Chapter 1: Concerning the Church and Her Authority .... 9
Chapter 2: On Councils..
Chapter 3: On the Primacy of the Apostolic and Petrine See.28
Chapter 4: That the Heretics Rashly Oppose the Scriptures.45
Chapter 5: Concerning Faith and Works.50
Chapter 6: Concerning Confirmation.63
Chapter 7: Concerning the Sacrament of Order.65
Chapter 8: On Confession.72
Chapter 9: On Satisfaction.77
Chapter 10: On the Eucharist under Both Kinds.85
Chapter 11: Concerning Marriage.89
Chapter 12: Concerning Extreme Unction.91
Chapter 13: On Human Constitutions.93
Chapter 14: On Feasts and Fasts.100
Chapter 15: Concerning the Veneration of the Saints .... 110 \
Chapter 16: Concerning the Images of the Crucified and of the Saints.122
Chapter 17: On the Sacrifice of the Mass.127
Chapter 18: Concerning Vows.134
Chapter 19: Concerning the Celibacy of the Clergy.142
Chapter 20: Concerning Cardinals and Legates of the Apostolic See.148
Chapter 21: Concerning Excommunication.150
Chapter 22: Concerning the War against the Turks.155
Chapter 23: Concerning the Immunity and Wealth of the Church.159
Chapter 24: On Indulgences.165
Chapter 25: On Purgatory.'.170
Chapter 26: Concerning Annates . 175
Chapter 27: Concerning the Burning of Heretics.178
Chapter 28: Disputations with Heretics Are to Be Held.186
Chapter 29: That Under the Eucharist Is the True Body of Christ.191
Chapter 30: Concerning the Baptism of Children .201
Chapter 31: On Free Will.210
Chapter 32: On Prayer and the Canonical Hours.220
Chapter 33: On Plurality of Priests and on Tithes.234 "W
Chap ter 34: On the Building of Churches and Their Decoration.244
Chapter 35: On the (Indelible) Stamp (Character).254
Chapter 36: On Transubstantiation.258 t
Chapter 37: That Masses Are to Be Said in Latin, Not in German.264
Chapter 38: On Private Masses.270
CHAPTER 1 ON THE CHURCH AND HER AUTHORITY
The First Proposition has three members.
Proposition 1: The Church is the body of Christ, the bride 2 of Christ, the Kingdom of Heaven.
i. He has subjected all things under His feet, and gives Him¬ self as Head over all the Church, His Body, and its fulness, filling all things in all" [Eph 1:22-23].'
"May you walk worthy of the calling with which you were called, with all lowliness and meekness, with patience, forbearing one an¬ other in love, endeavoring to keep the unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace. One body and one Spirit, even as you were called in one hope of your calling. One Lord, one faith, one baptism, one God and Father of all, who is over all and through all and in us all" [Eph 4:1-6].
ii. The proof of the second part of the first proposition, name¬ ly, the Church is the Bride of Christ.
"One is my dove, my perfect one, she is the only one of her mother, she is the chosen one of her who bore her" [Cant 6:9].
"A garden enclosed is my sister, my bride, a garden enclosed, a fountain sealed" [Cant 4:12].
"Wives, submit yourselves to your husbands, as unto the Lord. For the husband is the head of the wife, even as Christ is the Head of the Church, and He is the Savior of the body. But just as the Church is subject to Christ, so also are wives subject to their husbands in all things. Husbands, love your wives, even as Christ has loved the Church, and gave Himself for her, that He might sanctify her, cleansing her by the layer of water in the Word of life, that He might present her to Himself a glorious Church, not having spot or wrinkle, or any such thing, but that she should be holy and without blemish" [Eph 5:22-27]. 4
Of Jerusalem like a bride adorned for her husband [Rev 21:2]. But you are the body of Christ, and members one of another" [1 Cor 10:17; 12:12; Rom 12:5]. Thus therefore the Church is one, not outwardly, but in¬ wardly, as the ark of Noah was one [1 Pt. 3:20f] which was the figure of the one Church; outside that one sealed Church no one is saved, just as men outside the ark perished. Christ is no biga¬ mist: the Church of the apostles and ours are one Church. Before Luther was born, there was the Church that believed the Mass a sacrifice, seven sacraments, etc. She was the bride of Christ. Therefore now let us remain with that same Church, and not be joined to the Church of the wicked. Christ, because He loves the Church His bride, did not leave her, neither for five hundred nor a thousand years. How then would the Head desert His body for so 2 J long a time? Wien He forsook the Synagogue, less loved on account of sins, only seventy years in the physical captivity of Babylon, how would He forsake His bride one thousand years in captivity of errors ? iii. Proof of the third part of the proposition, namely, the Church is the kingdom of heaven"For the kingdom of heaven is like unto a man that is a householder, who went out early in the morning to hire laborers for his vineyard" [Matt 20:1]. The kingdom of heaven is likened unto a certain king, who made a marriage feast for his son, and sent forth his servants to ca^ them that were bidden to the marriage feast . . ." [Matt 22:2f], Then is the kingdom of heaven like ten virgins who took their lamps and went forth to meet the bridegroom, and the bride; five of these moreover were foolish ..." [Matt 23:If], You will find many similar parables. Application inferring three corollaries:
1. If the Church is here called the kingdom of heaven, how could error and falsehood reign in that kingdom for a thousand years? For the kingdom of heaven is the kingdom of truth.
2. It is clear that God goes out even until evening to bring in workers [cf. Mt 20:6f]; but the Lutherans believe on the 1 contrary that no one was brought in for a thousand years, except their idol, Luther.
3. It is clear that the Church here on pilgrimage has been gathered from good and bad, for Christ clearly says that there are wise and foolish virgins [cf. Mt 25:2ff], good and bad fish [Mt 13:44-52]. See Gregory, Homilies, [1.11.4; 1.12.3: PL 76.1116, 1120].
Proposition 2: The Church does not err, not only because she always has Christ as her Bridegroom, but also because she is ruled by the teaching authority of the Holy Spirit who never for2 sakes her. "I shall ask my Father, and He will give you another comforter" [Jn 14:16]. "Holy Father, preserve in thy name those whom thou hast sent to me" [Jn 17:11]. "Moreover, I pray not only for those apostles, but also for those who are going to believe through their words, in me" [Jn 17:20]. "The Church of the living God is the pillar and foundation of truth" [1 Tim 3:15]. How then can it err? "I have yet many things to say to you, but you cannot hear them now. When He, the Spirit of truth, is come. He shall teach you all truth" [Jn 16:12f]. Here the Lutheran must show us the Gospel, the teaching authority of the Holy Spirit, promised in the 3 Church. "And you need not that any one teach you; but as His anoint¬ ing teaches you concerning all things, and is true, and is no lie" [1 Jn 2:27]. Therefore, the anointing of the Holy Spirit always teaches the Church. "And behold I am with you always, even to the end of the world" [Mt 28:20], said Christ (who is the way, the truth, and the life) to His disciples. It is clear that the Church as the pillar of truth, with Christ as leader and the Holy Spirit as teacher, does not err. How much less believable is it then that the whole Church would err for a thousand years, as the 1 Lutherans rave! Proposition 3: Even as the Church is one, so is there Unity in the Church. "I beseech you, brethren, to mark those who make decisions and offenses contrary to the doctrine which you have learned" [Rom 16:17]. Later: "They serve not Christ . . . but their own belly." Later: "Their pleasing speeches . . . deceive the hearts of the innocent" [Rom 16:18]. "I beg of you, moreover, brethren, by the name of our Lord Jesus Christ that all of you say this, and that there not be schisms among you; be perfect in the same mind and the same knowledge [1 Cor 1:10]. The Lutherans cause new schisms and fight both among themselves and with others, so that now Carlstadt has broken off, and Egranus* and Luther, and Zwingli, and the Catabaptists. For God is not a God of dissension but of peace, just as I teach in all the Churches of the saints" [1 Cor 14:33],^” Rather therefore is it to be believed that God inspires a true understanding of Scripture to the concord and unity of the Church, than to one private man such as Luther or Zwingli or Osiander: nay, it follows, that what Holy Mother Church defines or accepts is not to be believed with less firmness or held in less veneration than if it were expressed in Scripture. "Whatever things were written were written for our instruc¬ tion, that through patience and through comfort of the scriptures we might have hope. Now the God of comfort and of patience grant you to be of the same mind one with another according to Christ Jesus; that with one accord you may with one mouth glorify God, in prayer to God"[Rom 15:5-6]. Almighty everlasting God, by whose Spirit the whole body of the Church is sanctified and ruled. Paul subjoins, after the reckoning of the mystical body: "Be of the same mind one towards another; set not your mind on lofty things, but condescend to things that are lowly" [Rom 12; 16 ]. "If there is any consolation in Christ, if any consolation of charities, if any fellowship of the Spirit, if any bowels of com¬ passion, fulfill my joy, that you be of the same mind, having the same charity, being of one mind. . ." [Phil 2:If]. My people have done two evil things : "They have forsaken the fountain of the water of life, and they have dug for themselves leaky cisterns, which cannot contain water" [Jer 2:13]. Thus the Lutherans, leaving the true and living fountain of the Church, dig leaky cisterns of heretics, of Wyclif, Hus, the Albigenses, and others. In vain God sent His Son, in vain the Holy Spirit, in vain the apostles, martyrs, doctors, confessors, if through Luther alone the light of truth was to be opened. Why then did God not send one Luther for all?
