16. Of the errors that are and haue beene touching the vse of the discipline of the Church in punishing offenders 24. Chap. 17. Of the considerations moouing the Church to vse indulgence towards offenders 25. Chap. 18. Of their damnable pride who condemne all those Churches wherein want of due execution of discipline and imperfections of men are found 26. The second Booke is of the notes of the Châ—…h CHAP. 1. OF the nature of notes of difference and their seuerall kindes 29. Chap. 2. Of the diuers kindes of notes whereby the true Church is discerned from other societies of men in the world 30. Chap. 3. Of Bellarmines reasons against the notes of the Church assigned by vs. 32. Chap. 4. Of Stapletons reasons against our notes of the Church 34. Chap. 5. Of their notes of the Church and first of Antiquity 37. Chap. 6. Of succession 39. Chap. 7. Of the third note assigned by them which is Vnity 40. Chap. 8. Of Vniuersality 41. Chap. 9. Of the name and title of Catholike 42. The third Booke sheweth which is the true Church demonstrated by those notes CHAP. 1. OF the diuision of the Christian World into the Westerne or Latine Church and the Orientall or East Church 47. Chap. 2. Of the harsh and vnaduised censure of the Romanists condemning all the Orientall Churches as Schismatic all and hereticall 75. Chap. 3. Of the nature of heresie of the diuerse kindes of things wherein men erre and what pertinacie it is that maketh an hereticke 76. Chap. 4. Of those things which euery one is bound expresly to know and beleeue and wherein no man canne erre without note of heresie 77. Chap. 5. Of the nature of Schisme and the kindes of it and that it no way appeareth that the Churches of Greece c. are hereticall or in damnable Schisme 80. Chap. 6. Of the Latine Church that it continued the true Church of God euen till our time and that the errours we condemne were not the doctrines of that Church 81. Chap. 7. Of the seuerall points of difference betweene vs and our aduersaries wherein some in the Church erred but not the whole Church 83. Chap. 8. Of the true Church which and where it was befâ—… Luthers time 84. Chap. 9. Of an Apostasie of some in the Church 86. Chap. 10. Of their errour who say nothing can be amisse in the Church either in respect of doctrine or discipline 89. Chap. 11. Of the causes of the manifold confusions and euils formerly found in the Church ibid. Chap. 12. Of the desire and expectation of a reformation of the corrupt state of the Church and that the alteration which hath beene is a reformation 91. Chap. 13. Of the first reason brought to prooue that the Church of Rome holdeth the faith first deliuered because the precise time wherein errors began in it cannot be noted 93. Chap. 14. Of diuers particular errours which haue beene in the Church whose first author cannot be named 94. Chap. 15. Of the second reason brought to prooue that they hold the auncient faith because our men dissenting from them confesse they dissent from the Fathers where sundry instances are examined 96. Chap. 16. Of Limbus Patrum concupiscence and satisfaction touching which Caluin is falsely charged to confesse that he dissenteth from the Fathers 99. Chap. 17. Of Prayer for the dead and Merit 101. Chap. 18. Of the Fathers strictnesse in admitting men into the Ministery of single life and of their seuerity in the discipline of repentance 103. Chap. 19. Of the Lent Fast of Lay-mens Baptisme and of the sacrifice of the Masse 106. Chap. 20. Of the inuocation and adoration of Saints touching which the Century writers are wrongfully charged to dissent from the Fathers 109. Chap. 21. Of Martyrdome and the excessiue praises thereof found in the Fathers 114. Chap. 22. Wherein is examined their proofe of the antiquity of their Doctrine taken from a false supposall that our doctrine is nothing else but heresie long since condemned 115. Chap. 23. Of the heresie of Florinus making God the author of sinne falsely imputed to Caluine and others 117. Chap. 24. Of the heresies of Origen touching the Image of God and touching hell falsely imputed to Caluin 133. Chap. 25. Of the heresie of the Peputians making women Priests 134. Chap. 26. Of the supposed heresie of Proclus and the Messalians touching concupiscence in the regenerate 135. Chap. 27. Of the heresies of Nouatus Sabellius and the Manichees 139. Chap. 28. Of the heresies of the Donatists 141. Chap. 29. Of the heresies of Arrius and Aerius 142. Chap. 30. Of the heresies of Iouinian 143. Chap. 31. Of the heresies of Vigilantius 146. Chap. 32. Of the heresie of Pelagius touching originall sinne and the difference of veniall and mortall sinnes 147. Chap. 33. Of the heresie of Nestorius falsely imputed to Beza and others 149. Chap. 34. Of the heresies of certaine touching the Sacrament and how our men deny that to be the body of Christ that is carried about to bee gazed on 150. Chap. 35. Of the heresie of Eutiches falsely imputed to the Diuines of Germany 151. Chap. 36. Of the supposed heresie of Zenaias Persa impugning the adoration of Images 152. Chap. 37. Of the error of the Lampetians touching vowes 153. Chap. 38. Of the heresie of certaine touching the verity of the body and blood of Christ communicated to vs in the Sacrament ibid. Chap. 39. Of succession and the exceptions of the aduersaries against vs in respect of the supposed want of it 154. Chap. 40. Of succession and the proofe of the trueth of their doctrine by it 159. Chap. 41. Of vnity the kinds of it and that communion with the Romane Bishoppe is not alwaies a note of true and Catholike profession 160. Chap. 42. That nothing can be concluded for them or against vs from the note of Vnity or diuision opposite vnto it 164. Chap. 43. Of Vniuersality 169. Chap. 44. Of the Sanctity of doctrine and the supposed absurdities of our profession 170. Chap. 45. Of the Paradoxes and grosse absurdities of Romish religion 172. Chap. 46. Of the efficacie of the Churches doctrine 174. Chap. 47. Of the Protestants pretended confession that the Romane Church is the true Church of God ibid. Chap. 48. Of Miracles confirming the Romane faith 175. Chap. 49. Of Propheticall prediction 177. Chap. 50. Of the felicity of them that professe the trueth 178. Chap. 51. Of the miserable ends of the enemies of the truth ibid. Chap. 52. Of the Sanctitie of the liues of them that are of the Church 179. An Appendix to the third booke wherein it is proued that the Latine Church was and continued a true orthodoxe and protestant Church and that the maintainers of Romish errors were onely a faction in the same at the time of Luthers appearing AN answere to M. Brerelyes obiection concerning the masse publiquely vsed in all Churches at Luthers appearing pag. 185. Chap. 1. Of the canon of the Scriptures 224.
which the Romanists now teach nor power of nature to doe the workes of the Lawe according to the substance of the things commanded though not according to the intention of the Law-giuer to loue God aboue all and to do actions morally good or not sinfull without concurrence of speciall grace nor election and reprobation depending on the foresight of some thing in vs positiue or priuatiue nor merit of congruence and condignity nor workes of supererogation nor counsels of perfection as they now teach nor iustification by perfection of inherent qualities nor vncertainty of grace nor seaven Sacraments properly so named nor locall presence nor Transubstantiation nor orall manducation of the body of Christ nor reall sacrificing of it for the quick the dead nor remission of sinnes after this life nor tormenting of the soules of men dying in the state of saluation in a part of hell hundred of yeares by divels in corporall fire out of which prayer should deliver them nor that the Saints heare our prayers know or are acquainted with our particular wants nor the grosse Idolatry in those times committed and intollerable abuses found in the number fashion and worship of their images nor their absolution as now they define it nor treasure of the Church growing out of the superfluitie of Saints merits not rewardable in themselues to be disposed by the Pope for supplie of other mens wants to release them out of Purgatorie by way of indulgence nor the infallibility of the Popes iudgment and plenitude of his power such and so great that he may depose Princes and dispose of their crownes and dignities and that whatsoeuer he doth he may not be brought into order or deposed by authority of the whole Christian world in a generall Councell These are the errours which wee condemne and our adversaries maintaine and defend these wee are well assured were not the doctrines of that Church wherein our Fathers liued and dyed though wee do not deny but they were taught by some in that Church All these we offer to proue to be errour in matter of our Christian faith and that seeing wee could no longer haue peace with our adversaries but by approuing these impieties wee had iust cause to divide our selues from them or to speake more properly to suffer our selues to be accursed anathematized and rejected by them rather than to subscribe to so many errours and heresies contrary to the Christian and Catholike verity CHAP. 8. Of the true Church which and where it was before Luthers time THus then it appeareth which wee thinke to haue beene the true Church of God before Luther or others of that sort were heard of in the world namely that wherein all our Fathers liued and died wherein none of the errours reproued by Luther ever found generall vniforme and full approbation in which all the abuses remoued by him were long before by all good men complained off and a reformation desired And therefore though wee accknowledge Wickliffe Husse Hierome of Prague and the like who with great magnanimity opposed them selues against the Tyranny of the See of Rome and the impiety of those who withheld the trueth of God in vnrighteousnesse who being named Christians serued Antichrist as Bernard complained of some in his time to haue beene the worthy servants of God and holy martyrs and confessours suffering in the cause of Christ against Antichrist yet doe wee not thinke that the Church of God was found onely in them or that there was no other appearance of succession of Church and ministerie as Stapleton and other of that faction falsely impute vnto vs. For wee most firmely beleeue all the Churches in the world wherein our Fathers liued and died to haue beene the true Churches of God in which vndoubtedly salvation was to be found and that they which taught embraced and beleeued those damnable errors which the Romanists now defend against vs were a faction only in the Churches as were they that denied the resurrection vrged circumcision and despised the Apostles of Christ in the Churches of Corinth and Galatia If any of our men deny these Churches to haue beene the true Churches of of God their meaning is limitted in respect of the prevailing faction that was in the Church and including them and all the wicked impieties by any of them defended in which sense their negatiue is to bee vnderstood For howsoever the Church which is not to be charged with the errours and faults of all that in the midst of her did amisse held a sauing profession of the trueth of God yet there were many and they carrying the greatest shew of the Church that erred damnably and held not a sauing profession of diuine trueth wherevpon Gerson sayth that before the councell of Constance the false opinions touching the power of the Pope did fret like a Canker preuailed so far that he would hardly haue escaped the note of heresie that had said but halfe so much as was defined in the Councell of Constance by the vniuersall consent of the whole Christian world Gregorius Ariminensis sheweth that touching the power of nature to doe things morrally good and to fulfill the law without concurrence of speciall grace touching the workes of infidels predestination reprobation and punishments of originall sinne the heresies of Pelagius were taught in the Church and that not by a few or contemptible men but so manie and of soe great place that he almost feared to follow the doctrine of the Fathers and oppose himselfe against them therein The same doth Gerson report concerning sundry lewd assertions preiudiciall to the states of Kings and Princes which the Councell of Constance could not bee induced to condemne by reason of a mighty faction that preuailed in it though many great ones much urged it and though they made no stay to condemne the positions of Wicklife and Hus seeming to derogate from the state of the Clergie though many of them might carry a good and Catholike sense if they might haue found a fauourable construction Whereupon he breaketh into a bitter complaint of the partialities and vnequall courses holden in the Church and protesteth that he hath no hope of a reformation by a councell things standing as they then did The like complaint did Contarenus make in our time that if any man did debase the nature of man deiect the pride of sinnefull flesh magnifie the riches of the grace of God and vrge the necessity of it hee was iudged a Lutheran and pronounced an Hereticke though they that gloried in the name of Catholikes were themselues Pelagian heretickes if not worse then Pelagians Alas saith Occam the time is come the blessed Apostle Saint Paule 2. Timoth. 4 prophecied of When men will not suffer wholesome doctrine but hauing their eares itching after their owne lustes get them a heape of Teachers turning their eares from the trueth and being giuen vnto fables This Prophecie is altogether fullfilled in our
a more sound and sincere profession of Christian verity than the Romanists doe It is true indeede that many of the famous Churches of the world haue beene swallowed vp of Mahometisme and Barbarisme but to attribute that their fall to their separation from the Church of Rome is vpon as good ground as to attribute the cause of Goodwin-sands to Tenterton-steeple That which he addeth that none of the Churches divided from Rome had euer any learned men after their separation sheweth plainely that his impudencie is greater than his learning For what will he say of Oecumenius Theophylactus Damascenus Zonaras Cedrenus Elias Cretensis Nilus Carbasilas and innumerable more liuing in the Greeke Churches after their separation from the Church of Rome Surely these were more than matchable with the greatest Rabbines of the Romish Synagogue But saith hee they could neuer hold any Councell since their separation If hee meane generall it is not to bee marvailed at seing they are but a part of the Christian Church If Nationall or Provinciall it is most childish and by sundry instances to be reprooued CHAP. 42. That nothing can bee concluded for them or against vs from the note of Vnitie or division opposite vnto it THus hauing cleared that which Bellarmine objecteth to prooue that subjection to and vnion with the Bishop of Rome is implyed in that vnity which is required to the being of the Church Let vs come to the other part and see whether any thing may bee concluded from that vnity which wee confesse to bee required to the being of the true Church either against vs or for them First therefore the Iesuite reasoneth against vs in this sort All they that are of the true Church must hold the vnity of the faith once deliuered to the Saints but there are sundry Heretikes erring damnably in matters of faith as Zuincheldians Anabaptists Trinitarians and the like gone out of the reformed Churches therefore they are not the true Churches of God If this kinde of reasoning were good hee might proue that those Churches wherein the Apostles liued were not the Churches of God because out of them proceeded sundry heretikes as Hymenaeus Philetus Nicolaus Simon Magus and the like But sayth he there be two differences betweene the Apostolike Churches and the reformed Churches in this respect the first that the doctrine of the reformed Churches it selfe and of it owne nature breedeth dissention the second that when there is difference growne they haue no rule by direction whereof to make an end of controversies But the divisions that grow from the Catholike Church proceede meerely from the malice of Sathan and haue no foundation in the doctrine of it and if any difference doe arise it hath a mâ—…anes to end all controversies by which is the determination of a Councell or the chiefe Pastour Both these differences we deny for neither doth our doctrine of it selfe breed dissention and diversitie of opinions neither are wee without meanes of composing controversies if they arise If Bellarmine will proue that our doctrine of it selfe breedeth division hee must shew that the grounds and principles of it are vncertaine and such as may occasion errour contrariety and vncertaintie of judgment which he neither doth nor can doe For the ground of all our doctrine is the written word of God interpreted according to the rule of faith the practise of the Saints from the beginning the conference of places and all light of direction that either the knowledge of â—…gues or any part of good learning may yeeld This surely is the rule to end all controversies by and not the authoritie of a Councell or the chiefe Pastour as Bellarmine fondly imagineth For they both must follow the direction of this rule in all their determinations Whereupon the Booke of God and monuments of Antiquity were alwayes wont to be brought into the Councels whereby the Fathers might examine all matters controversed or any way doubted of Now as wee want not a most certaine rule whereby to iudge of all matters of controversie and difference so in examining things by the direction of this rule wee require that Christian moderation in all men that euer was found in the seruants of God that no man presume of his owne wisdome iudgment and vnderstanding nor hastily pronounce before conference with others â— For the spirits of the Prophets are subiect to the Prophets and God is the God of order and not of confusion It is therefore a vile calumniation of Bellarmine when hee sayth that with vs euery one preferreth himselfe before others and euery one taketh on him peremptory iudgment of another For contrariwise wee teach all men to submit their priuate opinions to the examination of others the meaner to respect those of greater place and quality the fewer the more and those men which pertinaciously contradict the doctrine agreed vpon by consent of all that are in authority or the greater part wee reiect from the communion of our Churches and so with vs an end is made of all controversies The rule then with vs is most certaine and infallible knowen to all to wit the scripture or the written word of God expounded according to the rule of faith practice of the Saints and the due comparing of one part of it with another in the publike confessions of faith published by the Churches of our communion In all which there is a full consent whatsoeuer our malicious adversaries clamourously pretend to the contrary and all those that stubbornely resist against this rule or any thing therein contained and refuse to bee ordered by it wee reiect as factious and seditious schimatickes Thus doe wee disclaime all Anabaptists Familists Zuinchfeldians Trinitarians and all other Sectaries whatsoeuer But sayth Bellarmine how is it then that there are soe many diuisions not only from your Churches but also in your Churches and amongst them that you take for your brethren and men of your owne communion as Lutherans Caluinists Flaccians Melancthonists Hosiandrines and the like To this wee answere that this diuersity is to be imputed wholly to our aduersaries For when there was a reformation to be made of abuses and disorders in matters of practice and manifold corruptions in very many parts of Christian doctrine in a Councell by generall consent it could not be hoped for as Gerson long before out of his owne experience saw and professed by reason of the preuailing faction of the Popes flatterers but this was necessarily to be assayd seuerally in the particular kingdomes of the world it was not possible but that some diversity should grow while one knew not nor expected to know what another did Yet it so fell out by the happy prouidence of God and force of that maine trueth they all sought to aduance that there was no materiall or essentiall difference amongst them but such as vpon equall scanning will bee found rather to consist in the diuerse maner of expressing one
afterwards when they are grown inveterate for that then they will corrupt the monuments of antiquity 8 That the whole present Church may be ignorant of some things and erre in them but that in matters necessary to bee knowne and beleeued expressely it cannot erre and that it cannot erre in any the least thing with pertinacie such and so great as is found in Heretickes Ninthly that Councels and Popes may erre in matters of greatest consequence This our opinion thus layde downe is defended by Waldensis Occam and others Waldensis saith the Church whose faith neuer faileth according to the promise made to Peter who bare the figure of the Church when Christ said I haue prayed for thee that thy faith faile not is not any particular Church as the Church of Africa within the bounds whereof Donatus did inclose it nor the particular Romane Church but the vniversall Church not gathered together in a generall Councell which hath sometimes erred as that at Ariminium vnder Taurus the Governour and that at Constantinople vnder Iustinian the younger but it is the Catholique Church dispersed through the whole world from the Baptisme of Christ vnto our times which doth holde and maintaine the true faith and the faithfull testimony of Iesus CHAP. 6. Of the Churches office of teaching and witnessing the truth and of their errour who thinke the authority of the Church is the rule of our faith and that shee may make new articles of our faith THus hauing spoken of the Churches assured possession of the knowledge of the truth in thenext place wee are to speake of her office of teaching witnessing the same touching the which our adversaries fall into two dangerous errours the first that the authority of the Church is Regula fidei ratio credendi the rule of our faith the reason why we belieue The second that the Church may make new articles of faith Touching the first of these erroneous conceipts the most of them doe teach that the last thing to which the perswasion of our faith resolueth it selfe the maine ground whereupon it stayeth is the authoritie of the Church guided by the spirit of truth For say they if infidels and misbeleeuers demaund of vs why we beleeue the Trinity of persons in the Vnity of the same Divine essence the Incarnation of the Sonne of God the Resurrection of the dead and the life of the world to come we answere because these things are contayned in the Scriptures If they proceede farther to aske why wee beleeue the Scripture we answere because it is the word of God if why wee beleeue it to bee the word of God because the Church doth so testifie of it if why we beleeue the testimony of the Church because it is guided by the spirit of truth so that that vpon which our faith settleth her perswasion touching these things is the authority of the Catholique Church ledde and guided by the spirit of truth If it be said that it is one of the things to bee beleeued that the Church is thus guided by the spirit therefore that the authority of the Church cannot be the reason cause of beleeuing all things that pertain to the Christian faith because not of those things which concerne her owne authority Stapleton who professeth to handle this matter most exactly Sometimes seemeth to say that this article of faith that the Church is guided by the spirit and appointed by God to be a faithfull mistrisse of heauenly truth is not among the Articles of faith nor in the number of things to be beleeued Which the Rhemists vpon these words The Church is the pillar and ground of truth most constantly affirme saying We must beleeue heare and obey the Church as the Touchstone Pillar and firmament of truth for all this is comprised in the principle I beleeue the holy Catholique Church Sometimes that though perhaps in that Article it be implyed that wee beleeue whatsoeuer the Church teacheth vs yet not necessarily that wee beleeue that the Church is a faithfull and infallible witnesse mistresse of trueth And sometimes as in his triplication against Whitaker he sayth that when we professe that we beleeue the holy Catholike Church we doe not onely professe to beleeue that there is such a Church in the world but that wee are members of it and doe beleeue and embrace the doctrine of it as being guided infallibly by the spirit of trueth and that wee are taught in the Articles of our faith that the Church ought to bee listned vnto as to an infallible mistresse of heauenly trueth Surely it seemeth his braine was much crased when he thus wrote saying vnsaying saying he knew not what That which he addeth that this proposition God doth reveale vnto vs his heavenly truth teach vs the mysteries of his kingdome by the ministery of his Church is a transcendent wherevpon that article wherein wee professe to beleeue the Catholike Church doth depend as all the rest do is not an Article of the Creede doth but more more shew the distemper of his head But in that which hee addeth for confirmation hereof that we do not professe in the first Article of our faith to beleeue God as the reuealer of all hidden and heauenly truth and to rest in him as in the fountaine of all illumination is the note brand of an impious miscreant For this doubtlesse is the first thing implyed in our faith towards God that we yeeld him this honour to be the great master of all trueth vpon whose authority we will depend renouncing all our owne wisedome knowing that as no man knoweth the things of a man but the spirit of a man so no man knoweth the things of God but the spirit of Got and that flesh and blood cannot reueale these things vnto vs but our father which is in heauen That the precept of louing God aboue all is not distinctly set downe among the rest of the tenne commaundements but is implyed though principally in the first yet generally in all is to no purpose If he thinke it is not at all contayned in the Decalogue his folly is too too great CHAP. 7. Of the manifold errours of Papistes touching the last resolution of our faith and the refutation of the same THus wee see hee cannot avoid it but that the Church is one of the things to be beleeued therefore cannot be the first generall cause of beleeuing all things that are to be beleeued For when we are to be perswaded of the authority of the Church it is doubtfull vnto vs and therefore cannot free vs from doubting or settle our perswasion because that which setleth the perswasion must not be doubted of There is no question then but that the authority of the old Testament may bee brought to proue the new to him that is perswaded of the old and doubteth of the newe and the authoritie of the newe to
his Epistle to Michael the Emperour pronounceth that the priuiledges of the See of Rome are perpetuall rooted and planted by Almighty God in such sort that men may stumble at them but cannot remoue them may pull at them but cannot pull them vp therefore he thinketh the Pope cannot erre which is a very bad consequence For the infallibility of iudgment in the Pope is not mentioned among the inuiolable priuiledges of the Church of Rome and therefore the priuiledges of that Church may be inuiolable and yet the Pope subiect to errour neither hath Nicolas one word of the Popes not erring The testimonies of Leo the ninth and Innocentius the third as being late and partiall in their own cause may iustly be excepted against yet do they not proue the thing in question For they speake of the See and throne of Peter in which the faith may continue without failing though the Popes erre and seeke to subuert the same so long as any other that are to gouerne the throne with them perseuere in the true faith Wherefore from the prayer of Christ made for Peter that his faith should not faile they descend to other proofes taken from the promise made to Peter by Christ that vpon him he would build his Church and his mandate requiring him to feede his sheepe and to feede his Lambes which are too weake to perswade vs that the Pope cannot erre or is more priuiledged then other Bishops in this respect First because it is most cleare and euident and confessed by our aduersaries themselues that the Church was builded vpon all the Apostles as well as vpon Peter and there is no kind of feeding of Christs sheepe and flocke that commeth not within the compasse of that office and commission which the other Apostles had in common with him as I haue elsewhere shewed at large Secondly because Peter and his colleagues were foundation stones vppon which the Church was builded in that their doctrine was receiued by immediate and vndoubted reuelation without mixture of errour vpon which the faith of all after-commers was to stay it selfe none of which things agree to the Romane Bishop So that it is no way necessary that there should be the same infallibility of judgment in him that was in Peter and in his colleagues Thirdly because we know and all that are in their right wits do acknowledge that a man may be a Pastor in the Church of God and yet subject to errour and that therefore Christs requiring Peter to do the duty of a Pastor will not proue that the Pope cannot erre Wherefore from the Scriptures they passe to the Fathers and among them first they produce Theodoret who in his Epistle to Renatus a Presbyter saith that among other things the reason why the Romane Church hath a kind of chiefety among other Churches is because it hath euer remained free from heresie From whence I thinke hardly any good proofe can be drawne of the Popes not erring For how will this consequence euer be made good There are many things that make the See of Rome great as the greatnesse of the city the Empire the sepulchers of those common Fathers and Doctors of truth Peter and Paule those two great lights that rose in the East cast forth their beames into all parts of the world but set in the West and sundry other things and among them the felicity and happinesse of it that till the time of Theodoret no heresie euer preuailed in it therefore the Bishop of Rome can neuer erre Seeing Theodoret doth not dispute what may be but sheweth only what by the happy prouidence of God had beene and besides speaketh not precisely of the Bishop of Rome but of the Romane See including the whole company of the Bishops of the West adhering to him which was a great part of the whole Christian Church and more glorious then the rest for that it was more free from hereticall novelties in those times then they To Theodoret they adde Saint Augustine who saith the succession of Bishops from Peters chaire to his time is that rocke against the which the proud gates of hell cannot preuaile His meaning is that what all those Bishops haue constantly and successiuely taught as true must needes be true and what they haue impugned as false must needes be false seeing it is impossible that any errour or the impugning of any trueth should haue bin found successiuely in all the Bishops of that or any other Apostolicall Church whatsoeuer But what is this to the Popes not erring Surely as litle as that of Gelasius in his Epistle to Anastasius the Emperour that the glorious confession of the Apostle Peter thou art the Christ the Son of the liuing God is the roote of all the faith and piety of the whole world that therefore the Apostolique See carefully looketh vnto it that no chinke be made in it that it be not spotted with any contagion for that if it should there were no meanes of resisting any errour But because this maketh not for them the Cardinall helpeth the matter with an vntruth saying that Gelasius proueth that the See of Rome cannot erre because the confession of it is the roote of al the faith piety that is in the world whereas he neither goeth about to proue the one nor speaketh any word of the other but of the excellencie of the confession that Peter made the necessity of preseruing it inuiolable and the care of the See of Rome in and before his time for the safe keeping of the same Wherefore let vs come to the places that are cited to this purpose out of Gregories Epistles which shew plainly they are past shame that manage the Popes affaires defend his cause For whereas Gregory saith that if he that claimeth to be vniuersal B doe fall all the whole Church is ouerthrowne and that therefore there must bee no such vniversall Bishop and particularly sheweth by the grieuous heresies that prevailed in the Church of Constantinople how ill it would haue beene for the Churches of God if the Bishops thereof had beene vniversall Bishops as they sought to be they bring this place to proue that the Pope cannot erre whereas they should haue brought it to shew how dangerous it is that there should bee any one vniversall Bishop such as their Pope desireth to be and that therefore as Cyprian obserueth Almighty God wisely foreseeing what euils might follow such vniversality of power and jurisdiction in one man ordained that there should bee a great number of Bishops joyned in equall commission that so if some fell the rest might stand and keepe the people from a generall downefall The next allegation is out of the Epistle to Eulogius Bishop of Alexandria whereby the Reader may see with what conscience these Iesuited Papists doe cite the writings of the Fathers The wordes of Gregory are these Your most sweete Holinesse hath
the Trueth whom hee giueth vp into a reprobate sence Secondly in opposition to that which I alleadge hee vndertaketh to proue there were no such differences betweene the Ancient as those betweene the followers of Luther and Zuinglius but demeaneth himselfe like a false gamester for whereas I place the differences and conflictes betweene Epiphanius and Chrysostome in the front as hottest and most violent the one of them refusing to pray with the other the one challenging the other for manifold breaches of Canons and the one professing he hoped the other should neuer die a Bishop the other that he should neuer returne to his country aliue both which things fell out according to their vncharitable wishes desires Epiphanius dying by the way as he was returning home and Chrysostome being cast out of his Bishopricke and dying in banishment he scarce taketh any notice hereof but saith only the differences betweene Luther and Zuinglius exceeded the conflicts betweene Chrysostome and Epiphanius which yet I thinke hee will hardly proue Touching Ruffinus and Hierome it is certaine the one of them charged the other with heresie and vsed most bitter speaches one against another to the great scandall of the world The differences betweene Augustine and Hierome were carried more temperately neither doe I say they exceeded in passion as Luther and Zuinglius did yet did Augustine charge Hierome with taking on him the Patronage of lying and affirming that the Authours of Canonicall Scriptures lyed in some passages of the same the consequence whereof he thinketh to bee most dangerous and damnable Besides this they differed about the ceasing of the legall obseruations so that their differences were greater then those of Luther and Zuinglius if they had rightly vnderstood one another Yet will Master Higgons shew a great difference betweene the differences of the Auncient and those of Luther and Zuinglius First because Chrysostome and Epiphanius Hierome and Ruffinus had an ordinary vocation whereas Luther and Zuinglius are supposed to haue beene raysed vppe extraordinarily Secondly for that they quarrelled onely about the bookes of Origen and the improbation thereof but the differences betweene Luther and Zuinglius were founded originally in matters of faith pertaining to the necssity of saluation Thirdly in respect of extent in that their differences were not the differences of whole Churches as these are and of duration in that their divisions were soone extinguished but these are propagated in succession and increased with continuall addition To euery of these pretended differences I will briefly answere first to the first that we neuer thought that Luther and Zuinglius had an extraordinary calling as the Apostles other sent immediatly of God had but that God stirred and moued them extraordinarily with Heroicall resolution to vse that ordinary ministeriall power which they had receiued in the corrupt state of the Church for the reprehending and reforming abuses in the same and therefore they might be subiect to errours and infirmity as Chrysostome and Epiphanius were notwithstanding any thing wee say or conceiue of them To the second wee say Master Higgons sheweth himselfe in it either faithlesse or ignorant For we know Epiphanius was an Anthropomorphite that hee was willing for that cause to condemne the bookes of Origen wherein this grosse errour is condemned besides took part with Theophilus Bishop of Alexandria who though hee were of another minde yet fained himselfe to be an Anthropomorphite to condemne the bookes of Origen as contrary to that conceipt deposed Chrysostome for which his temerity hee was anathematized by the Church of Rome if we may beleeue Nicephorus Neither were these the priuate differences of particular men but of the greatest Churches of the world as Chrysostome confesseth in his Epistle to the Bishop of Rome saying that all the Churches euery-where by reason heereof were brought vpon their knees Touching Ruffinus it is evident that he was challenged for fauouring the heresies of Origen whose workes he translated so that it was no matter of circumstance but of substance in highest degree about which Hierome he calumniated one the other for proof heereof Anastasius Bishop of Rome writing to the Bishop of Hierusalem touching Ruffinus saith he had so translated the books of Origen out of Greek into Latin as that he approued the errors contained in them was like a man that consenteth to the vices faults of other men Yea Hierome feared not directly to pronounce him to be an Hereticke and more blinde then a Mole We reade that in the time of the first Councell of Ephesus called for the suppressing of the heresie of Nestorius there grew most bitter contentions betweene Cyrill of Alexandria and Iohn of Antioch so that the Churches subiect to them were deuided one from another in such sort that they Anathematised one the other imputing heresie each to other yet were they in truth and indeede of the same judgment and in the end it was found that these contentions grew out of dislikes mistakings and mis-constructions of things well meant but not so taken The like may be sayd of Theodoret who notwithstanding all the conflicts betweene him and Cyrill and the condemnation passed vppon him as if hee had beene an Hereticke was in the end found to be an Orthodox by Leo and the Bishoppes of the West and vppon a full and cleare declaration and profession of his faith receiued as a Catholicke Bishoppe into the Councell of Chalcedon Gregory Nazianzen in his oration made in the praise of Athanasius sheweth that there was a maine diuision of the Christians of the East and the Romanes or those of the West the one part suspecting the other of heresie vpon a meere not vnderstanding one another the Romans professed to beleeue that there are three persons in the blessed Trinity but could not bee induced to acknowledge three Hypostases whence the Orientall Christians thought them to bee Sabellians who thought that there is but one person in the Godhead called by three names on the otherside the orientall Christians professed that they beleeued three Hypostases in the God-head but would not admitte three persons whence they of Rome thought them to bee Arrians who beleeued that there are three distinct substances in the God-heade the word Hypostasis in the Schooles of secular learning importing substance as Hierome noteth but Athanasius perceiuing that they differed not in iudgment and that the Greekes meant the same by their Hypostases that the Latines did by their name of Persons left them free for the manner and forme of speech and made a peace betweene them by letting them know they all meant one thing though they expressed the same differently whereas otherwise it was to bee feared they would haue beene diuided with endlesse diuisions about these fewe Syllables About this matter Hierome liuing in the East parts wrote to Damasus Bishoppe of Rome his wordes are these They vrge vs to acknowledge
Schismatikes are they that breake the vnitie of the Church and refuse to submit themselues and yeeld obedience to their lawfull Pastours and guides though they retaine an entire profession of the trueth of God as did the Luciferians some others in the beginning of their Schisme though for the most part the better to justifie their Schismaticall departure from the rest of Gods people Schismatikes doe fall into some errour in matters of faith This is the first sort of them that depart and goe out from the Church of God and company of his people whose departure yet is not such but that notwithstanding their Schisme they are and remaine parts of the Church of God For whereas in the Church of God is found an entire profession of the sauing trueth of God order of holy Ministery Sacraments by vertue thereof administred and a blessed vnitie and fellowship of the people of God knit together in the bond of peace vnder the commaund of lawfull Pastours and guides set over them to direct them in the wayes of eternall happinesse Schismatikes notwithstanding their separation remaine still conioyned with the rest of Gods people in respect of the profession of the whole sauing trueth of God all outward actes of Religion and Diuine worship power of order and holy Sacraments which they by vertue thereof administer and so still are and remaine parts of the Church of God but as their communion and coniunction with the rest of Gods people is in some things onely and not absolutely in all wherein they haue and ought to haue fellowship so are they not fully and absolutely of the Church nor of that more speciall number of them that communicate intirely and absolutely in all things necessary in which sense they are rightly denied to be of the Church which I take to be their meaning that say they are not of the Church CHAP. 14. Of the second sort of them that voluntarily goe out from the people of God HEretikes are they that obstinately persist in error contrary to the Churches faith so that these doe not onely forsake the fellowship but the faith also and therefore of these there may be more question whether notwithstanding their hereticall division they still continue in any sort parts of the Church of God But this doubt in my opinion is easily resolued For in respect of the profession of sundry diuine verities which still they retaine in common with right beleeuers in respect of the power of order and degree of ministery which receiuing in the Church they carry out with them and sacraments which by vertue thereof they doe administer they still pertain to the Church But for that they hold not an entire full professiō of all such sauing trueths as to know and beleeue is necessary vnto saluation for that their Pastours and Priests though they haue power of order yet haue no power of jurisdiction neither can performe any acte thereof for that they retaine not the vnity of the spirit in the bond of peace they are rightly denied to be of the Church not for that they are not in any sort of it but for that they are not fully and absolutely of it nor of that more speciall number of them which communicate in all things wherein Christians should This more speciall number of right beleeuing Christians is for distinction sake rightly named the Catholike Church because it consisteth of them only that without addition diminution alteration or innouation in matter of doctrine hold the common faith once deliuered to the Saints and without all particular or priuate diuision or faction retaine the vnitie of the spirit in the bond of peace To this purpose is it that Saint Augustine against the Donatists who therefore denied the baptisme of Heretikes to be true Baptisme and did vrge the necessity of rebaptizing them that were baptized by them for that they are out of the Church doth shew that all wicked ones feined Christians and false hearted hypocrites are secluded from the Church of God considered in her best and principall parts and in the highest degree of vnitie with Christ her mysticall head aswell as ◅retikes and Schismatikes As therefore all they that outwardly professe the trueth and hold the faith of Christ without schisme or heresie are of the Church and are within as the Scripture speaketh yet are not all ofthat more speciall number of them that are intrinsecus in occulto intus but in more generall sort So likewise Heretikes and Schismatikes though they be not of that speciall number of them that in vnity hold the entire profession of diuine trueth are of the Church generally considered and of the number of them that professe the trueth of God reuealed in Christ. And this surely Augustine most clearely deliuereth For when the Donatists did obiect that Heresie is an harlot and that if the baptisme of Heretikes bee good sonnes are borne to God of heresie and so of an harlot than which what can be more absurde impious his answere was that the conuenticles of Heretikes doe beare children vnto God not in that they are diuided but in that they still remaine conjoyned with the true and Catholike Church not in that they are Heretikes but in that they professe and practise that which Christians should and doe professe and practise It is not therefore to be so scornefully rejected by Bellarmine Stapleton and others of that faction that we affirme that both Heretikes and Schismatikes are in some sort though not fully perfectly and with hope of saluation of the Church seeing Augustine in the iust and honourable defence of the Churches cause against Heretikes did long since affirme the same not doubting to say that Heretikes remaine in such sort conioyned to the Church notwithstanding their Heresie that the true Church in the midst ofthem and in their assemblies by Baptisme ministred by them doth beare and bring forth children vnto God The not conceiuing whereof gaue occasion to Cyprian and the African Bishops of errour and afterwards to the Donatists of their heresie touching the rebaptization of them that were baptized by Heretikes For seeing there is but ◅e Lord one faith one Baptisme seeing God gaue the power of the keyes and the dispensation of his word and sacraments onely to his Church if Heretikes bee not of the Church they doe not baptise This their allegation they amplified and enlarged from the nature and condition of heresie and Heretickes and the high pretious and diuine qualitie force and working of the sacraments thereby endeauouring to shew that so excellent meanes pledges and assurances of our saluation cannot be giuen by the hands of men so farre estranged from God There is say they one faith one hope one Baptisme not among heretikes where there is no hope and a false faith where all things are done in lying false and deceiueable maner where he adiureth Sathan that is the vassall of Sathan and possessed of the diuell
