Departure of Protestants from the Church of Rome occasioned by M. Luther I. Thesis Luther was vniustly Excommunicated out of the Romane Church Sect. 15. II. Thesis Luther had necessary Cause to depart from the Church of Rome Sect. 15. III. Thesis Luther and his Followers are farre more safe for their Soules state in that Separation from the Church of Rome and lesse Schismatikes than They whom they forsooke Sect. 16. IV. Thesis The Romish Obiections vrged against the Separation of Luther are notably friuolous Sect. 17. V. Thesis Their first Oiection in respect of Luthers former Vow to the Pope or Church of Rome is vaine and idle Sect. 18. VI. Thesis The second and most Popular Obiection against Luther in his Opposition to the Romane Church vrging him to prooue his Doctrine by immediate Succession and by naming his Teachers before him is as fond as the other Sect. 19. VII Thesis The Obiection That all Changes of Doctrines haue bene notorious in the Persons and Places of their Beginnings is false Sect. 20. VIII Thesis The last Obiection Of Cōtinuall and personall Succession in all ages is frustrate Sect. 21. The fourth and last Part of this Determination concerneth the state of the Churches of Protestants after the daies of Luther and their more iust Cause of continuing this Separation from the Church of Rome Sect. 22. I. Thesis Protestants are Generally Excommunicated by the Church of Rome Sect. 23. II. Thesis Protestants are vniustly Excommunicated Sect. 24. III. Thesis In the Continuance of this Separation Papists are rather Schismatikes than Protestants and consequently in the Heresie of the Donatists Sect. 25. IV. Thesis In the Continuance of this Separation the Vnion of the Protestants with the Catholike Church is both more true and more Vniuersall thā is the Vnion of the Romanists § 26 V. Thesis The Protestants granting it possible for some to be saued within the Church of Rome and the Papists denying that any can be saued in the Churches of the Protestants is but a Sophisticall proofe that there is more safety in the Romane Church Sect. 27 VI. Your common Obiection what is then become of the soules of our fore-Fathers more iustifieth the Protestants Separation from Papists than it can the Separation of Papists from Protestants Sect. 28. VII The Protestants at this day stand more Iustifiable in their Separation from Rome than did either the ancient Primitiue Churches in her Excommunicating of Them or yet Luther and his Followers in their Departure from Her Sect. 29. THE GRAND IMPOSTVRE Of the now Church of Rome Manifested in this ARTICLE of the new Romane Creed Viz. The Catholike Romane Church c. Without which there is no SALVATION THat this is the fundamentall ARTICLE of your Romane Church as it is called Romane We cannot bee better enformed than by the Bishops of Rome Heads of the same Church than by the Bodie thereof which is the Church of Rome it selfe in her Councell of Trent together with the Confirmation of the same by Pope Pius the IV than by your publike Catechisme ratified by the like authority Lastly than by her principall Doctors and Diuines in their most approoued and priuileged Books written vpon this Argument of THE CATHOLIKE CHVRCH All which you may read in their owne expresse words CHAP. I. The expresse Profession of the now Church of Rome concerning this her Article vz. The Catholike Romane Church c. without Subiection whereunto there is no Saluation is absolutely and peremptorily proclaimed by the Authority of the Popes SECT 1. IT wil be a good Decorum that in this case we begin to consult with the Heads of your Church the Popes of Rome themselues Gregory the VII in the yeere 1073 decreed thus The Church of Rome saith he was founded only by God and the Pope thereof is rightly stiled The vniuersall Bishop insomuch that whosoeuer consenteth not with the Church of Rome cannot be a Catholike After him in the yeere 1192. Pope Innocēt the 3. distinguishing of the Word Catholike or Vniuersall decreed as followeth If the Church saith he be called Catholike as a cōpany consisting of al Christian Churches so the Church of Rome is not to be termed The Catholike Church but a part therof but take the word Catholike a◠God is called vniuersall Lord because al things are vnder his dominiō so we say that the Church of Rome only hath al other Churches vniuersally subiect vnto it So he More than an hundred yeeres after him Boniface the 8. would needs be heard not speake but roare thunder by peremptory decree in this tenor viz. We declare define pronounce that it is Necessary for euery one that is to be saued to be subiect to the Pope of Rome Thus much for the testimonies of the Popes The iudgement of the late Romane Church SECT 2. SInce those times the Church of Rome her selfe in her Councell of Trent and by the Bull of Pope Pius the IV. set forth for the Confirmation of the same Councell in the yeere 1556. did impose vpon her Professors a new CREED consisting of more than twentie Articles of the now Romane Faith which shee hath prescribed vnto you and all other Ecclesiasticall persons of what denomination or Title soeuer to be professed vnder the tenor and forme of an Oath to wit I N. doe firmely beleeue sweare and professe that the Catholike and Apostolique Romane Church is the Mother and Mistresse of all Churches and I doe vowe promise and sweare true obedience to the Pope of Rome the Vicar of Christ Successour of S. Peter c. And this I hold to be the true Catholike Faith which whosoeuer beleeueth not cannot bee saued So your new Creed The now Romane Catechisme SECT 3. VPon this ground was founded that which you call the Romane Catechisme and published by the authoritie of the same Pope Pius and his Councell of Trent whereby yours as well as other Catechumenists are instructed to beleeue that The Catholike Church is One both because of one Faith also for that it is subiect to one inuisible Gouernour which is Christ and to one visible Head the Pope So your Catechisme The iudgement of Romane Doctors of singular Note SECT 4. IN the last place we are to consult with your publicke Readers in Schooles where by the testimonies of Three you may iudge of the faith of the rest especially these being as fully accomplished with all furniture of learning as any other The first thus The Church of Rome is the vniuersall Catholike Church not as it is a particular Bishopprick but as it comprehendeth all Beleeuers vnder the subiection of the Bishop of Rome And againe Wee must saith he hold it as a point of our Catholike Faith that this indiuiduall Congregation which professeth the Romane Faith and is vnited to the Pope of Rome is the true Catholike Church which I proue first by the Apostles Creed c. The Second thus We define saith
not Peter confessing III. ROCKE is that Confession whereupon Christ saith he will build his Church and members thereof but whosoeuer shall truly beleeue that which S. Peter confessed to wit Christ the Sonne of the liuing God is accordingly built vpon the Rocke albeit he should neuer haue heard so much as the name of Peter Ergo the Confession rightly vnderstood had Relation to Christ and not to the person of Saint Peter IV. The thing which Christ spake of was called the ROCKE as Fathers Authors and Professors on all sides do witnesse to signifie that which is Immoueable Impreinable and Eternall such as is Christ and his Truth But Peter found his Confession as it proceeded from himselfe to be moueable and shaken at one time thrice denying this Confession of his Lord when as also he knew himselfe to be mortall Ergo he did not thinke this Confession which Christ calleth the Rocke to haue Relation to himselfe but onely to Christ. So impossible it is that Saint Peter in his Confession should apprehend the ground of your now Romane Faith Whence you cannot but obserue with what modestie your forecited Aduocates Baronius Bellarmine and Roffensis could obiect vnto Protestants Impudencie Singularitie and Blindnesse for defending an Exposition of the word ROCKE so copiously and euidently warranted by all sorts of Witnesses euen within the Romish Church it selfe II. CHALLENGE From the iudgement of the ancient Fathers IN venerable Antiquitie we find some Fathers distinguishing betweene Petra the Rocke and Peter as plainly as between Christ and a Christian Some as directly noting Christ to be the Rocke as Saint Iohn did euer point him out to be The Lambe of God where they say This Rocke was Christ Some that Peter made his Confession As the mouth of the other Disciples And that The Faith confessed was the Rocke Some by way of Diminution Not Peter alone more than others Some exclusiuely Not Peter And though Some for we may not dissemble thus much do expound by Rocke Peter yet do they meane either a Primacie of Order or Honour in Peter not of authoritie and dominion or else a priority of Confession because he vttered the words first And so all the Apostles and Prophets are called Foundations by which is not meant their persons or dominions but their doctrines Else shew vs where euer any Prophet had any Ecclesiasticall iurisdiction in the Church of the Iewes And whereas you are vrgent in obiecting the Testimonie of Saint Augustine as though he would make the Case indifferent yet are you taught by your owne Bishop that Augustine in that place rather held that by Rocke was meant Christ. Albeit that to make this Exposition indifferent which you lay downe as a ground of your Faith would be the vtter destruction of your owne Cause For Faith must stand vpon Infallibilitie and not vpon an Indifferencie of Choosing whether So inconsiderate and precipitant was that your Author in his Obiection Now whatsoeuer may seeme to be wanting in this second Challenge it is plentifully supplied by One whose iudgement ought to be as acceptable as his learning was admirable Cast your eye on the Margent where you shall perceiue how many Fathers Interpreted the ROCKE to signifie either Christ confessed by Peter or else the Confession of Peter so that your Cardinall censuring the interpretation of Protestants not to be the Exposition of Catholikes doth in effect thereby wipe out of the number of Catholikes Ambrose Chrysostome Augustine and diuers other ancient Fathers Next that the Expounding by Rocke Peter doth nothing aduantage the Romish Conclusion which is from Rocke to inferre Saint Peters Monarchie and absolute Iurisdiction ouer all other Apostles because Rocke can be but a Symbol or signe of such properties as are belonging to a Rocke as Soliditie and Vnmouablenesse in the faith but not of Dominion Finally he noteth in your Cardinall a bold licentiousnesse who being a Romanist to make Saint Peter the Rocke durst correct the Vulgar Translation which hath beene pronounced Authenticall by the Councell of Trent III. CHALLENGE BY this time you see that your faith of Peters Monarchie which you beare the world in hand to be infallibly built vpon the word ROCKE mentioned by Christ vnto Peter is according to the iudgement of the Fathers Confessions of your owne Diuines and irresistable demonstrations of truth it selfe meerely built vpon the sands How then shall any conscience of man beleeue you in your Expositions of Scripture seeing you to be so egregiously ouertaken in that which you in all your disputes concerning this Cause obiect as if not the sole yet the most solid Rocke of your beleefe As for any other place of Scripture which can be alleaged in this Cause it were altogether superfluous to discusse in this place both because the euidence which you haue receiued from this one Text may sufficiently warne you not to presume of the learning and iudgement whereof your grand-Leadears make such boasts as also because all other Obiections haue beene fully satisfied elsewhere Where the acknowledgement of Cardinall Cusanus sometimes the Popes Legate excellently studied in the Fathers and primarily exercised in the Councell of Basil is made good who in debating the question of the Popes Iurisdiction with the assent of that Councell did publikely auerre that Peter receiued from Christ no greater authoritie than did the other Apostles nothing was said to him which was not spoken to them Hee proceedeth further particularly insisting vpon the obiected Scriptures and concludeth that the other Apostles were equally called Stones had equally the Keyes of the Kingdome of heauen deliuered vnto them equally receiued the charge of teaching that is Feeding of the whole flocke of Christ. As yet then you haue no foundation for your pretended Monarchie of Peter by any promise of Christ made vnto him In the next place we are to examine whether any ground appeare thereof by any Monarchicall or Iuridicall Act of Saint Peter through out the whole course of his Apostleship ouer all or any one of the other Apostles II. That Saint Peter neuer exercised any Act of Iurisdiction as properly belonging to himselfe ouer the other Apostles whereby to testifie that hee had any Dominion ouer them as the Monarch and Head of the Catholike Church SECT 5. TOuching Saint Peters practise and conuersation among the other Apostles wee suppose that the testimony of your Salmeron one of the first in the foundation of the Societie of Iesuites and throughout all his Volumes which are sixteene vpon all occasions every-where a zealous Proctor for the prouing and promoting of Saint Peters Monarchie may as well satisfie your selues as it doth vs. Hee therefore in answer to the Question why the pretended Monarchie of Saint Peter is not demonstrable by any publike Act of Peter telleth vs and his words are worthy of obseruation that Peter although he were Head and Iudge ouer the other Apostles yet he
