he or any of the rest for as all those of Rome might Appeal to their ovvn Patriarch so they might refuse and those of other Diocesses were prohibited to go to Rome and were bound either to their own Diocesan or else to the Patriarch of Constantinople But suppose the Bishop of Rome had been one of these two Plenipotentiaries the other joyned in Commission with him had a Coordinate Power because they were empowered to act severally and most certain it is that Coordinacy is inconsistent with Supremacy and Equality incompatible with Sovereignty But the Sultan Pontificians gave one of N. N's easy Answers to these Premises which their Wits will make use of viz. They are but wordish Testimonies which are easily despised or disguised Their great Achilles hath told us in plain terms A ready Invention will quickly find an Interpretation to transform them but withal he is so civil as to shevv a ready vvay how to deceive and baffle the Wits vvhich is to produce Matter of Fact and Practice of the Church vvhich is not so easily evaded nor so liable to misconstruction If therefore the Usage concur vvith the standing Lavvs the foregoing Conclusion is rightly deduced and the Romanists concluded guilty of those Crimes articled against them and vvhat the Practice hath been vvill be easily knovvn by the ensuing Instances Fortunatus Felicissimus and others being troubled that St. Cyprian having Intelligence hereof Writ (x) Lib. 1. Ep. 3. Ed. Pam. 55. to Cornelius and reproved him for assuming a Power to himself to judg of a Sentence passed in Africa telling him it was a Law amongst them and it is fit and just the Cause be there heard where the crime was committed which in plain English is The Fact was done in Africa under his Jurisdiction and what had an European to do to meddle with it for it follows in that Epistle A certain portion of the Lords Flock is assigned to each Pastor c. and the Authority of the African Bishops is no whit inferiour to that of the Bishops of Rome Nisi paucis perditis desperatis unless some few desperate lewd Companions think so The same St. Cyprian dealt as sharply with Stephen Bishop of Rome another of his contemporaries whom he charged with Perfidiousness in undertaking (y) Cypr. Ep. ad Pompeian Ed. Pam. 74. the Cause of Hereticks and with Ambition and Tyranny for that he made himself Bishop of Bishops and by Tyranny had driven his fellow-Bishops to a necessity (z) Conc. Carthag inter opera Cypr. of obedience Baron hath confessed that that Clause in the Council of Carthage beginning at Neque enim c. relates (a) Bar. An. 588 n. 24. particularly to Stephen But Firmilianus and (b) Ep. 45. Ed. Pam. the Eastern Bishops handled Stephen more roughly calling him a Schismatick and one that had made himself an Apostate from the Communion of Ecclesiastical Vnion and one who thought he might Excommunicate all thereby indeed Excommunicating himself alone from all St. Aug. (c) Ep. 162. Conc. Milev c. 22. Codex Afric c. 23. in the case of Cecilianus and Donatus a nigris causis severely rebuked Melchiades or Meltiades Bishop of Rome for that he with his Transmarine Colleague took upon them to discuss and reverse that Judgment which had been determined by a Council of Seventy Bishops in Africa Anastasius with the concurrence of his Bishops of Rome Decreed that the Donatists who had been preferred to Charges and Dignities though they should return to the Unity of the Church should not be continued but the African Fathers in Council made a Counter-Decree that the conforming and repenting Donatists should be received and retain their Places and Dignities with a non obstante Notwithstanding what had been decreed in the (d) About Ann. 401. Justel in Cod. Conc. Eccl. Afric c. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Bals c. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Aug. Ep. 50. Transmarine Roman Synod Julius Bishop of Rome pressed the restitution of Athanasius whereupon the Eastern Bishops met in Council and signified to him that it was a Pragmatical presumption in him to (e) Soz. l. 3. c. 7. to be ordered by him Socr. l. 2. c. 11. interpose in their affairs he ought not to contradict them neither would they endure 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to be ordered by him this was not the resolution only of the Eusebian and Semi-Arrian Bishops who yet were Conformists to the Orders of the Church but (f) Soz. l. 3. c. 12. Epiph. haer 68. Athan. or 1. contr Arr. of the Catholicks also acting in the Council who though they favoured Athanasius and his Cause yet thought fit to check the Bishop of Rome's insolency Juvenalis Bishop of Jerusalem moved the Council of Chalcedon that his Bishoprick might be promoted into a Patriarchate which motion the Fathers assembled did entertain and referred the ordering of the matter to himself and Maximus the Patriarch of Antioch who agreed that the Patriarch of Antioch should hold the two Phenicia's and Arabia and the Bishop of Jerusalem the three Palestines which Accord they represented to the Council desiring them to confirm it which they willingly (g) Conc. Chalc. act 7. p. 105. Evagr. l. 2. c. 18. Niceph. l. 5. c. 30. with the consent of the Popes Legats condescended to and over and above procured the Judges to add the Royal assent for its full settlement Baronius relates the Pope resisted what was done thus in Council and hindered the Execution thereof for a good while which was till the fifth Synod assembled where (h) Baron Ann. 553. n. 245 246. the Pope gave his Placet and then and not till then was the Accord put in execution but this is one of the great Annalists mistakes for fifteen years before that fifth Synod under Mennas assembled Peter Patriarch of Jerusalem did summon all the Bishops of the three Palestines two whereof were the Metropolitans of Caesarea and Scythopolis to convene in Council who accordingly without demur (i) Conc. Tom. 2. p. 472. obeyed his summons The Church and Bishops of Rome for a long time disallowed and rejected the second General Council yet the Catholick Church always owned it and as occasion offered acted by it That which moved the then Romanists to this dissatisfaction and aversness was that that Council had settled the See of Constantinople into a Patriarchate which Honour they repined at giving to the Bishop thereof precedency to the Patriarchs (k) Conc. 2.3 of Alexandria and Antioch and granting to him Power and Authority over the Churches in Asia minor (l) In all 28 Roman Provinces Brerewood's Enquiries p. 125. Thrace and Pontus and therefore soon after this Council determined the (m) Resisted it Baron An. 553. Bishop of Rome endeavoured to invalidate this Settlement for Statim post c. as soon as it was concluded Damasus then Bishop of Rome indicted a Roman Synod in which a Counter-Decree was enacted
