Selected quad for the lemma: cause_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
cause_n	according_a	faith_n	work_n	1,745	5	6.1448	4	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A07809	The grand imposture of the (now) Church of Rome manifested in this one article of the new Romane creede, viz: the holy, catholike, and apostolike Romane Church, mother and mistresse of all other churches, without which there is no saluation. Proued to ba a new, false, sacrilegious, scandalous, schismaticall, hereticall, and blasphemous article (respectiuely) and euerie way damnable. The last chapter containeth a determination of the whole question, concerning the separation of Protestants from the present Church of Rome: whereby may be discerned whether side is to be accounted schismaticall, or may more iustly pleade soules saluation. By the B. of Couentrie & Lichfield.	Morton, Thomas, 1564-1659.	1626 (1626)	STC 18186; ESTC S112909	370,200	394

Professors who are kept hood-winck't in the beleefe of so Imposterous Schismaticall and Damnable an Article by which all the Churches begot by the preaching of Saint Peter and all the other Apostles in the compasse of seauen yeers before the begetting of Rome must be iudged Damned for not beleeuing the Romane Church as you teach to haue beene the Catholike Mother-Church without which Faith there is no saluation Thus much in respect of the Time BEFORE Rome was a Church CHAP. IV. Of the Time about when the Church of Rome had her Foundation Arguing from the Faith of three Apostles Saint Peter S. Paul and S. Iohn and of the Apostolicall Churches in their daies SECT I. THese three Apostles than whom what witnesses can be more competent in this case Wee appeale to your selues The Popes of Rome say you acknowledge both Peter and Paul for their Predecessors because both of them did found and gouerne the Romane Church And as for Saint Iohn his long continuance in the Church Militant will Minister some matter of resolution heerein I. That Saint Peter the conceiued founder of the Church of Rome was not of the now Romane Faith concerning the Article of the Catholike Romane Church SECT 2. WE not to interrupt you by questioning the truth of Saint Peter's residence in that See as Bishop thereof doe punctually inquire whether it entred into his Faith to Beleeue the same Roman Church to be The Catholike Church without which there is no saluation nothing doubting but that you will thinke that He of all others would haue plainely vnfolded thus much whom your Popes assume to haue bene the Founder of that Church together with Saint Paul And because all the pretended Soueraigntie of the Romane Mother-Church is according to your faith deriued from the supreme Father-hood of your Romane Pope and this is as originally descended from the transcendent ordinarie Pastorship of S. Peter ouer all the other Apostles we begin to enquire into the faith of S. Peter Whatsoeuer Prerogatiue Saint Peter might challenge ouer all the other Apostles must appeare either by some promise made singularly to him by Christ or else by some practise of Saint Peter himselfe in the exercise and execution of such his Iurisdiction The due examination of both these would easily cleare the Cause That the Faith of Saint Peter did not conceiue any Monarchicall or supreme Iurisdiction promised vnto himselfe by Christ in the most pretended speech of Christ saying Matth. 16. Vpon this Rocke will I build my Church SECT 3. THis this Scripture in it the word ROCK you haue still obiected as the rocke and fortresse of your now Romane Faith concerning the Article of your Romane Catholike Church because From hence say your Iesuites is proued that Monarchie of S. Peter Insomuch as that whē Luther Caluine and others aduentured to expound this of Christ and Faith in him as the Sonne of God your two grand Cardinals oppose the One his owne passion calling it an Impudent madnesse in Protestants to expound the Rocke to signifie Christ The other obtrudeth the Consent of your owne Schoole saying That by Rocke is meant Peter it is the Common opinion of all Catholikes An Exposition approoued by your Bishop and that not without some insultation saying In this Truth triumpheth as if it were as cleare as the Sunne which Sunne-shine as some call it we Protestants alas our blindnesse cannot discerne but rather iudge that it hath bene and is mistaken by you for Moone-shine through some defect in your faculties or instruments of sight A large Librarie I suppose would scarce containe the bookes that haue bene written vpon this Text whereas the briefe of all that need be said may farre more easily than Homers Iliads be comprized within the shell of a wallnut The Protestants Exposition vpon this Scripture auouched by many excellent Witnesses in the Romane Church yea euen by the Popes themselues SECT 4. OVr Exposition hath euer bene to vnderstand that by ROCK is meant the Confession of Peter when he said of the Godhead of Christ Thou art Christ the Sonne of the liuing God and consequently signified by a metonymie Christ himselfe Where we meane not the Confession of Peter in Concreto as you would haue it vnderstood With relation vnto Peter but as the said Confession of the Godhead of Christ may be the Confession of euery Christian to which truth many of your owne Authors will beare witnesse To which purpose we alleage among your Preachers Ferus saying Vpon this Rocke That is the Confession of Peter and not vpon Peter Among your Glossers the Romane Glosse it selfe saying That is vpon the Article then Confessed concerning Christ and so our Lord Christ built it vpon himselfe Among your Friers Lyranus Vpon the Rock Christ. Among your Iesuites Pererius Christ is the Rock vpon which the Church is builded Among your Bishops Abulensis Not vpon Peter but vpon his Confession and he speaketh absolutely of the Confession it selfe in Abstracto without relation to Peter and giueth this reason because after this Confession thus made Peter himselfe failed in his faith by denying his Lord. Among your Cardinals Hugo and Cusanus By the Rocke is signified Christ. Among your Councels the last Councell of Trent speaking of the Nicene Christian Creed and pointing in the margent at this Text it saith that It is the foundation against which the gates of Hell shall not preuaile Therefore faith in Christ in Abstracto is the foundation for there is in that Creed no mention of Peter Lastly and chiefly among your Popes for now we are clymed vp to the pinnacle of your Temple no fewer than Foure Leo the first Agatho the first Nicolaüs the first and Adrian the first all of them Firsts and therefore more ancient than all others of their names haue as your selues witnesse expounded the Rock to meane the Confession of Saint Peter in acknowledging Christ to be the Sonne of God I. CHALLENGE from the iudgements of the fore-cited Authors IN these former Allegations although most of the Testimonies themselues do sufficiently shew that by ROCK is meant the Confession deliuered by Saint Peter really in it selfe and not personally as it had Relation to him yet for the better clearing of your iudgements you may take these Confirmations I. None will denie but that there was meant in Peters Confession that matter which he confessed but Peter confessed not himselfe but Christ saying Thou art the Sonne of the liuing God Ergo his Confession had Relation to Christ and not to himselfe II. You grant that Saint Peter confessed no more than that which he knew The other Disciples to haue beleeued before he spake because Christs question being generall What say yee He answered as the mouth of the rest True as may fully appeare in our Margent But the Apostles before he spake beleeued Christ confessed and

Rome and Bish●p thereof without subiection whereunto according to your Faith there is no saluation nor can any be saued that doth not beleeue the truth of this Article If therefore those ancient Popes beliefe had bin of a Subiection due vnto them from Emperours in such Causes wherein they by their practise of Humilitie Reuerence and Obedience denyed all such Right then should their Fact haue betrayed their Faith a faithlesnesse which wee you will pardon vs dare not impute vnto those holy ancient Popes In all these Instances you may obserue that wee haue alleaged onely such Popes who were the FIRST of their owne name because we would not be found superfluous yet these First because they must be so much the more aduantagious to warrant our Conclusion to wit that either must your Article of beleeuing such a Necessitie of Subiection damne so many and in your owne iudgements excellently godly and learned Popes of Ancient times or else must their profession condemne your Article of Noueltie and you consequently of Haeresie in beleeuing a Doctrine so Imposterous Scandalous Schismaticall and so manifoldly Blasphemous against so holy Emperours and Popes CHAP. XII Our Seauenth Argument is because this Article The Catholike Romane Church without beliefe whereof there is no Saluation damneth the most learned Saints and Martyrs that are placed in the Romane Calendar for Saints or Martyrs of Christs Church First from Saint Polycarpus SECT 1. POlycarpus Bishop of Smyrna is Registred a Saint in your Roman Calendar and indeede he was an excellent Saint of whom Ecclesiasticall Historie you know giueth so notable a Testimonie as shewing that hee was the Disciple of Iohn the Euangelist who being now brought to Martyrdome by the Proconsull his persecutor and being moued to sweare Heathenishly By Caesar answered saying I AM A CHRISTIAN being then threatned to be cast into the fire said This fire now flameth and will shortly be extinguished but there is an eternall fire prepared for the torment of the wicked which thou artignorant of being burnt in the fire he yeelded a smell as fragrant as the sweetest spices whom when the Iewes and Gentiles heard professing himselfe a Christian they cried out in their wrath saying This is the Doctor of Asia this is the Father of Christians c. Lastly this Polycarpus is hee by whose authoritie Polycrates in the fury of Pope Victor then Excommunicating all the Bishops of Asia that would not celebrate Easter according to the Romane Custome defended and iustified himselfe saying When Polycarpus came to Rome in the dayes of Anicetus Bishop of that See and fell into dispute about the time of Obseruation of the Feast of Easter yet could not Anicetus perswade Polycarpus to alter