YALE
UNIVERSITY LIBRARY

FULKE'S

ANSWERS TO

STAPLETON, MARTIALL, AND SANDERS.

jFor tf)e HuWication of tfpe ESaorfcs of tlje jFatflm
anO <&avlp Wiviuvt of tfie Mefortnelr
ISngUs!) tftiurrn.

STAPLETON'S FORTRESS OVERTHROWN.
A REJOINDER TO MARTIALL'S REPLY.
A DISCOVERY OF THE DANGEROUS ROCK OF THE
POPISH CHURCH COMMENDED BY SANDERS.

WILLIAM FULKE, D.D.,
MASTEB OF PEMBROKE HALL, CAMBRIDGE,

EDITED FOR

Et>e i^avtev Sonets,

REV. RICHARD GIBBINGS, M.A.,
RKCTOH 0? RAYMUNTERDONEY, IN THE DIOCESE OF RAPI10E.

CAMBRIDGE:
PRINTED AT
THE UNIVERSITY PRESS.

M.DCCC.XLVIII.

'HECTOR ROMULIDUM CECLDIT SUB ACHILLE JUELLO.
BHEMENSI HANNIBALI SCIPIO FULCUS ERAT."

CONTENTS.

PAGE
Advertisement  vii
Stapleton's Fortress overthrown . . .... 1
A Rejoinder to Martiall's Reply against the Answer of Master
Calfhill to the blasphemous Treatise of the Cross . .125
A Discovery of the dangerous Rock of the popish Church com
mended by Sanders  213

ADVERTISEMENT.

The editor has not considered it necessary to cancel the
note in page 45, in which, though he correctly attributed The
Defence of the truth to Bishop Jewel, yet he erred in identi
fying it with the Apology. For his first acquaintance with
the tract in question he is indebted to the Rev. Dr. Jelf, whose
valuable edition of Bp. Jewel's works was published since this
note was written. (See vol. iv. p. 201 : v. 62.) The volume
sought for is marked in the Bodleian " 8°. C. 322. Line", and
the title-page of the former portion is as follows : " An Apo-
logie of private Masse, spred abroade in writing without name
of Authour : as it seemeth, against the offer and protestacion
made in certayne Sermons by the reverent father Bisshop of
Salsburie: with an answer to the same Apologie, set foorth
for the maintenance and defence of the trueth. Perused and
allowed by the Reverent father in God, Edmond, Bishop of
London, accordyng to the order appointed by the Queenes
maiestie." — The title-page of the work in reply, as far as it
can now be read, is, " An Answere in defence of the truth.
Againste the Apologie of" * * * *. Fulke has given the
passage in a compressed form ; but Stapleton had cited it at
length, and it is thus in the original : " There lacked not gods
promisses amonge the Iewes. There lacked not succession of
bishops and pristes. There lacked not opinion of great holi-
nesse and austeritie of life. There lacked not great skil and
knowledge of the law of god : And yet it is moste evident
that they erred ; that they refused the trueth ; that, under the
name and gay shewe of the church, in very deede they per
secuted the church. Why shal we not thinke that the like
may bee in this time ?"

V1U ADVERTISEMENT.
With the foregoing transcript the editor has been favoured
by his kind friend the Rev. Dr. Jacobson, Regius Professor
of Divinity, Oxford ; and the Rev. Joseph Mendham, of Sut
ton Coldfield, has supplied him with information relative to
the Harborowe of Bishop Aylmer : p. 37.
Erase the comma after " princely," page 16, 1. 33 ; the
crotchets and letter a, p. 132, and the second 1 in " Jewell,"
note, p. 296.
Page 371, line 6, after " refused," insert [usurped,].
The mistake in Fox, spoken of in p. 98, note 3, has, as
the editor understands, been corrected in the recent 8vo.
edition. Sept. 19, 1848.

FULKE'S CONFUTATION

STAPLETON AND MARTIALL.

[fulke, II.]

T. STAPLETON
and Martiall (two Popish
Heretikes) confuted,
and of their particular here
sies detected.

By. D. Fulke, Master of Pembrooke
hall in Cambridge.

Done and directed to all those
that loue the truth, and
hate superstitious
vanities.

Seene and allowed.

AT LONDON,
Printed by Henrie Middleton
for George Bishop.

ANNO. 1580.

A CATALOGUE
OF ALL SUCH POPISH BOOKS, EITHER ANSWERED OR TO BE
ANSWERED, WHICH HAVE BEEN WRITTEN IN THE
ENGLISH TONGUE FROM BEYOND THE SEAS, OR
SECRETLY DISPERSED HERE IN ENGLAND
HAVE COME TO OUR HANDS, SINCE
THE BEGINNING OF THE QUEEN'S
MAJESTY'S REIGN.

1. Haeding against the Apology of the English Church, answered
by M. Jewel, Bishop of Sarum.
2. Harding against M. Jewel's Challenge, answered by M. Jewel.
3. Harding's Rejoinder to M. Jewel, answered by M. Edward
Deering. 4. Cole's quarrels against M. Jewel, answered by M. Jewel.
6. Rastel's Return of untruths1, answered by M. Jewel.
6. Rastel against M. Jewel's Challenge, answered by William
Fulke. 7. Dorman against M. Jewel, answered by M. Nowel.
8. Dorman's Disproof of M. Nowel's Reproof, answered by M.
Nowel. 9. The man of Chester2, answered by M. Pilkington, Bishop of
Duresme. 10. Sanders on the Sacrament, in part answered by M. Nowel.
11. Pecknam's Scruples, answered by M. Home, Bishop of Win
chester. 12. Pecknam's Apology, answered by W. Fulke.
13. Pecknam's Objections against M. Gough's Sermon, answered
by M. Gough, and M. Lawrence Tomson.
14. Stapleton's Counterblast, answered by M. Bridges.
15. Martiall his Defence of the Cross, answered by M. Caulfehill.
16. Fowler's Psalter, answered by M. Sampson.
17. An infamous libel or letter (incerio antliore) against the teach
ers of God's divine Providence and Predestination, answered by Master
Robert Crowley.
18. Allen's Defence of Purgatory, answered by W. Fulke.
19. Heskins' Parliament, repealed by W. Fulke.
20. Riston's Challenge, answered by W. Fulke and Oliver Carter.
1 [Stapleton, and not Rastell, was the author of A Returne of untruthes upon
M. Jewelles Reply. 4to, Antwerp, 1566.]
2 [Bp. Pilkington's Works, p. 481. ed. Parker Soc.] 1 — 2

4 A CATALOGUE OF POPISH BOOKS.
21. Hosius Of God's express word, translated into English, an
swered by W. Fulke.
22. Sander's Rock of the Church, undermined by W. Fulke.
23. Sander's Defence of Images, answered by W. Fulke.
24. Shaclocke's Pearl, answered by M. Hartwell.
25. The Hatchet of Heresies 1, answered by M. Bartlet.
26. Master Evans, answered by himself.
27. A Defence of the private Mass, answered (by conjecture) by
M. Cooper, Bishop of Lincoln.
28. Certain assertions tending to maintain the Church of Rome
to be the true and Catholic Church, confuted by John Knewstub.
29. Sander upon the Lord's Supper, fully answered by D. Fulke.
30. Bristowe's Motives and Demands, answered by D. Fulke.
31. Stapleton's Differences, and Fortresse of the Faith, answered
by D. Fulke.
32. Allen's Defence of Priests' authority to remit sins, and of the
popish Church's meaning concerning Indulgences, answered by D.
Fulke. 33. Martiall's Reply to M. Calfehill, answered by D. Fulke.
34. Frarin's railing declamation, answered by D. Fulke.
These popish treatises ensuing are in answering. If the
Papists know any not here reckoned, let them be brought to
light, and they shall be examined.
1. Stapleton's Return of untruths.
2. Rastel's Reply.
3. Vaux his Catechism.
4. Canisius his Catechism translated.
1 [This was the title given by Shacklock to his translation of a treatise by Cardinal
Hosius, De Htzresibus nostri temporis. 8vo. Ant. 1565.]

AN OVERTHROW,
BY W. FULKE,
DOCTOR OF DIVINITY, AND MASTER OF PEMBROKE HALL IN CAMBRIDGE,
TO THE FEEBLE FORTRESS OF POPISH FAITH2, RECEIVED
FROM ROME, AND LATELY ADVANCED BY THOMAS
STAPLETON, STUDENT IN DIVINITY.

Thomas Stapleton, student in divinity, translated the
five books of Bede's History of the English Church into the
English tongue3; before which History it pleased him to set a
table of forty-five Differences between the primitive faith of
England, continued almost a thousand years, and the late
pretended faith of the Protestants : all which we will consider
in order. First are five apostolical marks, found in their preachers,
and wanting (as he saith) in ours.
1. Augustin (whom he calleth their Apostle) shewed the token
of his Apostleship in all patience, signs and wonders. Beda, Lib. i.
C. xxx. & xxxi. L. ii. C. ii. Miracles, in confirmation of their doc
trine, Protestants have yet wrought none.
I answer, Peter, Paul, Matthew, James, John, &c. are
Apostles to us, sent not from Gregory of Rome, but by Christ
Himself out of Jewry ; the sign of whose Apostleship being
shewed " in all patience, signs and wonders4," and our doctrine
being the same which we have received of their writings,
heedeth no other confirmation of miracles to be wrought by
us. If Augustin, sent from Gregory a man, have planted
any human traditions, and confirmed them by lying signs
and miracles, as a forerunner of Antichrist, which was even
immediately after his time to be openly shewed; or if by
2 [The name, "A Fortresse of the Faith," was probably derived
from the Fortalitium Fidei of Alphonsus de Spina. Vid. Moshemii
Instt. Hist. Eccles. Ssec. xv. Par. ii. p. 634. Helmst. 1755.]
3 [Antwerp, 1565. A copy is in the Lambeth library.]
4 [2 Cor. xii. 12.]

6 DIFFERENCES BETWEEN
subtle practice miracles have been feigned to have been done
by him, and reported by a credulous man Bede, it hurteth
not our cause ; seeing other writers1 report him to have been
both a proud and a cruel man. And yet we receive all that
doctrine which he taught, agreeable to the doctrine of the
Apostles of Christ : whatsoever he taught beside, we are not
to receive it of an Angel from heaven, much less of Augustin
from Eome.
2. Their Apostles tendered unity, labouring to reduce the Britons
to the unity of Christ's Church. Nothing is more notorious in Pro
testants than their infamous dissension.
Augustin indeed laboured to bring the Britons in sub
jection to himself and to the Church of Rome ; which argueth
no desire of christian unity, but savoureth of antichristian
ambition and tyranny, as his cruel threatening .executed upon
them did shew sufficiently2.
The dissension of the Protestants is not in articles of faith ;
nor such but that they are all brethren, that unfeignedly
profess the doctrine of salvation ; although they dissent in the
matter of the Sacrament, in orders, rites and ceremonies.
3. Their Apostles were sent by an ordinary vocation. Protestants
have preached without vocation or sending at all, such as the Church
of Christ requireth.
They were sent by Pope Gregory, who had none ordinary
authority to send Apostles or preachers into foreign countries.
Wherefore, if they had any sending, it was extraordinary ; of
charity, and not of office. The Protestants that first preached
in these last days had likewise extraordinary calling. But
if the calling of the Papists may be counted a lawful calling,
they were called of the popish Church to be preachers and
teachers, before they knew or preached the truth of the
Gospel. 4. Their preaching was of God by Gamaliel's reason3, because
their doctrine continued nine hundred years; whereas the Protes-
1 Gal. Mon. [Geoffrey of Monmouth, " whose Welsh blood was up,
as concerned in the cause of his countrymen." (Fuller's Clmrch
Hist, of Britain, Cent. vii. p. 63. Lond. 1655.)]
2 [Bede distinctly states that Augustin died long before the mas
sacre of the Monks of Bangor. See Calfhill, p. 306. ed. Parker Soc]
s [Acts v. 39.]

THE PRIMITIVE AND LATE FAITH. 7
tante' faith is already changed from Lutheran to Sacramentary in less
than twenty years.
This reason of Gamaliel would prove Mahomet's enterprise
to be of God, because it hath likewise continued nine hundred
years : and yet it is false that the popish faith hath had so
long continuance. For the Papists are departed, as from many
other points of doctrine, so even from that of the Lord's
Supper, which Augustin planted among the Saxons, unto
carnal presence and Transubstantiation ; the contrary of which
were taught by Augustin, as appeareth by the public Saxon
Homily, lately4 translated into English and imprinted. The
diversity of opinions concerning the Sacrament maketh no
alteration of faith in them that agree in all other necessary
articles. Besides that, it is most false which he saith, that
Luther of the Protestants is counted a very Papist.
5. Their Apostles taught such a faith as putteth things, by the
belief and practice whereof we may be saved. The faith of the Pro
testants is a denial of popish faith, and hath no affirmative doctrine
but that which Papists had before.
The Protestants' faith afiirmeth, that a man is justified by
it only ; that the sacrifice of Christ's death is our only pro
pitiatory sacrifice ; that Christ is our only Mediator of re
demption and intercession, &c. Generally, it affirmeth what
soever the Scripture teacheth, and denieth the contrary.
Then follow thirty-nine Differences in doctrine.
6. Their Apostles said Mass, which the Protestants abhor.
The popish Mass was not then all made ; therefore they
could not say it. They ministered the Communion, which
Bede and other writers called Missa : they said no private
Mass, such as the Papists now defend.
7. In the Mass is an external sacrifice offered to God the Father,
the blessed body and blood of Christ Himself. Lib. v. Cap. xxii., this
4 [Viz. in 1567, under the patronage of Archbishop Parker. The
original volume is without date, but the year of its publication can
be discovered by the names of the Prelates who attested the genuine
ness of the work. L'Isle's second edition of the Homily appeared in
1623 ; and in 1638 the first two leaves of this impression were changed,
and a fictitious reprint was issued with the title, " Divers ancient Mo
numents," &c]

8 DIFFERENCES BETWEEN
doctrine is expressly reported. This seemeth blasphemy to the Pro
testants. The words of Bede, according to M. Stapleton's own
translation, are these, out of the Epistle of Ceolfride to Naitan
King of the Picts : " All Christian Churches throughout the
whole world (which all joined together make but one Catholic
Church) should prepare bread and wine for the mystery of
the flesh and precious blood of that immaculate Lamb, which
took away the sins of the world ; and when all lessons,
prayers, rites and ceremonies used in the solemn feast of
Easter were done, should offer the same to God the Father,
in hope of their redemption to come." Here is no sacrifice
of the body and blood of Christ, but of bread and wine for
the mystery thereof; no sacrifice propitiatory for sins, but of
thanksgiving, and remembrance of the propitiation made by
the Lamb Himself, in hope of eternal redemption ; no oblation
by the Priest only, but by the whole Church and every
member thereof, as was the oblation of the paschal lamb,
whereunto he compareth this sacrifice, interpreting those words
of Exod. xii. : " Every man shall take a lamb according to
their families and households, and offer him in sacrifice at the
evening." That is to say, (saith Ceolfride,) All Christian
Churches, &c. as before. By which words it is manifest, that
the Papists now-a-days are departed even from that faith of
the Sacrament and sacrifice thereof that Augustin brought
from Rome.
8. This sacrifice is taught to be propitiatory, Lib. iv. C. xxii. ; which
Protestants abhor.
There is no mention of propitiatory sacrifice in that
chapter, but there is told a tale of a prisoner, that was loosed
from his bonds so oft as his brother, which was a Priest, said
Mass for his soul, supposing he had been slain in battle ; by
which many were persuaded, that the wholesome blessed
sacrifice was effectuous to the everlasting redemption and
ransoming both of soul and body. So were they worthy to
be deceived, that would build a doctrine, without the word of
God, upon the uncertain report of men ; who either devised
this tale as being false, or else, if it were so, could not discern
the illusions of Satan, seeking to maintain an error contrary
to the glory of Christ.

THE PRIMITIVE AND LATE FAITH. 9
9. Confession of sins made to the Priest, Lib. iv. Cap. xxv. &
xxvii. This Sacrament of the Protestants is abolished.
In neither of these chapters is mentioned the popish Au
ricular Confession, as a Sacrament necessary to salvation. In
the twenty-fifth mention is made of one, which, being troubled
with conscience of an heinous sin, came to a learned Priest to
ask counsel of remedy, and shewed what his offence was. In
the twenty-seventh chapter it is expressly said, that all the
people did openly declare unto S. Cuthbert in Confession the
things that they had done. Such Confession as either of both
these were, the Protestants have not abolished, although they
number not Confession among the Sacraments.
10. Satisfaction and Penance for sin enjoined appeareth, Lib. iv.
Cap. xxv. ; which the Protestants' court admitteth not.
There is no word of Satisfaction for his sins, but of fasting
and prayers, as fruits of repentance, whereunto he was first
exhorted by the Priest, according to his power and ability ;
but he, not content herewith, urged the Priest to appoint him
a certain time of fasting for a whole week together : to whose
infirmity the Priest somewhat yielding, willed him to fast two
or three days in a week, until he returned to give him farther
advice. Every man may see a broad difference betwixt this
counsel and popish Satisfaction and Penance.
11. Merit of good works in this story is eftsoones1 justified, Lib.
iv. Cap. xiv. & xv. ; which the Protestants count prejudicial to God's
glory. In the fourteenth chapter there is no mention of the merit
of good works, but that after the brethren had fasted and
prayed, God delivered them of the pestilence. We never
denied but that God regardeth our prayer and fasting, though
not as meritorious, but as our obedience which He requireth of
us, and saveth us only for His mercy sake. The fifteenth
chapter scarce toucheth any matter of religion ; and therefore
I know not what he meaneth to quote it, except it be an error
of the printer2.
1 [often, ever and anon.]
2 [" Not presuming to alter any of Stapleton's words, take it with
all the printer's faults, done probably by an outlandish press." (Ful
ler, Cent. v. p. 29.) However, it is certain that the MSS. vary in the
numbers prefixed to some of the chapters.]

10 DIFFERENCES BETWEEN
12. Intercession of Saints Protestants abhor ; the practice whereof
appeareth, Lib. i. Cap. xx. & Lib. iv. Cap. xiv.
In the former place Beda supposeth, that God gave the
Britons victory at the intercession of S. Alban ; but where
learned he this kind of intercession out of the holy Scrip
tures ?
In -the latter place a boy being sick of the plague re-
porteth, that God would cease the plague at the intercession
of S. Oswald, as the Apostles Peter and Paul declared to him
in a vision. But seeing the Apostles have taught no such
doctrine in their writings, they have admonished us to beware
of such fantastical visions. Gal. i. ; 2 Thessa. ii.
13. The Clergy of their primitive Church, after holy orders taken,
do not marry, Lib. i. Cap. xxvii. Now, after holy orders and vow to the
contrary, Priests do marry.
The counsel of Gregory to Augustin is this : " If there
be any among the Clergy out of holy orders which cannot
live chaste, they shall take wives." These words command
some of the Clergy to take wives ; they forbid not the rest to
marry. For what shall they that are in holy orders do, if
they cannot five chaste? Again, the histories are plentiful,
that Priests were married in England three or four hundred
years after Augustin.
14. In their primitive Church the vow of chastity was thought
godly and practised. Now they are counted damnable and broken.
Such vows as were made without consideration of men's
ability to perform them are justly accounted rash and pre
sumptuous. Such is the vow of virginity in a great many,
which our Saviour Christ affirmeth to be a rare gift, not in
every man's power. As for the vow of chastity, if any were
made by popish Priests, it was oftener broken before the
restoring of true knowledge than since ; whose incontinency
hath infected the world with whoredom and uncleanness.
15. Such Monks and Virgins lived in cloisters, in obedience and
poverty; which are overthrown of Protestants as a damnable estate.
The horrible abuse of cloisteral life hath caused the
subversion of them, beside their errors, superstition and
idolatry.

THE PRIMITIVE AND LATE FAITH. 11
16. Prayer for the dead, Dirige over night, and Requiem Mass in
the morning, was an accustomed manner, Lib. iii. Cap. ii. Lib. iv.
Cap. xxi. ; which the Protestants count to be abomination.
Prayer for the dead is an older error than popish Religion.
But Dirige and Requiem Mass had another meaning, Lib. iii.
Cap. ii., than the Papists have now ; for there it is said : " In
the self-same place the religious men, of Hagustalden1 church
have now of long time been accustomed to come every year,
the eve and the day that the same King Oswald was afterward
slain, to keep Diriges there for his soul ; and in the morning,
after Psalms being said solemnly, to offer for him the sacrifice
of holy oblation." You must understand, that this Oswald
was of them that so did taken for an holy Martyr ; and
therefore these psalmodies and sacrifices were of thanksgiving
for the rest of his soul, not of propitiation for his sins, as
the Papists account them. Lib. iv. Cap. xxi., there is nothing
to the matter in hand ; but in the next chapter following is
the tale of him that was loosed from his fetters by saying of
Mass ; by the relation whereof, and not by the word of God,
many began to think the sacrifice of the Mass profitable for
the dead.
17. Reservation of the Sacrament thought no superstition, Lib. iv.
Cap. xxiv. Now counted profanation of the Sacrament.
Reservation was an older error than Popery ; yet contrary
to the commandment of Christ, " Take ye, and eat ye."
18. Houseling2 before death used as necessary for all true Chris
tians, Lib. iv. Cap. iii. & xxiv. Protestants, under pretence of a Com
munion, do now wickedly bereave Christian folk of it.
These chapters shew that it was used, but not that it was
used as necessary. The Communion of the sick is also used
of us. Neither can M. Stapleton prove, that it was then
ministered to the sick person alone, as is used among them.
But in the twenty-fourth chapter of the fourth book it may
be gathered, that as many as were present with the party
received with him, because there was a mutual demand of his
being in charity with them, and they with him. *
19. Consecrating of Monks and Nuns by the hands of the Bishop
1 [Hexham.]
2 [Receiving the Sacrament of the Lord's Supper.]

12 DIFFERENCES BETWEEN
a practised solemnity in their primitive Church, Lib. iv. Cap. xix. &
xxiii. ; which Protestants, by the liberty of their Gospel, laugh and
scorn at.
Chap, xix., it is said, that Wilfride gave to Ethelrede the
vail and habit of a Nun ; and Cap. xxiii., that one Hein [Heiu]
took the vow and habit of a Nun, being blessed and consecrated
by Bishop Aidan. In those elder times no virgin was suffered
to profess virginity but by the judgment of the Bishop ; who
was not only a minister of the ceremony of profession, but
also a judge of the expedience and lawfulness of the vow ; so
that the vow of virginity was moderated, and kept within
more tolerable bounds than is used of the Papists.
20. Commemoration of Saints at Mass time, Lib. iv. Cap. xiv. &
xviii. Such commemorations in the Protestants' Communion are ex
cluded as superstitious and unlawful.
Chap, xiv., it is said, upon the report of a boy's vision,
" And therefore let them say Masses, and give thanks that
their prayer is heard, and also for the memory of the same
King Oswald, which sometime governed their nation." Ad
mitting this vision to be true, here is but Mass and memory
of thanksgiving. In the eighteenth chapter is nothing to
any such purpose. In the Communion of our Church is a
thanksgiving with Angels, Archangels, and all the glorious
company of heaven, although we make no special mention of
any one Saint by name.
21. Pilgrimage to holy places, especially to Rome, a much weighty
matter of all estates, Lib. iv. Cap. iii. & xxiii. & Lib. v. Cap. vii.
Nothing soundeth more profane and barbarous in the ears of Pro
testants. In the first of these places there is mention of pilgrimage
into Ireland, not for the holiness of the place, but for the
wholesome instruction that then was there. For it seemeth
by the story in many places, that Ireland (although not sub
ject to the see of Rome) was then replenished with godly
learned men, of whom men sought out of Britain to be in
formed in Religion. Peregrination to Rome was used of
superstition, and opinion of great learning to be had from
thence. Yet was there no pilgrimage to Images, nor to
Rome, so filthy a sink of all abominations as it hath been
since those days,

THE PRIMITIVE AND LATE FAITH. 13
22. Of the Reliques of holy men, of reverence used towards them,
and miracles wrought by them, the history is full. Nothing is more
vile in the sight of Protestants than such devotion of Christians.
Such superstition and credulity of the former age is justly
misliked of us ; but the idolatry and forging of Reliques, which
is too common among the Papists, is rightly detested of us.
23. Blessing with the sign of the Cross, accounted no superstition,
Lib. iv. Cap. xxiv. & Lib. v. Cap. ii., in the devotion of the Protestants
is esteemed magic.
Signing with the sign of the Cross, which sometime against
the Gentiles was an indifferent ceremony, used of the Papists
for an ordinary form of blessing is both superstitious and
idolatrous. 24. Solemnity of burial Protestants despise ; whereas it was the
devotion of their primitive Church to be buried in monasteries,
churches and chapels.
Honourable burial of the Saints' bodies, which were the
temples of the Holy Ghost, and are laid up in hope of a glo
rious resurrection, Protestants despise not. Yet were the
first Archbishops of Canterbury buried in a porch beside the
church, Lib. ii. Cap. iii. There was no burial-place appointed
in the monastery of Berking until by a light it was revealed,
as the history saith, Lib. iv. Cap. vii. ; but with time supersti
tion of burial grew ; yet nothing comparable in that age to the
superstition of Papists of these latter times. There was no
burial in S. Francis' cowl, nor after the popish solemnity.
25. Benediction of the Bishop, as superior to the people, was
used ; which Protestants scorn at. Lib. iv. Cap. xi.
The Protestants allow benediction of the Bishop in the
name of God, as the superior, although they justly deride the
popish manner of blessing by cutting the air with Crosses ;
neither is there any such blessing spoken of in the chapter
by him cited.
26. The service of th'e Church was, at the first planting of their
faith, in the Latin and learned tongue, Lib. i. Cap. xxix. Lib. iv. Cap.
xviii. ; which the Protestants have altered.
There is no such thing to be proved in the first place, nor
any thing sounding that way but only this, that Gregory

14 DIFFERENCES BETWEEN
sent into England to Augustin many books, of which it is a
popish consequence to gather, that they were books of Latin
service. In the latter it is declared, that John the Chanter
of Rome brought from thence the order of singing and read
ing ; and put many things in writing which pertained to the
celebration of high feasts and holydays for the whole com
pass of the year. But this being almost an hundreth years
after the coming of Augustin, it appeareth the Church of
England had no such Latin service before. For Gregory
willed Augustin to gather out of every Church what cere
monies he thought expedient for the English Church, and
bound him not to the orders or service of the Church of Rome.
And it may be gathered, that long after there was no certain
form of administration of the Sacraments put in writing and
generally received; but that the Priests, which then were
learned, ordered the same according to their discretion; for
their chief labour was in preaching and instructing. For
Beda reporteth, upon the credit of one which lived in his time,
and was Abbot of Wye, Herebald by name, that he being in
great extremity and danger of death, by falling from an horse,
S. John of Beverley, the Bishop that was his master, asked
him whether he knew without all scruple or doubt that he
was baptized or no. To whom he answered, that he certainly
knew that he was baptized, and told the Priest's name that
baptized him. To whom the Bishop replied, saying, " If
you were baptized of him, doubtless you were not well bap
tized ; for I know him well, and am right well assured, that
when he was made Priest he could not, for his dull-headed wit,
learn neither to instruct nor to baptize. And for that cause
I have straitly charged him, not to presume to that ministry
which he could not do accordingly." By this it may be
gathered, that the form of Baptism was not set down in writ
ing, which every dull-headed dogbolt Priest can read ; but that
it was referred to the learning of the Minister, which did in
struct them that were of age, and came to receive Baptism.
But this ignorant Priest, whom S. John of Beverley deprived
of his ministry, could neither catechise nor baptize : for which
cause the young man being catechised again, and after he re
covered of his fall, was baptized anew, as one that was not
rightly baptized before. Moreover, Lib. iv. Cap. xxiv., Beda
sheweth of one Cednom, in the abbey of Hilda, to whom was

THE PRIMITIVE AND LATE FAITH. 15
given miraculously the gift of singing and making hymns for
religion in his mother tongue, of the creation of the world,
and all histories of the Old Testament, of the incarnation, pas
sion, resurrection, and ascension of Christ, &c, which by all
likelihood were used in the churches. And when Latin ser
vice was first used, it is not incredible but that the people did
meetly well understand it ; for the Latin tongue was in those
days understood in most places of the western Church : and
Beda noteth some especially, which understood no language
but the Saxon. The interpreters which Augustin brought
out of France do confirm this conjecture. For the rude Latin
tongue spoken in France was better understood of the vulgar
people than that was spoken at Rome and in Italy : for which
cause there was a Canon made in the third Council at Tours1,
that the Homilies should be turned in rusticam Romanam
linguam, " into the rude Latin tongue," that they might more
easily be understood of all men. Again, the Britons and
Picts, which converted the greatest part of the Saxons, how
could they have been understood preaching in Welsh, but
that the vulgar Latin tongue was a common language to
them both? Finally, the manifold uses of divers churches,
as Sarum, York, &c, declare, that the Latin service was but
lately in comparison set down, when knowledge decayed both
in the Priests and the people.
27. Protestants have plucked down altars, which they had of old
time. They had altars, but standing in the midst of the church,
as the tables stood in the primitive Church.
28. Altar-cloths and vestments, used of them, Protestants admit
not. A sorry ceremony, in which no part of Christianity con-
sisteth. The like I say of the 29, holy vessels, 30, holy
water, and 31, ecclesiastical censure, about which there was
no small ado.
32. Their primitive Church was governed by Synods of the Clergy
only, in determining controversies of religion, which Protestants have
called from thence unto the lay court only.
1 [Cap. xvii. apud Crabbe Gondii. Tom. ii. p. 620. Colon. Agripp.
1551.]

16 DIFFERENCES BETWEEN
The latter part is a slander upon the Protestants, the for
mer part a lie upon the ancient Saxons; for at the Synod
y^ Whitby holden at Strenshalch [Strenaeshalch] not only the Kings.
in Yorkshire. *- . -, Tr. r\ • -iT-,
Oswine and Alfride were present, but also King Oswine did
order the Synod, and in the end concluded the matter in con
troversy. Lib. iii. Cap. xxv.
33. The spiritual rulers of the primitive Church were Bishops
and Pastors duly consecrated. Protestants have no consecration, no
true Bishop at all.
This is another lewd slander against the Protestants ; for
they have true Bishops, though not consecrated after the
popish manner. Laurence, the second Archbishop of Can
terbury, acknowledgeth the Ministers of the Scots and Britons
for Bishops, although they were not subject to the Church
and see of Rome. Lib. ii. Cap. iv. Aidanus, Finanus, Colmanus
are judged of Beda for true Bishops, although they were
divided from the Church of Rome : and so are such Bishops as
were ordained by them ; for they converted the greatest part
of the Saxons unto Christian faith, as Northumbrians, Mer
cians, and East Saxons.
34. Protestants have brought the supreme government of the
Church to the lay authority. In the primitive faith of our country the
lay was subject to the Bishop in spiritual causes.
And so are they now in such causes as they were subject
then. But that the supreme authority was in the civil Ma
gistrate at that time, it may appear by these reasons. First,
Pope Gregory himself calleth the Emperor Mauritius his sove
reign lord, Lib. i. Cap. xxiii. & xxviii. & xxix. & xxx. ; and
after him Pope Honorius called Heraclius his sovereign lord,
Lib. ii. xviii. King Sonwalch preferred Agilbert and Wini to be
Bishops : afterward he deposed Wini, which for money bought
of Wulf her King of Mercia the see of London. Lib. iii. Cap. vii.
Earcombert King of Kent, of his princely, authority, purged
his realm of idolatry, and commanded that the fast of forty
days should be kept. Lib. iii. Cap. viii.
King Oswine ordered the Synod at Strenshalch. Lib. iii.
Cap. xxv. Oswine and Ecgbert, Kings, deliberate touching
the peaceable government of the Church ; and, by the choice
and consent of the Clergy, did nominate Wighard Archbishop
of Canterbury. Lib. iii. Cap. xxix.

THE PRIMITIVE AND LATE FAITH. 17
King Ecgfride deposed Bishop Wilfride. Li. iv. Ca. xii.
Ostfor, [al. Oftfor,] at the commandment of King Edilred,
was consecrated by Wilfrid, Bishop of the Victians. Li. iv.
Ca. xxiii. These places of the history shew, that Kings had
chief authority both over persons and causes ecclesiastical,
such as we now acknowledge our Princes to have.
35. The final determination of spiritual causes rested in the see
Apostolic of Rome, which is now detested of Protestants.
Although the see of Rome usurped much in those days,
yet was not the authority thereof acknowledged by the
Churches of the Britons, Irish and Scots. The Britons before
Augustin's time sent not to Rome, but unto France, for aid
against the Pelagian heretics. At Augustin's coming, and
long after, they refused to yield obedience to the see of Rome :
yea, among the Saxons themselves, Wilfrid, deposed by the
King, and absolved by the Pope, could not be restored but
by a Synod of his own country. Li. v. C. xx.
36. Their faith and Apostles came from the see of Rome. The
Protestant departeth therefro.
The Protestants are returned to the ancient faith, which
was in this land before Augustin came from Rome; which did
not so much good in planting faith where it was not, as in
corrupting the sincerity of faith where it was before he came.
37. Their faith was first preached with Cross1 and procession.
Heresies first raged by throwing down the Cross, and altering the
procession therewith.
The popish faith began with superstition, which the
Christian Catholics have justly abolished.
38. Their first Apostles were Monks. The first preachers of the
Protestants have been apostataes, as Luther, CEcolampadius, Martyr, &c.
Nay, they have returned from apostasy to the true faith
and religion of Christ. Augustin and the rest of the Monks
of that time differed much from the popish Monks of the
latter days. For they were learned preachers, Lib. iii.
i [" 'Tis very true indeed, that there is not the least intimation in
Bede that they worshipped it." (Manning's England's Conversion and
Reformation compared, p. 122. Antw. 1725.)]
r n 2
[fulke, ii. J

18 DIFFERENCES BETWEEN
Cap. xxvi; these idle loiterers: they laboured with their hands,
Lib. v. Cap. xix; these lived of the sweat of other men's brows.
They made no such vow, but they might serve the Com
monwealth if they were called thereto : Sigbard [Sighard]
of a Monk was made King, Lib. iv. Cap. xi. : these professed
themselves dead to all honest travail, either in the Church or
Commonwealth. 39. The first imps1 of their faith, and scholars of the Apostles,
were holy men. Luther confesseth his scholars to be worse than they
were under the Pope2.
There were hypocrites in those days ; also there were in
continent Nuns. Lib. iv. Cap. xxv. And Beda confesseth, that
Aidane (which was no slave of the Romish see) was more
holy than the Clergy of his time, whose devotion was key
cold. If Luther flattered not his scholars, he is more to be
commended ; yet cannot Stapleton prove, that he speaketh so
of all, but of some carnal professors only.
40. Their first preacher lived Apostolically in voluntary poverty.
This Apostolical perfection Protestants, that bear themselves for the
Apostles of England, neither practise themselves, nor can abide in
other. First, it is a slander, that any Protestants bear them
selves for Apostles of England. Secondly, let the world judge
whether the preachers of the Gospel come nearer to the
poverty of the Apostles than the Pope, their great Apostle of
the Romish Church, with the rest of the pillars of the same,
the Cardinals, &c.
1 [The word "imp" was formerly taken in a good sense, and sig
nified offspring.]
2 [Staphylus, from whom, as there is abundant reason for believing,
Stapleton derived this accusation against Luther's followers, refers for
his authority to the " Postilla magna" upon the Gospel for the first
Sunday in Advent. (Apologia, edit. Lat. 2. De vero Scriptures saerce
intellects, fol. 47. Colon. 1562.) The Kirchen-Postilla, or Postilla
Ecclesiastica, was valued by Luther above most of his other writings,
and must not be confounded with his Hus-PostiUa, or Postilla Domes-
tica, a work of inferior moment. (Cf. Jo. Alb. Fabricii Centifolium
Lutheranum, pp. 297, 299. Hamb. 1728. & Joan. Fabric. Hist. Bibl.
Fabr. Par. ii. pp. 232—3. Wolfenb. 1718.) Of the first part of the
former treatise the editor has before him copies of the earliest
editions, Argentor. et Basil. 1521 ; and in neither of these can the
acknowledgment in question bo discovered.]

THE PRIMITIVE AND LATE FAITH. 19
41. Their faith builded up monasteries and churches. Protestants
have thrown down many, erected none.
The first monasteries were colleges of learned preachers,
and builded for that end. King Edilwald builded a monastery,
wherein he and his people might resort to hear the word of
God, to pray, and to bury their dead. Lib. iii. Cap. xxiii. The
like practice was in the abbey of Hilda. Lib. iv. Ca. xxiii.
From which use seeing they were of late degenerated into
idleness and filthy lusts, they were lawfully suppressed. And
as for building of churches where they lack, Protestants have
and do employ their endeavour.
42. By the first Christians of their faith God was served day and
night. Protestants have abolished all service of God by night, and
done to the Devil a most acceptable sacrifice.
Protestants have abolished no service of God by night,
but such as was either impious or superstitious ; for they also
serve God both day and night, even with public prayer, and
exercise of hearing the word of God preached.
43. By the devotion of the people first embracing their faith
much voluntary oblations were made to the Church. By the reckless
religion of the Protestants due oblations are denied to the Church.
Of them that be true professors of the Gospel both due
oblations are paid, and much voluntary oblations also, for the
maintenance of the preachers, for relief of the poor, the
strangers and captives, &c.
44. Princes endued the Church with possessions and revenues.
The lewd looseness of the Protestants hath stirred Princes to take
from the Church's possessions so given.
Nay, the pride, covetousness, and luxuriousness of popish
Clergy have moved them to do that is done in that behalf.
45. Last of all, their faith reduced the Scottish men living in
schism to the unity of the Catholic Church. This late alteration hath
moved them from unity to schism.
Nay, their superstition at length corrupted the sincerity
of faith in the Britons and Scots ; and from the unity of the
Catholic Church of Christ, brought them under the schismatical
faction of the see of Rome ; from which they are now again
returned with us, God be thanked, to the unity of Christ's
true Catholic and Apostolic Church.
2—2

20 DIFFERENCES BETWEEN
These Differences, which he hath either falsely observed, or
else craftily collected out of the dross and dregs of that time,
he promiseth to prove to concur with the belief and practice
of the first six hundred years in the second part of his feeble
Fortress; which is easily blown over with one word. Although
some of these corruptions have been received within the first
six hundred years, yet is he not able to prove that they
have been from the beginning, and so continued all that time.
Wherefore his Fortress will do them small pleasure, to establish
them for Christian truths, which have had a later beginning
than our Saviour Christ and His Apostles.
But forasmuch as he hath gathered Differences of the first
Church of the Saxons from ours, I have also gathered Differ
ences of the same from theirs at this time ; and let the readers
judge of both indifferently.
1. The Church of English Saxons, for three hundred
years after Augustin, did believe bread and wine to remain in
the Sacrament after consecration, which the Papists deny:
proved by a Sermon extant in the Saxon tongue, translated
out of Latin1 by iElfrike, Archbishop of Canterbury, or
Abbot of S. Albone's2, appointed to be read unto the people
at Easter before they received the Communion ; also by two
Epistles of the same iElfrike3.
2. The Church of English Saxons believed the Sacrament
to be the body and blood of Christ, not carnally, but spiritually;
expressly denying as well the carnal presence as Transubstan-
tiation, which the Papists hold. iElf. Serm. Pasc. & Ep.
3. The Church of English Saxons did give the Commu
nion under both kinds unto the people, which the Papists do not.
iElf. Serm. Pasc. & Beda, Lib. i. Cap. xxvii. & Lib. v. Cap. xxii.
1 [Very many passages were directly translated from the famous
book of Ratramn. See Ussher's Answer to a Challenge, pp. 54  56.
Lond. 1686. The parallelism has been still more accurately shewn
by Hopkins, in the Dissertation prefixed to his English version of
Ratramnus, pp. 40 — 51. Lond. 1688.]
2 [Vid. Whartoni Dissert, de duobus -<Elfricis : Anglia Sacra, Tom.
i. pag. 125, seqq. Archbishop Nicolson's Correspondence, Vol. i. p. 19.
Soames's Anglo-Saxon Cliurch, pp. 219—22, 237 — 8. Lond. 1838.]
3 [Published, so far as concerns " the sacramentall bread & wyne,"
by Archbishop Parker, with the Saxon Homily.]

THE PRIMITIVE AND PAPISTS' FAITH. 21
4. The Priests of that time said no private Mass on
working- days, but only on holy-days, which therefore were
called Mass-days. iElfr. Ser. Pasc. Popish Priests every
day. 5. The people did then communicate with the Priest.
Beda, Lib. ii. Cap. v. The popish Priest eateth and drinketh
all alone. 6. The English Saxon Church did celebrate Easter with
the old Jews in one faith, although they differ from them in
the kind of external Sacraments : whereby they affirmed the
substance of the Sacraments of both the Testaments to be all
one, which the Papists deny. .Mfr. Serm. Pasc. & Epist.
Bed. Lib. v. Ca. xxii.
7. The Sacrament of the Lord's Supper was not then
hanged up to be worshipped, nor carried in procession, be
cause they had not the opinion of carnal presence which the
Papists have, &c.
8. The English Saxons' Church denied that wicked men
received the body and blood of Christ. JEMr. Serm. Pasc.
The Papists hold, that not only wicked men, but also brute
beasts eat the body of Christ, if they eat the external Sacra
ment thereof4.
4 [" Si corpus Domini a muribus vel araneis consumptum ad ni-
hilum devenerit, sive multum corrosum fuerit, si integre vermis in eo
inventus fuerit, comburatur. Si sine horrore residuum prsedicto modo
corrosum sumi poterit, tutius est ut sumatur." (Cautele Misse, in
Missal, ad sacros. Rom. eccles. vsum, fol. cxii. Paris. 1529.) In the
instructions "De defectibus in celeb. Missarum occurrentibus," pre
fixed to the Roman Missal published by the command of Pope Pius V.,
there is a remarkable section, " Si Hostia," which provides for the
disappearance of the consecrated Host, in the event of it having been
taken " a mure vel alio animali :" but in the modern Missals, sanctioned
by Popes Clement VIII. and Urban VIII., all mention of the mouse,
and of its capture, death and burning, is omitted  " Quid ergo sumit
mus, vel quid manducat?" asks Peter Lombard; (Sententt. Lib. iv.
Dist. xiii.) and he answers, " Deus novit hoc." However, the Master
of the Sentences is condemned for having taught, " quod brutum non
sumit verum corpus Christi, etsi videatur ;" (See his " Errores" annexed
to the Paris edition, 1553. fol. 418.) and Pope Gregory XI. excom
municated those who should maintain the same opinion. Vid. Eyme-
rici Directorium Inquisitorum, pp. 33, 197. Romsa, 1578. Cosin's Hist.
of Transub. pp. 102, 152. Lond. 1676. Jewel's Reply to Harding's
Answer, Art. xxiii. Innocent. Pap. III. De sacro Altaris myster. Lib.

22 DIFFERENCES BETWEEN
9. The English Saxons allowed the Scriptures to be
read of the people in the Saxon tongue; whereof Canutus
made a law, that all Christian men should diligently search
the law of God1. The Papists deny the search of God's
law to all Christian men, that are not of the Clergy, or
learned in the Latin tongue.
10. The English Saxons decreed in Synod, after Latin
service prevailed, and the knowledge of Latin decayed, that
the Priests should say unto the people on Sundays and holy-
days the interpretation of that Gospel in English; ^Elfr.
Lib. Can.2 ; which the Papists neither do nor will suffer to
be done. 11. The English Saxons commanded, that all men should
be instructed by the Priests to say the Lord's Prayer, the
Creed, and the Ten Commandments in the English tongue;
Will. Mai. Li. i. de part, [Pont3.] JElfr. in Lib. Can. Ca-
nut. in Leg. ; which the Papists have taught to be heretical.
12. The English Saxons decreed in Synod, and King
Canutus made a law, that the Priests should instruct the
people in the understanding of the Lord's Prayer, the Creed,
&c. ubi supra; which the Papists altogether neglect, affirming
ignorance to be the mother of devotion4.
iv. Cap. xi. fol. 58. Lipsise, 1534. Waldens. Doct. ant. Fid. Tom. ii.
C. 46. f. 80. Venet. 1571. Gab. Biel Sac. Can. Miss. Exposit. Lect.
lxxxviii. fol. 266. Basil. 1510. Canones Penitent. Casus quadrages.
Lips. 1516. Boxhornius, De Harmon. Euchar. p. 214. Lugd. Bat. 1595.
Gavanti Thesaur. sac. Rit. T. ii. p. 8. Venet. 1823. Wilkins, i. 139.
Gage's Survey of the West Indies, pp. 446 — 9. edit. 4. Lond. 8vo.]
1 [See the laws of Canute in Lambard's 'Apxatovo/ila, p. 105. ed.
Wheloc. Cantab. 1644.]
2 [The decree is to be found in the twenty-third Canon of iElfric
to Wulfinus, annexed by Whelock to Lambard's book. Ussher, when
using this testimony, and referring to this sentence in Fulke, has three
times adduced a single passage, in consequence of his not having been
aware that iElfric's "Epistola ad Clericos," "Epistola Anglo-Saxonica,"
and "Liber Canonum" are one and the same work. (De Scripturis et
Sacris vernaculis,-pp. 128 — 9. Conf. Whartoni Auctarium, p. 377. Lond.
1690.)] a [Guil. Malmesburiensis, Lib. i. De gestis Pontiff. Angl. p. 112.
edit. Savil. Lond. 1696. cit. Usser. in Hist. Dogmat. p. 197.]
4 [See Bp. Jewel's Works, Part i. p. 57. ed. Parker Soc. ; the xxviith
Article of his Reply to Harding's Answer; and the Zurich Letters,
first series, p. 15. Cambr. 1842.]

THE PRIMITIVE AND PAPISTS' FAITH. 23
13. The worshipping of Images, and the second Council
of Nice that decreed the same, was accursed of the Church of
God in England and France, and written against by Alcuinus5
in the name of the Church of England and France. Math.
West6. Symeon Dunel7. Rog. Houed8. &c. The Papists de
fend both that idolatrous Council, and their wicked Decree.
14. The Priests in the primitive Saxon Church were
married for three or four hundred years; witness all histories
of England ; which the Papists do not allow.
15. The vow of chastity was not exacted of them that
were made Priests, for the space of more than four hundred
years after the arrival of Augustin into Kent; which Decree
was made by Lanfrancus in a Synod at Winchester, anno
10769- 16. Notwithstanding this Decree and many other, both
Priests refused to make that vow, and kept their wives by
the King's leave. Gerard. Ebor. Ep. ad Anselm.10 Histor. Pe-
troburg11. Papists permit neither of both.
17. Lanfrancus decreed, that such Priests as had wives
should not be compelled to put them away. The Papists
enforce Priests to put away their wives.
18. The Popes that were founders of the English Saxon
Church acknowledged the Emperors to be their sovereign
lords. Bed. Li. i. Cap. xxiii. Lib. ii. Cap. xviii.
6 [Who is supposed to have written the Caroline Books, A. D. 790.
These were published by Du Tillet in 1549.]
6 [Flores Histor. p. 146. Francof. 1601.]
1 [De Regibus Anglorum, apud Twysdenum, S. R. A. p. 111. Lond.
1652.] s [Annall. P. i. Rer. Angl. Scriptt. p. 405. Francof. 1601. See
Soames's Bampton Lectures, pp. 170 — 1. Oxford, 1830.]
9 ["Nullus Canonicus uxorem habeat. Sacerdotum vero in cas-
tellis vel in vicis habitantium, habentes uxores non cogantur ut dimit-
tant; non habentes interdicantur ut habeant." (Concill. x. 351. ed.
Labb. et Coss.) It was natural that Labbe should say of this Synod,
"plerisque suspecta est." (Concill. Histor. Synops. pag. 158. Lut. Paris.
1661.] 10 [See the extract from the letter of Gerard, Abp. of York, in
Fox. ii. 403. Lond. 1684.]
11 [The testimony of the author of the Saxon History of Peter
borough may be found in Sir Henry Spelman's Councils, Tom. ii.
p. 36. Compare Wharton's Treatise of the Celibacy of the Clergy,
p. 160. Lond. 1688.]

24 DIFFERENCES BETWEEN
19. Pope Honorius took order, that the Archbishop of
Canterbury might be consecrated in England, without travel
ling to Rome. Bed. L. ii. Ca. xviii. The latter Popes
denied this.
20. Pope Gregory exhorteth King Ethelbert to set forth
the faith of Christ to his subjects, to forbid the worship of
Idols, &c. Bed. Lib. i. Cap. xxxii. The Papists would not
have the civil Magistrate govern in ecclesiastical causes.
21. And lest you should say, (as M. Sander doth,) that
the King was herein the Bishop's Commissary, Earcombert,
King of Kent, of his princely authority purged his realm of
idolatry, and commanded the fast of forty days to be kept.
Bed. Lib. iii. Cap. viii. The Papists deny that a King may do
such things of his princely authority.
22. Kings in those times preferred men to bishoprics ;
Bed. Lib. iii. Cap. vii. ; which the Papists affirm to be unlawful.
23. Kings in those days deposed Bishops, as Senwalch
did Wini ; Bed. Li. iii. Cap. vii. Ecgfrid deposed Wilfride,
Lib. iv. Ca. xii. ; which the Papists do not admit.
24. King Ecgfride would not receive Wilfrid, being re
stored by the Pope. Bed. Lib. iv. Cap. xiii. & Lib. v. Cap. xx.
The Papists count it blasphemy not to obey the Pope's decree.
25. The same Wilfride, being again deprived by means
of King Aldfride, and being the second time absolved by the
Pope, could not be restored to his bishopric but by a Synod
of his own Clergy. Bed. Lib. v. Cap. xx. By which it appear-
eth, the Clergy were not then in perfect slavery to the Pope.
26. Kings in those days were present at Synods, and
ordered them, and concluded in them, as Oswine did at Strens
halch. Lib. iii. Cap. xxv.
27. Archbishops were commanded by Kings to conse
crate Bishops ; as Wilfride was to consecrate Ostfor \_al. Oftfor,]
at the commandment of King Edilred. Bed. Li. iv. Cap. xxiii.
Papists deny Kings to have sovereign authority in ecclesiastical
causes. 28. Privileges of monasteries sought at Rome had first
the consent of the King unto them. Bed. Lib. iv. Cap. xviii.
Papists of later times seek privileges against the King's will.
29. Monks in that time were called to serve the Com
monwealth ; as Sighard, a Monk, was made King of the East
Saxons. Lib. iv. Ca. xi. Papists call such apostataes.

THE PRIMITIVE AND PAPISTS' FAITH. 25
30. Monasteries were then colleges of learned men, to
furnish the Church with Ministers and Bishops. Li. iv. Ca.
xxiii. Among Papists they be stalls to feed idle bellies, that
serve neither the Church nor the Commonwealth.
31. Study of the Scriptures and hand labour was the
exercise of Monks in those first and better times. Bed. Lib.
iv. Cap. iii. Idleness and vain ceremonies is the exercise of
popish Monks.
32. Monasteries were founded, that men might in them
hear the word of God, and pray. Bed. Li. iii. Ca. xxiii.
Popish monasteries in latter times were builded only to pray
for men's souls, and to say Masses in them, &c.
33. Upon Sundays the people used ordinarily to flock
to churches and monasteries, to hear the word of God. Bed.
Lib. iii. Cap. xxvi. In popish monasteries there neither was
nor is any ordinary resort to hear the word of God, nor any
ordinary preaching.
34. The Monks of that time were all learned preachers.
Bed. Lib. iii. Cap. xxvi. The popish Monks are most unlearned,
and few preachers out of their dens.
35. In those days every Priest and Clerk was a preacher ;
so that when any came to any town, the people would resort
to them to be taught of them. Bed. Lib. iv. Cap. xxvi. The
greatest number of popish Priests, in these latter days, are
most ignorant asses, and void of all spiritual understanding.
36. Unlearned Priests were forbidden to serve in the
church ; Bed. Lib. v. Cap. vi. ; insomuch that S. John of
Beverley baptized again a young man which was baptized
of an unlearned Priest. The Papists allow unlearned Priests
to baptize and say Mass, that cannot catechise and instruct
their hearers.
37. Songs and hymns out of the holy Scriptures were
made meet for religion in the mother tongue. Bed. Lib.
iv. Cap. xxiv. Papists can abide no songs of Scripture in the
English tongue.
38. Anchorets of that time laboured with their hands.
Bed. Lib.- iv. Cap. xxviii. Popish Anchorets live idly, and
labour not with their hands.
39. Dirige and Mass was said for Saint Oswald's soul:
by which it is manifest, that they esteemed the Mass to be
a sacrifice of thanksgiving. Lib. iii. Cap. ii.

26 DIFFERENCES BETWEEN
40. Bega, a Nun, after she saw the soul of the Abbess
Hilda carried into heaven, exhorted her sisters to be occu
pied in prayers and psalms for her soul. Whereby it ap-
peareth, that the doctrine of Purgatory was not yet confirmed
among them. Lib. iv. Ca. xxiii. Nothing is so certainly
defended among Papists as Purgatory.
41. Holy men fasted then with eating of milk, as Eg
bert. Bed. Lib. iii. Ca. xxvii. And Cedda fasted Lent with
eggs and milk. Lib. iii. Ca. xxiii. Papists of later times
have utterly forbidden all white meats in Lent and fasting-
days. 42. There was a Church of Christ in Britain before the
coming of Augustin, not subject to the see of Rome, which
continued long after his coming. Lib. ii. Cap. iv. The Pa
pists account none Christians, but such as be bondslaves to
the see of Rome.
43. Laurence, the second Archbishop of Canterbury,
accounteth the Bishops of the Scots and Britons for Bishops,
although they were not subject to the see nor Church of
Rome. Bed. Lib. ii. Cap. iv. The Papists take none for
Bishops that be not under the see of Rome.
44. The churches of the Britons were builded after
another form than the churches of the Romish obedience.
Bed. Lib. iii. Cap. iv. The Papists affirm there were no
churches ever builded, but in fashion and use of Popery.
45. The Scottish Church, instructed from Ireland, ob
served all such works of devotion as they could find in the
Prophets, Gospels, and Apostles' writings ; and therefore of
Bede and the English Church were acknowledged for Chris
tians, although they would not become members of the
Church of Rome. Bed. Li. iii. Ca. iv. The Papists hold that
there is no salvation out of the Church of Rome ; which is a
new Church in England, in comparison of the elder that was
before Augustin's time.
46. Aidanus, a preaching Bishop, having no possessions,
labouring to fulfil all that was written in the holy Scriptures,
the Prophets and Apostles, shining in miracles both in his
life-time and after his death, was never subject to the Church
of Rome ; yet accounted a Saint of the Church in those days.
Bed. Lib. iii. Cap. xvi. The Papists allow no Saints but
canonized by their Pope.

THE PRIMITIVE AND PAPISTS' FAITH. 27
47. The exercise of Aidanus' company, both shorn and
laymen, was reading of the Scriptures, and learning of the
Psalms. Bed. Lib. iii. Cap. v. The exercise of popish Bishops'
servants is nothing less.
48. The greatest part of the English Saxons were con
verted to Christianity by the Britons and Scots, that were no
members of the Church of Rome. As, all the kingdom of
Northumberland, both Bernicians and Deires, were converted
by Aidanus ; except a few persons whom Paulinus, the Roman,
in long time had gained. The whole kingdom of Mercia,
which was the greatest part of England, received the faith
and baptism of Finanus the Scot, the successor of Aidanus.
Bed. Lib. iii. Cap. xxi. The East Saxons by Cedda, that
was also of the Scottish ordering. Lib. iii. Cap. xxii. The
Papists affirm that all our religion came from Rome.
49. Ceadda was consecrated by Wini, Bishop of the
West Saxons, assisted by two Briton Bishops that were not
subject to the see of Rome ; and was nevertheless accounted
for a lawful Bishop. Bed. Lib. iii. xxviii.
50. Beda accounted Gregory for the Apostle of the
Englishmen. Lib. ii. Cap. i. The Papists now take Augus
tin for their Apostle.
I omit many other opinions and ordinances of that age :
as, Augustin would have none forced to religion ; that Wednes
day should be fasting-day ; the Bishop of London should
have a pall as well as York, &c, wherein the Papists differ
from them; that brag of nothing but antiquity, universality,
and consent.

[book

AN OVERTHROW OF
STAPLETON'S FORTRESS,
OR, AS HE CALLETH II HIMSELF,
THE PILLAR OF PAPISTRY.

THE FIRST BOOK.
CHAPTER I.
Stapleton. Stapleton. An introduction, declaring the necessity of the matter
to be treated upon, and the order which the author will take in
treating thereof.
Fulke. Fulke. Omitting the necessity of the matter, his order
which he promiseth to keep is this. First, he will prove, if
he can, that Papistry is the only true Christianity. This pro
position he will follow by two principal parts. In the former,
he will prove by authority of Scriptures, and answering of the
adversaries' objections, that the Church cannot possibly err.
Secondly, that this Church must be a known Church; that no
malignant Church can prevail against it ; that Papistry can be
no schism nor heresy. In the latter part, after a few reason
able demands, that Protestants must not refuse to answer,
putting the case that the known Church of nine hundred
years is a kind of Papistry, he will prove that the faith of
Protestants is differing from that was first planted among
Englishmen in more than forty points ; and that in all those
points of difference he will shew they agree with the first
six hundred years, which he saith (but falsely) that Protest
ants offer to be tried by. For although the Bishop of Sarum
made challenge of many articles now holden of the Papists,
not to be found within the compass of the first six hundred
years, and therefore to be new and false doctrines ; yet nei
ther he, nor any Protestant living or dead, did ever agree
to receive what doctrine soever was taught within the first

I.] STAPLETON'S FORTRESS OVERTHROWN. 29
six hundred years. But this I dare avow, that what article
of doctrine soever we do affirm, the same hath been affirmed
of the godly Fathers of the primitive Church ; whatsoever
we deny, the same cannot be proved to have been univer
sally affirmed and received of all the godly Fathers, by the
space of the six hundred years together.

CHAPTER II.
Stapleton. That Protestants do condemn the universal Church of Stapleton.
Christ, of these many hundred years ; and the reason of the whole
disputation following grounded thereupon.
Fulke. To prove that the Protestants condemn the uni- Fulke.
versal Church of Christ these many hundred years, he alle-
geth the sayings of some Protestants, miserably wrested from
their meaning : that Latimer was our Apostle ; that Luther
begat truth; that the Gospel doth arise; in the first appearing
of the Gospel, &c. : or as though by these sayings, and such
like, they should deny that ever there had been any Church
in the world before these times; whereas every child may un
derstand, they speak of the restitution of the truth of the
Gospel into the open sight of the world in these latter days.
Likewise, where some have written, that the Pope hath
blinded the world these many hundred years; some say a
thousand years, some twelve hundred, some nine hundred,
some five hundred, &c. ; and the Apology affirmeth, that
Christ hath said the Church should err, he cavilleth that all
the Church for so many years is condemned of all error :
whereas it is evident to them that will understand, that al
though some erroneous opinions have prevailed, and in pro
cess of time have increased in the greatest part of the
Church, for many hundred years ; yet so long as the only
foundation of salvation was retained, the universal Church of
Christ so many hundred years is not condemned. But when
Antichrist (the mystery of whose iniquity wrought in the Apos
tles' time, 2 Thess. ii.) was openly shewed, and that apostasy
which the Apostle foresheweth was fulfilled, then and from
that time, whensoever it was, not the universal Church of
Christ is condemned, but the general apopasy [apostasy] of
Antichrist is detected.

30 stapleton's fortress [book

THE ARGUMENT,
WHEREUPON THIS FIRST PART OF THE VAWMURE1 OF
THIS FORTRESS IS BUILDED, IS THUS FRAMED
BY THE BUILDER HIMSELF.
Stapleton. Stapleton. The known Church of Christ doth continue, and shall
continue always without interruption, in the true and upright faith :
But Papistry was the only known Church of Christ all these nine
hundred years :
Ergo, Papistry all these nine hundred years hath continued, and
shall continue always, even to the world's end without interruption,
in the true and upright faith.
Fulke. Fulke. This argument hath never a leg to stand upon:
for understanding (as he doth) the known Church to be that
which is known to the world, to continue without interrup
tion so known to the world, the major, is false. For
although the Church shall continue always without interrup
tion, yet it shall not continue always so known; but, as in the
days of Elias, be hid from the outward view of men.
Again, the minor, that Papistry was the only known
Church, understanding (as he doth) that it was only reputed,
taken, and acknowledged so to be, it is utterly false. For
the Greek and oriental Church, which is not the popish
Church, hath been reputed, taken, and acknowledged to be
the Church of Christ by as great a number of professors of
Christianity as have acknowledged the popish Church. So
that where he thinketh and saith all his labour remaineth
to prove the major, you see that if he could prove it, yet
all his labour is lost. But, to follow him in his major, he
divideth it into two parts : the one, that the Church doth
always continue in a right faith : the other, that this is a
known Church. Both these he promiseth to prove by Scrip
ture. And the first truly he shall not need : but yet it fol-
loweth not, but that the Church may err in some particular
points, not necessary to salvation; although it continue in a
right faith, concerning all principal and necessary articles.
1 [Vawmuro: outwork.]

I.] OVERTHROWN BY W: FULKE. 31

CHAPTER III.
Stapleton. Evident proofs and clear demonstrations out of the Stapleton.
Psalms, that the Church of Christ must continue for ever without in
terruption sound and upright.
Fulke. He is plentiful in proving that which needeth Fulke.
no proof, that the Church of Christ shall continue always :
and first out of the lxxxviii.2 Psalm, which he rehearseth, and
interpreteth of the Church out of Augustin, lest he should
trust his own judgment, as he fantasieth that our preachers do,
altogether refusing to read interpreters. We affirm, that the
Church of Christ hath and shall continue to the world's end :
but we deny that the popish Church is that; which could not
be before there was a Pope, before their heresies were brought
out of the bottomless pit, which were not breathed up all in
six hundred years after Christ, no not in a thousand years
after Christ, and some not almost in fourteen hundred years
after Christ; I mean the sacrilegious taking away of the Com
munion of the blood of Christ from the people in the Council
of Constance3. What impudency is it of Papists, to urge the
perpetual continuance of Christ's Church without interruption,
and then to begin at six hundred years after Christ; and not
to be able to shew a perpetual course of all their doctrine
from Christ, His Apostles, and the primitive Church!
But, to prove that the Church of Christ cannot possibly
(as Protestants wickedly do fable) have failed and perished
these many hundred years, he citeth the lxi. Psalm, with
Augustin's exposition thereupon. But what Protestant so
fableth, M. Stapleton ? You had need to make men of paper,
to fight against the paper walls of your fantastical Fortress.
The Papists, when they cannot confute that we say, they will
beat down that we say not. " How say the Protestants, that
these nine hundred years and upward the Church hath
perished ; it hath been overwhelmed with idolatry and super
stition?" The Protestants never said so, M. Stapleton. The
Church hath not perished, though the greatest part of the
world hath been overwhelmed with idolatry and superstition.
God can provide for His chosen, that they shall not be
2 [Engl, lxxxix. — Stapleton's Fortresse, p. 30. S. Omers, 1625.]
3 [Sess. xiii. an. 1415.]

32 stapleton's fortress [book
drowned, when all the world beside is overwhelmed. Another
testimony to the like effect, and with the like conclusion, he
bringeth out of the Psalm civ., and thereupon a pithy syllo
gism. " We prove the Catholic Church by the continuance of
Christianity : The continuance of Christianity only in Papistry
is clear : Ergo, Papistry is only the true Church of Christ."
Nego tibi minorem, M. Stapleton. When will you prove the
continuance of Christianity only in Papistry, when Papistry
began since Christ and His Apostles? and if you mean
Christianity for the external profession of Christ's religion,
then will you prove the oriental Churches to be Papistry,
which defy the authority of your Pope.
Last of all, out of the Psalm ci., and Augustin's appli
cation of the same against the Donatists, which said that the
Church was perished out of all the world except Africa
where they were, he would compare the Protestants to them,
whereas indeed the Papists are more like to them. For they,
holding that there is no Church of Christ but the Romish
Church, affirm in effect as the Donatists, that the Church of
Christ for many hundred years hath perished out of all
parts of the world beside Europa, where only, and yet not in
all parts thereof, they have borne the sway. Whatsoever,
therefore, Augustin writeth against the Donatists, for shutting
up the Church of Christ only in Africa, may be rightly
applied to the Papists, for restraining it only to a part of
Europa. But, contrary to the Papists and Donatists, we affirm,
that the Catholic Church of Christ is and hath been, even
in the most dark times of Antichrist's kingdom, dispersed
throughout the whole world; nothing doubting but God, which
preserved seven thousand in one corner of Israel, not much
greater than some shire of England, hath preserved seven
thousand thousand in all parts of the wide world, whiGh
never bowed their knees to the Romish Baal, nor kissed
him with their mouth.
CHAPTER IV.
Staplfton. Stapleton. Proofs and testimonies out of the prophet Esay, that
the Church of the Messias continueth for ever unto the world's end,
assisted always by God Himself.
Fulke. Fulke. The testimonies of the perpetuity of the Church

I.J OVERTHROWN BY W. FULKE. 33
out of the Prophet Esay, with the exposition of Hieronym
upon them, maketh nothing against us, which willingly ac
knowledge the same, but deny that they pertain to the popish
Church, which had her beginning long after Christ and His
Apostles, and her full tyranny confirmed more than a thou
sand years after Christ. The same Hierom disputeth against
the custom of the particular Church of Rome, and appealeth
to the Church of all the world : Si auctoritas quceritur, orbis
major est urbe, &c. : " If authority be sought, the world is
greater than a city." And again : Quid mihi profers unius
urbis consuetudinem ? " What bringest thou forth to me
the custom of one city ?" Evagr.1 We stand for the Catho
lic Church of Christ dispersed over all the world, against the
particular, schismatical, heretical, and antichristian Church of
Rome ; which, though she have invaded by tyranny over a
great part of Europe, yet never did she prevail over the
whole Church throughout the world, nor yet over all Europe.

CHAPTER V.
Stapleton. The doctrine of Calvin touching the Church is ex- Stapleton.
amined to the touchstone of the holy Scriptures alleged. Wherein
also is treated and disputed by what marks the Church may be known.
Fulke. First he confesseth that Calvin2 hath learnedly, Fulke.
largely, and truly treated of the unity, authority, and obe
dience of the Church. He affirmeth also, that he acknow
ledged a visible Church in the world ; whose communion we
ought to keep, and of her to receive the spiritual food of doc
trine and Sacraments; which ought not to be forsaken for the
evil life of the members thereof. All this he commendeth
and alloweth. But herein he sheweth his malicious cavilling
stomach, that he supposeth Calvin to affirm, that the universal
1 [S. Hieron. Ep. ad Evagrium; (or rather ad Evangelum.) Opp.
ii. 329. Basil. 1565. This remarkable Epistle was published, with u,
preface by Luther, Vitebergse, 1538. Almost the entire of it is in
cluded in the Canon Law; (Dist. xciii. Cap. xxiv.) and Christfrid
Wsechtler has examined its contents. (Acta Eruditor. an. 1717. pp.
484, 524, seqq. Lips.) Latterly, in Germany, the authenticity of the
Letter has been questioned. See Gieseler, i. 65.]
2 [Institut. Lib. iv. Cap. i.] 3
[fulke, II.]

34 stapleton's fortress [book
Church of Christ is visible, where he speaketh but of parti
cular congregations, members of the whole, which are visible,
not to the world always, but to the members of the same.
The marks of the Church, which Calvin sayeth to be true
preaching of the word of God, and due administration of the
Sacraments, although he confesseth them to be in the Church,
yet he denieth them to be the marks of the Church. For the
mark must be better known than the thing whereof it is a
mark: But the Church is more evident than those marks: Ergo
they be no true marks. The minor he proveth by that
which Calvin teacheth, that we must learn of the Church the
true meaning of the Scripture. But hereof it followeth not,
that the Church is better known than these marks. For there
is a farther trial, which ought to be better known, by which
both are to be known : namely, the word of God ; whereunto
we must have recourse, to try whether those things that are
preached are even so indeed ; as the Thessalonians [Bereans]
did by the preaching of Paul and Barnabas. [Silas.] Act.
xvii. ver. 11. The unmoveable truth is to be sought in the
Scriptures : what preaching or Church agreeth with that truth
is to be received, and none other. And whereas he sayeth
that heretics challenge these marks as well as Catholics, I
grant they do so : but no more do they challenge these
marks than they challenge the Church to be on their side;
for there was never heresy, but they bragged as much of
the Church as of the truth. Therefore the Church is not more
clear than these marks ; but these marks, tried by the word
of God, are more clear than the Church, which is therefore
the Church because it maintaineth true doctrine. The doc
trine is not true because the Church maintaineth it. The
cause is better known than the effect; for knowledge is to
understand by causes.
But M. Stapleton hath two better marks than Calvin
describeth : to wit, the universality and communion of all
nations ; the continuance and ever-remaining thereof among
Christians. These marks by no logic can be causes of the
Church, but adjuncts unto it ; and therefore the worst argu
ments that can be to know it by : even such as the foolish
man's argument was, that knew his horse by the bridle. But
admit these to be proper adjuncts of the Church, yet shall
not the popish Church be able to prove those to be her marks.

I.J OVERTHROWN BY W. FULKE. 35
For Popery neither doth, neither ever did, possess all the
world, except a piece of Europe be all the world. The Church
of Christ is Catholic, although there were but three or four
persons in all the world that maintained true doctrine : as
there was not many when Christ and His Apostles, and a few
other, were the only Church in all the world, and the Catholic
Church before they were dispersed into many nations. For
the Church is called Catholic or universal, not because all men
or most men do pertain unto it ; but because all that be mem
bers of Christ, how many or how few soever they be, and
wheresoever they be, are members of that Church. But M.
Stapleton saith, " The universality of the Church is a matter
evident to the eye ; and therefore the Catholic Church is always
visible." To this I answer, that if the Catholic Church, or the
universality thereof, were always visible, or at any time visi
ble, or the universality thereof evident to the eye, it should
be no article of faith : for faith is of such things as are not
seen with the eye, but believed with the heart. Heb. xi. ver.l.
We agree with Augustin against the Donatists, that no heresy
was in all countries and in all ages. For Papistry, which is
the greatest heresy and apostasy, was never in all countries
and all ages. But if an heresy were in all countries and
ages, yet proveth it not itself to be a Catholic truth. Idolatry
hath been in all countries and ages; yet is it not thereby
proved to be a Catholic truth. The Church of Christ, whereof
we are members, hath been in all parts of the world and in
all ages ; though not always nor ever received of the greatest
part of men. And if this be a " most clear and evident
mark," (as he saith,) "that no heretic can pretend to be
joined in communion with all Christian countries," the pojiish
Church hath not this mark ; which is not joined in communion
with the Greeks, Armenians, Chaldeans, Ethiopians, and so
many nations as at this day, and since the Apostles' times,
have been christened countries.
But now we come to the second mark of the Church,
the continuance thereof from the beginning to the end of the
world; which is indeed a proper adjunct of the Church of
Christ, not to be found in any heresy, nor in Papistry, the
greatest of all heresies. But M. Stapleton, which cannot
prove that Papistry hath continued always, will argue upon
that it hath continued a certain time. " The Church" (saith
3—2

36 stapleton's fortress [book
he) "hath continued a certain hundred years in that faith
and doctrine only which Papists do teach : But in those very
hundred years the Church neither could lack, neither could
have a wrong faith, or be seduced with damnable doctrine:
Therefore Papists had all that time the true faith ; and their
faith and doctrine is true, sound and upright." The major of
this argument he affirmeth to be our confession, which is
nothing else but an impudent lie of his own confiction/ For
which of the Protestants ever confessed that the Church hath
continued so many hundred years in that faith and doctrine
only which the Papists teach ? If he have the wit to draw
such confessions from us, he may prove what he list against
us. But he promiseth to prove abundantly the continuance
of popish doctrine from the beginning, which we so stoutly
deny. In the meantime he returneth to Calvin, whom he
chargeth to have learned his opinion and doctrine of the
Donatists, concerning the marks of the Church; taking to wit
ness the Ep. xlviii. * of Augustin ad Vincentium, where the
Donatists answered the argument of universality, that the
Church was called Catholic, " not because it did communicate
with the whole world, but because it observed all God's com
mandments, and all His Sacraments." But what a vain quarrel
this is, he himself doth sufficiently declare, when he bringeth
in Augustin immediately, confessing the Church to be called
Catholic because it holdeth that verity wholly and throughly,
whereof every heresy holdeth a part or piece only ; and addeth
thereunto the communication with all nations, videlicet, that
hold that verity wholly and throughly. And lest this might
seem to be borrowed of the Donatists only, Augustin himself
affirmeth as much, De Genesi ad literam, imperfect. Cap. i.2 :
Constitutam ab Eo \_Illo~\ matrem Ecclesiam ; quce Catholica
dicitur ex eo quia universaliter perfecta est, et in nullo
claudicat, et per totum orbem diffusa est : " That by Him
the Church is appointed our mother ; which is called Catholic
for that it is universally perfect, and halteth in nothing, and
is dispersed throughout the whole world." Whereas Augus
tin requireth universal perfection in all true doctrine and
administration of the Sacraments with universality, the Papists
1 [al. xciii. $. 23. Opp. ii. 182. ed. Ben. Antw. (Amstel.) 1700.]
2 [$. 4. Opp. Tom. iii. P. i. col. 71.]

I.J OVERTHROWN BY W. FULKE. 37
take universality alone, which Augustin never said nor
taught to be a sufficient note of the Church.
After this he chargeth Calvin to deny the perpetual con
tinuance of the Church, because he said, that the pure preach
ing of the word hath vanished away in certain ages past : by
which he meaneth not, (as this foolish caviller taketh him, or
rather mistaketh him,) that true preaching had utterly perished
out of the whole world,. but out of the popish Synagogue;
which in Europe boasted itself to be the only Church of Christ,
when in the chief articles of Christianity it derogated from
the glory of Christ, and was subject to the doctrine of the
Man of sin, the adversary and enemy of Christ. And if
malice had not blinded him, he would have so understood
Calvin ; alleging his saying immediately after, wherein he
confesseth, that the Church of Christ never failed out of the
world. Whereupon he demandeth, whether the Church of the
Protestants is that which hath never failed ? If we say it is,
he demandeth further, where those marks of preaching and
ministering of the Sacraments have been these many hundred
years ? which question he hopeth some disciple of Calvin will
assoil him. I answer, those marks were to be seen in such
places, where the Churches were gathered, that had separated
themselves from the Church of Rome. If he urge me further
to shew him the particular places, let him resort to the book
of Acts and Monuments, which it seemeth he hath read over.
If that will not satisfy him, by example of our Saviour Christ
I will refel his vain question with another question: Where
did those seven thousand, that God preserved in the days of
Elias, assemble for prayers, preaching and sacrifice ? If he can
not tell, no more am I bound to shew him in what particular
places they preached and ministered the Sacraments. And
therefore neither need the Apology to recant, nor the Har-
borough3 be revoked, nor M. Foxe call in his book, nor M.
8 [Fortresse, page 74. — This "Harbourough", "which saieth that
Luther begott truth," was previously quoted by Stapleton in p. 20.
The reference is to Bp. Aylmer's work against John Knox, entitled : An
Harborowe for faithfull and trewe subjects, against the lateblowne Blasts,
concerning the government of Women; Strasburg, 1559. See Strype's,
Life of Aylmer, last edit, page 147; or the article added to Bayle's
Diet. ii. 514. Lond. 1735. Fuller, Book ix. p. 223. Lond. 1655.
Martin Mar-Prelate's Epistle, p. 3. new ed. Petheram, Lond. Neai's,

38 stapleton's fortress [book
Nowell his Reproof. It will not suffice a wrangling caviller
an hundred times to affirm, that the Church hath always
continued, even when Papistry most prevailed, and even
under the tyranny and persecution of Papistry ; like as the
Church was among the idolatrous Baalites in the days of
Elias, or among the wicked Jews that persecuted the Pro
phets. But hereto he replieth, that though the assemblies
of the Jews were no Churches, yet their temple, sacrifices,
ceremonies, law and doctrine was good. I answer, so much
of these as they retained according to God's law was good ;
and so I confess of the doctrine and Sacraments of the
Papists : as Baptism, concerning the substance of the Sa
crament; the historical faith of the Trinity, of the Incar
nation, Passion, Resurrection of Christ, &c. But if these and
many more pieces of truth might be sufficient to make them
the Church of Christ, many heretics might challenge the
Church; which have confessed and practised a great number
of truths more than they ; which err but in one article, as
the Arrians, Pelagians, &c. ; whereas the Papists err in
many ; yea, in the whole doctrine of Justification by faith,
and the worship of God. And therefore Papistry is not
only a schism, error or heresy; but, as Calvin, out of Daniel
ix. and Paul, 2 Thessal. ii. rightly concludeth, an apostasy,
defection, and antichristianity ; not abolishing, but retaining
the names of Christ, of the Gospel, and of the Church ; but
the true virtue, power, and strength of the same utterly for
saking, denying, and perseauting.

CHAPTER VI.
Stapleton. Stapleton. Other prophecies alleged and discussed, for the con
tinuance of Christ's Church in a sound and upright faith.
Fulke. Fulke. Divers texts of Scripture are cited, some rightly,
some strangely applied, to prove that we deny not ; namely,
the perpetual continuance of the Church of Christ in a sound
and right faith, in all matters necessary to salvation: upon
History of the Puritans, Vol. i. p. 276. Lond. 1822.— Aylmer is spoken
of in Bccon's Jewel of Joy : Catech. &c, p. 424. ed. Parker Soc.J

!¦] OVERTHROWN BY W. FULKE. 39
every one of which he inferreth, how could Christ forsake
His Church these nine hundred years? as though we said that
Christ hath had no Church in the space of nine hundred
years ; which we never doubted of.

CHAPTER VII.
Stapleton. Proofs out of the Gospel, for the continuance of Christ's Stapleton.
Church in pure and unspotted doctrine.
Fulke. When M. Stapleton cometh to prove that which Fulke.
we deny, his proofs will be neither so plentiful nor so suf
ficient. His counterfeit painted Fort must have puppets made
to assail it. The Church of Christ, concerning the substance
of doctrine necessary to salvation, shall continue pure and
unspotted, although in other matters she may be deceived ;
even as every one of God's elect, for whom our Saviour
Christ prayeth, John xvii. ; which text M. Stapleton citeth to
prove the continuance of the Church. We will never say,
that hell-gates have prevailed against the universal Church
of Christ, though they have prevailed against the see of
Rome. Yet must we say, as the Scripture teacheth us, that
Antichrist shall prevail in the world. 2 Thessal. ii. One
Scripture is never contrary to another. We are challenged
to read you out of the Scriptures the breach, interruption,
and failing of the Church of Christ so many hundred years.
As you understand the breach and failing for an utter
abolishing of the Church of Christ out of the world; such
breach and failing, as we do not read it, so we do not affirm
it. But that we affirm we read, that in the latter days some
shall depart from the faith, attending to spirits of error in
hypocrisy, &c; whose marks are, to forbid marriage, and to
abstain from meats, which God hath created, &c. 1 Tim. iv.
We read, that before the coming of Christ shall be an apos
tasy ; and the Man of sin shall be openly shewed, which shall
deceive a great part of the world. 2 Thess. ii. We read,
that the whore of Babylon, which all ancient writers expound
to be Rome, shall with her sorcery enchant and make drunk
all nations, &c. Apoc. This and much more we read, to
shew what your universality is, and to take away the ob-

40

STAPLETON'S FORTRESS

[BOOK

jection of our paucity, and not appearing to the greatest part
of the world, at such time as it pleased God, for the unthank-
fulness of men, to send them the efficacy of error, to be de
ceived, because they would not receive the truth.

CHAPTER VIII.
Stapleton. Stapleton. To deny the continuance of the Church in a sound and
upright faith is to defect the mystery of Christ's incarnation.
Fulke. Fulke. This man hath great leisure, with store of ink
and paper, that filleth so many chapters with proof of that
which none of his adversaries will deny ; who all with one
mouth confess, and cry out against him so loud, that if he
were not either deaf or dead he might hear ; that as Christ
the head continueth for ever, so doth the Church His body :
but that the popish Church at this time, and many hundred
years before this time, is the body of Christ, the spouse of
Christ, the flock of Christ's sheep, which is divided from
Christ, which is an adulteress from Christ, which heareth not
the voice of Christ; this we all deny, and this you shall
never be able to prove while the world standeth, babble and
scribble as long as you will.

CHAPTER IX.

Stapleton. Stapleton. That Protestants do condemn the practice and belief
of the first six hundred years in many things, no less than of this latter
age.
Fulke. Fulke. If Papists do allow the practice and belief of the
first six hundred years in all things, they may justly reprove
us for refusing the same in some things. But if they refuse the
practice and belief of that age in many things, because their
Church, their judge, doth now practise and hold the contrary ;
why should they require us to be bound to the practice and
opinion of those times in all things, when by Scriptures, the
only rule of truth with us, we find that they have erred
in some things ? But, to leave his impudent railing and lying,
that we or any of us did ever offer to justify whatsoever was

I.J OVERTHROWN BY W. FULKE. 41
done or held by godly men of the first six hundred years, let
us see what practice and belief he chargeth us to condemn.
First, (saith he,) they not only reprove certain Fathers for
certain errors, but in many points they condemn all the
Fathers for common errors ; as Invocation of Saints, and
Prayer for the dead. And do not you Papists reprove the
practice of all the Fathers, and Pope Innocent1 with them,
not only for ministering the Communion* to infants, but also
for holding that they be damned, except they receive the
Communion ? Augustin. Cont. duas Ep. Pelag. ad Bonifac.
Lib. ii. Cap. iv.2 Do you not reprove the practice and opinion
of all the Fathers, for allowing marriage in the Ministers of
the Church, which you utterly condemn ? What shall I say
of the Communion in both kinds, given to the lay-people by
consent of all antiquity ; of communicating with the Priest ;
and many such-like things, the practice and belief whereof
you utterly refuse ?
But, to return to the examples of Invocation of Saints,
which Stapleton saith are clear by all writers of the first six
hundred years ; railing like a saucy merchant at M. Jewell and
M. Grindall, men whose learning and godliness he may envy, but
will never attain unto. What a bold bayard is this, to affirm
that Invocation of Saints is clear by all writers of the first six
hundred years, when no writer of three hundred years after
Christ hath any one jot either of practice or belief to allow it !
" Epiphanius among the heresies of the Caianes counteth Invo
cation of Angels. Tom. iii. Hser. iii.3 The other error of Pray-
1 [Exstat Kescriptum Innocentii Papse I. inter S. August. Oper.
Tom. ii. col. 487. ed. Ben. — "Hinc constat" (says Binius, Concill. i. i.
624. Colon. Agripp. 1618.) " Innocentii I. sententia, (quae sexcentos
circiter annos viguit in Ecclesia, quamque S. Augustinus sectatus est,)
Eucharistiam etiam infantibus necessariam fuisse." It is remarkable
that the Council of Trent has not spared a Pope any more than others;
for its decision is : " Si quis dixerit, parvulis, antequam ad annos dis-
cretionis pervenerint, necessariam esse Eucharistiae Communionem,
anathema sit." (Sess. xxi. Can. iv. Compare Whitby's Idolatry of
the Church of Rome, pp. 246 — 8. Lond. 1674.)]
2 [§. 7. Opp. x. 288.]
3 [Adv. Hcer. Lib. i. Tom. iii. Hser. xxxviii. Opp. i. 277. Paris.
1622. — S. Epiphanius (Hseres. lx.) also speaks of the extinct heresy
of tho Angelici, but confesses his ignorance as to the origin of their
name. S. Isidore of Seville, however, declares: "Angelici vocati-quia

42 stapleton's fortress [book
ing for the dead is more ancient : but yet it sprang first from
the heresy of Montanus ; neither is there any writer ancienter
than Tertullian a Montanist, in whom any steps of Prayer for
the dead are to be found. To these he adjoineth a slander
of Calvin, whom he affirmeth to teach, that God is the cause
and author of evil ; which how impudent a lie it is, all they
that have read Calvin of Predestination can testify. The
reservation of the Sacrament of the Lord's Supper Calvin
confesseth to have been an erroneous practice of the ancient
Church. And what say you Papists? Was it not erroneous
to reserve that which Christ commanded to be eaten and
drunken? But you make no bones of Christ's commandment.
If it were not erroneous, why was it forbidden in divers
Councils ?
If you care not for that, yet think not to mock the world
with the ancient practice of reservation, which you yourselves
condemn. Will you suffer men and women to carry home
the Sacrament, and lock it in their chests ; to hang it about
their necks ; to receive it in their houses when they list ? If
you allow not these things, which was the reservation of
ancient times, you are twice impudent to charge us for re
proving that practice, which you yourselves do not admit to
be lawful. But yet again, he chargeth Calvin to condemn the
whole primitive Church of Jewish superstition, for saying the
Fathers followed rather the Jewish manner of sacrificing, than
the ordinance of Christ in the Gospel. What a shameless
beast is this, to slander Calvin to condemn the whole pri
mitive Church ; when he speaketh only of the later and
Angelos colunt"; (Origg. Lib. viii. Cap. v.) and the Canon Law con
tains this statement. (Gratiani Decret. ii. Par. Caus. xxiv. Qu. iii. Cap.
Quidam autem.) S. Augustin has given similar evidence : " Angelici,
in Angelorum cultu inclinati." (De Hceress. Cap. xxxix.) Photius adds,
that the famous thirty-fifth Canon of the Laodicean Council was made
concerning the Angelites. (Nomocanon, Tit. xii. Cap. ix.) The shame
less corruption of this Canon by Merlin, Crabbe, Carranza and others,
who have changed "Angelos" into "Angulos", is well known: and
Hen. Agylaaus, in his Latin translation of the Xomocanon, annexed to
the first Greek edition published by Chr. Justellus, Lut. Paris. 1615,
has avoided all reference to the same Decree. It requires some atten
tion in a reader to enable him to perceive that Canon Xe, the render
ing of which number is omitted in the Latin, is the one which has
passed sentence irepl 'AyycXirav.]

I.J OVERTHROWN BY W. FULKE. 43
more corrupt times, in which he sheweth their error, but
condemneth not the Church !
But now he will prove, that Protestants hold six heresies
condemned within the first five hundred years. The first is
Justification by faith only, condemned in Aerius [AetiusJ and
Eunomius, August. Hcer. liv. Epiph. Hozr. lxxvi. : which is a
very shameless slander, for there is no such Justification by
faith only condemned in them as we hold ; which no man of
the ancient Fathers more copiously defendeth than Augustin
himself. The second is also a most impudent lie; that to
condemn free will in man to work well, as we mean it, is an
heresy of the Manichees and Marcionists : for both which
opinions, as we hold them, Augustin himself shall speak, Ep.
cv.1, Sixto : Restat igitur ut ipsam fidem, unde omnis
justitia sumit initium, propter quod dicitur ad Ecclesiam
in Cantico Canticorum, Venies et pertransies ab initio
fidei, non humano, quo isti extolluntur, [al. quod isti ex-
tollunt,~\ tribuamus arbitrio ; nee ullis prcecedentibus me
ntis, quoniam inde incipiunt bona qucecunque sunt merita ;
sed gratuitum donum Dei esse fateamur, si gratiam veram,
id est, sine meritis cogitemus : " Therefore it remaineth, that
we ascribe not faith itself (from whence all righteousness
taketh beginning, for which it is said unto the Church in the
Ballad of Ballads, Thou shalt come and pass through from the
beginning of faith,) unto man's free will, whereof they are
proud ; nor to any merits going before, for all good merits
whatsoever they are begin from thence ; but that we confess
it to be the freely given gift of God, if we think of true
grace, which is without merits." Thus writeth Augustin
against the Pelagians, which maintained free will to do well,
and were counted heretics therefore ; the contrary whereof
Stapleton doth now count to be heresy in us. The third
heresy imputed to Aerius was the denial of Prayer for the
dead ; which neither Augustin nor Epiphanius, that count it
for an error, can by the word of God convince to be so.
The fourth is Jovinian's opinion, making marriage equal with
virginity ; which we do not hold, but that in some respect
virginity is preferred, as the Apostle teacheth, 1 Cor. vii.
But that we exhort them to marry, which cannot keep their
vow of continence, which rashly and presumptuously they
1 [alias exciv.]

44 stapleton's fortress [book
made, we are warranted by Epiphanius, Contra Apostolicos,
Hazr. Ixi.1 ; Hieronym. Ad Demetriadem2. The fifth, that
is, the contempt of fasting-days appointed by the Church,
we hold not with Aerius and Eustachius, but contrariwise
that they are to be observed ; although we make none account
of the fasting-days appointed and superstitiously kept by
the popish Church. The sixth, the superstition of Christians
used at the tombs of Martyrs, we condemn with Vigilantius
and Augustin, De moribus Ecclesiaz Catholicce, Lib. i. Cap.
xxxiv.3 Neither is Vigilantius condemned of any man in his
time, but by the private judgment of Hieronym only*.
Now in how many heresies the Papists communicate with
the old heretics, I have shewed before in other treatises,
which it were needless here to repeat.

CHAPTER X.
Stapleton. Stapleton. Objections of Protestants to prove the Church may
err, by the example and similitude of the old law, answered and con
futed. 1 [§. vii. Opp. i. 512. ed. Petav.]
2 [This Epistle to Demetrias, which commences with the words
"Inter omnes materias", (S. Hier. Opp. i. 62. Basil. 1565.) is altoge
ther different from that ("Si summo ingenio", Tom. iv. p. 12.) which
Erasmus has placed among " Pseudepigrapha docta", and which S.
Augustin attributes to Pelagius. See Bp. Taylor's Lib. of Proph.
Sect. viii. Polem. Disc. p. 1010. Lond. 1674. In the genuine Epistle
the metaphorical expression "a sancta Christi synoride" is employed
by S. Jerom with reference to Proba and Juliana, the grandmother
and mother of Demetrias. S. Chrysostom (DeLazaro Concio iv. Opp.
i. 752. Conf. ii. 578. ed. Ben.) likewise has made mention "ttjs £wo>-
pl8os " of Martyrs ; and in this case a most extraordinary circumstance
occurred : for Petrus Galesinius and Cardinal Baronius, having found
the word " Synoridis " in some old Latin version, and being extremely
ignorant of Greek, transformed S. Chrysostom's " $wapls", "biga", or
pair of Martyrs, viz. Juventinus and Maximums, into a previously un
heard of female Saint, whom they styled Synoris of Antioch ! Vid.
Bar. Martyrol. Rom. edit. i. ad diem 24 Jan. Ottii Exam, in Annatt.
Baron. Cont. iii. p. 12.5. Tiguvi, 1676. Dallseum, De vero urn Patrum,
pp. 97  8. Genev. 1656. Ant. Reiseri Launoii Anti-Bellarmin. p. 862.
Amst. 1685. Theod. Hist. Ecc. iii. xv.]
3 [Opp. i. 531. ed. Ben.]
* [Christian! Kortholti Disquiss. Anti-Baron, p. 346. Lips. 1708.]

I- J OVERTHROWN BY W. FULKE. 45
Fulke. The objection is only this, out of the Defence of Fulke.
the truth5, fol. 94, as he saith : The Church of the Jews lacked
not God's promises, succession of Bishops and Priests, opinion
of holiness and austerity of life, knowledge of the law of God ;
and yet they erred : why may we not think the like may be
in this our time6 ? Both major and minor of this argument,
he saith, is false ; for first, they had not such promises as the
Church of Christ hath, of perpetual continuance in the truth,
because they were not appointed to continue always : wherein *
he bewrayeth his gross and beastly ignorance, that cannot
discern between the nation of the Jews, and the Church of
God among the Jews, which hath even the same promises of
everlasting continuance that the Church of the Gentiles hath ;
which is not another Church from the Church of the Jews,
but an accession and an addition unto it. How many promises
of eternal continuance be made in the Prophets to Israel, to
Zion, to Jerusalem ! Read Esa. ca. lx. Ixii. & Ixiii., among
a number. The accomplishment whereof, although it be seen
in the Church gathered of the Gentiles, yet who would be so
impudent to deny that they pertain principally to the Church
of Israel, as to the elder brother? But what strive we
further, when the Apostle to the Romans, cap. ix. vers. 3.
[4.J expressly affirmeth, that the promises pertain to Israel ;
even as the adoption, the glory, the covenants, the giving of
the law, &c. ? Yet M. Stapleton thinketh himself a sharp
8 [At first it appeared not very <?asy to trace either the author of
this book, or the work itself; but after some examination it became
manifest that Bp. Jewel's Apology is here referred to, and that the
substance of several passages is cited rather than any exact words.
See Chap. iv. pages 66, 68, 70, 71. Chap. vi. 133—4. Lond. 1685.
Compare Def. ofApol. p. 121. Lond. 1609. Harding (p. 496.) styled
his opponent " Sir Defender" ; and the title of the English Apology,
as given by Strype (Annals, Vol. i.) and by Bp. Jewel himself, (Def. of
Ap. p. 1.) is this : "An Apologie, or Answer, in defence of the Church
of England ; with a briefe and plaine Declaration of the true Religion
professed and used in the same." This excellent work, as is well
known, was first published in the year 1562; and in 1565 John Rastell
put forth his "Reply against an Answer, (falsly entit.) A Defence of the
truth" ; copies of which are in the Bodleian and Lambeth libraries.
Stapleton's Bede and Fortresse were printed in the last named year ;
and he has evidently quoted from Rastell.]
6 [. . . "and is the Church of Rome the only Church that can
neither fall nor err ?" (Apol. p. 72.)]

46 stapleton's fortress [book
disputer, when he objecteth out of the Epistle to the Hebrews,
Heb. viii., that the testament of Messias is established in more
excellent promises, because of the new covenant out of Je
remy xxxi. ; as though both the testaments did not pertain
to the Catholic Church of Christ, as well that of the Jews as
this of the Gentiles. The new testament and promises are
better than that was made in Sinai ; but the new testament
of Messias pertaineth as much to the Church of the Jews as
to the Church of the Gentiles : or else the Apostle had
laboured in vain, writing to the Jews, to draw them from the
ceremonies of the old testament to the covenant of Messias,
established only in mercy and forgiveness of their sins. Christ
was the Lamb slain from the beginning of the world ; whose
redemption pertained as much unto the fathers that lived
before His incarnation, as unto them that are born since:
therefore the promise of the eternity of the Church begin-
neth not at the nativity of Christ, but at the beginning of
the world. So that for continuance and perpetuity of God's
Spirit with His Church, without the which it cannot be the
Church of God, the promises from the beginning have been
the same that are now ; although, according to God's most .
wise dispensation, they have been more clearly revealed in
the latter times, and most clearly of all by Christ Himself and
His Apostles.
Now remaineth the minor to be proved ; that the Church
of the Jews hath erred. JVhich he denieth1, because the
High Priests answered truly of the nativity of Christ, and
because Caiphas prophesied unwittingly of the virtue of
Christ's death ; than the which nothing can be more blockish.
They erred not in one article ; ergo they erred not at all.
One of them spake the truth against his will in one point;
ergo the Synagogue of the Jews never erred. Again he
saith, the whole Synagogue, before the law of Christ took
place, in necessary knowledg'e of the law of Moses did never
err. For proof whereof, more like a block than a man, he
bringeth such places of Scripture, as either shew what the
Priests' duty should be, but not affirm what their knowledge
was ; or else prophesy a reformation of the corrupt state of
the Clergy from ignorance to knowledge. As Ez. xliv.2:
1 [Fortresse, p. 112. Compare Jewel's Apol. Chap. vi. p. 111.]
2 [Ezek. xliv. 15. 23.]

I.J overthrown by w. fulke. 47
" The Priests and Levites shall teach my people." And Mai.
ii. : " The lips of the Priest should keep knowledge, and men
should require the law of his mouth." Agg. ii.: "Ask the
Priest the law3-" But what drunken Fleming of Douay
would reason thus : the Scribes and the Pharisees sat in
Moses' chair ; therefore the Synagogue did either never or
not then err? Our Saviour Christ willed them to be heard,
while they spake out of Moses' chair ; not while they taught
to worship God in vain, preferring their traditions before the
commandment of God. But who would spend any more
time in reasoning against such a one, as defendeth that the
Scribes and the Pharisees did not err ; whose false doctrine
concerning adultery, murder, swearing, the worship of God,
not only the Person, but also the quality of Messias and His
kingdom, our Saviour Christ Himself so often and so sharply
doth reprove ? But the whole Synagogue (saith he) in neces
sary knowledge of the law of Moses did never err. If he
understand the whole Synagogue for every man, we confess
the same ; and so we say that the whole Church, that is, all
the elect, neither in the first six hundred, nor in the latter
nine hundred years, did never err in necessary knowledge
of the Gospel. But if you take the whole Synagogue for
the whole multitude that had the ordinary authority, and did
bear the outward face and countenance of the Church, they
have erred before the coming of Christ. Example in the
whole Synagogue, in the days of Josias, when the very book
of the law was unknown unto the Priests, until it was found,
by occasion of taking out of money out of the temple, by
Hilchiah the Priest. So that from the beginning of the reign
of Manasse until the eighteenth year of the reign of Josias,
which was almost eighty years, idolatry openly prevailed in
the temple of God ; the whole Synagogue, that is, all in
authority and countenance, embracing the same, except a few
poor Prophets, that were slain for crying out against it. 2
King. xxii. & 2 Chro. xxxiv. And such was the state of the
Church in the most corrupt times ; continuing as then, but yet
in persecution, adversity, and being unknown unto the world,
except now and then God stirred up some witness to testify
His truth, which was slain of the beast. Apoc. xi. Now con
cerning the childish sophism, that although it was not possible
3 [Haggai ii. 11.]

48 stapleton's fortress [book
that the Church could err, yet it is not proved that it hath
erred, what should I speak, when the Defender directly
oppugneth that paradox which the Papists hold ; namely, that
the Church cannot err ? To conclude, while he walketh under
a cloud of the Church sanctified and assisted by the Holy
Ghost, defended by the presence of Christ, &c, he playeth
bo-peep under a coverlet. For whatsoever promises are made
to the faithful spouse of Christ pertain nothing at all to the
popish Church of Antichrist ; which is departed from the
faith, carrying the brand-marks of hypocrisy, in prohibition
of marriage and meats, so evident that all the water in the
sea cannot wash them out.

CHAPTER XI.
Stapleton. Stapleton. Objections out of the New Testament moved and
assoiled 1.
Fulke. Fulke. The first objection is, the abomination of deso
lation standing in the holy place, that is, the Church. Matth.
xxiv. He asketh where the Defender2 hath learned to ex
pound this holy place of the Church ? Forsooth, where M.
Stapleton learned, that it may be understood of the temple
at Jerusalem, where Pilate placed Caesar's image, or of the
image of Adrian : namely, in Hierom, upon this text, Matth.
xxiv. ; which understandeth the abomination of desolation to
be Antichrist, of whom Saint Paul speaketh, whom he de
nieth not but that he shall sit in the Church. His words are
these 3 : De hoc et Apostolus loquitur, quod Homo iniquitatis
et adversarius elevandus sit contra omne quod dicitur Deus
et colitur ; ita ut audeat stare in templo Dei, et ostendere
quod ipse sit Deus : cvjus adventus secundum operatimem
Satanm destruat eos, et ad Dei solitudinem redigat, qui se
susceperint. Potest autem simpliciter aid de Antichristo
accipi, aut de imagine Cmsaris, &c. : " Of this abomination
of desolation the Apostle also speaketh, that the Man of sin
and the adversary shall be lifted up against all that is called
God or worshipped ; so that he dare stand in the temple of
i [solvod.] a [Jewel's Apology, Chap. iv. pp. 66, 72.]
8 [Opp. Tom. ix. p. 71. Basil. 1565.]

i.J overthrown by w. fulke. 49
God, and shew himself as God : whose coming according to
the working of Satan may destroy them, and bring them to
solitariness from God, which shall receive him. And it may
either be taken simply of Antichrist, or of the image of
Caesar," &c.
Let him now reason with Hieronym, how the sacrifice
should cease after the end of sixty-two weeks : although,
for my part, I think the pollution of the temple, which was
a token of the desolation imminent, was a figure of the cor
ruption of the Church by Antichrist.
The second objection. S. Paul witnesseth that Anti
christ should sit in the temple of God, that is, in the Church.
What of this ? (saith he ;) will it follow that he hath sitten
there these nine hundred years ? as though the Defender were
to prove how long Antichrist should sit, and not rather that
the visible and outward multitude of the Church should err.
Like madness, (shall I say ?) or impudence, he sheweth
where he saith, the Protestants commonly name S. Gregory
to be that Antichrist4 ; which I am sure he never read nor
heard any Protestant affirm5. But the Pope cannot be Anti
christ, (saith he,) because Antichrist should then labour to
extirp the faith of Christ; for the Pope hath called people
from infidelity to Christianity. That letteth not but that he
is Antichrist ; for the Pope calleth none but unto the name of
Christianity, under colour of which he exerciseth tyranny :
otherwise he laboureth to extirp the faith of Christ, and to
prefer himself before Christ ; whose redemption he teacheth
to take away only the guilt of sin, whereas his pardon
taketh away both the pain and the guilt of sin.
The third objection is out of S. Peter6 ; that in the Church
should be many masters and teachers of lies. But these
(saith he) shall not tarry nine hundred years, for their de
struction sleepeth not. A wise shift ; as though the Apostle
4 [On the contrary, Pope Gregory the Great is frequently appealed
to as one who utterly condemned the assumption of the title of Universal
Bishop. Vid. Epistt. Lib. iv. Capp. lxxvi, lxxviii, Ixxx, Ixxxii, lxxxiii.
& L. vi. C. cxciv. Opp. Tom. ii. Antv. 1572. Compare Bp. Jewel's Apol.
Chap. iv. p. 73 ; and Ch. vi. p. 137.]
6 [Brereley's Apologie of the Romane Church, pp. 2, 3. an. 1604.
Morton's Catholike Appealefor Protestants, pp. 60, 61. Lond. 1610.]
6 [2 Pet. ii. 1—3.] 4
[fulke. J

50 stapleton's fortress lbook
gave not a general admonition for the Church in all ages,
even in that wherein he lived himself.
The last is out of 1 Tim. iv. ; that in the latter days such
should come, which shall give ear to the doctrine of Devils,
forbidding to marry, and eat such meats as God hath created
to be received with thanksgiving. In this matter he professeth
to be short ; as he hath no lust to tarry being in that, wherein
his cauterized conscience is so galled. But he answereth
briefly, it was fulfilled in the Manichees. What then ? Doth it
follow that it is not fulfilled in the Papists ? Doth the Spirit
speak evidently of the Manichees, an obscure heresy ; and not
rather of the apostasy of Antichrist, whose hypocrisy should
be cloaked by feigned chastity and fasting1 ? No, no, Master
Stapleton, your conscience, although marked with a hot iron,
yet cannot but inwardly confess, that this prophecy pertaineth
especially to Papistry, the greatest heresy that ever was.

CHAPTER XII.
Stapleton. Stapleton. Other common objections of Protestants, taken out of
the Law, discussed and assoiled.
Fulke. Fulke. The objections are these : where was the out
ward face of the Church in the time of Noe, in the time of
the departing of the ten tribes, in the days of Elias ? He
answereth out of Augustin, De unitate Ecclesice, against the
Donatists, Cap. xii.2, which made the same objections ; that
as these examples of fewness of the Church are read in the
Scriptures, so the Church to be dispersed over all the world
is read in the same Scriptures, and therefore it cannot be
restrained to the communion of Donatus in Africa.
The like say we, (howsoever it pleaseth his malice to
slander us ;) that the Church is and was these fifteen hundred
years dispersed over the whole world, and therefore cannot
be restrained to the faction or communion of the Pope in a
part of Europe.
Concerning the apostasy of the ten tribes he answer
eth, that the Clergy, videlicet the Priests and Levites, re-
i [Conf. Can. Apostol. Ii, & liii. Bevcrcg. Pand. i. 34, 35.]
- [Opp. ix. 244. ed. Ben. a Cler.J

I.J overthrown by w. fulke. 51
mained in sound religion, and many of the people : so God
hath His Church always ; which we deny not. Yet, in the
days of Manasse, where can he shew me any Clergy of the
Jews that continued in sound religion ? And yet I doubt
not, but there were some particular persons; for God had
His Church among them even then : but the outward face of
the Church was all turned into idolatry and false worshipping
of God. Where he saith, except the Church had remained
in Europe these nine hundred years, Protestants should not
have had from whence to depart, I answer ; Protestants are
not departed out of the Church of Christ, but out of Babylon.
And yet I acknowledge, that there were members of Christ's
Church dispersed, yea, and Churches gathered also in the time
of deepest ignorance, in most regions of Europe, though not
regarded, or condemned for heretics ; in Calabria, in France,
in England, in Bohemia. Finally, whereas he would seem to
repair the Pope's loss in Europe with the recovery of large
countries in the East, wise men may easily see, and fools also
may laugh at it, how vain a brag it is, to boast of matters so
far off as none can bear witness of but himself, and such as
he is. CHAPTER XIII.
Stapleton. That the true Church of Christ, which continueth for Stapleton.
ever, is a visible and known Church ; no privy or secret congregation.
Fulke. His name is Thomas, forsooth ; and therefore he Fulke.
saith, he will never believe that there was any other Church
but the Church of Rome, except he may so see it that he
may point to it with his finger. But, gentle Thomas, our
Saviour Christ saith, Blessed are they that believe, and see
not. If the Catholic Church of Christ might be seen at any
time, it should be no article of our faith, which is an evidence
of things that are not seen. Heb. xi. The members thereof,
as several congregations, are seen, sometimes of many of all
sorts of men ; sometimes of them only that are true members
of them : but Jerusalem which is above, and is the mother of
all the faithful, is not seen but with the eyes of faith. There
fore, Thomas, if you will never believe the Catholic Church,
except you see it with your bodily eyes, you can never be
any member thereof.
4 — 2

52 stapleton's fortress [book
You allege out of Esay ii., " The hill of the house of the
Lord shall be prepared in the top of all hills," &c. This is
fulfilled in the calling of the Gentiles, which have not ceased
to walk in the light of our God since they were first called ;
though not always in like numbers, not always in favour with
the powers of the world, nor always in sight of the blind
is.xiix. worldlings. And Christ is the "light of the Gentiles," unto
the uttermost parts of the earth : therefore not unto one part
of Europe only, as you popish Donatists do affirm. And the
Matth. T. Apostles were " the light of the world," to carry the light of
is. ixi. salvation unto the furthermost parts of the earth. " And
their seed shall be known among the Gentiles, and their
buds among the people. All that see them shall know them,
that they are the seed which the Lord hath blessed." The
Church of the Gentiles confesseth the seed of Abraham, which
sometimes was obscure and known to few, to be the blessed
seed ; and rejoiceth that by faith she is engrafted into the
stock of Abraham, to be partaker of the same blessing.
All this proveth no light, sight, or knowledge of a Church
to be pointed at with unfaithful Thomas his finger ; but hea
venly, spiritual, and to be discerned by faith.
is- '»• Again, when Esay sayeth, God " hath prepared His arm
in the eyes of all nations, and all the ends of the earth shall
see the salvation of our God," he meaneth to the elect and
chosen of all nations, to the predestinate people. " Not only
so, Sir Protestant." Why so, Sir Papist ? " The Prophet
sayeth further: Quibus non est narratum viderunt; et qui non
audiverunt contemplati sunt : ' Such as the Messias hath not
been preached unto, yet they have seen ; and such as have
not heard have yet beholden.' " Ergo, not the elect only.
What then, Sir Papist, tag and rag, all the reprobate
of all times, is this your interpretation ? But, Thomas, I
pray you give us leave to believe the interpretation of
S. Paul before you, who expoundeth it clean contrary to
you ; Romans xv. ver. 20 : " Yea, I enforced myself to
preach the Gospel, not where Christ was named, lest I should
have built on another man's foundation : but, as it is written,
h. m. To whom he was not spoken of, they shall see ; and they
that heard not shall understand." Lo, Thomas, Saint Paul
expoundeth this text of them which had seen Christ and
known the Gospel first by his preaching; and not of "such

i-J overthrown by w. fulke. 53
as the Messias hath not been preached to." Therefore, be
no more unfaithful, but beheve the Catholic Church, though
it cannot be seen.
Yet will he not leave the matter so ; for Esay prophe-
sieth, that "the Lord would be a perpetual light and glory is.ix.
of His Church ; that the sun of the Church shall not go
down any more, nor the moon vade, because the Lord shall
be her everlasting light." " Nations shall walk in their [herj
light, and Kings in the brightness of her arising."
Verily, Thomas, though our bodily eyes cannot see this,
yet do we most constantly believe, that it is fulfilled in the
Church as it was promised. But that the external bright
ness of the Church is not promised to be in all ages alike,
we may clearly see by this that he saith : " Kings shall walk
in the brightness of thy rising up :" for every age of the
Church hath not had Kings to walk in the brightness of her
light. Let Thomas, which will not believe the continuance of
our Church, except it be so shewed that he may point at it
with his finger l ; let him, I say, point out with his finger what
Kings in every age, for the space of the first three hundred
years, did walk in the brightness of the Church's arising.
It will not serve him to name Algarus [AbgarusJ of Edessa,
or Lucius of Britain : but he must shew a continual succes
sion of Kings for all that time ; or if he cannot, let him
confess, that the external glory and brightness of the Church
is not in all ages to be seen, as the spiritual magnificence and
light thereof is everlasting.
His next reason is of the continuance of pastors and
teachers in the Church, which he imagineth to have failed
in our Church for nine hundred years ; but he is altogether
deceived. For when the state of the Romish Church was
grown to be such a confuse Babylon, that it was necessary
for God's people to go out of it, Apoc. chap, xviii. verse 4 ;
which came not to the full ripeness of iniquity until a thou
sand years after Christ ; God sent pastors and teachers to
His Church so departed out of Babylon, in these parts of
Europe ; which continued by succession even until God re
stored His Gospel into open light of the world again.
1 [" Yes, Sir, my name is Thomas : and vnlesse you shew me who
they are ; when and where they taught as you teache, that I may
point vnto them with my finger ; I will neuer, beleeue there were any
such." (Fortresse, pp. 137 — 8.)]

54 stapleton's fortress [book
Beside that, a great number of Eastern Churches have
continued even from the Apostles' time unto this day, though
not in soundness of all opinions, yet in open profession of
Christianity ; among whom doubtless some retained the foun
dation always, which were never obedient to the see of
Rome, neither partakers of a great number of her horrible
heresies : so that if it were granted that the Church must
always be visible, yet the Papists are never the near [nearer]
to prove their faction to be the Church ; because the Greek
Church, for outward shew of a Church, hath been always
as notorious in the East as the Latin Church in the West.
Finally, where Augustin sayeth1, (although upon a text
wrongly interpreted2,) that the Church is placed in the sun,
that is, a manifest place of the world ; not in a corner, like
the conventicles of heretics ; he meaneth not that the Church
is always seen of all men, but that it seeketh no corners or
coverture of darkness, as heretics do, to shroud their false
hood in ; although in the time of persecution it be driven
into straits, and is content to be hidden from the adversaries
thereof ; except in some cases, where the glory of Christ re-
quireth an open confession.
The same Augustin would have the Church to be known
only by the Scriptures. De unitate Ecclesice, Cap. xvi.3:
Sed utrum ipsi Ecclesiam teneant, non nisi [de~\ divinarum
Scripturarum canonicis libris ostendunt [ostendant] : " But
whether they hold the Church, let them shew by none other
ways but by the canonical books of the holy Scriptures."
If the Papists were able to prove their doctrine by the Scrip
tures, they would not labour so much for the title of the
Church ; which of necessity would follow them if they taught
nothing but that, and all that, which the holy Scriptures do
teach. 1 [Enarrat. in Psal. xviii. fol. 16, b. Lugd. 1519.— "Dominus au-
tem, ut adversus regna temporalium erroruni belligeraret ; non pacem
sed gladium missurus in terram; in tempore, vel in manifestatione
posuit tanquam militare habitaculum Suum ; hoc est, dispensationem
incarnationis Suae." S. Augustin's second exposition of the verse is
this : " In manifestatione Ecclesiam Suam : non in occulto ; non quse
Iateat ; non velut operta; nc forte fiat sieut operta super greges hsere-
ticorum."] 2 [Psal. xviii. Lat. xix. Engl. 4.]
3 [Contra Donat. Ep. Cup. xix. §. 50. Opp. ix. 253.]

i.J overthrown by w. fulke. 55
CHAPTER XIV.
Stapleton. Three reasons why the Church of Christ ought of ne- Stapleton.
cessity always to be a clear, evident, visible, and known Church. In
the second of which reasons a sensible disputation is made, to try
whether our country among other might possibly have attained to the
right faith, without the help of a known Church, in all this pretensed
time of Papistry.
Fulke. The first reason is, that except the Church and Fulke.
true pastors thereof might be openly known, the infidel seek
ing for Christianity shall come from paganism to heresy,
&c. ; the grace and gift of Christ should be unprofitable as a
rich treasure fast locked up, &c. ; which were inconvenient in
many respects, &c. : therefore the Church must be openly
known and evident, &c. I answer; this reason savoureth of
Pelagianism, which is enemy to the grace of God ; presuppos
ing that infidels of their own good motion, without the grace
of God, may seek Christianity. But if we remember what
our Saviour Christ saith, " No man cometh unto Me, except
My Father draw him," Joan. vi. ver. 44, we must acknow
ledge, that as it is the only grace of God that moveth in
infidels a desire to seek Christ ; so the same grace, and no
outward appearance to be judged by carnal reason, shall
direct them, whom He hath chosen to eternal life, among so
many sects in the world to find, see, and acknowledge the
only true Church and pillar of truth, out of which there is
no salvation. Wherefore this reason hath no ground but
upon a supposition of Pelagianism ; that God hath only re
vealed His truth unto men of the world, and left men to their
own reason to find it out by external notes, such as infidels,
not lightened by God's grace, by the light of natural reason
may discern.
The second reason is, "that it hath pleased God, that
because faith leaneth upon authority, and authority is strong
in a multitude ; although in the primitive Church, by miracles,
and evident gifts of the Holy Ghost, the authority of a few
drew whole countries to the faith ; yet, miracles ceasing, to
keep the Church always in a known multitude, whose autho
rity might draw the simple, persuade the learned, and keep
out the heretics." If this carnal reason were good, there
were small or no use of the Scriptures at all. The authority

56 stapleton's fortress [book
of the Church, and that always known, might suffice for all
matters. But Augustin, (saith he,) in his book De utilitate
credendi, ad Honoratum, Cap. xiv.1, useth this reason to
bring Honoratus from the Manichees to the Cathohcs; out of
whom he citeth a long discourse to this effect : that as the
common multitude and fame moveth a man to believe that
there was such a one as Christ, and that His writings and
Scriptures are to be credited ; so of the head rulers of that
multitude, and not of any privy and new sect, such as the
Manichees was, he must learn the understanding of this book
and Scriptures. This he taketh upon him to exemplify by
the state of our country, at the first conversion thereof by
Augustin. Although this carnal reason might have some
shew with Honoratus, a stranger from the Church, and one
not lightened with the Spirit of God; yet how vain it is,
being applied to the Papists, you may easily see by this ; that
since the Church of Rome hath been the Church of Anti
christ, as great a multitude, which might and hath moved
many infidels to receive the profession of Christianity, hath
been separated from it as hath cleaved to it. Put the case,
then, of an infidel in the East, which, moved by the fame
and consent of many nations, hath thought well of Christ,
hath given credit to the Scriptures ; to what head rulers
should he resort for instruction in the Scriptures? To the
rulers of that multitude, by which he was first moved to be
lieve ? Then should he never become a Papist ; for all the
Patriarchs of the East Church have been and are still at
utter defiance with the Pope of Rome. You see, therefore,
by plain demonstration, that this reason holdeth no further
than Augustin's authority extendeth; who in other places
appealeth only to the Scriptures; and even against the Mani
chees confesseth, that the plain demonstration of the truth
(which is to be found in the holy Scriptures) is to be pre
ferred before the consent of nations, authority of miracles,
succession of Bishops, universality, consent, name of the Catho
lic Church, and whatsoever can be taught beside. Contra
Epist. Munich, quam vocant Fundamenti, Cap. iv.2
The third reason why the Church must always be a
known multitude is, for keeping out of wolves and heretics;
i [Tom. viii. col. 48. ed. Ben.]
2 [Opp. viii. 110.]

i.J overthrown by w. fulke. 57
which must be, that they which are tried may be made
manifest ; which cannot be in a secret congregation. Yes,
M. Stapleton, very well. The Church was never so secret
but it was known to the members of it ; which might use the
authority thereof for trying, avoiding, and excommunicating
of heretics, according to the holy Scriptures. But evermore
you do wilfully deceive yourself when you affirm, that there
was no Christians known in the world, by the space of nine
hundred years, but Papists. You eannot deny but Brittany,
Scotland, and Ireland had Christians at and since the coming
of Augustin; which were no Papists, as by the History of Beda
is manifest. What should I here name so many nations of
Europe, Asia, and Africa ; which yet to this day continue in
profession of Christianity, and never were subject to the
tyranny of the Romish Bishop ; and from whom the Romish
Bishop, with his sect of Papists, hath clearly departed many
hundred years ago? Wherefore, according to Augustin's
sentence3, the Catholic Church is not a particular sect in
Europe, but an universal gathering of the dispersed over all
the world, where God hath His elect in all places. Or, if you
understand the Church for a visible multitude professing
Christ, there is no reason why the Churches of the East, so
many, so large, so ancient, should be excluded ; and the multi
tude of Papists, holding of one city in Italy only, to be
received.
CHAPTER XV.
Stapleton. A number of shameless shifts and silly surmises, which Stapleton.
Protestants have invented to establish their variable doctrine, and to
confound the authority of the Church.
Fulke. Indeed, a number of these, which he rehearseth Fulke.
as shameless shifts, are shameless lies and impudent slanders,
devised by the Devil to bring the truth in disdain ; but
yet so openly proved to be false, that they need no confuta
tion. First he sayeth, that Luther condemned all Councils and
Fathers4, yea, all learning of philosophy5 and humanity; so
3 Cont. Faust. Li. xiii. Ca. xiii. [col. 185. Opp. Tom. viii.]
4 [Cf. Coccii Thesaur. Cathol. Tom. i. p. 1118, seqq. Colon. 1619.
Brerele/s Apologie, p. 134. a.d. 1604.]
6 [It is true that Luther called Aristotle "sceleratus nebulo.''