the Church of Epirus yet the Great Council of (m) Conc. penult 28. Act. 16. Chalcedon thought fit to remand this liberality and enstate them upon the Bishop of Constantinople upon this ground that then Constantinople was the Imperial City for thus the Order goes The Fathers orderly gave the Priviledg of Chiefty and Headship to the See of Old Rome because that Ally had the Empire and moved with like Consideration gave (n) Evagr. ◠◠c. ult the like Priviledges to the See of Constantinople thinking it agreeable to reason that the City of Constantinople being honoured with the Empire and Senate as Rome had been should enjoy the like Priviledges These Priviledges were not only some Honorary Titles and Dignities as some Romanists fancy but the like that Rome had which in express words is said to be a Priviledg of the Chiefty or Headship which some learned Romanists have observed and therefore render 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 (o) Anton. Salm. Dr. Ham. Schis disarm p. 94. Privilegia Dignitates Authoritates Priviledges Dignities and Authorities It is true the Precedency of Place which is meerly Honorary was reserved to the Bishop of Rome for which Respect and Honour there was great reason because the Church of Rome was a Metropolitical Church of long standing whereas the Church of Constantinople was not long before only a Suffragan This Canon hath put the Romanists to all their Shifts some pretending the whole last Action to be Spurious and Clandestine but why then did the Popes Legats oppose it a Spurious Act is of it self void and a Clandestine Act could not prejudice their Master and his Interest and why do they produce this Scandalous as they judg Act as a Proof for the Popes Plenitude of Power over that of a General Council These men will play at small game rather than stick out Counterfeit stuff must pass for the maintenance of the Papal Prerogative Others of them are so bold as to tell the World that after the Canon was passed the Patriarchs of Constantinople and Antioch for he of Alexandria was dead and that See vacant were ashamed to move it this is a most disingenuous shameless falsity for it is notoriously known and most certain they (p) Conc. Tom. 3. p. 475. E. both subscribed it others would make the World believe this Council was not then free and the Canon extorted by tumultuous importunity This is another scandalous Calumny for all the Fathers did own it as their (q) Ibid. p. 463. Act and Deed both by Subscriptions and Attestations before the Judges deputed by the Emperour to see that Synodal Order was regularly observed for confirmation whereof they published a Manifesto But they of all other Shufflers seem to have taken the wisest course who very cautiously and industriously have left it out of their Editions of the Councils which saved them the labour of beating their Brains to invent such handsom Excuses Cavils and Calumnies which yet were much more than needed for this Canon was not Operative but Declarative not Introductory but Confirmative in Confirmation of what fifty years before had passed at the first General Council of Constantinople which resolved That the Bishop of Constantinople ought to have the Honour of Primacy next after the Bishop of Rome for that Constantinople (r) Conc. Constant 1. c. 1 2 3. Soz. l. 7. c. 9. is new-Rome And if both these were suspected and failed or not extant yet there is another Canon of this Council of Chalcedon which the Roman Censors have not as yet traduced either as Spurious or Clandestine or Forced and is received in their Editions which will quite foil and rout out Monarchical Sovereignty It is this (s) Conc. Chalced. c. 9. Act. 15. Si vero c. If any have a Complaint against the Metropolitan of the Province let him either repair to the Primate of the same Diocess or chief Jurisdiction or to the Royal City of Constantinople and let him be judged there Caran approved by Bell. in his Annot. will have the Bishop of Rome to be the Exarch for 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is not a Primate but a Prince and the Roman High-Priest is that Prince This shift is refelled in the third Council (t) Conc. 26 juxt Car. of Carthage which determined The Bishop of the first See which the Bishop of Rome is acknowledged to be shall not be called Prince of the Bishops As for the word Exarch in the Ecclesiastical notion it is sometimes applyed to an Arch-Bishop thus in the Greek Euchologue Notice being given to the Patriarch that a Church was building and near finished he directed a Letter for its Consecration 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to the Metropolitan thereof or in his absence to some of the Bishops in that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Province but ordinarily or more frequently it is attributed to the (v) Dr. Ham. Ans to the Animad on the dissert p. 177. Primate as here which is confirmed by Anaclitus who in a Decretal Epistle received by the Romanists which therefore is of good Authority against them thus informs us viz. In the head of the Province Primates are placed by Divine Ecclesiastical Laws that to them the Bishops when it is needful may resort and make their appeals this also is entered into and recited in the Body of the Canon-Law approved and published by Gregory the thirteenth All which is perfectly consonant to the directions for Appeals given in the Council of Chalcedon Let Appeal be made from the Bishop to the Metropolitan from him to the Primate or Exarch and that Law of the Emperour Justinian Let Patriarchs according to the Laws and Canons hear and make an end But the Bishop of Rome cannot be this Exarch for here are two Plenipotentiaries appointed in the same Commission strengthned with equal Power and Authorized to act jointly and severally in taking Cognisance of the Appeal and to give Sentence upon it and the Pope was neither of these Plenipotentiaries or Commissioners but only in a reserved case when the Bishop complainant should appeal to him which Bishop too must be one of his own Diocess and so had no Power conferred on him but that which the rest of the Patriarchs enjoyed equally with him for the respective Bishops of their Diocesses might if they pleased (w) Conc. Constan 1. c. 3. Appeal to their own Primate or the Bishop of Constantinople it was at their discretion to choose which of these they liked to hear and determin their cause of Complaint and were tied to make choice of one of these two but not at all to Appeal to Rome and the Bishop agrieved though he were one of the Roman Patriarch's Diocess might vvave him and seek remedy from the Bishop of Constantinople and therefore the Bishop of Rome had but the same Povver vvhich the other Patriarchs enjoyed and the Patriarch of Constantinople had the like in a more ample manner than either
restitution thereof but he defended his Invasion and Usurpation by the warranty of the Popes Excomunication and to prevent all after-Claims by virtue of the Popes Bull bequeathed it in his last Will and Testament to his Daughter Jane Queen of Castile and ordered the union of the two Kingdoms (d) New Heresy of the Jes p. 37. inde out of Monsieur de Hay in his Treatise of the right of the King of France from the Testimony of Spanish Historians against the Cavils of Card. du Perron who attempted the vindication of the Pope and forecited Spanish Historian from Guicciardine lib. 11. Castile and Arragon But the Pope had yet a further Game to manage a Council must be had whereupon he calls a Counter-Council as Eugenius before him had convened an Anti-Synod at Florence at the Lateran in Rome where some Cardinals and Bishops who favoured his Pretensions and some on other motives assembled to him before whom at first he (e) Concil Lat. Sess 1. excused his Perjury by reason of State his next endeavour was by the publication of a Bull to condemn the Pisan Synod and by a second to null its Acts together with the Pragmatical Sanction To gain validity to this Practice he procured Francis the first (f) So the Concordate and from it Relnffusc licet de seriis li. 1. ff de Offic. Cons or rather compelled him for he protested he complied with the Pope much against his mind being constrained so to do by his pressing necessities to condescend to the Abrogation of the