uncontrouled uncontradicted Apostolical Scriptures as the 17th Canon with the 1 Tim. 5. 1 Cor. 7. the 27th Canon with the 1 Tim. 4. 1 Cor. 9. 1 Tim. 4. Canon 68 with 1 Tim. 4. 2. A repugnancy with â—â—h other jarring strings not tuned to a harmony as the 6 17 27 40 50 65 68. 3. The inconsistency of some Canons as the 8 20 36 38 with the Historical Transactions of the Age of the Apostles 4. They are not testified by any Authority of any Credit neither in the Age of the Apostles not in the first the second very scantily in the third that succeed not in Justin Martyr St. Irenaeus St. Clemens of Alexandria Origen or St. Jerome I insist upon this Subject the longer that I may once for all discover the paint and varnish of this adulterate beauty of the Sanctuary trickt up in the title the dress of the Canons of the Apostles I confess they have the face of Antiquity though not entirely unblemisht but they have not the immediate not the true stamp of the Authority of the Apostles as their Authors As for the Ninth Canon alledged if it be of any validity why doth the Trentine Council the Oracle of the present Church of Rome run counter with it whilst it allows private Masses If it be of no validity why do you object what you abrogate The approbation of the Sixth General Council produced is obnoxious to the same exception If any stress may be laid upon it why is the lustre of it so studiously zealously eclipsed Why are the Doctrines decreed so severely impeacht confidently doomed for erroneous by the Grandees of your Church by Popes Cardinals because that Council hath allowed the Marriage of Priests hath prescribed Laws to the Church of Rome If no stress may be laid on it the objection is a confutation of it self It is a fallacy without any grain of ingenuity to offer that for a figure to be much reckoned to us which to your selves passeth for a Cypher of no value To inspect the strength of your Argument for the Second Century A single pretended Canâ—â— of the Apostles not adhered to in the present Church of Rome approved by a single Canon in the Sixth General Synod not acknowledged to be Oecumenical or Orthodox by the greatest Champions of the present Church of Rome hath defined that any Bishop or Priest the Oblation being made not communicating shall be Excommunicated Therefore the Church now in Communion with the See of Rome and no other had a Succession from Christ and the Apostles for the Second Century A very loose extravagant Inference Doway or Rome may invent such Logick neither Athens nor Alexandria would H. T. From the Year of Christ 200. Chief Pastors 205 Zepherinus 221 Calixtus I. 223 Pontianus 238 Antherus 239 Fabianus 255 Cornelius 255 Lucius 257 Stephanus I. 260 Sixtus II. 261 Dionysius I. 273 Felix I. 275 Eutychianus 284 Caius 291 Marcellinus The Second and Third Ages whether by reason of the Churches great Persecutions or the not stirring of any famous Hereticks produced no Councils yet the Succession of Popes Martyrs and Confessors we have which is sufficient for our purpose W.T. We assert a more genuine Interest in these Martyrs Confessors recited than your selves To ratifie or rather to varnish a false claim you produce counterfeit Decrees of Popes H.T. The Decrees of Popes in these Ages Anacletus decreed That Priests when they sacrifice to our Lord must not do it alone but have Witnesses that they may be proved to have sacrificed perfectly to God in Sacred places and so the Apostles have appointed and the Roman Church holds 1. Epist. de Consecr d. 1. c. Episcopus And in the end of the same Epistle If more difficult questions shall arise let them be referred to the Apostolick See of Rome For so the Apostles have ordained by the Command of our Lord Anno Dom. 101. Alexander decreed That Bread only and Wine mingled with Water should be offered in the Sacrifice of the Mass. Epist. Orthod de Consecr ch 2. in Sacram. Sixtus decreed That the Sacred Mysteries the B. Eucharist and Sacred Vessels should not be touched but by Sacred Ministers and that the Priests beginning Mass the People should sing Holy Holy Holy c. In his Epistle to all the faithful of Christ. Anno Dom. 129. Telesphorus Commanded the Seven Weeks of Lent to be fasted Ep. Decr. Anno Dom. 139. Pius in his Epistles to the Italians enjoyned Penance for him by whose negligence any of the Blood of our Lord should be spilt 9. 1. c. qui compulsus An. Dom. 147. Anicetus tells us That James was made Bishop of Jerusalem by St. Peter James and John in his Decr. Ep. to the Bishop of France and cites Anacletus for it Ep. 2. dist 25. c. prohibe fratres Soter decreed That no Man should say Mass after he had eaten or drunk De Consecr dist 1. c. ut illud Zepherinus decreed That the greater causes of the Church are to be determined by the Apostolick See because the Apostles and their Successors had ordained Ep. to the Bishop of Sicily 217. These were all Popes of Rome but no true Protestants I hope W.T. We reject all these specious Evidences as disingenuous Forgeries Una litura sat est The Grounds of our Rejection are these 1. Because the Style is not varied whereas commonly Mens Expressions are