Alexandria amongst which foure the Bishop of Rome had the first place in order and fitting when they did meete to gether but no definitiue sentence to vndoe that which they did or to conclude without them and this held touching generall counsells and somethinge for the nominating of bishops if need had bin and not touching the bishop of Rome only but also towardes others of that fellowship and thence sprange their letters of mutuall certificate each to others touching that one faith which they al professed as Gregory the great seemeth to insinuate when he saith Hinc est etiam quòd quoties in quatuor praecipuis sedibus Antistites ordinantur synodales sibi epistolas viciscim mittant Gregor l. 7. episc 53. ex saÌ„dvis mon. l. 7. so 358. Stapl. Princ. fidei doct l. 4. c. 20. fol. 149. Greg. l. 6. epis 37. ex Saund. visib monar l. 7. fol. 220. The dignity in the 3. patriarchal seats is equall Rome Alexandria Antioche SozoÌ„ l. 6. c. 23 Sanders abuseth this place alleadging it so as if the coÌ„sent only of the bishop of Rome were required Declaue Dauid l. 4. fol 80. Socrat. eccles histo l. 7. c. 28. Noe bishop ordained without the consent of the bishop of CoÌ„stantinople Hence it is also that oftentimes we finde that men of chelfe authoritie are appointed to rule in the fowre cheife seas mutually they sende synodicall Epistles each to others Cum multi sint Apostole pro ipso tamen principatu sola Apostolorum principis sedes in authoritate coÌ„valuit quae in tribus locis vnius est Although there bee many Apostles yet for the principalitie the seate of the prince of the Apostles was cheife in authoritie which authoritie in 3 places is equal For he Peter exalted the seate wherin he vouchsafeth to abide and ende his life Hee also beautified the seate vnto which he seÌ„t the EvaÌ„gelist Mark his disciple And he established the seate wherin he sate seuen yeares although he remoued from thence And other mens consents were established by law to bee had aswell as the bishop of Rome as we may read in the same history of Sozomene that the counsell holden at Ariminum was condeÌ„ned because nether Vincentius nor the rest to whome it belonged aswell as the bishop of Rome though his minde should haue bin knowne before other had not agreed vnto it It is moreover read againe in plaine tearmes in the diuisioÌ„ betweene Sisinius and those of Cyzicium they appointing one bishop and he nominating an other Hoc ab illis factum est neglecta illa lege quae iubet nequis episcopus desiguetur absque sententia authoritate Episcopi Constantinopolis This they did faith the storie because they neglected that law which commandeth that no bishop be appointed and ordained without the consente of the bishop of Constantinople so it appeareth if the businesse concerning the whole church were handled theÌ„ al their knowledges and mindes were had and knowne in it if it concerned any particular part therof then the particular bishops of the prouince 1. Bellar. de Rom. pont l. 2 c. 13. fo 223. ex Theodoret. ec cles his l. 5. c. 9. is abused aswel as the rest By commandement of the Popes letters saith Bellarm. 2. Bellar. de conc eccles l. 1. c. 13. f. 60. By the Popes letters they came to Constantinople A most impudeÌ„t vntruth shamlesly avouched 3. Bel. de conc eccles l. 1. c. 19. fo 83. 87. The bishop of Constantinople was president If the bishopp of Rome or his Legat must needs be president of couÌ„sells then this counsel lacked a president or otherwise it must appeare that Nectarius was his Legat or deputy both which are absurd to think and the patriarch yeilded thervnto the Emperour aboue alto bridle and call all to accompt You shal further see their sincerity in alleadging the histories by an other exaÌ„ple about the bishop of Romes supreme power out of the ecclesiasticall historie also The second generall counsell in their Epistle to Damasus which is extant in Theodoret doe say that they came to the citty of ConstaÌ„tinople ex mandato literarum pontificis by commandement of the Popes letters sent vnto them by the Emperour And there also they confesse the church of Rome to bee the head and they the members This saith Bellarmine in his first report of that historie In the second place he bringeth it in for proof of the Popes authority in calling of generall counsells Theoporete reporteth saith he that the Emperour Theodosius did not so much call the counsell at Constantinople as that hee seÌ„t the letters of Damafus the Pope to the bishops by which letters the counsell was summoned For so write the bishops gathered together in the counsell vnto Damasus the Pope mandato inquiunt literarum supertore anno à vestra reverentia ad sanctissimum