Chapter 2 of 6

2Conferred with them. Though St. Paul were taught his Gospel of God and not of man, and had an extraordinary calling by Christ himself, yet by revelation he was sent to Jerusalem to confer the said Gospel which he preached, with his elders the ordinary Apostles and Rulers of the Church, to put both his vocation and doctrine to their trial and approbation, and to join in office, teaching, and society or communion with them. For there is no extraordinary or miraculous vocation, that can sever or separate the person so called, in doctrine or fellowship of Christian life and religion, from the ordinary known society of God's people and Priests. Therefore whosoever he be (upon what pretence soever) that will not have his calling and doctrine tried by the ordinary Governors of God's Church, or disdaineth to go up to the principal place of our religion, to confer with Peter and other pillars of the Church, it is evident that he is a false teacher, a Schismatic, and an Heretic. By which rule you may try all your new teachers of Luther's or Calvin's school: who never did nor ever durst put their preaching to such conference or trial of holy Council or Bishops, as they ought to do, and would do, if it were of God, as St. Paul's was.Conferred with them. Though S. Paul were taught his Gospel of God and not of man, and had an extraordinarie calling by Christ him self, yet by reuelation he was sent to Hierusalem to conferre the said Gospel which he preached, with his elders the ordinarie Apostles and Rulers of the Church, to put both his vocation and doctrine to their trial and approbation, and to ioyne in office, teaching, and societie or communion with them. For there is no extraordinarie or miraculous vocation, that can seuer or separate the person so called, in doctrine or fellowship of Christian life and religion, from the ordinarie knowen societie of Gods people and Priestes. Therfore whosoeuer he be (vpon what pretence so euer) that wil not haue his calling and doctrine tried by the ordinarie Gouerners of Gods Church, or disdaineth to go vp to the principal place of our religion, to conferre with Peter and other pillers of the Church, it is euident that he is a false teacher, a Schismatike, and an Heretike. By which rule you may trie al your new teachers of Luthers or Caluins schoole: who neuer did nor euer durst put their preaching to such conference or trial of holy Councel or Bishops, as they ought to do, and would do, if it were of God, as S. Paules was.

2In vain. Though St. Paul doubted not of the truth of the Gospel which he preached, knowing it to be of the holy Ghost: yet because other men could not, nor would not acknowledge so much, till it were allowed by such as were without all exception known to be Apostles and to have the spirit of truth, to discern whether the vocation, spirit, and Gospel of Paul were of God, he knew he should otherwise without conference with them, have lost his labour, both for the time past and to come. He had not had (saith St. Jerome) security of preaching the Gospel, if it had not been approved by Peter's sentence and the rest that were with him. Jerome ep. 29. c. 2. See Tertul. li. 4 Cont. Marc. nu. 3. Therefore by revelation he went to confer with the Apostles at Jerusalem, that by them having his Apostleship and Gospel liked and approved, he might preach with more fruit. Wherein we see, this holy Apostle did not as the seditious proud Heretics do now a days, which refusing all man's attestation or approbation, will be tried by Scriptures only. As also we may learn that it is not such absurdity as the Adversaries would make it, to have the Scriptures approved by the Church's testimony. Seeing the Gospel which St. Paul preached (being of as much certainty and of the same Holy Ghost that the Scriptures be) was to be put in conference and examination of the Apostles, without all derogation to the truth, dignity, or certainty of the same. And the cavilling of Heretics, that we make subject God's Oracles to man's censure, and the Scriptures to have no more force than the Church is content to grant unto them, is vain and false. For, to bear witness or to give evidence or attestation that the preaching or writing of such, is true and of the Holy Ghost, is not to make it true: no more than the Goldsmith or touchstone that try and discern which is true gold, make it good gold, but they give evidence to man that so it is. And therefore that disputation also, whether the Scripture or the Church be of greater authority, is superfluous: either giving testimony to the other, and both assured by the Holy Ghost from all error: the Church yet being before the Scriptures, the spouse