Pragmatical Sanction But this Pope dying some ten Months after he had assembled his Partisans and Pensioners could not perfect his Project Leo the tenth succeeds him who falls afresh upon the Pragmatical Sanction yet upon second and better thoughts he stops the Carreer for two or three years resolving however having the work half done to his hand to compleat it in convenient time and so at long run in the eleventh Session of that Conventicle upon the 19 of December 1516 the certain Birth-day of the new Popish Church he passed a Decree point blank contrary to that of Constance continued and confirmed in those of Basil Bourges Tours and Pisa viz. That the Pope had authority over all Councils and that it was necessary to Salvation that all Christians should be subject to the Pope This is Origo Papistarum thus by such unauthorized Antichristian means then upon that 19th day of December and there at Lateran Popery commenced and had its rise both name and thing for though some Romanists pretend the title of Papist to be of more antient extraction deriving it from Pope Peter Pope Paul and Pope Christ yet Dr. Bristow a bitter enemy to Protestants and a fast friend to the Cause witness his great endeavours and attempts in the Rhemish Testament is better advised and (g) Demaund 8. speaks out the whole truth The name saith he of Papists was never heard of till the days of Leo the tenth All which premises being laid together a mean accomptant may easily compute of how long standing Popery is according to the true reformed Roman account The total of all which those (h) Sess 1. And Cassander thinks Papists to be Pseudo-Catholicks they being such who will not permit the Church to be reformed though corrupt Lib. de Offic. boni viri Sect. sunt alii c. very Lateran Assemblers could not deny but have so far honestly witnessed that by reason of the malignity of the times the Popes seemed to have tollerated the Pragmatical Sanction because they could not help it thanks for nothing in as much as for all the Popes could do even to that very day it stood in full force and virtue But for all was then done the true Roman Catholicks even then did not think the Pragmatical Sanction was sufficiently annulled neither did that Lateran Decree find any kind reception amongst them but soon after was stoutly rejected as Heterodox for within four Months after towards the latter end of March ensuing the Divines of Paris spoke as undervaluingly of this Lateran Synod as it had done of the Council of Basil contemning and condemning it as Conciliabulum Conventiculum a Conspiracy or Conventicle (i) Appel Vnivers Paris à Leon. 10. facta die 27 Martii An. 1517. Bochell lib. 8. de decret Gal. Eccl. c. 4. not assembled in Gods name and the Cardinal Lorraine writ expresly after that to Pope Pius the fifth that as the French Church would never receive that of Florence so they also had always protested against the Lateran made up of a (k) New Heresy of the Jesuites p. 103. out of the History of the Concordate composed by Monsieur de Puy few Italian Bishops And that this Lateran Decree would be opposed Pope Leo foresaw who therefore cunningly contrived a way if not to prevent yet to smother and stifle all opposition For (l) 70 Decret p. 534. Caran p. 893. in a certain Decretal he ordained that hereafter for ever no man should Print or cause to be Printed any Book or Writing in the City of Rome nor in any other place unless first by his Vicar or Minister of his Palace or by some Bishop or other deputed thereto it be diligently examined and Subscribed and after the Trent-sticklers finding that Books notwithstanding this Policy were published and did creep abroad they made a Rule which they gave in charge to the Inquisitors That if in the Books of latter Catholicks written since the year 1315 that which needs Correcting can be amended by taking away or adding a few things that course should be followed otherwise let it be (m) Caran p. 894. instruct post indicem c. Index l. Prohib p. 25. altogeeher blotted out But neither the Popes Authority Power nor Policy could prevail so far with the Roman Catholicks of that time as to over-rule the Council of Basil or confirm the Lateran for many of them constantly adhered to the (n) As the Germans Kings of England and France ad Ann. 1422. in the Margin of his life p. 101. c. Ep. Synod Concil Basil Council of Basil because Eugenius the fourth by an Authentick Bull recited in the sixteenth Session acknowledged that it was Lawful and General from the beginning of it to that moment and in the last of the Bulls which he revoked after he had (o) But not till after admonition and citation Acts of Superiority 8 pronouncing him contumacious for threatning of a dissolution Caran p. 856. rejoyned himself to that Council he declared that in matters of Faith the opinion of a Council ought to be preferred to that of the Pope which cannot hold if the Pope be Infalible as the Lateran crew suggested because there is no opinion which can or ought to be preferred to the judgment of an Infallible Monarch and Umpire and as those Romanists stuck to the Council of Basil so did they to the Council
of Constance as a lawful General-Council and to its Decree concerning the Superiority of a Council above the Pope and as many do to this day which also necessarily destroyeth the supposition of the Popes Infallibility because no inferiour Authority can be Infallible for that it can be controuled and corrected by a superiour over-ruling Power and that which is Infallible cannot neither ought to be controuled or corrected If any Romanists conceive and some there be who would be esteemed and pass for such with otherwise discerning men to be the more moderate sort that this is no direct consequence it were well done of them to reconcile the different pretensions and contradictory perswasions of the Pope and a Council and clearly declare whether the two contesting parties can be both Infallible for an Infallibility they will have and if there be such a thing it must be seated in the one or the other for there are no other pretenders to it and if we must have two Infallibles then which of them for the time being is the most Infallible to end the Controversy for till this be decided there can be no end of Controversies because this Controversy will be still agitated and few or none besides shall be satisfactorily determined because all others do mostly depend on this or whether it were not more prudent by way of Accommodation to compound the difference betwixt themselves that by consent the Contestants should take the Infallibility by turns the Pope have his vicissitude and the Council theirs or that it pass as a long time it hath done by a standing Rule of Catch that Catch can provided it can be so ordered that it be done without hot bickerings and canvassings But the through-paced Papists stand close to their tacklings for where they fix the Supremacy there also very consonantly to their supposition they lodg the Infallibility for thus they argue in the ease of the Pope His Authority (p) Bell. l. 4. de Pont. c. 24. Sect. 2. c. l. 2. de Conc. c. 13. And this is saith he the judgment of the best writers quos recenset ib. Sect. ult and therefore his judgment is the last and highest id l. 4. de Rom. Pont. c. 1. Sect. Sed nec Sect. denique and because it is the last and highest therefore it is Infallible ib. l. 3. Sect. contra l. 2. de Conc. c. 9. Sect. accedat c. c. 11. Sect de 2. Sect. de 3. is Supreme therefore his judgment in causes of Faith is the last and the highest and