A CHRISTIAN DIALOGUE, BETWEEN THEOPHILUS A DEFORMED CATHOLIC IN ROME, AND Remigius a reformed Catholic in the Church of England. Containing. A plain and succinct resolution, of sundry very intricate and important points of religion, which do mightily assail the weak consciences of the vulgar sort of people; penned for the solace of all true hearted English subjects, and for the utter confusion of all seditious Jesuits and jesuited Popelings in England or else where, so long as they shall persist inordinately in their novelties, heresies, errors, and most gross and palpable superstitions.  Ecclesiast. Cap. 4. Ver. 28. 
Strive for the truth unto death, and defend justice for thy life, and the Lord shall fight for thee against thine enemy.  Prou. Cap. 12. Ver. 1. 
He that loveth instruction, loveth knowledge; but he that hateth correction, is a fool.  
LONDON, Printed by Nicholas Okes, for William Welby, and are to be sold at his Shop in Paul's Churchyard, at the sign of the grayhound. 1609.   

TO THE RIHGT WORSHIPFUL MY APPROVED GOOD FRIENDS, SIR STEuen Procter, Sir Timothy Whittingham, Sir Vincent Skinner, and Sir Timothy Hutton, Knights; and his majesties most zealous, vp●ight, & painful justices of the Peace.  
Having published many books in defence of the truth, against the adversaries of the truth, (the Pope, his Cardinals, Jesuits, and jesuited Popelings I mean) and perceiving by many arguments, that sundry of my dear Country men are not yet fully resolved in certain main points of religion, upon which all the rest, in some sort, do depend; I have deemed it a labour very necessary for the common good, to dispute those most intricate points pro & contra Dialoguewise; that so all difficulties therein may be cleared, all obscurity taken away, and the truth plainly laid open, before the eyes of every indifferent reader.  
The Papists most impudently brag and boast, that they maintain, keep and defend that faith and doctrine which S. Peter and S. Paul, delivered to the Romans, that neither their Pope, nor their Church can err, that their Church, and none but their Church, is able to show and truly to prove a perpetual uninterrupted succession of their Bishops and Priests: that the written word of God containeth not all things necessary to be believed unto salvation, for that it showeth not the holy Bible to be canonical and that original sin remaineth only materially in the bodies of the regenerate, and not formally in their minds, wills, and hearts. All these points, and every of them (though most difficult and intricate) I have taken in hand to confute, relying upon God's holy assistance, who never forsaketh the truth. What I have performed, let your wisdoms and others judge. The work such as it is, I dedicate to your worships, not only to give as a sign of a grateful mind for your kind favours to meward; but much more to intimate to the world, that inward joy of mine heart, which issueth out of your rare zeal to God's eternal truth, constant loyalty to your most gracious Sovereign, and painful labours for the good of our Church and Commonweal. The almighty give you many happy years upon earth, and vouchsafe to increase his manifold graces in you, that you may daily more and more (and others by your Christian example) employ your painful labours for the advancement of his glorious Gospel, the cutting down of sin, the extirpation of late startup▪ Popery, and the rooting out of all traitorous Jesuits, and jesuited Popelings, which have been, and still are, too much favoured and winked at, by sundry in authority, especially in these North-parts of noble England. Dixi. March. 21. 1609.  
Your worships to be commanded, THOMAS BELL.   

A Table of the Chapters contained in this Book.  

CHAP. 1. Of the old Roman and ancient Church of Rome. Pag. 1.  
CHAP. 2. Of the false and erroneous faith of the late Bishops of Rome. Pag. 11.  
CHAP. 3. Of sundry important objections, which seem to prove the Pope's prerogative of faith. Pag. 26.  
CHAP. 4. Of the Succession of Bishops, in the Church of Rome. Pag. 66.  
CHAP. 5. Of Popish unwritten Traditions. Pag. 102.  
CHAP. 6. Of the state of the regenerate, with the particular adjuncts of the same. Pag. 121.    

CHAP. 1. Of the old Roman and ancient Church of Rome.  Theophilus. 
GOD bless you Father Remigius, I hope you will this day yield great comfort to my distressed heart; for I have often heard, that you are both pro●undly learned, and charitably affected to all your Christian neighbours; so as for your great learning you are very able, and for your rare charity ever ready, to give good counsel to such, as stand in need of you: I therefore for Christ's sake beseech you, to show me the ready way to heaven.  Remig. 
To believe rightly and live christianly, is 
Ma●. v 14●. Luc 13. v. 24.  your very pathway to Heaven: but it is a strait and narrow gate, and few do find the same.  Theoph. 
Alas, my good father, then shall more be damned then saved, God forbid, it should be so.  Remig. 
That which God hath decreed, man cannot 
Mat. 20. ●▪ 17. Luc. 〈◊〉. v. 24.  withstand. Many (saith Christ,) are called, but few are chosen. Strive to enter in at the strait gate; for many will seek to enter in, and shall not be able. Yet our most merciful and just God, will condemn none to eternal death; but for their notorious sins, and just deserts.  Theoph. 
We may exclaim with holy Polycar●e, o God, to what a world hast thou reserved us? etc. Now every one can give good words, both in the Pulpit and else where; but badder life and wickeder dealing, was never more frequent in any town or City. The Catholics, for good life and meritorious acts, are the mirror of the Christian world.  Remig. 
Whom do you call Catholics? I am a Catholic myself.  Theoph. 
The Pope, his Cardinals, his Monks, his Friars, his holy Nuns, and all such as agree in faith and doctrine with the Church of Rome.  Remig. 
If you speak of Pope Formosus, Pope john degraded him, and brought him to laical state again, after he had been the Bishop of Portua. He further took him sworn, that he neither should be Bishop again, not ever return to the City of Rome. Howbeit, Pope Martin absolved him from his oath, and after a few years, he did notonely come to Rome, but there was made the Pope. 
Pope Stephanus a cruel Tyrant.  If you speak of Pope Stephanus the sixth▪ he persecuted Pope Formosus even after his death. He called a Council, and disannulled all the decrees of Pope Formosus his predecessor. He caused his body to be brought into his Consistory, the papal induments to be taken away, a laical habit to be put on she dead corpse, two fingers of his right hand to be cut off; and that done, forsooth, his body to be put again into the grave. Mean you Pope Sergius the third? he caused Pope Formosus (who now had been dead almost ten whole years) to be taken out of his tomb, and to be set in a chair with pontifical attire upon his back; that done, he commanded his head to be cut off, and to be cast into their●iuer Tiber. Mean you Pope john the twelfth? his father Albericus being a man of great power and might, enforced the Nobles to take an oath, that after the death of Pope Ag●pitus, they would promote his 
Pope john a notorious who▪ ●▪ munger.  son Octavianus to the Popedom: The oath was accomplished, and he was named john. He was a great hunter, and a man of licentious life: he kept women openly to the notorious scandal of the Church, insomuch, that some of the Cardinals wrote to O●to then King of the Saxons, to come and besiege Rome, and so to afflict him for his sins. Which the Pope perceiving, commanded the Cardinal's nose to be cut off, that gave that counsel; and his hand, that wrote the letters Speak you of Pope Boniface the seventh? he was made Pope by the Romans after they 
Pope Bonifacea Church rob●●.  had thr●t●ed Benedictus the sixth: who afterward not able to tarry in the City, robbed S. Peter's Church of all the ●●asure in it, and fled to Constantinople. Means you Pope Benedict the eight? he was seen after his death, as it were corporally riding upon a black horse (the Devil.) he confessed that he was in great torment, & therefore desired 
Pope Ben●● an extortioner.  some money to be given to the poor, because all that he had given the poor aforetime, was gotten by robbery and extortion. Mean you Pope john the woman? she 
Pope john with child.  belying her sex, and clad in man's attire, was with great admiration of her sharp wit and singular learning, chosen to be the Pope of Rome. But shortly after by the familiar help of her beloved companion, she brought forth the homely fruits of her Popedom. Mean you Pope Boniface the eight? he made a constitution, in which he called 
Pope Boniface entered as a Fox, li●ed as a Wolf, and died as a Dog.  himself both Lord spiritual & Lord temporal of the whole world: whereupon he required Philip the French King, to acknowledge that he held his Kingdom of him: which when the King scorned to do, he gave his Kingdom to him thatcouldget it. This Pope entered as a Fox, reigned as a 
Pope sylvester promised ●omag● to the Devil.  Wolf, and died as Dog. What shall I say of your Monks or Friars? Pope Silvester the second was first a Monk, a Frenchman borne, Gilbe●●us by name: he promised homage to the Devil, so long as he should accomplish his desires: who being very ambitious, did so often express his desire to the Devil, as he made homage to him. He was first made Archbishop of Rheims; then of Ravennes, at the last Pope of Rome: for the Devil knowing his ambitious mind, brought him to honour by degrees. All this to be most true, these Popish writers of high esteem even in the Church of Rome (viz. Geniblacensis, Marianus Scotus, Ba●●holemeus Carranza, Martinus Polonus, Philippus, Bergomensis, Bapt. Platina, & Palmerius,) have publishes it in printed books to the view of the whole world, which doubtless they would never have done, if the truth itself had not enforced their pens thereunte. For the holy life of your Jesuits and jesuited br●●d, I will say nothing; their dear brothers the secular Priests, ha●● related that matter sufficiently, in many books late extant in print against them: they charge them with pride, ambition, covetousness, cozenage, theft, cruelty, murder, treason, and what not? yea, of Friar Parsons, they give this testimony in particular, viz. by Parson's platforms, secular Priests must depend upon Blacwel, 
Robert parsons an holy Friar.  and Blackwel upon Garnet, and Garnet upon Parsons, & Parsons the Priest's bastard upon the Devil. Read 
If th●● shalt read ●hi● Anatomy▪ thou canst not but abho●●e ●a●e ●p●●a●● Popery.  the Anatomy of Popish tyranny, and there then shalt find this truth, with great variety of like matter. I let pass, what Polidorus Virgilius, Abbas, Panormitanus. & Pope Pius himself, before called Aeneas Silvius, have written of the filthy life of Popish Priests, Monks, Friars, and Nuns. Peruse the survey of popery, and the trial of 
Aug. Epist. 119.  the new religion; and that done, the truth will show itself herein: For, if S. Austin said truly that in his time all was full of human superstitions, with the servile burdens whereof men were so pressed, as the jews estate under their legal ceremonies was more tolerable, than the state of Christians: Truly may we say much more, 
A●●st▪ contra Epist ●●●dam.  of the last and worst days.  Theoph. 
S. Peter & S. Paul delivered the Catholic saith to the Church of Rome; and the succession from S. Peter and S. Paul, kept S. Augustine in the unity of the Church. So writeth S. Austen of himself.  Remigius. 
True it is first, that both S. Peter and S. Paul preached at Rome, and for the testimony of Christ's Gospel were there put to death, both on one day, not both in one year; the one beheaded, the other crucified: none well studied in the ancient fathers, & histories of the Church, will or can this deny: true it is secondly, that many Bishops of Rome were holy men, who constanly yielded up their lives (as become holy martyrs,) for the testification of the truth of Christ's Gospel: true it is ●●irdly, that S. Austen saith of himself, that the succession of Priests from S. Peter, was one thing amongst many that kept him in the Church: true it is fourthly, that the majesty of the Roman Empire, together with the great liberality, which the Romans exhibited to the Martyrs in exile and otherwise afflicted, yielded no small honour to the City and Church of Rome: and hereupon (I will it not deny) it came to pass, that the ancient counsels had ever great respect to the dignity and excellency of Cities, in the distribution of Episcopal and patriarchal seats: hereupon it likewise came, that the West and Occidental Churches (not so the East-churches) did greatly reverence the Church of Rome; and many times to appease controversies and dissensions, had recourse unto it, as to the Mother-church and ancient nurse of the faith: which things S. Augustin beholding together with the succession, (not barely of place or persons, but) of Bishops, in faith, doctrine, and holy conversation, was confirmed in the unity of the Church: for so as then, so now, nothing doth or can yield greater comfort or solace to a Christian heart, then to behold the lines of 
S. Aus●●● respected succession, w●●ch was ●oy●●● with holy ●●f● and pure ●oct●i●●, the evil life of Minister's doth much hurt to the truth.  God's ministers to be agreeable to their doctrine, and their doctrine to be consonant to the word of God: for, what man would not rather in any difficulty, have recourse to that Minister and Preacher, whose life is agreeable to his doctrine, then unto him, who though he preach pleasantly, yet liveth not accordingly? None doubtless. For this respect said the holy Apostle to the Romans, that through their evil life, the word of God was blasphemed among the Gentiles: and for this respect likewise, are the Bere●ms highly commended in holy writ, in that they examined the Apostles doctrine by the live and rule of God's word: yea, for this respect doth the holy vessel of 
Rom. 2 v. 14. Act. 27 v. 10 11 〈◊〉. Hebr. 31. v. 7.  our Lord jesus, very gravely admonish the Hebrews, to consider the end of their conversation who, have preached God's word unto them: but for all this, no ancient council, no holy father, no history Ecclesiastical, did ever 
Note that the Bishop of Rome did never allege for himself that he could not err because he know no such prerogative in very deed.  ascribe this supereminent prerogative to the Bishop of Rome, that he could no err in his judicial and definitive resolutions: neither ever was the Bishop of that Sea acknowledged, for the sole and only judge in controversies of religion: this is to be so, one only testimony of S. Cyprian will or at least may suffice: for S. Cyprian a very ancient father, a great learned Bishop, and a most blessed martyr, although he highly reverenced the Church of Rome, for respects now related, and consequently the 
Cyp●● Epist ad Pompeum.  Bishops thereof, yet was he so far from acknowledging, the falsely now usurped prerogative of the Bishop of Rome, that his faith could not fail, that he flatly rejected his opinion, contemned his definitive sentence, and decided his judicial decrees, calling him blind buzzard, and arrogant Prelate. The like I might allege cut of many famous papists; Adrianus, Panormit: nus Alphon●us, Gersonus, Ockamus and others: but this ●onu●ceth, that neither S. Austin nor any ancient father in their time, nor the Bishop of Rome, did object against S. Cyprian, that the said Bishop could not err.  Theoph. 
This is a wonderment to me, that our Popes, Monks, and Jesuits, have been so licentious and wicked livers: but seeing so many famous Popish writers and the late secular. Romish Priests, have in printed books published to the whole world, testified so much of and against them, it maketh me to stagger, and to doubt of the Romith religion, although informer times, I have high reverenced the same: for if the Bishop of Rome had been privileged not to err, not only the Bishop of Rome, but the holy fathers also of that age, would have objected the same against S. Cyprian, undoubtedly it cannot be denied.  Remig. 
You neither are nor ever were, a more earnest & zealous papist, than myself have been: but I heartily thank God for it, I now behold as clearly as the noon day, the absurdities and abominations of late upstart popery, the case is so clear, as every child of God may with all facility perceive the same.  Theoph. 
Why do you call it (late upstart popery,) it hath continued from S. Peter, and every Pope is his successor.  Remig. 
This is one mighty point, which hath not only seduced and be witched you, but both many others, and mine own self, aswell as you. I truly called it. (late upstart popery,) because of ten parts it, scarscely retaineth 
The Jesuits are a now & young recte of Fiyers.  two parts of the old Roman religion, which S. Peter and S Paul by their preaching, delivered to the Church of Rome: yea since the Jesuits began, (which was about the year 1537.) popish religion is ten times more absurd, than it was afore.  Theoph. 
The Catholics hold constantly, that the true faith and religion which S. Peter and S. Paul preached at Rome, hath ever continued at Rome until this present day; and that no other Church in the Christian world, is able to show a perpetual and uninterrupted succession of their Bishops and priests, save only the Church of Rome.  Remig. 
This is my answer. First, that the word (Catholic) is an holy and ancient name, given in the beginning to all Christians and faithful people in the world, and therefore is it this day highly reverenced, and continually rehearsed in the public prayers of our English Church: but there be two sorts of Catholics, the one deformed, the other reform, which reform Catholics, 
The papists are the defamed Catholic, we the reform.  are all the true members of our English Church, and all such as confess and embrace the same faith and doctrine with them: Secondly, that the faith and doctrine, which S. Peter and S. Paul preached to the old 
Rome▪ 1. v. 8  Romans, remaineth at Rome indeed: but how? no otherwise, doubtless, than an old beggar's cloak remaineth still to the beggar, though it have an hundred clouts of diverse colours, added and fastened one to another: Thirdly, that our English Church is able to show a better and sounder perpetual and uninterrupted succession of her Bishops and Priests, than the late upstact Church of Rome.  Theoph. 
What, are you Englishmen Catholics? you are (say we at Rome) flat heretics and apostates, as whom, many late Popes of Rome, have accursed to the deep pit of hell.  Remig. 
You know there is a sort of Friars at Rome, commonly called the Franciscans, (which sect was hatched 
The sect of Franciscans.  and borne in the year 1206.) who have by little and little swerved from their first institution, and become so licentious and dissolute, that another sect of Friars commonly 
Theophilus a Citisen of Rome.  called Capuchéenes, (which thing, you being a Citizen of Rome, know aswell as myself.) have accused them to have depraved and foully perverted the rules of their ancient order, sect, and profession, in so much, as they cannot this day with safe consciences embrace the same, and therefore have they reform their said sect, and do term themselves the reformed true Franciscans indeed: this (if it be duly considered,) is doubtless this day our case, in our Church of noble England, as also of many other reformed Churches, within the Christian world: for as the Capuchéenes hold fast, 
Let this be well remembered. our Church reverenceth antiquity & only rejecteth novelties.  keep still, and constantly defend, all the ancient rules of the old and true Franciscans, and duly reject and abandon that, which by little & little crept into their sect, (supertition abuses, neglect of discipline, and dissolute life,) even so is it this day in our Church of England. she holdeth fast, keepeth still, and most constantly deserd●th, 
The late romish ●aith is the new religion.  all and every rite of the old Roman religion, highly reverencing the same, as Catholic and Apostolic doctrine. She only rejecteth and abandoneth, heresies, errors, superstitions, and intolerable abuses, by little and little brought into the Church, (the enemy the dinel having sown 
Ma●. 13. ver. 25.  tars, while the careless pastors were a sleep:) For neither did most noble Queen Elizabeth in her time, neither doth our most pious & religious Sovereign King 
we are the true reformed Catholics.  JAMES, (who most happily reigneth over us,) set up or bring into the Church any new religion, but he, as Queen Elizabeth before, only reformeth & purgeth the 
●. reg. 2. ver 27. 35. ●. par. 1●. 4. reg. 8. 2. 2. pat. 29. par. 2●. 30. 31. 34.  Church, after the holy examples of King David, King Solomon, King josaphat, King Ezechias, King josias, and other godly and zealous Kings in their days, and carefully reduceth it to the primitive order, and to the purity of the old Roman religion. This to be so, none can in conscience deny, that will with a single eye this day behold thegodly settled Canons of this Church of England.  Theoph. 
If you were able to prove unto me, that the Church of Rome did any time swarm or revolt from the old Roman religion, I would doubtless forsake the late romish doctrine (as you term it,) and joyfully yield unto the truth.  Remig. 
I shall prove it by the power of God, and assistance of his holy spirit, before the end of this our conference, if you like to stay to the end thereof, and be not wearied with my discourse.  Theoph. 
God reward you for your Christian kindness and this painful travail for my sake, your talk is so comfortable to mine heart, that I shall not be weary thereof, though I should stay an whole year in your company: but I fear me I shall be too chargeable to you, if I tarry long with you.  Remig. 
I live (as you see) like a scholar, and keep but a sparing diet: if you can content yourself therewith, I shall joy thereat: For I know assuredly, that our merciful God, who, freely without my deserts, sendeth me all things necessary for my bodily sustenance and who hath 
Mat. 10. ●. 12  also freely promised, not to suffer a cup of cold water given in his name, to pass at any time without reward, will never see or suffer me to want things necessary to myself, for bestowing Christian hospitality, upon my neighbour for his sake: yield therefore your serious attention, and ye shall behold these thrées things as clear as the noo●e day: viz. the false and erroneous faith of your Bishops of Rome, their most brttish and detestable lives, and their interrupted and most uncertain▪ succession as which is so mingled and mangled, or rather so defaced and utterly extinguished, that no man can tell, what indeed to make thereof. Of which three points, while I shall distinctly discourse, I would have you to put forth plainly and at large, all such doubts as any way do trouble you: for that I hold the best course, for your full satisfaction and confirmation in the truth, of the true, ancient Cathalike, and orthodore faith.   

