The sum of the conference between John Rainoldes and John Hart touching the head…The summe of the conference betwene Iohn Rainoldes and Iohn Hart touching the head…
The sum of the conference between John Rainoldes and John Hart touching the head and the faith of the Church. Wherein by the way are handled sundry points, of the sufficiency and right expounding of the Scriptures, the ministry of the Church, the function of priesthood, the sacrifice of the mass, with other controversies of religion: but chiefly and purposely the point of Church-government ... Penned by John Rainoldes, according to the notes set down in writing by them both: perused by John Hart, and (after things supplied, & altered, as he thought good) allowed for the faithful report of that which past in conference between them. Whereunto is annexed a treatise entitled, Six conclusions touching the Holy Scripture and the Church, written by John Rainoldes. With a defence of such things as Thomas Stapleton and Gregory Martin have carped at therein.The summe of the conference betwene Iohn Rainoldes and Iohn Hart touching the head and the faith of the Church. Wherein by the way are handled sundrie points, of the sufficiencie and right expounding of the Scriptures, the ministerie of the Church, the function of priesthood, the sacrifice of the masse, with other controuerises of religion: but chiefly and purposely the point of Church-gouernment ... Penned by Iohn Rainoldes, according to the notes set downe in writing by them both: perused by Iohn Hart, and (after things supplied, & altered, as he thought good) allowed for the faithfull report of that which past in conference betwene them. Whereunto is annexed a treatise intitled, Six conclusions touching the Holie Scripture and the Church, writen by Iohn Rainoldes. With a defence of such thinges as Thomas Stapleton and Gregorie Martin haue carped at therein.
John Rainolds 1549–1607Londini: printed by John Wolfe, 1584Londini: printed by Iohn Wolfe, 1584
475, [1], 479-674, 659-750 p. · 304k words · STC 20626 · ESTC S115546
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.
Hart. But the Council of Chalcedon did offer themselves the title of universal Patriarch to Pope Leo, as S. oGregory writeth: they did not only hear it given him by others.
Hart. But the Councell of Chalcedon did offer themselues the title of vniuersall Patriarke to Pope Leo, as S. oGregorie writeth: they did not only heare it giuen him by others.
Rainoldes. S. Gregory affirmeth it to be pa new, a proud a pompous, a profane, qa rash, perverse, foolish, abominable, rwicked, and ssuperstitious title: ta name of singularity, of arrogance, of blasphemy. The Council of Chalcedon was a company of six hundred Bishops and thirty, sound in religion, and zealous of the glory of God. You must pardon me, if I discredit rather the word of one Gregory: then think that six hundred and thirty such Bishops did offer to commit so great iniquity and folly. For neither is there any proof of that offer in any part of the Council, which is wholly extant: and that which made uGregory to misreport the Bishop of Constantinople, might induce him likewise to misreport these Bishops too. Wherein his affection may be the more suspected, because
he saith farther, that it was offered to his predecessors not only by the Council, but also by the Fathers following. The names (it is likely) of these Fathers following should have been forth coming, if they had been at hand, the matter being so important. Howbeit if they, and the Council both, had not only offered it, but given it also: yet might they have given it in respect of lesser preeminence then the Papacy. Which it must needs be the Council should have done: for else they had contraried
the Pope himself gave it to the Patriarch of Constantinople, as a title of honour (I trow) and not of power. Wherefore the first title, put upon the Fathers of the Council of Chalcedon, inferreth not the Popes supremacy. Much less doth the next, alleged out of Cyprian. For although Cornelius, a godly Bishop of Rome, be there named Bishop of the Catholic Church: yet is he so named, not
⟨p. 647⟩
as the word [Catholic] signi••eth universal, but as it signify eth right believing, holding the Catholic faith. Wherefore it maketh no more for his supremacy, then for
other Catholic Bishops, who all are named Bishops of the Catholic Church.
