A reply unto M. Hardinges answerA replie vnto M. Hardinges ansvveare

Now for a brief answer to M. Ivel, who denieth, that within. 600. years after Christ the Bishop of Rome was ever called an Universal Bishop, or Head of the Universal Church, and maketh him self very sure of it: although it be a childish thing to stick at the name any thing is called by, the thing by the name signified being sufficiently proved: yet to the intent good folk may understand that all is not trueth of the old Gospel, which our new Gospellers either affirm, or deny: I will bring good and sufficient witness, that the bishop of Rome was then called both Universal Bishop, or Ecumenical Patriarch, which is one, to wit, Bishop, or principal father of the whole world, and also Head of the Church. Leo that worthy B. of Rome, was called the Universal Bishop, and Universal Patriarch, of six hundred and thirty Fathers assembled together from all parts of the world in General Council at Chalcedon: which is both 118¹ expressed in that Council, and also clearly affirmed by S. Gregory in three sundry Epistles to Mauritius the Emperor, to Eulogius Patriarch of Alexandria, and to Anastasius Patriarch of Antioch. Thus that name was deferred unto the Pope by the Fathers of that great Council: which by them had not been done, had it been unlawful. In very deed neither Leo him self, nor any other his successor, ever called or wrote him self by that name, as S. Gregory saith, much less presumed they to take it unto them: But rather used the name of humility, calling them selves each one Seruum Seruorum Dei, The Seruant of the Servants of God. Yet sundry holy Martyrs Bishops of Rome used to call them selves Bishops of the universal Church (119)²