Test quest 57. Tract 47. in Joh. St. Augustin We might add to this what (g) Tertull. Carm. Tertullian says That all the Apostles had an equal power and that they were all the same as St. Peter was as (h) Cypr. lib. de unitat Ecclesiae St. Cyprian explains it and that they had all the same dignity as Pope (i) Append. com Theod. Ep. 8. Gelasius says Philér I am very well satisfied as to your first proof and I think you have shewed sufficiently by the Holy Scripture that the supream Authority is in the Church and in the Council which represents it That St. Peter himself tho he were the Prince of the Apostles was subject to it and that he was not looked upon as the supreme Judge in things that concerned Religion but as the first Minister in the College of the Apostles I desire you now to pass on to your second proof and to shew me by the perpetual and constant Tradition of the Church that the Popes who have succeeded St. Peter were never considered as the supreme arbitrators of things concerning Religion but that the Soveraign Authority to which the Popes themselves ought to be subject was esteemed ever to be in the Council Phila. I will readily perform the promise I made to you but I would have you observe by the by That the Bishops of Rome have not succeeded St. Peter in the charge of his Apostleship which was a personal employment and particular to those whom Jesus Christ had immediately called whom he had Bapized by his Holy Spirit and enriched with extraordinary gifts by which means these blessed people were Infallible and possessed a soveraign and Independent Authority in the Church and a Ministry which was not restrained to a certain place but which was dispersed throughout the whole World. I would also have you observe That the succession of the Bishops of Rome to St. Peter was but in the charge of a Bishop whereof St. Peter and the rest of the Apostles did communicate the Rights or Prerogatives to their successors and that this Charge hath this common Right with the Apostleship that it confers the power of Preaching the Word of administring the Sacraments and of using the power of the Keys but it gives no infallibility or power of exercising the Ecclesiastical Ministry all the World over After this Observation which is not amiss to our purpose I come to what I promised you And I observe in the first place that in the most Ancient Monuments of Christian Antiquity I find no traces of this Supreme Power which the Roman Bishops of the last Ages would attribute to themselves We have the Epistles of St. Ignatius which are of an Apostolick Character but there is not so much as the least foot-step of this supreme Authority attributed to the See of Rome This Holy Prelate speaks of the Church of Rome as of other Churches He calleth it the Church sanctified and illuminated by the will of God without giving it the least authority over any other and in his 7th Epistle to those of Smyrna he directeth it to the Bishop in the name of the Church and acknowledgeth nothing above him which he would never have done had he believed the Bishop of Rome to have been not only above other Bishops but also above a Council St. Justin Martyr in his Apology for the Christians gives an account to the Emperor Antoninus of the behaviour of Believers in his time but there is not one word of a superior and supreme Master that resided at Rome and made his Soveraign decision concerning matters of Religion St. Polycarp the Disciple of St. John as Eusebius relates it in his Book of Ecclesiastical History came to Rome to confer with Anicetus who was there Bishop concerning the day whereon he was to keep Easter but yet he followed not this Bishops Opinion which without doubt he would have done if it had been true that the Bishop of Rome had been at that time held the supreme Judge of the Church St. Irenaeus Bishop of Lyons in his Epistle to Victor Bishop of Rome as †Lib. 5. cap. 2 24. Eusebius saith sharply reproves him for separating from his Communion the Eastern Church because they would not keep Easter upon the same day that he did How could this Bishop have reproved things of this nature if he had believed that Victor had been in this conjuncture the absolute judge to whose Decisions and to whose Tribunal the Church was obliged to submit There were several Synods held both in the East and West There was one in the East where Policrares Bishop of Ephesus presided wherein far from acknowledging the Bishop of Rome for the Arbitrator of the whole Church they condemn his opinion as Eusebius witnesseth Was not there a Council also held in France our own Country wherein the Bishop of Rome had no share