Romans — Chapter 16

Some great arguments must they needs haue to controule the credit of the whole world. This of truth is here their argument, neither haue they a better in any place, to wit: If S. Peter had been at Rome, S. Paul would haue saluted him, as he did others here in the end of his letter to the Romanes. Is not this a high point to disproue al antiquitie by? Any man of discretion may straight see, that S. Peter might be knowen vnto S. Paul to be out of the Citie, either for persecution or busines, when this epistle was written (for he went often out, as **S. Epiphanius declareth) & so the omitting to salute him, can proue no more, but that then he was not in Rome: but it proueth not so much neither; because the Apostle might for respect of his dignitie & other the Churches affaires write nto him special letters, & so had no cause to salute him in his common Epistle. Or how know they that this Epistle was not sent inclosed to S. Peter, to be deliuered by his meanes to the whole Church of the Romanes in some of their assemblies? It is very like it was recommended to some one principal man or other that is not here named: and twenty causes there may be vnknowen to vs, why he saluted him not: but no cause why our Aduersaries vpon such friuolous reasons should reproue an approued truth. For euen as wel might they say that S. Iohn was neuer at Ephesus because S. Paul in his Epistle to the Epesians doth not salute him. The Heretikes hatred of the Romane See. And plaine it is, that it is the Romane seat and faith of Peter, which they (as al Heretikes before them) doe feare & hate, and which wil be their bane: and they know that there is no argument which conuinceth in their conscience, that Peter was neuer at Rome. Therfore to conclude we say to them in S. Augustines wordes: ***Why cal you the Apostolike chaire, the chaire of pestilence? what hath the Church of Rome done against you, in which S. Peter did sit, and from which by nefarious furie you haue separated your selues? *Chalced. conc. act. 3. **Epiph. her. 27. ***li. 2. cont. lit. Petil. 6,51.

14. Holy kisse.) Kissing the Pax. Hereof, and by the common vsage of the first Christians, who had special regard of vnitie and peace among themselues, and for signe and protestation thereof kissed one another, came our holy ceremonie of giuing Pax, or kissing one another in the Sacrifice of the blessed Masse. *Orig. in 16. Ro.

16. Salute one another.) Neuer Sect-maisters made more foule or hard shifts to proue or defend falshood, then the Protestants: but in two points, about S. Peter specially, they passe euen themselues in impudencie. The first is, that they hold he was not preferred before the other Apostles, which is against the Scriptures most euidently. That S. Peter was at Rome. The second is, that he was neuer at Rome, which is against al the Ecclesiastical histories, al the Fathers Greeke & Latine, against the very sense & sight of the monuments of his Seats, Sepulchre, doctrine, life, and death there. Greater euidence certes there is thereof and more weighty testimonie, then of Romulus, Numas, Cæsar's, or Cicero's being there; yet were he a very brutish man that would deny this to the discredit of so many Writers and the whole world. Much more monstrous it is, to heare any deny the other. Theodorete saith he was there, writing vpon this chapter. Prosper also carmine de ingratis in principio. S. Leo de natali Petri S. Augustin to. 6. c. 4. cont. ep. fund. Orosius li. 7. c. 6. S. Chrysostome in Psal. 48. S. Epiphanius hær. 27. Prudentius in hymnos 2. S. Laurentij & hymnos 12. Opatus li. 2. contra Donatistas. S. Ambrose li. 5. ep. 5. ep. Basilicis tradendis. S. Hierome in Catalogo. Lactantius li. 4. c. 21. de vera sapientia. Eusebius hist. Eccl. li. 2. c. 13,15. S. Athanasius de fuga sua. S. Cyprian ep. 55. nu. 6. Tertulian de præscriptionibus nu. 14. and li. 4. contra Marcionem nu. 5. Origen in Genes. apud Euseb. li. 3. c. 1. Irenæus li. 33. c. 3. Hegesippus li. 3. c. 2. de excid. Hierosolym. Caius & Papias the Apostles own scholers, and Dionysius the B. of Corinth, alleaged by Eusebius li. 2. c. 14. and 24. Ignatius ep. ad Romanos. The holy *Councel of Chalcedon, and many other affirme it. See the Annotations 1. Pet. c. 5,13. Yet Peter himself (according to the iudgement of the Ancient Fathers) confesseth he was at Rome, calling it Babylon 1. ep. c. 5. Euseb. li. 2. c. 14. hist. Ec. Some of these tel the time and cause of his first going thither: some, how long he liued there: some, the manner of his death there: some, the place of his burial: and al, that he was he first Bishop there. How could so many of such wisedom and spirit, so neere the Apostles time deceiue or be deceiued? how could Caluin and his, after fifteen hundred yeares know that which none of them could see? The Protestants great arguments, that Peter was neuer at Rome. Some great arguments must they needs haue to controule the credit of the whole world. This of truth is here their argument, neither haue they a better in any place, to wit: If S. Peter had been at Rome, S. Paul would haue saluted him, as he did others here in the end of his letter to the Romanes. Is not this a high point to disproue al antiquitie by? Any man of discretion may straight see, that S. Peter might be knowen vnto S. Paul to be out of the Citie, either for persecution or busines, when this epistle was written (for he went often out, as **S. Epiphanius declareth) & so the omitting to salute him, can proue no more, but that then he was not in Rome: but it proueth not so much neither; because the Apostle might for respect of his dignitie & other the Churches affaires write nto him special letters, & so had no cause to salute him in his common Epistle. Or how know they that this Epistle was not sent inclosed to S. Peter, to be deliuered by his meanes to the whole Church of the Romanes in some of their assemblies? It is very like it was recommended to some one principal man or other that is not here named: and twenty causes there may be vnknowen to vs, why he saluted him not: but no cause why our Aduersaries vpon such friuolous reasons should reproue an approued truth. For euen as wel might they say that S. Iohn was neuer at Ephesus because S. Paul in his Epistle to the Epesians doth not salute him. The Heretikes hatred of the Romane See. And plaine it is, that it is the Romane seat and faith of Peter, which they (as al Heretikes before them) doe feare & hate, and which wil be their bane: and they know that there is no argument which conuinceth in their conscience, that Peter was neuer at Rome. Therfore to conclude we say to them in S. Augustines wordes: ***Why cal you the Apostolike chaire, the chaire of pestilence? what hath the Church of Rome done against you, in which S. Peter did sit, and from which by nefarious furie you haue separated your selues? *Chalced. conc. act. 3. **Epiph. her. 27. ***li. 2. cont. lit. Petil. 6,51.

17. To marke them.) Against Sect-maisters how to examine our faith. He carefully warneth them to take heed of seditious sowers of Sects & dissension in religion, and this euer to be their marke, if they should teach or moue them to any thing which was not agreable to that which they had learned at their conuersion: not bidding them to examin the case by the Scriptures, but by their first forme of faith and religion deliuered to them before they had or did read any booke of the new Testament.

18. But their owne belly.) Heretikes giuen to voluptuousnes. Howsoeuer Heretikes pretend in wordes and external shew of their sheep's coat, indeed they seeke but after their owne profit and pleasure, & by the Apostles owne testimonie we be warranted so to iudge of them as of men that indeed haue no religion nor conscience.

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