Conference Between Rainolds and Hart, Chapter 6 (2 of 4)

Conference Between Rainolds and Hart · Chapter 6 (2 of 4)

Hart.

No: because we reade not that he was Bishop of Ioppe. p. 267We reade that he was Bishop of Rome.

Rainoldes.

But you can not proue it by those words of Peter, which you would ground it on: although it were graunted that he meant Rome by Babylon. For y^e most that might be proued so therby, is, y^t he was at Rome. Which furthereth no more the Pope of Rome then of Ioppe. And thus you may sée, what tragedies you make for how small trifles: when you lay so heinous a crime to our charge for denying that, which although we graunt, we neyther winne, nor lose by it.

Hart.

But if he were at Rome, it will be the likelyer that he was Bishop there. And that hee was so, Eusebius sheweth in his Chronicle.

Rainoldes.

I perceyue the Pope must fetch his supremacie from earth and not from heauen. You are fallen againe, from scripture, to Eusebius. Against whose autoritie I might take exception, because he saith that Peter continued bishop of Rome, preaching the gospel there, fiue and twentie yeares: which I hauehave proued to be vntrue. Though, (if I may speake mine owne coniecture of it,) the difference of the Chronicle and historie of Eusebius concerning that point, doth moue mee to thinke, that it was not writen by Eusebius, but by Ierom. For ccHieron. praefat. in Eusebij Chron.he, in translating the Chronicle of Eusebius, did enterlace some thinges which séemed to be omitted: **In Romana maximé historia.chiefely, in the Roman storie. Now Ierom might receiue it from ddIn pontificali.Damasus bishop of Rome: on whom eeHieron. epist. 11. ad Ager. & l. 2. contra Rufinum.he attended as a secretarie. And Damasus was not so voide of all affection, but ffTheodoret. histor. ecclesiast. l. 5. c. 9. Sozom. l, 6. c. 23. Ammia…. Mar…ellin. l. 27.he could be content to aduance the credit of his owne Sée by helping it to be reputed the bishoply See of Peter. But whether Eusebius, or Ierom, or Damasus, or whosoeuer hauehave saide that Peter was a Bishop: either they vsed the name of [Bishop] generally, and so it proueth not your purpose; or if they meant it, as commōly we do, they missed the truth. For generally, 11foreign whence the Latin (Episcopus) & our English word (Bishop) are deriued.a Bishop, is an ouerseer. In which signification it reacheth to all, who are put in trust with ouersight & charge of any thing: as ggIn the Greek translation o… the Seuentie interpreter…, Numb 4.16.Num 4:16Eleazar is called Bishop of the tabernacle; & Christ, hh1. Pet. 2.…5.1 Pet 2:5the Bishop of our soules. But, in our cōmon vse of spéech it noteth him, to whō y^e ouersight & charge of a particular Church is committed: such as were the Bishops of iiAct 20.28.Acts 20:28Ephesus, of kkPhilip. 1.1Phil 1:1Philippi; and they whom Christ calleth llReuel. ….20▪the Angels of the Churches. Now Peter was not Bishop after this p. 268later sort: for he was an Apostle, and 22foreign, so called, as chosen to be sent …road to preach to e…ery creature. Mark. 3.14. & 16.15.Mark 3:14Mark 16:15the Apostles were sent to preach to all the world. Wherefore when the Fathers said, he was a Bishop: either they meant it in the former sense, or ought to hauehave meant it. This is somewhat harder to be perceiued by Ierom: but others open it more plainely. For mmHieronym. de scriptor. e… cle. verbo, Clemens.he reckeneth Peter the first Bishop of Rome; Linus, the second; Cletus, the third; Clemens, the fourth, and so the rest successiuely: as likewise, nnverbo, Ignatius.in Antioche, Ignatius, the third; whereby Euodius is the second; ooverbo, Simon Pet.and Peter, the first. But ppIn chronic. & histor. l. 3. c. 19Eusebius nameth Euodius, the first Bishop of Antioche; Ignatius, the secōd: and qqAduers. haere. l. 3. cap. 3.Irenaeus nameth Linus, the first Bishop of Rome; **Who is called Anacletus, by Irenaeus and Eusebius.Cletus the second; and so forth. Whereby they declare, that (in their iudgement) although Peter preached at Antioche and Rome both, yet he was neither Bishop of Antioche, nor Rome, as vsually that name is taken. Yea they distinguish the Bishops, and the Apostles therein purposely. For rrAduers. h…r. lib. 3. cap. 3.Irenaeus saith, that the two 11Apostoli.Apostles, namely Peter and Paule, when they had founded and taught the Romane Church, committed 22Episcopatum.the Bishoply charge therof to Linus. And he repeateth often in reckening vp the Bishops, (as doth ssHistor. eccles, l. 3. c. 2. & 19. l. 4. c. 1. & 5. l. 5. c. 1. &c.Eusebius also) that they were such, and such, in order, and number, from the Apostles. And ttPraefat. Recognitionum Clementis ad Gaudentium.Rufinus writeth, that Linus and Cletus were Bishops while Peter liued: that they might hauehave 11Episcopatus curam.the care of the Bishoply charge, and hee might do 22Apostolatus officium.the duetie of the Apostleship. Which is confirmed farther by uuHaeres. 27.Epiphanius. Who, though hée say that Peter and Paule were both Apostles & Bishops in Rome: yet hee saith withall that there were other Bishops of Rome, while they liued; because that 11foreign.the Apostles, went often into other countryes to preach Christ; & the city of Rome might not be without 22foreign.a Bishop. As if he should hauehave said, that a Bishops duetie doth bind him to attend the Church, whereof the holy Ghost hath made him ouerseer. Now, though the Apostles Peter and Paule did performe that duetie to the Church of Rome, while they abode there: yet because it was the charge of their Apostleship to preach to others also, therefore they went thence to oth…r coastes and nations, and left the Romane charge to the Bishop of Rome. And so you may learne by the Fathers thē selues, that when they termed any Apostle a Bishop of this or that citie, as namely, S. Peter of Antioche, or Rome: they meant it in p. 269a generall sort, and signification, because he did attend that Church for a time, and supplyed that roome in preaching of the Gospel, which Bishops did after. But as the name of [Bishop] is commonly taken for the ouerseer of a particular church, and pastor of a seuerall flocke: so Peter was not Bishop of any one citie, and therefore not of Rome.

Hart.

Yet the Bishops of Rome did succéede Peter: euen by the testimonie of the same autors namely of Irenaeus, Eusebius, The fourth Diuision.and Epiphanius, in the places by you alleaged.

Rainoldes.

They did succeede Peter, as Bishops an Apostle: and they did succéede him in Rome, as other Bishops did in other cities. Wherefore if the Bishop of Rome by this succession hauehave right to the supremacie: what hath the Bishop of Antioche? For he succeeded Peter too.

Hart.

The Bishop of Antioche did succéede Peter, while Peter liued yet, and had not left his right. But the Bishop of Rome succéeded him, when he died: and thereby was aduanced vntounto that supremacie, which Peter kept while hee liued.

Rainoldes.

Your men were wont to answere, xxAs Pope Marcellus saith c. Rogamus. 24. q. 1. Turre oremata Summ. de eccles. l. 2. c. 36. Canus Locor. Theologi…or. l. 6. c. 8.that Antioche had first right to the supremacie by the chaire of Peter: but Peter did remoue his chaire thence to Rome. This was somewhat stale. Which your Father yyRober…. Bellarm. Controuer. 4. quaest. 5.Robert smelled belike, & so he thought it better to say that Peter kept his right, while hee liued: but, when he died, the Bishop of Rome was his successour, and had it (as I trow) by legacie. A pretie shift if it woulde stand: but it lacketh life. For Linus Bishop of Rome, who succéeded Peter, succéeded Peter liuing: in the same maner as did the Bishop of Antioche.

Hart.

Not so. But Clemens rather did succéede Peter: and that, after his death. For, when he perceiued his end to draw néere, he tooke Clemens by the hand: and said, in the hearing of the whole Church, (which was then assembled,) Hearken vntounto me, my brethren and fellow-seruants. Because (as my Lord & maister Iesus Christ, who sent me, hath told me,) the day of my death approcheth: I ordeine this Clemens to bee your Bishop, vntounto whom alone I commit the chaire of my preaching and doctrine; and I giuegive to him that power of binding and loosing which Christ gaue to me, that whatsoeuer he decreeth of any thing in earth, the same shall bee decreed in p. 270heauen.

Rainoldes.

Who told you this tale?

Hart.

A tale? It is recorded in an old monument.

Rainoldes.

Whence came that olde monument?

Hart.

From Clemens himselfe: who liued in the time of the Apostles; and is mentioned by zzPhil. 4.3.Phil 4:3S. Paule.

Rainoldes.

But where doth he record it?

Hart.

In his first epistle, writen to Iames the brother of the Lord.

Rainoldes.

In déede an olde monument. It is so olde, that it is rotten. A very drunken forgerie: wherein it is said, that Peter praied Clemens to write (after his death) this epistle to Iames the brother of the Lord, to comfort him: and Clemens did so. Whereas aaIoseph. antiquit. Iudaicar. l. 20. c. 16. Euseb. histor. eccles. l. 2. c. 23.Iames was dead long before Peter, about an eight yeares at least.

Hart.

This is one of the arguments that are brought against it by your Centuries of Meydenburg: which I make no account off,bbHistor. ecclesiast. Magd. Cent. 2. cap. 7. though you alleage them all. For ccFrancis. Turrian. pro epistolis Pontificum l. 2. c. 13.Turrian hath sifted & confuted them, in his defense of the decretal epistles of the Popes: where he bringeth reasons why Clemens might write well to Iames being dead, and Peter with him so to do.

Rainoldes.

Turrian; a Iesuit: a couer fitte for such a cuppe. Whose defense of those bastards fathered on the ancient Bishops of Rome falsely, may be iustly censured with that which ddDe causis corruptarum art. lib. 2.Viues saith of your golden legend: it is writen by a man of a brazen face & a leadē hart. For nothing can be spoken so fondly & absu…dly, which he hath not some reasō for: as though he had resolued to be ma… with reason. Howbeit, sith you are fore-stalled with a preiudice of his defense against the Centuries: I will not touch y^e arguments whereupō they stād. Though his answeres to them, if they should be laid in the skales togither, would be found lighter then vanitie it selfe, in all indifferent readers eies. His dealing in this one point may giuegive a tast thereof. For though to write letters to a dead man be a thing so senselesse, that the epistle therefore is nipped, as vnlikely, by eeDe summ. eccles. l. 2. cap. 101.Cardinall Turrecremata; and cast off, as counterfeit, by ffDe concordant. catholica l. 2. c. 17 & l. 3. c. 2.Cardinall Cusanus: yet Turrian defendeth it as wisely done, and omitteth nothing to shew with how good reason Clemens might write letters to Iames being dead, yea though hee knewe him to bee dead; saue that, p. 271(as ggAntonius Sade…l in respons. ad repetita Turriani sophismata. part. 1.a learned man told him pleasantly) hee sheweth not by what carier Clemens did send the letters to him. But, to let both Turrian and the Centuries go: the drift of the epistle being to prooue that Peter ordained Clemens his successour, disc…editeth, it selfe (as hhDe concord. catholica l. 3. cap. 2.Cusanus hath also noted) by the iudgement of the Fathers, S. iiEpist. 165.Austin, S. kkDe scriptor. eccle. in verbo Clemens.Ierom, llDe schism. Dona…ist. lib. 2.Optatus, and mmIrenaeus lib. 3. c. 3. Eusebius in Chron. & histor. eccl. l. 3. c. 2. Epiphanius haeres. 27. Dorotheus in Synopsi. Beda in Martyrologio.the rest, yea by nn…latina, Onuph…ius Pon…acus Genebrardus, and the auncienter whom they folow.your owne Chronicles and histories ecclesiasticall, who all agrée that Linus was Peters successour, and so they marre the tale of Clemens.