Imperatorem Theodosium missarum That by letters receaued the last yeare from your holynesse meaning the Pope sent vnto the most holy Emperour Theodosius wee prepared to take our iourney to Constantinople Although therfore saith Bellarmine Theodosius called the counsel yet he called it by commandement of the sea Apostolike In the 3. place hee bringeth this same example for the presidentship and cheifty of the bishop of Rome in counsells In the secoÌ„d counsel held at Constantinople saith hee it is certaine that the Emperour fat not cheife but only sent the letters of the bishop of Rome to the rest by which they were called to the counsell And it is certaine saith he that the Roman bishop was not president but Nectarius the bishop of Constantinople the reasoÌ„ wherof is because the bishop of Rome was not there nor any Legate for him for Damasus the Pope had called the bishops of the East to Constantinople But from that place he would haue had them come to Rome that so at Rome there might haue bin a full plenary counsell both of the East West bishops How bouldly are these vntruthes avouched 4. Saund. â—… fol. 41. But if Damasus had beene there without doubt he had sat cheife as appeareth by their Epistle to Damasus Vbi illi Damasum vs caput suum agnoseunt ipse filios cos vocat wherin they acknowledge him for their head and he calleth them sonnes so much for Bellarmine Saunders in his Visible monarchy maketh a briefe of this matter thus The fathers that were saith he gathered togither in the second general counsel holden at Constantinople when they were vrged by Damasus the bishop of Rome to come thither amongst other causes why they coulde not so do brought this for one By the Popes letters they came to Constantinople That by the letters of the same Damasus written to the Emperor Theodosius they were appointed only to prepare themselues for a â—ourney to ConstaÌ„tinople And that they had brought the coÌ„sents of the bishops who remained at home in their provinces with them
pleased God to reserue two of the strōgest in out liuing their first labours more thā 20. years the most learned and iudicious Bishop of Winton D. Reynolds the one for his dialogues against the Iesuits the other for his conference with Hart wherein they see their desire on their enimies no aduersary daring to propound against either of them Who doth not thinke the memory of D. Humfrey is yet fresh and laudable in the highest degree for his answere to Campians chalenge for elegancy of stile exactnesse of method and substance of matter without all cast of the dice as Lactantius said by St. Cyprian D. VVillet hath bin very painefull as his Synopsis and Tetrastilon doe plainely shew The venerable Deane of Exeter D. Sutcliue may not in this page of praise be omitted for answering aswel the most learned amōg the aduersaries as those that haue the most dissolute tongues Bellarmine and Gifford It woulde be too long to reakon all therfore I cōtent my selfe with picking out the choise It shal alwaies be my praiers vnto Almighty God that whensoeuer it shall please him to call these or any of these to him selfe out of this wearisome life there may others arise in your places to goe on with the cause as the Poet speaketh of the Golden bough primo avulso non deficit alter Aeneid lib 6. one being taken away there wanteth not an other and so giue the aduersarie not so much as a breathing time And when you of the Cleargie and Schollers haue thus discharged their duties to God the Prince what rests for the Laity to doe but to take vp and read and hauing read as the men of Baerea in the Acts to compare both sides with the scripture then resolue to iustifie the truth in all sinceritie Act. 17. And to you I say this againe the clearnesse and perspicuitie of your writings hath added such a plainenes to my vnderstanding to the finding out of the truth that if I should not absolutely averre that the doctrine this day taught and professed in this Realme were the true and sincere doctrine of Christ and of his Church I should surely sin against mine owne conscience the contrarie of the Church of Rome beeing only built on the rubbish of contradictions impieties gloses slights falsifications and forgeries as by the samplar which I haue drawne out of their bookes for that purpose wil manifestly appeare I say not to you who are mighty in knowledge that way already but to euerie meane reader for whose sakes only I vndertooke this labour Ignoscant scientes ne offēdātur nescientes satius est offerre habēti quà m differre non habentē Aug. de bapt contra Donat. lib. 2. cap. 1. The Lord Iehova continue the Kings Maiestie in his holie intention of furthering