because it is the last and the highest therefore it is Infallible But upon the whole matter it is evident from what hath before been avouched that the Holy Apostles St. Peter and St. Paul were not the Founders of the present Romish Church as it is now constituted and managed but Julius the Second and Leo the Tenth by their new settlement and so their pretence of possession which at the best was tortious is quite out of doors and at last N. N's Original of Protestancy falls out to be indeed the just date and commencement of Popery Wherefore as the Papists frequently but foolishly propose to us Where was your Church before Luther So we upon the foregoing grounds may more reasonably demand of them where was your Popish Church before Julius the Second and Leo the Tenth which Question they will never satisfy till they renounce their new Faith and new Foundation of Faith upon which their new Church is superstructed 3. Supposing this acknowledgment then an 1516. and there in our parts of the World this is far from rendring it Catholick because far removed from that Golden Rule of Catholicism delivered by Vin. Lyr. and approved by all good Catholicks quod ubique quod semper quod ab omnibus c. For if before that year and age and in other parts of the World that which Protestants now call Popery was not acknowledged Catholick Doctrine it must not now be acknowledged Catholick neither ought it then and in our parts of the World to have been acknowledged Catholick the ancient Primitive is to be more respected and reverenced than the Church of the last Century and other parts of the Christian World have been and are as truly and univocally parts of the one Holy Catholick Church as ours can be and the true Faith is one and the same in all ages and places But will or can N. N. answer to Bell. who l. de notis Eccl. c. 7. positively declares that if only one Province should retain the Catholick Faith yet it should be truly and properly called the Catholick Church as long as it might be shewed as Protestants have it was the same which it was at other times in other plaees of the World Driedo dogmat Eccles lib. 4. part 2. seems to be of his mind And what will he say to Dr. Bristow who motive the 45. confesseth some there have been in many ages in some poinis of the Protestants opinion insomuch that there is scarce one piece or Article of our whole Faith but by one or other first or last it hath been called in Question and that with such liking for the time that they all have in a manner drawn after them great herds of followers these some and all were long before this Origenists Aera 1516. and what if these some of Bristow prove to be very many as the Cardinal of Praeneste reckoned them Vicards poor people of Lions Speronists Arnoldists and Waldenses who as Reinerus reports were far spread and of long standing in the Church For thus he relates the matter refort Illyric Catal. test devit tom 2. p. 543 but in an old Edition p. 32. lit D. they continued so long as no Sect hath some say it hath been since Sylvester some since the Apostles there is universality of time and there is almost no countrey wherein it spreadeth not there is universality of place and persons they have great shew of Piety living uprightly before men and believing all things aright concerning God and all the Articles of the Creed and abating his great shew they were good Catholicks because holy believers and livers but that he added a subsequent cause only they hate and blaspheme the Church of Rome and that marred all otherwise they had passed muster and St. Bernard is much to the same purpose Serm. 65. sup Cant. Edit Venet. an 1575. Tom. 1. p. 328. tit H. Si fidem interroges c. If you require an account of their Faith nothing is more Christian if of their Conversation nothing more commendable they frequent the Church honour the Priests offer their Gifts make Confession and communicate in the Sacraments these were no Schismaticks they hurt none circumvent none contemn none are true and just in all their dealings performing what they promised these were not unjust wicked men yet he had a pique at them they did not observe the Monkish Vow of Continence which he conceived
others not till afterwards and upon several days 5. But N. N. is wronged is being reproved for falshood and misadventures he good man will say nothing but that for which he hath good authorities and good proofs which whether they be regular and valid is next to be examined SECT II. N. N. THis Narration of the Consecration at the Nags-head I have taken out of Hollywood Constable and Dr. Champney's Works They heard it from many of the ancient Clergy who were Prisoners in Wisbitch-Castle as Mr. Bluel Dr. Watson Bishop of Lincoln and others these had it from Mr. Neal and other Catholicks who were present at Mr. Parker's Consecration at the Nags-head as Mr. Constable affirms The story was divulged yet being so evident a truth none durst contradict it notwithstanding both the Nullity and Illegality was objected against them in Print not long after by the Famous Dr. Stapleton's Counterblast fol. 301. SECT II. J. S. ALL this here presented amounts to thus much 1. Mr. Neal and Mr. Constable reported the story therefore it is true Neal was an eye-witness and Constable took it upon trust and all the rest hear-say men So that the whole depends upon their credit and honesty who have crack'd their credit by their holy Fraud and lying Legends and practising the black Art of Equivocation and their honesty is justly suspected who care not what they say so they say something for the advantage of the good old Cause as will hereafter be declared 2. Dr. Bishop a fast Friend to the Cause in his Repr of Dr. Abbot's Defence p. 120 confutes this way of Argumentation saying Any man not past all care of his Reputation would be ashamed to cite such late partial Writers it is either where their testimony is not contradicted by their Adversaries when they set themselves industriously to detect falsifications in their Allegations or else those Protestants do annex the Authorities and Reasons on which their testimonies are grounded Testimonies of private men or hear-say men when crossed by Authentick Records are always slighted and contemned If the Homagers of a Manor swear to a custom which is more than speaking to it yet if there be any Court-Roll extant and produced which declares the contrary to their Depositions their testimony is thereby utterly invalidated Baronius in the point of Maxentius his Birth presumed to correct all former Historians by the discovery of an ancient Coin certainly an ancient Record is better than an ancient Coin can be for standing Records have always by all Nations and the consent of Mankind been esteemed the strongest human testimonies and the best assurances of Faith which ought not to be disbelieved or disputed upon the reports of particular men because they have been purposely devised and preserved for the discovery of Truth and the decision of Controversies which might arise in after-Ages and the rectifying of particular mens several apprehensions Such as these we produce in this case which have convinced and fully satisfied more ingenuous Adversaries than N. N. or his Narrators seem to be When Dr. Reynolds shewed these Records to Mr. Hart he confessed they were undeniable The Bishop of Chalcedon acknowledged that Father Oldcorn alias Hall took the leisure and pains to search the Records who thereupon concluded them authentick Arch-Bishop Whitgift with four other Bishops prevailed with four Popish Priests