Hart.

You doo ill to call it a tale, and droonken forgerie: such reprochefull termes.

Rainoldes.

You must beare with my plainenes, I call a …gge, a figge; and a spade, a spade.

Hart.

Nay, it is neither a forgerie, nor a tale. For, the epistle is auncient, translated out of Greeke into Latin by Rufinus, who liued within foure hundred yeares after Christ. And this touching Linus, the storie of whose succession (you thinke) dispro…eth it, was thought vponupon then, & is answered by ooPraefat. Recognit. Clemēt. ad Gaudent.Rufinus. For … his preface to the booke entitled the recognitions of Clemens, which he translated too, some demaund (saith he) how, when as Linus and Cletus were Bishops of Rome before Clemens, himselfe (in his epistle to Iames) saith that the chaire of teaching was committed to him by Peter. Whereof this is the reason, as we hauehave heard, that Linus and Cletus were in deed Bishops in Rome before Clemens, but while Peter liued: that they might hauehave the care of the Bishoply charge, & he might do the duety of the Apostleship. As it is found that also he did at Caesarea: where, though being present himselfe, yet he had a Bishop whom he had ordained, namely Zachaeus. And thus may eche of these things be thought to be true: both that they were reckened Bishops, before Clemens; and Clemens neuertheles receiued the chaire of teaching after the death of Peter.

Rainoldes.

The auncientie of the epistle is no warrant for it, but that it might be false and forged. ppLin…s de passion. Pet. & Paul. lib. 2. Hi…ron. de script. eccles. verbo Seneca.The epistles of Seneca to Paul, of Paul to Seneca, are no lesse auncient: which yet hauehave nothing worthie of either Paul, or Seneca. There hauehave béene verie many misbegotten pamphlets wandring abroad, qqHieron. de scriptor. eccle… verbo Paulus. & Lucas, & Clemens. c. santa Romana. distinct. 15.euen from the time of the Apostles; yea, vnderunder the names of p. 272the Apostles themselues. The lesse hauehave you to maruell, if there were some miscreant who wrote in the name of Clemens to Iames. As for Rufinus, who translated it, (if yet he did translate it, and some hauehave not abused 11Clementis recognitionis posterio… opus Rusini praefatione, aut confieta, aut aliunde petita tra…s…orma…um. Sixt. Senens. Biblioth. sanct. lib. 2.him as well as Clemens:) his iudgement was not such, but he might be deceiued in a greater matter. Which, if you beléeue not on S. rrApologia cō tra Rufinum.Ieroms credit, because he was his aduersarie: looke into these same workes that he translated, and you shall perceiue it. For, the thinges writen in the Recognitions of Clemens (which you mention) sent to Iames also, are, the most of them, vncertaine; many, fabulous; yea and some, hereticall, as ssSixt. Senensis Biblioth. sanct. lib. 2.your selues confesse. Yet ttPraefat. recognit. Clement. ad Gaudent.Rufinus iudged it a hidden treasure of wisedome, & thought he had a bootie of it. Againe, in uuClement. epist. 1. ad Iaco…um fratrem Domini.that epistle, wherein Clemens maketh him selfe Peters successor, he certifieth Iames, that he sent him before (by the commandement of Peter) an other booke, entitled, 22Itinerarium Clementis.the booke of Clemens touching thinges which Peter did in his iourney. Now, this iourney-booke hath béene so long, so famously knowne, for a roague: that he hath not onelyonly béene burnt through the …are of olde by xxAthanasius in Synopsi. Gelasi…s in concili… 70. episcoporum. dist. 15. c. sacta Romana.sundrie Fathers and Bishops in a Councell; but also of late yySixtus Sen. Bibliothecae sanct. lib. 2.the college of Inquisitors at Rome hauehave enrolled him in the Register of bookes condemned by the Church. Wherefore he was a counterfeit, that set abroad these bastardes in the name of Clemens: howsoeuer Rufinus thought them (of simplicitie,) to be his owne, whose they were named. And with this perswasion was he moued to thinke on some probabilitie how that might be true, which séemed false therein: of Peters ordeining Clemens to be his successor, when Linus and Cletus were Bishops before him. The only shew whereof being **Cuius rei hanc accepimus esse rationem. Praefat. recognit. Clement. ad Gaudent.a report, receyued by tradition: he was faine to take it, for lacke of a better. But he erred in it: either not knowing, or not considering times and stories. For, by his answere, Linus and Cletus should be no longer Bishops then while Peter liued: and, when he dyed, Clemens should succéede him next immediatly. Whereas it is apparant by zzEusebius in Chronico.records of times, that Linus continued Bishop eleuen yeares, after Peters death: and Cletus twelue, after Linus; before that Clemens had the roome. Which albeit aaPro decretalib. epist. Pont. lib. 3. cap. 10.Turrian the Iesuite do… gnaw vponupon (as he is wont,) to make it away: yet is the matter so manifest & certaine, that bbChronogr. lib. 3. in Lino.Genebrard, the freshest of your Popish p. 273Chroniclers, and passing all the rest as in skill, so in zeale for the Popes causes, could not but set it downe as true.

Hart.

Yet he saith withall, that Peter did nominate Clemens to succeede him. But Clemens gaue the roome first to Linus, and then to Cletus, not so much of modestie, as by the counsell of the Lord, 11Ne huius nominationi… exemplum transiret ad posteros▪ & liberae ecclesiae prouidenti… in deligendo sibi praesule decerperet.least the example of this nomination should passe to the posteritie, and derogate from the free prouidence of the Church in choosing of her owne Bishop.

Rainoldes.

He saith so in deede. But who séeth not that this was deuised to make stories agrée with the tale of Clemens: and (by the way) to countenance the election of Popes, which now the Cardinals vse? For, ccSacrar. cer… mon. Rom. eccles. l. 1. sect. 1.the booke of Ceremonies of the Church of Rome, treating of that election, affirmeth that Peter nominated Clemens to be his successour, with this cōdition (it is thought,) if the Cardinals would admit him. But they, 22Huiusmodi denominationis formam grauiter in futurum ecclesiae posse nocere.perceiuing that the forme of this nomination might greatly hurt the Church in processe of time, did not accept of Clemens, but did choose Linus, and made him Pope after Peter. Howbeit Clemens afterwarde was chosen by the Cardinals, when Linus and Cletus were deceased. Though Genebrard in …ming the fansie to his purpose, doth not so much follow the booke of the Ceremonies as the glose of the ddc. Si Petrus …. q. 1. in glossa.Canon law: which (with better care of the Popes credit) saith, that Pope Clemens him selfe 33Renunciauit Papatui, videns quód esset perniciosum exemplo quod aliquis sibi eligeret successorem.renounced the Papacie, considering that it would be an euill and pernicious thing for the example, that any should choose his owne successour. Into such follies do you … your selues, to say that the blessed Apostle of Christ, S. Peter, did ordeine that, which was pernicious for the example, refused by the Pope, mislyked by the Cardinals, preiudiciall to the Church: and all to maintaine the epistle of Clemens, with the tale in it, that Peter made him his successour. A thing so absurd, that where it is mentioned in eec. vn…e. 8. q. 1.the Canon law, there is it n…ed to …e 44Palea.chaffe: and ffIn annotat. ad c. vnde 8. q. 1.Contius, a learned lawier of your owne, doth note vponupon that note, that it is counted chaffe worthily, 55Nam tota est commentitia.for it is all counterfeite: and ggPetr. Comest. histor. scholast. in Act. Apol…. cap. 101.Comestor, the autor of the scholastical historie, who liued when the darkenes of Poperie was grossest, refuteth and reiecteth it as a méere forgerie. But whatsoeuer it …e, and ho… so euer auncient, … the same p. 272duplicate page p. 273duplicate page p. 274(it may be) which S. hhDe scriptorib. eccles. verbo C…emens.Ierom saith, did beare the name of Clemens, and was reproued by olde writers, but be it, what you wil: you confesse your selfe that to be vntrue, for proofe wherof you cited it, that Clemens succeeded Peter, and not Linus. Wherefore, séeing Linus did succéede Peter, & that while Peter liued, in the same sort as Zachaeus did (you say) at Caesarea, & Euodius at Antioche: the Bishops of Antioche, & of Caesarea, may claime as well the Papacy by Peters succession, as may the Bishop of Rome.

Hart.

Yet by your owne graunt and the consent of histories, Linus who succéeded him in Rome, did out-liue him. And therefore he was the successour of Peter, not onelyonly while Peter was aliue yet, but when he was deceased also.

Rainoldes.

He was so. What of that?

Hart.

Of that I conclude the Bishop of Romes supremacy, and conuince you of errour. For Peter had charge of all the Church of Christ. But the Bishop of Rome is the successour of Peter. The Bishop of Rome therefore hath charge of all the Church of Christ.

Rainoldes.

As if you should say: ii…. King. 11. vers. 42.Salomon did raigne ouer all Israell. But kkvers. 43.Roboam, Salomons sonne, was his successour. Roboam therefore raigned ouer all Israell. Whereby you might conuince the scripture of errour, for saying that ll…. King. 12. vers. 20.Ieroboam was king ouer all Israell, and none did folow Roboam, but the tribe of Iuda onelyonly.

Hart.

They reuolted from Roboam. But he had right to be their king, as being heire of Salomon.

Rainoldes.

But what is that to my reason? For pointes in a similitude are bound to hold no farder, then that, wherein they are resembled. Els you might adde too, that the Pope is liker to Ieroboam then to Roboam, because of his mmvers. 28.golden gods: and therefore should be king rather of all Christendome, then of the prouince of Rome onelyonly. But if your cauill please you against that reason: heare an other. The Apostles of Christ had charge of all nations. All Bishops are successours of the Apostles. Therefore all Bishops hauehave charge of all nations. Will you reply now that men reuolt from Bishops: but they hauehave right to be Popes, as being heires of the Apostles?

Hart.

No: For though all Bishops succeede the Apostles, p. 275as S. nnEpist. ad EuagrIerom saith well, & it is true: yet they succede them not in their whole right. They succeede them in the kind of charge, ooMarc. 16.15.Mark 16:15to preach the Gospell: but not in the amplenes, to preach it vntounto eueryevery creature. They succeede the Apostles, but not in the Apostleship. For of the Apostleship there is no succession, as D. ppPrincip. doctrinal. l. 6. c. 7.Stapleton sheweth.

Rainoldes.

Then D. Stapleton sheweth, that the Bishop of Rome doth not succéede Peter in the Apostleship neither.

Hart.

And what if he do not?

Rainoldes.

