Three Pillars and Arch-patriarchs of the Popish Synagogues, Treatise 4 · Section 34 – Section 35
SECTIO. 34. From the 104. leafe to the 111. in which he taketh on him to defende the vanitie of Popish arguments vsed by papists vnderunder colour of similitudes and allusions.Rastell
The Bishop discouereth this reason of Pope Innocent the thirde, God made two lightes,Fulk the Sunne and the Moone, therefore the Pope is so much aboue the Emperour, as the Sunne is aboue the Moone, Maister Rastell being angrie at this discouery, saith it is no mystery nor argument of strength, yet was it vsed by the Popes holynes which cannot erre. But the Church hath stronger arguments for proofe of this conclusion. First saith Maister Rastell that there be two states, spirituall and temperall it is proued by other reasons, and the first reason he vseth to proue the state spirituall, is much like that of the Popes whiche hee excuseth, Psal. 44▪ and In steede of thy fathers there are sonnes borne vntounto thee (meaning saith he the Apostles, and bishopps, and their successours) them shalt thou appoint princes, and rulers ouer all the whole earth. As though none were the sonnes of the Church, but the Apostles, Bishoppes, and their successors, and as though the Prophete spake of temperall rule in this life, and not of a spiritual kingdome and inheritance of all the worlde, which is common to all the faithfull after this life.
But to omitte that which is not in controuersie of two states in the worlde, and the excellencye in spirituall thinges, of the ministery of the Churche aboue the office of princes, yet who will either graunt that the ministery is simply superiour to the King or Emperour so that the ministers are not his subiectes, or that the Pope in any respect ought to hauehave any dignitie as a minister of the gospell, whiche hee disdaineth to preach?
Another defence of this pontificall argument, is, that it was a sweete and misticall allusion in his familiare letters to the Emperour: In deede greate familyaritie hee had with the Emperours of his time, with whome hee was in continuall discorde. Last of all like a blasphemous Dogge hee compareth it with the argument vsed by S. Paule for the couering of womens heades, taken of nature it selfe, whiche though it will not satisfie a contentious person whome nothing will satisfie, yet is it sufficient and stronge ynough to proue what naturall comlynesse requireth in that case, where as this of the Pope hath no shadowe of reason in it. For all the rest of those argumentes rehearsed by the Bishop, he maketh that generall reason, that their Church hath no custome to contende for them, yet hauehave they a custome to burne men for refusing such thinges, as they are not able to contende in argument to defende. And as for shauen crownes, and purple sandales, holy water, or praying in one tongue, hee sayeth, they were neuer taken for secreat mysteries in the Church, and if the scriptures applyed to them do not proue them, they take no harme, for by like they are good ynough without the scriptures. Sauing that the saying of Ezechiell Chap. 36. I will sprinkle you with cleane water, hee seeth not, but that it may bee applyed to holy water, though it bee meant of baptisme, because holy water putteth vsus in mynde of our baptisme. Where fynde you that meaning of holy water in all the exorcising or coniuring thereof? A poore shift God wott to defende a beggerly ceremonie.
As for Ecce duo gladij hic, to prooue that the Pope hath power of both swordes, hee defendeth it to bee good and sufficient. Firste, because Christe had power of both, although hee vsed but one. But what hath the Pope to doe with Christe? Forsooth hee made Peter his lieutenaunt and ruler of all Christians, when hee had him feede his sheepe and lambes, Euen as good a reason as Ecce duo gladij hic.
But what hath the Pope to doe with Peter, if Peter had beene such a one? Forsooth, because hee sitteth at Rome. So did Nero, and was Pontifex Maximus to as good as the Pope. But Barnarde vseth the same texte so. What if Barnarde was disposed to iest with the Pope in his owne interpretations? or if hee were in earnest, can Barnarde make that good which is starke naught?
Last of all, the shamelesse and blasphemous beast, is not afrayde to compare this argument with the allegorie vsed by the holie Ghoste, Gal. 4. of the two wiues in Abrahams house, that were figures of two Testaments, which the Apostle vsed not to proue, but to declare and shewe plainly, as it were by example, that which hee had before moste substantially proued.
SECTIO. 35. From the seconde face of the III. leafe, to the seconde face of the 118. leafe.Rastell
The argumentes where on the masse is builded,Fulk being so absurde as euen his brasen face blusheth to allowe, hee aunswereth, the thinges proued by these argumentes are but the heire and nayles of the masse, and not the substantiall partes thereof, and yet those partes are good ynough without those argumentes, namely by tradition. For the Corporall was of lynen before the argument of Christes buriall cloath was made for it, Chalices were of goulde and siluer, before the texte, Babylon is a cuppe of goulde, was alleadged for them. And facer… signifieth to sacrifice, though Virgils verse had neuer beene written, Cum faciam vitula. For in the Iudges, Manoah saide to the Angell faciamus tibi haedum de capris, wee may offer to thee a kidde of the Goates: O subtile Maister Rastell. Where learned you first that Manoah spake latine? Secondlye that hee woulde offer sacrifice to a man, and not rather make readie a kidde to bee eaten of him, whome he thought to hauehave beene a man? for it followeth immediately in the text that Manoah knew not that hee was an Angell of GOD, least you shoulde imagine that Manoah had beene a Papist, and woulde hauehave offered a sacrifice to an Angell. But yet to couer his shame with impudence, he saith he will bee yet bolder, and applie whatsoeuer hee findeth in the scripture to mainteine Popish ceremonies, hee careth not howe fitlye, Theologia Mistica, hee saith hee woteth well non est argumentis apta. Mysticall Diuinitie is not fit to make argumentes of. But GOD keepe our faith from grounding vppon such diuinitie, as will neither satisfie our conscience, nor conuince the errors of other.
Laste of all, least hee shoulde passe ouer this place without a blasphemie, hee compareth these balde reasons of Siluester and Durande, with the argument that Saint Paule maketh. 1. Cor. 9. vppon this text of the law, Thou shalt not binde vp the mouth of the Oxe that treadeth out the corne: therefore GOD which prouideth that beastes labouring shoulde not want their foode▪ much more woulde hauehave the minister of the Gospell rewarded for his trauell. Whiche is a most pithie argument, from the lesse to the more, as euerye learned man and godly will acknoweledge.