Conference Between Rainolds and Hart — John Rainolds

Conference Between Rainolds and Hart · John Rainolds

The sixth Chapter. The two maine groundes, on which the supremacie vsurped by the Pope, doth lie. The former, that there should be one Bishop ouer all in earth: 1 because Christ said, There shall be one flocke, and one pastor; 2 and among the Iewes there was one iudge, and hie Priest. The later, that the Pope is that one Bishop: 3 because Peter was Bishop of Rome, (as some say,) 4 and the Pope succeedeth Peter. Both examined, and shewed to faile in the proofe of the Popes supremacie.

RAINOLDES.

The first Diuisiō.Then aMat. 11.19.wisedome must be content to be iustified of her childrē. Howbeit God is able to chaunge your hart in such sort, that as in the Gospell, bMat. 21.29.he, who said he would not goe into the vineyarde, repented afterward, and went: so you may yéeld to this on better aduise, to which you say you will not yéeld. Though, if your opinion of Peters supremacie were graunted to be true: it proueth not your title to the Popes supremacie (the principall point in question) which you claime thereby. For let vsus faine, that Peter was head of the Apostles. How followeth it thereof, that the Bishop of Rome is head of all the Church of Christ?

Hart.

It foloweth by *Chapt. 1. Di…is. 2. and Chap. … Diuis. 1.the second part of my reason: The Bishop of Rome succeedeth Peter in the same power ouer Bishops, that he had ouer the Apostles. For, if Peters power ouer the Apostles did reach vntounto the whole flock, both of the shéepe and the lambes: then must the same power of his successor ouer Bishops reach by like reason vntounto the same flocke, and so to all the Church of Christ.

Rainoldes.

But how doo you proue that the Bishop of Rome succéedeth Peter in his power?

Hart.

Because that the power committed to Peter was not to dye with Peter. For this had not bene agréeable to the goodnes and wisedom of Christ: vpō whom it lay to prouide for his church vntill the end of the world, as cIn Psalm. ….Austin sheweth he did. Thinke not (saith hee to the Church) thinke not thy selfe forsaken, because thou seest not Peter, because thou seest not Paule, because thou seest not them by whom thou art begotten. Of thine ofspring there is growne vntounto thee a fatherhood: in steed of thy fathers, children are borne vntounto thee.

Rainoldes.

The goodnes and wisedome of our Sauiour Christ prouided for his Church, as S. dEphes. 4.11.Paule witnesseth, by giuing Pastors, and teachers: Pastors, and teachers; not one, to the whole; but many to the seuerall partes of his Church. For they, whom Christ hath chosen to serue him in the ordinarie feeding of his flocke, to instruct his people, and guide them in the way of life, vntill the end of the world: are named in the scripture sometime eforeign Act. 20.17. & 1. Pet. 5.1.Elders, of their age; sometime fforeign. Act. 20.28. foreign. 1. Pet. 5.2.Bishops of their duetie. And he hath taken order by his spirite and word that gAct. 14.2…. & 20.28. Philip. 1.…. Tit. 1.5.such should be appointed in eueryevery Church, through eueryevery citie. This was it that Austin regarded, when he said; the church is not forsaken although she see not the Apostles: considering that in steed of the Apostles, she hath Bishops. For *Patres mis…i sunt apostoli: pro apostolis filii natisunt tibi, constituti sunt episcopi. August. in Psalm. 44.by the name of [Fathers] he meant the Apostles, and by the name of [children] bishops: In steed of thy fathers, children are borne vntounto thee. Which, how it may serue your purpose, I see not. Unlesse perhaps you meane, that (amongst those children) the Bishop of Rome should be heire, as eldest: and Bishops of other cities should be handled, al, like younger brethren. But Austin saith not so.

Hart.

It is proued by Austin that our Sauiour Christ prouided for his church. And this (I graunt) he did by giuing seueral Pastors vntounto seuerall flockes: but so, that he committed the charge of them all to one supreme Pastor; which is the Bishop of Rome.

Rainoldes.

Thus I heare you say. But I had rather heare, Thus saith the Lord.

Hart.

You shall heare it. The Lord saith that hIoh. 10.16.there shal be one flocke, and one shepheard, or (as we translate it) one folde and one Pastor. *Staplet▪ princip doct. lib. 6. cap. 15.whereof I make this reason. By the name of Pastor is noted an ordinarie gouernment and charge, which hath relation to a flocke: and therefore, as long as the flocke continueth, the Pastors office must continue; the office of one Pastor, as the flocke is one. It continued in Peter, when Christ made him supreme Pastor. Now, when Peter dyed, it should continue in his successor. And the successor of Peter is the Bishop of Rome. The Bishop of Rome therefore is the supreme Pastor of the Church of Christ.

Rainoldes.

I perceiue your Pope can make no shew of title to supreme-headship of the Church, vnlesse he put Christ from the possession of it. For Christ by [one Pastor] doth signifie himselfe: as it may appeare by the drift of all his spéech, wherein he maintaineth his office and autoritie iIoh. 9. vers. 16. & 24. & …29.against the slanders of the Phariseis. kIoh. 10.14.I am, saith he, the good Pastor, and know mine owne, and am known of mine. As the Father knoweth me, so know I the Father: and I lay downe my life for my sheepe. Other sheepe I hauehave also, which are not of this fold: and them must I bring, and they shall heare my voyce, and there shalbe one flocke, one Pastor. One Pastor, who but he, of whome the wordes afore, and after, are meant? He, who is the good Pastor; who knoweth his sheepe; who layeth downe his life for them; who hath other sheepe beside the Iewes, to wéete, the Gentiles, whom hee will bring to his folde; and so of them both the Church shalbe, as one flocke; obeying Christ, as one Pastor. This is the one Pastor, that our Sauiour meant. Which if you wil not beléeue on my word, or rather on his word who spake it: beléeue l…ibli… castiga…a a Theologis …ouaniensibus, excusa a Christophoro Plantino Antuerpiae.your own Bible, expoūding it by conferēce of scripture with scripture, of Iohn with Ezekiel. In whom God doth promise that mEzek. 37. vers. 22.he wil make (of Israel, & Iuda) one people: and nvers. 24.set his seruant Dauid (that is, Christ, the sonne of Dauid) to be one Pastor vntounto them all, oEzek. 34.23.and hee shall feede them. Thus, in Gods law, the wordes are meant of Christ. The Pope *The canon …aw. c. vnam sanctam. extra. de maioritat. & …edient.in his law, wil hauehave him selfe meant by them. You are angry with vsus, when we call him Antichrist. Is not the name of Antichrist too gentle for him, who claimeth that to himselfe, which is proper to Christ?

Hart.

The Pope will hauehave himselfe to be meant by them, as the vicar of Christ: and so they doo belong to him. Though they belong also to Christ: which we deny not. For thus saith the Pope. Of the Church, which is one, there is one bodie, and 1Vnum capu… non duo capita▪ quasi monstrū, Christus videlicet & Christi vicari…s, Petrus, Petriqué successor.one head, not two heades, as a monster, namely Christ and Christes vicar Peter, and Peters successor: sith the Lord saith to Peter himselfe, Feede my sheepe: my sheepe, saith he, in generall, not in particular these or these: whereby hee is vnderstood to hauehave committed all to him. Whether they bee therfore Grecians or others, who say that they are not committed to Peter and to his successors: they must needes confesse them selues not to bee of the sheepe of Christ: 2Dicente Domino in Iohanne, Vnum ouil… & vnicum e…se pastorem.Sith the Lord saith in Iohn, that there is one folde and one Pastor. Which wordes, though they conclude the Pope to bée that one Pastor: yet you must not take them as though the Pope meant them of himselfe alone, but that they are verified first in Christ, then in Peter, lastly in himselfe. And so there continueth one Pastor by succession, euen as the Church continueth one.

Rainoldes.

Doo you know what you say, when you say, there continueth one Pastor by succession, Peter after Christ, the Pope after Peter? I hope you doo it ignorantly, *1. Tim. 1.….and therefore may obteine mercy, though you blaspheme in it.

Hart.

Blaspheme? why say you so?

Rainoldes.

Because you deny Christ the Sonne of God to be the one Pastor, and so the head of his Church. For he to whom an other succeedeth in an office, doth cease him selfe to beare the office: as pAct. 24.….Felix did cease to bee gouernour of Iurie, when Festus was in place to be his successour. Wherefore if the office of that one Pastor continue by succession: then doth it wholy rest in the successor, that is the Pope; and Christ, the predecessor is discharged of it.

Hart.

You speake as though we named the Pope, Christes successor: which we are farre from. For we know that Priestes after the order of Aaron had therefore successors, qHeb. 7.2….because they were not suffered to endure by reason of death. But Christ endureth euer, as being a Priest after the order of Melchisedech: and so hath no successors. We name S. Peter, Christes vicar: the Pope Christes vicar, and successor of Peter: but neither Peter, nor the Pope, successor of Christ.

Rainoldes.

If it be as you say, then raze out for shame that prophane spéech out of your rSa…rar. ceremon. Roman. eccl. lib. 1. … 1.sacred Ceremonies of the Church of Rome: *Ch…tus primum denominatione successorem instituit, dicens Petro, pasce oues mea…: & ea ratione Petrus Clementem etiam nominauit.Christ did first name and ordaine Peter, his successor, saying to him, Feede my sheepe: and in the same sort did Peter also name Clemens. But sith you acknowledge that Christ is one Pastor, and yet hath no successor: you hauehave giuen ouer the fortresse of that which you meant to seaze on by those wordes of Christ, that there should be one flocke, one Pastor. For where as you saide that this soueraine Pastor must & doth continue one by succession, in Peter, and the Pope: you confesse now, that without succession he doth continue one in person, euen Christ, s1. Pet. 2.25.the Pastor of our soules, Heb. 13.20.the great, u1. Pet. 5.4.the chiefe Pastor, xReuel. 1.13. & ….1.who walketh in the middest of the seuen golden candlestickes, that is, of the seuen (and by consequent of all) Churches.

Hart.

I confesse, that Christ continueth the Pastor of our soules, the chiefe Pastor, and hath no successor, as succession is taken properly. But he made a vicar, that is a chiefe Pastor, vnderunder him, in earthe to continue by succession. Whom also hée meant by the name of one Pastor, and not himselfe alone.

Rainoldes.

The verie wordes of scripture, and circumstances of the text doo proue the contrarie. For, to whom did Christ speake, when he saide: yIohn. 10. vers. 15.I hauehave other sheepe, which are not of this folde: and them must I bring, and they shall heare my voyce, and there shalbe one flocke, one Pastor? was it not to zvers. 7. & 19.the Iewes?

Hart.

To the Iewes.

Rainoldes.

Then by other sheepe, not of that folde, hée meant the Gentiles.

Hart.

The Gentiles.

Rainoldes.

And it was Christes office, to bring them also to his folde.

Hart.

It was so.

Roinoldes.

To bring them by his voyce, which they should heare.

Hart.

What then?

Rainoldes.

Is not he avers. ….the Pastor, bvers. 3.whose voyce the sheepe heare?

Hart.

Who denyeth it?

Rainoldes.

Then if the Iewes and Gentiles heare the voice of Christ, and so become one flocke: how could he meane any but himselfe alone by the one Pastor?

Hart.

