importuned yet ineffectually he absented himself upon several pretences of Indisposition of Body really of mind of the small Number of Western Bishops of the invalidity of which reason he was sufficiently convinced Whereas the true concealed Reason confessed by Nicephorus was the Stomach of Vigilius that he could not brook to be Eclipsed by the Bright Lustre of the Arch-Bishop of Constantinople being President Claranza the Abbreviator of the Councils Devoted to the Romish Interest asserts the Presidency of Menas in the front of the Second Constantinopolitane Council This is cleared beyond dispute by the Acts of the Council it self wherein is inserted Menas being President 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 will admit no other Construction Baronius himself the Third Witness quoted produced this Record H. T. The Second Constantinopolitane Council defined That our Lord Jesus Christ Crucified in the Flesh is both the True Lord of Glory and one of the Holy Trinity Can. 10. against Peter the Arch-Bishop of Constantinople who held that the whole Trinity was Crucified for us as appears Art 1. It defined One Divine Nature to be in all Three Persons Can. 1. 2. Nativities in Christ c. 2. One only Person to be in Christ though two distinct Natures against Anthimius annd Theodor. Can. 4. 5. It defined against Theodore That Christ was not troubled with Passions in the Mind or Concupiscences of the Flesh Can. 12. W.T. This is a Digression from the Controversie No Heresie condemned in the Second Constantinopolitane Council is Espoused in the Reformed Churches H.T. In this Age the Third Council of Carthage Decreed That the Sacrament of the Altar Mass but by such only as were fasting Can. 29. It approved the whole Catalogue of Canonical Books by name as they are now published in our Bible and approved by the Catholick Church except only Baruch which is not named because an Appendix to Jeremy whose Secretary he was Can. 47. This Council was subscribed by St. Augustine and approved in the Sixth General Synod W.T. The Time of the Sacraments Celebration is no poiâ— Controverted The Romanists dissent touching the Numerical Synod of Carthage wherein the latter Canon produced the Forty Seventh was Established whether in the Third or in the Seventh Council of Carthage Most refer it to the Third yet among them there is a difference touching the Date of it Some fix it in the year 387 others in the year 419 but H. T. degrades it to a lower Station within the Circuit of the Sixth Century and thereby renders its Testimony the less Venerable The Romish Doctors set no grand Estimate on the Dictates of this Council The Twenty Third Canon That Prayer be always directed to God the Father at the Altar consists not with the Judgment or Practice of the Church of Rome The Missal solemnly directs a Devout Address to the Lamb of God The Second Canon That a Bishop of a prime Seat be not called Prince of Priests or Chief Priests c. doth derogate from the Supream Ecclesiastical Preheminence challenged due to the Roman Papacy In the vindicating whereof whilst Gratian Recites this Canon he prevaricates in a Parenthesis The Bishop of Rome excepted This Addition being shuffled in without any Warrant from the Council it self Others upon this occasion depretiate the Council as being Provincial only that could not transmit any Obligation from Africa to Rome As not to Rome so not to Britain neither As it had the force of a Provincial Council only for the Twenty-Third Twenty-Sixth Canons so for the Forty-Seventh also objected by H. T. Not only to poize but to down-weigh the Third Council of Carthage I shall set in the opposite Scale the Synod of Laodicea though not entirely Oecumenical yet not barely diminutively Provincial being a Convention out of divers Provinces of Asia though not more Ancient than the first Council of Nice according to the computation of Baronius yet it is confest of all hands that it preceded in time the Third of Carthage As to the Confirmation of the Third of Carthage by the Sixth General Synod objected the Council of Laodicea sufficiently matches it and abundantly transcends it in the Ratification of the Fourth Oecumenical Council that of Chalcedon and in the Primitive Authentick Code establisht in the same Council that of Carthage being first inserted in the Code by Dionisius Exiguus the Abbot in the year 425. The same Council of Laodicea recounts the same Canonical Books of the Old Testament wherein the sole difference consists which the hurch of England doth That it recites not other Books but that it rejects them not is the light Cavil of Melchior Canus not wanting a Confutation not corresponding with the Phrase or Importance of that Canon St. Cyril of Constantinople lays a main stress upon it believing the Books of Canon-Scripture to be those which the Laodicean Synod hath put down and which the Orthodox Catholick Church of Christ being Illuminated by the Holy Ghost hath confest But because of the presence of St. Austin and the Authority of the Sixth General Synod produced as Abettors to the Third of Carthage I shall not Explode but Interpret the Canon produced by H. T. offering that Genuine Construction of it which best conforms to the