eminent and peculiar power is giuen and whom all must obey In respect of this first kinde of vnity consisting in the subjection of each people or portion of the flocke of Christ to their lawfull Pastours if they who should obey this one Pastour as being in the stead place of Christ doe either wholly withdraw themselues refusing to be subject to any Ministerie like Core and his complices pretending that all the people of God are holy and that the guides of the Church take too much vpon them or when one is elected doe set vp an other against him and forsaking the right cleaue to him that hath no right This is the first kinde of Schisme Secondly because there must be an vnitie not onely among the parts of each particular Church but also of many particular Churches and the Pastours and guides of them among themselues the Churches which forsake the communion of other Churches without just cause doe fall into Schisme And if they not onely refuse to communicate with them in the performance of the acts of religion vpon causelesse dislike but swarue from the rule of faith the other doe constantly hold they become not onely schismaticall but hereticall also These are the seuerall kindes of Schisme of which one is much more daungerous then another The forsaking the rule of faith or absolute refusall to be subject to the holy Ministerie saying as they did Are not all the people holy you take too much vpon you c. is damnable Schisme In each Church wherein there must be one Pastour hauing eminent and peerelesse power when one is lawfully called they who presume to set vp an other if they know the former to be lawfully possessed of the place or their ignorance thereof bee affected or they be so violentlie carried with the streames of contention and faction that they would not yeeld though the right should appeare vnto them this Schisme is likewise damnable But if it be doubtful and men carry mindes readie to yeeld when they shall see the right it is not so When whole Churches with their Pastours and guides diuide themselues from other refusing to communicate with them if this separation grow out of pride and Pharisaicall conceit of fancied perfection and absolute holinesse as did the Schisme of Novatus Donatus Lucifer and others of that sort it is damnable Schisme but if out of ignorance or errour not ouerthrowing the rule of faith or ouer earnest vrging of ceremonies rites and observations as the separation of Victor Bishop of Rome and the Churches of Asia had beene if Irenaeus had not interposed himselfe or striuing for precedence it is dangerous but not damnable vnlesse it be joined with such pertinacie that though it should appeare they were in errour or did amisse and contrary to the rule of charitie they would not yeeld This being the nature of Schisme and Heresie and these the kindes and degrees of them more or lesse dangerous let vs in the next place see what is to be thought of all those Churches of Graecia Armenia Aethiopia Russia before mentioned Every of which is in some sort rent and divided from other Wee dare not with the proud Romanists condemne so famous Churches as culpable of damnable Heresie and Schisme and cast so many millians of soules into hell for every difference in matter of opinion or rent from the other parts of the body of the Church All these therefore holding the rule of faith and beleeuing all those things that are on the perill of eternall damnation to bee particularly and expresly knowne and beleeued and their seperation not growing for ought wee know out of Pharisaicall and damnable pride as did that of Nouatus Donatus and the like but out of error not directly contrary to the rule of faith or some other humane infirmitie and defect and it no way appearing that their obstinacie is such that though they knew they did amisse they would still continue so to do wee accompt them in the number of the Churches of God and doubt not but that innumerable liuing and dying in them notwithstanding their sundry defects imperfections and wants are and haue beene saued Wee conclude therefore that their Schismes and seperations are sinfull wicked and dangerous and their errours inexcusable insnaring the consciences of many to endlesse perdition and greatly endangering all that are or haue beene misse-led with them but not damnable excluding from all possibility of salvation Wee make a great difference betweene them that were the first Authors and beginners of these diuisions and such as walke in the wayes and insist in the steps of their misse-led and seduced fathers betweene such as are more and such as are lesse deepely plunged into errour CHAP. 6. Of the Latine Church that it continued the true Church of God euen till our time and that the errours wee condemne were not the doctrines of that Church TOuching the Latine Church likewise wee are of the same opinion that it continued still a part of the Catholike Church notwithstanding the manifold abuses and superstitions that in time crept into it and the dangerous and damnable false doctrine that some taught and defended in the middest of it It is therefore most fond and friuolous that some demand of vs where our Church was before Luther began For wee say it was where now it is if they aske vs which wee answere it was the knowen and apparant Church in the world wherein all our Fathers liued and died wherein Luther and the rest were baptized receiued their Christianity ordination and power of ministery If they reply that that Church was theirs and not ours for that the doctrines they now teach and wee inpugne the cerimonies customes and observations which they retaine and defend and wee haue abolished as fond vaine and superstitious were taught vsed and practised in that Church wherein our fathers liued and dyed wee answere that none of those points of false doctrine and errour which they now maintaine and wee condemne where the doctrines of that Church constantly delivered or generally receiued by all them that were of it but doubtfully broached and deuised without all certaine resolution or factiously defended by some certaine onely who as a dangerous faction adulterated the sincerity of the Christian verity and brought the Church into miserable bondage Touching the abuses and manifold superstitions which wee haue remoued it is true they were in that Church wherein our fathers liued but not without signification of their dislike of them and earnest desire of reformation as shall appeare by that which followeth As therefore the Churches of Corinth Galatia Pergamus and Thyatira had in them emulations diuisions neglect of discipline contempt of the Apostles of Christ some that denied the resurrection of the dead that ioyned circumcision and the workes of the law with Christ in the work of saluation thē that maintained the doctrine of the Nicolaitans suffered the woman
Schismatikes are they that breake the vnitie of the Church and refuse to submit themselues and yeeld obedience to their lawfull Pastours and guides though they retaine an entire profession of the trueth of God as did the Luciferians some others in the beginning of their Schisme though for the most part the better to justifie their Schismaticall departure from the rest of Gods people Schismatikes doe fall into some errour in matters of faith This is the first sort of them that depart and goe out from the Church of God and company of his people whose departure yet is not such but that notwithstanding their Schisme they are and remaine parts of the Church of God For whereas in the Church of God is found an entire profession of the sauing trueth of God order of holy Ministery Sacraments by vertue thereof administred and a blessed vnitie and fellowship of the people of God knit together in the bond of peace vnder the commaund of lawfull Pastours and guides set over them to direct them in the wayes of eternall happinesse Schismatikes notwithstanding their separation remaine still conioyned with the rest of Gods people in respect of the profession of the whole sauing trueth of God all outward actes of Religion and Diuine worship power of order and holy Sacraments which they by vertue thereof administer and so still are and remaine parts of the Church of God but as their communion and coniunction with the rest of Gods people is in some things onely and not absolutely in all wherein they haue and ought to haue fellowship so are they not fully and absolutely of the Church nor of that more speciall number of them that communicate intirely and absolutely in all things necessary in which sense they are rightly denied to be of the Church which I take to be their meaning that say they are not of the Church CHAP. 14. Of the second sort of them that voluntarily goe out from the people of God HEretikes are they that obstinately persist in error contrary to the Churches faith so that these doe not onely forsake the fellowship but the faith also and therefore of these there may be more question whether notwithstanding their hereticall division they still continue in any sort parts of the Church of God But this doubt in my opinion is easily resolued For in respect of the profession of sundry diuine verities which still they retaine in common with right beleeuers in respect of the power of order and degree of ministery which receiuing in the Church they carry out with them and sacraments which by vertue thereof they doe administer they still pertain to the Church But for that they hold not an entire full professiō of all such sauing trueths as to know and beleeue is necessary vnto saluation for that their Pastours and Priests though they haue power of order yet haue no power of jurisdiction neither can performe any acte thereof for that they retaine not the vnity of the spirit in the bond of peace they are rightly denied to be of the Church not for that they are not in any sort of it but for that they are not fully and absolutely of it nor of that more speciall number of them which communicate in all things wherein Christians should This more speciall number of right beleeuing Christians is for distinction sake rightly named the Catholike Church because it consisteth of them only that without addition diminution alteration or innouation in matter of doctrine hold the common faith once deliuered to the Saints and without all particular or priuate diuision or faction retaine the vnitie of the spirit in the bond of peace To this purpose is it that Saint Augustine against the Donatists who therefore denied the baptisme of Heretikes to be true Baptisme and did vrge the necessity of rebaptizing them that were baptized by them for that they are out of the Church doth shew that all wicked ones feined Christians and false hearted hypocrites are secluded from the Church of God considered in her best and principall parts and in the highest degree of vnitie with Christ her mysticall head aswell as ◅retikes and Schismatikes As therefore all they that outwardly professe the trueth and hold the faith of Christ without schisme or heresie are of the Church and are within as the Scripture speaketh yet are not all ofthat more speciall number of them that are intrinsecus in occulto intus but in more generall sort So likewise Heretikes and Schismatikes though they be not of that speciall number of them that in vnity hold the entire profession of diuine trueth are of the Church generally considered and of the number of them that professe the trueth of God reuealed in Christ. And this surely Augustine most clearely deliuereth For when the Donatists did obiect that Heresie is an harlot and that if the baptisme of Heretikes bee good sonnes are borne to God of heresie and so of an harlot than which what can be more absurde impious his answere was that the conuenticles of Heretikes doe beare children vnto God not in that they are diuided but in that they still remaine conjoyned with the true and Catholike Church not in that they are Heretikes but in that they professe and practise that which Christians should and doe professe and practise It is not therefore to be so scornefully rejected by Bellarmine Stapleton and others of that faction that we affirme that both Heretikes and Schismatikes are in some sort though not fully perfectly and with hope of saluation of the Church seeing Augustine in the iust and honourable defence of the Churches cause against Heretikes did long since affirme the same not doubting to say that Heretikes remaine in such sort conioyned to the Church notwithstanding their Heresie that the true Church in the midst ofthem and in their assemblies by Baptisme ministred by them doth beare and bring forth children vnto God The not conceiuing whereof gaue occasion to Cyprian and the African Bishops of errour and afterwards to the Donatists of their heresie touching the rebaptization of them that were baptized by Heretikes For seeing there is but ◅e Lord one faith one Baptisme seeing God gaue the power of the keyes and the dispensation of his word and sacraments onely to his Church if Heretikes bee not of the Church they doe not baptise This their allegation they amplified and enlarged from the nature and condition of heresie and Heretickes and the high pretious and diuine qualitie force and working of the sacraments thereby endeauouring to shew that so excellent meanes pledges and assurances of our saluation cannot be giuen by the hands of men so farre estranged from God There is say they one faith one hope one Baptisme not among heretikes where there is no hope and a false faith where all things are done in lying false and deceiueable maner where he adiureth Sathan that is the vassall of Sathan and possessed of the diuell
Hee proposeth the sacramentall demaunds and wordes of holy stipulation whose mouth wordes send forth a canker He giueth the faith that is himselfe an infidell Hee giueth remission of sinnes that is himselfe most wicked and sinfull Antichrist baptizeth in the name of Christ he blesseth that is himselfe accursed of God hee promiseth life that is himselfe dead he giueth peace that is himselfe an enimy to peace he calleth on the name of God that is a blasphemer of God he administreth and executeth the holy office of Priesthood that is profane he prepareth furnisheth and attendeth the Altar of God that is a sacrilegious person All which objections howsoeuer carrying a faire shew at the first sight and view yet are most easily answered if wee consider that heretikes notwithstanding their heresies doe in some sort still pertaine to the Church and so consequently haue that degree order office ministerie and calling which is holy by vertue whereof they doe administer the holy Sacraments euen as in the true and Catholique Church many wicked ones are found that are no lesse the vassals of Sathan and possessed of the diuell dead in sinne accursed of God profane sacrilegious and enemies of peace than heretikes and â—…hismatikes who yet for that they haue that order office and degree of ministerie which is holy doe no lesse nor with lesse effect administer the holy Sacraments than they that are the samplers of all sanctitie pietie and vertue Whereupon the schoolemen rightly note that there are foure sorts of Ministers to wit good secretly bad openly and apparantly wicked but not put from their office and place nor cast out of the Church and lastly such as are depriued of their office and dignitie and remoued from the happie fellowship of right beleeuers The first administer the Sacraments with benefite profit and good to themselues others The second with benefit to others but not to theÌ„selues The third with hurt to themselues and scandall to others but yet to the euelasting good of them that receiue them if the fault be not in themselues The fourth administer those Sacraments that are holy in their owne nature the meanes pledges assurances of saluation but without any benefit to theÌ„selues or others because they are in diuision and schisme Whereas nothing though neuer so good excellent is aualeable to their good that are out of the vnitie the people of God should haue among themselues If I giue my body to be burned and haue not charitie it profiteth me nothing saith the Apostle CHAP. 15. Of them whom the Church casteth out by excommunication HItherto we haue treated of such as being once of the Church of themselues goe out from the companie of right beleeuers by schisme or heresie Now it remaineth to speake of them whom the Church casteth out by excommunication Excommunication is that sentence of the Church whereby shee ejecteth and casteth out wicked sinners out of her communion Which communion what it is and wherein it consisteth that we may the better vnderstand wee must obserue that communion is sometimes taken for hauing the same things in common and sometimes for mutuall doing and receiuing good to and from each other In the former sense the communion of the Church is of two sorts outward and inward The outward consisteth in those things which all they that are of the Church haue in common as the profession of the trueth reuealed in Christ and the Character of Baptisme which as a note distinctiue separateth Christians from Infidels and vnbeleeuers The inward consisteth in those things which only the best parts of the Church haue in common as faith hope loue and the like The Communion of the Church in the later sense consisteth in a mutuall and enterchangeable course of action whereby the parts thereof doe and receiue good to and from one another one supplying the want and defect of another This is of two sorts Publike and private The publike consisteth first in the prayers which the Church powreth foorth for euerie the least and most contemptible member thereof thereby obtayning of God the giuing supply and continuance of all necessary good ioyned with a most happie protection keeping them from falling into those evils they are subiect vnto Secondly in the dispensation of Sacraments by the hands of her Ministers Private in mutuall conuersation of one man with another Excommunication doth not depriue the Excommunicate of the former kinde of communion For euerie sentence of excommunication is either iust or vniust If it be vniust they may still retaine all those things which the best parts of the Church haue inward or outward as sometimes it falleth out through the prevailing of factious seditious and turbulent men that the best men are vniustly and vndeseruedly cast out of the true Church as Austine noteth who though they neuer be permitted to returne againe and reenter yet if they continue without gathering any conuenticles or broaching of heresies and still loue professe and seeke to promote what in them lyeth the trueth of God which is holden and professed in the Church of God from the assemblies whereof they are vniustly excluded and banished who dare denie them to be of the Church And therefore Bellarmine himselfe though he make shew as if he meant to proue that excommunicate persons are not of the Church as he endeuoureth to doe that Heretikes and Schismatikes are not yet hee altereth the matter cleane and saith only they are not in the Church corpore externâ communicatione as if hee would only proue that they are excluded from the meetings and assemblies of the Church and conuersing with the people of God There is therefore no doubt but that they are of the Church and that if they patiently endure these indignities iniuries and wrongs they shall be highly rewarded of Almighty GOD but saith Bellarmine they are not of the Church corporally and in outward Communion then which what could be more friuolously spoken For who maketh any doubt but that they are thrust out of the assemblies so that they may not be bodily present when the people of God doe meete together to performe the acts of diuine worship but that therefore they are not properly of the visible Church who that advisedly considereth what he saith would ever say Seeing they haue still the communion which onely is essentiall and maketh a man to be of the Church in that they haue all those things both inward outward which the best among them that remaine not eiected haue as faith hope loue and profession of the whole truth of God the character of baptisme obedient and humble submission to their lawfull superiors which things and no other are required to make a man to be of the Church For the performance of holy duties is an action of them that are already of the Church and doth not make a man to be of the Church Yea the performance of these duties is a thing of that
passionate zeale that they abandoned the societie of them that did held them not Christians and rebaptised them which came from them to their pretended purer societies The fift of the Luciferians who received men returning from heresie to the Catholique faith without rebaptization and enioyned them penitence gaue them imposition of hands But Bishops that had beene drawne into heresie they would not admitte vnlesse they forsooke their office and ministerie against these Hierom writeth his booke against the Luciferians All these did erre vrging overmuch the Church discipline in casting off the wicked and not admitting the vnworthy to her happie fellowshippe CHAP. 17. Of the considerations moouing the Church to vse indulgence towardes offenders BVt the true Church admitteth and receiveth all that with sorrowfull repentance returne and seeke reconciliation how great soever their offences haue beene not forgetting to vse due severitie which yet shee sometime remitteth either vpon due consideration or of negligence The due and iust consideration moouing the Church to remitte something of her wonted severitie is either priuate or publique perill Private as when the partie beeing of a tender timorous and relenting disposition if hee bee proceeded with rigorously is in daunger to fall into despaire or to bee swallowed vppe with ouermuch sorrow In this case the Apostle hauing excommunicated the incestuous Corinthian writeth to the Church of Corinth speedily to receiue him againe least hee should be swallowed vp with overmuch griefe and in this sorte the auncient Bishoppes were wont to cut off great parts of enioyned penance which remission and relaxation was called an indulgence Out of the not vnderstanding whereof grew the popish pardons and indulgences Publike perill is then when the multitude authority and prevailing of the offenders is so great as that if they be cut off and separated from the rest a schisme may iustly bee feared without hope of any good to be effected thereby in this case there is iust cause why the Church forbeareth to proceede to excommunication For whereas the end of excommunication is that evill doers being put from the company of right beleeuing Christians and forsaken of all may be made ashamed of their evill doing and so brought to repentance this cannot be looked for when the multitude of offenders hath taken away all shame These are the due and iust motiues which cause the Church sometimes to forbeare to punish with that extremitie which the qualitie and condition of the offenders fault may seeme to require But sometimes of negligence not led by any of these considerations shee omitteth the due correction of such as haue offended God and scandalized his people So the Corinthians before the Apostles Letter written vnto them suffered an incestuous person seemed not much to be mooued with so vile a scandall And the like negligence is often found in the Churches of God which notwithstanding their fault in this behalfe continue the true Churches of God still and priuate men may communicate with them that through the Churches negligence are thus tolerated and suffered and that both in publique actes of religion and priuate conuersation without being partakers of their sinnes if they neither doe the same things nor approue like and applaud them that doe and if they neglect not by all good meanes to seeke their correction and amendment CHAP. 18. Of their damnable pride who condemne all those Churches wherein want of due execution of discipline and imperfections of men are found THere are and haue beene alwayes some who possessed with a false opinion of absolute sanctitie and spotlesse righteousnesse reiect the societies and companies of them in whom any imperfection may be found which was the furious zeale of the Pelagians in old time and the Anabaptists in our time Others there are which though they proceede not so farre yet denie those societies of Christians to be the true Churches of God wherein the seueritie of discipline is so farre neglected that wicked men are suffered and tolerated without due and condigne punishment These while they seeme to hate the wicked and flie from their companie for feare of contagion doe schismatically rent and inconsiderately diuide themselues from the bodie of Gods Church and forsake the fellowship of the good through immoderate hate of the wicked Both these doe dangerously and damnably erre the first in that they dreame of heauenly perfection to be found amongst men on earth whē as contrariwise the Prophet Esay pronounceth that all our righteousnesse is like the polluted and filthy ragges of a menstruous woman And b David desireth of Almighty God that he will not enter into iudgement with him for that in his sight no flesh shall be iustified And Augustine denounceth a woe against our greatest perfections if God doe straitly looke vpon them The later though they doe not require absolute and spotlesse perfection in them that are in and of the Church yet thinke it not possible that any wicked ones should bee found in so happie blessed a societie not remembring that the Church of God is compared to a Nette that gathereth into it all sorts of fishes great and small good and badde which are not separated one from another till they be cast out vpon the shore that it is like a field sowen with good seede wherein the enuious man soweth tares like a floore wherein wheate and chaffe are mingled together like the Arke of Noah wherein cursed CHAM was aswell preserued from drowning as blessed SEM. But they will say there may be Hypocrits who for that their wickednes is not knowne cannot be separated from them who in sincerity serue and worship God but if their wickednesse breake foorth that men may take notice of it either they are presently reformed or by the censures of the Church cut off from the rest which course if it be not so holden but that wicked ones without due punishment be suffered in the middest of Gods people those societies wherein so great negligence is found cease to bee the true Churches of God and wee may and must diuide our selues from them This was the errour of the Donatistes in former times and is the errour of certain proud arrogant Sectaries in our time But if the Church of God remained in Corinth where there were diuisions sects emulations contentions and quarrels and going to law one with another for every trifle end that vnder the infidels where that wickednesse was tolerated and winked at which is execrable to the very heathens where Paules name and credite was despitefully called in question whom they should haue honoured as a father where the resurrection of the dead which is the life of Christianity was with greate scorne denied who dare deny those societies to bee the Churches of God wherein the tenth part of these horrible evills and abuses is not to be found We see then the difference betweene the turbulent disposition
did see in the greater Church of Sangalli a chalice guilded with gold that weighed threescore and tenne markes of siluer provided no doubt for the publique communion of the people formerly vsed Beatus Rhenanus saith that Conradus Pellicanus a man of wonderfull sanctity and learning did finde in the first constitution of the Carthusians that they are forbidden to possesse any vessels of price besides a siluer chalice and a pipe with which the lay people might sucke out the bloud of our Lord. Besides the booke written more then foure hundred yeares since concerning the treasures of the Church of Mentz amongst chalices of gold of a greate weight hauing handles and golden Crosses c reckoneth also syluer pipes six in number if I be not deceiued deputed to this vse of sucking out the bloud of our Lord which I suppose sayth hee the Archbishop was wont to vse Ordo Romanus sheweth that when the Bishop of Rome doth celebrate the Archdeacon giueth him to drinke of the holy chalice and afterwards powreth a little out of the same into a greater chalice or cuppe which the acoluth doth hold that the people may be confirmed or receiue the sacrament of the Lords bloud out of the sacred vessell For the wine that was not consecrated being mingled with the blood of Christ is altogether sanctified The Bishops therefore come in order to receiue of the hande of the Pope and aftar them all the Priestes come vp that they may communicate at the alter and while the Archdeacon communicateth the chiefe Bishop that is present holdeth the challice for as Bishops attend the Pope in the Church of Rome so priestes should attend and assist Bishops in other Churches The Archdeacon after hee hath communicated receiueth the chalice back againe from the Bishop and confirmeth all those with the Lords blood to whom the Pope hath giuen the communion of the body of our Lord. This seruice being performed by the altar hauing receiued by the Subdeacon the pipe with which the people are to be confirmed the Archdeacon deliuereth the chalice to be carried to the acoluth to be layed vp by him in the vestery Then doth the pope goe downe to giue the communion to the Princes of the people and their wiues and as the Archdeacon doth confirme those to whom the Pope giueth the Communion of the Lords body so do the other Deacons confirme them to whom after the Pope hath ministred to those of the better sort the other Bishops and Priestes do giue the Communion and as soone as the pope beginneth to minister the Communion to the Clergie and people the schoole of singers beginneth to sing the antheme appointed for the Communion and after that when the Pope thinketh fit Glory be to the Father c. Here wee see a cloud of witnesses testifying for the Communion in both kinds wherevpon â— Cassander feareth not to pronounce that hee verily thinketh it cannot be shewed that the sacrament of the Eucharist was any otherwise ministred in any part of the Catholike Church to the faithfull people in the holy assembly from the Lords table for a thousand yeares and more but vnder both the sacramentall signes of bread and wine Neither can this saying of Cassander be refuted by that in the second of the Acts where the faithfull are sayd to haue continued in the breaking of bread and prayer Nor by that wee reade in antiquity of the Lay communion which Caietan childishly vrgeth For sundry worthy diuines in the Roman Church haue sufficiently shewed the weakenesse of these sillie allegations Let vs see therefore how the Communion in one kind came into the Church It appeareth by Leo the first that the Manichees as they denied Christ to haue beene borne in the truth of our flesh so they denied him to haue truely dyed and risen againe and therefore they vsed to fast vppon that day that is to vs the day of saluation and ioy And whereas to hide their infidelity and heresie they came sometimes to the Churches of Catholikes and were present at the celebration of the sacred mysteries they did so temper the matter that with vnworthy mouthes they receiued the Lords body but declined to drinke the blood of our redemption Leo carefully endeauoured to make this thing knowne to all that by these signes they might bee discried that their sacrilegious dissembling might bee found out and that being discouered they might by sacerdotall auctoritie be cast out of the society of the Saints By this of Leo it appeareth that the Manichees out of an hereticall conceipt began to communicate in one kinde and that all were wont to communicate in both kindes that hereby the Manichees might be discouered and knowne from other right beleeuers in that they would communicate but in one kinde alone Which thing also Andradius doth rightly note In the time of Gelasius there were certain found that out of some superstitious conceipt would not communicate in both kindes Wee haue found saith Gelasius that certaine hauing receiued a portion of the sacred Body onely abstaine from the cup of the most holy bloud Which men because they are saide to be holden with I know not what superstition either let them receiue the whole Sacrament or let them be put and kept frrom the whole seeing there can be no division of one and the same mysterie without grievous sacriledge Thirdly whereas in case of necessity as when children or such as were sicke and weake were to receiue the communion the auncient did sometimes dippe the mysticall bread into the consecrated wine and so gaue it vnto them as it appeareth by the history of Serapion by that which Cyprian and Prosper report and by that which the Councell of Turon prescribeth that the Eucharist which is reserued for the voyage provision of such as are ready to depart hence shall be dipped into the blood of the Lord that so the Priest may truely say The body and blood of our Lord be beneficiall vnto thee vnto eternall life Some beganne to bring in this manner of dipping into the ordinary communion vnder pretence of carefull avoyding the danger of shedding the blood of Christ and greater reuerence towards the same For certaine Monkes brought the same custome into their Monasteries ingenuously confessing that herein they did contrary to the custome of other Churches But that they were forced so to doe by the rudenesse of their novices who they feared would runne into some grosse neglect if they should receiue the blood of Christ apart Neither did this custome stay here but it made an entrance into other Churches abroad also for Ivo Carnotensis about the yeare 1100 hath these wordes Let them not communicate in the bread dipped but according to the decree of the Councell of Toledo let them communicate in the bodie apart and in the blood apart those onely excepted to whom it is not prescribed but permitted to communicate in the bread dipped out of
Faith and Religion His meaning it seemeth is that all Protestantes acknowledging Puritanes to bee of one Church with them are Puritanes and therefore hee would haue all to know that howsoeuer hee make shew of blaming Puritanes onely or principally yet in truth hee equally condemneth all and that therefore hee doth but dissemble or say hee knoweth not what But do all these Protestant writers named by him teach that there is no materiall difference betweene protestants and Puritanes Surely no. For touching my selfe I neuer wrote any such thing neither in the place cited by him nor any where else so that hee beginneth with a manifest and shamelesse vntruth But I doe the more willingly pardon him this fault for that it seemeth hee doth not consider what he writeth For in the title of his booke hee professeth that hee will take the proofes of his Catholique religion and Recusancy onely from the writings of such Protestant Diuines as haue beene published since the raigne of his Maiesty ouer this kingdome for that as hee sayth they often change their opinions at the least at the comming of euery new Prince And yet page 30. hee citeth the Bishop of Winchesters booke written many yeares agoe and Doctor Couell his booke in defence of Master Hooker as often as any other which yet was written in her late Maiesties time But what if I had written that howsoeuer there are some materiall differences betweene Protestants and Puritanes as it pleaseth him to stile them yet not so essentiall or substantiall but that they may bee of one Church faith and religion What absurdity would haue followed Would it be consequent from hence as he inferreth that it is not materiall with vs whether men be of a true or false religion of any or none at all Haue there not beene nay are there not greater differences betwixt Papists who yet will be angry if they be not esteemed to be all of one Church faith and religion Did not Pope Iohn the two and twentith thinke that the soules of the just shall not see God till the generall resurrection and did not the French King that then was with the whole vniuersity of Paris condemne the same opinion as hereticall with sound of trumpet Did not Ambrosius Catharinus teach that a man may be certaine with the certainty of faith that he is in state of grace and Soto the contrary Did not Pighius Contarenus and the Authors of the booke called Antididagma Coloniense defend imputatiue justice and other Papists reiect it Did not some amongst them teach the merit of condignity doe not others moued with a sober moderation thinke there is no such merit Doe not some thinke the Pope is vniuersall Bishop others that he is not but prime Bishop onely Doe not some teach that all Bishops receiue their jurisdiction from the Pope others the contrary Doe not some thinke the Pope may papally erre and others that he cannot Doe not some of them thinke he is temporall Lord of all the world and others the contrary Doe not so 〈◊〉 them thinke he may depose Princes and others that he may not is there not a very materiall point of difference amongst Papists touching predestination Let them shew vs if they can so many and materiall differences betweene Protestants and Puritanes And yet these were all of one Church in their judgement yea Pope Stephen who reuersed all the actes of Formosus his predecessour pronounced the ordinations of all those to bee voide whom he had ordained brought his dead body out of the graue into the Councell stript it out of the Papall vesture put vpon it a lay habit and cutting off two fingers of his right hand cast it into Tyber Pope Iohn his successour who called a Councell of 74. Bishops to confirme the ordinations of Formosus the Arch-bishoppes of France and the King being present at Rauenna burned the acts of the Synod which Stephen had called to condemne Formosus and Sergius who againe condemned Formosus and pronounced all his ordinations to be voide reuersing the acts of Pope Iohn and his Synode were all of one Church of one communion faith and religion Nay which is more strange when there were three Anti-popes sitting in diuerse places accursing one another with all their Adherents and that for many yeares yet still they were of one Church of one communion faith and religion Yet may not wee inferre from hence against them as they doe against vs that it is not materiall with them whether men be of a true or false religion of any or none at all Surely they are more priuiledged then other men for some of them may take the Oath of Allegeance disclaime the Popes power and right to intermeddle with Princes states and other refuse it and yet still be Catholicke brethren in the communion of the same Church Yea a Priest may like of this Oath and perswade others to take it and afterwards goe ouer the Sea and alter his iudgement and returning choose rather to suffer death then to take it againe yet no man must take notice of it But if a Minister subscribe and afterwards vpon ill aduice refuse to doe the same againe then all the courses of our Religion are such that by no outward signes communion profession protestation or subscription a man can tell who is of what religion amongst vs. But let vs passe from the Epistle to the booke it selfe CHAP. I. IN the first chapter which is of the supreame and most preeminent authority of the true church and how necessary it is to finde it follow the directions and rest in the iudgement of it he hath these words Doctor Field a late Protestant writer beginneth his Dedicatory Epistle to the Lord Archbishop of Canterburie before his Bookes of the church in this manner There is no part of heauenly doctrine more necessary in these dayes of so many intricate controversies of Religion then diligently to search out which amongst all the societies of men in the world is that blessed company of holy ones that household of Faith that spouse of Christ and church of the liuing God which is the pillar and ground of truth that so we may embrace her communion follow her directions and rest in her iudgement And after some other things cited out of others he addeth the ioyning with the true church is so needfull a thing that D. Field concludeth There is no saluation remission of sinnes or hope of eternall life out of the church To what purpose this allegation serueth I cannot conceiue for there is nothing in any of these speeches of mine that euer any protestant doubted of or from which any thing may bee concluded against vs or for the papists The church of God saith Master Caluine is named the Mother of the Faithfull neither is there any entrance into eternall life vnlesse shee conceiue vs in her wombe vnlesse shee