his Custome which he had kept with Saint Iohn and with other Apostles with whom he himselfe had beene conuersant and in the end both Anicetus and Polycarpus notwithstanding their dispute about these Rites did mutually communicate with each other Thus farre the Ecclesiasticall Storie CHALLENGE BY this it appeareth that Polycarpus and Polycrates were both of the same spirit to maintaine their old Custome of Easter notwithstanding whatsoeuer Opposition of the Bishop of Rome because they both tooke their Resolution from the same ground to wit an Apostolicall Custome of their Church so that Pope Anicetus could no more preuaile with Polycarpus by perswasion for Alteration thereof than Pope Victor could ouercome Polycrates by his Excommunication The difference then is not betweene the Two Asian Bishops Polycarpus and Palycrates for both had the same Resolution the onely difference is betweene the Two Popes viz. Anicetus notwithstanding this Contrarietie will hold Communion with Polycarpus but Victor will needs breake out into Excommunication against Polycrates and was freely reproued for his presumption by godly Fathers of those times You will say this was but a Question of Rites and a matter of small importance be it so But the meaner the matter is they contended about the mainer and more forcible is our Consequence by good Law of Logicke as for example your whole claime is that the Pope is the Bishop of Bishops and Spirituall Monarch in the whole Christian world and ouer Kings and Monarchs You know that in them Impetrare est Imperare their Couetings and desires are Commands If therefore Saint Polycarpus would not yeeld his consent at the much instancing of Pope Anicetus in as wee may so call it a trifle in respect it plainly argueth that hee ought the same Pope no Canonicall Obedience by Law of Discipline much lesse by Doctrine of Faith if any of the now new Romane Articles had beene imposed vpon him seeing that for all the perswasion which the Pope could vse he kept his owne Conclusion still Nor is it altogether nothing which you may obserue that when both Iewes and Heathen cryed out vpon him calling him in despight The Father of Christians as though there were no Bishop in Christianitie as Monarch aboue him he did not vtter one word in behalfe of the Pope and his Supreme Dignity aboue All other Bishops which doubtlesse hee ought to haue acknowledged if that this kinde of Appellation were as you teach so proper to the Pope as to be an Argument of his Primacie aboue all other Christian Bishops II. Saint Cyprian was Exoommunicated by Stephen Bishop of Rome for not beleeuing the Necessitie of Vnion with him SECT 2. SAint Cyprian is also one of the Saints inrolled in your Romane Calendar vnder the title of Confessor and Martyr This witnesse you doe as vehemently Obiect for defence of your former Romane Article as wee doe to impugne and confute it Your Obiection answered It is an horrour to any man of iudgement to see the violence which is offered by your Doctors vnto Saint Cyprian by racking his sentences and inforcing him to say in defence of Papall Primacy that which he neuer ment nor yet dreamed of For that which hee spake of his owne onely Authority against Schismatikes who troubled his Iurisdiction That soundeth in the preoccupation of your iudgements as though it concerned onely the Pope of Rome and where hee maketh One Vniuersall Bishopricke consisting of All Bishops equally one with another without any respect to Rome more than to any other Church That also ringeth in your eares the onely Monarchy of the Bishop of Rome All which your futilily is exactly confuted by an Author who will surely satisfie any confcionable Reader But Saint Cyprian writing to Pope Cornelius doubtlesse a godly Bishop among other allurements hee inserteth this Perfidiousnesse saith he cannot haue accesse to Rome the chaire of Peter Ergo saith your Cardinall Cyprian affirmed that neither the Pope nor the Church of Rome could possibly erre No Father of the Primitiue times is more vrged by you for proofe of this Conclusion than Saint Cyprian no Epistle more insisted vpon than this now cited no words more inculcated than these which we haue alleaged and

out of the Church and therefore he assembled a Prouinciall Synod for the restoring of the name of Chrysostome into the publike Tables of the Church We should haue expected in a Case concerning your Papall Monarchy that Cyrill that was thus moued by a Vision of Chrysostome to repent the not-restoring of his name should haue much more beene moued by his certaine knowledge of the displeasure of your Supreme Monarch the Pope of Rome who did nothing but flash and thunder out Excommunications against all Opposites and that the Restitution of Chrysostomes name should haue beene done simply by Submission to the same Popes Decree and not onely according to Cyrill his determination by the consent of his owne Prouinciall Councell or that the Cause of alteration should haue beene if Nicephorus may deserue any credit onely by vertue of a Vision in a dreame The Eleuenth and for wee should bee two tedious to pursue your Cardinalls vnconscionablenesse in each one the last that we shall insist in is Acacius Bishop of Constantinople