Church of Rome saith he not as a particular Dioces or Bishopricke is called the Catholike Church but as it comprehendeth and containeth all Beleeuers in Christ vnder the obedience of the Pope of Rome So they This counterfeit Glosse vpon these termes The Catholike Church as vnder the Obedience of the Pope as Catholike and Vniuersall Head wee shall bring to the Test of the Antient Faith by the witnesse of more than three Fathers I. The iudgement of Saint Augustine SECT 8. WHat was meant by the Catholike Church in the Sence of Antiquity Saint Augustine may be vnto vs herein as the mouth of the whole Church seeing that he had more occasions to discusse this Article than any Other especially because in his time the Donatists did no lesse falsly than arrogantly appropriate the name of the Whole Church vnto their Church in Africke euen as you although in a different Sence hold it proper to the Church of Rome at this day But Saint Augustine The word in Greeke saith he is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in Latine Totum aut Vniuersale that is whole or vniuersall 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is not one but the whole whence the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or Catholike is deriued Thus by distinguishing Whole Church from One Church he sheweth that it is as vnconceiuable that the Catholike Vniuersall or Whole should bee but one One part as it is impossible for one part to be the Whole Which is your Paradoxe to call the Head the whole Body whilest as in your Article you make ROMANE as the Head The Catholike and Vniuersall Church it selfe Thus haue we heard Saint Augustine will you now see him Then behold Rem gestam For when by that busie fellow Petilian the Donatist a publike Conference was held at Carthage betweene seuen Orthodoxe Bishops on the one part and seuen Donatists on the other concerning the Catholike Church Saint Augustine was singled out by the Disputer and posed in these words Whence art thou Who is thy Father Is the Bishop Caecilian he This was the Obiection challenging Augustine to answer whence hee receiued his Religion and vpon whom he depended Heare now his answer My communion saith he began first at Hierusalem and from remote places came nearer vntill it entred into Africke and so disperst it selfe through-out all the World From this my Father God and my Mother-Church will I neuer be separated for the calumnies of any man CHALLENGE SAy now if either Petilian the Heretike could haue questioned Saint Augustine professing himselfe a Catholike whether hee had his dependance vpon CAECILIAN Bishop of Carthage as his spirituall Father if it had beene a currant profession among the Churches of those times to haue held the Bishop of Rome The Catholike Father or the Church of Rome The Catholike Mother-Church without which there is no saluation Or whether it could haue stood with the Conscience of Saint Augustine if he had beene of your now Romish Faith in a question about the Father-hood What Bishop and Mother-hood what Church he professed fo◠to passing by all mention of the B. of Rome acknowledge no Head but Christ and neglecting the Romane Church adhere to the Whole Church dispersed throughout the whole Christian World as indeed the properly called Mother-Church How should not Saint Augustine although neuer so admirable a Saint haue beene held a Schismatike and Heretike if he had liued in these daies either for his ignorance or Contempt of the now Romish resolution of Faith in all such Questions to wit that the Spirituall Father of the Church is the Pope of Rome and the Church of Rome is the Catholike Church is selfe because Head of all the rest As for the prime Mother-Church by spirituall procreation wee see that Saint Augustine acknowledgeth no other than Hierusalem which verefieth that which hath been largely prooued to wit that although the ancient Romane Church might in many respects be called A Mother Church of many other Churches in Christendome especially in respect of her admirable care for the preseruation of diuine truth and peace in the Christian world Yet now since first by vsurping an Originall Prerogatiue of the Vniuersall Mother she is become the Mother of Arrogance and Falsehood 2. By preiudicing the Birth-right of other Churches more ancient than her selfe She may be called the Mother of Schisme 3. By excluding All from hope of Saluation that beleeue her not to bee the Mother-Church shee may iustly bee iudged the Mother of damnable Heresie Of Saint Augustines iudgement more hereafter II. The Iudgement of Saint Hierome concerning the Church Catholike SECT 5. SAint Hierome was a professed and deuoute Childe of the Church of Rome when Rome was yet a true and naturall Mother and no Step-dame who notwithstanding when the Custome of Rome was obiected against him in a Case of difference betweene Deacon and Priest calling the Aduerse part An arrogant paucity he maketh an answer full of indignity As though sayth he there were more authority in Vrbe quà m in Orbe that is in one Citie the Seate of the Bishop of Rome than in the whole Catholike Church besides This is the Testimonie of Saint Hierome wherein the Fathers of the Councell of Basil did in a manner triumph in opposition to the Papall Claime saying O Hierome what meane you Is there therefore greatnes in the Pope because he gouerneth the Church His authority is great indeed but not so great as the authority of the Catholike Church which is not conteined in one Citie but comprehendeth in it selfe the whole World CHALLENGE APply you to this former sentence of Saint Hierome if you can your former distinction namely that the Church of Rome is a Particular Church in it selfe but Catholike as the Head hauing Vniuersal Dominion ouer the whole Church and see whether it will abide the test of Saint Hierome who speaking of the Customes of the Church of Rome calleth the Custome of that Church Vrbem meaning the custome but of one Particular Church whose seate is at Rome and opposeth vnto it the Custome of the Catholike Church which hee calleth Orbem the whole world Shewing thereby with whom also doth accord the iudgement of the Fathers of the Councell of Basil that the Authority of the Church Catholike and of the Church of Rome are not equiualent much lesse the same for in Identity there can be no opposition or comparison None can compare a mans head with it selfe And what furthermore Saint Hierome did conceiue heereof will afterwards appeare in due Place III. The Iudgement of Saint Gregory Bishop of Rome Concerning the Head Catholike In denying the Title of Vniuersall Bishop as did likewise Pelagius and Leo both Bishops of the same See SECT 6. ALthough it can be no sufficient Argument for concluding a Papall authority to obiect vnto vs the testimonies of Popes which is your ordinarie guize in their owne Cause yet will it be vnto vs Armour of Proofe to oppose
so they say Both by the Canons and also by your letters and both these had relation to another part of Reasons and inducements premised in that place And is not this then slie Sophistrie to conclude an whole from a Part Yea but the same Councell say that They durst not iudge Iohn the Bishop of Antioch and therefore reserued him to the iudgement of Pope Celestine which plainly sheweth the supreme authority of the Pope So you What signifie these words that They durst not iudge Iohn of Antioch why they do plainly relate in the same Epistle that they had already deposed him We haue say they deuested him of all his Sacerdotall power So after this referring him to the iudgement of the Pope That for so they say they might with lenity ouercome his rashnesse This was not to preferre him to another Censure for there had bene no lenity in that but to the aduise of Celestine that by his perswasion he might be first reclaimed from error and afterwards restored to his place For a further discouerie of the Ecclipse of the Conscience in your Cardinall let vs consider what Supreme authority he would insinuate to wit that if the Councell could not depose Nestorius Patriarch of Constantinople without the Popes Mandate nor durst depose Iohn Patriarch of Antioch but referred the Cause to the iudgement of the Pope the issue hereof must be directly this viz. That the Pope is absolutely aboue a Generall Councell as the Cardinall defendeth else-where This were a Supreme authority indeed but in truth it is a falshood and long since condemned as you know by your owne Councels of Constance and Basil for a flat Heresie Which your Doctors of Paris haue alwaies disclaimed as contrary to antiquity and which no Councell since the beginning of the Christian Faith did as yet expresly decree as your Doctor Stapleton a great Champion in this Cause doth not denie and therefore betaketh himselfe to the Late tacit and silent consent of the Doctors of your Church Was not this then more than boldnesse in your Cardinall to inferre this Supreme authority out of this Councell Our Opposition First this Councell called Celestine Bishop of Rome Fellow-Minister and did as you haue heard Excommunicate and depose the Patriarch of Antioch before they made any Relation thereof vnto Celestine the Bishop of Rome Ergo It did not acknowledge the now pretended Supreme authority and priuilege of the Pope which is to haue Cases of that nature soly Reserued to his owne Determination Secondly looke into the Councell it selfe and into the Epistle alleaged wherein concerning the points which Pope Celestine had constituted Wee say they haue iudged them to stand firme wherefore we agree with you in one sentence and doe hold them meaning Pelagius and others to be deposed Ergo Consent to the Confirmation of the Popes sentence doth gaine-say his Supreme authority But principally we oppose the Acts of this Councell of Ephesus in decreeing that Neither the Patriarch of Antioch who made claime Nor any other should assume authority of ordaining any Bishop within the Isle of Cyprus The Arguments and Reasons whereupon the Synod made this Decree shew that as well the Authority of the Bishop of Rome as of any other is thereby excluded And they adde more peremptorily It is to be obserued say they in all Prouinces and Dioces that no Bishop drawe vnder his subiection any Prouince which was not his from the beginning lest that vnder pretence of Priest-hood he bring into the Church Arrogance and Pride The very selfe-same disease which Saint Basil and Saint Augustine with the whole Councell of Africke haue both expressely noted and openly detested in the Romane Popes euen of their times CHALLENGE NOne of you euer doubted that this Councell of Ephesus was Generall and the Bishops therein truely Catholikes wherein notwithstanding you see diuers Arguments although not of disunion yet of no Subiection And therefore You except you will condemne CC. holy Bishops must needs iudge your Romane Article to be damnably false IV. That the Beleefe of the Romane Article of The Catholike Romane Church without subiection whereunto there is no saluation Damneth aboue CCCC Catholike Bishops in the fourth Generall Councell of Chalcedon SECT 5. FOure hundred and thirty Bishops were assembled in this Councell of Chalcedon with whom we are to aduize concerning your Article of Necessary Subiection to the Bishop of Rome and his Church But first wee are ready to answer and then to replie Your Obiection THis Councell saith your Cardinall said that The custodie of the Vine that is of the Catholike Church is committed to the Pope by God It saith so and so doth that godly primitiue Pope Eleutherius say to the Bishops in France as you know that The whole Catholike Church is committed by Christ vnto them Were They therefore thinke you all Popes What say you The meaning of Eleutherius is say you that for as much as Heretikes doe oppugne the Catholike and Vniuersall Church it belongeth vnto euery Bishop to haue an vniuersal care to defend support it And this is a true Answer indeed else must you grant that Saint Paul was a Pope ouer Saint Peter because he tooke vpon him The cure or care of the whole Church and that Athanasius Bishop of Alexandria was Pope aboue the then Bishop of Rome because Gregory Nazianzene saith of him that He hauing the presidence of the Church of Alexandria may be said thereby to haue the Gouernement of the whole Christian World By these Euidences we are compelled to aske with what Conscience you could make such Obiections in good earnest to busie your Aduersaries and seduce your Disciples with all whereunto you-your-selues could so easily make answer But thus Catchitiue haue you beene at the shadow let vs trie whether we can apprehend the substantiall Truth Our Opposition For what is that which you will say belongeth really to the Supreame and Papall Dominion of the Bishop of Rome Because say you with common consent the Pope hath supreme authority in gouerning the Church therefore can hee change the Canons and decrees of General Councels So you But what then say you to the equalling of other Patriarchall Seates with Rome The Fathers of the Councel of Chalcedon say you did giue Priuileges to the Patriarkeship of Constantinople equall to the Church of Rome but Pope Leo did oppose against the Decree of the Councell and disclaimed it You say true but yet let vs come to the ground of beleefe as well of the Fathers of that Councell in opposing your pretended Papall dignity and authority as of your Doctors in contradicting them Secondly therefore The Pope of Rome say you hath his Monarchie and sole gouernment of the Church from diuine right And The Romane Church was founded by God What Prouince then in the world is free from her Iurisdiction So
you and such is your now Romane Faith But the Fathers of the Generall Councell of Chalcedon were of a contrary beleefe because their reason of withstanding the Pope was as you know For that they held that the See of Rome was founded by humane authority Thinking that the Church of Rome got the Primacie namely of Order by reason onely that it was the chiefe Imperiall Seate So you We haue heard of Oppositions enough Gladly would we vnderstand how you can reconcile these oddes so that wee may not iustly condemne your now Romane Faith of Nouelty by the iudgement of a Generall Councell This was indeed say you the Decree of a great Councell but the Decree was not lawfully proceeded in because the Legates of the Pope were absent and afterwards protested against it And Pope Leo himselfe would not approue it saying that hee did allow onely those Decrees and Canons in that Synod which concerned matters of Faith So you And now vpon this Euidence heare our Verdict CHALLENGE IN these Premisses we finde a Councell in your owne opinion and in the Iudgement of the Christian World lawfull and Generall consisting of more than 400 Fathers without exception Catholike and Orthodoxe These haue opposed your Article of the Necessity of Subiection to the Pope razing the very foundation thereof by beleeuing that his Primacie is not by diuine Authority Vpon this beleefe they easily cast downe the roofe of your Papall building denying the Popes power of gaine-saying the Positiue and humane Decrees and Canons of Generall Councels and by erecting a Patriarch whom They adorne with a Priuilege of power excepting priority of Order in taking place giuing voice c. Equall to the Bishop of Rome What is if this bee not to ruinate your Romane Article Yet much more stand you entangled in your owne Answers For if that so many and so Reuerend Fathers determined against the pretended Prerogatiue of Rome notwithstanding the Contrarie protestation of the Popes Legates they teach vs thereby another crosse point to your Article viz. that the voice of the Pope by his Legates is of no more virtue in a Synod than the suffrage of any other Bishop And what though the Legates of the Pope were absent at the making of this Act in the Councell because they would not bee present and were notwithstanding present the next day and disclaimed the Act yet could nothing preuaile And againe what was the nullity of authority in the Popes Legates whensoeuer they contended against the Maior part of a Synod But Pope Leo say you gainesaid the former Decree of that Councell albeit he did approue of all Canons in the same so farre as concerned marters of Faith This Answer also proueth you faithlesse in all your defence euen by the iudgement of Pope Leo. For if he therefore opposed the Decree of that Synod which oppugneth the Papall Primacie and Dominion because it was no matter of Faith he thereby plainely confesseth your Article which maintaineth the Dominion of the Romane Church without which there is no saluation not to be at all an Article of Faith We conclude Therefore either must those 430 godly most Reuerend Fathers together with Leo the Pope himselfe be damned by your Romane Article or else must your Article be condemned by their contrarie iudgement and Decree Which notwithstanding the Popes Contradiction was afterwards sufficiently confirmed in other parts of Christendome by the vse thereof which as you confesse Continued a long time So large and long a false-hood is that which your