CHAP. 2. Of the false and erroneous faith of the late Bishops of Rome.  Theophilus. 
WE at Rome hold it constantly for an article of 
Luc. 12. ●. 3●.  the Catholic faith, that our Popes and Bishops are the successors of S. Peter, and therefore can they not err in faith or doctrine, no more then S. Peter could; for whose faith Christ prayed, that it should never fail.  Remig. 
How the late Bishops of Rome are S. Peter's successors, it shall be showed (God willing) in the chapter of succession. Let us now unfold, and sincerely examine, the faith and doctrine of some special Popes in particular, for the view and consideration of a few will be a sufficient trial for all the rest.  Theoph. 
I must needs yield thereunto, for we hold it a part of the Catholic faith, that Christ's prayer was effectual for all S. Peter's successors alike, so as if any one of them can be convinced to have erred, we cannot safely rely and ground our faith upon the rest.  Remig. 
That the Bishops or Popes of Rome (as ye call them,) may become heretics, yea, that they have been heretics de facto, it is a thing so clear, as I shall not need to stand long upon the same: for, many popish decrees and Papal constitutions tell us, that Popes may be deposed, when and so often as they serve from the true faith, and become heretics indeed: which decrees and constitutions must perforce presuppose, that the Popes may be heretics indeed: for otherwise, they 
Grat dist. 4●. chap. 〈◊〉 Pap●.  should be frustrate and to none end at all: one popish Canon and decree hath these express words, the Pope judgeth all, and must be judged of none, unless he serve from the faith, and be an heretic: another Canon hath these words, sheep which are committed to their pastor, may neither rebuke him, nor in any wise accuse him, vulesse he depart and forsake the faith: these are the 
Ans. 2. q. 7. Cap. ●u●●.  words of the Popes own Canons. I do allege them truly, as I mean to do all the rest, whatsoever I shall 
The Author takes it upon his salvation, th●● he dealeth truly.  speak of the Popes themselves, or of any popish writer, which I protest unto you once for all, as I will answer the sane at the dreadful day of general doom. Now we see by these Canons, that the Popes may be heretics, and in the case of heresy be censured, controlled, and condemned.  Theoph. 
I heartily thank you for this your Christian protestation, it fully persuadeth me that I may safely give credit to all your allegations and asseverations, whatsoever you say of our Popes, Popish writers, and their Faith and Doctrine: But can ye name any Pope indeed, that hath been an Heretic or an Apostate from the Faith? our honourable and learned Cardinal, the jesuit Bellarmine, stately denieth it.  Remig. 
Pope Anastasius, Pope Honorius, Pope john, and others have been Heretics. Vignerius. Melchier, Canus, Alphonsus, and Adrianus▪ all four famous and 
〈◊〉 dela●i● vigner d● ver●. fides.  learned Papists, and one of them (Adrianils) sometime Pope himself, do affirm it and defend it for a constant and undoubted truth. Nicholaus de Lyra, a famous Popish Friar, so learned a man, that Sir Thomas Moor called him a great Clerk, (as he was indeed) proveth evidently that the Church doth not consist in men, by reason of power or dignity either Ecclesiastical or Secular: and this is the ground and foundation, upon which he 
●●ra, in 16. cap. Mat.  buildeth his assertion: because (saith Friar Lyra) many Princes and Popes, and others of the inferior sort, are sound to have swerved from the faith, and to have been flat Apostates. Yea josephus Angles, a famous Popish Bishop, and religious Friar, in that very book which he 
●ose A●●●▪ ●. s. p. 2. q. de ixion. ar. 4. d●●f. 1.  delivered to the Pope himself, behold the force of truth) confirmeth this mine assertion in these expressed words; Papa hereticus aut Apostata, etc. The Pope being an Heretic or Apostata, may be deposed by a general Council, and the reason is, because as none can be a Prelate of any religion, which is not professed in that religion; so neither can he be Pope that holdeth not the faith o● the Church. Thus you see it▪ clear even by Popish famous Doctors, & the Popes own decrees (such 〈…〉 none can be better) that the bishop of Rome may forsake the Christian faith, teach false Doctrine, and become flat Apostates: Yea, that, de facto, the same hath been verified, of sundry Popes in very deed.  Theoph. 
Our Cardinal Bellarmine, and other learned Catholics tell us, that our Pope is a double person; private and public: that as he is a private person, he may think, speak, write and hold erroneous opinions, 
The Pope's double person.  false doctrine, and whatsoever else; yet this notwithstanding, that the Pope as he is Pope, and a public person can never err in any matter of faith, nor judicially define any thing against the truth. This our famous Dominican Friar Dominicus de Soto, setteth down in these express words; quamuis Papa ut Papa etc. Albeit the Pope, as 
Soto. in 4 s d. 2. 4. 2. 〈◊〉. ●.  Pope, cannot err, that is to say, cannot set down any error as an article of our faith, because the holy Ghost will not that permit; nevertheless, as he is a private person, he may err even in faith, as he may do in other sins.  Remig. 
This indeed is the ground and foundationo? all Popish faith and doctrine; that the Pope may err as a private man, but not as Pope and public person: for 
Qu●dl. ●. ●. 10.  this cause doth M. Watson tell us, in the name of all the secular Priests, in their conflict against the traitorous jesuits; that as the prudent Greek appealed from Alexander furious, to Alexander sober; and Bishop Crostrate from Pope Adrian private, to Pope Adrian public, and as sumus pontifex in cathedra Petri; so may the secular Priests, the Pope's devoted vassals, notwithstanding any decree set down by his Holiness to the contrary, by wrong information given, appeal even from the Pope; as Clemens unto his holiness, as Peter for this cause doth, the jesuit Parsons, or S. R. in his pretended answer to 
S. R. pag. 417.  the down ●all of Popery, proclaim it lustily to the work, that Bishops must not examine the doctrine which the Pope ●●●inereth judicially out of S. Peter's chair, as suprethe pastor of God's Church; but only that, wherein he uttereth his own private opinion. For this cause do the Pope's decrees roundly tell us, that it is sacrilege to dispute of the Pope's power. So then; on the one side, 
Lib. 6. de ha●●t. cap qui conque cause 17 ●. 4. cap. si ●u●.  the Pope may be deposed, if he speak, write, or hold heretical opinions as a private man; but on the other side, whatsoever the Pope shall define or decree, as Pope and public person, that we must receive, reverence, and constantly believe; otherwise, we must be adjudged Heretics and be burnt with fire and saggot at a stake. What a religion eat ye this? the Pope may decree things 
Popery is a most meserarable religion.  at his own good pleasure either as a private man, or as a public person; the one way he cannot err, as Papists do and must believe; but the otherway, he both may err and hath de facto erred in very deed: it therefore standeth with all reason, piety and good conscience, that the Papists shall examine his decrees, whether they proceed from the Pope as a public person or as a private man, le●t they receive errors for faith, falsehood for truth, & poison for wholesome medicine. Howbeit, they must believe all things resolutely; they may doubt or dispute of nothing curiously, lest they be accused of sacrilege or heresy. For, if the Pope when he spoke or wrote sat in S. Peter's chair at Rome, (an old rotten and worm-eaten thing, which the silly people adore, reverence, and kiss, as myself sometimes have done, and Saint Peter perhaps never saw or knew the same) than the case is clear, the Pope's decree is as sound as the holy Gospel, and proceedeth from the holy Ghost.  Theoph. 
All this is very true, and we are taught to believe, that Saint Peter sat in that chair indeed, and that it hath been reverently kept from Saint Peter's death to this day, insomuch that they are likewise taught to bring girdles to touch the said chair, which therefore are called Saint Peter's girdles for the safe deliverance of women which are with child, and do use them: neither did I ever hear to this day, that any Pope taught false Doctrine, or decreed any untruth out of Saint Peter's chair.  Remig. 
Whether Saint Peter ever sat in that chair or not, it is not much material; this one thing is certain, that it is this day most superstitiously abused and that the real sitting in the material chair, cannot preserve him that sitteth in it, from false doctrine or erroneous faith, whereof more at large hereafter, as your demands or difficulties shall minister fit occasion; that many Popes have been Heretics and flat Apostates, is already proved out of your own best approved Doctors. Now will I likewise prove unto you (God willing) even by the express testimonies of most renowned Popish writers; that sundry Popes have taught and decreed false doctrine, and that as public persons sitting in Saint Peter's chair, as they call it, and that done. I will answer to all your objections against the same. M. Gerson, sometime 
Gers▪ in Serp●. de Pasck. ●. pa●t.  Chancellor of the famous University of Paris, and a man of high esteem in the Council of Constance, writeth plainly, and avoucheth it for a constant known truth, that Pope john the 22. of that name, taught publicly, that the souls of the just do not see God till the day of general Doom, as also, that his false doctrine was publicly condemned with the sound of trumpets, even before Philip, than King of France. Yea Adrianus (who was Bishop of Rome himself) doth constantly avouch the same truth as testifieth Alphonsus a zealous and learned Popish Writer, in these express words; Novissime fertur de johann 22. quod etc. Last of all, it is reported of Pope john the 22. that he publicly taught, declared, and commanded all to hold 
The Pope ●rr●d. as a public person, ie cannot be denied.  the same, that the souls of the just before the day of judgement general, have not the stole, which is the clear and facial vision of God: and he is reported to have induced the university of Paris to this, that none should take degree of Theology in the same, but those that did first swear to defend this error, and to adhere to it for ever: Thus writeth Adrian, who was himself Pope or Bishop of Rome: And Alphonsus a man of good credit with the papists, after he had reckoned up five heresies, setteth down this for the ●i●th heresy: (viz that 
Alphon. ● Castrolib. ●. ad verse. h●re ses, ●rop● 〈◊〉 〈◊〉.  the souls of the just do not see God till the day of doom) ascribing the said heresy to the Armenians as to the authors thereof, and to the greeks together with Pope john, as the patrons and defenders of the same. So than it is clear as the noon day, that the Bishops of Rome both may err, and, de facto, have erred, not only as private men, but also as Popes and public persons in their judicial sentences and decrees. Bellarmine your romish 
Bellarm. de ●um Pontifice lib 4. c. 14  jesuits and Cardinal, seeing the force of this testimony, and ma●king well that it doth overthrow the highest point of their late start up popery, doth bestir●e himself more than a little in defence of popish faith: he would gladly persuade his reader, that their Pope john erred only as a private man, and not as a Pope or Bishop of Rome: 
●●te pope●y i● not the old but the new religion.  which is a subtle distinction, but falsely invented to seduce the silly people therewith, lest they should forsake the Pope & his new religion: I prove it many ways, first, because Pope Adrian himself saith, (docuit he taught) Secondly, because he saith (Publicé publicly) Thirdly, because he saith (Mandavit, he commanded all to hold it.) Fourthly, because none could be made Graduates in the University, which held not this opinion. Fiftly, because every Graduate was sworn to descend it, and to hold it for ever. So then, the Pope erred de facto, even in his public decree of faith, and that even by the 
Di●it Adrianus, A. D. 1171.  consent of Adrian, who sometime was Pope himself; yea, who for learning and knowledge, was one of the rarest Popes that ever were at Rome. What say you to this testimony, M. Theophilus? do ye not see it evidently proved, even by the testimony of approved Popish writers, that the Pope both may err, and, de facto, hath erred; and that not only as a private man, but also as a public person.  Theoph. 
Your reasons are so strong, so pithy, and so plain indeed, that I know not in the world how in truth to answer them, they make me to stagger in my old Romish faith, and to doubt of that, whereof I never doubted all my life before: for, we Catholics have ever holden it for an article of our Catholic faith, that the Pope as Pope and public person cannot err: and therefore that they are to be censured for Heretics, whosoever will not receive and believe, as articles of the Christian faith, whatsoever the Pope defineth judicially and publicly, as sitting in Peter's chair.  Remig. 
This lately coined diabolical distinction of the Pope's double person, with the circumstances wherewith it is adorned, may fitly be termed a trick of legerdemain, 
A trick of legerdemain.  wherewith many have been seduced a long time. For, when the Pope is charged and plainly convicted to have decreed false and erroneous doctrine to be holden for articles of the faith; then the Pope and his Jesuits, with their jesuited brood, tell us peremptorily, and as it were violently enforce us to believe it, that such decrees proceed from the Pope's Holiness, as a private man, but not as a public person. What a thing is this? if the Pope decree any thing, how absurd soever it be, and 
A most blasphemous doctrine.  affirm the same to be his judicial sentence out of Peter's chair, than the same must be holden and be believed for an article of faith, and to be as true as the Gospel of jesus Christ; and he that will not so hold, and so believe, must be burnt for an Heretic: & for all this, no Scripture, no general Council, no holy Father, no learned Popish Writer, for the space of 1400. years after Christ's sacred incarnation, (my life and salvation I gauge for the 
Mark this well.  trial) can be truly produced or alleged for the confirmation and clearing of such Popish dotage, or rather of such diabolical heresy, and never-inough detested villainy.  Theoph. 
Your words do penetrate, and touch the very bottom of my heart: but is it possible, that you can prove and justify this your assertion? if you can this perform, popery is confounded and stricken dead. I therefore pray you for Christ's sake, to prove this point so sound and clearly as I may be assured of the truth thereof.  Remig. 
M. Doctor Gerson, Chancellor of the university of Paris, a famous papist, and one of the principal divines in the general Council of Constance, delivereth the truth to the view of the christian world, in these express words: concluditur ex hac radice duplex veritas: prima, quod determinatio solius Papae in his quae sunt fidei, non obligat ut precise est talis ad credendum; alioquin staret in casu, quod quis obligaretur ad contradictoria, vel ad falsum contra fidem. Out of this root, is concluded 
Gers. prim. art. de e●am. doct. consid. 2.  a double truth: first, that the resolution or determination of the Pope alone in things belonging to faith) as it is precisely such (not confirmed by a general council, doth not tie or bind a man to believe it, for otherwise, the case might so fall out, that one should be bound either to believe contradictories, or else falsehood against his faith. Again, in another place, the same doctor and great learned man hath these express words: in causis fidei, non habetur in 
Gers in pripart de appellat. a Papa, in prop●sit.  terra judex infallibi is, vel qui non sit deviabilis a fide de lege communi, praeter ipsam Ecclesiam universalem, vel concilium generale eam sufficienter repraesentans: in causes of faith, there is no infallible judge upon earth, or which cannot swar●e from the faith, by the common course of Gods proceeding, saving the universal Church, or a general council. Many like testimonies this learned writer hath, which I let pass in regard of brevity, for that I deem these twain so clear and so sufficient, as they will persuade every indifferent reader: for first, we see 
This myself admit and believe.  plainly by M. Gersons' resolution, that no Christian is bound to believe the decree, definition, determination, or resolution of the Pope, as he is barely and precisely Pope or Bishop of Rome▪ without the assistance of a general council. Secondly that the Pope may err both privately and publicly in the resolutions of faith, aswell as their Bishops and ministers of the Church. Thirdly, that there are but two infallible judges upon earth concerning matters of faith, that is to say, the whole Congregation of the faithful, and a general Council lawfully and sufficiently representing the same: which resolution of this learned man, I admit with heart and voice, as most Christian, sound, orthodox, and consonant to the holy scriptures, general Counsels, holy fathers, and best learned papists: M. doctor Fisher late Bishop of Rochester, and a popish canonised martyr, delivereth his opinion in these express words, nec Angustini, nec Hieronymi, necalterius cui●s●●bet auctoris doctrinae sic Ecclesia subscripsit, quin ipsilocis aliquotab iis liceat dis●entire: nam in nonnullis ipsis locis se plane monstrarunt homines esse, atque nonnun quam aberrasse: the Church hath not see subscribed either to the doctrine of Austen or of Hierome, or of any other author or writer, but that she may sometime dissent from their opinions: for themselves have plainly showed themselves to be men and that they wanted not their errors. The jesuit Bella●mine, so dear to the Pope for his writing, that he gave him a Cardinal's hat, wrote in this manner, sine dubio singuli Episcopi errare pos●unt, & aliquando errant, & inter se quandoque dissentiunt, ut nesciamus 
Beliarm▪ de council, libri. 2. Cap. 2.  quinam eorum sequendus sit: without doubt all Bishops severally may err, & do sometime err indeed, & do also▪ sometime so dissent one from another, that we cannot tell which of them we may safely follow. By the verdict of these famous & learned papists we see M. Gersons' doctrine plainly confirmed: for albeit they name not the Pope, yet must they confess, perforce, that he is implied in their words, or else that he is no Bishop at all, which is a thing not impossible by popish faith, though I affirm it not: jacobus Almaynus, Gulielmus Ockamus, Thomas 
The council of Constance deposed Pope john.  Waldensis, josephus Angles, with many others I might allege, but I deem these sufficient. Two things I will add for your better satisfaction herein: the one, that this weighty point of doctrine, was most sound handled, and thoroughly debated in the council of Constance, where it was concluded, that a general council is above the Pope: that a general counsel may depose the Pope: that the same council, de facto, deposed Pope john the 23. of that name, and that the Pope as a public person may both be an heretic, and decree heretical doctrine: The other that the council of Constance was holden and celebrated, in the year of our Lord God, 1415. and that M Gerson was a famous divine of the same council, both beholding with his eyes, and hearing with his ears, (him self not being mute in the interim,) three Popes john the 23. Gregory the 12., and Benedict the 13.) deposed by the same council, and the constant resolution of the council against the Popes falsely challenged privileges: as namely, that the Pope as Pope and as he is a public person, neither is nor can be an infallible judge in matters of faith.  Theoph. 
These things are wonderful, which you seem truly and sincerely to relate. I will think upon them▪ they enforce me to stagger, and to doubt of the Catholic saith.  Remig. 
I deal sincerely with the papists, I protest upon my salvation, for I hold it a great sin to belly the devil of hell: but God forbid that ye should doubt of the Catholic faith.  Theoph. 
I remember well your distinction, of deformed and reform Catholics: I mean the deformed Catholic faith, which I now suspect to be the romish faith of our late Popes, I am not able to gainsay or withstand the truth, your reasons are so strong, your testimonies so plain, your applications so evident, & your grounds so invincible, that I cannot do withal, but needs I must give great credit to the same.  Remig. 
You shall yet hear stranger matters of your Popes, hearken to them attentively. Pope Celestine the 
Alphons. lib 1. Cap. 4. advers. haeres.  third of that name▪ erred as Pope and public person, in his judicial and public decree: this to be so, Alphonsus above named, that famous and religious papist, is a constant witness in these words, Celestinum Papa crass circa matrimonium fidelium, quorum al●er labitur in haeresim, res est omnibus manifesta: neque hic Celestini error talis fuit, qui soli negligentiae imputari debuit, ita ut illum errasse dicamus velut privatam personam, & non ut Papam, qui in qualibet re seria definienda consulere debet viros doctos, quoniam hui●smodi Celistini definitio habebatur in antiquis decretalibus, in capite, laudabilem, titulo de conuersione infidelium, quam ego ipse vidi, & legi: That Pope Celestine erred about matrimony of the faithful, whereof the one is fallen into heresy, it is a thing so manifest, as all men know the same: neither was this error of Pope Celestine such, as may be imputed to sole negligence, so as we may think he erred as a private 
Celestine erred as Pope and public person.  man, and not as Pope, who ought in every serious decree to ask council of the learned, for that decree of Celestine was in the old decretal epistles, in the chapter Laudabilem, which I myself have seen and read, out of these word of Alphonsus, who was a man highly renowned among the papists, I observe many worthy, and memorable points. First that Pope Celestine erred, and that, not as a private man, but even as Pope and public person. Secondly, that he erred in a very serious matter, even in a matter of faith, to wit, that matrimony was so dissolved, by reason of heresy, that the faithful man or woman might marry again, the heretical party living: which thing saith Alphonsus, (a great learned man, and a zealous papist,) was manifest to every man to be an heresy: and the popish late council of Trent, hath defined so to be. Thirdly, that this decree and definition of Pope Celestine, was in those days enroled in the Pope's decretals. Fourthly, that Alphonsus both saw and read the same decree. Fiftly, that the said decree cannot this day be found among the Pope's decretal epistles: so then, the Pope's use to change, not only their faith, but also their decrees.  Theoph. 
I see well, that simple people are shamefully abused, and that the late Popes have egregiously seduced them: for this is a case so clear, as every child may perceive the same: that which the Pope and his jesuits tell us of his double person, is but atrick of Legerdemarie. For Alphonsus saith plainly and resolutely (I see it cannot be denied) that Pope Celestine erred as Pope and public person, and not as a private man.  Remig. 
Let this testimony never be forgotten: for, it overthroweth and beateth flat to the ground, the chiefest bulwark, and strongest sort of all popish faith. It condenmeth the Pope and his doctrine, both affirmatively & negatively. Affirmatively, because it a●outheth the Pope to have erred as Pope and public person. Negatively, because it flatly denieth him to have erred as a private person. But there is another point in this testimony, and that of great importance, which may not be forgotten: I know not if you have marked the same.  Theoph. 
What is the point, I beseech you?  Remig. 
It is a kind of juggling and legerdemain, where with the Popes and their denoted vassals, have seduced the world a long time: they alter and change their Romish faith and doctrine at their own good will and pleasure, and to hide and cover the nakedness of their Pope's public errors, & heretical decrees; they cashéere and make away such former decrees of former Popes, as they cannot for shame approve, or by any honest means defend the same. For (as Alphonsus here telleth us) this heretical decree and definition, which Celestine made, as Pope, and not as a private person, was in the old decretal epistles, but this day cannot be found.  Theoph. 
This point indeed I did not observe, because Alphonsus saith he saw and read the same, but not that it is not this day to be found.  Remig. 
Alphonsus saith he saw the decree, and read it in the old decretals: and nameth the chapt eith where it was: whereby he giveth us to understand, that in the latter decretals he could not find the same. He further insinuateth to us, that albeit we cannot find the same judicial sentence in the decretals nowadays: yet may we assure ourselves of the truth thereof, for that himself both had seen and read the same in the old decretals: for if he had found the same in the later printed decretals, he would not have given the reader this caveat, viz. that it was set down in the old decretals, in the Chapter Laudabilem, and consequently, that the denial thereof, would not serve to excuse the Pope. Nay, I will yet show you a clearer case, if any clearer can be.  Theoph. 
I know not doubtless, how a clearer case can be found: yet for the better confirmation of the truth, I pray you withdraw not your pain.  Remig. 
Saint Cyprian was an ancient Father, a learned Writer, and a glorious Martyr of our Lord jesus: and for all that, he both believed, and publicly declared that the Bishops of Rome might err as well as other Bishops their brethren, not only in their private opinions, but also in their definitive sentences, & judicial decrees. For first, though Cornelius, then Bishop of Rome, together with the whole national Synod of all the bishops of Italy had made a flat decree touching rebaptisation; and secondly, though Pope Stephanus had confirmed the same decree, and strictly commanded it to be observed: and thirdly, though our Papists to much jesuited and Italianized, do of late days obstinately affirm, (as appeareth by the notes of the Rhemists upon the new Testament) that their Pope cannot err, when he defineth judicially: yet this notwithstanding, S. Cyprian, both practically and judicially giveth us to understand, that in his time the Bishop of Rome had no such privilege, as he this day arrogantly & Antichristianly taketh upon him: for we▪ Cyprian stoutly and resolutely withstood the decree of▪ Pope tephanus, who at that time was the Bishop of Rome: yea, he both sharply reproved him, and scornfully condemned his definitive sentence and decree.  Theoph. 
I see not, how this proceeding of Saint Cyprian, can prove that the Pope may err judicially in matters of faith: I beseech you take the pains to explicate the same more at large.  Remig. 
Saint Cyprian was ever reputed a learned man, and an holy Bishop in his life time, as also, a most glorious Martyr being dead. Now, in regard of his great learning, he could not have been ignorant of the Pope's rare privilege in noterring in matters of faith; if either the holy Scriptures had taught it, or the learned Fathers of that age had believed or received it: and in regard of 
This fact of S. Cyprian, confoundeth the Pope.  his piety and rare virtue, he would reverently have yielded to such a singular prerogative, and have given the glory to the son of God, the author thereof, if any such thing had been done unto him. Yea, if the Bishop of Rome had been Christ's vicar general, and so privileged, as our Jesuits and jesuited crew bear the world in hand he is, that is to say that he could not err, in his judicial definitions of faith: then doubtless, S. Cyprian must needs have been a flat heretic, and so reputed and esteemed in the Church of God: For, if any Christian shall this day do, or affirm as S. Cyprian did, or publicly deny the Pope's said falsely pretéded prerogative of faith in any place, Country, territories or dominions, where Popery beareth the sway: then without all peradventure, he must be burnt at a stake with fire and faggot for his pains.  Theoph. 
God reward you for your travail: I see it now 
Other Bishops were of Cyprians opinion.  as clearly as the noon day: For, S. Cyprian both knew the Scripture right well, and also what was the public faith of the Church in his time: & so, if either the Scripture had taught it, or the Church had believed it; he would never have withstood it, but reverently have yielded thereunto. But sir, our Doctors have much to say for themselves, would God it might please you to hear, and answer the same at large.  Remig. 
I will both willingly hear them, and sound (by the power of God) confute the same: For, I know right well, before I hear them from your mouth, what possibly they are able to say in their own defence.   

CHAP. 3. Of sundry important Objections, which seem to prove the Pope's prerogative of faith.  

Objection first.  Theophilus. 
CHrist prayed for Peter, that his faith should never fail; ergo, the Bishop of Rome's faith cannot fail nor the Pope err in his judicial decrees: for, seeing Christ constituted a Church, which should continue to the world's end; he prayed not only for S. Peter's person, but 
Luk. 22. v. 32.  also for all that should succeed him in his Chair at Rome.  Remig. 
I answer; first, that many learned Writers doubt greatly, not only of his supposed Chair, but even of his being there. Howbeit, because all the holy Fathers, 
S. Peter suffered at Rome.  and learned Writers of the ancient Church, do with uniform assent, affirm Saint Peter to have been Bishop of Rome, I willingly admit the same as a received truth. Secondly, that albeit Christ prayed for S. Peter's faith, as also appointed his Church to continue to the world's end: yet doth it not follow thereupon, that what privilege soever he obtained by prayer for S. Peter, the same must redound to all those that lineally succeed in his place or chair: for, no Scripture, no Council, no Father doth so write, or so expound Christ's prayer. Thirdly, that Christ prayed for the faith of the whole Church, or for Peter's faith, as he did represent the whole church, which is all one in effect: This I prove by sundry means. First, because Christ himself doth so expound himself in these 
joh. 17. v. 9 20.  words; I pray not for the world, but for them which thou hast given me, for they are thine. I pray not for these alone, but for them also, which shall believe in me through their word. Christ prayed aswell for the rest of his Apostles as he did for Peter; and a well for all the elect, as for his Apostles: and consequently, seeing Christ directed not his words to Peter as to one private man, but as to one representing the whole Church; it followeth of necessity, that whatsoever Christ did, or said, concerning Peter's faith, the same, perforce, must be understood of the faith of the whole Church, which faith shall never fail indeed Secondly, because johannes Gersonus, a famous Popish 
Gers. ubi. sup. cap. 2.  writer affirmeth constantly, as we have seen already, that there is no infallible judge upon earth in matters of faith, saving the universal Church, or a general Council lawfully assembled, and sufficiently representing the same, which doctrine, though proceeding from a Popish pen, I willingly embrace and reverence as an undoubted truth. Thirdly, because S. Austen applieth Christ's prayer generally & indifferently to all the whole Church. 
●ug. in quaest mixtis, q. 5. t●m. 4.  Quid ambigitur? etc. what doubt is there? did he pray for Peter, and did he not also pray for ●ames & john, to say nothing of the rest? it is clear that in Peter all the rest are meant▪ because he saith in another place, I pray for these O Father, which thou hast given me, and desire that they may be with me, where myself am. Lo, S. Austen understandeth Christ's prayer for Peter, of the whole Congregation of the faithful: and he proveth it by Christ's own explication, in an other place of the Holy Gospel. Fourthly, because Origen, 
Orig. Hom●● in Mat.  a very learned and ancient Father, affirmeth in a large discourse upon Saint Matthew, that all things spoken of Peter, touching the Church and the keys, are to be understood of all the rest: and the collection or illation of Origen, is evident, even by natural reason: for, as that learned father profoundly disputeth, if Christ prayed not aswell for the rest as he did for Peter, of small credit were a great part of the holy scriptures: a reason doubtless, insoluble for all Jesuits and jesuited popelings 
●a●or. apud Syle. defido▪ §. 9 & de conc §. 5.  in the world: for, if they could fail in their faith, they could also fail in their writing, and yet that they could not so fail, was by virtue of Christ's prayer. Fiftly because Panormitanus the Popes skilful Canonist, his religious Abbot, his renowned Arche-bishop, and his Lordly Cardinal (for he was all four) telleth us plainly and peremptorily, that Christ's prayer was for the whole congregation of the faithful: these are his express words; & pro hac tantum Chrstus in evangelio ●ruit ad patrem; ego rogavi pro te: and for this (he speaketh of the whole faithful congregation▪) Christ only prayed to his Father in the Gospel, (when he said) I have prayed for thee (Peter) that thy faith fail not. Behold 
Panorm. de elect. cap significati.  and mark well, and then yield your indifferent censure, when Christ (saith the famous papist Panormitanus) prayed that Peter's faith should not fail, he prayed for the faith of the universal Church, whose faith shall never fail indeed: & the same Panormitanus proveth his opinion directly and strongly by many texts of the Pope's canon-law. Sixtly because all the doctors & learned divines of the most famous university of (Paris mark well for this Argum●t (striketh dead;) do expound Christ's words in S. Luke▪ even as I have proved out of Cardinal Panormitanus, that is to say that Christ prayed for the faith of the whole Church, 
Ap●d. Bel. lib. 4 cap. 3. de rom. pontiff.  or for Peter's faith as he represented the whole Church which is all one in effect: this, this, is such a deadly wound to the Pope & to all his popelings, as all medicines in the world are never able to cure the same: this is it, which M. Gerson Chancellor of the same university, and a famous disputer in the council of Constance, published to the world in a printed book, (whose words we have heard already) 
G●rs. 〈…〉  that the Bishop of Rome may err in matters of faith and doctrine, aswell as other Bishops their brethren: and that there is no infallible judge upon the earth in matters of faith, save only the congregation of the faithful, and a general council sufficiently representing the same. Here I would have you; M. Theophilus, to observe seriously these points with me, which if you shall do, all partiality set a part, you cannot but abhor and detest late startup popery: these are the observations. First, that all which the Pope and his Jesuits can possible say on the Pope's behalf, why he cannot err judicially in matters of faith, is even this and nothing else, that Christ prayed for S. Peter's faith and his successors. Secondly, that not one doctor, two▪ or three, but Austen, Origen, Panormitane, together with all the great learned divines of the university of Paris, do with▪ uniform consent and sweet harmony, expound Christ's prayer to be made for the whole congregation of the faithful. Thirdly, that all the learned doctors of the said university are papists, and consequently, that they say or write nothing against the Pope, but what the zeal of truth urgeth them unto. Fourthly, that all the learned divines of Paris, (an university for learning and knowledge renowned throughout the Christian world,) do this day as ever in former times, hold constantly, and both Christianly and zealously descend the same, viz: That the Bishops of Rome both may err, and, de facto, have erred in matters of faith, and that Christ's prayer was only for the whole Congregation of the faithful. Fiftly, that the said university was ever so far from believing this heresy that the Bishop of Rome cannot err judicially in matters of faith, as also from interpreting Christ's prayer for any prerogative of his faith, or of his successors, that it publicly condemned Pope john's public error in faith, and that with the sound of the Trumpets, yea with the kings royal assent, and in his presence: their express words, and the 
Coram Philip. ●●ge Franc●●, supra cap. 2.  Pope's heresy we have heard at large already.  

The first Reply.  Theoph. 
Cardinal Bellarmine (who is as it were the Popes own mouth,) telleth us constantly, that Christ in his prayer obtained two privileges for Peter: the one, that his faith should never fail, the other, that neither Peter, nor any in Peter's seat, should ever teach false doctrine: and consequently he inferreth, that albeit the Bishops of Rome may err as privatemen, yet never judicially in matters of faith.  Remig. 
I answer first, that Bellarmine bringeth nothing for his opinion, but his own bare imagination, and therefore that it is lawful for us barely to deny it, till he with reason be able to prove it, which forsooth will be, ad Calendas 
Bellarm. de verb. de●on script. lib. 4. cap. 12.  graecas. Secondly, that the same Bellarmine telleth us elsewhere, that the word of God is the rule of faith: and that the written word, because it is the rule, hath this prerogative, that whatsoever is contained in it, is of necessity true, and must be believed: and whatsoever is repugnant to it, is of necessity false, and must be rejected: wherein he unawares confuteth himself, and justifieth mine assertion: for the Scripture telleth us every where, that all Bishops e●re, and both deceive others and are deceived themselves. The Prophet David showeth it plainly 
Ps. 116. v. 11. jere. 16. v. 19  when he affirmeth all men to be liars. The Prophet ●eremy crieth aloud, that the Gentiles in the end of the world, shall come and freely confess that their forefathers inherited lies and vanity. Saint Paul confirmeth 
Rom. 3. v. 4 Mal. 1. v. 8.  the same when he telleth us, that only God is true, and every man a liar. The Prophet Malachi reproveth th● Priests of the law, for their manifold errors: ye are gone (saith he) out of the way, ye have caused many to fall by the law, ye have broken the covenant of Levi. The Priest and the Prophet (saith Esay) have erred by strong 
Esa. 28. v. 7  drink: they are swallowed up with wine: they have gone astray through strong drink: they fail in vision: they stumble in judgement. They shall seek a vision of the Prophet 
Eze. 7 v. 〈◊〉.  (saith Ezechiel) but the law shall perish from the Priest, and counsel from the Elders. The heads (saith Micach) judge for rewards, and the Priests teach for hire, and the Prophets prophesy for money. Her Prophets 
Micach. 3. v. 1●. Soph. 3 v. 4  (saith Sopho●e) are light and wicked persons: her Priests have polluted the Sanctuary: they have wrested the law. What? erred not Terrullian, Montanizing? Cyprian, Rebaptizing? Origen, Corporizing? Nazianzen, 
Offē●is. adu. Luth. art. 32.  Angelizing? Eusebius, Arrianizing? Lactantius, Millenizing? Saith not john Fisher, that famous Popish Bishop, that we may justly dissent from the judgement of Austen, Hierome, & whosoever else? and that because they ●aue showed themselves to be men, and not to have wanted their errors? Doth not Cardinal Bellarmine freely grant, that all Bishops do so dissent sometime one 
Lege. Ca●eta●. in prefat, in libr. M●●is, & Aug. ep. 11. 19 Eze. 20. 10.  from another, that we cannot tell which of them we may safely follow? All these assertions are so true, as no one of them can be gainsaid: and consequently, if the Popes of Rome be men and not women, as Pope john; if they be Bishops and not pilate's, they both may err, and, de facto, have erred, as we have seen already. And Cardinal Bellarmine must either bring some scripture, divine and Canonical, which assureth us that the Pope's faith cannot fail, or else to give us leave (howsoever he deal● with his jesuited vassals) to believe him and his Pope at leisure. But indeed, no Scripture, no Council, no ancient Father, no approved History of the Church, can be produced by any one, or all Papists in the world, that saith the Bishop of Rome's faith cannot fail, or that the faith of him, who succeed in the seat of Peter, can never fail.   

The second reply.  Theoph. 
You have said very much against the infallibility of the Pope's faith: howbeit, the learned Papists think they have a reply, which cannot easily be answered. They hold, that Saint Cyprian affirmeth resolutely, that false faith can have no access to Saint Peter's chair, which if it be so, then cannot I perceive how the Popes can err in matters of faith: for you freely admit, that the Bishops of Rome 
Cyprian. lib. 1. epist. 3.  are Saint Peter's successors there, & sit in his seat or chair: and I like your dispute a great deal the better, because I see and find you willing to discover every thing truly, & to conceal nothing that seemeth to make for their profession and religion. But I greatly desire a sound answer to this great and mighty reply: for our learned Divines do think it unanswerable, and altogether insoluble.  Remig. 
I answer: first, that the jesuit S. R. or Robert Parsons (if you will) citeth this reason or testimony out of S. Cyprian; but corruptly and falsely, as in the reply to his pretenced answer to the downfall of Popery, it doth and may appear. Secondly, that it is a very childish reply, & unworthy to be alleged of any learned writer: for these are S. Cyprians words: ad quos perfidia 
Cyprian ubi. super.  acces●●m habere non potest: They know not them to be Romans to whom falsehood or deceitful dealing can have 
He speaketh of one Felicissimus & his bad companions.  no access: or with whom falsehood and crafty dealing can find no place (or comfort.) Now, this answer is as much to the purpose, for proving that the Pope's faith cannot fail, as if I should demand of M: Friar Parsons, how far it is to London: and it should please his gravity to answer a poke full of plums. For first, S. Cyprian 
S. R. pag. 31●.  speaketh of the Romans indefinite, whom he commendeth to be so honest, so sincere, and so upright in all their proceedings, that the false reports, and unjust allegations of disobedient persons, can find no help or comfort in their Tribunals or Consistorie-courts. Now, Robert parsons, (to make a show of the Popes falsely pretended prerogative in, matters of faith) doth first of all corruptly set down these words (to S. Peter's chair) for these words in the text (ad q●os Romanos, to which Romans.) then 
See the ●esuits antepast. pag. 13●.  he falsely setteth down (false faith) for the word (perfidia) in S. Cyprian, which there signifieth not false faith, but falsehood and deceitful dealing: as if S. Cyprian had said▪ it skilleth not, for the Romans are so wise, so sincere, and so upright in all their proceedings, that no false reports, or deceitful allegations, can have any place, or find any refuge in their Courts. Now I pray you heartily, 
The Romans being faithful men▪ would not give ear to faithless liars.  to censure the case and cause indifferently: was this honest dealing of your jesuit to change the word falsehood) into false faith? as if forsooth, Saint Cyprian had meant, that the Pope's faith cannot fail: when indeed S. Cyprian (as we have heard) doth utterly renounce that heretical and damnable position; viz. that the Pope's faith cannot fail: For, if S. Cyprian had believed that position, and withal had gainsaid and withstood the Pope's definitive and judicial sentence, he should both in the judgement of other holy Fathers, and in his own conscience have been a flat Heretic. But never did any holy Father, or the Church of God so repute him. Pope Stephanus. with a Council of all the Bishops and Priests of Italy, defined flatly against rebaptisation: which decree of Council with the Pope's assent thereto, Saint Cyprian scorned and contemned, still defending his former opinion constantly. Yea, he was so far from acknewledging the prerogative in Popes, which they of latter days challenge to themselves, that he would not take Pope Stephanus for his superior, or to have any jurisdiction over him, but termed him proud, ignorant, blind, and naughty, as is evident to such as read his Epistle to Pompeius. Out of which proceedings, I note these memorable points First, that he knew what the Pope and his Council had decreed. Secondly, that he judged a Romish Council to be of no greater force than a Council African. Thirdly, that he judged the council of Italy to be of no greater force for the Pope's consent, than was the council of Astricke, for his own consent. Fourthly, that provincial Counsels are of no greater authority for the Pope's confirmation, then for the confirmation of another Bishop.   