Rainoldes. S. Gregorie affirmeth it to be pa new, a proud a pompous, a profane, qa rash, peruerse, foolish, abominable, rwicked, and ssuperstitious title: ta name of singularitie, of arrogancie, of blasphemie. The Councell of Chalcedon was a companie of six hundred Bishops and thirtie, sound in religion, and zealous of the glorie of God. You must pardon me, if I discredit rather the word of one Gregorie: then thinke that sixe hundred and thirtie such Bishops did offer to commit so great iniquitie and folie. For neither is there any proofe of that offer in any part of the Councell, which is wholy extant: and that which made uGregorie to misreport the Bishop of Constantinople, might induce him likewise to misreport these Bishops too. Wherein his affection may be the more suspected, because xhe sayth farther, that it was offered to his predecessors not only by the Councel, but also by the Fathers following. The names (it is likely) of these Fathers following should haue bene foorth comming, if they had bene at hand, the matter being so important. Howbeit if they, and the Councell both, had not only offered it, but giuen it also: yet might they haue giuen it in respect of lesser preeminence then the Papacie. Which it must needes be the Councell should haue done: for else they had contraried ytheir owne decrées and actions. And zthe Pope himself gaue it to the Patriarke of Constantinople, as a title of honour (I trow) and not of power. Wherefore the first title, put vpon the Fathers of the Councell of Chalcedon, inferreth not the Popes supremacie. Much lesse doth the next, alleaged out of Cyprian. For although Cornelius, a godly Bishop of Rome, be there named Bishop of the Catholike Church: yet is he so named, not ⟨p. 647⟩as the word [Catholike] signi••eth vniuersall, but as it signif• eth right beleeuing, holding the Catholike faith. Wherefore it maketh no more for his supremacie, then for aAthanasius Bishop of Alexandria, and bother Catholike Bishops, who all are named Bishops of the Catholike Church.
pepist. 32.
qepist. 38.
repist. 39.
sl. 6. ep. 24.
tl. 4. ep. 32. & 38.
uRegist. lib. 7. ind. 2. ep. 63. as I have showed in the former Division.Regist. lib. 7. ind. 2. ep. 63. as I haue shewed in the former Diuision.
xlib. 7. ind. 1. epist. 30.
yConcil. Chalced. •an. 9 & 17. & •8. and in the Sessions throughout.
zAdrian the […]. Synod. […] 2. act. 2.Adrian the 〈…〉. Synod. 〈…〉2. act. 2.
aEpist. Arsen. Athanas. apol. 2
bEpist. concil• Nicaeni, Socrat. l. 1. c. 6. & concilii Sardicensis Theodoret. li. 2. ca. 8. Quint. con cil. Constantinop. confess. 8. in subscript.Epist. concil• Nicaeni, Socrat. l. 1. c. 6. & concilii Sardicensis Theodoret. li. 2. ca. 8. Quint. cō cil. Constantinop. cōfess. 8. in subscript.
Hart. A particular Church may be called Catholic in respect of the Catholic faith which it professeth. And so was Athanasius Bishop of the Catholic Church of Alexandria.
Hart. A particular Church may be called Catholike in respect of the Catholike faith which it professeth. And so was Athanasius Bishop of the Catholike Church of Alexandria.
Hart. Nay: he was Bishop of the Catholic Church of the whole world, not of the city of Rome only. For it followeth cin the same place, that there ought to be one Bishop in the Catholic Church.
Hart. Nay: he was Bishop of the Catholike Church of the whole world, not of the citie of Rome onely. For it followeth cin the same place, that there ought to be one Bishop in the Catholike Church.
