satisfied in any thing vnder God And so generally and absolutely denie that the Image of God can bee lost or blotted out These make a difference betweene the Image of God thus restrained to the largnesse and and admirable perfection of the naturall faculties of the soule and the similitude or likenesse of God which appeareth in the qualities and vertues of it making him that possesseth them partaker of the diuine nature which they confesse to be lost Now this similitude is all one with the Image of God in the second consideration set down by Aquinas and therefore in this matter Caluin erreth not but writeth that which is consonant vnto the truth Touching the second part of this imputation it is true that Origen erred thinking hell to be nothing else but horror of conscience But he that looketh in the place in Caluin cited by the Iesuite shall see that he saith no such thing but the cleane contrary So that the Reader shall finde Bellarnne to be constant and stil like himselfe adding one calumniation to another CHAP. 25. Of the heresie of the Peputians making women Priests THe fourth Heresie imputed vnto vs by our adversaries is that of the Peputians who gaue women authoritie to intermeddle with the sacred ministerie of the Church That we doe so likewise they indeavour to proue by misreporting the words of Luther There are two things therefore which Luther saith in the place alleadged by them First that in absolution and remission of sinnes in the supposed Sacrament of Penance a Bishop or ordinary Presbyter may doe as much as the Pope himselfe which Alphonsus à Castro writing against Heresies confesseth to bee true The second that when and where no Presbyter can be found to performe this office a Lay man yea or a woman in this case of necessitie may absolue which our adversaries neede not to thinke so strange seeing themselues giue power to women to baptise in case of necessitie which I thinke is as much a ministeriall acte as to absolue the penitent in such sort as absolution is giuen in the Church of Rome And yet they would thinke themselues wronged if from hence it should bee inferred that they make women Priests and Bishoppes But Bellarmine reporteth the wordes of Luther as if hee should say absolutely that a woman or childe hath as much power and authority from God in these things as any Presbyter or Bishop wherein hee is like himselfe Absolution in the Primitiue Church was the reconciling and restoring of penitents to the peace of the Church and to the Communion of the Sacraments from which during the time of their penitencie they were excluded This in reason none could doe but they to whom the dispensation of the Sacraments was committed and who had power to deny the Sacraments The Popish absolution is supposed to bee a Sacramentall acte Sacramentally taking away sinne and making the party absolued partaker of the remission of it This is a false and erronious conceite LVTHER thinketh it to bee a comfortable pronouncing and assuring of good to the humble penitent and sorrowfull sinner which though ordinarily and ex officio the Minister bee to doe yet may any man doe it with like effect when none of that ranke is or can be present Thus when the matter is well examined it is meerely nothing that Bellarmine can proue against Luther But that which hee addeth touching our late dread Soueraigne ELIZABETH of famous memorie that shee was reported and taken as chiefe Bishop within her dominions of England c. is more then a Cardinall lye and might beseeme the father of lyes better then any meaner professour of that facultie For the Kings and Queenes of England neither doe nor haue power to doe any ministeriall act or act of sacred order as to preach administer Sacraments and the like But that power and authority which we ascribe vnto them is that they may by their princely right take notice of matters of Religion and the exercise of it in their kingdomes That they may and in duty stand bound to see that the true Religion bee professed and God rightly worshipped That God hath giuen them the sword to punish all offenders against the first or second Table yea though they be Priests or Bishops That neither the persons nor the goods of Churchmen are exempted from their power That they holde their Crownes immediatly from God and not from the Romish Antichrist That it was the Lucifer-like pride of Antichrist which appeared in times past in the Popes wheē they shamed not to say that the Kings of England were their villanes vassalls and slaues Thus then the fourth supposed heresie we are charged with proueth to be nothing but a diuelish slander of this shamelesse Iesuite Wee say therefore to silence this slanderer that we all most constantly hold the contrary of that he imputeth vnto vs And that wee thinke there is no more daungerous or presumptuous wicked boldnesse then for any man not called set a part and sanctified therevnto to intermeddle with any part of the sacred ministerie of the Church CHAP 26. Of the supposed heresie of Proclus and the Messalians touching concupiscence in the regenerate THe fift heresie which hee endevoureth to fasten vpon vs is he saith the heresie of Proclus of whom Epiphanius maketh mention But what was the heresie of Proclus Let Bellarmine tell vs for our learning It was sayth he that sin doth alwayes continue and liue in the Regenerate for that concupiscence is truely and properly sin which is not taken away by Baptisme but only allaied stilled and brought as it were into a kind of rest and sleepe by force thereof and the working of faith In this Bellarmine sheweth his intolerable either ignorance or impudence or both For Epiphanius in the place cited by him refuteth the heresie of Origen who denied the resurrection of the bodies of men as thinking such bodily substances which we see are continually subject to alteration here in this world not capable of immortality And that God did put these bodies vpon Adam and Eue after their sin at that time when he is said to haue made them coates of skinnes This Epiphanius refuteth shewing that God who only hath immortality made man though out of the earth yet by the immediate touch of his owne hands that he breathed into him the breath of life for that he meant he should be immortall that man had flesh and blood and a true bodily substance before his fall as is prooued by that of Adam concerning Eue This is now flesh of my flesh and bone of my bone that there was no euill found in the World such as death is in the beginning that man voluntarily sinned against God and therevpon God brought in death that euen as the Schoolemaster vseth correction not for any delight he hath in it but for that thereby he intendeth to bring his Schollers to forsake their negligent and disordered courses and to
disposing the affaires of Princes their States there were euer many worthy men that opposed themselues against his vnjust and Antichristian claimes There are some sayth Waldensis that erre supposing that the roote of all terrene power dependeth in such sort of the Pope that it is deriued vnto Princes by commission from him and that if they abuse the same hee may take the disposing of such affaires as belong vnto them into his own hands This they indeauour to proue because the Ecclesiasticall power is more eminent and excellent than the power of Princes but this their proofe is too weake for let vt runne through all examples of things which are different in degree of excellencie and one of them more worthy than another wee shall see that the Sunne is better than the Moone yet the power and vertue of moystening that is in the Moone is not imparted to it from the Sunne the soule is more excellent than the body yet the body was before the soule came into it and in it many workes of sense are performed which the spirit by it selfe cannot performe gold is better then leade yet doth it not giue being vnto it so that though it were granted that Episcopall dignity is more high and eminent then the authority of Princes yet the first spring of Regall power is in the King from God and not from the Pope There is sayth Waldensis one doctor Adam a Cardinall who in a dialogue betweene a Bishoppe and a King indeauoureth altogether to deriue the authority of Kings from the Papall power both in the being and excercise of it and reserueth onely a power of execution to Princes at the commaund of the high bishop this errour hee condemneth and sayth that howsoeuer the solemnities of the oath vnction crowning and the like are performed to Kings by Bishoppes yet hath not kingly dignity her beginning from Priesthood but by the ministery of Priests Kings receiue it from God and are put in possession of it Fawning and deceitfull flattery sayth Gerson whispereth in the eares of Ecclesiasticall persons especially of the Pope in shamelesse manner saying vnto them O sacred Clergie how great how great is the height and sublimity of thy Ecclesiasticall power how is all secular authority compared thereunto altogether nothing For as all power in heauen and earth was giuen to Christ soe Christ left it all to Peter and his Successours soe that Constantine the Emperour gaue nothing to Pope Syluester that was not his before but onely restored that which had bin vnjustly detayned besides as there is no power but of God so is there none whether Temporall or Ecclesiasticall Imperiall or Regall but from the Pope in whose thigh CHRIST hath written King of Kings and Lord of Lords of whose power to dispute is sacrilegious boldnesse to whom no man may say Sir why doe you so though he alter over-turne waste and confound all States Rules Dominions and Possessions of men whether Ciuill or Ecclesiasticall let me be judged a Lyar saith he if these things bee not found written by them that seeme wise in their owne eyes and if some Popes haue not giuen credit to such lying and flattering wordes Nay I am greatly deceiued if before the holding of the sacred Synode of Constance this tradition did not so farre forth possesse the mindes of very many men rather literall then literate that whosoeuer should haue taught the contrary should haue beene noted and condemned for heresie THE FOVRTH BOOK OF THE PRIVILEDGES OF THE CHVRCH CHAP. 1. Of the divers kindes of the priviledges of the Church and of the different acceptions of the name of the Church NOw it remayneth that wee proceede to the other parts of our first generall diuision to wit the priviledges that pertaine to the Church the diverse and different degrees orders and callings of them to whom the gouernement of it is committed The priviledges that pertaine to the Church are of two sorts The first proper to the best and most essentiall parts of it to wit the elect and chosen of God as are the promises and assurances of euerlasting loue and happinesse the second such as are communicable vnto others not partaking in that highest degree of vnitie the partes of the Church haue amongst themselues or with Christ their head These are specially foure the first the possession of the rich treasure of heauenly trueth whence it is called by Irenaeus Depositoriū diues by the Apostle the pillar and ground of truth The second is the office of teaching and witnessing the same truth The third the authority to iudge of such differences as arise amongst men concerning any part of it The fourth is power to make lawes for the better guiding gouerning of them that professe this truth Touching the first that wee may the better vnderstand in what degree and sort and vpon what assurances the Church is possessed of the knowledge and profession of the truth reuealed in Christ wee must obserue the diverse acceptions of the name of Church for accordingly more or lesse in this kinde is attributed to it and verified of it The Romanistes make the Church to bee of three sorts For there is as they say Ecclesia virtualis repraesentativa essentialis By the name of virtuall Church they vnderstand the Bishoppe of Rome who being by Christes appointment as they suppose chiefe Pastor of the whole Church hath in himselfe eminently and virtually as great certainty of truth infallibility of iudgement as is in the whole Church vpon whom dependeth all that certainety of truth that is found in it By the name of representatiue Church they vnderstand the assembly of Bishops in a generall Councell representing the whole body of the Church from the seuerall parts whereof they come By the name of the essentiall Church they vnderstand the whole multitude of the beleeuers This essentiall Church either comprehendeth all the faithfull that are and haue beene since CHRIST appeared in the flesh or all that are and haue beene since the Apostles time or onely those that now presently liue in the world CHAP. 2. Of the different degrees of infallibility found in the Church IF we speake of the Church as it comprehendeth the whole number of beleeuers that are and haue beene since CHRIST appeared in the flesh it is absolutely free from all errour and ignorance of Diuine things that are to be knowne by revelation Quid enim latuit Petrum c. For as Tertullian sayth rightly and aptly to this purpose What was hidden and concealed from Peter vpon whom Christ promised to build his Church and to whom hee gaue the keyes of the Kingdome of Heauen from Iohn the Disciple hee so dearely loued which leaned on his breast at the mysticall Supper and the rest of that blessed company that should after bee manifested to succeeding generations so that touching the Church taken in this sort there is no question but it is absolutely led
to their after-commers by succession but in steed of immediate calling wee haue now succession in steed of infallibility of judgment the direction of their writings guiding vs to the finding out of the truth in steede of Generall commission particular Assignation of seuerall Churches to rule and parts of Christs flocke to feed in steed of miraculous gifts and the Apostles power to conferre them a setled course of Schooles and Vniuersities fitting men for the worke of the Ministery insteed of their Miracles wherewith they confirmed their doctrine the Faith already receiued and by so many generations recommended vnto vs as confirmed by the Apostles Miracles at the first Neither was it fit as Saint Augustine noteth that these miraculous courses should still haue continued For euen as a man that neuer had seene the seede cast into the earth and there rotting and the trees dead in Winter after reuiuing and flourishing againe in their appointed time would wonder no lesse at it then if he should see a blind man receiue sight or a dead man life but now that these things are ordinary wee little esteeme them so if those miraculous things appearing in the Apostles and first Ministers of Christ which with their newnesse and strangenesse moued much at the first should haue beene continued still they would haue grown into contempt and not haue beene regarded at all All that which hath beene sayd touching the dignity Apostolicall and the things properly pertaining to it is so cleare and euident that wise and judicious men make no question of any part thereof Yet are there some that seeme to doubt whether the Apostles generally had immediate calling or vniuersality of commission supposing that Peter onely was immediately designed by Christ and the rest by him that he onely had an illimited commission without all restraint and the rest an inferiour commission to that of Peter bounded and stinted Touching the first of these doubts Bellarmine whose manner it is not to conceale the diuisions and differences that are or haue beene amongst the Friends and Louers of the Church of Rome but to write them in the forehead of euery controuersie sheweth that there are three opinions amongst the Diuines of the Romish Church touching this point The first that as well the Apostles as succeeding Bishops receiued their power and and jurisdiction from Peter and his supposed successour the Bishop of Rome The second that both Apostles and Bishops receiued their Ecclesiasticall power and jurisdiction immediately from Christ and not from Peter nor his Successours The third that Bishops receiue their jurisdiction from the Pope but that the Apostles receiued all their power and jurisdiction immediately from CHRIST and not from Peter The Second of these opinions is wholly true and I will in due place confirme the same The third in part true and in part false which Bellarmine followeth and the first wholly false which hee largely and substantially confuteth prouing first that the Apostles receiued all their jurisdiction and power immediately from Christ and not from Peter as well out of the words of our Sauiour when hee sayth As my Father sent mee soe send I you as out of the election of Matthias who was not chosen by Peter or the other Apostles but designed immediatly by God himselfe shewing by direction of the Lot falling on Matthias that it was hee whom hee would haue to succede into the void roome of Iudas the Traytour adding that the Apostles gaue him no authority and that Paul professeth the same touching himselfe protesting that hee receiued all his power and Iurisdiction immediately from Christ and thereby prouing himselfe to be an Apostle Secondly he proueth that the fullnesse of all Ecclesiasticall power was committed to all the Apostles in as large and ample sort as to Peter by the testimonies of Chrysostome and Theophylact and that Christ by those words As my Father sent mee so send I you made all the Apostles his Vicars or Vicegerents yea gaue them his owne office and authority and out of Cyrill that by these words he made them Apostles and Doctours of the whole world and that to let them know that in Apostolique power hee gaue them all Ecclesiasticall power he sayd vnto them As my Father sent me so send I you it being certaine that the Father sent the Sonne with all fulnesse of power Farther he addeth out of Cyprian that the same fulnesse of power was giuen vnto the rest of the Apostles by those words As my Father sent me so send I you that was promised to Peter by those I will giue thee the keyes of the Kingdome of Heauen performed by those other Feed my Sheep feed my Lambes Now saith he it is certain that by those words I will giue thee the keyes of the Kingdome of Heauen and by those other Feed my sheep c. is vnderstood all fulnesse of Iurisdiction both inward and outward therefore the fulnesse of Ecclesiasticall power and Iurisdiction was giuen to euery one of the Apostles Thus then the Cardinall confesseth first that all the Apostles were immediately taught of God without learning any thing of Peter or needing in any thing to be confirmed by him Secondly that their commission was generall so that there was not any act of Ecclesiasticall Ministery to which their commission did not extend nor any places in which nor persons towardes whom they might not performe the acts of their Ministery Thirdly that they receiued all this authority and power immediatly from Christ and not from Peter and that therefore they could neither be limited nor wholly restrained by him in the vse and exercise of the same Thus doth hee ouerthrow the whole frame and fabrique of their building who ground the pretended supremacy of the Pope vpon Christs words spoken to Peter For to what purpose doe they vrge that to Peter onely Christ said Feede my Sheepe c that to him onely he gaue the keyes of the Kingdome of Heauen and vpon him onely promised to build his Church seeing they are forced to confesse that the commission of feeding Christs sheepe was giuen in as ample sort to the rest as to Peter that they all receiued the whole power of the keyes that the Church was builded vpon the rest as well as vpon Peter and equally founded vpon them all If the Cardinall shall shrinke from this his confession we can easily force him to it againe and make him acknowledge that whatsoeuer Christ promised intended or performed by any of his speeches directed vnto Peter he performed to all Christ said specially to Peter Feede my sheepe yet had the rest our Adversaries being Iudges the same commission Hee promised to him the keyes of the Kingdome of Heauen so that what hee should binde on Earth should bee bound in Heauen hee named him Peter and promised vpon that Rocke to build his Church yet all receiued the same keyes as well as he the same power of binding and
loosing the Church was equally builded on them all These things I will particularly confirme and proue and first that all the Apostles had the same commission of feeding the flocke of Christ that Peter had it is euident For whereas there are but foure kindes of feeding Vitâ exemplari subsidio corporali doctrinâ salutari disciplinâ regulari that is By exemplary conversation by ministring things necessary for the entertainment of this present life by wholesome doctrine and by regular discipline and gouernement all these waies the rest of the Apostles stood bound to feede the flocke of Christ as well as Peter For they were all the Lights of the world and their Light was so to shine before men that they seeing their good workes might glorifie their Father in Heauen they were all to take care of the poore and needie they had all power to preach and minister Sacraments by Christs owne warrant saying vnto them all Goe teach all Nations baptizing them in the Name of the Father and of the Sonne and of the Holy Ghost and to gouerne and guide the Church and people of God as well as Peter Christ sending them as his Father sent him and assuring them that whose sinnes they remit they are remitted and whose sinnes they retaine they are retained Neither can this bee doubted of seeing Bellarmine himselfe confesseth in the place before alleadged that in the Apostolique power all power and Jurisdiction Ecclesiasticall as well inward as outward was contained so that that which Bellarmine and other Papistes insist vpon that Christ commended all his Sheepe vnto Peters care and charge in that hee saide vnto him Feed my sheepe without any limitation or distinction as if in this respect they would shew vs some singular thing in Peters feeding of the flocke of Christ not found in others is too silly For who knoweth not that euery Apostle had generall commission and that howsoeuer for the better dispatch of the worke they had in hand they diuided amongst them the seuerall prouinces of the world yet this was as Bellarâ—… himselfe confesseth Prouinciarum non iurisdictionis diuisio that is a diuision of prouinces not of Iurisdiction for there was not any of them but had power to preach minister Sacraments and exercise discipline wheresoeuer they would one of them no way hindering the employment of another but all with joynt care seeking to set forward the worke they had in hand Yea this is so cleare that the Cardinall ingenuously confesseth it to be so saying in expresse words that the rest of the Apostles were heads Rulers and Pastours of the vniuersall Church Touching the power of the Keyes promised to Peter and the power of binding and loosing it will easily appeare that no singular thing was either promised or giuen vnto him but that which was common to him with the rest Thomas Aquinis fitly obserueth that in corporall things the Key is an instrument that openeth the doore and giueth entrance to him that formerly was excluded Now the doore of the kingdome of heauen is shut against vs by sinne both in respect of the staine of it and the guilt of punishment whence it commeth as hee aptly noteth that the power by which this stoppe impediment is taken away is named the Key This power is in the diuine Trinity principally and by way of authority in that God onely taketh away sinne dimittendo quae facta sunt adiuvando ne fiant perducendo ad vitam vbi omnino fieri non possunt that is By forgiuing the sinne that is past by helping the sinner that he doth not the like againe and by bringing him to that life where hee can sinne no more And therefore the blessed Trinity is said to haue the Key of Authority Christ had power to remoue this stoppe and hinderance by the merite of his passion by instituting Sacraments and making them effectuall instruments of the communication of his grace for the taking away of sinne and therefore he is said to haue the Key of Excellency In men there is a ministeriall Power to remoue the impediment of sinne that hindereth from entring into Heauen and therefore they are rightly said to haue a key of Ministery which is two-fold of Science and of Iurisdiction Of Science remouendo ignorantiam inducendo ad conuersionem that is by remouing the blindnesse of heart that is found in men and inducing them to conuert and turne to God Of Iurisdiction in receiuing men into the society of holy ones and in admitting those that they thinke meete worthy to the participation of the holy Sacraments in which the efficacy of Christs passion communicateth it selfe as also in reiectâ—…ng the vnholy and vncleane The Iurisdiction of the Church is rightly signified Metaphorically by the name of a Key because the chiefe command in a house or Citty is in him to whom the keyes of that house or Citty are committed hee that hath the keyes hath thereby power to admit and receiue into the house or Citty whom he will to exclude and shut out whoÌ„ he pleaseth And therefore when Princes enter into their Cities Towns the Citizens are wont to offer vnto theÌ„ the keyes thereof thereby acknowledging that the chiefe power command of those places doth rest in them Wherevpon when the Lord promised to Eliacim sonne of Hilkiah servant of King Hezekiah chiefe authority in the Kings Court and in the Citty of Ierusalem he said by his Prophet I will giue the keye of the house of Dauid vpon his shoulders Hee shall open and no man shall shut hee shall shut and no man shall open In which sense also it is said in the Reuelation of Christ that He hath the key of Dauid that he openeth and no man shutteth that hee shutteth and no man openeth that is hath all fulnesse of power in his Fathers house and kingdome Thus then the key of Ministery being onely the power of teaching instructing admonishing comforting gouerning and yeelding sacramentall assurances of Gods mercy grace by dispensing the Sacraments Christ hath instituted and this power being the same in Peter the rest it is cleare that the keyes of the kingdome of Heauen were equally committed vnto them all The force of these keyes is not onely expressed by the acts of opening shutting but of binding loosing also thereby to shew that they are no materiall keyes but Metaphorically vnderstood and spirituall and that heauen is then opened vnto men that they may enter into it when they are loosed from their sins that hindered them from entring in thither and hereupon it is that Christ hauing promised the keyes of the kingdome of heauen to blessed Peter telleth him likewise that what hee shall binde on earth shall be bound in heauen and what he shall loose on earth shall be loosed in heauen The bonds wherewith men are bound on earth are of foure sorts First of Lawes obliging