it selfe the note of Antiquitie because it hath long continued and beene before others in the profession of Christianitie but besides it is required that it haue aunciently and ever holden the doctrine of trueth This is specially to be noted against old heresies whereof some began in the Apostles times And hee saith of the Churches of Greece Aethiopia and Armenia that though their Antiquitie did reach as high as the Apostles times yet notwithstanding propter doctrinae novitates postea inuentas veram antiquitatem non habent because they haue brought in newe doctrine they haue no true Antiquitie CHAP. 6 Of Succession HItherto we haue spoken of Antiquitie which they make the first note of the Church It followeth in the next place that wee speake of Succession The ministerie of pastours and teachers is absolutely and essentially necessary to the being of the Church For how should there be a Church gathered guided and gouerned without a ministerie Therefore the ministery of those whom God sanctified to himselfe to teach instruct and gouerne his people is an essentiall marke and note of the Church as wee haue already shewed Now because the Church is not to last onely for some short time so to cease but to continue to the end of the world this ministery must continue likewise which because it cannot continue in the same persons all being subiect to death it is necessary that when some faile others possesse the places they formerly held which is to Succeede Neither is this Succeeding of one into the place of another necessary onely by reason of that failing which is by death but because the places of sacred ministery must not be vnfurnished if either the wickednesse of them that are in place cast them out or their weakenesse cause a voluntary relinquishment of their office and standing others must succeede Lawfull and holy ministery therefore is an inseparable and perpetuall note of a true Church for no Church can be without it but Succession not so For the Churches in the first establishment in the Apostles time had it not and many Churches which in sundry ages since haue beene founded had none their Bishops being the first and succeeding none in those episcopall chaires wherein they sate If therefore we should cauill against them as they doe against vs wee might deny Succession to bee a note of the Church because there haue beene and may be true Churches without it as all at the first in the beginning of Christianity and all others since newly founded in their first beginnings But because wee knowe they make not Succession of pastours and Bishoppes a note of the Church absolutely considered but of that which being formerly established is still to bee continued by multitudes of men and people continually succeeding and comming into the places of others that went before them in the same profession of Christianity Let vs see whether Succession of Bishops and pastours may truely be sayd to be a note of the Church Absolutely and without limitation doubtlesse it is not For there may bee a continued Succession of Bishoppes where there is no true Church as at this day amongst the Grecians Armenians and Aethiopians which yet are not the true Churches of GOD in the opinion of them that plead for succession Bellarmine therefore sayth that Succession is inseparable so that there can bee no Church without it but that it is not proper so that wheresoeuer it is found we may assure our selues that there is the Church so forgetting himselfe who requireth in the notes that they be proper and rejecteth our note of purity of doctrine free from pertinacious errour because it may be found among schismatickes though it be inseparable and the true Church cannot be without it But Stapleton handleth this point of Succession much better For hee saith that Succession is an inseparable and proper note of the true Church but not euery Succession but that which is true and lawfull Let vs therefore see what hee requireth to make a true and lawfull Succession First there must be a place voide by resignation deprivation or death Secondly they that succeede must haue election and ordination from them to whom it appertaineth to elect and ordaine Thirdly they must not depart from the faith that was formerly holden by them that went before vnlesse any of them did first decline and goe aside from the way of the first and most auncient that held those places before and therefore in the catalogue of Bishops succeeding one another in each seuerall See wheresoeuer any first began to teach any new and strange doctrine different from that which was formerly deliuered the thread and line of succession was by him either wholly broken or some-what endaungered according to the quality of the errour and the manner of defending and maintaining the same So that this is all which Stapleton saith that wheresoeuer wee finde a Church once established vnder a lawfull ministery in the vndoubted profession of the trueth if afterwards there be a Succession of Pastours and Bishoppes in the same place and that none of them depart from the faith of the former that so it may be evident that what faith was first holden is still holden by them that presently are in place there wee may assure our selues to find the true Church Thus still wee see that truth of doctrine is a necessary note whereby the Church must be knowen and discerned and not ministery or Succession or any thing else without it But saith he the people must not judge which is true doctrine and which is false by the particular consideration of the things themselues but onely by the newnesse strangenesse contrarietie it hath with that which they haue learned of their pastours guides forefathers He alloweth then a kind of judgement to the vulgar sort who must discerne which is the true doctrine which is the false though not by particular consideration of the things themselues that are taught yet by the newnesse strangenesse of them Touching the judgement the people of God ought to haue of the doctrine of Christianity I will speake when I come to the fourth part of my first and generall diuision In the meane while it sufficeth that not bare naked Succession but true lawfull wherein no new or strange doctrine is brought into the Church but the auncient religiously preserved is a marke note or character of the true Church CHAP. 7. Of the third note assigned by them which is Vnitie THe third note of the Church assigned by them is Vnity There are many sorts degrees of Vnity found in the Church The first in respect of the same beginning and originall cause which is GOD that hath called vs to the fellowshippe of his Sonne and to the hope of eternall life 10. 6. No man commeth vnto me vnlesse my father draw him The 2d in respect of the same last end wherevnto all they that are of the Church doe
of Chalcedon they condemne Leo Bishop of Rome they accurse Eutyches and honour Dioscorus and Iacobus his Disciple Fourthly they are baptized in the name of the Father Sonne and Holy Ghost in such sort as other Christians are but they are also circumcised both Male and Female which may seeme to cut them off from the fellowship of true Christians and the hope of saluation according to that of the Apostle if yee be circumcised yee are fallen from grace and Christ can profit you nothing For the clearing of this point Thomas à Iesu deliuereth these propositions First that Circumcision and other legall observations were so abrogated after the promulgation of the Gospell that the continuing of them became not only a dead thing and of no force but deadly also So that Cerinthus Ebion thining otherwise were condemned as Heretickes 2 That some legall observations though not as legall may bee nay are retained and continued amongst Catholique Christians For the better vnderstanding of this proposition he noteth that legall and ceremoniall things may be obserued foure wayes First as they are legall that is with an intention to keepe the Law and to doe as the Law prescribeth and in this sort Christ submitted himselfe to bee circumcised Secondly that things prescribed or forbidden in the Ceremoniall Law may bee done or omitted not onely in respect of obedience to the Law but as figuring the comming of Christ or as figures of Christ to come as Thomas Aquinas sheweth So the holy Fathers that liued before Christ kept this observation Thirdly we may doe or omit such things as are commaunded or forbidden in the Ceremoniall Law neither as figures of Christ to come nor as being bound by the Law so to doe or not to doe but onely to make it knowne that such Lawes were not euill but of God howsoeuer they are now no longer to haue any binding force Thus the Christians after the resurrection and ascension of Christ before the full promulgation of the Gospell retained circumcision for a time that they might bury the Synagogue with honour Fourthly such things may be done or omitted as the Law forbiddeth or prescribeth materialitèr sine vllâ formalitate vel respectu ad legem veterem that is though the same thing be done that is there prescribed yet it is not done as there prescribed but for other ends as we keepe the feast of Pentecost which the Iewes obserued but not because it was prescribed in the law nor for the same reasons for which they kept it for it was therefore a solemne day with them because as on that day the law was given vnto them vpon mount Sina but with vs because on that day the law of the spirit and life was given so in like sort some Christians consecrate in vnleavened bread yet are they not to be condemned as Iewish seeing the reasons of their observation are very different from those motiues the Iewes had So that to omit or doe such things as are forbidden or Commaunded in the ceremoniall law materialiter tantum that is without anie of the former respects is vndoubtedly lawfull as if a man should bee circumcised or should abstaine from swines flesh for physicall considerations or keepe Saturday holy as many Christians doe but to omit or doe such things as are forbiden or prescribed in the ceremoniall law because they are there forbidden or prescribed or as figures of Christ is hereticall wherefore let vs see in what sort the Abissens vse circumcision Zagazabo professeth that they vse it onely as an auncient observation of their Countrie which they had receiued before they became Christians even from the time that the Queene of Sheba went to see Solomon and that they retaine it onely for the honour of their nation that they may thereby shew that they are of the stocke of David and indeede Herodotus speaking of certaine nations that were circumcised before the comming of Christ amongst the rest hee numbreth the Aethiopians which being soe I see not why wee should censure them as heretickes for this observation William Reinolds speaking of the Abyssens hath these words The Abyssens Christianly and as wee that beleeue as Christians should doe Baptize their infants and that they may shew from how noble a stock they are come circumcise them also but not as if circumcision were of any force or a man might put any trust in it as the Iewes doe which being soe I would no more condemne them in respect of Circumcision then a man that should abstaine from swines flesh which was forbidden by the Law vpon the advise of his physician onely Caietan and Bartholomeus de Medina thinke they sinne not in retaining this observation but supposing it to be lawfull whether it be fit they should be tolerated still soe to doe many taking offence at it I had rather sayth Caietan heare the Church speake then other particular authors Some impute to them that they are not Circumcised onely or principally for the causes before expressed but in imitation of Christ and consequently to fullfill the law which was the end of circumcision and therevpon condemne them as observers of the Ceremoniall Law But first it will hardly be proved as I thinke that they vse circumcision in imitation of Christs circumcision And secondly it will not follow if it be so that they are circumcised to the same end he was but only that they desire to be like vnto him in the outward act and to haue that done vnto them in the honour of him So that I rather encline to the opinion of Caietan and Bartholomeus de Medina who acquit them then to that of Soto and others that condemne them vpon this supposall The particular points of their religion are these First they think that the soule is ex traduce Secondly they vse the same forme of words in baptizing that the Latines doe saying I baptize thee in the name of the Father of the Sonne and of the Holy Ghost 3 None baptizeth with thē but the Priest or in his absence the Deacon 4 Their males are not Baptized till the 40th day their females till the 80th till which time the mother is not purified nor entereth into the Church but if there be danger of death they are baptized sooner but they must not suck the brests of the mother vntill shee be purified They are vniustly charged that they Baptize with fire for there is none amongst them that do so but in some Provinces they signe themselues in the forehead either that they may differ from the Mahumetans or for the cure of diseases incident to the eyes 5 On twelfe day in memory of the baptisme of Christ they goe forth in great multitudes to the riuer and after many praiers said by the priests they put them selues into the water but no man is newly baptized 6 They thinke that the infants of beleeuing parents are sanctified in the vvombe as Hieremie and Iohn the Baptist were and therefore
eminent and peculiar power is giuen and whom all must obey In respect of this first kinde of vnity consisting in the subjection of each people or portion of the flocke of Christ to their lawfull Pastours if they who should obey this one Pastour as being in the stead place of Christ doe either wholly withdraw themselues refusing to be subject to any Ministerie like Core and his complices pretending that all the people of God are holy and that the guides of the Church take too much vpon them or when one is elected doe set vp an other against him and forsaking the right cleaue to him that hath no right This is the first kinde of Schisme Secondly because there must be an vnitie not onely among the parts of each particular Church but also of many particular Churches and the Pastours and guides of them among themselues the Churches which forsake the communion of other Churches without just cause doe fall into Schisme And if they not onely refuse to communicate with them in the performance of the acts of religion vpon causelesse dislike but swarue from the rule of faith the other doe constantly hold they become not onely schismaticall but hereticall also These are the seuerall kindes of Schisme of which one is much more daungerous then another The forsaking the rule of faith or absolute refusall to be subject to the holy Ministerie saying as they did Are not all the people holy you take too much vpon you c. is damnable Schisme In each Church wherein there must be one Pastour hauing eminent and peerelesse power when one is lawfully called they who presume to set vp an other if they know the former to be lawfully possessed of the place or their ignorance thereof bee affected or they be so violentlie carried with the streames of contention and faction that they would not yeeld though the right should appeare vnto them this Schisme is likewise damnable But if it be doubtful and men carry mindes readie to yeeld when they shall see the right it is not so When whole Churches with their Pastours and guides diuide themselues from other refusing to communicate with them if this separation grow out of pride and Pharisaicall conceit of fancied perfection and absolute holinesse as did the Schisme of Novatus Donatus Lucifer and others of that sort it is damnable Schisme but if out of ignorance or errour not ouerthrowing the rule of faith or ouer earnest vrging of ceremonies rites and observations as the separation of Victor Bishop of Rome and the Churches of Asia had beene if Irenaeus had not interposed himselfe or striuing for precedence it is dangerous but not damnable vnlesse it be joined with such pertinacie that though it should appeare they were in errour or did amisse and contrary to the rule of charitie they would not yeeld This being the nature of Schisme and Heresie and these the kindes and degrees of them more or lesse dangerous let vs in the next place see what is to be thought of all those Churches of Graecia Armenia Aethiopia Russia before mentioned Every of which is in some sort rent and divided from other Wee dare not with the proud Romanists condemne so famous Churches as culpable of damnable Heresie and Schisme and cast so many millians of soules into hell for every difference in matter of opinion or rent from the other parts of the body of the Church All these therefore holding the rule of faith and beleeuing all those things that are on the perill of eternall damnation to bee particularly and expresly knowne and beleeued and their seperation not growing for ought wee know out of Pharisaicall and damnable pride as did that of Nouatus Donatus and the like but out of error not directly contrary to the rule of faith or some other humane infirmitie and defect and it no way appearing that their obstinacie is such that though they knew they did amisse they would still continue so to do wee accompt them in the number of the Churches of God and doubt not but that innumerable liuing and dying in them notwithstanding their sundry defects imperfections and wants are and haue beene saued Wee conclude therefore that their Schismes and seperations are sinfull wicked and dangerous and their errours inexcusable insnaring the consciences of many to endlesse perdition and greatly endangering all that are or haue beene misse-led with them but not damnable excluding from all possibility of salvation Wee make a great difference betweene them that were the first Authors and beginners of these diuisions and such as walke in the wayes and insist in the steps of their misse-led and seduced fathers betweene such as are more and such as are lesse deepely plunged into errour CHAP. 6. Of the Latine Church that it continued the true Church of God euen till our time and that the errours wee condemne were not the doctrines of that Church TOuching the Latine Church likewise wee are of the same opinion that it continued still a part of the Catholike Church notwithstanding the manifold abuses and superstitions that in time crept into it and the dangerous and damnable false doctrine that some taught and defended in the middest of it It is therefore most fond and friuolous that some demand of vs where our Church was before Luther began For wee say it was where now it is if they aske vs which wee answere it was the knowen and apparant Church in the world wherein all our Fathers liued and died wherein Luther and the rest were baptized receiued their Christianity ordination and power of ministery If they reply that that Church was theirs and not ours for that the doctrines they now teach and wee inpugne the cerimonies customes and observations which they retaine and defend and wee haue abolished as fond vaine and superstitious were taught vsed and practised in that Church wherein our fathers liued and dyed wee answere that none of those points of false doctrine and errour which they now maintaine and wee condemne where the doctrines of that Church constantly delivered or generally receiued by all them that were of it but doubtfully broached and deuised without all certaine resolution or factiously defended by some certaine onely who as a dangerous faction adulterated the sincerity of the Christian verity and brought the Church into miserable bondage Touching the abuses and manifold superstitions which wee haue remoued it is true they were in that Church wherein our fathers liued but not without signification of their dislike of them and earnest desire of reformation as shall appeare by that which followeth As therefore the Churches of Corinth Galatia Pergamus and Thyatira had in them emulations diuisions neglect of discipline contempt of the Apostles of Christ some that denied the resurrection of the dead that ioyned circumcision and the workes of the law with Christ in the work of saluation thē that maintained the doctrine of the Nicolaitans suffered the woman
many hundred yeares after him yea the Greeke and Aethiopian Churches continue that errour and the practise of communicating infants assoone as they are baptized euen vnto this day Touching predestination how many obscurities vncertainties and contrarieties shall we finde Surely before Augustines time many great worthy prelates and doctors of the Church not hauing occasion to enter into the exact handling of that part of Christian doctrine did teach that men are predestinate for the foresight of some thing in thēselues And Aug himselfe in the beginning of his conflicts with the Pelagians was of opinion that at the least for the foresight of faith men are elected to eternall life which afterwards he disclaimed as false and erronious and taught that mans saluation dependeth on the efficacie of that grace which God giueth and not his purpose of sauing vpon the vncertainty of mans will This doctrine of Augustine was received and confirmed in the Church against the Pelagians and Semi-Pelagians And Bellarmine professeth that Augustines doctrine in this case is the doctrine of the Church yet so that many followed the former conceipt as wee may easily see by the writings of the Schoole men many of which do teach that men are elected for the foresight of some thing positiue or priuatiue in themselues Howe farre some did Montanise in the matter of second marriage so farre disliking it that they would not haue it blessed in the Church but imposed penance on them that married a second wife after the death of the first Hierome against Iouinian certaine auncient provinciall Councells are proofes more then sufficient Touching the state of Saints departed their generality of presence in all places their vniversall knowledge of all things and admirable working every where where their memories are solemnized are not more confidently affirmed by Hierome and Gregory than they are modestly denyed and doubted of by Augustine Hugó de sancto victore the Author of the glosse and others That there were superstitions and abuses in the primitiue Churches wee haue such witnesses as the Romanists dare not except against Doth not Hierome confesse that the burning of lights at noone day vsed in some Churches was an act of zeale but not according to knowledge Did not a Councell forbid those pernoctations in the cemeteries and places ef the martyrs buriall which when Vigilantius reproued Hierome with such fiercenesse and rage as cannot well be excused traduced him as the vilest monster the earth did beare Are not these vigils long since abolished Doth not Augustine confesse there were certaine adoratores sepulchrorum et picturarum worshippers of Tumbes and Pictures in the Church in his time It is therefore much to be maruailed at that our aduersaries charge us with I know not what impiety for that wee say there hath beene a defection not only of heretickes from the Church and faith but also in the Church of her owne children from the sincerity of the heauenly trueth sometimes more and sometimes lesse in some things by some and in some other by others That this defection began long agoe but found greater and stronger opposition in the first six hundred yeares then after there being in later times a great decay of the auncient piety whence it came that many moe and worse errours then euer before were broached and they which were in some beginnings before were augmented and more dangerously defended In which sence some of our men haue said that Gregory was the last of the Good Bishops and the first of the bad For that all things since his time haue greatly decayed and the state of the Church beene much corrupted CHAP. 10. Of their errour who say nothing can be amisse in the Church either in respect of doctrine or discipline IT is vaine saith Gerson that some object the Church is founded on a Rocke and therefore nothing can be amisse either in the doctrine or discipline of it nothing that should neede any reformation If it be so saith he then where is the observation of that Canon that Clarks goe not into Innes or Tavernes that Monkes in their owne places attend onely prayer and fasting without intermedling with Ecclesiasticall or secular busines whence is the superfluous pompe and Princely state of Cardinals and Bishops making them forget that they are men what say they to that abhomination that one man holdeth two hundred or three hundred Ecclesiasticall benefices That the sword of excommunication is so easily drawne out against the poore for euery trifle as for debts and that the Lords of the Clergie vse it for the maintenance of their owne temporall states That strangers are appointed by the Pope to haue cure of soules not vnderstanding the language of them ouer whom they are set nor liuing amongst them Open your eyes saith he and see if the houses of Nuns be not stewes of filthy harlots if the consecrated Monasteries be not Faires Markets and Innes Cathedrall Churches dennes of theeues and robbers Priests vnder pretence of maides keepe harlots consider whether so great variety of pictures and images be fit and whether it occasion not Idolatrie in the simple Looke vpon the number variety of religious orders the canonising of new Saints though there be too many already as Briget of Suetia Charles of Britaine the feasts of new Saints being more religiously kept than of the blessed Apostles Enquire if there be not Apocryphall Scriptures hymnes and prayers in processe of time either of purpose or of ignorance brought into the Church to the great hurt of the Christian faith Consider the diversities of opinions as of the conception of Mary and sundry other things See if there be not intollerable superstition in the worshipping of Saints innumerable observations without all ground of reason vaine credulity in beleeuing things concerning the Saints reported in the vncertaine Legends of their liues superstitious opinions of obtaining pardon and remission of sins by saying so many Pater nosters in such a Church before such an Image as if in the Scriptures and authenticall writings of holy men there were not sufficient direction for all acts of piety devotion without these fabulous and frivolous additaments nay which is yet worse see if these observations in many Countries and Kingdomes of the World bee not more vrged than the Lawes of God euen as wee shall finde in the decrees and decretals a Monke more seuerely punished for going without his coule then for committing adulterie or sacriledge CHAP. 11. Of the causes of the manifold confusions and euils formerly found in the Church THese are the euils deformities and sores of the Church which this worthy man in his time cōplained of The causes where of he thought to be principally two First the neglecting of the Lawes of GOD and direction of the Scriptures following humane inventions Secondly the ambition pride couetousnesse
of the Bishop of Rome Touching the first which is the neglect of divine lawes infinite multiplying of humane inuentions he pronounceth confidently there can be no generall reformation of the Church without the abolishing of sundry canons and statutes which neither are nor reasonably can be obserued in these times which doe nothing else but insnare the consciences of men to their endlesse perdition That no tongue is able sufficiently to expresse what euill what danger what confusion the contempt of holy Scripture which doubtlesse is sufficient for the gouernment of the Church for otherwise Christ had beene an vnperfect lawgiuer and the following of humane inuentions hath brought into the Church For proofe hereof saith he let vs consider the state of the clergie to which heauenly wisedome should haue beene espoused but they haue committed whoredome with that filthy harlot earthly carnall and diuelish wisedome so that the state of the Church is become meerely brutish monstrous heauen is below and the earth aboue the spirit obeyeth and the flesh commaundeth the principall is esteemed but as accessary and the accessary as principall yet some shame not to say that the Church is better gouerned by humane inuentions than by the diuine law and the law of the Gospell of Christ which assertion is most blasphemous For the Euangelicall doctrine by the professours of it did enlarge the bounds of the Church and lifted her vp to heauen which these sonnes of Hagar seeking out that wisedome which is from the earth haue cast downe to the dunghill And that it is not wholly fallen and vtterly overthrowne and extinct it is the great mercy of our God and Sauiour Touching the second cause of the Churches ruine which is the ambition pride and couetousnes of the Bishop and Court of Rome he boldly affirmeth that whereas the Bishoppes of Rome challenging the greatest place in the Church should haue sought the good of Gods people they contrarily sought onely to aduance themselues ad imitationem Luciferi adorari volunt vt dij neque reputant se subditos esse cuiquam sicut filij Belial sine iugo nec sibi posse dici cur ita facis nec Deum timent nec homines reuerentur In imitation of Lucifer they will bee adored and worshipped as Gods Neither doe they thinke themselues subiect to any but are as the sonnes of Beliall that haue cast off the yoke not enduring whatsoeuer they doe that any one should aske them why they doe so They neither feare God nor reuerence men Wherevpon hee feareth not to deliuer the opinion of many good and worthy men in his time That there beeing a Schisme in the Church by reason of the contention of the three Popes which continued for a long time in that age wherein hee liued it were good to take the aduantage of the time and neuer to restore to any Pope againe that vniversall administration of the temporalities of the Church and swaying the jurisdiction of the same but that it were best that all things were brought backe to that state they were in the times of the Apostles or at least in the times of Syluester and Gregorie when each prelate in his owne iurisdiction was permitted to gouerne them committed to his charge and dispose of the temporalities belonging to the Church without so many reseruations exactions as haue beene since brought in The Popes in time getting all into their owne hands with so many abuses fraudes and Simonies all seruing to maintaine the state of the Romish Court and of that head thereof which long since grew too heauie for the body to beare Neither was this the priuate opinion conceipt of Gerson only but Petrus de Aliaco Cardinalis Cusanus Picus Mirandula innumerable more of the best wisest and holiest men the Church had saw those abuses errours vncertainties and barbarismes wherewith the glory of the Church was greatly blemished and almost quite defaced and wished and expected a reformation Yea nothing was more certainely looked for a long time before Luther was borne than the ruine of that pompous state of the Church the staying of the furious couetous and tyranous proceedings of the Court and Bishop of Rome and the freeing of the Church from that Aegypticall bondage wherein it was holden CHAP. 12. Of the desire and expectation of a reformation of the corrupt state of the Church and that the alteration which hath beene is a reformation WHen the Pope resolued to accurse Anathematise and excommunicate Grostead the renowned Bishop of Lincolne because he contemned his papall Bulles and Letters who was therefore in his time named Romanorum malleus contemptor The Cardinalls opposed themselues saying hee was a right good man and holier then any of them the things he charged the Pope with most true and that therefore it was not safe thus to proceede least some tumult should follow especially say they seeing it is knowne there must be a departure from vs and a forsaking of the Romane See The same Grosteade a little before his death complayning of the wicked courses holden by the Romanists whose scourge he was said the Church should neuer finde any ease from the oppressiue burdens laid vpon her nor be deliuered from the Aegyptiacall bondage shee was holden in till her deliuerance were wrought in ore gladij cruentandi in the mouth of the sword all bathed in bloud Sauanorola holden by many for a Prophet surely a renowned man for pietie and learning tould the French King Charles the eight hee should haue great prosperity in his voyage into Italy and that God would giue the sword into his hand and all this to the end hee should reforme the corrupt state of the Church which if hee did not performe he should returne home againe with dishonour and God would reserue the honour of this worke for some other and so it fell out At that time when Luther began to reprooue the abuses of the Church of Rome things were in so bad state that not onely the blood of Christ was prophaned the power of the keyes by abuse made contemptible and the redemption of soules out of purgatory set as a stake at dice by the pardon-sellers to bee played for but so many grieuances there were besides that all the world sighed vnder the burden of them and wished that some man of heroicall magnanimitie would oppose himselfe When God had stirred vp so worthy an Instrument what did the Pope and his adherents Surely as Guicciardin reports there were that yeere many meetings in Rome to consult what was best to bee done The more wise and moderate sorte wished the Pope to reforme things apparantly amisse and not to persecute Luther least continuing those intollerable disorders abuses and villanies whereof all good men complayned and persecuting him that reprooued them with so great applause of the whole Christian world men should thinke innocencie vertue and piety in him to be
should follow his example but to beginne the new law as Moses did the old and therefore to take it as imposed vpon vs by Christs example in the nature of a precept and to be done in imitation of Christ and as being in it selfe a thing pleasing vnto GOD for that it is an imitation of his Sonnes action is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as Caluin rightly noteth and not voide of superstition and errour Now that the Fathers either erred themselues in this sort or sought to abuse others neither Calvine nor wee euer thought For they neuer imagined that the principall reason that mooued the authours and beginners of this fast to prescribe it was the onely imitation of Christs fast or because they thought it it in it owne nature a thing respected by God meerely as an imitation of his Sonnes action but that whereas it is very fit there bee a solemne time at least once in the yeare wherein men may call themselues to an account for all their negligences repent them of all their euill doings and with prayers fastings and mournings turne vnto the Lord this time was chosen as fittest both because that heerein wee remember the sufferings of Christ for our sinnes which is the strongest and most prevailing motiue that may bee to make vs hate sinne and with teares of repentant sorrow bewaile it which could no otherwise bee taken away but by the bloud shed of the Sonne of GOD as also for that after this meditation of the sufferings of Christ and conforming our selues to them his joyfull resurrection for our justification doth immediatly present it selfe vnto vs in the dayes following in the solemnities whereof men were wont with great devotion to approach to the Lords Table and they which were not yet baptized were by Baptisme admitted into the Church Thus then it was not without great consideration that men made choice of this time wherein to recount all their negligences sinnes and transgressions and to prepare themselues by this solemne act of Fasting both for the better performance of their owne dueties in those ensuing dayes of joyfull solemnitie as also to obtaine at Gods handes the gracious acceptance of such as they offered vnto him to bee entred into his couenant For the manner was in the Primitiue Church neuer to present any vnto Baptisme vnlesse it were in the case of necessity and danger but onely in the Feasts of Easter and Pentecost Thus then these being the reasons mouing to institute a set and solemne Fast and to appoint it at this time and season of the yeare rather than any other for the limitation of the number of dayes men had an eye as to a convenient direction to Christs Fast of forty dayes in the dedication of the new Covenant which number also Moses as being the giuer and Elias as being the restorer of the olde Law kept and obserued before him not as if they had beene precisely and absolutely tyed by force of these examples for then they would precisely haue kept that number which yet they did not for the Saturdayes and Sundayes deducted which were not aunciently fasted neither in the Greeke Church nor in some of the Latine Churches there remaine not forty dayes and if onely the Sondayes bee deducted as in the Latine Church there will want of the number for those in capite Ieiunii which being added to the rest make vp the number of 40. were not obserued from the beginning but added afterwards Our Divines therefore doe teach that Fasting is commaunded by Almighty GOD not as a thing in it selfe regarded but respectiuely to those ends before mentioned that GOD hath set no certaine times of Fasting but that the Church may appoint vpon set and ordinary or speciall and extraordinary occasions and causes times of fasting and that men are bound to obey The Fast of Lent they doe not dislike but thinke it may be kept as a convenient tradition of Antiquity dispensable by authority of the Church vpon due consideration of times and persons so that no false nor superstitious opinions bee added but the practise of the Romanists they condemne for that whereas they pretend to follow the ancient custome of fasting to be tyed vnto it they retaine no shew of the auncient fast but make a meere mocke of God man as their own best friends are forced to confesse besides their erronious opinions of merit satisfaction grosse superstition in the difference of meates Thus then we did not put down the true right vse exercise of fasting but the mockery of it do wish that in the ful establishment of the Churches the ancient discipline of fasting due coÌ„sideratioÌ„ had of times conditioÌ„s of men may be restored again If any of our Diuines seeme to dislike that there should be any set fasts as being Iewish it is not the generall resolution of the reformed Churchs but the priuate opinion only of some particular mâ—… who were carried with the hate of Romish errours and superstition in the set fasts to dislike them wholly which aduisedly I see not how they could doe and I am well assured many of very great esteeme do allow and approue the vse of them The next obiectioÌ„ is most friuolous Caluin saith Lay men long since presumed in times of necessity to baptize werein whether they did well or not the Fathers in those times wherein they were suffered thus to do could not nor did not resolue what can be inferred of this Whether they did well or not Caluin saith the Fathers were not resolute and hee think eth their doing can hardly be excused from vsurpation of that which no way pertained to them therefore saith Bellarmine he dissenteth from all antiquity confesseth the doctrine of the Romish Church to be most ancient Let Bellarmine giue vs leaue to reason from his speeches in the same sort he will soone perceiue he hath wronged Caluine Bellarmine saith the Fathers were doubtfull whether if men not yet baptized should attempt to baptize it were baptisme or not he pronounceth peremtorily it is therefore he dissenteth from all antiquity As likewise they doubted whether baptisme administred sportingly were true baptisme or not he his consorts make no question of it therefore they dissent from all antiquitie But let vs proceed to the next allegation Caluin saith it is most certaine that all antiquity is clearely against the Romish doctrine of the reall sacrificing of Christ in the blessed Sacrament that the Fathers did most rightly conceiue of this sacred mystery without derogating any way from the sufficiencie and plenitude of Christs sacrifice A man would hardly thinke any man would allcage this place to proue that Caluin confesseth the doctrine of the Fathers and the opinion of the Romanists are all one and yet this doth the Iesuite so forcible and powerful he is in reasoning that what a man most constantly denieth he can
vertue of their owne proper for me Caietan confesseth that God doth not so produce them as an immediat agent but that the 2d causes doe mediate between him and them as secondary principal agents bring forth their effects Yet are not these that is the first the 2d causes partiall but totall causes of all those effects which they produce For the cleering whereof we must obserue that a cause may bee said to be totall either totalitate effectus that is because it bringeth forth the whole effect though some other cause haue such efficiencie also in respect of the same that without the helpe of it it cannot bring forth any such effect as when 2 men draw a ship either of them produceth the whole effect and moueth the whole ship but yet not so wholly but that either hath need of the others helpe and concurrence Or secondly a cause may bee said to bee totall totalitate causoe and that in 2 sorts either so as to produce the whole effect without any concurrence of any other cause in which sense neither God nor the creature neither the first nor the 2d cause must be said to be a totall cause or so as that though some other do concurre yet the being power of working and actuall cooperation of it is wholy from the agent with which it doth concurre and so God is a totall cause of all those effects that he produceth by and together with the 2d causes So that the opinion of them who thinke that God hath no immediat influence into the effects of 2d causes nor immediate concurrence with such causes in producing their effects is to be exploded out of all Christian schools Churches as profane heathnish Wherfore there are who finding that this first opiniō is not to be admitted flie to a 2d little better then the former For they acknowledge that God hath an immediate influence into the effects of all 2d causes but they think it to be general indefinit to be ◅ted determined by the different concurse of 2d causes It is true indeed that God worketh all things as an vniversall cause but this may bee vnderstood wayes For first a cause may be sayd to be vniuersall in the vniuersality of predication as opposit to speciall or particular as an artificer in respect of this that speciall kinde of artificers is generall and is an vniuersall cause of all workes of arte and they of such speciall workes as are incident to their seuerall kinds Secondly a cause may bee sayd to bee vniversall in that it extendeth it selfe to effects of all sorts in respect of something common to them all and not in respect of that which is proper to each of them vnlesse the working of it bee limited and directed by something else The fire warmeth the water with which poison is mingled in the same sorte that it doth any other water and without any difference of it own action And the actions of the sun fire are such as that men make vse of thē to vvhat purposes they please accordingly as their vvorking is differently applied bring forth differēt effects Thirdly a cause may be sayd to be vniversall because the efficiencie and vvorking of it extendeth it selfe to many things according to the seuerall differences of them without being limited and determined by any other thing These men suppose that God is an vniversall cause in the second sense and that his concurrence influence is indefinit generall and such as may be taken and applied by second causes in what sort they will So that the actions of free vvill the actions of euery other second cause haue from the freedome of the wil the particular quality of the second causes that they are of this or that sort good or bad not from the concurse or influence of the first cause which is finde◅init as is the concurse influence of the sun vvith other inferiour causes and as one man may make offer of his helpe concurrence to whatsoeuer another vvill make vse of it So they suppose that God offereth his concurse to second causes to be vsed by them to what purpose in what sort they will According to this conceipt they suppose they can easily cleere the doubt and free God from all imputation of being authour of sin though he concurre immediatly with second causes in to the producing of those actions that are sinfull For say they his concurse influence is indefinit and is by them applied in ill sorte to ill purposes But first this conceipt cleereth not God from being authour of sin And secondly it cannot stand with the grounds of Philosophie or diuinity That it cleereth not God from being authour of sin but rather layeth this imputation on him it is euident For if the concurse of God be generall indefinit indifferent and to be determined by the creature to the producing of good or euill it followeth that when the will of the creature determineth it selfe to the specificall act of sin God also determinately concurreth with it in particular to the producing of such an acte in kinde That this consequence is good it is evident because whosoeuer shall offer his help concurrence cooperation to another indifferently for the producing of good or euill the actes of sin or vertue as it shall please him he concurreth in trueth indeede to the producing of the acte of sin in particular as it is such an act if by the will of the other his concurrence cooperation bee determined to such an acte in particular Wherefore if God for his part offer onely a generall concurse such as is indifferent to the producing of actes of vertue or sinne accordingly as the will of the second cause shall determine it it will follow that God concurreth determinately or in particular to the producing of the acte of sin as being determined to the producing of such an act in particular by the will of the creature before he come to actuall cooperation or concurrence Secondly this conceipt cannot stand with the grounds of true Philosophie or diuinitie For if Gods concurse were onely generall and indefinit to bee determined by the will of the creature the will of the creature should bee before the will of God in respect of the particularity of things yea in respect of some reall acte as an acte it should be simply the first agent For according to this fancie because the creature inclineth to such an acte to put a thing in being therefore God cooperateth Whence it will follow that there are 2 beings of things that God is not simply the first cause of all those things that haue being 2ly It pertaineth to diuine prouidence determinately to will aforehand to appoint what afterwards shall be to moue second causes to certaine and determinate effects so to dispose all things that they may attaine the ends for which they were created But this could