He is brought in to witnesse in his Epistle to Pope Simplicius that the same Pope had The Care of all Churches as if the word Vniuersall Care of all Churches did conclude an Vniuersall power and Monarchy ouer them all The Vanity of which Consequence hath beene discouered by diuers Instances in Others to whom the like Vniuersall Care of all Churches was applied as vnto Saint Paul in the dayes of Peter to Athanasius in the dayes of Pope Iulius and to the Bishops of France in the dayes of Pope Eleutherius in whom you will sweare wee know there was nothing lesse intended than a Monarchicall Popedome But that this sense should be collected out of the words of Acacius it exceedeth all limits of modesty For what one Bishop can you name of those times that euer opposed himself more against the Iurisdiction of the Pope of Rome than did this Patriarch of Constantinople Acacius This you may easily try by the manifold out-cries of Baronius vpon him for his defence of Peter Mogge by him established in the Bishopricke of Alexandria against the will of the same Pope Simplicius calling him a Franticke man violently opposite vnto the Bishop of Rome insomuch that the Pope did Excommunicate him but hee shewed his contempt of that Censure sufficiently by liuing and dying therein Was not this Witnesse worthily selected by your Cardinall trow you who in that hee saith doth nothing aduantage Papall claime and in that which he publikely worketh and acteth doth quite ouerthrow it Wee may not let passe the publike Sanction and Decree of the Emperour Leo whereby hee authorized and ratified the great dignitie of the Patriarchship of Constantinople and the Patriarch thereof For therein he calleth Acacius A most blessed and religious Patriarke the Church of Constantinople hee nameth The Mother of all Christians that professe the Orthodox Religion the Priuileges of that Church hee requireth and decreeth to be as ample as euer they at any time had beene before or in the time of his Empire and to continue in the same latitude and extent perpetually to all future ages This is the effect of this Emperors Decree and can this accord with your Romish Monarchie Your Baronius the chiefe Herald that we can read of for the blazoning and magnifying of it will say No for he fretteth at the very heart in reading of it and therefore vpon his owne sole coniecture will haue his Reader thinke that the frame of this Sanction was stiled by Acacius himselfe that called the Church of Constantinople The Mother of all Christians professing the Orthodox Faith and that therefore these were not saith he the words of that godly Emperor So he As though the Church of Constantinople so large in its own Ecclesiasticall Dioces and by reason of the Emperiall Seat in that Citie so potent in the discharge of Patriarchall Function might not be called the Mother of All Orthodoxall Churches although not as Rome falsely and ridiculously stileth her selfe as if she were the Procreating Mother of all Churches since Christ and so for many Churches Christian were planted before Rome a Mother before she was borne a Childe yet a Nursing Mother might Constantinople be then iustly named so farre as her care and endeauor sought and laboured the Conseruation of all others in pietie and Religion But not to stand vpon the Stile looke vpon the Matter it selfe and then will this Godly Emperour proue as Theodosius and other Predecessours before him a Patron of the Priuiledges of the Church of Constantinople Equall with the Prerogatiues of ROME according to the Decree of the Generall Councell of Chalcedon notwithstanding the much fuming and fretting of your Popes thereat to this day And who can blame your later and Monarchicall Popes who know right well that Monarchie brooketh no Aequalitie Caesar if hee will be Monarch must be either Solus or Nullus onely One or None at all CHALLENGE IF the importunitie of the Cause had not exacted of vs so large a discourse we might haue spared thus much paines which wee haue bestowed in this disquisition for the discouery of the Vanitie of your Romish Claime by the Testimony of the Ancient Fathers in the Greeke Church wherein haue bin laid open so many falsehoods of your Proctor as that hee may be iustly suspected to haue pleaded your Romane Cause Strenuè sanè feruently enough but according to the Prouerbe Graecâ fide Your Obiections from the Sentences of Latine Fathers for your Papall Defence and the Falshood and Vanitie thereof discouered First from Saint Cyprian SECT 8. THE First Father whom your Cardinall produceth for proofe that the Church of ROME and Bishop thereof is sole Monarke ouer all other Churches and Bishops is Cyprian wee say Cyprian that Pole-starre of true Bishops and admirable Martyr of Christ whom wee haue proued to haue beene by his writings as an Ecclesiasticall Hanniball at the gates of Rome crying defiance to the presumed Monarchie thereof And sooner shall your Cardinall pull the Club of Hercules out of his hands than wrest away from Cyprians writings the Patronage which Protestants thence haue for defence of this present Cause The Obiection of your Cardinall is onely a racking of certaine phrases of Cyprian as namely One Church one Root one Priest in Christ his stead one Chaire one Bishopricke one Bishop c. Euery one of these Ones hee expoundeth to point out in speciall the Proper Church of Rome and not to be either vsed Generally for what soeuer Church or Bishop else nor yet particularly for Cyprian himselfe or for the Church of Carthage whereof he was Bishop This is the maine issue of this Cause concerning the Testimonies of Cyprian Two Formes of Answering lye directly before vs First is that Cyprian may be expounded by his owne Words Secondly that his Words may be interpreted by his Workes One Chaire saith hee beginning at Peter