Him selfe alone (I graunt) directly, and first: but secondarily, and by consequent, his vicar too, Peter, and Peters successor. For Christ, while he liued in flesh vponupon the earth, did not bring the Gentiles: cMat. 15.24,he was not sent (he saide) but to the lost sheepe of the house of Israel. In the which respect S. Paul calleth him dRom. 15.8.y^e minister of circumcision, because he did execute his office, and ministery, onelyonly towardes the people of circumcision, that is, the Iewes. The Gentiles he did bring after his ascension, by the ministerie of his seruants, chiefly of S. Peter: whom eAct. 10.11.hauing instructed by a vision from heauen, hée sent him to Cornelius, & fAct. 15.7.chose him that the Gentiles should heare by his mouth the worde of the Gospell, and beleeue. Wherefore, as Christ saide, that he must bring the Gentiles, though he meant to bring them not by his owne preaching, but by the mouth of Peter; and so Peter brought them after a sorte too: likewise he gaue him selfe the name of one Pastor, though he fedde his flocke not in his owne person, but in his vicar; and so might hée meane his vicar too thereby.

Rainoldes.

This is a greater argument, that he meant not Peter, nor Peters successor (as you terme him) by the name of one Pastor. For if he meant him selfe, not as hee liued in the flesh, but as he gEph. 1. vers. 2…raigneth in glorie: then meant he that prerogatiue which is onelyonly his, as hvers. 22.head of the Church, and may be no way giuen vntounto flesh and blood. For the proofe whereof we are to weigh farther, that in saying iIoh. 10. ver. 16I must bring them, & they shall heare my voyce: he meaneth effectuall bringing, and hearing, through which they, who are kver. 4. & 27.his sheepe, do folow him, and lver. 28.he doth giuegive them eternall life, and they shall neuer perish: and none shall plucke them out of his hand. Now, whom Christ bringeth after this maner, he bringeth them by two meanes: by the preaching of his worde, and the working of his Spirite. As he worketh by his Spirite: so he hath no vicar, him selfe doth mAct. 16.14.open the heart of Lydia: and nMat. 1.8.baptize with the holy Ghost: and oMat. 28.20.is with his disciples still vntil the end of the worlde. As he calleth by his worde: so are all ministers of the worde, his vicars. For hee sendeth them in his steede, and preacheth vntounto men by them. So he saith to the pMat. 10.40.twelue Apostles, He that receiueth you, receiueth me: and to the qLuc. 10.16.seuentie disciples, He that heareth you, heareth me. So Paule saith of r…. Cor. 5.20.him selfe, Timothee, Siluanus, and the rest that laboured with him, We are embassadours for Christ, God as it were beseeching you through vsus: we pray you in Christes steed, be ye reconciled to God. First therefore, sith the Spirite doth make the word effectuall, and Christ hath no vicar, as he worketh by his Spirite: it foloweth, y^t in naming him selfe, y^e one Pastor, who doth bring his sheep, and they heare his voice, he could imply no vicar. For the word doth sound in vaine to the eare, vnlesse the Lord doo open the heart with his Spirite: and 1. Cor. 3.7.neither he that planteth is any thing, nor he that watereth, but God that giueth the encrease. Againe, if he had implied their ministerie, by whom the shéepe heare his voice, and so are brought: yet must that belong to many vicars, not to one; or if to one, not to Peter. For they, who should be brought thereby, are the Gentiles: and Christ hath brought the Gentiles by many tEphes. 4.11.Pastors and teachers, not only by the Apostles: nor amongst the Apostles by Peter chiefely, but by uRom. 11.13.Paule: and that, through xAct. 13.2.the calling of the holy Ghost, and yGal. 2.9.their agréement betwéene them selues. Finally, if Christ had meant (as you distinguish it) him selfe first, and directly; secondarily, & by cōsequent Peter: it must be for his preaching y^e word to the flocke. And what is this to Peters successour the Pope: who preacheth not as Peter did? For, zSacra…. cerem. Rom. eccles. lib. …. sect. 4.he vseth not to preach, but when he saith Masse; nor then, vnlesse he list: and asect. 5.he saith not Masse, but on a fewe hie feastes; nor then, if he be let: and the Italian gouernment, specially *As D. Alle… speaketh of it: in his Apolog. …f the Engl. Se…n. chapt. 6.the Papacy so discreetly menaged, must néedes hauehave lets a number. His Princely cares do trouble him: he leaueth Priestly to the Friers. Wherefore, that sacrilegious vsurper of Rome committeth two euils, against, both the head, and the bodie of the Church. Against the head: in that he maketh the prerogatiue of one Pastor common to all Popes, which is proper to Christ. Against the body: in that hee claimeth the title of Christes vicar, as proper to him selfe, which is common to all Pastours.

Hart.

Nay, you who b…. …3.4.reuile the high priest of God, commit a great euill. But he cōmitteth none at all. For he taketh not the prerogatiue of one Pastor as Christ, but vnderunder Christ. And he claimeth the title of Christes vicar, by an excellencie, as the chiefe, and generall: though all other Bishops be Christes vicars also.

Rainoldes.

This is to roale the stone of Sisyphus. You driue it vp the hill, and still it slippeth backeward: yet cease you not to striue, but you striue in vaine. For though you fetch it vp neuer so often, downe againe it will. All Bishops (you say) are the vicars of Christ: but the Pope claimeth that title by an excellencie. True. By an excellencie he robbeth al Bishops of that honour, which Christ hath giuen them. For he doth account them all to be his vicars, as Cardinall cIn Summ. de eccles. lib. 2. cap…. 62.Turrecremata calleth them expressely the vicars of the Pope: and proueth by d2. q. 6. c. decre…to. c. sequenti.the Popes owne law, that they are so. Wherefore if you will hauehave them Christes vicars too: the matter must be helped out with your distinction, that first, and directly, they are the Popes vicars; and Christes, by a consequent, and secondarilie. As for the man, whom you call the hie priest of God: I know him not. For he is not the hie priest, of the Iewes, I trow. And Christians hauehave no hie priest, but the Sonne of the Highest: euen him, of whom eHeb. 7.2….it is writen, such an hie priest it became vsus to hauehave, which is holy, harmelesse, vndefiled, separate from sinners, and made higher then the heauens. Wherefore, I speake not the wordes of reuiling, but of truth and modestie, when I call him a sacrilegious vsurper, who taketh the crowne of the king of kings, and fetteth it on his owne head. This doth that man of sinne: who saith that *De necessitat… salutis omni humanae creaturae, subesse Romano Pontifici. c. Vnam sanctam. Extrauag. de maiori…. & obedient.it is necessarie for eueryevery man vntounto saluation, to be subiect to the Pope: and that they, who say hee hath not charge ouer them, are not of Christs sheepe, because the Lord saith in Iohn, that there shall be one flocke and one pastour.

Hart.

You néede not account it so heinous a matter to conclude that doctrine by these wordes of Christ. Chiefely, sith it is probable, that he meant them rather of the Pope then him selfe. For he saith, there shall be one flocke and one Pastor: he saith not, there hath beene; but, there shall be. Now him selfe, as being God, was alway Pastor of the Gentiles also, no lesse thē of the Iewes. And so in respect of him there had before bene one flocke, and one pastor. Wherfore sith he speaketh of a thing that should be, not that had bene alreadie: he might be well thought to hauehave meant not him selfe but the Pope rather, who (in his stéed) is Pastor both of Iewes and Gentiles.

Rainoldes.

Had the Gentiles alway God for their Pastor, as well as the Iewes? What meant S. Paule then, who saith, fEph. 2.12.to the Gentiles: ye were without Christ, and aliants from the common wealth of Israell, and straungers from the couenants of promise, and had no hope, and were without God in the world? For gPsal. 23.1. & 80.1.God is called Pastor, in respect of them, whom he guideth, and feedeth with the foode of life. So that if he were Pastor of the Gentiles alway, as you say he was: then they were alway faithfull, and members of the Church, and had the hope of God in Christ. But if they were before without Christ, without hope, without God in the world, and aliants from the common wealth of Israell, that is, the Church, and straungers from the couenants of promise made to the faithfull, as they were, S. Paule saith: then neither were they one flocke with the Iewes, neither was God their one Pastor. wherfore what …oeuer shew of probabilitie the Pope might séeme to hauehave for abusing those wordes to maintaine his own pride: in truth they agree to him, hEph. 2.14.who broke the stoppe of the partition-wall, and made of both one, that is to Christ Iesus, and onelyonly to Christ.

Hart.

Well. If the wordes agree not to the Pope perhaps in one sense: they may in an other. For there are sundry senses of the holy scriptures, but in generall two, as hRobert. Bellarmin. in lection. Roman. con…. 1. quest. 5.Father Robert sheweth whereof the one is called historicall, or literall; the other, mysticall, or spirituall. And so the spéech of Christ touching one Pastor, might signifie the Pope in a mysticall sense, though not in the literall. As likewise the name of hye priest, signifying the Iewish literally, doth mystically betoken him.

Rainoldes.

That sense is the right sense of the scriptures, which the holy Ghost, the author of them, meant. Now, the holye Ghost hath vttered them in such sort, that not the wordes onelyonly do signifie things, according to their naturall sense: but the things also expressed by the wordes do signifie other things, according to the Lordes ordinance, who shadowed that by figures in the olde Testament, which is performed in the newe. As, for example, it is writen in iExod. 12.46.the law of Moses, you shall not breake a bone of him. These wordes are spoken touching the lambe of the passeouer: and signifie, as they sound, that the Iewes should dresse it whole, without breaking any bone thereof. But this thing doth signifie a fa…ther thing in secret: to wéete, that when kIohn 19.3….Christ, who was represented & figured by the lambe, should suffer death to saue vsus, a bone of him should not be broken. Thus, of one place there are two senses: the former called literall, because the letter, as it were that is the very wordes, being vnderstood aright, do import it; and the later, mysticall, because the thing imported and meant by the letter, doth betoken a déeper mysterie. Of these, the literall sense is knowne to be the meaning of the holy Ghost. For wordes were made to open the conceites of our mind: and so are they vsed by the holy Ghost to shew the will of God vntounto vsus. The mysticall is known to be his meaning also, when himselfe reuealeth it: as he hath done in that touching the lambe. Otherwise it is not. For men may deuise many mysticall senses of a place in scripture, and them, one contrarie to an other: as often times they doo. Which all could not be meant by the Spirit of truth: and whether any of them were, who can say? We hauehave no assurance then of mysticall senses: which may be mens fansies. OnelyOnly the literall sense, which is meant vndoubtedly by the holy Ghost, is of force to proue the assured truth, and therefore doth binde in matters of beliefe. And this is so cléere that lThom. Aquin. Summ. Theolo. part. 1. q. 1.211.10. Alfons. a Castr. aduers. Haer. l. 1. c▪ 3. Sanders …ocke of the Church chapt. 3. The narration of the Seminaries.your owne Doctors acknowledge it, and teach it: euen *Robert Bellarmin. contr. 1. quast. 5.he whom you alleaged. For he saith, It is agreed betweene you and vsus 2Ex solo literali sensu, pe ti debere argumenta efficacia.that forcible aguments ought to be drawne onelyonly from the literall sense: and that is surely knowne to be the sense and meaning of the holy Ghost. As for mystical senses, it is not alwaies sure, whether the holy Ghost meant them: vnlesse they be expounded in the scriptures, as that in Iohn, you shall not breake a bone of him. 3His exceptis, stultum est ex mysticis sensibus velle eflicaciter probare dog…ata fidei.Which excepted, it is a folly to go about to proue the pointes of faith forcibly by mysticall senses. Wherefore if it be not expounded in the scriptures, that the wordes of Christ (touching one Pastor) are meant, as of him selfe, by the literall sense; so, by the mystical, of the Pope: you sée that Father Robert saith, it is a folly, to go about to proue the Popes supremacie by them, if you will proue it forcibly. Now, what I say of one Pastour: the same I say of high Priest. By whom, mExod. 28.4.the law of Moses doth signify the hye priest, literally: nHeb. 8.5.the epistle to the Hebrewes doth shew that mystically he betokened Christ. But that the Pope was meant by him in any sense eyther literall or mysticall: I finde not in the scriptures.