But St. Irenaeus presided and wrote a very pressing letter to Victor to oblige him to retain Communion with the Eastern Churches Do you think now seriously that things would have been carried thus if they had believed that the Bishop of Rome had held a Soveraign authority in the Church Some time afterwards the Heretick Novatians whose Picture Cornelius Bishop of Rome hath drawn in his Epistle to Fabian Bishop of Antioch being deprived of the Roman Chair which he had usurped and where he had published this Error That they ought not to be admitted to Repentance who had fallen into grievous sins Cornelius did not undertake of himself to condemn this Error which he would have done without all question if he had thought himself to have been the soveraign Arbitrator of the Church but he assembled at Rome a Council of Sixty Bishops There were also held without any order of Cornelius many Councils in divers places namely at Antioch which had been an horrible attempt had Cornelius been the absolute Magistrate of the Christian Common-wealth Matthew Bishop of Arles having joyned himself to Novatian Faustinus Bishop of Lyons did not address himself to Cornelius but to St. Cyprian Bishop of Carthage who wrote to the neighbouring Bishops of France and to the Bishop of Rome to exhort them to do their Duty and in this Letter he saith That he held in his own hand the ballance of the Church Government Doth not all this then demonstratively prove that the Bishop of Rome was not at that time looked upon as the Monarch of the Church I add to these Examples that of the famous Council of Antioch held in the year 265. against Paulus Samosatenus wherein assisted more than 270. Bishops This sworn enemy of our Saviour's Divinity being relapsed into the Heresy which he had formerly abjured in an Assembly held in the same City and because he could not be brought back to his Duty by the Letters and Remonstrances of the neighbouring Bishops it was their Opinion to call a Council and to this purpose Helenus Bishop of Tharsus and
cause some rupture with the Pope Into what confusion and disorder might not so unfortunate an accident cast us †Greg. Naz. Orat. 12. Were we not better to Sacrifice somewhat to the good of our peace which is the greatest Legacy that our Saviour left to his Apostles * Joh. 14.27 Pacem meam do vobis What is there more precious than Union and Concord since that Jesus Christ gave so great a Character of it to his Disciples †Joh. 13.35 In hoc cognoscent omnes quia mei Discipuli estis si dilectionem habueritis ad invicem What is there more prejudicial than disunion and discord which destroy the most flourishing States Omne regnum divisum contra se desolabitur domus divisa contra se non stabit Matt. 12.25 Phila. I agree with you that we ought to do our utmost to obtain Peace that we ought to sacrifice our own Interests nay that for so great a good we ought to relinquish things that seem to us of importance Ipsum enim nomen pacis amabille says St. Austin but you must own too that we ought to do nothing for Peace to the prejudice of Truth St. Paul joyns these one with the other ‖ Eph. 4.15 Veritatem facientes in Charitate And God who calls himself Charity calls himself also Truth I know also that the Fathers of the Church exhort us greatly to avoid Schism as a mortal poison but a Peace made against the interest of Truth is not a real Peace and when we cannot make it and maintain it but at the prejudice of this Trurh it were better that a Scandal should arise than that Truth should be abandoned Satius est says St. Bernard ut scandalum oriatur quam ut veritas disceratur Philér How My dear Philal. Do you think that the Propositions of the Clergies Declaration and of Father Buhi's Thesis contain such essential and such important Truths that it would be a crime not to defend them tho it were to the disturbance of the Publick Peace Phila. Yes Dear Sir I am very well perswaded that all these Propositions are founded upon Texts of Scripture upon the Canons of Councils and upon the perpetual and constant Tradition of the Church principally of the Gallican Church and by consequence I believe that we ought not to depart from them any ways and that we cannot do it without danger But because it will be a matter of long Discourse I shall defer the examining of it to another walk The Second Dialogue PHilalethe and Phileréné who were no less desirous to entertain each other upon the subject whereon they had begun than to enjoy the fine weather of the Spring came the next day to the place appointed for their Conversation Scarce had they walked a turn or two talking of indifferent matters but