as different as their Complexions their Styles as their Features As the Style is not varied so it is not adorned not only void of the Elegancy of Rhetorick but of the congruity of the Grammar directly repugnant to the terseness the politeness of the Phrase of those times both for Ecclesiastical and prophane Authors Minuius Felix St. Cyprian Pliny Suetonius the uniform barbarism of Expression manifests these decretals to be the products of the same rude Pen in a later corrupter Age than is pretended 2. Because the Matter of these Decretals doth not correspond with the Piety and Exigency of those times of bloody Persecution They conduce to promote Ambition not Martyrdom to gratifie Carnal not Spiritual Interests calculated for the splendour of the Church not its Umbrage its Adversity not to excite Devotion but support Preheminence 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 3. The Scripture Citations are according to St. Jerom's Translation whereas the youngest Pope in the present Catalogue in dispute were deceased many years before St. Jerom's Birth in the year 341. I might add to this falseh◠〈◊〉 point of Chronology the inadvertency of a fallacy 〈◊〉 dating several Decretal Epistles by the account of such Consuls who never were joyned together according to the Test. of Baronius Annals and some in other Ages separated 4. These Decrees are not mentioned by Eusebius the Favourite of Constantine the Great in the East nor by St. Jerome who converst with Pope Damasus in the West not by Damasus himself though such had fair occasions of relating them had there been any such
exception when that proof which is falsely produced is truly retorted We willingly submit to the Test of these recited Bishops of Rome who lived Saints and most of them dyed Martyrs whose Doctrine we own and embrace as true and orthodox whose practice Humane Infirmities excepted we estimate as meet patterns to be imitated whereas both have been notoriously scandalously receded from by pretended Successors in the See of Rome for at least eleven Centuries last past H.T. In this first Age or Century after Jesus Christ we find the Primacy in St. Peter as is manifest by the said Council in the Acts where after a serious debate whether the Jewish Ceremonies ought to be imposed on the Gentiles St. Peter defined in the negative Acts 15. 7 8 9 10. W.T. St. Peter declared v. 14. but defined not He spake not first authoritatively to lead nor last juridically to ratifie Not first untruly alledged by Bellarmine there had been much disputing before v. 7. much arguing among the Judges according to the ordinary gloss Not last this priviledge this preheminence appertained to St. James as Bishop of Jerusalem Therefore he speaks last It is the Reason offered by St. Chrysostome and St. Theophilact St. Peter had a special occasion of an Historical Narrative touching the Gentile Conversion as also St. Paul and St. Barnabas had but neither did pronounce Juridical Sentence No mean Romanists had so much ingenuity as to acknowledge that all the rest of Apostles even St. Peter not excepted did vail to the Jurisdiction of St. James whilst he presided at Jerusalem H. T. St. James who was Bishop of the place seconding by his Sentence what Peter had decreed all the Multitude saith Jerome held their Peace and into his Peters Sentence James the Apostle and all the Priests did pass together Ep. 89. to August c. 2. Peter saith he in the same place was Prince and Author of the Decree W.T. It was St. Peters preparatory Sentence or Opinion but St. James ultimate Decree final Determination assisted with the rest of the Apostles So Gaudentius hath exactly exprest it The Testimony of St. Jerome recited consists in two phrases The one is St. James and the rest passing into the Sentence of Peter Which imports no more but that what was asserted by St. Peter was approved by St. James and the rest The Nicene Council did assent to the Opinion acquiesce in the Judgment of the Famous Paphnutius yet did he not preside in that Council The second quoted expression of St. Jerome is that St. Peter was Prince and Author of the Decree This denotes a precedence of time in uttering his Opinion before those recounted afterwards not a preheminence of place of office above them in establishing that Opinion This is not inconsistent with the significancy of Prince in Cicero's stile That it cannot be understood in a notion of dignity of Principality is evident in the Constitution or Decree its self pronounced by St. James which contained some Subjects not mentioned by St. Peter To abstain from pollutions of Idols and from Fornication and from things Strangled and from Blood H.T. That St. Peter translated his Chair from Antioch to Rome is proved First Because he remained not always at Antioch as all that Church acknowledgeth nor did she challenge the first Chair in any General Council as appears in the Councils Secondly By the Decrees of Councils Popes and other Fathers giving the Primacy to the Roman Church W.T. It is a loose Illogical Inference St. Peter remained not always at Antioch therefore he translated his Chair to Rome He might