Then he succéedeth not to all the right of Peter. Then how is the supremacie proued by this succession? Then the Pope vsurpeth, who will be the Apostles successor in the Apostleship. For he calleth his office qqIn praefatione Clementinarum.the office of the Apostleship; and things which he doth heare, rrc. a… Apostolatus. extrauag. Ioh. 22. de concession. praebend. de priuil.his Apostleship doth heare them; and in his prohibitions, he willeth weightie matters ssc. Porro. Dist. 63.to be referred to his Apostleship; and in his vsuall style, the style of the Court of Rome, his c. ad audientiam. i. de rescriptis.letters, his uuc. Nulli. Dist. 19.decrees, his xxSacrar. cer… moniar. Rom. eccles. lib. 1. sect. 8.mandates and precepts are called Apostolike, and all Apostolike, that toucheth him; the Apostolike yysect. 6.Bull, the Apostolike zzsect. 14.seale, the Apostolike aasect. 5.messenger, Apostolike bbsect. 1.palace, ccsect. 8.chamber, ddReg. Cancellariae Apost.chauncerie, Apostolike eeSacr. cerem. Rom. eccles. l. 1. sect. 5.Legate, Apostolike ffc. In his. de priuileg. & excessibus priuilegiat.pardon, Apostolike ggc. Ideo. 25. q. 1.authoritie, Apostolike hhAlbert. Krantz. Saxon. l. 5. c. 8.dispensation; and what not? Wherein we hauehave an other of your spirituall coosinages, as kindly as **Chapt. 1. Diuis. 2.the former, wherein you clad the Pope with the name of Peter. Nay, this doth passe that. For, in that, hee cometh forth with the spoiles of Peter, one Apostle: in this, of more then one. For Bishops, in their iic. ego N. extra. de iureiurando.oth of fealtie to the Pope, are sworne 11Limina Apostolorum visitabo.to visite yearely the Court of the Apostles, that is, of the Pope; 22Nisi eorum absoluar licentia.vnlesse they bee dispensed withall by the Apostles, that is, by the Pope.

Hart.

You neede not think this kinde of speeches so disorderly. For S. Bernard vseth them, or the like vntounto them. Yea, kkDe consid. ad Eugen lib. 1.the very title of the Apostleship is giuen to the Pope by him.

Rainoldes.

S. Bernard was a worthy man, in **About the yeare. 1140.that corrupt age, in which he liued. But your selues hauehave a prouerbe, that llBernardus no… vidit omnia.Bernard saw not all thinges. Yet he saw many more, then you can well brooke: and mmBernard. de cōsid. ad Eugen. lib. 4.some wherein the Pope succeedeth Constantine, not Peter; nnlib. 1.2. & 3.some wherein he succéedeth neither. That he saw the filth of the Papacie but in part: it may be imputed page missing p. 278neuer had himselfe you… Popes supremacie, the right of the heauenly and of the earthly kingdome, the princehood both in temporall and spirituall things. Such power neither the scriptures nor Fathers giuegive to Peter. But what are the scriptures which the Fathers alleage?

Hart.

How farre the supremacie of Peter did reach in earthly things and heauenly, spirituall and temporall: I will not reason now. But **Staplet. principior. doctrin. lib. 6. cap. 15.the auncient Fathers alleage the same scriptures to proue that his supremacie came to his successors in the Church of Rome, which I alleaged before to proue his right to the supremacie. For, that the promise in the sixtéenth of Matthew, vponupon this rocke I will build my Church, and so forth, is verified in the Sée of Rome, S. bbIn Psalm. cont…a partem Donati.Augustin teacheth: Number (saith hee) the Priestes euen from the verie seate of Peter, and in that ranke of fathers marke who succeeded whom: that is the rock against which the proud gates of hell preuaile not. And, that the performance of the said promise in the last of Iohn, Feede my sheep, perteineth also to the Pope, S. ccDe sacerdotio, lib. 2.Chrysostome is witnesse, auouching expressely, that Christ did commit his sheepe to bee fedde both vntounto Peter, and to Peters successours. Which to bee likewise meant by those words in the two and twentéeth of Luke, I hauehave praied for thee that thy faith faile not, and thou being conuerted strengthen thy brethren: ddIn decretali…s epist. Concil. Tom. 1.Pope Marcus in his decretall epistle to Athanasius, Pope Lucius in his decretal epistle to the demands of French and Spanish Bishops, Pope Felix in his decretall epistle to Benignus, hauehave manifestly taught.

Rainoldes.

Nettles amongst roses, when you set the bastard autours of these decretals amongst the auncient Fathers. But tel me in good sooth: thinke you that euerie Pope must denie Christ?

Hart.

Denie Christ? What meane you to aske me that question?

Rainoldes.

Because you seeme to say, that eeLuc. 22. ver. 32.Luke 22:32Christes words to Peter, and thou being conuerted strengthen thy brethren, are meant of all them.

Hart.

What? And say I therefore, that they must denie Christ?

Rainoldes.

Or els you say nothing. For why said Christ to Peter, and thou being conuerted? Did he not say it ffver. 34.in respect that Peter would auert and turne him selfe away from him, when p. 279he denied him thrise?

Hart.

So: what if he did?

Rainoldes.

Then if the same wordes be meant of al Popes, euerie Pope must first be turned away from Christ, that he may be conuerted after: and therfore euerie Pope must deny Christ. If I should say so: some would be angrie with me. But you may say what you list.

Hart.

This is such a reason, as y^t, (which hath bene made too,) y^t if the wordes, ggMat. 16. ver. 1…Matt 16:1Thou art Peter, concerne Peters successour, then the wordes, hhver. 23.Satan, thou art an offense to me, must concern him also, because they were spoken by Christ to Peter both. But, as iiRob. Bellarm. contr. 4. quaest. ….Father Robert answereth to that, so doo I to this, that the reason followeth not. For certaine thinges (saith he) are spoken to Peter for himselfe alone; certaine for himselfe, and for al Christians; certaine for himselfe, and for his successors. This is plainely gathered by the diuers reason and consideration, whereon they are spoken to him. For those thinges which are spoken to him as one of the faithfull, are vnderstood to be spoken vntounto all the faithfull: as, kkMat. 18.2…,Matt 18:2if thy brother trespasse against thee. Those things which are spoken in some respect of his owne person, are spoken vntounto him alone: as, llLuc. 22.34.Luke 22:34thou shalt denie me thrise. Those things which are spoken in regard of his pastorall duetie, are spoken vntounto all pastours: as mmIoh. 21.15.John 21:15feede my sheepe, and, strengthen thy brethren. And thus you may sée y^t the wordes of Christ, I hauehave praied for thee, that thy faith faile not, and, strenghthen thy brethren, might in such sort be spoken vntounto Peter, that they might pertaine to eueryevery Pope also: though the other wordes, to denie Christ, and to be conuerted, do not perteine to them. You will not say your selfe, (I trust) of faithful Christians, that they must all denie Christ. Yet nnChapt. 3. Diuis. 2.you said that this praier & commandement of Christ perteine to them all, if you be remembred.

Rainoldes.

I remember it well: and it is verie true. But this doth giuegive a deadly stripe to that argument, which you pretē ded to be made by the Fathers. For if the wordes of Christ, Feede my sheepe, and, strengthen thy brethren, must bee vnderstood as spoken vntounto all Pastors, which by your answere you graunt: then how can they proue the supremacie of one Pastor, which you conclude in your argument?

p. 280Hart.

I did not meane by [all Pastors] the Pastors of all Churches: but all the Pastors of one Church, namely of the Church of Rome.

Rainoldes.

But Robert, the Father whose wordes you alleaged, doth meane the Pastors of all Churches. And the commandement of Christ, Feede my sheepe, belongeth to them also: vnlesse oo… 23. de reformat. c. 1.the councell of Trent mistake it.

Hart.

It belongeth to them: but to the Bishop of Rome chiefly. For ppDe sacerdo…io lib. 2.Chrysostome expresly saith, (as I alleaged,) that Christ did commit the feeding of his sheepe to Peter and to Peters successours.

Rainoldes.

And be you certaine, that by [Peters successours] he meant the Bishops of Rome?

Hart.

Whom should he meane but them?

Rainoldes.

He meant all Bishops: not all y^e Bishops of one Church, but the Bishops of all Churches. Which is euident by his wordes, and the entent whereto he spake them. For to stirre vp Basil, and make him glad and willing to doo the office of a Bishop, which he had vndertaken, he telleth him, that Christ when he saide to Peter, Dost thou louelove me? Feede my sheepe, did thereby shew how deere his sheepe are vntounto him, and therefore would surely giuegive great rewarde to Pastors who feede them, and guide them. For why did he shed his owne blood, (saith Chrysostome) but euē to purchase those sheepe, the care of whom he committed to Peter and to Peters successours. Whereupon he goeth forward, and declareth what that charge is, which Christ gaue to Peter and to all Pastors by that commission Feede my sheepe. So that both the course of Chrysostom… spéech, and the drift of his reason, and the person whom it implyeth, S. Basil, Bishop, not of Rome, but of Caesarea, doo manifestly shew, that he meant, by naming [the successours of Peter] all Pastors of the flocke, al Bishops of the Church of Christ. And this is so cléere, that qqRob. Bellarmin. contr. 4. quaest. 3.Father Robert himselfe (in his Romane Lectures) doth not only graunt it, but also proue it by two reasons: one, out of rrDe agone Christian. c. 30Austin, that Peter was a figure of the Church, that is to say, he represented all Pastours, when Christ said to him, feede my sheepe: an other, out of ssSerm. 3. in an…iuersar. assump…ionis su….Leo, that Peter is an example and as it were a paterne, the which all Pastors ought to folow. How much the more shamefull is the ignorance p. 281of your Doctors, if they knew it not; the wilfulnes, if they knew it: who beare men in hand that Chrysostome doth proue the Popes supremacie by those successours. Wherin the ouersight **Who alleage it, and vrge i… as very forcible to that purpose: in their Annotat. on Ioh. 21.17.John 21:17of your Rhemists is great: but a paire of Iesuites, Cani…ius and Busaeus, doo go beyond their felowes. For ttIn opere Catechistico Petri Canisij edito a Busae o. de praeceptis eccles. art. 9.they, amongst many sentences of the Fathers, the woorst of them as fit as this to proue the Papacie, doo set out this as the best; and triumph of it, as of a péerelesse proofe, by giuing it a speciall note in the margent: **Nota…tum Petro, tum succes soribus curam ouium commissam.Note, (say they,) to Peter, & to Peters successours. Note it, say the Iesuites. In déede it is a point well worth the noting, that you doo so notoriously abuse the Church of Christ. For you perswade the simple, and chiefly young scholers who trust your common-place-bookes, that Chrysostome spake of Peter and Peters successours, in the same meaning that the Pope doth, when he uuPope Boniface the eighth▪ c. vna sanctam. extra. de maioritat. & obedientia.saith that Peter and Peters successour is the head of the Church; and xxPope Pius the fourth. In bulla super …orma iuramenti prosessionis fidei.bindeth men by solemne oth to be obedient to the Bishop of Rome, the successour of Peter. Whereas S. Chrysostome meant by Peters successours, all them whom Christ doth put in trust to feede his sheepe: as yyLib. 4. dist. 18.the Maister of the sentences, and zzIn 4. sentent. dist. 18. q. 1. art. 1Thomas of Aquine doo giuegive the name of Peters successours to all Priestes & Prelates (as they terme them,) that is, to all Pastors & Doctors of the Church: as S. aaDe agone Christ. cap. 30.Austin teacheth that it is said to all when it is said to Peter, Dost thou louelove me? Feede my sheepe: as S. bbDe dignitat… …acerd. cap. 2.Ambrose writeth that he and all Bishops hauehave receiued the charge of the sheepe with Peter: as ccIn epist. ad clerū Carthag. apud Cyprian. epist. 3.the Roman clergie apply it to the rest of the disciples of Christ, & to the clergie of Carthage too. Such inuincible reasons you fetch out of the Fathers for the Roman Papacy: by which eueryevery Bishop may claime as much aboue the Roman, as may the Roman aboue any.