Hart.

The second Diuision.But I find in the scriptures that Christians must stil hauehave a hye Priest amongst thē on earth, to be their chief iudge.

Rainoldes.

Were finde you that?

Hart.

In the seuentéenth chapter of the booke of Deuteronomie, euen in these wordes. oDeut. 17.8.If there rise a matter too hard for thee in iudgement betweene blood and blood, betweene 1Causam & causam. vulgat. …dit latin.cause & cause, betweene plague and plague, in the matters of controuersie within thy gates: then shalt thou arise, and goe vp to the place which the Lorde thy God shall choose, and thou shalt come to the Leuiticall priestes, and to the iudge, that shall be in those dayes, and aske, and they shall shew thee the sentence of iudgement. And thou shalt do according to that thing which they shall shewe thee from that place that the Lord shall choose: and thou shalt obserue to do according to all that they shall enforme thee. According to the law which they shall teach thee, and according to the iudgement which they shall tell thee, shalt thou doo. Thou shalt not decline from the thing which they shall shew thee, neither to the right hand, nor to the left. And he that shall presumptuously refuse to obey the commandement of the Priest who serueth then the Lord thy God: Vulgat. edit. …x decreto iudicis morietur homo ille.by the decree of the iudge shall that man dye, and thou shalt take away euil out of Israell. Here the hye Priest is made the chiefe iudge, to heare, and determine, hard and doubtfull causes, amongst the people of God. And who amongst Christians is such a Priest and iudge, but the Pope onelyonly?

Rainoldes.

Now the first chapter of the booke of Genesis would serue you as well to proue the Popes supremacie, if it were considered. For pGen. 1.1.it is written there: In the beginning God created the heauen and the earth.r…. vnam sanctam. Extrauag. de maioritat. & obedient.

Hart.

What meane you so to say?

Rainoldes.

Nay aske that of qPope Boniface the eight.him who doth expound it so: saying, that whosoeuer resisteth his supremacy, resisteth Gods ordinance; vnlesse he faine (as Manichee did) that there are 1Duo principia, sicut Manichaeus.two beginninges, which is false & hereticall: because, as Moses witnesseth, 2Non in princ…pijs, sed in principio, creauit Deus coelum & …ecram.not, in the beginninges, but in the beginning God created heauen and earth ▪ See, in the beginning, not, in the beginninges: and therefore not many are hye Priestes of the Church, but the Pope onelyonly.

Hart.

The place, which I alleaged, doth plainely speake of the high Priest: and so it doth serue my purpose more fitly, then this, which doth not touch him. Howbeit, as learned men, when they hauehave proued a point by stronger arguments, are wont to set it foorth with floorishes of lighter reasons, rather to polishe it as it were, then to worke it and frame it: so the Pope hauing brought better euidence for proofe of his supremacie, doth trimme it vp with this of Genesis, as you would say, by an allusion.

Rainoldes.

An illusion, you should say. But the places both, as well this of Genesis, as that of Deuteronomie, are taken in a mysticall sense of your owne: so that to winne a matter which must be wunne by sound proofe, they are both of like force, because that neyther is of any. For the literall sense of that in Deuteronomie doth concerne the Iewes: to whom the Lorde spake it by his seruant Moses. Now, how dangerous it is to buyld, as vponupon scripture, thinges, which are not grounded vponupon y^e literal sense thereof: we may learne by the mysticall sense of that place, which a Pope giueth; and no common Pope, but Innocentius the third, the Father of the Lateran-councel, in which your popish Shrift and Transsubstantiation were enacted first. He, in a decretal (which is enrolled in y^e hc. per venerabilem. extra. qui sint filij legitimi.canon law, as a rule of the gouernemēt of y^e Church for euer) doth bring foorth that same place of Deuteronomie, to proue that the Pope may exercise tēporal iurisdiction not onelyonly in his owne dominion, but in other countries too, on certaine causes. And, *Sané, cum Deu…eronomi…, lex secunda interpretetur: ex vi vocabuli comprobatur, vt quod ibi decernitur in nouo Testamento de beat obseruari. A principle for a Pope.because Deuteronomi… is the second lawe, by interpretation: it is proued (saith he) by the force of the worde, that what is there decreed ought to be obserued in the newe Testament. Upon the which principle he doth expound it thus: that the place which the Lord hath chosen, is Rome: the Leuiticall Priestes are his brethren, the Cardinals: the iudge is himselfe, the vicar of Christ: the iudgements are of three sortes; the firs…, betweene blood and blood, is meant of 1Criminale, & ciuile.criminall & ciuil causes; the last, betweene plague and plague, of 2Ecclesiasticum, & criminale.ecclesiastical and criminall; the midle, betweene cause & cause, pertaineth vntounto 3Tam ecclesiasticum, …uam ….both ecclesiasticall & ciuill. In the which when any thing shalbe hard or doubtfull: recourse must be had to the iudgement of the See Apostolike (that is, of Rome:) whose determination if any man presumptuously refuse to obey, he is adiudged to dye, that is, to be cut off, as a dead man, from the communion of the faithfull by excommunication. Lo: this is a mysticall sense of that place, which you alleaged out of Deuteronomie. It runneth verie roundly with the Popes supremacie. But Christian States (I hope) will hold the literall sense against it. For if they allow this doctrine of Pope Innocentius, as catholike: the Pope must be supreme head of all Christians, both in ecclesiasticall causes and ciuill. The *2. Thess. 2.7.mysterie of iniquitie did worke verie fast, when the chiefest mysteries of the Romish faith were built vponupon such mystical senses.

Hart.

I know that the misticall senses of the scripture are of no strength to conuince an aduersarie. But the literall sense of that which I alleaged doth proue the point in question. For there lyeth often times, within the literall, an other sense hidden: which is not directly vttered, and plainely, but is gathered and inferred by the force of argument. As, for example, sExod. 3.6.God said to comfort Moses and the Israelites, I am the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Iacob. These wordes in the first sense, doo signifie the couenant that God made with Abraham and with Abrahams seede, whom hée chose to be his seruants, and promised he would bée their God. But tMat. 22.32.Christ alleageth them to proue (against the Sadduces) the resurrectiō of the dead. Which he doth conclude by consequēce of reason. God is not the God of the dead, but of the liuing. He is the God of Abraham ▪ Therefore Abraham is not dead. Abraham is a man consisting of two partes, the soule and the bodie. If Abraham then liue, and yet his bodie be dead: his bodie must rise againe, to the end that God may iustly be called the God, not of Abrahams soule, but of Abraham. Wherefore, in that God is called the God of Abraham, it followeth (by discourse) that the bodies of men shall bée raysed from death to life. Is not this reason conteined in the literall sense of the scripture, from which it is deduced?

Rainoldes.

Yes: and is of force to proue the point in controuersie. For whatsoeuer followeth necessarily of the literall sense: that is as true and sound as the sense, whereof it followeth. But how will you gather so the Popes supremacie from the place in Deuteronomie.

Hart.

By a reason, which I ground vponupon the likenes and proportion of the Church of Christ to the children of Israell. For if the Israelites had a high Priest to be their iudge in matters of difficultie and doubt, betweene blood and blood, betweene cause & cause, betweene plague and plague: why should not we semblably hauehave a hie Priest to bée the iudge in our causes?

Rainoldes.

This reasō is drawn from a similitude: that, as it was amongst the Iewes in the olde Testament; so must it bée amongst Christians in the new. Logicians say, that similitudes do halt of one foote. But this doth halt of both. For neither was the high Priest amongst the Iewes, iudge of all those matters: nether doth it follow thereof, although he had béene, that amongst Christians there must a high priest bée likewise iudge of all. Els, it must be lawfull for all your priestes to marry. For uLeuit. 21.7·it was so amongst the Iewes. And Masse must be be saide no where but at Rome. For the Iewes xDeut. 12.14.might not sacrifice, but in the place which the Lord had chosen. And yDeut. 16.16.all the males, amongst the Iewes, must goe thither eueryevery yeare thrise. Which were ouermuch for all your males, to Rome. Yet must they doo it by your reason. For it is written in Deuteronomie. And because *Deuteronomium: of the greeke words, foreign.Deuteronomie is the second law by interpretation: the force of the word proueth, that, what is there decreed, ought to be obserued in the new Testament, saith Pope Innocentius.

Hart.

The condicion of Christians is not in all respectes like vntounto the Iewes, nor Rome vntounto Ierusalem. And why it is not like in the matters which you mention: there may bée reasons giuen.

Rainoldes.

May there be reasons giuen? Then reasons may be giuen, why your reason is naught. But, that you may sée what a lame thing it is: marke the pointes whereon it standeth. First, the high Priest (you say) is the iudge, to whom, for the deciding of hard and doubtfull controuersies, the Lord doth send the Iewes. This the scripture saith not: but maketh a difference betwéene the iudge and the Priest. For it giueth sentence of death, vponupon him, who refuseth to harken 1foreignto the Priest, or to the iudge. Wherein, by disioyning the Priest from the iudge, it declareth plainely that the Priest was not the same that the iudge.

Hart.

Our commō editiō in Latin doth not reade it so: but in this sort: he that shal presumptuously refuse to obey Sacerdotis …mperio: exiudicis decreto.the cō mandement of the Priest, by the decree of the iudge shall that man die. You sée it is here, the commandement of the Priest: & the decree of the iudge is an other point. It is not, as you cite it, the Priest, or the iudge.

Rainoldes.

It is not so in your Latin, which man hath translated. But it is so in the Hebrew, writen by the Spirite of God.

Hart.

But we hauehave a decree of the Councell of Trent, zConcil. Trident. Session. 4.that our old and common edition in Latin shall be taken as authenticall, in publike lectures, disputations, sermons and expositions: and that *Nemo illam reiicere quouis praetextu audeat vel praesumat.no man may dare or presume to reiect it vnderunder any pretense. If no man may reiect it vnderunder anye pretense: then not vnderunder pretense of the Hebrew text. And that for great reason. For the Hebrewe Bibles, which are extant now, are shamefully corrupted in many places by the Iewes, of spite and malice against Christians: as Bishop Lindan. de opt. gen. interpret. scriptur. lib. 1. cap. 2.Lindan sheweth largely and learnedly, in the defense of that decrée of the Trēt-councell.

Rainoldes.

This is a shamefull sclaunder brewed by Satan, and set a broch by Lindan; to the intent, that errours, which hauehave preuailed in Poperie, either by the faulte of the Latin translator, or by the ouer sighte of them who hauehave mistaken him, should not be discouered and put to shame by the light of the Hebrew truth. And this shall appeere by his arguments and dealings, if you will sift them in particular. If in generall onelyonly you meane to vse his name to discredite the truth, as bStaplet. princ. doct. l. 11. c. 12.your Doctor doth: I will send both you, and him, for an answere to three of the learnedst and fittest iudges of this matter, that your church hath, euen Isaac Leuita, Arias Montanus, and Payua Andradius. Of whom cIohan. Isaac Leu. German. defensio veritatis Hebra icae sacrarum scripturarum aduersus libros tres reuerendi D. Wilhelmi Lindani quos de optimo scripturas interpretandi genere inscripfit.the first, being Lindans owne maister, and professor of the Hebrue tongue in the vniuersitie of Coolen, hath writen three bookes in defense of the Hebrew truth against the cauils of his scholler. dBenedict. Arias Montanus de varia in Hebraicis libris lectione: &, de exemplari psalterii Anglicani. In sacro appatatu Regiorum Biblior. Tom. 6.The next, for his rare skill of tongues and artes, was put in trust by king Philip to set forth the Bible in Hebrew, Chaldee, Greeke and Latin; wherein he hath reproued that treatise of Lindan, and disclosed his folly. eDiegu. Payuae d'Andrada de…ensio fidei …ridentin. lib. 4.The last, was the chiefest of the Diuines and Doctors, at the Councell of Trent. The decrées wherof though he hauehave defended, and namely that which you mention: yet not so, but he hath withall con…uted them, who say, that the Iewes hauehave corrupted the Hebrew text. Your cause (M. Hart) beginneth to be desperate, when it can finde no coouert▪ but such as your owne patrones are ashamed off.