The third Reply.  Theoph. 
Cardinal Bellarmine telleth us that the Pope defined the controversy indeed: but not as a matter of faith: and consequently, Saint Cyprian could not be an Heretic, albeit he withstood the decree of the Pope.  Remig. 
What a Religion is Popery? what a man is 
Bell knoweth Bellarmine right well.  Cardinal Bellarmine? shall we make him another Pope? shall we admit every thing he saith, for and as, Christ's holy Gospel? I knew the man right well before he was Cardinal, and I think no Angel hath spoken to him since. I fit so be, let him work miracles for confirmation thereof. The Pope utterly disliking Saint Cyprians opinion, and deeming it repugnant to Christ's Gospel, did for that end convocate all the clergy men of Italy, that the controversy might be derided, and the truth thereof made manifest to the world. And yet, saith Bellarmine, he defined it not as a matter of faith. The controversy was about rebaptisation, and consequently, either flatly with the Gospel, or flatly against the same. If it were flatly with the Gospel, than erred the Pope and his Council egregiously: if it were flatly against the gospel, and the Pope so decreed it, then decreed he against it, as against a matter of faith, or else opinions and doctrines 
Mark this point well.  against the Gospel, are not against the Catholic faith: but the truth of the matter is this, viz. that if the Papists grant, (as of necessity they must grant) S. Cyprian to have withstood and contemned the Pope's judicial and definitive sentence, & for all that, ever to have been reputed an holy▪ man and learned Father: it will fallow of necessity, that the Pope hath no such authority and prerogative as he a long time falsely hath usurped, and still tyrannically pretendeth to have. And therefore the jesuited Cardinal▪ deemed it the best course for the continuance of his Popes falsely pretended prerogatines, to tell us, that though the Pope defined the controversy, yet did he not define it as a matter of faith, and so Saint Cyprian could he no heretic, because he withstood no decree of faith, as if forsooth it rested in the Pope's power to make matters of faith and heresy at his good will and pleasure.  Theoph. 
This your answer doth yield great solace to to my heart: for our great masters bear us in hand, that whatsoever the Pope decreeth, the same must we receive and believe as an undoubted truth, and their daily practice is correspondent thereto: for whosoever shall deny or gainsay the Pope's decree, (who is with us as another God) shall undoubtedly be burnt as a convicted Heretic. Bellarmine's answer, seemeth indeed to be nothing else but a plain trick of Legerdemain: as is his like conceit and doctrine, concerning his Pope's double person. But good sir, doth not the Evangelist tell us, that Christ built his church upon Saint Peter? and that hell gates shall never prevail against it: the words seem very plain. Thou art Peter, and upon this rock will I 
Mat 16. ver. 18.  build my church, and Hell gates shall not prevail against it.    

Objection second.  Theoph. 
Christ built his Church upon Peter, ergo his faith cannot fail: the antecedent is proved by Christ's own words following. For if his faith could fail, than should hell gates indeed prevail against him.  Remig. 
I answer, that Christ did not build his Church upon Peter, I prove it. First because the words are changed, both in the Greek, which is the fountain ana original 
As in all assemblies of government, one for order sake and peace must bed ssigned to end, and to moderate the actions, so was a preminence given to Peter among the Apostles that all things might be done in peace & order, a primacy, not of powers as over inferiors, but of order, as amongst equals.  and also in the romish approved Latin translation, which only must be believed and followed, by the decree of their Tridentine Council: for the alteration of the word, insinuateth significantly an alteration in the sense. If Christ had meant to build his Church upon Peter, he would have said, (upon this Peter) and not (upon this Rock:) And it is not to the purpose to say, that Christ spoke in the Hebrew of Sy●●ack tongue: for we have the original in Greek from S. john, who being full of the holy Ghost would never, have changed the words, but to insinuate & express a different sense and meaning if as: Christ had said▪ thou art a Rock by name, and myself a Rock by nature and indeed so strong, so permanent, & so invincible, that hell gates cannot prevail against it: Upon this Rock therefore of thy confession, will I build my Church: against the faith of which Church, neither hell nor the Devil shall ever prevail. Secondly, because the Apostle affrmeth constantly, that no man can lay any other foundation then that which is laid, which is jesus Christ: Christ therefore speaking in S Matthew of the Rock of the Church, doth by the word (Rock) annotate himself, not S Peter: for we see that S Paul doth so expound Christ's words, whose interpretation may fitly be gathered out of the circumstances of the text in S Matthew, either is it to the purpose, to cite out of the Re●elation of S. john, that the wall of the City which he behold, had twelve foundations, and in them the names of the twelve 
1. Cor. 3. 11. Mat. 16. 18 Apo●. 21▪ 14.  Apostles of the Lamb, for the Apostles were but partial and mutable foundations: but Christ is the total and permanent foundation of the Church neither can any City▪ wall, or other thing, have mo● total foundatios than one: neither yet can the twelve foundations, make for Peter's prerogative ●●y thing at all: for seeing the foundations were▪ 〈◊〉 in number precisely assigned by the vision to the twelve Apostles, without distinction o● limitation: it followeth by● necessary 〈…〉 the 〈◊〉. 〈…〉 for this ●e●pe●●▪ do the holy fathers usually write, that what 〈…〉 Christ spoke or did to Peter concerning the Church, he spoke it 〈…〉 〈…〉 th● 〈…〉 in the name of the ●ho● 〈…〉 con●●●-●●th my expositions T●●s Petrus etc. thou art Peter 
Aug. de. verb. Dom. serm. 13.  (●uch Christ) and upon this Rock which thou hast confessed, upon this Rock which thou hast acknowledged, saying, thou art Christ the Son of the living God, will I ●uil● 〈…〉 Churchy that is, upon myself the Son of the living God, will I build my Church, upon myself will I build thee, not myself upon thee. Fourthly, because S. Chrysostome jumpeth with S. Austin's interpretation, in these words, columnae quidem etc. the Apostles 
Chrys. serm. de penned. 10. 3.  are the pillars, because by their virtue they are the strength of the Church: they are the foundation, because the Church is built upon their confession, when the Lord saith, thou art Peter, and upon this Rock will I build my Church. Fiftly, because S. Hylary is consonant to the other holy fathers: these are his words, this faith is the 
Apoc. 21. v. 14.  foundation of the Church: by this faith hell gates shall not prevail against it: this faith hath the Keys of Heaven. Sixtly, because the received Popish gloss upon this text, 
Hilarius de trinit lib. ●. p 103. Pan●rmit. & S●luester.  understandeth by the Rock, Peter's faith, & the confession which he made. Seventhly, because Panormitan and Sylvester two very famous 〈…〉 are both of the same opinion. Out of this discourse, I observe these points for your better instruction. First that Christ is the Rock upon which Peter is built: that Christ is the Rock, upon which the Church is built: that the Son of God is the Rock upon which the Church is built. Secondly, that the Apostles are called the foundation, because (as testifieth S. Chrysostome) the Church is built in their confession, when the Lord saith, thou art Peter, and upon this Rock will I build my Church. Thirdly that the confession pronounced for ●●der sake by the mouth of one (even Peter by name) was the joint confession of them all (the Church is built in their confession,) mark well these 
mark this point well for it is wonderful and killeth the papists.  words, of the ●●lded mouthed doctor S. Chrysostome, they are words of great importance, they prove the controversy so sufficiently, as no evasion can take place, they prove effectually, that whatsoever was said to Peter touching the Church, was meant of the whole Congregation of the faithful, for as Peter spoke and answered 
Mat. 16. ver. 13. 15. Luke 22. ver. 32. Mat. 18. ver. 15. 18. 19 20  in the name of the whole Church, so Christ's demands, answers, and promises, were made and intended for the whole Church: for as S. Chrysostome truly saith, Peter's confession was made in the name of all the Apostles, and consequently in the name of the whole Church, when he pronounced Christ the Son of the living God: and even so Christ's answer and promise was made to Peter (as appeareth by the circumstances of the text) in the name of the whole Church, and I may not forget to add hereunto, the joint-testimonis of all the learned divines of Paris who (as we have heard already) understand all things spoken to Peter in Church matters, to 
The whole university of Paris teacheth this my doctrine.  be meant of the whole Church: as when he prayed that Peter's faith should not fail, he then prayed for the infallibility and perpetuity of the faith of the whole Church: all both the holy and ancient fathers and, also best approved popish writers (our Jesuits and jesuited popelings only excepted,) do willingly subscribe hereunto.   

Objection 3.  Theoph. 
Christ commanded Peter, and only Peter, and that three several times to feed his sheep. Ergo Peter, & only Peter had the ordinary charge and government of Christ's sheep, and consequently, all Priests, all Bishops, all Archbishops, all patriarchs, receive their authority and jurisdiction from the Pope, as from Saint Peter's successor.  Remig. 
I answer that all Christ's sheep, were committed 
Gal. 2. 7.  to all the Apostles, jointly and severally, aswell to Paul & the rest, as to Peter: yea, rather to Paul, though he were none of the twelve, then to Peter: for he saith of himself that the Gospel of the uncircumcision was committed to him, even as was the Gospel of Circumcision 
Mark this point again and again.  unto Peter: and consequently, since all Christians now were Gentiles then: the Pope if he will needs have a superiority over all his brethren the Bishop's, must perforce reduce his succession from S. Paul: & for this policy perhaps it is, that the Pope ever joineth Saint Paul and Saint Peter together, whether it be in giving pardons, or other faculties whatsoever. I prove the proposition. First, because Christ committed the charge of all Nations, to all his Apostles alike, without any privilege or restriction, 
To avoid 'sme, di Per hath primacy of order but not of power.  more or less, to one rather then to another. Secondly, because Christ for edification sake, required a three sold confession of Peter, in regard of his threefold negation, left novises and weaklings should have been scandalised, understanding that such a notorious sinner without public confession of his faith, should have any jurisdiction over 
Mat. 28. v. 19 Mark 16. v. 14. 15. ioh. 21. v. 14. 15.  them: but not to give any special prerogative to Peter thereby; The reason hereof is evident, because our Saviour had before this charge of feeding, given a very large commission to all his Apostles of feeding all Nations: and therefore he can now mean and intent no other thing, but only to move Peter to walk warily, to be mindful of his infirmities, & to be careful of his charge. Thirdly, because Saint Austen, that mighty pillar of Christ's Church, confirmeth & defendeth this my present doctrine. These are his express words: Ecclesiae Catholicae personam sust●●● Petrus & cum ei dicitur, ad omnes dicitur, a●●● me? pas●●●ues meat: Peter represented the person of the Church Catholic & when it is said to him it is said to all, 
Aug. de ogonae Christi cap. 30. Rom. 3.  lovest thou me? feed my sheep. Fourthly, because S. Cyprian decideth this controversy 〈◊〉 plainly, as cannot but satisfy 〈…〉 indifferent readers these are his express words; loquitur Dominus ad Petrun, ego dico tibi; quia tu es Petrus, 
Cypr. de simplicit. Prelaetorum p. 113.  etc. & Paulo post hoc erant utique & caeteri Apostoli quod fuit Petrus, pari consortio prediti & honoris & potestatis, sed exord●● abo●ni●ate proficiscitur, ut Ecclesia una monstretur: Our Lord speaketh unto Peter. I say unto thee that thou art Peter, and upon this Rock will I build my Church etc. the same were the rest of the Apostles doubtless, that Peter was, endued with equal fellowship, both of honour and of power, but the beginning proceedeth from unity, that the Church may be showed to be one. And the same holy Father confirmeth this his doctrine in another place in these memorable words; Episcopatus unus est, 〈…〉 a singulis in solidum pars tenetur, there is but one Bishoprick●, a part whereof every Bishop possesseth 
Cypr. de unitate Ecclesiae, p. 29●.  and enjoyeth wholly. S. Austen confirmeth S. Cyprians sentence and judgement, in these words: Claves non unus homo Petrus, sed unitas accepit Ecclesiae; not one only ma● Peter, received the Keys, but the unity of the 
Covarr to 1. part 2, 9 p. 242. col. 4. prope finem.  Church. Fiftly, because two famous popish writers are jump of though same opinion, & constantly descend the same doctrine: Couar●vi●s a profound Canonist, & a popish Archbishop of great esteem in the romish Church hath these express words; & enim juxta Catholicorum virorum auctoritates, & communem omnium traditionem, Apostoli parem ab ipso Domino jesu eum Petro potestatem ordinis & iuridictionis acceperunt, ita quidem, ut quilibet Apostolorum aequalem cum Petro habuerit potestatem ab ipso Deo, intotum orbem, & in omnes actus quos Petrus agere poterat: for according to the authorities of Catholic writers, and the common tradition of all, the Apostles received from our Lord jesus Christ himself, equal power with Peter, both of order and of iuridiction; in somuch, doubtless, as every Apostle had equal power with Peter from God himself, and that both over the whole world, and to all actions that Peter could do. josephus Angles a famous Friar and a very learned popish Bishop, 
Angl. in 4. q de clau, di● fie. 2. Concl. 1. pag. 6.  in that self same book which he dedicated to the Pope, hath by the force of God's spirit testified the same truth, both against the Pope & against himself: these are his own words: si comparemus B. Petri & aliorum Apostolorum potestatem ad gubernationem omniumcredentium, tantam alij Apostoli habuerunt potestatam, quantam B. Petrus habuit; ita quod poterant quemlibet Christianum totius orbis, sicut modo Rom. Pont. excommunicare, & in qualibet 
Lo, Peter had the primacy of order, as amongst equals, not of power, as over inferiors, for he was the first both in order and calling. joh. 1 42. Mat. 10. 2. 〈◊〉 tollend● schismata.  Ecclesia Episcopos & Sacerdotes creare: ratio est, quia omnis potestas B. Petro promissa & tradita fuit, & caeteris Apostolis collata, & hoc sine personarum, loci, vel fori discrimine: if we compare the power of S. Peter and of the others Apostles, to the government of all the faithful, other Apostles have even as much power as S Peter had; so that they could then excommunicate every Christian in the whole world, and in every Church make Bishops and Priests: the reason is, because all power promised and given to S. Peter, was also given to the rest of the Apostles, and that without difference, of persons, place, or consistory. Thus we have a full and resolute judgement, both for answer to the objection, and for the supposed prerogatives and privileges of S. Peter: which resolution is not only deduced out of the holy scripture, but plainly contested also by the uniform consent of the holy fathers, S. ●vprian and S. Austen, and in like manner of the famous and learned papists, Covarruvias and ●osephus Angles, for they teach us many sound points in divinity; First, that all the Apostles had as great authority, and as full and large every way, as Saint Peter had. Secondly, that every Apostle, aswell as Peter, could make and constitute Bishops and Priests every where, throughout the Christian world. Thirdly, that what act soever S. Peter could do, every Apostle had power and authority to do the same. Fourthly, that the jurisdiction of every Apostle, was as great and as large every way, as Saint 
Mark well that all Writers teach this doctrine.  Peter was. And this, (saith Covarruvias) is the common received doctrine of all Catholic writers: this is a point of Catholic doctrine so important and so memorable, as it well deserveth to be written in golden letters. Fiftly, that Christ's speeches unto Peter in the singular number, did not argue any superiority of jurisdiction, but only signify the unity of the Church. Sixtly, that the authority and jurisdiction of every Apostle was equal to Peter's, and that without all difference of persons, place or consistory. This is another point of great consequence: for seeing, first, all and every of the Apostles, had equal jurisdiction: 
Mark this well, for it striketh dead.  seeing secondly, that their jurisdiction was not limited, but over the whole world: seeing thirdly, that the whole jurisdiction of every Apostle, ended and expired with his death: and seeing fourthly, that S. john lived after all the 
Mortuus est joannes. A. D. 99  Apostles: it followeth of necessity, that the Ecclesiastical jurisdiction of the whole world, remained in Saint john, after the death of Peter, and the other Apostles. So then, if the Bishop of Rome, will have indeed any such prerogative, as he falsely pretendeth to have, he must bring and show us his commission from S. john, and not from S. Peter: for S john being the survivor, had all jurisdiction 
Let this be well marked.  in himself. And if the late Bishops of Rome, can show us such a commission from Saint john, viz that Saint john translated and committed his whole power, authority and jurisdiction to the Bishop of Rome, and his successors, I for my part, will willingly yield obedience to the same, not otherwise. For I require the Pope's charter from S. john.  Theoph. 
This is wonderful which you say: and yet you prove the same so pithily, as I must, perforce, yield thereunto. I will proceed, by your favour, to be resolved in other doubts.  Remig. 
Leave nothing unsaid, which possibly can be devised, or advised for the supposed prerogatives of your Pope.   

Objection fourth.  Theoph. 
The Apostle telleth us that the Church cannot 
1 Tim. 3. v. 15.  err, and he proves it, because it is the pillar and ground of truth.  Remig. 
It is true, that the Apostle saith so: and myself do willingly admit the doctrine, and humbly reverence the same. I most willingly grant that Christ's church cannot err in matters of faith, we differ not in the nature 
we differ not in the thing, but in the modification thereof.  of the thing (markewel my words) but in the modification and application of the thing: that is to say, wèe all grant on all sides, that the Church cannot err; but we differ in the application of our grant, what Church it is that cannot err: what Church mean you M. Theophilus?  Theoph. 
I mean, as all Catholics do, of the Pope and Church of Rome.  Remig. 
I told you that you are but bastards and deformed Catholics, as your own Capuchéenes do tell your deformed Franciscans: and withal I tell you that the Pope or Church of Rome (which is with Papists, all one) hath, de facto, erred egregiously as is already proved: Nay, it is unpossible that the Apostle should mean of your Pope or Church of Rome. I prove it many ways. First because the famous Popish Doctor, johannes Gersonus, hath freely told us, (as we have heard already related) the the Bishop of Rome hath, de facto, erred, not only in his private opinion but also in his public and judicial definitions: & that therefore we have no infallible judge upon earth saving these two. viz. the whole Congregation of the faithful, and a general Council sufficiently representing the same: where I wish you to mark attentively, the word (Sufficiently) because it is very emphatical, ● of great moment. Secondly, because the Popish Doctor Sylvester Pryeras, a divine so learned, that he is by them so named (Absolutus Theologus) confirmeth the opinion and doctrine of M. Gerson, the famous Chancellor of Paris, in these express words; Et sic intellige glossam 
sylvest de Eccles. §. 4.  dicentem, quod Ecclesia quae errare non potest, dicitur non papa, sed congregatio fidelium, quae scilicet tenet fidem quam Petrus eum aliis populis docuit: And thus 
Lo, not the Pope, but the congregation of the faithful is 3. the church that cannot err.  must the gloss be understood, which saith, that the Church which cannot err is not the Pope, but the congregation of the faithful; that is, such as hold firmly that faith, which Peter with other (godly) people taught. Thirdly, because Panormitanus, that famous Popish Canonist, Abbot, Archbishop, & Cardinal, for he was all four, and therefore of high esteem with the Pope and Church of Rome, jumpeth with the other learned Papists, Gerson 
Panorm. de elect cap. significasti. Cers idem. docet. p. 1. de exam. doctrine.  and Sylvester, and stoutly confirmeth their doctrine: These are his express words: Name in concernentibus sidem, etc. For concerning matters of faith, even the judgement of one that is a mere lay-man ought to be preferred before the sentence of the Pope: if that lay-man could bring Better reasons out of the old and new Testament, than 
Seo the antepast. pag. 173. 175▪ 177.  did the Pope. And it skilleth not, if one say, that a Council cannot err, because Christ prayed for his Church, that it should not fail: for I say, that although a general Council represent the whole universal Church: yet in truth, there is not truly the universal Church, but representatively: For the universal Church (which is it that cannot err) consisteth of the collection of all the faithful: 
Oh that this learned man durst have spoken out.  Whereupon all the faithful in the world, make this Church universal, whereof Christ is the head. The Pope is the vicar of Christ, but not truly the head of the Church, as noteth the gloss upon the Clementines, which gloss saith notably, that when the Pope is dead, the Church wanteth not an head, and this is that Church which cannot err: whereupon it is possible, that the true faith of Christ might remain in one alone, and so it may be truly said, that the faith faileth not in the Church. Christ before his passion prayed for Peter, that his faith should not fail: therefore the Church is not said to fail, neither to err so long as the true faith abideth in one only: thus writeth this famous and learned papist. Fourthly, because 
●  the Pope's own dear gloss upon his own d●●rées, doth most lively describe that Church which cannot err, to be the Congregation of the faithful: for thus is it there written in express terms; Quaero de qua Ecclesia intelligas, quod hic dicitur, quod non possit errare? si de ipso 
Caus. 24. quaest 1. arecta, 〈◊〉 glosia.  Papa, certum est quod Papa errare potest: respondeo, ipsa congregatio fidelium hic dicitur Ecclesia, & talis Ecclesia non potest non esse: I ask thee (O Pope Leuci,) of what Church thou understandest that, which thou tellest us in this place? to wit, that the Church cannot err? for, if thou understand it of the Pope himself, it is certain that the Pope may err: I therefore answer, that the Church is here taken for the congregation of the faithful, and such a Church can never err (indeed.) Fiftly, because 
●  the popish ceremonial practice in the holy week, while they put out all the candles save one, doth lively express unto us, that the Church of Rome, and Bishop there, may err indeed: for thereby the romish Church doth give us to understand, that the light of faith was extinguished 
Vide Dur. in ration●.  in all generally, save only in the blessed virgin Mary, (that most holy mother of true God and true man) and so their usual yearly practice three days together in the week afore Easter, doth utterly condemn the faith of the Pope and of the Church of Rome. Sixthly, because S. Austen and S. Anselm do both of them so expound 
● Tim. 3. v. 15.  S. Paul's words, the ground of this objection: these are S. Austin's express words; secundum ergo sabbathi etc. therefore we may not understand the second of the sabbath, to be any other than the Church of Christ, yet the Church of Christ in the saints; the Church of Christ in those which are not overcome with the temptations of this wicked 
Aug. in Ps. 47. in pref.  world, for they are worthy the name of Firmament, therefore the Church of Christ is called the Firmament, in those that are firm; which is (saith he) the Church of the living God, the pillar and Firmament of truth. The like saying hath the same holy father in many other places, but especially where he writeth against the Donatists. 
Vide Aug. lib. 7. de bapt. c. 51. tom. ●.  Anselmus an ancient father, and well approved of the papists, doth follow Saint Austin's interpretation: these are his words; Domus in qua Deus habitat etc. the house in which God dwelleth, is the whole congregation of the faithful, who are to be taught diversly: and the same Church is in the perfect a pillar, that is, sublime, strait, inconcussible, supporting & lifting up the younger sort: and in the same perfect, it is the firmament of truth, 
Ansel. in. 1. tim. 3. v 15.  because in words and examples, it confirmeth in the hearts of the weak, the verity of faith, and Gods commandments. Out of this discourse of these holy fathers, & famous Popish writers, I gather these golden observations. First 
●  that a mere lay-man's judgement even in matters of faith, aught to be received before the Pope's resolution, if that 
Gerson part. 1. de examine doctrine.  lay-man bring better reasons out of the scripture than the Pope doth: and M. Gerson, that famous chancellor of Paris, stoutly def●deth this point with their Cardinal Panormitanus, where I wish by the way, to remember well, that hence it is proved, that not only mere laymen may be heard in counsels, and their judgements preferred 
Jesuits Antepast. pag. 134.  before the Popes; but also that the scriptures are the rule of our faith; not partial, as Bellarmine would have it (whose opinion is disproved in the Jesuits Antepast) but total and in every respect. Secondly, that a general council may err, because it is not the Catholic or universal Church indeed. And here I think it very fit to reduce to your remembrance, what I told you afore out of M. Gerson, viz. that we have only two judges upon earth, which are infallible, that is, not the Pope forsooth, or the Church of Rome, but the whole congregation of the faithful, and a general council: but what general council? of Trent? of Lateran? of Florence? of Ravenna? of Ferrara? of Rome? No, no, such are provincial, 
Mark this point well.  or at the most, national, not any one of them, or such like truly general: for) as M. Doctor Gerson very learnedly told us) that Council which cannot err, must not only be general in what sort soever, or sworn to defend the Pope's canon-law, after the manner of late startup Popery; but it must be such a general Council as doth sufficiently represent the whole Church or congregation of the faithful: for the word (sufficiently) which I wished you afore to mark, out of M. Gersons' doctrine, is very emphatical, and giveth light both to the truth, and to Panormitans doctrine, which word, if it be not well marked, there will seem a variance between the two learned Papists, Panormitan and Gerson: for the one of them saith, that a general council may err, and it is true: the other saith that a general council cannot err, but is the second infallible judge upon earth, and this is also true, but in a different respect: both the learned men agree 
See the antepast. 172.  in this, and myself with them, that the whole congregation of the faithful is that Church, which cannot err in faith: for, though the elect may err in part, and at some time, yet shall they never err, either all generally, or any one finally: for whom, and in respect of whom, the Church is rightly called the pillar of truth: this is only it, in which they vary; which is no true variance indeed, but seemeth so in show of words: for that Council which 
Mark well this point.  sufficiently (mark the word) doth represent the whole congregation of the faithful, (when and where such a one can be had,) may truly be called the Catholic Church militant here on earth. Thirdly, that that Church 
The body of Christ, which the wicked are not. Ephe. 2. v. 22 23.  which cannot err, is not the visible company of Bishops and Priests, Pastors, and Doctors; but the society of the predestinate, which are effectually called to the knowledge of the truth. Fourtly, that it is the society and congregation of the faithful, which the Apostle calleth the pillar of truth: and neither the Pope, nor his Cardinals, nor yet the Church of Rome, albeit (M. Theophilus) 
1. Tim 3. 15  ye know it right well, that when the papists speak of the Church, and tell us it cannot err, then do ye mean either your Pope alone, or the Pope with his Cardinals and others of that crew. Fifthly, that the Popes own dear Doctors have told his holiness roundly, that it is not the Pope that cannot err, but the congregation of the faithful: If any man should this day tell the Pope this tale, burning with fire and faggot would soon be his reward: howbeit, such their books are yet extant in many men's hands: for which benefit, God's name be blessed, 
Ps. 118. v. 23  for it is his handy work: we have cause to cry a loud with the Prophets; Hoc factum est a Domino, & est mirabile in oculis nostris.   

Oblection. 4.  Theoph. 
Christ promised to be with his Apostles unto 
Mat 28. v. 20. Esa. 59 2●. jere. 33. v, 20.  the world's end: which must needs understood of the Bishops of Rome, the only true successors of the Apostles: for seeing the Apostles departed hence long sithence, it must, perforce, be understood of some Bishop, which finally succeed them.  Remig. 
True it is, and more cannot be inferred of the text, that Christ spoke not only of the Apostles, but even of them also, who should be living unto the world's end. Howbeit, he meant neither the Bishop of Rome, nor his Cardinals, nor the Church of Rome: what meant he then, (will you say) or of whom did he speak of, seeing the Apostles, being mortal, were to go the way of all flesh, and so could not be here on earth till the world's end? Christ therefore promising to be with them to the world's end, must perforce mean of those who were to succeed after them: but I answer withal facility: to this invincible so supposed Bulwark, First, with S. Chrysostome 
Chrysost. in cap 5. M●●. hom 15. Tom. 1.  in these words: nam cum dicit, ecce ego vobiscum sum omnibus diebus usque ad consummationem seculi; non ad eos tantum loquitur, sed per eos ad universum prorsus orbem: for when he saith; behold, I am with you always until the end of the world; he speaketh not only to them, but to all, doubtless, that are in the whole world. and the like assertions the same golden-mouthed father hath in many other places of his works. Secondly, with S. Austen in these words; non itaque sic dictum est Apostolis, eritis mihi testes in Jerusalem, & in tota judaea, 
Aug. in ep. 90. 4. 23 8.  & Samaria, & usque ad extremum terrae etc. it is not therefore so said to the Apostles, ye shall be my witnesses in Jerusalem, and in all jury, and in Samaria, 
Maike well these unanswerable testimonies  and even to the utmost parts of the world, as if they only to whom he then spoke, should have accomplished so great a matter, but as he seemeth to have said only to them, that which he said in these words: behold, I am with you to the world's end: which thing nevertheless every one perceineth, that the spoke it to the universal Church, which by the death of some, and by the birth of other some, shall continue to the world's end; even as he saith that to them, which doth nothing at all pertain to them, and yet is it spoken, as if it only pertained to them, to wit, 
Mat. 24. v. 33.  when ye shall see these things come to pass, know that it is near in the doors: for, to whom doth this pertain, but to those who shall then be living, when all things shall be accomplished? Thus writeth Saint Austen, out of whose words with S●int Chrysostoms', I observe this memorable doctrine: viz, that this objection, wherein the papists glory more than a little, maketh nothing for them: for (as say those holy fathers) these words already recited, 〈◊〉 spoken to the whole congregation of the faithful, which are or shall be to the world's end: and Saint A●ston proveth it by two reasons. First, because not only the Apostles, but others together with them, should be his witnesses in Jerusalem and Samaria, albeit Christ spoke that of them, touching the being witnesses of him, as he spoke this to them concerning his spiritual presence, & therefore as he spoke the other to all the faithful, so did he also this, that is, promised his invisible presence, not only to the Apostles or Pastors of the Church, but even to all the faithful in the world. Secondly, because Christ spoke that to his Apostles, as pertaining only to them, which for all that did nothing at all concern them: as if he had said, it is not a good reason, to deny Christ's presence to the whole Church, because he uttered the words only to the Apostles: for, seeing he spoke that to the Apostles, which pertained nothing to them, but only and solely to others, much more might he speak y● to them, which betongeth to them with others.  

The first reply.  Theoph. 
Christ himself saith, that the holy Ghost shall teach the Apostles all truth; even many things, whereof they were not capable then: and therefore did he reserve 
joh. 16. v. 13. joh. 14. v. 16.  those things, till▪ the coming of the holy Ghost, who should continue with them for ever for that end.  Remig. 
I answer, that the holy Ghost, after Christ's ascension, taught the Apostles all truth indeed, of such 
The holy Ghost taught no new doctrine, but only reucaled the true sense of such things as the Apostles did not understand.  things as he had reserved by reason of their ●udity and imperfection in conceiving heavenly doctrine: but withal▪ I say; that those things so reserved, and the truth so taught, was nothing else but a manifest explication of the self same verity, which they in brief before had heard: For, the holy Ghost did coin no new doctrine, nor reveal any new articles of faith; but only taught the Apostles the true sense of Christ's words, which afore for their dullness they were not able to perceive: which sense, they being directed by the instinct of the holy Ghost, delivered to the whole world, First by word, and afterward by writing. This mine answer thus explicated, I prove by two evident demonstrations: First, because Christ himself doth 
joh. 14. v. 16.  so expound himself, in these words following: (He shall teach you all things, and bring all things to your remembrance which I have told you), Which assertion must be 
It is the self same doctrine, but more plainly declared.  well noted, because the latter words are a plain declaration of the former: as if Christ had said, all things which the holy Ghost shall teach the Apostles after my departure, are no new doctrine, but the very same things which they heard afore of me. This only difference there is, that the Apostles do more plainly understand them, by the assistance of the holy Ghost. Secondly, because the best learned Popish Doctors, do constantly de●end the same doctrine, and this mine exposition. For the famous schoolman , and great learned Popish Bishop, Melchior Canus, hath these express words; Nec ullas in fide no●as Revelationes Ecclesia habet: For the Church hath no new revelations 
Canus de lec●s. lib. 3. c. 4. pag. 101.  in matters of faith. Thus teacheth Christ himself: and thus their ●●i●e learned Bishop affirmeth: and yet will the Papists porfor●e compel us daily to admit new doctrines from the Church of Rome.   