and fauouring the doctrine established and blesse prosper the Reuerend Bishops and Cleargy to be watchfull against the common adversarie the Papist And to giue the rest of the Kingdome sound resolutiō to ioine strongly togither to the discountenauncing of Antichrist and all his designes From Tydworth the 1. of Nouember 1607. Yours in all duty and reverence John Panke TO AL OBSTINATE AND STIFFE Recusants held in wilfull blindnesse and to all luke-warme indifferent Papists not yet fully setled in their Recusancy health of body and soundnesse of iudgment I That hitherto bin your courses poore seduced Bretheren by the charge that your Masters haue laid on you to refuse all manner of conference with vs or to read any of our treatises or books that do any way tend to the crossing of your opinions which purpose as it taketh away all sounde iudgement which may anie way come vnto you so it hath given me for my part a ful a resolute determination never to beleeue but that by that policy they only would vphold the drift of their religion that they feare it woulde fal if it shoulde come to trial To meete with this mischiefe on your part I haue taken a labor not vsual to win you if it be possible to reading I haue laide almost forty of your owne writers togither some our owne countrymen here at home others the best of your side that ever wrot The Catologue of their names and editions of their books that so you be not deceiued I haue noted vnto you in the next pages following I haue compared them in three of the principal questions betweene you and vs. The sacrifice of your Masse Reall presence or transubstantiation and Popes supremacy and do protest I never did nor yet do thinke any man living is able to take those authors and proue any of those points by them or can draw out a plaine and simple forme of speech how they would bee vnderstoode in any of those questions I am not ignorant neither do I make your teachers so simple but you and they can say This they belieue in grosse 1 you offer vp the sonne of God to his father and that is your Masse 2 you haue him really present and so you eate him and that is your sacrament And 3 that the Pope is Christs Vicar and that is your beliefe All this I beleeue you can say but this is not that which you ought to seeke at your teachers hands For come to explane what agreement your Masse hath with that which Christ did at his last supper the night before he suffered And what that was which he did at his last supper and what the morrow on the crosse And what your Masse is to either or both When we aske discourse vpon this here they stagger and turne like madde men as though it did belong to them only to affirme what they lusted and yeeld no account of what they say or indeed as though they knew not what to say Harding What wordes are there and what termes are not there Stapleton Not as vpon the Crosse explane and proue How is it vnbloudy The Rhemists say that the same bloud that Christ shed on the Crosse is in the chalice at Masse Dureus saith the sacrifice of the Masse is not without bloud in it but is offered with out shedding of bloud Cōt Whit. rat 4. fol 183. what shoulde the bloud do ther if it be not shed How the Pope claimeth his supremacy is doubted of amongst them Being demanded where be the words of scripture by which the Priest hath power to offer vp Christ to God his father they answere there be words that set forth an obligation in act and deede but no termes expressed a solution to a question much like the direction givē by a Miller to a passenger who bid him leaue the bottome and ride the lower way betweene the two hils What difference is there betweene word and tearms Can any man distinguish The Church offereth a daily sacrifice not as vpon the crosse but the selfesame thing that was offered on the crosse The thing offered is one selfe same sacrifice but in
matter of faith as other men do if in examination it happen to be an error yet shal it be none in the Pope but must be one in al men else For trial of this let any man read the 1. 2. chapt de sanct beat where he proueth it an error vpon whom soeuer shall thinke that the soules of the blessed doe not see God vntill the last day Bellar. de Sanctor beatit l. 1 c. 1. 