whereof you cited them: namely, that Paule went to see Peter for a reuerent respect and honor of his person. But I deny the argument, which you inferre thereof, that Peter had therefore a singular power, whereby you meane the supremacie. You should hauehave laid the Fathers (if you would néedes bestow them) on this which is denied, not on that which is graunted. But this is the world. Men will rather giuegive to the rich, who need not, then to the poore who need.

Hart.

I thought you would rather hauehave denied that, then this: for this is cléere of it selfe; and néedeth no proofe. The common p. 167vse of men sheweth it. For they giuegive honor and reuerence to them, in whom they acknowledge a superioritie▪

Rainoldes.

Perhaps, a superioritie: yet not a supremacie.

Hart.

If Peter were Paules superior in power: the supremacie is proued.

Rainoldes.

If in power: you say somewhat. Though neuerthelesse he might be full hie in power, and yet come short of your supremacie. But he was superior to him in some things els, and not in power.

Hart.

That he was superior to him in power: I proue. S. Peter had honor giuen to him of Paule: therefore he was in power aboue him.

Rainoldes.

Euill newes for husbandes, that hauehave shrewes to their wiues, if this argument be good. For nn1. Pet. 3.7.1 Pet 3:7they are commaunded to giuegive honor to the woman as to the weaker vessell: whereof (by your Logicke) the wiues may claime authoritie and power aboue their husbandes. S. Peter saw not this consequence: he did not thinke on his supremacie. For although he teach, that the husband should giuegive honor to his wife, yet he calleth the wife the weaker vessell, not the stronger: and oo1. Pet. 3.1,1 Pet 3:1he commandeth wiues to be subiect to their husbands, that is, to be inferior (I trow) in power vntounto them. Which S. pp1. Cor. 11.10.1 Cor 11:10Paule noteth also more expressely, when he saith, the woman ought to hauehave power vponupon her head.

Hart.

This answere doth not weaken the strength of mine argument. For the name of honor, when husbandes are commanded to giuegive it to their wiues, is taken improperly. But honor, as I take it, as Paule gaue it to Peter, is vsed in his proper sense: to signifie a reuerence, the which an inferior doth owe to a superior, a subiect to him that is in power aboue him.

Rainoldes.

The honor which husbands are bound to giuegive vntounto their wiues, as to the weaker vessels, doth signifie an honest care and regard of bearing with their weakenes, prouiding for their wantes, and shewing all husbandly louelove and duetie to them. Such a reuerence as you mention it doth not signifie, I graunt: yet doth it signifie a reuerence which is implied in the louelove and duetie that their husbands owe them. qqTim. 3.3.S. Paule saith to Timothee: honor the widowes, which are widowes in deede. p. 168He meaneth that they should be charitably relieued: but this reliefe is no reason, why they should not reuerently bee regarded too. For you are deceiued, if you thinke, that none are bound to reuerence others, but onelyonly the inferiors their superiors in power. The Gentiles were taught by nature it selfe, that a reuerence is due to eueryevery state of men: rrMaxima debetur puero reuerentia. Iuuenal. Satyr. 14.to children, with an héed that no vnhonest thing be done in their presence, because their tendernes is proue to learne it; ssMagna fuit quondam capitis reuerentia cani. Ouid. Fastor. lib. 4.to old men, with an honor, in respect of their wisedome, their experience, their grauitie, wherewith the gray heares are wont to be accompanied; ttAdhibenda est quaedam reuerentia aduersus homines, & optimi cuiusque & reliquorum. Cic. offic. lib. 1.to all, but chiefly to the best, with a modest account of their good opinion, and an honest desire to be approued of them. Wherefore if your argument do stand vponupon the proper signification of honour: you shall perceiue your selfe, that it can neuer proue a supremacie of power. For honour, is an outward profession and testimonie of a reuerent opinion, which we hauehave conceiued of some kind of excellencie in him to whom we giuegive it. So, the chiefest honor is due vntounto uuReu. 7.12.Rev 7:12God, the father of lightes, the fountaine of all excellencie: and after him to men, in seuerall degrees, according to their seuerall estates and giftes of excellencie wherewith the Lord hath blessed them: to aa1. Pet. 2.17.1 Pet 2:17the king, as bbvers. 13.preeminent, and ccvers. 14. 1. Tim. 6.1.1 Tim 6:1all that gouerne vnderunder him; to ddPhil. 2.29. 1. Tim. 5.17.Phil 2:291 Tim 5:17the ministers of the gospel, the more, the better they do their duetie; to eeExod. 20.12.Exod 20:12them whom nature most doth bind vsus, our fathers and mothers; to ffLeuit. 19.32.Lev 19:32the aged, ggGen. 41.39.Gen 41:39the wise, hhEster. 6.3.the vertuous, iiAct. 5.34.Acts 5:34the learned: in a word to kk1. Pet. 2.17.1 Pet 2:17all men; but chiefely llCor. 12.24.to the faithfull, as members of the bodie of Christ, none so base but hath an excellencie, the excellencie of a Christian. And hereby appeareth the weakenes of your argument: that Paule was inferior to Peter in power, because hee gaue him honour. Did not mm1. King. 2.19.1 Kgs 2:19Salomon in his maiestie giuegive honor to his mother? and was not he the king, and she a subiect to him? Are we not all taught nnRom. 12.10.Rom 12:10to go one before an other in giuing honour, as well the rich as the poore, as well the high as the lowe? What a proud and arrogant mind had **Staplet. princi. pior. doctrin. lib. 6. cap. 13.that bodie (vnlesse his mind and tongue dissented) who thought that hee must giuegive honor to no man, but to them only that are in power aboue him. Belike this diuinitie was learned out of that chapter of the booke of Ceremonies (which I touched afore) ooSacr. ce…emon. sanct. Rom. eccles. lib. 3. sect. 1.that the Pope doth do reuerence to no man, of duetie and right: for then he p. 169is afraid least it should be thought that some man is in power aboue him. Yet ppLib. 1. sect. 13.in the same booke (to see a good nature) we reade that **In the yeare of Christ 1…68.he did honour Fridericke the Emperour: in so much that he placed him next vntounto him selfe aboue all the Cardinalles; and 11Altitud… sedis ita era… instituta vt non altior esset locus vbi sederet imperator, quam vbi Pontifex teneret pedes.the place in which the Emperour did sit, was no lower then the place, where the Pope did holde his feete. Nowe, the seate of the Emperour declareth, that the Pope was aboue him in power: and yet the Pope 22Honorauit, quantum potuit… cum summa tamen grauitate & maiestate.did honour him. Paule therefore might hauehave beene aboue Peter in power, though hee did honour Peter. If he might: the honour, which hee gaue to Peter, dooth strike no stroke for the supremacie. Wherefore you may dimisse it as a coward out of the field, not fitte to fight the Popes battailes. Doth not this mine answere touch [honour] taken properly? Or will you set the Emperour aboue the Pope in power? Or is it a lie that the Pope did honor him?