The second reply.  Theoph. 
Christ promiseth the continuance of the holy 
〈◊〉▪ 14. vet. 16.  Ghost, even after the death of the Apostles. ergo, he meaneth of their successors aswell as of themselves.  Remig. 
I answer that Christ promiseth the presence of 
Mat. 28. ver. ●0.  the holy Ghost here, as he did afore, his own presence to the world's end, and so one and the same answer may fitly serve to both, to wit, that the holy Ghost is promised to the whole congregation of the faithful: the Doctors of Paris are all of the same opinion.   

The third reply.  Theoph. 
Christ commanded the people to do whatsoeever 
Mat. 23. ver. 2. 3.  the Scribes and Pharisees willed them to observe, and this he did for this respect only, because the Scribes and Pharisees sat in Moses chair: But doubtless, if they sitting in Moses chair could have erred, Christ would never have commanded his disciples and the people so strictly to observe their doctrine: and none will, or can deny, that to sit in Peter's chair, hath as great prerogative every way, as to sit in Moses chair: ergo, the Pope that now sits in Peter's chair at Rome, can never teach false doctrine.  Remig. 
I answer: first, by the Pope's own decrees in 
dist. 42. cap. multi Sacerdotes.  these express words: Multi Sacerdotes, & pauci Sacerdotes, multi in nomine, & pauci in opere. Videte ergo fratres, quomodo sedetis super cathedram, quia non cathedra facit Sacerdotem, sed Sacerdos cathedram. Non locus sanctificat hominem, sed homo sanctificat locum. Non omnis Sacerdos sanctus, sed omnis sanctus est Sacerdos, qui bene sederit super cathedram, honorem accipit cathedrae, qui malè sederit, iniuriam facit cathedrae. Many Priests and few Priests, many in name, & few in work: therefore my brethren, beware how you sit upon the chair: for not the chair makes the Priest, but the Priest makes the chair: the place doth not sanctify the man, but the man sanctifies the place: every Priest is not a holy man, but every holy man is a Priest: he that shall sit well in the chair, receives the honour of the chair: but he that sits evil doth injury to the chair. Thus saith the Pope's own decree. I add nothing, I change nothing: I will deal sincerely, upon my salvation. Would to God the Pope and his jesuited Popelings, did this day put this decree 
The faithful dealing of the Author.  in practice Christianly. Let not the Popes henceforth, boast of sitting in Peter's chair. Let them remember that they be many in name, but few in work: they have not this hundred years, preached an hundred Sermons. What say I? an hundred Sermons? for so far as I can learn not one at all: therefore as the Popes own Canons tell us, the Popes did honour Saint Peter's chair. Secondly with Saint Austen, in these express words: sedendo Cathedram Moysi, legem Dei docent; ergo per 
Aug. tract. 46. in Ioh, an▪ in medi● Rome 9  illos Deus docet: sua vero si illi docere velint, nolite audire, nolite facere: sitting in the chair of Moses, they teach the law of God; therefore God teacheth by them: but if they will needs teach their own inventions & fantasies, then hear them not, do not as they bid you do. Thirdly with Saint Hilary in these words: cum igitur doctrina Pharisaeorum ob id probabi●is esse docetur, quia ipsi in Moysi Cathedra sederunt, doctrina necessatio significatur 
Hylar. in Psal. 118. Pag. 698.  in Cathedra: seeing therefore, that the doctrine of the pharisees is for that proved probable, because they sat in the chair of Moses; therefore by the chair, doctrine must of necessity be signified. Thus write these two ancient and most learned fathers: by whose judgements it is very clear and evident, that the chair of Moses, and the doctrine of Moses, is all one: and consequently, 
Mark this doctrine, and forget it not.  that not they who occupy the room of Moses, or Peter, are to be followed, but they that teach the doctrine of Moses and Peter are to be heard, and their commandments must be done: and ce●tes, if ever the Bishops of Rome, (the late Popes I mean,) shall be able to prove that they preach no otherwise then Saint Peter did, (if first they preach at all) nor decree or command no otherwise then Saint Peter or Saint Paul did, I will obey them, I will with a beck, do as they command me. Fourthly, I answer with popish Friar Lyra, (whom Sir Thomas 
Lyr. in cap. 23. Mat.  Moor called a great Clerk, & the Pope so esteemeth his writings,) in these express words: omnia quaecunque dix●rint vobis, facite, q via Praelatis etiam malis est obediendum, nisi in his quae sunt manifestè contra Deum: do all things that they shall say unto you, because we must obey even those Prelates that be evil, unless they teach plainly against God. Fifthly, with Dionysius Carthusianus, 
Carth in cap 23. Mat.  in these very words: hoc est absolutê & universaliter intelligendum, quia Scribae & Pharisaei multa superstitiosa & falsa docuerunt, corrumpentes scripturam, & irritum facientes verbum Dei per suas traditiones: intelligendum est ergo de Predicatoribus eorum, non contrarijs legi Moysimalis: enim Praesidentibus obediendum est, quādi● non docent nec iubent contraria Deo: this must not be understood absolutely and generally, because the Scribes and pharisees taught many superstitious and false things, corrupting the Scripture, and making frustrate the word of God with their traditions: we must therefore understand it of their Preachers, which teach nothing contrary to the Law of Moses: for we must obey evil Rulers, so long as they neither teach nor command against God. Thus write Lyranus and Carthusianus, two famous Popish Friars, teaching the self sane doctrine, with the holy Fathers, Saint Austen and Saint Hylary: viz, that we must believe those Preachers and teachers, that teach the same doctrine which Moses thought, & that that is to fit in the chair of Moses, but not barely to occupy the place.   

The fourth Reply.  Theoph. 
God commanded to obey the Priests, and 
Deut. 17. ● 9 10. 11.  not to serve in any one jot from their doctrine, by turning either to the right hand or to the left: this argument seemeth to me to be unanswerable.  Remig. 
Mark well my answer, and then you will say it is of no force: I answer thus, that the Priests of Moses' law might e●●e, and did, de facto, err indeed: which conclusion I have already proved, out of the doctrine of the Scribes and Pharisees: for, they were not only wicked men in life and conversation, but they also seduced the people, taught false doctrine, and corrupted 
Popery is plainly confuted by her own doctors.  the pure word of God: which point, because it is a thing of great consequence, I will endeavour myself by God's help, to make it plain unto you. And because nothing is or can be of greater force against the papists then to confute their doctrine by the testimony of their own approved Doctors, I will after my wont manner, allege the express words of approved papists, who were very dear unto your Pope: Nicolaus Lyranus, 
Lyr. in cap. 17 deuter.  (who hath written very learned commentaries upon the whole Bible, the old and new Testament,) a zealous popish Friar, hath these words; hic dicit glos●a Hebraica, si dixerint tibi, quod dextra sit sinistra, vel sinistra dextra, talis sententia est tenenda; quod patet manifestè falsum, quia sententia nullius hominis cuiuscunque sit authoritatis, est tenenda, si contineat manifestatè falsitatem, vel errorem. 
Lo, papistry is confuted by Papists even of the best sort.  Et hoc patet, period quod permittitur in textu Postea subditur, et docuerint te juxta legem eius, ex quo patet, quod si dicant falsum, et declinent a lege Dei manifestè, non sunt audiendi. Here saith the Hebrew gloss, if they shall say to thee, that the right hand is the left, or the left hand the right, such sentence is to be holden, which thing appeareth manifestly false: for, no man's sentence, of how great authority soever he be, must be holden or obeyed if it manifestly contain falsehood, or error: & this is manifest by that which goeth before in the text, they shall show to thee the truth of judgement. It followeth in the Author; and they shall teach thee according to his law. Hereupon it is clear; that if they teach falsely, and serve from the law of God manifestly, then are they not to be heard or followed. Thus writeth this learned Popish Doctor: out of whose words, well worthy to be engraven in golden letters, I note these memorable observations. First, that our Papists now a days are so gross, and senseless, as were the old jewish Rabbins, as who labour this day to enforce us to believe the Pope, though he err never so grossly; telling us that chalk is cheese, and the left hand the right. Secondly, that Nicholaus de Lyra, a great learned Papist, (whose authority is a mighty argument against the Papists) doth here expressly condemn the gross error of the Hebrew Doctors, and in them the impudent error of all Jesuits and Romish Parasites, who to satisune the humour of their Pope, and to uphold his Antichristian tyranny, do wrest the holy scripture from the manifest truth thereof. Thirdly, that we must neither believe Bishop nor the Pope of Rome, nor any mortal man of what authority soever, if he teach us contrary to the manifest truth of God's word. Fourthly, that this learned Popish Doctor, doth gather out of the text itself, that the high Priest might err, preach false doctrine, and consequently, that the jesuit Bellarmine doth but flatter the Pope's holiness, when he bestirreth himself to prove out of this place, that the Bishop's ●f Rome cannot err, because the jewish Bishops had the like privilege, and could not teach against the truth. The same Doctor Lyra delivereth the same doctrine in effect in another place, where he hath these words: We vobis Scribae: hic ostendit qualiter corrumpebant veritatem doctrinae, in his quae pertinent ad salutem: Dicebant enim quod observare legem erat necessarium omnibus ad salutem, quod falsum est, quia multi gentiles sunt saluati, ut job & plures alij: ex suppositione autem huius falsi, discurrebant alioqui doctores Hebraei per diversas civitates & castra, 
Lyra. in cap. 23. Mat.  ut possent convertere aliquos de Gentilitate ad judaismum: Woe to you Scribes: here he showeth how they 
The jewish Church erred in matters of faith  corrupted the truth of doctrine: even in those things which pertain to salvation: for they said, that the keeping of the law was necessary for all men unto salvation, which is false, because many Gentiles are saved, as job and sundry others: by reason of this false supposition, some Hebrew doctors wandered through divers Cities & Towns, that so they might convert some from Gentility to judaisine again. The same Lyra hath these words: Vae vobis 
Lyra ubi super.  D●ces caeci: hic consequenter ostendit, qualiter corrumpebant veritatem doctrinae, in his quae pertinent ad actum latr●ae, cuius actus est jurare modo debito, & juramentum observare: Pharisaei enim & Scribae ex cupiditate moti, dicebant, quod illi qui iurabant per templum Dei, nec peccabant, nec erant in aliquo obligati, sed illi qui iurabant per aurum Templi, erant obligati ad soluendum Sacerdotibus certam portionem auri: Woe to you blind guides: here he showeth consequently, how they corrupted the truth of doctrine, in those things which pertain to the pure and proper worship of God, the act whereof is to swear after a due manner, and to perform the oath: for the Scribes & Pharisees ●●oued with covetousness, said, that they who did swear by the Temple of God, neither sinned, neither were bound to do any thing, but they who did swear by the gold of the Temple, were bound to give some portion of gold to the Priests: Dyonisius Carthusianus another zealous, famous, and learned papist, defendeth the same doctrine: these are his own words: 
Carthus. 23. cap. Mat.  Non sinitis intrare, quia falsa doctrina & pravis exemplis pervertitis eos: sequitur, qui dicitis, quicunque iuraverit per Templum, nihil est, id est, solucre non tenetur, & fi peieret, non erit criminis reus: You do not suffer them to come in, for you prevent them with false doctrine, and evil example: you say, whosoever sweareth by the Temple, it is nothing, that is to say, he is not bound to keep his o●th, and if he be forsworn, he shall not be guilty of 
Call't in cap. 17. deut. Canus lib. 3. c●p ult. pag. 106.  any crime: yea, Caietanus the famous▪ Cardinal of Rome, teacheth the self same doctrine with the other papists: and Melchior Canus a very famous popish Bishop, and profound school Doctor hath these words: Fatemur Sacerdotes n● esse audiendos, nisi docuerint juxta legem Domini: We grant (saith the famous and best learned papist of all the rest) that the Priests ought not to be heard, or obeyed, unless they shall preach and teach according to God's law: thus we see or may see if we hide not our eyes, that by the judgement of these great papists, the Bishops and Priests of the old law, did not only scandalise the people with their wicked life, but also taught false doctrine, & corrupted the holy scripture: and it is a wonder to see and consider, the palpable blindness or else malice of our jesuited papists: for, the very words of the law, (if we mark them well) do plainly express and lively set before our eyes, the true sense and meaning thereof, viz, that we must then obey the Priests, & then hearken to their commands, when they teach according to God's law, but not when they wrest and corrupt his holy and sacred word: the words of the text are these: & facies quodcunque dixerint, qui praesunt loco quem elegerit 
Deut. 17. v. 10.  Dominus, & docuerint te juxta legem eius: And thou shalt do whatsoever they shall say, which are over that place which the Lord hath chosen, and shall teach thee according to his law. Lo this condition is required, that the Priests do teach God's law: for these words are taken out of the Latin vulgata editio, which the late Council of Trent preferreth before the Hebrew and the Greek▪ and strictly tieth all papists to the same.   

The fifth reply.  Theoph. 
The words do not import any condition, but a mere assertion and flat promise, that they shall not err: 
Mal. 2. v. 7.  for so teacheth the Prophet Malachi: Labiae Sacerdotis custodient scientiam, & legem requirent ex ore eius, quia Angelus Domini exercitnum est: The Priest's lips shall keep knowledge, and they shall seek the law at his mouth, for he is the Angel of the Lord of hosts.  Remig. 
I answer: first, that the words in Deuteronomie do plainly insinuate, or rather emphatically express a conditional precept: for, in the ninth verse, the people are charged to ask council of the Priests and judges, and in the tenth verse, the Priests are charged to teach according to God's law: as if God had said, in all 
Deut. 17. v. 9 v. 10.  thy difficult and distressed cases, thou shalt have recourse to my Priests, because I have given them in charge, to teach and instruct thee in the true sense and meaning of my law: if there arise, saith the text, a matter too hard for thee in judgement, thou shalt come to the Priests, who are appointed to do justice, and to tell the true meaning of the law. Secondly, that the Prophet Malachi is not repugnant to holy Moses, but giveth his readers to understand, that the Priest's office is to know the law, and truly to teach the people the same: so as we may clearly note a condition required at the Priest's hand, but can find no promise made unto him, that he shall accomplish 
Deut. 17. v. 8. 9 10.  and perform the same: nay, it is evident many ways, that the Priests had no promise made, that they should ever teach the law truly. First, because the scripture telleth us every where, how grossly and shamefully the Priests have erred: that which we have heard already of the Scribes and pharisees, may be a sufficient testimomony and trial thereof. Secondly, because the next words following in the text, will make mine exposition good: these are the express words of the Prophet, but ye are gone out of the way, ye have caused many to fall by the 
Mal. 2. v. 8. Note this well.  law, ye have broken the covenant of Levi, saith the Lord of hosts. Mark these words well: so soon as the Prophet hath tolo us, that the Priests lips shall keep knowledge, by and by he addeth but the Priests are gone out of the way, they have scandalised many by the law, they have broken the covenant of Levi: as if he had said, the Priests indeed should know the law, and teach the people the truth thereof, but they do nothing less, they have scandalised God's people, they are gone out of the 
Mal. 2. v. 8.  way, they have broken the covenant of Levi. Where we must note seriously, these words of the Prophet (but ye have broken the covenant of Levi) for, in that he saith, ye have broken the covenant, he plainly giveth us to understand, that the Priests had not performed the condition required at their hands, and implied in the covenant of Levi. Thirdly, because the text in Deuteronomie, speaketh aswell of the political and civil 
Deut. 17. v. 9 10. Deut. 10. 12. Exod. 28. 4  judge, as of the Priest, which Bellarmine your popish Cardinal cannot deny: and yet, that the civil judge may err, all, both jesuits and other Priests will confess. Fourtly, because in an other place of the law, the same promise that is here made to the Priests (which I call 
Leu. 26. 3. 25. Deut. 28. 1. Deut. 16. v. 18.  a condition required and implied in the covenant of Levi) is made generally to all civil judges and Officers. Thess are the words: judges & Officers shalt thou make thee in all thy Cities, and they shall judge the people with righteous 
Deut. chap 16, v 18.  judgement. Where I note by the way, the falsehood of the Latin vulgata editio: which the late popish Council of Trent extolleth above the Greek and Hebrew: 
Deut. 17. v, 10, 11. Mal. 2. v, 7.  for, in the Chapter next afore, the text saith thus: Vt iudicent populum, that they may judge the people: but in the Chapter, which the papists cite for them, it is thus: and they shall teach the people: and in the Prophet Malachi, thus: and the Priests lips shall keep knowledge: and yet in the Hebrew text (which is the fountain and original) the word (and) is in every place: which the Papists guilefully change into the word (that) in the 16. 
Deut. 16. 18  Chapter: so to make their matter good, if it would or could be: but let (v●) be made (et) as it is in the Hebrew, and the question is at an end. For, as it is said of the Priests that they shall teach the truth, so is it said of the civil judges & officers, that they shall judge the people righteously: and 
This point must be remembered.  yet do their adversaries grant that it is a condition in the civil judges, and no promise at all: and that therefore they may fail in doing justice, and swar●e from the truth therein: so than this is the truth of the question, that where the Scripture saith, the Priests shall teach the Law, and the judges minister justice: it hath no other sense and meaning, but that their charge & office requireth so 
Deut. 16. 18.  much at their hands: there is a condition implied of doing, but no promise made of performing: and the Latin vulgata edit●o, doth plainly insinuate this interpretation. Though the papists conceive no such thing, these are the express words: judices & Magistratus constitues, etc. ut iudicent populum justo judicio, nec in alteram partem declinent: Thou shalt make judges and Magistrates in all thy Cities which the Lord thy God giveth thee, throughout thy Tribes, and they shall judge the people with righteous judgement, saith the Hebrew text: that they may judge the people with righteous judgement, and not decline into the other part, saith the popish Latin text: where every child may discern a condition implied, but no promise of 
Deut, 17, 9 Mal. 2. 8.  performing the same. Fiftly, because as the Priests are said to teach the law, so are the people said to require the law of them: and consequently if it be a condition in the one, it is so in the other, and semblably if a promise in the one, a promise also in the other.   

The 6. reply.  Theoph. 
The Apostle telleth us, that Christ hath put 
Ephes 4. v. 11 13 14.  Pastors & Doctors in his Church, unto the end, that henceforth we be no more children, wavering and carried about with every wind of doctrine, ergo, it seemeth that the Pastors of the Church shall ever teach the truth.  Remig. 
This text (as the others of Deuteronomie and Malachi) insinuateth a condition of doing, but no promise at all of performing.   

The 7. reply.  Theoph. 
God gave Pastors and Teachers to his Church for this end, that they should not be carried away with false doctrine. But if all persons have erred, as you affirm, 
Ephes. 4. v. 14.  then in vain did God give Pastors to his Church, to preserve his▪ people in the truth. For they that should have taught the truth, did even themselves serve from the truth; and so they became unfit instruments to do the will of God.  Remig. 
I answer: first, that albeit Gods will be one, as himself is one, willing, by his own essence, and by 
God's will is his essence.  one eternal and immutable act whatsoever he willeth; yet is his will said to be manifold, aswell of the holy Fathers, as of the Schooledoctors: and this is done for two special considerations. The former is, by reason of the variety of the things which God willeth. The latter, for the variety of the manner by which God seemeth to will things. Here upon arise many divisions of Gods will, assigned by the learned for explication sake. Some divide Gods will into antecedent and consequent. Some others divide it into the will of sign, and will of good pleasure. Others, into the will revealed, and will secret or not revealed. Others into the will absolute and will conditionate, and the like. Secondly, that though Gods will consequent, and will of good pleasure, be ever accomplished undoubtedly; yet is his will antecedent, and will of sign, oftentimes neglected and left undone. Of the former will, the Prophet speaketh thus: Whatsoever pleased the Lord, that did he in heaven, and in earth, in the Sea 
Psa. 46 80. Ps. 155. 6. Rom. 9 19  and in all the depths. And the Apostle saith: For who hath resisted his will? Of the latter we have many examples in the holy Scriptures: God commanded Pharaoh to let his people go, but Pharaoh would not obey. God would 
Exo. 4. 22. 23 Mat. 23 v. 37.  have gathered the jews together, even as the Hen gathereth her Chickens under her wings, but they would not have it so. God would have all men saved, as the holy Apostle witnesseth; and yet we know by the holy Gospel, that the greater part shall be damned. Thirdly, that Gods will now objected, is only Voluntas signi (his 
1 Tim. 2. v. 4. Mat. 20. v. 16.  will of sign) and not voluntas beneplaciti (his will of good pleasure) and therefore it can never be effectually concluded out of this Scripture, that the Pastors of the visible Church do always teach the truth, and never serve from the same: for the Apostle speaketh indefinitely, and indifferently of all Teachers, and of all hearers, of all shepherds and of all sheep, neither excepting one nor other; and yet both you know, and I know, that many Preachers preach false doctrine, and that many hearers embrace the same: whereupon it followeth of necessity, that if the Apostle should mean as you would have him to mean; then should Christ's intent and purpose be frustrate in very deed, which for all that, is it that yourselves impugn. The Apostle therefore meaneth only 
Genuinu● loci sensus.  this, viz. that Christ showeth, voluntate signi, what he would have his shepherds and sheep to do, and what is their duty to do, although his voluntas beneplaciti, do not ever cause the same to be accomplished.   

The 8. reply.  Theoph. 
You have fully satisfied me, and proved very pithily that the Priests commonly serve from the truth. But I think it impossible for you to prove that the high Priest in the law did err at any time.  Remig. 
What? impossible say you? it is a thing so far 
Exod. 32. v 4. 5. 6.  from being impossible, that I am able to effect it with all facility. Aaron was the high Priest in the law, and yet erred he most grossly and egregiously, while he taught the people flat Idolatry, telling them that the molten Calves brought them out of the Land of Egypt.  Theoph. 
Aaron indeed consented to Idolatry, and made the molten Calf, but the text saith not, that he taught Idolatry.  Remig. 
This is Cosen-german to that of the Pope's double person. ye have heard of a Bishop of Rome, that said right learnedly; that he that can hinder sin and doth it not, is as much in fault as he that doth it. Tully that heathen Orator, knew the same even by the sole light of nature. This being so, which the Apostle confirmeth to be 
Rom. 132 Virtually, though not vocally,  true; it followeth by a necessary consequence, that Aaron was guilty of the Idolatry committed: and albeit the text say not that he taught Idolatry vocally: yet doth it plainly insinuate, or rather fully express that he did it virtually and effectually. For, first, when the people required him to make them Gods, he did not reprove them, but 
Exod. 32, v 1, 2. 3. 4. 5. 6, ●5.  roundly consented to them, where, and when he should have vocally told them the Law, the truth whereof by silence he bewrayed. Again, the people said openly, these be thy Gods, O Israel, which brought thee out of the land of Egypt: and yet Aaron was so far from preaching against that heretical assertion, that thereupon he built an Altar before the Calf, and proclaimed, saying, to morrow shall be the holy day of the Lord: as if he had said, your doctrine is my doctrine, your faith, my faith, your opinion mine opinion: I practically show it in building this Altar before the Calf, and in proclaiming to morrow to be holiday. Thirdly, the text saith plainly that Aaron made the people naked, and consequently, that he erred in his doctrine. Fourthly, because not the high Priest only, but all the Priests of the Consistory at Jerusalem, 
Deut. 17. ●. 10. 11.  together with the devil judges, were assigned to declare the Law unto the people. Lastly, (and this reason striketh dead) because Caiphas the high Priest erred perniciously and taught most execrable blasphemy, when he 
Mat. 26. v▪ 64. 65.  denied Christ to be the son of God. A true Messias of the world: for as soon as Christ had said (hereafter shall ye see the son of man sitting on the right hand of the 
The high Priest, erred most grossly.  power of God, and come in the clouds of heaven) The high Priest rend his clothes, saying he hath blasphemed, what have we any more need of witnesses? behold, now ye have heard his blasphemy.  Theoph. 
I am fully satisfied in this point. God, (for whose sake ye have taken this great labour) give you reward for the same. Now, if it please you, there is another question or two, which I think unanswerable, I would willingly propound them, if it may stand with your favour.  Remig. 
I see you desirous to know the truth, and therefore I am not weary of any pains taken in that behalf. Let us hear your supposed unanswerable questions, in God's holy name: for whose glory and your good, I will answer sincerely, as before.  Theoph. 
My first question is, of the succession of the Popes of Rome: for no Church is able truly to show their succession, (as the Pope, his Cardinals, and Jesuits tell us) save only the Church of Rome.  Remig. 
I hope in God (though indeed it be not a thing easily done) to make it as plain to you, as I have done the other question, or rather God in me, that our English Church can show a better succession, then can the Church of Rome.     

