flowers of the Crown so they might but hold the Diademe it self from their competitors Therefore our Ecclesiasticall law was called the Kings law because the edge and validity of it did proceed from authority royal our Ecclesiasticall Courts were stiled the Kings Courts by his Judges It is true the habitual Jurisdiction of Bishops flowes from their Ordination But the actual exercise thereof in Publick courts after a coercive manner is from the gracious concessions of Soveraign Princes In a word the law being meerly intended as a remedy against usurpation it cannot be a new Law but onely a Legislative declaration of the Old Common Law of England I will conclude this Chapter with the words of Bishop Bilson As for his Patriarchate by Gods law he hath nonâ— in this Realm for Six hundred years after Christ he had nonâ— for the last Six hundred years looking after greater matters he would have none Above or against the Princes Sword he can have none to the Subversion of the Faith or oppression of his Brethreâ— he ought to have none you must seek further for Subjection to his Tribunall This Land â—weth him none CHAP. V. That the Britanick Churches were ever exempted from forraign Iurisdiction for the first six hundred years And so ought to continue THirdly supposing that the reformed Church of England had separated it self from Rome and supposing that the municipal laws of the Realm then in force had not warranted such a separation yet the British Churches that is the Churches of the British Islands England Scotland and Ireland c. by the constitution of the Apostles and by the solemne sentence of the Catholique Church are exempted from all forraign Jurisdiction and cannot be Schismatical in the lawful vindication of a just priviledge so well founded for the clearer manifestation whereof let us consider First that all the twelve Apostles were equall in mission equall in commission equall in power equall in honour equal in all thingâ— except priority of order without which no Society can well Subsist So much Bellarmine confesseth that by these words As my father sent me so send I you Our Saviour endowed them with all the fulnesse of power that mortall men were capable of And therefore no single Apostle had Jurisdiction over the rest par in parem noâ— habet potestatem but the whole Colledge of Apostles to which the supream Mesnagery of Ecclesiasticall affaires did belong in common whether a new Apostle was to be ordained or the office of Deaconship was to be erected or fit persons were to be delegated for the ordering of the Church as Peter and Iohn Iudas and Sylas Or informations of great moment were to be heard as against Peter himself Though Peter out of Modesty might condescend and submit to that to which he was not obliged in duty yet it had not become the other Apostles to sit as Judges upon their Superiour placed over them by Christ. Or whether the weightier questions of the calling of the Gentiles and circumcision the law of Moses were to be determined still we find the Supremacy in the Colledge Secondly that drousy dream that the plenitude of Ecclesiastical power and Jurisdiction was given by Christ to Saint Peter as to an ordinary Pastour to be derived from him to his Successours but to the rest of the Apostles as delegates for tearm of life to die with themselves as it is lately and boldly asserted without reason without authority either divine or humane so it is most repugnant to the doctrine of the Fathers who make all Bishops to be the Vicars and Embassadours of Christ not of the Pope and successours of the Apostles indifferently Vicaria ordinatione who make but one Episcopacy in the world whereof every Bishop hath an equal share St. Peter was a Pastor and the Pastoral office is of perpetual necessity in the Church True But so were all the rest of the Apostles Pastors as well as he And if we examine the matter more narrowly cui bono for whose advantage this distinction was devised it was not for S. Peters own advantage who setting aside his principallity of order is confessed to have had but an equall share of power with his fellow Apostles but fo rs the Popes advantage and the Roman courts whom they desire to invest solely with the key of all originall Jurisdiction And if we trace on this Argument a little further to search out how the Bishop of Rome comes to be Saint Peters heire ex assâ— to the exclusion of his Elder Brother the Bishop of Antioch they produce no authority that I have seen but a blind ill grounded legend out of a counterfeit Hegâ—sippus of Saint Peters being about to leave Rome and Christs meeting him upon the way and admonishing him to return to Rome where he must be crucified for his name which reason halts on both sides The foundation is Apocryphal and the superstruction is weak and unjointed without any necessary connexion Thirdly it appeareth not to us that the Apostles in their daies did either set up any universall Monarchy in the Church or so much dilate the borders or bounds of any one mans single Jurisdiction as to subject so great a part of the Christian World as the Western Patriarchate to his obedience The highest that they went if any of those Canons which bear their names be genuine was to nationall or provincial Primates or Patriarchs for a Protarch or Primate and a Patriarch in the language of the ancient Church signified one and the same thing in whose praeheminence there was more of order and care then of single Jurisdiction and power Read their three and thirtieth Canon It behooves the Bishops of every distinct Nation to know him who is their first or Primate and to esteem him as their head And to do nothing that is of difficulty or great moment contrary to his opinion But neither let him do any thing without the opinion of all them This Nationall Primacy or Protarchatâ— or Patriarchate under which the Britannique Churches flourished for many ages is the very same which we contend for Fourthly it is worthy of our inquiry how in processe of time some Primates did obtain a much more eminent degree of honour and a larger share in the government of the Church then others And of this their adventitious Grandeur we find three principal fountaines First ancient customes Secondly the Canons of the Fathers And thirdly the edicts of Christian Princes First ancient customes Upon this ground the first generall Councel of Nice settled the authority and priveledges of the three Patriarchal Sees of Rome Alexandria and Antioch Let ancient customes prevail And these customes commonly proceeded either from the memory of the Apostles who had founded such Churches from whence as from Apostolical fountaines their neighbours did fetch sound doctrine and reciprocally paid to them due respect So
any the least particle of divine right if there had been any such Nor could they justly be accused of violating that humane right which had been quitted long before nor be blamed rightly for denying obedience to him from whose Jurisdiction they were exempted by the Canon of an Oecumenical Councel and who had himself implicitely renounced that Ecclesiastical right which he held from the Church Perhaps some may conceive a defect in the manner of proceeding of the King and Church of England that they did not first make a Remonstrance of their grievances and seek redresse of the Pope himself So the Councel of Towers thought it fit Visum est tamen Concilio ante omnia mittendos Legatos ad D. Papam Julium c. It seemeth good to the Councel that in the first place messengers be sent from the French Church to the Pope who may admonish him with brotherly love and according to the Evangelical form of correction to desist from his attempts and to imbrace peace and concord with the Princes But if he will not hear the messengers let him be demanded to convocate a free Councel according to the decrees of the holy Councel of Basile And this being done and his answer received further provision shall be made according to right To this I answer first That it had been reasonable and just indeed that we had made our first addresse to the Pope if we acknowledged the Roman Bishop to be our lawful Patriarch But the same respect is not due to an usurper Secondly we have seen by frequent experience how vain and fruitlesse such addresses have proved from time to to time According to the former advise of the Councel of Towers the King of France sent Ambassadors to Rome but the Pope refused to hear them or to convocate any Councel and before his death Anathematized Maximilian King of the Romans the Kings of France and of Navarre and divers other Princes Cardinals and Bishops deprived the Kings and Princes of their respective Realms and Principalities the Bishops of their dignities and benefices and gave their Kingdoms and Principalities to the first that could take them from which sentence they appealed to a future Councel The most ancient arbitrary imposition of the Popes upon the British Churches was the Pall an honourable and at first innocent ensign of an Archbishop otherwise of no great moment first introduced in the reigns of the Saxon Kings after the six hundreth year of Christ But in process of time it became vendible and a great summe was exacted for it whereof Canutus long since complained at Rome and had remedy promised as he well deserved of that See But how well it was observed the experience of after-ages doth manifest when both the price was augmented and withall an oath of allegiance to the Pope imposed Electo in Archiepiscopum sedes Apostolica pallium non tradet â—isi prius praesteâ— fidelitatis et obedientiae juramentum The See Apostolique will not deliver the Pall to an elect Archbishop unlesse he first swear fidelity and obedience to the Pope what was become of their old oath of allegiance to their King In the year 1245. the King the Lords spiritual and temporal and the whole Common-Wealth of England joyned together unanimously in a complaint and exhibited their grievances to Rome that the Pope extorted more then his Peter-pence out of the Kingdom contrary to law that the Patrons of Churches were defrauded of their rights strangers preferred souls endangered their bullion exported the Kingdome impoverished provisions made pensions exacted That the English were drawn out of the Realm by the authority of the Pope contrary to the customes of the Kingdom They complained of the coming among them of the Popes infamous messenger non obstante by which oaths customes writings grants statutes rights priviledges were not only weakened but exinanited They complained of collections without the Kings leave that hospitality was not kept the poor not sustained the Word not preached Churches not adorned the cure of souls neglected divine offices not performed and Churches ruined by the abuses of the Papal Court I cannot omit one clause in the letter of the Lords to the Pope Nisi de gravaminibus domino Regi et regno illatis Rex et râ—gnum citiùs liberentur oportebit nos ponere murum pro domâ— Domini et libertate regni Quod quidem ob Apostolicae sedis reverentiam hucusque facere distuliâ—us Vnlesse the King and Kingdom be quickly freed from these grievances we must make a wall of defence or partition for the house of the Lord and the liberty of the Kingdom which we have hitherto forborn to do out of our reverend respect of the Apostolique See They seem to allude to that wall which Severus made to save the Kingdom from the incursions of the Scots and Picts Surely that was not more necessary then than that wall of partition which Henry the eighth made afterwards to save the Realm from the affronts and extortions and injuries of the Roman Court. Neither did they make their addresses to the Pope alone but to the Councel of Lyons by the Procters of the whole Nobility and Commonalty of England for redresse of the violent oppressions intolerable grievances and impudent exactions which were practised in England by meanes of that hateful clause non obstante too often inserted in the Popes letters They represented that there were so many Italians for the most part ignorant and unlearned that understood not one English word nor did ever tread upon English ground beneficed among them that their yearly revenue exceeded the revenue of the Crown Neither did they complain onely but threaten and swear that they would not permit such abuses for the future But what ease did the poore English find by complaining to the Pope either in Councel or out of Councel Martine the Popes Commissioner for he could not send a Legate without the Kings consent extorts excommunicates interdicts the Pope himself is angry because like sturdy children they durst cry and whimper when they were beaten and perswades the King of France to invade England and either to depose the King or subject him to the Court of Rome which lost the Pope the heart of the English The King told them that their King began to kick against him and play the Frederick And they threatened that if he persisted they should be forced to do that which would make his heart ake After this Edward the third made his addresses likewise to Rome for remedy of grievances in the year 1343. How did he speed No better then his Great grandfather Henry the third The Pope was offended and termed his modest expostulation rebellion But that wise and magnanimous Prince was not daunted with words to requite their invectives he made the statutes of Provisoes and praemunire directly against the incroachments and usurpations of the Court of Rome Whereby he so abated their power
Command or permission And after permission onely by authority of the King and not by authority of the Pope to shun confusion and mixture of Jurisdictions 10. Neither the King nor his Realm nor his Officers can be excommunicated or interdicted by the Pope nor his Subjects absolved from their Oath of Allegiance 11. The Pope cannot impose Pensions in France upon any benefices having cure of soules nor upon any others but according to the Canons according to the expresse condition of the resignation or ad redimendum vexationem 12 All Bulls and Missives which come from Rome to France are to be seen and visited to try if there be nothing in them prejudicial in any manner to the estate and liberties of the Church of France or to the Royal authority 13 It is lawful to appeal from the Pope to a future Councel 14 Ecclesiastical persons may be convented judged and sentenced before a secular Judge for the first grievous or enormious crime or for lesser offences after a relapse which renders them incorrigible in the eye of the Law 15. All the Prelates of France are obliged to swear feaâ—ty to the King and to receive from him their investituâ—es for their fees and manours 16. The Courts of Parliament in case of appeales as from abuse have right and power to declare null void and to revoke the Popes Bulls and Excommunications and to forbid the execution of them when they are found contrary to sacred decrees the liberties of the French Church or the prerogative Royal. 17. Generall Councels are above the Pope and may depose him and put another in his place and take cognisance of appeals from the Pope 18. All Bishops have their power immediately from Christ not from the Pope and are equally successours of Saint Peter and the other Apostles and Vicars of Christ. 19. Provisions reservations expectative graces c. have no place in France 20. The Pope cannot exempt any Church Monastery or Ecclesiastical body from the Jurisdiction of their Ordinary nor erect Bishopricks into Archbishopricks nor unite them nor divide them without the Kings Licence 21. All those are not hereticks excommunicated or damned who differ in some things from the doctrine of the Pope who appeal from his decrees and hinder the execution of the ordinances of him or his Legates These are part of the liberties of the Gallicane Church The ancient British Church needed no such particular priviledges since they never knew any forreign Jurisdiction The English British Church which succeeded them in time in place and partly in their members and holy orders ought to have injoyed the same freedom and exemption But in the daies of the Saxon Danish and Norman Kings the Popes did by degrees insinuate themselves into the mesnagery of Ecclesiastical affaires in England Yet for many ages the English Church injoyed all these Gallicane priviledges without any remarkable interruption from the Roman Court. As in truth they do of right by the Law of nature belong to all Sovereign Princes in their own Dominions Otherwise Kingdomes should be destitute of necessary remedies for their own conservation And in later ages when the Popes having thrust in their heads did strive to draw in their whole bodies after the whole Kingdome opposed them and made Lawes against their several grosse intrusions as we have formerly seen in this discourse And never quitted these English as well as Gallicane liberties untill the Reformation But perhaps we may find more loyalty and obedience to the Court of Rome in the Catholick King Not at all Whatsoever power King Henry or any of his Successours did ever assume to themselves in England as the Political Heads of the Church the same and much more doth the Catholique King not onely pretend unto but exercise and put in practice in his Kingdome of Sicily both by himself by his Delegates whom he substitutes with the same authority to judge and punish all Ecclesiastical crimes to excommunicate and absolve all Ecclesiastical persons Lay-men Monks Clerks Abbats Bishops Archbishops yea and even the Cardinals themselves which inhabit in Sicily He suffers no appeals to Rome He admits no Nuncio's from Rome Atque demum respâ—ctâ— Ecclesiasticae Iurisdictionis neque ipsam Apostolicam sedem recognoscere hâ—bâ—re superiorem nisi in casu praevenâ—ionis And to conclude he acknowledgeth not any superiority of the Sâ—e of Rome it sâ—lf but onely in case of prevention What saith Baronius to this He complains bitterly that praetensa Apostolica authoritate contra Apostolicam ipsam sedem grande piaculum perpetratur c. Vpon pretence of Apostolique authority a grievous offence is committed against the Apostolick See the power whereof is weaknâ—d in the Kingdome of Sicily the authority thereof abrogated the Iurisdiction wronged the Ecclesiastical Lawes violated and the rights of the Church dissipated And a little after he declaimes yet higher Quid in ad ista dixeris lector What wilt thou say to this Reader but that under the name of Monarchy besides that one Monarch which all the faithful have ever acknâ—wledged as the onely visible Head in the Church Another head it risen up and brought into the Kingdome of Sicily for a Monster and a prodigy c. But for this liberty which he took the King of Spain fairly and quietly without taking any notice of his Cardinalitian dignity caused his books to be burned publickly It will be objected That the King of Spain challengeth this power in Sicily not by his Regal authority as a Sovereign Prince but by the Bull of Vrbanus the second who constituted Roger Earl of Sicily and his heires his Legates à latere in that Kingdome whereby all succeeding Princes do challenge to be Legati nati with power to substitute others and qualifie them with the same authority But first if the Papacy be by Divine right what power hath any particular Pope to transfer so great a part of his office and authority from his Successours for ever unto a Lay-man and his heires by way of inheritance If every Pope should do as much for another Kingdom as Vrbanus did for Sicily the Court of Rome would quickly want imployment Secondly if the Bull of Vrbanus the second was so available to the succeeding Kings of Sicily which yet is disputed whether it be authentick or not whether it be full or defective and mutilated why should not the Bull of Nicholas the second his predecessour granted to our Edward the Confessour and his Successours be as advantagious to the succeeding Kings of England why not much rather seeing that they are thereby constituted or declared not Legates but Governours of the English Church in the Popes place or rather in Christs place seeing that without all doubt Sicily was a part of the Popes ancient Patriarchate but Britaigne was not And lastly seeing the situation of Sicily so much nearer to Rome renders the Sicilians more capable of receiving Justice from thence then the English