Rainoldes▪ That is, in the Catholic Church of the city of Rome. For Cornelius himself, in whose epistle that is written, saith other where (entreating dof the same matter) that there ought to be one Bishop in the Catholic Church, wherein there are six and forty Elders and seven Deacons. Now ein a Synod which then was held at Rome, there were above threescore Elders and Deacons: how many hum dread more through the whole world? Wherefore sith six and forty Elders and seven Deacons, were not all the Elders and Deacons of the world, but of the city of Rome: it followeth that the Catholic Church wherein he saith there ought to be one Bishop, was the Catholic Church of the city of Rome, not of the whole world. And, that this was meant in that of Cornelius, it is very plain by the occasion of his speech: as also by the canon of the Council of Nice made on that occasion. For the Church *being troubled at that time with the schism and heresy of Novatus: the Novatians refusing the communion of the Catholics, ordained new Bishops for their heretical synagogues and schismatical conventicles. Whereby it came to pass that in one city there were two Bishops, a Catholic, and an heretic: as in fRome, Cornelius and Novatianus; in gCarthage, Cyprian, and Fortunatus. The Catholics therefore, communicating in faith and love with Cornelius, hcalled him Bishop of the Catholic Church: condemning the Novatians as heretics, and schismatics, with their Bishop ⟨p. 648⟩Novatianus. And as they said farther, that there ought to be one Bishop in a Catholic Church, according to the ancient order as I ishowed: so was it decreed by the kNicene Council touching the Novatians who became Catholics, that, if a Bishop of theirs were converted lthe Catholic Church having a Bishop; he should not enjoy a Bishops room, but an Elders, least that there should be two Bishops in a city. Wherefore the Bishopric of the Catholic Church, in the time of Cornelius, was the charge that every Catholic Bishop had. Neither meant they more who said that there ought to be but one Bishop in a Catholic Church, then S. Chrysostom did, saying to Sisinius Bishop of the Novatians in Constantinople, A city may not have two Bishops.
Rainoldes▪ That is, in the Catholike Church of the citie of Rome. For Cornelius himselfe, in whose epistle that is written, sayth other where (entreating dof the same matter) that there ought to be one Bishop in the Catholike Church, wherein there are sixe and fourtie Elders and seuen Deacons. Now ein a Synode which then was held at Rome, there were aboue threescore Elders and Deacons: how many hū dred more through the whole world? Wherefore sith six and fourtie Elders and seuen Deacons, were not all the Elders and Deacons of the world, but of the citie of Rome: it followeth that the Catholike Church wherein he saith there ought to be one Bishop, was the Catholike Church of the citie of Rome, not of the whole world. And, that this was meant in that of Cornelius, it is very plaine by the occasion of his speéche: as also by the canon of the Councell of Nice made on that occasion. For the Church *being troubled at that time with the schisme and heresie of Nouatus: the Nouatians refusing the communion of the Catholikes, ordeined new Bishops for their hereticall synagogues and schismaticall conuenticles. Whereby it came to passe that in one citie there were two Bishops, a Catholike, and an heretike: as in fRome, Cornelius and Nouatianus; in gCarthage, Cyprian, and Fortunatus. The Catholikes therefore, communicating in faith and loue with Cornelius, hcalled him Bishop of the Catholike Church: condemning the Nouatians as heretikes, and schismatikes, with their Bishop ⟨p. 648⟩Nouatianus. And as they sayd farther, that there ought to be one Bishop in a Catholike Church, according to the ancient order as I ishewed: so was it decréed by the kNicen Councell touching the Nouatians who became Catholikes, that, if a Bishop of theirs were conuerted l
dEpist. ad Fabium Antioch. e•piscopum.
eEuseb. hist. eccles. lib. 6. c. 42.
*As it is showed before, Chopped. 5. […]. 2.As it is shewed before, Ch•pt. 5. 〈…〉. 2.
fCyprian. epist. 52. ad An•on.
gEpist. 5• ad Corneliu•.
hE•ist 46. Cornelij ad Cyp•.
iIn the third Division of this Chapter.In the thirde Diuision of this Chapter.