Hart.

I hauehave not read th…se mens discourses. But certainely what soeuer they say for the rest: neither they nor you shall be euer able to proue, *Staplet. princ. doctr. l. 11. c. 12.that the Iewes hauehave not corrupted the Hebrew t…xt in the one and twentéeth Psalme, or fPsal. 22.17.two and twentéeth as they number it. For where it should be read (as our Latin hath it, and the Greeke also) they hauehave pearced my hands and my feete: the Hebrues now do reade, not Caaru, that is, they hauehave pearced; but Caari, that is, as a Lion; as a Lion my hands and my feete. Whereby, a notable prophecie describing so plainely the maner and kind of the passion of Christ should bée taken out of our hands through the trechery of the Iewes, if wée should folow the Hebrew text as it is now. But it is so manifestly knowne to be corrupted: that your selues, though allowing the Hebrew, as authenticall, yet folowe it not in this place, in your English Bibles.

Rainoldes.

This is the onelyonly argument, that gDe opt. gen. interpret. script. lib. 1. cap. 6.Lindan hath of any shew, to proue, that the Iewes hauehave corrupted the Hebrew text. But if it be weighed with an euen ballance: you shall find it a meere cauill. For what will you say of your owne selues? Did the Church of Rome corrupt the Latin text in the third of Genesis, Gen. 3.15.where it is read of the woman, she shall bruse thy head: for that which should be read of thewomans séed, he shall bruse thy head?

Hart.

Some of your men say so. But they do great iniury to the Church therin.

Rainoldes.

They hauehave as great cause, at least, if not greater, to say this of Romanistes, as you the other of the Iewes. For if▪ we match the prophecies; this is more notable,1De opt. gen. interpret. Scrip. lib. 3 cap. 9. which is corrupted in your Latin: of the victorie of Christ ouer Satan, and ours through him. If we compare errors; this is more manifest: in so much that it is proued to be an error euen by Lindan also, not onelyonly by kAugustin. Steuchus in recognit. Genes. ad verit. Heb. Andrad. defens. sid. Trident. lib. 4.others; and the Hebrue text, with the Chaldee paraphrase, and the Greeke translation, do all make against it, as lIn … lection. Bibl. edition. vulgat Regiorū Biblior. Tom. 6.the Diuines of Louan graunt.

Hart.

But this might créepe in by some humane ouersight, or negligence of scriueners: as sundry such errours hauehave crept in to writen bookes of all sortes, euen in the best copies. The words [ipsa] and [ipse] in which the variance lyeth, doo not so greatly differ, but that a man might easily mistake the one for the other,

Rainoldes.

No more do the wordes 1foreignCaaru, & 2foreignCaari. The differēce is as smal. Wherfore if the one might be an ouersight of scriueners in the Latin, as you say, and truely: why might not the other be likewise in the Hebrew, as it is gessed by mDefension. fidei Tridēt. lib. 4.Andradius. And that it was so, it is declared at large by nIn praefat. ad lectorem de varia in Hebraicis libris lectione: … de Masoreth ratione atque vsu.Arias Montanus: who for his singular knowledge and iudgement both in artes and tongues, was chosen, (as I said) to ouersée the setting foorth of that famous Bible in Hebrewe, Chaldee, Greeke, and Latin, which was printed at Anwerpe, with the approbation of your *Pius the fifth in praefat. Regior. Biblior. and Gregory the thirteenth, praefat. Ar. Montan. …lucid. in nou. Test.Popes and Doctors. For (in the sixth tome of that worke) he sheweth, that, when the Iewes returned into their countrey after their captiuitie of seuentie yeares in Babylon: it befell vntounto them, partly by occasion of their long troubles which did distract their mindes, partly by corruption of their natiue tongue which was growne out of kind, first into the Chaldee and afterward into the Syriake, that they neither knewe nor pronounced so wel the words of the scripture, writen (as the maner was) without vowels. Whereby it came to passe that in the writing of them their crept in some faulte, either through iniury of the times, or by reason of troubles which fell vponupon the people, or by negligence of some scriueners. But this inconuenience was met withall afterward by most learned men: such as Esdras was, and afterward Gamaliel, Ioseus, Eleazar, and other of great name: who prouided by common trauell with great care and industry, that the text of scripture and the true reading thereof, should be preserued most sound and vncorrupt. And from these men, or from their instruction, being receaued and poolished by their scholers in the ages folowing, there came (saith he) as we iudge, that most profitable treasure which is called 1foreign traditio, vel, traditionalis, quód tradat abunde & fideliter varias. Hebraicorum Bibliorum lectiones, quaecun— que vnquam fuere.Masoreth, that is to say, a deliuery, because it doth deliuer aboundantly and faithfully all the diuers readings (that euer were) of the Hebrewe Bibles, Wherein there appeareth an euident token of the prouidence of God, for the preseruation of the sacred bookes of scripture whole, and sound: that the Masóreth hath beene kept till our time these many hundred yeares with such care and diligence, that 2Nullam vel minimam in variis exemplaribus discrepanti am admisisse doprche…sus vnquam.in sundry copies of it (which hauehave bene writen) no difference was euer found; and it hath beene added in all the writen Bibles that are in Europe, Afrike, or Asia, each of them agreing throughly therein with other, euen as it is printed in the Venice-bibles, to the great wonder of them who reade it. Now, in this Masoreth, made so long ago, so diligently writen, so faithfully kept, in so many countryes, through so many ages, as Arias Montanus witnesseth, the Iewes them selues acknowledge by their owne testimonie, that where in common bookes it is read Caari, in certaine it is Caaru. Wherefore, if some Iewish scriueners (who wrote out bookes) depraued it of malice, and spite, which might be, though they who accuse them doo bring neither autour, nor time, nor any sure argument to proue it, but if some depraued it: yet, séeing their Masôreth doth note the diuerse reading, and in part doth iustifie that which is the truer: it is hard to charge them (as you doo) with corrupting of the Hebrewe text. Much harder, then if we should charge your Romish church, with corrupting of the Latin, where you read [ipsa] in stéed of [ipse,] not he, but she shall bruse thy head.

Hart.

Not so: for we hauehave kept also that reading [ipse] euen in our vulgar Latin translation. For oIn Bibliis excusis Antuerp. 8. Plantino.the Diuines of Louan do note that it is found in two writen copies. And we do confesse it to be more agréeable both to the Hebrewe text, and the Chaldee paraphrase, & the Greeke translation: yea that S. Ierom read it so too: as you may see in the Notations of pNotationes in sacra Biblia, quibus, va…iantia discrepantibus exemplaribus loca discutiuntur: autore Francisco Luca Brugensi, S. Theologiae Liccutiato.Franciscus Lucas, to which our latin Bibles (set forth by the Diuines of Louan) doo referre you.

Rainoldes.

Yet Franciscus Lucas doth wrangle still about it: and saith, that all the Latin copies, which they could finde doo read it [ipsa;] and of the two, which you mention, he doubteth, whether one did folow the Latin or the Hebrewe; and hee maketh shew of proofe that the Hebrew may well agree to the Latin, with a litle hammering of it. Yea, and that is more, as in al y^e Bibles, y^t I hauehave séene of yours, y^e Latin hath ipsa, not ipse, shee, not he; though qAndradius, and Lindanus, in the places afore alleagedyour greatest frends hauehave wished you (forshame) to mēd it: so in an Hebrue text of y^e famous rTom. 8. in Hebraitis Biblijs. q…bus Latina interpretatio inse…a est.Bible of king Philip, (which but now I mētioned) y^e word [1foreign he] is altered according to the latin [2foreign shee;] and that not of errour but of purpose, as it is witnessed by sNotationibus in Gene. in cap. 3. ver. 15. Guido Fabricius excudi foreign …uraui t quanquam errore positum foreign sitFranciscus Lucas. Which is greater boldnes in corrupting the Hebrue, thē you can iustly charge y^e Iewes with. But if it besufficient to cléere both y^e Latin edition, & your selues, y^t you hauehave found a booke, or two, wherein [ipse] is read as your Diuines say: how much more iustly may we cléere both the Hebrue text and the Iewes, who, (as it is noted in their Masóreth) found sundrie bookes with [Caaru.] Chiefly, sith they commend the bookes, as 1foreignwel corrected, which had that reading: you commend not yours. And they 2foreignreproue a note, which some had made rashly, to bring in the other reading in steed of that: you make such notes your selues. And they (vponupon the text, where [Caari] is read) doo note 3foreignthat the word hath another meaning. then where it signifieth [as a Lion:] what note you so of [ipsa?] And you these many ages hauehave kept in your Bibles a faulty reading, without any mention of the true: they hauehave done the contrarie in theirs of auncient time. Finally, where you can finde but two copies, in which the Latin edition doth read ipse, not ipsa: if yet you can finde two, (for of them you doubt:) they, beside the copies extant at the time that the Masóreth was writen, hauehave had sundrie amongst them euen till our dayes, in which it is read not Caari, but Caaru. For it is auouched out of many singular good copies, by tDefens. fidei Trident. lib. 4▪Andradius: & uIn defens. verit. Hebr. sacrar. scriptur. lib. 2.Isaac protesteth that hée saw such a one him selfe with his grandfather: and xDe arcanis catholicae verit. lib. 8. cap. 17.Petrus Galatinus saith, that euen yet it is found so writen in certaine copies most auncient. Whereby you may sée withall, how vniustly you cast vsus in the téeth, that our English Bibles folow not the Hebrue text in this place. For tell me, I pray. In the English translation of the new Testament (which you at Rhemes did trauell in) translated you neuer a worde, that you found not in the common text of the Latin edition?

Hart.

Yes: yThe preface of the Rhemish Testament.when by the Greeke or the Fathers wee saw it was a manifest faulte of the writers heretofore, that mistooke one word for another.

Rainoldes.

Yet, when you did so, you zThe title of the Rhemish Testament.translated faithfully out of the authentical Latin into English.

Hart

What els? Because we did it according to the best corrected copies of the Latin.

Rainoldes.

And why say you then, that wee translate not according to the Hebrue, when we translate according to the best corrected copies of the Hebrue? Specially, when we, beside y^e Masoreth, do follow the consent of written copies so many: where you *As namely Heb. 13.2. latacrunt. whereon the Diuines of Louan note, they found it in one written copie. In Biblijs excusis Antaer…. … ▪ Planti….sometime translate that which was found in one, though all the rest were against it. But thus shall they dash their foote against the stones, who will runne when they are blinde.

Hart.

Nay you are blinde rather, who doo call vsus blinde. We can speake such wordes as easily of you, as you may of vsus.

Rainoldes.