Church of Rome about the time when it was first erected That Saint Iohn his Faith did not conceiue the same Article of Subiection to the Catholike Romane Church c. SECT 15. NOt long after the same Time of the foundation of the Church of Rome did Saint Iohn write his Booke of Reuelation wherein he reuealeth that the Citie of Rome is Babylon according to the generall consent of your owne Iesuites and other Diuines directed not onely by the iudgement of Ancient Fathers but especially and inuincibly by Saint Iohn in the clearenesse of that Scripture So iust Cause had the most iudicious of Kings Christian IAMES our late Soueraigne of famous memorie to auerre saying This place viz. Reuel chapp 17. 18. doth clearely and vndeniably declare that Rome is or shall be the seat of that Antichrist For no Papist now denieth that by Babylon here Rome is directly meant c. Next that it signifieth Rome not onely as it was Ethnicall Rome in the dayes of heathenish Emperours by which mist many of your Doctors a long time gulled and deceiued their Disciples lest your Papall Rome might haue come within their ken but also noteth Rome as it shall be in the later age of the World the Seat of Antichrist And not thus onely but that the same Citie shall be burnt with fire A Truth so euident that your Rhemists who otherwise of all others are most bleare-eyd at the sight of any light that may any way make against Rome doe thus farre grant as to say The great Antichrist shall haue his seat at Rome as it may well be thought but others thinke Ierusalem rather shall be his seat But your Iesuites Ribera and Viega both of ●hem Spanish Doctors and publike Professors doe confidently auerre that They dare hold him for A MOST NOTABLE FOOLE that shall denie it as being a matter without all doubt So say they nor so onely but also proue it by conuincing Arguments 1 Because that the Text saith expresly of this Babylon that It shall be burned 2 They that shall then liue shall see the smoke of her fire and lament her destruction 3 Because the spirit warneth all them that are in her to depart Come out of her my people that yee receiue not of her plagues But there were then n● Faithfull in the heathenish Rome or if any were yet are they commanded to Come out of her for feare of being consumed with fire And lastly they adde to the euidence of the text the Oracles of Sibyl as it were a torch vnto the Sunne viz. that The seauen-hild Rome shall be destroyed with fire Thus farre your owne Authors not once questioned for this doctrine and although professing it in the fierie Region of the Spanish Inquisition yet not so much as an heire of their beards scorched therefore yea these their bookes are publikely allowed by the iudgement of besides others the Prouinciall of the Iesuites Marry yet the foresaid Authors lest they might hereby seeme to yeeld any matter of insultation to vs Heretikes as they call vs or hereby preiudice the Church of Rome they doe againe and againe admonish their Readers that this Prophecie although it point out the destruction of the Citie of Rome for her Apostacie from the faith by her Idolatrie yet aimeth it not at the Church of Rome or the Bishop thereof because the Apostacie shall be say they from the faith of that Church and Obedience to that Bishop Who though he abandon Rome and Rome it selfe be destroid yet is hee still Bishop of Rome So they I. CHALLENGE GOD himselfe by his owne example in his first dayes worke taught vs to diuide the light from the darknesse Thus then That the people of the Citie of Rome in the later age of the world must generally depart from the faith that whatsoeuer faithfull remaining must Depart out of the Citie that the Citie her selfe for her wickednesse and Idolatry must be consumed by fire seemeth now at length euen to our Romish Aduersaries themselues a truth as cleare as the day and that iustly as hath bin shewed But that to free their Church and Pope of Rome from the preiudice of defection and reuolt from the faith wee must forsooth beleeue that The Pope when all Christian people are departed out of the Citie and the Citie it selfe vtterly extinct shall still remaine the Bishop of Rome this we take to be as darke as darknesse it selfe We shall therefore call for a Torch for so you call Baronius his writings to discouer this darknesse He sheweth that The Church of Rome was constituted first by Peter at Rome where saith he his Pontificall seat or chaire was made of wood Then hee sheweth the ancient custome of Erecting Chaires or Seats for Bishops in their Churches placing them aloft and adorning them with ornaments where they did sit c. This was the originall of