of Christ, and proper dwelling, temple, or subject of God and his graces: for the which Church the Scriptures were, and not the Church for the Scriptures. In which Church there is judicial authority by office and jurisdiction to determine of doubtful questions touching the sense of the Scriptures and other controversies in religion, and to punish disobedient persons. Of which judicial power the Scriptures be not capable, as neither the truths and determinations of the same can be so evident to men, nor so agreeable and fit for every particular resolution, as diversity of times and persons requireth. Certain is the truth, and great is the authority of both: but in such divers kinds, as they cannot be well compared together. The controversy is much like as if a man touching the ruling a case in law or giving sentence in a matter of question, should ask, whether the judge, or the evidence of the parties, be of more authority or credit, which were as frivolous a dispute, as it were a disordered part for any man to say, he would be tried by no other judge but by his own writings or evidences. With such trifters and seditious persons have we to do now a days in divinity, as were intolerable in any profane science or faculty in the world.In vaine. Though S. Paul doubted not of the truth of the Gospel which he preached, knowing it to be of the holy Ghost: yet because other men could not, nor would not acknowledge so much, til it were allowed by such as were without al exception knowen to be Apostles & to haue the spirit of truth, to discerne whether the vocation, spirit, & Gospel of Paul were of God, he knew he should otherwise without conferéce with them, haue lost his labour, both for the time past and to come. He had not had (saith S. Hierom) securitie of preaching the Gospel, if it had not been approued by Peters sentence and the rest that were with him. Hiero. ep. 29. c. 2. See Tertul. li. 4 Cont. Marc. nu. 3. Therfore by reuelation he went to conferre with the Apostles at Hierusalem, that by them hauing his Apostleship and Gospel liked and approued, he might preach with more fruite. Wherein we see, this holy Apostle did not as the seditious proud Heretikes do now a daies, which refusing al mans attestation or approbation, wil be tried by Scriptures onely. As also we may learne that it is not such absurditie as the Aduersaries would make it, to haue the Scriptures approued by the Churches testimonie. Seing the Gospel which S. Paul preached (being of as much certaintie and of the same Holy Ghost that the Scriptures be) was to be put in conference and examination of the Apostles, without al derogation to the truth, dignitie, or certaintie of the same. And the cauilling of Heretikes, that we make subiect Gods Oracles to mans censure, and the Scriptures to haue no more force then the Church is content to graunt vnto them, is vaine and false. For, to beare witnes or to giue euidence or attestation that the preaching or writing of such, is true and of the Holy Ghost, is not to make it true: no more then the Goldsmith or touch-stone that trie and discerne which is true gold, make it good gold, but they giue euidence to man that so it is. And therfore that disputation also, whether the Scripture or the Church be of greater authoritie, is superfluous: either giuing testimonie to the other, and both assured by the Holy Ghost from al error: the Church yet being before the Scriptures, the spouse of Christ, and proper dwelling, temple, or subiect of God and his graces: for the which Church the Scriptures were, and not the Church for the Scriptures. In which Church there is iudicial authoritie by office and iurisdiction to determine of doubtful questions touching the sense of the Scriptures and other controuersies in religion, & to punish disobedient persons. Of which iudicial power the Scriptures be not capable, as neither the truthes & determinations of the same can be so euident to men, nor so agreable and fit for euery particular resolution, as diuersitie of times and persons requireth. Certaine is the truth, and great is the authoritie of both: but in such diuers kindes, as they can not be well compared together. The controuersie is much like as if a man touching the ruling a case in law or giuing sentence in a matter of question, should aske, whether the iudge, or the euidéce of the parties, be of more authoritie or credit, which were as friuolous a dispute, as it were a disordered part for any man to say, he would be tried by no other iudge but by his owne writings or euidences. With such trifters and seditious persons haue we to do now a daies in diuinitie, as were intolerable in any prophane science or facultie in the world.