corrupted and degenerated it doth still retein a Communion not onely with the Catholick Church and with all Orthodox Members of the Catholick Church but even with that corrupted Church from which it is separated except onely in corruptions We may well inlarge the former ground that if two particular Churches shall separate themselves one from another And the one retein a communion with the Universal Church and be ready to submit to the determinations thereof And the other renounce the Communion of the Universal Church and contumaciously despise the Jurisdiction and the decrees thereof the former continues Catholick and the later becomes Schismatical To shew that this is our present condition with the Church of Rome is in part the Scope of this Treatise They have subjected Oecumenical Councels which are the Soveraign Tribunals of the Church to the Jurisdiction of the Papal Court And we are most ready in all our differences to stand to the judgment of the truly Catholick Church and its lawful Representative a free general Councel But we are not willing to have their virtual Church that is the Court of Rome obtruded upon us for the Catholick Church nor a partial Synod of Italians for a free general Councel Thirdly there may be an actual and criminous separation of Churches which formerly did joyn in one and the same Communion And yet the Separaters be innocent and the persons from whom the separation is made be nocent and guilty of Schisme because they gave just cause of separation from them It is not the separation but the cause that makes the Schisme Saint Paul himself made such a separation among his disciples And Timothy is expresly commanded that if any man did teach otherwise and consented not to wholsome words even to the words of our Lord Iesus Christ and to the doctrine which is according to godlinesse 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 withdraw thy self stand aloof or separate thy self from such persons It is true that they who first desert and forsake the Communion of their Christian brethren are Schismaticks but there is a moral defection as well as local It is no Schisme to forsake them who have first themselves forsaken the common faith wherein we have the confession of our adversaries They who first separated themselves from the primitive pure Church and brought in corruptions in faith practice Leiturgy and use of Sacraments may truly be said to have been hereticks by departing from the pure faith and Schismaticks by dividing themselves from the external communion of the true uncorrupted Church It is no Schisme to separate from hereticks and Schismaticks in their heresie and Schisme This is all the Crime which they can object to us The Court of Rome would have obtruded upon us new articles of faith we have rejected them They introduced unlawful rites into the Leiturgies of the Church and use of the Sacraments we have reformed them for our selves They went about to violate the just liberties and priviledges of our Church we have vindicated them And for so doing they have by their Censures and Bulls separated us and chased us from their communion where lies the Schisme Fourthly to withdraw obedience from a particular Church or from a lawful Superiour is not alwaies criminous Schisme Particular Churches may sometimes erre and sometimes clash with the universal Church Patriarchs and other subordinate Superiours may erre and sometimes abuse their authority sometimes forfeit their authority sometimes disclaim their authority or usurp more authority then is due unto them by the Canons They would perswade us that obedience is to be yeelded to a Church determining errours in points not fundamental But they confound obedience of acquiescence with obedience of conformity They forget willingly that we acknowledge not that they ever had any lawful authority over us par in parem non habet potestatem Equals have no Jurisdiction over their equals The onely difficulty is that this seems to make Inferiours Judges of their Superiours the flock of their Pastour the Clergy of their Bishop the Bishop of his Metropolitan the Metropolitan of his Patriarch whereas in truth it onely gives them a Judgment of discretion and makes them not to be Judges of their Superiours but onely to be their own Judges salvo moderamine inculpatae tutelae to preserve themselves from sin or heresie obtruded upon them under the specious pretences of obedience and Charity This is not deficere but prospicere not to renounce due obedience to their lawful Superiours but to provide for their own safety Some things are so evident that the Judgment of the Church or a Superiour is not needfull Some things have been already judged and defined by the Church and need no new determination If a Superiour presume to determine contrary to the determination of the Church it is not rebellion but loyalty to disobey him When Eunomius the Arrian was made Bishop not one of his flock rich or poor young or old man or woman would communicate with him in the publick service of God but left him to officiate alone When Nestorius did first publish his heresie in the Church in these words If any man call the Virgin Mary the Mother of God let him be accursed the people made a noise run out of the Church and refused ever after to communicate with him Valentinian the Emperour shunned the communion of Sixtus the third Many of the Roman Clergy withdrew themselves from the communion of Anastasius their Bishop because he had communicated with the Acatians Rusticus and Sebastianus two of the Popes chiefest Deacons did not onely themselves forbear the Communion of Vigilius but drew with them a good part of the Church of Rome and other Occidental Churches It cannot be denied but that among many examples of this Lyne some are reprehensible not because they did arrogate to themselves a liberty which they had not but because they abused that liberty which they had either by mistaking the matter of fact or by presuming too much upon their own judgments To prevent which inconveniencies â—he eighth Synod decreed not by way of censure but of caution as a preservative from such abuses for the future that no Clerk before diligent examination and Synodical sentence should separate himself from the communion of his proper Bishop no Bishop of his Metropolitan no Metropolitan of his Patriarch Then what is Schisme Schimse signifies a criminous scissure rent or division in the Church an Ecclesiastical Sedition like to a mutiny in an Army or 〈◊〉 in a State Therefore such ruptures are called by the Apostle indifferently 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Schismes or seditious segregations of an aggregate body into two opposite parties And there seems to me to be the same difference between heresie properly so called and Schisme which is between an inward sicknesse and an outward wound or ulcer Heresie floweth from the corruption of faith within
Schisme is an exteriour breach or a solution of continuity in the body Ecclesiastick Consider then by what nerves and Ligaments the body of the Church is united and knit together and by so many manner of ruptures it may be schismatically rent or divided asunder The Communion of the Christian Catholick Church is partly internal partly external The internal Communion consists principally in these things To believe the same intire substance of saving necessary truth revealed by the Apostles and to be ready implicitly in the preparation of the mind to embrace all other supernatural verities when they shall be sufficiently proposed to them To judge charitably one of another To exclude none from the Catholick Communion and hope of salvation either Eastern or Western or Southern or Northern Christians which professe the ancient faith of the Apostles and primitive Fathers established in the first general Councels and comprehended in the Apostolick Nicene and Athanasian Creed To rejoyce at their well-doing To sorrow for their sins To condole with them in their sufferings To pray for their constant perseverance in the true Christian Faith for their reduction from all their respective errours and their re-union to the Church in case they be divided from it that we may be all one sheepfold under that one great Shepherd and Bishop of our Soules And lastly to hold an actual external Communion with them in Votis in our desires and to endeavour it by all those means which are in our power This internal Communion is of absolute necessity among all Catholicks External Communion consists first in the same Creeds or Symbols or Confessions of Faith which are the ancient badges or cognisances of Christianity Secondly in the participation of the same Sacraments Thirdly in the same external worship and frequent use of the same divine offices or Leiturgies or Forms of serving God Fourthly in the use of the same publick Rites and Ceremonies Fifthly in giving communicatory Letters from one Church or one person to another And lastly in admission of the same discipline and subjection to the same supream Ecclesiastical authority that is Episcopacy or a general Councel for as single Bishops are the heads of particular Churches so Episcopacy that is a general Councel or Oecumenical Assembly of Bishops is the head of the universal Church Internal communion is due alwaies from all Christians to all Christians even to those with whom we cannot communicate externally in many things whether credenda or agenda opinions or practises But external actual communion may sometimes be suspended more or lesse by the just censures of the Church clave non errante As in the primitive times some were excluded a coetu participantium Only from the use of the Sacraments others moreover a coetu procumbentium both from Sacraments and Prayers others also a coetu audientium from Sacraments Prayers and Sermons and lastly some a coetu fidelium from the society of Christians And as external communion may be suspended so likewise it may sometimes be waved or withdrawn by particular Churches or persons from their neighbour Churches or Christians in their innovations and errours Especially when they go about to obtrude new fancies upon others for fundamental truths and old Articles of faith Christian charity is not blind so as not to distinguish the integral and essential parts of the body from superfluous wens and excrescences The Canons do not oblige Christians to the arbitrary dictates of a Patriarch or to suck in all his errours like those servile flatterers of Dionysius the Sicilian Tyrant who licked up his very spettle and protested it was more sweet then Nectar Neither is there the like degree of obligation to an exact Communion in all Externals There is not so great conformity to be expected in Ceremonies as in the Essentials of Sacraments the Queens daughter was arrayed in a garment wrought about with divers colours nor in all Sacraments improperly and largely so called by some persons at some times as in Baptisme and the holy Eucharist which by the consent of all parties are more general more necessary more principal Sacraments Neither is so exact an harmony and agreement necessary in all the explications of articles of faith as in the Articles themselves nor in superstructions as in fundamentals nor in Scholastical opinions as in catechetical grounds Nor so strict and perpetual an adherence required to a particular Church as to the Universal Church nor to an Ecclesiastical constitution as to a divine Ordinance or Apostolical tradition Humane priviledges may be lost by disuse or by abuse And that which was advisedly established by humane authority may by the same authority upon sufficient grounds and mature deliberation be more advisedly abrogated As the limits and distinctions of Provinces and Patriarchates were at first introduced to comply with the civil government according to the distribution of the Provinces of the Roman Empire for the preservation of peace and unity and for the ease and benefit of Christians so they have been often and may now be changed by Soveraign and Synodical authority according to the change of the Empire for the peace and benefit of Christendom Neither the rules of prudence nor the Lawes of Piety do oblige particular Churches or Christians to communicate in all opinions and practises with those particular Churches or Christians with whom they hold Catholick communion The Roman and African Churches held good communion one with another whilest they differed both in judgment and practise about rebaptization Cannot one hold communion with the Fathers that were Chiliasts except he turn Millenary The British Churches were never judged Schismatical because they differed from the rest of the West about the observation of Easter We see that all the famous and principal Churches of the Christian World Graecian Roman Protestant Armenian Abissene have their peculiar differences one with another and each of them among themselves And though I am far from believing that when Lâ—gâ—machies are taken away their real dissensions are half so numerous or their errous half so â—oul as they are painted out by their adversaries aemulation was never equal Judge And though I hope Christ will say Come ye blessed to many whom fiery Zelots are ready to turn away with Go ye cursed yet to hold communion with them all in all things is neither lawful nor possible Yea if any particular Patriarch Prelate Church or Churches how eminent soever shall endeavour to obtrude their own singularities upon others for Catholique verities or shall injoyn sinful duties to their Subjects or shall violate the undoubted priviledges of their inferiours contrary to the Canons of the Fathers It is very lawful for their own Subjects to disobey them and for strangers to separate from them And if either the one or the other have been drawn to partake of their errours upon pretence of obedience or of Catholique communion they may without the guilt of Schisme nay they ought to reform
Dominions Witnesse the lawes of Ercombert Ina Withred Alfrede Edward Athelstan Edmond Edgar Athelred Canutus and Edward the Confessor among whose lawes one makes it the office of a King to govern the Church as the Vicar of God Another implyes a power in the King and his Judges to take cognisance of wrong done in Ecclesiastical Courts It was to this Holy King Edward the Confessor that Pope Nicholas the second by his bull for him and his Successours granted this ensuing priviledge to the Kings of England for ever Namely the Advocation and protection of all the Churches of England and power in his stead to make just Ecclesiastical constitutions with the advise of their Bishops and Abbats This grant is as full or fuller then that which Vrban the second made to Roger Earl of Sicily from whence the Kings of Spain at this day do not onely Challenge but enjoy in a manner all Ecclesiastical power in Sicily If the Pope had ever had any such right as he pretends this onely Bull were sufficient to justifie our Kings But they injoyed this very power from the beginning as an essential flower of their Crownes without any thanks to the Pope To make just Ecclesiasticall constitutions in the Popes stead saith the Bull. To govern the Church as the Vicar of God saith the law of the Land The Bishops of Rome have ever been very kind in granting those things which were none of their own and in making deputations and delegations to them who stood in no need of their help being lawfully invested before hand by another title in that power and dignity which the Popes pretended out of their goodnesse to confer upon them but in truth did it onely for the reputation of their See and for maintaining the opinion of their own Grandeur Whether the deputation were accepted or not they did not much trouble themselves So they dealt with 〈◊〉 president in the Councell of Nice So they dealt with the Patriarch of Iustiniana Prima so they served Good King Edward and many others This Legislative power in Ecclesiastical causes over Ecclesiasticall persons the Norman Kings after the conquest did also exercise from time to time with the advice and consent of their Lords spiritual and temporal Hence all those Statutes concerning Benefices Tythes Advowsons Lands given in Mortmain prohibitions consultations praemunires quare Impedits priviledge of Clergy extortions of Ecclesiasticall courts or officers and regulating their due fees wages of Priests Mortuaries Sanctuaries Appropriations and in summe all things which did belong to the externall subsistence regiment and regulating of the Church and this in the raigns of our best Kings long and long before the reformation Othobone the Popes Legate under Vrban the fifth would have indowed Vicars upon appropriated Rectories but could not But our Kings by two Statutes or Acts of Parliament did easily effect it With us the Pope could not make a Spiritual corporation but the King The Pope could not exempt from the Jurisdiction of the ordinary but the King who by his charter could convert Seculars into Regulars The Pope could not grant the Priviledge of the Cistercians and other orders to be free from the payment of Tyths but the King The Pope could not appropriate Churches but the King we find eight Churches appropriated to the Abby of Crowland by the Saxon Kings three Churches appropriated to the Abby of Battell by the Conquerour and twenty by Henry the first to â—â—e Church of Sarisbury The King in his great Councel could make void the certificates of Ordinaries in cases of Ecclesiasticall cognisance and command them to absolve those persons who were judged by his authority to be unjustly excommunicated The Pope could not translate an Arch Bishoprick or a Bishoprick but the King The disposition of Ecclesiastical preferments upon lapse accrued not to the Pope but to the King a plain evidence that he was the Lord Paramount And the King onely could incurre no lapse Nullum tempus occurrit Regi because the law supposed that he was busied about the weightie affaires of the Kingdom The revenewes of a Bishoprick in the vacancy belonged not unto the Pope but to the King which he caused to be restored sometimes from the time of the first vacancy sometimes from the time of the filling of the Church with a new Incumbent according to his good pleasure The Canons of the Pope could not change the Ecclesiastical Lawes of England but the King whose lawes they were He had power in his great Councel to receive the canons if they were judged convenient or to reject them and abrogate them if they were judged inconvenient When some Bishops proposed in Parliament the reception of the Ecclesiastical Canon for the Legitimation of Children born before marriage without such a reception the Canon was of no force in England All the Peers of the Realm stood up and cryed out with one voice Nolumus leges Angliae mutari We will not have the lawes of England to be changed The King and Parliament made a Legislative exposition of the Canon of the Councel of Lyons concerning Bigamy which they would not have done unlesse they had conceived themselves to have power according to the fundamental constitutions of the kingdom either to receive it or reject it Ejus est legem interpretari cujus est condere He that hath authority to expound a law Legislatively hath power to make it The King and Parliament declared Pope Vrban to be the right Pope in a time of Schisme that is in relation to England their own Kingdom not by determining the titles of the Popes but by applying the matter to the one and substracting it from the other All these are so many evidences that when Popery was at the highest the Bishops of Rome had no such absolute Ecclesiasticall Soveraignty in the Church and Realm of England And that what power they exercised at any time more then this was by connivence or permission or violent usurpation And that our Primates had no forraign Superiour Legally established over them but onely the King as he was the Supream head of the whole body politick To see that every one did his duty and injoyed his due right Who would not suffer one of his Barons to be excommunicated from Rome without his privity and consent No Legate de latere was allowed by the law in England but the Archbishop of Canturbury And if any was admitted of courtesy he was to take his oath to do nothing derogatory to the King and his Crown If any man did denounce the Popes excommunication without the assent of the King by the law he forfeited all his goods Neither might any man appeale to Rome without the Kings License In the year 1420 the Pope translated the Bishop of Lincolne to York But the Dean and Chapter absolutely refused to admit him and justified their refusal by the Laws of the Land And