Proposition 4: It is clear that, representatively, the Church is her prelates and leaders gathered together. "And the king turned his face about, and blessed all the Church of Israel, and all the Church of Israel stood," etc. [1 K 8:14]. Note "the Church of Israel"; what alone would be more representative is clear from the beginning of this chapter: "Then all the elders of Israel were assembled, with the heads of the tribes, and the leaders of the families of the children of Israel unto King Solomon," etc. [1 K 8:1].
Objections of the Heretics. 2
1. The authority of Scripture is greater than that of the Church. For the Church ought to be ruled according to Scripture. For the Word of God yields to no one.
2. It is not lawful for either the Church or any man to go against Scripture.
3. One does not say that what the Pope with the Cardinals and the bishops determines has been determined by the Church, be¬ cause the Church is the congregation of all believers and the con¬ nection in true faith by which the just man lives.
4. The Church of God is in the Spirit alone, because she is believed, and thus hidden.
5. Luther says that he is of the Church, and believes the Church is with him, where he is preacher. So also Zwingli, Carlstadt, Pelican, Soblerus, Hubmaier Pacimontanus* etc.
Disposal of Objections
1. Christ did not write any book, nor did He bid the dis¬ ciples or apostles to write one, yet He gave many precepts con¬ cerning the Church; hence when about to send apostles out to plant the Church, He did not say, "Go write," but "Go into the whole world and preach the Gospel to every creature" [Mt. 24:14], Therefore the law was written on tablets of stone, but the Gospel on hearts. "Since you are a letter of Christ, sent out by us, and written not with ink but with the Spirit of the living God, not in tablets of stone, but in the physical tablets of the heart" [2 Cor 3:3]. Jeremiah agrees: "Behold, the day is coming, says the Lord, and I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel, and with the house of Judah, not like the covenant I made with your fathers, etc., but this will be one which I shall make with the house of Israel after those days, says the Lord; I shall give my law in their inward parts, and in their heart I shall write it, and I will be their God and they will be my people" [Jer 31:31-33]. Jerome: Why is it necessary to take into one's hands what the Church does not receive?
2. The Church is older than Scripture, for when the Apostles began to preach, there was no written Gospel, nc Vetter of Paul, and yet there was the Church dedicated by Christ's blood. 1
Thus the apostles without the Scripture of the New Testament chose Matthias [Acts l:22ff], ordained seven deacons [Acts 6:3]; Peter caused Ananias and Sapphira to die [Acts 5:lff]. Even though the apostles were very diligent in sowing the Word of God, yet very few things are found written by them. It follows logi¬ cally that they taught many more things than they wrote; the things taught have equal authority with the things written.
3. Scripture is not authentic without the Church's authority:' for the canonical writers are members of the Church. Hence against a heretic wishing to contend against the Church's constitution and custom one objects with the very weapons whereby he wishes to contend against the Church. He is going to quote the canonical Scrip¬ tures of the four Gospels, and the Pauline Epistles. Let the objec¬ tion immediately be raised against him: how does he know that these Scriptures are canonical except from the Church, for why does he believe the Gospel of Mark, who did not see Christ, to be canonical, and not the Gospel of Nicodemus, who saw and heard Christ, as John testifies [Jn 3:lff]? So why has the Gospel of Luke the disciple been received, and the Gospel of Bartholomew the apostle been rejected, unless we humbly confess the authority of the Church 2 with the Blessed Augustine, something Luther sometimes taught, that the Church could judge concerning the Scriptures. Therefore it thus is clear that the Church is older than Scripture, and Scripture would not be authentic without the Church's 3 authority. Hence, Augustine, Against the Epistle Called Fundamental, 5.6 [PL 42.176]: "I would not have believed the Gospel unless the authority of the Churchy had moved me to do so. More below on Scripture at Chapter 4.
i. Scripture teaches: "Remember to hallow the Sabbath day; six days shall you labor and do all your work, but the seventh day is the Sabbath day of the Lord your God," etc.* Yet the Church has changed the Sabbath into Sunday on its own authority, on which you have no Scripture.
ii. Christ said to His disciples on the mountain: "I have not come to abolish the law but to fulfill it" [Matt 5:17]. And yet the Church of the apostles in council boldly made pro¬ nouncement on the cessation of legal matterb.
iii. In the final chapter of Matthew, Christ said to the disciples: "Go therefore and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit, teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you [Matt 28:19f]. Here Christ gave the form of baptizing ex¬ plicitly in the name of the Trinity, and yet the primitive Church changed this form of baptizing to "in the name of Christ Jesus." Repent, says Peter, "and let each one of you be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ in forgiveness of your sins" [Acts 2:38].2 And in Acts 8 [:12j it is said that the Samaritans were baptized by Philip in the name of Jesus. And in Acts 19 [:5]: "When these things were heard they were baptized by Philip in the name of Jesus," that is, by Paul. n
iv. Scripture is defined in the council: "It seemed good to the Holy Spirit and to us" [Acts 15:28] etc., "that you should abstain from sacrifices offered to idols, and blood and things strangled [v. 29]. This matter, so clearly defined and expressed, the Church by her authority changed, because she uses both blood and strangled meat. Note the power of the Church over scriptureSee below, Chapter 13, On Human Constitutions.
v. Now if you wish to live more according to the scriptures than according to the authority of the Church, now all the Jews coming to baptism would be held to the law of Moses, for thus they would find in the Scriptures that apostles and other converts have lived. James and the elders spoke to Paul returning from the Gentiles: See, brother, how many there are among the Jews who have believed, and all are emulators of the law. Moreover, they have heard of you, that you teach all the Jews that are among the Gentiles to forsake Moses, saying that they ought not to circumcise their children, nor to walk according to their custom. What is it tnerefore? The multitude must needs come together, for they will hear that you have come. Do therefore this which we say to you. We have four men that have a vow on them; having taken them, purify yourself with them, and be at charge for them, that they may shave their heads, and all shall know that there is no truth in the things about which they had been informed concerning you, but you walk and yourself keep the law. Moreover, concerning those of the Gentiles who believed, we have written, adjudging that they should keep themselves from idols, from what is sacrificed, from blood and what is strangled, and from fornication" [Acts 21:20-25]. Here, Paul, with many thousands, kept at one behest of the law of St. James. Would you, 0 Luther, converted from the Jews today, rather live according to those scriptures, or according to the authority of the Church?
