Bellarmine fain to dive for it deposing Anthimus Bishop of Constantinople But this Instance being scanned will also prove slender and lame The case was this Anthimus having deserted his charge at Trabisonde did creep into the See of Constantinople a course then held irregular and repugnant to the Canons and withall he had imbibed the Eutychian heresie Yet for his support he had wound himself into the favour of the Empress Theodora a countenancer of the Eutychian Sect. Things standing thus Pope Agapetus as an Agent from Rome to crave succour against the Goths pressing and menacing the City did arrive at Constantinople Whereupon the Empress desired of him to salute and consort with Anthimus But he by petitions of the Monks c. understanding how things stood did refuse to doe so except Anthimus would return to his own charge and profess the Orthodox doctrine Thereupon the Emperour joined with him to extrude Anthimus from Constantinople and to substitute Menas He say the Monks in their Libel of request to the Emperour did justly thrust this Anthimus from the Episcopal Chair of this City your Grace affording aid and force both to the Catholick faith and the divine Canons The act of Agapetus was according to his share in the common Interest to declare Anthimus in his judgment uncapable of Catholick communion and of Episcopal Function by reason of his heretical Opinions and his transgression of Ecclesiastical Orders which moved Justinian effectually to depose and extrude him You say they fulfilling that which he justly and canonicaly did judge and by your general edict confirming it and forbidding that hereafter such things should be attempted And Agapetus himself saith that it was done by the Apostolical authority and the assistence of the most faithfull Emperours The which proceeding was completed by Decree of the Synod under Menas and that again was confirmed by the Imperial Sanction Whence Evagrius reporting the story doth say concerning Anthimus and Theodosius of Alexandria that because they did cross the Emperour's commands and did not admit the decrees of Chalcedon they both were expelled from their Sees It seemeth by some passages in the Acts that before Agapetus his intermedling the Monks and Orthodox Bishops had condemned and rejected Anthimus according to the common Interest which they assert all Christians to have in regard to the common Faith As for the substitution of Menas it was performed by the choice and suffrage of the Emperour the Clergy Nobles and People conspiring the Pope onely which another Bishop might have done ordaining or consecrating him Then saith Liberatus the Pope by the Emperour's favour did ordain Menas Bishop consecrating him with his hand And Agapetus did glory in this as being the first Ordination made of an Eastern Bishop by the hands of a Pope And this said the Pope we conceive doth add to his dignity because the Eastern Church never since the time of the Apostle Peter did receive any Bishop besides him by the imposition of hands of those who sate in this our Chair If we compare the proceedings of Agapetus against Anthimus with those of Theophilus against St. Chrysostome they are except the cause and qualities of persons in all main respects and circumstances so like that the same reason which would ground a pretence of Universal Jurisdiction to one would infer the same to the other Baronius alledgeth Acacius Bishop of Constantinople deposed by Pope Felix III. But Pope Gelasius asserteth that any Bishop might in execution of the Canons have disclaimed Acacius as a favourer of Hereticks And Acacius did not onely refuse to submit to the Pope's Jurisdiction but slighted it And the Pope's act was but an attempt not effectual for Acacius dyed in possession of his See VIII If Popes were Sovereigns of the Church they could effectually whenever they should see it just and fit absolve restore any Bishop excommunicated from the Church or deposed from his Office by Ecclesiastical Censure for Relief of the Oppressed or Clemency to the Distressed are noble Flowers in every Sovereign Crown Wherefore the Pope doth assume this power and reserveth it to himself as his special Prerogative 'T is says Baronius a privilege of the Church of Rome onely that a Bishop deposed by a Synod may without another Synod of a greater number be restor'd by the Pope and Pope Gelasius I. says That the See of Saint Peter the Apostle has a right of loosing whatever the Sentences of other Bishops have bound That the Apostolick See according to frequent ancient custome had a power no Synod preceding to absolve those whom a Synod had unjustly condemned and without a Council to condemn those who deserv'd it It was an old pretence of Popes that Bishops were not condemned except the Pope did consent renouncing communion with them So Pope Vigilius saith of St. Chrysostome and Flavianus that although they were violently excluded yet were they not look'd upon as condemned because the Bishops of Rome always inviolably kept communion with them And before him Pope Gelasius saith that the Pope by not consenting to the condemnation of Athanasius Chrysostome Flavianus did absolve them But such a power of old did not belong to him For 1. There is not extant any ancient Canon of the Church nor apparent footsteps of custome allowing such a power to him 2. Decrees of Synods Provincial in the former times and Diocesan afterwards were inconsistent with or repugnant to such a power for judgments concerning Episcopal Causes were deemed irrevocable and appointed to be so by Decrees of divers Synods and consequently no power was reserved to the Pope of thwarting them by Restitution of any Bishop condemned in them 3. The Apostolical Canons which at least serve to prove or illustrate ancient Custome and divers Synodical Decrees did prohibit entertaining communion with any person condemned or rejected by canonical Judgment without exception or reservation of power of infringing or relaxing that Prohibition and Pope Gelasius himself says That he who had polluted himself by holding communion with a condemned person did partake of his condemnation 4. Whence in elder times Popes were opposed and checked when they offered to receive Bishops rejected in particular Synods So St. Cyprian declared the Restitution of Basilides by Pope Stephanus to be null So the Fathers of the Antiochene Synod did reprehend Pope Julius for admitting Athanasius and Marcellus to communion or avowing them for Bishops after their condemnation by Synods And the Oriental Bishops of Sardica did excommunicate the same Pope for communicating with the same persons Which Instances do shew that the Pope was not then undoubtedly or according to common opinion endowed with such a power But whereas they do alledge some Instances of such a power I shall premise some general Considerations apt to clear the business and then apply answers to the particular Allegations 1. Restitution commonly doth signifie
of Ecclesiastical Affairs concerning the publick state of the Church the defence of the common Faith the maintenance of order peace and unity jointly to belong unto the whole body of Pastours according to that of St. Cyprian to Pope Stephanus himself Therefore most dear brother the body of Priests is copious being joined together by the glue of mutual concord and the bond of unity that if any of our College shall attempt to make heresie and to tear or waste the flock of Christ the rest may come to succour and like usefull and mercifull shepherds may recollect the sheep into the flock And again Which thing it concerns us to look after and redress most dear brother who bearing in mind the divine clemency and holding the scales of the Church-government c. So even the Roman Clergy did acknowledge For we ought all of us to watch for the body of the whole Church whose members are digested through several Provinces Like the Trinity whose power is one and undivided there is one Priesthood among divers Bishops So in the Apostolical Constitutions the Apostles tell the Bishops that an universal Episcopacy is entrusted to them So the Council of Carthage with St. Cyprian Clear and manifest is the mind and meaning of our Lord Jesus Christ sending his Apostles and affording to them alone the power given him of the Father in whose room we succeeded governing the Church of God with the same power Christ our Lord and our God going to the Father commended his Spouse to us A very ancient Instance of which administration is the proceeding against Paulus Samosatenus when the Pastours of the Churches some from one place some from another did assemble together against him as a pest of Christ's flock all of them hastning to Antioch where they deposed exterminated and deprived him of communion warning the whole Church to reject and disavow him Seeing the Pastoral charge is common to us all who bear the Episcopal Office although thou fittest in a higher and more eminent place Therefore for this cause the Holy Church is committed to you and to us that we may labour for all and not be slack in yielding help and assistence to all Hence Saint Chrysostome said of Eustathius his Bishop For he was well instructed and taught by the grace of the Holy Spirit that a President or Bishop of a Church ought not to take care of that Church alone wherewith he is entrusted by the Holy Ghost but also of the whole Church dispersed throughout the world They consequently did repute Schism or Ecclesiastical Rebellion to consist in a departure from the consent of the body of the Priesthood as St. Cyprian in divers places doth express it in his Epistles to Pope Stephen and others They deem all Bishops to partake of the Apostolical Authority according to that of St. Basil to St. Ambrose The Lord himself hath translated thee from the Judges of the Earth unto the Prelacy of the Apostles They took themselves all to be Vicars of Christ and Judges in his stead according to that of St. Cyprian For Heresies are sprung up and Schisms grown from no other ground nor root but this because God's Priest was not obeyed nor was there one Priest or Bishop for a time in the Church nor a Judge thought on for a time to supply the room of Christ. Where that by Church is meant any particular Church and by Priest a Bishop of such Church any one not bewitched with prejudice by the tenour of Saint Cyprian's discourse will easily discern They conceive that our Saviour did promise to Saint Peter the Keys in behalf of the Church and as representing it They suppose the combination of Bishops in peaceable consent and mutual aid to be the Rock on which the Church is built They alledge the Authority granted to Saint Peter as a ground of claim to the same in all Bishops jointly and in each Bishop singly according to his rata pars or allotted proportion Which may easily be understood by the words of our Lord when he says to blessed Peter whose place the Bishops supply Whatsoever c. I have the sword of Constantine in my hands you of Peter said our great King Edgar They do therefore in this regard take themselves all to be Successours of Saint Peter that his power is derived to them all and that the whole Episcopal Order is the Chair by the Lord's voice founded on Saint Peter thus St. Cyprian in divers places before touched discourseth and thus Firmilian from the Keys granted to Saint Peter inferreth disputing against the Roman Bishop Therefore saith he the power of remitting sins is given to the Apostles and to the Churches which they being sent from Christ did constitute and to the Bishops which do succeed them by vicarious ordination 4. The Bishops of any other Churches founded by the Apostles in the Fathers style are Successours of the Apostles in the same sense and to the same intent as the Bishop of Rome is by them accounted Successour of Saint Peter the Apostolical power which in extent was universal being in some sense in reference to them not quite extinct but transmitted by succession yet the Bishops of Apostolical Churches did never claim nor allowedly exercise Apostolical Jurisdiction beyond their own precincts according to those words of St. Hierome Tell me what doth Palestine belong to the Bishop of Alexandria This sheweth the inconsequence of their discourse for in like manner the Pope might be Successour to Saint Peter and Saint Peter's universal power might be successive yet the Pope have no singular claim thereto beyond the bounds of his particular Church 5. So again for instance Saint James whom the Roman Church in her Liturgies doth avow for an Apostle was Bishop of Jerusalem more unquestionably than Saint Peter was Bishop of Rome Jerusalem also was the root and the mother of all Churches as the Fathers of the Second General Synod in their Letter to Pope Damasus himself and the Occidental Bishops did call it forgetting the singular pretence of Rome to that Title Yet the Bishops of Jerusalem Successours of Saint James did not thence claim I know not what kind of extensive Jurisdiction yea notwithstanding their succession they did not so much as obtain a metropolitical Authority in Palestine which did belong to Caesarea having been assigned thereto in conformity to the Civil Government and was by special provision reserved thereto in the Synod of Nice whence St. Jerome did not stick to affirm that the Bishop of Jerusalem was subject to the Bishop of Caesarea for speaking to John Bishop of Jerusalem who for compurgation of himself from errours imputed to him had appealed to Theophilus Bishop of Alexandria he saith Thou hadst rather cause molestation to ears possessed than render honour to thy Metropolitan that is to the Bishop of Caesarea By which
bulk whereas so long ago when it was but in its budd and stripling age it was observed of it by a very honest Historian that the Roman Episcopacy had long since advanced into a high degree of power beyond the Priesthood 3. This pretence doth thwart the Scripture by destroying that brotherly co-ordination and equality which our Lord did appoint among the Bishops and chief Pastours of his Church He did as we before shewed prohibit all his Apostles to assume any domination or authoritative Superiority over one another the which command together with others concerning the Pastoral function we may well suppose to reach their Successours so did St. Hierome suppose collecting thence that all Bishops by original Institution are equals or that no one by our Lord's order may challenge Superiority over another Whereever saith he a Bishop is whether at Rome or at Eugubium at Constantinople or at Rhegium at Alexandria or at Thanis he is of the same worth and of the same Priesthood the power of wealth or lowness of poverty do not make a Bishop higher or lower but all are Successours of the Apostles where doth not he plainly deny the Bishop of Eugubium to be inferiour to him of Rome as being no less a Successour of the Apostles than he doth he not say these words in way of proof that the authority of the Roman Bishop or Church was of no validity against the practice of other Bishops and Churches upon occasion of Deacons there taking upon them more than in other places as Cardinal Deacons do now which excludeth such distinctions as Scholastical fancies have devised to shift off his Testimony the which he uttered simply never dreaming of such distinctions This consequence St. Gregory did suppose when he therefore did condemn the Title of Vniversal Bishop because it did imply an affectation of Superiority and dignity in one Bishop above others of abasing the name of other Bishops in comparison of his own of extolling himself above the rest of Priests c. This the ancient Popes did remember when usually in their compellation of any Bishop they did style them Brethren Collegues fellow-Ministers fellow-Bishops not intending thereby complement or mockery but to declare their sense of the original equality among Bishops notwithstanding some differences in Order and Privileges which their See had obtained And that this was the general sense of the Fathers we shall afterward shew Hence when it was objected to them that they did affect Superiority they did sometimes disclaim it so did Pope Gelasius I. a zealous man for the honour of his See 4. This pretence doth thwart the Holy Scripture not onely by trampling down the dignity of Bishops which according to St. Gregory doth imply great pride and presumption but as really infringing the Rights granted by our Lord to his Church and the Governours of it For to each Church our Lord hath imposed a Duty and imparted a Power of maintaining divine Truth and so approving it self a pillar and support of truth of deciding Controversies possible and proper to be decided with due temper ultimately without farther resort for that he who will not obey or acquiesce in its Decision is to be as a heathen or publican Of censuring and rejecting Offenders in Doctrine or Demeanour Those within saith Saint Paul to the Church of Corinth do not ye judge But them that are without God judgeth wherefore put away from among your selves that wicked person Of preserving Order and Decency according to that Rule prescribed to the Church of Corinth let all things be done decently and in order Of promoting edification Of deciding Causes All which Rights and Privileges the Roman Bishop doth bereave the Churches of snatching them to himself pretending that he is the Sovereign Doctour Judge Regulatour of all Churches over-ruling and voiding all that is done by them according to his pleasure The Scripture hath enjoyned and empowered all Bishops to feed guide and rule their respective Churches as the Ministers Stewards Ambassadours Angels of God for the perfecting of the Saints for the work of the Ministery for the edification of the Body of Christ To them God hath committed the care of their People so that they are responsible for their Souls All which Rights and Privileges of the Episcopal Office the Pope hath invaded doth obstruct cramp frustrate destroy pretending without any warrant that their Authority is derived from him forcing them to exercise it no otherwise than as his Subjects and according to his pleasure But of this Point more afterward 5. This pretence doth thwart the Scripture by robbing all Christian People of the Liberties and Rights with which by that Divine Charter they are endowed and which they are obliged to preserve inviolate Saint Paul enjoyneth the Galatians to stand fast in the liberty wherewith Christ hath made us free and not to be entangled again with the yoke of bondage there is therefore a liberty which we must maintain and a power to which we must not submit and against whom can we have more ground to doe this than against him who pretendeth to dogmatize to define Points of Faith to impose Doctrines new and strange enough on our Consciences under a peremptory obligation of yielding assent to them to prescribe Laws as Divine and necessary to be observed without warrant as those Dogmatists did against whom Saint Paul biddeth us to maintain our Liberty so that if he should declare vertue to be vice and white to be black we must believe him some of his Adherents have said consistently enough with his pretences for Against such tyrannical Invaders we are bound to maintain our Liberty according to that Precept of Saint Paul the which if a Pope might well alledge against the proceedings of a General Synod with much more reason may we thereby justify our non-submission to one man's exorbitant domination This is a Power which the Apostles themselves did not challenge to themselves for We saith Saint Paul have not dominion over your faith but are helpers of your joy They did not pretend that any Christian should absolutely believe them in cases wherein they had not Revelation general or special from God in such cases referring their Opinion to the judgment and discretion of Christians They say Though we or an Angel from heaven preach any other Gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you let him be accursed If any man c. which Precept with many others of the like purport injoyning us to examine the truth to adhere unto the received Doctrine to decline heterodoxies and novelties doth signify nothing if every Christian hath not allowed to him a judgment of discretion but is tyed blindly to follow the dictates of another St. Austin I am sure did think this liberty such that without betraying it no man could be obliged to believe any thing not grounded upon Canonical Authority for