wee are of wee will most willingly listen vnto them But this they doe not and therefore their talking of the Fathers reasoning from succession when they dare not reason as the fathers did is most vaine and idle CHAP. 41. Of Vnity the kindes of it and that Communion with the Romane Bishoppe is not alwayes a note of true and Catholike profession THe next note of the Church assigned by them is Vnity The Vnity of the Church consisteth principally in three things First in obseruing and holding the Rule of faith once deliuered to the Saints Secondly in the subiection of the people to their Pastours and thirdly in the due connexion of many Pastours and the flockes depending on them among themselues All these kinds and sorts of vnity wee thinke necessarily required in some degree in all those societies of Christians that will demonstrate themselues to bee the true Churches of God and deny not but that vnity in this sort expressed and conceiued is a most apt note of the true Church The papists suppose that besides these kinds and sorts of vnity before expressed there is also required another kind of vnity to the being of the Church namely subiection to and vnion with that visible head which as they thinke Christ hath left in his steade to gouerne the whole body of the Church and to rule both Pastors and people This head as they suppose is the Bishoppe of Rome from whose communion sith wee are fallen they inferre that wee are diuided from the vnity of the true Church This last kinde of vnity deuised by the Papists wee deny to bee necessarily required to the beeing of the true Church First therefore let vs see what may bee said for or against the necessity of this kinde of vnitie and in the next place consider what our aduersaries can conclude for themselues or against vs from that kind of vnity which wee acknowledge to be necessarily required to the being of the true Church If the vnion of all Christians with this supposed visible head which is the Bishop of Rome were necessarily required as a perpetuall dutie then was there no true Church in the time of the Anti-Popes when the wisest knew not who were the true Popes and who were vsurpers If they shall reply that it is necessary to hold Communion with the true if hee may bee knowne this hath no more warrant of reason than the former seeing the best learned amongst thēselues thinke that not only the Pope but also the whole cleargy people of Rome may erre and fall into damnable heresies in which case it is the part of euery true Christian to disclaime all communion with them and to oppose himselfe against them and all their hereticall impieties That it is possible for the Pope to erre and become an heretique so many great Divines in the Church of Rome haue at all times most constantly defended that the greatest patrons of the infallibility of the Popes judgement at this day are forced to confesse it is not necessary to beleeue that the Pope cannot erre but that it is onely a matter of probable dispute Thus then it is evident to all that will not wilfully oppose themselues against the truth that consent with the Romane Bishoppe cannot bee made a perpetuall and sure note of the true Church Nay the Grecians most constantly affirme that the Popes taking all to himselfe and challenging to bee head of the vniversall Church hath beene the cause of the Churches division But because Bellarmine is so excellent a Sophister that he is able to proue any thing to bee true though neuer so false and absurde Let vs see how hee proueth that consent with the Bishop of Rome is a note of the true Church in such sorte that whosoeuer holdeth Communion with him is a Catholike and contrarily whosoeuer forsaketh his Communion is an Heretique or Schismatique This hee endeavoureth to make good by the testimonies of sundry of the auncient Fathers wrested against their knowne meanings and vndoubted resolutions in other parts of their workes and writings His first allegation is out of Irenaeus in his third booke and third Chapter against heresies But if wee consider the circumstances of the place and the occasion of the wordes ci◅d by Bellarmine wee shall easily see they proue no such thing as hee laboureth to enforce For Irenaeus in that place sheweth how all heresies may bee refuted by opposing against them the tradition of the Apostles which hee saith wee may easily finde out and discerne how contrary it is to the franticke conceites of heretiques by taking a view of them which were ordained Bishoppes by the Apostles in the Churches of Christ and their successours to this present time which neuer taught nor knew any such thing as these men dreame Now because it would bee tedious to reckon all the successions of Bishoppes succeeding one another in euery Church therefore he produceth the succession of the Bishops in the Romane Church in steede of all because that being the most famous and renowned Church of the world constituted and founded by the two most principall and glorious Apostles Peter and Paul whatsoeuer was successiuely taught and receiued in that Church and consequently deliuered vnto it by those blessed Apostles must needes be the doctrine and tradition of the rest of the Apostles deliuered to all other Churches of the World For what was there hidden from these Apostles that was revealed vnto any of the rest and what would they hide from this principall Church that was any way necessary to bee knowne Therefore saith Irenaeus the producing of the Romane succession is in stead of all For it must needes bee that what this most principall Church receiued from these great Apostles that nothing else the other did receiue from their Apostles first preachers which he expresseth in these words Ad hanc Ecclesiam propter potentiorē principalitatē necesse est omnem convenire Ecclesiā hoc est cos qui sunt vndique fideles Bellarmines sense of these words that all Churches must frame themselues to beleeue what the Church of Rome beleeueth and prescribeth to others to bee beleeued no way standeth with the drift of Irenaeus in this place as may appeare by that which hath beene sayd and therefore this allegation might haue beene spared His next authorities are out of Cyprians Epistles in the first of which Epistles we shall finde that there were certaine Schismatikes that fled from their owne lawfull Bishop and superiours with complaints to other Bishops and Churches and amongst the rest to the Church and Bishop of Rome not knowing sayth Cyprian or at least not considering that the Romanes are such as will not giue entertainement to such perfidious companions nor listen to lying and false reports For that is the meaning of those words Ad quos perfidia non possit habere accessum But Bellarmine wresteth the words to another sense to wit that infidelitie and
vncertainety of finding out the trueth by that meanes Thirdly whereas they say wee haue no miracles and therefore not the true faith and Religion wee deny both the antecedent and the consequent For first the restoring of the purity of religion in our age hath not beene without wonderfull demonstration of the power of God to confirme the trueth of our doctrine and the equity of our cause as may appeare by that which is reported by Illyricus the English Martyrologue and other histories of better credite than those out of which they report their miracles And besides we say though we had no miracles wee are not thereby conuinced of errour For the vse of miracles was specially if not onely in respect of infidels as Caietane sheweth in the place aboue mentioned out of 1 Corinthians 11. and the authority of Gregorie in his tenth Homily and serued to make the mysteries of God seeme credible to such as were wholly auerse from them So that now the faith being already generally planted receiued in the world and confirmed by the miracles done by Christ and his Apostles and nothing being taught by vs but the same which was deliuered by them in the beginning nothing contrary to the confirmed and receiued doctrine of the Church of God then in the world when those differences betweene vs and our aduersaries began there is no reason they should vrge vs to confirme our doctrine by miracles If they require vs to confirme our calling and Ministery as being extraordinary wee say it is not extraordinary as hath beene sufficiently cleared in the note of succession That which Bellarmine addeth that Luther and Calvine attempted to doe miracles but could doe none is but the lying reporte of his owne companions their sworne enemies whose testimony in this case is not to be regarded CHAP. 49. Of Propheticall Prediction THe next note of the Church vrged by them is Propheticall prediction The certaine foreknowledge of future contingent things is proper vnto God and therefore none can foretell such things before they come to passe but they to whom God reuealeth them but that this kind of reuelation is made only to them that are of the true Church I thinke Bellarmine will not say For then what shall wee thinke of Balaam and the Sybils so that prediction of future things is no certaine nor proper note of the true Church But if it were it would not helpe them not hurt vs. For those men they speake of that liued in the dayes of our fathers prophesied of things to come were of the true Church and many of them did most certainely foresee foretell the ruine of the Pope his estate and the alteration reformation of the Church in our time gaue most cleare testimony vnto that which we haue done Neither is there any better proofe of the goodnesse of our cause than that that which we haue done in the reformation of the Church was before wished for expected foretold by the best men that liued in former times in the corrupt state of the Church That which Bellarmine scornefully reporteth of Luthers false lying prophesie that if he continued but two yeares in preaching the Gospell the kingdome of the Pope should be ouerthrowen shall wee doubt not bee found true to the confusion of the enemies of Gods trueth Religion notwithstanding all the indeuours of the Iesuites to make vp the breaches of Babylon which must be throwen downe till not a stone be left vpou a stone But that Luther foretold many things before they came to passe wherein his predictions were found most true wee haue the testimony of Melancthon Illyricus diuers others CHAP. 50. Of the felicity of them that professe the trueth THe next note of the true Church assigned by Bellarmine is the temporall felicity of them that are of it It was but his priuate fantasie that mooued him to assigne this note of the Church For his fellowes the Diuines of Rhemes in their annotations vpon the fift of Matthew doe vtterly disclaime it saying in expresse precise wordes Wee see then that the temporall prosperity of persons and countreys is no signe of better men or truer Religion But let vs suppose these pettie Diuines are deceiued in this their iudgement though if they bee wee must condemne all the Primitiue Christians that were in the times of the ten bloody persecutions and let vs grant that the Cardinall sayth truely that temporall felicity and prosperity is a note of the true Church and Religion what doeth hee gaine by it surely nothing at all for he is most blind that seeth not the prosperity of all those Countries of Germany Denmarke England Scotland and the like where the reformed Religion is maintained and the long life happy Reigne of those Princes that haue most favoured and sought to advance the same as of great ELIZABETH of famous memory late Empresse of England c. who as she was the great glorieus protectour of the Reformed Churches so was she the wonder of the world in respect of the happy successe shee had in all things she tooke in hand and the perpetuall course of felicity and prosperity that euer attended her notwithstanding the daungerous attempts of bloody miscreants the hired slaues of the sonne of perdition How the professours of this Religion though fewer in number forsaken destitute of all worldly assurances and being by the falshood treachery of their bloody enemies oftentimes brought as it were to nothing in France other places haue yet strangely and indeed miraculously lifted vp their heads againe to the terrour and confusion of their proudest enimies hee that seeth not is a stranger in the world Wherefore I I will leaue the consideration of this note to the indifferent Reader not fearing any great preiudice that can grow from thence against our cause CHAP. 51. Of the miserable endes of the enemies of the trueth THe next is the miserable end of such as are enemies of Gods true Religion It is true that God hath oftentimes shewed his iudgements most clearely against the wicked enemies of his trueth and glory so that in the end the impiety of their former courses was made to appeare as wee see in Herode Arrius Nestorius and others but that any such thing fell out to Luther Caluine or any of those worthy men Bellarmine is pleased in this place to slander we vtterly deny And to the lewd and lying reports of Coclaeus Bolsecus we oppose the testimony of Iunius Melancthon and others And surely it was the worlds wonder that Luther opposing himself against the bloody Romanists against whom no King nor Emperour in later times resisted but he wrought his owne ouerthrow should notwithstanding liue so long die so peaceably and be buried so honourably as few of his ranke haue euer beene Touching Caluine there were many witnesses of the manner of his sicknesse but of his death none but the
debt there whiles wee celebrate the memory of his passion we acknowledge confesse our sinnes which be without number grant that we are not able to satisfie for the least of them therfore beseech our mercifull Father to accept in full payment satisfaction of our debts his passion which after this sort as hee hath ordained to be done in the sacrifice of the masse we renew represent before him where our sinfull life hath altogether displeased him wee offer vnto him his welbeloued Son with whom we are sure he is well pleased most humbly making supplication to accept him for vs in whom only we put all our trust accounting him all our righteousnes the authour of our saluation Thus doth the Church daylie renew in mysterie the passion of Christ doth represent it before God in the holy masse for the attaining of all the graces benefites purchased by the same passion before after the measure of his goodnes as our faith deuotion is knowne vnto him And againe The Church offereth Christ Gods Sonne to God the Father that is representeth to the Father the body and bloud of Christ which by his omnipotencie hee hath there made present and thereby reneweth his passion not by suffering of death againe but after an vnbloudy manner not for this end that we should thereby deserue remission of sins deliuerance from the power of the deuill which is the proper effect of Christs passion but that we should by faith devotion this representation of his passion obtaine remission grace already deserued by his passion to be now applyed to our profite and saluation c. not that we can apply the merits of Christs death as we list to whō we list but that we by the representation of his passion most humbly make petition prayer to Almighty God to apply vnto vs the remission grace which was purchased deserued by Christs passion before after the measure of his goodnes and as our faith and deuotion is knowne vnto him The thing offered both in the sacrifice of Christ on the Crosse in the sacrifice of the Church on the Altar is all one in substance being the naturall body of Christ our high Priest and the price and ransome of our redemption but the manner and effects of these two offerings are diuerse the one is by the shedding of Christs bloud extending to the death of Christ the offerer for the redemption of all mankind the other is without shedding of his bloud onely representing his death whereby the faithfull and deuout people are made partakers of the merits of Christs passion Hitherto the Bishoppe of Lincolne and to the same purpose the Authour of the Enchiridion of Christian religion hath these words Diligenter ergo haec omnia nobis intuentibus nihil vel absurdi vel scrupulosi in toto missae contextu occurret sedomnia praesertim quae canon complectitur pietatis plenissima ac plané reuerenda vt sunt videbuntur Aut enim Ecclesia respicit ad corpus sanguinem Christi pro se in cruce oblata vi omnipotentis verbi in altari praesentia non veretur haec appellare hostiam puram hostiam sanctam hostiam immaculatam panem sanctum vitae aeternae calicem salutis perpetuae aut ad oblationem repraesentatiuam commemoratiuam passionis seu corporis Christi veri quae fide misericordiam per Christum apprehendente redemptionem quae est in Christo deo patri opponente peragitur non dubitat hoc sacrificium laudis offerre pro se suisque omnibus pro spe salutis incolumitatis suae nimirum spem salutis incolumitatis ac redemptionem animarum debitalaude ac gratiarum actione deo accepta referens petitque vt hanc oblationem seruitutis suae Deus placatus accipiat diesque nostros in sua pace disponat atque ab aeterna damnatione nos eripi et in electorum suorum grege iubeat numerari non quidem ex meritis nostris aut ex dignitate nostrae seruitutis sed per Christum dominum nostrum that is If wee rightly looke into these things nothing will occurre vnto vs in the whole context of the masse that may iustly seeme absurd or cause any scruple but all things there found especially such as are contained in the canon will appeare vnto vs as they are indeede full of piety and much to be reuerenced for either the Church hath respect to the body and bloud of Christ offered for her on the crosse and by force of his Almighty word present on the altar and so feareth not to call these a pure host an holy host an immaculate host the holy bread of eternall life and the cuppe of eternall saluation or else shee hath an eye to the representatiue and commemoratiue oblation of the passion or true body of Christ which consisteth in faith apprehending mercy by Christ and opposing vnto God the redemption that is in Christ and soe shee doubteth not to offer this sacrifice of praise for her selfe and all her members for the hope of her saluation and safety that is with all due praise and thankesgiuing shee acknowledgeth that shee hath receiued from GOD the hope of saluation safetie and the redemption of the soules of her sonnes and daughters and desireth that God will take in good part this oblation of her service and bounden dutie that hee will dispose our dayes in peace that hee will deliuer vs from eternall condemnation and that hee will make vs to be numbred with his elect not for our merits or the worthinesse of this seruice but thorough Christ our Lord. With these Georgius Wicelius a man much honoured by the Emperours Ferdinand and Maximilian fully agreeth defining the masse to bee a sacrifice rememoratiue and of praise and thankesgiuing and in another place he saith the masse is a commemoration of the passion of Christ celebrated in the publike assembly of Christians where many giue thinkes for the price of redemption With these agreeth the Interim published by Charles the fift in the the assembly of the states of the Empire at Augusta March 15 t 1548 and there accepted by the same states But some man happily will say here are many authorities alleaged to proue that sundry worthy diuines in the Roman Church in Luthers time denyed the new reall offering or sacrificing of Christ and made the sacrifice of the altar to bee onely representatiue and commemoratiue but before his time there were none found soe to teach Wherefore I will shew the consent of the Church to haue beene cleare for vs to uching this point before his time and against the Tridentine doctrine now prevailing Bonaventura in his exposition of the masse hath these words The body of Christ is eleuated and lifted vp in the masse for diuers causes but the first and principall is that wee may obtaine and regaine the favour of God the Father
wordes When a Lay man saith the Lords prayer or any other devoutly his affection is lifted vp toGod reficitur affectus non intellectus sed quandò intelligit reficitur affectus intellectus and this the Apostle sheweth to be true in respect of the publique prayers because if the people vnderstand the prayer or blessing of the Priest melius reducitur in deum devotius respondet Amen And then proceeding to those words If thou blesse c. hath these words What shall hee doe that supplieth the place of the vnlearned Which words import as much as what doth it profite the simple people that vnderstand not as if he should say litle or nothing because they know not how to conforme themselues to him that is the minister of the Church by answering Amen and that for this cause in the Primitiue Church the blessings and all other things pertaining to the publique seruice of God were in the vulgar tongue but after that people were multiplyed and increased and they had now learned to conforme themselues to the Priest by standing when the Gospel is reade and by adoring the Eucharist the seruice was in Latine and that it sufficeth now that the Clearke doth answere for the whole people Here is confession that the people profiteth litle or nothing when the praiers and blessings are in a tongue they vnderstand not that therefore the Primitiue Church had the seruice in the vulgar that while it is in Latine they cannot themselues but another must answere Amen for them and that yet now they haue learned by standing or kneeling differently to conforme themselues to the Priest according to the different things he doth which a deafe man that neuer heard word may doe by obseruation of the eye it is well enough But Cardinall Caietan vpon the same place hath these words Out of this doctrine of the Apostle Paul it may be gathered that it were better more for the edification of the Church to haue the publique prayers that are reade in the hearing of the people pronounced in a tongue common to the cleargy and people and vnderstood of them both then in Latine And when hee was challenged by the Parisians for saying it were better to haue the prayers said in the Church in the vulgar rather then in the Latine tongue his answere was that they recited not his words fully for he had not said it were better but it were better for edification nor that the prayers should be said but that the publique prayers should be said in the vulgar tongue and this his assertion hee said was grounded vpon the authoritie of the Apostle Cardinall Contarenus proposing the question what is to bee thought of such prayers as ignorant men make without vnderstanding answereth that it is to be conceiued that they are of force in respect of the affection of the mind and intention they haue to pray vnto God though they know not what they desire or pray for but that they want the fruit which they should haue if they vnderstood those prayers that they vtter with their mouthes for then they would direct the intention of their mindes and their desires to God for the obtaining in particular of such things as with the mouth they pray for and they would bee more edified by the pious sense and vnderstanding of their prayers And he concludeth that they pray not in vaine but that they would pray better if they vnderstood the meaning of their prayers And to the same purpose Harding against Bishop Iuell saith it were better the people should say their prayers in their owne tongue that they might the better vnderstand them Innocentius the 3d seemeth to haue had due consideration hereof therfore he prescribeth that because in sundry parts there are mixed within the same city or diocesse people of different languages hauing in the vnity of the same faith different rites and manners the Bishops of such Cities or Diocesses shall prouide fit men to celebrate divine service according to the diversities of their rites and languages to minister the sacraments of the Church vnto them instructing them both by word and example Some restraine the words of Innocentius to the Greeke and Latin tongues only as if he had only allowed the hauing of the seruice in different tongues in those citties and places where Greeks and Latines met But I see not why these words should be thus restrained seeing there is no question but this Pope would allow that which Iohn the 8◠his predecessour others had don in permitting nay in cōmanding the seruice to be in the Slauonian tongue And besides how he could say that the Greeks in some parts of the world agreed with the Latines in the faith whom he so bitterly reproueth for very maine differences in religion and who as Thomas à Iesu testifieth most stiffely hold their owne religion though they liue vnder Princes of the Roman profession I know not Wherefore to grow to a conclusion it appeareth that anciently all Churches that euer most of the Christian Churches had their seruice in a tongue vulgarly vndestood that if any had not it was either because they knew not how to write any thing in their owne tongue or because that which was their naturall tongue ceased to be so after they first had the seruice in it that many had soe in the West Church when Luther first shewed his dislike of Romish errors abuses that there neuer wanted worthy diuines Bs Praelates of great esteem who vrged the vnfitnesse of hauing it in a tongue not vndestood the necessity of the vulgar that all in whom there was any sparke of grace sought to haue it vnderstood And therefore as I noted before out of Iohn Billet sundry Churches though they had their seruice in Latine yet caused the same things that they read in Latine to be expounded in the vulgar others as the Bs in the third councel of Tours that such things should be read to the people in the vulgar as might informe instruct them in all points of Christian faith religion their words are these We all with vnanimous cōsent haue thought fit to ordain that euery B. shall prouide and haue homilies containing necessary admonitions that so they that are vnder him may be taught our meaning is that these homilies shall containe instructions touching the catholike faith according to their capacities concerning the euerlasting rewards of the good eternall damnation of the wicked the resurrection last iudgment such works course of life whereby men may attain or whereby they are sure to be excluded from eternall life And we ordaine that euery B. take care to translate the same homilies plainely and perspicuously into the vulgar Roman or German tongue that all may the more easily vnderstand the things that are vttered vnto them Among other articles proposed in the councell of Trent by the Embassadors of Ferdinand
the Emperor cōcerning the necessary reformation of the Church one was that Happily it were to be permitted that in some places prayers faithfully translated into the vulgar tongue might be intermingled with those things that are sung in latine Likewise in the articles of reformation exhibited to the councell of Trent by Charles the 9◠In sacrificio paraecialibus Euangelium apertè dilucidè pro populi captu copiose ex suggestu exponatur quo in loco quae plebano praeeunte fient preces linguâ fiant vernaculâ peractâ autem re diuinâ latine mysticis precibus lingua etiam vernacula publicae ad Deum preces fiant ibidem plura Which thing if it had bin granted by the councell no new nor strang thing had bin brought in for as Hosius testifieth the Church neuer forbad to sing in the Churches in the vulgar tongue in time and place It were to be wished sayth Erasmus that the whole service of God might be celebrated and performed in a tongue vnderstood of the whole people as in auncient times it was wont to bee and that all things should bee soe plainely and distinctly sounded out that they might bee vnderstood of all that list to attend And Cassander fully agreeing with Erasmus and alleadging to this purpose the Popes permitting of it to the Slauonians vpon the hearing of a voice frō heauen the authority of Caietan sayth It were to be desired that according to the mandate of the Apostle and the auncient custome of the Church consideration might be had of the people in the publike praiers of the Church and in the hymnes and lessons which are there read and sung for the peoples sake and that the ordinary and vulgar sort of beleeuers might not for ever bee wholly excluded from all communion of prayers and diuine readings and hee addeth that vnlesse there bee a reformation in this and other things there is no hope of any durable peace or consent of the Church and professeth hee cannot see but that they to whom the government of the Church is committed shall one day giue an account why they suffered the Church to bee thus miserably disquieted and rent in sunder and neglected to take away the causes whence heresies schismes do spring as in duety they should haue done So that in this poynt as in the former we see the Church wherein our Fathers liued and died was a true Protestant Church CHAP. 5. Of the three supposed different estates of meere nature grace and sinne the difference betweene a man in the state of pure and meere nature and in the state of sinne and of originall sinne THey of the Church of Rome at this day imagine that God might haue created a man in the state of pure nature or nature onely aswell without grace as sinne and that in this state of pure or meere nature without any addition of grace hee might haue loued God aboue all and haue kept all the commaundements of God collectiuely so as to breake none of them at the least for a short time though happily hee could not haue holden on constantly so to keepe them all as neuer to breake any of them seeing there would haue beene a contrariety betweene reason and that appetite that followeth the apprehension of sense in that state of pure or meere nature So that according to this conceipt grace was added not to inable man to loue God aboue all to keepe the severall cōmaundements which hee hath giuen to doe the workes of morall vertue For all these hee might haue beene able to performe out of the power of nature without any such addition but to make him able constantly to keepe all the commaundements of God collectiuely so as neuer to breake any one of them and to keepe them so as to merit eternall happines in heauen Hence they inferre diverse things First that the losse of grace or originall righteousnes that was given to Adam doth not depriue those of his posterity of the power of louing God their Creator aboue all of keeping his commaundements divisiuely and doing the seuerall workes of morall vertue though happily not with that facilitie that in the state of grace hee might haue done them Secondly That Infidels and such as haue no fellowship with the Saints people of God nor any part in his grace may decline sinne and doe the workes of morall vertue Thirdly That all the contrariety that is found in the powers of the soule the rebellion of the inferiour faculties against the superiour the pronenesse to euill and difficultie to doe good would haue beene the conditions of meere nature without addition of grace or sinne and consequently that they are not sinne in the state wherein wee are that these evills are not newly brought into the nature of man by the fall that as man would haue beene mortall in the state of meere nature because compounded of contraries so out of the contrariety of sensitiue and rationall desire hee would haue found a rebellion in himselfe of the inferiour faculties against the superiour that as a heauy thing falleth not downeward while it is stayed but falleth so soone as the stay is taken away by reason of the same nature it had while it was stayed and as a ship that lay quietly while it was stayed with an anchor vpon the remouing of the same is driuen with the windes yet in no other sort then it would haue beene before if it had not beene stayed so all these contrarieties differences and pronenesse to desire things contrary to the prescript of right reason would haue beene in meere nature as the conditions of it would haue shewed themselues if grace had not hindered them and that there is no other difference betweene a man in the state of pure or meere nature and in the state of originall sinne then there is betweene a man that neuer had any cloathing and him that had but by his owne fault and folly is stript out of all betweene whom there is no difference in the nature of nakednesse but all the difference standeth in this that the one is in fault for not hauing cloathes the other not so For they suppose man would haue beene carried as strongly to the desire of sinfull things in the state of pure nature as now that freewill is not made more weake then in that state it would haue beene nor the flesh become more rebellious then it would haue beene without grace before the entrance of sinne This opinion ◠Bellarmin followeth and professeth that though some of excellent learning thinke that both Thomas and the best and most approued of the schoolmen were of a contrary iudgment yet they are deceiued in so thinking and that this is the opinion of them all Against these erroneous conceipts that are indeede the ground of all the points of difference betweene them and vs touching originall sinne freewill the power of nature the workes
to posterities This may rightly be named a tradition not as if we were to beleeue any thing without the warrant and authority of the Scripture but for that wee neede a plaine and distinct explication of many things which are somewhat obscurely contayned in the Scripture which being explicated the Scriptures which otherwise we should not so easily haue vnderstood yeeld vs satisfaction that they are so indeede as the Church deliuereth them vnto vs. The fourth kind of tradition is the continued practise of such things as neither are contayned in the Scripture expressely nor the examples of such practise expressely there deliuered though the grounds reasons and causes of the necessity of such practise be there contayned and the benefit or good that followeth of it Of this sort is the Baptisme of Infantes which is therefore named a tradition because it is not expressely deliuered in Scripture That the Apostles did baptize infants nor any expresse precept there found that they should so doe Yet is not this so receiued by bare and naked tradition but that wee find the Scripture to deliuer vnto vs the grounds of it The fift kind of traditions comprehendeth such observations as in particular are not commanded in Scripture nor the necessity of them from thence concluded though in generall without limitation of times and other circumstances such things be there commanded Of this sort many thinke the observation of the lent fast to be the fast of the fourth and the sixt dayes of the weeke and some other That the Apostles deliuered by liuely voyce many obseruations dispensable and alterable according to the circumstances of times and persons we make no question Onely this we say that they are confounded with Ecclesiasticall traditions so that which they are doth hardly appeare and that they doe not necessarily binde posterities The custome of standing at prayer on the Lords day and betweene Easter and Whitsontinde was generally receiued as deliuered by Apostolique tradition and when some beganne to breake it is was confirmed by the Councell of Nice yet is it not thought necessary to be obserued in our time Out of this which hath beene sayd wee may easily resolue what is to bee thought touching traditions For first the Canon of scripture being admitted as deliuered by Tradition though the diuine truth of it be in it selfe cleare and euident vnto vs not depending of the Churches authority there is noe matter of faith deliuered by bare and onely tradition as the Romanists seeme to Imagine Yea this is so cleare that therein they contrary themselues indeauouring to proue by scripture the same things they pretend to hold by tradition as wee shall finde if wee run through the things questioned betweene them and vs. The onely cleare instance they seeme to giue is touching the perpetuall virginity of Mary which they say cannot be proued by scripture and yet is necessary to be beleeued But they should know that this is no point of Christian faith That shee was a Virgin before in and after the birth of Christ wee are bound to beleeue as an article of our faith and so much is deliuered in scripture and in the Apostles Creede but that shee continued so euer after is a seemely truth deliuered vnto vs by the Church of God fitting the sanctity of the blessed Virgin and the honour due to soe sanctified a vessell of Christs incarnation as her body was and soe is de pietate but not de necessitate fidei as the Schoole-men vse to speake Neither was Heluidius condemned of Heresie for the deniall hereof but because pertinaciously hee vrged the deniall of it vpon misconstruction of scripture as if the deniall of it had beene a matter of faith Touching this Allegation of our Aduersaries concerning Maries perpetuall Virginity wee must know that howsoeuer they pretend to hold it onely by tradition yet the Fathers that defend it against Heluidius endeauour to proue it by the Scripture Their instance of Childrens Baptisme is most apparantly against themselues for they confesse it may be proued by scripture Bellarmine proueth it by three reasons taken from the scripture The first is from the proportion betweene Baptisme and Circumcision the Circumcision of Children then and the Baptisme of them now This argument he saith as they propose it cannot be auoyded The second from these two places Iohn 3. Except a man be borne a new of water and of the spirit hee cannot enter into the kingdome of Heauen And that other Suffer little children to come vnto mee for vnto such belongeth the Kingdome of Heauen This Argument he sayth is strong effectuall and pregnant to proue the necessity of the Baptisme of Infants The third is taken from the Baptizing of whole families by the Apostles in which by all likelihood there were infants Surely in this point of traditions our aduersaries bewray their great folly inconstancie making it euident to the whole world they know not what they say Bellarmine sayth that many things touching the matter and forme of sacraments are holden by tradition as not being contained in scripture and yet in the particulars there is nothing defined in the Church of Rome touching these things which he indeauoureth not to proue by scripture Some alleage for proofe of tradition the consubstantiality of the sonne of God with the Father and the proceeding of the holy Ghost from them both Others constantly affirme that these things are proued by scripture Some of them say Pugatory is holden by tradition others thinke it may bee proued by scripture g Melchior Canus endeauouring to proue the necessity of traditions produceth sundry things as not written as inuocation of Saints worshipping of images the Priests consecrating and partaking in both parts of the sacrament That ordination and confirmation are to bee conferred and giuen but onely once which when hee hath alleaged hee dareth not say the scripture doth not deliuer them for feare of gainesaying the truth in some of them and his owne fellowes in other And therefore hee sayth These things perhaps the scripture hath not deliuered For Bellarmine thinketh the Scripture doeth strongly proue the Invocation and worship of Saints and Angels and who is so impudent to deny that the Ministers of the Church are bound by the commaundement of Christ contayned in the Scripture to consecrate and participate in both parts of the Sacrament That confirmation and ordination once conferred are not to be reiterated may be concluded out of the nature of them described vnto vs in the Scripture So that for matters of faith wee may conclude according to the judgement of the best and most learned of our adversaries themselues that there is nothing to be beleeued which is not either expressely contayned in Scripture or at least by necessary consequence from thence and other things evident in the light of nature or in the matter of fact to bee concluded That there were many speeches and diuine sayings of our
themselues to another not of falsehood but of superfluitie the first instance whereof that they giue is the sixt of Mathew where the Lords prayer in the vulgar Latine endeth with that petition deliuer vs from euill leauing out for thine is the Kingdome the power and the glory which they suppose to bee superfluously added in the Greeke But these men should know that though it were granted that these words were superfluous yet nothing is thereby derogated from the Greeke seeing some Greeke Copies and they very auncient omit them as Beza sheweth Their next instance is Rom. 11. where the vulgar Latine hath If of grace not of workes otherwise grace should be no more grace to which is added by way of Antithesis and opposition in the Greeke If of workes not of grace otherwise workes should be no more workes It will be very hard for our adversaries to proue that these latter words are superfluously added being found not onely in the most Greeke Copies but in the Syriacke translation But if it were granted yet there is one Greeke Copie of great antiquity that omitteth these words as well as the vulgar Latine The next instance is the sixt of Marke and the 11. Verily I say vnto you it shall be easier for Sodome and Gomorrha c. If it were granted that these wordes were superfluously added which yet there is no reason to doe seeing besides very many Greeke Copies the Syriacke translation hath them also yet would this make nothing for the improuing of the credite of the Greeke seeing as Beza professeth there are three Greeke Copies that omit them The like may bee said touching the next allegation of Mathew the 20 22 23. where these wordes and bee baptised with the baptisme that I am baptised with are supposed to bee superfluous for there are some Greeke Copies that omit them as well as the vulgar Thus hauing examined the seuerall allegations of our adversaries against the authoritie and credite of the Greeke Text of the New Testament wee see that they faile in them neither being able to convince it of falsehood nor superfluitie Wherefore to conclude this matter wee say with Hierome that the Latine editions are to be corrected by the Greeke that by the providence of GOD the verity of the Scriptures of the New Testament hath euer beene preserued in the originall That those faults and errours which are crept into some Copies may easily by the helpe of others be corrected and that there is no difference in matter of substance in so great variety of Copies as are found in the world If any man say the Greeke hath beene corrupted since the dayes of Hierome and that therefore though hee in his time thought the translations might bee corrected by the originals yet now wee may not take the same course we answere it may easily be proued that all those supposed corruptions which they now finde in the Greeke were found in it in Hieromes time For there are but two places to wit 1. Corinth 15. and 1. Iohn 4. 3. where all Greeke Copies haue otherwise then they say the truth is and these places were corrupted if there bee any errour in the present reading before Hieromes time Thus much touching the sufficiencie of the Scriptures and the editions wherein the authenticall veritie of the same is to bee sought CHAP. 30. Of the Power of the Church in making Lawes NOw it remaineth that wee come to the next part of our diuision touching the power of the Church in making lawes As the will of God willing and purposing the being of each thing is the first and highest cause of things so the same will of God determining what is fitte to bee what of what kinde in what sort each thing must bee that it may attaine and possesse the vttermost degree of perfection the orderly disposition of things requireth to bee communicated to it is the first and highest lawe to the whole world And as the will of God determining what is fitte defining what ought to bee and what must bee if the Creatures attaine their highest perfection is a generall lawe to all Creatures soe when he maketh knowne to creatures rationall and of an vnderstanding nature which haue power to doe or omitte thinges thus fitte to bee done that though hee leaue it in their power and freedome of choise to doe or omitte them yet they shall be tyed either to doe them or to loose the good they desire to enjoy incurre the euils they would avoyd It is more specially named a lawe of commandement precept or direction binding them vpon whom it is imposed to the performance of that it requireth The Precepts and Commandements of Almighty God are of two sorts for either they are such as in respect of the nature and condition of the things themselues are good and soe binde all men at all times or else they are positiue prescribing things variable according to the diuersities of times and the different condition of men liuing in them The former kinde of lawes God imposed vpon men in the day of their creation or redemption and restauration together with the very nature and being which hee gaue them the later prescribing things not naturally and perpetually good but good onely at some time to some men and to some purposes and vses to which they serue were not imposed at first together with the institution of nature or the restauration of the same by grace but are then imposed when the things they prescribe are iudged good and beneficiall Soe God prescribed before the comming of Christ his sonne those sacrifices and offerings which now hee regardeth not and hath now instituted those Sacraments Ceremonies and rites of Religion which before were not knowne in the world Thus wee see that the originall of all lawes is the will of God who as hee reserueth for himselfe the honor of being the supreame first and highest cause of all thinges and yet communicateth part of his Diuine power to subordinate and inferiour causes so though he alone be the great lawegiuer to euery creature yet hee communicateth part of his authority to such among the sonnes of men as he is pleased to make greater than others giuing them power to command and prescribe lawes vnto them Touching this matter thus generally deliuered there is noe difference betweene vs and our aduersaries For it is confessed on both sides that God who is the great lawgiuer to the whole world hath chosen out some from amongst the rest of the sonnes of men whom hee hath beene pleased to honour with his owne name to set vpon his owne seat and to make rulers and lawgiuers vnto his people but the question is within what bounds this power is contained and how farre the band of lawes made by such authority extendeth CHAP. 31. Of the boundes within which the power of the Church in making lawes is contayned and whether shee may make lawes concerning the worshippe of God TOuching
the first the question is vsually proposed whether the Rulers of Gods Church and people may make lawes concerning Gods worshippe and service For the clearing whereof Stapleton distinguisheth the things pertayning to the worshippe and service of God into three sorts The first such as are seales assurances and in their sort and kinde causes of grace as the sacrifices in old time and the sacraments now the second such as remooue the impediments of grace dispose to the receipt of it and worke other spirituall and supernaturall effectes though they giue not grace in so high degree as the first as the signing with the signe of the Crosse sprinkling with holy water and the like the third such as are vsed onely for order and comelinesse in the performance of the principall and essentiall duties of Gods worshippe and seruice These being the diuerse sorts of things pertayning to the worshippe and seruice of God the question and controuersie betweene vs and our aduersaries is onely touching thinges of the second ranke For they confesse the Church hath no power to institute things of the first sort and wee willingly grant vnto it a most ample power in things of the third sort Let vs first therefore lay downe their opinion and then examine the trueth or falshood of it Their opinion is that the Church hath power to institute Ceremonies and obseruations though not to iustifie and giue grace as doe the sacraments yet to cure diseases driue away deuils purge out veniall sinnes and to worke other the like spirituall and supernaturall effects and that not onely by way of impâ—…tration and by force of the prayers of the Church which hath prayed that they that vse such things may enjoy such happy benefites but ex opere operato by the very worke wrought the vse of these things applying the merits of Christ to the effecting of these inferiour effects as the Sacraments doe to the effects of Iustification and remission of sinnes The signe of the Crosse sayth Bellarmine driueth away Diuels three wayes first by the deuotion of them that vse it it being a kinde of invocation of his name that was crucified for the redemption of the world expressed not by words but by this signe Secondly by the impression of feare which the verie sight and apprehension of it worketh in the diuell as being the thing whereby Christ wrought his overthrow Thirdly ex opere operato in which sort Infidells vsing this signe haue wrought these effects The Rhemists vpon 1. Tim 4. 5. Euery Creature is good c. haue these obseruations First that euery creature is by nature and condition of creation good Secondly that Sathan vniustly vsurpeth vpon these creatures in by them seeking to hurt the bodies and soules of men Thirdly that by prayer and inuocation of Gods name notwithstanding the curse vpon all creatures Sathans readinesse to doe vs harme they are good and comfortable to vs so that in them wee taste the sweetenesse of Diuine goodnesse Fourthly that the blessings of Gods Church and her Ministers doe not onely stay and hinder Sathans working remoue the curse and make the creatures serue for our good accordingly as at the first they were appointed but apply them also to so sacred vses as to be instruments of remission of sinnes iustification and infusion of grace as appeareth in the sacraments instituted by Christ Fiftly that besides and out of the vse of Sacraments the prayers and blessings of the Church doe sanctifie diuers creatures to the working of spirituall and supernaturall effects as to expell Diuells cure diseases and remitte veniall sinnes and that not only as sanctified things are wont to doe in that they stirre vp and increase devotion and the fervour of piety but in that the Ministers of the Church by their soueraigne authority haue annexed to the vse of them power to worke such effects This last proposition containeth the whole matter of difference betweene them and vs for touching all the former wee consent and agree with them For clearing of this point wee lay downe these propositions First that by ordinary prayers the Creatures of God are sanctified to ordinary vses Secondly that the presenting them or some part of them in holy places and to holy persons to be blessed of them maketh the vse of them more comfortable then the former blessing but addeth no supernaturall force efficacie or grace vnto them Thirdly that Christ appointed and the Church daylie sanctifieth the Creatures of God and elements of this world to bee the matter of his Sacraments Fourthly that bread being appointed to bee the matter of the Sacrament of the body of Christ and water of Baptisme the Christians in ancient time held that bread which had beene offered and presented at the Lords Table out of which a part was consecrated for the vse of the Sacrament more holy then other bread And this is that bread Augustine saith was giuen to the Catechumens as also they religiously kept of that water which had beene hallowed for the vse of Baptisme and by the vse of it strengthened their assurance of enjoying the benefites which are bestowed on men in Baptisme Neither can our adversaries clearely proue any separate sanctifying of water to haue beene vsed in the Primitiue Church If they could it were nothing else but the bringing of some part of this element into holy places with humble desire that they which in memory of Baptisme should vse it and so have their faith strengthened might more and more receiue the effects of sauing grace as the Christians of Russia and Aethiopia vnto this day on the Epiphany on which day they remember the Baptisme of Christ goe into the water praying vnto God that the effects of the Sacrament of Baptisme may more more be seene and appeare in them Fiftly that the Church consecrateth sundry outward things to the vse of Gods seruice not giuing them any new quality force or efficacie but onely praying that God will bee pleased to accept that which is done in or with them and to worke in vs that the vse of them importeth Sixtly holy men hauing the gift of miracles did vse sometimes water sometimes oyle sometimes other things and gaue them to bee vsed by other for the working of miraculous effects after the example of Elizeus and Christ himselfe of which sort is that of Ioseph mentioned by Epiphanius who filling a vessell with water signing it with the signe of the Crosse and casting it into a certaine fire caused it to burne though Sathan hindered it before that it could not burne as likewise that of Hilarion who gaue a kind of hallowed oyle to certaine who by vsing it were cured of their diseases But the consecrating of oyle salt water and the like things by men not hauing the gift of miracles to driue away deuils cure diseases remit veniall sinnes and worke other spirituall and supernaturall effects ex opere operato by application of the