to view these Records which when they had done they declared to them freely that they were not to be doubted of 3. It hath been the common practice of such as these Narrators were as shall after more fully appear to divulge stories by an holy fraud either to stagger weak minds or to settle the over-credulous Bigots of their party in a detestation of Arch-Bishop Whitgifts life whom the Romanists may believe if they please if they will not take his word let them choose and shew the contrary hath given us a pregnant testimony hereof for he informs us that that Arch-Bishop going to Dover at his entrance into the Town an Intelligencer from Rome landed who wondred to see an Arch-Bishop in England and so honourably attended but seeing him the Sunday following waited on with a nobler Train and hearing the solemn Service of the Church he was overtaken with admiration and told an English Gentleman Sir Edw. Hobby who accompanied him that they were led in great blindness at Rome by our own Nation who made the people there believe that there was not in England either Arch-Bishop or Bishop or Cathedral Church or any Church-Government but c. 4. These his Narrators could never agree in the most material circumstances of the story they cannot speak either to the number of the Consecrators or Consecrated nor to the determinate place and time 5. The Story was contradicted assoon as it was divulged as hereafter will be more fully declared 6. Dr. Stapleton's Objection did not run on the Nag's-Head Score he never so much as mentioned it and therefore may reasonably be presumed either not to have heard any thing of it or not to believe it the former is more probable for it was not divulged in his time 7. If the matter had been performed clandestinely or intended so to have been Mr. Neal and the other Catholicks could not have been admitted neither should its clandestine performance have rendered the Act invalid When John the twelfth ordained a Deacon in a Stable I demand whether in N. N's private judgement the Ordination were invalid SECT III N.N. THey being not able to make good the Ordination against Catholicks were forced to beg an Act of Parliament whereby they might enjoy their Temporalities notwithstanding the defect of their Ordination against the Canons of the Church and Law of the Land For albeit King Edwards Rite of Ordination was established by Act of Parliament 1 Eliz. yet it was notorious that the Ordination of the Nags-Head was very different from it and framed ex tempore by Scories Puritanical Spirit The Words of the Act are Such from and order for Consecrating Archbishops Bishops c. as was set forth in Edward the sixth's time shall stand and be in full force and effect and all Acts or Things heretofore done or made by any person or persons elected to the Office and Dignity of Archbishop c. by virtue of the Queens Letters Patents or by Commission sithence the beginning of her Reign be and shall be by Authority of this Parliament declared and judged good and perfect in all respects and purposes c. See Poulton in his Kalendar p. 141. n. 5. by which Act it appears that not only King Edwards Rite but any other used since the first of the Queens Reign upon her Commission was enacted good and so consequently the Nags-Head might pass Hence it was they were called Parliament Bishops SECT III. J. S. THE chief Argument which N.N. framed in this Section runs thus 1. Their Ordinations were defective as not ordered according to the Canons of the Church and Laws of
Papal Dispensation SECT VII N. N. I Have spoken both with Catholicks and Protestants that remember near 80 years and acknowledg that so long they have heard the Nags-Head Story related as an undoubted Truth SECT VII J.S. DOughtily argued from the authority of the Common People who as they do not at all understand the matter so they as little concern themselves in such affairs and what they have take all on trust to conclude an undoubted Truth But if this will pass then the Papists were guilty of the Barbarous Murther of our late Glorious and Pious King though I am perswaded many of them abhorred the Fact and the Plot leading thereto because it hath been reported that they did devise and forward the Fact and when the villanous Act was done much rejoyced at it This Argument at the best is a Topick from vulgar Fame which as the Lawyers speak is praesumptie levis temeraria and so no proof in Law SECT VII N. N. THE Queens Dispensation seems to acknowledg it which Mr. Mason is willing to shadow with a distinction The Queen saith he did but dispence with the Trespass against her own Laws not essential points of Ordination but only accidental not in Substance but in Circumstance But if the Consecration was at Lambeth and according to the form of Edward the sixth what need was there of any Dispensation especially given not in conditional but in absolute termes since both Substance and Circumstance had been according to the Protestant Law SECT VII J S. THis is N. N's best seeming Argument but the best is it seems but so For 1. Dispensations are granted ex abundanti and in majorem cautelam even at the Court of Rome though the work it self be exactly performed sometimes they are used to obviate sleeping defects oft for better security and to prevent Mistakes and Cavils as in this Queens time it happened in another case for she passed a Bill for the restitution of Archbishop Cranmer's Children who needed none in strictness for their Father was not Condemned for Treason as some surmised but as Mr. Harding confesseth fol. 574. for Heresy which taints not the Blood nor makes any forfeiture of Estate yet because the Archbishop had formerly been accused for High-Treason the Act was useful to make sure work 2. He pretends the Dispensation respected Archbishop Parkers Consecration which is a mistake for it concerned only his Confirmation which was eight days before on December 19. 1559. 3. He suggests It was given not in conditional but c. This is False for the words are Si quid c. If any thing c. which heretofore hath always been taken for a conditional term SECT VIII N. N. BIshop Bonner excepted against his Indictment because the Oath of Supremacy was said to be tendered to him by Robert Horn Bishop or Winchester who was by no Law Bishop and thereupon had no Authority to tender him the Oath and upon his Plea was never more troubled any further See his Case Abridgment of Dier's Reports 7 Eliz. p. 234. SECT VIII J.S. 1. IF Bishop Bonner or N. N. by no Law mean the Law of Christ neither the Judges nor Jury could take Cognizance of it if they conceive the Law of the Realm which his reference only respected they might if the matter had been tried 2. The ground of Bishop Bonners Plea was that King Edward's form was not sufficiently received which by the way supposeth Dr. Horne was Consecrated by it by the Statute 1 Eliz. which a Friend to the Cause the Author to the Anker p. 4. and with him his Superiours who approved his Book hath acknowledged it was saying Queen Elizabeth renewed the Form of Common-Prayer Book much like that in King Edwards time and so hath N. N. his own dear self more than once and more fully 3. The Exceptions against this Indictment shew only that Bishop Bonner was put to a desperate shift for three of his Exceptions to this Indictment were excepted against and over-ruled by all the Court this indeed which was last which he kept for a reserve though it failed him too was allowed with a restriction and upon conditional terms which proves nothing till the supposition be validly asserted