voluntary deference the conduct of affairs is wont to be allowed none presuming to stand in competition with them every one rather yielding place to them than to their equals The same conduct of things upon the same accounts and by reason of their possession doth continue fast in their hands so long as they do retain such advantages Then from a custom of managing things doth spring up an opinion or a pretence of right thereto they are apt to assume a title and others ready to allow it Men naturally do admire such things and so are apt to defer extraordinary respect to the possessours of them Advantages of wealth and might are not onely instruments to attain but incentives spurring men to affect the getting authority over their poorer and weaker neighbours for men will not be content with bare eminency but will desire real power and sway so as to obtain their wills over others and not to be crossed by any Pope Leo had no reason to wonder that Anatolius Bishop of Constantinople was not content with dry honour Men are apt to think their honour is precarious and standeth on an uncertain foundation if it be not supported with real power and therefore they will not be satisfied to let their advantages lie dead which are so easily improveable to power by inveigling some and scaring or constraining others to bear their yoke and they are able to benefit and gratifie some and thereby render them willing to submit those afterwards become serviceable to bring others under who are disaffected or refractory So the Bishops of Constantinople and of Jerusalem at first had onely privileges of honour but afterward they soon hooked in power Now the Roman Bishops from the beginning were eminent above all other Bishops in all kinds of advantages He was seated in the Imperial City the place of general resort thence obvious to all eyes and his name sounding in all mouths He had a most numerous opulent splendid flock and Clergy He had the greatest income from liberal oblations to dispose of He lived in greatest state and lustre He had oportunities to assist others in their business and to relieve them in their wants He necessarily thence did obtain great respect and veneration Hence in all common affairs the conduct and presidence were naturally devolved on him without contest No wonder then that after some time the Pope did arrive to some pitch of authority over poor Christians especially those who lay nearest to him improving his eminency into power and his pastoral charge into a kind of Empire according to that observation of Socrates that long before his time the Roman Episcopacy had advanced it self beyond the Priesthood into a Potentacy And the like he observeth to have happened in the Church of Alexandria upon the like grounds or by imitation of such a pattern 2. Any small power is apt to grow and spread it self a spark of it soon will expand it self into a flame it is very like to the grain of mustard seed which indeed is the least of all seeds but when it is grown it is the greatest among herbs and becometh a tree so that the birds of the air come and lodge in the branches thereof Encroaching as Plutarch saith is an innate disease of Potentacies Whoever hath any pittance of it will be improving his stock having tasted the sweetness of having his will which extremely gratifieth the nature of man he will not be satisfied without having more he will take himself to be straitned by any bounds and will strive to free himself of all restraints Any pretence will serve to ground attempts of enlarging power and none will be balked For Power is bold enterprizing restless it always watcheth or often findeth never passeth opportunities of dilating it self Every accession doth beget farther advantages to amplifie it as its stock groweth so it with ease proportionably doth encrease being ever out at use As it groweth so its strength to maintain and enlarge it self doth grow it gaining more wealth more friends more associates and dependents None can resist or obstruct its growth without danger and manifold disadvantages for as its adherents are deemed loyal and faithfull so its opposers are branded with the imputations of rebellion contumacy disloyalty and not succeeding in their resistence they will be undone None ever doth enterprise more than to stop its careir so that it seldom loseth by opposition and it ever gaineth by composition If it be checked at one time or in one place it will like the Sea at another season in another point break in If it is sometimes overthrown in a Battel it is seldom conquered in the War It is always on its march forward and gaineth ground for one encroachment doth countenance the next and is alledged for a precedent to authorize or justifie it It seldom moveth backward for every Successour thinketh he may justly enjoy what his Predecessour did gain or which is transmitted into his possession so that there hardly can ever be any restitution of ill-gotten power Thus have many absolute Kingdoms grown the first Chief was a Leader of Volunteers from thence he grew to be a Prince with stated Privileges after he became a Monarch invested with high Prerogatives in fine he creepeth forward to be a Grand Seigniour usurping absolute dominion so did Augustus Caesar first onely assume the style of Prince of the Senate demeaning himself modestly as such but he soon drew to himself the administration of all things and upon that foundation his Successours very suddenly did erect a boundless power If you trace the foot-steps of most Empires to the beginning you may perceive the like So the Pope when he had got a little power continually did swell it The puny pretence of the succeeding Saint Peter and the name of the Apostolical See the precedence by reason of the Imperial City the honorary Privileges allowed him by Councils the Authority deferred to him by one Synod of revising the Causes of Bishops the countenance given to him in repressing some Heresies he did improve to constitute himself Sovereign Lord of the Church 3. Spiritual power especially is of a growing nature and more especially that which deriveth from Divine Institution for it hath a great awe upon the hearts and consciences of men which engageth them to a firm and constant adherence It useth the most subtile arms which it hath always ready which needeth no time or cost to furnish which cannot be extorted from its hand so that it can never be disarmed And its weapons make strong impression because it proposeth the most effectual encouragements to its abettours and discouragements to its adversaries alluring the one with promises of God's favour and eternal happiness terrifying the other with menaces of vengeance from heaven and endless misery the which do ever quell religious superstitious weak people and often daunt men of knowledge and courage It is presumed unchangeable
that you would command a General Synod to be celebrated within Italy to which request although back'd with the desire of the Western Emperour Theodosius would by no means consent for as Leontius reporteth when Valentinian being importuned by Pope Leo did write to Theodosius II. that he would procure another Synod to be held for examining whether Dioscorus had judged rightly or no Theodosius did write back to him saying I shall make no other Synod The same Pope did again of the same Emperour petition for a Synod to examin the cause of Anatolius Bishop of Constantinople Let your clemency saith he be pleased to grant an Vniversal Council to be held in Italy as with me the Synod which for this cause did meet at Rome doth request Thus did that Pope continually harp upon one string to get a General Synod to be celebrated at his own doors but never could obtain his purpose the Emperour being stiff in refusing it The same Pope with better success as to the thing though not as to the place did request of the Emperour Marcian a Synod for he concurring in opinion that it was needfull did saith Liberatus at the petition of the Pope and the Roman Princes command a General Council to be congregated at Nice Now if the Pope had himself a known right to convocate Synods what needed all this application or this supplication to the Emperours would not the Pope have endeavoured to exercise his Authority would he not have clamoured or whined at any interruption thereof would so spiritfull and sturdy a Pope as Leo have begged that to be done by another which he had authority to doe of himself when he did apprehend so great necessity for it and was so much provoked thereto would he not at least have remonstrated against the injury therein done to him by Theodosius All that this daring Pope could adventure at was to wind in a pretence that the Synod of Chalcedon was congregated by his consent for it hath been the pleasure of whom I pray that a General Council should be congregated both by the command of the Christian Princes and with the consent of the Apostolick See saith he very cunningly yet not so cunningly but that any other Bishop might have said the same for his See This power indeed upon many just accounts peculiarly doth belong to Princes It suteth to the dignity of their state it appertaineth to their duty they are most able to discharge it They are the Guardians of publick tranquillity which constantly is endangered which commonly is violated by dissensions in religious matters whence we must pray for them that by their care we may lead a quiet and peaceable life in all godliness and honesty they alone can authorize their Subjects to take such Journeys or to meet in such Assemblies they alone can well cause the expences needfull for holding Synods to de exacted and defrayed they alone can protect them can maintain Order and Peace in them can procure Observance to their Determinations they alone have a Sword to constrain resty and refractory persons and in no cases are men so apt to be such as in debates about these matters to convene to confer peaceably to agree to observe what is settled They as nursing Fathers of the Church as Ministers of God's Kingdom as encouragers of good works as the Stewards of God entrusted with the great Talents of Power Dignity Wealth enabling them to serve God are obliged to cause Bishops in such cases to perform their duty according to the example of good Princes in Holy Scripture who are commended for proceedings of this nature for so King Josias did convocate a General Synod of the Church in his time then saith the Text the King sent and gathered together all the Elders of Judah and Jerusalem In this Synod he presided standing in his place and making a covenant before the Lord its Resolutions he confirmed causing all that were present in Jerusalem and Benjamin to stand to that Covenant and he took care of their Execution making all present in Israel effectually to serve the Lord their God So also did King Hezekiah gather the Priests and Levites together did warn did command them to doe their duty and reform things in the Church My Sons said he be not now negligent for the Lord hath chosen you to stand before him to serve him and that ye should minister unto him and burn incense Beside them none other can have reasonable pretence to such a Power or can well be deemed able to manage it so great an Authority cannot be exercised upon the Subjects of any Prince without eclipsing his Majesty infringing his natural right and endangering his State He that at his pleasure can summon all Christian Pastours and make them trot about and hold them when he will is in effect Emperour or in a fair way to make himself so It is not fit therefore that any other person should have all the Governours of the Church at his beck so as to draw them from remote places whither he pleaseth to put them on long and chargeable Journeys to detain them from their charge to set them on what deliberations and debates he thinketh good It is not reasonable that any one without the leave of Princes should authorize so great conventions of men having such interest and sway it is not safe that any one should have such dependencies on him by which he may be tempted to clash with Princes and withdraw his Subjects from their due obedience Neither can any success be well expected from the use of such Authority by any who hath not Power by which he can force Bishops to convene to resolve to obey whence we see that Constantine who was a Prince so gentle and friendly to the Clergy was put to threaten those Bishops who would absent themselves from the Synod indicted by him at Tyre and Theodosius also a very mild and religious Prince did the like in his summoning the two Ephesine Synods We likewise may observe that when the Pope and Western Bishops in a Synodical Epistle did invite those of the East to a great Synod indicted at Rome these did refuse the journey alledging that it would be to no good purpose so also when the Western Bishops did call those of the East for resolving the difference between Flavianus and Paulinus both pretending to be Bishops of Antioch what effect had their summons and so will they always or often be ready to say who are called at the pleasure of those who want force to constrain them so that such Authority in unarmed hands and God keep Arms out of a Pope's hands will be onely a source of discords Either the Pope is a Subject as he was in the first times and then it were too great a presumption for him to claim such a power over his fellow-Subjects in prejudice to his Sovereign nor indeed did he presume so far untill he
the Pope with him in his actings He thereby might pretend to the first place of sitting and subscribing which kind of advantages it appeareth that some Bishops had in Synods by the virtue of the like substitution in the place of others but he thence could have no authoritative Presidency for that the Pope himself could by no delegation impart having himself no title thereto warranted by any Law or by any Precedent that depended on the Emperour's will or on the Election of the Fathers or on a tacit regard to personal eminence in comparison to others present This distinction Evagrius seemeth to intimate when he saith that the divine Cyril did administer it and the place of Celestine where a word seemeth to have fallen out and Zonaras more plainly doth express saying that Cyril Pope of Alexandria did preside over the Orthodox Fathers and also did hold the place of Celestine and Photius Cyril did supply the seat and the person of Celestine If any latter Historions do confound these things we are not obliged to comply with their ignorance or mistake Indeed as to Presidency there we may observe that sometime it is attributed to Cyril alone as being the first Bishop present and bearing a great sway sometimes to Pope Celestine as being in representation present and being the first Bishop of the Church in Order sometimes to both Cyril and Celestine sometimes to Cyril and Memnon Bishop of Ephesus who as being very active and having great influence on the proceedings are styled the Presidents and Rulers of the Synod The which sheweth that Presidency was a lax thing and no peculiarity in right or usage annexed to the Pope nor did altogether depend on his grant or representation to which Memnon had no title The Pope himself and his Legats are divers times in the Acts said 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to sit together with the Bishops which confidence doth not well comport with his special right to Presidency Yea it is observable that the Oriental Bishops which with John of Antioch did oppose the Cyrillian Party in that Synod did charge on Cyril that he as if he lived in a time of Anarchy did proceed to all irregularity and that snatching to himself the Authority which neither was given him by the Canons nor by the Emperours Sanctions did rush on to all kind of disorder and unlawfulness whence it is evident that in the judgment of those Bishops among whom were divers worthy and excellent persons the Pope had no right to any authoritative Presidency This word Presidency indeed hath an ambiguity apt to impose on those who do not observe it for it may be taken for a privilege of Precedence or for Authority to govern things the first kind of presidence the Pope without dispute when present at a Synod would have had among the Bishops as being the Bishop of the first See as the Sixth Synod calleth him and the first of Priests as Justinian called him and in his absence his Legates might take up his Chair for in General Synods each See had its Chair assigned to it according to its order of dignity by custom And according to this sense the Patriarchs and chief Metropolitans are also often singly or conjunctly said to preside as sitting in one of the first Chairs But the other kind of Presidency was as those Bishops in their complaint against Cyril do imply and as we shall See in practice disposed by the Emperour as he saw reason although usually it was conferred on him who among those present in dignity did precede the rest this is that authority 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which the Syrian Bishops complained against Cyril for assuming to himself without the Emperour's warrant and whereof we have a notable Instance in the next General Synod at Ephesus For In the Second Ephesine Synod which in design was a General Synod lawfully convened for a publick cause of determining truth and settling peace in the Church but which by some miscarriages proved abortive although the Pope had his Legates there yet by the Emperour's order Dioscorus Bishop of Alexandria did preside We said Theodosius in his Epistle to him do also commit to thy godliness the authority and the preeminency of all things appertaining to the Synod now assembled and in the Synod of Chalcedon it is said of him that he had received the authority of all affairs and of judgment and Pope Leo I. in this Epistle to the Emperour saith that Dioscorus did challenge to himself the principal place insinuating a complaint that Dioscorus should be preferred before him although not openly contesting his right The Emperour had indeed some reason not to commit the Presidency to Pope Leo because he was looked upon as prejudiced in the cause having declared in favour of Flavianus against Eutyches whence Eutyches declined his Legate's interessing in the judgment of his cause saying they were suspected to him because they were entertained by Flavianus with great regard And Dioscorus being Bishop of the next See was taken for more indifferent and otherwise a person however afterward it proved of much integrity and moderation He did saith the Emperour shine by the grace of God both in honesty of life and orthodoxy of faith and Theodoret himself before those differences arose doth say of him that he was by common fame reported a man adorned with many other kinds of vertue and that especially he was celebrated for his moderation of mind It is true that the Legates of Pope Leo did take in dudgeon this preferment of Dioscorus and if we may give credence to Liberatus would not sit down in the Synod because the presession was not given to their Holy See and afterwards in the Synod of Chalcedon the Pope's Legate Paschasinus together with other Bishops did complain that Dioscorus was preferred before the Bishop of Constantinople but notwithstanding those ineffectual mutinies the Emperour's will did take place and according thereto Dioscorus had although he did not use it so wisely and justly as he should the chief managery of things It is to be observed that to other chief Bishops the Presidency in that Synod is also ascribed by virtue of the Emperour's appointment Let the most reverend Bishops say the Imperial Commissaries in the Synod of Chalcedon to whom the authoritative management of affairs was by the Royal Sovereignty granted speak why the Epistle of the most Holy Archbishop Leo was not read and You say they again to whom the power of judging was given and of Dioscorus Juvenalis Bishop of Jerusalem Thalassius of Caesarea Eusebius of Ancyra Eustathius of Beristus Basilius of Selencia it is by the same Commissioners said that they had recieved the authority and did govern the Synod which was then and Elpidius the Emperour's Agent in the Ephesine Synod it self did expresly style them Presidents and Pope Leo himself calleth them Presidents and Primates of the Synod Whence it
Pope was grievously mistaken in the case whence St. Basil much blameth him for his proceeding therein 4. They cite the Restitution of Eustathius Bishop of Sebastia by Pope Liberius out of an Epistle of St. Basil where he says What the most blessed Bishop Liberius proposed to him and to what he consented we know not onely that he brought a Letter to be restored and upon shewing it to the Synod at Tyana was restored to his See I answer That Restitution was onely from an invalid Deposition by a Synod of Arians at Melitine importing onely an acknowledgment of him upon approbation of his Faith professed by him at Rome the which had such influence to the satisfaction of the Diocesan Synod at Tyana that he was restored Although indeed the Romans were abused by him he not being sound in Faith for He now saith Saint Basil doth destroy that faith for which he was received 5. They adjoin that Theodoret was restored by Pope Leo I. for in the Acts of the Synod of Chalcedon it is said that be did receive his place from the Bishop of Rome I answer The act of Leo did consist in an approbation of the Faith which Theodoret did profess to hold and a reception of him to communion thereupon which he might well do seeing the ground of Theodoret's being disclaimed was a misprision that he having opposed Cyril's Writings judged Orthodox did err in Faith consenting with Nestorius Theodoret's state before the Second Ephesine Synod is thus represented in the words of the Emperour Theodoret Bishop of Cyrus whom we have before commanded to mind onely his own Church we charge not to come to the Holy Synod before the whole Synod being met it shall seem good to them that he come and hear his part in it He was not perfectly deposed as others were who had others substituted in their places He was deposed by the Ephesine Synod The Pope was indeed ready enough to assume the Patronage of so very learned and worthy a man who in so very suppliant and respectfull a way had redressed to him for succour for whom doth not courtship mollifie And the majority of the Synod being inflamed against Dioscorus and the Eutychian Party was ready enough to allow what the Pope did in favour of him Yet a good part of the Synod the Bishops of Egypt of Palestine of Illyricum notwithstanding the Pope's Restitution that is his approbation in order thereto did stickle against his admission into the Synod crying out have pity on us the faith is destroyed the Canons proscribe this man cast him out cast out Nestorius his Master So that the Imperial Agents were fain to compromise the business permitting him to sit in the Synod as one whose case was dependent but not in the notion of one absolutely restored Theodoret's presence shall prejudice no man each one's right of impleading being reserved both to you and him He therefore was not entirely restored till upon a clear and satisfactory profession of his Faith he was acquitted by the judgment of the Synod The effectual Restitution of him proceeded from the Emperour who repealed the proceedings against him as himself doth acknowledge All these things says he has the most just Emperour evacuated to these things he premised the redressing my injuries and the Imperial Judges in the Synod of Chalcedon join the Emperour in the Restitution Let the most reverend Theodoret enter and bear his part in the Synod since the most holy Archbishop Leo and sacred Emperour have restored his Bishoprick to him Hence it may appear that the Pope's Restitution of Theodoretus was onely opinionative dough-baked incomplete so that it is but a slimme advantage which their pretence can receive from it IX It belongeth to Sovereigns to receive Appeals from all lower Judicatures for the final determination of Causes so that no part of his Subjects can obstruct resort to him or prohibit his revision of any Judgment This Power therefore the Pope doth most stifly assert to himself At the Synod of Florence this was the first and great Branch of Authority which he did demand of the Greeks explicitely to avow he will said his three Cardinals to the Emperour have all the Privileges of his Church and that Appeals be made to him When Pope Alexander III. was advised not to receive an Appeal in Becket's Case he replied in that profane allusion This is my glory which I will not give to another He hath been wont to encourage all People even upon the slightest occasions iter arripere as the phrase is obvious in their Canon Law to run with all haste to his Audience Concerning Appeals for the smallest causes we would have you hold that the same deference is to be given them for how slight a matter soever they be made as if they were for a greater See if you please in Gratian's Decree Caus. 2. quaest 6. where many Papal Decrees most indeed drawn out of the spurious Epistles of ancient Popes but ratified by their Successours and obtaining for current Law are made for Appeals to the See of Rome It was indeed one of the most ancient encroachments and that which did serve most to introduce the rest inferring hence a title to an universal Jurisdiction They are the Canons says Pope Nicholas I. which will that all Appeals of the whole Church he brought to the examination of this See and have decreed that no appeal be made from it and that thus she judge of the whole Church but her self goes to be judged by none other and the same Pope in another of his Epistles says The holy statutes and venerable decrees have committed the causes of Bishops as being weighty matters to be determined by us As the Synod has appointed and usage requires let greater and difficult cases be always referred to the Apostolick See says Pope Pelagius II. They are the canons which will have the appeals of the whole Church tryed by this See saith Pope Gelasius I. But this power is upon various accounts unreasonable grievous and vexatious to the Church as hath been deemed and upon divers occasions declared by the ancient Fathers and grave persons in all times upon accounts not onely blaming the horrible abuse of Appeals but implying the great mischiefs inseparably adherent to them The Synod of Basil thus excellently declared concerning them Hitherto many abuses of intolerable vexations have prevailed whilst many have too often been called and cited from the most remote parts to the court of Rome and that sometime for small and trifling matters and with charges and trouble to be so wearied that they sometime think it their best way to recede from their right or buy off their trouble with great loss rather than be at the cost of suing in so remote a Countrey Saint Bernard complaineth of the mischiefs of Appeals in his times in these words How long will you