Hart.

You triumph ouer me at eueryevery small occasion, as though you had a conquest. But you see not your owne absurdities and follies. You spake ere-while of the Apostles, as equall in power: now you speake of Paule, as if hee were aboue Peter, like a Pope aboue an Emperour. And I did frame my reason out of the Scriptures and Fathers: and you do bring the booke of Ceremonies to kill it. Will you subdue vsus with such warriours?

Rainoldes.

I would faine triumph, not ouer you, but ouer your errours, if I could. The strength of my cause and valure of my proofes maketh me the chéerefuller in dealing with the dastardes, which you set against them. My former wordes, of the Apostles as being equall in power, agrée well with these of Peter and Paule. For I say not, that Paule was aboue Peter, but that he might hauehave bene aboue him in power, for all the honour which he gaue him. And this is sufficient to ouerthrowe your reason. But if my example of the Pope and Emperour did cause you to mistake me: you may take an other and fitter for y^e purpose, the Colledge Apostolike, as qqPope Pius the second. Sacrar. cerem. lib. 1. sect. 8.the Pope dooth call them, I meane the Cardinalles of Rome. Who, though they be in states, orders, and liuings, one aboue an other: rrLib. 3. sect. 1.yet 11Cardinales intersese & gestis & verbis & nutu summam exhibent reuerentiam: stando, sedendo, eundo, equitando, & in rebus omnibus alter alteri deferendo.in all things, and with all curtesies they all giuegive hie reuerence one vntounto an other. And when any of them doth come into the p. 170chappell of the Popes holinesse to say his deuotions, he turneth towardes the Cardinalles of his owne order, and goeth not directly to his own place, vnlesse he be the lowest: but beginning at the lowest, 22Quasi ibi remanere velit.as though he wold abide there, he is desired & entreated of eueryevery one to go higher, vntil hee come directly to his own place, vnlesse he be the lowest: & himselfe 33Modesté: semel atque iterum.(demurely, once, & again) desireth him, who is next vntounto him, that he will go before him; & 44Tandem in locum suum residet.at lēgth he sitteth down in his place. This is a foule trouble to make so much adoo at the comming in of euerie Cardinall to prayers: chiefly, when prayers are begun. Yet to shew how modestly they thinke of themselues, and how they honour one an other, 55Hoc idem facit quotiescunque aliquis venit postalios, praesente vel absente Pontifice.eueryevery one (that commeth after others) dooth it, whither the Pope be there or no. Out of doubt, Cardinalles, men of such wisedome, would not commit this folly, if eueryevery one whom they honour must be aboue them in power. But you deale iniuriously with me, to say, that you framed your reason out of the scriptures and Fathers, and I bring the booke of Ceremonies to kill it. For neither did you ground vponupon the wordes of scripture, but onelyonly on a circumstance obserued by the Fathers, that Paule went to Peter of reuerence to honour him: and I slew the reason (which you made thereof) with the sword of scriptures; I vsed the booke of Ceremonies, but as an Irish Lackey, to cut off a dead mans head. I would not hauehave vouchsafed as much as to name him, but to cast the doong of your solemnities in your faces: and to shewe the fondnesse of a Popish reason, by practise of a Papall mockery. Though I sée not, why you should preferre so the scriptures and Fathers before the booke of Ceremonies. For the booke of Ceremonies speaketh more good of the Pope in one leafe, then both the other doo throughout all their volumes. And **Sacrarum ceremoniarum, fiue rituum ecclesiasticorum sanctae Romanae Ecclesiae libri tres. Romae. Typis Valerij Dorici. 1560. Cum priuilegi….it is solemnely printed at Rome with Peters picture in the front, and the keies in his handes and [**Pa…ce oues meas. Feede my sheepe] written about him, as a booke of great account: where many of the Fathers doo lye in the dust of the Vatican Library, and cannot come into the light. Notwithstanding, if you be willing to yéeld your selfe prisoner to the Fathers, as Gentlemen, & thinke the booke of Ceremonies to be a raskall souldiour whom you disdaine to yéeld vntounto: behold your owne witnesses who make not Paule inferiour to Peter, otherwise, then in the time of his Apostleship, p. 171the one made first, the other last. S. Ierome: who putteth ssComment▪ in epist. a… Gala…. cap. 2.an equalitie betweene them, though Paule did honour him, ttcap. 1.as an Apostle before him. S. uuIn epist ad Gal. cap. 1.Gal 1Chrysostome: who pronounceth that Paule (to say no more of him) was Peters peere in dignitie. S. xxIn epist. ad Gala. cap. 1. & ….Gal 1Ambrose: who giueth a primacy to them both, and saith that Paule was euen such an other as Peter. S. yyExposit. epist. ad Galat. cap. 1.Gal 1Austin: who declareth their authoritie to hauehave beene equall; and that, for Paules honor, what he wanteth in time, is supplied by Christes glory, in that he made him an Apostle, not (as the rest) vponupon the earth, but when he raigned now in maiestie. And these things are written by the same Fathers, whose wordes, touching the honour that Paule gaue to Peter, your **Staplet. prin… ▪ doct. li. 6. ca. 1….Doctor setteth in a beadrole, as though in their iudgement Paule acknowledged Peter his supreme head thereby. Wherein you may perceiue both his deceitfull dealing, that alleageth their wordes, as setting one aboue the other, who in expresse words doo make one equall to the other: and your expositions how iumpe they méete with the Fathers, who gathered an equalitie of Peter and Paul by the epistle to the Galatians, whence you conclude Peters supremacy ouer Paule.