viz. That if the truth of the matter were so indeed that he was not Consecrated by King Edwards Rite he might Plead it and the Jury Try it which Resolution was according to Law But it never came to any issue for the Parliament cleared his Consecration and so stopped further Proceedings this being made good that he was legally Consecrated by the highest publick Judgment should stand good with N. N. and his Colleagues because he once but falsly pleaded an Inferiour publick Judgment for his own purpose and the credit of his Narrators 4. He alledgeth a reason for the goodness of Bishop Bonner's Exceptions for if it signifies not this it is impertinently inserted he was never troubled any further Most absurd for it is usual with Higher-Powers not to trouble those any further whom they have secured unless N. N. be as bloody as Bishop Bonner and his Comrades were who thought it was nothing to imprison those who refused Obedience to their Orders unless they burned them with Fire and Faggot Protestants are not so merciless and cruel as Papists and such was the Clemency of the then Higher-Powers which N. N. had he been ingenuous would have commended that they thought that Bishop Bonner being deprived and imprisoned for his Obstinacy greater severity was more than needful and would rather argue Revenge than Justice But whatsoever N. N. thinks some men in the world think that deprivation and continued imprisonment is trouble enough and would be thankful in such cases they were troubled no further SECT IX N. N. BUT to salve this sore Mr. Mason that quick-sighted Gentleman hath spied out Authentick Records which for fifty odd years lay in a Saint-Solitude invisible to Mr. Jewel Mr. Horne and others of those times who were severely taxed for the Nullity and Illegality of their Orders For questionless if any such had appeared in their days they would not have lost so great advantage by concealing them when the producing of them would have much foiled their Enemies if not absolutely routed them Mr. Fulk denies ordinary Calling to be always necessary which he would not have done if he had known the Records which if they had been authentical and extant would have saved him from that desperate shift SECT IX J. S. 1. THE Records were not hung out of the Registers Office as Haberdashers and Milleners do their Wares and so did not appear but when the Office was open at usual times or perhaps upon a sudden emergent at other times any who had a desire might with the usual Fee and perhaps without have seen them and so they did appear they were not concealed 2. Many Records by this account lie in a Saint-solitude for more than fifty years ten times told over as hereafter
it and pursue it hotly with Hue and Cry from Country to Country 6. Though several Reasons have before been assigned and more might why our Writers in those times such as Bishop Jewel c. did not expresly appeal to the Records yet I take the Chief to be this The then Romanists did pretend to a mixt Succession but chiefly insisted upon the Moral and Doctrinal so Dr. Stapleton Graeca Ecclesia c. The Greek Churches though they have lineal Succession yet because of the Heresies which they hold and the Schism they make they have not lawful (Å¿) Staplet Princ. doctr l. 13. c. 6. Succession and again Successio de qua agitur c. The Succession of which we dispute is not of places and persons but of true (t) Id. relect c. 1. qu. 4. art 1. 2. notab 5. and sound Doctrine Thus also Mr. Harding def fol. 119. Did Capon Shaxton or ever any Bishop of that See before you teach your Doctrine whom have you succeeded as well in Doctrine as in outward sitting in that Chair To which Question if Bishop Jewel had appealed to the Records he had trifled because they are only evidences of meer matter of Fact not at all of Doctrines taught 7. But N. N. is a man of confidence he believes there were many living in Queen Elizabeth's time could have proved them Forged this is strange forgery is a work of darkness carried on by a few these are too many to be privy to the Fact and very closely with all the securities of secrecy and therefore a man of indifferent judgment will hardly be perswaded that many can be accessory and privy to a designed Forgery 8. On a sudden this great Undertaker grows dull for he supposeth that to make the Records more incredible which to all others makes them most credible To N. N. they are more incredible upon testimony of publick Authority which is indeed to destroy all human security and contrary to the common notices of mankind But N. N. is resolved to speak the Truth at last SECT XI N. N. THE truth is most of the Clergy of England in those times were Puritans and inclined to Zwinglianism they therefore contemned and rejected Consecration as a Rag of Rome and were contented with the extraordinary calling of God and his Spirit as all other Churches do who pretend to Reformation neither is it credible there was any other Consecration of Parker and his Camrades but that which passed at the Nags-head SECT XI J. S. THE truth is there is no truth in any of these Affirmations for 1. The Clergy of England then had a Liturgy with Rites and Ceremonies witness N. N. in what he said before which they orderly observed they did own and defend the three Orders (u) Bishop Jewel Apol. c. 3. divis 1. defence fol. 85. of Bishops Priests and Deacons witness the Ritual which N. N. also acknowledgeth to be the allowed Form of the Church of England to have been ever in Christ's Church since the time of the Apostles which the Puritans do not if they did the Romish Emissaries would lose some Proselytes and therefore N. N.'s suggestion that the Clergy then did condemn Consecration as a rag of Rome is a most malicious untruth 2. The Clergy then neither followed Zwinglius nor any other Person nor any Sect or Sectaries of Men farther than they followed the Scripture and the Practice of the Primitive Church these they took for their rule 3. If by Zwinglianism he intends as it is usually called Zwinglianism the rejecting that monstrous Figment of Transubstantiation they were therein followers of the Apostles and Doctors of the Catholicks if he conceive Zwinglius opposed Episcopacy he is deceived for he and the Helvetians did honour it What he adds of other Reformed Churches is most false for most of them have and do own Bishops either name or thing or both as in the Dominions of the King of Sweden Denmark and the most of them in High Germany even as many as subscribed to the Augustane Confession those under the Duke of Saxony Luxenburg the Marquess of Brandenburg the Prince of Anhault and many others and those of the Reformed Churches which have no Bishops account it their want an infelicity It is a bad Cause which must be underpropped with impious Frauds and is supported only with hideous and palpable Lies 4. In the close of this Section N. N. brings by head and shoulders his Nags-head again to shew he can write as well against common sense as without common honesty for his suggestion neither is it credible and is contrary to the apprehensions of all Impartial Judges for it is morally impossible the Fable should be credible because Dr. Parker's Consecration was performed as is before related in the presence of four of the most eminent Notaries Publick in the Kingdom one whereof was principal Actuary at Cardinal Pool's Consecration SECT XII N. N. HEar the Judgment of Whitaker and Fulk who lived in and about that time the English Ordinations were first called in Question I would not have you think saith Whitaker