Chapter 5 of 5

1Seniors. Though the Latin, Senior, be not appropriated to holy order by use of vulgar translation-speech, neither in the Latin nor in our language: yet it is plain that the Greek word which the Apostle here useth, is here also (as commonly in other places of the new Testament) a word of Ecclesiastical office, and not of age, and is as much to say as Priest. For the Apostle himself being of that order, speaketh (as by his words it is plain) to such as had charge of souls, saying, Feed the flock of God which is among you. Because we follow the vulgar Latin translation, we say Seniors and Senior: whereas otherwise we might and should say according to the Greek, The Priests therefore I beseech, myself a fellow-priest with them. So doth S. Jerome read (Presbyteros compresbyter) and expound ep. 85. So translateth Erasmus, and Beza himself.Seniors. Though the Latin, Senior, be not appropriated to holy order by vse of vulgar translation-speache, neither in the Latin nor in our language: yet it is plaine that the Greeke vvord vvhich the Apostle here vseth, is here also (as commonly in other places of the nevv Testament) a vvord of Ecclesiastical office, and not of age, and is as much to say as Priest. For the Apostle him self being of that order, speaketh (as by his vvordes it is plaine) to such as had charge of soules, saying, Feede the flocke of God vvhich is among you. Becavse vve folow the vulgar latin translation, vve say Seniors and Senior: vvheras othervvise vve might and should say according to the Greeke, The Priests therfore I beseche, my self a fellovv-priest vvith them. So doth S. Hierom read (Presbyteros compresbyter) and expound ep. 85. So translateth Erasmus, and Beza him self.

3Overruling. Not superiority, preeminence, sovereignty, or rule on the one side, nor obedience, subjection, and inferiority on the other side, be forbidden in the Clergy: but tyranny, pride, and ambitious domination be forbidden, and humility, meekness, moderation are commended in Ecclesiastical Officers. the Greek word here of ruling or overruling, being the same that our Saviour useth in the Gospel of the tyrannical rule of secular Heathen Princes, saying to his Apostles, that it shall not be so among them: according as here the prince of the Apostles teacheth his brethren the Ecclesiastical rulers.Ouerruling. Not superiority, preeminence, soueraintie, or rule on the one side, nor obedience, subiection, and inferiority on the other side, be forebidden in the Clergie: but tyrannie, pride, and ambitious domination be forbidden, and humility, meekenes, moderation are commended in Ecclesiastical Officers. the Greeke vvord here of ruling or ouerruling, being the same that our Sauiour vseth in the Gospel of the tyrannical rule of secular Heathen Princes, saying to his Apostles, that it shal not be so among them: according as here the prince of the Apostles teacheth his brethren the Ecclesiastical rulers.

3The Clergy. Some of the English new translations turn it corruptly, Parishes: others, heritages: both, to avoid the most known, true, and common word in all Christian languages, to wit, Clergy, a word, by use of all antiquity, & agreeably to the holy Scriptures, made proper to the Spiritualty or Clergy. though in another more vulgar acception it may agree to all Christ's chosen heritage, as well of lay people as Priests. which the Protestants had rather follow, because they will have no difference between the laity & the Clergy. But the holy fathers far otherwise even from the beginning. Whereof see S. Cyprian ep. 4. 5. 6. &c. And S. Jerome ep. 2. to Nepotianus c. 5. where he interpreteth this word. Therefore (saith he) Clericus, that is, a Clergy man, which serveth the Church of Christ, let him first interpret his name, and the signification of the name being declared, let him endeavour to be that which he is called. If κλῆρος (Clerus) in Greek, be called in Latin, Sors, therefore are they called Clerici, that is, Clergy men, because they are of the lot of our Lord, or because our Lord himself is the lot or portion of Clergy men &c. Which calling no doubt was taken out of the holy Scriptures, Num. 18. and Deut. 18. where God is called the inheritance, lot, and portion of the Priests and Levites: and now when men be made of the Clergy, they say, Dominus pars hæreditatis meæ. that is, Our Lord is the portion of mine inheritance. but specially out of the new Testament, Acts 1, 17. 25. and 8, 21. Where the lot or office of the Ecclesiastical ministry is called by this word κλῆρος, Clerus. See in Venerable Bede the causes why this holy state being severed by name from the Laity, doth wear also a crown on their head for distinction. Lib. 5. hist. Angl. c. 22.The Clergie. Some of the English nevv translations turne it corruptly, Parishes: others, heritages: both, to auoid the most knovven, true, and common vvord in al Christian languages, to vvit, Clergie, a vvord, by vse of al antiquity, & agreably to the holy Scriptures, made proper to the Spiritualty or Clergie. though in an other more vulgar acception it may agree to al Christs chosen heritage, as vvel of lay people as Priests. vvhich the Protestants had rather folovv, because they vvill haue no difference betvvene the laity & the Clergie. But the holy fathers far othervvise euen from the beginning. Vvhereof see S. Cyprian ep. 4. 5. 6. &c. And S. Hierom ep. 2. to Nepotianus c. 5. vvhere he interpreteth this vvord. Therfore (saith he) Clericus, that is, a Clergie man, vvhich serueth the Church of Christ, let him first interprete his name, and the signification of the name being declared, let him endeauour to be that vvhich he is called. If κλῆρος (Clerus) in Greeke, be called in Latin, Sors, therfore are they called Clerici, that is, Clergie men, because they are of the lot of our Lord, or because our Lord him self is the lot or portion of Clergie men &c. Vvhich calling no doubt vvas taken out of the holy Scriptures, Numer. 18. and Deutero. 18. vvhere God is called the inheritance, lot, and portion of the Priests and Leuites: and novv vvhen men be made of the Clergie, they say, Dominus pars hæreditatis meæ. that is, Our Lord is the portion of mine inheritance. but specially out of the nevv Testament, Act. 1, 17. 25. and 8, 21. Vvhere the lot or office of the Ecclesiastical ministerie is called by this vvord κλῆρος, Clerus. See in Venerable Bede the causes vvhy this holy state being seuered by name from the Laity, doth vveare also a crovvne on their head for distinction. Lib. 5. hist. Angl. c. 22.