Hart.

How the Fathers all agrée with one consent of Peters supremacy: it shall be shewed hereafter. As for the circumstance which I obserued out of them touching the fact of Paule, y^• when he went to see Peter, he went of reuerence to honour him: I doo not account so greatly thereof, as ofthe fact it selfe; nor vrge I the Fathers so much obseruing that, as the report of this made by the Scriptures. For they set it forth, with so liuely wordes, as if it were of purpose to paint out Peters primacie. **Gal. 1.18.Gal 1:18Then after thre yeares I went to Ierusalem (saith Paule) to see Peter and taried with him fifteene daies. Marke his words, I pray, and sée what weight they cary with them. He went to Ierusalem, so farre, so long a iourney; and he went notwithstanding his great affaires ecclesiastical; and he went to see Peter, not in the vulgar maner, but (as S. zzIn epist. ad Gal. cap. 1.Gal 1Chrysostom noteth that the **foreign.Gréeke word importeth) to behold him, as men behold a thing or person of name excellencie and maiestie. Neither did he go onelyonly to see him; but he abode with him also, to fill him selfe with a perfit viewe of his behauiour. And he abode with him no common time, but fifteen daies: fiftene daies, a great matter, and more then many would p. 172thinke, who doo not search the depth of scriptures. In such estimation was Peter with Paule: and will you yet deny his primacy?

Rainoldes.

King **Plutarch. in Apophthegm.Agesilaus, when one praysed an Orator, that he could amplifie thinges, and make them of small to séeme great: I, saith hée, would neuer count him a good shoomaker, who would put a great shoo vponupon a small foote. You play the Orator, M. Hart, with your amplifications: and that in such sort, as you passe the shoomaker of Agesilaus▪ For you do not only put a great shoo vponupon a small foote: but you stretch the leather with your …éeth too. And yet when you hauehave wéeried your selfe with stretching it: you will hauehave stretched it in vaine. For though your shoo be too great for the primacy of Peter, yet will it be too small for the supremacy of the Pope.

Hart.

We speake not of the Pope now, but of Peter. Why stray you from the point?

Rainoldes.

I thought they had béene things both of one nature, and differing in name only. But I will speake of Peter. And that you may sée that the shoo which you made is too great for his foote: I will shew it by a plaine demonstration to the eye. The mother of our Sauiour, the blessed virgin Marie, is called, in the scripture, Luc. 1. ver. 28.Luke 1:28blessed among women: that is (as I interpret it after the Hebrue phrase) the most blessed of women. What thinke you of her? Was there any woman in her time aboue her, in any thing of name, of excellencie and maiestie?

Hart.

Aboue her? God forbid. Neither in her time, nor before her, nor after her.

Rainoldes.

Yet shée, when bbver. 35.the holy Ghost was come vponupon her now, and the power of the highest had ouershadowed her, ccver. 39.went into the hill country with hast to a citie of Iuda, not only to sée, but also ddver. 40.to salute her coosin Elisabet. And eever. 41.her salutation was such, that when Elisabet great with child did heare it: the babe sprang in her belly, and she was filled with the holie Ghost. Neither did shée only goe to salute her; but ffver. 56.taried with her also: and that no common time, but about three moneths; three moneths, a great time, chiefly for a woman, which was conceaued with childe. If you tendered not the blessed virgins honor more then you doo Paules: your Rhetorike, that depresseth Paule beneath Peter, would much more debase p. 173her beneath Elisabet. For shée was coosin to Elisabet according to the flesh: Paule was Peters brother according to the spirite, **Matt. 12.42.Matt 12:42a néerer kinne, & straiter bond of amitie and duetie. Shée went a harder iourney, into the hill countrie: Paule a pleasantor to Ierusalem; whither some other causes might allure him also. Shée was a woman, weaker of bodie, and might away with trauell worse: Paule a man, strong, exercised with toyles and troubles. Shée went thither in hast: Paule, after three yeeres. Paule went to see Peter: shée to salute Elisabet. Her salutation was so heauenly, that the babes bodie, & the mothers spirit felt it: nothing is written of Paules seeing Peter, but only that he saw him. She staied with her coosin about three moneths: Paul abode with Peter no more then fifteene daies. Yet Paule, as an Apostle, might be and stay any where: the virgin, as ggLuc. 1.27.Luke 1:27a maide betrothed to a man, had greater cause to kéepe home, chiefly being with childe. Wherefore if Peter were aboue Paule in excellency and maiestie, because he did goe to Ierusalem to see him, and stayed with him fifteen daies: what might Elisabet be aboue the blessed virgin, which went into the hill countrie to salute her, and abode with her about three moneths?