Hart.

In déede, to feede the sheepe is common after a sorte to the Pastors of all Churches. But in many Churches the faith of Pastors hath failed. Wherefore Christes prayer for the faith of Peter, that it should not faile, is not common to them all. OnelyOnly the Bishops of the Church of Rome hauehave neuer failed in faith. By the which euent of thinges it is plaine, that Christ made that prayer for Peters successours in the See of Rome: and so did establish them ouer al, in charging them to strengthen p. 282their brethren.

Rainoldes.

And doo you thinke that all the Bishops of Rome hauehave had the same priuilege which Christ obtained for Peter in that his faith failed not?

Hart.

The verie same, no doubt.

Rainoldes.

And hauehave they shewed their faith by ddIam. 2.18.Jas 2:18their workes too, by ee1. Ioh. ….4. & 3.2….keeping Christes commandements, by louing one another?

Hart.

They hauehave so perhaps.

Rainoldes.

Away with that [perhaps:] for all the world knoweth they hauehave not. Yea seuen hundred yeares ago, not to speake of later times, wherein their power and wealth hauehave kindled sparkes of greater licence, and loosed the reines vntounto their lustes, but seuen hundred yeres ago, when they were yet of meaner estate, the proofe hereof was famous by sundrie of their liues succeeding one another: Formosus, Boniface, Stephen, Romanus, Theodore, Iohn the ninth, and a litle after them, Christopher, and Sergius. Of whom their owne friendes and fauorers doo write that ff… Iohan. decim.they were gone from Peters steppes, that ggIn Benedicto quart. & Sergio ….they did get his See by briberie, that they were hh…odigiosi. …ebraid. Chronogr. lib. 4.mō strous men, or rather iiPortenta & monstra. Platina in Bene…icto quart. & Christophoro. prim.beastes and monsters. Amongst whom, the 11Platina in vita Formosi.first was accursed by a Pope, and made himselfe Pope by periurie. The 22Sigon. de regno Ital. lib. 6.second would (but that he was preuented by death;) the 33Platina in vita Steph. sexti.third did repeale the decrées of the first, and condemne his actes: the 44Romani.fourth condemned the third, and iustified the first: the 55Theodo…i secundi.fifth did keepe the same race: the 66Iohannis decimi.sixth confirmed it by a Councell: the 88Sergij tertij.last, for all the Councell and the Popes allowing it, restored the third to his credit, and againe cō demned the first. **Ita vertigo …otabat Petri successores. Iesu Christi vicarios i… …erris.Thus were Peters successors whirled about with giddinesse, as kkMetropolis lib. 2. cap. 22.Krantzius speaketh of them: and the head of the Church was long without a braine. A thing verie straunge, and such as (I thinke) hath scarce béene heard off amongst the Barbarians: that llPope Stephē the sixth.one of these successours, did take vp the carkasse of mmPope Formosus. Sigonius de regn. Ital. l. 6.his predecessour out of his graue, brought it into iudgement before a Councell of Bishops, spoyled it of his Papall roabes, clad it with a lay-mans garmentes, endited it, arraigned it, condemned it, nnLui…prand. …cin. l. 1. c. 8. where he ascribeth it to Sergius, because they were of Sergius faction whose ministerie Stephen did vse in it: Sigon. lib. 6. …ergiani.cut off thrée fingers ofit, and cast it into the streame of Tiber. Yet this Pope might hauehave béene a Saint of the Popes, in comparison of oowhom Platina calleth Iohn the thirteenth.Iohn the p. 283twelfth. For he did shew more crueltie vponupon the bodies of many liuing; then the other, of one dead: and the other excelled not so much in one vice, as Iohn the twelfth in all, in vngodlinesse, vnrighteousnesse, intemperance, pride, in whooredomes, adulteri…s, incestes, murders, in periuries, simonie, sacrileges, blasphemies, and such abominations as I abhorre to mention. Not Catiline, not Nero, not Heliogabalus, not y^e most monstrous wretches that euer liued in Rome, came néere vntounto him. It were incredible that one caraine should hauehave so much, so horrible filth, but that his owne Church and the Italian Bishops (in a Councell assembled by the Emperour Otho) did charge him with these thinges, and with thinges more vilanous and outragious then these. And himselfe, when the Emperour and Councell wrote vntounto him, that he should come to make his answere, made this answere to them, and other he would make none, that hee cursed them all to hell if they attempted to depriue him, as hée heard say they did. Luitprandus, a deacon of a Church in Italie, ppPlatina in vita Stephani quint.a man commended for his holines, who liued at the same time, qqHistor. re…ū per Europam gesta…um l. 6. c. 6. & 7. & 8. & 10doth write this storie of Pope Iohn; and that with such credit, that beside rrMartin. Polon. in supput. Pont.Martinus, ssIn Chronic. monast. Hirsau.Tritemius, ttin Iohann. decimo tert.Platina, uuSaxon. l. 4. c. 9. & Metrop. l. 3. c. 1.Krātzius, and xxSigibertus in Chronic. Blondus decad. 2. lib. 3.others, men of your owne religion, who write the summe of it after him: Sigonius (an Italian, yyThe discouery of Nicols, part. 2.to whom your Pope giueth almost a thousand crownes yearely to reade in one of his Uniuersities,) though he dissemble much, in his Italian historie, the thinges that touch the Popes state; yet zzSigon. de regno Italiae lib. 7.he acknowledgeth this, and writeth it somewhatfully. Now (I hope) you will not say of this Pope, Pope Iohn the twelfth, that perhaps he shewed his faith by his workes: or if you would say that he shewed his faith (as it may be he did,) yet you will not say that it was such a faith, as was the faith of Peter for which our Sauiour prayed. For, if you thinke here, that notwithstanding all these crimes he might be good after, as Peter repēted when he had denyed Christ, and so his faith did not faile, though it did fainte: then I must tell you further, that Pope Iohn went forwarde as he had begoon, and his death was answerable vntounto his life. aaAlb. Krantz. Metrop. l. 5 c. 1.While he was committing adulterie▪ he was slaine: whether bbPlatina in vita Iohan. decimi tert. Blondus decad 2. lib. 3.thrust through by some who tooke him in the act, or ccLuitpr…nd. Ticin. l. 6. c. 11. Sigibert. in Chron. Tritem. in Chron. monast. Hirsaug.striken by the diuell; historians agrée not. But ddSumma de eccles. l. 2. c. 103.Cardinall Turrecremata doth take that as more likely, which is p. 284more dreadfull. Because the life (saith he) of Pope Iohn was detestable, and marueilous offensiue to the Christian people: therefore Christ himselfe gaue out the sentence of condemnation against him. For, while he was abusing a certaine mans wife, the Diuell strooke him sodenly, and so he died without repentance.

Hart.

What if Pope Iohn, and some others of them, offended in their liues? Yet their faith failed not, that faith which Christ spake off. For by the name of [faith] he meant the doctrine of faith, which he prayed for Peter and so for his successours that they might kéepe sound, and neuer be seduced from it to any heresie. No more was Pope Iohn, nor any other of the Popes: though in their liues they were not all of the best.

Rainoldes.

I thought that Christ had meant by the name of [faith] a liuely Christian faith: which eeRom. 3.25.Rom 3:25imbraceth the promise of the merciemercy of God; which ffGal. 5.6.Gal 5:6worketh by louelove, and bringeth forth the fruites of faith; which ggIoh. 6.47.John 6:47whosoeuer hauehave, they hauehave assurance of euerlasting life. But you thinke belike that he meant a dead faith: a faith, which they hauehave of whom hhIam. 2.19.Jas 2:19it is writen, the Diuels beleeue, and tremble; a faith, which Pope Iohn might hauehave, and be a reprobate, and dye without repentance, and be the heire of death eternall.

Hart.

I say not that Christ meant a dead faith, but the right faith: that is, as I saide, the true and Catholike doctrine of the faith of Christ. As the scripture vseth that worde, where it is writen, that ii1. Tim. 1.1.1 Tim 1:1in the later times some shall depart from the faith, and shall giuegive heede to spirites of errour, and doctrines of Diuels. The doctrines of Diuels are heresies whatsoeuer. The faith is the true doctrine set against heresies. S. Pe…er held this faith when he saide, kkMatt. 16.16.Matt 16:16Thou art Christ, the Sonne of the liuing God. From this faith the diuell would hauehave remoued him. But Christ prayed for him that it should not faile. And so I say he prayed for the Bishops of Rome, that it should faile in none of them.

Rainoldes.

But this faith is also a faith, which llLuc. 4.…1.Luke 4:1the Deuils may hauehave, and yet tremble: a faith, which Pope Iohn might hauehave and be a reprobate, and die without repentance, and be the heire of death eternall.

Hart.

What if it be so?

p. 285Rainoldes.

Then Christ praied for Peter, that he should neuer lose that faith, which faith he might hauehave kept and yet be lost himselfe, euen lost both bodie and soule to euerlasting death.

Hart.

If I should graunt you so much:

Rainoldes.

Nay, you must néedes graunt it: for it is proued by Pope Iohn. But why said Christ to Peter, mmLuc. 22▪ ….Luke 22Satan hath desired, that he may sift you, as wheat? What is that to sift the disciples, as wheat?

Hart.

To sift them, as wheaten meale: that is, to shake out of them all their truth and faithfulnes, as flower out of the sieue, and leaue nothing within them but branne as it were.

Rainoldes.

Then Satan desired to shake out of them al their louelove towardes Christ, that they might forsake him, and reuolte from him.

Hart.

He did so.

Rainoldes.

And this he did, to what ende, but that he might destroy them: nnIob 1.11. & 2.5.Job 1:11Job 2:5as he desired to sift Iob? As S. Peter warneth vsus: oo1. Pet. 5. ver. ….1 Pet 5the Deuill goeth about like a roaring lion seeking whom he may deuour.

Hart.

It is true.

Rainoldes.

And as S. Peter armeth vsus against the attempts of the Deuill by this lesson, ppver. … ▪whom resist ye strong in faith: so Christ did arme him by praying to God, and obteining for him, that his faith should not faile.

Hart.

Uery true. He armed him and made him most strong qqLuc. 22.3….Luke 22:3that he being conuerted might strengthen his brethren.

Rainoldes.