Article of Necessary Subiection to Rome doth exact of the whole Church of Christ. V. That the beleefe of the Article of an Vniuersall Subiection to Rome as the Catholike Church damneth the 165 Fathers of the first Generall Councell at Constantinople being the second of that name Anno 553. SECT 6. LEt your owne most priuileged albeit most partial Authors Baronius Binius relate the whole Cause 1. Concerning the authority of this Councell whether it deserue the Title of Vniuersall Councell or no They answer that It was a General Councell and so approued by all Popes Predecessors and Successors to Saint Gregory and by himselfe saying I doe reuerence the fift Councell of Constantinople Now come we to the relation of the Cause First of Pope Agapetus The cause of Anthimius which he had condemned was afterwards ventilated in the Councell of Constantinople This argueth the No-Dominion of the Pope ouer that Councell which will take vpon them to examine that cause which the Pope had before condemned After Agapetus succeedeth Vigilius At what time In the Councell of Constantinople that which they called Tria Capitula was condemned The summe of their Answer is this Pope Vigilius before this Generall Councell of Constantinople defended the Cause of the Tria Capitula which the Councell being gathered together condemned The Pope resisted the Decree of the Councell the Councell endeth Pope Vigilius for not consenting to this Councell is banished by the Emperour Iustinian After that this Councell had so concluded Vigilius confirmed the sentence of the Councell of Constantinople and was thereupon released out of Banishment by the Emperour In all this say you the Popes change of his minde cannot be preiudiciall to him or his See for that the cause being no matter of Faith but onely of Persons he did it vpon iust reason least the East Church and the the West should fall into Schisme and be rent in sunder Thus farre your Authors CHALLENGE BE the Cause matter of Faith or onely of Fact or Persons it mattereth not nor to what end it was done Wee are not to inquire into the doctrines but the dispositions of this Councell nor to respect the point of Vnion of Churches but that which you haue created for a new Article of Faith the point of Necessary subiection to the Romane Church and Bishop thereof First by your owne Confession the Pope defendeth that which afterward the Councell gain-sayeth Next the Pope contradicteth the Decree of the Councell to wit of the same Councell determinately concluding and persisting in their Sentence against the same Pope euen to his Banishment for the same Cause Yet in the end he is glad for Vnions sake to yield vnto the former Decree of the Councel So They who in their Annotations conceale that which the Text expressely deliuereth We condemne say they all that haue defended Tria Capitula But Vigilius say you had before this Councell defended those Tria Capitula Therefore was your Pope also condemned by this Councell Behold now forsooth your Romane Faith Behold your Monarch Behold his Dominion Behold the necessary Subiection of his Subiects If it be called Dominion to Command and be glad to yeeld or accounted Subiection of that Councell to prescribe Decrees against the sentence of your Pope or esteemed Faith of your Article of Necessary subiection to the Romane Church vpon losse of Saluation to persist in
Rome from Carthage but rather that there was a Canon to controll it they descended in the end to a flat and peremptory resolution Yet before wee set downe their Conclusion faine would we know how your Aduocates can quit and free your three Popes from forgery of a Canon of Nice They tell vs first that the Two Greeke Patriarchs were deceiued by giuing credit vnto their Greeke Copies which were Corrupted by Heretikes Next that the Popes themselues were deceiued in alleaging the Councell of Nice instead of the Councell of Sardis wherein saith your Cardinall The Canon was extant And lastly that the Bishops of Africke were deceiued in not acknowleging any Generall and Catholike Councell of Sardis by name S. Augustine affirming that He knew no Sardican Councell which was not Hereticall I. CHALLENGE WHich Answer of your Cardinalls importeth thus much to wit that we are to belieue that two hundred and seuenteene Bishops two Reuerend Patriarchs and three ancient Popes erred in their ignorance of a Generall Councell of Sardis in those daies wherein the matter was aduisedly and exactly discussed rather than these Two Cardinals which are but of yesterdaies birth in their coniecturall presumptions which is in effect as much as to tell vs that those Archers canot discerne so well of a true aime who are an hundred and fifty paces distant from the marke as they who are of a thousand and two hundred for such was the difference betwâ—ene the yeeres of those ancient Fathers and of these Cardinalls from the time of the Councell of Nice Which Answer wee haue else-where proued to be no solution but a fiction rather and meere Illusion Yet that we may deale liberally with you so as not onely to suppose but if you will to confesse also that there was a Generall Councell called Sardican as such your Testimonies delare and therefore to yeeld so farre to Baronius and Binius as to thinke that Augustine and the Africane Bishops could not be ignorant of the Sardican Councell which Saint Augustine himselfe calleth Plenarium vniuersae Ecclesiae Concilium An Vniuersall Councell Neuerthelesse heereupon must we likewise make bold to tell you that the Canons which you cite for your Appeales must bee iudged fictions because else the African Bishops with Saint Augustine could not haue answered your Pope that No Synod had ordained that any might come from his Holinesse to order these matters Nor could those Popes haue omitted the mention of such a Canon if any such had been when now it so much stood them vpon both for keeping themselues free from crime of forging a false Canon of the Councell of Nice and also for aduantaging their pretended Claime of Appeales by virtue of a Canon of Sardis Howsoeuer let vs proceed to that which followeth III. The decision and peremptory resolution of the Africans in Opposition against the Papall Claime of Appeales SECT II. FIrst 217 Bishops Saint Augustine being a principall one doe addresse their letters to the Pope of Rome shewing the false-hood of the Claime of Appeales made by your Three Popes Zozimus Boniface and Celestinus that it had no Patronage from the Councell of Nice but rather that there was in that Councell another Canon making much against such Appeales by determining that Popes being so farre remote from Africk could not be so competent Iudges in such Causes l Except say the Africans Some will thinke that God will inspire some One singular man with Iustice and denie that grace to innumerable persons assembled together in one Synod And therefore in plaine termes they desire the Pope not to admit heereafter of any such Appeale and in conclusion they call that Papall presumption a Smoakie secular arrogancy which say they we will not indure Furthermore the same Councell of Africk made Two Canons by the one as it were taking the Crowne of Pope-dome from the Head of your Bishop of Rome by the other piercing and wounding the Papall Primacie to the very heart For what fairer Crowne can you put vpon that Head than the Supreme title of Monarch ouer the whole Church or of Chiefe Priest and Bishop of Bishops wherewith you professedly adorne and in a manner adore your Romane Pope But these African Fathers vpon occasion of this contention with your Popes decreed That the Bishop of the Primary Sea should not bee called the Head of Bishops or chiefe Priest but onely the Bishop of the Primary Sea Secondly what greater Prerogatiue or higher token of Monarchie could your Popes couet than that which you challeng as A matter knowne to the Catholike Church which is that Appeales are to bee made to Rome from all the coasts of the world against which the same holy Bishops made this peremptory decree viz. If any Priest shall thinke that hee ought to Appeale beyond the Sea meaning to Rome let him not bee receiued any longer into the Communion of the Church of Africk So they All that your Cardinals can say to helpe your Popes at a dead lift is that the former pretended Canon of Nice insisted vpon was to be found in the Councell of Sardis which Antiquity hath denied And yet if that were granted your Monarchy standeth still vpon humane Authority For that Synod of Sardis sheweth plainely that their grant of Appeales to Iulius Pope of Rome was but vpon fauour and not vpon duty being not an old Custome but a new Constitution If it please you say they so much to honour the memory of Peter let vs write to Iulius Bishop of Rome c. And againe If you all bee pleased whence nothing can be gathered but that the same pretended Grant was no more than Ad placitum and might by the same Authority be as easily repealed We add that albeit you challenge a right that All causes of great moment among which these of Appeales is a principall one should bee Reserued to the Bishop of Rome you notwithstanding confesse that In the dayes of Saint Cyprian there was no Reseruation of any such Cases in vse II. CHALLENGE HEre haue we a faire and cleare glasse wherein any one that doth not wilfully close his eyes may see the full face of the vsurped and conunterfeit Monarchie of the Church of Rome For in your Romane profession your latter Popes proclaimed the Papall Monarchie to bee founded vpon Diuine Authority Whereas your ancient Romane Popes at the time of the African Councell when if euer they were to make good Appeales from all the parts of Christendome to Rome their principall part of Supreme power they themselues notwithstanding argued not from any diuine Law but onely from the humane decree of the Canon of Nice which the Fathers of that Councell discouered to be notoriously false For if the then Popes had thought that they could for this Papall pretension draw a sharpe two-edged sword ex iure diuino what needed they to haue fought with this wooden
was the Councell of Arimine So he And why must not this be true if you will allow your Cardinall Bellarmine to make this Greeke Father to speake what Papall Romane Language he shall impose by his Sophisticall translation But your Cardinall Baronius one otherwise as partiall as any Writer euer was and catching at euery shadow of proofe for the aduancement of Papall Monarchy hath made another interpretation of the words of Saint Basil which may be a iust confutation of your other Cardinall from point to point For Bellarmine talketh of the Popes Seeing the Easterne Bishops by a Visitation of Iurisdiction But Baronius alloweth no more than a Seeing by Consideration of their estate but euery Care and Consideration of other mens estate doth not inferre a Iurisdiction ouer them Secondly Bellarmine will needs haue Saint Basil to desire the Popes Decree another tenure of Papall Authority Baronius readeth the word Councell or Aduise which may agree with a Co-equall Thirdly Bellarmine interpreteth Basil as though he yeelded to the Pope a peremptory power of Cutting off and disanulling the Acts of Generall Councels such as was that of Arimine Baronius saith that the motion of Basil was they should Bring with them such things as had bene done namely by some Orthodox at Arimine which might make for the necessary solution of that Councell which all Catholikes haue iudged Hereticall But this argueth not an Authoritatiue power proper to the Pope of dissoluing of Decrees of any Generall Councell which for the space of sixe hundred yeares he neuer had but an Arbitrary Authority granted vnto him by consent of the Easterne Bishops to exercise his fatherly and graue iudgement for the better establishing of the East-Churches which were now rent into sixe seuerall Schismes through the difference of sixe diuerse Heresies Howsoeuer what Authority this was we may best know from Saint Basill himselfe who deploring the State of the East-Churches now pestered with diuers pernitious Heretikes desireth helpe from the Bishops of the West how To comfort the afflicted and to set right and restore those that are broken Helpe then of Confortation it was not of Dominion Secondly shewing that he desireth no more helpe from the Westerne Bishops than the Bishops of the East both ought and would requite in the like case he calleth it A mutuall helpe of louing and brotherly Visitation or Consideration Thirdly his reason why he is so importunate to haue the helpe of the Westerne Bishops he expresseth to be this Because that priuate grudges among the Bishops of the East hindered the fruit of their doctrine and therefore the Westerne Bishops the farther distant they were so much the more Authority would they haue with the people and he addeth that Accustomed speach is not so preualent as that which proceedeth from Strangers chiefly if they were such as were more specially indued with Gods grace as you are euery where knowne to be saith Saint Basil speaking of the Westerne Bishops because you haue preserued the Faith in all sincerity among you So Saint Basil who would neuer haue vsed so often so great and sometimes indeed so crosse and thwarting reasons to moue the Westerne Bishops to compassionate their case and helping them for composing of such and so pernicious distractions by reasons taken onely from Brotherly loue Mutuall duty and Facility of effectuating that great good because of the Remotenesse of their dwelling and therefore to be esteemed persons more indifferent because of their Constancie in preseruation of sincere Faith and consequently beetter witnesses for the ancient Truth without any mention at all of the Prerogatiue of the Bishop of Rome as their Pope or of their Church of Rome as their Mother and Mistresse as you haue pretended if he had any beleefe of this Article Because this one reason taken from the Papall Romane Iurisdiction and dominion if it had bene a matter of Faith had bene more perswasiue and would haue bene more preualent than whatsoeuer hath hitherto bene mentioned by S. Basil. Besides which will be worthy your remarking after fowre seuerall Legations and Messages from the Greeke Church deliuered vnto the Bishops of the Latine Church for their help the Greekes as Baronius is perswaded neuer receiued any Answer Now therefore consult with your best iudgments whether the Church of Rome and her Chiefe Bishop whom Saint Basil more than once condemneth of Pride which Pride was also condemned by a Councellin Africke vnder Saint Cyprian and another wherein Saint Augustine was present for intruding craftily and iniustly vpon the Iurisdiction of other Churches would in humility refuse the offer of Subiection of the whole Greeke Church or he not haue exercised his Visitation ouer them if any such authority had beene intended by Saint Basil. For so should Rome haue beene marked with a greater note of infamy than was her Pride euen her deserting of the flocke of Christ committed vnto her and in a manner betraying the Cause of Catholikes vnto their many and most mischieuous Aduersaries the Sects of Heretikes But wee shall shew that Saint Basil was of a flat contrarie Faith Our Opposition shewing that Saint Basil did not beleeue your Article of Necessity of Subiection to the Romane Pope or Church Baronius would you should know that Saint Basil hauing written diuers letters and sent many Messages vnto Pope Damasus and to other Westerne Bishops yet receiuing no Answer from them in so vexatious and perilous times when the Greeke Church seemed as a ship almost split asunder by the continuall billowes of most pestilent Heresies He thereupon fell into distrust and if he might so say hatred with the Church of Rome So he We had rather you should heare Saint Basil expressing his owne Cordolium and hearts-griefe What helpe can we expect saith he from the supercilious Pride and haughtinesse of the Westerne Bishops who neither know the truth themselues nor yet will Baronius negligently rendereth it Tell learne it Againe I meant to write vnto the Chiefe of them meanig Pope Damasus to signifie by letters that Pride ought not to be accompted a Dignity And againe the same holy Father Saint Basil speaking of the Church of Rome as you know said I hate the Pride and arrogancie of that Church Yea but wee heare him call the Bishop of Rome CHIEFE True but with this limitation their Chiefe And yet if it had beene Chiefe of all others could this inferre a Popedome and Dominion aboue others Then must you confesse that Athanasius was more Pope than Damasus For Basill that calleth Damasus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 calleth Athanasius 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifying The Crowne of the Head The chiefe of all Wee are saith he to flie vnto thy integrity as to the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Top or Crowne of All others CHALLENGE SAint Basil Bishop of Caesarea speaking of the Bishops of the West saith distinctly I meant to write