be deaf to the complaints of the whole World or make as if you were so why sleep you when will the consideration of so great confusion and abuse in appeals awake in you they are made without right or equity without due order and against custome Neither place nor manner nor time nor cause nor person are considered they are every where made lightly and for the most part unjustly with much more passionate language to the same purpose But in the Primitive Church the Pope had no such power 1. Whereas in the first times many causes and differences did arise wherein they who were condemned and worsted would readily have resorted thither where they might have hoped for remedy if Rome had been such a place of refuge it would have been very famous for it and we should find History full of such examples whereas it is very silent about them 2. The most ancient Customs and Canons of the Church are flatly repugnant to such a power for they did order causes finally to be decided in each Province So the Synod of Nice did Decree as the African Fathers did alledge in defence of their refusal to allow appeals to the Pope The Nicene decrees said they most evidently did commit both Clergymen of inferiour degrees and Bishops to their Metropolitans So Theòph in his Epistle I suppose you are not ignorant what the Canons of the Nicene Council command ordaining that a Bishop should judge no cause out of his own district 3. Afterward when the Diocesan administration was introduced the last resort was decreed to the Synods of them or to the Primates in them all other appeals being prohibited as dishonourable to the Bishops of the Diocese reproaching the Canons and subverting Ecclesiastical Order To which Canon the Emperour Justinian referred For it is decreed by our Ancestours that against the Sentence of these Prelates there should be no Appeal So Constantius told Pope Liberius that those things which had a form of Judgment past on them could not be rescinded This was the practice at least in the Eastern parts of the Church in the times of Justinian as is evident by the Constitutions extant in the Code and in the Novels 4. In derogation to this pretence divers Provincial Synods expresly did prohibit all Appeals from their decisions That of Milevis Let them appeal onely to African Councils or the Primates of Provinces and he who shall think of appealing beyond Sea let him be admitted into communion by none in Africk For if the Nicene Council took this care of the inferiour Clergy how much more did they intend it should relate to Bishops also 5. All persons were forbidden to entertain communion with Bishops condemned by any one Church which is inconsistent with their being allowed relief at Rome 6. This is evident in the case of Marcion by the assertion of the Roman Church at that time 7. When the Pope hath offered to receive Appeals or to meddle in cases before decided he hath found opposition and reproof Thus when Felicissimus and Fortunatus having been censured and rejected from communion in Africk did apply themselves to Pope Cornelius with supplication to be admitted by him Saint Cyprian maintaineth that fact to be irregular and unjust and not to be countenanced for divers reasons Likewise when Basilides and Martialis being for their crimes deposed in Spain had recourse to Pope Stephanus for Restitution the Clergy and People there had no regard to the judgment of the Pope the which their resolution Saint Cyprian did commend and encourage When Athanasius Marcellus Paulus c. having been condemned by Synods did apply themselves for relief to Pope Julius the Oriental Bishops did highly tax this course as irregular disclaiming any power in him to receive them or meddle in their cause Nor could Pope Julius by any Law or Instance disprove their plea Nor did the Pope assert to himself any peculiar authority to revise the Cause or otherwise justifie his proceeding than by right common to all Bishops of vindicating Right and Innocence which were oppressed and of asserting the Faith for which they were persecuted Indeed at first the Oriental Bishops were contented to refer the cause to Pope Julius as Arbitratour which signifieth that he had no ordinary right but afterward either fearing their Cause or his Prejudice they started and stood to the canonicalness of the former decision The contest of the African Church with Pope Celestine in the Cause of Apiarius is famous and the Reasons which they assign for repelling that Appeal are very notable and peremptory 8. Divers of the Fathers alledge like reasons against Appeals Saint Cyprian alledgeth these 1. Because there was an Ecclesiastical Law against them 2. Because they contain iniquity as prejudicing the right of each Bishop granted by Christ in governing his flock 3. Because the Clergy and People should not be engaged to run gadding about 4. Because Causes might better be decided there where witnesses of fact might easily be had 5. Because there is every where a competent authority equal to any that might be had otherwhere 6. Because it did derogate from the gravity of Bishops to alter their Censure Pope Liberius desired of Constantius that the Judgment of Athanasius might be made in Alexandria for such reasons because there the accused the accusers and their defender were St. Chrysostome's Argument against Theophilus meddling in his case may be set against Rome as well as Alexandria 9. St. Austin in matter of appeal or rather of reference to candid Arbitration more proper for Ecclesiastical causes doth conjoin other Apostolical Churches with that of Rome For the business says he was not about Priests and Deacons or the inferiour Clergy but the Collegues Bishops who may reserve their cause entire for the judgment of their Collegues especially those of the Apostolical Churches He would not have said so if he had apprehended that the Pope had a peculiar right of revising Judgments 10. Pope Damasus or rather Pope Siricius doth affirm himself incompetent to judge in a case which had been afore determined by the Synod of Capua but says he since the Synod of Capua has thus determined it we perceive we cannot judge it 11. Anciently there were no Appeals properly so called or jurisdictional in the Church they were as Socrates telleth us introduced by Cyril of Hierusalem who first did appeal to a greater Judicature against Ecclesiastical rule and custome This is an Argument that about that time a little before the great Synod of Constantinople greater Judicatories or Diocesan Synods were established whenas before Provincial Synods were the last resorts 12. Upon many occasions Appeals were not made to the Pope as in all likelihood they would have been if it had been supposed that a power of receiving them did belong to him Paulus Samosatenus did appeal to the Emperour The Donatists did not appeal to the Pope
of Rome under Pope Silvester of Rome under Sixtus III. but they are palpably spurious and the learned among them confess it But antiquity was not of this mind for it did suppose him no less obnoxious to judgment and correction than other Bishops if he should notoriously deviate from the faith or violate canonical discipline The Canons generally do oblige Bishops without exception to duty and upon defailance to correction why is not he excepted if to be excused or exempted It was not questioned of old but that a Pope in case he should notoriously depart from the faith or notably infringe discipline might be excommunicated the attempting it upon divers occasions do shew their opinion although it often had not effect because the cause was not just and plausible the truth and equity of the case appearing to be on the Pope's side St. Isidore Pelusiota denieth of any Bishop's office that it is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 an uncontrollable government In the times of Polycrates and Pope Victor the whole Eastern Church did forbear communion with the Pope Firmilian told Pope Stephanus that by conceiting he might excommunicate all other Bishops he had excommunicated himself The Fathers of the Antiochene Synod did threaten to excommunicate and depose Pope Julius They did promise to Julius peace and communion if he did admit the deposition of those whom they had expelled and the constitution of those whom they had ordained but if he did resist their decrees they denounced the contrary The Oriental Bishops at Sardica did excommunicate and depose him St. Hilary did anathematize Pope Liberius upon his defection to the Arians Dioscorus did attempt to excommunicate Pope Leo. Acacius of Constantinople renounced the communion of Pope Felix Timotheus Aelurus cursed the Pope The African Bishops did Synodically excommunicate Pope Vigilius Pope Anastasius was rejected by his own Clergy Pope Constantine by the people and so was Pope Leo VIII Divers Bishops of Italy and Illyricum did abstain from the Pope's communion for a long time because they did admit the fifth Synod Photius did excommunicate and depose Pope Nicholas I. Maurus Bishop of Ravenna did anathematize Pope Vitalianus The Emperour Otho II. having with good advice laboured to reclaim Pope John XII without effect did indict a Council calling together the Bishops of Italy by the judgment of whom the life of that wicked man should be judged and the issue was that he was deposed Pope Nicholas I. desired to be judged by the Emperour The fifth Synod did in general terms condemn Pope Vigilius and the Emperour Justinian did banish him for not complying with the decrees of it The sixth and seventh General Synods did anathematize Honorius by name when he was dead because his heresie was not before confuted and they would have served him so if he had been alive Divers Synods that of Worms of Papia of Brescia of Mentz of Rome c. did reject Pope Gregory VII Pope Adrian himself in the VIII Synod so called did confess that a Pope being found deviating from the faith might be judged as Honorius was Gerbertus afterward Pope Sylvester II. did maintain that Popes might be held as Ethnicks and Publicans if they did not hear the Church The Synod of Constance did judge and depose three Popes The Synod of Basil did depose Pope Eugenius affirming that The Catholick Church hath often corrected and judged Popes when they either err'd from the faith or by their ill manners became notoriously scandalous to the Church The practice of Popes to give an account of their faith when they entred upon their office to the other Patriarchs and chief Bishops approving themselves thereby worthy and capable of communion doth imply them liable to judgment Of the neglect of which practice Euphemius Bishop of Constantinople did complain Of this we have for example the Synodical Epistles of Pope Gregory I. XII To the Sovereign in Ecclesiastical affairs it would belong to define and decide controversies in faith discipline moral practice so that all were bound to admit his definitions decisions interpretations He would be the supreme Interpreter of the divine law and Judge of controversies No point or question of moment should be decided without his cognizance This he therefore doth pretend to taking upon him to define points and requiring from all submission to his determinations Nor doth he allow any Synods to decide questions But the ancients did know no such thing In case of Contentions they had no recourse to his judgment they did not stand to his opinion his authority did not avail to quash disputes They had recourse to the Holy Scriptures to Catholick Tradition to reason they disputed and discussed points by dint of argument Irenaeus Tertullian Vincentius Lirinensis and others discoursing of the methods to resolve points of Controversie did not reckon the Pope's authority for one Divers of the Fathers did not scruple openly to dissent from the opinions of Popes nor were they wondred at or condemned for it So Saint Paul did withstand Saint Peter So Polycarpus dissented from Pope Elutherius So Polycrates from Pope Victor So St. Cyprian from Pope Stephen So Dionysius Alex. from Pope Stephen all which persons were renowned for wisedom and piety in their times Highest Controversies were appeased by Synods out of the Holy Scripture Catholick Tradition the Analogy of faith and common Reason without regard to the Pope Divers Synods in Africk and Asia defined the Point about rebaptization without the Pope's leave and against his opinion The Synod of Antioch condemned the doctrine of Paulus Samosatenus without intervention of the Pope before they gave him notice In the Synod of Nice the Pope had very small stroke The General Synod of Const. declared the Point of the Divinity of the H. Ghost against Macedonius without the Pope who did no more than afterward consent This the Synod of Chalcedon in their compellation to the Emperour Marcian did observe The Fathers met in Sardica to suppress the reliques of Arianism communicated their decrees to the Eastern Bishops and they who here discovered the pestilence of Apolinarius made known theirs to the Western The Synod of Africk defined against Pelagius before their informing Pope Innocentius thereof not seeking his judgment but desiring his consent to that which they were assured to be truth Divers Popes have been incapable of deciding Controversies themselves having been erroneous in the questions controverted as Pope Stephanus in part Pope Liberius P. Felix P. Vigilius P. Honorius c. And in our opinion all Popes for many ages It is observable how the Synod of Chalcedon in their allocution to the Emperour Marcian do excuse P. Leo for expounding the faith in his Epistle the which it seems some did reprehend as a novell method disagreeable to the Canons Let not them say they object to us the Epistle of the marvellous Prelate
be disposed to live innocently quietly and lovingly together so that they should not hurt or destroy in all God's holy mountain for that would be a Duty incumbent on the Disciples of this Institution which all good Christians would observe The Evangelical Covenant as it doth ally us to God so it doth confederate us together The Sacraments of this Covenant are also symbols of Peace and Amity between those who undertake it Of Baptism it is said that so many of you as have been baptized into Christ have put on Christ and thence Ye are all one in Christ Jesus All in one Spirit have been baptized into one Body And in the Eucharist by partaking of one individual Food they are transmuted into one Body and Substance We saith Saint Paul being many are one bread one body for all of us do partake of one bread By which Sacraments also our people appears to be united for as many grains collected and ground and mingled together make one bread so in Christ who is the bread of heaven we may know our selves to be one body that our company or number be conjoined and united together With us there is both one Church and one mind and undivided concord Let us hold the peace of the Catholick Church in the unity of concord The bond of concord remaining and the individual Sacrament of the Catholick Church continuing c. He therefore that keeps neither the unity of the Spirit nor the conjunction of Peace and separates himself from the bond of the Church and the college or society of Priests can have neither the power of a Bishop nor the honour Thus in general But particularly All Christians should assist one another in the common Defence of Truth Piety and Peace when they are assaulted in the Propagation of the Faith and Enlargment of the Church which is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to contend together for the faith of the Gospel to be good souldiers of Christ warring the good warfare striving for the Faith once delivered to the Saints Hence if any where any Heresie or bad doctrine should arise all Christians should be ready to declare against it that it may not infect or spread a doubt arising as in the case of celebrating Easter They all with one consent declared by letters the Decree of the Church to all every where Especially the Pastours of the Churches are obliged with consent to oppose it While we laboured here and withstood the force of envy with the whole strength of our faith your Speech assisted us very much Thus did the Bishops of several Churches meet to suppress the Heresie of P. Samosatenus This was the ground of most Synods So they who afterward in all places and several ways were gathered together against the innovations of Hereticks gave their common opinion in behalf of the faith as being of one mind what they had approved among themselves in a brotherly way that they clearly transferred to those who were absent and they who at the Council of Sardis had earnestly contended against the remainders of Arius sent their judgment to those of the Eastern Churches and they who had discovered the infection of Apolinarius made their opinions known to the Western If any Dissention or Faction doth arise in any Church other Churches upon notice thereof should yield their aid to quench and suppress it countenancing the peaceable checking and disavowing the factious Thus did St. Cyprian help to discountenance and quash the Novatian Schism Thus when the Oriental Churches did labour under the Arian Faction and Dissentions between the Catholicks St. Basil with other Orthodox Bishops consorting with him did write to the Western Bishops of Italy and France to yield their succour For this my brother we must earnestly endeavour and ought to endeavour to have a care as much as in us lies to hold the Vnity delivered to us from the Lord and by the Apostles whose successours we are and what lies in us c. All Christians should be ready when opportunity doth invite to admit one another to conjunction in offices of Piety and Charity in Prayer in communion of the Eucharist in brotherly conversation and pious conference for edification or advice So that he who flies and avoids communion with us you in your prudence may know that such a man breaks himself off from the whole Church Saint Chrysostome doth complain of Epiphanius Then when he came to the great and holy City Constantinople he came not out into the Congregation according to custome and the ancient manner he joined not himself with us nor communicated with us in the Word and Prayer and the Holy Communion c. So Polycarp being at Rome did communicate with P. Anicetus If Dissention arise between divers Churches another may interpose to reconcile them as did the Church of Carthage between that of Rome and Alexandria If any Bishop were exceedingly negligent in the discharge of his Office to the common damage of Truth and Piety his neighbour Bishops might admonish him thereto and if he should not reform might deprive him of Communion All Christians should hold friendly correspondence as occasion doth serve and as it is usefull to signifie consent in Faith to recommend Persons to foster Charity to convey Succour and Advice to perform all good offices of Amity and Peace Siricius who is our companion and fellow-labourer with whom the whole world by mutual commerce of canonical or communicatory Letters agree together with us in one common Society The Catholick Church being one body 't is consequent thereto that we write and signifie one to another c. In cases of doubt or difficulty one Church should have recourse to others for Advice and any Church should yield it Both common charity and reason requires most dear brethren that we conceal nothing from your knowledge of those things which are done among us that so there may be common advice taken by us concerning the most usefull way of ordering Ecclesiastical affairs One Church should acquaint others of any extraordinary transaction concerning the common Faith or Discipline requesting their approbation and countenance Thus did the Eastern Churches give account to all other Churches of their proceedings against P. Samosatenus Which letters are sent all the world over and brought to the notice of all the Churches and of all the Brethren When any Church or any Pastour was oppressed or injured he might have recourse to other Churches for their assistence in order to relief Let him who is cast out have power to apply himself to the neighbouring Bishops that his cause may be carefully heard and discussed Thus did Athanasius being overborn and expelled from his See by the Arian faction goe for refuge to the Church of Rome St. Chrysostome had recourse to the Bishop of Rome and to those of the West as also to the Bishop