6Added nothing. The Gospel and preaching of St. Paul was wholly of God, and therefore though it were put to the Church's probation, as gold is to the touchstone: yet being found in all points pure, nothing could be altered or amended therein by the Apostles. Even so the Scriptures which are indeed wholly of the Holy Ghost's enditing, being put to the Church's trial, are found, proved, and testified unto the world to be such, and not made true, altered, or amended by the same. Without which attestation of the Church, the holy Scriptures in themselves were always true before: but not so known to be, to all Christians, nor they so bound to take them. And that is the meaning of the famous sentence of St. Augustine Cont. ep. fund. c. 5. which troubleth the Heretics so much. I would not believe the Gospel (saith he) unless the authority of the Church moved me.Added nothing. The Gospel and preaching of S. Paul was wholy of God, & therfore though it were put to the Churches probation, as gold is to the touch stone: yet being found in al pointes pure, nothing could be altered or amended therein by the Apostles. Euen so the Scriptures which are in deede wholy of the Holy Ghosts enditing, being put to the Churches trial, are found, proued, and testified vnto the world to be such, and not made true, altered, or amended by the same. Without which attestation of the Church, the holy Scriptures in them selues were alwaies true before: but not so knowen to be, to al Christians, nor they so bound to take them. And that is the meaning of the famous sentence of S. Augustine Cont. ep. fund. c. 5. which troubleth the Heretikes so much. I would not beleeue the Gospel (saith he) vnles the authoritie of the Church moued me.

7To Peter of the circumcision. We may not think, as the Heretics deceitfully teach, that the charge of the Apostles was so distincted, that none could preach or exercise jurisdiction but in those several places or towards those peoples or provinces only, whereunto by God's appointment or their own lot or election, they were specially designed. For, every Apostle might by Christ's commission (Mat. 28. Go, and teach all nations) use all spiritual function through the whole world, yet for the more particular regard and care of provinces, and for peace and order sake, some were appointed to one country, and some to another: as, of the other Apostles, we see in the Ecclesiastical histories, and for St. Peter and St. Paul, it is plain by this place and other, that to them as to the two chief and most renowned Apostles, the Church of all Nations was given, as divided into two parts, that is, Jews and Gentiles: the first and principal being St. Peter's lot, that herein also he might resemble our Saviour, who was sent namely to the lost sheep of Israel (Mat. 15.), and was properly the Minister of the Circumcision (Ro. 15.): the second being St. Paul's, whom Christ chose specially to preach to the Gentiles: Not so for all that, that either he was limited to the Gentiles only, (whom the Acts of the Apostles report, in every place, first to have entered into the Synagogues and preached Christ to the Jews, as he wrote also to the Hebrews and ever had special regard and honour to them:) or Peter so bound to the Jews only, that he could not meddle with the Gentiles: seeing he was the man chosen of God, by whom the Gentiles should first believe (Act. 10. & 15. v. 7.), who first baptized them, and first gave order concerning them. Therefore the treachery of Calvin (Calu. li. 4. c. 6. nu. 15. Instit.) is intolerable, that upon this distinction of the Apostles' charge, would have the simple suppose, that St. Peter could not be Bishop of Rome (so might he bar St. John from Ephesus also) nor deal among the Gentiles, as a thing against God's ordinance and the appointment between him and St. Paul: as though thereby the one had bound himself to the other, not to preach or meddle within his fellow's compass. And which is further most seditious, he exhorteth all men to