Hart.

Nay. But there is more in the fiftéene dayes of Pauls abode with Peter, then in the thrée moneths of Maries with Elisabet.

Rainoldes.

More? What is that?

Hart.

Marry there is a mysterie (as S. Ierome sheweth) in the number of dayes which Paule did spend with him.

Rainoldes.

You commended the liuely wordes of the text: & nowe from them you flit to Ierome. They be mysteries, I sée, that must set a helping hand to your supremacy: the literall sense of scripture will do nothing for it. But what is the mysterie?

Hart.

S. hhEpist. ad Paulin. presbyt. inter epist. Hier. epist. 103.Ierome (in an epistle, which commonly is printed in the beginning of the Bible, because it intreateth of all the bookes of holy scriptures) falling into mention of Paule how hee staied with Peter fifteene dayes, doth giuegive this reason of it: hoc enim mysterio hebdomadis & ogdoadis futurus gentium praedicator instruendus erat; for by this mysterie of the number of seuen and eight, he who shuld become the preacher of the Gentiles, was to be instructed.

p. 174Rainoldes.

And what did S. Ierome meane by this mysterie of the number of seuen and eight, which he diuideth those fifteene dayes into? How was Paule (I pray) to be instructed by it?

Hart.

Looke you to that. Those are his owne words: wherein you hauehave as much expressed, as I said: that it is a mysterie.

Rainoldes.

But it is like to be a mysterie still, if it be not expounded: and wée shall lose the kernell, vnlesse the nut be broken.

Hart.

Why? What do you thinke S. Ierom meant by it?

Rainoldes.

I know not, I assure you: vnlesse he meant, as one, (I know not the mā, but they name him 11Maximus Papa in ep ist. ad Orientales: apud Turrecrematam in Summa de ecclesia lib. 2. cap. 107.father Maximus) expoundeth it, that Paule went to learne of Peter, and remained with him as it were in a Schoole a certaine number of daies. I abode with him, saith Paule, fifteene daies. 22Per mysticum hebdoadis & octoadis numeram, veteris Testamenti simul et noui didicit sacramentum.By the mysticall number of seuen and eight, he learned both the olde and the newe Testament.

Hart.

And what doo you say of this exposition?

Rainoldes.

I say that father Maximus did doate whē he made it. For by this reason Paule should hauehave learned the gospell of Peter: which the Scripture denyeth, protesting, iiGal. 1.12.Gal 1:12that he neither receiued it of man, neither was taught it, but by the reuelation of Iesus Christ. And if you desire candlelight at noone daie to helpe the brightnes of the Sunne shining in his strēgth: you may know that the Fathers, llExposit. epist. ad Gal. cap. 1. Not that he might learne the Gospell by Peter, but that he might encrease brotherly louelove with bodily acquain…ance, saith Austin on this place. And as Austin, so the …est, to like effect, in their commentaries on the epistle to the Galatians.Gal 1Austin, Chrysostome, Ambrose, Theodoret, Ierom, and mmTheophy lactus, and Oecumenius.others, affirme the same precisely, that Paule came to Peter, not to learne of him, but of a reuerence, and louelove, to be acquainted with him. As for Ierom, who séemeth (in the epistle which you mention) to thinke otherwise, against the scripture & him selfe: no maruaile, if sometimes he wēt out of y^e way through a liking of allegories, as a great reader & folower of Origen, **De principiis lib. 4. cap. 2.who handled the scriptures too licentiously, w^t wādring mystical senses. nnHieron. praefat. comment. in Abdiam prophet.Himselfe, whē he was grown to be of riper iudgemēt, acknowledged an ouersight of his 11In adolescentia mea.youth herein: confessing, that (by trauailing after 22Mysticos intellectus.mysticall senses) he rashly folowed 33Allegoricé interpretatus Abdiam prophetam, cuius historiam nesciebam.allegories, in expounding a Prophet, whose litterall sense he vnderstood not.

Hart.

What soeuer it were that S. Ierom meant, he meant a prerogatiue of Peter ouer Paule: which you may not auoid either p. 175by his youth, or by an allegorie. For, he gaue the like prerogatiue to Peter, without an allegorie, in his olde age, vponupon the manifest wordes of Paule: ooGal. 2.1.Gal 2:1I went vp saith Paule, to Ierusalem by reuelation and conferred with them the Gospell, which I preach among the Gentiles: but particularly with them that were the chiefe, least perhaps I shuld run, or had run in vaine. Paul, saith S. ppAd Aug…stin. epist. 11. inter ep. August.Ierom, had not had securitie of preaching the Gospel, vnlesse it had bene approued by the sentence of Peter, and of the rest, that were with him.

Rainoldes.

You are wont to lay it vntounto our charge, that we discouer the nakednes of the Fathers. In déede, you are they, who entreate them so. Nay, you do not onelyonly discouer their nakednes, but you blase it out, and praise the beautie of their blemishes, and thinke them best clad where they are naked most. For what a spéech is this, which you alleage of Ierom, that Paule had not had securitie of preaching the Gospell, vnlesse Peter had approued it. What? Was he called by qqGal. 1. ver. 1.Gal 1:1God to preach the Gospell, and durst he not do it, except men did like it? And when rrver. 12.Christ had taught it him by reuelation was he not sure of it, but by conference with Peter? And had he preached it ssver. 18. & Gal. 2. ver. 1.Gal 2:1almost twentie yeares, and was he now afraid least hee had preached falsely.