stile of Law For the very word Competit in the stile of the Iudiciall Court signifieth one that is Sufficient as Iudex competens vsed by Vlpian A Competent Iudge and not onely a Conuenient Iudge And for the strict sense of the word in the point of Appeale we may iustly Appeale to all Courts to Christendome whether Ecclesiasticall or Ciuill which may challenge any Right of Appeale Because if for example the Iudge of the Audience or Arches should answer an Appellant Sir the matter hath beene iudged by the Court of York and I know the Chancellor there to be a learned and a iust man therefore to vse your Cardinalls phrase It cannot be â—onuenient for mee to iudge that which hath receiued a former iudgement might not the Appellant reioyne What Sir Not conuenient for you to receiue an Appeale Why you are therefore appointed Iudge in Cases of Appeale yea and sworne to discharge your Office of Iudgement and not to preiudice any Cause by saying you see no cause to admit it before you haue heard it For bee you assured that I shall either shew iust proofe of iniustice offered vnto me by my former Iudge or else I must submit my selfe to the Censure of your Court Such an incongruity and absurdity it is to modifie the word Competere with the bare sense of Conueniency as though it were not Conuenient for one to performe that which hee is bound in Conscience to discharge Wee therefore contend for the strict sense of Non Competere that is to say Not appertaining in the Sentence of Pope Damasus as may furthermore appeare clearely by the Sentence it selfe wherein Damasus will haue the man vnderstand Two things One is Forma iudicandi non competit The Forme of iudging doth not belong vnto me hee saith not Causa iudicandi non competit The Cause of iudging belongeth not vnto me But you know that no true Court of Appeale can say that it hath not a Forme of iudging the Second is the Cause why he said Non competit to wit because the Cause had beene iudged by a Prouinciall Synod as by those who were Finitimi Neere to the parties as well Accusers as Accused as if he had taken his reason from the very Decree of the Councell of Carthage set downe by Saint Cyprian whereof you haue heard at large calling it Vnequall and Vniust that a Cause should bee iudged in Remote Courts where the parties cannot appeare but especially that any one Iudge should take vpon him to re-iudge that which was preiudged by a Prouinciall Councell Otherwise how easie a matter had it beene for the man that tendered his Appeale to haue pushed the Popes Answer away with the hornes of a Dilemma thus Eitheir haue you a Right of iudging in this Case of Appeales after a Prouinciall Councell or you haue not If you haue then do me right and iustice to heare it If you haue not then it is but a false Delusion in men to Attribute to the See of Rome an Vniuersall power of iudging all Iudges as being the Supreme Monarch ouer all Bishops and their Prouinciall Counsells Damasus therefore in this Answering to wit The forme of Iudging Non potest nobis competere did meane that he could not in such a Cause be held a Competent sufficient or lawfull Iudge Behold now your Vniuersall Iudge behold your Monarch controlled and confuted out of the mouth of your Iudge himselfe Our Fifth Discouery of the Falshood of your Pretence of Vniuersall Right of Appeales to Rome from the Councell of Mileuis SECT 19. IN the yere of Christ 416 Threescore Bishops in a Councell at Mileuis where Saint Augustine was present decreed in the words following If Priests or Deacons or Inferior Clerkes shall haue complaint against their Bishops let their next bordering Bishops heare their Cause and determine it but if they shall Appeale from those Bishops yet let them not Appeale any whither but to an African Councell or to the Primates of the Prouinces wherein they are And whosoeuer shall thinke he may Appeale beyond the Seas let none within Africke admit him into their Communion Two points are considerable in this Inhibition of Appeales First concerneth the Place the Second the Persons Touching the Place it is at length granted by your great Aduocate in this Cause to wit that by those words If any Appeale beyond the Sea let none in Africke admit him into his communion is forbidden Appeales vnto Rome Where by the way is to bee taxed â—he impudencie of your Gratian who whereas the Canon was made purposely against Appeales to Rome yet shamed he not to add to that Canon of himselfe this exception Except the Appeale be made to the Apostolike See of Rome Which is in Musicke Discantus contra punctum and in your Law Statuimus i. e. Abrogamus But thus much being granted how is not this a prohibition against your pretended Right of Appeales to Rome Satisfie this point or else yeeld the Cause Although saith your Cardinall the Councell prohibited and forbad that Priests and inferior Clerkes should Appeale to the Bishop of Rome yet did they not forbid that the Pope of Rome should admit of Appeales made vnto him nor had they any power or authority so to doe So he This being the onely Answer which after his perusall of all other Answers hee thought to haue any colour of satisfaction in we take it to be in effect the losse of the cause For our Question is whether the Bishop of Rome haue a sole and Soueraigne Right ouer the whole Church of Christ to iudge all Causes by his absolute Prerogatiue of Popedome And an Appeale being A remouing of a Cause from an inferior Iudge to a Superior we reply that where there lieth a Prohibition against Appealing to a Iudge that Iudge is not held a Superior Iudge But this Councell granted a Prohibition against the Appealing of Priests within Africke vnto the Pope of Rome therefore was not the Pope of Rome in this Case of Priests held a Superiour Iudge much lesse the Supreme of all others as you pretend And although that Councel could not forbid the Pope who was in a Transmarine Prouince to admit of such Appeales yet in forbidding the Appeales vnto the Pope they thereby denyed that he had lawfull power to receiue them As heere in England the prohibiting of euery person to Appeale vnto any without the Kings Dominions doth by vndenyable Consequence shew that none without the Kings Dominions hath iust power to admit of any such Appellants How victorious then is Truth in this one Cause which by the euidence thereof haâ—h inforced her aduersary by necessary Sequele thus farre to professe it Which Answer of his notwithstanding hee would gladly patch vp with an Addition of a meere falshood saying Pope Zozimus did command this Canon of the non-Appeales of Priests to be confirmed False for Pope Zozimus is knowne by the whole processe of the
the Romane Church which boasteth her selfe to be the Mistresse of all Churches and Iudge of all matters of Faith is not after a Thousand Six hundred yeares fully assured whether Comparison being made betweene her Pope and her selfe Hic or Haec Hee or Shee be the Supreme Iudge When then and how will you resolue in this so principall a Case must the Scales still stand euen that neither of them shall ouer-poise Not so for you teach if One as your fore-man may speake for you all that Although this case haue not beene decided by any absolute Decree yet it is defined saith hee by the tacit and secret censent of the Doctors of the Church scarce any one Diuine holding any other opinion herein than that which before that of late this Controuersie was moued was anciently in force namely that the Pope is aboue a Councell as the Head is aboue the Body As if he should say Sirs if the Question be whether Iohn an Oake or Iohn a Stile be heire to that Land because the Witnesses conceale their meaning without question they by a tacit Consent are for the Complainant that Iohn an Oake must carry the Land O Quacksaluer Consider you not now that the Subiect of all this Dispute is The Catholike Visible Church whose Consent likewise is to be discerned onely by Visible Characters whether it be by word or by writing And are you now come to this passe as that in a Cause of so great moment you must depend vpon the iudgement of the Tacit Consent of your Doctors Wee doe not therefore maruell why they must needes be blinde Guides who themselues haue no better Direction than dumbe Iudges All other Christian Churches in the world stand for the Authoritie of a Generall Councell against whatsoeuer Pope which the Cause of your Pope hauing now bin heard we are to proue from the Romane Church it selfe That the Romane Church is rather Iudge than the Romane Pope in all Causes of that Church by the publike Decree of the same Church in it selfe First in the Councell of Constance SECT 18. IN the yeare of Christ our Lord 1415. was celebrated the Councell of Constance in Germanie a place then most fit consisting as you know of almost a Thousand Fathers whereof more then Three hundred were Bishops This Synod with an Inprimis beginneth with this Article The Holy Synod inspired with the Holy Ghost being lawfully assembled making vp a Generall Councell which representeth the whole Catholike Church hath immediate power from Christ whereunto euery state and condition be it the Papall or whatsoeuer is bound to obey in all things which concerne either Faith or Generall reformation of the Church whether in the Head or Members thereof Thus farre that Councell which was expresly confirmed by Pope Martin to be held Inuiolable in matter of Faith CHALLENGE TEll vs now whether euer the Church of Rome had a Councell more ample for multitude of Fathers being almost a Thousand whether euer any Councell could assume more Infallibilitie to it selfe than to be congregated by the Holy Ghost thereby making her Degrees Authenticall or whether euer any Councell could Derogate more from the Papall Power as it is now beleeued and Attributed to your Popes than to subiect him to the Determination of a Councell in matters both of Direction in Faith and Reformation of manners or can any of you require a more fundamentall reason thereof than that which is intimated in the Decree it selfe saying that The Councell hath its Authoritie immediately from Christ The meaning whereof is as you are taught that the Popes Authoritie is not of Diuine but onely of Humane Institution or Lastly can you expect a stronger confirmation of all this than is the Ratification thereof by the then Lawfull Pope Now then for now wee are come to our conflict by Comparison If as your Cardinall and others answer The Pope confirmed other matters of Faith decreed in that Councell but would not ratifie this Decree as being so derogatiue to his Headship and supreme Iudicature then behold that which wee assumed to proue as great a Difference betweene that Assembly of Fathers which was as much the Representatiue Body of the Romane Church as any can be named Whence it must as well follow that your Pope if hee had hereupon Excommunicated the Fathers of that Councell had bin a Schismatike as it doth follow that diuiding himselfe from their Decree hee could by your Romane Principles be no lesse than an Haeretike For the Decree is peremptorie as a matter of Faith the Reason they gaue was concluded against the Pope namely that the Pope of Rome is not Head of the Church by any Diuine Ordinance euen as a Thousand yeares before this the Fathers of the Councell of Chalcedon anciently beleeued Another like Example in the Councell of Basil. SECT 19. IN the yeare 1431. there was a Councell gathered at Basil by the Authoritie of Pope Martin the Fift and after confirmed by Eugenius wherein were 90. Fathers who hauing confirmed the Decrees of the Councell of Constance whereby the Pope is made subiect vnto a Councell and the Censure thereof now at the length Pope Eugenius perceiuing they held this course will needes dissolue the Councell and translate it to Florence The Councell it selfe withstandeth this and Commandeth the contrary shewing thereby that The Pope sought nothing but by abrogating of Councels the destruction of the Church Therefore they fairely suspend the Pope and in the end according to the iudgement of the Councell of Constance they Decree as an Vniuersall Truth that the Pope hath no Authoritie aboue a Councell nor power of himselfe to dissolue it which truth whosoeuer say they shall obstinately contradict is to be iudged an Heretike So They. Will you now see the Pope and the Councell grapple together The Councell hath suspended the Pope and iudgeth him no better than a Schismatike The Pope pronounceth the Fathers of the Councell Schismatikes Separated from the Mother Church of Rome meaning the Conclaue of some Cardinals at Rome and the Head thereof for the space of seauen yeares last past The Councell answereth saying What will the Pope then damne for Schismatikes all the Cardinals Bishops and the Emperour himselfe with Kings and Princes there present yea and the whole Church which doth approue of this Councell In the end to end the fray The Pope saith the Councell did yeeld to the Admonition made vnto him of not dissoluing the Councell Here is presented before you the Romane Head and in the Opinion of the Fathers of that Councell the Catholike Bodie of the Romane Church in a Distraction and Separation either from the other for Seauen yeares space As for the Popes Pretence of his Romane Church which were but a few Domesticall Cardinals the Councell did not accompt them worthy the name of the Members of the Church This being