As easily: but not as iustly. For it is notorious, that, in this opinion, which you hold out of Stapleton, and he …ut of Lindan, both they and you are blinded: what through ignorance of truth, touching the Hebrue text; what through fansie to error, in the Latin translation. Through ignorance of the Hebrue: in that you say, the Iewes hauehave shamefully corrupted it. Which aPra…fat ad lectorem de var…a in Hebra. lib lectione. Regior. Biblior. Tom. 6.Arias Montanus (no partiall iudge herein) 1A n…re fo… Gregory Martin. who should hauehave learned rather of Arias Monta…us to search and to r…uerence the truth of the Hebrue te…t: then to ca…l at it, and lewdly …tan…er it of falshood. In his Discouer. chap. 22.noteth to be their saying who know not the Masoreth. Through fansie to the Latin: in that you account of it, as authenticall. And refusing the originall text, vnderunder colour, that one place therof hath in some copies a fault in one letter: you preferre a translation which hath many such throughout all copies, as bIn va…. lection. b. latin. Biblior. edit v…lgat. Reg. Bibl. Tom. 6.the Diuines of Louan shew; which hath (by confession of your owne cDe op. gen. interpt. scrip. lib. 3. cap. 4.Lindan) monstrous corruptions of all sortes; which is printed so, euen among your selues, that scarce one copie can bee found, that hath one booke of scripture whole & vndefiled: in which there are dcap. 1.many pointes that are translated too intricately, and darkely, yea some improperly, some abusiuely, some not so fully, yea not so well and truely; and (to be short) which hath ecap. 2.sundrie places thrust out from their plaine and naturall sense, chiefly in the Psalmes and the 2Which yet our countriemen at Rheme… hauehave … & … Latin hauehave made a … English.new Testament: as Lindan (not content to vouch it of him selfe) doth prooue by the testimonies of the auncient Fathers, Austin, and Ierom, and Hilarie, and Victorinus. Are not they blinde, who preferre a translation, and such a translation before the originall? yea, who gConcil. Trident. Sess. 4. Si quis libros ipsos (veteris & noui Testamenti) integros cum omnibus suis partibus, prout in veteri vulgara Latina editione habentur, pro sacris & canonicis non susceperit: anathema sit.bind men to receiue it as authentical, or rather as holy as sacred, as canonicall, vnderunder paine of damnation. And if they thinke themselues not to be blinde in that they do so: are they not so much the blinder (like gIo…. 9.41.the Pharises) because they say, we see.

Hart.

You take much paines in vaine with this talke about the Hebrue ▪ For I will not yéelde one iot from the decrée of the Councell of Trent. Wherefore if you can proue out of our authenticall latin translation, that the Priest is not meant by the iudge, in that place of Deuteronomie: I will harken to you. Otherwise you may alleage the Hebrue against the Iewes: for it shall neuer moue me.

Rainoldes.

I am sorie, if you be so frowardly set. Yet well fare hDefens. fid. Trident. lib. 4.Andradius, who thinketh that the Councel of Trent did not meane either to condemne the Hebrue trueth (as he calleth it,) or to acquite the latin translation from all error, when they named it authenticall: but onelyonly, that the latin hath no such error, by which any pestilent opinion in faith and maners may be gathered. But if you will not be moued with the Hebrue: what say you to the 1foreignChaldee paraphrase? Or if that also hauehave as small credit, because it expresseth the Hebrue so faithfully in the bookes of Moses: what say you to the Greeke of the seuentie interpreters? Which iIrenaeus aduers. haeres. l. 3. c. 25. Hilar. in Psal. 2. Epiphan. de mensur. & pond. Augustin. de ciuitat. Dei. l. 18. c. 43. Cyprian doth follow them euen in this point also, …ran…ating it, sacerdotem autiudicem: cp. 40. & 55. & 62. & 65. & 69.the auncient Fathers who either knew not your latin at all, or had it not in such price, did marueylously estéeme off. In 2foreign.them it is as in the Hebrue, to the Priest or the iudge: whereby it is apparant they thought the iudge, one; and the Priest, another. Will you be moued by them: or may I alleage the Greeke against the Grecians too?

Hart.

I reuerence the Greeke of the seuentie interpreters. But I thinke it might be corrupted more easily, then the latin might: yea, and that it hath béene so in many places. Wherefore I appeale still vntounto our latin: and will not forsake it vnderunder any pretense.

Rainoldes.

Let vsus examin then (if there bée no remedie) the wordes of your latin. *Qui superbierit nolēs obedi…e sacerdotis imperio: ex decreto iudicis mori…ur homo ille.He that shall presumptuously refuse to obey the commandement of the Priest: by the decree of the iudge shall that man dye. Is there not a difference put, euen by this spéech, betwéene the Priest and the iudge: the Priest, as ecclesiasticall; the iudge as ciuil magistrate; Let the iudge put him to death, who disobeyeth the Priest?

Hart.

I denye not, but the sworde of iustice is giuen to the ciuil magistrate: and so there is a difference betwéene the iudge & the Priest. Yet amongst the Iewes sometimes both the offices did méete in one person, as you may séee by k1. Sam. 4.18.Eli.

Rainoldes.

But this was verie rare, & extraordinarie. Now the Law, which God prescribed in Deuteronomie by his seruant Moses, did touch the common state and ordinarie gouernment of the people of Israel. For both it is generall without limitation of persons or times, as to be kept still for the ending of their controuersies, not onelyonly in the dayes of Eli: and it is written, that when king Iosaphat restored the state decayed, l2. Chron. 1…. ver. 8.in Ierusalem hee set of the Leuites and the Priestes, and of the chiefe of the families of Israell, for the iudgements of the Lorde and for controuersies. Which to hauehave béene done in respect of that law: it appeareth by the wordes that he spake vntounto them. mver. 10▪Whatsoeuer controuersie shall come vntounto you, from your brethren who dwell in their cities, betweene blood and blood, betweene law and precept, statutes and iudgements: doo ye admonish them that they offend not against the Lord. Wherefore séeing that the law in Deuteronomie, was made to establish a highest court of iudgement, in which all harder causes ecclesiasticall and ciuil should be determined without appeale farther: the reason and the practise of the law do shew, that, in respect of the two kinds of causes, there were ordained two sortes of men to heare them, ecclesiasticall, and ciuill; the ciuill meant by the iudge, the ecclesiasticall, by the Priest. Who because they were distinct, as in office, so in person too ordinarily: it followeth thereof, that the Priest was not meant by the iudge.

Hart.

Yet the Glosse, expounding that place of Deuteronomie, doth say that by the iudge ▪ is meant the high Priest, euen as I say.

Rainoldes.

But nComment. in 17. Deut,Lyra, and Caietan (as worthie men, as they who compiled the Glosse, if you will heare men) doo say that by the iudge is meant the ciuill magistrate, euen as I say. Which sense of the place is so plaine & certaine: that Carolus Sigonius, the Popes owne historian (in oDe repub. Hebraeor. lib. 6. cap. 7.a booke which *In the yeare of Christ. 158…lately he set foorth at Bononia, with approbation of the Bishoppe, and holy Inquisition, and dedicated to Pope Gregory the thirtéenth, affirmeth that the king is meant by the iudge in that place of Deuteronomie. It may be, M. Hart, that sith you were beyond-sea, they hauehave bethought them selues: and seeing that your Glosse doth goe against the text, they will no longer stand vntounto it. Indéede, if the supremacie belong to the iudge▪ the Prince hath greater right thereto then the Pope. For it is certaine (as I hauehave declared by circumstances of the scripture,) that the Priest was not meant by the iudge.

Hart.

It skilleth not to my purpose, whether he were, or no. It sufficeth me, that he who refuseth to obey the Priest, must die, by the law. Which is enough to proue the soueraintie of one Priest.

Rainoldes.

Not so. For the name of Priest (in this law) doth signifie the Priestes. Which is cléere, by reason that the punishment of the transgressor hath a relation to the law: and the law doth will men to go to pDeut. 17.9.the Priests: the Priestes, it saith, as of many; not, as of one, the hie Priest. Wherefore, in giuing sentence of death against him, who disobeieth the Priest; it meaneth the Priestes: according to *foreigna kind of spéech, wherin y^e whole is noted by the part. As afterward likewise, qDeut. 18. ver. 3.entreating of the duetie and right of the Priestes, it noteth them in generall by name of the Priest.

Hart.

But here, vponupon mention of the Priest, it foloweth: who doth serue the Lord thy God. By the which title the hie Priest may séeme to hauehave béene namely noted, and seuered from the rest.

Rainoldes.

He might so, were it not that the same title is also giuen rver. 5.afterward to Priestes, generally: yea, where this matter is touched Deut. 21.5.againe of purpose, the Lord thy God hath chosen the Priestes, the sonnes of Leui, to serue him, and to blesse in the name of the Lorde; and by their word shall eueryevery controuersie, and eueryevery plague be tried.

Hart.

Yet you will graunt, (I trust,) that amongst the Priestes there was one chiefe: yea, euen in this matter of highest iudgement in doubtfull causes. Which, (in t2. Chr. 1….11.the same place of Scripture that you brought to expound this,) is shewed by king Iosaphat: saying vntounto them, to whom that iudgement was committed; Amarias the Priest shall be the chiefe ouer you in matters of the Lord.

Rainoldes.

This I will graunt you. But you must graunt me also, that looke what is giuen to him, amongst the Priestes, in matters of the Lord, y^t is, in ecclesiastical: the same, amongst the iudges, is giuen to Zebadias in matters of the king, that is in ciuil causes. For, Iosaphat doth say as well the one, as the other. So that (to come now to the later point of your lame similitude,) if Christians must hauehave a soueraine Bishop ouer all, because the Iewes had one chiefe Priest ▪ then Christians must hauehave a soueraine Prince ouer all, because the Iewes had one chiefe iudge. And as all harder causes, at least of religion must be referred to the Pope: so all of ciuill matters must be referred to the Emperour. And as, amongst the Iewes, the Priest and iudge were resident in the place which the Lord had chosen: so the Pope and the Emperour must both abide in Rome. Which uOnuphrius in vit. Pont. Pauli tert. Pontifex ex quibusd…m C… sa…is verbis veritus, ne Caesar Romae diu commoratus eius occupandae illecebtis caperetur, clam Bellai…m & Stephanum Columna, vt in Italia… Gallos accirent, emisit.Pope Paule the third did feare that Emperour Charles the fifth would hauehave done. But he sent for the French men to kéepe him out. If Gregorie (that now is Pope) be better minded, and will resigne his ciuill State vntounto the Emperour with the Palace of Vaticane, and Castell of Saint Angelo: then may the reason, which you ground vponupon the law in Deuteronomie, serue you with greater shew. Howbeit, euen in that case it would rather further the Emperour then the Pope: because it mentioneth the iudge, as one; the Priestes, as many.

Hart.

It is not necessary for the gouernment of the common-wealth among Princes, that any one of them be Prince ouer all. But as the king of Iuda was in his owne kingdome: so eueryevery Prince is highest in his own dominion.

Rainoldes.

Neither it is necessarie for the administration of the Church, amongst Bishops, that any one of them be Bishop ouer all. But as the hie Priest was chiefe ouer the Iewes, so is eueryevery Bishop ouer his owne charge.

Hart.

Nay, the case of the Church and common-wealth herein are vnlike, and different. Because that common-weales may be vpholden, although they be gouerned not onelyonly by diuerse kings, and ciuill magistrates, but also by diuerse ordinances and lawes. But the Church as it hath one faith, in all Christians: so ought it to hauehave the same lawes and ordinances of religion in all countries.

Rainoldes.