authority so to do Which kind of reasoning I thinke the Reader will not much like of Touching Athanasius Bishop of Alexandria Paule Bishop of Constantinople and Marcellus Bishop of Ancyra deposed by the Orientall Synode their complaints to the Bishop of Rome and other Bishops of the West of the wrongs done vnto them how the Bishop of Rome with the Westerne Bishops fought to relieue them with how ill successe and how litle this instance serueth to proue the thinge in question I haue shewed before as likewise Theodorets desiring Leo with his Westerne Synodes to take knowledge of his cause Soe that it is a vaine bragge of Bellarmine that to these and the like testimonies of Antiquity nothing is nor can be answered CHAP. 38. Of the weakenesse of such proofes of the supreme power of Popes as are taken from their Lawes Censures Dispensations and the Vicegerents they had in places farre remote from them HAVING examined the pretended proofes of the illimited vniversality of the Popes authority and jurisdiction taken from the power they are supposed to haue exercised in former times ouer other Bishops by confirming deposing or restoring them let vs come to their Lawes Dispensations Censures see if frō thence any thing may be cōcluded If they could as strongly proue as they cōfidētly endertake that Popes in ancient times made Lawes to bind the whole Christian Church dispensed with such as were made by general Coūcels cēsured al men as subject to them of necessity we must be forced to acknowledge the fulnesse of all power to rest in the Romane Bishops But their proofes are too weake to make vs beleeue any such thing For first touching the decrees of Popes they did not binde the whole Christian Church but the Westerne Provinces onely that were subject to them as Patriarches of the West And secondly they were not made by them without the consent and joint concurrence of the other Bishops of the West assembled in Synodes and sitting with them as their fellow Iudges with equall power of defining and determining things concerning the state of the Church as appeareth by the Decrees of Gregory the first who sitting in Councell with all the Bishops of the Roman Church the Deacons and inferiour Clergy-men standing before them made Decrees and confirmed them by their subscriptions the rest of the Bishops and the Presbyters also who sate in Councell with them subscribing in the very same sort that Gregory did And of Decrees in such sort made Leo speaketh when he requireth the Bishops of Campania Picene Thuscia to keepe and obserue the Decretall constitutions of Innocentius and all other his predecessours which they had ordained as well touching Ecclesiasticall orders as the Discipline of the Canons or otherwise to looke for no fauour or pardon And in the very same sort are the words of Hilarius to be vnderstood when he saith That no man may violate either the divine constitutions or the Decrees of the Apostolique See without danger of losing his place For this he spake sitting as President in a Councell of Bishops assembled at Rome of things decreed by Synodes of Bishops wherein his predecessours were Presidents and Moderatours as he was now but not absolute commaunders But Bellarmine saith that Pope Anastasius the yonger in his Epistle to Anastasius the Emperour willeth him not to resist the Apostolicall precepts but obediently to performe what by the Church of Rome and Apostolicall authority shall be prescribed vnto him if hee desire to holde communion with the same holy Church of GOD which is his Head Therefore the Pope had power to command and giue lawes to the Emperour and consequently had an absolute supreme authority in the Church Surely this allegation of the Cardinall is like the rest For Anastasius doth not speake in any such peremptory and threatning manner to the Emperour but acknowledging his breast to bee a Sanctuary of happinesse and that he is Gods Vicar on earth telleth him in modest and humble sort that hee hopeth hee will not suffer the insolencie of those of Constantinople proudly to resist against the Evangelicall and Apostolicall precepts in the cause of Acatius but that he will force them to performe and doe what is fit and in like humble sort beseecheth him when he shall vnderstand the cause of them of Alexandria to force them to returne to the vnity of the Church The last instance of the Popes Law-giuing power brought by Bellarmine is the priviledge granted to the Monastery of Saint Medardus by Gregory the first in the end whereof we finde these words Whatsoeuer Kings Bishops Iudges or secular persons shall violate the Decrees of this Apostolicall authority and our commaundement shall be depriued of their honour driuen from the society of Christians put from the communion of the Lords body and bloud and subjected to Anathema and all the wofull curses that Infidels Heretikes haue beene subject to from the beginning of the world to this present time A strong confirmation of the priviledges graunted is found in these wordes but a weake confirmation of the thing in question for the priuiledges were graunted and confirmed in this sort not by Gregory alone out of the fulnesse of his power but by the consenting voyce of all the Bishops of Italy and France by the authority of the Senate of Rome by Theodoricus the King and Brunichildis the Queene So that from hence no proofe possibly can be drawne of the Popes absolute power of making lawes by himselfe alone to binde any part of the Christian Church much lesse the whole Christian world Wherfore let vs passe from the Popes power of making lawes to see by what right they claime authority to dispense with the Lawes of the Church and the Canons of Generall Councels The first that is alleadged to haue dispensed with the Canons of Councels is Gelasius But this allegation is idle and to no purpose For first it cannot bee proued that by dispensing he sought to free any from the necessity of doing that the strictnesse of the Canon required but those onely that were subiect to him as Patriarch of the West And secondly he did not dispense but vpon very vrgent cause and driuen by necessity so to doe and yet not of himselfe alone but with the concurrence of other Bishops of the West assembled in Synode The other instances that are brought of the dispensations of Gregory the first are nothing else but the instances of the ill consciences of them that bring them For Gregory did not dispense with the English to marry within the degrees prohibited as the Cardinall vntruely reporteth but only aduised Austine not to put them that were newly conuerted from such wiues as they had married within some of the degrees prohibited in the time of their infidelity lest hee might seeme to punish them for faults committed in the daies of their ignorance and to discourage other from becomming Christians Neither
himselfe was no temporall or earthly king and therefore much lesse Peter or the Pope that pretendeth to be Christs Vicar and Peters successour Notwithstanding they that are otherwise minded endevour to proue that Christ was a temporall king and that hee left a kingly power to Peter and his successours First out of Scripture strangely wrested Secondly out of the testimonies of Popes For better authorities they haue none The principall text of Scripture which they alleage is in the Gospell of Saint Matthew where our Sauiour saith All power is given me in heauen and in earth But Bellarmine telleth them and the best Diuines agree with him that that place is not to bee vnderstood of a temporall power such as earthly kings haue but either of a spirituall whereby Christ so raigneth in earth in the hearts of men by faith as hee doth in heaven in the presence of his glorie among the Angels or a diuine power ouer all creatures not communicable to mortall men The former of these interpretations the Authour of the Interlineall Glosse followeth the later Lyra vpon this place his words are Licèt Christus quantum ad diuinitatem ab aeterno haberet hanc potestatem in quantum homo ab instanti conceptionis haberet potestatem in coelo in terra authoritativè tamen executivè non habuit ante resurrectionem suam sed voluit esse passibilitati subiectus propter nostram redemptionem that is Although Christ in that he was God had this power from all eternity and in that hee was man had power both in heauen and in earth from the first moment of his conception in respect of authority yet in respect of the execution and performance of the acts of it he had it not before his resurrection but was pleased to bee subiect to passibilitie for our redemption Let vs come therefore from the Scripture to the testimonies of later Popes for Fathers auncient Councells or auncient Bishops of Rome they haue none to speake for them The first Pope that they alleage is Pope Nicholas in a certaine Epistle of his where he saith as they tell vs that Christ committed and gaue vnto blessed Peter the Key-bearer of eternall life the rights both of the earthly and heauenly Empire To this authority first wee answere that Pope Nicholas hath no such words in any Epistle howsoeuer Gratian who citeth them as the words of Nicholas mistooke the matter Secondly that supposing the words to be the words of Nicholas his meaning may bee that the spirituall power of binding and loosing which Christ left to Peter is not onely of force in earth but in heauen also that being bound in heauen that is bound on earth and they beeing repulsed from the throne of grace in heauen and excluded from Gods fauours that are reiected from the holy Altars and put from the Sacraments of the Church Wherevpon Chrysostome saith that the power of the church directeth and commaundeth the very Tribunall of heauen and addeth that heauen taketh authority of judging from the earth For that the Iudge sitteth on earth and the Lord followeth the sentence of his servants according to that of Christ Whatsoeuer you shall binde on earth shall be bound in heauen Others expound the supposed words of Pope Nicholas of the spirituall power of Peter ouer the good and bad in the visible church the good being named the kingdome of heauen and the bad an earthly kingdome or company But howsoeuer it is most certaine that Pope Nicholas in his Epistle to Michael the Emperour hath the cleane contrary to that which some would charge him with For there hee sheweth that howsoeuer before Christ some were both kings and priests as was Melchisedeck and as likewise some other among the Pagans were yet after Christ none were so Neither did the Emperour take vnto him the rights of the chiefe Priesthood nor the chiefe Priest the name of the Emperour Sed mediator Dei hominum homo Christus sic actibus propriis dignitatibus distinctis officia potestatis vtriusque discreuit vt Christiani Imperatores pro aeterna vita pontificibus indigerent Pontifices pro cursu temporalium tantummodò rerum Imperialibus legibus vterentur that is But the Mediatour of God and men the man Christ did so distinguish and seuer the duties and offices of either of these kinds of power by their proper actions distinct dignities that both Christian Emperours should stand in neede of Bishops for the attaining of eternall life and that Bishoppes should vse the lawes of Emperours for the course of temporall things onely that so both the spirituall action and employment might be free from carnall turmoyles and that he who goeth on warfare vnto God might not at all bee entangled with secular businesses and that on the other side he might not seeme to bee set ouer the things that are Diuine whom the businesses of this world should possesse that both the modestie of each of these orders and degrees might bee preserued and that also no one hauing both these kindes of power should be lifted vp too high The next authoritie is that of Bonifacius the eighth who hath these words speaking of the Church which is one and whereof he supposeth the Bishop of Rome to be the head Wee are instructed by the Evangelicall sayings that in this Church and in the power of it there are two swords to wit a spirituall and a temporall For when the Apostles said Beholde heere are two swords to wit in the Church because they were the Apostles that spake the Lord did not answere that it was too much but that it was enough and therefore surely whosoeuer denyeth the temporall sword to be in the power of Peter seemeth not well to consider the word of the Lord commaunding him to sheathe his sword The answer vnto this authority is easie For Bonifacius as Duarenus noteth was a vaine busie turbulent arrogant and proud man presuming aboue that which was fit and challenging that which no way pertained vnto him and therefore we may justly reject both him and his sayings But for the words of our Sauiour it is euident that they proue no such thing as this Pope would inforce out of them Some saith Maldonatus frō these words would proue that the Church hath two swords the one spirituall the other temporall which whether it haue or haue not cannot be proued out of this place where other swords are meant then either of Ciuill or Ecclesiasticall authority Our Sauiour telleth his Disciples the times approaching will be such as that a man had neede for his owne defence to sell his coate to buy a sword Whereupon the Disciples supposing they should vse materiall swords in their owne defence answere that they haue two swords To whom Christ replyeth that it is enough not confirming their erring opinion but answering them Ironically as Theophylact and Euthymius thinke Or otherwise letting them vnderstand that
same fulnesse of authority in as ample independent sort as before because the benefite of Christ tendeth to no mans hurt grace ouerthroweth not nature therefore still they remaine independent and subiect to none in the same power and in the exercise of it If they shall say they are subject to none while they vse their authority well but that if they abuse it they lose the independent absolutenesse thereof their saying will bee found to bee heteticall For if vpon abuse of independent authority they that haue it lose and forfeit it ipso facto then authority and abuse of authority or at least extreme abuse of it cannot stand together which is contrary to that of Saint Augustine where he saith Nec tyrannicaefactionis perversitas laudabilis erit si regia clementia tyrannus subditos tractet nec vituperabilis ordo regiae potestatis si Rex crudelitate tyrannicâ saeuiat aliud est namque iniustâ potestate iustè velle vti aliud est iustâ potestate iniustè velle vti that is Neither shall the peruersnesse of tyrannicall vsurpation euer be praise worthy though the tyrant vse his subiects with all Kingly clemency nor the order of Kingly power euer be subiect to iust reprehension though a king grow fierce and cruell like a tyrant For it is one thing to vse an vnlawfull power lawfully and another thing to vse a lawfull power vnrighteously vniustly The third reason may bee this If God did giue to the Pope authority to depose Princes erring and abusing their authority hee would giue them the meanes to execute that their authority reacheth vnto to wit ciuill greatnesse armies of Souldiers walled cities towers and strong holds both for defence and offence and all other thinges necessary for the putting downe of wicked Kinges But the Pope as Christs Vicar hath none of these neither was hee at any time as a temporall Prince the greatest monarch of the world and so able to represse the insolencies of all hereticall pagan and wicked Kings hindering the peaceable proceeding of the Gospell of Christ therefore he hath no such authority For to say that God giueth authority not the meanes whereby it may execute and performe that which pertaineth to it is impious The onely meanes the Pope hath to depose Princes are two but neither of them within the compasse of his power to dispose of The first is the raising of subjects against their Prince The second is the raising of neighbour Princes The former of these meanes is very defectiue seeing as Bellarmine rightly obserueth out of Ecclesiasticus Such as the Ruler of a citie is such are they that dwell in it And therefore if the King bee an hereticke the most part of his people will bee so too and rather assist him for the maintenance of his heresie then resist against him for the suppressing of it Which thing as he saith experience teacheth For when Ieroboam became an Idolater the greatest part of the kingdome worshipped Idols When Constantine reigned Christian Religion flourished When Constantius reigned Arrianisme prevailed and ouerflowed all When Iulian swayed the Scepter the greatest part returned to Paganisme So that Iouian being chosen after his death refused to bee Emperour protesting that being a Christian hee neither could nor would bee Emperour ouer infidells Whereupon they all professed that howsoeuer they had dissembled before yet they were still in heart Christians and now would shew it againe So that wee see the first meanes for the suppressing of erring Princes is no meanes or a very vncertaine one And a second is worse then the first For I neuer read in any Diuine of what religion soeuer that one King is bound to make warre vpon another vpon the Popes command for the suppressing of heresie And therefore the Pope may breath out excommunications till he be breathlesse but can goe no farther by any meanes that God hath giuen him Fourthly thus we reason Either the power of the Pope is meerely Ecclesiasticall and spirituall or it is not If it bee not then hath hee ciuill authority from Christ which they deny If it be then can it inflict no punishments but meerely spirituall and Ecclesiasticall For of what nature each power is of the same are the punishments it inflicteth The temporall power inflicteth onely temporall outward and corporall punishments as losse of goods imprisonment banishment or death The spirituall only spirituall as suspension excommunication and the like Now I suppose the losse of a kingdome with all the riches and honour of it captivity banishment or death vpon resistance against the sentence of deposition is a temporall and externall punishment of the worst nature and highest degree that may be Lastly if soueraigne Kings may bee put from their Kingdomes vpon abuse of their authority either they forfeit and lose the right of them ipso facto and are depriued by Almighty God and then the Pope can but declare what God hath already done as any man else may vpon perfect vnderstanding of the case or else other neighbor Kings or their owne subjects are to depose them and the Pope is onely to put them in mind of their duty and as a spirituall pastour to vrge them to the performance of it and then he deposeth thē not but they Or lastly the power of assuming their authority to himself vpon their abuse thereof pertaineth vnto him and then in ciuill authority he is the greatest and ouer all which yet these men deny For hee that is to judge of Princes actions and vpon dislike to limite restraine or wholly take their power from them is supreme in that kinde of authority And if he may take ciuill authority from other and giue it to whom he pleaseth there is no question but hee may giue it vnto himselfe and so hath power vpon all defects of Princes to take into his owne hand that which formerly pertained to them and to doe the acts that were to be performed by them Now as these reasons strongly proue that the Pope cannot depose Princes in ordine ad spiritualia so the weaknes of the reasons brought to proue it will much more confirme the same Their first reason is taken frō the perfection and excellency of the Ecclesiasticall or spirituall power which they say is greater and farre more excellent then that which is ciuill Whereunto we answer with Waldensis that though the spirituall power be simply more perfect excellent then the ciuill yet either of these in the performance of things pertaining to them is greater then the other and each of them independent of the other Ambrose was greater then Theodosius in respect of the administration of diuine things might either admit him to or reiect him from the Sacraments But Theodosius in respect of all temporall things was greater then hee and might cōmand him send him into banishment or take away all that he had The Sun is more excellent then the Moon