to him so many Dependents what might not he say or doe Pope Gregory VII being a man of untameable Spirit and taking advantage from the distractions and corruptions of his Times did venture to pull a feather with the Emperour and with success having mated him did set up a peremptory claim to Sovereignty over all Persons in all Causes In his footsteps his Successours have trodden being ever ready upon occasion to plead such a title and to practise according to it No Pope would foregoe any Power which had been claimed by his Predecessours And Popes would ever be sure to have dancers after their pipe numberless abetters of their pretences No wonder then that persons deferring much regard to the Authority of Popes and accommodating their conceits to the Dictates of them or of persons depending on them should in their opinions vary about the nature and extent of Papal Authority it having never been fixed within certain bounds or having in several Ages continued the same thing § XI Wherefore intending by God's help to discuss the pretended Authority of the Pope and to shew that He by no Divine institution and by no immutable right hath any such Power as he doth claim by reason of this perplexed variety of Opinions I do find it difficult to state the Question or to know at what distinct mark I should level my Discourse § XII But seeing his pretence to any Authority in Temporals or to the Civil Sword is so palpably vain that it hardly will bear a serious dispute having nothing but impudence and sophistry to countenance it seeing so many in the Roman Communion do reject it and have substantially confuted it seeing now most are ashamed of it and very few even among those Sects which have been its chief Patrons will own it seeing Bellarmine himself doth acknowledge it a Novelty devised about 500 years ago in St. Bernard's time seeing the Popes themselves what-ever they think dare now scarce speak out and forbear upon sufficient provocation to practise according to it I shall spare the trouble of meddling with it confining my Discourse to the Pope's Authority in Ecclesiastical affairs the pretence whereto I am persuaded to be no less groundless and no less noxious than the other to Christendom the which being overthrown the other as superstructed on it must also necessarily fall § XIII And here the Doctrine which I shall contest against is that in which the Cordial partizans of that See do seem to consent which is most common and current most applauded and countenanced in their Theological Schools which the Popes themselves have solemnly defined and declared for standing law or rule of jurisdiction which their most authentick Synods whereby their Religion is declared and distinguished from others have asserted or supposed which the tenour of their Discipline and Practice doth hold forth which their Clergy by most solemn professions and engagements is tied to avow which all the Clients and Confidents of Rome do zealously stand for more than for any other point of Doctrine and which no man can disclaim without being deemed an enemy or a prevaricator toward the Apostolick See § XIV Which Doctrine is this That in the words of the Florentine Synod's Definition the Apostolical Chair and the Roman High-Priest doth hold a Primacy over the Vniversal Church and that the Roman High-Priest is the Successour of Saint Peter the Prince of the Apostles and the true Lieutenant of Christ and the Head of the Church and that he is the Father and Doctour of all Christians and that unto him in Saint Peter full Power is committed to feed and direct and govern the Catholick Church under Christ according as is contained in the Acts of General Councils and in the Holy Canons That in the words of Pope Leo X. approved by the Laterane Synod Christ before his departure from the world did in solidity of the Rock institute Peter and his Successours to be his Lieutenants to whom it is so necessary to obey that who doth not obey must die the death That to the Pope as Sovereign Monarch by Divine Sanction of the whole Church do appertain Royal Prerogatives Regalia Petri the Royalties of Peter they are called in the Oath prescribed to Bishops Such as these which follow To be Superiour to the whole Church and to its Representative a General Synod of Bishops To convocate General Synods at his pleasure all Bishops being obliged to attend upon summons from him To preside in Synods so as to suggest matter promote obstruct over-rule the debates in them To confirm or invalidate their Determinations giving life to them by his assent or subtracting it by his dissent To define Points of Doctrine or to decide Controversies authoritatively so that none may presume to contest or dissent from his Dictates To enact establish abrogate suspend dispense with Ecclesiastical Laws and Canons To relax or evacuate Ecclesiastical Censures by indulgence pardon c. To void Promises Vows Oaths Obligations to Laws by his Dispensation To be the Fountain of all Pastoral Jurisdiction and Dignity To constitute confirm judge censure suspend depose remove restore reconcile Bishops To confer Ecclesiastical Dignities and Benefices by paramount Authority in way of Provision Reservation c. To exempt Colleges Monasteries c. from Jurisdiction of their Bishops and ordinary Superiours To judge all persons in all Spiritual Causes by calling them to his cognizance or delegating Judges for them with a final and peremptory Sentence To receive Appeals from all Ecclesiastical Judicatories and to reverse their Judgments if he findeth cause To be himself unaccountable for any of his doings exempt from judgment and liable to no reproof To erect transfer abolish Episcopal Sees To exact Oaths of Fealty and Obedience from the Clergy To found Religious Orders or to raise a Spiritual Militia for propagation and defence of the Church To summon and commissionate Souldiers by Croisade c. to fight against Infidels or persecute Infidels Some of these are expressed others in general terms couched in those words of P. Eugenius telling the Greeks what they must consent unto The Pope said he will have the Prerogatives of his Church and he will have Appeals to him and to feed all the Church of Christ as Shepherd of the Sheep Beside these things that he may have authority and power to convoke General Synods when need shall be and that all the Patriarchs do yield to his will That the Pope doth claim assume and exercise a Sovereignty over the Church endowed with such Prerogatives is sufficiently visible in experience of fact is apparent by the authorized dictates in their Canon-law and shall be distinctly proved by competent allegations when we shall examine the branches of this pretended Authority In the mean time it sufficeth to observe that in effect all Clergy-men do avow so much who bonâ fide and without prevarication do submit to take the Oaths and Engagements prescribed to them
fell to proposing about making an abode there not knowing what he said so brisk was he in imagination and speech Upon the good Womans report that our Lord was risen from the dead he first ran to the Sepulchre and so as Saint Paul implieth did obtain the first sight of our Lord after the Resurrection such was his zeal and activity upon all occasions At the Consultation about supplying the place of Judas he rose up proposed and pressed the matter At the Convention of the Apostles and Elders about resolving the debate concerning observance of Mosaical Institutions he first rose up and declared his sense In the Promulgation of the Gospel and Defence thereof before the Jewish Rulers he did assume the conduct and constantly took upon him to be the Speaker the rest standing by him implying assent and ready to avow his word Peter saith Saint Luke standing with the rest lift up his voice and said unto them so did they utter a common voice saith St. Chrys. and he was the mouth of all That in affection to our Lord and zeal for his service Saint Peter had some advantage over the rest that Question Simon Peter dost thou love me more than these may seem to imply although the words 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 may bear other interpretations whereby the seeming invidiousness of the Question according to that sense will be removed However that he had a singular zeal for promoting our Lord's service and propagation of the Gospel therein outshining the rest seemeth manifest in the History and may be inferred from the peculiar regard our Lord apparently did shew to him Upon these Premises we may well admit that Saint Peter had a Primacy of Worth or that in personal accomplishments he was most eminent among the twelve Apostles although afterward there did spring up one who hardly in any of these respects would yield to him who could confidently say that he did not come behind the very chief Apostles and of whom St. Ambrose saith Neither was Paul inferiour to Peter being well to be compar'd even to the first and second to none and St. Chrysostome For what was greater than Peter and what equal to Paul This is the Primacy which Eusebius attributeth to him when he calleth him the excellent and great Apostle who for his virtue was the proloquutor of all the rest II. As to a Primacy of Repute which Saint Paul meaneth when he speaketh of the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 those which had a special reputation of those who seemed to be Pillars of the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the supereminent Apostles this advantage cannot be refused him being a necessary consequent of those eminent qualities resplendent in him and of the illustrious performances atchieved by him beyond the rest This may be inferred from that advantageous renown which he hath had propagated from the beginning to all posterity This at least those elogies of the Fathers styling him the Chief Prince Head of the Apostles do signifie This also may be collected from his being so constantly ranked in the first place before the rest of his Brethren III. As to a Primacy of Order or bare Dignity importing that commonly in all meetings and proceedings the other Apostles did yield him the precedence the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or privilege of speaking first whether in propounding matters for debate or in delivering his advice the conduct and moderation of affairs that this was stated on him may be questioned for that this were a kind of womanish privilege and that it doth not seem to befit the gravity of such persons or their condition and circumstances to stand upon ceremonies of respect for that also our Lord's Rules do seem to exclude all semblance of ambition all kinds of inequality and distance between his Apostles for that this practice doth not seem constantly and thoroughly to agree to his being endowed with this advantage especially seeing all that practice which favoureth it may fairly be assigned to other causes for that also the Fathers Authority if that be objected as a main argument of such a Primacy in points of this nature not bordering on essentials of Faith is of no great strength they in such cases speaking out of their own ingeny and conjecture and commonly indulging their imaginations no less freely than other men But yet this Primacy may be granted as probable upon divers accounts of use and convenience it might be usefull to preserve order and to promote expedition or to prevent confusion distraction and dilatory obstruction in the management of things yea to maintain concord and to exclude that ambition or affectation to be formost which is natural to men For seeing all could not goe speak or act first all could not guide affairs it was expedient that one should be ready to undertake it knowing his cue See saith St. Chrysostome noting on Act. 2.14 where Saint Peter speaketh for the rest the concord of the Apostles they yield unto him the speech for they could not all speak and One saith St. Hierome is chosen among the twelve that a head being appointed an occasion of Schism might be removed St. Cyprian hath a reason for it somewhat more subtile and mystical supposing our Lord did confer on him a preference of this kind to his Brethren who otherwise in power and authority were equal to him that he might intimate and recommend unity to us and the other African Doctours Optatus and St. Austin do commonly harp on the same notion I can discern little solidity in this conceit and as little harm However supposing this Primacy at least in respect to the Fathers who generally seem to countenance it divers probable reasons may be assigned why it should especially be conferred on Saint Peter 1. It is probable that Saint Peter was first in standing among the Apostles I mean not that he was the first Disciple or first converted to Faith in Christ but first called to the Apostolical Office or first nominated by our Lord when out of all his Disciples he chose twelve and called them Apostles Simon whom he called Peter and Andrew his Brother He was one of the first Believers at large he was perhaps the first that distinctly believed our Lord's Divinity he was probably the very first Apostle as the fittest Person in our Lord's eye for that employment He saith St. Hilary did first believe and is the Prince or first man of the Apostleship He saith St. Cyprian was the first whom the Lord chose He saith St. Basil was by judgment preferred before all the Disciples He by other Ancients is called the first-fruits of the Apostles And according to this sense St. Hierome I suppose doth call him and his Brother Andrew Principes Apostolorum that is according to frequent usage of the word Princeps in Latin the first of the Apostles So that as in divers Churches perhaps when
had such a right it is not probable that Saint Peter by his fact would have deprived it thereof or willingly done any thing in prejudice to it there being apparently so much equity that the Church should have a stroke in designation of its Pastour In ancient times there was not any small Church which had not a suffrage in the choice of its Pastour and was it fitting that all the Church should have one imposed on it without its consent If we consider the manner in ancient time of electing and constituting the Roman Bishop we may thence discern not onely the improbability but iniquity of this pretence how was he then chosen was it by a General Synod of Bishops or by Delegates from all parts of Christendom whereby the common interest in him might appear and whereby the World might be satisfied that one was elected fit for that high Office No he was chosen as usually then other particular Bishops were by the Clergy and People of Rome none of the World being conscious of the proceeding or bearing any share therein Now was it equal that such a power of imposing a Sovereign on all the grave Bishops and on all the good people of the Christian world should be granted to one City Was it fitting that such a charge importing advancement above all Pastours and being entrusted with the welfare of all Souls in Christendom should be the result of an election liable to so many defects and corruptions which assuredly often if not almost constantly would be procured by ambition bribery or partiality would be managed by popular faction and tumults It was observed generally of such Elections by Nazianzene that Prelacies were not rather by vertue than by naughtiness and that Episcopal Thrones did not rather belong to the more worthy than to the more powerfull And declaring his mind or wish that Elections of Bishops should rest onely or chiefly in the best men not in the wealthiest and mightiest or in the impetuousness and unreasonableness of the people and among them in those who are most easily bought and bribed whereby he intimateth the common practice and subjoineth but now I can hardly avoid thinking that the popular or civil governances are better ordered than ours which are reputed to have divine grace attending them And that the Roman Elections in that time were come into that course we may see by the relation and reflexions of an honest Pagan Historian concerning the Election of Pope Damasus contemporary of Gregory Nazianz. Damasus saith he and Vrsinus above humane measure burning with desire to snatch the Episcopal See did with divided parties most fiercely conflict in which conflict upon one day in the very Church 130 persons were slain so did that great Pope get into the Chair thus as the Historian reflecteth the wealth and pomp of the place naturally did provoke ambition by all means to seek it and did cause fierce contentions to arise in the choice whence commonly wise and modest persons being excluded from any capacity thereof any ambitious and cunning man who had the art or the luck to please the multitude would by violence obtain it which was a goodly way of constituting a Sovereign to the Church Thus it went within three ages after our Lord and afterwards in the declensions of Christian simplicity and integrity matters were not like to be mended but did indeed rather grow worse as beside the reports and complaints of Historians how that commonly by ambitious prensations by Simoniacal corruptions by political bandyings by popular factions by all kinds of sinister ways men crept into the place doth appear by those many dismal Schisms which gave the Church many pretended Heads but not one certain one as also by the result of them being the choice of persons very unworthy and horribly flagitious If it be said that the Election of a Pope in old times was wont to be approved by the consent of all Bishops in the world according to the testimony of St. Cyprian who saith of Cornelius that he was known by the testimony of his fellow-Bishops whose whole number through all the world did with peacefull unanimity consent I answer that this consent was not in the Election or antecedently to it that it was onely by Letters or messages declaring the Election according to that of St. Cyprian that it was not any-wise peculiar to the Roman Bishop but such as was yielded to all Catholick Bishops each of whom was to be approved as St. Cyprian saith by the testimony and judgment of his Collegues that it was in order onely to the maintaining fraternal communion and correspondence signifying that such a Bishop was duly elected by his Clergy and People was rightly ordained by his neighbour Bishops did profess the Catholick Faith and was therefore qualified for communion with his Brethren such a consent to the Election of any Bishop of old was given especially upon occasion and when any question concerning the right of a Bishop did intervene whereof now in the Election of a Pope no footstep doth remain We may also note that the Election of Cornelius being contested he did more solemnly acquaint all the Bishops of the world with his case and so did obtain their approbation in a way more than ordinary 13. If God had designed this derivation of Universal Sovereignty it is probable that he would have prescribed some certain standing immutable way of Election and imparted the right to certain Persons and not left it at such uncertainty to the chances of time so that the manner of Election hath often changed and the power of it tossed into divers hands And though in several times there have been observed several ways as to the Election of the Roman Pontifs according as the necessity and expediency of the Church required Of old it was as other Elections managed by nomination of the Clergy and suffrage of the People Afterward the Emperours did assume to themselves the nomination or approbation of them For then nothing was done by the Clergy in the choice of the Pope unless the Emperour had approv'd his Election But he seeing the Prince's consent was required sent Messengers with Letters to intreat Mauritius that he would not suffer the Election made by the Clergy and People of Rome in that case to be valid Leo VIII being tired out with the inconstancy of the Romans transferred the whole power and authority of chusing the Pope from the Clergy and People of Rome to the Emperour At some times the Clergy had no hand in the Election but Popes were intruded by powerfull Men or Women at their pleasure Afterwards the Cardinals that is some of the chief Roman Clergy did appropriate the Election to themselves by the Decree of Pope Nicholas II. in his Lateran Synod Sometimes out of course general Synods did assume the Choice to themselves as at Constance Pisa and Basil.