Hart.

S. Ierom saith not so: but that he had not had securitie of preaching it, vnlesse it had bene approued by the rest, with whom he did confer of it.

Rainoldes.

S. Ierom saith not so: but that he had not had securitie. Then S. Ierom saith so, in that he saith not so: and you vnsay in one word, that which you say in an other. For what is it else not to hauehave securitie of preaching the Gospell: then to be afraid either of his doctrine, that it is not true; or of his fact, that it is not lawfull?

Hart.

Why doth ttGal. 2.2.Gal 2:2the scripture then report of S. Paule that he conferred with them, least he should runne, or had runne in vaine.

Rainoldes.

Because many Christians, whom Paule had preached the Gospell too, began to be seduced by false Apostles of the Iewes: uuGal. 1.7. & 5.2.Gal 1:7Gal 5:2who taught them, that except they kept the law of Moses, they could not be saued. And to winne credit to their hereticall doctrine, that the hearers might receiue it the sooner for p. 176the authoritie of the teachers: they said, it was the doctrine of Peter, and the rest, the chiefe of the Apostles, the pillars of the Church. As for Paule, who taught the contrarie thereof: they disgraced him, as one that was crept into the Apostleship after thē; and hauing learned the gospell of them, which he preached, yet dissented frō them in the preaching of it. Which spéeches of seducers, if they had beléeued, whom Paule either should or had alreadie preached the Gospell vntounto: xx2. Cor. 11.3.2 Cor 11:3then should they hauehave fallen away with mindes corrupted from the simplicitie, that is in Christ, and Paule hauehave lost his labor, and runne in vaine, as hee speaketh, that is to say, without profit, without the yyRom. 1.13.Rom 1:13fruit of that hee ran for. As Christ complaineth in zzEsay 49.4.Isa 49:4the Prophet, I hauehave labored in vaine, I hauehave spent my strength in vaine and for nothing: because he was not receiued of the Iewes, to whom he preched the word of life. Wherefore Paule, desirous, as a carefull husbandman, to reape where he had sowne: did seeke to roote out the wéedes of false Apostles, y^t did or might hinder the growth of the corne. In which consideration, hauing shewed, first, touching his authoritie, aaGal. 1. ver. 1.Gal 1:1that he had it not of men, nor by man, but by God: next, touching his doctrine, bbver. 12.that he learned it of Christ, not of the Apostles: touching his dissension from them, he sheweth last, ccGal. 2.2.Gal 2:2that he went and conferred with the chiefe of them, euen Iames, Peter, and Iohn, who were accounted to be pillars, that they might witnesse their consent, and make his preaching to be fruitfull, and stoppe the mouthes of false Apostles. All this S. Ierom saw, and taught, ddIn epist. ad Gal. cap. 1. & 2.Gal 1in his commentaries on Paule to the Galatians: where he aduised better of Paules intent, and drift, and sifted all the pointes and circumstances of the text. The wordes which you stand on, were vttered lesse aduisedly by him, in eeDe Petro repre henso a Paulo. Epist. 11. inter epist. August.an epistle written to S. Austin: against whom, to iustifie his opinion, (though false,) that Peters fault at Antioche was no fault in deede, nor Paule reproued him in earnest, he saith, for the credit of one aboue the other, Paule had not had securitie of preaching the Gospell, vnlesse that Peter had approued it. Wherefore I may iustly speake in his excuse (at the least, to soften the hardnes of his spéech) the same which ffEpist. 64.Basil said in excuse of Gregorie, that his wordes were vttered **foreignnot by way of doctrine, but of contention; rather to maintaine his quarell against Austin, then to deliuer his iudgemēt of y^e matter; as writing p. 177of affection more what he fansied, then of discretion what he thought. Whereof there appeareth as it were a print euen in his owne wordes. For he doth mention Peter by name, (of whom he did contend with Austin,) and none of the rest: whereas the Scripture nameth no more him then others; but ggGal. 2. ver. ….Gal 2first saith (in generall) of Paule, that he conferred with them that were the chiefe; and hhver. 9.after (in particular) of Iames, Peter and Iohn, that they were counted to be pillars. Thus, neither did Paule conferre with Peter onelyonly, but with Iames and Iohn, and therefore it proueth no suprem…cie of Peter, more then of Iames and Iohn; and, although he had, yet were it a token (by Ieromes own iudgement) that Paule was Peters equall; not Peter his superior. For, **Inter confer… tes aequalitas est. Hieron. in epist. ad Galat▪ cap. 2.Gal 2there is equalitie betweene them (saith Ierom) who conferre togither. I would to God, M. Hart, if you will needes follow S. Ieroms authoritie, yet you would folow him in the best thinges: and what you say with error in heate of contention, you would amend by truth in iudgement of doctrine. But that which is written of giftes and rewards, iiDeut 16.19.Deut 16:19they blind the eies of the wise, and peruert the wordes of the iust: is no truer in iudges and arbiters of ciuill causes, then in you and **The Remist…, who presse these places, of Ierom, touching the mystery of fifteene dayes, and security of preaching the Gospell: as the former also of Tertullian, touching duety ▪ of Ambrose, and Chrysostome, touching honour, and the force of the Greeke word (to see:) with the circumstances of maiestie, and so farre, and notwithstanding his great affaires Ecclesiasticall: in their annot. on the Epist. to the Galat. chap. 1. and 2.Gal 1yours who meddle with the decision of spirituall matters. The giftes, which partly the pollicie of the Pope hath enterteined you with, in his Seminaries, and affaires; partly the state of the Papacie doth yéelde to such as speake things pleasing him: they do blind your eies, and peruert your wordes, that you thinke darkenes to be light, and light, darkenes; and call euill good, and good euill. They make you not to see in Paule to the Galatians his direct purpose of ouerthrowing that, which you would hauehave him build. They moue you to depraue the circumstāces of his words, as though he proued him selfe inferior to Peter in that by which he proueth him selfe not inferior. They stirre you to transforme his summission into subiection: and to abuse the spirite of his apostolike modestie to the raysing vp of the Papall pride and pompe of the supremacie. Paule went to see Peter with a desire of knowing him, which the Greeke word importeth: as they vse (saith zzIn epist. ad Galat. cap. 1.Gal 1Chrysostome) to speake, who go to see great and famous cities. You can not sée that Chrysostome saith (on the same place) that Paule 11foreign.was Peters equall in dignitie, to say no more: but you take this note of his, & puffe it vp with the word of Maiesty; p. 178thereby to make the simple reader to conceaue, that Peter was as stately as **The Pope.he to whom 22Maiestate tua. Paul. Manut. Epist. lib. 8. ad Pium quart. Pontisicem maximum.that terme is vsed. Paule went to Ierusalem kkAct. 9.26Acts 9:26from the citie of Damascus: not much aboue a hundred miles. You say he went, so farre, so long a iourney: as though it had bene no lesse then hence to go to the court of Rome, which **c. Ego N. Episcopus. extra. de iureiurando. Limina Apostolorum singulis annis per me aut per certum nuntium visitabo, nisi eorum absoluar licentia: sic me Deus adiuuet & haec sancta Euangelia.Bishops do to the Pope, not of their owne accord (as Paule,) but enforced thereto by solemne oth; not twise in seuentéene yeares (as Paule,) but eueryevery yeare once, by them selues, or by their messengers, vnlesse the Pope dispense with them. But of all the rest, that passeth, that you say hee went to Ierusalem, to sée Peter, notwithstanding his great affaires ecclesiasticall. Here was art, by the way, to shew, that Bishops may neglect their own charge to go to sée the Pope, vnderunder the color of Pauls example. And to hide this art, it was an other point of art: if it bée known, it is nought worth. For what were these great affaires ecclesiasticall, which Paule omitted to see Peter? Forsooth, llAct. 9.24.Acts 9:24at Damascus the Iewes laie in waite, and watched the gates of the citie day and night that they might kill him: in so much that he was faine to be conueied away by the wall in the night time, the disciples letting him downe in a basket; and so he scaped to Ierusalem. These are the affaires, the great affaires ecclesiasticall, the which notwithstanding, Paule went from Damascus to Ierusalem to see Peter. Wherein, hée had a reuerent regard to the supremacy of Peter, as you say: as **Greg. Martin in his treatise of Christian peregrination.a friend of yours saith, he went in pilgrimage to Peter. Whether of you applieth the place to better purpose, and fitter for the text: it may be a question. But in shew it séemeth to make more for pilgrimage, then for the supremacy.