the influence thereof more powerfull yet is there a kind of influence vpon the waters wherein the Moon is more excellent then the Sun In like sort the power which is spirituall may do greater things then that which is temporall yet the temporall may do those things the spirituall cannot do And therfore it will not follow that the Ecclesiasticall state the principall Ministers of the Church may take vnto themselues the authority of Kings or take vpon them to do the things that pertaine to Kingly offices because they are greater in dignity and haue a greater power vnlesse they had a greater dignity power in the same kind Nowthey who most amplifie the greatnes of Ecclesiasticall power preferring it before the other which is ciuill neuer make the greatnes of it to consist in that in ciuill affaires it may do more then that but in that it hath a more noble object more wonderfull effects We also saith Nazianzen haue power and authority that farre more ample and excellent then that of ciuill Princes insomuch as it is fit the flesh should yeeld to the spirit things earthly to things heauenly Priesthood saith Chrysostome is a Princedome more honourable great then a Kingdome tell not mee of the purple diademe scepter or golden apparell of Kings for these are but shadowes and more vaine then flowres at the spring time If you will see the difference betweene them how much the King is inferiour to the Priest cōsider the manner of the power deliuered to them both you shall see the Priests tribunall much higher then that of the King who hath receiued only the administratiō of earthly things But the Priests tribunal is placed in heauē he hath authority to pronoūce sentence in heauēly affairs And again Earthly Princes haue power to bind but our bodies onely but the bands which Priests can lay vpō vs do touch the soul it self reach euen vnto the heauēs so far forth as that whatsoeuer Priests shal determin here beneath that God doth ratifie aboue in heauen and confirme the sentence of his seruants vpon earth When king Richard the first returning from the holy land was taken and holde as a prisoner by Duke Leopold of Austria and the Emperour Henry the sixth Queene Elenor his mother seeking all meanes to procure his deliuerance among other thinges wrote a letter to the Bishop of Rome intreating him to interpose his authority The words of her letter are these expressing the passion and earnest desire of her heart This onely remaineth ô Father that you draw forth the sword of Peter against malefactors which sword God hath appointed to be ouer nations and kingdomes The Crosse of Christ doth excell the Eagles that are in Caesars Banners the spirituall sword of Peter is of more power then was the temporall sword of Constantine the Emperour and the See Apostolicke is more potent then any Imperiall power or authority and I would aske whether your power be of God or of men did not the God of Gods speake to you in Peter the Apostle saying Whatsoeuer you shall binde vpon earth shall be bound in heauen and whatsoeuer you shall loose on earth shall bee loosed in heauen and why then do you so negligently or rather cruelly delay for a long time to lose my sonne or why dare you not do it perhaps you will say that the power giuen you by God of binding and losing is for soules and not for bodies Let it bee so truly it is sufficiont for vs if you will binde the soules of those that hold my sons body bound in prison By all these sayings of them that most admired the excellency of Priesthood it appeareth that the excellencie thereof aboue princely power is in respect of the object thereof which is more noble the effects thereof which are more wonderfull not in respect of greater power authority right to dispose of temporal affaires businesses either simply or vpon any abuse or negligence of ciuil Princes So that from hence it cannot be inferred that the chiefe ministers of the Church may depose the Princes of the world Hugo de sancto Victore sayth There are two kinds of power the one terrene the head whereof is the King the other spirituall the head whereof is the pope To the Kings power those things pertaine that are terrene to the Popes those that are spirituall and looke how much the spirituall life is better then the earthly so much doth the spirituall power excell the earthly in honour and dignity For the spirituall power doth constitute the terrene power that it may be and iudgeth it whether it proceede aright or not But it selfe was first instituted of God and when it goeth aside can bee judged of none but of God onely From hence as Waldensis sheweth some men tooke an occasion of errour affirming that the roote of terrene power doth so farre fotrh depend vpon the Pope that by commission from him the execution of things pertaining thereunto is deriued vnto the Prince and that when the Prince goeth aside or faileth to do his duty the chiefe Bishop may manage the ciuill affaires because hee saith the spirituall power doth institute the ciuil power that it may be But these men presume too farre and in so doing offend because the terrene power of Kings is not reduced into any other originally as hauing authority ouer Kings but vnto Christ onely and yet notwithstanding as the Priest joyneth the man and his wife in marriage and blesseth them that they may be man and wife and joyfull parents of happy children and judgeth afterwards whether they performe the duties of marriage or not So the chiefe Priest setteth the crowne vpon the head of the Empreor anointeth him with holy oyle taketh an oath of him for the defence of the Christian faith and religion putteth vpon him the royall robes and thereby inuesteth him with royall power putteth him in possession of his Imperiall state and dignity But it is not to be imagined saith Waldensis that the imperiall power is from the power of the Church or dependeth of it though certaine solemnities bee vsed by Bishops in the inauguration of Kings and Emperours neither may the chiefe Ministers of the Church any more challenge the disposing or managing of ciuill affaires vpon any defect or failing of ciuill Princes then they may the administration and dispensation of holy things vpon the defect or failing of the Ecclesiasticall Ministers Yet in case of necessity either of these two states may and ought to helpe and succour the other not as he sayth vt vtens potestate sed fraternitatis accessu that is Not as hauing authority or by vertue thereof presuming to doe any thing but as one brother maketh hast to helpe another in danger reaching forth the hand to stay him that is standing and to raise him that is fallen Both the brethren sayth Waldensis both
appointed both as it seemed good vnto himselfe Three other proofes the Iesuite hath yet behinde The first is out of Socrates out of whom hee saith it may bee proued that Iulius the Pope called the Councell of Sardica but how I cannot tell For Socrates saith expressely that the Councell of Sardica was called by the two Emperours Constance and Constantius whereof the one raigned in the East the other in the West the one by his Letters desiring it the other most willingly performing that hee desired But of Iulius calling it hee maketh no mention If the Iesuite thinke it may bee proued that Iulius called it because among them that sought to excuse themselues from comming vppon fained pretences some complained of the shortnesse of the time appointed for this meeting and cast the blame thereof vpon Iulius he is greatly deceiued seeing Iulius might be blamed for procuring the Emperor Constance by his Letters directed to Constantius his brother to set so short a time as he did though hee did not call the Councell himselfe And that it was not the Authority of the Pope that brought the Bishops together in this Councell it is most euident in that when he wrote to them to restore Athanasius to his place they reiected his Letters with contempt maruailing that he medled more with their matters then they did with his Neither is it likely that Constantius would be commanded by Iulius to call this Councell Seeing when the Councell had commanded Athanasius to be restored to his place yet hee refused to giue way till his brother threatned to make warre vpon him for it But it this proofe faile Bellarmine hath a better For hee sayth Sixtus the third in an Epistle to those of the East writeth That Valentinian the Emperor called a Synode by his authority whence it followeth that the calling of Generall Councels pertaineth in such sort to the Popes that the Emperours may not call them but by warrant and authority from them If the Reader will bee pleased to cōsider of this proofe he shall easily discerne how litle credit is to be giuen to Iesuited Papists in their allegations For first Sixtus doth not say the Emperour Valentinian called a Synode by his authority but that hee commaunded a Synode should be called by his authority that is commaunded him to call it And the author of the Pontificall speaking of the calling of the same Synode sayth the Emperour commanded that the Councell and holy Synode should bee congregated Secondly it was but a Diocesan Synode consisting of the Presbyters and Cleargy of Rome called together about certaine crimes obiected to Sixtus whereof hee purged himselfe before them Now I thinke it will not follow that if the Bishoppe of Rome might call together the Cleargie of his owne Diocesse the calling of Generall Councels pertained to him onely or that if the Emperour thought fit rather to command the Romaine Bishoppe to call together his Cleagie then to doe it immediately by his owne authority therefore hee would haue done the like in summoning Generall Councells consisting of all the Bishops of the World Wherefore let vs passe to the last of his proofes taken out of the Epistle of Adrian the second to Basileius the Emperour prefixed before the eighth Generall Councell which vndoubtedly vpō proofe wil be foūd to be no better then the rest For first it is groūded on the saying of a Pope that liued many hundred yeares after Christ and long after the diuision of the Empire and the withdrawing of the Church of Rome from the obedience of the Emperours of the East and so not much to be regarded in a question concerning the right of the Emperour Secondly hee speaketh not in his owne name but in the name of all the West Church And thirdly that he saith Wee will that by your industry a great assembly be gathered proueth not that the Pope tooke vpon him peremptorily to command the Emperour For seeing in the whole Epistle hee vseth words of exhorting praying intreating these words may seeme to import no more but Our desire is that there should be such an assembly by your industrie in which our Legates sitting as Presidents matters may be examined and all things righted Or we though no way subiect to your Empire yet at your request are content that such a Councell be called and that our Legates do sit in it with the Bishops subiect to your Imperiall command For that Basileius called the Councell appeareth by his words to the Bishops in the beginning of it But if none of these exceptions against the Emperours ancient practice of calling Councels will hold our Aduersaries rather thē they will suffer the Pope to be a looser will not sticke to charge the Emperours with vsurpation and taking more on them then pertained to them Whosoeuer saith Andradius shall thinke that the power and authority of Emperours is to bee esteemed and iudged of by the things done by them in the Church rather then by Christs institution the Decrees of the Elders and the force and nature of the Papall dignity it selfe hee shall make vnbridled pride and head-long fury to be chiefe commaunder and to sway most in the Ecclesiastical Hierarchy Thus doth Andradius censure the auncient Christian Emperours and exemplifieth not onely in Constantius the Arrian but Iustinian also as himselfe confesseth a good Emperor For refutatiō of which most vnjust exception wee say that howsoeuer it bee not to bee doubted but that ill affected or ill directed Emperours did some-times that which was not fit yet that in calling Councels by their Princely authority and commaunding all Bishoppes to come or send vnto them they exceeded not the bounds and limites of their commission it is evident in that neuer any Bishop durst blame them for it But all sought vnto them euen the Bishops of Rome themselues praying them so to doe as I shewed before by the examples of Liberius Innocentius and Leo which thing also Bellarmine himselfe confesseth Wherefore seeing it is evident by the allowed practise of former times that the calling of Generall Councels belonged to the Emperours after they became Christians let vs see what they tooke on them in these Councels after they had called them and consequently what right power and authority Christian Princes haue to manage the affaires and commaund the holy Bishops and Ministers of the church CHAP. 53. Of the power and authority exercised by the auncient Emperours in Generall Councels and of the supremacie of Christian Princes in causes and ouer persons Ecclesiasticall THe first thing that Christian Emperours in auncient times assumed to themselues in Generall Councels was to be present in them when they pleased as we reade of Constantine the Great that hee not onely called the Councell of Nice but was present in it of Martian that hee was present in the Councell of Chalcedon with Pulcheria the Empresse of Constantine the fourth that hee was present
and the two first kindes thereof 432. Chap. 14. Of the third kind of communication of properties and the first degree thereof 434. Chap. 15. Of the third kind of communication of properties and the second degree thereof 438. Chap. 16. Of the worke of Mediation performed by Christ in our nature 441. Chap. 17. Of the things which Christ suffered for vs to procure our reconciliation with God 445. Chap 18. Of the nature and quality of the passion and suffering of Christ. 450. Chap. 19. Of the descending of Christ into hell 453. Chap. 20. Of the merit of Christ of his not meriting for himselfe his meriting for vs. 464. Chap. 21. Of the benefites which we receiue from Christ. 469. Chap. 22. Of the Ministery of them to whom Christ committed the publishing of the reconciliation between God and men procured by him 471. Chap. 23. Of the Primacie of power imagined by our Aduersaries to haue beene in Peter and their defence of the same 479. Chap. 24. Of the preeminence that Peter had amongst the Apostles and the reason why Christ directed his speeches specially to him 486. Chap. 25. Of the distinction of them to whom the Apostles dying left the managing of Church-affaires and particularly of them that are to performe the meaner seruices in the Church 488. Chap. 26. Of the orders and degrees of them that are trusted with the Ministery of the word and Sacraments and the gogouernment of Gods people and particularly of Lay-elders falsely by some supposed to bee Gouernours of the Church 493. Chap. 27. Of the distinction of the power of Order and Iurisdiction and the preeminence of one amongst the Presbyters of each Church who is named a Bishop 497. Chap. 28. Of the diuision of the lesser titles and smaller Congregations or Churches out of those Churches of so large extent founded and constituted by the Apostles 501. Chap. 29. Of Chorepiscopi or Rurall Bishops forbidden by old Canons to encroach vpon the Episcopall office and of the institution necessary vse of Archpresbyters or Deanes 504. Chap. 30. Of the forme of the gouernement of the Church and the institution and authority of Metropolitanes and Patriarches 510. Chap. 31. Of Patriarches who they were and the reason why they were preferred before other Bishops 515. Chap. 32. How the Pope succeedeth Peter what of right belongeth to him and what it is that he vniustly claimeth 518. Chap. 33. Of the proofes brought by the Romanists for confirmation of the vniuersality of the Popes iurisdiction and power 521. Chap. 34. Of the pretended proofes of the Popes vniuersall iurisdiction taken out of the decretall Epistles of Popes 524. Chap. 35. Of the pretended proofes of the Popes Supremacie produced and brought out of the writinges of the Greeke Fathers 533. Chap. 36. Of the pretended proofes of the Popes Supremacie taken out of the writings of the Latine Fathers 539. Chap. 37. Of the pretended proofes of the Popes vniuersall power taken from his intermedling in ancient times in confirming deposing or restoring Bishops deposed 550. Chap. 38. Of the weakenesse of such proofes of the supreame power of Popes as are taken from their lawes Censures dispensations and the Vicegerents they had in places farre remote from them 556. Chap. 39. Of Appeales to Rome 561. Chap. 40. Of the Popes supposed exemption from all humane iudgment as beeing reserued to the iudgement of Christ onely 571. Chap. 41. Of the titles giuen to the Pope and the insufficiencie of the proofes of his illimited power and iurisdiction taken from them 582. Chap. 42. Of the second supposed priuiledge of the Romane Bishops which is infallibility of iudgement 585. Chap. 43. Of such Popes as are charged with heresie and how the Romanists seeke to cleare them from that imputation 593. Chap. 44. Of the Popes vniust claime of temporall dominion ouer the whole world 602. Chap. 45. Of the Popes vniust claime to intermedle with the affaires of Princes and their States if not as Soueraign Lord ouer all yet at least in ordine ad Spiritualia and in case of Princes failing to do their duties 609. Chap. 46. Of the examples of Church-men deposing Princes brought by the Romanists 618. Chap. 47. Of the ciuill dominion which the Popes haue by the gift of Princes 632. Chap. 48. Of generall Councels and of the end vse and necessity of them 642. Chap. 49. Of the persons that may be present in generall Councels and who they are of whom generall Councels do consist 645. Chap. 50. Of the President of generall Councels 649. Chap. 51. Of the assurance of finding out the truth which the Bishops assembled in generall Councels haue 660. Chap. 52. Of the calling of Councels and to whom that right pertaineth 667. Chap. 53. Of the power and authority exercised by the ancient Emperours in generall Councels and of the Supremacie of Christian Princes in causes and ouer persons Ecclesiasticall 677. Chap. 54. Of the calling of Ministers and the persons to whom it pertaineth to elect and ordaine them 686. Chap. 55. Of the Popes disordered intermedling with elections of Bishops and other Ministers of the Church their vsurpation intrusion and preiudicing the right and liberty of others 696. Chap. 56. Of the ordinations of Bishops and Ministers 702. Chap. 57. Of the things required in such as are to be ordained Ministers and of the lawfulnesse of their Marriage 704. Chap. 58. Of Digamie and what kind of it it is that debarreth men from entring into the Ministerie 727. Chap. 59. Of the maintenance of Ministers 733. What things are Occasionally handled in the Appendix to the fifth Booke THat Protestants admit triall by the Fathers 749. Of Purgatory and Prayer for the dead 750. 764. 776. 783. 787. 792. Whether generall Councels may erre 761. The opinion of the Greekes concerning Purgatory 764. Of Transubstantiation 770. The opinion of some of the Schoolemen thinking that finall Grace purgeth out all sinfulnesse out of the soule in the moment of dissolution 772. Of the heresie of Aerius 789. Nothing constantly resolued on concerning Purgatory in the Romane Church at Luthers appearing 790. Abuses in the Romane Church disliked by Gerson 795. Grosthead opposing the Pope 809. The agreement of diuers before Luther with that which Protestants now teach 813. Of the difference betweene the German Diuines and vs concerning the Vbiquitary presence and the Sacrament 819. The differences of former times amongst the Fathers and of the Papists at this day compared with the differences that are found amongst Protestants 823. Of the Rule whereby all controuersies are to be ended 827. That the Elect neuer fall totally from grace once receiued 833. What manner of faith is found in infants that are baptised 837. Of the saying of Augustine that hee would not beleeue the Gospell if the authority of the Church did not moue him 841. Of the last resolution of our faith 844. 856. Of the sufficiency of the Scripture 847. Of Traditions 849. 892. Of the merit of works
the Patriarch of Constantinople the second which conclusion was not of such force but that the succeeding Bishops of Constantinople cōtinued the same challeng their predecessors made as any oportunity was offered sought to aduance their pretended title till at length there growing some difference between thē in the matter of the proceeding of the holy G whome the Latines affirmed to proceede from the Father and the Sonne the GREEKES from the Father only either pronounced the other to be heretickes schismatickes Wherefore let vs see what the religion of the Greeke Church is and whether these Christians be so farre forth orthodoxe that wee may account them members of the true Catholicke Church of God or so in errour that we may reject them as schismaticks hereticks though in number never so many Bernard speaking of them sayth nobiscum sunt non sunt iuncti fide pace diuisi quanquam fide ipsa claudicaverint à rectis semitis That is they are with vs and they are not with vs they are of the same profession with vs touching matters of faith but they hold not the vnity of the spirit in the band of peace although they haue halted also and in some sort declined from the straight pathes in matters pertayning to the Christian faith Touching the state of these Christians the Romanists lay downe these propositions First that there is a double separation from the Church of God the one by heresie ouerthrowing the fayth the other by schisme breaking the vnity The second that schismaticks though they fall not into heresie are out of the Church cut off from being members of the same and consequently in state of damnation Beleeue certainely and no way doubt sayth St Augustine that not onely all Pagans but all Iewes hereticks schismaticks also dying out of the communion of the Catholicke Church shall goe into everlasting fire The third that the Graecians are Schismatically divided from the Roman Church that they haue long continued so that they are excommunicate with the greater excommunication thundred out against all Schismaticks in bulla coenae Domini and consequently are in state of damnation But whether they bee not only Schismaticks but haereticks also as some feare not to pronounce they are not yet agreed Azorius thinketh they are not to bee censured as hereticks and yeeldeth a reason of his so thinking because in those articles of the faith where they are thought to erre they differ verbally onely and not really from those that are vndoubtedly right beleevers and giueth instance first in the question touching the proceeding of the holy Ghost wherein hee thinketh they differ but in forme of words from them that seeme to bee their opposites and secondly in the questions touching the Pope his power priviledges and authority concerning all which hee affirmeth they haue no other opinion then Gerson the Parisians who were neuer yet pronounced heretickes for they yeeld a primacie to the Bishop of Rome but no supremacy They acknowledge him to bee Patriarch of the West amongst all the Patriarches in order honour the first as long as hee continueth orthodoxe and seeketh not to encroach vpon the jurisdiction of others But they deny as also the Parisians doe that his judgement is infallible or his power authority supreame absolute they teach that hee must doe nothing of himselfe in things pertayning to the state of the vniversall Church but with the concurrence of others his colleagues and that hee is subject to a generall Councell All which things were defined in the Councells of Constance and Basil and the contrary positions condemned as haereticall Neither want there at this day many worthy Diuines liuing in the Communion of the Roman Church who most strongly adhere to the decrees of those Councells and peremptorily reject those of Florence and Trent wherein the contrary faction prevayled For the whole kingdome and state of France admit those and reject the other and would no lesse withdraw themselues from all communion with the Roman Bishoppe then the Grecians doe if they should once bee pressed to acknowledge that his power and authority is supreame and absolute that hee cannot erre and that hee may dispose the kingdomes and depose the kings soveraigne princes of the world as the Iesuites and other the Popes flatterers affirme and defend Whence it will follow that they are not onely free from heresie as Azorius resolueth but frō schisme also So that after so great clamours and so long contendings they must of necessity bee forced in the end to confesse they haue done them infinite wrong and sinned grievously against God in condemning to hell for no cause so many millions of Christian soules redeemed with the most precious blood of his dearest Sonne There are sayth Andreas Fricius who thinke that the Russians Armenians and other Christians of the East part pertaine not to the Christian Church but seeing they vse the same sacraments which wee doe seeing they professe to fight vnder the banner of Christ crucified and rejoyce in their sufferings for his sake farre bee it from vs ever to thinke that they should bee cast off and rejected from being fellow citizens with the Saints and of the houshold of God having borne the burden endured the heate of the day so many ages in the vineyard of the Lord. Nay rather I thinke there can be no perfect cōsociation vnion of the whole Church without them For the Latine Church alone cānot be takē for the vniversall Church that which is but a part cānot be the whole But some man happily will say whatsoeuer we think of these differēces touching the power authority of the B. of Rome yet in the article of the proceeding of the holy ghost they erre damnably so are hereticks that Azorius was deceived when hee thought otherwise Wherefore for the cleering of this poynt first I will make it evident that not onely Azorius but sundry other great and worthy Divines thinke the difference about the proceeding of the holy Ghost to bee meerely verball Secondly I will shew how the seeming differences touching this poynt may bee reconciled Thirdly I will note the beginnings and proceedings in this controversie The Grecians sayth Peter Lombard affirme that the holy Ghost proceedeth from the Father onely not from the Sonne yet wee must know that the Greekes doe acknowledge the holy Ghost to bee the spirit of the Son aswell as of the Father because the Apostle sayth the spirit of the Son And trueth it selfe in the Gospell the spirit of trueth Now seeing it is no other thing to bee the spirit of the Father and the Son then to bee from the Father the Son they seeme to agree with vs in judgement touching this article of faith though they differ in words Grosthed the famous and renowned Bishop of Lincolne writing vpon a part of Damascen deliuereth his opinion touching this controuersie
if they die without Baptisme dare not pronounce of them as the Romanists do 7 They deny confirmation extream vnction to be sacraments 8 Touching the Eucharist they consecrate ordinarily in leauened bread but on Maundy Thursday in vnleavened bread and in wine or the juice of raisons moistened in water and so pressed out They minister the Communion in both kinds to all both Clergie men and Lay-men The priest ministereth the bread and the Deacon the wine in a spoone They giue this Sacrment to infants when they are baptized in this sort The priest dippeth his finger into the consecrated wine and putteth it into the mouth of the child They haue neither eleuation nor reservation nor circumgestation as the Roman Church hath They all Communicate twice every weeke but the Sacrament is neuer ministred in private houses no not to the Patriarch or Emperour him selfe 9 Touching purgatorie they beleeue that soules after death are detained in a certaine place named in their tongue Mecan aaraft id est locus alleviationis that is a place of refreshing in which the soules of such as die not hauing repented of their former sinnes in such full and perfect sort as was sitting are detained and so whether the soules of good men doe enioy the vision of God before the resurrection they resolue not 10 They say no masses for the dead they bury them with crosses and prayers but specially they vse the beginning of St Iohns Gospell The day following they giue almes and so a certaine number of dayes and make feasts also 11 They grant no indulgences 12 They haue no cases reserued 13 They beleeue that the Saints do intercede for vs they pray vnto them they haue painted images but none molten or carued they much esteeme them in respect of those holy ones they represent and make sweete perfumes before them 14 Their Priests receiue no tithes but they haue lands on which they liue 15 Their Bishops and Priests are married but may not marry a second wife and continue in those degrees and orders vnlesse the Patriarch dispence with them 16 They thinke it vnlawfull to fast on Saturdaie or Sundaie and vrge to that purpose the Canon of the Apostles 17 They keepe Saturday holy as well as Sunday following the Auncient Custome of the East Church they eate flesh on that day throughout the whole yeare except only in Lent and in some Provinces they eate flesh on that day euen in the Lent also 18 They fast Wednesdaies and Saturdaies till the Sunne setting and celebrate not on those dayes till the euening 19 Betweene Easter and Whitsontide they eate flesh freely on those daies 20 They abstaine from things strangled and blood observing the Canon of the Apostles in so doing as they suppose and besides forbeare to eate of such kinds of meate as were forbidden by Moses Law 21 The Emperour hath a supreame authority in all causes aswell Ecclesiasticall as Civill though the Patriarch also exercise a spirituall iurisdiction 22 They deny the supremacy of the Roman Bish. But they yeeld a primacie vnto him acknowledging him to be the first amongst Bishops Hauing spoken of the Grecians Assyrians and supposed Monophysites it remaineth that wee come in the last place to treate of the Maronites Touching the name ◠Baronius sheweth that it was not from any heretick named Maron but that there was a holy man so named and that in honour of him a certaine monastery was founded which was named the monastery of St Maron that all the monkes of that monastery were named Maronites These in time as it may be thought ioyned them selues to the Monophysites formerly described though happily not without some litle difference And hence all the Christians that professed to beleeue so as these did were named Maronites They haue a Patriarch of their own who claimeth to be Patriarch of Antioch He resideth in a monasterie some 25 miles from Tripolis in Syria He hath vnder him some 8 or 9 suffragan Bishops These Maronites inhabit mount Libanus and some of them in Damascus Aleppo and some parts of Cyprus Mount Libanus is of such extent that it is in compasse 7 hundred miles It hath no cities but villages which are neither few nor small Within this compasse none inhabite but Christians though vnder the Turke For they redeeme it at a high rate and pay an intollerable tribute to liue without mixture of Mahumetans The particulars of their Religion are these First they beleeue that the Holy Ghost proceedeth from the Father onely 2 They blesse consecrate the water so often as any are to be baptized And not as in the Roman Church on the Saturday before Easter only for the whole yeare The reason of which observation is for that at Easter and at Whitsontide onely in the Primitiue Church they ministred Baptisme which they did because in baptisme men are mortified to sin quickned in the life of grace by vertue of Christs death resurrection and giuing of the spirit All which things were cōmemorated in these solemnities 3 They neuer baptize males and females together lest they should contract a kind of affinity 4 None baptizeth with them in what necessity soeuer but a Priest or Deacon 5 They require not the intention of the Minister but thinke the faith of the Church sufficeth 6 They baptize not a male till the 40th day nor a female till the 80th in respect of the impurity of the mother which they thinke continueth so long 7 They seeke no confirmation from the Bishop nor haue any other anointing then that which is vsed in baptisme 8 They consecrat the Eucharist in vnleauened bread in a massie loafe out of which they giue a peece to euery cōmunicant 9 They giue the Sacraments to Lay men in both kinds 10 They celebrat but once in one day vpon one the same altar 11 They think the Person of the Holy Ghost to be in the holy oile in such sort as the Person of Christ is in the Eucharist 12 They thinke that the Eucharist receiued into the mouth goeth not into the stomack but presently diffuseth it selfe through all the members of the body 13 On fasting-dayes they celebrate not till the euening which custome Tho à Iesu saith is not to be altered affirming that it was most auncient in the Church of God the Councell of Cabilon related in the decrees prescribing that they should celebrate the Sacrament in the Ember fasts in the euening on the saturday before Easter in the beginning of the night And although saith he the Church yeelding to our infirmity permit the Latines to doe otherwise yet where the old custome may be kept it is not only not to be takē away but much to be cōmended that men when they fast may put it off as long as may be before they eat any thing In former times they did not eat in Lent till the euening as appeareth by the Councell formerly mentioned Which custom continued till
generall state of the Church or of the principall most eminent highest parts members of the same none of which things might bee proceeded in without the Bishop of Rome and his Colleagues but otherwise he was not to intermeddle with inferiour persons and causes within the Iurisdiction of other Patriarches neither immediatly nor vpon appeale and complaint The 7 t◠Roman Bishop brought to testifie for the absolute supreme power of Popes is Gelasius out of whom two things are alledged The first is that he saith the See of Peter hath power to loose that which the Bishops of other Churches haue bound The second that it hath power to judge of euery Church that no Church may judge of the judgment of it For answer to this testimony of Gelasius first we say that the Church of Rome may not meddle with reviewing re-examining or reversing the acts of other Churches proceeding against Lay-men or inferiour Cleargy-men Secondly that in the case of a Bishop complaining of wrong by the authority of the Councell of Sardica she might interpose her selfe not so as to bring the matter to Rome there to be heard but so farre forth onely as to commaund and appoint a review to be taken by the Bishops of the next bordering Province or at the most to send some Cōmissioners to sit with such second Iudges Thirdly that in cases which concerned the principall Patriarches whether they were differences between them their Bishops or between themselues the chiefe See as the principall part of the whole Church might interpose it self Neither was this proper to the See of Rome for other Patriarchs likewise of the higher thrones might interpose thēselues in matters concerning the Patriarchs of inferiour thrones whence it is that Basil writing to Athanasius Bishop of the second See telleth him that the ordering of the Church of Antioch which was the 3d See did pertain to him that he was to see to the setling of things there though the quieting of the whole East required the helpe of the Occidentall Bishops Cyril in the case of Nestorius not yet fully established in the right of a Patriarch intermedled proceeded so far as to reject him his adherents frō the cōmunion of the churches of Egypt Lybia Pentapolis But the B. of the inferior thrones might not judge the superior therfore Iohn of Antioch of the 3d See is reprehended reproued for judging Cyril Bishop of the 2d See Dioscorus Bishop of the 2d See is condemned in the councel of Chalcedon as for other things so for this amōg other that he presumed to judge the first See So that this is it which Gelasius saith that the See of Rome that is the Bishop of Rome and the Bishops of the West may iudge and examine the differences betweene Patriarches or between Patriarches and their Bishops but neither so peremptorily nor finally but that such iudgement may be reuiewed and reexamined in a generall Councell and that no other particular Church or See may iudge the Church of Rome seeing euery other See is inferiour to it no way denying but that a generall Councell may review reēxamine and reuerse the acts iudgements of the Romane See as being greater and of more ample authority Neither truely can there be any better proofe against the pretended supremacie of the Popes then this Epistle the circumstances whereof are these Acatius Bishop of Constantinople for communicating with certaine Eutichian Heretickes was by the See of Rome condemned some disliked his proceeding against him because a Synode was not specially summoned for the purpose especially seeing he was Bishop of the Princely citty Gelasius standeth not vpon the claime of vniuersall power thereby to iustifie his proceeding but aunswereth First that Eutiches being condemned in the Councell of Chalcedon all such were accursed likewise as should either by defence of such errour or communicating with men so erring fall into the fellowship of the same heresie and that therefore there needed no Synode but the See Apostolique might execute that was there decreed Secondly that the Catholicke Bishops in the East being deposed and Heretickes thrust into their places there was no reason why hee should haue consulted with them Thirdly that hee did nothing of himselfe but with a Synode of the Westerne Bishops The next foure Bishops produced by the Cardinall are Iohn the second Anastasius the second Felix the fourth and Pelagius the second out of whom hee alleageth nothing but this that the See of Peter holdeth the chiefty assigned of the Lord in the vniuersall Church and that the church of Rome is the head of all churches Wherevnto wee briefly answere that the See of Peter euer held the chiefty that the church of Rome was euer the head of all churches not in vniuersality of absolute supreme power commanding authority but in order honour in sort before expressed that by the See of Peter and church of Rome is meant the whole West church not precisely the Diocese of Rome as likewise we haue noted before and therefore these allegations to proue the Popes supremacie ouer all Bishops are nothing to the purpose The last of the twelue Bishops brought by Bellarmine is Gregorie the first out of whom foure things are alledged the first is that he required the Africanes to permit appeales to Rome from the Councell of Numidia and blamed the Bishops of Africa for that after letters written vnto them they had degraded Honoratus the Arch-deacon The second that he sent a Pall to the Bishop of Corinth The third that he saith Eusebius Bishop of Constantinople acknowledged the Church of Constantinople to be subiect to the See Apostolique The fourth that the Bishop of Constantinople professeth his subiection to the See Apostolique To these obiections we answer First that it is contrary to the resolution of the ancient Councels of Carthage Mileuis that the Bishop of Rome should admit appeales of inferiour Clergy-men out of Africa that therefore by some positiue constitution or later agreement Gregory might bee permitted to heare the complaints of an Arch-deacon appealing vnto him out of Africa yet from the beginning it was not so though some parts of Africa were euer within the compasse of the Patriarchship of Rome Secondly that he sent the Pall to the Bishop of Corinth because hee was within his Patriarchship all Patriarches being to confirme their Metropolitanes by imposition of hands or by sending the Pall. 3◠That there was no such Eusebius Bishop of Constantinople in Gregories time as is mentioned in the Epistle alledged and that they that were as Iohn Cyriacus stroue and contended with Gregory to be aboue him and to haue the first place in the Church that not without the help furtherance of the Emperour so that it may be doubted whether Gregory wrot this or not it being so contrary to that wee know to
diminished much lesse tooke away the liberty of other inferiour Sees but that they might resist and gainesay till they were satisfied and made to see the equity of the iudgement of the first See accordingly as we finde they did in the Councell of Chalcedon reiecting him as an Heretique whom the Bishop of Rome had receiued till vpon more full particular examination they found him to be catholicke and acquited him in their owne iudgement So that here we see there is nothing to proue the Pope to bee an absolute supreme iudge of all as Bellarmine vntruly alledgeth But happily hee will say that Theodoret intreateth Renatus to perswade Leo to vse his authority and to require the Bishoppes that had proceeded against him to come to his Synode in the West seeing the See of Rome hath a direction of all Churches and that therefore hee seemeth to acknowledge an absolute supreme power in the Pope For answere herevnto we say that the circumstances of this Epistle doe clearely conuince and proue he had no such conceipt For first he speaketh not of Leo alone as if of himselfe hee could determine the matter of difference betweene him and his Aduersaries but of him and his Westerne Councell Secondly hee doth not say that he his Councell alone may determine the matter but that his See being the first See hee and his Bishops may call all other Bishops to their Councell and this is that direction or government which he saith the first See or Westerne Church hath of other Churches namely in going before them and inuiting and calling them to publique deliberations not in peremptory and absolute commanding without them and ouer them The tenth witnesse produced out of the Greeke church is Sozomene out of whom two things are alledged The first is that he saith Iulius Bishop of Rome restored Athanasius Bishop of Alexandria and Paulus Bishop of Constantinople to their churches from which they were violently and vniustly expulsed by certaine Orientall Bishops The second that he did this because the care of all pertained to him in respect of the dignity of his See How the words of Sozomene reporting that Iulius restored these Bishops to their churches are to bee vnderstood we may learne of Iulius himselfe who in his Epistle mentioned by Athanasius in his second Apologie hauing blamed the Orientall Bishoppes for proceeding in a matter of so great consequence concerning the faith and the Bishops of the principall Churches of the world without him and his Bishops and as he vnderstood very irregularly telleth them that he durst not confirme that they had done that he communicated still with Athanasius and Paulus not foreiudging any thing but desirâ—…ng them to come to a Synode where thinges might bee fully debated and determined and that though hee alone wrote for them yet he wrote in the name and with the consent of all the Bishops of the West Vpon which his letter they were so farre from restoring them to their places that they tooke it in ill part that hee did write vnto them telling him that when hee proceeded against certaine Nouatians they intermedled not and that therefore hee should not meddle with their proceedings seeing the greatnesse of citties maketh not the power of one Bishop greater then the power of another By which their peremptory reiecting of his motion it appeareth that hee neither did nor could put the expulsed Bishops into their places againe which thing Sozomene himselfe testifieth also telling vs that they could neuer recouer their places till the Emperour by his mandatory letters preuailed So that when he saith Iulius restored them his meaning is that hee restored them as much as lay in him as likewise it may be said of Cyrill and Iohn of Antioche that after many and bitter contentions they were in the end reconciled and restored each to other their Churches from which yet they were neuer driuen indeed but in the censures of the one of them passed against the other But Sozomene saith the care of all Churches pertained to the Bishop of Rome therefore he acknowledgeth that hee had an vniversalitie of power ouer all Surely this consequence will neuer be made good For the Metropolitane or he that is Bishop of the first See in each Province in respect of the dignitie of his See hath the care of the whole Province yet can he doe nothing but as hee is directed by the maior part of the Bishops So that the care of all is said to pertaine to him not because he hath power to dispose of all things by himself but because all publike proceedings concerning the whole Province must take their beginning from him nothing of that nature may be taken in hand without consulting him In like sort and in the same sense and meaning Sozomene saith that for the dignity of his See the care of all pertained to the Bishop of Rome not as if the absolute disposing of all things did rest in him but for that he as prime Bishop of the world was first to be consulted before any thing concerning the common faith and the whole state of the Christian Church were determined and for that by the assistance and concurrence of other Bishops he as first in order and honour amongst them was to beginne and set forward allthings of greatest consequence tending to the common good Three more witnesses Bellarmine hath yet behinde Acatius the Bishop of Patara and Iustinian the Emperour out of whom three things are alledged The first that the Bishop of Rome beareth about with him the care of all Churches The second that the Pope is ouer the Church of the whole world The third that the Pope is the Head of all holy Churches To the first of these allegations taken out of Acatius his Epistle to Simplicius Bishop of Rome I haue answered before as likewise in what sense the Pope may be said to be ouer the Church of the whole world to wit in respect of a primacie of order and honour but not of power in which sense also Iustinian the elder writing to Iohn the second saith his See is the Head of all Churches And thus hauing examined the testimonies of the Greeke Fathers we are now to proceed to the authorities of the Latine Church CHAP. 36. Of the pretended proofes of the Popes supremacie taken out of the writings of the Latine Fathers THe first among the Latine Fathers that Bellarmine produceth is Cyprian who of all other most clearely ouerthroweth the error of the Romanists touching the Papacie therefore is very vnadvisedly produced by them in the first place and appointed to marshall and conduct the rest of their witnesses yet let vs heare what he will say Out of Cyprian foure places are alledged The first is in his booke de vnitate Ecclesiae The second in the third Epistle of his first book written to Cornelius The third in the tenth Epistle of his second booke to the same
Michael the Emperour admit this Councell as if it were of credite and vrge the authority of it to confirme things questioned betweene them and vs though they bee not able to answere the reasons of the other side to the satisfaction of any indifferent man for this is the manner of these Iesuited Papists to reject or admit nothing otherwise then as they thinke it may make for them or against them But to leaue them thus striuing and contending one with another and to come to the saying alleadged by Bellarmine out of this supposed Councell it no way maketh for them but against them and cannot stand with the grounds of their owne Divinity vnlesse they will bee of their opinion who think that the church must endure an hereticall Pope that he must be still taken to be a sheepheard of the sheep of Christ though as a devouring wolfe he make havocke of the flocke of Christ. For is not Infidelity as badde as Heresie And did not Marcellinus as much endanger the Church of Rome and the Religion of Christians in making friendship with Dioclesian by sacrificing to his Idoles as Liberius did by subscribing to the Arrians wicked proceedings against Athanasius and communicating with Heretickes Was it lawfull for the cleargy of Rome vpon the knowledge of Liberius his fact to depose him and might not the same cleargy assisted with three hundred Bishops judge and depose Marcellinus But heere wee may see the partiality of these Papists and that they write without all conscience For Bellarmine being to justifie Felix to be a true Pope who possessed the place while Liberius liued saith that in his entrance hee was a schismaticke Liberius yet liuing and continuing a Catholique Bishop but that after the fall of Liberius for which the Church did lawfully depose him hee was by the same church admitted and taken for a true Bishop Yea though Liberius were not in heart an Hereticke but was presumed to bee an Hereticke onely because hee made peace with the Arrians and so was an Hereticke in his outward courses and acts of which men are to judge and not of the heart And yet touching Marcellinus hee saith hee thinketh hee lost not his Popedome nor might not bee deposed from it for that most execrable externe act of idolatrie infidelitie because it might be thought he did it out of feare Shall the vncertain coniecture of the motiue that made him doe so vile an act excuse him from being proceeded against as an Infidell that doth the workes of an Infidell and shall not the like conjectures stay the proceedings against men as Heretickes vpon their outward concurring with Heretickes in some things Shall feare excuse Marcellinus and shall not the impatience of Liberius no longer able to endure such intollerable vexations as he was subject to excuse him was it not as strongly presumed that impatience moued the one to doe that hee did as feare the other Yes surely much more For if wee may beleeue the acts of this faigned Councell Marcellinus was rather wonne with flattery and faire promises then forced with terrours the Emperour seeking to winne him with kindnesse and not to force him with seuerity and extremity being perswaded by Alexander and Romanus so to doe For that if hee could insinuate himselfe into the affection of the Bishop and assure him vnto himselfe he might thereby easily gaine the whole city Thus hauing examined the first testimony produced by the Romanists to proue that the Bishoppes of the Romane See may not bee judged and found it to bee of no credite let vs see if the next will bee any better The next is taken out of the Romane Councell vnder Pope Sylvester consisting of 284 Bishops wherein we finde these wordes Neque ab Augusto neque à Regibus neque ab omni Clero neque â populo iudicabitur primasedes that is The first See shall not bee judged neither by Augustus neither by Kings neither by the whole Clergie neither by the people Before we come to answere this authority we must obserue that many things are most fondly and fabulously deuised and attributed to this Syluester vnder whom this imagined Romane Councell is supposed to haue beene holden For whereas Eusebius Zozomen and other Historians of credit report that the conuersion of Constantine the great was partly out of those good lessons he had learned of his father and partly by a strange apparition of the signe of the Crosse with an inscription in it in hoc vince that is in this ouercom appearing to him in the aire when preparing himselfe to the warre against Maxentius he carefully bethought himselfe to what God hee should betake him and whose helpe among the Gods hee should specially seeke and partly by a vision of Christ appearing to him whereupon he sent for the Priests of that God that had so manifested himselfe vnto him and learned of them what God he was Those fond men that published the faigned acts of Syluester report that Constantine after many horrible murthers of his nearest Kinsmen and the parricide of his owne sonne Crispus being stricken with leprosie was wished by the South-sayers to whom hee sought for counsell and aduice to take the blood of Innocents and to bathe himselfe in it for the curing of his leprosie but that discouraged from the effusion thereof by the piteous cries of their tender mothers hee be thought himselfe better and sought expiation of his grieuous crimes which all other denying to him for so grieuous offences Hosius of Corduba told him that the Christians could purge him and Peter and Paul appearing to him told him hee must recall Syluester out of his hiding place whither he was gone for feare and seeke baptisme of him and that then he should be purged both from the impurity of his soule body which accordingly was done and he recouered In thankefull requitall whereof he cast downe the Temples of the false Gods builded many Christian Churches and gaue to Syluester the citty of Rome with all Italy and many other prouinces besides making him temporall Lord of all those places Whereas it is most certaine that Constantine was not baptized till a litle before his death as it appeareth by Eusebius by Hierome by the Synodal Epistle of the Coūcel of Ariminum written to Constantius reported by Theodoret Socrates and Zozomen and as certaine that Constantine was a Christian Emperour before Syluester was Bishop For in the daies of Melchiades his predecessour hee tooke notice of the differences among Bishops in respect of Caecilianus and rested not till hee had composed them professing that hee so honoured the Catholique Church that hee could not endure any schisme to be in it Notwithstanding the same authors of lyes go forward and tell vs after the Baptisme of Constantine by Syluester of a Councell holden at Rome by the same Syluester consisting of 284. Bishops brought thither and maintained there at the