2 This error is put vpon Iohn 22. Bellarmine confesseth as much Ioannem hunc reverâ sensisse animas non visuras Deum nisi post resurrectionem That Iohn 22. did verily beleeue Bell. de Rom. pont l. 4. c. 14. fol 549. c. 12. fol. 531. he saueth Pope Nicholas by the like that the soules see not God vntil the last day But this he thought saith he when he might so thinke without danger of heresie nulla enim adhuc praecesserat Ecclesiae definitio for there had no determinatioÌ„ of the church gone before Why The determinatioÌ„ of himselfe is the determination of the church aswel as you said before his telling of a thing to himselfe was the telling of it to the church And why excuseth he the Pope by the not determination of the Church When hee telleth vs himselfe De conc auth l. 2. c. 2 5. That neither generall counsels nor particular which otherwise are subiect to erre can erre if the Pope confirme them And yet see the man be telleth vs De Rom. pont l. 4. c. 14 f. 551 that Iohn need not to reuoke the error cum in errorem nullum incidisset for he fel into no error If hee fel into no error neither did they fal into any error on whoÌ„ Bellarmine laieth the same error nor must he cal it an error to say The soules of the righteous see not God vntil the last day seeing he himselfe saith that Iohn so held and yet held no error FroÌ„ absurd and grosse coÌ„clusions they fal to flat blasphemies Rom. 6.23 Rhem annot on that Text. Blasphemies ContradictioÌ„s The reward of sin is death but everlasting life is the gift of God saith S. Paul the Rhemists say in their annotations that The sequele of the speech required that as he said deathor damnation is the stipend of sin so life everlasting is the stipend of iustice so it is What indignity is this to the holy Ghost to crosse him so manifestly S. Paule maketh opposition betweene eternal life eternal death touching the cause of either The proper working cause of death is sin so saith the Apostie The reward wages or stipend of sin is death but everlasting life is what the stipende of good workes as the Rhemists say no but the free gift of God The Apostle might as easilie haue said so as they if it had bin so Annot 2. Cor. 5. vers 10. Wil Reinolds cont Whiâ—…k fol. 105â— Why did S. Paule invert and turne the sentence if as the one had deserued hel so the other had deserued heaven but only to exclude what the Rhemists bring in They iterate this in an other place where they say Heaven is as well the reward of good works as hell is the stipend of ill workes This is also seconded by one from Rhemes who saith that the Apostle Saint Paule laieth in indifferent ballance good works and euil maketh the one the cause of heauen as the other is the cause of hel But if it be so that good works be the cause purchase merit of eternall life as these men tell vs as trulie as euill works are the purchase and merit of hel what saie they to their owne note Rhem. Annot. Rom c 9. v. 11. 16. vpon another text where they tel vs that by the example of the two two twinns Iacoh Esaw it is euident that nether nations nor particular persons bee elected eternallie or called temporallie or preferred to Gods fauour before other by their owne merits but of theÌ„ two vvhere iustlie hee might haue reprobated both hee saued of mercie one What is this as S Paul said before eternal life is the gift of God excluding merits Yet they stand not alwaie to this last For they saie againe Man hath free will to make himselfe a vessell of saluation or damnation Rhem. Annot 2. Tim. 2. v. 21. though saluation be attributed to gods mercy principally the other to his iust iudgment Hâ—w hath man free wil to make himselfe a vessel of saluation or damnation wheÌ„ saluation is principallie of Gods mercie and the other of his iudgment Whie explaine they not that darke speech that wee maie vnderstand it Interpres eget interprete They neede more Interpreters then the text They told vs before that Gods meere mercie is seene in the elect and iustice in the reprobat And that they that are saued Annot. Rhem. Rom 9. v. 6.11 14. 16. must hold of gods eternal purpose mercy and election And this election and mercy dependeth on his owne purpose will determination that all are worthie of damnation before they bee first called to mercie Make good this doctrine which they haue last set downe and agreed vpon the former will proue blasphemous and deregatorie to the mâ—iestie of God That good workes are the cause of beauen as evill are the cause of hell Or that man hath free will to make himself a vessell of saluation or damnation I doubt not if the Rhemists be followed but that a man might take vp moe contradictions then those before which they haue heaped amongst their notes in that testament 2. Tim 2.25 God giueth repentance Where S. Paul writing to Tymothy willeth him to instruct with meeknesse those that resist or vvithstand the truth prouing if at anie time God will giue them repentance that they maie acknowledge the truth they note That conversion from sin and heresie is the gift of god and of his special grace Annot. vppon that place in the margent pag. 589. I might aske them first how this agreeth with their owne note one the other side of their owne leafe so oft mentioned before Man hath free wil to make him selfe a vessel of saluation or damnation But I wil leaue that now and demand of them howe it agreeth with this The grace of god woorketh not in man against his will nor forceth anie thing without his acceptation and consent Annot. 