CHAP. 4. Of the Succession of Bishops in the Church of Rome.  Theophilus. 
NO Church in the universal world is able to show a perpetual succession of her Bishops, without interruption, save only the Church of Rome: and therefore, seeing God hath appointed & placed in his visible Church 
Ephes. 4. v. ●2.  (as the Apostle teacheth us) a conrinual succession of Bishops unto the world's end: the Church of Rome, and none but the Church of Rome, is or can be the true Church of God.  Remig. 
This indeed is a reason so strong in the judgement of Papists, that none living can truly answer the same. Howbeit when the difficulty thereof shall be truly examined to the bottom, it will be found of no force at all, but as light as a feather.  Theoph. 
Will you deny the Apostles doctrine? will you 
Ephes. 4. v. ●2.  not grant (as S. Paul telleth us) that there must be Bishops and Priests in the Church, till the world's end?  Remig. 
I am very willing to grant every truth: neither will I deny that there have been, are, and shall be Bishops and Priests, or Pastors and teachers, in this visible Church militant on earth, until Christ's second advent, and general doom of the world.  Theoph. 
Well, there must be Bishops and Priests, or Pastors and Teachers, (as the Apostle termeth them) even to the consummation of Saints, and end of the world. Now sir, you are not able (say our Doctors, our jesuits, our Cardinals, our Popes) to show or name any Church in the world, but the Church of Rome, which hath always had in it these Pastors and Doctors from Christ's visible departure to this day.  Remig. 
I answer, that succession is of two sorts, to wit, material and formal. Material is of the persons and the places: formal of the faith and doctrine. Touching the succession formal (which is the principal, and from whence the denomination must be derived) the Church of Rome cannot challenge it, as it is already proved: for, 
The Church of Rome wanteth formal succession.  (if ye remember) I have proved both sound and plainly, that many Bishops of Rome, have taught false doctrine, and that not only as private men, but even as public persons in their judicial definitions and decrees: and consequently that the true, proper, and formal succession, can no way be truly verified of the Church of Rome.  Theoph. 
That is very true, which ye now say: it cannot be denied, but still it seemeth true that the material succession pertaineth only to the Church of Rome.  Remig. 
Mark well what I shall sincerely deliver in this behalf. Saint Clement (whose epistles the Papists 
Clem▪ ep, 1. Iren. lib. 3. cap. 3. Epi●h her. 27. ●is seb. lib 3. c. 13. 14. 15.  magnify, when they seem to make for their purpose) testifieth for himself, that Saint Peter appointed him to be his successor. Irenaeus, Epiphanius, Eusebius, and the canon of the Popish Mass, do all with uniform consent place Linus and Cletus before the said Clement. But for all this, Sophronius, Metaphrastes, and the Popish Pontifical▪ which cannot lie, affirm stoutly and peremptorily, that Saint Peter was living after Linus. This variety so troubled the learned Papist Nauclerus, that he 
Naucler. pa●● 3● histor.  was enforced to coin this new and untimely hatched distinction, viz. that Saint Peter did indeed appoint Clement to be his successor; but the said Clement perceiving 
S. Peter's doing is controlled  that it would be a thing pernicious to the Church, if one Bishop should choose another to be his successor; yielded up his right, and so Linus was elected in his room. The bare recital of this imaginary solution, is a sufficient confutation thereof: for (as you see) he taketh upon him to control S. Peter.  Theoph 
This variety among Catholic Writers is strange; and it is more strange, that Clement should alter and change S. Peter's constitution. But it surpasses all the rest, that any thing which S. Peter ordained, could be pernicious to the Church.  Remig. 
This is an evident demonstration (that Romish succession is as a nose of wax, and as uncertain as the wind; but I will show you greater wonders, and by Gods help so unfold the truth of Popish mangled material succession, that you will loathe and detest the same for ever. The famous Papist Onuphrius Panuinius reckoneth up thirty Schisms in the Church of Rome. But I, for the present, content myself with two; whereof their 
Carranz. in spit. council. p. 370. & p. 373.  own dear Friar Bartholomeus Carranza, can instruct them sufficiently. The former Schism endured for the space of 64. years: during which time their godly Popedom was at a union in France, & not one day at Rome, albeit (as ye know) your Pope, Cardinals, and jesuited Popelings bear the world in hand, that God placed their holy, s● supposed, seat at Rome. In the latter Schism of the twain, three of their holy Bishops were Popes at one and the self same time, to wit, john the 24 of that name, Bennet the 13. and Gregory the 12. Out of which discourse▪ two things of great moment are to be observed. First, that it is a mere foolery to challenge any singular prerogative, by Saint Peter's death at Rome. Again, that that succession cannot but be uncertain; which is derived from three Bishops, striving and grinning for the Popedom, as dogs do for a bone.  Theoph. 
The Popes or Bishops of Rome, challenge S. Peter's privileges, because he died at Rome.  Remig. 
What? must Bishop's living 64. years in France, be privileged at Rome, because S. Peter died there? better reason it were, to grant the chéekest prerogative 
The chiefest Bishop died at Jerusalem.  to the Bishops of Jerusalem, because Christ our Lord and master died there.  Theoph. 
Although three did strive at once for the Popedom, yet could there be but one Pope at one and the same time.  Remig. 
Two no small absurdities do perforce arise from hence. The one, that the succession of the Popes of Rome (whereof they glory somuch) is very doubtful and uncertain. The other, that the Church of Rome, was many years without a head; and so by popish doctrine, without an infallible judge in matters of their faith. But I will tell you a greater mystery. A woman is not 
1 Tim. 2. 1● 〈◊〉.  capable of holy orders, (as Christ's Apostle assureth us,) nor of any Ecclesiastical function in the Church; and consequently the Popish succession which is derived from our holy mistress Pope john, cannot possibly be of force. Here the Church of Rome hath utterly forsaken her succession, and is not comparable to our Church of England, in that behalf.  Theoph. 
If it were possible for a woman, to be enthronized into Peter's chair at Rome: then as you say, popish succession were overthrown indeed, it cannot be gainsaid. But such a thing neither hath been, neither is, neither ever can be till the world's end.  Remig. 
What? do you think it a thing impossible to be done? an huge number of famous popish writers, do resolutely contest it for a constant truth.  Theoph. 
If you be able, this to prove indeed, henceforth popish succession, shall never come with in my creed.  Remig. 
Sigebertus Geniblasensis, Marianus Scotus, Matthaeus Palmerius, Martinus Polonus, Philippus Bergomensis, Baptista Platina, Bartholomaeus Carranza, & johannes Nauclerus, are my substantial witnesses in this weighty point of Popery, viz that Pope john was a woman, who by the familiar help of her beloved companion, brought forth publicly the homely fruits of her Popedom.  Theoph. 
These writers which you name, were indeed Papists of high esteem in the Church of Rome, but they lived long after Pope john, and therefore knew nothing of that matter, but by report of others.  Remig. 
I answer: first, that these eight Historiographers, lived longer one after another, than Sigebertus Geniblasensis and Marianus Scotus lived after Pope john. Secondly, that all Historiographers, write for the most part, by the report of others. Thirdly, that so many writers, 
Pope john was a woman.  otherwise of good credit with your Pope, may well be credited of us in a matter against your Pope; especially since sundry of them be your own holy popish Friars. Fourthly, that this story of Pope john, is publicly painted, and is this day to be seen in your Cathedral Church of Syenna: which painting, our politic newly hatched Jesuits, sought earnestly to have had it defaced, in the late repairing of that Church; but the Bishop of the place, 
Exod 8, 19  (digitus Dei est hic) would not suffer them to prevail. 
Digitus Dei est hic. The truth must prevail in time.  Fifthly, that these eight writers, who were all the Popes own vassals, and lived long one after another, would never for shame have published one and the self same story to the world if any one of them could in his life time have learned the centrary to be the truth.  Theoph. 
They say only and barely (ut ferunt) as the report and fame goes: and other grave writers that lived before them all, and nearer the time of Pope john, make no mention thereof at all.  Remig. 
I answer: first, that an argument, ab authoritate, negatiué, is not holden good in your Schools; and yourselves do roundly condemn in others that manner of dispute. Secondly, that if these famous writers had not been fully persuaded of the truth of the story, they would never have published it to the world: and hereof this double reason may be yielded. First, for that the Pope's dear friends, were, no doubt, very loathto reveal the shame and turpitude of their holy fathers, save only then and so much, when and how much the very force of truth compelled them to do. Again, because they being very learned, could not be ignorant, that it was a great damnable sin to defame so great a man. Thirdly, that the said Authors write of this matter, even as they do of other things. Palmerius and Sigibertus, both have these 
Palmer. & Sigeber. in Chron.  express words: Fama est, hunc johannem faeminam fuis●e, & unisoli familiari tantum cognitam, qui eam complexus est, & gravis facta, peperit Papa, existens: quare, eam inter Pontifices non numerant quidam: The fame goes, that this john was a woman, and not known but to her familiar friend; by whose familiarity she became with child, 
Obrave succession of women Popes.  and was delivered even whiles she was Pope: for which respect, some do not reckon her among the Popes. Marianus, Polonus, Bergomensis, Platina, and Carranza, (whom I have already named) teach flatly and plainly the self same doctrine, writing upon the same woman Pope: and here must I put you in mind of this mackeable point, viz. that Marianus Scotus, affirmeth the story constantly, flatly, and simply, without all and's or iffs. 
The Popes of Rome 4. can bear children but not preach.  Yea, Martinus Polonus, the Popes own Penitentiary, singeth the self same song. Fourthly, that some Historiographers, favouring the Pope more than the truth, have of purpose (so to cover the Pope's shame) concealed the truth of the story. To these I may fitly add that which their famous Abbot saith; the beast (saith my L. Abbot Bernardus, 
Bernard. a● Ganfrid. ep. 12. 5. Apoc. 13. v. 5. 7.  the best Abbot that ever I heard or read of) mentioned in the Revelation, to whom was given a mouth speaking blasphemies, and to make wars with the Saints, fitteth in Peter's chair.  Theoph. 
This is wonderful which you say, and I hope I may give credit to your reports, your protestation hath assured me thereof: howbeit for my further satisfaction, let me tell you that one of your authors Nauclerus, by name, utterly denieth the story, as I have heard.  Remig. 
I make a conscience, (I thank my Lord God humbly for it) to deal sincerely in all my writings, and 
The Author's protestation for his sincere dealing.  with you in this our Christian conference, wishing heartily, that the papists would do the like: I have ever dealt so truly and uprightly against the papists in all my writings, as I now in my old and decrepit age, I am ready to take it upon my salvation, and to seal the truth thereof with my blood. Concerning your report of Nauclerus, you shall truly hear his own words and that done, yield your censure according to the truth: after that this Nauclerus had told a long tale in the favour of our Woman-Pope, (so to cover and hide the nakedness of his holiness) at the length he resolveth with himself, and concludeth the controversy in these express words: Sed etsi fuit verum, nulli tamen, ex hoc, salutis eme●sit periculum: quia nec Ecclesia tunc fuit fine capite quod est Christus, 
Naucler. pag 713. histor.  ait Antoninus: nec enim ultimi effectus Sacramentorum, quae illa conferebat, deficiebant eis qui debite accipiebant, scilicet gratia, licet mulier non sit susceptibilis Characteris alicuius ordinis, nec conficere Eucharistiam, etiam de facto ordinata, possit, nec absoluere a peccato, unde ab ea ordinati erant iterum ordinandi: gratiam tamen Sacramentorum Christus supplebat in recipientibus dign●, ignorantia facti invincibili eos excusante: But although it were true, no man for all that sustained any loss of his salvation: because even then the Church had still an head which is Christ, as Antoninus witnesseth: neither did they, who devoutly preached the Sacraments which he ministered, want the l●st effects thereof, which is grace, albeit a woman be neither capable of any Character of order, neither able to celebrate the Eucharist, or to absolve from sin, whereupon, such as received orders of her, were to be ordered again, nevertheless, Christ supplied the grace of the Sacraments in those that received them worthily, invincible ignorance of the fast excusing them: thus you see the opinion and verdict of your own dear Doctor Nauclerus that famous papist, who hath said for the credit of your Pope, what possibly he could devise: now deliver your censure in God's name according to the truth.  Theoph. 
I will confess the truth: I observe out of this testimony of our reverend and learned histriographer, these memorable points of doctrine. First that Nauclerus hath employed his whole industry, and all his wits, to defend the Pope from shame and dishonour, if it possibly could be done. Secondly, that Antoninus their reverend Archbishop and canonised Saint, is of his opinion. Thirdly, that Christ is the head of the Church, and that therefore the Church wanted not a head in time of the woman Pope, if ever there were such a monster in the world. Fourthly, that popish succession is as uncertain as the weathercock, howsoever myself and others, have hitherto been seduced therewith: and I humbly thank my Lord God, that by your most Christian instruction, (as by an instrument appointed by him for that end) I now at the last behold the same.  Remig. 
Non nobis Domine, non nobis, sed nomini tuo 
Ps. 115 v. 2  da gloriam: it is no small comfort and solace to mine heart, that God's holy spirit doth so mightily work in you: you have observed well the doctrine of Nauclerus, though some thing may fitly be added thereunte. Two further points of great consequence, are implied in the doctrine of Nauclerus: the one that it is this day doubtful, which of their romish Cardinals and Bishops be rightly ordered, and whether they be mere Lay-men, or Priests: the other, that the Cardinals, popish Priests, and lay people of Rome, did for many years commit flat idolatry.  Theoph. 
These points could I never have considered in his doctrine, God reward your pains employed for his sake▪ but what? are not the Cardinals and Priests in the Church of Rome, truly and lawfully consecrated in their functions?  Remig. 
I speak not generally and absolutely, of the consecration of the Cardinals, Bishops, and Priests in the Church of Rome, fit occasion will be offered hereafter, to speak more precisely of that point of doctrine: the question is now, of those particular Cardinals, Bishops and Priests, who were consecrated for such, in the time of the Woman-pope john, for as the Popes own dear Doctor Nauclerus telleth us, all such as were ordered by the Woman-pope, were to be ordered again, as being but mere Lay-men.  Theoph. 
I am at my wit's end, what to say or think of the Church or Pope of Rome.  Remig. 
What? I am sure you remember the old received Maxim; (Vbi Papa, ibi Roma; ubi Roma, ibi Ecclesia Catholica) where the Pope is, there is Rome; and where Rome is, there is the Catholic Church. So, as, the Pope is Rome, the Catholic Church, Christ himself and all.  Theoph. 
I cannot indeed but remember the same, it is so frequent and usual in every learned Papists mouth. But alas alas, the remembrance thereof, doth this day wound me at the very heart: for hitherto I have been taught to hold it for a constant truth, that the Catholic Church, the Church of Rome, and the Pope's holiness, were all as one, that is to say, that the Pope's faith, was the faith of the Church of Rome, and the faith of the Church of Rome, the faith of the Catholic Church militant here on earth.  Remig. 
It is very true which you say, and this approved Romish Maxim confirmeth the same: for when the Pope and his Popelings tell us, that the Church cannot err, then do they mean that the Pope cannot err: and when they speak of the Catholic Church, than they ever 
Mark this. The Church cannot err, that is the Pope cannot err. 1489.  mean of the Church of Rome & of such Churches as jump in faith with the Pope. So then we must jump with the Collier, and say we believe as the Church believeth, and the Church believeth as we believe: for, by this learned answer, (if Cardinal Hosius writ truly) we may overcome the devil; but when all is said & done, we must believe, we cannot indeed tell what: for when the Pope saith thus and thus you must believe, if then he speak as a private man, my faith is wan, and no faith indeed: for as a private man he may err, and so both deceive himself and me, as we have seen already: and yet (alas for pity) these two articles I must hold for an undoubted truth, which agree together as York and soul Sutton. First, that the Pope may err, and become an heretic. Secondly, that I am an Heretic, unless I believe as he teacheth me, if he speak as a public person. This notwithstanding, I may not, to die for it, examine the Pope's decrees, whether they proceed from him, as he is 
Victor. de potest Pap●, p●o●os. 16. caus. 17. q▪ 4▪ cap. qui●.  a private man, or as a public person: for in so doing, I must incur the crime of sacrilege. What a thing is this? silly Papists are brought into greater thraldom & perplexity▪ than ever was Buridanus himself, or the poor beast his Ass.  Theoph. 
I have been too long seduced with paltry popery; I see it is but flat cozenage, and a mere trick of legerdemain. Henceforth I renounce it, and will only object my difficulties to be better confirmed in the truth. But sir, I do not yet understand the other point of doctrine, which you observed out of Nauclerus.  Remig. 
It is clear out of Nauclerus that the Cardinals, popish Bishops, Priests, and Lay-people of Rome, committed flat Idolatry in the time of their Woman-pope 
Flat Idolatry, even by Popish ●a●h.  john, who for the honour of S. Peter (as you have heard already) brought forth a child in the altitude of her popedom. Thus you shall understand the same Nauclerus telleth us plainly, that their woman-pope could neither make Priests, nor yet consecreate their Eucharist. To this doctrine, let us add these points. First, that all Papists must adore their Breadgod in every popish Mass. Secondly that by popish faith, none but popish Priests can turn bread into Christ's body. Thirdly, that all Priests made by their woman-pope were mere Lay-men. This foundation thus firmly laid▪ we may erect without danger 
This woman-pope, lived A. D. 18.  of falling, this high and lofty building, viz that all the Cardinal's, Bishops, Priests, and Lay-people, who ever heard the Masses of their women-pope, or of the Bishops and Priests made by her, did commit flat Idolatry at every one of the said Masses: the reason is evident, because such Priests were indeed mere Lay-men, and so could not change the bread and make it God almighty: and consequently the spectators and adorers that were present, adored bakers bread for the everliving God. All this is sound Popish faith and doctrine.  Theoph. 
It is abomination in God's sight: but what shall we say to M. Nauclerus? he seemeth to purge & free the worshippers, by reason of invincible ignorance.  Remig. 
Our jesuit S. R. in his pretenced answer to 
S. ●. pag. 142.  the downfall of Popery, jumpeth in opinion with Nauclerus, he freely granteth in the place quoted in the margin, that there is no consecration (and consequently no God almighty) when the Priest wanteth both actual and virtual intention, or omitteth any essential word of their said consecration; but withal he excuseth the worshippers of bread for God almighty, because of their invincible ignorance. I return this answer to them both, viz. that this distinction of ignorance, invented in Popish Schools, hath no foundation in God's word, neither yet, in the pure canons of the Pope's law. For the former, the Prophet Ezechiel, (or rather God by the meuth of Ezechiel) telleth us plainly and in flat terms, that though the watchman give not the people warning, but suffer them to live in ignorance, yet shall they be guilty, and perish in their sinews. Yea, Christ himself telleth us, that who knoweth the law and doth it not, shall 
Ezec. 3. 18. & cap. 33. v. 8. Psal. 79. v. 6 Luk. 12. 48. Caus. 17. q. 4 cap. siquis.  not be punished alone, but he in like manner shall be punished for the transgression that knew it not. This mitigation only is allotted to the ignorant, that his punishment shall be more tolerable, and he beaten with fewer stripes. For the latter, the Popes own Canons teach us, that neither the ignorance of the law of nature, nor of the law divine can excuse us, when we offend against the 
Esa. 55. v. 8. 9 3. Reg. 8 39 Rom. 8. 17. 1 Par. 28. 9 ●. Sam. 16 ● Psa. 7. v. 10. Mar. 2. 27.  same. Yet true it is, that in human affairs, and civil judgements, invincible ignorance will excuse, but God's judgements and his ways are not like to man's, they are far different from them: man can but judge the external act, but God searcheth the very heart and veins: man is subject to God's laws, but God is above both man's laws and his own; and hath also full power to dispense with the same. There yet remaineth a mortal and uncurable wound in Popish Succession at Rome; which I hold very necessary for you to know, for your better confirmation in the truth.  Theoph. 
For Christ's sake take the pains to unfold it to me: for nothing is so dear to my soul, as the knowledge of the truth.  Remig. 
The incurable wound, may be reputed the second wonderment of the world: this is it, mark it well. The general Council of Basil, deposed Pope Eugenius for his contumacy, and chose Amadaeus (who was named Foelix the first) and put him in his room: this, notwithstanding, Eugenius crept again into the Popedom without any Canonical election, and continued in the place as Pope.  Theoph. 
I do not well conceive or understand, what you would infer hereupon. I therefore humbly crave your larger explication thereof.  Remig. 
The Council of Basil was holden in Anno, 1439. and summoned Eugenius to appear before it, then 
A. D. 1439.  and there to yield an account of such matters as the Council had to object against him, but he would not appear: 
Lo, the Council deposed the Pope for his disobedience.  and therefore for his contuinacie, disobedience, & contempt of the Counsels summons, he was by the authority of the said Council deposed, and Amadaeus was made the Pope or Bishop of Rome. The Schism between Amadaeus and Eugenius continued about nine years, until Foelix was content to resign to Nicholas, and then it ended. Now sir, all the Cardinal's, Bishops, Priests, & Deacons, who afterward sprung of Eugenius (possessing Peter's chair without Canonical election) that is, of the Church of Rome, are illegitimate, irregular, schismatics, usurpers and not lawful governors of the Church by popish faith and doctrine.  Theoph. 
One refuge the Papists would seem to have herein, viz. that the counsel could not depose the Pope: which if it once be proved against them, their backs are at the wall, and their Popish Romish succession.  Remig. 
It is without all question, that a general Council was and is above the Pope: no learned papist ever did, or this day doth deny the same, the Popes themselves, the jesuits, and jesuited crew only excepted. Cardinalis Cameracensis, Abbas Panormitanus, Nicholaus Cusanus, Adrianus Papa, Cardinalis Florentinus, johannes Gersonus, jacobus Almaynus, Abulensis, Alphonsus▪ the Divines of Paris and all others, (except ever before excepted,) do resolutely and constantly defend as an undoubted truth grounded upon the holy scriptures, that a general Council is above the Pope: the practical proceedings of papists every where, have yielded us an assured argument thereof: for first, the Council of Basil (as we have seen) deposed Pope Eugemus, and chose Amadaeus in his room. Secondly, the general Council of Constance, (which was celebrated about 15. years before the Council of Basill) did publicly depose three Popes (john, 22. Gregory, 12. and Benedict, 13.) and those Martin the fifth, and made him Pope: which things doubtless, these Counsels having many very learned men in them, would never have attempted so publicly and so resolutely as they did, if it had not been a resolved and known case and truth, throughout the Christian world.  Theoph. 
The case is clear and evident to every indifferent reader: but give me leave I pray you, to tell what the papists say to this, the Council of Basil (say they) was not a lawful Synod, because it had neither the presence of the Pope, nor of his Legates.  Remig. 
This answer is a new invention of our late 
A Spaniard being but a Soldier, was the author of the sect of the Jesuits, A. D. 1540  strat-up jesuits, (who never were heard of or known to the Church of God, for the space of a thousand, five hundred, and forty years after Christ's sacred Incarnation, and whose first author was one Ignatius Loyola, a soldier & a Spaniard borne) having neither scripture, Council, father, or good reason, whereupon it may be grounded. For first, the Council was called by Pope Martin the fifth to be holden at Papias, from whence by reason of the pest it was removed to Senas, afterward it was translated by Alphonsus the King of Arragon, and continued at Basill, where were present both Sigismundus the Emperor, and julianus the Pope's own Legate, and after him Ludovicus the Cardinal of Arles supplied his place. Again, not only the Council of Basil, but the Counsels also of Constance, of Florence, and of Lateran, did all constantly and uniformly define for an undoubted truth, that a 
A general Council is above the Pope, by the verdict of best learned papists.  general Council is above the Pope, and hath authority to cite him, to control him, and to depose him: for due proof and trial whereof, the Council of Constance deposed, de facto, three Popes, viz. john 23. Gregory 12. and Benedict 13. and chose Martin the first, and made him Pope in his place. Another or two like mortal wounds I could unfold unto you, but these seem to me sufficient.  Theoph. 
For Christ's sake, take the pains to relate them, it is a thing well worth the labour.  Remig. 
Pope Sergius the third, caused the corpse of Pope Formosus (who now had been dead almost ten years) to be taken out of his tomb, and to be set in a chair, with the pontifical attire upon him (O brave Gallant?) and that done, his head to be cut off, and to be cast into the river Tiber. He disannulled the acts and orders 
Carranz●, ●ol. 354. & 355.  given by Pope Formosus, insomuch as all were enforced to take orders again, who had been made Bishops or Priests by Pope Formosus.  Theoph. 
Marry sir, the Papists may boast indeed of their Romish succession, and be derided of all wise men for their pains.  Remig. 
Amongst the Pope's excommunications the 29. is against the College of Cardinals in the Romish Church, who by Simony or simoniacal pacts, procure themselves to be advanced to the Popedom. By virtue of which excommunication, all such as are made Popes by Simony & simoniacal pacts, do, ipso facto, incurre the sentence of excommunication, from which they can never be absolved, but by one that is Pope indeed, 
Barth fumus A. D 1503.  and Canonically elected thereunto. Upon which excommunication, one of the Pope's inquisitors, Bartholomaeus Fumus, a very learned Dominican Friar, hath published this commentary, for the true sense & meaning of that extravagant, which Pope julius the second divulged in that behalf: these are his express words: Nota hic & bene, Papa Simoniacé electus non est ve●e Papa Note here, and that to good purpose, that the Pope which is elected by Simony, is not the true Pope indeed. Mark well, and let me see what you observe out of this discourse.  Theoph. 
I see evidently by the Pope's own constitution, and flat decree, (as by the law of the Medes and Persians) which no papist may withstand or gainsay, that whosoever is chosen Pope by Simony, is no Pope indeed.  Remig. 
You have marked the discourse very well, let us now proceed, and look circumspectly into the matter, as which is of so great importance, as nothing can be more: Baptista Platina a man very near and very dear unto the Popes, (as who was by office Abbreviator Apostolicus, and consequently best acquainted with the manners and dealings of Popes) telleth us roundly and constantly, that the Popes of latter days crept into the Popedom, by gifts bribes, and Simony: these are his express words: eò enim tum Pontificatus devenerat, ut qui plus largitione & ambitione, (non dico sanctitate vitae 
Plate▪ in ●ita Sylues●. 3  & doctrinae valere's) is tantummodo dignitatis gradum, bonis oppressis & reiectis obtineret, quem morem: utinam aliquando non retinuissent nostra tempora: For to that pass was the Popedom now brought, that whoseever was able to prevail most in giving bribes & in ambition, (I say not in good life and doctrine,) that many only should have the degree of honour, and good men should be rejected, which custom would to God our d●y●● had never known. Again, that same Platina in another place hath these words: Adeo enim involuerat hic mos, ut i●m 
Platin▪ in vita Da●●.  cuique ambitioso liceret Petri sedem invadere: For this custom did so increase, th●t now every ambitious fellow might invade Saint Peter's chair. Gregory the fifth was by sedition thrust out of his throne, and Pope john the 
Platin in vita john. 18. Carranz. fol. 355.  18. by tyranny occupied the Popedom: so write both Platina and Carranza, who were the Pope's good friends, albeit they could not conceal the truth hereof: yea Platina proceedeth further, and saith: qua quidem beatitudine johannes carnit, fur certè in Pontificatu & latro. Non enim 
The Pope both a thief and a robber.  ut par fuerat, per ostium intraut: which happy life Pope john wanted, as who was a thief and a robber: for he entered not in by the door, as he ought to have done. To be brief, Pope Bonifacius the eight, may sound the Trumpet for all the rest: for, of him thus writeth his dear 
Carranz. fol. 369.  Feyer Carranza: Intravit ut Vnlpes, regnavit ut Lupus, mortuus est ut Canis: he entered as a Fox, he reigned as a Wolf, he died as a Dog. By this discourse, two 
O holy Pope, who would not ●●sl● thy foot '  things are cleared, which are of so great weight and moment, as they are able to batter down popery, and to draw it under foot. For first, what Bishop soever is made Pope, by gifts, bribes, and Simony, that Bishop neither is, nor can be the true Pope indeed. Secondly, the Bishops of Rome have now ●or a long time been very wicked men, and have aspired to the Popedom by bribes and Simony. To which two main points of popery, this third (as a golden corollary) is consectary, and cannot be denied, viz, that the Bishops of Rome for many years, were not true Bishops or Popes in very deed: and consequently, by popish doctrine, there are no true popish Bishops in the world.  Theoph. 
All the jesuits and jesuited papists in the world, are never able truly to answer these reasons, for doubtless, they are insoluble.  Remig 
The 18. excommunication falleth upon all those which deny the Church of Rome to be the head of all other Churches, and the Pope to be the commander of all people: this excommunication was thundered out, for the establishing of the Pope's tyranny throughout the Christian world: the 21. excommunication is against all such as shall boldly affirm either that the blessed Virgin Mary was conceived in original sin, or not so conceived: and shall thereupon condemn them of heresy, or of mortal sin, that hold, preach, or defend the contrary: this excommunication Pope Sixtus the fourth thundered out in his Extravagant, in the year 1474. by which practical 
A. D. 1474.  proceedings and doctrine, we may easily espy the uncertainty of the Pope's faith and religion, as also his ignorance, in the high mysteries of popish doctrine: for, though he cannot err judicially in matters of doctrine, as the papists must believe, yet can he not decide this easy question, whether the Virgin Mary was conceived in original sin, or not: but Aquinas the Pope's angelical doctor and canonised Saint, (whose doctrine two Popes, Vrbanus the fourth, and Innocentius the fifth, have confirmeth to be sound and true▪) affirmeth resolutely, that she was conceived in original sin: tell me now, what ye think of the Pope's succession at Rome?  Theoph. 
I see flatly and evidently, that by popish doctrine, faith, and religion, we cannot this day tell, who are true Bishops of Rome indeed: and consequently, that the succession derived from them, is of no credit or force at all: but yet by your favour, I desire your further resolution to such shows and colours of succession, as they pretend for the Church of Rome. Saint Austen saith, (say they) 
Aug. contr. ep. fund.  that the succession of Priests even from Saint Peter to these days, kept him in the bosom of the Church: so Optatus, Tertullianus, & others, do often allege, & stand upon the succession of Bishops, as an argument of the truth.  Remig. 
It is true, that Saint Austen made a great account of the succession of Bishops in the Church of Rome, and myself (also all learned men I think,) do jump with Saint Austen in that his opinion: for the resolution of which objection, sundry observations already Proved are to be well remembered. First, that the Bishops of Rome were in the beginning, many of them holy Martyr, who gave their lives for the testimony of our Lord jesus. Secondly, that they joined formal succession with material, until Saint Austin's days and long after. Thirdly, that the Church of Rome by little and little swerved from the truth, and declined in many points of doctrine from the ancient received faith. Fourthly, 
Mark● well for Christ's sake.  that the latter Bishops of Rome have decreed publicly against the known faith: in so much, as some of them have been condemned with the sound of the Trumpets, other some have been convicted of arianism, others of Nestorianisme others of flat Atheism, others to have crept into Peter's chair, (as they term it) by flat Simony, others have occupied the place by violent intrusion, others by homage done to the devil of hell. Fifthly, that faith and honest dealing was now decayed in the Church of Rome, and long before the days of Carranza and Platina brought to that miserable estate, that every ambitious fellow might invade Peter's seat. Sixthly, that by popish doctrine and uniform assertions of best approved popish writers, succession in the Church of Rome is so doubtful, that they cannot prove themselves this day to be true Bishops indeed: I say (by popish doctrine) because myself do hold them true Bishops, though very wicked and ungodly 
The old Bishops of Rome, joined formal succession with material.  men: of which point I shall have occasion, to speak of more at large by and by: my answer therefore in brief is this: viz, that the Bishops of Rome in Saint Austin's time, joined formal succession with material, which if the Bishops of Rome would this day perform, all godly Christians would now join with them, as Saint Austen did in his time: for as Saint frene say, we ought to obey 
Irenaeus. lib. ●. cap. 43.  those Priests, that with the succession, keep the word of truth.  Theoph. 
Saint Paul saith plainly, that there must be Bishops and Pastors in the church until the world's end: whereupon it followeth (say the Papists, whom now I have upon good grounds renounced) that you Protestants have no Church at all: for before Luther departed from them, all Bishops and Priests for many years together, embraced their Romish religion. This objection (say our Jesuits and jesuited Popelings) doth so gall the Protestants, as they cannot tell in the world, what answer to frame thereunto.  Remig. 
I answer: first, that we are the true reformed Catholics, as is already proved Secondly, that Pastors 
Ephe ●. 2. 〈…〉.  & Doctors (as S. Paul saith) have ever been in the Church, are at this present, and shall be to the world's end. Thirdly, that albeit the visible Church cannot want material succession (the continuance whereof Christ hath promised) yet cannot that succession without formal, yield any sound argument of true faith and religion. For which respect the famous Papist Nicholaus de Lyra, after he hath told us that many Popes have swerved from the 
Lyran in cap. 16. Mat.  faith, and become flat Apostates, concludeth in these express words: propter quod Ecclesia consistit in illis personis, in quibus est notitia vera, et confessio fidei & veritatis. By reason whereof, the Church consisteth in those persons, in whom there is true knowledge, and confession of the faith and verity. Thus writeth this learned popish Friar, telling us resolutely, that though there must be evermore 
Ephes. 4. ver. 11.  a visible Church, with visible Pastors & Doctors in it, yet those visible Pastors & Doctors, both may serve, & have de facto, swerved, from the true faith & religion: and 
joh. 10. v. 4. 1●. 16 26. 27. 8 〈…〉 ●. ●5. ●uc. 〈◊〉. ●. 2. 〈◊〉 2 〈◊〉. 1 joh. ●. 〈◊〉.  that therefore the Church indeed consisteth of the predestinate and elect children of God, whose faith shall never fail: this point you have heard so pithily approved, as is able to satisfy every in different reader.  Theoph. 
The Jesuits say that howsoever you wrangle about your formal succession, yet it is clear that you have no material succession at all, unless you term it material succession, when mere Lay-men occupy the rooms of lawful Bishops: for none may take upon them, or intrude themselves into the holy ministry, but such as are lawfully called thereunto, as Aaron was: & yet all the world can tell 
Hebr. 5. 4.  you, that all your Ministers, Bishops, Priests, and Deacons, in the time of King Edward, and Queen Elizabeth, and now of King JAMES, have no other orders & consecration at all, but such as they received of our Romish Bishops indeed.  Remig. 
Our succession is both material and formal, Christian and Apostolical: as which is consonant to the holy Scriptures, and to the usual practice of the primitive Church. For first, our Bishops can prove their Doctrine by the scriptures, and by the testimonies of best approved popish writers, as we have seen already. Secondly, our Bishops have mission and imposition of hands, according to the practice Apostolical▪ and of all approved antiquity. Thirdly, our Bishops are made in such form and order, as they have ever been accustomed, a few popish, superstitious, and beggarly ceremonies omitted, which by little & little▪ had of late years crept into the Church, that is to say, by free election of the Chapter, by consecration of the Archbishop, and other his associates, and by the admission of the Prince.  Theoph. 
Saint Epiphanius inveigheth bitterly against one 
Epiph. lib. 3. pag▪ 3 ● 5.  Zachaeus, who being but a Lay-man (as your Puritans be) presumed impudently to handle the holy Mysteries. S. Hierome in like manner saith of Hilarius the heretic, that 
Higher▪ cont. Lucifer.  he could neither baptise nor administer the Eucharist, because he was but a Deacon when he went out of the church, and what are you but Deacons? nay what are you but mere Lay-men? for you are neither consecrated after the old manner, nor confirmed by the Pope, as the jesuits bear the world in hand.  Remig. 
I answer, first, that if mere Lay-men should presume in our Churches, either to preach, teach, or handle the holy mysteries, they could not escape condign punishment, according to their demerits Secondly, 
Act. ●▪ 24. Act. 6. 6. Act. 4▪ 23. 1 ●●Soan●●▪ 2. 2 ●●m▪ 1. 6 l●●. 1 5.  that the want of your greasing and other beggarly Ceremonies, (wherewith the primitive Church was never acquainted, as holy writ teacheth us,) cannot make the consecration of our Bishops unlawful. Thirdly that our Bishops are consecrated, & confirmed according to the ancient manner of the primitive Church: for, three things only are necessary, all which (God be thanked for it,) are this day practised in our Church of England: to wit, election of the whole Congregation, confirmation of the Prince, and consecration with godly prayers, and imposition of hands. Of the last of these three, that is, of the imposition of hands, with prayer mention is made to Timothy, and else where. For the confirmation of the Prince, and not of the Pope (which is the second point) this is 
1 T●m. 5 22 2 T● 1. 6. Tit. 1. 5. Act 6 6. Act. 14 ● 3. Pela● 〈◊〉▪ Seu●●●▪ Benediciu●.  enough for the trial, viz. that these three Popes, Pelagius the second, Se●erinus, and Benedictus the second, and all other Bishops of Rome till the said Benedict, inclusiuè were ever elected and confirmed by the emperors commandment: which verity is freely confessed in express terms▪ by four famous Popish writers; who therefore are and aught to be of more credit and force against the Papists, than any other authors whatsoever. The names of the popish Doctors are these: Baptista Platina, Bartholomaeus Carranxa, Anastatius Bibliothecarius, and Onuphrius Panuinius. Piatina hath these words, Ni● 
Platin. in vita ● e●●●. 2. A. D. 579.  enim tum in eligendo Pontifice actum erat▪ nisi eius electionem Imperator approbasset: for at that time (which was about the year of our Lord God 100L.) nothing was done effectually concerning the election of the Bishop of Rome, unless the Emperor had confirmed the same. Touching the creation of Severinus, (for the other testimony was of Pelagius) the same Platina writeth in this manner: Vana enim tunc habebatur Cleri ac populi electio nisi Imperatores 
Platin. in vita Severi. A. D. 637. Platin in vita Bened.  aut eorum Exarchi confirmassent: For the election of the Clergy and the people was of no force at all in those days, unless the Emperors or their Lieutenants had confirmed the same: this was done, about the year, 637. Concerning the creation or making of Benedict, Platina hath these words; ad hunc Constantius Imperator sanctionem misit, ut deinceps quem Clerus, populus, Exercitusque Romanus in Pontificem delegislet, eundem statim verum Christi Vicarium esse omnes crederent, nulla aut Constantinopolitani Principis, aut Italiae Exarchi expectat authoritate, ut antea fieri consueverat id enim ratum erat in creando Pontifice, quod Princeps confirmaslet, vel qui eius vices in Italia gerebat: The Emperor Constantine sent a decree to this Pope, that whomsoever the Clergy, people and Roman Soldiers should henceforth choose for their Bishop, all people should by and by believe him to be the U●car of Christ, (scilicet) if they would: 
A. D. 685. Caaranz. pag▪ 301. apud Onuph. in Chron.  This was done in anno 68●.  
Bartholomaeus Carranza a famous Dominican Friar, hath the very same assertion ad verbum.  
Anastasius and Onuphrius have these express words. Pontifices qui deinde fuerant, creati & con●ecrati sunt sine Constantinopolitani Imperatoris iussione: The Popes or Bishops of Rome that lived afterward, were made and consecrated without the Emperor of Constantinople his command: as if they had said, in the old time and ancient Church, no Bishop of Rome could have been admitted at any time, unless he had brought letters patents from the Emperor though now the practise be far otherwise. Now M. Theophilus, tell me what you gather out of this discourse.  Theoph. 
Out of this doctrine of this famous papists, I gather to the confusion of the late Bishops of Rome, their jesuits, and all jesuited papists, these three evidents, golden, and most necessary corollaries. First, that the vulgar and common sort of people are grossly deceived, when they term popery the old religion, and repute them for the ancient Catholics: for, we are indeed the true and 
Corollary. 1.  ancient Catholics, (I put myself in the number, because God now hath made me a true reformed Catholic,) and the papists are become flat heretics, in many points of the true faith, though not apostates from the whole. For, this Benedict the second could not be made 
A. D. 684.  Bishop of Rome, 684. years after Christ's sacred advent, without the emperors letters Patents: so then▪ the Emperors 
Lo, Popery is the new religion.  had the sovereignty over the Bishops of Rome, for the space almost of seven hundrens years after Christ, & so long the Popes acknowledged the Emperors for their sovereign Lords, as without whose letters Patents they could have no jurisdiction in the Church. I add as consectary hereunto, that as in civil causes many are debarred from their lawful inheritance, through the violent dealing of mighty men, even so we, the true reformed Catholics, have been many years excluded from the free use of our own Church and Sacraments, by the force, violence, and tyranny, of the bloodthirsty Romish Bishops, and partly by remissness of sundry Emperors, who upon a blind zeal not grounded upon God's word, yielded up their sovereign rights unto them: and as temporal men are in time restored to their ancient right, by zealous and godly Magistrates: even so were we and are we (God make us thankful for it) by the goodness of God and most Christian Princes, (King Henry the eight, King Edward the sixth, Queen Elizabeth, and King JAMES our most gracious sovereign now happily regnant over us) restored to the old Christian, Catholic, and Apostolic religion, and with all Christian freedom placed again in our own Churches, the spiritual birthright of ourselves and our ancestors. Secondly, thath our Bishops in England are made and 
Corollary. 2.  consecrated, according to the ancient, Christian, Catholic, Apostolic, and old Roman manner, that is to say, 
Corollary. 3  by the letters Patents of the Prince. Thirdly, that the Emperors of Constantinople, for the space of 200. years and odd after the dissolution of the Empire in the west, had still the sovereignty over the Bishop of Rome: for the west Empire was dissolved in Anno 471, and Benedict the second obtained of the Emperor Constantine in Anno 684, that the Bishops of Rome might from thenceforth be chosen, confirmed, and enjoy their jurisdiction, without the commandment and letters Patents of the Emperor.  Remig. 
You have marked well the discourse, and for all that, have not observed one point of great consequence.  Theophilus. 
What is that I beseech you heartily?  Remig. 
The late Popes or Bishops of Rome, tell us, that Constantine the great, at his departure from Rome to Constantinople, gave the Bishop of Rome and his successors his crown and all his royal dignity, both in the City of Rome, and in Italy, and in all the west parts: 
Dist. 96. Canon. Constantinus.  which goodly story invented for the Pope's advancement, we see by the constant verdict of these four learned Papists, to be nothing else indeed but a lying fable: for the the Bishops of Rome were still subject to the Emperors, & 
Popes were subjects to Emperors, above 340. years after the departure of Constantine from Rome.  received their authority and jurisdiction by their letters patents above 340. years, even until Benedict the second: to which I add, that many of the popish Cannons are of as good credit as Esop's fables.  Remig. 
This is a point of great consequence, which I should never have espied, but by your relation.  Theoph. 
I would wish you likewise to observe, that the Emperors, Constantinus, justinianus, and others, yielding up their sovereign rights to the Bishops of Rome upon a fond zeal without knowledge, opened the window to all antichristian tyranny: for in short time after, the Romish Bishops became so arrogant and Lordly, that they took upon them to dispose Royal sceptres, and to translate them to their pleasures.  Theoph. 
It is a memorable observation, I shall keep it in remembrance: but let me still reason for the Papists, as if I were one of them; for when all difficulties are answered, I shall be the stronger in the truth. The Church of God cannot be without Bishops and Priests, as the Apostle 
Ephe. 4. 11.  recordeth, and yourself granteth: but so it is, that when he first reform the Church, as you term it, ye neither had any Bishops, nor any Priests of your own, neither could ye find any in any other place, but only with us and in our Church, when Martin Luther went out from us: our Church therefore and none but ours, is the true Church of God; as which only hath the true succession Apostolical.  Remig. 
I answer first, that our succession in the Church of England, is far better than theirs of Rome: for theirs of Rome, (as we have heard and seen) is most doubtful and uncertain: but ours of England so constant and so assured, as no denial can be made thereof: I prove it, because in Anno, 596. Gregory the great 
A. D. 596.  scent Augustine the Monk, with justus, Melitus, and others (as our approved Chronicles do relate) to preach the Gospel to the Saxons, who were kindly received of King Ethelbert: and he converted to the Christian faith, gave to the same Austen the City of Canterbury: since which time our Church of England is able to prove her perpetual succession of Bishops, without schism or interruption at all, albeit the Church of Rome (as is already proved) is not able to perform hal●e so much. Secondly, that though the visible Churches were every where greatly stained and polluted with many gross errors, superstitions, and abuses, at such time as M. Luther began a 
Mark this well, that our church received their Bishops from Rome, when that church was in good case. 596.  Christian reformation: yet for all that, the Bishops and Priests of the popish Churches were still true Bishops for their calling, albeit otherwise very wicked men, and consequently, that our Bishops and Priests though descended, created, and made of such deformed popish Prelates, are true Bishops and Priests indeed.  Theoph. 
If our Bishops and Priests were made of theirs, then must either theirs be good, or ours as bad as theirs: and so we shall have no true Bishops at all.  Remig. 
Mark well what I say, that ye may understand the saint. The Philosopher saith, that one may be 
Ariost in lit. Politic.  a good Citizen, though a bad man: Even so say I, that though the Papists were wicked men, and the Popish Bishops, that created our Bishops, foully polluted both in life and doctrine: yet were they still true Christians & true Bishops, and consequently true members of the visible Church: for they still professed, held, and maintained the chief fundamental points of religion; of God of the blessed Trinity, of Christ and his two natures, of his death & passion: of his resurrection and ascension: of the general doom; & of all the rest comprised in the sum of 
The Popish church is still a true Church, though not a godly Church.  religion, which we call the Apostles creed: and therefore, though they grievously wounded, and in a manner killed themselves, by their errors, corruptions, superstitions, and abuses: yet in regard of the truth which they kept constantly, there remained in them some life of Christianity. They wanted legs, and arms, and had their bodies and souls corrupted with many pestilent diseases; but they did still draw breath, and were not wholly dead. We read in the Apostolical history, that there were some that believed, who being of the heresy of the pharisees, did still hold the ceremonies of the law, and urged others to be circumcised. The Prophet David was sore wounded with adultery and murder; but yet he still continued the child of God: and Peter cursed and swore that he 
Act. 15 5. joh. 12. v. 42. 2 Sam. 11. & cap. 12. Mat. 26. v. 74.  knew not Christ, who for all that, still believed in Christ to the end.  Theoph. 
How can they be both good and bad Bishops at once? it seemeth to me a thing impossible.  Remig. 
I answer: first, that the same persons may aswell be both good and bad at once, as the same man may be both a father and a son at once: and yet do all Logicians grant, that this latter may be effected with all facility. For, one and the same man, may at one and the same time, be both a father in respect of his own child, & a son in respect of his father, who is Grandfather to the said 
Relativa a● ctu sese ponunt & an● f●runt.  child. Secondly, that there is as great disparity between a true Bishop and a good Bishop, as there is between a true man and a good man: but as he is a true man, that hath the nature of a true man, how bad soever he be in 
judas was a true Apostle, & yet array●or too.  faith, life & conversation, as Turks, jews, Traitors, Heretics & Apostates; even so are they true Bishops of the visible Church, who have their calling, places, & jurisdiction allotted them by the same Church, how bad soever they be in other respects.  Theoph. 
Those Popish Bishops that made and created our Bishops and Priests, in the beginning of Queen Elizabeth's reign, ordained and consecrated them after another manner, than they are this day, and ever have been since that time, ergo, either must their Bishops, or else all our Bishops, the first only excepted (who were created after the popish manner) be false, counterfeit, and no true Bishops indeed.  Remig. 
Neither their Bishops, nor ours, are false and counterfeit, but both true and perfect Bishops, in every essential and necessary point pertaining to a Bishop.  Theoph. 
Theirs were made by the authority of the Pope, yours by the authority royal of your gracious Princess of famous memory. Theirs with Oil and Chrism, and many other ceremonies, which yours do not use at all.  Remig. 
All the things by you named, are mere extrinsical and not of the essence and nature of a Bishop, or of a Priest.  Theoph. 
Either must they sin in using Oil, Chrism, and other ceremonies, or you in rejecting and contemning the same.  Remig. 
I answer: first, that neither of both doth follow of necessity, the reason is evident: because things merely adiaphora, and indifferent of their own nature, 
Anointing is not an essential part of a King.  may be used or not used, as it seemeth good to the supreme magistrate. For example sake: whether Kings & Queens be anointed at their Coronations, or not, it is mere extrinsical to their sacred sovereignty, as who are as perfect Kings before it, as after the same: and consequently, though our Church have rejected such ceremonies, as unprofitable or not necessary at the least, yet doth she not condemn other reformed Churches, which use and still retain the same, after the simple use and manner of the first iust tution thereof; all levity, superstition, and opinion of necessity set apart. Secondly, that though our Bishops were consecrated in popish manner with oil and Chrism, and by the Pope's authority: yet neither did, nor could such external rites, frustrate and evacuate, their ministerial dignity: for to use your Schoole-termes; 
Valide non ●ice●è.  many things, are done validè, which are not done, licitè: if the Jesuits and jesuited papists deny this, they must condemn many of their Popes, as it is already proved. Thirdly, that the abolishing of needles ceremonies, superstitiously abused, can no ways prejudice the lawful and true calling of our Bishops.  Theoph. 
All Bishops and Priests made by them, are received as true Bishops of you; but Bishops and Priests made by you, are but mere Lay-men with them; which seemeth an evident argument, that true bishops are only made by the authority of the Pope.  Remig. 
I answer: first, that the authority of the Bishop 
Commune Nice● c●n. ● dist 3▪ cap. ●os ●ntiquus ● 〈…〉. Co●sta●ti● n●p. 6. ●an. ●6.  of Rome, is but like the authority of other patriarchs; as it was defined by the first famous general Council under Constantine the great. Secondly, that the famous general Council of Constantinople (which was celebrated in Anno 681.) granted the bishop of Constantinople equal privileges with the Bishop of Rome, and to excel in all Ecclesiastical affairs as the Bishop of Rome; save only that the chief patriarchal seat was reserved to him for order-sake and peaceable government of the Church. For as Rome was the chief seat of the Emperor, and therefore called Caput mundi; so was the Bishop there for the honour & dignity of the Empire, (to which all the world paid tribute in the days of Augustus Caesar) reputed the chiefest Bishop of the visible 
Luke. 2. 1.  Church. Thirdly, that the Bishop of Rome's authority, was so far from being superior to the Emperors (who was ever called the Emperor of Rome) that no Bishop there for the space of 684. years, could have and enjoy any jurisdiction, unless the same Bishop were confirmed by the letters patents of the Emperor. This 
A. D. 684.  point of doctrine (which is of great consequence) is already proved; and that, even by the testimony of many learned and famous Papists. Fourthly, that neither the Pope's authority, neither Oil nor Crisme, nor any other Popish ceremony, either is or can be any essential part of the Ecclesiastical ministry, and consequently, that the Papist must needs be condemned, either of too too gross ignorance, or else of extreme malice, whilst they reject our Ministers, and repute them mere Lay-men: and that for the want of a few curious and unprofitable ceremonies, which are not only mere extrinsical to the function, but withal superstitiously abused every where. Fifthly, that the Papists condemn themselves in their own practical proceedings, whiles they admit our Sacrament of Baptism by our Ministers administered, and 
Mark this well.  withal reject as mere Lay-men our Ministers of the same. For as they supply the accedentall ceremonies in the one, so may they do also with as great reason in the other. Wherefore I conclude, that as our Church showeth both charity and wisdom, in admitting their Bishops and Priests, so doth their Church show both malice and ignorance, in refusing ours. And that is all indeed, that truly can be inferred of their senslles and peevish refusal; albeit many silly simply seduced papists, neither do nor can so conceive the matter. This my answer is yet confirmed by another Popish practical usage. They reject our Ministers, 
Silly ignorant papists are grossly deceived.  because they want their popish beggarly ceremonies: and for all that▪ they grant their own Ministers to be true Priests still, even after they have degraded them, and taken all their ceremonies from them. Mark well, what I shall relate, for it is a wonderment of the new world. The Papists tell us (and it is a special article of late popish faith) that if a popish Priest come into a great market place, where there is great store of wheate-bread, though a thousand or more loaves in number, and then, and there looking on the same bread, shall pronounce these 
This cannot be denied by popish doctrine.  words (hoc est corpus meum, this is my body) with intention to consecrate the same: then forthwith every loaf of the said wheat-bread, is made Christ's body, and per concomitantiam as their Schools term it) God almighty; so as the people are bound by popish faith and laws to adore the same loaves, every loaf as the son of the everliving God: trial here of was once made a Rome as myself being in Rome, heard from the mouth of a jesuit. For, as the jesuit reported to me (and I have reason to credit him in such a case and cause) a Priest being degraded, and designed to die for his homely qualities, as he passed in the street by a bakers shop, beheld a great quantity of wheat-bread, and recited these words (hoc est corpus meum) and then told the people that he had consecrated the same bread; 
Behold here a great Mystery of popish foolery.  so desiring once to be avenged of the Pope, and his godless Popelings: Whereupon consultation was had out of hand among the learned there, and sentence resolutely ●●en by the Pope, that every loaf was God almighty. After which sentence so clearkely pronounced, the bread was carried away with great solemnity, and such reverence and adoration exhibited to the same, as was due to the son of the everliving God. Now, if Popish Priests can this do, even after their anointing and greasing taken from them: yea, after their dear Pope hath degraded, and after his best manner unpriested them, they have no reason, doubtless to say, that our Bishops cannot perform the function of true Bishops, seeing our Bishops 
Mark well gentle reader.  are consecrated of popish truly made Bishops, though without Popish unprofitable and superstitiously abused ceremonies. This resolution is sound deduced out of the very bowels of Popish faith and religion.  Theoph. 
What? was not that religion popish, which 
A. D. 596.  your nation received at their first conversion from Paganism? did not Pope Gregory affect their conversion, by sending Augustine, Melitus ●ustus, and others into England? how then can ye for shame (●ay our Popes, Cardinals and Jesuits) deny that faith & religion which your native country embraced and believed, at your first receiving of the Christian faith? how can ye contemn and condemn those Popes, who bestowed such inestimable and precious treasures upon your country? Would to God I could sound answer this reason.  Remig. 
Listen well to my discourse, and you shall (God willing) be able to confute it with all facility: this is the answer. First that our nation first received the faith, i● the time of Vespasian Emperor of Rome, about 70● years after Christ's sacred Incarnation, by the preaching of Christ's holy Apostle Simon Zelotes. Secondly that if it be true which Freculphus writeth, the Brutans had received the faith of Christ about the year 6●. by the preaching of those twelve which Philip the Apostle sent into this land whereof joseph of Aramath●a was the chief. Thirdly that about the year 1●9. Elutherius then Bishop of Rome at the request of King Lucius the son of Co●lis, 
A. D. 179.  sent Faganus and Derwianus into Britain to baptize the said King and his people, and to instruct them in the faith of Christ. Fourthly, that seeing the Brutanes had been subjects and tributaries to the Romans, above 
Note, that Elutherius called king Lucinus the Vi●ar of God in his kingdom.  600. years, it is no rare thing, that Gregory the chief Bishop of the Romans, should send preachers into England with the good liking of Ethelbert then King of Kent: for it is every Christians duty, to do what in him lieth in such a case. Fifthly, that the name Pope is a Greek word, which signifieth father, and in the ancient Church was common to other Bishops with the Bishops of Rome, which you may find proved at large, in a little book entitled the trial of the new religion Sixthly, that in the time of this Gregory, and long after, the faith and doctrine of the Church of Rome, was in good case, though in some part stained with some corruptions: neither is it blame worthy, either in Bishop Gregory, that sent it, or in King Ethelbert that received it, that our 
Every child knoweth romanum eloquium is the Latin tongue  nation had then the Church service in the Latin tongue, for (as the proverb saith: necessity hath no law) besides that the Roman language was then in the Latin tongue, (and so to them their vulgar tongue) and they altogether ignorant of the language of our nation: for of old time, (as Nicholaus Lyranus that learned popish Friar telleth us) every Church had divine service in her mother and 
Lyr. in 1, cor. 14.  vulgar tongue: of which subject I have written at large, in the survey of popery: and no marvel, if our Church receiving the Church service in the Latin tongue, (though upon necessity, for that the Romans were ignorant of the Saxons language,) did a long time retain the same: for, though it were a fault, (comparatively a small one) would to God our Church had never been stained with greater corruptions: one thousand year are fully expired, since Gregory was the Bishop of Rome: since which time, most intolerable abuses, superstitions, errors, and flat heresies have crept into the Church of Rome, 
The true members of the Church are said to be invisible, not because the men be not seen, but for that their faith and conscience to Godward is not perfectly known to us.  which is all that our Church hath abolished, still constantly retaining as pure and inviolable the old Roman faith and religion.  Theoph. 
You told me that the visible Church both may err, and, de facto, hath erred: and the same (as you have sound proved by the testimonies of best approved popish writers) may fitly and truly be verified in many late Bishops of Rome: but how any Church can be invisible, (which is the Church, say you, that cannot err) I do not yet understand▪ I pray you take some pain, for my better instruction in that behalf.  Remig. 
True it is that every particular Church is visible in itself, for all men, women, and children, (every one in his corporal consistence) are visible, as experience teacheth us: and for all that, this is a true and most constant position, that that Church which cannot err, 
Mal. 1. 2. Ephes▪ 1. 4. Rom. 10. 12 1 Tim. 2. v. 19 joh. 10. 36. Rom. 8. 27. ●ere. 17. 9 Apoc. 2. 23.  invisible: for the true a●d exact knowledge whereof, you must distinguish in man two things: his external corporeity or corporal consistence, and his internal election in Christ jesus. Man considered the former way is visible indeed, every child can decipher the case but the latter way he is invisible, and known only unto God, or to those to whom he revealeth it.  Theoph. 
I seem now to have a glimmering of the question, though no perfect insight into the same. I pray you unfold the case distinctly, and declare it by some familiar examples, if it may be.  Remig. 
At such time as the Prophet Elias made his complaint in Santaria, that he only was left alone an 
3 Reg. 18. 22 Rom. 11. 4.  Oracle from heaven answered him in this manner: I have reserved to myself seven thousand men; which have not 
They are visible in themselves, but their faith and conscience is not known unto men.  bowed the knee to Baal. By which divine Oracle it is evident, the seven thousand persons were invisible to Elias, and all the same visible in themselves, at one and the same time▪ Do ye now understand the case?  Theoph. 
I seem to conceive it, by virtue of your former distinction. They were visible as men, but invisible as the children of God: for that Elias knew not their faith and election in jesus Christ.  Remig. 
You conceive it aright, judas Iscariot as he was 
Mat. 10. 4. and 26. 47. & 22.  a man, was visible both to the rest of the Apostles, and to others; who for all that, as he was a traitor, was visible to God alone: for which cause the Apostles were astonished, when they heard that one of them should betray Christ their Lord and Master. The Apostle confirmeth the same, when he saith, the foundation of God remaineth sure, and hath this seal, the Lord knoweth who are his: 
Mat. 26. v. 22. 2 Tim. 2. 19  the faith and conscience of the elect to Godward, is unknown to men, and so to them they are invisible, though visible in their own persons.  Theoph. 
I must needs yield to this▪ as to a manifest truth: but are not all members of the which Church believe in Christ, and hold the catholic faith, as we do?  Remig. 
All that profess externally the Catholic faith, are members of the visible Church, and must be reputed 
Mat. ●8▪ 17. 1 Cor. 5. 5. 2 Cor. 2. v. ●. 10.  for such, so long as they are not cut off from the Church, by the just censure of excommunication. But Gods elect only are the true Church, that is to say, that mystical body, whereof Christ jesus is the mystical head, Gods elect only are that Church, to which Christ promised his invisible presence to the world's end. Gods elect only are that Church, which is the pillar of truth▪ and cannot err. 
1 Cor. 10. 17. Ephes. 5. 23. 25, 26. Col 1. 18. 24 joh. 10. v. 16, 27. 1. joh. 2, 19 Mat. 28. ●0. 1. Tim 3. 15.  But the reprobates neither are nor can be that mystical body, whereof Christ is the head: for our Lord jesus is so far from being their head, that he hateth all those that work wickedness, and will put them from him with a sharp ve vobis, at the general doom. Gods elect only are the bride betrothed to our Lord jesus the Bridegroom, between whom there is such an inseparable union, as no power create upon earth, or in heaven, is able to dissolve 
Psal. 5. 7. Mat. 25. ver. 14. 2. Tim 2. 19,  the same.  Theoph. 
God reward you for your great pains, which you have taken herein for his name's sake, and my good, you have so resolved me in these most intricate difficulties 
Our Church doth still retain all the old Roman religion.  of christian religion, that I stand at utter defiance with the late startup Romish faith and doctrine, highly reverencing the old Roman religion, and so much of late Romish faith and doctrine, as is consonant and agreeable to the same. But for all this, the Papists seem to have strong reasons for their unwritten traditions, which indeed are so strong as myself know not how to answer them.  Remig. 
Doubt nothing in this behalf: God of his mercy will illustrate your understanding in this difficulty, as he hath done already in the rest: but for this subject, I have written so largely thereof in two several books, (viz. the down fall of Popery, and the jesuits Antepast) that I am altogether unwilling to handle the same a fresh.  Theoph. 
I have read both those books, & they do content me exceedingly: howbeit, some objections may yet be made against the doctrine there delivered, which myself am not able to confute: I therefore would humbly entreat your pains, not for a new discourse thereof, (which I hold needless) but for a fuller and plainer explication of some especial doubts, wherewith our learned papists troubleme.  Remig. 
Propound them in God's name, by whose holy and powerful assistance, I trust to return them to the Pope's utter shame, to the and everlasting confusion of all jesuited papists, that shall obstinately believe or defend the same.   