Emperours charges But there are many things that bewray it to be a mere counterfeit For first it hath a sencelesse title for it is named another Romane Councell vnder Syluester the first whereas no man can tell of any besides this Secondly it is fronted with a briefe Epilogue in steed of a Preface Thirdly there is scarce any sence to bee made of any one sentence throughout the whole Fourthly it is sayd to consist of 139 Bishops out of the citty of Rome or not farre from it and the rest out of Greece whereas all men know the citty of Rome had but one Bishop so that it was sencelesse to say there were in that Councell 139 Bishops out of the citty of Rome or not farre from it And besides all men see how silly a thing it was to muster so many names of Bishops without specifying the places whereof they were Bishops Fiftly whereas it is said to haue consisted of 284 Bishops out of the citty of Rome and places neere to it and out of Greece as if it had beene a generall Councell it is strange that the Histories reporting farre meaner Councels then this is supposed to haue beene should neuer make any mention of this nor the occasion of calling it Sixtly whereas the supposed Fathers of this Councel do condemne though in very sencelesse manner certaine vnknowne heretickes it is strange they should make no mention of the Arrians who were famous and at that time troubled all the East Seuenthly the end why these supposed Fathers met was ridiculous For thus it is expressed i Vt Ecclesiae regia non vatieinentur sed sit fiâ—…ma claudat ostium propter persecutorem Or as another Edition hath it Vt Ecclesia regia non vacilletur sed sit firma claudat ostium propter persecutorem For why should these good men forbid the kingly Churches to prophecie or why should they feare the shaking or tottering of them or shut the doore for feare of the persecutor after Constantine was become a Christian baptized by Syluester and in requitall of his kindnesse had giuen him all the Empire of the West Lastly whereas the manner of Councels was that the Bishops sate round in a compasse the Presbyters sate behind them and the Deacons stood before them the Councell of Carthage forbiddeth a Bishop to sit suffer a Presbyter to stand Hierome sheweth that euen in Rome the manner was that Presbyters did sit and Deacons stand here it is noted that none sate but Bishops These things being obserued touching the credit of this Councel let vs come to the Decrees of it by which the Pope would exempt himselfe from all iudgment of men whatsoeuer villanyes he should chance to commit Thus then the Decrees of this sacred Synode are passed in fauour of the Pope First it is decreed that no Presbyter à die onus Presbyterij latine fitter for Hog-heards then Bishops shall marry and that if he do hee shall loose his honour for 12. yeares Secondly it is ordered thus That if any one shall do against this present hand-writing hee shall be condemned for euer For let no man iudge the first See for neither shall the Iudge be iudged of Augustus nor of all the Clergy nor of Kings nor People These sencelesse Decrees of a fained ridiculous Synode our aduersaries such is their pouerty in this cause bring forth as good authorities for the Pope But I thinke the reader will not much be moued with them vnlesse it be to pitty those that liued before vs who were abused with such fooleries and shamelesse forgeries and to giue thankes to God that hath giuen vs meanes to descry the cozening deuices of Satans Agents Neither doth it any thing assure vs of the truth of this Councel that Pope Nicholas was coÌ„tent to make vse of it in his Epistle to Michael the Emperor of Constantinople seeing he citeth also in the same Epistle the Romane Synode vnder Sixtus the third in the cause of Polychronius Bishop of Hierusalem whereas yet not withstanding Binnius saith confidently that euery learned man wil pronounce the acts of it to be counterfeit if he attend the names of the Consuls in whose times it is supposed to haue bin holden the name of him that was accused and other things described in those supposed pretended acts To these they adde another authority as it may seeme of the same stamp out of the Councell of Rome vnder Sixtus the third which they endeuour to strengthen with certaine sayings out of a booke of one Euodius a Deacon admitted and allowed in the fifth Councell vnder Symmachus The Romane Councell vnder Sixtus was called to examine a very foule fact wherewith Sixtus was charged which was the abusing of one Chrysogonet a professed and consecrated virgin In this Councell Sixtus presented himselfe and professed that it was in his power choice either to submit himselfe to the iudgment of the Councell or to refuse it yet voluntarily referred his cause to be there heard whence our Auersaries suppose they may inferre that all the world may not iudge the Pope against his will The Barbarismes manifold senceles absurdities that are found in this Councell may iustly make us suspect it of forgery But admitting it to haue bin a lawfull Synode no such thing can be concluded out of it as our aduersaries dreame of For it was but a Diocesan Synode there was neuer a Bishop in it besides Sixtus whom they went about to iudge And therefore it was not to be maruailed at if Sixtus said it was in his power and choice whether hee would be iudged by the Presbyters Deacons of his owne Church or not seeing no Bishop be he neuer so meane may be judged by the Clergy of his own Church but by the Synode of the Bishops of the prouince and therefore I greatly feare they wil hardly draw a good argument froÌ„ hence to proue that the Pope may not at all be iudged For I think it will not follow Maximus the exconsul said it was not lawful for those Lay-men inferiour Clergy-men theÌ„ assembled to giue sentence against the B of Rome the B himselfe protested that he might chuse whether he would be judged by them or not therefore the whole Christian world may not judge the Pope Wherefore let vs come to the sayings of Euodius see whether they confirme the Romish conceipt any better The occasioÌ„ of the writing of this booke of Euodius was this Symmachus the Bishop of Rome being charged with certaine grieuous crimes was to bee judged in a Synode called by Theodoricus the King not without his own coÌ„sent To this Councel he was willing to come and to submit him selfe to the judgement of it onely hee desired restitution of such things as had beene taken from him till he were convicted which he could not obtaine and yet presented himselfe in the Synode But such was the
intermeddle with the disposition of earthly kingdomes or restraine or depose Princes how much soeuer they abuse their authoritie The first of these three opinions had anciently and hath presently great patrons and followers Yet Bellarmine very confidently and learnedly refuteth the same First shewing that the Pope is not soueraigne Lord of the whole world Secondly that he is not Lord of the Christian world And thirdly that hee is Lord of no part of the world That he is not Lord of the whole world he proueth because not of those Provinces that are possessed by Infidels which hee demonstrateth First because Christ committed none but onely his sheepe to Peter and therefore gaue him no authoritie ouer Infidels which are not his sheepe whereunto Saint Paul agreeth professing that hee hath nothing to doe to iudge them that are without Secondly because dominion and the right of Princes is not founded in grace or faith but in free will and reason and hath not sprung from the written Law of Moses or Christ but from the law of Nations and Nature VVhich is most cleare in that God both in the Olde and New Testament approueth the Kingdomes of the Gentiles and Infidels as appeareth by that of Daniel to Nebuchadnezzar O King thou art King of Kings For the God of Heauen hath giuen thee a kingdome power and strength and glory and in all places where the children of men dwell the beasts of the field and the fowles of the heauen hath hee giuen into thine hand and hath made thee a ruler ouer them all And that of Christ Giue vnto Caesar the things that are Caesars With whom the Apostle agreeth requiring the Christians of his time not only to pay tribute to Heathen kings but also to obey them for conscience sake which men were not bound to if they had no authority and right to commaund Neither can it be said that heathen princes are the Popes Lieuetenants and theresore to be obeyed for his sake though not for their owne seeing the Pope would haue no such Lieutenants if it lay in him to place them or displace them Lastly hee proueth that the Pope hath no such soueraigne right of commaunding ouer all as is pretended seeing it had beene vaine for Christ to giue him a right to that whereof hee should neuer get the possession And hauing thus proued that Infidels were truely and rightly Lords of the countries subiect to them before the comming of Christ that he found no nullitie in their titles nor euer seized their kingdomes and dominions into his owne hands as some fondly imagine that he did hee proceedeth to proue that Princes when they become Christians lose not the right that they formerly had to their kingdomes but get a new right to the kingdome of heauen For that otherwise Christs grace should destroy nature and his benefits be preiudiciall to such as are made partakers of them Whereas Christ came not to destroy and ouerthrow things well setled before but to perfect them nor to hurt any but to doe good to all For confirmation whereof hee alleageth part of the Hymne of Sedulius which the whole Church doth sing Hostis Herodes impie Christum venire quid times Non eripit mortalia Qui regna dat coelestia that is O impious enemie Herod why doest thou feare Christs comming He will not depriue thee of thy transitorie kingdome vpon earth that giues an eternall kingdome in heauen Whence it followeth that Christ imposed no such hard condition on those kings that were to become Christians as to leaue their crownes dignities And so he commeth to his second proposition that the Pope is not temporall Lord of the Christian world which he confirmeth First because if the Pope were soueraigne Lord of all the Christian world Bishops should be temporall Lords of their cities the places adioyning subiect to them Which neither they will graunt that contend for the soueraigntie of the Pope nor can stand with that of Saint Ambrose who saith If the Emperour aske tribute we deny it him not The Church lands doe pay tribute And againe Tribute is Caesars it is not denied him but the Church is Gods and may not be yeelded to Caesar. And that of Hosius Bishop of Corduba who as we reade in Athanasius telleth the Emperour that God hath giuē him the Empire but that he hath committed to Bishops those things that pertaine to the Church Secondly out of the confession of Popes Pope Leo confessing that Martianus the Emperour was appointed to the Empire by God and that God was the authour of his Empire And Gelasius writing to Anastasius the Emperour and acknowledging that there are two thinges by which principally the world is guided to wit the sacred authority of Bishoppes and the regall power of Princes with whom Gregorie agreeth when hee saith Power ouer all is giuen from heauen to the piety of my Lord. And from hence hee inferreth his third proposition that the Pope is temporall Lord of no part of the world in the right of Peters successour and Christs Vicar For if there were no nullitie in the titles of infidell kings and princes nor no necessity implied in their conuersion of relinquishing their right when they became Christians but that both infidels christians notwithstanding any act of Christ continued in the full possession of princely power right it could not be that Christ should inuest Peter or his successours with any kingly authority seeing hee could giue them none but such as he should take from others Nay hee proceedeth farther and sheweth that Christ himselfe while hee was on the earth was no temporall Lord or King and therefore much lesse gaue any temporall dominion or kingdome to his Apostles That he was no temporall king he proueth because the right to bee a King or Lord in such sort as men are Kings or Lords is either by inheritance election conquest or speciall donation and gift of Almighty God Now that Christ according to the flesh was a King by right of inheritance hee saith it cannot be proued because though hee came of the kingly familie yet it is vncertaine whether he were the next in bloud to Dauid or not And besides the kingdome was taken away from Dauids house before Christ was borne God had foretold that of the house of Ieconiah of which Christ came as we may reade in the first of Saint Matthew there should neuer be any temporall King such as David and the rest that succeeded him were saying Write this man barren a man that shall not prosper in his dayes for there shall bee no man of his seede to sitte vpon the throne of Dauid to haue power any more in Iudah And whereas it might be obiected that the Angell prophecied that the Lord God should giue vnto Christ the seat of Dauid his father the Cardinall answereth out of Hierome vpon the place of Hieremie and
Ambrose vpon Luke that the words of Almighty God which we read in Hieremie are to be vnderstood of a temporall kingdome and the words of the Angell of a spirituall and eternall kingdome That Christ was not a temporall King by right of election hee proueth by that of Christ himselfe when he saith O man who hath made me a judge or a diuider among you And by that of S. Iohn where he saith that When Christ knew they meant to come take him make him a King he fled againe himselfe alone into a mountaine So that he neither was chosen nor would haue accepted of any such choise That by right of conquest and victory hee was not a temporall King it appeareth in that his warre was not with mortall Kings to depriue them of their kingdomes but with the prince of darkenesse according to that of the Apostle To this purpose did the Sonne of God appeare that he might dissolue the workes of the Diuell And that againe Now is the Prince of this world cast out And that of Saint Paule who speaking of Christ sayth That spoyling principalities and powers hee made a shew of them openly triumphing ouer them in himselfe So that his warrefare was not by carnall weapons to get himselfe an earthly kingdome but by spirituall weapons mightie through God to get a spirituall kingdome that hee might reigne in the hearts of men by faith and grace where Sathan reigned before by infidelity disobedience and sinne Lastly that he was no temporall king by any speciall gift of God his Father it is euident out of his owne words when he saith My kingdome is not hence For as the Fathers note vpon these words Christ meant by so saying to put Pilate out of doubt that he affected no temporall kingdome And therefore the sence of his words must needes be this I am a King but not in such sort as Caesar and Herod My kingdome is not of this world that is The supports of it are not things of this world it doth not consist in honour riches and power of this world This thing the Cardinall farther proueth to be true because he came to minister and not to be ministred vnto to be judged and not to judge and by his whole course of conuersation shewed the same neuer taking vpon him to do any kingly act For whereas hee cast out the buyers and sellers out of the Temple it rather pertained to the Priestes office then the kings according to that which wee read in the old Testament that the Priest draue the king himselfe out of the Temple when disorderly he presumed to do things not pertaining to him and yet he did it not by any Priestly or kingly authority but after the manner of Prophets by a kind of diuine zeale like that wherewith Phinchees was moued to kill the adulterer and adulteresse and Elias to slay the Prophets of Baal This most true opinion of the Cardinall that Christ was no temporall king is farther confirmed in that such a kind of kingdome had not beene necessary Nay it had beene an hinderance to the worke he had in hand which was to perswade to the contempt of glorie honour riches pleasures and all such other earthly things wherewith the Kings of the earth abound and by suffering death to ouercome him that had the power of death and to reconcile the world vnto God And besides in that all the places where any mention is made of the kingdome of Christ are necessarily vnderstood of a spirituall and eternall kingdome So in the Psalme I am apointed of him a King to preach his commandement And againe in the booke of Daniel In their dayes shall God raise vp a kingdome which shall not be destroyed for euer And of his kingdome there shall be no end Whereas the kingdomes of men continue but for a time and therefore if Christ had beene a King in such sort while he was vpon the earth as men are he had ceased to be so when hee left the earth And then it could not haue beene true that of his kingdome there should be none end Nay seeing the kingdome of the Iewes was possessed by the Romanes at or immediately after the time of the departure of Christ out of the world and afterwards by the Saracens and Turkes how could that of Daniel haue beene fulfilled that his kingdome shall not be giuen to another people if his kingdome had beene like the kingdomes of men So it is true that Christ came into the world to be a king and that GOD gaue him the seate of Dauid his father But this kingdome was diuine spirituall eternall and proper vnto him in that hee was the Sonne of God and in that he was God and Man But a temporall kingdome such as the sonnes of men haue he had not And heereupon Saint Augustine bringeth in Christ speaking in this sort Audite Iudaej Gentes audi circumcisio audi praeputium audite omnia regnae terrena non impedio dominationem vestram in hoc mundo c. that is Heare O Iewes and Gentiles heare circumcision and vncircumcision heare all ye kingdomes of the earth I hinder not your dominion and rule in this world because my kingdome is not of this world Feare not therefore with that most vaine and causelesse feare wherewith Herod feared and slew so many innocent babes being cruell rather out of feare then anger and so forward shewing that the Kingdome of Christ is meerely spirituall and such as no way prejudiceth the kingdomes of men Which the Glosse confirmeth noting that Christ while hee was yet to liue longer in this world when the multitudes came to make him a King refused it but that when hee was ready to suffer he no way reproued but willingly accepted the hymnes of them that receiued him in triumphant manner and welcommed him to Hierusalem honouring him as a King because hee was a King not hauing a temporall and earthly kingdome but an heauenly Whereunto Leo agreeth shewing that Herod when hee heard a Prince was borne to the Iewes feared a successour but that his feare was vaine and causelesse saying O caeca stultae aemulationis impietas quae perturbandum putas divinum tuo furore consilium Dominus mundi temporale non quaerit regnumqui praestat aeternum that is Oblinde impietie of foolish emulation which thinkest to trouble and hinder the Counsels of God by thy furie The Lord of the World who giueth an eternall Kingdome came not into the World to seeke a temporall kingdome And Fulgentius accordeth with him saying The golde which the Sages offered to Christ shewed him to bee a King but not such a King as will haue his Image and superscription in the coyne but such an one as seeketh his image in the sonnes of men Whence it followeth he was no temporall or mundane King seeing they haue their images and superscriptions in their
coyne that are kings after the manner of the World This assertion may be proued by many vnanswerable reasons The first is this Christ standing before Pilate and being asked by him if he were a King aunswered That his Kingdome was not of this world Therefore he was not temporall or mundane King This consequence fome deny affirming that Christ intended not in his answer to Pilate to deny his kingdome to be a temporal earthly mundane kingdome but that he meant onely to let him know that he had receiued his kingdome of God that the World neither gaue it him nor chose him to it And therefore he saide Regnum meum non est hinc and not Regnum meum non est hic that is My Kingdome is not hence and not My Kingdome is not here This was the evasion of Pope Iohn the two and twentieth as Ockam testifieth but hee refuteth the same by most cleare circumstances of Scripture and euidence of reason shewing that Christ being accused vnto Pilate as an enemy to Caesar in that he made himselfe a King so cleared himselfe that Pilate pronounced that he found nothing against him which he could not nor he would not haue done if he had confessed his Kingdome to be a mundane Kingdome though hee had deriued the right and title of it from Heauen For Caesar would not haue endured any claime of such a Kingdome though fetched from Heauen Neither durst Pilate haue pronounced him guiltlesse that had made such a claime and therefore Christ when hee saide his Kingdome was not of this World meant not onely to deny the receiuing of it from the World but also the dependance of it vpon any thing in the World the supports of it not being things earthly but heauenly and diuine it no way consisting in riches honour power worldly greatnesse as doe the kingdomes of men but in the power of God Which thing is aptly expressed by Christ himselfe when he saith If my Kingdome were of this world my Souldiers would fight for mee The second reason is this He that is no judge of secular quarrels nor divider of inheritance is no King For these things belong to the office of a King But Christ was no judge of such quarrels and differences therefore hee was no King That hee was no judge of secular quarrels nor divider of inheritances it is evident by his owne deniall thereof Which Saint Ambrose excellently expresseth saying Beâ—… terrena declinat qui propter diuina descenderat nec iudex dignatur esse litium arbiter facultatum viuorum habens mortuorumque iudicium arbitrium meritorum that is Hee doth well decline things earthly who descended and came downe for things divine Neither doth hee vouchsafe to bee a judge of quarrels and an arbitratour to determine the differences of men about their possessions who is appointed to bee judge of the quicke and dead and to whom it pertayneth to discerne betweene the well and ill doings of men And againe Meritò refutatur ille frater qui dispensatorem coelestium gestiebat terrenis occupare that is That brother is worthily reiected and hath the repulse who sought to busie him whom God hath appointed the disposer of things heauenly with things that are earthly The third is because Christ refused to be a King when it was offered him and told his disciples that The kings of the nations haue dominion ouer them and they that are great exercise authoritie But that it should not be so with them but that whosoeuer would be great among them must be their minister The fourth hee that is a King and will neuer meddle with the things that belong to a King is justly to be charged either with wickednes or negligence But Christ neuer medled with any thing pertaining to the office of a temporall king in this world therefore either he was no such king or he may be charged with malice or negligence But neither of these two latter may be admitted therefore hee was no such king The fifth there cannot be two kings of one kingdome vnlesse either they hold the same ioyntly or the one acknowledge to hold the same as of and from the other But Caesar and Christ neither held the kingdome of Iudaea ioyntly neither did Caesar hold it as from Christ nor Christ as from Caesar. Therefore either Caesar was no true king or Christ was no secular king of that kingdome But that Caesar was a true king it appeareth by the testimony of Christ himselfe saying Giue or rather render to Caesar the things that are Caesars Now Caesar claimed tribute as Lord of the countrey and therefore hee was truely Lord and King of it That Caesar held not of or from Christ as man it is euident and much more that Christ who wholly refused to be a king did neuer acknowledge to hold any kingdome from mortall man The sixth that was the kingdome of Christ whereof the Prophets prophesied But they prophesied not of any earthly kingdome therefore Christs kingdome was not earthly That they prophesied not of any earthly kingdome it is euident in that the kingdome they prophesied of was to be confirmed and restored by him but the earthly kingdome of Iudaea was not confirmed by the comming of Christ but vpon the refusall of him vtterly ouerthrowne therefore it was not that the Prophets prophesied of That the kingdome they prophesied of was to be confirmed restored and bettered the words of the Prophets are proofe sufficient Behold the day commeth saith the Lord and I will raise vp vnto Dauid a righteous branch and a king shall reigne and he shall bee wise and shall doe iudgement and iustice in the earth In those dayes Iudah shall be saued and Israel shall dwell boldly And this is the name that they shall call him by The Lord our righteousnesse And againe A little child is borne vnto vs and the principality or rule is on his shoulders His name shall bee called wonderfull the mighty God Father of the world to come the Prince of peace the increase of his gouernement and peace shall haue no end Hee shall sitte vpon the throne of Dauid and vpon his kingdome to order and to stablish it with iudgement and with iustice from henceforth euen for euer Now that the kingdome of Iudaea was not established but vtterly ouerthrowne immediatly after Christs departure hence vpon and for the refusall of him the words of Christ foretelling it and the euent of things answering vnto his prediction are proofe sufficient The day shall come vpon thee saith Christ to Hierusalem the chiefe citie of that kingdome that thine enemies shall cast a trench about thee and hold thee in straight on every side they shall cast thee to the earth and thy children that are in thee and shall not leaue a stone vpon a stone because thou knewest not the time of thy visitation Thus we see it strongly proued that Christ