exercise his Apostolical Function in both Churches and yet possibly discharge a distinct Episcopal Office in neither During his absence from Antioch he was at Jerusalem at Alexandria at Babylon He spent some years at Pontus Galatia Cappadocia but it cannot be thence concluded nor is it asserted that he fixed a Pontifical Chair in either As to the succession of St. Peter Antioch had at least as much right to challenge the first Chair in a General Council as Rome St. Paul was at Rome at Corinth at Athens at Ephesus at Philippi He was an Apostle in each place properly a Bishop in neither As to your second allegation of the Decrees of Councils Popes Fathers giving Primacy to the Roman Church This is specious pompous in appearance but is not solid vigorous in force Latet dolus in generalibus A Generality is the fittest Dress and Vail for a Fallacy As for the first Chair in a General Council the point of Primacy specified no Antient General or National or Provincial Council hath assigned it to the Pope I confess the Laterane Council under Leo the 10th hath so establisht it but that was in the year 1516. The Councils of Constance and Basil allow it not As for the pretended Decrees of Popes in their own concern of Power and Grandeur they are of little validity By the Canon Law the Pope cannot be Judge in his own Cause It were irrational and presumptuous to exact it The first Chair in General Councils hath been sometimes arbitrarily granted to the Pope in the Primitive Church and sometimes to other Patriarchs That there hath been no ancient concession no constant uninterrupted Prescription for it appears in the Records of the first Council of Nice the Sardian Council the first and second Constantinopolitan the first and second Ephesine Whenever the Pope had the prime Chair in any General Council anciently it was only Honorary for Session for Distinction not Authoritative for Jurisdiction H.T. The Council of Sardis Anno Dom. 400 Western Fathers 300. East 76. decreed That in cases of Bishops for the honour of St. Peters memory it should be Lawful to appeal from whatsoever other Bishop to the Bishop of Rome Can. 3. W.T. I offer several exceptions for the empairing the validity of this Testimony First I deny this to be a General Council If it were it ought to be sorted the second General Council next to the Nicene before the first Constantinopolitan You alledge the consluence of 300 Western 76 Eastern Fathers If it had been so it had been a great disproportion betwixt the Eastern and Western Prelates and a grand advantage to promote the Papal Dignity There is a mixture of Truth and Falshood in the citation of this Authority Omnis fabuld fundatur in Historia An Oecumenical Council it was in the intention the design of the Emperor but not in the execution the management of the Council In the one respect it hath been anciently called a General in the other a Particular Council Both the Eastern and Western Fathers were Summoned by Imperial Edict in Obedience whereto both repaired to Sardis But they consulted nor convened not together upon a difference touching St. Athanasius and Paulus The Eastern receded from Sardis and held a Council apart at Philippi in Thracia The Western Prelates that remained apart at Sardis could not constitute
Irenaeus Bishop of Lyons in France the Scholar of St. Polycarp though he owned the Tenour of Pope Victor yet in his own and the concurrent Judgment of the Gallicane Divines he reprehended Victor with a Holy Acrimony When several points were warmly Controverted in the Africane Church within the Compass of the Third Century the present consideration St. Cyprian the Martyr Bishop of Carthage did not wait for a decision from Rome but did refer the Questions to be discust and determined by Africane Councils When St. Cornelius his Contemporary Bishop of Rome did intermeddle in the Ecclesiastical Affairs of his Province of Carthage St. Cyprian did hotly Resent and Expostulate the Encroachment In his Epistle he terms the Bishop of Rome a Colleague a Brother I deny not but the See of Rome was in the purest Antiquity consulted with from other Churches but it was Arbitrary of Choice not necessary of Duty it was prompted by a veneration had not to the power the Authority of the Roman See but to the Piety and Literature of the Roman Prelates for the first Three Centuries most of them died Martyrs Upon this account the Patriarlts and Bishops of other Churches were frequently consulted with out of the verge of their own Jurisdictions From the See of Rome the Judgment of St. Ambrose was implored from Millaine Sometimes Convicted Condemned Delinquents in other Churches repaired to the See of Rome as Fugitives to skulk as Sophisters to delude Such were Fortunatus and Felicissimus doomed in Africa Thus when Basilides was justly Excommunicated Deposed in Spain he fled to Rome and fraudulently wrought upon the facility of Pope Stephen not reputed Infallible this being not the Divinity of that Age to bustle in the behalf of himself and Martialis alike Criminal and alike Sentenced for their re-admission This precipitate unjustifiable attempt gave great