Hart.

Sée, what wrong you doo to that learned man. Hée saith, that when Paule went to see Peter, he made a certaine pilgrimage: and you report him to hauehave said, that he went in pilgrimage.

Rainoldes.

Hee made a certaine pilgrimage: I crye you mercy. I thought he would hauehave proued that kinde of pilgrimage which our Church reproueth: and so he meant to doo; at least, he pretended it. But, in prouing it, he dalieth (like a Sophister) with a certaine pilgrimage, such as our Church alloweth. You might as well say, that I came from Oxford in pilgrimage to you: in a certaine pilgrimage. And he was ouerséene, that amongst p. 179examples of pilgrimage in scripture, he did not mention mmGen. 47.9.Gen 47:9Iacob: who saith that he spent his life time in pilgrimage; yea, and that his fathers spent in their pilgrimages longer time then he. But whatsoeuer shew the fact of Paule hath for a certaine pilgrimage, in that he went to see Peter: it hath no shew at all for Peters supremacy. Nay, the whole discourse of Paule in that point, dooth driue flat against it: as it hath appeared (in **Chap. 3. Diuis. 1.part therof) already. Wherfore, you were abused by them who sent you thither. You should hauehave done better to hauehave conteined your selfe within the Actes of the Apostles. And if your two places, in the first, and the fiftéenth, had not force inough to proue that which you would: you might in stéed therof hauehave taken two other, out of the eight, & the eleuenth, which hauehave force enough to proue that which you should. For, in the one, nnAct. 8.14.Acts 8:14the Apostles which were at Ierusalem, sent Peter and Iohn to the people of Samaria, to strengthen them in the faith through the gift of the holy Ghost. In the other, ooAct. 11.3.Acts 11:3the Apostles and brethren that were in Iury called Peter to an accoūt (when he had preached to Cornelius,) why hee went in to men vncircumcised, and did eate with them.

Hart.