the bond of marriage remaineth inviolable and is not nor may not be dissolued and therefore if this comparison hold a Christian King falling into heresie apostasie or atheisme and seeking to draw his people to the same doth not lose the right of dominion he hath ouer them Thirdly in Bellarmines opinion it is not refusall to dwell together nor sollicitation to idolatrie that could make a separation if the band of matrimony contracted betweene Infidels were simply firme and indissoluble as that of Christians is But heathen Princes haue as good interest in their Kingdomes which are not founded vpon grace or faith but vpon the light of reason the freedome of will and the Law of Nature and Nations as beleeuers therefore their solliciting to infidelity and idolatrie cannot make their titles to their kingdome voide Lastly malitious desertion or refusall to dwell with the beleeuer vnlesse he some way at lest by silence consent to the blasphemies of the Infidell is directly contrary to the nature essence end and intendment of marriage and therefore dissolueth marriage but the abvse of sacred authority to the promoting of impiety and suppressing of true Religion is not contrary to the nature and essence of authority but to the right vse of it and therefore it doth not make voide the title of magistrates seeing it is certaine that lawfull authority may stand with most horrible abuse of the same Wherefore let vs proceede to their seuenth proofe When Princes say they come to the Church and are admitted to the Communion of the faithfull people of God they are not admitted but vpon promise and agreement that if they forsake the faith or hinder the good of GODS people they will bee content and it shall bee lawfull for the Gouernours of the Church to take their authoritie from them therefore when Princes become heretiques or Apostataes it is lawfull by their owne agreement and consent for the Gouernours of the Church to depose them The antecedent of this Argument I thinke will neuer bee made good For what Prince in his admission to bee a Christian did euer thus condition with the Church either expressely or by necessary implication examples of any such stipulation I am perswaded they canne bring vs none It is true indeede that the very vow of a Christian made in Baptisme implieth in it a resolution and promise rather to depart with any thing and lose all then to forfeit the inheritance he is entitled vnto to dishonour God or any way to hinder the good of his church but this vow and promise is made to God and not to the church and therefore God may take from Christian kings their kingdomes when they become heretiques and seeke to misleade the people as forfeited vpon their own agreements but the Church hath nothing to doe with them more then the great Turke vpon any such forfeiture made vnto Almighty God It is true that all infidels and wicked ones haue forfeited their kingdomes to God but yet in the title of mundane iustice they haue right to them still and may not bee dispossessed of them by mortall men vnlesse they bee specially authorised by almighty God as the Israelites were to cast out the Canaanites And this was the meaning of Wickliffe when he affirmed that a Prince being in state of mortall sinne ceaseth to bee a Prince any longer namely in respect of any title he canne plead to God if hee be pleased to take the advantage of the forfeiture but in respect of men he hath a good title still in the course of mundane iustice So that whosoeuer shall lift vp his hand against him offereth him wrong The Church therefore may proceede no further then to admonish Princes when they offend and for grieuous and scandalous faults to deny vnto them the benefit of her Communion The last proofe they bring for deposing Princes when they become heretickes is taken from the office of a Pastor to whom it pertaineth to driue away wolues to restraine and keepe the Rammes and great leaders of the flockes from hurting those sheepe that are more weake This reason as it is the last so it is the worst of all For each Pastour must doe these things according to the nature and quality of his Pastorall office and therefore a spirituall Pastour must performe them by spirituall and ecclesiasticall censures driuing away the wolues from his flockes by suspension excommunication and anathema and restraining the Rammes from hurting the rest by the same meanes so binding them with bands that exceed all the bands of restraint vsed by the secular powers CHAP. 46. Of examples of Church-men deposing Princes brought by the Romanistes HAuing examined the reasons brought to proue that the chiefe gouernours of the Church may depose Princes erring from the faith and hindering the course of religion let vs see what examples our Aduersaries produce of the practise of deposing them The first is the example of Samuel appointing Saul to be a king and afterwards deposing him for his disobedience But in this example they are grossely deceiued For first Samuel was neither high Priest nor Priest at all not being of the posterity of Aaron Secondly Samuel did not appoint Saul to be king as being of higher authority but as obeying and executing the mandate of God as the meanest man in Israel might haue done as we reade in the second of the Kings of one of the sonnes of the Prophets who at the commandement of Elizeus annointed Iehu king ouer Israel yet was neither Elizeus nor he greater in dignity then Kings Thirdly we doe not reade in the sacred History that Samuel deposed Saul but that God deposed him and that Samuel was the messenger sent from God to let him know it Because saith Samuel thou hast cast away the word of the Lord the Lord hath cast thee away that thou shalt not reigne And againe the Lord hath cut away the kingdome of Israel from thee this day Yea so farre was Samuel from deposing Saul that he mourned for him till God blamed him saying How long dost thou mourne for Saul whereas I haue cast him away that hee should not reigne ouer Israel The next example is that of Hieremy the Prophet to whom the Lord said I haue set thee ouer nations and people to plucke vp and to roote out and to destroy and throw downe to build and to plant Whence they inferre that the chiefe Priest is ouer the kingdomes of the world and may giue them to whom hee will But first wee must obserue that Hieremy was not the high Priest but one of an inferiour ranke that therefore if we will conclude any thing from hence touching the power of disposing kingdomes by Priests every Priest must haue this power Secondly we must know that Hieremie was set ouer the kingdome of Iudah and other kingdomes not to rule them but prophetically to denounce vnto them and foreshew the things that afterwards should fall out Whereupon Lyra
chiefe-fathers of Israel they came to Ierusalem and all the congregation made a couenant with the King said The Kings sonne must reigne as the Lord hath said of the sons of Dauid Hereupon the King is proclaimed Athaliah is slaine the house of Baal destroied the Altars and idols that were in it broken down In all this narration there is nothing that maketh for the chiefe Priests power of deposing lawfull kings if they become heretiques For first Athaliah was an vsurper no lawfull Queene Secondly here was nothing done by Iehoiada alone but by him and the Captaines of hundreths and the chiefe Fathers of Israel that entred into couenant with him Thirdly there is great difference betweene the high Priest in the time of the Lawe and in the time of Christ. For before the comming of Christ the high Priest euen in the managing of the weightiest ciuill affaires and in iudgement of life and death sate in the Councell of State as the second person next vnto the King by Gods owne appointment Whereas our Aduersaries dare not claime any such thing for the Pope And therefore it is not to bee maruailed at if the high Priest beeing the second person in the kingdome of Iudah by Gods owne appointment and the Vnckle and Protectour of the young king whom his wife had saued from destruction bee the first mouer for the bringing of him to his right and when things are resolued on by common consent take on him not onely to commaund and direct the Priests and Leuites but the Captaines souldiers also for the establishing of their King the suppressing of a bloody tyrant and vsurper For all this might be done by Iehoiada as a chiefe man in that state and yet the Pope be so farre from obtaining that he claimeth which is to depose lawfull kings for abusing their authority that hee may not presume to do all that the high Priests lawfully did and might doe as not hauing so great preeminence from Christ in respect of matters of ciuill state in any kingdome of the world as the high Priest had by Gods owne appointment in the kingdome of Iudah Israel In the old Law saith Occā the high Priest meddled in matters of warre in the judgment of life and death the losse of members vengeance of blood it beseemed him well so to do But the Priests of the new Law may not meddle with things of this nature Wherefore from the power dominion which the high Priest of the old Law had it cannot be concluded that the Pope hath any power in tēporal matters The fifth example is of Ambrose repelling Theodosius the Emperour from the communion of the Church after the bloody and horrible murther that was committed at Thessalonica by his commandement The story is this The coach-man of Borherica the Captaine of the souldiers in that towne for some fault was committed to prison Now when the solemne horse-race and sporting fight of horsemen approched the people of Thessalonica desired to haue him set at liberty as one of whom there would be great vse in those ensuing solemne sports which being denied the citty was in an vprore and Botherica and certaine other of the magistrates were stoned to death and most despitefully vsed Theodosius the Emperour hearing of this outrage was exceedingly moued and commaunded a certaine number to be put to the sword without all iudiciall forme of proceeding or putting difference betweene offendors and such as were innocent So that seauen thousand perished by the sword and among them many strangers that were come into the citty vpon diuerse occasions that had no part in the outrage for which Theodosius was so sore displeased were most cruelly and vniustly slaine Saint Ambrose vnderstanding of this violent and vniust proceeding of the Emperour the next time he came to Millaine and was comming to the Church after his wonted manner met him at the doore and stayd him from entring with this speech Thou seemest not to know O Emperour what horrible and bloudy murthers haue beene committed by thee neither dost thou bethinke thy selfe now thy rage is past to what extremities thy fury carried thee perhaps the glory of thine Imperiall power will not let thee take notice of any fault thy greatnesse repelleth all checke of reason controlling thee but thou shouldest know the frailty of mans nature and that the dust was that beginning whence we are taken and and to which we must returne Let not therefore the glory of thy purple robes make thee forget the weakenesse of that body of flesh that is couered with them Thy subjects O Emperour are in nature like thee and in seruice thy fellowes for there is one Lord and commander ouer all the maker of all things Wherefore with what eyes wilt thou behold his temple or with what feete wilt thou treade on the sacred pauement thereof wilt thou lift vp to him those hands from which the bloud yet droppeth wilt thou receiue with them the sacred body of our Lord or wilt thou presume to put to thy mouth the cup replenished with the precious bloud of Christ which hast shed so much innocent bloud by the word of thy mouth vttering the passion of thy furious minde Depart therefore adde not this iniquity to the rest and decline not those bands which God aboue approueth With these speeches the Emperour was much moued and knowing the distinct duties both of Emperours and Bishops for that he had bin trained vp in the knowledge of heauenly doctrine returned to the Court with teares sighes A long time after for eight moneths were first past the solemne feast of the Natiuity of Christ approached and all prepared themselues to solemnize the same with triumphant ioy But the Emperor sate in the Court lamenting powring out riuers of teares which when Ruffinus maister of the pallace perceiued he came vnto him and asked the cause of his weeping to whom weeping more bitterly then before he said O Ruffinus thou makest but a sport of these things for thou art touched with no sence of those euils wherewith I am afflicted but the consideration of my calamity maketh me sigh and lament for that whereas the doores of Gods Temple are open to slaues and beggars and they goe freely into the same to make prayers vnto their Lord they are shut against me and which is yet worse the gates of heauen are shut against me also for I cannot forget the words of our Lord who saith Whomsoeuer ye shall bind on earth shall be bound in heauen To whom Ruffinus replied I will runne if it please thee O Emperour to the Bishop and intreate him to vnloose these bands wherewith hee hath bound thee No saith the Emperour it is to no purpose so to doe for he will not bee intreated I know his sentence is right and iust and that he will not transgresse the law of God for any respect of imperiall power Yet when Ruffinus was
earnest and promised confidently to pacifie Ambrose he bade him goe with speede and himselfe followed after in hope of reconciliation trusting vpon the promises of Ruffinus But when Ambrose saw Ruffinus he sayd vnto him O Ruffinus thou doest imitate the impudencie of shamelesse dogges for hauing beene the aduiser and counsellor to so vile murthers thou hast hardned thy forehead and hauing cast away all shame blushest not after the committing of so great and horrible outrages against men made after the image of God And when he was importunate with him and told him the Emperour was comming full of fierie zeale he brake forth into these words I tell thee Ruffinus I will not suffer him to passe the thresholds of Gods house and if of an Emperour he become a tyrant I will ioyfully suffer death Whereupon Ruffinus caused one to runne to the Emperour to desire him to stay within the Court But the Emperour being on the way when the messenger met him resolued to come forward and to endure the reproof of the Bishop So hee came to the sacred railes but entred not into the Temple and comming to the Bishoppe besought him to vnloose him from the bands wherewith hee was bound The Bishop somewhat offended with his comming told him the manner of his comming was tyrant-like and that being mad against God he trampled vnder his feete the lawes of God Not so said the Emperour I presse not hither in despite of order neither doe I vniustly striue to enter into the house of God But I beseech thee to vnloose me to remember the mercifull disposition of our common Lord and not to shut the doore against me that hee would haue opened to all that repent What repentance therefore saith the Bishoppe hast thou shewed after so grieuous an offence what medicines hast thou applied to cure thy wounds It pertaineth to thee sayth the Emperour to prepare the medicines that should heale mee and to cure my wounds and to me to vse that thou prescribest Then sayd Ambrose seeing thou makest thy displeasure iudge and it is not reason that giueth sentence when thou sittest vpon the throne to doe right but thy furious proceedings make a law that when sentence of death and confiscation of goods shall bee passed there may passe thirty dayes before the execution of the same that so if within that space it be found vniust it may be reuersed or otherwise it may proceede This law the Emperour most willingly consented to make and thereupon Ambrose vnloosed him from his bands and he entred into the Temple and prayed vnto God not standing nor kneeling but prostrate vpon the earth and passionately vttering these words of Dauid My soule cleaueth to the pauement Lord quicken me according to thy word Here we see an excellent patterne of a good Bishoppe and a good Emperour and it is hard to say whether Ambrose were more to be commended for his zeale magnanimous resolution and constancie or the Emperour for his willing and submissiue obedience But of deposing Princes here is nothing Ambrose being so farre from any thought of lifting vp his hand against the Emperour that he resolued to subiect himselfe vnto him euen to the suffering of martyrdome if neede should require But saith Bellarmine Ambrose exercised ciuill authority in that hee tooke notice of this murther of the Emperour beeing a criminall cause and forced him to make a ciuill law for the preuenting of furious and bloodie proceedings in iudgment This surely is a weake collection for the Church hath power by vertue of her Ecclesiasticall iurisdiction to take notice of such horrible crimes as murther to punish them with spirituall punishments Neither was the inducing of Theodosius to make a ciuill law for the preuenting of such like euils as he was now censured for before he would reconcile him to the Church an act of ciuill authoritie But such testimonies as this is they that haue no better must be forced to vse That which followeth of Gregories confirming the priviledges graunted to the Abbey of Saint Medardus in such sort that whatsoeuer Kings Iudges or secular persons should go about to violate them should be depriued of their honour proueth not the thing in question For it is evident that the confirmation of these priviledges was passed not by S. Gregory alone but by a whole Councell and more specially by Theodoricus the King and Brunichildis the Queene who might binde their successours and other inferiour secular Rulers vnder paine of deprivation though neither Gregory of himselfe nor yet a councell of Bishops could doe any such thing by their authoritie alone Wherefore let vs proceede to the next example Gregory the second saith Bellarmine excommunicated the Emperour Leo the third who was an enemy to Images he forbade any tribute to be payde him out of Italy and consequently depriued him of part of his Empire Surely if Greg. the second of himself alone had had such power as to forbid all Italy vpon his dislike to pay any more tribute to the Emperour there were some good shew of proofe in this allegation But if wee examine the stories we shall finde the case to haue beene farre otherwise then Bellarmine would beare vs in hand it was For first Gregory did not excommunicate Leo of himselfe but called a Synode to doe it Secondly he did not forbid the paying of tribute out of Italy to the Emperour but the circumstances of the History are these Leo seeking to win the Bishop of Rome and the people of Italy to the casting downe of Images in the West as he had done in the East Gregory the Bishop did not onely refuse to obey him but admonished all other to take heed they did no such thing for feare of any Edict of the Emperour By which exhortation the people of Italy already mis-conceited of the Emperours governement were so animated that they were likely to haue proceeded to the election of a new Emperour and Nauclerus sheweth that the decrees of the Bishop of Rome disswading the people of the West from obeying the Emperour in casting downe of Images were of so great authoritie that the people and souldiers of Ravenna first and then of Venice beganne to make shew of rebellion against the Emperour and his Exarche or Lieutenant and to inforce the Bishop of Rome and the other people of Italy to disclaime the Emperour of Constantinople and to chuse another in Italy And that this rebellion proceeded so farre that euery city putting downe the Magistrates of the Exarch set vp Magistrates of their owne whō they named Dukes but that the Bishop of Rome at that time pacified thē and by his perswasions stayed them from chusing any new Emperour in hope that he would amend So that we see the Bishop of Rome with his Bishops by their authority did nothing but stay the people from obeying the Emperours vnlawfull Decrees as they iudged them but no way went about to depose the
Emperour or to depriue him of any thing that of right pertained to him But the people of Italy moued against the Emperour proceeded further then the Bishop of Rome would haue had them to haue done For they put downe the Magistrates appointed by the Emperour and set vp other of their owne and would haue forced the Bishop of Rome and the other people of Italy who yet consented not vnto them to disclaime the Emperour of Constantinople and to chuse another in Italy And therefore if at that time they forbare to pay any more tribute as Zonaras saith they did it was not because the Pope forbade them so to doe as hauing supreme power in ciuill things but being averse from the Emperour as for other dislikes so by the Popes perswasions they stayed the tribute of themselues as of themselues they put downe the Magistrates of the Emperour without the liking of the Bishop of Rome That which Otho Frisingensis hath that the Pope hauing often admonished the Emperour and found him incorrigible perswaded the people of Italy to depart from the Empire seemeth to bee contrary to the reports of the Authour of the great Chronicle Nauclerus Rhegino and others but yet maketh the Pope onely a perswader and the people of Italy the doers of that was done And in like sort it must bee vnderstood that Zonaras saith the Bishop of Rome stayed the paying of tribute to the Emperour namely that his dislike of the Emperours courses together with their owne distast of his actions did so auert the minds of the Italians from the Emperour that they refused to pay him tribute that being attributed to him as done by him which his perswasions though tending to another purpose did worke without his liking and against his will And in the same sence it is that Sigebert saith Gregory charged the Emperour with errour blamed him for it and turned away the people of Rome and the tribute of the West from him The third instance of Popes intermedling in the disposition of the kingdomes of the world is that of Zacharias the Pope of whom Gregory the seuenth in his Epistles writeth thus Another Romane Bishop also to wit Zacharias deposed the French King from his kingdome not so much for any fault done by him as for that he was vnfit to sway so great power and put Pipine the father of Charles the great afterwards Emperour into his place freeing and absoluing all the Frenchmen frō their oath of feaultie Which words of Gregory are found likewise in the decrees To this allegation Occam answereth that Zacharias did not depose Childericke the French King as Gregory the seuenth vntruly reporteth but onely gaue allowance of the Peeres doposing of him And to that purpose alleageth the Glosse vpon the decrees wich sayth Dicitur deposuisse quia deponentibus consensit that is The Pope is said to haue deposed the King because hee gaue consent to those that did depose him and allowed their act But he noteth also that there are others that doe not soe excuse the Pope but do thinke he put his sickle into another mans haruest and tooke vpon him to do that hee had no authority to doe which other Popes likewise haue not feared to doe in prejudice of the right of the laity as they shew out of another Glosse Soe that the Century writers are not alone in the reprehension of this fact of Zacharias as Bellarmine vntruly anoucheth notwithstanding I rather follow the judgment of the author of the Glosse and thinke that he did but giue his opinion what might be done and approue the act when it was done For confirmation whereof I will lay downe the circumstances of the narration touching the proceedings in this matter as I find them reported by ancient writers First all Historians agree that the Kings of France in those times giuing themselues to idlenesse and pleasures wholly neglected the gouernment that they were seene but only once in the yeare of their subjects and that the gouernor of the Kings house ruled all Neither did things stand thus for a short space but Sigebert saith they continued so 88 yeares In this office of a prefect or gouernor Pipine incceeded his auncesters but exceeded them in the greatnesse of worthy exploits neither did any thing hinder the course of his great and honourable actions but that hee was forced to suffer endure a king almost witlesse mad with diuers sencelesse fooleries Wherefore they who write the histories of France report that the Nobles and people of that nation duely weighing the vertue of Pipine and the witlesse follies of Childericke the King consulted Zachary then Bishop of Rome desired him to tell them whether he thought so foolish and vnworthy a King were any longer to be endured or Pipine to be defrauded of royall dignity which he deserued was right worthy of Who when they had receiued answere from the Pope that he was to be estemed the King who knew best how to performe kingly duties the French by the publique and common aduice and counsell of the whole nation proclaimed Pipine King and shore the head of Childericke and made him a Clearke Nauclerus saith the French men anciently had their kings descended of an ancient stocke who of Meroueus the sonne of King Clodius the second were called Merouingians the race of which kings continued till Childericke and in him ended For long before they were of no esteeme or authority neither had they any thing but the vaine and empty title of Kings for the riches and power of the kingdome were in the hands of the prefects of the pallace who were called the chiefe of the Kings house and swayed the vvhole kingdome vvho at that time vvere the successors of Charles Martell and vvere named Dukes Neither vvas there any other thing permitted to the King but that contenting himselfe vvith the bare name of a King hauing long haire and a long beard hee should sit vpon the throne and haue some shew of a ruler and heare Embassadors comming from all parts and giue such answers vnto them as out of his owne power which he was taught and commanded to giue Hee had nothing to liue on but such a stipend and allowance as the Prefect was pleased to allow vnto him Hee possessed nothing but one little village once onely in the yeare hee was seene of his subiects in a publique and solemne assembly hauing saluted them all returned againe into his priuate course of life leauing the gouernment of all to the Prefect Pipine therefore who then supplied that place as succeeding his ancestors in the same considering the slouth and idlenesse of these Kings who neglecting the common-wealth did hide themselues in their owne priuate houses and that both the Nobles people tooke notice as well of his vertues as of the sencelesse follies of Childericke consulted the Pope as we heard