the Case whether shall we call the Schismatikes for so the one party necessarily must be That in this Case the Pope is the Schismaticke SECT 20. SOme would thinke that the Pope could not be the Schismatike because which is your common Argument the Head although it be diseased yet it is not separated without the destruction of the Body If there be any peircing sharpnesse in the point of this Reason it may to your owne mischiefe easily be turned backe into your owne bowels as the Fathers of the same Councell wisely did because say they If the Case could be the same in a Naturall Body as it is in a Body Ecclesiasticall that assoone as one Head is remoued another might be had then in many head-aches would men make often changes of their Heads And indeed if there were not this difference betweene the Ecclesiasticall and Naturall Head it should follow that as oft as the Ecclesiasticall Head the Pope should die the Ecclesiasticall Body and Church of Christ should perish also So they Come we to their other Reason That which Christ promised to his Church doth more especially agree to a Generall Councell now Christ said vnto Peter if he should take any offence Dic Ecclesiae Tell the Church the Complainant is not of equall Authority with the Iudge It were ridiculous to interpret that by Church was meant Peter himselfe and as fond to send him vnto any Inferiour to himselfe and no lesse absurd had it bene to send him to the whole Church diffused euery-where therefore Christ meant the assembly in a Councell Besides The Pope is Minister and but one part in Comparison to the whole therefore lesse yea in Authority for the greatnesse of the Authority dependeth vpon the Maior pars the greater part of suffrages and voyces So that Synod of Basil. We might adde hereunto the Argument of Nilus the Greek Arch-Bishop of Thessalonica If that saith he the Pope had Infallibility of Iudgement to what end were the cost and labour of troubling all parts of Christendome for gathering Generall Councels Nor he alone but another more Romish than he could be If so saith he why should the learned in Lawes be sought for Why so many Vniuersities vexed by discussing of Questions belonging to Faith c. So he CHALLENGE AFter your perusall of these Premises remember but your Iesuites Assertion If the Pope should diuide himselfe from the whole Church Hee should be iudged a Schismatike But whether the guilt of Schisme be in Pope or Councell your owne guilt in such a Case can be no lesse than Periury who by your Article are bound to belieue that both Subiection and Vnion vnto both Romane Church and Pope are Necessary to Saluation You haue now a Woolfe by the eares whether you hold him or let him loose you are sure to be bit Thus much of the Dis-union betweene the Head and Body of the Romane Church The fourth Instance of the Dis-union betweene the Romane Church and some Members thereof in the Examples of France and England SECT 21. AN Appeale was made about the same time of the Councell of Basil against Pope Leo the tenth by the Vniuersitie of Paris in Defence of the Authority of the same Councell wherein the same Vniuersity taxeth the Session of the Pope and his Cardinalls as Not gathered together by the Spirit of God professing herein that Not the Popes particular Assembly in the Citie but the Congregation in the publicke Councell is to be called The Church of Rome And this Right of Appeale from the Pope is a liberty which the Vniuersity of Paris hath alwaies challenged to this day yea and the whole Church of France whose King by his Orator in the Councell of Trent made knowne the Vniuersall Tenet of that Church namely that The Pope is not Superiour to a Councell Which they still maintaine notwithstanding Pope Pius the fourth his contention by Arguments in his letters to the contrary And how little accompt they make of the Trent-Canons which are the Articles of Faith whereunto you are sworne is more than manifest seeing they haue not yet admitted of that Councell within the Kingdome of France and therefore are yet at libertie to beleeue as much thereof as they list Not long after this in the dayes of Henry the Eight then King of England Stephen Gardiner being of the Romane Religion yet withstood the Romane Dominion in this kingdome saying as followeth The Authority which the Bishop of Rome would be thought to haue by Gods Law is no Authoritie with vs like as no manner of forraine Bishop hath Authority among vs. Afterwards he descanteth vpon the Title of Head as it is attributed to the Church and Pope of Rome and denyeth him to be the Head by Dominion but by Order in like respect as Appelles was called the Head of Painters and Lutetia or Paris the Head of Vniuersities As for the other Supremacy which the Pope challengeth it is that which Pope Boniface the second begged of the Emperour Phocas It is an ambitious vanity for them to be called Supremes who are Postremes in that which is least All sorts of people in England are agreed vpon this point with most stedfast consent learned and vnlearned both men and women that no manner of person bred or brought vp in England hath ought to do with Rome So he This was the Faith of the Church of England then notwithstanding the Excommunication of the Pope against the King and All his Adherents CHALLENGE IN these Examples to omit others you haue two most potent Kingdomes excepting the Article now in Question vnited in Faith and the one also professing Subiection to your Church of Rome as noble Members thereof who all in all the time of their Opposition if your Article of Necessary Subiection and Vnion to the Church of Rome and Pope thereof bee of Faith are made liable with all their people vnto eternall Damnation Wherefore as we do complaine of the maliciousnesse of your Romane Article which denounceth Curses vpon all Protestants and Others of a different Religion from Rome so may wee cry out vpon the madnesse thereof by which she strangleth the children of her owne wombe yea and her whole Representatiue Bodie in her late Generall Councels as hath bene proued CHAP. XV. The Determination of the whole Controuersie betweene the Church of Rome and the Church of England together with other Protestant Churches concerning the CHVRCH CATHOLIKE to discerne whether Side is rather to be accounted Schismaticall or may more iustly pleade Soule 's Saluation First by Generall THESES SECT 1. THE word CATHOLIKE CHVRCH is that which you oppose vnto vs in euery Dispute as it were a Gorgons head able to terrifie Protestants at the first mention thereof Which name as it is appropriated to the Romane Church we haue prooued to be but a bare name and indeed Medusa's head painted in a shield a meere delusion able to feare
desire to be vnited with the Church So they which is full enough for your fuller conuiction CHALLENGE IF without the Romane Church some may bee actually saued then the Addition of the word ROMANE caonot be a Declaration of The Catholike Church without which there is no Saluation But the Romane Church is such without which as you confesse some may be actually saued Ergo the Addition of the word ROMANE to the Catholike Church cannot bee a Declaration thereof For although All agree in this as your selues confesse that Without the Catholike Church there is no saluation yet haue you confessed two sorts of Christian Professors namely Excommunicates and Catechumenists to bee actually saued albeit no Members of your Romane Church As for being Saued only by Desire or Vâ—we of being in your Church it is but a wilde and extrauagant piece of learning in the iudgement of your owne Iesuite But we will reason the matter with you Know you not that the Church Catholike is compared by Saint Petor to the Arke of Noah that as all which were within that Arke were saued all without it were drowned although they Desired neuer so much to haue been admitted into the Arke so it is in the Church Catholike whosoeuer are essentiall members thereof cannot possibly perish and contrarily whoseuer is not a reall and vitall member therein cannot but perish The fourth Argument to proue that the Addition of the word ROMANE cannot be a Declaration of the Catholike Church mentioned in the Apostles Creed In respect of the Diuine Authority of the Article SECT 7. IT hath alwaies beene the Profession of the Catholike Church it selfe not to esteeme any Doctrine an Article of Faith which is not constituted and to speake with better Emphasis Created by Diuine authority This being a Truth vniuersally consented vnto you if you will make good the Addition of the word ROMANE to the Article of the Catholike Church are iustly challengable either to proue that the Romane Church as it is the Romane Church was constituted by diuine Authority to be rather than any other transcendently THE Catholike Church or else to confesse your Article of Romane Church without which there is no Saluation to be but new and consequently a Doctrine rather of fancie than of Faith The necessity of this Consequence was well foreseene of those your Popes who were the first Authors and Patrons of this Article and therefore haue published in their writings and decrees that The Romane Church was by Diuine Authority ordained to be the Catholike Church This Question dependeth vpon the reason of the Pope of Rome his succession to Saint Peter to wit whether it were allotted to the Bishop of Rome to succed Saint Peter as Head of the Catholike Church by the institution of Christ or else by the fact of Saint Peter himselfe For if it were by command and appointment of Christ then it must be allowed as a Diuine Ordinance but if it issued onely from the fact of Saint Peter then by your owne Confessions it is no doctrine of Faith This being the state of the Question as it is propounded by your selues hereunto we desire to receiue your owne Resolutions To this purpose when wee consult with your choisest Doctors as namely Bellarmine Suarez Soto Paludanus Bannes Augustinus Triumphus Cordubensis Armachanus Waldensis and Others they that speake more ingenuously doe freely grant that the pretended Pontificall Dignity Romane as it is Romane is not from diuine authority because onely from the fact of Peter They that are more affectionate to the Romane See although they attribute it to the Institution of Christ yet dare they not say that this is to be beleeued vpon certainty of Faith but onely as a matter Probable and Coniecturall Nay if you shall haue but a little patience vntill we descend to that point you shall perceiue by the iudgement of the Catholike Church it selfe in a generall Councell of primatiue Antiquity that The Prerogatiue which the Church of Rome then had was but from Humane authority CHALLENGE AN Addition standing onely vpon Probability and Coniecture cannot be infallibly a Declaration of an Article of Faith founded vpon Diuine and Infallible authority But your Addition of the word ROMANE standeth as you confesse vpon probability and Coniecture onely Ergo it cannot be an infallible Declaration of the Apostolicall Article The Catholike Church without which there is no saluation And consequently your word ROMANE added to the Christian Creed thereby to make the Romane Church The Catholike Church without which there is no saluation must necessarily be iudged Antichristian The fift Argument to proue that the Addition of the word ROMANE cannot be a Declaration of the Article The Catholike Church as it is Visible in respect of the Time past whereunto the word CATHOLIKE hath relation euen before Rome was founded a Church SECT 8. WHo knoweth not that your Addition of the word ROMANE vnto the Apostolicall Article of The Catholike Church is to infuse an opinion into the mindes of Christians that Catholike and Romane are termes vniuocall and conuertible which is as much as to say that whensoeuer there was a Romane Church it was The Catholike Church and whensoeuer there was a Catholike Church it was Romane Scarce shall you finde any Romish Professor especially among the vulgar who haue not this conceit of that Article of Christian Faith Notwithstanding your more learned Doctors are not ignorant that this Apostolicall Article The Catholike Church was published before that in Rome was founded a Church and that the Apostolicall Church it selfe was Catholike before the Article of the Catholike Church was proclaimed Which name CATHOLIKE or vniuersall was first attributed to the Church Christian To distinguishit as you know from the Synagogue of the Iewes which was circumscribed and confined to one only nation whereas the Church Catholike is not limited to any one place but is as broad in succession of place as is the whole world Now concerning the Catholike Church in the time of the Apostles Card. Baronius whose History you honour as an heauenly Lampe or torch telleth you that The Creed of the Apostles wherein is the Article of The Catholike Church was composed by them in the yeere of Christ XLIV and that the Catholike Church was extant sometime before this Article was put into the tenor of the Creed Which he demonstrateth from the act of Saint Peter who in the yeere of our Sauiour XXXIX is found Visiting the Churches in Pontus Galatia Cappadocia Asia c. That the same Apostle Saint Peter Constituted the Church of Antioch in the same yeere and after that he had gouerned the See of Antioch seuen yeeres hee in the yeere XLV translated his See from Antioch to Rome Your other Chronologer Genebrard yeeldeth vnto vs eleuen yeeres betweene the Composing of the Apostles Creed and the first foundation of the Church of Rome by the Apostle Saint