gratiâ infinita increata That is Christ merited for all sufficiently on his part in that grace was found in him not as in a particular man but as in the Head of the whole Church for which cause the fruit of his passion might redound to all the members of the same Church and because as Damascene sayth by reason of the vnion of the natures of God and Man in his Person he doth the workes of a man in a more excellent sort then any meere man can do the benefite and force of his working and operation extended to the whole nature of Man which the action of a meere man cannot do The reason of which difference is not to be attributed to any habituall created grace but to that which is increate for that the finite grace that is in Christ that is his vertue and worke of vertue is availeable for the good of many it is from his infinite and increate Grace CHAP. 21. Of the benefits which wee receiue from Christ. HAuing spoken of the Satisfaction and Merit of Christ it remaineth that we speake of the benefites which we receiue from him which are all most fully expressed by the name of redemption which is the freeing of vs from that miserable bondage and captiuity wherein we were formerly holden by reason of Adams sin This bondage was twofold first in respect of sin and secondly in respect of punishment In respect of sinne we were bondmen to Sathan whose will we did according to that of the Apostle His seruants ye are to whom ye obey In respect of punishment we were become bondmen to Almighty God the righteous Iudge of the world who vseth Sathan as an instrument of his wrath and an Executioner of his dreadfull Iudgments against such as do offend him and prouoke him to wrath These being the kinds of captivity and bondage wherein we were holden it will not be hard to see how we are freed and redeemed from the same There is no redemption as the Diuines do note but either by exchange of prisoners by force and strong hand or by paying of a price Redemption by exchange of prisoners is then when wee set free those whom we hold as captiues taken from our Enemies that they may make free such as they hold of ours and this kind of redemption hath no place in the deliuerance of sinnefull men from sinne and misery but their deliuerance is onely wrought by strong hand and paying of a price For Christ redeemed vs from the bondage of sinne in that by the force and working of his grace making vs dislike it hate it repent of it and leaue it he violently tooke vs out of Sathans hands who tyrannically and vnjustly had taken possession of vs but from the bondage of punishment in respect whereof we were become Bondmen to Almighty God hee redeemed vs not by force and strong hand but by paying a price satisfying his justice and suffering what our sinnes had deserued that so being pacified towards vs he migh cease to punishvs and discharge Sathan who was but the Executioner of his wrath from afflicting vs any longer In this sort do wee conceiue of the worke of our redemption wrought for vs by Christ and therefore it is absurdly and vntruely sayd by Matthew Kellison in his late published Suruey of the supposed new religion that we make Christ an absurd Redeemer for we speake no otherwise of Christ the Redeemer then we haue learned in the Church and House of God But for the satisfaction of the Reader let vs see how he goeth about to conuince vs of such absurdity as hee chargeth vs with The Protestants sayth he do teach thē which nothing can be more absurd that Christs passion was our Iustice Merit Satisfactiō that there is no Iustice but Christs no good workes but his workes no merit but his merite no satisfaction but his satisfaction that there is noe justice or sanctitie inherent in man nor none necessary that no Lawes can bind vs because Christs death was the ransome that freed us from all Lawes Diuine Humane that no sinnes nor euil workes can hurt vs because Christs Iustice being ours no sinnes can make vs sinners that no Hell or Iudgment remaineth for vs whatsoeuer wee doe because Christs Iustice being ours sins can neither be imputed to vs in this life nor punished in the next and that herein consisteth Christian liberty A more shamelesse slanderer and trifling smatterer I thinke was neuer heard of For some of these assertions are vndoubted truths against which no man may oppose himselfe vnlesse he will be branded with the marke of impiety and blasphemy as that Christs passion is our justice merite and satisfaction that there is no merite properly soe named but Christs merite no propitiatory and expiatory satisfaction but Christs satisfaction and the other are nothing else but shamelesse and hellish slaunders and meere deuices and fancies of his idle braine without all ground of truth as that there is no justice nor sanctity inherent in Man nor none necessary that good workes are not necessary that noe lawes canne binde vs that noe sinnes nor euill workes canne hurt vs and that no hell nor judgment remaineth for vs whatsoeuer wee doe For we most constantly affirme and teach that there is both justice and sanctity inherent in Man though not so perfect as that hee may safely trust vnto it desire to bee judged according to the perfection of it in the day of Tryall Likewise wee teach that good workes are in such sort necessary to saluation that without Holinesse a desire at the least to performe the workes of sanctification no man shall euer see God Neither doe we say that no Lawes can binde vs as he slaunderously misreporteth vs but wee constantly teach that not to doe the things contained prescribed in the Law of God is damnable damning sinne if God vpon our repentance forgiue it not And therefore Bellarmine though hee wrongeth vs in like sort as Kellison doth yet in the end like an honest man he confesseth ingenuously that he doth wrong vs and sheweth at large that Luther in his booke de votis Monasticis defineth the liberty of a Christian to consist not in being freed from the duty of doing the things prescribed in the Law of God as if at his pleasure he might doe them or leaue them vndone but in that there are no works forbidden in the Law that may stand with Faith so euill that they can condemne vs nor none there prescribed performed by vs so good as to cleare defend justifie vs So making vs free non ab operibus faciendis sed defendentibus accusantibus that is not from the necessitie of doing the things that are commaunded as good but from seeking justification in workes or fearing condemnation for such euil workes as wee consent not fully vnto but dislike resist against and seeke remission of Whereunto Caluin agreeth teaching that Christian
and tying them to the performance of certaine duties Secondly of sinnes Thirdly of punishments to be inflicted by Almighty God and Fourthly of punishments to be inflicted by men The bond of Lawes is of two sorts For there are diuine lawes and there are humane Lawes God bindeth men to the doing of what hee pleaseth and Men that are in authority either Ciuill or Ecclesiasticall to such things as they thinke fit Touching these bonds none haue power to loose but they that haue power to binde so that what God by precept bindeth vs to doe none but God can free vs from the necessity duty of doing it and what the Church or Magistrate binde vs to no inferiour power can loose vs or free vs from Loosing in this sense opposed to binding by law and precept is in two sorts By Reuocation and by Dispensation Reuocation is an absolute Abrogation of a Law in respect of all places times persons and conditions and that either by expresse and direct Repeale or by generall neglect and long continued disuse Dispensation is in respect of certaine persons times places and conditions of Men thinges so that a dispensation permitting the Law to retaine her wonted authority onely freeth some particular person or persons at some times in some places and in some condition of thinges from the necessity of doing or leauing vndone that which vnlesse it be in consideration of such particular circumstances the Law-giuer meant should be obserued but in such cases not so Heere the question is moued by occasion of that kinde of loosing which is by reuersing Lawes formerly in force whether God the giuer of the morall Law may revoke the same and dispense with men for the not doing of things there prescribed of the doing of things there forbidden The answere is that these Lawes are imposed vpon men by the very condition of their nature and creation as the very condition and nature of a man created by GOD requireth that he should honour loue feare and reuerence him that made him and therefore touching the precepts of the first Table that concerning the Sabaoth excepted it is cleare and euident that they cannot be altered nor Man by God himselfe discharged from the duty of honouring loving and fearing God so long as he hath any beeing Touching the precepts of the second Table it is resolued that GOD cannot dispense with man or giue him leaue to doe the thinges therein forbidden as to steale murther or lie For all these imply and involue in them that which is simply euill and to bee disliked but by some alteration in the doer or matter of action he may make that not to bee euill that otherwise would bee euill and consequently not forbidden as namely that to bee no theft or murther which otherwise would be as when hee commanded the Israelites to spoyle the Aegyptians they did not commit the act of robbery for robbery is the taking away of a thing from the owner against his will but these thinges which the Israelites tooke away were the Aegyptians no longer after God the supreme Lord had spoyled them of the title they had therevnto and assigned the same to the Israelites So likewise for one man to take away the life of another hauing no authority so to doe is murther and no man can be dispensed with lawfully to doe any such act but for a Magistrate to take away the life of an offender is a lawfull act and no act of murther and so if Abraham had slaine his sonne Isaac it had not beene murther being authorized so to doe by God who hath supreme authority in the world and may justly as a Iudge for sinne found in men take away the liues of whom he pleaseth and as supreme and absolute Lord bring all to nothing that for his wills sake he made of nothing though there were no sinne nor fault at all But touching Ceremoniall Iudiciall and Positiue Lawes of God concerning Sacraments and obseruations of what kinde soeuer seeing they are imposed after vpon the being of nature wee thinke that God may alter them at his pleasure so that at one time it may bee lawfull to doe that was forbidden at another The Gouernours that God hath set ouer his Church and people by commission from him may interprete what is doubtfull in these Lawes of God or in those of the other sort but yet according to the Law but they may not abrogate or dispense with any Law of God either naturall and morall or positiue established concerning the vse of Sacraments and things pertaining to Gods worship and seruice But concerning those Lawes that were made by the Apostles and Primitiue Fathers touching matters of outward obseruation the succeeding Guides of the Church may either dispense with them or reverse them vpon the due consideration of the difference of times Men and things And so wee see to whom it pertaineth to binde men with their lawes and to loose them from the bonds thereof The bond of sin which is the second kinde of those bonds I mentioned is two-fold for there is Vinculum captivitatis and Vinculum servitutis that is a man that is a sinner is so bound that hee can neither returne to doe good nor leaue off to doe euill for sinne holdeth him in a bond of captivitie that hee shall not returne to doe good and with a bond of seruitude that he shall not cease to doe euill And though God hath so ordered the nature of Man that hee who will doe euill shall thus bee entangled yet it is man that thus entangleth wrappeth and bindeth himselfe and not God But for the bond of eternall condemnation and the punishments following euill doers which is the third kinde of those bonds wherewith I shewed that men are tyed and bound it is of GOD. From these bonds of sin and punishment inflicted by GOD none but hee alone can free men by his fauour and the worke of his grace as the supreme and highest cause none but Christ by Merite Satisfaction The Ministers of the Church by the Ministery of the Word and Sacraments may convert Men to God instrumentally making them partakers of his graces bringing thē into such an estate wherein they shall be sure for Christs sake to finde mercie with GOD for the remission taking away of their sinnes They may pray for them and out of the knowledge of their estate assure them of remission But other power to vnloose and vntie these direfull horrible bonds of sinne and punishment they haue none only the punishments which they haue power to inflict they haue authoritie to diminish lessen or take away so that whom they bind with the bonds of Ecclesiasticall censures punishments those by the same authoritie they may vnloose For as the Guides of Gods Church may prescribe enjoyne and impose certaine actions of Mortification and penitentiall conversion vnto GOD so when they see cause they may release from the same as by
excommunication they may restraine from vse of Sacraments societie of Beleeuers and benefite of the Churches praiers so by Absolution they may free from all these bonds againe Neither is this kinde of binding and loosing lightly to bee esteemed of or little regarded for he that for his contempt and disobedience is debarred from the vfe of the Sacraments from enjoying the societie of the beleeuers and partaking in the benefite of the Churches prayers is vndoubtedly excluded from all accesse to the Throne of grace in Heauen all acceptation there so consequently no lesse bound in Heauen then in Earth and he that is vnloosed from these bonds on Earth is vnloosed and set free in Heauen that without all restraint he may goe boldly to the Throne of Grace to seeke helpe in the time of neede Thus wee see the diuerse kindes of binding and loosing that the Guides of Gods Church haue power and authority by Lawes and precepts censures and punishments to binde those that are committed to their care and trust and when they see cause by reuersing such Lawes and precepts wholly or in part and by diminishing releasing taking away such censures and punishments to vnty them and set them free againe The bond of Diuine Lawes they may no otherwise meddle with then by letting them know who are so bound how straightly they are tyed The bonds of sinne and punishments by Diuine Iustice to be inflicted they haue no power and authoritie to vnloose but they concurre as helpers to the vnloosing of them by the Ministery of the Word vvinning and persvvading men to convert vnto God to cast their sinnes from them and by the Sacraments instrumentally communicating vnto them the grace of repentant conversion and the assurance of remission and pardon In all these kindes of binding and loosing the Apostles were equall seeing our Aduersaries themselues confessing they had the same power of Order and jurisdiction in like extent within the compasse whereof all these kinds of binding and loosing are confined Wherefore let vs proceede to speake of the power of remitting and retaining sinnes giuen to the Apostles by Christ our Sauiour To remit sinne properly is nothing else but to resolue not to punish sinne and therefore hee onely may properly be sayd to remit sinne that hath power to punish it Now as sinne is committed against the prescript of God our Conscience and Men in authority soe GOD the conscience of the Sinner and the Magistrate and Minister haue power to punish sinne GOD with punishments temporall and eternall of this life and that which is to come the Conscience with remorse the Magistrate with death banishment Confiscation of goods imprisonment and the like and the guides of the Church with suspension excommunication degradation and such other censures Hence it followeth that GOD onely is sayd properly to remitte the punishments that his justice doth inflict that the conscience onely vpon repentance canne take away that bitter and aflictiue punishment of remorse wherewith shee is wont to torment and disquiet the minde of the offendour and that the Magistrate and Minister onely haue power to take away those punishments that in their seuerall courses they may and doe inflict Notwithstanding the Minister by the Word perswading men to repentance procuring remission and out of his prudent obseruation of the parties conuersion vnto GOD assuring him that it will goe well vvith him as also by the Sacrament instrumentally communicating to him as well the grace of repentant conuersion as of free remission that soe hee may heare the very sound and voyce of GOD in mercy saying to the heart and spirit of the repentant Sinner I am thy Saluation may bee sayd in a sort to remitte sinne euen in that it is an offence against GOD not by way of authority and power but by winning and perswading the sinner to that conuersion which obtaineth remission from GOD and by the Sacrament instrumentally making him partaker as well of the grace of remission of sinne from GOD as of conuersion from sinne to GOD. There are but foure things in the hand of the Minister the Word Prayer Sacraments and Discipline By the word of Doctrine hee frameth winneth and perswadeth the sinner to repentant conuersion seeking and procuring remission from God By Prayer he seeketh and obtaineth it for the sinner By Sacraments he instrumentally maketh him partaker as well of the grace of remission as conuersion And by the power of Discipline he doth by way of authority punish euill doings and remit or diminish the punishments he inflicteth according as the condition of the party may seeme to require By that which hath beene sayd it appeareth that to bind and loose to remit to retaine sins are equiualent the same saue that to bind and loose is of more ample large extent in that it implyeth in it the binding by precepts lawes the loosing which is by reversing or dispensing with the same And therefore hauing shewed that the Apostles were equall in the power ofbinding and loosing we need ad no farther proofe that they were equall in power of remitting retaining sins Wherefore let vs proceede to the promise of Christ made to Peter that vpon the Rocke mentioned by him he would build his Church and let vs see whether any peculiar thing were promised vnto Peter in that behalfe The Church of God we know is compared in Scripture to a City an House and a Temple and therefore the beginning proceeding and increasing of the same is rightly compared to building Now in building there must be a foundation vpon which all may rest and stay that is put into the same building and the foundation must be sure firme immoueable for otherwise it wall faile and so alll other parts of the building wanting their stay will fall to the ground Now nothing is so firme sure and immoueable as a Rocke and consequently no building so strōg as that which is raised vpon a rockie foundation wherevpon our Sauiour sheweth that a House builded on the sand is easily ruinated soone shaken to pieces but that an House builded vpon a rocke standeth firme notwithstanding the furie and violence of the flouds winds and tempests and compareth a Man rightly grounded and established in his perswasion and resolution to an house so built By a Rocke therefore in this place is meant a sure foundation that will not faile nor be moued or shaken how great a weight soeuer be laid vpon it In a foundation there are three things required The first is that it bee the first thing in the building the second that it beare vp all the other parts of the building the third that it be firme and immoueable For as Christ saith If the eye that is the light of the bodie be darknesse how great is that Darknesse So if that which is to support and beare vp all doe faile shrinke all must needs be shaken and fall a
left certaine direction for farre lesser things then these mens gouernment is supposed to be That the gouernment of these supposed Lay-elders is not bounded in the Scripture or Fathers it is most euident neither can any man liuing shew vs any such bounding of the same in either of them The gouernment of the Church is in respect of two sorts of men the Cleargie and the Laytie Touching the former they are to be tryed and approued for their life and learning they are to be ordained with solemne imposition of hands and if they deserue it they are to be suspended from the execution of their office or vtterly depriued and degraded Shall Lay-elders haue as much to doe in all these actions as they to whom the Ministerie of the Word and Sacraments is committed are they competent Iudges of mens learning and aptnesse to teach that neither are Teachers nor learned Can they giue the sacred power of holy ministery to others that haue it not themselues Or is it not a certaine Axiome on the contrary side that the lesser is blessed of the greater Surely they that in England sought to bring in the gouernment of the Church by Lay-elders were of opinion that they ought to haue interest in all these things as well as the Pastours of the Church And indeede admit them to the gouernment of the Church by force of certain doubtfull words of Scripture mentioning gouernment without any distinction or limitation and there is no reason to straighten them but that they should haue their sway in all parts of it But they of Geneva France and other parts exclude these Elders from intermedling in ordination and leaue the power to trye examine approue and ordaine to the Pastours onely Likewise as I thinke they referre the deciding of doubts in matters of Faith and Religion to the Pastours onely and not to the suffrages of Lay-men by multitude of voyces ouer-ruling them Touching the other sort of them of whom the Church consisteth which are Lay-men who are to bee admonished corrected put from the Sacraments yea from the communion of the Church for impiety disobedience and wickednesse and vpon repentance and submission to bee receiued againe doth not the ordering of these men in this sort come within the compasse of the power of the Keyes and of binding and loosing Did Christ leaue these to his Apostles as speciall fauours and are they now transferred from their Successours the Bishops and Pastours of the Church to Lay-men that haue neither part nor fellowship in the worke of the Ministerie Hath GOD committed the dispensation of his Sacraments to the Pastours of the Church Is it on the perill of their soules that they duely giue them or with-holde them as cause shall require And shall there bee in others that are not trusted with them as great a power to direct the vse of this Ministeriall authoritie as in them nay greater the other being more in number and their voyces more to carry any thing that shall bee brought into deliberation Besides all this which hath beene saide there are many more doubts touching the authoritie of these men wherein I feare there wil be none found amongst the friends and fauourers of these Lay-elders that will be able to giue vs any satisfaction For first I would gladly know whether these ruling Elders must bee in euery Congregation with power of ordination and deprivation suspension excommunication and absolution or whether this power bee onely in the Ministers and Elders of diuerse Churches concurring Surely in Geneva there are Elders in the Congregations that are abroad in agro that is in the Country but these haue no power of excommunication much lesse of ordination or deprivation They may onely complaine to the Consistorie of the Cittie Nay they that are in the Congregations within the Cittie haue no separate power with their owne Ministers but a joynt proceeding with the rest of the Ministers and Elders of the other Churches and Congregations all which concurring make but one Consistorie Secondly let them tell vs whether these offices be perpetuall as the offices of Bishops and Pastours or annuall and but for a certaine time But to leaue them in these vncertainties the fourth reason that moueth vs to reject the conceipt of these Lay-elders is because the founders of this new gouernment fetch the patterne of it from the Sanedrim of the Iewes the platforme whereof they suppose Christ meant to bring into his Church when hee said Tell the Church Whereas it is most cleare that that Court was as a ciuill court and had power to banish to imprison yea and to take away life till by the Romanes the Iewes were restrained which made them say in the case of Christ that it was not lawfull for them to put any man to death Our fift and last reason is for that all Fathers and Councels mentioning elders or Presbyters place them betweene Bishops and Deacons and make them to bee Cleargy-men and that in the Acts where the Apostles are said to haue constituted Elders in euery Church Pastours and Ministers are meant and not Lay-men is strongly confirmed by that in the twentieth of Acts where the Elders of the Church of Ephesus conuented before Paul are commanded to feede the flock of Christ ouer which they were appointed ouerseers whence it followeth ineuitably that they were pastours The places of Scripture brought to proue this kinde of gouernment by Lay-elders are specially three The first is that to Timothie Let the Elders that rule well bee esteemed worthy of double honour especially they that labour in the word and doctrine The second is that in the Epistle to the Romanes He that ruleth let him doe it with diligence The third is that to the Corinthians where Gouernours or Gouernments are mentioned The two later allegations are too too weake to proue the thing in question For will any man that knoweth what it is to reason reason à genere ad speciem affirmatiuè that is from the generall to the particular and speciall affirmatiuely Or will euer any man of common sense bee perswaded that this consequence is good There were gouernours in the Primitiue Church mentioned by the Apostles and required by them to rule with diligence therefore they were Lay-gouernours Surely I thinke not Wherefore let vs see if the first place alledged by them yeelde any better proofe Touching this place some interprete it in this sort The Guides of the Church are worthy of double honour both in respect of gouerning and teaching but specially for their paines in teaching so noting two parts or duties of Presbyteriall offices not two sorts of Presbyters Some in this sort Amongst the Elders and Guides of Gods Church and people some laboured principally in gouerning and ministring the Sacraments some in preaching and teaching So Paul sheweth that hee preached and laboured more then all the Apostles but baptized few or none leauing that to bee performed by others
and when Paul and Barnabas were companions and their trauels were equall yet Paul is noted to haue beene the chiefe speaker so that though both were worthy of double honour yet Paul especially Some interprete the words in this sort There were some that remained in some certaine places for the guiding and gouerning of such as were already wonne by the preaching of the Gospell other that travayled with great labour and paines from place to place to spread the knowledge of God into all parts and to preach Christ crucified to such as had neuer heard of him before Both these were worthy of double honour but the later that builded not vpon another mans foundation more especially then the former that did but keepe that which others had gotten and governe those that others had gained Thus wee see that these words may haue a very good and true sense without pressing of them to confirme the late conceipt of some few men touching Lay-elders Which construction wee haue no reason to admitte seeing the circumstances of the place doe not enforce it nor no Ecclesiasticall writer did euer so interprete the words before our age So that to conclude this point the name of Presbyter one place onely in the first of Timothy and the fifth excepted where it is a name of age and not of office in the writings of the Apostles doth euer note out vnto vs a Minister of the Word and Sacraments The reason why the Apostles chose this word rather then the name of Sacerdos which wee commonly translate Priest though the English word Priest come of Presbyter was lest there should be a confusion of the Ministers of the old Testament who were to offer sacrifices vnto God figuring the comming of Christ with those of the new and to shew that none should be appointed Ministers but men of ripe age and confirmed judgment But some man will say the auncient Writers mention Seniours without whose advice nothing was done an Ecclesiasticall Senate and a Presbytery or company of Presbyters which gouerned the Church together with the Bishop therefore the matter is not so cleare against Lay-elders as some would make it Wee deny not but that there were Presbyters in the primitiue Church constituted and ordained by the Apostles and their Successours not onely to preach and minister Sacraments but to gouerne direct and guide the people of God also but that they were Lay-men it cannot bee proued The Bishops in the greater Churches and in the Citties had a great number of Clergy-men seruing in diuers sorts as it appeareth by Cyprian and the whole Ecclesiasticall history but out of the whole Clergie at large the Presbytery or company of Presbyters was called forth to the weightiest deliberations and to assist the Bishop for the preseruation of discipline Admonitos nos instructos sciatis dignatione diuinâ sayth Cyprian vt Numidicus Presbyter ascribatur Presbyterorum Carthaginensium numero nobiscum sedeat in Clero that is Know yee that we haue beene admonished and directed by God himselfe to choose Numidicus and to make him one of the company of the Presbyters of Carthage that he may sit together with vs as a Clergy-man by which words it appeareth that there was in Cyprians time a Colledge of Presbyters or Elders in the Church of Carthage which sate together with the Bishop for the hearing and determining of the causes of the Church but that these Elders were Clergie-men and not such Lay-seniours as some would haue Cornelius Bishop of Rome writing to Cyprian se totum Presbyterium contraxisse that is that hee drew together the whole Presbytery or companie of Presbyters for the reconciling of certaine Schismatiques to the Church and that hee called together fiue Bishops also and by common consent ended the whole matter Of this Senate and company of Presbyters Tertullian speaketh in his Apologie when he sayth with vs the most approued Seniours do sit as praesidents to censure offendours and to exercise discipline And of these likewise is it that Hierome sayth writing vpon Esay We also in the Church haue our Senate the company of Presbyters And vpon Titus The Churches were gouerned by the common aduice and councell of the Presbyters For to put it out of doubt that he meaneth not Lay-elders hee sayth in the same place Idem est ergo Presbyter qui Episcopus that is Therefore a Presbyter and Bishop are all one There is onely one place in Ambrose that hath some shew of proofe for Lay-elders His words are The Iewish Synogogue and after the Church had Seniours or Elders without whose councell nothing was done in the Church which by what negligence it grew out I know not vnlesse it were by the sloth or pride of the Teachers whilest they alone would seeme to be something Here is mention of Elders without whose aduice nothing was done but it is not sayd they were Lay-men But some man perhaps will reply that the Elders which Ambrose speaketh of ceased before his time which cannot be vnderstood of Clergie-men therefore they were Lay-men To this we say that Ambrose doth not say the elders without whose councell nothing was to be done ceased before his time and were no more but that the aduising and consulting with them ceased whilest some would doe all themselues If it be sayd that they who thus assumed more then was fitte and excluded those Seniours without whose councell anciently nothing was done are not said to haue bin Bishops but Doctours and that therefore Ambrose speaketh not of Bishops excluding other Ministers of the Word and Sacraments from their consultations but of Clergie-men refusing the aduice of Lay Seniours we answere that Ambrose by the name of Teachers whose sloath or pride hee condemneth in this place might fitly vnderstand the Bishops seeing none but bishops haue power to preach in their owne right and other but only by permission from them Hereupon it is that Possidonius in the life of Augustine saith that Valerius Bishop of Hippo gaue S. Augustine his Presbyter leaue to preach because being a Grecian hee could not very well expresse himselfe in Latine In the Councell of Vase leaue is giuen by the Councell of Bishops to Presbyters for to preach But because this question touching Lay-elders is excellently handled by sundry of our Diuines I will not trouble the Reader with any farther discourse of this matter CHAP. 27. Of the distinction of the Power of Order and Iurisdiction and the preheminence of one amongst the Presbyters of each Church who is named a Bishop CEasing to speake of supposed Lay-elders which the Church of God knoweth not let vs come to the other that were appointed to teach and gouerne the people of GOD. Where first wee are to speake of the diuerse degrees of honour and preheminence found amongst them Secondly of their calling and appointing to the same And thirdly of their maintenance For the clearing of the former of these three
leaders which they follow the Bees haue their King the Cranes fly after one in order like an Alphabet of letters there is but one Emperour one Iudge of a Prouince Rome newly built could not endure two brethren to bee Kings together and therefore was dedicated in parricide Esau Iacob were at warre in the wombe of Rebeccah euery Church hath her owne Bishop her owne Arch-presbyter her owne chiefe Deacon and all Ecclesiasticall order consisteth herein that some doe rule and direct the rest In a shippe there is but one that directeth the helme In a house or family there is but one master And to conclude in an armie if it be neuer so great yet the direction of one Generall is expected Thus then all confesse that there alwayes hath beene and must be in each Church a preëminence of one aboue the rest of the Presbyters of the same but some thinke this preëminence should be onely a priority of order in sitting before in propounding things to be thought of and in moderating the whole action of deliberation and that all things should be swayed by voyces the President or Bishop hauing no voyce negatiue or affirmatiue but as the maior part shall direct him Likewise this presidencie they thinke should bee but annuall or to end with the action about which they meete whether it be to determine a doubt to ordaine a Minister or to doe any other such like thing This new conceipt wee cannot approue of because wee finde no patterne of any such Bishop or President in all antiquity But the Fathers describe vnto vs such a Bishop as hath eminent and peerelesse power without whose consent the Presbyters canne doe nothing Hence haue heresies sprung and schismes arisen sayth Cyprian because one Priest in the Church is not acknowledged for the time to bee Iudge in Christs steed to whom if all the brethren would be subiect according to the diuine directions no man would after the diuine iudgements after the suffrages of the people after the consent of other Bishops make himselfe Iudge not of the Bishop but of God Let the Presbyter saith Ignatius doe nothing without the Bishop The Bishop saith Hierome must haue an eminent and peerelesse power or else there will be as many schismes in the Church as there are Priests And Tertullian sheweth that without the Bishops leaue and consent no Presbyter may baptize minister any Sacrament or doe any ministeriall act So that it is most cleare and euident that the Bishop in each Church is aboue and before the rest of the Presbyters of the same not in order onely but in degree also and power of Iurisdiction Yet on the other side we make not the power of Bishops to be Princely as Bellarmine doth but Fatherly so that as the Presbyters may doe nothing without the Bishop so he may doe nothing in matters of greatest moment and consequence without their presence and aduice Wherevpon the Councell of Carthage voideth all sentences of Bishops which the presence of their Clergie confirmeth not and euen vnto this day they haue no power to alienate lands and to doe some such like things without the concurrence and consent of the Presbyters of the Cathedrall and great Church It is therefore most false that Bellarmine hath that Presbyters haue no power of Iurisdiction and the proofe he bringeth of this his assertion most weake when he alledgeth that all Councels both generall and prouinciall wherein Iurisdiction is most properly exercised were celebrated and holden by Bishops as if Presbyters had had nothing to doe therein For it is most cleare and euident that in all prouinciall Synodes Presbyters did sit giue voyce and subscribe as well as Bishops And howsoeuer in generall councels none did giue voyce but Bishops alone yet those Bishops that were present bringing the resolution and consent of the prouinciall Synodes of those Churches from whence they came in which Synodes Presbyters had their voyces they had a kinde of consent to the decrees of generall Councells also and nothing was passed in them without their concurrence Thus were things moderated in the primitiue ages of the Church and though Bishops had power ouer Presbyters yet was it so limited that there was nothing bitter or grieuous in it nothing but that which was full of sweetnesse and content For if any difference grew betweene the Bishop and his Presbyters the Presbyters might not iudge their Bishop whom they were to acknowledge to be a Iudge in Christs stead but an appeale lay vnto a prouinciall Synode to which not onely the Bishops of the prouinces were to come but a certaine number of Presbyters also out of each Church to sit as Iudges of such differences Neither might the Bishop of himselfe alone depriue degrade or put from their office and dignity the Presbyters and Deacons of his Church but if there were any matter concerning a Presbyter he was to joyne vnto him fiue other Bishops of the prouince and if any matter concerning a Deacon two other Bishops before he might proceede to giue sentence against Presbyter or Deacon The causes of other inferiour Cleargie-men the Bishop might heare and determine himselfe alone without the concurrence and presence of other Bishops but not without the concurrence of his owne Cleargie without whose presence no sentence of the Bishop was of force but judged and pronounced voide by the canon Touching the preheminence of Bishops aboue Presbyters there is some difference among the Schoole-Diuines For the best learned amongst them are of opinion that Bishops are not greater then Presbyters in the power of consecration or order but only in the exercise of it and in the power of Iurisdiction seeing Presbyters may preach and minister the greatest of all Sacraments by vertue of their consecration and order as well as Bishops Touching the power of consecration or order saith Durandus it is much doubted of among Diuines whether any be greater therein then an ordinarie Presbyter For Hierome seemeth to haue beene of opinion that the highest power of consecration or order is the power of a Priest or elder so that euery Priest in respect of his priestly power may minister all Sacraments confirme the baptized giue all orders all blessings and consecrations but that for the avoiding of the perill of schisme it was ordained that one should be chosen who should bee named a Bishop to whom the rest should obey and to whom it was reserued to giue orders and to doe some such other things as none but Bishops doe And afterwards hee saith that Hierome is clearely of this opinion not making the distinction of Bishops from Presbyters a meere humane invention or a thing not necessary as Aerius did but thinking that amongst them who are equall in the power of order and equally enabled to doe any sacred act the Apostles for the avoyding of schisme and confusion and the preseruation of vnity peace and order ordained that in each Church
the Bishops vsed for the gouerning and ouer-seeing of certaine parts of their Diocese allotted to them with such limitations as they pleased for counsell aduise in managing of their weightiest affaires and the Arch-deacons which they vsed as spies in all places and trusted with the dispatch of what they thought fit they had for their direction in cases of doubt and for their ease in the multiplicitie of their employments certaine of their cleargie skilfull in the canons and Lawes of the Church whom they vsed as Officials to heare all manner of causes and matters of instance betweene party party but suffered them not to meddle in the censuring and punishing of criminall things or in any matter of office but in case of absence or sicknesse they had Vicars generall that might doe any thing almost that pertaineth to the Bishops Iurisdiction The former are not onely named Officials but Chauncellours though the name of Chauncellour bee not in this sense so auncient as the former Cancellarius originally and properly signifieth a Notarie or Secretarie because these for the preseruing of their writings and notes of remembrance were wont to sit and write Intra cancellos that is Within certaine places inclosing them made in the manner of Checquer-worke But from hence in time it came to be vsed for any one that is employed for the giuing of answere vnto sutors for keeping of Records and notes of remembrance and generally for the performance of some principall duties pertayning to him whose Chauncellour he is said to be CHAP. 30. Of the forme of the gouernment of the Church and the institution and authority of Metropolitanes and Patriarches THis being the forme of gouernment of each Diocese and particular Church let vs consider what dependance or subordination such particular Churches haue For it cannot nor may not be imagined that each Diocese or particular church is absolutely supreme and subiect to no higher authority The Papists are of opinion that Christ constituted and appointed one chiefe Pastour with vniuersality of power as his Vicegerent generall vpon earth placed him in the chiefe City of the world and set him ouer all the other both Bishops and Churches But the auncient Fathers are of another opinion For Hierome pronounceth that all Bishops are equall in order office and ministery whether of Rome Eugubium Tanais or Constantinople howsoeuer riches and magnificence of Churches and cities may make one seeme to be greater then another and Cyprian speaketh to the same purpose saying Let no Bishop make himselfe a Iudge of other euery one hauing receiued his authority from Christ and therefore being accountant to him onely And this he speaketh vpon occasion of a difference betweene him and the Romane Bishops of that time about rebaptization Wherefore let vs examine these contrary opinions and see which of them is most agreeable vnto truth and reason For the confirmation of the former of these two opinions the Romanists alledge many things to proue that the best forme of Regiment and gouernment is a Monarchie and consequently that Christ who vndoubtedly established the best forme appointed one supreme Monarch in his Church To this allegation Ockam most excellently and learnedly answereth in his Dialogues shewing and prouing at large that though the gouernment of one or a Monarchie be the best forme of Regiment in one citty or country as Aristotle rightly teacheth yet it is not the best forme of policie and gouernment in respect of the whole world and all the parts of it so farre distant remote one from another because the whole world and the infinite different countreyes and regions of it regularly may be better gouerned by many whereof no one is superiour to other then by one alone neither is the same forme of gouernment alwayes most expedient for the whole and for each part for greater circuits and for straighter or narrower bounds seeing one man may susteine the burthen of hearing determining and dispatching the greater causes more important matters in one kingdome or countrey but no one can so manage the weightiest businesses of the whole world And that in like sort though it be expedient that there should bee one Bishop ouer some part of the Church and people of God yet there is not the same reason that there should bee one ouer the whole seeing no one canne dispatch the greater businesses and manage the weightier affaires of the whole Christian world Besides he saith it would bee most dangerous that there should be any such one supreme ruler of the whole Church for that if he should fall into errour or heresie all the whole world would bee in great danger to bee seduced the members for the most part conforming themselues to their head and the inferiours to their rulers and superiours That which Ockam saith may be confirmed by the authority of Saint Augustine who thinketh a Monarchie or the gouernment of one supreme ruler most fit for the seuerall countries and parts of the world but not for the whole His words are Feliciores essentres humanae si omnia Regnaessent parua concordi vicinitate laetantia that is The state of worldly things would bee much more happy if the whole world were diuided out into small kingdomes joyfully conspiring together in a friendly neighbourhood then if all should be swayed by one supreme commander Thus then wee deny not but that amongst all the simple and single formes of government a Monatchie is the best for each country and people neither doth Caluine contradict vs herein as Bellarmine seemeth to report for hee doth not simply say that amongst all the simple formes of gouernment Aristocratie is best and to bee preferred but onely in the respect of often declinings and swaruings of absolute Kings hardly moderating themselues so in so free and absolute a liberty of commaunding all as that their wils should neuer swarue from that which is right and good But Bellarmine himselfe thinketh that the mixt formes of gouernment are to bee preferred before any of those simple formes of Monarchy Aristocratie and Democratie as having in them the best that is found in every of those single and simple formes And such is the gouernment of the Church of God Christ vndoubtedly establishing the best forme of gouernment in the same For the gouernment of each Diocese particular Church resteth principally in one who hath an eminent peerelesse power without whom nothing may be attempted or done yet are there others joyned with him as assistants without whose counsell aduice and consent he may doe nothing of moment and consequence whom hee cannot at his pleasure displace and remoue from their standings or depriue them of their honour or any way hardly censure them of himselfe alone but in the case of a Deacon hee must haue two other Bishops to concurre with him and in the case of a Presbyter fiue without which concurrence he may not proceed against