nature that by violence and the vniust courses holden by wicked men wee may be hindred from it without any fault of ours If the sentence of excommunication be iust yet it doth not cut the excommunicate off from the mysticall body of Christ but doth presuppose that they haue already cut off themselues or that if this sentence being duely and aduisedly pronounced make th◅ not relent but that still they hold out against it they will cut off themselues and depriue themselues of all inward grace and vertue From the visible Church of Christ it doth not wholly cut them off for they may and often doe retaine the entire profession of sauing trueth together with the Character of Baptisme which is the marke of Christianitie and so farre forth notwithstanding their disobedience still acknowledge them to be their lawfull pastours and guides by whose sentence they are excommunicate that they would rather endure and suffer any thing thē schismatically ioyne themselues to any other communion It doth therefore onely cut them off from communicating with the Church in the performance of holy duties and depriue them of those comforts which by communicating in the sacraments c. they might haue enioyed This excōmunicatiō is of two sorts the greater and the lesser The greater putteth the excōmunicate frō the sacrament of the Lords body blood depriueth them of all that cōfort and strength of grace which from it they might receiue it denieth to thē the benefit of the Churches publick prayers so leaueth thē to thēselues as forelorn miserable wretches without that assistāce presence protection which frō God she obtaineth for her obedient children Whence it is that they are said to be deliuered vnto Sathan because they are left naked void of all meanes to make resistance vnto his will pleasure as if this were not enough they are denied that solace which they might finde in the company and conversation of the people of God who now doe no lesse flye from them than in olde time they did from the Lepers who cryed I am vncleane I am vncleane The lesser excommunication excludeth onely from the Sacramentall pledges and assurances of Gods loue which when it is pronounced against them that stubbornely stand out and will not yeeld themselues to the Churches direction disposition is properly named excommunication but when it is pronounced against them that yeeld when they haue offended and seeke the blessed remedies of the euils they haue committed it is not so properly named excommunication but it is an act of the discipline of repentance and of that power and authority which Christ left vnto his Church whereby shee imposeth and prescribeth to her obedient children when they haue offended such courses of penitency whereby they may obtaine remission of their sinnes and recouer the former estate from which they are fallen CHAP. 16. Of the errours that are and haue beene touching the vse of the discipline of the Church in punishing offenders TOuching this discipline of repentance and power of the Church in ordering offenders and the vse thereof there are and haue beene sundry both errours and heresies The first of the Pelagians in former times the Anabaptists in our times who for euery the least imperfectiō cast men out of their societies denying that any are or can be in or of the Church in whom the least imperfection is found Which if it were true there should be no Church in the world all men being subject to sinne and sinfull imperfection that either are or haue beene For it is a vaine dispute of the Pelagians whether a man may be without sinne or not whereof see that which Augustine and Hierom haue written against the madnesse and folly of those men For confirmation of their errour touching absolute perfection they alleage that of the Canticles Thou art all faire my Loue and there is no spot in thee And that of the Apostle to the Ephesians that Christ gaue himselfe for his Church that he might make it to himselfe a glorious Church not hauing spot or wrinkle but that it should be holy and without blame For answere wherevnto first we must remember that which formerly was obserued to wit that sundry glorious titles are giuen to the Church which agree not to the whole totally considered but to some parts onely so it is said to be faire glorious and without spot or wrinkle not for that all or the most part of them that are of the Church are so but because the best and principall parts are so and for that the end intent and purpose of the gift of grace giuen to the Church is to make all to be so if the fault be not in themselues Secondly we must obserue that there is a double perfection purity and beauty of the Church without spot or wrinkle to wit absolute and according to the state of this life The first is not found in any among the sonnes of men while they are clothed with the body of death And therefore if we speake of that absolute purity and perfection the Church is said to be pure all faire and to haue no spot or wrinkle not for that actually and presently it is so but for that it is prepared to be so hereafter as Augustine fitly ◅teth The second kinde of purity which is not absolute but according to the state of this life consisteth herein that all sinnes are avoyded or repented of and in Christ forgiuen and his righteousnesse imputed In this sense the Church is now presently pure and vndefiled and yet not free from all sinfull imperfection as the Pelagians and Anabaptists vainely and fondly imagine contrary to all experience and the wordes of the Apostle If wee say wee haue no sin we deceiue our selues and there is no trueth in vs. The second errour touching the power of the Church in the ordering of sinners and the vse thereof was that of the Novatians who refused to reconcile and restore to the Churches peace such as grievously offended but left them to the iudgment of God without all that comfort which the sacraments of grace might yeeld vnto them and if any fell in time of persecution and denied the faith how great and vnfained soever their repentance seemed to bee they suffered them not to haue any place in the Church of God The third of certaine of whom Cyprian speaketh that would not reconcile nor restore to the Churches peace such as foradultery were cast out The fourth of the Donatistes who would not receiue into the lap bosome of the Church such as hauing in time of persecution to saue their owne liues deliuered the bookes and other holy things into the hands of the persecutors did afterwards repent of that they had done and with teares of repentant greefe seeke to recouer their former standing in the Church of God againe yea they proceeded so farre in this their violent and
enlargement of his jurisdiction The first of the Slavons sayth Cromerus that were converted to the faith were those of Bulgaria who became Christian the yeare 860 in the time of Nicholas the first About these there was much contention a long time betweene Rome and Constantinople either of them clayming jurisdiction over them as having wonne them to the true knowledge and worshippe of God But in the end the Grecians prevayled and they were wholly put vnder the jurisdiction of Constantinople Some thirty yeares after these they of Rascia Servia Bosina Croatia Dalmatia and Illiricum received the Christian faith from their neighbours the Grecians and Italians in the time of the raigne of Suatoplugus amongst the Moravians who gaue his name to Christ and was the meanes of the conversion of Borivoius Duke of the Bohemians about the yeare 900. Not long after the conversion of the Bohemians about 980 yeares after Christ in the time of the raigne of Basilius and Constantine Emperours of Constantinople the Russees began publickely to professe the Christian faith Volodomirus their prince having married the Emperours sister and receiued teachers from the Patriarch of Constantinople This prince after hee became a Christian placed a Metropolitan at Kiovia an Archbishop at Novograd and in other citties Bishops consecrated by the Patriarch of Constantinople Since which time the Russians adhere most constantly to the Greeke religion rites After this the Polomans possessed themselues of sundry parts of Russia but the Russians not long enduring that subjection cast off the yoake and became free againe yet continued not long so for within short time after Russia in a great part became subject to the Lituanians partly by conquest and partly by marriages and from them was passed over againe to the Polonians For Ludovicus King of Hungary and Poland had two daughters of which the younger named Heduigis succeeded him in the kingdome of Polonia who was married to Iagello prince of Lituania and thereby all Lituania and that part of Russia also that was subject to Lituania was joyned to the kingdome of Polonia for ever But the histories report that while the Russees were diuided into many principalities which fell out immediatly after the death of Volodomirus one Iohn the son of Daniel a prince amongst them taking a good liking of the river and tower of Mosqua repaired the tower before meane and base and made it the seate of his principality So that the Russees subject to him were named Moscovites from the riuer and tower of Mosco And when long after they of the posterity of Iohn having joyned vnto them partly by marriages partly by fraud partly by force such people of that nation and language as lay neere vnto them formerly weakened by the incursions of the Tartars and others and so enlarged their principality All such Russees as were joyned to that empire though much more noble and mighty then the Moscovites were content to be named Moscovites and yet still retayned the name of Russees also as the Podolians are Russees and yet haue a peculiar name These Moscovites by conquest obtained Novograde and after that those Russees that were called Severianenses fell from the subjection of the Lituanians to the Moscovites either moued so to doe by the iniuries they had receiued from them as they pretended or rather by reason of the difference in religion betweene them and the good correspondence they held with the Muscovites in this respect so that the principality of Mosco grew to bee exceeding great The Duke of Mosco growing thus great obtained of the Patriarch of Constantinople to haue a metropolitan of Mosco who was named Metropolitan of Russia both by the Patriarch and others aswell as the Bishop of Kiovia who was long before so named and continueth yet still so to bee In that part of Russia that is subject to the King of Polonia there are seaven Bishoprickes whereof the Bishoppe of Kiovia is the Metropolitan In the other which is subject to the great Duke of Mosco there are eleven Bishoprickes whereof the Bishop of Mosco is Metropolitan the Bishop of Novograde Rascavium are Archbishops the rest ordinary Bishops All these as being at the first consecrated and placed by the Patriarch of Constantinople were vnder his jurisdiction 4º The Turkes conquests haue beene an occasion of the enlargment of the Constantinopolitan iurisdiction for when sundry parts of the Christian world formerly subject to Rome were brought vnder the bondage of the Turkes the Bishops and Pastors like hirelings forsooke their flockes over which the Patriarch of Constantinople pittying their case placed Bishops and Pastors of the greeke religion who by little and little wonne them to the liking of the same Thus wee see how farre the Constantinopolitan iurisdiction spreades it selfe so that I thinke it will be found that the number of Christians vnder that Bishop with the Melchites and Georgians that are ioyned in communion with him though never vnder his jurisdiction doth farre exceede them of the Roman communion vnlesse they draw in their new converts in the Indies to fill vp the number The division separation betweene the Greeke Latine Churches grew out of the ambitious cōtentiōs of the Bishop of Rome the Patriarch of Constantinople in this sort In the time of the Nicen Councell and before as appeareth by the acts of the Councell limiting their bounds there were three principall Bishops or Patriarchs of the Christian Church namely the Bishop of Rome Alexandria and Antioch After which time Constantinople before named Bizantium made great by Constantine being the seate of the Emperours the Bishop of this See not only obtained to haue the dignity of a Patriarch among the rest but in the second generall Councell holden at Constantinople was preferred before both the other of Alexandria and Antioch set in degree of honour next vnto the Bishop of Rome In the great Councell of Chalcedon hee was made equall with him to haue all equall rights privileges prerogatiues because he was Bishop of new Rome as the other of old But not long contenting himselfe with this equality the magnificencie and glory of his City dayly increasing making him proud and insolent hee challenged to be superiour and would be named vniversall B. not challenging to himselfe to be B. alone but incroaching vpon the right of all other thereby declaring himselfe greater and more honorable then any of the rest and the chiefe Bishop of the whole world because his citie was the chiefe citie of the world About this was the contention betweene Gregorie the first and Iohn of Constantinople which not being ended in the dayes of Gregory because the Emperour Mauritius was averse from him favouring the claime of his aduersary Bonifacius obtained of Phocas to haue the mattter in such sort concluded betweene them that the B. of Rome should haue the first and chiefe place in the Church of God and
many hundred yeares after him yea the Greeke and Aethiopian Churches continue that errour and the practise of communicating infants assoone as they are baptized euen vnto this day Touching predestination how many obscurities vncertainties and contrarieties shall we finde Surely before Augustines time many great worthy prelates and doctors of the Church not hauing occasion to enter into the exact handling of that part of Christian doctrine did teach that men are predestinate for the foresight of some thing in thēselues And Aug himselfe in the beginning of his conflicts with the Pelagians was of opinion that at the least for the foresight of faith men are elected to eternall life which afterwards he disclaimed as false and erronious and taught that mans saluation dependeth on the efficacie of that grace which God giueth and not his purpose of sauing vpon the vncertainty of mans will This doctrine of Augustine was received and confirmed in the Church against the Pelagians and Semi-Pelagians And Bellarmine professeth that Augustines doctrine in this case is the doctrine of the Church yet so that many followed the former conceipt as wee may easily see by the writings of the Schoole men many of which do teach that men are elected for the foresight of some thing positiue or priuatiue in themselues Howe farre some did Montanise in the matter of second marriage so farre disliking it that they would not haue it blessed in the Church but imposed penance on them that married a second wife after the death of the first Hierome against Iouinian certaine auncient provinciall Councells are proofes more then sufficient Touching the state of Saints departed their generality of presence in all places their vniversall knowledge of all things and admirable working every where where their memories are solemnized are not more confidently affirmed by Hierome and Gregory than they are modestly denyed and doubted of by Augustine Hugó de sancto victore the Author of the glosse and others That there were superstitions and abuses in the primitiue Churches wee haue such witnesses as the Romanists dare not except against Doth not Hierome confesse that the burning of lights at noone day vsed in some Churches was an act of zeale but not according to knowledge Did not a Councell forbid those pernoctations in the cemeteries and places ef the martyrs buriall which when Vigilantius reproued Hierome with such fiercenesse and rage as cannot well be excused traduced him as the vilest monster the earth did beare Are not these vigils long since abolished Doth not Augustine confesse there were certaine adoratores sepulchrorum et picturarum worshippers of Tumbes and Pictures in the Church in his time It is therefore much to be maruailed at that our aduersaries charge us with I know not what impiety for that wee say there hath beene a defection not only of heretickes from the Church and faith but also in the Church of her owne children from the sincerity of the heauenly trueth sometimes more and sometimes lesse in some things by some and in some other by others That this defection began long agoe but found greater and stronger opposition in the first six hundred yeares then after there being in later times a great decay of the auncient piety whence it came that many moe and worse errours then euer before were broached and they which were in some beginnings before were augmented and more dangerously defended In which sence some of our men haue said that Gregory was the last of the Good Bishops and the first of the bad For that all things since his time haue greatly decayed and the state of the Church beene much corrupted CHAP. 10. Of their errour who say nothing can be amisse in the Church either in respect of doctrine or discipline IT is vaine saith Gerson that some object the Church is founded on a Rocke and therefore nothing can be amisse either in the doctrine or discipline of it nothing that should neede any reformation If it be so saith he then where is the observation of that Canon that Clarks goe not into Innes or Tavernes that Monkes in their owne places attend onely prayer and fasting without intermedling with Ecclesiasticall or secular busines whence is the superfluous pompe and Princely state of Cardinals and Bishops making them forget that they are men what say they to that abhomination that one man holdeth two hundred or three hundred Ecclesiasticall benefices That the sword of excommunication is so easily drawne out against the poore for euery trifle as for debts and that the Lords of the Clergie vse it for the maintenance of their owne temporall states That strangers are appointed by the Pope to haue cure of soules not vnderstanding the language of them ouer whom they are set nor liuing amongst them Open your eyes saith he and see if the houses of Nuns be not stewes of filthy harlots if the consecrated Monasteries be not Faires Markets and Innes Cathedrall Churches dennes of theeues and robbers Priests vnder pretence of maides keepe harlots consider whether so great variety of pictures and images be fit and whether it occasion not Idolatrie in the simple Looke vpon the number variety of religious orders the canonising of new Saints though there be too many already as Briget of Suetia Charles of Britaine the feasts of new Saints being more religiously kept than of the blessed Apostles Enquire if there be not Apocryphall Scriptures hymnes and prayers in processe of time either of purpose or of ignorance brought into the Church to the great hurt of the Christian faith Consider the diversities of opinions as of the conception of Mary and sundry other things See if there be not intollerable superstition in the worshipping of Saints innumerable observations without all ground of reason vaine credulity in beleeuing things concerning the Saints reported in the vncertaine Legends of their liues superstitious opinions of obtaining pardon and remission of sins by saying so many Pater nosters in such a Church before such an Image as if in the Scriptures and authenticall writings of holy men there were not sufficient direction for all acts of piety devotion without these fabulous and frivolous additaments nay which is yet worse see if these observations in many Countries and Kingdomes of the World bee not more vrged than the Lawes of God euen as wee shall finde in the decrees and decretals a Monke more seuerely punished for going without his coule then for committing adulterie or sacriledge CHAP. 11. Of the causes of the manifold confusions and euils formerly found in the Church THese are the euils deformities and sores of the Church which this worthy man in his time cōplained of The causes where of he thought to be principally two First the neglecting of the Lawes of GOD and direction of the Scriptures following humane inventions Secondly the ambition pride couetousnesse
should follow his example but to beginne the new law as Moses did the old and therefore to take it as imposed vpon vs by Christs example in the nature of a precept and to be done in imitation of Christ and as being in it selfe a thing pleasing vnto GOD for that it is an imitation of his Sonnes action is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as Caluin rightly noteth and not voide of superstition and errour Now that the Fathers either erred themselues in this sort or sought to abuse others neither Calvine nor wee euer thought For they neuer imagined that the principall reason that mooued the authours and beginners of this fast to prescribe it was the onely imitation of Christs fast or because they thought it it in it owne nature a thing respected by God meerely as an imitation of his Sonnes action but that whereas it is very fit there bee a solemne time at least once in the yeare wherein men may call themselues to an account for all their negligences repent them of all their euill doings and with prayers fastings and mournings turne vnto the Lord this time was chosen as fittest both because that heerein wee remember the sufferings of Christ for our sinnes which is the strongest and most prevailing motiue that may bee to make vs hate sinne and with teares of repentant sorrow bewaile it which could no otherwise bee taken away but by the bloud shed of the Sonne of GOD as also for that after this meditation of the sufferings of Christ and conforming our selues to them his joyfull resurrection for our justification doth immediatly present it selfe vnto vs in the dayes following in the solemnities whereof men were wont with great devotion to approach to the Lords Table and they which were not yet baptized were by Baptisme admitted into the Church Thus then it was not without great consideration that men made choice of this time wherein to recount all their negligences sinnes and transgressions and to prepare themselues by this solemne act of Fasting both for the better performance of their owne dueties in those ensuing dayes of joyfull solemnitie as also to obtaine at Gods handes the gracious acceptance of such as they offered vnto him to bee entred into his couenant For the manner was in the Primitiue Church neuer to present any vnto Baptisme vnlesse it were in the case of necessity and danger but onely in the Feasts of Easter and Pentecost Thus then these being the reasons mouing to institute a set and solemne Fast and to appoint it at this time and season of the yeare rather than any other for the limitation of the number of dayes men had an eye as to a convenient direction to Christs Fast of forty dayes in the dedication of the new Covenant which number also Moses as being the giuer and Elias as being the restorer of the olde Law kept and obserued before him not as if they had beene precisely and absolutely tyed by force of these examples for then they would precisely haue kept that number which yet they did not for the Saturdayes and Sundayes deducted which were not aunciently fasted neither in the Greeke Church nor in some of the Latine Churches there remaine not forty dayes and if onely the Sondayes bee deducted as in the Latine Church there will want of the number for those in capite Ieiunii which being added to the rest make vp the number of 40. were not obserued from the beginning but added afterwards Our Divines therefore doe teach that Fasting is commaunded by Almighty GOD not as a thing in it selfe regarded but respectiuely to those ends before mentioned that GOD hath set no certaine times of Fasting but that the Church may appoint vpon set and ordinary or speciall and extraordinary occasions and causes times of fasting and that men are bound to obey The Fast of Lent they doe not dislike but thinke it may be kept as a convenient tradition of Antiquity dispensable by authority of the Church vpon due consideration of times and persons so that no false nor superstitious opinions bee added but the practise of the Romanists they condemne for that whereas they pretend to follow the ancient custome of fasting to be tyed vnto it they retaine no shew of the auncient fast but make a meere mocke of God man as their own best friends are forced to confesse besides their erronious opinions of merit satisfaction grosse superstition in the difference of meates Thus then we did not put down the true right vse exercise of fasting but the mockery of it do wish that in the ful establishment of the Churches the ancient discipline of fasting due coÌ„sideratioÌ„ had of times conditioÌ„s of men may be restored again If any of our Diuines seeme to dislike that there should be any set fasts as being Iewish it is not the generall resolution of the reformed Churchs but the priuate opinion only of some particular mâ—… who were carried with the hate of Romish errours and superstition in the set fasts to dislike them wholly which aduisedly I see not how they could doe and I am well assured many of very great esteeme do allow and approue the vse of them The next obiectioÌ„ is most friuolous Caluin saith Lay men long since presumed in times of necessity to baptize werein whether they did well or not the Fathers in those times wherein they were suffered thus to do could not nor did not resolue what can be inferred of this Whether they did well or not Caluin saith the Fathers were not resolute and hee think eth their doing can hardly be excused from vsurpation of that which no way pertained to them therefore saith Bellarmine he dissenteth from all antiquity confesseth the doctrine of the Romish Church to be most ancient Let Bellarmine giue vs leaue to reason from his speeches in the same sort he will soone perceiue he hath wronged Caluine Bellarmine saith the Fathers were doubtfull whether if men not yet baptized should attempt to baptize it were baptisme or not he pronounceth peremtorily it is therefore he dissenteth from all antiquity As likewise they doubted whether baptisme administred sportingly were true baptisme or not he his consorts make no question of it therefore they dissent from all antiquitie But let vs proceed to the next allegation Caluin saith it is most certaine that all antiquity is clearely against the Romish doctrine of the reall sacrificing of Christ in the blessed Sacrament that the Fathers did most rightly conceiue of this sacred mystery without derogating any way from the sufficiencie and plenitude of Christs sacrifice A man would hardly thinke any man would allcage this place to proue that Caluin confesseth the doctrine of the Fathers and the opinion of the Romanists are all one and yet this doth the Iesuite so forcible and powerful he is in reasoning that what a man most constantly denieth he can
not be if his concurse were indefinite generall only 3ly If it were as these men imagine the determination of the will of the creature should not bee within the compasse of things ordered by diuine prouidence and so God should not haue particular prouidence of euery particular thing That this is consequent vpon the fancie of indefinite concurse it is euident For if Gods concurse bee indefinite and in generall only then doth hee not truly and efficiently worke that the will of the creature shall in particular encline to and bring forth such an indiuiduall actiō And if he be not the cause that it so enclineth worketh his prouidence extēdeth not to such working seing his prouidence extēdeth to those things only wherein he hath a working So that if these things were soe as these men imagine Gods prouidence should extend it selfe to contingent things in a generality only in that he hath giuen to intellectual creatures a freedome to what whē how it pleaseth thē in particular in respect ofthings of this nature hee should haue a presidence onely and no prouidence Neither doth that which is alleaged by these men touching the indifferēt cōcurse of the Sunne or that of a man offering his concurrence in a generality only proue that Gods concurse is such For the Sunne is a finite and limited thing hauing something in act somthing in possibility so is man likewise therefore they may be determined to produce such such indiuiduall acts by the concurse of some other cause But God is a cause of infinite perfection and a pure act hauing nothing admixt of possibility so that his action and will cannot bee determined limited by any other Wherefore the resolution of the best diuines is that Gods concurse influence is not into the effects of 2d causes only but into the 2d causes thēselues So that he doth not only by an immediate concurse influence concurre with the 2d causes for the bringing forth of such effects as they determine themselues vnto but he hath an influence into the 2d causes thēselues mouing working thē to bring forth effects such effects as he thinketh good to worke thē vnto This is proued by sundry reasons First as we see 2d causes do not only produce some certaine effects operations as within some certaine kind but they giue vnto thē their last actuall perfection to bee But this they cānot giue vnlesse they be made cōpleate in vertue actiue by the first agent because an agent must be no lesse actuall then the effect or operation it bringeth forth But euery created agent is mixed compounded of actuall being possibility is not so actuall as an execution that is a 2d act therefore before it can bring forth any execution or effect it must be made cōpleate in vertue operatiue by the actuall motion of the first agent 2ly To bee is a most vniuersall act the proper effect of God onely therefore if wee will speak formally properly 2d causes in that they giue being to their own effects are but instruments of God whence it will follow that they must be moved by him in nature before they giue being to any of their effects For an instrument doth nothing towards the producing of the effect of the principall agent vnlesse it be actually moued by the principall agent 3ly Euery such thing as is somtimes an agent in act sometimes but potentially only must be moued by some mouer that is a pure act hath nothing mingled with it of possibility before it eā bring forth any actiō But the will of the creature is somtimes actually in actiō somtimes but potētially only therefore it must be moued by the first act before it can bring forth any action Which must bee granted for that otherwise the will of the creature in respect of some actions should bee the first mouer of it selfe and the first determiner That which is wrought by God in and vpon the second causes to make them actually to bee in action is a thing that hath a kinde of incompleate beeing in such sort as colours haue a being in the aire and the power of the act in the instrument of the artificer and so often as 2◠causes whether of naturall or supernaturall order haue in respect of the forme inherent in them a sufficient actiue power in the nature of the first act to bring forth their effects the helpe or precedent motion of God whereby he moueth and applyeth the same actiue powers to operate is not a qualitie but is more properly named a powerfull motion whereby the first and most vniversall agent so worketh vpon them that the 2d causes are actually in action euery one in sort fitting to the nature condition of it And to this purpose it is that Tho Aquinas hath that habituall grace is a quality but the actuall help whereby God moueth vs to will a thing is not a quality but a certain motion of the mind And surely it will easily appeare that there is a great difference between these For the habite doth perfit the power of the soule as a forme or first act implying possibility in respect of actuall operation because the habite doth not determine the power actually to worke but fitteth it only for action inclineth it thereunto But this actuall helpe mouing putting forth the 2d causes into their actions doth not perfit the power of working but makes thē actually to be in action Lastly the habit in respect of the nature of it may be the cause of diuerse actions but that actuall help mouing whereof we speak determineth the will to one individuall action yet taketh not from it a power of dissenting and doing otherwise Alvarez a great learned Archbishop that hath lately written with good allowance of the Church of Rome layeth downe these propositions First that God by an effectuall will predetermined all such acts of men and Angels as are good and all such as are not euill ex obiecto though in individuo they be euill sins ex malâ circumstantiâ Which he proueth out of the 10th of Esay where Almighty God saith Assur is the rod of my wroth he is my staffe I will send him to a deceiptfull nation against the people of my fury will I giue him a command a litle after Shall the axe boast against him that cutteth with it or shall the saw bee lifted vp against him that draweth it as if a rod should be lifted vp against him that lifteth it the staff which is but wood Here it is evident that Assur sinned ex malâ circumstantiâ in subduing the nations and yet it is cleere that God predetermined that he should waste and destroy the nations that he sent him to that purpose and moued him so to doe His 2d proposition is this that whatsoeuer is positiue of being in an act of sin though intrinsecally
of Pelagius CHAP. 27 Of the heresies of Nouatus Sabellius and the Manichees THe sixt heresie that wee are charged with is that of Nouatus who would not haue those that fell in the time of persecution reconciled and receiued againe to the communion of the Church vpon their repentance But wee receiue all Penitents whatsoeuer and therefore this lying slander may be added to the rest to make vp a number But they will say the Nouatians were condemned for denying penance to be a Sacrament and that therein at least wee agree with the Nouatians This is as false as the rest for it is most certaine that the absolution which was giuen in the Primitiue Church disliked by Nouatus was not taken as a sacramentall acte giuing grace remitting sinnes but as a judiciall acte receiving them to the peace of the Church and the vse of the Sacraments which had beene formerly put from them This the best and most iudicious of the Schoole-men confesse besides the infinite testimonies that might be alleaged out of the Fathers to proue the same It was then an admitting to the vse of the Sacraments not it selfe a Sacrament But Caluin sayth that the speech of Hierome that poenitentia is secunda tabula post naufragium is impious and cannot be excused and therefore it seemeth he inclineth to the Nouatians heresie in denying the benefite of penitencie to distressed and miserable sinners that seeke it Augustine in his booke De mendacio ad Consentium maketh it a disputable question whether a man that vsually lieth speaking trueth at some one time with purpose to make men thinke it like the rest of his lying speaches wherewith they are well acquainted may not be said to lie when hee speaketh trueth because hee intendeth to deceiue and doeth deceiue Surely if this man should speake any trueth I feare the Reader would thinke it a falsehood because his ordinary manner is seldome or neuer to speake any trueth Doeth Caluine say the speach of Hierome is impious and not to bee excused as hee reporteth he doeth Surely no but that if it be vnderstood as the Papists vnderstand it it cannot bee excused For they conceiue thereby that the Sacrament of Penance is implied which Hierome neuer thought of But hee will say the Nouatians refused to haue those that they baptized to receiue imposition of hands with which was joyned in those times the anoynting of the parties with oyle Surely so they did but so doe not wee for we tâ—…inke of the vse of imposition of hands as Hierome doeth in his booke against he Luciferians But touching the vse of oyle though at that time there was no cause for the Nouatians to except much against it yet now that it is made the matter and element of a Sacrament and that by a kinde of consecration the ground whereof wee know not wee thinke we doe not offend in omitting it no more than the Church of Rome in omitting innumerable ceremoniall obseuations of like nature that were in vse in those times The seauenth is the heresie of Sabellius which he sayth was reuiued by Servetus So it was indeede that Seruetus reuiued in our time the damnable heresie of Sabellius long since condemned in the first ages of the Church But what is that to vs How little approbation hee found amongst vs the just and honourable proceeding against him at Geneva will witnesse to all posterity The eighth is the heresie of the Manichees which taught that euills which are found in the World were from an euill beginning so making two originall causes the one good of things good the other euill of things euill It is true that this was the damnable opinion of the Manichees But will the shamelesse companion charge vs with this impiety I thinke hee dareth not for hee knoweth that wee teach that all the euils that are in the World had their beginning and did proceede from the freedome of mans will which while hee vsed ill hee ouerthrewe and lost both himselfe and it that while hee turned from the greater to the lesser good and preferred the creature before the Creatour hee plunged himselfe into innumerable defects miseries perplexities and discomforts and justly deserued that GOD from whome thus wickedly hee departed should make all those things which formerly hee appointed to doe him seruice to become feeble weake vnfit and vnwilling to performe the same But saith he Luther affirmeth that all things fall out by a kinde of absolute necessitie whence the heresie of the Manichees may bee inferred The aunswere to this objection is easie for Luther taketh necessitie for infallibilitie of event thereby meaning that all things fall out infallibly so as God before disposed and determined but doth not imagine a necessitie of coaction enforcing nor a naturall and inevitable necessitie taking away all freedome of choyce as our adversaries injuriously impute vnto him If this of Luther faile as in deede it doeth Bellarmine hath another proofe and demonstration that wee are Manichees for that Calvine denyeth man to haue freedome of choyce in any thing whatsoeuer This is a most false and injurious imputation For though Calvine deny that man can doe any thing in such sort as therein to bee free from the direction and ordering of Almighty GOD yet hee confesseth that Adams will in the day of his creation was free not onely from sinne and miserie but also from limitation of desire and naturall necessitie and left to her owne choyce in the highest matter and of most consequence of all the rest and that man by making an euill choyce did runne into those euills which he is now subject vnto Calvin then is not worse than the Manichees as making God the Authour of those euills which the Manichees attribute to an euill beginning as Bellarmine is pleased to pronounce of him but is farther from that hellish conceit than Bellarmine is from hell it selfe if he repent him not of these his wicked and hellish slanders But sayth hee the Manichees blamed and reprehended the Fathers of the Olde Testament and so also doeth Calvine therefore Calvin is a Manichee This is as if a man should thus reason with Bellarmine Porphyry blamed Paul as an arrogant man for reprehending Peter that was his auncient and before him in the faith of Christ and Bellarmine diliâ—…eth him for persecuting the Church of GOD in the time of his infidility therefore Bellarmine is as bad or worse than Porphyry For the Manichees thought that the Old Testament was from an euill beginning and therefore exaggerated all the faults and sinnes of the Fathers that then liâ—…ed for confirmation and strengthening of this their blasphemie But Calvin hateth this impiety more than the Romanists who imagine a greater difference betwixt the state of the Iewes and the Christians that hee doeth It is therefore an ill consequence Caluine doth not hide nor excuse but condemne the murder and adultery of Dauid the drunkennesse of Noe and the