58 stapleton's fortress [book
that books were burned, and common schools ceased for
certain years in Germany, with other like monstrous lies;
alleging for his author that beastly apostata Staphylus1.
This slander deserveth no answer, being raised by one shame
less liar against an hundred thousand witnesses.
The second shift is, that Luther did afterward receive
philosophy and books of humanity, yea, and Divines of five
or six hundred years, and some Councils also ; with this
perilous condition, so far as they repugned not to holy Scrip
ture. This seemeth an unreasonable condition to Stapleton;
who belike would have all Gentility2 and many heresies abso
lutely received.
The third : " The Fathers should not be admitted, when
they taught anything beside the express Scripture3 ; as
worshipping of Images, praying to Saints, &c, which they
had by tradition." If such things came from the Apostles,
why were they not written by them as well as such Fathers
of later time ? yea, why did the Apostles write that which
is contrary to such traditions?
The fourth: " The first six hundred years they did admit,
because they knew there was little in them against them clear
and open ; because few books were written in that time, and
many lost that were written." And yet there remain more
written in that time than a man can well read over in seven
years. " Again, cities being stuffed with heathen, Jews,
and heretics, every mystery was not opened in pulpit, nor
committed to writing." These belike were greater mysteries
than the Apostles and Evangelists have committed to writing.
But I marvel how they were taught, if neither in pulpit nor
in writing. Belike in secret confession : but our Saviour Christ
would have His mysteries preached in the housetops. "Last of
all, for that many controversies now in hand were never heard
of in those days." Therefore M. Jewell made his Challenge
of the first six hundred years ; which Stapleton thinketh he
was not able to abide by, and that M. Nowell suspected no
less, because he accounted it a very large scope. But how
(Lvcubrat. in Psal. xxi. [xxii.] " In tomo operationum nuper excuso
obmiss." sig. I iv. Basil. 1522.)]
i [Do Gormanica Bibliorum vorsione, in Apolog. fol. 124, sqq.
Colon. 1502.]
s [Heathenism.] 3 [Calvini Listit. Lib. iv. Cap. viii.]

i.J overthrown by w. fulke. 59
he hath abiden by it is sufficiently proved, to the glory of the
truth, and the confusion of Papistry.
The fifth : " They reject the latter nine hundred years,
because painims yielding to the faith, and heretics to the
Church, the mysteries of our faith were more openly published
in pulpits and writings." It appeareth, and that in records
of the latter nine hundred years, that many old heretics still
remained in the cities, beside the Jews remaining until this
day ; of which he made the Fathers of the first six hundred
years so much afraid, for uttering the mysteries, as of painims
and heretics.
The sixth : " Some hold, that all the Church might err
for a time." None ever held, that all the Church might err
so far as that they fell away from Christ.
The seventh : " Other said, there was a Church all this
nine hundred years, but oppressed by the miscreants, being
privy and unknown." This, he saith, is " vain and blas
phemous, being against holy Scripture and good reason, as he
hath proved." What he hath proved you have seen ; and
how the Scripture must be fulfilled, which prophesieth of the
coming of Antichrist, and the apostasy of men from the faith :
which cannot be, if the Church should always flourish in mul
titude, and external appearing of visible glory.
The eighth : " That Protestants' books have been lost."
The ninth : " Books of holy Fathers have been corrupted."
The tenth : " False writings have been devised, and fa
thered upon the first Popes of Rome." All these he counteth
to be but suspicions and surmises ; which are yet so manifest
truths that even Thomas, the unbelieving Apostle, without
the judgment of his senses, might feel them with both his
hands and be satisfied ; although Thomas, the apostata from
God, and traitor to his Prince and country, will neither see
nor handle them. But all these surmises he will overthrow
with supposing one case. If a man have continued in pos
session, and could bring records of his right from William
the Conqueror, and all his neighbours to say for his quiet
possession, without check or nay, as the Papists can deduct
the possession of their religion from eight hundred years, &c. ;
were it a good plea against such a man to say, his records
are false, his evidences forged, his possession injurious, &c,
without bringing in any affirmative proofs, records, evidence

60 stapleton's fortress [book
or witness, &c? I answer, it were no good plea. But first I
deny that you Papists can bring such records, witness, and
possession of nine hundred years ; and secondly I affirm, that
we can bring good records, evidences, and witness to the con
trary. Wherefore this case helpeth you nothing at all ; as it
is false that the religion now called Papistry hath been pro
fessed these nine hundred years : which I have proved by
more than forty Differences, gathered out of the History of
Bede, and other monuments of antiquity.
CHAPTER XVI.
Stapleton. Stapleton. A note of countries and provinces brought to the faith
of Christ from paganism, within the compass of those latter nine hun
dred years.
Fulke. Fulke. He beginneth with the conversion of the English
Saxons and Brittany, and so proceedeth to the conversion of
divers small nations in Germany and other parts : last of all,
he cometh to the conversion of many thousands in the isle of
Goa, testified by letters of the Jesuits ; all which he maketh
to be converted into one faith and religion of Papistry. But
that is false ; for I have proved by many Differences, that
although the first beginning of these nine hundred years was
corrupt in many things, yet was it not so corrupt as Papistry,
nor agreeing with Papists in many of their chief heresies for
three or four hundred years after. Now touching such as have
been converted to plain Popery since that time, or by the
Jesuits in this time, if their monstrous reports be credible, it
proveth not that they are of an Apostolic spirit1. The Scribes
and Pharisees were zealous to make proselytes to Judaism.
The great and mighty nations of the Goths, Vandals, Huns,
&c, that overran the greatest part of the Roman Empire, were
converted from Gentility by the Arrians ; whose heresy a long
time they held, as all histories do record. The Nestorians
converted great nations that yet continued in their heresy.
Photius the heretic converted the Bulgarians. Finally, the
Greek Church hath converted as many nations unto their
1 [See a remarkable statement, with regard to the formation of
Romish converts in China, in the Church Missionary Record for Nov.
1847, p. 259.]

I.] overthrown by w. fulke. 61
profession of Christianity as the Romans have done to their
Papistry. Wherefore this argument of conversion of nations
doth no more prove Papistry to be true Christianity than it
doth justify Judaism, Arrianism, Nestorianism, Grecism,
which the Papists count to be an heresy as well as the other.

CHAPTER XVII.
Stapleton. Whether at any time the religion of Protestants have Stapteton.
converted any infidels to the faith.
Fulke. The religion which we hold, whom he calleth Fulke.
Protestants, being the same which was delivered by Christ
Himself and His Apostles, hath converted all nations of the
world, that ever were converted, from infidelity to the true
faith and religion of Christ. Wherefore it is a foolish fantasy,
that he requireth us to shew one country, city or man, con
verted within these nine hundred years. If Protestants could
brag as well as the Jesuits, they might boast of many thousands
converted by them in the new-found lands of Gallia Antarc
tica2 and India, beside many Jews that are known to be
turned to the Christian faith in this part of the world. If in
the time of persecution, when they had much ado to save
their own faith from deceiving, and their lives from cruelty,
they had no leisure to travel into heathen countries to seek
the conversion of infidels, no wise man will marvel. The
slanderous reports of Villegagnon3 and the Jesuits are of as
good credit as their persons are of honesty and soundness of
religion. CHAPTER XVIII.
Stapleton. The argument of continuance of the known Church is Stapleton.
fortified out of the most ancient and learned Fathers.
Fulke. The ancient and learned Fathers never allowed Fulke.
any continuance of the Catholic Church and faith but such
as had their beginning at Christ and His Apostles ; and not
such as began five or six hundred years after Christ, as all
2 [Brazil.]
3 [Fox, ii. 129. ed. 1684. Catal. des livres de Van do Velde, i. 445.
Gand, 1831]

62 stapleton's fortress [book
the testimonies which he citeth do plainly prove unto us.
First, Augustin, Ep. clxvi.1, reproveth the Donatists, for
that they would not acknowledge the Church which Christ
Himself had planted, and which had continued even until
that time. But it pleaseth this man greatly which Augustin
writeth, Cont. Ep. Parm. Lib. iii. Cap. v.2 ; that " there is no
security of unity, except the Church be declared out of the
promises of God ; which, as it is said, being set upon an hill
cannot be hid, and therefore it is necessary that it be known
to all parts of the earth." The known Church that Augustin
speaketh of is not the peculiar Church of Rome, but the
universal Church of Christ dispersed over all the world;
which is in such sort known and seen, as the mountain
whereon it is builded is known and seen. But that moun
tain is Christ, spoken of in Daniel, which is not known or
seen but by faith : no more is the universal Church of Christ
known or seen but by faith. And thus he writeth against
the Donatists, which challenged the society of the just to be
only in Africa ; whereon, as also that the mountain in the
which the Church is set is Christ, Augustin writeth in the
same chapter : Qui ergo non vult sedere in concilio vanita-
tis, non evanescat typho superbioz, quozrens conventicula
justorum [a] totius orbis imitate separata; quce non potest
invenire. Justi autem sunt per universam civitatem, qua
abscondi non potest, quia supra montem constituta est:
montem ilium dico Danielis ; in quo lapis ille, pr&cisus sine
manibus, crevit, et implevit universam terrain. Per totam
igitur istam civitatem, toto orbe diffusam, justi gemunt et
mcerent ob iniquitates quce. sunt [funt] in medio eorum:
" He therefore that will not sit in the council of vanity, let him
not vanish away in swelling of pride, seeking the conventicles
of the just separated from the unity of all the world ; which
he cannot find. Now the just are throughout the whole city,
which cannot be hid, because it is set upon an hill : I mean
that hill of Daniel ; in which that stone, being cut off without
hands, increased, and filled the whole earth. Therefore in
all this city, dispersed over all the world, the just do groan
and mourn for the iniquities which are in the midst of them."
Thus Augustin, being rightly understood, maketh alto-
l [al. cv. $. 17. Opp. ii. 230.]
2 [col. 50. $. 28. Opp. Tom. ix.J

i.J overthrown by w. fulke. 63
gether against the schismatical Church of Rome ; which is not
set upon that mountain which is invisible to the eye of the
flesh ; but seeketh the utter ruin of that city, which, being
builded on Christ, is known in all parts of the world by faith.
But Hieronym saith muchfor the matter, Contra Luciferi-
anos3: "I could dry up all the streams of thy propositions with
the fame [flamej of the Church." And who doubteth, but
where the Church is acknowledged to be, the clear doctrine
thereof may stop the mouth of any heretic which acknow
ledged it for the Church ? The same Hieronym, Ad Dam-
mach. [Pammach.] et Oceanum, de error. Orig.A Cur post,
&c, writeth thus: " Why, after four hundred years, labourest
thou to teach us which we knew not before ? Why dost thou
bring forth that which Peter and Paul would never teach ?
Even until this day the Christian world was without this doc
trine. I will hold that faith an old man, in which I was born
a child." A worthy saying of Hierom, which may be rightly
applied against the Papists ; which teach such doctrine as
neither Peter nor Paul would ever teach, nor the Christian
world knew for six hundred years after Christ ; yea, for almost
a thousand years after Christ in many points. The like force
is in the saying of Gregory Nazianzen against the Arrian, Ep.
ii. ad Clidon.5 Si ante hos triginta, &c: " If our faith began
but thirty years ago, when there are almost four hundred years
since Christ was shewed, and [thenj the Gospel hath for so long
space been in vain, our faith also hath been in vain ; and they
which have given witness thereto have testified in vain; so many
and so worthy Prelates in vain have governed the people."
This saying is verified of Christian faith, which had continued
in the world six, seven, or eight hundred years before
Papistry in many points began. Christ hath been preached,
and yet Papistry never heard of: yea, whatsoever doctrine
had a later beginning than Christ and His Apostles this
Father condemneth of error. Even as the same man writeth
in the other place by M. Stapleton cited, De Theod. Li. ii.6
Ut hcec prazsidia omittam, &c: " To omit these helps, yet it
3 ["Poteram . . . omnes propositionum rivulos uno Ecclesise sole
siccare.'' (Opp. ii. 147. Basil. 1565.)]
4 [Opp. Tom. ii. p. 192.]
5 [Ad Cledomum: Opp. i. 748. Lut. Paris. 1609.]
0 [Oratio ii. de Thcologiu. Orat. xxxiv. Opp. Tom. i. pp. 541 — 2.]

64 stapleton's fortress [_bo°k
should satisfy us, that none of those which have been inspired
with the Spirit of God hath hitherto either pronounced this
sentence, or allowed it being uttered by any other ; and the
doctrine of our Church doth abhor it." He braggeth not
upon the present opinion of the Church, but as the same
hath always been allowed of all the Apostles and their suc
cessors, and the contrary never received. Therefore, whereas
Theodoret1 reporteth, that that confession of the faith was
admitted (in the Council of Nice,) which prevailed and was
published throughout the world, he meaneth not that the
Fathers followed either the multitude, or the common opinion
of men, which were reputed for the Church in that time ; but
because the same confession had always, even from the begin
ning, been received and continued in the Church, as conso
nant and agreeable to the word of God, by which the
Church must be tried to be the true Church; and where
as articles of faith are not proved true, because they be held
by them that are commonly taken to be of the Church. To
conclude, the prescription of Tertullian2 against Hermogenes
we do willingly admit, and offer to be tried thereby; that
whether of our religion or theirs is the more ancient, that
undoubtedly must be truth. But then the prescription of nine
hundred years, whereof Stapleton so often and so much doth
cackle, will not serve the Papists ; as they cannot prescribe
scarce half so long for many of their opinions. For except
we be able to prove our religion as ancient as the time of
Christ and His Apostles, we refuse not to be accounted
heretics. If we teach nothing but that we can justify by
manifest demonstration out of the holy Scriptures ; the same
also in the most principal points being confirmed with the
testimony of the ancient Fathers of the primitive Church; the
Papists, which accuse us of heresy, shall be found not only to be
heretics, but blasphemers of God, and slanderers of His Saints.
1 [The reference seems to be to a sentence in his Eccles. Hist. Lib. i.
Cap. vii. ; which may be found also in the Hishma Tripartita, Lib. ii.
Cap. v., and may be taken in connexion with a passage in the Tim-
philes or Religiosa Histor ia, in the Life of S. James, Bishop of Nisibis,
inaccurately cited by Stapleton, p. 208.]
2 [Adv. Hermog. Cap. i. Opp. 233. Lut. Palis. 1675— Dr. Burton
remarks that this edition is the same as that published in 1664, except
that tho title-page was changed. (Test, of Ante-Xicene Fathers: List of
edit. Oxford, 1820.)]

i.J overthrown by w. fulke. 65

CHAPTER XIX.
Stapleton. It is proved, by three reasons or arguments, deducted Stapleton
out of holy Scripture, that all the time of Papistry can be no schism
or heresy, and therefore was true Christianity.
Fulke. The first reason is this : No heresy or schism is Fulke.
universal : The faith of England these nine hundred years was
universal: Ergo, it was no schism or heresy. The minor, which
is false, he would prove by this reason : The faith of Eng
land was the faith of France, Spain, Italy, Germany, and of
all other Christian countries : therefore it was universal. This
antecedent is false ; for beside that in England, France, Spain,
Italy, &c, since the Church of Rome ceased to be the Church
of Christ, there were always true Christians which yielded
not to Papistry, as many regions as he hath named of the
East country held not the faith which was then openly re
ceived in England, in many principal articles ; and namely in
that which they make to be the chief of all, the article of the
Pope's supremacy, and subjection to the Church of Rome :
therefore all christened countries were not of the same faith
of Papistry these nine hundred years. He laboureth like a
wise man to prove that no sect is universal : but that Popery
was universal, it is sufficient for Papists to say, because they
are never able to prove it.
The second reason is, that No heresy is of long continu
ance to prevail over true believers, to oppress the truth, &c. :
Papistry hath continued these nine hundred years : Therefore
Papistry is no heresy. Although the minor be not simply true,
yet the major is utterly false. But he would prove the major
out of S. Paul, 2 Tim. iii., saying of such as should withstand
the truth, like Jannes and Jambres, that they should " not
further prevail ; for their foolishness shall be made known to
all men, even as theirs was." Admit that this were spoken of
those which should forbid marriage and meats, which he
would have to be the Manichees, 1 Tim. iv., as it is spoken
of hypocrites, which shall be in the Church to the end of the
world ; yet here is no shortness of time prescribed for the
continuance of their error ; for he said before, 2 Tim. ii. vers.
16, that " they shall increase unto more ungodliness, and their
[fulke, ii.J

G6 stapleton's fortress [book
word shall fret as a canker." He meaneth therefore, that
they shall not long continue unknown, not to all men, but to
all faithful and godly men ; as the folly of Jannes and Jambres
was not made manifest to all the Egyptians, but unto the
Israelites. Likewise, whereas Peter saith, 2 Peter ii., that
the destruction of false Prophets " sleepeth not," he meaneth
not but that they may have by succession a long continuance
in the world : for he himself admonisheth us, that we may not
count the Lord's delaying of judgment to be slackness, as
Stapleton doth, if it should be deferred nine hundred years ;
" for one day with the Lord is as a thousand years, and a thou
sand years as one day." Heretics therefore shall have a quick
judgment, and heresy shall shortly have an end; for that
neither of both shall continue alway uncondemned. But that
his major proposition is utterly false, which is, " No heresy
is of long continuance," I shew by these instances. The
heresy of them that joined Circumcision with the Gospel is
more than fifteen hundred years old; and yet it continueth
in Africa among Ethiopians, as witnesseth Munster and other
writers of geography : as also the heresy of the Nestorians,
which is twelve hundred years old, and yet continueth among
the Georgians. Finally, so ancient as the full tyranny of
the Pope is, so ancient is the departure of the Greek and
Eastern Churches from him; which they count to be a schism
and heresy.
The third reason : No heresy can continue, and overgrow
the true Church : Papistry hath continued : Ergo, Papistry is
no heresy. The minor of this syllogism is false ; for Papistry
hath not continued from the time of Christ, but hath had her
beginning long since ; and was not grown to a ripeness of all
her heresies in more than a thousand years after Christ, as
I have shewed in the table of Differences. Therefore, what
soever he saith to prove the major is to no purpose, when
the minor is manifestly false.

I.J overthrown by w. fulke. 67

CHAPTER XX.
Stapleton. The third reason of the former chapter is fortified out Stapleton.
of the ancient and learned Fathers.
Fulke. Now he taketh in hand a goodly piece of forti- Fulke.
fication ; and, like a worthy surveyor of the Pope's buildings,
he bestoweth great cost out of Hilarius1, Chrysostom2, and
Clemens Alexandrinus3, for defence of such a point as none
of his adversaries would ever offer to assail : namely, the con
tinuance of the Church and true religion ; which cannot be
overcome, nor kept down by any tyranny or heresy ; but the
more it is persecuted and oppressed, the more it will flourish
and increase. And for this cause the true Church and faith
of Christ, although it have been long trodden down and
afflicted by the tyranny of Antichrist, even to such time as
God had appointed that Antichrist should rage in the world,
for the sins thereof, and especially for the contempt of the
truth, 2 Thess. ii. ; yet hath it in the end prevailed, increased,
and flourished, and by no craft or cruelty of Antichrist could
any longer be suppressed or kept under. Let not Papists
therefore brag that they have prevailed so long ; but let
them now behold their overthrow by the increase of God's
Church, and look for their final destruction at the glorious
appearing of our Saviour Christ. We doubt not therefore,
but determine with Augustin, De utilitate credendi, to rest
in the bosom of that Church, which, from the seat of the
Apostle, by consent of mankind, hath continued by succession
of Bishops, and hath obtained the height of authority: all
heretics barking about it ; which, partly by the judgment of
the people, partly by the gravity of Councils, partly by
the majesty of miracles, have been condemned. But we
utterly deny the popish Church to be this Church : which
hath had no continuance of succession from the Apostles'
seat in faith and doctrine ; though it claim never so much
the succession of persons and places. With the Donatists,
Simon Magus, Marcion, Eunomius, and other heretics, we
have nothing to do. If truth in Aerius and Vigilantius was
1 [De Trinitate, Lib. vii. Opp. col. 917. ed. Ben. Paris. 1693.]
2 [De Pentecoste, Horn. i. §. i. Opp. Tom. ii. 457. ed. Bened.]
3 [Stromal. Lib. vi. Opp. pp. 697 — 8. Lut. Paris. 1641.]
5 — 2

68 stapleton's fortress [book
condemned for error, not by the Scriptures, but by the tra
dition of men ; such condemnation can be no prejudice to
them or their opinion, when, being called again into judgment,
they are found by sentence of God's word, and the judgment
of the more ancient Fathers, to have been wrongfully con
demned. To conclude, Papistry hath not prevailed against
the Church of God ; which, having sought by all means so
long time to root her out of the earth, yet was never
able to bring to pass her wicked device, but that the Church
of Christ, and the true religion thereof, hath at last, in the
sight of all men, gotten the upper hand, in despite of the
Pope and Papistry, and all Papists.

II.] OVERTHROWN BY W. FULKE. 69

THE SECOND PART OF THE FORTRESS.
CHAPTER I.
Stapleton. Certain demands to Protestants ; putting the case that Stapleton.
Papists these many hundred years have lived in a wrong faith : all
which (the case so put) they ought of necessity to satisfy.
Fulke. Whatsoever the Protestants can say for them- Fulke.
selves, (as their credit is not great with him,) except they
can prove one of his two demands, he thinketh no godly or
wise man will regard any thing they can say.
The first demand is : Where, or under what Pope or Em
peror Papistry began ? I answer : Papistry being Antichristi-
anity, the mystery of that iniquity began even in the time of
the Apostles, 2 Thess. ii., Claudius being Emperor of Rome ;
and so continued increasing in apostasy until the time of
Sigismund the Emperor, who procured the Council of Con
stance, in which the lay -people were robbed of the cup of the
Lord's blood. Stapleton must bear with me, if I cannot name
the Pope, because at that time there were no less than three
Popes at once ; and no man then living, but as he was affec
tionate to one of those three, could determine which of them
was Pope. This Stapleton, though he have a brasen face,
will not deny. He requireth us further to shew the com
plaint of other Churches against Papistry. First, for the
beginning of the mystery of iniquity, S. Paul complaineth,
2 Thess. ii. : and for the proceeding of that which was the
chief point thereof, namely, the tyranny of the Bishop of
Rome, always, as it shewed itself, some there were which
complained of it. Victor is the first Bishop of Rome which
discovered the hid mystery of iniquity, in usurping against
his fellow Bishops, in the time of the Emperor Severus :
against whom complained, and sharply reproved him, Ire-
nseus, Bishop of Lyons, Polycrates, and many other. Euseb.
Lib. v. Cap. xxv.1 Afterward, in the days of Theodosius,
Honorius and Arcadius, the Emperors, when the Bishops of
1 [Cap. xxiv. in edit. Vales. See Beaven's Account of S. Irenceus,
pp. 44 — 53. Lond. 1841.]

70 stapleton's fortress [book
Rome, Innocentius, Bonifacius, Zosimus, Anastasius, and Celes-
tinus usurped more openly ; insomuch that they forged among
them a Decree of the Council of Nice1, whereby they claimed
their authority; they were complained of by the Bishops and
i [The history of this matter is involved in much obscurity ; and
there is scarcely any end to the contradictions and falsehoods ex
hibited in the statements of those who assert, that an appellate juris
diction was granted to the Bishops of Rome by the Council of Sardica
in the year 347. (Vid. Morton's Grand Imposture, pp. 141 — 156. Lond.
1628. Sergeant's Anti-Mot tonus, Chap, xxvii. pp. 419 — 50. an. 1640.
Geddes, Essay on Can. of Sard. Tracts, ii. 415. Lond. 1730. Comber's
Roman Forgeries, ii. 107 — 11. lb. 1689. Brereley's Prot. Apol. pp.
47—8. Butler's Lives of the Saints, ii. 145. Dubl. 1833. Marc. Ant.
Cappellus, De Appellatt. Eccles. Afric. Cap. v. 178. Bomse, 1722.)
With respect to the "forgery" in question, it is to be observed, that
Apiarius, an excommunicated African Priest, having taken refuge in
Borne, Pope Zosimus directed that he should be at once restored;
and founded his own title to obtain obedience upon a pretended Nicene
(but really upon a doubtful Sardican) Decree, which appeared to recog
nise the Pontiff's claim. (Ittigii Hist. Cone. Xic. p. 68. Lips. 1712.
Jewel's Replie, Art. iv. p. 356. ed. Parker Soc. Ballerin. De ant. coll.
Can. ii. i. $. iii. Gallandii Sylloge, p. 125. Venet. 1778.) Two hun
dred and seventeen Bishops, amongst whom was S. Augustin, being
assembled at the sixth Council of Carthage, denied that they could
discover any Greek or Latin Canon, sanctioned at Xicoca or elsewhere,
which could be alleged in vindication of appeals to Rome: "nulla
invenimus Patrum Synodo constitutum." (Binii Concilia, i. i. 757.
Colon. Agripp. 1618. Rob. Burhillus, Contra Eudamion-Joannem,
p. 110. Oxon. 1613.) It would seem to be utterly incredible, that
Zosimus could have been ignorant of the nature and number of the
Nicene Decrees ; and equally impossible that he could have innocently
confounded Nictea with Sardica ; a great CEcumenical Council with a
Synod of western Bishops held twenty-two years afterward. (Edm.
Richerii Hist. Concill. Gen. i. 70. Colon. 1683. TXssher's Letters, p. 19.
Lond. 1686. Cave's Discourse ofanc. Church-Govern, pp. 236 — 7. lb.
1683.) The African Prelates knew not any thing of the since cele
brated Sardican Ordinance: (Coci Censura, p. 230. Lond. 1614.
Thorndicius, De rationc ac jure fin. Control'. Eccles. p. 432. Lond. 1677.
Fulko's Reioynder to Bristow's Replie, p. 19S. Lb. 15S1. Tillemont,
Memoirez, viii. 50. A Brux. 1732. Lupi Synod. Decrct. i. 214 — 15.
Lovan. 1665.) and after having sent to Constantinople, Alexandria and
Antioch, and having received from the Patriarchs "most faithful
copies" of the "entire Canons" framed at Nicrca, and finding therein
no allusion to tho assumed papal privilege, but rather the reverse;
remembering also the decision of tho second Council of Milevis, pe
remptorily refused to submit to usurpation, the offspring of secular

II. J OVERTHROWN BY W. FULKE. 71
Church of Africa in open Council, the forgery detected, and
Decrees made, that none in Africa should appeal to any Bishop
over the sea ; and that the Bishop of the first see should
not be called Prince of Priests, nor by any such name of
pride, but only Bishop of the first see. Cone. Milevit. C.
xxii.2 Cone. Carth. vi. Cap. iv. Cone. African. C. xcii. &
Ep. Concil. ad Bonifac. fy Cozlestinum.
arrogance and fraud: "ne fumosum typhum seculi" (they said) "in
Ecclesiam Christi videamur inducere,"
Some other reflections naturally present themselves. The first is,
that the papal claim to monarchy by divine right was manifestly
renounced by Zosimus, Boniface and Coelestin, when they rested solely
upon human authority, viz. the alleged Decree. (Du Pin, De antiq.
Eccl. Discip. p. 109. Col. Agr. 1691. Reiseri Launoii Anti-Bellarm.
p. 133. Amstel. 1685.) Secondly, even if the genuineness of the
Canon were allowed, the Synod granted to the Roman Pontiff nothing
further than the power to appoint a new trial, in the case and country
of a Bishop oppressed and injured like S. Athanasius. (De Marca, De
concord. Sac. $ Imp. vii. iii. 311. Paris. 1669. Pasch. Quesnelli Ap
pend, ad Opp. S. Leonis M. pp. 256 — 7. Lugd. 1700.) Besides, let
Baronius (Martyr ol. die 16 Octob.) and those who have followed him
reason as they may, there appears to be sufiicient reason for believing,
that there was a most remarkable conclusion to the entire dispute.
The Churches of Africa remained for a century at variance with the
Church of Rome; but were restored to "peace" when Eulalius,
Archbishop of Carthage, condemned and anathematized those who,
"through the instigation of the Devil," as he declared, had resisted
the encroachments of the Roman see. (Binii Concill. ii. i. 644, 645.)
This last circumstance proves irresistibly, that though Brereley and
others may boast of " S. Austin's Religion," as if it were in unison with
theirs, yet the eminent Saint and Father, whom they profess to de
light to honour, actually died out of communion with the Church
of Rome. (Laud's Conference with Fisher, pp. 172 — 5. Lond. 1639.
Morton's ' Catholike Appeale for Protestants, pp. 448 — 50. lb. 1610.
Du Moulin, Nouveaute du Papismc, p. 405. A Geneve, 1633.)]
2 [Tho twenty-second Canon of the second Synod of Milevis, an.
416, ends with these words : " Ad transmarina autem qui putaverit
appellandum, a nullo intra Africam in communionem suscipiatur."
(Binius, i. i. 705.) Gratian has shamelessly annexed this absurd ex
ception : "nisi forte Romanam sedem appellaverint." (Decret. ii. Par.
Caus. ii. Qu. vi. Cap. xxxv. Placuit.) "Sedheec exceptio non videtur
quadrare." (Bellarmin. De Rom. Pont. Lib. ii. Cap. xxiv.) Gratian
may have borrowed his appendix from a sentence in the second
spurious Epistle of Pope Cornelius. Vid. Blondelli Pseudo-Isidor. c)
Turrian. vapidant. p. 316. Genevce, 1628.]

72 stapleton's fortress [book
Afterward, in the days of the Emperor Mauritius, when
John of Constantinople usurped the title of Universal Bishop,
as the forerunner of Antichrist, Gregory himself, Bishop of
Rome, complained of him, and pronounced that he was the
forerunner of Antichrist. Wherefore Stapleton lieth shame
fully, when he saith we make him the first Antichrist : for,
as I have testified before, although there was in him a su
perstitious affection unto ceremonies, and that he was infected
with certain old errors that had prevailed before his time;
yet because he held the foundation of salvation by Christ
only, and detested the usurpation of that antichristian title,
we account him for a member of the true Church of Christ.
But after him, when, in the days of Phocas, Bonifacius by
pride and simony had usurped the same antichristian autho
rity, and procured that the Church of Rome should be counted
head of all Churches, he was complained of by the Church
of Ravenna in Italy; which would not acknowledge that anti
christian title, neither would submit herself unto the whore
of Babylon before the time of Donus the Pope, which was
almost seventy years after. That Master Stapleton misnameth
Martianus instead of Mauritius, I will impute it to no igno
rance ; although, if such a fault escape any of us, we are
by and by cried out upon to be ignorant in all antiquity,
&c. Thus have I answered Master Stapleton's demand, con
cerning the principal foundation and rock of Papistry; al
though no necessity such as he supposeth doth move me.
For albeit the precise time of the entering of any heresy
cannot be named, yet it followeth not that the same heresy
is a truth therefore.
The second demand is : When and by whom Luther was
called, when he begun to preach the Gospel? I answer; if
calling of the popish Church be lawful, as the Papists will
not deny, Luther had such ordinary calling as the Church
where he lived did allow: for he was called to be a public
teacher before the Pope's pardoner came into Saxony ; against
whose most impudent blasphemies and shameless errors he
first inveighed in his public sermons. Wherefore, concerning
his vocation, tho mouths of Papists ought to be stopped. But
Stapleton will not be so satisfied ; for he sayeth, that the
popish Church would never call him to preach against herself.
That is not material. The popish Church gave him such autho-

II.] OVERTHROWN BY W. FULKE. 73
rity as she had to preach ; which he used first to seek her re
formation, if she had been reformable : but when he saw her
oppose herself against the manifest truth, he had just cause to
depart from her unto the Catholic Church of Christ.
It sufficeth not Stapleton, that he learned by the Scrip
tures that the Church erred, because all heretics abuse the
Scriptures : as though there were no certainty of truth to be
found in the Scriptures : which blasphemy derogateth all
authority from the holy Scriptures inspired of God ; which
the Apostle sayeth to be able to reprove all errors, " that the
man of God may be perfect, prepared to all good works."
2 Tim. iii. ver. 16, [17.] Again, where he affirmeth, that he
had the interpretation of the Scriptures from heaven, Staple-
ton urgeth, that then he must shew some miracle : as if the
ordinary inspiration of God's Spirit, without the which no
man can understand any of God's mysteries, of necessity
requireth confirmation of miracles. But Luther himself (he
sayeth) requireth miracles of Muncer, which boasted of reve
lation ; and so ought we to do of Luther. No, Sir ; Muncer
boasted of an extraordinary revelation, and taught a doctrine
directly contrary to the word of God written ; and therefore
the case is nothing like. After this he telleth a slanderous
fable, out of that runagate Baldwin1, of the Conference at
Poissy ; that Beza and Martyr could not agree whether their
calling was ordinary or extraordinary : the conclusion whereof
was this, that Beza was ordained of Calvin, and Calvin, as
Beza said, of none. Which how impudent and shameless a
lie it is that Beza should report of Calvin, it is manifest to
all men that know the story of that Church and city of
Geneva ; that Calvin was called and ordained by the Church
there, when he was altogether unwilling to remain in that
city, but in a manner compelled by the earnest obtestation
of Farellus. Cal. in Prafa. in Psalm. Beza, in Vita
Calvini. And yet more monstrous is that lie, that Beza should
grant the rebellion that followed to be a sign of his vocation;
when the world knoweth, that the beginning of these civil
wars came altogether from the Papists ; the Duke of Guise
giving the occasion by the devilish slaughter and butchery
1 [Franciscus Balduinus, in Responsione ad Calvinum.]

74 stapleton's fortress [book
of Vassie1. But to the principal matter in question: that
Luther and some other, having an extraordinary calling from
God to teach and reform the Church, need not to confirm
their calling by miracles, when they teach nothing but that is
confirmed by manifest authority of holy Scriptures, in the
consciences of all men that wilfully oppose not themselves
against the truth, either that they will not know it, or that
they will not obey it, it is evident by so many Prophets
as God stirred up in the old time ; which had no extraordi
nary [ordinary] calling of the Church, being not of the tribe
of Levi ; yet, being only interpreters of the law, needed no
signs or miracle to confirm their calling.
Our Saviour Christ Himself confirmeth the extraordinary
calling of the Scribes and Pharisees, when he willeth them
to be heard sitting in Moses' chair : of which yet a great
number, and almost all, were no Levites nor Priests ; there
fore had no ordinary calling.
Yet Gregory himself, in the History of Bede, at the first
planting of the particular Church in England, alloweth
extraordinary ordaining of Bishops. Lib. i. Cap. xxvii.
Wherefore, if Luther's calhng were altogether extraor
dinary, (as Papists cannot say, except they deny the calling
of their own Church,) he is not bound to approve his calling
by miracles ; when his doctrine, and all things in which he
departeth from the Church of Rome, is proved true, and
agreeable to the word of God.
The third demand is, that we must shew a succession
from the Apostles ; as the Scripture witnesseth the Church to
have, and the ancient Fathers exacted of heretics.
The Scripture requireth no succession of names, persons2,
or places, but of faith and doctrine: and that we prove, when
we approve our faith and doctrine by the doctrine of the
Apostles. Neither had the Fathers any other meaning, in
calling upon new upstart heresies for their succession, but of
1 [See Morori's Diet. art. Guise, (Francois de Lorraine, Due de) ed.
Amst. 1740. Bulkley's addition to Fox, Vol. iii. p. 862. Lond. 1684.]
2 [While tho words of the promise "Lo, I am withyo» alway," &c,
imply a succession of pfrsons bearing a distinctive character, the in
junction " Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have com
manded you" keeps before the view of tho Church the obligation of
transmitting the hereditary ,/<«'<*¦]

II. J OVERTHROWN BY W. FULKE. 75
a succession of doctrine as well as of persons. Which is
manifest by Tertullian, De prwscript? : Ita per successiones,
&c. : " So coming down by successions from the begin
ning, that their first Bishop have for his authors and ante
cessors one of the Apostles or Apostolic men, but yet such a
one as hath continued with the Apostles." These words of
Tertullian are manifest, that succession of Bishops even to the
Apostles helpeth not, except there be a continuance in the
doctrine of the Apostles : which when the Papists can shew,
we will gladly yield unto them. In the meantime, it is not
the continual succession of persons in any place, which teach
contrary to their antecessors which have taught in that place,
that can carry away the credit of the whole doctrine and
religion of Christ.

CHAPTER II.
Stapleton. An Introduction to the proofs which follow in the Stapleton.
second part of this Fortress.
Fulke. Repeating what he fantasieth he hath fortified be- Fume.
fore (which how weak it is, I have sufficiently discovered), in
this chapter, he promiseth first to declare, by divers sure and
necessary tokens which Protestants do lack, that the faith
then planted was a right faith ; which, in many principal
points, we do not deny but that it was a right faith.
Secondly, repeating the difference in doctrine, govern
ment, ceremonies, course and consequence of both the reli
gions, he will prove all that they had differing from us,
partly by Scripture, and partly by the faith of the first six
hundred years. To which I reply ; first, that whatsoever
was then taught, contrary to that we teach for matter of
faith, cannot be proved by Scripture : secondly, that although
some errors, which then were taught, may be proved to have
been held within the six hundred years, yet they cannot be
proved to have been held always, especially in the oldest
3 [De prcescript. Hcereticor. Cap. xxxii  "Edant ergo origines Ec-
clesiarum suarum : evolvant ordinem Episcoporum suorum, ita per
successiones ab initio decurrentem, ut primus illo Episcopus aliquem
ex Apostolis, vel Apostolicis viris, qui tamen cum Apostolis perseve-
raverit, habuerit auctorem et antecessorem."]

76 STAPLETON'S FORTRESS [BOOK
times ; and therefore can make no prejudice against bur cause,
which take not upon us to allow all things that were held
in six hundred years, no more than the Papists themselves
do. Finally, I have shewed as many Differences of that time
from the Papists as he is able to shew of us from them ; and
yet some of his Differences are impudent forgeries.

CHAPTER III.
Stapleton. Stapleton. Five Apostolical marks found in our Apostles, and
wanting in Protestants ; who must be our Apostles, if the other were
not.
Fulke. Fulke. The Protestants take not upon them to be Apos
tles, but professors and teachers of the Apostolic doctrine.
And therefore they boast of no miracles, which is with him
the first note of Augustin's Apostleship : which miracles, if
they were testified to us by an Evangelist, we might well
believe them ; but seeing they are written bv a credulous
man, that recordeth every fable that was told him, we have
small cause to credit them. Bede's History is no Gospel.
Beside that, the British Histories utterly deny those sup
posed miracles ; reporting Augustin to be a minister of Satan
rather than of God.
But admit that he did some of those things as are re
ported of him ; it might please God in respect of Christian
faith, which he planted among the English nation, to work
some miracles by him, and yet not to allow all things that he
taught. Shall not the very workers of iniquity say in that day,
"Lord, we have wrought miracles in Thy name?" Matth. vii.
vers. 22. As for the miracle supposed to be done by Master
Lane of Westchester l, which he scorneth at, I see not but it
is as good as the best done by Augustin : and yet, for mine
own part, I think it was no miracle, but a natural work; the
maid perhaps being affected with the mother, or some such
like disease.
The lies he tclleth2 of Luther and Calvin, out of that un
godly rascal Staphylus, I think not worthy to be spoken of:
i [See some particulars respecting the exorcism in one of Mr.
Maitland's pamphlets on Fox's Martyrology: Puritan Thaumaturgy,
pp. 121—124. Lond. 1842.]
2 [Forhrssc. pp. 256—7. Stapleton refers to fol. 404 of his English

II. J OVERTHROWN BY W. FULKE. 77
although he make himself witness of the one ; and the other
is a monstrous invention of Satan, which, being reported to be
done in a noble city, and before so many witnesses, can find
none that had the brasen face like Staphylus to say he saw
it. Which making and loving of lies sheweth Papists to be
the right-begotten children of the Devil, the father of lies.
The miracles reported by Master Fox, the shameless
beast, when he cannot deny, being testified by witnesses
above all exception he can make, affirmeth " to be esteemed
of his own fellows but as civil things, and such as may
happen by course of reason." I say not this as though I
would have our doctrine the rather to be credited one jot
more for any such miracle ; but to shew the shameless dogged
stomach of this popish slanderer ; which, when he had none
other answer to make as concerning such miracles, forgeth
that we ourselves deny all such to have been miracles : which
he is not able to prove, although he would burst for malice
against the truth.
The second mark and Difference is, that there was " one
heart" of the believers3: Augustin and his company never dis
agreed. The Protestants are at great variance among them
selves ; not for learning's sake, as the Concurrents in Italy4;
nor upon quirks and subtilties in matters indifferent, as the
Schoolmen that hold positions ; but upon the weightiest articles
of our belief, as heretics are wont to hold opinions.
I answer : Among them that have departed from the
Church of Rome unto the Church of Christ, there hath been
some variance about the Lord's Supper ; but yet in no greater
matters than hath been between two godly Martyrs of the
primitive Church, Cornelius of Rome, and Cyprian of Car
thage, about Baptism ; although not handled with like mo
desty on the one part as was then of both : yea, no greater
than as yet remaineth undecided among the Papists, touching
the authority of the Pope and the popish General Council ;
although they all, like Pilate and Herod6, the Pharisees and
translation of the " absolut Apologie " of Staphylus. The editor has
not discovered the passage in the Latin version by Laurentius Surius,
Colon. 1562.]
8 [Acts iv. 32.]
4 [Stapleton, p. 260.]
8 [S. Jerom anciently used this similitude, when speaking of the

78 STAPLETON'S FORTRESS [BOOK
Sadducees, can agree together to put Christ to death, and to
persecute the truth. Finally, if in the first restoring of the
truth, some matters to some men were not so apparent, what
marvel ; when your Augustin, and ours also, as far as he
was Christ's, was doubtful and ignorant, even in very small
and trifling matters; which argued some dissension of opinion in
him and his Monks, or else those questions might have been
determined without sending to Rome ? Li. i. Cap. xxvii., &c.
The third mark is an ordinary vocation, which Luther
lacked. I deny that Augustin had an ordinary vocation to
preach in England ; or that the Bishop of Rome hath any
ordinary authority to send Apostles into the countries of any
infidels : which if he had, they should be the Bishop of
Rome's Apostles, and not the Apostles of Christ ; for they
be his Apostles which hath authority to send them. But if
Augustin had ordinary vocation by the Bishop of Rome, why
had not Luther ordinary vocation of that Church which
authorised him to preach ? If you say, he could have no ordi
nary vocation because he was an heretic, I answer; it fol-
loweth not: for even heretics have had ordinary vocation;
namely, so many Bishops and Priests of Rome, Alexandria,
and other places, as after their calhng have fallen into here
sies. Wherefore leave his vocation, which against you is
good enough, and try his doctrine. If his doctrine be found
true, and agreeable to the word of God, who hath stirred
him up to discover openly the heresies of Antichrist, let not
his doctrine be refused for his extraordinary calling. The
slanders and unlearned conclusions against Luther I omit, as
unworthy any answer ; being either false lies of Staphylus, or
inconsequent collections of Stapleton.
The fourth Apostolical mark is the continuance of nine
hundred years ; whereas the Protestants' doctrine hath con
tinued but thirty years1, or, as the blockheaded Papist scorn-
eth at M. Haddon, thirty years except six ; with Gamaliel's
counsel upon the matter, which with this popish Priest is
good divinity : " If this counsel or work be of men, it will
enemies of tho Church : " nulli dubium est, ut qui inter se discrepant
in Ecclesiaj oppugnationo consentiant ; juxta illud, quod Herodes et
Pilatus, inter so discordantcs, in Domini passioneanricitiafcederantur."
(Super Esaiam, Lib. iii. Cap. vii. sig. C ii. Venet. 1497.)]
i [Staploton, pp. 205 — 6. Cf. Staphyli Apolog. fol. 95, b.]

II. j OVERTHROWN BY W. FULKE. 79
come to nought," &c. : whose antecedent being true, the con
clusion is stark naught. To this I answer : I have shewed
by many Differences, that the religion brought in by Augus
tin hath not continued without alteration in many points
these nine hundred years. And albeit it had, yet it is not
thereby proved true ; because divers heresies have continued
much longer time, which are not thereby justified ; as of the
Circumcisers, Nestorians, &c. : yea, Mahometism hath con
tinued nine hundred years ; begun with feigned miracles ;
commended by Sergius, a Monk, which had ordinary vocation
to teach ; continued with great consent these nine hundred
years ; which are four of Stapleton's Apostolic marks; and also
teacheth many things that before were unknown, which is
the fifth mark. Whereas Protestants have added nothing to
the faith of Christ, but taken many things away from it, I
answer ; if Augustin with him brought in all truth, and be
sides that some errors, which have increased in process of
time thick and threefold, Protestants were worthy of thanks
for removing the errors, though they brought in no new
matters of faith ; as he is thanksworthy which weedeth a
garden or field, although he sow no new seeds therein. But
it is most untrue that Papists had all truth before we dis
covered their errors : for the doctrine of Justification, of the
worship of God, of the use of good works, and of the Sacra
ments, was either almost or altogether lacking in Popery ;
which by the doctrine of the Gospel is restored.
But now let us see what Protestants have taken away.
Forsooth, " From the quick, from the dead, from faith, from
the Church, from Saints, from God. From the quick, free will,
state of perfection, and all merit of good works." Yea, Sir
Pelagian, the Scripture sayeth, "No quick man shall be justified
in the sight of God;" Psalm cxliii. v. 2; which taketh away all
that you haven given him. " From the dead, all prayer and
intercession for them." When you can allow the dead these
things out of the Scripture, we will not deny it to them.
" From the faith, an article of Christ's descension into hell."
A lewd lie of a slanderous Papist. " From the Church, as it
is the whole body, five Sacraments." Three more than
Christ instituted. " The continual assistance of God's Holy
Spirit, promised by our Saviour." A shameful lie. " And
the visible sight in this world, assured unto us by holy Scrip-

80 stapleton's fortress [book
ture." That Scripture is yet to shew, whereby the Church
should be promised always to be in open sight of the greatest
part of the world. " From the Church, as the spiritual part,
they have taken supreme government in matters ecclesias
tical." None other than such as is against the Scripture,
" Let every soul submit itself to the higher powers." Rom. xiii,
ver. 1. " Authority of making that which Christ bade them
to make in His last Supper." If you say you make the body
of Christ, in such sense as you affirm the Sacrament to be the
body of Christ, God's curse light on you. The doing of all
that Christ commanded to be done in remembrance of Him
we take not away. " The power of binding and loosing, with
most of the authority due unto that estate and vocation." A
very slander. " From the Church they take Altars, Crosses,
Images," &c. Because the temple of God hath nothing to
do with Images. 2 Cor. vi. ver. 16. " From God Himself,
an external sacrifice ; the true proper service due to God only
and continually, as S. Augustin proveth at large, De Civitate
Dei1." A slander of Augustin, which, Lib. x. Cap. xx., calleth
the Lord's Supper a Sacrament of the oblation of Christ, the
only singular sacrifice2: so that now there remaineth no more
sacrifice for sin ; " for by one sacrifice once offered He hath
made perfect for ever those that are sanctified." Heb. x. ver.
14. By which only sacrifice there was forgiveness of our
sins ; and " where there is forgiveness of sins, there is no more
sacrifice for sin." Heb. x. 18.
You see what sure and stedfast Apostolic marks these
are, which are found in Mahomet as much as in Augustin:
so that if Augustin had not the word of God, to warrant the
principal parts of the faith which he preached in England,
by these five marks he might neither be proved to be an
Apostle, nor yet a true preacher.
i [Stapleton had the boldness to refer to the fourth and fifth chap
ters, though in the latter may be found these words : " Illud, quod
ab hominibus appellator sacrificium, signum est veri sacrificii." Cf.
Crompton's Saint Austin's Summes, p. 119. Lond. 1625.]
a [" Per hoc et Sacerdos est, Ipse offerens, et Ipse oblatio. Cujus
rei Sacrainentum quotidianum esse voluit Ecclesite sacrificium."]

II. J OVERTHROWN BY W. FULKE. 81
CHAPTER IV.
Stapleton. Differences in doctrine between the primitive faith of Stapleton.
England and the heresy of Protestants. And first of Mass ; of the
propitiation thereof; of intercession of Saints; of their commemo
ration at Mass-time; of Confession of sins; and of merit of good works.
Fulke. Concerning the Differences I have written al- Fulke.
ready, in answer to his table of Differences. Now must we
see how he proveth them by testimony of the first six hun
dred years. The first in this chapter and sixth in number
is the Mass ; whose name he may indeed find within the com
pass of six hundred years, although otherwise taken than it is
of Papists : but yet from Christ until four hundred years be
complete3, the name of Missa is not found in any ancient
authentical writer4. And therefore he beginneth with Am
brose, in his Epistle, E. xxxiii. [al. xiv. J which place you shall
find discussed in mine answer to Heskins, Lib. iii. Cap. xxxii. ;
letting you to understand by the way, that he citeth the
words otherwise than they be, and so doth M. Heskins ; and
yet neither of them both as they be in Ambrose : by which
it appeareth, that neither of them both read them in Ambrose.
Stapleton citeth them thus : Missam facere cozpi : dum of-
8 [Strictly speaking, this statement is inaccurate ; for S. Ambrose
died in the year 396, according to Mabillon, and at all events not
later than 398, which is the period fixed upon by Papebroch. Vid.
Acta Sanctt. Tom. i. April. Fabricii Biblioth. Eccles. pp. 213 — 14.
Hamb. 1718.]
i [S. Ambrose was the first who used this well-known word to
designate the Eucharistic office. (Epist. xiv. Lib. ii. Opp. v. 205. Lut.
Paris. 1661.) Gieseler (i. 294.) erroneously appeals for its intro
duction to the third Canon of the second Council of Carthage, a. d.
390. Compare Johnson's note on the sixth Canon of the African
Code. (Vade-mecum, ii. 173.) It is strange that Mr. Newman should
have adduced, except as a matter of curiosity, the third spurious
Epistle of Pope Pius I. a.d. 161. (Fleury, i. 15. Oxf. 1842.) He or
Mr. Christie might have added the evidence of the equally fictitious
letter of Pope Cornelius to Lupicinus, dated, as Baronius asserts, anno
255. (Vid. Blondelli Pseudo-Isidor. S; Turr. vap. pp. 199, 320.) The ex
pressions "inter Missarum solemnia" are contained in an Epistle
professedly more ancient than either ; namely, in the first of those
falsely attributed to Pope Alexander I., and assigned to the year 115.
( Blondellus, p. 165.) Moreover Ivo (Par. iii. Cap. lxii.) and Gratian
(De Consec. Dist. i. C. xiv.) quote the phrase "Missas celebrare" from
the third decretal letter of the Pseudo-Clement, circiter a. d. 68.]
r i 6
[FULKE, II. J

82 stapleton's fortress [book
ferrem, nunciatum est, &c. : " I began to say Mass : while I
offered, word was brought to me," &c. Ambrose saith some
what otherwise. The next testimonies he citeth are out of
Augustin, Ser. ccli. & ccxxxvii. de Tempore, which all learned
men know to be none of Augustin's1 ; but if they were, they
be after four hundred years beforesaid.
The next is Leo, Ep. lxxxi. Cap. ii.2, which in mine an
swer to Heskins, before quoted, you shall find bandied at large.
After this follow the Canons of seven or eight Councils Pro
vincial, in which the name of Missa is found : but all kept
above four hundred years after Christ; and therefore prove
not a perpetual continuance of that name from Christ until
the first six hundred years ended. Besides that, the Masses
so named were neither in form nor matter that which the
popish Mass is3. For, concerning the form, it was patched
together in many parts long after the first six hundred years;
as their own Pontifical and other histories witness. Concern
ing the matter, it was not the popish Mass, for that there was
in it a Communion ; and the natural body of Christ was not
offered therein, which within the first six hundred years was
not believed to be really and corporally in the Sacrament.
1 [The former Sermon is rejected by the Benedictines, and is
placed by them in the Appendix to the fifth volume, where it is ranked
as Sermo cclxxx. de Diversis. coll. 330 — 31. It does not appear that
there is any ground for doubting the authenticity of the latter docu
ment ; (De Scripturis, Serm. xlix. Opp. v. 189.) but it would be
difficult to construe the words alleged by Stapleton from the eighth
chapter, viz. " Ecce post Sermonem fit missa " [Catechumenis,] into
anything favourable to Romanism. It is particularly observable that
he has omitted the term " Catechumenis," which decides the meaning
of the passage : and instead of the expressions signifying, as he ren
ders them, "After Sermon Masse is saied," they would seem merely to
imply, " After the Sermon the Catechumens are dismissed"; and then,
as S. Augustin proceeds to say, "manebunt fideles," &c., "the com
municants will remain " in church, and go to the place of prayer.]
2 [al. Ep. xi. p. 221. in edit. Quesnell.— Bp. Jewel, in his Sermon
at Paul's Cross, (p. 17. ed. Parker S.) quoted this authority for
administering the Communion more than once upon a single day.
Gratian (De Consee. Dist. i. Cap. Ii.) has falsified the conclusion of
tho Epistle by changing "Apostolicao autoritatis " into "Apostolica
sedis autoritas."]
3 [Bingham's Antiquities, Book xiii. Chap. i. Sect. iv. Morton, Of
the Masse, B. i. C. i. Lond. 1631.]

.II. J OVERTHROWN BY W. FULKE. 83
The seventh Difference is, " that the Mass is a propitia
tory sacrifice ; and was so believed in the first six hundred
years." Whereof he reporteth him to Cyprian, Ser. v. de
lapsis*, who saith, "The conscience of sinners is purged with
the sacrifice of the Priest." But Cyprian's words are not so.
He speaketh of them, which, being fallen in time of persecu
tion, made haste to the Communion without due repentance
and public satisfaction to the Church, and prayer of the
Priests made for their sins : Ante exomologesin factam cri-
minis; ante purgatam conscientiam sucrificio et manu Sa-
cerdotis : " Before confession of their offence being made ;
before their conscience be purged by sacrifice and hand of
the Priest," &c. These words do shew, that he meaneth
none other purging of their conscience by sacrifice than by
imposition of the Priest's hands ; which can be no propi
tiatory sacrifice, but the sacrifice of prayer of the Priest for
them. As for the sacrifice of the Mass, there is no mention
of it. Again, he reporteth him toHierom, To. i. in Jovinianum5,
saying, " The Priest to offer daily for his own sins, and the
people." Neither are Hierom's words as he citeth them,
but thus : Sacerdoti, cui semper pro populo offerenda sunt
sacrificia, semper orandum est : " The Priest, which must
always offer sacrifice for the people, must always pray."
Where is here the sacrifice propitiatory of the Mass, when
Hieronym expoundeth his sacrifice for prayer in the second
part of the same work6; saying that Christ in typo sanguinis
Sui non obtulit aquam sed vinum, "in the figure or type
of His blood offered not water but wine ;" both denieth Tran-
substantiation and the carnal presence, and also expresseth
what manner of oblation he meaneth, when he useth the
name of sacrifice, offering, oblation ; namely, a sacrifice of
thanksgiving in remembrance of Christ's death?
Thirdly, he reporteth himself to Ambrose, Lib. i. Offic. Cap.
xlviii.7, who affirmeth " Christ to be yet offered in the Church
for the remission of our sins." But the report of Ambrose is
clean against him : Ante agnus offerebatur ; offerebatur vitulus.
* [Opera, p. 128. Oxon. 1682.]
6 [Opp. Tom. ii. p. 40. Basil. 1565.]
6 [ut sup. pag. 73.]
* [fol. 47. Colon. 1520.]
6—2

84 stapleton's fortress [bqok
Nunc Christus offertur: sed offertur quasi homo, quasi re-
cipiens passionem; et offert Se Ipse quasi Sacerdos, utpeccata
nostra remittat : [al. dimittat :J hie in imagine, ibi in veri-
tate; ubi apud Patrem pro nobis quasi Advocatus intervenit:
" Before a lamb was offered ; a calf was offered. Now Christ
is offered : but He is offered as a man, as suffering His pas
sion ; and He offer eth Himself as a Priest, that He may forgive
our sins : here in an image, there in truth ; where He maketh
intercession for us as an Advocate with the Father." What
can be more evident 'against the sacrifice of the Mass than
that he sayeth, Christ is offered here in an image, not in truth :
He is offered by Himself, not by a popish Priest : He is offered
as a man suffering His passion ; therefore not in an unbloody
sacrifice, but in an image of His bloody sacrifice ?
Fourthly, he reporteth himself to Gregory Nazianzen,
Orat. i. in Julianum l, who sayeth, that " by the oblation of
this sacrifice we are made partakers of the passion of Christ."
He speaketh not of the Mass, but thus he saith : Mox incrw
enti sacrificii oblatione manus commaculat ; per quod nos
Christo unimur, necnon passionis ac diuinitatis Ejus par-
ticipes reddimur : " Anon he defileth his hands with the
offering of the unbloody sacrifice ; by which we are united to
Christ, and are made partakers of His passion and divinity."
He calleth the ministration of the Communion the oblation of
the unbloody sacrifice, as the Fathers of that time did speak
unproperly. But elsewhere he sheweth expressly, that the
only sacrifice of Christ's death is a propitiatory sacrifice, and
such as cannot be repeated : In sand. Pasc. Or. iv.2 : Mag
num illud et insacrificabile (ut ita dicam) sacrificium, quod
in p>rima natura legalibits intermixtum est hostiis, non pro
parva orbis parte, neque pro paucis, sed toto mundo purga-
tioneiu obtulit ceviternam : " That great and unsacrificeablc
sacrifice, (as I may call it,) which in the first age was set forth
by the sacrifices of the law, lie offered to be an eternal pur
gation ; not for a small part of the world, nor for a few, but
for the whole world."
His fifth report, out of the counterfeit Epistle of Alexander,
Bishop of Rome3, I will not vouchsafe to answer.
i [Opp. Lat. Tom. i. p. 204. Paris. 1583.]
2 [Oral. xiii. sec. in Pasch. Tom. i. pag. 921.]
3 [Kpist. i. Alex. Papas T. apud Blondell. p. 166.]

II.] OVERTHROWN BY W. FULKE. 85
His sixth reporter is Origen, Horn. xiii. in Leviticum4;
who writeth of the commemoration, that Christ commanded in
His last Supper to be done, that Ista est commemoratio sola
quoz propitium facit hominibus Deum : "This is the only
commemoration which purchaseth propitiation and mercy of
God to men." Although here be never a word of the sacri
fice of the Mass, yet how shamefully he applieth only to the
commemoration of the last Supper that which Origen speaketh
not of that only, but of the propitiation by faith in His blood,
you shall easily see by Origen's whole sentence, out of which
he hath gelded this patch. Sed parva satis et tenuis est hu-
jusmodi intercessio. Quantum enim profecit ad repropiti-
andum, ubi uniuscujusque tribus per panem fructus, per
fructus opera consideranda sunt ? Sed si referantur haze
ad mysterii magnitudinem, invenies commemorationem istam
habere ingentis repropitiationis effectum. Si redeas ad ilium
panem qui de ccelo descendit, et dat huic mundo vitam ;
ilium panem propositionis, quern prozposuit Deus propitia-
tionem per fidem in sanguine Ejus ; et si respicias ad illam
commemorationem de qua dicit Dominus, Hoc facite in
Meam commemorationem, invenies quod ista est commemo
ratio sola quoz propitium faciat hominibus Deum. Speak
ing of the shewbread of the law, he sayeth : " But small and
little worth is such intercession. For how much hath it pro
fited unto propitiation, where the fruit of every tribe by bread,
and by their fruit their works are to be considered ? But if
these things be referred to the greatness of the mystery, thou
shalt find this commemoration to have effect of great propi
tiation. If thou return to that bread which came down from
heaven, and giveth life to the world ; that bread of proposi
tion, which God hath set forth to be a propitiation by faith
in His blood ; and if thou look unto that commemoration, of
which the Lord sayeth, Do this in remembrance of Me, thou
shalt find that this is the only commemoration which maketh
God merciful to men." Thus you see that Origen taketh not
the Sacrament alone, but Christ, and faith in His blood, whereof
the Sacrament is a commemoration, to be the only propitia
tion for our sins, figured in the shewbread.
His last man is Augustin, De Civitate Dei, Li. xxii.
4 [The perverted sentence from this Homily has been cited by
Coccius also. (Thesaur. Cathol. Tom. ii. p. 657. Colon. 1620.)]

86 stapleton's fortress [book
Ca. viii.1 : Vir tribunitus \_tribunitius~\ Hesperius, &c. :
"Hesperius, a worshipful man who is with us, hath in his
territory of Fussala a piece of ground called Cuber. [Zubedi.J
In the which place, understanding his house to be vexed with
evil Spirits, to the great affliction of his cattle and servants,
required in my absence our Priests, that some of them would
go thither, by whose prayers they might depart. One went
thither : he offered there the sacrifice of the body of Christ;
praying as much as he was able, that the same vexation
might cease. Incontinently, through the mercy of God, it
ceased." Here is nothing but the name of sacrifice, which
the Fathers then used unproperly for the celebration of the
Communion. But that by merit of that sacrifice God was
pacified to cast out those devils Augustin sayeth not, but
Stapleton absurdly gathereth : for Augustin calleth the death
of Christ the singular and only true sacrifice. Cont. advers.
Leg. et Proph. Lib. i. Cap. xviii.2 Therefore the Commu
nion was unproperly a sacrifice, but of thanksgiving, as the
same Augustin writeth. De fide, ad Pet. Cap. xix.3 & Cont.
advers. Leg. et Proph. Lib. i. Cap. xx.4 Wherefore, his
popish brag notwithstanding, here is never an ancient Father,
within the six hundred years, that acknowledgeth the propi
tiatory sacrifice of the Mass5.
The eighth Difference is intercession of Saints, which Pro
testants abhor. There is no man denieth, but that this error
prevailed within the time of the first six hundred years, and
namely in the latter three hundred years ; for in the first
three hundred there is nothing to be found, whereby it may
be gathered. Epiphanius accounteth Invocation of Angels an
heresy of the Caiani. Tom. iii. H. xxxviii.6 And although
some shew of Invocation of Saints in the latter time may be
i [col. 1344. Basil. 1570. Vid. Waterland's Review of the doctrim
of the Eucharist, pp. 528—31. Lond. 1737. Discussion between Eev.
Messrs Pope and Maguire, pp. 246—7. Dublin, 1S27.]
2 [" unum verum et singularo sacrificium.'' (Opp. viii. 403.)]
3 ["gratiarum actio."' (Tom. vi. Append. 510.) This work was
doubtless written by S. Fulgentius Ruspensis. Exstat in Baynaudi
Heptude Prinmltim, p. 485, seqq. Paris. 1671. Conf. Erotemata de
malis uc bonis libris, p. 12S. Lugd. 1653.]
4 [" Sacrificium laudis." (viii. 404.)]
o [Bp. Morton, Of the Mime, Book vi.]
« [See boforo, pago 41.]

II. J OVERTHROWN BY W. FULKE. 87
excused by rhetorical exornation, as M. Grindall7 truly said;
and some Prayers for the dead, as that of Ambrose for Theo-
dosius ; whom both he calleth a perfect servant of God, and
yet prayeth for his rest8, which agreeth not with popish
prayers for them in Purgatory ; yet it is confessed that this
was one of the spots of that time; which, being not proved by
Scripture, can be nothing else but a superstition of men.
What said I ? can it not be proved by Scripture ? Behold the
learned Clerk, M. Stapleton, proveth it out of S. Peter, Ep. ii.
Ca. i. : "I think it right, as long as I am in this tabernacle,
to stir you up and admonish you ; being certain that I shall
shortly leave this tabernacle, according as our Lord Jesus
Christ hath signified unto me. But I will endeavour also
to have you often after my death, that you may remember
these things." Here is a strange kind of translation of these
words of his own Latin text : Dabo autem operant et fre
quenter habere vos post obitum meum, ut horum memoriam
faciatis : " But I will endeavour also that you may have,
after my departure, whereby to make remembrance of these
things." For I will neither trouble him with the Greek text,
which perhaps he regardeth not, nor with Erasmus' transla
tion, which are without all ambiguity. But I appeal to gram
marians, whether habere vos, in this place, may be reasonably
construed " to have you," or else be resolved by ut habeatis
vos, " that you may have." His collection is more monstrous
than his construction ; for thus he addeth immediately after his
translation : " I ask here, How will S. Peter, after his death,
endeavour and procure that the people may remember his
sayings ? They will not, I dare say, say that he will come
in a vision or by revelation unto them. What remaineth
then, but that he will further them with his good prayers ?
And so do the ancient Greek scholies expound this place."
And I ask here, How prove you that S. Peter, after his
death, will endeavour and procure for them ? 0 shameless cor
ruption! S. Peter saith, that, because he hath not long to
live, he will not only put them in remembrance living ; but
' [Remains, p. 26. ed. Parker Soc. Compare Stapleton's Fortresse,
pp. 105, 277.]
8 ["Da requiem perfectam [al. perfecto] servo Tuo Theodosio."
(Concio de obitu Theod. Imp. Opp. v. 122. See Ussher's Answer to a
Challenge, p. 200. Lond. 1631.)]

88 stapleton's fortress [book
also leave his Epistle, that it may be a perpetual admonition
of them, even after he is dead. But the ancient Greek
scholies1 (as he saith) do so expound it. Why are not those
scholies set down; and their antiquity shewed to be within the
compass of the first six hundred years ? Indeed CEcumenius,
which lived about five hundred years last past, reporteth that
some did wrest that text unto such a sense : but they, which
did "simply handle" the words of S. Peter, did expound it
as I have done before.
The ninth Difference is commemoration of Saints at Mass-
time. If you mean commemoration only, as I have shewed
before, we make it in our Communion ; and therefore this is
no Difference, but a lie of Master Stapleton; for we say,
" Therefore with Angels and Archangels, and all the holy
company of heaven, we laud and magnify," &c. Likewise in
the Collects mention is made of the Apostles, whose memory
our Church doth keep. Indeed we use no Invocation of
Saints, which was used within the latter three hundred years,
but not to be proved in the first three hundred years. Nei
ther do we think the honour of Saints to be a dishonour to
God, but such honour as robbeth God of His glory, which
He will not communicate with any creature. But Augustin2
sheweth the memory of Martyrs to be kept of the Christian
people, Ad excitandam imitationem; et ut meritis eorum con-
societur, atque orationibus adjuvetur: "To stir up imitation;
and that they may be joined in fellowship of their merits, and
helped with their prayers." The fellowship of their merits
he meaneth to be, made like them in good works : for he
acknowledged no desert of our good works, but only the
mercy of God. It is pity that Julian the Apostata had so
great occasion to charge the Christians with superstition of
sepulchres, whereof they had no ground in the Scriptures:
1 [These " auncient Scholies " are probably the Enarrationes vetus-
tissimorum Theologorum, published by Joannes Hentenius, Paris. 1545.
The comment is merely this : " Nonnulli per hyperbaton intelligunt
hoc modo : Dabo autem operam, et post meum exitum, vos habere
semper, sivc indies et continue, horum memoriam : volentes ex hoc
ostendere, quod etiam post mortem Sancti eorum meminerunt quse
hie pro viventibus perfocerunt. Alii vero, simpliciter tractantes illud
dictum," &c. (foil. 138—9. Cf. QScumenii Opp. Tom. ii. p. 534. Lut.
Paris. 1631.)]
2 [Opp. viii. 24(5. Contra Faustum, Lib. xx. Cap. xxi.]

Ii. J overthrown by w. fulke. 89
although Cy rill us defendeth no superstition, but only a re
verent estimation of the tombs of the Martyrs for their vir
tues' sake, after the example of the heathen. Again he saith,
that the reliques of the dead were not seen bare, and negli
gently cast upon the earth ; but well laid up, and hidden in
the bosom of their mother in the depth of the earth : wherein
they differed not a little from the usage of Papists about their
reliques. Cyrill. Contr. Julian. Lib. x.3 The pride of Eus
tachius in contemning the public churches, ministering in cor
ners, we condemn with the Council of Gangra4- Concerning
the reading of the passions of Martyrs in the church, which
he cavilleth that Master Jewell left out in his reply to Doctor
Harding [Cole5,] out of the seven and forty Canon of the
Council of Carthage hi., Bartholomew Garizon [Carranza6]
confesseth that it is an addition ; and without all such addition
the same that M. Jewell requireth, that nothing be read in
the church but the canonical books; as the fifty-ninth Canon
of the Council of Laodicea.
The tenth Difference is of Confession and Penance; in
which he maketh two kinds, open Confession and private. For
the open Confession, used in the primitive Church, he bringeth
many proofs out of Acts xix., Augustin, Tertullian, Cyprian,
the Council of Nice : which need not ; for we grant that it
was used, and we ourselves, according to such discipline as our
Church of England hath, do use it ; that public and notorious
offenders make public Confession of their faults, for satisfaction
3 Tpag. 335. edit. Ezech. Spanhem. Lips. 1696.]
4 [Videatur Synodi Gangrensis Prsefatio, in Cod. Can. vet. p. 44.
Lut. Paris. 1609.]
5 [Works, Part i. p. 70. Comp. pp. 265, 269. ed. Parker S. Def.
of Ap. v. iii. 10.]
6 [Summa Conciliorum, p. 137. Salmant. 1551. The word "Ad-
ditio " is in the margin near the end of the Canon in this volume ; but
it has disappeared from the edition Lugduni, 1601. It was restored in
the reprint adorned with the improvements of Sylvius and Janssens,
Lovan. 1668 ; but in this twelfth edition the reference to the Council
of Laodicea was suppressed. It would seem that there was sufficient
reason for Carranza's insertion of the word " Additio," inasmuch as
the third Council of Carthage is said to have been held in the year
397, while the Boniface mentioned in the latter part of the forty-
seventh Canon was not Bishop of Koine for more than twenty years
afterward. See Bp. Cosin's Scholastical History, p. 112. Lond. 1672.]

90 stapleton's fortress [book
of the congregation. But when this public Confession was
abused, he saith, that this practice of the Church, and the
counsel of S. James, willing Christians to confess one before
another, was restrained to the auricular Confession of the
Priest only. But neither he sheweth when, nor by what
authority, the counsel of the Apostle, and practice of the
Church was thus altered. He citeth an Epistle of Innocentius
ad Decentium, Cap. vii.1 to prove, "that particular Con
fession was not first instituted in the Council of Lateran2, as
Calvin babbleth ; but that if a man were diseased, he should
not tarry for the time of Easter, but Mox confiteri, be shriven3
out of hand ; which was not done in the face of the Church,
but privately in the chamber:" whereas this Mox confiteri,
for all his shameless and ignorant babbling, is not at all in
that chapter ; which is this : De posnitentibus vero, qui sive
ex gravioribus commissis sive ex levioribus Poznitentiam
gerunt, si nulla interveniat ozgritudo, quinta feria ante
Pascha eis remittendum, Romance Ecclesice consuetudo de-
monstrat. Cozterum de pondere ozstimando delictorum, Sa-
cerdotis estjudicare; ut attendat ad Confessionem poznitentis,
et ad fletus atque lacrymas corrigentis ; ac turn jubere
dimitti, cum viderit congruam satisfactionem. Sane, si quis
in ozgritudinem incident, atque usque ad desperationem
devenerit, ei est ante tempus Paschoz relaxandum; ne de
sozculo absque Communione discedat : " Now concerning
penitents, which either for greater or smaller offences do
Penance, if no sickness come between, the custom of the
Church of Rome sheweth, that they must be released the
fifth day before Easter. But as for esteeming their offences,
it is the Priest's part to judge ; that he may give heed to the
Confession of him that repenteth, and to the tears and weeping
of him that amendeth ; and then to bid him be dismissed,
1 [Jac. Merlini Concill. Tom. i. fol. clxxi. Colon. 1530. This
Epistle is considered counterfeit. Vid. Coci Censur. quorund. scriptt.
p. 105. Joan. Denisonus, De Confess. Auricular, vanitate, p. 65. Oxon.
1621.] 2 [Cone. Lat. iv. sub Innoc. III. hab. an. 1215. Cap. xxi. Vid.
Sirmondi Concill. Gen. Tom. iv. p. 50. Koin.-c, 1612. A commentary
on this colebrated Decree is entitled, Perutilis repetitio famigerati. c.
Omnia utriusquc sexus, &c. Lips. 1517.]
a [Shriven : hoard at Confession.]

H.J overthrown by w. fulke. 91
when he shall see convenient satisfaction. But truly, if any
man fall into sickness, and that he be come even to despe
ration, he must be released before the time of Easter; that
he depart not out of the world without the Communion." Here
is no word of shriving ; for the Confession was made publicly
before Penance enjoined: and if, in this case, of necessity there
were Confession in the chamber, it is not proved to be au
ricular, nor common to all men without the case of necessity.
That which he citeth afterward out of Hierom, in Eccles.
Cap. x.4, is meant of asking counsel of an afflicted conscience ;
for Innocentius, that was after Hieronym, testifieth of the
public Confession of the Church. The rest also that he citeth
out of Augustin and Cyprian is plain of open Confession : and
never a word of auricular Confession, enjoined by Papists
under pain of damnation, he can bring within the first six
hundred years. Wherefore I will help him. Sozomenus, Lib.
vii. Cap. xvi.5 sheweth, that in the Church of Constantinople
a Priest was appointed, which should hear Confessions of them
that came to him ; and, enjoining Penance, should absolve
them : but by Nestorius this order of Confession was taken
away, because a certain noble woman was corrupted in the
church by a Deacon. Where also he sheweth, that the
custom of Rome was to do open Penance, and not private.
This writer testifieth of private Confession, used and abolished
within the six hundred years ; but with infinite inconveniences
instituted afresh in the later Romish Council of Lateran.
The eleventh Difference is of the merit of good works ;
which he will prove by Scripture, first out of Ecclesiasticus
xvi. : "All mercy shall make place to every man, according to
the merit of his works :" which is neither canonical Scripture,
nor rightly translated ; for according to the truth of the Greek
it is thus: "He will give place to all good deeds; and every
one shall find according to his works6." The second text is
1 Pet. iv.: "Charity covereth the multitude of sins:" by which
the Apostle meaneth, (as Salomon, out of whose Proverbs7 he
4 [Denisonus, ut sup. p. 64.]
fi [Eccles. Hist. Autores, p. 680. Basil. 1549.]
6 [The verse is thus given in a Latin Bible, Paris. 1523 : " Omnis
misericordia faciet locum unicuique, secundum meritum operum suo-
rum." It is the same in the Vulgate, or Clementine, version.]
1 [x. 12.]

92 stapleton's fortress [book
citeth it,) that even as hatred causeth brawling, and discover
ing of men's infirmities, so charity covereth and concealeth
the multitude of our brother's offences. This is nothing for
merit. The third place, 2 Pet. L, " when he biddeth us to
' labour to make sure our vocation and election' by good
works :" by which words the Apostle willeth us to confirm
unto ourselves the certainty of our calling and election, which
is most certain to God, by the necessary effects and fruits of
our election and calling; which are good works, not the cause,
but the effect and end of our election. " He hath chosen us
that we might be holy," Ephe. i., not because we were holy.
His fourth text is, 2 Cor. viii. : " Let your abundance supply
their lack, that their abundance may supply your lack also:"
which I agree with him and Theodoret to be the communion
of Saints ; but I deny that the communion of Saints is of
merits, but of graces and benefits of God.
The last text is Col. i. : " S. Paul performed in his flesh
such as lacked of the passions of Christ ; that is, the effects
and fruits thereof; which was, to suffer with Christ for His
body, which is the Church: meaning that the Church, and not
he only, should have merit thereby." This blasphemy was
far from S. Paul's meaning ; who saith not, that he should
merit any thing which Christ had not merited ; but that he
as a member should suffer that which Christ had not suffered,
who suffered as the Head for our eternal redemption : and Paul
as a member suffered to be made conformable to the Head;
not to redeem the Church, but to give testimony to the
Gospel of salvation, for the edifying of the Church. Where-*
fore I will conclude with Ambrose, ad Virgin. Exhor.1 : Unde
mihi tantum meriti est, cui indulgentia pro corona est!1
" Whence should I have so great merit, when mercy is my
crown?" and with Augustin, in Psal. xliii.2: Quid dicturi su-
mus ? merita nostra fecisse ut nobis ilia salus perpetua
mitteretur a Domino ? Absit. Si merita nostra aliquid fa-
cerent, ad damnationcm nostram veniret : " What shall we
say ? that our merits have caused that this perpetual salvation
should be sent to us from the Lord? God forbid. If our
merits did any thing, it should come to our damnation."
I [De hortat. ad Virg. Tract. Opp. iv. col. 444. Lut. Paris. 1661.]
2 [Vol. 69. Lugd. 1519.]

II.] OVERTHROWN by w. fulke. 93

CHAPTER V.
Stapleton. Of the single life in the Clergy; of the state of virgin- Stapleton.
ity in Nuns ; of Monks and Friars; of the vowed profession of both.
Fulke. The twelfth Difference is the single life of the Fulke.
Clergy. He saith, " We read expressly, Lib. i. Cap. xxvii.,
in Bede's History, that none of the Clergy had wives that
were within holy orders." How expressly we read, you shall
hear the very words of his own translation : " And if there
be any among the Clergy out of holy orders which cannot
live chaste, they shall' take wives, and have their stipend
allowed them without." Here is no express words, that none
of the Clergy that were within holy orders had wives ; but a
particular order for Augustin, and in respect that he was a
Monk, not to have his portion of the oblations severed from
his Clergy ; and if any of his Clergy were married, so that he
was not to live in the College among unmarried men, that he
should have his stipend allowed abroad. For the manner of
the see Apostolic was then, (as Gregory saith,) which the
Papists now observe not, to give commandment to such as be
made Bishops, that all manner of oblations that are given be
divided into four portions ; and the one thereof given to the
Bishop toward his hospitality, the other to the Clergy, the,
third to the poor, the fourth to the reparation of the churches.
So that there is no rule for the Clergy of other Bishops, that
were no Monks, but that they might marry, if they could not
live chaste, as well within holy orders as without : and so was
the practice of the Church of England more than four hundred
years after, until the Decree of Lanfrancus, anno 10763 ; who
yet was more favourable to them that had wives than Sta
pleton, which would have them put away. Decretum est,
pt nullus Canonicus uxorem habeat : Sacerdotum vero in
castellis vel in vicis habitantium habentes uxores non
cogantur ut dimittant ; non habentes interdicantur ut
Jiabeant. Et deinceps caveant Episcopi, ut Sacerdotes vel
Diaconos non prozsumant ordinare, nisi prius profiteantur
ut uxores non habeant : " It is decreed, that no Canon may
nave a wife : but of Priests dwelling in towns and villages,
3 [Fox, ii. 403. Vid. ante, p. 23.]

94 stapleton's fortress [book
such as have wives, let them not be compelled to put them
away; but such as have not, let them be forbidden to have.
And from henceforth let Bishops take heed, that they presume
not to ordain Priests or Deacons, except they do first profess
to have no wives."
This Decree proveth, that before this time not only mar
ried men were ordained Priests, but also that Priests after
they were ordained did take wives. The same is proved by
the words of the Epistle of Gerardus, which was afterward
Archbishop of York, unto Anselm, Archbishop of Canterbury1:
Cum ad ordines aliquos invito, dura cervice renituntur, ne
in ordinando castitatem profiteantitr : " When I call any
to orders, they resist with a stiff neck, that in taking order
they do not profess chastity." But now when this jolly fortifier
should prove the single life of all the Clergy in the first six
hundred years, he can bring nothing but certain Decrees,
that such as were promoted to Priesthood unmarried should
not after marry : yet he confesseth that there were many
married men taken unto the order of Priesthood; but seldom,
he saith, in the Latin Church. Yet let us see his authorities.
First Augustin, Lib. ii. Cap. ult. De adulter, in conjugis2,
saith, that they were wont to bring example of the conti-
nency of Clerks, to persuade men to abstain from adulterous
marriages. Solemus eis proponere etiam continentiam Cle-
ricorum, qui plerumque ad eandem sarcinam subeundam
capiuntur inviti; eamque susceptam usque ad debitum finem
Domino juvante producunt: [adjuvante perducunt :] "We
are wont to set before them the continency of Clerks, which
are oftentimes taken against their wills to bear the same
burthen; and when they have taken it upon them, do bring it
to the due end, the Lord assisting them." Of this he gather-
eth, that the Clergy in Saint Augustin's days refrained from
wives all the days of their life : which, as it is true of some,
so it is utterly false of all. Again, the compulsion which he
speaketh of was not unto continency, but unto the ministry ;
and in the ministry not of necessity of greater estimation;
as tho words immediately following do declare. LHcimus
ergo eis, Quid si et vos ad hoc subeundum populorum violen-
tia caperemini, nonne smceptum caste custodiretis officiiim;
l [Seo page 23.]
2 [De Conjugiis adulterinis : Opp. Tom. vi. col. 306.]

ui overthrown by w. fulke. 95
repente conversi ad impetrandas vires a Domino, de qmbus
nunquam antea cogitastis ? Sed illos, inquiunt, honor
[plurimum] consolatur. Respondemus, Et vobis amplius
timor [timor multo amplius~] moderetur. Si enim hoc multi
Dei ministri repente atque inopinate impositum suscepe-
runt, sperantes se illustrius in Christi hozreditate fulgere ;
quanto magis vos adulteria cavendo vivere [continenter]
debetis; metuentes non in regno Dei minus lucere, sed in
Gehennoz ignibus [Gehenna ignis] ardere ? " We say
therefore unto them, What if you also were taken by the
violence of the people to bear the same, would yon not
keep chastely the office taken upon you ; being suddenly
turned to obtain of the Lord such strength as before you
never thought of ? But the honour (say they) doth comfort
them. We answer, And fear should more restrain you.
For if many ministers of God have taken upon them this
thing, being laid upon them suddenly and unlooked for,
hoping that they shall shine more notably in the inheritance
of Christ ; how much more ought you to live so as you
beware of adultery, fearing not to shine less in the kingdom
of God, but to burn in the fires of hell ?"
Next he citeth a Canon ascribed to the Apostles3 out of
Justinian4, confirmed in the sixth General Council of Constan
tinople in Trullo5 : Ex conjugatis, &c: " Of such as come
to the Clergy unmarried, and after will marry, we permit that
only to the Readers and Singers." Nevertheless he confesseth
that Zonaras6 expoundeth this so, that if any refuse to five
chaste, being asked at his orders taken, he is permitted first
to marry, and then admitted to the ministry. And the
Council of Constantinople, in the same sixth Canon : Si quis
autem eorum qui in Clerum accedunt velit lege matrimonii
mulieri conjungi, antequam Hypodiaconus vel Diaconus vel
3 [Can. xxvi. in vol. cum Zonarse Comment, prim. ed. cura Joan.
Quintini, Paris. 1558.]
4 [Constit. Novell, vi. p. 15. Greg. Haloandro interp. Noremb.
1531. This Constitution was made in the year of the Consulate of
Belisarius, viz. 535.]
5 [Or rather in the sixth Canon of the Quinisext Council, held
a. d. 692. The Decrees of this Synod are not now received by the
Western Church.]
6 [Vid. Joan. Zonarse Comnwntar. p. 135. Lut. Paris. 1618.]

96 STAPLETON'S FORTRESS LDuvrL
Presbyter ordinetur hoc faciat : " But if any of them which
come into the Clergy will be joined to a woman by the law
of matrimony, let him do it before he be ordained Subdeacon,
Deacon, or Priest." Where is now the necessity of single
life in the Clergy ?
After this he citeth the Council of Ancyra1, Can. x. ;
which is clean contrary to his purpose2, if he had recited it
whole, as he only taketh the tail. The Canon is this : Diaconi
quicunque cum ordinantur, si in ipsa ordinatione protestati
sunt dicentes, velle se habere uxores, nee posse se continere;
hi postea, si ad nuptias venerint, maneant in ministerio,
propterea quod his Episcopus licentiam dederit. Quicunque
sane tacuerunt, et susceperunt manus impositionem, professi
continentiam, si postea ad nuptias venerint, a ministerio
cessare debebunt : " Whosoever when they are ordained Dea
cons, if in the very time of their ordaining they make
protestation and say, that they will have wives, and that they
cannot contain; if these afterward come to be married, let
them remain in the ministry, because the Bishop hath given
them licence. But truly whosoever hath held their peace,
and received imposition of hands, professing continence, if
after they marry, ought to cease from the ministry." This
-Canon sheweth, that it was lawful for the Clergy being in
holy orders to marry, if they professed not continence; to
which profession none was bound, as they are in Popery.
Again, if after profession they married, they were not di
vorced, as Papists used in Queen Mary's time ; but com
manded to abstain from the ministry.
The last authority he citeth is out of the Synod of Neo-
,ca3saria3 : Presbyter, &c. : " A Priest, if he marry a wife, ought
to be deposed from his order." It followeth in the same
Canon : " But if he commit fornication or adultery, he must
be moreover cast out of the Church, and driven to do Penance
1 [a. d. 314. Joverii Sanctiones Ecclesiastical, Class, ii. fol. 1. Par.
1555.] 2 [Gratian confesses that, tempore Neocsesariensis et Ancyrana
Synodi, " nondum erat introducta continentia ministrorum altaris."
(Dist. xxviii. Cap. xiii.)]
s [hab. an. 314, vel 315. Can. 1. — Tho last two authorities have
probably been borrowod from the Canon Law. (Dist. xxviii. Capp.
viii, ix.)]

II- J OVERTHROWN BY W. FULKE. 97
among laymen4." This was a Decree of seventeen Bishops in
the province of Paulus Polemoniaca, [Pontus Polemoniacus ;]
and is to be understood of such a Priest as professed conti
nency 5 : whose marriage yet was not made void, but he put
out of 'his office; whereas he that had committed fornication
was put both out of the ministry and of the Church. Which
seeing the Papists observe not in their lecherous Priests,
they have small right to use this Canon; which yet bind-
eth none but that province that made it.
Now where he saith it was a rare thing for the Clergy
of the Latin Church to be married, Hierom, no friend to
marriage, shall testify the contrary ; who speaketh of it as an
ordinary matter. Eliguntur mariti in Sacerdotium, non
nego, quia non sunt tanti virgines quanti necessarii sunt
Sacerdotese : "Married men are chosen unto the Priesthood,
I deny not, because there are not so many virgins as it is
necessary there should be Priests." And Oceano'1 he con
fesseth, that by the doctrine of the Apostles Priests might
have wives; complaining that in his time all other qualities of
a Minister described by the Apostle were neglected, only the
liberty of marriage looked unto. Qui dixit unius uxoris
virum, &c. : "He that said 'the husband of one wife,' even he
commanded that he should be unreproveable, sober, wise,
comely, harbourous, a teacher, modest, not given to wine, no
fighter, no quarreller, not covetous, no young novice in the
faith." Ad hcec omnia claudimus oculos ; solas videmus
4 [There is not any mention of laymen in the Greek, nor in the
Latin version by Dionysius Exiguus.]
5 [The Canon does not prevent a married Deacon from obtaining
Priest's Orders, but forbids a Presbyter to marry after his ordination.]
6 [This declaration is made in the first book against Jovinian. Opp.
Tom. ii. p. 40. Basil. 1565.]
7 [Epistt. Par. i. Tract, iii. Ep. 1. sig. u vi. Lugd. 1508 : vel Opp.
Tom. ii. p. 324. edit. Erasm. sup. cit. — The Epistle here quoted com
mences with the words " Nunquam fili," and must not be mistaken for
the supposititious letter to Oceanus, De vita Clericorum. Baronius is
surprised that the latter document should have been condemned as
spurious; (Martyrol. Rom. die Sept. 23. p. 406. Antverp. 1613.) but
Erasmus, in his Censure prefixed to it, expresses his conviction, that
" Quisquis hunc sermonis characterem non potest ab Hieronymiano
secernere, is nee asinum ab equo distinguet." (S. Hier. Opp. iv. 317.
Cf. not. in Gratiani Decret. Dist. xxxii. Cap. xvii. ed. Pith. Paris.
16S7.)] [fulke, ii.J

98 stapleton's fortress [_jj<juk
uxores: "At all these things we shut our eyes; we see
nothing but their wives."
Likewise, in Aggeum, Cap. i.1, he inveigheth against
the rulers of the Church, which, building their carnal house,
providing for their children and possessions, neglected the
building of the temple of God. Again, in Epi. ad Eph. Li. iii.
Ca. vi.2, he inveigheth against Bishops and Priests of his
time, that brought up their children in secular and profane
learning, peradventure at the charges of the Church. Yea,
divers Popes have been married men3: for Pope Silverius
was son of Pope Hormisda, as the very Pontifical4 witness-
1 [Opp. vi. 230. "Hsec autem universa quae dixi possunt de Eccle-
sise rectoribus intelligi ; qui sedificantes carnalem domum, liberisque
suis et possessionibus providentes, non curant vel in seipsis exstruere
templum Dei, vel ecclesiam Domini quae infecta et diruta est in-
staurare."] 2 [Opp. Tom. ix. p. 237. "Legant Episcopi atque Presbyteri, qui
filios suos saecularibus Uteris erudiunt, et faciunt Comoedias legere, et
mimorum turpia scripta cantare, de ecclesiasticis forsitan sumptibus
eruditos."] 3 [It would be easier to prove from the Pontifical that divers
Popes have been the sons of Priests. Fox, quoting from Wicelius,
has mentioned several names, but with excessive inaccuracy. (Vol. ii.
p. 391. ed. 1684.) It is a singular fact that the father of Pope Theo
doras was a Bishop ; and that Boniface I., Felix III., Agapetus I., and
John XV. are spoken of as having been the sons of Presbyters. A
Subdeacon was the father of S. Deusdedit ; and Adrian II. was the
son of Talarus, who was afterwards raised to the episcopate.]
4 [The authority of the Liber Pontificalis, which is called by Gib
bon " a curious and authentic record of the times," (Decline and Fall,
Vol. iv. p. 474. ed. Milman, Lond. 1846.) will not be denied by papal
advocates. It is needless to enter here upon any minute discussion
with respect to the author or the character of the work, concerning
which many particulars may be seen in Spanheim (Miscell. sac. Antiq.
Lib. v. Cap. viii. Opp. ii. 647. Lugd. Bat. 1703.) and Oudin. (Comm.
de Scriptt. Eccl. ii. 258 — 307. Lips. 1722.) Bishop Pearson maintains
that the book was composed by an anonymous and uncertain writer in
the sixth century: (De success, prim. Rom. Episc. p. 129. Lond. 1687.)
while Romanists at first boldly ascribed it to Pope Damasus; and
when this supposition was found to be untenable, the compilation was
attributed to Anastasius Bibliothecarius, who lived in the ninth age,
and who at all events wrote not any more of the Lives of the Pontiffs
than those few which extend from Gregory IV. to Nicholas I. The
entire work bears the name of Anastasius in the first edition published
by the Jesuit Joannes Busseus, 4to, Mogunt. 1602, and in the finely

U-J OVERTHROWN BY W. FULKE. 99
eth5 ; and Beda sheweth, Lib. ii. Cap. i., that Pope Felix was
great grandfather to Pope Gregory6.
I will spend no more time in so clear a matter. Where
fore the single life, required of necessity in the Clergy, is not
proved within the six hundred years so often named.
The thirteenth Difference is "of the state of virginity in
men and women. Such state Protestants acknowledge not ;
but rather abhor it, and persecute it." It is a mere slander :
for we honour virginity that is not counterfeit in them that
had made themselves chaste for the kingdom of heaven. But
when Master Stapleton will make virginity impossible to no
man, he is directly contrary to our Saviour Christ; Non
omnes, &c. : " All men cannot receive this saying, but they to
whom it is given," Mat. xix. ; and to Saint Paul, 1 Cor. vii.;
Qui non continet : " He that cannot contain, let him marry."
I confess also, that within the six hundred years there were
some Colleges of virgins ; which differed as much from popish
Nuns as many popish Nuns from honest women. They lived
not idly, as popish Nuns, of their lands and revenues; but
with spinning and making of cloth they maintained them
selves. August. De moribus Eccl. Catholicce, Cap. xxxi.7
They lived continently, or else they married : popish Nuns,
though they live never so incontinently, yet will they never
printed folio volume edited by Fabrotus, Paris, o Typog. Reg. 1649;
and we learn from Lucas Holstenius that the Pontifical has been
assigned to Luitprandus also. (Collect. Rom. Par. ii. p. 121. Romse,
1662.) It is quite certain, however, that Joannes Rainoldus, (Prcelect.
clxxx. de libris Apocr. Tom. ii. col. 817. Oppenheim. 1611.) Cocus
(Censura, pag. 138.) and Ger. Joan. Vossius (De Histor. Lat. Lib. ii.
Cap. viii. p. 64. Amst. 1697.) were misled by the idea that all the
Lives are to be referred to the authorship of a single writer. Vid.
Joan. Ciampini Examen Lib. Pontif. Romas, 1688.]
B [" Silverius, natione Campanus, ex patre Hormisda, Episcopo
Romano." (p. 53. Mog. 1602.) Platina thought it advisable to omit the
word "Romano;'' (De vit. Pontiff, fol. xxxvi. Venet. 1518.) but the
sentence is given correctly in the Catalogue of Daniel Papebrochius.
Vid. Bolland. Prwfationes, Tractatus, &c, Tom. ii. p. 164. Antuerp.
1749.] 0 [Beda states that Pope Felix, probably the third, whose death
took place a. d. 492, was " atavus " to Pope Gregory the Great, who
died in the year 604 ; but this word cannot be taken literally.]
7 [Opp. Tom. i. col. 529. ed. Ben. Ant.]
7—2

100 STAPLETON'S FORTRESS LBUuK
marry. Epiph. Lib. ii. Tom. i. Hazr. Ixi.1 : Popish Nuns are
for the most part like those Monks and Nuns of the heretics
Origeniani Turpes : Non student castitati, sed simulatce
castitati, et nom.en saltern habenti : " They study not for
chastity, but such as is feigned chastity, and hath only a
name of chastity :" volentes esse in honore propter putatam
apud ipsos castitatis exercitationem : " willing to be in
honour for the supposed exercise of chastity among them,"
when there is nothing less than chastity.
Concerning the rule of Augustin, Ep. cix.2, prescribed to
the virgins that tumultuously and seditiously would have
changed their governess ; if we do admit it to be written by
Saint Augustin, yet it is not sufficient to authorise the super
stitious orders of popish Nuns : among whom their habit is
not the least part of their superstition ; which Augustin in his
virgins forbiddeth to be notable, or differing from other women.
Non sit notabilis habitus vester; nee affectetis vestibus pla-
cere, sed moribus : " Let not your apparel be such as may be
noted or marked ; neither desire ye to please with garments,
but with manners." The like writeth Hierom concerning
the apparel of virgins of his time. Again, S. Augustin's
virgins were not bound to their cloister ; but might depart, if
they liked not the severity of their rule, or else were expulsed
from thence. Convicta secundum prozpositce vel Presbyteri
arbitrium debet emendatoriam sustinere vindictam: quam
si forte [al. ferre] recusaverit, et si [al. etsi] ipsa non ab-
scesserit, de vestra societate projiciatur : " She that is con
victed (but of wanton looks,) according to the decree of the
governess or Priest, ought to sustain a punishment for her
amendment : which if she refuse to bear, and if she herself
depart not away, let her be cast clean out of your society."
If this rule were observed, few popish Nuns should be left in
their cloisters. Moreover, Saint Augustin's virgins were com
manded to understand what they did pray or sing : not one
among forty of popish Nuns understand their popish service
which they sing. Psalmis et hymnis cum cratis Deum,
hoc versetur in corde quod profertur in voce : " When you
1 [Hceres. lxiii. p. 170. Basil. 1578. Fulke has used the Latin
version by CornariuB.]
2 [alias ccxi. Opp. ii. 597.]

II. J OVERTHROWN BY W. FULKE. 101
pray to God with psalms and hymns, let that bo in your
heart which is pronounced in your voice."
These and many other Differences may be observed ;
which are sufficient to confute Stapleton, which would make
his popish Nuns all one with the virgins of the ancient and
purer Church. But Eusebius out of Philo sheweth, that even
in the Apostles' time there were trenvela ical novaarripia,
"oratories and monasteries" of men and women. Lib. ii. Cap.
xvi.3 It is true that Eusebius so judgeth : but whoso readeth
Philo his own writing shall plainly see, that he speaketh rather
of a sect of Jews at Alexandria, given to contemplation, and
not of Christians4. Beside this, the monasteries which he
speaketh of were not abbeys wherein they lived, but only soli
tary places of study for a time : for in them they had neither
meat nor drink ; as Philo expressly affirmeth. To conclude,
seeing that in the Scripture we have no commandment for
virgins, we commend them that have the gift, and exhort
them so to continue. But seeing the gift is rare in our days,
and the examples of them that have professed virginity, and
lived abominably, are too many ; we think it neither needful
nor expedient to set up Colleges of virgins, nor to exact any
vow of them; but to leave them to their conscience and liberty,
which the Holy Ghost hath given them.
The fourteenth Difference is "of Monks and religious men,"
3 [Hist. Eccles. Cap. xvii. in edit. Vales.]
4 [There cannot be any doubt that Eusebius hastily formed an
erroneous judgment relative to this matter : and the idea that the
Therapeutse, described by Philo, give countenance to modern asceti
cism is perfectly absurd ; for they were neither Monks nor Christians.
Basnage (Histoire des Juifs, Liv. ii.) appears to have proved that
Philo's treatise was written in the time of Augustus : (Compare Gib
bon, i. 515.) and though Scaliger, Mosheim and others have pleaded
for the identity of the Essenes and Therapeuta?, it would seem that
there was not any necessary connexion between the Jewish sect and
the Egyptian mystics. Conf. Jos. Scalig. De emend. Temp. vi. 538.
& in Chronolog. Euseb. p. 14. Amst. 1658. Moshem. De rebus Christ.
ante Const, pp. 54 — 7. Helm. 1753. Neander's Hist. Vol. i. p. 53.
Lond. 1842. Burton's Bampton Lectures, pp. 74 — 5, 350 — 1. Oxf.
1829. Lect. on Eccles. Hist. Vol. i. pp. 22, 300. lb. 1833. Valesii
not. in loc. Euseb. Bruckeri Hist. Philos. ii. 759. Photii Biblioth.
Cod. civ. Fabricii Vita, p. 243. Hamb. 1737. Bibl. Greec. Vol. iv.
pp. 738 — 9. ed. Harles. R. P. Tassin, Hist. Lit. de la Congregation
de- S. Maur, pp. 597 — 8. A Brux. 1770.]

102 STAPLETON'S FORTRESS [BOOK
as though none were religious but Monks. I confess they
had within the six hundred years men that lived a solitary
life, called Monachi, Anachoreti,[se,J Eremitse, &c; but no more
like our popish boars, living in their franks, than Angels are
like to Devils. Their Differences I have shewed, even out of
Bede, in the Table of Differences. But Stapleton saith, that
the faults of a few ought not to have caused subversion of
the whole orders. I answer ; they were so few that offended
that they were almost all naught. And what be the Monks
of Flanders, where he dwelleth at this day ? be they much
reformed? Is not idleness, drunkenness, brawling, their
greatest exercise, when they be free from idolatry and su
perstition? How many learned men be in those cloisters
that are diligent preachers, even in the popish Church?
What their chastity is, God knoweth : but the country speak
eth evil of them. In his title of the chapter he speaketh of
Friars ; whereof I had great marvel to see his impudency, that
would promise to prove them to have been within the first
six hundred years, that sprung not up more than twelve
hundred years after Christ ; but in this section of the
chapter there is no word of them : neither could the popish
Monks themselves abide them, ever since their arising.
The fifteenth Difference is vows of virginity, both in men
and women ; and here he bringeth in Friars, in the Devil's
name, to be as ancient as S. Augustin, whose words he thus
translateth, in 1 Tim.1 v. : Nemo ergo positus in monas-
terio Frater dicat, Recedo de monasterio : " Therefore let
no Friar placed in a monastery say, I will depart out of the
monastery," &c. " This testimony of Saint Augustin" (he saith)
"may suffice to shew, that in the Church of the first six hundred
years both Friars and Nuns vowed virginity," &c. Surely my
lungs will not serve me to cry lond enough against the im
pudency of this shameless creature; that, to abuse the ignorant,
translateth Frater in S. Augustin by the popish French-
English name of Friar ; to make them believe that the Au
gustin Friars were instituted by Saint Augustin, which are not
yet two hundred year old. For, about the year of our Lord
one thousand four hundred and six, this order of Friars, under
1 [S. Augustin was expounding 1 Tim. v. 12, but the passage quoted
is contained in his comment upon the seventy-fifth Psalm, fol. 61, b.
Lugd. 1519.]

II.] OVERTHROWN BY W. FULKE. 103
the name of Saint Augustin, was first erected by one Redus,
Comes Montis Granelli, and one Gualterus Marsus his co
adjutor, at Fesula, a city of Etruria ; confirmed by Gregory
XII., one of the two Popes that then ruled the roast both
together, the one in Italy, the other in France. Cronic. Cro-
nicorum Herm. Sched.2
Now touching the vow of virginity made in those ancient
times, that it was not free to return to the world, as both
Erasmus3 and Polydore4 affirm, whom he chargeth "very
fondly and ignorantly so to write;" how far it did bind
you shall hear, first out of Epiphanius, and then out of Hie-
rom. Epiphanius, Contra Apost. Hozr. Ixi. Lib. ii. To. i.5, thus
writeth : Melius est itaque unum peccatum habere, et nonplu-
ra. Melius est lapsum a cursu palam sibi uxorem sumere
secundum legem, et a virginitale multo tempore poznitentiam
agere; et sic rursus ad Ecclesiam induci, velut qui mala
operatus est, velut lapsum et fractum, et obligatione opus
habentem ; et non quotidie occultis jaculis sauciari ab im-
probitate, quoz a Diabolo ipsi infertur. Sic novit Ecclesia
prozdicare : hozc sunt sanationis medicamenta : " There
fore it is better to have one sin, and not many. It is better
for him which is fallen from his course openly to take him a
2 [The reference is to the Chronicon mundi, or Chronicon Chronico-
rum, commonly called the Nuremberg Chronicle, the author of which
was Hartmann Schedel. It was first published Norimb. 1493. (Vid.
Placcii Theatrum Anon. p. 272. Hamb. 1708. Fabricii Bibl. med. ^ inf.
Latin. Lib. viii. 668. lb. 1735.) Bergomensis, from whom the writer
borrowed much, was evidently the source of this entire statement;
(Supplem. Chronic. Lib. xiv. fol. 316. Brixie, 1485.) but the Monks
he speaks of are those Mendicants bearing the name of S. Jerom, and
under the rule of S. Augustin. Cf. Hospin. De origine Monachat. fol.
287, b. Tiguri, 1588. Ant. Dadin. Alteserras Ascetic, p. 47. Paris.
1674.] 3 [D. Hieronymi Vita, sig. BB. This is the very passage to which
the following reference was erased by order of Cardinal Quiroga, in
his Expurgatory Index : " Votorum nulla vincula apud veteres Mona-
chos." (fol. 134. Madriti, 1584.)]
4 [Polydorus Vergilius, De rerum inventoribus, Lib. vii. Cap. i.
p. 440. Basil. 1550. Eleven lines in this place have been sentenced
to extinction by the Inquisitor General, Cardinal Zapata. (Ind. lib.
prohib. S; expurg. p. 825. Hispali, 1632.)]
6 [pag. 167. Jano Cornar. interp.]

104 STAPLETON'S FORTRESS [BOOK
wife, according to the law, and to repent long time from his
virginity ; and so to be brought again unto the Church, as
one that hath wrought evil, as one that is fallen and broken,
and having need of binding up; and not to be daily wounded
with secret darts, which of the Devil are cast against him.
So knoweth the Church to preach : those be the medicines of
healing." Saint Hierom, ad Demetriadem1, writeth thus: Sanctum
virginum propositum, et cozlestis Angelorumque familioz glo-
riam, quarundam [al. quorundam] non bene se agentium
nomen infamat. Quibus aperte dicendum est, ut aut nubant,
si se non possunt continere; aut contineant, si nolunt nubere:
" The report of some that behave not themselves well slan-
dereth the holy purpose of virgins, and the glory of the
heavenly and angelical family. To whom it must be said
openly, that either they should marry, if they cannot con
tain ; or else they should contain, if they will not marry."
Wherefore, by these two Doctors' judgment, our doctrine
differeth not from the doctrine of the primitive Church
within the six hundred years after Christ.
CHAPTER VI.
Stapleton. Stapleton. Of Prayer for the dead ; of solemnity in Christian
burials ; of Houseling before death ; of reservation of the Sacra
ment ; of the sign of the Cross ; of benediction of Bishops.
Fulke. Fulke. The sixteenth Difference is Prayer for the dead,
with Dirige and Mass in the morning. The fortification thereof
he leaveth, because it is done sufficiently by another; he
meaneth Master Allen of Purgatory : and for tho assault and
battery of that piece, I also refer the reader to my over
throw of the same Defence.
The seventeenth Difference is solemnity of Christian bu
rial ; which is used and allowed of us so far as it is without
superstition. He allegeth that Paulinus did write to Saint
Augustin, from the sea-coasts of Italy to the sea-coasts of
Africa, to be fully instructed, whether the holiness of the
place any thing availed the burial of the body, &c. But
why did not he send nearer home, to the Apostolic see of
i [ad fin. Opp. i. pag. 71.]

II. J OVERTHROWN BY W. FULKE. 105
Rome, the Pope whereof (or else you lie) cannot err ? For
Augustin was not able to resolve him ; who, although he
suppose this benefit there may be, that the friends of the
body buried near a Martyr's tomb may be occasioned there
by, in remembering the place of his burial, to commend his
soul to that Martyr, yet he cannot tell how the Saints
departed should know the requests of them that live. Cap.
xvi. Lib. De cura pro mortuis2. And except this occasion
of praying for their souls, he knoweth not what the holiness
of the place can help them3: wherein he differeth from Pa
pists, that think it a great matter of itself to be buried in a
holy place ; which of them for that purpose is exorcised and
hallowed. The eighteenth Difference is " Houseling before death ;
which the Sacramentaries make to be of no necessity, because
they bind the sinner to a number of other communicants." If
it be a matter of necessity, how is it with all infants ; how
with many that die suddenly, &c. ? are all such damned ?
But he sayeth, the practice of the primitive Church proveth it
to be necessary; as in the example of Serapion, Euseb. Lib.
vi. Cap. xliv.4, and of Satyrus, Saint Ambrose's brother, In
obitum Satyri5, &c. And is it even so ? Doth the example
of one man that was excommunicated, and could not be quiet
until he had received the Communion ; and of another that
never received it, nor was baptized, prove it necessary for all
men? "Yea," (saith Stapleton,) "who will read only but one
Canon of the Nicene Council shall find therein not only a
general commandment for all Christendom, but also the
ancient practice of the Church before that time." And I
say, whoso will read not only the whole Canon, but the very
title thereof, shall find, that it was a remission only for
excommunicated persons. Cano. xii. De excommunicatis a
sceculo exeuntibus6 : " Of excommunicated persons departing
2 [Opp. Tom. vi. col. 385. Cf. Ussher's Answer to a Challenge,
p. 435. Lond. 1631.]
3 Cap. ii. 4 [pag. 246. ed. Vales.]
fi [Opp. iv. 315.]
6 [Both the title of the Canon and the Decree itself are given by
Fulke according to the old version in Isidore's collection, published by
Merlin. (Concill. i. lix, lx. Colon. 1530.) The same translation has
been adopted in tho Canon Law. (Caus. xxvi. Qu. vi. Cap. ix.)]

106 stapleton's fortress lbook
this world." De his vero qui recedunt ex corpore, antiques
legis regula observabitur etiam nunc: ita ut si forte quis
recedat ex corpore, necessario vitoz sues viatico non defrau-
detur. Quod si desperatus aliquis recepta Communione
supervixerit, sit inter eos qui sola oratione communicant.
De omnibus tamen his, qui a corpore recedunt in tradendo
eis Communionem, et cura et probatio sit Episcopi : " But
concerning them which depart out of this body, the rule of
the ancient law 1 shall be observed even now also : so that if
perhaps any depart out of the body, he may not be defrauded
of the necessary provision of his life. But if any being at
the point of death after he have received the Communion do
recover and live, let him be among them that communicate in
prayer only. Nevertheless, concerning all those men that
depart out of the body in delivering to them the Communion,
let both the charge and the trial be in the Bishop's discretion."
This Canon was not made for all Christian men, that at
times of public administration of the Sacraments might freely
be partakers ; but only of such as were excommunicated, and
appointed a time of penance for their trial, before they
should be admitted to the Lord's Supper : before which time,
if they were at the point of death, and the Bishop allowed
of their repentance, this Canon provideth, that they might
be received to the Communion for their comfort ; but yet so,
that if any did recover and live, they should accomplish their
time among the penitents that was before enjoined them.
This thing being so apparent, what shall we say of these
English Louvainists; that either they never read the books out
of which they cite their authorities, or else without all shame
they wrest them against their own conscience ?
The nineteenth Difference is the reservation of the Sacra
ment; wherein as I confess in some erroneous kind of reserv
ation we differ from some of the primitive Church, so they
differed from Christ, which commanded it to be eaten and
drunken : and it is manifest, that their reservation differed
from the popish reservation, both in the manner and in the
end. But concerning reservation, I refer the reader to mine
answer to D. Heskins' first book, Cap. xxiv., xxv., xxvi., &
1 [The "ancient and canonical law" here alluded to seems to bo
the injunction contained in the fifty-second Apostolic Canon, with
rogard to the reception of penitent sinners.]

n.] overthrown by w. fulke. 107
xxvii. ; where you shall find all his authorities discussed,
except the fourteenth Canon of the Council of Nice ; out of
which he allegeth2, that the Deacons might, absente Episcopo
et Presbytero, proferre Communionem et comedere, "in the
absence of the Bishop and Priest, take out the Communion
and receive it :" "whereby," he sayeth, "it is evident, that it
was reserved in the churches, where the Deacons might come
to receive it." But I must admonish the reader, that these
words which he citeth are an addition of Gratian3 and the
popish Church4; and are not in the true copies in Greek of
that Council ; nor in the right Latin translation5, as even
Peter Crabb the Papist confesseth6; nor yet in the edition of
Ruffinus7. But such draff and dregs of falsifications, addi
tions, detractions, mutations, &c, are good enough for popish
swine. The twentieth Difference is blessing with the sign of the
Cross : for fortification of which piece he referreth the reader
to Martiall's Treatise of the Cross8; and I to M. Calf hill's
Answer9, and my Rejoinder.
The twenty-first Difference is benediction of the Bishop,
which he sayeth is mocked at and reviled by Protestants.
But he sayeth untruly : for although we may justly deride the
2 [Fortresse, p. 333.]
3 [This is a mistake. The truth is, that Gratian's chapter (Dist.
xciii. Cap. xiv.) is free from the interpolation ; and that as far as the
word "amputentur" he used the Isidorian version of the fourteenth
Nicene Canon, while the remainder is taken from the eighteenth
Canon as translated by Dionysius Exiguus, who is followed by Ivo
(Decret. ii. Cap. xxxvi. Lovan. 1561.) and the Codex printed at Mentz
in 1525.] 4 [Jac. Merlini Concilia, i. Ix. — From Isidorus Mercator Stapleton
may have derived this spurious passage : " Quod si non fuerit in prse-
senti vel Episcopus vel Presbyter, tunc ipsi proferant et edant."]
6 [By Dionysius Exiguus, whose version accompanies the Greek in
Binius. (i. i. 278.)]
6 [Concill. Tom. i. pp. 255, 256. Colon. Agr. 1551.]
7 [Another error is apparent here; for in Rufm's abridgment of
the Canon we find this strange decision inserted : " Si vero Presbyter
nullus sit in prsesenti, tunc demum etiam ipsis licere dividere." (Hist.
Eccles. Lib. i. C. vi. Basil. 1549.) Fulke's inaccuracy may be detected
by consulting the Centuriators. (Cent. iv. Cap. vii. col. 491. & Cap.
ix. c. 658. Basil. 1562.)]
8 [Art. v.] 9 [p. 250, seqq.]

108 stapleton's fortress [book
vain ceremonial casting of Crosses in the air of their bite-
sheeps rather than Bishops with their two fingers, which is
nothing else but a ridiculous superstition; yet we contemn not
the godly benediction of a Christian Bishop and pastor,
which useth the same according to the word of God. There
fore the examples of Nectarius, which desired the benediction
of his Bishop Diodorus at his departure ; and Aurelius, which
blessed Augustin and his company, after he had visited them,
shew no Difference of them from us. And if Eudoxia the
Empress desired Chrysostom to bless her son Theodosius his
godson, what did Chrysostom but pray for him, and wish
him well in the name of the Lord ? And how did Diodorus
bless Nectarius, and Aurelius bless Augustin and the rest,
but by godly prayer made to God for them ? not with vain,
dumb, and idle ceremonies after the popish manner : so
that the manner of blessing of the ancient times doth rather
prove a Difference of Papists from them, than of us from
them. And moreover you may consider how, to make up a
number of Differences, what small matters he is fain to fly
unto ; and even such as he hath no shew of hold at all in the
writers of the ancient Church of six hundred years after
Christ for them ; but only to set a face of the matter, as
though there were nothing new amongst them : when not
only their ceremonies, but also many of the principal articles
of their doctrine, wherein they differ from us, were either
not heard of in those ages, or else were openly impugned by
writers of those times. Only the dregs and refuse of the
former age they retain ; as Prayer for the dead, Invocation
of Saints, and a few other such matters.