their faith and profession before they were receiued and allowed one of another and before tehy were accounted and reputed for lawfull Patriarches Wherefore presupposing that the gouernment of the Church is not Monarchicall in respect of any one supreame Pastour on earth but mixt and hauing seene how notwithstanding the diuersitie of many Pastours the Church may be preserued in peace and vnity let vs more exactly and distinctly consider what the auncient forme of Church policie and gouernment was If we looke into the monuments of Antiquity wee shall finde that there were aunciently three Subordinations in the Church For the actions of the Bishoppe of each particular Church of a citty and places adjoyning were subject to the censure and judgment of the rest of the Bishops of the same prouince amongst whom for order sake there was one chiefe to whom it pertained to call them together to sit as moderator in the midst of them being assembled and to execute what by joynt consent they resolued on The actions of the Bishoppes of a prouince and a prouinciall Synode consisting of those Bishoppes were subject to a Synode consisting of the Metropolitanes and other Bishoppes of diuerse prouinces This Synode was of two sorts For either it consisted of the Metropolitanes and Bishoppes of one kingdome and nation onely as did the Councels of Africa or of the Metropolitans and Bishoppes of many kingdomes If of the Metropolitanes and Bishoppes of one kingdome and state onely the chiefe Primate was mederator If of many one of the Patriarches and chiefe Bishops of the whole world euery Church being subordinate to some one of the Patriarchicall Churches and incorporate into the vnity of it Thirdly the actions of the Bishops of a whole kingdome and Patriarchship were subject to an Oecumenicall Synode consisting of all the Patriarches and the Metropolitanes and Bishops subject to them Touching prouinciall Councells to the censures whereof the actions of particular Churches are subject they were by the auncient Canons of the Church to be holden in euery prouince twice euery yeare It is very necessary say the Fathers of the Councell of Nice that there should be a Synode twice euery yeare in euery prouince that all the Bishops of the prouince meeting together may in common thinke vpon those thinges that are doubtfull and questionable For the dispatch of Ecclesiasticall businesses and the determining of matters in controuersie Wee thinke it were fit say the Fathers in the Councell of Antioche that in euery prouince Synodes of Bishops should be assembled twice euery yeare The first councell of Constantinople decreeth the same and the Fathers assembled in the Councell of Chalcedon complaine that in some prouinces the Synodes of Bishops are not holden and that thereby many Ecclesiasticall matters needing reformation are neglected and therefore they appoint that the Bishops of euery prouince shall assemble euery yeare twice at that place which the Bishoppe of the mother Citty shall thinke fit to amend all thinges that shall be found to bee amisse in the prouince Here we see the necessity of holding these Synodes and by whom they were to bee called and moderated Wherefore let vs now proceede to see of whom they consisted what causes they examined and determined what the power of the Metropolitane originally was and what in processe of time by positiue constitution vpon due and just considerations it grew to be Touching the persons that prouinciall Synodes consisted of it is cleare and euident that not onely Bishops but Presbyters also were present in these Assemblies and had decisiue voyces whereupon the Councell of Antisiodorum sayth Let all the Presbyters being called come to the Synode in the Citty The Councell of Tarracon Let letters bee sent by the Metropolitane to his brethren that they bring with them to the Synode not onely some of the Presbyters of the Cathedrall Church but also of each Diocese And the fourth Councell of Toledo describing the forme of celebrating prouinciall Synodes hath these words Let the Bishops assembled goe to the Church and sit according to the time of their ordination and after all the Bishops are entred and set let the Presbyters be called and the Bishops sitting in compasse let Presbyters sit behind them and the Deacons stand before them In the first Councell of Toledo we find these words Considentibus Presbyteris astantibus Diaconis caeteris qui intererant Concilio congregato Patronus Episcopus dixit c. that is The Presbyters sitting together with the Bishops the Deacons standing before them and the rest which were present in the Councell assembled Patronus the Bishop said c. The like we reade of a Synode holden by Gregory the Pope The words are these Gregorius Papa coram sacratissimo corpore Beati Petri Apostoli cum Episcopis omnibus Romanae Ecclesiae Presbyteris residens assistentibus Diaconis cuncto Clero dixit c. that is Gregory the Pope sitting before the most sacred body of blessed Peter with all the Bishops of the Romane Church and the Presbyters also the Deacons standing before them and all the Clergie said c. And that Presbyters were not only present in Provinciall Synodes but had decisiue voyces as well as Bishops it appeareth by their subscribing to the Decrees of such Synodes in the very same forme and manner that Bishops did So that it will be found most false and vntrue that Bellarmine hath that Presbyters haue no voyces in Synodes and the auncient forme of our Convocation here in England wherein not onely the Arch-bishops and Bishops but sundry Presbyters also as well out of Cathedrall Churches as Dioceses at large are present and haue decisiue voices will clearely refute the same The causes that were wont to be examined and determined in the meeting of the Bishops of the prouince were the ordinations of Bishops when any Churches were voyd and the depriving and reiecting of all such as were found vnworthy of their honour and place and in a word any complaint of wrong done in any Church was there to be heard Let the prouinciall Synodes be holden twice euery yeare saith the Councell of Antioch and let the Presbyters and Deacons bee present and as many as thinke they haue beene any way hurt or wronged there expect the determination of the Synode The power of the Metropolitane was in calling the rest of the Bishops to the Synode in appointing the place of their meeting and in sitting as President in the midst of them and so were things moderated that neither the rest might proceede to doe any thing without consulting him nor hee to doe any thing without them but was tyed in all matters of difference to follow the maior part and if hee neglected his dutie in convocating his brethren that so things might bee determined by common consent hee was by the Canons subiect to censure and punishment Thus at first all matters were to be heard determined and
Councell Therefore in the third place he addeth Ruffinus who in his preface before his translation of the recognitions of Clemens out of Greeke speaketh of an Epistle of Clement vnto Iames the brother of our Lord and sayth hee turned it out of Greeke into Latine and this sayth Bellarmime which we haue is vndoubtedly the same that he translated as may be proued out of Gennadius therefore the Epistle that is now carried about vnder the the name of Clemens is ancient and not late or counterfeit But that these Philistines may fall by their owne sword wee will oppose against Bellarmine the Cardinall Baronius the Cardinall against the Romane reader of controuersies the Romane Annalist For Baronius proueth out of Gennadius whom Bellarmine alleageth that these Epistles wee haue are not the same that Ruffinus translated because those hee translated had prefaces before them but this of Clement hath none Thus wee see the Epistles of the Popes of the first 300 yeares proue nothing because they are counterfeite Of them that were written by such as liued after the first 600 yeares I shall haue a fitte opportunity to speake in another place Wherefore let vs come to those of the middle ranke where Bellarmine produceth twelue auncient Bishoppes of Rome clayming that supreme absolute and commaunding authority ouer the whole Church which we deny The first of the twelue is Iulius the first in his Epistle extant in the second Apologie of Athanasius The witnesse is good and wee will not except against him but hee deposeth directly against them that produce him neither is there any better evidence to bee desired then this his Epistle For the Bishops of the East hauing written to Iulius and blamed him for communicating with such as they reiected going about to reuerse the acts which they had agreed on and hauing told him that the greatnesse of citties maketh not the power of Bishoppes to bee the greater and that therefore he should not takē on him to bee greater then other Bishops and to vndoe that which they had done because he was Bishop of a greater citty then any of them was hee answereth modestly in this his Epistle that hee hopeth hee offendeth not in desiring them to come to a Synode that therein their proceedings might bee examined seeing the Nicene Councell appointeth the acts of one Counecll to be reëxamined in another Secondly he sheweth that they whom they sent to informe him the Westerne Bishops touching their proceedings against Athanasius being conuicted by the Presbyters of Athanasius desired him to call a Councell of his owne Bishops and to write to Athanasius and those of Eusebius part to come vnto the same wherein they doubted not but they should proue the things they had alleaged Thirdly he sheweth that if without the sollicitation of their Agents he had desired them to meete in Councell it had beene no fault nor any way preiudiciall vnto them Fourthly that they who will not haue their proceedings reëxamined contemne Councels by admitting such as were condemned by the Nicene Councell that Athanasius was not condemned at Tyrus that he was not present when he was condemned at Mareotta and that many wrote in his defence to him the other Bishops of the West that yet he foreiudged nothing but would haue had matters defined in a Coūcel Fiftly he sheweth that though he wrote alone yet he reported not his own opinion only but of all the Bishops of Italy and the countries thereabout Lastly he telleth them that the Bishops they proceeded against being no vulgar persons but Bishops of such churches as the Apostles themselues planted before they had proceeded against them they should first haue written to him and his colleagues that from thence might haue beene defined what was right and good then which course what could be more fitting For Athanasius Bishop of the second See with other his adherents were not to be iudged by Bishops of an inferiour ranke especially in a matter concerning the faith without first consulting the Bishop of the first See his colleagues that from thence an action of such consequence might take beginning And therefore Iulius rightly telleth the Orientall Bishops that in their rash proceeding against so great worthy a Bishoppe as was Athanasius they had offended against the ordinations of Paul that the Fathers had not taught them so to doe and that he had receiued otherwise from blessed Peter Here is nothing found for any thing I see that any way proueth the Pope to haue a supreme commaunding power ouer the whole church but rather the contrary For hee doth nothing without the Synode of the Westerne Bishops Hee challengeth not the right of iudging the causes of the Orientall Bishops either by himselfe alone or with his Synode of Westerne Bishops much lesse deriueth the claime of any such right from Peter as the Iesuite vntruly misreporteth the matter but thinketh that the finall and supreme iudging of them pertaineth to a generall Councell The next allegation is out of an Epistle of Damasus wherein writing to the Bishops of the East he commendeth them that they gaue due reverence to the See Apostolique and calleth them sonnes To what purpose this allegation serueth I know not For if any man doe thinke it consequent that the Pope hath an vniversall commanding power ouer all because the Bishops of the East yeelded a kinde of due respect and reverence to the See Apostolique that is to the Bishop of Rome and his colleagues for that it was in order and honour the first See he is greatly deceiued and may bee confuted out of the Epistle of the Orientall Bishops in answere whereof Damasus writeth For they write vnto him not as to their Lord and Commaunder but as to their brother and colleague and direct not their letters to him onely but to him and the other Bishops of the West Their Epistle beginneth in this sort To their brethren and Colleagues Damasus Ambrose Britto Valerianus Acholius c. and the rest of the holy Bishops assembled in the great citie of Rome Where by the way we may obserue that howsoeuer Damasus call them sonnes as being Bishops of meaner places inferiour Sees yet they call him brother and colleague as being equall in office and power though inferiour in order and honour Besides this they refused to come to Rome though earnestly entreated by Damasus so to doe but stayed at Constantinople and there held a Councell wherein they condemned the heresies of the Eunomians Macedonians ordained sundry Bishops as the Bishops of Constantinople Antioche and Hierusalem Nectarius Flavianus and Cyrill they made the Bishop of Constantinople a Patriarch and set him in degree of honour next vnto the Bishop of Rome These ordinations of Nectarius and Flavianus especially Damasus liked not and yet was forced to giue way vnto them and to yeeld to the Bishops assembled at Constantinople being but an hundred and fiftie in number the name
in brotherly sort wished the Bishop of Antioch to resist heretiques and to let him vnderstand of the state of the Churches and to be a consort of the Apostolique See in this care to see that the priuiledges of the third See were not deminished by any mans ambition assuring him that whensoeuer he will do any thing for the aduancing of the dignity of the See of Antioch he also will be ready to concurre with him In all which passages betweene Leo and the Bishop of Antioch there is nothing found that hath any shew of proofe of the Popes supremacie Fourthly we say that Cyrill the Patriarch of Alexandria besought Leo to giue noe consent to the attempts of Iuuenall Bishop of Hierusalem seeking to prejudice the Church of Antioch to subject Palaestina to himselfe but that he besought Leo not to permit nor suffer Palaestina to be taken from Antioch and subjected to the Church of Hierusalem as if the whole power of permitting or hindring this thing had rested in Leo is but the false report of the Cardinall according to his wonted manner of misse-alleaging authors for the the aduantage of his cause So that the disposition of this matter rested not wholly in Leo but his concurrence with the Bishops of Antioch and Alexandria was necessary for the withstanding of the attempts of Iuuenall which his concurrence and helpe hee promised the Bishop of Antioch as we haue already heard and was euer ready to yeeld the same vnto him Fiftly we say that Leo did not command Dioscorus the Patriarch of Alexandria but whereas the manner was when the Patriarches were first elected ordained that they should mutually consent one to another and that hee who was newly ordained should send vnto the rest his Synodall letters and testimonies of his lawfull election and ordination Dioscorus being newly elected appointed Patriarch of Alexandria sendeth his Synodall letters to Leo Bishop of Rome that so he might giue his consent receiue embrace him as his fellow Patriarch Leo that these beginnings of Dioscorus might be more sure and firme nothing wanting to perfection fatherly as more ancient and brotherly as of the same ranke with him putting him in mind of some differences betweene their two Churches about the time of the ordination of Ministers and for that it seemed not likely vnto him that Marke the scholler of Peter tooke any other order in this behalfe then Peter did saith vnto him Wee will haue you to obserue that which our Fathers euer obserued making this a condition of the allowance consent he was to yeeld vnto him and vrging the practice of the Apostles sayth hee shall do well if obeying these Apostolicall institutions he shall cause that forme of ordination to be kept in the Churches ouer which God hath set him which is obserued in the Churches of the West that Ministers of the Church may be ordained onely on the Lords day on which day the creation of the world was begun in which Christ rose in which death was destroyed and life after which there is no death tooke beginning in which the Apostles receaued frō the Lord the trūpet of preaching the Gospel the ministration of the Sacrament of regeneration Sixtly we say that Leo intermedleth in the Churches of Africa and requireth some ordained contrary to the Canons to be put from their places tollerateth others and willeth the cause of Lupicinus a Bishop who had appealed vnto him to be heard there because he was Patriarch of the West and these parts of Africa were within his Patriarchship and that yet this his intermedling in so particular sort with the affaires of the Africane Churches was not very pleasing vnto those of Africa as shall appeare by that which followeth Lastly we say that the Church of Rome was the head of all Churches in the sence before expressed and had a presidence of order and honour amongst them and had in that sort as Leo truly saith more subject to it then euer were vnder the Romane Empire but vnder any absolute supreme commanding power of the Church of Rome they were not But saith Bellarmine if the former testimonies of Leo be auoided there is one more yet behind so cleare and full for the supremacie of the Pope that nothing can be sayd in answere vnto it in his Epistle to Anastasius Bishop of Thessalonica His words are these Amongst the most blessed Apostles like in honour there was a certaine difference and distinction of power and whereas they were equally chosen yet notwithstanding it was giuen to one of them to haue a preeminence amongst the rest from which forme the distinctiō and difference that is amongst Bishops hath taken beginning and by a most wise disposition it hath beene prouided that all without difference shall not challenge all vnto thēselues but that there should be in seuerall prouinces seuerall Bishops whose sentence judgment should be first and chiefe amongst the brethren and againe certaine other constituted and placed in greater cities who might take the care of more then the former by whom the care of the whole Church might flow vnto that one seate of Peter and nothing any where might dissent from the head These words truely make a goodly shew and may seeme most strongly to proue the supremacie that the Popes now challenge but in very deede they most powerfully ouerthrow it For the Bishops of Rome will neuer be perswaded in proportionable sort as is expressed in the words of Leo to challenge no more in respect of the whole Church then the Metropolitane Bishops doe in respect of their Provinces and the Patriarches in respect of their Churches of a larger extent For then they must doe nothing but accordingly as they shall bee swayed by the major part of the voyces of the Bishops of the Christian Church For the Metropolitane may doe nothing in his province nor the Patriarch in his larger extent but as they shall be directed swayed by the major part of the voices of their Bishops and yet surely the meaning of Leo was not to giue so much to the Bishop of Rome in respect of all Christian Bishops as pertaineth to the Metropolitanes and Patriarches in respect of their Bishops For the Metropolitane is to ordaine the Bishops of the Province and the Patriarch to ordaine and confirme the Metropolitanes by imposition of hands or mission of the Pall but the Pope neuer had any such power in respect of the Patriarches who were onely to send their Synodall Epistles to him testifying their faith as he likewise to them without expecting any other confirmation then that mutuall consent whereby one of them assured of the right faith and lawfull ordination of another receiued and embraced each other as fellowes and colleagues So that that care of the vniversall Church which Leo saith floweth together and commeth vp to that one chaire of Peter is to be vnderstood only in respect of things concerning the common faith
generall state of the Church or of the principall most eminent highest parts members of the same none of which things might bee proceeded in without the Bishop of Rome and his Colleagues but otherwise he was not to intermeddle with inferiour persons and causes within the Iurisdiction of other Patriarches neither immediatly nor vpon appeale and complaint The 7 t◠Roman Bishop brought to testifie for the absolute supreme power of Popes is Gelasius out of whom two things are alledged The first is that he saith the See of Peter hath power to loose that which the Bishops of other Churches haue bound The second that it hath power to judge of euery Church that no Church may judge of the judgment of it For answer to this testimony of Gelasius first we say that the Church of Rome may not meddle with reviewing re-examining or reversing the acts of other Churches proceeding against Lay-men or inferiour Cleargy-men Secondly that in the case of a Bishop complaining of wrong by the authority of the Councell of Sardica she might interpose her selfe not so as to bring the matter to Rome there to be heard but so farre forth onely as to commaund and appoint a review to be taken by the Bishops of the next bordering Province or at the most to send some Cōmissioners to sit with such second Iudges Thirdly that in cases which concerned the principall Patriarches whether they were differences between them their Bishops or between themselues the chiefe See as the principall part of the whole Church might interpose it self Neither was this proper to the See of Rome for other Patriarchs likewise of the higher thrones might interpose thēselues in matters concerning the Patriarchs of inferiour thrones whence it is that Basil writing to Athanasius Bishop of the second See telleth him that the ordering of the Church of Antioch which was the 3d See did pertain to him that he was to see to the setling of things there though the quieting of the whole East required the helpe of the Occidentall Bishops Cyril in the case of Nestorius not yet fully established in the right of a Patriarch intermedled proceeded so far as to reject him his adherents frō the cōmunion of the churches of Egypt Lybia Pentapolis But the B. of the inferior thrones might not judge the superior therfore Iohn of Antioch of the 3d See is reprehended reproued for judging Cyril Bishop of the 2d See Dioscorus Bishop of the 2d See is condemned in the councel of Chalcedon as for other things so for this amōg other that he presumed to judge the first See So that this is it which Gelasius saith that the See of Rome that is the Bishop of Rome and the Bishops of the West may iudge and examine the differences betweene Patriarches or between Patriarches and their Bishops but neither so peremptorily nor finally but that such iudgement may be reuiewed and reexamined in a generall Councell and that no other particular Church or See may iudge the Church of Rome seeing euery other See is inferiour to it no way denying but that a generall Councell may review reēxamine and reuerse the acts iudgements of the Romane See as being greater and of more ample authority Neither truely can there be any better proofe against the pretended supremacie of the Popes then this Epistle the circumstances whereof are these Acatius Bishop of Constantinople for communicating with certaine Eutichian Heretickes was by the See of Rome condemned some disliked his proceeding against him because a Synode was not specially summoned for the purpose especially seeing he was Bishop of the Princely citty Gelasius standeth not vpon the claime of vniuersall power thereby to iustifie his proceeding but aunswereth First that Eutiches being condemned in the Councell of Chalcedon all such were accursed likewise as should either by defence of such errour or communicating with men so erring fall into the fellowship of the same heresie and that therefore there needed no Synode but the See Apostolique might execute that was there decreed Secondly that the Catholicke Bishops in the East being deposed and Heretickes thrust into their places there was no reason why hee should haue consulted with them Thirdly that hee did nothing of himselfe but with a Synode of the Westerne Bishops The next foure Bishops produced by the Cardinall are Iohn the second Anastasius the second Felix the fourth and Pelagius the second out of whom hee alleageth nothing but this that the See of Peter holdeth the chiefty assigned of the Lord in the vniuersall Church and that the church of Rome is the head of all churches Wherevnto wee briefly answere that the See of Peter euer held the chiefty that the church of Rome was euer the head of all churches not in vniuersality of absolute supreme power commanding authority but in order honour in sort before expressed that by the See of Peter and church of Rome is meant the whole West church not precisely the Diocese of Rome as likewise we haue noted before and therefore these allegations to proue the Popes supremacie ouer all Bishops are nothing to the purpose The last of the twelue Bishops brought by Bellarmine is Gregorie the first out of whom foure things are alledged the first is that he required the Africanes to permit appeales to Rome from the Councell of Numidia and blamed the Bishops of Africa for that after letters written vnto them they had degraded Honoratus the Arch-deacon The second that he sent a Pall to the Bishop of Corinth The third that he saith Eusebius Bishop of Constantinople acknowledged the Church of Constantinople to be subiect to the See Apostolique The fourth that the Bishop of Constantinople professeth his subiection to the See Apostolique To these obiections we answer First that it is contrary to the resolution of the ancient Councels of Carthage Mileuis that the Bishop of Rome should admit appeales of inferiour Clergy-men out of Africa that therefore by some positiue constitution or later agreement Gregory might bee permitted to heare the complaints of an Arch-deacon appealing vnto him out of Africa yet from the beginning it was not so though some parts of Africa were euer within the compasse of the Patriarchship of Rome Secondly that he sent the Pall to the Bishop of Corinth because hee was within his Patriarchship all Patriarches being to confirme their Metropolitanes by imposition of hands or by sending the Pall. 3◠That there was no such Eusebius Bishop of Constantinople in Gregories time as is mentioned in the Epistle alledged and that they that were as Iohn Cyriacus stroue and contended with Gregory to be aboue him and to haue the first place in the Church that not without the help furtherance of the Emperour so that it may be doubted whether Gregory wrot this or not it being so contrary to that wee know to
as being against the Canons and yet tolde Chrysostome there was no helpe nor no meanes to releeue him but in a generall Councell which by all possible meanes he will labour to procure till which time hee must be content and referre all to God who taketh care of these things But with how ill successe hee sought to procure a generall Councell for the restoring of him to his place againe wee may finde in k Sozomene who reporteth that being desirous that Chrysostome might returne he sent with those Orientall Bishops that came to him to intreate his helpe and assistance fiue Bishops and two Presbyters to Honorius Arcadius to obtaine a Councell and to haue the time appointed who were so farre from prevailing and obtaining that they sought that they were sent away with disgrace as forreine and outlandish disturbers of the state of the Empire These are the principall and most materiall circumstances of the narration and report of the vniust deposition of Chrysostome his writing to the Bishop of Rome and the answer hee had from him and the other Bishops of the West which make most strongly against the pretended supremacie of Popes For Innocentius telleth Chrysostomes friends that it lyeth not in him to helpe him but in a generall Councell And though hee and the Bishops of the West pronounce the proceedings of Theophilus voide as against the Canons and do make them voyd as much as by their dissenting they can yet they confesse that the absolute voyding of them and the punishing of Theophilus was not in them but in a generall Councell But sayth Bellarmine Chrysostome in another Epistle giueth Innocentius thankes for his fatherly care and kindnesse intreateth that his enemies may not be excluded from the communion if by any meanes they may be reclaimed therefore it seemeth Chrysostome thought hee had an absolute supreame commanding power What it is in this Epistle that argueth that supreame power which Bellarmine dreameth of I cannot tell For I know no reason why Chrysostome now a deposed and distressed Bishop might not vse so respectiue a forme of speech to the Bishop of the first See and esteeme of him as a father without acknowledging him to haue any absolute supreame power ouer all And all the other circumstances and parts of the Epistle most clearely make against the Papacie For he sayth Innocentius had done what he could but that his enemies notwithstanding went still forward in their ill courses and for the auoyding of greater scandals distractions confusions desireth him not to reiect them from his communion considering the greatnesse of the worke for that this was the contention almost of all the world So that the Churches were brought vpon their knees the people dispersed the Cleargy vexed Bishops banished and the constitutions of the holy Fathers violated and broken The eighth Greeke Father is Cyril Bishop of Alexandria out of whom Bellarmine alleageth noe new thing but the very same which hee brought out of the Councell of Ephesus whereof he was president and therefore I will make no new answere here to this renued allegation but referre the Reader to the answere already made The ninth Greeke Father is Theodoret out of whom Bellarmine seeketh to confirme the Papacie for that though he were a Bishop of Asia and had vnder him eight hundred Churches yet he acknowledgeth the Bishop of Rome to be his supreme Iudge and in an Epistle written to Renatus a Presbyter of the Church of Rome sayth that that holy See hath the gouernment and direction of the Churches throughout the world For answere vnto this objection we must obserue that Theodoret being deposed banished and grieuously vexed for matters of faith seeketh to haue his cause reexamined and heard againe by the Bishop of Rome and the Bishops of the West which thing he obtained and was by Leo and the rest of the Bishops of the West judged Catholique receiued to their communion and as much as lay in them restored to his Bishopricke againe yet could he not repossesse his place till the Councell of Chalcedon put him into it which though it were informed by the deputies of Leo that hee had long before receiued him to his communion yet admited him not till he was reexamined and at the first many of the Fathers disliking his answeres as imperfect cryed out aloud that he was a Nestorian and desired that the Heretique might be cast out censuring him as Cyril and other Catholique Bishops had done before But when hee fully and peremptorily accursed Nestorius with all his adherents they all with one consenting voyce pronounced him worthy of his place and admitted him to sit in Councel with them Whereby it apeareth that howsoeuer the Westerne Bishops pronounced him Catholique receiued him to their communion and as much as in them lay restored him to his place yet of themselues they neither could nor did perfect that worke but were forced to leaue it to the generall Councell all which Leo himselfe in his Epistle to Theodoret acknowledgeth Adiutorium nostrum sayth he in nomine Domini qui fecit coelum terram qui nullum nos in nostris fratribus detrimentum sustinere permisit sed quae nostro prius ministerio definierat vniuersae fraternitatis irretractabili firmauit assensu vt verè à se prodijsse ostenderet quod priùs à prima omnium sede formatū totius Christiani orbis iudicium recepisset vt in hoc quoque Capiti membra concordent Nā ne aliarum sedium ad eam quam caeteris omnium Dominus statuit praesidere consensus assentatio uideretur inuenti priùs sunt qui de iudicijs nostris ambigerent that is Our helpe is in the name of the Lord who made both heauen and earth who suffered vs not to sustaine any losse in our brethren but confirmed established by the irreuocable assent of the whole brotherhood what things he had before defined by our ministery that he might clearly shew that thing vndoubtedly to haue proceeded frō himselfe which being formerly framed by the first See the iudgment of the whole Christian world received So that herein the head mēbers conspire together For lest the consenting of other Sees to that which the Lord of all appointed to be the first of all might seeme to bee but flattery there were some found that at first doubted of our iudgements whether they were right or not And he addeth that multum Sacerdotalis officij meritum splendescit vbi sic summorum servatur authoritas vt in nullo inferiorum putetur imminuta libertas that is that the excellent worthinesse of the Priestly office doth then most appeare in shining brightnesse when the authority of the highest is so retained that the liberty of the inferiour and lesser be thought in nothing to be diminished or empaired Thereby insinuating that hee and his Westerne Bishops did so goe before in their resolution touching the case of Theodoret that they no way
continued 85. yeares Milesius perceiuing Paulinus to be ordained Bishop ouer them that were diuided from his communion seemed noe whit therewith to be offended or displeased but spake peaceably to Paulinus desiring him that they might joyne their flockes and feede them together and if sayd hee the throne diuide vs let mee lay the Gospell in it and then do thou sit in it sometimes and I will sit in it at other times and if I dye before thee thou shalt haue the care and charge of all if thou dye before mee the care and charge of all shall be deuolued to mee This counsell Paulinus would not harken vnto and therefore the Emperours officer adiudged the Churches to Milesius and the guiding of the diuided sheepe to Paulinus Whereupon when Milesius dyed though Paulinus would haue had the place yet hee was refused because hee had refused to harken to the Counsell of Milesius and the Bishoppes chose Flauianus a man verie conspicuous for his great labours and one that had exposed himselfe to many dangers for the good of the Church Yet this ordination greatly displeased the Aegyptians and Romanes The reason of which their soe great dislike was for that when there was much contention betweene Milesius and Paulinus it was so agreed that all they that were fit for that Bishopricke or might in likelyhood bee in any hope or expectation of it should sweare neither to seeke it nor accept it while either of these liued nor noe way to hinder but that after the death of the one the other might haue the full and entire gouernement of the whole of which number it was thought that Flauianus was one that therefore not without periury contrary to his vow and oath hee had hindred the reuniting of the diuided parts of the Church This dislike conceiued against Flauianus dyed not when Paulinus dyed but though Euagrius most vnlawfully and against the Canons had gotten the Bishoprique hauing noe ordination but from his predecessour whereas the Canons allow no such nomination of a Successour and besides require the presence of the Bishoppes of the prouince yet would they that at first disliked the ordination of Flauianus take noe knowledge of any of these things but cōmunicated with Euagrius incited the Emperour against Flavianus who being vrged continually by the Bishop of Rome and others no longer to suffer Flavianus to enjoy his place and told that suppressing Tyrants he did ill to suffer the violatours of the Lawes of the Church to escape vnpunished sent for Flavianus thinking to send him to Rome there to be judged in a Synode of Bishops who when hee came into the presence of the Emperour tolde him confidently that if any man would object against his doctrine or life he would desire to be tryed by no other Iudges but his greatest enemies but if the matter were for his Episcopall chaire he would willingly relinquish it that the Emperour might commit it to whom hee would vpon which his confident answere the Emperour dismissed him and bade him to goe home and feed the flocke committed to him Yet long after many complaints were againe renewed against him to the Emperour by sundry Bishops being at Rome fearing to taxe the Emperour himselfe for that he suppressed not the tyranny of Flavianus but the Emperour bade them say what that tyranny was as if he were Flavianus for that he had vndertaken the defence of him Which when they refused to doe professing themselues vnwilling to stand vpon termes with the Emperour he exhorted them to lay aside their foolish quarrellings and to reunite the Churches that had long without cause beene divided for that Paulinus was now dead and Euagrius came vniustly to the Bishopricke and the ordination of Flavianus was so farre forth allowed of that all the Churches of the East with the Churches of Asia Pontus Thracia and Illyricum held Flauianus to be lawfull Bishop of the East Hereupon the Bishops promised to surcease and that if Flavianus would send Legates vnto them they would kindly intreate them and hold communion with him Howsoeuer it appeareth by Socrates that after the death of Euagrius hee procured there should be no Bishop chosen in opposition to him and first pacified Theophilus and afterwards by his meanes Damasus Sozomen reporteth that Chrysostome after he was made Bishop of Constantinople finding that the Aegyptian westerne Bishops dissented from those of the East in respect of Flavianus and that all the Churches throughout the whole Empire were divided about him besought Theophilus to bee pacified towards him and to assist him for the reconciling of Damasus also To this suite of Chrysostome Theophilus yeelded sent certaine to Rome who prevailing sailed into Aegypt and from thence as also from Rome brought letters of reconciliation peace both from the Aegyptian and Westerne Bishops This History I thinke will neuer proue that the Bishop of Rome deposed Flavianus Bishop of Antioche and that hee could not hold his Bishopricke till the Bishop of Rome consented to him For the thing that was sought was not his holding of his Bishopricke as Bellarmine vntruly reporteth but the peace and concord of the Churches divided about him Neither was the difference onely betweene him and Damasus but all the Bishops of Aegypt the West dissented from him likewise and therefore Ambrose sheweth that the examining of the matter betweene Euagrius and him was committed to Theophilus the Bishops of Aegypt and desireth him to make relation of the end he should make to the Bishop of Rome that he also agreeing thereunto an vniversall peace might be concluded So that nothing can bee concluded out of this history for proofe of the vniversall power of Popes Seeing Damasus could neither of himselfe alone nor with the concurrence of the Westerne Bishoppes depose Flavianus nor by any meanes perswade the Emperour to thrust him out of his place but was sharply reprooued by the Emperour for quarrelling with him and required to bee at peace with him that so the Churches formerly divided without cause might be revnited The next instance of the Popes deposing Bishops is that of Sixtus the third who deposed Polychronius Bishop of Hierusalem if wee may beleeue Bellarmine but in truth there was neuer any such thing The circumstances of the whole proceeding against Polychronius Bishop of Hierusalem if there be any credite in the report of Pope Nicholas and the acts of the Councell vnder Sixtus the third were these Two things specially were objected to him the one that hee went about to violate the ancient bounds of the Ecclesiasticall Iurisdiction of Bishops set and limited by the Fathers to preferre himselfe before the other principall Bishops and to make his See the first whereas in trueth it was the last amongst the Patriarchicall Sees the other that Simoniacally he conferred Ecclesiasticall honours vpon such as would purchase the same Hereupon the Bishops subiect to him not willing to proceede
did he dispense with them of Sicilia for the not keeping of the canon of the Nicene councell requiring prouinciall Synodes to be holden twice euery yeare but whereas they held not such Councels so much as once in the yeare hee commaunded that they should not faile to meete in Councell once at the least every yeare seeing the Canons require that these meetings should bee twice These truly are very weake and insufficient proofes of the Papall power in dispensing with the lawes of the Church and the canons of generall Councels and yet these are the best nay these are all that they canne make shew to bring out of all Antiquity Let vs therefore proceede to the censures that the ancient Bishops of Rome are reported to haue exercised and see if they proue the vniuersality of power now claimed The first allegation to this purpose is the intent of Victor Bishop of Rome resoluing to haue reiected from his communion all the Churches of Asia for keeping the feast of Easter on the same day the Iewes did For saith Bellarmine howsoeuer Irenaeus and others disswaded him from executing that hee intended yet it appeareth his obseruation was right in that it was afterwards confirmed by the Nicene Councell and that hee had authority ouer all in that hee went about to excommunicate those of Asia for dissenting from him in the obseruation of that Feast and keeping it with the Iewes though hee were content for the avoiding of some inconueniencies at the intreaty of Irenaeus to forbeare proceeding against them For answere hereunto wee must obserue that by reason of the custome of those of Asia that kept the feast of Easter precisely at the same time the Iewes did there was moued not a little contention throughout the whole world and many Synodes in euery place called For in Palestina a Synode was holden whereof Theophilus of Caesarea and Narcissus of Hierusalem were Presidents another at Rome whereof Victor was President and another of the Bishoppes of Pontus whereof Palmas as most auncient was President and in sundry other places other Synodes were called But the Synode of the Bishops in Asia whereof Polycrates was President stiffely maintayned the auncient custome that had long prevailed in those parts and wrote an Epistle to Victor and those of the Romane Church to iustifie themselues in this behalfe Victor and his Bishops much offended with this their pertinacy as they construed it would for this cause haue reiected them from their communion But Irenaeus with some other of a milder spirit and better temper stayed them from such rash and violent proceedings and Irenaeus wrote his letters to this purpose to the Bishop of Rome and other his colleagues so that here is nothing to proue the power of the Pope For what was resolued on both touching the right of the observation and the proceedings against them that disliked it was resolved by the Synodes of Bishops and not by Victor alone as likewise Irenaeus was not alone but many other ioyned with him in the reprehension of Victor whose number and multitude prevayled much with him and stayed his proceedings as well as the perswasions of Irenaeus And yet did not the Westerne Bishops take vpon them to excommunicate those of Asia as the Cardinall vntruely affirmeth but onely to reiect them from their communion and fellowshippe there being a very great difference betweene excommunication properly so named and the reiecting of men from our communion or fellowship For excommunication properly so named is a resolution to deny the Sacraments to such as are to receiue them of vs the abandoning of all fellowship with them and the requiring and commanding of others to refraine from all communicating with them in priuate or publique and argueth him that so excommunicateth to be superiour in authority and greater in place then they are whom he excommunicateth But reiecting from communion or refusing to communicate with men may bee found among them that are equall So Cyril wrote to Nestorius that if hee reuoked not certaine dangerous positions hee would communicate no longer with him So the Bishops of the East told Iulius Bishop of Rome that if hee communicated with Athanasius they would no longer communicate with him And such was the proceeding that Victor intended against those of Asia and therefore proueth not that he was their superiour or had a commaunding authority ouer them And yet surely howsoeuer it be true that his manner of observation was better then theirs whom he disliked his intention vpon such an occasion to haue made a breach in the Christian Churches was justly with some bitternesse reprehended by Irenaeus and his brethren For howsoeuer Bellarmine would make the Reader beleeue by alledging that of Blastus who vrged the keeping of Easter with the Iewes and sought to bring in Iudaisme that Victor had reason to bee violent as hee was as perceiuing some ill meaning in them that helde the Iewish observation yet farre be it from vs to thinke that Polycarpus and so many worthy and holy men as aunciently kept that observation were any way inclinable to Iudaisme But this difference may be thought to haue growne not from any diuersity of Iudgement touching matters of faith but for that in some places they thought it fit to keep this feast on the Lords day for very important reasons mouing them so to doe and in other places though they could haue beene content to haue done so likewise vpon the same reasons yet kept they it after the old manner for the avoyding of the scandall of the Iewes for the easier winning of them that were not yet gained to Christianity and the holding of them in the loue liking of Christian profession that were already of Iewes become Christians The next instance is of Innocentius the first who after that he heard of the death of Chrysostome whom Theophilus had deposed the Emperour Arcadius banished excommunicated the Emperour Empresse and anathematized Theophilus in such sort that he should vtterly be excluded haue no place among Christians But this report may very justly bee doubted of the credit thereof resting onely on the authority of Nicephorus Seeing the auncient Historians that report the proceedings of Theophilus and Arcadius against Chrysostome his complaints to the Bishop of Rome and other Bishops of the West of the wrongs that had beene done vnto him report also the answere of the Romane Bishop to haue beene that hee greatly pittied his case but saw no hope of remedy nor meanes to releeue him vnlesse a generall Councell might be called to which purpose he would do his best with the Emperour and that Chrysostome himselfe wished him not to proceede so farre as to reiect them from his communion that were his aduersaries for feare of further inconueniences this being the contention almost of the whole world and the Churches by occasion heereof every where brought vpon their knees Yea all auncient Historians are silent and
