before &c. All which declare that he sought not to thrust out all other Byshops out of their Churches, and to be byshop himselfe alone. For that was neuer offered to the Bishops of Rome by the Councell of Chalcedon, that they should be Byshops alone and none other. Neither did Lucifer seeke to haue no mo aungels in all heauen, but him selfe, but he to be aboue all other alone.

Likewise the word præcurrere, that is to runne before other in the Epistle of Pelagius, declareth that Iohn sought not to be Byshop alone, but Byshop vniuersall. MarginaliaPelagij. 2. Epist. 1.We say not that a man runneth before an other, whē hee runneth alone, and no man followeth him, that is not properly præcurrere, but solus currere. Moreouer in seekyng to be superior to other Byshops, he seeketh not to take away other Bishops, but to take other Byshops inferior to him. For where no inferior is, there cā be no superior, forasmuch as these together are correlatiues, and inferre necessary respect mutually. And if it were true as this Gloser sayth, that he had sought to be Byshop alone, how would that Councell either haue graunted that vnto him, or haue offered it to the Bishop of Rome before? or if they had, how could it be possible for him alone to serue all Churches, without any felow Byshop to helpe him? And where thys foresayd clerke standeth so much vpon the wordes of S. Gregory: Solus episcopus, Gregory therfore shall expounde Gregory, and one Solus shall declare an other. Wherfore if this diuine (whatsoeuer he be Doctour or Bacheler) either knoweth not, or would learne, what (onely Byshop) meaneth in this place: an other place of the sayd Gregory may instruct him, where Gregory writyng to Eulogius, MarginaliaEx epist. Greg. 36. lib. 4.Patriarch of Alexandria, geueth this reason, why he refused the same title offered to him (which then was offered to the sayd Iohn Patriarche of Constantinople) saying: Quia videlicet si vnus Patriarcha vniuersalis dicitur, Patriarcharum nomen cæteris derogatur, sed absit hoc. &c. That is to say: For if one alone would be called Patriarch vniuersall, then should the name of Patriarches be derogated frō all other. &c. Whereby two thynges are to be noted: First what thyng it was whiche the Patriarche of Constantinople did seeke, for Gregory here findeth no other fault, but with the same whiche was geuen to Iohn, whiche was to be called Patriarche vniuersall. The second thyng to be noted, is the cause why Gregory did rebuke this title, both geuen to Iohn, and offred to him, because (sayth he) if one take vpon him the name of vniuersall Patriarch, then is the name Patriarche taken from the rest. As who would say: if I should take vpō me to be named vniuersall Patriarch, thē should ther be no other Patriarche, but I should be Byshop Patriarche alone. And here commeth in your Solus Episcopus. &c.

Furthermore, the same Gregory speakyng of the sayd Solus, in an other place by, seemeth to declare there what he meaneth by this Solus here, in these wordes as folow: vt & nullio subesse, & solus omnibus præesse videretur. MarginaliaEx Epist. Gre. 38. Lib. 4.That is to say: so that he would be subiect to none, and would be chieftaine to all other alone. &c. And so by this place, may the other place be expounded, vt solus Episcopus sit is, qui solus inter Episcopos præesse appetat. That is, that he seeketh to be as bishop alone, who alone seeketh to be extolled aboue other byshops. But to be short in a matter that needeth not many wordes: he that thus cauelleth vpon this place Solus Episcopus in Gregory, must be desired here not to take Solus alone, but ioyne with all the worde goyng before, which is, despectis fratribus by the which might seeme sufficiently declared, what Gregory ment by Solus Episcopus, meaning, that to despise other byshops, & to diminish their honor, to set vp his own, & to be subiect to none, but to preferre him selfe inequally before all other, is as much as to be coŬted bishop alone. And thus much touchyng this obiection.

MarginaliaAn other obiection resoluedAn other obiection of our aduersaries is this: although (say they) no Byshop of Rome was euer called, or would be called by the name of vniuersall Bishop: yet it followeth not therefore, that they be not, or ought not to be heades of the vniuersall Church. Their reason is this:

MarginaliaA double vntruth in one Popish argumentAs S. Peter had the charge of the whole Church (by the testimonie of Gregory) committed vnto him, although he were not called vniuersall Apostle:

MarginaliaPeter how he had charge, and not charge of the Church.So no more absurde it is, for the Pope to be called the head of the whole Church, and to haue the charge therof, although he be not called vniuersall Byshop, &c.