We confess the Church to be the congregation of all the faithful who are of the body of Christ, and when primates and leaders of any province decide anything, the whole province is said to have decided it. Thus the prelates of the Church are called "the Church," because they represent her and their subjects. Otherwise the Church could never be gathered. "But if he does not hear you . . . tell the Church; but if he does not hear the Church, let him be to you as a Gentile and publican" [Matt 18:16f]. Ac¬ cording to Luther's view, if anyone wanted to tell the Church, he would have to traverse the whole earth. Chrysostom [Horn, in Mt, 60.2: PG 58.586] explains: "It clearly refers to the prelates that is, presidents, because he will soon give the power of binding and loosing to the apostles as prelates." "If you perceived a case before you difficult and ambiguous to judge, between blood and blood, between cause and cause, between leper and non-leper, and you saw the judgment to be a matter of controversy within your gates: rise up and go up to the place which the Lord your God has chosen and come to the priests of the tribe of Levi, to the judge that shall be in those days, and inquire of him, who will judge the truth of the judgment for you, and you shall do what they say, who are in charge of the place the Lord has chosen, and they will teach you according to his law, and you will'follow their decision, and turn aside neither to the right nor to the left. But he who in his pride refuses to obey the authority of the priest, who is at that time ministering to the Lord your God, that man will die by the decree of the judge, and you shall remove the evil from Israel, and all the people hearing it will fear, so that none shall henceforth be swollen with pride" [Dt 17:8-13]. See the power of the priest under the law. How much more power do you think the priest under the Gospel has, and ponder the penalty of the dis¬ obedient. "And when Paul and Barnabas had no small dissension against them, the brethren decided that Paul and Barnabas and certain others of them should go up to the apostles and presbyters in Jerusalem about this question" [Acts 15:2], See how the Deu¬ teronomy c. 17 passage was fulfilled. And what was the Church? Not the whole congregation, but they went up to the apostles and presbyters who represented the Church.'*'
4. If the Church is hidden, how did Christ enjoin the tell¬ ing it to the Church, and if he did not hear the Church, etc. But if it were hidden, what could be said to it, or how would it hear? Likewise the Church is the body of Christ, and the Christians are its members [Rom 12:5; 1 Cor 10:17; 12:12; Eph 1:23; 5:30; Col 1:24]. Let Luther say whether they were hid¬ den and only mathematically the Church, when Paul said: "Now you are the body of Christ, and members each in his part" [1 Cor 12:27], It is the way of heretics to have caverns and caves and lurking places: the Church puts the lamp upon a lampstand [Lk 8:16]. The Church is shown to you in councils, in the Apos¬ tolic See, in bishops and leaders of individual Churches. For if the Church were only mathematical, the brother of Paul (Timothy) would not have praise through all the Churches [2 Cor 1:1]. David would not have said: "With you is my praise in the great church" [Ps 21:26], "and in the seat of the elders let them praise him" [Ps 106:32]. For this see Augustine on the First Epistle of John, the first tractate at the end.'''
5. What Luther says, all the heretics have said. Accordingly Augustine inveighs against the Donatists, who wanted to confine the universal Church to the cornerstone of a few heretics. See more 2 in Johann Cochlaeus, On the Authority of the Church, and John Fisher. Among the older writers see Juan Torquemada, who wrote extensively on behalf of the Church.
CHAPTER 2: ON COUNCILS
Because the Authority of the Church Rests Chiefly in Councils, We Shall Now Deal in a Proper Order concerning Councils. Proposition 1: Examples are found of the convening of coun¬ cils in the Church [both by the Fathers of the Old Testament and] by the Apostles in the New Testament. [In the Old Testament an example is inferred where it is said: leading men of the synagogue, and who in the time of assembly were called by name' [Num 16:2.]. "Obededom and his sons were assigned to the south, in which part of the house was the council of the elders" [1 Ch 25:16]. [But in the New Testament one reads in the Acts of the Apostles of more councils being convened. I first mention one, after the ascension of the Lord, concerning the election of Matthias, where "Peter rising up in the midst of the brethren said . . . Men, brethren, the scripture must needs be fulfilled of which the Holy Spirit spoke before through the mouth of David concerning Judas, who was the leader of those who apprehended Jesus" [Acts l:15ff]. [The second council was convened over the establishment of deacons for the ministry of the daily dispensation: "Then the Apostles, calling together the multitude of the disciples, said: It is not fitting that we should leave the word of God and serve tables. Therefore, select from among you seven men of good reputa¬ tion, full of the Holy Spirit and wisdom, for us to appoint over this business" [Acts 6 :2f]. [The third council was concerned with the question of observing legal matters; of this it is said:] "But there arose some of the sect of the Pharisees that believed, saying: They must be circumcized, and be commanded to observe the law of Moses. And the Apostles and elders assembled to consider this matter" [Acts 15:5f], and afterwards a decision was made. "For it has seemed good to the Holy Spirit and to us, to lay no further burden upon you than these necessary things: that you abstain from things sacrificed to idols, and from blood, and from things strangled, and from fornication; from which things keeping yourselves, you shall do well" [Acts 15:28f], Note the form of the Apostolic Council. The Apostles and Elders assembled. The Gentiles did not set themselves against the Apostles. Now, by what authority, by what scripture, do you, Luther, do this toward councils? Why do you deprive us of the freedom given by Christ? For even if in deliberating they should cite scripture from Amos ch. 9 [.Iff], yet thereby they have brought forward nothing to forbid these three; likewise they have added no scripture in the decision. Antioch too accepted Jerusalem's decision. Luther despises Rome's decision. It is clear that a council had the power of determining that any were necessary for that time, which neverthe¬ less was not simply necessary for faith. Why then is the same power not today in the Church, as often as necessity demands it? There is the same Christ, the same Spirit, the same faith. Why then is there not an equal power of councils? [A fourth council was held by the Apostles in Jerusalem to do away with the suspicion of certain Jews, who thought Paul treated the ceremonies of the Law as if they were idolatry [Acts 15]. [The fifth council was gathered under Paul at Miletus, con¬ cerning the rule of the Church, when "Paul sending to Ephesus, called the elders of the Church. And when they had come to him and were together, he said to them: You know . . . ." [Acts 20:17]. And later: "Take heed to yourselves, and to the whole flock . . . . [Acts 20:28].] Likewise the Apostles celebrated another synod. For about to set out to preach the Gospel throughout the earth, accord¬ ing to the Lord's command, meeting together, and each one offering his opinions, they handed on the Creed, as it is held from the tra¬ dition of the fathers, which the whole Church holds. For so St. Clement, disciple and successor of the Apostles attests in his decrees. Likewise Pope Leo I, writing to Augustine, says: "The short and perfect confession of the Catholic Creed has been sealed by the decisions of the twelve Apostles." Likewise Ambrose, esteeming the key of the kingdom of heaven to be the faith of the Apostles, says: "I believe that this key has been fashioned bylabor of the twelve workmen. For holy faith was conceived by the Creed of the twelve Apostles, who as skilled workmen coming to¬ gether as one, fashioned the key by their council. For they called that Creed a key, through which the devil's darkness is laid open, that the light of Christ may come." "Do not transgress the ancient boundaries, which your fathers have laid" [Prov 22:28].^ "Again, I say to you, that if two of you shall consent upon earth, concerning anything whatsoever they shall ask, it shall be done to them by my Father who is in heaven. For where there are two or three gathered together in my name, there am I in the midst of them" [Mt 18:19f]. No one can more clearly be proved not to have heard the Church than if he did not hear a council. In no place is there greater agreement than in a council. In no place are more gathered in the Lord's name than in general coun¬ cils. "Ask the bygone generation, and diligently seek out the memory of the fathers, for we are but of yesterday and know nothing, for our days on earth are a shadow; they will teach you, and tell you, and utter words out of their heart" [Job 8:8-10]. "Wisdom is with the elders, and prudence in length of days" [Job 12:12]. Therefore let us hear councils and fathers, not heretics recently born and apostates. If the authority of councils be taken away, then all things in the Church will be ambiguous, doubtful, uncertain, un¬ sure, for at once will all the heresies condemned by councils re¬ turn. But if you fight against them with Scripture, now cut off from the authority of the Church, they will reject whatever they please, as Luther rejected the Epistle of St. James, because it was in disagreement with him, and likewise Maccabees. And once the heretics did not accept the four Gospels, just as the Manichees rejected the Old Testament. A matter to be pitied indeed! If that notion of the heretics were true, whenever any doubt arises concerning the faith, there would be no way of deciding it, but each one, according to the prudence of his own head, would incline to one side or the other. How then would Christ have suf¬ ficiently provided for His Church through the Gospel Law, which nevertheless ought to be utterly perfect? "He that shall contra¬ dict your mouth . . . let him die" [Josh 1:18]. "How great things he commanded our fathers, that they should make the same known to their children, that another generation might know them" [Ps 77:5f]. Therefore, let us believe the com¬ mandments, and trust the councils and the fathers. 