demonstrate clearly if it were needful that the dependence of Bishops and other Orthodox Christians upon the Pope being rightly conceived as it is and as it is really necessary according to the certain and true princâ—ples of Catholick Religion doth not bring any the least shadow of danger to the Common-Wealth though in hostility with the Pope or of a different communion from the Pope If we lived in Plato's Common-Wealth where every one did his duty this reason were of more force Far be it from us to imagine that the right exercise of any lawful power grounded upon the certain and true principles of Catholick Religion should be dangerous to any Society But this is not our case What if the Bishops and Court of Rome have swerved from those certain and true principles of Catholick Religion or have abused that power which was committed to their trust by Christ or by his Church Or have usurped more authority then did belong unto them Or have Engrossed all Episcopal Jurisdiction to themselves leaving the Bishops of the Land but Cyphers in their own Diocesses Or have hazarded the utter ruine and destruction of the Church by their Simony extortion provisions reservations and exemptions Or have obtruded new unwarrantable Oathes upon the Subjects inconsistent with their allegiance Or have drained the Kingdome of its treasure by pecuniary avaricious arts Or have challenged to themselves a negative voice against the right heir of the Crown Or authority to depose a crowned King and absolve his Subjects from their Oathes and allegiance to their Soveraignes And have shewed themselves incorrigible in all these things This is our case In any one of these cases much more in them all conjoyned it is not onely lawful but very necessary for Christian Princes to reform such grosse abuses and to free themselves and their Subjects from such a tyrannical yoke if they can by the direction of a general Councel if not of a Provincial And it is not Schisme but Loyalty in their Subjects to yeild obedience The same Author proceeds That no civil power how Soveraign soever can correct the fundamental articles of Christian faith nor pervert the order of sacred rites received by universal tradition as instituted by Christ nor justifie any thing by their Edicts which is against Christian charity To all this we do readily assent and never did presume to arrogate to our selves or to exercise any such power But still this is wide from our case What if the Bishop of Rome have presumed to coyn and attempted to obtrude upon us new Articles of Faith as he hath in his new Creed and to pervert the sacred rites instituted by Christ as in his with-holding the Cup from the Laity Then without doubt not we but he is guilty of the Schisme Then it is lawful to separate from him in his innovations without incurring the crime of Schisme This is laid down by the Author himself as an evident conclusion and we thank him for it That it is necessary for every Christian to acknowledge no authority under heaven either Ecclesiastical or Civil that hath power to abrogate those things that are revealed and instituted by Christ or to determine those things which are opposite unto them quod Schismatis origo foret which should be the original of Schisme But where that Author infers as a corollary from the former Proposition That no Edict of a Soveraign Prince can Iustifie Schisme because all Schisme is destructive to Christian charity I must crave leave with all due respect to his person to his learning to his moderation and to his charity to rectifie that mistake If by Schisme he understand criminal Schisme that which he saith is most true That were not onely to Justifie the wicked which is an abhomination to the Lord but to justifie wickednesse it self But every separation or Schisme taken in a large sence is not criminal nor at all destructive to Christian Charity Sometimes it is a necessary Christian charitable duty In all the cases that I have supposed above and shall prove hereafter they that make the Separation continue Catholiques and they that give the cause become the Schismatiques But it may be urged That this proceeds from the merit of the cause not from the authority of the Soveraign Prince I answer It proceeds from both Three things are necessary to make a publique reformation lawful Just grounds due moderation and sufficient authority There may be just grounds without sufficient authority and sufficient authority without just grounds and both sufficient authority and just grounds without due moderation But where these three things concur it justifies the reformation before God and man and renders that separation lawful which otherwise were Schismatical Lastly it is alledged That the power of the Soveraign Magistrate is not so absolute that he can command any thing at his pleasure so as to oblige his Subjects to obedience in things repugnant to the Law of nature or the positive Law of God No Orthodox Christian can doubt of this truth The authority of the inferiour ceaseth where the Superiour declareth his pleasure to the contrary Da veniam Imperator tu carcerom ille gehennam minatur Pardon me O Emperour thou threatenest me with imprisonment but God Almighty with hell-fire But this is nothing to our case neither the Law of Nature nor the Law of God doth injoyn Brittish Christians to buy pardons and indulgences and dispensations and Bulls and Palls and priviledges at Rome contrary to the fundamental Laws of the Realm Boniface the eighth by his Bull exempted the University of Oxford from the Jurisdiction of the Archbishop of Canterbury whereupon did grow a controversie between Thomas Arundel Archbishop and the University And the said Bull was decreed to be void by two succeeding Kings Richard the second and Henry the fourth in Parliament as being obtained in praejudicium Coronae suae Legum consuetudinum Regni sui enervationem to the prejudice of his Imperial crown and to the weakning of the Lawes and Customes of his Realm But this disobedience to the decrees of Soveraign Princes must be joyned with passive obedience it must be onely when and where their commands are evidently unjust such as Phaâ—aohs commanding the Hebrew Midwives to kill all the Male children or Sauls injoyning his guard to slay the Priests of the Lord or like Nâ—buchadnezzars idolatrous edict charging all men to fall down and worship his golden Image For otherwise if the case be doubtful it is a rule in Case divinity Subditis tenentur in favorem Legis judicare Subjects are bound to judge in favour of the Law Otherwise they run into a certain crime of disobedience for fear of an uncertain A War may be unjust in the Prince and yet the Souldier be guiltlesse Nor is the Subject obliged to sift the grounds of his Soveraigns commands too narrowly It happens often that reum facit Principem iniquitas
imperandi innocentem subditum ordo serviendi The Prince may be unjust in his commands and yet the Subject innocent in his obedience Take the case at the worst it must be doubtful at the least the Popes Soveraignty and the Jurisdiction of the Roman Court being rejected by three parts of the Christian world and so unanimously shaken off by three Kingdoms And in such a case who is fittest to be Judge the Pope the People or the King Not the Pope he is the person accused And frustra expectatur cujuslibet authoritas contra seipsum It is in vain to expect that one should imploy his authority against himself Not the people would a Judge take it well that a Gaoler should detain the Prisoner from execution untill he were satisfied of the justice of his sentence Or a Pilot that he may not move his Rudder according to the alterable face of the heavens but at the discretion of the ordinary Marriners No whensoever any question hath been moved between any kingdom or Republick of what Communion soever and the Court of Rome concerning the liberties and priviledges of the one or the extortions and incroachments of the other they have evermore assumed the last Judicature to themselves as of right it doth belong unto them The Romanists themselves do acknowledge that Soveraign Princes by the Law of God and nature not only may but are in justice obliged to oppose the tyranny of Ecclesiastical Judges and to protect and free their subjects from their violence and oppression Parsons himself wondreth that any man should deny this power to Kings in their own kingdomes But we are fully satisfied and assured that that universal power which the Pope claimes by Divine right over all Christians and particularly over the Britannique Churches without their consents And much more that Jurisdiction which de facto he did or at least would have exercised there and lesse then which he would not go to the destruction of their natural and Christian liberties and priviledges was and is a tyrannical and oppressive yoak If all Christians were as well satisfied of the truth of this our assumption as we are this controversie were at an end And thus far all Roman Catholicks not interessed nor prepossessed with prejudice do accord fully with us that by whomsoever Papal power was given whether by Christ or his Apostles or the Fathers of the Church in succeeding ages it was given for edification not for destruction And that the Roman Court in later dayes hath sought to impose grievous oppressive and intolerable burthens upon their subjects which it is lawful for them to shake off without regarding their censure as we shall see in the next proposition But because all are not so well satisfied about the just extent of Papal authority and power we must search a little higher Secondly we do both agree that Soveraign Princes may by enabled and authorized either by concession or by prescription for time immemoriall perhaps it were more properly said by vertue of their Soveraign authority over the whole body politique whereof the Clergy are a part â—o exercise all external acts of Ecclesiastical coercive Jurisdiction by themselves or at least by fit delegates praecipiendo suis subditis Sacerdotibus ut excommunicent rebelles contumaces And this is asserted in the case of Abbesses which being women are lesse capable of any spiritual Jurisdiction The truth is that as all Ecclesiastical Courts and all Ecclesiastical coercive jurisdiction did flow at first either from the Bounty and goodnesse of Soveraign Princes to the Church or from their connivence or from the voluntary consent and free submission of Christians Volenti non fit injuria consent takes away errour I except alwayes that jurisdiction which is purely spiritual and an essential part of the power of the Keies whereof Emperours and Kings are not capable So whensoever the Weal-publick and the common safety of their people doth require it for advancement of publick peace and tranquillity and for the greater ease and convenience of the subject in general according to the Vicissitude and conversion of humane affairs and the change of Monarchies they may upon well grounded experience in a National Synod or Councel more advisedly retract what their predecessours had advisedly granted or permitted And alter the face and rules of the external discipline of the Church in all such things as are but of humane right when they become hurtful or impeditive of a greater good in which cases their subjects may with good conscience and are bound in duty to conforme themselves to their Lawes Otherwise Kingdoms and Societies should want necessary remedies for their own preservation which is granted by both parties to be an absurdity Weigh all the parts of Ecclesiastical discipline and consider what one there is which Christian Emperours of old did not either exercise by themselves or by their delegates or did not regulate by their Lawes or both concerning the priviledges and revenues of holy Church the calling of Councels the presiding in Councels the dissolving of Councels the confirming of Councels concerning holy Orders concerning the patronage of and nomination to Ecclesiastical benefices and dignities concerning the Jurisdiction the suspension deposition and ordering of Bishops and Priests and Monks and generally all Persons in holy orders concerning Appeales concerning Religion and the Rites and Ceremonies thereof concerning the Creeds or common Symbols of faith concerning Heresie Schisme Judaisme the suppression of Sects against Swearing Cursing Blaspheming Prophanenesse and Idolatry concerning Sacraments Sanctuaries Simony Marriages Divorces and generally all things which are of Ecclesiastical cognisance wherein he that desires satisfaction and particularly to see how the coercive power of Ecclesiastical Courts and Judges did flow from the gracious concessions of Christian Princes may if he be not too much possessed with prejudice resolve himself by reading the first Book of the Code the Authentiques or Novels of Iustinian the Emperour and the Capitulars of Charles the great and his successours Kings of France We have been requested said Iustinian by Menna the Archbishop of this City beloved of God and universal Patriarch to grant this priviledge to the most reverend Clerkes c. in pecuniary causes referring them first to the Bishop and if he could not compose or determine the difference then to the secular Judge And in criminal causes if the crime were civil to the civil Magistrate if Ecclesiastical to the Bishop By the Councel of our Bishops and Nobles said Charles the great we have Ordained Bishops throughout the Cities that is we have commanded and authorized it to be done And do decree to assemble a Synod every year that in our presence the Canonical decrees and Lawes of the Church may be restored I beseech you what did our King Henry and the Church of England more at the reformation It is true Soveraign Princes are not said properly to make Canons because they do not prescribe them
Aristocratical dignity So Non tellus cymbam tellurem cymba reliquit It was not we that deserted our pretended Patriarch but our pretended Patriarch deserted his Patriarchal office So long as the Popes contented themselves with Patriarchal rights they soared no higher then to be the executours of the Canons When Acacius complained that he was condemned by the sole authority of the Roman Bishop without a Synodal sentence Gelssius the Pope then pleaded for himself that Acacius was not the beginner of a new errour but the follower of an old And therefore it was not necessary that a new Synodal sentence should be given against him but that the old should be executed Therefore saith he I have onely put an old sentence in execution not promulged a nâ—w And as they had quitted their title so likewise they had forfeited it both by their Rebellion and by their exorbitant abuses First by their notorious rebellion against General Councels The authority of an inferiour ceaseth when he renounceth his loyalty to his superiour from whom he derives his power A General Councel is the Supreme Ecclesiastical power to which Patriarchal power was alwayes subordinate and subject General Councels with the consent of Sovereign Princes have exempted Cities and Provinces from Patriarchal Jurisdiction with the consent of Sovereign Princes they have erected new Patriarchates as at Hierusalem and Constantinople And made the Patriarch of Constantinople equal in all priviledges to the Patriarch of old Rome Against this Supreme Ecclesiastical power the Popes have not onely rebelled themselves but have compelled all Bishops under their Jurisdiction to take an oath to maintain their rebellious usurpations When a President of a Province shall rebell against his Sovereign Prince and seek to usurpe the whole Empire to himself and impose new oathes of allegiancc upon his fellow-subjects it is not Treason but Loyalty in them to thrust him by the head and shoulders out of the gates of their City When a Steward not imposed upon the family by the Master but chosen in trust by his fellow-servants during their Masters absence shall so far violate his trust that he will by force make himself the Master of the family and usuâ—pe a dominion not onely over his fellowes but over his Masters Wife and Children and oblige his fellow servants to acknowledge an independent Sovereign power in him it is not want of duty but fidelity to substract their obedience from him This is our case with the Roman Bishops They have sought to usurpe a dominion over the Catholick Church the spouse of Christ and all their fellow-servants Then ought not all good Christians to adhere to the Catholick Church and desert a schismatical Patriarch They have rebelled against the representative Church a general Councel should we involve our selves in their rebellion and perjury by swearing to maintain and make good their usurpations I confesse inferiours are not competent Judges of their Superiours But in this case of a subordinate Superiour and in a matter of Heresie or Schisme already defined by the Church the sentence of the Judge is not necessary the sentence of the Law and the notoreity of the fact are sufficient It is not we that judge him but the Councels of Constance and Basile Neither could our Ancestours hope to have a General Councel suddenly whilest so great a part of Christendom was under the Turk nor a free Occidental Councel whilest the usurper had all Ecclesiasticall power in his hands What remained then but to reform themselves According to the sage advice of Gerson I see that the Reformation of the Church will never be effected by a Councel without the presidence of a well affected wise and constant guide Let the Members therefore provide for themselves thâ—oughout the Kingdomes and Provinces when they shall be able and know hâ—w to compasse this work Moreover as they have forfeited their power by their Rebellion so they have most justly also by their rapine extortions and terrible and exorbitant abuses the most shamefull abuses that ever were committed by persons trusted To passe by the hundred grievances of Germany the complaints and protestations and pragmatical Sanctions of France the memorials of Castile the sobbes of Portugal and to confine my discourse to the sufferings of our own Nation which have been more particularly related already in this Treatise when I set down the grounds of our Reformation They robbed the King of his investitures of Bishops which Henry the first protested to the Pope himself by his Proctour that he would not lose for his Kingdome and added threatenings to his protestations Yet to gratifie Anselme who though otherwise most deserving was the first violater of the ancient customes of our Kingdome in that kind he waved his right But soon after resumed it made Rodolph Bishop of London Archbishop of Canterbury and invested him by a crosier and a ring The like he did to many others They robbed the King of his patronages by their collations and provisions and expectative graces Two or three or ten benefices were not accounted sufficient for a Roman Courtier in those daies but an hundred or two hundred or more They robbed him of the last appeales of his Subjects contrary to the ancient Lawes of England They fomented the rebellion of his own Subjects at home sometimes of his Barons sometimes of his Bishops playing fast and loose on both sides for advantage They dis-inherited him of his Crown They gave away his Kingdome for a prey to a forreign Prince They incited strangers to make war against him And they themselves by meer collusion and tricks had well near thrust him out of his Throne They robbed the Clergy in a manner of their whole Jurisdiction by their exemptions and reservations and visitations and suspensions and appeales and Legantine Courts and Nunciatures thrusting their sickles into every mans harvest They robbed them of their estates and livelihoods by their provisions and pensions by their coadjutorships and first-fruits and tenths by the vast charge of their investitures and palles and I know not how many other sorts of exactions and arbitrary impositions The most ancient of these was the pall whereof our King Canutus complained long since at Rome and had remedy promised They robbed the Nobility and Commonalty many waies as hath been formerly related If all these were not a sufficient cause of forfeiture certainly abuse did never forfeit office And though they had sometimes had a just Patriarchal power and had neither forfeited it by rebellion nor abuse Yet the King and the whole body of the Kingdome by their Legislative power substracting their obedience from them and erecting a new Patriarchate within their own Dominions it is a sufficient warrant for all English-men to suspend their obedience to the one and apply themselves to the other for the welfare and tranquillity of the whole body politick as hath before been declared Thirdly