This difference and vnlikenes betwéene the Church and common-wealth, is lesser then you imagine, if it bee marked well. For iustice, and right, in giuing eueryevery one his due, should hauehave the same place in the common-wealth, which faith and religion claimeth in the Church. Now, as in religion there are some things of substance, and some of ceremonie: so there are some pointes essentiall in iustice, and some accidentall. The essentiall pointes of iustice are the same in lawes of all common-wealthes. For what is *C…. de Legib. lib. 1. …. Nam & … legib…s.a law, but a diuine ordinance, commanding thinges honest, and forbidding the contrarie? The accidentall pointes doo and may vary according to circumstances of places, times, and persons. So lawes of religion must be the same for substance in all Christian Churches: in ceremonies they may differ, as in xEuseb. histor. …ccles. l. 5. c. 23. Socrat. histor. …ccles. l. 5. c. 21.the primitiue Church they did. Wherefore the same faith, and lawes of religion do no more inforce all churches to obey one Bishop, then the same right and ordinances of iustice do require one Prince to rule all common-wealthes. But what soeuer your fansie make you thinke of this point: the place in Deuteronomie adiudging them to death who disobey the Priest, can not helpe your fansie, though it had béene meant of no other Priest, but of the high Priest onelyonly. For Christ, whē he sent his Apostles to preach the Gospell, said vntounto them: yMat. 10.14.Whosoeuer shall not receaue you, nor heare your wordes, when yee depart out of that house, or that city, shake of the dust of your feete. Truely I say vntounto you, it shall be easier for them of the land of Sodome and Gomorrha in the day of iudgement, then for that citie. Which wordes being spoken to all the Apostles, not to Peter onelyonly, and therefore belonging to all their successors, as well as to Peters: doo shew that eueryevery Bishop, hath as great authoritie giuen him by Christ, as the Priest had by that law in Deuteronomie. In so much that zEpist. 40. & 55. & 62. & 65. & 69.Cyprian doth alleage it often, (by a better reason of proportiō then yours,) to proue the authoritie of Bishops each in seuerall ouer the flockes committed to them.

Hart.

And what if a matter of religion be harder then Bishops each in seuerall be able to decide it? What if they disagree, and will not yéeld one to another? Doth not wisedome shew, that there must be a chiefe iudge to ende the controuersie? to keepe the truth of faith, and peace of the Church, that it be not pestered with heresies and schismes?

Rainoldes.

The wisedome of God hath committed that chieftie of iudgement (so to call it) not to the soueraine power of one, but to the common care of many. For when there was a controuersie in the Church of Antioche about the obseruation of the law of Moses, some Iewes teaching contrarie to that which Paule and Barnabas taught: aAct. 15.2.they ordeined that Paule and Barnabas, and certaine other of them, should go vp to Ierusalem to the Apostles and Elders about that question. And so by their common agreement and decrée, the controuersie was ended, the truth of faith kept, and peace maintained in the Church. After which example, bEuseb. histor. eccle. lib. 5. cap. 14. & 21. & 22. lib. 7. cap. 26. & 28. Cyprian. …p. 6. & 14. & 31. & 53. & 72. & 75. Concil. An…vr. Gangr. A…ioc. Laodic. & caet▪the Bishops (that succéeded them) made the like assemblies, on the like occasions: and by common conference tooke order for such matters, both of doctrine, and discipline, as concerned in common the state of their Churches. So did the Apostles and Apostolike men prouide against schismes & heresies. Their wisedome reached not vntounto your policie of one chiefe iudge.

Hart.

The profit of Councels and Synods of Bishops is very great, we graunt. For many eyes see more then one. But it wil be greater, if they be all counsellors vntounto one gouernor, then if they gouerne eche his owne, and all in common. For reason doth teach vsus, that the regiment of one, which wee call a monarchie, is better and worthier then the regiment of many: as the Philosophers shew, who write of Common-weales.

Rainoldes.

Reason, is a notable helpe of mans weakenes, if it be obedient to faith, as a handmaide; not rule it, as a maistresse. And humane artes, wherein the Philosophers hauehave séene many sparkles of the truth of God by the light of reason, are profitable instruments to set forth the truth, so farre as they hauehave peace, not warre, with Gods worde. But if the Philosophers hauehave erred, as c1. Cor. 2.14▪naturall men, who neither doo conceiue the things of the spirit of God, nor can know them; if reason hauehave her eyes (as it were) dazeled, because dIoh. 1.5.the light shineth in darkenesse, and the darkenesse did not comprehend it: then is it to be feared e2. Cor. 11.3.least, as the Serpent seduced Eue through his suttletie, so he beguile you by reason; and you forget that lesson of the holy Ghost, Col. 2.8.beware least there be any man that spoyle you through philosophie. Which I say not so much in respect of this point of the Church gouernment, as of your whole doctrine: a mightie ground whereof in your Schoolemen, is philosophie; and gCampian in the fifth art. of his epist.your Iesuites challenge doth offer to proue it by naturall and morall reason. For here if I would iustifie the cause by Philosophers, it is …asily shewed, that the Churches state is a most perfite monarchie: wherein Christ is king; his lawes, are the scriptures; his officers, are the Bishops; not ordained to bée assistantes vntounto one deputie, but to be deputies all them selues, euen h1. Pet. 5.2.Pastors of his flock, & iHeb. 2….17.guides & k…. 10.…8.rulers of his Church. Howbeit, if it differ from the kingly states of worldly cōmon-weales, which philosophie writeth off, as it doth in part: Philosophers must not maruel, sith lIoh. 18.36.Christ hath declared his kingdōe is not of this world. Indéede, the Apostles thought of such a kingdome: mMat. 20.26.but Christ saide, it should not be so amongst them, as with the Princes of the Gentiles. Which sentence of Christ your Popes not vnderstanding, and wéening the Apostles to be forbidden nothing but an heathnish tyrannie, and liking well a monarchie because Philosophers prayse it: they hauehave raised a nNicol. Sander. de visib. Monar.visible monarchie of their owne, in steede of Christes monarchie; and hauehave chaunged his kingdome, which is not of this world, into a worldly kingdome, the kingdome of the Romanes, as oFrancis. Turrian. de eccle. & ordin. minist. eccl. l. 1. c. 2.a Iesuit calleth it. Neither contenting them selues with such a kingdome, as Princes of the Gentiles had: they make them selues Princes *Super gentes & regna, saith Pope Iohn the two & twētieth in extrauagant. commun.ouer all the kingdomes and nations of the earth. Which is a greater monarchie then Philosophers like off: as I coulde proue out of them, if the Popes cause were to be handled in their schooles. But because I list not to trifle out the time with idle discourses about pointes of State; as your pSand. visib. monar. l. 3. c. 3 Bellar. controuers. 4. quaest. 1.Rabbines doo, to proue y^t a monarchie is the best regiment: therefore against such reasons I laye that exception which qDe praescript. aduers. haeret.Tertullian did of olde against heretikes: What hath Athens to do with Ierusalem? the schoole of philosophy with the Church of Christ? The duetie of Christians is to search and weigh in matters of faith, not what reason, but what religion; not what the Philosophers, but what the Prophets, & Apostles; not what mans fansie, but what the Spirit of God doth say. And so the former parts of your maine argument for the Popes supremacie, are too weake to proue it. The last is weaker then they both. For, that there should be one chiefe and highest Pastor of the Church in earth: it hath some reason by philosophie. That Peter was appointed by Christ to be that one: it hath some shew of scripture. But that the Pope succéedeth Peter therein, it hath no shew of scripture; and (I trow) you will not proue it by philosophie.

Hart.

That the Pope succéedeth Peter therein:The third Diuision. it is a cléere case. For sIn Chronic…Eusebius writeth, that Peter, hauing laide the foundation of the Church of Antioche, (where he sate seauen yeares) went to Rome: & (preaching the gospell there fiue and twentie yeares) continued Bishop of that citie. Now, the Pope is Bishop of Rome: that you graunt. Then I conclude thereof, that he succedeth Peter. For Peter continued Bishop of that citie, as it is witnessed by Eusebius.

Rainoldes.

I desired that I might heare, Thus saith the Lord: and you told me that I should heare it. In the first parte of your argument, you fell from it, to, Thus saith the Pope. In the next you mended it, with, Thus say Philosophers. Now you proue the last, by, Thus saith Eusebius. And this is more sightly somewhat, then the former: but no stay of faith, without the word of God.

Hart.

You ought not to cast off Eusebius so lightly, as though he were of no credit. For he is the best and auncientest historian of all that hauehave traueled in setting forth the stories of the Church of Christ. And the paines, the diligence, the reading and iudgement, which in his Chronicle he shewed, was great and wonderfull. In so much that gLoeor. Theolog. lib. 11. cap. 6.Canus is perswaded of him, that no ecclesiastical Gréeke or Latin autor could hauehave left more excellent monuments of times.

Rainoldes.

I like of Eusebius, as of a good historian: and I allow the prayse giuen him by Canus. But hcap. 4.Canus hath a good conclusion withall, touching both him, and al historians, to wéet, that *Praeter autotores sacros nullus histori…us certus esse potest, id est, idoneus ad faci endam certam in Theologia fidem.beside the writers of the scripture, no historian can be sure; that is to say, able to make sure and certaine proofe in Diuinitie. A thing so apparant and euident of it selfe, that hée saith, it is not to be confirmed with his proofes. OnelyOnly, he reherseth to the same effect a true & pleasant spéeche of iIn vit. ….Flauius Vopiscus: who, beginning to write stories, said that he enterprised it the more boldly, because he should hauehave companions in lying; sith he knew no historian, that had not lyed in somewhat. Now, if this be incident vntounto all historians, except them of scripture: who wrote by the Spirit of God, and not of man: then Eusebius also, though a good historian, might be subiect to it. Which you must the rather be perswaded of him, because kDist. 15. c. Sanc… Romana.Pope Gelasius (in a Councell of seuentie Bishops) reproued his storie, as faultie. Which reproofe your l…. 11. cap 6.Canus alloweth as iust, & giueth reasons of it: namely, for mEuseb. histo. eccles. l. 1. c. 14.his reporting of Christes epistle to Agbarus, and nl. 1. c. 1. and so forth cō monly.his auouching many things by Clemens Alexandrinus; wheras the fable of the one, and the works of the other are reproued by oDist. 15. c. San… Romana.the Councell,

Hart.

These faultes, and the rest, that Canus doth touch, are in the historie of Eusebius: which yet not onelyonly Canus but the Councell also commende, as not to be refused altogither. But that which I alleaged is in the Chronicle of Eusebius: a booke, neither noted so by the Councell, and greatly praysed by Canus.

Rainoldes.