2 Augustine, Epistle to Januarius [54.1]: "Those unwritten tra¬ ditions that we preserve, which are observed throughout the earth, one is to understand, what by the Apostles themselves or plenary Councils (whose authority in the Church is most conducive to sal¬ vation) have been commanded and established to be kept." [Gratian, Deer., 1.12.11: Fr 1.29] Hence it is utterly insolent madness to argue over whether such things are to be done. Therefore the Lutherans are insolent and mad. Augustine, Against the Donatlsts, 7.[1.1], assumes that the holy Catholic Church is fortified against the Donatists with the authority of a plenary council. And Book 1, chapter 18 [.28] ad¬ judges a plenary Council to have the agreement of the entire Church. Gregory in his Epistles [3.10]: "Just as the four books of the Evangelists, so also the four Councils do I confess to accept * and venerate: namely, Nicea, Constantinople, Ephesus, and Chalcedon." [Gratian, Deer. 1.15.2, Fr. 1.35.] ^Constantinople I (A.D. 381)
Proposition 2: The greater Churches (just as they are in Council) represent the whole Church. This is very often made clear in Exodus.* Take for example Ex 19:3, when God willed to give the Law to Moses, He commanded him: "These things you shall say to the house of Jacob and tell the children of Israel," etc. And yet afterwards of Moses it is said: "Moses came, and calling together the chief born of the people, he set forth all the words ...” etc. [Ex 19:7]. And although only the elders of the people answered, when Moses spoke to them,still the text subjoins: "All the. people answered together" [Ex 19:8] etc. It was not all the people, un¬ less by representation. "Ask your father, and he will declare to you: your elders and they will tell you" [Dt 32:7]. Now a stupid people and proud citi¬ zens ask Luther, Zwingli, Blarer, Osiander, Bucer. "Despise not the discourse of the wise elders, . . . but acquaint yourself with their proverbs. For from them you shall learn wisdom and instruction of understanding, and to serve great men without blame" [Ecclus 8:9f]. Let not the discourse of the elders be passed over, for they have learned from their fathers, since from them you shall learn understanding and instruction.
Objections of the Heretics.
1. In a council are men: therefore they often deceive and are deceived, since "Every man is a liar" [Ps 115:11].** 2. It Is understood that the Council of Carthage under the holy man Cyprian with 80 bishops erred concerning the rebaptizing of heretics. 3. Likewise the plenary Council of Rimini of 600 bishops erred with Arius. And Ephesus II likewise with Eutyches^ and 3 Dioscorus. And the Council of Constantinople under the Emperor Constantine on the abolition of images.
4. And also general councils unanimously undertaken deter¬ mined various things, even in those things which are set forth to be believed: as the Council of Constance on the primacy of the Pope, against the Councils of Nicea and Africa. Objections of the Laity evilly influenced by the Lutherans. Since the Laity are of the Church, and there is no less a ques¬ tion about the salvation of their souls than of the clergy's it is fitting that they should take part.
Disposal of Ob/j ections. 1. We admit that those who assemble in Councils are men, yet in a lawful General Council, they are governed by the Holy Spirit as their guided who does not allow them to be deceived. For Paul and John, Isaiah and David, were men, yet Paul says in his Epistle 2 to the Galatians (1:8): "If an angel from heaven should preach a gospel other than what we have preached to you, let him be anathema." Therefore the canonical writers wrote infallibly, yet they were men. Likewise the fathers in the Councils. 2. That Council of Carthage was not plenary but particular, as Augustine shows against the Donatists: particular councils can err, and be corrected by general councils (Aug, Against the Donatists, 2 [.3.4]. And that the very councils which take place throughout individual regions and provinces, without any doubt yield to the authority of plenary councils, convened from the whole Christian world, is clear by the evidence of things. 3. The synod of Rimini was not a council, nor was it lawfully gathered. The works of the heretics were forced upon Liberius against his will, contrary to the Council of Nicea, with Taurus, the prefect, urging by prayers and threats on behalf of the Arians at the command of the emperor. And the simple-minded Eastern bishops were led astray by the subterfuges of the heretics; afterwards when they understood them, they retracted the conclusions of Rimini. So also the Synod of Ephesus*in which the heretic Dioscorus presided, was not lawfully convened, since the Pope's legates refused to approach that evil place, and it was condemned by the Council of Chalcedon. Thus the impious Emperor Constantine*when he was repulsed by the pontiff gathered the Synod of Constantinople which was after2 ward condemned by the Second Council of Nicea under the Empress Irene; hence likewise Carlstadt, Zwingli, Hetzman, Blarer, repuls¬ ing Luther in this point, have been condemned. Note here that general councils, gathered in the Holy Spirit, never are found to have departed from the way of truth, most espe¬ cially on defining those matters which pertain to orthodox faith and right morals. But councils convoked by the command and assent of heretics have always departed from the right faith. Such was the Council of Rimini.' Concerning this the Ecclesiastical History. [Sozomen, 4.16-19], amply speaks. Such also was the Council of Milan, convened at the command of Constantius the Arian Emperor, to obtain the condemnation of Athanasius, the keenest defender of the faith. In this council, the Catholic bishops Dionysius, Eusebius, Paulinus, Hilary, and some others, because they would not subscribe to the condemnation of Athanasius, were driven into exile, as is stated in the Ecclesiastical History, [Sozomen, 4.9], Of this sort also was the Council of Antioch'’under the Arian Emperor Constantius, celebrated in the confession of 40 bishops, where Athanasius was ejected from his episcopal see which he held in Alexandria, and con¬ demned to exile: so that thereupon the strength and authority of the Council of Nicea might be more readily destroyed, and falsehood triumph over truth (more fully recalled in Hist. Tripart., 4.9). Similar^also was the council afterwards assembled at Seleucia in Isauria of 160 bishops against the Council of Nicea. See Hist. Tripart., 5.34. Plenary councils, which are concerned with morals and the governance of the Church, have made various decisions ac¬ cording to the quality and condition of times, persons, etc. without prejudice to faith. Hence Innocent III speaks as follows on consanguinity and affinity [Deer. Greg. IX, 4:14.8; Friedberg, 2.703.53-57]: "It ought not to be judged reprehensible, if ac¬ cording to the variety of the times, human statutes may vary now and again, especially when urgent necessity or evident utility demands it, since God Himself made some changes in the New Testa¬ ment from those which He laid down in the Old."^ So he speaks. Yet lawful general councils have not contradicted themselves in matters of belief. This is Augustine's view: that previous plenary councils are emended by later ones [Agalnst the Donatists, 2.3.4]. Moreover on the fact that the African and Nicene Councils are not in conflict with that of Constantinople, see Ch. 3, below, 2 On the Papacy The laity can take part in councils as witnesses, as defenders, as conciliarists, as advisors, as executors, yet since the birth of Christ they have never had a definitive voice in councils. In Acts 15:2: " . . . they determined that Paul and Barnabas should go up, and certain of the other side, to the Apostles and presbyters to Jerusalem about this question." Note that they went up to the clergy, not to the laity, and no mention is made of laymen in that same council. In the eighth council, the fourth session, the princes bidden to interrogate, said: "As we are following your word, we shall interrogate them by virtue of your precept, not ... by our own authority, for this authority belongs to you." The Emperor Basil says of the laity: "Although it is not per¬ mitted to them according to the canon to say anything substantial concerning ecclesiastical cases, for this is the function of pon¬ tiffs and bishops." [Constantinople, AD 869] Sozomen [EH. 6.7] relates: "While Valentinian was hastening through Thrace toward Rome, then the bishops of Hellespont of Bithynia sent a legate Hypatian, the president of Heraclia, seeing that he deigned to interest himself in the correction of dogma.