to become over-dilatory Pope Liberius for such reasons did request Constantius that Athanasius his cause should be tryed at Alexandria where he saith he that is accused and the accusers are and the defender of them and so we may upon examination had agree in our sentence about them Therefore divers ancient Canons of Synods did prohibit that any Causes should be removed out of the bounds of Provinces or Dioceses as otherwhere we shew 2. Such an Authority as this pretence claimeth must necessarily if not withheld by continual Miracle throw the Church into sad bondage All the World must become slaves to one City its wealth must be derived thither its quiet must depend on it For it not being restrained within any bounds of place or time having no check upon it of equal or co-ordinate power standing upon Divine Institution and therefore immutably setled must of its own nature become absolute and unlimited Let it be however of right limited by Divine Laws or Humane Canons yet will it be continually encroaching and stretching its power untill it grow enormous and boundless It will not indure to be pinched by any restraint It will draw to it self the collation of all preferments c. It will assume all things to it self trampling down all opposite claims of right and liberty so that neither Pastour nor People shall enjoy or doe any thing otherwise than in dependence on it and at its pleasure It will be always forging new prerogatives and interpreting all things in favour of them and enacting sanctions to establish them which none must presume to contest It will draw to it self the disposal of all places the exaction of goods All Princes must become his Ministers and executours of his Decrees It will mount above all Law and Rule not onely challenging to be uncontrollable and unaccountable but not enduring any reproof of its proceedings or contradiction of its dictates a blind Faith must be yielded to all its Assertions as infallibly true and a blind obedience to all its Decrees as unquestionably holy whosoever shall any-wise cross it in word or deed shall certainly be discountenanced condemned ejected from the Church so that the most absolute tyranny that can be imagined will ensue All the World hath groaned and heavily complained of their exactions particularly our poor Nation it would raise indignation in any man to reade the complaints This is consequent on such a pretence according to the very nature of things and so in experience it hath happened For It is evident that the Papacy hath devoured all the privileges and rights of all Orders in the Church either granted by God or established in the ancient Canons The Royalties of Peter are become immense and consistently to his practice the Pope doth allow men to tell him to his face that all Power in Heaven and in Earth is given unto him It belongeth to him to judge of the whole Church He hath a plenitude as he calleth it of Power by which he can infringe any Law or doe any thing that he pleaseth It is the tenour of his Bulls that whoever rashly dareth to thwart his will shall incur the indignation of Almighty God and as if that were not enough of Saint Peter and Saint Paul also No man must presume to tax his faults or to judge of his judgment It is Idolatry to disobey his commands against their own Sovereign Lord. There are who dare in plain terms call him Omnipotent and who ascribe infinite power to him And that he is infallible is the most common and plausible opinion so that at Rome the contrary is erroneous and within an inch of being heretical We are now told that If the Pope should err by enjoyning vices or forbidding vertues the Church should be bound to believe vices to be good and vertues evil unless it would sin against Conscience The greatest Princes must stoop to his will otherwise he hath power to cashier and depose them Now what greater inconvenience what more horrible iniquity can there be than that all God's people that free people who are called to freedom should be subject to so intolerable a yoke and miserable a slavery That tyranny soon had crept into the Roman Church Socrates telleth us They have rendred true that definition of Scioppius The Church is a stall or herd or multitude of Beasts or Asses They bridle us they harness us they spur us they lay Yokes and Laws upon us The greatest tyranny that ever was invented in the world is the pretence of Infallibility for Dionysius and Phalaris did leave the mind free pretending onely to dispose of body and goods according to their will but the Pope not content to make us doe and say what he pleaseth will have us also to think so denouncing his imprecations and spiritual menaces if we do not 3. Such an Authority will inevitably produce a depravation of Christian Doctrine by distorting it in accommodation of it to the promoting its designs and interests It will blend Christianity with worldly notions and policies It certainly will introduce new Doctrines and interpret the old ones so as may serve to the advancement of the power reputation pomp wealth and pleasure of those who manage it and of their dependents That which is called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to make a trade of Religion will be the great work of the Teachers of the Church It will turn all Divines into mercenary slavish designing Flatterers This we see come to pass Christianity by the Papal influence being from its original simplicity transformed into quite another thing than it was from a divine Philosophy designed to improve the reason to moderate the passions to correct the manners of men to prepare men for conversation with God and Angels modelled to a systeme of politick devices of notions of precepts of rites serving to exalt and enrich the Pope with his Court and Adherents Clients and Vassals What Doctrine of Christian Theology as it is interpreted by their Schools hath not a direct aspect or doth not squint that way especially according to the opinions passant and in vogue among them To pass over those concerning the Pope his Universal Pastourship Judgship in controversies Power to call Councils Presidency in them Superiority over them Right to confirm or annull them his Infallibility his double Sword and Dominion direct or indirect over Princes his dispensing in Laws in Oaths in Vows in Matrimonial cases with all other the monstrous prerogatives which the sound Doctours of Rome with encouragement of that Chair do teach What doth the Doctrine concerning the exempting of the Clergy from secular jurisdiction and immunity of their goods from taxes signify but their entire dependence on the Pope and their being closely tyed to his interests What is the exemption of Monastical places from the jurisdiction of Bishops but listing so many Souldiers and Advocates
in opulency in ability and opportunity to promote the common interest in all kinds of advantages Moreover because in all Societies and Confederacies of men for ordering publick affairs for the settling things in motion for effectual dispatch for preventing endless dissentions and confusions both in resolving upon and executing things it is needfull that one person should be authorized to preside among the rest unto whom the power and care should be entrusted to convoke Assemblies in fit season to propose matters for consultation to moderate the debates and proceedings to declare the result and to see that what is agreed upon may be duly executed Such a charge then naturally would devolve it self upon the Prelate of the Metropolis as being supposed constantly present on the place as being at home in his own seat of presidence and receiving the rest under his wing as incontestably surpassing others in all advantages answerable to the secular advantages of his City for that it was unseemly and hard if he at home should be postponed in dignity to others repairing thither for that also commonly he was in a manner the spiritual Father of the rest Religion being first planted in great Cities and thence propagated to others so that the reverence and dependence on Colonies to the mother City was due from other Churches to his See Wherefore by consent of all Churches grounded on such obvious reason of things the presidency in each Province was assigned to the Bishop of the Metropolis who was called the first Bishop the Metropolitane in some places the Primate the Archbishop the Patriarch the Pope of the Province The Apostolical Canons call him the first Bishop which sheweth the Antiquity of this Institution the African Synods did appoint that name to him as most modest and calling him Primate in that sense other ancient Synods style him the Metropolite and to the Metropolites of the principal Cities they gave the Title of Archbishop The Bishops of Rome and Alexandria peculiarly were called Popes although that name was sometimes deferred to any other Bishop During this state of things the whole Church did consist of so many Provinces being 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 independent on each other in Ecclesiastical administrations each reserving to it self the constitution of Bishops the convocation of Synods the enacting of Canons the decision of Causes the definition of Questions yet so that each Province did hold peacefull and amicable correspondence with others upon the like terms as before each 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or Episcopal precinct did hold intercourse with its neighbours And whoever in any Province did not comply with or submit to the Orders and Determinations resolved upon in those Assemblies was deemed a schismatical contentious and contumelious person with good reason because he did thwart a Discipline plainly conducible to publick good because declining such judgments he plainly shewed that he would admit none there not being any fairer way of determining things than by common advice and agreement of Pastours because he did in effect refuse all good terms of communion and peace Thus I conceive the Metropolitical governance was introduced by humane prudence following considerations of publick necessity or utility There are indeed some who think it was instituted by the Apostles but their Arguments do not seem convincing and such a constitution doth not as I take it well sute to the state of their times and the course they took in founding Churches Into such a Chanel through all parts of Christendom though with some petty differences in the methods and measures of acting had Ecclesiastical administrations fallen of themselves plain community of reason and imitation insensibly propagating that course and therein it ran for a good time before it was by general consent and solemn sanction established The whole Church then was a Body consisting of several confederations of Bishops acting in behalf of their Churches under their respective Metropolitanes who did manage the common affairs in each Province convoking Synods at stated times and upon emergent occasions in them deciding Causes and Controversies incident relating to faith or practice framing Rules serviceable to common Edification and decent uniformity in God's service quashing Heresies and Schisms declaring truths impugned or questioned maintaining the harmony of communion and concord with other Provinces adjacent or remote Such was the state of the Church unto which the Apostolical Canons and Constitutions do refer answerable to the times in which they were framed and which we may discern in the practice of ancient Synods Such it did continue when the great Synod of Nice was celebrated which by its authority presumed to represent the authority of all Bishops in the World who were summoned thereto backed by the Imperial Authority and Power did confirm those Orders as they found them standing by more general custome and received Rules in most Provinces reducing them into more â—â—â—orm practice so that what before stood upon reason customary usage particular consent by so august sanction did become universal Law and did obtain so great veneration as by some to be conceived everlastingly and immutably obligatory according to those maximes of Pope Leo. It is here farther observable that whereas divers Provinces did hold communion and entercourse so that upon occasion they did by their formed Letters render to one another an account of their proceedings being of great moment especially of those which concerned the general state of Christianity and common faith calling when need was for assistence one of other to resolve points of faith or to settle order and peace there was in so doing a special respect given to the Metropolites of great Cities and to prevent dissensions which naturally ambition doth prompt men to grounded upon degrees of respect an Order was fixed among them according to which in subscriptions of Letters in accidental congresses and the like occasions some should precede others that distinction being chiefly and commonly grounded on the greatness splendour opulency of Cities or following the secular dignity of them whence Rome had the first place Alexandria the second Antioch the third Hierusalem the fourth c. Afterward Constantine having introduced a new partition of the Empire whereby divers Provinces were combined together into one Territory under the regiment of a Vicar or a Lieutenant of a Praefectus-praeterio which Territory was called a Diocese the Ecclesiastical state was adapted in conformity thereto new Ecclesiastical Systems and a new sort of spiritual Heads thence springing up so that in each Diocese consisting of divers Provinces an Ecclesiastical Exarch otherwise sometimes called a Primate sometimes a Diocesan sometimes a Patriarch was constituted answerable to the Civil Exarch of a Diocese who by such constitution did obtain a like Authority over the Metropolitanes of Provinces as they had in their Province over the Bishops of Cities so that it appertained to them to call together the Synods of the whole Diocese to preside
immediately subjected to his Patriarchal Jurisdiction Pope Nicholas I. doth very jocularly expound this Canon affirming that by the Primate of the Diocese is understood the Pope Diocese being put by a notable figure for Dioceses and that an appeal is to be made to the Bishop of Constantinople onely by permission in case the Party will be content therewith We may note that some Provincial Churches were by ancient custome exempted from dependence on any Primacy or Patriarchate Such an one the Cyprian Church was adjudged to be in the Ephesine Synod wherein the privileges of such Churches were confirmed against the invasion of greater Churches and to that purpose this general Law enacted Let the same be observ'd in all Dioceses and Provinces every where that none of the Bishops most beloved of God invade another Province which did not formerly belong to him or his Predecessours and if any one have invaded one and violently seiz'd it that he restore it Such a Church was that of Britain anciently before Austin did introduce the Papal Authority here against that Canon as by divers learned Pens hath been shewed Such was the Church of Africk as by their Canons against transmarine appeals and about all other matters doth appear It is supposed by some that Discipline was scrued yet one peg higher by setting up the Order of Patriarchs higher than Primates or Diocesan Exarchs but I find no ground of this supposal except in one case that is of the Bishop of Constantinople being set above the Bishops of Ephesus Caesarea and Heraclea which were the Primates of the three Dioceses It is a notable fib which Pope Nicholas II. telleth as Gratian citeth him That the Church of Rome instituted all Patriarchal Supremacies all Metropolitan Primacies Episcopal Sees all Ecclesiastical Orders and Dignities whatsoever Now things standing thus in Christendom we may concerning the interest of the Roman Bishop in reference to them observe 1. In all these transactions about modelling the spiritual Discipline there was no Canon established any peculiar Jurisdiction to the Bishop of Rome onely the 2. Synod of Nice did suppose that he by custome did enjoy some Authority within certain precincts of the West like to that which it did confirm to the Bishop of Alexandria in Egypt and the Countries adjacent thereto 3. The Synods of Constantinople did allow him honourary privileges or precedence before all other Bishops assigning the next place after him to the Bishop of Constantinople 4. In other privileges the Synod of Chalcedon did equall the See of Constantinople to the Roman 5. The Canons of the two First and Fourth General Synods ordering all affairs to be dispatched and causes to be determined in Metropolitan or Diocesan Synods do exclude the Roman Bishop from meddling in those concerns 6. The Popes out of a humour natural to them to like nothing but what they did themselves and which served their Interests did not relish those Canons although enacted by Synods which themselves admitted for Oecumenical That subscription of some Bishops made above sixty years since as you boast does no whit favour your persuasion a subscription never transmitted to the knowledge of the Apostolick See by your Predecessours which from its very beginning being weak and long since ruinous you endeavour now too late and unprofitably to revive So doth Pope Leo I. treat the Second Great Synod writing to Anatolius and Gregory speaking of the same says That the Roman Church has not the acts of that Synod nor receiv'd its Canons 7. Wherefore in the West they did obtain no effect so as to establish Diocesan Primacies there The Bishops of Cities which were Heads of Dioceses either did not know of these Canons which is probable because Rome did smother the notice of them or were hindred from using them the Pope having so winded himself in and got such hold among them as he would not let go 8. It indeed turned to a great advantage of the Pope in carrying on his Encroachments and enlarging his worldly Interests that the Western Churches did not as the Eastern conform themselves to the Political frame in embracing Diocesan Primacies which would have engaged and enabled them better to protect the Liberties of their Churches from Papal Invasions 9. For hence for want of a better the Pope did claim to himself a Patriarchal authority over the Western Churches pretending a right of calling to Synods of meddling in Ordinations of determining Causes by appeal to him of dictating Laws and Rules to them against the old rights of Metropolitans and the later Constitutions for Primacies Of this we have an Instance in St. Gregory where he alledging an Imperial Constitution importing that in case a Clergy-man should appeal from his Metropolitan the cause should be referred to the Archbishop and Patriarch of that Diocese who judging according to the Canons and Laws should give an end thereto doth consequentially assume an appeal from a Bishop to himself adjoyning If against these things it be said that the Bishop had neither Metropolitan nor Patriarch it is to be said that this cause was to be heard and decided by the Apostolical See which is the head of all Churches 10. Having got such advantage and as to extent stretched his Authority beyond the bounds of his sub-urbicarian precincts he did also intend it in quality far beyond the privileges by any Ecclesiastical Law granted to Patriarchs or claimed or exercised by any other Patriarch till at length by degrees he had advanced it to an exorbitant omnipotency and thereby utterly enslaved the Western Churches The ancient Order did allow a Patriarch or Primate to call a Synod of the Bishops in his Diocese and with them to determine Ecclesiastical Affairs by majority of suffrages but he doth not doe so but setting himself down in his Chair with a few of his Courtiers about him doth make Decrees and Dictates to which he pretendeth all must submit The ancient Order did allow a Patriarch to ordain Metropolitans duly elected in their Dioceses leaving Bishops to be ordained by the Metropolitans in their Provincial Synods but he will meddle in the Ordination of every Bishop suffering none to be constituted without his confirmation for which he must soundly pay The ancient Order did allow a Patriarch with the advice and consent of his Synod to make Canons for the well ordering his Diocese but he sendeth about his Decretal Letters composed by an infallible Secretary which he pretendeth must have the force of Laws equal to the highest Decrees of the whole Church The ancient Order did suppose Bishops by their Ordination sufficiently obliged to render unto their Patriarch due observance according to the Canons he being liable to be judged in a Synod for the transgression of his duty but he forceth all Bishops to take the most slavish oaths of obedience to him that can be imagined The ancient Order did appoint that Bishops accused for