keep fast the foresaid compact, and rather to have respect to St. Paul's Apostleship, than to St. Peter's: as though the preaching, authority, and Apostleship of both were not a like true, and all of one holy Spirit, whether they preached to Jews or Gentiles, as both did preach unto both peoples, as is already proved, and at length, partly by the daily decay of the Jewish state and their incredulity, and partly for that in Christianity the distinction of Jew and Gentile ceased after a season: both went to the chief city of the Gentiles, and there founded the Church common to the Hebrews and all nations, Peter first, and Paul afterward. And therefore Tertullian saith, de præscript. nu. 14. O happy Church, to which the Apostles poured out all doctrine with their blood. Where Peter suffereth like to our Lord's passion, where Paul is crowned with John (Baptist's) death.To Peter of the circumcision. We may not thinke, as the Heretikes deceitfuly teach, that the charge of the Apostles was so distincted, that none could preach or exercise iurisdiction but in those seueral places or towardes those peoples or prouinces onely, wherevnto by Gods appointment or their owne lot or election, they were specially designed. For, euery Apostle might by Christes commission (Mat. 28. Goe, and teach al nations) vse al spiritual functió through the whole world, yet for the more particular regard & care of prouinces, & for peace & order sake, some were appointed to one countrie, & some to an other: as, of the other Apostles, we see in the Ecclesiastical histories, and for S. Peter & S. Paul, it is plaine by this place & other, that to them as to the two cheefe and most renowmed Apostles, the Church of al Nations was giuen, as deuided into two partes, that is, Iewes and Gentiles: the first and principal being S. Peters lot, that herein also he might resemble our Sauiour, who was sent namely to the lost sheepe of Israel (Mat. 15.), and was properly the Minister of the Circumcision (Ro. 15.): the second being S. Paules, whom Christ chose specially to preach to the Gentiles: Not so for al that, that either he was limited to the Gentils onely, (whó the Actes of the Apostles report, in euery place, first to haue entered into the Synagogs & preached Christ to the Iewes, as he wrote also to the Hebrues & euer had special regard & honour to thé:) or Peter so boúd to the Iewes only, that he could not meddle with the Gentiles: seing he was the man chosen of God, by whom the Gentils should first beleeue (Act. 10. & 15. v. 7.), who first baptized them, and first gaue order concerning them. Therfore the treacherie of Caluin (Calu. li. 4. c. 6. nu. 15. Instit.) is intolerable, that vpon this distinction of the Apostles charge, would haue the simple suppose, that S. Peter could not be Bishop of Rome (so might he barre S. Iohn from Ephesus also) nor deale among the Gentiles, as a thing against Gods ordinance and the appointment betwene him and S. Paul: as though thereby the one had bound him self to the other, not to preach or meddle within his fellowes compasse. And which is further most seditious, he exhorteth al men to keepe fast the foresaid compact, and rather to haue respect to S. Paules Apostleship, then to S. Peters: as though the preaching, authoritie, and Apostleship of both were not a like true, and al of one holy Spirit, whether they preached to Iewes or Gentiles, as both did preach vnto both peoples, as is already proued, and at length, partly by the daily decay of the Iewish state and their incredulitie, and partly for that in Christianitie the distinction of Iew & Gentil ceased after a season: both went to the cheefe citie of the Gentiles, and there founded the Church common to the Hebrues and al nations, Peter first, and Paul afterward. And therfore Tertullian saith, de præscript. nu. 14. O happie Church, to which the Apostles powred out al doctrine with their bloud. Where Peter suffereth like to our Lordes passion, where Paul is crowned with Iohn (Baptists) death.