Doo you not sée then that he must néedes meane by [faith] a liuely faith, which hath the louelove of Christ and constant godlines ioined with it? by which the Deuill is conquered, hell escaped, heauen assured? For, if he had meant the doctrine, as you construe it, the true and Catholike doctrine of the faith of Christ: how had he armed Peter against those fiery darts of Satā, which a right opinion in matters of faith was not able to quench? Wherin marke, I pray, what blemish you cast on the wisedome of Christ, whom you suppose to hauehave said to Peter: the Deuill will tempt you to draw you from my louelove, and to destroy you body and soule; but I hauehave prayed for thee, that thou shalt thinke aright in matters of faith. Which is, as if a Captaine, to cheere vp a souldiour (whom he had speciall care off) against p. 286the battaile, should tell him: the enimie will assault you with poisoned shot, to kill you; but I hauehave got a shield of paper for thee, to defend thee from it. Then which what can be spoken more ridiculous, or absurd?

Hart.

As though a right faith were no stronger fense against assaultes of the Deuill, then is a shield of paper against poisoned shot. S. Paule thought not so, rr… 6.16.who in the armour of a Christian exhorteth vsus aboue all things to take the shield of faith.

Rainoldes.

S. Paule meaneth not the same by [faith] that you doo. For he addeth of that shield, that we may quench all the fiery dartes of **foreign.the wicked (that is to say, of the deuill) with it. But a right opinion in matters of faith cannot quench them all: as it is plaine by Ioh. 13.…. Mat. 27.4. Act. 1.18.John 13Matt 27:4Acts 1:18Iudas, or by Pope Iohn. Therefore, hee meaneth by [the shield of faith] a liuely Christian faith, which God doth giuegive to his elect, and to them onelyonly; ttRe…. 12.11. Heb. 10. ver. 19.22. & …8.Heb 10:19Heb 10:22Heb 10:8by which wee ouercome the deuill, and all his forces, and enter into heauen. Howbeit, I deny not, that a right opinion in matters of faith is stronger then paper against some dartes of Satan, to weete, against errours. But to be preserued safe from these dartes, is not enough to life: neither doo all of them giuegive mortall woundes. The dartes, whereof I spake, are more sharpe, & deadly. Whom they wound, they kill. Against the which kind, if Christ had armed Peter with such a faith as you imagine, when Satan desired to sift him as wheat: it is profane to thinke it, but it foloweth of your fansie, that he armed him with (as it were) a paper-shield against poysoned shot. For, as against this shot a shield of paper cannot preserue our temporall life: so a right opinion in matters of faith could not saue him to life eternall from those dartes.

Hart.

And what if our Sauiour meant a liuely faith in that he prayed for Peter?

Rainoldes.

Then he prayed for Peter that which he prayed not for the Popes. For uu…he obteineth alwaies the things which he prayeth for. But he obteined not a liuely faith for al the Popes, as I hauehave proued. Therefore he prayed not for it. And so is that position found to be false, on which you pitch the Papacie; that Christ made that prayer for Peters successours in the See of Rome, The second Diuision.which he made for Peter, not to faile in faith.

Hart.

Yet Christ gaue him also that faith which we speake off: I meane a right iudgement in matters of faith, with grace, p. 287that neither it should faile. And in this priuilege the Pope doth succeede him, though not in the other.

Rainoldes.

You should first proue that Christ meant this priuilege in mentioning [faith] there: or els, I will answere, that xxLuc. 24.49. Act. 2.4.Luke 24:49Acts 2:4he gaue it to Peter, as to the Apostles. And so may their successours claime it, as well as Peters. But admit he meant it. The Pope doth not succeede him in this priuilege neither. For the Pope may, not onelyonly erre in doctrine, but also be an heretike. Which (I hope) you will not say that Peter might.

Hart.

Neither, by my good will, that the Pope may.

Rainoldes.

But you must: no remedie. It is a ruled case. Your Schoolemen and Canonistes, yyIn dialogo part. 1. lib. 6. cap. 1.Ockam, zzIn Summa. lib. 5. tit. de ha…eticis.Hostiensis, aaSumma de eccles. l. 2. c. 93. & 112.Turrecremata, bb… Pontificum.Zabarella, ccDe concord. catholica l. 2. c. 17.Cusanus, ddSumm. part. 3 tit. 22. c. 7.Antoninus, eeAduers. haeres. l. 1. c. 2. & 4.Alfonsus, ffLoco…. theolog. lib. 6. cap. 8.Canus, ggDe visib. Monarc. lib. 7.Sanders, hhControuers. 4. part. 2. quaest. 1·Bellarmin, and iiCanonistae in Dist. 40. c. Si Papa. Archid. & Ioan. Andr. c. in fidei. de haereticis. in Sex…. Caietan. de autoritat. Papae & concil. cap. 20. & 23.others, yea the kkDist. 40. c. Si Papa.Canon law it selfe, yea a llSynod. Romana quint. sub Symmacho.Councell, a Romane councell, confirmed by the Pope, do graunt it.

Hart.

They graunt that the Pope may be an heretike, perhaps, by a supposall: as many things may be, which neuer were, nor are, nor shall be. For you cannot proue, that euer any Pope was an heretike, actually: though possibly they may be. Wherof I will not striue.

Rainoldes.

If they may be possibly, which you must néedes graunt: then is it certaine that it was not meant by the words of Christ that they should not faile in doctrine of faith. For whatsoeuer he saith, that it shall not be: that cannot be possibly. But it it is no surer that they may be heretikes: then it is manifest, that some of them hauehave béene. For whē the Church was pestered with the heresie of the Monothelites, who, (whereas Christ is made our Sauiour and redéemer by that he doth consist of mm1. Tim. 3.1….1 Tim 3:1two natures, God and man; and as of two natures, so of nnLuc. 22.42.Luke 22:42two willes, agreeably to the natures,) they say that Christ hath but onelyonly **Whence they are called (after y^e Greeke) Monothelites, as you would say One-wilmen.one will, and by consequent but one nature; which razeth the ground of our saluation: Honorius the Pope did hold and teach this heresie. The ooSext. synod. Constantinopolit. actione 12. & 13.sixth generall councell found him guiltie of it: condemned him, and cursed him for it.

Hart.

Whether Pope Honorius held that heresie or no: the Catholikes are of diuers iudgements; some thinking that he did, some that he did not. Father Robert, the reader of controuersies in Rome, preferreth the opinion of ppDe hierar. ecclesiast. l. 4. c. 8.Pighius, qqContra Brentium. lib. 2.Hosius, and p. 288rrAnnotat. in … latin. vit. Hon or. prim.Onuphrius, before them al who thinke otherwise: and so with their consent, he doth acquite Honorius.

Rainoldes.

How? by a pardon? as ssIob. 18.40.Job 18:40Barrabas was acquited? Or, hauehave they empaneled a iurie of Clerkes, and found him not guiltie?

Hart.

They shew by good reasons that he is falsely slaundered. For Pighius and Hosius doo bring the testimonies of historians, Platina, Sabellicus, Nauclerus, Blondus, & Aeneas Siluius: who say, that Honorius did condemne the heresie of the Monothelites. Whereto Onuphrius addeth the authorities of Emmanuell Callêca, a Grecian; and Iohn of Turrecremata, Cardinal of San-sisto: who hauehave proued by their writings that he was a Catholike Bishop.

Rainoldes.

HaueHave proued? Nay they would, had not their proofes failed. But is not this a straunge answere? The question is touching Honorius, a Pope, who liued almost a thousand yeares ago, what he taught in a point of faith. The Bishops, who liued about the same time, ttSynod. se…t. subscript. act. …not many fewer then two hundred or (as Histor. mis…ell. Paul. Diac. …. 19.some write) three hundred, do say, and proue their saying by his owne writings, that he taught erroneously as the Monothelites. Platina, Sabellicus, Nauclerus, Blondus, Siluius, Callêca, and Turrecremata, seuen of the Popes freends, of whom the eldest liued aboue sixe hundred yeares after him, doo affirme the contrary. Whether of these are likelier to know and say the truth thereof?

Hart.

But there are also in the Popes librarie the writings of Maximus, who liued about the same time. And it is plaine by him that Honorius did not subscribe to that heresie: yea, that of a certainetie he did condemne it.

Rainoldes.

Onuphrius might say so, and (as he thought) safely, because it was not likely, that we should see Maximus in y^e Popes librarie to disproue his saying. But it is disproued by your owne De…ens. fidei Trident. lib. 2.Andradius. Who discoursing hereof, to shewe that it is not certaine that Honorius did first condemne the heresie of the Monothelites, though Platina, and Sabellicus, and Blondus, and Aeneas Siluius say he did: for Theophanes, (saith he) and Anastasius, historians much ancienter then they, do write that Iohn the fourth Pope after him was the first who did it. And Maximus (as it is well noted by Torrensis a singular p. 289learned man, hauing purposly vndertaken to cleere Honorius of that heresie, made not any mention of his condemning it: though, if it had beene so, he must hauehave knowne it needes, and could not hauehave omitted it. Now, this yyLib. de sexta. sep…ima, & octaua synod….Torrensis, whom Andradius prayseth, hath alleaged that whole place of Maximus touching Honorius: whereof the summe is this, that the secretarie of Honorius, who wrote the verie epistle that he was charged by, and knewe belike his meaning best, expounded part thereof in a good sense, that it might seeme sounde. And this is that Maximus 11In Biblio…heca Palatina.in the Popes library, by which your Onuphrius doth take it to bée 22Satis manifestum est.plaine, (or at the least would hauehave vsus take it,) that Honorius did neuer subscribe to that heresie, yea, that of a certaintie he did condemne it. But sée what difference betwéene men. Andradius, who alloweth the secretaries exposition which Maximus alleaged to cléere Honorius of that heresie, yet thinketh it plaine by that place of Maximus, that hee did not condemne it. Torrensis, a friend of the Popes too, declareth, that a part of the epistle of Honorius is helped reasonably by the secretaries exposition: but it fitteth not another parte thereof, in which it is plaine by his owne wordes, that he was a Monothelite. So Torrensis who had accesse to the Popes library as well as Onuphrius, hath shewed that Onuphrius did meane to steale a lye by sending vsus to Maximus in the Popes library. As for Maximus himselfe, he was loth, for good will both to Honorius and the truth, that the heretikes should boast (as zzIn concil. Roman. Martin. Secreta… 4.they did) of such a patrone: and therefore he desired to withdraw him from them. But aaSext. Synod. Constantinop. act. 11.the generall Councell (before which hée wrote) found after, on better examination of the matter, that Honorius ioyned with them, and taught as they did. Wherefore, whatsoeuer Maximus hath writen or rather wished of it: the Councell is of greater credit then Maximus; much more, then Callêca or Turrecremata, who could not say therein so much as Maximus, bbIoan. de Turrecrem. in summa de eccles. l. 2. c. 93.and Maximus is the best that they say.

Hart.

That which you alleage of the Councell, were somewhat, if they had condemned Honorius of that heresie. But they did not: although it be so writen in the Councell now. For Anastasius, the kéeper of the Popes library, who liued within two hundred yeares after Honorius, doth teach in his Latin p. 290historie, out of Theophanes a Gréeke writer, that the 11Vulg…a exempla…a sextae synodi a Graecis cor…upta.common copies of the sixth Councell were corrupted by the Grecians; and the 22Canones, in quibus Honorius condemna…ur, supposititios esse.Canons thereof, in the which Honorius is condemned, were forged.

Rainoldes.

Canons? what Canons? There are no Canons of the sixth Councell in which Honorius is condemned. Neither doth Anastasius or Theophanes say it.