offence to the Spanish Bishops who passionately complained of it to St. Cyprian and the other Bishops of Carthage requesting their Advice who unanimously animated them to persist in their Sentence of Excommunication not to submit to Stephanus not to re-admit such Malefactors Sabinus being rightly the Successor of Basilides ejected St. Cyprian confidently determin That it could not be rescinded by Pope Stephen Sometimes Innocent persecuted Persons in other Churches made their applications to the See of Româ— But it was as to a Sanctuary for refuge not as to a Tribunal for Judicature an address to the Pope not an Appeal This was the case of St. Athanasius his Successor St. Peter of St. Chrysostome St. Flavianus and others it was a resort as to an Orthodox Prelate because of the Communion of the same Faith not as to a Supreme Judge upon a Prerogative of Power it was for advice for solace not in expectation of a final Sentence of an irrevocable Decree Aeneas Sylvius afterwards Pope Pius the Second had so much Ingenuity as to acknowledge that before the Nicene Council every Bishop lived to himself and that there was small regard had to the Church of Rome Even after the Nicene Council the Primitive Bishops of Rome for a time would not assume to themselves Would not usurp that Power of deciding important difficulties beyond the limits of their own Patriarchal Jurisdiction I shall cull out two Instances in the Causes of two Learned Renowned but Persecuted Patriarks the one of Alexandria the other of Constantinople of St. Athanasius and St. Chrysostome In the former Constantius the Arrian Emperour being exasperated against St. Athanasius Liberius Bishop of Rome cajoled him supplicated him that a Council might be assembled at Alexandria he offered in effect the same reason for appointing Alexandria in the Cause of St. Athanasius that St Cyprian did in excepting against Rome in the African concerns Where the Party impeacht the Accusers Advocates and others interested may most fitly be convened This is recited in the admirable Colloquy as the Centurist of Magdeburg stile it betwixt Constantius and Liberius Liberius alledged no decisive Jurisdiction in himself in the See of Rome The later instance is the cause of St. Chrysostome wherein Pope Innocentius the first declared a necessity of a Synodal Convention to asswage the Tempest in the Church He asserted no Papal Oecumenical Power to determine Controversies He approved the Milevitan Council which prohibited Appeals in the African Churches unless to African Councils or Primates Excommunicates Appellants to transmarine Jurisdictions About Sixteen years after the Sixth Carthaginian Council which lasted six years having regularly chalked out the gradations of Appeals in the African Church absolutely debarred any to the See of Rome I have dilated this point because the Roman Champions lay so much stress upon it and that I may not need to ventilate to sift it any more in this Tract I have not yet examined the Proofs in the supposititious Decretal Epistles of Anacletus and Zepherinus The latter derives the Power of the Apostolick See from the Apostles and their Successors The former from the Apostles by the Commandment of our Lord. Fallacies are enwrapped shrowded in generalities No injunction of Christ or any of his Apostles is recited for the Papal final deciding of difficult Controversies De non existentibus de non apparentibus eadem est ratio What is not apparent may rationally be rejected as not existent After these false varnishes of Antiquity H. T. having marshalled the specious Pictures of a Gallery rather than the vigorous Forces of a Camp or the Arguments of the School he insults before he vanquishes or indeed encounters marches in Triumph like the Roman Emperour with his Army having collected Cockleshels not conquered any Enemies He quits the Field in this quarrel with a flaunting Trophee of Victory These were all Popes of Rome but no true Protestants I hope This Sarcasme is more imbitter'd with Gall than seasoned with Salt The Name of Protestants took its Rise in the year 1529 from the protestation of Six Princes and 14 Principal Cities of Germany an appeal from the Decree of the Diet to Caesar and to a future General Council or National of Germany and to all Judges not suspected These Protestants did and those who are so called do still own the Tenets in Religion of the Popes recited in this Third Century H.T. Catholick Professors to the year 300. Simplicius Callepodius Abdon Sennen Pammachius Tyburtius Valerianus Marcellinus Dorotheus Gordianus Pudentiana Triphon Elaesius Maximianus Clemens Barbara Agatha Apollonia Cyprianus Hippolytus Gregorius Thaumauturgus Laurentius Tharsus Cecilia Victorius Nemesius Olympius Adrianus Georgius Pantaleon Agens Barlain Jereon with his Companions Cosmas Damianus Mauritius with the Theban Legion c. W.T. This Muster of Names is no Hostile Battalia unless against your selves We assert a real affinity Doctrinal and Practical with these Saints and Martyrs whereas you degenerate from the Purity the Loyalty of their Principles The Theban Legion that brings up the Rear was not