CHAPTER VII.
Stapleton. Stapleton. Of Pilgrimage and Reliques; of church service; of
Altars ; of church ornaments, and holy vessels ; of the Ecclesiasti
cal Tonsure ; and of Holy Water.
Fulke. Fulke. The twenty-second Difference is pilgrimage to
holy places, especially to Rome. Indeed we find that pere
grination to Jerusalem was esteemed of many, and great
resort to Rome of the wiser sort ; not for the holiness of the
places, but for the frequence of godly and learned men then

II.] OVERTHROWN BY W. FULKE. 109
living in those places. Otherwise, for the holiness of the
place, S. Hierom, ad Paulinum1, whither M. Stapleton send-
eth us, doth sufficiently declare what was to be esteemed of
it. Non Hierosolymis fuisse, sed Hierosolymis bene vixisse
laudandum est : "It is no praise to have been at Hierusalem,
but to have lived well at Hierusalem." And speaking even
of our own country, he addeth : Et de Hierosolymis et de
Britannia cequaliter patet aula ccelestis : " The court of
heaven is open equally from Jerusalem and from Britain."
Again : Beatus Hilarion, cum Palcestinus esset, et in Palazs-
tina viveret, uno tantum die vidit Hierosolymam ; ut nee
conternnere loca sancta propter vicinitatem, [viciniam,] nee
rursus Dominum loco claudere videretur : " Blessed Hilarion,
when he was a Palestine born, and lived in Palestine, saw
Jerusalem but one day only ; that neither he might seem to
contemn the holy places because of nearness, nor again to
shut up the Lord in a place." And because Master Stapleton
niaketh pilgrimage a matter of faith, he saith further, after
he hath shewed how many excellent men never came at Je
rusalem, &c. : Quorsum, inquies, hozc tarn longo repetita
principio ? Videlicet, ne quicquam fidei tuce deesse putes,
quia Hierosolymam non vidisti : " Thou wilt say, To what
end are these things fetched from so long a beginning?
Verily, that thou shouldest not think any thing to be wanting
to thy faith, because thou hast not seen Jerusalem." Thus
Hierom, albeit it was much used, yet judged peregrination
unto Jerusalem to be a matter of small importance2.
1 [Opp. Tom. i. 102. Conf. Pet. Molin. De Peregrinationibus su-
perstitiosis, p. 36. Hanov. 1607.]
2 [The most remarkable ancient treatise, discommending pilgrim
ages to Jerusalem, is probably the Oration or Epistle of S. Gregory
Nyssen, De iis qui adeunt Hierosolyma. As it might have been ex
pected, Bellarmin devotes a folio column to the endeavour to "dilute"
its strength. (De cultu Sanctorum, iii. viii. 1087. Disp. T. ii. Ingol.
1601.) He commences with saying, "forte non esse Nysseni illam
Orationem"; and, to give weight to his suspicion, he adds, "forte etiam
Greece non invenitur. " It happens, however, that the genuineness of
the document has been fully demonstrated ; and that, a considerable
time before he wrote, this tract had been published both in Latin and
Greek, 8vo. Paris, apud Guil. Morelium, 1551. In the year 1562, on
account of its rarity, the Centuriators reprinted the anonymous Latin
version ; (Cent. iv. Cap. x. coll. 936—8.) and Peter Du Moulin's edition
appeared at Paris in 1606, and again Hanov. 1607. Oudin (De Scriptt.

110 STAPLETON'S FORTRESS |_BOOK
But Chrysostom sayeth, Horn. v. de beato Job1, that if
strength of body did serve, and that he were not letted with
the charge of his Church, he would have travelled to Rome,
to see the chains wherewith Saint Paul was bound : and this
Stapleton will warrant to have been done without supersti
tion. I would fain know how he will discharge this saying
of his, in the same Homily, either of superstition or of an
excessive commendation : Si quis me cozlo condonet omni,
vel ea qua Pauli manus vinciebatur catena, illam ego ho
nore prceponerem : " If any man could give me all heaven,
or else that chain wherewith Saint Paul's hand was bound, I
would prefer that chain in honour2." Excuse this if you
can, so it be not with a rhetorical exornation; for that you
cannot abide. Nevertheless, the same Chrysostom sheweth,
that it was not needful for obtaining remission of sins to take
in hand any pilgrimage. In Epist. ad Phil. Horn.3 : Non
opus est in longinqua peregrinando transire, nee ad remo-
tissimas ire nationes; non pericula, non labores tolerare, sed
velle tantummodo : " There is no need to go a pilgrimage
Eccles. i. 608.) has charged Claud Morell with having been prevailed
upon by the Jesuit Fronto Duceeus to suppress a treatise which had
been issued by his father ; but it is comprised amongst the collected
works of S. Gregory, Tom. ii. pp. 1084 — 7. Paris. 1615, and is fol
lowed by the intemperate notes of the malevolent Gretser. Conf.
Fabricii Bibl. Grasc. ix. 120. ed. Harles. Montfaucon, Diarium Itali-
cum, Cap. xxi. p. 309. Paris. 1702.]
1 [These five Homilies, set forth in Latin by Lselius Tiphernas, are
utterly fictitious, (Cf. ed. Ben. vi. 579.) though Sixtus Senensis assigns
them to S. Chrysostom "sine ulla controversia." (Biblioth. iv. 277.
Franc. 1575.)]
2 [See some striking language toward the end of the thirty-second
Homily on the Epistle to the Romans. — A spurious Sermon, Inadora-
tionem venerabilium Catenarum, &c, is frequently attributed to S.
Chrysostom ; but Baronius rejects it, because " nondum Petri Catena?
innotuissent, nee Constantinopolim delates essent." (Annall. Tom. v.
ad an. 439. n. v. Conf. not. in Martyrol. die Aug. 1. Crakanthorp,
Contra Archiep. Spalatens. p. 414. Lond. 1625. Coci Censur. p. 166.)
The words " membra mihi optabilia, ipsaque co:.lesti gloria longe me-
liora," in reference to S. Peter's martyrdom, occur in the counterfeit
" Oratio encomiastica in principes Apostolorum Petrum et Paulum.1'
(Opp. T. viii. Par. ii. p. 10. ed. Boned.)]
3 [Fulke has used the Latin version of S. Chrysostom's first Homily
on the Epistle to Philemon, by Ambrosius Camaldulensis. Vid. pag.
1738. ed. Commelin. 1596.]

II.J OVERTHROWN BY W. FULKE. ' 111
into far countries, nor to go to the furthest nations, nor to
suffer perils nor travels, but only to be willing." Now let
the wisdom of the Papists take heed, as he admonisheth the
wisdom of the Protestants, that they charge not Chrysostom
with the heresy of sola fides, or licentious liberty, more than
we check him for superstition. The like of remission of sins,
without pilgrimage, he sayeth, Horn, de Anima, [Anna,] et
educatione Samuelis* ; which is as contrary to the draff of
popish pilgrimage as the peregrination used in this day is
out of use with us. For Papists were wont to make pilgrim
age a meritorious work ; and many had it in penance, per
suaded by their ghostly father they could not otherwise have
remission of their sins, except perhaps by a Pope's pardon,
with a commutation of penance.
Concerning the place of Augustin which he citeth, Ep.
cxxxvii.6, it proveth no ordinary pilgrimage then in use ; but
only sheweth Augustin's device in a case of such doubt, as he
could not find out the truth between one that was accused and
his accuser ; that it was not amiss they should both travel to
some such place, where miracles are said to be wrought, if
happily [haplyj there in such place the truth might be re
vealed by miracle. And yet I confess, not urged by any thing
Stapleton saith, that Augustin elsewhere speaketh of peregri
nation to Rome. In Psal. lxxxv.6: Quales isti Principes vene-
runt de Baby lone ? Principes credentes de sozculo. Principes
venerunt ad urbem Romam, quasi caput Babylonis : non
ierunt ad templum Imperatoris, sed ad memoriam pisca-
toris : " What are these Princes that came from Babylon ?
Princes of the world, that believe. The Princes came to Rome,
as to the head of Babylon : they went not to the temple of
the Emperor, but to the memory of a fisher."
To conclude, as there was used peregrination to Jerusa
lem and other places, to the memories of Martyrs, so was
there never any pilgrimage to Images, which is the greatest
pilgrimage of Papists, within the six hundred years mentioned :
wherein Papists differ as much from their practice as we, and
more also.
The twenty-third Difference is the reverence of Reliques,
4 [The Homily cited is tho third Sermon on Hannah, translated by
Erasmus. Vid. Tom. iv. p. 723. ed. Bened.]
fi [al. lxxviii. Opp. ii. coll. 138 — 9.]
6 [lxxxvi. (Engl, lxxxvii.) fol. 83, b. Lugd. 1519.]

112 STAPLETON S FOH.TK.iiOB J300K
used within the six hundred years, as witnesscth Basil, Chry
sostom, and other. The Reliques or bodies of the Saints we
reverence, so far as we have any warrant out of the holy
Scriptures. Neither did those ancient Fathers (although im
moderate in that kind of reverence) yet make idols of them ;
nor set them bare to be seen or handled, and worshipped, but
laid up in the earth; as I have before shewed1 out of Cyrillus,
Lib. x. Contra Julianum. But what inconvenience grew
by that excessive esteeming of the dead bodies of the Saints
Sozomenus sheweth, Li. vii. Ca. x.2 : Pauli Constantinopoli-
tani Episcopi corpus in ecclesia repositum est. Id quod et
multos veritatis ignaros, prozsertim mulieres ac plures e
plebe, in earn opinionem induxit, ut Apostolum Paulum ibi
conditum esse putent : " The body of Paul, Bishop of Con
stantinople, was buried in the church. Which thing brought
many ignorant of the truth, especially women and many of
the common people, into this opinion, that they think the
Apostle Paul to be buried there." But whereas in the end he
would have us restore so many holy Reliques of abbeys and
churches as have been spoiled and profaned, it is needless,
seeing the Papists can make as many when they list; even
by the same cunning that they make some of the Apostles to
have two or three bodies apiece, beside heads, arms, ribs,
and other parts in infinite places : whereof he that will hear
more, let him read Calvin's book of Reliques ; and credit him
but as a reporter of that which all the world is able to re
prove him of, if he should wilfully feign any thing.
The twenty -fourth Difference is Altars ; for proof whereof
he bringeth Chrysostom and Augustin, which speak of Altars,
whom also he confesseth to call the same tables : but that nei
ther in matter nor form they were like popish Altars, but
tables indeed made of boards, and removable, and standing in
the midst of the church, I have shewed sufficiently in mine
answer to Doctor Heskins, Lib. iii. Cap. xxxi. ; by which it is
proved that the Papists, and not we, differ from the primitive
Church in this point.
The twenty-fifth Difference is Latin service ; which he
would prove out of Bede by the books " that Gregory sent
to Augustin ; which could be none other but Latin." But
1 [p. 89.]
2 [Tho extract commencing at " Id quod" is takon from the Latin
version by Musculus.]

II.] OVERTHROWN BY W. FULKE. 113
how prove you that those books were service-books3? or that,
if they were service-books, they were not translated into the
vulgar tongue ? As for the fortification of this piece by the
elder times, he referreth us to Doctor Harding's proof against
Master Jewell's Challenge : and to the same Bishop's learned
Reply do I refer the reader for overthrow of the same feeble
fortress of Harding.
The twenty-sixth Difference is of altar-cloths, church-
vestments, &c. Such altar-cloths and such vestments as
Christ used in the celebration of the holy Sacrament we
think not only to be sufficient, but also most convenient, for
the administration of the same. Nevertheless, if any other
vestments, without superstition, be appointed by lawful autho
rity, we think no strife or contention is to be raised for so
small matters.
But let us see of what antiquity he will make the holy
vestments. First, Tertullian, Lib. de Monogam.4, maketh
mention of infulas, the upper garment of the Priest. But
he might understand Tertullian (if he were disposed) to use
that term but in derision of them, that, when they would be
proud against the Clergy, they alleged that we are all Priests,
&c. ; but when we are called (said he) to the same severity
of discipline with the Clergy, deponimus infulas, et pares su-
musb, " we put off our rochets, and we be private men." This
infula was the apparel of the heathen Priests ; to which he
alludeth, when he scoffeth at them that in dignity would be
Priests, but in discipline laymen. The alb which is spoken
of, Con. Carthag. iv. Can. xli.6, was nothing like your popish
alb ; but a white garment, which was used in sign of dignity,
and was forbidden of the Deacons to be worn, but only in
time of the oblation and reading. Saint John's petalum1, if he
3 [Bede merely mentions "codices plurimos." (Lib. i. Cap. xxix.)]
4 [Cap. xii. Tertullian was a Montanist when he composed this
treatise.] 6 [Rigaltius correctly reads "impares sumus."]
6 ["Ut Diaconus tempore oblationis tantum, vel lectionis, alba
induatur.'' (Joverii Sanctiones Eccles. Class, ii. fol. 21. Paris. 1555.)]
7 [Eusebius (Hist. Ecc. iii. xxxi.) quotes an Epistle of Polycrates,
in which he states that S. John wore " to neTaXov," a golden plate,
(called also " the plate of the holy crown,") such as that which adorned
the forehead of the High Priest. See Exod. xxviii. 36 : xxxix. 30.
Lightfoot's Temple Service, Chap. iii. p. 21.] o
[fulke, ii.J

114 stapleton's fortress [book
could tell what to make of it, he would not call it generally "a
pontifical vestment." Saint John was a poor Pontifex to go
in pontificalibus. The rich garment which Constantine gave
to the church of Jerusalem, if it had been a cope, (as he saith,)
it had been an unhandsome garment to dance in ; as the story
saith it came into the hands of one that danced in it1. The
admonition that he giveth2 to such as sleep in Church goods,
meaning belike such as have their beds garnished with old
copes, were more meet to be made to some of his benefactors
that sleep in abbeys, and yet will not awake out of them.
To conclude, although there is some mention of garments,
applied specially for the use of divine service, yet the popish
tragical trumpery of this time differeth as much from them in
form and use as they do in time and age.
The twenty-seventh Difference is of holy vessels. Such
vessels as are comely and decent for the ministration of the
Sacraments we have without superstition ; which, beginning to
grow in the ancient times, the Fathers did rather reprove
than foster.
Gregory Nazianzen, whom he citeth in his Oration Advers.
Arrianos, et de seipso3, speaking of the ministering vessels that
might not be touched of many, meaneth allegorically of pro
faning the mysteries of Christian religion ; alluding to the pro
fanation of the vessels of the Jewish temple by Nabuzardan
and Balthasar4, as his words do plainly shew : liola Xeirovp-
yiKa anevn, tois ttoWois a^avcrTa, ^epaiif avopwv e^eowKa,
1 [and fell down dead. Vid. Histor. Tripartit. Lib. v. Cap. xxxvii.
August. 1472.]
2 [Stapleton's excellent admonition is this : " Let such as sleepe in
church gooddes awake at this example. Let them remember that by
their impenitent hart they heape vnto themselves wrath in the day of
iudgement. Let them not be carelesse, though now they sit soft;
but rather feare, that the longer the blow is a fetching, the sorer it
shall strike when it falleth downe." (Fortresse, p. 352.) The Epistle
to the reader, prefixed to Sir Henry Spelman's tract De non temeran-
dis Ecelesiis, Oxf. 1646, contains sufficient proof, that there is nothing
unfounded in the fear, that those who are guilty of sacrilege will not
" be visited after tho visitation of all men." Many are the judgments
which may bo traced to the commission of this sin, in the United King
dom as well as on the Continent.]
3 [Opp. Tom. i. p. 433. Lut. Paris. 1609.]
4 [2 Kings xxv. Dan. v.J

II. J overthrown by w. fulke. 115
tj NafiovfypSav ; &c. : " What ministering vessels, not to be
touched of many, have I delivered to the hands of the wicked ;
either to Nabuzardan, or to Balthasar, which rioted wickedly
in holy things, and suffered punishment worthy of his madness ?"
Chrysostom reproved the preposterous superstition of the
people, which durst not touch the holy vessels, but yet feared
not to defile themselves with sin. In Ep. ad Eph. H xiv.5 :
Non vides, &c. : " Dost thou not see those holy vessels ? Be
they not always used to one purpose ? Dare any man use
them to any other purpose ? Now art thou thyself more
holy than these vessels, and that by much. Why then dost
thou pollute and defile thyself?" He hath forgotten Exupe-
rius, Bishop of Tholosse6, which carried the Lord's body in a
wicker basket, and His blood in a glass, when he maketh so
much ado about holy vessels. Hier. Ad Rusticum'1. Acacius,
Bishop of Amida, is commended for melting the vessels of the
Church of gold and silver, to redeem prisoners from the
Persians8. The twenty-eighth Difference is the shaven crown of
Priests ; for antiquity whereof he citeth Eusebius in Panegy
ric.9 : Vos amid Dei Sacerdotes, longa talari veste et corona
insignes : " Ye friends of God, ye Priests, seemly by your
long side-garment and crown." Verily he is worthy to be
shorn on his poll with a number of crowns, that understandeth
this of a shaven crown. If nothing else could have driven
him from this dream, at least he should have remembered the
solemn disputation, whereof he spake immediately before, in
Beda, Li. v. Ca. xxii.10; by which it appeareth, that the Greeks
s [p. 1127. ed. Commelin. 1596.]
6 [Toulouse.]
7 ["Nihil illo ditius, qui corpus Domini canistro vimineo, sangui-
nem portat in vitro." (Opp. i. 48. Conf. Le Faucheur, De la Cene du
Seigneur, p. 380. A Geneve, 1635.)]
8 [Socratis Hist. Ecchs. Lib. vii. Cap. xxi. Musculo interp. Basil.
1549.] 9 [This insufficient reference is not to the Oratio de laudibus Con-
stantini, but to what is called in the English version " A Panegyrick
concerning the splendid posture of our affairs." (Eccl. Hist. x. iv.
Lond. 1709. Cf. Nicephor. Lib. vii. Cap. xl. Paris. 1562.) Baronius
relies upon the same perverted testimony which was adduced by Sta
pleton. (Annales, ad an. 58. sect, cxxxiv.)]
i° [al. xxi. Conf. Prosper. Stellartium, De Coroniset Tonsuris, p. 169.
8—2

116 stapleton's fortress [book
were shorn square, and not round; and therefore Eusebius,
speaking to Greek Priests, would never have called their
square tonsure a crown. But the words of Eusebius put all
out of doubt : 'Q <pt\oi Qeov Kal '[specs, o\ tov dyiov iroo^pri,
Kal tov oupdviov t»79 oo^rjs areepavov, to re ^piafia to
evOeov, Kal ttjv lepaTtKtjv tov Aytov Uveu/xaTos aToXnv irepi-
(iefiXri/nevoi, &c. : " 0 ye friends and Priests of God, which
are clothed with the holy long garment, and the heavenly
crown of glory, and with the divine unction, and the priestly
robe of the Holy Ghost," &c. Is there any block so senseless
to think that he called a shaven head the heavenly crown of
glory ? Who seeth not, that in commendation of the spiritual
dignity of the Ministers of the Church, he alludeth to the
Aaronical attire of the Priests of the Law ?
The next testimony is out of the Tripartite History1; that
Julian the Apostata, to counterfeit religion, shore himself to
the hard ears : therefore religious men were then shorn.
There is no doubt but the Clergy, and such as professed
sobriety and modesty, used to poll their heads ; whereas the
licentious multitude delighted in long hairs : which shearing or
polling after grew to a ceremony, and from a ceremony to
a superstition ; but small mention of the ceremony there is
within the six hundred years, and that toward the latter end
of them. But where he compareth the scoffing, that the Turk
might make at the blessed passion of Christ, with such plea
sant railing as Protestants use against their Friars' cowls and
shaven crowns, he sheweth in what blasphemous estimation
he hath such vile dung of men's invention, to compare it with
the only price of our salvation.
The twenty-ninth Difference is Holy Water ; for antiquity
whereof he allegeth two miracles : the one out of Bede, Li.
i. Cap. xvii., of Germanus, which, with casting a few sprinkles
of water into the sea, in the name of the Trinity, assuaged a
tempest ; the other of Marcellus, Bishop of Apameaa, which,
when the temple of Jupiter could not be burned with fire,
after prayers made, commanded water signed with the Cross
to be sprinkled on the altar : which done, the Devils departed,
Duaci, 1625. Usserii Britann. Eccles. Antiqq. Cap. xvii. p. 478, Lond.
1687.] i [Lib. vi. Cap. i. Conf. Socratis E. H. L. iii. C. i.]
2 [Histor. Tripart. ix. xxxiv.]

II.] overthrown by w. fulke. 117
and the temple was set on fire, and burned. But these mi
racles wrought by water prove not an ordinary use of Holy
Water in the Church in those times. As for the counterfeit
Decree of Alexander, the fifth3 Bishop of Rome, is a worthy
witness of such a worshipful ceremony4.
In the end of this chapter he inveigheth against a new
trick, which he saith the preachers have, to make their audi
ence cry Amen ; comparing it with the applause and clapping
of hands used in the old time, but misliked of godly Fathers,
Chrysostom and Hierom5. So that for the preacher to pray
to God, and to give God thanks, whereto the people answereth
Amen, it is counted of Stapleton a new trick ; and yet it is as
ancient as S. Paul. 1 Cor. xiv. vers. 16. But to make such
a loud lie, that Satan himself, the father of lies, (I suppose,)
for his credit's sake, would be ashamed to make in his own
person ; videlicet, that " to tears, to lamenting, or to bewail
ing of their sins, no Protestant yet moveth his audience ;" it
is an old trick of a cankered-stomached Papist.
CHAPTER VIII.
Stapleton. Differences between the former faith of Catholics and Stapleton.
the late news of Protestants, concerning the government and rulers of
the Church. Fulke. The thirtieth Difference is Synods of the Clergy ; Fulke..
which is a lewd and impudent slander, for we allow them, and
use them, as all the world knoweth. But (saith he) no conclu
sion is made in them, but such as pleaseth the Parliament.
This is a false lie ; for although no Constitution made in the
Convocation hath the force of a law except it be confirmed by
Parliament, yet many Constitutions and Canons have been
made, that were never confirmed by Parliament.
The thirty-first Difference is Imposition of hands ; which
is a mere slander, for that ceremony is used of us in ordaining
of Ministers. Likewise where he saith, that when all the
popish Bishops were deposed, there was none to lay hands
on the Bishops that should be newly consecrated, it is utterly
3 [or seventh.]
4 [Calfhill's Answer to Martiall, p. 16. ed. Parker Soc]
6 [See Bingham's Antiquities, xiv. iv. xxvii.]

118 stapleton's FORTRESS [B°0K
false : for there was one of the popish Bishops that con
tinued in his place1 ; there were also divers that were conse
crated Bishops in King Edward's time2: and although there
had been but one in that time of reformation, it had been
sufficient by his own Gregory's resolution. Bed. Lib. i. Cap.
xxvii.3 Another example is Lib. iii. Cap. xxviii., of Ceadda,
Archbishop of York, consecrated by Wini, Bishop of the West
Saxons, assisted by two Briton Bishops, that were not subject
to the see of Rome : because at that time there was never a
Bishop of the Romish faction in England but this Wini ; who
was also a simoniac, and bought the bishopric of London for
money. I speak not this, as though in planting of the
Church where it hath been long time exiled, an extraordinary
form of ordaining were not sufficient ; but to shew that the
Papists do pick quarrels, contrary to their own pretended
records of antiquity, and Catholic religion.
Where he inveigheth against the unsufficiency of a number
of our Ministers, which are come out of the shop into the
Clergy, without gifts sufficient for that calling ; as I cannot
excuse them nor their ordainers, so I dare be bold to affirm,
they are no worse, either in knowledge or conversation, than
the huge rabble of hedge Priests of Popery.
The thirty-second Difference ; that such Bishops as were
created by the Archbishops of Canterbury and York were
created by the appointment of the Pope. This is a shameless
lie; for which he can bring no colour, either out of the first
six hundred years, or out of Bede's History. Where he saith,
" If it can be shewed by any history, that at any time by
1 [" The only See in England, which did not undergo any change at
that time, was Llandaffe : the Bishop whereof (Anthony Kitchin) had
such dexterity as to stand his ground in all Revolutions ; and to con
tinue semper idem, which way soever the wind blew, in all those four
seasons, which were variously influenced by King Henry and Edward,
Queen Mary and Elizabeth!" (Lindsay's Preface to Mason's Works,
p. xxvii. Lond. 1734.)]
2 [Palmer's Jurisdiction of British Episcopacy vindicated,^. 166 — 7.
Lond. 1840.]
3 [" Respondit Gregorius : Et quidem in Anglorum Ecclesia, in
qua adhuo solus tu Episcopus invoniris, ordinare Episcopum non alitor
nisi sine Episcopis potes." The Benedictine editors of S. Gregory's
works observe, that the erroneous reading "nisi cum Episcopis" is
found in some MSS.]

II.] OVERTHROWN BY W. FULKE. 119
the mere temporal authority ever any Catholic Bishops were
created, he dare yield and grant that ours are lawful Bishops;"
for answer, that Catholic Bishops of old by as mere tempo
ral authority were created as any are created among us, I
refer him to Bede, Lib. iii. Cap. vii. & xxix. Lib. iv. Cap.
xxiii., of Agilbert and Wini, by authority of Sonwalch, [Coin-
ualch;J Wighard nominated by authority of Oswine [Osuiu]
and Egbert ; Ostfor [OftforJ consecrated at the commandment
of King Edilred : beside Wini made Bishop of London for
money by Wulf her, King of Mercia ; which authority he could
not have abused, except it had been in him lawfully to use.
The thirty-third Difference is, that Princes had not the
supreme government in ecclesiastical causes. For proof whereof
he allegeth Gregory Nazianzen and Saint Ambrose ; both which
speak not of chief authority, but of knowledge of spiritual
matters ; which is not to be sought ordinarily in Princes, but
in the Clergy. Secondly, he citeth Calvin and lllyricus,
which do write against such civil Magistrates as think by
their supremacy they have absolute authority to decree what
they will in the Church: whereas we in England4 never attri
bute so much to the Prince's authority, but that we always
acknowledge it to be subject to God and His word. The
Papists right well understand this distinction; but it pleaseth
them to use this ambiguity of supreme authority, to abuse the
ignorance of the simple.
The thirty-fourth Difference is, that the Bishops and godly
men in matters of doubt counselled with the Pope of Rome.
So did the Pope of Rome with them, while there was any
modesty in him : so did Pope Sergius ask counsel of poor
Beda. Math. West.6 Nay, but Saint Hierom, so well learned,
4 [Art. xxxvii.]
6 [Matthew of Westminster, in his Flores Historiarum, published by
Abp. Parker in 1567 and 1570, has only repeated a misstatement
which can be traced to William of Malmesbury. The latter writer in
forms us, that Pope Sergius wished for the advice of Beda about cer
tain matters, and that ho accordingly addressed a letter to Ceolfrith,
Abbot of Jarrow, requesting that the historian might be sent to Rome.
Baronius (ad an. 701. sect. ii. Tom. viii. 641. Antverp. 1611.) has
given this Epistle interpolated by Malmesbury, who hesitated not to
corrupt the document by the introduction of Beda's name, and by
assigning to him the rank of Presbyter, to which he had not then
attained. Tho whole difficulty respecting Beda's pretended journey

120 stapleton's fortress Lbook
consulted with Pope Damasus, which entered his see with the
slaughter of sixty persons. I might answer, that Damasus
also asked counsel of Saint Hierom1 : so that in him which
is consulted there is rather opinion of knowledge than of
authority. But Hierom confesseth that he will not separate
himself from the Church of Rome, &c. Ep. ad Dam.2 ii. So
long as the Church of Rome was the Church of Christ, there
was great cause he should join with it. But now is it ceased
to be the spouse of Christ, and is become an adulteress, as the
Prophet saith of Jerusalem : yea, it is become Babylon, the
mother of all abominations ; and therefore that heavenly voice
commandeth all Christians to depart out of her. But con
cerning the Pope's authority, I have answered at large to
D. Sander's Rock of the popish Church.
The thirty-fifth Difference (but I know not how it differeth)
is the Pope's authority abolished ; by whom Christianity was
first in this land received. It is well known, that there was
Christianity before Gregory sent Augustin, not of Pope-like
authority, but of godly zeal, as it seemeth, to win the English
nation to Christ. After followeth a large complaint for abo
lishing the Pope's authority; a canon invective against dissen
sions among us ; and slight fortification of the Pope's authority,
for unity's sake, out of Hierom, Cont. Jovinian., and Cyprian,
De simpl. Prcel., answered at large in the Discovery of D.
Sander's Rock.
The thirty -sixth Difference : Augustin came first in pre
sence of the King with a Cross of silver, and an Image of
Christ painted in a table : the Protestants began with taking
away the Cross, and altering the Litany. But this part is
left unfortified, except it be with a marginal note, that Chry
sostom used in Litanies Crosses of silver and burning tapers.
Indeed I read Chrysostom had certain candlesticks or cressets
of silver, made in form of a Cross, to carry lights upon them,
to Rome was for the first time removed by Mr. Stevenson, the excel
lent editor for the English Historical Society. (Ven. Bed. H. Ecc.
Introduct. pp. x — xiii. Lond. 1838.)]
1 [Opp. Tom. ii. p. 131. Basil. 1565. A spurious correspondence
between S. Jerom and Pope Damasus exists in the fourth volume, pp.
319 — 20. Erasmus humorously declares, that the author of these let
ters was certainly not free from fever.]
2 [loc. sup. cit.]

II.] overthrown by w. fulke. 121
in the night-season ; but not of any tapers burning by day,
and carried before the Crucifix, after the popish manner :
Socr. Li. vi. Ca. viii. : but hereof ye may see more in mine
Answer to Martiall's Reply, Articl. vii.3
The thirty-seventh Difference : " Augustin and his com
pany, to the number of forty, were Monks : the first preachers
of this no faith were runagate Monks and apostate Friars."
Their learning, godliness, and just cause of departing out of
those cloisters of unclean birds, is sufficiently testified to the
world. The thirty-eighth Difference : "The preachers which were
traded up by them were of a virtuous, lowly, simple, poor,
and meek conversation." Then were they very unlike your
popish Prelates. But Luther complaineth that his scholars
were more wicked than under the Pope4. If some were so,
it followeth not that all are so. Again, " Beza sold his bene
fice to two men." If he had not confessed it himself, Stapleton
might never have known of it. Afterward he raised rebellion
for a sign of his vocation, and persuaded Poltrot5 to murder
the Duke of Guise, or else Stapleton belieth him. What
Mallot and Pieroreli were, I know not6 : I doubt not but
they were honester than many Popes have been. " Knokes
was a galley-slave three years." The more wicked those
Papists which betrayed him into the galley; the master
whereof was glad to be rid of him, because he never had
good success so long as he kept that holy man in slavery :
whom also, in danger of tempest, though an errant Papist,
he would desire to commend him and his galley to God
in his prayers. The ejection of the nobles from Zuicher-
land is as truly imputed to the Zuinglians by your author
Staphylus as all the rest of his slanders and monstrous lies
are to be credited ; which was done by the Papists in that
country, almost two hundred years before Zuinglius was
born. Christerne, King of Denmark, was expelled his realm
3 [Calfhill, pp. 298 — 301. ed. Parker Soc]
4 [See before, p. 18.]
6 [Stapleton (or the printer) wrongly calls him " Poultron."]
6 [" Mallot, an other famous preacher of Fraunce, had bene for his
good deedes marked in the shoulders, as such offenders in England are
burned in the hand. Pierroceli, the third chiefe ghospeller of huge-
nots, was a rennegat frier of the Franciscanes." (Fortresse, p. 402.)]

&

122 stapleton's fortress [book
for his tyranny by all the states, before they received the
Gospel. How dutiful the doing of the Protestants in France
hath been, let the King's own Acts of Pacification testify ;
which always dischargeth them of rebellion, and acknow-
ledgeth all that they have done to have been done in his
service. The thirty-ninth Difference : "Voluntary poverty in Au
gustin not found in the first planters of this new trim
tram." A matter worthy to be answered with a whim
wham. It were easy to shew how many have forsaken
great dignities and livings among the Papists, to become
poor preachers of the Gospel.

CHAPTER IX.
Stapleton. Stapleton. Differences concerning the consequences and effects of
the first faith planted among us, and of the pretended faith of Pro
testants.
Fulke. Fulke. The fortieth Difference : " They that were con
verted builded churches and monasteries : Protestants pull
down monasteries, churches, chapels, hospitals, and alms
houses." In the table of Differences I have shewed how
much those monasteries then builded differed from popish
abbeys : and where he chargeth Protestants with pulling
down all monasteries, he forgetteth that Cardinal Wolsee, by
the Pope's authority, pulled down the first in our time that
were suppressed ; and that the popish Clergy consented to
the act of suppression ; which were the Devil rather than Pro
testants. For hospitals and almshouses, it is a slander, ex
cept some private person of covetousness hath overthrown
any. As for churches and chapels builded by us, so many
as are necessary, it is apparent to the world. Almshouses
and hospitals by us are erected, such as are none in Popery.
The Universities also are augmented, both in buildings and
revenues, since the pulling down of abbeys1.
The forty -first Difference : " In monasteries God was
1 [A curious and interesting " Catalogue of good workes done since
tho times of the Gospell," viz. within sixty years during the reigns of
Edward, Elizabeth, and James I., is contained in Willet's Synopsis
Papismi, pp. 1220—43. Lond. 1634.]

II.] OVERTHROWN BY W. FULKE. 123
served day and night with external prayer at midnight."
Although rising at midnight ordinarily be an inconvenient
hour in many respects, and therefore we have no ordinary
prayer at that time, yet have we early in the morning be
fore it be day, in many places, exercise of prayer and
preaching. Neither was it at midnight that the Nuns of
Berking sung their lauds and hymns, Lib. iv. Cap. vii.:
for it was after Matutines, which could not be but in the
morning, although early and before day.
The forty-second : " The devotion of those Christians
brought in voluntary oblations ; which are now ceased, and
due tithes grudged at." The voluntary oblations of the godly
are not now wanting, where need is.
The forty-third : " The Princes and higher power[sJ en
dued the bishoprics with lands : now they take them away."
It was necessary when they had none before, but were newly
erected. If any be now taken away, and sufficient left, it is
not the matter we regard, but good proceeding of the Gospel.
If covetousness of any man procure from the Church where
it wanteth, they shall answer it, and not we.
The forty-fourth : " Ethelbert established Christianity by
laws ; making special statutes and decrees for the indemnity
and quiet possession of the Church goods, and of the Clergy.
Now no state is more open to the oppression than the Clergy."
If Ethelbert established Christianity by laws, he did more
than Papists would have Princes to do now. But if the Clergy
be now oppressed, it is not for want of good laws, or good
will in the Prince and higher powers to defend it ; but by
occasion of a number of dissembling Papists, to whom execu
tion of justice in some places is committed.
The forty-fifth Difference is, " Unity then where is dissen
sion now." God be praised, we consent in all articles neces
sary to eternal salvation : and if the Scots, by our example, are
come to the same unity of faith with us, it is the Lord's work ;
for whom we give Him hearty thanks.
The conclusion of this fantastical Fortress is an exhortation
to Papists not to dissemble their Papistry, nor to communicate
with us; dissuading them by many examples of such as yielded
not to the persecution of the Arrian heretics. But seeing by

124 stapleton's FORTRESS overthrown by w. FULKE.
the word of God we cannot be convinced of heresy, those
examples make nothing against us. And yet I wish the
Papists (if it be not God's will to open their eyes, that they
may see the truth,) yet to give over their dissembling, and
openly to shew themselves as they are. For whether
their religion be good or bad, dissembling
and counterfeiting cannot be
but evil.
God be praised.

A REJOINDER TO
JOHN MARTIALL'S REPLY AGAINST THE ANSWER
OF MASTER CALFHILL
TO THE BLASPHEMOUS TREATISE OF THE CROSS.
BY W. FULKE,
DOCTOR IN DIVINITY.

TO THE READER.
Of all the treatises sent over within these twenty years
from the Papists, there is none in which appeareth less learn
ing and modesty, nor greater arrogance and impudency, than
in this one book of Martiall. Who, as he termeth himself a
Bachelor of Law, so, more like a wrangling petty-fogger in
the Law than a sober student in Divinity, doth in a manner
nothing else but cavil, quarrel, and scold. Which as it were
an easy matter to wipe away with a sharp answer, for him
that would bestow his time therein, so I think it for my part
neither needful nor profitable. The memory of that godly
learned man Master Doctor Calfhill, whom he abuseth, is
written in the book of the righteous, and shall not be afraid
of any slanderer's report. Omitting therefore all frivolous
quarrels, I will only endeavour to answer that which hath in
it any shew of reason or argument to defend the idolatry of
the Papists. In which matter also, as many things are the
same which are already satisfied in my confutation of Doctor
Sander's book of Images, so I will refer the reader to those
chapters of that treatise where he shall find that which I hope
shall suffice for the overthrow of idolatry.
This Reply, as the first Treatise, is divided into ten Arti
cles ; all which in order I will set down, with such titles as
he giveth unto them. But first I must say a few words con
cerning his request made to the Bishop of London, and the
rest of the superintendents of the new Church, as it pleaseth

126 A REJOINDER TO J. MARTIALL S
him to call them, and his Preface to the reader. His request
is, that the Bishops should certify him by some pamphlet in
print, whether sixty-one Articles, which he hath gathered out
of Master Calfhill's book, be the received and approved doc
trine of the new Church of England ; able to be justified by
the word of God, and the Fathers and Councils within six
hundred years after Christ. How wise a man he is in making
this request, I leave to reasonable men to judge.
And touching the Articles themselves, I answer, that some
of them be such as the Church of England doth hold and
openly profess ; as that Latin service, monkish vows, the Com
munion in one kind, &c, are contrary to God's word: the
other be particular affirmations of Master Calfhill, which in
such sense as he uttered them may be justified for true, and
yet pertain not to the whole Church to maintain and defend:
as whether Helena were superstitious in seeking the Cross
at Jerusalem ; whether Dionyse and Fabian were the one
suspected, the other infamed, &c. Beside that a great number
of them be so rent from the whole sentences whereof they
were parts, that they retain not the meaning of the author,
but serve to shew the impudency of the caviller : as that the
counsels of Christ in His Gospel be ordinances of the Devil;
the prayers of Christians a sacrifice of the Devil ; the Council
of Elibeus [Eliberis1] was a General Council, &e. Where
fore I will leave this fond request, with all the railing that
followeth thereupon, and come to the Preface to the reader.
First, he findeth himself greatly grieved, that not only
ancient Fathers are by M. Calfhill discredited, but also the holy
Cross is likened to a gallows, &c. ; which moved him to follow
Salomon's counsel, and to answer a fool according to his
folly. After this he taketh upon him to confute M. Calfhill's
Preface, in which he proveth, that no Images should be in
churches to any use of religion, because God forbiddeth
them, Exo. xx. and Levit. xix., in the first table of religion.
His reply standeth only upon those common foolish distinc
tions of Idols and Images, of Latvia and Doulia, which are
handled more at large and with greater shew of learning by
D. Sander in his book of Images, Cap. v., vi., vii., viii.; whi
ther I refer the reader for answer. Likewise, that discourse
which he maketh, to prove that an Image of Christ is not a
i [Calfhill, pp. 154, 302.]

REPLY TO MASTER CALFHILL.

127

lying Image, is answered in the same book, Cap. vii. The
authority of Epiphanius he deferreth to answer unto the
fifth Article. To Irenseus he answereth, that he only re
porteth that the Gnostic heretics had the Image of Jesus,
but reproveth not that fact ; but he reproved them only
because they placed the Image of Christ with the Images of
Plato, Pythagoras, &c, and used them as the Gentiles do.
This were indeed a pretty exception for a brabbling lawyer to
take: but a student in Divinity should understand, that Ire-
nasus in that book and chapter, Li. i. Ca. xxiv., declareth no
fact of the heretics that was good, but his declaration is a
reproof. And so it is throughout that whole book, containing
thirty-five chapters.
But he chargeth M. Calfhill for falsifying Augustin in
saying, that he alloweth M. Varro affirming " that religion is
most pure without Images ;" first quarrelling at the quotation,
which by error of the printer is De Civitate Dei, Lib. iv.
Cap. iii., where it should be Cap. xxxi.2 ; a meet quarrel for
such a lawyer : secondly, shewing that the Latin is Castius
observari sine Simulachris religionem : " That religion would
have been more purely kept without Idols, or feigned Images ;"
as though there be any Images but feigned : and the word
Imago, even in their own Latin translation of the Bible, is
indifferently taken for Idolum and Simulachrum, and that in
many places. Deut. iv. ver. 16 ; 4 Reg. xi. ver. 18 ; Sapient.
Cap. xiii. & xiv. ; Esai. xl. ver. 18, & xliv. ver. 13 ; Ezec.
vii. vers. 20, where Imagines and Simulachra are both placed
together; Ezech. xvi. Ca. [ver. J 17; Amos v. ver. 23, [26, J
where he sayeth, Imaginem Idolorum, " the Image of your
Idols," and many other places declare, that this counterfeit
distinction was not observed, no not of the Latin interpreter.
As for his other logical quiddity, wherein he pleaseth himself
not a little, that religio non suscipit magis et minus, sheweth
that either his law is better than his logic, or else both are
not worth a straw.
Further he chargeth M. Calfhill for adding words which
are not found in Augustin3, " where Images are placed in
temples, in honourable sublimity," &c. These words are
found in the Ep. xlix. ad Deogratias : Cum Mis locantur
2 [Calfhill, p. 43.]
3 [See Calfhill, page 43.]

128 A REJOINDER TO J. MARTIALL'S
sedibus, honorabili sublimitate, ut a precantibus atque immo-
lantibus attendantur : " When they are placed in these seats,
in honourable sublimity, that they are looked upon by them
that pray and offer," &c. : but Martiall looked only to the
quotation, Ps. xxxvi. & cxiii. Yet doth not M. Calfhill re
hearse the words, but the judgment of Augustin ; from which
he doth nothing vary, except Martiall will cavil at the words
" Images in temples," where Augustin sayeth Idola Mis sedi
bus, " Idols in these seats," speaking of temples in which
Images were placed. But he speaketh (saith Martiall,) in [on]
the Psalms, against the Images of the heathen, and not of the
Christians. Then read what he writeth, De moribus Ecclesice
Catholicoz, Lib. i. Cap. xxxiv. & De consensu Evangelist.
Lib. i. Cap. x., where you shall find his judgment of such
Images as were made of Christians, to be all one with those
of the Gentiles. The judgment of other Doctors, whom he
nameth, you shall find answered in the fourteenth or thirteenth
chapter of Master Sander's book of Images.
That the Jews had no Images in their temple, he saith it
is a Jewish and Turkish reason to prove that we should have
none : much like the Priest that would not beheve in Christ,
if he knew that he were a Jew. So wise he is, to compare the
superstition of the wicked Turks with the observation of the
law by the godly Jews. Nay, he is yet more eloquent, and
sheweth that the Protestants are like the Turks, in condemn
ing of Images, in allowing marriage after divorce, &c. : as
though we might not acknowledge one God, lest we should be
like the Turks and Jews ; nor honour virtue, nor dispraise
vice, because they do so ; nor obey Magistrates, nor eat and
drink, because the Turks and Jews do so. O deep learning
of a lawyer Divine !
That Images do not teach, he sayeth it is a position more
boldly advouched than wisely proved ; and then quoteth Gre
gory, Ep. ix. Lib. ix., &c. : but he is deceived if he think we
hold that Images teach not ; for we affirm with the Prophet
Abacuc, that they teach lies, Cap. ii. ver. 18 ; and vanity. Jer.
X, ver. 8.
As for the story of Amadis the Goldsmith, and the Epistle
of Eleutherius fetched out of the Guildhall in London1, as
i [Calfhill, pp. 52, 53. Compare Mason's Works by Lindsay, pp.
66—68. Lond. 1734.]

REPLY TO MASTER CALFHILL. 129
M. Calfhill maketh no great account of them, so I pass them
over ; although Martiall would have men think they be the
strongest arguments the Protestants have against the super
stition of the Cross, and the usurped tyranny of the Pope.
Finally, the excuse he maketh of his railing by M. Calf
hill's example, how honest it is, I refer to wise men to con
sider. If M. Calfhill had passed the bounds of modesty, it
were small praise in Martiall to follow him, yea, to pass him.
But if M. Calfhill (as indifferent men may think) hath not
greatly exceeded in terms of heat against Martiall's person,
whatsoever he hath spoken against his heresies, the continual
scorning both of M. Calfhill's name and his person, used so
often in every leaf of his Reply, in the judgment of all reason
able persons will cause Martiall to be taken for a lawless
wrangler, rather than a sober and Christian lawyer.

THE FIRST ARTICLE.
Fulke. This Article hath no title, and in effect it hath no Fulke.
matter : for thirteen leaves are spent about a needless and
impertinent controversy, of the authority of the holy Scrip
tures and of the Church of God ; whereof the one is the rule
of faith, the other is the thing ruled and directed thereby.
Now whether ought to be the judge, the rule, or the thing
ruled, is the question : the rule, say we, as the law : the
Church, sayeth he, as the justicier. And then we are at as
great controversy, what or where the Church is. In effect,
the controversy cometh to this issue ; whether he be a justicier,
or an injusticier, which pronounceth sentence contrary to the
law. I would think that common reason might decide these
questions: that he which giveth sentence against the law
may have the name and occupy the place of a justicier, but
a true justicier he cannot be indeed. Right so the popish
Church, which condemneth the truth for heresy, hath usurped
as the judge, but indeed is a cruel tyrant. But the contro
versy is not of the word, but of the meaning : and where shall
that be found but in the mouth of the Judge ? (sayeth he.) If
this were true, I would never be a Bachelor of Law, if I were
as Martiall ; nor yet a Doctor thereof, except it were to de
ceive poor clients for their money, if there were not a sense
[iULKE, II.] 9

130

A REJOINDER TO J. MARTIALL S

[art.

Luke x.
] John iv.
Matt, xviii.
Exod. a.
Joel i.
Eph. iv.

or meaning of the law, which other men might understand as
well as he that occupieth the place of the Judge, that I might
appeal when I saw he gave wrong sentence. But let us
briefly run over his Achillean arguments.
The Eunomians, Arrians, Eutychians, and Maximus the
heretic rejected the testimonies of the Fathers, and the autho
rity of the Church, and appealed to the Scriptures. So. doth
many a wrangling lawyer, to continue his fee from his client,
appeal when he hath no cause, but received right sentence
according to the law : ergo no appeal is to be admitted. This
is Martiall's law, or logic, I know not whether. But what
was this Maximus you name so often, Master Martiall, that
S. Augustin writ against? Could you read your note
book no better ? Against Maximinus the Arrian he writeth,
that neither of them both was to be holden by the authority
of Councils, the Nicene or the Ariminense, but by the autho
rities of the Scripture. Lib. iii. Cap. iv.1
But Tertullian would have heretics convinced by the au
thority of the Church, and not of the Scriptures. Yea, verily,
but such heretics as denied certain Scriptures, and perverteth
the rest by their false interpretations. Such are the Protes
tants, sayeth Martiall : for Luther denieth the Epistle to the
Hebrews, the Apocalypse, the Epistle of S. James, and S. Jude.
But Luther is not all Protestants ; neither did Luther always
or altogether deny them. Neither do the Protestants affirm any
thing in matters of controversy in their interpretations, but
the same is affirmed by writers of the most ancient and pure
Church. Martiall objecteth, that Christ sent not His disciples
always to the Scriptures ; " but sometimes to the fig-tree, to
the flowers of the field, to the fowls of the air, &c. : Paul
allegeth the heathen Poet; also custom and tradition." And
we also use similitudes of God's creatures, and allege custom
and condition [tradition :] but so that the Scripture be the only
rule of truth; whereto whatsoever in the world aoreeth is true,
whatsoever disagreeth from it is false. The traditions of the
Apostles, which by their writings we know to be theirs, we
reverently receive, not as men's traditions, but as the doctrine
of God ; for we hear them even as God. Also we hear the
voice of the Church admonishing ns, if we give offence.
Finally, the Patriarchs, Prophets, Apostles, Evangelists,
i [Calfhill, pp. 10, 129.]

I-J REPLY TO MASTER CALFHILL. 131
Pastors, and Doctors, we all reverence and hear, as the mes
sengers of God; but so that they approve unto us their say
ings out of the word of God and doctrine of Christ. Likewise
we admit the writings of the Fathers so far as they agree
with the writings of God; and further to be credited they
themselves required not. The sayings of the Doctors that
Martiall citeth, for the credit of old writers, you shall find
satisfied in mine Answer to Heskins, almost in order as they
be here set down : for one Papist borroweth of another ; and
few of them have any thing of their own reading. The saying
of Clemens is answered, Lib. i. Cap. viii. ; Eusebius concern
ing Basil and Gregory, and Hieronym, Cap. vii. The sayings
of Irenseus and Athanasius, that we ought to have recourse to
the Apostolic Churches, which retain the doctrine of the
Apostles, against new heresies, as also of Tertullian to the
like effect, we acknowledge to be true : but seeing the Church
of Rome retaineth not the Apostolic doctrine at this day, we
deny it to be an Apostolic Church. Therefore as many as
build upon it, or upon any ancient writer's words, which hath
not the holy Scriptures for his warrant, as M. Calfhill said,
buildeth upon an evil ground ; for " if an Angel from heaven
teach otherwise than the Apostles have preached unto us, he
be accursed." Here the quarrelling lawyer findeth fault with
his translation, because evangelizavimus may be referred as
well to the disciples as to the Apostles : so that the disciples'
preachings are to be credited as well as the Apostles'. No
doubt, if they preach the doctrine of the Apostles ; of which
the controversy is, and not of the persons that preach it.
But these quarrels, Sir Bachelor, are more meet for the bum
courts, where perhaps you are a prating Proctor, than for the
schools of Divinity. We are gone out, you say ; and that we
confess in our Apology. Yea, we are gone out of Babylon ;
but not out of the Church of God, but abide in the doctrine of
Christ : and you are gone out of the Church of God, which
remain in the sink of Rome, that is departed from that which
was heard from the beginning, and was sacrosanctum apud
ApostolorumEcclesias2, "most holy in the Apostles' Churches."
You cannot abide to be charged with the saying of Christ,
" They worship Me in vain, that teach the doctrine and pre- Matt. xv.
cepts of men." First you say "the Apostles were men whose
2 Tert. Li. iv. cont. Marc. [Cap. v.]
9 — 2

132 A REJOINDER TO J. MARTIALL'S [ART.
traditions the Church must receive." Yea, Sir, but they deli
vered no doctrine of their own. Secondly, " Christ speaketh
of the Scribes and Pharisees, and their fond traditions ; and
not of the Church, and her Catholic traditions and customs."
And they be Scribes and Pharisees, which even in the Church
teach a false worshipping of God, according to the doctrines
and traditions of men, disannulling the commandments of God ;
as the popish teachers in their doctrine of Images, Communion
in one kind, private Mass, &c.
That Augustin, framing a perfect preacher, willeth him
to confer the places of Scripture together; you say it is a
profound conclusion to infer, that he sendeth him not to
Doctors' distinctions, censure of the Church, canons of the
Popes, nor traditions of the Fathers, " but only to quiet and
content himself with the word of God." And these last words,
you say, are not found in Augustin, De Doct. Chr. Cap. ix. et
sequentibus; as though Master Calfhill1 recited the words, and
not the sense, for which he referreth you not only to that
chapter, but to the rest following, in all which there is no
mention of Doctors' distinctions, Popes' canons, &c. "But
this is an argument ab authoritate negative.[a.]" Make as
much and as little as you will of Augustin's authority, Master
Calfhill hath rightly inferred upon Augustin's judgment, that
if conference of Scriptures will make a perfect preacher, which
you grant, he needeth neither Doctors' distinctions, nor Church
censures, &c, but may quiet and content himself with the only
word of God.
But it would make an horse to break his halter, to see
how Martiall proveth out of Augustin, that God teacheth us
by men, and not by Angels, and that knowledge of the tongues
and instructions of men is profitable for a preacher ; yea, the
consent of most of the Catholic Churches, and the interpreta
tions of learned men : as though all those were not to be re
ferred to the due conference of Scriptures, where only resteth
the substance of doctrine and the authority of faith, and not
in Doctors' distinctions, Church censures, Popes' canons, &c,
which have no ground in the Scriptures, or else be contrary
to them. Where Master Calfhill sheweth, that as before the
Now Testament was written all things were examined ac
cording to the words and sermons of the Apostles, so after
i [page 57.]

I- J REPLY TO MASTER CALFHILL. 133
the New Testament was written all things ought to be
examined according to their writings, because there is none
other testimony of credit extant of their sermons and writings;
Martiall replieth out of Saint Augustin, that we have many
things by tradition which are not written, which, being uni
versally observed, it were madness to break. Ep. cxviii. 2 But
Augustin speaketh not of doctrine, but of ceremonies or obser
vations. Out of Hierom, ad Pam.3, he objecteth, that our
Creed is not written in the Scriptures : which is utterly false,
although the form of the Symbol be not set down as we
rehearse it.
Thirdly, out of Epiphanius, Contra Apostolic. Lib. ii.
Hazres. Ixi.4, "that we must use tradition, because all things
cannot be taken out of the holy Scriptures. Therefore the
holy Apostles delivered certain things in writing, and certain
things in tradition," &c. But they delivered nothing in tra
dition contrary to their writings ; neither omitted they to
write any thing that was necessary for our salvation. The
matter whereof Epiphanius speaketh is, that it is a tradition
of the Apostles that it is sin to marry after virginity decreed :
and yet he holdeth, that it is better to marry after virginity
decreed than to burn ; contrary to the doctrine of the Papists.
But Martiall frankly granteth, that no Doctor is to be credited
against the Scripture, and the consent of the whole Church :
yet where Master Calfhill said, that no man in any age was
so perfect that a certain truth was to be builded on him,
bringing examples of Aaron and Peter, the one tho High
Priest of the Jews, the other affirmed by the Papists to be
the same of the Christians, he quarrelleth at his induction,
because he sayeth not et sic de singulis ; whereas his argu
ment followeth not of the form of induction, but of the place
a majore ad minus.
After this, (as he doeth nothing but cavil,) he chargeth
Master Calfhill for corrupting Saint Augustin, saying, " Trust
a [al. liv. Opp. Tom. ii. 93—4. ed. Ben. Amst.]
* [It would appear that the reference is to the following passage in
the letter against the errors of John of Jerusalem : (Opp. ii. 173.) " In
Symbolo fidei ot Bpci nostra, quod, ab Apostolis traditum, non scribitur
in charta et atramonto, sed in tabulis cordis carnalibus," &c. — S. Jerom
evidently alluded to 2 Cor. iii. 3.]
i [p. 511. ed. Petav. Paris. 1622.]

134 A REJOINDER TO J. MARTIALL'S [ART.
me not, nor credit my writings," &c. ; Procem. Lib. iii. de
Trinit.; for Saint Augustin sayeth not "Trust me not1 :" but
he confesseth that he sayeth, " Do not addict thyself to my
writings, as to the canonical Scriptures." See what a corruption
here is, when Master Calfhill rendereth not the words, but
the meaning of Augustin.
Again, Saint Basil (he sayeth) is vilely abused, because
Master Calfhill sayeth, Saint " Basil setteth forth by a proper
similitude with what judgment the Fathers of the Church
should be read ;" Cone, ad Adol.2; whereas Basil speaketh of
profane writers : as though Basil's similitude may not serve
to shew how both should be read, because he speaketh but of
one sort.
Likewise he crieth out that Saint Hierom is not truly
alleged, because the printer in the English translation of
Hierom's words hath omitted this word "not," which he hath
set down in the Latin. The four pretty persons he putteth
upon Master Calfhill, as foolish and childish I omit ; only the
slanderers' persons I will touch. In saying that " the Fathers
declined all from the simplicity of the Gospel in ceremonies,"
he chargeth M. Calfhill to be a slanderer; because God
hath not suffered all the Fathers to decline, lest hell-gates
should have prevailed against His Church : although M. Calf
hill spake of those Fathers only whose writings are extant,
yet the gates of hell in idle ceremonies did but assault, they
did not prevail against the Church. And these Fathers de
parted not from the Gospel, but declined from the simplicity
thereof: but you Papists have departed from the Gospel
and doctrine of salvation, in setting up a new sacrifice, in
seeking justification by works, in overthrowing the true and
spiritual worship of God.
As for the two judges, the word and the Spirit, he
denieth them, finding many " defects in the word ; as that it
is senseless, dumb, deaf, not able to prove itself to be the
word of God ; having no more power to be a judge and decide
controversies than the book of statutes to put on my Lord
Chief Justice's robes, and to come to the King's Bench and
give sentence." I think there is no Christian man but ab-
1 [" Noli mois Uteris, quasi Scripturis canonicis, inservire.'' But
tho word "credo" occurs in the same sentence.]
2 [Calfhill, p. 59]

LJ REPLY TO MASTER CALFHILL. 135
horreth to read these blasphemies. Bat let ns see whether
the book of statates (although it put oa no robes) is not
judge, eYen over my Lord Chief Justice himself; who is a
minister serving to pronounce the law, not a King to alter the
law ; for he himself most be obedient to the law. Now in all
controversies that be de jure, either the law is plain to be
understood, or it is obscure. If it be plain, as that a felon
mast be hanged, or the son most inherit his rather, &c, the
Judge, pronouncing the law with authority, and execution fol
lowing his sentence, bridleth the obstinate person that will not
obey the law, which he knoweth as well as the Judge. If the
law be hard to be understood, the Judge must seek the inter-:
pretation thereof according to the mind of the law-maker, and
not according to his own fantasy. So that in all cases the
Judge hath no authority over the law, but under the law : so
that if he <rive wrong sentence, both he and his sentence are
to be judged by law. Or else why do you, Martiall, in your
mil law courts so often cry oat, Sit liber judex, "Let the book
be judge," if you will not allow the book of God's law to be
judge, even over them which have authority, as Justices have
in the common law, to pronounce it, and to declare it ?
The Spirit he refuseth to be judge, " because It is invisi
ble, secret, unknown, unable to be gone to, but in the
Church :" therefore the Church is the judge, and neither the
word nor the Spirit. Bat the Spirit, by His own substance in
comprehensible, is by Bis effecfe in the holy Scriptures visible,
revealed, known, and able to be gone unto : therefore a suf
ficient judge, taking witness of the Scriptures, and bearing
witness unto them. For that majesty of truth, that power of
working, that uniform consent, which is in all the Scriptures
inspired of God, maketh a wonderful difference of them from
all writings of men of all sorts.
But let as see Martiall's arguments against the Spirit of
God to be judge of the interpretation of the Scriptures. Paul
and Barnabas in the controversy of circumcision, went not to
the word and Spirit, but to the Apostles and Elders at Jeru
salem. O blockhead and shameless ass ! Paul and Barnabas
doubted not of the question, but sought the general quiet of
die whole Church by consent of a Council. But whither
went the Apostles and Elders for decision of the question
bat to the word and Spirit ? Read Act. xv.

Acts xvii.

136 A REJOINDER TO J. MARTIALL'S [ART.
Again, he citeth Deuteronom. xvii., that the people in
controversies should resort to the Priests for judgment : but
where should they fetch their judgment but of the law of
God, as it is in the same place ?
Again, Christ hath appointed Apostles, Evangelists, &c. :
therefore it is not a general precept for all men to try, all
men to judge what doctrine they receive ; because all be not
Apostles, Evangelists, &c. Then in vain said Christ to all
jamesv. men, "Search the Scriptures;" in vain the Apostles, "Try the
fjohniv. ' spirits :" neither did the Boerheans well, that " daily sought
the Scriptures, to see if those things were so" as the Apostles
taught. Martiall is to be pitied, if he know no difference between
authority of public teaching, and the trial and examination of
doctrine ; whereof this pertaineth to all men, the other to such
only as are called thereto. But Martiall proceedeth to shew,
that as God appointed one High Priest to the Jews, to avoid
schisms, so he appointed Peter among the Christians : and for
this purpose he citeth divers sentences of the ancient Fathers,
which all in order almost the reader shall find cited and satis
fied in mine Answer to Doctor Sander's book of the Eock of
the Church, Cap. v. ; except one place of Tertullian, De pudi-
citia1, which I marvel this popish lawyer would allege, being
so contrary to his purpose, but that the poor man understood
it not. Qualis es, &c.2 : " What art thou overthrowing and
changing the intention of our Lord, giving this personally to
Peter ? Upon thee (said He) I will build My Church." If it
were personally said to Peter, (Sir Bachelor,) counsel with Bal-
dus and Bertholdus whether it go by succession to the Pope
or no, which Tertullian denieth to pertain to every Elder
of the Church, because it was spoken personally to Peter.
And now at the length beginneth he to come to the
argument of his book, the sign of the Cross ; which he said
was the fourth signification of the word " Cross" in Scripture,
and calleth it " the material and mystical sign of the Cross ;"
which Master Calfhill denieth to be once mentioned in Scrip
ture in that sense that Martiall taketh it. Martiall repeateth
that which he had said before, that Esay, cap. xlix., saith, "I
1 [Writton after ho had becomo a Montanist.]
a [Cap. xxi. Opp. p. 574.— "In ipso Ecclesia exstructa est; id est,
per ipsuni."]

I.J REPLY TO MASTER CALFHILL. 137
will set out Mine sign on high to the people ;" which Hierom
upon that place expoundeth to be " the standard of the Cross;
that it may be fulfilled which is written, 'The earth is full of
His praise;'" et iterum, &c, " and again, ' In all the earth
His name is wonderful.'" Which words following immedi
ately Martiall craftily suppresseth; and falleth into a brab
bling matter, that preaching, which Master Calfhill said was
this standard, is not the only standard or sign lifted up by
God for conversion of the Gentiles, but miracles and good
examples of life, &c. : whereas the question is, whether the
popish sign of the Cross be the sign spoken by Esay and
Hierom. And the exposition added by Hierom sheweth
plainly, that he meaneth not a red or blue Cross banner, but
the preaching of Christ crucified3; whereby the earth is
filled with the praise of God, and His name is wonderful in
all the earth. But Martiall in the end concludeth, that " it
hath pleased the ancient Fathers to appoint and ordain the
sign of the Cross to be one mean among many, by which the
praise of God is set forth ;" where he should have proved,
that the sign of the Cross (as he taketh it) is mentioned in
the Scriptures. Other cavils and slanders, not more false
than foolish, I will clearly omit, as I purposed in the begin
ning ; and follow only such matter as is proper to the ques
tion in controversy, namely the sign of the Cross.
The second text, to prove that the sign of the Cross is
mentioned in the Scripture, he citeth out of Jere. iv., " Lift
up a sign in Sion;" which Hierom likewise expoundeth,
" Lift up the standard of the Cross in an high tower, that
is, in the height of the church." Concerning this interpreta
tion of Hierom, how apt it is for the place, I will spend no
time with Master Martiall: only this is sufficient for the pur
pose, that Saint Hierom meaneth not the Cross on the top
of the steeple, but the passion of Christ ; whereto he ex-
horteth the people to run for aid, as to a standard of comfort,
against the enemy that was coming upon them.
The third text is Matth. xxiv. : "The sign of the Son of
man shall appear in the clouds:" which divers of the old writers
expound to be the sign of the Cross : some to be Christ Him
self ; as Chrysostom, in Matt. xxiv. Horn. xlix. : some to be
the Cross itself on which He died ; as Chrysost. in Matt. Horn,
3 [Calfhill, page 94.]

138 A REJOINDER TO J. MARTI ALL'S [ART.
Ixxvii., and Theophylact, in xxiv. Matth.: some other the
passion, or sign of the Cross ; as Hierom upon that place : so
that the Doctors being in divers opinions, and speaking doubt
fully, there is no certainty of the matter. That the sign of
the Son of man is Christ Himself, as Chrysostom rehearseth
some to have thought in his time, is the most probable opinion ;
because both Mark cap. xiii. and Luke xxi. do seem so to ex
pound that sign of the Son of man in Matthew. But Martiall
is such a perilous logician, that he will admit nothing but
necessary consequences ; which we must be bold to urge and
require of him for the mention of the sign of the Cross, in such
variety of Doctors' opinions, and a matter so obscure.
The fourth text is Ezechiel ix., the sign Thau set on the
foreheads of them that should be preserved from destruction.
But what argument or authority hath he to prove that this
mark was the sign of the Cross ? None at all : only he quar-
relleth after his manner against M. Calfhill's reasons, which
shew it was not the sign of the Cross, but an inward spiritual
mark. And lest he should flee to the figure of the Samaritan
letter Thau1, which Hierom saith in his time was some
what like a Cross, Hierom himself sheweth that the Sep-
tuagintes, Aquila, and Symmachus translate Thau a mark, as
the word signifieth : only Theodotion left the Hebrew word
untranslated; which, because it is the name of the last Hebrew
letter, divers thought to signify Thorah, " the law," whereof
they were observers that were so marked. Cyprian also
taketh it for a mark, without naming the letter Thau,
Contra Demetrianum2. Wherefore, seeing here is nothing
whereby the fashion of the mark may be gathered, fondly
doth Martiall gather that it was the sign of the Cross.
The fifth text is the mark commanded to be set upon all
God's servants in the Apoc. vii., which Martiall out of Thomas
Aquinas concludeth to be the sign of the Cross. But that is
disproved by M. Calfhill's three reasons ; which Martiall, like
an impudent wrangler, will understand only of the place of
Ezechiel. 1. The Spirit of life and faith is not given with
the sign of the Cross : 2. which is not sufficient to discern
the good from the bad: 3. but is received of all sorts.
Therefore the seal spoken of in those places is not the sign of
the Cross.
i [Calfhill, p. 107.] " [AdDcmetr. Opp. p. 194. ed. Episc. Fell.]

!-J REPLY TO MASTER CALFHILL. 139
Martiall's Cross, not being found in the holy Scriptures,
hath yet often remembrance among the ancient Fathers ;
whom M. Calfhill doth justly reprove in this behalf, so highly
to extol that sign, which hath no ground in the word of God,
either in contention against the Gentiles that disdained it, or
in emulation of the heretics that first used it. For if all
records of ecclesiastical antiquity be sought, that are authen-
tical, and not manifestly counterfeited, there shall no mention
be found of Martiall's Cross in the fourth signification before
the superstition of the Yalentinian heretics, which called the
Cross Horon, confirmativam Crucem ; which Irenaaus, Lib. i.
Ca. i.3, doth speak of : so doth Epiphanius. Contra Valent.
Hazr. xxxi.4 But against this reproof of the old writers Martiall
hath a plausible common-place to sport himself: in which, not
withstanding, every wise man can see how fondly he be-
haveth himself, to be patron to them which either need not his
defence where they write well, or cannot be justified by him
where they write amiss. I will therefore pass over all such
fruitless controversies, and keep me only to the argument.
That Chrysostom was immoderate sometimes in extolling
the sign of the Cross, and such-like matters, either Martiall
must confess, or else excuse it by a rhetorical hyperbole :
as where he saith of Saint Paul's chain, Si quis me cozlo
cmdonet omni, vel ea qua Pauli manus vinciebatur catena,
illam ego honore prceponerem : " If any man could reward
me with all heaven, or else with that chain wherewith Paul's
hands were bound, I would prefer that chain in honour5.*'
Such are many excessive speeches in Chrysostom, both of
the sign of the Cross, of the Lord's Supper, of Baptism, and
other things. In Tertullian's time the sign of the Cross was
used among Christians, to shew themselves to be Christians,
against the Gentiles ; if it were not a piece of Montanus'
superstition. But whereas Martiall citeth Constantinus for the com
mendation of his Cross, he sheweth himself an egregious
ignorant person both in antiquity and in the history. For
the sign which Constantine commended to be a healthful
3 [_4-.fi-. Hoeres. p. 7. Paris. 1575.]
* [p. 59. Cornar. interp. Basil. 157S.]
5 [S. Chrysostom has already been released from responsibility for
these expressions. See page 110.]

140 A REJOINDER TO J. MARTIALL'S [aRT.
sign, and true token of virtue, by which he delivered the
city from tyrants, was not the sign of the Cross, but the
character of the name of Christ, which was shewed to him
from heaven with this inscription, ev tovtip v'tKa, " In this
God," not in this sign, thou shalt " overcome1."
And lest Martiall should cavil at the sign of the Cross
named by Eusebius, De Vit. Const. Lib. i.2, you shall under
stand, that he describeth the standard of Constantine to have
been a long spear, in the top whereof a bar went overthwart
like a Cross, to hang the banner upon; which even the heathen
Emperors used. But in the banner was set forth in gold
and precious stones that sign which Constantine did see; which
was the Greek letter P, with the letter X in the midst
t. thereof, after this manner : which is to be seen in many
hundreds of ancient coins, both of Constantine and other
Christian Emperors ; which is the character of the name of
Christ ; agreeing with the words of Eusebius, -^(a^ofievov tov
P Kara to fxeoaiTaTov. By which you may see how ridicu
lously Martiall and the Papists look only to the cross staff
upon which the banner hanged ; and see not the very whole
some sign indeed, which was described in the banner ; namely,
in the name of Christ, by whom Constantine had so glorious
victories. But Martiall, omitting to speak of the Cross used among
the heathen Priests of Serapis, will discuss Master Calfhill's
two rules : the one, that whatsoever is brought in under the
cloke of good intent is not straightway allowable. To this he
sayeth, that some things are brought in by private men,
without authority of the Pope ; and for private men he count-
eth the Bishops of Spain and France, in their Provincial
Councils. These bind not generally, except the Pope allow
them. Some things are received by tradition and custom,
generally received unaltered : such is the Cross. Some are
brought in by tradition and custom, but not generally received;
as that infants should receive the Communion, &c. : such the
Cross is not. But seeing he hath not concluded the con
tradiction of Master Calfhill's sixte [fixed, or first] rule, it
standcth still unmoveable ; that some things aro brought in
of a good intent, which are not allowable.
Tho second rulo is, Whatsoever hath been upon good
1 [Calfhill, p. 111.] 2 [Cap- x^'-J

I.J REPLY TO MASTER CALFHILL. 141
occasion received once must not necessarily be retained still ;
but, by advice of Stephanus, Bishop of Rome, if it be turned
to superstition, be altered by them that come after. These
after-comers, saith Martiall, are none other but the Bishops
of Rome his successors ; who, as they made the law, so they
must repeal it. But Stephanus sayeth3, Si nonnulli ex proz-
decessoribus et majoribus nostris fecerunt aliqua; naming
not only his predecessors, but also his elders : wherefore he
meaneth that not only his successors, but also his after-comers
in every particular Church, as well as his successors in the
Church of Rome, ought to abolish with good authority such
abused customs. But Martiall will not acknowledge that
crossing hath bred such inconveniences, that the inward faith
hath been untaught, and that the virtue hath been given to
the sign, which only proceedeth from Him which is signified ;
for crossing was not the cause, but the negligence of the
Clergy : as though there may not be many causes of one
thing ; and if crossing were but an occasion of such incon
veniences, there were good cause to take it away. Also he
denieth that they attribute the virtue of [toj the sign, without
relation to the merits of Christ's passion : whereas M. Calfhill
speaketh not of such shifts as crafty lawyers can make for
their excuses, but of the opinion of the ignorant people, who
have thought, without any further relation, that the sign of
the Cross was an holy, blessed, and wholesome thing. And
what do they that use' the example of Julian, who, crossing
himself of custom, and not with any relation to Christ whom
he despised, prove what virtue the sign of the Cross hath,
when the Devils immediately avoided ? Do they not manifestly
ascribe virtue to the sign, without relation of the maker?
Yea, saith Martiall, but Christ gave such virtue to that sign
by His death and passion. Shew that out of the Scriptures,
and the controversy is at an end.
But Martiall the lawyer, for the virtue of the Cross,
citeth Martiall the Apostle ; for so he will be called, and was,
as his cousin Martiall the lawyer affirmeth, one of the seventy-
two Disciples of Christ. But seeing he and his Epistles have
slept seven or eight hundred years in a corner, that they
were never heard of by Eusebius, Hierom, Gennadius, nor any
other of those times, he cometh too late now to challenge the
3 [Gratiani Decret. Dist. lxiii. Cap. xxviii.]

142 A REJOINDER TO J. MARTIALL'S [ART.
name of an Apostle or Disciple of Christ, whose name or
writings in so many hundred years no man hath registered,
But this argument is of authority negative, quod [quothj
Martiall. But what argument have you so good to prove
him authentical, as this is probable to prove him counterfeit ?
Nay, if we believe Martiall, Master Calfhill hath falsified the
Scripture, in saying that no man dare come near nor resist
Leviathan and Behemoth the Devils : for beside the quotation
is false, Cap. xl. for xli.1, the popish translation hath not so ;
and Christ His Apostles and faithful do resist the Devil.
Yea, Sir, but not with sword nor spear, whereof he speaketh,
nor with your Cross, but with spiritual armour. As for the
error of the quotation and your translation, every child may
see how fond a quarrel it is.
The excuse that Master Calfhill maketh for Damascen,
seeing Martiall doth not allow, let him make a better himself :
for some of Damascen's errors were such as Martiall. himself
and the Papists will not allow.
"But Lactantius maketh the blood of the paschal lamb
sprinkled on the door-post a figure of the Cross on men's
foreheads." That is false in your sense, Master Martiall : for he
speaketh allegorically of the spiritual impression of the blood of
Christ by faith ; and that his words declare, where he saith2,
that Christ is salvation " to all which have written the sign of
blood, that is, the sign of the Cross upon which He shed His
blood, on their foreheads." But Christ is not salvation to all
that have your sign of the Cross on their bodily foreheads. But
whereas Lactantius in the next chapter saith, that Devils are
chased away both by the name of Christ, and by the sign of
His passion3; if it pleased God, in those times, by such out
ward signs to confound His adversaries, what is that to de
fend the superstitious and erroneous abuse of those signs at
this time ?
And here Martiall falleth into another brabble4 : for, mis
taking his argument, which is not worth a straw, the end is,
the Cross is like a Sacrament, although that it be not as good
as a Sacrament. But wherein is it like ? It hath neither in
stitution, nor element, nor promise, nor effect of a Sacrament :
then it is as like as an apple is like an oyster. You say it is
i [Calfhill, p. 70.] 2 Lib. iv. Cap. xxvi. De vera Sap.
3 [Calfhill, p. 83.] * [Brabble: brawl.]

I.J REPLY TO MASTER CALFHILL. 143
instituted by tradition. Prove that tradition to have come
from Christ and His Apostles. I have shewed it came from
heretics. Again, God said to Constantine, In hoc signo vince.
I have shewed that God spake neither of a Cross nor of a
sign : and yet if He had, it was but a particular vision, au
thorising no general observation. You say, it may be a
Sacrament as well as bread and wine, which hath no promise.
You lie like an arrogant hypocrite : for bread and wine in
the use of the Lord's Supper hath as good promise as water
in Baptism. Concerning the effect of the Sacraments, and
how they be causes of grace, not as principal efficients, but as
instrumental means by which God useth to work in the faith
ful, it were to begin a new matter to stand in argument with
you, which do nothing but wrangle, scoff, and rail in this
argument, as you do in all the rest.
Wherefore, to return to the Cross, Master Calfhill saith,
that if there were such necessity in the Cross to fight against
Satan, the Apostles dealt not wisely to omit such a necessary
weapon. Martiall answereth, that neither he nor the Fathers
defend it as necessary. Well then, we have gained thus much,
that the Cross is a needless weapon against the Devil. But
if it had been necessary, he saith, it had been none oversight
in the Apostles, which have in some Epistles omitted more
needful matters ; as though they were bound to speak of all
matters in every Epistle. But of the use of the Cross they
never speak : no, not where they instruct a Christian man to
fight against the Devil ; against whom it is needful to use all
weapons that be of any force. The quarrel of altering Saint
Peter's words I omit, as childish : Master Calfhill rehearseth
his meaning, and not his words. The other argument that
followeth, of heretics resembling Antichrist in denying, you
shall find answered in my Confutation of D. Sander's Rock,
Cap. xviii., in the eleventh mark of an Antichristian.
But Martiall is not content that his error in citing the
thirty-ninth Question for the thirty-eighth of Athanasius ad
Antiochum should be noted5. Indeed, the error of number
is a small matter: but when a man will follow wilfully a
corruption for a truth, it cannot be excused. That Devils
fly when they see the Cross is Question fifteen in the best
reformed prints, whatsoever Martiall doth follow. But to the
5 [See Calfhill, pp 73—4.]

144 A REJOINDER TO J. MARTIALL'S [ART.
purposo, except Martiall can dcclaro unto us with what eyes
tho Devils behold the Cross, ho shall have much ado to per
suade us that this author speaketh of bis sign of the Cross
in this place. Othcrwiso I doubt not, but when Devils con
sider tho conquest of Christ upon tho Cross, they tremble and
flee away, and are miserably tormented, as Athanasius saith :
but not whensoever they see the Cross borne in procession, or
set up in tho market-place, or pointed in tho air, cither by a
superstitious Papist, or by a devilish conjurer. Saint Anthony's
counsel, as great and as good as you make him, may well be
suspected, seeing it hath no ground in the holy Scriptures.
That Chrysostom alloweth signing with tho Cross in tho
body is confessed ; but that he accounteth it an idlo ceremony,
where faith in The crucified is not, Martiall cannot deny : nor
yet, that faith in tho death of Christ is sufficient, without tho
sign of tho Cross in the body. Yet will ho not grant it to bo
superfluous ; but resembleth it to tho incarnation and passion
of Christ, without which wo might bo saved by the absolute
power of God, to the uso of Ministers, good works, &c. :
whereas we ought to say, that all these things are necessary,
becauso God hath so ordained them ; but the crossing of the
body is no ordinanco of God, but of men.
That Origen, in Cap. vi. ad Rom. Li. vi., speaketh not of
Martiall's Cross, but of the passion of Christ, the whole con
text of his words proveth, as M. Calfhill sheweth1. But Mar
tiall replieth that ho saith, " So great is tho virtuo of tho
Cross of Christ, that if it be set beforo our eyes, and faithfully
retained in our mind, so that wo look still upon the death of
Christ with tho eyes of our mind, no concupiscence, &c, can
overcome us." These words (saith he) prove two Crosses;
ono before tho eyes, tho other beforo tho mind. But if ho
would shore2 up his eyes, he might sco that Origen speaketh
not of tho eyes of tho body, but of the eyes of the mind. As
for tho tautology that he would avoid, it may please his wisdom
to understand, that tho explaining of a metaphor is no tauto
logy, or vain repetition.
That Cassiodorus3 and Lactantius speak of tho sign of tho
Cross, it is granted. But because they speak of it beside tho
book of God, Master Calfhill doth well to disprove thoir
i [p. 79.] 2 [Shore: lift.]
-1 [IC.vpos. in Psal. iv. Opp. ii. 19- od. Bon.]

I.J REPLY TO MASTER CALFHILL. 145
reasons : as where Cassiodoro compareth that sign of the Cross
upon the faithful to the Prince's stamp on the coin, the com
parison is naught. For the sign of the Cross which is upon
hypocrites sheweth them not to be Christ's servants : neither
did Christ give any such outward sign, by which they should
be known that would profess to be His servants, but Baptism.
How good Christians the Friars, that are tho greatest crossers,
be, I will not stand to discuss : their hypocrisy is too well
known in the world.
Again, where Lactantius joineth the sign of the Cross
with the name of Christ to be of force to drive away Devils,
he doth as if a man should join a straw with a spear to run
at tilt withal. For the name of Christ is sufficient, and
needeth none assistance of the sign of the Cross, to cast out
Devils, where Christ hath given that power and faith. Yet
Martiall objecteth, that the name of Christ was not sufficient
to cast out some kind of Devils, as in example of the man's
son, Matt. xvii. But it was not for want of the sign of the
Cross, but for want of faith, which must be obtained at the
hands of God by prayer and fasting. He would have Scrip
ture whereby the sign of the Cross is forbidden to be used ;
as though every indifferent thing that may be abused is ex
pressed by name. To make a sign or figure of the Cross is
an indifferent thing : to make it for a defence against Devils
is a superstitious thing ; and forbidden by all such texts of
Scripture [asj forbid superstition, and confidence reposed in
any thing saving in God only, by such means as He hath
appointed. That young novices in the faith were crossed before they
wore baptized in Augustin's time, it need to be no question :
and yet it followeth not, that those words of Augustin which
Martiall citeth, De Symb. ad Catech. Lib. ii. Cap. i.4, were
spoken of the signing, but of that which was signified by the
sign, as Master Calfhill answoreth.
The rest of this Article is spent in frivolous quarrels ; in
which is no argument to uphold the superstitious use of the
Cross, but that Devils are afraid of it; as in the story of
Julian, and a Jew, in which God declared what force it had
cc opere operato, of the work wrought, even without faith;
but this lie maketh extraordinary. A simple force, that the
4 [See Calfhill, p. 84.]
[fulke, h, J 1"

146 A REJOINDER TO J. MARTIALL'S [ART.
Devil should seem to fly from them in whose hearts he dwelled
still. But Martiall would know how Master Calfhill is assured
that the Devil did counterfeit fear, and was not afraid indeed.
Verily, I think there need to be no better reason given, than
that in outward appearance he pretended to fly from their
bodily presence, from whose hearts he departed not at all, or
rather for their wicked conjuring entered with greater force.
How little the Devil is afraid of the sign of the Cross where
faith is not, the story of the seven sons of Sceva declareth,
Act. xix. ; where the Devil, being conjured by the name of
Jesus whom Paul preached, fell upon the conjurers and tor
mented them : unless Martiall think it was because they lacked
the sign of the Cross; which would have made them fly away,
when the name of Jesus and Paul prevailed not against them.
To conclude, it cannot be denied but divers of the ancient
Fathers affirm more of the sign of the Cross than they can
justify by the holy Scripture: and yet they are abused often
times by Martiall and such as he is, as though they spake
of the sign, when they had respect only to the death and
passion of Christ; as before is shewed, and more remaineth
afterward to be shewed.

THE SECOND ARTICLE.
JIabtiali. Martiall. That the Cross of Christ was prefigured in the law of
nature, foreshewn by the figures of Moses' law, denounced by the
Prophets, and shewed from heaven in the time of grace.
Fulke. Fulke. Master Calfhill said, that the sign of the Cross
was neither prefigured in the law of nature, nor foreshewed
by the figures of Moses' law, nor denounced by the Prophets,
nor shewed from heaven in the time of grace; but the passion
of Christ, and manner of His death. Against whom cometh
forth Martiall, and offereth to prove, that the Cross whereon
Christ died was prefigured, &c; which is no contradiction of
M. Calfhill's assertion : although the Fathers rather dally in
trifling allegories than soundly to prove that the Cross was
prefigured in those places which he allegeth. As August.
Contra Faust. Lib. xii. Cap. xxxiv.1 ; that the two sticks
which the widow of Sarepta gathered did prefigure the Cross
1 [Opp. Tom. viii. col. 174.]

II. J REPLY TO MASTER CALFHILL. 147
whereon Christ died, not only by the name of wood, but by
the number of the sticks : et De v. Hceres. ad QuodvultDe.
Cap. ii.2; that Moses, lifting up his hands to heaven, did pre
figure the Cross whereby Christ should redeem the world :
so saith Tertullian and Augustin in divers places. All which
prove not that the Image or sign of the Cross, but that the
Cross itself, whereon Christ died, was prefigured : whereof We
make no question but it might be, seeing it was in God's
determination that Christ should die on the Cross ; although
we would wish sounder proofs than these for such prefigu-
ration. Here would Martiall excuse his ridiculous argument,
because it is not in mode and figure : but indeed it faileth
both in form and matter ; for his minor is false, that the sign
of the Cross was prefigured by the hands of Moses : as
though there were no difference between the Cross on which
Christ suffered, and a superstitious sign of the Cross that a
Papist maketh.
Concerning the sign Thau in Ezechiel, cap. ix., I have
spoken sufficiently in the first Article, that it was not the
figure of any letter like a Cross, but a mark unnamed or
described, as Apo. vii. And whereas Hierom saith that the
Samaritans had a letter somewhat like a Cross, it is not to be
thought that the Samaritans had the true form of letters, and
the Jews lost it. Chrysostom3 draweth it to the Greek letter,
and trifleth of the number which the letter Tau signifieth.
Tertullian4 is indifferent between the Latin letter and the
Greek; and setteth this T for the mark of his forehead, differ
ing somewhat from our popish Q: for which cause Martiall
calleth the character of the Latin letter Tau, saying, " Our
Tau is a sign of the Cross." But of this mark more, Art. i.,
and in my Answer to D. Sander's book of Images, Cap. xiii.
or xii. Concerning the figure of the Cross that was in the old
2 [The Tractatus contra quinque Hozreses (in Append. T. viii.) is
fictitious, though defended by the Louvainists and Bellarmin. It is
here confounded with the genuine Liber de Hoeresibus, ad Quodvult-
Deum.] 3 In Mark H. 14. [The fourteen Homilies on the Gospel by S. Mark
are spurious, and " Monachi alicujus satis inficeti opus." (Cave, Hist.
Lit. i. 317. Oxon. 1740.)]
4 Adver. Mar. Li. 30. [Lib. iii. Cap. xxii.— Calfhill, p. 106.]
10—2

148 A REJOINDER TO J. MARTIALL'S [ART.
time in the idol Serapis, whereunto he thinketh scorn to
be sent for the antiquity of that sign, he answereth out of
Socrates, that it was there set by the providence of God, as
the inscription of the altar in Athens; and among the hiero-
glyphical letters of the Egyptian Priests signified life to come.
But this proveth no more the superstitious use thereof than
the altar in Athens proveth that we should set up such altars,
and dedicate them to the unknown God.
Next followeth the brawl about the story of Constantine's
Cross, which should be the figure of the Cross shewed from
heaven in the time of grace; wherein Martiall noteth no less
than six contradictions and four lies in M. Calfhill: but of
them let the reader judge. The sign shewed I have proved
before not to have been Martiall's Cross, but the character of
the name of Christ : and so doth Constantinus himself call it,
speaking to Christ ; tov 2ov yapaKTt\pa eepaWofiyvo?, &C1 :
" Holding forth Thy character, I have overcome," &c. ; mean
ing the standard in which that character was embroidered.
But of this I have spoken sufficient, Art. i., and against
D. Sander's book of Images, Cap. xiii. Ar. or [xii.J after
the error of his print.
After much wrangling and brabbling about M. Calfhill's
principles, wherein it were easy to display Martiall's folly, but
that I have professed to omit such by-matters, he cometh to
the sign of the Cross shewed to Julian, and marked in his
soldiers' apparel : which if it were true, as Sozomenus reporteth
it, yet proveth it not that the sign of the Cross was shewed
from heaven that it should be used of Christians; and the
less, because it was shewed to none but Jews, and forsakers
of Christian religion, as Master Calfhill noteth2 : which might
probably be thought to be the mark of persecutors rather
than of Christians. But seeing the sign of the Cross hath
very oftentimes appeared not only in clouds, but also on
men's apparel, with divers other sights, as Conradus Lycos-
thenes in his book De Prodigiis observeth; whether the cause
of those apparitions be natural or supernatural, or sometime
perhaps artificial, the appearing of that sign from heaven doth
no more argue an allowance of the popish ceremony of cross-
1 [" -riji' 'S.rjv v<ppayiha Travraxov irpoftaWopevos, koKKivikov frfr\aapi\v
a-Tparov." (Euseb- De vita Const. Lib. ii. Cap. Iv.)]
2 [page 120.]

II. J REPLY TO MASTER CALFHILL. 149
ing in religion than the appearing of other shapes and sights
in heayen do teach us to frame ceremonies of armour, of
horsemen, of beasts, of trees, of pillars, of circles, and such
like, because the figures of them have been shewed from
heaven. So that hitherto the sign of the Cross hath not been
proved to have been prefigured in the law of nature, nor of
Moses, neither denounced by the Prophets, nor used by the
Apostles, nor shewed from heaven to be a pattern of the
allowance of superstitious crossing among the Papists.

THE THIRD ARTICLE.
Martiall. That every church, chapel and oratory, erected to the Martiall.
honour and service of God, should have the sign of the Cross.
Fulke. First, it is to be remembered, that for this posi- Fulke.
tion he hath no shew of the authority of the holy Scriptures ;
nor yet the testimony of any ancient writer, that any church,
chapel, or oratory should have any Cross graven or painted
within it or upon it, for five hundred years after Christ.
Eusebius, describing divers churches builded in his time,
sheweth no such necessary furniture of a Christian church ;
although he set forth even the fashion of the stalls or stools
where the Ministers should sit. Lib. x. Cap. iv.
But Martiall, to have shew of antiquity, beginneth with a
new-found old Doctor, called Abdias : whose authority seeing
Master Calfhill rejecteth as a mere counterfeit, Martiall spend-
eth certain leaves in quarrelling at some of his reasons ; and
the rest he passeth over, because he can say nothing against
them. But touching the credit of this Abdias, if any man be
not satisfied with M. Calfhill's reasons, I refer him further
to the Bishop of Sarum's book against Harding, Art. i. Div.
v. p. 83-
To speak of the vow of virginity supposed to be made by
the Virgin Mary, it is impertinent to the cause. It cometh
somewhat nearer, that he defendeth building of churches
in the honour of Saints, because some churches of old have
had the name of Saints. But Augustin saith of the Saints :
Quare honoramus eos charitate, non servitute. Nee eis
templa construimus. Nolunt enim se sic honorari a nobis •
quia nos ipsos, cum boni simus, [sumus,] templa summi Dei
3 [Bp. Jewel, pp. 112—13. ed. Parker Soc. Calfhill, pp. 126—35.]

150 A REJOINDER TO J. MARTIALL'S [ART.
esse noverunt : " Wherefore we honour them with love, not
with service. Neither do we build churches to them. For
they will not be so honoured of us ; because they know that
we ourselves, when we are good, are the temples of the
highest God." De vera Religion. Ca. Iv.1 Also, Ep. clxxiv.
Pascentio2, he proveth the Holy Ghost to be God, because
He hath a temple. Also. Ench. ad Laurent. Cap. lvi.3 The
like judgment he hath De Civit. Dei, Li. viii. Cap. xxvii.
& Li. xxii. Ca. x. ; shewing that it is a divine honour
proper to God to have temples erected to His honour ; and
declaring that the Martyrs' churches were places set up in
their memory, not temples in their honour.
But Martiall, finding nothing for the space of five hundred
years after Christ for his purpose, at length stumbleth upon a
Canon of the Provincial Council of Orleans in France ; that
" No man should build a church before the Bishop came and
set up a Cross." This Canon made in those days sheweth,
that churches beforo the making thereof were builded without
a Cross : neither bindeth it any but such as build churches
within the province of Orleans : beside that it may be
doubted of the antiquity of the Canon, seeing it is not found
in the records of that Council, but taken out of the Pope's
Canon Law, where is most counterfeit stuff4 : beside that it
is not observed among the Papists themselves, that before any
church, chapel, or oratory be builded, the Bishop of the
diocese should come and make a Cross there.
The next Canon he citeth out of the Council of Tours the
second : Ut corpus Domini in altari, non in armario, sed
sub Crucis titulo componatur: "That the Lord's body be laid
on the altar, not in a chest or almery, but under the title of
the Cross." But Martiall doth English it thus : " That the
body of our Lord, consecrated upon the altar, be not reposed
and set in the revestry, but under the Rood." He braggeth,
that when he was usher of Winchester school, he taught his
scholars the true signification of the Latin words. But beside
pro ciu. that he translateth armarium, "a revestry," which Tully useth
for a place wherein money was kept5, which could not well be
an open house, and also maketh a manifest difference between
1 [Opp. Tom. i. col. 588.] 2 [alias cexxxviii. Opp. ii. 651.]
3 [Opp. vi. 159.] 4 [Calfhill, p. 135.]
s [" Armaria et arcro habont libros." (S. Hieron. in S. Matth. Cap.
xxiii. Opp. T. ix. p. 68.)]

Pro Cel.

III. J REPLY TO MASTER CALFHILL. 151
armarium and sacrarium; beside also that he calleth Iitulum
Crucis "the Rood," where findeth he in this sentence the Latin
word for his English word "consecrated"? But to the pur
pose of the Cross, this Canon sheweth, that in old time they
used to lay it otherwise than under the title of the Cross;
whether they meant thereby the sign of the Cross, or these
words, Jesus Naz. Rex Judozorum, which was the title of the
Cross; as they had in those days many ceremonies grown
out of use, and therefore not understood of us.
The third Council is a Canon of the sixth General Council
at Constantinople in Trullo, which in the margent he calleth
the Council of Chalcedon in Trullo, Can. lxxiii.6 ; which M.
Calfhill could not find in that Council, because it is certain,
and confessed by Garanza [Carranza*,J Martiall's author, that
the sixth Council of Constantinople in Trullo made no cere
monies [Carions,J but [statements] of the faith, and that these
which he setteth forth were made privately by them long after
in the days of Justinian: therefore they have neither the
authority of Canons, nor be free from suspicion of forgery.
And yet the Canon alleged proveth not this Article ; for it
only commandeth Crosses that were made in the pavement to
be put out. Nay, saith Martiall, the prohibition of the Cross
to be made on the ground permitteth it to be made in all
other places ; " for a prohibition restrictive of a thing to be
done in one place is a lawful permission for all other places
which are not namely included in that prohibition :" and for
this he referreth himself to the judgment of the lawyers. But
I think his law deceiveth him in this point as much as his
divinity almost in every point. For if the King's edict forbid
swearing, fighting, brawling in his court, I suppose he doth
not permit these things as lawful in all other places. The
last Canon, which forbad the laying of the Lord's body in the
vestry, doth not lawfully permit it to be laid in the belfry.
The captain's prohibition, that no man shall discharge his
belly within the precinct of the camp, is not a lawful per
mission that a soldier may defile a church without the camp.
The law that forbiddeth the Prince's image to be made on
the pavement is not a lawful permission that the same may
be set upon the high altar. What Martiall's law is in these
G [Calfhill, Supplem. Observat. pp. x  xi.]
7 [Summa, p. 396. Salm. 1551.]

152 A REJOINDER TO J. MARTIALL'S [ART.
cases, I know not : but my reason serveth me not to allow of
those prohibitions for lawful permission.
And where these Canon-makers say they did " reverence
the lively Cross with mind, tongue, and sense," Martiall in-
ferreth that "this word 'sense' declareth that they had a
sensible Cross, to which they might shew their reverence with
their external senses." Which senses, Martiall? their sight,
their hearing, their smelling, their tasting, or their feeling ?
Did you teach your scholars at Winchester thus to interpret ?
Was it the Image of the Cross, or the lively Cross, that shewed
them that saving health, which they profess to reverence in
word and mind ? And were you wont to construe cum " see
ing," vivifica Crux "the living Cross," ostenderit "doth shew?"
— for thus you give me example to play with you. And if
one of your boys that learned Terence had so construed, would
you not have straightway asked him, Cujus modi et temporis
ostenderit ? If he had answered, " The preterperfect tense,"
you would have demanded whether "doth" be the sign of
that temps, or "have." If "have," then have you not rightly
translated Cum Crux vivifica Mud salutare nobis ostenderit,
"Seeing the living Cross doth shew unto us that healthful
thing." Wherefore, to leave this trifling, the Canon is this :
"Seeing the living Cross" (that is to say, the passion of Christ,)
"hath shewed unto us that saving health, it behoveth us to
employ all our study, that we may give unto it, by which we
are saved from our old fall, that honour which is convenient.
Wherefore, giving reverence unto it with mind, speech, and
understanding, we command that the figures of the Cross,
which are made of some in the ground and pavement, bo
utterly taken away ; lest the trophy of our victory be injured
by treading of those that pass over it." It is not without
fraud that, beside your false translation, you have omitted per
quam ab antiquo lapsu servati sumus; lest every popish
woman might see that the Canon speaketh not of honour given
to the Image of the Cross, whereby we are not saved, but to
the passion of Christ.
But Martiall rejecteth the Council of Constantinople, con
demning Images, as M. Calfhill doth the second of Nice,
allowing them. The best way then, as Augustin counsclleth
tho heretic Maximinus, wore to give over tho hold of Councils
on both sides, and try tho matter by the word of God.

III. J REPLY TO MASTER CALFHILL. 153
It is a fond quarrel that he picketh to M. Calfhill, of the
time when the Eliberine Council was kept1. If it be ancienter
than he supposeth, it is of greater credit; for the latter times
were more corrupt. And whereas he girdeth2 at the marriage
of Ministers, because in the twenty-seventh Canon of that
Council the Bishop or Priest was forbidden to have any wo
man to dwell with him, but either his sister or his daughter,
being a virgin and professed to God, he sheweth both his
falsehood and his folly : his falsehood, for that he translateth
extraneam, which is a strange woman, " no other woman ;"
his folly, in seeing the Priest's daughter, he cannot see his
wife. But the thirty-third Canon commandeth them abstinence
as from their wives, and begetting of children. I answer, if
that Canon were not to be understood of a temporal absti
nence, the General Council of Nice decreed against it; as ap-
peareth in Socrat. Lib. i. Cap. xi.
But touching the Canon against Images, Placuit : " We
decree, that Pictures ought not to be in the church, lest that
which is worshipped and adored should be painted on the
walls ;" first he repeateth his principle of law, before set
down, for prohibition; that Pictures are only forbidden, and
not other Images: as though he that forbiddeth wounding
permitteth murdering : beside that they should be simple
Images, in which were no picture or painting. Secondly he
saith, that Pictures on walls only are forbidden : but therein
he lieth ; for they are generally forbidden in the church : ergo
not in walls only. Thirdly he saith, "Here is an evident
proof that Pictures were then worshipped. For this argu
ment followeth necessarily upon these words : That was
worshipped that was forbidden to be painted in the walls :
But Pictures were forbidden to be painted upon walls : Ergo
Pictures were worshipped. Answer, M. Calfhill." Who would
have thought that an usher of Winchester and student in
Louvain, that teacheth us an old lawyer's point, would also
teach us a new logic point, to conclude affirmatively in the
second figure, and that all upon particulars? "Answer, M.
Calf.," quod Martiall. Nay, answer goose to such an argu
ment : and reason who will any longer with such an ass about
1 [Calfhill, p. 154. Tho mistake was assuredly one of considerable
moment ; and Calfhill was lod into it by the Homily against peril of
Idolatry, which he too closely followed upon more than this occasion.]
2 [Girdeth: snooreth.]

154 A REJOINDER TO J. MARTIALL'S [aRT.
this matter. For I will hearken to his law, seeing his logic is
no better : " For the better understanding of a statute or a
Canon, divers circumstances are to be considered." This
was law enough to make him a Bachelor.
Well, the circumstances are these. The authors of this
Canon were Catholic and wise Bishops. The place, Granata,
a city in Spain ; which had then many infidels, that thought
Christians to commit idolatry by having of Images. The time,
when they feared persecution ; as appeareth by the fifty-ninth
and sixtieth Canon. But if we beheve Garanza1 your author,
it was about the time of the Nicene Council, when no perse
cution could be feared : and therefore your cause, which you
make the fourth circumstance, is forged; that they feared lest
those Images should have been despitefully abused by the
Pagans, when they were fled. Neither are you able to prove
it ; and therefore in the end you conclude, it was but a Synod
of nineteen Bishops, whose Decree was undone by the second
Nicene General Council, the Council at Frankfort, &c. That
the Council of Frankfort condemned the Council of Nice, he
only denieth that it did so, but answereth not the authority
cited by M. Calfhill. The book of Carolus Magnus against
Images he condemneth for a forged tale ; although ancient
writers make mention of it, and the style of the book doth
argue that it was written in that time, if not by the Emperor,
yet by his appointment2. But seeing he referreth us to the
Confutation of the Apology, fol. 328, I will refer the readers
to the Defence of the Apology3 for the same matter.
After this he spendeth certain leaves in defending the
credit of Irene, the idolatrous Empress, and in defacing those
Emperors that were enemies to Images : wherein he hath the
idolatrous historians favourable, not sparing to report what
soever their malicious enemies could invent to slander them.
But hereof I have written somewhat in mine Answer to
D. Sander's book of Images, Cap. iv. or iii., and Cap. xv.
or xiv. Now cometh in S. Ambrose extolling the Cross, Ser.
lvi. : "As a church cannot stand without a Cross, so a ship
is weak without a mast. For by and by the Devil doth dis
quiet it, and the wind doth squat it. But when tho sign of the
i [Calfhill, p. 154, note 1.]
2 [Supra, p. 23, n. 5.]
3 [Bp. Jewel's Works, vi. 474. Cf. iii. 257. cd. Jolf.]

HI. J REPLY TO MASTER CALFHILL. 155
Cross is set up, by and by both the iniquity of the Devil
is beaten back, and the tempest of wind is appeased." Here
Martiall triumpheth against M. Calfhill, that the author speak
eth not of a cross-beam in the church, but of the sign of the
Cross. But he lieth shamefully: for this writer speaketh not
of a material church, chapel, or oratory, but of the congre
gation of Christ, in which the Cross and passion of Christ
hath the same force that the mast in a ship, which is made
after the figure of the Cross, and the plough-beam in tillage,
&c. His other sentence, Serm. Iv., is yet more plain against
him : Arbor enim qucedam in navi est Crux in Ecclesia,
quce inter totius sozculi blanda et perniciosa naufragia in-
columis sola servatur. In hac ergo navi quisquis aut arbori
Crucis se religaverit, aut aures suas Scripturis divinis
clauserit, dulcem procellam luxurioz non timebit : " For the
Cross in the Church is as it were a certain tree in a ship,
which among the flattering and pernicious shipwrecks of the
whole world alone is preserved in safety. In this ship there
fore whosoever shall either bind himself to that tree of the
Cross, or stop his ears with the holy Scriptures, he shall not
fear the sweet storm of luxuriousness," &c. He alludeth to
the fable of Ulysses, which tied himself to the mast, and
stopped his ears with wax, that he might not hear the song
of the mermaids. This sentence (whereof Martiall durst cite
but three or four words) declareth, that this author maketh
nothing for the title of this Article of erecting the Cross in
churches, chapels, &c. And yet, when all is done, I must
confess with the learned, that these Sermons were not written
by S. Ambrose ; but by one Maximus of latter time, Bishop
either of Taurinum or of Milan4.
Concerning the tale that you father upon Sir Ambrose
Cave, of an island by Rhodes, and a road there where no
anchor nor cable will hold the ship, unless the mariner make
the sign of the Cross over the place where he casteth anchor;
it may be he reported it as a fond persuasion of superstitious
people, but I think not that he gave any credit to it. Popery
is full of such tales. But why do you charge M. Calfhill with
a lie, for saying that in the popish Catholic time the church
of Paul's was twice burned within fifty years' space? Marry,
"because it was not on Corpus Christi eve; nor the Communion
table was burned with all the four aisles, within the compass of
4 [Soo Calf hill, p. 177.]

156 A REJOINDER TO J. MARTIALL'S [ART.
three or four hours : therefore it was not the like plague." But
how often hath the Sacrament of the altar (your God) been
burned, when churches were fired ? Mo things, in which there
is any diversity, shall be like, by Martiall's logic or law : I
cannot tell whether it is, by which he condemneth M. Calfhill
for a liar.
Touching Lactantius, he reasoneth to and fro of his autho
rity himself, and yet chargeth M. Calfhill for so doing. Our
judgment of Lactantius, as of all old writers, is this : that
whatsoever they speak contrary to the truth of the holy
Scriptures, we may boldly reject it ; whatsoever they say
agreeable unto them, we do willingly admit it. The chief
matter touching this Article is this ; that certain verses are
ascribed to Lactantius, exhorting men to worship the Cross;
which verses M. Calfhill1 denieth to have been written by
Lactantius : first, because S. Hierom, in the catalogue of his
works, maketh no mention of them. But they might be un
known to Hierom, saith Martiall. It is not like they could be
unknown to Hierom, and known to Martiall. Secondly, be
cause he speaketh of churches, that were scarcely builded in
Lactantius' time. But Martiall proveth that Christians had
churches even in the Apostles' time, and ever since ; as though
any man doth doubt of that, but of such churches as this
versifier speaketh of. Thirdly, because the doctrine of these
verses, concerning Images, is contrary to that Lactantius
taught, and was generally received in his days. Martiall
replieth, that all which Lactantius did write against Images
was against the false Images of the heathen ; and not against
the holy Images of the Christians. But Christians in his time
had no Images as holy in any use of religion ; and his argu
ments are general against all Images in religion. Finally,
it is also manifest that this versifier, making a poetical proso
popoeia, induceth Christ hanging upon the Cross, and speaking
to him that cometh into the church : and therefore no argu
ment of Cross or Image may be rightly gathered out of the
poem, whosoever was the author. For immediately after this
verse, Flecte genu, lignumque Crucis venerabile adora, fol
loweth, Flebilis innocuo terramque cruore madentem Ore
petens humili, lachrymis sufunde subortis : "Bow thy knee,
worship the venerable wood of the Cross," and " Lamentably
kissing with humble mouth the earth, which is moist with
i [pages 180—4.]

III.] REPLY TO MASTER CALFHILL. 1 ;> '
mino innooont 1*100(1. wash it over with tears (lowing out."
By those versos then Martiall may as well prove, that tho
church-floor was moist with tho blood of Christ, as that there
was a Cross in tho church.
To Lactantius ho joineth Augustin. De Sanctis Horn, xix.9,
saying that churohos arc dedicated with tho sign of the Cross:
where he not only changed the word characters into mysteno.
but also translated the word mustcrio " by the sign." Where
he confesseth his fault, he may bo pardoned: but where he
justifioth mustcrio and signo U^ be all one. he sheweth him
self as he is. But how will ho persuade us. that those Homilies
/),• Tempore, and De Sanctis, of which some ono is ascribed
to so many authors, were either written by Augustin. or by
any of those times? The style is so dissonant that any man
learned, and of indifferent judgment, will confess : although
it is not to be denied but the sign of the Cross was supersti-
tiously abused even in tbo days of Augustin. and long beforo.
Whereas Augustin reporteth of a woman called Innoeentia,
which had a canker healed in her breast by the sign of the
Cross i if it were a miracle, it proveth not that every church.
chapel, and oratory should have a Cross. Croat miracles
were done by imposition of hands: yet it followeth not there
fore that every church must have imposition of hands.
Again, not only cankers, but also fistulas, tooth-aebe. and
many other diseases have been healed by charms. And
yet these charms are not justifiable thereby : much less to
be brought into the church, as wholesome ceremonies and
prayers. But albeit the Cross be no ordinary mean whereby God
useth to conserve health, ^saith Martiall.) yet may you not
conclude that lie hath not ordained it to remain in tho
Church, for any remembrance of His death and passion. "For
think you." (saith lie,) "He hath left no more means but the
preaching of His word, which every one can hear ? Yes. it
hath pleased His Majesty to ordain by General Councils tho
sign of the Cross and Images to bo a moan to put us in
remembrance of Christ's death." &c But seeing tho Church
nourished three hundred years without a General Council: and
neither that General Council which was first holden, nor three
other which followed, make mention of any such matter; where
was the ordinance of God by General Councils for tho Cross?
* [Calfhill, p. is 4.1

158 A REJOINDER TO J. MARTIALL'S [ART.
Ho will say, it had tho appointment of tho Prelates of the
Church. Which ? and whon ? Every idle ceremony and un
godly heresy that prevailed had tho Prelates of the Church
either for the authors, or for the approvers. But Christ com
mitted to the Prelates (saith Martiall) tho charge and govern
ment of His Church. Yea, Sir, to feed them with His word ;
and not with dumb signs and dead Images, which things He
hath forbidden.
Now come we to Paulinus, Bishop of Nola ; by whom it
appeareth that tho sign of the Cross was set up cloven hun
dred years ago in some churches : but the title of the Article
is, that it should be set up in all churches. But Martiall will
provo that it was well dono by Paulinus, to set up tho sign
of the Cross in his church, " because ho was an holy and
learned Bishop ; and no Catholic Bishop or General Council did
find fault with him : for whatsoever any holy and learned
Father did at any time, and was not controlled of any
Catholic Father for his doing, was well done, and must be so
taken." I deny this major: for Augustin was an holy and
learned Bishop, which did give the Communion to infants, and
thought it necessary for their everlasting salvation; neither
was ho controlled therefore : yet did he not well, neither was
his opinion true. And where Martiall taketh upon him the
defence of Paulinus, in commending a woman that separated
herself from her husband under pretence of religion, he
playeth the prattling proctor ; picking of quarrels against M.
Calfhill, without all honesty or shame. For he feigneth that
tho fault is alleged for want of consent of her husband:
whereas such separation as he commendeth, without consent,
is directly contrary to the doctrine of the Holy Ghost. 1 Cor.
vii. v. 5. Likewise, where M. Calfhill nameth a book that the
Apostles wrote, Martiall saith it was but of Paul's Epistles.
Where ho saith it was laid unto diseases, M. Martiall saith it
saved a man from drowning. But of theso quarrels too much.
Martiall confesseth, that where a Doctor swerveth from Scrip
ture, no man ought to follow him. But if Paulinus swerved
not from Scripture, whon he brought Images into the church,
we need not doubt that any man swerved from Scripture;
seeing nothing is more plain in all tho Scriptures than for
bidding of Images and similitudes of any thing to bo mado or
had in any use of religion.
Where M. Calfhill answereth to tho Decree of Justinian,

ill.] REPLY TO MASTER CALFHILL. 159
(that no church should bo builded before tho placo woro con
secrated, and a Cross set up by tho Bishop.) that this was a
constitution of tho external policy. Martiall labouroth to prove
tliat it was religious ; and vet at lensrth eranteth tliat it was
a matter of external policy. Whereupon I infer, that it was
not of necessity ; and so tho Article is not proved thereby,
"That everv church should," &c. But it conieth of great wis-
dom, that ho will defend the timo of Justinian from ignorance
and barbarity, because tho civil law was then gathered, and a
few learned men woro found in tho wholo world. All this not
withstanding, tho barbarians had overeoiuo a great part of the
empire, and filled tho world with ignorance and barbarousness.
Against tho Decree of Yalentinian and Theodosius, cited
out of Crinitus1, ho hath many quarrels. First, against Pe-
trus Crinitus, who was as good a Clerk as Martiall. Then
at the Homily against Images3, where the printer calleth him
IVtrus Erinilus. Yet again that Yalentinian, not being written
at large, is mistaken for Yalens, where it should bo Yalen-
tinianns. •• And if Yalens and Theodosius had made such a
law. what an oversight was it of Eusebius to suppress it!"
When Eusebius was dead before any of them were born, it
was a great oversight, in Martiall's judgment, to suppress in
his story a law made by them which lived near an hundred
year after him : so that belike he would have Eusebius to
write stories of things to come. But concerning that law of
Yalentinianus and Theodosius. you shall see more in mine
Answer to D. Sander's book of Images. Cap. xiii. or xii.
Tho rest of this chapter is spent in commending the Church
of Roiuo; whose custom it hath been (saith Martiall) these
twelve hundred years to set the sign of the Cross in tho
church ; and Tope Pius the fourth did it himself of late, &c.
Concerning tho Church of Rome, so long as she continued in
true religion, and so far forth as she maintained the truth,
as sho was greatly commended of ancient writers whom
Martiall nameth, so now it is to her greater reproach and
shame, earn in laudum et gloria; degeiteran esse. •• that she is
grown out of kind and desert of all such praises ;" as the
Clergy of Rome, writing to Cyprian. Lib. ii. Epist. vii.3
1 [See Calfhill, p. 1>H).]
s [Second part of the Homily against peril ofLMatry. The typo
graphical mistake was afterwards corrected.]
s [Ad Vaiuel. num. xxxi. Ad Erasm. L. ii. Kp. vii In edit. Oxon.

160 A REJOINDER TO J. MARTIALL'S [ART.
To conclude, therefore, there is nothing shewed to prove
that every church, chapel, or oratory should have a Cross :
although in the latter and more corrupt times of the Church,
it is declared, that some churches had a Cross ; and at length
grew to a custom in those parts of the world, that every
church had one, and was thought necessary that it should
have one.

THE FOURTH ARTICLE.
Martiall Martiall. That the sign of the Cross was used in all Sacra
ments, &c.
Fulke. Fulke. That it hath been used in the latter declining
times, we will not stand with Martiall : but that in the best
and purest age of the Church, by the Apostles and their imme
diate successors, it was used or allowed, before the Valentinian
heretics, I affirm that Martiall cannot prove by any ancient
authentical writer, between the Apostles and Irenaeus. Where
fore Master Calfhill answereth well, that the ceremony once
taken up of good intent, being grown into so horrible abuse,
is justly refused of us. Martiall will know what our voca
tion is ; as though we were not able to prove our calling both
before God and men. Our Synods he refuseth, because no
Council can be kept without the consent of the Bishop of
Rome : in which point as many of the Papists are against him,
which hold that even a General Council may be kept to depose
an evil Pope against his will ; so he mistaketh the Tripartite
History1, and Julian [Julius] Bishop of Rome2, where they
speak of General Councils and Synods, to determine of matters
of faith ; from which the Bishop of Rome, while he was a
Bishop, was not to be excluded, because those cases touch all
Bishops; dreaming that they speak of all Councils. But long
after their times it was practised as lawful for Kings and
Bishops of several provinces to gather and hold Provincial
Synods, for the state of their several Churches, without the
consent or knowledge of the Bishop of Rome : in which some
Epist. xxx. pag. 57. — " Quarum laudum et glorise degenerem fuisse,
maximum crimen est."]
1 [Lib. iv. Cap. ix. Cf. Socrat. Ecc. Hist. L. ii. C. viii.]
2 [See the same sentence in two spurious Epistles attributed to
Pope Julius I.— Blondelli Psmdo-Isidor. pp. 447, 459.]

Iy-J REPLY TO MASTER CALFHILL. 161
things have been determined against the will of the Bishop
of Rome, as in the Councils of Carthage and Africa ; and in
General Councils also, as in that of Chalcedon, Constantinople
the fifth and sixth, the Councils of Constance and Basil.
But signing with the Cross is a tradition of the Apostles,
and so accounted by S. Basil : therefore we ought not to for
sake it for any abuse, (saith Martiall.) But how will S. Basil
persuade us of that, when we find it not in their writings ? It
is more safe therefore to follow his counsel in his short De
finitions, Q. i.3, where he affirmeth, that it is not lawful for
any man to permit himself to do or say any thing without the
testimony of the holy Scriptures. And this we will hold, even
with Basil's good leave, against all pretended traditions of the
Apostles whatsoever. We know the Apostle willeth us to
hold the traditions, either learned by his Epistles, or by his
sermons : but what he delivered in his sermons we cannot
tell but by his Epistles. Yes, saith Martiall, the Church
telleth you of the sign of the Cross. But seeing the Church
telleth us of other things, which are left and forsaken ; avouch
ing them likewise to be traditions of the Apostles, which
ought not to have been so given over, if they had been
Apostolic traditions indeed ; we see no cause why we may
not refuse these as well as those ; having no ground of
certainty for Apostolic traditions but only the Apostolic
writings. Tertullian counteth the tasting of milk and honey
after Baptism for an Apostolic tradition, because it was a
ceremony in his time as well as crossing. The one was left-
long ago : why may not the other be forsaken, that hath no
better ground, and hath been worse abused ?
Concerning the tale of Probianus4, which followeth next
after this discourse, I will refer the reader to mine Answer
to D. Sander's book against Images, Ca. xiii., or xii. after the
error of his print.
3 [D. Basilii Opera Graeca, p. 483. Basil. 1551. — Bellarmin, after
having declared that it is uncertain whether these Regulce contractiores
were written by S. Basil or by Eustathius Sebastenus, significantly
adds, " quod auotor harum Qusestionum, Qusestione 1. & Qusest. 95, non
videtur adniittere Traditiones non scriptas . . . Quare cumvalde proba-
bile sit, eas Qusestiones editas esse ab homine parum probate fidei, non
est cur earum testimonium magni faciamus." (De amissione Gratis,
Lib. i. Cap. xiii. Opp. Tom. iv. 111. Ingolst. 1601.)]
4 [Calfhill, page 198.]
[fulke, II.]