He answered: 'Since I am the least of people, it is not right for me to investigate such things. But let the priests to whom this duty is assigned gather together wherever they will.'" Ambrose to Valentinian, Against Auxentius: "If we examine the order of the Scriptures, or histories of the ancients, who is there who will refuse in a case involving the faith, that bishops are wont to judge concerning Christian emperors, not emperors con¬ cerning bishops?" The Emperor Marcian in the Chalcedonian Council said at the synod: "We wish the Council to concern itself with the preserva¬ tion of the faith, not with displaying power, after the example of the most glorious prince Constantine, in order that, once the truth has been found, the multitude, [already] drawn to depraved doctrine, may not disagree besides." And again: "There are certain definite chapters, which in respect to goods, we reserve to Your Holiness; we have determined that it is fitting that these be disposed of according to rule by you through this synodical council, rather than established by our laws." [Gratian, Deer., 1.96.3: Fr. 1.338]
The Emperor Basil at the End of the 8th Council. "Concerning you laymen, both those in high office and those absolutely converted, I do not have anything more to say than that we are in no way permitted to undertake discussion of ecclesiastical cases, or steadfastly to resist the integrity of the Church, and to oppose a universal council. For such things are the responsibility of patriarchs, pontiffs and bishops to investigate and examine, who have been assigned the office of governing; who have the power of sanctifying and binding and loosing; who have obtained the churchly and heavenly keys. These are not our responsibilities: it is we who ought to be fed, who need to be sanctified, to be bound or loosed from a bond. However much of religion and wisdom a lay per¬ son may manifest, or even if he may be inwardly endowed with all virtue, so long as he is a layman, he does not cease being called a sheep. This is the reason why, for those of you established in the order of sheep, pastors have the subtlety of discussing words, of seeking and striving after the things which are over us. There¬ fore we must with fear and sincere faith hear them and revere their faces, since they are ministers of Almighty God, and possess his form, and require nothing more than those things which are of our order. Hence by Christ the people are given leave to do not those things which princes, kings, tetrarchs or nobles might tell them, but 'whatever the scribes and Pharisees sitting in Moses' seat, have told you, this observe and practice.'* But when the heretics seek popular applause, Jeremiah's prediction is fulfilled: 'the prophets prophesied a falsehood, as the priests applauded with their hands, and my people loved such things, but what will happen to them when the end comes?' [Jer 5:31].^ On these things the Lord speaks through Isaiah: '. . . children that will not hear the laws of God, who say to the seers: see not; and to those that behold: Behold not, for us those things that are right: speak unto us pleasant things, see errors for us. Take away from me the way, turn away the path from me, let the Holy One of Israel cease from before us' [Isaiah 30:9-11]." Do the Lutheran people now say this very thing to their own false prophets? There is therefore a consummate har¬ mony between the Holy Scriptures, the Church and her councils.
CHAPTER 3: ON THE PRIMACY OF THE APOSTOLIC AND PETRINE SEE
Because the supreme authority (which we contemplate in councils and in the Apostolic See is within the Church, it is fitting that we briefly affirm the primacy of the Roman Pontiff and of Peter.
After Peter's confession, Jesus says to him: "Blessed are you Simon Bar-Jonah, because flesh and blood have not revealed to you, but my Father who is in heaven: and I say to you, you are Peter, and upon this rock I will build my Church, and the gates of hell will not prevail against her: and I will give to you the keys of the Kingdom of heaven, and whatsoever you bind on earth, will be bound also in heaven, and whatsoever you loose on earth, 2 will be loosed also in heaven" [Mt 16:17ff]. It is clear how he meant to designate the person of Peter, for he set forth his old name, Simon, his new name, Peter, the name of his father Bar-Jonah and properly shows this. "You are, and upon this rock," Jerome explains: "That is, upon you, and I will give you the keys," etc.
And through these words the holy fathers attest that the primacy was promised to Peter, and upon Peter the Church was to be built.
Cyprian, Epist 68.8, to PupianP and 54.7, to Cornelius.^
Origen, On Matthew, Horn. 6.
Jerome, Against the Pelagians 1. and On Matthew, 16.
Ambrose, Sermon 47.^
Augustine, Against the Epistle of Donatus.^
Chrysostom, On Matthew, Horn. 4.
Hilary, On Matthew.
Leo, On the Anniversary of his Assumption of the Pontificate, Sermon 3.
Gregory, Moral!a; Epist., to Emperor Maurice.
Cyril, On John, 2.12; Council of Constantinople IV; of Pope Nicolas. See our book, On the Primacy of Peter. The power which Christ promised to Peter, He gave after the resurrection. "Jesus said to Simon Peter, Simon, son of John, do you love me more than these? He said to him: Yes, Lord, you know that I love you. He said to him: Feed my sheep" [Jn 21:15]. This he repeated a third time: "Feed my sheep."
To Peter alone as the prince of the Apostles in the presence of the other Apostles, He committed the flock: for "to pasture" in the Scriptures means "to rule," and in Ez 34:2; Isaiah 44:28; 56:11; Jer 22:22; Jer 23:1; Ps 72:70f, kings are called "shepherds." This is true in Hebrew and in Greek.
That the primacy was given to Peter through these words, Cyprian, De Simplicitate Praelatorum, attests. Jerome in his Discourse an Peter to Eustochium, Ambrose in his Sermon on Penance, and on the Faith of Peter. Chrysostom On John, Horn. 8, on Repentance Augustine, Questions on the New and Old Testaments, Qu. 75. Leo in his Sermon on the Lord's Ascension. Gregory, Horn, in Ev., Mk 16, and Epist. to Ciranus. Bernard, in his Sermon 3 On the Seven Loaves Bede in his Homilies.
Peter's primacy is proved from many other passages of Scripture Lk 22:31f: "Simon, behold Satan has desired to have you, that he may sift you as wheat; but I have prayed for you, that your faith may not fail, and you, being once converted, may confirm your brethren." Note that He prays for Peter more than the rest, and petitions two things: indefectibility of faith and power to confirm the faithful. Thus do the following interpret it: Augustine, Chrysostom, Leo, Cyril, Bede. In Mt, Ch. 17, Christ said to Peter: "Go to the sea, and cast in a hook; and that fish which shall first come up, take; and when you have opened its mouth, you shall find a shekel: take that, and give it to them for me and you" [Mt 17:26]. It is clear that Christ, with many disciples present, equates only Peter with himself in paying tribute. So understand this: Jerome, Augustine, Chrysostom, Origen, Ambrose.
*falso: concilium Chalcedonense octavum. Eck intends the 8th Ecumenical Council - Constantinople IV (AD 869).
Mt 10:2, Mk 3:6, Lk 6:14, where the appointment of the Apostles is described: by all Peter is named as head, first, that Jerome and Chrysostom reckoned on behalf of his primacy on the basis of Jn 21 that Peter alone came to Christ across the waters of the sea. This is the sign of a singular pontificate, says Bernard, On Consideration, to Eugenlus. And if to the other disciples it is commanded that they let down their nets, only to Peter is it said "launch out into the deep” [Lk 3:4]. So ponders Ambrose.
We have now heard from the holy fathers: all attribute the primacy to Peter, first promised by the Lord, then after the resurrection set forth over the whole Church. Let some thing be added to these prior proofs.
Dionysius, On the Divine Names, ch. 3.
Athanasius in his Epistles to Marcus, Liberius, and Felix II, in which he abundantly proves the primacy of the Pope.
Eusebius H.E., 2.14. Augustine On John’s Gospel, Tract. 56.* Against the Donatists, 2, etc.
Lactantius, Divine Institutes 7.
