Chapter 16 of 16

16Salute one another. Never Sectmasters made more foul or hard shifts to prove or defend falsehood, than the Protestants: but in two points, about St. Peter specially, they pass even themselves in impudency. The first is, that they hold he was not preferred before the other Apostles, which is against all Scriptures most evidently. The second is, that he was never at Rome, which is against all the Ecclesiastical histories, all the Fathers Greek and Latin, against the very sense and light of the monuments of his Seat, Sepulchre, doctrine, life, and death there. (That St. Peter was at Rome.) Greater evidence certes is thereof and more weighty testimony, than of Romulus, Numas, Cæsars, or Ciceros being there: yet were he a very brutish man that would deny this to the discredit of so many writers and the whole world. Much more monstrous it is, to hear any deny the other. Theodorete saith he was there, writing upon this chapter. Prosper also carmine de ingratis in principio. St. Leo de natali Petri. St. Augustine to. 6. c. 4. cont. ep. fund. Orosius li. 7. c. 6. St. Chrysostom in ps. 44. St. Epiphanius hær. 27. Prudentius in hymno 1. S. Laurentij, & hymno 12. Optatus li. 2. contra Donatistas. St. Ambrose li. 1. ep. de Basilica tradendis. St. Jerome in Catalogo. Lactantius li. 4. c. 21. de vera sapientia. Eusebius hist. Eccl. li. 2. c. 13, 15. St. Athanasius de fuga sua. St. Cyprian ep. 55. nu. 6. Tertullian de præscriptionibus nu. 26. and li. 4. contra Marcionem nu. 4. Origen in Genes. apud Euseb. li. 3. c. 1. Irenæus li. 3. c. 3. Hegesippus li. 5. c. 2. de excid. Hierosolym. Caius and Papias the Apostles' own scholars, and Dionysius the B. of Corinth, alleged by Eusebius li. 2. c. 14. & 24. Ignatius ep. ad Romanos. The holy Council of Chalcedon, and many other affirm it. (Peter Chalced. Conc. act.) yea Peter himself (according to the judgement of the ancient Fathers) confesseth he was at Rome, calling it Babylon 1. ep. c. 5. (See the Annotations 1 Pet. c. 5, 13.) Some of these tell the time and cause of his first going thither: some, how long he lived there: some, the manner of his death there: some, the place of his burial: and all, that he was the first Bishop there. How could so many of such wisdom and spirit, so near the Apostles' time deceive or be deceived? how could Calvin and his, after fifteen hundred years know that which none of them could see? Some great argument must they needs have to control the credit of the whole world. This of truth is here their argument, neither have they a better in any place, to wit, If St. Peter had been at Rome, St. Paul would have saluted him, as he did others here in the end of his letter. (The Protestants' great argument, that Peter was never at Rome.) Is not this a high point to disprove all antiquity by? Any man of discretion may straight see, that St. Peter might be known unto St. Paul to be out of the City, either for persecution or business, when this epistle was written, (for he went often out as St. Epiphanius declareth) (Epiph. hær. 27.) and so the omitting to salute him, can prove no more, but that then he was not in Rome. but it proveth not so much neither, because the Apostle might for respect of his dignity and other the Churches' affairs, write unto him special letters, and so had no cause to salute him in his common Epistle. Or how know they that this Epistle was not sent inclosed to St. Peter, to be delivered by his means to the whole Church of the Romans in some of their assemblies? It is very like it was recommended to some one principal man or other that is not here named: and twenty causes there may be unknown to us, why he saluted him not: but no cause why our Adversaries upon such frivolous reasons should reprove an approved truth. For even as well might they say that St. John was never at Ephesus, because St. Paul in his Epistle to the Ephesians doth not salute him. And plain it is, that it is the Roman seat and faith of Peter, which they (as all Heretics before them) do fear and hate, and which will be their bane: (The Heretics' hatred of the Roman see.) and they know that there is no argument which convinceth in their conscience, that Peter was never at Rome. Therefore to conclude, we say to them in St. Augustine's words, Why call you the Apostolic chair, the chair of pestilence? What hath the Church of Rome done against you, in which St. Peter did sit, and from which by nefarious fury you have separated yourselves? li. 2. cont. lit. Petil. c. 51.Salute one an other. Neuer Sectmaisters made more foule or hard shifts to proue or defend falsehod, then the Protestants: but in two points, about S. Peter specially, they passe euen them selues in impudencie. The first is, that they hold he was not preferred before the other Apostles, which is against al Scriptures most euidently. The second is, that he was neuer at Rome, which is against al the Ecclesiastical histories, al the Fathers Greeke and Latine, against the very sense and light of the monuments of his Seate, Sepulcher, doctrine, life, and death there. Greater euidence certes is thereof and more weighty testimonie, then of Romulus, Numas, Cæsars, or Ciceros being there: yet were he a very brutish man that would deny this to the discredite of so many writers and the whole world. Much more monstruous it is, to heare any deny the other. Theodorete saith he was there, writing vpon this chapter. Prosper also carmine de ingratis in principio. S. Leo de natali Petri. S. Augustine to. 6. c. 4. cont. ep. fund. Orosius li. 7. c. 6. S. Chrysostome in ps. 44. S. Epiphanius hær. 27. Prudentius in hymno 1. S. Laurentij, & hymno 12. Optatus li. 2. contra Donatistas. S. Ambrose li. 1. ep. de Basilica tradendis. S. Hierome in Catalogo. Lactantius li. 4. c. 21. de vera sapientia. Eusebius hist. Eccl. li. 2. c. 13, 15. S. Athanasius de fuga sua. S. Cyprian ep. 55. nu. 6. Tertullian de præscriptionibus nu. 26. and li. 4. contra Marcionem nu. 4. Origen in Genes. apud Euseb. li. 3. c. 1. Irenæus li. 3. c. 3. Hegesippus li. 5. c. 2. de excid. Hierosolym. Caius and Papias the Apostles owne scholers, and Dionysius the B. of Corinth, alleaged by Eusebius li. 2. c. 14. & 24. Ignatius ep. ad Romanos. The holy Councel of Chalcedon, and many other affirme it. yea Peter him self (according to the iudgement of the auncient Fathers) confesseth he was at Rome, calling it Babylon 1. ep. c. 5. Some of these tel the time and cause of his first going thither: some, how long he liued there: some, the maner of his death there: some, the place of his burial: and al, that he was the first Bishop there. How could so many of such wisedom and spirit, so neere the Apostles time deceiue or be deceiued? how could Caluin and his, after fifteen hundred yeres know that which none of them could see? Some great argument must they needes haue to controule the credite of the whole world. This of truth is here their argument, neither haue they a better in any place, to wit, If S. Peter had bene at Rome, S. Paul would haue saluted him, as he did others here in the end of his letter. Is not this a high point to disproue al antiquitie by? Any man of discretion may straight see, that S. Peter might be knowen vnto S. Paul to be out of the Citie, either for persecution or busines, when this epistle was written, (for he went often out as S. Epiphanius declareth) & so the omitting to salute him, can proue no more, but that then he was not in Rome. but it proueth not so much neither, because the Apostle might for respect of his dignitie and other the Churches affaires, write vnto him special letters, and so had no cause to salute him in his common Epistle. Or how know they that this Epistle was not sent inclosed to S. Peter, to be deliuered by his meanes to the whole Church of the Romanes in some of their assemblies? It is very like it was recommended to some one principal man or other that is not here named: and twenty causes there may be vnknowen to vs, why he saluted him not: but no cause why our Aduersaries vpon such friuolous reasons should reproue an approued truth. For euen as wel might they say that S. Iohn was neuer at Ephesus, because S. Paul in his Epistle to the Ephesians doth not salute him. And plaine it is, that it is the Romane seate and faith of Peter, which they (as al Heretikes before them) do feare and hate, and which wil be their bane: and they know that there is no argument which conuinceth in their conscience, that Peter was neuer at Rome. Therfore to conclude, we say to them in S. Augustines wordes, Why call you the Apostolike chaire, the chaire of pestilence? What hath the Church of Rome done against you, in which S. Peter did sit, and from which by nefarious furie you haue separated your selues? li. 2. cont. lit. Petil. c. 51.