that is fatherly guides of Gods Church and people that only for orders sake and the preseruation of peace there is a limitation of the vse and exercise of the same Heerevnto agree all the best learned amongst the Romanists themselues freely confessing that that wherein a Bishop excelleth a Presbyter is â—…t a distinct higher order or power of order but a kind of dignity office 〈◊〉 imployment onely Which they proue because a Presbyter ordained persaltum that neuer was consecrated or ordained Deacon may notwithstanding doe all those actes that pertaine to the Deacons order because the higher order doth alwaies imply in it the lower and inferiour in an eminent and excellent sort But a Bishoppe ordained per saltum that neuer had the ordination of a Presbyter can neither consecrate and administer the sacrament of the Lords body nor ordaine a Presbyter himselfe being none nor doe any acte peculiarly pertaining to Presbyters Whereby it is most euident that that wherein a Bishoppe excelleth a Presbyter is not a distinct power of order but an eminencie and dignity onely specially yeelded to one aboue all the rest of the same ranke for order sake and to preserue the vnitie and peace of the Church Hence it followeth that many things which in some cases Presbyters may lawfully doe are peculiarly reserued vnto Bishops as Hierome noteth Potius ad honorem Sacerdotij quam ad legis necessitatem Rather for the honour of their Ministery then the necessity of any lawe And therefore wee reade that Presbyters in some places and at some times did impose hands and confirme such as were baptized which when Gregory Bishop of Rome would wholly haue forbidden there was soe great exception taken to him for it that he left it free againe And who knoweth not that all Presbyters in cases of necessity may absolue reconcile Penitents a thing in ordinary course appropriated vnto Bishops and why not by the same reason ordaine Presbyters Deacons in cases of like necessity For seing the cause why they are forbidden to do these acts is because to Bishops ordinarily the care of all churches is committed and to them in all reason the ordination of such as must serue in the Church pertaineth that haue the chiefe care of the Church and haue Churches wherein to imploy them which only Bishops haue as long as they retaine their standing and not Presbyters being but assistants to bishops in their Churches If they become enmies to God and true religion in case of such necessity as the care and gouerment of the Church is deuolued to the Presbyters remaining Catholique being of a better spirit so the duty of ordaining such as are to assist or succeede them in the work of the Ministrie pertaines to them likewise For if the power of order and authority to intermedle in things pertaining to Gods seruice bee the same in all Presbyters and that they be limited in the execution of it onely for order sake so that in case of necessity euery of theÌ„ may baptise confirme them whom they haue baptized absolue reconcile Penitents doe all those other acts which regularly are appropriated vnto the Bishop alone there is no reason to be giuen but that in case of necessity wherein all Bishops were extinguished by death or being fallen into heresie should refuse to ordaine any to serue God in his true worship but that Presbyters as they may do all other acts whatsoeuer speciall challenge Bishoppes in ordinary course make vnto them might do this also Who then dare condemn all those worthy Ministers of God that were ordained by Presbyters in sundry Churches of the world at such times as Bishops in those parts where they liued opposed themselues against the truth of God and persecuted such as professed it Surely the best learned in the Church of Rome in former times durst not pronounce all ordinations of this nature to bee void For not onely Armachanus a very learned and worthy Bishop but as it appeareth by Alexander of Hales many learned men in his time and before were of opinion that in some cases and at some times Presbyters may giue orders and that their ordinations are of force though to do so not being vrged by extreame necessity cannot be excused from ouer great boldnesse and presumption Neither should it seeme so strange to our aduersaries that the power of ordination should at some times be yeelded vnto Presbyters seeing their Chorepiscopi Suffragans or Titular Bishops that liue in the Diocesse and Churches of other Bishops and are no Bishops according to the old course of discipline do dayly in the Romish Church both confirme Children and giue orders All that may be alledged out of the Fathers for proofe of the contrary may be reduced to two heads For first whereas they make all such ordinations voide as are made by Presbyters it is to bee vnderstood according to the strictnesse of the Canons in vse in their time and not absolutely in the nature of the thing which appeares in that they likewise make all ordinations sine titulo to be voide All ordinations of Bishops ordained by fewer then three Bishops with the Metropolitane all ordinations of Presbyters by Bishoppes out of their owne Churches without speciall leaue whereas I am well assured the Romanists will not pronounce any of these to be voide though the parties so doing are not excusable from all fault Secondly their sayings are to bee vnderstood regularly not without exception of some speciall cases that may fall out Thus then we see that obiection which our adnersaries tooke to bee vnanswerable is abundantly answered out of the grounds of their owne Schoole-men the opinion of many singularly learned amongst them and their owne daily practise in that Chorepiscopi or Suffragans as they call them being not Bishops but onely Presbyters whatsoeuer they pretend and forbidden by all old Canons to meddle in ordination yet doe daily with good allowance of the Romane Church ordaine Presbyters and Deacons confirme with imposition of hands those that are baptized and doe all other Episcopall acts whiles their great Bishops Lord it like princes in all temporall ease and worldly bravery The next thing they object against vs is that our first Ministers what authority soeuer they had that ordained them yet had no lawfull ordination because they were not ordained placed in voide places but intruded into Churches that had lawfull Bishops at the time of those pretended ordinations and consequently did not succeede but encroach vpon other mens right To this wee answere that the Church is left voyde either by the death resignation depriuation or the peoples desertion and forsaking of him that did precede In some places our first Bishoppes and Pastours found the Churches voydby death in some by voluntarie relinquishment in some by depriuation and in some by desertion in that the people or at least that part of the
illud singulare sacrificium offertur veterem Ecclesiae morem reuocare quo non solum sacrificans ipse sed diaconi reliqui Ecclesiae ministri qui diebus solennioribus velut testes taÌ„ti sacrificii necessarâ—…ruÌ„ ministeriorum coadiutores adhibentur vt perceptionis corporis sanguinis domini nostri Iesu Christi participes se preberent seria canonum sanctione iubebautur sed fideles omnes pro recolendà mortis domini nostrae redemptionis memorià ad hoc mediatoris nostri sacrificium confluentes sedulis exhortationibus monendi excitandi sunt vt prius explorati confessi absoluti sacrosanctae communionis gratiam sumant diuinissimae Eucharistiae participationem vnà cum sacerdote sedulo deuotè frequentent that is And here truely it were expedient that when that most true and singular sacrifice is offered wee should renewe the old custome of the Church by which not only he that celebrateth but the Deacons also and the other ministers of the Church which on the more solemne daies are vsed as witnesses of so solemne an act as coadiutors in respect of sundry necessary ministeries were commaunded by a serious sanction of the canons to be partakers of the sacrament of the Lords body blood but all such faithfull beleeuing men as resort to this sacrifice of our mediator to renew the memory of the death of our Lord and our redemption by the same should be admonished and stirred vp by effectuall and often exhortations hauing examined themselues confessed their sinnes and obtained absolution to receiue the grace of the holy communion and carefully and deuoutly to frequent the participation of the diuine Eucharist together with the priest By this which hath been said it appeareth that the priests receiuing alone neglecting or excluding the coÌ„municating of others as not much necessarie his act being availeable to apply the benefits of Christs passion without receiuing the sacrament is indeed a point of Romish religioÌ„ but not coÌ„tained in the masse for it is contrary to the name of the masse the words of the canon intendmeÌ„t of theÌ„ that coÌ„posed it contrary to the old canons the practice of the Church it proceeded froÌ„ the indeuotion of the people or rather the negligence or error of the guides of the Church that either failed to stirre theÌ„ vp to the performaÌ„ce of such a duty or made them belieue their act was sufficient to communicate the benefits of Christs passion to them not without the dislike of the better sort So that hitherto no proofe is made that the Church wherein our Fathers liued and died was no Protestant Church but rather the contrary for this Church did euer protest against this abuse professed her dislike of the same acknowledged that this custome was much different from the auncient Honorius in gemma animae saith it is reported that anciently the priests were wont to receiue meale of euery house or familie which custome the Greeks are said to coÌ„tinue still that out of this they made the Lords bread which they did offer for the people hauing coÌ„secrated it distributed it to theÌ„ For euery of theÌ„ that offered this meale were present at the masse respectiuely to theÌ„ it was said in the canon omniuÌ„ circuÌ„stantiuÌ„ qui tibi hoc sacrificiuÌ„ laudis offeruÌ„t that is coÌ„sider the deuotioÌ„ of all that stand rouÌ„d about who offer to thee this sacrifice of praise But after that the Church encreased in number but decayed in deuotion it was decreed in respect of carnall men that they that could should coÌ„municate euery Sunday or on the chief feast daies or thrice in the yeare And now because the people ceasing to coÌ„municate so great a quantity of bread was no longer necessary it was decreed that it should be formed in fashion of a pennie instead of offering meale they offered euery one a penny by which they acknowledged Christs being sould for a certain number of pence These pence were conuerted either to the benefit of the poore or for prouiding of somthing pertaining to the sacrifice in stead of the consecrated bread they were wont to receiue there was giuen them holy bread as they called it Whatsoeuer men think of this which Honorius hath of offering meale it is certaine that in the Primitiue Church they did offer those things that were to be consecrated in the sacrament and that the breade that was there consecrated was vsuall and loafie bread and in forme round as it appeareth by Epiphanius in Ancoratu Gregory in his dialogues who calleth the bread of consecration coronas round â—…aues all which things shew a Protestant Church Wherefore let vs come to the next point of Romish religion supposed to be contained in the masse which is the depriuing of the people of the one part of the Sacrament and the giuing them the same onely in one kind In the Primitiue Church saith â— Lyra the Sacrament was ministred in both kinds Dionysius Carthusianus agreeth with him affirming the same which thing may be prooued by innumerable testimonies of antiquity Ignatius saith there is one bread broken to all one cup distributed to all After the offering is made let euery one saith Clement in order take the Lords body and his precious blood with all reuerent shamefastnes feare The bread saith Dionysius which was one is broken in parts the cup that is but one is divided amongst al. Iustin Martyr in his 2 Apologie saith that after he that is the president hath finished his thanksgiuing the people by a joyfull acclamation haue approoued consented to the same the deacons ministers divide vnto euery one of theÌ„ that are present that each one may partake of that bread wine water ouer which the blessing thanksgiuing hath bin powred out and they doe beare the same to them that are absent Of whose hand saith Tertullian speaking of a faithfull woman married to an Infidell shall shee receiue of whose cup shall she partake Cyprian in his Epist. to Cornelius How doe we teach or prouoke them in for the confession of Christs name to shed their bloud if wee deny vnto theÌ„ when they are to enter into this warfare the blood of Christ or how shall we make them fit for the cup of martyrdome if wee shall not first admit them to drinke the cup of the Lord iure communicationis by the right of communicating in another place Therfore they daylie drinke the cup of Christs blood that they may shed their bloud for Christ. And in a 3 place speaking of a certain child that had bin polluted in the idols temple he saith When as the solemnities were fulfilled the deacon began to offer the cup to them that were present when other had receiued her course came but the little girle by the instinct of God turned away her
darke the length breadth and other dimensions of a thing but not whether it be faire or foule white or blacke So men in this obscurity of discerning may finde out that there is a God and that he is the beginning and cause of all things but they cannot know how faire how good how mercifull and how glorious hee is that so they may loue him feare him honour him and trust in him as God vnlesse they haue an illumination of grace The difference therefore betweene those of the Church of Rome and vs touching originall sinne consisteth in two points First In that they make the former defects of ignorance difficultie to doe good pronenesse to euill contrarietie betweene the powers of the soule and the rebellion of the meaner and inferiour against the better and superiour consequents of nature as it might and would be in it selfe simply considered without all defection and falling from God that originall righteousnesse was giuen to prevent and stay the effects that these naturally would haue brought forth and that these are not the consequents of Adams sinne but that onely the leauing of them free to themselues to disorder all is a consequent of the losse of that righteousnesse which was giuen to Adam and by him forfaited and lost that they proceede from the guilt of sinne but that they make not them guilty in whom they are But we say that these are no conditions of nature simply considered that they cannot bee found but where there is a falling from God that they are the consequents of Adams sinfull aversion from God his Creator that they are a part of original sinne and that they make men guilty of grieuous punishment so long as they remaine in them The second thing is that originall sin is indeed according to their opinion the privation of originall righteousnes but as original righteousnes was not giuen simply to inable men to decline euill and do good but collectiuely constantly and meritoriously to decline euill doe good so the privation of it doth not depriue men of all power of declining euill doing good but only of the power of declining all euill and doing all good collectiuely meritoriously But we say that originall righteousnes was given simply to inable men to decline euill to doe good and that without it the nature of man could not performe her proper and principall actions about her principall obiects So that the privation of it depriveth a man of all power of knowing loving fearing honouring or glorifying God as God and of all power of doing any thing morally good or not sinfull and putteth him into an estate wherein hee cannot but loue and desire things that God would not or so as hee would not haue him yea of louing other things more than God and and so as to dishonour God in any kind rather than not to enjoy the things he desires So that if wee speake of originall sinne formally it is the privation of those excellent gifts of diuine grace inabling vs to know loue feare serue honour and trust in God and to doe the things he delighteth in which Adam had lost If materially it is that habituall inclination that is found in men averse from God carrying them to the loue and desire of finite things more then of God and this also is properly sin making guilty of condemnation the nature and person in which it is found This habituall inclination to desire finite things inordinately is named concupiscence and this concupiscence is two fold as Alensis noteth out of Hugo for there is concupiscentia spiritus and concupiscentia carnis there is a concupiscence of the spirit or superiour faculties of the flesh or inferiour the former is sinne the latter sinne and punishment For what is more iust then that the will refusing to bee ordered by God and desiring what hee would not haue it should finde the inferiour faculties rebellious and inclined to desire things the will would haue to bee declined It remaineth therefore that wee proceede to proue that this doctrine was receiued taught continued in the Churches wherein our Fathers liued died till after Luthers time I haue shewed already that Gregorius Ariminensis professeth that Adam in the state of his creation was not inabled to perform any acte morally good or so to doe any good thing as not to sin in doing it by any thing in nature without addition of grace which thing he proveth out of the master of the sentences whose words are these speaking of the first man before his fall Egebat itaque homo gratiâ non vt liberaret voluntatem suam quae peccati serva non fuerat sed vt praepararet ad volendum efficaciter bonum quod per se non poterat That is The first man needed grace not to free his will for it neuer had been in bondage but to prepare and fit it effectually to will that which is good which of it selfe it could not doe And he confirmeth the same out of Saint August his words are these Istam gratiam non habuit homo primus quâ nunquam vellet esse malus sed habuit in qua si permanere vellet nunquam malus esset sine quâ etiam cum libero arbitrio bonus esse non posset sed eam tamen per liberum arbitrium deserere posset nec ipsum ergo Deus esse voluit sine suâ gratiâ quem reliquit in eius libero arbitrio quoniam liberum arbitrium ad malum sufficit ad bonum auâ—…m parumest nisi adiuuetur ab omnipotenti bono quod adiutorium si homo ille per liberum non deseruisset arbitrium semper esset bonus sed deseruit et desertus est that is The first man had not that grace that might make him so will good as neuer to become euill but truely hee had that wherein if hee would haue continued hee should neuer haue bin euill and without which notwithstanding all the freedome of his will he could not be good yet by the freedome of his will he might loose it wherefore God would not haue him to be without his grace whom he left in the freedome of his will because free will is sufficient of it selfe to doe evill but it is of litle force or rather as the true reading is of no force nothing to do good vnlesse it be holpeÌ„ of the omnipotent good which helpe if maÌ„ had not forsakeÌ„ by his free will he had ever beene good but he forsooke it and was forsaken Thirdly he proueth the same in this sort Si Adam ante peccatum potuisset per suas vires naturales praecise agere actum moraliter bonum ipse potuisset facere se de non bono bonum posito quod aliquando fuisset sine omni actu voluntatis cum suis taÌ„tum naturalibus aut de bono meliorem deo illum non specialiter adiuvante that is If Adam had power before the
that all the workes of infidells and men not renewed and iustified by Gods speciall grace were sinnes Yea so great is the force of this trueth that since the councell of Trent some of great esteeme and place in a sorte giue way vnto it For Didacus Alvarez an Archbishop within the dominions of the king of Spaine hath written a learned worke de Auxiliis gratiae and dedicated it with good allowance to the king that now is wherein hee sayth that though euery morall acte that is good ex genere obiecto as to giue almes to a poore man out of naturall compassion bee of that nature that it may bee done in reference to God as loued aboue all as the authour of nature or as the cause and obiect of supernaturall happinesse yet no such can bee so done de facto but by the acte of charitie So that by a man vnregenerate no such acte canne bee done in reference to God formally or vertually Now I suppose there is no morall acte that canne bee done by man but it must bee referred formally or vertually to some last end and if not to God as hee sayth the workes of Infidells cannot then to some other end and then of necessity they must bee sinne for whatsoeuer is done in reference to any thing besides God as the last end is done perversely and sinfully The good man no doubt saw the trueth touching this poynt and therefore sayth that there is no true vertue without charity that the workes of Infidels are not onely not meritorious but not truely good nor the workes of vertue and proveth the same at large out of Augustine whence it will follow that they are sinne for every morall acte is either a worke of vertue and truely good though in an inferiour sort or sinne but this he durst not say and so putteth himselfe into a necessitie of contradicting himselfe for if an infidell when hee giueth an almes cannot doe this act in reference to GOD as the last end either formally or vertually then hee must doe it formally or vertually in reference to some other thing most loued by him and if hee doe so then he putteth an ill circumstance to this his action and so it cannot but bee sinne Thus then wee haue strongly proued out of the testimonies of such as best vnderstood the doctrine of the Church that grace was giuen to Adam in the day of his creation not onely to make him constantly and collectiuely to doe all the morall duties that were required of him and to merit supernaturall happinesse as if he might haue done the seuerall duties and performed the seuerall acts of morall vertue without it but simply to inable him to doe good and decline euill so that it being taken away man knoweth not his true good nor is any way inclined to seeke it as he should doe For whereas there was a threefold eye in Adam as Hugo de Sancto Victore noteth Carnis quo mundum quae in mundo cernebat rationis quo se quae in se contemplationis quo deum primum perfectè habet secundum ex parte tertium omninò non habet nam postquam tenebrae peccati intraverunt oculus contemplationis extinctus est ut nihil videret oculus rationis lippus factus est ut dubiè videret solus oculus carnis in suâ claritate permansit That is Of the flesh by which hee saw the world and the things that are in it of reason whereby hee saw and vnderstood himselfe and all the things that were in himselfe and of contemplation by which he was to see God the first he hath still in perfection the second in part the third he hath wholly lost for after the darkenesse of sinne entred the eye of contemplation was put out so as to see nothing at all the eye of reason was dimmed so as to see doubtfully only the eye of the flesh remained in perfection And two kindes of euill are brought into the nature of man Privativa amissio notitiae in intellectu rectitudinis in voluntate conversionis ad deum tanquam ad proprium obiectum positiva perpetuae tristes dubitationes de Deo de providentiá Dei iudicio promissionibus comminationibus in voluntate conversio ad obiecta contraria legi That is there are newly brought into the nature of man euils of two sorts privatiue as the losse of the true right knowledge of God in the vnderstanding of rectitude in the will and of due conversion to God as her proper object positiue as perpetuall doubtings of God of the providence of God his judgement promises threates in his will a conversion to the desiring of things the Law forbiddeth This corruption of mans nature is excellently described by Prosper Humana natura in primi hominis praevaricatione vitiata etiam inter beneficia inter praecepta auxilia Dei semper in deteriorem est proclivior voluntatem cui committi non est aliud quam dimitti Haec voluntas vaga incerta instabilis imperita infirma ad efficiendum facilis ad audendum in cupiditatibus caeca in honoribus tumida curis anxia suspicionibus inquieta gloriae quam virtutum avidior fame quam conscientiae diligentior per omnem sui experientiam miserior fruendo his quae concupiverit quam carendo nihil in suis habet viribus nisi periculi facilitatem And againe Omnes homines in primo homine sine vitio conditi sumus omnes naturae nostrae incolumitatem eiusdem hominis praevaricatione perdidimus inde tracta mortalitas inde multiplex corporis animique corruptio inde ignorantia difficultas curae inutiles illicitae cupiditates sacrilegi errores timor vanus amor noxius iniusta gaudia poenitenda consilia non minor miseriarum multitudo quam criminum By this which hath beene sayd it appeareth that the Church wherein our Fathers liued and died euer taught as wee doe touching the state of mans creation fall and originall corruption and euer reiected the fancies of those more then Semipelagians that brought in the errours the Romanists now maintaine and so was in this as in the former points a true orthodoxe and Protestant Church CHAP. 6. Of the blessed Virgins conception HAuing spoken of Originall sinne and shewed the nature of it the next thing that is questioned is the generality of it for wee say that amongst al them that haue beene borne of women there neuer was any found that was not conceiued in sinne besides Christ the Lord who had God for his father and a virgin for his mother of whose spotlesse conception his Fathers diuinity and mothers virginity were proofe sufficient But they of the Church of Rome at this day for the most part say that the blessed virgin the mother of our Lord was conceiued likewise without spotte of originall sinne Leo the tenth was moued to determine this question touching the conception of
by Gerson disliking the honour then giuen to Images their number and fashion as being occasions of Idolatry in the simple which to be true the words of Augustine are proof sufficient who demaundeth who it is or where he may bee found that adoreth or prayeth beholding an Image as the manner was in the Romane Church is not in such sort affected that he perswadeth himselfe it heareth him and is able and ready to grant him the things he desireth and seeketh in his prayer CHAP. 24. Of Absolution ABsolution is now supposed by those of the Church of Rome to be a Sacramentall Acte giuing grace ex opere operato and so remitting sinne both quoad culpam poenam but in the Primitiue Church it was nothing else but a restoring of men formerly put from the Sacrament cast out of the Church to the Churches peace and vse of the Sacraments again as appeareth by Cyprians Epistles Neither was Absolution giuen in those times till pennance were first performed Amongst the ancient sayth Lindan Absolution was seldome giuen but after penance performed onely in time of persecution pestilence warre or dangerous sicknesse of the party the manner was sometimes to giue absolution presently at the suit of the penitent to require of him the performance of pennance afterward if hee escaped those dangers Hence in time it came that ordinarily they gaue Absolution first and then imposed penance to be performed afterward Now because they could not conceiue from what this Absolution should free them not being formerly subjected to any censure of the Church some began to thinke that it freeth them from the staine of sinne and the punishments due vnto the same thereby making it a Sacramentall Acte yet so as many retayned a right perswasion still The Priest saith Alexander of Hales is a Mediatour betweene God man to God he ascendeth as an inferiour by way of petition and as a suiter to man he descendeth as a Commaunder and Iudge In the first sort hee obtayneth for men by his prayer and procureth acceptation with God in the second hee reconcileth them to the Church his prayer obtayneth grace his absolution presupposeth it so that the Keyes of the Church extend to the remission of sin by way of request obtayning it not by way of authority giuing it CHAP. 25. Of Indulgences and Pardons TOuching Indulgences or Pardons they were originally nothing else but the releasing of some part of that penance that had beene enioyned as appeareth by the whole course of antiquity Wherevpon it was a long time the opinion of many in the Romane Church that Indulgences are of force onely in indicio Ecclesiae not in iudicio Dei and that they free men only from injoyned penance which the forme of them was wont to import it being euer added in those relaxations ab iniunctis poenitentiis and Caietan sheweth the same affirming that an Indulgence is principally an acte of jurisdiction and the freeing from enjoyned penance That which bred another conceit in the Romane Church in later times was an errour in practise for whereas aunciently they neuer remitted any part of the penance they had enjoyned but out of the consideration of the extraordinary signes of repentance appearing in the penitent arguing that to bee performed in shorter time than was expected which was intended in later times they granted these relaxations and remissions in favour when there was no inducement in respect of any thing appearing in the parties Now because to free them from these penitentiall exercises tending to the preventing of Gods Iudgements before so much was performed as was necessary for the turning away of his displeasure might seeme hurtfull rather than beneficiall to them to whom such favours were shewed in that they were left to Gods judgements into whose hands it is fearefull to fall they began to bethinke them how they might supply the defects of penitentiall conversion vnto God in those they thus pardoned and not leaue them to the danger of his future judgement This they could not otherwise devise to doe but by casting the ouerplus of other mens satisfactions vpon them and releeuing them out of the treasury of the Church which groweth as they suppose out of the satisfactorie sufferings of Christ and his Saints multis tamen doctoribus aduersantibus as Caietan noteth where hee sheweth that Durandus teacheth that the Saints had no superfluous merits not rewarded in themselues Touching Indulgences Durandus sayth little can bee sayd of any certainety or as vndoubtedly true seeing the Scripture speaketh not expresly of them neither the Fathers as Augustine Hillarie Ambrose Hierome and the rest so that in speaking of them wee must follow the common course Touching the force of these pardons how vncertainly and vnconstantly their greatest doctours dispute it is not vnknowne for Bonaventura noteth that many were of opinion that pardons haue no other vse nor haue any further force or vertue but onely to remit certaine dayes penance if the cause in respect whereof they be granted bee equivalent vnto the penance which was to haue beene performed so making them to bee but onely a commutation of penance and not a relaxation or remission Gerson sayth the judiciall and publike power of the keyes extendeth not it selfe principally or directly to the diminishing or taking away of any punishments but such as it selfe inflicted or might haue inflicted as are the punishments of Excommunication irregularity and other disablings to performe Ciuill or Ecclesiasticall actes And in another place he sayth the granting of Indulgences extendeth not it selfe to punishments following the corruption of nature and flowing from originall sinne for it is certaine that the Pope doeth not absolue and free men from thirst hunger infirmities and death so that such absolutions extend only to the punishments aboue mētioned such as may be inflicted by the just Iudgment and prescription of him that imposeth penance for actuall sins Whe ther the power of the Keyes extend only to such as are on earth or to them also that are in Purgatory the opinions hee sayth of men are contrary vncertaine but howsoeuer this he pronounceth confidently that onely Christ can giue such pardons for thousands of dayes and yeares as many Popes assume to themselues power to graunt CHAP. 26. Of the Infallibility of the Popes judgment TOuching the infallibility of the Popes judgment it was so farre from being a thing resolued of in the Church of God before our time that Stapleton confesseth it is yet no matter of faith but of opinion onely because so many famous and renowned Deuines haue euer holden the contrary as Gerson Almaine Occam allmost all the Parisians all they that thought the councell to be aboue the Pope Adrianus Sextus Durandus Alfonsus à Castro and many moe CHAP. 27. Of the power of the Pope in disposing the affaires of Princes and their states LAstly Touching the power of the Pope in
we should haue no greater certainty of things Diuine and revealed then such as humane meanes and causes can yeeld And so seeing wee can neuer bee so well perswaded of any man or multitude of men but that we may justly feare either they are deceiued or will deceiue if our faith depend vpon such grounds we cannot firmely vndoubtedly beleeue Nay it is consequent vpon this absurd opinion that the Children of the Church and they of the houshold of faith haue no infused or Diuine faith at all for that whatsoeuer is revealed by the God of truth is true the Heathens make no doubt but doubt whether any thing were so revealed and that any thing was so revealed if these men say true we haue no assurance but by humane meanes and causes But the absurdity hereof the same Canus out of Calvin doth very learnedly demonstrate reasoning in this sort If all they that haue beene our teachers nay if all the Angels in Heauen shall teach vs any other or contrary doctrine to that we haue receiued we must holde them accursed and not suffer our faith to bee shaken by them as the Apostle chargeth vs in the Epistle to the Galatians therefore our faith doth not rely vpon humane causes or grounds of assurance Ne mens nostra vacillet altius petenda quà m ab hominum vel ratione vel auctoritate scripturae authoritas Besides our faith and that of the Apostles and Prophets being the same it must needes haue the same object the same ground and stay to rest vpon in both but they builded themselues vpon the sure and vnmooueable rocke of Diuine truth and authority therefore we must doe so likewise If any man desire farther satisfaction herein let him reade Canus and Calvin to whom in these things Canus is much beholding Others therefore to avoide this absurdity run into that other before mentioned that we beleeue the things that are diuine by the meere and absolute command of our will not finding any sufficient motiues reasons of perswasion hereupon they define faith in this sort Fides est assensus firmus ineuideÌ„s that is faith is a firme certaine ful assent of the mind beleeuing those things the truth whereof no way appeareth vnto vs. For father explication and better clearing of this definition of faith they make two kindes of certainty for there is as they say certitudo evidentiae and certitudo adhaerentiae that is there is a certainty of evidence which is of those things the truth whereof appeareth vnto vs and another of adherence and firme cleauing to that the trueth whereof appeareth not vnto vs. This later they suppose to bee the certainty that is found in fayth and there vpon they hold that a man may beleeue a thing meerely because hee will without any motiues or reason of perswasion at all the contrary whereof when Picus Mirandula proposed among other his conclusions to bee disputed in Rome hee was charged with heresie for it But hee sufficiently cleared himselfe from all such imputation and improued their fantasie that so thinke by vnanswerable reasons which I haue thought good to lay downe in this place It is not sayth hee in the power of a man to thinke a thing to bee or not to bee meerely because hee will therefore much lesse firmely to beleeue it The trueth of the antecedent wee finde by experience and it evidently appeareth vnto vs because if a doubtfull proposition bee proposed concerning which the vnderstanding and minde of man resolueth nothing seeing no reason to leade to resolue one way or other the minde thus doubtfull cannot incline any way till there bee some inducement either of reason sight of the eye or testimony or authority of them wee are well conceipted of to settle our perswasion Secondly a man cannot assent to any thing or judge it to bee true vnlesse it so appeare vnto him but the sole acte of a mans will cannot make a thing to appeare and seeme true or false but either the euidence of the thing or the testimony and authority of some one of whose judgement he is well perswaded Thirdly though the action of vnderstanding quoad exercitium as to consider of a thing and thinke vpon it or to turne away such consideration from it depend on the will yet not quoad specificationem as to assent or dissent for these opposite and contrary kinds of the vnderstandings actions are from the contrary and different appearing of things vnto vs. Fourthly the sole command of the will cannot make a man to beleeue that which being demanded why hee beleeueth he giueth reasons and alledgeth inducements but so it is that in matters of our Christian faith we alledge sundry reasons mouing vs to beleeue as Christians doe as appeareth by the course of all Diuines who lay downe eight principall reasons moouing men to beleeue the Gospell namely the light of propheticall prediction the harmony and agreement of the Scriptures the diligence of them that receiued them carefully seeking to discerne betweene truth and errour the authority grauitie of the writers the reasonablenesse of the things written the vnreasonablenes of all contrary errours the stability of the Church and the miracles that haue beene done for the confirmation of the faith it professeth Fiftly if there be two whereof one beleeueth precisely because he will and another onely because hee will not beleeue refuseth to beleeue the same thing the acte of neither of these is more reasonable then the other being like vnto the will of a Tyrant that is not guided at all by reason but makes his owne liking the rule of his actions Now who is so impious to say The Christians that beleeue the Gospell haue no more reason to leade them so to doe then the Infidels that refuse to beleeue With Picus in the confutation of this senselesse conceipt wee may joyne Cardinall Cameracensis who farther sheweth that as a man cannot perswade himselfe of a thing meerely because hee will without any reason at all so hauing reason hee cannot perswade himselfe more strongly and assuredly of it then the reason hee hath will afforde for if hee doe it is so farre an vnreasonable acte like that of a Tyrant before mentioned Durandus likewise is of the same opinion Assentiri nullus potest nisi ei quod apparet verum igitur oportâ—…t quèd illud quòd creditur appareat rationi verum vel in se vel ratione mâ—…dij per quod assentitur si non in se sed tantùm ratione medij illud medium apparebit verum vel in se vel per aliud medium si non est processus in infinitum oportet quòd deueniatur ad primum quod apparet rationi esse verum in se secundum se That is No man can yeeld assent to any thing but that which appeareth to him to be true therefore whatsoeuer a man beleeueth must seeme and appeare vnto him to bee
of Canonicall bookes a tradition must necessarily receiue it from a certaine and constant report of the ancient But hereof no more in this place because the exact handling of it pertaineth to another place to wit touching the Scriptures CHAP. 13 Of the Churches authority to iudge of the differences that arise touching matters of faith THus hauing spoken of the Churches assured possession of diuine truth and her office of teaching testifying and proposing the same the next thing that followeth is her authority to judge of the differences that may arise touching matters of the faith taught by her or any part thereof and more specially touching the interpretation of the Scriptures and word of God Iudgement is an acte of reason discerning whether a thing be or not and whether it be that it seemeth to be and is thought or said to be This judgment is of two sortes The first of definitiue and authenticall power The second of Recognition The judgement of authenticall power defining what is to bee thought of each thing and prescribing to mens consciences so to thinke is proper to God being originally found in the father who by his sonne as by the immediate and prime messenger and Angell of his secret Counsell and by the holy Ghost as the spirit of illumination maketh knowne vnto men what they must thinke and perswadeth them so to thinke So that the supreame judgement wherein the conscience of men doeth rest in the things of GOD is proper to GOD who onely by his spirit teacheth the conscience and giueth vnto it assurance of truth Neither is God the supreme Iudge onely inrespect of the godly who stay not till they resolue their perswasions into the certainty of his diuine testimony and vndoubted authority but also in respect of the wicked who in their erronious conceipts are judged by him and of whose sinister and vile courses he sitteth in judgement while he confoundeth their tongues diuideth them one from another maketh them crosse themselues and bringeth all they doe to nothing This judgement all are forced to stand vnto and this is that that maketh a finall end of all controversies according to that of Gamaliel If this thing be of God it will prosper and prevaile and wee inresisting it shall be found fighters against God if not it will come to naught Thus then the judgement of God the father as supreme the judgement of the sonne as the eternall word of God of the spirit as the fountaine of all illumination making vs discerne what is true is that in which wee finally rest The judgement or determination of the word of God is that wherein wee rest as the rule of our faith and the light of Diuine vnderstanding as that whereby we iudge of all things The judgement of Recognition is of three sorts For there is a judgement of discretion common to all Christian men a judgement of direction proper to the guides of the Church and a judgement of jurisdiction proper to them that are in cheife places of authority The first of these is nothing else but an acte of vnderstanding discerning whether things be or not and whether also they bee that which they seeme to bee The second endeuoureth to make others discerne likewise and the third by authority suppresseth all those that shall thinke and pronounce otherwise then they judge that haue the judgement of Iurisdiction Touching the judgement of Recognition wee acknowledge the judgement of the vniuersall Church comprehending the faithfull that are and haue beene to be infallible In the Church that comprehendeth onely the beleeuers that liue at one time in the world there is alwayes found a right judgement of discretion and right pronouncing of each thing necessary all neuer falling into damnable errour nor into any error pertinaciously but a right judgement of men by their power of jurisdiction mantayning the truth and suppressing errour is not alwayes found So that sometimes almost all may conspire agaâ—…nst the truth or consent to betray the sincerity of the Christian profession as they did in the Councells of Ariminium Seleucia in which case as Occam aptly obserueth out of Hierome men haue nothing left vnto them but with sorrowfull hearts to referre all vnto God If sayth Hierome iniquity prevaile in the Church which is the house of God if iustice be oppressed if the madnes of them that should teach guide others proceed so farre as to pervert all the straight wayes of God to receiue rewards to doe wrong to treade downe the poore in the gates and to refuse to heare their complaynts let good men in such times hold their peace let them not giue that which is holy vnto dogges let them not cast pearles before swine least they turne againe and trample them vnder â—…eete let them imitate Ieremie the Prophet who speaketh of himselfe in this sort I sate alone because I was full of bitternesse Euen so sayth Occam when heresies prevaile in the Christian world when truth is trampled vnder feete in the streetes and Prelates Princes being enemies to it endevour with all their power to destroy it when they shall condemne the doctrine of the Fathers molest disquiet and murder the true professours let good men in such times hold their peace keepe silence and be still let them not giue holy things to dogges nor cast pearles before swine least they turne and tread them vnder feete least they wrest and abuse the Scriptures to their owne perdition and the scandall of others but let them with the Prophet sit alone and complaine that their soules are full of bitter heavinesse CHAP. 14. Of the rule of the Churches judgment THus hauing set downe the diuerse kinds of iudgment which must determine and end all controuersies in matter of faith and religion it remaineth to shewe what is the rule of that iudgment whereby the Church discerneth betweene truth and falsehood the faith and heresie and to whom it properly pertaineth to interpret those things which touching this rule are doubtfull As the measure of each thing is that by vertue whereof wee know what it is and the quantity of it so the rule is that by application whereof wee know whether it be that which it should be and be so as it should be The rule of action is that whereby we know whether it be right and performed as it should be or not The rule of doctrine is that whereby wee know whether it be true or false The rule of our faith in generall whereby we know it to be true is the infinite excellencie of God who in eminent sort possesseth all those perfections which in the creatures are diuided and found in an inferiour sort in the full perfect vnion with whom and inioying of whom consisteth all happinesse For by this rule we know that the doctrine of faith which only professeth to bring vs backe to God to possesse and enioy him not as he is participated of vs but as he
