Whereas Pelagius, and Gregory, writing against the Presumption of John the Bishop of Constantinople for taking upon him this name, are much alleged by the enemies of Unity, against the Authority of Peters Successor over the whole Church: we say, that they following the steps of their Predecessors refused the name of Universal Bishop in such sense, as Pelagius, and specially Gregory oftentimes declareth, that where one is called Universal Bishop, he seemeth to be called ⟨p. 123⟩*Bishop alone,2 so as Bishopric should be taken away from all others. But they refused not so to be called after this meaning, as though by that refusal the Authority of the Bishop of Rome should be restrained, and not extend over the whole Church. They deny, that any man might so be Universal Bishop, as he should be also the peculiar ruler, and Governor of every particular Church. For so all other Bishops had ben in vain: and that is contrary to Christs Institution, who ordained all the Apostles to be Bishops. To say all in few, they refused the name that might odiously be taken, they refused not the Primacy* which Christ to them had committed. Therefore Gregory writing to Morris the Emperor, alleging the words that make for Peters Authority over the whole Flock of Christ, saith of Peter,* The Charge of the whole Church and Principality is committed to him, and yet is he not called Universal Apostle. Where it is plain, that Gregory doth both affirm the charge of the whole, and denieth the name of Universal. Let these Defenders grant the thing, and we strive not for the name.
VVhereas Pelagius, and Gregorie, writinge againste the Presumption of Iohn the Bishop of Constantinople for takinge vpon him this name, are mutche alleged by the enimies of Vnitie, againste the Authoritie of Peters Successour ouer the whole Churche: we saye, that they folowinge the sleppes of theire Predecessours refused the name of Vniuersal Bishop in sutche sense, as Pelagius, and specially Gregorie oftentimes declareth, that where one is called Vniuersal Bishop, he semeth to be called ⟨p. 123⟩*Bishop alone,2 so as Bishoprike should be taken away from al others. But they refused not so to be called after this meaninge, as though by that refusal the Auctoritie of the Bishop of Rome should be restrained, and not extende ouer the whole Churche. They denie, that any man might so be Vniuersal Bishop, as he should be also the peculiar ruler, and Gouernour of euery particular Churche. For so al other Bishops had ben in vaine: and that is contrary to Christes Institution, who ordeined al the Apostles to be Bishops. To saie al in few, they refused the name that might odiously be taken, they refused not the Primacie* whiche Christe to them had committed. Therefore Gregorie writinge to Morice the Emperour, alleaginge the woordes that make for Peters Auctoritie ouer the whole Flocke of Christe, saithe of Peter,* The Charge of the whole Churche and Principalitie is committed to him, and yet is he not called Vniuersal Apostle. VVhere it is plaine, that Gregorie doth both affirme the charge of the whole, and denieth the name of Vniuersal. Let these Defenders graunte the thinge, and we striue not for the name.
- *Untruth, and most Vain fantasy. For no Bishop of Constantinople ever dreamed of such Authority.Vntruthe, and most Vaine fantasie. For no Bishop of Constā tinople euer dreamed of sutche Authoritie.
- 2UniversalVniuersal
- *Untruth. For Christ never erected any such Primacy.Vntruthe. For Christe neuer erected any sutche Primacie.
- *The like whole Charge was given to Paul, John, and Matthew: as shall appear.The like vvhole Charge vvas geuen to Paule, Iohn, and Mathevve: as shal appeare.