16Holy kiss. Hereof, and by the common usage of the first Christians, who had special regard of unity and peace among themselves, and for sign and protestation thereof, kissed one another, (Kissing the Pax.) came our holy ceremony of giving the Pax, or kissing one another in the Sacrifice of the blessed Mass. (Orig. in 16. ad Ro.)Holy kisse. Hereof, and by the common vsage of the first Christians, who had special regard of vnitie and peace among them selues, and for signe and protestation thereof, kissed one an other, came our holy ceremonie of giuing the Pax, or kissing one an other in the Sacrifice of the blessed Masse.

17To mark them. He carefully warneth them to take heed of seditious sowers of Sects and dissension in religion, (Against Sectmasters: how to examine our faith.) and this ever to be their mark, if they should teach or move them to any thing which was not agreeable to that which they had learned at their conversion: not to examine the case by the Scriptures, but by their first form of faith and religion delivered to them before they had or did read any book of the new Testament.To marke them. He carefully warneth them to take heede of seditious sowers of Sectes and dissension in religion, and this euer to be their marke, if they should teach or moue them to any thing which was not agreable to that which they had learned at their conuersion: not to examine the case by the Scriptures, but by their first forme of faith and religion deliuered to them before they had or did read any booke of the new Testament.

18But their own belly. Howsoever Heretics pretend in words and external shew of their sheep's coat, in deed they seek but after their own profit and pleasure, (Heretics given to voluptuousness.) and by the Apostles' own testimony we be warranted so to judge of them as of men that in deed have no religion nor conscience.But their owne belly. Howsoeuer Heretikes pretend in wordes and external shew of their sheepes cote, in deede they seeke but after their owne profite and pleasure, & by the Apostles owne testimonie we be warranted so to iudge of them as of men that in deede haue no religion nor conscience.

19Your obedience. Against Heretics and their illusions, there is no better way than in simplicity to cleave unto that which hath been taught before: for the which the Roman obedience is much commended. See Annot. upon the first chap. vers. 8.Your obedience. Against Heretikes and their illusions, there is no better way then in simplicitie to cleaue vnto that which hath bene taught before: for the which the Romane obedience is much commended. See Annot. vpon the first chap. vers. 8.