Episcopall Chaires and Seats so that Patriarks and Bishops had their denominations from the Churches wherein they tooke possession and where they had their first Chaires or seats Hence came the distinct Appellations of the Patriarcal Church or seat of Antioch the Seat of Constantinople and this now specified as they say the Pontificall Seat of Rome Albeit therefore that it cannot be denied that the Bishop of Rome being excluded from his Church and Seat is notwithstanding to b● accounted the Bishop of that people and place yet when hee is so departed from them that they are also departed from him so as there shall be no people in Rome professing his faith nor yet that Seat which is the Citie of Rome extant at all but wholly consumed with fire then to be called the Bishop of the Church or Seat of Rome is but a man in the moone and Titulus sine re namely as it is written of Hierusalem How is that faithfull Citie become a whore The Citie is called faithfull not as being now faithfull but onely because it had bin so Saint Paul in his Inscriptions to diuers Churches taketh their denominations from the places where the faithfull Professors were thus To the Churches of Galatia To the Church of God in Corinth and elsewhere to shew that the Church rather doth consist in the Professors then in the places and omitting the name of Church he doth mention onely the Persons To the Saints at Colosse and faithfull brethren in Christ To all the Saints in Christ at Philippi and also for Rome To them at Rome beloued of God called Saints And must wee notwithstanding conceit of a Bishop of a Church of Rome wherein there is neither people professing nor place of profession As if they should call one the Shepheard of Vtopia where there is neither Sheepe in the Countrey nor Countrey for Sheepe except 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 should be the Shepheard and they speak the language of Babel where None shall heare Nothing of Nobody at all

those dayes was not esteemed to be The Catholike or Vniuersall Pope not The Catholike Bishop of Bishops his Iurisdiction not to haue any Catholike or Vniuersall Right for Appeales his Iudgement not to be a Catholike Rule of Faith his Church not to be The Catholike Mother-Church his Excommunication not to be a Separation from the properly called Catholike Church and much lesse a Catholike and Vniuersall Separation from the state of life So damnable is your Article of The Catholike Roman Mother-Church without subiection whereunto as you say there is no Saluation whereby with one breath you damne not onely Cyprian that glorious Saint of Christ but also all other his Associates and Colleagues Bishops in Africa Numidia and Mauritania of whom some were Martyrs some Confessors all Professors of the true Faith of Christ against the persecuting Infidels of those times It would nothing now auaile you to obiect that Cyprian in his Contention against Pope Stephen was in an Error in the Question of Rebaptization because euery error is not eradicant to roote out or cut off a Member from the Bodie of the Church Catholike else what shall we think of Pope Stephen himselfe who was in an error in the other Question concerning the vsurpation of the Right of Appeales to Rome which not onely Cyprian in his Councell of Carthage but Augustine also in the Councell of Africke resolutely withstood But what need many words Cyprian say you was alwaies held a Catholike Wee adde that if this Obiection were of force it would much more fortifie the Cause of Protestants For if Cyprian being Excommunicated by the Pope for an error was notwithstanding still held for a Catholike as hath beene confessed and hath euer since bene Registred for a Saint then doubtlesse Protestants stand much more secure who are excommunicate for withstanding not onely the grosse Idolatry but also as many Heresies of that Church of Rome as she hath new Articles of Faith among which this to wit The Catholike Roman Church without Vnion whereunto there is no Saluation 〈◊〉 not be held the least being as you see so Imposterous Schismaticall and Execrable as euery Instance yet giuen doth manifestly conuince Our third Instance in the Churches of Africke in the dayes of Saint Augustine in two Councels fully preiudiciall to this now Article viz. The Romane Catholike Church without which there is no Saluation SECT 8. THE first Councell was that of Mileuis Anno 402. concluding against the pretended Prerogatiue of Appeales to Rome This Case is handled at large afterwards The summe of all is This Councell wherein Saint Augustine was present consisted of threescore Bishops which had beene esteemed alwaies Orthodoxe in the Catholike Church albeit that their conclusion of denying any Right of Appeales from Africke to the Church of Rome which Iurisdiction of Appeales is held to be a principall part of the Article viz. The Romane Catholike Church in the Church of Rome at this day Which one Article consisting of foure points of Necessitie first Necessity of Vnion with the Church of Rome secondly Necessity of Subiection vnto it thirdly Necessity of Beleefe of both the former fourthly Necessitie of Saluation in them All is now rent in pieces by that one Prohibition of that Councell which