Paulinus, De S. Foelice. Anselm to Pope Urban. Valentinian, Marcian, Phocas, Justinian, Emperors under the title "On the Supreme Trinity and the Catholic Faith."
We have set forth very fully all these matters in our three books On the Primacy of Peter to Leo X,1 and you will find many rare items in the large work. Against Luther of Johann Faber, Archducal Councillor (now Bishop of Vienna). 2
Reason persuades that there was a high priest under the old Law, whose authority was heard [Dt 17 [:9]. And the monarchical rule is best: and such is the order in the Church Triumphant. This is beautifully confirmed by Gregory Nazianzus: Moses in doubtful times provided for the synagogue [Dt 17: 10ff]. Why should not Christ have provided for His bride the Church?
Gregory, Moralia, 21.15^ "(God) created all men equal in nature, but by reason of merits, he set some behind others in order by a secret dispensation. But this diversity which derives from one (nature), is distributed by divine judgment: so that, since every man does not walk the way of life, one may be ruled by another." The heretic strongly desires that the Church Militant not have a ministerial head; and that there may come to pass in the Church what is written: "In those days there was not a king in Israel, but each man did what seemed good to him" [Jdg 17:6, 18:1, 31; 21:24]
Objections of the Heretics
1. Christ did not promise or give to Peter the keys for his own person, but because he was acting in the person of the Church.
2. If the Church is built upon Peter the man, the gates of hell have already prevailed against him in the voice of one maidservant [Mt 26:69-88], and will daily prevail over his successors and sinners.
3. And since the Church was built upon a rock, but his rock was Christ [1 Cor 10:4] it cannot be referred to Peter, "... and other foundation can no one lay; save that which has been laid" [1 Cor 3:11].
4. The primitive Church of the Apostles would not have been a Church, since Peter,18 years after Christ had suffered, was still in Jerusalem. Where then was the Roman Church?
5. Peter never was at Rome.
6. Peter is a member of the Church.
7. How could Peter have been the rock, when in Mt 16:18f Christ said: "Get behind me, Satan."
Disposal of the arguments adduced against Peter.
1. We admit, with Augustine, that the keys were given to the Church, yet in the person of Peter, that is, Christ formally gave the keys to Peter, for the benefit of the Church; He gave the keys not to one, but to unity. Thus Peter acted in the person of the Church, just as the Emperor of Germany. Therefore certain persons have the keys, because otherwise there would be no use of them.
2. The gates of hell prevailed against the persons succeeding Peter, yet not against the power of Peter. This succession of Peter abode in power, although the persons might sin. But when Peter denied Christ, the Church had not yet been founded but was to be founded on him, because Christ said: "Upon this rock I shall build my church," that is to say, after the resurrection.
3. Even if Christ is the chief rock and primary foundation, yet He has vicars and substitutes, secondary rocks. For alongside Paul's statement that Christ alone is the foundation stands the statement of John [Rev 21:14]: "And the wall of the city had twelve foundations, and in them, the twelve names of the twelve apostles, and of the Lamb."
4. Luther is mistaken that Peter came so late to Rome: for he was 5 years in Pontus, and 7 years at Antioch in Asia; afterwards he migrated to Rome: although in the 18th year he came from Rome to Jerusalem to the Council. Now, nothing applies to the matter. For Peter was the supreme pontiff wherever he was, although by the revelation of the Spirit, as St. Marcellus the martyr says, he chose a see for himself at Rome. Therefore Peter was for a time supreme bishop before he became Bishop of Rome. 2
5. This is a new lie of Urban Rieger, or another Lutheran, that Peter never was at Rome and previously Paul converted those of whom he speaks in Gal. 2. St. Jerome attests to that in his comment on Rom 1:11, "that I may impart to you some spiritual grace" etc. To strengthen, he says, those Romans, holding the faith by the preaching of Peter. Paul says he wished to strengthen, not so much from their having been received by Peter, but that their faith might be strengthened by two apostles, witnesses, and doctors: otherwise he would have taken care not to build on another's foundation.
The very ancient man Hegesippus, who came to Rome under Anicetus in the year of our Lord 160, wrote in Book 3 of On the Destruction of Jerusalem, how Nero sought a pretext for killing the Apostles, and when the command was given that the Apostles be seized, Peter was asked that he give himself over to another.
Dionysius Bishop of the Corinthians, living at Rome A.D. 50, says: "You having admonitiorf from Peter and Paul, have joined the planting (plantation) of the Roman Church." Also both men arriving and teaching in this city at the same time, were crowned too with martyrdom in like manner at one and the same time. A certain writer 2 named Gaius under Pope Zephyrinus attests the same thing.
Saint Ignatius, a disciple of John the Evangelist, writes to the Tarsians: "What of the fact that Peter was crucified? That Paul and James were cut down with swords? That John wTas banished to Patmos?" And in his letter to the Romans.: "Not just as Peter and Paul do I bid you: for they were Apostles of Jesus Christ, but I am the least." Irenaeus, bishop of Lyon, Against Heretics, 3.1., says as follows: "Matthew gave the Scripture of the Gospel to the Hebrews in their own language, while Peter and Paul proclaimed the Gospel at Rome, and founded the Church."
And Ch. 3: "By the two most glorious apostles Peter and Paul, the Churches of Rome were founded and established." Tertullian, living A.D. 150, wrote in Against Marcion, 3. : "To the Romans, Peter and Paul left the Gospel with the seal of their own blood." And On the Prescription of Heretics, 36, speaking of Rome, he adds: "Where Peter is broughtinto equality with the Lord's passion."
Eusebius of Caesarea, Hist. 2: says: "In those times of Claudius, by the mercy of divine providence, he led Peter, the most approved of all the Apostles, and the greatest in magnificence of faith and merit of virtue, the prime prince, to the city of Rome."
And in the book De Temporibus: "In the same year, he was seized by Herod." And later: "Peter, a Galilean by birth, the first pontiff of the Christians, after he had first founded the Church of Antioch, proceeded to Rome, where preaching the Gospel he persevered for 25 years as bishop of the same city."
Gaudentius of Brixen, a very ancient writer, says: "On this day in the city of Rome, the cruelty of Nero slew both for the name of Christ."
Jerome, On Famous Men, c.l ; "Simon Peter, son of John of the province of Galilee, of the village of Bethsaida, brother of Andrew the Apostle, and prince of the Apostles, after his episcopate of the Church of Antioch, and preaching of the dispersion of those who had believed in the circumcision in Pontus, Galatia, Cappodocia, Asia, and Bythynia, in the second year of the Emperor Claudius hastened to Rome to overcome Simon Magus; there he occupied the episcopal see for 25 years."
Dionysius the Areopagite, St. Paul's disciple, attested the same to his fellow-disciple Timothy, concerning the passing of the Apostles.
Linus the next pope after Peter, wrote to the Easterns in behalf of the martyrdom of Peter in the city.
Ambrose in Sermon 67, says: "Let us not think it came to pass without cause, that on one day, in one place they bore the sentence of one tyrant, suffered on one day, so that together they came to Christ, in one place, lest Rome should be deprived of either one." etc. And further on: "In the city of Rome, which obtained the chief position and headship of the nations," he speaks of Peter and Paul. Papias of Jerusalem, the hearer of John the Evangelist, attests that Peter wrote his first canonical epistle at Rome.
[Paulus Orosius, .Hist, 6.6, "in the 805th year since the founding of the city of Rome, Tiberius Claudius the fourth after Augustus began to reign, and remained emperor for 16 years. At the beginning of his reign, Peter, Apostle of the Lord Jesus Christ came, and taught with faithful word faith unto salvation to all believers, and confirmed it with mighty virtues. And thereupon there began to be Christians at Rome." And in the following chapter: "Nero was the first at Rome to inflict torture and death upon the Christians, and ordered them to be tortured through all the provinces with equal persecutions, and attempting to uproot the very name itself, he killed the most blessed Apostles Peter with the cross and Paul with the sword."]
This is attested by Athanasius, Marcellus, Damasus, Leo, Bernard and innumerable others.
[See Johannes Faber, in his work, past the middle.]