sunder These being the things required in a foundation simply and absolutely in respect of all times persons and things Christ onely is that foundation vpon which the spirituall building of the Church is raised because he onely is that beginning whence all spirituall good originally floweth and commeth vpon whom all the perswasion of the truth of things revealed staieth it selfe as being the Angell of the great Couenant and that eternall Word that was with God in the beginning vpon whom all our hope confidence and expectation of any good groundeth it selfe all the promises of God being in him yea and Amen And in this sense the Apostle Saint Paul saith Other Foundation canne no man lay then that which is layd which is Iesus Christ. And S. Augustine and other of the Fathers vnderstand by that rocke vpon which our Sauiour promised Peter to build his Church the rocke that Peter confessed which rocke was Christ vpon which foundation euen Peter himselfe was builded for that other Foundation can no man lay then that which is laid which is Iesus Christ. But in respect of some particular times persons and things and in some particular and speciall considerations there are other things that may rightly bee named foundations also in respect of the spirituall building of the Church So in respect of the frame fabrique of vertue and weldoing raised in this building the first vertue namely Faith vpon which all other vertues doe stay themselues and from which they take the first direction that any vertue can giue is rightly named a foundation In respect of the forme of Christian doctrine the first principles of heauenly knowledge are rightly named a foundation Not laying againe saith the Apostle the foundation of faith and of repentance from dead workes of the doctrine of Baptismes of the imposition of hands of the resurrection of the dead and ofeternall iudgement let vs be led forward vnto perfection These first principles of heauenly knowledge are named a foundation because they are the first things that are knowen before which nothing can be knowen and because vpon the knowledge of these things all other parts of heavenly knowledge doe depend In respect of the confession of the true faith concerning Christ the first cleare expresse and perfect forme of confession that euer was made concerning the same may rightly be named a foundation and in this sense Peters faith and confession is by diuerse of the Fathers named the Churches foundation But they vnderstand not by the faith and confession of Peter either the vertue and quality of faith abiding in his heart and mind or the outward act of confessing but the forme of confession made by him when he said Thou art the Christ the Sonne of the liuing God vpon which forme as being the rule of all right beleeuing the Church of God is builded In respect of the supernaturall knowledge of God in Christ the first immediate reuelation made to the Apostles from whom all other were to learne and by whose Ministerie accompanied with all things that might winne credit they were to be gained vnto God may very rightly and justly be named a foundation vpon which the faith of all after-commers is to stay it selfe and from which in all doubts they must seeke resolution And in this sort Bellarmine saith truely that the Apostles may be named Foundations of the Church according to that description in the Reuelation of Saint Iohn of the wall of the citie of God that had 12. foundation-stones vpon which it was raised and in them written the names of the Lambes twelue Apostles and that of S. Paul that wee are builded vpon the foundation of the Apostles and Prophets Christ Iesus being the Head corner-stone And this in three respects First because the Apostles were the first that founded Churches and conuerted vnbeleeuers to the faith Secondly because their doctrine which they receiued immediatly from God by most vndoubted revelation without mixture of errour or danger of being deceiued is the rule of the faith of all aftercommers and that sure immoueable and rockie foundation vpon which the perswasion of all succeeding generations and posterities may and doth most securely stay and ground it selfe Thirdly because they were Heads Guides and Pastors of the whole vniuersall Church hauing not onely supreme but prime and originall gouernment of the same out of whose most large and ample commission all Ecclesiasticall power and authoritie of after-commers was in an inferiour degree and sort to bee deriued and taken In all these respects all the Apostles were that strong rocke and those strong rockie foundation-stones on which the Church is builded though in a peculiar sense Christ alone bee the Rocke and in all these respects as S. Hierome saith Super omnes ex aequo Ecclesiae fortitudo solidatur that is the strength and firmenesse of the Church doth equally indifferently stay it selfe vpon them all and consequently no more vpon Peter then any of the rest Hitherto we finde nothing peculiar to Peter and not common to all the Apostles so that all the allegations of our Adversaries touching the feeding of the Sheep of Christ committed to Peter the power of the keyes of binding and loosing of remitting and retaining sinnes and the promise that on him as on a rockie foundation-stone elect and precious Christ would build his Church are to no purpose seeing they are forced to confesse that all these things were likewise either by direct words or by intendment bestowed on all the rest Wherefore let vs see how notwithstanding this their confession they can make good that there was a primacie of power in Peter and how they goe about to confirme the same CHAP. 23. Of the primacie of power imagined by our Adversaries to haue beene in Peter and their defence of the same FOr the avoyding of the cleare evidence of the truth of all that which hath beene said touching the equalitie of the Apostles of Christ amongst thēselues which our Adversaries cannot but see acknowledge they haue two shifts The first that the Apostles were equall towards the people but not amongst themselues The second that they were equall in the Apostolique power but that Peter had that amplitude of power which the rest had as Apostles by speciall fauour and onely in for their own persons as an ordinary Pastour and in such sort that he might leaue the same to his Successors These their silly shifts evasions we will examine that so the truth of that which hath bin said be more fully cleared that all men may see perceiue that nothing can be substātially objected against it nor no evasiō foūd to avoid it Touching the first thing that they say it is an Axiome as I thinke that may not bee doubted of that whatsoeuer things are equall in respect of a third thing are in the same sort fo farre for equall amongst themselues So
left certaine direction for farre lesser things then these mens gouernment is supposed to be That the gouernment of these supposed Lay-elders is not bounded in the Scripture or Fathers it is most euident neither can any man liuing shew vs any such bounding of the same in either of them The gouernment of the Church is in respect of two sorts of men the Cleargie and the Laytie Touching the former they are to be tryed and approued for their life and learning they are to be ordained with solemne imposition of hands and if they deserue it they are to be suspended from the execution of their office or vtterly depriued and degraded Shall Lay-elders haue as much to doe in all these actions as they to whom the Ministerie of the Word and Sacraments is committed are they competent Iudges of mens learning and aptnesse to teach that neither are Teachers nor learned Can they giue the sacred power of holy ministery to others that haue it not themselues Or is it not a certaine Axiome on the contrary side that the lesser is blessed of the greater Surely they that in England sought to bring in the gouernment of the Church by Lay-elders were of opinion that they ought to haue interest in all these things as well as the Pastours of the Church And indeede admit them to the gouernment of the Church by force of certain doubtfull words of Scripture mentioning gouernment without any distinction or limitation and there is no reason to straighten them but that they should haue their sway in all parts of it But they of Geneva France and other parts exclude these Elders from intermedling in ordination and leaue the power to trye examine approue and ordaine to the Pastours onely Likewise as I thinke they referre the deciding of doubts in matters of Faith and Religion to the Pastours onely and not to the suffrages of Lay-men by multitude of voyces ouer-ruling them Touching the other sort of them of whom the Church consisteth which are Lay-men who are to bee admonished corrected put from the Sacraments yea from the communion of the Church for impiety disobedience and wickednesse and vpon repentance and submission to bee receiued againe doth not the ordering of these men in this sort come within the compasse of the power of the Keyes and of binding and loosing Did Christ leaue these to his Apostles as speciall fauours and are they now transferred from their Successours the Bishops and Pastours of the Church to Lay-men that haue neither part nor fellowship in the worke of the Ministerie Hath GOD committed the dispensation of his Sacraments to the Pastours of the Church Is it on the perill of their soules that they duely giue them or with-holde them as cause shall require And shall there bee in others that are not trusted with them as great a power to direct the vse of this Ministeriall authoritie as in them nay greater the other being more in number and their voyces more to carry any thing that shall bee brought into deliberation Besides all this which hath beene saide there are many more doubts touching the authoritie of these men wherein I feare there wil be none found amongst the friends and fauourers of these Lay-elders that will be able to giue vs any satisfaction For first I would gladly know whether these ruling Elders must bee in euery Congregation with power of ordination and deprivation suspension excommunication and absolution or whether this power bee onely in the Ministers and Elders of diuerse Churches concurring Surely in Geneva there are Elders in the Congregations that are abroad in agro that is in the Country but these haue no power of excommunication much lesse of ordination or deprivation They may onely complaine to the Consistorie of the Cittie Nay they that are in the Congregations within the Cittie haue no separate power with their owne Ministers but a joynt proceeding with the rest of the Ministers and Elders of the other Churches and Congregations all which concurring make but one Consistorie Secondly let them tell vs whether these offices be perpetuall as the offices of Bishops and Pastours or annuall and but for a certaine time But to leaue them in these vncertainties the fourth reason that moueth vs to reject the conceipt of these Lay-elders is because the founders of this new gouernment fetch the patterne of it from the Sanedrim of the Iewes the platforme whereof they suppose Christ meant to bring into his Church when hee said Tell the Church Whereas it is most cleare that that Court was as a ciuill court and had power to banish to imprison yea and to take away life till by the Romanes the Iewes were restrained which made them say in the case of Christ that it was not lawfull for them to put any man to death Our fift and last reason is for that all Fathers and Councels mentioning elders or Presbyters place them betweene Bishops and Deacons and make them to bee Cleargy-men and that in the Acts where the Apostles are said to haue constituted Elders in euery Church Pastours and Ministers are meant and not Lay-men is strongly confirmed by that in the twentieth of Acts where the Elders of the Church of Ephesus conuented before Paul are commanded to feede the flock of Christ ouer which they were appointed ouerseers whence it followeth ineuitably that they were pastours The places of Scripture brought to proue this kinde of gouernment by Lay-elders are specially three The first is that to Timothie Let the Elders that rule well bee esteemed worthy of double honour especially they that labour in the word and doctrine The second is that in the Epistle to the Romanes He that ruleth let him doe it with diligence The third is that to the Corinthians where Gouernours or Gouernments are mentioned The two later allegations are too too weake to proue the thing in question For will any man that knoweth what it is to reason reason à genere ad speciem affirmatiuè that is from the generall to the particular and speciall affirmatiuely Or will euer any man of common sense bee perswaded that this consequence is good There were gouernours in the Primitiue Church mentioned by the Apostles and required by them to rule with diligence therefore they were Lay-gouernours Surely I thinke not Wherefore let vs see if the first place alledged by them yeelde any better proofe Touching this place some interprete it in this sort The Guides of the Church are worthy of double honour both in respect of gouerning and teaching but specially for their paines in teaching so noting two parts or duties of Presbyteriall offices not two sorts of Presbyters Some in this sort Amongst the Elders and Guides of Gods Church and people some laboured principally in gouerning and ministring the Sacraments some in preaching and teaching So Paul sheweth that hee preached and laboured more then all the Apostles but baptized few or none leauing that to bee performed by others
things the Schoole-men note that there is a two-folde power found in the Ministers of the Church of GOD the one of Order the other of Iurisdiction The power of Order is that whereby they are sanctified and enabled to the performance of such sacred acts as other men neither may nor can doe as is the preaching of the Word and ministration of the holy Sacraments This power is to bee exercised orderly and the acts of it to bee performed in such sort that one disturbe not another Whereupon the Apostles the first Ministers of CHRIST IESVS though equall in the power of Order and Iurisdiction yet for the better and more orderly dispatch of the great worke of converting the world which they had in hand and that they might not hinder one another divided amongst themselues the parts and Provinces of the World but when for the assisting of them while they liued and succeeding them dying they were to passe ouer part of their power to other they so gaue authoritie to such as they made choyce of for this worke to preach baptize and doe other acts of sacred Ministery which are to bee performed by vertue of the power of order that before they invested them with this power they divided the parts of the world converted to Christianity into seuerall Churches and when they ordained them assigned each of them to that particular Church wherein he should preach and minister Sacraments So that these successours of the Apostles had not an illimited commission but were confined within certaine bounds that they were not to preach nor minister Sacraments but onely within the limits and compasse of those places which were assigned vnto them vnlesse it were with the consent desire and liking of other willing to draw them at sometimes for speciall causes to performe such sacred acts within the limites and bounds of their charge This assigning of men hauing the power of order the persons to whom they were to minister holy things and of whom they were to take the care and the subjecting of such persons vnto thē gaue them the power of jurisdiction which they had not before And thus was the vse of the power of order which is not included within any certain boūds limited in those the Apostles ordained their power of Iurisdictiō included within certain bounds so that the one of these kinds of power they haue not at all without the extēt of their own limits nor the lawful vse of the other Hence is that resolutiō of the Diuines that if a Bishop adventure to do any act of Iurisdictiō out of his own Diocese as to excōmunicate absolue or the like all such acts are vtterly voide of no force but if hee shall doe any act of the power of order in another mans charge as preach or minister Sacraments though he cannot be excused as not offending if he doe these things without his consent yet are the Sacraments thus ministred truly Sacraments and of force When the Apostles first founded Churches and assigned to such as they ordained to the worke of the ministery the seuerall parts of the flocke of Christ and people of GOD of which they appointed them to take care and charge they so sorted divided out particular Churches that a Cittie and the places neere adioyning made but one Church Wherevpon wee shall finde in the holy Scriptures that to ordaine Presbyters 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is in euery Church and in euery Citty are all one Now because Churches of so large extent required many Ministers of the Word and Sacraments and yet of one Church there must be but one Pastour the Apostles in setling the state of these Churches did so constitute in them many Presbyters with power to teach instruct and direct the people of God that yet they appointed one onely to be chiefe Pastour of the place ordaining that the rest should be but his assistants not presuming to doe any thing without him so that though they were all equall in the power of order yet were the rest inferior vnto him in the government of that Church whereof hee was Pastour and they but his assistants onely As another of my ranke cannot haue that Iurisdiction within my Church as I haue but if hee will haue any thing to doe there he must be inferiour in degree vnto me So wee reade in the Reuelation of Saint Iohn of the Angell of the Church of Ephesus to whom the Spirit of God directeth letters from heauen as to the Pastour of that Church It is not to be doubted but that there were many Presbyters that is Ministers of the Word and Sacraments in so large a Church as that of Ephesus was nay wee reade expressely in the Acts that there were many in that Church that fed the flocke of Christ and consequently were admitted into some part of pastorall office employment yet was there one amongst the rest to whom onely the Lord did write from heauen to whom an eminent power was giuen who was trusted with the government of that Church and people in more speciall sort then any of the rest and therefore challenged by name by Almighty God for the thinges there found to bee amisse the rest being passed ouer in silence The like wee reade of the rest of the seven Churches of Asia compared to seuen golden candlestickes in the midst whereof the Sonne of God did walke hauing in his hand seuen starres interpreted to haue beene the seuen Angels of those seuen Churches Neither was this orderly superiority of one amongst the Presbyters of the Church found onely in the seuen Churches of Asia but in other Churches also For Saint Hierome testifieth that in the Church of Alexandria from the time of Marke the Evangelist there was euer one whom the Presbyters of that Church chose out of themselues to be ouer the rest Neither was this proper to the Church of Alexandria but wee can shew the successions of Bishops in all the famous Churches of the world euen from the Apostles times and therefore all admitte and allow a kinde of preëminence of one aboue the rest in each Church Heresies haue sprung saith Cyprian and schismes risen from no other fountaine then this that Gods Priest is not obeyed nor one Priest in the Church acknowledged for the time to bee Iudge in Christs steed If one saith Hierome in each Church be not aboue and before the rest of the Presbyters there will be as many Schismes as Priests and the best learned in our age that affect presbyteriall government ingenuously confesse it to be an essentiall perpetuall part of Gods ordinance for each presbytery to haue a chiefe amongst them the necessity whereof wee may learne from all Societies both of men indued with reason and of other thinges also to which God hath denied the light of vnderstanding The dumbe beasts saith Hierome and wilde Heards haue their
leaders which they follow the Bees haue their King the Cranes fly after one in order like an Alphabet of letters there is but one Emperour one Iudge of a Prouince Rome newly built could not endure two brethren to bee Kings together and therefore was dedicated in parricide Esau Iacob were at warre in the wombe of Rebeccah euery Church hath her owne Bishop her owne Arch-presbyter her owne chiefe Deacon and all Ecclesiasticall order consisteth herein that some doe rule and direct the rest In a shippe there is but one that directeth the helme In a house or family there is but one master And to conclude in an armie if it be neuer so great yet the direction of one Generall is expected Thus then all confesse that there alwayes hath beene and must be in each Church a preëminence of one aboue the rest of the Presbyters of the same but some thinke this preëminence should be onely a priority of order in sitting before in propounding things to be thought of and in moderating the whole action of deliberation and that all things should be swayed by voyces the President or Bishop hauing no voyce negatiue or affirmatiue but as the maior part shall direct him Likewise this presidencie they thinke should bee but annuall or to end with the action about which they meete whether it be to determine a doubt to ordaine a Minister or to doe any other such like thing This new conceipt wee cannot approue of because wee finde no patterne of any such Bishop or President in all antiquity But the Fathers describe vnto vs such a Bishop as hath eminent and peerelesse power without whose consent the Presbyters canne doe nothing Hence haue heresies sprung and schismes arisen sayth Cyprian because one Priest in the Church is not acknowledged for the time to bee Iudge in Christs steed to whom if all the brethren would be subiect according to the diuine directions no man would after the diuine iudgements after the suffrages of the people after the consent of other Bishops make himselfe Iudge not of the Bishop but of God Let the Presbyter saith Ignatius doe nothing without the Bishop The Bishop saith Hierome must haue an eminent and peerelesse power or else there will be as many schismes in the Church as there are Priests And Tertullian sheweth that without the Bishops leaue and consent no Presbyter may baptize minister any Sacrament or doe any ministeriall act So that it is most cleare and euident that the Bishop in each Church is aboue and before the rest of the Presbyters of the same not in order onely but in degree also and power of Iurisdiction Yet on the other side we make not the power of Bishops to be Princely as Bellarmine doth but Fatherly so that as the Presbyters may doe nothing without the Bishop so he may doe nothing in matters of greatest moment and consequence without their presence and aduice Wherevpon the Councell of Carthage voideth all sentences of Bishops which the presence of their Clergie confirmeth not and euen vnto this day they haue no power to alienate lands and to doe some such like things without the concurrence and consent of the Presbyters of the Cathedrall and great Church It is therefore most false that Bellarmine hath that Presbyters haue no power of Iurisdiction and the proofe he bringeth of this his assertion most weake when he alledgeth that all Councels both generall and prouinciall wherein Iurisdiction is most properly exercised were celebrated and holden by Bishops as if Presbyters had had nothing to doe therein For it is most cleare and euident that in all prouinciall Synodes Presbyters did sit giue voyce and subscribe as well as Bishops And howsoeuer in generall councels none did giue voyce but Bishops alone yet those Bishops that were present bringing the resolution and consent of the prouinciall Synodes of those Churches from whence they came in which Synodes Presbyters had their voyces they had a kinde of consent to the decrees of generall Councells also and nothing was passed in them without their concurrence Thus were things moderated in the primitiue ages of the Church and though Bishops had power ouer Presbyters yet was it so limited that there was nothing bitter or grieuous in it nothing but that which was full of sweetnesse and content For if any difference grew betweene the Bishop and his Presbyters the Presbyters might not iudge their Bishop whom they were to acknowledge to be a Iudge in Christs stead but an appeale lay vnto a prouinciall Synode to which not onely the Bishops of the prouinces were to come but a certaine number of Presbyters also out of each Church to sit as Iudges of such differences Neither might the Bishop of himselfe alone depriue degrade or put from their office and dignity the Presbyters and Deacons of his Church but if there were any matter concerning a Presbyter he was to joyne vnto him fiue other Bishops of the prouince and if any matter concerning a Deacon two other Bishops before he might proceede to giue sentence against Presbyter or Deacon The causes of other inferiour Cleargie-men the Bishop might heare and determine himselfe alone without the concurrence and presence of other Bishops but not without the concurrence of his owne Cleargie without whose presence no sentence of the Bishop was of force but judged and pronounced voide by the canon Touching the preheminence of Bishops aboue Presbyters there is some difference among the Schoole-Diuines For the best learned amongst them are of opinion that Bishops are not greater then Presbyters in the power of consecration or order but only in the exercise of it and in the power of Iurisdiction seeing Presbyters may preach and minister the greatest of all Sacraments by vertue of their consecration and order as well as Bishops Touching the power of consecration or order saith Durandus it is much doubted of among Diuines whether any be greater therein then an ordinarie Presbyter For Hierome seemeth to haue beene of opinion that the highest power of consecration or order is the power of a Priest or elder so that euery Priest in respect of his priestly power may minister all Sacraments confirme the baptized giue all orders all blessings and consecrations but that for the avoiding of the perill of schisme it was ordained that one should be chosen who should bee named a Bishop to whom the rest should obey and to whom it was reserued to giue orders and to doe some such other things as none but Bishops doe And afterwards hee saith that Hierome is clearely of this opinion not making the distinction of Bishops from Presbyters a meere humane invention or a thing not necessary as Aerius did but thinking that amongst them who are equall in the power of order and equally enabled to doe any sacred act the Apostles for the avoyding of schisme and confusion and the preseruation of vnity peace and order ordained that in each Church
generall state of the Church or of the principall most eminent highest parts members of the same none of which things might bee proceeded in without the Bishop of Rome and his Colleagues but otherwise he was not to intermeddle with inferiour persons and causes within the Iurisdiction of other Patriarches neither immediatly nor vpon appeale and complaint The 7 t◠Roman Bishop brought to testifie for the absolute supreme power of Popes is Gelasius out of whom two things are alledged The first is that he saith the See of Peter hath power to loose that which the Bishops of other Churches haue bound The second that it hath power to judge of euery Church that no Church may judge of the judgment of it For answer to this testimony of Gelasius first we say that the Church of Rome may not meddle with reviewing re-examining or reversing the acts of other Churches proceeding against Lay-men or inferiour Cleargy-men Secondly that in the case of a Bishop complaining of wrong by the authority of the Councell of Sardica she might interpose her selfe not so as to bring the matter to Rome there to be heard but so farre forth onely as to commaund and appoint a review to be taken by the Bishops of the next bordering Province or at the most to send some Cōmissioners to sit with such second Iudges Thirdly that in cases which concerned the principall Patriarches whether they were differences between them their Bishops or between themselues the chiefe See as the principall part of the whole Church might interpose it self Neither was this proper to the See of Rome for other Patriarchs likewise of the higher thrones might interpose thēselues in matters concerning the Patriarchs of inferiour thrones whence it is that Basil writing to Athanasius Bishop of the second See telleth him that the ordering of the Church of Antioch which was the 3d See did pertain to him that he was to see to the setling of things there though the quieting of the whole East required the helpe of the Occidentall Bishops Cyril in the case of Nestorius not yet fully established in the right of a Patriarch intermedled proceeded so far as to reject him his adherents frō the cōmunion of the churches of Egypt Lybia Pentapolis But the B. of the inferior thrones might not judge the superior therfore Iohn of Antioch of the 3d See is reprehended reproued for judging Cyril Bishop of the 2d See Dioscorus Bishop of the 2d See is condemned in the councel of Chalcedon as for other things so for this amōg other that he presumed to judge the first See So that this is it which Gelasius saith that the See of Rome that is the Bishop of Rome and the Bishops of the West may iudge and examine the differences betweene Patriarches or between Patriarches and their Bishops but neither so peremptorily nor finally but that such iudgement may be reuiewed and reexamined in a generall Councell and that no other particular Church or See may iudge the Church of Rome seeing euery other See is inferiour to it no way denying but that a generall Councell may review reēxamine and reuerse the acts iudgements of the Romane See as being greater and of more ample authority Neither truely can there be any better proofe against the pretended supremacie of the Popes then this Epistle the circumstances whereof are these Acatius Bishop of Constantinople for communicating with certaine Eutichian Heretickes was by the See of Rome condemned some disliked his proceeding against him because a Synode was not specially summoned for the purpose especially seeing he was Bishop of the Princely citty Gelasius standeth not vpon the claime of vniuersall power thereby to iustifie his proceeding but aunswereth First that Eutiches being condemned in the Councell of Chalcedon all such were accursed likewise as should either by defence of such errour or communicating with men so erring fall into the fellowship of the same heresie and that therefore there needed no Synode but the See Apostolique might execute that was there decreed Secondly that the Catholicke Bishops in the East being deposed and Heretickes thrust into their places there was no reason why hee should haue consulted with them Thirdly that hee did nothing of himselfe but with a Synode of the Westerne Bishops The next foure Bishops produced by the Cardinall are Iohn the second Anastasius the second Felix the fourth and Pelagius the second out of whom hee alleageth nothing but this that the See of Peter holdeth the chiefty assigned of the Lord in the vniuersall Church and that the church of Rome is the head of all churches Wherevnto wee briefly answere that the See of Peter euer held the chiefty that the church of Rome was euer the head of all churches not in vniuersality of absolute supreme power commanding authority but in order honour in sort before expressed that by the See of Peter and church of Rome is meant the whole West church not precisely the Diocese of Rome as likewise we haue noted before and therefore these allegations to proue the Popes supremacie ouer all Bishops are nothing to the purpose The last of the twelue Bishops brought by Bellarmine is Gregorie the first out of whom foure things are alledged the first is that he required the Africanes to permit appeales to Rome from the Councell of Numidia and blamed the Bishops of Africa for that after letters written vnto them they had degraded Honoratus the Arch-deacon The second that he sent a Pall to the Bishop of Corinth The third that he saith Eusebius Bishop of Constantinople acknowledged the Church of Constantinople to be subiect to the See Apostolique The fourth that the Bishop of Constantinople professeth his subiection to the See Apostolique To these obiections we answer First that it is contrary to the resolution of the ancient Councels of Carthage Mileuis that the Bishop of Rome should admit appeales of inferiour Clergy-men out of Africa that therefore by some positiue constitution or later agreement Gregory might bee permitted to heare the complaints of an Arch-deacon appealing vnto him out of Africa yet from the beginning it was not so though some parts of Africa were euer within the compasse of the Patriarchship of Rome Secondly that he sent the Pall to the Bishop of Corinth because hee was within his Patriarchship all Patriarches being to confirme their Metropolitanes by imposition of hands or by sending the Pall. 3◠That there was no such Eusebius Bishop of Constantinople in Gregories time as is mentioned in the Epistle alledged and that they that were as Iohn Cyriacus stroue and contended with Gregory to be aboue him and to haue the first place in the Church that not without the help furtherance of the Emperour so that it may be doubted whether Gregory wrot this or not it being so contrary to that wee know to
nothing of the dependance of all other Churches on the Church of Rome in their faith and profession nor that all Churches haue kept the faith in that Church that is in cleauing to it as to their Head and Mother as Bellarmine vntruly fansieth But all that is heere saide is nothing else but that vndoubtedly the same faith was giuen and deliuered to all other Churches that was deliuered by blessed Peter and Paul to the Church of Rome the chiefest of all The two next Greeke Fathers that are produced to testifie for the supremacie are Epiphanius and Athanasius who report that Vrsacius and Valens sworne enemies of Athanasius repenting them of their former errours came to Iulius Bishop of Rome to giue an account and to seeke fauour and reconciliation Surely the producing of such testimonies as these are is nothing else but meere trifling and they that bring them know right well that they no way proue the thing questioned the circumstances of this narration touching Vrsacius and Valens are these The cause of Athanasius as himselfe testifieth was first heard in his own Province by an hundred Bishops and he there acquitted Secondly at Rome by more then fiftie Bishops at the desire of Eusebius his Adversary and lastly at Sardica by three hundred Bishops where he was likewise acquitted To the decrees of this Synode Vrsacius and Valens his enemies making shew of repentance subscribed confessing they had played the Sycophants neither rested they there but they wrote to Iulius Bishop of Rome to testifie their repentance and to desire reconciliation and likewise to Athanasius himselfe It were strange if any man could proue the absolute supreme power cōmanding authority of the Bishop of Rome ouer all the world by this testimony wherin nothing is foūd of submissiō to Iulius or of seeking his fauor cōmuniō more then the fauour and communion of Athanasius and all other Catholique Bishops adhering to him The Epistle of Athanasius to Felix Bishop of Rome is a meere counterfeit as that worthy and renowned Iuel hath proued at large by vnanswerable demonstrations and therefore it needeth no answere The allegation of the accusation of Dionysius of Alexandria to Dionysius of Rome joyned with it by Bellarmine is of the very same stampe and yet if it were not proueth nothing against vs. For there is no question but that in matter of faith men may accuse any erring Bishop to the Bishop of Rome and his Westerne Bishops and that they may iudge and condemne such a one though the Pope be not supreme head of the Church The fifth Greeke Father that they alledge is Basil who as they say in an Epistle to Athanasius attributeth to the Bishop of Rome authority to visit the Churches of the East to make decrees and to reuerse the decrees of generall Councels such as that of Ariminum was Truly to say no more the alledging of this testimony sheweth they haue very little conscience that alledge it For these are the circumstances of Basils Epistle whereof let the Reader iudge Basil writing to Athanasius whom hee highly commendeth for that whereas other thinke it well if they take care of their owne particular churches his care was no lesse for the whole church then for that which was specially committed to him aduiseth him that the onely way to settle things put out of order in the Easterne churches by the Arrians were the procuring of the consent of the Westerne Bishops if it were possible to intreat them to interpose themselues for that vndoubtedly the rulers would greatly regard and much reuerence the credit of their multitude and people euery where would follow them without gainesaying But seeing this which was rather to be desired would not in likelihood easily be obtained he wisheth that the Bishop of Rome might be induced to send some of good discretion and moderation who by gentle admonitions might pacifie the mindes of men and might haue all things in readinesse that concerned the Arimine Councell necessary for the dissoluing and shewing the inualidity of the acts of that Councell I doubt not but the Reader vpon the bare view of these circumstances will easily perceiue that this Epistle of Basill maketh very much against their opinion that alledge it For hee preferreth and rather wisheth a Councell then the Popes owne interposing of himselfe if there had beene any hope of a Councell Besides these whom the Pope was to send were not to proceed iudicially and by way of authority but by intreaty and gentle admonitions to pacifie the mindes of men therefore here is nothing of visiting the Churches of the East or voiding the acts of the Councell of Ariminum by way of sentence and formall proceeding as Bellarmine vntruly reporteth but onely a reaching forth of the hand of helpe to the distressed parts of the Church by them that were in better state and a manifesting or declaring of the inualidity of that Councell the vnlawfull proceedings of it and the reasons why it neither was nor euer ought to be admitted The sixth Greeke Father brought to be a witnesse of the Popes supremacie is Gregorie Nazianzen who saith that the Romane Church did euer hold the right profession as it becommeth the citty which is ouer all the world This testimony is no lesse abused then the former as it will easily appeare to him that will take the paines to view the place alledged Nature saith Nazianzene doth not affoord two Suns yet are there two Romes the lights of the whole world the old and the new seate of the Empire The one of these lights appeareth at the rising and the other at the setting of the Sunne and both iointly send forth a most excellent glittering brightnesse The faith of the one was a long time and now is right knitting and ioyning the West to the sauing word of Life as it is fitte the Mistresse and Lady of the world should be In which words it is euident that hee speaketh of the greatnesse of the cittie of Rome in respect of her ciuill and temporall soueraignty and not in respect of the spirituall power of the Church and therefore it is strange that Bellarmine should deny the same For though in the time of Nazianzen the Emperour made his abode for the most part at Constantinople and not at Rome yet he calleth Rome the Mistresse of the world in respect of the ciuill state thereof as appeareth in that he speaketh of two famous cities two lights of the world and nameth the one the old Seate and the other the new Seate of the Empire The seuenth Greeke Father is Chrysostome who if we may beleeue Bellarmine being deposed by Theophilus Bishoppe of Alexandria and put from the Bishopricke of Constantinople in a Councell of Bishops writeth to the Bishop of Rome by his authority to voyde the sentence of Theophilus and to punish him whence it will follow that Chrysostome acknowledged the Romane Bishop to bee supreme Iudge of