2. cor 6. v. 1. Annot. Ioh. 6. v. 44. Annot Luc. 14. v. 23. Conuersion from sin heresie is the gift of God For whosoeuer are lead by the spirit of God Rhem. Rom. 8. v 14. in marg Hee meaneth not that the children of god be violently compelled against their wills but that they bee sweetly dâ—awn moued or induced to doe good ex Aug. Ench c. 64. de verbis domin Serm. 43. c 7 deverb Apost ser 13. c. 11 1â— Acts â— and therfore it lieth in a mans will to
it pleased almighty God to send ease to his Church in making her chiefe enemies her dearest friends Then began Kings to be her nursing fathers Queenes to be her nursing mothers Then first called he Constantinus surnamed the Great to the knowledge of the truth Esay 49. v. 23. After the first 300. yeeres of a Pagan becōming a Christian putting downe Idololatry and erecting the true service of God Vnder him and his sonnes there liued the Romane Bishops Melchiades Silvester Marcus Iulius Liberius and Felix Strife about Felix Eccle 1. hier l. 4 c. 8. There is much strife in the church of Rome at this and Felix Strife about Felix Eccles hier l. 4. c. 8. There is much strife in the church of Rome at this day about this Felix some of them reakoning him for a Pope and some putting him out Albertus Pighius saith they that register him for a Pope bewray their own ignorance Bellarmine saith Bell. de Rom. pont li. 4. c. 9. fol. 509. their church worshippeth him as Pope and Martyr The strife betweene them two about Felix groweth about Liberius who was Pope next before him This Liberius in his banishment vnder Constantius the Emperour did subscribe to the Arrian heresy and so in his absence out of the Citty Felix was Pope in his roome Thus much doth Bellarmine cōnfesse of Liberius And because Pighius most impudētly denieth that he subscribed Chron. l. 3. fol. 574. Ammianus Marcellinus Comes So was Marcellinus martired yet he fell before They were wont to tell vs that Christ praied for Peter but nowe they tel vs he praied for the chaire he sitteth on Contra haer l. 1. c. 4. Defen Conc. Trid. li. 2. fol. 244. Fasc Tempor in liberio Platina in liberio Annot. Onuphrij Anast Bibl. in Lib. Feli. About the yere of our Lord. 370. A schisme at Rome between Damasus Vrsinus Polid. Verg. de inven rerū li. 5. c. 4. f. 401. Bellar. de cleric l. 1. c. 18. f. 92. Aug. epist 93. l. 2. ad Bonif. cont 2. epist Pelag. c. 4. therefore he shutteth out Felix from being Pope at all D. Genebrard cannot tel what to say directly on this Felix part First he telleth vs that Ammianus Marcellinus in his Chronicles did passe by him as suspected of heresie and Onuphrius one that wished as wel to the sea of Rome as wel might be maketh him a schismatike and an vnlawful Pope for Liberius over liued him obtained the place alone But other more truer saith he do report that he was Martired in a tumult by the Arrians And yet in the next words he saith that Felix was appointed by Acatius the disciple of Eusebius into the place of Liberius and held for an Arian But such was the force of the Chaire that it would rather hold a Martyr Pope than an heretike Pope or one that should favor the heretikes Thus farre Genebrard Alphousus a Castro maketh no question but that Liberius was an Arrian heretike Anà radius is content that we should cal him vnconstant faithlesse or vniust but in no case an heretike Fasciculus Temporū saith he was the first infamous Pope If you desire more of these two Popes Liberius and Felix read or cause to bee read vnto you Platina who wrote the liues of the Popes and Onuphrius annotations on him and Anastatius Bibliothecarius on the same argument set out by thēselues not aboue three yeeres since and you shal see diversity enough After those followed Damasus Siricius Anastasius Innocentius Sozimus Bonifacius Celestinus Sixtus 3. and Leo the great There was a schisme then in the Church of Rome betweene Damasus and one Vrsinus or Vrcisianus but Damasus obtained yet not without bloud Siricius was the first that in the west parts forbad priests to marry as Polidore Virgil alleadgeth out of Gratian whervnto Bellarmine is now fairely come That it is not forbidden by the law of God that Priests should marry Innocentius the first held and taught a dangerous errour that is That it is necessary to salvation for