Hart. But S. mCyprian writeth, that neither heresies nor schisms have sprung of any other fountain, then of this, that the Priest of God is not obeyed: and that one Priest for the time in the Church, and one judge for the time in stead of Christ is not regarded. To whom, if the whole brotherhood would be obedient according to Gods teachings: then no man would make any thing ado against the company of Priests. Wherein, by one Priest, he meaneth one Bishop; and, by one Bishop, Cornelius the Pope, to whom he writeth those words. So that he confesseth the Pope to be the Bishop of the whole Church, and teacheth men to think of him, as one judge for the time in Christs stead.
Hart. But S. mCyprian writeth, that neither heresies nor schismes haue sproong of any other fountaine, then of this, that the Priest of God is not obeyed: and that one Priest for the time in the Church, and one iudge for the tyme in steede of Christ is not regarded. To whom, if the whole brotherhoode would be obedient according to Gods teachings: then no man would make any thing adoe agaynst the company of Priests. Wherein, by one Priest, he meaneth one Bishop; and, by one Bishop, Cornelius the Pope, to whom he writeth those wordes. So that he confesseth the Pope to bée the Bishop of the whole Churche, and teacheth men to thinke of him, as one iudge for the tyme in Christes steede.
Rainoldes. You err still in the same point. The Church wherein Cyprian requireth obedience unto one Bishop and judge in Christs steed, is the particular Church of every city, not the universal. For he speaketh it on occasion of injury offered to himself by the Novatians in Carthage: who there had ordained a new Bishop against him, as their fellows did in Rome, against Cornelius. And as the words 1before, and 2after, do show that he meaneth it of all Catholic Bishops, each in his own charge: so the whole discourse & circumstances argue that he applieth it to himself, not to Cornelius. Chiefly, that, of 3a Bishop approved to his people in the Bishopric four years. Which can by no means agree to Cornelius, who was 4not three years Bishop. Or if, because Cyprian doth write ⟨p. 649⟩it to the Pope, you have such a prejudice that it is the Popes peculiar: you may know that he writeth the same oto an other expressly of himself; Thence have schisms & heresies sprung, & do spring, that the Bishop, which is one, and ruleth the church, is despised by the proud presumption of certain men. Wherefore though your pRhemists and qother of the Popes friends do ply the box with that saying of one Priest & one judge for the time in Christs steed: yet in very truth it maketh as much for the Bishop of Rochester, as for the Bishop of Rome. The more is Stapletons blame: who knowing and confessing the same not only rotherwhere, but in sthis very work of his principles too; yet in tthe end thereof abridgeth it to the Pope. Marvell, that in his preface to Gregory he past it. He might have alleged it better then he hath The head of all Churches. Which title is given in uVictor to the Church of Rome, not to the Bishop: and toucheth less the Papacy there, then in S. Gregory; in whom it doth not prove it, as xI have declared. Marry, that which followeth is of greater show, out of Ambroses commentary on S. Paul to Timothy: where Damasus (the Bishop of Rome in his time) is called ruler of the Church. But, first, whatsoever he were who wrote that, it was not S. Ambrose the famous Bishop of Milan: on whom are falsely fathered the commentaries on S. Paul, as your yDivines of Lovan do observe and testify.
Rainoldes. You erre still in the same point. The Church wherein Cyprian requireth obedience vnto one Bishop and iudge in Christs steed, is the particular Church of euery citie, not the vniuersall. For he speaketh it on occasion of iniurie offered to himselfe by the Nouatians in Carthage: who there had ordeined a new Bishop against him, as their fellowes did in Rome, against Cornelius. And as the words 1before, and 2after, do shew that he meaneth it of all Catholike Bishops, ech in his owne charge: so the whole discourse & circumstances argue that he applieth it to himselfe, not to Cornelius. Chiefly, that, of 3a Bishop approued to his people in the Bishoprick foure yeares. Which can by no meanes agree to Cornelius, who was 4not thrée yeares Bishop. Or if, because Cyprian doth write ⟨p. 649⟩it to the Pope, you haue such a preiudice that it is the Popes peculiar: you may know that he writeth the same oto an other expresly of himself; Thēce haue schismes & heresies sproong, & doe spring, that the Bishop, which is one, and ruleth the church, is despised by the proud presumption of certain men. Wherefore though your pRhemists and qother of the Popes friends doe plie the box with that saying of one Priest & one iudge for the time in Christs steed: yet in very truth it maketh as much for the Bishop of Rochester, as for the Bishop of Rome. The more is Stapletons blame: who knowing and confessing the same not onely rotherwhere, but in sthis very worke of his principles too; yet in tthe ende thereof abridgeth it to the Pope. Maruell, that in his preface to Gregorie he past it. He might haue alleaged it better then he hath The head of all Churches. Which title is giuen in
1Sacerdotum hosts & contra ecclesia catholicam rebels.Sacerdotum hostes & cōtra ecclesia catholicam rebelles.