we make such reckoning of your Orders as to hold our own Vocation unlawful without them Cont. Dur. p. 821. Mr. Fulks more plainly you are highly deceived if you think we esteem your Offices of Bishops c. better than Laymen Ans to Counterf Cath. p. 50. and in his Retentive p. 67. with all our hearts we difie abhor detest and spit at your stinking greasy Antichristian Orders Is it credible these prime Protestants would answer thus if they had not known that the Story of the Nags-head was true SECT XII J. S. HItherto N. N. hath been a fabulous Romancer and Legendary he now falls under the suspition of a Plagiary for in all probability he hath by a trick of Legerdemain filched these Quotations from some Puritan Pamphleteers many of which have made use of them upon another design But 1. In the different Judgment of N. N. the Question was started in Arch-Bishop Parker 's time though not pursued indeed nor moved for many years after at which time Dr. Whitaker and Dr. Fulk were either but School-boys or Freshmen but when they were Writers the Romanists thought fit to let it lie in a Saint-solitude and smother it with profound silence hoping to get a better opportunity to market the Fable 2. Supposing the English Ordination was first questioned in their times by what Magick will N. N. infer his conclusion or prove his Fable credible His Argument â—â—us from the Staff to the Corner for thus he demonstrates Dr. Whitaker and Dr. Fulke defied and sleighted yea scorned the Popish Ordinations therefore they believe the jolly merry Fable Dr. Whitaker saith We hold our Vocation lawful without their Form and Orders N. N's wild inference from hence is Therefore he knew the Story to be true which if it had been so would have rendered it unlawful Dr. Fulk The Romish Orders are stinking greasy
determine what Intention was necessary because they could not agree about the efficacy of the Sacraments it being impossible there should be the same Intention of two who differ in their judgments concerning it The common Salvo was that the Intention to do as the Church doth was sufficient but this satisfied not the scruple because men â—â—ffered in opinion what the Church is and their opinions herein being different their Intentions in administring the Sacraments would also prove different To evade this it was pretended all the Priests had the same design but as it is impossible for any to know the things that is the purposes of Man save the Spirit of Man which is in him 1 Cor. 2.11 so it is unconceivable how they should have the same end and aim who have different Judgments Humours Passions and Interests At last they were driven to this shift perhaps there may be some such wretched Priest yet this case is rare To this the Bishop of Minori replied would God said he that the case was rare and that in this corrupt age we had not cause to doubt there were many but suppose there are but a few or one only let a Knave Priest Baptize who hath not an Intention to administer the true Baptism to a Child who being after a grown Man is created a Bishop of a great City so that he hath Ordained a great part of the Priests in his Diocess it must be said that he being not Baptized is not Ordained nor they Ordained who are promoted by him Behold Millions of Nullities of Sacraments by the malice of one (z) Histor Council of Trent fol. 241. Priest in one Act only 4. To give full measures of Doubts and uncertainties in the most mysterious act of their Religion Dr. Holden (a) Apendix of Schism p. 445. Refert Dr. Ham. dispatcher Preface p. 14. averreth All Roman Catholicks do believe and reverence the Sacrifice of the Mass as the most substantial Act of their Religion but if it be demanded wherein the substance of this Sacrifice doth consist no substantial Resolution can be expected from them their Doubts and uncertainties about the Nature and Essence thereof are so cross and various There are divers opinions concerning it saith (b) Azor. l. 10. c. 9. or part 2. l. 2. c. 14. Azor. There are six Acts of which it is doubted in which one or more of them the Essence of the Sacrifice consisteth saith (c) Tom. 3. dist 75. art 1 2. Suarez Some place it in the one Act of Consecration but the doubters dispute against it for say they Consecration belongeth rather to the nature of a Sacrament than a Sacrifice and every external Sacrifice such as the Mass is must be sensible but the Conversion made by the words of Consecration is not sensible for the real change is not and again if the Act of Consecration then the outward Elements only are the Hoast and matter offered but we may not say the Species are the Hoast others set it in the Oblation but the dissenting Brethren oppose this because Christ used no Sacrificial Act at his Last Supper and if Christ did not the Priest ought not though some of them grant it belongs to the intergrity of the Sacrifice But how the Trent-Divines were divided in their judgment herein may be read Hist Counc of Trent fol. 544 c. Some of them again conceive Consecration Consumption or Sumption to be the Essence this others contradict because then say they the Body and Blood of Christ must be destroyed for that which is Offered in Sacrifice is to be destroyed but Sumption can be no part thereof because the Act of Receiving is not for although Christ be not received after the Consecration yet is he truly said to be Sacrificed and Doctors doubt whether Christ did receive in his last Supper and the Priest receiving doth nothing in Christs person but his own others stood for Fraction but this the doubters easily disprove for it is say they an Act purely Sacramental not at all Sacrificial and Fraction being before Consecration the Substance of the Bread and Wine remaineth When N. N. hath solved all these Doubts and satisfied all these Doubters he may be more confident of the demonstrative Power of Doubts and uncertainties in the mean time he may apply them to his own Church in his own words Mutatis mutandis Therefore the Romanists before they can prudently believe themselves to have true Faith or be the Catholick Church must clear all Doubts and uncertainties not objected by Protestants but started and pursued by their own Divines concerning their Church their Head of the Church their Ordinations and the most Substantial Act of their Religion the Mass for though any Person should not c. 7. N. N. goes one step forward the step to Christian and Catholick belief is c. This hath nothing of usefulness to his Conclusion unless he prove that a Clergy not regularly ordained cannot believe all the Articles of the Christian Faith c. that the Protestant Church hath a doubtful Clergy in which his attempts have hitherto been unsuccessful and unlucky to him and his Church If his meaning be the well-grounded Credibility of his Church is the foundation of Christian belief this is to beg the Question and is false for Christian Faith is not an assent and adherence to the Objects thereof upon the bare Testimony of the Church but on that of God neither is its warranty derived from the Church's Proposition but Divine Revelation True Faith is founded on the writings of Moses and the Prophets of Christ and his Apostles Eph. 2.20 which moved Durand thus to define it It is an habit whereby we assent to the Doctrines of the Scripture for the Authority of God revealing them But if he intend only that the Church's Proposition is to her members the first motive and preparative of Faith it will not be gainsaid but then he must remember that a prudent Christian will not take the Church for well-groundedly credible till he find by the Rule of Faith She deserves to be so esteemed for it is impossible the Church can appear so to him till he know the Faith it proposeth which he cannot do but by applying it to the Rule for every intellectual and moral habit must be sufficiently known before the Acts resulting from them can be predicated of any subject capable to exercise them As I must know what Prudence is before I can truly affirm of any man that he is Prudent 8. That which N. N. mainly drives at is to seduce the members of the Church of England from her Communion and solicite them to Apostate to Rome To effect this he took as he conceived a seasonable opportunity to perplex the minds of men with his Doubts and uncertainties by reason of our late sad divisions Then the Romanists bent all their forces to perswade easy seduceable tempers This Church was either a dead or (d) Bishop