Philalethe to make good the promise he had made the day before to his dear Friend began thus I told you yesterday says he that the Propositions contained in the Declaration of my Lords the Bishops and in the Thesis maintained by Father Buhi are of greater importance than you thought of and that they contained in them Truths too evident and too necessary to be let go for the motives of a deluding Peace To convince you of it we will make it the subject of our present Discourse I believe that the first and chief of these Questions and which ought to serve as a foundation to all the rest is that which concerns the Authority of Councils which hath ever been most venerable among Christians and which I believe to be of Divine Right and above the Authority of the Pope And in this I rely upon the Scripture and the perpetual and constant Tradition of the Church I believe answered Philéréne as you do That the Authority of Councils is of Divine Right and no Christian that ever I heard of hath yet disputed it But I know not whether you can so clearly prove as you hope for that this Authority of Councils is above that of the Pope for that many Learned men hold the contrary and there seems to be nothing in Antiquity decisive upon this matter The Council of Constance was the first that in this case pronounced in favour of Councils and what that Council declared about it was not in an absolute sence but in some certain respects and for some certain occasions Phila. I acknowledg that there are some famous Doctors who are of this opinion That the Pope is above the Council but it cannot also be denied but that the number of Learned men who hold the contrary Opinion is much the greater and you shall scarce find a Man of Learning in all France but he adheres to their Party Philér I am not for entring upon this particular discourse but you will oblige me to shew me by good Reasons that the Authority of Councils is the supream Authority in the Church and that Believers ought not to acknowledg any other upon Earth in things which relate to Faith and Discipline Phila. To be as good as my word to you then in what I promised you I suppose you know the Original of Councils A Man of your reading in the Divine History cannot be ignorant that God himself established them when he commanded Moses to take to him Seventy Elders for the Government and Conduct of his Ancient people and you know without doubt that the Jews had not only their Council of Twenty three which they called the Lesser House of Judgment but also their Council of Seventy wherein presided their Anaci which Council was composed of Sacrificers Priests and Scribes of the Law and was called the Greater House of Judgmen Our Councils have been formed after this Model and the Apostles began them at Jerusalem But to remove all difficulty our Question seems to be clearly decided by our Saviour in the 18th of St. Matthew when he referreth them who had any difference to the Church if they could not decide it by another way Dic Ecclesiae you see our Saviour referreth his Disciples to the Church without excepting St. Peter himself for which reason St. Augustin says very pertinently * Ep. 112. Tra. 118. in don lib. 1. pebapt con Donat. cap. 51. That the Church is the last and supreme Judgment that St. Peter signified the Church when our Saviour said to him That whatsoever he should bind on Earth should be bound in Heaven and whatsoever he should loose on Earth should be loosed in Heaven that it is the Church which received the power of the Keys and that if any one despiseth her when she correcteth he ought to be looked upon as a Publican and a Sinner It is furthermore the Church which is called the Support and Pillar of Truth * 1 Tim. 3.15 Columna firmamentum veritatis If you take good heed to this expression of St. Paul and to the Reasons whereon he grounds it you will agree that the Church is
the depositary of Truth and that she hath the supream jurisdiction over her Children for their behaviour for it is certain in this Text that St. Paul alludes either to the Pillars which were erected in the Heathen Temples upon which were fixed the Statues and the Deities which were there worshipped or to the Two Pillars of Solomon's Temple one of which was called Jakin and the other Bohas and that he would have us understand by it that it is the Churches Office to declare to establish and to maintain the Truth Philér I see very well that the Church being the Spouse of Jesus Christ she is made partaker of the advantages and privileges which Marriage endoweth her with and that she being his Body is as it were clothed with his Majesty But St. Peter Was not