and of the South Saxons under Kingils their King who did unite the heptarchy into a Monarchy were converted by the preaching of Berinus an Italian by the perswasions of Oswald King of Northumberland Oswâ—ld King of Northumberland was baptized in Scotland and Religion luckily planted in that Kingdome by Aidan a Scottish Bishop Penda King of Mercia was converted and christened by Finanus Successour of Aidan by the means of a marriage with a Christian Princesse of the Royal Family of Northumberland Sigibert King of the East Angles in whose daies and by whose means Religion took root among the East Saxons was converted and christned in France All these Saxons which were converted by Britons or Scots may as justly plead for their old immunities as the Britons themselves We acknowledge Saint Gregory to have been the first that did break the ice And yet we see how small a proportion of the inhabitants of the British Islands do owe their conversion to Rome in probability not a tenth part Fourthly consider that the conversion of a Nation to the Christian faith is a good ground in equity all other circumstances concurring why they should rather submit themselves or a General Councel assign them to that See that converted them then to any other Patriarchate As was justly pleaded in the case between the Bishops of Rome and Constantinople about the right of Jurisdiction over the Bulgarians But the conversion of a Nation is no ground at all to invest their converter presently with Patriarchal authority over them or any Ecclesiastical superiority especially where too great a distance of place doth render such Jurisdiction uselesse and burthensome And most especially where it cannot be done without prejudice to a former owner thrust out of his just right meerly by the power of the sword as the British Primates were Or to the subjecting of a free Nation to a forreign Prelate without or beyond their own consent In probability of reason the Britons ought their first conversion to the Eastern Church as appeareth by their accord with them in baptismal rites and the observation of Easter Yet never were subject to any Eastern Patriarch Sundry of our British and English Bishops have converted forreign Nations yet never pretended to any Jurisdiction over them Fifthly and lastly consider That whatsoever title or right S. Gregory did acquire or might have acquired by his piety and deserts towards the English Nation it was personal and could not descend from him to such Successours who both forfeited it many waies and quickly within four or five years after his death quitted their Patriarchate and set an higher title to a spirituall Monarchy on foot whilest the most part of England remained yet Pagan when Pope Boniface did obtain of Phoeas the usurper an usurping Pope from an usurping Emperour to be universal Bishop Their Canon-shot is past that which remains is but a small volly of Muskets They adde that we have schismatically separated our selves from the Communion of our Ancestours whom we believe to be damned That we have separated our selves from our Ecclesiastical predecessours by breaking in sunder the line of Apostolical succession whilest our Presbyters did take upon them to Ordain Bishops and to propagate to their Successours more then they received from their predecessours That our Presbyters are but equivocall Presbyters wanting both the right matter and form of Presbyterial ordination To extinguish the order is more schismatical then to decline their authority And lastly that we derive our Episcopal Jurisdiction from the Crown First for our natural Fathers the answer is easie We do not condemn them nor separate our selves from them Charity requires us both to think well and speak well of them But prudence commands us likewise to look well to our selves We believe our fathers might partake of some errours of the Roman Church we do not believe that they were guilty of any heretical pravity but held alwaies the truth implicitely in the preparation of their minds and were alwaies ready to receive it when God should be pleased to reveal it Upon these grounds we are so far from damning them that we are confident they were saved by a generall repentance He that searcheth carefully into his own heart to find out his errours and repenteth truly of all his known sins and beggeth pardon for his unknown errours proceeding out of invincible or but probable ignorance in Gods acceptation repenteth of all Otherwise the very best of Christians were in a miserable condition For who can tell how oft he offendeth The second accusation of Priests consecrating Bishops is grounded upon a senselesse fabulous fiction made by a man of a leaden heart and a brazen forehead of I know not what assembly of some of our Reformers at the sign of the Nags-head in Cheapside or rather devised by their malicious enemies at the sign of the Whetstone in Popes-head-Alley Against which lying groundlesse drowsie dream we produce in the very point the authentick records of our Church of things not acted in a corner but publickly and solemnly recorded by publick Notaries preserved in publick Registers whither every one that desired to see them might have accesse And published to the world in Print whilest there were thousands of eye-witnesses living that could have contradicted them if they had been feigned There is no more certainty of the Coronation of Henry the eighth or Edward the sixth then there is of that Ordination which alone they have been pleased to question done not by one as Austine consecrated the first Saxon Prelates but by five consecrated Bishops Let them name the person or persons And if they were Bishops of the Church of England we will shew them the day the place the persons when and where and by whom and before what publick Notaries or sworn Officers they were ordained And this not by uncertain rumours but by the Acts and instruments themselves Let the Reader chuse whether he will give credit to a sworn Officer or a professed adversary to eye-witnesses or to malicious reporters upon hearsay to that which is done publickly in the face of the Church or to that which is said to be done privately in the corner of a Tavern These authentick evidences being upon occasion produced out of our Ecclesiasticall Courts and deliberately perused and viewed by Father Oldcorn the Jesuit he both professed himself clearly convinced of that whereof he had so long doubted that was the legitimate succession of Bishops and Priests in our Church and wished heartily towards the reparation of the breach of Christendome that all the world were so abundantly satisfied as he himself was Blaming us as partly guilty of the grosse mistake of many for not having publickly and timely made known to the world the notorious falshood of that empty but far spread aspersion against our succession As for our parts we believe Episcopacy to be at least in Apostolical institution approved by Christ himself in
A IVST VINDICATION OF THE Church of England FROM The unjust Aspersion of Criminal SCHISME WHEREIN The nature of Criminal Schisme the divers sorts of Schismaticks the liberties and priviledges of National Churches the rights of Sovereign Magistrates the tyranny extortion and Schisme of the Roman Court with the grievances Complaints and opposition of all Princes and States of the Roman Communion of old and at this very day are manifested to the view of the World By the Right Reverend Father in God Iohn Bramhall Dr. in Divinity and Lord Bishop of Derry Pacian in ep ad Sempron My name is Christian my sirname is Catholique By the one I am known from Infidels by the other from Hereticks and Schismaticks LONDON Printed for Iohn Crook at the sign of the Ship in S. Paul's Church-Yard 1654 THE Contents of the particular CHAPTERS CHAP. I. THe Scope and summe of this Treatise Pag. 1. CHAP. II. The stating of the question what is Schisme who are Schismaticks and what is signified by the Church of England in this question p. 6. CHAP. III. That the Separation from the Court of Rome was not made by Protestants but Roman Catholicks themselves p. 31 CHAP. IV. That the King and Kingdome of England in their Separation from Rome did make no new Law but vindicate the ancient Law of the Land pag. 54. CHAP. V. That the Britannick Churches were ever Exempted from all forreign Iurisdiction And so ought to continue pag. 87 CHAP. VI. That the King and Church of England hâ—d both sufficient authority and sufficient grounds to withdraw their obedience from Rome p. 1â—6 CHAP. VII That all Kingdomes and Republicks of the Roman Communion Germany France Spain Portugal Sicilly Brabant Venice do the same thing in effect when they have occasion p. 160 CHAP. VIII That the Pope and Court of Rome are many waies guilty of Schisme and the true cause of the Dissensions of Christendome Pag. 229 CHAP. IX An Answer to the Objections of the Romanists p. 245 CHAP. X. The Conclusion of the Treatise p. 275. Courteous Reader BY reason of the Authour's Absence and difficulty of the written Copy severall Errata's have past the Presse which you are desired to amend and among the rest these following Page 7. in Margine Act. leg Art p. 13. line 17. Lyne leg kind p. 13. in marg Manrit leg Maurit p. 14 l 1 Schimse leg Schisme p. 15 l. 15 Creed leg Creeds p. 18 l. ult legemachies leg logomachies p. 21 l. 8. qui leg quis p. 22 l. 4. teach for touch p. 35 l. 8. these for those p. 39. l. 31. dele little p. 42 in margine modo for nodâ— p. 65 in margine 78 for 787 p. 67 Hesâ—is for Hosius in marg p. 74 l. 1 sepultura for sepulchra p. 79 l. 4 Asseâ—tie for Asserio p. 85 l. 30 the for his Legates p. 102 l. 25 as for or p. 113 in marg lais for Caiet p. 119 l. 2 novum for nonum p. 121 l. 11 no for had p. 140 for 138 p. 141 for 139 p. 144 for 142 p. 145 for 143 p. 914 for 149 p. 129 l. 23 chink for klink and l. 25 despensations for dispensations p. 130 l. 10 Simoniae for Simonia and l. 20 21 aliam and nummam for alium and nummum p. 131 l. 1 conscivit for consuevit p. 132 l. 16 singulta for singultu and lin 20 speculiem for speculum p. 133 l. 28 papale for papali l. 29 rigarâ— for rigore line 30 praecipient for praecipiente p. 138 l. 6. for then the oath read then that the oath p. 142 l. 5 sweare for sware And in the margent Hoops for Harps p. 153 l. 15 provisos for provisors And in the marg theops for the copy p. 164 l. 10 deest not p. 165 l. 30 thar for that p. 186 l 32 which leg wherewith p. 199 l. 14 Redimendum leg Redimendam p. 214 l. 4 leg Placaert l. 27 but for but p. 217 in marg Imprss. leg Impress A JUST VINDICATION OF THE Church of England CHAP. I. The Scope and summe of this Treatise 1. NOthing hath been hitherto or can hereafter be objected to the Church of England which to strangers unacquainted with the state of our affaires or to such of our Natives as have onely looked upon the case superficially hath more Colour of truth at first sight then that of Schisme that we have withdrawn our obedience from the Vicar of Christ or at least from our lawful Patriarch and separated our selves from the Communion of the Catholick Church A grievous accusation I confesse if it were true for we acknowledge that there is no salvation to be expected ordinarily without the pale of the Church 2. But when all things are Judiciously weighed in the Ballance of right reason when it shall appear that we never had any such forrein Patriarch for the first six hundred years and upwards And that it was a grosse Violation of the Canons of the Catholick Church to attempt after that time to obtrude any forrein Jurisdiction upon us That before the Bishops of Rome ever exercised any Jurisdiction in Brittain they had quitted their lawful Patriarchate wherewith they were invested by the authority of the Church for an unlawful Monarchy pretended to belong unto them by the institution of Christ That whatsoever the Popes of Rome gained upon us in after-ages without our own free consent was meer tyranny and usurpation That our Kings with their Synods and Parliaments had power to revoke retract and abrogate whatsoever they found by experience to become burthensome and insupportable to their Subjects That they did use in all ages with the consent of the Church and Kingdom of England to limit and restrain the Exercise of Papal power and to provide remedies against the daily incroachments of the Roman Court so a Henry the Eighth at the reformation of the English Church did but tread in the steps of his most renowned Ancestours who flourished whilest Popery was in its Zenith And pursued but that way which they had chalked out unto him a way warranted by the practise of the most Christian Emperours of old and frequented at this day by the greatest or rather by all the Princes of the Roman Communion so often as they find occasion When it shall be made evident that the Bishops of Rome never injoyed any quiet or settled possession of that power which was after deservedly cast out of England so as to beget a lawful prescription And lastly that we have not at all separated our selves from the Communion of the Catholick Church nor of any part thereof Roman or other qua tales as they are such but only in their innovations wherein they have separated themselves first from their Common Mother and from the fellowship of their own Sisters I say when all this shall be cleared and the Schisme is brought home and laid at the right door then we may safely conclude that by how much we should turn more Roman
then we are whilest things continue in the same condition by so much we should render our selves lesse Catholique and plunge our selves deeper into Schisme whilest we seek to avoid it 3. For the clearer and fuller discussion and demonstration whereof I shall observe this method in the Ensuing discourse First to state the question and shew what is Schisme in the abstract who are Schismatiques in the Concrete and what we understand by the Church of England in this question Secondly I will lay down six grounds or propositions every one of which singly is sufficient to wipe away the stain and guilt of Schisme from the Church of England how much more when they are all joyned together My six grounds or Propositions are these First that Protestants were not the authors of the late great separation from Rome but Roman Catholicks themselves such as in all other points were chief Advocates and Pillars of the Roman Church and so many that the names of all the known dissenters might be written in a little ring Secondly that in abandoning the Court of Rome they did not make any new Law but onely declare and restore the old Law of the Land to its former Vigour And vindicate that liberty left them as an inheritance by their Ancestours from the incroachments and usurpations of the Court of Rome Thirdly that the ancient Brittish and Scottish or Irish Churches were evermore exempted from the Patriarchal Jurisdiction of the Roman Bishops untill Rome thirsting after an universal unlawful Monarchy quitted their lawful Ecclesiastical power And so ought to continue free and exempted from all forrein Jurisdiction of any pretended Patriarch for evermore according to the famous Canon of the General Councel of Ephesus which Gâ—egory the Great reverenced as one of the four Gospels Fourthly that though the Authors of that Separation had not themselves been Roman Catholicks and though the Acts or Statutes made for that end had not been meerly declarative but also operative And although Brittain had not been from the beginning both de jure and de facto exempted from Roman Jurisdiction yet the King and Church of England had both sufficient authority and sufficient grounds to withdraw their obedience as they did Fifthly that all the Soveraign Princes and Republicks in Europe of the Roman Communion whensoever they have occasion to reduce the Pope to reason do either practise or plead for the same right or both Sixthly that the Papacy it self qua tâ—lis as it is now maintained by many with universality of Jurisdiction or rather sole Jurisdiction Iure divino with superiority above General Councels with infallibility of Judgment and temporal power over Princes is become by its rigid censures and new Creeds and Exorbitant decrees in a great part actually and altogether causally guilty both of this and all the greater Schismes in Christendome 3. Lastly I will give a satisfactory answer to those objections which those of the Roman Communion do bring against us to prove us Schismaticks CHAP. 2. The stating of the question what is Schisme who are Schismaticks and what is signified by the Church of England in this question EVery suddain passionate heat or misunderstanding or shaking of Charity amongst Christians though it were even between the principal Pastors of the Church is not presently Schisme As that between Saint Paul and Barnabas in the Acts of the Apostles who dare say that either of them were Schismaticks or that between Saint Hierome and Ruffinus who charged one another mutually with Heresie Or that between Saint Chrysostome and Epiphanius who refused to Joyn in prayers Saint Chrysostome wishing that Epiphanius might never return home alive And Epiphanius wishing that Saint Chrysostome might not dye a Bishop both which things by the just disposition of Almighty God fell out according to the passionate and uncharitable desires of these holy persons who had Christian Charity still radicated in their hearts though the violent torrent of sudden passion did for the time bear down all other respects before it These were but personal heats which reflected not upon the publick body of the Church to which they were all Ever ready to submit and in which none of them did ever attempt to make a party by gathering disciples to himself such a passionate heat is aptly stiled by the Holy Ghost 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a paroxisme or a sharp fit of a feverish distemper which a little time without any other application will infallibly remedy Secondly every premeditated clashing of Bishops or Churches about points of doctrine or discipline long and resolutely maintained is not presently criminous Schisme so long as they forbear to censure and condemn one another and to expel one another from their Communion and are ready to submit to the determinations of a general Councel Such were the contentions of the Roman and African Bishops about rebaptization and appeals It were hard to say that those two blessed Saints Cyprian and Austine and all those pious Prelates who joyned with them lived and dyed Schismaticks With this general truth agrees that of Doctor Holden fully that when there is a mutual division of two parts or members of the mystical body of the Church one from the other yet both retein Communion with the Vniversal Church which for the most part springs from some doubtful opinion or lesse necessary part of divine worship quamcunque partem amplexus fueris Schismaticus non audies quippe quod universa ecclesia neutram damnarit whatsoever part one take he is no Schismatick because the universal Church hath condemned neither part Whether he hold himself to this principle or desert it it is not my purpose here to discusse But this is much sounder doctrine then that of Mr. Knott that the parts of the Church cannot be divided one from another except they be divided from the whole because these things which are united to one third are united also between themselves Which errour he would seem to have sucked from Doctor Potter whom he either would not or at least did not understand That whosoever professeth himself to forsake the Communion of any one member of the body of Christ must confesse himself consequently to forsake the whole Of which he makes this use That Protestants forsake the Communion of the Church of Rome And yet do confesse it to be a member of the body of Christ therefore they forsake the Communion of the whole Church The answer is easie that whosoever doth separate himself from any part of the Catholique Church as it is a part of the Catholick Church doth separate himself from every part of the Catholick Church and consequently from the Universal Church which hath no existence but in its parts But if one part of the Universal Church do separate it self from another part not absolutely or in Essentials but respectively in abuses and innovations not as it is a part of the Universal Church but only so far as it is