6. We speak of Peter as member and part of the Church, but we 2 deny that he could not besides be the ministerial head, or vicar of the true head. Similarly, it is one thing to act as a private person; something else, as a public person. And if he is head he is undoubtedly a member. 7. No wonder that Peter, upbraided by Christ because he decided, contrary to his confession, that Christ should be killed, because not yet had he received the keys, not yet had he been confirmed not yet had the fulness of the spirit come upon him. Therefore not yet was he the rock, but after the resurrection Christ founded upon him the Church, as Jerome expressly states in his Commentary on Matthew, at that verse. Lastly, Chrysostom and Hilary would not apply the name of Satan to Peter, but to the devil, the supporter of this advice. Now the fall of the person does not remove the power. Origen, On Matthew, Horn. 3, says: "As yet Peter was leaden, and it could happen that he would have a revelation from the Father, whereby he might profess Christ to be the son of the living God. As yet this great mystery was hidden from him, whereby Christ willed to be crucified for the salvation of the human race, and to rise on the third day."
For when Luther by "rock" understands faith; faith, just as much as grace, is lost in man, and no more is the faith of one man than of another man: and thus upon the faith of all the faithful has the Church been built. And if all the faithful are the foundation, what Church will he then give unless he most ineptly says the same is founded upon himself?
Still Other Obj actions of the Heretics against Peter and the Pope.
1. Peter did not have authority over the Apostles, but the Apostles over him, because they sent him and John into Samaria [Acts 8:14].
2. And Peter did not ever exercise that primacy, as the Pope does; the latter does not wish there to be any bishop in the world, unless he receives the pallium and confirmation from him.
3. Peter knew this was forbidden by Christ in Lk 22:24f, when a contention broke out over who of them was to be regarded as the greatest, Jesus said to them: "The Kings of the Gentiles lord it over them; and they that have power over them, are called beneficent. But you are not so: but he that is greatest among you, let him become the least, and he who is the leader, as he who serves." It is clear (say the heretics) that it is the Kings of the Gentiles, not the pontiffs, who lord it over them.
4. Mk 10:37ff, when the sons of Zebedee aspired to that power, they received the reply: namely, that they should drink of the cup, and yet not be certain where they would sit [Mk 10:39f],
5. In Luke 9:46 and Matthew 18:Iff, He taught them that such superiority should be avoided.
6. Paul withstood Peter [Gal 2:11].
7. Pope Victor wishing to excommunicate the Easterns, was forbidden to do so by Irenaeus Bishop of Lyon.
8. Anicetus yielded to Polycarp Bishop of Smyrna.
9. The Eastern bishops did not obey Pope Julius. *
10.It was the Emperor Constantine IV who determined that the pope was first.
11. Thus many thousands of martyrs of the Eastern Church would have been condemned, likewise Cyprian, Augustine, Nicolas, because there never was a pope over the churches of Asia, Greece, or Africa.
12. When did he establish the Antiochian, Constantinopolitan, Alexandrian, or Indian bishoprics?
13. Theophilus of Alexandria and Epiphanius deposed Chrysostom and the same Epiphanius excommunicated John of Jerusalem.
14. The Council of Nicea attests that the bishop takes charge of suburban churches.
15. The same council decreed that bishops were to be ordained by provincial bishops, not by the pope.
16. The same council attributed the primacy to the Jerusalem bishopric, not to that of Rome. And Jerusalem was first, because "out of Zion went forth the Law" [Is 2:3].
17. At the Council of Africa IV, the bishop of the prime see was not to be called "prince of bishops" or anything of that sort, but only "bishop of the prime see"; later: not even the Roman pontiff is to be called "universal."
18. Both Pelagius and Gregory rejected the name "universal bishop."
19. The primacy of the pope is proved from the decrees and decretals of the Roman pontiffs, books originating within the last 400 years.
We have gone into these matters more deeply because the heretics have shouted more against the rock than they attacked anything else.
Disposal of Objections.
1. Now we shall say that Peter exercised the primacy, yet when you argue that Peter was sent into Samaria, why was he thus less than the Apostles? This is the form of argument of the Arians that the Father sent the Son [Jn 6:44; 10:29; Gal 4:4]. Therefore the Father is greater than the Son, because the sender is greater than the sent. As if Herod who was not greater than the Magi, did not send the three Magi, to worship the child, and it is frequent that the more powerful are sent from the college and the Senate by counsel or love, not by the authority of inferiors. Hence in Joshua 22:11-14 one reads: "And when the children of Israel had heard of it . . . that the children of Ruben and of Gad and the half tribe of Manasses had built an altar in the land of Canaan, upon the banks of the Jordan, over against the children of Israel: they all assembled in Shiloh, to go up and fight against them. And in the meantime they sent to them into the land of Gilead, Phineas the son of Eleazar the priest, and ten princes with him, one of every tribe, ' that they might censure them for having committed this sacrilege. Note that the Sons of Israel, the lesser people, sent Phineas, who "was their leader before the Lord," as stated in 1 Chr 9:20. Therefore it is clear from these Scriptural passages, that it is of no consequence to assert: he is sent; therefore he is less than the sender or the senders.
2. Peter carried out his office. We do not wish to recount what they recounted in Jn 6:69f; Lk 12:41; Mt 19:27; Lk 5:8; Mt 4:X8f; Mt 17:23f; Mt 18:21; but when in Acts he had already been created Pontiff, let us hear what he did: for first he directed the ordination of Matthias as an Apostle. "Peter rising up in the midst of the brethren, standing, said: 'Men, brothers. . . etc. [Acts l:15f]. Secondly, on the day of Pentecost, he defended all the Apostles. "Peter standing up with the eleven, lifted up his voice" [Acts 2:14]. Thirdly, with John present he healed the lame man and defended him in the presence of the people [Acts 3:Iff], Fourthly, in the council he defended himself and John [Acts 4:5ff]. Fifthly, he pronounced the death sentence on Ananias and Sapphira [Acts 5:4ff]: this was the greatest indication of coercive authority. Sixthly, he condemned the accursed trafficking of Simon [Acts 8:20ff], Seventhly, he was bidden to receive even Gentiles as prelates into his power, when he saw "a sheet. . . in which there were beasts and reptiles," etc., and a voice came to him: "Arise, Peter; kill and eat" [Acts 10:11-13]. Here he was bidden as head to receive Gentiles in the body of the Church.
Eighthly, in the Apostolic Council he was the author of the decision suspending the law, as Jerome teaches, and Acts 15:7ff. Beware therefore of heretically lying against St. Peter, that he did not use the power divinely bestowed upon him. Concerning the corollary, it is false, for each patriarch confirmed his own bishops, and the patriarch of Thessalonica confirmed his own bishops in Greece, yet did so as the vicar of the pope, as is clear from the acts of Pope Leo. The heretic supposes that all bishops have the pallium, which is false, because regularly archbishops have it, and a few bishops by privilege, as the bishop of Bamberg in Germany. [See our 34V treatise On the Primacy, 3.15.] On the reason for the pallium see 1529 St. Gregory, Epist.* 3. It is agreed that Christ forbade ambition and tyranny, but not authority because that is from God, and "he who resists authority, resists God's ordinance" [Rom 13:2]. There he wished to teach the humility of the president, not to remove his power. In like manner from the fact that He was ministering and also taught other chief persons to minister, anyone would wrongly infer that Christ had no power. And when Christ asked who is the greater among you, it is evident that he wished someone else to be greater in power, although it happened to him that he was the lesser one by the showing forth of ministry. 4/5. We reply similarly, for he willed, as Jerome says, for his followers to reach the pinnacle of virtues, not by power but by humility. For those who are in power ought to humble themselves 35r within, as if they were not in power, that they may become as little children in humility, not in sense and in age-; 6. Paul reproved Peter, because he was holding onto the edification of faith, that is, to the office of the apostolate in which they were equals, yet Peter was still prior in rule and authority. For even today it often happens that the Pope and other superiors are often reproved by inferiors. Indeed, the heretic Luther censures all churchly prelates, though he is the superior of none of these.