Alacke, you imagine, that the Apostles had equall power with Peter, because they sent him abroad in commission, and asked him a count of that which he did. Poore reasons: God wote. For an inferiour may entreat his superiour to doo his busines for him. And specially a bodie politike or a corporation may choose their head and send him: as Citizens may send their Mayor to the Prince, or Parlament, though he be head of the Citie because he may be more fit to doo their businesse. And as they may send him, so may they aske a reason of that which hée hath done, and call him to account of it. Wéene you, that the Cardinals may not entreate the Pope to doo this or that, which shall be conuenient for the commoditie of the Church? Or, that the Pope will thinke his state to be abased, if they enquire of him why hée dooth this or that? Perhaps you wéene so, because you know neither the Pope, nor the Cardinals. But what say you then to your owne selues? Doo not your Seniours in Corpus Christi Colledge send abroad your President about your Colledge businesse? Dooth he not giuegive you an account of those things which hée hath done? Or, if he giuegive it not, may you not aske it of him? And is p. 180he therefore not your head?

Rainoldes.

Yes, he is our head: but he is such a head, that your head of Rome had rather you should loose your head, then you should so behead his power. I tolde you so much **In the first Diuision of this chapter.before in effect: and made it plaine vntounto you by Duarens similitude of the President of a court of Parlament in France, named the head of the court. You might hauehave conceiued the same of our President: and thought his headship as vnfit for the proofe of your purpose, as you thought the other. For he is bound to statutes: by them we send him out, and aske account of that he dooth. No statutes binde your Pope: but his lust is his law; and what hée will, that is holy. We may depriue our President if he shoulde commit any heinous crime, as murther, or adultery. Your Pope, although he be as wilfull a murtherer, and as notorious an adulterer as Pope ppLuit prand. Ticin histor. rer. per Europ. gestar. lib. 6. cap. 6.7. & 8.Iohn the twelfth, yea, though he be taken in most horrible incests, and vilanies of all sortes: yet a Councell may not depose him, no not the Emperour with a Councell. It is true y^t Otho y^e Emp…ror did depose him in a Councell assembled of purpose therunto. But your **Cardinall Turrecremata: and Father Robert the Iesuit.Doctors tell vsus y^t the Emperor did it qqTurrecremata. in summ. de eccles. lib. 2. cap. 103.de facto, not de iure; rrRobert. Bellarmin. controuers. 4. part. 1. quaest 5.of a good zeale, not according to knowledge. Wherfore I would not hauehave you to vse these similitudes, of Presidents in Colledges, & Mayors in Cities, & heads in Corporations. Or, if you wil vse them, yet vse them to the simple, whom such similitudes may deceiue: but vse them not to vsus, who sée the dissimilitude of them, and can (by Gods grace) discern a fish from a serpent. Doo you thinke your selfe, I pray, in good sooth, that Peter (in the Actes of the Apostles) was as Pope, and the rest of the Apostles as the Colledge of Cardinals?

Hart.

Why aske you me that? as though I spake not what I thought.

Rainoldes.

It would be strange newes to heare that y^e Cardinals shuld send y^e Pope in Embassage, (& make him as it were Legate a latere,) chiefly, to pray for men conuerted to the fayth of Christ, and to preach vntounto them. The Colledge of the Apostles sent Peter ssAct▪ 8. ver. 15.17. & 25.Acts 8:15Acts 8:17Acts 8:25to doo these things. You séeme to say, they did it by intreatie; be it: and, as a corporation may send their head about their busines, because hee is more fit to doo it. But might the Colledge of Cardinals send the Pope abroad by y^e like intreatie? Unlesse perhaps you make this difference betwéene p. 181them: that in other corporations the head sometimes is fitter; but the Pope is fitter for no busines of the Church, then any of his corporation. Howbeit, euen of that too, it followeth in part, that Peter was not throughly as Pope in the former point. As for the later, of calling him to account: although your good wéening of the Pope persuadeth you, that he would not thinke his state to be abased if the Cardinals should aske him why he dooth this or that: yet they who knew him better a great deale, then you, and loued him so well that they woulde not belie him, doo witnesse, not onelyonly by word but by writing, that he will not bée dealt withall by his inferiours, as Peter was by the Apostles. I meane not your Canonists: in whose ttc. ad Apostolatus. Extrauagant. Ne sede vacante. In glossa.glose it goeth for a famous rule, that none may say vntounto the Pope, 44Domine, cur ita facis?Syr, why do you so? But I meane the learnedst and best of your Diuines: who setting the Church aboue the Pope in authoritie, mislike that the Pope will not be subiect to the Councell. Of whom (to name one for many) Iohn Ferus, a Frier of S. Francis order, but godlier then **Such as Buchanan describeth in his Franciscanus.the common sort, intreating (in his Commentaries written on the Actes) of the example of Peter, how hée was required to render a reason of that which hee had done, maketh this note vponupon it. uuFerus in Act. Apost. cap. 11.Peter the Apostle, and chiefe of the Apostles, is constrained to giuegive an account to the Church, neither dooth he disdaine it: because he knew him selfe to be not a Lorde, but a minister of the Church. The Church is the Spouse of christ and ladie of the house: Peter a seruant and minister. Wherefore the Church may, not onelyonly exact an account of her ministers, but also depose thē & reiect them altogither, if they be not fit. **SicSo did they 11olimof old time, 22quámsaepissime actum estvery often, 33in Concilijs.in Councels. But 44Im pij Pontificeswicked Bishops, 55nuncnow, 66ne ab Ecclesia quidem argui & in ordinem cogi volunt.will not be reproued, no not of the Church, nor be ordered by it: as though they were Lordes, not ministers. Therefore 77Iusto Dei iudicio ab omnibus et singulis confunduotur.they are confounded of all and eche in seuerall, by the iust iudgement of God. Doo you know what Bishops they be, who refuse to bee subiect to the Church? Who say, they are aboue the Councell? Who may iudge all, and none may iudge them? This Preacher, a Preacher of your own, not ours, dooth call them wicked Bishops. The Lord of his mercy make his wordes a prophecy: that those wicked Bishops may be confounded of all and eche in seuerall, by the iust iudgement of God.

p. 182Hart.