diminution Schisme for the most part is changeable and varies its Symptomes as the Chamaelion colours As it was said of the Schisme of the Donatists that the passion of a disordered woman brought it forth Ambition nourished it and covetousnesse confirmed it And therefore it is as hard a task to shape a coat for Schismaticks as for the Moon which changeth its shape every day The reason is because having once deserted the Catholick communion they find no beaten path to walk in but are like men running down a steep hill that cannot stay themselves or like sick persons that tosse and turn themselves continually from one side of their bed to the other searching for that repose which they do not find Hence it comes to passe that Schisme is very rarely found for any long space of time without some mixture of heretical pravity it being the use of Schismaticks to broach some new doctrine for the better justification of their separation from the Church Heretical errours in point of faith do easily produce a Schisme and Separation of Christians one from another in the use of the Sacraments and in the publick service of God As the Arrian heresie produced a different doxology in the Church The Orthodox Christian saying Gloâ—â— be to the Father and to the Son and to the holy Ghost And the heretical Arrian Glory be to the Father by the Son in the Spirit So of later times the opinions of the lawfulnesse of detaining the cup from the Laity and of the necessity of adoring the Sacrament have by consequence excluded the Protestants from the participation of the Eucharist in the Roman Church Thus Heresie doth naturally destroy unity and uniformity That is one Symptome of Schisme But it destroyes order also and the due subordination of a flock to their lawful Pastour nothing being more common with hereticks then to contemne their old guides and to choose to themselves new teachers of their own factions and so erect an altar against an altar in the Church That is another principal branch of Schisme So a different faith commonly produceth a different discipline and different formes of worship A man may render himself guilty of heretical pravity four wayes First by disbelieving any fundamental article of faith or necessary part of saving truth in that sense in which it was evermore received and believed by the universal Church Secondly by believing any superstitious errours or additions which do virtually by necessary and evident consequence subvert the faith and overthrow a fundamental truth Thirdly by maintaining lesser errours obstinately after sufficient conviction But because that consequence which seems clear and necessary to one man may seem weak and obscure to another And because we cannot penetrate into the hearts of men to judg whether they be obstinate or do implicitely and in the preparation of their minds believe the truth it is good to be sparing and reserved in censuring hereticks for obstinacy Fourthly by maintaining lesser errours with frowardnesse and opposition to lawfull determinations Though it be not in the power of any Councel or of all the Councels in the world to make that truth fundamental which was not fundamental or to make that proposition heretical in it self which was not heretical ever from the daies of the Apostles Or to increase the necessary Articles of the Christian faith either in number or substance yet when inferiour question 's not fundamental are once defined by a lawful general Councel All Christians though they cannot assent in their judgments are obliged to passive obedience to possesse their soules in patience And they who shall oppose the authority and disturb the peace of the Church deserve to be punished as hereticks To summe up all that hath been said Whosoever doth preserve his obedience intire to the universal Church and its representative a General Councel and to all his Superiours in their due order so far as by Law he is obliged who holds an internal communion with all Christians and an external communion so far as he can with a good conscience who approves no reformation but that which is made by lawfull authority upon sufficient grounds with due moderation who derives his christianity by the uninterrupted line of Apostolical Succession who contents himself with his proper place in the Ecclesiastical body who disbelieves nothing contained in holy Scripture and if he hold any errours unwittingly and unwillingly doth implicitely renounce them by his fuller and more firm adherence to that infallible rule who believeth and practiseth all those credenda and agenda which the universal Church spread over the face of the earth doth unanimously believe and practise as necessary to salvation without condemning or censuring others of different Judgement from himself in inferiour questions without obtruding his own opinions upon others as Articles of faith who is implicitely prepared to believe and do all other speculative and practical truths when they shall be revealed to him And in summe qui sententiam diversae opinionis vinculo non praeponit unitâ—â—tis that prefers not a subtlety or an imaginary truth before the bond of peace He may securely say My name is Christian my sirname is Catholique From hence it appeareth plainly by the rule of contraries who are Schismatiques whosoever doth uncharitably make ruptures in the mystical body of Christ or sets up altar against altar in his Church or withdrawes his obedience from the Catholique Church or its representative a General Councel or from any lawful Superiours without just grounds whosoever doth limit the Catholique Church unto his own sect excluding all the rest of the Christian world by new doctrines or erroneous censures or tyrannical impositions whosoever holds not internall Communion with all Christians and externall also so far as they continue in a Catholique constitution whosoever not contenting himself with his due place in the Church doth attempt to usurp an higher place to the disorder and disturbance of the whole body whosoever takes upon him to reform without just authority and good grounds And lastly whosoever doth wilfully break the line of Apostolical Succession which is theâ—very nerves and sinewes of Ecclesiastical unity and communion both with the present Church and with the Catholique Symbolical Church of all successive ages He is a Schismatick qua talis whether he be guilty of heretical pravity or not Now having seen who are Schismaticks for clearing the state of the Question Whether the Church of England be Schismatical or not it remaineth to shew in a word what we understand by the Church of England First we understand not the English Nation alone but the English Dominion including the Brittish and Scottish or Irish Christians for Ireland was the right Scotia major and that which is now called Scotland was then inhabited by Brittish and Irish under the names of Picts and Scots Secondly though I make not the least doubt in the world but that the Church of England before
addresse for Justice to a secular Magistrate But they do not forbid him to appear before a secular Magistrate being cited And they allow him in all cases though of pure Ecclesiastical cognisance to seek to a Soveraign Prince for an equal indifferent hearing by Bishops delegated and authorised by him The testimony of this Statute is so clear and authentick in it self that it need not be corroborated with any other acts of the same kind Yet three things are urged against it First that Henry the Eighth at this time was a favourer of the Protestants Secondly that he cared not for Religion but looked onely to the satisfaction of his own humours and lusts Thirdly that to withhold due obedience is as Schismatical as to withdraw it And that the reformed Church of England may be innocent of the one and yet guilty and accessary to the other To the first exception I reply That Henry the eighth was so far both then and long after from being a friend or favourer of the Protestants that he was a most bitter persecutor of them After this the Pope himself though he was not well pleased to lose so sweet a morsel as England was so well approved of Henry the Eighth's rigorous proceedings against the Protestants that he proposed him to the Emperour as a pattern for his imitation Insomuch as some strangers in those daies coming into England have admired to see one suffer for denying the Popes Supremacy and another for being a Protestant at the same time So though they looked divers waies yet like Sampsons Foxes each had his firebrand at his taile But to clear this point home there needs no more but to view the order of the Statutes made concerning Religion and Ecclesiastical Jurisdiction in the raign of that King The Act for no person to be cited out of his own Diocesse except in certain cases The Act prohibiting all appeales out of England to the Court of Rome The Act for the submission of the Clergy to the King The Act for payment of first fruits to the Crown An Act for Exoneration from all exactions of the Court of Rome The Act declaring the King to be Supream Head of the Church of England An Act against Popish Bulls Faculties and Dispensations And the Act for utterly extinguishing the usurped authority of the Roman Bishop were all or the most of them enacted before the eight and twentieth year of Henry the Eighth And if my notes fail me not for we are chased from our books they were all received and established in Ireland the very same year the Lord Gray being then Lord Deputy of Ireland All this while there were no thoughts of any reformation All this while the Protestants found little grace from King Henry nor indeed throughout his whole raign ordinarily As for the suppression of Monasteries in his time I shall deal clearly and declare what I conceive to be the judgment of moderate English Protestants concerning that Act. First we feare that covetousnesse had a great oare in the boat and that sundry of the principal Actors had a greater aime at the goods of the Church then at the good of the Church Or otherwise why did they not as they pretended and gave out preserve the spoiles of the cloisters for publick and charitable uses as the foundation of Hospitalls and freeing the common Wealth from a great part of its necessary charges why did they not restore the appropriated or as we call them truly impropriated tythes to the Incumbents and lawful owners who had actuall cure of souls from whom they had been unjustly withheld especially considering that in some parishes the poore vicars stipend was not sufficient to maintain a good Plow-man The Monks pretended that they had able members to discharge the cure of souls and what difference whether the Incumbent were a single person or an aggregated body But what meer Lay-men could pretend is beyond my understanding Secondly we examine not whether the abuses which were then brought to light were true or feined but this we believe that foundations which were good in their original institution ought not to be destroyed for accessary abuses or for the faults of particular persons So we should neither leave a Sun in heaven for that hath been adored by Pagans nor a spark of fire or any eminent creature how beneficial soever upon earth for they have all been abused Therefore Licurgus is justly condemned because out of an hatred to drunkenness he cut down all the Vines in Sparta whereas he should have brought the fountaines of water nearer Thirdly when the Clergy in a Kingdome are really and not upon the feined pretenses of Sacrilegious persons grown to that excessive Grandeur that they quite overballance the Laity and leave the common wealth neither sufficient men nor sufficient means to maintain it self it is lawful by prudent lawes to restrain their further growth as our Ancestors and all the nations of Europe have done by prohibiting new foundations of Religious houses and the alienation of Lands to the Church without special License As we shall see hereafter And if the excesse be so exorbitant that it is absolutely and evidently destructive to the constitution of the common wealth it is lawfull upon some conditions and cautions not necessary to be here inserted to prune the superfluous branches and to reduce them to a right temper and aequilibrium for the preservation and well-being of the whole body Politick It hath been alwayes held lawful in some cases to alienate some things that had formerly been given to the Church as for the redemption of Christian Captives for the sustenance of poor Christians who are living Temples in the daies of famine and for preservation of the Church it self from demolition But Eradication to pluck up good institutions root and branch is not reformation which we professe but destruction To conclude this digression So as Monasteries were moderated in their number and in their revenues So as the Monks were restrained from medling between the Pastor and his flock that is the Bark and the Tree as it was of old Monachus in oppido Piscis in arido a Monk in a great town was thought like a little fish upon dry land So as the abler sort who are not taken up with higher studies or weightier imployments were inured to bestow their spare howers from their devotions in some profitable labour for the publick good that idlenesse might be stripped of the cloak of contemplative devotion So as the vow of perpetuall coelibate were reduced to the forme of our English Vniversities so long a fellow so long unmarried or of the Canonesses Biggins on the other side the Seas which are no longer restrained from wedlock then they retain their places or habits So as their blind obedience were more inlightened and secured by some certain rules and bounds So as their mock poverty for what is it else to professe want and
as in justice he is bound he is not to be reputed a Schismatick If men might not be saved by a general and implicite repentance they were in a woful condition for who can tell how oft he offendeth Cleanse thou me from my secret faults And if by general and implicite repentance why not by general and implicite faith why not by general and implicite obedience So as they do their uttermost indeavours to learn their duties and are ready to conform themselves when they know them God looks upon his creatures with all their prejudices and expects no more of them then according to the talents which he hath given them If I had books for that purpose I might have cited many Lawes and many Authors to prove that the final separation from Rome was made long before the reformation of the Church of England But it is a truth so evident and so undeniable by all these who understand our affaires that I seem to my self to have done overmuch in it already I do expect that it should be urged by some that there was a double separation of the Church of England from Rome The former from the court of Rome The second from the Church of Rome The former in point of discipline The latter in point of Doctrine The former made in the daies of Henry the Eighth The other in the daies of Edward the sixth That if the Protestants were not guilty of the former yet certainly they were guilty of the later To this I give two answers first that the second separation in point of Doctrine doth not concern this question Whether the Church of England be Schismatical but another whether the Church of England be Haereticall or at least Heterodox for every error doth not presently make an haeresy which cannot be determined without discussing the particular differences between the Church of Rome and the Church of England It is an undeniable principle to which both parties do yeeld firm assent that they who made the first separation from the primitive pure Church and brought in corruptions in faith Leiturgy or use of the Sacraments are the guilty party Yea though the separation were not local but onely moral by introducing errours and innovations and making no other secession This is the issue of our controversie If they have innovated first then we are innocent and have done no more then our duties It is not the separation but the cause that makes a Schismatique Secondly I answer that as Roman Catholicks not Protestants were the authors of the Separation of England from the Court of Rome so the Court of Rome it self not Protestants made the Separation of England from the communion of the Church of Rome by their unjust and tyrannical censures excommunications and interdictions which they thundred out against the Realm for denying their spiritual Soveraignty by divine right before any reformation made by Protestants It was not Protestants that left the communion of the Church of Rome but the Court of Rome that thrust all the English Nation both Protestants and Roman Catholicks together out of their doores and chased them away from them when Pope Paul the third excommunicated and interdicted England in the daies of Henry the eighth before ever any reformation was attempted by the Protestants In that condition the Protestants found the Church and Kingdom of England in the daies of Edward the sixth So there was no need of any new separation from the communion of the Church of Rome The Court of Rome had done â—hat to their hands So to conclude my first Proposition Whatsoever some not knowing or not weighing the state of our affaires And the Acts and Records of those times have rashly or ignorantly pronounced to the contrary it is evident that the Protestants had no hand either in the separation of the English Church from the Court of Rome or in their separation from the Church of Rome The former being made by professed Roman Catholicks the later by the Court of Rome it self both before the reformation following in the dayes of Edward the sixth both at a time when the poor Protestants suffered death daily for their conscience upon the six bloody Articles CHAP. IV. That the King and Kingdom of England in the separation from Rome diâ— make no new Law but vindicate their ancient Liberties THe second Conclusion upon examination will prove as evident as the former that Henry the eighth and those Roman Catholicks with him who made the great separation from the Court of Rome did no new thing but what their predecessors in all ages had done before them treading in the steps of their Christian Ancestors And first it cannot be denyed but that any person or Society that hath an eminent reputation of learning or prudence or piety or authority or power hath ever had and ever will have a great influence upon his or their neighbours without any legal Jurisdiction over them or subjection due from them Secondly it is confessed that in the primitive times great was the dignity and authority of the Apostolical Churches as Rome Antiâ—ch Ephesus Hierusalem Alexandria which were founded by the Apostles themselves And that those ancient Christians in all their differences did look upon the Bishops of those Sees as honourable Arbitrators and faithful Depositaries of the genuine Apostolical traditions especially wherein they accorded one with another Hence is that of Tertullian Constat omnem doctrinam quae cum illis Ecclesiis Apostolicis matricibus et originalibus conspi at c. Whatsoever doctrine agrees with those Apostolical original mother Churches is to be reputed true And in this sense and no other Saint Cyprian a great admirer and imitater both of the matter and words of Tertullian whom he honoured with the title of his Master doth call the Church of Rome a Matrix and a root But if the tradition varied as about the observation of Easter between Victor Bishop of Rome and Polycrates Bishop of Ephesâ—s the one prescribing from St. Peter and S. Paul the other from S. Iohn The respective Churches did conform themselves to their Superiours or if they were free as the Britannique Churches were to their own judgment or to the example of their neighbour Churches or kept them to the tradition delivered unto them by their first converters As in this very controversie about Easter and some baptismal rites the Brittish and Scottish Bishops alwaies adhered to the Eastern Church A strong presumption that thence they received the faith and were not subordinate to the Patriarchal See of Rome But yet all this honourable respect proceeded from a free prudential compliance without any perpetual or necessary subjection Afterwards some Churches lost some gained the place and dignity of Apostolical Churches either by custome so Ephesus lost it or by the Canons of the Fathers so Constantinople did get it or lastly by Imperial priviledges so Iustiniana and Carthage obtained it Thirdly it