7/8. Anicetus was the first to determine that Easter be celebrated on Sunday. First Pius, then Victor, confirmed this, and their decision prevailed. At first the Easterns resisted this, because from the bidding of St. John, they celebrated on the 14th moon of the first month. From Smyrna Polycarp addressed Anicetus (Note: Greek to Roman), and recognized that he was performing the office of bishop, yet Anicetus could not persuade Polycarp says Eusebius in the Church History. Luther the Corrupter says: Anicetus yielded to Polycarp." He wished to excommunicate the Easterns resisting Victor, whom Irenaeus warned, not that Victor should have no power over the Easterns. For why should the holy martyr have concerned himself; but to consider the concord of the Church and her peace, he determined that disturbance not arise in the Church.
9.It is wonderful that the heretic leans upon the deed of heretics, for those eastern bishops expelled Athanasius and Paul, who taking refuge with Pope Julius, after the heretics were arraigned and excommunicated, were restored. Here the heretic tumbles down, because Pope Julius more than 1100 years ago had authority over the eastern bishops of Asia and Egypt. * It is false that Constantine IV first gave the primacy to the Roman pontiff, when previously he had it from the Gospel with the confirmation of Emperors Constantine, Valentinian, Gratian, Theodosius, Marcian, Basil, and others.
10. Hence it is not inappropriate that the decree of the princes yield to the right of the Apostolic See, in order that the temerity of the rebels may be restrained. Yet the heretic has erred that Constantine IV determined anything in this matter, but he has only remitted the confirmation of the elected Pope, which the Emperor previously was accustomed to do in his own way.
11. None of the holy martyrs withdrew themselves from obedience to Peter or his successors where and when it was necessary. The heretic is mistaken: but if the pope is supreme, it is necessary that all bishops be confirmed by him, for just as it suffices for priests to be confirmed by bishops, so bishops by archbishops, primates or patriarchs. So you understand concerning Ambrose, Augustine, and Nicolas. I believe that because of the pride of the bishops in Germany it came to pass that they shook off the authority of the primate of Magdeburg. And prior things are clear from the eighth council, from the Council of Nicea and others. See Dist. 64 of the Decretals. It is clear that the bishops of Africa were under the Roman pontiff, because from the council of Milevis they wrote to Pope Innocent I, seeking confirmation of that. See Augustine, Epist. 90, 91. The third and fourth Councils of Carthage were confirmed, one by the authority of Pope Zozimus, the other by the authority of Boniface, since he sent Bishop Fatistinus thither. Augustine was concerned with them. The Councils under Cyprian in Africa sought approval from Pope Cornelius (Cyprian, Epistles, 1.2; 2.11). Now it was clear that the bishops of Asia, Egypt and Greece were under the Roman Pontiff, because it was through the Roman Pontiff that Athanasius was restored, Chrysostom was restored, Flavian was restored, Appiarus in Africa was restored. For abundant evidence, see our book On the Primacy *
12. It was not necessary for the installation of a bishop to take place directly at the hands of the Roman Pontiff, yet that those churches were subject to the pope, is clear from the fact that he restored bishops ejected from these churches. And today, from Pope Leo X, and from Hadrian VI, Asiatic bishops have received confirmation.
13. How much can heresy claim? When it has nothing solid for itself, it brings forward the utterly wicked ejection of the best of bishops, John Chrysostom, who was ejected through the utterly greedy and wicked Theophilus of Alexandria, with the help of the ungodly Empress Eudoxia. The injustice committed against this holy man the heretic takes for a lawful act, but remains silent about the fact that he was restored by Pope Innocent, and the negotiation carried on by the Pope with Alexander Bishop of Antioch; and the Emperor Arcadius resisting the Pope and Chrysostom, was excommunicated. Go now, heretic, and deny that the bishops of Greece _were under the Roman Pontiff! Concerning John of Jerusalem it is clear from St. Jerome that a council had been called at Antioch (for at that time the Bishop of Jerusalem was under that Patriarch, and under the Archbishop of Caesarea) and John was condemned by the synod, in which Epiphanius was of preeminent authority.
14. Canon 6 of the Council of Nicea goes as follows: "The ancient custom persisted in Egypt, Libya and Pentapolis, and the Bishop of Alexandria has authority over all these, seeing that it is a custom like to that of the Roman bishop. Similarly in Antioch and the other provinces his honor is to be kept with each and every Church [Gratian Deer. 1.65.6; Fr. 1.251] that this passage does not exclude the Roman primacy which the heretic wrongly infers, but that the authority of the three patriarchal churches was then confirmed, for at that time there were only three patriarchal sees, that is, the Roman, the Antiochene, and the Alexandrine. Nay, more strongly through that council the primacy of the Roman pontiff is proved, first because although Nicea was in Asia, yet Ossius of Cordova, presided over the Council in the name of the Pope, and signed first not in his own name as all the remaining bishops, but in the Pope's name. Secondly, because it was decided in the Council of Nicea that in case of the deposition of a bishop, appeal could be made from the whole world to the Roman Pontiff. Athanasius leaned on him and obtained restoration; so did Chrysostom. And when the Church of Africa opposed Pope Zozimus in the restoration of Appiarus, once made certain of the matter by the Council of Nicea, the Church acquiesced. Go, now, heretic and rave that the Nicean Council controverts the Pope.
15. On the ordination of bishops, what has this to do with primacy, when today the pope very rarely ordains a bishop or perchance never, but at the present time three bishops meeting together, ordain and consecrate a bishop? [Deer. 1.64.1, Fr 1.247].
16. Canon 7 of this Council so provides. "For the custom and ancient tradition obtained, that the episcopal office was conferred upon Elias, that he might have the consequence of honor, apart from the rank of metropolitan" [Gratian, Deer. 1.65.7: Fr. 1.251]. This stupid heretic dreams of a primacy attributed to Jerusalem, when as yet primacy was not attributed to it, as it permitted it to be subject to the Metropolitan who was at Caesarea, as Jerome states. Therefore it decreed that Jerusalem was to be honored by ancient tradition, but says nothing about primacy, as Jerusalem was first in time but not in rank. The African Council did not deal with the primacy or with Rome, but the African bishops settled among themselves that their primates (such were the bishops of Carthage, Numidia, Mauritania, etc.) were not to flaunt their glorious titles, and their jurisdiction over others. Canon 6 of the Third African Council deals with this and nothing else. And the mad heretic when he read in the Decretals [1.99.3: Fr. 1.350f] the words of Gratian attached thereto, believed them to be the words of the Council, and they were not. But we will shortly speak of the universal bishop.
18. Gregory and Pelagius did not spurn the primacy of the Roman Church, but approved of it, as we have shown very fully in our treatise On the Primacy of Peter. But they so denied that there could be any universal bishop, because there should be a proper ruler of each Church. Since thus there could be no other bishop, the episcopal honor should both be withdrawn from all and referred back to one alone. That because there was something distinctive in the hierarchical order, the holy fathers rightfully rejected it, except for the dignity of the Roman Church.
19. The Primacy of the Roman Church is proved not only from the decrees of the Pontiffs, but from the Gospel, from the holy martyrs, councils and doctors. But the heretic is mistaken: he believes that there were no other canonical laws except after the appearance of Gratian's Decretum and the Decretals of Gregory IX, despite , the fact that there had always been statutes and laws in the Church. For example there was once a Codex of canons a Decretum of Pathasius, Decretum of Burchardus, a Panormia of Ivo, etc. Therefore all things heretical vanish like water bubbles.
Conclusion. Let us all receive the authority of the Church shining in the Apostolic See of the Roman See: since Jerome in times difficult for the faith consulted her, writing from Asia Minor to Damasus; Augustine writing from Africa to Innocent and Boniface; and Cyprian writing to Cornelius; Athanasius writing from Egypt to Marcus and 2 Julius, Ambrose writing from Italy, etc. Now those defending themselves against rebaptizers draw back from their basis, hence they confess many things not written and yet to be adhered to. Zwingli infers from the baptism of Mary 3 the baptism of children.