his forehead as not to blush when he brought into the light and presented to the view of the world such rotten forgeries that was not ashamed to become a proctor of the filthy stewes Wherefore leauing him his counterfeit and apocryphall stuffe which he sought to vent vnto the world let vs proceede from the appeales of Lay-men inferiour Clergy-men Bishops to speake of the appeales of the chiefe Primates or Patriarches For the clearing of which point we must obserue that it is a rule in Church-government that the lesser and inferior may not iudge the greater superiour And therefore the Bishops of the Prouince may not iudge the Metropolitane but may only declare in what cases he is iudged excommunicated suspended or deposed ipso facto by the sentence of the Canon it selfe and by separating themselues from him withdrawing themselues from being subiect to him put him in a sort from his place and depose him But otherwise if any Bishop haue ought against his Metropolitane he must goe as I shewed before to the Patriarche and his Synode to complaine as to fit and competent Iudges For against the gâ—…eater person wee complaine to the greater Iudge we must flie If a Clerke haue ought against a Bishop the matter may bee iudged in the Synode of the Prouince but if Clerke or Bishoppe haue any complaint against the Metropolitane the Canon of the Councell of Chalcedon prouideth as I noted before that they shall goe to the Primate of the Diocese or to the See of the Princely City of Constantinople From whence in like proportion it is consequent that thòugh the Metropolitanes and Bishoppes subiect to a Patriarche may declare in what cases hee incurreth the sentence of suspension excommunication deposition or degradation pronounced by the very Law and canon it selfe and so withdraw themselues from his obedience yet may they not by way of authority proceede against him but must flie to another Patriarche who in a Synode consisting of his owne Bishops and the Bishoppes of that Patriarch that is complained of may iudge and censure him so that hee bee a Patriarch in order and honour greater then hee against whom they complaine seeing the lesser may not iudge the greater And therefore we finde that in the differences that fell out between Cyrill of Alexandria and Iohn of Antioche Iohn was blamed for that beeing but Bishoppe or Patriarche of the third See hee tooke vpon him to judge Cyril that was Patriarche of the second and hauing but a fewe Bishoppes joyned with him to judge Cyril with many Soe likewise Dioscorus was condemned not onely for fauouring the wicked heresie of Eutiches and his violent proceedings in the second Councell of Ephesus but specially for that being but Bishop of the second See hee tooke vpon him to judge Leo that was Bishop of the first See And this was that which Iulius in his Epistle reported by Athanasius in his second Apologie blamed in the Bishops of the East namely that they proceeded to the judging of Bishops of such Sees as were Athanasius of Alexandria and Paulus of Constantinople without making him first acquainted with the same that so their proceedings might haue taken beginning from him as beeing in order the first among the Patriarches And hence it was that Theophilus Bishop of Alexandria taking himselfe to be Bishop of the second See came to Constantinople and there with other Bishops judged Chrysostome and that Chrysostome as being by vertue of the Canon of the Councell of Constantinople made Bishop of the second See and set in order and honour before the Bishops of Alexandria and Antioche would haue taken vpon him to judge some matters concerning Theophilus and in this sort did sundry Bishops of Rome in Synodes consisting of their owne Bishops and the Bishops subject to the Patriarch of Constantinople judge and depose certaine Bishops of Constantinople Whereupon Nicholas the first in his Epistle to Michael the Emperour sayth that scarce any Bishop of Constantinople can be found that was orderly deposed and driuen from his Bishopricke and whose deposition held as good and lawfull without the consent of the Bishop of Rome and therefore protesteth against the deposition of Ignatius as vnlawfull and vnjust for that he was condemned by his owne Bishops comparing the Synode that deposed him to the second of Ephesus and affirming that it was much worse then that For that there Dioscorus Bishop of Alexandria with his colleagues judged Flauianus though most violently and disorderly But here there was none of the Patriarches nor any one Biof any the meanest cittie that was not his owne Suffragan By that which hath beene sayd it is euident that the great Patriarches of the Christian Church are not to bee judged but by some other of their owne ranke in order before them assisted by inferiour Bishops that the Bishoppe of Rome as first in order among the Patriarches assisted with his owne Bishoppes and the Bishoppes of him that is thought faulty may iudge any of the other Patriarches that such as haue complaints against them may flye to him and the Synodes of Bishoppes subject to him and that the Patriarches themselues in their distresses may flye to him and such Synodes for reliefe and helpe though of himselfe alone he haue no power to do any thing Wherefore let vs proceed from the distinction and explication of the diuerse and different kinds of appeales lawful and vnlawfull permitted and forbidden to examine the allegations of our Aduersaries and to see whether from any allowed practise and approued course of appeales made to Rome in the Primitiue Church they can inferre the Vniversality of Papall power and jurisdiction The first example that Bellarmine bringeth is very impertineÌ„t For whereas he should proue that the Bishops subject to any of the foure Patriarches might lawfully appeale to Rome that there lay appeales from any part of the world thither hee bringeth forth the testimony of Leo telling the Bishoppes of France subject to him as Patriarche of the West that of ancient time appeales were wont to be made out of France to Rome which no way proueth the Bishoppe of Rome to bee vniuersall Bishoppe vnlesse wee will acknowledge euery one of the Patriarches to haue beene soe too it being lawfull to appeale vnto them out of any the remotest Prouinces subiect to theÌ„ From this ill-chosen example hee proceedeth to a worse of Marcion the heretique who being excommunicated by his owne Bishoppe in Pontus fledde to Rome that hee might be absolued of the Romane Church as he telleth vs out of Epiphanius But surely it is most strange that he can be content thus to abuse himselfe and others For he knoweth right wel that Marcion did not appeale to Rome and that if hee had so done the act of a vile and execrable heretique should not bee drawne into example The historie of Marcion as we finde in Epiphanius is this Marcion was the sonne
of a Bishop in Pontus hee embraced virginitie in his first times and seemed to liue a retired solitarie and Monasticall kinde of life but in the end casting the feare of God behinde his backe hee abused a certaine virgin and not onely fell himselfe but drew her also away from the course of vertue and well-doing into the fellowship of sinfull wickednesse Heereupon hee was excommunicated and put out of the Church by his owne Father For his Father was a right good and vertuous man and carefull of the things that concerned his calling and though after he was put out of his Church hee sought very earnestly to be admitted to penitency that so he might bee restored to the Church againe yet his Father exceedingly grieued not onely in respect of his fall but also in respect of the dishonour and shame hee had brought on him would by no meanes be induced to yeelde vnto it Whereupon hee left that Citie whereof his Father was Bishop and went to Rome in the time of the vacancie of that See after the death of Hyginus and after he had stayed there a certaine space and conferred with the Presbyters of that Church hee desired to be admitted to their assemblies But they tolde him they could not so doe without the consent of his honourable Father For say they wee have one faith and one consent and wee may not contrary our good fellow-minister thy Father Which their answere when hee heard hee was filled with fury and madnesse and professed in great rage that hee would rent their Church in peeces and cast a schisme into it that should neuer haue an end This is the narration wee finde in Epiphanius concerning Marcion his going to Rome Wherein there is nothing that any way proueth that it was alwayes lawfull to appeale from all other Bishops to the Bishop of Rome For first it doth not appeare that Marcion went thither to complaine of his Father but being put from the communion by him and not obtaining reconciliation by any intreaty as a runnagate he sought to other places and among other went to Rome hoping there to bee receiued into the Church But the guides of that church knowing the canon which forbiddeth one church to admit them another hath reiected and cast out vtterly refused to permit and suffer him to communicate with them And secondly if hee had gone to Rome by way of appeale it would most strongly ouerthrow all such courses and proue that the Romane Bishop may not reverse and make voide the Acts and proceedings of other Bishops seeing the gouernours of the Romane church at that time freely professed vnto Marcion and told him peremptorily that it was not lawfull for them to admit him to their communion without his Fathers consent by whom hee was excommunicated But the truth is he did not seeke by their authoritie as superiours to reverse his Fathers censure and iudgement or to bee restored to the communion of that church out of which he was eiected which had beene to appeale but being in Rome desired onely to bee admitted to ioyne in prayers and other exercises of Religion with them of that Church which yet as Epiphanius reporteth was denied vnto him The next example is of Fortunatus and Faelix in Africa deposed by Cyprian as Bellarmine would make vs beleeue and appealing to Cornelius Bishop of Rome for releefe But there is no word of trueth in that which this Cardinall writeth For these men did not goe to Rome to complaine that they were vniustly deposed as hee vntruely reporteth but these are the circumstances of the matter as we may reade in the Epistles of Cyprian A company of wicked ones hauing made Fortunatus one of the Presbyters that were suspended by Cyprian and a great number of other Bishops a Bishop in opposition to Cyprian hasten to Rome to Cornelius with false reports of the number of Bishops that concurred in the ordination of Fortunatus that so hee might be induced to admit of him as a true Bishop and hold communion with him Which when Cornelius wisely refused to doe he feared not to threaten grieuous things vnto him With the suddennesse and strangenesse whereof Cornelius much moued maruailed greatly that Cyprian had not before certified him of this schismaticall ordination that so hee might haue beene the better prepared Whereunto Cyprian answered That it was not necessarie to be so carefull about the vaine proceedings of heretiques that he had before giuen him the names of such Bishops as were found to whō and from whom hee might write and receiue letters And that howsoeuer false ill dealing by haste and preuention thinketh to gaine all yet that is but for a little time till trueth overtake it and discouer it euen as the darknesse of the night continueth till the Sunne arise And farther hee sheweth that these schismaticall companions had no reason to make such haste to Rome to publish it and make it knowen that they had set vp a false Bishop against a true For that either it pleased them that they had so done and then they continued and went forward in their wickednesse or they repented of that they had done and then they knew whither to returne and needed not to haue gone to Rome For saith he whereas it is agreed among vs and it is both iust and right that euery man shall be heard there where his fault was committed and all Pastours haue a part of the flocke of Christ assigned to them which euery one is to rule governe as being to giue an account vnto the Lord of his actions it is not fitte nor to be suffered that they ouer whom we are set should runne vp and downe and by craftie and deceitfull rashnesse shake in sunder the coherent concord of brethren but that they should haue their causes handled where they may haue both accusers and witnesses of their crimes Vnlesse a few desperate and wicked companions doe thinke the Bishops of Africa that iudged them haue lesser authority then others A more cleare testimonie or pregnant proofe against appeales to Rome then this cannot be had And yet this is one of the principall authorities the Cardinall bringeth to proue the lawfulnesse of appeales to Rome To the next place alleaged out of Cyprian touching Basilides and Martialis Bishoppes of Spaine I haue answered already and made it most cleare that nothing could be alleaged more preiudiciall to the Popes claimes and more for the aduantage of the trueth of that cause which wee defend So that it seemeth our Aduersaries haue turned their weapons against themselues and whetted their swords and made readie their arrowes to wound themselues to death How the facts of Athanasius Chrysostome Flauianus and Theodoret appealing to the Bishop of Rome with his Western Synodes for reliefe and helpe when they were oppressed and wronged by the Easterne Bishops proue not the illimited and vniuersall power of the Pope I haue at large shewed before to the satisfaction I
Michael the Emperour admit this Councell as if it were of credite and vrge the authority of it to confirme things questioned betweene them and vs though they bee not able to answere the reasons of the other side to the satisfaction of any indifferent man for this is the manner of these Iesuited Papists to reject or admit nothing otherwise then as they thinke it may make for them or against them But to leaue them thus striuing and contending one with another and to come to the saying alleadged by Bellarmine out of this supposed Councell it no way maketh for them but against them and cannot stand with the grounds of their owne Divinity vnlesse they will bee of their opinion who think that the church must endure an hereticall Pope that he must be still taken to be a sheepheard of the sheep of Christ though as a devouring wolfe he make havocke of the flocke of Christ. For is not Infidelity as badde as Heresie And did not Marcellinus as much endanger the Church of Rome and the Religion of Christians in making friendship with Dioclesian by sacrificing to his Idoles as Liberius did by subscribing to the Arrians wicked proceedings against Athanasius and communicating with Heretickes Was it lawfull for the cleargy of Rome vpon the knowledge of Liberius his fact to depose him and might not the same cleargy assisted with three hundred Bishops judge and depose Marcellinus But heere wee may see the partiality of these Papists and that they write without all conscience For Bellarmine being to justifie Felix to be a true Pope who possessed the place while Liberius liued saith that in his entrance hee was a schismaticke Liberius yet liuing and continuing a Catholique Bishop but that after the fall of Liberius for which the Church did lawfully depose him hee was by the same church admitted and taken for a true Bishop Yea though Liberius were not in heart an Hereticke but was presumed to bee an Hereticke onely because hee made peace with the Arrians and so was an Hereticke in his outward courses and acts of which men are to judge and not of the heart And yet touching Marcellinus hee saith hee thinketh hee lost not his Popedome nor might not bee deposed from it for that most execrable externe act of idolatrie infidelitie because it might be thought he did it out of feare Shall the vncertain coniecture of the motiue that made him doe so vile an act excuse him from being proceeded against as an Infidell that doth the workes of an Infidell and shall not the like conjectures stay the proceedings against men as Heretickes vpon their outward concurring with Heretickes in some things Shall feare excuse Marcellinus and shall not the impatience of Liberius no longer able to endure such intollerable vexations as he was subject to excuse him was it not as strongly presumed that impatience moued the one to doe that hee did as feare the other Yes surely much more For if wee may beleeue the acts of this faigned Councell Marcellinus was rather wonne with flattery and faire promises then forced with terrours the Emperour seeking to winne him with kindnesse and not to force him with seuerity and extremity being perswaded by Alexander and Romanus so to doe For that if hee could insinuate himselfe into the affection of the Bishop and assure him vnto himselfe he might thereby easily gaine the whole city Thus hauing examined the first testimony produced by the Romanists to proue that the Bishoppes of the Romane See may not bee judged and found it to bee of no credite let vs see if the next will bee any better The next is taken out of the Romane Councell vnder Pope Sylvester consisting of 284 Bishops wherein we finde these wordes Neque ab Augusto neque à Regibus neque ab omni Clero neque â populo iudicabitur primasedes that is The first See shall not bee judged neither by Augustus neither by Kings neither by the whole Clergie neither by the people Before we come to answere this authority we must obserue that many things are most fondly and fabulously deuised and attributed to this Syluester vnder whom this imagined Romane Councell is supposed to haue beene holden For whereas Eusebius Zozomen and other Historians of credit report that the conuersion of Constantine the great was partly out of those good lessons he had learned of his father and partly by a strange apparition of the signe of the Crosse with an inscription in it in hoc vince that is in this ouercom appearing to him in the aire when preparing himselfe to the warre against Maxentius he carefully bethought himselfe to what God hee should betake him and whose helpe among the Gods hee should specially seeke and partly by a vision of Christ appearing to him whereupon he sent for the Priests of that God that had so manifested himselfe vnto him and learned of them what God he was Those fond men that published the faigned acts of Syluester report that Constantine after many horrible murthers of his nearest Kinsmen and the parricide of his owne sonne Crispus being stricken with leprosie was wished by the South-sayers to whom hee sought for counsell and aduice to take the blood of Innocents and to bathe himselfe in it for the curing of his leprosie but that discouraged from the effusion thereof by the piteous cries of their tender mothers hee be thought himselfe better and sought expiation of his grieuous crimes which all other denying to him for so grieuous offences Hosius of Corduba told him that the Christians could purge him and Peter and Paul appearing to him told him hee must recall Syluester out of his hiding place whither he was gone for feare and seeke baptisme of him and that then he should be purged both from the impurity of his soule body which accordingly was done and he recouered In thankefull requitall whereof he cast downe the Temples of the false Gods builded many Christian Churches and gaue to Syluester the citty of Rome with all Italy and many other prouinces besides making him temporall Lord of all those places Whereas it is most certaine that Constantine was not baptized till a litle before his death as it appeareth by Eusebius by Hierome by the Synodal Epistle of the Coūcel of Ariminum written to Constantius reported by Theodoret Socrates and Zozomen and as certaine that Constantine was a Christian Emperour before Syluester was Bishop For in the daies of Melchiades his predecessour hee tooke notice of the differences among Bishops in respect of Caecilianus and rested not till hee had composed them professing that hee so honoured the Catholique Church that hee could not endure any schisme to be in it Notwithstanding the same authors of lyes go forward and tell vs after the Baptisme of Constantine by Syluester of a Councell holden at Rome by the same Syluester consisting of 284. Bishops brought thither and maintained there at the
earnest and promised confidently to pacifie Ambrose he bade him goe with speede and himselfe followed after in hope of reconciliation trusting vpon the promises of Ruffinus But when Ambrose saw Ruffinus he sayd vnto him O Ruffinus thou doest imitate the impudencie of shamelesse dogges for hauing beene the aduiser and counsellor to so vile murthers thou hast hardned thy forehead and hauing cast away all shame blushest not after the committing of so great and horrible outrages against men made after the image of God And when he was importunate with him and told him the Emperour was comming full of fierie zeale he brake forth into these words I tell thee Ruffinus I will not suffer him to passe the thresholds of Gods house and if of an Emperour he become a tyrant I will ioyfully suffer death Whereupon Ruffinus caused one to runne to the Emperour to desire him to stay within the Court But the Emperour being on the way when the messenger met him resolued to come forward and to endure the reproof of the Bishop So hee came to the sacred railes but entred not into the Temple and comming to the Bishoppe besought him to vnloose him from the bands wherewith hee was bound The Bishop somewhat offended with his comming told him the manner of his comming was tyrant-like and that being mad against God he trampled vnder his feete the lawes of God Not so said the Emperour I presse not hither in despite of order neither doe I vniustly striue to enter into the house of God But I beseech thee to vnloose me to remember the mercifull disposition of our common Lord and not to shut the doore against me that hee would haue opened to all that repent What repentance therefore saith the Bishoppe hast thou shewed after so grieuous an offence what medicines hast thou applied to cure thy wounds It pertaineth to thee sayth the Emperour to prepare the medicines that should heale mee and to cure my wounds and to me to vse that thou prescribest Then sayd Ambrose seeing thou makest thy displeasure iudge and it is not reason that giueth sentence when thou sittest vpon the throne to doe right but thy furious proceedings make a law that when sentence of death and confiscation of goods shall bee passed there may passe thirty dayes before the execution of the same that so if within that space it be found vniust it may be reuersed or otherwise it may proceede This law the Emperour most willingly consented to make and thereupon Ambrose vnloosed him from his bands and he entred into the Temple and prayed vnto God not standing nor kneeling but prostrate vpon the earth and passionately vttering these words of Dauid My soule cleaueth to the pauement Lord quicken me according to thy word Here we see an excellent patterne of a good Bishoppe and a good Emperour and it is hard to say whether Ambrose were more to be commended for his zeale magnanimous resolution and constancie or the Emperour for his willing and submissiue obedience But of deposing Princes here is nothing Ambrose being so farre from any thought of lifting vp his hand against the Emperour that he resolued to subiect himselfe vnto him euen to the suffering of martyrdome if neede should require But saith Bellarmine Ambrose exercised ciuill authority in that hee tooke notice of this murther of the Emperour beeing a criminall cause and forced him to make a ciuill law for the preuenting of furious and bloodie proceedings in iudgment This surely is a weake collection for the Church hath power by vertue of her Ecclesiasticall iurisdiction to take notice of such horrible crimes as murther to punish them with spirituall punishments Neither was the inducing of Theodosius to make a ciuill law for the preuenting of such like euils as he was now censured for before he would reconcile him to the Church an act of ciuill authoritie But such testimonies as this is they that haue no better must be forced to vse That which followeth of Gregories confirming the priviledges graunted to the Abbey of Saint Medardus in such sort that whatsoeuer Kings Iudges or secular persons should go about to violate them should be depriued of their honour proueth not the thing in question For it is evident that the confirmation of these priviledges was passed not by S. Gregory alone but by a whole Councell and more specially by Theodoricus the King and Brunichildis the Queene who might binde their successours and other inferiour secular Rulers vnder paine of deprivation though neither Gregory of himselfe nor yet a councell of Bishops could doe any such thing by their authoritie alone Wherefore let vs proceede to the next example Gregory the second saith Bellarmine excommunicated the Emperour Leo the third who was an enemy to Images he forbade any tribute to be payde him out of Italy and consequently depriued him of part of his Empire Surely if Greg. the second of himself alone had had such power as to forbid all Italy vpon his dislike to pay any more tribute to the Emperour there were some good shew of proofe in this allegation But if wee examine the stories we shall finde the case to haue beene farre otherwise then Bellarmine would beare vs in hand it was For first Gregory did not excommunicate Leo of himselfe but called a Synode to doe it Secondly he did not forbid the paying of tribute out of Italy to the Emperour but the circumstances of the History are these Leo seeking to win the Bishop of Rome and the people of Italy to the casting downe of Images in the West as he had done in the East Gregory the Bishop did not onely refuse to obey him but admonished all other to take heed they did no such thing for feare of any Edict of the Emperour By which exhortation the people of Italy already mis-conceited of the Emperours governement were so animated that they were likely to haue proceeded to the election of a new Emperour and Nauclerus sheweth that the decrees of the Bishop of Rome disswading the people of the West from obeying the Emperour in casting downe of Images were of so great authoritie that the people and souldiers of Ravenna first and then of Venice beganne to make shew of rebellion against the Emperour and his Exarche or Lieutenant and to inforce the Bishop of Rome and the other people of Italy to disclaime the Emperour of Constantinople and to chuse another in Italy And that this rebellion proceeded so farre that euery city putting downe the Magistrates of the Exarch set vp Magistrates of their owne whō they named Dukes but that the Bishop of Rome at that time pacified thē and by his perswasions stayed them from chusing any new Emperour in hope that he would amend So that we see the Bishop of Rome with his Bishops by their authority did nothing but stay the people from obeying the Emperours vnlawfull Decrees as they iudged them but no way went about to depose the
Catholicarum quam plurimum scripturarum solertissimus indagator authoritatem sequatur inter quas fanè illae sunt quas Apostolica sedes habere ab eâ alij meruerunt accipere epistolas So that whereas Saint Augustine saith that in reckoning the Canonicall bookes of Scripture a man must follow the authority of the greater number of Catholique Churches and among them especially such as either had Apostolicall seates as Hierusalem and the like or receiued Epistles from some of the Apostles as did the Churches of Corinth and Galatia Gratian maketh him say that the Epistles which the Apostolicall See receiued or other receiued of it are to be reckoned among Canonicall Scriptures This ouersight of Gratian Picus Mirandula long since obserued and after him Alfonsus a Castro whereby wee may see how easie it was for men in former times to runne into most grosse errors before the reuiuing of learning in these latter times while the blinde did lead the blinde For Gratian was the man out of whom the greatest Diuines of former times tooke all their authorities of Fathers and Councles as appeareth by their marginall quotations And how ignorantly and negligently he mistooke them mis-alleaged thē this one example is proof sufficient But whatsoeuer we think of Gratian we shall find that not only our Diuines but the best learned among our aduersaries also put a greatdifference between the sacred scriptures of the holy Canon and the Decrees of Councels For first they say the Scripture is the word of God reuealed immediately and written in a sort from his owne mouth according to that of S. Peter the holy men of God spake as they were moued by the holie Ghost And that of S. Paul All Scripture is by diuine inspiration which is not so to be vnderstood as if alwaies the holy Writers had had new reuelations and had alwayes written that which before they were ignorant of for it is certaine that the Euangelists Mathew and Iohn wrote those things which they saw and Marke and Luke those things they heard from others as Luke himselfe confesseth in the beginning of his Gospel But the holy writers are therefore said to haue had immediate reuelation and to haue written the words of God himselfe because either some new things and not knowne before were reuealed to them by God or because God immediately inspired and moued the Writers to write those things which they had seene and heard and directed them that they should not any way erre in writing whereas Councels neither haue nor write immediate reuelations or words of God but only declare which is that word of God vttered formerly to the Prophets and Apostles how it is to bee vnderstood and what conclusions may bee deduced from it by discourse of reason Secondly the holy Writers performed that which they did without any further labour or trauell then that in writing and calling to minde what they had seene and heard but in Councels the Bishoppes and Fathers with great paine and trauell seeke out the trueth by discourse conference reading and deepe meditation and therefore the holy Writers are wont to attribute all to God onely and the Prophets were wont often to repeate The Lord sayth Thirdly in the Scriptures not onethe whole sentences but euery word pertaineth to Faith for no word is therein vaine or ill placed But in Councels there are many disputations going before resolution many reasons brought for confirmation of things resolued on many things added for explication and illustration many things vttered obiter and in passage that men are not bound to admitte as true and right nay many things are defined in Councels that men are not bound to stand vnto For it is the manner of Councels sometimes to define a thing as certainely and vndoubtedly true pronouncing them Heretiques that thinke otherwise and subiecting them to curse Anathema and sometimes as probable onely and not certaine as the Councell of Vienna decreed that it is more probable that both grace and vertues accompanying grace are infused into Infants when they are baptized then that they are not and yet is this no matter faith in the Church of Rome Fourthly in the scripture all things as well concerning particular persons as in generality are vndoubtedly true For it is as certaine that Peter and Paul had the spirit of God as that no man can be saued without the illumination and sanctification of the spirit but in the determinations and decrees of Bishoppes assembled in a generall councell it is not so for they may erre in iudging of the persons of men and therefore there is no absolute certainty in the canonization of Saints as both Thomas and Canus do confesse Fiftly in Scriptures there are no precepts touching manners either concerning the whole church or any part of it that are not right equall and just But councels may erre if not in prescribing things euill in stead of good yet in prescribing things not fitting nor expedient if not to the whole church yet to some particular part of it as not knowing the cōdition of things therein Yea some there are that think it not hereticall to beleeue that generall councels may prescribe some lawes to the whole church that are not right profitable and iust as to honour such a one for a Saint who indeed is no Saint to admit such orders of Religious men as are not profitable to receiue the communion onely in one kinde and the like And there are many that confidently pronounce that generall councells may decree such things as may breed inconuenience and may sauour of too great seuerity and austerity which the guides of the church in the execution of the same must bee forced to qualifie and temper So that the onely question is whether a generall councell may certainely define any thing to bee true in matter of faith that is false or command the doing of any act as good and an act of vertue that indeed and in trueth is an act of sinne Touching this point there are that say that all interpretations of holy Scriptures agreed on in generall councels and all resolutions of doubtes concerning things therein contained proceed from the same Spirit from which the holy Scriptures were inspired and that therefore generall councels cannot erre either in the interpretation of Scriptures or resoluing of things doubtfull concerning the faith But these men should know that though the interpretations and resolutions of Bishops in generall councels proceed from the same Sperit from which the Scriptures were inspired yet not in the same sort nor with like assurance of beeing free from mixture of errour For the Fathers assembled in generall councels doe not rely vppon immediate reuelation in all their particular resolutions and determinations as the Writers of the Bookes of holy Scripture did but on their owne meditation search and study the generall assistance of Diuine grace concurring with them That the Fathers
assembled in Generall councels rely not vpon any speciall and immediate revelations may easily be proued by sundry good and effectuall reasons For first whensoeuer we hope to come to know any thing by speciall and immediate revelation from God wee vse not to betake our selues to study and meditation but to prayer onely and other good workes or at least principally to these Whence it is that Daniel when he hoped to obtaine of GOD the interpretation of Nebuchadnezars dreame by speciall and immediate revelation did not exhort his companions and consorts by study to search out the secret he desired to know but by prayer and supplication to seeke it of GOD. And after hee had found out the secret hee sought for hee saide O God of my Fathers I confesse vnto thee and praise thee because thou hast giuen mee wisedome and strength and hast shewed vnto me those things which we desired of thee and hast opened vnto vs the word of the King Whence also it is that Christ promising-his Apostles that hee would reveale vnto them what they should speake when they should bee brought before Kings and Rulers willeth them To take no care how or what to speake for that it should bee revealed vnto them in that houre what they should speake It is not you that speake saith our Sauiour but the spirit of my Father that speaketh in you When as therefore wee hope to learne any thing of GOD by immediate revelation wee must not apply our selues to study and meditation but to prayer But when men meete in Generall councels to determine any doubt or question they principally giue themselues to meditation study and search therefore they hope not to bee taught of GOD by immediate revelation Secondly when wee desire to haue things made knowne vnto vs by immediate revelation from GOD wee goe not to them that are most learned but to them that are most devout and religious whether they bee learned or vnlearned whether of the cleargy or the Laity whether men or women because for the most part GOD revealeth his secrets not to them that are wiser more learned but to them that are better more religious and devout according to that of our Sauiour r I giue thee thankes O Father LORD of Heauen and Earth because thou hast hidde these things from the wise and men of vnderstanding and hast opened them vnto Babes And therefore the good King Iosias when hee desired by revelation to know the will of GOD touching the wordes of the volume that was found in the Temple hee sent Helkiah the High Priest to Huldah the Prophetesse and sought not concerning the wordes of the Law among the Priests whose lippes are to preserue knowledge and at whose mouth men ought to seeke the Law because though the Law bee to bee sought at the mouth of the Priest in all those things which may bee learned by study meditation search yet in those things that are to bee learned by revelation recourse must bee had to them that haue the spirit of prophecie if any such bee or else to them that are most holy and whose prayers are most acceptable vnto God Neither are men for satisfaction in these things rather to goe to the Priestes then to any Lay-man that is vtterly vnlearned But in councels men goe to them that are more learned and of better place in the church though they bee not the best and holyest men Therefore questions touching matters of faith are not determined in councels by immediate revelation If it be said that the Apostles and Elders in that first councell which is mentioned in the Actes relyed on the knowledge they had of the Scriptures and Trueth of GOD and did not wayte for a new immediate revelation and that therefore this kinde of reasoning will bring them within compasse of the same danger of erring that wee subiect their Successors vnto because they relye not vpon immediate revelation but search and study It will bee easily aunswered that though the Apostles and others assembled in that councell depended not vpon immediate revelation but the knowledge they had of the Scriptures and Trueth of GOD and thence inferred what was to be thought of the matter then in question yet were they not in danger of erring as their successours are because they relyed not on such imperfect knowledge as study meditatiō begets but such as divine revelatiō causeth to wit perfect absolute whēce they knew how to deriue the resolution of any doubt or question beeing specially assisted by the Spirit of Trueth Neither lette any man thinke that the Apostles assembled in this Councell were any way doubtfull what to resolue when they heard the matter proposed because there is mention made of great disputation in that meeting For as it may bee thought that questioning and disputing was among the Elders and Brethren and not among the Apostles the meanest of them being able to resolue a farre greater matter without any the least doubt or stay So that it is absurd that Melchior Canus from hence inferreth that the Decrees of this Councell wherein there was so great a dispute are not Canonicall Scripture any other wayes then the wordes of Pilate are because they are recorded by the Euangelists in the holy Scripture But to returne to the matter whence this obiection made vs digresse it is no way necessary to thinke that the Fathers are any otherwise directed by the Spirit of Trueth in Generall Councels then in Patriarchicall Nationall or Prouinciall Seeing Generall Councells consist of such as come with instructions from Prouinciall Nationall and Patriarchicall Synodes must follow the same in making Decrees as hath beene shewed before and consequently that they are not led to the finding out of the trueth in any speciall sort or manner beyond that generall influence that is required to the performance of euery good worke So that as God assisting Christian men in the Church onely in a generall sort to the performance of the workes of vertue there are euer some wel-doers and yet no particular man doth alwayes well and there is no degree or kinde of Morall vertue commanded in the Law but is attained by some one or other at one time or other one excelling in one thing and another in another yet no particular man or company of men hath all degrees and perfections of vertue as Hierome fitly noteth against the Pelagians so in like sort God assisting Christian men in the Church in seeking out the truth only in generall sort as in the performance of the actions of vertue not by immediate reuelation and inspiration as in the Apostles times there are euer some that hold and professe all necessary truth though no one man or company of men doe find the truth euer and in all thinges nor any assurance can be had of any particular men that they should alwayes hold all necessary truthes And therefore we may safely conclude that