resolutely oppose so many Sentences and Messages from Rome and condemn him twice whom the Pope had absolved Consider that Wilfride was an Arch-Bishop not an inferiour Clerk And if an appeal from England to Rome had been proper or lawful in any case it had been so in his case But it was otherwise determined by those who were most concerned Malmesbury supposeth either by inspiration or upon his own head that the King and the â— Arch-Bishop Theodore were smitten with remorse before their deaths for the injury done to Wilfride and the slighting of the Popes Sentence Letter and Legates But the contrary is moâ—â— apparently true for first it was not King Alfrede alone but the great Councel of the Kingdom also nor Theodore alone but the main body of the Clergy that opposed the Popes Letter and the restitution of Wilfride in that manner as it was decreed at Rome Secondly after Alfrede and Theodoret were both dead we find the Popes sentence and Wilfrides restitution still opposed by the surviving Bishops in the Raign of Alfredes son To clear the matter past contradiction let us consider the ground of this long and bitter contention Wilfride the Archbishop was become a great pluralist and had ingrossed into his hands too many Ecclesiastical dignities The King and the Church of England thought fit to deprive him of some of them and to confer them upon others Wilfride appealed from their sentence unto Rome The Pope gave sentence after sentence in favour of Wilfride But for all his sentences he was not he could not be restored untill he had quitted two of his Monasteries which were in question Hongesthill deane and Ripon which of all others he loved most dearly and where he was afterwards interred This was not a conquest but a plain waving of his sentences from Rome and a yeelding of the question for those had been the chief causes of the controversie So the King and the Church after Alfredes death still made good his conclusion That it was against reason that a person twice condemned by the whole Councel of the English should be restored upon the Popes Bull. And as he did not so neither did they give any assent to the Popes Legation So unfortunate were appeales to Rome in those daies And as unfrequent as unfortunate for from that time untill Anselmes daies after the Norman Conquest in the Raign of Henry the first we do hardly meet with another appeal Then Pope Paschalis the second had devised a new Oath for Arch-Bishops when they received their Pall An oath much wondered at in all places as a strange innovation Significasti reges Regni majâ—res admiratione permotos c. You signified unto me that Kings and Nobles were moved with admiration that the Pâ—ll was offered unto you by our Ministers upon condition that you should take an oath which they brought you written from us c. This oath was that which animated Anselme to contest so hotly with the King The main controversie was about this very question of Appeales to Rome The King pleaded the fundamental Lawes and Customes of the Land consuetudo Regni mâ—i est à Patrâ— meo instituta ut nullius praeter licentiam Regis appelletur Papa Qui consuetudines regni tollit potestatem quoque coronam Regis violat c. It is a custome of my Kingdome instituted by my Father that no Pope may be appealed unto without â—the Kings License He that takes away the Customes of the Kingdome doth violence to the power and Crown of the King It is to be noted that the Lawes established by his Father that was William the Conquerour were no other then the Lawes of Edward the Confessor that is to say the old Saxon Lawes So he might justly say both that it was an ancient immemorial custome of the Kingdom and also that it was instituted or established by his Father So Hoveden tells us that at last he yeelded to the request of his Barons c. that was by his authority to confirm the Lawes of King Edward But the best was that though Anselme the Archbishop was obliged by oath to the Pope yet the Bishops were not so soon brought into the same bondage And therefore the former Authour tells us that In his exequendis omnes Episcopi Angliae Primati suo suffragium negarunt In the execution of these things all the Bishops of England did deny their suffrage to their Primate So unanimous were they in this point Which unanimity of the whole Realm both Clergy and Laity doth appear yet more evidently by the Statute of Clarendon made in the Raign of the grand-child of this King when all the Prelates and Peeres of the Realm did confirm the former ancient Brittish English custome not onely by their consents but by their oathes whereof we shall have occasion to speak more hereafter And upon this custome was that Law grounded which our Histories do make mention of Si quis inventus fuerit literas vel mandatum ferens Domini Papae c. capiatur et de eo sicut de Regis traditore regni sine dilatione fiat justitia If any one be found bringing in the Popes Letter or Mandate let him be apprehended and let justice passe upon him without delay as a traitor to the King and Kingdom And generally every man is interdicted or forbidden to appâ—al to the Pope And the Legations from Rome were almost as rare as appeals to Rome during the raigns of all the Brittish and Saxon Kings untill the Norman conquest As Gregory Bishop of Ostium the Popes own Legate did confess That he was the first Roman Priest that was sâ—nâ— into those parts of Bâ—iâ—tain from the time of S. Austin And those Legates were no others then ordinary messengers or Embassadors sent from one Neighbour to another Such a thing as a Legantine Court or a Nuncios Court was not known in the Brittish world in those ages and long after It is not enough to shew that one Roman Bishop did once send over one or two Doctors to help to propagate or confirm the faith or to lend their helping hands to Religion fainting This may well set forth their devotion and our obligation But further as to the present question it signifies just nothing Favours cease to be favours when they are done on purpose to deprive men of their ancient liberties The Brittish Bishops and English also have done as much for other Nations over whom they did never challenge any Jurisdiction The French Church sent over Germanus Lupus to help to root up the relicks of Pelagianisme in Brittain yet did never pretend thereby to any authority over the Brittaines Add to this that during all the time from St. Gregory to the conquest it was usual for the Brittish Saxon and Danish Kings with their Clergy or great Councel to make Ecclesiastical lawes and to regulate the external discipline of the Church within their
spare for Britain In the whole term of three hundred years there were few above two hundred Bishops Ordained at Rome Italy alone may brag well near of as many Bishops at one time as many succeeding Popes did ordain in all their ages Let them not tell us of the scarcity of Christians in those dayes The writings of Tertullian and Saint Cyprian and the Councels held within the time limited do evince the contrary No the first badge of their Patriarchal authority in Britain was sending of the Pall as the onely badge during the times of the Britons and Saxons And the first Pall that came into Britain was after six hundred years But this doth yet appear much more clearly from the answer of Dionothus the Reverend and learned Abbot of Bangor which according to the manner of those times was an University or Seminary of Learning and piety among the Britons and he the well deserving Rector of it made in his own name and in the name of the Britons when they pressed him to submit to the Romaen Bishop as his Patriarch that he knew no obedience due to him whom they called the Pope but the obedience of love And that under God they were to be governed by the Bishop of Caerleon Observe first what strangers the Britons were to the Papacy That man whom you call the Pope Secondly that they acknowledged no subjection or subordination no obedience whatsoever due from them to Rome but onely the reciprocal duty of love that was just the same that Rome did owe to them Thirdly that under God that is immediatly without any Forrein Prelate or Patriarch intervening they were to be governed by the Bishop of Caerleon as their onely Primate and Patriarch Which priviledge continued to the succeeding Bishops of that See for many ages afterwards saving that the Archiepiscopal Chair was removed from Caerleon to St. Davids in the Raign of King Arthur And lastly observe the time when this answer was made after the first six hundred years were expired So it is a full demonstrative convincing proof for the whole term prefixed But lest any man should cavil and say that Dionothus was but one man and that the body of the British Clergy might be of another mind that which followes strikes the question dead That Austin Saint Gregories Legate proposing three things to the Britons First that they should submit to the Roman Bishop Secondly that they should conforme to the customes of the Roman Province about the observation of Easter and the administration of Baptisme And Lastly that they should joyn with him in Preaching to the Saxons all the British Clergy assembled themselves together Bishops and Priests in two several Synods one after another to deliberate hereupon and after mature consideration they rejected all his propositions Synodically and refused flatly and unanimously to have any thing to do with him upon those terms Insomuch as St. Austin was necessitated to return over the Seas to obtain his own consecration and after his return to consecrate the Saxon Bishops alone without the assistance of any other Bishops They refused indeed to their own cost twelve hundred innocent Monks of Bangor shortly after lost their lives for it Rome was ever builded in blood Howsoever these words quamvis Augustino prius mortuo have since been forged and inserted into venerable Bede to palliate the matter which are wanting in the Saxon Copy The concurring Testimonies of all our Historiographers witnessing the absolute and unanimous refusal of the Britons to submit to Rome and the matter of fact it self do confirm this for an undoubted truth beyond all exception So clear a truth it is that the British Churches for the first three hundred years neither ought nor paid any subjection to Rome Whence might well proceed that answer of Elutherius to King Lucius if that Epistle be not counterfeit when he desired him to send over a Copy of the Roman Lawes That he should chuse a Law Ecclesiastical out of holy writ by the Councel of his Kingdom that is principally of his Bishops for saith he you are the Vicar of Christ in your Kingdom The same in effect which is conteined in the Lawes of Edward the Confessor Hence it is that both our Histories and our Lawes do stile our Archbishops Priâ—ates which in the Language of the Primitive times signifies as much as Patriarchs And sometimes call them expresly by the very name of Patriarchs it self Hence Vrban the second intertained and welcomed Anselm our Archbishop of Canterbury into the Councel of Barre tanquam alterius orbis Papam as the Pope of another world Or as others relate the passage as the Apostle of another world and a Patriarch worthy to be reverenced CHAP. VI. That the King and Church of England had both sufficient authority and sufficient grounds to withdraw their obedience from Rome and did it with due moderation SO from the persons who made the separation from the Lawes and Statutes of our Realm which warranted the separation and from the ancient Liberties and priviledges of the Britannick Churches I proceed to my fourth ground drawn from the Imperial prerogatives of our Soveraign Princes That though we should wave all the other advantages yet they had power to alter in the external discipline and regiment of the Church whatsoever was of humane institution for the benefit and advantage of the body politick Doctor Holden proposeth the case right by way of Objection But peradventure the Protestants will say that the King or supream Senate of every Kingdome or Common-Wealth have power to make Lawes and statutes by which either directly or at least indirectly as well the Clergy as the Laity of that Kingdom or Common-Wealth are bound to reject all forrain Iurisdiction superiority and dependance And that his Legislative power is essentially annexed to every Kingdom and Commonwealth seeing that otherwise they cannot prevent those dangers which may spring and issue from that fountain to their destruction and ruine The Protestants do say indeed without all peradventure upon that very ground which is alledged in the objection Neither do the Protestants want the suffrage of Roman Catholicks therein Because humane nature saith one cannot be destitute of necessary remedies to its own preservation And another To whom a Kingdome is granted of necessity all things are esteemed to be granted without which a Kingdome cannot be governed And a Kingdom cannot be governed unlesse the King enjoy this power even over Clerks c. Necessary remedies are no remedies unlesse they be just but worse then the disease And being just the Subject is obliged to active obedience But let us see what the Doctour pleads in answer to his own objection First he passeth by the native power of civil Soveraign Empire which ought not to have been omitted for therein consists the main force of the argument But as to the Ecclesiastical part he saith he could
under pain of Excommunication or suspension or degradation or any spirituall punishment But to affirm that they cannot make Ecclesiasticall constitutions under a civill pain or that they cannot especially with the advise and concurrence of their Clergy assembled in a National Synod reform errours and abuses and remedy incroachments and usurpations and innovations either in faith or discipline and regulate the new Canons or Customes of Intruders and Upstarts by the old Canons of the primitive Fathers is contrary to the sense and practise of all antiquity King Solomon deposed Abiathar from the high Priesthood and put Sadoc in his place Nor want we Presidents of Popes themselves who have been convented before Emperours as Sixtus the third before Valentinian though Platina mince the matter a little too much damnatur Bassus calumniator iniquus annuente Valentiniano c. Leo the third before Charles the great That have been banished by Emperours as Liberius unjustly banished by Constantius and more unjustly restored Sylverius justly banished by Iustinian That have been imprisoned by Soveraign Princes as Pope Iohn the first by Theodoric That have been deposed by them As Iohn the twelfth by Otho the great and Gregory the sixth by Henry the second Henricus secundus in Italiam cum magno exercitu veniens habita Synodo cum Benedictum novum Sylvestrum tertium Gregorium sextum tanquam tria teterrima monstra abdicare se magistratu coegisset c. Henry the second coming into Italy with a great army having convocated a Synod when he had compelled Benedict the Ninth Sylvester the third and Gregory the sixth as three most filthy monsters to quit their government he created Syndeger Bishop of Bamberge afterwards Clement the second Pope Of old when any Schisme did infest the Roman Church as I think no See in the World hath been oftner rent asunder by pretenders to the Papacy the Emperours when they pleased did assume unto themselves the cognisance thereof and determine the succession either by themselves or by their Exarch or Delegates as Honorius between Boniface the first and Eulalius Theodoric the King between Symmachus and Laurentius The Exarch of Ravenna between Sergius the first and Paschalis Otho the third between Iohn the Seventeenth and Gregory the fifth But when these imperiall acts are done in Synods they are more authentique and more conform to Antiquity Thirdly our learned and ingenuous countryman Davenport under the name of Franciscus à Sancta Clara far be it from me to censure Christian charity and moderation for lukewarmnesse or Atheistical neutrality like those whose chief religion consists in crying up a faction I rather wish he had been more universally acquainted with our English Doctrine in his paraphrastical exposition of our English Articles to this question How and whether it be lawful in points of faith to appeal from the Pope and to decline his Iudgment cites the resolution of Gerson in these words following Hoc etiam practicatum est per quoscunque Reges et Principes c. This also hath been practised by all Kings Princes who have withdrawn themselves from the obedience of those whom such or such did Iudge to be Popes which substractions neverthelesse were approved by the sacred Councell of Constance some expressely some implicitly The most Christian King Lewis the twelfth convocated a Nationall Councell of the French Church at Towers wherein sundry Articles were proposed deliberated of and concluded touching these affaires The third Article was that if the Pope should invade another Prince in an hostile manner and excite other Princes to invade his territories whether that Prince might not lawfully withdraw himself from the obedience of such a Pope where observe that though this case alone be specified as being fitted to that present controversy between the King of France and the Pope yet all other cases of the same nature or consequence are included And conclusum est per Concilium principem posse ab obedienâ—ia Papae se subducere ac substrahere non tamen in totum et indistincte sed pro tuitione tantum ac defensione jurium suorum temporalium It was concluded by the Councel that the Prince might withdraw himself from the obedience of the Pope yet not totally nor indistinctly but onely for the defence of his temporal rights The fourth proposition was when such a substraction was lawfully made what the Prince and his subjects more particularly Prelates and other Ecclesiastiques ought to do in such things for which they had formerly no recourse to the Apostolique See And conclusum est per concilium servandum esse jus commune antiquum et pragmaticam Sanctionem regni ex deeretis Sacro-Sancti concilii Basiliensis desumptam It was concluded by the Councell that the ancient common right was to be preserved and the pragmaticall Sanction of the Kingdom taken out of the Decrees of the Sacred Councell of Basil. The eighth proposition was if the Pope proceeding unjustly and by force should pronounce any censures against such a Prince whether they ought to be obeied And conclusum est unanimiter per concilium talem sententiam nullam esse nec de jure vel alio quocunque modo ligare It was concluded unanimously by the Councell that such a Sentence was of no force not binding in law or any other way which opinion or resolution of theirs the above-menâ—tioned Authour saith he ought not to condemne whilest the Church doth tolerate it Behold a principall cause of the separation of the English Church from the Pope the usurpations and incroachments of the Roman Court upon the Politicall rights of the Crown which they would not let go until they were quite shaken off Anthonius de Rosellis a zealous assertour of the Papall authority concludes that the Pope being an heretick or an Apostate though but in secret it is lawful without any sentence or declaration preceding for any of his Subjects that know it Especially for Kings and Princes to depart from him and withdraw themselvs from under his power by that naturall right which they have to defend themselves This may well be doubted of in the case of private persons before sentence by those who believe him to be constituted by Christ the Soveraign Monarch of the Universall Church But in the case of Soveraign Princes with Provincial Councells when Generall Councells cannot be had and much more when General Councells have given their sentence formerly in the case as the Councells of Constance and Basil have done concerning the Papacy And with us who are sufficiently resolved that St. Peter had no preheminence above his fellowes but onely principality of order and the begining of unity And that whatsoever power the Bishop of Rome hath more then any other Bishop it is meerly from the customes of the Catholique Church or from the Canons of the Fathers or from the Edicts of Princes and may be taken away upon sufficient grounds by equall authority to