appeareth that at that time according to common opinion and practice authoritative Presidency was not affixed to the Roman Chair In the Synod of Chalcedon Pope Leo did indeed assume to himself a kind of Presidency by his Legates and no wonder that a man of a stout and ardent Spirit impregnated with high conceits of his See and resolved with all his might to advance its interests as his Legates themselves did in effect declare to the world should doe so having so favourable a time by the misbehaviour of Dioscorus and his adherents against whom the Clergy of Constantinople and other Fathers of the Synod being incensed were ready to comply with Leo who had been the Champion and Patron of their Cause in allowing him extraordinary respect and whatever advantages he could pretend to Yet in effect the Emperour by his Commissioners did preside there they propounding and allowing matters to be discussed moderating debates by their interlocution and driving them to an issue maintaining order and quiet in proceedings performing those things which the Pope's Legates at Trent or otherwhere in the height of his power did undertake To them supplicatory addresses were made for succour and redress by persons needing it as for instance Command said Eusebius of Dorylaeum that my supplications may be read Of them leave is requested for time to deliberate Command saith Atticus in behalf of other Bishops that respite be given so that within a few days with a calm mind and undisturbed reason those things may be formed which shall be pleasing to God and the Holy Fathers Accordingly they order the time for consultation Let said they the hearing be deferred for five days that in the mean time your Holiness may meet at the house of the most Holy Archbishop Anatolius and deliberate in common about the faith that the doubtfull may be instructed They were acknowledged Judges and had thanks given them for the issue by persons concerned I said Eunomius Bishop of Nicomedia do thank your Honour for your right judgment And in the cause between Stephanus and Bassianus concerning their title to the Bishoprick of Ephesus they having declared their sense the Holy Synod cryed this is right judgment Christ hath decided the case God judgeth by you And in the result upon their declaring their opinion the whole Synod exclaimed This is a right judgment this is a pious order When the Bishops transported with eagerness and passion did tumultuously clamour they gravely did check them saying These vulgar exclamations neither become Bishops nor shall advantage the parties In the great contest about the privileges of the Constantinopolitan See they did arbitrate and decide the matter even against the sense and endeavours of the Pope's Legates the whole Synod concurring with them in these acclamations this is a right sentence we all say these things these things please us all things are duely ordered let 〈◊〉 things ordered be held The Pope's Legates themselves did avow this authority in them for If said Paschasinus in the case of the Egyptian Bishops your authority doth command and ye injoin that somewhat of humanity be granted to them c. And in another case If said the Bishops supplying the place of the Apostolical See your Honours do command we have an information to suggest Neither is the Presidency of these Roman Legates expressed in the Conciliar Acts but they are barely said 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to concur and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to sit together with the other Fathers and accordingly although they sometimes talked high yet it is not observable that they did much there their Presidency was nothing like that at Trent and in other like Papal Synods It may be noted that the Emperour's Deputies are always named in the first place at the entrance of the Acts before the Pope's Legates so that they who directed the Notaries were not Popish In effect the Emperour was President though not as a Judge of Spiritual matters yet as an Orderer of the Conciliar transactions as the Synod doth report it to Leo the faithfull Emperours said they did preside or govern it for good order sake In the Fifth General Synod Pope Vigilius indeed was moved to be present and in his way to preside but he out of state or policy declined it wherefore the Patriarch of Constantinople was the Ecclesiastical President as in the beginning of every Collation doth appear whence clearly we may infer that the Pope's Presidency is no-wise necessary to the being of a General Council In the Sixth General Synod the Emperour in each Act is expesly said to preside in person or by his Deputies although P. Agatho had his Legates there In the Synod of Constance sometimes the Cardinal of Cambray sometimes of Hostia did preside by order of the Synod it self and sometime the King of the Romans did supply that place so little essential was the Pope's Presidency to a Council deemed even then when Papal authority had mounted to so high a pitch Nor is there good reason why the Pope should have this privilege or why this Prerogative should be affixed to any one See so that if there be cause as if the Pope be unfit or less fit if Princes or the Church cannot confide in him if he be suspected of prejudice or partiality if he be party in causes or controversies to be decided if he do himself need correction Princes may not assign or the Church with allowance of Princes may not chuse any other President more proper in their judgment for that charge in such cases the publick welfare of Church and State is to be regarded Were an Erroneous Pope as Vigilius or Hâ—â—orius fit to govern a Council gathered to consult about defining Truth in the matter of their Errour Where a Lewd Pope as Alexander VI John XII Paul III innumerable such scandalously vitious worthy to preside in a Synod convocated to prescribe strict Laws of Reformation Were a Furious Pugnacious Pope as Julius II apt to moderate an Assembly drawn together for settlement of Peace Were a Pope engaged in Schism as many have been a proper Moderatour of a Council designed to suppress Schism Were a Gregory VII or an Innocent IV or a Boniface VIII an allowable manager any where of Controversies about the Papal Authority Were now indeed any Pope fit to preside in any Council wherein the Reformation of the Church is concerned it being notorious that Popes as such do most need Reformation that they are the great obstructours of it that all Christendom hath a long time a Controversie with them for their detaining it in bondage In this and many other cases we may reject their Presidency as implying iniquity according to the Rule of an old Pope I would know of them where they would have that judgment they pretend examin'd what by themselves that the same may be adversaries witnesses and judges to such
disorderly Behaviour notoriously incurred they deemed incapable of the Office presuming their places ipso facto void This Pope Gelasius I. proposed for a Rule That not onely a Metropolitan but every other Bishop hath a Right to separate any persons or any place from the Catholick Communion according to the Rule by which his heresie is already condemned And upon this account did the Popes for so long time quarrel with the See of Constantinople because they did not expunge Acacius from the roll of Bishops who had communicated with Hereticks So did Saint Cyprian reject Marcianus Bishop of Arles for adhering to the Novatians So Athanasius was said to have deposed Arian Bishops and substituted others in their places So Acacius and his Complices deposed Macedonius and divers other Bishops And the Bishops of those times 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 factiously applying a Rule taken for granted then deposed one another So Maximus Bishop of Jerusalem deposed Athanasius So Eusebius of Nicomedia threatned to depose Alexander of Constantinople if he would not admit Arius to communion Acacius and his Complices did extrude Maximus Bishop of Jerusalem He also deposed and expelled Cyril of Jerusalem and deposed many other Bishops at Constantinople Cyril deposed Nestorius and Nestorius deposed Cyril and Memnon Cyril and Juvenalis deposed John of Antioch John of Antioch with his Bishops deposed Cyril and Memnon Yea after the Synod of Ephesus John of Antioch gathering together many Bishops did depose Cyril Stephanus concerning Bassianus Because he had entred into the Church with swords therefore he was expelled out of it again by the holy Fathers both by Leo of Rome the Imperial City and by Flavianus by the Bishop of Alexandria and also by the Bishop of Antioch Anatolius of Constantinople did reject Timotheus of Alexandria Acacius Bishop of Constantinople did reject Petrus Fullo 3. St. Cyprian doth assert the power of Censuring Bishops upon needfull and just occasion to belong to all Bishops for maintenance of common Faith Discipline and Peace Therefore saith he writing to Pope Stephanus himself dear brother the body of Bishops is copious being coupled by the glue of concord and the band of unity that if any of our College shall attempt to frame a heresie or to tear and spoil the flock of Christ the rest may succour and like usefull and mercifull shepherds may gather together the sheep of our Lord into the flock The like Doctrine is that of Pope Celestine I. in his Epistle to the Ephesine Synod In matter of Faith any Bishop might interpose Judgment Theophilus did proceed to condemn the Origenists without regard to the Pope Epiphanius did demand satisfaction of John of Jerusalem 4. This common right of Bishops in some cases is confirmed by the nature of such Censures which consisted in disclaiming persons notoriously guilty of Heresie Schism or Scandal and in refusing to entertain communion with them which every Bishop as entitled to the common Interests of Faith and Peace might do 5. Indeed in such a case every Christian had a right yea an obligation to desert his own Bishop So John of Hierusalem having given suspicion of Errour in Faith St. Epiphanius did write Letters to the Monks of Palestine not to communicate with him till they were satisfied of his Orthodoxy Upon which account St. Hierome living in Palestine did decline communication with the Patriarch thereof asking him if it were any where said to him or commanded that without satisfaction concerning his faith they were bound to maintain communion with him So every Bishop yea every Christian hath a kind of Universal Jurisdiction 6. If any Pope did assume more than was allowed in this case by the Canons or was common to other Bishops of his rank it was an irregularity and an usurpation Nor would Examples if any were producible serve to justifie him or to ground a right thereto any more than the extravagant proceedings of other pragmatical and factious Bishops in the same kind whereof so many instances can be alledged can assert such a power to any Bishop 7. When the Pope hath attempted in this kind his power hath been disavowed as an illegal upstart pretence 8. Other Bishops have taken upon them when they apprehended cause to discard and depose Popes So did the Oriental Faction at Sardica depose Pope Julius for transgressing as they supposed the Laws of the Church in fostering hereticks and criminal persons condemned by Synods So did the Synod of Antioch threaten Deposition to the same Pope So did the Patriarch Dioscorus make shew to reject Pope Leo from communion So did St. Hilary anathematize Pope Liberius 9. Popes when there was great occasion and they had a great mind to exert their utmost power have not yet presumed by themselves without joint authority of Synods to condemn Bishops so Pope Julius did not presume to depose Eusebius of Nicomedia his great Adversary and so much obnoxious by his patronizing Arianism Pope Innocent did not censure Theophilus and his Complices who so irregularly and wrongfully had extruded St. Chrysostome although much displeased with them but endeavoured to get a General Synod to doe the business Pope Leo I. though a man of spirit and animosity sufficient would not without assistence of a Synod attempt to judge Dioscorus who had so highly provoked him and given so much advantage against him by favouring Eutyches and persecuting the Orthodox Indeed often we may presume that Popes would have deposed Bishops if they had thought it regular or if others commonly had received that opinion so that they could have expected success in their attempting it But they many times were angry when their horns were short and shewed their teeth when they could not bite 10. What has been done in this kind by Popes jointly with others or in Synods especially upon advantage when the cause was just and plausible is not to be ascribed to the authority of Popes as such It might be done with their influence not by their authority so the Synod of Sardica not Pope Julius cashiered the enemies of Athanasius so the Synod of Chalcedon not Pope Leo deposed Dioscorus so the Roman Synod not Pope Celestine checked Nestorius and that of Ephesus deposed him The whole Western Synod whereof he was President had a great sway 11. If Instances were Arguments of Right there would be other pretenders to the Deposing power Particular Bishops would have it as we before shewed 12. The People would have the power for they have sometimes deposed popes themselves with effect So of Pope Constantine Platina telleth us at length he is deposed by the people of Rome being very much provoked by the indignity of the matter 13. There are many Instances of Bishops being removed or deposed by the Imperial authority This power was indeed necessarily annexed to the Imperial dignity for all Bishops being Subjects
no more than acknowledging a person although rejected by undue Sentence to be de jure worthy of communion and capable of the Episcopal Office upon which may be consequent an Obligation to communicate with him and to allow him his due Character according to the Precept of Saint Paul Follow righteousness faith charity peace with them that call upon the Lord with a pure heart This may be done when any man notoriously is persecuted for the Truth and Righteousness Or when the iniquity and malice of pretended Judges are apparent to the oppression of Innocence Or when the Process is extremely irregular as in the cases of Athanasius of St. Chrysostome And this is not an act of Jurisdiction but of Equity and Charity incumbent on all Bishops And there are promiscuous Instances of Bishops practising it Thus Socrates saith that Maximus Bishop of Jerusalem did restore communion and dignity to Athanasius And so Cyril of Alexandria and John of Antioch being reconciled and reduced to a good understanding of each other did restore to each other their Sees rescinding the Censures which in heat they had denounced each on other Which sheweth that Restitution is not always taken for an act of Jurisdiction wherein one is Superiour to another for those persons were in rank and power co-ordinate 2. Restitution sometime doth import no more than a considerable influence toward the effects of restoring a person to communion or Office no judicial act being exercised about the case The Emperour writing that Paulus and Athanasius should be restor'd to their Sees availed nothing That was a Restitution without effect Thus a Pope's avowing the Orthodoxy or Innocence or Worth of a person after a due information about them by reason of the Pope's eminent rank in the Church and the regard duely had to him might sometimes much conduce to restore a person and might obtain the name of Restitution by an ordinary scheme of speech 3. Sometimes persons said to be restored by Popes are also said to be restored by Synods with regard to such instance or testimony of Popes in their behalf In which case the Judicial Restitution giving right of Recovery and completion thereto was the act of the Synod 4. When Cases were driven to a legal debate Popes could not effectually resolve without a Synod their single acts not being held sufficiently valid So notwithstanding the Declarations of Pope Julius in favour of Athanasius for the effectual resolution of his case the great Synod of Sardica was convened So whatever Pope Innocent I. did endeavour he could not restore St. Chrysostome without a General Synod Nor could Pope Leo restore Flavianus deposed in the Second Ephesine Synod without convocation of a General Synod the which he did so often sue for to the Emperour Theodosius for that purpose Pope Simplicius affirmed that Petrus Moggus having been by a common decree condemned as an adulterer or Usurper of the Alexandrian See could not without a common Council be freed from condemnation 5. Particular instances do not ascertain right to the Person who assumeth any power for busie bodies often will exceed their bounds 6. Emperours did sometimes restore Bishops Constantine as he did banish Eusebius of Nicomedia and others so he did revoke and restore them so says Socrates They were recall'd from banishment by the Emperour's command and receiv'd their Churches Theodosius did assert to Flavianus his right whereof the Popes did pretend to deprive him which did amount to a Restitution at least to the Romanists who do assert Flavianus to be deposed by the Popes Instantius and Priscillianus were by the rescript of the Emperour Gratianus restored to their Churches Justinian did order Pope Silverius to be restored in case he could prove his Innocence 7. Commonly Restitution was not effectual without the Emperour's consent whence Theodoret although allowed by the great Synod did acknowledge his Restitution especially due to the Emperour as we shall see in reflecting on his case Now to the particular Instances produced for the Pope we answer 1. They pretend that Pope Stephanus did restore Basilides and Martialis Spanish Bishops who had been deposed for which they quote St. Cyprian's Epistle where he says Basilides going to Rome imposed upon our Collegue Stephen who lived a great way off and was ignorant of the truth of the matter seeking unjustly to be restored to his Bishoprick from which he had justly been deposed But we answer The Pope did attempt such a Restitution by way of Influence and Testimony not of Jurisdiction wherefore the result of his act in St. Cyprian's judgment was null and blameable which could not be so deemed if he had acted as a Judge for a favourable Sentence passed by just Authority is valid and hardly liable to Censure The Clergy of those places notwithstanding that pretended Restitution did conceive those Bishops uncapable and did request the judgment of St. Cyprian about it which argueth the Pope's judgment not to have been peremptory and prevalent then in such cases St. Cyprian denieth the Pope or any other person to have power of restoring in such a case and exhorteth the Clergy to persist in declining the communion of those Bishops Well doth Rigaltius ask why they should write to St. Cyprian if the judgment of Stephanus was decisive and he addeth that indeed the Spaniards did appeal from the Roman Bishop to him of Carthage No wonder seeing the Pope had no greater authority and probably St. Cyprian had the fairer reputation for wisedom and goodness Considering which things what can they gain by this Instance which indeed doth considerably make against them 2. They alledge the Restitution of Athanasius and of others linked in cause with him by Pope Julius He says Sozomen as having the care of all by reason of the dignity of his See restored to each his own Church I answer the Pope did not restore them judicially but declaratively that is declaring his approbation of their right and innocence did admit them to communion Julius in his own Defence did alledge that Athanasius was not legally rejected so that without any prejudice to the Canons he might receive him and the doing it upon this account plainly did not require any Act of Judgment Nay it was necessary to avow those Bishops as suffering in the cause of the common Faith Besides the Pope's proceeding was taxed and protested against as irregular nor did he defend it by virtue of a general power that he had judicially to rescind the acts of Synods And lastly the Restitution of Athanasius and the other Bishops had no complete effect till it was confirmed by the Synod of Sardica backed by the Imperial authority which in effect did restore them This instance therefore is in many respects deficient as to their purpose 3. They produce Marcellus being restored by the same Pope Julius But that Instance beside the forementioned defects hath this that the
as well in the places and bounds of Ecclesiastical Jurisdiction as of Secular Empire Wherefore Saint Peter's Monarchy reason requiring might be cantonized into divers spiritual Supremacies and as other Ecclesiastical Jurisdictions have been chopp'd and chang'd enlarged or diminished removed and extinguished so might that of the Roman Bishop The Pope cannot retain power in any State against the will of the Prince he is not bound to suffer correspondences with Foreigners especially such who apparently have interests contrary to his honour and the good of his people 5. Especially that might be done if the continuance of such a Jurisdiction should prove abominably corrupt or intolerably grievous to the Church 6. That power is defectible which according to the nature and course of things doth sometime fail But the Papal Succession hath often been interrupted by contingencies of Sedition Schism Intrusion Simoniacal Election Deposition c. as before shewed and is often interrupted by Vacancies from the death of the Incumbents 7. If leaving their dubious and false suppositions concerning Divine Institution Succession to Saint Peter c. we consider the truth of the case and indeed the more grounded plea of the Pope that Papal preeminence was obtained by the wealth and dignity of the Roman City and by the collation or countenance of the Imperial authority then by the defect of such advantages it may cease or be taken away for when Rome hath ceased to be the Capital City the Pope may cease to be Head of the Church When the Civil powers which have succeeded the Imperial each in its respective Territory are no less absolute than it they may take it away if they judge it fit for whatever power was granted by humane Authority by the same may be revoked and what the Emperour could have done each Sovereign power now may doe for it self An indefectible power cannot be settled by man because there is no power ever extant at one time greater than there is at another so that whatever power one may raise the other may demolish there being no bounds whereby the present time may bind all posterity However no humane Law can exempt any Constitution from the providence of God which at pleasure can dissolve whatever man hath framed And if the Pope were devested of all adventitious power obtained by humane means he would be left very bare and hardly would take it worth his while to contend for Jurisdiction 8. However or whencesoever the Pope had his Authority yet it may be forfeited by defects and defaults incurred by him If the Pope doth encroach on the rights and liberties of others usurping a lawless domination beyond reason and measure they may in their own defence be forced to reject him and shake off his yoke If he will not be content to govern otherwise than by infringing the Sacred Laws and trampling down the inviolable Privileges of the Churches either granted by Christ or established by the Sanctions of General Synods he thereby depriveth himself of all Authority because it cannot be admitted upon tolerable terms without greater wrong of many others whose right out-weigheth his and without great mischief to the Church the good of which is to be preferred before his private advantage This was the Maxime of a great Pope a great stickler for his own dignity for when the Bishop of Constantinople was advanced by a General Synod above his ancient pitch of dignity that Pope opposing him did say that whoever doth affect more than his due doth lose that which properly belonged to him the which Rule if true in regard to another's case may be applied to the Pope for with what judgment ye judge ye shall be judged and with what measure ye mete it shall be measured to you again On such a supposition of the Papal encroachment we may return his words upon him It is too proud and immoderate a thing to stretch beyond ones bounds and in contempt of antiquity to be willing to invade other mens right and to oppose the Primacies of so many Metropolitans on purpose to advance the dignity of one For the privileges of Churches being instituted by the Canons of the holy Fathers and fixt by the Decrees of the venerable Synod of Nice cannot be pluckt up by any wicked attempt nor altered by any innovation Far be it from me that I should in any Church infringe the Decrees of our Ancestours made in favour of my Fellow-priests for I do my self injury if I disturb the rights of my brethren The Pope surely according to any ground of Scripture or Tradition or ancient Law hath no Title to greater Principality in the Church than the Duke of Venice hath in that State Now if the Duke of Venice in prejudice to the publick right and liberty should attempt to stretch his power to an absoluteness of command or much beyond the bounds allowed him by the constitution of that Common-wealth he would thereby surely forfeit his Supremacy such as it is and afford cause to the State of rejecting him the like occasion would the Pope give to the Church by the like demeanour 9. The Pope by departing from the Doctrine and Practice of Saint Peter would forfeit his Title of Successour to him for in such a case no succession in place or in name could preserve it The Popes themselves had swerved and degenerated from the example of Peter They are not the Sons of the Saints who hold the places of the Saints but they that doe their works Which place is rased out of St. Hierome They have not the inheritance of Peter who have not the faith of Peter which they tear asunder by ungodly division So Gregory Nazianzene saith of Athanasius that he was Successour of Mark no less in piety than presidency the which we must suppose to be properly succession otherwise the Mufti of Constantinople is Successour to St. Andrew of St. Chrysostome c. the Mufti of Jerusalem to St. James If then the Bishop of Rome instead of teaching Christian Doctrine doth propagate Errours contrary to it If instead of guiding into Truth and Godliness he seduceth into Falshood and Impiety If instead of declaring and pressing the Laws of God he delivereth and imposeth Precepts opposite prejudicial destructive of God's Laws If instead of promoting genuine Piety he doth in some instances violently oppose it If instead of maintaining true Religion he doth pervert and corrupt it by bold Defalcations by Superstitious additions by Foul mixtures and alloys If he coineth new Creeds Articles of Faith new Scriptures new Sacraments new Rules of Life obtruding them on the Consciences of Christians If he conformeth the Doctrines of Christianity to the Interests of his Pomp and Profit making gain godliness If he prescribe Vain Profane Superstitious ways of Worship turning Devotion into Foppery and Pageantry If instead of preserving Order and Peace he fomenteth Discords and Factions in the Church being a Make-bate and Incendiary among