before vpon whose answere that he was to be reputed King that could best do the duty of a King the French by a publique decree of the whole nation chose Pipine to be King which thing Zachary approued Otho Frisingensis saith that the French se nt messengers to Rome sciscitandi gratia to aske the Popes aduice and to be resolued by him vpon whose answere and by whose authority warranting them it was lawfull so to do Bonifacius Arch-bishop of Mentz the other Princes of the kingdome met together and chose Pipine King And Rhegino saith Pipine was chosen King according to the manner and custome of the French and being annointed by the hands of Bonifacius Arch-bishop of Mentz was by the French lifted vp into the royall throne and Childericke who was but in title onely a King was shorne and thrust into a Monastery With these agreeth Sigebertus and the rest Wherefore to conclude this point touching the deposition of Childericke we must obserue First that hee was not deposed for heresie or any way going about to hinder the course of religion and that therefore the Pope could not depose him vnlesse Princes be subiect to such censures for defects of nature and negligence in doing their duties Secondly that hee and his predecessours for almost an hundred yeares were put from all gouernement and were but in name onely Kings others hauing the authority and that with the allowance of the whole state So that it is the lesse to be maruelled if the Pope beeing consulted as a Diuine answered it was fit rather that hee should haue the name title and inauguration of a King that was to do the duty then hee that was to be but a shadow onely Yet do I not say that hee spake like a good Diuine Thirdly that in those times the Vniuersity of Paris was not yet founded and the kingdome had few learned men and that therefore they sought to forrainers For otherwise wee know that afterwards the Kings and Princes of France rather beleeued the Diuines of Paris then the Court of Rome in greater matters then this Fourthly that the Bishop of Rome as Patriarch of the West was the chiefe Bishop in these parts of the world and therefore not vnfitly consulted in a matter of such consequence as this was Wherefore let vs now proceed to the fourth instance which is that of the translation of the West Empire from the Emperours of Constantinople to Charles the Great which our Aduersaries say was done by Pope Leo the third But surely whosoeuer shall looke into the course of Histories shall find that this instance maketh rather against them then for them For it is most certaine that the Pope by his papall power did not translate the Empire The Romanes sayth Sigebert who long before in their hearts were fallen away from the Emperour of Constantinople now taking the opportunity of the occasion offered while a woman hauing put out the eyes of Constantine the Emperour her sonne tooke vpon her to rule ouer them with one consent proclaimed Charles the King their Emperour and by the hands of Leo the pope set the Crowne vpon his head and gaue him the title of Caesar and Augustus With Sigebertus the author of the great Chronicle agreeth His words are these In the time of the solemnities of the Masse celebrated vpon Christmas day in S. Peters Church Leo the pope by the decree of the people of Rome at their entreaty crowned Charles proclaimed Emperor of the Romanes set such a Diademe vpon his head as the anciēt Emperors were wont to weare then the people which was present in great number with ioyful acclamation cried out thrise Carolo Augusto á Deo coronato magno et pacifico Imperatori vita victoria So that we see it was the decree of the Romanes that made Charles Emperour and that they vsed Leo for the performance of the solemne rites of his Coronatiō vnction With Sigebert the Authour of the great Chronicle we may joyne Lambertus Schaffnaburgesis His words are Carolus á Romanis Augustus est appellatus That is the Romanes proclaimed Charles Augustus And Nauclerus saith Pontifex populi Romani consensu Carolum Romanorum Imperatorem declarat c. that is The high Bishop with the consent of the people of Rome proclaimeth Charles Emperour of Romanes crowneth him with a Diademe The people with a joyfull shout crying out thrice Carolo Augusto á Deo coronato magno pacifico Imperatori vita victoria But to cleare this point to make it euident to all the world that howsoeuer the Pope Clergy might concurre in this act with the people nobles of Italy as hauing part interest in matters of state as well as other yet the Pope by his Papall power did not translate the Empire three things are to be obserued The first that in the time of Gregory the 2d there was a great rebellion in Italy against the Emperour of Constantinople and a desire to chuse a new Emperour that they of Rauenna Venice proceeded so farre in it that they would haue forced the Bishoppe of Rome and others to concurre with them whereby it appeareth that the act of translation was not proper to the Bishop of Rome but proceeded frō the concurring desires of the Italians and was their act rather then his The second that Charles was a mighty potent great prince hauing vnder him all France Spaine a great part of Germany with many other countries by his sword had subiected to him the Lombards was Lord of the greatest part of Italy before either the people proclaimed him or the Pope crowned him Emperor So that howsoeuer the Italians by Leo the B. proclaimed crowned accounted him Emperour yet it was his right of inheritance his sword that had possessed him of the thing before euer they gaue him the title of the West Empire The third that whether the Italians had right to choose an Emperour or not it mattereth nothing seeing they rebelled against their Emperor thought that in case of such necessity they might so do and that therefore the obiection of Bellarmine against our position is too weake when he saith the people had no power to choose the Emperour For howsoeuer anciently the Emperours were chosen by the souliers or came to it by inheritance yet the people at this time de facto tooke vpon them to choose without curious disputing the question of right The fifth instance of the Popes intermedling in the disposition of the kingdomes of the world is that of Gregory the 5 who as Bellarmine saith appointed the forme of chusing the Emperour by the seauen Princes of Germany and ordained that the Emperour should euer after be chosen by them For the clearing of which point wee must obserue that the Empire of the West being translated from Constantinople into France in the person of Charles
a pilgrime and so going to Rome with this Hildebrand in his company by his aduice counsell found the meanes to get himselfe chosen Pope by the Clergy and people of Rome Leo dyed and Gebehardus afterwards named Victor succeeded him and Stephen him about whose time Henry the third dyed Henry the fourth his sonne succeeded him and after Stephen Benedict and Nicholas Alexander gate the papall See against whom great exception was taken for that contrary to the custome hee was chosen without the Emperours consent and with the liking of the yong Emperor and his mother as some report Another was set vp by the Bishops of Lombardy affirming that no man might be chosen or designed to the Popedome without the Emperours allowance And besides Anno Arch-bishop of Coleyn went to Rome to expostulate the matter with Alexander and the Cardinals adhering to him and to know of him how he durst contrary to custome and the law prescribed and imposed anciently vpon the Popes assume the Popedome without the consent of the Emperour alleaging many things to shew the vnlawfulnesse of this fact and beginning at Charles the great hee named many Emperours who had either chosen or confirmed Popes and made good their election But being ready to go forward and to adde more proofes vnto that which he had said Hildebrand the Arch-deacon the whole company of Cardinals beckening vnto him so to doe stood vp and answered in this sort Arch-bishop Anno the Kings and Emperours of Rome neuer had any authority right or commanding power in the choyce of the Pope and if at any time any thing were done violently or disorderly it was afterwards corrected and set right againe by the censure of the Fathers After the death of Alexander this Hildebrand who thus euer opposed himselfe against the Emperours claimes was by the Romanes chosen Pope without the Emperours consent Which the Bishops of France vnderstanding knowing well of how violent seuere and vntractable a disposition hee was vnwilling to haue him possesse so high a place in the Church told the Emperour that if hee did not in time preuent the matter and voyd his election greater euils and perils would beset him then he could at first thinke of Whereupon he sent Embassadours to Rome to know the cause why the Romanes contrary to the ancient custome had chosen a Pope without his consent And if they gaue not satisfaction to put Hildebrand from the Papal dignity which he had vniustly gotten The Embassadours comming to Rome were kindly and courteously entertained and when they had deliuered their message Hildebrand like a vile dissembling hypocrite contrary to his owne practise and that which he had perswaded other vnto answered that hee neuer sought this honor but that it was put vpon him and that yet hee would not accept of it till by a certaine Embassadour hee was assured that not onely the Emperour but the Princes of Germany consented to his election Which answer when the Emperour receiued hee was fully satisfied and with all readinesse by his royall consent confirmed his election and commanded that he should be ordained Thus wee see how to serue his owne turne he could now acknowledge the Emperours interest and refuse to be ordained before hee had obtained his confirmation which yet before in the case of Alexander he disclaimed though a some say hee neuer yeelded so much to the Emperour but euer held out against him disclaiming his intermedling and that a most horrible schisme ensued thereupon Howsoeuer he was no sooner Pope but he began to molest the Emperour challenging him for Symony in conferring Ecclesiasticall dignities and requiring him to come to some Synodall answer which when he refused to doe he excommunicated him depriued him of his Empire and absolued his subiects froÌ„ their Oath of obedience This was the first Pope that euer presumed to depose any Emperour Lego relego saith Otho Frisingensis Romanorum Regum Imperatorum gesta nusquam invenio quenquam eoâ—…um ante hunc à Romano Pontifice excommunicatum vel regno privatum nisi fortè quis pro anathemate habendum ducat quod Philippus ad breve tempus à Romano Pontifice inter poenitentes collocatus Theodosius à beato Ambrosio propter cruentam caedem à liminibus Ecclesiae sequestratus sit that is I reade and I reade ouer againe and againe the Acts of the Romane Kings and Emperours and I no where finde any of them before this excommunicated by the Romane Bishop or depriued of his kingdome unlesse haply any man doe thinke that is to be taken for an excoÌ„munication that Philip was for a short time put among the Penitents by the Bishop of Rome and Theodosius for his bloudy murther stopped by blessed Ambrose from entring into the Church And therefore whatsoeuer Gregory pretendeth to the contrary professing that hee treadeth in the steps of the Saints and his holy predecessours yet it is true that Sigebert saith which hee hopeth hee may say with the leaue of all good men that this novelty that hee say not heresie had not shewed it self in the world in their time that the Priests of that God which maketh hypocrites to reigne for the sins of his people should teach his people that they owe no subiectioÌ„ to wicked Kings and that they owe no feaulty vnto them though they haue taken the oath of feaulty that they are free froÌ„ periury that lift vp their hands against the king to whoÌ„ they haue sworne that they are to be taken for excoÌ„municate persons that do obey him What horrible confusioÌ„s followed vpon this censure of Gregory Otho Frisingensis reporteth in most tragicall manner His wordes are these How great euils how many warres and dangers of warres followed thence How often was miserable Rome besieged taken and sacked How one Pope was intruded vpon another as likewise one King set vp against another it is irksome to me to remember To conclude the whirle-winde of this tempest inwrapped in it so many euils so many schismes so many perils of the soules and bodies of men that it alone may suffise in respect of the cruelty of the persecutioÌ„ and the long continuance of the time thereof to set before our eyes the infelicity of mans miserable conditioÌ„ For first the Emperour offended with the Pope for molesting him about the Investitures of Bishoppes which his Predecessours anciently had and enjoyed and the Clergy discontented with him for his forbidding marriage hee was in an assembly of the States and Bishops of Germany holden at Wormes deposed a letter written to him requiring him no longer to meddle with the Episcopall Office But such was the resolutioÌ„ and stoutnesse of this turbulent vnquiet spirit that being encouraged by certain Bishops of Germany promised their aide helpe he depriued the Bishops that had giuen sentence against him and deposed Henry the Emperour absoluing his subiects froÌ„ their Oath of obedience Whereupon
this immunity And Sixtus Senensis saith that Hierome speaketh not of that tribute which subiects pay to their Princes here in this world but of that which we all owe to CHRIST so that this is that he saith why doe not we wretched men professing our selues to be the servants of Christ yeeld vnto his Maiesty the due tribute of our seruice seeing Christ so great and excellent payde tribute for our sakes S. Austine in his first book of Questions vpon the Gospels saith that Kings sons in this world are free that therefore much more the sonnes of that Kingdome vnder which all kingdomes of the World are should bee free in each earthly Kingdome which words Thomas and Sixtus Senensis vnderstand of a freedome from the bondage of sin but Iansenius rejecteth that interpretation because Austine saith the children of Kings are free from tribute and thinketh that Austines meaning is that if God the King of Heauen Earth had many naturall sonnes as hee hath but one only begotten they should all be free in all the Kingdomes of the world and other apply these words to cleargy-men though there bee nothing in the place leading to any such interpretation But whatsoeuer we thinke of the meaning of Austine Bellarmine saith it cannot bee inferred from these his wordes that cleargy-men by Gods Law are free from the duty of paying tribute because as Chrysostome noteth Christ speaketh only of naturall children and besides prescribeth nothing but onely sheweth that vsually among men Kings sonnes are free from tribute and therefore whereas the authority of Bonifacius the Eighth who affirmeth that the goods persons of Cleargy-men are free from exactions both by the law of God and man is brought to proue the contrary Hee answereth first that haply the Pope meant not that they are absolutely freed by any speciall graunt frō God but only that there is an example of Pharaoh an Heathen Prince freeing the Priests of his Gods mentioned in Scripture which may induce Christian Kings to free the Pastours of Christs Church Secondly that it was but the priuate opinion of the Pope inclining to the iudgment of the Canonistes and that he did not define any such thing So that men may lawfully dissent from him in this point So that we see by the testimonies of Scripture and Fathers and the confession of the best learned among our aduersaries themselues that Almighty God did not by any special exemption free either the goods or persons of Cleargy-men from the command of Princes and that in the beginning they were subiect to all seruices iudgements payments burdens that any other are subiect to and required by Christ the Sonne of God and his blessed Apostles to be so But some man happily will say that though Christ did not specially free eyther the goods or persons of Cleargy-men from the subiection to Princes yet there are inducements in reason and in the very light of nature such and so great to moue Princes to set them free that they should not do well if they did not so Whereunto wee answere that there is no question to be made but that the Pastors of the Church that watch ouer the soules of men are to bee respected and tendered more then men of any other calling and so they are and euer were where any sence of religion is or was The Apostle Saint Paul testifieth of the Galathians that they receiued him as an Angell of God yea as Christ Iesus himselfe that they would haue euen plucked out their eyes to haue done him good The Emperour Constantine honoured the Christian Bishops with the name and title of Gods acknowledged himselfe subject to their iudgment though he swayed the scepter of the World and refused to see what the complaintes were that they preferred one against another or to read their bils but professed that to couer their faults he would euen cast frō him his purple Robe Whence it came that many priuiledges were anciently graunted vnto them both in respect of their persons goods For first Constantine the Great not onely gaue ample gifts to the Pastors of the Churches but exempted them also from those seruices ministeries and imployments that other men are subiect to His Epistle to Anelinus the Proconsul of Africa wherein this graunt was made to them of Affrica is found in Eusebius Neyther is it to be doubted but that he extended his fauours to the Bishops of other Churches also aswell as to them The words of the Grant are these Considering that the due obseruation of things pertaining to true religion and the worshippe of God bringeth great happinesse to the whole state of the Common-wealth and Empire of Rome For the incouragement of such as attend the holy Ministery and are named Cleargy-men my pleasure is that all such in the Church wherein Caecilianus is Bishop be at once and altogether absolutely freed and exempted from all publicke Ministeries and Seruices Neither did the Emperors only exempt them from these seruices but they freed them also frō secular iudgements vnles it were in certaine kindes of criminall causes Wherein yet a Bishop was not to be cōuēted against his wil before any secular Magistrate without the Emperors cōmand Neyther might the temporall Magistrates condemne any Cleargy-man till hee were degraded by his Bishoppe howsoeuer they might imprison and restraine such vpon complaints made And answerably hereunto the Councell of Matiscon prouideth that no Cleargy-man for any cause without the discussion of his Bishop shall bee wronged imprisoned by any Secular Magistrate that if any Iudge shal presume to doe soe to the Cleargy-men of any Bishoppe vnlesse it be in a criminall cause hee shall bee excommunicated as long as the Bishoppe shall thinke fitte This was all the immunity that Cleargy-men anciently had by any grant of Princes and as much as euer the Church desired to enjoy but that which in latter times was challenged by some and in defence of the claime whereof Thomas Becket resisted the King till his bloud was shedde was of another kinde For whereas it was not thought fitte by the King and State of the Realme at that time that Church-men found in enormous crimes by the kings Iustices should be deliuered ouer to their Bishoppes and so escape ciuill punishment but that confessing such crimes or being clearely conuinced of them before the Bishoppe the Bishoppe should in presence of the Kings Iustices degrade them and put them from all Ecclesiasticall honour and deliuer them to the Kings Court to be punished Becket was of a contrary minde and thought that such as Bishoppes degraded or putte out of their Ministery of the Church should not bee punished by the ciuill Magistrates because as hee sayd one offence was not to be punished twice The occasion of this controuersie betweene the King and the Arch-bishoppe was giuen by one Philip Brocke a Canon of Bedford Who beeing brought before