CHAP. 5. Of Popish unwritten traditions.  Theophilus. 
I will still by your favour argue as a papist on the behalf of the papists, that so I may more clearly have a sound insight into the truth: you Protestant's (for so we use to term you,) bear us in hand, that the scripture or written word of God containeth all things necessary for man's salvation: but our learned and religious Cardinal Bellarminus assureth us, that the truth is far otherwise, and that many things necessary for men's salvation, are only known and received by tradition: and what he writeth, is the Pope's ownefaith, and consequently the faith of the whole Church: for he dedicated his books to the Pope's holiness, who highly commended and approved them, that he made him Cardinal (though before but a poor Friar) for his pains.  Remig. 
I answer first, that I know your Cardinal right well, and willingly acknowledge him to be learned, 
Act. 9 v. 1, 2 Act. 26. v. 4 5.  as also religious and ●ealous after the manner of his sect, but in such sort as Paul was before his conversion. Secondly, that your Cardinal doth often acknowledge the truth unawares against himself, as do your other jesuits: one only assertion I will now cite, out of the jesuit S. R. (Robert Parsons is the man) in his pretenced answer to the downfall of popery: these are his express 
S. R. pag. 286.  words; where if by divina eloquia, we understand holy writ, (as Bell translateth and Saint Austen seemeth to mean) me thinks he plainly avoucheth, that God hath procured every thing to be clearly written, which to know is necessary to every man's salvation: the same teace Saint Syril, saying, not all things which our Lord 
S. Cyril lib. 11. in joan. cap. 68  did, are written, but what the writers deemed sufficient, as well for manners, as for doctrine, that by right faith and works, we may attain to the Kingdom of Heaven: and Saint Chrisostome, what things soever are necessary, 
Chrys●st. 2. Thes. hom. 3.  are manifest out of scripture: this is our Jesuits own tale, in the best manner he can utter it, whiles he bestirreth 
The jesuits confession.  himself more than a little, to answer my book (the downfall of popery) out of whose confession and free grant, (such is the force of truth) I observe these memorable and golden lessons. First, that every thing necessary for every man's salvation, is contained in the holy scriptures. Secondly, (and this is a thing to be admired, 
Mark well for Christ's sake.  coming from a papists mouth) that every point necessary for salvation, is plainly and clearly set down in holy writ. Thirdly, that God himself appointed all necessary things to be clearly written. Fourthly, that Saint Augustine, Saint Chrisostome, and Saint Cyrill, are of mine opinion. Fiftly, that the jesuit unawares justifieth that doctrine, which he purposely laboureth to overthrow: 
Act. 9 5  for, as our Lord jesus said to Saul, it is hard for him to kick against pricks.  Theoph. 
The jesuit S. R. (when you rightly name Parsons,) granteth all things to be written which are necessary for salvation but not which are necessary for 
S. R. p. 285.  faith and doctrine: these are his own and express words: for surely, the Prophets and Evangelists writing their doctrine for our better remembrance, would omit no one point which was necessary to be actually known of every one especially, seeing they have written many things, which are not so necessary: and this conclusion 
〈◊〉, 49. in joan, 10, 9,  teacheth Saint Austen, when he saith, that those things are written which seemeth sufficient for the salvation of the faithful: where I note (saith S. R.) that he said not, which seemeth sufficient to Christian faith, but which seemed sufficient to salvation: because fewer points suffice to salvation, than the Christian faith containeth, thus writeth the jesuit in flat terms, freely granting the scripture 
Lo, the Christian faith is superfluous.  to contain all things necessary for salvation, but not all things necessary for faith and doctrine.  Remig. 
I answer: first, that the jesuit granteth as much as I desire, when he granteth the holy scripture to contain all things necessary for our salvation: for doubtless, if all things necessary for salvation, be written 
This is all I desire,  in the scripture, it followeth of necessity, that no unwritten tradition is necessary for the same. Secondly, that 
Lo, no unwritten tradition is necessary for salvation,  noting is or can be necessary for the Christian faith, but the same is also necessary for salvation: for otherwise it would follow, (which no Christian may avouch) that a man may be saved without the Christian faith: but S. Athanasius in that creed or summary of faith, (which the Church of Rome receiveth and highly reverenceth,) affirmeth 
Athanasius in symbol,  resolutely, that whosoever believeth not stédfastly every jot of the Christian faith, shall perish everlastingly. Thirdly, that whosoever hath the holy scripture, hath all things necessary for his salvation. Fourthly, that seeing the Christian faith by popish doctrine, contaïneth many points not necessary for salvation, it followeth of necessity, that many points of popish, so supposed Christian faith, are needless in very deed, and for that respect with some other, our Church of noble England hath abolished the same with speed: for we are the true reformed Catholics, who hold constantly the old Roman religion in every point: but the late startup Romish faith is fully replenished, with curious sophistications, frivolous di●●●●●ns, vain inventions, counterfeit miracles, gross errors, palpables her●stes, intolerable superstitions, mere foolishness, and flat leasings.  Theoph. 
It is nowhere siad in scripture, (saith the jesuit S. R.) that all the books, chapters, verses, and sentences 
S. R. p. 292.  which in the Bible are admitted for Canonical, are truly Canonical and Gods pure word, without the mixture 
The Papists invincible Bulwark.  of man's word: and yet is this a point of Christian faith, yea, hereupon depend all the articles which we gather out of the scripture: this is that invincible Bulwark, (saith Parsons) which no Protestant can ever batter down while the world shall endure.  Remig. 
I answer: first, that by our jesuits doctrine (as we have head) if may be a point of Christian faith, and yet not necessary to salvation, and consequently, if 
Mark this point well  this point were not known by the scriptures, yet might the scripture contain all things needful to salvation. Secondly that the holy scripture showeth itself to be canonical, and the pure word of God: for, as holy David saith, it is 
Ps. 11. v. 105. 2. Pet. 1. 19 Hebr. 4. ver 12. He is a reprobate whole heart God's word doth not touch. 2. Cor. 44.  a Lantern to our feet and a light to our paths, as Saint Peter saith, it is a light that shineth in the dark: and S. Paul saith. God's word is lively, and mighty in operation, and sharper than any two edged sword: it is not ink and paper, or a bare and dead Letter, but quick and powerable, and showeth itself as light to the children of light. For, (as the same Apostle telleth us) if Christ's Gospel be hid, it is hid in them that perish, in whom the God of this world hath blinded the minds of them which believe not, lest the light of Christ's glorious Gospel should shine unto them: yea, the self same Apostle saith, that 
1. Cor. 2. 15. 1. joh. 2. ver. 27. 1. joh. 10. ver. 27.  the spiritual man judgeth all things. Saint john also saith, that the unction which Gods children have received, teacheth them all things. And what need many words? Christ himself assureth us, that his sheep hear hi● voy●●▪ and that they follow him, because they know his voice▪ he addeth, that they will not follow a stranger, and he yieldeth this reason there●●, because they know not the voice of strangers: this is confirmed by an 
joh. 10. v. 3. 4. 5. joh. 3. 18.  old received Theological maxim, viz, that when we pray, we speak to God, but when we read, or hear the holy scripture red, than God speaketh to us: but certes, when God speaketh to us, if we be his, we will hear him, if we be his sheep we will know his voice and follow him. Thirdly, that every part of the new Testament, doth affirm itself to be the pure word of God: for it saith, the holy Gospel of jesus Christ, according to Matthew Mark, Luke and john: the Acts of the holy Apostles, written by Luke the Evangelist: the Epistle of the Apostle Paul, to the Romans, Corinthians, Galatians, Ephesians, Philippians, Colossians, Thessaloniti●ns, Timotheus, Titus and Philemon: the Epistle of Peter james, Jude, and john, the servants of jesus Christ: the revelation of jesus Christ, which God gave unto john his servant by his holy Angel. Fourthly, that the new Testament giveth testimony to the old, and the old to the new, in the sweet harmony of divine truth: for Christ himself te●l●th us, that all must come to pass which are written of him, in the law, in the Prophets, and in the Psalms: and for this end was it, that Abraham 
Luke. 24▪ ver. 29.  answered the rich glutton in these words; they have Moses and the Prophets, let them hear them: as if he had said, now the law is not studied now the Prophets are contemned, and now God is not heard speaking in his holy word: some would have Angels come down from heaven, some desire miracles, others the 
To hear Moses and the Prophets, is to read their books.  dead to rise again: howbeit to hear Moses and the Prophets (which is to read the scriptured, for Moses and the Prophets were dead many hundred yéeces afore) is the true and only way to attain eternal life: this reason striketh dead, as which proveth the scripture of the 
Rom. 1. v. 1.  old Testament to be Canonical, and the pure word of God: and this reason is confirmed by Saint Paul, when he telleth us, that he was put apart to preach the Gospel of God which afore was promised by his Prophets in the holy scriptures: and it is further confirmed, because the 
Act. 26. ver. 22.  same Apostle saith in an other place, that he taught nothing, but which Moses and the Prophets had foretold should come to pass. Fifthly, that these holy writings 
Christ confirmed the old Testament to be Canonical.  of Moses and the Prophets, were common among the jews in Christ's tune, and yet did Christ never once reprove the jews for any corruption therein, or charge them with changing, adding, or taking away of any one jot or title either of the law or of the Prophet's: for our merciful 
Nomb. 23. ver 5. 7. 8. Act. 9 ver. 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 1. Tim. 1. 13. Mat. 7 15. 16. job. 2. v. 8. 10 11.  and powerable God, who caused Balaam to bless when he entered to curse: who, when Saul was a cruel persecuter, blasphemer, and ravening Wolf, made him with one word as meek as a Lamb: who shut up the Sea with doors and stayed her proud waves, & appointed her bounds whither she should come, but no further: enforced the adversaries of the truth (the jews I mean) to preserve the holy scriptures of the old Testament inviolable and pure from all corruption, and not to add any thing thereto, 
Exod. 8. 19 Deut, 4. 2, Deut 12. 32  or take aught therefrom, neither to profane the same, with the least mixture of man's word: our Lord jesus assured us hereof, when he constantly pronounced, that it was more easy for Heaven and Earth to pass away, 
Luke, 2●, 35 Luke, 16, ver, 17, Mat, 5, 10. Mat, 24, 34, Luke 21, ver, 33.  than that one title of the law should fall: thus you see, or may see, I weened, that the popish invincible bulwark is battered down, & made even with the ground: for none but God alone, can infallibly foretell things to come.  Theoph. 
Your reasons are unanswerable in my judgement, and your manner of disputation so forcible, as it is able fully to persuade any indifferent reader. Howbeit, I do not yet see how the holy scripture doth prove itself canonical: for if that were possible to be proved, not only our jesuit Pars●as, but the Pope, his Cardinals, and all his jesuited Popelings should be confounded everlastingly.  Remig. 
I have proved out of Christ's own words, that whatsoever is contained in the law of Moses, in the books 
Luk. 24. v. 44▪ Luk. 16. v. 26. Esa. 41. ver. 23. Exod. 8. 19  of the Prophets, & in▪ the Psalms, that same must needs be true, and come to pass: and consequently, whatsoever scripture must needs come to pass, and cannot but be true, that Scripture doubtless is canonical, and the pure word of God: for only God's prediction of future things is infallible.  Theoph. 
Do not many godly people, especially the zealous Preachers of God's word, utter many speeches which must needs come to pass, and cannot but be true?  Remig. 
I answer with this distinction, that words uttered by men, may be considered two ways. First, as the words of pure man. Secondly, as God's words pronounced by pure man. The words uttered by man the second way, must needs come to pass, and cannot but be true: and therefore do we receive and reverence, as the pure word of God, and Canonical scripture, all the law given by Moses, as also all the rest of the old and new testament, 
Psa. 116. ●1. Psa. 62. 10. Exod. 8. 19 jer. 17. 5. 1. Reg 13. v. 18. 24. Esa. 41. v. ●2. 23.  this day truly acknowledged for Canonical and holy writ: but words uttered by man the first way, are fallible, and may deceive both the speaker and the hearer. For as God's Prophet telleth us, all men are liars: another Prophet accurseth him that putteth his trust in man: another Prophet was devoured of a Lion, for that he gave credit, & relied upon the feigned revelation of an old Prophet in Bethel: for none can infallibly foretell things to come, except one that is Almighty and all-sufficient of himself.  Theoph. 
Men tell us, that the sun shall rise at such an hour, and go down at such an hour: as also, that the Moon shall shine at such a time, be dark at such a time, and so in sundry other things: All which, though foretold 
Man's pure word must not needs come to pass.  by man, cannot but be true and come to pass. Semblably may we say, that though the predictions recounted in the law and the Prophets, must needs come to pass, and cannot but be true, yet may they be the words of pure man, and not canonical Scripture.  Theoph. 
You deceive yourself in your own allegations: for neither the rising and setting of the sun, nor yet the light and darkness of the moon, must needs come 
jos. 10. v. 12 13. 2 Reg. 20. v. 11. Mat. 27. v. 45. Luk. 23. v. 44. Mark. 15 v. 33. joh. 18. v. 20. Exod▪ 12. 18. ●  to pass, as Astronomers do affirm: for God, all sufficient, the author thereof, can stay or change their natural courses at his holy will and pleasure. joshua in the power of God commanded the sun to stay in Gibeon, & the moon in the valley of A●alon; and it came to pass accordingly. The sun, at the request of good King Ezechias, went backward ten degrees. In the time of Christ's most bitter and sacred passion, darkness was over all the land of Chanaan, from the sixth hour until the ninth, that is to say, by Theological supputation, from twelve a clock till three in the afternoon: and yet did Christ suffer when the moon was at the full, and about noon or midday. For, he was crucified (oh cruel jews) even when they kept their feast of the Passeover, which was, and must needs be done in the full moon, according to the prescript of the law.  Theoph. 
Your discourse yieldeth great solace to 
Exo. 8▪ 19 Psa. 135. 6. Rom. 9 19  mine heart. I see it as clearly as the noon day, that all creatures are subject to God their maker, that every word of man is fallible, and that only Gods will is Canonical, and cannot but be true. But Christ addeth a limitation and restriction to his words, which troubleth me more 
Luk. 24: v. 44.  than a little. He saith not simply and absolutely, that all things written in the Law, the Prophets, and the Psalms, must be fulfilled, but that all things which are there written of him, must of necessity come to pass.  Remig. 
Though Christ use a restriction, by reason of his occasioned particular application, yet is his argument general, as which is drawn from the excellency & infallibility of holy writ: as if he had said, whatsoever is written in the law of Moses, in the Prophets and in the Psalms, that same must needs come to pass, and cannot but be true, and consequently, whatsoever is there spoken of me, that must needs come to pass: neither is this mine, but Christ's own exposition, I assure you.  Theoph. 
If it be possible to prove this, the Papists may 
O doleful Placebo.  sing this doleful song, The Pope from their royal Sceptres, hath many Kings put down, but now his neck is broken, and the Romish faith quite overthrown.  Remig. 
It is not only possible, but a thing very easy. Mark well, and understand my discourse aright. Our Saviour in the same chapter, reproveth his Disciples as 
Luk. 24. v. 25.  they went to Emmaus, condemning them of folly and infidelity, for that they did not simply and generally believe all that the Prophets had spoken. Oh fools (saith Christ) and slow of heart, to believe all that the Prophets have spoken. Again, another text saith that he began at Moses, and at all the Prophets, & interpreted unto them in all 
Luk. 24. v. 27.  the Scriptures, the things which were written of him. This is that interpretation which the holy Ghost affordeth us. Out of which, I observe these memorable docoments. First, that Christ spoke absolutely and simply without any restriction at all, of all things written in the Law, the Prophets and the Psalms. Secondly, that Christ interpreted in all the Scriptures the things that were written of him. Thirdly, that all the Scriptures of the Prophets, of Moses, and of the Psalms, are true, and the Canonical rule of our faith.  Theoph. 
Christ indeed speaketh simply and generally of the Prophets; but he neither nameth Moses, nor the book of Psalms.  Remig. 
I answer: first, that Christ's speech is synecdochical, 
The figure Synecdoche.  very usual and frequent in the holy Scriptures, it compriseth the whole in the part thereof. Secondly, that Christ nameth both Moses and all the rest of the old Testament: For after he had reproved his Apostles for 
Luk. 24. v. 27.  not believing all things in the Prophets, the text saith plainly in the words following, that Christ began at Moses, and interpreted in all the Scriptures: and a little after, in the self same chapter, he maketh mention both of 
v. 44. v. 45.  Moses, of the Prophets, and of the Psalms: and in the verse then immediately following it is said, that Christ opened their understanding, that they might understand the Scriptures: so that Christ undoubtedly meaneth all the scriptures of the old Testament, when synecdochically he meaneth only the Prophets: which thing I shall yet 
joh. 5. v. 45 46. 47. joh. 7. 38. joh. ● 2. 48.  prove by another scripture more plain than all the rest. Do not think that I will accuse you to my father, there is one that accuseth you, even Moses in whom ye trust. For had ye believed Moses, ye would have believed me, for he wrote of me: but if ye believe not his writings, how shall ye believe my words? These are the very words of our Lord and Master Christ: out of which I gather these comfortable lessons. First, that the writings of Moses accuse the reprobate, and consequently, that they are Canonical Scripture: for otherwise, neither their condemnation, nor their accusation should be of force. Secondly, that to believe Moses (mark these words) is to believe Christ himself. Thirdly, that not to believe the writings of Moses, is not to believe Christ's words, and consequently, that the writings of Moses are Canonical Scripture, and the pure word of God.  Theoph. 
You resolve me so sound in every point, that I can no way in truth withstand your doctrine. Howbeit, me think I hear the jesuit Parsons whispering in the ears of his silly Disciples, that there is no text from the first 
S. R. Pag. 292. Boasteth of this his objection.  of Genesis, to the last of the apocalypse, which saith, that all the Books, Chapters, Verses, and Sentences, which in the Bible are admitted for Canonical, are truly Canonical, & Gods pure word, without the mixture of man's words: if possibly you be able to confute this objection, they have no more to say.  Remig. 
Answer me awhile to my demands, and you 
Ps, 62, 10, Ps, 116. 11,  shall easily find out the confutation, he that saith generally without restriction at all, that all men are liars, doth he not affirm old men and young, rich and poor, learned and unlearned, and every man of what state or calling soever he be, to be a liar?  Theoph. 
He so affirmeth, it cannot be denied.  Remig. 
Doth not he, who saith that all things in S. Paul's Epistles, are the pure word of God, affirm every Chapter, every verse, and every sentence therein contained, to be the pure word of God?  Theoph. 
It is most true, it cannot be gainsaid.  Remig. 
Doth not he affirm every Book, every Chapter, every verse, and every sentence of the Prophetical writings, to be the true & the pure word of God, who saith, that all things which the Prophets have written are true, and the pure word of God? an he deny any particular, that granteth all?  Theoph. 
He cannot doubtless: do it for he that granteth the whole must perforce grant every part of the whole even as he that granteth God to have made all things, must of necessity grant him to have made every particular thing, whatsoever hath any essence or being in the whole world.  Remig. 
You have granted enough, (though no more than the truth) for the full refutation of our Friar jesuit. I have proned (as ye know) out of the express Scripture of the new Testament, that all things written in the law of Moses, in the books of the Prophets, & in the Psalms 
Psa. 35 19 Mat. 5. 17. Mat. 22. 40 Mat. 19 17. Rom. 4. v. 13, 14. 15. 16 Gal 3. v. 24 Heb. 7. 19 Heb. 8 v, 7 9 ●0. 13. Heb. 9 22. Psa. 35. 19  (in which three, as also sometime in the law & the Prophets, and other sometime in the law only, all the old Testament is comprised) are the pure word of God, and consequently the Canonical scripture: For if we believe not the books of Moses, neither will we believe Christ's own words, as it is already proved.  Theoph. 
But our sesuite perhaps will say, that there are sundry Canonical books in the old Testament, besides these which you have named.  Remig. 
What the jesuitical Friar Parsons will say, 
See the Anatomy of Popish tyraany.  small account is to be made: for, (as his dear brethren by popish profession have written of him) he is a monster of mankind, a notorious liar, the wickedest man upon the earth, begotten of some● Incubus, and depending upon the Devil of hell: this and much more of like homely qualities, the secular Priests have confessed of Parsons that unfortunate Rector of the English College in Rome: and this they have done in their printed books lately published to the view of the whole world: this honest man Parsons, hath lately published the pretenced answer to the Downfall of Popery: but his back is so pitifully broken with the said Downfall, (alas poor Friar, I am sorry for thy heaviness) that his neighbours think he cannot live any while: Yet I hope (which is my small comfort in such a distressed case) that the Popish secular Priests will sing a joyful dirge (if not a black sanctus) for his soul. But woe is me, that my native countrymen at Rome, have such a governor set over them: now to your objection out of Parsons, I answer thus. First, that the scripture saith plainly, that Christ interpreted all the scriptures which spoke of him, and consequently all the Canonical books of the old Testament, for no book Canonical can be named, which maketh not some mention of our Lord jesus. Secondly, that both our saviour, his Apostles, and all the ancient fathers, did ever comprise all the old Testament▪ in the law the Prophets, and the Psalms, it cannot be denied.  Theoph. 
The scripture saith not, that Christ interpreted all the scriptures that spoke of him, but that he interpreted out of them, those things which they spoke of him.  Remig. 
I answers: first, that Christ interpreted God's word, but not the word of man. Secondly, that in interpreting that which was of him else, he did in effect interpret the whole. Thirdly, that in interpreting and pe● consequens, approving those things which were of and concerning himself, he did indeed approve, commend, 
joh. 5. v. 46▪ 47.  and authorize the whole: for▪ as Saint Austen and other holy fathers tell us, and the jesuit doth yield 
S. R.  thereto, if any part of the holy scripture should be false, 
Pag. 29 2.  we could have no certainty of the rest, much less could 
joh. 5. v. 47.  we ground our faith upon them.  Theoph. 
You have sound proved the scripture of the old Testament to be Canonical, even by the express words of the new Testament: but what text of scripture can prove the new Testament to be Canonical, and the pure word of God without the mixture of man's word? is this possible to be done?  Remig. 
It is not only possible, but very easy to be done: I prove it. First, because the Gospel (which is 
Rom. 1. v. 2. 17.  the whole new Testament) is contained in the old Testament, for Saint Paul plainly testifieth, that he was set apart to preach the Gospel of God, which he afore had promised by his Prophets in the holy scriptures. Secondly, because the same Apostle constantly avouched to 
Act. ●0. v. 〈◊〉. 27.  the Elders of Ephesus, that he had showed to them all the council of God. Thirdly, because the self same Apostle affirmeth in an other place, that he taught nothing 
Act. 26. v. 23.  but the law of Moses and the Prophets: nevertheless (saith he) I obtained help of God, and continue unto this day, witnessing both to small and to great, saying none other thing, than those which the Prophets & Moses did say should come to pass. Fourthly, because Saint 
1. Tim. 4. 12. 2. Tim. 3. 15.  Paul testifieth to young Timothy, that he kn●w the holy scriptures of a child, which are able to make him wise unto salvation, through the faith which is in Christ jesus. By these testimonies and authorities, two things are cleared: the one, that all the books of the old testament delivered by Moses to the jews, are Canonical and the pure word of God, able to make us wise unto salvation: the other, that all Saint Paul's doctrine, and consequently of the other Apostles, (for he taught all the council of God, which was all the doctrine of all the rest in substance) was contained in Moses and the Prophets: and this is confirmed by the Apostles words to King Agrippa, which are these: O King Agrippa, believest thou 
Act. 20. v. 27. Act. 26. v. 2●▪ v. 27.  the Prophes? I know that thou believest: Lo, Saint Paul knew that Agrippa believed the law and the Prophets, and commendeth him for the same: I therefore conclude, that the holy scripture itself doth prove itself to be Canonical, and the pure word of God.  Theoph. 
The Papists say, that we received both the old 
S▪ R. p. 369.  and new Testament from them, and not from the jews.  Remig. 
I answer: first, that the primitive and Apostolical Church received the old Testament from the jews, and that the Apostles were only the publishers of the new Testament, not of the old. Secondly, that we believe the old Testament to be Canonical scripture, neither for the testimony of the jews, (though they delivered it, and were the publishers thereof▪) neither yet for the authority of the Church of Rome, or of any other Church in the Christian world. Thirdly, that we believed it to be the pure word of God, and Canonical scripture, because Christ so pronounced of it, long before the Apostles were confirmed in the truth. Fourthly, that 
Luke, 24. ve●. 27▪ 4●. joh. 16▪ 13. 4.  the Pope, his Jesuits, and jesuited Popelings, do enforcedly to a●●●● 〈◊〉 the holy Bible, that which is in very many places the pure word of man.  Theoph. 
How is this possible? have not the Papists the holy Bible?  Remig. 
The old Testament, which is the pure word of God, is in the Hebrew tongue, and the new in Greek▪ but the late popish Council of Trent (which the jesuits and all jesuited Papists have admitted) commandeth straight to use only their Latin vulgata editio, which the Apostles did never read or see, much less did they authorize it for Canonical scripture▪ and the pure word of God: and consequently, albeit they have both the Hebrew and the Greek locked up in their studies and Libraries: yet for as much as they prefer their own vulgar Latin translation, (commonly called Saint Hieromes) and cruelly bind and tie all divines to ●s● the same in all schools and pulpits, and no texts, sentences, or allegations to be admitted, save only out of the same: it followeth by an inevitable consequent, and necessary deduction, 
The Popish Bible is the word of man.  that their Canonical so supposed Bible is not Canonical, but in very deed the word of man: this is confirmed, because the Papists this day violently obtrude for Canonical, sundry books of the old Testament, which are not in the Cannon of the Hebrews, neither yet delivered to the Church by Christ or his Apostles.  Theoph. 
I now remember a strange saying of the jesuit Parsons, viz, that many parts of the Bible were doubted of long after the death of the Apostles: which 
S. R. p. 387.  argueth to me, that their unwritten traditions are fallible, and their doctrine new.  Remig. 
The Pope's religion Chaugeth every day, by reason of new revelations made unto his Holiness: but from whence they came, whether from Heaven or from hell, that cannot I tell, let the reader judge: this I am assured of, that their own learned masters cannot agree about their revelations: Melchior Canus a learned Popish Bishop affirmeth constantly, that the Church hath 
Canus de locis, lib. 3. cap 4. p. 10●.  no new revelations in matters of faith: but the Pope's minorite Friar T●telmannus, otherwise a learned man indeed, telleth us an othertale, viz. that many mysteries of divine truth, are daily revealed to the Church, every 
T●telm de locis dialect▪ cap. 33.  day more and more: and thus by reason of their Popish feigned revelations, the late Romish faith doth daily increase above man's expectation, and is as like the old Roman religion, as York is like soul Sutton: I will now make an end of this question, referring you for the rest to the Jesuits Antepast, where you may find at large, concerning this subject, whatsoever your heart can desire: but before I end the conference, let me ask you a merry question: what will you say, if (for a parting blow with the jesuit Parsons) I prove out of his own printed book, as also out of the jesuitical Cardinal Bellarmine, even in that book which he dedicated to the Pope's holiness, with which book he so pleased the Pope, that he made him Cardinal for the same, that all the books, Chapters, verses, and sentences, which are admitted for Canonical, are actually proved in holy scripture to be truly Canonical, & Gods pure word without the mixture of man's word? which for all that, is that mighty point of faith, which the said two Jesuits and all jesuited Papists contend with might and many to be an unwritten tradition of the Church.  Theoph. 
What will I say? Is that your question? I will tell you both what I will say and do: I will say you have done that, which to this day was ever thought impossible: and this I promise to cause the same to be written in Marble with golden Letters, and to put the stone in Saint Peter's Church at Rome, In Perpetuam rei memoriam.  Remig. 
Be attentive, and mark well what I deliver, for I trust by God's help, to prove it most substantially: these are the express words of S. R. or of Robert Parsons that Traitorous and brazen faced jesuit. First 
S. R. pag. 284.  conclusion is: all such points of Christian faith, as are necessary to be actually believed of every one, that hath use of reason though he be never so simple, are actually contained in scripture, either clearly, or obscurely: these are Parson's words, I neither add any thing, change any thing, nor take any thing away: the jesuit Bellarmine 
Bellarm. lib. 4. de verb. scripto, c. 11. col. ● 91▪ to 1.  hath these express words: These observations being marked, I answer, that all those things are written by the Apostles, which are necessary for all men, & which the Apostles preached openly to all the vulgar people, but that all other things are not written: These are the Cardinal's words: I cite them most sincerely. I hold it a damnable sin to belly the Devil. Out of these testimonies, I gather very plainly, that all things which every one is bound to believe, are actually contained in the holy scripture: and consequently that all the books, chapters, verses & sentences which are admitted for Canonical, are truly Canonical & Gods pure word without the mixture of man's word: which conclusion, for all that, is it that both our Jesuits and all their cursed jesuited brood do violently impugn.  Theoph. 
The Papists would seem to frustrate your conclusion, because they only believe it for the testimony of the Pope, and Church of Rome.  Remig. 
They would gladly seem indeed to do many things which they are not able to perform. But the truth is as I have said: & thus both briefly & pithily I prove the same. Whatsoever is necessary for every Christian, the same is contained in the scriptures of the Apostles: but the knowledge of all the Books, Chapters, Verses, and 
Mark well this my probation.  Sentences, admitted for Canonical to be truly Canonical, and the pure word of God, is necessary for every Christian, ergo, the same is contained in the Scriptures 
Glogismus in prima figura & modo Daril.  of the Apostles. The conclusion of this argument cannot be denied, because it is a perfect Syllogism, in the first figure, and in the third made called Darij. The proposition is confessed both by Cardinal Bellarmine, and by the jesuit Parsons. You have heard their express words truly alleged, as themselves in printed books have set them down so then the difficulty (if there be any at all) resteth in the assumption, viz. if to know the holy Bible to 
Lo, late Popery is flat heresy  be Canonical and the pure word of God, be necessary for every Christian, which being a fundamental point of religion, is so clear and so apparent to every one, as methinks it is a needless labour to take in hand to prove the same. But I prove it: first, because the knowledge of the holy Gospel & every part thereof▪ is necessary to every on's 
joh. 10. 22. Rom. 16. Rome 14. 23 Hebr ●. 7. Rome 10. 17 joh. 3 18.  salvation. Secondly, because the Papists themselves do ever urge the same, as a necessary point of faith and salvation, so often as it seemeth any way to make for their unwritten traditions. Thirdly, because all the articles of faith deduced out of the scriptures, depend thereupon: for these are the jesuit S. R. his own words, yet this is a point of the Christian faith, yea, thereupon depend all the articles we gather out of Scripture. Thus disputeth our jesuit in his pretenced answer to the Downfall of Popery, after he hath bitterly many times denied▪ that 
Note this point well▪ S. R. pag▪ 292. The jesuit plainly confoundeth himself.  the holy Scripture doth show itself to be God's word: but the force of truth is so mighty in operation, the while of malice he striveth against it, he unawares confoundeth himself, and pleadeth for the truth in very deed. Fourthly, because the jesuit S. R. urged, and as it were deadly wounded with the sharp pikes of his adversaries arguments, plainly & resolutely confesseth the doctrine which I defend. In one place he hath these express words: me thinks he plainly avoucheth (he speaketh of Saint Austen) that God hath procured every thing to be clearly written, which to know, is necessary for every man's salvation. 
Pag. 287.  In another place he hath these words: what 
The jesuit unawares▪ killeth the Pope & his religion.  things soever are necessary, are manifest out of scripture. Now sir, what man can think our jesuit to be in his right wits, that thus woundeth himself with his own weapons? for he doth not only grant, that every thing necessary for every man's salvation, is manifest in the scripture, but withal, that every necessary thing is clearly written in the same: and consequently, he granteth unaware & against himself, either that to believe the holy Bible to be the pure word of God, is a trifle, a thing of small moment, and not at all necessary to salvation, which if the Papists do, they must perforce condemn themselves, and utterly overthrow their Romish faith; or else, that the same is plainly and clearly set down in the holy Scripture; the cause is clear, I hope I have said enough.  Theoph. 
All the world knoweth, old and young, rich and poor, learned and unlearned, that to know and believe the holy Bible to be God's word, is so necessary to salvation, as none without it can be saved.  
It now remaineth for my full satisfaction and resolution in all points of Catholic doctrine in controversy, that if I know how to answer the Papists concerning one point of doctrine, wherewith they never cease to charge you & your profession, I would think myself able to answer and confound all Papists in the world, and to persuade all indifferently affected persons, to abhor and detest late startup popery world without end.  Remig. 
Let me know, I pray you heartily, what the point of doctrine is, wherewith our adversaries so surcharge us and our profession, conceal nothing from me, that any way troubleth your conscience: for doubtless I am most willing to undergo any pains for your instruction in the truth.  Theoph. 
They charge you to hold & teach, that the best liver among you sinneth in the best act he doth, which seemeth a doctrine so strange & irksome to all godly ears, as myself cannot but detest the same: for if we can do nothing but sin, we must perforce condemn all good works, all preaching, all teaching, and all holy conversation.  Remig. 
I wonder that any living wilcharge our Church with such unsavoury doctrine.  Theoph. 
Your adversaries affirm with open mouths, (so disgracing you and your profession, as much as in them lieth) that this is a general received axiom with all your 
S. R. p. 220.  Divines: justus in omni opere bono peceat: The just man sinneth in every good work he doth; and that all, even our best works are sin.  Remig. 
Myself, though most unworthy of that sacred name, am one among the rest. Howbeit, I am so far from believing or defending that doctrine, that I utterly renounce the same, in the sense formerly by you avouched. For the exact examination of which proposition, by them te armed our Maxim or Axiom, let us dispute the question, pro & contra, as we have done the rest.   