The man is one, who wrote them both: and might be ouerséene, as in the one, so in the other. Yea pLib. 11. cap. 6.Canus himselfe, who praiseth his Chronicle, yet praiseth it with this exception, that neither all thinges which Eusebius there reporteth, are true. But men may find some thinges which may bee worthily and truely blamed. As, for example, that he writeth, that Sennacherib who besieged Ierusalem, and Salmanassar who tooke Samaria, were one, and the same man. Which thing to be contrarie to the holy scripture qComment. in Esai. cap. 36.S. Ierom hath shewed. Now this, which I sticke at in the Chronicle of Eusebius, is such an other ouersight: and may be as worthily reproued, as that of Canus; because it is no lesse against the scripture then that. For whereas he saith, that Peter, hauing laid the foundation of the Church of Antioche, (where he sate *In the Chronicle of Eusebiu… it is […iue and twentie:] through the fault of the printers or writen copies which they folowed. For (by the count of yeares, and consent of writers who seem to folow him) it should be seuen onelyonly.seuē yeares) went to Rome, & preaching the Gospell there fiue and twentie yeares cōtinued Bishop of that city: Peter (by this account) should hauehave gone to Antioche about the fourth yeare after Christs death, and there abode seuen yeares, euē till the second yeare of Claudius y^e Emperour, in which he went to Rome. But y^e scripture sheweth, y^t Paule (who was rAct. 9.….not presently conuerted after Christes death) yet sGal. 1.18. Act. 9. ver. …8.after three yeares found Peter at Ierusalē : & Peter, after that, abode within tver. 32.the coastes of Iewrie, first uver. 38.at Lydda, then xver. 43.at Ioppe, then at yAct. 10.48.Caesarea, then zAct. 11.2.at Ierusalem, where aAct. 12. ver. 3.Herode cast him into prison, in y^e second or third yeare of Claudius, as it is likely, (for bver. 23.he died cIoseph Antiquitat. Iudaicar. l. 19. c. 7. where this Herode is called Agrippa. Euseb. hist. ecles. …. 2. c. 10.in the fourth:) when, dAct. 1….22.the Church of Antioche was in the meane season both planted and watered by others, not by Peter. Wherefore, the former braunch of that which Eusebius reporteth touching Peter, that he had sate seuen yeares at Antioche, in the second yeare of Claudius, is flatly contrarie to the scripture. The later is as contrary, that from that yeare forward he did sit at Rome fiue and twentie yeares, that is, all his life time, till he was put to death by Nero. For, (to graunt the vttermost, which may hauehave any shew of reason,) admitt, that he was cast by Herode into prison, in the first yeare of Claudius; before which he could not; for *Ioseph. antiquit. Iudaicar. l. 19. c. 5.Claudius gaue the kingdome of Iewry to Herode. When the Angell had deliuered him out of prison, eAct. 12.17.he went into an other place: whether to Rome or to Antioche, or perhaps to neither, y^e scripture leaueth it vncertaine; but, by the Chronicle of Eusebius, either to Antioche or to Rome. If he went to Antioche, and there abode some yeares, before he came to Rome: then is the second yeare of Claudius past, and his abode at Rome could not bee fiue and twentie yeares. Now, it is certaine that he went to Antioche at that time or some other. For fGal. 2.11.the scripture witnesseth that Paule did there reproue him. But if that were some other time, and from his prison in Ierusalem he went straight to Rome: yet neither could he so be fiue and twentie yeares there. For after hée came thither, a time must be found wherein he was at Antioch; and an other time wherin he was at g1. Pet. 5.13.Babylon; & an other time, wherin he was at hGal. 2.1. & Act. 15.7.Ierusalem, at the Councell of the Apostles; and some yeares after that, iRom. 15.25. Act. 19.21. & 20.22.when Paule wrote to the Romans, kRom. 16.3.amongst the chiefe, whom he saluted, he named not Peter; and some yeares after that, when Paule lAct. 28. ver. 17.came prisoner to Rome, when he mver. 30.abode there certaine yeares, when he nTo the Galat. Ephes. Philip. Colos. Tim. and Philemon.wrote many epistles thence, Peter is not mentioned, nay those thinges are mentioned which would be staines of his Apostleship, if he had béene at Rome. For, oCol. 4.11.Paule saith of others, these onelyonly are my worke-fellowes vntounto the kingdome of God, which hauehave bene a comfort to me:, & p2. Tim. 4.16.at my first answering, no man assisted me, but all forsooke me: I pray God it bee not laid vntounto their charge. Of the which reasons, though some are but probable, yet some are sure proofes, that Peters continuance at Rome was not such, as is reported by Eusebius. And this is so manifest, that, to say nothing of qMethodius▪ in Chronic. Marian. Scot. Chr…. lib. 2. Regino, Chron. lib. 2.auncienter writers, who (to make the scriptures agrée somewhat better with his fiue and twentie yeares abode at Rome,) brought him thither later, and gaue him longer time of life: Onuphrius Panuinius, a Frier of your owne, most deuout to the Pope, most skilfull in antiquities and stories of the Church, acknowledgeth and confirmeth it. For, in the discourses of his Annotations on rDe viti… Pont. …om. Annotat. in vitam B. Petri Apost.Platina, printed at Venice, & afterward at Coolein: 1Apertissim… constat ex actis Apostolorum, & …auli epistola ad Galatas.it is most cleere (saith he) and surely known by the Actes of the Apostles, and Pauls epistle to the Galatians, that, for nine yeares after Christes death, vntill the second yeare of the raigne of Claudius, Peter neuer went out of Iewry. Wherfore if he came to Rome, at that time, as it is agreed amongst all autours that he did: it followeth of necessitie, 2Antiochiae septem annis non sedisse ante aduentum ad vrbem.that hee did not sit seuen yeares at Antioche before he came thither, but that his sitting at Antioche was some other time. Which thing I hauehave resolued on, thus, by the testimonie of most auncient writers. He did come to Rome the second yere of Claudius. From which time there are to the time of his death about fiue and twentie yeares. Wherin, although the auncient writers do say that he sate at Rome: yet doth it not folow thereof that he abode still in the citie. For in the fourth yeare after his comming thither, he returned to Ierusalem: and there was present at the Councell ofthe Apostles. 3Inde Antio…iam prosec…us septem ibidem annis permansit.Thence he went to Antioche, and there continued seuen yeares; vntil that Nero was Emperour. In the beginning of whose raigne, he came againe to Rome: where hee repaired the Romane church, which was decaying. And after that 4Peregrinatio…e per uniuersam Europam fere suscepta.when hee had traueiled almost throughout al Europe, he returned to Rome in the last yeare of the raigne of Nero, and there was put to death. This is the confessiō of your owne Onuphrius, made perhaps against the heare (as I may terme it:) but the light of truth and scripture forced him to it. Wherby you may perceiue that when Eusebius wrote, that Peter sate, first, seuen yeares at Antioch, and fiue and twentie at Rome, after: that befell to him, which Hist…r. lib. 1.Thucydides saith of the old stories of the Grecians; men receyue reportes of thinges done before them from hand to hand, one from another, foreign.without examining & trying them. Some, through a desire (as it is likely) of honouring the Sees of Antioche & Rome, hearing that S. Peter had preached in them both, deuised that he sate seuen yeares in the one, and fiue and twentie in the other. Eusebius fell vponupon it, and wrote it in his Chronicle without farther tryall. But if he had tryed it by the touchstone of scripture: hée would hauehave cast it off, as counterfeite. Which I thinke the rather, because in his storie tHistor. ecclesiast. l. 2. c. 14.he mentioneth y^e coming of Peter to Rome as out of Iurie, not from Antioche, for his first coming thether in the time of Claudius: and for his coming thither againe in Neros time, ul. 3. c. 1he sheweth out of xExposit. in Gene…. Tom. …Origen that it was towarde his end, whē he had preached the gospell to the Iewes in Pontus, Galatia, Cappadocia, Asia, and Bithynia. Wherefore sith Eusebius doth in his storie dissent from his Chronicle, and in his Chronicle dissent from the scripture: you must not blame me if I require a surer proofe then his worde, that Peter was Bishoppe of the Citie of Rome.

Hart.

To talke about the yeares of Peters coming to Rome, or his continuance there, I am not disposed. I leaue it to them, who list to search antiquities. But that he was in Rome, it is a thing vndoubted: the scripture doth witnesse it. For in y^e first epistle of his, the fifth chapter, y1. Pet. 5.13.the Church (saith he) saluteth you, that is in Babylon, coelect, and Marke my sonne. Where your Protestants shew them selues (as in all places, that doo make against them) to be most vnhonest and partiall handlers of Gods worde. The auncient Fathers, namely zIn catalog de scriptoribus ecclesiasticis, verbo Marcus.S. Ierom, aHistor ecclesi…st. lib. 2. c. 14.Eusebius, bin 1. Pet. 5.13.Oecumenius, and many moe agrée, that Rome is meant by the worde Babylon here also, as cin the 16. & 17. chapters.in the Apocalypse: saying plainely that S. Peter wrote this epistle at Rome, which is called Babylon for the resemblance it had to Babylon that great citie in Chaldaea (where the Iewes were captiues) for magnificence, monarchie, resort and confusion of all peoples and tongues, and for that it was, before Christ and long after, the seate of all Ethnike superstition and idolatry, & the sl…ughter-house of the Apostles & other Christian men, the heath… Emperours then kéeping their chief residence there. This being most plaine & consonant to y^t which foloweth of S. Marke, whom all the ecclesiasticall histories agree to hauehave béene Peters scholer at Rome, & that he there wrote his gospell: yet you, *As the Rhemists say: who charge the Protestants with al this, in their Annotat. on … Pet. 5.13. and Rom. 16.16.fearing hereby the sequele of Peters or the Popes supremacie at Rome, deny that euer he was there, or that this epistle was writen there, or that Babylon doth here signifie Rome. But you say that Peter wrote this epistle at Babylon in Chaldaea, though you neuer read either in scriptures, or other holy or prophane history, that hee was euer in that citie. But sée your shamelesse partialitie. Here, Babylon (say you) is not taken for Rome: because it would folow that Peter was at Rome, and so forth. But in the Apocalypse, where all euill is spoken of Babylon, there you will hauehave it signifie nothing else but Rome, and the Romane church also, not (as the Fathers interprete it) the temporall state of the heathen Empire there. So do you folow in eueryevery word no other thing, but y^e aduantage of your own heresie. Which is most notorious by this, that you hold that Peter was neue… at Rome. Wherein you passe your selues in impudencie. For it is against all the ecclesiasticall histories, all the Fathers Gréeke and Latin, cComment in epist. ad Rom. cap. 16.Theodoret, dC…mine de ingratis: in prin…i…io.Prosper, eDe nat…li Petri.S. Leo, f…om. 6. c. …. …ontr. epist. …undam.S. Austin, gLib. 7. cap. 6.Orosius, hIn Psalm. 48.S. Chrysostome, iHaeres. 27.S. Epiphanius, kIn hymn. …. S. Laurent. & hymn. 12.Prudentius, lLib. 2. contr. Donatistas.Optatus, mLib. 5. epist. de Basilicis tra…endi….S. Ambrose, nIn catalogo.S. Ierom, oLib. 4. cap. 21. de vera sapi…ntia.Lactantius, pHist. eccles. lib. 2. cap. 13. & 15.Eusebius, qDe …uga su….S. Athanasius, rEpist. 55. num. 6.S. Cyprian, sDe praescript. …um. 14. & cōtr. Marcion. l. 4. …. 4.Tertullian, tIn Gene…. apud Euseb. l. 3. c. 1.Origen, uLib. 3. cap. 3.Irenaeus, xLib. 3. c. 2. de excidio …ero…olym.Hegesippus, yAlleaged by Eusebius l. 2. c. 14. & 24.Caius and Papias, the Apostles owne scholers, and Dionysius the Bishop of Corinth, zEp. ad Roma…os.Ignatius, aConcil. Chalcedon. act. 3.the holy councell of Chalcedon, and many others. Yea Peter him selfe (according to the iudgement of the Fathers, as I hauehave shewed) confesseth that he was at Rome, calling it Babylon.

Rainoldes.

