This definition of S. Austen standyng, with the thinges before premised, now here ioyneth the question betwene vs and the Papistes, whether the Metropolitane Churche of Rome, with the Archbyshop of the same, ought to be preferred before other Metroplitane Churches, & Archbishops through vniuersall Christendome, or not? To the aunswere whereof, if the voyce of order might here be heard, it would say: geue to thinges that be matches and like, like honour, to thinges vnlike, vnlike honour. &c. Wherefore, seyng the sea of Rome is a Patriarchall Sea, appointed by the primitiue Churche, and the Byshop therof an Archbyshop limited within his owne bordering Churches, which the Councell of Nice calleth surburbicas Ecclesias, as other Archbyshops be: he ought therfore orderly to haue the honour of an Archshop (ordering him selfe therafter) and such outward preheminence as to other Archbyshops is due. More if he doe require, he breaketh the rule of right order, he falleth into presumption, and doth wrong vnto his felowes, and they also do wrong vnto them selues, whosoeuer they be, whiche feeding his humour of ambition, geue more vnto him then the foresayd rule of order doth require. For so much as they yeld to him more then is his right, so much they take from them selues, which is due to them. MarginaliaEx Regist. tro Grego. li. 4. Epist. 32And the same is the cause, why both Gregory and Pelagius his predecessour reprehendeth them, whiche gaue to the Archbyshop of Constantinople, that, whiche now the byshop of Rome claymeth to him selfe, charging them with the breach of order in these wordes: Ne dum priuatum aliquod daretur vni, honore debito sacerdotes priuarentor vniuersi, MarginaliaEx Epist. 2 Pelagij. 2. Dist. 99. ca. 4. Nullusthat is: least that while any singular thing is geuen to one person, all other Priestes be depriued of their due honour. And for the like cause Pelagius exhorteth that no Priest do geue to any one Archbishop, the name of vniuersall Byshop, ne sibi debitum subtrahat cum alteri honorem offert indebitum. That is: least (sayth he) in so doyng, he take from him selfe his due honor, while he yeldeth that, which is not due to an other. And also in the same Epistle: Quia si summus Patriarcha vniuersalis dicitur, Patriarcharum nomen cæteris derogatur. For (sayth he) if he be called the chief vniuersall Patriarche, then is the name of Patriarches derogated from other. &c. Wherfore as is sayd, seing the Bishop of Rome is an Archbishop, as other be: Order geueth, that he should haue the dignitie, which to Archbishops is due, whatsoeuer is added more, is derogation to the rest. And thus much concerning distinction of degrees, & order in geueing to euery degree his place and honour.

MarginaliaThe second aunswere to the obiectiō, before mouedThe second reason or aūswer to the obiection before moued, pag. 16. is this: that beyng graunted to the Papistes, that the Doctours aforesayd, speakyng of the principallitie of the Church of Rome, doe meane not onelye of the inward vertues of that Church, but also of the outward autoritie and iurisdiction of the same, aboue other Churches: yet the cause wherefore they dyd attribute so much to the Churche, is to be expended, whiche was this, as before was alledged out of the Coūcel of Calcedon, cap. 28 διὰ τὸ βασιλεύειν τὴν πόλιν ἐκείνην, MarginaliaEx Concil. Calced. cap. 28that is: for the rule and impery whiche that Citie of Rome had then aboue other Cities, whiche cause beyng outward and carnall, was neither then cause sufficiēt, and now ceasing, importeth not to vs the like effect, accordyng as they say: Sublata causa, tollitur effectus. So that by the reason thereof, the foresayd principallitie of the Churche of Rome, did not hold then, iure diuino, sed humano. And as it holdeth by mans law, so by mans law may be repealed agayne.

Wherfore, be it admitted, that both the Pope sitteth & succeedeth in the chayre of Peter, and also that he is the Byshop of the greatest citie in the world: yet it followeth not therby, that he should haue rule and Lordshyp ouer all other bishops & Churches of the world. For first touching the succession of Peter, many thinges are to be considered.

MarginaliaCertaine demaūdes for the Papistes to aunswere vnto.First, whether Peter sat, and had his chayre in Rome, or not?

Secondly, whether he sat there as Apostle, or as Byshop?

Thirdly, whether the sitting in the outward seate of Peter maketh successour of Peter?

Fourthly, whether he sitteth in the chayre and seate of Peter, which sitteth not in the doctrine of Peter?

Fiftly, whether the succession of Peter maketh rather an a Apostle, then a Byshop, and so should we call the Pope, the Apostle of Rome, and not the Byshop of Rome?