he made the Head of this Church Did not Jesus Christ make him his Lieutenant and Vicar when he said to him that upon him he would build his Church †Matt. 16.18 19. Tu es Petrus super hanc Petram c. Was it not to St. Peter that he gave the Soveraign Authority when he said to him Dabo tibi claves Regni Coelorum quodcunq ligaveris super Petram c. Phila. It is true that all Catholick Divines do acknowledg St. Peter as the Ministerial head of the Church and Prince of the Society of the Apostles but this was not a principality of Dominion which our Saviour expresly forbiddeth his Apostles ‖ Matt. 16.18 19. Luke 22.25 Item Matt. 20.25 Reges gentium Dominantur eorum vos autem non sic For which reason St. Bernard says in the 3d Book of his Considerations to Eugenius Imperium interdicitur Ministerium indicitur But this is only a Primacy of Order ₠Lib. de unit Eccl. Propter bonum unitatis says St. Cyprian who assures us furthermore that all the Apostles Erant pari consortio Honoris Authoritatis praediti Besides Was not St. Peter a Member of the Church St. Augustine and St. Cyprian says he was and that with a great deal of reason since that all Believers compose but one body to whom Jesus Christ as the Head doth communicate the spirit of Life It is then manifest that the Member dependeth upon the Body and not the Body upon the Member Also St. Ambrose says upon this Subject in his Commentary upon St. Luke That the Church is above St. Peter Ecclesia est super Petrum This evidently appears by what St. Luke says in the 15th of the Acts concerning the first Council that was held among Christians in which Assembly of the Apostles and Ministers of the Church at Jerusalem the question which St. Paul and St. Barnabas related to them on the behalf of the Church of Antioch was decided but they decide it not by the Authority of St. Peter but by that of the Holy Ghost and of themselves Visum est spiritui sancto nobis c. Also in the 21st of the same Book St. James and St. Paul say that they had made this Ordinance St. Jude and St. Silas are sent not on the behalf of St. Peter but of the whole College of the Apostles Add to this That St. Peter himself was sent with St. John by the Apostles to those of Samaria after they had received the Word of God as it is related in the 8th Chapter of the same Book which proves invincibly that St. Peter was not the Soveraign Master of the Society of the Apostles but that he was in some degree their inferior whatsoever the place were that he held amongst them not unlike the first Senator in the Body of a Senate it being the right of a Superior to send an Envoy Philér I apprehend very well what you say But can it be denied but that Jesus Christ promised somewhat particularly to St. Peter in the 16th of St. Matthew when he said to him in particular Ego vero dico tibi c. Phila. I could tell you as a great many Catholick Divines do That St. Peter having answered in the name of all the Apostles Jesus Christ gave him nothing in particular but what he received he received in the name of all the Apostles and of the whole Church of which he was then the Type as St. Austin says in the 1st Book of his Retractations Cap. 21. speaking of St. Peter Typum gerebat Ecclesiae cui sunt traditae claves which is founded upon the Text of the 20th of St. John where Jesus Christ gives equally to all his Apostles the power of forgiving and of retaining Sins I could say with St. Chrisostome upon this passage and with (a) De Verb. Dom. Serm. 13. Tract in Joh. 12.4 Serm. de divers 118. in Psal 86.97 c. St. Augustine That this Rock whereon Christ promiseth to build his Church was that firm and solid Confession of Faith which St. Peter had just then made or else Jesus Christ himself who was this Corner-stone whereon was placed the mystical building of the Church Et super hanc Petram quam cognovisti says St. Augustin dicens tu es Christus Filius Dei viventis edificabo Ecclesiam meam id est super me ipsum Filium Dei edificabo Ecclesiam meam super me edificabo te non me super te (a) Cyril lib. 4. de Trinit St. Cyril (b) Hil. lib. 2. 