denying any Right of Appeales from Africke to Rome did thereby deny the pretended Catholike Subiection to the Romane Chaire Secondly decreeing Excommunication against those African Priests that should dare to Appeale to Rome thereby they deny an absolute Necessity of Vnion with Rome Thirdly this Excommunication being to be extended against them that should Thinke it necessary to Appeale to Rome they thereby deny Necessity of Beliefe of the Prerogatiue of Rome And lastly condemning this Beliefe among themselues they thereby deny it to be an Vniuersall Right necessary to be belieued of all Others All this is euidently prooued in the place alleaged The second Instance in the Churches of Africke in the daies of Saint Augustine was the African Councell by name against the Church of Rome in the Case of Appeales concerning which for methods sake we are to lay open first the Occasion of Opposition betweene the Churches of Africke and Rome secondly the Discussion thereof thirdly the Separation of the Church of Afrike from Rome fourthly the honorable estimation had of the African Bishops as of the Saints of God notwithstanding their not acknowledging of Subiection to the Romane Church I. The Occasion of the Opposition by Saint Augustine and the Africans against the Iurisdiction of the Church of Rome in the supreme Case of Appeales SECT 9. COnsult you with your owne Chronologers in the body of the Councels of old and you shall find that the Case standeth thus One Apiarius a leud Priest and as you know of a scandalous flagitious and abhominable life being Excommunicated by the Bishops of Africke fleeth to Rome and as it were taketh Sanctuary there by Appealing to Pope Boniface then Bishop of that Sea The Pope sought by his owne Authority to haue this infamous Priest restored againe auouching for the ground of his Authority the Canon of the Councell of Nice which as he pretended declared the power due to the Bishop of Rome to take hold of all Appeales made vnto the Pope from all other Christian Churches and Prouinces and to order matters according to his owne wisedome II. The Discussion of the Cause SECT 10. THE Bishops of Africke and among them Saint Augustine hauing read the Popes Claime of Appeale by virtue as was alleaged of a Canon of the Councell of Nice fell first to demurre with themselues suspecting that the Pope had suggested a false pretence and therefore sought first to satisfie themselues by sight of the Copies of the Councell of Nice before they would returne the Pope any full answer and after diligent search into all the ancient Copies which they could finde they yeelded this Answer to the Bishop of Rome We haue read say they manie Copies of the Canons of Nice both Greeke and Latine and yet finde we among them no such Canon for Appeales to Rome as you alleage In this case of doubt it was agreed on both sides that messengers should be sent vnto Cyrill Patriarch of Alexandria and vnto Atticus Patriarch of Constantinople to the end that vpon search of their Records they might bee certified of the Truth of this matter These two Patriarchs send them faithfull Transcripts which they themselues did auouch to be The most true and authenticall Copies wherein that Canon which Three Popes to wit Boniface Zozimus and Caelestinus successiuely had alleaged as their onely euidence for their right of Appeales could not be found nor any syllable therof Vpon this Answer of those graue Patriarchs these Africane Bishops in number 217 perceiuing the falshood of the Popes Allegation and finding that no such Canon appeared in those ancient Copies of the Councell of Nice which could aduantage that their pretence of Appeales to

that euery mans Cause be heard where the crime is committed And which words your Cardinall thought good to pretermit euery Pastor hath committed vnto him a portion of the flocke of Christ which he is to gouern wherof he is to giue an account vnto God And doubtlesse they who are vnder our gouernment ought not to gad and wander nor rashly and cunningly to make a difference betweene Bishops that are at Vnity and Concord but they should pleade their cause there where both accusers and witnesses may be had except some few desperate and naughty fellowes thinke the Authority of the Bishops of Africke to be of lesse power or might who haue iudged and by the grauity of their iudgement haue condemned men whose consciences are fettered in the cords of their owne offences their cause is already knowne and tried and iudgement is giuen already vnto them nor can it agree with the censure of Bishops to deserue the reprehension of lightnesse and inconstancy So he Than which what could be said more to the strangling of your pretended Right of Appeales to Rome Your Cardinals Answeres are many and various it will be the most expedite way for vs to follow him step by step 1. Cyprian saith he albeit he did vnwillingly endure yet did he not altogether abrogate Appeales True if you meane simply the Abrogation of All Appeales within Africke but if you vnderstand that he abrogated not All Appeales beyond the Seas and consequently to Rome then is your Answer most false Secondly your Cardinall instanceth in an Example of One Appealing from Spaine vnto Rome many hundred