Sixtly, whether Ecclesiastical functions ought to be estemed by ordinarie succession of place, or by Gods secret callyng or sendyng?

Seuenthly and lastly, whether it stand by Scripture, any succession at all to be pointed in Christes Church, orwhy more from Peter, then from other Apostles?

All which interrogatours, being well discussed (which would aske a long process) it should well appeare what litle hold the Pope hath to take this state vpon hym, aboue all other Churches, as he doth. In the meane tyme, this one argument by the way may suffice, in steede of many, for our aduersaries to aunswere to, at their conuenient laysure. Which argument thus I forme & frame in Camestres.

MarginaliaAn argument prouyng the popes of this latter Church of Rome not to be successors of Peter.

And when they haue wel perused the Minor of this argument, and haue well conferred together the doctrine taught them of S. Peter, with the doctrine taught now by the Popes, of iustification of a Christen man, of the office of the law, of the strength and largenes of sinne of mēs merites, of free will, of workes of supererogation, of setting vp images, or vii. Sacramentes, of auricular confession, of satisfaction, of sacrifice of the Masse, of communicating vnder one kinde, of eleuatyng and adoryng the Sacramentall elementes, of Latine seruice, of inuocation, of prohibition of meates, and mariage, of vowyng chastitie, of sectes and rules of diuers religions, of indulgences and pardons: also with their doctrine taught now of Magistrates, of the fulnes of power, and regalitie of the sea of Rome, with many other like to these. &c. then will I be glad to heare what they will say to the premisses.

Secondly, if they would proue by the allegation of the Doctours Ireneus, Ambrose, Austen, Theodoritus aforesayd, the Byshop of Rome to be the chief of all Byshops therfore, because theCitie whereof he is Byshop, is chief and principall aboue all other Churches, that consequent is to be denyed. For it followeth not (taking as I sayd, the principallity of that Church, to stand διὰ τὸ βασιλεύειν τὴν πόλιν, that is, vpon the principall dominion of that Citie) no more then this consequent followeth.

London is the chief Citie in all England.

Ergo the Byshop of London is the chiefest of all Byshops in the Realme.

Which argument were derogatory to the Bishop both of Canterbury, and of Yorke.

Yea to graunt yet more to our aduersaries (whiche is all they can require) the minde of the foresayd Doctours Irenæus, Ambrose, Austen, and Theodoritus, in geuyng principallitie vnto Rome, to haue respect vnto the vertue of succession from Peter, and not vnto the greatnes of the Citie: yet notwithstandyng for all this their argument holdeth not, if it be rightly considered: to say.

The Apostolicall Sea of Rome, hauyng successiō from Peter, with the Bishops therof, was chief then of all other Churches, in the primitiue tyme of these Doctours.MarginaliaA false consequent of the papistes.

Ergo, the Apostolicall sea of Rome, with the Byshops therof, hauyng successiō from Peter, ought now to be chief of all other Churches, in these our dayes.

MarginaliaAunswere to the consequent.This consequent might well follow, if the tymes were like, or if succession which gaue then the cause of principallitie, were the same now whiche was then. But now the tyme and succession is not correspondent, for then succession in the tyme of these Doctours, was as well in Doctrine Apostollical, as in place Apostollical. MarginaliaSuccession Apostolicall double wise to be considered.Now the succession of doctrine Apostolicall hath long ceased in the sea Aposticall: and nothyng remayneth but onley place, whiche is the least matter of true spirituall and Apostolicall succession. And thus much to the authoritie and testimonie of these forenamed Doctours.

Besides these obiections heretofore recited out of Irenæus, Ambrose, Austen, and Theodoritus, our aduersaries yet obiect and heape vp agaynst vs, moreouer, examples of the primitiue tyme of the Church, testimonies of generall Councels, and opinions of auncient writers, taken out of the booke of Councels, and Epistles decretall, wherby their intent is to proue, the foresayd termes (of the head of the Church, ruler of the Church, chief of all other Priestes) to be applied not onely to Peter, but also to the Byshop of Rome, with in the compasse of the primitiue tyme. MarginaliaTestimonies alledged for the principalitie of the Pope.And here commeth in the testimonie cited of Vincentius Lirinensis. Of the Epistle of Paschasinus and his fellowes, writyng to Leo from the Councell of Chalcedon. The testimonie also of Iustinian the Emperour in hys Codex: where Ioannes then Pope was called caput omniū Ecclesiarū. Epist. inter claras.