Hart.

No? Sure ccAnnotat. in Plat. vit. Honor.Onuphrius saith as I saide. And that which he saith, he saith that Sirletus, then, a chiefe Notarie, now Cardinall of Rome, an excellent learned man, had marked it.

Rainoldes.

A foule and grosse faute, either of Sirletus, or Onuphrius, or both. For there were two méetinges of Bishops at Constantinople, which both doo beare the name of the sixth Councell: Sexta Synodus Constantinop.the former, vnderunder the Emperour Constantine the fourth, about the yeare of Christ sixe hundred and eightie; 22Canones patrum Constantinop. in Trullo.the later, vnderunder his sonne Iustinian, towarde a thirtie yeares after. The former was assembled against the heresie of the Monothelites: the Bishops of the west Church, as well as of the east were present, and they with one consent did al condemne Honorius. In the later there met the Bishops of the east onelyonly, who made rules and orders of ecclesiasticall discipline, which are the Canons that you mention. These Canons doo conteine the summe of the ordinances of the Gréeke Church: wherein the Church of Rome is grated vponupon, both for ddcan. 3. & 13. & 55. & 69.other pointes, and chiefly for can. 36. & 39.the Popes supremacie. The Gréeke Bishops therefore to winne the more credit vntounto their Canons, said that they were made by the sixth generall Councell. Of which Synod. Nicen. secund. action. 4. …. Habeo librum. distinct. …6.they reported, that, when it was dimissed, the verie same Fathers, whom Constantine the Emperour assembled before, were againe assembled by his sonne Iustinian, after a foure or fiue yeares, and ordained those Canons. But Theophanes, and Anastasius hauehave shewed that to be a tale, as it is in déede: and in discourse thereof hauehave saide of those Canons, that they are falsly named the Canons of the sixth Councell. Now Sirletus, falling belike on these wordes, and remembring that the sixth Councell is saide to hauehave condemned Honorius: thought it either true, or wholesome to be taught as true, that hee was condemned by harlotrie Canons not made by the Councell, but forged in the Councels name. Which fansie peraduenture he p. 291told his friend Onuphrius: and Onuphrius for ioy went and set it in print. So, by the conueiance of Onuphrius and Sirletus, pretending and abusing the countenance and names of Anastasius, and Theophanes: the sixth generall Councell is put to silence (as it were,) from bearing witnesse against Honorius. But, the mischiefe of it is, that ggLib. de sext…. septima, & octaua synod.Torrensis againe doth marre the play. For out of the histories of Theophanes and Anastasius (which are not common to be séene) he hath alleaged also this place touching those Canons. Whereby it is manifest that their meaning was not to discredit the actions of the sixth Councell which condemned Honorius in the time of Constantine, as you would hauehave vsus to imagin. Their meaning was onelyonly to shew that the Canons, which are called the Canons of the sixth Councell, were made by other Bishops in the time of Iustinian, long after that Councell, and therefore are falsly fathered vponupon that.

Hart.

But is not Honorius condemned by those Canons, whosoeuer made them?

Rainoldes.

He is not as much as named in any of them, hhCan. patru… Constantinop. in Trullo. can. ….saue onelyonly in the first: where they who named him, hauehave named him so, that both they hauehave seuered them selues from the sixth Councell, by which he was condemned, and hauehave encreased the credit of it. For they recken him amongst the heads of the Monotheli…es, and say of them all, that the sixth Councell did condemne them iustly.

Hart.

That Canon sauoureth of corruption, which speaketh so of Pope Honorius.

Rainoldes.

So. What say you then to the iiSexta Synod Constantinop. act. 13.sixth generall Councell it se…fe? They doo speake of him a great deale more bitt…rly, reprouing his doct…ine as the doctrine of heretikes, false, wicked, pestilent. Nor thinking it enough to condemne his doctrine, they curse his name and person also.

Hart.

I say y^t the copies of y^e sixth general councel are corrupted.

Rainoldes.

The sixth generall Councell hath handled the cause of the Monothelite heretikes in eightene actions, as they are termed. In the first action, the eight, and the eleuenth: the heretikes alleage in their owne defense, that Pope Honorius taught as they doo. In the twelfth, and thirtenth, his writinges are examined, his heresie discouered, himselfe condemned, p. 292and cursed. In the sixtenth, seuententh, and eightenth, the sentence which was giuen against him, and **Honorio haeretico …nathema.the curse, are repeated often, againe and againe, with acclamation of the Councel. Thinke you that the copies of the actions of the Councell are corrupted in all those places?

Hart.

In all, in which Honorius is condemned, or cursed.

Rainoldes.

What? and that those places are corrupted in all copies, and that without difference, all after one sort▪ al with the same wordes?

Hart.

All? why not? is that impossible?

Rainoldes.

Not impossible: yet improbable. But the kkSynod. Nicaena 2 action. 7. in definit. Synod.seuenth generall Councell, which you es…éeme so greatly for their defense of image-worship, this seuenth doth make no better account of Honorius.

Hart.

The seuenth generall Councell is corrupted too.

Rainoldes.

But in the llSynodus octaua Constantinop. sub Adrian. secund. act. 7.eight general Councel there is rehersed a spéech of Adrian the Pope, which he had vttered in a councell assembled by himselfe. In that he affirmeth, that the Bishops of the east did condemne Honorius with the consent of the Bishop of Rome.

Hart.

The eight generall Councell is corrupted too.

Rainoldes.

But mmIn epist. ad Constantin. August. Synod. sext. act. 18.Leo the second, who was Pope then when the sixth Councell was ended, doth namely confirme this point with these wordes: we accurse Honorius, who hath not lightned this Apostolike Church with Apostolike doctrine, but by wicked treacherie hath labored to subuert the vndefiled faith.

Hart.

That epistle of Leo is corrupted too.

Rainoldes.

But many other learned both Gréeke and Latin autors, nnDe ration. temp. & in martyrologio.Beda, ooDe sept. sacris synod. Graecor.Psellus, ppContra Nicetam.Vmbertus, qqIn paefat. ad sextam Synod.Balsamon, rrChronic. l. 2.Marianus Scotus, ssSept. Synod. act. 3. in epist. ad …pisc. &Tharasius, and the **episcopor. ad Tharas.easterne bishops, yea ttPontifical. in v…r. 1 con. secūd.your owne Pontificall of the Popes liues, make reporte of it.

Hart.

What néedeth this adoo? It is all answered by uuBellarm. controuer. 4. part. …. quaest. 1.Father Robert in a word. For either these autors are corrupted them selues, or they were deceiued by the copies of the sixth councell being corrupted.

Rainoldes.

The saying of Tully (I sée) is verie true: xxCic. ad Luc. epist. lib. 5.He that is once gone beyond the boundes of modestie, must p. 293lustily be impudent. yyDe hierar. ecclesiast. lib. 4.Albertus Pighius, an Archpapist, intending to proue (in his bookes of the holy princehood of the Church,) that in all causes of faith and religion the Pope is the soueraine iudge of all Christians, whom they are bound to heare and folow: because it was absurd, he thought, and very daungerous to attribute so great a power to one man, vnles y^e man were such, as might not erre in faith, zzcap. 6. & 7.therefore he tooke vponupon him to bring in this doctrine that the praier of Christ for Peters faith not to faile, doth priuilege the Pope from falling into any heresie. Whereupon, as in generall he denied that the Pope may be an heretike, aacap. 8.though all Diuines and Canonistes (by his confession) graunt it: so, to clense Honorius thereof in particular, hée said that the copies of the sixth Councell, which made against him, were corrupted. This dealing of Pighius was greatly misliked by lerned men of his own side, bbPighius praefat. in diatrib. de actis sext. & sept. synod.in so much y^t one of them reproued him for it in a publike assembly, & wisht him to recant it. They alleaged against him, that Honorius was condemned and pronounced an heretike by two generall Councels, the sixth, and the seuenth: wherofthe authoritie ought to be held as sacred. But Pighius was so farre from being moued therewith, that he wrote a ccDe actis sextae & septimae synodi, quod sint parengrapha & minime germana▪ Alberti Pighii Diatribe.new treatise against those two Councels, affirming them to be corrupted: and in heat of zeale for the Popes quarell he called the sixth Councell **Ter execrandum concilium.a most cursed Councell. Here the Councels case and perill that was like to fall on all autours, if such hot heads might make such desperate answeres, did stirre vp the spirite of ddLib. de …exta, septima & octaua synodo.Franciscus Torrensis to write against Pighius: whom he hath confuted, and proued that Honorius was in deede an heretike, condemned by the Councell iustly. Sith the which time though eeCon…. Brent. lib. 2.Hosius a Cardinall, and ffAnnot. in Platin. vit. Honor.Onuphrius a Fryer, men of hard foreheads, hauehave taken Pighius part: yet neither hauehave they strengthned the reasons of Pighius, shaken in péeces by Torrensis; and other of your Doctors more ingenuous and sound, namely ggSanction. eccles. clas…. 1. in propugnaculo sextae synodi.Iouerius, hhLocor. the …l…gicor. l. 6. c. 8.Canus, iiDe…ens. f…dei. Trident. l ….Andradius, and kkDe iust … lib. 2. cap. 23.Alfonsus a Castro, hauehave shewed their mislike of Pighius and Honorius both. Yea, …ur countriman llIn his Det…tion lib ….Harding, who would not graunt so much of any other Pope, yet graunted of Honorius, that he may be iustly burdened with heresie, and fell in deede into it. But now, behold, a newe gamster, a Iesuit, Father Robert, doth set vponupon the matter fresh, and teacheth in his solemne p. 294lectures at Rome, that 11Opinio vera est, posse esse haereticum.it is true, the Pope may be an heretike: marry 22Probabile est, & pi… credi potest, hereticum … non posse.it is probable, and godly to be thought, that he cannot be an heretike. A straunge resolution, and fitte for a Iesuit. Yet to shew how probable he can make that seeme which he confesseth to be false, by holding the contrarie therof to be true: he saith somewhat for eueryevery one of those Popes that are charged with heresie; and for Pope Honorius he dealeth more impudently then Pighius himselfe. For he toucheth not the credit of the sixth, or seuenth Councell, onelyonly; but all that come in his way: Councels, Popes, Gr…ekes, Latins, Historians, Diuines, either they are corrupted, or abused by corruption. Well may the opinion, which Father Robert saith for, be probable & false both. But this of Honorius, by which he would confirme it, is (out of all doubt) though false, yet not probable.

Hart.

It is probable enough, as Father Robert handleth it. For streames may be corrupted as easily as the fountaine, or take infection at least from the fountaine being corrupted. Now the fountaine as it were, whence the rest hauehave drawne it, is the sixth Councell. And he saith, that there the name of Honorius was thrust in amongst the names of other heretikes, by malitious men, of spite against the Pope. Whereof hee bringeth two proofes. One, that Anastasius witnesseth it to hauehave bene so, out of Theophanes. An other, that the Gréekes aduentured sometimes to corrupt bookes: as nn…ext. synod. Constantinop. act. 3.the same Councell declareth by their practises.

Rainoldes.