9Gave the right hands of society. There is and always ought to be, a common fellowship and fraternity of all Pastors and preachers of the Church. Into which society whosoever entereth not, but standeth in Schism and separation from Peter and the chief Apostolic Pastors, what pretence soever he hath, or whence soever he challengeth authority, he is a wolf, and no true Pastor. Which union and communion together was so necessary even in St. Paul's case, that, notwithstanding his special calling of God, yet the Holy Ghost caused him to go up to his elder Apostles, to be received into their fellowship or brotherhood. for it is to be noted, that SS. Peter, James, and John were not sent to St. Paul, to join with him or to be tried for their doctrine and calling, by him: but contrariwise he was sent to them as to the chief and known ordinary Apostles. They therefore gave Paul their hands, that is to say, took him into their society, and not he them. And St. Jerome's rule concerning this, shall be found true to the world's end, speaking of St. Peter's successor: He that gathereth not with thee, scattereth. Ep. 17. And in another place for the same cause he calleth Rome, tutissimum Communionis portum, the most safe and sure haven of communion or Society. Ep. 16. And whereas the Heretics by this also would prove that Peter had no preeminence above Paul being his fellow Apostle, it is ridiculous. As though all of one fellowship or brotherhood be always equal, or as though there were not order and government, superiority and inferiority, in every society well appointed. And they might perceive by this whole passage, that Peter was the special and in more singular sort, the Apostle of the Jews, though James and John were also: as St. Paul is also called in more singular sort the Apostle and doctor of the Gentiles than St. Barnabas, and yet they were both alike taken here into this society, as they were both at once and alike segregated into this ministry, and ordered together Act. 13. It is a poor reason then to say or think, St. Peter not to be above St. Barnabas neither, because of this society and fellowship unto which he was received together with St. Paul.Gaue the right handes of societie. There is and alwaies ought to be, a common fellowship and fraternitie of al Pastores and preachers of the Church. Into which societie who so euer entereth not, but standeth in Schisme and separation from Peter and the cheefe Apostolike Pastors, what pretence so euer he hath, or whence so euer he chalengeth authoritie, he is a wolfe, and no true Pastor. Which vnion and communion together was so necessarie euen in S. Paules case, that, notwithstanding his special calling of God, yet the Holy Ghost caused him to go vp to his elder Apostles, to be receiued into their fellowship or brotherhod. for it is to be noted, that SS. Peter, Iames, and Iohn were not sent to S. Paul, to ioyne with him or to be tried for their doctrine and calling, by him: but contrariewise he was sent to them as to the cheefe and knowen ordinarie Apostles. They therfore gaue Paul their handes, that is to say, tooke him into their societie, and not he them. And S. Hieroms rule concerning this, shal be found true to the worldes end, speaking of S. Peters successor: He that gathereth not with thee, scattereth. Ep. 17. And in an other place for the same cause he calleth Rome, tutissimum Communionis portum, the most safe and sure hauen of communion or Societie. Ep. 16. And whereas the Heretikes by this also would proue that Peter had no preeminéce aboue Paul being his fellow Apostle, it is ridiculous. As though al of one fellowship or brotherhod be alwaies equal, or as though there were not order and gouernement, superioritie and inferioritie, in euery societie wel appointed. And they might perceiue by this whole passage, that Peter was the special and in more singular sort, the Apostle of the Iewes, though Iames and Iohn were also: as S. Paul is also called in more singular sort the Apostle and doctor of the Gentiles then S. Barnabas, and yet they were both alike taken here into this societie, as they were both at once and alike segregated into this ministerie, and ordered together Act. 13. It is a poore reason then to say or thinke, S. Peter not to be aboue S. Barnabas neither, because of this societie and fellowship vnto which he was receiued together with S. Paul.