6. de Trin. St. Hilary (c) Amb. in c. 2. de Episto St. Ambrose and (d) Hiero. lib. cont Jov. c. 19. St. Hierom are of this opinion but to deal freely with you it is none of mine For I had rather take this Text as (e) Tert. lib. 1. de pud cap. 21. Tertullian and St. Cyprian and say with these other Doctors That Jesus Christ spoke in particular to St. Peter and promised him some Prerogatives above his Colleagues And to justify my Opinion I observe first That St. Peter answers in particular concerning his Faith. Now Faith is so internal a thing that nothing but the Conscience of each particular person can answer for it and by consequence we cannot say that this Apostle answered in the name of the whole Society of the Apostles When it concerned some outward thing which was obvious to the senses this Apostle might answer in the name of all his Brethren as when he says to our Saviour We have left all to follow thee Omnia c. But when the question was concerning a motion of the heart he could not answer for any but himself Secondly You must observe that our Saviour promiseth a particular recompence to the Faith of Peter for which after that the Apostle had said Tu es Christus Filius Dei vivi He Answers him Ego vero dico tibi quia tu es Petrus beatus es Simon Barjona to make him know that he would reward particularly the strength of his Faith and the fervency of his Zeal For this reason he puts him in mind of the new name he had
given him Tu es Petrus says he and furthermore super hanc Petram edificabo Ecclesiam meam He makes him understand by this That he shall not bear the name of Peter in vain since he intended to build his Church upon this Foundation-stone and tho the Evangelist St. Matthew changeth the Term yet it cannot be inferred from thence that he changeth the Subject because that Cephas the Syriack term which our Saviour used when he said to Simon the Son of Jona Thou art Peter signifies a Rock so that to translate the Syriack letter which Jesus Christ made use of we must say that our Saviour said to Simon the Son of Jona Thou art a Rock and upon this Rock will I build my Church And it cannot be denied but that St. Peter was a fundamental stone whereon Jesus Christ did build his Church since that in the 21st of the Revelations the Apostles are called (g) V. 14. Fundamenta coelestis Jerusalem You will be fully confirmed in this opinion if you observe that the Church is oftentimes compared in Scripture to a Temple to a House Believers are the living Stones of it Jesus Christ is the Corner-Stone and the Apostles the Foundation-stones And of these St. Peter is to be accounted the first because he laid the first foundation of this mystical building To these two Observations I would add a third drawn from the Hebrew Language amongst whom those who beget Children are called the Foundations of Houses Who then can doubt in either sense but that St. Peter is one of these Foundation-stones nay the very Foundation-stone it self since that by his Preaching full of Faith and of Zeal he laid the first Foundation of the Christian Church and begat Children unto God as well of the Jewish People as of the Gentiles I say the same thing of what our Saviour added That he would give him the Keys of the Kingdom of Heaven These Keys are Keys of an Authority not of Dominion and of Empire but of Jurisdiction and of Direction such as belong to a Steward and such as God promised to lay upon the Shoulders of Eliakim in the 22d of Isaiah We may also say that Jesus Christ alluded to the Custom of the Jews who invested their Doctors by the ceremony of delivering to them the Keys or to the Custom of the Pharisees who attributed to themselves the power of binding who called every thing bound which was prohibited and that loosed which was allowed of No Man therefore can deny but that St. Peter was established the principal Doctor of the Christian Church and that the Keys of Heavenly Knowledg whereof he just then gave an admirable proof were committed to him He loosed both the Jews and the Gentiles Those from the Observation of the Ceremonies of the Law and the Traditions of their forefathers which was a grievous burthen these from the false Opinions and false Worships wherein they had been bred And he confirmed both the one and the other in the belief of the Mysteries of Salvation and in the practice of the Maxims of the Gospel In all these respects who can doubt but that St. Peter received in a particular manner the Keys of the Kingdom of Heaven Philér All that you have said seems to me to be very good and very solid but what had St. Peter to his own particular in all this Are not the other Apostles as well as St. Peter these Foundation-stones of the Church in the sense which you have observed Were not the other Apostles as well as St. Peter established the Infallible Doctors of the Church Did not they all make use of the Keys of the Kingdom of Heaven in binding and loosing upon Earth the sins of Men Phila. I agree with you in all you say But though these Privileges were common to all the Apostles that doth not at all hinder St. Peter's having them after an Eminent manner and in this respect he had certainly some Prerogatives above his Brethren They