miles distant yet Cyprian writing hereof saith he said Non tàm quàm the Pope was not so much too blame who was deceiued by the Appellant as was the Appellant himselfe that deceiued him As though this were not a full Reprehension of both If one say that he is not so fellonious that receiueth stolne goods as the man that did steale them your Non tàm quàm doth distinguish them in the degree of more or lesse fellony but maketh no difference in their nature and kind for both are felonies So then the Pope was lesse blameable Ergo he was blameable but the other more because the Appellant would needs Appeale in the consciousnes of his Crime but the Pope entertained it in a presumption of the mans integrity and therefore Both blameable because as Cyprian argueth against equity and iustice Thirdly but The decree which Cyprian speaketh of saith your Cardinall was against the First iudgement which is to be made in the place where the crime is committed but he forbiddeth not Second iudgements else-where by way of Appeale Than which what can be more false I had almost said faithlesse for the Cardinall himselfe knoweth that Cyprian vseth this as a Reason against their flying to Rome for a second Iudgment euen Because saith Cyprian they had bene already iudged by me and my Bishops by whom they were condemned Fourthly but Cyprian saith he argueth from this Decree as it implyeth most notorious and manifest crimes What did your Cardinall meane by this his Ipse dixit to infascinate his Reader and to depriue him both of reason and sense For ordinary reason teacheth in points of Law first that A man must not distinguish where the Law doth not distinguish although then it happened that these Crimes of the Appellant were indeed notorious yet in the Decree it selfe there is no such Distinction Secondly it is a vaine thing to thinke that any Crime can appeare so Notorious to a Iudge who is many hundred miles off but one report will encounter another and the Appellant will still make faire pretence of innocency for himselfe vntill the matter be tryed And that we may Appeale to common sense in reading of the Canon and Decree it selfe it is Generall thus It is iust that euery mans Cause be heard there where the crime is committed It seemeth then that your Cardinall dreamed of a Cause implyed in this Decree which could not be any mans Cause else he would haue considered that where Euery mans Cause is expressed No cause of any man could be excepted Fifthly but If Cyprian saith he should here deny Appeales then should he take away all Appeales not onely to Rome but euen to euery place else which Answer how vnworthy it is the iudgement of any man of learning you will easily perceiue Cyprian as your Pamelius noteth was the Chiefe Primate in Africke who held a Councell of his Bishops to Excommunicate Fortunatus and to depose him the Councell fore-seeing the factiousnesse of Fortunatus that he would seeke to Rome to trouble the Church of Christ by working distraction betweene the Churches of Rome and Carthage made the former Decree expressing the iniquity of any Appeale to Remote places where the Cause could not be iustly tryed Heereby the said Councell tooke not away All Appeales within Africke for it was then lawfull for a Clerke to Appeale from his Bishop to an Arch-Bishop from a Metropolitan to a Councell and behold here was a Councell of Bishops which put the Period to all further Appeales expressely forbidding Appealing to places so remote as Rome was which none in Africke could come vnto without Transmigration ouer Sea Your Cardinal's Answer would teach a man to argue thus There lyeth an Appeale from th● Bishop of Chester to the Arch-Bishop of York and from the Court of York to the Delegates but the State of England denieth Transalpinari Appeales from England ouer the Alpes to Rome Ergò the State of England abrogateth all manner of Appeales whether from Chester to York or from York to the Delegates Moreouer Cyprian speaking of those Schismaticall Appellants Except saith he some few desperate and wretched fellowes thinke the Authority of the Bishop of Africke lesse Insinuating as we may truly iustly and according to their Intention interpret it than the Authority of the Bishop of Rome thereby impairing the power of the Bishop of Rome in respect of the iudgement of a Nationall Councell No saith your Cardinall but the words lesse Authority haue Relation to the Cause and not to the Bishop of Rome as signifying that the Bishops of Africke had authority sufficient to iudge that Cause Here againe he feigneth Cyprian to haue thought those few desperate and wretched Appellants to haue beene so absurd as to thinke they could not be iudged by a Prouinciall Councell whereunto they were subiect An absurdity which none i● Christianitie could truely imagine Besides the words Lesse Authoritie of them that haue iudged haue Relation to him whom those Fellowes desired to re-iudge their Cause namely the Pope therefore it was as much as if Cyprian had said Least those few naughty fellowes may thinke the Bishops of Africke haue lesse Authority than is that which they Appeale vnto and their Appeale was to the Bishop of Rome So apparant it is that Cyprian thus twitting those Few desperate