2Sacerdotes, id est, dispensatores Dei.
3Episcopus plebi suae in episcopatu quadriennio jam probatus.Episcopus plebi suae in episcopatu quadriennio iam probatus.
4Eusebius in chron. Damasus in Pontificali. Platin. de vit. Pontificum. Ge••brard. Cronogr. lib. 3. O•uphr. in Chron. Pont. Rom.Eusebius in chron. Damasus in Pontificali. Platin. de vit. Pontificum. Ge••brard. Cronogr. lib. 3. O•uphr. in Chrō. Pont. Rom.
qPolus Ca•d. pro eccles. unitat. defens. lib. 2. Remundus Rufus, duplicat. in patronum Molin•i propont. Maximo. Canisius Catechism. de praeceptis ecclesiae tit. 9. Lindanus Panopliae Evangelicae lib. 4. cap. 86. Pamelius Annotat. in Cyprian epi. 55. Copus dialog. 1 cap. 18. & 21. Ha•ding and Dormā against Bishop Jewel. Though Dor• man (being taught the truth by M. Nowell acknowledged that S. Cyprian meant it of all Bishops. As Stapleton (in Hardings behalf) confessed also▪ whose example should have moved ye Rhemists to have spared S. Cyprian in that point.Polus Ca•d. pro eccles. vnitat. defens. lib. 2. Remundus Rufus, duplicat. in patronum Molin•i propont. Maximo. Canisius Catechism. de praeceptis ecclesiae tit. 9. Lindanus Panopliae Euangelicae lib. 4. cap. 86. Pamelius Annotat. in Cyprian epi. 55. Copus dialog. 1 cap. 18. & 21. Hading and Dormā against Bishop Iewel. Though Dor man (being taught the truth by M. Nowell acknowledged that S. Cyprian meant it of all Bishops. As Stapleton (in Hardings behalfe) cōfessed also whose exāple should haue moued ye Rhemists to haue spared S. Cyprian in that point.
Next, the words themselves which are in that author on mention of the house of God, [the ruler whereof at this day is Damasus,] are not (in my judgement) the authors own words, but a gloss crept in amongst them. For whereas S. Paul, writing unto Timothy, declared why he did so, to weet, that thou mayst know how thou oughtest to behave thy self in the house of God, which is the Church of the living God: zthe commentary thereon doth expound it thus, I write unto thee that thou mayest know how to govern the Church, which is the house of God; that whereas all the world is Gods, yet the Church is called his house. [the ruler whereof at this day is Damasus,] For the world is naught, troubled with sundry errors. Therefore ⟨p. 650⟩the house of God and truth must of necessity be said to be there, where he is feared according to his will. In the which words, if that of [Damasus] were omitted, the l•ter clause containing a reason of the former would cleave thereunto more suantly and fitly. Which maketh me to think that it was not pitched in the text by the author, but found a •hinke and so came in; as aan other gloss of [Damasus successor] hath done into bOptatus. And I think it the rather, because some are persuaded by manifold conference, (as your cLovanists note,) that the book of questions of the old and new testament entitled to S. Austin, & this to S. Ambrose are the same authors. For dhe, who wrote that book, was not alive (of likelihood) when Damasus was Pope. Howbeit, if he were too, and of a kind affection to Rome, ewhere he lived, thought good to mention him: the words which he useth in Latin, [cuius hodie rector est Damasus.] might mean that Damasus was [a ruler of the Church] not, as fyou english it [the ruler.] Which to have been so, it appeareth farther by the word [at this day,] spoken with a relation to the days of Timothy: that as he did govern the Church in Pauls time, so at that present was Damasus ruler of it. Wherefore sith Timothy was gplaced at Ephesus to set that Church in order, not to rule the whole: Damasus might be called a ruler of the Church, in that he was 4Bishop of the Church of Rome, as S. hAmbrose termeth him, though he were not the ruler of the universal. S.