Here is a gréeuous crime, wherewith you charge our Protestants, of shamelesse partialitie. But whether shew them selues more partiall and vnhonest handlers of Gods word, our Protestants, or your Papistes: you are too partiall (M. Hart) to iudge. There is a iust iudge who will reueale it in that day, before the eies of all men: and in the meane season he doth reueale it dayly, to them whom he maketh wise to trie spirites, & to discerne the truth from errour. As for this particular, wherein we séeme to you most vnhonest and partiall, that in Peters epistle we take the word [Babylon] properly, for the citie of that name in Chaldaea; and in the Reuelation wee say that it signifieth Rome, figuratiuely: we do not this for any aduantage of heresie, as you falsely charge vsus, but in sinceritie before God. For in the Reuelatiō, in which there are as many bHieron. in ep. ad Paulin. presb…t.mysteries as wordes, and wordes applyed commonly to allegories and figures: Rome might be fitly meant by the name of Babylon. And that it was so, it apperéeth by the circumstances: if not, of cReu. 17.….the seuen hils, wheron Rome was built, (and dIn epist. Paulae & … …pist. 17.Ierom gathereth it thereof;) yet of eReu. 17.18.the great citie, which raigneth ouer the kinges of the earth, which in S. Iohns time was Rome; f…ertullian. aduer. Iu…aeos & adue…. Marcion. lib 3 Hieron. ad Algasiam quaest. 11. & praefat. in lib. …the Fathers so interprete it; you say it, and subscribe vntounto it. But, in all the rest of the new Testament, where things are plainely spoken off, it si… teth most with reason that the word Babylon be taken in his proper meaning: the text doth force it in gMat. ….11. Act. 7.…3.other places; and, in that epistle of Peter it is the likelier, because h1. Cor. 1.2. Reu. 14. & 2.1… & 3.7. 1. Cor. 16.… Col. 4.16.the like spéeches in superscriptions, in salutations, in dates of epistles, are elsewhere meant simply. In the Reuelation, iRe…. 11.8.the great citie is called spiritually Sodom. In k2. Pe…. ….…Peters epistle, we take the name of Sodom properly. Is it partialitie in vsus, to take it so? Or were it not a folly in you to reproue it? But this is the matter belike, which pincheth you, y^t in the Reuelatiō, where all euill is spoken of Babylon, we will hauehave it signifie nothing else but Rome, and the Romane Church also, not the temporall state of the heathen Empire there, as the Fathers interprete it. The Fathers then interprete it of Rome, you confesse. If you condemne vsus for interpreting it so: you must condemne them with vsus. If you say that we do not therein, as they, because we expound it of nothing els but Rome, and they not so: you slaunder vsus. For lBabylonis nomine, Satanae congregation… significat: sed eam potissimu… quae ab ecclesia Romana pend… In exposit ecclesiast. Nou. Test. excerpt … probat. Theologis ab A…gustino Marlora….some of vsus expound it of the citie of the Deuill, that is, the societie and companie of all the wicked, as some of them do. And what doth it aduantage you, or your quarell, if, as by mReu. 21.10.Ierusalem is meant the citie of God, that is, the societie and companie of all the faithfull: so Rome, an other Babylon, doo note the Deuils citie, as a figure and sampler of it? For, in this sort also will Babylon be Rome stil. Wherein, that you may learne the lesse to carpe at vsus, hearken to nRobert Bellarmin. Contr. 4. quaest. 6.your Iesuit: who hauing shewed, that the whoore which sitteth on the seuen hils, is (in *Augustin. Aret. Haim. … Rupert.some mens iudgment) the citie of the Deuil, which often times is called Babylon, and set against Ierusalem, the citie of God, that is, the Church: but in my iudgement (saith he) it is beter to vnderstand the citie of Rome by the whoore, as oAduers. Iudaeos: & Marcion lib 3.Tertullian and pAd Alga…. quaest. 11.Ierom doo. To whom he might hauehave added q… Apocalypsin cap. 1….sundry of the Grecians: and rDe ciuitate De… lib. 18. c. ….S. Austin also. But they interpret it (you say) of the temporall state, not ecclesiasticall; of the Romane Empire, not of the Romane Church, as we doo. No maruaile. For in their …aies the Church did differ from the Empire: the Empire, wicked; Church, godly. In ours it is not so. The state ecclesiasticall is chaunged into the temporall: the Church hath swallowed vp the Empire; and what the Romane Empire was, that now the Roman Popedo e is. Wherefore when we apply the mysterie of Babylon to the Church of Rome: we apply it still (as the Fathers did) to the temporall state, if not of an heathen Empire there, yet of a Christian waxing heathnish. There we sée s…euel. 17.4.a purple whoore, sitting vponupon many waters, droonken with the blood of Saintes, and with the blood of Christs martyrs, hauing a golden cuppe in her hand, full of abominations and filthines of her whooredome. tDe visib. Mo…a…. lib. 8. cap. 8.Sanders, the greatest patron of the Popes monarchie, doth proue out of Tertullian, that where there is the greatnesse of the kingly citie, where the pride of the Empire, where the persecution of Christians doth rage: there is Babylon, no doubt, there is the great citie, there is that woman which sitteth vponupon peoples, nations, and languages, with whom the kinges of the earth doo commit whooredom, and the inhabitants of the earth are droonken with the wine of her whooredome. Now Rome in these respects was Babylon (as he construeth it) while the heathen Emperours obtained the temporall state there, not since the Popes hauehave had it. But let the states of the Popedome and of the Empire be compared; and the stories of uIn Su…ton. Capitolin. 1. amprid. &c. histor. Ethnicor.the Emperours, who raigned there before the Popes, and of xIn Platina. Onuph. Guicciardin. & histor. eccles. Ang. Gal. …erman. &c.the Popes (who hauehave succéeded them) be examined: and if it be not found that the Papall state hath matched the Imperiall in greatnes of power, in pride of dominion, in persecuting of Christians; then let vsus be iudged to varie from the Fathers in giuing Rome the name of Babylon. Els are we cleered by verdit of Sanders from that wherewith you charge vsus, of expounding it to the aduantage of our heresie: and you must pronounce that we deale vprightly with the name of Babylon, in the Reuelation. As for our vsage of it in the epistle of Peter: the reasons which you bring to prooue a fault therein, may serue for our acquitall. You say, that we neuer read either in scriptures, or other holy, or prophane history, that Peter was euer in the citie of Chaldaea, which is named Babylon. A simple proofe, if we had not. For, the Apostles, being sent to y…at. …8.19.al nations, were in many cities, wherein we neuer read they were. And yet we hauehave read in Methodius (an ancient bishop, and historian) alleaged by zCh…on. lib. 2Marianus Scotus, that Peter did preach the gospell in 1Babylon…a▪ taken …y others, for the countrie: by sundrie w…iters ec…lesias… call, …or the c… tie of Babylon. Hist. eccle. …useb. Rufin. interpret. l. …. cap. 1…. August. in Psal. 26. & 61. de …iuitat. De… l. 18. cap. 2. Ioseph. antiquit. Iudaic. l. 20. c. 18 Prosper in dimid. Temp. cap. 7. & lib. senten. ex August. se…t. 221. Oth. Frising. chr…n lib. 7. cap. 3.Babylon: y^t is, either the citie, or at least the countrie; and where they preached in the countrie, they did it in the chiefe and mother-citie commonly. But the ancient Fathers, namely S. Ierom, Eusebius, Oecumenius, & many moe agree, that Peter meant Rome by the word Babylon. They deliuer it, I graunt: but they receyued it from Papias, a man, though you commend him for the Apostles owne scholer, yet aforeign. Euseb. l. 3. c. 36.of verie small iudgement: who, mistaking the meaning of the Apostles spèeches in 2The fansie of the Millenaries, or Chiliasts as they were called.a matter of greater weight, deceyued many Fathers that followed him for his antiquitie, as both bHistor. ecclesiast. l. 3. cap. 36.Eusebius and cDe scriptor. ecclesiast. in verbo Papias.Ierom doo report of him. The lesse strange it is, if they beléeued him, and others them, in this point, of no such importance. But, it is consonant to that which followeth of Marke: whom all the ecclesiastical histories agree to hauehave beene Peters scholer at Rome, and that he there wrote his gospel. And dEuseb. histor. ecclesiast. lib. 2. cap. 15. Hieron. de scriptor. eccle…. verbo Marcus.this doth come from Papias also, by one as good as himselfe, euen by Clemens Alexandrinus. Wherefore, I know, what credit it hath; what truth, I know not. For if eIn Chronic.Cassiodorus, fChronic. l. 2.Rhegino, gAdo Vienn. breu. Chr. aet. 6.Ado, and hBeda in Martyrolog. Maria… Scot. Chron. lib. 2. Martin. Polon. s…ppu… P…nt. Roman. Platina de vit. Pont. and the rest.all the ecclesiasticall histories hauehave erred, in saying that Peter did abide at Rome fiue and twentie yeares; which errour they were caried into by iIn Chron.Eusebius, or whosoeuer first reported it: why might they not also be deceyued in this point by the report of Papias, or some who had it from Papias? Though, if it be true, that S. Marke was Peters scholer at Rome: yet this proueth not, that he meant Rome by the name of Babylon. For Peter saith onelyonly, the Church which is in Babylon, & Marke my sonne salute you. Now Marke (as kEuseb. hist. ecclesiast. l. 3. c. 36.your Papias also doth report) did follow and accompanie Peter in his trauel. So that he might be with him as well at Babylon in Chaldaea, as in Italie at Rome. Wherefore whether Peter were at Rome or no: the proofe therof resteth vponupon humane histories. For this of Gods word, whereby you would proue it faine, saith nothing for it. Which lVi… cus Velenus, in opusculo inscripto, Petrum non venisse Romam, ne …ue illi… passum.a learned man of our side hauing weighed, and séeing mpersuas ▪ ….the dissension of writers touching the time that hee came to Rome; and knowing by npe…s. 3.4.10.12. & 13.the scripture that their spéeche of his abode in Rome, is false; and marking the shamefull practise of the Romanists in opers. 18.forging tales for their aduancement, as Constantines donation; and spying some such forgerie amongst their monuments of Peter, ppe…s. 16.as Linus fable of his death; and finding qpe…s. 17.his martyrdome mentioned by rComme…tar. …n Matthae. c. 23Ierom and Lyra, in such sort, as though he had béene crucified by the Scribes and Pharises: he was brought (by these & the like perswasions) into this opinion, that Peter neuer came to Rome. If you aske my iudgement: I thinke he was deceiued therein. And so doo many mo. None of all the Protestants, sCarion & Melanch…hon in Chron. lib. 3. Pantaleon in Chronographia. Vadian. …pitome trium terrae partium, in Italia. M. Fox in his ecclesiasticall historie.who hauehave dealt in writing of histories & Chronicles, to my knowledge, (tBalaeus in Act. Rom. pont. lib. 1. in praefat. one excepted) denyeth, that he was at Rome. They who are straitest in it, doo say uFunccius cō ment▪ in Chronolog. lib. 5.it may be doubted, it is no article of our faith: and xHistor. eccles. Magdeburg. Centur. 1. lib. 2. cap. 10.either he was not there, or at another time then most autors thinke, and lesse then fiue and twentie yeares. Wherein, what doo they say, but that which is most true and manifest? The greater wrong you doo vsus, to charge vsus in general, that we holde that Peter was neuer at Rome. And, to aggrauate the matter you muster vp the names of the ancient Fathers, as though we did bande our selues against them all. Whereas in verie déede, yCaluin. institut. lib. 4. cap. 6. …ect. 15. Petrus Martyr in lib. 1. Regum. c. 12.they, whom you count our captaines, doo therefore graunt Peter to hauehave béene at Rome, because the ancient Fathers affirme it so with one consent. Yea zLuther. in. 1. Pet. cap. 5. Bullinger. in Apocalypsin cap. 14. concion. 64.some of them (expounding those same wordes of Peter) apply the name of Babylon to Rome, as you doo: some, who allow not of that exposition, yet graunt hée was at Rome. And so the reproch of shamelesse partialitie which you cast on vsus, redoundeth on your selues. For if you had any modestie and equitie, you would neuer say, that we denye Rome to be meant by Babylon, because it would follow that Peter was at Rome, and so forth. Specially, sith neyther all of vsus deny it: and many who denye it, yet deny not but Peter was at Rome. But whereas you adde, that we deny it, fearing hereby the sequele of Peters or the Popes supremacie at Rome:aTheodor. Bez. & Erasmus annot. in nou. Test. 1. Pet. 5. therein you passe your selues in impudencie. For we doo confesse, (and you too) I trust, that bAct. 9.43.Peter was at Ioppe. And doo we (or rather you) feare hereby the sequele of Peters or the Popes supremacie at Ioppe.

Conference Between Rainolds and Hart, Chapter 6 (1 of 4)