he bare to him gaue commandement that the election of the Bishop of Rome being resolued on the Bishops should presently proceede to the ordination of him without expecting any confirmation from the Emperour But the power of confirming the newly elected Bishoppe of Rome before hee might bee ordayned or execute the Bishoppely office was againe restored to Charles the great his successours Kings of France and Emperours of the West in more ample sort then it had beene before by Adrian the First which being againe taken from his successours by Adrian the Third was restored to Otho the First King of the Germanes Emperour of the West by Leo the Eigth From which time it continued till Gregory the Seauenth who though hee was glad to seeke the Emperours confirmation himselfe when hee first entred into the Popedome yet afterwards he disclaymed it as vnlawfull so condemning many of his Predecessours that had allowed and confirmed this part of Imperiall power vnder great paines and curses to fall vpon such as should euer goe about to violate the same After whose times other Popes reserued the whole power of electing the Romane Bishoppe to the Cardinalls alone as wee see the manner is vnto this day Thus writeth Onuphrius professing that hee carefully looked ouer all the auncient monuments of the Romane Church to finde out the certainety of these things Neither neede we to doubt of the trueth of that hee writeth yet for farther proofe least any man should doubt I will produce the reports of Historians the Acts of Councels to confirme that hee saith Platina in the life of Pelagius the 2d saith nothing was done in the election of the Romane B. in those dayes without the Emperours consent and confirmation and sheweth that the reason why Pelagius was created Bishoppe without the commaund of the Emperour was for that they could send no messenger to him the Citty being besieged And touching Gregory the First hee reporteth that when he was chosen Bishoppe of Rome knowing the Emperours consent necessarily to bee required in the election and constitution of the Bishoppe unwilling to possesse that place and roome hee sent vnto him earnestly intreating him to make voyde the election of the Cleargy and people which his suite the Emperour was so farre from graunting that hee sent to confirme the Election and to enforce him to take the Pastorall charge vpon him in that most daungerous and troublesome time Whereby wee see how farre the Emperours intermedled in the election and constitution of the Romane Bishoppes in those daies It is true indeede that the same Platina reporteth that Constantine admiring the sanctity vertue of Benedict the second sent vnto him a sanction that euer after all men should presently take him for Bishop without expecting the concurrence of the authority of the Emperour of Constantinople or the Exarch of Italy whomsoeuer the Cle◅rgy people and armies of the Romanes should chuse Not-with-standing this freed◅me and libertie continued not long for as wee may reade in the Decree◅ Charle◅ the Great and Adrian the first held a Synode in the Church of Saint Sauiour in Rome wherein met 153 Bishops religious men and Abbottes in which Synod Adrian with the consent of the Bishops there assembled gaue vnto Charles power to choose the Bishop of Rome and to order the Apostolicall See together with the dignity of being a Patrician or Nobleman of Rome and besides decreed that all Arch-bishoppes and Bishops in the Provinces abroad should seeke investiture of him and that no man should bee esteemed a Bishoppe or bee consecrated till he were allowed and commended by the King This Decree the councell published anathematizing all that should violate it and confiscating their goods yet did Adrian the third as Platina reporteth take so good heart vnto him that whereas Nicholas the first did but attempt such a thing rather then performe it hee in the very beginning of his Papall dignity made a Decree that without expecting the Emperours consent or ratification the election of the Cleargy Senate and People should bee good But Leo the Eight in a Synode gathered together in the Church of Saint Sauiour in Rome following the example of Adrian the first with the consent of the whole Synode restored vnto the Emperour that power and authority which Adrian the first had yeelded vnto him and Adrian the third had sought to depriue him of The wordes of that councell are these I Leo Bishop and seruant of the seruants of God with the whole Cleargy and people of Rome doe constitute confirme and strengthen and by our Apostolicall authority graunt and giue to our Lord Otho the first King of Germaines and to his successours in this Kingdome of Italy for euer power to choose a successour and to order the Bishop of this highest See Apostolicke as also Arch-bishoppes and Bishoppes that they may receiue investiture from him and consecration whence they ought to haue it those onely excepted which the Emperour himselfe hath graunted to the Popes and Arch-bishops and that no man hereafter of what dignity or religious profession soeuer shall haue power to chuse a Patrician or a chiefe Bishoppe of the highest See Apostolicke or to ordaine any Bishop whatsoeuer without the consent of the Emperour first had which consent and confirmation notwithstanding shall be had without money So that if any Bishop shall be chosen by the cleargy people he shall not bee consecrated vnlesse hee bee commended and invested by the fore-named King And if any man shall attēpt to do any thing against this rule Apostolicall authority We decree that he shal be subiect to excommunication and that if he repent not he shall bee perpetually banished or be subiect to the last most grievous deadly and capitall punishments Hence it came that when any Bishop was dead they sent his staffe and ring to the Emperour and hee to whom the Emperour was pleased to deliuer the same after a solemne fashion and manner was thereby designed and constituted Bishop of the voyde place Thus wee see how authentically vnder great paines and curses the Pope and councell yeeld that right to the Emperor subjecting all that euer should goe about to disanull their Decree to the great curse perpetuall banishment and grievous punishments Yet Pope Hildebrand who as if he had beene a fire-brand of hell set all the world in a Combustion disanulled this Law as impious and wicked and Victor Vrbanus and Paschalis succeeding him were of the same minde By reason whereof there grew a great dissention betweene the Popes and Emperours Henry the fourth and after him Henry the fifth challenging not onely the right of confirming the election of the Popes but power also to conferre Bishoprickes and Abbeyes by Investiture of staffe and ring as the Popes Adrian and Leo had yeelded and granted to Charles and his successours which thing also had beene enioyed by the Emperour for the space of three
scholler in the schoole of impudency a farre longer time then yet he hath beene But happily he may find vanity in these passages of mine though no vntruth Let vs see therefore what hee saith what aduantage saith hee can Doctour Field gaine from Gersons improbation of the afore-said lewd assertions preiudiciall to the states of Kinges and Princes why doth hee presse the authority of Gerson whose medicine hee knoweth to bee very sharpe against the disease of all such Princes as by the infection of Heretickes are seduced from the integrity of the Catholicke faith to wit persecution by fire and sword Surely heere Theomisus Higgons bewrayeth more then vanity for as if he meant presently to become a traytor against his Soueraigne whom he his consortes suppose to be seduced from the Catholicke verity he beginneth at the very first to talke of sharpe medicines against such Princes and those prescribed by Gerson as he telleth vs but hee will be found a lying and cogging mate for Gerson in the place cited by him hath nothing for the Popes deposing Princes for heresie or any thing else which yet is that medicine he meaneth nay wee are assured hee neuer held any such trayterous position but writing against the flatterers of Princes hee wisheth Princes to take heed they listen not to such men as will instill into them many false opinions touching their power and absolutenesse contrary to the faith and trueth of God whereby in the end they may make themselues so odious as to bee pursued by fire and sword by their subiects So that whereas Gerson speaketh of errours in faith concerning the state of Princes bringing them to doe things so odious as to bee persecuted with fire sword this good fellow turneth his words to another sence as if he had meant that for error in faith the Pope were to depose Princes and whereas to meete with certaine false and foolish suggestions made to some Princes contrarie to the doctrine of faith hee setteth downe certaine propositions whereof the first is that Princes must not iustifie themselues and thinke they offend not whatsoeuer they doe and that the Lawes Ecclesiasticall and Ciuill will auaile for the furtherance of this consideration hee turneth the words into this sence that these Lawes are auailable for the deposing of Kinges so treacherous and trayterous is this Fugitiue become already From this first obseruation he proceedeth to a second saying that if the reformation wished for by Gerson consisted onely or principally or at all in the redresse of lewd assertions preiudiciall to the states of Kings the Protestants haue not effected that which he desired their positions being dangerous likewise and therevpon breaketh out into a long and large discourse concerning the positions of Protestants touching the state and power of Princes But surely he is like a Spaniell not acquainted with his game that runneth after euery bird that riseth before him and is to bee taught better before there will be any great vse of him For I bring not the report of Gerson touching hese assertions so much to shew what he would haue reformed as to make it appeare how strangely things were carried in former times how little hope he other good men had of any reformation by a Councell seeing these positions so dangerous apparantly false could not be condemned in the Councell of Constance by reason of a mighty faction prevayling in the same so all that he saith vpon this false ground is nothing to the purpose notwithstanding if the man were worth the medling with or the matter required it it were easie to shew that Protestants are farre from holding any such trayterous opinions as Papists defend But I haue resolued to confine my selfe to the defence of my selfe against his childish exceptions and no way to follow him into any other of his idle discourses Touching Gersons condemning certaine-positions attributed to Wickliff and Hus and Husses suffering in the cause of CHRIST against Antichrist and the idlenesse of Higgons in charging Mee with contradiction in that I graunt the one and affirme the other I haue spoken already But so plentifull hee is in objections that nine thinges more remaine in this chapter not obiected before which hee obiecteth to mee The first is the extenuation of the turbulent and impious positions of Wickliff in that I say they seemed to derogate from the Cleargy Secondly that I conceale the impiety of Wickliff in other thinges Thirdly that I cite in one place things found in diuers places Fourthly that I exaggerate the seuerity of the Councell of Constance against Wickliff c. and make as if Gerson had disliked it whereas he did not Fiftly that I say Gerson desired a reformation and thought that it was to be assayed seuerally in the particular Kingdomes of the world there being little or no hope of doing any good by a Generall Councell Sixtly that the proceeding in this worke of reformation seuerally in diuerse parts of the world without a common deliberation was the cause of those differences that now appeare in the reformed Churches according as Gerson feared it would fall out 7ly That I say Gerson Grosthead others were of the true Church who yet were mēbers of the Church of Rome Eigthly that I misalleage a saying of Gerson And the nineth that whereas Gerson sayth the Popes sought to be adored as God I say they sought to bee adored and worshipped as God To euery one of these I will answere in a word To the first that I extenuate not the impious positions falsely and maliciously gathered out of Wickliffes workes as that God must obey the Diuell and if there be any other like but accurse them to the pitte of hell but speaking of those which in Gersons iudgement were not so hurtfull neither to the conuersation of men nor the state of common-weales as those against Princes which the Councell of Constance could not bee induced to condemne I say of them they seemed to derogate from the Cleargy because I know not certainely vppon what ground or in what sence many of them were vttered by him To the second I answere that I concealed not the impiety of any articles where-with Wickliffe was charged but hauing no occasion to speake of any other but such onely as were not so bad in Gersons iudgement as some they in the coūcell could not be induced to condemn I had no reason to censure thē any otherwise then I did for had they beene so bad as Maister Higgons would make them to be the Pope and Councell were not very good that could by no meanes bee induced to condemne such as were farre worse as Gerson telleth vs. To the third I say that it is lawfull for a man to cite in one place out of one author thinges found in him in diuerse places or else Maister Higgons is too blame who doth so To the fourth I say that I exaggerate not the seuerity of the
Apostles and in many places we finde the same to haue beene done rather for the honour of Priest-hood then the necessity of any Law otherwise if the Spirit descend not but onely at the prayer of the Bishop they are to be lamented who in villages castles and remote places baptized by Priests or Deacons dye before they are visited by the Bishop and then follovve these words The safety of the Church depends on the dignity of the chiefe Priest to whom if an eminent power be not giuen there will bee as many schismes in the Church as there are Priests So that this is that which he saith that it is rather for the honour of the Bishop or chiefe Priest of each Church that the imposition of hands vpon the baptized is reserued vnto him alone then the necessity of any law because if he had no such preeminences things peculiarly reserued vnto him in respect whereof he might be greater then the rest of the Priests Ministers in the Church there would be as many schismes as Priests and hence he saith it commeth that without the command of the Bishop or chiefe Priest neither Priest nor Deacon haue right to baptize So that it is manifest the chiefe Priest he speaketh of whose power is eminent peerelesse is so named in respect of other Priests in the same church that may not so much as baptize without his mandate not in respect of the pastors of the whole vniuersall church Wherefore if this pamphleter would haue dealt truly honestly he should haue said VVhereas heretofore some vnchristian Sermons books termed the Bishop of Rome the great Antichrist we shal now receiue a better doctrine more religious answer that there must be one chiefe Priest or Bishop in euery Diocesse hauing a more eminent authority then the rest then whereas men now detest his falshood they would but onely haue laughed at his folly But let vs come to his second allegation and see if there be any more truth in that then in this His wordes are these Doctor Field telleth vs from Scripture that Christ promised to build his Church vpon Saint Peter then no Christian will doubt vnlesse he will doubt of Christs truth and promises but it was so performed Let the reader peruse the place and hee shal find that I doe not tell them from Scripture that CHRIST promised to builde his Church vpon Peter as this man adding one falshood to another most vntruely sayth I doe but onely cite a place of Tertullian to proue that nothing was hid from the Apostles that was to be reuealed to after-commers where hee hath these words What was hidden and concealed from Peter vpon whom Christ promised to build his Church from Iohn the Disciple hee so dearely loued that leaned on his breast at the mysticall supper and the rest of that blessed company that should be after manifested to succeeding generations But he will say that I approue the saying of Tertullian and therefore thinke the Church was built vpon Peter Truly so I doe but I thinke also as Hierome doth that it was built no more vpon him then vpon all the rest and therefore the supremacy of Peters pretended successour will not bee concluded from thence Dicis saith Hierome super Petrum fundatur Ecclesia licet idipsum in alio loco super omnes Apostolos fiat Super omnes ex aequo Ecclesiae fortitudo solidatur that is Thou wilt say the Church was built vpon Peter It is true it was so but we shall find in another place that it was builded vpon all the Apostles Surely the firmenesse of the Church doth equally stay and settle it selfe vpon them all This is so cleare and evident that Bellarmine himselfe confesseth that all the Apostles may be said to haue beene foundations of the Church and that the Church may bee truely said to haue beene built vpon them all First because they preached Christ to such as had not heard of him before and were the first that founded Christian Churches Secondly in respect of their doctrine which they learned by immediate reuelation from the Sonne of God in which the Church is to rest as in the ground and rule of her faith Thirdly in respect of gouernmēt in that they were all heads rulers of the vniuersal Church Thus wee see if I had told them out of Scripture that Christ promised to build his Church on Peter our Aduersaries could not from thence haue inferred the supremacie of the Pope his pretended Successour Wherefore let vs come to his next allegation His words are Doctor Field and the rest doe ordinarily yeelde that the Romane Church continued the true Church of God till the yeare of Christ sixe hundreth and seauen when Bonifacius the Pope there claimed as they say supremacie first in the Church This is a meere imagination of his own for I no where speake of the Churchcōtinuing till the time of Bonifacius the Pope or till the yeare sixe hundred and seauen as if it had then ceased and therefore hee doth not here cite any page of my booke as in other places but citeth it at large But saith hee Doctor Field plainly acknowledgeth that the supremacy belonged to the Popes of Rome before the first Nicene Councell and then by the rules which hee giueth to knowe true traditions custome of the Church consent of Fathers or an Apostolicall Churches testimony this must needes bee of that first kinde and then of equall authority with Scripture as hee acknowledgeth of such traditions Such is the intollerable impudency of this man that I protest I canne scarce beleeue mine owne eyes or perswade my selfe that hee writeth that which I see hee doth For doe I any where acknowledge the supremacy belonged to the Popes of Rome before the Nicene Councell Nay doe I not in the place cited by him say that before the Nicene Councell there were three principall Bishoppes or Patriarches of the Christian Church to witte the Bishoppes of Rome Alexandria and Antioche as appeareth by the actes of the Councell limiting their bounds Had these their bounds limited and set vnto them and was there one of them an vniuersall commander If hee say I acknowledge the Bishop of Rome was in order and honour the first amongst the Patriarches before the Nicene Councell and thereupon inferre that I acknowledge his supremacie and commaunding power ouer the rest hee may as well inferre that I giue to the Bishop of Alexandria a commanding authority ouer the Bishoppe of Antioche because before the Nicene Councell he was before him in order and honour That which hee addeth as a Corollary that by the rules I giue to know true traditions this must bee of that kinde and cōsequently of equall authority with Scripture argueth in him a greater desire of saying something then care what he saith For first it no way appeareth out of any thing that I haue said touching the primacy of the Pope before the
time of the Nicene Coūcell that either custome of the Church consent of Fathers or the testimony of an Apostolical Church giue the supremacie to the Popes 2ly It is false that hee saith that I make custome of the Church or the testimony of an Apostolicall Church rules whereby to finde out which are true traditions and which are not For first I doe not say that custome of the church obseruing a thing is a proofe that that thing which is so obserued was deliuered frō the Apostles but such a custome whereby a thing hath beene obserued from the beginning So that though the Popes had beene supreame in power and commaund before the Nicene Councell which all the Papists and diuells in hell shall neuer proue yet would it not follow that this their supremacy were by tradition from the Apostles Secondly I doe not make the testimony of an Apostolicall church to be a rule whereby to know true traditions from false as hee is pleased to bely me but I disclaime it in the very place cited by him My words are these The third rule whereby true traditions may bee knowne from false is the constant testimony of the Pastours of an Apostolicall church successiuely deliuered to which some adde the present testimonie of any Apostolicall Church but this none of the Fathers admit neither doe I The Churches of Corinth Ephesus and Rome are Apostolicall Churches whatsoeuer their Pastors haue successiuely deliuered as receiued from the Apostles is vndoubtedly Apostolicall but not euery thing that the Pastours of those Churches that now presently are shall so deliuer seeing they are contrary the one to the other in things of great importance Thirdly whereas he saith I acknowledge vnwritten traditions to bee of equall authority with the Scriptures he is like himselfe For I neuer acknowledge that there is any matter of faith of which nature the Popes supremacy is supposed to be deliuered by bare tradition and not written but say onely if any thing may be proued to haue beene deliuered by liuely voyce by them that wrot the Scriptures there is no reason but it should be of as great authority as if it had beene written Two more allegations there are yet behind in this chapter that concerne mee The first that I say and Protestants generally agree with mee that the Regiment of the West Churches among which this nation is belonged to the Pope of Rome It seemeth this man hath a great desire I should say so and some hope I will say so But I protest as yet I neuer wrote any such thing and therefore here againe hee referreth his Reader to no page of my Booke as in other places but citeth it at large wherein he sheweth more wit then honesty for it is good to put a man to seeke farre for that which can no where be found But what if I had said the Bishop of Rome was Patriarch of the West would that proue an vniuersall power ouer the whole Church or such a kind of absolute authority ouer the Churches of the West as in latter times by vsurpation hee exercised ouer them Surely I thinke not But saith hee Doctour Downame saith before the grant of Phocas the Church of Rome had the superioritie and preeminence ouer all other Churches excepting that of Constantinople and Doctour Field telleth him absolutely that the title of Constantinople was but intruded and vsurped and when the first Nicene Councell gaue such honour to the Romane Church there was not so much as the name of Constantinople This is the last allegation that concerneth mee in this chapter The place that hee citeth is neither to bee found in the first booke of the Church quoted by him nor any where else For I no where euer say that the councell of Nice gaue supreame commaunding authority ouer all the Churches to the Bishop of Rome but only that it confirmed the distinct iurisdictions of the three Patriarches of Rome Alexandria and Antioche And touching the title of Constantinople where of he speaketh if hee meane the title of being vniuersall Bishop it is most true that it was intruded and vsurped as also the like is at this day by the Bishops of Rome which Gregorie their predecessour disclaimed thinking it intollerable that one man should subiect to himselfe all the members of the body of Christ which is his Church But if hee meane the title of being a Patriarch in order the second hauing equall priuiledges with the Bishop of Rome farre be it from me to thinke it was intruded or vsurped or to condemne the acts of the Councels of Constantinople and Chalcedon two of those foure which Saint Gregorie receiued as the foure Gospels as the Romanists doe because they gaue priuiledges to the Bishop of Constantinople equall to those of the Bishop of Rome Nay hereby it appeareth to be true that S. Hierome was wont to say Orbis maior est vrbe For after that Constantinople before named Byzantium was enlarged by Constantine named after his name and made the seate of the Emperours though the very name of it was not at all heard of in the time of the Nicene Councell yet in the second generall Councell holden at Constantinople the Bishop thereof was made a Patriarch and set in order and degree of honour before the other two of Alexandria and Antioche and in the great Councell of Chalcedon where there were more then 600 Bishops assembled he was again confirmed in the dignity of a Patriarch and to haue equall priviledges with the Bishop of Rome Against this decree they that supplyed the place of Leo in the councell resisted and Leo himselfe would by no meanes admit that the Bishops of Alexandria and Antioche claiming from Peter the one because Marke was there placed by him the other for that in person he abode there for a time should be put lower and the Bishop of Constantinople who had not like pretence to sit aboue them Yet the Fathers of the councell not so much respecting the claime from Peter as the greatnesse of the city and thinking it was the greatnesse of the city of Rome during the Emperours presence there that caused the Fathers formerly to giue honour to the Bishop of that city supposed they might now for the same cause giue like honour to the Bishop of Constantinople being become equall in state and magnificence to olde Rome and named new Rome as euery way matching it and howsoeuer the succeeding Bishops of Rome stroue a long while about this matter yet in the end they were forced to yeeld and to take the Bishops of Constantinople for Patriarches in degree of honour set before the other two CHAP. 4. IN this chapter hee endeavoureth to proue by testimonies of Protestants that all bookes receiued for Scripture by the Romane church are canonicall and herein are two things that concerne me The first that the Romane church being the spouse of Christ his true church and pillar of