forbid all Difference as well as contrariety Now it is clear those twelve new Doctrinals of Faith defined by the Pope Pius the fourth and set at the foot of the Old Creed if they be not contrary to them as most of them really are which might be proved by an Induction yet are they different from them for they are neither implicitly and virtually contained in them nor can by any direct or immediate consequence be deduced from them and therefore have no respect or relation to them nor connexion with them neither are they applied to the Old Creed as Explications thereof but were designed as so many supernumerary Articles of Faith the Catholick Church having only twelve Articles the Roman Church twenty four as some of their own sticklers confess which except a man believe faithfully he cannot be saved For they are dictated and proposed as so many distinct material objects of Faith to be believed in the same degree of necessity with the other to which they are superadded and therefore in the judgment of this Council and of the Latines themselves in their subterfuge the composition thereof is a dangerous Innovation and corruption in the Rule of Faith and the severe imposition of it is a Schismatical Presumption and a tyrannical Antichristian Usurpation 2. The second Conclusion is firmly deduced from another Canon of the same Council (b) C. 8. Caran in can Pelt Jesuit in summa illius capitis Nicene Council c. 6. which runs thus Let the same course be observed in other Diocesses and in all Provinces every-where that none of the Holy Bishops seiz upon another Province which was not of old and from the beginning under his Power This indeed particularly respected the exemption of the Cypriots from the encroachments of the Patriarch of Antioch yet for-as-much as the Decree passed in general words without any reservation to the Bishop of Rome he is thereby concluded as well as any other to be an ambitious Vsurper if he claim or exercise any Jurisdiction over the Churches which from the beginning were not under his Power Some of N. N's quick-sighted Gentlemen have apprehended the Decree to be so highly prejudicial to their pretensions and affections who therefore have endeavoured by Legerdemain to juggle it out of the Acts of this Council though if this unworthy Artifice had succeeded yet these Shufflers had gained nothing by it for the Nicene Council much earlier than this had confined the Bishop of Rome to his Bounds giving the like Ecclesiastical Jurisdiction to the Patriarchs of Alexandria and Antioch within their respective Diocesses which the Bishop of Rome had within his The importance of which Order is That as certain Churches were consigned to the Bishop of Rome so were certain to the Bishops of Alexandria and Antioch and as those of his Diocess were not subject to them so neither those of their Diocesses were subject to him upon this account that it was not lawful 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for any one to Invade (c) Nilus de primatu Papae and Soz. l. 7. c. 9. taketh this to be the Sense of the second General Council in Constantinople the words of the Canon confirm Nilus his Interpretation the Parilis mos and the ancient Customs As the Bishop of Rome had Power over all his Bishops so the Bishop of Alexandria was to have over his ex more according to Custom which Custom too was like which makes it appear the Roman Bishop was limited to his Diocess for there is no parity between an Vniversal Monarch and a Patriarchal Bishop and as it is absurd to say Alexandria must have bounds as Rome hath if Rome then had none so it is good Sense to say Let Alexandria be limited to her assignment and partition for Rome is the Sense then is Let the Jurisdiction of the Roman Bishop be a Copy Pattern or Form for the Bishop of Alexandria as Pope Nicholas Epist 8. ad Mich. p. 690 expresseth it The Nicene Canon took from Rome an Example particularly what to give to Alexandria therefore if the Bishop of Rome his Jurisdiction was over all the World it could not be a Form or Reason for the limitation and distriction of Alexandria into Cantons so the African Fathers understood it Ep. Afric Conc. ad Coelest c. 105. anothers Jurisdiction The Bishop of Alexandria was to have under his charge Aegypt Lybia c. the Bishop of Rome had the oversight of the Churches of his Neighbourhood the (d) Ruff. l. 1. c. 6. Hincma p. 6. c. 4. C. R. was one of the seven Accidental Diocesses Berer Diatrib 1. c. 1. 3. and Britain was another id ib. p. 198. Suburbicarian Regions beyond which his Jurisdiction did not extend and which made up his Diocess viz. three Islands Corsica Sicilia and Sardinia and seven Provinces on the Continent Campania Tuscia Vicenum suburbicarium Apulia with Calabria Brutium Samnium and Valeria and further yet the Bishop of Rome had but one of the seven Diocesses as they were anciently called or chief Jurisdictions which were appointed to the Western Church and for those other seven or as some (e) Mr. Brerewod thinks there were but thirteen Diocesses in the whole Empire Enquir p. 170. number them six assigned to the Eastern Church they were never subject to his Jurisdiction Pope Agatho about (f) Confesseth in 6 Synod Act. 4. Conc. Tom. 5. p. 60 F. 64. E. 65. B. So Zonaras Ann. 680. confesseth his Authority did not reach the East but before that time when St. Ignatius lived the Church of Rome was only the Church of the chief City of the Regions (g) Inscription of his Epist ad Roman of the Romans and before him in St. Clements time it was but the Provincial Church of God at Rome as the Church of God was but the Provincial Church (h) Clemens Title of his Epist ad Corinth of God at Corinth to both which that Form of Prayer observed in the Church and exemplified in the Author of the Apostolical (i) Lib. 8. c. 10. Constitutions is very agreeable viz. Let us pray for the Episcopacy of the whole World for our Bishop James of Jerusalem and his Diocess for Clement of Rome and his Diocess for Evodius of Antioch and his Diocess So just was that Censure of a fast Friend to the Cause once (k) Aeneas Sylvius Ep. 288. the most was to preside over the West as Zonar a Pope which he bluntly delivered viz. before the Nicene Council little respect was had to the Roman See But what Respect She had then and like time after was only Arbitrary at the Courtesy of the Church which sometime gave her a large Apartment sometimes Cantoned it For a time the Church allotted the Bishop of Rome the Government of some Western Churches which anciently and from the beginning belonged not to his Diocess as the Macedonian (l) Zonar note on the 6 Sardican Canon Illyrian Peloponesian and