French King The Councell of Aruerne by the permission of the King Theodobertus The Fifth of Orleans by Childebert The first of Bracar by Ariamirus or as some will haue it Theodomirus The second of Turon with the conniuence of the King The second of Bracar by Ariamirus The first Cabilon Councell by the mandate of Gunthram as likewise that of Matiscon and Valentia The third of Toledo by Richaredus The Councels of Narbone and Caesar-Augusta by Richaredus King of Sueueland Many other examples might be produced but these suffice to shew what the ancient practise was and what Christian Princes in former times tooke vpon them in this behalfe And that they did lawfully so to intermeddle it appeareth in that S. Gregory writing to Theodoricus exhorteth him by the crowne of life to call Councels and reforme abuses Wherefore let vs proceede to see who called the Generall Councells that haue bin holden in the Christian Church Hauing perused sayth Cusanus the Actes of all the General Councels to the Eighth inclusiuely which Eighth was holden in the time of Basilius the Emperour I find that they were all called by the Emperours Whereupon sayth hee Elias the most holy Presbyter that supplyed the place of the Bishop of Hierusalem sayd openly in the Eighth Generall Councell in the hearing of all that Emperours did euer call Councels and that Basilius was not inferiour to those that went before him in the care of prouiding for the Church by Synodall meetings And Anastasius the Popes Library-keeper in his Glosse vpon the same place saith that the Emperors were wont to call Councells out of the whole world Which thing is so cleare that Hierome writing against Ruffinus and taking exception againsta certaine Councell biddeth him say what Emperour it was that commaunded that Councell to be called and therefore Bellarmine confesseth it and giueth foure reasons why it was so whereof the first is for that there was an Imperiall Law that there should not bee any great Assemblies without the Emperours priuity consent and authority for feare of sedition The second for that all those Cities in which such Councels might bee holden being the Emperours they might not bee holden without his consent The third for that the Councells were holden at the Emperours charges both in respect of carriages and the diet and intertainment of the Bishops during the time of their being in Councell as Eusebius in the life of Constantine doth testifie and Theodoret in his Historie The fourth for that it was fitte the Popes in those times acknowledging the Emperours to bee their Soueraigne Lords should as we reade they did as suppliants beseech them to commaund Councells to be called And surely if wee had neither his confession nor reasons we neede not doubt hereof hauing the testimony of all stories to confirme the same For Ruffinus saith Constantine called the Councell of Bishops at Nice and with him Theodoret agreeth saying expressely that Constantine called the noble Synode of Nice and Eusebius in his booke of the life of Constantine affirming that by his letters most honorably written he drew together the Bishoppes out of all parts marshalling them as a mighty army ofGod to encounter the enemies of the true faith The occasion of calling this Councell was the Heresie of Arrius denying the Sonne ofGod to bee consubstantiall with the Father The next Generall Councell after this was the first at Constantinople called for the suppressing of the Heresie of Macedonius and Eunomius who denied the holy Ghost to be God co-essentiall and co-eternall with the Father and this Councell was called by Theodosius the elder as Theodoret testifieth The third was holden at Ephesus and called by Theodosius the Younger at the suite of Nestorius Bishop of Constantinople fearing the proceedings of Cyrill Bishoppe of Alexandria and Caelestinus Bishop of Rome against him The Fourth Councell was holden at Cahlcedon and called by Martian the Emperour The occasion was this In the time of Flauianus Bishop of Constantinople the Heresie of Eutyches beganne about which a Prouinciall Councell was called at Constantinople whereunto vnfortunate Eutyches being called was found to haue vttered horrible blasphemies for hee affirmed that howsoeuer before the personall vnion there were two distinct natures in Christ yet after the vnion there was but one and besides affirmed that his body was not of the same substance with ours Whereupon hee was put from the Ministery of the Church and degree of Priest-hood But not enduring thus to bee depriued of his place and honour he complaineth to Theodosius the Emperour pretending that Flauianus had fained and deuised matters against him and rested not till hee procured a Synode at Constantinople of the neighbour Bishoppes to re-examine the matters who confirming that which was formerly done another by hīs procurement was called at Ephesus by Theodosius and Dioscorus Bishoppe of Alexandria made President of it In which Councell all thinges were carried in a very disordered violent sorte for Dioscorus permitted not the Bishoppes to speake freely neither would hee suffer the letters of the Bishoppe of Rome who was absent to bee read such Bishoppes as he disliked he violently cast out of the Councell retayned none but such as were fitte to serue his turne Hee deposed Flauianus Bishoppe of Constantinople Eusebius of Dorileum Domnus Bishop of Antioch and Theodoret with sundry other The Legates of the Bishop of Rome offended with these violent proceedings protested against them as vnlawfull and Flauianus who was not only depriued but so beaten that not long after hee died appealed to the Bishoppe of Rome other Bishops of the West for helpe and remedy vpon the hearing of which complaints Leo then Bishop of Rome with many other Bishops of the West went to the Emperour and in most humble and earnest manner vpon their knees besought him to call a Councell in Italy which he would not yeeld vnto but called one at Chalcedon commaunding him and all other Bishops to come vnto it The fift Councell was holden at Constantinople and called by Iustinian the Elder as Euagrius testifieth I haue shewed before what the occasion of calling this councell was and that though Vigilius Bishop of Rome and the Westerne Bishops refused to bee present in it together with the rest or to confirme it when it ended yet it was holden a lawfull councell The sixt Generall councell was holden at Constantinople and was called by Constantine the fourth as appeareth by his letters to the Bishopps of Rome Constantinople and the rest prefixed before it The occasion whereof was the Heresie of the Monothelites who denied the diuersity of wills actions and operations in Christ consequently of natures The seuenth was holden at Nice about the vse of Pictures in the church and called by Constantine the Emperour as appeareth by his Epistle to Adrian Bishop of Rome prefixed before it
in the sixth Generall Councell and Basileius in the eighth and when they pleased to bee absent to send some in their stead as Theodosius the yonger sent e Candidianus to be present for him in the councell of Ephesus and Martianus though present in the first Session yet being for the most part of the time absent appointed certaine secular Iudges to sit in the Councell of Chalcedon The second thing that they assumed to them was to sit in the highest place and so wee reade that in the councell of Nice all the Bishoppes being placed in order the Emperour some few going before him entred into the Councell at whose comming all the Bishops rose vp and did reverence vnto him and hee passed through the midst of them as an heauenly Angell of God hauing on a purple robe and shining vesture be-decked with gold pearles and pretious stones and stayed not till hee came to the highest place where a little seate of Gold was prepared wherein yet hee sate not downe but stood vpright till the Bishoppes had bowed and beckened vnto him to sit downe In like sort we reade of Martian that hee sate in the highest place in the Councell of Chalcedon with the Senatours and Iudges by his side And of Constantine the fourth that he sate in the highest place in the sixth Generall Councell And when they were not present in person the Senatours and secular Iudges deputed by them sate in the middest in the highest roome as wee shall finde they did in the councels of Chalcedon at such times as the Emperour was away The third thing which the Emperours tooke on them either in their owne persons or by such as they deputed besides the defence of the Bishoppes from outward violence was a kinde of direction of things that were to bee done in the councell This direction consisted in seauen things First in providing that nothing should bee done passionately violently and by clamour of multitudes but that the ground of each thing should be sought out Secondly in providing that nothing should bee extorted by feare and terror from them that meete to decree for truth justice without all priuate and sinister respects Thirdly in seeing that nothing should be omitted that the holy Canons require to bee done for the finding out of that which is true and right that so both errour and wrong might bee avoyded Fourthly in not suffering them to passe from one thing to another before that they had in hand were fully ended nor to digresse to things impertinent which might breed confusion and hinder the effecting of that which was intended And in putting an end to each action when they saw as much done as was fitte or otherwise deferring the farther deliberation to some other time Fifthly when they found an indisposition in them to agree to such and so cleare determination of matters in question as might satisfie all to dissolue the Councell and to call another Sixthly in judging pronouncing according to that they saw alleadged with the approbation and assent of the Councell Lastly in subscribing and confirming by their royall assent the thinges resolued and agreed on All these thinges as Cusanus rightly noteth the Emperours tooke on them in Generall Councels and the performance of euery of these we may finde in the Councell of Chalcedon but specially the First and the Fifth For whereas the tenne Bishops of Egypt that were there in the name of the rest refused to subscribe to the Actes of the Councell till they should haue a new Patriarch chosen and ordained not out of any dislike of that was done or as being of another iudgment but because the custome of their country permitted them not to subscribe vnlesse their Patriarch went before them in so doing there was a generall clamour against them of all the Bishops crying out alowde that they were to be excommunicated Anathematized And though they fell prostrate on their faces before the whole Councell professing their refusall to proceede from no priuate conceit desiring to be pittied and not vrged to any formall subscription for that if they should doe any such thing they were sure neuer to bee endured by the Bishoppes of their Country yet could they finde no fauour or relenting till the secular Iudges out of their discretion finding the true ground of this their stay to subscribe to bee such as they alleadged deliuered their opinion that it was a thing reasonable and in pitty to be granted vnto them that they should be foreborne and stay in the Citty till their Archbishop were chosen Which when Paschasinus the Legate of Rome heard hee said if your glorious excellency command that it bee so let them put in sureties not to depart the Citty till their Archbishop bee chosen and the rest of the Bishoppes agreed to him So that the matter which was ready to bee swayed by the whole Councell with clamour and out-cry in a very violent sort was stayed by the wisedome of the secular Iudges the poore distressed suppliants pittied and the hard proceeding of the Bishops against them hindred And in the same Councell we read that the Bishops hauing agreed on a forme of Confession of Faith were desired by the Emperours Deputies the secular Iudges for the satisfaction of all men to adde certaine wordes out of the Epistle of Leo to that forme of Confession which when they all some few of the East and the Legates of Rome excepted with great clamour refused to doe the Iudges tolde them the Emperour should knowe of their clamorous courses And that if they would not agree together to make some good end a Councell should be called in the West and they forced to walke thither Neither did Christian Emperours onely thus intermeddle in Generall Councells as chiefe Lords of the whole world but particular Kings and Princes likewise within their seuerall dominions and Kingdomes did as much For wee reade that Charlemaigne with the aduice counsell of the seruants of GOD and his Nobles gathered together into a Synode all the Bishoppes in his kingdome with their Presbyters that they might aduise him how the law of God and religion well established in the times of former Princes but now much fallen and decayed might be restored and Christian people attaine saluation and not bee misled by false Priests and by the aduise of his Bishoppes and Nobles according to this his good intent and purpose hee ordained Bishoppes in his citties and set ouer them Bonifacius as their Arch-bishop hee decreed that a Synode should be holden once euery yeare that in his presence the Decrees of the Canons and Lawes of the church might be restored and what should be found amisse in Christian religion amended he degraded false Priests Deacons clearkes that were whoremongers and adulterers he prescribed pennance to certaine offenders and subiected them to imprisonment other corporall punishments and corrections This Acte of Charlemaine is
and not these for being sent by men that haue authority though abusing the same they haue a true and lawfull Ministery till they be put from it by superiour authority else were all Ministration of Sacraments and other sacred things voyde performed by such as simoniacally or by sinister meanes get into these holy places The fourth are such as neither are sent of GOD nor of men nor by men but of them-selues of whom our Sauiour Christ saith all that came before me were theeues robbers and of whome almighty GOD pronounceth and sayth by the Prophet Ieremy I sent them not they 〈◊〉 I spake not to them they prophecied This euill is carefully to bee declined and therefore CHRIST would not suffer the diuels to speake that which was true least vnder the pretence of trueth errour might creepe in seeing hee that speaketh of him-selfe cannot but speake lyes These are the foure sortes of them that serue in the worke of the Ministery whereof the last haue no calling at all and all they doe is voide the Third haue a lawfull commission though they obtayned it by sinister meanes and bee vnworthy of it so that they could not bee put into it without the faulte of the ordayners The First had a lawfull but extraordinary calling needefull onely in those first beginnings of Christianity and not longer to continue The second haue that calling which is Ordinary and to continue whereof wee are now to speake In this calling there are three things implied Election Ordination and Assignation to some particular Church whereof men elected and ordained are appointed to take charge In ancient times there was no ordination at large without particular Assignation and sine titulo allowed as it appeareth by the Councell of Chalcedon forbidding any such thing to be done and voyding any such Act if it should bee done and therefore in those times the very electing and ordayning was an assigning of the elected ordayned to the place of Charge they were to take and a giuing of them the power of iurisdiction as wel as of order But this Canon in latter times grew out of vse whence ensued great confusions in the state of the Church as Duarenus rightly noteth yet are we not of opinion that all such ordinations are voyde in the nature of the thing whatsoeuer the Ancients pronounced of them according to the strictnesse of the Canons For seeing Ordination which is the sanctifying of men to the worke of the holy Ministery is a diffeernt thing in nature from the placing of them where they shal do that holy worke and a man once ordained needeth not any new Ordination when he is remoued from one Church to another it is euident that in the nature of the thing Ordination doth not so depend on the title and place of Charge the Ordayned entereth into as that Ordinations at large should bee voyd yet are they not to bee permitted neither are they in our Church For the Ordinations of Ministers in Colledges in our Vniuersities are not within the compasse of those prohibited Ordinations at large and sine titulo and none other by the order of our Church may bee Ordayned vnlesse he be certainly prouided of some definite place of charge imployment And as the Auncient were thus precise in admitting none into the holy Ministery but with assignation of the particular place of his imployment so they tooke as strict order that men once placed should not sodainly be remoued and translated to any other church or charge In the Councell of Sardica Hosius the President of that Councell sayd That same ill custome and pernicious corruption is wholy to be plucked vp by the rootes that it may not be lawfull for a Bishoppe to passe from his citie to any other city For the cause why they doe so is knowne to all seeing none is found to passe from a greater citie to a lesser whence it appeareth that they are inflamed with ardent desires of couetousnesse and that they serue their owne ambitious designes that they may exercise dominion and grow great If therefore it seeme good to you all that such an euill as this is may be more seuerely punished lette him that is such a one bee reiected from all communion euen such as Lay-men inioy To whom all the Bishoppes answered it pleaseth vs well To whom Hosius replyed Though any shall bee found so ill aduised as haply in excuse of himselfe to affirme that hee receiued letters from the people to draw him from his owne city to another yet I thinke seeing it is manifest that some few not sincere in the Faith might be corrupted by reward and procured to desire his translation all such fraudes should altogether bee condemned So that such a one should not bee admitted so much as to the communion which Lay-men enioy no not in the end which thing if it seeme good vnto you all confirme and settle it by your Decree And the Synode answered it pleaseth vs well Leo to the same purpose writeth thus If any Bishoppe despising the meanenesse of his owne citie shall seeke to gette the administration gouernment of some more noted and better respected place and shall by any meanes translate remoue himselfe to a greater People and more large and ample charge let him bee driuen from that other chaire which hee sought and lette him bee depriued also of his owne So that hee bee neither suffered to rule ouer them whom out of a couetous desire hee would haue subiected to himselfe nor ouer them whom g in pride hee contemned and scorned And the like is found in other but as Theodoret sheweth it was ambition and such other like euils that these Holy Fathers sought to stoppe and preuent rather then generally to condemne all Translation of Bishops from one Church and cittie to another For these changes may sometimes bring so great and euident vtility that they are not to be disliked And therefore the same Theodoret sheweth that notwithstanding this Canon Gregory Nazianzen was remoued from his Church and constituted Bishop of Constantinople And Socrates reporteth that Proclus was remoued thither from Cyzicum Wherefore passing by these matters as cleare and resolued of Let vs proceed to see first to whom it pertaineth to Elect Secondly to whom it belongeth to ordaine such as are duly elected and chosen to the worke of the Ministery Touching Election wee thinke that each Church and People that haue not by lawe custome or consent restrayned themselues stand free by Gods law to admitte maintaine and obey no man as their Pastor without their liking and that the peoples election by themselues or their rulers dependeth on the first principles of humane fellowships and assemblies for which cause though Bishops by Gods lawe haue power to examine and ordaine before any may be placed to take charge of soules yet haue they no power to impose a Pastor on any Church against their
he bare to him gaue commandement that the election of the Bishop of Rome being resolued on the Bishops should presently proceede to the ordination of him without expecting any confirmation from the Emperour But the power of confirming the newly elected Bishoppe of Rome before hee might bee ordayned or execute the Bishoppely office was againe restored to Charles the great his successours Kings of France and Emperours of the West in more ample sort then it had beene before by Adrian the First which being againe taken from his successours by Adrian the Third was restored to Otho the First King of the Germanes Emperour of the West by Leo the Eigth From which time it continued till Gregory the Seauenth who though hee was glad to seeke the Emperours confirmation himselfe when hee first entred into the Popedome yet afterwards he disclaymed it as vnlawfull so condemning many of his Predecessours that had allowed and confirmed this part of Imperiall power vnder great paines and curses to fall vpon such as should euer goe about to violate the same After whose times other Popes reserued the whole power of electing the Romane Bishoppe to the Cardinalls alone as wee see the manner is vnto this day Thus writeth Onuphrius professing that hee carefully looked ouer all the auncient monuments of the Romane Church to finde out the certainety of these things Neither neede we to doubt of the trueth of that hee writeth yet for farther proofe least any man should doubt I will produce the reports of Historians the Acts of Councels to confirme that hee saith Platina in the life of Pelagius the 2d saith nothing was done in the election of the Romane B. in those dayes without the Emperours consent and confirmation and sheweth that the reason why Pelagius was created Bishoppe without the commaund of the Emperour was for that they could send no messenger to him the Citty being besieged And touching Gregory the First hee reporteth that when he was chosen Bishoppe of Rome knowing the Emperours consent necessarily to bee required in the election and constitution of the Bishoppe unwilling to possesse that place and roome hee sent vnto him earnestly intreating him to make voyde the election of the Cleargy and people which his suite the Emperour was so farre from graunting that hee sent to confirme the Election and to enforce him to take the Pastorall charge vpon him in that most daungerous and troublesome time Whereby wee see how farre the Emperours intermedled in the election and constitution of the Romane Bishoppes in those daies It is true indeede that the same Platina reporteth that Constantine admiring the sanctity vertue of Benedict the second sent vnto him a sanction that euer after all men should presently take him for Bishop without expecting the concurrence of the authority of the Emperour of Constantinople or the Exarch of Italy whomsoeuer the Cle◅rgy people and armies of the Romanes should chuse Not-with-standing this freed◅me and libertie continued not long for as wee may reade in the Decree◅ Charle◅ the Great and Adrian the first held a Synode in the Church of Saint Sauiour in Rome wherein met 153 Bishops religious men and Abbottes in which Synod Adrian with the consent of the Bishops there assembled gaue vnto Charles power to choose the Bishop of Rome and to order the Apostolicall See together with the dignity of being a Patrician or Nobleman of Rome and besides decreed that all Arch-bishoppes and Bishops in the Provinces abroad should seeke investiture of him and that no man should bee esteemed a Bishoppe or bee consecrated till he were allowed and commended by the King This Decree the councell published anathematizing all that should violate it and confiscating their goods yet did Adrian the third as Platina reporteth take so good heart vnto him that whereas Nicholas the first did but attempt such a thing rather then performe it hee in the very beginning of his Papall dignity made a Decree that without expecting the Emperours consent or ratification the election of the Cleargy Senate and People should bee good But Leo the Eight in a Synode gathered together in the Church of Saint Sauiour in Rome following the example of Adrian the first with the consent of the whole Synode restored vnto the Emperour that power and authority which Adrian the first had yeelded vnto him and Adrian the third had sought to depriue him of The wordes of that councell are these I Leo Bishop and seruant of the seruants of God with the whole Cleargy and people of Rome doe constitute confirme and strengthen and by our Apostolicall authority graunt and giue to our Lord Otho the first King of Germaines and to his successours in this Kingdome of Italy for euer power to choose a successour and to order the Bishop of this highest See Apostolicke as also Arch-bishoppes and Bishoppes that they may receiue investiture from him and consecration whence they ought to haue it those onely excepted which the Emperour himselfe hath graunted to the Popes and Arch-bishops and that no man hereafter of what dignity or religious profession soeuer shall haue power to chuse a Patrician or a chiefe Bishoppe of the highest See Apostolicke or to ordaine any Bishop whatsoeuer without the consent of the Emperour first had which consent and confirmation notwithstanding shall be had without money So that if any Bishop shall be chosen by the cleargy people he shall not bee consecrated vnlesse hee bee commended and invested by the fore-named King And if any man shall attēpt to do any thing against this rule Apostolicall authority We decree that he shal be subiect to excommunication and that if he repent not he shall bee perpetually banished or be subiect to the last most grievous deadly and capitall punishments Hence it came that when any Bishop was dead they sent his staffe and ring to the Emperour and hee to whom the Emperour was pleased to deliuer the same after a solemne fashion and manner was thereby designed and constituted Bishop of the voyde place Thus wee see how authentically vnder great paines and curses the Pope and councell yeeld that right to the Emperor subjecting all that euer should goe about to disanull their Decree to the great curse perpetuall banishment and grievous punishments Yet Pope Hildebrand who as if he had beene a fire-brand of hell set all the world in a Combustion disanulled this Law as impious and wicked and Victor Vrbanus and Paschalis succeeding him were of the same minde By reason whereof there grew a great dissention betweene the Popes and Emperours Henry the fourth and after him Henry the fifth challenging not onely the right of confirming the election of the Popes but power also to conferre Bishoprickes and Abbeyes by Investiture of staffe and ring as the Popes Adrian and Leo had yeelded and granted to Charles and his successours which thing also had beene enioyed by the Emperour for the space of three
the Councell of Constance Wherefore seeing so many Councells Popes yeelded the power of electing or at least of allowing and confirming the Popes to the Emperours and seeing so good effects followed of it and so ill of the contrary there is no reason why our Aduersaries should dislike it For seeing the people aunciently had their consent in these affaires Fredericke the Emperour had reason when hee said that himselfe as King and ruler of the people ought to bee chiefe in choosing his owne Bishop Neither had the Emperours onely this right in disposing of the Bishopricke of Rome and other dignities Ecclesiasticall but other Christian Kings likewise had a principall stroake in the appointing of Bishops For as Nauclere noteth the French Kings haue had the right of Inuestitures euer since the time of Adrian the first and Duarenus sheweth that howsoeuer Ludouicus renounced the right of choosing the Bishop of Rome yet hee held still the right of Inuestiture of other Bishops into the place whereof came afterwards that right which the King vseth when in the vacancie of a Bishopricke hee giueth power to choose and some other royalties which the Kings of France still retaine It appeareth by the twelfth Councell of Toledo that the Kings had a principall stroake in elections in the Churches of Spaine and touching England Matthew Paris testifieth that Henry the first by William of Warnaste his agent protested to the Pope he would rather loose his kingdome then the right of Inuestitures and added threatning words to the same protestation Neither did he onely make verball protestations but hee really practised that hee spake and gaue the Arch bishopricke of Canterbury to Rodolphe Bishoppe of London inuesting him by Pastoral staffe ring Articuli cleri prescribe that elections shall be free frō force feare or intreaty of Secular powers yet so as that the Kings license bee first asked after the election done his royall assent and confirmation bee added to make it good Whereupon the Statute of prouisors of Benefices made at Westminster the fiue and twentith of Edward the third hath these wordes Our Soueraigne Lord the King and his heires shall haue and enioy for the time the collations to the Archbishoprickes and other dignities electiue which bee of his aduowry such as his progenitors had before free election was granted sith that the first elections were granted by the Kings progenitours vpon a certaine forme and condition as namely to demaund licence of the King to choose after choyce made to haue his royall assent Which condition being not kept the thing ought by reason to returne to his first nature So that we see that at first the Cleargy people were to choose their Bishops Ministers yet so that Princes by their right were to moderate things and nothing was to be done without them But when they endowed Churches with ample revenewes possessions disburdened the people of the charge of maintaining their Pastors they had now a farther reason to sway things then before And thence it is that the Statute aboue-mentioned saith the Kings gaue power of free elections yet vpon condition of seeking their licence confirmation as hauing the right of nomination in themselues in that they were Founders Likewise touching Presbyters the auncient Canon of the Councel of Carthage which was that Bishops should not ordain clearks without the consent of their Cleargie that also they should haue the assent and testimony of the Citizens held while the Cleargy liued together vpon the common contributions and divident but when not onely titles were divided distinguished and men placed in rurall Churches abroad but seuerall allowance made for the maintenance of such as should attend the seruice of God by the Lords of those Countrey townes out of their owne lands and the lands of their tennants they that thus carefully provided for the Church were much respected And it was thought fit they should haue great interest in the choosing and nominating of Clearkes in such places Iustinian the Emperour to reward such as had beene beneficiall in this sort to the Church and to incourage others to doe the like decreed That if any man build a Church or house of Prayer and would haue Clearkes to be placed there if hee allow maintenance for them and name such as are worthy they shall be ordained vpon his nomination But if he shall choose such as bee prohibited by the Canons as vnworthy the Bishop shall take care to promote some whom he thinketh more worthy And the Councell of Toledo about the yeare of Christ 655 made a Canon to the same effect The words of the councell are these We decree that as long as the Founders of Churches doe liue they shall be suffered to haue the chiefe and continuall care of the said Churches shall offer fit Rectors to the Bishop to be ordained And of the Bishop neglecting the Founders shall presume to place any others let him know that his admission shall be voyde and to his shame but if such as they choose be prohibited by the Canons as vnworthy then let the Bishop take care to promote some whom he thinketh more worthy Whereby we see what respect was anciently had to such as founded Churches gaue lands and possessions to the same yet were they not called Lords of such places after such dedication to God but Patrons onely because they were to defend the rights thereof and to protect such as there attended the seruice of God though they had right to nominate men to serue in these places yet might they not judge or punish them if they neglected their duties but onely complaine of them to the Bishop or Magistrate Neither might they dispose of the possessions thus giuen to the Church and dedicated to God but if they fell into poverty they were to be maintained out of the revenewes thereof This power and right of nomination and presentation resting in Princes and other Founders can no way prejudice or hurt the state of the Church if Bishops to whō examination and ordination pertaineth doe their duties in refusing to consecrate ordaine such as the Canons prohibite but very great confusions did follow the Popes intermeddling in bestowing Church-liuings and dignities as wee shall soone finde if wee looke into the practise of them in former times CHAP. 55. Of the Popes disordered intermedling with the elections of Bishoppes and other Ministers of the Church their vsurpation intrusion and preiudicing the right and liberty of others THe Popes informer times greatly preiudiced the right and liberty of other men and hurt the estate of the Church of God three waies first by giuing priuiledges to Fryers a people vnknowne to all antiquity to enter into the Churches and charges of other men to do Ministeriall acts and to get vnto themselues those things which of right should haue beene yeelded to other Secondly by Commendams and Thirdly by reseruations
quondam oblata turned out of French into Latine by Duarenus and added to his booke De sacris Ecclesiae Ministeriis that there being a great number of goodly Churches founded by the Kings of France when the Bishops of Rome began to prejudice the liberties of them the King the Nobles the Princes of the bloud the Cleargy and commons assembled to resist the vexations oppressions wrongs of the Court of Rome made many good Constitutions for the repressing of such insolencies So Lewys when first the Pope began to meddle in the yeare one thousand two hundred sixty seauē decreed that Preslacies Dignities electiue should be giuen by election and such as are not electiue by collation and presentation of Patrons and that the Court of Rome should extort no money for any such thing out of the Kingdome of France And when notwithstanding this Decree in processe of time the Court of Rome attempted divers things contrary to the liberty of the church of France Charles the Sixth with the advise of his Nobles Prelates Abbottes Colledges Vniversities and other partes of his Kingdome in the yeare one thousand foure hundred and sixe made a Constitution whereby hee restored the church to her auncient liberty and this Decree was published in the yeare one thousand foure hundred and seauen in which yeare Benedict the Pope and his Ministers hauing imposed and exacted great summes of money a new complaint was made to the King and thereupon a Decree made that nothing should bee payde out of France in the nature of Annates or Tenthes and that such as had beene excommunicated for refusall of them should bee absolued againe In the yeare one thousand foure hundred and eighteene a Constitution was made whereby all Reservations and Apostolicall graces as they call them together with all exactions of the court of Rome were forbidden And when as the Romanes contemning all Constitutions ceased not to trouble and confound the Hierarchy of the Church and scattered abroad euery where throughout the World their Reservations and expectatiue graces whence followed great and horrible deformities in the church at last a Generall Councell was assembled for the Reformation of the church in the Head and members which prohibited these Reseruations and expectatiue Graces restored the canons touching Elections and Collations and subjected all that should contumaciously resist yea though the Pope him-selfe to due punishment The Decrees of this councell Charles the Seauenth confirmed with the consent of all Estates of his Kingdome and this his Decree of Confirmation was called the Pragmaticall Sanction But the Popes neuer rested till they had if not wholly ouerthrowne it yet greatly weakened it The attemptes of Pius the Second who beeing a private man in the Councell of Basil set it forward what hee could are not vnknowne as also of Sixtus the Fourth Innocentius the Eighth Alexander the Sixth Iulius the Second and Leo the Tenth who published a Constitution whereby the Pragmaticall Sanction was much weakened though not wholly taken away and those his new Decrees were called Conventa that is agreements betweene the King and him From these Decrees the Vniversity of Paris appealed to a Generall councell And thus wee see how well the Popes fulfill the commaundement of Christ in feeding his Sheepe that labour so mainely the ouer-throw of those canons which being taken away the whole Ecclesiasticall Order is confounded whole countries are made desolate and forsaken Kingdomes are robbed of their money and treasure churches are ruinated and subverted For so did all good men out of wofull experience complaine in former times Wherefore passing by these intrusions vsurpations and tyrannicall inter-meddling of Popes with things not pertayning to them it is evident by that which hath beene saide that the Election of fit Ministers to teach the people of God pertaineth to the cleargy and people by the reasons and grounds of humane societies vnlesse by their owne consent forfeiture restraint of superiour authority cōmaunding ouer them or speciall reasons prevailing more then those generall grounds of humane fellowship it be taken from them As in case of founding churches and endowing them with lands the Patrons haue the right of presenting in cases of intollerable abuses negligences or insolencies the Prince as Head of the people assumeth to himselfe the nomination of such as are to serue in the holy Ministery of the church Some there are that thinke the right of the people in choosing their Pastours and Ministers to bee such as that it may not bee limited restrayned or taken away vpon any consideration what-soeuer and that therefore there is no lawfull Election of Ecclesiastical Ministers vnlesse the people chuse But the errour of these men is easily refuted For seeing the Scripture Word of GOD giueth no such power to the people and all the interest they haue or canne claime is but from the ground of humane fellowship subject to many limitations alterations and restraintes there is no reason to thinke that necessarily the people must euer elect their Pastors In the reformed Churches of France Geneua the people giue no voyces in the election of Ministers but are onely permitted if they haue any causes of dislike or exception to make them knowne to the Pastours and guides of the Church and the power of iudging of such exceptions resteth wholy in them In so much that when one Morellius a fantasticall companion sought to bring the elections of Bishoppes and Ministers to bee Popular and swayed by the most voyces of the people hee was condemned by all the Synodes in France as Beza sheweth in his Epistles That there is no precept in the whole new Testament forcing popular elections it is euident And the onely example that is brought of any such thing is that of the seauen Deacons but first there was some speciall reason why the peoples consent was sought in the election of these Deacons beeing to bee trusted with the treasure of the Church and the disposing of the contributions of the faithfull and secondly from one example a generall rule may not bee gathered Seeing the circumstances of things times persons admit infinite varieties some alleadge that place in the Acts for proofe of popular elections where the Apostles are said to haue appointed Elders or Presbyters by 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 because 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifieth that kind of election that is made by the more part of the voyces of the Electors expressing their consent by lifting vp of their handes as sometimes men shew their consent by going to one side of the place or roome where they are whence they are sayd Pedibus ire insententiam But surely these places are vnaduisedly alledged for proofe of popular elections For first the Apostles onely are said 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and consequently the election pertayned to them onely and they onely elected for 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifieth to elect and not to gather voyces Secondly though 〈◊〉 〈◊〉