The Councell declareth that there were some copies of a former Councell, that had bene corrupted by heretikes among the Greekes. But, as euill dealing doth still leaue steppes behind it, whereby it may be traced out, ooAct. 3. & 14.Acts 3their corruption was discouered both by circumstances of the thing, and by the maner of writing, and by conference with other copies. Now in these places of the sixth Councell in which Honorius is touched: you can shew no token of any such suspicion. Nay, the tokens all are cleere to the contrarie: euen y^t which you alleage of the Greekes conuicted to hauehave corrupted bookes. For if they had corrupted so much of the Councell in so many places: it is very likely that they would hauehave also corrupted those places, wherein they are noted and discredited for such corruptions. Neither doth Anastasius report out of Theophanes, that the Greekes did so. Perhaps p. 295Father Robert did dreame out of Onuphrius, that hee had said so. But, although Onuphrius say more in that point then truth did afford: yet he saith not that. As for Anastasius: he is so farre from saying it, that he gainesayeth it rather. For, ppAnastas. bibl…othecar. in vit. Leon. 2.in his storie of the Popes liues, he setteth Honorius downe amongst the heretikes who were condemned by the sixth Councell. The same is confirmed qqF…an. Torrensis de. sext. sept. & octau. synod….in an olde copie of the seuenth Councell, which he translated out of Greeke, and left it in the Popes librarie. And at the eight Councell he was him selfe present, and put it into Latin most diligently and faithfully: there a Pope doth witnesse it. To be short, Torrensis addeth moreouer touching Anastasius, that if he had suspected the Greekes to hauehave corrupted any of the places concerning this matter: hee would hauehave giuen warning (no doubt) of it also, as he hath done of other. Wherfore, though ill disposed men amongst the Greekes corrupted bookes sometimes: yet the consent of copies, chiefely of the Latin **Scriptus est hic codextem poribus Se…gii primi Papae: reconditus in patriarchio ecclesiae …omanae. Concilior. Tom. 2. in calce sextae synodi.writen shortly after the time of the Councell & laid vp at Rome, the coherence of things, the agreement of autours, and circumstances of the storie, doo make it very vnlikely that they dealt so with the sixth Councell in the matter of Honorius. It were pitie that all euidences of men should be distrusted, because there are some euidences falsified by euill men. But Father Robert dealeth, as Alexander the great: who, when he could not vndoo the knot of Gordius, did cutte it a sunder with his sword.

Hart.

Your knot of Honorius (I wisse) is not so hard, but that he might vndoo it without this sword: and he doth so. For mmBellarmi…. cōtrouers. 4. pa… 2. quaes…. 1.he sheweth, that the epistles of Honorius to Sergius, on which the sixth Councell adiudged him an heretike, are both wisely writen, and 11Nullum con…inent errorem.sound, without errour. Wherefore though we shoulde graunt that hee had sentence giuen against him by the Councell: it foloweth not thereof, that he was an heretike. They might condemne him vniustly.

Rainoldes.

Take heede. You were better let the knot alone then vndoo it so. This medicine will do more harme, then the disease. In deede a great rrTurrecre…. in …umm. de ecclesia l. 2. c. 93.Cardinall, on whom you relie much, would play fast and loose with it in such sort vponupon the spéech of Pope Adrian: who saith that Honorius was cursed by the Bishops of the East after his death, because he was accucused of heresie. For hereupon he gathereth, that Honorius p. 296was not an heretike while he liued, nor cursed by the Pope, or Bishops of the west. But it foloweth straight in Alloquut. 3. … concilio …omano, lecta in Synod. act. 7.the spéech of Adrian, (which the Cardinall cut off,) that vnlesse the Pope had consented to it, the Bishops of the east would not hauehave condemned him. Moreouer, the actes of the Counc…ll shewe, how Bishops of the west were also Sext. Synod. Const…ntinop. ….present, and uuAct. 17. & 18.Acts 17subscribed. So that the sentence (giuen against Honorius) was giuen by the Councell, and by the Pope him selfe, not by the easterne Bishops only. Wherfore if the epistles of Honorius were sound, on which, as vnsound, he was condemned of heresie: then a generall Councell confirmed by the Pope did erre in condemning him. And if you graunt this, as you must by consequent: you betraye the strongest castell of Poperie, to saue a captaines honour. For men of iudgement will thinke, that the doctrine of the reformed Churches may be sound, for which as vnsound the Councell of Trent confirmed by the Pope hath condemned vsus. They might condemne vsus vniustly.

Hart.

Not so. For they examined and knew very perfitly the doctrine of the reformed Churches, as you call them.

Rainoldes.

What? And did the other condemne and curse the doctrine of Honorius a Pope: and did they not examine and know it very perfitly?

Hart.

If this do not stand with the Councels credit: Father Robert maketh an other answere yet, which may be liked better. Namely, that the epistles were perhaps Portas…is episto…l…sunt con…ic….counterfeited: not writen by Honorius, but by some heretike in his name. And so might the Councell condemne the doctrine iustly, but erre in the person.

Rainoldes.

Yet were this also a blemish of the Councell, to condemne a Pope in steede of an heretike. But they hauehave not deserued to be touched with it. For, the Sext. synod. Constantinop. act. 12.former epistle, vponupon the proofe whereof they did proceed to sentence, they saw it conferred with the authētical Latin copie, & found it to agrée. Beside that, yyMaximus in disputat. contr. Pyr…hum.y^e autor whom your selues alleage to cléere Honorius, confessed it to be Honorius his owne: and he confessed it then, when the secretarie of Honorius, who wrote it with his owne hand, was aliue, of good account, and bare witnesse of it. The Sext. synod. Constantinop. …ction. 13.later was approued to the Councel, as the former: though they p. 297stoode lesse about it, as néeding lesse inquiry, when he was now alreadie cast. But it hath all presumptions for it, so probable, that not as much as aaHierar. …. ib. 4. cap ….Pighius could suspect it, though he suspected the other. Neither do I thinke that father Robert thought them in déede to be counterfeited. But as a man that is in daunger of drowning doth snatch at eueryevery bulrush to saue his life, if it may be: so he, seing the Pope made subiect to heresie by the sixth generall Councell, doth catch at euerie fansie, whereby he hath some hope to helpe him. The fansie of Pighius is, that the Councell did not condemne Honorius: the copies of it are corrupted. bbDefens. …. Trident. lib. 2.Andradius checketh that, and saith he was condemned: but the Councell erred in condemning him, as iudging him to erre, who did not. ccDe sext. sept. & octau. Synod.Torrensis varieth from them both, and cometh in with a finer quirke: to wéete, that Pope Honorius did consent with heretikes, but, as a priuate man; and not, as Pope. This ddIn the places afore quoted.Canus, and Alfonsus, and Harding rest vponupon, and eeCh…onog…. lib. 3.Genebrard after them: who addeth yet withall (for feare of the worst) that the hereticall epistles of Honorius were counterfeited perhaps. All these hath Father Robert, and flitteth vp and downe, to this, to that, amidst them: at the last, as one halfe gone and past sense, he layeth hold on the weakest, euen on the bulrush of Pighius. Now, if that of Pighius be so inconuenient, that the force of truth doth driue you backe from it: you must retire also from that, as inconuenient, whereof it doth folow. That is the false principle, wherein you ioyne with him, and ffPighius pr… fat. in diatrib. & in dia…ibe de actis sext. & se…. Synod.he thereon doth reason thus: Christ prayed for the Pope, in that he prayed for Peter, his faith not to faile: therefore the Pope cannot erre. The Pope cannot erre: therefore Pope Honorius was not an heretike. Honorius was not an heretike: therefore the sixth generall Councell did not condemne him. For the conclusion hereof, being false, doth argue a falshood in that which doth inferre it. That is the first proposition: which you must amend, and reason thus of the contrarie. The sixth generall Councell did condemne Honorius: therefore he was an heretike. Pope Honorius was an heretike: therefore the Pope may erre. The Pope may erre: Christ therefore prayed not for the Pope, in that he prayed for Peter. For had he prayed for the Pope, then the faith of Pope Honorius had not failed. But his faith failed. Christ therefore prayed p. 298not for him.

Hart.

The third Diuision.You shall not teache mee how to reason. The firste proposition of Pighius is good, though it be admitted that his conclusion is fawtie. For the learned Catholikes, albeit they graunt that Honorius was an heretike and condemned iustly by the sixth generall Councell: yet they hold that Christ prayed for the Pope, and that therefore the Pope cannot erre; but how? Christ did not respect S. Peters person, but his office, when hée prayed for him that his faith should not faile: for it was to this end, that he being conuerted might strengthen and confirme his brethren. Now, because the Church, for whose sake that priuilege was giuen vntounto Peter, should néede to be strengthned afterwarde no lesse then in his time: therefore was it giuen to him, not as to him alone for himselfe, but as for his successours in the Church of Rome too. So, the Pope is priuileged from falling into errour by the prerogatiue of his office, through the ordinance of Christ: that would hauehave all Bishops and Pastors of the world to depend on him for their confirmation in faith and ecclesiasticall regiment. Whereof it ensueth that he cannot erre in respect of his office, although in respect of his person he may: or (to speake it after the phrase of the 11Er…orem esse duplicem: alte…ū personalem. al…erum iudicialē. Melchior Canus locorum Theolog. lib. 6. cap. 8.Schoolemen) he may erre personally, but not iudicially. For errour is twofold: personall, and iudiciall. Errour personall, is the priuate errour of a man: iudiciall, the publike. Into publike errours Popes can not fall: they may into priuate. I meane, 22As the Rhemists expound that distinction of Canu…: in their Annotat. …n Luk. …2.…1.Luke 2:1they may erre in person, vnderstanding, priuate doctrine, or writinges: but they cannot nor shall not euer iudicially conclude or giuegive definitiue sentence for falshood or heresie against the Catholike faith, in their Consistories, Courtes, Councels, decrées, deliberations, or consultations kept for decision and determination of such controuersies, doutes, or questions of faith as shalbe proposed vntounto them: because Christes prayer and promise protecteth them therein for confirmation of their brethren. And hereupon wée say the Pope may erre, as a priuate man, but not as Pope. Which, although you call it a quirke, and fansie, yet hath it pith & weight. For [Pope] doth note the office: [a priuate man] the person. And any man of sense may sée the difference betwene the person and the office, as well in doctrine, as life. Liberius in persecution might yeeld, Marcellinus for feare might commit idolatrie, p. 299Honorius might fall to heresie, and more then all this, some Iudas might créepe into the office: and yet all this without preiudice of the office and seate, in which (saith S. ggEpist. 166. in fine.Augustine) our Lord hath set the doctrine of truth. hhIoh. 11.50John 11:50Caiphas by priuilege of his office prophecied right of Christ: but according to his owne faith and knowledge, knew not Christ. The Euangelists and other penne…s of holy write, for the execution of that function had the assistance of God, and so farre could not possibly erre: but that Luke, Marke, Salomon, or the rest might not erre in other their priuate writings, that we say not. It was not the personall-

Rainoldes.