162 A rejoinder to j. martiall's [art.
Where Calfhill thinketh it not meet that we should be re
strained to that whereof there is no precept in Scripture, nor
they themselves yield lawful cause, Martiall telleth him that
he must be restrained, if he will be a good Christian. For
there is no precept in express Scripture to beheve three Per
sons and one God in the blessed Trinity, the equality of sub
stance of Christ with His Father in His Godhead, &c., the
perpetual virginity of Mary, the keeping of the Sunday, the
Sacrament receiving fasting, the Baptism of infants, &c. You
see what an Atheist he is, that can find no more certainty in
the Scriptures for the blessed Trinity than for S. Mary's vir
ginity ; for the Godhead of Christ than for receiving the
Communion before other meats. If Papists have no ground
of their faith out of the Scriptures, yet we can prove whatso
ever is necessary for us to believe. If he dally upon the
word "express Scripture," either he answereth not to the same
thing whereof he is demanded, or else he knoweth not that
an argument rightly concluded out of holy Scripture is as
good as the very words of the Scripture : as when I say, If
Peter believed and was baptized, ergo he was saved, is as true
as these words, " Whoso believeth and is baptized shall be
saved." To the second demand, whether the ancient Fathers did
attribute such virtue to the wagging of a finger, that the
Holy Ghost could be called down, and the Devil driven away
by it, Martiall answereth, " It is most evident, that as soon
as prayer is duly made, and the sign of the Cross made, the
Holy Ghost, according to the promise of Christ, cometh down
and sanctifieth, &c, and the Devil is driven away." This
is Martiall's evidence : other reason he bringeth none. If he
refer the promise and coming of the Holy Ghost to prayer, he
playeth the palterer, that, being demanded of the Cross, an
swereth of prayer. Otherwise, let him shew what promise
Christ hath made to the sign of the Cross, or to prayer
with the sign of the Cross more than without it. If he
cannot, you may easily see his poverty.
To the third, whether they would have refused the Church
and Sacraments for want of a Cross, he "believeth verily
they would not ; for the Sacraments lacketh not the virtue, if
the sign of the Cross be omitted : yet the fault is great when
the tradition of the Apostles is wilfully rejected." Whether

IV.J REPLY TO MASTER CALFHILL. 163
it be like they delivered any needless or unprofitable cere
mony, let wise men judge.
After this followeth a long and foolish dialogism about the
interpretation of Cyprian's1 words : " Whatsoever the Ministers
of the Sacraments be, whatsoever the hands are that dip those
that come to Baptism, whatsoever the breast is out of which
the holy words proceed, the authority of operation giveth
effect to all Sacraments in the figure of the Cross ; and the
Name which is above all names, being called upon by the
dispensers of the Sacraments, doth all." Martiall so scanneth
these words, as though M. Calfhill knew not the difference
between the power of God and the ministry of man in the
Sacraments, which Cyprian doth plainly distinguish in these
words. But to the purpose, Cyprian seemeth to make the
figure of the Cross a mean by which God worketh in the
Sacraments. But indeed he meaneth, that all Sacraments
take their effect of the passion of Christ ; as a bare sign and
token whereof they used the figure of the Cross, and not as a
mean whereby God worketh ; seeing it is confessed by Mar
tiall, that " the Sacraments, if the sign of the Cross be omitted,
lack not their virtue."
Another foolish brabble and usher-like construing he
maketh of Cyprian's2 words, De Baptismo : Verborum solem-
nitas, et sacri invocatio Nominis, et signa attributa insti-
tutionibus Apostolicis Sacerdotum ministeriis, visibile Sa-
cramentum celebrant. For, reproving Master Calfhill for
translating signa attributa institutionibus Apostolicis, " signs
attributed to the institution of the Apostles," he teacheth him
to construe "signs attributed by the Apostolical institutions,
through the ministry of the Priests." Wherein I marvel that
such an ancient student will now suffer the word attributa to
go without a dative case : which I think he would not have
done in his petite school at Winchester. But if I might be
bold, under the correction of such a grounded grammarian, to
construe the lesson over again, I would give the Latin this
English : " The solemnity of words, and invocation of the holy
Name, and the signs appointed by the institutions of the
Apostles for the ministry of the Priests, doth make the visible
Sacrament." And what be those signs? By M. Martiall's
leave, the elements ; as water, bread, and wine.
1 [Arnold's. See Calfhill, p. 200.] 2 [Arnold's. Calfhill, 201.]
11 — 2

164 A REJOINDER TO J. MARTIALL'S [ART.
But then M. Grindall, (whom I laugh to see this wise
dialogue-maker to bring in swearing once or twice in this de
vised talk, as though our Bishops used that vein as commonly
as popish Prelates ;) M. Grindall, I say, must send me to
Saint Anthony's school ; because the elements of the Sacra
ments be of Christ's own institution, and not of His Apostles :
wherefore those signs must be other goodly ceremonies ; and
the sign of the Cross must not be least. But if Martiall ever
were a scholar in that school, or any other of any value, he
might have learned long ago that institutio signifieth not only
the first beginning of an ordinance, but also a teaching or
doctrine. And so doth Cyprian mean, that by the doctrine
of the Apostles the Priests are appointed to use those signs:
which if Martiall's ushership will not admit, Cyprian, in telling
what maketh the visible Sacrament, hath left out the principal
part thereof; namely the element, and that which indeed in
it is only visible ; for the solemnity of words and invocation
are audible rather than visible.
But in this foolish dialogue is cited Justinus, Apol. ii.1,
to prove that the old Fathers used the sign of the Cross in all
Sacraments. "Justinus Martyr," (saith he, in the place of M.
Grindall,) " talking of the Cross, biddeth us view in our minds,
and consider with reason all things that are in the world ; and
see whether sine hac figura administrentur, they may be
done without this sign." How like it is that M. Grindall
should say Justinus biddeth us, when he biddeth the Gentiles,
I leave to speak of. But that he speaketh of our Sacraments,
how will Martiall prove ; when both he speaketh to the hea
then, and of heathenish customs and ceremonies, or else civil
and natural matters ; as of sailing, ploughing, digging, and all
handicrafts, whose tools had some figure of the Cross ; in
which the Gentiles did so fondly abhor and despise Christ
for it, whereas it was to be found even in the shape ot
man in the trophies and standards of their Emperor, in the
consecration of their dead Emperors' Images, whom they wor
shipped as Gods ? For which causes Justinus thought it un
reasonable that they should contemn Christ for His Cross' sake.
But of using the sign of the Cross in all Sacraments there is
no mention in Justinus.
1 [Apolog. i. Opp. p. 90. Lut, Paris. 1615. The first Apology is
ranked second in this edition.]

IV. J REPLY TO MASTER CALFHILL. 165
That in Chrysostom's time, and other more ancient Fathers,
the sign of the Cross was used at the celebration of the Sa
craments, M. Calfhill granteth, as a ceremony ; and you con
fess " it is but a ceremony ; and that our Sacraments, lacking
the sign of the Cross and that usual ceremony, be perfect not
withstanding." And yet you exclaim against us for omitting
a needless ceremony, where we see it hath been turned from
that indifferent usage of the forefathers into an idolatrous
custom and opinion of necessity.
The credit of Dionysius, for so ancient a scholar of S.
Paul as you would make him, is too much cracked by Eras
mus2 to be cured by Martiall.
Where M. Calfhill truly saith, and you cannot deny but
he hath as good authority for honey, milk, wine, to be re
stored in Baptism, and the Communion to be given to chil
dren, as you have* for the Cross ; you answer, These were
altered by the Church of Rome, which hath authority so to
do : the Cross still remaineth. But mark what you say :
were these traditions of the Apostles ? If you say no, the
like will I say of the Cross ; for the same authority com-
mendeth them all alike for traditions of the Apostles. Well,
if they were traditions of the Apostles by the Holy Ghost,
which you hold to be of equal authority with the Scriptures,
and the Church of Rome hath abolished the one, why may
she not abolish the other ? so that your answer containeth
manifest blasphemy.
To fortify your traditions, you allege that Jesus did
many things " which are not written," &c. ; but you leave off
that which followeth, "But these are written that you might
believe, and in believing have eternal life." Jo. xx. And yet
S. John speaketh of miracles ; not of ceremonies to be used in
Baptism, whereunto you apply it. But Jesus Himself saith He
hath "many things to say," that the Apostles could not then
bear, &c. Joan. xvi. : and you would know in what work of
the Apostles those things are written ; yea, you would have
the chapter noted. Pleaseth it you to look yourself in the
Acts of the Apostles, and in their Epistles, &c. ; and you shall
find, that the Scriptures will instruct the man of God "unto
all good works," and make him " wise unto salvation." If
2 [Vid. Epist. prsefix. Paraph, in 1 Cor. ; itemque Schol. in S. Hieron.
Catal. Scriptt. Eccl. Opp. Tom. i. 308. Cf. Coci Censur. pp. 60—1.]

166 A REJOINDER TO J. MARTIALL'S [ART.
these will not serve your turn, seek where you will, and
find the Devil and eternal damnation. But, I pray you,
could not the Apostles bear the hearing of the sign of the
Cross, of salt, oil, spittle in Baptism ? Were these such hard
lessons to learn, or heavy to bear ? If you think they were,
I envy not unto you so wise a thought.
But you will teach us, how we shall know that these are
traditions of the Apostles. To this inquiry you answer, Even as
we know the Gospels and Epistles to be the canonical Scrip
tures, by authority of the Church; which you think sufficient for
that purpose. But so do not we : for although we receive the
testimony of the Church, yet we have greater authority out of
the Scriptures of the Old Testament, and that Spirit by which
they were written, being always the same by which we are
persuaded that the Gospels and Epistles are the holy Scrip
tures. Again, the universal Church of a^l times and places
giveth witness to those writings : so doth it not to these tradi
tions. Therefore we are never the near to know Apostolical
traditions by authority of the popish Church ; which ascribeth
things manifestly contrary to the word of God and writings
of the Apostles to Apostolic traditions, as Images, half Com
munion, private Mass, &c.
After this brabbling of traditions followeth a long brawl
about numbers, which the Papists do superstitiously observe;
and of the authority of the seventy Interpreters, whose
translation, if it were extant1, no doubt but it were worthy
of great reverence : but seeing these questions are fruitless,
and impertinent unto the Article, I will clearly omit them.
Martiall, returning to prove that the sign of the Cross
was used in consecrating the body and blood of Christ,
findeth himself greatly grieved that M. Calfhill calleth the
Mass " the sacrifice of the Devil ;" wherein be so many good
i [Fulke possibly means extant in absolute purity. He could
scarcely have been unacquainted with the existence of at least two of
the four principal editions of the Septuagint, viz. the Complutensian
and the Venetian; the former completed in 1517, the latter published
in 1518. The Boman edition was printed seven years after the ap
pearance of the present work, namely in 1587 ; and the Alexandrian
followed in 1707. Vid. Waltoni Prolegom. ix. §§. 28 — 30. Appar.
Biblic. pp. 332—4. Tiguri, 1673. Grabii Proleg. Cap. iii. Oxon. 1707.
Le Long Biblioth. Sac. Tom. i. p. 185. Paris. 1723.]

I V. J REPLY TO MASTER CALFHILL. 167
things, as the Collects, Gospel, Epistle, Gloria in excelsis, &c. :
by which reason I might prove a devilish conjuration, in which
be so many names of God, and good words, to be an holy
piece of work. Therefore it is not many good parts, abused
to make a wicked thing good, that can justify the Mass ; which
is an horrible blasphemy against the death and only sacrifice
of Christ. But M. Calfhill doth not satisfy him, where he,
citing out of Albertus Magnus, "that Christ did bless the
Sacrament with a certain sign of His hand ; as Jacob laid his
hands on Joseph's sons, and Christ laid His hands upon the
children, and lifted up His hands, and blessed His Apostles,"
&c, asketh, why we might not say Christ made a sign of the
Cross ; considering that Chrysostom, Augustin, and Euthymus
[Euthymius] testify, that in their time the sign of the Cross
was used in consecration? This question (he saith) is not
soluted. This is soon answered ; because laying on of hands,
and lifting up of hands, which be sometime used in blessing,
doth not prove a crossing with the fingers of one's hand, as
the Papists use ; and because the Evangelists, which describe
all that He then said or did for us to follow, make no mention
of any such sign of hand made by Him in blessing.
The long discourse that followeth of blessing and giving
of thanks is needless : for we know and confess, that as they
sometimes signify all one thing, so they differ sometimes ; and
we confess that the bread and wine in the Lord's Supper were
blessed, that is to say, sanctified and consecrated; but not with
any sign of hand, which is the matter in question, but with the
word of God, and with prayer ; not only as bodily meats, but
as heavenly and spiritual mysteries, to feed the soul. But it
is a sport to see how Martiall, when he hath proved that which
was not in question ; that the bread and wine were blessed and
sanctified by Christ, and that they must now be so consecrated
by the Church ; he runneth away with the sign of the Cross,
whereof he hath brought no proof of the use by Christ, say
ing, " There must be consecration by honouring the words of
Christ, and calling upon His name, and making the sign of the
Cross : which manner of consecration the Church learned of
Christ, and hath continued ever since ; so that we may boldly
say with Albertus, ' He blessed it with a certain sign of His
hand'." But I pray you, Sir, where learned you this sign
used by Christ? How prove you that it hath been used

168 A REJOINDER TO J. MARTIALL'S [ART.
ever since ? It is enough for Martiall to say, that " all the
learning in English Doctors will never be able to prove this
assertion of his to be frivolous."
But seeing he is so Greekish to teach M. Calfhill to con
strue Saint Paul's words1, to iroTrjpiov t»5s evXoylas, &C, and
findeth fault with him for giving the aorists the signification
of the present temps, let him look in his lexicon, where I
ween all his Greek is, how he will abide by this saying,
" evyapujTr\aa<i in Saint Matthew, evXoynaas [evXoynaev] in
Saint Luke, evXoyovfxev in Saint Paul, have relation to the bread
and wine2, and answer to the question ' whom?' or 'what?,'" see
ing ev-^apLdTeo) is no verb transitive ; although the Christian
writers, as Justinus Martyr, hath feigned a passive unto it.
Again, in the saying of Chrysostom, Ho. xxiv. in 1 Cor.
Cap. x.3, where Martiall will have us mark that the body of
Christ is seen upon the altar, let him and his fellows mark,
that if it be none otherwise there than as it is seen, it is pre
sent only to the faith by whose eye it is seen.
After this tedious treatise of blessing and thanksgiving, he
cometh to his old petition or [of?] principle4, that the signing
with the Cross is a tradition of the Apostles ; and angry he is,
that he should be called on to prove that it is a tradition of
the Apostles, whereof he can find no mention in ecclesiastical
writers before the Valentinian heretics. And whereas Cyprian,
Ad Panpeium5, calleth all traditions to the writings and com
mandment of the Apostles, he crieth out that Cyprian is slan
dered, because he himself allegeth the tradition of Christ for
mingling of water with the wine. If Cyprian break his own
rule, who can excuse him ? But if he had been urged as
much for the necessity of water as he was for the necessity
of wine in the Sacrament, he would have better considered of
the matter.
From this matter he descendeth to prove the number
of Sacraments to be seven, because Matrimony is of some
old writers called a Sacrament6; when they mean not a Sacra-
1 [1 Cor. x. 16.]
2 [Compare Fulke's Defence of the English translations of the Bible,
p. 497. ed. Parker Soo.]
s [Calfhill, page 232.] 4 [Petitio principii.]
6 [Pompeium. Ep. lxxiv. p. 211. ed. Oxon. 1682.]
0 [It is so called in the first part of the Homily against Swearing.]

IV.] REPLY TO MASTER CALFHILL. 169
ment in that sense that Baptism is a Sacrament, but gene
rally a mystery. And because M. Calfhill saith that Sacra
ments were signs ordained of God to confirm our faith, he
will prove that we have no Sacraments at all ; because Bap
tism, if it be ministered to men of years, confirmeth not their
faith ; for they must have their faith confirmed before they be
baptized, and so must they that receive the Communion:
but when infants be baptized, they have no faith but the
faith of the Church ; and therefore their faith cannot be con
firmed. Did you ever hear such a filthy hog grunt so beastly
of the holy Sacraments, that they should be no helps of our
father ? [faith?] We believe that infants, although they have
no faith when they are baptized, yet have their faith confirmed
by their Baptism even to their lives' end ; and that they which
come to the Lord's table with a true faith in God's promises
have the same confirmed by the seal of His word, which is
that holy Sacrament. Martiall calleth for Scripture. Among a
thousand texts, this one shall serve : Abraham " received the
sign of circumcision, a seal of the righteousness of faith which
he had being uncircumcised." Rom. iv. v. 11. Tell us, Mar
tiall, by thy law, wherefore a seal serveth, if not for confirma
tion ? But what should I talk with them of faith ; which, as
they have none in the promises of God, so they know not
what it meaneth ?
To that reason of Master Calfhill, that Matrimony hath
no promise of forgiveness of sins, he answereth, denying that
every Sacrament hath a promise of forgiveness of sins annexed;
and afterward he asketh, Where hath the Supper of our Lord
a promise of remission of sins ? for sins are forgiven before
the Sacrament be received. Is this the divinity of Louvain ?
Is the holy Supper available neither for confirmation of faith,
nor to forgiveness of sins? Wherefore saith Christ of the
cup, " This is My blood of the new testament, which is shed
for many unto forgiveness of sins?" "Nay," (saith Martiall,)
" if there be a remission of sins, then is it a Sacrament propi
tiatory, contrary to your own doctrine." Nothing the sooner;
so long as remission of sins be not tied to the work wrought,
according to your heresy, but sealed unto the faith of the
worthy receiver. Likewise he quarrelleth against that reason,
that Matrimony conferreth no grace; which is easily proved
by this, that Matrimony is good, being contracted among

170 A REJOINDER TO J. MARTIALL'S [ART.
Gentiles and heathen persons. And whereas he bringeth in
the blessing[s] of God to married persons, either they be such
as pertain to all men in general, and so prove no grace of
Marriage in the Church; or else to the faithful only, and so
pertain to faith, and not to Marriage ; as that the faithful
woman shall be saved by1 bringing forth of children. The
question of Marriage after divorcement, because it pertaineth
not to the Cross, I will not meddle with it. M. Calfhill hath
said more than Martiall can answer.
Touching the popish Sacrament of Penance, which Martiall,
and not S. Hierom, calleth "the second table after shipwreck,"
M. Calfhill hath likewise proved effectually, that it is no
Sacrament of Christ's Church. Against which Martiall bring
eth nothing but certain sentences of Scripture, to prove how
necessary repentance is, after men have sinned, to obtain re
mission of sins. Whereof S. Hierom speaketh, and not of
popish Penance, consisting of Contrition, Confession, and Satis
faction, with their blasphemous Absolution,
Concerning Extreme Unction, that it is no perpetual Sa
crament of the Church, it is plain by Scripture ; because the
gift of healing, which was annexed unto the anointing of oil
spoken of in S. James, hath long ago ceased. Wherefore it
followeth, that the same ceremony of anointing was temporal ;
even as the promise of bodily health that was joined to it
was temporal. Finally, touching the Council of Trent, that
hath allowed all these for Sacraments, how lawful it was,
when he that was accused for heresy should be the only
judge, I think Martiall by his law could discuss if he list.
And as for the safe-conduct granted to the Protestants, they
have learned by the case of J. Huss and Hierom of Prague to
trust the faith of Papists as much as they like their religion.
To conclude, there is nothing proved in this Article, which
pretended that the Cross was always used in the Sacraments :
and it is confessed, that when it is used, it is but a ceremony ;
and such as the want thereof taketh not away the effect of
the Sacraments. Wherefore, seeing the Sacraments are perfect
without it, they are not to be condemned, which upon good
ground and sufficient authority have refused it.
1 [through, "dia rrjs reicvoyovlas." 1 Tim. ii. 15.]

V.] REPLY TO MASTER CALFHILL. 171

THE FIFTH ARTICLE.
Martiall. That the Apostles and Fathers of the primitive Church Martiall.
blessed themselves with the sign of the Cross, and counselled all
Christian men to do the same ; and that in those days a Cross was set
up in every place convenient for it.
Fulke. The first controversy is of the signification of Fulke.
this word benedicere, which with Martiall is all one with
signare. For although he find not in the old writers be-
nedicebant se signo Crucis, " they did bless themselves with
the sign of the Cross," yet he findeth signabant se signo
Crucis, " they marked themselves with the sign of the Cross,"
which is all one with him. But not so with us : for there
was another use of marking at the first than for blessing.
The Christians among the pagans marked themselves with
the sign of the Cross, in token that they professed Him that
was crucified : afterward, to put themselves in mind of the
death of Christ. These were tolerable uses of an indifferent
ceremony. The opinion of blessing with the Cross, as M.
Calfhill sayeth, was taken (as the term) from superstitious
old women. And Martiall cannot deny but the term of
"blessing" in that sense is a new signification of the word, and
therefore not used of the ancient Fathers : which that he might
obscure with brabbling, as his custom is,he repeateth his former
jangling of the significations of this word benedicere, and how
it sometime signifieth to bless with the hands, as when Christ
blessed His Apostles and the children ; as though to use a
ceremony of lifting up or laying on of hands, when He bless-
eth, is to bless with a bare ceremony of the hands, as they
do with their Cross. Nay, he sayeth, to bless with the Cross
is as old as Jacob, who with his hands across blessed Joseph's
children. The Papists are wise in their generation, when
they would not have unlearned men to read the Scriptures:
for every child of seven years' age, reading the story of
Jacob's blessing, will easily perceive, that his laying of his
hands overthwart was not for any blessing with the Cross,
but because he was to lay his right hand upon the younger,
and his left upon the elder ; contrary to their father's placing
of them, which would have had his elder son preferred.
But seeing Martiall maketh himself so cunning in the signi-

172 A REJOINDER TO J. MARTIALL'S [ART.
fications of benedicere, "to bless," which he will not have "to say
well,11 or "pray for" only,&c, but "to sanctify;" let him remem
ber, that in his own sense the Apostle sayeth to the Hebrews,
cap. vii. ver. 7, " That which is less or inferior is blessed of
the superior :" by which argument he proveth Melchisedech to
be greater than Abraham. If then the Apostles and Fathers
did bless themselves with the sign of the Cross to sanctifv
themselves, I demand, whether the sign of the Cross was
greater than the Apostles? for no man will say that the
Apostles were greater than themselves. If it were not
greater, then surely they were not blessed by it. Wherein
also the fable of Abdias is convinced, which sayeth of S.
Paul muniens se signo Crucis, " arming himself with the
sign of the Cross." Was the sign of the Cross stronger than
S. Paul ? for men arm themselves with harness of defence
which is stronger than themselves. Was not that iravoirXla,
that universal armour or complete harness, which he ex-
Eph.vi. horteth other men to put on, as sufficient to withstand all the
assaults of the Devil, sufficient for himself, without the sign of
the Cross ? But seeing the Apostle there describeth "the whole
armour of God," whereof the sign of the Cross is no piece,
it is certain that it is no armour meet for the defence of a
Christian man. Wherefore your fabling Abdias and coun
terfeit Clement can carry no credit with wise and learned
Christians. Nor yet the examples of Anthony, Martin, Do-
natus, and Paula, reported of credible writers, yet no
Evangelists, which armed themselves with the sign of the
Cross, doth either force or move us to imitation, further than
they had warrant for their doings out of the holy Scriptures.
Where M. Calfhill sayeth, that the Devil1 delighted in
the sign of the Cross, and feigned himself to be afraid of it;
that the hermit might run to that sorry succour, and men
put more affiance in it, he meaneth, that the Devil delighted
in the superstitious opinion of it ; for otherwise he doth
neither fear nor love the sign of the Cross of itself : for if it
had been so terrible to the Devil as Martiall and others do
think, Saint Paul would not have left it out of the complete
harness of God, whereby all the deceits and fiery darts of
the Devil are withstood.
And although the elder and better age used and received
i [Not the Devil, but S. Anthony. See Calfhill, p. 252.]

V.] REPLY TO MASTER CALFHILL. 173
that sign tolerably, yet, considering the shameful abuse thereof,
it ought now of right and conscience to be condemned, as M.
Calfhill sayetL But Martiall will none of that : for things
good of their own nature must not be taken away nor con
demned for the abuse. Yery true : but who will grant him
that the sign of the Cross is good of itself? It is as much as
may be borne to grant it to be a thing indifferent. And
whereas Martiall will acknowledge none abuse of that sign, what
else should we say but, Who is so blind as he that will not
see? Concerning the authority of the Epistle of Epiphanius,
translated by S. Hierom2, and his fact in rending a veil
wherein was painted an Image, as it were of Christ or some
Saint, &c, I will refer the reader to mine Answer to D. San
der's book of Images, Cap. iv., or, according to the error of
his print, Cap. iii. ; where he shall see all Martiall's cavils
shaken off, except one, which I think no man ever espied
before this wily lawyer : and that is of the word quasi;
"having an Image 'as it were' of Christ or some Saint;" but
not an Image of Christ or of some Saint indeed, for then he
would not have rent it : but perhaps it was an Image of Ju
piter, or Hercules, &c. But, under correction of Master Usher,
this is but a quasy3 argument that is grounded upon quasi;
as though it should signify always a thing that is not true,
but as it were so, and yet not so. For Cicero, that knew the
nature of the word quasi as well as Martiall, useth it other
wise : Illos qui omnia incerta dicunt, quasi desperatos ali-
quos, relinquamus : " As for them that say all things are un
certain, let us leave, as men past hope." Will Martiall say
they were not past hope indeed? S. Mark sayeth that Mark i.
Christ did teach, quasi potestatem habens, " as one that had
authority." Will he say He had not authority indeed ? S. John John i.
saith of Christ, "Who have seen His glory," quasi Unigeniti,
"as the glory of the only-begotten Son of God." Let Martiall
say with the Arrians He was but quasi Unigenitus, " as it
were the only-begotten Son of God," and not He indeed.
Again he sayeth, Cum fecisset quasi jiagellum, " When He [John u. 15.]
had made as it were a scourge." Master Usher will construe
it so, that [it] was not a scourge indeed, because he sayeth
" as it were a scourge."
2 [Calfhill, pp. 42, 253.] 3 [queasy, sick.]

174 A REJOINDER TO J. MARTIALL'S [ART.
But Martiall will still urge the fact of Paula in worship
ping the Cross of Christ, until it be shewed out of Epiphanius,
by better evidence than yet is shewed, that he would have
no Cross, no Crucifix, nor Image in the church. A man
would think this were sufficient evidence, when he sayeth,
Cum ergo hoc vidissem, in ecclesia Christi, contra autho-
ritatem Scripturarum, hominis pendere Imaginem, &c. :
" Wherefore when I saw this, that in the church of Christ did
hang an Image of a man, contrary to the authority of the
Scriptures, I rent it," &c. Further evidence out of Epipha
nius you may see in the place before cited.
Martiall would have us make a calendar of Christian
men, that refused to bless themselves with the Cross : which
were an infinite matter, seeing from the Apostles unto the
Valentinian heretics it is not read, that any such estimation
was of the Cross, that it should be any blessing or confirma
tion. Master Calfhill's rule, that "we must five not after
examples, but after laws," meaning, not follow whatsoever hath
been done by good men, but whatsoever was well done, ac
cording to the law of God, Martiall rejecteth upon vain, foolish,
and frivolous reasons ; as, that some examples are to be fol
lowed; that the law serveth not for a just man ; that custom
must be followed where law faileth, &c. Beside that, he
slandereth Luther, as one that would have all laws and
orders of Princes put away. Again, whereas M. Calfhill
sheweth, that the Fathers taught other things more oft and
more earnestly than the use of the Cross ; as that it was a
wickedness to fast on Sunday, or to pray on our knees1;
beside the oblations on birth-days, milk and honey, with the
Communion given to infants, &c. ; Martiall answereth, These
are abrogated by the Church : this is not. But seeing none
of them hath been in worse abuse than this custom of cross
ing, this ought to be abrogated of every Church as well as
those. But whereas Martiall compareth the doctrine of S.
Paul, 1 Cor. xi., for covering or uncovering of men and
women's heads, and the decree of the Apostles for blood and
strangled, Act. xv., with those abrogated customs, he doth
very lewdly : for beside that the authority of the one is certain,
the other uncertain, and of some forged, the doctrine of S.
Paul, as he there delivereth it, is perpetual; and the decree of
i [Calfhill, pp. 257, 413.]

V.J RErLY TO MASTER CALFHILL. 175
the Apostles was never meant of them but to be temporal,
for avoiding offence of the Jews.
As touching the credit of the old writers, who had all
their errors, we like well the counsel of Vincentius Liri-
nensis2, that we should still have recourse for trial to the
most ancient; in which we must needs account the writings
of the Apostles both of most antiquity and of greatest autho
rity. Wherefore, seeing the manner of blessing with the
Cross is not found either in the writings of the Apostles, or
in the most ancient Fathers, Justinus, Irenseus, Clemens Alex-
andrinus, by Vincentius' counsel we may justly account it for
a corrupt custom, crept into the Church either by emulation
of heretics, or in contention against the pagans.
But Martiall slandereth us, and the Apology of the Church
of England, that the chief cause of our separation from the
Church of Rome was the evil life of the governors thereof ;
and vainly spendeth time to prove out of Cyprian, Augustin,
and Calvin, that for that cause we ought not to separate
ourselves : whereas we are departed out of Babylon, not so
much for the abominable life thereof as for the corrupt and
false doctrine taught therein ; by which it is shewed to be
the Synagogue of Satan, and not the Church of Christ.
And here Martiall huddleth up a number of quotations for
the authority of the Pope and of the Church of Rome ; which
seeing they have been all oftentimes answered, and by me
also in answer to D. Sander's Rock, it were folly here to
stand upon them.
But he will not be counted a falsifier of Tertullian, when
of divers copies and impressions he wilfully chooseth the
worst, that he might wring it to his purpose : although the
matter be not worth the strife about it; for Tertullian's
judgment of tradition without Scripture in that place is
corrupt. For Martiall himself confesseth that a tradition
unwritten should be reasonable, and agreeable to the Scrip
tures; and so he saith the tradition of blessing with the
Cross is, because the Apostles by the Holy Ghost delivered
it. But who shall assure us thereof ? Tertullian and Basil
are not sufficient warrant for so worthy a matter, seeing
S. Paul leaveth it out of the universal armour of God.
But where M. Calfhill distinguisheth traditions into some
2 [Advers. Hoer. fol. 4. Paris. 1561.]

176 A REJOINDER TO J. MARTIALL'S [art.
necessary, as necessarily inferred of the Scripture ; some con
trary to the word, and some indifferent; Martiall, like an im
pudent ass, calleth on him to shew in what Scripture, Doctor,
or Council he findeth this distinction of traditions : as though
a man might not make a true distinction in disputation, but
the same must be found in so many words in Scripture,
Doctor, or Council ; when he himself cannot deny but the dis
tinction is true, and every part to be found in the Scriptures,
Doctors, and Councils. But the examples please him not; for
the covering of women, and their silence in the church, are
taught in express words of Scripture, and therefore are
not necessarily inferred of Scripture : " Therefore there is
one he," quod Martiall. YYho would think such a block
worthy of answer ; which thinketh a truth may not be in
ferred of the express words of Scripture, when of nothing it
can be better inferred ? Again, he calleth it another He, that
S. Paul proveth his tradition by the Scripture; for he bring
eth no text nor sentence of Scripture to prove that women
should be covered in the church. But Martiall doth not
only belie M. Calfhill, but also slander S. Paul ; seeing he
allegeth out of Genesis, both that the man is the image and
glory of God, and that the woman was made for man.
The examples of the second sort, as Latin service, wor
shipping of Images, &c, Martiall will not allow : but the
Scripture is plain to them that have eyes, and be not like
the Images whom they worship.
Again, he liketh not that there should be any limitation
in observing traditions of the Church in things indifferent ; as
if cases of necessity and of offence might not make a limita
tion, without contempt of the Church's authority. But he
will learn in which kind of traditions we place the signing
with the Cross, and the rest named by Basil. I answer,
that marking with the Cross, in some respect, as it was first
used of the old Fathers, is of the third kind ; but as it is used
of you Papists, for a blessing and sanctifying, of the second
kind. If it be told him, that the Fathers builded some
straw and wood as well as gold and silver, he saith those
words were meant of manners, and not of doctrine; wherein
he sheweth himself a profound student in S. Paul's Epistles.
Yet if the Fathers have any private opinions, or that some
bastard books be intituled to them, yet will he follow the

V.] REPLY TO MASTER CALFHILL. 177
rule of S. Basil, Horn. con. SabeU : Dominus, &c. : " Our
Lord hath so taught; the Apostles have preached; the Fathers
have observed ; the Martyrs have confirmed. It shall suffice
to say, I have been so taught." I would he would or could
follow this counsel: but he leaveth out all the rest, and taketh
but the tail, " We have been so taught." But if he will have
us to allow blessing with the Cross, let him begin with the
head, and shew where our Lord hath taught it, the Apostles
preached it, and so forth continue his gradation to the end.
But hitherto he hath been hammering of tags to his two
tagless points, as M. Calfhill nameth them; and now he
cometh to work upon his third point, "that a Cross was
set up in every place." And first he goeth to work with
the authority of Martialis, one of the seventy-two Disciples
of Christ ; which was as surely a Disciple of Christ as a kins
man of his : of whose credit I have spoken before, and
therefore will not here repeat it.
Whereas he is accused of falsifying of Athanasius, he
coloureth the matter by following two or three corrupt prints ;
wilfully refusing the true edition and best reformed according
to the most ancient written copies. His leaving out of words
material, which he cannot excuse by the print, he defendeth by
his written copy, and layeth the fault on the printer. Better
a bad excuse than none at all. Lawyers have many such
shifts. But the place is Qucestion. xvi. ad Antioch.2: Quare
credentes omnes ad Crucis imaginem Cruces facimus ; Ian*
ceoz vero sanctce, aut arundinis, aut spongioz figuras nullas
conficimus; cum tamen hozc tarn sint sancta quam ipsa Crux?
Responsio. Figuram quidem Crucis ex duobus lignis com-
pingentes conficimus ; ut si quis infidelium id in nobis repre-
hendat quod veneremur lignum, possimus, duobus inter se
disjunctis lignis, et Crucis dirempta forma, ea tanquam
inutilia ligna reputare ; et infideli persuadere quod non
colamus lignum, sed quod Crucis typum veneremur: in
lancea vero, aut spongia, vel arundine, nee facere hoc nee
ostendere possumus : " Why do all we believers make Crosses'
after the image of the Cross ; but we make no figures of the
holy spear, or of the reed, or of the sponge ; whereas yet
1 [Horn. xxiv. in ed. Bened. Tom. ii.: vel Opp. Grcec. p. 237. Basil.
1551.] 2 [See Calfhill, pp. 73, 268, 272, 376.]
[fulke, ii. ] 1^

178 A REJOINDER TO J. MARTIALL'S [aRT.
these are as holy as the Cross itself? The answer. We
make indeed the figure of the Cross by putting two pieces of
wood together ; that if any of the infidels reprehend that in
us that we worship wood, we may, by separating the two
pieces of wood, and breaking the form of the Cross, account
them as unprofitable pieces of wood ; and persuade the infidel
that we worship not wood, but that we worship the type of
the Cross : but in the spear, or sponge, or reed, we can nei
ther do nor shew this."
Here Martiall observeth, that all Christian men made
Crosses ; yet can he not prove that they did set these Crosses
in the church : but that they used them in other places, it
appeareth by that they were made so as, the infidels seeing
them, they might be taken asunder. But I will observe, that
seeing they made no images of the reed, sponge, spear, &c,
they made no images of Christ's passion, which the Papists
account so profitable.
Secondly, Martiall urgeth, that they worshipped the type
of the Cross ; which Master Calfhill sayeth is not the figure,
but the thing represented by the Cross. And verily the
Gentiles should have as great cause to reprehend them for
worshipping the shape of a creature, as for worshipping the
creature itself. Wherefore, except Martiall will say the
Christians made a fond excuse, let him not play the fool so
magnifically, in cavilling upon Master Calfhill's interpretation,
when he cannot otherwise reasonably defend the author's
meaning. Finally, let Martiall remember that the spear, sponge, and
reed be as holy as the Cross itself: and therefore in respect
of no holiness thereof the Cross was made rather than the
rest ; but because the form thereof being easily broken in two
Sticks, the Gentiles might acknowledge, that the Christians
made the Cross neither for the wood nor for the fashion, but
for a remembrance of Christ crucified, whom they worshipped.
From the Cross he digresseth awhile to the marriage of
vowed Priests ; complaining that Innocentius and Siricius,
Popes of Rome, are slandered where they are said to take
marriage for a satisfying of lusts of the flesh, where they
speak only of the marriage of Priests that had vowed to live
unmarried : which is false ; for they speak of Priests that were
married lying with their own wives. Plurimos enim Sacer-

y.J REPLY TO MASTER CALFHILL. 179
dotes atque Levitas, post longa consecrationis sum tempora,
tarn de conjugibus propriis, quam etiam de turpi coitu, sobo-
lem didicimus procreasse1: " For we have learned that many
Priests of Christ and Levites, long time after their consecra
tion, have begotten children, as well of their own wives as of
filthy copulation." Thus do they account both faults alike.
Again, the reasons they bring are such as concern marriage
generally ; that " they which be in the flesh cannot please
God," &c. Read the Epistle of Siricius ad Himerium Tarra-
conen.2, and Innocentius ad Victricium3; which are all one,
word for word, concerning this matter. But where Martiall
taketh upon him to charge us with a statute in force against
the marriage of Priests in England, unrepealed, he is miscon
ceived. For we have a clause of a statute in force, that all
marriages lawful by the laws of God shall be accounted law
ful by the laws of the realm. So long therefore as the mar
riage of Priests may be approved by the law of God, there is
no danger in the law of the realm. Concerning the filthy
lives of the popish Clergy it is needless to speak, being so
well known in the world : and yet it is not their wicked life
that separateth us from their synagogue, but their heretical
doctrine. But, returning again to the Cross, he burdeneth M. Calf
hill with a he, because he said that Martiall, having named
houses, markets, wildernesses, highways, seas, ships, garments,
parlours, walls, windows, armour, &c, where the Cross should
be, nameth not the church ; whereas a little before he cited
out of Chrysostom, that it was used in the holy table at the
holy mysteries. But Chrysostom saith not that the Cross was
erected and set up, or painted, in any church, although he say
the figure thereof was used. Wherefore here is no lie proved.
Touching the saying cited out of Augustin, Serm. cxxx.
1 [Siricius Papa, ad Himerium Tarracon. Episc. Vid. Gratiani
Decret. Dist. lxxxii. Cap. iii. L'Art de verifier les Dates, ii. 362. A
Paris, 1750.]
2 [Ubi supra, vel apud Crabb. Concill. Tom. i. p. 417. Colon.
Agripp. 1551.]
3 [Crabbe, i. 455. Codex Canonum Eccles. Rom. p. 337. Lut. Paris.
1609. — The fourth Epistle of Pope Siricius is considered spurious, and
seems to have been copied from the Epistle to Victricius ascribed to
Pope Innocent I. See the latter document in Blondel's Pseudo-Isido-
rus, pp. 551 — 556.]
12—2

180 A. REJOINDER TO J. MARTIALL'S [ART;
de Tempore, although the authority is not greatly to be re
garded of those Sermons, yet admit it were Augustin's indeed1,
M. Calfhill saith truly, that he speaketh neither of Martiall's
material nor mystical Cross, but of the death of Christ, and
the Cross whereon He suffered ; as all the discourse of that
Sermon declareth : " Before the Cross was a name of con
demnation ; now it is made a matter of honour : before it
stood in damnation of a curse; now it is set up in occasion
of salvation2." This now Martiall would either craftily or im
pudently refer to Augustin's time, which is spoken of the time
of Christ's passion, when the Cross was set up in occasion of
salvation, and not an Idol thereof in Augustin's time.
He complaineth, that to another place of Augustin,
wherein mention is made of the sign of the Cross, nothing is
said ; where nothing needeth, when it is confessed that the
sign of the Cross was used in his time. And concerning
Constantine's Cross, we have spoken already sufficiently.
To conclude therefore, here is nothing replied in this Article
to prove that the Apostles and Fathers of the first Church
did bless themselves with the sign of the Cross; although
the Fathers of latter time used to mark themselves with that
sign, and counselled others so to do. Neither is there any
thing but the forged new-found Martial's Epistle, which is
worse than nothing, to prove that the sign of the Cross in
the first age of the Church was used by the Apostles, or
their immediate successors, before the days of Valentinus the
heretic.

THE SIXTH ARTICLE.
Martiall. Martiall. That divers holy men and women got them little pieces
of the Cross, and inclosed them in gold, &c.
Fulke. Fulke. It is confessed that divers made great account
to have little pieces of the Cross, to inclose them in gold,
and hang them about them ; but their superstition is re-
1 [It will be found safer to admit that it is S. Chrysostom's indeed.
See the commencement of the first Homily De Cruee et Latrone, inter
Opp. S. Jo. Chrys. Tom. ii. p. 403. ed. Bened. Cf. Calfhill, pp. 63,
277.] 2 [The latter clause is » very inaccurate rendering of "irporepo*
avpfiokov KaraKplireas, vvv\ Se V7r66eats (raTrjpias."]

VI.] REPLY TO MASTER CALFHILL. 181
proved both by Hieronym and Chrysostom. To Hierom
Martiall answereth, that he reproved not the having of those
pieces, but the confidence put in them ; as the Pharisees did
in their phylacteries hanged upon their bodies, and not print
ing the law in their hearts. Be it so : but what accounteth
he the having of them ? Even the straining of a gnat : culi-
cem liquantes, et camelum deglutientes. Lib. iv. Cap. xxiii.3
But in other places (saith Martiall) he wisbeth himself to
kiss the wood of the Cross. Apol. iii. cont. Ruff.* This was
a small matter, and yet it was more than having a little
piece of the Cross : for he speaketh of his visiting the places
of the death, burial, and birth of Christ ; in which he might
take more occasion of meditation upon the mysteries of our
redemption. To Chrysostom, which counted it impiety in certain Priests,
that hanged Gospels about them, and pieces of the coat and
hair of Christ, he maketh like answer ; alleging out of his
Demonstr. ad Gentiles, that all the world desired to have the
Cross, and every man coveted to have a little piece of it, and
to inclose it in gold, &c. And whereas M. Calfhill answereth,
that this was no praise of the parties, but a practice of the
time, Martiall replieth, that it was a praise of the parties ; re
peating what Chrysostom doth write in commendation of the
sign of the Cross, &c. ; whereas indeed Chrysostom, speaking of
the matter in question, only sheweth what was the affection
of Christians to the Cross, which was sometime the wood of
condemnation : which affection, although in some it were im
moderate, yet Chrysostom's reason against the Gentiles should
not turn him to perpetual shame, (as Martiall saith ;) for he
proveth that Christ was God, in that He had wrought so great
a conversion unto the faith, that no man was now ashamed of
the sign of the Cross, which before was a token of condemna-
3 ["Hoc apud nos superstitiosa? mulierculse, in parvulis Evangeliis
et in Crucis ligno, et istiusmodi rebus, qu» habent quidem zelum Dei,
sed non juxta scientiam, usque hodie factitant ; culicem liquantes, et
camelum glutientes." (Comment. S. Hieron. Lib. iv. in S. Matth. Cap.
xxiii. Opp. Tom. ix. p. 68. Basil. 1565.)]
4 [S. Jerom's words are these: "Protinus concito gradu Beth
lehem meam reversus sum ; ubi adoravi prsesepe et incunabula Salva-
toris." (Opp. Tom. ii. p. 240.) Conf. Ad Eustoch. Epitaph. Paulae
matris, i. 172: " Prostrataque ante Crucem, quasi pendentem Do-
minum cerneret, adorabat."]

182 A REJOINDER TO J. MARTIALL'S [art.'
tion. To conclude, where Martiall abuseth the words of
Christ, Hozc oportet facer e, &c, " These things ought to be
done, the other not omitted," to prove that the fact of having
these pieces of the Cross, and inclosing them in gold was good,
he must either bring the law of God, as the Pharisees did for
tithing of mint and anise, or else we cannot be persuaded that
such estimation of pieces of wood is good and godly.

THE SEVENTH ARTICLE.
Martiall. Martiall. That a Cross was borne at the singing or saying of the
Litany, &c.
Fulke. Fulke. That Processions came not from Gentility to
Christians Martiall will prove, because Processions came
from tradition of the Apostles ; and that he proveth by a
saying of Leo1: "Whatsoever is retained of the Church into •
custom of devotion, cometh of the tradition of the Apostles
and doctrine of the Holy Ghost." So is Procession, &c. But
the minor is false : for the Church of Christ, for many hun
dred years after Christ, knew no Processions. But if Pro
cessions came from the Gentiles, saith Martiall, shall we
therefore condemn them? Have we not the liberal sciences
and many politic laws from the Gentiles? — as though there
were one reason of religion, and politic laws or liberal arts.
Deutxu. The one we are forbidden to learn of the Gentiles; the other,
being the gifts of God, we may take them even from the
Gentiles. Neither doth Augustin against the Manichees,
whom Martiall citeth, Lib. xx. Cap. xxiii. Con. Faust., speak
of any heathenish ceremonies received in Christian religion ;
but of such things as we must have common with them, like
the sun and the air, as meat, drink, apparel, houses, &c.
Whether Processions came from the Montanists or Arrians,
certain it is they came not from Christ nor His Apostles.
Tertullian, a Montanist, maketh mention of certain Stations ;
1 ["Dubitandum non est, dilectissimi, omnem observantiam erudi-
tionis esso divinae; et quicquid ab Ecclesia in consuetudinem est
devotionis receptum, de Traditione Apostolica et de Sancti Spiritus
prodire doctrina." (Sermo Ixxvii. de jejunio Pentecostes ii. Opp. T. i.
pp. 161 — 2. Lugd. 1700.)]

VII.] REPLY TO MASTER CALFHILL. 183
but I suppose they were no Processions, but standings2. The
miracle of water turned into oil, to serve for light in the
church, reported by Eusebius3, 1 marvel to what end Martiall
bringeth forth, and counteth that it was an hundred years
before the heresy of Arrius.
The Litany or supplication prescribed by the Council of
Mentz4 Martiall saith the Papists do observe ; for they ride
not in the Rogation-week, nor wear their copes : but how ob
serve they that the Canon commandeth them, to go bare
footed in sackcloth and ashes ? The Council of Orleans, anno
5155, calleth these Litanies Rogations; but of Procession or
going abroad it speaketh nothing. S. Ambrose indeed is
ancienter than this Council ; but whether that Commentary
upon the Epistles that goeth under his name were of his
writing, it is not agreed among learned men6: at least wise
there be divers additions, and the written copies vary. Besides
that the word whereupon he buildeth, dies Processionis, both
in written and printed copies is dies purgationis, "the days
of a woman's purification :" or if algates7 he will have it Pro-
cessionis, as some printed books have, yet the very circum
stance of the place will prove, that it is the days of a woman's
2 [According to Babanus Maurus, Statio signifies "observatio statu-
torum dierum vel temporum." (De institut. Clericor. Lib. ii. Cap.
xviii. Phorcse, 1505.) In Tertullian's Jlontanistic treatise De Jejuniis,
Cap. xiii., he speaks of " Stationum semijejunia :" by which we are to
understand the abstinence, less rigorous than the Lent-fast, anciently
observed till the ninth hour, or three o'clock in the afternoon, on the
Wednesdays and Fridays throughout the year ; which times prescribed
for humiliation and other religious duties were the Stationes, or
" stationary days," of the primitive Church. Vid. Petavii Animadvers.
in S. Epiphanii Opp. Tom. ii. pp. 356 — 8. Paris. 1622, Bingham's
Antiquities, Book xxi. Chap. iii. Fleury, iii. 216. Oxf. 1844.]
3 [Hist. Eccl. Lib. vi. Cap. ix.]
4 [an. 813. See Calfhill, p. 297.]
5 [a. d. 511. C. xxix. "Bogationes, id est Litanias.'' (Binii Con
cill. ii. i. 562. Conf. Gratiani Decret. De Cons. Dist. iii. Cap. iii.)]
6 [The Commentary upon S. Paul's Epistles was certainly not
written by S. Ambrose. It is generally cited under the name of
Ambrosiaster, and many ascribe it to Hilary the Deacon; but the
Benedictine editors, in their Dissertation upon this point, do not
decide the question. Vid. S. Amb. Opp. Tom. ii. Append. TiUemont,
Memoires, x. 127. A Brux. 1732.]
7 [Algates : at any rate, notwithstanding : probably all gaits.]

184 A REJOINDER TO J. MARTIALL'S [ART.
going forth after her childbirth ; and therefore no Procession
after the Cross.
And if Agapetus did not devise Processions first, as M.
Calfhill saith, your own Canon Law lieth1, and not he; De Con.
D. i. Agapitus, as your author Garanza citeth it2-
But, to come near unto the Article, Sozomenus, Lib. viii. Ca.
viii.3, sheweth, that the Arrians at Constantinople began a kind
of Procession, with singing of Psalms by course : which John
Chrysostom, fearing lest any godly men should be seduced by
them, took up the same fashion ; and so passed the Arrians
in number, et processu, "and going forward;" "for silver
standards of the Cross, with burning wax candles, went before
them." This place sheweth how godly men took up fond
ceremonies in emulation of heretics.
But now concerning these silver standards in form of the
Cross, which Socrates, Li. vi. Ca. viii.4, sheweth did serve to
carry wax candles or torches burning upon them, to give the
people light in the night-season, (for then their Processions
were in the night,) Martiall is as mad as a March hare that
they should be counted no better than candlesticks or cresset-
staves. And yet when he hath prated what he can, for that
principal use they served, although it may be that Chry
sostom had some superstitious fantasy in the forms also of the
Cross, which he devised to be as the standards for the Catho
lic army to follow, so the same cross staves served both for
candlesticks and standards. Howsoever it was, this Procession
differed much from our popish Processions, in which Idols are
carried about ; and not as candlesticks, but candlesticks before
them, with candles' light in the day-time, and not in the night.
His surmise that the silver Crosses were set in the
church, because no place is mentioned where they left them
when they came home, is foolish. They had common
theatres and meeting-places, more meet for setting up of such
candle-bearing crosses than the churches. The quarrel of the
1 [The Canon Law, De Consec. Dist. i. Cap. xxiii., does not mention
anything about Processions.]
2 [Fulke is mistaken hero : for Carranza (Summa Concill. p. 252.
Salmant. 1551.) quoted Gratian merely with reference to the character
of Agapetus; and the words "Hie Dominicas Processiones instituit"
are a distinct marginal note.]
s [Sec Calfhill, pp. 29S— 301.] 4 [Calfhill, 299.]

VII ] REPLY TO MASTER CALFHILL. 185
four lies I pass over. Let the reader compare both their books,
and judge whether Martiall have handled that story with
sincerity. The Council Elibertine forbad candles to be lighted in the
day-time in the churchyards : Ergo they forbad them not
on the Lord's table, quod Martiall. But why then go
you with torches and tapers into the churchyard, both in
Procession and at burials ? And seeing it was an heathenish
custom to light them in churches as well as in churchyards,
they which forbad the one would not have allowed the
other. But you light them not as heathen men, of whom
Lactantius speaketh, thinking God to be in darkness, and to
have need of light ; but ad signum latrice demonstrandum,
"to declare a sign of the high service that you owe to God."
If it be so, why light you them to Saints ; yea, to Images ?
The Gentiles had as good excuses as you. Nevertheless you
are determined to keep your lights still, as you have record
and witness out of Eusebius, Athanasius, &c. Indeed there
is great reason, because they had candles' light in the night,
you will have them in the day. But of light I wish the reader
to look more in my Refutation of Rastal's [Rastell's] Confuta
tion, to the thirty-third leaf of his book.
After this followeth a vain discourse, to prove that we
are heretics, because we have departed from the unity of the
Church, from the Clergy, from the Bishop of Rome, &c. All
which is false : for we have not departed from the Church of
Christ, which is ruled by His word, nor from the Christian
Clergy, nor from any godly Bishop of Rome, in any point in
which he departed not from the truth : but we are gone out
of Babylon ; we have forsaken Antichrist, and all his mer
chants, that made sale of men's souls. Our prayer in a known
tongue, our Communion in both kinds, our reverent adminis
tration of the Lord's Supper, have the Scripture for their
warrant, and the primitive Church for their witness.
His railing upon Luther I will not deal withal. God
hath advanced Luther as His poor witness above the Pope,
the proud Antichrist ; which maketh all Papists to spite him.
Concerning Justinian's Constitution5 for Crosses to be
borne at the singing of the Litany, it savoureth of the cor
ruption of his time. Such godly Constitutions as he made,
6 [Calfhill, pp. 135, 189, 304—5.]

186 A REJOINDER TO J. MARTIALL'S [ART.
as well in ecclesiastical as politic matters, we esteem as the
good laws of a foreign Prince are to be regarded.
And at length we come to Augustin the Monk ; which,
coming from Rome, did more hurt in corrupting true reli
gion than good in planting any rehgion. And whereas
Martiall saith, if our religion came from Eleutherius, it came
from Rome ; although it were no shame to confess it came
from Rome in those purer times, yet Christian religion came
to us even from the Apostles, as witnesseth Gildas the
Briton1, being planted here in the reign of Tiberius the
Emperor. And as for Augustin, although the King Ethelbert
and the people were well prepared before his coming by the
Queen and the Bishop that attended upon her, yet, according
to his zeal, he took some pains to make the people receive
the doctrine of Christ ; although in behaviour he was proud,
as Galfride writeth, and Beda not altogether denieth but that
he seemed so, and in ceremonies superstitious. So that the
doctrine of Christ which he taught came from Jerusalem,
from whence the Gospel was first preached ; his errors and
superstition came from Rome. That the Bishops of the
Britons refused both his authority and ceremonies, it argueth
that Christianity was in this land not subject to the see of
Rome. If they refused to join with Augustin in teaching
the Saxons, it might be not for that they envied their salva
tion which were their enemies, but because they would not
consent to join in that work with him which sought to bring
them into subjection.
Concerning the cruel murder of the Monks of Bangor in
Augustin's quarrel, Galfride, a Briton, imputeth no small part
of the fault to Augustin2: Bede, a Saxon, would have him
clear of it. But seeing the threatening of x\ugustin is agreed
upon, and the slaughter followed, it is shrewd evidence against
1 [Bp. Stillingfleet (Origines Britann. pp. 4 — 6. Lond. 1685.) justly
remarks, that " most of our writers" have misunderstood the passage
in the Epistle of Gildas here referred to ; and even the unequalled
Ussher has misapplied it. (Brit. Eecl. Antiqg. p. 2. Lond. 1687.)
Gildas evidently speaks of a twofold shining of the light of the Gospel :
the first general, and having reference to the whole world; the second
particular, and relating only to Britain. It is with regard to the
former, and not tho latter, that he, following Eusebius and Tertullian,
has mentioned the end of the reign of Tiberius.]
2 [See before, page 6.]

VII.] REPLY TO MASTER CALFHILL. 187
him. That Augustin's Cross and painted table differeth from
that the Papists now use in Procession, Martiall counteth it
not material, seeing afterward they received other kind of
Images from Rome, and other kind of Images were then used
in churches : which yet were hard for him to prove ; for the
Grecians to this day receive none but painted Images.
The pretence that Master Calfhill saith Augustin might
have to excuse him, to feed the eyes of them that never heard
of Christ with the image of His death, that, lending their ears,
he might instruct their hearts, Martiall will not admit : or if
he did admit it, that it followeth not, that they which have
not like pretence may not use like example : whereas Master
Calfhill doth neither absolutely affirm the pretence, nor allow
it to be good.
From this pretence he passeth into a defence of praying
to Saints, to justify the popish Litany, " Yirgin Mary, pray
for us ;" which he denieth to be idolatrous, because some steps
or shew of Invocation of Saints are found in some old writers ;
and calleth for Scripture to prove it to be idolatrous, yet re-
feeth whatsoever Luther, Calvin, or the Magdeburgs have
said against it. But, by his favour, I will use one or two
reasons out of Scripture to prove it to be idolatrous to call
upon the Yirgin Mary, or any creature. Saint Paul saith,
Rom. x. ver. 14, " How shall they call upon Him in whom
they have not believed?" By which it is evident, that none
ought, nor can in true faith be called upon, but He in whom
we believe ; and it is idolatry to beheve in any but in God
only : wherefore it is idolatry to call upon Mary, or any crea
ture, but upon God only. Again, the Apostle, 1 Tim. ii. ver.
5, saith, " There is but one God, and one Mediator of God
and men, the man Jesus Christ ;" where the Apostle speaketh
not only of redemption, but of prayers, supplications, inter
cessions, &c. ; which overthroweth your blind distinction of
Mediator of intercession and redemption.
For keeping the memory of the dead, which Lactantius
counteth superstition, you think yourselves clear of it, because
Matthew, Peter, and Paul, &e. are alive in heaven. But you
must remember that Christ sayeth Abraham, Isaac, and
Jacob were alive to God3 : but in respect of men they are
dead ; and therefore those memories are not excused of super-
3 [S. Matth. xxii. 32.]

188 A REJOINDER TO J. MARTIALL'S [ART.
stition, according to Lactantius' judgment. Further you say,
The note that the material Cross is no ensign of Christ hath
simple proof. But indeed your assertion, that it should be an
ensign of Christ, hath no proof at all.
The book of Carolus Magnus against Images you imagine
to have been written by Calvin, or Illyricus, or some other
late Protestant : but of the credit and antiquity thereof I have
written, against Doctor Sander's book of Images, Cap. ul
timo. Also concerning the second Council of Nice, which
Martiall citeth for Procession with the Cross, Cap. xv. or xiv.
That God would not suffer the bones of Moses to be
translated, lest they should have been matter of idolatry, he
saith it is no cause why translating of other Saints' bodies
should not be permitted ; because God " will have mercy upon
whom He will have mercy1," and be gentle to whom it pleaseth
Him. " Hath not the pot-maker power to make one vessel to
honour, and another for reproach ?" " May He not transfer
Peter's bones, and let Moses' alone ? May He not make Paul's
body to be honoured, and Joseph's obscured; Saint Stephen's
shrined, and Samuel's interred ? I think you will not deny."
These reasons to rehearse, it is a sufficient confutation of them.
But for the high estimation of Reliques, Hierom is of his
side against Vigilantius, whom he calleth a famous heretic:
and yet no man condemned him for an heretic but Hierom,
who rather raileth on him than reasonetb against him. As
for Eusebius, although he speak honourably of the bones of
Polycarpus, which the Christians gathered and buried, as the
parts of an holy Martyr's body, yet he nameth not any
worshipping of them, such as the Papists use. But Martiall
maketh much ado that Master Calfhill alloweth the excuse
which the heathen men made, that they would not deliver the
body of Polycarpus, lest the Christians should leave Christ,
and begin to worship him ; saying it was the instinct of the
Devil to deny his body, &c, and so to say. What then?
Although they meant cruelly and slanderously against the true
Christians, which could neither forsake Christ, nor worship
any other2 ; yet the same answer might be well made to
i [Bom. ix. 18, 21.]
2 [" Ignorantes, quia nunquam Christum relinquere possurmts
Christiani . . . neque alteri cuiquam precem orationis impendere." See
the Epistlo of the Church of Smyrna, concerning the martyrdom of

VTI.] REPLY TO MASTER CALFHILL. 189
superstitious Papists, who have forsaken Christ, and worship
men, yea, dead bones, and them often not of godly men, nor
always of men.
That Chrysostom was a great admirer of Reliques I
shewed before, insomuch that he would change the kingdom
of heaven for the chain that Saint Paul was bound withal3:
wherein if he spake not excessively, let Martiall follow him.
We esteem the kingdom of heaven more than all the Reliques
that ever were. And yet we allow a reverent laying up of the
bodies and bones of the Saints, so it be without superstition
and idolatry, as was meant by the ancient Fathers ; although
the contrary followed of their too much zeal and carefulness
of such small matters.
To conclude, you have heard what can be said for the
antiquitv of Processions, and bearing of the Cross before
them. Whether it be an Apostolic tradition, that was first
devised by Chrysostom in emulation of heretics, let the readers
judge.
THE EIGHTH ARTICLE.
Martiall. That many strange and wonderful miracles were wrought Martiall.
by the sign of the Cross.
If this Article were granted in manner and form as it is Fcxke.
Bet down and meant by the author ; namely, that God by the
sign of the Cross hath wrought miracles ; yet doth it not fol
low that the sign of the Cross is now to be used of us, nor
that we should repose any confidence therein. By the rod of
Moses great miracles were wrought : yet was neither the sign
of that rod to be esteemed, nor hope of health to be placed in
it, nor the rod itself to be worshipped. The Apostles by Markvi.
anointing with oil did work great miracles : yet neither the
sign of that anointing is of us to be used, nor the oil to be
worslupped. Wherefore, if God, to shew the virtue of Him
that was crucified, hath wrought miracles by the Cross, or sign
thereof, it followeth not that the sign is still to be used, or
the Cross honoured, but He that was crucified.
S. Polycarp. Patres Apostol. ed. Jacobson. Tom. ii. p. 607. Oxon.
1840. Euseb. Hist. Eecl. iv. xv. 134. ed. Vales. Ruinart Acta Marty-
rum, p. 37. Veronse, 1731.]
3 LSee page 110.]

190 A REJOINDER TO J. MARTIALL'S [aRT.
Whereas M. Calfhill said that miracles are done by the
Devil and his ministers, although Martiall cannot deny it, yet
he saith it followeth not that all miracles, or those of the Cross,
were done by the Devil : whereas M. Calfhill's meaning is
plain, that we ought not to beheve all things that are com
mended to us by miracles, but to examine all doctrine by the
word of God ; against which we must beheve no miracles, no
Prophets, no Angels. Gal. i. But whereas Martiall laboureth
to prove that miracles done by sign of the Cross were
done by God, he should first have proved substantially that
miracles were done indeed by the Cross, and after proved by
what power they were done : for we may not believe every
report of miracles ; especially when they are alleged to confirm
false doctrine.
Let us therefore consider the first miracle which he re
hearseth of the Cross of Christ that Helena found, if she found
any; for Eusebius, that knew Helena, and speaketh much of
her commendation, and of her doing at Hierusalem, as I take
it, would not have concealed such a notable invention, if any
such had been, in his story ; and therefore the note in his
Chronology seemeth to be a late addition1- But to the
miracle, that the Cross was discerned from the other two
by a sick gentlewoman upon whom it was laid ; whereupon,
as soon as it touched her, she recovered. This report of Rus-
tinus [Rufinus] seemeth to be uncertain : first, because Ambrose
sayeth the Cross was known by the title, without speaking of
any miracle : secondly, because the report of other writers is,
that the miracle was of a dead woman, and some of two dead
persons ; whereof to see more, I refer the reader to mine
Answer to D. Sander's book of Images, Cap. xiii. or xii.
Concerning the rest of the miracles reported by Paulinus,
Epiphanius, Augustin, and others, let them have such credit as
their authors deserve ; which is not to build faith or doctrine
upon them or their writings. Let it be that some were true
and wrought by God, yet followeth it not, that all that have
been since reported in the popish legends were either true, or
not wrought by the Devil : whereabout Martiall maketh much
wrangling ; but neither affirmeth nor concludeth any thing
universally. None use more crossing than witches and con
jurers. The Devil seemeth to be afraid to come near them:
1 [See Calfhill, pp. 321 — 2.]

VIII.] REPLY TO MASTER CALFHILL. 191
certain strange works are brought to pass by them. Let Mar
tiall affirm any virtue included in the Cross or sign thereof
absolutely, and then we may deal with him accordingly. For
while he telleth us what may be done by faith and the sign of
the Cross, and what God hath done by good men with that
sign ; it is nothing to the authorising of that sign, seeing the
Devil by credulity in wicked men hath done the like by the
same sign.
And this is a true position of M. Calfhill, though Martiall
will not understand it, " That it is not a sufficient proof to
make a thing good," or to shew it to be good, (because he
cavilleth like a calf at the word of ' making,') " to say that
miracles were wrought by it." Martiall asketh first, whether
the miracles of Christ were not a sufficient proof of His divine
power ? where he flieth from the position, which speaketh
not of the principal efficient cause, but of a ceremony, a mean,
or instrument. More pertinently he asketh of the hem of
Christ's coat, Saint Paul's napkins, whether they had not a
virtue by his body ? I answer, no : no more than Judas' lips
that kissed Christ, and Peter's shadow, which could neither be
holy nor efficient of any thing, because it was nothing but the
privation of the light by coming between of his body. So I
say of coats, napkins, ashes of Martytrs, and sign of the Cross :
if any miracles were done by means of them, they are not
thereby holy, neither have they any virtue in them.
The Lord hath given us a general rule to examine all
miracles and miracle-workers by the doctrine they teach;
Deut. xiii. : " If there arise among you a Prophet, or dreamer
of dreams, (and give thee a sign or wonder, and the sign and
the wonder which he hath told thee come to pass ;) if he say,
Let us go after other Gods, which thou hast not known, and
let us serve them ; thou shalt not hearken unto the words of
that Prophet, or unto that dreamer of dreams : for the Lord
your God proveth you, to know whether you love the Lord
your God with all your heart, and with all your soul. Ye
shall walk after the Lord your God, and fear Him, and keep
His commandments, and hearken unto His voice, and ye shall
serve Him, and cleave unto Him." By this Scripture we are
taught to examine all miracles, whether they tend to the
honour of the only true God, and the maintenance of His true
worship according to His word : which Martiall himself in a

192 A REJOINDER TO J. MARTIALL'S [aRT.
manner confesseth, saying "that miracles done by heretics are
not able to commend a thing." But he findeth groat fault with
Master Calfhill for coupling the generation of a child in adul
tery, or feeding by stolen bread, to be miracles, because they
be not extraordinarily miracles : and yet he cannot deny but
they be great wonders ; and the reason of the means is all one
in both. Now let us see how he answereth those three reasons of
Master Calfhill's why miracles make not for the Cross. And
first, he answereth to a question, "Why the dirt in the
street, by which Christ wrought a miracle, should not be
honoured as well as the Cross on the altar ?" He answereth,
" Because the Cross was an instrument by which all the world
was saved." So was Judas ; so was Pilate. The second, he
saith "The Cross is a lively representation of Christ's death."
Nay, a dumb and dead Idol, which is good for nothing.
Abacuc ii. The third, " The Cross is effectuous ever since."
A deed [dead] efficient. Fourth, " The Cross is commanded of
God to be made and used by divers revelations from heaven."
Nay, by the Devil from hell. And yet, if Angels from heaven
had taught the Cross to be made and used as another Gospel,
as it is accounted of the Papists as great as Circumcision was
of the Jews, not preached by the Apostles, nor contained in
the Scriptures, we might safely accurse them.
But now to the reasons. The first is, " Why should not
such external means as Christ and His Apostles used, and
Scripture mentioneth, be had in administration rather than
the idle device of man, of which there is no lawful precedent ?"
Martiall answereth, " The Cross is no idle device, but a tradi
tion of the Apostles, whereof they have lawful precedents."
But seeing no precedent is lawful to build our faith upon but
the holy Scriptures, which the Papists have not for their Cross,
the reason standeth untouched.
The second reason : " If miracles were done by the sign
of the Cross, yet not only by it ; therefore the Cross should
not only be magnified without the rest." Martiall affirmeth
that he would not have the Cross magnified without the rest,
as prayer and faith. How doth he then magnify the Cross in
Julian's story, which was without prayer and faith ?
The third reason : " If miracles were done by the Cross,
yet it should not be had in estimation, except all other things

VIII.] REPLY TO MASTER CALFHILL. 193
by which miracles were wrought, as the hem of Christ's gar
ment, the spittle and clay, the shadow of Peter, and nap
kins of Paul, were likewise honoured and esteemed." Martiall
answereth, "This is but his assertion; for which he hath neither
Scripture, Council, nor Doctor :" as though an argument a
paribus were not good, except the conclusion were expressed
in Scripture, Doctor, or Council. Yet he replieth, that the
Cross is the principal mean by which miracles have been
wrought. But the Scripture is against that : for Christ
wrought no miracle by the sign of the Cross. Nay, I slander
him; for he reasoneth not ad idem, but the Cross is the chief
and principal instrument of our redemption : yet not holier
than the spear, the reed, and the sponge, as Athanasius
affirmeth. Ad Antioch. Quoz. xvi.1 But even the hem, the
spittle and clay, if he had them, Martiall would honour, wor
ship, and esteem for His sake whose precious body they
touched. Then let him worship the sun, that touched Him
with his beams of light; or, if that be too far off, let him
worship Judas' lips that kissed Him, if he can come by them.
Concerning the person of Helena, I would wish nothing
to be spoken of her but to her honour, except in case where
her honour should be an hindrance of the honour of Christ.
Martiall, to justify her in all things, raileth upon M. Calfhill
for charging her with superstition ; as though he had been
the first that had so written of her, when it is reported of her
that she was usque ad srqjerstitionem pia, " devout even to
superstition." And yet her superstition appeareth not so great
in any thing as in this supposed invention of the Cross.
The variety in time that is in the witnesses of the invention
of the Cross the blasphemous beast is not ashamed to com
pare with the appearance of variety which is in the Evan
gelists: where indeed there is none; whereas this discord can
not be reconciled. Yet will he not have the tale discredited
for the discord in time ; as though there were none other
discord. The manifest contradiction that is between Ruffinus, say
ing, Titulus non satis evidenter Dominici prodebat signa
patibuli, " The title did not shew evidently the sign of our
Lord's gibbet," and Ambrose, saying, Titulo Crux salutaris
patuit, "By the title the healthful Cross was manifestly
i [Calfhill, 73 — 1, 272—3.]
[fulke, II.] xo

194 A REJOINDER TO J. MARTIALL'S [art
known;" this contradiction, I say, he denieth to be any, af
firming that a simple logician would prove it to be none;
thinking that satis evidenter, " evidently enough," would
excuse the matter ; as though we knew not what patet doth
signify as well as Master Usher of Winchester.
That a ship would not carry the pieces of the Cross that
are shewed in so many places, he counteth it an impudent he
of Calvin ; whom he raileth upon like a ruffian, and slandereth
like a Devil. Yet Erasmus affirmeth the same in his Pere-
grinat. Relig. erg.1: and he that will beheve neither of them
both, let him consider, beside so many whole Crosses as are
shewed instead of that one, and of great boards that are kept
in many places as part of it, so many thousand churches and
abbeys as either now shew or have shewed chips and pieces
of it, and he shall not think their report to be incredible.
The talk of the nails, which were but three at the first,
and all bestowed at the time of the invention, yet are now
multiplied to thirteen or fourteen, which bewrayeth an horrible
impudency in the popish idolaters, Martiall refuseth as im
pertinent : yet will he not confess the forgery ; which is a
token of a wicked and devilish conscience. Where M. Calfhill
sayeth that miracles were not done by the Cross to establish
a worshipping or having of it, Martiall requireth proof by
Scriptures, Councils, or Doctors. I reason thus a panbus out
of the Scripture : Miracles were done by oil, shadow, and other
things, not to establish a worshipping or having of them: the
like reason is of miracles done by the Cross. Beside that the
Scripture is plentiful in challenging all honour and worship to
the author, and not to the means or instruments. Peter and
John, means of the healing of the lame man, refused all honour
and worship in respect of his healing, Act. iii. vers. 12 : yet
were they other manner of means than the Cross ever was in
doing of miracles.
That M. Calfhill sayeth, miracles teach us not to do the
like, but to beheve the like, Martiall sayeth, they teach us
to do the like if we may : and he proveth it by him that
teacheth that alms covereth sin2; who thereby teacheth to do
1 [The Colloquies of Erasmus are thus condemned in the Index
E.rpurgatorius of Cardinal Zapata: "Expungatur totum opus familia-
rium Colloquiorum." (p. 244. Hispali, 1632.)]
2 [Ecclus. iii. 30.]

VIII.] REPLY TO MASTER CALFHILL. 195
alms, &c. Thus the wise man compareth miracles and men
together, facts and doctrine, act and possibility, even as right
as a ram's horn. But how shall we come by this power to
work miracles by the sign of the Cross ? for to assay with
out assurance of God's power is to tempt God. Therefore we
may no more cross us against Devils, because God hath some
time chased them away by that sign, than we may anoint
blind men's eyes with clay, to prove if they will see after it,
because Christ wrought a miracle by that mean, which, as Mar
tiall saith, teacheth us to do the like if we may. What esti
mation Paulinus, a superstitious man, had in his piece of the
Cross, which was perhaps a piece of another tree than ever
came in Jewry, we have not to follow him in his folly.
That miracles wrought of holy men by the sign of the
Cross, &c, is not a sufficient reason to prove that the sign of
the Cross should be had, kept, set up, and honoured, I have
already proved out of the Scripture by the like or equal : and
yet it is against reason, when we deny your arguments, whose
consequence you ought to prove, that we should be driven to
prove that they follow not. Where M. Calfhill sayeth, that
miracles only ought not or may not commend a thing, you
pick quarrels to him without cause ; objecting the miracles of
Christ, who took witness not only of His miracles, but also of
the holy Scriptures. When you have urged the miracle done
by the sign of the Cross, out of Epiphanius, as much as you
can, yet proveth it not the honouring and setting up of the
sign of the Cross in these days, as M. Calfhill telleth you ;
seeing that we live not among Turks or Saracens, that we need
to have any such sign whereby we might be known to be
worshippers of Christ.
But you would fain learn, what if a Portingal, or one of
the new-converted islands of India, coming by chance into
England, of which he never heard before, and seeing neither
Images nor Crosses in church nor street, how he should know
in whom we believe. And I would learn of you, what skilleth
it, if such a man as never came here, nor ever by any likeli
hood shall come hither, yet supposed to be driven on a board
out of India into England ; what skilleth it, I say, if he knew
not in whom we believe, and so depart as wise as he came ?
What remedy, but we must have all places filled with Images
.and Crosses, for such a man to know what we hold of, who
13—2

196 A REJOINDER TO J. MARTIALL'S [ART.
shall be never the better thereby, nor the worse if he know
not? But you think that happily [haply] strangers of Greece,
Constantinople, Jewry, and India may come to our coasts; and
therefore we ought to have the sign of the Cross in churches,
chapels, and highways, to signify of Whom we hold. We have
not many such strangers : but when they arrive, we have
books of the holy Scripture in Greek, Hebrew, Chaldee,
Syrian, Arabic, Sclavonian tongues ; in which they may be in
structed that are desirous to understand what rehgion we pro
fess. The Lord God thought it sufficient to have His law
written upon great stones, at the entrance into the Holy
Land, to let all strangers know both Whom, and after what
manner, the people of Israel did honour and serve their God.
Deut. xxvii. 3. But as for Images and pillars, He utterly
forbad them to set up any for any use of rehgion. Deut.
xii. 1. [3.] & xvi. ver. 2. [22.]
THE NINTH ARTICLE.
Martiall. Martiall. What commodity every Christian man hath or may have
by the sign of the Cross.
Fulke. Fulke. Whereas M. Calfhill detesteth the idolatrous
Council of Nice the second, by the example of Ambrose, who
abhorred the heretical Council of Ariminum, Martiall, willing
to justify that rabble of idolaters assembled at Nice, would
shew great difference, not only between the Councils, but also
between him and Ambrose; saying, that he was a Catholic
Bishop, acknowledging obedience and subjection to the Pope's
Holiness : as though the Bishop of Rome in his time either
required such obedience and subjection, or that Ambrose ac
knowledged any. But concerning that assembly of Nice, and
the authority thereof, how they determined contrary to the
word of God, not only in the matter of having and worshipping
of Images, but also in other things, I refer the reader to mine
Answer unto M. Sander's book of Images, Cap. xv. or xiv.
Of all that M. Calfhill saith against that Council of Nice,
Martiall chooseth but one saying of Germanus to defend;
wherein he picketh two quarrels against M. Calfhill : one, that
he should misunderstand the saying of Germanus, as though
he meant that grace were dispensed by Images, where he

IX.] REPLY TO MASTER CALFHILL. 197
saith, " An Image is a figuring of holy virtue, and dispen
sation of grace." But if grace be not dispensed by Images,
whether Germanus said so or no, I pray you, to what purpose
are they set up in the churches? or what profit may a
Christian man have by the sign of the Cross, when Martiall
denieth that any grace is dispensed by Images ? The second
quarrel he picketh is, that M. Calfhill denieth that the virtues
of Saints can be seen in their Images, which could not be seen
in their persons. Martiall saith, "This reason condemneth
the Scripture as well as Images : for the ink and paper hath
no mind or sense to hold the power of Christ, and virtue of
the Apostles, more than Images have:" as though the
Scripture were nothing but ink and paper ; or as though that
all things that may be learned and understood by hearing
may be discerned by the eye, which conceiveth only bodily
shapes of things, and cannot attain to see faith, holiness,
virtue, &c, whereof no Images can be made.
When M. Calfhill sayeth, that the Image of Mars or S.
George, Venus or the mother of Christ, cannot be discerned
asunder, Martiall hath nothing to reply, but that we must not
suppose to find any Images among the Christians but of Christ
and His Saints : so that Images be wise books, which cannot
teach their scholars what or whereof they are ; but they must
learn of the common opinion how to esteem of them. That
Images be teachers of pride, avarice, wantonness, &c, as the
Prophet sayeth they are the doctrine of vanity and lies,
Abac, ii., Martiall saith blasphemously, that Images give no
more occasion of vices than the holy Scriptures, of which some
wicked men take occasion of drunkenness, whoredom, usury,
&c. But seeing the Scripture directly and plainly condemneth
all these and other vices as occasion is given by them, how
soever any is taken by ungodly persons; whereas Images,
which teach no goodness, but, being gorgeously and whorishly
decked with gold and precious stones, otherwise than the
Saints delighted, even as in holy Scripture they are counted
as stumbling-blocks, so they teach men vainly affected to
delight in such things as they see to please the Saints. But
Martiall sayeth that gilded Images make men think of the
joys of heaven. 0 ridiculous fantasy ! They may sooner
make men think of the vanity of the world, to delight in it.
But when the Holy Ghost, by the mouth of His Prophets, hath

198 A REJOINDER TO J. MARTIALL'S [art.
determined that Images are the doctrine of lying and vanity,
it were lost labour to dispute any longer what good things
they can teach. Jer. x. ver. 8. Abac. ii. ver. 18.
The examples of Ezechias, Josias, and Salomon, he saith
are brought to no purpose against Images amongst Christians ;
as though it were more lawful for Christians than for Israel
ites to commit idolatry. But the Christians (saith he) direct
their hearts, and offer their prayers to God; and therefore
there is no mistrust of idolatry amongst them. Why, Martiall ?
Have not the Papists in England made, and do they not yet
still in other places make, vows to the Images that are in
such a place and such a place ? Do they not travel thither,
and offer up both prayers and sacrifice of candles, money,
jewels, and other things unto the Images? Have not your
Idols given answer ? Have they not wagged their heads and
lips, &c? 0 shameless dogs, and blasphemous idolaters! The
Lord so deal with you as you know in your own consciences
that the ignorant people have made their prayers even to the
stocks and stones, thinking them to have a life and divinity
in them : and yet you say there is no mistrust of idolatry,
lest you should be driven by example of Ezechias to destroy
and break your Images ; although otherwise they were not
against God's commandment, but even made by His appoint
ment, as the brasen Serpent was. That fond quarrel of yours,
that Salomon was not abused by Images, but by women, I
leave to women to laugh at your vanity, when they read that
by women he was brought to be an idolater and worshipper
of Images. And every child that readeth Chrysostom, Horn. liv. in
viii. Tom., [Joan.1,] can understand, that although occasioned
by obstinate Jews, yet he speaketh generally of all obstinate
minds, whether they be professors of Christianity or no.
Animo desperato, &c. : " There is nothing worse than a
desperate mind. Although he see signs, although miracles be
wrought, yet he standeth still in the self-same frowardness."
For an obstinate sinner, that hath professed Christianity, is no
more moved with miracles and the sign of the Cross than a
Jew or Pharaoh was.
It hath more colour, but not more truth, that Athanasius2
1 [Opp. viii. 324. Calfhill, p. 353.]
2 [De incarnatione Verbi Dei, §. 50.]

IX.] REPLY TO MASTER CALFHILL. 199
ascribeth not all effects of conversion of wicked men, &c. wholly
and solely to the faith of Christ, when he saith, " Who hath
done this," &c, " but the faith of Christ, and sign of the
Cross ?" Martiall confesseth that faith is able to do it without
the Cross, but that God would have the sign of the Cross
common with faith. If ye ask in what Scripture God hath
revealed this will, he hath nothing to say. Only he denieth
M. Calfhill's exposition of Athanasius, that the sign of the
Cross was joined to faith, not as a fellow-worker, but as a
witness and sign of the faith against the Gentiles, because he
hath neither Scripture, Doctor, nor Council for it. Wherein
he lieth shamefully : for the Scripture, shewing that faith only Rom. m. 28.
is the instrument by which we apprehend God's mercy and our
justification, by which God purifieth our hearts, sufficiently Actsxv-9'
proveth that the sign of the Cross is no worker in these cases.
Chrysostom, speaking of our conversion, &c. saith, Horn.
xiv. in Ep. ad Rom3: Unum hoc, &c. : " We have offered this
one only gift of [to] God, that we give credit to Him promising
us things to come, and by this only way we are saved." This
Doctor ascribeth all to faith; therefore nothing to the sign of
the Cross. Whether the Parisians approve Erasmus his cen
sure4, it is not material. The censure is true, and approved
by as wise and well-learned as they.
Touching the next quarrel, that Cyrillus6 acknowledgeth
it no fault of the Christians to make the sign of the Cross at
their doors, it is very foolish, as all the rest be : for although
he defend it as a good deed, and in his time tolerable, yet if
any did worship the wood of the Cross, as Julian charged
them, it was a fault, which Cyrillus doth excuse and seek to
cover: but of that matter you may read more in mine Answer
to D. Sander's book of Images, Cap. iv., or iii. after the error
of his print.
That S. Basil alloweth Images in churches, he citeth his
Sermon upon Barlaam6, where he exhorteth painters to set
forth the valiant conflicts of the Martyr by their art : but of
setting up those tables in churches there is no word. Neither
8 [Opp. Tom. ix. p. 584. ed. Ben.]
* [See Calfhill, p. 361.]
8 [Vid. S. Cyrilli Alexand. Lib. vi. Contra Julianum, pp. 194, 195.
ed. Ezech. Spanhem.]
6 [Opp. Gtsbc. p. 203. Basil. 1551.]

200 A REJOINDER TO J. MARTIALL'S [ART.
do I perceive he speaketh of other painters than eloquent
rhetoricians : for immediately before he saith : Quin mag-
nificentioribus laudum ipsius Unguis cedamus. Sonanti-
ores doctorum tubas ad illius prozconia advocemus. Ex-
surgite nunc, O prozclari athleticorum gestorum pictores, &c:
" But let us give place to more magnificent tongues, utterersof
bis praises. Let us call hither the louder sounding trumpets
of learned men. Arise now, 0 ye noble painters of the valiant
acts of champions," &c. And it is usual among learned men
to compare good orators to cunning painters.
The counterfeit Oration of Athanasius1, brought in the
idolatrous Council of Nice2, we reject as a matter forged by
heretics and idolaters. The other Doctors' places, whom he
quoteth, are all considered and answered in several places of
mine Answer to Doctor Sander's book of Images, before
mentioned. Whether an Image may be made of Christ, which is both
God and man, you shall find it more at large entreated in my
said Answer, Cap. vii. or vi.
That the Cross in the time of Cyrillus had none Image
upon it, it is to be proved by this reason, that Julian would not
have omitted to object the worshipping of Images unto Chris
tians, which they condemned in the heathens, if any Images
had been upon their Crosses, which he charged them to have
worshipped. Concerning the calling of churches by the name
of Saints we have spoken already.
That S. Paul joineth not Pictures with Scriptures to be
our instruction and comfort, it is an argument of better force
than Martiall hath wit to answer. For if any such instruction,
comfort, or commodity had any ways come to Christians by
Pictures, he would not have written that the Scriptures are
1 [This must be the fictitious Liber de passione Imaginis Christi,
called by Crabbe (in Indice Tom. ii. Concill.) " luculentus ac pius
Sermo", and alleged by Bellarmin (De Imagg. L. ii. C. x. et xii.) and
many other Bomanists in defence of Image-worship. Baronius can
didly rejects this history of the fabled Picture of Berytus ; (Annall. ad
an. 787. §§¦ xxxiv — xlix. Tom. ix. Ant. 1612. Martyrol. die Novemb.
9.) and the learned Montfaucon pronounces it to have been the work
"imperiti alicujus et infacundi hominis." (S. Athan. Opp. ii. 343.)
Conf. Baynaudi Erotemata, p. 173. Coci Censur. pp. 93 — 95.]
2 [Sept. Synod. Act. iv. Concill. Gen. Tom. iii. p. 472. Eomse,
1612.]

IX.] REPLY TO MASTER CALFHILL. 201
able to make " the man of God perfect, prepared to all good
works." 2 Tim. iii. vers. 17. Article iii. [ix.3]

THE TENTH ARTICLE.
Martiall. The adoration and worship of the Cross allowed by the Mautiall.
ancient Fathers.
Fulke. Martiall thinketh it not reason that he should Fulke.
prove the adoration of the Cross by some testimony of
Scripture, because God hath not so tied Himself to the written
letter of the Scripture, that nothing can be taken for truth
which is not written in Scripture. But God hath so tied us
to the written letter of the Scripture, that we are bound to
believe nothing but that which may be proved thereby. The
Baptism by heretics, the Baptism of infants, the authority of
the Epistle to the Hebrews, of Saint James and Jude, and of
all the canonical Scriptures, have proof and approbation out
of the holy Scriptures ; and are not received of us by the
only tradition and authority of the Church ; which yet we
do not refuse when it is warranted by the holy Scriptures
inspired of God.
The ancient Fathers, Athanasius, Chrysostom, &c. were
not exempted from the infirmity of men, that they could so
order their terms as no heretics should take occasion of error
by them ; when even the terms of holy Scripture are often
times abused by them, clean contrary to the meaning of the
Spirit, by which they were written.
But Martiall, like a proud fool, disdaineth to be called to
define " adoration," because every term is not necessary to be
defined. And yet I suppose he would claw his poll twice or
ever he could make a true definition of it, or a description
either. At the least wise, seeing the word of "adoration" is
taken so many ways, but that he would walk under a cloud
of ambiguity, he should have expressed what manner of adora
tion he doth speak of. But he is content to take adoration
for bowing down, prostrating, putting off the cap, &c, which
he thinketh may be done to a senseless Image, as well as to
the Queen's cloth of estate, her privy seal, &c. ; as though
there were no difference between civil reverence and religious
3 [Calfhill, p. 349.]

202 A REJOINDER TO J. MARTIALL'S [ART,
worship : and yet I ween no man doeth this honour to those
senseless things, although he shew reverence to the Prince at
the sight of them.
The second Commandment, Exod. xx., he saith, toucheth
not popish Images more than politic images of dragons, eagles,
owls, &c. in arms or other pictures. So good a lawyer he is,
that he cannot interpret the law according to the matter
whereupon it is made, namely religion ; but fantasieth, that
because Images out of the use of religion be not forbidden to
be made by a law of religion, therefore they be not forbidden
to be made, no not in the use of religion.
The Prophets, he saith, cry out against the Images of
Gentiles : and, by his leave, against the Images of the Is
raelites also. The Image of the brasen Serpent was a figure of
Christ : and yet the Prophets condemned, and Ezechias de
stroyed the worship of the brazen Serpent.
For the examination of the sentence of Ambrose, De obitu
Theodosii1, I refer the reader to mine Answer to D. Sander,
of Images, Cap. xiii. or xii.
Augustin, in Joan. T. xxxvi.2, sheweth how reverently the
Cross was esteemed of the Romans, that now malefactors
were no more punished upon it, lest it should be thought they
were honoured if they suffered that kind of death which our
Saviour Christ died : as among us, if rascal thieves should
be beheaded at the Tower-hill, where only honourable per
sonages use to suffer, it might be said they were honoured
with that kind of execution. Hereupon Martiall both foolishly
and lewdly dreameth, that if thieves had been put to death
upon the Cross, the people were likely to have honoured them
for the Cross's sake.
Hierom saith3, that Paula " worshipped, lying before the
Cross, as though she had seen Christ hanging upon the
Cross ;" yet saith he not that she worshipped the Cross.
Ambrose" saith of Helena, that "when she found the Cross,
she worshipped the King, and not the tree ; for that is an
heathenish error, and a vanity of ungodly persons." Where-
i [Calfhill, pp. 192, 377.]
2 [Opp. Tom. iii. ii. 396. ed. Ben. Amst.]
3 [See beforo, p. 181, note 4.]
4 De obit. Thood. [" Invcuit titulum, Begem adoravit ; non lignum
utique, quia hie Gcntilis est error et vanitas impiorum."]

X.] REPLY TO MASTER CALFHILL. 203
fore if Hierom or any other Father should teach us to
worship the Cross as an Idol, we might well say to him,
Avoid, Satan. But Martiall, lest he should seem weary of
wrangling, scoffeth at M. Calfhill for talking of a wooden
tree ; as though the matter of a thing might not be named,
but where there is difference of matter. Why say we then
an earthly or fleshly man, if we may not say a wooden tree,
by Martiall's philosophy, lest men should think we talk of
watery and fishy men ? I had not thought to have named
Martiall's term of gentlemen's recognizances, of dragons,
eagles, &c. used in this Article, but that he is so captious to
take exceptions to M. Calfhill's terms, himself being a lawyer,
to trip in a term of law.
That service and worship do so concur together, that the
one cannot be without the other, Martiall granteth; although
he think M. Calfhill can bring no Scripture, Doctor, nor
Council for it ; when he bringeth the saying of Christ, Matth.
iv. But when he inferreth that we must serve God only,
therefore we must worship God only, Martiall bringeth instance
of civil service, and worship of parents ; when our Saviour
Christ speaketh only of religious worship, which the Devil
required to be given him, not as God, but as the distributor
of all the kingdoms of the world under God.
That Angels are inferior to Christ, which worship Him, Heb.i.
and are not worshipped again, Martiall saith it is an addition
unto S. Paul, because in all that Epistle we are not forbidden
to worship Angels. But where he proved before that God
only is to be worshipped, and the Angel refuseth to be wor
shipped of John, Apoc. xix. vers. 10, xxii. vers. 8, who was
not so mad to worship him as God, but as an excellent crea
ture, what addition can this be to the sense and meaning of
the Apostle ; especially when he addeth immediately, that they
are all "ministering Spirits, appointed to minister for them
that shall inherit salvation ? " They are appointed of God to
serve : they are not set up to be served and worshipped. Their
honour and delight is, that God only may be served and
honoured. Out of Damascen5 he excuseth their worshipping of the
5 [De orihodoxa Fide, Lib. iv. Cap. xii. fol. 152. Paris. 1519. —
" Non materiam venerantes, (absit enim,) sed figuram, tanquam Christi
signum."]

204 A REJOINDER TO J. MARTIALL'S [ART.
Cross, for that they worship "not the matter," as wood,
copper, &c, " but the figure ;" as if it were less idolatry to
worship an accident than a substance.
The honour which Peter refused to receive of Cornelius
was not such as became the Minister of God ; and therefore
was reproved by Peter, without counterfeiting of humility.
The other examples that Martiall bringeth of civil worship done
unto David by Abigail and Nathan be clean out of the purpose.
Concerning the worship of Angels I have spoken imme
diately before. Martiall slandereth S. John, that he would
have worshipped the Angels as God. The conclusion of this
argument he thinketh worthy to be hissed at : Angels may
not be worshipped: ergo much less the Cross. What shall
we say to such a Chrysippus, as alloweth not the argument a
majoribus ? The objection of the Cherubims, the brasen
Serpent, the oxen, and other Images in the Temple, you shall
find answered, Cap. v. or iv. of my Confutation of D. Sander's
book of Images.
The seventeen authorities, brought by M. Calfhill against
the worshipping of Images, Martiall will answer, if he can :
and first, he denieth that Clemens speaketh of Crosses,
Crucifix, &c, but of the Images of the Gentiles. Indeed in
his days the true Christians had no such Images, that he
should speak of them. But consider his reasons that he
maketh against the worshipping of heathenish Images, and
they serve also to condemn the worship of popish Images.
The fables of the Image of Christ's face, that he gave to
Yeronica, and sent to Algarus, [Abgarus,] is good draff for
such swine as delight in idolatry. But Martiall thinketh, that
as our ears call upon us to bow our knees at the name of
Jesus, so do the eyes at the sight of the Crucifix. But he
must understand, that we worship not the sound of the name
of Jesus, rebounding in the air ; but the power, the majesty,
and authority of Jesus we acknowledge and honour : not called
upon by the sound of the name of Jesus, but by the voice of
the Gospel, to which the Idol of the Crucifix hath no re
semblance ; neither is it a lawful mean to stir up our remem
brance, because it is forbidden of God.
Where Saint Paul saith, that Christ was described or
pointed unto the Galatians, we must either say, that the pas
sion of Christ was painted in a table, or else they carried the

*¦] REPLY TO MASTER CRLFHILL. 205
Image of the Cross of Christ rent and torn in their minds.
" If they might carry an Image in their minds, why might
they not have it fair painted in a table ? Speak, Master
Calf: answer, if you can." O mighty Martiall, withdraw
your grim countenance awhile, and give him leave to gather
his wits together. First he saith, that Saint Paul speaketh
of neither of both your Images, but of the effect and fruit of
the death of Christ ; which was so lively described before
them, that they ought not to have sought any thing more to
the sufficiency of His redemption, and their salvation. Se
condly, although the sense of hearing be appointed of God,
Rom. x., to instruct faith, yet he findeth not the sense of
seeing, and especially of Images, which God hath forbidden,
admitted to be a mover to Christian devotion, or worship of
God. And therefore there is no like reason, that as the story
may be carried in remembrance, so the Image may be painted,
and set up in the church to be worshipped.
The injunction of kneeling at the Communion intendeth
no worship of the bread and wine, more than of the table,
the cup, the book, the desk, the wall, &c, before which the
people kneel: and therefore it hath nothing like to your
kneeling before the Cross ; which is not only before it, but
also to it, to worship it.
But you think you have an argument to choke us, of the
ceremony of swearing upon a book, seeing swearing is a kind
of adoration. But, Sir, we swear not by the book, as you
Papists do: we call God only to witness. The book is but an
external indifferent ceremony, and that rather civil than
ecclesiastical ; whereas adoration of God by Images is prohi
bited by God's law. Again, we give no honour at all to the
book, as you do to your Images.
That Clemens alloweth the honour given to man, as to
the Image of God, we allow very well, because man is a true
Image of God. Your, blocks and stocks be all false and coun
terfeit Images.
To Clemens Alexandrinus, Irenaeus, and Tertullian, he
maketh the same answer, that they speak only of heathenish
Images. The like he might say, where they speak against
adulteries, that they speak of the adulteries of the heathen,
and not of Christians. And the same to Cyprian, Origen,
Arnobius, Lactantius, and Athanasius ; bringing instance of

206 A REJOINDER TO J. MARTIALL'S [ART.
the civil reverence done to the Prince's seat, and to the
Prince himself. And whereas Arnobius1 saith expressly and
absolutely, " We worship no Crosses," he expoundeth it,
We worship them not as Gods. Such expositions may avoid
all authorities. The Gentiles, which knew the Christians wor
shipped but one God, did not object worshipping of Crosses
unto them as Gods.
Against the authority of Lactantius he bringeth in a
verse falsely ascribed unto him, Flecte genu, lignumque
Crucis venerabile adora, " Bow the knee, and adore the
venerable wood of the Cross." If Martiall allow this verse
for authentical authority, how will he justify that he said
before, they worshipped not the wood, stone, metal of the
Cross, but the figure or sign of it ?
Against Athanasius he obtrudeth that counterfeit Sermon
of the Image of Christ in Berisus [Berytus ;] and once again
urgeth his forged Question xxxix. ad Antiochum, which is
Quest, xvi., as we have set it down at large Article v., having
in it no such words as he citeth, Crucis figuram ex duobus
lignis componentes, adoramus, " We, making a figure of the
Cross of two pieces of wood, do adore it."
To Epiphanius he answereth, that he speaketh only against
women, which offered sacrifice to the Yirgin Mary ; whereas
neither it was lawful that women should offer sacrifice, nor
that Mary should be made a God. But indeed Epiphanius
speaketh against the adoration of dead men by Images. Et
mortui quidem sunt qui adorantur, &c. : "And they truly
which are worshipped are dead : but they bring in then-
Images to be worshipped which never lived ; for they cannot
be dead which never lived." He would have Mary to be
honoured, but not with worshipping her Image, for that were
idolatry. Martiall hath two strong collections : " If a woman
may not sacrifice, ergo she may not be head of the Church ;"
as though it were necessary that the chief governor of the
Church should do sacrifice. The other, "That women may not
offer external sacrifice : ergo there is an external sacrifice that
men may offer." As good as this : A woman may not circum
cise : therefore Circumcision is in use to be done by men. To
i [Minucius Felix, De Idolor. vanit. p. S9. Oxon. 1678. — " Cruces
nee colhnus nee optamus."]

X.J REPLY TO MASTER CALFHILL. 207
be short, Epiphanius calleth the heresy of the Collyridians,
that sacrificed to the Virgin Mary, hceresis simulacrijica,
" an Image-making heresy."
But lest Martiall should seem to be beaten clean away
from Epiphanius, he citeth him, De vitis Prophet.2, alleging
a prophecy of Hieremy of the second coming of Christ, which
should be quando gentes universce ligno supplicabunt, " when
all nations shall make their supplications to wood." Here is
either Martiall's sign of the Cross, or an heathenish error com
manded by the Prophets, he saith. But if he will boast of
the authority of the ancient Epiphanius, he must bring better
stuff than this fragment, De vita et inter. Proph.; which,
following so many Jewish fables, argueth the later Epiphanius,
the patron of Images, to be the author, rather than the elder
of Cyprus. For this prophecy of Hieremy, even as the fable
of the ark swallowed of a stone, &c, savoureth of Jewish
vanity. And yet if we should admit it as authentical and true,
the sense should rather be, that Christ shall come when all
nations shall be idolaters or wood-worshippers, than when all
nations should worship the sign of the Cross, as Martiall sup
poseth : for Christ at His second coming shall scarce find faith.
Therefore, infidelity possessing the greatest part of the world,
it is more like all nations should worship wooden Idols than
Christ, by honouring the sign of His Cross.
To Ambrose, denying that Helena worshipped the wood
of the Cross, he opposeth a forged saying of Ambrose3, cited
in the second Council of Nice4, where lying, forging, and
false worshipping did bear all the sway. Concerning the
true testimony of Ambrose, read more in mine Answer to D.
Sander's book of Images, Cap. xiii. or xii.
To Hierom, not admitting the civil honour used to be
given to the pillars and Images of the Emperors, much less
adoration of Images in religion, he opposeth his saying in
Psalm, xcviii.5, affirming that adoration of the Cross is allowed
by him; whereas that Commentary, by learned and indifferent
2 [S. Epiph. Opp. Tom. ii. p. 240. Paris. 1622. — Petavius declares,
in his Preface to the reader, that " sexcentse mendaciorum nugse "
prove the spuriousness of this treatise.]
3 [Calfhill, p. 173.]
4 [Vid. Act. ii. p. 413. Concill. Gen. Tom. iii. ed. Sirmond.]
6 [Opp. Tom. viii. p. 146. Basil. 1565.]

208 A REJOINDER TO J. MARTIALL'S [art.
judges, Erasmus1 and Amerbachius2, is proved by many
arguments to be none of Hieronym's writing, but of one of
much later time. Thus hath Martiall against the true testi
monies of the Fathers nothing to oppose, but their counter
feited authorities and false-inscribed writings.
Concerning Hieronym's adoration of the manger and in
cunabula3, "the cradle" of Christ, which Martiall so often
called " the swathling clothes," I have answered before, that
he meaneth no such adoration as the Papists give unto then-
Images, but a reverent estimation, as of an ancient holy monu
ment : wherein yet I will not altogether excuse Hierom of
superstitious affection, as I will not charge him with idolatry.
For Chrysostom's judgment of worshipping the Cross, I
refer the reader, as before, to Cap. xiii. or xii. of mine Answer
to D. Sander's book of Images.
To Claudius, Bishop of Taurino4, that in all his diocese
forbad the worship of the Cross, he answereth, Alphonsns de
Castro counteth him for an heretic, and Jonas, Bishop of Or
leans, writeth against him. Indeed Jonas writeth against his
overthrowing of Images, but he writeth also against the ado
ration of Images. His words are these, Lib. L De cultu
Imagin. : Claudius, Prozsul Ecclesice Taurinensis, &c. :
" Claudius, Bishop of the Church of Taurine, saw his flock
(among other things which it did worthy of reformation) to be
given to the superstitious, yea, the pernicious worshipping of
Images ; of which disease some of those parts are sick, of an
old-rooted custom," &c. So that not only Claudius, but also
Jonas, was directly contrary to this tenth Article.
Touching the brabbling distinction of Latria and Dovlia,
I refer the reader to mine Answer to Doctor Sander's book
of Images, Cap. vi. or v. ; as also for that noble argument
that followeth, whereby he would prove that Papists cannot
commit idolatry.
That M. Calfhill affirmeth outward profession to be neces
sary for every Christian man, Martiall saith he condemneth
i [Videatur Alienorum Index, prsef. Tom. i. sig. a 6. — " . . . nihil
illic esse arbitror Hieronymi."]
2 [Commentarii, qui " DivoHieronymo hactenus sunt falso inscripti."
(Bruno Amorbacbius Lectori. Tom. viii. Tit. vers.)]
s [See before, p. lsl, note 4.]
* [Turin.]

X.] REPLY TO MASTER CALFHILL. 209
his doctrine of only faith justifying. Verily, a club is more
meet than an argument, to beat it into such an ass's head,
that when we teach that only faith doth justify, we say not
that God requireth nothing of a Christian man but faith
only. Again, who would vouchsafe to answer his quarrelling
of true faith without confession ? " The rulers believed, but
did not confess. John xii. Here was faith," (quod Martiall,)
"but no confession." But who will grant that here was a true
justifying faith ? Likewise this argument : " There is a corpo
ral service of outward gesture due to God : therefore it is no
idolatry to kneel before an Image." And again : " Protestants
kneel before Images in glass windows, and hold up their hands
at Paul's Cross : therefore they defile their bodies with sacri
lege. And if they excuse themselves by their good intent,
the same will serve the Papists, which adore the Image for
that it representeth Christ or His Saints." But Protestants
adore no Images with any intent, thou foolish advocate of
idolaters, no more than Martiall doth reverence to a dog,
when he putteth off his cap, or maketh courtesy in any house
where a dog is before him.
" And verily," he sayeth, " a man may as well be suspected
for idolatry if he bow before any visible creature, as if he
kneel before an Image." But not so probably as Martiall may
be suspected to be out of his wits when he maketh such com
parisons. The Jews were not only suspected, but also affirmed
by the Gentiles to worship the clouds and the power of heaven,
because in prayer they looked up to heaven: Qui pur as nubes
et cozli Numen adorant, sayeth the poet of them5. Where
fore, by Martiall's comparison, they might as well have prayed
before Images.
And where he sayeth that Protestants condemn outward
things, except hats, beards, barrel breeches6, &c, he sheweth
his vanity. Our judgment concerning outward things, that
serve for order and comeliness, (being not defiled with idolatry
and superstition,) is sufficiently known. What we teach of
fasting and praying, vowing, &c, it were superfluous here to
repeat, when public testimonies of our doctrine are daily given,
both in preaching and writing : and surely I am to blame,
5 [Juvenalis Sat. xiv. 97. — " Nil prater nubes et cceli Numen ado-
rant."] 6 [Fox, ii. 431. ed. 1684.]
r t 14
[FULKE, II.] •*¦*

210 A REJOINDER TO J. MARTIALL^ [ART.
that vouchsafe such vain calumniating of any mention. That
" not to bow their knee to Baal" is not a peculiar note of
God's servants, because other things are required in God's
servants than to be free from idolatry, it is a foolish and more
than childish quarrel : for in the days of Elias that was a
peculiar note to discern them from idolaters, whom God had
preserved both from yielding to idolatry in heart, and also
from dissembling with outward gesture.
But Martiall would learn whether M. Calfhill, kneeling
down before his father to ask him blessing, did not commit
idolatry. How often shall I tell him he is an ass, that cannot
make a difference between civil honour and religious worship ?
And once again he must be answered, why the people are suf
fered to swear upon a book, with their caps in their hands,
rather than to kneel before the Cross in doing of their adora
tion to God. If he will be answered, I will tell him again,
partly because it is against civil honesty that the people should
stand covered before the Judge ; partly because they swear by
the name of God, whom they ought to reverence. But kneel
ing before a Cross, to worship it, is manifest idolatry, and
expressly forbidden by the law of God, " Thou shalt not bow
down to them, nor worship them." The people are not allowed
to put off their caps to the book ; neither yet to swear by the
book. When Martiall can prove that it is lawful for Christians
to worship Images, then we will grant it is uncharitable to
judge them idolaters that kneel before them.
But he will not grant the Cross to be " nothing" in that
sense that Saint Paul sayeth "an Idol is nothing1," because
it is a representation of a thing that was. By this reason the
Image of Jupiter, Hercules, Romulus, which were men some
time, were no Idols : the Image of the sun, of an ox, an ape, a
cat, &c, worshipped of the Egyptians, were no Idols, neither
was the worshipping of them idolatry. The questions to be
propounded in the Chancery I leave to Martiall to propound
himself. But where he sayeth that " no evidence of any ido
latrous fact in worshipping the Cross can be shewed in true
Christians," I agree with him : but in Papists, if he mean thein,
great evidence. Who went a pilgrimage to the Roods of
Boston, Dovercourt, and Chester ? Were they not Papists ?
Who made the Roods to sweat, to bleed, and to smell sweet,
1 [1 Cor. viii. 4.]

X.J REPLY TO MASTER CALFHILL. 211
as D. Read did with his Rood of Becclys ? Were they not
Papists? Finally, who sayeth and singeth to the Crucifix,
Ave, Rex noster, &c, "All hail, our King;" "All hail, 0 Cross,
our only hope2," &c? I doubt not but the country of Christian
men will judge this as good evidence for pulling down the
Cross as Ezechias had for destroying the brasen Serpent.
It is Martiall's "poor judgment," when you see men pray
ing, they be Christian men ; therefore they serve God in
spirit and truth. But afterward he restraineth it to men that
were baptized in Christ : yet may they be heretics, and
therefore no true worshippers of God. But that which he
spake in way of humility, he will now say stoutly : " Sir,
when you see men, that is to say, men that are baptized,
men that believe in God, praying, yea, before an Image, and
holding up their hands, and knocking their breasts, it is a
good consequent to say they be Christian men : ergo they
serve God in spirit and truth; and we may not judge the
contrary." This argument holdeth of the place of stoutness ;
for other consequence there is none in it, nor yet witty con
veyance. For first, when I see men, I must say they be men
that are baptized, and believe in God ; whereas by sight I
cannot perceive that they are baptized : and yet if I know
that they be baptized, I cannot tell whether they believe in
God as Christians or as heretics, or whether they be hypo
crites without faith. How shall I then judge them to be
Christian men? Finally, when I see them do an open act
contrary to Christian profession, yet, by Martiall's divinity, I
may not judge but that they be good Christians, and worship
God in spirit and truth: even as by his Canon Law3 I am
taught, that if I see a Priest embracing of a woman, I must
judge he doeth it for no harm, but to bless her.
To be short, Martiall's good consequent will make him
confess, that all the Protestants " that hold up their hands
at Paul's Cross, and say 'Amen' when the preacher sayeth
'God confound the Papists,'" (whereat he scoffeth,) be Chris
tian men, and worship God in spirit and truth. As for their
adoration of the Cross, he saith [it] standeth as well with the
glory of God as our kneeling at the Communion, putting off
2 [Calfhill, p. 381.]
8 [Gloss, in Decret. ii. Par. Caus. xi. Quasst. iii. Cap. Absit. fol.
cox. Parrhis. 1518.]
14—2

212 A REJOINDER TO J. MARTIALL'S REPLY. [ART. X.]
our caps to the cloth of estate, to the Prince's letters, bowing
to the Prince's person, kissing of the book, &c. : so that with
him things by God expressly forbidden stand as well with
His glory as things by Him commanded and permitted.
In the end, complaining that Master Calfhill hath not
answered him to thirty places out of the ancient writers,
whereof let the readers when they have compared judge, he
glorieth that his railing and slanderous conclusion is not dealt
withal but by silence; which silence he taketh for a confession:
but indeed it is a sufficient confutation of such lies and slan
ders as have no colour of truth in them. Our Saviour Christ,
being called a Samaritan, made none answer to it. Socrates,
an heathen man, kept silence when a varlet railed on him,
Wherefore silence in such a case as this is neither a confes
sion, nor a conviction.
To conclude, I will not altogether refuse, as Master Calfhill
doth, to deal with " so lewd an adversary as Martiall is:" but
I would wish that the Papists, for their credit's sake, would
henceforward set forth a better champion for their causes,
or else help him with better weapons to fight in
their quarrel. For in this Reply be doth
nothing in a manner but either construe
like an usher, or quarrel like a
dogbolt lawyer.

FINIS.

A DISCOVERY

THE DANGEROUS ROCK

THE POPISH CHURCH.

A BIS CO VE BIE
OF THE DAVNGEROVS
ROCKE OF THE POPISH
Church, commended by Nicholas Sander
D. of Diuinitie.
Done by William Fulke Doctor of diuinitie,
and Maister of Pembroke hall
in Cambridge.

Imprinted at London by Thomas Vautroullier
for George Bishop.
1580.

A DISCOVERY
OF THE
DANGEROUS ROCK OF THE POPISH CHURCH,
LATELY COMMENDED BY NICHOLAS SANDERS, DOCTOR
IN DIVINITY1; AT WHICH THE CATHOLIC CHURCH
OF CHRIST HATH BEEN IN PERIL OF SHIP
WRECK THESE MANY HUNDRED YEARS.
BY W. FULKE,
DOCTOR IN DIVINITY.

Sander. The Eternal Rock of the Universal Church. " Christ Sander.
was the Rock." "Another foundation no man is able to put.''
1 Cor. iii. and x.
The Temporal Rock of the Militant Church. "Thou art Peter;
and upon this Rock I will build My Church." Matt. xvi.
Fulke. S. Paul speaketh manifestly, 1 Cor. iii., of build- Fulke.
ing of the Church Militant ; and Christ, Matt, xvi., speaketh
of an Eternal Rock, against the which the gates of hell shall
not prevail. Therefore your distinction of Eternal and Tem
poral, Universal and Militant, which is the foundation of all
your rotten Rock, is an impudent and blasphemous falsehood.
Of the continuance of your Temporal Rock it is in vain
to contend, when your Rock is nothing else but an heap of
sand and dung, whereon your popish Church is builded.
Sander. To the right worshipful M. Doctor Parker, bearing the Sander.
name of the Archbishop of Canterbury, and to all other Protestants in
the realm of England, Nicolas Sander wisheth perfect faith and
charity in our Lord; declaring in this preface, that the Catholics (whom
they call Papists) do pass the Protestants in all manner of signs or
marks of Christ's true Church.
Concerning the omission of titles accustomed to be given Fulke.
to the Archbishop of Canterbury, for which you excuse your-
1 [" The Roche of the Chvrche. Wherein the Primacy of S. Peter
and of his Successours the Bishops of Rome is proned out of God's
Worde. By Nicolas Sander, D. of diuinity. — Lovanii, Apud Ioannem
Poulerum. Anno D. 1567." 8vo.]

216 DISCOVERY OF THE DANGEROUS ROCK
self, I think M. D. Parker, while he lived, did not much
esteem them, given to him by any man, and least of all looked
to receive them at such men's hands as you are. But touching
the religion and Church whereof he was a Minister, I will
answer you in his behalf, and of all other Ministers and
members thereof; that no excuse will serve you, upon so
slender reasons as you bring, to condemn the" same of schism
and heresy ; nor to defend that Synagogue of Satan, whereof
you profess yourself to be a champion, to be the undefiled
Church and Spouse of Christ. For think you, M. Sanders,
that we will more mislike the Church of Christ, persecuted
by the hypocritical cruelty of Antichrist for the space of five
or six hundred years before our age, than we do the same,
persecuted by the furious rage of heathenish tyrants for three
hundred years after the first planting of the same among the
Gentiles ? And think you if we are now to learn that all that
glory and bright shining of Christ's Church promised by the
Prophets is spiritual and not carnal, heavenly and not earthly,
eternal and not transitory ? or that we know not your Syna
gogue to be the very contrary kingdom, and see of Antichrist,
even by that outward glory and glistering pomp of open
shew that you boast of, according to the prophecy of Christ
in the Revelation? Apoc. xiii. & xvii.
And as for the " city built upon an hill," whereof you have
never done babbling, by the plain context of the Gospel [it] is
not the whole Church, but every true Pastor and Minister
thereof; who are also "the light of the world," "the salt of
the earth," and a candle set on a candlestick to give fight,
not hidden under a bushel to be unprofitable. Matt. v. And
Christ hath always been with His Church, although the
Church of Rome be departed from Him ; and He both liveth
and reigneth for ever over the house of Jacob, though He be
persecuted in His members by the whore of Babylon; and
His name is great among the Gentiles, from the sun-rising
to the going down thereof, notwithstanding that all nations
have drunk of the cup of her fornications. The prophecies
of God's Spirit do not one of them overthrow the other ; but
the one sheweth how the other is to be understanded.
And whereas you say our Church hath been under a
bushel before these fifty years, because no history maketh
mention of any congregation professing our faith in any towns

OF THE POPISH CHURCH. 217
or places of divers countries at once, I answer, this is as true
as all your doctrine beside : for all ancient histories, that write
of the state of the primitive Church, make mention of the
same faith which we profess. And although toward the re
velation of Antichrist the purity of the faith began to be
polluted, yet the substance thereof continued until by Anti
christ that great defection and apostasy was made, whereof
the Apostle prophesieth, 2 Thess. ii. 3. And yet, even in
the time of that apostasy, many histories make mention of
the continuance of our faith and Church in divers countries
in Europe, namely, England, France, Italy, or although under
cruel persecution and tyranny ; beside great nations of the
East, which never submitted themselves to the Church of
Rome, and yet retained the substance of Christian faith and
profession, though not without particular errors and super
stition. Wherefore, although they that were blind, or far
off from the Church of Christ, could not see her glory, al
though she had been set upon never so high an hill, no
more than a city built upon the Alps can be seen in England;
yet they that had spiritual eyes, and by God's grace drew
near unto His Church, did in the most obscure times (as the
world esteemeth them) see the clear beauty of her light, and
the glory of the Lord's hill, lifted up above all the hills in
the world. Esa. ii.
The heathen tyrants thought by their cruel persecution
that they had utterly rooted out the name and nation of
Christians from the face of the earth. Nero gloried that he
had purged the world of the superstition of Christ, as ap
peareth in an old inscription in a picture of stone : Neroni
CI. Cm. Aug. Pontif Max. ob provin. latronib. et Mis qui
novam generi hum. super stitionem inculcar. purgatam :
" To Nero Claudius, Caesar Augustus, the greatest Prelate ;
for that he hath purged the province of thieves, and them
that brought in a new superstition to mankind." Likewise
another like pillar there is of Diocletian and Maximian, in
these words : Diocletian. Jovius, Maximi. Herculeus, [Her-
culius.J Cozs. Augu. amplificato per Orientem et Occident.
nup. Rom. et nomine Christianorum deleto, qui Remp. ever-
tebant : " Diocletian us Jovius, and Maximianus Herculeus,
[Herculius,] Caasaris [Csesares] Augusti ; having amplified
the empire of Rome both in the East and West, and ut
terly destroyed the name of Christians, which did overthrow

218 DISCOVERY OF THE DANGEROUS ROCK
the Commonwealth." Another like there is of Diocletian
alone : Diocletian. Cces. Aug. Galerio in Oriente adoptat.
superstitione Christi [Christ.] ubique deleta, et cultu Deo-
rum propagato : "Diocletianus, Caesar Augustus, having adopt
ed Galerius in the East, and in all places utterly destroyed
the superstition of Christ, and set forth the worship of the
Gods." By these inscriptions and glorious titles you see that
the heathenish tyrants persuaded themselves that they had
utterly defaced the religion of Christ, and destroyed His
Church out of the world. What marvel then if Antichrist
and his adherents, which to the cruelty of the former tyrants
have added most detestable hypocrisy, have thought that
they had so wholly subverted the true religion of Christ and
His true Church, that the name either of Church or religion
might not seem to have remained in the world, but that of
the Romish Antichrist ? But as Nero, the Pontif. Maximus of
Rome, which with Diocletian and the rest were deceived in
their time, so their successors in place, office, and wickedness,
the Popes of Rome, are likewise disappointed of their cruel
purpose. But M. Sander glorieth, that in all marks and signs of
the true Church the popish Church doth excel ours. But
first of all, that which is the only true mark and trial of the
Church, namely the word of God, he denieth to be a suffi
cient mark of the true Church : yet had he before confessed
the Church to be " the pillar and stay of truth." 1 Tim. iii.
But the rule of truth (if we believe our Saviour Christ) is
the word of God : John xvii. 17.: therefore the word of God
is the only true trial and mark of the Church.
But let us consider his reasons, by which he would per
suade us that the word of God is not the chief mark whereby
the true Church of God may be known. First he saith, the
mark whereby another thing is known ought itself to be
most exactly known; whereas we are not agreed what God's
word is. Note this reason of his, by which he taketh away
all authority and use from the word of God, not only thereby
to discern the true Church, but also to teach us any other
thing that is needful for us to know. But why, I pray you,
are we not agreed what is God's word? Forsooth, because
some call only the written letter and the meaning thereof
God's word : other think many things are God's word which
are not expressly written, but delivered by tradition from the

OF THE POPISH CHURCH. 219
Apostles, and by the Holy Ghost, which hath written IIis
laws in our hearts. Of this latter sort be the Papists ; but
they are easily confuted : for this principle must needs stand
unmoveable, that God's Spirit is never contrary to Himself.
Therefore, seeing the Spirit of God hath pronounced of the
Scriptures that they arc "able to make" "the man of God
perfect, prepared to all good works," '2 Tim. iii. 16, it is cer
tain that God hath revealed nothing by tradition, for our
instruction, which is not contained in His word written ; much
less any thing that is contrary to His doctrine delivered in the
holy Scriptures.
IIis second reason is, that we arc not agreed upon the
written word of God, because the Protestants do not admit
so many books of the Old Testament as the Catholics do.
I answer, the Protestants do admit as many as the Catholic
Church ever did or doth at this day.
IIis third reason is, that the meaning of those books
which we are agreed upon is altogether in question between
us : therefore that can be no mark of the Church which itself
is not known. I answer, although heretics, which are over
thrown in their own conscience, will acknowledge no meaning
to be true but their own, yet are there many principles in
the Scriptures so plain as they are granted by both parties,
or else cannot without shame be denied of our adversaries ;
out of which plain, certain, and immutable principles all mat
ters in controversy may be proved, and the same Church also
discerned : which is the very cause why the Papists dare not
abide the trial by the Scriptures, but fly to traditions, even
as their forefathers, the ancient Yalentinian heretics, of whom
IrenaDiis writeth, Lib. iii. Cap. ii. : Cum ex Scripturis argu-
untur, in accusational) convcrtuntur ipsarum Scripturam
[Seripturarum ;] quasi non recte habeant, neque fuit [sint]
ex auctoritate, [et] quia varie sunt dictce, et quia non possit
ab [ex] his inveniri Veritas [ab his] qui nesciant traditio-
nem: non en i in per literas traditam [Mam,] sed per vivain
vocem : " When they are convinced out of the Scriptures,
then fall they to accusing of the Scriptures themselves; as
though they were not right, nor of sufficient authority, be
cause they are spoken doubtfully, and that the truth cannot
be found of them which know not the tradition : for that was
not delivered by letters, but by word of mouth."

