A04468:1015
A defence of the Apology of the Church of England containing an answer to…A defence of the Apologie of the Churche of Englande conteininge an answeare to…
A defence of the Apology of the Church of England containing an answer to a certain book lately set forth by M. Harding, and entitled, A confutation of &c. By John Jewel Bishop of Salisbury.A defence of the Apologie of the Churche of Englande conteininge an answeare to a certaine booke lately set foorthe by M. Hardinge, and entituled, A confutation of &c. By Iohn Iewel Bishop of Sarisburie.
Imprinted at London : In Fleetestreate, at the sign of the Elephant, by Henry Wykes, Anno 1567. 27. OctobrisImprinted at London : In Fleetestreate, at the signe of the Elephante, by Henry VVykes, Anno 1567. 27. Octobris
Modern spelling is a reading aid: the words are the author’s, only the spelling is modernized. Original shows the page as printed, with the transcription marks.
I might farther say, that Peters See Apostolic was over the Jews, and not at Rome over the Heathen.1 For so S. Paule saithe, Mihi concreditum est Evangelium Praepuiij, sicut Petro Circumcisionis: Qui potens erat Petro in Apostolatu Circumcisionis, Potens erat in me inter Gentes: The Gospel of the Uncircumcision was committed unto me, as the Gospel of the Circumcision unto Peter: God that was mighty in Peter in the Apostleship of the Circumcision, was mighty in me among the Heathens. Therefore if the Pope this day will claim only by Peters Title, and require no more, then Peter had, then must he seek his Primacy amongst the Jews, where Peter had his Jurisdiction limited, and not at Rome among the Heathen Christians, among whom, as S. Paul saith, he had not much to do.
I might farther saie, that Peters See Apostolike was ouer the Iewes, and not at Rome ouer the Heathene.1 For so S. Paule saithe, Mihi concreditum est Euangelium Praepuiij, sicut Petro Circumcisionis: Qui potens erat Petro in Apostolatu Circumcisionis, Potens erat in me inter Gentes: The Gospel of the Vncircumcision was committed vnto me, as the Gospel of the Circumcision vnto Peter: God that was mighty in Peter in the Apostleship of the Circumcision, was mighty in me emonge the Heathens. Therfore if the Pope this daie wil claime onely by Peters Title, and require nomore, then Peter had, then muste he séeke his Primacie emongst the Iewes, where Peter had his Iurisdiction limited, and not at Rome emonge the Heathen Christians, emonge whome, as S. Paule saithe, he had not mutche to doo.
- 1Calat. 2.
Where you say, that according to the Ecclesiastical Canons, ever from the Apostles time, Bishops have evermore been Consecrate by three other Bishops, with the Confirmation of the Bishop of Rome, as if without him no man might be allowed to be a Bishop, ye should not so unadvisedly report so manifest Untruth. For, I beseech you, where be these Ecclesiastical Canons? Who devised them? Who made them? Who gave the Pope that singular Privilege, that no Bishop should be admitted in all the World, but only by him? I remember, your Canonists have saide,