such a kind Unity which is a sufficient Proof that it hath no firm ground We may say of it as Saint Austin saith of the Church it self I will not that the Holy Church be demonstrated from humane reasonings but the Divine Oracles Saint Paul particularly in divers Epistles designedly treating about the Unity of the Church together with other Points of Doctrine neighbouring thereon and amply describing it doth not yet imply any such Unity then extant or designed to be He doth mention and urge the Unity of Spirit of Faith of Charity of Peace of Relation to our Lord of Communion in Devotions and Offices of Piety but concerning any Union under one singular visible Government or Polity he is silent He saith One Lord one Faith one Baptism one God and Father of all not one Monarch or one Senate or one Sanhedrin which is a pregnant sign that none such was then instituted otherwise he could not have slipped over a Point so very material and pertinent to his Discourse 2. By the Apostolical History it may appear that the Apostles in the Propagation of Christianity and founding of Christian Societies had no meaning did take no care to establish any such Polity They did resort to several places whither Divine instinct or reasonable occasion did carry them where by their Preaching having convinced and converted a competent number of persons to the embracing Christian Doctrine they did appoint Pastours to instruct and edifie them to administer God's Worship and Service among them to contain them in good order and peace exhorting them to maintain good correspondence of Charity and Peace with all good Christians otherwhere this is all we can see done by them 3. The Fathers in their set Treatises and in their incidental Discourses about the Unity of the Church which was de facto which should be de jure in the Church do make it to consist onely in those Unions of Faith Charity Peace which we have described not in this political Union The Roman Church gave this reason why they could not admit Marcion into their Communion they would not doe it without his Father's consent between whom and them there was one faith and one agreement of mind Tertullian in his Apologetick describing the Unity of the Church in his time saith We are one body by our Agreement in religion our Vnity of discipline and our being in the same Covenant of hope And more exactly or largely in his Prescriptions against Hereticks the breakers of Unity Therefore such and so many Churches are but the same with the first Apostolical one from which all are derived thus they become all first all Apostolical whilst they maintain the same Vnity whilst there are a Communion of peace names of brotherhood and contributions of hospitality among them the rights of which are kept up by no other means but the one tradition of the same Mystery They and we have one Faith one God the same Christ the same Hope the same Baptism in a word we are but one Church And Constantine the Great in his Epistle to the Churches Our Saviour would have his Catholick Church to be one the members of which though they be divided into many and different places are yet cherisht by one Spirit that is by the will of God And Gregory the Great Our Head which is Christ would therefore have us be his members that by the joints of Charity and Faith he might make us one body in himself Clem. Alex. defineth the Church A people gathered together out of Jews and Gentiles into one Faith by the giving of the Testaments fitted into Vnity of Faith This one Church therefore partakes of the nature of Vnity which Heresies violently endeavour to divide into many and therefore we affirm the ancient and Catholick Church whether we respect its constitution or our conception of it its beginning or its excellency to be but one which into the belief of that one Creed which is agreeable to its own peculiar Testaments or rather to that one and the same Testament in times however different by the will of one and the same God through one and the same Lord doth unite and combine together all those who are before ordained whom God hath predestinated as knowing that they would be just persons before the foundation of the world Many Passages in the Fathers applicable to this Point we have alledged in the foregoing Discourses 4. The constitution of such an Unity doth involve the vesting some Person or some number of Persons with a Sovereign Authority subordinate to our Lord to be managed in a certain manner either absolutely according to pleasure or limitedly according to certain Rules prescribed to it But that there was ever any such Authority constituted or any Rules prescribed to it by our Lord or his Apostles doth not appear and there are divers reasonable presumptions against it It is reasonable that whoever claimeth such Authority should for assuring his Title shew Patents of his Commission manifestly expressing it how otherwise can he justly demand Obedience or any with satisfaction yield thereto It was just that the Institution of so great Authority should be fortified with an undoubted charter that its Right might be apparent and the Duty of Subjection might be certain If any such Authority had been granted by God in all likelihood it would have been clearly mentioned in Scripture it being a matter of high importance among the establishments of Christianity conducing to great effects and grounding much duty Especially considering that There is in Scripture frequent occasion of mentioning it in way of History touching the use of it the acts of Sovereign Power affording chief matter to the History of any Society in way of Direction to those Governours how to manage it in way of Exhortation to Inferiours how to behave themselves in regard to it in way of commending the Advantages which attend it it is therefore strange that its mention is so balkt The Apostles do often speak concerning Ecclesiastical Affairs of all natures concerning the Decent administration of things concerning preservation of Order and Peace concerning the furtherance of Edification concerning the Prevention and Removal of Heresies Schisms Factions Disorders upon any of which occasions it is marvellous that they should not touch that Constitution which was the proper means appointed for maintenance of Truth Order Peace Decency Edification and all such Purposes for remedy of all contrary Mischiefs There are mentioned divers Schisms and Dissensions the which the Apostles did strive by instruction and persuasion to remove in which Cases supposing such an Authority in being it is a wonder that they do not mind the Parties dissenting of having recourse thereto for decision of their Causes that they do not exhort them to a Submission thereto that they do not reprove them for declining such a Remedy It is also strange that no mention is made of any Appeal made by
any of the dissenting Parties to the Judgment of such Authority Indeed if such an Authority had then been avowed by the Christian Churches it is hardly conceivable that any Schisms could subsist there being so powerfull a Remedy against them then notably visible and most effectual because of its fresh Institution before it was darkned or weakned by Age. Whereas the Apostolical Writings do inculcate our Subjection to one Lord in Heaven it is much they should never consider his Vicegerent or Vicegerents upon Earth notifying and pressing the Duties of Obedience and Reverence toward them There are indeed Exhortations to honour the Elders and to obey the Guides of particular Churches but the Honour and Obedience due to those Paramount Authorities or Universal Governours is passed over in dead silence as if no such thing had been thought of They do expresly avow the Secular Pre-eminence and press Submission to the Emperour as Supreme why do they not likewise mention this no less considerable Ecclesiastical Supremacy or enjoin Obedience thereto why Honour the King and be subject to Principalities so often but Honour the Spiritual Prince or Senate doth never occur If there had been any such Authority there would probably have been some intimation concerning the Persons in whom it was setled concerning the Place of their residence concerning the Manner of its being conveyed by Election Succession or otherwise Probably the Persons would have some proper Name Title or Character to distinguish them from inferiour Governours that to the Place some mark of Pre-eminence would have been affixed It is not unlikely that somewhere some Rules or Directions would have been prescribed for the management of so high a Trust for preventing Miscarriages and Abuses to which it is notoriously liable It would have been declared Absolute or the Limits of it would have been determined to prevent its enslaving God's heritage But of these things in the Apostolical Writings or in any near those times there doth not appear any footstep or pregnant intimation There hath never to this day been any place but one namely Rome which hath pretended to be the Seat of such an Authority the Plea whereof we largely have examined At present we shall onely observe that before the Roman Church was founded there were Churches otherwhere there was a great Church at Jerusalem which indeed was the Mother of all Churches and was by the Fathers so styled however Rome now doth arrogate to her self that Title There were issuing from that Mother a fair Offspring of Churches those of Judaea of Galilaea of Samaria of Syria and Cilicia of divers other places before there was any Church at Rome or that Saint Peter did come thither which was at least divers years after our Lord's Ascension Saint Paul was converted after five years he went to Hierusalem then Saint Peter was there after fourteen years thence he went to Hierusalem again and then Saint Peter was there after that he met with Saint Peter at Antioch Where then was this Authority seated How then did the political Unity of the Church subsist Was the Seat of the Sovereign Authority first resident at Jerusalem when Saint Peter preached there Did it walk thence to Antiochia fixing it self there for seven years Was it thence translated to Rome and setled there ever since Did this roving and inconstancy become it 5. The primitive State of the Church did not well comport with such an Unity For Christian Churches were founded in distant places as the Apostles did find opportunity or received direction to found them which therefore could not without extreme inconvenience have resort or reference to one Authority any where fixed Each Church therefore separately did order its own Affairs without recourse to others except for charitable Advice or Relief in cases of extraordinary difficulty or urgent need Each Church was endowed with a perfect Liberty and a full Authority without dependence or subordination to others to govern its own Members to manage its own Affairs to decide Controversies and Causes incident among themselves without allowing Appeals or rendring Accounts to others This appeareth by the Apostolical Writings of Saint Paul and Saint John to single Churches wherein they are supposed able to exercise spiritual Power for establishing Decency removing Disorders correcting Offences deciding Causes c. 6. This 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and Liberty of Churches doth appear to have long continued in practice inviolate although tempered and modelled in accommodation to the circumstances of place and time It is true that if any Church did notoriously forsake the Truth or commit Disorder in any kind other Churches did sometime take upon them as the Case did move to warn advise reprove it and to declare against its proceedings as prejudicial not onely to the welfare of that Church but to the common interests of Truth and Peace but this was not in way of commanding Authority but of fraternal Solicitude or of that Liberty which Equity and Prudence do allow to Equals in regard to common good So did the Roman Church interpose in reclaiming the Church of Corinth from its Disorders and Seditions So did Saint Cyprian and Saint Denys of Alex. meddle in the Affairs of the Roman Church exhorting Novatian and his Adherents to return to the Peace of their Church It is also true that the Bishops of several adjacent Churchs did use to meet upon Emergencies concerning the maintenance of Truth Order and Peace concerning Settlement and Approbation of Pastours c. to consult and conclude upon Expedients for attaining such Ends this probably they did at first in a free way without rule according to occasion as Prudence suggested but afterwards by confederation and consent those Conventions were formed into method and regulated by certain Orders established by consent whence did arise an Ecclesiastical Unity of Government within certain Precincts much like that of the United States in the Netherlands the which course was very prudential and usefull for preserving the Truth of Religion and Unity of Faith against heretical Devices springing up in that free age for maintaining Concord and good Correspondence among Christians together with an Harmony in Manners and Discipline for that otherwise Christendom would have been shattered and crumbled into numberless Parties discordant in Opinion and Practice and consequently alienated in Affection which inevitably among most men doth follow Difference of Opinion and Manners so that in short time it would not have appeared what Christianity was and consequently the Religion being overgrown with Differences and Discords must have perished Thus in the case about admitting the Lapsi to Communion Saint Cyprian relates when the persecution of Decius ceased so that leave was now given us to meet in one place together a considerable number of Bishops whom their own faith and God's protection had preserved sound and entire from the late Apostasie and Persecution being assembled we deliberated of the composition of the matter with wholsome moderation
c. Which thing also Agrippinus of blessed memory with his other Fellow-bishops who then governed the Church of Christ in the African Province and in Numidia did establish and by the well-weighed examination of the common advice of them all together confirmed it Thus it was the custome in the Churches of Asia as Firmilian telleth us in those words Vpon which occasion it necessarily happens that every year we the Elders and Rulers do come together to regulate those things which are committed to our care that if there should be any things of greater moment by common advice they be determined Yet while things went thus in order to common Truth and Peace every Church in more private matters touching its own particular state did retain its Liberty and Authority without being subject or accountable to any but the common Lord in such cases even Synods of Bishops did not think it proper or just for them to interpose to the prejudice of that Liberty and Power which derived from a higher Source These things are very apparent as by the course of Ecclesiastical History so particularly in that most pretious Monument of Antiquity St. Cyprian's Epistles by which it is most evident that in those times every Bishop or Pastour was conceived to have a double relation or capacity one toward his own Flock another toward the whole Flock One toward his own Flock by virtue of which he taking advice of his Presbyters together with the conscience of his People assisting did order all things tending to particular Edification Order Peace Reformation Censure c. without fear of being troubled by Appeals or being liable to give any account but to his own Lord whose Vicegerent he was Another toward the whole Church in behalf of his People upon account whereof he did according to occasion or order apply himself to confer with other Bishops for preservation of the common Truth and Peace when they could not otherwise be well upheld than by the joint conspiring of the Pastours of divers Churches So that the Case of Bishops was like to that of Princes each of whom hath a free Superintendence in his own Territory but for to uphold Justice and Peace in the World or between adjacent Nations the entercourse of several Princes is needfull The Peace of the Church was preserved by communion of all Parts together not by the subjection of the rest to one Part. 7. This political Unity doth not well accord with the nature and genius of the Evangelical dispensation Our Saviour affirmed that his Kingdom is not of this World and Saint Paul telleth us that it consisteth in a Spiritual influence upon the Souls of men producing in them Vertue Spiritual Joy and Peace It disavoweth and discountenanceth the elements of the world by which worldly designs are carried on and worldly frames sustained It requireth not to be managed by politick artifices or fleshly wisedom but by Simplicity Sincerity Plain-dealing as every Subject of it must lay aside all guile and dissimulation so especially the Officers of it must doe so in conformity to the Apostles who had their conversation in the world and prosecuted their design in simplicity and godly sincerity not with fleshly wisedom but by the grace of God not walking in craftiness or handling the word of God deceitfully c. It needeth not to be supported or enlarged by wealth and pomp or by compulsive force and violence for God hath chosen the foolish things of the world to confound the wise and the weak things of the world to confound the mighty and base despicable things c. that no flesh should gloâ—y in his presence And The weapons of our warfare are not carnal but mighty through God c. It discountenanceth the imposition of new Laws and Precepts beside those which God hath injoined or which are necessary for order and edification derogating from the Liberty of Christians and from the Simplicity of our Religion The Government of the Christian State is represented purely spiritual administred by meek persuasion not by imperious awe as an humble ministery not as stately domination for the Apostles themselves did not Lord it over mens faith but did co-operate to their joy they did not preach themselves but Christ Jesus to be the Lord and themselves their servants for Jesus It is expresly forbidden to them to domineer over God's people They are to be qualified with Gentleness and Patience they are forbidden to strive and enjoined to be gentle toward all apt to teach patient in meekness instructing those that oppose themselves They are to convince to rebuke to exhort with all long-suffering and doctrine They are furnished with no Arms beside the divine Panoply they bear no sword but that of the Spirit which is the word of God they may teach reprove they cannot compell They are not to be entangled in the cares of this life But supposing the Church was designed to be one in this manner of political regiment it must be quite another thing nearly resembling a worldly state yea in effect soon resolving it self into such an one supposing as is now pretended that its management is committed to an Ecclesiastical Monarch it must become a worldly Kingdom for such a Polity could not be upheld without applying the same means and engines without practising the same methods and arts whereby secular Governments are maintained It s Majesty must be supported by conspicuous Pomp and Phantastry It s Dignity and Power must be supported by Wealth which it must corrade and accumulate by large Incomes by exaction of Tributes and Taxes It must exert Authority in enacting of Laws for keeping its State in order and securing its Interests backed with Rewards and Pains especially considering its Title being so dark and grounded on no clear warrant many always will contest it It must apply Constraint and Force for procuring Obedience and correcting Transgression It must have Guards to preserve its Safety and Authority It must be engaged in Wars to defend its self and make good its Interests It must use Subtilty and Artifice for promoting its Interests and countermine the Policies of Adversaries It must erect Judicatories and must decide Causes with Formality of legal process whence tedious Suits crafty Pleadings Quirks of Law and Pettifoggeries Fees and Charges Extortion and Barretry c. will necessarily creep in All which things do much disagree from the original constitution and design of the Christian Church which is averse from pomp doth reject domination doth not require craft wealth or force to maintain it but did at first and may subsist without any such means I do not say that an Ecclesiastical Society may not lawfully for its support use Power Policy wealth in some measure to uphold or defend it self but that a Constitution needing such things is not Divine or that so far as it doth use them it is