were all of them Foundation-Stones whereon Jesus Christ built his Church But it may be said that St. Peter laid the Foundation of this mystical building after a most singular manner not only because he set the first hand to it but also because he built this House all the World over by the means of those who having been taught immediately from his mouth and dispersed at length throughout the World Preached the Gospel every where They all received the Keys of the Kingdom of Heaven but St. Peter was the first that with his Keys opened the Doors of this Kingdom and made a larger use of it than the others You see also that he was the first called to the Apostleship That he shewed also a particular zeal and love for his Master who distinguished him from the others by his favours and by the name of Peter which he gave him But all these Prerogatives give him only a Primacy of Order and not of Dominion an Authority not of Empire and of Monarchy but of Precedency and of Direction such as that of a first President in a Senate or of a famous Philosopher among those of his Profession for which reason (a) Dial. ◠cap. 4. St. Jerom says of St. Peter that he was the first of the Apostles as Plato was the Prince of the Philosophers Philér I am convinced of the truth of what you say But doth it not appear in the 21st of St. John that Jesus Christ gives even an Authority of Dominion to St. Peter above his Brethren whom he distinguisheth by the name of Sheep as other common believers by the name of Lambs Phila. You can conclude nothing from that Text in favour of the Monarchical authority of St. Peter for in this place according to the opinion of (a) Cyril Alex. lib. 12. in Joh. cap. 64. St. Cyril of Alexandria and of (b) Cyril Hieros Catech. 2. St. Cyril of Jerusalem Jesus Christ did only renew to St. Peter the dignity of his Apostleship which he enjoyed but as the other Apostles did that he might not think he had lost it by his three times denying his Master and for this reason it is that he bids him three times to feed his Sheep It is to no purpose to seek after a Mystery in the terms of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 since that the two first signify at the bottom the same thing and the two last are given indifferently to Believers in the Scripture The holy Fathers do also hold that the Apostles received the same right and the same power as St. Peter when our Saviour said to him Pasce oves meas according to (c) Basil de vit solit cap. 23. consti cap. 42. St. Basil (d) Greg. Naz. in Test Epist St. Greg. Nazianzen (e) Ambrose in pass St. Ambrose and (f) Aug. de Agon Chr. cap. 30. lib. quest vet No.
he was forthwith condemned for his disobedience in a Synod of ten Provinces held at Attini We may add to this example of Hincmare that of Arnulph A B. of Rheims who was condemned and deposed for several crimes in an Assembly of many Bishops held at Rheims who declared that they acted by the Authority which had been given to the Apostles and which had been left to them This sufficiently sheweth that an Apostolick spirit reigned in the souls of our Prelates and that in spight of the enterprizes and attempts of the Court of Rome they maintained this general opinion of their worthy Predecessors That they held their charges and the authority which belongeth to them from God and not from the See of Rome They shewed the same zeal in the A B. of Sens his Affair at the Synod of Pontignon and in that of Saire concerning a Church in the Diocess of Tours held by a Cardinal sent by John the 20. Which they call a Sacriledg and a contradiction to the Holy Canons which ordain that a Bishop can do nothing in anothers Diocess without his consent And in that of Geofry Bishop of Chartres in whose place one Ivo had been surrogated by Pope Vrban 2d whom Richarius A B. of Sens Mertropolitan of Chartres together with the Bishops of Paris Troys and Meaux opposed They also shewed this same spirit in the advice they gave to Philip the August to appeal to the next Council from the Sentence of Innocent 3 as from an abuse in the Pragmatick Sanction which St. Lewis made by their advice and in the Council which they gave together with others assembled at Paris in the year 1209 to Philip the Fair against the enterprizes of Boniface 8 not to mention the famous Book call'd Somnium Viridarii writ and published by the order of Charles the Fifth called the Wise noâ— of the Laws and Rules wich Charles the 6. his Son made against the Usurpations of the Court of Rome which sheweth sufficiently that the Authority of the See of Rome was not looked upon as the superior Authority in France But after that the