Next, the wordes themselues which are in that autour on mention of the house of God, [the ruler whereof at this day is Damasus,] are not (in my iudgement) the autours owne wordes, but a glose crept in amongst them. For whereas S. Paule, writing vnto Timothee, declared why he did so, to wéete, that thou mayst know how thou oughtest to behaue thy selfe in the house of God, which is the Church of the liuing God: zthe commentarie thereon doth expoūd it thus, I write vnto thee that thou maiest know how to gouern the Church, which is the house of God; that whereas all the world is Gods, yet the Church is called his house. [the ruler whereof at this day is Damasus,] For the world is naught, troubled with sundrie errours. Therefore ⟨p. 650⟩the house of God and truth must of nece•sitie be saide to be there, where he is feared according to his will. In the which wordes, if that of [Damasus] were omitted, the l•ter clawse contayning a reason of the former would cleaue therevnto more suantly and fitly. Which maketh me to thinke that it was not pitched in thetext by the autour, but found a •hinke and so came in; as aan other glose of [Damasus successour] hath done into bOptatus. And I think it the rather, because some are perswaded by manifolde conference, (as your cLouanists note,) that the booke of questions of the old and new testament entitled to S. Austin, & this to S. Ambrose are the same autours. For dhe, who wrote that booke, was not aliue (of lykelihoode) when Damasus was Pope. Howbeit, if he were too, and of a kinde •ffection to Rome, ewhere he liued, thought good to mention him: the wordes which he vseth in Latin, [cuius hodie rector est Damasus.] might meane that Damasus was [a ruler of the Church] not, as fyou english it [the ruler.] Which to haue bene so, it appéereth farther by the word [at this day,] spoken with a relation to the dayes of Timothee: that as hée did gouerne the Church in Paules time, so at that present was Damasus ruler of it. Wherefore sith Timothee was
zCommentaria quae Ambrosij titulum ferunt. in 1. Tim. 3.
aDamaso Siriciu, •odie.
bLib •. As Bald••n•. showeth Annot. in […] lib. 1. & 2.Lib •. As Bald••n•. sheweth Annot. in 〈…〉 lib. 1. & 2.
cCen••r. in lib. […] 4.Cen••r. in lib. 〈…〉 4.
d[…] Pope until about 370. •ieron. in Chron.〈…〉 Pope vntill about 370. •ieron. in Chron.
Austin is the last o• them whose testimonies you cited▪ And, the preeminence of a higher room, whereof ihe made mention to Boniface the first, importeth a prerogative of honour over others, not sovereignty of power. A prerogative of honour; according to the canon of kthe first Council of Constantinople: which 5gave that prerogative to the See of Rome, 6because that city reigned. Not sovereignty of power; as it is evident by the Council of Africa: where lhe denied that to the same Boniface, to whom he granted this preeminence. It was therefore only the dignity of place, which S. Austin meant by the higher room. As melse where, having named Cyprian, Olympius, and other ancient writers, he saith that Innocentius was 7after them in time, before them in place: because they were Bishops of inferior cities; and he of the Roman.