220 DISCOVERY OF THE DANGEROUS ROCK
Thus much Irenasus of the old heretics : and what his
judgment was of the meaning of the Scripture, which M. San
der maketh so ambiguous, he declareth, Lib. ii. Cap. xxxv.
[xlvi.] : Universce Scriptures, et Propheticoz et Evangelicoz,
in aperto, et sine ambiguitate, et similiter ab omnibus audiri
possunt, &c. : " The whole Scriptures, both of the Prophets
and of the Gospels, are open and without ambiguity, and may
be beard of all men alike." This speaketh Irenaaus, not of
every text of Scripture, but of the whole doctrine of the
Prophets and Apostles ; which is so plain, and easy to be
found in the Scriptures, that no man can miss thereof, that
seeketh not of purpose to be deceived ; as he saith, Cap. lxvii.
[lxvi.] of the same book.
1. But M. Sander is content, for disputation sake, to admit
God's word for a mark of the true Church, and will prove
that it is first with the Papists. For if by God's word we
mean the written letter of the Bible, they are before us,
because we have none assured copies thereof which we re
ceived not of them : for since that day in which S. Peter and
S. Paul delivered God's word to the Romans, the Church of
Rome hath always kept it without leasing or corrupting.
I answer, we mean not by God's word the written letter
only, but receiving and obeying the true and plain sense
thereof, to be the mark of the Church. Again, I deny that
we had any assured copies of the Old and New Testament of
the popish Church ; but the one of the Jews in Hebrew, the
other of the Greek Church in Greek. And whereas he
talketh of a certain day in which S. Peter and S. Paul de
livered the Scripture to the Romans, it savoureth altogether
of a popish fable. Finally, how the Romish Church in these
last days hath kept the Scripture from corruption, although
I could shew by an hundred examples, yet this one shall
suffice for all : the very first promise of the Gospel that is in
the Scripture, Gen. iii., that The Seed of the woman should
break the Serpent's head, the popish Church hath either
wilfully corrupted, or negligently suffered to be depraved,
thus: Ipsa conteret caput tuum, "She shall break thine head;"
referring that to the woman which God speaketh expressly
to The Seed of the woman.
2. The second mark is, that the Papists acknowledge more
of the Bible than we do, by the books of Toby, Judith,

OF THE POPISH CHURCH. 221
Wisdom, Ecclesiasticus, and of the Maccabees. I answer, in
that you add unto the word of God, it is a certain argument
that you are not the true Church of Christ ; for the true
Church of Christ hath ever accounted those books for Apo
cryphal: witness hereof Hieronym, Prozf. in Proverb^: Sicut
ergo Judith, et Tobice, et Maccabazorum libros legit quidem
Ecclesia, sed eos inter Canonicas Scripturas non recipit ;
sic et hcec duo volumina legat, ad ozdificationem plebis, non
ad auctoritatem ecclesiasticorum dogmatum confirmandam:
"Therefore as the Church doth indeed read the books of
Judith, Tobias, and of the Maccabees, but she receiveth them
not among the Canonical Scriptures ; so she may read these
two books,1' (meaning the book of Wisdom and Ecclesiasticus,)
" for the edifying of the people, but not to confirm the autho
rity of ecclesiastical opinions."
Neither is Augustin, De Doct. Christ. Lib. ii. Cap. viii.,
(whom M. Sander2 quoteth,) of any other judgment ; but pre
scribed rules how the Canonical Scriptures are to be known.
And, Cont. Gaudent. Epist. Lib. ii. Cap. xxiii.3, he confesseth
plainly, that the book of Maccabees is not accounted of the
Jews as the Law, the Prophets, and the Psalms, which our
Saviour Christ admitteth as His witnesses : yet it is received
of the Church, if it be read or heard soberly. Whereby it
is manifest, that the Church in his time received it not ab
solutely as part of the Canonical Scripture, but under con
dition of a sober reader or hearer.
As for the Decree ascribed to Gelasius4, it hath no suffi
cient credit of antiquity 6 ; and much less the late Councils of
1 [Opp. Tom. iii. p. 25. Compare a passage in our sixth Article.
It is worthy of observation, that in the old Latin Bibles (for example
Paris. 1523,) this Preface is to be found, as well as the other Pro
logues by S. Jerom: so that we have in the very volume of the Scrip
tures, as received by the Church of Rome, a remarkable testimony
against her modern addition to the Canon.]
2 [Preface to Archbishop Parker.]
3 [Cosin's Scholast. Hist. p. 98. Lond. 1672.]
* [a.d. 496. Vid. Gratiani Decretum, Dist. xv. Cap. Sancta Rom.
Eccles.] 6 [A good deal of uncertainty exists with regard to this Decree,
which has manifestly been corrupted ; but it would not be difficult to
justify the assertion of Mabillon, " nullatenus dubito quin luec Epistola
decretalis Gelasium auctoreni habeat." (De Cursu Gallicano, ad calc.
lib. De Lit. Gall. p. 386. Lut. Paris. 1685.)]

222 DISCOVERY OF THE DANGEROUS ROCK
Florence1 and Trent2 which he quoteth : beside that the same
Decree of Gelasius, admitting but one book of Esdras, excludeth
the Canonical book of Nehemias3; and receiveth but one book
of the Maccabees4, which will do the Papists but small pleasure.
3. The third mark : The popish Church receiveth not only
the Hebrew text of the Old Testament, and the Greek of
the New, but also the Greek translation of the Septuaginta,
and the common Latin translation, to be of full authority ;
whereas we give small credit to those translations, except
they agree with the first Hebrew and Greek copies: there
fore the Papists have God's word in more authentic tongues
and copies than we have. I answer, the Tridentine Council
alloweth none for authentical but the common Latin transla
tion, that is the worst of all. But in that the popish Church
admitteth differing translations from the original truth of the
Hebrew and Greek text to be of full authority with the
truth, it appeareth plainly that she is not the Church of
Christ; which either wilfully confoundeth error with truth,
or else lacketh the spirit of discretion to know the one from
the other. And for more authentic copies, it is impudently
said that the Papists do receive : for we receive not only all
these which he nameth, but also the most ancient Chaldee
1 [If the Catalogue of Canonical books here alluded to were
genuine, its authorship could be referred only to Pope Eugenius IV. ;
(see Calfhill, pp. 247 — 8.) but the large collections of the Councils do
not contain this document. (Bp. Cosin, Schol. Hist. p. 186.) Car-
ranza, Queen Mary's Confessor, (Sum. Cone. p. 626. Salni. 1551.) first
set forth this spurious inventory ; and Longus a Coriolano, (Summa,
p. 891. Antv. 1623.) Sixtus Senensis, (Biblioth. viii. Haeres. xii. p.
713. Francof. 1575.) Becanus, (Analogia Vet. ac Nov. Test. Cap. i.
Paris. 1633. Compend. Manual. Control: p. 26. Duaci, 1628.) Bel-
larmin, (De verbo Dei, Lib. i. Cap. iv.) and very many others, have
adduced as authentic the interpolated Decree. The Parisian Doctor,
Louis Bail, frankly declares : " Revera in hoc nulla fides habenda Car-
ranzse, qui nonnisi ex falsis Actis Coneilii Florentini Decretum istud
haurire potuit." (Summa Conciliorum, Tom. i. p. 489. Paris. 1659.)]
2 [Sess. iv.]
3 [It must be remembered that the name " Esdras " included the
books of Ezra and Nehemiah; as in Melito's letter to Onesimus, in
the last Apostolic Canon, and in the sixth Article of the Church of
England.] 4 [Ivo (Decret. iv. 63.) reads "libros" instead of "librum:" but,
at all events, the section relates not merely to the Canonical Scriptures,
but to writings read in the church "pro fidelium ajdificatione."]

OF THE POPISH CHURCH. 223
Paraphrasts, and the Syrian text of the New Testament ;
yea, the Arabical text of the whole Bible, beside all vulgar
translations of English, French, Dutch, Italian, Spanish, which
the Papists cannot abide. All those, I say, we receive as
authentical copies for Christian men to use ; but so that the
trial of all translations be made by the original truth of the
Hebrew and Greek texts, in which tongues the Old and New
Testament were first written.
Fourthly, the Papists do translate and expound God's
word in all manner of tongues better than we ; because they
have not only internal vocation, but also external vocation, and
commission from the Apostles, by lineal succession of Bishops
and Priests ; whereas we have no commission but from the
Commonwealth, which hath none authority to make Priests,
&c; and yet "how shall they preach if they be not sent?"
Rom. x. I answer, concerning translations of the word of God
into all tongues, I never saw any ; neither is there any trans
lation to be shewed of any Papist into any vulgar tongue.
And as for the external calling of the Papists, I say it is
not from any lawful succession of the Apostles and ancient
Church, whose faith and doctrine they do not follow in their
interpretations. For if lineal succession of Priests and Bishops
could make interpretations good, the doctrine of Arius, Nes-
torius, Macedonius, and many other heretics, whose external
calling was according to the lineal and ordinary succession of
Bishops and Priests, might be auctorised for Catholic : yea,
the Papists might not refuse whatsoever Luther, Bucer, Cran-
mer, and other have taught, which had the same lineal suc
cession that M. Sander doth now brag of. And as for our
external calling, he saith falsely it is of the Commonweal, &c;
whereas it is of the Church, and therefore ordinary and law
ful. And the saying of S. Paul, whom he citeth, Rom. the
tenth, is of the inward calling and sending by God : whereof
our doctrine agreeable with the Scripture, and our whole
intent to set forth the glory of God, is a sufficient proof; the
one to satisfy men, the other to answer our own conscience.
Fifthly he saith, it is no perfection at all on our side,
that we read God's word to the people in our church-service
in the vulgar tongue ; for thereby we lack the use of the
better tongues, as of the Greek and Latin. 0 master of
impudency, what use is there of the Greek and Latin tongues
to be read to the people that understand them not? And

224 DISCOVERY OF THE DANGEROUS ROCK
why are those the better tongues ? He saith they were
sanctified on Christ's Cross for all holy uses, and especially
to serve God in the time of sacrifice. But how were they
sanctified, I pray you ? Forsooth, because Pilate wrote the
title in Hebrew, Greek, and Latin, that it might be under
stood of all nations for what crime He was condemned. And
is Pilate now become a sanctifier of tongues for God's ser
vice ? Is the malicious scorn of an heathen tyrant a sanctifi-
cation of these tongues ? 0 brasen foreheads of shameless
Papists ! But hear more yet of this impudent stuff.
This sanctification was the cause that the Apostles in the
East and West delivered these tongues alone as holy, learned,
and honourable ; not regarding the infinite multitude of profane
and barbarous tongues : whereof it came, that the East Church
was called the Greek Church, and the West the Latin Church.
But the Scriptures, Acts the second, doth teach us, that the
Holy Ghost hath sanctified all tongues of all nations to the
praising of God, and that the Apostles delivered the magnifical
praises of God in all languages. Acts ii. 11. And although
the Greek and Latin tongues were most used and most com
monly understood in the Roman empire, yet the Church of
Christ was enlarged farther than ever the Roman empire ex
tended, in Persia, Armenia, ^Ethiopia, India, &c, where there
was no knowledge either of the Greek or Latin tongues. And
even in the Roman empire, those nations to whom the Latin
and Greek tongues were not vulgar used their church-service
in other tongues. Hieronym, in Epitaphio Pan Ice ad Eu-
stochium, telleth, that at the solemn funerals of Paul every
nation that was present did sing their Psalms in order in
their own language: Hebrozo, Grozco, Latino, Syroque ser-
mone Psahni in ordine personabant : " In the Hebrew,
Greek, Latin, and Syrian speech the Psalms were sung in
order." But seeing Master Sander alloweth none other sanc
tification of the tongues but Pilate's title on the Cross, how
is the Hebrew tongue, which was one of the three, and the
most principal, as the first tongue of the world, and for the
excellency thereof called " the holy tongue ; " how is that, I
say, shut out from church-service? Why was there not an He
brew service established by the Apostles as well as the Greek
and Latin?
But yet he bringeth another argument, to prove that it
is lawful to read service to the people in a tongue which

OF THE POPISH CHURCH. 225
they understand not, by the example of Christ, who in time
of His sacrifice did recite the beginning of the twenty-first1
Psalm, "My God, My God, why hast Thou forsaken Me ?" in
the Hebrew tongue, which He knew the people did not un
derstand, and did not interpret the same in the vulgar tongue.
Good Lord, into what foolishness doth Satan carry their
minds that wilfully strive against the truth! For what
reason is this ? Christ in His private prayer, that concerned
His own person, spake with a tongue that was not commonly
understood : therefore the ordinary public service ought to be
in a strange tongue. Christ compassed about with His ene
mies, and none within the hearing of Him but the Virgin
Mary and John the Evangelist, which loved Him or regarded
Him, spake Hebrew : therefore the Priest in the church must
speak Latin or Greek.
But when M. Sander hath played with this argument as
long as he can, his antecedent is utterly false : for Christ re
cited not that text of the Psalm in the Hebrew, but in the
Syrian tongue, which was the vulgar tongue, understood and
spoken of all the people ; as is manifestly proved by the word
Sabachtani, reported by both the Evangelists, Matt, xxvii.
Mark xv., which is of the Syrian tongue, whereas the Hebrew
text is Hasabtani, as I report me to all that can but read
two tongues, Hebrew and Syrian. And whereas the malicious
hell-hounds said He called for Elias, it was not because they
understood Him not, but because they most despitefully mocked
His most vehement prayer ; taking occasion of the like sound
of the name of God and of Elias, as scornful deriders use to
do. Sixthly, lest the Protestants should pass the Papists in
any one iota, they have the use of the vulgar tongues in
Dahnatia, Assyria, and ./Ethiopia, which acknowledge the
Supremacy of the Bishop of Rome. This is a loud lie : for
neither the Church of Dalmatians, Moscovites, Armenians,
Assyrians, Ethiopians, nor any other of those East nations
that retain the name of Christ, did ever acknowledge the
Pope's Supremacy. I know they have feigned fables of letters
sent from Preto Joannes2 and such like; which are mere
1 [Eng. xxii.]
2 [Prester John. See Geddes's Cliurch Hist, of Ethiopia, pp. 21 — 3.
bond. 1696. Mosheim, ii. 423 — 4. ed. Soames. Paulsen et Moshem.
r i 15
[fulke, ii.j

226 DISCOVERY OF THE DANGEROUS ROCK
forgeries, upon the submission of some one poor wanderer
that hath come out of those countries.
But M. Sander will shew the cause why all nations are
not suffered likewise to use their vulgar tongues in their ser
vice. First he sayeth, " Vulgar tongues cause barbarousness ;"
for the preachers of those countries understand not the Latin
and Greek tongues by this means. What an absurd reason
this is, experience doth shew. For when or where was greater
ignorance in the Clergy than there and at such time as the
Latin service was used ? How many in all England under
stood or could read the Greek tongue within these sixty or
eighty years ? I speak nothing of the Hebrew tongue. Con
trariwise, what age was ever more full of liberal knowledge
in all sciences and learned tongues than this is ; even in Eng
land, France, and Germany, where service is used in the vul
gar tongue? Therefore the use of the vulgar tongue in
church-service is not the cause of barbarousness.
The second reason is, that " necessity" enforceth the Apos
tolic see to tolerate these nations in their vulgar tongues,
because they know none other : but Protestants by schism " are
fallen from Latin to English, that is, from better to worse,"
and therefore not to be tolerated. But indeed the necessity
is, because they will not receive your Latin tongue ; and our
schism is from Antichrist to be joined with Christ, from whose
doctrine the Church of Rome by horrible schism is departed :
for what the doctrine of Christ is concerning public prayers
in a tongue that is not understood, His Apostle Saint Paul
hath abundantly taught us, the 1 Corinthes, the xiv. chapter.
Finally, we defend that our natural English tongue is better
to edify English men than your bald Latin tongue that you
use in your popish service is for any use of any man learned
or unlearned. Seventhly, the Papists do not only consider "the written
letter, but also the plain meaning of every proposition;11 and
as the words do sound, so do they understand them : and hereof
he bringeth many examples. To this I answer, that if they
understand all propositions, as well figurative as plain and
proper speeches, as the words do sound, they make monstrous
interpretations: as, if they understand this proposition, "The
Hist. Tartar. Eccles. pp. 16 — 28. Helmst. 1741. Ottonis Frising.
Chronicon, Lib. vii. Cap. xxxiii. p. 146. Basil. 1569.]

OF THE POPISH CHURCH. 227
rock was Christ," as the words sound, they make a new
transubstantiation of the stone into Christ : or this, " This cup
is the new testament," if their interpretation be none other
than the sound of the word doth give, they make the new
testament to be nothing but a drinking- vessel.
But, to discuss his examples, the first is this text, Matth. 1,
xxvi. : " This is My body :" " Why," saith he, " is this which
Christ pointeth to denied to be His body ?" I answer, it is
affirmed to be His body in that sense that He spake ; and
otherwise than He meant, it is denied to be His body.
Again, James saith, Cap. ii., " A man is justified of works, 2,
and not of faith only." " Why then are works denied to
justify, or only faith taught to justify?" I answer, works are
not denied to justify before men ; and only faith is taught to
justify before God. Rom. iii.
" The doers of the law shall be justified." Rom. ii. " Why 3.
then teach you the law not to be able to be done ?" Because
the Apostle saith that " of the works of the law none shall
be justified before God :" Rom. iii. 20 : for if the works of the
law could be done by any man perfectly as the law requireth,
he should be justified by them, as the text affirmeth.
" ' By the obedience of one,' that is Christ, ' many shall 4.
be made righteous.' " Rom. v. " Why then are we denied to
be really righteous, and said to be righteous by imputation
only?" Because the obedience of Christ is not really our
obedience, but by imputation of God through faith.
" The love of God is spread in our hearts by the Holy 5.
Ghost which is given us." Rom. v. " This is more than a bare
imputing of righteousness to us." Tea, Sir, but this is not
our justification, but an effect thereof : for he said immediately
before, that "being justified by faith, we have peace with
God." "Whose sins ye forgive, they shall be forgiven them." 6.
Joh. xx. " Why then are Bishops and Priests denied to forgive
sins?" We grant that true Bishops and Elders have autho
rity to forgive sins, in God's name, but not absolutely.
" He that is great among you, let him be made as the 7.
younger." Luke xxii. " Why then deny you that one was
greater among the Apostles, and is still among the Bishops
their successors?" One was not greater among the Apostles
in authority : for their greatness was to be the greatest ser-
15—2

228 DISCOVERY OF THE DANGEROUS ROCK
vant, and to take the most pains, and to be most humble..
Mat. xviii.
8. " ' Thou art Peter,' or a Rock ; ' and upon this Rock I
will build My Church'." Mat. xvi. "Why is the militant
Church denied to be built upon S. Peter, and his successors
in that chair and office?" The Church is affirmed to be
"built upon the foundation of the Prophets and Apostles,"
and so upon Peter as one of them ; in which office he hath
no successors.
9. " Keep the traditions which ye have learned, either by
word, or by an Epistle." 1 [2] Thessa. ii. "Why then are tra
ditions so despised that the name cannot be suffered in the
English Bible?" It may and is suffered in that sense which
the Holy Ghost useth it ; but not to bring in Prayer for the
dead, or any thing contrary to the Scripture, under the
name of traditions Apostolic. For the Apostle speaketh only
of the doctrine which he delivered to them, either by preach
ing or by Epistle; which is none other than is contained in
the holy Scriptures : for of other traditions, pretended to be
of the Apostles, he biddeth them take heed in the same
chapter, vers. 2.
10. " He that joineth his virgin in marriage doth well, and
he that doth not join her doth better." " Why make you
marriage as good as virginity?11 For such as have the gift
of continence, we grant virginity is better, in such respects
as the Apostle teacheth.
ll. "Vow ye, and render your vows unto God.11 Psal. Ixxv.1
" If thou wilt be perfect, go and sell all things which thou
hast, and give them to the poor, and follow Me." Mat. xix.
"There are eunuchs, which have gelded themselves for the
kingdom of heaven." " Obey your rulers, and be subject unto
them." "Why then are the vows of poverty, of chastity and
obedience, counted unlawful, or men constrained not to per
form them ?" The first text pertaineth to the old testament :
the second is a singular trial to that one place : the third we
grant in them to whom it is given : the fourth we never made
question about it : but all these are evil-favouredly patched
together, to prove the vow of Monkery lawful ; which is super
stitious for want of God's commandment, blasphemous for the
opinion of merit, impossible for the frailty of many men's
i [lxxvi. n.]

OF THE POPISH CHURCH. 229
natm'e. As for compulsion, there is none used : for no man is
compelled to be rich, unchaste, or disobedient.
" Do ye the worthy fruits of Penance." Luc. iii. "Why 12.
then is Satisfaction and Penance despised with you ?" This
text is, " Do ye the fruits worthy of repentance." We honour
the fruits worthy of true repentance, and exhort all men to
bring them forth; but popish Satisfaction hath nothing like
to them. For we believe that God doth freely forgive the
penitent for Christ's sake.
"The husband and wife being two in one flesh is 'a great 13.
Sacrament' or mystery in Christ, and in the Church." Ephe. v.
"Whv is then the marriage of faithful persons denied to be a
Sacrament?" If you understand a Sacrament generally for
every mystery, we may grant you it is a Sacrament : but if
you understand a Sacrament specially for an outward sign of
God's favour and grace, or a seal of our justification, it is
none: for if it were, it should be necessary for all men to
receive it. Again, it hath the institution of God before the fall
of man ; therefore can be no Sacrament of the new testament
to testify our restitution. Tour common translation turneth
the Greek word fivaT^ptov, which is "a holy secret," oftentime
Sacramentum : yet I know you would be ashamed to confess
so many Sacraments of the popish Church as there be mys
teries which he calleth Sacraments : as Ephe. iii. the preaching
of the Gospel to the Gentiles he calleth Sacramentum: 1 Tim.
iii. so he calleth the incarnation of Christ Sacramentum pie-
tatis. And are you not ashamed to delude ignorant men with
the ambiguous name of a Sacrament ?
" Work your salvation with fear and trembling." Phi. ii. 14.
"Why then are you so presumptuous as even by faith to
assure yourselves of your salvation?" Because it followeth
immediately, that "it is God which worketh in us both to will
and to perform according to His good will." For it is no pre
sumption to assure ourselves that the promises of God are
true : and he may well fear which is assured to be saved ;
for faith doth not exclude, but plant in us the fear of God,
though not a servile fear. As for the deep secrets of God's
predestination, we take not upon us to know them, otherwise
than they be revealed by His word. Finally, where you ask
whether faith be not " an ordinary gift in the Church," I an
swer you with the Apostle, that " all men " which are in the

230 DISCOVERY OF THE DANGEROUS ROCK
outward face of the Church, and participate the Sacraments,
" have not faith." 2 Thess. iii. 2.
The eighth mark of the Church, " if not only the plain
understanding of any one sentence, but also the circumstance
of the place and the conference of God's word be necessary,"
the Papists have used it in every question. For proof here
of M. Sander referreth us to his Treatise of the Supper of the
Lord, Lib. iv., and to his book of Images, Cap.ii. [v.] andxi.,
and in this book to the Ca. ii. and iv. I answer, you make
a light shew for a fashion ; but vou neither consider the cir-
cumstances rightly, nor make any true collation of one place
with another, as is proved by the answers of these books.
Therefore your academical conclusion is false, heretical, and
blasphemous ; that " the only word of God, being never so well
handled, is no sufficient mark to shew the truth ; " when Christ
saith, " Sanctify them in Thy truth ; Thy word is the truth."
Joan. xvii. 17.
The ninth : M. Sander saith " the heads of the Church,
the Councils, the Bishops, and the ancient Fathers must be
judges whether we do well apply the Scriptures or no :" as
whether S. Peter be the Rock ; which M. Jewel denieth, and
he proveth by sixteen Doctors afterward, Cap. iv. ; of which
proof we shall consider, God willing, in due place. But
whereas M. Sander quoteth Aug., Cont. Julian. Lib. ii.1, for
his rule of judges, I say he hath no such rule in that book:
only Augustin doth convince the arguments of the Pelagians
of novelty by the judgment of Iren. Cyprianus, Rhetianus,
[Reticius,] Ambrosius. &c, and other which lived before their
time, and therefore were no partial judges. So do we convince
the popish heresies and their arguments of novelty, not only
by the manifest word of God, but also by the testimony of
the most ancient Fathers, although we may not admit all that
they did write to be true : even as the same Augustin, being
pressed with the auctority of Ambrose, Chrysostom, and
Cyprian by the Donatists and Pelagians, provoketh from them
only to the Scriptures. De Nat. et Gra. Cap. Ixi.2 De Unit.
Eccl. Cap. xvi.3 Cont. Crescon. Lib. ii. Cap. xxxi.4 De Gra
tia Christ. Cap. xliii.5 That the allegation of the Fathers
1 [Opp. Tom. x. col. 361. ed. Bened. Amst.]
2 [Tom. x. eol. 106.] 3 [Tom. ix. 249.]
* [Tom. ix. 292.] 5 [Tom. x. 107.]

OF THE POPISH CHURCH. 231
sufficeth not of itself, we agree with Master Sander : but that
there is any other trial of the truth than Scripture we will
never grant; seeing God hath therein delivered His whole
doctrine, whatsoever is necessary for us to believe that we
may be saved. Joh. xx. 31.
But the Papists, for the tenth mark, "join tradition and 10.
practice of God's Church, which can never deceive a man.
' We think,' saith Chrysostom6, 'the tradition of the Church to
be worthy of belief. Is it a tradition ? Ask no further.' " But
how shall we prove it to be a tradition of the Church ? The
Valentinians (as I shewed before out of Irenseus) denied the
Scriptures to be sufficient without knowledge of the tradition.
Therefore, to discern the tradition of the Church from the
tradition of the heretics, we have none other trial but by the
Scriptures. Therefore Chrysostom saith, in 2 Cor. Ho. iii.7,
that S. Paul did write the same things which he told them
before in preaching. As for the universal practice either of
the Pope's Supremacy, or of the Sacrifice of the Mass, which
he braggeth of, shall never be proved, but the contrary.
The eleventh mark is the auctority of "General Councils," ll.
confirming the truth, and condemning heretics : and such he
maketh the late Council of Trent to be. But we deny that
Conciliabulum of a few popish hypocrites to be a General
Council; in which no man should have a definitive voice but
they that were accused of heresy; and whereof he that is
most of all charged with heresy, that is the Pope, is made
the supreme judge. Wherefore the Papists have no lawful
General Council on their side. Although General Councils, as
he confesseth, are no sufficient trial of the true Church ; both
because they may be hindered many ways, and also because
they may err, as did the Councils of Arimine and Ephesus.
In respect of these considerations, he maketh the twelfth 12.
mark to be " the Supremacy of the Pope," which is wholly
theirs; for trial whereof this book following was written.
But for proof that Christ hath appointed such a judge over
all he citeth Joan, xxi., that Christ commanded Peter to feed
His sheep ; as though that pertained not to every one of the
Apostles as much as to Peter. Also Lu. xxii., that Christ,
having prayed that Peter's faith might not fail, commanded
him, when he was converted from his fall, to confirm his
6 [In 2 Thess. Horn, iv.] » [Opp. T. x. p. 443. ed. Ben.]

232 DISCOVERY OF THE DANGEROUS ROCK
brethren : which pertaineth only to the person of Peter, and
cannot with any cable-ropes be drawn to the Bishop of
Rome, or any successor of Peter ; for it concerneth his singular,
full comfort and duty, in respect of his fall and God's mercy ;
except that, according to analogy, it may be applied to any
man that is so raised after his fall : and so that precept, " Con
firm thy brethren," giveth no special commandment to the
Pope, but to every man whom God hath mercifully converted
as He did Peter.
13. With the twelfth mark M. Sander would have ended, but
that the Protestants affirm the lawful preaching of " God's
word, and the lawful administration of the Sacraments," to be
a mark whereby they will be tried. But seeing lawful
preaching and ministering must be tried by God's word, M.
Sander first asketh what we call God's word : and secondly
he asketh if he have not proved it to be more with them
than with us, whatsoever it be. It is like this popish aca
demical Atheist hath proved God's word to be on his side,
that will not have it certainly known what God's word is.
After this he will prove the Papists to be most lawful preach- ¦
ers, because they are likest to the Apostles, in converting
many nations within these nine hundred years, when he saith
"no man alive could once hear us peep:" as though contro
versy [conversion] of nations would argue a true Church.
By which reasons not only the Protestants may now prove
themselves to be most like the Apostles, in converting so
many nations of Europe ; but also the Arians, and most of all
the Mahumetists, might prove themselves the true Church.
It is not, therefore, conversion of nations, but conversion of
them to the true doctrine of the Apostles, which maketh us
like the Apostles ; and the Papists, Arians, and Mahometists
most unlike unto them.
And where he saith that no sound of ours was heard in
nine hundred years' space by any man alive ; to see how
impudently he lieth, read Flaccius Illyricus, in Catalogo
Testium veritatis, and you shall see in all ages what monu
ments are extant of some few whom God reserved from that
general apostasy of Antichrist. Read also the Acts and
Monuments set forth by M. Foxe, and you shall see the same
most plentifully.
He will prove their administration of the Sacraments to
be more lawful than ours, because they have five more than

OF THE POPISH CHURCH. 233
we. But I answer, because they have five more than the
word of God alloweth, or the primitive Church acknow-
ledgeth ; and in the administration of the other they have
either altogether perverted the institution, as in the Lord's
Supper ; or shamefully corrupted it with superstition, as in
Baptism ; they are not the Church of Christ, but the Church
of Antichrist. When we allege the persecution of the Romish Antichrist 14.
to be the cause that our Church hath not flourished in out
ward peace, and to be a mark also of the truth of our con
gregation, "What? Masters," (saith D. Sander,) "Antichrist's
persecution shall dure but three years and an half ; and is the
Pope Antichrist, who hath dured these nine hundred years ? "
But, good M. Doctor determiner, how prove you that Anti
christ's persecution shall dure but three and an half of such
years as the Pope hath dured nine hundred ? You quote
Dan. vii., Apoc. xiii. You might by as good reason say it
shall dure but three days and an half. Apoc. xi. 9. Will you
take upon you so precisely to determine of the mystical
number, which is sometime called three years and an half,
sometime forty-two months, sometime twelve hundred and
sixty days, sometime three days and an half, sometime a
time, and times, and half a time ; all which make half a pro
phetical week, and signify a time determined of God, but not
plainly revealed to many ? [man ?]
Secondly, you ask how it could be " the true Church,
against which Antichrist so long prevailed, that no man could
tell whether any such were in the earth ; " when hell-gates
shall not prevail against the true Church. I answer, if you
cannot put a difference between impugning and prevailing,
you will have much to do to defend your Romish Church to
be the true Church against the Turks themselves, who have
possessed a great part of that ground which you say pertained
once to your Church. But herein appeareth the mark of
the true Church, against which the gates of hell have not
prevailed ; that although Satan was let loose, the whore of
Babylon drunken with the blood of her members, her two
witnesses slain, she herself driven into the wilderness, her
seed persecuted wheresoever they were dispersed, yet she is
restored in the sight of the world, her witnesses raised from
death to life, the Devil is vanquished, the purple whore of
Ion is fallen, and Antichrist shall at length be thrown

234 DISCOVERY OF THE DANGEROUS ROCK
into the lake with the Devil and his Angels. " This is the
Lord's work, and it is marvellous in our eyes."
is. If either persecution, or not failing in persecution, be a
mark of the Church, it is more in the Papists than in the
Protestants. For persecution he will prove that they be per
secuted by us, as the mother by that child which departeth
from her obedience, as Agar and Ismael from Sara. But I
answer, we are departed from Agar, under whom we were in
bondage, to Sara, by whom we are made children of the
heavenly Jerusalem : and even as Agar departed from Sara,
so did the Synagogue of Rome from the Catholic Church of
Christ. For not failing in persecution, experience teacheth
in all countries which have received the Gospel how small
punishment the greatest number of Papists will abide for
their popish profession : whereas so many thousands of God's
Saints being most cruelly murdered by the popish Church,
the Church of Christ is not diminished but increased thereby ;
even as Cyprian l saith, " The blood of the Martyrs is the
seed of [the] Church."
[16.] If antiquity be a mark, it is proved to be on the Pa
pists' side by this reason : " The Church is all one : the
latter part of the Church for nine hundred years last past is
on the Papists' side : therefore the former part also." But
this reason, standing upon a shameful begging of that which
is questioned, is soon turned upon your own neck. The
Church is in all but one : but the beginning of the Church
maketh not for you : therefore that which you say is the
latter part of the Church, being contrary to that former, is no
part of the Church : so that by this reason you shall neither
have antiquity, or any part of the Church.
But " if you appeal to particular examples," (saith M.
Sander,) " I say the Christians in the primitive Church did
communicate under one kind at Emaus and at Jerusalem."
And I say, M. Sander, if he would burst himself with study,
shall never prove it. He quoteth Aug., De consen. Evang.
Lib. iii. Cap. xxv.2, whose opinion was that Christ gave the
Sacrament at Emaus ; but of Communion in one kind he never
once dreamed.
1 [Tertullian, S. Cyprian's " master," used the words, " Semen est
sanguis Christianorum." (Apologet. ad fin.) See a note in the Eng
lish translation of his Works, Vol. i. p. 105. Oxford, 1842.]
2 [Tom. iii. Par. ii. col. 101.]

OF THE POPISH CHURCH. 235
He saith " the Christians did set up Images in the honour
of Christ;" quoting Eus. Lib. vii. Cap. xiv.3: whereas Eusebius
speaketh of heathen men, that "of heathenish custom" did
set up Images, and not of Christians.
Dionysius4, although he be ancient, yet he wrote not in
the time of Eusebius, Hieronymus, or Gennadius, and so was
known for no writer in the Church for five hundred years
after Christ. Wherefore I will not stand about his errors
and ceremonies ; which yet for the most part are as unlike
the popish ceremonies as they are to ours.
Although we have no certainty of the writings of Igna
tius which are extant5, yet is there nothing in them that
favoureth the Papists' religion. He nameth a sacrifice which
could not be offered without the Bishop. That cannot be the
Mass, which every hedge-priest may say. Ad Smyrn.6 " He
would have the Emperor obey the Bishop," (saith M. Sander.)
Ad Phil. But this proveth the Epistle to be counterfeit7;
for there was no Christian Emperor when Ignatius lived :
(although in divine matters the Christian Emperor ought to
obey the Bishop, or rather God's word which the Bishop
preacheth.) "Also he speaketh of virgins that had conse
crated themselves to God8." And who speaketh against them
3 [Cap. xviii. ed. Vales. Cf. Calfhill, pp. 28, 29. Bingham, Book
viii. Chap. viii. Sect, vi.]
•4 [Calfhill, p. 211.]
5 [The genuine Epistles were not at this time separated from those
which are confessedly fictitious. Isaac Vossius published the au
thentic Letters at Amsterdam, in the year 1646; and these were re
printed Lond. 1647, in the Appendix Ignatiana, by Archbishop Ussher,
who had previously set forth the interpolated Epistles, Oxon. 1644.]
6 [In the Epistle ad Smyrnaios, §. viii. it is declared : '' Ovk i£6v
ton xopij tov 'E7R07co7rou ovtc /3cum'£eu>, oi/re ayaTrrjv iroieiv :'' but in
stead of the last phrase the interpolator has put " oiVe irpoo-<pep^iv, oi're
Svaiav Trpoo-Koptfav, ovre Soxqv emreXelv." Consequently Fulke has re
ferred to the surreptitious passage, which is thus rendered by the old
Latin interpreter : "non licet sine Episcopo neque offerre, neque sacri
ficium immolare, neque Missas celebrare." Vid. cl. Usserii ed. p.
118; vel Jac. Fabri Stapulens. edit. sig. D 5. Argent. 1527. PP.
Apostol. cura Jacobson. Tom. ii. p. 433. Oxon. 1840. Suiceri Thesaur.
in verb. Ao;^. Tom. i. 960—1. Amstel. 1728.]
7 [The sentence in question occurs in the interpolated Epistle ad
PhilaMphenos. Videatur Usserii edit. p. 99.]
8 [Usser. p. 97. In the old Latin version of this passage there is

236 DISCOVERY OF THE DANGEROUS ROCK
which having the gift of continency do keep virginity ? In
the same Epistle he affirmeth both Peter and Paul to have
been married1, and will not condemn the marriage of Church
Ministers. "He commendeth the Lent-fast." Ad Antioch.2 Choose,
M. Sander, whether your Decretals lie of Thelesphorus that
invented the Lent-fast3, or that this is a counterfeit Epistle of
an error, which by some has been considered a corruption. (See Sir
H. Lynde's Case for the Spectacles, p. 67. Lond. 1638.) The word
"animabus'' has been inserted instead of "precibus:'' but probably
the mistake was originated by the reading of " \jrvxais" for " ei^aij."
This note may remain, though it is certain that Sanders had in view
a sentence -which appears in the spurious Epistle ad Antiochenos.
(Usser. p. 158.)]
1 [This well-known but inconclusive statement is found in the same
interpolated Letter to the Philadelphians. (ut sup. p. 98.) Ussher,
in the seventeenth chapter of his Dissertatio, has mentioned many par
ticulars connected with this counterfeit testimony; and Daille per
versely makes use of it as the ground of his fortieth argument against
the remains of S. Ignatius. (De lib. suppos. Dionys. et Ignat. p. 353.
Geneva?, 1666.) Romanists have endeavoured to suppress this un
friendly evidence, such as it is, by vitiating the passage whether in MS.
or print ; and of course the simplest remedy is that suggested by the
Vatican Expurgatory Index ; viz. " verba ilia, ' et Pauli et aliorum
Apostolorum,' videntur e textu abradenda." (p. 116. Romse, 1607:
pp. 101 — 2. Berg. 1608.) We may see this recommendation tran
scribed and adopted in the Bibliotheca Patrum, Tom. iii. p. 22. Paris.
1610; Magna Bibliotheca, T 'om. i. p. 85. Colon. 1618; and Maxima
Bibliotheca, T. ii. P. i. p. 83. Lugd. 1677. It is alluded to also in the
notes of Martialis Msestrseus, p. 17. ad fin. Tom. xiii. Mag. Bibl. Patt.
Paris. 1654.]
2 [Fulke's reference here evidently belongs to a preceding place.
Lent is spoken of in the utterly false Epistle to the Philippians;
(Usser. p. 186. Conf. Dallamrn, DeJejun. et Quad-rag. p. 417. Davent.
1654.) a document of sufficient validity for Mr. Taylor's purposes.
(Ancient Christianity, i. 119. Lond. 1839.)]
s [Gratiani Decret. Dist. iv. Cap. iv. Statu imus; an Ordinance
noted for the memorable Gloss upon its commencement : " Statuimus,
i. e. Abrogamus." (See Bp. Jewel's Works, Part i. p. 33. ed. Parker
Soc. Donne's Pseudo-Martyr, p.- 112. Lond. 1610.) Blondel has with
reason called the author of this feigned Decree an "impostor •" (Pseudo-
Isidor. ct Turr. vap. p. 188.) and Bp. Gunning (Paschal or Lent Fast,
p. 94. Oxf. 1845.) observes, that the foundation of the error, with
regard to the alleged institution of Lent by Telesphorus, was a forgery
"practised upon" the Chronicle of Eusebius; into which, after the

OF THE POPISH CHURCH. 237
Ignatius. In the Epistle ad Phil.*, where he commendeth
the forty days' fast, the Wednesday and the Friday fast, he
saith farther : Quicunque Dominicum aut Sabbathum non je-
junaverit, prozter unum Sabbathum Paschce, ipse est Christi
interfector : " Whosoever shall not fast the Lord's day or
Sabbath, beside one Sabbath of Easter, he is a murderer of
Christ." If this be true antiquity, why doth the Church of
Rome omit fast on Sunday ? If it be counterfeit, why is not
M. Sander ashamed to allege it ?
" Justinus5 witnesseth that water was mingled with wine."
Yea, but it was to allay the strength of the wine, not that
it was necessary for the Sacrament; though afterward it grew
to a superstitious observation. " He saith further, the Deacons
carried the consecrated mysteries to them that were absent ;
which Calvin reputeth an abuse." If they carried the bread
and the wine as the Sacrament, it was an abuse not to be
warranted by God's word. But seeing the Deacon's office
was to minister to the poor, I think rather they carried it as
the alms of the Church to such as were needy.
What Pius6 decreed we find in no writer of credit. As
for the Pope's Law, it is no good evidence ; having a bushel
of dross and counterfeit dregs to one grain of good and true
story of Chochebas, as Scaliger declares, "intruserunt editores de
Quadragesima? jejunio a Telesphoi-o instituto." (Animadvers. p. 216.
Vid. Euseb. Chron. Gr. p. 212: Lat. p. 167. Amstel. 1658.)]
4 [Usser. ut sup. 186 ; vel Pabri Stapul. edit. sig. C 5. Argent.
1527. The true reading is this : " Quicunque Dominicam aut Sabba-
tum jejunaverit, prater unum Sabbatum Paschse, ipse est Christi inter
fector." Conf. Can. Apostol. lxvi. Hooker, Vol. ii. pp. 417  18. Oxf.
1841.] 6 [Apol. i. §. lxxxv. Opp. p. 97. Lut. Paris. 1615.]
6 [Gratiani Deer. De Consec. Dist. iii. Cap. xxi. Blondellus, p. 194.
With respect to the supposed injunction of Pope Pius I., for the ob
servance of the feast of Easter upon the Lord's day, it is to be remem
bered, first, that this Epistle is spurious; and secondly, that the
Chronicle of Eusebius has been basely interpolated for the purpose of
maintaining the falsehood. Scaliger assures us, that " Qua? Pio attri-
buuntur in editionibus de Resurrectionis Dominicse die Dominico cele-
brandse institutione, ea in nullo veterum codicum. comparent. Sed
Marianus a Beda, Beda a libro Herma? apocrypho in sua Chronica
traduxerunt ; et ab illis in Eusebianum textum ab editoribus admissa
sunt." (Anirnad. p. 219. Cf. Eusebii Chron. Lat. p. 168: Grajc. p. 212.
Gunning, ut sup. pp. 95—6.)]

238 DISCOVERY OF THE DANGEROUS ROCK
antiquity. Indeed Eusebius testifieth that Victor, Bishop of
Rome, did excommunicate the Bishops of Asia about the
celebration of Easter : but he testifieth also that Victor was
sharply rebuked by divers other godly Bishops, namely by
Irenseus of Lyons, and Polycrates of Ephesus, for so doing.
Euseb. Lib. v. Cap. xxv.1
" Tertullian2 saith, All doctrine is false and lying, that
agreeth not with some Apostolic Church." And such is the doc
trine that the Church of Rome holdeth ; which agreeth with no
Apostolic Church, no not with the ancient Apostolic Church
of Rome. But our doctrine agreeth with all the Apostolic
Churches that ever were planted in the earth, and continued
in the doctrine of the Apostles.
Tertullian, a Montanist3, speaketh indeed of oblations for
the dead ; but they were none other than such as they offered
for the birth-days, and that was thanksgiving. He speaketh
of Prayer for the dead, which he received of Montanus the
heretic. The Stations he speaketh of were no gaddings, but
standings4. The visitation of Jerusalem is denied to no man
that will take the pains to go thither : neither was it ever
like to popish pilgrimage, which is to run a whoring after
Idols. We confess with S. Cyprian5, that the bread in the
Sacrament is " changed, not in shape but in nature," to be the
flesh of Christ ; understanding nature for property, and the
flesh of Christ to be received spiritually.
In public offences we would have confession to be made
publicly before the Elders of the Church, as Cyprian would
them that fell in persecution : but of popish Auricular Con
fession he never spake one word. We acknowledge the
forgiveness of sins by the Ministers to be ratified by God;
not binding God's judgment to it, but it to God's judgment.
1 [ed. Muse, xxiii— xxvi. Calfhill, p. 269. Tassin, Hist. Litt. de
la Cong, de S. Maur, p. 637.]
2 [De prcescript. Hmreticor. Cap. xxi.]
s [Calfhill, 257.]
4 [Bingham's Antiq. B. xxi. Chap. iii. Hooker, v. lxxii. 8. p. 416.
ed. Keble, 1841. See note 2, page 183.]
5 [The passage quoted by Sanders is contained in the supposititious
treatise De Ccena Domini; (ad calo. Opp. S. Cypriani, p. 40. ed. Fell.)
the author of which, Arnoldus Carnotensis, lived about the year 1160.]

OF THE POPISH CHURCH. 239
We grant that temporal punishment for satisfaction of the
Church ought to be appointed unto pubhc offenders; which
may be released upon their hearty repentance, and is no
more like to popish pardons than the stews and market of
Rome is like the Church of God.
The rest which he huddleth up together, I will answer
as briefly. S. James his chair was esteemed but as a monu
ment of antiquity, and no holiness put in it. Euseb. Lib. vii.
Cap. xv.6 The solemn dedicating of churches was no more
like popish hallowing of churches than Christian preaching
and praying is like to conjuration. Euseb. Lib. ix. Ca. x.7
The strait life of Heremites was as like the popish Here-
mites that dwelt at every good town's end, where the
other dwelled in the wilderness, as the city and the desolate
wilderness are alike. Ruff. Li. xi. C. iv.8
Driving of Devils by Holy Water was no ordinary cere
mony, but a miracle once wrought by the Bishop of Apamea ;
who, when the temple of Jupiter could not be burned with
fire that was set unto it, after he had prayed, caused water
signed with the Cross to be sprinkled on the altar; which
being done, the Devils being driven away, the temple was set
on fire and burned. Theodor. Lib. v. C. xxix.9 The auctority
of unwritten traditions is so defended by Basil, De Sp. Sanct.
xxvii.10, that he affirmeth, "Whatsoever is not of the holy
Scriptures is sin." Mor. Diff. [Def] lxxx.11
Prayer to Saints, as the dregs of that time, I leave to be
Bucked up of the Papists. Repentance, but no popish Sacra
ment of Penance, is commended by S. Ambrose. The name
of the Mass is not in Ambrose, Ep. xxxiii.12: for missamfacere
signifieth "to let go," or "let pass," not "to say Mass." The
name of Sacrifice signifieth a sacrifice of thanksgiving.
The Canon of the popish Mass is not in Ambrose, but
the form of celebration of the Communion in his time. De
Socr. Li. iv. Ca. v. & vi.13 Chrysostom reciteth the text of
S. James only to prove that God forgiveth sins at the
6 [Cap. xix. ed. Vales.] ' [Lib. x. Cap. iii.]
8 [Rufini Hist. Eccl. ii. iv.] 9 [Cap. xxi. edit. Vales.]
10 [See Calfhill, p. 266.]
[" nSv to inrbs rfjs Seairvevo-Tov ypa<pr)s, ovk ek ir'urreas 'iv, apapria
eWiV" CAo-Ki/riKd. ri. Opp. Graze, p. 437. Basil. 1551.)]
12 [See before, p. 81.] w [Calfhill, p. 202.]

240 DISCOVERY OF THE DANGEROUS ROCK
prayers of the Elders; not speaking of the ceremony of
Extreme Unction, used by the Papists. Et De Sacer.
Li. iii.1 Hieronym, ad Vilant.2, alloweth not the superstitious use
of burning candles in the day-time. That he will not allow
Bishops to beget children, it sheweth his errors, condemned
by the Nicene Council by the persuasion of Paphnutius.
Socr. Li. i. Cap. xi.3 Hieronym speaketh not of a certain
number of prayers, to confirm the use of your beads ; but
of a certain number of the verses of the holy Scripture,
to be learned as a talk [task] to the Lord. Ad Furian.
[Furiam 4.]
That he which hath had two wives could not be a Priest
in Hieronymus' time, that was a little of that chaff which
afterward overwhelmed the good corn in the Church of Rome.
Hierom affirmeth that he, as helper unto the writing of Da
masus, Bishop of the city of Rome, did answer the synodical
consultation that came from the East and the West. What
is this to any purpose of the Papists ? Not only the Bishop
of Rome was consulted, nor he always ; except the matter
concerned the whole Church, when no member should be left
unconsulted, and not made privy.
Finally, that Augustin saith, that the fire by which some
shall be saved after this life is " more grievous than any pain
of this life," Psal. Ixxvii.5, he saith the contrary, De fide, ad
1 [Opp. Tom. i. p. 384. ed. Bened.]
2 [Adversus Vigilantium. Opp. Tom. ii. p. 123. Basil. 1565.]
3 [Hist. Eccles. i. xi. ed. Vales.]
* ["De Scripturis Sanctis habeto fixum versuum numerum: istud
pensum Domino tuo redde." (Opp. T. i. p. 82.)]
8 [In Psal. xxxvii. fol. 55. Lugd. 1519. — "...gravior tamen erit
ille ignis quam quicquid potest homo pati in hac vita." A spurious
passage, similar to this, is twice inserted in the Canon Law, (Deer. i.
Par. Dist. xxv. Cap. v. & ii. Par. Caus. xxxiii. Qu. iii. De Poenit. Dist.
vii. Cap. vi.) and ascribed to S. Augustin : • " Hie ignis, etsi seternus
non sit, miro tamen modo gravis est. Excellit enim omnem poenam
quam unquam aliquis passus est in hac vita, vel pati potest." The
work here cited is the fictitious treatise De vera et falsa Pcenitmtia,
which the Master of the Sentences also has adduced, (Pet. Lombardi
Sententt. Lib. iv. Dist. xx. fol. 338. Paris. 1553.) and which is referred
to by the present Bishop of Exeter in his valuable Letters to CliarUs
Butler, Esq., p. 117. Lond. 1826. — S. Austin's sentiments respecting
Purgatory may be learned from his Summes by Crompton, pp. 164 — 7.

OF THE POPISH CHURCH. 241
Laurent. Cap. Ixviii.6; where he denieth that text of Scrip
ture to be understood of punishment after this life, and
sayeth the whole matter of Purgatory may be inquired of as
a matter uncertain. The like De octo Dulcitii Quozst. xci7.
et Cont. Pelag. Hypog. Lib. v.8; he knoweth heaven and
hell, and utterly denieth the third place to be found in the
Scriptures. By which it appeareth, that this error of Purga
tory was but very young in Augustin's time.
And now you see what antiquity he can boast of: for
when he hath wrested and wrong9 all that he can, scarce
two or three errors have any shadow of antiquity, and those
not in the greatest matters ; whereas the whole substance of
the doctrine of faith in God, justification by Christ, the true
worship of God, the virtue of Christ's death, the infirmity of
man, the right use of the Sacraments, the auctority of the
holy Scriptures, and a number more of such principal heads
of Christian learning, in which we differ from them, he is as
silent as a stone.
The seventeenth mark is the name of "Catholics," which 17.
M. Jewel confesseth to have been of late given to the Papists ;
which, among other things, stayed S. Augustin in the right
faith, as he confesseth, Cont. Epist. Manich. Lib. iv10. But
seeing the name of Catholics was falsely given to you, which
are now rightly called by the name of your arch-heretic the
Pope Papists, the only name of Catholics, which was given
to you by yourselves to shadow your heresies, cannot prove
you to be Christians, or your Church to be Catholic ; especially
seeing you lack the truth, which Augustin in the same place
confesseth to be more worth than either succession, antiquity,
the name of Catholic, or any other thing else.
The eighteenth mark is "the succession of Priests and [18.]
Bishops," even from the seat of Peter unto Pius the fifth, in
whose time this book of M. Sander was written : which mark
is approved by Augustin, by Irenseus, by Tertullian, by Op-
Lond. 1625, or from Ussher, Answer to a Challenge, pp. 183 — 4.
lb. 1631.]
6 [Enchirid. ad Laur. Opp. Tom. vi. coll. 162—3.]
7 [Quaist. i. Opp. vi. 93—4.]
8 [Opp. T. x. Append, p. 26. This work is doubtless counterfeit.]
0 [wrung.]
10 [Or rather Cap. iv. ; for it is a single book. Opp. viii. 110.]
r i 16
[FULKE, II. J

242 DISCOVERY OF THE DANGEROUS ROCK
tatus, and by Hieronym, as he saith, being one of the most
evident of all other : but therein he belieth all these Fathers
whom he citeth ; who never alleged the bare succession of
place and persons, but joined with the continuance of doctrine,
received from the Apostles, against new and late-sprung-up
heresies. Augustin shall speak for the rest; who, after he
hath alleged unto the Donatists the successions of Bishops
from Peter in the unity of the Catholic Church, among which
Was never a Donatist, the judgment of the Bishop of Rome
in absolving of Cecilianus, and many such-like reasons where
unto he thinketh the Donatists should yield, yet in the end
he addeth these words1: Quamquam nos non tarn de istis
documentis prozsumamus, quam de Scripturis Sanctis : " Al
though we do not so much presume of this [those] documents
as of the holy Scriptures."
These eighteen marks M. Sander will have to be more
richly seen in them than in the Protestants : but what marks
they are, and how they are to be found in their Church, I
have briefly shewed. But now he cometh to a general chal
lenge, to prove that we have nothing which they lack, and
we lack many things which they have. " First, they have
a justifying faith as well as we ; but not justifying alone, but
with charity, which is the life of faith." But charity is a
fruit of a living and unfeigned faith, not the fife thereof;
1 Tim. i. 5.; the effect, not the cause : and we hold with Saint
Paul, " that a man is justified by faith without the works of the
law ;" Rom. iii. ; for charity is no instrument to apprehend the
mercy of God, but faith only : therefore faith only doth justify.
We are "justified" gratis, "freely, by His grace:" Rom. iii.
24 : therefore nothing can come in account of justification
before God but only faith ; which seeing the Papists have not,
they have not a justifying faith.
We have two Sacraments, and they have seven : but
seeing they have five more than Christ instituted, and have
perverted the one, and polluted the other, they have but
one Sacrament at the most, and that horribly profaned; I
mean Baptism. " We have an inward priesthood," he saith,
" to offer up Christ in our hearts ; and they offer Him both in
hearts and hands." But our spiritual priesthood is not to
1 [Epist. Fortunati, Alypii, et Augustini ad Generosum. Opp. S.
Aug. Tom. ii. col. 92. ed. Ben. Amst.]

OF THE POPISH CHURCH. 243
offer up Christ, but "spiritual sacrifices, acceptable by Christ;"
1 Pet. ii. 5 ; Heb. xiii. 15 ; and they are horrible blasphemers
that take upon them to offer up Christ, whom none could offer
but Himself, by His eternal Spirit. Heb. ix. 14.
He saith that the Papists " believe as well as we, that
Christ by one sacrifice paid our ransom for ever, when they
shew it to the eye in the oblation of their Mass ;" than the
which nothing can be more contrary to the holy sacrifice of
Christ once offered, and never to be repeated, because He
found "eternal redemption" thereby. Heb. x. 14 ; ix. 12, and
25, &c.
He addeth, that they believe Christ to be the Head of the
Church, " and shew it by a real figure of one head in earth,"
meaning the Pope, whom now he maketh a figurative head ;
as though Christ were not present with His Church, or that
His Church were a monster with two heads.
As laymen receive the Communion in both kinds with
us, so they do with them in Austria by the Pope's dispensa
tion; as though Christ's commandment and institution were
not sufficient without the Pope's dispensation. Wherein also
he affirmeth a monstrous absurdity, that the Sacrament was
not instituted in two kinds, to be so received ; but by an un
bloody sacrifice, to shew the nature of His bloody sacrifice, in
which His soul and blood was separated from His body and
flesh : and yet he saith the body and flesh of Christ is not
[as] well contained in the cup as His blood in the paten, with
the body and form of bread, and no separation of the one
from the other, and no more contained or distributed by
both than by one alone : which saying is to be received with
whoops and hisses of all men that have their five wits.
They have Marriage, he saith, in greater price than we,
because they teach it to be a Sacrament : but we find it not
instituted by Christ to be a Sacrament of the new testament ;
therefore we receive it as an holy ordinance, containing also
» great mystery, but yet no Sacrament. But if it be an
holy Sacrament, why do you think it unmeet for Ministers
of the Church? and why doth your Pope Siricius2, or
2 [Crahbe Concill. Tom. i. p. 417. Colon. Agripp. 1551. Extracts
from this Epistle, ascribed to Pope Siricius, are contained in the Canon
Law. Dist. lxxxii. Capp. iii, iv. The words alluded to occur also in an
16—2

244 DISCOVERY OF THE DANGEROUS ROCK
rather some counterfeiting Canonist in his name, call holy
Matrimony a living in the flesh, such as cannot please God ?
But although Marriage be " honourable in all men," you say
it is not so in them that have gelded themselves for the
kingdom of heaven ; who have no more possibility to marry
than a gelded man to beget children. You were best then
to tell the Apostle that his saying was too general ; for he
should have excepted them that so gelded themselves. But
S. Paul saith, notwithstanding your impossibility, " If a virgin
do marry, she doth not sin." 1 Cor. viii. [vii.] 28. You will
reply, he speaketh of them that have not vowed : and how
prove you that Christ speaketh of them that have vowed
longer than God would give them grace to live chaste ; which
he affirmeth to be a peculiar gift, and not in the power of
every man? Matt. xix. 12. But what if your popish geld
ings, by neighing at every man's wife, and by tumbling in
all beds, where they are not kept out by force, prove them
selves to be stone horses ; are they still in the number of
those that, having gelded themselves for the kingdom of
heaven, may not possibly marry, and yet neither will nor can
possibly live chaste ?
But omitting these things which they have as well as we,
now he cometh to those things which we lack, and yet many of
them are very necessary ; as Insufflations, that is, blowing upon;
Exorcisms, that is, conjuring ; holy Oil in Baptism, Chrism in
Bishopping, external Priesthood, Sacrifice, Altars, Censing,
Lights, and so forth ; a large rabblement of popish errors, and
superstitious ceremonies. And that we say falsely, in saying
these are naught, he proveth by S. Paul's saying to the Gala-
thians, prozterquam quod accepistis, " beside that you have
received ;" for once, saith he, we have received those things
of our ancestors : as if S. Paul had not spoken of the Gospel,
but of beggarly ceremonies ; which, because they are another
Gospel and way of salvation, brought in by the Pope, than S.
Paul delivered to the Galathians, we hold the Pope and them
justly accursed. " But we justify them," saith he, " by the
word of God :" not written, I am sure ; but by your counter
feit word of traditions, and, as you say, by books of ancient
Epistle to Exupcrius, attributed to Pope Innocent I., and cited in Cap.
ii. of the same Distinction.]

OF THE POPISH CHURCH. 245
Fathers ; and yet not by books of the most ancient Fathers, in
whom is little or nothing at all of such dross and chaff,
among a great deal of good corn.
" But seeing we made no new religion in those and such
like things," saith he, "but keep the old, humility, obedience,
and unity is our fault, if we have any." 0 faultless hypo
crites! if the older truth had never been revealed unto you,
against your old heresies, your faults had been the less ; but
now your darkness being convinced of the light, your pride,
rebellion, and schism from Christ and His Church is and
appeareth most heinous and manifest.
Now seeing M. Sander dare not encounter with us in
this very point of our contention, he feigneth an idol of an
adversary, to shew his manhood upon before his friends, that
they may praise him for a worthy champion. He imagineth
that we reply, that Luther and Calvin did so change popish
religion as Christ and His Apostles did change the Jewish
religion ; and then he layeth on load, that Luther and Calvin's
authority is not like to Christ's : whereas we make no such
comparison ; but affirm that these godly preachers were sent
of God, so to reveal and discover the idolatry and corruptions
maintained in the Church, as Elias, Elizeus, Oseas, and the
other Prophets were sent to restore and reform the true
worship of God, corrupted and decayed among the Israelites;
reproving and reforming all things according to the infallible
rule of God's word.
And whereas he trifleth of the continuance of the sacri
fice of Christ, according to the order of Melchisedech, I say
it is horrible blasphemy to make any successors unto Christ
in that Priesthood which the Holy Ghost saith1 He hath
avapafiaTov, "such as passeth not from Him by succession
to others, because He liveth for ever." And whereas he
quoteth Irenasus, Lib. iv. Cap. xxxii., and Augustin, in Psal.
xxxiii. De Civi. Dei, Lib. xvii. Cap. xx. Cont. adv. Leg.
Lib. i. Cap. xviii., read the places who will, and he shall find,
that these Fathers speak not at all of any propitiatory sacri
fice of Christ's very body and blood in the Sacrament, but of
the sacrifice of thanksgiving, which the Church throughout
all the world doth offer to God, in the celebration of the holy
mysteries, for their redemption by the death of Christ. But
i [Heb. vii. 24.]

246 DISCOVERY OF THE DANGEROUS ROCK
it is sufficient for blind and obstinate Papists to see the
book's margent painted with quotations of Doctors by them
which peradventure never turned the books themselves, but
borrowed their quotations of other men.
But M. Sander saith, whereas we pretend that Luther
and Calvin do all things according to God's word, they are
" the more to be abhorred," not only because the one is con
trary to the other, but also because they " pretend to have
their doings figured and prophesied in the Gospel; whereas
there is but one Christ, which hath been born and died but
once : therefore these men have no power to abrogate the
Mass, or to take away the key of ancient religion." To their
dissension I answer, it is not in many points, but in one,
and that not of the greatest weight. As for their pretence of
their doings to be figured or prophesied in the Gospel, it is
a dream of M. Sander's drowsy head; for they make none
such, but they shew the abuses of the Romish Church by
the doctrine of God's word : and by the same they shew
the way to reform them and this to the glory of Christ,
who died but once : they abrogate the Mass, by which it
should follow, if it were of any force, that He should die
often ; for without death, and "shedding of blood," there is
no sacrifice for remission of sins. Heb. ix. 22, and 26.
If we deny the Mass to be that they say it is, he an
swereth, that as he doth not read that the Jewish Priests
did err "concerning the substance of their pubhc sacrifice,"
so is it less possible "that the universal Church of Christ
should err in that public act wherein Christ is sacrificed."
Here is a wise argument, having neither head nor foot, nor
any joint to hang together. For whatsoever M. Sander
readeth, we read that Urias the High Priest made an hea
thenish altar in the Temple, at the commandment of the
King Aehas, and offered sacrifice thereon. 2 Reg.1 xvi. We
read also in Josephus, that Caiaphas2 and divers other of
the High Priests were Sadducees, which could not but err in
i [Kings.]
2 [It does not appear from Josephus (Antiqq. Judaic. Lib. xviii.
Capp. iii, vi.) that Caiaphas was a Sadducee. He states (L. xx. C. viii.)
that Ananus the son of Ananus, who is called Ananias in the Acts of
tho Apostles, belonged to this sect. Compare Acts xxiii. 2 — 9 : v. 17.
Lightfoot's Temple Service, Chap, iv.]

OF THE POPISH CHURCH. 247
the substance of their public sacrifice,3 when they believed
not the resurrection, seeing the end of their sacrifices was
to signify the eternal redemption by Christ.
Now to the second part of tho argument I say, the uni
versal Church did not err; though the schismatical Synagogue
of Rome departed from Christ's institution. But M. Sander
chaseth us away with this .double negative, " No, no, Masters,
Antichrists [Antichrist's] you may be ; Christ [Christ's] you
cannot be." God's curse light on him that would have any
other Christ than Jesus, the Son of God and Mary, which
sitteth at the right hand of His Father in heaven. But it is
your Antichrist of Rome, that usurpeth not only the office,
but also receiveth the name of Christ and God of his anti
christian Canonists : which I know you will not deny, though
your face be of brass, because the books may be shewed to
any man that list to see them4.
After his large excursion, he returneth to D. Parker,
whom he would advise to revolt to the popish Church : but
he, (God be thanked,) having ended his days in the Catholic
Church of Christ on earth, is now received into the fellowship
of the triumphant Church in heaven. I pass over how mali
ciously he raileth against the blessed Martyr Tho. Cranmer ;
for defence of whose learning and godliness I refer the reader
to his story, faithfully set forth by M. Fox5. All other Arch
bishops of Canterbury, he saith, from Augustin sent thither
by Gregory, were of their popish profession. Of a great
number it is as he saith, but not of all. For the opinion of
the carnal presence of Christ in the Sacrament was not re
ceived in the Church of England for two or three hundred
years after Augustin's arrival; as that Homily, which that
reverend Father, Matthew, late Archbishop of Canterbury,
caused to be translated and imprinted, doth manifestly de
clare6. And whereas he scorneth at the persecuted congregation
of Wickleve, Husse, and the Poor Men of Lyons, boasting of
the external pomp and visor of glory that was in the Romish
Church; I have sufficiently answered before, that both the
s [Jackson's Works, Tome i. iii. xv. p. 471. Lond. 1673.]
4 [Calfhill, note 3, pp. 5, 6. ed. Parker Soc.]
6 [Acts and Mon. iii. 531 — 563. Lond. 1684.]
6 [See before, p. 7.]

248 DISCOVERY OF THE DANGEROUS ROCK [c'H.
apostasy of the Church of Antichrist, and the persecution of
the Church of Christ, was so described and prophesied before,
that neither the one nor the other should trouble any man's
conscience with the strangeness thereof, so long as the truth
of the little flock, and the falsehood of the revolted multitude,
are manifestly tried by the authority of the Scriptures.
The conclusion of all his Preface is, that which was the
cause of this treatise, that there " never lacked a chief Bishop
in Saint Peter's chair;" whose Supremacy being "granted, all
other controversies be superfluous." Yea, verily, all Scriptures,
Doctors, and Councils be needless, where there is such a person
always at hand, who cannot err in any thing that he com-
mandeth men to believe or do. And contrariwise, if there be
any necessary use of Scriptures, Doctors, Councils, learning,
tongues, &c, there is no such chief Bishop on earth. But
what say you, M. Sander, did there never lack a Pope to sit
in Peter's chair ? Was that see never void many days, many
months, and many years together ? And when there was two
Popes or three Popes at once, and that oftentimes, who sat in
Peter's chair ? You will say, One of them : but which, you
cannot tell. Whose voice should the people obey as Christ's
Vicar? The one cursed, the other absolved; the one com
manded, the other forbad. Is not all your bragging of
Peter's chair, and unity, thereby proved to be nothing else
but a mere mockery?
The Lord Jesus confound Antichrist with the breath of
His mouth, and with His glorious appearance; and defend His
Church in truth and holiness for ever and ever. Amen.

THE FIRST CHAPTER.
Sandeii. Sander. The state of the question concerning the Supremacy of
Saint Peter, and of the Bishops of Rome after him.
Fulke. Fulke. Upon our denial of the Supremacy of the Pope,
and of S. Peter, he saith we deny "all primacy and chief
government in the Church." Whereupon he raiseth three
questions to entreat of.
1. " Whether it be against the word of God that there should
be in IIis Church any primacy or chief authority."

I.] OF THE POPISH CHURCH. 249
" Whether S. Potcr bad tho samo primacy, or no."
" Whether tlio Bishop of Rome had it after S. Peter."
To which wo answer, with distinction of the words Primacy
and Church, that wo affirm there is a spiritual and eternal
primacy of tho univorsal Church; which is proper only to
our Saviour Christ ; which never was given to Peter, nor to
any mortal man. Likowiso wo affirm, that in particular
Churohos thoro is and must bo a primacy of order ; which is
temporal, according to the disposition of the Church. And
such primacy in tho Collego of the Apostles might Peter have
for some time : but that he had it not always, it appeareth in
tho Council of tlio Apostles, in tho fifteenth of tlio Acts, of
which James in a manner, by all writers' consent, was Presi
dent and Primate ; and, upon the controversy being throughly
debated, pronounced tho definitive sentence, 'E7o5 Kplvto, ike;
aocording to which tho Synodal Epistle to tho Churches of
Antiochia, Syria, and Cilieia was written, in the name of "tho
Apostles, Eldors, and brethren."
But concerning S. Peter. M. Sander moveth now questions.
First, whereas Christ promised that Simon should be called
Cephas or Peter, which is "a stono" or Rock, Joh. i.; and after
ward performed His promise when Ho choso him to be an
Apostle, Mar. iii. Luk. vi. ; and thirdly, when Simon con
fessed His Cod head, tho reason of tlio promise was declared,
that Ho would build IIis Church upon that Rock ; tlio question
is, whether Peter himself bo that Rock upon which Christ
would build His Church, or Christ Himself, or tho faith and
confession of Petor.
M. Sander, tho spokesman for tho Papists, passing over tlio
second question, that is. whether Christ Himself, whom Peter
confessed, by [be] this Rock, denieth the faith or confession
of Peter to bo tho perfect sense of tliat promise; affirming
tlio Rock on which tbo Church is builded to be S. Peter, not
barely confirmed, but in respect of tho promise past, tho
present confession, and the authority of feeding Christ's sheep
given him after His resurrection; of which four conditions
tho Protestants (ho saith) do lack no less than three. But
what do tbo Papists lack, when in their sense they exclude "tho
Rock Christ," the only " foundation," than the which •• none
other can bo laid," 1 Cor. x. 4 ; 1 Cor. iii. 11, by any wise
builder of tho Church ? Yet seeing M. Sandor is so desirous

250 DISCOVERY OF THE DANGEROUS ROCK [cH,
to have Peter to be the stone whereof Christ speaketh, laying
first Jesus Christ to be the head corner-stone, I will frankly
yield unto him that which he could never win by force, that
Christ, saying to Peter, "Thou art Peter; and upon this Rock"
or stone "will I build My Church," meaneth even Peter him
self, upon whom He would build His Church; but so that He
maketh not Peter a singular Rock or stone to bear the whole
building, (for then He should put Himself out of place,) but
one of the principal stones of the foundation, even as all the
Apostles and Prophets were ; for so the Holy Ghost speaketh,
Ephe. ii. vers. 20 : " Being builded upon the foundation of
the Apostles and Prophets, Jesus Christ being the head corner
stone ; in whom all the building being compacted groweth
unto an holy temple unto the Lord."
Now let us consider whether any singular authority was
committed to Peter, when he was willed to feed the sheep of
Christ. M. Sander saith yea, because it was said to him
alone, " Feed My sheep," and no particular flock named, it
must needs be meant the whole flock. Mark these main
pillars of the popish Rock. Christ said only to Peter,
" Come after Me, Satan, for thou art an offence to Me," &c. :
therefore Peter only was an enemy of Christ. If the Pope
must needs have the one text as peculiar to him, let him take
the other also. Again, Peter himself saith to the Elders,
"Feed as much as in you lieth the flock of Christ." 1 Peter v.
Here is no particular flock named : therefore he meaneth the
whole universal flock. But he urgeth farther, that as Peter
loved Christ more than the rest, so he did feed the flock of
Christ above all other Pastors. But if labouring in preaching
the Gospel be the feeding of Christ's flock, not Peter, but
Paul laboured more than he, and all the rest of the Apostles.
1 Cor. xv.
The answer of the Protestants to his demand, " why Peter
alone, in presence of other Apostles, was commanded thrice
to feed the sheep," (that by thrice confession and injunction
to feed he might abolish the shame of his thrice denying,
and know that he was restored to his Apostleship, from which
he deserved to be deprived,) M. Sander liketh not for three
causes. First he saith, he had not lost his Apostleship, be
cause his fault was not externally proved, nor confessed in
judgment, nor stubbornly defended, &c. ; as though Christ,

I.] OF THE POPISH CHURCH. 251
which knew and foretold his infirmity before he fell, bad
need of external proofs, or a Commissary's court, to deprive
Peter of his office. 0 blockish reason ! Although neither
Calvin nor Beza do affirm that he was altogether excluded
from his office by his fault, but that he deserved so to be ;
and therefore had need especially to be confirmed by our
Saviour Christ more than the rest, as his offence was more
shameful than of any of the other. Therefore the second
reason that he bringeth of his restitution, if he had lost it,
is superfluous : Joh. xx. : for he was none otherwise restored
than tho rest were ; but at this time especially confirmed, as
his special case required.
His last reason is, that "admit Peter had not been restored
before this time, yet now he was restored to a greater au
thority than any other Apostle had received at any time :" and
whereas we reply that all the Apostles were equal, by testi
mony of Cyprian and Hierom, he answereth by distinction,
forsooth that they were equal in Apostleship ; and yet Peter
was chief of tho Apostles, and an ordinary chief Shepherd or
high Bishop, wherein they were all inferiors to him, and he
was their Primate and their head ; and this distinction he
promiseth to prove exactly hereafter. In the meantime it is
a monstrous paradox, that all the Apostles should be equal
with Peter in Apostleship, and yet Peter be the chief of the
Apostles. He that can prove inequality to be where he grant-
oth equality to be, and in the same respect, is a strange
logician. Finally, whereas some men, granting Peter to be
the Rock, deny the honour to his successors, he will prove
that tho Bishop of Rome, and none other, hath all that au
thority which refer sometime had ; and consequently that the
Protestants come nearer to the nature and condition of Anti
christ than any Pope of Rome ever did or can do.

THE SECOND CHAPTER.
Sander. That thero is a certain primacy of spiritual government Sandeb.
in the Church of Christ ; (though not properly a lordliness, or heathenish
dominion.) And in what sort this ecclesiastical primacy ditfereth from
the lordly government of secular Princes, and how it is practised by
tho Bishop of Rome. Also the Apostles' strife concerning superiority
is declared. That there was one greater among the Apostles to be a
ruler and as a minister do not repugn. The pre-eminence of Priests

252 DISCOVERY OF THE DANGEROUS ROCK [ch.
above Kings. A King cannot be supreme governor in all ecclesiastical
causes, because by right and law he cannot practise all ecclesiastical
causes. The High Priest is preferred before the King by God's law.
The evil life of a Bishop taketh not away his authority. The differ
ences between the Bishop of Rome and temporal Princes. That Moses
was a Priest.

Fulke. Fulke. The ecclesiastical government of the Church is a
ministry or service, by the authority of Christ and His Apostle
Peter ; and therefore neither properly nor unproperly a godli
ness, [lordliness,] or heathenish dominion ; but altogether as
unlike to it as our Saviour Christ, the pattern of all true Minis
ters, was unlike to an earthly lord or an heathen Prince. But
whereas M. Sander in the first sentence of this chapter saith,
" That no man properly can be lord among the Christians,
where all are servants indifferently, under the obedience of
one true Lord and Master Jesus Christ," he sheweth him
self not only to be a Papist, but also an Anabaptist. For the
common service that we owe unto Christ hindereth not but
that a Christian man may be lord and King over his fellow-
servants and brethren in Christ as properly as ever he might
be before the incarnation of Christ, who saith Himself that
His kingdom "is not of this world;" who Himself was obedient
and taught obedience both to God and Caesar, to each in
things that belonged to them : and that dominion which He
forbiddeth unto His Apostles, like to the Princes of the nations;
Luc. xxii. Matth. xx. ; and which S. Peter forbiddeth the
Elders of the Church, 1 Pet. v., is not prohibited to all
Christians, but to the Ministers of the Church only, in respect
of their ministry.
And yet that there ought to be a government of the
Church, and some kind of primacy also, it is clearer by the
Scriptures than that it need any proof ; especially such slen
der proofs as M. Sander bringeth : and namely, where he
citeth this text, " Feed My sheep," to signify that Peter
should give every man his due portion and just measure of
victuals in convenient time; which thing neither Peter did,
neither was he able to do ; and much less any man in succes
sion to him, which is not equal in gifts with him. And
therefore the example of a steward, who may provide for a
competent number of one family, is fondly applied to make
one steward over the whole world, beside Him that is al-

II.] OF THE POPISH CHURCH. 253
mighty. For although the Apostles were not limited to any
certain congregation, but were generally ambassadors into all
parts of the world, yet were they not appointed to give to
every man his due portion, but to appoint Pastors in every
Church and town for that purpose; Tit. i. Acts xiv. verse
23 ; and they themselves to proceed in matters pertaining to
their general commission.
And therefore although M. Sander, in applying these words
of Hieronym, Cont. Luciferianos1, which he calleth exsortem
quandam et eminentem potestatem, " a certain peerless and
high power," and of Cyprian, Lib. i. Ep. iii.2, of " one Priest
in the Church for that time," &c, true [to] every several
Pastor, or, as he termeth them, parish Priest, dealeth more
honestly than other Papists, that draw the same testimonies as
proper to the Pope's sovereign auctority ; yet in that he argu-
eth that the like should be in the whole Church militant
which is in every parish, it is out of all compass of reason :
for that which is possible in the one is altogether impossible
in the other. And the argument is no better than if we
should say, there is one steward in every College or great
house : therefore there is one steward over all the world.
And whereas he would prove his matter good by that
S. Matt., cap. x., rehearsing the names of the Apostles, calleth
Peter "the first," it is too childish and frivolous. For in every
number one or other must be the first ; and it seemeth that
Peter was first called to the office of Apostleship : therefore his
primacy was of order, and not of auctority. Neither is he
always first named : for Gal. ii. 9, where the question is of the
dignity of the Apostles, James is named before Cephas or
Peter ; as he was indeed elected to be the principal Minister
at Hierusalem, by consent of most ancient writers. Neither
doth it follow, that because the High Priest of the old law was
called Princeps populi, " a Prince of the people," therefore
Peter was made Prince of all Christian men. For neither was
the High Priest alone called the " Prince of the" people," as
M. Sander seemeth to say ; neither had Peter by those words,
" Feed My sheep," any auctority committed unto him more
than to the rest of the Apostles. As for the name of Lord,
or term of dominion, sometime given by ecclesiastical writers
1 [Opp. Tom. ii. p. 139.]
2 [Ad Cornel. Ep. lix. Opp. p. 129. ed. Oxon.]

254 DISCOVERY OF THE DANGEROUS ROCK [cH.
to the Bishop or his government, we strive not about it ; so
there be no such dominion by him exercised as Christ and
His Apostles forbiddeth, and as we see to be usurped and
practised by the Pope of Rome and his Clergy, howsoever M.
Sander in terms of distinction would seem to shadow it. But
he will shew out [of] one of these places which we allege, as
if it did utterly forbid all superiority among the Disciples,
Luke xxii., that the ecclesiastical primacy is clearly established
and confirmed.
First, he saith most untruly, that we deny all superiority
among the disciples of Christ, as though we denied all govern
ment among Christians ; except he do childishly understand
the disciples of Christ for Ministers ecclesiastical only : and
yet we deny not all superiority among them, but that kind of
primacy which the Pope claimeth, and tyrannically usurpeth.
Secondly, he maketh a long preamble before he come to the
matter ; that although the Apostles did divers times strive for
the primacy, as in the way to Capharnaum, Mark ix. ; upon the
request of Zebedee's wife, Mark x. ; and after His last supper,
Luke xxii. ; yet Christ never denied that there should be one
greater among them, and often signified that the same should
be S. Peter ; especially when He said, " Thou art Peter ; and
upon this Rock I will build My Church." If you demand why
they strove for Supremacy when He had determined it, he
yieldeth a substantial reason ; because, while Christ lived upon
earth, it was in His free choice to have appointed it otherwise,
until at the last, in the twenty-first of John, He said unto him,
" Simon, thou son of Jona," &c. By these it appeareth that
M. Sander confesseth, that no text of Scripture proveth the
Supremacy of Peter more directly and plainly than this of
John xxi. : which when every child seeth how little force it
hath to prove it, you may easily judge that the Papists them
selves, against their own consciences, do enforce all other
texts uttered before to establish it : and namely this of
Luke xxii. ; in which he saith that Christ, taking up the strife
that was among His Apostles about the primacy, ended His
talk at last with Simon Peter, shewing him to be that one
that was greater than the rest.
What ass, if he could speak with man's voice, would rea
son thus; that because Christ, converting His speech from
exhorting all His Apostles to admonish Peter of his special

II.] OF THE POPISH CHURCH. 255
danger he stood in by his infirmity, signified that Peter was
greater than all the Apostles ? But we must hear him com
pare these words of Christ, Luke xxii., with the words of S.
Matthew and Mark in other places ; which he saith the Mag-
deburgen. Cent. 1 doth " huddle up," as [if] they were all one,
whereas they differ much.
The words of Christ, Matt. xx. and Mar. x., are these :
"Whosoever among you will be greater, let him be your
servitor ; and whosoever among you will be first shall be
your servant." In Saint Luke xxii.: "He that is greater
among you, let him be made as the younger ; and he that is
chief as he that ministereth." M. Sander will have great
difference to be in these sayings. First, generally, that the
former sentence speaketh not of the greatness among eccle
siastical officers, but all Christians : which is utterly false ;
because this kind of greatness is prescribed unto them to
whom external dominion is forbidden. But that is not to all
men, but unto the Apostles only and their successors : there
fore this kind of greatness is proper only unto them. For
he speaketh not of greatness by humility only, but of great
ness without foreign dominion and worldly dignity, and joined
with service ; which is peculiar to the ministry ecclesiastical.
Secondly, he maketh six frivolous differences ; which either are
false, or else make no diversity in the sense of the places.
The first : Matthew and Mark speak of any man, " Who
soever;" S. Luke of one man, which by the article 6 is
pointed out. If the article 6 do always point one certain
man, it is somewhat that M. Sander saith : but if ten thou
sand times and more (as every man meanly learned in the
Greek tongue doth know) it signifieth not one certain man,
then is this a fond difference.
The second: The other speak of a desire to be great,
"Whoso would be great ;" S. Luke of the effect already pre
sent, " He that is greater." But the words of S. Matt., xviii.
ver. 4, overthrow this difference with the former : for there
o nei^wv, "the greatest," is taken for any one that shall
humble himself as a child, and not for one made Primate of
the Church.
The third difference is, that the letter [latter] speak of
him that would be /ueyas, " great ;" S. Luke of him that is
Hel^wv, " greater ;" by which is meant " the greatest of all,"
1 [Cent. i. Lib. ii. Cap. vii. 525—6. ed. Basil.]

256 DISCOVERY OF THE DANGEROUS ROCK [ch.
after the Greek phrase. But that neyas in the others signi
fieth "the greatest," according to the Hebrew phrase, it is
manifest by the word used by both, which call him also wpcH-
tov, " the first" or chiefest of all. Therefore these three dif
ferences are not worth three chips.
The fourth : S. Matthew calleth him that would be great
lovXois, " a servant ;" S. Luke giveth no name of service to
him that is greater, but he is willed to be younger or under
ling. Yet S. Luke in another place, cap. ix. vers. 48, calleth
him fxtKporepos, " the least," which shall be the greatest. But
what fond quarrelling is this ! Doth not the Pope call him
self "Servant of the servants of God?" By which he ac-
knowledgeth that the greatest service belongeth to him that
claimeth the greatest dignity; though indeed he yield no
service, but usurpeth all tyranny. Is M. Sander now ashamed
of that service, that the Pope by solemn title hath so long
professed ?
As for a pre-eminence of order, we deny not but it was
among the Apostles, and must be in every several company ;
although it be not necessary that it should be perpetual in
one man, but as every Church shall ordain : but a primacy
of authority over all the Church, we utterly deny that ever
it was granted to Peter, or any man, by our Saviour Christ.
M. Sander citeth Ambrose, in Luke xxii., to prove it : Qui
lapsus es, &c. : " Thou which didst slide before thou didst
weep, after thou hast wept art set upright ; that thou shouldest
rule others, who before hadst not ruled thyself." " Lo,"
(saith he,) " Peter did rule others." A great miracle : but
doth it follow, that either he ruled all men, or that he ruled
his equals the Apostles ? of whom the same Ambrose saith :
De Spiritu Sancto, Lib. ii. Cap. xii.1: Nee Paulus inferior
Petro ; quamvis is Ecclesioz fundamentum, et hie sapiens
architectus, sciens vestigia credentium fundare populorum :
" Neither was Paul inferior to Peter ; although he was the
foundation of the Church, and Paul a wise builder, knowing
how to found the steps of the people believing." And again, in
his book De incarnatione Domini, Ca. iv.2 : Hie, inquam, ubi
audivit, Vos autem quid Me dicitis? statim, loci non im-
memor sui, primatum egit : primatum confessionis utique,
non honoris; primatum fidei, non ordinis: "This Peter, I
i [Opp. Tom. iv. col. 254. Lut. Paris. 1661.]
2 [Opp. iv. 290.]

II.] OF THE POPISH CHURCH. 257
say, when he heard, 'But what do you say that I am ?' imme
diately, not forgetting his place, executed his primacy : verily
the primacy of confession, not of honour ; the primacy of faith,
not of degree." By these places of Ambrose it appeareth
what government and primacy was granted to Peter, and
how he exercised the same.
The fifth difference is, " that the other Evangelists say
absolutely, Let him be a minister and a servant ; in S. Luke it
is said, with a great moderation, Let him be made as the
younger, and as he that minister eth." If this be a good
argument to prove that the ministry is more truly a great
ness than a ministry, the Arrians may deny by the like that
Christ is more truly a man than the Son of God ; because
Saint John sayeth, " We saw His glory, as the glory of the
only-begotten Son of God." 0 beastly absurdity ! And yet
he sayeth, " If any man say that there was not one certain
man greater among the Apostles, who might be as the
younger, it is plain contradiction to Christ, and he is Anti
christ." But where, on God's name, sayeth Christ, that there
is one certain man greater among the Apostles ?
The last, and the least difference is, " that the greater
man is evidently named a little after, when Christ saith to S.
Peter, 'Simon, Simon, behold Satan hath desired to sift you
as it were wheat: but I have prayed for thee, that thy faith
shall not fail : and thou, being once converted, confirm thy
brethren.' " Master Sander asketh what other thing it is for
Peter to confirm his brethren, but to practise and exercise his
greatness over them ; for every one that confirmeth is greater
than they which are confirmed. Who ever did read such im
pudent assertions? Peter's faith was confirmed by Mary
Magdalen : therefore she was greater than Peter. Paul was
confirmed by Ananias : therefore he was greater than Paul
Aquila and Priscilla confirmed Apollo : therefore they were
greater than he.
To conclude, if 6 /xei^wv in S. Luke xxii. do necessarily
prove that there was one certain man among them "greatest,"
then J piKpoTepos in the ix. of Luke, 48, doth prove that
there was one "least" among them : "He that is least among
you all," (saith our Saviour Christ,) " even he shall be the
greatest." And lest M. Sander should renew his difference
°' M«7as and ne'iCwv, it may please him to understand, that
17
[fulke, II.]

258 DISCOVERY OF THE DANGEROUS ROCK [cH.
the contention was among the Apostles, tis av e'tn fielXwv
avToiv, "which should be the greater" or greatest "of them:"
which question our Saviour Christ doth not decide, if M. San
der's difference of fieyas and /xel^cov in this place may stand.
Wherefore hitherto Peter hath found no Supremacy; and
much less the Pope, by prerogative of his chair ; who cannot
be said to sit in Peter's chair, except he taught Peter's doc
trine : which if he did teach, as he doth the contrary, yet
Peter's auctority could no more be derived to him thali the
auctority of Moses to every one of the Scribes and Pharisees
which did sit in Moses' chair.
He citeth Ambrose to prove that there is a prelacy or
preferment in the Church, because he forbiddeth contention
thereabout ; as though there could not be a prelacy or prefer
ment of every Bishop over his Church, but there must be one
Bishop over all the Church. The like he allegeth out of
Bede, which speaketh expressly of all the teachers of the
Church, and not of one Pope over all. The conclusion of his
disputation is, that the ecclesiastical primacy doth in all points
resemble (as much as it possibly may) the primacy of Christ :
and therefore he that denieth the primacy among the Apostles
to be a true primacy in his kind is blasphemous against Christ
Himself. Nay rather, he that communicateth with any man
that which is peculiar to our Saviour Christ, that He only
should be, as S. Paul speaketh of Him, iv iraai Awroy irpw-
tsvcov, " Himself the Primate in all things," Col. i. 18, which
is the " Head of His body," which is " the Church," is found
a manifest blasphemer of our Saviour Christ. But that they
which excel among the Apostles, and their successors the
Bishops, may be humble and yet great, after the example of
our Saviour Christ, is no question at all : but that any hath
such greatness in auctority as our Saviour Christ hath over
His whole Church is the thing we deny.
If Gregory affirm that Peter " by God's commission had
the primacy of the holy Church," and was " grown in power
above the rest," it is no marvel, seeing he was so near to the
open manifestation of Antichrist ; which succeeded him the
next save one ; whose tyranny began to increase long before
Gregory's time : yet was he in his pretended primacy more
modest than any that followed him to this day ; utterly re
fusing and condemning as profane, proud, and blasphemous

II.] OF THE POPISH CHURCH. 259
against Christ, the title of Universal Bishop1, which John of
Constantinople did usurp, and other Bishops would have given
to him. And whereas M. Sander frameth an objection of our part,
that no man can be both a minister and a governor ; there
fore no ecclesiastical Minister can be a governor ; he playeth
with his own shadow. For we deny not but a Minister of
the Church, which is a servant, is also a governor. But we
affirm that his government is spiritual, not worldly ; unlike
to the earthly government of this world, even as the kingdom
of Christ is not of this world. But it followeth not, because
that every Bishop and shepherd is a governor, therefore there
must be one Bishop and shepherd governor of them all ; other
than our Saviour Christ, the arch or "head Shepherd," and
" Bishop of our souls." 1 Pet. v. 4, and 1 Pet. ii. 25.
M. Sander commendeth the saying of Leo Bishop of Rome
to Anastasius Bishop of Thessalonica2 : Qui se, &c. : " He that
knoweth himself to be set over some men, let him not disdain
to have some man preferred before him." But he proceedeth:
sed obedientiam quam exigit etiam ipse dependat : " but
such obedience as he requireth of other, let him yield himself."
By this saying it appeareth, that although Leo take [so] much
upon him as to hear the controversies that cannot be deter
mined by the Metropolitans, yet he acknowledgeth, that in
equity he was bound to yield that obedience to others which
he required of others, if he himself were in fault.
But M. Sander maketh another objection for us, on this
manner : The Princes of the Gentiles do also serve their
subjects in conserving peace, keeping out their enemies, &c. :
but the Clergy must be altogether unlike to temporal go
vernors : therefore there must be no primacy or government
among them, although it be joined with service. Once again
I say, we make no such objection : but we answer the Ana
baptists that so object, that the government of the Clergy, as
it differeth in matter which is spiritual, so also it differeth in
form and manner from the regiment temporal ; which is with
outward pomp of glory, and with the material sword; and
this with all humility, and with the sword of the Spirit. Con-.
1 [Opp. Tom. ii. Ep. Lib. iv. Capp. lxxvi, lxxviii, Ixxx, lxxxii, Ixxxiii.
Lib. vi. C. cxciv. Antv. 1572.]
2 [Epist. xii. alias lxxxiv. Opp. i. 224. Lugd. 1700.]
17—2

260 DISCOVERY OF THE DANGEROUS ROCK [CH.
trariwise, M. Sander answereth this objection so as he both
strengtheneth the hands of the Anabaptists, and sheweth
himself little to differ from their opinion. First therefore he
saith, that " Christ forbiddeth His Apostles and Bishops such a
dominion as is used among the Princes of the earth ; not alto
gether such as ought to be among them." But that He
speaketh not of tyrannical dominion, it appeareth by the title of
Evepyerai, "Benefactors," which their subjects did give them
for their bountifulness towards them, in preserving them from
enemies, in peace and wealth. Secondly he saith, "that
although the King be never so good, yet it is not the kingly,
but the priestly power, which God chose from the beginning
to rule His people withal. And although Kings serve God's
eternal purpose, and they are commanded to be obeyed, yet
the making of Kings over God's own people at the first came
not of God by way of His merciful election, but by way of His
angry permission." What Anabaptist could speak more here-
tically or seditiously against the lawful auctority of Kings
and Princes ?
But let us see his reason. "Nemrod," he saith, "was the
first King we read of, which either by force usurped, or
was advanced by evil men." I answer, if Nemrod was the
first that usurped auctority as a tyrant, yet was he not the
first that exercised kingly auctority lawfully, neither was he
ruler over God's people. But what will he say of Mel-
chisedech, King of Salem ? Was not he elected of God at the
first, both to be a King, and a figure of the King of Kings ;
who should not have had that dignity, "if it had not been of
itself both lawful and godly ? Secondly he saith, " God was
angry with His people for asking a King, when they had a
Priest to rule them." I answer, He was not angry for their
asking of a King, but for refusing of a Prince ordained by
Him ; which was Samuel, a Levite indeed of the family of
Cohath, but no Priest of the family of Aaron: for in his
days were High Priests, Eli, Achitob, Achimelech. But after
the days of Eli, which was both High Priest and Judge,
Samuel was ordained Prince or Judge of the people ; having
auctority above Achitob or Achimelech the High Priests in his
time : which were sufficient to decide the controversy of the
Supremacy, if M. Sander would give place to the Scriptures.
But who can discharge him of Anabaptistry, where he

II.] OF THE POPISH CHURCH. 261
denieth the making of a King to be God's institution ; affirming
it to be " the fact and consent of men, allowed indeed by God ;"
when tho Apostle expressly sayeth it is " God's ordinance,"
Rom. xiii. ? And where he saith that Abel, Noe, Abraham
were directly from God chosen to be Priests as Aaron, he
sayeth most untruly ; for they had in their family the princi
pality of civil government as directly as they had the Priest
hood: but neither of both in such sort as Aaron had the
Priesthood ; in whom the one was distincted from the other.
And of Abraham it is testified that he was " a Prince ordained
of God." Gen. xxiii. 6. He setteth forth the excellency of
Priests by their auctority in making Christ's body "with their
holy mouth," as Hierom speaketh. But that proveth not the
Supremacy of one Priest above all men, nor of one Priest
above another.
As for tho ordaining of Peter to be general shepherd,
and high Bishop of the whole flock, by commanding him to
feed His sheep, when he can conclude it out of that Scrip
ture in any lawful form of argument, we will yield unto it.
But this is intolerable impudency, that, pretending to shew
how much the Pope is more excellent than any King, he ask
eth, "To what Christian King did Christ ever say, 'As My
Father sent Me, I send thee ?' " as though Christ had ever
said so to Peter in singular, and not to all His Apostles in
general, "As My Father sent Me, so I send you." Joan. xx.
Concerning the Rock that He would build His Church upon,
and the feeding of Christ's sheep and lambs, we shall have
more proper place to examine afterward what Supremacy they
give to the Pope, or to Peter either. His farther raving against
the dignity of Kings, who list to see, let him turn to the 57th
pago of his book, Cap. ii. : and yet I cannot omit that he
saith, that " the pomp of a King is most contrary of all other
degrees to the profession of Christian faith ;" and maketh
worldly pomp as unmeet for a King as for a Bishop.
"But the Scripture" (he saith) "never calleth any King
Head of the Church." Neither do we call' any King Head of
the Church, but only Christ : but in every particular Church
the Scripture alloweth the King to be the chief Magistrate,
not only in governing the Commonwealth, but also in making
godly laws for the furtherance of religion ; having all sorts of
men, as well ecclesiastical as civil, subject unto him, to be go
verned by him, and punished also, not only for civil offences, ' ~V -

262 DISCOVERY OF THE DANGEROUS ROCK [cH.
but also for heresy, and neglect of their duties in matters
pertaining to the religion of God. For although many civil
Magistrates at the first were enemies of the Gospel, yet was
it prophesied, that " Kings should be nursing fathers, and
Queens nursing mothers" unto the Church. Es. xlix. Again, it
is an impudent and gross lie, when he saith that God was angry
" because the government of the High Priest was rejected,
and a kingly government called for." For they rejected not
that government of the High Priest, but of Samuel the Judge,
who was no High Priest, although he was a Prophet ; neither
was there ever any High Priest Judge but only Eli.
" But if all Supremacy be forbidden over the whole Church
militant," (saith M. Sander,) " it is forbidden likewise that
there should be any superior in any one part of the Church."
And this he proveth by a jolly rule of logic : " For the
parts, (according to their degree,) are of the same nature
whereof the whole is." 0 subtile reason ! by which I will
likewise conclude, There may not be one schoolmaster for all
the children of the world; therefore thefe may not be one
schoolmaster for one town in all the world : There cannot
be one physician for all the world ; therefore there may not
be a physician for every city : yea, there cannot be one
Priest for all the Churches in the world ; therefore there
may not be a Priest in every parish. Again, he reasoneth
thus : " If a King be supreme head over his own Christian
realm, it must be by that power which he either had before
his Christianity, or beside it : for by his Christianity it
is not possible that he should have greater power than
the Apostles had." I answer, the King's Supremacy is
perfectly distinct from any power the Apostles had. For
although he have authority over ecclesiastical persons, and
in causes ecclesiastical, according to God's word, yet is he
no ecclesiastical officer, but a civil Magistrate ; having chief
authority in all causes, not absolute to do what he will, but
only what God commandeth him ; namely, to provide by
laws that God may be truly worshipped, and all offences
against His religion may be punished.
And whereas M. Sander inferreth, that an ethnic Prince
or Turk may be supreme head of our Church, we utterly deny
to any such the name of an head, which cannot be a member :
but even an ethnic Prince or Turk may be chief Magistrate over
the faithful ; and make laws for the maintenance of Christian

II.] OF THE POPISH CHURCH. 263
religion, as an hypocrite Christian may. They are also to
be obeyed in all things that are not contrary to God. Na-
buchadnezer, Darius, Cyrus, Artaxerxes, which were heathen
Princes, made godly laws for the true worship of God, and
furtherance of His people ; as in the prophecy of Daniel, the
books of Ezra and Nehemiah, it is manifest. S. Paul appealed
to Nero the Emperor. Eusebius testifieth, Lib. vii. Cap. xxiv.1,
,that the Christians, in a matter of a Bishop's election, and
for a Bishop's house, were directed by the decree of Aure-
lianus an heathen Emperor. And this notwithstanding, the
Church is always under the sovereign authority of Christ,
and the spiritual government of her several " Pastors and
teachers," when [whom] Christ, ascending into heaven, or
dained for her edification and unity, and not one Pope over
all. Eph. iv. 13.
But now he will enter one degree farther, and suppose
" that a King may be as good as it is possible for any mortal
man to be, or as any Bishop and Priest is ; yet he can neither
baptize, consecrate, forgive sins, praise, excommunicate, bless,
nor be judge of doctrine, by his kingly authority. If he can
do none of those, he cannot be supreme governor in all
ecclesiastical causes." I deny this argument : for his Supre
macy is not to do those things, or any of them, but to pro
vide and command that they may be done as they ought to
be. But he riseth up again and saith, that " whosoever hath
sovereign authority, either in civil matters or ecclesiastical,
he may in his own person execute any of those things which
any of his inferiors may do." So he saith, " The King, if he
will, may be Judge in Westminster-Hall, Shrieve, and Con
stable : yea, he may play the tailor, master-carpenter, or
tanner." It is marvel he saith not that he may be both a
King and subject. "Likewise the Primate" (he might as
well say the Pope) " may help a Priest to Mass, carry the
Cross in procession, dig a grave," &c. I deny this rule to
hold in all things. For there are some things that the
Prince may not do for lack of knowledge ; and some things
for lack of calling ; and yet he may command both to be
done. For controversies of law he may not decide, except
he have knowledge of the law ; nor minister physic, except he
have knowledge in physic : yet he may command both lawyers
1 [Cap. xxx. p. 282. ed. Vales.]

264 DISCOVERY OF THE DANGEROUS ROCK [cH.
and physicians to do according to their knowledge. Likewise
to preach, baptize, &c, he may not, because he lacketh call
ing ; for none may do those things lawfully but he that hath
a special calling : but he may command those things to be
done, and to be well done, according to God's law, whereof
he ought not to be ignorant; and for that purpose is espe
cially commanded to study in the book of God's law, that not
only in matters concerning his own person, but in matters
concerning God's honour, he may cause all men to do their
duty. Deut. xvii. 18. So did David, Salomon, Jehosaphat,
Ezechias, Josias, command the Priests to offer up the sacri
fices, and to do their duty; which it is not lawful for then?
Kings to execute.
And is it so strange a matter, that a popish King may
not command his Chaplain to say Mass, or to say his Mass
reverently and orderly, as the laws of Popery do require?
If he may command over those matters, which yet he may
not do himself, let M. Sander see how his rule holdeth,
that whosoever hath authority in any matters may do all
things himself which any of his inferiors may do, or which
he may command to be done. Whereupon he concludeth, that
" the King hath no right or supreme power at all in ecclesi
astical causes, (unless it be committed to him from the Bishop:)"
so that a King, if he be a Bishop's Commissary, may do that
by M. Sander's exception, which neither by commandment of
God, nor his kingly power, he hath auctority to do.
Another argument he bringeth as good as this, that "the
lesser authority doth not comprehend the greater :" and there
fore M. Home must answer him, whether to preach, baptize,
forgive sins, &c, be greater or lesser ministry than the
King's authority. If it be greater, then it cannot be com
prehended in the King's authority, which is lesser. What
that reverend Father, the Bishop of Winchester, hath an
swered, it may be seen in his book against M. Feckenham.
But to talk with you, M. Sander, what if I grant that the
ecclesiastical ministry is not comprehended in the King's
authority ? Will you thereupon infer, that the King's autho
rity is not to command the Ministers of the Church in these
matters to do their duties according to the word of God?
Indeed you conclude so ; but your argument is naught : for
the King is God's Lieutenant, to see both the Church and
the Commonwealth to be well ordered. And the same thing

II ] OF THE POPISH CHURCH. 265
may be greater and lesser than another in divers respects.
As in authority of commanding the King is greater than the
physician : in knowledge and practice of physic the King is
less than the physician. So in authority of commanding the
Prince is greater than the Minister : but in authority of
ministration he is less ; and no inconvenience in the world to
the dignity of either estate or calling.
The Bishop of Winchester's examples, M. Sander saith,
are evil applied : for they only shew what was done, and
not what ought to have been done ; and so for many circum
stances are subject to much wrangling. 1. For either he was
no good Prince which meddled with disposing of holy matters ;
2. or in that deed he was not good ; 3. or he did it by com
mission from a Prophet or an High Priest ; 4. or he was de
ceived by flatterers ; 5. or he was enforced by necessity. But
all these quarrels notwithstanding, the examples of Scripture
are so many and so plain, that M. Sander's wrangling cannot
obscure them. David, a good Prince, did well in appointing
the Levites and Priests to their several offices, and forbidding
the Levites to. carry the Ark and the vessels thereof, without
any commission from Priest or Prophet, but only by the word
of God ; not deceived by flatterers, nor enforced by neces
sity. 1 Chron. xxiii. 25. Salomon did the like about the
Temple : he deposed Abiathar the High Priest, and set Zadoc
in his room1. 1 Reg. ii. 27 and 35. And such are the ex
amples of all the godly Kings of Judah ; which, being com
mended in the Scripture, are not uncertain, deceitful, or
unknown in their circumstances ; but much more certain argu
ments for the authority of Princes in ecclesiastical matters
1 [As the conduct of Solomon in deposing Abiathar affords the
only example that can be adduced from Scripture to justify the depri
vation of Bishops by mere secular power, it is important to shew that
the learned Mason was much mistaken when he allowed, that on this
occasion " a King deprived one that was a, lawful High Priest." (Of
tit English Ministry, Book iii. Chap. ii. p. 219. ed. Lindsay, Lond.
U34.) It is certain that Zadok was the heir of the line of Eleazar,
the elder son of Aaron; (1 Chron. vi. 3 — 8: 50 — 53.) and conse
quently Abiathar, whom Solomon deposed in fulfilment of the Lord's
denunciation against the house of Eli, was not the rightful High
Priest, but he was of the family of Ithamar. (1 Chron. xxiv. 3.) The
course of succession in the latter case was this : Eli, Phinehas, Ahitub,
Ahimelech, Abiathar.]

266 DISCOVERY OF THE DANGEROUS ROCK [ch.
than this text which he citeth, " Feed My sheep," to forbid
them. But here he will ask " whether a Christian King be Peter's
sheep or no ?" I answer, by propriety no ; but a sheep
of Christ's, as Peter is. Nevertheless, admit Peter to be a
shepherd, and the King to be his sheep, what then ? For
sooth it is against the law of nature for a sheep to rule his
shepherd. I grant, in those things in which the one is shep
herd, and the other a sheep. But I ask of him, is not a King
also in some respect called in Scripture a shepherd ? If he
doubt, Esa. xliv. 28, and Jere. xxiii. 4. may resolve him. And
is not Peter and Paul in this respect also sheep ? If he deny
it, let the Apostles speak for themselves : " Let every soul be
subject," &c. Rom. xiii. If now I should reason that it is
against the law of nature that the sheep should rule his shep
herd, I am sure he would answer with making a diversity of
respects. You may then see what a wise argument he hath
made, that may be turned back on his own head. Wherefore
here is no such impossibility as he inferreth ; but that a King
in some respect of ecclesiastical government may be above his
own Pastor, as in other respect he is under him.
M. Sander will go forward for all this, and putteth [the]
case that a Bishop should come to a Christian King, as Ambrose
did (Ep. xxxiii.1) to Emperor Valentinian, offering his body and
goods to his pleasure ; but the thing which the Emperor un
lawfully required he would not yield unto : what could the
Emperor do to him ? He could not excommunicate him :
and if he imprisoned him, or put him to death, he did but as
Nero or the Turk might do. " Therefore, if the King be
never so much christened, he hath no power over the Bishop's
soul." If it were possible for the Pope to require an unlawful
thing, I might put the like case of his Holiness. What if a
Christian man should come to him, &c, he might excommuni
cate him, as Caiphas did all that confessed Christ : he might
imprison him, as Annas did the Apostles : he might command
him to be smitten, as Pashur did Jeremy, and Ananias Paul,
&c. Therefore, if he were never so much a Pope, he hath
no power over a Christian man's soul. Mark the pith of M.
Sander's arguments. But if Auxentius the heretic should
have come to that Emperor, had the Emperor none authority
1 [Epistt. Lib. ii. xiv. Opp. Tom. v. col. 209.]

II.] OF THE POPISH CHURCH. 267
to call a Synod to inquire of his heresy ; and, he being found
an heretic, to have condemned him therefore ? In these
doings he had done as Constantine about Arius and Donatus ;
and not as Nero with Peter and Paul.
But Ambrose his authority is cited, Ep. xxxii.2 : Si vel
Scripturarum seriem, &c. : "If we call to mind either the
process of holy Scriptures, or the ancient times, who can deny
but that in a cause of faith, in a cause I say of faith, Bishops
are wont to judge of Emperors, not Emperors of Bishops ?"
And who saith the contrary, but that in causes of faith the
Emperor is ordinarily to be instructed of the Bishops, and
not the Bishops of the Emperor ? or that the Prince hath
absolute authority in matters of religion to do what he will?
when we say that in all things he must follow the direction
of God's word ; the knowledge whereof, especially in difficult
matters, he is to receive of the Ministers of the Church ; as of
the lawyers the knowledge of law, although he be bound to
see justice executed.
But M. Sander will know how a King shall correct or de
pose a Bishop. I answer, if his crime be apparent, even as
Salomon deposed Abiathar: if it be doubtful, by order of
judgment and trial according ; of civil Judges, if it be a civil
crime ; and ecclesiastical, if it be heresy that he is accused of.
If he cannot be condemned upon just trial, he is to be absolved.
If this will not satisfy the King, he hath no farther lawful
authority by any Supremacy ; and if he proceed further, he
exerciseth tyranny. And Augustin doth justly complain of
the importunity of the Donatists ; which, when the cause had
been decided by certain Bishops, deputed by the Emperor,
they would never be satisfied ; but still appealed to the Em
peror, and " accused the Bishops that were appointed their
judges before the earthly King." M. Sander urgeth that
word vehemently, that he calleth Constantine " an earthly
King :" and yet he is so blind that he will not see, that the
same earthly King, which assigned those Bishops to be judges,
was still acknowledged of all parts to be the supreme go
vernor. Ep. xlviii.3
But omitting the words of men, he will prove the dignity
of High Priests above faithful Princes by the authority of God
in the Old Testament ; Levit. iv : because there God assigneth
2 [Opp. v. 204.] 3 [al. xciii. Opp. Tom. ii. col. 178.]

268 DISCOVERY OF THE DANGEROUS ROCK [ch.
a sacrifice for the sin of every degree of men, according to
their dignity : and first beginneth with the High Priest ; next
whom is the whole people ; third the Prince ; and last of all
every private man. There is no doubt but the High Priest,
as he was an image and figure of Christ, was chief in dignity :
although in other respects he was inferior to the Prince ; as
Aaron was to Moses, Achitob or Achimelech to Samuel, Abi
athar and Zadoc to David and Salomon. The like is confessed
of every Minister of the Gospel : and therefore the authority
of Philo and Theodoretus, which he useth in this point, might
have been spared. And yet may a wicked Minister be de
posed by a godly Prince. Abiathar, in the Temple, at the
altar, in the holiest place, and sacrificing, was greater than
Salomon : yet was he justly deposed by Salomon for his
treason. Master Sander chargeth us to affirm, that the evil life of
a Bishop taketh away his authority : which he denieth to be
so, as long as the Church doth tolerate and permit them in
their places. Whereupon he concludetb, that though the Bishop
of Rome have never so much abused his office, yet he cannot
leese [lose] his primacy. Indeed the abuse of the man taketh
not away the authority of the office : but if the office be per
verted from the right use, and degenerated into an heathenish
tyranny, as the Bishop of Rome's place hath been many hun
dred years ; the name of a Bishop only, and that scarcely
remaining ; we justly affirm that such dignity as that see had
by consent of men, it hath clean lost by abuse of their au
thority. Moreover he saith it hath no colour of truth, that we
affirm the Pope to govern, not as a Pastor, but to bear a
sovereignty, as Princes of the world ; and that he will shew
by six differences, which he will consider in order.
1. First, no man succeedeth in that chair by right of inhe
ritance. The like I may say of the German Emperor : there
fore this is no difference.
2. Secondly, it is not obtained by right of battle, invasion,
or otherwise, but by election. So is the Emperor at this day,
only by election. And if Master Sander be not too impu
dent, he will not deny but there hath been bickering and
intruding by force into that chair ; and, that is worse, entering
by simony, murder, treason, and devilish sorcery.

II.] OF THE POPISH CHURCH. 269
The third : neither child, nor woman, nor infidel, nor 3.
Catechumeni, can be chosen Bishop of Rome. No more can
any such be chosen Emperor, by the golden Bull, and law of
the election. And yet, seeing boys are made Cardinals, which
be electors of the Pope, and eligible, there is none impossi
bility but a boy may be chosen Pope, as well as a woman
hath been Pope ; Joan I mean. John the XXIII.1 was con
demned in the Council of Constance2 for an infidel, which
denied the immortality of the soul.
The fourth : the election of the Bishop of Rome, as of all 4.
other Bishops, pertaineth only to ecclesiastical persons : a King
may be chosen by the people without the Clergy. To this I
say, that the Bishop of Rome was wont to be chosen as well
by the people as by the Clergy : and so is the Emperor
chosen by as many Bishops as civil Princes, except in case of
equality of voices. Neither is the Clergy ever excluded in any
lawful election of any King, where he is made by election.
The fifth : to omit the Bishop of Rome's temporal dominion, 5.
which he confesseth to be but accessory to his bishoprick, in
his ecclesiastical government he useth not that force and
power which worldly Princes do: he compelleth none, no
not the Jews in Rome, to baptism. No more doth the Em
peror. But what means useth he to depose Kings, and absolve
their subjects from their oath of obedience, where he judgeth
them for heretics ? How maketh he wars, and setteth all the
world in an uproar, to defend his usurped dignity and false
doctrine? Doth he not by force compel Christians to his
filthy idolatry, or else cruelly murdereth and tormenteth
them? The sixth : the Bishop of Rome (as Bishop) never punisheth 6.
them with the material sword which forsake his Church.
No ; but as Antichrist and a tyrant he imprisoneth them,
hangeth them, drowneth them, burneth them: "not as a
Bishop," saith M. Sander, "but as a temporal Prince and
1 [In a note placed before the Acts of the Council of Constance,
Joverius thus candidly accounts for the fact, that this Pope is some
times styled John XXIII., and at other times XXIV.: " Varietas oritur
ex Joanna ilia Maguntina, qua? Joannes Anglicus dicta est ; quse a qui-
busdatn in catalogo Pontifteum recensetur post Joannem VII., imperante
Lothario, ab aliis vero omittitur." (Sanctiones Eccles. Class, i. fol. 128,
b. Paris. 1555.)]
3 [Sess. xii. hab. an. 1415.]