11I resisted him. Wicked Porphyry (as St. Jerome writeth) chargeth St. Paul of envy and malapert boldness, and St. Peter of error. Proæm. Comment. in Galat. Even so the like impious sons of Cham, for this, and for other things, gladly charge St. Peter, as though he had committed the greatest crimes in the world. for, it is the property of Heretics and ill men, to be glad to see the Saints reprehended and their faults discovered, as we may learn in the writings of St. Augustine against Faustus the Manichee, who gathered out all the acts of the holy Patriarchs, that might seem to the people to be worthy blame. Whom the said holy Doctor defendeth at large against him, as both he, and before him St. Cyprian, find here upon this Apostle's reprehension, much matter of praising both their virtues: St. Paul's great zeal, and St. Peter's wonderful humility: that the one in the cause of God would not spare his Superior, and that the other, in that excellent dignity, would not take it in ill part, nor by allegation of his Supremacy disdain or refuse to be controlled by his junior, which of the two they count the greater grace and more to be imitated. For neither Peter (saith St. Cyprian) whom our Lord chose the first and upon whom he built the Church, when Paul disputed with him of circumcision, challenged insolently or arrogantly took any thing to himself, saying that he had the Primacy, and therefore the later Disciples ought rather to obey him. ep. 71 ad Quintum. nu. 2. And St. Augustine ep. 19. c. 2 in fine. That (saith he) which was done of Paul profitably by the liberty of charity, the same Peter took in good part by holy and benign godliness of humility, and so he gave unto posterity a more rare and holy example, if at any time perhaps they did amiss, to be content to be corrected of their juniors, than Paul, for to be bold and confident: yea the inferiors to resist their betters for defending the truth of the Gospel, brotherly charity always preserved. By which notable speeches of the Doctors we may also see, how frivolously the Heretics argue hereupon, that St. Peter could not be Superior to St. Paul, being so reprehended of him: whereas the Fathers make it an example to the Superiors, to bear with humility the correption or controulement even of their inferiors. Namely by this example St. Augustine (li. 2 de bapt. c. 1.) excellently declareth, that the B. Martyr St. Cyprian, who walked awry touching the rebaptizing of them that were christened of Heretics, could not, nor would not have been offended to be admonished and reformed in that point by his fellows or inferiors, much less by a whole Council. We have learned, saith he, that Peter the Apostle, in whom the Primacy of the Apostles by excellent grace is so preeminent, when he did otherwise concerning circumcision than the truth required, was corrected of Paul the later Apostle. I think (without any reproach unto him) Cyprian the Bishop may be compared to Peter the Apostle. howbeit I ought rather to fear lest I be injurious to Peter. for who knoweth not that the principality of Apostleship is to be preferred before any dignity of Bishop whatsoever? but if the grace of the Chairs or Sees differ, yet the glory of the Martyrs is one. And who is so dull that cannot see, that the inferior, though not by office and jurisdiction, yet by the law of brotherly love and fraternal correption, may reprehend his superior? Did ever any man wonder that a good Priest or any virtuous person should tell the Pope, or any other great Prelate, or greatest Prince in earth, their faults? Popes may be reprehended, and are justly admonished of their faults, and ought to take it in good part, and so they do and ever have done, when it cometh of zeal and love, as of St. Paul, Irenæus, Cyprian, Jerome, Augustine, Bernard: but of Simon Magus, Novatus, Julian, Wycliffe, Luther, Calvin, Beza, that do it of malice, and rail no less at their virtues than their vices, of such (I say) God's Prelates must not be taught nor corrected, though they must patiently take it, as our Saviour did the like reproaches of the malicious Jews, and as David did the malediction of Semei. 2 Reg. 16.I resisted him. Wicked Porphyrie (as S. Hierom writeth) chargeth S. Paul of enuie and malepart boldnes, and S. Peter of errour. Proæm. Comment. in Galat. Euen so the like impious sonnes of Cham, for this, and for other things, gladly charge S. Peter, as though he had committed the greatest crimes in the world. for, it is the propertie of Heretikes and il men, to be glad to see the Saincts reprehended and their faultes discouered, as we may learne in the writings of S. Augustine against Faustus the Manichee, who gathered out al the actes of the holy Patriarches, that might seeme to the people to be worthy blame. Whom the said holy Doctor defendeth at large against him, as both he, and before him S. Cyprian, finde here vpon this Apostles reprehension, much matter of praising both their vertues: S. Paules great zeale, and S. Peters wonderful humilitie: that the one in the cause of God would not spare his Superior, and that the other, in that excellent dignitie, would not take it in il part, nor by allegation of his Supremacie disdaine or refuse to be controwled by his iunior, which of the two they count the greater grace and more to be imitated. For neither Peter (saith S. Cyprian) whom our Lord chose the first and vpon whom he built the Church, when Paul disputed with him of circumcision, chalenged