Tracts of St. Austin the best Evidence of his Judgment and the best Vindication of the Sixth General Council from an implicit contradiction of it self in the approbation of Two Synods the one of Laodicea the other the Third of Carthage whose Canons seem to clash with each other The Books excepted by the Church of England not listed in the Canonical Catalogues as not in the Church of Laodicea The Church doth read as Jerome saith for Example of Life and Instruction of Manners but yet doth not apply them to Establish any Doctrine Cardinal Cajetane the Most Learned Textuary and Schoolman and Casuist in the Church of Rome of his Age gives the same account of the Sentiment of St. Austin and the Decree of the forementioned Council of Carthage to wit That the Books Excluded may be called Canonical not for the Confirmation of Faith but for the Edification of the Faithful Melchior â—â—nus reprehended Cajetane for making St. Jerome his Rule and derogates from St. Jerome because he did track Josephus the Famous Jewish Antiquary in the Enumeration of the Canonical Books of Scripture It is confest by Driedo That St. Jerom did herein retain the Computation of the Jewish Synagogue not of the Christian Church as he pretends Andradius acknowledges that St. Jerome recited the Opinion of the Jews Their Testimony in an Unanimous Consent is no light fallible Topick for the Canonical Scripture of the Old Testament To them were committed the Oracles of God to wit contained in Sacred Scripture So Cardinal Tolet expounds them The Jews the Faithful Depositories for these Jewels without whom they had not been transmitted to the Gentiles is the acknowledgment of Cornelius à Lapide Upon
this account St. Austin called the Jews a Scriniary Nation carrying the Law and the Prophets and the Library-keeper for Christians A Trust which they performed with singular fidelity which I shall not need assert by the Authority of Philo cited by Eusebius not of Origen and St. Jerom both confest Compurgators of the Jews Integrity by Learned Romanists I shall not need to add St Austins clear Evidences nor to muster up other Witnesses Ancient or Modern since Bellarmine himself was their solemn Advocate to acquit them from any aspersion of Corruption in the preservation of the Records of Sacred Scripture They would rather die a Hundred times saith Bellarmine a Thousand times saith Philo. To add more Force and Lustre to the solemn Authentick Suffrages of the Jews it is observed That neither Christ nor any of his Apostles in the New Testament did cite any passage out of those Books which are in the Old Testament Exploded from being Canonical Scripture by Reformed Churches called Ecclesiastical Books by St. Cyprian Apocryphal by others The Primitive Church never Exposed them for Canonical in the strictest sense viz. as stampt with Divine Inspiration as embraced with a true not equivocal Catholick Allowance for a Doctrinal Infallible Test. The grand proofs of Antiquity besides the Third distrusted Council of Carthage are the sentiments of two Popes Innocentius the First and Gelasius Both which may rationally be suspected for counterfeit Authorities there being no such extant till Three Hundred years after the dissolution of each As for the former the more clear and Venerable Testimony that of Innocentius the First if there were a reality of his Decree alledged there needed no probationary reference of the Forty-Seventh Canon in the Third Council of Carthage so much insisted on to the Judgment of Bonifacius inferiour to Innocentius the First for Age for Repute and Lustre To manifest the Romish Catalogue of Canonical Books of Scripture to be Novel and Unwarrantable I shall conclude this point with the summary Recapitulation of Dr. Cosin late Bishop of Durham after a copious distinct examination of particulars Thus have we hitherto taken an exact and perfect view of what the Catholick Church of God hath delivered concerning the Canon of Divine Scripture in all times and in all places In Judea by the Ancient Hebrews by Christ himself and by his Holy Apostles In Palestine and Syria by Justin Martyr Eusebius St. Jerome and Damascon In the Apostolical Churches of Asia by Melito Polycrates and Onesims In Phrygia Cappadocia Lycaonia and Cyprus by the Council of Laodicea St. Basil Amphilochius Epiphanius In Egypt by Clemens of Alexandria Origen and Athanasius In the Churches of Africa by Julius Tertulian St. Cyprian and St. Austin the Council of Carthage Junitius and Primasius In all the Five Patriarchates by St. Cyril St. John Chrysostome Anastasius St. Gregory Nicephorus and Balsamon In Greece by Dionisius Antiochus Adrianus Lentius Zonaras Philippus and Callistus In Italy by Philastrius Rusinus Cassiodore Commestor Balbus Antoninus Mirandula Cajetine and Pagnine In Spain by Isidore Hugo Cardinalis Paulus Burgensis Tostatus and Ximenius In France by St. Hilary the Divines of Marseils Victorinus of Poicâ—iers Charle Magnes Bishops Agobard Radulphus Honorius Petrus Cluniac Hugo and Richardus of St. Victors at Paris Beleth Petrus Collegn Hervaeus Natalis Faber and Chlictoveus In Germany and the Low Countreys by Rabanus Strabus Hermanus Contract Ado. Râ—pertus the Ordinary and Interlineary gloss