that by which it was acquired I say in this our case there can be no doubt at all And yet it can much lesse be doubted whether a Soveraign Prince with a National Synod may remedy the incroachments and usurpations of the Roman Court within his own dominions or exclude new Creeds and new Articles of faith lately devised and obtruded contrary to the determination of the General Councel of Ephesus of which let us hear what is Doctor Holdens opinion Notum est inter Catholicos omnes tanquans axioma certissimum c. It is known that all Catholicks do hold this as a most certain axiome that nothing ought or may be maintained for a Christian revealed truth but that which was received by our Ancestors and delivered from one generation to another by continued succession from the times of the Apostles This is all that we have done and done it with due submission to the highest Judge of Ecclesiastical controversies upon earth that is a general Councel If the Court of Rome will be humorous like little children who because they cannot have some toy that they have a mind to do cast away all that their parents have given them we cannot help it Over and above all the former grounds which the Romanists themselves do in some sort acknowledge I propose this further that Patriarchal power in external things is subject and subordinate to Imperial When Mauritius the Emperour had made a Law that no Souldier should turn Monk untill his warfare were accomplished St. Gregory Bishop of Rome disliked the Law and represented his sense of it to the Emperour but withall according to his duty published it Ego quidem missioni subjectus eandem legem per diversas terrarum partes transmitto quia lex ipsa omnipotenti deo minime concordat Ecce per suggestionis meae paginam dominis nunciavi utrobique ergo quae debui exolvi qui Imperatori obedientiam praebui pro deo quid sensi minime tacui I being subject to your command have transmitted your Law to be published through diverse parts of the world And because the Law itself is not pleasing to Almighty God I have represented my opinion thereof to my Lords wherefore I have performed my duty on both sides in yeelding obedience to the Emperour and not concealing what I thought for God A most rare and Christian president of that great Patriarch and fit for our observation and imitation in these dayes He acknowledged the Emperour to be his Lord and himself to be subject to his commands And though no humane invention can warrant an act that is Morally evil in it self yet if it be onely impeditive of a greater good as that blessed Saint did take this Law to be the command of a Soveraign doth weigh down the scale and obligeth a Patriarch to obedience in a matter that concerns Religion How much more doth the command of the English Monarch and the English Church disoblige an English subject from a forrein Patriarch whose Original right is but humane at the most and in the case in question between Rome and England none at all But to come up yet closer to the question The general Councels of Constantinople and Chalcedon with the presence concurrence and confirmation of Theodosius the great Martian the Emperours notwithstanding the opposition of the Roman Bishop by his Legates did advance the Bishop of Constantinople from being a poore Suffragan under the Metropolitan of Heraclea to be the second Patriarch and equal in dignity power and all manner of priviledges to the first and assigned unto him for his Patriarchate Pontus and Asia the lesse and Thracia and some other countries part of which territories they substracted from the obedience of the Roman Bishop at least over which the Roman Bishops challenged Jurisdiction and part from other Patriarchs And the reason of this alteration was the same for which Caesarea of old was a long time preferred before Hierusalem and Alexandria before Antioch and Rome before all others to conform the Ecclesiasticall regiment to the Politicall because Constantinople was made of a mean City the seat of the Eastern Empire and had as many Diocesses and Provinces subject unto it as old Rome it self But lest it may be conceived that this was not done at all by Imperial power but by the authority of the Oecumenical Synods we may observe further that Iustiniâ—n the Emperour by his sole Soveraign Legislative power did new-found the Patriarchate of Iustiniana prima and assign a province unto it and indow it with most ample priviledges freeing it from all appeals and all acknowledgment of superiority giving the Bishop thereof equal power with that which the Bishop of Rome had in his Patriarchate The same priviledges and prerogatives were given by the same Emperour by the same Legislative authority to the Bishop of Carthage notwithstanding that the Bishops of Rome did alwayes pretend that Carthage was under their Jurisdiction I deny not that Vigilius and Gregory succeeding Popes did make deputations to the Bishop of Iustiniana to supply their places But this was but an old Roman fineness The Bishops of Iustiniana needed none of their Commissions Iustinian the Father and founder of the Imperial Law knew well enough how far his Legislative power did extend And though the Act was notorious the whole world and inserted into the body of the Law yet the Fathers of that age did not complain of any innovation or usurpation or breach of their priviledges or violation of their rights King Henry the Eight had the same Imperial power and was as much a Soveraign in his own Kingdomes as Iustinian the Emperour in his larger Dominions as William Rufus Son and successor of the Conqerour said most truly that the Kings of England have all those liberties in their own Kingdomes which the Emperours had in the Empire and had as much authority to exempt his own subjects from the Jurisdiction of one Patriarch and transferre them to another especially with the advise consent and concurrence of a National Synod So King Arthur his predecessor removed the Primacy from Caâ—rleon to Saint Davids and another of them to Canterbury for the advantage of their subjects according to the exigence of the times If the Pope had been the King of Englands Subject as former Popes were the Emperours he might have served him as they did some of his predecessours called a Councel regulated him and reduced him to order and reason or if he proved incorrigible have deposed him But the Pope being a stranger all that he could justly do was what he did rather then to see his royall prerogative daily trampled upon his Lawes destroyed his Subjects oppressed rather then to have new Articles of faith daily obtruded upon the English Church rather then to incur the peril of willful Idolatry against conscience and therefore formal to Cashier the Roman Court with all their pardons and
indowed being by provisions from Rome frequently conferred upon strangers which could not speak one word of English nor did ever tread upon English ground Insomuch that at one time there were so many Italians beneficed in England that they received more money yearly out of it then all the revenues of the Crown to the high disservice of Almighty God the great scandal of Religion the decay of hospitallity and the utter ruine of the English Church But the least share of their oppressions did not light upon the Bishops who by their dispensations and reservations of cases and of pensions and exemptions and inhibitions and visitations and tenths and first fruits and provisions and subsidiary helps were impoverished and disabled to do the duties of their function They take their aime much amisse who look upon Episcopacy as a branch of Popery or a device of the Bishop of Rome to advance his own greatnesse Whereas the contrary is most certain that the Pope is the greatest Impugner of Bishops and the Papacy it self sprung from the unjust usurpation of their just rights Let it be once admitted that Bishops are by divine right and instantly all his dispensations and reservations and exemptions and Indulgences and his Conclave of Cardinalls and the whole Court of Rome shrink to nothing This was clearly perceived by both parties in the ventilation of that famous question in the Councel of Trent concerning the divine right of Bishops proposed by the Almaines Polonians and Hungarians seconded bravely by the Spaniards prosecuted home by the French owned by the Archbishop of Paris as the doctrine of Sorbone and onely crossed by the Italian faction to preserve the glorie of their own country and the advantages which that nation doth reap from the Papacy By whose frowardnesse and prevarication in all probability the re-union of the Church and the universal peace of this part of Christendom in necessary Truths was hindred at that time I presume the case was not so very ill in forrain parts but yet ill enough Or otherwise St. Bernard would not have made so bold with Eugenius adding that if the daies were not evil he would speak many more things Why do you thrust your sickle into other mens harvest c. He complaines of the confusion of appeals how they were admitted contrary to law and right besides custom and order without any distinction of place or manner or time or cause or person He complaines further of the exemption of Abbats from their Bishops Bishops from their Archbishops Archbishops from their Primates And this he stiles Murmur communem querimoniam Ecclesiarum The murmuring and common complaint of the Churches Lastly they cheated and impoverished the people by their dispensations and commutations and pardons and indulgences and expeditions to recover the holy Land and Jubilees and pilgrimages and agnus Dei's and a thousand pecuniary Artifices So as no sort of men escaped their fingers The third ground of their separation from Rome was because they found by experience that such forreign Jurisdiction so exercised was destructive to the right ends of Ecclesiastical discipline which is in part to preserve publick peace and tranquillity to retein subjects in due obedience and to oblige people to do their duties more conscienciously Farre be it from any Christian to imagine that policy is the Spring-head of Religion There never was yet any one Nation so unpolitick and brutishly barbarous but they had some Religion or other they who obeyed no governors but their parents paid religious duties to some God they who wanted Clothes to their backs wanted not their sacred Ceremonies they who were without municipal Lawes were subject of themselves to the law of conscience But where Religion hath lost its influence and vigour by contempt and much more where the influence of Religion is malignant where Policy and Religion do not support one another but interfere one with another Societies are like Castles builded in the air without any firm foundation and cannot long endure like as that single Meteor Castor appearing without Pollux portends an unfortunate voyage Let us flatter our selves as much as we please said Tully to the Romans we have not overcome the Spaniards in Number nor the Galles in Force nor the Carthaginians in Craft nor the Grecians in Art nor the Italians in Vnderstanding but the advantage which we have gained over them was by Religious piâ—ty So great an influence hath Religion upon the body Politique Wherefore our Ancestors having seen by long and costly experience that the tyrannical Jurisdiction of the Roman Court instead of peace and tranquillity did produce disunion in the Realm factions and animosities between the Crown and the Miter intestine discord between the King and his Barons bad intelligence with Neighbour-Princes and forreign Wars Having seen a stranger solicited by the Pope either to destroy them by War or to subdue them to the obedience of the Roman Court. Having seen their native Country given away as a prey to a forreign Prince Philip of France And the Pope well near seated in the Royal Chair of Estate for him and his successours for ever to the endlesse dishonour of the English name and Nation by the cheating tricks of Pandolphus his Legate having seen English Rebels canonized at Rome and made Saints it was no marvel if they thought it high time to free themselves from such a chargable and dangerous guest Fourthly besides the former bad influence of forreign Jurisdiction upon the body Politique they found sundry other inconveniences that incited them to separate from Rome They must have been daily subject to have had new Creeds and new Articles of faith obtruded upon them They must have been daily exposed to manifold and manifest peril of Idolatry and sinning against God and their own consciences They must have forsaken the Communion of three parts of Christendom which are not Roman to joyn with the fourth They must have approved the Popes apparent rebellion against the supream Ecclesiastical power that is a general Councel And their Bishops must have sworn to maintain him in these his rebellious usurpations whether they should prefer their native and Christian liberty or give them up for nothing whether they should preserve their Communion with the Catholique Church or with the Court of Rome whether they should desert the Pope or involve themselves in Rebellion Schisme Sacriledge and Perjury the choice was soon made Lastly they see that the Popes had disclaimed all that just power which they had by humane right and challenged to themselves a spiritual Monarchy or Sovereignty by divine right whereby their sufferings which in themselves were unsupportable were made also irremediable from thence Wherefore they sought out a fit expedient for themselves being neither ignorant of their old Britannick exemption and liberties of the English Church nor yet of the weaknesse of the Roman pretences Our progenitors knew well enough that their authority extended not to take away
Church may be restored Ludovicus Pius convocated a Councel at Aquisgrane to reform the abuses of the Clergy and confirmed the same and commanded the constitutions thereof to be put in execution as appeareth by his own Epistle to Arno Archbishop of Salzburge Otho the first called a Councel at Rome and caused Iohn the 12th to be deposed and Leo the eighth to be chosen in his place The sentence of the Councel was Petimus magnitudinem Imperii vestri c. VVe beseech your Imperial Majestie that such a Monster may be thrust out of the Roman Church And the Emperour confirmed it with a placet we are pleased Henry the fourth called a German Synod at VVormes And another of Germans and Italians at Brixia wherein sentence of deprivation was given against Gregorie the seventh and confirmed by the Emperour Quorum sententiae quòd justa probabilis coram Deo hominibúsque videbatur c. egoâ—quoque assentiens omne tibi Papatûs jus quod habere visus es abrenuncio c. Ego Henricus Rex Dei gratiâ cum omnibus Episcopis nostris tibi dicimus Descende descende To whose sentence because it seemed just and reasonable before God and men I also assenting do declare thee to have no right in the Papacy as thou seemest to have I Henry by the Grace of God King of the Romans with all our Bishops do say unto thee Descend from thy Seat descend So Frederick the first called a Councel at Papia to settle the right succession of the Papacy wherein Roland the Cardinal was rejected and Victor declared lawful Bishop of Rome And all this was done with due submission to the Emperour Christianissimus Imperator c. The most Christian Emperour in the last place after all the Bishops and Clergy by the advice and upon the petition of the Councel received and approved the election of Victor I will conclude this first part of the parallel with the words of the same Emperour in the same Councel Quamvis noverim officio ac dignitate Imperii penes nos esse potestatem congregandorum Conciliorum c. Although I know that by vertue of our office and Imperial dignity the power of calling Councels rests in us especially in so great dangers of the Church For both Constantine and Theodosius and Justinian and of fresher memory Charles the Great and Otho Emperours are recorded to have done this Yet I do commit the authority of determining this great and high businesse to your wisdome and power that is to the Bishops there assembled But it may be objected that the Emperours with their Synods never made any such Schismatical reformation as that which was made by the Protestants in England I answer First that the Schisme between the Roman Court and the English Church other Schisme I know none on our parts was begun long before that reformation in the daies of Henry the eighth and the breach sufficiently proclaimed to the world both by Romish Bulls and English Statutes We could not be the first separatours of our selves from them who had formerly thrust us out of their doors It is not Schismatical to substract obedience from them to whom it is not due who had extruded us out of their Society but it is Schismatical to give just cause of substraction Secondly I answer That there was a great necessity of Reformation both in Germany and England For proof whereof I produce two witnesses beyond exception the one a Pope the other a Cardinal The former is Adrian the sixth in his instructions to his Legate in the year 1522. which the Princes of the Empire take notice of in their auswer His words are these Scimus in hac Sancta sede aliquot jam annis multa abhominanda fuisse c. VVe know that for some by-past yeares many things to be abominated have been in this holy See abuses in spiritual matters excesses in commands and to conclude all things out of order c. wherein for so much as concerns us thou shalt promise that we will use all our endeavour that first this Court from whence peradventure sure enough all the evil did spring may be reformed that as corruption did flow from thence to the inferiour parts of the Church so may health and Reformation To procure which we do hold our selves so much more strictly obliged by how much we do see the whole world greedily desire such a Reformation O Adriane si nunc viveres The other witnesse is Cardinal Pool who makes two main ends of the Councel of Trent The one the reconciling of the Lutherans The other quo pacto ipsius Ecclesiae praecipua vel potiùs omnia ferè membra ad veterem disciplinam instituta à quibus non parùm declinârunt revocentur To consider how the principal members of the Church or rather almost all the members might be reduced to their ancient discipline and Ordinances from which they had swerved much Yet when himself was sent afterwards by Paul the fourth to reform the Church of England it seemeth that he had forgotten those great deviations of the principall members and those very representations which he himself with eight other selected Cardinals and Prelates had made upon oath to Paul the third Then he saw that this lying flattering principle that The Popâ— is the Lord of all benefices and therefore cannot be a Simoniack was the fountain ex quo tanquam ex equo Trojano irrupere in Ecclesiam Dei tot abusus et tam gravissimi morbi c. from which as from the Trojan horse so many abuses and so grievous diseases had broken into the Church of God and brought it to a desperate condition to the derision of Christian Religion and blaspheming of the Name of Christ And that the cure must begin there from whence the disease did spring by taking away all abuses in dispensations of all kinds and ordinations and collations and provisions and pensions and permutations and reservatitions and coadjutorships and expectative graces and unions and non-residence and exemptions and absolutions and all such pecuniary artifices because it is not lawful by any means to reap any gain from the exercise of the power of the Keyes Tollantur say they hae maculae c. Let these spots be taken away to which if any entrance be given in any Common-wealth or Kingdom whatsoever it must needs fall headlong instantly or very shortly to ruine Thirdly I answer that the Emperours and the German Church did not onely desire a reformation as appeareth by the Letter of Sigismond the Emperour to the King of France Maximo desideâ—io jamdudum tenebamur c. We have long desired greatly to see the onely Spouse of Christ the Catholick Church happily reformed in our daies but after we were assumed to the Imperial Government our desire passed into command c. And the advises of Constance conceived by the Deputies of the German Nation in