offices of humanity toward their subjects travelling or trading any where in the World common Reason doth require such things But may common Unity of Polity from hence be inferr'd Arg. X. The effectuâ—â— Preservation of Unity in the primitive Church is alledged as a strong Argument of its being united in one Government Answ. 1. That Unity of Faith and Charity and Discipline which we admit was indeed preserved not by influence of any one Sovereign Authority whereof there is no mention but by the concurrent vigilance of Bishops declaring and disputing against any Novelty in Doctrine or Practice which did start up by their adherence to the Doctrine asserted in Scripture and confirmed by Tradition by their aiding and abetting one another as Confederates against Errours and Disorders creeping in Answ. 2. The many Differences which arose concerning the Observation of Easter the Re-baptization of Hereticks the Reconciliation of Revolters and scandalous Criminals concerning the decision of Causes and Controversies c. do more clearly shew that there was no standing common Jurisdiction in the Church for had there been such an one recourse would have been had thereto and such Differences by its Authority would easily have been quashed Arg. XI Another Argument is grounded on the Relief which one Church did yield to another which supposeth all Churches under one Government imposing such Tribute Answ. 1. This is a strange Fetch as if all who were under obligation to relieve one another in need were to be under one Government Then all Mankind must be so Answ. 2. It appeareth by St. Paul that these Succours were of free Charity Favour and Liberality and not by Constraint Arg. XII The use of Councils is also alledged as an Argument of this Unity Answ. 1. General Councils in case Truth is disowned that Peace is disturbed that Discipline is loosed or perverted are wholsome Expedients to clear Truth and heal Breaches but the holding them is no more an Argument of political Unity in the Church than the Treaty of Munster was a sign of all Europe being under one civil Government Answ. 2. They are extraordinary arbitrary prudential means of restoring Truth Peace Order Discipline but from them nothing can be gathered concerning the continual ordinary State of the Church Answ. 3. For during a long time the Church wanted them and afterwards had them but rarely For the first three hundred years saith Bell. there was no general assembly afterwards scarce one in a hundred years And since the breach between the Oriental and Western Churches for many Centenaries there hath been none Yet was the Church from the beginning One till Constantine and long afterwards Answ. 4. The first General Councils indeed all that have been with any probable shew capable of that denomination were congregated by Emperours to cure the Dissentions of Bishops what therefore can be argued from them but that the Emperours did find it good to settle Peace and Truth and took this for a good mean thereto Alb. Pighius said that General Councils were an invention of Constantine and who can confute him Answ. 5. They do shew rather the Unity of the Empire than of the Church or of the Church as National under one Empire than as Catholick for it was the State which did call and moderate them to its Purposes Answ. 6. It is manifest that the congregation of them dependeth on the permission and pleasure of secular Powers and in all equity should do so as otherwhere is shewed Answ. 7. It is not expedient that there should be any of them now that Christendom slandeth divided under divers temporal Sovereignties for their Resolutions may intrench on the Interests of some Princes and hardly can they be accommodated to the Civil Laws and Customs of every State Whence we see that France will not admit the Decrees of their Tridentine Synod Answ. 8. There was no such inconvenience in them while Christendom was in a manner confined within one Empire for then nothing could be decreed or executed without the Emperour's leave or to his prejudice Answ. 9. Yea as things now stand it is impossible there should be a free Council most of the Bishops being sworn Vassals and Clients to the Pope and by their own Interests concerned to maintain his exorbitant Grandeur and Domination Answ. 10. In the opinion of St. Athanasius there was no reasonable cause of Synods except in case of new Heresies springing up which may be confuted by the joint consent of Bishops Answ. 11. As for particular Synods they do onely signifie that it was usefull for neighbour Bishops to conspire in promoting Truth Order and Peace as we have otherwhere shewed Councils have often been convened for bad Designs and been made Engines to oppress Truth and enslave Christendom That of Antioch against Athanasius of Ariminum for Arianism The second Ephesine to restore Eutyches and reject Flavianus The second of Nice to impose the Worship of Babies The Synod of Ariminum to countenance Arians So the fourth Synod of Laterane sub Inn. III. to settle the prodigious Doctrine of Transubstantiation and the wicked Doctrine of Papal Authority over Princes The first Synod of Lions to practise that hellish Doctrine of Deposing Kings The Synod of Constance to establish the maime of the Eucharist against the Calistines of Bohemia The Laterane under Leo X. was called as the Arch-bishop of Patras affirmed for the Exaltation of the Apostolical See The Synod of Trent to settle a raff of Errours and Superstitions Obj. II. It may farther be objected that this Doctrine doth favour the Conceits of the Independents concerning Ecclesiastical Discipline I answer No. For 1. We do assert that every Church is bound to observe the Institutions of Christ and that sort of Government which the Apostles did ordain consisting of Bishops Priests and People 2. We avow it expedient in conformity to the primitive Churches and in order to the maintenance of Truth Order Peace for several particular Churches or Parishes to be combined in political Corporations as shall be found convenient by those who have just Authority to frame such Corporations for that otherwise Christianity being shattered into numberless shreds could hardly subsist and that great Confusions must arise 3. We affirm that such Bodies having been established and being maintained by just Authority every man is bound to endeavour the upholding of them by Obedience by peaceable and compliant Demeanour 4. We acknowledge it a great Crime by factious behaviour in them or by needless separation from them to disturb them to divide them to dissolve or subvert them 5. We conceive it fit that every People under one Prince or at least of one Nation using the same Language Civil Law and Fashions should be united in the bands of Ecclesiastical Polity for that such a Unity apparently is conducible to the peace and welfare both of Church and State to the furtherance of God's worship and
Service to the edification of People in Charity and Piety by the encouragement of secular Powers by the concurrent advice and aid of Ecclesiastical Pastours by many advantages hence arising 6. We suppose all Churches obliged to observe friendly communion and when occasion doth invite to aid each other by assistence and advice in Synods of Bishops or otherwise 7. We do affirm that all Churches are obliged to comply with lawfull Decrees and Orders appointed in Synods with consent of their Bishops and allowed by the Civil Authorities under which they live As if the Bishops of Spain and France assembling should agree upon Constitutions of Discipline which the Kings of both those Countries should approve and which should not thwart God's Laws both those Churches and every man in them were bound to comply in observance of them From the Premisses divers Corollaries may be deduced 1. Hence it appeareth that all those clamours of the pretended Catholicks against other Churches for not submitting to the Roman Chair are groundless they depending on the supposition that all Churches must necessarily be united under one Government 2. The Injustice of the Adherents to that See in claiming an Empire or Jurisdiction over all which never was designed by our Lord heavily censuring and fiercely persecuting those who will not acknowledge it 3. All Churches which have a fair settlement in several Countries are co-ordinate neither can one challenge a Jurisdiction over the other 4. The nature of Schism is hence declared viz. that it consisteth in disturbing the Order and Peace of any single Church in withdrawing from it Obedience and Compliance with it in obstructing good Correspondence Charity Peace between several Churches in condemning or censuring other Churches without just cause or beyond due measure In refusing to maintain Communion with other Churches without reasonable cause whence Firmilian did challenge P. Stephanus with Schism 5. Hence the right way of reconciling Dissentions among Christians is not affecting to set up a political Union of several Churches or subordination of all to one Power not for one Church to enterprize upon the Liberty of others or to bring others under it as is the practice of the Roman Church and its Abettors but for each Church to let the others alone quietly enjoying its freedom in Ecclesiastical Administrations onely declaring against apparently hurtfull Errours and Factions shewing Good-will yielding Succour Advice Comfort upon needfull occasion according to that excellent Advice of the Constantinopolitane Fathers to the Pope and Western Bishops after having acquainted them with their proceedings towards the conclusion they thus exhort them We having in a legal and canonical way determined these Controversies do beseech your Reverence to congratulate with us your Charity spiritually interceding the fear of the Lord also compressing all humane affection so as to make us to prefer the edification of the Churches to all private respect and favour toward each other for by this means the word of faith being consonant among us and Christian Charity bearing sway over us we shall cease from speaking after that manner which the Apostle condemns I am of Paul and I am of Apollos but I am of Cephas for if we all do appear to be of Christ who is not divided amongst us we shall then through God's grace preserve the body of the Church from Schism and present our selves before the throne of Christ with boldness 6. All that withdraw their communion or obeysance from particular Churches fairly established unto which they do belong or where they reside do incur the guilt of Schism for such persons being de Jure subject to those particular Churches and excommunicating themselves do consequentially sever themselves from the Catholick Church they commit great wrong toward that particular Church and toward the whole Church of Christ. 7. Neither doth their pretence of joining themselves to the Roman Church excuse them from Schism for the Roman Church hath no reason or right to admit or to avow them it hath no power to exempt or excuse them from their duty it thereby abetteth their Crime and involveth it self therein it wrongeth other Churches As no man is freed from his Allegiance by pretending to put himself under the protection of another Prince neither can another Prince justly receive such disloyal Revolters into his Patronage It is a Rule grounded upon apparent Equity and frequently declared by Ecclesiastical Canons that no Church shall admit into its protection or communion any persons who are excommunicated by another Church or who do withdraw themselves from it for Self-excommunication or Spiritual felony de se doth involve the Churches Excommunication deserving it and preventing it Which Canon as the African Fathers do alledge and expound it doth prohibit the Pope himself from receiving persons rejected by any other Church So when Marcion having been excommunicated by his own Father coming to Rome did sue to be received by that Church into communion they refused telling him that they could not doe it without the consent of his Reverend Father between whom and them there being one faith and one agreement of mind they could not doe it in opposition to their worthy fellow-labourer who was also his Father St. Cyprian refused to admit Maximus sent from the Novatian party to communion So did P. Cornelius reject Felicissimus condemned by St. Cyprian without farther inquiry It was charged upon Dioscorus as a heinous misdemeanour that he had against the Holy Canons by his proper authority received into communion persons excommunicated by others The African Synod at the suggestion of St. Austin decreed that if it happen'd that any for their evil deeds were deservedly expell'd out of the Church and taken again into communion by any Bishop or Priest whosoever that he also who received him should incur the same penalty of Excommunication The same is by latter Papal Synods decreed The Words of Synesius are remarkable He having excommunicated some cruel Oppressours doth thus recommend the case to all Christians Upon which grounds I do not scruple to affirm the Recusants in England to be no less Schismaticks than any other Separatists They are indeed somewhat worse for most others do onely forbear communion these do rudely condemn the Church to which they owe Obedience yea strive to destroy it they are most desperate Rebels against it 8. It is the Duty and Interest of all Churches to disclaim the Pretences of the Roman Court maintaining their Liberties and Rights against its Usurpations For Compliance therewith as it doth greatly prejudice Truth and Piety leaving them to be corrupted by the ambitious covetous and voluptuous Designs of those men so it doth remove the genuine Unity of the Church and Peace of Christians unless to be tyed by compulsory Chains as Slaves be deemed Unity or Peace 9. Yet those Churches which by the voluntary consent or command of Princes do adhere in confederation to the Roman
Pont. 1.10 Tostat. in Matth. 16. qu. 67. 1 Cor. 3.11 Scio me postea saepissimè exposuisse ut super hanc Petram intelligeretur quem confessus est Petrus harum autem duarum sententiarum quae sit probabilior eligat Lector Aug. Retr 1.21 Vide Aug. in Joh. tr 124. de verb. Dom. in Matt. Serm. 13. Super hanc inquit Petram quam confessus es aedificabe Ecclesiam meam Aug. in Joh. tr 124. de Verb. Dom. in Matt. Serm. 13. Tom. 10. Super hanc Petram id est super me aedificabo Ecclesiam meam Ans. in Matt. 16.18 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Chrys. in Matt. 16.18 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Chrys. in Joh. 1.50 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Chrys. Tom. 5. Or. 163. Super hanc igitur confessionis Petram Ecclesiae aedificatio est Hil. de Trin. 6. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Theod. Ep. 77. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. Orig. in Matt. 16. p. 275. In vera fide persistite vitam vestram in Petra Ecclesiae hoc est in confessione B. Petri Apostolorum Principis solidate Greg. M. Ep. 3.33 Persist in the true Faith and establish and fix your life upon the rock of the Church that is upon the confession of Blessed Peter the Prince of the Apostles Super ista confessione aedificabo Ecclesiam meam Felix III. Ep. 5. Vide Nic. I. Ep. 2 6. Joh. VIII Ep. 76. Vnus pro omnibus loquens Ecclesiae voce respondens Cypr. Ep. 55. One speaking for all and answering in the name of the Church Cui Ecclesiae figuram gerenti Dominus ait Super hanc Aug. Ep. 165. To whom representing the whole Church our Lord saith Vpon this rock c. Petrus ex persona omnium Apostolorum profitetur Hier. in loc Peter professes in the person of all the Apostles Vide Rigalt in Cypr. Ep. 27.40.70.71.73.69 Luke 22.14 Mark 9.34 Matth. 18.1 Matth. 20.24 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 And when the ten heard it they were moved with indignation Quare sunt fundamenta Apostoli Prophetae quia eorum auctoritas portat infirmitatem nostram Aug. in Ps. 86. In illis erant fundamenta ibi primùm posita est fides Ecclesiae Hier. in Ps. 86. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Bas. in If. 2. p. 86â— Petrus à Petra nomen adeptus est quia primus meruit Eâ—clesiam fidei firmitate fundare Chrysol Serm. 53. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. Orig. in Matth. 16. p. 275. Eph. 2.20 Petra Christus est qui donavit Apostolis ut ipsi quoque Petrae vocentur Hier. in Amos. 9.12 Dicis super Petrum sundatur Ecclesia licèt id ipsum in alio loco super omnes Apostolos fiat Hier. in Jovin 1.14 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Basil. in Isa. 2. p. 869. Cypr. Ep. 71 73. Dominus noster Episcopi honorem Ecclesiae suae rationem disponens dicit Petro Ego tibi dico Inde per temporum successionum vices Episcoporum ordinatio Ecclesiae ratio decurrit ut Ecclesia super Episcopos constituatur omnis actus Ecclesiae per eosdem praepositos gubernetur Cypr. Ep. 27. de Vnit. Eccl. Latuit aliquid Petrum aedificandae Ecclesiae Petram dictum Tertull. de Praescr cap. 22. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Chrys. Peter first of all the Apostles preached Christ. Petra dicitâ—r eâ— quòd primus in natiorâ—bus fidei fundamenta posuerit Ambr. de Sanctis Serm. 2. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Bas. contra Eunom lib. 2. Petra aedificandae Ecclesiae Tertull. de praes c. 22. Sic enim exitus docet in ipso Ecclesia extructa est id est per ipsum c. Tert. de pudic cap. 21. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. Chrys. Tom. 5. Or. 59. Matth. 10.2 John 6.69 Loci non immeâ—or sui primatum egit primatum Confessionis non honoris Fidei non ordinis Ambr. de Incarn cap. 4. Per claves datos Petro intelligimus summam potestatem in omnem Ecclesiam Bell. de Pont. 1.3 Dixit Petro dabo tibi claves at non dixit dabo tibi soli Rigalt in Epist. Firmil 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Orig. in Matt. 16. p. 275. Quod Petro dicitur Apostolis dicitur Ambr. in Psal. 38. What is said to Peter is said to the Apostles Licè◠id ipsum in alio loco super omnes Apostolos fiat cuncti claves regni coelorum accipiant Hier. in Jov. 1.14 Though the same thing in another place is done upon all the Apostles and all receive the Keys of the Kingdom of Heaven Claves regni coelorum communicandas caeteris solus accepit Opt. lib. 7. Communicandas caeteris dixit quâ—s ipse Christus communicaturus erat caeteris Rigalt in Cypr. de Vn. Eccl. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Theoph. in loc 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Chrys. in praef Evang. Joh. Claves intelligit verbum Dei Evangelium Christi Rigalt in Cyp. Ep. 73. Episcopi quos constat esse vicarioâ— Christi clavigeros regni coelorum Conc. Compend apud Bin. Tom. 6. p. 361. Transivit quidem in Apostolos alios vis istius potestatis sed non frustra â—ni commendatur quod omnibus intimetur Petro ergò singulariter hoc creditur quia cunctis Ecclesiae rectoribus Petri forma proponitur Leo I. in Nat. Petri Pauli Serm. 2. The efficacy of this Power passed indeed upon all the Apostles yet was it not in vain that what was intimated to all was commended to one Therefore this is committed singly to Peter because Peter's pattern and example is propounded to all the Governours of the Church In B. Petro claves regni coelorum cuncti suscepimus sacerdotes Ambr. de dign Sac. 1. Ecclesia quae fundatur in Christo claves ab eo regni coelorum accepit id est potestatem ligandi solvendique peccata Aug. tract 124. in Joh. vide tract 50. The Church which is founded upon Christ received from him the Keys of the Kingdom of Heaven i. e. the power of binding and loosing Sins In typo unitatis Petro Dominus dedit potestatem Aug. de Bap. 3.17 Our Lord gave the power to Peter as a type of Unity 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Phot. Cod. 280. Such Authority was given to the rest of the Apostles in the person of him who was the chief Non sine causa inter omnes Apostolos Ecclesiae Catholicae personas sustinet Petrus huic enim Ecclesiae claves regni coelorum datae sunt cùm Petro datae sunt Aug. de Ag. Chr. cap. 30. in Ps. 108. Not without cause does Peter among the rest of the Apostles sustain the Person of the Catholick Church for to this Church are the Keys of the Kingdom of Heaven given when they are given unto Peter * August supr Matt. 18.18 John 20.23 Sic enim exitus docet in ipso Ecclesia extructâ— est id est per ipsum ipse clavem imbuit vide quam Viri Israelitae auribus mandate quae dico Jesum Nazerenum virum à Deo vobis destinatum
321. ad Pet. Alex. He grieved us when he said that our godly brethren Meletius and Eusebius were reckoned among the Arians 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Bas. Ep. 10. What help can we have from the pride of the Africans who neither know the truth noâ— endure to learn it P. Zos. I. Ep. 3 4. Deinde quòd inter tantam hominum multitudinem adeò pauci sunt Episcopi amplae singulorum Parochiae ut in subjectis plebibus curam Episcopalis officii nullatenus exequi aut ritè administrare valeant P. Greg. VII Ep. 2.73 And then because in so great a multitude of People there are so few Bishops and every one's Diocese very large that they are in no-wise able to execute or rightly perform the charge of the Episcopal office among the people over whom they are set Cypr. Ep. 55. p. 116. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Chrys. Ep. 102. ad P. Innoc. I. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. For if this custome prevail and if they that will may go to other mens Dioceses at so great a distance and eject whom any man pleases know that all will go to wrack c. Decreta Nicena sive inferioris gradus clericos sive ipsos Episcopos suis Metropâ—litanis apertissimè commiserunt Prudentissimè enim justissiméque viderunt providerunt quaecunque negotia in suis locis ubi orsa sunt finienda Ep. Conc. Afric ad P. Celest. I. in fine Cod. Afric vel apud Dion Eâ—ig Aut quomodo ipsum transmarinum judicium ratum erit ad quod testium necessariae personae vel propter sexûs vel propter senectutis infirmitatem vel multis allis impedimentis adduci non poterunt Ibid. Nè ergo quod inter longinquas regiones accidere solet in nimias dilationes tenderent veritatis examina P. Leo I. Ep. 34. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Theod. 2.16 Inoleverunt autem hactenus intolerabilium vexationum abusus permulti dum nimium frequenter à remotissimis etiam partibus ad Romanam curiam interdum pro parvis minutis rebus ac negotiis quamplurimi citari ac evocari consueverunt c. Vid. Conc. Bas. Sess. 31. p. 86. But hitherto very many intollerable vexatious abuses have prevailed while too often men have been used to be cited and call'd out even from the remotest parts to the Court of Rome and sometimes for slight and trivial businesses and occasions Vid. Hist. Conc. Trid. p. 61. Privilegia istius sedis perpetua sunt divinitùs radicata atque plantata impingi possunt transferri non possunt trahi possunt evelli non possunt P. Nic. I. ad Mich. Imp. The privileges of this See are perpetual rooted and founded upon Divine Authority they may be dashâ— against they cannot be removed they may be drawn aside they cannot be pluck'd up Vid. Concil Bas. Sess. 31. p. 87. Licèt Apostolica praerogativa possimus de qualibet Ecclesia clericum ordinare P. Steph. apud Grat. caus 9. qu. 3. cap. 20. Though by our Apostolical prerogative we may ordain a Clergy-man of any Church Hist. Conc. Trid. p. 60. so they pretend Concil Later 4. sub Innoc. 3. Sitque alienus à divinis Pontificalibus officiis qui noluit praeceptis Apostolicis obtemperare Greg. IV. dist 19. cap. 5. And let him have nothing at all to doe with Divine and Pontifical Offices who would not obey Apostolical Precepts * Vid. Mat. Paris Oportet autem gladium esse sub gladio Temporalem Authoritatem Spirituali subjici potestati Bonif. VIII Extrav Com. 1.8.1 But there must be a sword under a sword and Temporal Authority subject to Spiritual chesâ—a piu ufficio di Ponâ—efici aggiurgere con l'armi col sorgue de Christiani c. Guicc l. 11. p. 858. Quid hodie erant Episcopi nisi umbra quaedam quid plus eis restabat quà m baculus mitra c. An. Sylv. de gestis Syn. Bas. lib. 1. What were Bishops now but kind of shadows what had they left more than a Staff and a Miter c. Concil Lat. 5. Sess. 11. p. 129. De omni Ecclesia jus habet judicandi P. Gelas. Grat. Caus. 9. qu. 3 cap. 18. Secundum plenitudinem potestatis de jure possumus supra jus dispensare Greg. decret lib. 3. tit 8. cap. 4. Hujus culpaâ— isthîc redarguere praesumit mortalium nullus Grat. dist 40. cap. 6. Si Papa Neque cùiquam licere de ejus judicare judicio Caus. 9. qu. 3. cap. 10. Cùm enim obedire Apostolicae sedi superbè contemnunt scâ—lus idololatriae teste Samuele incurrunt Greg. VII Ep. 4.2 Nulli fâ—s est vel velle vel posse transgredi Apostolicae sedis praecepta Greg. IV. apud Grat. dist 19. cap. 5. No man may nor can transgress the commands of the Apostolick See Ab omnibus quicquid statuit quicquid ordinat perpetuò irrefragabiliter observandum est Ibid. cap. 4. P. Steph. Whatever he decrees whatever he ordains must always and inviolably be observed by all Erronea haeresi proxima Bell. de P. 4.2 Si autem Papae erraret praecipiendo vitia vel prohibendo virtutes teneretur Ecclesia credere vitia esse bona virtutes malaâ— nisi vellet contra conscientiam peccare Bell. de Pont. 4.5 Gal. 5.1.13 1 Pet. 2.16 Papa occupavit omnia jura inferiorum Ecclesiarum ità quòd inferiores Praelati sunt pro nihilo Card. Zab. de Sch. Inn. VII p. 560. The Pope hath invaded all the rights of inferiour Churches so that all inferiour Prelates are nothing set by Ecclesia est mandra sive grex aut multitudo jumentorum sive asinorum Eccl. c. 47. Illà nos fraenant nos lore alligant nos stimulant nobis jugum onus imponunt Ibid. 2 Cor. 2.17 1 Tim. 6.5 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Supposing that gain is godliness 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Thess. 2.5 A cloke of Covetousness 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Eph. 4.4 Pasce id est regio more Impera Ecce duos Gladios Oravi nè deficeret Feed i. e. rule as a King Behold two Swords * Vid. Sleâ—d p. 673. Sleid. lib. 4. p. 82. lib. 12. p. 322. Hist. Conc. Trid. p. 24. Vid. Riv. in Castig Nol. p. 525. Cenâ—um gravamina Vid. ipsum Greg. VII Ep. 1.42.2.45 See the description of them in S. Bernard in Cant. Serm. Gâ—iocâ—aâ—d in Suppl Adv. Pelag. in Riv. Castig N. cap. 8. Vid. Bernard Convers. S. Paul Serm. â— p. 87. Nulla unquam monitione nulla exhortatione induci jam largo tempore potuit ut aliquam errorum emendationem Christo placentem aut noâ—issimorum abusuuâ— correctionem in Ecclesia Sancta Dei efficere satageret Conc. Bas. Sess. 23. p. 76. Sess. 31. p. 89. He could never be brought in this long time by any advice or exhortation seriously to set upon any amendment of errours or correction of the most gross abuses in the Holy Church of God Vid. Conc. Trid. p. 22. It will certainly render him a