Austin is the last o• them whose testimonies you cited▪ And, the preeminence of a higher roome, whereof ihe made mention to Boniface ye first, importeth a prerogatiue of honour ouer others, not soueraintie of power. A prerogatiue of honour; according to the canon of kthe first Councell of Constantinople: which 5gaue that prerogatiue to the See of Rome, 6because that citie raigned. Not soueraintie of power; as it is euident by the Councell of Afrike: where lhe denied that to the same Boniface, to whom hée graunted this preeminence. It was therefore only the dignitie of place, which S. Austin meant by the higher roome. As melse where, hauing named Cyprian, Olympius, and other auncient writers, he sayth that Innocentius was 7after them in time, before them in place: because they were Bishops of inferiour cities; and he of the Roman.
iContra d•as ep•st. Pelag an•t. ad Bonifa••u• li• 1. c. •.
kCan. 3.
5[Greek or Hebrew].〈non-Latin alphabet〉.
6[Greek or Hebrew], as •he coun••l o• Chalced• interpreteth their fact, c•n. 2•.〈non-Latin alphabet〉, as •he coun••l o• Chalced• i••erpreteth their fact, c•n. 2•.
lEp. […] Afric. ad Bonifacium, & C•lestinum.Ep. 〈…〉 Afric. ad Bonifacium, & C•lestinum.
mCont. Julian. P•lag•. l. 1. c. 4.Cont. Iulian. P•lag•. l. 1. c. 4.
Rainoldes. But S. Austin addeth in as plain terms, that Bishops may reserve their cases to the judgement of their fellow-bishops, chiefly of the Apostolic Church: and that a general Council is above the Pope in judging of those causes too. Which is a clear proof that by the principality of the Apostolic See he meant the Church of Rome to be chief of other Churches (as I said) in honour, not in power. For in power, all others, at least the Apostolic, (that is, in which the faith of Christ had been taught by the Apostles themselves) are made equal with it. But amongst all, in which the Apostles themselves had taught the faith, the Roman for honour & credit had the chiefty. And thus have I discharged my self of my promise: which was, that I would yield unto the Popes supremacy, if you proved it by the sayings and judgement of the Fathers, alleged and applied rightly. For none of all them which you have alleged, neither of any other church, nor of the Roman it self, doth avouch it. Whereby the shameless vanity of oBristow may be seen: who, being not contented to say of all the Fathers, that they were Papists; addeth that in familiar talk among our selves we are not afeard plainly to confess it. The Lord, who is witness of our thoughts, and speeches, knoweth that we are lewdly slandered herein. And for mine own part, I am so far off from confessing plainly that they were all Papists: that I have plainly declared and confirmed not one of them to have been. For the very being and essence of a Papist consisteth in opinion of the Popes supremacy. But the Popes supremacy was not allowed by any of the Fathers. Not one then of all the Fathers was a Papist. Wherefore, if you have the Fathers in such reverent regard and estimation, as you pretend, M. Hart: let, if not the Scriptures, yet the Fathers move you to forsake Papistry; and give to every pastor and church their own right, whereof Christ hath possessed them, and the Pope hath robbed them.