infants to receiue the cōmunion contrary to Saint Paules rule that none should receiue but those that are able to examine themselues and contrary to the doctrine of the Church of Rome vnder Pius quartus in the Tridentine counsell which accurseth those that thinke the Eucharist is to bee given to infantes before the yeares of discretion Sess 21. can 4. The bishops of Rome contended with the bishops of Aphrica for superiority Bonifacius 1. was the sonne of lucundus a Preist as saith Platina so was Felix 3 who immediatly followed sonne vnto Felix a Priest Leo epist 45. Fasciculus tēp Geneb in Chron. l 3. fol. 600. Eulatius against Bonifacius an 423. Gelasius was the sonne of a bishop called Valerius Plat. in vit eius The first 600. yeares Gelasius decreed in 2. maine points against them now Anastasius 2. an heretike so that the Apostolicall seate in one of these two must needs er In Sozimus Bonifacius Celestinus time there was much cōtrouersie between thē the Aphrican bishops touching appeales to Rome Sozimus began the claime and could not make it good he graced himselfe with warrant from the Nicene councell which beeing demanded no canon nor decree could be shewed The Aphricā bishops deny their appeales thither and so grew much turmoile But if all Churches in al cases were subiect to the sea of Rome iure diuino by Gods law as they would make vs beleeue now very simple was Sozimus to claime by the Canons of the councel of Nice and very forgetful of their duties were the Aphrican bishops who would put him to proue his authoritie by an humane invention when the high God had by his lawes subiected them vnto him before Leo the great yet was his authoritie so smal that hee could not remoue Abbat Eutiches from him but was forced to intreate the Empresse Pulcheria to vse her authoritie therin By this time there had bin fowre schismes in the church of Rome yet Genebrard acknowledged but three After Leo were Hillarius Simplicianus Felix 3. Gelasius Anastasius 2. Simmachus Hormisda Iohn 1. Felix 4. Bonifacius 2. Iohn 2. Agapetus Silverius Vigilius Pelagius Iohn 3. Benedictus Pelagius 2. Gregory the greate these reacheth downe to the first 600. yeares Amongst which Gelasius decreed that to minister the holy communiō in one kind is open sacriledge and againe he defined that the substance of bread and wine remaine after consecratiō both which are diametrally opposite to the doctrine of the new church of Rome Anastasius the second was an heretike as appeareth by the histories Wernerus saith he was the 2 infamous Pope he was a Nestorian heretike as before him his predecessor Liberius was an Arrian Vigilius vsed indirect means to attaine to the Popedōe Huius Vigilij ingressus parum legitimus suit cum praetet ecclesiasticas regulas praedecessore suo Silverio viuente Pōtificatus administratione
23. being president at the beginning whereat was present the Emperour Segismundus against the schisme of the three Popes that then were Iohn 23. sate at Benonia Gregory the 12 at Ariminum and Benedict 13. in Spaine TheÌ„ had christ neuer a vicar at that time Lib. de Rom. Pont. l. 4 c. 14. Counsel of Constance Camp ratio 4. de concilijs The counsell vndid what the Emperour confirmed Bellar. de coÌ„ ecces l. 1. c. 5. 6. 7. Why doth Bellarmine giue vs such a distinctioÌ„ of couÌ„sells which none of his fellowes ever did but because hee ever hath one deuise which they never thought of Ter. in Phor. act 2. scen 2. non te horum pudet at si talentum reÌ„ reliquisset deceâ—… primus esses memoriter progenieÌ„ vestram vsque ab avo atqueâ—tarâ— preferenâ— which three were quite throwne out and Martin 5. elected the vndoubted Pope Iohn was accused in that counsel as denying the life everlasting and the resurrection of the flesh It is answered hee was not the lawful true Pope because there were 3. at that time whose factions had al great favorites and learned advouchers The counsel pronounced of him that he was a sinke of sins a devill incarnate Bellarmine coÌ„fesseth there were 53. articles proved against him and that he was of so lewd a life as though hee had beleeued there should be no iudgment hereafter But see the mischiefe This councel of Constance that thus condemned and threw out the Pope condemned also Iohn Husse a good ChristiaÌ„ for an hereticke In that they extol receiue the counsel in renouncing the Pope they do not Husse had the Emperours safe conduct to come and goe freely to the counsel but the bishops nothing regarding the Emperours warrant overthrew the deed and put him to death who put himselfe into their hands Caesar obsignavit Christianus orbis resignanit maior Caesare The Emperor signed the warrant saith Campion