4Crown of glory. As life everlasting shall be the reward of all the just, so the preachers & Pastors that do well, for their doing shall have that reward in a more excellent degree, expressed here by these words, Crown of glory. according to the saying of Daniel c. 12. They that sleep in the dust of the earth, shall awake, one sort to life everlasting, others to everlasting rebuke. but such as be learned, shall shine as the brightness of the firmament: and such as instruct many to justice, shall be as stars, during all eternity.Crovvne of glorie. As life euerlasting shal be the revvard of al the iust, so the preachers & Pastors that doe vvel, for their doing shal haue that revvard in a more excellent degree, expressed here by these vvordes, Crovvne of glorie. according to the saying of Daniel c. 12. They that sleepe in the dust of the earth, shal avvake, one sort to life euerlasting, others to euerlasting rebuke. but such as be learned, shal shine as the brightnes of the firmament: and such as instruct many to iustice, shal be as starres, during al eternitie.

13That is in Babylon. The Protestants show themselves here (as in all places where any controversy is, or that maketh against them) to be most unhonest and partial handlers of God's word. The ancient fathers, namely S. Jerome in Catalogo de scriptoribus Ecclesiasticis, verbo Marcus: Eusebius li. 2 c. 14 hist. Oecumenius upon this place: and many more agree, that Rome is meant by the word Babylon, here also as in the 16 and 17 of the Apocalypse: saying plainly, that S. Peter wrote this Epistle at Rome, which is called Babylon for the resemblance it had to Babylon that great city in Chaldea (where the Jews were captives) for magnificence, Monarchy, resort and confusion of all peoples and tongues, and for that it was before Christ and long after, the seat of all Ethnic superstition & idolatry, & the slaughter house of the Apostles & other Christian men, the Heathen Emperors the keeping their chief residence there. See S. Leo Ser. 1 in Nati. Petri & Pauli. This being most plain, and consonant to that which followeth of S. Mark, whom all the Ecclesiastical histories agree to have been Peter's scholar at Rome, and that he there wrote his Gospel: yet our Adversaries fearing hereby the sequel of Peter's or the Pope's supremacy at Rome, deny that ever he was there, or that this Epistle was written there, or that Babylon doth here signify Rome: but they say that Peter wrote this Epistle at Babylon in Chaldea, though they never read either in Scriptures or other holy or profane history, that this Apostle was ever in that town. but see their shameless partiality. here Babylon (say they) is not taken for Rome, because it would colour that Peter was at Rome &c. but in the Apocalypse where all evil is spoken of Babylon, there they will have it signify nothing else but Rome, and the Roman Church also, not (as the fathers interpret it) the temporal state of the Heathen Empire there. So do they follow in every word, no other thing but the advantage of their own heresy. See the Annotation upon the last of the Romans v. 16. and upon the 17 of the Apocalypse. v. 5. And as for their wrangling upon the supputation of the time of his going thither, and the number of years that he was there, & the diversity that seemeth to be in the Ecclesiastical writers concerning the same, read B. Fisher and other that substantially answer all such cavils. And if such contentious reasoning might take place, we should hardly believe the principal things recorded either in Ecclesiastical histories, or in the Scriptures themselves. Concerning the time of Christ's fleeing into Egypt, of the coming of the Sages to adore him, yea of the years of his age, & time of his death, all ancient writers do not agree. and concerning the day of his last supper and institution of the holy Sacrament, there is diversity of opinions. shall we therefore infer that he never died, and that the other things never were? Can the Heretics accord all the histories that seem even in holy Scripture to have contradiction? Can they tell us certainly, when David first came to Saul, and the like? doubt they whether the world was ever created, because the count of the years is divers? Do they not believe that Paradise ever