270 DISCOVERY OF THE DANGEROUS ROCK [ch.
lord ; as Moses, being one of the Priests of our Lord, was also
master of civil government." Behold, this deviser of differ
ences at length maketh him a civil Prince and temporal lord,
from whom he had laboured by so many differences to dis
tinguish before.
But now lest you should espy his impudent conclusion,
he draweth into a new controversy, whether Moses were a
Priest. And first he will prove that Moses was a Priest by
the Scripture, Psal. xcviii. [xcix.J, where it is said, Moses et
Aaron in Sacerdotibus Ejus. If he will not allow the Hebrew
word Cohanim to signify Princes, as it doth in divers other
places, yet saith not the Psalm that Moses and Aaron were
both Priests, but that " among His Priests" they were such
as " called upon His name," and were heard ; and Samuel,
who followeth in the same verse, confessed now by Master
Sander to be a Levite, forgetting that before he made him
High Priest.
But farther to prove that Moses was a Priest, he citeth
Augustin, Hieronym, Gregor. Naz., Dionys., and Philo ; but all
to small purpose for his cause. It must needs be confessed
that Moses, as all the Patriarchs before him in their families,
was a Priest before the distinction of the two offices was made,
when Aaron and his posterity only were chosen to be Priests,
after which time he was no longer a Priest ; neither did he
any thing as a Priest, but as a Prophet, and as a Prince. But
admit he were both a Prince and a Priest, yet he commanded
Aaron as a Prince, and not as a Priest : for Aaron was High
Priest, and therefore could have no Priest above him. By
which it is inferred, that the office of a Prince is to command
the High Priest; and so was it always practised by all godly
Princes. But Master Sander, returning to his last and least differ
ence, affirmeth that the Bishop of Rome never condemneth any
man for heresy or schism to corporal death in his own person,
nor teacheth that they may be condemned of other ecclesias
tical persons. But who understandeth not this mockery ?
For as well it may be said, The King never hangeth any man
in his own person ; therefore none are executed by his autho
rity ; as, The Pope never condemneth any to death in his own
person ; therefore he persuadeth not his religion with fire and
sword. But will the Pope and the Bishop, that are so mild
and gentle, suffer them whom they condemn for heresy to

11.] OF THE POPISH CHURCH. 271
escape their hands before they have delivered them to death ?
0 cruel and shameless hypocrites !
"Nevertheless," Master Sander saith, "they have power
over men's souls by that which our Saviour said to Peter, ' To
thee I will give the keys of the kingdom of heaven,' &c. ;
which words are derived to the Bishop of Rome by means of
the chair of S. Peter." A strange kind of derivation never
touched in the Scripture. "To which words the said Bishop
referreth all his power : whereas worldly Princes appeal to
the law of the Gospel neither in getting, nor governing, nor
establishing their dominion and power." Mark well this En
glish Anabaptist. Is not this the law of the Gospel, " There
is no power but of God ; and the powers that be are ordained
of God," Rom. xiii. 1, for getting of dominion and power ?
And is not this the law of the Gospel for their governing;
that governors are sent of God " for the punishment of evil
doers, and for the praise of them that do well?" 1 Pet. ii.
vers. 14. And for the establishing of their dominion, is not
this the law of the Gospel, " Give unto Ceesar the things that
belong to Cassar?" Matthew xxii. verse 21. And again, we
" must be subject of necessity ; not only for fear, but even for
conscience." Rom. xiii. verse 5.
As for the Pope's piety and lenity wherewith he ruleth,
when all the world seeth how proudly and tyrannically he
behaveth himself, it were folly to spend many words about it.
As for his gentle terms of "Sons" and "Brethren," wherewith
he saluteth Princes and Bishops, and the "Servant of the ser
vants of God," which he calleth himself, [they] be simple and
short clokes to hide his horrible presumption and tyranny ;
wherewith he not only most shamefully revileth most Christian
Princes, as it appeareth in that traitorous Bull which came
from him against our most gracious sovereign Lady, but also
taketh upon him to depose them from their estate royal ;
usurping to himself the name of "Holiness," of "Head of the
Church," &c, of Christ, of God Himself, and calleth Princes
his " vassals," &c. ; of which blasphemies his Canon Laws are
stuffed full : and therefore it is too far in the day for M.
Sander to make us think there is no difference between white
and black, pride and humility, gentleness and cruelty, holi
ness and hypocrisy, faith and falsehood, vice and virtue.

272 DISCOVERY OF THE DANGEROUS ROCK [cH.

THE THIRD CHAPTER.
Sander. Sander. Of the divers senses which are in the holy Scripture;
and namely about these words, " Upon this Rock I will build My
Church ;" and which is the most literal and proper sense of them.
Fulke. Fulke. To contend about the diversity of senses, it were to
take up a new controversy. I admit that which Master Sander
confesseth, the literal sense only to be of force to convince
the adversary ; and the literal sense not to be always ac
cording to the grammatical sound of the words, but accord
ing to the most plain meaning of the speaker. As when
Christ sayeth to Peter, " To thee I will give the keys of the
kingdom of heaven," He meaneth not material keys of iron,
but authority in the kingdom of heaven; as keys are deli
vered by the master to his steward, but not as keys of a
city are delivered; which betoken the giving of possession
of that city, to be governed by him which receiveth the
keys, (as Master Sander saith.) For that was no part of
Christ's meaning, to resign the government of His Church to
Peter; for such giving of keys is of the subjects to their supe
rior : but to make him one of the stewards of His great house,
to open and shut, according to His appointment. Otherwise,
only Christ " hath the key of David, which openeth, and no
man shutteth; and shutteth, and no man openeth." Apoca
lypse iii. verse 7.
Likewise when He saith, "Thou art Peter," I confess
and agree with Master Sander, that the literal sense is not,
Thou art a natural stone ; but, Thou art that toward My
Church which a stone is toward the house that is builded
upon that stone : but so that Peter is not the only foundation,
nor the corner-stone, which is only Christ, but one of the
twelve stones of the foundation; as it may more plainly
appear in the Apocalypse, the twenty-first chapter, and the
fourteenth verse.
Furthermore I confess, that whatsoever by necessary con
clusion may be gathered of any true literal sense is of equal
authority with the word of God with that which is expressed
in plain words : as the consubstantiality of Christ with God
the Father, the blessed Trinity, and such-like. But whereas
M. Sander joineth to these not only the perpetual virginity

III.] OF THE POPISH CHURCH. 273
of the Virgin Mary, which is not certainly though probably
to be gathered, but also Transubstantiation, the Sacrifice of
the Mass, and Purgatory, against which the sense of the
Scripture is manifest, I will not admit them for examples.
But to come to his purpose, he findeth in the ancient
Fathers four divers senses of these words, "Upon this Rock
I will build My Church1 :" whereof three he rejecteth as un.r
perfect, which have ancient writers, as "he confesseth, for their
authors ; the last he hath no ancient writer to defend.
The first, that Christ is that Rock on whom the Church
is builded ; which Augustin holdeth.
The second, that every disciple of Christ is the Rock ;
which is Origen's opinion.
The third, that Peter's faith or confession is the Rock ;
which is Chrysostom's judgment.
The fourth, which is his own, and therefore he calleth it
"the perfect sense," is, that Peter, concerning his office in God's
Church, through the promise of Christ which is past, and
the faithful confession of His Godhead which is presently made,
and the power of feeding His sheep which then was to come,
is this Rock upon which the Church is built. Here I wish
the reader to note, that the Papist rejecteth three senses of
three several ancient writers, and maketh the fourth himself;
that you may see with what equity they exclaim against us,
if upon never so good ground we depart from the inter
pretation of the ancient Fathers. But now let us see what
reasons he hath to confute these three Doctors' opinions as
insufficient interpretations.
First he sayeth, "If Augustin's sense were true, all the
three other should be void." Indeed, his own sense, understand
ing Peter to be a singular Rock more than the other Apostles,
is made void thereby, as it is false. But the other two may
stand very well with Augustin's meaning : for he meaneth not
Christ barely, but Christ whom Peter and every true disciple
of faith confesseth to be the Rock of the Church. Neither
doth the word "Thou" hinder this sense; seeing Augustin
understandeth Peter to be a denominative a Petra, "of the
stone:" nor the word "I will build;" for notwithstanding He
1 [The various bearings of this declaration in S. Matth. xvi. 18 are
accurately pointed out in note Q in the English translation of Ter-
tullian's Works, Vol. i. Oxf. 1842. pp. 492—497.]
r n 18
[FULKE, II.]

274 DISCOVERY OF THE DANGEROUS ROCK [cH.
had begun to build His Church before, yet He would build
still, and that more magnifical than before.
The sense of Origen he rejecteth as not literal; upon which
I will not stand.
The sense of Chrysostom he refuseth, saying, " The faith
of Peter is not the only Rock whereupon the Church shall be
builded ; for then it had been built upon the faith of John
Baptist before this time." A pithy argument; as though there
is any more than " one faith," Ephesians iv. verse 5, which is
the same in Peter and in John, and in all the other Apostles ;
the same, I say, in kind, not in number. Neither did Chry
sostom mean that the singular faith of Peter were the Rock
of the Church; but the same one faith and confession em
braced of every member thereof.
That He sayeth " I will build," whereas He had already
begun to build, and did then presently build, what inconvenience
is it, but in a quarreller's mind ? He speaketh of the future
tenses, to signify the great amplification of His Church which
He would make by the preaching of the Apostles.
But of all senses Master Sander liketh his own best, as
perfect, and containing all the other therein. For first, saith
he, "If Peter be the Rock, then Christ that made him is much
more, as the Giver and Author of his power." But I deny that
Christ did give the same that He is Himself; that is, to be
the only singular foundation, Rock, and corner-stone of His
Church. Secondly, he saith, " If Peter in respect of his confession
be a Rock, then his confession is a Rock." But then say I,
they that make the same confession are as much a Rock as he.
Thirdly, he saith, " If Peter, being captain-disciple of all
that ever were, be a Rock, then all other disciples that are
contained in him as in the chief may also be this Rock." Who
had thought Peter had been such an universal thing to con
tain all disciples in him? Doth not this contain manifest
blasphemy, to make all disciples contained in Peter; which
are contained only in Christ, as the members in their mys
tical body, whereof He only is chief Head, Sovereign, Captain,
or what other name of superiority can be devised ?
But now that he hath made such a monstrous jumbling of
three opinions in one, he is not ashamed to charge Master
Jewell for leaving the most literal sense, and mingling three

III.] OF THE POPISH CHURCH. 275
opinions of these four in one ; as though bis sense, which is
farthest off from the meaning of Christ, were the only or most
literal sense. But seeing he wisheth Master Jewell or any of
us to discuss the meaning of Christ particularly with all cir
cumstances, for my part, considering all circumstances, I think
the most simple and plain meaning of Christ is, that Peter is
a Rock or stone upon which the Church is builded ; but none
otherwise than every one of the Apostles is, Ephe. ii. and
20 verse, and in the Apocalypse, the xxi. chapter, and 14
verse : of which M. Sander also confesseth every one to be
a Rock in his kind.
But now let us see the five circumstances by which Master
Sander will prove Peter for to be such a Rock as none of all
the rest of the Apostles is but he.
The first: Christ promised Simon, before he confessed,
that he should "be called Peter;" which was the first cause of
being the Rock. John i. Admit this to be a promise, and not
an imposition of a name, in respect of the gifts of fortitude
and constancy wherewith He would endue him, this proveth
him not to be a singular Rock.
The second: he was named Peter before he confessed;
which was the performance of the promise, Mark iii. I
doubt not but that he had confessed Christ before he was
made an Apostle, although he had not made that solemn con
fession expressed in Matthew xvi. Wherefore this circum
stance is a frivolous argument. And his brother Andrew,
which first brought him to Christ, confessed Jesus to be the
Messias before Peter was come to Christ.
The third : when he had confessed the Godhead of Christ,
which was the fruit of the gift and of the promise, Christ
pronounced him to be such a Rock whereupon He would build
His Church ; which was the reward of his confession. But
all the Apostles made the same confession : therefore the same
reward was given to all, that they should every one be a
Rock or stone on which the Church should be builded.
The fourth : Christ prayed that Peter's faith might not
fail; which was the warrant of the perpetuity of his strong
confession. Luke xxii. Christ prayed for all His Apostles,
Joan. xvii. The special prayer for Peter was in respect of
his greater weakness when he was left to himself.
The last : to shew what strength Peter should give to his
18—2

276 DISCOVERY OF THE DANGEROUS ROCK [cH.
brethren after his conversion, Christ bade him feed His lambs :
whereby he was made such a Rock, whereby He should stay
up His Church, by teaching and ruling the faithful, as whose
voice the sheep should be bound to hear in pain of damnation.
First I answer, that the strength or confirmation which he
should give to his brethren was not all one with his feeding
of the lambs ; but was used to the strengthening of his weak
brethren, the rest of the Apostles, whom after his marvellous
conversion he did mightily confirm, though in his fall he was
shewed to be the weakest of all. Then I say, the feeding of
the sheep of Christ was committed to him with the rest of
the Apostles ; in which he had no prerogative of auctority
given, but an earnest charge to shew his greater love by
greater diligence in his office. So that hitherto Peter is none
otherwise a Rock than every one of the Apostles is.

THE FOURTH CHAPTER.
Sander. Sander. Divers reasons are alleged to prove (chiefly by the cir
cumstance and conference of holy Scripture) that these words, " Thou
art Peter; and upon this Rock I will build My Church," have this literal
meaning : Upon thee, 0 Peter, being first made a Rock, to the end thou
shouldest stoutly confess the faith, and so confessing it, I will build
My Church. The promise to be called Peter was the first cause. Why
the Church was built upon him, the Protestants cannot tell. Which is
the first literal sense of these words, " Upon this Rock will I build My
Church."
Fulke. Fulke. First it is to be remembered, that M. Sander,
in the chapter before, rejecting the interpretation of three
of the greatest Doctors of the Church, Origen, Augustin, and
Chrysostom, not only is bound in equity to give us the same
liberty which he taketh himself, but also to confess that these
three principal Doctors, following other senses than his, were
iomorant of that which he and all other Papists make to be
the chief article of Christian faith ; namely, of the Supremacy
of Peter, when they acknowledged not Peter to be the Rock
whereupon Christ would build His Church ; and therefore
would never have subscribed to his book, which he instituteth
[intituleth] The Rock of the Church.
But now to the argument of this chapter. Chrysostom.
is cited to prove, that where Christ saith to Peter, "Thou

IV.] OF THE POPISH CHURCH. 277
art Simon the son of Jona : thou shalt be called Cepha, which
is by interpretation Peter," a new name is promised to Simon.
In Joan. Horn, xviii.1 Honorifice, &c. : " Christ doth fore-
speak honourably of him : for the certain foretelling of things
to come is the work only of the immortal God. It is to be
noted, that Christ did not foretell at this first meeting all
things which should come to pass afterward to him. For
He did not call him Peter ; neither did He say, ' Upon this
Rock will I build My Church ;' but He said, * Thou shalt be
called Cephas.' For that was both of more power, and also
of more auctority." There is nothing in this sentence but
that we may willingly admit. Peter was not yet instructed,
that he might be one of the twelve foundations of the Church,
as he was afterward. And that Chrysostom judged no sin
gular thing to be granted by that saying of Christ, Matt, xvi.,
to Peter, appeareth by his words, in Evang. Joann. Prozf.2,
where he applieth the same to John : Tonitrui enim filius
est Christo dilectissimus, columna omnium quoz in orbe sunt
Ecclesiarum, qui cozli cloves habet: "For the son of thunder
is most beloved of Christ, being a pillar of all the Churches
which are in the world, which hath the keys of heaven."
Neither doth Cyrillus, whom he citeth, make any thing
for his purpose. In Joan. Lib. ii. Cap. xii.3 Nee Simon,
&c. : " And He telleth aforehand that his name shall be
Peter, and not now Simon : by the very word signifying
that He would build His Church on him, as on a Rock and
most sure stone." These are the words of Cyrillus ; but that
he meaneth not his person, but his faith, he sheweth mani
festly in his book de Trinit. Lib. iv.4, speaking upon the text
1 [Opp. Tom. viii. p. 112. ed. Ben.]
2 [In S. Joan. Horn. i. Opp. viii. 2,]
8 [fol. 36, b. Paris. 1508. Sanders certainly used the translation
of S. Cyril's Commentary by Georgius Trapezuntius. This volume is
remarkable for the extraordinary insertion of four intermediate books,
from five to eight inclusive, which were written b'y Judocus Clich-
toveus, who is consequently styled by Cave " maleferiatus iste nebulo."
(Hist. Lit. i. 392. Oxon. 1740.) Clichtoveus, however, has been most
unjustly accused of forgery, for he used much precaution to prevent
mistake: but the result of his attempt to supply the deficiency, in
order, as he said, to render the work " uniforme et continuum," has
shewn that Dr. James's apprehension of " great danger " was not with
out foundation." (Bastardie of the false Fathers, p. 67.)]
4 [ad init.]

278 DISCOVERY OF THE DANGEROUS ROCK [ch.
of Matth. xvi., the ground of M. Sander's book: Petram
opinor per agnominationem nihil aliud quam inconcussam
et firmissimam Discipuli fidem vocavit; in qua Ecclesia
Christi ita firmata et fundata esset ut non laberetur :
" I think he called a Rock by denomination nothing else but
the most unmoveable and steadfast faith of that Disciple ; on
which the Church of Christ should be so established and
founded that it should not fall." Here is another principal
Doctor joining with Chrysostom against M. Sander, who
affirmeth that the Rock is nothing else but Peter's faith.
After these he nameth Theophylact1 and Euthymius, two
late writers, but he citeth nothing out of them presently.
But after shewing the force of God's promise to be effectual
to work all means necessary for the performance of it, he
citeth out of Euthymius, in Luke vi.2, that it was like that in
John i. Christ promised that Simon should be called Peter,
and in Luke vi. [Mark iii.] called him Peter. All this needed
not : we doubt not but Simon was called Peter. Yea, but
Cyrillus saith, in Joan. Lib. xii. Cap. lxiv.3, that "he, being
Prince and head, first cried out, saying, ' Thou art Christ, the
Son,' " &c. : therefore he was head, before his confession, by
promise and name. I will not here say how contrary M.
Sander is to himself, which in the Cap. iii. said that his
Supremacy was granted to him as a reward of his confession ;
but I will answer Cyrillus by himself, in Joan. Lib. iv. Cap.
xxviii.4, that Peter was ordine major, "superior in order," to
avoid confusion ; not in degree, dignity, or auctority.
And whereas M. Sander urgeth so vehemently, that the
name of Peter was not given for his confession, but was sin
gular to him by promise ; so that it belonged literally to
no Prophet, Apostle, nor Disciple, but only to him and his
successors ; it is a most fond and frivolous matter : for the
name of Bonarges was specially given to the sons of Ze-
bedee in respect of their excellent gifts, and at the same
time that the name of Peter was given to Simon : which
seeing it pertaineth not to their successors which have not
the same gifts, no more doth the name and dignity of Peter
pertain to any that sit in his chair ; if ever he had any fixed
chair among the Gentiles, which by God's ordinance was
i [Comment, in S. Joan. Cap. i. p. 580. Lut. Paris. 1635.]
2 [In S, Marc. iii. 16. Comm. ii. 50. Lips. 1792.]
8 [fol. 219, b. ed. Lat. sup. cit.] * rf0l. 10i.]

IV.] OF THE POPISH CHURCH. 279
appointed to be the principal Apostle of the Jews. More
over, where he laboureth tooth and nail to prove that these
words, " Upon this Rock I will build My Church," are to be
referred to Peter, as I said before, I will grant even as
much. But that Peter by these words was made a singular
Rock, more than all the Apostles, upon which the whole
Church is builded, I utterly deny; neither shall he be ever
able to prove it. For it is an impudent lie, "that only
Peter at this time had this high revelation, to acknowledge
Christ to be the Son of God :" for he answered in the name
of all the rest, who believed the same which he in their
name confessed. Did not Andrew before Peter acknowledge
Him to be the Messias ? Did not Nathanael, which was none
of the Apostles, acknowledge Him to be " the Son of God,"
and " the King of Israel ? " Joan. i. 49.
But he reasoneth substantially when he saith, " Thou only
art the Rock, because thou alone hadst this name, &c, pro
mised ; thou alone hadst it given ; thou alone didst confess Me ;
and to thee alone I say, 'Thou art Peter;'" as though a man
may not have a name whose signification is common to many.
Salomon alone was promised to be called, and was called,
Jedidiah; that is, the beloved of God. Shall we therefore
reason that Salomon only was beloved of God? As for that he
only confessed, I have shewed before that it is false: for
Christ, saying "Thou art Peter," meaneth not to say Thou
only art a Rock ; but Thou well answerest thy name, which
signifieth a Rock or stone ; and I will indeed use thee as a
Rock or stone to build My Church upon : yet not meaning
the person, but the office and doctrine of his Apostleship.
But now hath M. Sander no less than twenty-one reasons
to prove that Peter is the Rock here spoken of; which although
they may for the most part be easily avoided, yet I will grant
that Peter is one of the twelve stones whereupon the Church
is builded, but not the only stone.
Therefore his first four arguments I deny. First, Simon
is alone promised to be called Peter. Second, he alone is
called Peter. Third, Christ speaketh to him alone, saying,
" And I say to thee," &c. Fourth, Christ saith of him alone,
" Thou art Peter." Therefore Simon alone is the Rock of the
Church. Let him prove the consequence if he can. The next
five, which prove that these words are to be referred to
Peter, although that they be not very strong, yet I grant

280 DISCOVERY OF THE DANGEROUS ROCK [cH.
the words may be aptly referred to Peter. The reasons are :
first, upon the pronoun : the second, the word " Rock" of
which Peter is named : third, the conference of them toge
ther : fourth, the word " I will build :" fifth, the word " My
Church." The tenth argument I deny ; that Christ, by saying to
Peter, " Feed My lambs," " Feed My sheep," made him the
head-stone of God's militant Church, next unto Christ.
The eleventh, that Peter is shewed to be the Rock spoken
of by giving of the keys, I confess : but seeing the keys are
given to all the Apostles, this proveth Peter to be none other
wise a Rock than every one of them. That John received the
keys I shewed even now out of Chrysostom.
The twelfth, that the property of a Rock in constant
withstanding of tempests agreeth with Peter, I grant : and so
it doth to the rest of the Apostles, for whom Christ prayed
as He did for Peter ; who also strengthened and confirmed
their brethren as Peter did.
The thirteenth : I confess that hell-gates shall not prevail
against the Church, nor against any member thereof; which
is a small reason to make Peter supreme head thereof.
The fourteenth, which is the authorities of those Doctors
that teach Peter to be the Rock, whom he nameth, when he
citeth their sayings, or quoteth their places, I will severally
consider. The fifteenth : their reasons also, when I see them, to de
rive Peter's authority to his successors, I will weigh likewise.
The sixteenth, the practice of fifteen hundred years, I deny.
The seventeenth : I deny that all General Councils, or any
General Council for six hundred years after Christ, acknow
ledged Peter to be the Rock in that sense the Papists do
now. The eighteenth : if the confession of Peter be the Rock,
yet it is none inconvenience that the Church should be build
ed thereon, which began to be builded on the same confession
offered by John Baptist.
The nineteenth : though you confound the divers senses
given by the Fathers in your fourth sense, yet that proveth
not your sense to be true.
The twentieth: seeing the Apostles are certain foundations
and Rocks upon which the Church is builded, I confess that
Peter must needs be one : but that he was the most principal

IV.] OF THE POPISH CHURCH. 281
Rock in respect of his name Peter, which is " a stone," I say
it followeth no more than that Salomon was best of all men
beloved of God because of that name Jedidiah, which sig
nifieth " beloved of God."
The twenty-first : that all the Protestants do not agree in
the interpretation of these words, " Upon this Rock I will
build My Church," it proveth not your exposition to be true :
for neither do all the old Doctors, nor yet the new Papists,
agree in one and the same interpretation of this text. And
oftentimes it may invincibly be proved, that an heresy hath
no ground out of such a text of Scripture, although the true
and natural sense thereof cannot be found at all.

THE FIFTH CHAPTER.
Sander. It is proved out of the ancient Fathers, that S. Peter is Sander.
this Eock whereupon the Church was promised to be builded, other
wise than M. Jewell amrmeth.
Fulke. That Peter was a Rock or stone upon which the Fulke.
Church was builded is granted of us ; but that he alone was a
Rock for the whole Church to be builded upon we deny : and
M. Jewell1 rightly affirmeth, that the old Catholic Fathers
have written and pronounced not any mortal man, as Peter
was, but Christ Himself the Son of God, to be this Rock
whereon the whole Church is builded. But M. Sander will
prove (if he can) out of the old writers, that not only Christ
is the chief Rock, but Peter also is another Rock ; so that the
Church, by his doctrine, is builded upon two Rocks. And this
he will shew, first, by their words ; secondly, their reasons ;
thirdly, and by the same places which M. Jewell allegeth for
the contrary opinion.
The decretal Epistles of Anacletus, Pius, Fabianus, &c, which
in his own conscience he knoweth to be forged2, he omitteth,
and beginneth with Tertullian, De Prozscrip. advers. Hozres? :
1 [Reply to Harding's Answer, Art. iv. Works, Part i. p. 340. ed.
Parker Soe.]
2 [Sanders nevertheless asserts, that testimonies from them are
"most unjustly rejected of the Protestants." (Rockeofthe Churche,
p. 139.)] 3 [Cap. xxii. Opp. p. 209.]

282 DISCOVERY OF THE DANGEROUS ROCK [cHi
Latuit aliquid Petrum, ozdificandoe Ecclesice Petram dictum?
" Was any thing hid from Peter, which was called a Rock of
the Church which was to be builded?" This is granted, that
he was a Rock or stone whereon the Church is builded : and
the same Tertullian, in his book de Pudicitia1, saith of this
whole text, that this was conferred to Peter personally; and
pertaineth to none other but such as he was, namely, an
Apostle or Prophet : Secundum enim Petri personam spiri-
tualibus potestas ista conveniet, aut Apostolo aut Prophetoz :
" For according to the person of Peter this power shall be
long to spiritual men, either to an Apostle or to a Prophet."
Where is then the succession of the Bishop of Rome ?
But Hippolytus saith : Princeps Petrus, fidei Petra2 :
"Peter is 'chief, a Rock of faith." He meaneth a strong
preacher of faith ; not a Rock whereon faith is builded.
Origenes, in Exod. Ho. v.3, calleth S. Peter Magnum
illud, &c. : " that great foundation and most sound Rock,
whereupon Christ hath builded His Church." But let Ori
genes expound himself: In Matth. Cap. xvi.4: Si autem super
unum illumPetrum arbitraris universam Ecclesiam ozdificari
a Deo, quid dicis de Jacobo et Joanne, filiis tonitrui, vel de
singulis Apostolis ? Vere ergo ad Petrum quidem dictum
est, Tu es Petrus; et super hanc Petram azdificabo Eccle
siam Meam; et portce inferorum non prozvalebunt ei: tamen
omnibus Apostolis, et omnibus quibusque perfectis fidelibus,
dictum videtur, quoniam omnes sunt Petrus et Petroz; et in
omnibus ozdificata est Ecclesia Christi; et adversus nullum
1 [Cap. xxi. Opp. 574. In this place Tertullian, then a Montanist,
denies the transmission of the power of binding and loosing.]
2 [These words (alleged by Baronius also, ad an. xxxi. num. xxvii.)
are found in the tenth section of the spurious tract De consummation
Mundi, according to the version by Joannes Picus. Auhertus Mirseus
has wrongly distinguished this treatise from the Homilia de Christo et
Antichristo ; (Schol. in S. Hieron. Lib. de Viris Must. Cap. Ixi.) and it
is strange that its genuineness should have been maintained by Bishop
Bull. (Defens. Fid. Nic. Sect. iii. Cap. viii. §. 4. Opp. p. 220. Lond.
1703.) See Todd's Discourses on the Prophecies relating to Antichrist,
i. 218. Dubl. 1840.]
3 [Opp. Tom. ii. edit. Ben. Paris. 1733. Berington and Kirk's
Faith of Catholics, p. 157. Lond. 1813: pp. 139—40. lb. 1830.]
* [Vid. Origenis Commentaria, ed. Huet. Par. i. p. 275. Rothom.
1668.]

V.] OF THE POPISH CHURCH. 283
eorum qui tales sunt portce prazvalent inferorum : " But if
thou think the whole Church is builded by God upon that
one man Peter, what sayest thou of James and John, the
sons of thunder, or of every one of the Apostles ? Therefore
it was indeed truly said unto Peter, ' Thou art Peter ; and
upon this Rock I will build My Church ; and the gates of hell
shall not prevail against it :' yet it seemeth that it was spoken
also to all the Apostles, and to all the perfect faithful, because
they are all Peter and stones ; and on them all the Church, of
Christ is builded ; and against none of them which are such
the gates of hell shall prevail." By this you see how Origen
is none of his, howsoever he abuse his name.
Next he citeth Cyprian, Lib. i. Ep. iii.5 & Lib. iv. Ep. ix.6,
which sayeth that the Church was builded upon Peter : which
we confess, as upon one of the foundation-stones. But the same
Cyprian, De simplicitate Prozlatorum1 , saith : Hoc erant
utique et cceteri Apostoli quod fuit Petrus ; pari consortio
prcediti et honoris et potestatis : sed exordium ab unitate
proficiscitur, ut Ecclesia una monstretur : " The rest of the
Apostles were even the same thing that Peter was ; endued
with equal fellowship both of honour and auctority : but the
beginning proceedeth from one, that the Church might be
shewed to be one." This speaketh Cyprian upon the very
text now in discussing.
Consequently he citeth Hilary, Lib. vi. de Trinit.8,
Petrus, &c: "Peter lieth under the building of the Church:"
and in Cap. Matth. xvi.9: O in nuncupations, &c: "0 happy
foundation of the Church in having the new name pronounced !
« [al. Ep. lix. Opp. p. 131. ed. Fell.]
6 [Epist. lxvi. p. 168.]
' [vel De unitate Ecclesice, Opp. pp. 107 — 8. edit. Oxon. 1682.
One of the most glaring depravations ever attempted by Romanists
has been exhibited in this treatise. (See the Conference betwene
Bainoldes and Hart, pp. 210 — 17. Lond. 1584. Bilson's True Differ-
«nce, pp. 65, 66. Oxf. 1585. Cyprianus redivivus, by Dr. James, at the
end of hiB Ecloga Oxonio-Cantab. Lib. ii. p. 117. Lond. 1600 ; and
Corruption of the true Fathers, pp.1 — 32. lb. 1611.) In the sentence
cited by Fulke. after the word " proficiscitur," the clause " Primatus
Petro datur" was inserted; and after "Ecclesia una," the text was
further interpolated by the addition of " et Cathedra una."]
8 [§. 20. Opp. col. 891. ed. Bened.]
9 [num. 7. col. 690.]

284 DISCOVERY OF THE DANGEROUS ROCK [ch.
and 0 Rock, worthy of the building of that Church which
should dissolve the laws of hell !" But the same Hilary sayeth
of Christ, De Trinit. Lib. ii.1: Una hozc est felix fidei Petra,
Petri ore confessa, Tu es Filius Dei vivi: "This is that only
happy Rock of faith, confessed by the mouth of Peter, 'Thou
art the Son of the living God.'" And again, Lib. vi.2: Super
hanc igitur confessionis Petram Ecclesice ozdificatio est:
" Upon this Rock of confession is the building of the Church."
And again3 : Hozc fides Ecclesioz fundamentum est. Per
hanc fidem infirmce [al. infirmes] adversus earn sunt portce
inferorum. Hozc fides regni cozlestis habet claves, &c. :
" This faith is the foundation of the Church. By this faith
the gates of hell are of no force against it. This faith hath
the keys of the kingdom of heaven," &c. Therefore not
the person of Peter is the Rock for all the Church to be
built upon.
S. Ambrose hath the next place, whom he citeth, Ser.
lxvi.4: Si ergo, &c. : " If Peter then be a Rock upon which the
Church is builded, he doth well to heal first the feet; that
even as he doth contain the foundation of faith in the Church,
so in the man he may confirm the foundation of his members."
Of the auctority of this Sermon I will not dispute5. It shall
suffice that Ambrose, in Ps. xxxviii.6, saith : Quod Petro
dicitur, Apostolis dicitur. Non potestatem usurpamus, sed
servimus imperio : " That which is said to Peter is said to
the Apostles. We usurp not power, but we serve under
commandment." By this saying of Ambrose, Peter is so a
Rock and foundation as the other Apostles are ; and not a
Rock to bear all the building himself.
S. Basil is alleged, in Cone, de Pcenit."1: Petrus Petra est,
&c. : " Peter is a Rock through Christ the Rock. For Jesus
giveth His own dignities : He is a Rock, and maketh a Rock."
l [n. 23. c. 800.]
2 [§. 36. col. 903.] 3 [num. 37. c. 904.]
4 [The passage adduced by Sanders occurs in Ser mo xi. in Festo
SS. Apostolorum Petri etPauli: S. Ambros. Opp. Tom. v. col. 141.
Lut. Paris. 1661.]
6 [Its authenticity, however, cannot be so easily admitted. It is
contained in the Appendix to the fifth tome of S. Augustin's works,
(col. 237. ed. Bened.) where it is numbered Sermo cci., olim xxvi., de
Sanctis.] " [Opp. ii. 744.] 1 [Opera Grasca, p. 244. Basil. 1551.]

V.] OF THE POPISH CHURCH. 285
This proveth not Peter to be the only Rock of the militant
Church, as M. Sander would make him.
After him he citeth Hierom, in xvi. Matth.8: utEdificabo
Ecclesiam Meam super te : "I will build My Church upon
thee." " Behold," saith M. Sander, " the Church promised to
be built upon a mortal man." If he say true, Christ saith in
vain that "flesh and blood" made him not Peter. But the
same Hieronym interpreteth that power, there given to Peter,
to pertain to every Bishop and Priest as much as to Peter :
and, Contra Jovinian. Lib. i.9, he writeth : At dicis, Super
Petrum fundatur Ecclesia; licet id ipsum in alio loco super
omnes Apostolos fiat, et cuncti claves regni cozlorum acci-
piant, et ex ozquo super eos Ecclesice fortitudo solidetur :
tamen propterea inter duodecim unus eligitur, ut, capite
constituto, schismatis tollatur occasio: "But thou sayest, The
Church is founded upon Peter ; although in another place the
same is done upon all the Apostles, and they all received the
keys of the kingdom of heaven, and the strength of the Church
is grounded equally upon them : yet for this cause one is
chosen among the twelve, that, the head being appointed,
occasion of division might be taken away." You see now
that Peter is no more a Rock or foundation than the rest ;
neither hath any more auctority of the keys than the rest ;
although, by his judgment, he was chosen to be the chief or
first in order, to avoid strife ; not in dignity, or auctority.
Chrysostom is cited, ex var. in Matth. [locis,] Horn, xxvii.10 :
Princeps, &c: "Peter, Prince of the Apostles, upon whom
8 [Opp. Tom. ix. p. 49.] 9 [Opp. T. ii. p. 35.]
10 [The words cited by Sanders (p. 143.) are these: "Princeps
Apostolorum Petrus, super quem Christus fundavit Ecclesiam, vere
immobilis Petra, et firma confessio ;'' and they are to be met with in a
work which is not genuine. (See Jewel, Vol. iii. pp. 98, 463 : v. 156. ed.
Jelf, Oxf. 1848.) Nothing can be more evident than S. Chrysostom's
denial that the Church was founded upon S. Peter's person; for the
language of this "Prince of interpreters" is: " rfi irerpa . . . tovtco-ti,
rjj mora t^s opoXoyias." (In S. Matth. Horn. liv. Opp. Tom. vii. p.
648. ed. Ben. Compare Barrow, Of the Pope's Supremacy, p. 87.
Lond. 1680.) In the Homily upon S. Peter and Elias, the authen
ticity of which is most uncertain, the following passage may be seen :
"Petrum ilium, Apostolorum Coryphseum, fundamentum immobile,
Petram qua? frangi nequit, Ecclesise Principem," &c. ; (Opp. ii. 731.)
and the spurious Sermon De negatione Petri contains the expressions
"Princeps Apostolorum," " Petram Ecclesiae," &c. (Opp. viii. ii. 138.

286 DISCOVERY OF THE DANGEROUS ROCK [cH.
Christ founded the Church, a very immoveable Rock, and a
strong confession." M. Sander would have us note that Peter
is called "confession;" that when he saith the Church is builded
upon faith and confession, we might understand no man's faith
and confession but Peter's ; as though all the Apostles had
not the same faith, and made not the same confession. But
notwithstanding that Chrysostom doth often acknowledge
Peter to be the Prince of the Apostles, yet he willeth us to
consider that his principality was not of auctority, but of
order : Jam et Mud considera, quam et Petrus agit omnia
ex communi Discipulorum sententia; nihil auctoritate sua,
nihil cum imperio : " Now also consider this, how even Peter
doth all things by the common decree. of the Disciples; nothing
by his own auctority, nothing by commandment." Ex. [In]
Act. Ho. iii.1 Also, in ii. ad Gal.2, he doth not only affirm
that Paul was equal in honour with Peter, but also that all the
rest were of equal dignity : Jamque se cozteris honore parent
ostendit ; nee se reliquis illis, sed ipsi summo3 comparat ;
declarans quod horum unusquisque parem sortitus sit dig
nitatem : " And now Paul sheweth himself equal in honour
with the rest ; neither doth he compare himself with the rest,
but even with the highest himself; declaring that every one of
them hath obtained equal dignity."
Now followeth Epiphanius, in Anchor.*: Ipse Dominus,
&c. : " The Lord Himself did constitute him chief of the Apos
tles ; a sure Rock upon which the Church of God is built ;
and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it. Now the
gates of hell are heresies and auctors of heresies. For by
Conf. pag. 9.) Barrow (ubi sup.) has inadvertently adduced an extract
from the first fictitious Sermo in Pentecosten : (Opp. iii. 790.) and with
respect to the Power of the keys, when S. Chrysostom had stated that
it was granted not to S. Peter only, but to the rest of the Apostles, the
Jesuit Petrus Possinus has taken care to add the surreptitious words
" successoribusque suis." (Catena Grcecorum Patrum in S. Matth. Tom.
i. p. 232. Cf. Barlow's Brutum Fulmen, pp. 79 — 80. Lond. 1681.)]
i [Opp. Tom. ix. p. 23.] 2 [Tom. x. pp. 684—5.]
• [" Coryphaeo ;" which is the term employed by some of the
Fathers, when they attribute to S. Peter a primacy of order.]
* [§. ix. Opp. Tom. ii. p. 14. Paris. 1622. There is nothing in the
original equivalent to the words " Ipse Dominus constituit eum," which
Sanders has quoted, following the version by Janus Cornarius. p. 364.
Basil. 1578.]

V.] OF THE POPISH CHURCH. 287
all means faith in him was established, which received the
key of heaven." That Peter was chief of the Apostles in
order we strive not : that he was a sure Rock we grant : but
that he alone was the Rock of the Church we deny. The
same Epiphanius acknowledgeth the Bishop of Rome to be
fellow-minister with every Bishop, and no better ; and there
fore, setting forth the Epistle of Marcellus to Julius Bishop of
Rome', he giveth this superscription: Beatissimo comminis-
tro Julio, Marcellus in Domino gaudium : " To his most
blessed fellow-minister Julius, Marcellus wisheth joy in the
Lord." The place of Cyrillus which followeth I have set down
and answered in the chapter before.
After him Theodoretus6 allegeth Psellus: In Petro, &c. :
"In Peter, the Prince of the Apostles, our Lord in the Gospels
hath promised that He will build His Church." Damascen7
and Euthymius8, later writers, are alleged to the like effect.
All which prove nothing but that Peter is a Rock, which we
confess ; as every one of the Apostles is.
Then followeth Augustin in his Retractations9 ; which
leaveth it to the choice of the reader, whether he will under
stand Peter, figuring the person of the Church, to be the
Rock spoken of by Christ, or Christ whom he confessed.
But that Peter, as Bishop of Rome, should be the Rock, he
saith nothing. Again, leaving it to the reader's choice, he
sheweth he had no such persuasion of the Rock of the Church
as M. Sander teacheth.
6 [Hceres. lxxii. Opp. p. 271. ed. Cornar.]
6 [In Cantic. Canticorum: Opp. Tom. i. p. 349. Colon. Agripp.
1573. The genuineness of this Commentary is doubted by many
critics. Vid. Cavei Hist. Lit. i. 407. Oxon. 1740. Fabricii Biblioth.
Grme. Vol. viii. p. 283. Hamb. 1802. Acta Eruditorum, Supplem.
Tom. ii. Lipsiae, 1696. p. 418.]
' [Sanders has alleged the Historia SS. Barlaami et Josaphati, of
which Raynaud remarks that "supposita videtur." (Erotemata, p. 137.
Lugd. 1653.) It is true that the Roman Martyrology (die Novemb.
27.) ascribes the work to Damascen ; but Raderus maintains that Jo
annes Sabaita was the author. See his Isagoge to the Scala Paradisi
of Climacus, sig. e ij. Lut. Paris. 1633. Cf. Fabricii Bill. Eccles. ad
Sigeb. Gemblac. Cap. 75. p. 102. Hamb. 1718.]
8 [Vid. Euthymii Zigabeni Comment, in Evangel. Tom. i. P. ii.
p. 650. Lipsia;, 1792.]
9 [Lib. i. Cap. xxi. Opp. Tom. i. col. 23.]

288 DISCOVERY OF THE DANGEROUS ROCK [cH.
After him Prosper Aquitanicus, and Leo with Gregory,
two Bishops of Rome, say nothing but that Peter was a
Rock ; which we grant without controversy.
Last of all the Council of Chalcedon is cited, Act. iii.1 :
Petrus Apostolus est Petra et crepido Ecclesice: "Peter
the Apostle is a Rock and a shore2 of the Church ;" which
M. Sander translateth " the top of the Church." Indeed the
Legates of the Bishop of Rome uttered such words; which may
be well understood, as all the rest of the Fathers, that Peter
was one of the twelve foundations of the Church. But that
the Council acknowledged not the Bishop of Rome to have
such authority as is pretended, appeareth by the sixteenth
Action of the Chalcedon Council3; where, notwithstanding the
Bishop of Rome's Legates4 reclaimed, and Leo himself refused
to consent, yet by the whole Council it was determined that
1 [Concill. Gen. Tom. ii. p. 244. Romse, 1609.]
2 [Or support. The word is " np-qnis," fundamentum.]
8 [Concilia Generalia, ii. 420. Dionysius Exiguus has not inserted
the twenty-eighth Canon of this Council in his Codex, (p. 133. ed. Lut.
Paris. 1609.) lest he should injure the papal assumption of pre
eminence. Gratian has attempted to accomplish his purpose in
another way, viz. by shameless corruption of the text : for whereas in
the original we find " opi£opev," " deflaimus," he has adopted the term
"petimus." Instead of "senior Roma," the rendering of " wpta^vripa
'Pwprj," he has " superior Roma." Thirdly, in order to depress Con
stantinople, which, according to the Decree, was to have " laa irpeo-(2eia,"
" oequalia privilegia," with Rome, Gratian introduces the word "similia:"
and lastly, in direct opposition to the Canon which ordains, "km iv rois
iKKXrjo-iao-TiKois," that "even in ecclesiastical matters" Constantinople
should be honoured like imperial Rome, he boldly puts forward the
reading " non tamen in ecclesiasticis rebus." (Dist. xxii. Canon Reno-
vantes, Cap. vi.)]
4 [Petrus de Marca, Abp. of Paris, (De concord. Sacerd. fy Imper.
Tom. ii. p. 29. Par. 1669.) has pointed out a, memorable instance of
falsification in the " Sententia" of the papal Legate Paschasinus. The
words " Caput universalis Ecclesia?,'' applied to Pope Leo, and also the
expressions " Petri Apostoli praeditus dignitate," are not to be found in
the Greek. Compare the passage as given by Crabbe, (Concill. i. 945. Co
lon. Agr. 1551.) in what he calls the "Epistola Paschasini et aliorum,"
with his own Latin text of the third Act of the Chalcedonian Council ;
(p. 847.) and also the " Exemplar Sententinc," transmitted by S. Leo to
the Bishops of France, (Opp. i. 301. Lugd. 1700.) with the original
Greek in Sirmondus (Concill. ii. 244.) and Binius. (Tom. ii. P. i.
p. 192.)]

V.] OF THE POPISH CHURCH. 2S9
the Archbishop of Constantinople should have equal authority
with the Archbishop of Rome in the East ; only the title of
priority or seniority reserved to the Bishop of Rome5.
To conclude, M. Jewell said truly, for all M. Sander's
vain and childish insulting and impudent railing, that no mor
tal man, but Christ only, is the Rock and foundation of the
Church : albeit that Peter and all the Apostles, in respect of
their office and doctrine, were foundation-stones whereon the
Church was builded ; Jesus Christ being the corner-stone, and
only one general foundation.
THE SIXTH CHAPTER.
Sander. The divers reasons which the Fathers bring to declare Sander.
why S. Peter was this Rock do evidently shew, that he was most lite
rally this Rock, whereupon Christ would build His Church. How Peter
leareth the person of the Church.
Fulke. That he was a Stone or Rock whereon the Fulke.
Church is builded hath been often granted ; but that he only
was such a Stone is still denied. First, Basil, adversus Euno.
•Lib. ii.6, is cited, with his reason : Petrus, &c. : " Peter re
ceived the building of the Church upon himself, for the ex
cellency of his faith." I answer, so did the other Apostles, for
the excellency of their faith ; for continuance whereof Christ
prayed, as well as for Peter's faith. John xvii.
The second, Hilary, de Trinit. Lib. vi.7, saith : Superemi-
6 [Though the Pope might possess a primacy of order and pre
cedency, he had not that of jurisdiction or monarchical power. In
the last Act of the Council of Chalcedon, two corruptions may be
noted in the Latin text. First, where the judges declared that, ac
cording to the Canons, the Archbishop of ancient Rome was to have
the first place among other Prelates, (rrpo navrav pkv ra wpoiTeia, " the
primacy before all others,") the Latin falsely attributes to him " omnem
primatum." Again, when the Legate Lucentius affirmed, that the
Apostolic throne commanded that all things should be done in the
presence of the deputies, (ripav irapovrmv iravTa Trpo-Treo-Qai,) the translator
thus perverts his statement : " Sedes Apostolica nobis prsesentibus
himiliari non debet." (Concilia Generalia, ii. 430, 431. Romse, 1609.
See Comber's Church History cleared from Roman Forgeries, pp. Ill —
12. Lond. 1695.)]
6 [Conf. Coccii Thesaur. Cathol. Tom. i. p. 800.]
1 [Opp. col. 904. ed. Bened. — If Romanists had any ground for
believing S. Hilary to be on their side, they would not have en-
r i 19
[FULKE, II. J

290 DISCOVERY OF THE DANGEROUS ROCK [dL
nentem, &c. : " Peter, by confession of his blessed faith,
deserved an exceeding glory." And so did the rest of the
Apostles, by their confession of their blessed faith, obtain an
exceeding or passing glory, ultra humanoz infirmitatis mo-
dum, " beyond the measure of man's infirmity :" which words
also Hilary hath, lest you should think he preferreth
Peter in auctority before the other Apostles. For Peter's
faith and confession he did before interpret to be the Rock of
the Church ; which, because it was common to all the Apostles,
he maketh their authority equal x : Vos, O sancti et beati viri,
[et] ob fidei vestrce meritum claves regni cozlorum sortiti,
et ligandi atque [al. ac] solvendi in cozlo et in terra jus
adepti ! " 0 you holy and blessed men, which for the wor
thiness of your faith have obtained the keys of the kingdom
of heaven, and have attained to auctority to bind and loose
in heaven and in earth ! " And if you urge that Peter spake,
when all the rest held their peace, yet is that primacy
but of order, not of authority: for they all believed as Peter
confessed ; and Peter confessed in the name of all the rest.
The third, Cyprian, ad Jubaianum2 : Ecclesia, quoz est
una, &c. : "The Church, which is one, is founded by our
Lord's voice upon one which hath received the keys of it."
This reason, saith he, can bear but one such Rock; for if there
were more Rocks at once, there should be more Churches.
But it is reason that Cyprian should expound himself, which
by founding meaneth the beginning of the foundation, as he
saith, De simplicitate Prozlat? : Loquitur Dominus ad Pe-
deavoured to suppress his evidence. When he had declared, (De
Trin. Lib. ii. §. 23.) "Unum igitur hoc est immobile f undamentum ;
una hteo felix fidei Petra, Petri ore confessa, 'Tu es Filius Dei vivi,'"
Erasmus felt authorised to insert this marginal note : '• Petram inter-
pretatur ipsam fidei professionem. ;" and (in S. Matth. xvi. 18.) cited S.
Augustin also to justify the assertion contained in the margin, viz.
"Ecclesia non est fundata super Petrum." However, the Spanish
Inquisitors, in defianoe of the judgment of S. Hilary and S. Augustin,
have sentenced to extermination both the text and margin of Eras
mus. See Bp. Barlow's Bruium Fulmen, p. 38. Index libror. prohib. et
expurg. edit. 1667. p. 289.]
i [col. 901.] 2 [Epist. Ixxiii. edit. Fell. p. 203.]
s [Fulke quotes this important passage as it is found in the old
editions, Venet. 1547; Lugd. 1550. After the words "Pasce oves
Meas" Bishop Fell (Opp. 107.) inserts the sentence, "Super unum

VI.] OF THE POPISH CHURCH. 291
trum, &c. : " The Lord speaketh to Peter, * I say to thee,'
saith He, 'that thou art Peter; and upon this Rock I will
build My Church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail
against it. To thee will I give the keys of the kingdom of
heaven ; and whatsoever thou shalt bind upon earth shall be
bound in heaven ; and whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth
shall be loosed in heaven.' And to the same after His resur
rection He saith, ' Feed My sheep.' And although He giveth
to all His Apostles after His resurrection equal power, and
saith, ' As My Father hath sent Me, so also do I send you :'
' Receive the Holy Ghost : ' ' Whose sins you forgive, they shall
be forgiven; and whose sins you retain, they shall be retained ;'
yet, that He might shew the unity by His authority, He dis
posed the beginning of the same unity, beginning at one.
For verily the rest of the Apostles were even the same
thing that Peter was ; endued with equal fellowship both of
honour and of power : but the beginning proceedeth from
unity, that the Church might be shewed to be one." Thus
far Cyprian : by which we see that there is but one begin
ning ; yet all the Apostles are equal. This unity of beginning
of building Tertullian also, Lib. de Pudic.4, sheweth to have
been in Peter, when he was the first that preached after the
ascension of Christ.
The fourth, Augustin, Horn, de Pastoribus5 : Dominus,
&c. : "Our Lord hath commended unity in Peter himself. There
were many Apostles; and it is said to one, ' Feed My sheep'."
Here he will have Peter to represent Christ, the only good
Shepherd : although the words import no such thing ; but only
a mystery of unity, which is but frivolously gathered by the
author of that book or homily, untruly ascribed to S. Augus
tin6 : where yet he will not have Peter to be the head ; but
to bear a figure of the body of Christ, which is the Church.
Whereupon his words follow soon after: Nam et ipsum Petrum,
ledificat Ecclesiam Suam," which appears in Gratian's Decretum also,
an unexceptionable witness against the interpolations in this treatise.
(Caus. xxiv. Qu. i. Cap. xviii.) See before, p. 283; and cf. Polani
Syllog. Tim. Theol. Par. ii. p. 380. Basil. 1601.]
4 [Vide supra, p. 282.]
6 [De Scripturis Sermo xlvi. Tom. v. col. 169. ed. Ben. Amst.]
0 [ThiB Homily on part of Ezek. xxxiv. is not spurious. See Calf
hill, page 67. ed. Parker Soc.]
19—2

292 DISCOVERY OF THE DANGEROUS ROCK [cH.
cui commendavit1 oves Suas, quasi alter alteri, unum Secum
facere volebat ; ut sic ei oves commendaret, ut esset Ille Caput,
ille figuram corporis portaret, id est Ecclesice; et tanquam
sponsus et sponsa, essent duo in carne una : " For He would
make even Peter, to whom He commended His sheep, as one to
another, one with Himself; that He might so commend His
sheep to him, that He Himself might be the Head, and Peter
might bear the figure of His body, that is, of His Church; and
so they might be as the bridegroom and his spouse, two in
one flesh." These words shew how vain M. Sander's collec
tion is for Peter's headship ; beside that he citeth the words
otherwise than they are in the author, even as his note-book
served him.
The fifth reason is uttered by Hierom, adversus Jovinia-
num, Lib. i.2, answering the objection of Jovinian, and intend
ing to prove that John the virgin was as excellent as Peter
the married man : At dicis, &c. : " But thou sayest, The
Church is built upon Peter ; albeit the self-same thing in
another place be done upon all the Apostles, and all do re
ceive the keys of the kingdom of heaven, and the strength of
the Church be grounded equally upon them : yet therefore
one is chosen among twelve, that, a head being made, the
occasion of schism may be taken away 3."
Here he would have three things to be noted. First,
" that the Church is so built upon Peter the Rock, that in the
same place where it is built upon Peter, the like is not done
1 [MSS. commendabat.] 2 [See before, p. 285.]
3 [S. Jerom in continuation asks, " Sed cur non Joannes electus
est virgo?" and he replies, "^Etati delatum est; quia Petrus senior,
erat." Baronius (ad an. xxxii. num. vi.) has cited this passage. He
had, however, on a previous occasion (ad an. xxxi. §. xxiv.) unfor
tunately used the following language : " Ex his apparet quam turpiter
errent, qui primatum putant Petro collatum quod senior ceteris esset."
S. Jerom therefore, in the opinion of this Cardinal, has fallen into " a
shameful error" relative to S. Peter's primacy. But the matter does
not end here: for Hen. Spondanus, who epitomised the Annals of
Baronius, denies that any deference was shewn to S. Peter's age, "ut
hceretici contendunt." (p. 16. Mogunt. 1618.) Consequently this writer,1
disfiguring the statement of his author, declares that S. Jerom was an
heretic! — "En dignum Censorem, qui inter Romance vel Hispanicse
Inquisitionis tortores cooptetur." (Casauboni Exercitt. p. 257. Lond.
1614.)]

VI.] OF THE POPISH CHURCH. 293
upon the other Apostles." But seeing he himself before urged
the future tense, "I will build," this collection is false. Christ
promiseth that He will build His Church upon Peter; but
when He buildeth, He useth all the Apostles as well as Peter.
Secondly, " that the Church is equally built upon all the
Apostles." Therefore not more on Peter than on the rest.
Thirdly, " that one is chosen head, to avoid schism."
But "if all be equal," he asketh "how one may be head ?"
I answer, even as the foreman of the jury in some respects is
chief, and yet they are all equal. But he answereth, " They
are equal in authority as Apostles, but not as Bishops." But
seeing the office of every Apostle is above the office of every
Bishop, it will follow that every Apostle, as Apostle, is above
Peter as Bishop of Rome ; which were a perilous matter for
Master Sander to admit. Howbeit, concerning this distinction
of his, more is to be said in a more proper place. In the
mean time he urgeth, that Peter was chosen of Christ to be
head, to avoid strife and schism : which reason, seeing it hold
eth always, there ought always one head to be chosen to be
a head and perpetual Rock, by succession. I answer, the
reason of avoiding schisms may gain so much, that in every
Church, such as the first of the Apostles was, such an head
for such purpose may be chosen : but it will not enforce one
head, being a mortal man, over all the Church, which no one
man can keep in unity. And how convenient the headship of
the Romish Church is to avoid schisms, let so many schisms as
have been made even for the attaining of the same headship
bear witness : whereof one continued thirty-nine years.
As for Leo, Bishop of Rome, it is well known he was
too much addict to maintain the dignity of his see ; and yet
he was far from the tyranny which the later Bishops usurped
and practised, under pretence of Peter's Supremacy. His
words are cited, in Ann. Ass. Ser. iii.4 : Super hoc Saxum,
* [Opp. Tom. i. p. 53. Lugd. 1700. The words ''hoe Saxum'' and
" soliditatem," adduced by Sanders, are not to be found in the original.
Besides, in the end of bis extract he omits "Fidei," and inserts
"Rock.." By these means S. Leo's teaching is basely misrepresented :
for, according to him, tho height of the Church was to rise upon the
firmness of the Faith. (" in hujus Fidei- firmitate,") and not upon the
qtrongth of S. Peter's person. Ho proceeds to say, " This confession,
the gates of hell shall not master, the bands of death shall not bind i

294 DISCOVERY OF THE DANGEROUS ROCK [cH.
&c. : " Upon this Stone, this soundness and strength, I will
build an everlasting temple ; and the height of My Church,
which is to reach to heaven, shall rise in the strength of this
Rock." A great extolling of Peter, usual to the Bishops of
Rome : but yet no more is said of him than may be truly said
upon every one of the Apostles.
The sixth reason is uttered by Augustin, Ep. clxv.1 :
Petro, totius Ecclesice figuram, &c: "Our Lord said to Peter,
bearing the figure of the whole Church, ' Upon this Rock I will
build My Church'." And again, in Joan. Tr. cxxiv.2: Ecclesice,
&c. : " Peter the Apostle, by a generality that was figured,
did bear the person of the Church, by reason of the primacy
of his Apostleship." Here he maketh much ado about his
primacy, by reason whereof he beareth the figure of all the
Church ; willing to infer, that because he was Primate of the
Apostles, and in respect of his primacy represented the whole
Church, therefore he was sovereign ruler and general officer
of the whole militant Church3- But it followeth not, that
every one which is made an attorney or proxy, to receive a
thing for a whole commonalty, is thereby made general ruler
of all that commonalty.
The Papists themselves4, in the Council of Basil, discharge
for that word is the word of life :" " Hanc confessionem portas infer!
non tenebunt, mortis vincula non ligabunt ; vox enim ista vox vitae
est."] 1 [al. liii. Opp. Tom. ii. 91. Fortunati, Alypii, et S. Aug. Ep. ad
Generosum.] 2 [Opp. Tom. iii. P. ii. col. 599. — S. Augustin's interpretation of
the Rock is made known in the sentences subjoined : " Ideo quippe
ait Dominus, ' Super hanc Petram sedificabo Ecclesiam Meam,' quia
dixerat Petrus, ' Tu es Christus, Filius Dei vivi.' Super hanc ergo,
inquit, Petram, quam confessus es, sedificabo Ecclesiam Meam. Petra
enim erat Christus : super quod fundamentum etiam ipse sedificatus
est Petrus. ' Fundamentum quippe aliud nemo potest ponere, prseter
id quod positum est, quod est Christus Jesus.' "]
s [With reference to this point, see the first four chapters of the
Jesuit Fitzherbert's Obmutesce to the Ephphatha ofD. Collins: ed. an.
1621.] 4 [The treatise in question, proving the superiority of a General
Council to a Pope, cannot with accuracy be attributed to a " Papist."
It is extant in the Appendix or " Farrago" of documents annexed by
Crabbe to the Acts of the Synod of Basil. (Vid. Tom. iii. 303. Colon.
Agr. 1651.)]

VI.] OF THE POPISH CHURCH. 295
us of this conclusion ; where they agree to the sentence of
John, Patriarch of Antiochia, which citeth Augustin5 to wit
ness that Peter received the keys as minister of the Church.
And Augustin writeth, De Agone Christ. Cap. xxx.6 : Non
enim sine causa inter omnes Apostolos hujus Ecclesice Catho*
licce personam sustinet Petrus : hide enim Ecclesioz clavis
[claves] regni cozlorum datoz sunt, [cum Petro datce sunt.]
Et cum ei dicitur, ad omnes dicitur, Amas Me ? Pasce oves
Meas : " For not without cause among all the Apostles Peter
sustaineth the person of this Catholic Church : for to this
Church the keys of the kingdom of heaven are given. And
when it is said unto him, it is said to all, ' Dost thou love
Me?' 'Feed My sheep.'"
By this sentence it is plain that Christ, after Augustin's
mind, preferred not Peter in power before all the rest ; but to
receive equal power with the rest, he made him as it were
the attorney of the rest. So that, all these reasons duly con
sidered, the sayings of the Doctors, which affirm Peter to be a
Rock or Stone on which the Church is builded, do not prove
that he was an only foundation of the whole Church : but with
the rest of the Apostles he was one, and the first, of the twelve
stones whereon the Church was founded ; and that in respect
of his office and doctrine, not of his person, as he was a mor
tal man.
THE SEVENTH CHAPTER.
Sander. The authorities alleged by M. Jewell7, to prove that Sandee.
Peter was not this Rock, prove against himself that Peter was this Rock;
although they prove that there was another kind of Rock also beside
him ; which thing we deny not.
Fulke. The first authority is Gregorius Nyssenus, in Fulke.,
he. Vet. Test.8 : " ' Thou art Peter; and upon this Rock I will
6 [Whose testimony is inserted in the Canon Law. (Deer. ii. Par.
Caus. xxiv. Qu. i. C. vi.)]
6 [Opp. Tom. vi. col. 190. Cf. Fitzherbert, ut sup. p. 98.]
1 [Works, Part i. p. 340. ed. Parker Soc.]
8 [Opp. Tom. i. p. 994. Paris. 1615. It is almost universally be
lieved, that the Testimonia adversus Judaios here referred to are not
an authentic composition. Of this opinion were Cave, (Hist. Lit. i.
245. Oxon. 1740.) Scultetus, (Medull. Theol. Patt. Syntag. p. 888.

296 DISCOVERY OF THE DANGEROUS ROCK [cH.
build My Church.' He meaneth the confession of Christ:
for he had said before, ' Thou art Christ, the Son of the hving
God'." M. Sander replieth, that it is neither said, " that Peter
was not this Rock," nor "that Christ was this Rock," but that
the confession of Peter was the Rock, which he granteth ; and
therefore Peter much rather must be the Rock : for his con
fession, " which cometh from his soul and heart, as from a
fountain or spring," is greater than the act of confession.
First, I deny his argument : because Peter's confession came
neither from his soul nor heart, but from God, which revealed
the truth unto him, as Christ saith, " Flesh and blood," &c.
Secondly I say, Gregory meaneth by Peter's confession Him
which Peter confessed; namely Christ, which is the only Rock
of the Church, whereon the whole Church is builded ; as his
words do sound : "for he had said before, ' Thou art Christ,' "
&c. But M. Sander, reasoning like a learned Clerk, findeth
fault with M. Jewell's argument, comparing it to this : " There
cometh eloquence from a man, but he is not eloquent :" " Pe
ter's confession is the Rock ; therefore Peter is not the Rock."
Would a man think that a Doctor in Divinity should either be
so ignorant in the art of reasoning, or so impudent in pervert
ing a good reason, that a very child might reprove either
the one or the other? I appeal to logicians, whether this
reason of M. Jewell's, The Rock cometh from Peter by con-
Francof. 1634.) Oudin, (Comment, i. 601. Lips. 1722.) Hottinger, (Dis-
sertt. miscell. Pent. p. 81. Tiguri, 1654.) Rivetus, (Crit. Sacr. iii. xxiii.
p. 350. Genev. 1642.) and Du Pin. (Eccl. Hist. i. 261. Dubl. 1723.)
Their argument against the genuineness of the treatise is, that S.
Chrysostom is herein cited : but this difficulty was entirely removed
by the Vatican librarian Zacagnius, who, in the year 1698, first pub
lished the original Greek text, with four new chapters which complete
the work. (Coll. Monum. vet. pp. 288 — 329.) He has made it mani
fest that the compilation consists of twenty-two chapters : but of these
only eighteen were translated from an imperfect manuscript by the
former editor Laurentius Siphanus ; who, when he came to the spurious
addition, complains in the margin, (Opp. i. 992.) that his author in
very many places "foedissime corruptus et mutilatus est." It is in
this " pannus Nysseni operi assutus'' that the mention of S. Chrysostom
is found, as well as the sentence alleged by Bishop Jewell, which is
hence deprived of all validity. Vid. Zacag. p. 326. not. 3. ; et Prcefat-
pp. xxxviii — ix.]

VII.] OF THE POPISH CHURCH. 297
fession ; ergo, Peter is not the Rock, be like this argument,
Eloquence cometh from Cicero ; therefore Cicero is not elo
quence ; and not, as M. Sander inferreth, ergo, Cicero is not
eloquent. But he hath another example : " A man's oration
js eloquent ; therefore the man himself is eloquent : so Peter's
confession is the Rock ; therefore Peter himself is the Rock."
I deny the resemblance ; for there is resembled the adjective
in the one, and the substantive in the other. But thus he
should compare them : Tully's defence of Milo is an eloquent
oration ; therefore Tully is an eloquent oration. Which rea
soning is no more absurd than this of M. Sander : Peter's
ponfession is the Rock ; therefore Peter is the Rock. Con
trariwise you may reason : Peter's confession was the Rock ;
therefore Peter was rocky or stony.
The second authority is Hilary : Hozc unq_ est, &c. : " This
is that only blessed Rock of faith, that Peter confessed with
his mouth." M. Sander cavilleth, that this is not spoken
upon the words said to Peter, but upon the words spoken by
Peter. But beside that the whole context of the place is
against him, both in that Lib. ii. De Trinit.1, and also Lib. vi.2,
Super hanc confessionis Petram Ecclesice ozdificatio est,
" Upon this Rock of confession is the building of the Church,"
which M. Sander would avoid by bringing in of two Rocks,
Christ and Peter, the particle exclusive shutteth him clean
out of the doors ; for Hilary saith not, that Christ is a Rock,
but that He is the only Rock. Therefore this is but one
Rock, and one building; and not, as M. Sander saith, two
Rocks, and two buildings ; for as well he might say two
Churches. Now where Hilary upon Matthew3 acknowledgeth
Peter to be a Rock and foundation of the Church, it is an
swered before, that he was one of the twelve foundations
spoken of Apoc. xxi. in a far other meaning than Christ is
the only Rock.
The third authority is Cyrillus, Dial. iv. de Trini.4 : " The
Rock is nothing else but the strong and assured faith of the
Disciple." "This," saith M. Sander, " is that I would have :"
for this Disciple was S. Peter ; and the Rock here spoken of is
nothing else but S. Peter's faith : therefore it is not Christ.
Nay, rather, the Rock is nothing but S. Peter's faith : there-
l [$. 23. col. 800.] 2 [§• 36. c. 903.]
3 [Cap. xvi. n. 7. col. 690.] 4 [Opp. v. i. 507. Paris. 1638.]

298 DISCOVERY OF THE DANGEROUS ROCK [cH.
fore it is not his person, and so no mortal man. For those
words, " nothing but Peter's faith," do not exclude Christ ; be
cause faith cannot be without necessary relation unto Christ :
but they exclude the person of Peter as a mortal man ; be
cause flesh and blood revealed not this confession unto him,
but the heavenly Father.
The fourth authority is Chrysostom1 : "Upon this Rock,
that is, upon this faith and this confession, I will build My
Church." M. Sander saith, " He that believed and confessed
was Peter, and not Christ : " ergo, the Rock is Peter, and not
Christ. Although this argument have no consequence in the
world, yet, to admit that it doth follow, I will reply thus:
But he that believed and confessed was not Peter only : there
fore Peter only was not this Rock.
The fifth is Aug. De verbis Dom? : " Christ was the Rock,
upon which foundation Peter himself was also built." M.
Sander asketh, if one Rock may not be built upon another,
as Peter upon Christ? Yes, verily; but Peter none otherwise
than the rest of the Apostles, who were all foundation-stones,
laid upon the great Corner-stone, or only Foundation-rock,
Jesus Christ.
S. Augustin3 again addeth in Christ's person : " I will
not build Myself upon thee, but I will build thee upon Me."
M. Sander, following the allegory of building, confesseth that
Christ is the first and greatest Stone ; upon which by all pro
portion the second stone that should be laid must be greatest
that can be gotten next the first. If this be so, it is marvel
the Angel, which shewed unto John the building of the
heavenly Jerusalem, shewed him not this second stone by
itself, but the twelve stones lying equally one by another
upon the main foundation. Apo. xxi. Whereby we see that
M. Sander uttereth nothing but the visions of his own head.
The sixth is Origenes, in fourth sentence, [second sense4,]
in xvi. Mat.5: " He is the Rock, whosoever is the disciple of
Christ." M. Sander reciteth this sense as not literal : and see-
1 [Opp. Tom. vii. p. 648. See note 10, p. 285.]
2 [In Joan. Evang. Cap. xxi. Tract, cxxiv. Opp. T. iii. P. ii.
col. 599.]
3 [Serm. Ixxvi. de verb. Evang. Matth. xiv. Cap. i. Opp. T. v. c. 290.]
4 [See page 273.]
6 [Commentar. i. 275. ed. Huet.]

VIL] OF THE POPISH CHURCH. 299
ing Peter is a Disciple, and the first, he will prove Peter, next
to Christ, to be the chief Rock. Indeed, according to this
sense, it must needs be that Peter is one principal Rock,
among so many thousand Rocks : but because he is named first
in the catalogue of the Apostles, it is a sorry reason to make
him so to excel, that he is one Rock that beareth all the rest.
But M. Jewell is frantic in M. Sander's opinion; that, denying
any mortal man to be this Rock, now proveth every mortal
man that is Christ's disciple to be this Rock. Nay, rather,
M. Sander is brain-sick, that cannot understand this reason :
Every Christian is such a Rock as Peter was : therefore Peter
in being a Rock was not made Pope, or head of the universal
Church. Origenes proceedeth: "Upon such a Rock all eccle
siastical learning is built." " But S. Peter is such a Rock,"
(saith Master Sander:) "ergo, upon him all ecclesiastical learn
ing is built. Who would wish such an adversary as M. Jewell
is, who proveth altogether against himself?" Nay, who can
bear such an impudent caviller, that findeth a knot in a rush6?
For your conclusion is granted, M. Sander, that all ecclesi
astical learning is built upon S. Peter : but so it is built upon
every true disciple of Christ, by Origen's judgment.
Again Origen saith7: "If thou think that the whole
Church is built only upon Peter, what then wilt thou say
of John, the son of thunder, and of every of the Apostles ?"
First, M. Sander chargeth the Bishop for leaving out in
English this word ilium, so that he should have said " upon
that Peter;" whereby he accuseth him to deny that Peter is a
Rock; which is an impudent lie. Secondly, when this au
thority doth utterly overthrow his whole building of the
popish Rock, he can say nothing but that John was a mortal
man; and so were all the Apostles as well as Peter: therefore
M. Jewell said not truly, that the old Fathers have written
" not any mortal man, but Christ Himself, to be this Rock,"
when John and all the Apostles be Rocks : as though there
were no difference between the only foundation and Rock of
the whole Church, which is Christ, and all the other stones
that are built upon it.
Last of all Origen saith8: "Shall we dare to say that
6 ["Nodum in scirpo quaeris." (Erasmi Adagia, fol. xxxviii. Ar
gent. 1510.)]
» [See before, pp. 282-3.] 8 [loc. sup. cit.]

300 DISCOVERY OF THE DANGEROUS ROCK [cH.
the gates of hell shall not prevail only against Peter ? or are
the keys of the kingdom of heaven given only to Peter?"
M. Sander answereth, " It is enough that the gates of hell
shall least of all prevail against Peter : he hath chiefly the
keys of heaven." But what reason hath he for this impudent
assertion ? " Peter of all the Apostles first confessed in the
name of the whole Church." Admit this were true, as it can
never be proved, that this was the first time that any of the
Apostles confessed Christ ; yet no primacy of superiority is
hereby gained, if the sentence, as Origen expounded it, per
taineth to every faithful disciple. What advantage M Sander
hath taken of the Bishop's allegations, let the readers judge.

THE EIGHTH CHAPTER.
SENDEE. Saader. The conclusion of the former discourse, and the order
of the other which followeth.
Fulke. Fulke. The conclusion consisteth of seven points. In
the first he repeateth what he would have men think he hath
gained in his former discourse, concerning Peter to be the
Rock of the Church whereon it is built.
In the second, for continuance of the building promised,
"there must be always some mortal man ; which, being made
the same Rock by election, and afterward by revelation,
should make the same confession, whensoever he is demanded
or consulted in matters of rehgion." If this were true, there
were no necessity of the holy .Scriptures: neither yet of Synods
and Councils ; if one Pope were able to resolve all the de
mands moved by all men of the world.
In the third he sayeth, " If there must be some such one
Rock, it is not possible it should be any other but the Bishop
of Rome." First, because he alone hath been the first and
chief in all assemblies. Secondly, be only sitteth in Peter's
chair. Thirdly, and the consent of the world hath taken
him so, ever indeed ; but by the adversaries'1 confession above
a thousand years. But, God be thanked, the Church hath no
need of any such Rock : neither is any such taught Ephe.
the fourth; where the order of the building thereof, and of all
necessary builders of faith and doctrine, are fully set forth.

VIK.] OF THE POPISH CHURCH. 301
And the three reasons are all false, in manner and form as
they are universally set down, as in their proper places shall
be showed. In tho fourth he glorieth, that he hath chosen to prove
that point which of all othor is most hard, "that all the
Apostles were not the samo thing that Peter was." And first
he will ask, " in what Gospel or holy Scripture it is written,
that every othor Apostle was tho samo Rock which Saint Mat
thew testifieth Saint Peter to have boon?" I answer, not only
by necessary collection out of many places of Scripture, which
he himself acknowledged to be tho literal sense as well as
that which followeth the sound of words, it is proved, but
also in plain words of Saint Paul, Ephe. the second, verse 20 ;
whore the Church is " builded upon tho foundation of the
Apostles and Prophots, Jesus Christ being tho head corner
stone :" and Apo. xxi. verso 14 ; where the twelve precious
stones, the foundations of tho wall of the city, had on them
" tho names of the twelve Apostles of the Lamb."
The fifth is either thus, or nothing at all ; for it is not
noted in him as the othor be : If Cyprian or Hierom were
alleged for this equality, " it were sufficient for him to say
they were no Evangelists ; for he sheweth it written, ' Thou
shalt be called Cephas1,' and ' Thou art Peter'." You see these
1 [The Jesuit Nicolaus Serarius (Cumin, in lib. Maehab. &c. p. 599.
Mogunt. 1600.) conceivos, that in this Syrian name there was a "sua-
vis allusio" to tho Creole word Kf</)aX?; ; and this interpretation is
sanctioned by many pontifical authorities. For example, Pope Inno
cent III. alUrius, that " licet Cephas socundum unam linguam intorpre-
tatur l'otrus, secundum alteram exponitur Caput;" (J)e. sacro Altaris
mytterio, Lib. i. Cap. viii. fol. fi. Lips. 15.S4.) and olsowhero in similar
language, "Tn vocalioris Cephas; quod etui Petrus interprotatur, Caput
tamen oxponitur." (Innoc. I*. III. EpiM. Ihcret.. Lib. ii. p. 514. Colon,
Agripp. 1606.) The third spurious Epistlo of Anaelotus, who was
Bishop of Homo toward the end of tho lirst century, is professedly the
most ancient evidence on behalf of this supposed derivation; (Blon-
Ad\iPaeu.do-hid. p. 13!). gee Bp. Ridley's Works, p. 180. ed. Parker
Sue.) and of course Gratian avails himself of a testimony so simple
and conclusive as " Cephas, id est Caput et principium." (Dist. xxii.
Oap. ii.) It is remarkable that Uurehard and \vo(l)ecrel. Par. v. Cap.
269.) givo tho passage thus: " ut roli«|uis omnibus prcoessct Apostolis
Cephas; id est, ut Petrus prineipatum tenoret Apostulatus :" but Tur-
rian endeavours to defend tbo Pseudo-Anneletus against the Centu-
l'iators. (Ada. M<uj<kburg. Cent. Lib. ii. Cap. iii. Plorent. 1572.) S.

302 DISCOVERY OF THE DANGEROUS ROCK [cH.
men, that brag of the Doctors, will be holden by them as
long as they list.
The sixth : whereas all holy Scriptures is on the popish
Catholics' side, he lamenteth the unhappiness of these days,
in which men altogether unlearned in them, by the bare
naming of God's word, "have among peddlers won their spurs,
and among the ignorant have gotten the opinion of knowledge."
As truly as none but peddlers and ignorant men embrace this
doctrine which we teach, so truly all Scriptures be on M.
Sander's side. Among so many Princes, noblemen, and ex
cellent learned men as at this day acknowledge this doctrine
to be the truth, M. Sander's head was very sleepy, when he
could see none but peddlers and ignorant persons.
The seventh: he will take upon him to shew by what
means Saint Peter excelled the other Apostles, and sheweth
in what order he will proceed : which, seeing it is contained
word for word in the titles of the seven chapters next follow
ing, I thought it needless here to rehearse.
Isidore of Seville, who occasionally errs in his Origines, is mistaken
about the name Cephas ; (Lib. vii. Cap. ix.) and as to what Du Pin
(Not. in loc.) justly calls the "allusio parum solida" found in the
works of S. Optatus, (De Schism. Don. L. ii. p. 31. Antverp. 1702.)
it occurs in a place allowed to be otherwise interpolated ; and Baldwin
confesses that the words "unde et Cephas appellatus est" appear to be
those " ineptse alieujus glossse ad marginem temere adscriptce, et deinde
abs librariis contextui insertse." (Vid. Priorii et variorum Annott. in
ed. Paris. 1679. p. 35.) Baronius therefore need not have been so
well contented with the etymology in question, (ad an. 31. §. xxvii.)
which was slighted by ./Eneas Sylvius before he became Pope Pius II.
(Commentt. de gestis Basil. Cone. Lib. i. p. 13. edit, prine. ; p. 12. Basil.
1551. Conf. ejusdem Germanium, Cap. lxxxvii. Argent. 1515.) It may
be added, that the Index Auctorum damnatce memorke, issued by Mas-
caregnas, Inquisitor General of Portugal, contains the not surprising
admonition, " Caute legenda Opera ^Enese Sylvii ;" (p. 88. Ulyssip.
1624.) and. he himself, in his Bull of Retractations, (Binius, iv. i. 739.)
entreats that those things written against the papal claims, while he
bore the heathenish name ^Eneas, might not be put in competition
with his tenets when he had been transformed into a Christianized
Pontiff: "jEneam rejicite, Pium reeipite," &c. His Commentaria
were reprinted in 1535 by Orthuinus Gratius, in the Fasciculus rcrum
expetendarum a-cfugiendarum, which, as well as the work in a separate
form, was proscribed by the Venetian Inquisitors in their Cathalogus
librorum haireticorum, an. 1554, republished by the Rev. Joseph Mend
ham in the year 1840.]

IX.] OF THE POPISH CHURCH. 303

THE NINTH CHAPTER.
Sander. That Saint Peter passeth far the other Apostles in some Sander.
kind of ecclesiastical dignity.
That S. Peter had some excellent gifts, peradventure more Fulke.
than some of the Apostles ; that he had great dignity among
the Apostles, may easily be granted : but that he had auctority
over them, such as the Pope claimeth over all Bishops, is of
us utterly denied. Neither doth any one, nor all together,
of M. Sander's thirty-four arguments prove that he had one
jot of auctority over his brethren.
First : He was " first" in order of numbering of the twelve
Apostles. Second : He was " promised to be called Cephas before
the twelve were chosen."
Third : He was " named Peter at the time of the choice :"
ergo, he had the Pope's auctority over them.
Who would grant the consequence of these arguments ?
Let us see what the other be.
Fourth : It was " said to him alone, ' Thou art Peter ; and
upon this Rock I will build My Church.'" I deny that it was
said to him alone : for all the Apostles were likewise Rocks,
upon which He would build His Church.
The like I say of the fifth, that " the keys of the kingdom
of heaven were promised to him alone :" for every one of the
Apostles received them as well as he ; being ordained with
equal power of binding and loosing, of remitting and retain
ing sins. Matt, xviii. 18 ; Joan. xx. 23. Notwithstanding the
words at one time were spoken to Peter alone, yet did they
give him no singular auctority.
The sixth : " Christ paid tribute for Peter, as under-head
of His family :" ergo, he was greater than the rest. A fond
argument. This didrachma was paid for every man in the
city where he dwelt : and because Peter had a house and a
family in the city, Christ paid for him with whom He lodged,
and Himself.
But if you draw it into an allegory, these absurdities will
follow: first, that Christ maketh His Church and spiritual

304 DISCOVERY OF THE DANGEROUS ROCK [cH,
kingdom subject to tribute ; yea, to Moses' law, by which that
kind of tribute was due. Secondly, you divide Christ's Church
into two households. Didrachma was to be paid for the head
or first-born of every house. And you shew your ignorance
in referring this payment to Num. iii., which was only for the
first-born, whereas this was for all men. And for the first
born was due five siccles, [shekels,] whereof every one was
half an unee [ounce] of silver at the least: whereas didrachma,
containing but two drachmas, whereof every one was equal
with the Roman penny, could be but sixteen pence at the most
of our money.
It is a strong argument, that the payment of tribute, which
argueth subjection, should make Peter so great a lord that
he should be out of all subjection : which if Chrysostom had
considered, he would not have grounded Peter's primacy upon
so frivolous an argument1.
The seventh : Christ preached " out of Saint Peter's boat,
to shew that in his chair His doctrine should always be stead
fastly professed." An argument to be answered either with
laughing or hissing.
The eighth : Though "all the Apostles were to be sifted,
yet Peter's faith alone is prayed for." This is utterly false :
for Christ prayed for all His Apostles' faith, Joh. xvii. If
specially for Peter, it was in respect of his greater danger,
and not in respect of his greater dignity.
The ninth : "Peter first entered into the sepulchre :" ergo,
he was made Pope. He entered for farther confirmation of
his faith concerning Christ's resurrection. This may be im
puted to diligence, but not to dignity.
Tenth : "The Angel saith, ' Tell His Disciples and Peter';"
naming him severally, because of his shameful fall he had more
need of comfort.
The eleventh : " Ambrose2 thinketh Peter was the first
man that saw Him." Nay, rather, the soldiers which kept the
grave saw Him before Peter ; and the women also ; which
1 ["Because then Christ was a first-born Child, and Peter seemed
to be first of the Disciples, to him they come.'' (S. Chrys. Horn. IviiL
on S. Matth. Library of Fathers, Vol. xv. p. 786. Oxf. 1844.)]
2 [Comm. in Evang. Luc. Cap. xxiv. Opp. Tom. iii. col. 232. Conf.
-S. Luke xxiv. 34. 1 Cor. xv. 5.]

IXJ OF THE POPISH CHURCH. 305
would give them dignity above Peter, if first seeing were a
matter to argue dignity or auctority of the seer.
The twelfth : " Only S. Peter walked on the sea : that
signifieth the world to be his jurisdiction." As he walked by
faith, so by weakness of faith he began to sink. And the sea
that he walked on was but a lake or mere ; and therefore
cannot well signify the whole world. Beside, the argument is
as sure as if it were bound with a straw.
Thirteenth : " S. Peter is shewed to have loved Christ
more than the rest, and is alone commanded to feed His
sheep." He had good cause to love Him more, because greater
sins were forgiven him : but it is false that he only was com
manded to feed Christ's sheep, for all the Apostles were like
wise commanded.
Fourteenth: "It is said to Peter, 'Thou shalt stretch forth
thy hands,' and 'Follow thou Me:' by which a particular kind
of death on the Cross is prophesied." A violent death, but no
particular kind of death, is shewed by these words. And
although it were, yet Peter in being crucified was made no
greater than Andrew, who was crucified also, if the stories of
both be true.
Fifteenth : "Peter answered always for the Apostles: ergo
he was chief." No more than the foreman of the jury.
Although it is not true that he always answered for the rest ;
for sometime Thomas, sometime Philip, sometime Judas, an
swered. John xiv.
Sixteenth : " Peter pronounced Judas Iscariot deposed."
That was by special instinct of the Holy Ghost, and by no
ordinary authority.
Seventeenth: "After the sending of the Holy Ghost, Peter
above all the rest first taught the faith." Chrysostom and
Cyril saith he did it by the consent of all the rest, who
all stood up together with him ; although one spake, to avoid
confusion, when the apology was made to answer the slan
derous scoffers. But before that they taught every one alike.
Eighteenth : " The multitude converted said to Peter and
to the other Apostles, but to Peter by name, ' What shall
we do?'" If this prove any thing, it proveth the equality
of the Apostles ; that, having heard one man preach, they
•demand not of him alone, but of all the rest with him, what
they shall do.
r i 20
|FULKE, II.]

306 DISCOVERY OF THE DANGEROUS ROCK [CH,
Nineteenth : " Peter made answer for all, that they should
repent and be baptized." It was good reason, seeing he made
the apology for all.
Twentieth : " Peter did the first miracle after the coming
of the Holy Ghost; and by healing the lame's feet shewed
mystically that he was the Rock, to establish the feet of other."
I answer, John healed him as much as Peter, by Peter's own
confession, Act. iii. 12, and the lame man's acknowledging
the benefit to be received equally from both, in holding Peter
and John.
Twenty-first : " Peter confessed Christ first ; not only be
fore private men, but at the seat of judgment. Act. iv." It is
false that Peter confessed Christ first before private men ; and
at the seat of judgment he confesseth equally with John.
Twenty-second : " Peter alone gave sentence with fulness
of power upon Ananias and Sapphira." Not by ordinary power,
but by special revelation, and direction of the Holy Ghost;
whatsoever Gregory, a partial judge in this case, doth gather.
Twenty-third: " Peter was so famous above the rest, that
his shadow was sought to heal the diseased." This was a
singular and personal gift, which the Pope hath not; therefore
it pertaineth nothing to him.
Twenty-fourth : " Peter did excommunicate, and enjoin
penance to Simon Magus, the first heretic." Peter denounced
God's judgment against him ; but not by way of excommuni
cation. And yet the argument is naught, as all the rest are,
though the antecedents were granted.
Twenty-fifth : " Peter was the first that raised a dead
body to life, namely Tabitha, after Christ's ascension." This
is neither proved to be true ; neither, if it were, should Peter
thereby have greater auctority than his fellow- Apostles, which
likewise raised the dead; and peradventure before Peter,
although S. Luke make no mention of them.
Twenty-sixth: "Peter had first by vision, that the Gen
tiles were called to believe in Christ." This is false ; for Paul
had that in vision before him. Act. ix. & xxvi. 17.
Twenty-seventh : " God chose that the Gentiles should
first of all hear the word of the Gospel by Peter's mouth,
and should believe. Acts xv." This is false ; for Peter saith
not " first of all," but " of old time :" and the eunuch of
Ethiopia was baptized by Philip before Cornelius of Peter.

IX.] OF THE POPISH CHURCH. 307
twenty-eighth: "Prayer was made for Peter by the
Church; whicn n^ not so earnestpy mao|e for any 0ther
Apostle that we read of." inc-„ o^nest prayer for Peter is
set forth to shew that God at their prayer .layered Peter •
not that Peter was thereby shewed to be greater in auctority.
Twenty-ninth : " Paul and Barnabas came to Jerusalem
to the Apostles, to fetch a solution from Peter, Act. xv., as
Theodoret noteth1." But S. Luke noteth, that they came to
all the Apostles and Elders at Jerusalem, and not to Peter
only; nor for his solution, but for the solution of the Council.
Thirtieth : " In the Council, Act. xv., Peter did not
only speak first, but also gave the determinate sentence."
Both the parts of this proposition are false : for Saint Luke
testifieth there was great disputation before Saint Peter
spake. Also Saint James, as President of the Council, gave the
definitive sentence ; according to whose words the synodical
epistle was written in the name of all the Apostles and Elders
at Jerusalem. Thirty-first: " Saint Paul came to Jerusalem to see Peter,
as Chrysostom sayeth, because he was primus, first or chief."
But Saint Paul himself affirmeth in the same place, and divers
other, that he was equal with Peter and the highest Apostles.
Galatians ii. 8, ; 2 Corinthians xii. 11.
Thirty-second : " Peter was either alone, or first and
chiefest, in the greatest affairs of the Church." The greatest
affair of the Church was the preaching unto the Gentiles ; in
which Peter was neither alone, nor first nor chiefest; but
Paul chiefest. Gal. ii.
Thirty-third : " Peter was sent to Rome, to occupy with
his chair the mother Church of the Roman province, and
chief city of the world ; and there vanquished Simon Magus,
the head of heretics," &c. All this is uncertain, being not
found in the Scriptures ; but those stories which report it
convinced by Scriptures to be false in divers circumstances.
Thirty-fourth : " Peter's chair and succession hath been
1 [Sanders (Rocke, p. 200.) refers to " Ep. ad Leonem :" but Cra-
kanthorp remarks, that of the Epistles which bear the name of Theo
doret " two are most eminent ; that to Dioscorus, and the other to
Pope Leo. That the former is forged the other doth demonstrate . . .
so, vice versa, that the latter is forged is demonstrated by the former."
(Vigilius Dormitans, p. 444. Cf. p. 417. Lond. 1631.)]
20—2

308 DISCOVERY OF THE DANGEROUS ROCK [cH.
acknowledged of all ancient Fathers," &c. Although ihti see
of Rome, appointed for the seat of i\«':°Mt= hath of ol<i been
very ambitious ; yet it *° « fat)le that 1X1 hath been acknow
ledged by "" aliCien^ Fathers to have the auctority which the
Disnops thereof have claimed. For Irenseus rebuked Victor for
usurping. All the Bishops of Africa in Council withstood In
nocentius, Zozimus, Bonifacius, and Caebastinus, [Ccelestinus,]
alleging for their auctority a counterfeit Decree of the Council
of Nice1, as we have shewed before in the first treatise2. The
like may be said of the Councils of Chalcedon3, of Constan
tinople, the fifth4, &c, which withstood the Bishop of Rome's
auctority in such cases as he pretended prerogative.
To conclude, neither any one, nor all together of these
thirty-four reasons prove Peter to be greater in auctority
than the rest of the Apostles ; and much less the Bishop of
Rome to be greater than Bishops of other seats.
THE TENTH CHAPTER.
Sander. Sander. That the Apostles, beside the prerogative of their Apos
tleship, had also the auctority to be particular Bishops : which thing
their name also did signify in the old time.
Fulke. Fulke. Although the Apostles had all such auctority
as every particular Bishop hath, yet had they not two offices,
but one Apostleship ; no more than a King, although he have
all auctority that every Constable hath, is thereby both a
King and a Constable, but a King only. Neither doth their
staying, or as he calleth it residence, in some particular city,
prove that the Apostles either were or might be Bishops ; that
is, give over their general charge, and take upon them a
particular ; or still retaining their general charge, to exercise
the office of a Bishop any longer than until the Church was
perfectly gathered where they remained. For although the
Holy Ghost distinguished their universal charge into several
parts, to avoid confusion; as in making Peter chief Apostle of
the Circumcision, and Paul of the Gentiles ; yet were they not
thereby made Bishops. And although the consent of writers
1 [Supra, pp. 70 — 1.]
2 [Viz. A Retentive, to stay good Christians in tree faith and religion,
against the motiues of Richard Bristow : p. 44.]
s [See before, pp. 288 — 9.] 4 [General. Council, a.d. 553.]

X.] OF THE POPISH CHURCH. 309
is, that James was Bishop of Jerusalem ; yet, following the
course of the Scriptures, we must hold that James, by decree
of the Holy Ghost, was appointed to stay there, not as a
Bishop, but as an Apostle, for the conversion of the Jews,
which not only out of all Jewry, but out of all parts of the
world, came thither ordinarily to worship. Of S. Peter's
sitting at Antioch as Bishop we find nothing in the Scrip
tures ; and less of his removing to Rome. But we find that
when Peter came to Antioch, Paul withstood him to his face,
and reproved him openly : which he might not well have done,
if Peter had been supreme head of the Church, and in his
own see, as M. Sander doth fantasy.
Where he allegeth the text et episcopatum ejus accipiat
alter, " and let another take his bishoprick," to prove that
Judas and so the Apostles were Bishops, it is too childish
and fond an argument ; seeing the Greek word which S.
Luke useth, and the Hebrew word which the Prophet useth,
signifieth generally a charge or office, and not such a particu
lar office of a Bishop as now we speak of.
He citeth farther Theodoret, in iii. Cap. i. ad Tim.5, to
prove that the name of an Apostle in the primitive Church did
signify such a Bishop. But how greatly Theodoret was de
ceived appeareth by this, that he citeth for proof Philip, ii. ;
Epaphroditus to be the Apostle of the Philippensians, because
S. Paul saith of him, " Epaphroditus your Apostle, and my
helper :" whereas he meaneth that he was their messenger ;
using the word aVoo-roAos' in the general signification for "a
messenger," and not for the name of such an officer as an
Apostle or Bishop. He nameth also Titus and Timotheus,
which in the Scripture are never called Apostles : likewise the
Apostles and Elders at Jerusalem; which were indeed the true
Apostles of Christ's immediate sending, and not Bishops
ordained by men. And whereas Hierom saith that " all
Bishops be successors of the Apostles," he meaneth manifestly
in auctority within their several charges, and not that the
Apostles were Bishops. Likewise where Augustin saith that
" the Bishops were made instead of the Apostles," it rather
proveth that the Apostles were no Bishops : for then, if the
Apostles were Bishops, he should say, Bishops were made in
stead of Bishops. 5 [Opp. Tom. ii. p. 181. Colon. Agripp. 1573.]

310 DISCOVERY OF THE DANGEROUS ROCK [cH.
The last reason is, that if the office of Bishops had not
been distinct in the Apostles from their Apostleship, that
office would have ceased with the Apostleship : for the whole
being taken away, no part can remain, except it had another
ground to stand in beside the Apostleship, as the bishoply
power had. Indeed, if the Apostleship had ceased before
Bishops had been ordained, bishoplike power would have
ceased with it : but seeing the Apostles ordained Bishops
and Elders in every congregation, to continue to the world's
end, the Bishop's office hath not ceased, though the office of
the Apostles is expired. Wherefore, seeing neither by Scrip
ture, reason, nor Doctors, this distinction of offices in the
Apostles can be proved ; when Peter is called Head, Prince,
Chief, First, Captain of the Apostles, by Cyril, or any ancient
writer, we must understand, as Ambrose teacheth, "a primacy
of confession or faith, not of honour or degree." De Incar.
Dom. Cap. iv.1
THE ELEVENTH CHAPTER.
Sander. Sander. How far S. Peter did either excel or was equal with the
Apostles in their Apostolic office. Wherein divers objections are
answered, which seem to make against S. Peter's Supremacy.
Fulke. Fulke. But that necessity enforceth him, M. Sander
thinketh it [a] sin of curiosity to inquire of that equality or in
equality of the Apostles, " whereas it should suffice us to follow
the present state of the universal Church practised in our
time :" as though the universal Church of any time did ever
acknowledge the Pope to be supreme head ; although a great
part of the world hath of long time so taken him. He think
eth it out of controversy that S. Peter was the first of the
Apostles, as S. Matthew saith primus, " 'the first,' Simon,
which is called Peter." And he is not content that he was
first in the order of numbering, but he will have him first in
dignity, because he is always named first. But that is neither
true, nor a good reason if it were true, because he is named
first, therefore he is of greatest dignity : but Gal. ii. 9,
James, and Cephas, and John are said to have been "pillars"
of the Church, and yet Paul equal with them. Although if
1 [Opp. iv. 290. Lut. Paris. 1661. — "Primatum confessionis utique,'
non honoris ; primatum fidei, non ordinis."]

XI ] OF THE POPISH CHURCH, 311
we granted greatest dignity to Peter, yet thereupon did not
follow greatest authority. For these three Apostles last
named were of greatest dignity among the Apostles, yet not
of greater authority than the rest. And although the ancient
Fathers of the word primus have derived the name ofprima-
tus, or "primacy," yet have they also expressed wherein this
primacy doth consist ; namely, not in authority, but in order :
neither doth those names, Prince, Chief, Head, Top, Guide,
Mouth, Greatest of the Apostles, used by some of them, signify
his authority over them, but his dignity amongst them.
But if you ask him wherein Peter was chief, he an
swereth, " The question is curious : for in the nature and order
of the Apostleship every Apostle was equal with all his fellows
and so is every Bishop, Priest, King, Duke, Knight, with every
one of his degree." If this be as he saith, then was Peter
chief neither as Apostle nor Bishop. " But there may be an
other thing" (saith he) " coincident to some degree of men,
not necessary for the [their] being, but for their well-being."
One therefore was set over the Apostles for unity's sake,
and to avoid schisms, as Cyprian and Hierom write in places
before cited. This must needs be a primacy of order, and
not of authority: for among men of equal authority, as he
confesseth the Apostles were, one may be chosen as the Pre
sident or Primate, to avoid confusion, the austerity [authority]
remaining equal to every one ; but one cannot^ be preferred in
authority to remain still equal with his fellows in authority.
But whereas Optatus, Lib. ii. De schism. Don.2, and Leo,
ad Anastas. Ep. lxxxii.3, are cited to prove that the same
primacy, which Peter some time [sometimes] (but yet not
always) had among the Apostles, should be retained in suc
cession of his chair, to maintain unity among all men, it hath
no ground in the holy Scriptures : and yet those good men were
far from imagining such an absolute power of Peter's successor
as M. Sander defendeth in the Pope ; although sometimes he
do handle it so nicely, as it might seem to be a thing of nothing
wherein the Pope is above his fellow-Bishops. Where I said
that Peter had not always the primacy of order among the
Apostles, it is proved both by the xv. of the Acts, where James
was President of the Council; and Gal. ii., not only where
2 [p. 39. ed. Mer. Casaub. Lond. 1631.]
3 [lxxxiv, alias xii. Vid. Quesnelli edit. p. 224.]

312 DISCOVERY OF THE DANGEROUS ROCK [cH.
James is named before Peter', but also where Peter abstained
and separated himself, after certain came from James, fearing
them of the Circumcision, lest he should have been evil thought
of, as he was before for keeping company with Cornelius ; and
in divers other places of the Acts of the Apostles.
But M. Sander will add another truth to the former
doctrine of Peter's primacy ; namely, that, seeing the Apostles
needed no head, because they were not in danger of error,
the head was appointed over them for an example of the
Church afterward, when that personal privilege of the Apos
tles ceased to be in their successors. But how will he prove
that the privilege of not erring hath continued in Peter's suc
cessors more than in the successors of all the Apostles ? For
sooth, because Christ prayed that Peter's faith might not fail,
that he might confirm his brethren. I have often shewed that
He prayed for the perseverance of all His Apostles : and the
cause of His special prayer for Peter was proper to Peter's
person ; therefore cannot be drawn to his successors. And
what madness is it to defend that the Pope cannot err, when
Pope Honorius was condemned for an heretic both by the'
sixth [General] Council, [the third] of Constantinople, and by
the Decree of Leo II., Bishop of Rome, confirming the same
Council ! Act. xviii.1 Ep. Leon. II. ad Constant.2
But M. Sander concludeth, to answer the argument of the
equality of the Apostles, that Paul was equal with Peter in
Apostleship ; but by the appointment and will of Christ Peter
was head, "to shew that His Church, having one Pastor in it
above the rest, is one, as a kingdom one by having one King
in it." Howbeit we find the will of God for the Supremacy
and headship of Christ over all His Church, to make it one,
in the holy Scriptures; when of Peter's headship or Supre
macy there is never a word. And Paul saith that he was
"nothing inferior to the highest Apostles:" 2 Cor. ii. [xii. 11:]
if nothing absolutely, then was not Peter his superior in any
respect. That Paul reprehended Peter, M. Sander saith he might
do it by equality of his Apostleship. If that be so, why may
not every Bishop reprehend the Pope by equality of bishop-
rick? If you grant they may, then have you so many
Canons against you as you can never save their authority, and
i [Joverius, Class, i. fol. 83.] 2 [lb. fol. 85, b.]

?T.] OF THE POPISH CHURCH. 313
abide by your confession. But this fault, you say, with
Tertulhan, was "of conversation, not of preaching ;" that Peter
might not seem to have erred in doctrine. Nevertheless it
cannot be excused but Peter also erred in doctrine : not in
the general doctrine of the abolishing of the law, or of Chris
tian liberty, but of bearing too much with the Jews in preju
dice of the Gentiles, whom he compelled to Judaism, and in
derogation of the truth of Paul's doctrine : which dissimulation
he entered not into for any worldly respect, but because he
was deceived in opinion ; thinking that in that case he ought
so to have done, before he, being reprehended by Paul, saw
the inconvenience, and then mildly yielded to the correction.
But in this humble submission, saith Master Sander, " Peter
proved himself to be the head of all the Apostles ; seeing
Christ had said, ' He that is greater among you let him be as
the lesser.' " Indeed he shewed herein such greatness as Christ
commendeth ; but no headship or authority over his brethren.
Cyprian, ad Quintum3, saith he, "did not judge this re
proving of Peter to be an argument against his Supremacy,
but a witness of his humility :" but he giveth us this much to
understand, that if he had challenged primacy, he had taken
upon him arrogantly. His words are these : Nam nee Petrus,
quern primum Dominus elegit, &c. : " For neither did Peter,
whom our Lord chose the first, and upon whom He builded
His Church, when Paul did strive with him about Circumcision
afterward, challenge anything insolently ; or take upon him
arrogantly to say that he had the primacy, and that he
ought rather to have been obeyed of novices and after-comers :
neither did he despise Paul, for that he was before a persecutor
of the Church, but he did admit the counsel of truth."
The like saith Augustin for his humility, but as a
later writer more pregnant for his primacy : De Dap. cont.
Don. Lib. ii. Cap. i.4 In Scripturis, &c. : " We have learned
in the holy Scriptures, that Peter the Apostle, in whom the
primacy of the Apostles in so excellent grace hath the pre
eminence, when he used to do otherwise than the truth re
quired about Circumcision, was corrected of Paul, who was
admitted after him to be an Apostle." In this saying the
primacy is of time and order ; not of dignity and authority.
3 [Ep. lxxi. pp. 194-5. ed. Fell.]
* [Opp. Tom. ix. col. 65. ed. Ben. Amst.]

314 DISCOVERY OF THE DANGEROUS ROCK [cH.
But Gregory, much later than Augustin, granteth to Peter
not only a primacy, but also a majority : in Ezech. Horn.
xviii.1 Quatenus, &c. : " That he who was chief in the top of
the Apostleship should be chief also in humility." And
again : Ecce a minore, &c. : " Behold, Peter is reproved of
his lesser ; and he disdaineth not to be reproved : neither
doth he call to mind that he first was called to the Apostle
ship." These words make Peter greater none otherwise than
that he was first called to the Apostleship ; which argueth
small authority over his juniors.
Hereupon he taketh occasion to inveigh against the pride
of Luther, Zwinglius, Calvin, &c, and their bitter dissensions ;
shewing how far they are unlike to the Apostles. It is not
to be doubted that they were many degrees inferior to the
virtue and holiness of the Apostles : but yet as well in humi
lity as all other virtues, if they come not nearer to them than
the Pope and his pompous Clergy, let God and all indifferent
men be judges.
Moreover, whereas it is objected against the Supremacy of
Peter, that the Apostles sent" him to lay hands upon those
whom Philip the Deacon had baptized ; he answereth, that
proveth no more their equality than when "the Canons of a
Cathedral church do choose them Dean or Bishop to go about
business of the Chapter," it proveth the Dean and Bishop to
be inferior to the Canons. But, by his favour, where the
Dean or Bishop are sent about business, it argueth the
Bishop and Dean, in respect of those [that] business, to be
inferior to the whole Chapter ; as Peter and John were to
the whole College of the Apostles : though the Bishop or
Dean in other respects be superior to the Canons ; and Peter
and John were equal to every one of the Apostles.
Wherefore M. Sander's conclusion is upon a false suppo
sition, that Peter had authority to depose the Apostles, if
they had fallen as Judas did ; therefore the Pope hath the
like over Bishops. For neither had Peter any singular auc
tority to depose any of his fellow-Apostles, no more than he
had to choose one in place of Matthias ; nor the Bishop of
Rome over other Bishops ever had of right, but by conces
sion, election, or usurpation. 1 [fol. Ixxxi, b. Parrhis. 1512.]

XII.] OF THE POPISH CHURCH. 315
THE TWELFTH CHAPTER.
Sander. That S. Peter's prerogative above the other Apostles Sandeb.
is most manifestly seen by his chief bishoply power. How Christ
loved Peter above others.
Fulke. M. Sander, fantasying that he hath proved Fulke.
Peter superior to the Apostles, not in their Apostleship, but
in his bishoply degree, doth yet again distinguish the order
and office of a Bishop from the authority and jurisdiction of
the same. And in order and office he confesseth that all Bi
shops of the world are equal; as Hierom sayeth, ad Eva-
grium2, and Cyprian, De unitate Ecclesice3; but not in au
thority. But seeing he rehearseth the testimony of Hierom
imperfectly, I will set it down at large, that you may see
whether it will bear his distinction. He writeth against a
custom of the Church of Rome, by which the Deacons were
preferred above the Priests, whom he proveth by the Scrip
ture to be equal with Bishops, except only in ordaining : Quid
enim facit, exempta [excepta] ordinatione, Episcopus, &c. :
"For what doth a Bishop, excepting ordination, which a
Priest or Elder doth not ? Neither is it to be thought that
there is one Church of the city of Rome, and another of the
whole world. Both France, and Britain, and Africa, and
Persia, and the East, and India, and all barbarous nations,
worship one Christ, observe one rule of truth. If auctority
be sought, the world is greater than a city. Wheresoever a
Bishop be, either at Rome, or at Eugubium, or at Constan
tinople, or at Rhegium, or at Alexandria, or at Tunis, he is of
the same worthiness, and of the same priesthood. Power of
riches and baseness of poverty make not the Bishop higher
or inferior : but they are all successors of the Apostles."
And lest you should think he speaketh only of equality
in order and office, and not in authority, he doth in another
place shew that the authority of every Priest is equal with
every Bishop by God's disposition ; and that the excelling of
one Bishop above other Priests came only by custom : In
Titum, Cap. i.4: Sicut ergo Presbyteri sciunt se, ex Ecclesioz
consuetudine, ei qui sibi prozpositus fuerit esse subjectos;
2 [Supra, p. 33.] 3 [See before, pages 283, 290-1.]
4 [Opp. Tom. ix. p. 245. ed. Erasm.]

316 DISCOVERY OF THE DANGEROUS ROCK [CH-
ita Episcopi noverint se, magis consuetudine quam disposi
tions Dominiccs veritate, Presbyteris esse majores : " There
fore as Priests do know, that by custom of the Church they
are subject to him that is set over them ; so let Bishops
know, that they are greater than Priests rather by custom
than by truth of the Lord's appointment." If the authority,
then, and jurisdiction of Bishops dependeth upon custom, and
not upon God's appointment, Peter was not by our Lord's ap
pointment preferred in bishoplike authority before the rest
of the Apostles ; nor the Bishop of Rome before other Bishops
and Priests ; but only by custom, as Hierom saith. S. Cy
prian's words also infer the same1 : Episcopatus unus est;
cujus a singulis in solidum pars tenetur : " The Bishop's
office is one ; whereof every man doth partake the Bishop's
office wholly." Now if authority and jurisdiction do pertain
to the Bishop's office, every Bishop hath it wholly ; as, (to
follow M. Sander's example,) whatsoever is incident to the
nature or kind of a man is equally in every man.
But now the greatest matter resteth, to prove how S.
Peter had more committed to his charge than the rest of
the Apostles ; and that he taketh on him to prove by this
reason : Peter loved Christ more than all the rest of the
Apostles : therefore He gave him greater authority in feeding
His sheep than to the rest. But I deny the argument. For
Peter loved Christ more than the rest, because Christ had
forgiven him greater sins than to the rest : Luc. vii. 47 : in
consideration whereof He required greater diligence in doing
his office ; but gave him not a greater charge or authority.
Now where M. Sander reasoneth, that Peter loved Christ
most because Christ first loved him most, and Christ loved
him most because He would make him governor of His Church,
it is a shameful petition or begging of that which is in ques
tion. For the nearest cause of Peter's greater love was the
greater mercy which he found : which mercy, proceeding from
the love of God, as the first and infinite cause, can have no
higher, superior, or former cause. But Peter, in respect of
greater love shewed to him, in that greater sin was forgiven
him, was bound to shew greater love toward Christ; which
He required to be shewed in feeding His sheep : yet this
proveth not that greater authority was given him, or that
1 [De unit. Eeel. Opp. 108.]

xil.] OF THE POPISH CHURCH. 317
he did feed more than all men; for S. Paul saith truly of
himself, " I have laboured more than they all." 1 Cor. xv. 10.
Whereby it appeareth, that Peter as a man was not equal
with Christ in the effect [affect] of excellent love, which was
in Him incomparable.
And whereas M. Sander talketh so much of his commission
of feeding, I say, these words, " Feed My sheep," &c, be not
words of a new commission, but words of exhortation, that he
shew exceeding diligence in the commission equally delivered
to all the Apostles : "As My Father hath sent Me, so I send
you." Joan. xx. 21. But the ancient Fathers expound it so
that it might seem to be a singular commission to Peter. It
cannot be denied but divers of the ancient Fathers, otherwise
godly and learned, were deceived in opinion of Peter's pre
rogative; which appeareth not in the Scriptures, but was
challenged by the Bishops of Rome ; which seemed to have a
shew of some benefit of unity to the Church, so long as the
empire continued at Rome, and the Bishops of that city re
tained the substance of Catholic religion. Yet did they never
imagine that such blasphemous and tyrannical authority, yea
such false and heretical doctrine, as afterward was maintained
under the pretence of that prerogative, should or ought to
have been defended thereby.
But let us see what M. Sander can say out of the ancient
writers. August., in Horn, de Past. Cap. xiii.2, writeth :
Dominus, &c. : " Our Lord hath commended unity in Peter
himself. There were many Apostles, and it is said to one,
' Feed My sheep.' God forbid there should now lack good
Pastors [. . .] but all good Pastors are in one, they are one."
This maketh nothing for Peter's authority over the rest : but
only the author supposeth the unity of all Pastors to be alle-
gorically signified, in that Christ speaketh that to one which
is common to all good shepherds ; namely, to feed His sheep.
And again, de Sanct. Horn, xxiv.3: In uno Petro, &c. : " The
unity of all Pastors was figured in one, Peter." So might
it well be, without giving Peter authority over all Pastors.
Chrysostom is the next; Lib. ii. de Sacerdotio4; who
saith that Christ did ask whether Peter loved Him, not to
3 [Opp. T. v. col. 168. $. 30.]
3 [al. De Scripluris Serm. cxlvii. Opp. v. 489.]
4 [Opp. Tom. i. pp. 371, 372. ed. Ben.]

318 DISCOVERY OF THE DANGEROUS ROCK [oik
teach us that Peter loved Him, but to inform us quanti Sibi
curoz sit gregis hujus prcefectura1, "how great care He taketh
of the government of this flock." Here he would have us
mark, that Chrysostom calleth it a rule and government of
the flock which Christ intendeth. Yea, Sir, we see it very
well ; but you would make us blind, if we could not see, that
Chrysostom speaketh not of a general rule granted to Peter
only, but of the government of every Church by every Pas
tor. And therefore you dance naked in a net, when you
allege the words following absolutely, as though they pertained
to Peter only ; Petrum Christus auctoritate prozditum esse
voluit, &c; whereas Chrysostom, speaking to every Priest,
and shewing how careful he ought to be in his office, in respect
of his high calling, and the excellent dignity thereof, saith:
Etiamne nunc nobiscum contendes, fraudem istam tibi non
bene ac fozliciter cessisse, qui per earn universis Dei optimi
maximi bonis administrandis sis prazficiendus ; quum proz-
sertim ea agas, quoz cum Petrus ageret, ilium Christus
auctoritate prozditum esse voluit, ac reliquos item Apostolos
longe prozcellere ? " Wilt thou then still contend with us, that
this fraud hath not happened well and luckily to thee, which
by it art to be made overseer of all the goods of God
almighty ; especially when thou doest those things, which when
Peter did, Christ would have him to be endued with author
ity, and also far to excel the other Apostles?"
Here M. Sander will have us note three things : 1. Peter's
authority : 2. passing the Apostles : 3. far passing. We mark
them all, that they are directly overthrowing M. Sander's Rock
of the popish Church. For they declare, that Peter in doing
those things was endued with authority, and far passed the
other Apostles ; even as every Priest, (to whom Chrysostom
speaketh,) when he doth the same things, is endued with the
same authority, and far passeth all other men. So that here
is none other authority nor excellence of Peter than such as is
common to all Ministers in executing their charge ; and was
common to all the Apostles, when they did the same things
that Peter did. For Chrysostom proveth to Basil, that he did
him no hurt, when by policy he caused him to be called to the
ministry against his will; seeing that thereby he was made
partaker of the reward of the faithful and wise servant, and
1 [" quantum cordi Sibi esset hujusmodi gregis prsefectura."]

XII.] OF THE POPISH CHURCH. 319
equal in authority with Peter, if of love towards Christ he
would dihgently feed His flock. So that Leo2 had no just
cause to say, that, in respect of any greater authority, "Peter
had a special care of feeding the sheep committed to him ;"
but rather in respect that he had greater cause to love Christ,
which had so mercifully forgiven him so shameful a fall.
But Arnobius3 is a less partial witness than Leo, a Bishop
of Rome; and he, upon the Psal. cxxxviii., writeth thus: Nullus
Apostolorum nomen, &c. : " None of the Apostles received the
name of a Pastor : for our Lord Jesus Christ alone said, 'I am
the good Pastor;' and again, ' My sheep follow Me.' Therefore
this holy name, and the power of this name, after His resur
rection He granted to Peter repenting; and He that was
thrice denied gave to His denier that power which He had
alone." Arnobius (saith he) noteth none of the Apostles ever
to have had the name of a Pastor given to him by Christ,
beside S. Peter alone. But I demand of M. S. where he hath
in Arnobius this word " ever ?" for he saith that Peter had
this name after the resurrection, which none of the Apostles
had before. He writeth against the Novatians, which denied
help to such as repented after Baptism ; proving by example
of Peter that they are to be received, seeing Christ gave
him greater dignity after his repentance than he had before
his fall : but that Peter had greater authority than the rest
of the Apostles, he never thought or said. M. Sander cutteth
off both the head and the tail in this discourse, lest the
meaning of Arnobius might appear ; for thus he writeth :
Dicis certe baptizatis non debere poznitentibus subveniri.
Ecce Apostolo poznitenti succurritur, qui est Episcoporum
Episcopus; et major gradus additur [redditur] ploranti,
2 [Epist. x. ad Episc. per provinc. Viennens. constit. Opp. i. 217.
Quesnel admits that the words "pros cseteris" in this sentence should
most probably be "pro cseteris." (Not. p. 435.)]
8 [Comment, in Psal. sig. x 3. Argentor. 1522. Erasmus, who
first published this work, vainly endeavours (in his dedicatory Epistle
to Pope Adrian VI.) to vindicate its authorship for Arnobius Afer,
when it really belongs to Arnobius Junior, who lived a century and a
half later. See the Conference betwene Rainoldes and Hart, p. 505.
Lond. 1584. Ger. Jo. Vossii Hist. Pelag. Lib. i. Cap. xi. p. 50.
Amstel. 1655. Ussher's Letters, p. 436. Lond. 1686. Jortin's Life
of Erasmus, i. 302. lb. 1758. Mosheim's Eccles. Hist. Vol. i. p. 454.
ed. Soames, Lond. 1841.]

320 DISCOVERY OF THE DANGEROUS ROCK [cH.
quam sublatus est deneganti. Quod ut doceam, illud os-
tendo, quod nullus Apostolorum nomen Pastoris accepit, &c. :
" Indeed thou sayest that such as repent, being baptized,
ought not to be helped. Behold the Apostle repenting is
helped, which is a Bishop of Bishops ; and a greater degree is
restored to him weeping, than was taken from him denying.
Which that I may teach, this I shew, that none of the Apostles
received the name of a Shepherd," &c. Again, in the end,
following the words before cited by M. Sander, he saith : Ut
non solum recuperasse quod amiserat probaretur, verwm
etiam et multo amplius poznitendo, quam negando perdiderat,
acquisisse : " He gave His denier that power which before
His resurrection He alone had ; that he might be proved not
only to have recovered that which he lost, but also to have
gotten much more by repenting than he lost by denying."
This speaketh Arnobius of the general authority which Peter
had over all the Church ; as every Apostle had likewise, and
was a Bishop and overseer of Bishops as well as Peter, and a
Pastor of the universal Church ; which thing Arnobius never
did deny. These therefore be M. Sander's arguments : None of the
Apostles had the name of a Pastor before Christ's resurrec
tion ; ergo they never had it. Peter was called to greater
dignity after his fall than he had before ; ergo he was greater
than his fellow-Apostles. Again, Peter was a Bishop, or an
overseer of Bishops ; ergo he was Bishop over the Apostles.
Next Arnobius is cited Ambrose; in xxiv. Luc.1; who first
said that Peter was "everywhere either alone or first;" and
then, upon these words, " Peter, dost thou love Me," saith :
Dominus interrogat, &c. : " Our Lord asked not to learn,
but to teach whom He, being to be lifted up into heaven, did
leave to us as the Vicar of His love. For so thou hast it,
' Simon, thou son of John, dost thou love Me ? Yea, Lord,
Thou knowest that I love Thee. Jesus saith to him, Feed My
lambs.' Peter, being privy of a good conscience, doth testify
his own affection, not taken for the time, but already well
known to God : for who else were able to profess this thing
of himself? And because he alone amongst all professeth,
he is preferred before all." M. Sander omitteth the con
clusion: Major enim omnibus charitas : "For the greatest
1 [Opp. Tom. iii. coll. 232, 233.]