CHAP. 6. Of the state of the regenerate, with the particular adjuncts of the same.  Remigius. 
THis proposition, which seemeth to trouble you more than a little (the just man sinneth in every good work) may admit a double sense and meaning, viz, a rigorous and a favourable interpretation. I● we interpret it according to the rigour of the words, the sense must be this: the just man sinneth, even in the best work he doth: which sense I willingly grant) is not only strange, but with all very irkson●● to all Christian ears: howbeit, if it may find a favourable interpretation, the sense and meaning will be this: the just man sinneth, whiles he 
Mark well, the just man sineth whiles he doth good works, but not in doing▪ them.  doth the best work he can: which sense is most Christian, sound, Catholic, Apostolical, and consonant to the holy scriptures. But here ye must mark seriously, that it is one thing to sin, in doing a good work, an other thing to s●me while the same good work is a doing.  Iheoph. 
This your distinction: as it is very subtle, so is it also right iovous & comfortable to mine heart: it affordeth me a kind of glimmering though no full insight into the question.  Remig. 
He that will exactly know the truth of this question, must ap●ly distinguish the quadruple state of man. First, his state before sin until his fall. Secondly, his state after sin until his regeneration. Thirdly, his state after regeneration until his glorification. Fourthly, his state after glorification world without end. In the first state, albeit man sinned indeed, and thereby made both himself and his posterity subject to eternal torment: yet was he so created of God his maker, that he might have lived without sin for ever and aye. In the second state, man can do nothing that good is, but sin continually. In the third state, man by God's grace and great mercy is enabled to do good, though not wholly to ●schew sin, save only according to the measure of his regeneration. In the fourth state, man is so confirmed in grace, that he cannot sin world without end. Which distinction being well marked and remembered, we shall easily understand, that albeit man can never be without sin in this life but add sin to sin continually, yet may he by the grace of regeneration, do good works, even while he sinneth mortally.  Theoph. 
It seemeth to me a thing impossible, that man shall be able to do any good work while he sinneth damnably?  Remig. 
It is a generell received axiom with all skilful Logicians, that true things must be granted, fals● things denied, and ambiguous things distinguished: which being true, as it is most true indeed, if we shall distinguish regeneration aright, the truth of this intricate question will soon appear: viz. that one may aswell both sin and do good at one and the same time, as he may at the same time be both a father and a son.  Theoph. 
Our Papists contend with might and main, that howsoever we distinguish regeneration, yet shall man in his justification be freed from all sin, and consequently he cannot sin mortally in the best act he doth.  Remig. 
The Papists err grossly about regeneration, whilst they do not understand the same aright according to the holy scriptures: or they bear the world in hand, that every justified person is freed from all sin in his soul, and only subject to sin materially in his body: which if it were true, as it is most false, then doubtless could not the regenerate man commit mortal sin while he doth his best works.  Theoph. 
The Apostle seemeth to stand on their side, 
Gal. 5. 17.  when he telleth us, that the flesh lusteth against the spirit, and the spirit against the flesh: and it is confirmed by the 
Rom. 7. 25.  same Apostle, in another place, where he affirmeth himself to serve the law of God in his mind, but the law of 
2. Cor. 4. 16 Ephes. ●. 2● 24.  sin in his flesh: which doctrine elsewhere he delivereth in other terms, distinguishing man into the inward and outward man, and in another place into the old and new man.  Remig. 
The Pope, his Cardinals, jesuits, and jesuited Popelings, for the maitenance of their false and erroneous doctrine of man's justification, do shamefully abuse and wrest the holy scriptute to a contrary sense and meaning, fraudulently persuading their silly devoted vassals, that original concupiscence remaineth only in the body, and not at all in the soul, where as the truth is far otherwise, as holy wridtoth evidently co●uince.  Theoph. 
They contend and obstinately affirm, that the inward man doth connotate the soul, and the outward man the body: and the terms of inward and outward, seem very agreeable to their application.  Remig. 
The spirit, the law of the mind, the inward, and outward inall, are all one with the holy Apostle, and do signify the whole man as he is regenerate: and semblably, the flesh, the law of the members, the outward, and the old man, are with the same Apostle all one, and do signify the whole man as he is corrupt by the fall of Adam.  Theoph. 
If it be possible for you ●oo demonstrate this doctrine out of holy writ, you thereby give the Pope a deadly wound, and turn his religion upside down.  Remig. 
Mark well my discourse, that ye may understand the same. Saint john hath these express words: which are borne hot of blood nor of the will of the flesh, nor 
joh. 13  of the will of man, but of God: in which asseveration, the holy Evangelist understandeth by the word (flesh) the whole man as he is corrupt and unregenerate.  Theoph. 
How can it be proved, that Saint john: understandeth the corrupt man by the word (flesh.)?  Remig. 
These four are distinguished in the Evangelist, blood, the will of the flesh, the will of the man, and God: by which distinction he giveth us to understand, that the will of the flesh doth connotate the whole man corrupt: I prove it, because the Evangelist distinguisheth blood, flesh, and man, one from another by a particular dissunctive, and God from them all, by a particular adversative.  Theoph. 
Your affirmance of the quadruple distinction, is evident, but how should flesh connotate the corrup man, it doth not so well appear.  Remig. 
I prove it two ways. First, if the word (flesh) should signify the body or fleshly parts of man, the Evangelist should thereby confound himself, and frustrate his distiction: the reason is evident, because in the first word (blood) he did formerly inf●●nate so much unto his reader Secondly, because the Evangelist addeth an adjunct to the word (flesh) which can no way agree to the body.  Theoph. 
What is that adjunct, I pray you.  Remig. 
The will of the flesh: for will is added unto flesh, not unto blood, and it is a proper faculty of the soul, but not of the body: for the flesh or body hath no will at all. 
The body doth not cou●t without the soul.  which for all that the Evangelist attributeth to the flesh: and consequently, he meaneth and speaketh of that flesh which hath a will, and so of the corrupt man, fitly compared to flesh, as who before his regeneration savoureth only the things of the flesh: which sense the Apostle plainly vn●oldeth, when he affirmeth the animal, sensual, and natural man, not to perceive the things of thy spirit of God. This reason or explication is confirmed by an other 
1. Cor. ●. ver. 14.  testimony of the same Apostle, where he avoucheth the flesh to lust against the spirit, and the spirit against the flesh, so that the children of God cannot perform the 
Gal. 5. v. 14.  things they will and earnestly desire: for this conflict between the flesh and the spirit, must needs be understood 
●ug. de perf. just. r● tioc. 17.  of the regenerate and unregenerate parts of man: for the flesh lusteth not without the soul, as both Saint Austen and reason teace us.  Theoph. 
The Papists expound the words of the Apostle otherwise, affirming the combat to be between the body signified by the flesh, and the soul signified by the spirit.  Remig. 
The Papists say much, but prove little: they strive for life to obscure the Apostles true sense and meaning, as which turneth their faith & religion vp●idedoune: but I God willing) will prove what I say, by the express words of holy writ, and by evident reason. First therefore, many texts of holy scripture do convince the Papists o● 
S. R. p. 160. P●. 51. 10. 11  gross error, while they perversely and, mordicus aver, that the soul of the regenerate is free from all mortal sin, and that original sin remaineth only in the body materially: the first text is comprised in these words, create in me a clean heart, O God, and renew a right spirit within me: cast me not away from thy presence, and take not thine holy spirit from me. In these words the holy Prophet showeth plainly, that he was regenerate, and yet not free from sin: for in that he desireth his heart to be purified, and his spirit to be renewed, he giveth us to understand, that his soul is not free from sin, nor himself perfectly regenerate. On the other side, in that he prayeth God not to take away his holy spirit from him, nor to cast him away from his presence; he showeth evidently to the indifferent reader, that he is regenerate, though not wholly, yet in part. The second text confirmeth the same, in these words: though our outward man perish, yet the inward man is renewed daily. The third 
2 Cor. 4. v. 16. Ephes. 4. 23 Col. 3. 9  text is yet plainer, in these words: be renewed in the spirit of your mind, and put on the new man, which after God is created in righteousness and true holiness. The fourth text is as plain, in these words: seeing ye have put off the old man with his works, and have put on the new, which is renewed in knowledge after the image of him that created him. The fifth text doth further confirm the same, in these words: night and day praying exceedingly that we might see your face, and might accomplish 
1 Thes. 3. v. 10. 1 Cor. 13 v 12.  that which is lacking in your faith. By all which texts it is very clear and evident, that the regenerate man is not wholly renewed in his souls: for which respect, Saint 
Apoc. 22. v. 11. Rom. 7.  john exhoedeth him that is justified, to be justified more: Qui justus est, iustificetur adhuc Yea, S. Paul throughout a whole chapter, doth in effect intent no other thing, but only to demonstrate by many arguments, that man's regeneration is unperfect aswell in the soul as in the body: two verses only will suffice, for the clearing of our question. The former verse is contained in those words: 
v. 14. v. 18.  for we know that the law is spiritual, but I am carnal, fold under sin. The latter verse, in these words: for I know, that in me, that is in my flesh, dwelleth no good thing, for to will is present with me, but I find no means to perform that which is good. Out of which verses, I observe these memorable doctrines. First, that by the word (flesh) must needs be understood the whole man, as he is corrupt and not regenerate: I prove it, because the Apostle saith, (in me) and expoundeth it by his flesh. Secondly, that the word (flesh) cannot determine the word (me) unless it signify the corrupt parts both of body and soul: for the words (I and (me) do connotate his person, not barely any one part of his soul or body. Thirdly, that he saith, no good dwelled in him: albeit he confesseth both in this chapter, & in sundry other places, that the grace of God and the holy Ghost dwelleth in him, 
1 Cor. 15. 10. 1 Cor. 6 v. 19 Rom. 8. 9 1 Cor. 13. 12  and consequently, that when he saith, no good dwelleth in him, he meaneth of the parts unregenerate, which he nameth his flesh, saying, in me, that is, in my flesh dwelleth no good thing. Fourthly, that the holy vessel of our Lord jesus, affirmeth himself to be sold under sin, and to be carnal, and consequently, that sin is in him formally throughout all his unregenerate parts, and not only in his body materially, as our Pope and jesuits would enforce us to believe: for though the regenerate be spiritual in the greater part, yet are they in part carnal; as the holy Apostle here avoucheth of himself, and S. james of himself and all the rest: howbeit, Saint Paul & S. james were as spiritual as any this day living, if not more: yet the best livers of all have not so put on the new man, but the relics of the old man still remain 
●ac. 3. 2.  in them, which they must endeavour by the grace of regeneration, daily more & more to abolish and put away from them.  
Secondly, the same truth of man's unperfect regeneration, 
Secundè princip. ter.  may be proved by evident reason. For the soul which giveth life, sense, and moving to the body, and doth inform the same, cannot possibly be an enemy to the body, 
anima est forma corporis.  and have continual wars which it. For (as the Apostle teacheth us) no man ever yet hated his own flesh, but nourisheth and cherisheth the same, even as Christ doth his Church: and it is confirmed, because the flesh coveteth 
Ephes. 5. v. 29.  nothing without the soul. These authorities and reasons well considered, this illation cannot but be clear & 
Aug. de perf. just. rat. ●6. 17  evident, viz. that the contention, conflict, and rebellion, which is between the flesh and the spirit, cannot possibly be understood of the soul and the body, but of the parts unregenerate, aswell of the soul as of the body: for the Apostle by the flesh, every where understandeth the sensual man, as he is begotten and borne of his parents: to wit, that old Adam, which is not led by the spirit of God, neither obeyeth the law of God, but his wicked affections: so doth our saviour himself call that flesh which is borne of the flesh, and that spirit which is borne of the spirit: for 
joh. 3. 6. Aug. in johan. ●r●ctat 80. 2 Cor. 7. 1. Apoc. 22. 11.  (as S. Austin saith) the justified man is yet mundus & mundandus, clean, and to be made clean, clean in part, and in part unclean: and therefore is he willed to cleanse himself from all filthiness of the flesh and spirit, and to grow up into all holiness in the fear of God.  Theoph. 
You have so sound proved that man's regeneration is unperfect, and that original concupiscence still remaineth even formally in the unregenerate, not only in his body but also in his soul, as it is able fully to persuade any indifferent reader, and all such as are careful of their salvation. Howbeit I still stand doubtful, & am at my wits end what to think of this your received Maxim; justus in omni opere bono peccat; the just man sinneth in every good act.  Remig. 
I told you afore, that it is one thing to sin in doing a good act, another thing, to sin while the good act is a doing. The former way no man sinneth at any time; but the latter way, the best liver on earth, sinneth continually. For of original uncleanness there is that yet sticking in the best, for the which God may justly condemn them to hell fire.  Theoph. 
I remember the distinction very well, but there are many texts of holy Scripture, which seem to make against the same.  Remig. 
Propound them all one by one, and omit not any that troubleth you: for I hope in God so to answer them, as you shall never henceforth stand in doubt thereof.  Theoph. 
God himself saith, that the wickedness of man was great on earth, and that all the imaginations of 
Gen. 6. 50  the thoughts of his heart were only evil continually. Out of which words proceeding from the spirit of God, I observe these memorable points of doctrine. First, that man is very wicked. Secondly, that not only some, but even all the imaginations of his heart, are evil. Thirdly, that they are not only evil for a day, week, month or a year, but even continually. Fourthly, that they are only evil, and have no good at all in them, and consequently, that man can do no good at all, but sinneth in his best acts continually.  Remig. 
I answer: that the text by you alleged, is understood in the corrupt man before his regeneration, in whom there is no good at any time; not of the regenerate man, in whom there is much good continually. I prove it many ways: First, because in the very next chapter, the 
Gen. 7. 1.  spirit of God pronounceth Noah righteous in his sight. Secondly, because holy writ affirmeth constantly that Zacharias 
Luk. 1. 5. 6.  and Elizabeth, were both just before God, and walked in all his commandments. Thirdly, because the 
1 joh. 3. 9  holy Apostle of our Lord jesus, telleth us very plainly, that he which is borne of God sinneth not: yea, S. john proceedeth further, and avoucheth resolutely, that he cannot sin, because he is borne of God. Fourthly, because 
1 joh. 3. 10.  by doing of righteousness, the children of God are known and discerned from the children of the Devil. Fifthly, because the Apostle comparing the works of Cain 
1 joh. 3. 12.  and of Abel together, affirmeth the works of the one to be evil, and the others to be good. Sixthly, because S. john telleth us of Virgins which are not defiled with women, 
Apo●. 14. 4.  but follow the Lamb whithersoever he goeth. Seventhly, because the holy scripture commendeth Cornelius for a devout man, and one that feared God, and affirmeth his prayers and alms to have come up into remembrance before God. Eighthly, because Peter did a good act when he 
Mat. 16. v. 16. 17.  confessed Christ to be the son of the living GOD: for Christ answering, pronounced him blessed, affirming, not flesh and blood, but God above to have revealed it to him. Ninthly, because they are happy that suffer persecution 
Mat. 5. v. 10  for righteousness. Tenthly, because the whole Scripture (especially the Epistle to the Hebrews) maketh frequent 
Hebr. 11.  mention of the good works which the children of God have done.  Theoph. 
The Scripture saith plainly, that we all are 
Psal. 51. 5. Ps. 1 43. v. 2. Psa 1 30. 3. jac. 3. 2. Prou. 20. 9  conceived and borne in sin, that no flesh can be justified in God's fight, that if he straightly mark our iniquities, none is able to abide it, that the holy Apostles offend in many things, that all have sinned and are deprived of the glory of God: ergo, it seemeth that the best liver sinneth, in the best work he doth.  Remig. 
True it is, that the best livers on earth are great sinners, and that they may justly be damned to hell 
Aug. lib. 9 confes. c, 13.  for the same. For as S. Austen saith gravely: Woe to the best liver on earth, if God judge him, his mercy set apart. But hereupon can it never be concluded that the just man sinneth in every work he doth.  Theoph. 
The best works of the regenerate are unperfect, and consequently the regenerate man sinneth in the best work he doth?  Remig. 
Your consequence doth not hold, the reason is at hand, viz. because every imperfection, neither doth nor can make a good act evil: for although imperfection be so linked and chained with sin in the regenerate, that wheresoever it be found, there is sin also in the same subject; yet is not that sin in the act well done, but either in some other act evil done, or else in the omission of that which ought to be done. Let us take an example for the illustration of the truth and question now in hand; and let us suppose, that S. R hath lent 40. pounds unto T. B. to be repaid upon May-day next, at which day the said T. B. bringeth only 30. pounds, being all that he possibly can provide. In this ease, the debtor tendereth an unperfect payment to the Creditor. Howbeit, he doth not wrong the creditor in bringing him 30. pounds, but the injury is done in not bringing more.  Theoph. 
He wrongeth his creditor by his unthankfulness, in that he doth not bring him the just sum which he borrowed.  Remig. 
The Creditor is wronged indeed, yet not in the payment of the 30. pounds, but in the non payment of other ten pounds. Imperfection is ever chained with sin, as is already said, yet the sin or wrong done in this case to the Creditor, is not in the 30. pounds truly paid, but in the ten pounds remaining unpaid. For example sake. A servant receiving of his master ten shillings to be distributed to the poor, giveth only eight shillings thereof to them, and reserveth two shillings to himself. In this case the servant trespasseth generally: yet not in distributing eight shillings, a part of his charge, but in keeping back two shillings which he should have given: For when a servant is commanded to do allthing, which he doth only in part, but not wholly, the offence is not in that which he doth, but in that which he leaveth undone. 
Luk. 18. v. 13. 14. Exod. 1. 17. Exod. 32. v. 27. 1 Sam. 1. 15. Heb. 11. 31, 2 Sam. 12. v 7. 13. Mat. 26. 75. Act. 10. 2. 1 Reg. 15. 11. 2 Reg. 18. 6 2 Reg. 23. 25. Act. 13. 9 Rom. 7. v. 15. 25. Hebr. 11.  Even so is it in the question now in hand. For the lowly Publican sinned not in smiting his breast, and in ask mercy for his sins. The Midwives, Shiphrah & Puah sinned not in that they feared God, and disobeyed the king's wicked commandment. Moses sinned not, in s●aying the Idolaters at God's appointment. Hanna sinned not in pouring out her soul before the Lord. Rahab sinned not in receiving the spies peaceably. David sinned not in confessing his sins when Nathan the Prophet reproved him for the same. Peter sinned not in weeping bitterly for his sins. Cornelius sinned not in fearing God & praying continually. King Asa sinned not in doing right in the eyes of the Lord. King Ezechias sinned not in cleaning to the Lord, and in not departing from him. josias sinned not in turning to the Lord with all his heart, with all his soul, and with all his might. Paul full of the holy Ghost, sinned not in reproving Elimas the sorcerer, for perverting the right ways of the Lord: neither yet in hating the sin which he could not avoid. Abel sinned not in offering a greater sacrifice than Cain, by which he obtained Gods own testimony that he was righteous. Abraham sinned 
Hebr. 11. v. 8. 17. Gen. 22. v. 2. 3. 9 10. job. 1. v. 1. 22. Luk. 1. 5, 6.  not in obeying God when he was called, neither in offering up his only son when God commanded him so to do. job sinned not in being upright and just, in fearing God, and eschewing evil. Zacharias and Elizabeth sinned not in walking in all the commandments of the Lord, without reproach. S. Stephen full of the holy Ghost, and 
Act. 7. 59  ready to give his life for the truth's sake, sinned not in calling on God and saying, Lord jesus receive my spirit. 
1 Tim. 2. 7. 2. 3. The regenerate sin not in walking after the spirit. Rom. 8, 4.  Dutiful subjects sin not in praying daily for their Sovereigns: for holy writ pronounceth it to be good and acceptable in the sight of God. All which, and many other like testimonies (which in regard of brevity, I now omit) do prove and evidently convince, that though the regenerate sin while they do their good works, yet do they not sin in doing the same: for it is one thing to sin in doing the work, another thing to sin while the work is a doing.  Theoph. 
Your discourse hath fully satisfied me in this intricate and difficult question: I perceive your distinction to be as true, as it is subtle: the ignorance whereof, hath brought no small ruin to the Church of God: howbeit, sundry mighty objections, may be made against the same: which by your favour I shall propound as they come to my mind.  