upon the Bible the Gloss upon the Canon-Law Lyranus Dionysius Carthusianus Driedo and Ferus And in the Church of England by Venerable Bede Alcuin Giselbent Joh. Sarisburiensis Brito Ocham Thomas Anglicus and Thomas Waldon besides divers others that are not here numbred Thus far Doctor Cosin abbreviates his ample accurate History which as far as my Intelligence extends hath not been assayed to be answered by any Romanist It may with much more facility be reviled menaced than confuted Invectives Anathema's are the proper frequent Apologies for Convicted Errors With what Truth or Candor with what strength of Religion or Reason with what warrant of Piety or Antiquity the Canon of Scripture being there solemnly asserted universally establisht in all Climates in all Ages may in the Sixteenth Century of Christianity be contradicted controuled condemned by an inconsiderable number of Prelates assembled at Trent some thereof being Titular only all Homagers of the Papacy entirely swayed irresistibly influenced from the Conclave at Rome I refer it to all unbyast Intellectuals to all uncorrupt Judgments to determine H.T. In this Agâ— the Milevitane Council defined That whoever denyed Children newly born to be Baptized or says They contract nothing of Original Sin from Adam which may be cleansed by the lavoer of Regeneration c. Anathema W.T. I shall not insist upon the inadvertency in point of Chronology so precisely expressed in this Age. Whereas it is recorded in the several Editions of the Councils and generally by Annalists and Antiquaries Baronius not excepted that this Milevitan Council was held in the beginning of a former Century in the time of Pope Innocentius the First betwixt whom and the Fathers of that Synod there was a Mutual Correspondence of Letters Were the Date exact for the time yet was not the Citation apposite for the matter the Church of England solemnly declares what the Milevitan Council desines H.T. In this Age the Caesar Augustan Council decreed That Virgins who had vowed themselves to God should not be vailed till after 40 years probation W.T. I acknowledge this to be the last Decree of that Council and that it was approved by the suffrages of all the Bishops present all which being computed were but Twelve The Inscription of it is The Caesar Augustan Council of Twelve Bishops So it is set out in the large Editions of the Councils and in the summary Caranza If this Decree be of any grand Estimate and Validity why is it receded from in effect repealed in the Council of Trent that allows Virgins to be Votaries in Vails after Twelve years of Age Only Abbatisses and Prioresses are limited to the Age of Forty years If this be an uncancelled unvoided Decree alledged why is it not observed by the Romanists If it be cancelled and voided by them why is it objected to the Reformed This is no probate of a Succession but a Collusion H.T. In this Age Pope John the First decreed That Mass ought not to be celebrated but in places consecrated to our Lord unless great necessity should enforce it In his Epistle to the Bishops of divers plaâ—es giving this reason because it is written See thou offer not thy Holocausts in every place but in the place which the Lord thy God hath chosen Deut. 12. Anno 522. For as no other but Priests consecrated to our Lord ought to sing Masse and to offer Sacrifices upon our Lerd to our Lord upon the Altar so in no other but consecrated places
apprehensive that it was a check to the Transcendent Honour his Ambition aspired to Both Councils of Constantinople and Chalcedon checking his desire of superlative Grandeur H.T. Pope Antherus Anno 238 being asked by the Bishop of Bettica and Toletum Whether it were lawful for a Bishop to be changed from one City to another Answered affirmatively As Peter Prince of the Apostles was changed from Antioch to Rome Decret 7. q. 1. W.T. There is little certainly touching the exact time and continuance of the Papacy of Antherus Whether One year according to Eusebius or Three according to Volateran or Twelve according to Damasus There is less certainty touching the sincerity of the Decret Epistle produced which many have excepted against as spurious upon several accounts among others for the barbarism of the stile the impertinence incoherence of the conclusion Historical Narratives touching Eusebius and Felix long after his time However were the Epistle genuine the Title Prince of the Apostles is no proof of the preheminence alledged as hath been already manifested St. Austin applyed the same Phrase to St. Paul who was acknowledged by St. Chrysostome to be equal in Dignity with St. Peter 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 HT St. Gregory sayes he knows no Bishop but is subject to the See of Rome Ep. 6. 