XII.] OF THE POPISH CHURCH. 321
of all is charity." So Peter is hereby declared to have the
greatest love, but not to have the greatest authority.
M. Sander urgeth, that he is the "Vicar of Christ's love"
and pastoral office. The one indeed Ambrose saith ; the other
Sander sayeth, but is not able to prove : no, not by that which
followeth in the same place of Ambrose, that Peter had com
mitted to him to feed, " not only the lambs with milk, as at
the first ; nor yet the little sheep, as at the second time, but
the sheep; to the end that he, being more perfect, might
govern the more perfect." For every one of the Apostles
had the same charge to feed the sheep of Christ, and not
the lambs or little sheep only. Neither doth the word of
government help him. For every Apostle had the like govern
ment over the whole flock which Peter hath ; and there is an
ordinary government in every particular Church, 1 Co. xii.,
which proveth not the governors to be rulers one over an
other. Wherefore this collection is not only vain, but also
ridiculous, that Peter should have authority to govern Patri
archs, Archbishops, and Bishops, as well as Parish Priests,
because he must feed the sheep of Christ.
I will not here stand to discuss how properly the dis
tinction of lambs, little sheep, and sheep, is observed by Am
brose; but taking it according as he distinguisheth it, yet
here is nothing given to Peter but primacy of love, or, as
elsewhere he saith, of order ; but of authority singular here is
nothing at all : and that his conclusion declareth sufficiently :
Et ideo, quasi perfecto in omnibus, quern caro jam revocare
rum posset a gloria passionis, corona decernitur : " And
therefore a crown is decreed to him, as to one perfect in all
things, whom the flesh could not call back from the glory of
suffering." This conclusion M. S. (as his manner is) hath left
out ; by which it is apparent, that Ambrose inferreth no sin
gularity of authority in Peter, as more perfect than the rest
of the Apostles ; but as perfect in such degree as the rest of
the Apostles, which were likewise prepared to martyrdom,
were equal with him therein.
The testimony of Bernard, a late writer, though he were
no flatterer, yet I receive not ; as of one which was deceived
with the common error of his time.
But in sign that Peter was general Shepherd, saith M.
Sander, it is not read that he was "ordained Bishop of any
r i 21
[FULKE, II.]

322 DISCOVERY OF THE DANGEROUS ROCK [cH.
other than of Christ ; yet did he with two other Apostles or
dain S. James Bishop of Jerusalem," as Eus. Lib. ii. Cap. 0.
[i.] writeth. There is no doubt but James was acknowledged
by the Apostles to be appointed by the Holy Ghost to remain
at Jerusalem ; though not as a particular Bishop, but as an
Apostle of the whole Church. But as we read not that Peter
was made Bishop by any man, so we read not that he was
made Bishop by Christ.
Yet Arnobius, in Psa. cxxxviii.1, saith he was made " a
Bishop of Bishops:" Ecce Apostolo pomitenti succurritur, qui
est Episcoporum Episcopus : " Behold the Apostle being
penitent is succoured, which is a Bishop of Bishops." He
asketh if "any thing could be spoken more plainly?" Yes,
verily, you had need of plainer speeches than this, to prove
that he was Bishop of the Apostles. For admit that he was
an "overseer" of particular Bishops, as the word ' Eir'io-Koiros
doth signify, yet it followeth not that he was an overseer or
Bishop of the Apostles. In which sense Clemens also (if the
Epistle were not counterfeit2) might justly call James "a
Bishop of Bishops ;" and not, as M. Sander answereth, that
he was an Archbishop of inferior Bishops, but an Apostle,
overseer of particular Bishops.
That Cyprian, ad Quintum3, saith, Neque quisquam, &c:
" Neither doth any of us make himself a Bishop of Bishops,"
he answereth, that although no man may make himself, yet
Christ may make a man a Bishop of Bishops : but where
findeth he that Christ maketh the Pope a Bishop of Bishops ?
How Peter might be called a Bishop of Bishops, I have
shewed before. But the Council of Carth. iii., Cap. xxvi.4,
1 [Supra, pag. 319.]
2 [Which it is. Ep. i. ad Jacob, frat. Dom.]
s [The words "Neque enim quisquam nostrum Episcopum se
Episcoporum constituit" are not found in the Epistle to Quintus, but
in S. Cyprian's address at the opening of the Council of Carthage in
the year 256. (Opp. p. 229. ed. Fell.) In this passage there is an
evident allusion to the presumptuous interference of Stephen, Bishop
of Rome, in a matter of discipline not under his diocesan control.
Abrahamus Bzovius, in his Pontifex Romanus, when speaking of the
Pope's thirty-seventh title, "Judex Episcoporum," thought it altogether
necessary to insert the clause "prseter Romanorum Pontificem" as a
qualification of S. Cyprian's language, (p. 473. Colon. Agripp. 1619.)]
4 [Joverius, Class, ii. fol. 18, b. — " Ut prima? sedis Episcopus non

XII.] OF THE POPISH CHURCH. 323
forbiddeth that the Bishop of Rome, or any other Primate,
should be called "the Prince of Priests, or Highest Priest,
or by any such like name, but only the Bishop of the first
seat." Yet Optatus feared not to write thus, Lib. vii. De schism?,
of S. Peter : Prozferri Apostolis omnibus meruit, &c. : " He
deserved to be preferred before all the Apostles; and he alone
received the keys of the kingdom of heaven, to be communi
cated unto the rest." Master Sander confessing, and truly,
that the Apostles "took the keys belonging to their Apostolic
office immediately of Christ," saith they received the keys of
their bisboplike office of Peter. But what lock was there
that they could not open and shut by their Apostolic key,
when Christ saith, ' Whatsoever you bind or loose,' and ' Whose
sins soever you forgive or retain ; ' which was the power of
their Apostolic keys ? If the Apostolic keys were so sufficient,
what need they any bishoplike keys ? Into these absurdities
both he and Optatus do follow ; whiles the one will urge a
prerogative of Peter, the other will forge a bishoplike office
in the Apostles, whereof the Scripture giveth us no instruc
tion. As for Leo and Gregory, Bishops of Rome, although they
were not come to the full pride of Antichrist, yet the mystery
of iniquity having wrought in that seat near five or six hun
dred years before them, and then greatly increased, they
were so deceived with the long continuance of error, that
appelletur Princeps Sacerdotum, aut Summus Sacerdos, aut aliquid
hujusmodi, sed tantum primes sedis Episcopus." (See before, page
71.) This Decree is alleged by Ivo (Par. v. Cap. 57.) and Gratian.
(Dist. xcix. C. iii.)]
6 [Opp. pp. 101 — 2. Antwerp. 1702. S. Jerom (De Viris illust.
Cap. ex.) expressly states that the work of S. Optatus De schismate
Domtistarum was comprised in six books, and the author's own tes
timony (Lib. i. Cap. vii.) agrees with this assertion. The seventh
book was added in small type in the edition published by Franciscus
Balduinus in 1563. Mr. Husenbeth (St. Cyprian vindicated, p. 19. Nor
wich, 1839.) has cited the chapter adduced by Sanders, but afterwards
(p. 61.) mentions the seventh book against Parmenian as that " which
some critics indeed have rejected as of doubtful authenticity." Vid.
Du Pin Prcefat. §. ii. Fabricii Biblioth. Eccles. i. 200 — 1. Bibl. med.
et inf. Latin, v. 498—9. Joan. Fabric. Hist. Bibl. Fabr. i. 73. Wolf-
enb. 1717.]
21—2

324 DISCOVERY OF THE DANGEROUS ROCK [cH.
they thought the dignity of Peter1 was much more over the
rest of his fellow- Apostles than the holy Scriptures of God
(against which no continuance of error can prescribe) doth
either allow or bear withal. Wherefore, although he have
some shew out of the old writers, yet hath he nothing directly
to prove that Peter did excel the other Apostles in bisboplike
authority ; and out of the word of God no one jot or tittle
that Peter as a Bishop excelled the other Apostles, not as
Apostles, but as Bishops.

THE THIRTEENTH CHAPTER.
Sandeb. Sander. That the pastoral and chief Bishop's authority of Saint
Peter was an ordinary authority, and therefore it must go for ever
unto his successors ; whereas the Apostolic authority, being extraordi
nary, hath no successors in it. The Church never lacked a visible
Rock.
Fulke. Fulke. That the office of Apostles, which had general
charge to preach over the whole world, is ceased with the
Apostles' lives, it is indeed granted of us : but that their Apos
tolic authority was extraordinary, or that all then- authority
is so determined that it hath no successors in it, we do utterly
deny. For the same authority of preaching, of ministering
the Sacraments, of binding and loosing, which the Apostles had,
is perpetual in the Church, in the Bishops and Elders, which
are all successors of the Apostles. And if the Apostolic
authority hath no successors in it, what meaneth the Pope,
almost in every Bull and decretal Epistle, to brag so much of
the Apostolic authority, and to ground all things Apostolica
authoritate, "by the Apostolic authority?" By which it is
evident, that M. Sander's new distinction of "Apostolic" and
"Bishoplike" authority in the Apostles is not acknowledged
by the Popes themselves ; but invented lately by such as he
is, to have a starting-hole, to seem to avoid such arguments
and authorities as prove all the Apostles equal in authority.
But let us see what reasons he hath to prove that S.
Peter's pastoral authority was ordinary, and must go to his
successors, more than the pastoral authority of every Apostle.
First, S. Peter, being but one man, was not able to preach
1 [Palmer's Treatise on tlie Church, Vol. ii. pp. 491 — 2. Lond.
1838.]

XIII. J OF THE POPISH CHURCH. 325
to all men at once, nor to govern nations newly converted;
therefore he had twelve companions adjoined to him : but,
the world being converted, it is easy for the Pope without
such fellows to govern all the faithful, by help of many in
ferior officers : as though the Church had not inferior officers
in the Apostles' time. If S. Peter then was not able to rule,
which had such great gifts, much less the Pope, which is
nothing comparable with him in gifts, and is often a wicked
man and an heretic, is able to govern all the Church : for he
hath not so great an help of the conversion of the world as
he hath a want of Peter's gracious gifts, meet for such a
government. Secondly, he would have us mark " the peculiar names of
a Rock, of a Pastor, and of a Confirmer of his brethren, which
are given by Christ to S. Peter alone ; which argue that
Peter's Supremacy must necessarily continue for ever." But
who will grant to M. S. that Christ gave these peculiar names
to Peter alone? Indeed, that which is meant by the names
is ordinary and perpetual in the Church. Peter was a Rock;
not his person, but his doctrine, that remaineth still in the
Church. He was a Shepherd and confirmer of his brethren ;
and there be now many Shepherds and confirmers of their
brethren. Thirdly, he saith the Church never wanted a visible
Rock on the earth, beside the eternal Rock Christ ; who in
this life " might be so strongly fastened in the faith of Christ,
the great Rock, that he (though not for his own sake, yet
for the Church's sake,) might be able to stay up all other
small stones which joined [leaned] unto him," until Christ
came in the flesh ; who likewise appointed Saint Peter and
his successors to be this ordinary Rock, as Adam, Enos,
Henoch, Noe, Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, Moses, Aaron and his
successors, who sat in the chair of Moses until the coming
of Christ. Against this I say, that the Church militant on earth
hath her foundation in heaven, and not on earth : therefore
the Church hath not a visible Rock on earth. Again, it is
not true that some one hath always been this visible Rock on
earth. For who was greater, Abraham or Melchisedech ?
Out of all controversy Melchisedech. Then was not Abraham
the only Rock. After the death of Jacob and the twelve Pa-

326 DISCOVERY OF THE DANGEROUS ROCK [ch.
triarchs, who was the visible Rock until Moses was called?
And yet had God a Church among the Jews all that time.
Thirdly, who is so impudent to say, that all the successors
of Aaron were so strongly fastened in the faith, that they
were able to stay all the small stones that leaned upon them?
Was not Urias the High Priest an idolater ? 2 Reg. xvi.
What were Jason, Menelaus, Lysimachus, by the report of
the book of Maccabees ? Was not Caiphas and Annas Sad-
ducees, by the testimony of S. Luke, Act. v., and of Jose
phus1? Where is then the visible Rock, whose faith never
failed, &c. ? We see there was none such before Christ :
therefore there need to be none such after Him.
His fourth reason is of " the name of a Pastor," which sig
nifieth an ordinary office : " for as the sheep continue after S.
Peter's death, so must there be also a Shepherd, as Peter was."
But how proveth he that Peter was an only Shepherd? For
sooth Chrysostom saith, Lib. ii. De Sacerdotio2, Christus
sanguinem, &c. : " Christ hath shed His blood to purchase
those sheep, the care of whom He did commit both to Peter
and to Peter's successors." But whom doth Chrysostom take
for Peter's successors ? the Bishops of Rome only ? No,
verily, but all true Pastors of the Church, as his words going
before do manifestly declare : Neque enim turn volebat tes
tatum esse quantum a Petro amaretur ; siquidem id multis
nobis argumentis constabat. Verum hoc Ille turn agebat,
ut et Petrum et cceteros nos edoceret, quanta benevolentia ac
charitate erga Suam Ipse Ecclesiam afficeretur ; ut hac ratione
et nos quoque ejusdem Ecclesice studium curamque toto animo
susciperemus : " For His purpose was not then to testify unto
us how much He was beloved of Peter ; for that was evident
unto us by many arguments. But this thing then He in
tended, that He might teach both Peter and all us what
benevolence and love He beareth toward His Church; that by
this reason we also might take upon us with all our heart
the love and charge of the same Church." This sentence
sheweth, that Chrysostom accounted himself and every true
Pastor of the Church a successor of Peter; and not the Bishop
of Rome alone.
As for Leo, a Bishop of Rome, I have often protested that
i [See before, p. 246, n. 2.]
2 [Opp. Tom. i. p. 372. ed. Bened.]

XIII.] OF THE POPISH CHURCH. 327
he was more addicted to the dignity of his see than the
Scripture would bear him ; and therefore was overruled and
resisted in the General Council of Chalcedon.
His fifth argument is a rule of law : " Where the same
reason is, the same right ought to be3." The reason of Peter's
confession and power is such as agreeth to any ordinary office
of the Church : therefore the office of Peter being a Rock, of
strengthening his brethren, and feeding Christ's sheep, is an
ordinary office. But I say that Peter's confession made him
not a Rock, but declared him so to be ; being appointed of
Christ for one of the twelve foundations of the Church. The
office of strengthening and feeding, as it was not singular in
Peter, so it is not ordinary that it should be singular in any
man. His sixth reason : " Irenseus, Optatus, and Augustin did
reckon up such successors of Peter as had lived till every
of their ages or times:" therefore Peter had successors in
his pastoral office. It is not denied but he had them, and
other Bishops also, successors in his pastoral office; at least
the Bishops of Antioch, where by your own confession he was
Bishop before he came to Rome. Therefore his succession
was not singular to the Bishops of one see.
His seventh reason: "No man may preach to them to whom
he is not sent:" therefore there must be "a general Pastor,"
to send other to preach to them that are not converted, to
plant new bishopricks, to control them that are negligent, to
supply the things that lack, to excommunicate such as live in
no diocese, &c. For sending he quoteth Rom. x., where men
tion is only of the sending of God, and [not] of the sending by
men. But all bis questions and doubts may be answered.
Either the whole Church in General Councils, or every parti
cular Church in their Synods, as they shall see most expedient,
may send preachers; as the Apostles and Elders sent Peter and
John into Samaria; and order all such matters as he imagineth
must be done only by the Pope. But he asketh, " Who shall
summon all other Bishops to General or Provincial Councils?"
And I ask him, who summoned the four great and principal
General Councils, and so many Provincial Councils, but the
Emperors and Princes in whose dominion they were gathered ?
So that here is no necessary affairs of the Church, that doth
8 [" Ubi eadom ratio, idem jus."]

328 DISCOVERY OF THE DANGEROUS ROCK [cH.
require one general Pastor, or Pope of Rome, when all things
may and have been done best of all without him.
As for placing of Bishops in sees vacant, uniting of two
bishopricks in one, or dividing one into two, may better be
done by the auctority of those Churches, with consent of
their Princes, who seeth and knoweth what is needful in
those cases, than by one, which, sitting in his chair at Rome,
requireth half a year's travel from some part of the world to
him, before he can be advertised of the case, and yet must
understand it by hearsay, and therefore not able to see what
is expedient so well as they that are present, and see the
state of the matter.
Finally, it is against all likelihood that Christ would make
such a general Shepherd over all His flock, as many thousand
sheep, which live under the Sophi, [Cophti1,] the Cham, the
Turk, can have none access unto for such things as are sup
posed necessary to be had, and to be obtained from him only.
Wherefore, if the Pope were Head of the Church, such as
by cruelty of tyrants are cut from him should be cut from the
body of the Church. Yea, if heathenish tyrants could so
much prevail as they do in hindering this government of the
Pope, (pretended to be so necesssary,) the gates of hell might
prevail against the Church, contrary to the promise of Christ.

THE FOURTEENTH CHAPTER.
Sandeb. Sander. That the ordinary auctority of S. Peter's primacy be-
longeth to one Bishop alone. The whole government of the Church
tendeth to unity.
Fulke. Fulke. Concerning Peter's primacy, as there is little
in the Scriptures whereupon it may be gathered, so I have
shewed that it was not in him perpetual : for there are
greater arguments to prove the primacy of James. Again,
the greatest shew of Peter's primacy that we read of in the
Scriptures is the primacy or head Apostleship of the Circum-
1 [It is said that in some ancient monuments the Egyptians are
named " JJgophti," and hence "Cophti" or " Copti." See Brerewood's
Enquiries, p. 156. Lond. 1635. Pagitt's Christianography, pp. 37, 88.
lb. 1674. Baronius, Annall. Tom. vi. in Legat. Eccl. Alexand. pp.
712, 713. Antverp. 1658.]

xiv.] of the popish church. 329
cision. So that, if one Bishop should succeed him in that
primacy, he must be chief Bishop over the Jews, and not
over the Gentiles : for the chief Apostleship over the Gen
tiles was by God committed to Paul. Galat. ii. 7, 8. But
if M. Sander say, as he doth in another place, that the Pope
succeedeth both these Apostles, and therefore hath both their
auctority ; first, he overthroweth his own Rock of the Church,
which he will have to be Peter alone. Secondly, his argument
of unity, which he urgeth in this chapter, he subverteth, if
the Pope's auctority be derived from two heads. Thirdly, he
destroyeth his own distinction of bishoplike and Apostolic
auctority, if the Apostolic auctority of Paul should descend
to the Pope by succession.
Now let us consider what weighty reasons he hath to
prove the title of this chapter. S. Peter's auctority was
"specified" before the auctority was given to the rest of bind
ing and loosing. Mat. xviii. Therefore, seeing it was first
in him alone, it ought to descend to one Bishop alone. But
let M. Sander shew where it was given to him alone, or
promised to him alone either. For the promise, " Thou shalt
be called Peter," gave him no auctority ; nor yet the per
formance thereof, " Thou art Peter." But still the auctority is
promised, " I will build," " I will give," (I reason as M. Sander
doth of the future tense:) which promise, being made Matth. xvi.,
is performed Mattb. xviii., not to Peter only, but to all the
rest; and so all auctority is given in common. Johan. xx.
But S. Cyprian, ad Jubaianum, saith, that Christ gave
the auctority first to Peter : Petro primus [al. primum]
Dominus {super quern azdificavit Ecclesiam, et [wide] uni-
tatis originem instituit et ostendit,) potestatem istam dedit,
ut id solveretur in terris, [cozlis,] quod ille solvisset [in
terris.] This doth M. Sander translate, " Our Lord did first
give unto Peter," &c. ; whereas he should say, " Our Lord
was the first2 that gave to Peter (upon whom He builded His
Church, and instituted and shewed the beginning of unity,)
this power, that whatsoever he loosed, it should be loosed in
earth." This proveth that the auctority came first from
Christ, but not that it was given first to Peter. And if we
should understand it so that it was first given to Peter, yet
2 [The reading is "primum" not only in Bp. Fell's edition, p. 201,
but in the Venice impression of 1547, p. 491, and in that prepared by
Erasmus. Tom. ii. p. 107. Lugd. 1550.]

330 discovery of the dangerous rock [ch.
he meaneth not that it was given to reside in his person; but
that in him, as the attorney of the rest, it was given to them
also, as he saith, Lib. i. Ep. iii.1 : Petrus tamen, super quern
ozdificata ab eodem Domino fuerat Ecclesia, unus pro om
nibus loquens, et Ecclesice voce respondens, ait, Domine, ad
quern ibimus, &c. : " Yet Peter, upon whom the Church had
been builded by the same our Lord, as one speaking for all,
and answering in the voice of the Church, saith, 'Lord,
whither shall we go ?' " &c. : as he spake for all, so he re
ceived for all2. Which thing if it had been so, (as we find
not in the Scripture,) yet could it have been no ordinary
matter, to descend to one by succession. For the power being
once received by one in the name of the rest, and by him
delivered to the rest, it should be continued in succession of
every one that hath received it, and not every day to be
fetched anew from a several head. For that beginning came
from unity, which Cyprian speaketh of, when Peter, being
one, was the voice and mouth of the rest, and so received
power for the rest; which being once received, the Church
holdeth of Christ, and not of Peter or his successors; no more
than a corporation holdeth of him that was their attorney,
to receive either lands or authority from the Prince, but
holdeth immediately of the Prince. Wherefore this argu
ment followeth not; although the authority had begun in one,
that it should continue in one.
The second reason is, that the most perfect government is
meet for the Church: but "most perfection is in unity:" there
fore there ought to be one chief governor of all. This one
Chief Governor is our Saviour Christ ; Ruler both in heaven
and in earth : who, ascending into heaven, did not appoint
one Pope over all His Church; but Apostles, Evangelists, Pro
phets, Pastors, and Teachers; that we might "all meet in the
unity of faith," and grow into "a perfect man." Eph. iv.
11, 13.The third reason is, that " the state of the new testament
must be more perfect than the law :" but in the law there was
one high Pastor, the High Priest on earth : therefore there
must be one now also, and much rather. I answer, we have
Him indeed, our Chief Bishop and High Priest, of whom the
1 [Epist. lix. ad Cornel. Opp. p. 131. ed. Ox.]
2 [ThiB last clause seems to have been given by Fulke as part of
the extract from S. Cyprian, but erroneously.]

XIV.] OF THE POPISH CHURCH. 331
Aaronical Priest was but a shadow ; namely, Jesus Christ,
whose government is nothing less perfect and beneficial to His
Church in that He sitteth in heaven ; and hath, as before is
cited, left an ordinary ministry on earth, in many Pastors
and Teachers over every several congregation ; and not in
one Pope over all, which could not possibly either know
or attend to decide the one thousand part of controversies,
which are determined by the auctority of Christ's law, and
such Ministers as He hath ordained.
The fourth reason is of auctority. Cyprian, ad Jubaia-
num3 : Ecclesia, quce una est, &c. : " The Church, which is
one, was founded by our Lord's voice upon one which received
the keys thereof." And again, De simplicitat. Prazlat.4:
Quamvis, &c. : " Although Christ, after His resurrection,
giveth equal power to all His Apostles, and sayeth, 'As My
Father sent Me, so do I send you :' 'Receive the Holy Ghost:
If you remit to any man his sins, they shall be remitted ;
and if you retain them, they shall be retained ;' yet, that He
might shew the unity, He disposed by His auctority the origi
nal of that unity, beginning of one." But Cyprian proceedeth :
Hoc erant, &c. : " Verily the rest of the Apostles were the
same thing that Peter was ; endued with equal fellowship both
of honour and of power : but the beginning proceedeth from
unity, that the Church might be shewed to be one." These
words are plain to declare, that Cyprian acknowledgeth no
inequality of the Apostles, in respect of any auctority they
had: also that the building of the Church upon one, and
the receiving of the keys of one, was not an ordinary office
to descend by succession, but a singular privilege for that
one time ; to shew the beginning, and not the continuance, of
the power to proceed from one, but to be held always of One,
which is Jesus Christ ; without any shadows of one Bishop on
earth to signify the same, when Christ is revealed " with open
face" unto us now sitting in heaven. 2 Cor. iii. 18.
The like thing teacheth Optatus, Lib. ii. De schism.5:
Ut in una, &c. : " That in one chair in which Peter sat
8 [Epist. lxxiii. p. 203.]
4 [De unitate Ecclesim, Opp. pp. 107 — 8.]
6 [p. 31. ed. Du Pin. With respect to the evidence derived from
Optatus, see Chillingworth's Religion of Protestants, Chap. v. Works,
pp. 294—5. Lond. 1742. Poole's Testimony of St. Cyprian against
Rome, p. 129. lb. 1838.]

332 DISCOVERY OF THE DANGEROUS ROCK [cil,
unity might be kept of all men ; lest the rest of the Apostles
should every one challenge a chair to himself: so that he
should now be a schismatic and a sinner, that against a sin
gular chair should place another. Therefore in that one
chair, which is chief in gifts, Peter sat first." His meaning is
to defend the unity of the Church against the Donatists : but
of the auctority of Peter's chair over all other Bishops' chairs,
if he had spoken any thing, M. Sander would not have con
cealed it ; which doth us great wrong to think that we cannot
distinguish a chair of unity from a chair of auctority.
The place of Hierom, Cont. Jovin. Lib. i., hath been an
swered once or twice1; shewing that among the Apostles,
which were equal, Peter was chosen to be Primate, to avoid
contention ; which was a primacy of order, and not of aucto
rity. As for the collection of Leo, Bishop of Rome, that
Peter's primacy was "a platform for other Bishops," to under
stand that they must have a Bishop over them, if the very
Apostles had an head among them, [it] savoureth of the am
bition incident to that see which was appointed to be the seat
of Antichrist: although neither Leo himself challenged so much
as the Pope doth now ; neither the Bishops of his time would
yield unto him in so much as he challenged. For beside the
whole General Council of Chalcedon, that concluded against
him about the privileges of the Bishop of Constantinople ;
wherein they made him equal with the Bishop of Rome, the
title of seniority only reserved ; it appeareth by his Epistles
that many Bishops acknowledged not such primacy over
them as he claimed ; whereof he complaineth in divers of his
Epistles. The place of Cyprian, Lib. i. Epist. iii.2, " that heresies
have sprung because one judge is not acknowledged instead
of Christ, for the time, to whom the whole brotherhood might
obey," he cannot deny but it is meant of Cyprian of one
judge in every diocese : but he reasoneth a fortiori, that
there ought to be much rather one judge over all the world.
Howbeit I have shewed the inconsequence of this argument
by example of one physician, one schoolmaster, one judge in
temporal matters over the whole world ; to whom it is as im
possible to discharge such an office over all as it is profitable
for one such to be in every town. He saith that "particular
flocks are voluntary, and likewise particular Pastors ; but one
i [Supra, p. 292.] 2 [Ep. lix. p. 129. ed. Fell.]

XIV.J OF THE POPISH CHURCH. 333
flock and one Pastor is of absolute necessity on earth." Indeed,
the limits of particular flocks, and the persons of particular
Pastors, are left to the appointment and choice of the Church.
But that there should be particular flocks and Pastors, it is
of God's ordination, though God by His Apostles appointed it
to be so : yet is it of as absolute necessity, while the Church
is dispersed in divers places of the world, as that there is one
flock, and one Shepherd over all, Jesus Christ. And yet he is
not ashamed to challenge us, pag. 298, " Let the text be
named where Christ did institute many parishes : " whereas
he himself, pag. 294, quoteth Tit. i. and Act. xiv., which
places prove that Christ did institute many parishes ; except
he will say the Apostles did it without the institution of
Christ which he confesseth they did not without the special
inspiration of the Holy Ghost; or else will say, that the inspi
ration of the Holy Ghost, in the ordinance of many parishes,
differeth from the institution of Christ.
But he that wrangleth thus impudently and unreasonably
against the plain institution of many parishes by Christ,
bringeth " a plain text where it is said, ' Feed My sheep,' to
one Pastor." Hath this man any forehead, think you, that
calleth this a plain text to prove that there should be one
Shepherd upon earth over all the flock, because Christ upon
special occasion exhorted one man to feed His flock? Are
all things that were spoken to him singular unto him ? Christ
said to him, and to none other of the Apostles, " Come after Me,
Satan ; thou art an offence to Me ; for thou savourest not the
things that are of God, but of men." Christ said to Peter, and
to none other, " Put up thy sword into thy scabbard." Christ
said to Peter, and to none other, " Thou wilt deny Me thrice."
0 painted Rock of the popish Church ! that hath no better
ground than this saying, " Feed My sheep ;" when he that
challengeth auctority hereby of all other feedeth least, and
poisoneth most.
But let us return, and see what auctority of old Fathers
he hath to prove one pastoral pre-eminence over all the
Church. Cyprian, Lib. i. Ep. viii.3: Deus unus est, et Christus
unus, et una Ecclesia, et Cathedra una, super Petram
Domini voce fundata : " There is one God, and one Christ,
and one Church, and one chair, founded upon Peter by our
Lord's voice." Hear [Here] I say, first of all, that he doth
3 [Epist. xliii. p. 83. ed. Oxon.]

334 DISCOVERY OF THE DANGEROUS ROCK [CH.
falsify Saint Cyprian's words, turning Petram into Petrum1;
so that his saying is, " There is one chair, by our Lord's voice
founded on the Rock. Another altar or a new Priesthood
cannot be appointed, beside one altar and one Priesthood.
Whosoever gathereth elsewhere scattereth abroad," &c. But
if the word were Petrum, and not Petram, yet the whole
discourse of that Epistle sheweth, that Cyprian meaneth by
these words to set forth not the pastoral pre-eminence of one
man over the whole Church, but one Bishop in every diocese.
For -he writeth against five Elders or Priests, which had
chosen one Felicissimus, a schismatic, to be Bishop in Carthage
against him.
But what other malicious ignorance or shameless im
pudence is this, that he perverteth the saying of Christ of
Himself to the Pope, " There shall be one sheepfold, and
one Shepherd?" Joan. x. Yet see his reason: "A flock of
sheep is one by force of one Pastor : therefore, if the Pastor
on earth be not one, the flock is not one on earth." If this
argument be good, how is the flock one upon earth when
there is no Pope ? For the see hath been void divers times
many days, many months, and sometime many years. How
was the flock one when there were two or three Popes at
once, and that so often, and so long together ? Therefore the
flock on earth is one, by that one only Shepherd Jesus Christ;
whose divine voice all the sheep hear, though in His humanity
He be ascended into heaven ; and not by any one mortal man,
to whom they cannot be gathered, neither, being so far abroad
dispersed, can hear his voice.
And the whole order of the Church on earth tendeth to
an unity in Christ ; and not in one man whatsoever, as one
general Pastor. For if that one should be an heretic, and all
the Church tend to unity in him, the whole Church should be
wrapped in heresy with him. That divers Popes have been
heretics, as Liberius, Anastasius, Vigilius, Honorius, John the
XXIII., in known condemned heresies, it is too manifest by
records of antiquity that it should be denied. Wherefore Christ
instituted no such ordinary auctority, to be limited in one
succession, that it should have pre-eminence and jurisdiction
over all the Church : seeing unity is best maintained in
doctrine by His word, in government by the discipline by
Him appointed. And unity in truth cannot be had at the
> [It would appear that "Petrum" is the correct reading.]

XIV.] OF THE POPISH CHURCH. 335
hands of a man which is a liar : and experience sheweth, that
the jurisdiction which the Bishop of Rome hath claimed hath
been occasion of most and greatest schisms and dissensions
that have been in particular Churches ; when no man would
obey his ordinary Pastors and Bishops without the appealing
to the see of Rome : beside so many schisms as have been in
the same see ; which have set all the Christian world together
by the ears, while they were divided in factions; some holding
with one Pope, and some with another, and some with the
third, and some with none of them all.

THE FIFTEENTH CHAPTER.
Sander. That the Bishop of Rome is that one ordinary Pastor who Sandt.ii.
succeedeth in S. Peter's chair, and is above all Bishops, according to
the meaning of God's word. Why S. Peter died at Rome. S. Augus
tin's mind touching the Supremacy of the Pope of Rome.
Fulke. The first reason is, that although Peter at the Fulke.
first was rather high Bishop of the Circumcision than of the
Gentiles, yet because he did "at length settle himself at Rome
by God's appointment, and left a successor there," he sayeth he
"may well affirm that the Bishop of Rome's primacy is war
ranted by God's word." A strange kind of warrantise : for to
omit that the primacy over the Gentiles by God's word is
given to another, namely to Paul, from whom he can never
prove that it was taken afterward ; where hath he any word
of God to prove that by His appointment Peter settled himself
at Rome, and appointed there a successor ?
He quoteth Irenseus, Lib. iii. Cap. iii., who reporteth that
Linus, the first Bishop of Rome, was ordained not by Peter
only, but by Peter and Paul the Apostles, who founded the
Church there2: even as Polycarpus by the Apostles in Asia
was made Bishop in Smyrna ; which Church, with the Church
of Ephesus, founded by Paul, and continued by John, the
Apostles, he citeth as witnesses alike with the Church of
Rome of the tradition of the Apostles, against Valentinus and
Marcion, which, being void of Scriptures, bragged of the
tradition of the Apostles : but of Peter's primacy, or his suc
cessors over all Bishops, Irenseus saith not a word. No more
2 [" Fundantes igitur et instruentes beati Apostoli Ecclesiam, Lino
episcopatum administrandse Ecclesise tradiderunt."]

336 DISCOVERY OF THE DANGEROUS ROCK [ch.
doth Tertullian, whom likewise he quoteth, De prazscript.1 ;
but, even as Irenasus, would have the tradition of the Apos
tles, against those heretics that boasted of it, to be tried by
the confession of those Churches that were founded by the
Apostles. His second reason is upon a false supposition, that he
hath already proved Peter alone to be the Rock, to have
chief authority in feeding, &c. ; all which things are untrue.
That Peter came to Rome2, he is not content that it
be testified by all ancient ecclesiastical writers, but he saith
it is witnessed by the express word of God ; 1 Pet. v. :
" The Church which is gathered together in Babylon saluteth
you3." Although the history of Peter's coming to Rome,
and sitting there twenty-five years4, testified by so many
1 [Cap. xxxvi.]
2 [Sanders (Rocke, p. 308.) remarks, that "some brainesick men
woulde now persuade the contrarie." So early as the year 1520, a
curious treatise was published by Ulricus Velenus, to prove "Aposto
lum Petrum Rhomam non uenisse, neque illic passum." Bishop
Fisher wrote a reply: (Olearii Biblioth. i. 406. Jense, 1711.) and the
best work upon the negative side of the question is Care's Modest En
quiry wliether St. Peter were ever at Rome, and Bishop of that Church.
4to. Lond. 1687.]
3 [" Tametsi enim veteres existimaverint D. Petrum vocabulo
Babylonis signiflcasse urbem Romam, probabilis est Scaligeri conjec-
tura, qui ex ipsa Babylone scriptam a Petro putat Epistolam hanc ad
Judseos dispersos, qui habitabant in provinciis quarum Synagogae pen-
debant a Patriarcha Babylonico." (De Marca, De concord. Sacerd.
et Imp. Lib. vi. Cap. i. Tom. ii. p. 174. Paris. 1669.)]
* [It is not easy to ascertain precisely what can have originated
the idea of this fabulous duration of S. Peter's episcopate. Vedelius
supposes that the vulgar opinion was founded on the assertion of
Eusebius, that the Apostle went to Rome in the second year of
Claudius, and suffered martyrdom in the last year of the reign of
Nero, between which limits intervenes the space of a quarter of a cen
tury. (De Cathedra Petri, Lib. ii. Cap. xv. p. 296. Franeker. 1640.)
Antoine Pagi's conjecture, however, is much to be preferred ; namely,
that the error was produced by a misapprehension of a passage in the
second chapter of the treatise D^ mortibus Persecutorum, written by
Lactantius, (or Lucius Cecilius, according to Le Nourri.) Here it
is declared that, after the ascension of the Saviour, the Disciples
" dispersi sunt per omnem terram ad Evangelium prsedicandum, sicut
illis Magister Dominus imperaverat; et per annos xxv., usque ad prin-
cipium Neroniani imperii, per omnes provincias et civitates Ecclesia?
fundamenta miserunt. Cumque jam Nero imperaret, Petrus Romam

XV.] OF THE POPISH CHURCH. 337
writers6, is proved false in many circumstances by the plain
word of God, yet I am content to admit that he came thither
toward the latter end of Nero's reign. But that in his Epistle
he sent salutations from Rome, I cannot admit, seeing that in
such manner of salutations men use not to write allegorically ;
albeit that in the Revelation of Saint John Rome, the see of
Antichrist, is mystically called Babylon. But Babylon, from
whence S. Peter did write, is more probably to be taken for
a city of that name in Egypt, where Mark was with him ;
whom the consent of antiquity affirmeth to have been Bishop
of Alexandria, a city of Egypt also : who could not have been
with him at Rome, seeing it is manifest by the first and
second of the Epistle to the Galathians, and by divers of Saint
Paul's Epistles, that if ever Peter was at Rome, it was but a
short time in the latter end of Nero his empire ; whereas
Mark died in the eighth year of his reign, before Peter could
be at Rome. For in the tenth year Paul was brought pri
soner to Rome, Saint Luke accompanying him ; who would
not have omitted to shew that Peter was there to have met
him, as the rest of the brethren did, if he had then been at
Rome. Again, Paul, in so many Epistles as he writeth from
Rome, sending salutations from mean personages, would not
advenit," &c. The period, then, which has reference to the preaching
of all the Apostles equally, seems to have been wrongly considered to
relate to S. Peter's possession of the Roman see. (Critica Histor. —
Chronol. in Annales C. Baronii, Tom. i. p. 37. Colon. Allob. 1705.)
Francois Pagi, who edited this work in its completeness, and was
nephew to the author, has adopted the same explanation of this
difficulty in his Breviarium Gestorum Pontiff. Rom. T. i. p. 3. Lucse,
1729.] 6 [The Chronicon of Eusebius is "in primis" cited by Baronius, (ad
an. 44. §. xxv.) and likewise by Bellarmin, (De Rom. Pont. Lib. ii.
Cap. iv.) as bearing witness that S. Peter was Bishop of Rome for five
and twenty years : but, as Joseph Scaliger observes, " Grseca non
habent.'' (Animadvers. p. 189.) The interpolation appears in the
Latin version by S. Jerom, (p. 44.) who has repeated the statement
in his Catalogue of Ecclesiastical Writers. (Cap. i.) For such occa
sional depravations S. Jerom prepares us by saying in his Prcefatio in
Chronica, "Et Grseca fidelissime express)', et nonnulla quse mihi inter-
missa videbantur adjeci, in Romana maxime historia." It is strange
that the learned Benedictine Clemencet should speak of " les 25 annees
de Pontificat, que la Chronique d'Eusebe donne a Saint Pierre."
(L'Art de verifier les Dates, ii. 356. A Paris, 1750.)]
22
[fulke, 11.]

338 DISCOVERY OF THE DANGEROUS ROCK [cH.
have omitted mention of Peter, if he had been there. Saint
Luke then, affirming that he tarried two years in prison at
Rome, which must be until the twelfth year of Nero, it fol
loweth that, if Peter came, he came very late to Rome, within
two year before his death ; at which time it was not possible
that Mark, which was dead four years before, could be at
Rome with him. Wherefore Babylon in that text cannot be
taken for Rome.
Another reason of the Pope's Supremacy he maketh, that
Peter not only came thither, but also died there. A simple
reason why the city of Rome should have that prerogative,
because she murdered the Apostles. Rather might Jerusalem
claim it, in which Christ the Head of all died.
After this he telleth the fable, out of the counterfeit Ege-
sippus1, of Simon Magus flying in the air, and the Emperor
Nero his great delight in his sorcery. The credit of Egesip-
pus he defendeth, by blaming his translator for adding names
of cities which had none such when Egesippus lived2- But
1 [De excidio Hierosolymitano, Lib. iii. Cap. ii. fol. xxix. Colon. 1544.
— For the remains of the true Hegesippus, who wrote about the year
170, and is placed by S. Jerom before Justin Martyr, (De Vir. illust.
Cap. xxii.) vid. Grabii Spicileg. ii. 205 — 13. Oxon. 1714. Routhii Reli-
quioe SacrcB, i. 191 — 203. lb. 1814. The variations in the name of the
Pseudo-Ben-Grorion are Josephus, Joseppus, Josippus, Igisippus, Egesip
pus, Hegesippus ; and Colomesius speaks of the depravation of his title
in manuscripts which belonged to Isaac Vossius. (Paralipom. Opp.
p. 695. Hamb. 1709.) Bishop Pearson believed him to have been an
author of the fourth or fifth century ; (Lect. iii. in Acta Apostol. §. iv.)
but Gerard Vossius more prudently places him amongst historians
" incerte atatis." (De Hist. Lat. Lib. iii. Par. ii. p. 219. Amst. 1697.)
Elsewhere, (De Hist. Grme. ii. viii.) he assents to the likelihood of
Joseph Scaliger's opinion, that Gorionides lived at all events after the
year 600; and Cap. xiv. he represents him as "infimse antiquitatis
scriptorem," one who existed not long after A. d. 96S. Oudin is not
satisfied with this degree of lateness, but brings Hegesippus down to
1120. (Comm. ii. 1026.) Tillemont declares that " On ne scait quel
est cet auteur, ni en quel tems il a vecu;" (M'emoires, Tome i. p. 240.
A Brux. 1732.) and Struvius determines that he was not an impostor.
(Dissert, de doctis Impostoribus, §. v. p. 11. Jense, 1710.) But whether
he be considered an author or a compiler, or whether his work be
vitiated or not, it is certain from the antiquity of two MSS. described
by Mabillon that he must have flourished before the seventh age.
(Iter Italicum, p. 14. Lut. Paris. 1724.)]
2 [Sanders is not by any moans the only Romanist who has ap-

XV.] OF THE POPISH CHURCH. 339
that Simon Magus shewed no experiment of sorcery before
Nero, as this counterfeit Egesippus reporteth, it is plain by
Plinius, Lib. xxx. Cap. ii. Natur. Histor.; who, shewing how
desirous Nero was, and what means he had, to have trial
thereof, yet never could come by any. It was a practice of
old time to feign such fables for love of the Apostles : as Ter
tullian witnesseth, De Baptis?, of a Priest of Asia, that was
convicted and confessed that he feigned for the love of Paul
a writing unto Tecla, in which many absurd things were con
tained. Again, so many apocryphal Gospels, Epistles, Itine
raries, and Passions, as are counterfeited under the name of
Apostles and ancient Fathers, who knoweth not to be fables
and false inventions ? Among which this fable of Simon Ma
gus and Peter is one.
pealed with confidence to the Pseudo-Hegesippus. The Jesuit Coster
cites his evidence as genuine. (Enchirid. Controvers. p. 131. Colon.
Agripp. 1599.) Likewise Bellai-min, (De Rom. Pont. L. i. C. xxiii.
et Lib. ii. Cap. iii.) saying in the latter place that he was "vicinus
Apostolorum temporibus." But since this perplexing writer makes
mention of Constantinople, a name not heard of till the year 330, we
must concur in the judgment of Baronius : " Feruntur Hegesippi
nomine Commentarius de excidio Ierosolymitano, et ad ipsum ap-
posita Anacephaleosis : sed alterius plane auctoris est opus, qui (ut
alias diximus) post tempora Constantini floruerit.'' (Annall. Tom. ii.
ad an. 167. §¦ xv.) Grotser, in the first volume of his Defensio Controv.
Bellarm., (col. 1060. Ingolst. 1607.) asks with reference to Whitaker's
proof that this work was not composed by the ancient Hegesippus,
"Quis ex eruditiorum numero abnuit?" In his second volume, how
ever, (col. 672. lb. 1609.) he seems to hesitate, and affirms that " it is
not so evident that these Commentaries were not written by the old
Hegesippus as that the sun does not shine at midnight;" using the
argument of Sanders, that interpolations may have been inserted at a
succeeding time.]
3 [Cap. xvii. Rigaltius remarks that the name of Thecla had
crept from some margin into the text. The Acts of Paul and Thecla
were rejected as apocryphal by S. Jerom, (Catal. Seriptt. Eccl. Cap.
vii.) and were afterwards condemned by Pope Gelasius in the year
496. (Gratiani Decrct. Dist. xv. C. iii.) Baronius endeavours to
maintain their credit, (Martyrol. die Septemb. 23.) and quotes in
their favour a spurious Epistle of S. Jerom to Oceanus. (See before,
p. 97, note 7.) Grabe has published this curious narrative both in
Greek and Latin. (Spicil. Tom. i. pp. 95—127.) Conf. Fabricii Cod.
Apoc. Nov. Test. ii. 794—6. Hamb. 1703. Schmidii Decas Dissertt.
Apostoli uxorati, p. 364. Helmst. 1714.]
22—2

340 DISCOVERY OF THE DANGEROUS ROCK [cH.
That S. Luke maketh no mention of Peter's death, he
preventeth the objection, because he continued not his story so
far : which [no] doubt (saith he) he would not have omitted,
" if he had gone so far forward in his story." But seeing he
brought Paul to Rome, both in his journey and in his history,
why maketh he no mention of Peter's being there ; which, if
their story were true, must have sit there twenty years before?
To omit therefore the four causes why Peter should die at
Rome ; whereof three are taken out of a counterfeit August.,
De Sanctis Horn, xxvii.1, the fourth out of Leo and Gregory,
Bishops of Rome ; he cometh to decide the controversy be
tween the Greeks and Latins, who was first successor of Peter,
Linus or Clemens; taking part with them that affirm Clemens:
although Irenasus, the most ancient writer of any that is
extant, name Linus : who was not a Grecian far off, but a
Frenchman at Lyons, near hand to Italy: whose authority al
though he reject in naming Linus to be ordained Bishop by
both the Apostles, yet he glorieth much that he calleth the
Church of Rome maximam, et antiquissimam, &c.2, " the
greatest, and the most ancient, and known to all men; founded
and settled by two most glorious Apostles, Peter and Paul."
And again : Ad hanc Ecclesiam, &c. : " To this Church, by
reason of the mightier principality, every Church, that is,
the faithful that are every where, must needs agree3." But
he proceedeth, and sheweth the cause why : In qua semper
ab hiis qui sunt undique conservata est ea quoz est ab Apos
tolis traditio : " In which always that tradition which is
from the Apostles hath been always kept of them that are
round about."
M. Sander calleth it wilful ignorance in M. Jewell, that
saith " the mightier principality" spoken of in Irenseus is
meant of the civil dominion, and Roman empire ; whereas
it hath relation to the former titles of commendation, that it
was "the greatest," and "the most ancient:" the greatest, he
1 [alias Serm. ccii. in Append. Tom. v. ed. Ben. col. 138. This
Sermon is found also among the works of S. Ambrose, (v. 142. Lut.
Paris. 1661.) and those of S. Maximus Taurinensis. (Raynaudi Heptas
Prcesulum, p. 231. Par. 1671.)]
2 [Adv. Hcer. Lib. iii. Cap. iii. See Beaven's Account ofS. Irenceus,
pp. 63 — 68. Lond. 1841.]
3 [" convenire," should resort.]

XV.] OF THE POPISH CHURCH. 341
saith, because it was founded by Peter, the greatest Apostle.
But so saith not Irenseus : for he saith it was founded " by two
most glorious Apostles," and not by Peter alone. It was then
greatest, because the greatest number of Christians were
in Rome, as the greatest city. But how is it " the most
ancient" but in respect of Peter's seniority ; for otherwise
Jerusalem and Antioch were ancienter in time ? I answer, two
ways. First, it is sophistical to urge the superlative degree
grammatically : as when we say potentissimo Principi, " to
the most mighty Prince," doctissimo viro, " to the best
learned man," &c, we do not mean that no Prince is equal
or superior in power, nor that no man is equal or superior in
learning, to him whom we so commend ; but to shew the power
and learning of those persons to be excellent great. Secondly
I answer, that Irenseus speaketh conjunctly it is sophistical
to understand severally. He saith there is no Church of
such greatness, so ancient, and so well known, as the Church
of Rome. From this blind collection out of Irenseus he cometh down
groping to Cyprian ; who, speaking of certain factious heretics
that sailed from Carthage to Rome, to complain of Saint
Cyprian and other Bishops of Afric to Pope Cornelius, [saith :]
Lib. i. Ep. iii. ad Cor.4: Audent et ad Petri, &c. : "They
dare carry letters from schismatical and profane men unto the
chair of Peter, and the principal Church, from whence the
priestly unity began : neither consider that they are Romans,
whose faith is praised by the report of the Apostle; unto
whom falsehood can have none access."
In this saying we must note the privileges of S. Peter's Su
premacy to be at Rome. 1. " This [There] is S. Peter's chair ;
that is, his ordinary power of teaching," &c. Nay, rather, the
Bishop's seat ; which he and Paul did set up there, as Irenseus
sheweth. Li. iii. Ca. iii. 2. " There is the principal Church,
because the Bishop of Rome succeedeth the Prince of the
Apostles." Nay, rather, because it is the greatest Church,
being gathered in the greatest city of the world ; as Irenseus
also calleth it. 3. " The priestly unity began not in Rome,
but in Peter : therefore there is the whole authority of Peter."
The argument is naught : the beginning of unity proveth not
authority. 4. " This word ' unity' doth import, that as Peter
* [Epist. lix. pp. 135—6. ed. Fell.]

342 DISCOVERY OF THE DANGEROUS ROCK [cH.
alone had in him the whole power of the chief Shepherd, so
Cornelius his successor hath in him the same power." This
argument is of small importance ; for neither had Peter alone
such power, nor any of his successors. 5. " Where he saith
infidelity can have no access to the Romans, what other thing
is it than to say, [that] in the Church of Rome he ruleth for
whose faith Christ prayed?" Luc. xxii.
Christ prayed for the faith of all His Apostles, and of all
His disciples to the end of the world. Joan. xvii. Beside this,
Master Sander translateth perfidia, which signifieth falsehood
or false dealing, " infidelity." Secondly, that which Cyprian saith
of all the faithful Romans, he draweth to his Pope. Thirdly,
where Cyprian sheweth how long they shall continue without
falsehood; namely, so long as they retain the faith praised by
the Apostle, he maketh it perpetual to the see of Rome ;
whereas the Romans themselves write to Cyprian of those
praises of the Apostle : Quarum laudum et glories degene-
rem fuisse, maximum crimen est : "Of which praises and
glory to be grown out of kind, it is the greatest crime1."
Finally, if Cyprian had thought the Pope and Church of
Rome could not err, he would never have maintained an
opinion against them ; as he did in rebaptizing them that were
baptized by heretics.
The sixth : We must " add hereto, that Cyprian calleth
Rome Ecclesioz Catholicoz matricem et radicem, ' the mother
and root of the Catholic Church'." Lib. iv. Epist. viii.2 We
find not Rome so called there. We find that Cyprian and his
fellows exhorted all such troublesome persons as went over
sea, and carried false tales, ut Ecclesioz Catholicoz matricem
et radicem agnoscerent et tenerent, "that they would acknow
ledge and hold the mother and root of the Catholic Church:"
by which words they dissuaded them from joining with schis
matics ; who, being condemned in one Church, would gad up
and down for absolution in another.
The seventh : " Did not S. Cyprian confess Cornelius to
have received the appellation of Basilides lawfully out of
Spain?" Li. i. Ep. iv.3 There is no word of any such con
fession or appellation in that Epistle. But rather, if you
1 [See before, p. 159.]
2 [Epist. xlviii. p. 91. ed. Ox.]
3 [Ep. lxvii. pp. 172—3.]

XV.] OF THE POPISH CHURCH. 343
suppose an appellation and a restitution by the Bishop of
Rome, Cyprian and thirty-six Bishops with him determine
the same restitution to be void and of none effect : Neque
[Nee] rescindere ordinationem jure perfectam potest, quod
Basilides, post crimina sua detecta, et conscientiam [etiam]
propria confessione nudatam, Romam pergens, Stephanum
collegam nostrum, longe positum, et gestoz rei ac [tacitoz]
veritatis ignarum, fefellit ; ut ambiret [exambiret] reponi se
injuste in episcopatum, de quo fuerat juste depositus. Hozc
[Hoc] eo pertinent, [pertinet,] ut Basilidis non tarn abolita
sint quam cumulata delicta : ut ad superiora peccata ejus,
etiam fallacioz et circumventionis crimen accesserit. Neque
enim tarn culpandus est ille, cui negligenter obreptum [est,]
quam hie execrandus, qui fraudulenter obrepsit. Obrepere
autem [si] hominibus Basilides potuit, Deo non potest; cum
scriptum sit, Deus non irridetur : [deridetur :] " Neither can
it make frustrate the ordination lawfully made, that Basilides,
after his crimes were detected, and his conscience opened by
his own confession, going to Rome, hathMeceived our fellow-
Bishop Stephen, being far off, and ignorant of the matter and
of the truth; that he might ambitiously seek to be unjustly
restored into his bishoprick, from which he was justly deposed.
These things tend to this end, that the offences of Basilides
are not so much abolished as increased : so that to his former
sins the crime of deceitfulness and circumvention is added.
For neither is he so much to be blamed, who was negligently
deceived, as he is to be abhorred, which did craftily deceive
him. But if Basilides could deceive men, he could not de
ceive God ; seeing it is written, ' God is not mocked'."
Here is no lawful appellation spoken of, but the Bishop
of Rome's sentence pronounced void ; and he blamed for his
negligence and rashness, to meddle with matters whereof he
could have no knowledge, by means of distance of place.
But if M. Sander reply, that he is not reproved for taking
such appellations, he must hear what Cyprian saith of such
appellations, which began to be used in his days, unto Corne
lius, Bishop of Rome, immediately after the words cited by
him, Lib. i. Epi. iii.4, of those schismatics that were so bold
as to sail to Rome, and carry letters as above : Quce autem
causa veniendi, et pseudo-Episcopum contra Episcopos fac-
4 [Supra, pag. 341.]

344 DISCOVERY OF THE DANGEROUS ROCK [cH,
turn nunciandi ? Aut enim placet illis quod fecerunt, et in
suo scelere perseverant; aut si displicet, et recedunt, sciunt
quo revertantur. Nam cum statutum sit omnibus nobis, et
ozquum sit pariter et justum, ut uniuscujusque causa illic
audiatur ubi est crimen admissum; et singulis Pastoribus
portio gregis sit ascripta, quam regat unusquisque et gu-
bernet, rationem sui actus Domino redditurus; oportet utique
eos quibus prozsumus non circumcursare, nee Episcoporum
concordiam cohozrentem sua subdola et fallaci temeritate
collidere ; sed agere illic causam suam, ubi et accusatores
habere et testes sui criminis possint: nisi paucis desperatis
et perditis minor videtur esse auctoritas ' Episcoporum in
Africa constitutorum ; qui jam de illis judicaverunt, et eorum
conscientiam, multis delictorum laqueis vinctam, judicii sui
nuper gravitate damnarunt : " But what cause had they to
come, and to report that a false Bishop was made against the
Bishops ? For either that which they have done pleaseth them,
and they continue in their wickedness ; or if it displease them,
and they go back from it, they know whither they should
return. For whereas it is decreed of us all, and is also meet
and right, that every man's cause should be heard there
where the crime was committed ; and a portion of the flock
is committed to every Pastor, which every one ought to rule
and govern, as he that shall yield an account of his doings to
the Lord ; verily it behoveth them over whom we have rule
not to run about, neither by their crafty and deceitful rash
ness to craze the concord of Bishops agreeing together ; but
there to plead their matter, where they may have both accu
sers and witnesses of their crime : except the authority of the
Bishops ordained in Africa seemeth to a few desperate and
wicked fellows to be less ; which have already judged of them,
and condemned their consciences, bound with the weight of
their judgment in many cords of their offences." This place
of Cyprian declareth not only that the Bishops of Africa had
decreed against such appellations ; but also that they thought
their authority nothing inferior to the Bishops of Italy, nor
to the Bishop of Rome himself.
The eighth note out of Cyprian is, that he " required
Stephanus the Pope to depose Marcianus, the Bishop of Aries
in France: which to do in another province is a sign that the
Pope of Rome is above other Bishops." If it were true that

XV.] OF THE POPISH CHURCH. 345
M. Sander sheweth, it might prove the Bishop of Rome to
be a Primate or Metropolitan : it could not prove him to be a
Bishop over all the world. But it is utterly false that he
saith, " Cyprian required the Pope Stephen to depose him :"
for he was deposed by the judgment of all the Bishops of the
West Church ; ab universis Sacerdotibus judicatus, " con
demned of all the Priests." Only he exhorteth Stephen of
Rome, which was negligent in this behalf, to join with the
rest of the Bishops of France in ordering of another Bishop
in his stead ; who long since hath been excommunicated, and
deposed from his place, for taking part with Novatian the
heretic. And lest you should think the whole matter to be
referred to the Bishop of Rome, these are his words in the
same Epistle : Li. iii. Ep. xiii.1 : Idcirco enim, frater cha-
rissime, copiosum corpus est Sacerdotum ; concordioz mutuoz
glutine, atque unitatis vinculo copulatum : ut si quis ex col-
legio nostro hozresim facere, et gregem Christi lacerare et
vastare tentaverit, subveniant cozteri; et, quasi Pastores utiles
et misericordes, oves Dominicas in gregem colligant : " For
therefore, most well-beloved brother, the body or fellowship
of Priests is plentiful; being coupled together by the glue of
mutual concord, and the band of amity : so that if any of our
company shall assay to make an heresy, or to rent or waste
the flock of Christ, the rest should give aid ; and, as profitable
and merciful Shepherds, gather again the Lord's sheep into
His fold."
The ninth note is, that notwithstanding Cyprian "dis
sented from Pope Stephanus in opinion concerning the bap
tizing of such as had been baptized by heretics, yet he
denied not his prerogative; but kept still the unity of the
militant Church, in acknowledging the visible head thereof."
He quoteth his Ep. contra Stephan.2, wherein is no word
of acknowledging the Pope's prerogative : but contrariwise
every child may see, that seeing he did boldly dissent in
opinion from the Bishop of Rome, and wrote against him, he
held no such prerogative of that see as the Papists now
maintain, that the Bishop of Rome cannot err. Indeed
Cyprian professeth, that notwithstanding he differed from
him in opinion, yet he would not depart from the unity of
the Church. But what is this for acknowledging of a visible
1 [Epist. lxviii. p. 178.] 2 [Ep. Ixxiv. p. 210.]

346 DISCOVERY OF THE DANGEROUS ROCK

[CH.

head; whereof M. S. speaketh much, but Cyprian never a
word ; neither in that place, nor in any of all his works ?
The next authority is Hippolytus; whose words Prud[entius]
rehearseth : Peristeph. in Passion. Hip} : Respondet, Fugite,
&c. :
" His answer was, O flee the schisms
Of cursed Novat's lore:
And to the Cath'lic folk and flock
Yourselves again restore.
Let only one faith rule and reign,
Kept in the Church of old:
Which faith both Paul doth still retain,
And Peter's chair doth hold."
No doubt this was a good exhortation, so long as the
temple of Peter and Paul at Rome did hold the old Catholic
faith : from which seeing the Pope is now fled, we may not
honour the empty chair of Peter, to think there is his faith
where his doctrine is not.
After Hippolytus followeth Sozomenus2; who reporteth
that Athanasius, and certain other Bishops of the Greek
Church, came to Rome, to Julius the Bishop there, to com
plain that they were unjustly deposed by the Arians. Where
upon the Bishop of Rome, finding them upon examination to
agree with the Nicene Council, " did receive them into the
communion ; as one that bad care of them all, for the worthi
ness of his own see ; and did restore to every of them their
own Churches," &c. Here M. Sander hath his nine obser
vations : he delighteth much in that number. But it shall
not need to stand upon them. It is confessed that in Sozome-
nus's time, the writer of this story, who judgeth of things
done according to the present state in which he lived, the
see of Rome was grown into great estimation ; and counted
the first see, or principal in dignity of all Bishops' sees in
the world. Yea, it is true that Socrates, a writer of histories
as well as he, sayeth, that, long before his time, the Bishop's
1 [Opp. fol. ISO, b. Antverp. 1540.
" Respondit, Fugite, O miseri, execranda Novati
Schismata: Catholicis reddite vos populis.
Una fides vigeat, prisco qu.-e condita templo est;
Quam Paulus retinet, quamque cathedra Petri."]
2 [Lib. iii. Cap. viii. ed. Lat. Conf; Cassiodorii Hist. Tripart. L. iv;
C. xv.]

XV.] OF THE POPISH CHURCH. 347
see of Rome, as well as of Alexandria, was "grown beyond
the bands [bounds] of Priesthood into a foreign lordship and
dominion." Soc. Lib. vii. Cap. xi.3 But if we consider the
records of the very time in which Julius lived, we shall not
find that the dignity of his see was such, as that he had
such authority as Sozomenus ascribeth to him; and much less
such as M. Sander imagineth of him.
In Epiphanius there is an Epistle of one Marcellus, which,
beside that he called him his fellow-minister, acknowledged
no such dignity of his see. Lib. iii. To. i.4 And Sozomenus
himself testifieth that the Bishops of the East derided and
contemned his commandments : Lib. iii. Cap. viii. : and, Cap. xi.5,
they were as bold to depose him, with the Bishops of the
West, as he was to check them, that they called not him to
their Council. Wherein, as I confess, they did evil : yet
thereby they shewed evidently, that the Christian world in
those days did not acknowledge the usurpation of the Bishop
of Rome, as M. Sander saith they did. Neither durst they
ever to dissent from him, if it had been a Catholic doctrine
received in the Church, that the Bishop of Rome is head of
the Church, Bishop of all Bishops, judge of all causes, and
one which cannot err. As for Athanasius, Paulus, &c, and
other Bishops, being tossed to and fro by their enemies, no
marvel if they were glad to find any comfort at the Bishop
of Rome's hands, having first sought to the Emperors for
refuge ; of whom sometime they were holpen, sometime they
were hindered, as information was given either for them or
against them.
But "Arnobius," he sayeth, "giveth a marvellous witness
for the Church of Rome," in Psal. cvi.6 : Petrus, in deserto, &c. :
" Peter, wandering in the desert of this world, until he came
to Rome, preached the Baptism of Jesus Christ, in whom all
floods are blessed from Peter unto this day. He hath made
the going forth of the waters into thirst; so that he which
shall go forth of the Church of Peter shall perish for thirst."
3 [Fulke translates the Latin of Musculus : " ultra Sacerdotii limites
ad externum dominatum progresso."]
4 [Opp. Tom. i. p. 834. ed. Petav.]
6 [pp. 589, 591. edit. Muse. See Du Moulin's Defence of the
Catlwlicke Faith, pp. 421 — 23. Lond. 1610.]
6 [sig. p 7. Vide supra, p. 319, n. 3.]

348 DISCOVERY OF THE DANGEROUS ROCK [cH.
It is a marvellous wit of M. Sander, that can find such mar
vellous prerogative of Peter in this place, which Arnobius
would have in the example of Peter to be understood of all men :
Quid est Ascendunt ? Disce in Petro ; ut quod in ipso inve-
neris, in omnibus cernas. Ascendit Petrus, &c. : " What
meaneth this, ' They go up as high as heaven' ? Learn in
Peter; to the end that that which thou shalt find in Peter
thou mayest see in all men. Peter went up as high as hea
ven when he said, 'Although I should die with Thee, yet
will I not deny Thee,' " &c. And so applying the understanding
of the Psalm to Peter, and in him to all Christians, he cometh
to that marvellous testimony of the Church of Rome which
M. Sander reporteth; shewing how, after bis repentance, God
exalted him to be a preacher of that Baptism of Jesus Christ,
in whom all floods are blessed from Peter to this day. Where
M. Sander useth a false translation ; saying the floods are
blessed of Peter, and expoundeth the floods to be the
Churches ; whereas Arnobius speaketh of all waters, which
in Christ are sanctified to the use of Baptism, from the Apos
tles' time until this day. But it is a Catholic argument, that
whosoever goeth out of the Church of Peter goeth out of
the Church of Christ : therefore Rome is the mother Church,
and Peter the head thereof. Even like this : Whosoever goeth
out of the Church of Paul, or of any of the Apostles, where
soever they planted it, doth perish : therefore Corinth and Paul,
or any other city and the Apostle that preached there, may
be taken for the head and Pastor, and mother Church of all
other. Yet is this with M. Sander a marvellous testimony.
Optatus succeedeth Arnobius : Cont. Pamen de nat. [Par-
men. Donat.] Lib. ii.1 : Negare non potes, &c. : " Thou canst
not deny but that thou knowest that to Peter first the
Bishop's chair was given in the city of Rome ; in which Peter,
the head of all the Apostles, hath sit ; whereof he was also
called Cephas2: in which chair unity might be kept of all
men ; so that he should be a schismatic which should place any
other chair against the singular chair." [. . .] " Unto Peter suc
ceeded Linus : unto Linus succeeded Clemens :" and so nameth
all the Bishops until Siricius, which lived in his time 3 ; of
1 [Lib. ii. Capp. ii, iii.]
2 [See page 302, note.]
* [It is certain that Optatus wrote about a.d. 370, and that the

XV-] OF THE POPISH CHURCH. 349
whom he saith, qui noster est socius, " which is our fellow."
In this sentence Optatus laboureth to prove against the Dona
tists, which were schismatics, that there is but one Catholic
Church, from which they were departed. He useth the argu
ment of unity, commended in Peter's chair ; whom he calleth
head of the Apostles in respect of unity, and not of autho
rity : which appeareth by this, that in the end he accounteth
Siricius, Bishop of Rome and Peter's successor, not head of
all Churches, nor universal Bishop of all Bishops, but socius
noster, " our fellow" or companion; as one consenting with him
in the unity of that Church which was first planted by the
Apostles ; and not as a general governor of the universal
Church of Christ. Wherefore, although Optatus do more
than was necessary urge this argument of the unity of Peter's
chair, yet his meaning was, not to set forth an unreproveable
authority thereof, such as the Pope now challengeth, but only
to make it the beginning of unity.
At length he cometh to S. Hierom, in an Epistle to Da
masus4, out of which he gathereth divers sentences : Mihi
cathedram, &c. : " I thought it best to ask counsel of the
chair of Peter, and of the faith praised by the mouth of the
Apostle. [. .] I speak with the successor of a fisher, and with a
disciple of the Cross. I, following none first but Christ, am
joined in communion with thy blessedness ; that is, with the
chair of Peter. Upon that Rock I know the Church to be
builded. Whosoever shall eat the lamb out of this house,
he is unholy. If any man be out of the ark of Noe during
the time of the flood, he shall perish. [. . .] I know not Viiatis;
[Vitalis;] I despise Melitius; [Meletius;] I have no acquaint
ance with Paulinus. Whosoever doth not gather with thee,
he doth scatter abroad : that is, he that is not of Christ, is of
Antichrist." The conclusion openeth all the matter. As long
as Damasus Bishop of Rome gathereth with Christ, that is,
maintaineth true doctrine, Hierom will gather with him ; who
professed before that he would follow none as first but
Christ. For he would not have gathered with Liberius
Bishop of Rome, whom he confesseth to have subscribed to the
Arians that were heretics. In Catal. Script. Ecclesi.5 What
pontificate of S. Siricius did not commence till the end of the year
384. The text has consequently been corrupted.]
4 [Supra, p. 120, n. 1.] 6 [Cap. xcvii.]

350 DISCOVERY OF THE DANGEROUS ROCK [cil.
mockery is it then to draw the commendations of a good
Catholic Bishop, maintaining true doctrine, to every Bishop
sitting in that seat, agreeing neither in doctrine nor manners
with that Christian predecessor !
Augustin must succeed Hierom ; who, in his clxvi. Epis
tle l, giveth us this rule : Cozlestis Magister, &c. : " The hea
venly Master maketh the people secure concerning evil over
seers ; lest for their sakes the chair of healthful doctrine
should be forsaken. In which chair evil men are ever con
strained to say good things : for the things which they speak
are not their own ; but they are the things of God."
Here, sayeth Master Sander, " we have a chair of healthful
doctrine," and that is afterward called the chair of unity :
therefore it is not the chair of every Bishop, which are many,
and of which many have been heretics, but the only chair of
the Bishop of Rome ; in which chair the Pope, be he never so
evil, " is constrained to say good things," and cannot err.
But seeing I have often proved that many Bishops sitting in
that chair of Rome have spoken evil things, and were filthy
heretics, it followeth that this is not a wooden chair that
Augustin speaketh of, but the chair of true doctrine ; such as
the chair of Moses was, in which not only Aaron and his
successors, but even the Scribes and Pharisees did sit ; having
the authority of Moses, while they uttered nothing but that
which God delivered by Moses. But when they preached
false doctrine they did not sit in the chair of Moses, but in
the chair of pestilence, as the Pope and all other heretics do.
He talketh much of unity in S. Peter, in his chair, seat, and
succession ; as though any of these were worth a straw, with
out unity in S. Peter's doctrine, which was the doctrine of
Christ. But Saint Augustin, Contr. Epist. Fundament.2, confesseth
that the succession of Priests from Saint Peter unto this
present time stayed him in the Catholic Church. It is true
he confesseth that this succession among many things was one
that stayed him. And yet he acknowledged that the ma
nifest truth prozponenda est omnibus illis rebus quibus in
Catholica teneor, "is to bo preferred before all things by
which I am stayed in the Catholic Church ;" namely, before
1 [alias Ep. cv. §. 16. Opp. ii. 229.]
2 [Supra, p. 56.]

XV.] OF THE POPISH CHURCH. 351
antiquity, consent of nations, miracles, succession of Bishops,
and the name of Catholics.
Likewise, rehearsing the same things in a manner against
the Donatists, which Master Sander hath not omitted, Epist.
clxv.3, he sayeth : Quamvis non tarn de istis documentis
prcesumamus, quam de Scripturis Sanctis : " Although we
presume not so much of these documents as of the holy
Scriptures." Wherefore, as the argument of succession was
well used against heretics, so long as there was succession of
doctrine with succession of persons; so now to allege the
only succession of persons, where the doctrine is clean changed,
is as foolish and ridiculous as by shewing of empty dishes to
prove abundance of victuals ; or shewing vessels full of filthy
waters, to prove that they are full of good wine ; because meat
of old time hath been served in such dishes, and wine pre
served in such vessels.
But if the authority of one man, as Saint Augustin was,
seem little, M. Sander bringeth the two Councils, gathered in
Africa and Numidia4 against the Pelagians ; which sent their
Decrees to the see of Rome, "that the authority of the
Apostolic see might be given to them." Epi. xix. [xc.6] If
they required the Bishop of Rome to agree with them in the
truth, what prerogative of Supremacy do they grant unto
him6? Nay, rather, they do privily reprehend him, that he
had so long suffered the Pelagian poison to be spread under
his nose in Europe ; and the doctrine neither called to ex
amination nor confuted ; yea, rather seemed to consent to the
den of the Bishops of the East, that Pelagius was justly ab
solved. But Pope Innocentius himself praiseth them, Ep. xci.7,
that they had kept the customs of the old tradition in refer
ring the matter to his see ; and saith, " that the Fathers, not
by human but by divine sentence, have decreed, that what
soever was done in the provinces afar off they should not
account it before to be ended, except it came to the knowledge
3 [See page 242.]
4 [At Carthage and Milevis ; both held in the year 416.]
s [alias clxxv. S. Aug. Opp. T. ii. col. 470.]
6 [In addressing Innocent I., Bishop of Rome, the Fathers of this
Synod of Carthage use the words " Domine frater."]
1 [al. clxxxi. ubi supra, col. 484.]

352 DISCOVERY OF THE DANGEROUS ROCK [cH.
of this see ; where whatsoever had been justly pronounced
should be confirmed by the authority of this see ; and those
other Churches should take it, as it were waters which should
flow from their own native fountain." We know the ambitious
Epistle of Innocentius; if it be not counterfeited, because many
patches thereof are found in other decretal Epistles ; but we
deny that the authority which he pretended was acknowledged
by these two Councils. Yes, saith M. S., the Fathers of the
Milevitan Council1 say, Arbitramur, &c. : "We think these
men that have so pernicious and fro ward opinions will give
place more easily to the authority of your Holiness, being
taken out of the authority of the holy Scriptures ; by help of
the mercy of our Lord Jesus Christ, [God,] which vouchsafeth
to rule you when you consult, and to hear you when you
pray." Bj these words they shew, that they hope the heretics,
being reproved by the Bishop of Rome out of the word of God,
will the rather give place : without imagining that the Bishop
of Rome's authority is so stablished by the Scriptures, that
whatsoever he decree contrary to the Scriptures, the same
should be embraced.
But a farther confirmation of the Epistle of Innocentius he
bringeth out of Aug., Ep. cvi.2, where he saith Pope Innocent
" did write an answer" to the Bishops, in ["to"] "all things,
as it [was right, and as it] became the Prelate of the Apo
stolic see." But these words neither prove that Epistle to
be written by Innocent; nor, if it were, do allow his pretended
authority ; because that was no matter whereof they required
his answer3. But, to put it out of doubt, both these Councils
have decreed against the usurpation of the Romish see : as
the Council Milevitan, Cap. xxii., decreed that no man should
appeal out of Africa, under pain of excommunication 4.
The last authority cited out of Augustin is Epistle clxii.5;
speaking of the Church of Rome, in qua semper Apostolicos
cathedrae viguit principatus, " in which always the princi
pality of the Apostolic chair hath flourished." A matter often
1 [The second Synod of Milevis, anno 416. Vid. S. August. Opp.
Tom. ii. c. 473. Epist. clxvi.]
2 [alias clxxxvi. col. 506.]
3 [" Scripsimus . . literas familiares." (S. Aug. loc. cit.)]
* [See note 2, page 71.]
6 [al. xliii. Opp. ii. 69.]

XV.]

OF THE POPISH CHURCH. 353

confessed, that the Fathers, especially of the later times, since
Constantine advanced the Church in wealth and dignity,
esteemed the Church of Rome as the principal see in dignity ;
but not in absolute authority, such as in process of time the
Bishops of Rome claimed and usurped. For even the same
Augustin, with two hundred and sixteen Bishops, refused to
yield to the Bishop of Rome, claiming by a counterfeit Canon
of the Council of Nice to have authority to receive appeals
out of Africa; Epi. Con. Aphr. ad Bonifac; which they
count an intolerable pride and presumption ; and, in Epist.
cont. [Cone.] Aphri. ad Ccelestinum6, fumosum typ[h]um
seculi, " a smoky pride of the world," which the Pope
claimed; and an absurd authority, that one man should be
better able to examine such causes than so many Bishops of
the province where the controversy began, and by the old
Canons should be ended.
To Augustin he joineth Prosper, Bishop of Rhegium7 in
Italy, which afiirmeth in Lib. de Ingrat,8, that " Rome the
see of Peter was the first that did cut off the pestilence of
Pelajnus : which Rome, being made head unto the world of
pastoral honour, holdeth by religion whatsoever it doth not
possess by war." And again9: Rome, "through the primacy
of the Apostolic Priesthood, is made greater by the castle of
religion than by the throne of power." First, how untruly
he boasteth that the see of Peter was the first10 that did cut off
6 [Supra, note 1, pp. 70 — 1.]
' [It is not certain, nor even probable, that S. Prosper was more
than a layman.]
6 [Cap. ii. Opp. p. 548. Colon. Agripp. 1609 : vel in Clerici Append.
Augustin. p. 5. Amst. 1703.
..."Pestem subeuntem prima recidit
Sedes Roma Petri : quae pastoralis honoris
Facta caput mundo, quidquid non possidet armis,
Relligione tenet."]
9 [De vocatione omnium Gentium, Lib. ii. Cap. xvi. Opp. p. 846.
The author of these books is not known. (Tillemont, x. 129.) They
are found amongst the works of S. Ambrose: but are unquestionably
Dot his, inasmuch as they mention the Pelagians who arose after his
death. Erasmus attributes them to Eucherius of Lyons : others assign
them to Hilary, of Aides, Syracuse, or the friend of Prosper: Gerard
Vossius and Cave plead for Prosper of Orleans; and Quesnel (Dissert.
ii.) is in favour of Pope Leo the Great.]
10 [The meaning of the word "prima" in the passage above quoted,
23
[fulke, II.]

354 DISCOVERY OF THE DANGEROUS ROCK [CH.
the heresy of Pelagius, you may easily see by that the Council
of Africa did before condemn it, and had somewhat ado to
persuade Innocentius Bishop of Rome to it. Whereby you
see that Prosper was over partial to the see of Rome : to
whom yet he ascribeth a principality or primacy of honour,
not of power or auctority.
The testimonies of Leo and Gregory, Bishops of Rome, as
always, so now I deem to be unmeet to be heard in their own
cause : though otherwise they were not the worst men ; yet
great furtherers of the auctority of Antichrist, which soon
after their days took possession of the chair, which they had
helped to prepare for him. The last testimony out of Beda,
which lived under the tyranny of Antichrist, I will not stand
upon. M. Sander may have great store of such late writers
to affirm the Pope's Supremacy.

THE SIXTEENTH CHAPTER.
Sander. Sander. That the good Christian Emperors and Princes did never
think themselves to be the supreme heads of the Church in spiritual
causes; but gave that honour to Bishops and Priests, and most specially
to the see of Rome, for S. Peter's sake, as well before as after the
time of Phocas. A Priest is above the Emperor in ecclesiastical
causes. The Oath of the royal Supremacy is intolerable. Constan
tine was baptized at Rome. Phocas did not first make the see of
Rome Head of all Churches.
Fulke. Fulke. Concerning the Supremacy of our Sovereign,
which this traitorous Papist doth so maliciously disdain, al
though it be expounded sufficiently by her Majesty in her
Injunction not to be such as he most slanderously doth
deform it, yet I will here, as I have done divers times
before in answer to these Papists, profess, that we ascribe no
Supremacy to our Prince but such as the word of God
alloweth in the godly Kings of the old testament, and the
from the Carmen de Ingratis has been disputed. It may have reference
to Rome as the principal witness against Pelagianism ; or, with greater
likelihood, this Apostolic see may be named first in the order of the
narrative, rather than with respect to time. In the fourth chapter
S. Prosper speaks of two African Synods, (query, whether those of
Carthage and Milevis ? if not, certainly both of Carthage,) which had
decreed " quod Roma probet, quod regna sequantur."]

XVLJ OF THE POPISH CHURCH. 355
Church hath acknowledged in the Christian Emperors and
Princes under the new testament.
First, therefore, we ascribe to our Prince no absolute
power in any ecclesiastical causes, such as the Pope chal-
lengeth, but subject unto the rules of God's word. Secondly,
we ascribe no Supremacy of knowledge in ecclesiastical
matters to our Prince ; but afiirm that she is to learn of the
Bishops and teachers of the Church, both in matters of faith
and of the government of the Church. Thirdly, we allow no
confusion of callings ; that the Prince should presume to
preach, to minister the Sacraments, to excommunicate, &c. ;
which pertain not to her office. But the Supremacy we
admit in ecclesiastical causes is auctority over all persons, to
command, and by laws to provide, that all matters ecclesias
tical may be ordered and executed according to the word of
God. And such is the true meaning of the Oath that he
calleth blasphemous and intolerable. And as for examples
of honour given to the Bishops by Christian Princes, which
he bringeth forth, they deny not this Supremacy, nor make
any thing against it.
The first is of the Emperor Philippus, counted of some
for the first Christian Emperor1, although it be not like to be
true ; yet admitting the story written by Eusebius2 to be so,
this Prince without due repentance offered himself to receive
the holy mysteries ; and being refused by the Bishop of the
place, took it patiently, and submitted himself to the dis
cipline and order of the Church. I answer, this example
toucheth not the auctority he had in ecclesiastical causes :
1 ["Qui primus Romanorum Principum Christianus fuit." (Vin
cent. Lir. Advers. Hosres. fol. 23, b. Paris. 1561.) "Hie primus Im-
peratorum omnium Christianus fuit." (Pauli Orosii Histor. Lib. vii.
Cap. xx. fol. cccix. Colon. 1561.) In the worthless Acts of the Martyr
Pontius, (de quo plura apud Bolland. ad diem 14. Maii,) published by
Surius, (Tom. vii.) and cited by Baronius, (ad an. 246. §. ix.) it is
stated that the Emperor Philip and his son were converted by this
Saint, and baptized by Pope Fabianus. Eusebius, in the place pre
sently referred to, relates what he has written as a report ; " Kare'xet
Xdyor," " fama est ;" and elsewhere (De vit. Const, iv. bdi.) distinctly
affirms, that of all the Roman Emperors Constantine was the first who
received Baptism.]
2 [Eccl. Hist. Lib. vi. Cap. xxxiv.]
23—2

356 DISCOVERY OF THE DANGEROUS ROCK [CH.
for in receiving of the Sacraments the Prince differeth not
from a private person.
But he pusheth at M. Nowell with a two-horned argu
ment, called a dilemma. "If the Priest in these causes be
superior to the Emperor, other causes be greater or lesser
than these. If they be greater, the Emperor, which is not
supreme governor over the lesser causes, cannot be in the
greater: if they be lesser, then the Priest, which governeth
the Emperor in greater causes, must needs govern him in
lesser causes." These horns are easily avoided, not by dis
tinction of the causes, but of the governments. The govern
ment of the Prince is one, and of the Priest another : this
spiritual, the other external ; and therefore no contrariety
between them. For put the case, that Philippus had seen
the Bishop profane the Sacrament, in ministering to infidels,
or otherwise uncertainly behaving himself in his office, might
he not justly have punished him, as supreme governor over
the Bishop even in those matters? I say not to do them; but
to see that they be well done, and to punish the offenders :
neither is the meaning of the Oath any other. And accord
ing to this meaning, M. Nowell, M. Home, and M. Jewell
dare warrant the King to be supreme governor in all eccle
siastical causes ; although it please M. Sander to say the
contrary of them : whose traitorous quarrelling upon the
words of the Oath ought not to trouble any man's conscience;
when the meaning is publicly testified, both by the Prince,
and by the whole consent of the Church.
The next example is of Constantinus the Great ; which, in
the Synod of Nice, when the Bishops had offered unto him
bills of complaint, one against another, without disclosing the
contents of them, he said, as Ruffinus reporteth, Lib. x. Cap. ii.1 :
Deus vos constituit Sacerdotes, &c. : " God hath made you
Priests, and hath given you power to judge of us also ; and
therefore we are rightly judged of you : but ye cannot be
judged of men. For which cause expect ye the judgment of
1 [Histor. Eccles. Lib. i. Cap. ii. p. 233. edit. Basil. 1549. This
chapter is remarkable for having supplied words which are cited in
the Canon Law to prove that the Pope, being God, cannot be judged
by men: "nee posse Deum ab hominibus judicari manifestum est."
(Decret. i. Par. Dist. xcvi. Cap. vii. Satis evidenter.)]

XVI.j

OF THE POPISH CHURCH. 357

God alone among ye." Here M. Sander noteth, first, that
he calleth them "Priests ;" whereby he would prove they had
power to offer external sacrifice : which is a simple reason ;
for then all Christian men and women, within [which in] the
Scripture are called Priests, have the same power. Secondly,
he confesseth they have "power to judge" the Emperor; for
none can be greater than a Priest. In their challenge and
spiritual government the Emperor meaneth ; and not as the
popish Church practiseth, to dispose [depose] the Emperor.
Thirdly, that Priests " cannot be judged of men." If this
be so, one Priest cannot be judged of another ; and where is
then the Pope's Supremacy ? But he answereth, " If one
Priest judge another, it is God's judgment, and not the judg
ment of men ; because God hath set one Priest above another."
0 blockish answer ! as though God hath not set one Prince
above all his subjects. You see how popish Priests advance
themselves to the honour of God, and withdraw their obe
dience from God's Lieutenants on earth. An undoubted note
of Antichristians. You will ask me then, what sense these words have, " You
cannot be judged of men ?" I answer, either they are meant,
as Saint Paul speaketh, of the uprightness of his conscience
in doing of his office, which is not subject to the judgment of
men ; or else Ruffinus, as he was a bold reporter, frameth the
Emperor's words according to that estimation which he would
have men to have of the Clergy : for it is certain by records
of Constantinus' time, that he did judge Bishops, and took
upon him as supreme governor in ecclesiastical causes. Master
Sander confesseth he judged certain Priests, or ecclesiastical
causes ; but he did it, as Augustin sayeth, Epist. clxii.2, " as
one that would afterward ask pardon of the holy Bishops," at
the importunity of the Donatists ; and, as Optatus recordeth,
he said: De schis. Lib. i.3: Petitis a me, &c: "Ye ask of
me judgment in the world, whereas I myself look for Christ's
judgment." And Augustin reproveth the Donatists4, that
they would have "an earthly King" to be judge of their
cause. Indeed, the importunity of the Donatists was wicked ;
who would so refer the matter to the Emperor, that without
knowledge of ecclesiastical persons, who were only meet
2 [al. xliii. Cap. vii. §. 20. Opp. ii. 73.]
s [Cap. xxiii. p. 22. ed. Antv. 1702.]
< [Epist. xciii. Opp. ii. 178. ed. Ben.]

358 DISCOVERY OF THE DANGEROUS ROCK [cH.
judges in respect of knowledge in that case, they would have
the cause decided. But the Emperor, acknowledging his auc
tority, appointed judges ecclesiastical persons : first the Bishop
of Rome, Melchiades, whom he commanded with other Bishops
to hear the cause of Cascilianus ; as Eusebius, who lived in his
time, writeth. Li. x. Ca. v.1 And when the Donatists appealed
from the Bishop's of Rome and his companions' judgment,
he appointed other delegates, as Augustin also witnesseth.
Ep. clxii.2
But, to leave this cause of the Donatists, Eusebius in his
life, Libr. i.3, sayeth of him : Quoniam nonnulli variis locis
inter se discrepabant, quasi communis quidem [quidam]
Episcopus a Deo constitutus, Ministrorum Dei Synodos con-
vocavit ; nee dedignatus est adesse, et considere in illorum
medio : " Because some of them in divers places were at
variance among themselves, he, as a certain general Bishop
appointed of God, called together the Synods of the Ministers
of God ; and disdained not to be present, and to sit in the
midst of them." And in Lib. iii.4 he sheweth how he gathered
the Universal Synod of Nice, " as it were leading forth the
army of God to battle." To this Emperor did Athanasius
the Great, Bishop of Alexandria, appeal from the Synod of
Tyre, where he was injuriously handled; as both Socrates
testifieth, Lib. i.5, and the very Epistle of Constantine himself
unto that Synod6 ; commanding all the Bishops to come unto
his presence, and there to shew before him, {quern sincerum
esse Dei ministrum neque vos sane negabitis, "whom you
cannot deny to be a sincere minister of God,") how sincerely
they had judged in that Council. Finally, in the end of
the Epistle, he protesteth that he will execute his Supremacy
in causes ecclesiastical : Omni virtute conabor agere, quate
nus quce in lege Dei sunt, ea prozcipue sine aliqua tituba-
tione serventur. Quibus utique neque vituperatio, neque
mala superstitio poterit implicari, dispersis utique, ac palam
1 [p. 391. ed. Vales.] 2 [ut sup.]
3 [De vita Const. Lib. i. p. 169. Fulke has used the version by
Musculus, Basil. 1549.]
* [p. 189. "Proinde, quasi agmen Dei ad expeditionem ducturus,
Synodum fficumenicam collegit."]
6 [Hist. Ecc. L. i. Cap. xxxii. p. 290. ed. Muse.]
6 [Socrat. Lib. i. Cap. xxxiv. Fulke here quotes from the Tri
partite History, L. iii. 0. vii. Cassiodorii Opp. Tom. i. p. 223. edit.
Bened. Venet. 1729.]

XVI. J OF THE POPISH CHURCH. 359
contritis, et penitus exterminatis sacratissimce legis inimicis,
qui sub schemate sancti nominis blasphemas [blasphemias]
varias ad [et] diversos [diversas] inijciant: [injiciunt:] "I
will endeavour with all my might to bring to pass, that those
things that are in the law of God, those chiefly without any
staggering may be observed. Which by no reproof or evil
superstition can be entangled, when all the enemies of the most
holy law, which under a shape of an holy name do cast out
divers blasphemies unto sundry persons, are dispersed and
openly trodden down, and utterly rooted out."
Let this suffice to shew what Supremacy Constantinus did
exercise in causes ecclesiastical. Now Master Sander draweth
us to see what honour he gave to the see of Rome.
First, he taketh it for " most certain " that Constantine
was baptized by Silvester; which is an impudent lie and
forged fable7, as is manifest by Eusebius8, who lived in his
time and after him, who knew him familiarly, and affirmeth
that he was baptized in his journey towards Jordan9, where
he had purposed to have been baptized if God had spared
him life. But this manifest testimony of Eusebius Master
Sander refuseth, because he was suspected for affection to the
Arian heresy10. Beside that he was unjustly suspected, what
reason is it to discredit his story, who wrote at such time as
many thousands alive could disprove him, for any affection to
that heresy, whereto the Baptism of Constantine pertained
f [But recorded as a truth in the Roman Breviary. (In Festo S. Sil-
vestri: Par. Hiem. p. 258. Antverp. 1724.)]
8 [De vita Constantini, Lib. iv. Cap. lxii.]
9 [When he had come to the suburbs of Nicomedia.]
10 [Baronius (Not. in Martyrol. Rom. die Jun. 21.) falsely declares
that Eusebius persisted in favouring Arianism subsequently to the
holding of the first Council of Nicsea, at which " errorem deposuit,"
according to Trithemius. (De Scriptt. Eccles. Cap. lvii.) In this im
putation, as Crakanthorp remarks, (Defence of Constantine, p. 109.
Lond. 1621.) the Cardinal "treads but in the steps of some of the
worthy Fathers of their second Nicene Councell," whose indignation
was excited by the unfriendliness of Eusebius to Image-worship.
They "reject and anathematize" his writings, and all who should read
them; (Act. v. pp. 80,81. ed. Sirmond.) describing him as "a defender
of the Arian heresy," and a Theopaschite : (Act. vi. p. 98.) forgetful,
however, that the latter designation was singularly misapplied, inas
much as the Theopaschite doctrine was not devised until about a cen
tury and a half after his death.]

360 DISCOVERY OF THE DANGEROUS ROCK [dl.
nothing in the world? As for the stones and pillars of
marble, in which any such matter is graven, bearing the
name of his Baptistery1, except Master Sander could prove
that they were set up in his time, [they] are simple witnesses
against the history of Eusebius, which lived in his time.
Neither the forged Pontifical of Damasus2, nor the writings
of Beda, Ado, Marianus, Gregorius Turenensis, [Turonensis,]
Zonarus, [Zonaras,] Nicephorus, late writers, following the
fable of the Romish Church, are of any credit in respect of
Eusebius, and the eldest writers of the ecclesiastical story3,
that agree with Eusebius that he was not baptized many years
after Silvester was dead.
And concerning the Donation of Constantine4, it is too
1 [We read in the Annals of Baronius (ad an. 324. §. xiii.) that
within the Lateran palace "hactenus ejus visitur Baptisterium:'' but
Cardinal Bona confesses that this was named the Font of Constantine
because that he erected it, and not on account of his having been bap
tized in it. (Vid. Papebrochii Conatus Chronico- Histor. p. 132. Bol-
land. Prmfatt. et Tractatt. proelim. Tom. ii. Ant. 1749. Card. Polus,
De Bapt. Const, fol. 63, b. Romse, 1562.) Binius (Concill. i. i. 254-5.)
has adduced what he terms a " testimonium non contemnendum" from
the heathen writer Ammianus Marcellinus, who mentions " Constanti-
nianum Lavacrum:'' but this "Lavacrum salutare" was merely the
Thermal, or Balnewm, which Constantine, following the example of
other Emperors, had caused to be made. See Crakanthorp, ut sup.
pp. 63—66.]
2 [Supra, note 4, pp. 98—9.]
3 [Soerat. Lib. i. Cap. xxxix. Sozom. L. ii. C. xxxiv. Theodor. i.
xxxi. ed. Lat.]
4 [Gratiani Deeret. Dist. xcvi. Cap. Constantinus. Cf. Flacii IHyrici
Refut. invect. Bruni contra Centur. p. 45. Basil. 1566. James, Corrup
tion of the true Fathers, p. 96. This much celebrated fiction is by Gol-
dastus, (Replieatio pro Imperio, p. 167. Hanov. 1611.) and after him
by Brown, (Prsefat. in Gratii Fascic. p. xxv. Lond. 1690.) and Wharton,
(Append, ad Cavei Hist. Lit. ii. 154. Oxon. 1743.) erroneously attri
buted to Joannes Diaconus, surnamed " Digitorum mutilus." (Conf.
Fabric. Bibl. med. et inf. Latin. Vol. iv. p. 198. Hamb. 1735.) De
Marca assigns the invention of this imaginary grant to the year 767,
when the device may probably have been contrived by Joannes Sub-
diaconus, who was one of the Legates of Pope Paul I. (De concord.
Sac. et Imp. Lib. iii. Cap. xii. pp. 169, 171. Paris. 1669.) The style,
date, and purpose of this spurious Edict place it in harmony with the
famous Isidorian forgeries. (Joan. Richardson Prcelectt. Eccles. Vol. i.
p. 369. Lond. 1726.) It is to be observed also that, strictly speaking,

XVI.] OF THE POPISH CHURCH. 361
absurd for any wise man to defend, which hath been so long
before disproved by Laurentius Valla6, no enemy of the
Romish religion, although a discoverer of that fable. Again,
his forsaking of the city of Rome, and building of Constanti
nople, is as great a fable : for although he beautified Byzan
tium, and made it an imperial city, as placed conveniently to
keep the Oriental empire, yet he forsook not Rome, but still
retained it as the chief see of his empire. So did the Emperors
that followed him, until (after it was wasted by the barbarous
nations,) they made less account of it. And therefore
although Constans, the nephew of Heraclius6, could not con
veniently remove thither7, yet he removed from thence
what he thought good8. By which it appeareth he had au
thority in the city, by the providence of God, and not by
chance : as M. Sander dreameth that he was prohibited by
God's providence, in respect of the Pope's Supremacy, or else
the world should be governed by chance.
But leaving Constantinus the father, we must come to
Constantius his son, which was an Arian ; of whom Athanasius

there are two supposed Donations of Constantine ; the greater, and the
less : the former recorded in the " Palea," or " Chaff," annexed to the
genuine Decree of Gratian, in the place above referred to ; the latter
registered in the Decretals. (Sext. Deer. Lib. i. Tit. vi. Cap. xvii.
Fundamenta.) By the smaller privilege the city of Rome alone was
conferred upon the Pope : by the greater charter he received in addi
tion the imperial palace, " and all the provinces, places, and cities of
Italy, or the countries of the West." Vid. Joan. Naucleri Chronograph.
Vol. ii. Gen. xi. pp. 503 — 4. Colon. 1579. Conference betwene Rainoldes
and Hart, p. 402. Lond. 1584.]
5 [The manuscript of Valla's Declamatio is preserved in the Vatican
library. (Montfaucon Bibliolh. Bibliothecar. MSS. Tom. i. p. 119. n.
6314. Paris. 1739.) In opposition to him Bartholomaeus Picernus de
Monte arduo published the Donatio Constantini in a quarto tract, con
sisting of eight leaves, which he inscribed to Pope Julius II. An edi
tion of Valla's treatise was dedicated to the succeeding Pope, Leo X.,
by Ulric de Hutten, in the year 1517. Both works appeared together
under the title, " De Donatione Constantini, quid ueri habeat, erudi-
torum quorundam iudicium ;'' 4to ; and the Fasciculus of Orthuinus
Gratius contains a reprint of them. foil, lxii— lxxix. Colon. 1535.]
6 [Constans II. was the grandson of Heraclius. Fulke misinter
preted the word "nepotis."
1 [Joan. Zonaras Annates, Tom. ii. pp. 88—9. Paris. 1687.]
8 [Gibbon, iv. 403. ed. Milman.]

362 DISCOVERY OF THE DANGEROUS ROCK [cH.'
complaineth, that he had no reverence of the Bishop of Rome ;
Ep. ad solit. vit. agen.1; neither considering "that it was an
Apostolic see, nor that Rome was the mother -city of the
Roman empire." There were other Apostolic sees beside
Rome ; and the Christian world was larger than the Roman
empire : therefore this maketh nothing for the singular pre
rogative of that see.
But the noble Emperors, Gratianus, Valentinianus, and
Theodosius made a law, lege i. Cod. de summ. Trinit., " that
all their people should continue in that religion [in such a
religion] as the religion which is used from S. Peter unto this
day doth declare him to have delivered to the Romans; and
which it is evident that Bishop Damasus doth follow, and
Peter, Bishop of Alexandria, a man of Apostolic holiness."
This law proveth that the Emperors had authority in eccle
siastical causes ; and that they joined the Patriarch of Rome
with the Patriarch of Alexandria, not because he of Alexandria
agreed with him of Rome, but because they both agreed with
Peter, and Peter with Christ.
From these Emperors he cometh to Bonifacius2; who,
writing to the Emperor Honorius, and humbly desiring his aid
to appease the tumults of his Church, useth these words : Ec
clesioz rneoz, cui Deus noster meum Sacerdotium, vobis res
humanas regentibus, deputavit, cura constringit : ne causis
ejus, quamvis adhuc corporis incommoditate detinear, prop
ter conventus qui a Sacerdotibus universis et Clericis, et
Christianoz plebis perturbationibus agitantur, apud aures
Christianissimi Principis desim : "'The care of my Church,
to which our God hath deputed my Priesthood, while you
govern the affairs of men, doth bind me : that, although I am
yet withholden by infirmity of body, I should not be wanting
to the causes thereof, in the hearing of a most Christian
Prince, by reason of the meetings that are held of all the
Priests and the Clergy, with the perturbations of the Christian
people." These words shew that the Emperor was supreme
governor in causes ecclesiastical ; for he writeth concerning the
election of the Bishop. To whom the Emperor answereth,
making a law against the ambitious labouring for succession ;
that if two Bishops should be chosen, they should be both
1 [Hist. Arianor. ad Monachos : Opp. i. i. 364. ed. Ben.]
2 [Pope Boniface I.]

XVI.] OF THE POPISH CHURCH. 363
banished out of the city. Con. To. i.3 et Dist. xcvii.4 I have
set down the words at large, to shew the shameful falsifica
tion of M. Sander, who setteth them down absolutely thus :
Mihi Deus noster meum Sacerdotium, vobis res humanas
regentibus, deputavit : " Our God hath appointed my Priest
hood to me ; whereas you do govern worldly matters :" as
though he had denied to the Emperor all government in ec
clesiastical causes ; when he flieth to his authority in a cause
ecclesiastical, and doth not only acknowledge him to be a
conserver of civil peace, as M. Sander would have it.
To Honorius he joineth Galla Placidia the Empress, in her
Epistle to Theodosius, set before the Council of Chalcedon5,
affirming that Peter "ordained the primacy of the bishoply
office in the see Apostolic." Thus wrote the Empress, or her
secretary, and so it was taken in that time. The like saith
Valentinianus, in his Epistle6 to Theodosius his father7, that
" Antiquity gave the chiefty of priestly power to the Bishop of
the city of Rome." And Martianus with Valentinian confess8,
that the Synod of Chalcedon " inquired of the faith by the
authority of Leo, Bishop of the everlasting city of Rome."
Add hereunto that the Council itself confesseth, Act. hi.9, that
Leo was over them " as the head over the members." All
these prove indeed a primacy of the Bishop of Rome acknow
ledged in those days; but not such a primacy as is now
claimed. For the same Council and Emperors decreed, that
the see of Constantinople in the East should have the same
authority that the see of Rome had in the West ; the title of
8 [Crabbe Concill. T. i. p. 490. Colon. Agr. 1551.]
4 [Gratiani Decret. i. Par. D. xcvii. Cap. i.]
6 [Crabbe, Tom. i. p. 732.]
6 [lb. p. 731. — " There is some doubt whether these Epistles are
genuine." (Comber's Roman Forgeries, Part iii. p. 88. Lond. 1695.)] ¦
1 [Valentinian HI., Emperor of the West, was the son of Placidia,
daughter of Theodosius the Great.]
8 [Chalced. Concil. Act. iii. Crabbe, i. 865. Fulke has erred in
transcribing this passage : for the statement is, not that the faith was
diligently investigated by the authority of Pope Leo ; but that this
Bishop of Rome sanctioned the establishment of the foundations of
rehgion for " the holy city," (meaning the Church, according to San
ders, but more probably Constantinople,) as well as the grant to Bishop
Flavian of " the palm of a glorious death."]
' » [Crabbe, i. 867.]

364 DISCOVERY OF THE DANGEROUS ROCK [_CH.
seniority only reserved to the Bishop of Rome : although
the Bishop of Rome, Leo, by letters and his Legates in the
Council, cried out against it as loud as they could; Cont.
[Cone] Chal. Act. xvi.; namely, Lucentius cried, Sedes Apos-
tolica, &c, "The Apostolic see ought not to be abased in our
presence1," &c. ; but all the Synod and the judges continued
in their Decree.
The saying of Justinian, in Cod. de summ. Trinit., is ex
amined and answered in the sixty-ninth Article of M. Sander's
treatise Which is the true Church, before his book of Images:
as also the sayings of the Bishop of Patara, of Eugenius
Bishop of Carthage, and Gregory Bishop of Rome.
The report of the Council of Sinuessa2 is too full of
corruption and confusion to be credited for authentical au
thority. And yet it is plain that Marcellinus, the Bishop
of Rome, was convicted by witnesses3 to have committed
1 [Supra, note 5, p. 289.]
2 [The contemptible Acts of this fictitious Synod, said to have been
held in the year 303, may be seen in Binius (Concill. i. i. 178 — 183.)
and Crabbe. (i. 187 — 197.) They are continually cited as genuine by
Romanists, (See Jewel's Works, iv. 464. ed. Jelf. Rainoldes and Hart,
p. 655. Ussher's Answer, p. 13. Lond. 1631. Bp. Synge's Rejoynder,
pp. 203—4. Dubl. 1632. Bzovii Pontif. Rom. pp. 122 — 3. Bellarm.
De Cone. auct. Lib. ii. Cap. xvii. Bramhall, i. 255. Orf. 1842.) and
afford matter for perusal in the Breviary : (die xxvi. Aprilis.) but they
are entirely rejected as counterfeit by Papebrochius, (Conat. apud Bol-
land. Prcefatt. ii. 123.) Ant. Pagi, (Crit. in Ann. Baron, i. 333.) Launoi,
(Epistt. pp. 131, 271. Cantab. 1689.) and Natalis Alexander. (.His*.
Eccles. Tom. iii. 731. Paris. 1699.) Bellarmin was unable to allege in
their favour any testimony anterior to that of Pope Nicholas I., who
lived in the year 860. (De Rom. Pont. L. ii. C. xxvi. col. 817. Ingolst.
1601.)] 3 [These witnesses are styled in the Acts of this Council the "Libra
Occidua,'' a name which has given rise to much discussion. It appears
certain that this technical term was applied to them on account of
their number, seventy-two, as the Roman Libra consisted of so many
Solidi. From the word " Occidua," as distinguished from " Orientalis,"
it is plain that these Acts were invented after the division of the em
pire into East and West : and Valentinian I., who effected this partition
of the provinces in the year 364, also made a change as to the number
of Solidi which the Libra of gold was to contain; reducing the
amount to seventy-two, from eighty-four, which had been the sum in
the days of Constantine the Great. (Vid. Du Cange Glossar. in verb.
Cf. Bingham, Book ii. Ch. xiv. §. xv.) Even if the term " Occidua"

XVI.]

OF THE POPISH CHURCH. 365

idolatry4 before he confessed the sin, and received sentence
of condemnation and accursing of the Synod: howsoever
that patch is thrust in after the Acts of the Council, Prima
sedes, &c, "The first see is not judged of any5;" which in
every counterfeit decretal Epistle almost must have a place.
To prove that Phocas did not first make the see of Rome
"Head of all Churches6," when the history is plain he did,
M. Sander bringeth in these and such-like alleged before,
which acknowledged a certain primacy of the see of Rome.
And certain it is the Bishops of Rome before Phocas' time
affected a great primacy, which of many was acknowledged ;
but yet never absolutely, never without controversy, until
Phocas, for a great sum of money received of Boniface the
third, strake the stroke, and made the Decree, for which in
all popish writers he is highly praised : although in the Greek
Church his Decree was not long observed. Touching the ex
amples of Emperors and Princes of later times, although I
could shew they have often resisted the Pope, yet I know
many may be alleged that have submitted themselves to his
Antichristian tyranny : which I will not stand to examine,
because they can be no prejudice to the truth, approved by
examples of the eldest age.
should signify "diminished," as Gothofred supposes, still the date of
the Sinuessan Council is from the internal evidence of these Acts with
equal clearness shewn to be imaginary; and Cardinal Baronius con
fesses that this single criticism demonstrates, "Acta ilia Marcellini
nequaquam his temporibus esse conscripta." (Annall. ad an. 302. §.
xciv.)] 4 [The Pontifical (p. 13. Mogunt. 1602.) declares that S. Marcelli-
dus sacrificed to Idols ; but S. Augustin maintained his "innocence"
against the Donatists. (De unico Bapt. cont. Petil. Cap. rvi.)]
5 [While the Canon Law directs that no mortal should presume to
reprove the Pontiff's faults, " because that he who is to judge all must
not be judged by any one," this ominous exception is subjoined : " nisi
deprehendatur a fide devius." (Dist. xl. Cap. Si Papa.)]
6 ["Hie" [Bonifacius HI.] "obtinuit apud Phocam Principem, ut
sedes Apostolica beati Petri Apostoli Caput esset omnium Ecclesiarum."
The Pontifical, from which these words are taken, is the authority for
the concession of this noted privilege. It is commonly believed, but
upon the questionable testimony of Baronius, (ad an. 606. §. ii.) and
without the slightest ancient evidence, that the title of " Oecumenical
Bishop " was conferred by the usurper Phocas upon Pope Boniface IH.
and his successors.]

366 DISCOVERY OF THE DANGEROUS ROCK [cH.
As for the history of Lucius, King of Britain, that sent to
Eleutherius for preachers, if it were true1, it maketh nothing
for the Supremacy of the Romish Bishop. I will therefore
conclude this chapter with a saying of Socrates, in Proce.
Lib. v.2, to shew what authority he judged the Emperors to
have in ecclesiastical matters : Et ipsos quidem [quoque]
Imperatores hac historia continua complectimur ; propterea
quod ab illis, postquam Christiani esse cozperunt, res ec-
clesiasticoz pendent ; et maximoz Synodi ex illorum sententia
et congregatoz sunt et congregantur : " And in this continual
history we comprehend the Emperors themselves ; because that
upon them, since they began to be Christians, the matters
of the Church depend ; and the greatest Synods have been
gathered and are gathered by their authority." The punish
ment he threateneth to them that forsake the Church of
Rome shall one day fall upon them that take part with the
Church of Rome, as in part it doth already.

THE SEVENTEENTH CHAPTER.
Sander. Sander. Their doctrine, who teach the Bishop of Rome to be Anti
christ himself, is confuted by the auctority of God's word, and by the
consent of ancient Fathers. Why Antichrist is permitted to come.
Fulke. Fulke. After he hath shewed his opinion what manner
a one Antichrist shall be, and alleged the cause of his coming
out of S. Paul, 2 Thess. ii., " because men have not received
the love of the truth, that they might be saved, God shall
send them the working of error, that they may beheve lying,"
&c, he stormeth out of measure against the Protestants, for
that they can find no place to settle Antichrist in but in the
see of Rome, so beautified and dignified by Christ, and all
the primitive Church. But seeing Antichrist is appointed to
sit in the temple of God, which is a higher place than S.
Peter's chair, it is no marvel if Satan have thrust him into
that see, which of old time was accounted the top and castle
of all religion.
But let us see his reasons taken out of God's word, by
1 [But it is false. Supra, p. 128.]
2 [p. 365. Muscul. interp.]

XVII.] OF THE POPISH CHURCH. 367
which it is proved that the Pope cannot be Antichrist himself.
The first is, because in S. Paul he is called 6 avOpcoiros, &c,
"the man of sin;" which signifieth one singular man, and not
a number of men in succession : and this is affirmed to be the
Greek article in this word man by Cyrillus. In Joan. Lib. i.
Cap. iv.3 But how frendly [fondly] Cyrillus was deceived
you shall see by some examples even out of the New Testar
ment. In S. Matthew, cap. xii. 35, you have 6 dya06s
avQponros, and nat o Trovr/pos avOpwiro',, "A good man out of
the good treasure of his heart," and "an evil man out of the
evil treasure of his heart bringeth," &c, where no one singular
man is meant. In S. Mark, cap. ii. verse 27, " The Sabbath
was made" otd tov avQpunrov, Kal [ov-%] 6 av8 pooiros, "for
man, and not man for the Sabbath." In S. Luke, cap. iv.
verse 4, " Not with bread only," 6 avOpwircs, " a man shall
live, but by every word of God." S. Paul, 2 Tim. iii. ver. 17,
"That the man of God," 6 tov Qeov avQ pianos, "may be per
fect, and prepared to every good work." These places, and an
hundred more which might be brought, do prove how vain the
argument is that is taken of the nature of the Greek article.
Neither is Hierom or any of the ancient writers to be
heard, without authority of the Scripture, which supposed
that Antichrist should be one man : although none of them
directly affirmeth that he should be one man, as Christ was.
Hierom, in Dani. Cap. vii.4, saith, we must not think that
Antichrist should be a Devil, " but one of the kind of men, in
whom Satan should dwell." This proveth not that he should
be a singular man ; no more than the fourth beast, which sig
nifieth the Roman empire, out of which he should rise, should
be one singular Emperor. No more doth it prove that because
Antiochus was a figure of him, he must be but one man. And
as little that Ambrose, in 2 Thess. ii.5, saith, Satan shall ap
pear in homine, "in a man ;" which may signify the kind of
men, and not one singular person. Likewise Augustin6, call
ing Antichrist " the Prince," and " last Antichrist," meaneth
3 [fol. 11. Paris. 1508.]
4 [" No eum putemus, juxta quorundam opinionem, vel Diabolum
esse, vel Dsemonem ; sed unum de hominibus, in quo totus Satanas
habitaturus sit corporaliter." (Opp. Tom. v. p. 587. Basil. 1565.)]
s [See note 6, page 183.]
6 [De Civitate Dei, Lib. xx. Cap. xix.]

368 DISCOVERY OF THE DANGEROUS ROCK [cH.
no one person: for the words " Prince" and "last" may agree
to a whole succession of men in one state, as well as the
words "King" and "beast" to a whole succession of Emperors
in Daniel. To conclude, there is not one whom he nameth
that denieth Antichrist to be a whole succession of men, in
one state of devilish government : and Irenseus thinketh it
probable of the Roman kingdom. Lib. v.1
The second argument is, that Antichrist is called "the
adversary ;" and therefore is the greatest enemy of Christ,
" denying Jesus Christ to be God and man, or to be our Me
diator." I answer, the Pope doth so, denying the office of
Christ ; although with the Devils he confess in words Jesus
to be "the Holy One of God," and to be "Christ the Son of
God." Mark i. 24. Luke iv. 41. His Divinity the Pope
denieth, by denying His only power in saving ; His wisdom,
in His word to be only sufficient ; His goodness, in the virtue
of His death to take away both pain and guilt of sin ; which
he arrogateth to himself by his blasphemous pardons. Christ's
humanity he denieth by his Transubstantiation : His media
tion, in which He is principally Christ, he denieth by so
many means of salvation as he maketh beside Christ; vide
licet, man's merits, ceremonies invented by man, pardons, a
new Sacrifice of the Mass, &c.
The third argument is, that "Antichrist shall not come
before the Roman empire be clean taken away ;" for that
which Saint Paul saith, "Te know what withholdeth," &c.
Although it be not necessary to expound this of the Roman
empire, yet, following the old writers that so understood it, I
say, the Roman empire was removed before Antichrist the
Pope was throughly installed. For beside that the see of
the empire was removed from Rome, the government itself
was in a manner clean removed ; the title of the Roman Em
peror only remaining. At last another empire by the Pope
was erected in Germany, whereof little beside a name remain-
eth at this day : the Pope claiming authority of both the
swords ; and he that is the Emperor in title, if he have no
lands of his own inheritance, scarce equal with a Duke by
dominion of his empire.
The fourth argument is, that " the deeds and doctrine of
Antichrist against Christ must be open, and without all dissi-
1 [Cap. xxx.].

XVII.] OF THE POPISH CHURCH. 369
mulation ;" because Saint Paul maketh a difference between the
mystery of iniquity, and the open shewing of Antichrist. I
answer, they are open to all faithful Christians; although they
be hid from such as be deceived by Antichrist. Here M.
Sander answereth to that which he supposeth might be ob
jected, that some Glosses of the Canon Law call the Pope God2,
or make him equal with Christ ; yea, they call him God above
all Gods : but he thinketh to avoid it by saying, they call
him not God "by nature, but by office under Christ ;" where
they say he is equal with Christ. This blasphemy will not
so easily be excused : neither is it to be thought that any
man will ever call himself God by nature. But, to omit these
flattering Glosses of the Canon Law, doth not the Pope exalt
himself "above all that is called God, and worshipped" as God,
when he commandeth to abstain from meats and marriage,
whereof God hath created the one and instituted the other, as
good and holy, for greater goodness and holiness than God
created or instituted in them? Doth he not exalt himself
above God the Redeemer, when he affirmeth His redemption
to be either only from sins committed before Baptism, or only
from the guilt of sin ; whereas his popish pardons can absolve
from both ? Doth he not extol himself above God the Holy
Ghost, when he taketh upon him to sanctify the creatures
of the world otherwise than God hath sanctified them; to
apply the merits of Christ otherwise than God's Holy Spirit
worketh application by faith, &c?
The fifth argument is, that "Antichrist should be received
most specially of the Jews ;" of which he bringeth the opinion
of divers old writers : but because the Scripture saith no such
thing, but contrary, that he shall sit in the Church of God,
we deny the antecedent or proposition of this argument. But
M. S. allegeth the saying of Christ, Joan, v.: "I came in My
Father's name, and ye have not received Me : if another
come in his own name, ye will receive him." This other
man, saith M. S., is Antichrist ; and so expounded by the
ancient Fathers. I answer, they have no ground of this ex
position : for Theudas the Egyptian, Cocabas, and such-like,
deceived the Jews in their own name ; yet none of them
was this Antichrist.
2 [Jewel's Works, Vol. ii. pp. 195—7. ed. Jelf. Calfhill, note 3,
pp. 5—6. ed. Parker Soc]

[fulke, n.]

24

370 DISCOVERY OF THE DANGEROUS ROCK [cH.
The sixth argument is, that Antichrist, according to the
prophecy of Daniel, cap. vii., and the interpretation of Hierom,
shall subdue three Kings ; the Kings of Egypt, Africa, and
Ethiopia: which seeing the Pope hath not done, he is not
Antichrist. I answer, neither Hierom, nor any ecclesiastical
writer whom he followeth, hath any direction out of the
Scripture for this interpretation. Wherefore it is more like
that the Emperor is the little horn ; which, first diminishing,
as it were, a third part of the strength of the fourth beast,
at length began utterly to oppress and destroy it; I mean,
the Commonwealth of Rome.
The seventh reason is : " Antichrist shall prevail in his
reign but three years and an half ; Dan. vii. ; which time the
Apocalypse calleth forty-two months." I answer, this time
must not be limited by measure of man, but as God hath
appointed it. Daniel nameth no years, but "a time, times, and
half a time :" and Hierom, in his account of twelve hundred
and ninety-three days, differeth from S. John, Apoc. xii. 6,
who setteth them down twelve hundred and sixty days.
The eighth reason is, " that Helias shall come at the time
of Antichrist ; as Hippolytus, Augustin, Hierom, and Theodoret
teach : who is not yet come, although the Pope have long
flourished." I answer, the Scripture speaketh of no coming
of Helias ; but of Christ's two witnesses, which have never
failed in the greatest heat of the popish tyranny. Apoc. xi.
The ninth reason is, that "Antichrist shall be of the
tribe of Dan ; by the opinion of Irenasus, Hippolytus, Theodo-
retus, and Gregory : whereas the Popes are of no such tribe."
I answer, the Scripture hath not revealed any such matter :
neither doth Irenasus1 rest upon that opinion, but judgeth he
may well be the King of the Roman empire ; saying very
wisely : Certius ergo et sine periculo est sustinere adimple-
tionem prophetioz, quam suspicari, &c. : " Therefore it is
more certain and without danger to tarry the fulfilling of the
prophecy, than to surmise," &c. Again, if this opinion should
be true, he should not rise out of the Roman empire ; as all
old writers have consented he must, according to the pro
phecy. The tenth argument is, that "Antichrist shall not come
before the latter end of the world ; as Augustin and Theodo-
1 [Adv. Hwres. L. v. C. xxx.]