Rainoldes. But S. Austin addeth in as plain termes, that Bishops may reserue their cases to the iudgement of their fellow-bishops, chiefly of the Apostolike Church: and that a generall Councell is aboue the Pope in iudging of those causes too. Which is a cléere proofe that by the principalitie of the Apostolike See he meant the Church of Rome to be chéefe of other Churches (as I sayd) in honour, not in power. For in power, al others, at least the Apostolike, (that is, in which the faith of Christ had bene taught by the Apostles themselues) are made equall with it. But amongst all, in which the Apostles themselues had taught the faith, the Roman for honour & credit had the chiefty. And thus haue I discharged my selfe of my promise: which was, that I would yeeld vnto the Popes supremacie, if you prooued it by the sayings and iudgement of the Fathers, alleaged and applied rightly. For none of all thē which you haue alleaged, neither of any other church, nor of the Roman it self, doth auouch it. Whereby the shamelesse vanitie of oBristow may be séene: who, being not contented to say of all the Fathers, that they were Papists; addeth that in familiar talke among our selues we are not afeard plainely to confesse it. The Lord, who is witnesse of our thoughtes, and spéeches, knoweth that we are lewdly sclaundered herein. And for mine owne part, I am so farre off from confessing plainely that they were all Papists: that I haue plainly declared and confirmed not one of them to haue bene. For the very being and essence of a Papist consisteth in opinion of the Popes supremacie. But the Popes supremacie was not allowed by any of the Fathers. Not one then of al the Fathers was a Papist. Wherefore, if you haue the Fathers in such reuerent regard and estimatiō, as you pretend, M. Hart: let, if not the Scriptures, yet the Fathers moue you to forsake Papistrie; and giue to euery pastor and church their owne right, whereof Christ hath possessed them, and the Pope hath robbed them.
The ninth Chapter. 1 The Church is the pillar & ground of the truth. The common consent and practise of the Church before the Nicene Council, 2 the Council of Nice, 3 of Antioch, of Sardica, of Constantinople, Milevis, Carthage, Africa, 4 of Ephesus, of Chalcedon, of Constantinople est soones, and of Nice, of Constance, and of Basil; with the judgements of Universities, and several Churches throughout Christendom: condemning all the Popes supremacy.
The ninth Chapter. 1 The Church is the piller & ground of the truth. The common consent and practise of the Church before the Nicen Councell, 2 the Councell of Nice, 3 of Antioche, of Sardica, of Constantinople, Mileuis, Carthage, Afrike, 4 of Ephesus, of Chalcedon, of Constantinople est soones, and of Nice, of Constance, and of Basill; with the iudgements of Vniuersities, and seuerall Churches throughout Christendome: condemning all the Popes supremacie.
HART. 1The Church doth acknowledge the doctrine of the Popes supremacy to be catholic. Wherefore you do evil to touch it with the name of Papistry. For athe Church is the pillar and ground of the truth.
HART. 1The Church doth acknowledge the doctrine of the Popes supremacie to be catholike. Wherefore you doe euill to touch it with the name of Papistrie. For athe Church is the piller and ground of the truth.
Rainoldes. The Church is the pillar and ground of the truth, in office, and duty: and bthe Priest is the messenger of the Lord of hosts. But as cthere were Priests, who did not their message in showing Gods will: so there may be Churches, which shall not uphold and maintain the truth.
Rainoldes. The Church is the pillar and ground of the truth, in office, and dutie: and bthe Priest is the messenger of the Lord of hostes. But as cthere were Priestes, who did not their message in shewing Gods will: so there may be Churches, which shall not vpholde and mainetayne the truth.
Hart. Nay, that is true still, which the Church teacheth. For S. Paul saith not that it ought to be the pillar & ground of the truth, but that it is so.
Hart. Nay, that is true still, which the Church teacheth. For S. Paul sayth not that it ought to be the piller & ground of the truth, but that it is so.
the Catholike Church hauing a Bishop; he should not enioy a Bishops roome, but an Elders, least that there shoulde be two Bishops in a citie. Wherefore the Bishoprick of the Catholike Church, in the time of Cornelius, was the charge that euerie Catholike Bishop had. Neyther meant they more who sayd that there ought to bee but one Bishop in a Catholike Church, then S. Chrysostome did, saying to Sisinius Bishop of the Nouatians in Constantinople, A citie may not haue two Bishops.
I haue declared. Marry, that which followeth is of greater shew, out of Ambroses commentarie on S. Paul to Timothee: where Damasus (the Bishop of Rome in his time) is called ruler of the Church. But, first, whatsoeuer he were who wrote that, it was not S. Ambrose the famous Bishop of Milan: on whom are falsly fathered the cōmentaries on S. Paul, as your