2. W.T. St. Gregory though his memory be pretious being 600 years after Christ when the Church of Rome declined in piety though improved in power hath the less Authentick veneration This great Prelate being a Party is no competent Witness to assert and vindicate the Papal prerogative As the Witness produced so the Evidence it self is justly liable to exception That he knew none but subject to the See of Rome It must probably be limited to the bounds of his personal Acquaintance or his Patriarchical Jurisdiction That it cannot be more diffusively generally understood appears by his solemn waveing any Paternal or Magisterial power to prescribe to other Patriarks assuming only a fraternal Candour to advise That St. Gregory was not ignorant of a Grandee who was not subject to the See of Rome but challenged a higher station Ecclesiastical than himself is abundantly manifest by his zealous resentment of the Patriark of Constantinople his contemporary in espousing the transcendent Title of Universal Bishop not in excluding all others as the Romish Champions would sophistically evade it but in subjecting them It is his paraphrase of this Title To be Inferiour to no other to be Superior to all St. Gregory amply declared his abhorrence of this Title branding it to be novel prophane superstitious proud presumptuous an effect of Infidelity a tincture of Lucifer's Apostacy a badge of Antichrist H.T. Catholick Professors to the year 100 the Blessed Virgin St. John Baptist St. John Evangelist c. Martha Magdalen St. Paul St. Stephen Timothy Barnabas Terla Dennis Martial Ignatius Clemens W.T. They who are of sober discerning Intellectuals cannot but disgust and nauseate this unsavoury fallacy in obtruding shells without kernels Names without any Allegations These are as insignificant for proof in Divinity as Cyphers without any Figures are for account in Arithmetick unless you design to confute as Magicians to conjure by Names to produce Spells instead of Arguments for Enchantment not Conviction Your Confidence in those venerable Saints and your Interest also seems to be the same with that distracted person at Athens whose deluded Imaginations prompted to him That all the Ships and Commodities in the Haven were his own H.T. The Church was spread in this Age over all those Countreys to which St. Paul wrote his Epistles as also France Spain England c. See Baronius W.T. This is out of the Track of our Controversie That Church which was spread in this Age asserted no other Doctrines but what are owned by the Church of England H.T. Catholick Professors to the year 200 Eustachius Hermes Getulius Policarp Concordius Justin Martyr Eusebius Irenaeus Vincentius Potentianus Sophia Fides Spes Charitas St. Felicity with her Seven Children Lucius King of England c. W.T. The Church of England doth not recede from the Religion of these Saints If you have any Instances to charge us with why do you not produce their Testimonies If you have none why do you recite their Names It is an empty pageantry of Sophistry Ad populum phaleras H.T. The Apostles Canons define That if any Bishop or Priest the Oblation Mass being made shall not communicate he should be excommunicated as giving suspition of him who hath sacrificed That he hath not rightly offered Can. 9. approved in the Sixth General Synod W.T. Some of the Canons set out in a specious disguise the name of the Apostles have been boggled at by eminent Romanists among others by the Two Learned Cardinals the accurate Sticklers for the Papal Interest the one in an Historical Sphere the other in a Controversal Baronius and Bellarmine Though they are solemnly cited peremptorily obtruded upon others by the Modern Romanists yet they are not exactly observed by themselves Mich. Medina acknowledgeth that the present practice doth not retain a tenth part of them in the Church of Rome it self The alteration and corruptions of time are the smooth Apologies for the familiar recesses from these pretended Apostolical Rules They are branded for Apocryphal in the worst Nations as not received in the Catholick Church not in the Primitive Roman as composed by Hereticks in the judgment of Gelasius Bishop of Rome in the latter part of the Fifth Century who excelled most of his Successors in Piety and Literature as also by the famous Isidor Bishop of Hispalis towards the close of the Sixth Century Baronius vainly essayed to evade this latter Testimony being not extant as he alledged in the Edition in his Library since in the Decretal purged and refined by the Order of Pope Gregory XIII It is acknowledged to be transmitted from the Toletan Library to Rome which being a publick Record having so signal a Papal Approbation ought to be more Venerable Authentick for credit and estimate than that private Copy of a Cardinal who himself confest They may be so far deservedly termed Apocryphal as being destitute of Authority to have been entirely established by the Apostles Whereas Gelasius inserted them among Apocryphal Books that are not received Photius the Learned Patriark of Constantinople about the middle of the Ninth Century takes the rise of these Canons to be an extraction out of a tumultuous heap 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in his phrase of Synodical Canons The first recital of any such Canons called Apostolical in Genuine Antiquity the Testimony of Zepherine being notoriously spurious was St. Epiphanius towards the end of the Fourth Century Many Reformed Divines have by weighty Arguments unmaskt these Canons which have passed abroad with a false Passport not to be truly Apostolical Among others the Centurists of Magdeburg have offered these proofs 1. They clash with the