You néede not proue a thing confessed. Common sense doth teach it. A ruler of a company may be a good man and an euill magistrate. King Alexander had two friends, of whom he called 11Crat… foreign.one, the kinges friend; 22Hephaestio foreign.the other, Alexanders friend. The magistrate and the man, the king and Alexander, the office and the person, we doo not deny a difference betwixt them. Neither did I meane that eueryevery such answere is a quirke and fansie. Pope iic. quia quor… dam. extrauag. Iohan. 23. de verborum significatione.Iohn the two and twentieth, when (vponupon a controuersie about the beggerie of Friers) there was alleaged against him a saying of Pope Innocentius the fifth: **Dicimus, quó… hoc dix…rit, non vt Papa, sed vt frater Petrus d… Tarantasia, in quadam postilla sua.he saide, that Innocentius had said it, not as Pope, but as Frier Peter of Tarantasia (that was his name, as a priuate man) in one of his postils. And this was well saide of Iohn. For when Innocentius was Pope, he had no leasure (I trow) to write postils: it is likely that he wrote them before he was Pope, when he was Frier Peter of Tarantasia. But as that distinction of [Pope] and [priuate man] is vsed by your doctors in the case of Honorius: so I saide and say againe, it is a quirke, a vaine quirke and fansie. For that, which Honorius wrote, and was condemned for, he wrote it as Pope, not as a priuate man.

Hart.

You meane, that he wrote it when he was Pope: that is true. But he wrote it not as Pope.

Rainoldes.

I meane, that he wrote it as Pope: and I will proue it if you will giuegive me leaue. But first to take vp that which you hauehave laide to disproue it: you alleage that Caiphas was exempt from errour, nay prophecied right of Christ, by priuilege of his office. Whereby you would imply the like touching p. 300the Pope. The example agréeth verie fitly in part. But doth it agrée (thinke you) in that part, in which it must to serue your turne?

Hart.

What els? For it is writen in the holy gospell, that when the Iewes consulted in a Councel what to doo with Christ, whether to let let him alone, or apprehend him: Ioh. 11.44.John 11:44Caiphas, being the high Priest of that yeare, saide to them, you know nothing, neither do you consider, that it is expedient for vsus, that one man dye for the people, and the whole nation perish not. And this he saide not of himselfe: but being the hie priest of that yeare, he prophecied that Iesus should die for the nation.

Rainoldes.

But it is writen also in the holy Gospell, that in an other Councell and consultation of the Iewes, wherein they sought vniustly to condemne the iust, when Iesus being asked whether he were Christ, the sonne of God, confessed him selfe to be so: Caiphas, Matt. 26.65.Matt 26:65the hye priest, saide, hee hath blasphemed: what neede we witnesses any further? behold, now you hauehave heard his blasphemie. Was this spéeche of Caiphas, a prophecie, or an errour?

Hart.

What if it were an errour?

Rainoldes.

How sée you not then that Caiphas did not prophecie by priuilege of his office? For so he should hauehave prophecied in this Councell too, in which he sate as hye Priest, hée spake as hye Priest, and to him as hye Priest the Councell did assent in giuing sentence against Christ. But that amongst many mischiefes and falshoodes he spake the wordes of truth once, in a sense, not which he meant, (for he meant wickedly) but which his spéeche yéelded: there was a worke of God in it. Who, hauing sent his sonne, a sauiour to the Iewes, as he stirred them vp to know him, and receiue him, by Angels, by wonders, by voyces from heauen, by mmMatt. 2.1.Matt 2:1wise men from the east, nnLuc. 2.36.Luke 2:36a prophetisse in the temple, ooMatt. 3.1. and the rest▪ throgh the whole st… …ies of the E…ngelists.Matt 3:1Iohn Baptist in the wildernes, by men, women, childrē, all sortes of persons, yea by y^e diuels them selues: so he made the hye Priest to beare witnesse of him, by giuing out an O…cle vnderunder doutfull wordes, to make the Iewes more vnexcusable, that by his owne mouth the naughtie seruant might be iudged. Wherefore not the ordinarie priuilege of office, but an extraordinarie motion of God, did guide the tongue of p. 302Caiphas to prophecie of Christ: as ppNum. 22.28.Num 22:28he opened the mouth of the asse of Balaam, to reproue her maister. And you, who would gather an ordinarie priuilege of the Popes office by that extraordinarie prophecying of Caiphas: doo make a like reason, as if you should conclude that y^e Popes horse can speake, because that Balaams asse did. Nay, you might conclude this on greater reason. For Balaams asse spake twise: Caiphas prophecied but once.

Hart.

Your similitude is odious. I maruell why you vse such.

Rainoldes.

Because your reason is absurd: & I would faine hauehave you see it.

Hart.

Absurd? He that should call it absurd in our schooles, would be thought him selfe absurd. For, it is grounded vponupon a proportion betwixt the hie Priest, and the Pope; the Church of the Iewes, and of the Christians.

Rainoldes.

Then by a reason of proportion (belike) the Pope condemneth Christ, as Caiphas did; and vexeth Christians, as qqAct. 4.….Acts 4Annas. Doo you allowe hereof in your schooles also?

Hart.

Yet againe? I see you will neuer leaue these odious comparisons. The Pope, to Caiphas, and Annas?

Rainoldes.

You are a straunge man: who go about to proue by the example of Caiphas, that the Pope can not erre in office; and are angrie with me for touching the weakenes of your reason therein.

Hart.

Wel. **Staple…. princ. doctr. l. 2. c. 12.I graunt that Caiphas had not that priuilege. For it was not promised to the hie Priestes of the Iewish Church, but till the comming of Christ: at which time the Prophets shewed that it should faile them. For Ieremie saith thereof: rrIer. 4.9,Jer 4:9In that day the heart of the king shall perish, and the heart of the Princes and the Priestes shal be astonished. And Ezekiel, more plainely: ssEzek. 7.26▪Ezek 7:26The law shall perish from the Priest, & counsell from the Elders. But, till that time they had it, and did teach the truth according to the law, and were to be obeied in all things which they taught.

Rainoldes.

Yea? What say you then of Vrias, who was hie Priest vnderunder king Achaz, sixe hundred yeares before Christ? He ceased to sacrifice on the altar of God, appointed by the law: and, p. 203tt2. King. 16.16.2 Kgs 16:16hauing made a new one like to the altar of Damascus, he sacrificed vponupon it. Whereby he defiled himselfe and the land with rebellion against the Lord.

Hart.

I say that Vrias did erre in doing so. But we may refute this reason of yours by denying that Vrias did succede Aaron, and was of the tribe of Leui.

Rainoldes.

In déede uuHosius contr. Brent. lib. 2.a Cardinall answereth that you may refute it so in one word. And that is shewed plainelye enough (as he saith) by those wordes of scripture which are writen of Ieroboam; 1. King. 12.31.1 Kgs 12:31He made Chapels in hie places, and Priestes of the lowest of the people, who were not of the sonnes of Leui. But this refutation is as fitte against our reason of Vrias: as if a mā should say that Bishops in England are not Protestants, because the Bishops of Fraunce are Papistes. For, the Priestes, which Ieroboam made of the lowest of the people not of the sonnes of Leui, were in the kingdome of Israel, at Bethel and Dan: and Vrias was Priest in the temple at Ierusalem, in the kingdome of Iuda. The thing is apparant by yyFor Ieroboams Priestes, 1. King. 12.29. For Vrias, 2. King. 16.2.1 Kgs 12:292 Kgs 16:2the very course and text of the scripture. And zzThe Iewes in S…der Olamzuta Lira comment. in 4. Reg. 16. Nicephor. hist eccles. lib. 2. cap. 4. Genebrard. Chronogr. lib. 1. Sig…ius de rep. Hebraeorum lib. 5. c. 2.they, who would saue the Priesthood most gladly from y^e shamefull staine, agree that he was hie Priest, the successour of Aaron.

Hart.

Let it be admitted that he was so. The staine of his fault is not so foule as you make it. For what did he els, but that which we reade Pope Marcellinꝰ to hauehave done? Who, in the horrible persecution of Christians vnderunder Maximian and Diocletian, took incense for feare, and offered it to Idols. Vrias did transgresse the law of God, not wilfully, but through the frailtie of the flesh: not of his own accord, but by the kings commaundement. Wherfore it came rather of feare, then of rashnes or ignorance, that hee offended.

Rainoldes.

So did it aaMat. 26.70.Matt 26:70in Peter, that he denied Christ. And may you therefore say, that Peter was priuileged not to denie Christ? I maruell that you feele not the grossenes of your dealing. You say that hie Priestes are priuileged by their office to perseuere in true doctrine. It is shewed, that they fall to manifest Idolatrie. You graunt they do so: but they do it for feare, you say. Where is the priuilege then? For God, to whom so euer he giueth any benefit as it were by priuilege: hee giueth them a priuilege withall of speciall fauour to frée them from the lettes that p. 303might debarre them of the benefit. bb2. King. …0. ver. 1.Ezekias was sicke of a pestilent disease, whereof he should hauehave died. ccver. 6.God did adde fifteene yeares to his life. ddver. ….He tooke away his sickenes, that he might enioy it. S. eeAct. 27. ver. 20.Acts 27:20Paule was in daunger to be lost with shipwracke, and all the rest who sailed with him. ffver. 24.God did giuegive to him his owne life, and theirs. ggver. 43.He kept them all from danger and brought them safe vntounto the land. Wherefore if God had giuen a priuilege of true doctrine to the hie Priestes, hee woulde hauehave giuen them a priuilege of grace too, that no deceit of fleshe should make them fall away from it. But they might fall away from it by sundry meanes, to errour, yea to Idolatrie. For if they might for feare, why not for louelove also, hh1. King. 1…1 Kgs 1as Salomon did? If for louelove: why not for hope? If for hope: why not for hatred? If for any of these, why not for other causes? It remaineth therefore, that either the hie Priestes had not that priuilege: or, if they had it, they had it with exception, that they should not erre, vnlesse either feare, or other cause did moue them to it. Which if you affirme of Popes in like sort, as you séeme to doo by the example of Marcellinus: I will agree with you. For I am perswaded that no Pope can erre, vnlesse he be moued thereto by some cause, either blindnes of mind, or lewdnes of heart, or such humane affections. iiNihil in terra sine causa fit. Iob. 5.6.Job 5:6Nothing in the earth is done without a cause, saith your olde translation. Howbeit, for Vrias, perhaps you do him iniurie to say that he offended as Marcellinus did, of feare. For it appeereth not by circumstances of y^e text, but y^t he was as willing to transgresse the law, as was the king to bid him. kk2. King. 16. ver. 10.2 Kgs 16:10When king Achaz saw the altar that was at Damascus, he sent to Vrias the Priest the paterne of the altar and the facion of it, and all the workemanship thereof. And Vrias the Priest made an altar, in all pointes according as king Achaz had sent from Damascus: so did Vrias the Priest against king Achaz came from Damascus. What a readie minde was here in the Priest, who stayed not to speake with the king at his returne, to disswade him from it: but made the heathnish altar, against hee came frō Damascus? ll…And king Achaz commanded Vrias the Priest, saying, vponupon this great altar, set on fire the morning burnt-offring and euening meat-offring, and the kings burnt offring and his meat-offring, with the burnt-offring of all the people of the land, and their meat-offring, and their drinke-offrings: p. 304and sprinckle vponupon it all the blood of the burnt-offring, and al the blood of the sacrifice. As for the brazen altar, it shall be for me to enquire. And Vrias did according to all that king Achaz had commaunded. Behold, as Moses was faithfull in all the house of the Lord: so was Vrias the Priest in all that Achaz did commaund. Such a Prince, such a Priest.