Council of Constance had formally explained it self upon this matter men spoke bolder in France than they had done in former times Charles 7th forbad the French Prelates to go to the Council called at Ferrara in the year 1427. And he himself called in the City of Bourges a great and famous Assembly of the Princes of his Blood Officers of his Crown Prelates and Ecclesiastical persons members of his great Council Doctors in Law as well Divine as Humane and Professors of the Universities together with the Legates of Eugenius 4th After that the Doctors of the Universities had represented in the name of the whole Gallican Church her former state her Rights and the attempts which had been made upon her Liberties they besought his Majesty to remedy this disorder that he would be pleased to Authorize some Decrees and Canons of the General Councils of Constance and of Basil such as that is which declares that General Councils lawfully assembled and representing the Church militant have their power immediately from Jes Christ and are above the Pope which Councils they themselves had judged ought to be observed Wherupon the King approved confirmed the aforesaid decrees ordered all people to observe and keep them inviolaby This is that which was called the pragmatick Sanction 32 years afterwards Lewis 11. being won by the flatteries of Pius 2d and through evil suggestions as may be seen in the Book of the three Estates of the year 1483 revoked the Pragmatick Sanction without any consultation of the States before hand or of the Gallican Church The Kings Attorny General and the Rector of the University of Paris formally opposed the Registring the Kings Letters concerning these his Decrees The Court of Parliament it self represented in writing the great evils that would happen upon the abolishing of so just a Sanction to so good effect that Lewis 11th far from abolishing it gave orders for its confirmation as amongst others that of the 16 of August 1478 whereby it is forbidden to go the Rome to seek after any Benefice or to pay in any money upon pain of Confiscation of Body and Goods and to prevent Anathema's from Rome he caused his Parliament of Paris at the request of his Attorny-General to pass an Act that in case the Pope should undertake any thing to the prejudice of his Ordinances he should appeal to the next Council The Estates of the Kingdom whereof the Clergy is the first Order being Assembled at Tours present a Petition to King Charles the 8th in the first Article of which they desire His Majesty to keep and maintain inviolably the Pragmatick Sanction of Bourges founded upon the Decrees of the Councils of Constance and of Basil And in the National Council which Lewis the 12th Assembled in the same City of Tours in the year 1510 the observation of the Pragmatick Sanction was fully resolved upon Observe how our venerable Prelates have ever maintained the Interest and the Privileges of the Church against the attempts of the Court of Rome and how they make appear to the whole World that they do Religiously keep in their hearts the Sentiments which they had received from their Ancestors that they believed that the supreme Authority resided in General Councils and that how eminent soever that of the See of Rome might be it was still dependant upon theirs This is the Doctrine which hath been taught and maintained by the University of Paris as may be seen in the Writings of her most famous Doctors such as are the Chancellor (c) Tract de potest Eccles Gerson James Almain c. to which to may add a great many more as (d) Niâ— Cus de concord can lib. 2. cap. 2. the Cardinal of Cambray Nicho Cusan (e) Pan. in cap. signif extrav de elect the Abbot Panormitan (f) Abulensis in cap. 18. Matt. quaest 108. Abulensis (g) Fran. vict T. de potes Eccles Franciscus de Victoria (h) Alph. a Cast lib. 7. de just pun haer Alphonsus a Castro and all the Divnes of the Council of Trent which is spoken of in the 7th Book of the History of this Council who maintained with our Bishops of France and those of Spain that the jurisdiction of Bishops and their residence was of Divine Right Philer All that you have said perswades me sufficiently that the Authority of Councils is above that of the Popes but there are some scruples that I desire to be resolved in before that I can cordially embrace your Opinion These scruples arise from two things wherein you will agree with me The one is That the Popes have been ever desired to confirm Councils which without doubt had never been if their Authority had not depended on that of the Popes And the other is That the Title of Head of the Council is given to the Pope