You bring me wordes of Ferus, which were not his, perhaps, but thrust into his commentaries before they came vntounto the print, by some malitious heretike. For uuBiblioth. sanctae lib. 6. annotat. 72.Sixtus Senensis saith, that there are witnesses of very good credit, who auouch that the commentaries of Ferus vponupon Matthew were corrupted by heretikes, after his death, before they were printed.

Rainoldes.

Sixtus saith in déede of his Commentaries vponupon Matthew, that they were corrupted, chiefly in aaCommentar. in Matt. lib. 3.that place, where Ferus speaketh of the keyes that Christ did promise Peter. For there is set downe, as a speciall note, that Christ saith to Peter, **Tibi dabo cla…es regni coelorum: non dicit, regni terrarum.I will giuegive thee the keyes of the kingdome of heauen: hee saith not, the keyes of the kingdome of earth. These wordes pertaine nothing to an earthly power: which yet some endeuour by them to establish, affirming that Peter receiued fulnes of power not only in spirituall things, but also temporall. And after declaration, how this is plainely reproued by S. bbDe considerat. ad Eugen. lib. 1.Bernard, writing to Pope Eugenius: it is added farther. Peter receiued the keyes, that is to say, power: not an earthly power, that he might giuegive and take away dominions and kingdomes: neither such a power that it should be lawfull for him to doo what hee list, (as many men dreame,) but he receaued the power of binding and loosing, opening & shutting, remitting and retaining sinnes: neither this at his pleasure, but as a minister and seruant, doing the wil of his Lord. And these are the words, which sauour so strongly of an hereticall spirite, that Sixtus saith, it is auouched by credible witnesses, the cōmentaries of Ferus on Matthew wer corrupted, after his death, by heretikes, Praesertim hoc loco: saith Sixtus Senensis ▪chiefly in this place, before they wer printed. Wherin both y^e witnesses, & Sixtus (in my iudgement) hauehave shewed thē selues wise. For it is better to beare men in hand that heretikes corrupted the commentaries of Ferus, chiefely in this place: then it should be thought that the strongest hold of all your religion [the Popes supreme power to giuegive and take away kingdomes] is shaken by a man so learned, so famous, so Catholike, as Ferus. But Sixtus saith not of his Commentaries on the Acts, that they were corrupted also by heretikes. Yet some heretikes hand may séeme to hauehave béene in them, chiefely in this place: where he doth reproue the arrogancie of the Popes, and nameth them p. 183wicked Bishops. Wherefore it would do well, that the ouersight of Sixtus, herein, were mended by some other Sixtus: who might say as much of Ferus on the Actes, as Sixtus saith of him on Matthew. Perhaps you hauehave not witnesses, that wil auouch this, as some auouched that. The least matter of a thousand. For two or three such as 11Popish Chronicle writers.Surius, Pontacus, and Genebrardus, men that hauehave sold them selues to make lies in the defense of Popery, will be readie (on the credite of a 22Two knights of the poste.Lindan or Bolsecke,) not only to say it but to Chronicle it too. Here is al the difficultie, that xxFerns in Acta Apost. Coloniae. 1567. apud haeredes Arnoldi Birckman cum priuileg. Caes. Maiest. In Matthaeum, Maguneiae, 1559. apud Franciscum Behem cum priuilegio Caesar. Maiest & Regis Gallorum.these bookes are printed thus amongst your selues: who set them foorth first, and we receiue them at your hands. A great faulte, I know not whether of printers, or censours and allowers of bookes to the print: who suffer such scandalous places to bée printed. Yea yyIn Acta Apost. Parisiis, 1568. apud Sonnium cum priuileg. Regis & Caesar. Maiest. & Coloniae, 1577. apud Geruin. Calen. & haeredes Quent. In Matthaeum, Lugduni 1562. apud haeredes▪ Iuntae: & Antuerpiae, 1570. apud Philip. Nutium.to be printed so still: specially when Sixtus Senensis hath said and credible witnesses hauehave auouched that heretikes did corrupt them. No, no, M. Hart, it is too stale a iest to say that heretikes hauehave corrupted the commentaries of Ferus. For the abomination of the Popes supremacie, oppressing both the magistracie of the common wealth, and ministerie of the Church, is grown to such outrage: that if we (whom you call heretikes) should hold our peace, the stones would cry against it.

Hart.

What néedes all this of Ferus? Or Sixtus? Or Canonistes? Or I know not who? You called me to the scriptures, whē I brought the Fathers: and now from the scriptures you bring me to writers of our owne age.

Rainoldes.

Not from the scriptures to them: but to the scriptures by them. As Christ, when the Phariseis sclaundered his workes, zzMat. 12.27.Matt 12:27alleaged the example of their own children therby to make them sée the truth. And as he said to them, therefore your children shall be your iudges: so I say to you, therefore your brethren shall be your iudges.

Hart.

I graunt that the Pope doth not in all respectes submit him selfe, as Peter, to giuegive account of his dooings, both to the Apostles, and to inferior Christians. But Ferus should hauehave considered, and so must you, that the times are not like. It were not conuenient for him to do so now.

Rainoldes.

So I thought: the case is altered. You meane by [the times,] the mē, who liue in the times, I trow. In déede they p. 184are not like. For Peter was then a preacher of the Gospell, as Pastors are now: and the Pope now is a Prince of the world, as Nero was then.