say nothing of this excommunication but report the repulse which the messengers the Romane Bishop sent to the Emperour to procure a Councell receiued and Theophilus for ought I know was euer holden a catholicke Bishop both by Hierome and others to his dying day notwithstanding these quarrells betweene him and Chrysostome The excommunication of Leo the Emperour by Gregory the third whereof Zonaras writeth in the life of Leo Isaurus which is a third instance of Papall censures against the great men of the world proueth not the matter in question For Gregory did not anathematize Leo of himselfe alone but with a Synode of Bishops neither was he able by his owne authority to stay the Tribute that was wont to be payd to the Emperour but by his sollicitation procured a confederacie of the French and Germans against the Emperours of Constantinople and by their meanes stayed the Tribute that was wont to be paid wherevpon the Germans and French possessed Rome and became Lords of it The last example is that of Nicholas the first excommunicating Lotharius King of France and his concubine Valdrada together with the Arch-bishops of Coleyn Treuers But the answere herevnto is easie For first this example proueth not the thing in qâ—…estion to wit that the Pope hath an vniuersall power ouer all the world seeing all these were within the Patriarchship of the Bishop of Rome And secondly wee say these circumstances of this proceeding are vntruely reported by Bellarmine For this is the true report which wee finde in Rhegino and others Lotharius King of Lorrayne falling in loue with Valdrada which had beene his concubine while hee was yet a young man in his fathers house beganne to dislike Thietberga his wife Hereupon hee laboureth with the Bishops of Treuers and Coleyn to finde some meanes to put her away They call a Synode wherein Thietberga is charged to haue committed incest with her owne brother and thereupon pronounced an vnfit wife for the King The King thus freed from his wife professeth hee cannot liue single they pronounce it lawfull for him to marry another wife and he taketh Valdrada to wife whom he had formerly kept as his concubine Nicholas the first Bishop of Rome hearing of this sendeth into France to learne the certainty The Legates hee sendeth come to the King to expostulate the matter with him The King answereth that he did nothing but what the Bishoppes of his kingdome in a generall Councell had assured him was lawfull to bee done Whereupon the Bishops of Coleyn and Treuers were sent for to Rome and the Pope called a Councell in which the opinions and proceedings of these Bishops were condemned and they degraded by all the Bishops Presbyters Deacons that were assembled in Councell In all which narration there is no circumstance found that any way proueth the Pope to haue the fulnesse of all Ecclesiasticall iurisdiction but the contrary rather may from hence bee concluded because nothing is done against these two Bishops but by a Synode of Bishops assembled by their owne Patriarch But saith Bellarmine Pope Nicholas excommunicated the King and Valdrada his supposed wife therefore he is vniuersall Bishop The former part of this saying is most vntrue for the Pope did not excommunicate the King but Valdrada onely And I thinke the excommunicating of one silly harlot that had so grievously scandalized the Church of God and whose cause was iudged before in a Synode being brought thither and there examined by reason of the vniust proceedings of the Bishops of Coleyn and Treuers against a lawfull Queene in favour of her will neuer by any good consequence proue the Pope to bee vniuersall Bishop yet these are all the proofes the Cardinall canne bring from the censures the auncient Bishops of Rome are reported to haue vsed and therefore he proceedeth to shew demonstrate the Amplitude of the Popes illimited power iurisdiction by the Vicegerents hee appointed in all partes of the Christian world that were farre remote from him to doe things in his name by his authority But for answere herevnto we say that neither this Cardinall nor any other canne proue that the Bishops of Rome had any such Vicars Vicegerents or Substitutes but onely within the compasse of their owne Patriarchships and that therefore from the hauing of them nothing can be inferred for confirmation of their illimited power authority So Leo as we reade in his Epistles constituted Anastasius Bishoppe of Thessalonica his Vicegerent for the parts thereabouts as other his predecessours had done former Bishops of that Church Whâ—…ch causing great resort thither vpon diuers occasions may bee thought to haue beene the reason why the Councell of Sardica prouideth that the Clergy-men of other churches shall not make too long stay at Thessalonica So the same Leo made Potentius the Bishop his Vicegerent in the parts of Africa Hormisda Salustius Bishop of Hispalis in Boetica and Lusitania and Gregory Virgilius Bishop of Arle in the regions of France all these places being within the compasse of the Patriarchship of Rome as Cusanus sheweth And the same may be sayd of the Bishop of Iustiniana the first who was appointed the Bishop of Romes Vicegerent in those parts vpon signification of the Emperours will and desire that it should be so Neither doth the Cardinall proue any other thing whatsoeuer he maketh shew of For though Cyril Bishop of Alexandria were the Vicegerent of Caelestinus in the cause of Nestorius Bishop of Constantinople yet was he not his Vicegerent in such sort as they were that were within his owne Patriarchship as if he had had none authority of his owne but that onely which Caelestinus gaue vnto him But Caelestinus hauing beene informed by Cyril of the impieties of Nestorius and hauing in his Synodes of the West condemned the same joyned his authority with the authority of Cyril that so he might proceed against him not onely as of himselfe and out of the iudgments of his own Bishops but also out of the consenting resolutions of them of the West And therefore Euagrius sheweth that at or before the time appointed by the Emperour Nestorius and Cyril came to Ephesus where a Councell was to be holden and that Iohn of Antioch with his Bishops being not come after fifteene dayes stay Cyril Bishop of Alexandria the greatest of all the Bishops that were present who also supplied the place of Caelestinus with the rest of the Bishops thought good to send for Nestorius and to require him to appeare in the Synode to answere to the crimes obiected to him Whereby it is euident that Nestorius being to be iudged in a generall Councell Cyril being the greatest of the Bishops that were present the Bishop of Rome neither comming nor sending at the first was in his owne right President of that assembly But the Bishop of Rome who could not come but hauing assembled his Bishops
in the West had iudged and condemned him ioyned his authority with Cyril the principall of the Bishops that were present that so nothing might be wanting to the perfection of a generall Councell So that it is most certaine that Cyril was president of the Councell of Ephesus not as a Vicegerent onely to the Bishop of Rome but in his owne right though he had the authority direction and consenting concurrence of the Bishop of Rome and all the Westerne Bishops ioyned with the power and authority which he and the rest of the Bishops present had of themselues And therefore Leo saith in expresse wordes that Cyril was President of the Councell of Ephesus as likewise Photius and others affirme The same answer may serue for Acacius For he was not Vicegerent of the Bishop of Rome in hearing and determining the cause of Peter Bishop of Alexandria who was an Eutychian Heretique as hauing none authority of his owne but there was a ioynt concurrence of the Bishop of Rome and the Bishop of Constantinople the later hauing besides his owne right and interest the full power and authority of the other and being likewise to vse the helpe of the Emperour for the reducing of the Church of Alexandria to the vnity of the faith againe in which businesse he failed for though at first he condemned Peter Bishop of Alexandria yet afterwards he was content to cōmunicate with him For which cause he was iustly reprehended as not answering the trust that was reposed in him and as being a fauourer of heretiques and so in a sort an heretique himselfe To these allegations which we haue already heard Harding in his answer to Bishop Iewels challenge addeth another of a Bishop of Alexandria being Vicegerent to the Bishop of Rome out of the Epistle of Bonifacius the second to Eulalius or Eulabius But Bellarmine refuteth that Epistle and sheweth that it is counterfeit and that there neuer was any such Eulabius to whom Bonifacius might write and therefore we will no longer insist vpon the examination of the same but proceed to the proofes which our Aduersaries bring from appeales made to Rome CHAP. 39. Of Appeales to Rome FOR the clearing of the matter of Appeales we must obserue that they are of three sorts Of Lay-men of inferiour Clergie-men and of Bishops Of the appeales of Lay-men there is noe mention in all Antiquity and yet now the Bishops of Rome reserue all the greater causes euen concerning the Laitie to thēselues alone forbidding the ordinary guides of the Church to intermedle with them and very ordinarily admitte appeales of Lay-men to the infinite vexation of men and the great hinderance of the course of all Iustice. Whereas it is most wisely and rightly ordered each Bishop hauing his portion of the flocke of Christ committed to him as Cyprian obserueth that they that are committed to their charge should not bee permitted to runne hither and thither but bee iudged there where the thinges for which they are called in question were done and where the accusers and witnesses may bee present Concerning inferiour Clergy-men the holy Bishoppes in the Councell of Mileuis speake in this sort It hath seemed good vnto vs that if Presbyters Deacons other inferiour Clergi-men complaine of the iudgements of their own Bishops the neighbour Bishops intreated by them with the consent of their Bishoppes shall heare them and make an end and if they thinke good to appeale from their iudgement it shall not be lawfull for them to appeale but onely to the Councels of Africa or to the Primates of their owne Provinces And if they shall make their appeale beyond the seas no man in Africa shall receiue them to the Communion This whole Councell Innocentius the first approued as it appeareth by his Epistle which we finde in the booke of the Epistles of S. Augustin Hereunto Bellarmine saith some answere with Gratian who addeth to the Canon of this Councell forbidding appeales to be made beyond the seas an exception vnlesse it be to the Sea Apostolique But this exception saith Bellarmine seemeth not fitting seeing the Africanes made this decree that men should not appeale beyond the seas especially in respect of the Church of Rome and to restraine the making of appeales thither there neuer being any appeale from the Africans to any other church but to the church of Rome only And yet Stapleton answereth the authority of this Councell as Gratian doth and that out of Iulius and Fabianus Bishops of Rome as he saith The Councell of Sardica saith Bellarmine decreed that the causes of Presbyters and inferiour clergy-men appealing from the iudgements of their owne Bishops should be determined and ended by the neighbour-Bishops and Pope Zozimus as appeareth by the sixth Councel of Carthage and the Epistle of the same Councell to Bonifacius the Pope required the same canon to be reuiued Augustine likewise sheweth that it was not lawfull for those of the clergie vnder the degree of Bishops to appeale out of Africa Neither was this the peculiar priuiledge of Africa alone For the Councell of Chalcedon ordained that if a clergie-man haue ought against another of the clergy the matter shall be heard by the Bishop or by arbitrators chosen by both parties with the Bishops allowance But if he haue ought against his Bishoppe he shall prosecute the same complaint in the Synode of the province This canon of the Councell of Chalcedon the Emperour confirmed saying if any of the clergy complaine against his Bishop for any matter let the cause be iudged by the Metropolitane according to the sacred rules and the imperiall lawes And if any man appeale from his sentence let the cause be brought to the Arch-bishoppe or Patriarch of that Diocese and let him according to the canons make a finall end And yet notwithstanding these canons aboue recited precisely forbidding inferiour clergy-men to appeale to Rome we finde that the Bishops of Rome admitted the appeale of one Apiarius iudged condemned in Africa which caused a great difference betweene the Africanes and him Whereupon the Fathers in the Councell of Africa wish the Bishop of Rome as it beseemeth him to reiect and repell the wicked and vnlawfull appeales as well of Presbyters as of other inferiour clergy-men seeing the ending and determining of their causes is by no decree of any Synode denied to the church of Africa and the Nicene canons most clearely committe both inferiour clergy-men and Bishops to their owne Metropolitanes Bellarmine to cleare the Pope from intrusion and to avoide the testimonies authorities of the holy Bishops and Pastours of the church which we haue produced to shew the vnlawfulnes of appeales to Rome answereth first that though they of the inferiour clergy were prohibited to appeale to the Pope yet hee was not forbidden to admit their appeales which is a most strange answere For if they in appealing did
doubt not of all indifferent Readers And therefore there remaineth but onely one allegation of Bellarmine touching appeales to be examined Gregory the first saith he put Iohn the Bishop of Iustiniana the first from the communion for that he presumed to iudge the Bishop of Thebes hauing appealed to Rome The case was this The Bishop of Thebes wronged by his fellow-Bishops made his appeale to Rome Hereupon Iohn Bishop of Iustiniana the first who was the Bishop of Romes Vicegerent for certaine Prouinces neare adioyning was appointed by the Emperour to heare the cause which he did accordingly But without all indifferencie and in sort contrarie to the Canons and though vpon the discerning of his vniust and partiall proceeding an appeale were tendered to him yet gaue he sentence against the poore distressed Bishop Gregory hearing hereof putteth him from the communion for thirty dayes space inioyning him to bewaile his fault with sorrowfull repentance and teares Truely this allegation maketh a very faire shew at the first sight But if wee remember that the Bishop of Iustiniana the first and the distressed Bishop of Thebes wronged by him were within the Patriarchship of Rome as Cusanus sheweth they were you shall finde it was no more that the B of Rome did then any other Patriarch in like case might haue done within his owne precincts and limits Neither can the Cardinall euer proue that the Bishop of Rome had any such Vicegerent as the Bishop of Iustiniana the first was but onely within the compasse of his owne Patriarchship But saith hee it was a Greeke Bishop that Gregory thus proceeded against It is true it was so But what will hee inferre from thence Is it not knowne that many Greeke Bishops were subiect to the Bishop of Rome as Patriarch of the West was not the Bishoppe of Thessalonica a Greeke Bishop and yet I thinke no man doubteth but that hee was within the compasse of the Patriarchship of Rome as many other also were howsoeuer in time they fell from it adhered to the Church of Constantinople after the diuision of the Greeke and Latine Churches CHAP. 40. Of the Popes supposed exemption from all humane Iudgement as being reserued to the Iudgement of Christ onely OVR Adversaries finding their proofes of the Popes illimited power taken from such appeales as were wont in auncient times to bee made to Rome to bee too weake flie to another wherein they put more confidence which is his exemption from all humane Iudgement Christ whose Vicar he is having reserued him to his owne iudgement onely If this exemption could bee as strongly proued as it is confidently affirmed it would be an vnanswerable proofe of the thing in question But the proofe hereof will be more hard then of the principall thing in controuersie betweene vs. Touching this point I finde great contrarietie of opinions among Papists as men at their wits ends not knowing what to affirme nor what to denie For first there are some among them that thinke that the Pope though hee violate all lawes diuine and humane though hee become publickly scandalous and therein shew himselfe incorrigible yea though hee be a professed and damnable hereticke yet neither is deposed ipso facto by the sentence of the canon nor may be deposed by all the men in the world Which opinion if we admit to bee true the condition of the church the beloued spouse of Christ and mother of vs all is most woefull and miserable in that hereby shee is forced to acknowledge a denouring wolfe making hauocke of the sheepe of Christ redeemed with his precious bloud to be her Pastor and guide Secondly some are of opinion that the Pope if hee become an open and professed hereticke is deposed ipso facto by the sentence of the canon and that the church may declare that he is so deposed Thirdly there are that thinke that an hereticall Pope is not deposed ipso facto but that he may be deposed by the church Fourthly many worthy Diuines in the Romane church heretofore haue beene of opinion that the Church or generall Councell may depose the Pope not onely for heresie but also for other enormous crimes Of this opinion was Cardinall Cusanus Cardinall Cameracensis Gerson Chauncellour of Paris Almaine and all the Parisians with all the worthy Bishops Diuines in the Councels of Constance and Basill Yet the Papists at this day for the most part dislike and condemne this opinion and acknowledge no deposition of any Pope how ill soeuer vnlesse it be for heresie And Bellarmine to make all sure telleth vs farther that the church doth not by any authoritie depose an hereticall Pope but whereas he is deposed ipso facto in that hee falleth into heresie onely declareth the same and thereupon largely refuteth the opinion of Cardinall Caietane who thinketh that the Pope when he falleth into heresie is not deposed ipso facto but that deseruing to bee deposed the Church doth truely and out of her authority depose him First because as he saith if the Church or Councell may depose the Pope from his Papall dignity against his will for what cause soeuer it will follow that the Church is aboue the Pope which yet Caietane denieth For as it will follow that the Pope is aboue other Bishops and of more authority then they if he may depose them so if the councell of Bishops may depose the Pope they are greater then hee Secondly he saith to be put from the Papacie vnwillingly is a punishment so that if the Church may depose the Pope though vnwilling to leaue his place it may punish him and consequently is aboue him For hee that hath power to punish hath the place of a Superiour and Iudge Thirdly he that may restraine and limit a man in the vse and exercise of his ministerie and office is in authority aboue him therefore much more he that may put him from it By these reasons it is clearely demonstrated and proued that if the Church or generall Councell haue authority in case of heresie to depose the Pope at least in some sort it is of greater authority then the Pope And therefore to avoide this consequence as Gerson rightly noteth they that too much magnifie the greatnesse and amplitude of Papall power say that an hereticall Pope in that he is an Hereticke ceaseth to be Pope and is deposed by Almighty God So that the Church doth not by vertue of her authority and jurisdiction depose him but onely denounce and declare that he is so deposed by God to be taken for such a one by men and not to be obeyed This they endeauour to proue because all Heretickes are condemned by their owne iudgment as the Apostle saith and stay not as other euill doers till the Church cast them out but voluntarily depart of themselues from the fellowship of Gods people and cut themselues off from the vnity of the Body of the Church
like For with money they themselues may not meddle Pope Iohn the two and twentieth following Nicholas and finding by experience that these Fryers did but abuse the world with their faire shewes of perfection condemned their hypocrisie and would be no patron of it as his predecessour was First therefore hee shewed that perfection consisteth essentially in charity wich Paule nameth the bond of perfection that the abandoning of propriety in things maketh nothing to perfectiō farther thē it excludeth the care that is wont to be found in men in getting keeping disposing of them weakning the act of diuine loue So that if there be as much carefulnesse in men after the disclaiming of propriety in things as before their seeming pouerty maketh nothing to Christian perfection Now he sayth that after the ordination of his predecessour these Fryers were no lesse carefull in getting and keeping things both by begging judiciall suing and the like meanes then any other mendicants that haue some things as their owne in common And that therefore howsoeuer they pleased themselues their obseruation was of no more perfection then theirs that had something of their owne in common Secondly he shewed that these mendicants hauing the vse of such things as are giuen to them and the Church of Rome the propriety in name and title but not in deede being onely to secure them in the vse thereof and to make no benefit that it is but a single right the Church hath and that they are in trueth and indeede no poorer then they that haue thinges of their owne seeing they may change the vse of one thing for another or at least cause the procurator designed by the Church of Rome to change things into money and buy for them such as they rather desire to haue making vse of all things that come to their hands at their pleasure as much as they that haue them of their owne Thirdly hee pronounced that to thinke that Christ and his Apostles had nothing of their owne in speciall or common and that they had no right to vse such things as they had to sell them giue them or with them to buy other is contrary to the Gospell condemneth Christ and his Apostles of iniustice and ouerthroweth the whole Scripture Yet Pope Nicholas defined that Christ his Apostles had nothing of their own either in speciall or common and that the hauing of a common bagge no way contrarieth this conceit seeing that was but by a kinde of dispensation in the person of the weake and imperfect and to shewe that he disliketh not them that come short of his perfection Thus we see Pope Nicolas erred in a matter of faith patronized hypocrites in their faignes shewes of counterfeit perfection was disliked and contraried by his owne successour Iohn the two and twentieth for the same by reason whereof there grew a maine difference betweene Pope Iohn and the Franciscan Fryers hee charging them with heresie and persecuting them from place to place and they likewise disclaiming him as a damnable heretique and no Pope The principall men on the Fryers part were Michael Caesenas and Occam the great Schoole-man who hath written much against Pope Iohn touching this argument Neither is Pope Iohn though in this point of Christian perfection hee were of a sounder better judgment then his predecessor any happier thē he For he is likewise charged with errour in matter of faith that not vniustly by the same Friers that he so much hated persecuted For as Occam testifieth in his Dialogues hee taught that the soules of the just shall not see God till the generall resurrection and that not faintly or doubtingly but in such passionate and violent manner as not to endure those that thought otherwise Gerson likewise in his sermon vpon Easter day before the French King and his Nobles sayth That the theefe on the crosse in that very hower that Christ spake vnto him was made happy and sawe God face to face according to the promise of Christ made vnto him This day shalt thou bee with mee in Paradice and that thereby the doctrine of Iohn the two and twentieth is proued false that was coudemned by the Diuines of Paris with the sound of trumpets before King Philip vncle to the King before whom then he spake the King rather believing the Diuines of Paris then the Court of Rome Bellarmine to deriue the hate of this matter from the Pope to others would willingly fasten this errour on Caluine and to that purpose alleageth two places out of him But neither of them proueth any such thing For in the first he speaketh not of any stay of the Saints departed without in outward courts out of heauen till the resurrection as the Cardinall strangely misunderstandeth him but sheweth by a most apt comparison that as in the time of MOSES Law the high Priest onely entred into the Holiest of all to make an attonement and all the people stayed without So none but Christ goeth into the presence of God to make peace and to worke the great worke of reconciliation and that all the sonnes of men are to expect without till hee bring them assurance of fauour and acceptation And in the second place where saith that the dead are joyned with vs that liue in the vnity of the same faith his meaning is not that faith opposite to sight is found in the Saints after death as it is in vs but that they haue a cleare view and present enjoying of those things which we beleeue Neither is there any thing found in Caluine that may any way excuse the errour of Pope Iohn Thus then I hope it doth appeare by that which hath beene saide that Popes are subiect to errour that they may become Heretiques and define for heresie and that therefore the second supposed priviledge of the Roman Bishop which is infallibility of judgment is found to haue no proofe at all Wherefore let vs proceede to the third which is his power to dispose of the kingdomes of the World and to ouer-rule the Princes and Potentates thereof CHAP. 44. Of the Popes vniust claime of temporall dominion ouer the whole world TOuching the right and interest of Popes in intermeddling with secular affaires and disposing of the Kingdomes of the world there are three opinions among the Romanists The first is that the Pope is soueraigne Lord of all the world or at least of all the Christian world and that the Princes of the Earth are but his Vicegerēts and Lieuetenants The second that the Pope is not soueraigne Lord of the world nor of any part thereof and that therefore hee may not at his pleasure intermeddle with the affaires of Princes but only in case of some defect foūd in them as when they faile to doe their duty or seeke to hinder the common good especially of the Church The third that hee may not at all
though the times would be such as that many swords would not suffice to defend them yet that these two were enough because he meant to vse none at all but to suffer all that the malice of his enemies could doe vnto him This Maldonatus deliuereth to be the literall sense of Christs wordes sheweth a mysticall sense of them also out of Beda much more apt then that of Bonifacius Duo gladii saith Beda sufficiunt ad testimonium sponte passi Salvatoris Vnus qui Apostolis audaciam pro Domino certandi evulsà ictu eius auriculâ Domino etiam morituro pietatem virtutemque doceret inesse medicandi Alter quinequaquam vaginâ exemptus ostenderet eos nec totum quod potuere pro eius defensione facere permissos that is Two swords are sufficient to giue testimony vnto our Sauiour that he suffered willingly The one of which might shew that the Apostles wanted no courage to fight for their Master and by the eare that was cut off by the stroke thereof and healed againe by the Lord that he wanted neither piety to compassionate the miserable nor vertue and power to make him whole that was hurt though now hee were ready to dye And the other which neuer was drawne out of the sheath might shew that they were not permitted to doe all that they could haue done in his defence It is not to be denyed but that S. Bernard mystically expounding the words of Christ saith the Church hath two swords of authority But he thinketh it hath them in very different sort For it hath the vse of the one and the benefite of the other The one is to bee drawne by it the other for it So that this is all that hee saith that the sword of ciuill authority is to be vsed by the Souldiers hand at the commaund of the Emperour by the direction and at the suite of the Church From Bonifacius they passe to Innocentius the third who in the vacancy of the Empire willed those that were wronged in their rightfull causes to haue recourse either to some Bishop or to himselfe And Clemens the fifth who professeth to intermeddle with certaine secular businesses affaires and to determine certaine ciuill causes vpon three seuerall grounds Whereof the first is his greatnesse making him superiour to the Emperour The second his being in steed of the Emperour in the vacancy of the Empire And the third the fulnesse of power which Christ the King of Kings and Lord of Lords gaue vnto Peter and in him to his successours Whatsoeuer wee thinke of the former of these two Popes who seemeth to ground his intermedling in ciuill affaires vpon some law of the Empire and concession of ciuill Princes accordingly as we reade of Theodosius that he permitted any Lay-men hauing ciuill differences among themselues to referre the same to Ecclesiasticall Iudges if they listed Which concession proceeding ex pietate not ex debito that is out of piety and not out of any right or necessity that it must bee soe is long since growne out of vse the state of Church-men beeing much changed from that it was when hee granted them that priuiledge as Duarenus sheweth Yet Pope Clemens can by no meanes be excused from hereticall impiety affirming that which is most vntrue as may appeare by the many fold reasons brought before to proue the contrary nor from Antichristian pride in seeking to tread vnderneath his feete the crownes and dignities of Kings and Princes and to lift himselfe vp aboue all that is called God CHAP. 45. Of the Popes vnjust claime to intermeddle with the affaires of Princes and their states if not as soueraigne Lord ouer all yet at least in Ordine ad spiritualia and in case of Princes failing to do their duties THAT Christ was no earthly King that he left no Kingly power to Peter and that the Pope hath no meere temporall power in that he is Christs Vicar or Peters successor it is most euident out of the former discourse and the Cardinall Iesuite confesseth so much and yet he thinketh the Pope hath a supreme power to dispose of all temporall states and things in ordine ad bonum spirituale that is in a kinde of reference to the procuring and setting forward of the spirituall good But this fancy is most easily refuted by vnanswerable reasons presupposing his former concession For first no man can take away limit or restraine any power or the excercise of it but he in whom it is in eminent sort and from whom it was receiued But the ciuill power that is in Princes is not in the Pope neither did it proceede and come originally from him therefore it cannot be restrained limited or taken away by him The maior proposition is euident the assumption is proued because ciuill power is in heathen infidels who no way hold of the Pope Secondly because it is agreed by all Diuines of worth and learning that the ciuill power in the first originall of it is immediately from God or if not immediately by his owne deliuery thereof yet by no other mediation then that of the law of nature and nations The Emperours know saith Tertullian who gaue them the Empire they know that it was euen the same God who gaue vnto them to be men and to haue humane soules They well perceiue that he onely is God in whose onely power they are à quo sunt secundi post quem primi ante omnes super omnes Deos that is After whom they are in order the second but among all other the first before and aboue all Gods And againe Inde est Imperator vnde homo antequam Imperator inde potest as illi vnde spiritus that is From thence is the chiefe ruler and Emperor whence he was a man before hee was an Emperour from thence hath hee his power from whence he receiued the spirit of life The Author of the answer to the reports of a great and worthy Iudge among vs who hath lately written in the defence of the Popes ouerspreading greatnesse seemeth in part to agree with Tertullian and telleth vs that ciuill power is receiued from God not immediately by his owne deliuery thereof but mediately rather by the mediation of the law of nature and nations For by the law of nature God hath ordained that there should be politicke gouernment which the law of nations assuming hath transferred that gouernment to one or more according to the diuers formes thereof And Occam proueth at large that Imperiall power is not from the Pope and that it is hereticall to say that all lawfull ciuil power is from the Pope Our second reason is this Absolute soueraigne ciuill Princes while they were infidels had true dominion rule and authority holding it as immediatly from God not depending on any ruler of the church as hath beene shewed before But when they become Christians they still remaine in the
a pilgrime and so going to Rome with this Hildebrand in his company by his aduice counsell found the meanes to get himselfe chosen Pope by the Clergy and people of Rome Leo dyed and Gebehardus afterwards named Victor succeeded him and Stephen him about whose time Henry the third dyed Henry the fourth his sonne succeeded him and after Stephen Benedict and Nicholas Alexander gate the papall See against whom great exception was taken for that contrary to the custome hee was chosen without the Emperours consent and with the liking of the yong Emperor and his mother as some report Another was set vp by the Bishops of Lombardy affirming that no man might be chosen or designed to the Popedome without the Emperours allowance And besides Anno Arch-bishop of Coleyn went to Rome to expostulate the matter with Alexander and the Cardinals adhering to him and to know of him how he durst contrary to custome and the law prescribed and imposed anciently vpon the Popes assume the Popedome without the consent of the Emperour alleaging many things to shew the vnlawfulnesse of this fact and beginning at Charles the great hee named many Emperours who had either chosen or confirmed Popes and made good their election But being ready to go forward and to adde more proofes vnto that which he had said Hildebrand the Arch-deacon the whole company of Cardinals beckening vnto him so to doe stood vp and answered in this sort Arch-bishop Anno the Kings and Emperours of Rome neuer had any authority right or commanding power in the choyce of the Pope and if at any time any thing were done violently or disorderly it was afterwards corrected and set right againe by the censure of the Fathers After the death of Alexander this Hildebrand who thus euer opposed himselfe against the Emperours claimes was by the Romanes chosen Pope without the Emperours consent Which the Bishops of France vnderstanding knowing well of how violent seuere and vntractable a disposition hee was vnwilling to haue him possesse so high a place in the Church told the Emperour that if hee did not in time preuent the matter and voyd his election greater euils and perils would beset him then he could at first thinke of Whereupon he sent Embassadours to Rome to know the cause why the Romanes contrary to the ancient custome had chosen a Pope without his consent And if they gaue not satisfaction to put Hildebrand from the Papal dignity which he had vniustly gotten The Embassadours comming to Rome were kindly and courteously entertained and when they had deliuered their message Hildebrand like a vile dissembling hypocrite contrary to his owne practise and that which he had perswaded other vnto answered that hee neuer sought this honor but that it was put vpon him and that yet hee would not accept of it till by a certaine Embassadour hee was assured that not onely the Emperour but the Princes of Germany consented to his election Which answer when the Emperour receiued hee was fully satisfied and with all readinesse by his royall consent confirmed his election and commanded that he should be ordained Thus wee see how to serue his owne turne he could now acknowledge the Emperours interest and refuse to be ordained before hee had obtained his confirmation which yet before in the case of Alexander he disclaimed though a some say hee neuer yeelded so much to the Emperour but euer held out against him disclaiming his intermedling and that a most horrible schisme ensued thereupon Howsoeuer he was no sooner Pope but he began to molest the Emperour challenging him for Symony in conferring Ecclesiasticall dignities and requiring him to come to some Synodall answer which when he refused to doe he excommunicated him depriued him of his Empire and absolued his subiects froÌ„ their Oath of obedience This was the first Pope that euer presumed to depose any Emperour Lego relego saith Otho Frisingensis Romanorum Regum Imperatorum gesta nusquam invenio quenquam eoâ—…um ante hunc à Romano Pontifice excommunicatum vel regno privatum nisi fortè quis pro anathemate habendum ducat quod Philippus ad breve tempus à Romano Pontifice inter poenitentes collocatus Theodosius à beato Ambrosio propter cruentam caedem à liminibus Ecclesiae sequestratus sit that is I reade and I reade ouer againe and againe the Acts of the Romane Kings and Emperours and I no where finde any of them before this excommunicated by the Romane Bishop or depriued of his kingdome unlesse haply any man doe thinke that is to be taken for an excoÌ„munication that Philip was for a short time put among the Penitents by the Bishop of Rome and Theodosius for his bloudy murther stopped by blessed Ambrose from entring into the Church And therefore whatsoeuer Gregory pretendeth to the contrary professing that hee treadeth in the steps of the Saints and his holy predecessours yet it is true that Sigebert saith which hee hopeth hee may say with the leaue of all good men that this novelty that hee say not heresie had not shewed it self in the world in their time that the Priests of that God which maketh hypocrites to reigne for the sins of his people should teach his people that they owe no subiectioÌ„ to wicked Kings and that they owe no feaulty vnto them though they haue taken the oath of feaulty that they are free froÌ„ periury that lift vp their hands against the king to whoÌ„ they haue sworne that they are to be taken for excoÌ„municate persons that do obey him What horrible confusioÌ„s followed vpon this censure of Gregory Otho Frisingensis reporteth in most tragicall manner His wordes are these How great euils how many warres and dangers of warres followed thence How often was miserable Rome besieged taken and sacked How one Pope was intruded vpon another as likewise one King set vp against another it is irksome to me to remember To conclude the whirle-winde of this tempest inwrapped in it so many euils so many schismes so many perils of the soules and bodies of men that it alone may suffise in respect of the cruelty of the persecutioÌ„ and the long continuance of the time thereof to set before our eyes the infelicity of mans miserable conditioÌ„ For first the Emperour offended with the Pope for molesting him about the Investitures of Bishoppes which his Predecessours anciently had and enjoyed and the Clergy discontented with him for his forbidding marriage hee was in an assembly of the States and Bishops of Germany holden at Wormes deposed a letter written to him requiring him no longer to meddle with the Episcopall Office But such was the resolutioÌ„ and stoutnesse of this turbulent vnquiet spirit that being encouraged by certain Bishops of Germany promised their aide helpe he depriued the Bishops that had giuen sentence against him and deposed Henry the Emperour absoluing his subiects froÌ„ their Oath of obedience Whereupon
Pope perceiuing his dislike promised that both the writing and the painting should bee taken away that it might giue no occasiō of contention discord These Romish practises making the Emperour and his Nobles to vnderstand the wordes of the Popes Letter in the worst sense caused the message of these Cardinals to bee very offensiue and a generall murmuring against them was heard among the Princes which growing more lowde and being heard and discerned by the Legates one of them adventured in the quarrell of his Master to demaund of whom the Emperour hath his Empire if hee haue it not of the Lord Pope Which speach of the Cardinall so inraged the Princes that one of them to wit Otto the County Palatine of Boiaria had with his sword runne him through had not Fredericke the Emperor interposed his authority pacified the present rage The Emperor seeing in what termes things stood tooke the best course he could for the security of the Legates and commaunded that they should presently bee had to their lodgings that the next morning they should be gon returne directly to him that sent them and not to wander vp downe in the Territories of Bishops Abbots as he thus happily dispatched them away in safety so after they were gonne providently by letters he caused it to be made known throughout the whole Empire what had passed betweene him the Pope The Tenor of his letters was this Whereas the diuine power from which all power proceedeth both in heauen and earth hath committed to vs his annoynted the rule of the Kingdome and Empire and ordayned that by Imperiall armes wee should preserue the peace of the Churches we are forced not without great griefe of heart to complaine vnto you that from the head of the holy Church in which Christ imprinted the Character of his peace loue the causes of dissention the seminary of euils and the poyson of a most pestiferous disease doe seeme to flow by meanes whereof if God turne not away this euill there is danger least the vnity betwixt the Priest-hood kingdome be broken and a schisme follow For of late as we were in the Court of Bisuntium consulting about things concerning the honour of the Empire good of the Churches there came vnto vs certain Legates from the Pope who professed to bring such a message as tended greatly to the increase of the honour of the Empire But when we had the first day honorably entertained them as the manner is and the second day sat with our Princes to heare their message They as it were puffed vp by reason of the Mammō of iniquity out of the height of their pride out of the haughtinesse of their arrogant mindes and out of the execrable elation of their swelling hearts presented vnto vs an Embassage contained in letters written by the Pope the tenor whereof was That wee should alwayes haue before the eyes of our mind in what sort the Lord Pope had conferred vpon vs the Ensigne of the Imperiall crowne and that yet notwithstanding it would no way repent him if he had done vs greater fauours and wee had receiued more benefits of him These thinges not onely much affected but so moued the Princes and inraged them in such sort that if we had not stayed them by our Princely authority the two wicked Priestes the Legates had neuer returned aliue Wherefore seeing they had many schedules sealed to be written in at their pleasure by which as formerly they were wont to doe they might scatter the poyson of their iniquity throughout all the Churches of the Germane kingdome make bare naked the holy Altars carry away with them the vessels of the house of God as a prey that they might proceede no farther in mischief we cōmanded them without wandring or going aside to returne the same way they came For whereas we haue our kingdome by the election of the Princes from God only who in the passion of his son subiected the world to 2 sword◅ and the Apostle Peter informed the world with the same doctrine saying Feare God honour the King We are well assured that whosoeuer shall say that we receiue our Imperiall crowne as a benefit from the Pope he is contrary to the institution of God the doctrine of blessed Peter is a lyar and therefore our hope is that you will not suffer the honor of the Empire which hath continued from the Constitution of the Citty and the Institution of Christian Religion inviolable till our times to be diminished by such vnheard-of nouelties presumptuous pride But howsoeuer know yee that we will rather run into perill of death it self then suffer such a shamefull confusion to fall out in our times After the returne of the Cardinals their complaints made the Pope wrote letters to the Arch-bishops and Bishops of Germany telling them with what indignity the Emperour dismissed his Legates and how he forbad any to come to Rome out of his kingdome and prayed them to aduise him better and to let him know that the Church which is builded vpon a most firme sure rocke shall continue for euer howsoeuer it may bee shaken with windes and tempests The Bishoppes of Germany hauing receiued these letters from the Pope writ backe vnto him that howsoeuer the Church cannot bee moued yet they were greatly shaken by reason of these differences betweene him and the Emperour and tell him that the words of his letter were such as that neither the Emperor and Princes could indure them nor they knew how to defend them as being strange and vnheard-of before these times Notwithstanding they let him know that after the receipt of his letters they communed with the Emperour about these affaires and receiued from him such an answere as beseemed a Catholique Prince to wit that there are two things whereby his Empire must be swayed the Lawes of Emperors and the vse and custome of his ancestors These limits he is resolued not to passe and whatsoeuer will not stand with these he will vtterly refuse and reject he is willing to giue all due reuerence vnto his ghostly father but that he ascribeth the crown of his Empire to the diuine fauour onely the first voyce in the election to the Arch-bishop of Mentz and the rest to the other Princes in order that hee acknowledgeth to haue receiued the vnction of a King from the Arch-bishop of Coleyn and the supreme vnction which is that of an Emperour from the Pope and that whatsoeuer is besides these is more then ynough and proceedeth from that which is euill that hee had not sent away the Cardinals in contempt but forbad them to proceede any further with such writings as they had tending to the dishonour and scandall of the Empire and that hee had not restrained the going of men into Italy vpon necessary occasions to be allowed by their Bishops nor simply inhibited the comming of men from thence