The councell of Laodicea provideth in this sort touching them that marry the second time Concerning them that according to the Ecclesiasticall Rule are freely and lawfully joyned in the second mariage and haue not secretly so joyned them-selues It is fit that for some short time they giue them-selues to prayer and fasting which being past by a kinde of Indulgence they may be restored to the Communion The Author of the vnperfect worke that goeth vnder the name of Chrysostome proceedeth a little farther in this sort The Apostles saith he commanded to enter into the second mariage for the avoyding of fornication For according to the precept of the Apostle it is lawfull to take a second wife but according to the rule and prescription of Trueth it is indeed Fornication This conceipt grew so farre that the Councel of Nice was forced to make a Canon that the Catharists should not be receiued into the fellowship of the Church vnlesse they would communicate with such as fell in the time of persecution with such as had beene twice maryed whereby it appeareth that some rejected them as though they might not haue beene receiued into the Church no not after Penance So that to conclude this point touching Digamie it is not the hauing of more wiues than one successiuely that the Apostle condemneth but the hauing of more wiues at once Three reasons are brought by our Adversaries to proue the contrary but they will be found too weake if we examine them The first is that Polygamie or the hauing of many wiues at once was not in vse in the Apostles time that therfore the Apostle had no reason to forbid it but this may easily be refuted by good authorities Your Masters saith Iustine Martyr speaking to the Iewes euen to this day suffer euery one of you to haue foure or fiue wiues in his Apologie he vnderstandeth by Digamie the hauing of more wiues then one at one time not successiuely for hee saith they which according to mans Law doe enter into Digamie or second mariages are sinners according to the Doctrine of our Teacher and Master And Theodoret sayth In former times both Iewes and Gentiles tooke vnto them in mariage many wiues Their second reason is this The Apostle requireth that a widdow must haue beene the wife of one husband and his meaning must needes bee that she must not haue had more husbands then one successiuely Therefore when hee prescribeth that a Bishop must be the husband of one wife his meaning is that hee must not haue had more then one wife successiuely the forme of speach being the same That when he speaketh of widdowes hee meaneth that they must not haue had more husbands then one successiuely they proue because howsoeuer Men haue sometimes had more wiues then one at the same time yet Women neuer had more husbands and hereupon they charge vs with intollerable impudencie violent wresting of the Scriptures and bringing such an interpretation of the Apostles words as neuer came into any wisemans cogitation before when wee say hee repelleth such from entering into the order of widdowes as haue had two husbands at once and not such as haue beene twice maried But if it please them to giue vs leaue wee will shew them that they are too violent and say they know not what For wee thinke nay we know it hath bene heard of that a woman should haue two husbands at one time yea that both amongst Iewes and Gentiles in former times women forsaking their husbands or forsaken of them without iust cause haue married againe which the Apostle might iustly condemne and debarre such as had so done from entring into the order and ranke of sacred Widdowes Neither is it hard to shew that our interpretation hath beene thought of and approued more then a thousand yeares agoe by men of as great wisedome as our great maisters that thus insult ouer vs. For Theodoret vpon these very words of the Apostle writeth thus Hereof also it is manifest that he reiecteth not second mariages but decreeth that they liue chastly in matrimony for hee which before hath established the secōd mariage by law hath not here forbidden her which hath bin twice married to obtaine bodily reliefe And Theophilact likewise sayth The Apostle requireth Monogamie of her that is to be admitted into the company of widdowes that is that shee haue beene coupled but to one husband at once as a signe of honesty chastity and good manners Concerning these Widdowes two things are to be considered First hovv and in what sort they were imployed by the Church Secondly how farre fortth they were tyed not to leaue the Church-seruice and to marryagaine Touching their seruice it was first and principally about women that were to be baptized for their instruction and the addressing of them-selues to that Sacrament and the sacred Rites of the Church accompanying the same as appeareth by the Constitutions of Clemens it being more fitte for them to haue priuate and often accesse vnto them then for men Which thing also Epiphanius sheweth calling them by the name of Diaconesses Secondly the attending and taking care of the sicke and impotent Touching the second point wee suppose that these widdowes being of great Age destitute of all outward supportes seeking reliefe of the Church and dedicating themselues to the seruice thereof did by this very act professe and make knowne their purpose of continuing in that estate of Widdowhood and performing such seruice as to them any way appertained And therefore the Apostle condemneth them that after such profession made waxed wanton against Christ sought to put themselues out of the holy Ministery seruice they had dedicated themselues vnto to returne to Secular courses of life againe These according to the iudgment of Epiphanius were subiect to 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is just dislike and blame and were to be condemned for their leuity and inconstancie but not to 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is to the condemnation of eternall death and destruction if declining adultery and other like vncleanenesse they choose rather to marrie then to defile themselues with such impurities And Augustine resolueth that their marriage notwithhanding any profession they seeme to haue made to the contrary is not to be condemned as euill or to be dissolued but that onely their breach of promise made to God and his Church and their falling from their purpose is to bee disliked and condemned Thus do these learned and holy Fathers resolue touching such widdowes as the Apostle speaketh of And Peter Lumbard vpon these words of the Apostle in like sort adding that they breake their first faith euen that they professed in baptisme in that violating so solemne a promise and turning away so scandalously from the calling they had voluntarily put themselues into they seeme to forget and cast from them the very faith and profession of Christians Soe
communicating with the Priest in the Sacrament into a priuate masse which indeede if wee will speake properly is no masse or that hee helde it to bee a new reall sacrificing of CHRIST as the Iesuited Papistes doe at this day A sacrifice wee confesse it to bee of praise and thankes-giuing and a commemoration of the bloudy sacrifice of CHRIST vpon the Altar of the Crosse say that therefore it may bee named a sacrifice because signes haue the names of the things whereof they are signes as also for that there is in this Sacrament an offering or presenting of CHRIST and his passion to GOD by the faith of the Church that by it wee may obtaine grace and remission of sinnes but a new reall sacrificing of CHRIST wee denye and thinke with Luther that it is a hellish abomination so to doe That Gerson thought that there is a Purgatory doth no more prejudice his being a worthy guide of Gods Church then the errour of Cyprian and other before-mentioned Touching invocation of Saints though hee did not absolutely condemne it yet hee reprehended the abuses and superstitious observations then prevailing in the worshipping of Saints very bitterly as I shewed before sought to bring men to a truer sense of piety in that point then was ordinarily found amongst men in those times The like he did for indulgences restraining them more then was pleasing to the Popes faction and for the communion vnder one kinde howsoeuer hee thought the Church might lawfully prescribe the communicating in one kinde alone which wee cannot excuse yet hee acknowledgeth that the communion in both kindes was aunciently vsed and that when it may bee had with the peace of the Church it is to bee allowed But to what purpose doth Master Higgons alledge these things shall it bee lawfull for him and his to repute Iohn Gerson a worthy and godly man notwithstanding that he held that the Pope may erre that he is subiect to Generall Councels that he medleth with things no way pertayning to him when hee taketh vpon him to dispose the Kingdomes of the world that all our inherent righteousnesse is imperfit and as the polluted ragges of a menstruous woman that all sins are by nature mortall and the like and may not wee take him to haue beene a member of the true Church a good man and one that desired the reformation of things amisse notwithstanding his errour in some things and his not discerning all that was amisse The insufficiencie of this allegation it seemeth Master Higgons himselfe perceived and therefore saith hee will come to the supreame difference to which all other points as hee conceiueth are subordinate and inferiour that is to say the soueraigne primacy of the Romane Bishop and bringeth two very effectuall testimonies as hee thinketh of Gerson to proue the Popes soueraigne primacie The First is out of his booke De auferibilitate papae his words are these The formes of ciuill government are subiect to mutability and alteration but it is otherwise in the Church for her gouerment is Monarchicall and is so appointed by the institution of our Lord if any man will violate this sacred ordinance and persist obstinately in his contempt hee is to bee iudged an Hereticke as Marsilius of Padua and some other consorting with his fancie The second is out of his tract De vnitate Graecorum where prescribing many directions for the composing of the differences betweene the Greeke and Latine Churches hee layeth it downe as a foundation that there must bee one head on earth vnto which all men must bee vnited In these sayings Master Higgons saith Gerson shewed himselfe a worthy guide of Gods Church and a singular enemy of the Protestanticall reformation which violently impugneth the supremacie of the Pope in so much that Luther affirmeth that a man cannot be saued vnlesse from his heart hee hate the Pope and Papacie These things truely carrie a very faire shew and may deceiue such as cannot or will not throughly looke into them But whosoeuer knoweth what Gersons opinion of the Pope is and what Luther hath written against the Papacie will soone perceiue there is no contradiction betweene them or at least not in any essentiall and materiall point For Gerson was of opinion that the Pope is subiect to a Generall Councell and that hee is not free from daunger of erring and this hee thought to bee a matter of faith defined in the Councell of Constance and therefore would haue detested all claimes of infallible iudgement and vncontrouleable power of Popes as much as Luther did and would haue accursed his words of blasphemie if once hee should haue heard him say as wee doe and as before the holding of the Councell of Constance he did All the world cannot iudge mee though I ouerturne the whole course of nature no man may say vnto mee why doe you so I onely haue power to make lawes and to voide them againe I haue authority to dispence with the Canons of all Councels as seemeth good vnto mee and which is more to dispose of all the kingdomes of the world the assurance of finding out the trueth and not erring is not partly in mee and partly in the Councell but wholy in mee whatsoeuer all the world shall consent on is of no force if I allow it not Hee would haue said doubtlesse as I haue done if hee had heard him thus speake that wee are not bound to take the foame of his impure mouth and froath of his words of blasphemie as infallible Oracles This is that Pope and this is that Papacie which Luther saith euery one that will be saued must hate from his heart for otherwise if hee would onely claime to bee a Bishoppe in his precinct a Metropolitane in a prouince a Patriarch of the West and of Patriarches the first and most honourable to whom the rest are to resort in cases of greatest moment as to the head and chiefe of their company to whom it specially pertaineth to haue an eye to the preseruation of the Church in the vnity of faith and religion and the actes and exercises of the same and with the assistance and concurrence of the other by all due courses to effect that which pertaineth thereunto without clayming absolute and vncontrouleable power infallibilitie of iudgement and right to dispose the Kingdomes of the world and to intermeddle in the administration of the temporalties of particular Churches and the immediate swaying of the iurisdiction thereof Luther himselfe professeth hee would neuer open his mouth against him This kind of Primacie the Grecians likewise professed they would bee content to yeeld vnto him if other differences betweene them might be composed Cassander saith Hee is perswaded there had neuer beene any controuersies about the Popes power if the Popes had not abused their authority in a Lordly and ouer-ruling manner and through couetousnesse and ambition stretched it beyond the bounds and
Sacrament which I am well assured this Fugitiue cannot improue nor any of his great Maisters who haue the schooling of him will satisfie the Reader I doubt not touching the possibility of a generall reconciliation The lyes scoffes and fooleries of Higgons in these passages touching my pretending that the Sacramentaries subscribe to the Augustan confession my art of reconciling and the like I passe by as not worth the thinking of and conclude this point with this confident asseueration that the differences betweene those whom the Papists malice and other mens passion calleth Lutherans and Sacramentaries are either not reall or not so materiall but that they may be of one Church Faith and Religion The Third Chapter §. I. IN the next chapter he chargeth Me with falshood and inciuility in traducing Bellarmine and sayth I haue deuised three criminations against him The first supposed crimination ioyned with falshood as he saith is this Bellarmine saith Videmus omnes illas Ecclesias quae ab isto Capite se diuiserunt tanquam ramos praecisos à radice continuò aruisse and I say he affirmeth that all Churches of the world that euer diuided themselues from the fellowship of the Romane Church like boughes broken from a tree and depriued of the nourishment they formerly receiued from the roote presently withered away and decayed Surely it is a grieuous crime that I haue committed yet I hope if I meete with mercifull men it will be forgiuen Mee for I thinke that boughes broken from a tree will wither away But saith M. Higgons Cardinall Bellarmine meant nothing but tha the diuided Churches lost their glory and splendor and so withered but withered not away This I think the poore fellow will not stand vnto for these Churches by the very act of their separation in his iudgment became hereticall and schismaticall and so lost not only their glory and splendor but their being also and the life they formerly had and consequently like boughs broken from a tree withered away which yet neither he nor the Cardinall can euer proue For there appeared still all signes of life in them after their separation as before and some of them hold a more sincere profession of Christian verity to this day then the Romanists do and we would rather ioine our selues to the Grecians then to them as neither erring so dangerously nor so pertinaciously as they do For that which he bringeth out of Iustus Caluinus concerning Hieremy the Patriarch of Constantinople his renouncing our society and alleadging the Counsell of S. Paul for his warrant where he sayth reiect an Hereticke after the first or second admonition is a lye as many other sayings of the same Author are likewise The second crimination he speaketh of he sayth is contriued in this manner Bellarmine sayth that none of the Churches diuided from Rome had euer any learned men after their separation but here he sheweth plainly that his impudency is greater then his learning for what will he say of Oecumenius Theophylactus Damascen Zonaras Cedrenus Elias Cretensis Nilus Cabasilas and innumerable more liuing in the Greeke Churches after their separation from the Church of Rome Surely these were more then match-able with the greatest Rabbins of the Romish Synogogue M. Higgons should put a difference betweene a crimination and a iust defence of men wronged by the vnjust criminations of Bellarmine from which I indeauour to cleare them But let it be as he will haue it what hath he to say vnto it much surely if he could proue what he sayth for hee sayth there are 3. vntruthes found in it the 1. is that whereas I charge Bellarmine to affirme that none of the Churches diuided from Rome had any learned men after their separation he sayth only that none of the Churches of Asia or Africa had any How great a vexation it is for a man to bee matched with such Triflers as this is the reader may easily iudge by this particular For if neuer any of the Churches of Asia and Africa had any learned men after their separation from Rome neyther the Aethiopian Armenian Nestorian nor Greeke Churches had any The Aethiopian and Nestorian Churches beeing wholy in those partes and the greater part of the Greeke Church also now if none of these had any I thinke none had But that these had I shew by naming sundry particular men of great worth in the Greeke Churches This M. Higgons found to touch his Cardinall too neare and therefore hee sayth hee purposely declined the naming of the Greeke Church by restraining himselfe to the Churches of Asia and Affrica whereas he should haue said he purposely inlarged himselfe to all the Churches of Asia and Africa that he might draw into the generality of his speech not the Graecians only whose greatest number of Churches are in Asia but the Armenians Nestorians and Aethiopians also Now then see what Mr Higgons hath done hee hath confessed that the Greeke Churches which all men know to be principally in Asia reckoned among the Churches of Asia though some parts of them be in Europe to haue had learned men since their separation whence it followeth that the Cardinall without shame denied that any of the Churches of Asia had any so that in reason he should not be angry with Me in that knowing his Cardinals learning to be very great yet to magnifie his impudencie in this point I preferre it before his learning The 2. vntruth that M. Higgons would fasten vpon Me is that I say Damascen liued after the separation of the Greeks from the Latins which thing I still affirme to be most true Higgons himselfe in a sort cōfesseth as much for he saith out of Bellarmine that Damascen liued about the yeare of our Lord 740. that the violent separation of the Greeks from the Latines was occasioned principally about the yeare 766. 26. yeares after Now as I thinke in that he saith the violent separation was then he insinuateth that there was a separation before which thing if hee deny I will easily proue against him For it appeareth that the separation betweene the Greeks and the Latins began not in the yeare 766 but before in that in the yeare 766. a great Councell was called at Gentiliacum to compose the differences betweene them as we reade in Rhegino Sigebertus and others and the matter came to a publike disputation betweene them before Pipin the father of Charles the Great but that Damascen liued after the separatiō between the Greeks Latins it is evident in that the separation between thē being occasioned specially by the different opinion which they held concerning the proceeding of the Holy Ghost as Higgons telleth vs Damascen was opposite to the Latines in that point in so much that he saith expresly that the spirit is by the sonne but not from the sonne The third imagined vntruth is that I say Damascen Oecumenius Theophylact and the rest were more
or inducement to make vs beleeue things we know not but it must be the report of such an one as we know cannot be deceiued nor will not deceiue It must therefore be evident to euery one that firmely and without doubting beleeueth things not knowne vnto him vpon the report of another that he that reporteth them vnto him neither is deceiued nor can deceiue Whence it followeth necessarily that things are as he reporteth These things presupposed I demaund of this Treatiser whether he and his consorts assent to the Articles of the Christian Faith induced so to doe by the evidence of the things in thēselues or by the report of another That they assent not vnto thē induced so to do by the evidence of the things in thēselues they all professe but by the report of another I demand therefore who that other is whether God or man if man then haue they nothing but anhumane perswasion very weakly grounded wherein they may be deceiued for euery man is a lyar If God let them tel me whether it be evident in it self that God deliuereth these things vnto thē pronounceth them to be as they beleeue or not If not but beleeued only then as before by reasō of authority that either of God or man Not of God for it is not evident in it self that God deliuereth any thing vnto thē not of men for their report is not of such credit asthat we may certainly vndoubtedly stay vpon it seeing they may be deceiued deceiue other They answere therefore that it is no way evident vnto them in it selfe that God deliuereth the things they beleeue but that they perswade themselues hee deliuered such things vpōthe report of men but such men as are infallibly led into all truth See then if they doe not runne round in a circle finding no stay They beleeue the resurrection of the dead and the like things because God revealed it they beleeue that God revealed it because it is so contained in the Scripture and the Scripture because it is the Word of God and that it is the Word of God because the Church so delivereth and the Church because it is a multitude of men infallibly led into all truth and that there is a Church infallibly led into all truth because it is so contained in Scripture and the Scripture because it is the word of God and so round without euer finding any end Out of this circle they cannot get vnles they either groūd their Faith vpon the meere report of men as men humane probabilities or confesse that it is evident vnto them in it selfe that God speaketh in the Scripture and revealeth those things which they beleeue which if they doe it must bee in respect either of the manner matter there vttered or consequent effects In respect of the manner there being a certaine diuine vertue force and majesty in the very forme of the words of him that speaketh in the Scripture in respect of the matter which being suggested and proposed to vs findeth approbation of reason inlightned by the light of grace in respect of the consequent effects in that we finde a strange and wonderful change wrought in vs assuring vs the doctrine is of God that hath such effects which is that we say which they condemne in vs. The Treatiser would make vs beleeue that there are two opinions amongst them touching this point whereof the one is as he telleth vs that wee beleeue the Church because the Scripture teacheth vs that shee is to be beleeued the Scripture because the Church deliuereth it to vs to be the word of God And the other that by the assistance of God together with the concurrence of our naturall vnderstanding we produce an act of supernaturall Faith by which wee firmely beleeue the Articles of Christian Faith not for any humane inducements but for that they are revealed by Almighty God without seeking any further which if it be so it must be evident in it self to thē that follow this opiniō that God hath revealed deliuered the things they beleeue that by one of the 3 waies before mētioned thē they fal into our opiniō for if it be not evidēt to thē in it self that God speakes in the scriptures reveales the things they are to beleeue they must go further to be assured that he doth so speake and reueale the things that are to bee beleeued either to proofe of reason or authority For no man perswadeth himselfe of any thing but vpon some inducements Proofe of reason demonstratiue I thinke they will not seeke and probable inducements they may not rest in therefore they must proceede to some proofeby authority which can bee no other but that of the Church and then they ioyne with them that follow the other opinion and beleeue the articles of Christian faith conteyned in Scripture because God hath reuealed them and that God hath reuealed them because the Church telleth them so and the Church because the Scripture testifieth of it that it is led into all trueth which is a very grosse sophisticall circulation This the Treatiser did well perceiue and therefore to helpe the matter he distinguisheth the cause of beleeuing and the condition necessarily requisite that the cause may haue her working in shew making the Diuine Reuelation the reason or cause that we beleeue and the Churches proposing to vs the things to be beleeued a condition only and not a cause in sort as the fire alone is the cause of the burning of the wood but the putting of one of them to another is a necessary condition without which that cause can produce no such effect but this shift will not serue the turne For it is the fire onely that burneth the wood though it cannot burne vnlesse it be put vnto it so that in like sort if the comparison hold the Diuine Reuelation must of and by it selfe alone moue induce and incline vs to beleeue the things proposed by the Church as being euident vnto vs to be a Deuine Reuelation though without the Churches proposing we could take no notice of it Euen as in naturall knowledge it is the euidence of trueth appearing vnto vs originally found in the first principles and secondarily in the conclusions from thence deduced that is the sole and onely cause or reason of our assent to such principles and conclusions though without the helpe of some men of knowledge proposing them to vs and leading vs from the apprehension of one of them to another happily we should not at all attaine such knowledge But this euidence of the Diuine Reuelation in it selfe the Treatiser will not admit For it is no way euident in it selfe to him that God hath reuealed any of the things he beleeueth but the onely proofe besides humane motiues or reasons which are too weake to bee the ground of Fayth that he hath is the authority of the Church So that the Ministery of the Church is
not onely a condition but a cause of that perswasion of fayth which they haue yea the authority of the Church is the formall cause of all that faith seduced Papists haue And therefore the distinction of a cause and condition helpeth them not It is true indeed that the Ministerie of the Church proposing to men thinges to bee beleeued is onely a condition requisite to the producing of a supernaturall act of fayth in respect of them that haue some other thing to perswade them that that is true which the Church proposeth besides the authority of the Church but in respect of such as haue no other proofe of the trueth thereof it is a formall cause Now this is the condition of all Papists For let them tell Mee whether they beleeue the Scripture to be the Word of God without any motiue at all or not and if they doe not as it is most certaine they doe not whether besides such as are humane they haue any other then the authority of the Church if they haue not as doubtlesse they haue not they make the authority of the Church the formall cause of their faith and fall into that sophisticall circulation they are charged with For they beleeue the articles of religion because reuealed and that they were reuealed because it is so contayned in the Scripture and the Scripture because it is the Word of God that it is the Word of God because the Church telleth them it is and the Church because it is guided by the spirit and that it is so guided because it is so contayned in the Scripture this is such a maze as no wise man will willingly enter into and yet the Treatiser commendeth the treading of these intricate pathes and telleth vs that two causes may bee causes one of another That the cause may bee proued by the effect and the effect by the cause and that such a kinde of argumentation is not a circulation but a demonstratiue regresse that two causes may be causes either of other in diuerse respects we make no question For the end of each thing as it is desired setteth the efficient cause a worke and the efficient causeth the same to bee actually enjoyed Likewise we doubt not but that the cause may be proued by the effect and the effect by the cause in a demonstratiue regresse For the effect as better known vnto vs then the cause may make vs know the cause and the cause being found out by vs may make vs more perfitly and in a better sort to knowe the effect then before not onely that and what it is but why it is also So the death of little infants proueth them sinners and their being sinners proueth them mortall The bignesse of the footstep in the dust or sand sheweth the bignesse of his foote that made that impression And the bignesse of his foote will shew how bigge the impression is that he maketh but this maketh nothing for the justifying of the Romish circulations For heere the effect being knowne in a sort in itselfe maketh vs know the cause and the cause being found out and knowne maketh vs more perfectly to knowe the effect then at first wee did but the case is otherwise with the Papists for with them the Scripture which in it selfe hath no credit with them but such onely as it is to receiue from the Church giueth the Church credit and the Church which hath no credit but such as it is to receiue from the Scripture giueth the Scripture credit by her testimony And they endeauour to proue the infallibility of the Churches judgment out of the Scripture and the trueth of the Scripture out of the determination and judgement of the Church Much like as if when question is made touching the quality condition of two men vtterly vnknowne a man to commend them to such as doubt of them should bring no other testimony of their good and honest disposition but the testimony of each of them of the other It is true then which I haue said that to a man admitting the Old Testament and doubting of the New a man may vrge the authority of the Old and to a man doubting of the Old and admitting the New the authority of the New but to him that doubteth of both a man must alledge neither of them but must bring some other authority or proofe so likewise to him that admitteth the Scripture and doubteth of the Church a man may vrge the authority of the Scripture but to him that doubteth of both as all doe when they begin to beleeue a man must alledge some other proofe or else hee shall cause him to runne round in a Circle for euer and neuer to finde any way out Wherefore to conclude this poynt let our Aduersaries know that wee admitte and require humane motiues and inducements and amongst them a good opinion of them that teach vs as preparing fitting vs to fayth Secondly that wee require a supernaturall ayde light and habit for the producing of an act of faith Thirdly that we require some diuine motiue inducement Fourthly that this cannot be the authority of the Church seeing the authority of the Church is one of the things wee are to bee induced to beleeue Fiftly that wee require the ministery of the Church as a propounder of all heauenly trueth though her authority can be no proofe in generall of all such truth Sixtly that the Church though not as it includeth onely the beleeuers that are in the world at one time yet as it comprehendeth all that are or haue beene is an infallible propounder of heauenly truth and so acknowledged to bee by such as are assured of the trueth of the doctrine of Christianity in generall Seauenthly that the authority of this Church is a sufficient proofe of the trueth of particular things proposed by her to such as already are by other diuine motiues assured of her infallibility §. 7. FRom the authority of the Scripture which he would faine make to bee wholy dependant on the Church the Treatiser passeth to the fulnesse and sufficiency of it seeking amongst other his discourses to weaken those proofes which are brought by Mee for confirmation thereof Affirming that though I make shew as if it were a plaine matter that the Euangelists in their Gospels Saint Luke in the Actes of the Apostles and Saint Iohn in the Apocalyps meant to deliuer a perfect summe of Christian doctrine and direction of faith yet I bring no reason of any moment to proue it Whereas yet in the place cited by him I haue these wordes contayning in them as I suppose a strong proofe of the thing questioned Who seeth not that the Evangelists writing the history of CHRISTS life and death St Luke in the booke of the Acts of the Apostles describing the comming of the Holy Ghost the admirable gifts and graces powred vpon the Apostles and the churches founded and ordered by them and Saint Iohn writing the Revelations
which he had concerning the future state of things to the end of the world meant to deliuer a perfect summe of Christian doctrine if the proof contained in these words be not sufficiēt for my part I know not what may be for what can be necessary to bee knowne of Christians ouer and aboue that which is found in the olde Testament besides the Incarnation of Christ his words actions sufferings the manner of the establishment of churches in the faith of Christ and the ordaining and appointing of fit guides to take care of the government of the same and the future state of things to the end of the world But he saith no one of the Evangelists intended to set downe all that Christ did and suffered as it appeareth in that no one of them hath so done that it cannot be said that all jointly haue so done seeing that could not proceed but from some common deliberation or the disposition and inspiration of the holy Ghost mouing them to write neither of which can be said For that there was no such deliberation he saith it is evident in that no man mentioneth any such thing in that it is knowne they wrote in diuers countries at diuers times vpon diuers occasions that the inspiration of the holy spirit did not direct them to the writing of all things necessary hee saith it is likewise most cleare in that I confesse there are some things wanting in their bookes which the church beleeueth which could not be if the spirit had moued them to write all This obiection will soone be answered For first it is certain that some one of the Evangelists intended to write all things which Christ did and spake S. Luke professing that he had so done Which yet is not to be vnderstood of all things simply but such onely as he did spake in that time within the compasse whereof he confined his narration Neither doth this prejudice the fulnesse of the Evangelicall history For as Baronius noteth the later Evangelists taking a view of that the former had written for the most part added what things they found omitted by them So Marke Luke write of the ascension of Christ not mentioned by S. Mathew because he ended his story before he came to it And Iohn finding as Hierome saith that the other three had written onely the history of one yeare after Iohn the Baptist was cast into prison wherein Christ suffered approued that which they had written as true omitting that yeare because the things that fell out in it were reported by thē recorded such things as fell out before the imprisonment of the Baptist which they had not written as not fetching the beginning of their narration so farre off If it be said by this Treatiser that many things that Christ did are so omitted that they are found in none of the Evangelists for that Iohn who wrote last of all knew well what the rest had written hath these words Many other signes also Iesus wrought in the sight of his Disciples which are not written in this booke but these things are written that you may beleeue that Iesus is the Christ the son of God and that beleeuing you may haue euerlasting life through his Name And againe there are also many other things which Iesus did which if they should be written euery one I suppose the world would not be able to containe the Bookes which should be written Baronius will tell him that the Evangelists when they tooke in hand the writing of the sacred stories intended not to write all the things generally that Christ did but such so many only as might serue to confirme the Faith and to demonstrate that IESVS is the Son of GOD that the things which they haue written are sufficient to saluation that men beleeuing may haue eternall life So that though there were no commō deliberation or consultation amongst the Evangelists though they wrote at diuers times in diuers places yet by the sweet disposition of the holy Spirit that moued them to write it might and did so fall out in that one saw what another had written that the later added such things as they foūd omitted by the former so left vnto vs a perfect full narration concerning Christ his incarnation life death resurrectiō ascension as also the things he did and spake during the time of his conversing amōgst men So that the Treatiser is not able to proue that the Evangelicall historie is imperfect but there is one thing wherein hee gloryeth as if hee had gotten some great aduantage which is that I confesse that there are somethings found in the Epistles of the Apostles occasionally writtē beleeued by the Church that are not found in the history of the Euangelists the book of all the Acts of the Apostles nor the Reuelation of Saint Iohn whence hee thinketh hee may inferre that eyther the Authors of th◅se books meant not to deliuer a perfect summe directiō of Christian faith as I affirme or that they missed of their purpose which may not bee graunted But lette him know that there is no consequence of any such absurdity as hee imagineth from any thing I haue written For the things beleeued by the Church and not found in the former bookes but in the Epistles of the Apostles are nothing else but distinct and cleare determinations of doubts arising touching matters of faith or manners out of and according to the summe of Christian Doctrine found in the former bookes or historicall narrations of such thinges as passed betweene the Apostles themselues or between them and the Churches founded by them or some particular persons in them not mentioned in the Acts of the Apostles or lastly Apostolicall prescriptions of things pertaining to decencie order and comelinesse in the performance of the acts of Gods worship and seruice Now I thinke it will not follow that if there be found in the Apostolicall Epistles some more distinct cleere resolutiōs determinations of doubtes out of the forme and direction of Christian Doctrine found in the former bookes then are there found or a prescription of some outward obseruations that the former bookes containe not a perfect summe and direction of Christian faith much lesse will it be consequent that these bookes containe not a perfect direction of Christian faith because some historicall narrations not found in them are beleeued in the Church as that Paul left his cloake at Troas that hee mediated for Onesimus and sought to reconcile him to his Maister and the like The Treatiser therefore passeth from this exception and asketh how I will proue that all thinges beleeued by the Church not contained in the former books are found in the Epistles of the Apostles to whom I answere that when hee shall giue any instance of things beleeued by the Church not foūd in the former books either it shal be proued
sort was diuided vpon a meere mistaking and that Athanasius by making either part rightly to vnderstand the other procured a reconciliation Neither neede this to seeme strange for oftentimes controversies are multiplied and by ill handling made intricate that in trueth indeede are no controversies and might easily bee cleared if there were a due proceeding in the discussing of the same So that the Treatiser had no reason to say that an indifferent reader will hardly excuse me frō error in this behalfe Wherefore let vs goe forward and see what other proofes hee bringeth to proue that my assertiō cannot be true First whereas I say there is no difference touching the Sacramēt the vbiquitary presence the like between the Lutherans Sacramētaries as he maketh me to speak he saith I may easily be cōvinced of vntruth because Caluin avoucheth that by the vbiquitary presence Marcion an anciēt heretick is raised vp out of hell a thousand bookes are written about the same point shewing how great dissentions there haue beene in the world touching the same But this proofe is easily disproued for though it bee true that Caluine hath that to imagine that the body of Christ hath no finite dimensions but such as are extended as farre as heauen earth and that it is euery where by actuall position or locall extension is to make it a fantasticall body and to raise vppe the old hereticke Marcion out of hell yet to thinke that Christs body is personally euery where in respect of the conjunction and vnion it hath with God by reason whereof it is no where seuered from God who is euery where neither Calvine nor any other Oxthodoxall Diuine euer condemned So that the Diuines of Germany condemning that kinde of vbiquitary presence that Caluine doth and Caluine allowing that other whereof they speake they must of necessity agree together notwithstanding any thing the Treatiser can say to the contrary but because I haue largely handled this matter touching the vbiquitary presence and the Sacrament in my fifth Booke of the Church and in my answere to Higgons I will no longer infist vpon it but referre the Reader to the former places Secondly whereas I affirme that none of the differences betweene Melancthon and Illyricus except about certaine ceremonies were reall hee sayth whosoeuer readeth the actes of the Synode holden by the Lutherans at Altenberge and the writings of the Flaccians against the Synergists and Adiaphorists shall finde dissentions touching greater matters For the cleering of this objection it must bee obserued that the supposed differences betweene those whom the Treatiser calleth Flaccians and the other whom he nameth Synergists were touching the co-operation of the wil of man with the grace of God in her first conuersion vnto GOD and the necessity of good workes to saluation Concerning the former of these two poynts it was euer agreed on between both these sorts of men that after the first conuersion there is a co-operation of the will of man altered renewed by the worke of Gods Spirit with grace in all ensuing actions of piety and vertue and in this sence both of them as defending a Synergy or co-operation of mans wil with Gods grace might rightly bee named Synergists 2ly It was likewise agreed on by both sorts that man by the fall of Adam and in the state of sinne is not onely wounded in the powers of his soule in respect of things naturall externall and politicall so that hee cannot performe any action so well in any of these kindes of thinges as before hee could but that hee is vtterly spoyled of all power strength and ability to doe any spirituall and supernaturall actions of true vertue and piety and is not onely halfe dead but wholly dead hauing no more power of himselfe to doe any thing that is good then a dead man hath to performe the workes of life Thirdly it was agreed on that there is not left in men corrupted by Adams fall the least sparke of morall or spirituall good desire or inclination which being blowed vpon and stirred may concurre with Gods grace for the bringing forth of any good worke So that neither of them were Synergists in this sense though Illyricus Museus and other supposed that Victorinus and some other did thinke so Fourthly it was with like vnanimous consent agreed on that there remaineth still in man after the fal a desire of good and of that good wherein there is no defect of good no mixture of euill no mutability nor feare of being lost though such be the infelicity of sinfull man that hauing his vnderstanding darkned and his will peruersly inclined he seeketh and supposeth he may finde this good where it is not to be found So that when God commeth to conuert and turne a sinfull man to himselfe he needeth not newly to put a desire of good into him for that is naturally found in him but by inlightning the vnderstanding that it may discerne and see what true good is and where it is to bee found and by turning the will from desiring that as good which is not or not in such degree as is supposed he maketh him a good and happie man that was euill and miserable before Neither doth he create a will in man but changeth the will he findeth in him that it may affect that which it did not and so createth a new will and heart in him that is frameth him to the desire of that from which hee was most averse before There is then no spirituall nor morall good in man when he is to bee conuerted vnto God no knowledge of true and spirituall good nor no desire of the same which being stirred vp may concurre with the grace of God and therefore no synergy or co-operation of any such good knowledge or desire of good with the grace of God in our first conuersion but that confused knowledge of good and naturall inclination to desire it that is found in man before his conuersion when good desires are to be raised in him concurreth with the grace of God directing the vnderstanding to seeke that good where it is to bee found and turning bending and bowing the heart to the loue and liking of it For that man desireth that which seemeth good vnto him he hath of nature that he desireth that which seemeth and is not hee hath from the corruption of nature and it argueth sinfull defect and that hee desireth the true good and rightly it is of grace directing the vnderstanding and turning the will from affecting that which before peruersly it did desire to seeke that which it should and in such sort as it should And so in that hee doth desire and pursue that which he thinketh to be good out of the naturall inclination of his will but that which indeede is and he should thinke to be good out of the motions of the spirit there is a kinde of Synergy or co-operation of the naturall powers of man