but the Counsel disanulled it who is greater than the Emperour To saue the credit of this counsel for dealing against Husse and the Pope too Bellarmine hath devised a quadruple partition of the allowing or disallowing of counsels by them 1. he meÌ„tioneth general CouÌ„cels which he alloweth then general couÌ„cels which he disaloweth 3. he hath soÌ„e couÌ„sels which are partly to be allowed partly to be disallowed of which last sort of the couÌ„sel of ConstaÌ„ce with him For saith he touching the first sessioÌ„s wher they did enact that a general couÌ„sel should be aboue the Pope it is to be disalowed But in respect of the last sessioÌ„s those things which Pope Martin 5. alowd it is receued by al Catholiks But what saith the Poet Vide avaritia quid facit see what covetousnes caÌ„ do no Vide impudentia quiafacit see what impudeÌ„cy caÌ„ do Are they not a shaÌ„ed of this now that they fle their own Pops their own couÌ„sels Let vs now see how the forme of that Church stood after Martin 5. to whom succeeded Eugenius 4. against whoÌ„ was chosen by the Counsel of Bazil one Foelix 5. called before Anadaeus Duke of Savoy The counsell of Basill deposed Pope Eugenius which Felix after hee had sitteÌ„ 9. yeres did freely giue it over againe Then there was a new schisme began the cause was whether the Pope were aboue a generall counsell Fasc temp fol. 89. Conscientia Conscience Solum entia sponsaÌ„ Christi gubernaâ—e videmus Sand. de visib monar l. 7. fol. 516. Eccles hieâ—ar l. 6. c. 2. fo 402. or a counsell aboue the Pope These times were so miserable touching their Popes and Church that of CONSCIENS which before that time was somewhat the two first syllables were abated and only ENS stocks and blocks left to governe the spowse of Christ which is his church This couÌ„sel of Bazil is reakoned by Bellarmine amongst those which are partly allowed and partly disallowed And yet Sanders absolutely condemneth it as vnlawful for offering to depose Eugenius and therfore saith he it gaue occasion of a great schisme Albertus Pighius with one breath concludeth that both those counsels of Constance and Basill concludeth both against order and nature against the cleâ—re light of the Gospell and against all antiquity In opusc Caiet de author pap conc c. 8. in princ and against the Catholike church Caietane is much busied also with the credit of those two counsels the one confirming the decrees of the other he feareth to call that of ConstaÌ„ce a general or Occumenical counsel because it subiected the Pope to a councell and so opened a gappe which should haue bin shut Defenc. Trid. Conc. l. 2. fol. 428. 429. Andradius is resolute that the counsel was generall and may be so reakoned and interpreteth it not as if they had decreed simply that the Pope should be subiected to a councel in general The shephard renteth teareth the flock Now they praise those 2. councels vnto vs. Hard. cont Iuell twise in the 2. artic for the communion in on kind but onlie when they rend and teare Church by dissention and making of parts to get the popedome as then they did then for a generall councel to be stickler amongst them is not amisse The testimony of these men before-prized what shal we say to those who do obtrude both these Councels of Constance and Bazil vnto vs not only in matters of fact touching the coÌ„demning of Iohn Husse and Ierome of Prage but also in matters of doctrine faith in no smal matters nether but for proofe of their masse and the denying of the Laity the vse of the cup in the Lords supper Alien for the Masse de euch sacraf l. 2. fol. 558. l 1. c. 21. fol. 343 Canus loc theol lib. 12. fol. 416. Sand. de visib monar l. 8. c. 10. For the Church of Romes credit Andrad Orth. explic l. 7. fol. 615. Horace epist l. 1. ad Fuscum Arist Vrbis amatorem Fuscum salvere iubemus iuris ama tores hac in re scilicet vna multuÌ„ dissimiles ad caetera penè gemelli The residue downe to our time Alexander 6. father vnto Caesar Borgia Duke of Valence L. 6. c. 23. L. 3. 6. Geneb chron l. 4. fol. 1097. Bellica gloria quam pontificia clarior that without any manner of scruple or doubt of the authority and credit of them whereof their former fellows do dispute but as if their decrees were the perfect sound oracles of Gods vniversal church agreeing with the sacred and holy scripture They are in this like to those friendes in Horace who though they studied all one thing yet they did chuse a diverse kinde of life And so the Poet biddeth the lovers of the CouÌ„try life to salut the lovers of the citty life and though in that they were much vnlike yet in other things they were even twins So must Andradius Harding Allen Canus shake hands with