Objection first.  Theoph. 
It seemeth to many a thing impossible, that a man while he sinneth, should do good.  Remig. 
It is no more impossible, than it is for the same man to be a father while he is a son.  Theoph. 
The same man cannot be both a father and a son, at one and the same time in one and the same respect, but in diverse respects, though at the same time.  Remig. 
True that is, and I desire no more: the holy 
Rom. 7. 25.  Apostle decideth the controversy, in these golden words: I myself in my mind serve the law of God, but in my flesh the law of sin: here the chosen vessel of God doth plainly express, and lively lay open before our eyes, that himself both did good works, and also sinned while he did the same, though not in the same respect: for, to serve the law of God, is a right good work, but to serve the law of sin, is a great offence: yet both these the Apostle did at the same time, though not in the same respect: for, as he was regenerate, he served God truly; but in the unregenerate parts both of body & soul, or flesh and mind, (which with the Apostle are all one) he sinned damnably.  Theoph. 
How can the Apostles act be unperfect, and yet without sin?  Remig. 
I have so plainly unfolded this difficulty already, that I greatly admire, how you can be ignorant thereof: imperfection, though it be ever chained with sin in the regenerate, doth not for all that connotate his 
Rom. 7, 25.  act well donebu; teither some other act evil done, or else the ●mission of the act that should be done: For example, Saint Paul, when he served the law of God in his mind, did a good act, though unperfectly, and sinned not in doing the same: howbeit at the same time he sinned perfectly, in serving the law of sin nevertheless his imperfection consisted 
Psal. 5. 4. Psal. 6. 8.  not in serving the law of God, which was an act pleasing God, who never is or can be pleased with sin: but it consisted in serving the law of sin, which was perfectly an act, no way pleasing God: The imperfection ariseth not of that which is well done, but of that which is either ill done, or left undone. 
Are●pag. de d●●●nis. nominib. cap. 4.   Theoph. 
How can the serving of the law of sin, be be perfectly an evil act, seeing the serving of the law of God is not perfectly a good act.  Remig. 
The holy and ancient father Dionysius Ariopagita, unfoldeth this difficulty, whiles he affirmeth more to be required to good, then to evil: for perfect good, requireth a perfect and entire cause, but perfect evil, issueth out of every defect: Bonum exintegra causa, malum exquolibet defectu?  Theoph. 
The Apostle telleth us, that all men are sinners, that 
Rom. 3. v. 10. 11. 12.  there is none that doth good, no not one: how then can the regenerate be without sin, in the best act he doth?  Remig. 
True it is, that the bestlivers on earth are great sinners, and for their sins may justly be damned to hell-fire: true it is likewise, that none, no not one, doth any 
3 There are degrees in keeping Gods commandments.  good perfectly: yet this notwithstanding, true it is thirdly, that the regenerate doth much good imperfectly, and sinneth not in doing the same: for doubtless Saint Paul sinned not in serving the law of God unperfectly; albeit he sinned grievously at the same time, in serving the law of sin: for, (as the holy and ancient father Saint Austen 
Aug. de nup▪ & concup. lib. 1▪ cap. 29  writeth learnedly) Multum boni facit, qui facit quod scriptum est, post concupiscentias tuas non eas; sed non perficit, quod non implet quod scriptum est; non concupisces: He doth great good, who doth that which is written, follow not thy ●u●tes: but he doth not perfect his well doing, because he doth not fulfil that which is written, thou shalt not lust. The same father in another 
Aug. in psa. 118. conc. ●●fine.  place, hath these express words, Ecce, quemadmodum qui ambulant in vijs Domini non operantur peccatum, & tamen non sunt ●ine peccata▪ quia iam, non ipsi operantur iniquitatem, sed quod habitat in e●s peccatum: Behold, how they that walk in the ways of the Lord, do not sin, and yet are they not without sin, because now, not they work iniquity, but the sin that dwelleth 
Rom. 6. 12.  in them: in which words Saint Austen showeth plainly, that though the regenerate do not fulfil the law 
1 joh. 3. v. 9 10.  exactly, yet do they good and sin not, so long as they strive against sin, and suffer it not to reign in them: 
Ibidem. v. 12.  for which cause saith Saint john, that he which is borne of God, sinneth not, neither can sin, because he is 
Gen. 4. 8. 1 joh. 3. 8.  borne of God: and in the next verse, he affirmeth the children of God to be discerned from the children of the devil: for their good works and righteousness: a little after, he telleth us plainly, that Cain slew his brother Abel, because his own works were evil, and his brothers good: again in the same chapter, he avoucheth constantly, that he that committeth sin, is of the devil: I therefore conclude, that the regenerate, as regenerate (mark well the reduplication) do good and sin not: howbeit, as they commit sin, so are they of the devil and unregenerate: they keep Gods commandments in part and som● degree, but not in all.  Theoph. 
If the regenerate, as such be, without sin, then may they merit their own salvation, as the Papists hold and believe.  Remig. 
You are greatly deceived in this deep point of divinity: for, though the regenerate, as they are regenerate (this reduplication is very emphatical) neither do nor can 
● joh. 3. 9  sin, as the holy Apostle teacheth us, yet do they sin continually in their vnregenerat parts, which is enough for their ●u●● condemnation: for, as in the regenerate parts they serve the law of God, so in the unregenerate they serve the law of sin: and consequently seeing (as Saint james saith) 
jac. 2. 10. Gal. 3. 10. Deut. 27. ●6. Psa. 143. 2. Ps. 130. 3. Esa. 64. v. 6.  whosoever keepeth the whole law, and faileth in one point, is guilty of all: and seeing also as (Saint Paul saith) that every one is accursed which performeth not the law: it followeth that the regenerate 〈◊〉 far from meriting their salvation by their best works, that they might justly be damned for the same, if God should deal with them in justice and judgement, his mercy set a part.  Theoph. 
I cannot yet see, how ●e that sinneth whiles he doth a good work, doth not sin in doing the same: may it please you to illustrate it, by some familiar example.  Remig. 
You must either mark the distinction well, or else you can never understand the same a right. I will give you a very plain example by which you may easily see the truth thereof. Take one pen full of black ink in your right hand, an other full of red ink in your left hand; this done, draw with the said pens two long lines at one and the same time: in this case▪ it is very clear and evident, that in making a black line you do not make a red, neither yet in making a red line, do you make a black: howbeit, while you make the black line, you make also the red, and semblably, while ye make the red, you make also the black: but doubtless, in making black you do not make red, neither yet in making red do you make black: even so may you sin (it cannot with reason be denied) while you do a good work, and yet not sin in doing the same.  Theoph. 
Your example doth give me a perfect insight 
Mat. 6. ver. 24 Luk. 3. 16  into the question now in hand: but our saviour telleth us, that no man can serve two masters: how then can a man 
1. joh. 3. v. 8. 9 joh. 8 v. 34. Rome 6. v. 20 2.  both do well and sin at once? for to do well▪ is to serve the best master, and to sin, is to serve the worst of all: that is, even God and the devil.  Remig. 
I answer: first, that one may truly and honestly serve two masters, when the one is subordinate 
Pe● 2 v. 19▪ Ephes. 6. 5. Gen. ●5. ver. 8. 21 Dan. 2. v. 48. 49.  and subject to the other: for so doth Saint Paul teach us in these express words, servants, obey your masters according to the flesh, with fear and trembling, in singleness of your hearts, as unto Christ: lo, a servant may obey his carnal master, and in so doing Christ himself: so did holy joseph serve God, and the King of Egypt: so did Daniel serve God, and the King of Babel. Secondly, 
Gal. 5. 17.  that though the regenerate sin daily, and be continually assaulted with the combat of the flesh against the spirit, yet do they not suffer sin to reign in them, neither do they consent to the unlawful desires thereof, but utterly hate and detest the same: and consequently, they serve not two masters, but one only, even our Lord jesus 
Cor. 6. v. 11. 1. Ioh 5 v. 4. 1. joh. 3▪ v. 6 ver. 6. 7. 9  Christ: for, to hate sin, to fight courageously against sin, and to be at continual distance with it, as the jews were with the Canaanites, is not to serve sin, but to be a mortal enemy to sin, and rather the master than the servant thereof: which sense our Saviour himself doth plainly insinuate, in these words immediately 
Mat. 6. v. 24  following: for either he shall hata the one, and love the other, or else he shall lean to the one, and despise the other: as if he had said, no man can truly and dutifully serve two masters, as a servant ought to do: for it is not the part of a servant to hate his master, to withstand his commands, and every hour to fight with him, as the regenerate children of God do continually with sin: yea, the Apostle confirmeth the same sense, when he plainly confesseth 
Rom. 7. v. 19 20.  of himself, that he did not that good which he would, but that evil which he would not: and thereupon concludeth, that he himself did it not, but the sin that dwelled in him: for albeit sin, against his will remained still in him, and had daily conflicts and continual cumbats with him, yet had he the victory and upper hand 
1 joh. 5. v. 4  over sin, in that he stood constantly at defiance with it, and would never yield consent unto it. Thirdly, that one may serve two contrary masters secundum quid, though not simpliciter; in part, but not simply, wholly, or totally: and this sense doth the holy Apostle afford us, 
Rom. 7. 25.  while he confesseth resolutely, that he himself served the law of God in his mind, but in his flesh the law of sin: for, by reason of the relics of the flesh, and grace of the spirit, he was divided in himself.  Theoph. 
This seemeth to smell of Popery: for they teach, that the regenerate sin only in the body materially, and not at all in the soul.  Remig. 
I have proved formerly, if you well remember, that the Apostle understandeth by the word (flesh) whatsoever is in man not yet renewed by the holy Ghost to wit▪ not only 
Rom. 8. ver. 8.  the sensitive appetite, but even 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 will ●●●●nerate: For as the same Apostle ●ai●h else where 〈◊〉 They that are in the flesh cannot please God, which is all one, as if he had said they that have not the spirit of regeneration, which abolisheth sin in them, though not all at once, but by degrees, cannot possibly please God: neither can the 
The old man with all his powers, mind, will, and heart.  Popish sense by any means be true, seeing by it none living, no Pope, no Cardinal, no jesuit, can possibly please God: The reason is evident, because none can live on earth, but which have their souls in their bodies. This sense the Apostle doth plainly deliver in these words immediately following: now ye are not in the flesh, but in the spirit, because the spirit of God dwelleth in you: but if any man have not the spirit of Christ, the same is not his: here it is clear, that the word (flesh) doth connotate 
Rom. 8. v. 9  whatsoever is in man unregenerate, but not the body which the soul informeth. This sense is more plainly confirmed in another place, where it is written; for we know, that the law is spiritual, but I am carnal sold under sin: where we see evidently, that the Apostle by 
Rom. 7. 14.  (flesh) meaneth neither the body only, nor the soul only, but both body and soul, so far forth as they are ungenerate: for the word (carnal) doth not barely connotate any one part, either of body or of soul, but the whole person of man, not yet purified with the grace of regeneration. The words are very emphatical, (for I 
God's precepts are kept in some degrees, but not perfectly.  am carnal) S. Paul speaketh of himself, being the regenerate child of God, and for all that freely acknowledgeth himself to be carnal, and sold under sin. Which acknowledgement he maketh in respect of his unperfect renovation, as well of soul as of body giving us thereby to understand▪ that the best 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 are sanctified but in part, not wholly and perfectly. For doubtless, if the sanctification of God's Children were perfect in this life▪ S. Paul's should have found no defect: but he that is justified and sanctified, must continually endeavour to be 
Apoc. 22. 〈◊〉.  more and more just and holy. Which precept is given in vain, if sanctification in this life be perfect.  Theoph. 
I see it most evidently, that S. Paul and the rest of the Apostles, were not sanctified wholly, but only in part: and that therefore they both sinned, and did good works at once▪ albeit they sinned only while they did their good works, but never in doing the same. God's holy name be blessed for that insight into the Catholic truth, which in great mercy, he hath by this conference; bestowed on me: And I most humbly thank you (Father R●●igi●●) for your most Christian pains on my behalf; faithfully promising to rest yours during life, in what I possibly may or can, as one that oweth ever himself unto you.  
Laus Deo uni & trino.   
FINIS.