Apostles and in many places we finde the same to haue beene done rather for the honour of Priest-hood then the necessity of any Law otherwise if the Spirit descend not but onely at the prayer of the Bishop they are to be lamented who in villages castles and remote places baptized by Priests or Deacons dye before they are visited by the Bishop and then follovve these words The safety of the Church depends on the dignity of the chiefe Priest to whom if an eminent power be not giuen there will bee as many schismes in the Church as there are Priests So that this is that which he saith that it is rather for the honour of the Bishop or chiefe Priest of each Church that the imposition of hands vpon the baptized is reserued vnto him alone then the necessity of any law because if he had no such preeminences things peculiarly reserued vnto him in respect whereof he might be greater then the rest of the Priests Ministers in the Church there would be as many schismes as Priests and hence he saith it commeth that without the command of the Bishop or chiefe Priest neither Priest nor Deacon haue right to baptize So that it is manifest the chiefe Priest he speaketh of whose power is eminent peerelesse is so named in respect of other Priests in the same church that may not so much as baptize without his mandate not in respect of the pastors of the whole vniuersall church Wherefore if this pamphleter would haue dealt truly honestly he should haue said VVhereas heretofore some vnchristian Sermons books termed the Bishop of Rome the great Antichrist we shal now receiue a better doctrine more religious answer that there must be one chiefe Priest or Bishop in euery Diocesse hauing a more eminent authority then the rest then whereas men now detest his falshood they would but onely haue laughed at his folly But let vs come to his second allegation and see if there be any more truth in that then in this His wordes are these Doctor Field telleth vs from Scripture that Christ promised to build his Church vpon Saint Peter then no Christian will doubt vnlesse he will doubt of Christs truth and promises but it was so performed Let the reader peruse the place and hee shal find that I doe not tell them from Scripture that CHRIST promised to builde his Church vpon Peter as this man adding one falshood to another most vntruely sayth I doe but onely cite a place of Tertullian to proue that nothing was hid from the Apostles that was to be reuealed to after-commers where hee hath these words What was hidden and concealed from Peter vpon whom Christ promised to build his Church from Iohn the Disciple hee so dearely loued that leaned on his breast at the mysticall supper and the rest of that blessed company that should be after manifested to succeeding generations But he will say that I approue the saying of Tertullian and therefore thinke the Church was built vpon Peter Truly so I doe but I thinke also as Hierome doth that it was built no more vpon him then vpon all the rest and therefore the supremacy of Peters pretended successour will not bee concluded from thence Dicis saith Hierome super Petrum fundatur Ecclesia licet idipsum in alio loco super omnes Apostolos fiat Super omnes ex aequo Ecclesiae fortitudo solidatur that is Thou wilt say the Church was built vpon Peter It is true it was so but we shall find in another place that it was builded vpon all the Apostles Surely the firmenesse of the Church doth equally stay and settle it selfe vpon them all This is so cleare and evident that Bellarmine himselfe confesseth that all the Apostles may be said to haue beene foundations of the Church and that the Church may bee truely said to haue beene built vpon them all First because they preached Christ to such as had not heard of him before and were the first that founded Christian Churches Secondly in respect of their doctrine which they learned by immediate reuelation from the Sonne of God in which the Church is to rest as in the ground and rule of her faith Thirdly in respect of gouernmēt in that they were all heads rulers of the vniuersal Church Thus wee see if I had told them out of Scripture that Christ promised to build his Church on Peter our Aduersaries could not from thence haue inferred the supremacie of the Pope his pretended Successour Wherefore let vs come to his next allegation His words are Doctor Field and the rest doe ordinarily yeelde that the Romane Church continued the true Church of God till the yeare of Christ sixe hundreth and seauen when Bonifacius the Pope there claimed as they say supremacie first in the Church This is a meere imagination of his own for I no where speake of the Churchcōtinuing till the time of Bonifacius the Pope or till the yeare sixe hundred and seauen as if it had then ceased and therefore hee doth not here cite any page of my booke as in other places but citeth it at large But saith hee Doctor Field plainly acknowledgeth that the supremacy belonged to the Popes of Rome before the first Nicene Councell and then by the rules which hee giueth to knowe true traditions custome of the Church consent of Fathers or an Apostolicall Churches testimony this must needes bee of that first kinde and then of equall authority with Scripture as hee acknowledgeth of such traditions Such is the intollerable impudency of this man that I protest I canne scarce beleeue mine owne eyes or perswade my selfe that hee writeth that which I see hee doth For doe I any where acknowledge the supremacy belonged to the Popes of Rome before the Nicene Councell Nay doe I not in the place cited by him say that before the Nicene Councell there were three principall Bishoppes or Patriarches of the Christian Church to witte the Bishoppes of Rome Alexandria and Antioche as appeareth by the actes of the Councell limiting their bounds Had these their bounds limited and set vnto them and was there one of them an vniuersall commander If hee say I acknowledge the Bishop of Rome was in order and honour the first amongst the Patriarches before the Nicene Councell and thereupon inferre that I acknowledge his supremacie and commaunding power ouer the rest hee may as well inferre that I giue to the Bishop of Alexandria a commanding authority ouer the Bishoppe of Antioche because before the Nicene Councell he was before him in order and honour That which hee addeth as a Corollary that by the rules I giue to know true traditions this must bee of that kinde and cōsequently of equall authority with Scripture argueth in him a greater desire of saying something then care what he saith For first it no way appeareth out of any thing that I haue said touching the primacy of the Pope before the
time of the Nicene Coūcell that either custome of the Church consent of Fathers or the testimony of an Apostolical Church giue the supremacie to the Popes 2ly It is false that hee saith that I make custome of the Church or the testimony of an Apostolicall Church rules whereby to finde out which are true traditions and which are not For first I doe not say that custome of the church obseruing a thing is a proofe that that thing which is so obserued was deliuered frō the Apostles but such a custome whereby a thing hath beene obserued from the beginning So that though the Popes had beene supreame in power and commaund before the Nicene Councell which all the Papists and diuells in hell shall neuer proue yet would it not follow that this their supremacy were by tradition from the Apostles Secondly I doe not make the testimony of an Apostolicall church to be a rule whereby to know true traditions from false as hee is pleased to bely me but I disclaime it in the very place cited by him My words are these The third rule whereby true traditions may bee knowne from false is the constant testimony of the Pastours of an Apostolicall church successiuely deliuered to which some adde the present testimonie of any Apostolicall Church but this none of the Fathers admit neither doe I The Churches of Corinth Ephesus and Rome are Apostolicall Churches whatsoeuer their Pastors haue successiuely deliuered as receiued from the Apostles is vndoubtedly Apostolicall but not euery thing that the Pastours of those Churches that now presently are shall so deliuer seeing they are contrary the one to the other in things of great importance Thirdly whereas he saith I acknowledge vnwritten traditions to bee of equall authority with the Scriptures he is like himselfe For I neuer acknowledge that there is any matter of faith of which nature the Popes supremacy is supposed to be deliuered by bare tradition and not written but say onely if any thing may be proued to haue beene deliuered by liuely voyce by them that wrot the Scriptures there is no reason but it should be of as great authority as if it had beene written Two more allegations there are yet behind in this chapter that concerne mee The first that I say and Protestants generally agree with mee that the Regiment of the West Churches among which this nation is belonged to the Pope of Rome It seemeth this man hath a great desire I should say so and some hope I will say so But I protest as yet I neuer wrote any such thing and therefore here againe hee referreth his Reader to no page of my Booke as in other places but citeth it at large wherein he sheweth more wit then honesty for it is good to put a man to seeke farre for that which can no where be found But what if I had said the Bishop of Rome was Patriarch of the West would that proue an vniuersall power ouer the whole Church or such a kind of absolute authority ouer the Churches of the West as in latter times by vsurpation hee exercised ouer them Surely I thinke not But saith hee Doctour Downame saith before the grant of Phocas the Church of Rome had the superioritie and preeminence ouer all other Churches excepting that of Constantinople and Doctour Field telleth him absolutely that the title of Constantinople was but intruded and vsurped and when the first Nicene Councell gaue such honour to the Romane Church there was not so much as the name of Constantinople This is the last allegation that concerneth mee in this chapter The place that hee citeth is neither to bee found in the first booke of the Church quoted by him nor any where else For I no where euer say that the councell of Nice gaue supreame commaunding authority ouer all the Churches to the Bishop of Rome but only that it confirmed the distinct iurisdictions of the three Patriarches of Rome Alexandria and Antioche And touching the title of Constantinople where of he speaketh if hee meane the title of being vniuersall Bishop it is most true that it was intruded and vsurped as also the like is at this day by the Bishops of Rome which Gregorie their predecessour disclaimed thinking it intollerable that one man should subiect to himselfe all the members of the body of Christ which is his Church But if hee meane the title of being a Patriarch in order the second hauing equall priuiledges with the Bishop of Rome farre be it from me to thinke it was intruded or vsurped or to condemne the acts of the Councels of Constantinople and Chalcedon two of those foure which Saint Gregorie receiued as the foure Gospels as the Romanists doe because they gaue priuiledges to the Bishop of Constantinople equall to those of the Bishop of Rome Nay hereby it appeareth to be true that S. Hierome was wont to say Orbis maior est vrbe For after that Constantinople before named Byzantium was enlarged by Constantine named after his name and made the seate of the Emperours though the very name of it was not at all heard of in the time of the Nicene Councell yet in the second generall Councell holden at Constantinople the Bishop thereof was made a Patriarch and set in order and degree of honour before the other two of Alexandria and Antioche and in the great Councell of Chalcedon where there were more then 600 Bishops assembled he was again confirmed in the dignity of a Patriarch and to haue equall priviledges with the Bishop of Rome Against this decree they that supplyed the place of Leo in the councell resisted and Leo himselfe would by no meanes admit that the Bishops of Alexandria and Antioche claiming from Peter the one because Marke was there placed by him the other for that in person he abode there for a time should be put lower and the Bishop of Constantinople who had not like pretence to sit aboue them Yet the Fathers of the councell not so much respecting the claime from Peter as the greatnesse of the city and thinking it was the greatnesse of the city of Rome during the Emperours presence there that caused the Fathers formerly to giue honour to the Bishop of that city supposed they might now for the same cause giue like honour to the Bishop of Constantinople being become equall in state and magnificence to olde Rome and named new Rome as euery way matching it and howsoeuer the succeeding Bishops of Rome stroue a long while about this matter yet in the end they were forced to yeeld and to take the Bishops of Constantinople for Patriarches in degree of honour set before the other two CHAP. 4. IN this chapter hee endeavoureth to proue by testimonies of Protestants that all bookes receiued for Scripture by the Romane church are canonicall and herein are two things that concerne me The first that the Romane church being the spouse of Christ his true church and pillar of
professe the contrary euen in the place cited by him This allegatiō of my words might haue beene spared seeing there was neuer any man doubted of the truth of that for proofe whereof he alledgeth them Wherefore let vs come to his second part wherein he endeauoureth to shew that generall Councels make for the Romish Religion this hee proueth because when Protestants deny the authority of generall Councels they haue no excuse but because they were called by the Popes authority So saith he Doctor Field Doctor Sutcliffe M. Willet and the rest Surely it is a most shamelesse kinde of dealing to charge men with that they neuer thought spake nor wrote yet so doth the honest man vse me in this place and therefore citeth neither booke nor page as he is wont to doe but sendeth his Reader to seeke that which he shall neuer finde For I neuer denyed the authority of any councell onely because it was called by the Pope as he vntruely reporteth so that it is vaine and foolish that he vrgeth that in so doing I contradict my selfe in that the rules assigned by me to know true traditions as the testimony of the Pastors of Apostolicall Churches from the beginning the practise and consent of holy Fathers doe warrant vs that that priviledge euer belonged to the See of Rome that without the consent thereof no councell could be called none confirmed For the clearing of this point touching the calling and confirming of councels we must note that they are of diuerse sorts some Diocesan holden by each Bishop in his Diocese some Provinciall consisting of the Bishops of a Province called together or at least moderated by the Metropolitane some Patriarchicall consisting of the Metropolitans and Bishops of diuerse Provinces vnder one Patriarch and some Oecumenicall consisting of all the Bishops in the world The canon he speaketh of must bee vnderstood of Oecumenicall councels onely wherein things concerning the faith and state of the whole Catholique church are handled for otherwise each Bishop might hold a Diocesan Synode each Metropolitane a Provinciall and each Patriarch a Patriarchicall without requiring the consent of the Bishop of Rome wherefore let vs see how and in what sort the consent of the Bishop of Rome was required to the holding of generall councels and to what purpose his confirmation of their decrees was sought Cardinall Cusanus handleth this matter excellently well shewing at large that the meaning of the Canon of the primitiue church was not to giue any such absolutenesse to the Bishop of Rome that his negatiue should dash all or his affirmatiue establish what hee pleaseth without the consent and approbation of the rest but that being one of the prime Patriarches and chiefe Bishops of the Christian church nothing should be concluded without seeking requiring and expecting his presence ioynt deliberation and consent which is not to be marvailed at seeing no generall councell can be of force wherein the meanest Bishoppe in the world is purposely neglected or refused offering himselfe to such deliberation As no chapter act can bee good wherein any one hauing voyce in chapter is neglected or excluded though when he is present or at least called not excluded nor neglected things may passe though he say no euen so in like sort in a generall councell though no such assembly be lawfull and of force wherein the Bishop of Rome is neglected or his ioynt deliberation and consent not sought yet a man is rather to adhere to the Fathers in such a meeting consenting together then to the person of the Pope contradicting or refusing to assent to that they resolue on as not only those Papists do think that teach the Pope may erre is inferior to general coūcels in the power of iurisdiction but they also that are opposite to them in iudgement as Andradius sheweth out of Cardinall Turrecremata who professeth that a man should rather assent to the consenting voice of the Fathers assembled in a generall councell then to the person of the pope dissenting from them or refusing to confirme and ratifie that they agree vpon that in the power of discretiue iudgement the councell is greater then the pope Besides this we are to obserue that when the canon provided no Councell should bee holden and be of force without the Bishop of Rome the meaning of it was not precisely in respect of his person but of him and the Metropolitanes and Bishops of the West provinces subiect to him as Patriarch of the West who were a great and principall part of the Christian Church For the manner was when a generall councell was to be holden in the East as all the generall Councels that haue beene were that the Bishop of Rome as Patriarch of the West should impart the occasions of such a generall meeting in Councell to the seuerall Metropolitanes subiect vnto him and they calling their Bishops together in their seuerall provinces should send whom they thought fit to the same generall meeting with such directions and resolutions as it pleased them and as Cardinall Bellarmine hath rightly obserued it was enough if many Bishops of the East meeting and comming together some few came out of the West yea sometimes though none at all came as appeareth by the second generall Councell holden at Constantinople if the resolutions which the Bishoppe of Rome sent as agreed on in the seuerall Synodes subiect to him as Patriarch and the determinations of the Bishops and Fathers assembled concurred and consented And this doubtlesse was the reason why the confirmation of the Bishop of Rome with his Westerne Synodes was required for the ratifying of Generall Councels because neuer being present in person and very few or none of his Bishoppes being at those Councels it was necessary they should confirme ratifie what the rest in councell debated discussed and resolued on by testifying their assent For what could passe currantly as an act of a generall councell whereunto a great and principall part of the Christian World consented not So that it was not the Popes personall confirmation that was desired in auncient times as if all the Bishops in the World might erre the certainty of truth rested in him only as some men now teach but the consent of those Bishops that were subiect to him as Patriarch of the West as well as his owne who being absent were to ratifie strengthen and confirme the determinations of them that were present not as being more infallible in iudgement then they but by a ioynt concurrence and agreement This is all that can be proued out of the consent of Fathers Historians and practise of former times and therefore this man doth but trifle in this as in the rest Wherefore to conclude this matter touching Councels I dare vndertake to proue that Papists deny and reiect more councels then any of our Diuines doe Touching the right of calling Councels and in what cases they may bee called without the consent of
Stephen to write to the Bishops of France and writeth not himselfe as if the power of deposing Martianus were no more in Stephen then in himselfe Surely there may bee three reasons giuen of his so doing the first because hee was nearer to them then Cyprian The second because hee as Patriarch of the West with his Bishoppes was more likely to prevaile then Cyprian with his Africanes alone The third for that as Cyprian himselfe obserueth in the end of this Epistle it more concerned him then any other to maintaine the reputation of LVCIVS and CORNELIVS his predecessours and to oppose himselfe against Martianus who joyned himselfe with Nouatianus that had schismatically and heretically rent and diuided himselfe from them and made a schisme in their Church Neither doth that which followeth where he desireth Stephen to write vnto him who is appointed in the roome of Martianus that so he may know whom to write vnto and with whom to communicate import that hee should by himselfe alone constitute the Bishoppe of Arle but that writing to the people to choose and the Bishoppes of the prouince to direct them in choosing and to consecrate him they should choose hee should require to be certified from them of their proceedings accordingly that so he might impart the same vnto him The next proofe that the Pope hath authority to depose any Bishop of the world deseruing to be deposed is out of the Epistle of Nicholas the first to Michael the Emperour of Constantinople But whosoeuer shall peruse the place shall finde that noe such thing can be concluded out of it For the drift of Nicolas in that Epistle is to shew that the inferiours may not iudge their superiours as the prouinciall Bishops their Metropolitanes or the Metropolitanes their Patriarch but that still the greater must judge the lesser If a Clerke sayth the Councell of Chalcedon haue ought against his Bishoppe let the matter bee heard in the Synode of the prouince but if a Bishop or Clerke haue a complaint against the Metropolitane let him go to the Primate of the Diocese or to the See of Constantinople So that euer the greater must judge the lesser and the lesser may neuer presume to judge the greater so long as there is any greater to flye vnto And therefore Iohn of Antioch in the Councell of Ephesus was reproued for that being but Bishop of the third See he presumed to judge Cyril Bishop of the second See Dioscorus Bishop of the second See was condemned in the Councell of Chalcedon for that he iudged Leo Bishop of the first See This he insisteth vpon to shew that the Bishops subiect to Ignatius Patriarch of Constantinople had vnjustly proceeded against him then to shew that this their proceeding was strange new he saith there hath scarce beene any of the Bishops of Constantinople deposed whose deposition hath bin holden iust and good without the concurrence of the See of Rome Now how will this proue that the Pope hath power in himselfe alone to depose all Bishops worthy to be deposed is it consequent that if the Bishops of Patriarchicall Sees may not be judged by their owne Bishops alone nor by those that are in degree of honour inferiour to them and that the Patriarches of higher Sees with their Bishops must concurre with the Bishops of those Patriarches that are judged and that neuer any Bishop of Constantinople being next in honour to the Bishop of Rome was deposed but by such a Synode whereof the Bishop of Rome was president that the Bishoppe of Rome hath in himselfe alone the fulnesse of all Ecclesiasticall power Surely I thinke not our Aduersaries themselues being judges But Gelasius in his Epistle to the Bishops of Dardania sayth the See Apostolique by her authority condemned Dioscorus Bishop of the Second See therefore the Pope hath all Ecclesiastical power originally seated in himselfe alone Truely this cōsequence is no better then the former For by the See Apostolique Gelasius vnderstandeth the Romane Bishop and the Bishops of the West subject to him who Synodically condemned Dioscorus and yet not without the concurrence of many other Bishops nor so as that the iudgement was thought perfect till an Oecumenicall Synode confirmed it as it appeareth by the course of histories The next example is the deposition of Flauianus Bishop of Antioch by Damasus Bishop of Rome But this example might haue beene spared For it is most certaine that Damasus did not depose Flauianus The circumstances of the history are these Eustathius that worthy Bishop of Antioch who made that excellent Oration in the prayse of Constantine in the Councell of Nice and was so earnest and zealous a defender of the true faith against the Arrians being by certaine Arrians cast out of his Bishoprique and banished vpon the occasion of a lewd woman charging him to haue committed adultery with her but afterward confessing she had wronged him and that shee had beene suborned by those Arians so to accuse him Eulalius was chosen into his place whom Euphronius succeeded and after him Placitus obtained the Bishoprique All these did secretly fauour Arrianisme and therefore many both of the people and Priests forsaking the publique assemblies had their priuate meetings and were called Eustathians for that after the banishment of Eustathius they began thus to assembe together Stephen succeeded Placitus Leontius Stephen and Eudoxius Leontius who obtaining to be Bishop of Constantinople left the Church of Antioche voide Whereupon the Bishops of the prouince assembled together and chose Milesius to be Bishop some of them hoping that he would fauour Arrianisme and other knowing that he was an Orthodoxe the errour of the one side mis-perswaded of the man and the true knowledge the other had of him made both willingly to consent to his election and ordination But so soone as the Arrians perceiued what he was they deposed him and sent him into banishment placing Euzoius in his place which when the people and Priests that were Catholique perceiued who had long endured the insolencies of the Arrians they diuided themselues and refused to communicate with him After a while Milesius in the time of Iulian returneth from banishment to whom though such Catholiques as diuided themselues vpon dislike of Euzoius presently cleaued yet would not they that first diuided themselues in respect of Eustathius neither at the first ordination of Milesius though Eustathius were then dead nor now vpon his returne by any meanes be induced to hold communion with him and his which Lucifer one of them that had beene in banishment with Athanasius seeing and pittying laboured with them what he could to bring them to vnity But when he saw they would not be induced to joyne with Milesius and that Paulinus was their leader hee made him their Bishop which act of his made the Schisme more dangerous then before and of longer continuance then otherwise happily it would haue beene for it
continued 85. yeares Milesius perceiuing Paulinus to be ordained Bishop ouer them that were diuided from his communion seemed noe whit therewith to be offended or displeased but spake peaceably to Paulinus desiring him that they might joyne their flockes and feede them together and if sayd hee the throne diuide vs let mee lay the Gospell in it and then do thou sit in it sometimes and I will sit in it at other times and if I dye before thee thou shalt haue the care and charge of all if thou dye before mee the care and charge of all shall be deuolued to mee This counsell Paulinus would not harken vnto and therefore the Emperours officer adiudged the Churches to Milesius and the guiding of the diuided sheepe to Paulinus Whereupon when Milesius dyed though Paulinus would haue had the place yet hee was refused because hee had refused to harken to the Counsell of Milesius and the Bishoppes chose Flauianus a man verie conspicuous for his great labours and one that had exposed himselfe to many dangers for the good of the Church Yet this ordination greatly displeased the Aegyptians and Romanes The reason of which their soe great dislike was for that when there was much contention betweene Milesius and Paulinus it was so agreed that all they that were fit for that Bishopricke or might in likelyhood bee in any hope or expectation of it should sweare neither to seeke it nor accept it while either of these liued nor noe way to hinder but that after the death of the one the other might haue the full and entire gouernement of the whole of which number it was thought that Flauianus was one that therefore not without periury contrary to his vow and oath hee had hindred the reuniting of the diuided parts of the Church This dislike conceiued against Flauianus dyed not when Paulinus dyed but though Euagrius most vnlawfully and against the Canons had gotten the Bishoprique hauing noe ordination but from his predecessour whereas the Canons allow no such nomination of a Successour and besides require the presence of the Bishoppes of the prouince yet would they that at first disliked the ordination of Flauianus take noe knowledge of any of these things but cōmunicated with Euagrius incited the Emperour against Flavianus who being vrged continually by the Bishop of Rome and others no longer to suffer Flavianus to enjoy his place and told that suppressing Tyrants he did ill to suffer the violatours of the Lawes of the Church to escape vnpunished sent for Flavianus thinking to send him to Rome there to be judged in a Synode of Bishops who when hee came into the presence of the Emperour tolde him confidently that if any man would object against his doctrine or life he would desire to be tryed by no other Iudges but his greatest enemies but if the matter were for his Episcopall chaire he would willingly relinquish it that the Emperour might commit it to whom hee would vpon which his confident answere the Emperour dismissed him and bade him to goe home and feed the flocke committed to him Yet long after many complaints were againe renewed against him to the Emperour by sundry Bishops being at Rome fearing to taxe the Emperour himselfe for that he suppressed not the tyranny of Flavianus but the Emperour bade them say what that tyranny was as if he were Flavianus for that he had vndertaken the defence of him Which when they refused to doe professing themselues vnwilling to stand vpon termes with the Emperour he exhorted them to lay aside their foolish quarrellings and to reunite the Churches that had long without cause beene divided for that Paulinus was now dead and Euagrius came vniustly to the Bishopricke and the ordination of Flavianus was so farre forth allowed of that all the Churches of the East with the Churches of Asia Pontus Thracia and Illyricum held Flauianus to be lawfull Bishop of the East Hereupon the Bishops promised to surcease and that if Flavianus would send Legates vnto them they would kindly intreate them and hold communion with him Howsoeuer it appeareth by Socrates that after the death of Euagrius hee procured there should be no Bishop chosen in opposition to him and first pacified Theophilus and afterwards by his meanes Damasus Sozomen reporteth that Chrysostome after he was made Bishop of Constantinople finding that the Aegyptian westerne Bishops dissented from those of the East in respect of Flavianus and that all the Churches throughout the whole Empire were divided about him besought Theophilus to bee pacified towards him and to assist him for the reconciling of Damasus also To this suite of Chrysostome Theophilus yeelded sent certaine to Rome who prevailing sailed into Aegypt and from thence as also from Rome brought letters of reconciliation peace both from the Aegyptian and Westerne Bishops This History I thinke will neuer proue that the Bishop of Rome deposed Flavianus Bishop of Antioche and that hee could not hold his Bishopricke till the Bishop of Rome consented to him For the thing that was sought was not his holding of his Bishopricke as Bellarmine vntruly reporteth but the peace and concord of the Churches divided about him Neither was the difference onely betweene him and Damasus but all the Bishops of Aegypt the West dissented from him likewise and therefore Ambrose sheweth that the examining of the matter betweene Euagrius and him was committed to Theophilus the Bishops of Aegypt and desireth him to make relation of the end he should make to the Bishop of Rome that he also agreeing thereunto an vniversall peace might be concluded So that nothing can bee concluded out of this history for proofe of the vniversall power of Popes Seeing Damasus could neither of himselfe alone nor with the concurrence of the Westerne Bishoppes depose Flavianus nor by any meanes perswade the Emperour to thrust him out of his place but was sharply reprooued by the Emperour for quarrelling with him and required to bee at peace with him that so the Churches formerly divided without cause might be revnited The next instance of the Popes deposing Bishops is that of Sixtus the third who deposed Polychronius Bishop of Hierusalem if wee may beleeue Bellarmine but in truth there was neuer any such thing The circumstances of the whole proceeding against Polychronius Bishop of Hierusalem if there be any credite in the report of Pope Nicholas and the acts of the Councell vnder Sixtus the third were these Two things specially were objected to him the one that hee went about to violate the ancient bounds of the Ecclesiasticall Iurisdiction of Bishops set and limited by the Fathers to preferre himselfe before the other principall Bishops and to make his See the first whereas in trueth it was the last amongst the Patriarchicall Sees the other that Simoniacally he conferred Ecclesiasticall honours vpon such as would purchase the same Hereupon the Bishops subiect to him not willing to proceede
The eight was holdenat Constantinople about the difference betweene Ignatius and Photius and called by Basilius the Emperour as appeareth by the Appendix to the Acts of that councell collected out of diuerse Authors by Surius and extant in the second part of the third Tome of Councels set out by Binnius So that wee see all the Eight Generall Councels were called by the Emperours and not by the Popes which thing is so cleare and euident that our Adversaries dare not deny it but seeke to avoyde the evidence of the truth against which they dare not directly oppose themselues by all the shifts they can devise for first they say that though it be not so proper to the Pope to call Councels but that others may doe it ifhee assent vnto it or approue it yet that without his Mandate Assent or Approbation of such indiction and calling no councell is lawfull Secondly they say that the Emperours called councels by the authority of the Pope and thirdly that happily they presumed aboue that was fit forthem to doe Wherefore let vs see how they proue that they say That the right of calling Councels belongeth to the Pope and not to the Emperor and consequently that the Emperour may call none without his assent Bellarmine endeauoureth to proue in this sort They that meete in councels must bee gathered together in the name of Christ to be gathered in the name of Christ is to be gathered by him that hath authority from Christ and none hath authority from Christ to call together the Pastors of the church but the Pope onely therefore none but the Pope may call councels To this argument wee answere that indeed they must meet in the name of Christ who assemble in councels but that to meete in Christs name importeth not in the promise made by Christ a gathering together of them that meete by his authority And that the Cardinall can neuer proue that the Pope and hee onely is authorized to call together the Pastours of the churches That to bee gathered together in Christs Name importeth not to bee called together by publike authority as Bellarmine vntruely affirmeth it is evident by his owne confession in that hee acknowledgeth that the gathering together in Christs Name to which hee hath promised to joyne his owne presence may bee verified of many or few Bishops or Laymen priuate or publike persons about priuate or publike affaires whereas priuate men meeting about priuate businesses are not gathered together by any one hauing authority to commaund them but by voluntary agreement among themselues and therefore Andradius telleth vs that both by the circumstance of Christs speech and the commentaries of the holy Fathers it is euident that his wordes agree to euery meeting of such men as beeing joyned together in Faith and charity aske any thing of GOD and particularly produceth Chrysostome expounding Christs wordes as Calvine doth whom Bellarmine taxeth to wit that they are saide to bee gathered together in Christs Name whom neither respect of private gaine induceth nor the ambitious desire of honour inviteth nor the prickes ofhatred and envy incite driue forward whom the inflamed loue of peace the feruent affections of Christian charity impell and not the spirit of contention in one word they who meete to seeke out by force of diuine grace with common and heartiest longing desires sought and obtained what especially pleaseth Christ and what is true For they that come together to set forward and aduance their owne priuate designes and to serue their owne contentious dispositions and to deceiue miserable men with the glorious name of a Councell are by no meanes to be thought to come together in Christs name nor to hold Ecclesiasticall assemblies but such as are most pestilent and hurtfull of which sort they were which were holden heretofore in the time of Constantine and Constantius at Tyrus Ierusalem Antioch Sirmium and Seleucia and infinite other conuenticles of Heretiques to which that most aptly agreeth which Leo the Pope pronounceth of the second Councell of Ephesus to wit that while priuate causes were promoted and set forward vnder pretence of religion that was brought to passe by the impiety of a few that wounded the whole Church But sayth Bellarmine this note of meeting in the feare of God with desire of finding out the truth and doing good discerneth not lawfull Councels from other seeing all that meete in Councels pretend that they come together out of a desire of the common good and not for priuate respects and that therefore this is not to meete in Christs name which is strangely sayd of him as if lawfull Councels rightly proceeding in their deliberations might not bee discerned from other by any thing that other may pretend or as if this his silly argument might sway against the circūstances of Christs words and the Commentaries of the holy Fathers Wherefore passing from this first exception against his Argument wee secondly answere vnto it that Christ did not giue the power of calling Generall Councels to the Pope alone as hee alleageth and in what sort Christ committed his Church to Peter to be gouerned by him as likewise in what sence it is that Leo sayth Though there be many Pastours yet Peter ruleth them all we haue largely declared already So that from hence nothing can bee concluded to proue that Christ gaue the power and right of calling Generall Councels to the Pope alone And thirdly we say that though it be true that Christ did not leaue his Church to be gouerned by Tiberius Caesar an Infidell so continuing or to his successors like vnto him in Infidelity yet hee that promised to giue Kings to be nursing Fathers and Queenes to be nursing mothers vnto his Church left it to bee gouerned by those nursing Fathers and nursing Mothers which he meant in succeeding times to raise vp for the good comfort and peace of his faithfull people after that their faith patience and long suffering more precious then gold should bee sufficiently tryed in the fire of tribulation Wherefore let vs passe to the Cardinalls second argument which is noe better then the first For neither hath the Pope power either Ciuill or Ecclesiasticall to inforce all Bishops to bee present at such assemblies as hee shall appoint neither did the Emperours informer time want meanes to inforce all to come when they called for them And touching the present state of things wee are not so foolish as to thinke the right of calling generall Councels to rest in the Emperour hauing so little command as now hee hath but wee place it in the concurrence of Christian Princes without which no lawfull Generall Councell can euer bee had His third reason taken from the proportion of Metropolitanes and Patriarches calling Prouinciall and Patriarchicall Synodes holdeth not as I haue shewed before Neither that which seemeth of all other to bee strongest taken from the ancient