added further That they were but granted for a certain term which was effluxed The hundred Grievances rest not here but say moreover that they were but deposited at Rome to be preserved faithfully for that use And lastly Charles the fifth in his Rescript tells the Pope That other Kings do not suffer the spoyles of the Churches and Annates to be transported out of their Kingdoms to Rome so universally and so abundantly Seventhly to draw to a conclusion Henry the eighth imposed an oath of fidelity or allegiance upon his Subjects Ecclesiastical as well as temporal So did Frederick the first Emperour of that name I swear that from henceforth I will be faithful to my Liege Lord Frederick the Emperour of the Romans against all men the Pope is included or rather intended principally as by Law I am bound And I will help him to retain his Imperiall Crown and all his honour in Italy c. Henry the eighth took away Popish pardons and indulgences and dispensations The German Nation likewise groaned under the burthen of them Among their hundred grievances that of dispensations was the first And that of Papal Indulgences the third either for sins past or to come modo tinneat dextrâ it is their own phrase They call these artifices meer impostures by which the very marrow of Germaâ—y was sucked up their ancient liberty was enervated and the merit of Christs passion became sleighted Lastly Henry the eighth abolished the usurped jurisdiction of the Bishop of Rome within his Dominions The Emperours did not so whether they thought it not fit to leave an old Patriarch Or because they did not sufficiently consider the right bounds of Imperial power especially being seconded with the authority of an Occidental Councel or because they did not so clearly distinguish between a beginning of unity and an universality of Jurisdiction or because they had other remedies wherewith to help themselves I cannot determine But this we have seen That the Emperours have deposed Popes and have appealed from Popes to General Councels And have maintained their Imperial prerogatives against Popes and made themselves the last Judges of the liberties and necessities of the whole body Politique Frederick the third in the Dyet of Nurenburg sequestred all the moneys that should be raised in three years from Indulgences and absolutions whether Papal or Conciliary towards the raising of twenty thousand men for defence of the Empire against the Turk The resolution of the Elect Arch-Bishop of Trevers against Gregory the 7th was this Ne plus per hunc Sancta quae modo extremum traâ—it spiritum periclitâ—tur Ecclesia ex me dicâ— quod nullam ei posthac obedientiam servabo c. Lest the holy Church which is now brought to the last gasp incurre more danger by his means I speak of my self that hereafter I will perform no obedience to him that is Pope Hildebrand Neither was this his resolution alone All the German Bishops were of the same mind Because thy entrance into the Papacy was begun with so great perjuries And the Church of God is brought into such a grievous storm through the abuse of thy innovations and thy life and conversation is soiled with so manifold infamy As we promised thee no obedience so we let thee know that for the future we will perform none unto thee Et quia nemo nostrum ut publice declamas tibi hactenus â—uit Episcopus ita nulli nostrum â— modo eris Apostolicus And as thou hast reputed none of us for Bishops hitherto So hereafter none of us will esteem thee for the Successour of Saint Peter Which sentence was confirmed by the Emperour Ego Henricus Rex cum omnibus Episcopis meis tibi dico Deseâ—nde descende The first Councel of Pisa did not onely substract their obedience from Peter de Luna calling himself Benedict the 13th and Angelus de Gorario calling himself Gregory the 12th But they decreed that it was lawful for all Christians and accordingly did command them to substract their obedience from them Of which Councel the Councel of Constance was a continuation The second Councel of Pisa suspended Iulius the second from the Papacy and commanded all Christians to withdraw their obedience from him The former had the consent of the Emperour The later his assistance and protection as appeareth both by the solemn promise of the Emperours Ambassadours made in Councel and the acknowledgment of the Councel it self I will conclude this first part of my parallell concerning the Empire with two answers of German Bishops The first of the German and French to Anastasius the second wherein they tell him plainly that they did not understand that new compassion which the Italian Physicians used to cure the infirmities of France They â—axe them for seeking to restrain the absolution of souls to Rome They require that Italian Bishop that is without sin to cast the first stone at them They advise them not to use their pretended authority against their Bishops lest the blow should recoile upon themselves for that theirs had not learned to fear above that which was needfull they tell them that surely they in Italy think that the Galles had lost all these three Verbum ferrum ingenium their tongues their wits and their weapons And so they conclude Etiamsi inclinata esset arca testamenti nostri nostrorum Episcoporum esset non illorum inclinatam relevare Although the arke of their Covenant was falling yet it belonged to their own Bishops and not to them to lift it up again The other answer was of the Archbishops of Colone and Triers with the Synod of Coloegne to Nicholas the first Wherein after many bitter expressions they have these words His de causis nos cum fratribus nostris collegis neque edictis tuis stamus neque vocem tuam agnoscimus nequo tuas bullas tonitruaque tua timemus For these reasons we with our brethren and collegues do neither give place to thy edicts nor acknowledge thy voyce nor fear thy thundring bulles I expect that some will be ready to object that these substractions were but personal from the present Pope not from the See of Rome which is true in part But the same equity and rule of justice which warrants a separation from the person of the Pope for personal faults doth also justifie a more durable separation from the See of Rome that is from him and his Successours for faulty rules and principles either in doctrine or discipline untill they be reformed From Germany our passe is open into France where the case is as clear as the Sun how their Kings though acknowledged by the Popes themselves to be most Christian the eldest Sons of the Church and otherwise the great Patrons and Protectours of the Romane See with their Princes of the blood their Peers their Parliaments their Ambassodours their Schools and Universities have all of them in
the free and just speech of a French Bishop When Henry the fourth had in a manner ended the civill Wars of France by changing from the Protestant to the Roman Catholique Communion Yet the Pope who favoured the contrary party upon pretence of his dissimulation and great dangers that might ensue thereupon for a long time deferred his reconciliation untill the French Prelates by their own authority did first admit him into the bosome of the Church At which time one of them used this discourse Was France all on fire and had they not Rivers enough at home but they must run as far as Rome to Tybur to fetch water to quench it Since that in Cardinal Richlieu's daies it is well known what books were freely printed and publickly sold upon pont neuf of the lawfulnesse of erecting a new or rather restoring an old proper Patriarchate in France as one of the liberties of the Gallicane Church It was well for the Roman Court that they became more propitious to the French affaires Take one instance more which happened very lately The Pope refused to admit any new Bishops in Portugal upon the nomination of the present King because he would not thereby seem to acknowledge or approve his title to the Crown in prejudice of the King of Spain whereby the Episcopal order in Portugal and the other Dominions belonging to that Crown was well near extinguished and scarcely so many Bishops were left alive or could not be drawn together as to make a Canonical Ordination The three Orders of Portugal did represent to the Pope that in the Kingdomes of Portugal and the Algarbians wherein ought to have been three Metropolitans and ten Suffragans there was but one left and he by the Popes dispensation non-Residenâ— And in all the Asâ—atique Provinces but one other and he both sickly and decrepit And in all the African and American Provinces and the Islands not one surviving But the Pope continued inexorable whereupon theyâ— present their request to their neighbours and friends the French Prelates beseeching them to mediate for them with his Holinesse And if he continue still obstinately deaf to their just petition to supply his defect themselves and to Ordain them Bishops in case of necessity The French did the Office of Neighbours and Christians The Synode of the French Clergy did write to the Pope on their behalf in April 1651. But that way not succeeding they sent one of their Bishops as an expresse Envoié to his Holinesse to let him know that if he still refused they cannot nor will be wanting to themselves to their neighbours but would supply his defect what the issue of it is since I have not yet heard But to leave matter of fact and to come to the fundamental Lawes and Customes of France Every one hath heard of the liberties of the French Church but every one understands not what those liberties are as being better known by their practice at home then by Books abroad I will onely select some of them out of their own authentique authorities And when the Reader hath considered well of them let him judge what authority the Pope hath in France more then discretionary at the good pleasure of the King or more then he might have had in other places if he could have contented himself with reason Protestants are not so undiscreet or uncharitable as to violate the peace of Christendom for a primacy or headship of order without superiority of power or for the name of his Holinesse Or for a Pall if the price were not too high Or for a few innocent formalities 1. The Pope cannot command or ordain any thing directly or indirectly concerning any temporal affairs within the dominions of the King of France 2. The spiritual authority and power of the Pope is not absolute in France but limited and restrained by the Canons and Rules of the ancient Councâ—ls of the Church received in that Kingdom Where observe first that the Pope can do nothing in France as a Sovereign Spiritual Prince with his non obstantes either against the Canons or besides the Canons Secondly that the Canons are no Canons in France except they be received This â—ame priviledge was anciently radicated in the fundamental Lawes of England This priviledge the Popes indeavoured to pluck up by the roots And the contentions about this priviledge were one principal occasion of the separation 3. No command whatsoever of the Pope can free the French Clergy from their obligation to obey the commands of their Sovereign 4. The most Christian King hath had power at all times according to the occurrence and exigence of affairs to assemble or cause to be assembled Synods Provincial or National and therein to treat not onely of such things as concern the conservation of the Civil estate but also of such things as concern Ecclesiastical order and discipline in his own dominions And therein to make Rules Chapters Lawes Ordinances and pragmatique sanctions in his own name by his own authority Many of which have been received among the decrees of the Catholick Church and some of them approved by general Councels 5. The Pope cannot send a Legate à latere into France with power to reform judge collate dispense or do such other things accustomed to be specified in the authoritative Bull of his Legation except it be upon the desire or with the approbation of the most Christian King Neither can the said Legate execute his charge untill he hath promised the King in writing under his oath upon his holy orders not to make use of his Legantine power in the Kings Dominions longer then it shall please the King And that so soon as he shall be admonished of the Kings pleasure to forbid it he will give it over And that whilest he doth use it it shall be exercised conformably to the Kings will without attempting any thing to the prejudice of the decrees of Generall Councels or the liberties and priviledges of the Gallicane Church and the Universities of France 6. The Commissions and Bulls of the Popes Legates are to be seen examined and approved by the Court of Parliament And to be registred and published with such Cautions and modifications as that Court shall judge expedient for the good of the Kingdome and to be executed according to the said cautions and not otherwise 7. The Prelates of the French Church although commanded by the Pope for what cause soever it be may not depart out of the Kingdom without the Kings Commandment of License 8. The Pope can neither by himself nor by his Delegates judge of any thing which concerneth the state preheminence or priviledges of the Crown of France nor of any thing pertaining to it Nor can there be any question or processe about the state or pretensions of the King but in his own Courts 9. Papal Bulls Citations Sentences Excommunications and the like are not to be executed in France without the Kings
Bishop of the world Which sense was far enough from the intention either of Gregory the Great or Iohn of Constantinople who had both of them so many true Archbishops and Bishops under them But this sense agrees well enough with the extravagant ambition of the later Popes and of the Roman Court who do appropriate all original Jurisdiction to themselves So many waies is the Court of Rome guilty of Schismatical pravity Besides these branches of Schisme there are yet two other novelties challenged by the Popes and their Parasitical Courtiers But neither these nor the other yet defined by their Church both destructive to Christian unity both apt to breed and nourish to procreate and conserve Schisme An infallibility of judgment and a temporall power over Princes either directly or indirectly General and Provincial Councels are the proper remedies of Schisme But this challenge of infallibility diminisheth their authority discrediteth their definitions and maketh them to be superfluous things What needs so much expence so many consultations so much travel of so many poor old fallible Bishops from all the quarters of the world when there is an infallible Judge at Rome that can determine all questions in his own conclave without danger of errour Was Marcellinus such an infallible Judge when he burned incense to Idols Or Liberius when he consented to the Arrians and gave his suffrage to the condemnation of blessed Athanasius Or Honorius when he was condemned and accursed in the sixth General Councel for a Monothelite Or Iohn the 22th when he was condemned by the Theologues of Paris before the King with sound of Trumpets for teaching that the soules of the just shall not see God untill the general resurrection were those succeeding Popes Iohn and Martine and Formosus and Stephen and Romanus and Theodorus and Iohn and Benedictus and Sergius who clashed one with another and abrogated the decrees one of another over and over again such infallible Judges Neither is it meer matter of fact to decree the Ordinations of a lawful Bishop to be void To omit many others But howsoever they tell us That the first See cannot be judged I will not trouble my self about the credit of the authorities whether they be true or counterfeit Nor whether the first See signifie Rome alone or any other of the five Proto-Patriarchates Thus much is certain that by judgment of discretion any private man may judge the Pope and withdraw from him in his errours and resist him if he invade either the bodies or the soules of men as Bellarmine confesseth That in the Court of Conscience every ordinary Pastour may judge him and bind him and loose him as an ordinary man And by their leaves in the external Court by coercive power if he commit civil crimes the Emperour if Ecclesiastical a Councel or the Emperour with a Councel may judge him and in some cases declare him to be fallen from his Papal dignity by the sentence of the Law in other cases if he be incorrigible depose him by the sentence of the Judge But there is a great difference between the judgment of Subjects aâ— those Ecclesiasticks were and the judgment of a Sovereign Prince between the judgment of a General Councel and the judgment of an assembly of Suffragans and inferiours And yet the Roman Clergy are known to have deposed Liberius their own Bishop and justly Or otherwise Foelix their Martyr had been a Schismatick Their other challenge of temporal power whether directly or indirectly and in ordine ad spiritualia cannot chuse but render all Christians especially Sovereign Princes jealous and suspicious of their power and averse from the communion of those persons who maintain so dangerous positions so destructive to their propriety The power of the keâ—es doth not extend it self to any secular rights neither can Ecclesiastical censures alter or invalidate the Lawes of God and Nature or the municipal Lawes of a Land All which do injoyn the obedience of children to their Parents and of Subjects to their Sovereignes Gregory the seventh began this practice against Henry the fourth But what Gregory did bind upon earth God Almighty did not bind in heaven His Papal blessing turned to a curse And instead of an Imperial Crown Rodolph found the just reward of his treason The best is that they who give these exorbitant priviledges to Popes do it with so many cautions and reservations that they signifie nothing and may be taken away with as much ease as they are given The Pope say they is infallible not in his Chamber but in his Chair not in the premisses but in the conclusion not in conclusions of matter of fact but in conclusions of matter of faith Not alwaies in all conclusions of matter of faith but onely when he useth the right means and due diligence And who knoweth when he doth that So every Christian is infallible if â—e would and could keep himself to the infallible rule which God hath given him Take nothing and hold it fast So likewise for his temporal power over Princes they say the Pope not as Pope but as a spiritual Prince hath a certain kind of power temporal but not meerly temporal not directly but indirectly and in order to spiritual things Quo tencam vultus mutantem Protea nodo CHAP. IX An Answer to the Objections brought by the Romanists to prove the English Protestants to be Schismaticks BUt it is not enough to charge the Church of Rome unlesse we can discharge our selves and acquit our own Church of the guilt of Schisme which they seek to cast upon us First they object that we have separated our selves Schismatically from the communion of the Catholick Church God forbid Then we will acknowledge without any more to do that we have separated our selves from Christ and all his holy Ordinances and from the benefit of his Passion and all hope of salvation But the truth is we have no otherwise separated our selves from the communion of the Catholick Church then all the primitive Orthodox Fathers and Doctours and Churches did long before us that is in the opinion of the Donatists as we do now in the opinion of the Romanists because the Romanists limit the Catholick Church now to Rome in Italy and those Churches that are subordinate to it as the Donatists did then to Cartenna in Africk and those Churches that adhered to it We are so far from separating our selves from the communion of the Catholick Church that we make the communion of the Christian Church to be thrice more Catholick then the Romanists themselves do make it and maintain Communion with thrice so many Christians as they do By how much our Church should make it self as the case stands more Roman then it is by so much it should thereby become lesse Catholick then it is I have shewed before out of the Canons and Constitutions of our Church that we have not separated our selves simply and absolutely from the