but that his meaning was to meete certaine abuses whereby the Churches of his Kingdome had beene greeued impouerished and oppressed all discipline of men liuing retyred and in cloysters vtterly ouerthrowne Lastly that God hauing exalted his Church by meanes of the Empire in the head citty of the world it should not be by any meanes that the Church in the head citty of the world should ouerthrow the state of the Empire that the matter began with painting that it proceeded from painting to writing that the writing now begins to be vrged as good authority but that he wil not suffer it nor indure it so to be being resolued first to loose his crowne before hee giue any consent to the abasing of the crowne of the Empire in such sort and therefore requireth the paintings to be raced out and the writings to be recalled that such monuments of enmity between the Kingdome the Priest-hood may not remaine hereupon they beseech the Pope by new letters to mollifie that which was too hard and to sweeten that which was too sowre in the former This so wise iust and reasonable an answer of the Germaine Bishops preuailed so farre with the Pope that he sent other Legates of a milder spirit better temper to the Emperour with new letters wherein he sought to qualifie whatsoeuer was offensiue in the former for touching that he wrote of the benefit the Emperour had receiued of him which so highly displeased the Emperor supposing that he meant that hee had receiued the Imperiall crowne as a meere fauor or good turne from him hee answered that howsoeuer the word Benefit be taken in another sence sometimes yet hee vsed it in that signification which it hath by Originall institution and first imposition So that the word Benefit being compounded of two simple words bene and factum signifieth a good fact or a thing well done and in this sence his setting of the crowne vpon the Emperors head might be called a benefit not as being a meere fauour or good turne but for that it was well and honourably done of him to set the Ensigne of Imperiall maiesty and power vpon the head of him to whom such power pertained and so were things at that time pacified by the good indeauor of the Cardinals and by this mild letter of the Pope But afterwards they brake out againe Whereupon the Pope wrote in this sort to the Emperor Adrian the Bishop seruant of the seruants of God to Fredericke the Romane Emperor greeting and Apostolical blessing The diuine law as it promiseth long life to them that honour their parents so doth it pronounce the sentence of death against them that curse father or mother For wee are taught by the voyce of truth that whosoeuer exalteth himselfe shall be brought low Wherefore sonne beloued in the Lord wee do not a little maruaile that you seeme not to giue so much reuerence to blessed Peter and to the holy Church of Rome as you ought to do For in your letters written to vs you put your name before ours Wherein you incurre the note of insolency that I say not arrogācy What shall I say of the fealty you promised and sware to blessed Peter how doe you obserue it when you require of them who are Gods and the sonnes of the most High to wit Bishops the doing of homage vnto you and exact fealty of them inclosing their sacred hands in your hands and manifestly opposing your selfe against vs shut not onely the doores of the Churches but the gates of the Cities of your kingdome also against our Cardinals sent as Legates vnto you from our owne side Repent repent therefore we advise thee of vs thou receiuedst thy consecration and therefore take heed lest affecting things denyed vnto thee thou lose that which is yeelded to thee To this letter of the Pope the worthy Emperour answered in this sort Fredericke by the grace of God Emperour of Romans to Adrian Bishop of the Catholick Church wishing vnto him a firme adhering and cleauing to all those things which Iesus began to do speak The law of Iustice giueth to euery one that which is his own Neither do wee offend in this behalfe for we derogate nothing frō our parents but giue vnto them in this our Imperiall state all due honour to wit to those our Noble progenitors frō whom we receiued the dignity of our kingdome and our Crowne and not frō the Pope Had Sylvester Bishop of Rome any thing pertaining to Royall state and dignity in the time of Constantine was not liberty restored to the Church and peace by his meanes And hath not your Popedome receiued all such royall dignities as it now enjoyeth from Princes And why then is it so much disliked that when wee write vnto the Bishop of Rome by ancient right and after the old manner we put our name before his and according vnto the rule of Iustice permit him writing vnto vs to doe the like Turne ouer the Histories and Monuments of Antiquity and if you haue not yet obserued it you shall there finde that which we avouch and why should wee not require homage and the performance of other duties due from subiects to Princes of them who are Gods by adoption and yet thinke it no disparagement to hold things pertaining to our Royall state especially seeing hee who was authour and beginner both of your dignity and ours who neuer receiued any thing of any mortall King but gaue all good things vnto all paide tribute vnto Caesar for himselfe and Peter and gaue you an example to doe the like either therefore let them put frō them the things they hold of vs or if they thinke it behoouefull to retaine and keepe them still let them yeeld vnto GOD the things that are GODS and to Caesar the things that are Caesars The doores of our Churches and the gates of our Cities are shut against your Cardinals because wee finde them not to bee Preachers but men desirous of a prey not Confirmers of peace but polling companions to get money not such as come to repaire the breaches of the world but greedily and insatiably to gather golde But whensoeuer wee shall see them such as the Church requireth them to bee men bringing peace enlightning their Country assisting the cause of those of meane degree in equity and right they shall want nothing that is necessary for them To conclude When you thus contend about things little pertaining to Religion and striue with secular persons about titles of honour you seeme to haue forgotten that humilitie which is the keeper of all vertues and that meeknesse that should bee in you Let your Father-hood therefore take heede lest while you moue questions about things vnworthy to be stood vpon you scandalize them who with attentiue eare listen to the wordes of your mouth wait for your speaches as for the latter raine Wee are forced thus to write vnto you because wee see the
detestable Beast of pride hath crept vp euen to the seate of Peter Prouide alwayes well for the peace of the Church and fare you alwayes well Thus wee see how the popes not contenting themselues with the fulnesse of Ecclesiasticall jurisdiction though they had no just title vnto it proceeded yet further partly by the fauour of Christian princes and partly by fraud and violence got to be great princes in the world stayed not till they made challēge to be ouer the mightiest Emperors to dispose of their crowns dignities So shewing thēselues to haue the perfect marke and character of him of whom the Apostle speaketh Who sitteth in the temple of God as God and is lifted vp aboue all that is called God Yet could they not so prevaile in these their hellish practises nor so carry away the truth of GOD and the liberty of his Church into captiuity but that there were euer found both Christian Emperours and learned Diuines to resist them in their vniust claimes CHAP. 48. Of generall Councels and of the end vse and necessity of them HAuing examined what may be said for proofe of the Vniuersality of the Bishop of Romes power and iurisdiction first we finde that the Sonne of GOD gaue him no power in the common-wealth but a Father-hood onely in the Church Secondly that in the Church hee neither gaue him an illimited power of commaunding nor infallible iudgement in discerning but that the greatest thing that either hee canne challenge or wee yeeld vnto him is to be the prime Bishop in order and honour the first and not of himselfe alone or out of the fulnesse of his owne power but with the joynt concurrence of others equall in commission with him to manage the great affaires of Almighty God and to gouerne the Christian Church so that the fulnesse of Ecclesiasticall power and iurisdiction is in the companies assemblies and Synodes of Bishoppes and Pastors and not in any one man alone I shewed before that in the churches founded and established by the Apostles contayning whole Citties and places adjoyning though there were many ministers of the word and sacraments yet one was so the Pastour of each of these Churches that the rest were but his assistants and might doe nothing without him and that therefore there was an inequality established euen from the beginning not of order onely but of degree also betweene such as are Pastours of Churches are named Bishops and such as are but their assistants named by the common name of Presbyters yet is the power of him that excelleth the rest in degree in each Church fatherly not Princely for things were so ordered in the beginning that as the Presbyters could do nothing without the Bishoppe so the Bishop in matters of moment might doe nothing without his Presbyters and thereupon the Councell of Carthage decreeth that the Bishoppe shall not presume to heare and sententiate any mans cause without the presence of his Clergie And though it bee said that the Bishop alone may heare and determine the causes of such Cleargy men as are below the degree of Presbyters Deacons yet that alone excludeth not his Cleargy but the concurrence of other Bishops which in the causes of Presbyters Deacons is necessarily required For without the presence and concurrence of his Cleargy the Bishop may proceede to no sentence at all If any difference grew betweene the Bishop and his Cleargy or if consenting any one found himselfe grieued with their proceedings there was a prouinciall Synode holdentwise euery yeare in which the acts of Episcopall Synodes might be re-ëxamined These prouinciall Synodes were subordinate to Nationall Patriarchicall Synodes wherein the Primate of a Nation or Kingdome or one of the Patriarches sat as President And in these Nationall or Patriarchicall Synodes the acts of prouinciall Synodes might bee re-ëxamined and reuersed Of all which I haue spoken before in due place and vpon fit occasion haue shewed at large of whom these Synodes doe consist So that it is euident that the power of Ecclesiasticall iurisdiction resteth not in Bishoppes alone but in Presbyters also beeing admitted to Prouinciall and Nationall Synodes and hauing decisiue voyces in them as well as Bishops nor in any one Metropolitane Primate or Patriarch within their seuerall precincts and diuisions but in these and their fellow Bishops joyntly and that much lesse there is any one in whom the fulnesse of all Ecclesiasticall power and the right to command the whole Church doth rest So that this fulnesse of power is found only in the generall assembly of Pastors called a generall Councell Wherefore now it remaineth that wee speake of Generall Councels Wherein first wee are to consider the vtility and necessity of such Synodall assemblies and meetings Secondly of whom they must consist Thirdly what assurance they haue of diuine assistance direction and Fourthly who must call them Toucing the first the causes why generall Councels are called are three The first is the suppressing of new heresies formerly not condemned The second a generall vniforme reformation of abuses crept into the Church The third the taking away of Schismes growing in Patriarchicall Churches about the election of their Pastors the reiecting of intruders violently and disorderly possessing themselues of those Patriarchicall Thrones And so wee finde that the Councell of Nice was called by Constantine for the suppressing of the damnable heresie of the Arrians the eight generall Councell by Basilius for the ending of the difference that was growne in the Church of Constantinople about Ignatius and Photius contending for the Episcopall chaire and that all Generall Councels intended and sought the reformation of abuses there being scarce any one wherein Canons were not made for the reformation of disorders in so much that the Fathers of the sixth Generall Councell hauing only condemned the Heresie of the Monothelites and made no Canons met afterwards againe many of them and made those Canons that are now extant and are the chiefe directiō of the Greeke Church vnto this day These being the causes for which Councels are called it is euident that the holding of them is not absolutely and simply necessary but in a sort onely For Heresies may bee suppressed by the concurrence of Prouinciall Synodes holden in the seuerall parts of the world as they were in the first 300. yeares when there were no Generall Councells But one part of the Christian Church seeking the helpe of another in common dangers and one part readily concurring with another as for the extinguishing of a dangerous fire threatning all or the repressing repelling of a common enemy by mutuall intelligence passing from one to another they abandoned Heresies newly springing vp and preserued the vnity of the common faith Neither was this course holden onely in the time of persecution during the first 300. yeares but afterwards also in the time of the Churches peace wee finde the same course to
haue beene followed in the suppressing of the Pelagians and therefore Austine affirmeth that there were but some few heresies of that nature that a Generall Councell of all the Bishops of the East and West was necessarily to bee called for the suppressing of them And indeede wee finde that if some fiue or sixe heresies haue beene condemned by the censure of Generall Councells an 100. haue beene suppressed and extinguished by other meanes And of those for the condemning whereof Generall Councells were holden some were not extinguished a long time after For that of the Arrians grew stronger after then euer it was before and those of Nestorius and Eutyches continued some hundreds of yeares after the ending of those Councels in which they receiued the sentence of condemnation How is it then that Isidore saith the Church before Constantines time was diuided rent into diuers Factions and Sects because there was no Generall Councell as if there were no other meanes to preserue Vnity but Generall Councels and that wheresoeuer they may be had Peace were presently established For the clearing hereof we say that such new opinions as growing vp in those times found a concurring dislike in the seuerall Churches seeking one to another were then suppressed when yet there could bee no Generall Councels as the heresies of the Marcionites Valentinians and the like But they wherein there grew difference among the chiefe Pastours and Bishoppes of the Churches could not be determined in those times as the errours of the Millenaries of those that kept Easter after the Iewish obseruation and of those that held the necessity of re-baptizing of such as were baptized by heretickes in which point many worthy pastours Bishops of the Church did erre in the first ages of the Church neither could their errour bee extinguished as Austine noteth nor the trueth so cleared as that all dissenters should incurre the note of heresie till the decree of a Councell passed about it Quaestionis huius obscuritas saith Austine Prioribus Ecclesiae temporibus ante schisma Donati magnos viros magna charitate praeditos Patres Episcopos ita inter se compulit salua pace disceptare fluctuare vt diu Conciliorum in suis quibusque regionibus diuersa statuta nutauerint donec Plenario totius orbis Concilio quod saluberrime sentiebatur etiam remotis dubitationibus formaretur that is The obscurity of this question in former ages of the Church before the schisme of Donatus did cause great men and Fathers and Bishops indued with great charity so to striue among themselues and to wauer as doubtfull vncertaine without breaking the bond of Peace that for a long time the Decrees of Councels in seuerall Regions were diuerse and different without any settled certainty till that which was most wholesomely conceiued was fully formed settled and established by a plenary Councell of the Bishops of the whole world and no place left for doubting and vncertainty any longer Thus wee see that some heresies may easily be suppressed without troubling all the Bishops of the world to meet in a Generall Councell and that some others cannot easily bee suppressed without Generall Councels as heresies may be suppressed by the mutuall concurrence of seueral churches so by the like correspondence the seuerity of discipline may be vpholdē vniformely schismes prevented When Cornelius was elected and ordained Bishop of Rome at the first because there was some oppositiō Cyprian others were feareful to write vnto him as to the Bishop of Rome but afterwardbeing fully informed touching the lawfulnesse of his electiō and ordinatiō they reiected his Competitours and communicated with him onely the like we shall find to haue bin practised generally by all Bishops carefully seeking to be certified out of other Provinces and parts of the Church by such Bishops as were knowne to be Catholikes who came lawfully into places of Ministery being so come held the vnity of Faith and Charity that so they might holde Cōmunion with them and reject those that entered otherwise Whereupon Cyprian telleth Cornelius Bishop of Rome to whō in Africa he might write as to Catholick Bishops from whō he might receiue letters as from Catholickes Notwithstanding Generall Councels are the best meanes for preseruing of vnity of doctrine seuerity of discipline preventing of schismes when they may be had though they be not absolutely necessary to the being of the Church yet are they most behoouefull for the best readiest most gracious governing of the same how-soeuer there may bee a kind of exercise of the supreme jurisdictiō that is in the Church by the concurrence of particular Synodes the correspondence of seueral Pastors vpon mutuall intelligence of the sence judgment resolutiō of euery of them yet the highest most excellent exercise of the supreme Ecclesiasticall jurisdictiō is in Generall Councels Heere the Papists are wont to argue that the Protestants hauing no Generall Councels haue not the exercise of the supreme Ecclesiasticall jurisdictiō consequently that they are not that Church out of which no saluatiō is found but this is a very silly trifling and playing with their owne shadowes neither is it any thing else buta meere abusing of themselues others thus idlely fondly to jangle For first the Protestants being but a part of the Christian Church neuer challenged to themselues the authority that belongeth to the whole as the Papists doe who excluding all the Christians of Graecia Armenia Russia Aethiopia out of the fellowship cōmunion of Saints and as much as in them lieth casting them into hell suppose a Generall meeting of those of their own factiō to bee a Generall Councell And secondly if the Protestants did think themselues to be the whole Church yet their argument were of no force seeing the whole Church may be without the benefite of Generall Councels much longer then the Protestants haue beene since the divisiō between them the Papists for the Christians of the primitiue church had no general councell for the space of 300 yeares after Christ. But to returne to the point frō which we are a little digressed occasioned so to doe by this frivolous objectiō of the Papists touching the good and profitable vse of Generall councels there is no difference between vs our Adversaries but it is agreed on both sides that though they be not absolutely necessary yet they are very behoofefull much to be desired in diverse cases neither euer was there any man of judgement that thought otherwise For that which Nazianzen hath that hee neuer saw good end of any councell is not to bee vnderstood as spoken generally and absolutely but respectiuely to the turbulent times wherein he liued and the Arrian faction so prevailed that many Synodes were holden for the ouerthrow of the Nicene faith without all respect to the good of the Church CHAP. 49. Of the persons that may
thinke that this is the peculiar right of Bishoppes but they are clearely refuted by the Vniuersall practise of the whole Church from the beginning For in all Prouinciall and Nationall Synodes Presbyters did euer giue voyce and subscribe in the very same sort that Bishoppes did whether they were assembled to make Canons of discipline to heare causes or to define doubtfull points of doctrine as I haue before shewed at large and that they did not anciently sitte and giue decisiue voyces in Generall Councels the reason was not because they haue no interest in such deliberations and resolutions but because seeing all cannot meete in Councels that haue interest in such businesses but some must be deputed for and authorized by the rest therefore it was thought fitte that Bishoppes who are the chiefest among such as haue interest in deliberation of this nature should in giuing decisiue voyces supply the places of the rest especially seeing the manner was euer in all the first Councells that the chiefe Patriarches being acquainted with the matter that should be debated sent to all the Metropolitanes subiect to them who calling Prouinciall Synodes consisting of their Bishoppes and Presbyters discussed such doubtes and then by common consent choosing out certaine principall Bishoppes to goe to the Generall Councell in their name sent by thē their resolutions So that in effect Presbyters did subscribe as well as Bishoppes seeing they that went and subscribed were not to vary from the instructions they carried with them That this was the course it is euident by that of Iohn Bishoppe of Antioch in the third Generall Councell excusing his long tarrying by reason that his Metropolitanes could not sooner assemble their Cleargy to consult and by the Actes of the sixth Generall Councell where we find the suggestion of Agatho Bishop of Rome sent to the Councell subscribed by himselfe and the whole Synode of the West subiect to the See Apostolick in which Synode sundry Bishops doe subscribe as Legates sent from Nationall Synodes But if wee shall come to latter Councels holden in the West and esteemed by the Papists to bee Generall wee shall finde that Presbyters did giue voyces decisiue in them as well as Bishoppes For in the great Councell of Lateran as they call it vnder Innocentius the third there were but foure hundred eighty two Bishops but of Abbots and Priours Conventuall eight hundred who yet haue much lesse to doe in the government of the Church then Presbyters hauing care of soules And Bellarmine himselfe confesseth that by priviledge and custome Presbyters as namely Cardinals Abbots and the Generals of the Orders of Fryars may giue decisiue voyces in Generall Councels which they could not doe if by Gods Law it pertayned to Bishoppes onely For there is no prescribing against the Law of GOD and therefore I cannot see why the Romanists should so bitterly censure the councell of Basil because Presbyters were admitted to giue voyces in it Hauing cleared who they are that are to bee admitted to bee present and to giue voyces in Generall councels let vs proceede to see what number of Bishoppes is required to make a Generall councell and what order must be kept in the holding of it Touching the first the Diuines require three conditions to make a Generall councell whereof the first is that the summons bee Generall and such as may bee knowne to all the principall parts and provinces of the Christian World The second that no Bishop whence-soeuer hee come bee excluded if hee bee knowne to bee a Bishoppe and not excommunicate The third that the principall Patriarches bee present with the concurrence of the particular Synodes vnder them either in person or by their substitutes and Vicars or at least by their provinciall Letters as the Patriarch of Rome was present in the second Generall councell though hee were not there in person nor by substitutes And heereupon the second councell of Nice taketh exception to a certaine Synode holden in Constantinople as not Generall because neither all that were present did consent neither was there a concurrence in it of the Bishoppe of Rome and his Bishoppes either by his Vicars or provinciall letters nor of the Patriarches of the East to wit of Alexandria Antioch and Ierusalem and the Bishoppes subiect to them and therefore pronounceth that the wordes of those foolish men assuming to them the name of a Generall councell were not a candle sette on a candlesticke to giue light to all in the house but a meere smoake full of darkenesse blinding the eyes of men and were vttered as it were vnder the bedde and not vpon the mountaine of right beleefe and that their sound did not goe forth into all the earth nor their wordes to the vttermost endes of the World as the sound voyce and wordes of the former sixe Generall councels did But that wee may the better discerne how farre forth the presence of the chiefe Patriarches is necessary in Generall councels and that wee bee not deceiued in this point wee must obserue that when wee speake of patriarches either wee vnderstand them and their Synodes or themselues singly and apart If wee speake of them in the former sense no Synode can bee accounted fully and perfectly Generall to which the presence of any one of the chiefe patriarches is wanting and therefore the first councell of Ephesus was an imperfect Generall councell when before the comming of Iohn of Antioch and his Bishoppes it proceeded to the condemnation of Nestorius And wee see how great turmoyle and confusion that hath caused which could neuer bee quieted and taken away till Cyrill president of that councell and Iohn were reconciled and the Actes of the councell confirmed by the joint consent of them both and hence Cusanus saith it is that the eighth Generall councell when the Vicar of the Apostolicall Throne of Alexandria came rejoyced greatly and saide wee glorifie the GOD of all who hath supplyed vnto this vniuersall Synode what was wanting and hath now made it most full and perfect But if wee speake of them in the second sense that is singly and by themselues alone in case of heresie or wilfull refusall the councell may proceede without them and yet want nothing that pertaineth to the perfection of a generall Councell as did the Councell of Ephesus and the Councell of Chalcedon proceeding to the condemnation of Nestorius and Dioscorus vpon such euidence as they had against them though they refused to present themselues in those Synodes so that the concurrence of the Bishops subject to them be not wanting as in the case of Nestorius and Dioscorus it was not For the Bishops subject to Nestorius subscribed to his condemnation and the Bishops of Alexandria gaue their consent to the condemnation of Dioscorus their Patriarch and approued the proceedings of the synode against him though they refused to subscribe to the actes and decrees of it till they had a new Patriarch chosen
appointed both as it seemed good vnto himselfe Three other proofes the Iesuite hath yet behinde The first is out of Socrates out of whom hee saith it may bee proued that Iulius the Pope called the Councell of Sardica but how I cannot tell For Socrates saith expressely that the Councell of Sardica was called by the two Emperours Constance and Constantius whereof the one raigned in the East the other in the West the one by his Letters desiring it the other most willingly performing that hee desired But of Iulius calling it hee maketh no mention If the Iesuite thinke it may bee proued that Iulius called it because among them that sought to excuse themselues from comming vppon fained pretences some complained of the shortnesse of the time appointed for this meeting and cast the blame thereof vpon Iulius he is greatly deceiued seeing Iulius might be blamed for procuring the Emperor Constance by his Letters directed to Constantius his brother to set so short a time as he did though hee did not call the Councell himselfe And that it was not the Authority of the Pope that brought the Bishops together in this Councell it is most euident in that when he wrote to them to restore Athanasius to his place they reiected his Letters with contempt maruailing that he medled more with their matters then they did with his Neither is it likely that Constantius would be commanded by Iulius to call this Councell Seeing when the Councell had commanded Athanasius to be restored to his place yet hee refused to giue way till his brother threatned to make warre vpon him for it But it this proofe faile Bellarmine hath a better For hee sayth Sixtus the third in an Epistle to those of the East writeth That Valentinian the Emperor called a Synode by his authority whence it followeth that the calling of Generall Councels pertaineth in such sort to the Popes that the Emperours may not call them but by warrant and authority from them If the Reader will bee pleased to cōsider of this proofe he shall easily discerne how litle credit is to be giuen to Iesuited Papists in their allegations For first Sixtus doth not say the Emperour Valentinian called a Synode by his authority but that hee commaunded a Synode should be called by his authority that is commaunded him to call it And the author of the Pontificall speaking of the calling of the same Synode sayth the Emperour commanded that the Councell and holy Synode should bee congregated Secondly it was but a Diocesan Synode consisting of the Presbyters and Cleargy of Rome called together about certaine crimes obiected to Sixtus whereof hee purged himselfe before them Now I thinke it will not follow that if the Bishoppe of Rome might call together the Cleargie of his owne Diocesse the calling of Generall Councels pertained to him onely or that if the Emperour thought fit rather to command the Romaine Bishoppe to call together his Cleagie then to doe it immediately by his owne authority therefore hee would haue done the like in summoning Generall Councells consisting of all the Bishops of the World Wherefore let vs passe to the last of his proofes taken out of the Epistle of Adrian the second to Basileius the Emperour prefixed before the eighth Generall Councell which vndoubtedly vpō proofe wil be foūd to be no better then the rest For first it is groūded on the saying of a Pope that liued many hundred yeares after Christ and long after the diuision of the Empire and the withdrawing of the Church of Rome from the obedience of the Emperours of the East and so not much to be regarded in a question concerning the right of the Emperour Secondly hee speaketh not in his owne name but in the name of all the West Church And thirdly that he saith Wee will that by your industry a great assembly be gathered proueth not that the Pope tooke vpon him peremptorily to command the Emperour For seeing in the whole Epistle hee vseth words of exhorting praying intreating these words may seeme to import no more but Our desire is that there should be such an assembly by your industrie in which our Legates sitting as Presidents matters may be examined and all things righted Or we though no way subiect to your Empire yet at your request are content that such a Councell be called and that our Legates do sit in it with the Bishops subiect to your Imperiall command For that Basileius called the Councell appeareth by his words to the Bishops in the beginning of it But if none of these exceptions against the Emperours ancient practice of calling Councels will hold our Aduersaries rather thē they will suffer the Pope to be a looser will not sticke to charge the Emperours with vsurpation and taking more on them then pertained to them Whosoeuer saith Andradius shall thinke that the power and authority of Emperours is to bee esteemed and iudged of by the things done by them in the Church rather then by Christs institution the Decrees of the Elders and the force and nature of the Papall dignity it selfe hee shall make vnbridled pride and head-long fury to be chiefe commaunder and to sway most in the Ecclesiastical Hierarchy Thus doth Andradius censure the auncient Christian Emperours and exemplifieth not onely in Constantius the Arrian but Iustinian also as himselfe confesseth a good Emperor For refutatiō of which most vnjust exception wee say that howsoeuer it bee not to bee doubted but that ill affected or ill directed Emperours did some-times that which was not fit yet that in calling Councels by their Princely authority and commaunding all Bishoppes to come or send vnto them they exceeded not the bounds and limites of their commission it is evident in that neuer any Bishop durst blame them for it But all sought vnto them euen the Bishops of Rome themselues praying them so to doe as I shewed before by the examples of Liberius Innocentius and Leo which thing also Bellarmine himselfe confesseth Wherefore seeing it is evident by the allowed practise of former times that the calling of Generall Councels belonged to the Emperours after they became Christians let vs see what they tooke on them in these Councels after they had called them and consequently what right power and authority Christian Princes haue to manage the affaires and commaund the holy Bishops and Ministers of the church CHAP. 53. Of the power and authority exercised by the auncient Emperours in Generall Councels and of the supremacie of Christian Princes in causes and ouer persons Ecclesiasticall THe first thing that Christian Emperours in auncient times assumed to themselues in Generall Councels was to be present in them when they pleased as we reade of Constantine the Great that hee not onely called the Councell of Nice but was present in it of Martian that hee was present in the Councell of Chalcedon with Pulcheria the Empresse of Constantine the fourth that hee was present
to doe all these things this power the Princes of the World haue not at all much lesse the supreame authority to doe these things but it is proper to the Ministers of the church And if Princes meddle in this kinde they are like to Vzziah that offered to burne incense for which he was stricken with Leprosie The power of Iurisdiction standeth first in prescribing making Lawes Secondly in hearing examining and judging of opinions touching matters of Faith And thirdly in judging of things pertaining to Ecclesiastical order ministery and the due performance of Gods diuine worship seruice Touching the first the making of a Law is the prescribing of a thing vnder some paine or punishment which hee that so prescribeth hath power to inflict Whence it is consequent that the Prince hauing no power to excommunicate put from the Sacraments and deliuer to Satan can of himselfe make no canons such as Councels of Bishoppes doe who commaund or forbid things vnder paine of excōmunication and like spiritual censures but hauing power of life and death of imprisonment banishment confiscation of goods and the like he may with the advice and direction of his Cleargy commaund things pertaining to Gods worship and seruice vnder these paines both for profession of Faith ministration of Sacraments and conversation fitting to Christians in general or men of Ecclesiastical order in particular by his Princely power establish things formerly defined and decreed against whatsoeuer errour and contrary ill-custome and obseruation And herein hee is so far forth supreame that no Prince Prelate or Potentate hath a commaunding authority ouer him yet doe we not whatsoeuer our clamorous Aduersaries vntruly report to make us odious make our Princes with their Ciuill States supreame in the power of commanding in matters concerning God and his Faith and religion without seeking the direction of their Cleargy for the Statute that restored the title of Supremacie to the late Queene Elizabeth of famous and blessed memory prouideth that none shall haue authority newly to judge any thing to be Heresie not formerly so iudged but the high Court of Parliament with the assent of the Cleargy in their Conuocation nor with them soe as to command what they thinke fitte without aduising with others partakers of like precious Faith with them when a more generall meeting for farther deliberation may bee had or the thing requireth it Though when no such generall concurrence may bee had they may by themselues prouide for those parts of the Church that are vnder them From the power and authority wee giue our Princes in making lawes and prescribing how men shall professe and practise touching matters of Faith and Religion let vs proceed to treat of the other part of power ascribed vnto them which is in judging of errors in Faith disorders or faults in things pertaining to Ecclesiasticall order and ministery according to former determinations and decrees And first touching errors in faith or aberrations in the performance of Gods worship and seruice there is no question but that Bishops and Pastors of the Church to whom it pertaineth to teach the trueth are the ordinary and fittest Iudges and that ordinarily and regularly Princes are to leaue the iudgement thereof vnto them But because they may faile either through negligence ignorance or mallice Princes hauing charge ouer Gods people and beeing to see that they serue and worship him aright are to iudge and condemne them that fall into grosse errours contrary to the common sence of Christians or into any other heresies formerly condemned And though there be no generall fayling yet if they see violent and partiall courses taken they may interpose themselues to stay them and cause a due proceeding or remoue the matter from one company and sort of Iudges to another And hereunto the best learned in former times agreed clearely confessing that when some thing is necessary to be done and the ordinary guides of the Church do faile or are not able to yeeld that helpe that is needfull wee may lawfully flye to other for reliefe and helpe when these two things do meete in the state of the Church sayth Waldensis to witte extreame necessity admitting no delay and the want of ability to yeeld reliefe in the ordinary Pastor or Guide wee must seeke an extraordinary Father and Patron rather then suffer the frame fabricke and building of the Lord Christ to bee dissolued If any man happily say that Ambrose a most worthy Bishop refused to come to the Court to be judged in a matter of faith by Valentinian the Emperour and asked when euer hee heard that Emperours iudged Bishops in matters of faith seeing if that were granted it would follow that Lay-men should dispute and debate matters and Bishoppes heare yea that Bishoppes should learne of Lay-men whereas contrarywise if wee looke ouer the Scriptures and consider the course of times past wee shall finde that Bishoppes haue iudged of Emperours in matters of faith and not Emperours of Bishoppes and that therefore it cannot bee without vsurpation of that which no way pertaineth to them that Princes should at all medle with the iudging of matters of faith This obiection what shew soeuer it may seeme to carry is easily answered for first the thing that Valentinian took on him was not to iudge according to former definitions but he would haue iudged of a thing already resolued on in a generall Councell called by Constantine the Emperor as if it had bin free and not yet indged of at all whereas we do not attribute to our Princes with their Ciuill Estates power newly to adiudge any thing to be heresie without the concurrēce of the State of their Clergy but only to Iudge in those matters of faith that are resolued on according to former resolutiōs And besides this Valentinian was known to be partiall he was but a nouice and the other iudges he ment to associate tohimselfe suspected therefore Ambrose had reason to do as he did Wherefore let vs proceed to the other part of the power of jurisdictiō that cōsisteth in iudging of things pertaining to Ecclesiastical Order Ministery Concerning which point first it is resolued that none may ordaine any to serue in the worke of the Ministery but the spirituall Pastours and Guides of the church Secondly that none may judicially degrade or put any one lawfully admitted from his degree and order but they alone Neither doe our Kings or Queenes challenge any such thing to themselues but their power standeth first in calling together the Bishoppes and Pastours of the Church for the hearing determining of such things and in taking all due care that all thinges bee done orderly in such proceedings without partiality violence or precipitation according to the Canons and Imperiall lawes made to confirme the same Secondly when they see cause in taking things from those whom they iustly suspect or others except against and appointing others in their places Thirdly
in appointing some selected men for the visitation of the rest Fourthly in joyning temporall menincommission with the spirituall guides of the church to take view of and to censure the actions of men of Ecclesiasticall order because they are directed not onely by Canons but lawes Imperiall Fifthly when matters of fact are obiected for which the canons and lawes Imperiall judge men depriueable the Prince when hee seeth cause and when the state of things require it either in person if he please or by such other as hee thinketh fitte to appoint may heare and examine the proofes of the same and either ratifie that others did or voyd it as wee see in the case of Caecilianus to whom it was objected that hee was a Traditor and Faelix Antumnitanus that ordayned him was so likewise and that therefore his ordination was voyd For first the enemies of Caecilianus disliking his ordination made complaintes against him to Constantine and hee appointed Melchiades and some other Bishoppes to sitte and heare the matter From their judgement there was a new appeale made to Constantine Whereupon hee sent to the Proconsull to examine the proofes that might bee produced But from his iudgmēt the complainants appealed the third time to Constantine who appointed a Synode at Arle All this hee did to giue satisfaction if it were possible to these men and so to procure the peace of the Church And though he excused himselfe for medling in these businesses and asked pardon for the same for that regularly hee was to haue left these iudge ments to Ecclesiasticall persons yet it no way appeareth that hee did ill in interposing himselfe in such sort as hee did the state of things being such as it was nor that the Bishoppes did ill that yeelded to him in these courses and therefore in cases of like nature Princes may doe whatsoeuer hee did and Bishops may appeare before them and submit themselues to their iudgement though in another case Ambrose refused to present himselfe before Valentinian the Emperour for tryall of an Ecclesiasticall cause Neither is it strange in our state that Kinges should intermedle in causes Ecclesiasticall For Matthew Paris sheweth that the ancient lawes of England prouided that in appeales men should proceed from the Arch-deacon to the Bishoppe from the Bishop to the Arch-bishop and that if the Arch-bishop should faile in doing iustice the matter should be made knowne to the King that by vertue of his commandement it might receiue an end in the Arch-bishops Court that there might be no further proceeding in appeales without the Kings consent From the power which Princes haue in causes Ecclesiasticall let vs proceed to the power they haue ouer persons Ecclesiasticall and see whether they be supreame ouer all persons or whether men of the Church bee exempt from their iurisdiction That they are not exempted by GODS law wee haue the cleare confession of Cardinall Bellarmine and others who not onely yeeld so farre vnto the trueth forced so to doe by the cleare euidence thereof but proue the same by Scripture and Fathers The Cardinals wordes are these Exceptio Clericorum in rebus politicis tam quoad personas quam quoad bona iure humano introducta est non diuino that is The exemption of Cleargy-men in things ciuill as well in respect of their persons as their goods was introduced brought in by mans law and not by the law of God Which thing is proued first out of the precept of the Apostle to the Romanes Let euery soule be subiect to the higher powers and addeth Therefore pay yee tribute For when the Apostle saith Let euery soule be subiect hee includeth Cleargy-men as Chrysostome witnesseth and therefore when hee addeth for this cause pay yee tribute he speaketh of Cleargy-men also Whence it will follow that Cleargy-men are bound to pay tribute vnlesse they be exempted by the fauour and priviledge of Princes freeing them from so doing which thing Thomas Aquinas also affirmeth writing vpon the same place Secondly the same is proued out of the Ancient For Vrbanus saith The tribute money was therefore found in the mouth of the fish taken by Saint Peter because the Church payeth tribute out of her outward and earthly possessions And Saint Ambrose saith if tribute bee demaunded it is not denyed the Church-Land payeth tribute Now if Vrbanus Bishoppe of Rome and worthy Ambrose Bishop of Millaine then whom there was neuer any Bishoppe found more resolute in the defence of the right of the Church say that tribute is not to bee denyed but payed vnto Princes by men of the Church and in respect of Church-land I thinke it is evident there is no exemption by any Law of GOD that freeth the goods of Church-men from yeelding tribute to Princes For touching that text where our Sauiour sayth vnto Peter What thinkest thou Simon of whom doe the Kings of the Gentiles receiue tribute of their owne children or of strangers And Peter answereth of strangers Whence CHRIST inferreth that the children are free brought by some to proue the supposed immunity of Cleargy-men to bee from GODS owne graunt Bellarmine sufficiently cleareth the matter For first hee sheweth that CHRIST speaketh of himselfe onely making this argument Kings sonnes are free from tribute as beeing neither to pay to their owne fathers seeing their goods are common nor to strangers to whom they are not subiect therefore himselfe being the Sonne of the great King of Kings oweth no Tribute to any mortall man So that when hee saide the children are free hee meant not to signifie that any other are free but onely that himselfe was free Secondly he rightly obserueth that this place would proue that all Christians are free from Tribute if it proued any other then CHRIST to bee so for all Christians are the sonnes of GOD by adoption and grace And Hierome writing vpon this place hath these words Our Lord was the Kings son both according to the flesh and according to the spirit descending of the stocke of Dauid and being the Word of the Almighty Father and therefore as being the Sonne of the Kingdome owed no tribute but because hee assumed the humility of flesh it behooued him to fulfill all righteousnesse but vnhappy men that wee are we are called after the name of Christ doe nothing worthy so great an honour He for the great loue he bare towards vs sustained the crosse for vs and payde tribute but we for his honour pay no tribute and as Kings sons are free from tribute These words are brought by some to proue the imagined freedome we speake of but first they are so far from prouing any such thing that Erasmus thinketh Hierome reprehended it and disliked it as a thing sauouring of arrogancy that cleargymen should refuse to pay tribute which hee saith is contrary to the conceit of men in our time who thinke it the height of all piety to maintaine