Churches Councels and Fathers SECT 1. AFter our Proofe that the now Romane Article The Catholike Romane Church without Vnion and Subiection whereunto there is no Saluation is New Imposterous Scandalous c. taken from the tenor and sence of the Apostolicall Article The Catholike Church expressed in our Catholike Creed We proceed to confirme our former Proofe by like euidence from currant Examples taken from the Catholike Church it selfe And for our more expedite Method passage herein We shall proportion our Treatise according to three Distinctions of Tyme the Tyme before the Tyme when and the Tyme after that the Church of Rome had her first foundation and being I. Of the Time before the Church of Rome was founded First setting downe the Romane Article intituling the Church of Rome The Mother Church SECT 2. WEE need not tell you that it is an Article in your Church to beleeue that the Church of Rome is The Mother and Mistris Church of all other Churches where by Mother you vnderstand her ancient Prerogatiue of spirituall Generation and by Mistris her Iurisdiction and Supreme Authority of directing all other Churches as Members of the Church Catholike seeing that the Fathers of the Councell of Trent in their Canons and Decrees haue fiue times published the same Article in expresse words calling her The Common Mother on earth which cannot forget whom shee hath begotten As if all the Faithfull on earth were her ofspring Instantly vpon this Decree of the Councell the Father of all these Trent-Fathers Pope Pius the 4. for Confirmation of that Councell enioyned euery Ecclesiasticke to professe among other points the same Romane Article vpon Oath thus I N. sweare that I acknowledge the Church of Rome to be the Mother and Mistris of all other Churches without which faith none can be saued So then this Article is become as Catholike among you as is your Church Which opinion of her Vniuersal Motherhood hath beene the greatest fascination and witcherie that of long time hath blinded the eyes of most of her Professors and which we shall prooue to bee no better than a False and Imposterous inchantment voide of all light of truth and repugnant vnto the confessed Examples of illustrious Churches more ancient than her selfe The first Confutation of that Article of Romane Mother-hood is taken from the rottennesse of the Foundation thereof SECT 3. IF there bee any sound ground of truth in the Article viz. that The Church of Rome is Mother of all other Churches sure we are that your two Cardinals for learning and deuotion towards that Church most Eminent viz. Baronius and Bellarmine will be most able and willing to expresse it especially where they professedly determine the very point Baronius teaching that Saint Peter being constituted by Christ the ordinary Pastor of the whole Church did fixe his seate at Rome doth thereupon resolue saying Hence it is that the Romane Church is called the Mother-Church of all others And lest any might deny this Consequence as being that which it is indeed fond and absurd Bellarmine addeth the reason thereof The Church of Rome saith he could not be called the Mother-Church except that all the Apostles had had their ordination of Pastorship from Saint Peter And for proofe heereof the Cardinall referreth vs to the Epistles of Pope Anacletus witnessing that The order of Priesthood had its ' beginning from Peter So he whereas notwithstanding Sacerdotall Order doth but coniecturally inferre the Episcopall Howsoeuer these testimonies from the Epistles of Anacletus which your Cardinall Cusanus beleeueth to be Apocryphall and vnworthy of beleefe Two of your most priuileged Iesuites Azorius and Suarez denie That the other Apostles receiued their Episcopall Ordination from Saint Peter Which they maintaine vpon better grounds than the Counterfeit Epistles of a Pope can be euen vpon the Oracles of God's Word where it appeareth say they that Matthias had his Ordination to the Bishopprick which Iudas lost not by the hands of Peter but by lott immediately from God and Saint Paul his not by Saint Peter but by a voice from heauen euen immediately from Christ. They adde other Reasons in the end adioyne the Consent of S. Augustine of many other Diuines Yet were it admitted that Peter as ordinarie Pastor of the Catholike Church had ordained other Apostles Byshops and by their Ministry begotten those innumerable Churches which the same Apostles as you Confesse constituted seauen yeeres before the Church of Rome was erected yet were it a mad point of Genealogizing to conclude that Rome must be Mother to those daughters of Saint Peter which were begotten seauen yeeres before shee was borne whereas shee could be to them but a Sister at the most and that but a younger Sister too CHALLENGE GIue vs leaue to dispute from your owne Confessions thus If all the other Apostles were not ordained Byshops by Saint Peter there can be no apparent reason why the Church of Rome should be called the Mother-Church Thus Bellarmine But all the other Apostles were not ordained Byshops by Saint Peter Thus your Iesuites out of direct Scriptures accompanied with the Consent of Saint Augustine and many other Diuines Ergo there is not sufficient ground to cal the Church of Rome the Mother of al other Churches Twice miserable therefore is the state of your Priests both because they are tied periuriously to sweare That to be an Article of Faith which is a manifest false-hood as also for that they and all that Sect being entangled in this error of beleeuing the Romane Church to be the Mother of all other Churches are thereby consequently entangled in all other her errors and Idolatries The second Confutation of the same Article ariseth from the Respect of many illustrious Mother-Churches more ancient than Rome SECT 4. WE furthermore endeauour to impugne your former infatuation in beleeuing the Vniuersall Mother-hood of the Church of Rome by the faith of Fathers of Primitiue times farre more Reuerend for antiquity and more credible for impartiality than were your Fathers or rather Step-Fathers of Trent Not but that we as willingly as worthily doe acknowledge the Ancient Church of Rome to haue beene in former times an happie Mother of many renouned Christian Churches in the world and we accordingly blesse the wombe of that sincere Faith and Piety which then brought forth so innumerable an of-spring of so many holy Professors which notwithstanding shee might content her selfe to haue deserued the Title of a Mother-Church as other ancient Churches were and not of THE MOTHER-CHVRCH OF ALL OTHERS For we are verily perswaded that no reasonable man can allowe any childe so to honour his Mother as that he must necessarily thereby disparage all others his honourable Progenitresses and that we may so speake his owne Grand-mother and Great-grand-mother together with others of his kindred more ancient than Shee Such was the state of the Church of Rome in
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as it is in the Greek because also the Bishop of Rome hath 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the same custome thereby distinguishing and limiting their Prouinces so as the Bishop of Alexandria may still haue gouernment within his Prouinces As also the Bishop of Rome hath in his And that because of prescription of Custome 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 say they that is LET THE ANCIENT COVRSE HOLD and adde As also let Antioch and other Prouinces hold their ancient Priuiledges c. Which taketh away all Subordination of the authoritie of Alexandria to Rome This was the current sence of this Canon in the dayes of Antiquitie vntill the boldnesse of your Authors thinking to carry the matter by out-facing deuised a strange Answer The sence is saith Bellarmine that the Bishop of Alexandria should haue these Prouinces there mentioned because the Bishop of Rome was accustomed to permitt it so to be So he As though they were not words of Comparison that the Bishop of Alexandria should enioy his Priuileges accordingly as the Bishop of Rome held anciently his but that the Prerogatiue forsooth of the Bishop of Rome was and had beene then to Permitt or dispose of the Prouinces of the Patriarkes of Alexandria and Antioch and of other Bishops at his owne pleasure A Glosse both sencelesse and shamelesse Sencelesse for that it carrieth with it a Confluence of Absurdities First because it had beene an impietie for the Accusers to haue called the Case of the Bishop of Alexandria and Antioch into question to be determined in that Councell if it had beene the Catholike faith then to beleeue that it was in the power of the Bishop of Rome to order all such matters of Iurisdiction of other Patriarks as he should thinke good Next the Councell had bene guilty of vnpardonable remissenesse when they heard a Case so preiudiciall to the Authority of the Monarch of the Church the Pope of Rome and yet would not seuerely rebuke the Accusers as scandalous and Schismaticall fellowes nor reiect the Case it selfe with indignation and detestation as that which they could not take vpon them to decide without the danger of their soules against the Ordinance of Christ in the Bishop of Rome But much more for determining contrarily as they did saying LET ANCIENT CVSTOMES HOLD whereas they should rather haue expresly acknowledged in the Bishop of Rome the Ordinance of Christ as the life and soule of euery Custome which comprehendeth any matter of Faith necessary to Saluation And that this Answer is also shamelesse is prooued by the Sun-shine light of storie For that those words Because also the Bishop of Rome hath the same Custome are words of Comparison betwixt the Churches of Alexandria and Rome in the point of maintaining their ancient Priuileges Which not onely the words 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Because also do plainly prooue As when one shall say I will giue this man a Crowne because also I gaue a Crowne to his fellow but furthermore the three Editions now set downe in the body of your Councels by your Binius wherein the words are Because the Church of Rome hath the like Custome without any word of Permission Yet were all this but a kind of Modesty if you did not know that the Fathers of the Councell of Chalcedon vpon the same ground namely that it was but matter of Custome and no Diuine Ordinance did against the will of the Bishop of Rome aduance the Prerogatiue of the Bishop of Constantinople If you did not know that three of your Popes of Rome for the giuing of an high point of Dominion euen the Prerogatiue of Appeales to Rome from other Prouinces alleaged though forgedly and fraudulently the authority of the Councell of Nice And if you did not further know it Confessed by a Cardinall of farre more ancient note and greater ingenuity than his fellowes that the direct Sence of the Nicene Canon is that As the Bishop of Rome had power and authority ouer all his Bishops so the Bishop of Alexandria according to Custome should haue thorow-out Lybia c. The same Cardinall proceeds in shewing how much Rome hath since encroached beyond her ancient limits Wee see saith he how much the Bishop of Rome by vse and custome of Subiectionall Obedience hath at this day got beyond the ancient Constitutions But how shall we expect good conscience from your Bellarmine in acknowledging the true iudgement of the Councell of Nice who when it is obiected against the latter Romane Councels to prooue them bastardly and illegitimate that it is required as a necessary Condition in a Councell in all Diuine Constitutions to stand vpon Diuine grounds the holy Scriptures onely answereth that This is no equall condition And notwithstanding that the thrice-renoumed Emperour Constantine the GREAT required in this Synod of Nice that Because the bookes of the Apostles do plainly instruct vs in Diuine matters therefore we ought to make our Determinations vpon questions from words which are so diuinely inspired yet answereth the same Bellarmine thus Constantine saith he was a great Emperour indeed but yet no great Doctour of the Church who was yet vnbaptized and therefore vnderstood not the mysteries of Religion Thus doth this your Cardinall twit and taunt the iudgement of that godly Emperour witnessed by Theodoret where expressing his testimonie and citing the place yet as the Steward in the Gospell vniustly concealeth from his Reader that which followeth in Theodoret namely that The greater part of that Councell of Nice obeyed the voice of Constantine and Concluded matters accordingly So little regard haue the now Romanists to the authority of the Councell of Nice which hath bene euer since worthily honourable in the memorie of all true worshippers of Christ Iesus By which notwithstanding we see two Articles of Popery quite ouerthrowne One of the pretended Papall Dominion ouer the whole Church the oâ—her the Equalling of Traditions with Scriptures for the deciding of matters of Faith CHALLENGE THe Canons of those CCCXVIII Fathers of that Generall Councell of Nice who haue thus infirmed your Article of Vniuersall Subiection to the Romane Church found beleefe with all the syncere Professors throughout the Christian world Whether therefore you will haue your Article to damne so many Catholike Bishops the admirable lights of Gods Church or rather to esteeme your Romane Article Damnable and blasphemous in it selfe iudge you II. That the beleefe of the Romish Article The Catholike Romane Church c. Damneth the CL. Catholike Bishops in the second Generall Councell being the first at Constantinople Anno 380. SECT 3. WEE present before you the CL. Catholike Bishops in the second Generall Councell of Constantinople whereunto it may seeme that both you and we do willingly referre our selues First then we shall heare Your Obiections The second Generall Councell saith your Cardinall in their Epistle to Pope Damasus say that they
were gathered by the Mandate of Pope Damasus and confesse also that the Church of Rome is the Head and they the members So he And this is all that is obiected but vpon a mistake the Cardinall himselfe confessing that It was not the Epistle of the Councell but of certaine Bishops that had bene at the Councell And therefore for the first part of the Popes Mandate he referreth himselfe to another Councell against the Vniuersall Current of Histories which with generall consent set downe the Mandates of Emperours as the supreme and first compulsarie Causes for the collecting of Councels But that which he looseth in mis-citing his true Authors he studieth to gaine by mis-interpreting of the testimonie of Theodoret. For whereas Theodoret saith 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which is letters the yeare past He against all Lexâ—cons readeth The Mandate of letters Is not this fine art trow yee For take your owne Translation of 2. Cor. 8. ver 10. whether the vulgar Latine or the English This is profitable for you who haue begun not onely to do but also to be willing Gr. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Vulg. Ab anno superiori Rhemists English from the yeare past If any should translate the yeare past into Mandate might it not be suspected that the mans wits were now in the waine as being ignorant of the common Prouerb 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Last yeare the better to signifie the more and more worthie Is there here any sound of a Commander As for the Similitude of the Head and Members it hath no more colour of Superiority than that which we haue alwaies acknowledged namely of Order that is of Priority of Place of Voice and the like but neuer of Dominion That which the Inscription of the Epistle doth coÌ„fute which was not to Damasus alone but ioyntly to others thus Most honourable and Reuerend Brethren and Colleagues This is the Inscription and the Epistle it selfe is of the same thred We declare say they our selues to be your proper members but how that your raigning we may raigne with you Members therefore of Colleagueship as Cor-regnants We haue heard your Pretence be you as ready to heare our contrary proofe Our Opposition The said Generall Councell of Constantinople in the second Canon decreeth thus The Bishop of the Citie of Constantinople ought to haue the honour of Primacie next after the Bishop of Rome because it is new Rome Yeelding to Rome her birth-right of Primacie which whatsoeuer it was they iudge to haue bene established not by any Diuine Ordinance but by occasion of the Imperiall Seate which was at first the Citie of Rome as your Binius acknowledgeth to be collected from that ground Who therefore cannot digest this Canon but why This Canon saith he out of Baronius was not receiued by the Church of Rome Truly it were more then maruaile that the Church of Rome should admit any Canon that may any way derogate from her presumption Albeit your owne Cardinall Cusanus hath confessed her former Encroachments But to proceed punctually Which of the Fathers for the space of 60. yeares after opposed against this Canon what one Bishop before Pope Leo thought it not most equall Albeit there were present in that Councell Cyril Bishop of Hierusalem Timothy Bishop of Alexandria and Miletus Bishop of Antioch Bishops of three seuerall Patriarchall Seas who consented vnto it notwithstanding that they themselues receiued some preiudice by that Decree This Canon you know is of great force to beate downe your whole bul-warke which is your Article of Romane-Catholike and Vniuersall Dominion ouer the whole Church and therefore we must expect some Obiection against it One we find and that a