XVII.] OF THE POPISH CHURCH. 371
retus judged." But Gregory, seeing the ambition of John
of Constantinople, affirmed that the time of the revelation of
Antichrist was even at hand; and that the same John was
the forerunner of Antichrist, and Antichrist should shortly be
revealed, and "an army of Priests" should wait upon him2.
Now seeing he, whosoever took that which John refused, by
Gregory's judgment should be Antichrist ; and it is certain
that Pope Boniface the third3, soon after the death of Gregory
and his successors, usurped not only that but more also ; it is
certain by Gregory's prophecy, that the Pope is Antichrist :
who, being within the six hundred years, answereth to M.
Sander's fond challenge. And although none within that
compass had pointed out the see of Rome, yet the fulfilling
of the prophecy in the latter times did sufficiently declare
who it should be. And most of the ancient writers name
Rome to be the see of Antichrist ; although they could not
foresee that the bishoprick of that see should degenerate into
the tyranny of Antichrist.
M. Sander answereth, that Tertullian and Hierom call
Rome Babylon, " because of the confusion of tongues of di
vers nations that haunted thither in time of the Emperors.
And then Rome was full of idolatry, and did persecute the
Saints ; and namely more than thirty Bishops of Rome."
The reason of tongues is very absurd, and not given by any
of those writers. As for idolatry, and persecuting of Saints,
although it might be said in time of Irenasus and Tertullian,
yet could it not be said in the days of Hierom, Augustin,
2 [" Rex superbise prope est ; et, quod diei nefas est, Sacerdotum
est prseparatus exercitus." This remarkable sentence is found in an
Epistle of S. Gregory the Great to John, Patriarch of Constantinople,
who had usurped the title of "Universal Bishop." (Epistt. Lib. iv.
xxxviii.) In the old Paris, Antwerp, and Roman editions, the reading
is " Sacerdotum exitus," which is certainly corrupt. (See Dr. James's
Treatise, Part ii. pp. 77 — 80. Lond. 1611. Bp. Jewel's Works, ii. 142.
v. 458. vii. 174, 377. ed. Jelf.) The Benedictines have removed tho
error, which was probably occasioned by the MS. abbreviation "exitus."
(LeBas, Life of Jewel, p. 226, note. Lond. 1835.) Richerius informs
us that the clause immediately following, viz. " Antichristum multos
habiturum Sacerdotes iniqui sui mysterii cooperatores," "exstat in
manuscriptis codicibus, et nihilominus ex omnibus novis editionibus
abrasa est." (Apologia pro Joanne Gersonio, p. 202. Lugd. Bat. 1676.)
Cf. Matth. Larroquani Adversaria Sacra, pp. 277—8. lb. 1688.]
3 [Supra, p. 365, note 6.] 24 — 2

372 DISCOVERY OF THE DANGEROUS ROCK [cH.
Ambrose, Primasius, and a number that lived in time of the
Christian Emperors. And whereas Hierom, ad Algasiam1,
expoundeth the name of blasphemy written in the forehead
of the purple harlot to be " Rome everlasting," it agreeth
very well unto the see of the Popedom ; which they boast to
be eternal, although the empire of Rome shall be clean taken
away. For M. Sander himself liketh well the title given by
Martianus and Valentinianus to Leo, whom they call "Bishop
of the everlasting city of Rome." Cap. xvi.
But whereas Rome is the city builded upon seven hills,
spoken of in the Apocalypse, cap. xvii., M. Sander counteth
it a childish argument to prove the see of Antichrist to be
there, for that " the city is now gone from the hills, and
standeth in the plain of Campus Martius ; and the Pope sit-
teth on the other side of the river, upon the hill Vatican,
hard by Saint Peter's church ; by whom he holdeth his chair,
not at all deriving his power from the seven hills," &c. But
if the Pope sit now in another Rome than Peter the Apostle
sat, how will Master Sander persuade us that he sitteth in
the chair of Peter ? for that Rome where Peter sat was
builded upon seven hills ; and not gone down into the plain of
Campus Martius, nor over the river. Beside this, it is plain,
that although the people have removed their habitations from
the hills, yet the Pope hath not : for on them be still to this
day his churches, monasteries, and courts.
For on the Mount Ccelius be the monastery of Saint
Gregory, the church of John and Paul, the hospital of our
Saviour, the round church, the great minster of Lateran, in
which are said to be the heads of the Apostles Peter and
Paul, and the goodliest buildings in the world; where the
Bishops of Rome dwelled until the time of Nicolas the second,
which was almost eleven hundreth years after Christ.
The Mount Aventinus hath three monasteries ; of Sabina,
Bonifacius, and Alexius.
The Mount Exquilinus hath the church of Saint Peter
himself, surnamed Ad vincula.
The Mount Viminalis hath the church of S. Laurence in
Palisperna, [Panisperna2,] and S. Potentiana.
1 [Opp. Tom. iii. 173. ed. Erasm.]
2 [Corrupted from "Perpernia." Vid. B. de Montfaucon Diarium
Italicum, p. 203. Paris. 1702.]

XVII.] OF THE POPISH CHURCH. 373
The Mount Tarpeius, or Capitoline, hath an house of
Friars Minors called Ara Cceli : and there did Boniface the
ninth build a fair house of brick for keeping of courts.
The Mount Palatinus is a place called the Great Palace ;
and hath an old church of S. Nicholas, and of S. Andrew.
The Mount Quirinalis is not altogether void of habitation :
to which appertaineth the church of S. Maria de Populo.
The city with seven hills is still the see of Antichrist;
described by S. John at such time as those seven hills were
most of all inhabited, and garnished with sumptuous build
ings. But M. S., to darken the prophecy, saith, those "seven
hills be the fulness of pride in secular Princes, to whom the
Protestants commit the supreme government of the Church."
I will not speak of this contumely that he bloweth out against
Christian Princes ; neither will I stand to prove that seven
hills in that place are taken literally ; which is an easy mat
ter, because seven hills are the exposition of seven heads of
the beast: but how will M. S., or all the Papists in the
world, deny the city of Rome to be that Babylon and see
of Antichrist, when the Angel in the last verse of the chapter
saith, " And the woman which thou sawest is that great city,
which hath dominion over the Kings of the earth?" which
if any man say was any other city than Rome, all learning
and learned men will cry out against him. The see being
found, it is easy to find the person by S. Paul's description ;
and this note especially, that excludeth the heathen tyrants,
" He shall sit in the temple of God :" which when we see to
be fulfilled in the Pope, although none of the eldest Fathers
could see it, because it was performed after their death, we
nothing doubt to say and affirm still, that the Pope is that
" Man of sin," and " Son of perdition," the adversary that
lifteth up himself " above all that is called God ;" and shall be
destroyed "by the spirit of the Lord's mouth, and by the
glory of His coming."

THE EIGHTEENTH CHAPTER.
Sander. Not the Pope of Rome, but the Protestants themselves Sander.
are the members of Antichrist; by forsaking the Catholic Church, by
setting up a new Church, and by teaching false doctrine against the

374 DISCOVERY OF THE DANGEROUS ROCK [cH.
Gospel of Jesus Christ. Heretics depart from the Catholic Church.
Heretics, being once departed out of the Church, have new names.
Why among the Catholics some are called Franciscans, Dominicans, &c.
Heretics can never agree. The short reign of heretics. Heretics
preach without commission. Heretics do prefer the temporal reign
or sword before the spiritual. They are the members of Antichrist,
who withstand the external and public Sacrifice of Christ's Church.
Heretics deprive Christ of His glorious inheritance in many nations
together. The intolerable pride of heretics, in making themselves
only judges of the right sense of God's word. The Protestants teach
the same doctrine which the old heretics did. The Protestants are
the right members of Antichrist, in that they spoil God's Church of
very many gifts and graces, and articles of the faith.
Fulke. Fulke. He maketh eleven marks of an Antichristian. The
first is : They " depart from the Church," as all heretics do.
I answer, the Protestants have not departed from the Church
of Christ, but are gone out of the Church of Antichrist, ac
cording as they are commanded by the Holy Ghost ; Apoc.
xviii. 4 ; and are returned to the Church of Christ, which by
the Pope and the Devil was driven into the wilderness. Apoc.
xxii. [xii.] 6.
But M. Sander would have the place named where they
dwelt from whom the Pope departed ; as though the place
were material, when his departure from the doctrine of Christ
is manifest. And Saint Paul prophesied of the great apostasy
and departing from Christ which Antichrist should make,
2 Thess. ii., to himself and his own doctrine ; as Irenseus doth
expound it, Lib. v.1, and Basi., Ep. lxxi. ; which "all nations,"
peoples, and tongues should embrace. Apoc. xviii. 3. There
fore it were no marvel, if no place could be named altogether
void of the infection of Antichrist ; especially seeing the Church
herself was driven into the desert, that is, out of the sight of
men : yet there is no doubt, but God preserved His Church,
though in small numbers, both in the East and in the West.
And namely, one part of the Church of God was in Britain,
both in Wales and Scotland, not subject to the Pope, nor
acknowledging his auctority, at such time as Augustin the
Monk came from Pope Gregory, and so continued long after
the revelation of Antichrist. Bed. Hist. Lib. ii. Cap. ii.
Lib. iii. Cap. xxv. And no doubt but the like was in many
corners of the world. 1 [Cap. xxviii.]

XVIII.] OF THE POPISH CHURCH.

375

The second mark of an Antichristian he maketh to have
"new names" after they be gone out of the Church; as Luther
ans, Zwinglians, &c. ; whereas they have none but Catholics.
Yes, verily, the name of the popish Church and Papists is
as ancient as the name of Luther and Lutherans, and more
ancient too. M. Sander saith we give them these names of
spite, eight or nine hundreth years since the Papacy began.
The like I say of them, who call us Lutherans, &c, of mere
malice, when we are nothing but Christians. Wherefore the
trial must be in the doctrine which either sort profess, and
not in names. The Christians of the Arians were called
Homoousians, Athanasians, &c. : but the doctrine of the Ca
tholic Christians, agreeing with the word of God, proved
them to be no sectaries nor heretics. So doth our doctrine
justify us ; what names soever be devised against us.
But Master Sander would have us to shew a man, whose
proper name was " Papa" or " Romanus ;" as though many
heretics were not called of their heresy, or place from whence
they came, and not of proper names of men. Angelici,
Apostolici, Barbarita, [Barbelitas2,] Cathari, Collyridiani, En-
cratitas, Patripassiani, and a great number more were called
of their heresy: Cataphryges, Pepuziani, and such-like were
called of the place where they were. Wherefore the name
of Papists and Romanists agreeth with the example of old
heretics. As for the long tarrying, large spreading, and
strange coming in of the popish heresy, [it] is therefore
without example in all points like; because Antichrist is not
a common petit heretic, but the greatest and most dangerous
enemy that ever the Gospel had.
The names of Benedictines, Franciscans, &c, Master
Sander would excuse, because these sects maintain no doc
trine dissenting from the Pope, but all seek the perfection of
the Gospel by divers ways ; as though there were any other
way but Jesus Christ. Saint Paul, 1 Cor. i., condemneth the
holding of Peter, of Paul, of Apollo, when the doctrine was
all one ; and counteth them schismatics that so did. And the
purer primitive Church condemned such apish imitators of
the Apostles, in forsaking all things and possessing nothing,
2 [A name given to the Gnostics. Vid. S. Epiphanii Respons. ad
Epist. Acacii et Pauli, sig. i iij . ; et Lib. i. Adv. Hosr. Tom. ii. p. 85.
ed. Petav.]

376 DISCOVERY OF THE DANGEROUS ROCK [cH.
in abstaining from marriage, &c, for heretics ; and called them
" Apostolicos :" witness Epiphan. Cont. Aposto. Hozr. Ixi.1
The third mark of an Antichristian is "disagreement"
among heretics. And here, not content to charge us with the
disagreeing of Anabaptists from us, he amplifieth the dissen
sion between Luther and Zwinglius about the presence of
Christ's body in the Sacrament: for which contradiction he
thinketh it must needs follow that one of them is an Antichrist.
I answer, every error stiffly maintained maketh not an
heretic ; except it be in an article of faith necessary to sal
vation. Cyprian, against the Bishops of Rome, Stephanus
and Cornelius, held an error in Baptism as great as that same
of Luther, dissenting from Zwinglius in the Supper of the
Lord : yet is not Cyprian accounted for an heretic. Master
Sander replieth, and sayeth, that Cyprian was not so " stub
born" that he would excommunicate them that held the con
trary. Luther also and Zwinglius, although they could not
be reconciled in opinions, yet agreed " to abstain from con
tention," at Marpurg, Anno Domini 1529. Sleid. Lib. vi.2
Master Sander saith further, that in the contention of
Cyprian and Stephanus the Catholic faith was not fully
and universally received in any General Council. But he
forgetteth that the Bishop of Rome was one party ; whose
judgment should have ended the strife, if his authority had
been such then as he usurped most ambitiously afterward.
Now, whereas he defendeth the Papists for their unity,
which he sayeth could not be without the Spirit of God, I
answer, he might as well defend the doctrine of the Ma-
hometists, where is greater unity than ever there was among
the Papists : who, to omit an hundreth small contentions of
the Schoolmen, are not yet agreed of the greatest question
of all ; whether the Pope be above the Council, or the Council
above the Pope. For seeing some of the Papists make the
Pope's determination to be the rule of truth, other make the
Council, there is no unity among the Papists in truth, when
they are not agreed what is the only rule of truth : whereas
we all agree, that the word of God is the only rule of truth,
whereby we would have all doctrine tried and examined.
The fourth mark of an Antichrist is " to reign but a short
i [Opp. i. 506.]
2 [Joan. Sleidani Commentt. L. vi. p. 162. Francof. 1610.]

XVIII.] OF THE POPISH CHURCH. 377
time." And here he would have us to mark how Luther's
kingdom is come to an end ; whose doctrine Melancthon hath
changed, although Ulyricus would defend it. What deep root
the doctrine of God delivered by Luther hath taken, it is so
well known that it cannot be dissembled. Neither hath
Melancthon departed from him, except it were in his opinion
of the Real Presence. Wherefore this is a great impudency,
to triumph over the decay of Luther's doctrine ; which daily
increaseth, to the overthrow of the popish kingdom.
The fall of Hosiander, an heretic, no man either marvelleth
or pitieth. The doctrine of Zwinglius and CEcolampadius of
the Sacrament is the same that Calvin teacheth, as every wise
man doth know : and their learned works shall five and be in
honour when the Pope's Decretals and his Mass-books, &c,
shall stop mustard-pots, and be put to viler uses.
Neither is Calvin's doctrine failed by our Oath of Supre
macy : for Calvin, in the right sense of it, taught the same
Supremacy of Christian Princes which we swear to acknow
ledge in our Sovereign. Neither doth Beza teach any other
wise of the descending of Christ into hell than Calvin did ;
nor otherwise expoundeth the place of the Psalm, cited in
Acts the second, than Calvin doth ; as all men that will read
them both may see, notwithstanding the shameless cavil of
M. Sander. The long continuance of the popish kingdom is a small
cause to brag of ; when it, being found enemy to the kingdom
of Christ, is now entered so far into destruction, out of which
it shall never escape : although Master Sander saith it doth
"flourish;" when it is banished out of so many regions, and
daily decreaseth in every place : God's holy name be praised
therefore. The fifth mark of Antichrist, he sayeth, is " to preach
without commission ;" as Luther did, who was sent of none.
I answer, in the state of the Church, so miserably deceived as
it was in his time, God sendeth extraordinarily, immediately
from Himself: as Helias, and Helizasus, and the Prophets were
sent to the Jews and Israelites; which were not of the Priests
and ordinary teachers. So Christ sent His Apostles and Evan
gelists: and so was Luther and such as he sent to repair
the ruins of the Church. And yet the Papists have small
advantage against the calling of Luther; seeing he was a

378 DISCOVERY OF THE DANGEROUS ROCK [cH.
Doctor, authorized to preach in that Church where he first
began : which, after he had reformed the abuses thereof, and
restored true doctrine, in many points banished by the false
doctrine of Antichrist, the same reformed Church hath ever
since sent forth ordinary Pastors and teachers, and shall do
to the end of the world.
The sixth mark of an Antichrist is, that heretics " prefer
the temporal sword before the spiritual." And therefore Anti
christ shall by force of arms compel men to a new faith : for
" he shall come, as S. Paul sayeth, in virtute, that is to say, in
power or strength." 0 impudent falsifier of the holy Scrip
ture ! doth not Saint Paul say that his coming shall be " ac
cording to the efficacy of Satan, in all power, and signs, and
lying wonders, and in all deceitfulness of unrighteousness?"
2 Thess. ii. : by which is shewed seduction by false doctrine.
But he shall maintain his kingdom by cruelty ; as it is manifest
in the Revelation, cap. xiii. and xvii, &c.
But M. Sander hath a great quarrel against the Bishop
of Winchester1, for saying in his book against Feckenham,
that the civil Magistrates "may visit, correct, reform, and
depose any Bishop in their own realms ;" which is " directly
to say, that the power of the King is higher and greater in
God's Church than the power of a Bishop." And what in
convenience is this, in things pertaining to his office; seeing
that the Bishop's power in his spiritual office of preaching,
ministering, &c, is confessed to be above the King ? Hereby
we make " the body above the soul," saith M. Sander ; " the
temporal reign above the kingdom of heaven." Not a whit :
no more than Salomon in deposing Abiathar2; and Christian
Emperors in deposing proud Bishops of Rome. Only this we
say, that M. Sander dissembleth : the cause must be just,
for which the King should depose a Bishop or Pastor. For I
think there is equal right in deposing of the greatest Bishop,
and the poorest Priest from his benefice. This latter was
always lawful by the common laws upon just cause. Now if
the cause be just, it must be either manifest or doubtful. If
it be manifest, as Abiathar's was, for murder, treason, adultery,
&c, the King, observing the process of the law, as in all other
men's causes, may proceed against a Bishop. If the cause be
doubtful, it is either for life or doctrine. The trial of the
1 [Robert Home.] 2 [See note, p. 265.]

XVIII.] OF THE POPISH CHURCH. 379
Bishop's life ought to be, as all other men's are, with due con
sideration of his accusers. The trial of doctrine is not in the
King's knowledge ordinarily, but in the knowledge of the
ecclesiastical state ; who are judges of the doctrine by reason
of their knowledge, and to depose him from his ministry by
reason of their calling, if he be culpable : and the King hath
power to exclude him from his place, and from his life also,
if his offence deserve it.
But that in spiritual matters the King should rule the
Bishops and Pastors otherwise than God's word would
have them ruled, none of us did ever affirm : for that were
tyranny, and not Christian government. And of such tyranny
of Constantius, the Arian Emperor, doth Athanasius complain ;
in Epist. ad sol. vit. agent.3; and shew the judgment and
answers of the Christian Bishops, Paulinus, Lucifer, Eusebius,
Dionysius, Liberius, Hosius, unto him ; when he would have
enforced them to subscribe against Athanasius, for defending
the eternal Divinity of our Saviour Christ. But yet the same
Athanasius appealed himself to the godly Emperor Con
stantinus the Great ; although in the end the Emperor, being
carried away by multitude of false witnesses, as any mortal
man may be, and deceived, as David was about Mephibosheth,
gave wrong sentence against him. Socr. Lib. i. Ca. xxxiv.4 And
when the same Emperor, in his letters before, threatened to
depose him if he were disobedient, he never repined, but
acknowledged his auctority. Si cognovero quod aliquos
eorum qui Ecclesice student prohibueris, aut ab accessu Ec
clesice excluseris, mittam e vestigio qui te meo jussu deponat,
ac locum tuum transferat : " If I shall know," saith the
Emperor, " that thou wilt prohibit any of them that favour
the Church, or exclude them from entering into the Church,
I will send' one immediately which shall depose thee by my
commandment, and remove thy place." Socr. Li. i. Ca. xxvii.5
Thus Athanasius, judging Constantius the heretical Prince for
an Antichristian Image, in usurping auctority in matters of
faith against the truth, obeyeth Constantinus, a defender of
the truth, and seeketh aid of his auctority in ecclesiastical
causes, according to the truth.
M. Sander, fearing we would object against him that
3 [Supra, p. 362.] i [Cap. xxxv. p. 291. ed. Lat.]
* [Muscul. interp.]

380 DISCOVERY OF THE DANGEROUS ROCK [cH.
Constantinus, Martianus, and other godly Emperors, used to
sit in General Councils with the Bishops, replieth, that it was
only "to keep peace ;" whereas they did not only keep peace,
but also prescribe and command the Bishops to proceed ac
cording to God's word, as Constantine did in the Nicene
Council1: Evangelici enim, &c. : "The books of the Gospels
and of the Apostles, and the oracles of the ancient Prophets,
do plainly instruct us in the understanding of God. There
fore, setting all hateful discord aside, let us take out of the
sayings of God's Spirit the explication of the questions."
They did also publish the Decrees of the Councils by their
auctority, like as they called the Councils together to make
their Decrees.
But Ambrose saith, Ep. xxxii., [xiii.2,] that even an here
tical Emperor, coming to years of discretion, will be able to
consider " what manner a [of] Bishop he is, who layeth the
priestly right under the laymen's feet." By which, saith M.
Sander, you may see what manner a [of] Bishop M. Home and
his fellows be, which give "the most proud and intolerable
title of supreme head and governor to lay Princes." I answer,
in giving this title they mean to take nothing from the
right of the Clergy ; and confess with Augustin, that there
is no greater than a Priest in his office : although Moses,
after the distinction, was no Priest, but a civil Magistrate;
and in his calling above Aaron that was High Priest. And
although M. Sander say "this is the divinity of England" only,
to acknowledge the Prince to be chief governor, he sayeth
most untruly : for all learned men, of all countries, do acknow
ledge the same in such sort as we do in England ; and not as
he in Flanders either dreameth or slandereth us to do. For
we confess, with Valentinian the good Emperor, that the
Prince must "submit his head" to his godly Pastor, in matters
pertaining to his spiritual power. Theodor. Lib. iv. Cap. v.3
And yet we allow the same Valentinian, writing to the Bishops
of Asia and Phrygia : Theodor. Lib. iv. Cap. viii. : Qui omnes
1 [The words alleged by Fulke are from Theodoret, Lib. i. Cap. vii.,
according to the version by Camerarius. Bellarmin endeavours to
reply to this passage by saying : " Erat Constantinus magnus Impera-
tor, sed non magnus Ecclesia? Doctor.'' (De verbo Dei non scripto, Lib.
iv. C. xi. col. 246.)]
2 [Opp. T. v. c. 204.] 3 [ed. Lat. interp. Camerar.]

XVIII.] OF THE POPISH CHURCH. 381
noxios Dozmones student abigere precibus mis, &c. : " They,
which study by their prayers to drive away all hurtful Devils,
know to submit themselves to public offices, according to the
laws : they speak not against the Emperor's power ; but they
keep the commandments of a sincere4 and great Emperor,
and the commandments of God, and are subject to our laws ;
but you are found disobedient."
Finally, we never meant to give the Prince by flattery
auctority in such matters as belong to Bishops alone ;
neither would we have a confusion of the office of an Emperor
and a Bishop. Wherefore neither the saying of Leontius to
Constantius, nor of Eulogius to Valens, which were both he
retics, and would enforce men to receive the heresy of Arius,
doth any thing at all touch us, who limit the Supremacy of
Princes within the compass of God's word, and Christian re
ligion; against which neither Prince nor Priest hath any
auctority to command.
The seventh mark of Antichrist is " the withstanding of
the external and public Sacrifice of the Church;" by which he
meaneth the Sacrifice of the Mass. Nay, rather, it is a setting
up of a new altar, and Sacrifice propitiatory, against the only
propitiatory Sacrifice of Christ's death once offered ; by which
one oblation " He hath made perfect for ever them that are
sanctified." Heb. x. The auctor of this Sacrifice, which is
the Pope, he is indeed Antichrist, the Son of perdition.
But Master Sander, for proof of the Sacrifice of the Mass,
allegeth the prophecy of Malachi, cap. i., with sixteen fond
comparisons of the defects of the Jews, and the perfection of
the Gentiles; which he affirmeth to be "the uniform inter
pretation of the ancient Fathers ; of whom no one denieth the
body and blood of Christ to be here meant, albeit some of
them expoundeth [expound] this prophecy of prayers and in
ward righteousness, which are always joined with the unbloody
Sacrifice." I answer, no one of the ancient Fathers under-
standeth this prophecy of the Sacrifice of Christ's body and
blood otherwise than of a Sacrifice of praise and thanksgiving :
for proof whereof I must refer the reader to mine Answer to
M. Heskins, Lib. i. Cap. xxxiii., xxxiv., xxxv., & xxxvi., where
he shall find the places of the Doctors set down, which are
by M. Sander in place only quoted.
* [" sincerely keep the commandments."]

382 DISCOVERY OF THE DANGEROUS ROCK [ch.
But one other strange reason of M. Sander to prove the
Sacrament of the Lord's Supper to be a Sacrifice propitiatory
I may not omit, because I remember not that I have read it
before. " Every public and external fact, which is made by
God's authority to put us in mind of that great Sacrifice once
fulfilled on the Cross, must also be partaker of the nature of
that Sacrifice whereof it is a remembrance. As, if the killing
of a calf, which signified the death of Christ, was an external
Sacrifice ; how infinitely more shall the body and blood of
Christ, being made of bread and wine, to signify His own
death, be a public and external Sacrifice?"
This reason M. Sander maketh no small account of. But
how beastly an absurdity his principle is you shall easily
perceive, if you consider that Baptism is a public and ex
ternal fact, made by God's authority to put us in mind of the
death and bloodshedding of Christ : yet no man was ever so
mad to say Baptism is a Sacrifice. Again, the calf that was
killed was by God's appointment a Sacrifice of the only and
singular Sacrifice of Christ's death, and not by virtue of the
signification; for the Jews had other ceremonies than Sacrifices,
which did signify the death of Christ : but the Lord's Supper
is not by God's appointment a Sacrifice ; therefore the signifi
cation cannot make it so.
The eighth mark of the false prophets of Antichrist is "to
spoil Christ of His inheritance, which God gave Him in all
nations ;'' as the Protestants do, which for eight or nine
hundreth years cannot shew "any nation, town, or village,
church, or chapel in the wide world, where they had public
prayer." I answer, seeing the Spirit speaketh expressly of
a general apostasy, and of the flying of the Church into the
desert, it is no more derogation to the inheritance of Christ,
that His Church among many nations was in persecution
under Antichrist for seven or eight hundreth years, than that
the same was in persecution under the heathen Emperors for
three hundred years and more. For the nations were then
the inheritance of Christ in as glorious wise as when the
Church flourished in outward peace under the Christian Em
perors. Yet was there towns and countries, not only in
France, Italy, and Germany, but also in the east part of the
world great nations, among which Christ had a visible Church,
which were never subject to the Church of Rome. If M. S.

XVIII.] OF THE POPISH CHURCH. 383
reply, that they held some errors which we deny, as Prayer
for the dead, &c, I answer, holding the only foundation Jesus
Christ, they might be true Christians, although they were in
fected with some such errors as these.
The ninth mark of Antichrist is "intolerable pride, to
make himself judge of the sense of God's word, and of the
text also." I allow this mark : and it agreeth to none that
ever was so aptly as to the Pope ; whom the Papists affirm
that he cannot err in the sense of the Scripture ; who affirm
that he hath auctority to receive and reject what books of
Scripture he will. But M. Sander saith this note agreeth to
us ; and that we make ourselves judges of the sense of God's
word, and of the text. But we utterly deny that : for we
make the Spirit of God in His word judge of the interpre
tation. No, saith M. Sander ; and bringeth an example of
these words, of S. Paul, " He that joineth his virgin in mar
riage doth well ; and he that joineth her not doth better."
Hereupon (saith he) we ground this doctrine, " Virginity is a
better state, and more acceptable to God, than the state of
marriage." This we grant in some respect, as the Apostle
speaketh, but not simply. The question is of these words,
" he doth better," what is meant thereby. M. Sander charg
eth us to say, that S. Paul meaneth he doth better in the
sight of the world: which is an impudent lie, and therefore all
his foolish dialogism is a fighting with his own shadow. Beza
expoundeth, he doth "better," that is, "more commodiously ;"
not in respect of the world, but in respect of godliness, for
the reasons before alleged by S. Paul ; and S. Paul himself is
auctor of this interpretation, verse 35 of that seventh chapter
1 Cor., "This I say for your commodity," when he exhorteth
to virginity. And that his purpose was not absolutely and simply to
prefer virginity above marriage, as a thing of itself more ac
ceptable to God, it is plain by these words. First he saith,
"Of virgins I have no commandment of the Lord:" but he
hath a commandment to prefer those things that are most
acceptable to the Lord. Secondly he saith, " I suppose this
to be good for the present necessity :" by which words he doth
imply, that it is not always and absolutely better ; but at some
times, and in some respects, for them that have the gift of
continence, and for none other. So we hold virginity to be

384 DISCOVERY OF THE DANGEROUS ROCK [CH.
better than marriage, according to the meaning of the best
ancient writers ; whereof some were too great extollers of vir
ginity, yet not like the Papists.
But M. Sander sayeth, the Protestants "make themselves
judges not only of the meaning of God's word, but also of
the books themselves. For they reject not only the books of
Wisdom, Toby, and the Maccabees, with other such books,
but also the Epistle of S. James." Nay, rather, the Pope is
Antichrist, for receiving these books of Wisdom, Toby, Mac
cabees ; which were never received of the Church of the
Israelites, nor of the universal Church of Christ for Canonical
Scripture, as I have often shewed. And as touching the
Epistle of S. James, it is a shameless slander of him to say
that the Protestants reject it. But we must hear his reason.
First, Luther calleth it "a strawen Epistle1." So Luther
called the Pope supreme head of the Church, and the Mass a
Sacrifice propitiatory ; if Protestants be charged to hold what
soever Luther sometime held, and after repented. But the
Confession of Zurich2, with the consent of the Churches of Hel
vetia and Sabaudia, writeth thus of it : Jacobus ille dixit, &c. :
that " James said that works do justify : not speaking against
Saint Paul ; otherwise he were to be rejected." Here, saith
M. Sander, they think it possible " that S. James might be
contrary to Saint Paul, and so his Epistle to be no holy
Scripture." A wise collection, I promise you. S. Paul him
self said, " If I myself, or an Angel from heaven, should
preach any other Gospel than you have already received,
let him be accursed :" ergo, S. Paul thought it was possible
that himself or an Angel should be auctor of a new Gospel,
and so his preaching should not be the Gospel. Who seeth
not the madness of this consequence ?
But S. James his Epistle (he saith) hath always been
clearly admitted among true Catholics : and for witness hereof
he quoteth most impudently Euseb., Lib. i. [ii.] Ca. xxiii., in
which book and chapter Eusebius clearly affirmeth that it is
a counterfeit Epistle3. I say not this to allow the judgment
of Eusebius, but to shew the impudency of M. Sander. But
1 [See Fulke's Defence of the English translations of the Bible, page
15. ed. Parker Soc]
2 [An. Dom. 1566.]
8 [Perhaps only in the opinion of some. The word is " vo&verm."]

XVIII.] OF THE POPISH CHURCH.

385

he saith we reject S. James " because he is contrary to our
devilish doctrine of only faith." We teach only faith none
otherwise than the Apostle teacheth; that a man is justified by
faith, without works. We teach not that a man is justified
by a dead faith, which is void of good works ; but by a living
faith, which " worketh by love." We say, with Saint James,
" If a man say he have faith, and hath not works," his faith
shall not "save him." For Abraham's faith, which was imputed
to him for righteousness by God, was not without good works,
as appeared by his obedience in offering his son : wherein God
tried him, neither to know him, nor to justify him, whom he
knew and justified before ; but to shew his obedience, and to
justify him before men. So it is true that S. James sayeth, "A
man is justified of works, and not of faith only." For a soli
tary fruitless faith doth not justify before God : but a faith
which is fruitful in good works is the only instrument to appre
hend justification : and the works, as Augustin saith, " follow,
and shew a justified man ;" they go not before to justify. Thus
our doctrine agreeth very well with the Epistle of S. James,
and Saint Paul's doctrine : wherefore we have no need to re
ject the Epistle of Saint James, as contrary to our doctrine.
But the Protestants do not only "make themselves judges
of the whole books, but also over the very letter" (saith he)
" of Christ's Gospel ; finding fault with the construction of the
Evangelists; and bring the text itself in doubt." Example
hereof he bringeth Beza4, in his Annotations upon Luke xxii.,
of the words, " This cup is the new testament in My blood,
which is shed for you." In which text, because the word
"blood" in the Greek is the dative case, the other word that
followeth is the nominative case. Beza supposeth that S. Luke
useth a figure called Solozcophanes, which is " appearance of
incongruity ;" or else that the last word, " which is shed for
you," might, by error of writers, being first set in the margent
out of Matthew and Mark, be removed into the text. Here
upon M. Sander out of all order and measure raileth upon
Beza, and upon all Protestants. But I pray you, good Sir,
shall the only opinion of Beza, and that but a doubtful opinion,
indict all the Protestants in the world of such high treason
4 [See Gregory Martin's Discoverk of manifold Corruptions, pp. 14,
260. Rhemes, 1582. Fulke's Def. of Engl, transl. pp. 132—139, 512.
ed. Parker Soc] 25
[fulke, II.]

386 DISCOVERY OF THE DANGEROUS ROCK [cH.
against the word of God ? For what gaineth Beza by this
interpretation? Forsooth, the Greek text is "contrary to his
sacramentary heresy." For thus he should translate it : " This
cup is the new testament in My blood ; which cup is shed for
you :" not the cup of gold or silver, (saith he,) but " the liquor
in that cup ;" which is not wine, because wine was not shed
for us, but the blood of Christ. Why, then the sense is this :
This blood in the cup which is shed for you is the new tes7
tament in My blood. What sense in the world can these
words have? By which it is manifest that the words,
" which is shed for you," cannot be referred to the cup,
but to His blood. For the cup was the new testament in
His blood, which was shed for us : which sense no man can
deny, but he that will deny the manifest word of God. Nei
ther doth the vulgar Latin translation give any other sense ;
although M. Sander is not ashamed to say it doth. The vul
gar Latin text is this : Hie est calix novum testamentum in
sanguine Meo, qui pro vobis fundetur. What grammarian in
construing would refer qui to calix, and not rather to san
guine ? Again, Erasmus translateth it even as Beza : Hoe
poculum novum testamentum per sanguinem Meum, qui pro
vobis effunditur.
Now touching the conjecture of Beza, that those words by
error of the scrivener might be removed from the margent into
the text, [it] is a thing that sometime hath happened, as most
learned men agree, in the xxvii. of Matthew, where the name
of Jeremy is placed in the text for that which is in Zachary1 ;
and yet neither of the Prophets was named by the Evangelist,
as in most ancient records it is testified2. The like hath been
in the first of Mark ; where the name of Esay is set in some
Greek copies, and followed in your vulgar translation, for
that which is cited out of Malachi ; which name was not set
down by the Evangelist, but added by some unskilful writer,
and is reproved by other Greek copies.
But this place, you say, is not otherwise found in " any old
1 [" It was a thing known among the Jews, that the four last chap
ters of the book of Zechary were written by Jeremy ; as Mr. Mede has
proved by many arguments." (Allix's Judgment of the JewisK Church
against Unitarians,^. 15. Oxford, 1821.) See Mede's Works, pp. 786,
833—4. Lond. 1672.]
2 [Vid. S. August. De consensu Evangelistarum, Lib. iii. Cap. vii.]

XVIII.] OF THE POPISH CHURCH. 387
copy," as Beza confesseth. Then remaineth the second opinion ;
that S. Luke in this place useth Solcecophanes, which is " an
appearance of incongruity, and yet no incongruity." Wherein
I cannot marvel more at your malice, M. Sander, than at your
ignorance, which put no difference between Soloecismus and
Solozcophanes ; but even as spitefully as unlearnedly you affirm
that Beza should teach " that S. Luke wrote false Greek :"
whereas Solozcophanes is a figure used of the most eloquent
writers that ever took pen in hand ; even Cicero, Demosthenes,
Greek and Latin, profane and divine, and even of S. Luke
himself in other places ; whereof for examples I refer you to
Budaeus, upon the word Solozcophanes. The appearance of
incongruity is, that it seemeth that to eic^wopevov, which is
the nominative case, should agree with Tip a'lpaTi, which is
the dative case : whereas indeed to is used as a relative for o,
as it is often ; and the verb %o-ti, which wanteth, is understood,
as it is commonly in the Greek tongue ; and so the translation
must be : Hoc poculum novum testamentum est in sanguine
Meo, qui pro vobis effunditur, or effusus est. So that this
is nothing else but an impudent and unskilful quarrelling
against Beza : whereas you Papists defend, against the manifest
institution of the cup, and the practice of the primitive Church,
the Communion in one kind, of bread only. Con. Const. Sess.
xiii. xxi. [Can. iv.]
The tenth mark of an Antichristian is " to agree with the
members of Antichrist," which are heretics. To agree with
them in heresy is a point of Antichristianism, I confess : but
not to agree with them in any thing ; for every heresy
affirmeth things that are true. But let us see in what points
of heresy he chargeth us to agree with the old heretics.
First, " Eunomius said that no sin should hurt him, [a
man,] if he were partaker of the faith which he taught." So
the Protestants say of their faith. Yea, Sir ; but their faith
is not Eunomius' faith : and yet they say not that no sin
shall hurt them, but no sin shall condemn them : and so say
you Papists of your popish faith.
Secondly, Acesius, the Novatian Bishop, affirmed, that
"mortal sins committed after Baptism might not be forgiven
of the Priest, but of God alone." The Protestants deny the
Priest to have any right to forgive sins. This is a loud lie,
and false slander : for we hold that the Minister of God hath
25 — 2

388 DISCOVERY OF THE DANGEROUS ROCK [cH.
authority to forgive all sins that God will forgive, according
to the power given to them, Joan. xx. But you Papists agree
with the heretic in this point, that you deny the Priest to
forgive all sins, according to the power given ; but have your
Casus Episcopates et Papales1, by which you abridge the
power given by Christ.
Thirdly, " The Messalians denied that Baptism doth pluck
up the root of sins. The same is the opinion of the Protestants."
The Protestants have none opinion common with the Messa
lians, who affirmed that our own merits and satisfaction, with
prayers continual, were necessary for plucking up the root of
sins ; whereas we affirm that Baptism " saveth us," according
to the Scripture, 1 Pet. iii. 21, by forgiveness of our sins,
whereby even the root of sin is plucked up ; although concu
piscence remain after the act of Baptism, which you Papists
also confess to remain, and to be the root of sin, although you
grant it not to be sin. But we limit not the effect of Bap
tism to the time passed before the act of Baptism only, as
you do, but extend it to our eternal salvation : "He that be
lieveth and is baptized shall be saved." Mark xvi. 16. There
fore you Papists, both in this and in your continual lip-labour
maintained in your abbeys, agree with the Messalians.
Fourthly, Aerius taught, " that we must not pray for the
dead, nor keep the accustomed fastings, and that there is no
difference between a Priest and a Bishop." The superstition
of praying for the dead was justly reproved by Aerius : so
was the fast of custom and decree, rather than of considera
tion. For the first that prayed for the dead were heretics,
Montanists, as Tertullian and his sect. The first that made
prescript laws of fasting was Montanus the heretic also, as
Eusebius witnesseth. Lib. v. Cap. xviii. Of the third opinion
was Hierom, Evagrio2 ; affirming that the distinction was
made by men, and not by God.
Fifthly, " Jovinian judged virginity equal with marriage."
So do the Protestants. I have shewed before how it is equal,
and how it is superior.
Sixthly, S. Hierom reproveth Vigilantius of heresy, " for
1 [These reserved Cases are commonly printed in tracts consisting
Of a few leaves. The title generally is, Casus Papales et Episcopates:
sometimes the Casus Abbatiales are added.]
2 [See before, p. 33, note 1.]

XVIII.] OF THE POPISH CHURCH. 389
denying prayer to Saints, and giving honour to Reliques." For
praying to Saints there is no mention in S. Hierom. The
immoderate honouring of Reliques was justly reproved : and
yet it was not then the one half of that it hath been since.
Hieronym, although he rather rail than reason against Vigi
lantius, as Erasmus hath noted; yet he defendeth not the
adoration or worshipping, but the reverent estimation of
Reliques. Seventhly, "The Arians would not believe the consub-
stantiality of the same, [the Son,] because that word was not
written in the Scripture. So do the Protestants deny many
things upon the like pretence." This is a mere slander : for
we stand upon the sense of the Scripture, and not the words
only. ^
Eighthly, Eusebius noteth it " for an heinous impiety in
Novatus, that he was not consummate with Chrism, which the
Protestants call greasing." Indeed, Cornelius Bishop of Rome
reporteth, that Novatus was baptized in time of necessity,
being very like to die : Jacens in lecto, pro necessitate, per-
fusus sit : nee reliqua in eo quoz Baptismum subsequi solent
solemniter adimpleta sunt; nee signaculo Chrismatis con-r
summatus sit : unde nee Spiritum Sanctum unquam potu-
erit promereri: " Lying in his bed, according to the necessity,
he was baptized : neither were the other things that are wont
to follow Baptism solemnly fulfilled ; neither was he consum
mate with the seal of Chrism : whereby he could never
obtain the Holy Ghost." First I say, this is noted as no
impiety in Novatus, but as a defect of necessity. Secondly,
that the Chrism which Cornelius speaketh of was either a
seal of the extraordinary gifts of the Holy Ghost, which in
some remained in the Church until that time; or else he
magnifieth that ceremony intolerably, to deny the Holy
Ghost to such as had it not ; being none of the institution of
Christ, and contrary to that the Papists themselves hold at
this day.
Ninthly, "Lucius the Arian persecuted holy Monks. So
do the Protestants." Nay, they punish none but filthy idle
idolaters and hypocrites.
Tenthly, "The Montanists and Luciferians said there was
a stews made of the Church." They said so falsely when
¦the Church was chaste ; but Esay said truly, " How is the

390 DISCOVERY OF THE DANGEROUS ROCK [CH.
faithful city become an whore!" when the Church of Israel was
so indeed. Eleventhly, "The Donatists said the Church was lost
from all the world, and preserved only in Africa. So say
the Protestants, that the Church was lost in all parts of the
world, and raised up again in Germany." The Protestants
say not so : for the Church hath been scattered over the
face of the earth, since the first preaching of the Apostles
unto this day. But the Papists say that the Church was lost
out of all the world, and preserved only in a part of Europe ;
when, of all parts in the world, only a part of Europe, which
is the least part of the world, was subject to the Church of
Rome. Twelfthly, "The Severians used the Law and the Pro
phets ; but they perverted the sense of the Scriptures by
a certain peculiar interpretation of their own. So do the
Protestants." Nay, so do the Papists; that submit all un
derstanding of the Scripture, be it never so plain, to the
interpretation of their Pope and popish Church : as the Com
mandment of Images forbidden, and the cup to be received of
all, do most manifestly declare.
Lastly, " It hath always been a trick of Jews and
heretics to be still in hand with translating holy Scriptures ;
that by changing they may get some appearance of Scrip
ture on their side; as Theodotion, Aquila, Symmachus. So
do the Protestants now." Hieronym was no heretic; yet
did he translate the Scriptures both into Latin and into
the Dalmatian tongue. And the Papists have played the
part of Antichristian heretics, to confirm the vulgar Latin
translation ; which is so manifestly corrupt and false, contrary
to the truth of the Hebrew and Greek texts, upon pretence
of avoiding uncertainty of translations ; whereas there is none
so bad as that.
I might here run through a great number of the old
heresies, in which the Papists consent with the ancient heretics;
the Valentinians, in their Cross ; Montanists, in then? Purga
tory, and prescript fastings ; Carpocratians, in their Images ;
the Hemerobaptists, in their Holy Water; the Ossens and
Marcosians, in their Reliques, and strange tongue in prayers ;
the Heracleanites, in anointing them that are ready to die;
the Caians, in praying to Angels; the Archontics, in their

XVIII.] OF THE POPISH CHURCH. 391
counterfeit monkery ; the Marcionists, in extolling virginity
and fasting, and in permitting women to baptize; the En-
cratists, in abstaining from flesh ; the Apostolics, in their vow
of continence ; the Cyrians, [Collyridians,] in worshipping the
Virgin Mary ; the Pelagians, in their opinion of merits and
freewill ; the Eutychians, in denying the truth of Christ His
body; the Anthro[po]morphites, in making Images of God;
and many other, but that I have done it elsewhere more at
large. But of these Epiphanius, Augustin, and others are
witnesses. The eleventh and last mark is, that Antichristians should
go about " to make void and deny the supernatural graces
which God hath given to His Church ;" so that " the seal of
Antichrist," by Hippolytus' judgment, should be Nego, " I
deny." So do the Protestants, which deny five Sacraments of
the Church, the Sacrifice of the Mass, &c. : and so maketh
rehearsal of a great number of popish errors, which indeed
we deny, because they be contrary to the truth of God's
word. Among which he rehearseth some false and shameless
slanders ; as, that we " deny our sins to be taken away by
the Lamb of God ; saying they tarry still, but that they are
not imputed." Indeed, "if we say we have no sin, we
deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us :" but we say
all the sins that we have are taken away, when they are not
laid to our charge.
Secondly, he chargeth us to teach, "that no justice is
at all made in us by spreading charity in our hearts ; whereas
S. Paul saith, Rom. v., 'many shall be made just:' but they
say only that justice shall be imputed." We say with Saint
Paul, Rom. v., that " being justified by faith, we have peace
with God:" rejoicing in hope, which doth not confound us
in the midst of afflictions, " because the love of God is poured
forth in our hearts:" I mean the love of God toward us,
and not our love toward Him. We say likewise with
Saint Paul, that " by the obedience of One," which is Christ,
"many shall be made righteous." But how can we be made
righteous by obedience of Christ, but that His obedience is
imputed and made perfect unto us? O putid and absurd
slanders !
He chargeth us thirdly, that we " deny Baptism to remit
our sins :" which is false, except as Saint Peter denieth the

392. DISCOVERY OF THE DANGEROUS ROCK [CH.
work wrought to save us ; 1 Pet. iii. verse 21 : " Not the
washing of the filth of the body, but the answer of a good
conscience unto almighty God."
Fourthly, he chargeth us to deny " that Baptism is neces
sary to children which are born of Christian parents :" wherein
he lieth most impudently ; although we agree not with the
Papists that the infants of Christians, excluded by necessity
from Baptism, are damned. In which error although Augustin
was, yet he is no more to be followed than in another error
about the same infants, to whom both he and Pope Innocentius
thought the Sacrament of the Lord's Supper as necessary as
the Sacrament of Baptism ; affirming that infants which have
not received the Lord's Supper were damned : Contra duas
Episto. Pelag. ad Bonifac. Lib. ii. Cap. iv.1: Ecce, beatoz
memorioz Innocentius Papa sine Baptismo Christi et sine
participatione corporis et sanguinis Christi vitam non ha
bere parvulos dicit : " Behold, Pope Innocent of blessed me
mory sayeth, that without the Baptism of Christ, and the par
ticipation of the body and blood of Christ, little children have
no life." To conclude, we deny nothing that they can prove to be
true, but such matters as we prove by the only rule of truth
to be false. But the Pope sheweth himself to be Antichrist,
which denieth all the sovereignty of the office and prerogative
of Christ. He denieth that Christ is the only Head of His universal
Church in heaven and in earth.
He denieth that Christ only is a Priest, according to the
order of Melchisedech.
He denieth that Christ only is our Mediator, as well of
intercession as of redemption.
He denieth that Christ's word is sufficient for our sal
vation. He denieth that the Sacrifice of Christ His death is the
only purgation of our sins.
He denieth that the merits of Christ are our only justifi
cation. He denieth that God only is to be prayed unto.
He denieth the verity of Christ's body by his Transub
stantiation. 1 [Supra, pag. 41.]

XVIII.] OF THE POPISH CHURCH. 393
Finally, he denieth all honour and glory to be due only
to God by Jesus Christ : and therefore he is none other but
even that detestable monster Antichrist, whom I be
seech the Lord speedily to confound and abolish
by the spirit of His mouth, which is
His holy word, and by the bright
ness of His coming.
Amen.
God be praised.

INDEX.

Abdias, "a new-found old Doctor,"
149, 172.
Abgarus, 53, 204.
Abiathar, whom Solomon deposed, or
rather banished, not lawfully the
High Priest, 265.
Acta Eruditorum, 33, 287.
Acta Sanctorum, 81, 355.
jElfric, The Paschal Homily, 7, 20,
247 : Epistles, 20 : Ussher's mistake
concerning his Liber Canonum, 22.
Aerius, 43, 67.
Aetius, the Anomoean, 43.
Agapetus I. (Pope) whether he first
devised Processions, 184.
Agylams (Henricus) omits a remark
able reference in the Nomocanon of
Photius, 42.
Aidanus, 16, 26, 27.
Albertus Magnus, 167.
Alcuinus, at what time it is said that
he composed the Caroline Books,
23, 154.
Alexander I. (Pope) first spurious
Epistle, 81, 84: Stapleton relies on
it for the defence of Holy Water,
117.
Alexander (Natalis) rejects the fabu
lous Acts of the Synod of Sinuessa,
364.
"Algates," 183.
Allix (Peter, D.D.) 386.
Altesetra (Antonius Dadinus) 103.
Ambrosius (S.) his use of the term
Missa, 81, 239 : year of his death,
81 : a Sermon De Cruce, by S. Max
imus Taurinensis, ascribed to him,
154 — 5 : spurious Commentary on the
Epistles of S. Paul, 183, 367 : his
language concerning the Empress
Helena, 202: false testimony adduced
as if from him at the second Council
of Nicsea, 207 : questionable books
De Sacramentis, 239 : a Sermon at
tributed both to him and S. Augus
tin, 284 : u Sermon ascribed to him,
to S. Augustin, and to S. Maximus

Taurinensis, 340 : undoubtedly not
the author of the books De vocatione
Gentium, 353.
 Officiorum libri, 83.
 Concio de obitu Theod. Imp.,
87, 202.
 De hort. ad Virg. Tractate 92.
— In obitum Salyri, 105.
 In S. Luc., 256, 304, 320—21.
 De Spiritu Sancto, 256.
 De xncamat. Dom., 256, 310.
 Epistt., 266, 267, 380.
 In Psal., 284.
Ambrosius Camaldulensis, 110.
Amerbachius (Bruno) condemned as
fictitious the Commentary on the
Psalms attributed to S. Jerom, 208.
Ammianus Marcellinus, 360.
Anacletus (Pope), third spurious Epis
tle, what derivation it assigns for
Cephas, 301.
Anastasius Bibliothecarius, whether
the author of the Pontifical, 98  9.
Ancyra, Council of, permits the mar
riage of the Clergy, 96.
Angelici, the heretics, why so called,
41 — 2 : their doctrine condemned by
the Council of Laodicea, 42.
Anthony (S.) 172.
Antiquity, the test of truth in matters
of religion, 64, 175.
Apiarius, 70.
Appeals to Rome, 70—71, 308.
Aristotle, what called by Luther, 57.
Arnobius Afer, mistaken for Minucius
Felix, 206 : confounded by Erasmus,
Fulke, and others, with Arnobius
Junior, 319.
Arnobius Junior, Comment, in Psal.,
by whom and when first published,
319 : quoted, 319—20, 322, 347—8.
Arnoldus Carnotensis, treatises written
by him, and attributed to S. Cyprian,
163, 238.
Article, sixth, of the Church of Eng
land, 221, 222.
"Assoiled,"48.

396

INDEX.

Athanasius (S. ) 346, 347 : appealed to
Constantine, 358, 379 : spurious
Qumstiones ad Antiochum, 143, 177,
193, 206.
¦  De incarnatione Verbi Dei, 198.
 Fictitious Liber de passione Ima
gines Christi, 200, 206.
.  Hist. Arianor. ad Monachos,
362, 379.
Augustin the Monk, miracles ascribed
to him, 5, 76 : defended by Bede
with reference to the Monks of Ban
gor, 6, 186 : though he and his com
panions carried a Cross, there is not
(as Collier remarks, and Manning
admits,) the least intimation given
that they worshipped it, 17 : how he
and the ancient Ascetics differed
from popish Monks, 17 — 18 : received
"codices plurimos" from S. Gre
gory the Great, 113.
Augustinus (S.) his opinion as to the
necessity of administering the Com
munion to infants, 41, 392 : his
account of the Angelici, 42 : con
demned superstition at the tombs of
Martyrs, 44 : rejected the Canon
cited about appeals to Rome, 70,
353 : died out of communion with
the Church of Rome, 71 : spurious
Sermo amongst those de diversis,
82 : a work by S. Fulgentius, De
fide, ad Petrum Diaconum, attri
buted to him, 86 : Mendicants un
der the rule of, 103 : fictitious ad
dresses to Catechumens, 145 : coun-
. terfeit Tractatus contra quinque
Hosreses, 147 : spurious Sermo xix.
de Sanctis, 157 : a Homily by S.
Chrysostom, De Cruee et Latrone,
erroneously assigned to him, 179 —
80 : supposititious tract De vera et
falsa Pcenitentia, 240 : feigned Hy-
pog. contr. Pelag., 241 : a Sermon
attributed both to him and to S. Am
brose, 284 : Horn, de Pastoribus
wrongly rejected by Fulke, 291 : his
interpretation of the Rock, 294 : a
Sermon bearing his name, as well as
that of S. Ambrose, and of S. Max
imus Taurinensis,340: maintained the
innocence of Pope Marcellinus, 365.
 In Psalmos, 31, 54, 92, 102, 111,
240, 245.

Augustinus (S.) Epistolte, 36, 43, 62,
100, 111, 127, 133, 150, 242,267, 294,
350,351,352—3,357,358.
 De Genesi ad literam, 36.
 Cont. duas Ep. Pelag. ad Bon.,
41, 392.
 De Heresibus, 42, 43, 147.
 De moribus Ecclesia Catholics,
44, 99, 128.
 De unitate Ecclesia, 50, 54, 230.
 De utilitate credendi, 56, 67.
 Cont. Ep. Manich. quam voc.
Fundam., 56, 241, 350—1.
 Contra Faustum, 57, 88, 146,
182.
 Cont. Ep. Parmen., 62.
 De Civitate Dei, 80, 85—6, 127,
150, 245, 367.
 Sermones de Scripturis, 82, 317.
 Contra advers. Leg. et Proph.,
86, 245.
 De Conjug. adult., 94.
 De cura pro mortuis, 105.
 De consensu Evangelistarum,
128, 234, 386.
.  Contra Maximin. Arian., 130.
 De Doctrina Christiana, 132,221.
 De Trinitate, 134.
 De vera Religione, 149 — 50.
 Enchiridion ad Laurent., 150,
240—1.
 In S. Joannem, 202, 294, 298.
 Contra Gaudent., 221.
 Contra Julianum, 230.
 De Natura et Gratia, 230.
 Cont. Cresconium, 230.
 De Gratia Christi, 230.
 De octo Dulcitii Quastt., 241.
 Retractationes, 287.
¦ De Agone Christiano, 295.
 Serm. lxxvi. de verb. Evang.
Matth., 298.
 De Bapt. contra Don., 313.
 Horn, de Pastoribus, 291, 317.
 De unico Bapt. contra Petil.,
365.
Aylmer (Bishop) his Harborowe, and
Life by Strype, 37.
Babylon, mentioned in S. Peter's first
Epistle, not Rome, 336— 8: DeMarca
adopts Joseph Scaliger's conjecture,
336.
Bail (Louis) rejects the spurious in-

INDEX.

397

ventory of Canonical books which
Carranza ascribed to the Council of
Florence, 222.
Balduinus (Franciscus) Responsio ad
Calvinum, 73: his ingenuous acknow
ledgment of an interpolation in Op
tatus, 302: added the seventh book
against Parmenian in small type, 323.
Ballerraius (Petrus et Hieronymus)
70.
Barlow (Bishop) Brutum Fulmen,
286, 290.
Baronius (Cardinal) 71, 328: fictitious
Saint Synoris in his first edition of
the Roman Martyrology, 44: main
tains the genuineness of the spurious
letter to Ocean us, attributed to S.
Jerom, 97, 339: why he rejects a
Sermon, ascribed to S. Chrysostom,
in adorationem venerab. Catenarum,
110: his extraordinary proof of the
antiquity of shaven crowns, 115: de
rived from Malmesbury an interpola
ted letter ascribed to Pope Sergius I.,
119: disregards the counterfeit Liber
de passione Imaginis Christi, which
bears the name of S. Athanasius,
200 : considered S. Jerom shamefully
astray respecting the primacy of S.
Peter, 292: approved of the irrational
derivation of Cephas from Ke<pa\ij,
302: vainly relied on the corrupted
Chronicon of Eusebius, to prove that
S. Peter was for twenty-five years at
Rome, 337: refuses to admit the al
leged antiquity of the Pseudo-Hege-
sippus, 339: endeavours to uphold
the credibility of the Acts of Paul
and Thecla, 339: adduces the value
less Acts of the Martyr Pontius, 355:
his falsehood respecting the con
tinuance of Eusebius's tendency to
Arianism, 359 : speaks of the preser
vation of the Font of Constantine,
360: his confession as to the imagi
nary Acts of the Synod of Sinuessa,
365: the authority for the common
opinion as to the grant by Phocas to
the Popes of the title of " (Ecume
nical Bishop," 365.
Barrow (Isaac, D. D.) calls S. Chry
sostom " the Prince of interpreters,"
285 ; and ascribes to him a counter
feit Sermo in Pentecosten, 286.

Bas (C. W. Le) Life of Bishop Jewel,
371.
Basil, Council of, a treatise annexed to
its Acts, 294.
Basilius (S.) Concio ad Adolesc, 134:
questionable treatise De Spiritu
Sancto, 239.
 Regula contracliores ; and Bel-
larmin's expression of uncertainty as
to the author, 161.
 ¦ Horn. cont. Sabel., 177-
 Horn, in Barlaam Martyrem, 199.
 Mor. Def, 239.
 Concio de Pcenit., 284.
 Advers. Eunom., 289.
 Epist. lxxi., 374.
Basnage (Jacques) 101.
Bayle (Pierre) 37.
Beaven (James) 69, 340.
Becanus (Martinus) quotes as genuine
a fictitious Catalogue of Canonical
books, ascribed by Carranza to the
Council of Florence, 222.
Becon (Thomas, S. T. P.) 38.
Beda (Ven.) his History translated by
Stapleton, 5 : refutes a charge against
the Monk Augustin, 6, 186: varia
tion in the numbering of chapters in
his History, 9: his statement as to the
relationship between S. Gregory the
Great and Pope Felix III., 99: his
journey to Rome a fiction, 119 — 20.
Bellarmin (Cardinal) rejects Gratian 's
corruption of a Milevitan Decree, 71:
endeavours to discredit an Epistle of
S. Gregory Nyssen, De Us qui ad-
eunt Hierosolyma, 109: maintains the
genuineness of the spurious treatise
Contra quinque Hareses, attributed
to S. Augustin, 147: his doubt as to
the author of the Regula contrac
liores ascribed to S. Basil, 161: ad
duces the fictitious Liber de passione
Imaginis Christi, bearing the name
of S. Athanasius, 200: cites as au
thentic a counterfeit Catalogue of
Canonical books, assigned by Car
ranza to the Council of Florence,
222: quotes an interpolated passage
in the Chronicle of Eusebius as proof
that S. Peter continued for twenty-
five years at Rome, 337: relies on the
testimony of the Pseudo-Hegesippus,
339 : alleges on two occasions the fa-

398

INDEX.

bulous Acts of the Sinuessan Council,
364: his opinion of the Emperor
Constantine, 380.
Bergomensis. Vid. Forestus.
Berington (Joseph) 282.
Bernardus (S.) 321.
Beveregius (Episc.) Pandectte Cano-
num, 50.
Beza (Theodoras) 73, 385—7.
Bibliotheca Patrum, an instance of
their following the instructions of
the Index Expurgatorius of Rome,
236.
Biel (Gabriel) 22.
Bilson (Bishop) 283.
Bingham (Joseph) 82, 117, 183, 235,
238, 364.
Binius (Severinus) Concilia, 70, 71,
183, 288, 302, 364 : his deceitfulness,
or absurd mistake, concerning the
Baptistery which bears the name of
Constantine, 360.
" Bless," to, new signification of the
word, 171—2.
Blondellus (David) Pseudo-Isidorus
et Turrianus vapulantes, 71, 81, 160,
179, 236, 301.
Bollandus (Joannes). Vid. Acta Sanc
torum, et Papebrochius (Daniel).
Bona (Cardinal) his statement relative
to the Font of Constantine, 360.
Bonifacius I. (Papa) 362 — 3: his claim
founded on a supposed Sardican De
cree, 70—71, 308.
Bonifacius III. (Papa) what privilege
it is said that he procured from
Phocas for the Church of Rome, 72,
365: the nature of the evidence upon
which it is believed that he obtained
the title of " Oecumenical Bishop,"
365. See 371.
Boxhornius (Henricus) Harmonia Eu-
charistica, 22.
Bramhall (Archbishop) mentions the
fictitious Sinuessan Council, 364.
Brereley (John) 49, 57, 70, 71.
Brerewood (Edward) 328.
Breviarium Romanum, records as a
fact the fable of the Baptism of Con
stantine by Pope Silvester, 359: con
tains matter taken from the imagi.
nary Acts of the Synod of Sinuessa,
364.
Brown (Edwardus) his error respecting

the feigned Donation of Constantine,
360.
Bruckeri Hist. Crit. Philos., 101.
Bulkley (Edward) 74.
Bull (Bishop) mistaken as to a tract
assigned to S. Hippolytus, 282.
Burchardus, 301.
Burhillus (Robertus, S. T. D.) 70.
Burton (Edward, D. D.) his remark
concerning a supposed edition of Ter-
tullian's works, 64 : referred to about
the Therapeutic, 101.
Busseus (Joannes) 98.
Butler (Alban) 70.
Bzovius (Abrahamus) a'remarkable ad
dition made by him to a sentence
cited from S. Cyprian, 322: adduces
the fabulous A cts of the Council of
Sinuessa, 364.
Caiani, the heretics, invoked Angels,
41, 86.
Caiaphas, not a Sadducee, 246, 326.
Calfhill (James, D.D.) 107: source of
his error as to the date of the Synod
of Elvira, 153.
Calvin (John) 33, 37, 38, 42, 58, 73, 90.
Camerarius ( Joachimus) 380.
Cange (Car. Du Fresne, Dom. Du) 364.
Canones Apostolorum, 50, 95, 106, 222,
237.
Canones Pamitentiales, 22.
Canute (King) Laws of, 22.
Cappellus (Marcus Antonius) 70.
Care (Henry) Modest Enquiry whether
St. Peter were ever at Rome, 336.
Caroline Books, by whom and when
composed, 23, 154, 188.
Carranza (Barthol.) Summa Concill.,
89, 151, 154, 184: fictitious Cata
logue of Canonical books ascribed by
him to the Council of Florence, 222.
Carthage, Council of, a.d. 256, S. Cy
prian's memorable words at, 322.
 second Council of, did not first use
the term Missa, 81.
— third Council of, one of its Canons
corrupted, 89.
— fourth Council of, what alb it
speaks of, 1 13.
 sixth Council of, condemned ap
peals to Rome, and checked the pre
sumption of the Popes, 70, 71, 322—
3, 353.

INDEX.

399

Casaubonus (Isaacus) Exercitationes
ad Annates Baronii, 292.
Casaubonus (Mericus) 311.
Cassiodorius (Mag. Aurel.) Historia
Tripartita, 64, 114, 116, 160, 346,
358.
__— Exposit. in Psal., 144.
Casus reservati, 388.
Cave (Guil., S. T. D.) his unjust cen
sure of Clichtoveus, 277: erred in re
jecting the Testimonia adversus Ju-
daos, by S. Gregory Nyssen, 295 — 6 :
to whom he attributes the books De
vocatione Gentium, 353.
_ Historia Literaria, 147, 287.
 Discourse of ancient Church- Gov.,
70.
Cecilius (Lucius) Le Nourri assigns to
him a treatise commonly attributed
to Lactantius, 336.
Centuriatores Magdeburgenses, 107,109,
255.
Ceolfrid (Abbas) Epistle to Naiton,
King of the Picts, 8.
Cephas, supposed derivation from xe-
4>a\»j, 301-2.
Chalcedon, General Council of, its de
cision with regard to the Bishop of
Rome, 288—9, 308, 327, 332, 363—4 :
why its twenty-eighth Canon was
omitted by Dionysius Exiguus, 288 :
Gratian's shameless depravation of
the text, and other corruptions noted,
288, 289, 364.
Chillingworth (William) 331.
Chrysostomus (S. Joannes) a phrase in
one of his Sermons upon Lazarus
gave rise to the formation of an ima
ginary Saint, 44 : five spurious Ho
milies on Job ascribed to him, 110,
139, 189: fictitious Sermon inadorat.
venerabil. Catenarim, 110: counter
feit Oratio in principes Apostt. Pe
trum et Paulum, 110: his silver
Crosses, 120—1, 184: Opus imperfec-
tum in S. Matth., attributed to him,
137: spurious Homilies on the Gos
pel by S. Mark, 147: his first Sermon
De Cruce et Latrone wrongly as
signed to S. Augustin, 179—80 : the
Homilies ex var. in S. Matth. locis
not authentic, 285—6 : doubtful Ho
mily upon S. Peter and Elias, 285 :
fictitious Sermon De negatione Petri,

285: the first counterfeit Sermo in
Pentecosten alleged as genuine by
Barrow, 286: an interpolation inserted
by Possinus in the Catena Gracorum
Patrum, 286.
— De Lazaro Condones, 44.
 De Penlecoste, 67.
 Horn, in Ep. ad Rom., 110, 199.
 In Epist. ad Philem. Horn., 110.
 Horn, de Anna, 111.
 In Epist. ad Ephes., 115.
 In Ep. ad Corinth., 168, 231.
 Demons!, ad Gentiles, 181.
 Horn, in S. Joan., 198, 277.
 In Epistt. ad Thess., 231.
 De Sacerdotio, 240, 317—18, 326.
 In S. Matth. Horn., 285, 298, 304.
 In Act. Horn., 286.
 In Ep. ad Gal., 286.
Ciampinus (Joannes) Examen Libri
Pontificalis, 99.
Cicero, 150.
Claudius, Bishop of Turin, forbad the
worship of the Cross, 208.
Clemencet (Charles) L'Art de verifier
les Dales, 179: an error of his noted,
337.
Clemens Alexand., Slromata, 67.
Clemens Rom. (S.) spurious Ep. ad
Jacob, frat. Dom., 322.
 fictitious third decretal letter, 81.
Clement VIII. (Pope) 21.
Clericus (Joannes) 50, 353.
Clichtoveus (Judocus) unjustly cen
sured by Cave and many others,
277.
Climacus (S. Joannes) 287.
Coccius (Jodocus) Thesaurus Catholi-
cus, 57, 85, 289.
Cocus (Robertus) Censura quorundam
scriptorum, 70, 90, 110, 165, 200 : mis
taken about the Pontifical, 99.
Codex Canonum vetus, 107, 179.
Ccelestinus I. (Papa) alleged the famous
Sardican Decree, 70—71, 308.
Coinualch (King) 119: deposed Bishop
Wini, 16, 24.
Collier (Jeremy) his Eccles. Hist, of
Great Britain, Book ii. Cent, vi., re
ferred to. See Augustin the Monk.
Colomesius (Paulus) 338.
Comber (Thomas, D.D.) Roman For
geries, 70, 289, 363.
Confession, Auricular, where anciently

400

INDEX.

used and abolished, 91: when abso
lutely instituted, 90.
Constance, Council of, its Decree rela
tive to Communion in one kind, 31,
387: condemned Pope John XXIII.,
269.
Constans II. (Emperor) not the nephew
of Heraclius, 361.
Constantinople, when the name was
first heard of, 339.
 General Council of, an. 553, 308.
 third Council of, condemned Pope
Honorius I., 312.
 Quinisext Council held at, 95 : its
seventy-third Canon referred to, and
quoted, 151—2.
Constantinus Magnus (Imp.) the sign
shewn to him exhibited the character
of the name of Christ, 139—40, 148:
his Labarum, 140: appealed to by S.
Athanasius, 358, 379 : fable of his
Baptism by Pope Silvester, 359: his
Font, 360: particulars concerning his
Donation, 360 — 1 : his admonition to
the Bishops at the first Nicene Coun
cil, and Bellarmin's observation upon
his words, 380.
Constantius (Emperor) 361—2, 379.
Cophti, or Copti, (" Sophi " is a title of
the Emperor of Persia,) 328.
Cornarius (Janus) 100, 103, 286, 287.
Cornelius (Pope) second spurious Epis
tle, 71: false Epistle to Lupicinus,
81.
Cosin (Bishop) Hist, of Transub., 21.
 Schol. Hist, of Canon of Script.,
89, 221, 222. |
Costerus (Franciscus) 338.
Crabbe (Petrus) Concilia, 15, 107, 179,
200, 243, 288, 294, 363, 364.
Crakanthorpius (Ricardus, S. T. D.)
Defensio Ecclesice Anglicancs, 110.
 Vigilius Dormitans, 307.
'  Defence of Constantine, 359, 360.
Cranmer (Archbishop) 247.
Crinitus (Petrus)De honestaDisciplina,
159.
Crompton (William) 80, 240.
Cross, Invention of the, 190, 193 — 4.
Crucifix, how prayed to, 211.
Cyprianus (S.) language of the Roman
Clergy in an Epistle to him, 159 — 60,
342: treatises composed by Arnoldus
Carnotensis ascribed to him, 163, 238:

depravation of the tract De unitate
Ecclesia, 283, 290—91 : his remark
able allusion to Stephen, Bishop of
Rome, 322.
 De lapsis, 83.
 De unitate Ecclesia, 120, 283, 290
—91, 315, 316, 331.
 Ad Demetrianum, 138.
 Ad Pompeium, 168.
 Ad Jubaianum, 290, 329, 331.
 Ad Quinlum, 313.
 Ad Cornel. Ep. lix., 253, 283, 330,
332, 341, 343—4.
 Epistt., 283, 333—4, 342—3, 345.
Cyrillus Alexand., (S.) Contra Julia-
num, 89, 112, 199.
 In S. Joan., 277, 278, 367.
 Translation of his Commentary on
S. John by Trapezuntius, with the
addition by Clichtoveus, 277.
 De Trinitate, 277—8, 297.
Dallaeus (Joannes) De vero usu Pa
trum, 44.
 De lib. suppos. Dionys. et Ignat.,
236.
— — De Jejun. et Quadrages., 236.
Damascenus (S. Joannes) De ortho-
doxa Fide, 203.
 Historia SS. Barlaami et Josa-
phati, supposititious, 287.
Damasus (Pope) not the author of the
Pontifical, 98, 360 : counterfeit Epis
tle to S. Jerom, 120.
Decretals, 361.
Denisonus (Joannes, S.T.D.) De Con-
fessionis Auricularis vanitate, 90,
91.
Dioclesian (Emperor) 217 — 18.
Dionysius Areopagita, his "credit
cracked" by Erasmus, 165 : his writ
ings not known for five hundred years
after Christ, 235.
Dionysius Exiguus, 97, 107 : his faith
lessness with respect to a Canon of
the Council of Chalcedon, 288.
Doune (John, D.D.) Pseudo-Martyr,
236.
Earconberct, King of Kent, command
ed that all the Idols in his kingdom
should be destroyed, and that the
fast of forty days should be observed,
16, 24.

INDEX.

401

Ecgfrid (King) deposed Bishop Wil
frid, 17.
Eleutherius (Pope) 186 : fictitious Re
script to King Lucius, 128, 366.
Eliberis, Synod of, 126 : mistake made
by Calfhill, and in one of the Homi
lies, as to its date, 153 : Canon against
Images, 153—4 : forbad the lighting
of candles in the day-time in ceme
teries, 185.
Epiphanius (S.) reckons Invocation of
Angels amongst the heresies of the
Caiani, 41, 86 : speaks of the Ange
lici, 41 : mentions the superstition
of the Valentinians with reference to
the Cross, 139 : his famous letter to
John, Patriarch of Jerusalem, 173 — 4:
what he called the heresy of the Col-
lyridians, 207 : spurious tract De
vitis Prophetarum, 207.
 Panarium, 41, 43, 44, 100, 103,
133, 287, 347, 375, 376.
 Ancoratus, 286.
 Respons. ad Ep. Acacii et Pauli,
375.
Erasmus (Desid.) 329 : distinguishes
the true from the false Epistle to De
metrias, attributed to S. Jerom, 44 :
his remark upon the spurious Epistle
to Oceanus, 97 : his Life of S. Jerom
expurgated, 103 : disbelieved the al
leged antiquity of Dionysius the
Areopagite, 165 : his Colloquies sen
tenced to extinction, 194 : his opinion
as to the Commentary on the Psalms
erroneously ascribed to S. Jerom,
208: how he was treated on an im
portant occasion by the Spanish In
quisitors, 290 : assigns the authorship
of a Commentary on the Psalms,
which he first published, to Arnobius
Afer, instead of to Arnobius Junior,
319 : whom he supposed to have been
the writer of the books De vocations
Gentium, 353.
¦  Adagia, 299.
 Life, by Jortin, 319.
Esdras, what books the name included,
222.
Essenes, not identical with the Thera-
peuta?, 101.
Eugenius IV. (Pope) 222.
Eulalius, Abp. of Carthage, 71-
Eusebius Pamph., his error with respect
[FULKE, II.]

to the Therapeutse, 101 : his autho
rity for the statement about S. John's
petalum, 113: the Latin translation
of his Chronicle corrupted, so as to
make him bear witness of the inven
tion of the Cross, 190 : his Chronicle
falsified for' the purpose of maintain
ing that Lent was instituted by Pope
Telesphorus, and that Pope Pius I.
commanded that the feast of Easter
should be kept on Sunday, 236, 237 :
strange interpolation in S. Jerom's
version of his Chronicon, with regard
to S. Peter's long-continued residence
at Rome, 337 : did not persist in fa
vouring Arianism after the holding
of the first Nicene Council, 359 : why
his writings were anathematized at
the second Synod of Nicsea, 359.
 Hist. Eccles., 69, 105, 115, 149,
183, 189, 235, 238, 239, 263, 322, 355,
358, 384, 388.
 De vita Constantini, 140, 148,
355, 358, 359.
Eustathius Sebastenus, supposed by
some to have been the author of the
Regula contractiores ascribed to S.
Basil, 161.
Euthymius Zigabenus, 167, 278, 287.
Exuperius, Bishop of Toulouse, 115.
Eymericus (Nicolaus) Direclorium In-
quisitorum, 21.
Faber Stapulensis (Jacobus) 235, 237.
Fabianus ( Papa) fiction of his having
baptized the Roman Emperor Philip
and his son, 355.
Fabricius (Joannes) Historia Biblio
theca Fabriciana, 18, 323.
Fabricius (Joannes Albertus) Centi-
folium Lutheranum, 18.
 Bibliotheca Ecclesiastica, 81, 287,
323.
 Bibliotheca Grceca, 101 , 110, 287.
 Biblioth.med. et inf. Latin., 103,
323, 360.
 Codex Apoc. Novi Test., 339.
.  Vita, per Reimarum, 101.
Fabrotus (Carolus Annibal) 99.
Fathers, appealed to by Bp. Jewel, 28,
58 : their books corrupted, 59 : coun
sel of Vincentius Lirinensis concern
ing them, 175.
Faucheur (Michel le) 115.
26

402

INDEX.

Felix III. (Pope) what relation to Pope
Gregory the Great, 99.
Fell (Bishop) 290,329.
Fisher (Bishop) his reply to Velenus,
336.
Fitzherbert (Thomas) 294, 295.
Flacius Illyricus (Matthias) Catalogus
Tesiium veritatis, 232.
 Refut. invect. Bruni contra Cen-
tur., 360.
Fleury (L' Abbe") 81, 183.
Florence, Council of, spurious Cata
logue of Canonical books ascribed
to it by Carranza, 222.
Forestus, Bergomensis, (Jacobus Phi-
lippus) Supplem. Chronic, 103.
Fox (John) 23, 37, 61, 74, 93, 209,
232, 247 : an error of his noted,
98.
Frankfort, Council of, condemned the
second Synod of Nicaea, 154.
Fulgentius Ruspensis (S.) his work
De fide, ad Petrum Diaconum, as
cribed to S. Augustin, 86.
Fulke (William, D.D.) 70, 168, 308,
384, 385.
Fuller (Thomas) Church History of
Britain, 6, 9, 37.
Gage (Thomas) 22.
Galesinius (Petrus) source of his be
lief in the existence of the fabulous
Saint Synoris, 44.
Galfridus Monumetensis, the character
he gives of the Monk Augustin, 6,
186.
Gallandius (Andreas) 70.
Gangra, Synod of, 89.
Gavantus (Bartholomaeus) 22.
Geddes (Michael) 70, 225.
Gelasius I. (Pope) 222, 339: date of
his Decree, and Mabillon's opinion
as to the author, 221.
" Gentility," 58, 60.
Geoffrey of Monmouth. See Galfridus.
Gerard, Abp. of York, 23, 94.
Gibbon (Edward) 98, 101, 361.
Gieseler (J. C. I.) Text-book of Ec
cles. Hist., 33 : his error with respect
to the term Missa, 81.
Gildas, a passage contained in his
Epistle generally misunderstood, 186.
"Girdeth at," 153.
Goldastus (Melch. Haim.) mistaken as

to the author of the feigned Donation
of Constantine, 360.
Gothofredus (Jacobus) his opinion re
specting the Libra Occidua, 364 — 5.
Grabius (Joannes Ernestus, S.T.P.)
Prolegom. in edit. Alex. Septuag.
Interp., 166.
 Spicilegium, 338, 339.
Gratiauus, Decretum, 33, 42, 81, 96, 97,
105, 107, 141, 179,183, 184, 211, 221,
236, 237, 243, 244, 295, 323, 339, 356,
363, 365.
 corrupted a Canon of the second
Synod of Milevis, 71 : falsified an
Epistle of Pope Leo the Great, 82 :
his confession with regard to the
celibacy of the Clergy, 96 : suppositi
tious sentence ascribed to S. Augustin
respecting Purgatory, 240 : his shame
less depravation of a Canon of the
Council of Chalcedon, 288 : bears
witness against the interpolations in
a treatise by S. Cyprian, 291 : puts
forward an absurd derivation for Ce
phas, 301 : exhibits the supposed
Donation of Constantine, 360.
Gratius (Orthuinus) Fasciculus rerum
expetendarum ac fugiendarum, 302,
360, 361.
Gregorius Nazianzenus (S.) Ep. ad
Cledonium, 63.
 Orat. de Theologia, 63.
 Or. in Julianum, 84.
 In sanct. Pasch. Oral., 84.
 Orat. ad Arianos, et de seipso,
114.
Gregorius Nyssenus (S. ) his remark
able treatise concerning pilgrimages
to Jerusalem, 109 — 10: his Testi-
monia adversus Judcsos shewn to be
genuine, 295 — 6.
Gregory I. (Pope) called the Emperor
Mauritius his sovereign lord, 16 :
condemned the name of Universal
Bishop, 49, 72, 258—9, 371 : his me
morable words with respect to the
army of Priests prepared for Anti
christ, 3/1.
 Epistt., 128.
 In Esech. Horn., 314.
Gregory XI. (Pope) his condemnation
of a tenet respecting the consecrated
Host, 21.
Gregory XII. (Pope) 103.

INDEX.

403

Gretserus (Jacobus) 110 : his hesitation
with regard to Gorionides, 339.
Grindal (Archbishop) 41, 87, 164.
Guilelmus Malmesburiensis, De geslis
PontificumAnglorum, 22: his shame
ful depravation of a letter ascribed
to Pope Sergius I., 119.
Guise (Duke of) 73, 74, 121.
Gunning (Bishop) speaks of two inter
polations in the Chronicle of Euse
bius, 236, 237.
Hagustalden, 11.
Haloander (Gregorius) 95.
Harding (Thomas, D.D.) 45, 113,154.
Hart (John) Conference with Rai-
noldes, 283, 319, 361, 364.
Hegesippus, an account of the true and
false, 338—9.
Helena (Empress) Invention of the
Cross, 190, 193—4 : language of S.
Ambrose concerning her, 202.
Hentenius(Joannes)£»arr.uei.rAeoZ., 88.
Herebald, Abbot of Wye, account of
his Baptism, 14.
Herod and Pilate, 77—8.
Hieronymus (S.) an account of his
Epistle to Evangelus, 33: his genu
ine, and the spurious, Epistle to De
metrias, 44: fictitious letter to Ocea-
nus, 97, 339: Epistles to Pope Da
masus, two authentic, and one coun
terfeit, 120, 349: his correct testimony
as to the form of the Samaritan Thau,
147: spurious Commentary on the
Psalms, and the judgment of Erasmus
and Amerbachius concerning it, 207
— 8 : his evidence with respect to the
Canonical books of Scripture, 221:
how Baronius considered him shame
fully astray, and Spondanus repre
sents him as heretical, with reference
to S. Peter's primacy, 292: strangely
interpolated the Chronicon of Eu
sebius, relative to S. Peter's long
continuance at Rome, 337: confessed
that Pope Liberius was an Arian,
349.
¦  Super Esaiam, 33, 78, 137.
•  Ad Evangelum, 33, 315, 388.
¦ '  Ad Demetriadem, 44, 104.
 Comment, in S. Matth., 48, 150,
181, 285.

Hieronymus (S.) Contra Luciferianos ,
63, 253.
 Ad Pammach. et Oceanum, 63.
 Adversus Jovinianum, 83, 97,
120, 285, 292, 332.
 In Eccles., 91.
 Ad Oceanum, 97.
 In Aggeum, 98.
 In Ep. ad Ephes., 98.
 Ad Paulinum, 109.
 Ad Rusticum, 115.
 Ad Damasum, 120.
 Ad Pammach., 133.
 Apologia adversus Rufinum, 181,
208.
 Ad Eustoch. Epitaph. Paula ma-
tris, 181, 202, 224.
 Prtefat. in Proverb., 221.
 Adversus Vigilantium, 240.
 Ad Furiam, 240.
 In Ep. ad Titum, 315—16.
 De Viris illust., 323, 337, 338,
339, 349.
 In Daniel., 367, 370.
 Ad Algasiam, 372.
Hilarius (S.) his testimony as to S.
Peter, and the Rock of the Church,
dreaded by Romanists, 289 — 90.
 De Trinitate, 67, 283, 284, 289—
90, 297.
 In S. Matth., 283, 297.
Hilarius Diaconus, 183.
Hippolytus (S.) spurious tract De con
summation Mundi attributed to him,
and its authenticity maintained by
Bishop Bull, 282.
 Passio Hippolyti. Vid.Prudentius.
Holstenius (Lucas) observes that the
Pontifical has been wrongly ascribed
to Luitprandus, 99.
Homilies, Book of, error in as to the
date of the Synod of Elvira, 153:
name Crinitus corrupted into Eri-
nilus therein, 159: Matrimony called
a Sacrament in the Sermon against
Swearing, 168.
Homily, The Paschal, 247: first and
second editions, and imaginary re
print of it, 7: contains many passages
taken from Ratramnus, 20.
Honorius 1. (Pope) called the Emperor
Heraclius his sovereign lord, 16: con
demned by the sixth General Council,
312, 334.

404

INDEX.

Hooker (Richard) 237, 238.
Hopkins (William) his translation of
the book of Ratramn, 20.
Hormisdas (Pope) the father of Pope
Silverius, 98 — 9.
Home (Bishop) 356, 378, 380.
Hosius (Cardinal) De Haresibus nostri
temporis, 4.
Hospinianus (Rodolphus) 103.
Hottingerus (Joannes Henricus) 296.
" Houseling," 11, 105.
Husenbeth (F. C.) attempts to avail
himself of the seventh book against
Parmenian, attributed to S. Optatus,
323.
Hutten (Ulricus de) published a treatise
by Laurentius Valla against the Do
nation of Constantine, 361.
Ignatius (S.) his genuine and the inter
polated Letters, 235.
 Epist. ad Smyrnaos, 235.
 Interp. Ep. ad Philadelphenos,
235: how the Vatican Index and the
Bibliotheca Patrum deal with a re
markable sentence herein, 236.
 Spurious Epistle ad Anliochenos,
236.
 Fictitious Epistle ad Philippenses,
237: adduced as authentic by Mr.
Taylor, 236.
" Imps," 18.
Index Auctorum damnala memoritB,
Vid. Mascaregnas (F. M.).
Index Expurgatorius, 103, 194, 236,
290.
 Cathalogus librorum hareticorum.
Vid. Mendham (Josephus).
Innocentius I. (Papa) 351—2: a tenet
of his condemned by the Council of
Trent, 41, 392: Epist. ad Decentium
considered spurious, 90: Epistle to
Victricius, ascribed to him, of what
document the probable source, 179:
Epistle to Exuperius, cited in his
name by Gratian, 244: in what
language addressed by one of the
Synods of Carthage, 351.
Innocentius III. (Papa) Desacro Alta-
ris rnyslerio, 21, 301: fourth Council
of Lateran held under him, 90: his
interpretation of the name Cephas,
301.
Ireland, why there was formerly pil

grimage into, 12: people of anciently
called Scots, 16, 19.
Irena?us (S.) 245, 335, 340, 341, 368,
370, 374: rebuked Pope Victor, 69,
238, 308: reproved the Gnostics for
having an Image of Christ, 127:
speaks of the superstitious regard
shewn for the Cross by the Valen
tinian heretics, 139 : what he declares
to have been the conduct of the Va-
lentinians when confuted by the word
of God, 219: his judgment as to the
perspicuity of Scripture, 220: his tes
timony concerning the greatness and
antiquity of the Church of Rome,
340—1.
Isidorus Hispalensis (S.) his account
of the Angelici, 41 — 2: erred as to
the origin of the name Cephas, 302.
Isidorus Mercator, 105, 107, 360.
Ittigius (Thomas) 70.
Ivo, Decrelum, 81, 107, 222, 301, 323.
Jackson (Thomas, D.D.) 247.
Jacobson (Gulielmus, S.T.D.) Patres
Apostolici, 189, 235.
James (Thomas, D.D.) 277, 283, 360,
371.
Jelf (R. W., D.D.) a note in his edi
tion of Bp. Jewel's works referred to,
369.
Jerom (S.). Vid. Hieronymus.
Jerusalem, pilgrimages to, 108 — 9, 238.
Jewel (Bishop) 21, 22, 41, 45, 46, 48,
49, 70, 82, 89, 113, 149, 154, 236, 275,
281, 285, 289, 295, 296, 340, 356, 364,
369, 371.
 his Challenge, 28, 58.
 Defence of the truth, 45. See
Advertisement.
 Life, by Le Bas, 371.
Joan (Pope) the source of confusion in
the numbering of the Popes named
John, 269.
Joannes Cantator, "John the Chanter,"
introduced the Roman service into
England, (a.d. 678.) 14.
Joannes Diaconus, " Digitorum muti-
lus," whether the author of the
feigned Donation of Constantine, 360.
Joannes Sabaita, 287.
John (S.) what Poly crates declares
that he voTe, 113.
John, Patriarch of Antioch, 295.

INDEX.

405

John of Beverley (S.) 14, 25.
John XXIII. (Pope) condemned by
the Council of Constance, 269, 334.
Johnson (John) 81.
Jonas Aurelianensis, 208.
Jortin (John, D.D.) Life of Erasmus,
319.
Josephus, does not state that Caiaphas
was a Sadducee, 246, 326.
Josephus Ben-Gorion. Vid. Hege
sippus.
Joverius (Franciscus) Sanctiones
Ecclesiastica, 96, 113, 312, 322: his
account of the variation in the num
bering of the Popes named John,
269.
Jovinian, 43.
Julian, the Apostate, how he counter
feited religion, 116.
Julius I. (Pope) two spurious Epistles
ascribed to him, 160.
Justellus (Christophorus)his edition of
the Nomocanon, 42.
Justinianus (Imp.) Constitutiones no
vella, 95 : words of his sixty-seventh
Novel attributed to the first Synod of
Orleans, 150 : the same Decree re
ferred to, 158—9, 185.
 Codex, 362, 364.
Justinus Martyr (S.) his first Apology
referred to respecting the sign of the
Cross, 164, and the mingling of
water with wine for the Lord's Sup
per, 237.
Juvenalis, 209.
Kirk (John) 282.
Kitchin (Bishop) his dexterity, 118.
Knox (John) 37, 121.
Kortholtus (Christianus) Disquisiliones
Anti-Baroniance, 44.
Labbe (Philippus) how he disposes of
a Decree made by the Synod of Win
chester, a.d. 1076, 23.
Lactantius, 142, 144 : the verses as
cribed to him, De Passione Domini,
fictitious, 156, 206 : treatise De mor-
tibus Persecutorum, by him, or Lu
cius Cecilius, the source of an extra
ordinary error, 336 — 7.
Laelius Tiphemas, 110.
Lambardus (Gulielmus) De priscis
Anglorum Legibus libri, 22.

Lanfrancus, his Decree in the Synod of
Winchester, respecting sacerdotal
celibacy, 23, 93.
Laodicea, Council of, circ. A D. 366, a
corruption in one of its Canons noted,
42 : its Decree concerning the Cano
nical books, 89.
Larroquanus (Mattha?us) 371.
Lateran, fourth Council of, private
Confession instituted at, 90.
Latimer (Bp.) 29.
Laud ( Archbishop) 71.
Launoius (Joannes) rejects the suppo
sititious Acts of the Council of Si
nuessa, 364.
 Vid. Reiserus (Ant.)
Laurence, second Abp. of Canterbury,
his acknowledgment of the British
and Irish Clergy, 16, 26.
Laurence (S.) church of, "in Panis-
perna," 372.
Lent, not instituted by Pope Teles-
phorus, 236—7.
Leo I. (Pope) an Epistle of his cor
rupted by Gratian, 82 : humbled by
the Council of Chalcedon, 288—9,
308, 326—7, 332, 363—4 : his state
ment as to the Rock of the Church
shamefully perverted, 293—4 : an
emendation in one of his Epistles
proposed by Quesnel, 319, who
claims for him the composition of the
books De vocalione Gentium, 353.
 Sermo de jejunio Pentecostes,
182.
 Epist. ad Anastasium, 259, 311.
 In ann. die Assump. Ser. iii., 293.
 Epist. ad Episc. per prov. Vienn.
const., 319.
Leo II. (Pope) confirmed the condem
nation of Pope Honorius, 312.
Liberius ( Pope) an Arian heretic, 334,
349.
" Libra Occidua," 364—5.
Lightfoot (John) 113, 246.
Lindsay (John) 118, 128, 265.
L'Isle (William) his second edition of
the Paschal Homily, 7-
Lombardus ( Petrus) condemned for his
opinion as to the possibility of the
consecrated Host being eaten by a
beast, 21 : cites the fictitious treatise
De vera et falsa Pcenitentia, bearing
S. Augustin's name, 240.

406

INDEX.

Long (Jacobus le) Bibliotheca Sacra,
166.
Longus a Coriolano (Franciscus) adopts
Carranza's false Catalogue of Cano
nical books, ascribed to the Council
of Florence, 222.
Lucius (King) 53 : imaginary Rescript
addressed to him by Pope Eleuthe
rius, 128, 366.
Luitprandus, not the author of the
Pontifical, 99.
Luther (Martin) whether he acknow
ledged that his followers were worse
than they had been when Papists, 18,
121 : published S. Jerom's Epistle
to Evangelus, 33 : the name he gave
to Aristotle, 57: accused of reject
ing books of Scripture, 130, 384.
Ly costhenes ( Conradus) De Prodigiis,
148.
Lynde (Sir Humphrey) 236.
Mabillonius (Joannes) the year he
fixed on as that of the death of S.
Ambrose, 81 : his opinion as to the
genuineness of the Gelasian Decree,
221 : refutes errors respecting the
time when Hegesippus lived, 338.
Msesteeus (Martialis) 236.
Maitland (S.R., D.D.) Puritan Thau-
maturgy, 76.
Manning (Robert) his admission rela
tive to the Cross borne by the Monk
Augustin, 17.
Marca (Petrus de) 71 : observes that
the words of Paschasinus, the papal
Legate at the Council of Chalcedon,
have been vitiated, 288 : agrees with
Scaliger in his opinion that the Ba
bylon mentioned by S. Peter was not
Rome, 336 : his conjecture with re
gard to the Donation of Constantine,
360.
Marcellinus (Pope) upon what evidence
accused of having sacrificed to Idols,
and by whom defended, 364 — 5.
Marcellus, Bp. of Apamea, how it is
said that he effected the burning of
Jupiter's temple, 116—17, 239.
Mar-Prelate (Martin) 37.
Martialis Lemovicensis, his counterfeit
Epistles, 141-2, 177, 180.
Martiall (John) 107.
Martin (Gregory) 385.

Marlyrologium Romanum, 287-
Mascaregnas (Ferd. Mart.) Index Auc-
torum damnatcB memoria, 302.
Mason (Francis) 118, 128: his error
with regard to the deposition, or ba
nishment, of Abiathar, 265.
Mattheeus Westmonasteriensis, Flares
Historiarum, 23 : repeats the false
hood of Malmesbury concerning
Beda's journey to Rome, 119—20.
Maximus Taurinensis (S.)his Sermon
De Cruce Domini attributed to S.
Ambrose, 1 54—5 : a Sermon ascribed
to him, as well as to S. Augustin,
and to S. Ambrose, 340.
Mede (Joseph) 386.
Melito, Letter to Onesimus, 222.
Mendham (Josephus) Cathalogus li-
brorum hareticorum, de commiss.
Tribunal, sancliss. Inquisit. Vene-
tiarum, 302.
Mentz, Council of, an. 813, 183.
Merlinus (Jacobus) Concilia, 90, 105,
107.
Milevis, second Synod of, 351, 352 :
how Gratian corrupted one of its Ca
nons, 71.
Minucius Felix, his treatise De Idolo-
rum vanitate attributed to Arnobius,
206.
Miraeus (Aubertus) his error with refe
rence to a tract erroneously ascribed
to S. Hippolytus, 282.
Missa, the holy Communion, 7 : ancient
use of the term, 81, 82.
Missale Romanum, alteration noted in
the instructions prefixed to, 21.
Molina?us ( Petrus). Vid.Moulin ( Pierre
du).
Monasteries, why first founded, 19, 25.
Monks, differences between ancient and
modern, 17—18, 25.
Montfaucon (Bernardus de) Diarium
Italicum, 110, 372 : his opinion of
the counterfeit Liber de passione
Imaginis Christi, attributed to S.
Athanasius, 200.
 Bibliotheca Biblioth. MSS., 361.
Moreri (Louis) 74.
Morton (Bishop) Catholike Appeale,
49, 71-
.  Of the Masse, 82, 86.
 Grand Imposture of the (now)
Church of Rome, 70.

INDEX.

407

Moshemius (Joan. Laur.) Instt. Hist.
Eccles., 5, 225, 319.
 De rebus Christian, ante Const.,
101.
 Paulsen etMoshem. .Hurt. Tartar.
Eccl., 225—6.
Moulin (Pierre du) 71, 109, 347.
Musculus ( Wolfgangus) 112, 115, 347,
358, 366, 379.
Nauclerus (Joannes) Chronographia,
361.
Neal (Daniel) 37—8.
Neander (Augustus) 101.
Neocaesarea, Synod of, one of its Canons
altered, 96—".
Nero (Emperor) supposed inscription
to, (apud Gruterum,) 217 : whether
Simon Magus practised sorcery before
him, 338—9.
Netter a Walder,( Thomas). Vid. Wal-
densis.
Newman (J. H.) 81.
Nica?a, first Council of, 64, 153,240:
questionable SardicanDecree ascribed
to, 70—71, 308, 353 : allusion in one
of its Decrees to the fifty -second A -
postolic Canon, 106 : an interpolation
in the eighteenth Canon, 107 : admo
nition of Constantine to the Bishops
assembled at, 380.
Nica;a, second Council of, its Decrees
rejected in England and France, 23 :
condemned by the Council of Frank
fort, 154 : fictitious Liber de passione
Imaginis Christi alleged at, 200 :
false testimony adduced there, as if
from S. Ambrose, 207 : why this Sy
nod anathematized the writings of
Eusebius, 359.
Nicephorus Callistus, 115.
Nicholas I. (Pope) 364.
Nicholas II. (Pope) 372.
Nicolson (Archbishop) 20.
Nourri (Nicolas le) claims for Cecilius
the well-known treatise De mortibus
Persecutorum, 336.
Nowel (Alex., D.D.) 38, 58, 356.
CEcumenius, 88.
Oftfor (Bishop) consecrated at the
command of OEdilred, 17, 24, 119.
Olearius (Jo. Gottftidus) Bibliolh.
Scriptt. Eccles., 336.

Optatus (S.) 311, 331—2, 348—9, 357:
an unfounded allusion to the origin
of the name Cephas supposed to be
an interpolation in his text, 302, which
has been otherwise corrupted, 348 — 9:
the seventh book De schismate Do-
natistarum referred to, though S.
Optatus wrote but six, 323.
Origenes, Horn, in Levit., 85.
 In Ep. ad Rom., 144.
 In E.rod. Horn., 282.
 In S. Matth., 282—3, 298, 299—
300.
Orleans, first Synod of, j.. n. 511, a
Canon attributed to it, containing
words which belong to a Novel of
Justinian, 150: called Litanies Ro
gations, 183.
Orosius (Paulus) asserts that Philip
was the first Roman Emperor who
was a Christian, 355.
Osuiu (King) ordered the Synod of
Strenaeshale, 16.
Ottius (Joannes Henricus) Examen
perpetuum in Annates Baronii,
44.
Otto Frisingensis, Chronicon, 226.
Oudinus (Casimirus) 98: his charge
against Claud Morell, 109—10: mis
taken concerning the Testimonia ad
versus Judtsos, by S.Gregory Nyssen,
295 — 6 : greatly astray as to the time
when Gorionides existed, 338.
Pagi (Antoine) his conjecture as to the
source of the fable that S. Peter was
for twenty-five years at Rome, 336 —
7: rejects the counterfeit Acts of the
Synod of Sinuessa, 364.
Pagi (Francois) Breviar. gest. Pontiff.
Rom., 337.
Pagitt (Ephxaim) Christianography,
328.
Palmer (William) Jurisdiction of Brit.
Episc. vindicated, 118.
 Treatise on the Church, 324.
Papebrochius (Daniel) his opinion as
to the date of the death of S. Ambrose,
81: retains a word in the Life of Pope
Silverius. which Platina had unfairly
omitted, 99: records the testimony of
Cardinal Bona relative to the Font of
Constantine, 360 : rejects the fictitious
Sinuessan Council, 364.

408

INDEX.

Paphnutius, 240.
Parker (Archbishop) patronised the
publication of the Saxon Homily, 7,
247, and parts of two Epistles of
JElfric, 20: his two editions of the
Flores Historiarum of Matthew of
Westminster, 119: how addressed by
Sanders, 215 — 16: advised to revolt
to the popish Church, 247.
Paul (S.) Acts of Paul and Thecla,
339.
Paul I. (Pope) 360.
Paulinus, Bishop of Nola, 158.
Paulsen ( HermannusChristianus). Vid.
Moshemius (Jo. Laur.).
Pearson (Bishop) his opinion as to the
author of the Pontifical, 98: when he
believed that Hegesippus flourished,
338.
Pelagius, S. Augustin attributes to him
an Epistle found amongst S. Jerom 's
works, 44.
Petavius (Dionysius) referred to con
cerning the Stationes of the primi
tive Church, 183 : his description of
the counterfeit tract De vilis Pro-
phetarum ascribed to S. Epiphanius,
207.
Peter (S.) whether he wrote his first
Epistle from Rome, and continued
there for five-and-twenty years, 336
—8.
Peterborough, Saxon History of, 23.
Philippus, the Roman Emperor, by
some considered to have been a Chris
tian : fiction as to his Baptism, 355.
Phillpotts (Bishop) source of an ex
tract from the Canon Law adduced
by him with reference to Purgatory,
240.
Philo, his account of the Therapeuta?,
101.
Phocas, what privilege it is said that
he granted to the Church of Rome,
72 : the authority for this statement,
365 : upon whose testimony it is com
monly believed thatheconferredupon
the Popes the title of " (Ecumenical
Bishop," 365. See 371.
Photius, his remark respecting the An.
gelites ; and ho w A gylseus has omitted
a reference in his Nomocanon, 42.
— Bibliotheca, 101.
Picernus de Monte arduo (Bartholo-

mseus) published the feigned Do
nation of Constantine, 361.
Picus (Joannes) 282.
Pilate and Herod, 77—8.
Pilkington (Bishop) 3.
Pin (L. E. Du) 71, 296, 302, 323.
Pius I. (Pope) third spurious Epistle,
81: supposititious Ordinance relative
to the feast of Easter; and the Chro
nicle of Eusebius corrupted to main
tain the falsehood, 237.
Pius II. (Pope). Vid. Sylvius (.Eneas).
Pius V. (Pope) Missal sanctioned by,
21.
Placcius (Vincentius) Theatrum Anon.
et Pseudon., 103.
Platina (B.) omits an important word
in his Life of Pope Silverius, 99.
Plinius Sec. (C.) 339.
Polanus (Amandus) 291.
Polus ( Cardinalis) De Baplismo Con
stantini, 360.
Polycarpus (S.) 335: refusal of his re
mains to those who wished for them,
188.
Polycrates, 69, 238: his mention of S.
John's petalum, 113.
Pontificalis Liber, bears witness that
some Bishops of Rome were the
children of Priests, and one Pope the
son of another, 98 : an account of this
important record, 98 — 9 : referred to
concerning the Baptism of Constan
tine, 360: declares that S. MarceUinus
was an idolater, 365.
Pontius, the Martyr, worthless Acts of,
355.
Poole (G. A.) 331.
Pope, called God, 247, 369.
Pope (R. T. P.) 86.
Popes, false Epistles attributed to, 59,
281.
Popes, the sons of Priests, 98.
Possinus (Petrus) shameful interpo
lation noted in his Catena Grcecorum
Patrum, 286.
Prester John, 225—6.
Priorius (Philippus) 302.
Probianus, 161. ¦
Processions, 182—189.
Prosperus (S.) 288: whether Bishop of
Rhegium, 353: not the author of the
books Devocatione omnium Gentium,
353.

INDEX.

409

Prudentius, Peristeph. Passio Hippo-
lyti, 346.
Psellus, 287.
Quesnellus (Paschasius) 71, 319: main
tains that S. Leo was the author of
the books De vocalione Gentium,
353.
Quintinus (Joannes) 95.
Quiroga (Cardinal) his Expurgatory
Index, 103.
Rabanus Maurus, his explanation of
the word " Statio," 183.
Raderus (Matthams) 287.
Rainoldus (Joannes, S.T.D.) his error
about the Pontifical, 99.
 Conference with Hart, 283, 319,
361, 364.
Rastell (John) 45.
Ratramnus, many passages from his
book De Corpore et Sanguine Do
mini found translated in the Paschal
Homily, 20.
Raynaudus ( Theophilus) Erotemata de
malis ac bonis libris, 86, 200, 287.
 Heptas Prasulum, 86, 340.
Record, Church Missionary, 60.
Reiserus ( Antonius) Launoii Anti-Bel-
larminus, 44, 71.
Richardson (Joannes) 360.
Richerius (Edmundus) Hist. Concill.
Gen., 70.
 Apologia pro Joanne Gersonio,
371.
Ridley (Bishop) mentions as absurd the
papistical derivation of Cephas from
Ke<pa\i], 301.
Rigaltius (Nicolaus) 113, 339.
Rivetus (Andreas) 296.
Rogerius de Hoveden, Annates, 23.
Rome, the city built upon seven hills,
372—3.
Routh (Martinus Josephus, S. T. D.)
Reliquiae Sacra, 338.
Rufinus, 239: words added in his abridg
ment of a Nicene Canon, 107: a pas
sage in his History misapplied in the
Canon Law to prove that the Pope is
God, and above human judgment, 356.
Ruinart (Theodoricus) ActaMartyrum
sincera, 189.
Sacrilege, 114.
[fulke, II. J

Sanders (Nicholas, D.D.) 215.
Sardica, Council of, A.D. 347, remarks
on the famous Decree attributed to it,
respecting appeals to Rome, 70 — 71.
See pages 308, 353.
Savilius (Henricus, Eq. Aur.) 22.
Scaliger (Josephus) maintained the
identity of the Essenes and Thera-
peutae, 101 : points out interpolationsin
the Chronicle of Eusebius, 236, 237,
337: his conjecture as to the Babylon
mentioned by S. Peter in his first
Epistle, 336: his opinion concerning
Gorionides, 338.
Schedel (Hartmann) Chronicon Chro-
nicorum, 103.
Schmidius (Jo. Andr.) 339.
"Scholies," ancient Greek, 87, 88.
"Scots," the ancient Irish, 16, 19.
Scultetus (Abrahamus) 295.
Senwalch (King). Vid. Coinualch.
Septuagint, principal editions of the,
166.
Serarius (Nicolaus) his idea as to the
meaning of the name Cephas, 301.
Sergeant (John) Anti-Mortonus, 70.
Sergius I. (Pope) the fable respecting
his interview with Beda, 119 — 20.
Shacklock (Richard) The Hatchet oj
Heresies, 4.
"Shore," 288.
"Shore up," 144.
Sighard, a Monk, made King, 18, 24.
Silverius (Pope) the son of Pope Hor-
misdas, 98 — 9.
Silvester I. (Pope) feigned story of his
having baptized Constantine, 359.
Simeon Dunelmensis, De Regibus An-
glorum, 23.
Simon Magus, fables concerning his
sorcery, 338 — 9.
Sinuessa, an account of the fictitious
Synod of, 364 — 5.
Siphanus (Laurentius) 296.
Siricius (Papa) the fourth Epistle attri
buted to him whence probably de
rived, 179, 243: the text of S. Optatus
which contains his name corrupted,
348—9.
Sirmondus (Jacobus) Concilia Gene-
ralia, 90, 288, 289, 359.
Sixtus Senensis, mistaken in ascribing
five Homilies on Job to S. Chrysos
tom, 110: misled by Carranza with
27

410

INDEX.

respect to a Catalogue of Canonical
books, untruly assigned to the Coun
cil of Florence, 222.
Sleidanus (Joannes) 376.
Smyrna, Epistle of the Church of, 188
—9.
Soames (Henry) 20, 23, 225, 319.
Socrates Scholasticus, 115, 116, 121, 153,
160, 184, 240, 347, 358, 360, 366, 379.
Solomon, by a civil sentence, banished
Abiathar from Jerusalem, 265.
Sonwalch (King). Vid. Coinualch.
"Sophi," a title of the Emperor of Per
sia, 328.
Sozomenus (Hermias) 91, 112, 184, 346,
347, 360.
Spanhemius (Ezech.) 89, 199.
Spanhemius (Fridericus) 98.
Spelmannus(D. Henricus) Concilia, 23.
 De non temerandis Ecclesiis, 114.
Spina (Alphonsus de) Fortalitium Fi
dei, 5.
Spondanus (Henricus) how he altered a
sentence in Baronius, and in effect
represents S. Jerom as an heretic, 292.
Staphylus (Fridericus) the validity of
his reference to a tract by Luther
questioned, 18: an apostate, 58 : Sta
pleton's translation of his Apologia,
76-7-
Stapleton (Thomas) A Return of un
truths, 3 : his translation of Bede's
History, 5, 45: indebted to Staphylus
for a charge against Luther's follow
ers, 18: allusion to his name Thomas,
51, 53, 59: his admonition about
Church goods, 114.
Stations, what they were in ancient
times, 183, 238.
Stellartius (Prosperus) De Coronis et
Tonsuris, 115.
Stephanus I. (Papa) S. Cyprian's re
markable words in allusion to his con
duct, 322.
Stephanus V. (Papa) 141.
Stevenson (Joseph) the first to discover
the source of the fiction concerning
Beda's journey to Rome, 119 — 20.
Stillingfleet (Bp. ) corrected a common
error with respect to a passage in the
Epistle of Gildas, 186.
Strenaeshalch, Synod holden at, 16.
Struvius (Burc. Gott.) Dissertatio de
doctis Impostoribus, 338.

Strype (John) 37, 45.
Succession, Apostolic, 67, 74.
Suicerus (Joannes Casparus) 235.
Surius (Laurentius) Vita Sanctorum,
355 : his version of the Apology of
Staphylus, 77.
Sylvius (jEneas) rejected the papistical
etymology of the name Cephas : his
subsequent Retractations : his Com
mentaries prohibited ; and his works
in general to be read with caution,
302.
 Comm. de gestis Basil. Cone., 302.
 Germania, 302.
Synagogue, erred, 45 — 47.
Synge (Bishop) Rejoynder to the le-
suite's Reply, 364.
Tassin (Rene"- Prosper) Hist. Lit. de la
Congreg. de S. Maur, 101, 238.
Taylor (Bishop) 44.
Taylor ( Isaac) cites as authentic a coun
terfeit Epistle ascribed to S. Ignatius,
236.
Telesphorus ( Pope) a fictitious Decree
attributed to him ; and the Chronicle
of Eusebius corrupted to maintain
the false supposition of his having
instituted the Lent-fast, 236 — 7.
Tertullianus, Advers. Hermog., 64.
 De prescript. Hareticorum, 75,
238,281-2,336.
 Apologeticus, 234.
 De Baptismo, 339.
 his Montanistic treatises : De Mo-
nogamia, 113 : Cont. Mareion., 131,
147: DePudkitia, 136, 282, 291: De
Jejuniis, 183, 238.
Thau, the letter, in the book of Ezekiel,
138, 147.
Thecla: Acts of Paul and Thecla,ZZ9.
Theodoretus, Historia Ecclesiastica, 44,
64, 239, 360, 380—1.
 Theophiles, 64.
 Comment, in Cantica Canticorum,
of uncertain authenticity, 287.
 Epistles to Dioscorus and Pope
Leo, said by Crakanthorp to have
been forged, 307.
 In Ep. ad Tim., 309.
Theodorus (Pope) his father a Bishop,
98.
Theodosius II. (Emperor) Decree made
by him and Valentinian III., con-

INDEX.

411

cerning figures of the Cross engraven
or painted on the ground, 159.
Theophylactus, 138, 278.
Therapeutae, mistakes concerning them,
101.
Thomdicius (Herbertus) 70.
Tillemont (L.-S. LeNain de) 70, 183,
338, 353.
Tillet (Jean du) in what year he pub
lished the Caroline Books, 23.
Todd (J. H., D.D.) speaks of a fictitious
tract ascribed to S. Hippolytus, 282.
Tours, second Synod of, meaning of
one of its Decrees, 150 — 1.
 third Synod of, Canon concerning
the translation of Homilies, 15.
Trent, Council of, anathematizes all
who should hold an opinion main
tained by S. Augustin, and Pope In
nocent I., 41: its Decree concerning
the Canonical books of Scripture, 222:
not a lawful General Council, 231.
Trithemius (Joannes) his testimony as
to the abandonment of Arian ten
dencies by Eusebius, 359.
Turrianus (Franciscus) Advers. Mag
deburg. Cent., 301.
Twysdenus (Rogerus, Eq. Aur.) Hist.
Angl. Scriptores decern, 23.
Urban VIII. (Pope) 21.
Ussher (Archbishop) 70, 87, 116, 236,
241, 319, 364 : remarked the identity
of passages which occur in the Paschal
Homily, and in the book of Ratramn,
20 : his error respecting the Liber
Canonum of iElfric, 22 : misapplied
words in the Epistle of Gildas, 186 :
when he published the genuine and
theinterpolatedIgnatianEpistles,235.
Valentinian I. (Emperor) his division
of the empire, and law as to the
Libra, 364.
Valentinian III. (Emperor) Decree
issued by him and Theodosius II.,
with respect to figures of the Cross
made on the ground, 159 : not the
son of Theodosius the Great, 363.
Valentinians, heretics. See Irenseus (S.).
Valesius (Henricus) 101.
Valla (Laurentius) his famous Decla-
matio against the Donation of Con
stantine, 361.

Van de Velde (Joannes Franciscus) 61.
" Vawmure," 30.
Vedelius (Nicolaus) De Cathedra Pe
tri, 336.
Velenus ( Ulricus) his treatise intended
to prove that S. Peter never was at
Rome, 336.
Vergilius (Polydorus) a work of his
expurgated, 103.
Veronica (S.) 204.
Victor I., Bp. of Rome, reproved by
S. Irenasus, 69, 238, 308.
Vigilantius, 44, 67, 188.
Vilfrid (Bishop). See Wilfrid.
Villegaignon (Nicholas Durand de) 61.
Vincentius Lirinensis, recommends re
course to the most ancient writers,
175 : states that Philip, the Roman
Emperor, was a Christian, 355.
Vini (Bishop). See Wini.
Vossius (Gerardus Joannes) mistaken
about the Pontifical, 99 : his per
plexity concerning Gorionides, 338 :
for whom he claims the authorship
of the books De vocatione Gentium,
353.
 De Histor. Lat., 99, 338.
 De Histor. Grac, 338.
 Hist. Pelag., 319.
Vossius (Isaacus) when he published
the genuine Epistles of S. Ignatius,
235 : manuscripts of his corrupted as
to the name of the Pseudo-Hegesip-
pus, 338.
Waechtler (Christfrid) 33.
Waldensis (Thomas) Doctrinale anti-
quitatum Fidei, 22.
Waltonus (Episc.) 166.
Water, Holy, defended by a counter
feit Epistle of Pope Alexander I.,
117-
Waterland (Daniel, D.D.) 86.
Whartonus (Henricus) mistaken as to
the author of the supposed Donation
of Constantine, 360.
 Dissertatio de duobus JElfricis,
20.
 Auctarium ad Usserii Historiam
dogmaticam, 22.
 Treatise of the Celibacy of the
Clergy, 23.
Whelocus (Abrahamus) 22.
Whitby (Daniel, D.D.) 41.

412

INDEX.

Wicelius (Georgius) 98.
Wilfrid (Bp.) deposed by King Ecg-
frid, 17 ; and aho by King Aldfrid,
24: consecrated Oftfor at the com
mand of CEdilred, 17, 24.
Wilkins (David, S.T.P.) Concilia, 22.
Willet (Andrew, D.D.) Synopsis Pa-
pismi, 122.
Winchester, Synod of, an. 1076, 23, 93.
Wini (Bishop) deposed by King
Coinualch, and afterwards through
simony made Bp. of London, 16, 24.
Wolsey (Cardinal) suppressed monas
teries, 122.

Zacagnius (Laur. Alexand.) Collecta
nea Monumentorum : vindicates S.
Gregory Nyssen's claim to the au
thorship of the Testimonia adoersus
Judaos, 295—6.
Zapata (Cardinal) his Index librorum
prohib. et expurg., 103, 194.
Zonaras (Joannes) Comment, in Ca
nones Concill., 95.
 Annales, 361.
Zosimus (Pope) his conduct in the case
of Apiariu3, 70—71, 308.
Zurich, Confession of, 384.
Zurich Letters, 22.