was, because no man knoweth where it is? and such other like things infinite to rehearse? Which when they were done, were plain and known things in the world: and now for us to call them to an account, after so many years, ages, and worlds, is but sophistication and plain infidelity. And this sect of the Protestants standing only upon destruction, and negatives, & dealing with our religion even as Julian, Porphyry, and Lucian did, it is an easy thing for them to bestow their time in picking of quarrels.That is in Babylon. The Protestants shevv them selues here (as in al places vvhere any controuersie is, or that maketh against them) to be most vnhonest and partial handlers of Gods vvord. The aûcient fathers, namely S. Hierom in Catalogo de scriptoribus Ecclesiasticis, verbo Marcus: Eusebius li. 2 c. 14 hist. Oecumenius vpon this place: and many moe agree, that Rome is meant by the vvord Babylon, here also as in the 16 and 17 of the Apocalypse: saying plainely, that S. Peter vvrote this Epistle at Rome, vvhich is called Babylon for the resemblance it had to Babylon that great citie in Chaldæa (vvhere the Ievves vvere captiues) for magnificence, Monarchie, resort and confusion of al peoples and tongues, and for that it vvas before Christ and long after, the seate of al Ethnike superstition & idolatrie, & the slaughter house of the Apostles & other Christian men, the Heathen Emperours the keeping their cheefe residéce there. See S. Leo Ser. 1 in Nati. Petri & Pauli. This being most plaine, and consonant to that vvhich folovveth of S. Marke, vvhom al the Ecclesiastical histories agree to haue been Peters scholer at Rome, and that he there vvrote his Gospel: yet our Aduersaries fearing hereby the sequele of Peters or the Popes supremacie at Rome, deny that euer he vvas there, or that this Epistle vvas vvritten there, or that Babylon doth here signifie Rome: but they say that Peter vvrote this Epistle at Babylon in Chaldæa, though they neuer reade either in Scriptures or other holy or profane historie, that this Apostle vvas euer in that tovvne. but see their shameles partiality. here Babylon (say they) is not taken for Rome, because it vvould colour that Peter vvas at Rome &c. but in the Apocalypse vvhere al euil is spoken of Babylon, there they vvill haue it signifie nothing els but Rome, and the Romane Church also, not (as the fathers interprete it) the temporal state of the Heathen Empire there. So do they folovv in euery vvord, no other thing but the aduantage of their ovvne heresie. See the Annotation vpon the last of the Romans v. 16. and vpon the 17 of the Apocalypse. v. 5. And as for their vvrangling vpon the supputation of the time of his going thither, and the number of yeres that he vvas there, & the diuersitie that seemeth to be in the Ecclesiastical vvriters concerning the same, read B. Fisher and other that substantially ansvver al such cauils. And if such contentious reasoning might take place, vve should hardly beleeue the principal things recorded either in Ecclesiastical histories, or in the Scriptures them selues. Concerning the time of Christs fleing into Ægypt, of the comming of the Sages to adore him, yea of the yeres of his age, & time of his death, al aûcient vvriters do not agree. and concerning the day of his last supper and institution of the holy Sacrament, there is diuersitie of opinions. shal vve therfore inferre that he neuer died, and that the other things neuer vvere? Can the Heretikes accord al the histories that seeme euen in holy Scripture to haue contradiction? Can they tel vs certainely, vvhen Dauid first came to Saul, and the like? doubt they vvhether the vvorld vvas euer created, because the count of the yeres is diuers? Do they not beleeue that Paradise euer vvas, because no man knovveth vvhere it is? and such other like things infinite to rehearse? Vvhich vvhen they vvere done, vvere plaine and knovven things in the vvorld: and novv for vs to call them to an account, after so many yeres, ages, and vvorldes, is but sophistication and plaine infidelitie. And this sect of the Protestants standing onely vpon destruction, and negatiues, & dealing vvith our religion euen as Iulian, Porphyrie, and Lucian did, it is an easie thing for them to bestovv their time in picking of quarels.