insolently or arrogantly tooke any thing to him self, saying that he had the Primacie, and therfore the later Disciples ought rather to obey him. ep. 71 ad Quintum. nu. 2. And S. Augustine ep. 19. c. 2 in fine. That (saith he) which was done of Paul profitably by the libertie of charitie, the same Peter tooke in good part by holy and benigne godlines of humilitie, and so he gaue vnto posteritie a more rare and holy example, if at any time perhaps they did amis, to be content to be corrected of their iuniors, then Paul, for to be bold and confident: yea the inferiors to resist their betters for defending the truth of the Gospel, brotherly charitie alwaies preserued. By which notable speaches of the Doctors we may also see, how friuolously the Heretikes argue herevpon, that S. Peter could not be Superior to S. Paul, being so reprehended of him: whereas the Fathers make it an example to the Superiors, to beare with humilitie the correption or controulement euen of their inferiors. Namely by this example S. Augustine (li. 2 de bapt. c. 1.) excellently declareth, that the B. Martyr S. Cyprian, who walked awry touching the rebaptizing of them that were christened of Heretikes, could not, nor would not haue been offended to be admonished & reformed in that point by his fellowes or inferiors, much lesse by a whole Councel. We haue learned, saith he, that Peter the Apostle, in whom the Primacie of the Apostles by excellent grace is so preeminent, when he did otherwise concerning circumcision then the truth required, was corrected of Paul the later Apostle. I thinke (without any reproch vnto him) Cyprian the Bishop may be compared to Peter the Apostle. howbeit I ought rather to feare lest I be iniurious to Peter. for who knoweth not that the principalitie of Apostleship is to be preferred before any dignitie of Bishop whatsoeuer? but if the grace of the Chaires or Sees differ, yet the glorie of the Martyrs is one. And who is so dull that can not see, that the inferior, though not by office and iurisdiction, yet by the law of brotherly loue and fraternal correption, may reprehend his superior? Did euer any man wonder that a good Priest or any vertuous person should tell the Pope, or any other great Prelate, or greatest Prince in earth, their faultes? Popes may be reprehended, and are iustly admonished of their faultes, and ought to take it in good part, & so they do and euer haue done, when it commeth of zeale & loue, as of S. Paul, Irenæus, Cyprian, Hierom, Augustine, Bernard: but of Simon Magus, Nouatus, Iulian, Wicleffe, Luther, Caluin, Beza, that do it of malice, & raile no lesse at their vertues then their vices, of such (I say) Gods Prelates must not be taught nor corrected, though they must patiently take it, as our Sauiour did the like reproches of the malitious Iewes, and as Dauid did the malediction of Semei. 2 Reg. 16.

11Reprehensible. The Heretics hereof again infer, that Peter then did err in faith, and therefore the Popes may fail therein also. To which we answer, that howsoever other Popes may err in their private teachings or writings, whereof we have treated before in the Annotation upon these words, That thy faith fail not: it is certain that St. Peter did not here fail in faith, nor err in doctrine or knowledge. for it was conversationis non prædicationis vitium, as Tertullian saith. de præscript. nu. 7. It was a default in conversation, life, or regiment, which may be committed of any man, be he never so holy, and not in doctrine. St. Augustine and whosoever make most of it, think no otherwise of it. But St. Jerome and many other holy fathers deem it to have been no fault at all, nor any other thing than St. Paul himself did upon the like occasion: and that this whole combat was a set thing agreed upon between them. It is a school point much debated betwixt St. Jerome and St. Augustine ep. 9. 11. 19. apud Augustin.Reprehensible. The Heretikes hereof againe inferre, that Peter then did erre in faith, and therfore the Popes may faile therein also. To which we answer, that howsoeuer other Popes may erre in their priuate teachings or writings, whereof we haue treated before in the Annotation vpon these wordes, That thy faith faile not: it is certaine that S. Peter did not here faile in faith, nor erre in doctrine or knowledge. for it was conuersationis non prædicationis vitium, as Tertullian saith. de præscript. nu. 7. It was a default in conuersation, life, or regiment, which may be committed of any man, be he neuer so holy, and not in doctrine. S. Augustine and whosoeuer make most of it, thinke no otherwise of it. But S. Hierom and many other holy fathers deeme it to haue been no fault at all, nor any other thing then S. Paul him self did vpon the like occasion: & that this whole combat was a set thing agreed vpon betwene them. It is a schoole point much debated betwixt S. Hierom and S. Augustine ep. 9. 11. 19. apud Augustin.