foule one too that namely This is a surreptitious Canon without the generall consent of that Synod Which we shall then confesse as soone as you shall perswade any reasonable man to thinke thâ—t to be a Supposititious and forged Canon purposely against the dignitie of the Church of Rome which the Bishops of Rome themselues when they oppugned it as being vnequall yet neuer excepted against as Surreptitious and false Not Leo not Gelasius not Gregorie although that they tooke the Sanction of that Canon indignely Or that the Legates of the Pope in the Councell of Chalcedon stifly opposing against the subiect matter of this Canon would not haue branded it with the Note of Forgerie when they made expresse mention of it if they had so conceiued thereof Or which is beyond all that can be opposed that the Fathers of the Councell of Chalcedon in their letters to Leo Pope of Rome would be there knowne vnto him that they with mutuall consent Confirmed the Rule and Canon of the CL. Bishops in the Councell of Constantinople notwithstanding standing that his Bishops and Legates Paschasinus and Lucentius did dissent therefrom if they had not iudged the said Canon to be absolutely true So false is your obiection of Falshood against that Canon of the Councell of Constantinople CHALLENGE A Canon then you see of a Generall Councell albeit neuer receiued as you say by the Church of Rome because preiudiciall thereunto which is an euident argument of their No Subiection to the Bishop of Rome Execrable therefore is your Article of The Catholike Romane Church without subiection whereunto there is no Saluation whereby C L. Bishops accounted Catholikes throughout the Christian world must be necessarily excluded from Saluation That the beleefe of the Article viz. The Catholike Romane Church without subiection whereunto there is no Saluation damneth the C C. Bishops in the third Generall Councell at Ephesus Anno 434. SECT 4. IN this Generall Councell CC. Bishops at Ephesus some things there are which you obiect and some things which you must haue the patience to haue obiected vnto you Your Obiections You would proue out of this Councell an acknowledgement of The supreme authoritie of the Popes aboue them but how first They confessed that they deposed Nestorius by the command of Pope Celestine False there is not the word Command vsed by the Councell If that word had beene vsed you should haue proued it out of the Popes owne Letters themselues which we should not haue needed to put you to if any such word could appeare in the Councell obiected No you well know that to Command was not the stile of Popes in primitiue and ancient times Saint Gregory Bishop of Rome about an C L. yeares after Celestine did vtterly abhorre it I COMMAND saith he away with the word COMMAND I haue not commanded Yet thus you labour to frame and fashion your old Popes after the models of your new to the end your new ones may not seeme to haue degenerated from the old Yet something there is in the words of the Councell namely that They were mooued and compelled by his letters meaning by the perswasions of that Orthodoxe Bishop and that but onely tùm tùm in part for
of faith Now wee haue proued by your owne Witnesses as by your owne eyes that aboue 2280. Bishops in their VIII Generall Councels and euery Generall Councell you call the Catholike Church haue opposed your Article of pretended Subiection The first by proportioning aswell the limits of the Romane Dioces as of other Patriarks The second by iudging the Romane Primacie not to stand vpon any Diuine authoritie and setting vp a Patriarke of Constantinople contrary to the Popes will The third by inhibiting any Bishop whatsoeuer from Ordaining Bishops within the Isle of Cyprus The fourth by aduancing the Bishops of Constantinople and establishing them in equall Priuiledges with the Bishops of Rome notwitstanding the Popes earnest opposition against it The fift in Condemning the Sentence of Pope Vigilius albeit one extreamely vehement in that Cause The Sixt and Seauenth in condemning Pope Honorius of Heresie And the Eighth by imposing a Canon vpon the Church of Rome and challenging Obedience thereunto Any man therefore although destitute of good Conscience if but endued with common ingenuitie will iudge and confesse that this Article which thus Condemneth aboue 2280. Bishops of the first Eighth Generall Councels whereof most were as Catholike as they were ancient and learned together with all their Beleeuers for the space of aboue 540. yeares Professours of the Christian faith is iustly to be condemned as Scandalous Schismaticall Hereticall Blasphemous Respectiuely and euery way damnable CHAP. IX Our fourth Argument taken from the Examples of particular Churches Catholike which contemning the Excommunication of the Bishop of Rome were notwithstanding acknowledged to be in the state of Saluation SECT 1. THree things there are which your new Romane Article requireth as Necessary to Saluation of Christians throughout the World I. Is to haue Vnion with the Church of Rome and Head thereof II. Because there are two kindes of Vnions one in Equalitie as is betweene the Members of the same Body and another in an Inequalitie like as is betweene the Head and the Body your Article exacteth Vnion of subiection also The III. is the Necessitie of faith concerning both these as namely that euery Christian doe beleeue the truth of the Article in both to wit that they are indeede Necessary to Saluation Therefore haue wee singled out Examples of ancient Churches which you your selues note as Excommunicate by the Popo which notwithstanding all the Christian world haue held to haue beene in the state of Saluation Our first Instance is in the ancient Churches of Asia which notwithstanding the Excommunication of Pope Victor were in the state of Saluation SECT 2. YOur owne Authors boastingly relate that in the yeare 197. Pope Victor did excommunicate all the Easterne Churches for not obseruing the feast of Easter vpon the Lords day which Excommunication say they is not found to haue beene afterwards reuoked or retracted wherein notwithstanding those that were auerse continued a long time So they A storie certainly worthy your double consideration whereof you cannot be ignorant it being recorded by Eusebius at large that namely Polycrates Bishop of Ephesus in Asia pleaded the Cause of the Churches of Asia against the Excommunication of Victor in that his Epistle whereunto the other Bishops in Asia gaue their Consent Prouing that their Custome contrary to the Romane was receiued from Saint Iohn who leaned vpon our Lords brest that it was practised by Philip the Apostle who died in Asia that it was continued by Saint Polycarpus Martyr and Bishop of Smyrna by Thraseas Bishop and Martyr by Sagonius Bishop and Martyr and that then Polycrates being animated by these so worthy Examples and the vnanimous Consent of their Bishops in Asia stood in defiance with that Pope Victor and contemned his Excommunications saying I who haue now liued sixtie fiue yeares in the Lord and haue had communion in the faith with all the Brethren dispersed 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 throughout the world and nothing moued with these terrors meaning of Ezcommunication which are vrged against vs. Thus farre the Ecclesiasticall Storie wherein appeareth this Conclusion as manifest as if it had beene deliuered in expresse termes viz. That a Christian may haue Communion generally with the Catholike Church else-where throughout the world notwithstanding the Excommunication of the Pope and See of Rome and therefore cannot the Romane Church be called the Catholike Church as the Head whereunto all others ought to professe Vnion and yeeld Subiection Yea but your Question will be whether these Asian Churches being thus Excommunicate by the Pope of Rome and so without the Vnion of your Church could therefore be said to be without the state of Saluation This is the maine point for satisfaction whereunto first if you will respect the faith of those Churches it is plaine that they beleeued that the Excommunication of the Bishop of Rome had no further power than to seperate them from his owne Romane Societie and Communion but extended not to the Church Catholike and Separation from it And this will appeare to bee true by better testimonies from the same knowne Storie it selfe where you may read that This Act of Victor did not well please all other Bishops who did greatly reproue him for troubling the peace of the Church And among others Father Irenaeus in the person of his Brethren in France wrote Letters to Pope Victor Dehorting him from his purpose This is enough to proue that Pope Victor was the Schismatike that troubled the peace of the Church and not the Asian Bishops whom these other holy Bishops did so far iustifie as not to deserue Excommunication But to appeale to your owne Consciences shew vnto vs in all your reading if you can that Polycrates and other Asian Bishops so Excommunicate by Pope Victor were held by any other Catholike Bishops of those times to be thereby without the state of Saluation For this you know is the very soule of your Article viz. The Catholike Romane Church without which there is no Saluation Nay but you full well know that Contrarily Saint Hierome in his Catalogue of Ecclesiasticall Writers numbred Polycrates among those who did aduance the Catholike faith And againe relating this his opposition against Victor This I therefore mention saith hee to make knowne what was his meaning Polycrates Authoritie And yet againe Reporting the behauiâ—ur of Irenaeus and other Bishops in the same Case These saith hee albeit they differed in opinion from the Asian Bishops yet did they not consent to Pope Victor in the act of Excommunication So hee Where Not Consenting to the Popes Excommunication doth plainly inferre their inward Communion with the Bishops of Asia CHALLENGE THis one Case if there were no other were enough to strangle your Romane faith in that Article viz. The Romane Church without vnion wherewith there is no Saluation Wherein we finde the Bishops and Churches of Asia Excommunicated by the Romane Bishop and so separated from the Communion of his See
in the Church of Christ as those that stood in the state of Saluation The Subiestion required by you from Emperours to the Bishop of Rome SECT 2. MAny words of Introduction neede not your Conclusions are as followeth That Princes and whatsoeuer Potentates are not to meddle in Ecclesiasticall affaires They May not gather Councels by their owne Authoritie They Ought to yeeld Prioritie of Place especially to the Pope And To professe Reuerence this being a signe of Superioritie and also Obedience vnto him But how farre must this Reuerence extend if you your selues may prescribe namely sauing your Reuerence to the Kissing of the Popes feet which in your iudgement is An honour which the Pope may not refuse and which Pope Gregorie the Seuenth reckoneth in the Ninth place of those Priuileges which he challenged as properly belonging to him as Pope of Rome Not to insist vpon the barbarous boast which you make of your Popes In not admitting of two Emperours to their presence without an extreame kinde of Submission the one by approaching vpon his bare feet the other by subiecting his necke vnto the Popes feet While-as the Popes Oxe may bragge of more fauour than the first and his Asse than the second Much more might be added out of the last worke of Bellarmin entitled The Dutie of a Christian Prince wherein such is the spirit of that Cardinall that whatsoeuer any example of honour he could rake out of the ashes of Princes Kings or Emperours yeelded to either Popes Bishops or Priests in the superlatiue excesse of their humilitie zeale and deuotion that doth hee violently wrest to make of it a Generall Rule of Office and Dutie euen to the Dedignifying and abasing of Princes to the yeelding of praeeminence to Bishops and inferior Priests in Precedence and going first in Presidence and sitting aboue yea and they exact also very soberly I wisse a Prebibition and drinking before them A Doctrine wherein that old Cardinall hath beene sufficiently I hope conuinced of extreame dotage The Opposition of the former Emperours against the pretended Subiection SECT 3. THe First point of their Opposition may be discerned in their Interesting themselues in Ecclesiasticall affaires The Emperour Constantine as Saint Augustine witnesseth at large committed the Cause of Caecilian Bishop of Carthage vnto Pope Meltiades Obserue Ergò it was by the Emperors Commission and not to him alone but to him with others who are called in that Commission the Popes Colleagues Secondly Obserue Ergo the Pope was not Monarch or sole Actor herein nay after that the Pope had giuen his iudgement the same Emperor referred the same Cause to be more diligently examined and ended to the Bishops of Arles Thirdly Obserue Ergo the Iudgement of the Pope will suffer an higher Appeale for after in the Case of Athanasius the same Emperour chargeth all the Bishops of the Prouince of Tyre what to doe To appeare before mee saith hee without delay and to shew how sincerely and truely you haue giuen your iudgements And not thus onely but when the Cause Ecclesiasticall requireth hee proceedeth to denounce punishment by his owne Authoritie against whomsoeuer that shall honor the memory of those Bishops Theognis and Eusebius Other the like Demonstrations might be brought of Constantne his Authority in Causes Ecclesiasticall Of the Emperour Theodosius we reade that he gaue to the Bishop Dioscorus Authority and Superiority of place to moderate Causes in a Councell Can this consist thinke you with your pretended Subiection No He giueth say you that which he hath not to giue but doth it out of Ignorance of the Canon vsurping that Authority Oh you are angrie and no maruell though men fancie not that fruite which setteth their teeth on edge But we cannot be sparing in this kind For Theodosius the younger and Honorius both Emperours Say as you know that the Patriarch of Constantinople hath the same right ouer those in subiection vnder him which the Pope hath ouer his Where diuers Subiects must needs argue different Subiections and equality of Right must as nessarily dissolue Monarchie which can be but of One. And Iustinian the Emperour will hardly please you with whom you quarrell at the first hearing He authorized vnder his owne hand The Code or Bookes of Constitutions and Pandects for the Regulating of the Clergie as well as of the Laity Whereat you fret not a little Herein he is say you iustly reprooued of many as one inuading vpon and intruding into the Office of diuine causes The same Emperour taketh vpon him the Confirmation of the Election of the Bishop of Rome and behold againe you brand him withe the note of an Vsurper Finally in generall you shape vs this Answer These Emperours haue passed the bounds of their Authority You furthermore told vs of another Character of due Subiection which is the yeelding vnto the Pope the Prerogatiue of gathering Generall Councels albeit nothing is more obuious to Any conuersant in Ecclesiasticall reading than that which your owne Cardinall Cusanus hath confessed long since The first eight generall Councels saith he were gathered by Authority of Emperours and not of Popes insomuch that Pope Leo was glad to intreat the Emperour Theodosius the younger for the gathering of a Councell in Italy and could not obtaine it But can we forget your next Prerogatiue of Subiection viz. the Popes Precedency and Priority of place aboue euen Emperours themselues Surely if he had any ancient claime hereunto it should haue bene in that wherein he challengeth the greatest praeeminence to wit in a Generall Councell But when we aske the Question why no one of your Popes were euer personally present in any of the first Generll Councels if he must be thought to be the sole Head of the Church and he alone to haue an infallible iudgement in himselfe no not though they were in the same City as was Vigilius where the Councell was celebrated You answer that the reason why the Popes would not present themselues in these Councels was this Because the Greeke Bishops who were in those Easterne Councels wherein also the Emperours were present would haue preferred the Emperours in place aboue the Popes So you And we cannot but belieue you and thereupon make bold to conuince your new Doctors of egregious impudency who dare extend the height of the praeeminency of Popes aboue Emperours euen in defiance as it were of all Antiquity and of the Consent of all those Catholike Bishops in Generall Councels As for your last and basest point of Subiection of Kissing the Popes feet it tasteth so ranckly of Luciferian pride in the now Popes that we thinke it an exceeding iniury to the memory of holy Popes of the Primitiue times to belieue that they could affect or would admit such an homage and honour a lesse than which Saint Peter refused as too much if it had bene offered