Wherin is a double vntruth to be noted. MarginaliaThe first vntruth in this argument.Fyrst in that they pretend Peter to be the head, and to haue the charge of the whole Church: if we take here (charge or head) for dominion or maistership vpō or aboue the Church, in all cases iudiciarie, both spirituall & temporall: for the wordes of the Scripture be playne. Non dominantes in clerum. 1. Pet. Vos autem non sic. Luke. 22. That is. Not as maisters ouer theClergy. &c. but you not so, &c. Agayne that the Churche is greater, or rather the head of Peter it is cleare: I. Cor. 3. All thinges are yours, whether it be Paule, or Apollo, or Cephas: either the world, death or lyfe, you be Christes, Christ is Gods, &c. MarginaliaThe dignitie of the Churche aboue the Apostles.In whiche wordes the dignitie of the Churche no doubt is preferred aboue the Apostles, and aboue Cephas also. Moreouer as the dignitie of the wife is aboue the seruaunt, so must needes the honour and worthynes of the Church (beyng the spouse of Christ) surmount the state of Peter or other Apostles, which be but seruaūts to Christ and to the Churche, yea and though they were Princes of þ^e Church, yet after the mynde of Baldus: MarginaliaVide Baldum confi. 169 Lib. 3. Secundum. nonam impreßionem. Et secund. vete. consi. 359. lib 1.Magis attenditur persona intellectualis, quàm organica.MarginaliaProofes and reasons that there was no inequallitie of preeminence among the Apostles.Otherwise if by this word (charge) be ment onely the office and diligēce of teachyng: to that I aunswere: The same Lord that sayd to Peter, feede my sheepe, sayd also to the other, go & preach this Gospell to all nations. And he that said to Peter: what soeuer thou loosest, sayd also to the other: whatsoeuer ye remitte in the earth. Moreouer if the matter go by preaching, Paule the Apostle laboured more therin, then euer did Peter, by his owne confession: Plus laboraui, also suffered more for the same, Plus sustinui, neither was his doctrine lesse sound. Yea and in one point he went before Peter, and was teacher and scholemaister vnto Peter, wheras Peter was by him iustlye corrected. Gala. 2. MarginaliaOffice of teachyng geueth no dominiō, farther then in his booke.Furthermore, teachyng is not alwayes, nor in all thynges a poynt of maistershyp, but sometyme a poynt of seruice: As if a Frenchman should be put to an English mā to teach him Frēch; although he excelleth him in that kinde of faculty, yet it followeth not therfore, that he hath fulnes of power vpon him, to appoint his diet, to rule his household, to prescribe his lawes, to stinte his landes, and such other. MarginaliaPeter in no point excelleth the rest of the Apostles.Wherefore seing in trauaile of teachyng, in paynes of preachyng, in giftes of tounges, in largenes of commission, in operation of miracles, in grace of vocation, in receauyng the holy Ghost, in vehemencie of tormentes and death for Christes name, the other Apostles wer nothyng inferiour to Peter: Why Peter then should clayme any speciall prerogatiue aboue the reast, I vnderstād no cause. As in deede he neuer claymed any, but the patrones of the Apostolicall sea do clayme it for him, whiche he neuer claymed him selfe, neither if he were here, woulde no lesse abhorre it with soule and conscience, then we do now: and yet our abhorryng now is not for any malice of person, or any vantage to our selues, but onely the vehemencie of truth, and zeale to Christ and to his congregation. Moreouer if these men would needes haue Peter to be the Curate and ouersear of the whole vniuersall Church (which was to much for one man to take charge vpon) and to be Prince of all other Apostles, then woulde I fayne learne of them, what meaneth (Dextra societatis) MarginaliaDextra societatis.the right hand of societie betwene Peter, Paule, and Barnaby mētioned. Gal. 2. What takyng of handes is there betwene subiectes & theyr Prince in way of fellowshyp? Or where fellowshyp is, what maistershyp is there? Or agayne, what state of maistershyp is it like, that Christ would geue to Peter, who beyng in deede maister of all, tooke such litle maistershyp vpon hym selfe, that he washed Peters feete, to geue Peter ensample to take no maistershyp vpon him, but rather to humble him selfe, and that not onely in inward affection, but also in outward facte. Although I am not ignoraunt that Peter in places of the Gospell hath his commendation, neither do I deny Peter to be worthy of the same. But yet these words of commendation geueto him no state of superioritie, or iurisdiction vpon all other, to haue all vnder his subiection. As if a scholemaister should haue more speciall fauour to some one of his scholers for his ryper towardnes: yet this geueth him no fulnes of authority, or power coactive vpon the rest, vnlesse by speciall admission he be deputed thereunto. Wherof nothyng can be gathered of Peter, for if it be true that S. Austen sayth: MarginaliaAugust. in prefat. Psal. 108.that such thynges as were spoken to Peter, haue no lightsome vnderstandyng, except they be referred to the Church, wherof Peter dyd beare a figure: then hath þ^e person of Peter nothyng to clayme by these wordes, but all redoūdeth to the Church, which being ment by Peter, hath power, by this reason, both ouer the person of Peter, and all other persons in the Lord.

MarginaliaAnswere to an inuincible argumēt prouyng by Chrisostome the wholeBut here stumbleth in an argument of our aduersarie agayne, which he in the margent of his booke calleth an inuincible argument drawen out of the bowles of S. Iohn Chrisostome. Lib. 2. De Sacerd. Wherby he supposethMarginaliaChurch to be committed to Saint Peter. to haue geuen a shrewed blowe to the Protestantes, and to haue gotten a Hectors victory vpon a certaine Englishe prisoner taken in a playne field, and of all such as take his part. The text onely of Chrisostome he reciteth, but maketh no argument, albeit he maketh mention of an inuincible argument in the margent. But because he either wist not, or lyste not