that euery mans Cause be heard where the crime is committed And which words your Cardinall thought good to pretermit euery Pastor hath committed vnto him a portion of the flocke of Christ which he is to gouern wherof he is to giue an account vnto God And doubtlesse they who are vnder our gouernment ought not to gad and wander nor rashly and cunningly to make a difference betweene Bishops that are at Vnity and Concord but they should pleade their cause there where both accusers and witnesses may be had except some few desperate and naughty fellowes thinke the Authority of the Bishops of Africke to be of lesse power or might who haue iudged and by the grauity of their iudgement haue condemned men whose consciences are fettered in the cords of their owne offences their cause is already knowne and tried and iudgement is giuen already vnto them nor can it agree with the censure of Bishops to deserue the reprehension of lightnesse and inconstancy So he Than which what could be said more to the strangling of your pretended Right of Appeales to Rome Your Cardinals Answeres are many and various it will be the most expedite way for vs to follow him step by step 1. Cyprian saith he albeit he did vnwillingly endure yet did he not altogether abrogate Appeales True if you meane simply the Abrogation of All Appeales within Africke but if you vnderstand that he abrogated not All Appeales beyond the Seas and consequently to Rome then is your Answer most false Secondly your Cardinall instanceth in an Example of One Appealing from Spaine vnto Rome many hundred miles distant yet Cyprian writing hereof saith he said Non tà m quà m the Pope was not so much too blame who was deceiued by the Appellant as was the Appellant himselfe that deceiued him As though this were not a full Reprehension of both If one say that he is not so fellonious that receiueth stolne goods as the man that did steale them your Non tà m quà m doth distinguish them in the degree of more or lesse fellony but maketh no difference in their nature and kind for both are felonies So then the Pope was lesse blameable Ergo he was blameable but the other more because the Appellant would needs Appeale in the consciousnes of his Crime but the Pope entertained it in a presumption of the mans integrity and therefore Both blameable because as Cyprian argueth against equity and iustice Thirdly but The decree which Cyprian speaketh of saith your Cardinall was against the First iudgement which is to be made in the place where the crime is committed but he forbiddeth not Second iudgements else-where by way of Appeale Than which what can be more false I had almost said faithlesse for the Cardinall himselfe knoweth that Cyprian vseth this as a Reason against their flying to Rome for a second Iudgment euen Because saith Cyprian they had bene already iudged by me and my Bishops by whom they were condemned Fourthly but Cyprian saith he argueth from this Decree as it implyeth most notorious and manifest crimes What did your Cardinall meane by this his Ipse dixit to infascinate his Reader and to depriue him both of reason and sense For ordinary reason teacheth in points of Law first that A man must not distinguish where the Law doth not distinguish although then it happened that these Crimes of the Appellant were indeed notorious yet in the Decree it selfe there is no such Distinction Secondly it is a vaine thing to thinke that any Crime can appeare so Notorious to a Iudge who is many hundred miles off but one report will encounter another and the Appellant will still make faire pretence of innocency for himselfe vntill the matter be tryed And that we may Appeale to common sense in reading of the Canon and Decree it selfe it is Generall thus It is iust that euery mans Cause be heard there where the crime is committed It seemeth then that your Cardinall dreamed of a Cause implyed in this Decree which could not be any mans Cause else he would haue considered that where Euery mans Cause is expressed No cause of any man could be excepted Fifthly but If Cyprian saith he should here deny Appeales then should he take away all Appeales not onely to Rome but euen to euery place else which Answer how vnworthy it is the iudgement of any man of learning you will easily perceiue Cyprian as your Pamelius noteth was the Chiefe Primate in Africke who held a Councell of his Bishops to Excommunicate Fortunatus and to depose him the Councell fore-seeing the factiousnesse of Fortunatus that he would seeke to Rome to trouble the Church of Christ by working distraction betweene the Churches of Rome and Carthage made the former Decree expressing the iniquity of any Appeale to Remote places where the Cause could not be iustly tryed Heereby the said Councell tooke not away All Appeales within Africke for it was then lawfull for a Clerke to Appeale from his Bishop to an Arch-Bishop from a Metropolitan to a Councell and behold here was a Councell of Bishops which put the Period to all further Appeales expressely forbidding Appealing to places so remote as Rome was which none in Africke could come vnto without Transmigration ouer Sea Your Cardinal's Answer would teach a man to argue thus There lyeth an Appeale from th◠Bishop of Chester to the Arch-Bishop of York and from the Court of York to the Delegates but the State of England denieth Transalpinari Appeales from England ouer the Alpes to Rome Ergò the State of England abrogateth all manner of Appeales whether from Chester to York or from York to the Delegates Moreouer Cyprian speaking of those Schismaticall Appellants Except saith he some few desperate and wretched fellowes thinke the Authority of the Bishop of Africke lesse Insinuating as we may truly iustly and according to their Intention interpret it than the Authority of the Bishop of Rome thereby impairing the power of the Bishop of Rome in respect of the iudgement of a Nationall Councell No saith your Cardinall but the words lesse Authority haue Relation to the Cause and not to the Bishop of Rome as signifying that the Bishops of Africke had authority sufficient to iudge that Cause Here againe he feigneth Cyprian to haue thought those few desperate and wretched Appellants to haue beene so absurd as to thinke they could not be iudged by a Prouinciall Councell whereunto they were subiect An absurdity which none i◠Christianitie could truely imagine Besides the words Lesse Authoritie of them that haue iudged haue Relation to him whom those Fellowes desired to re-iudge their Cause namely the Pope therefore it was as much as if Cyprian had said Least those few naughty fellowes may thinke the Bishops of Africke haue lesse Authority than is that which they Appeale vnto and their Appeale was to the Bishop of Rome So apparant it is that Cyprian thus twitting those Few desperate
giueth instance in the Churches of Corinth and Galatia both which Saint Paul stileth Churches of the Saints albeit the one is reprehended by the Apostle for denying the Resurrection 1 Cor. 15. the other for teaching a necessary Obseruation of the Law of Moses with the Gospell of Christ. Gal. 1. So he Yet lest you may erre in terming that a True Church which is wilfuliy intangled in any Heresie he giueth this Condition that The same that erre be ready to be reformed and to obey the truth as were the Corinthians and Galatians Otherwise to bee vnwilling either to learne or to yeeld vnto a manifest truth is proper saith your Author vnto a Satanicall Synagogue and to the Churches of the Malignant So your Cardinall and that most truely THESIS VI. Some Vnsound Churches are necessarily to bee auoided and the iust Causes why SECT 7. AS Leprousie Plague and whatsoeuer contagious Diseases are necessarie causes of separation from vnsound houses so Obstinacie of error in Teachers affected Ignorance and obduration of people Idolatry in Gods Worship Tyrannie and Persecution against the true and sincere Professors may be iudged necessary Causes of Separation from any particular Churches Against a generall Obstinacie of false-Teachers opposing to the wholesome doctrine We haue a Caueat 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Depart from such 1 Tim. 6.5 Against the generall Obdurancie of hearts our Caueat is both Christ's Shake off the dust of your feet in departing and Saint Paul's 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 When certaine obstinate persons speake euill of the Word of God before the people he departed from them and separated the Disciples Act. 19.9 because else they should heare nothing but blasphemies against the truth of God Against the Corruption of Gods Worship Idolatrously the Command is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Flie from Idolatry 1 Cor. 10.4 euen as vnto the people vnder the Law when Bethel that is the House of God was turned into Bethauen that is the House of Vanity the Epithet of Idolatry then the Watch-word to the Faithfull was Separate your selues from among them Hos. 10. Against Tyrannie in Persecuting of Preachers or Professors in any one City the warning is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 likewise Flie vnto another Mat. 10.23 And lastly in the time of Antichristian Tyrannie and Idolatry in Romish Babylon the Spiâ—it saith 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Come out of her my people Apoc. 18.4 THESIS VII No vniust Excommunication out of a true Church can preiudice the Saluation of the Excommunicate SECT 8. YOur Romance Glosse authorized by Pope Gregory the XIII will speake as much as need be said to wit The Keyes of the Church erring in her binding and loosing the partie so bound is not then bound with God for it happeneth many times that he who is excommunicated out of the Church Militant is notwithstandeng in the Church Triumphant So your owne Glosse According as it hath beene obserued by you in the Blinde-man cured by Christ and professing the power of Christ whom therefore the Church of the Iewes 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Cast out of their Synagogues Ioh. 9.34 That is saith your Cardinall they excommunicated and separated him from the communion of Them who at that time were accounted faithful but yet happie was that Blinde-man who was Excommunicated for the name of Christ. So he And so may we say of Luther who was as one borne Blinde whilst hee continued in your Church according to your Assumption true vntill that Christ opened his eyes and he for acknowledging the diuine light was Excommunicate by your High Priest Yet happie man he who was taken into the protection of Christ whom he professed and worshipped Something more of Excommunication you may reade in the XV. Section Following The Second Part is concerning Departure from Rome more particularly comparing the Church of Rome with other Churches We are approached to the Walls of Rome and behold wee discouer in her iust iust Causes of Separation from her which we shall represent vnto you in that due place whereunto we now proceed by certaine Theses as it were by iust pases Comparing her first with other Remote Christian Churâ—hes THESIS I. The Church of Rome is as subiect to Errors as any other Church SECT 9. WHat Prerogatiue had the Church-of your Romanes aboue the Church of the Ephesians or Thessalonians in respect of any possibilitie of not Erring or of Contemning other Churches in respect of her selfe to which that may be obiected which the Apostle writ to the Corinthians to wit Came the Word of God first from you nay came it not First from Hierusalem to Antioch and many other places before Rome and at length from Greece to Rome And after that Rome is established a Church was it freed from Erring more than other through the Primacie which it challengeth ouer Others By what Law Humane that could not Diuine that did not authorize any such Primacy Which you are compellable to Confesse except you will say that the Catholike Church hath erred in the Generall Councell of Chalcedon which as hath beene confessed denied that Rome had her Primacie from diuine Ordinance except you will also Grant that the Church of Rome it selfe hath erred in her Councell of Constance which maintained the same Axiome to wit that the Church of Rome held not her Primacie from diuine authority Lastly except you will impeach the Apostle Saint Paul of error who by his 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 taught an indifferencie of all spirituall respect to Rome with other Churches as hath beene proued Take vnto you one infallible Argument that the Church of Rome may erre in matter of Faith It hath erred Ergo It may possibly erre That it hath one confessed instance may sufficiently resolue you if it bee pregnant Such is the doctrine of the Administration of the Eucharist vnto Infants vpâ—n Necessity of Saluation A doctrine by your owne Confession at this day false and yet at that day as is likewise Confessed taugh and continued in the Church of Rome for the space of 600 yeeres together THESIS II. That the Church of Rome is more subiect to Erring than any other Church Christian. SECT 10. WHy is it that Christ said The whole need not the Physitian but those that be sicke but onely to shew that the state of one in an health falsly-conceited is farre more desperate than the state of the most extreme disease sensibly â—elt in as much as that man is more incapable of remedie that feeleth not his owne maladie than hee that is sensible of his griefe Such is the Case of the Romane Church which is so much more obnoxious to Error as shee is flalsly perswaded shee cannot possibly erre and that vpon two notoriously-erroneous Articles which are fancied and fained onely by her selfe One is that shee beleeueth as an Article of her Faith that shee the Romane Church is that The Catholike Church which cannot erre Which