this immunity And Sixtus Senensis saith that Hierome speaketh not of that tribute which subiects pay to their Princes here in this world but of that which we all owe to CHRIST so that this is that he saith why doe not we wretched men professing our selues to be the servants of Christ yeeld vnto his Maiesty the due tribute of our seruice seeing Christ so great and excellent payde tribute for our sakes S. Austine in his first book of Questions vpon the Gospels saith that Kings sons in this world are free that therefore much more the sonnes of that Kingdome vnder which all kingdomes of the World are should bee free in each earthly Kingdome which words Thomas and Sixtus Senensis vnderstand of a freedome from the bondage of sin but Iansenius rejecteth that interpretation because Austine saith the children of Kings are free from tribute and thinketh that Austines meaning is that if God the King of Heauen Earth had many naturall sonnes as hee hath but one only begotten they should all be free in all the Kingdomes of the world and other apply these words to cleargy-men though there bee nothing in the place leading to any such interpretation But whatsoeuer we thinke of the meaning of Austine Bellarmine saith it cannot bee inferred from these his wordes that cleargy-men by Gods Law are free from the duty of paying tribute because as Chrysostome noteth Christ speaketh only of naturall children and besides prescribeth nothing but onely sheweth that vsually among men Kings sonnes are free from tribute and therefore whereas the authority of Bonifacius the Eighth who affirmeth that the goods persons of Cleargy-men are free from exactions both by the law of God and man is brought to proue the contrary Hee answereth first that haply the Pope meant not that they are absolutely freed by any speciall graunt frō God but only that there is an example of Pharaoh an Heathen Prince freeing the Priests of his Gods mentioned in Scripture which may induce Christian Kings to free the Pastours of Christs Church Secondly that it was but the priuate opinion of the Pope inclining to the iudgment of the Canonistes and that he did not define any such thing So that men may lawfully dissent from him in this point So that we see by the testimonies of Scripture and Fathers and the confession of the best learned among our aduersaries themselues that Almighty God did not by any special exemption free either the goods or persons of Cleargy-men from the command of Princes and that in the beginning they were subiect to all seruices iudgements payments burdens that any other are subiect to and required by Christ the Sonne of God and his blessed Apostles to be so But some man happily will say that though Christ did not specially free eyther the goods or persons of Cleargy-men from the subiection to Princes yet there are inducements in reason and in the very light of nature such and so great to moue Princes to set them free that they should not do well if they did not so Whereunto wee answere that there is no question to be made but that the Pastors of the Church that watch ouer the soules of men are to bee respected and tendered more then men of any other calling and so they are and euer were where any sence of religion is or was The Apostle Saint Paul testifieth of the Galathians that they receiued him as an Angell of God yea as Christ Iesus himselfe that they would haue euen plucked out their eyes to haue done him good The Emperour Constantine honoured the Christian Bishops with the name and title of Gods acknowledged himselfe subject to their iudgment though he swayed the scepter of the World and refused to see what the complaintes were that they preferred one against another or to read their bils but professed that to couer their faults he would euen cast frō him his purple Robe Whence it came that many priuiledges were anciently graunted vnto them both in respect of their persons goods For first Constantine the Great not onely gaue ample gifts to the Pastors of the Churches but exempted them also from those seruices ministeries and imployments that other men are subiect to His Epistle to Anelinus the Proconsul of Africa wherein this graunt was made to them of Affrica is found in Eusebius Neyther is it to be doubted but that he extended his fauours to the Bishops of other Churches also aswell as to them The words of the Grant are these Considering that the due obseruation of things pertaining to true religion and the worshippe of God bringeth great happinesse to the whole state of the Common-wealth and Empire of Rome For the incouragement of such as attend the holy Ministery and are named Cleargy-men my pleasure is that all such in the Church wherein Caecilianus is Bishop be at once and altogether absolutely freed and exempted from all publicke Ministeries and Seruices Neither did the Emperors only exempt them from these seruices but they freed them also frō secular iudgements vnles it were in certaine kindes of criminall causes Wherein yet a Bishop was not to be cōuēted against his wil before any secular Magistrate without the Emperors cōmand Neyther might the temporall Magistrates condemne any Cleargy-man till hee were degraded by his Bishoppe howsoeuer they might imprison and restraine such vpon complaints made And answerably hereunto the Councell of Matiscon prouideth that no Cleargy-man for any cause without the discussion of his Bishop shall bee wronged imprisoned by any Secular Magistrate that if any Iudge shal presume to doe soe to the Cleargy-men of any Bishoppe vnlesse it be in a criminall cause hee shall bee excommunicated as long as the Bishoppe shall thinke fitte This was all the immunity that Cleargy-men anciently had by any grant of Princes and as much as euer the Church desired to enjoy but that which in latter times was challenged by some and in defence of the claime whereof Thomas Becket resisted the King till his bloud was shedde was of another kinde For whereas it was not thought fitte by the King and State of the Realme at that time that Church-men found in enormous crimes by the kings Iustices should be deliuered ouer to their Bishoppes and so escape ciuill punishment but that confessing such crimes or being clearely conuinced of them before the Bishoppe the Bishoppe should in presence of the Kings Iustices degrade them and put them from all Ecclesiasticall honour and deliuer them to the Kings Court to be punished Becket was of a contrary minde and thought that such as Bishoppes degraded or putte out of their Ministery of the Church should not bee punished by the ciuill Magistrates because as hee sayd one offence was not to be punished twice The occasion of this controuersie betweene the King and the Arch-bishoppe was giuen by one Philip Brocke a Canon of Bedford Who beeing brought before
and not these for being sent by men that haue authority though abusing the same they haue a true and lawfull Ministery till they be put from it by superiour authority else were all Ministration of Sacraments and other sacred things voyde performed by such as simoniacally or by sinister meanes get into these holy places The fourth are such as neither are sent of GOD nor of men nor by men but of them-selues of whom our Sauiour Christ saith all that came before me were theeues robbers and of whome almighty GOD pronounceth and sayth by the Prophet Ieremy I sent them not they 〈◊〉 I spake not to them they prophecied This euill is carefully to bee declined and therefore CHRIST would not suffer the diuels to speake that which was true least vnder the pretence of trueth errour might creepe in seeing hee that speaketh of him-selfe cannot but speake lyes These are the foure sortes of them that serue in the worke of the Ministery whereof the last haue no calling at all and all they doe is voide the Third haue a lawfull commission though they obtayned it by sinister meanes and bee vnworthy of it so that they could not bee put into it without the faulte of the ordayners The First had a lawfull but extraordinary calling needefull onely in those first beginnings of Christianity and not longer to continue The second haue that calling which is Ordinary and to continue whereof wee are now to speake In this calling there are three things implied Election Ordination and Assignation to some particular Church whereof men elected and ordained are appointed to take charge In ancient times there was no ordination at large without particular Assignation and sine titulo allowed as it appeareth by the Councell of Chalcedon forbidding any such thing to be done and voyding any such Act if it should bee done and therefore in those times the very electing and ordayning was an assigning of the elected ordayned to the place of Charge they were to take and a giuing of them the power of iurisdiction as wel as of order But this Canon in latter times grew out of vse whence ensued great confusions in the state of the Church as Duarenus rightly noteth yet are we not of opinion that all such ordinations are voyde in the nature of the thing whatsoeuer the Ancients pronounced of them according to the strictnesse of the Canons For seeing Ordination which is the sanctifying of men to the worke of the holy Ministery is a diffeernt thing in nature from the placing of them where they shal do that holy worke and a man once ordained needeth not any new Ordination when he is remoued from one Church to another it is euident that in the nature of the thing Ordination doth not so depend on the title and place of Charge the Ordayned entereth into as that Ordinations at large should bee voyd yet are they not to bee permitted neither are they in our Church For the Ordinations of Ministers in Colledges in our Vniuersities are not within the compasse of those prohibited Ordinations at large and sine titulo and none other by the order of our Church may bee Ordayned vnlesse he be certainly prouided of some definite place of charge imployment And as the Auncient were thus precise in admitting none into the holy Ministery but with assignation of the particular place of his imployment so they tooke as strict order that men once placed should not sodainly be remoued and translated to any other church or charge In the Councell of Sardica Hosius the President of that Councell sayd That same ill custome and pernicious corruption is wholy to be plucked vp by the rootes that it may not be lawfull for a Bishoppe to passe from his citie to any other city For the cause why they doe so is knowne to all seeing none is found to passe from a greater citie to a lesser whence it appeareth that they are inflamed with ardent desires of couetousnesse and that they serue their owne ambitious designes that they may exercise dominion and grow great If therefore it seeme good to you all that such an euill as this is may be more seuerely punished lette him that is such a one bee reiected from all communion euen such as Lay-men inioy To whom all the Bishoppes answered it pleaseth vs well To whom Hosius replyed Though any shall bee found so ill aduised as haply in excuse of himselfe to affirme that hee receiued letters from the people to draw him from his owne city to another yet I thinke seeing it is manifest that some few not sincere in the Faith might be corrupted by reward and procured to desire his translation all such fraudes should altogether bee condemned So that such a one should not bee admitted so much as to the communion which Lay-men enioy no not in the end which thing if it seeme good vnto you all confirme and settle it by your Decree And the Synode answered it pleaseth vs well Leo to the same purpose writeth thus If any Bishoppe despising the meanenesse of his owne citie shall seeke to gette the administration gouernment of some more noted and better respected place and shall by any meanes translate remoue himselfe to a greater People and more large and ample charge let him bee driuen from that other chaire which hee sought and lette him bee depriued also of his owne So that hee bee neither suffered to rule ouer them whom out of a couetous desire hee would haue subiected to himselfe nor ouer them whom g in pride hee contemned and scorned And the like is found in other but as Theodoret sheweth it was ambition and such other like euils that these Holy Fathers sought to stoppe and preuent rather then generally to condemne all Translation of Bishops from one Church and cittie to another For these changes may sometimes bring so great and euident vtility that they are not to be disliked And therefore the same Theodoret sheweth that notwithstanding this Canon Gregory Nazianzen was remoued from his Church and constituted Bishop of Constantinople And Socrates reporteth that Proclus was remoued thither from Cyzicum Wherefore passing by these matters as cleare and resolued of Let vs proceed to see first to whom it pertaineth to Elect Secondly to whom it belongeth to ordaine such as are duly elected and chosen to the worke of the Ministery Touching Election wee thinke that each Church and People that haue not by lawe custome or consent restrayned themselues stand free by Gods law to admitte maintaine and obey no man as their Pastor without their liking and that the peoples election by themselues or their rulers dependeth on the first principles of humane fellowships and assemblies for which cause though Bishops by Gods lawe haue power to examine and ordaine before any may be placed to take charge of soules yet haue they no power to impose a Pastor on any Church against their
quondam oblata turned out of French into Latine by Duarenus and added to his booke De sacris Ecclesiae Ministeriis that there being a great number of goodly Churches founded by the Kings of France when the Bishops of Rome began to prejudice the liberties of them the King the Nobles the Princes of the bloud the Cleargy and commons assembled to resist the vexations oppressions wrongs of the Court of Rome made many good Constitutions for the repressing of such insolencies So Lewys when first the Pope began to meddle in the yeare one thousand two hundred sixty seauē decreed that Preslacies Dignities electiue should be giuen by election and such as are not electiue by collation and presentation of Patrons and that the Court of Rome should extort no money for any such thing out of the Kingdome of France And when notwithstanding this Decree in processe of time the Court of Rome attempted divers things contrary to the liberty of the church of France Charles the Sixth with the advise of his Nobles Prelates Abbottes Colledges Vniversities and other partes of his Kingdome in the yeare one thousand foure hundred and sixe made a Constitution whereby hee restored the church to her auncient liberty and this Decree was published in the yeare one thousand foure hundred and seauen in which yeare Benedict the Pope and his Ministers hauing imposed and exacted great summes of money a new complaint was made to the King and thereupon a Decree made that nothing should bee payde out of France in the nature of Annates or Tenthes and that such as had beene excommunicated for refusall of them should bee absolued againe In the yeare one thousand foure hundred and eighteene a Constitution was made whereby all Reservations and Apostolicall graces as they call them together with all exactions of the court of Rome were forbidden And when as the Romanes contemning all Constitutions ceased not to trouble and confound the Hierarchy of the Church and scattered abroad euery where throughout the World their Reservations and expectatiue graces whence followed great and horrible deformities in the church at last a Generall Councell was assembled for the Reformation of the church in the Head and members which prohibited these Reseruations and expectatiue Graces restored the canons touching Elections and Collations and subjected all that should contumaciously resist yea though the Pope him-selfe to due punishment The Decrees of this councell Charles the Seauenth confirmed with the consent of all Estates of his Kingdome and this his Decree of Confirmation was called the Pragmaticall Sanction But the Popes neuer rested till they had if not wholly ouerthrowne it yet greatly weakened it The attemptes of Pius the Second who beeing a private man in the Councell of Basil set it forward what hee could are not vnknowne as also of Sixtus the Fourth Innocentius the Eighth Alexander the Sixth Iulius the Second and Leo the Tenth who published a Constitution whereby the Pragmaticall Sanction was much weakened though not wholly taken away and those his new Decrees were called Conventa that is agreements betweene the King and him From these Decrees the Vniversity of Paris appealed to a Generall councell And thus wee see how well the Popes fulfill the commaundement of Christ in feeding his Sheepe that labour so mainely the ouer-throw of those canons which being taken away the whole Ecclesiasticall Order is confounded whole countries are made desolate and forsaken Kingdomes are robbed of their money and treasure churches are ruinated and subverted For so did all good men out of wofull experience complaine in former times Wherefore passing by these intrusions vsurpations and tyrannicall inter-meddling of Popes with things not pertayning to them it is evident by that which hath beene saide that the Election of fit Ministers to teach the people of God pertaineth to the cleargy and people by the reasons and grounds of humane societies vnlesse by their owne consent forfeiture restraint of superiour authority cōmaunding ouer them or speciall reasons prevailing more then those generall grounds of humane fellowship it be taken from them As in case of founding churches and endowing them with lands the Patrons haue the right of presenting in cases of intollerable abuses negligences or insolencies the Prince as Head of the people assumeth to himselfe the nomination of such as are to serue in the holy Ministery of the church Some there are that thinke the right of the people in choosing their Pastours and Ministers to bee such as that it may not bee limited restrayned or taken away vpon any consideration what-soeuer and that therefore there is no lawfull Election of Ecclesiastical Ministers vnlesse the people chuse But the errour of these men is easily refuted For seeing the Scripture Word of GOD giueth no such power to the people and all the interest they haue or canne claime is but from the ground of humane fellowship subject to many limitations alterations and restraintes there is no reason to thinke that necessarily the people must euer elect their Pastors In the reformed Churches of France Geneua the people giue no voyces in the election of Ministers but are onely permitted if they haue any causes of dislike or exception to make them knowne to the Pastours and guides of the Church and the power of iudging of such exceptions resteth wholy in them In so much that when one Morellius a fantasticall companion sought to bring the elections of Bishoppes and Ministers to bee Popular and swayed by the most voyces of the people hee was condemned by all the Synodes in France as Beza sheweth in his Epistles That there is no precept in the whole new Testament forcing popular elections it is euident And the onely example that is brought of any such thing is that of the seauen Deacons but first there was some speciall reason why the peoples consent was sought in the election of these Deacons beeing to bee trusted with the treasure of the Church and the disposing of the contributions of the faithfull and secondly from one example a generall rule may not bee gathered Seeing the circumstances of things times persons admit infinite varieties some alleadge that place in the Acts for proofe of popular elections where the Apostles are said to haue appointed Elders or Presbyters by 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 because 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifieth that kind of election that is made by the more part of the voyces of the Electors expressing their consent by lifting vp of their handes as sometimes men shew their consent by going to one side of the place or roome where they are whence they are sayd Pedibus ire insententiam But surely these places are vnaduisedly alledged for proofe of popular elections For first the Apostles onely are said 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and consequently the election pertayned to them onely and they onely elected for 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifieth to elect and not to gather voyces Secondly though 〈◊〉 〈◊〉
thinke will easily discerne for whereas the Apostle and after him Paphnutius in the Councel of Nice pronounce that mariage is honourable among all and the bed vndefiled and Chrysostome affirmeth that it is so honourable that men may be lifted vp into the Bishops chaires with it with what face can these men say that to liue in mariage is to liue in the flesh in such sort as not to please God Bellarmines evasion that they speak not of mariage simply but of forbidden mariage such as that of Priests is when they say to liue in mariage is to liue in the flesh that therefore they say only they who liue in vnlawfull forbidden mariage liue in the flesh cannot please God will not serue the turne For they speak not of vnlawfull forbidden mariage but goe about to proue that mariage is to be forbiddē denied to Presbyters by a reason taken frō the nature of it something in it or consequent of it in respect whereof it cannot stand with the holinesse of the degree and calling of Presbyters and Ministers So that they say simply to liue in mariage is to liue in the flesh and that therefore the holy Ministers of the Church who may not liue in the flesh must bee forbidden to marry their words being a reason mouing them to prohibite mariage and not taken from the prohibition as it will easily appeare to any one that will take the paines to view the Epistles of the Romane Bishops if yet they haue not beene corrupted as many other things of like nature haue But how-so-euer wee censure these sayings of the Popes it is most certaine that those particular Bishops of the West who vpon misconce it sought to restraine Presbyters from liuing with their wiues yet neuer proceeded so far as either to pronounce their mariages vnlawful or to dissolue them till of late And therefore they were most contrary in their judgments to the lewde assertions of Papists who thinke and teach that the mariages of Church-men are adulteries and feare not to say that it is worse for a man to take a wife to liue with continuallie then to joine himselfe vnto harlots which prodigious assertion all men in former times euen they who were most averse from the mariage of Cleargy-men would haue detested If a Presbyter saith the councell of Neocaesarea will marry a wife let him be put from his order but if hee commit fornication or adultery let him bee driuen further and put to pennance Whereunto the councell of Helliberis before-mentioned agreeth prescribing that such as commit adulterie shall be put from the communion of the Church for euer and likewise the councell of Arverne Some other indeede there were that proceeded a little further and put them from the communion of the Church that would liue in Matrimoniall society but the Bishops in the Councell of Turon thought good to moderate that extremity and onely to keepe them from further promotion and sacred imployment and with them the Bishops in the fifth Councell of Orleans agree So that these Bishops though inconsiderately restraining marriage yet durst not pronounce the marriages of Church-men voyde as our Aduersaries now do neyther did they for ought I can read force men to make any vow of continence For though some of them required a promise of liuing single yet was it no vow seeing a promise made to men is farre different from a vowe which is a promise made to God And many of them as it may seeme vrged such as they admitted into the Ministery to no such promise at all but receiued them in such sort that they should so lōg be imployed as they would refraine that if they pleased to marry they should still injoy the Communion of the Church but should not be imployed in sacred function any longer Touching the promise which some required the second Councell of Toledo prescribeth that at eighteene yeares of age they of the Cleargy shall resolue to marry or promise to containe that at twenty they shall be made Subdeacons The Councell of Ancyra prouideth that if Deacons shallprotest when they are ordained that they will not liue single but will haue wiues they shall be permitted to marry and yet keepe their places But if professing that they will containe they betake themselues to former or new marriages they shall inioy the Lay-communion but shall be put out of the Ministery and Cleargy Whereby it appeareth that there was no vniforme obseruation in the promise of continencie that was required seeing the one of these two Councels requireth it at eighteene yeares of age of such as were not yet Subdeacons and the other leaueth such as were to bee Deacons to their owne choyce at the time of their ordination nor that this promise was thought to make voyd the ensuing mariage seeing such as contrary to promise returned to the state of mariage were permitted to enioy the communion of the Church as Lay-men though in some places they were put out of the Ministery and Cleargy I say in some places because it appeareth by the Councell of Toledo appointing that such shall haue but the places of Lectors only that they were not wholy depriued of the honour of Cleargy-men in all places Afterwards indeed in the Ninth Councell of Toledo the Bishops finding that all their former indeauours preuailed not though they voyded not the mariages of Cleargy-men nor iudged them to be adulteries as our Aduersaries do yet they adjudged such as should be borne of such marriages to a kind of bondage and depriued them of that possibility of inheritance which formerly they might haue had But this was but the particular Decree of that prouinciall Councell and soe could binde none but those fewe Churches in those partes Neyther did it For long after heere in England as I haue shewed the Ministers of the church were publikely maried without any such wrong done eyther to them or their children And long after the restraint of Gregory the seauenth when this Decree of single life had in some sort preuailed they did still secretly marry and when they saw cause for the good of their children made proofe of their mariages Neither is it to be maruailed at that some particular Synodes in the west set on by the Bishops of Rome went about in some sort to restraine the lawfull Mariages of church-men lawfull I say both by the lawe of God and the resolution allowance practice of the greater part of the Christian Churches seeing they forbade those which euen in the iudgement of our aduersauersaries themselues I thinke cannot bee denied to haue beene lawfull If the widdowe or relicte of a Presbyter or Deacon shall ioyne herselfe to any man in mariage sayth the first Councell of Orleans let them after chastisement bee seperated or if they persist in the intention of such a crime let them be excommunicated Wherewith the
These men therefore make 2. sorts of vowes naming some simple and other solemne and affirme that the latter do debarre men from mariage and voyd their mariages if they do marry but that the former do so debarre them from marrying that they cannot marry without some offence and yet if they do their mariage is good and not to be voyded The Diuines of the Church of Rome as Caietane rightly noteth differ much in opinion about the difference of these vowes For some of them thinke that they differ in such sort as that one of them is a promise onely and the other a reall and actuall exhibition that the solemnity of a mans vow consisteth in a reall and actuall exhibition of himselfe and putting himselfe into such an estate as cannot stand with marriage But this opinion as hee rightly noteth cannot bee true seeing there is no such repugnance simply and in the nature of the thinges betweene the Order of the holy Ministery and Marriage as appeareth in that the Ministers of the Greeke Church as tyed by noe vowe are judged by all to liue in lawfull Mariage notwithstanding their Ministery and also in that the entering into noe religious Order voydeth mariage vnlesse it be approued by the Church There is therefore as he sheweth another opinion that it is not from different nature of the vowes that the one voydeth mariage contracted and the other doth not but from the authority of the Church that will haue mariage after a vowe made in one sort to bee voyd and not in another The latter of these two opinions Bellarmine sayth Scotus Paludanus and Caietane follow and as Panormitan reporteth the whole schoole of Canonistes And these do answere to the authorities of the Fathers denying mariages to bee voyde after a solemne vowe that they are to bee vnderstood to deny them to be voyde by Gods Law and that there was no Law of man then passed to make them voyde when they liued that they knew of and that therefore they might rightly bee of opinion in those times that no vowes made insuing marriages to be voyde seeing no vowes doe voyde marriages by GODS Law and there was no law of man in their time making marriage voyde in respect of a vowe made to the contrary Soe that euen in the judgment of many of the best learned of our Aduersaries themselues Mariage after a vow is not voyd by Gods law but only by the positiue Constitution of the Church which will haue it so to bee But against this positiue Constitution two things may be alleaged first that it began from that erroneous conceipt which Anstine refuteth in his booke do bono viduitatis as it appeareth by the Epistle of Innocentius grounding his resolution for voyding of mariages in this kinde vpon that verie reason of their beeing espoused to Christ which haue vowed vnto GOD that they will liue continently Secondly that the Church hath no power simply to forbidde any man to marry whom Gods Law leaueth free seeing single life is one of the things that men may be counselled and advised vnto but cannot be prescribed and imposed by commandement that the Church may keepe men from mariage if they will inioy some fauours as wee see in Colledges and Societies or that She may by her Censures punish such as vnaduisedly and without just cause shall breake their vow and promise wee make no question but that She may simply forbid any one to marry how faulty and punishable soeuer otherwise wee vtterly deny Neyther is the reason that is brought to proue this power to bee in the Church of any force For though it were graunted that the Church by her authority for respectes best knowne to her selfe may forbid a man to marry with some of those with whom God permitteth him to marry yet wil it not follow that she may absolutely forbid any one to cōtract mariage seeing parents to whom it pertaineth to direct the choyce of their children may forbid them to marry with such as they iustly dislike and yet they may not simplie restraine them from marying So that though it were yeelded that the Church for causes best known to her selfe may forbid mariage with moe then the Law of God doth and that in such sort as to void it hauing greater power in this behalfe then naturall parents yet would it not follow that shee may simplie forbid any one to marry and voide his mariage if he do whereas the Law of God voideth it not And so vvee see that as mariage after a solemne vow is not void by the Lavv of God so the Church hath no power to make any law to make it voyd But because though it be so yet it may seeme that no man that had vowed the cōtrary can marry without sinne it remaineth that wee proceede to consider and see whether there be any cases wherein a man that vowed the contrary may marry without offence to God First touching this poynt the Schoole-men generally resolue that the Pope may dispence with a Priest Deacon or Sub-deacon to marry though he haue sollemnely vowed the contrary by entring into holy Orders because the duty and bond of containing is not essentially annexed vnto holy Orders but by the Canon of the Church onely Aquinas and they of that time thought hee might not dispense with a Monke to marry For that single life is essentially implyed in the profession of a Monke and cannot be seperated from the same as it may from the office and calling of a Priest But since that time the generall opinion is that he may because though single life cannot be separated from the profession of a Monke yet he that is a Monke may be freed from that profession that he hath made and cease to be a Monke Neither is this onely the opinion of the Schooles but the practise of Popes hath concurred with the same For as Petrus Paludanus reporteth a Pope reviued a Monke who was next in blood and to succeed in the Kingdome of Arragon and dispensed with him to marry a wife for the good of that Kingdome Caietan sayth the like is reported in the stories of Constantia daughter and heire of Roger King of Sicily who was a religious woman and of fifty yeares of age and yet by the dispensation of Caelestinus was called out of the Cloyster and permitted to marry with the Emperour Henry the Sixth who begatte of her Fredericke the Second And Andreas Frisius reporteth out of the Histories of Polonia that Casimirus sonne of Mersistaus King of Polonia was a Monke and ordayned a Deacon and yet when after the death of Mersistaus his father there was none to sway the Scepter of that Kingdome whence many mischiefes followed Benedict the Ninth gaue him leaue to marry a wife making him to leaue his Cloyster his Vowes and Deaconship that so there might bee a succession in that Kingdome So that there is no question but that for a
any Papist at this day If Gerson or any other whom I honour held this heresie they held it not heretically as the Romanists now doe euen as Cyprian helde the heresie of rebaptization and sundry of the Auncient the heresie of the Millenaries but not heretically so that Vincentius Lyrinensis saith The Fathers were saued and the children condemned the authors of errours acquited the followers of them in the same cast into the pit of hell But Mr Higgons saith Bernard whose sayings touching the not punishing of such as are freed from the impurity of sin I alleadge thereby to ouerthrow the erroneous conceipt of Papists touching Purgatory admitteth Purgatory therefore I traduce the Testaments of the dead to establish such doctrines as they impugne For answer whereunto I say that whether Bernard admit Purgatory or not yet may hee haue a sentence which supposing all sinfulnes to be purged out in the moment of dissolution proueth that there is no Purgatory to which purpose I alledge him therfore traduce not the testaments of the dead to establish any Doctrines they impugned as M ◠Higgons vntruely vnjustly chargeth me For my distilling our Church out of the writings of learned men liuing vnder the Papacie I shall haue a sitter place to answere him when I come to his Appendix where I will make it appeare that the Israel of God hath not binforced as he vntruely saith it hath to seeke to the Philistines as the distressed Israelites did for the sharpening of their tooles when there was no Smith in Israel but that the Israel in Canaan deriueth it self from that Israel that sometimes was in Egypt in misarable bondage enjoyeth the jewels and treasures fighteth against the enemies of God with the weapons brought from thence And thus much touching Gregory §. 2. IN the next place hee commeth to Augustine whom he saith I haue likewise abused The words wherein the supposed abuse is offered vnto him are these The Romish manner of praying for the dead hath no certaine testimony of antiquity for no man euer thought of Purgatory till Augustine to avoide a worse error did doubtingly runne 〈◊〉 after whom many in the Latine Church embraced the same opinion but the Greeke Church neuer receiued it to this day 〈◊〉 inwhich words he saith I note the temerity irresolution and folly of Augustine the Reader I doubt not will note his temerity and folly in censuring me thus without a cause for I note not Saint Augustine for temerity nor make him the Author of a new fancy as hee falsely chargeth mee but shew that whereas there were very dangerous opinions in the Church in his time touching the state of the departed many of great esteeme thinking that men dying in mortall sinne and adjudged to hell shall in the end come out thence and be saued hee sought to qualifie the matter in the best sort hee could with least offence vnto them and to bring them from that error and therefore sayth If they would acknowledge the punishments of such to be eternall and thinke onely that they may bee mitigated or suspended for a time or that men dying in the state of grace yet in some lesser sinnes are afflicted for a time in the other world though he know not whether these things be so or not yet he would not striue with them This is not to be the author of a new fancy but in hope to reclaime men from a great extremity to leaue something lesse dangerous in the same kind doubtfull and this is all that I say of Saint Augustine neither is this my priuate fancy but the Graecians in that learned Apology before mentioned haue the same obseruation to wit that hee wrote not those things which hee hath touching Purgatory out of a certaine perswasion and as vndoubtedly holding them to be true but as it were in a sort inforced and for the avoiding of a greater euill which was this that there is a purging of all sinnes after death as some then thought So that as it seemeth thinking it something a violent course directly to go against the opinion of many and fearing his words would not seeme probable if whereas others thought all sins may be purged out after death he on the contrary side should say none may be purged hee chose rather to goe in a middle way not contradicting that which is lesse absurd and inconuenient that so he might more easily bring them he had to deale with from that which was farre more inconuenient then too much to exasperate thē This was the apprehension the Grecians had of Augustines writings touching this point which whosoeuer shall without any sinister affection peruse will find to bee righte and true Touching irresolution it was farre from Augustine in matters pertaining to the rule of faith but in other things wherein men may bee ignorant and doubtfull and dissent one from another without danger of eternall damnation no man was more slow to resolue no man more inclined to leaue things doubtfull But howsoeuer that hee was doubtfull and vnresolued in the points concerning the state of the dead it is euident in that he sayth If they whose mercifull error he refuteth would onely thinke the paynes of them that are in hell to bee mittigated or suspended hee would not greatly striue about it though I am well assured hee would not willingly haue resolued that these things are so The like may be sayd touching the temporall affliction of good men dying in the state of grace but yet with some lesser sinnes for hee was euer doubtfull concerning the same and neuer resolued that they are vndoubtedly in a state of temporall afflictions as Maister Higgons vntruly reporteth and thence inferreth many things childishly against mee but that they are in a state wherein prayers may auaile thē which two things are very different For the Graecians in their Apology before cited admit remission of sinnes after this life and yet deny that there is any estate of temporall affliction And I haue shewed before how sinnes may be sayd to bee remitted after this life in the enterance into the other world without admitting Purgatory-punishmēts But it cannot be excused that I say Augustine fearefully opposed himselfe against the error of thē who thought all right-beleeuing Christians how wickedly soeuer they liued shall in the end bee saued Surely the Graecians said as much before and are in good hope to be excused and therefore I am in some hope that I may be also for I do not say that he so feared any thing as to conceale any truth he was thorowly resolued of and which hee held necessary to be knowne of all but that he feared to offend them hee dealt with farther than of necessity hee must and therefore resolued to yeeld to them as farre as possibly hee might without impugning knowne and resolued truthes they being many and of great esteeme that were otherwise minded then he was Thus
most blessed ones are who are in that possession it is a great question that the holy Angells are there is no question but concerning holy men departed whether they may be said to be now already in that possession it is doubtfull c. Surely it is maruaile if Saint Augustine escape the censure of Master Higgons who pronounceth it folly to doubt of these thinges Sixtus Senensis saith wee must ciuilly interpret Saint Augustine in these his sayings but Bellarmine saith directly hee sometimes doubted of the place where the soules of the iust are after death and that vpon the 36. Psalme he denyeth them to be there where after the iudgement they shall bee This is that Augustine that Master Higgons in his scurrill and ruffian-like phrase saith was not so easily to bee iaded by me as Ambrose Thinking them all Iades as it seemeth and vnfitte for such a horse-man as hee is to ride on that haue beene doubtfull or found to erre in this point if he doe I would desire to know of him what he thinketh of Irenaus who saith that the soules of men dying shall goe into an invisible place appointed for them by God and shall abide there till the resurrection attending and waiting for it and that after receiuing their bodies and perfitly rising againe that is corporally as Christ rose they shall come into the sight of God Of Iustine Martyr who saith no man receiueth the reward of the thinges he did in this life till the resurrection that the soule of the good theefe that was crucified with Christ entered into Paradise and is kept there till the day of resurrection reward that there the soules of good men doe see the humanity of Christ themselues the thinges that are vnder them and besides the Angels and Diuels Of Tertullian who saith Nulli patet coelum terrâ adhuc salvâ ne dixer im clausa that is heauen is open to none while the earth remaineth safe and whole that I say not shut vp and againe thou hast our booke of Paradise wherein wee determine that euery soule is sequestred apud inferos with them that are in the lower dwellings till the day of the Lord. Of Lactantius who will haue no man thinke that soules are iudged presently after death but that they are all detayned and kept in one common custody till the time come when the greatest iudge shall examine their workes Of Victorinus Martyr who vpon those wordes of Iohn in the Reuelation I saw the soules of the slaine vnder the Altar of God obserueth that in the time of the Law there were two Altars one of Gold within another of brasse without that as heauen is vnderstood by that golden Altar that was within to which the Priests entered onely once in the yeare so by the brasen Altar the earth is vnderstood vnder which is Infernus a region remoued from paines and fire and the resting place of the Saints in which the iust are seene and heard of the vngodly yet they cannot passe one to another Of Bernard whose opinion Alphonsus á Castro confesseth to be as I haue said Sixtus Senensis likewise but thinketh that hee is to be excused with a benigne affection because of the exceeding great number of renowned Fathers of the Church which seemed to giue authority to this opinion by their testimony amongst whom he reckoneth Ambrose for one Lastly of Pope Iohn the 22. who was violent in the maintenance of this opinion These premises considered let the Reader iudge whether Master Higgons had any cause to complaine of want of faithfullnesse and exactnesse in me in that I say that many of the Fathers thought there is no iudgment to passe vpon men till the last day that all men are holdē either in some place vnder the earth or else in some other place appointed for that purpose so that they come not into heauen nor receiue the reward of their labours till the generall iudgement and that many made prayers for the dead out of this conceipt such as that is in Iames his Liturgy that God would remember all the faithfull that are falne a sleepe in the sleepe of death since Abel the Iust till this present time For I doe not make this the ground of the generall practise and intention of the Church in her prayers as this shamelesse companion would make men beleeue SECT 5. FRom the foure Doctors of the Church and the supposed wronges offered to them he proceedeth to shew that I calumniate a worthy person to defend the inexcusable folly of our Geneuian Apostle his meaning is that I wrong Bellarmine to iustifie Calvine but what is the wrong done to the Cardinall Doctour Field saith hee accuseth Bellarmine vniustly of trifeling and sencelesse foolery in the question of prayer for the dead Let the reader take the paines to peruse the place cited by Master Higgons out of my booke and he shall finde him to bee a very false vnhonest trifeling fellow in so saying For first I doe not accuse Bellarmine of sencelesse foolery in the matter of prayer for the dead as hee vntruly reporteth against his owne knowledge but in that he seeketh to calumniate Master Caluine worthy of eternall honor in very childish sort about the name of Merit Caluine saith the Fathers were farre from the Popish errour touching merit and that yet they vsed the word whence men haue since taken occasion of errour therefore saith Bellarm hee dissenteth from all antiquity and acknowledgeth the Romane faith to be the auncient faith religion This is Bellarmines form of reasoning against Caluin if he say any thing which whether it be full of senceles foolery or not I wil refer it to the iudgment of any one that hath his sences Yet notwithstanding M. Higgons goeth on maketh a consolatory conclusion that Bell needeth not to be discontented that I haue thus wronged him seeing I haue likewise vniustly accused the Fathers But if hee may be as justly charged with foolery in his manner of reasoning against Calvin as the Fathers are truely reported to haue holden the opinion imputed to them by me as there is no question but he may I thinke this comfortable conclusion will not be very cordiall vnto him Secondly I doe not say that Bellarmine doth trifle in the question of prayer for the dead as he likewise adding one lye to another sayth I doe but in prouing the doctrine of the Romane Church that now is to be the same with that which was of olde And therefore silly Master Higgons knoweth not what he writeth But that Bellarmine doth indeede whatsoeuer this trifler sayth to the contrary egregiously trifle I will demonstrate to the Reader in such sort that neither Higgons nor any of his new masters shall be able to avoyde it Thus therefore the case standeth Bellarmine in his discourse of the notes of the Church not in the particular question
touching the condition of such as dyed in an imperfect state of grace contrary to any thing holden by vs at this day These premisses considered and euery of these things being confessed by Master Higgons or proued abundantly by Mee it seemeth the poore man is beside himselfe and that his discontentments haue made him madde For otherwise what should moue him like a madde man to crye out in such sort as hee doth That I haue disabled my booke and ouerthrowne the Protestanticall Church that Papistes may triumph in the victory which their chiefest enemies haue wrought in their behalfe and ioyfully applaud the excellencie of their cause which enforceth her greatest aduersaries to prostitute themselues to such base and dishonest courses Let the base Runnagate looke to himselfe and his conscience will tell him that his courses haue beene base dishonest perfidious vnnaturall that I say not monstrous but our cause is such as shall euer be able to vpholde it selfe against all opposers without any such shifting devices as they of the adverse faction are forced to vse for the staying of that from falling for a little while that must fall and come to nothing in despight of all that Diuels or diuellish men by lying slaundering murdering and all hellish practises can doe to sustaine it §. 8. THus haue I breefely runne thorough his two bookes answered whatsoeuer concerneth my selfe in the same and so might passe presently to his Appendix but that towards the end of the 2d part ofhis second booke he once againe wrongeth that renowned Diuine Dr Humphrey in such sort as is not to be endured For he chargeth him with vnfaithfulnesse in his relations digressions from the matter a generall imbecillity of his whole discourse obscuritie vncertainty notorious deprauing of Saint Augustine and other vnfaithfull practises against the same Father and sayth the detection of his falshood ministred the first occasion of his chaunge If Master Higgons were not better knowne then trusted some man happily would bee mooued to thinke that some very grosse and vnexcusable ouer-sights are found in Doctour Humphrey against whom hee so clamorously inveigheth but seeing all the world taketh notice what manner of man hee is by that description of him which is found in a letter of a worthy Knight lately written to him another of his own father written to the same Knight I think there is no man of any sence that will regard his words any more then the braying of an Asse or the bellowing of an Oxe when he lacketh fodder yet to make it appeare that he hath calumniated and wronged a worthy person without all cause or shew of cause I will breefely set downe the summe of D. Humphrey his discourse Whereas Campian obiecteth to vs that we haue begged certaine fragments of opinions from Aerius and others condemned as heretickes first hee answereth that we haue not receiued our faith from Heretickes but from the Apostles and their successours Secondly he sayth that we condemne all the hereticall positions of Aerius yet admit whatsoeuer he held rightly and agreably to the holy Scripture in which saying Maister Higgons telleth vs the Papists will concurre with him Thirdly he alloweth a commemoration of the Saints and holy ones departed and consequently disliketh Aerius for condemning the same Fourthly hee condemneth that abuse in praying for the dead which Aerius condemned Fifthly he sayth the commemoration of the departed is not commanded in Scripture but holden by custome of the Church Sixtly that if wee dye not in a true and liuely faith all the prayers in the world cannot helpe vs contrary to the error of those men who thought that not onely a suspension or mitigation but a totall release of the punishments of men dying in mortall sinnes may be procured which error Augustine refuteth by the euidence of the words of the Apostle that vnlesse we here sowe vnto the spirit we cannot reape immortality And againe that we must all stand before the Tribunall seate of Christ that euery one may receiue according to the thinges hee did in this body whether good or ill Whence hee sayth is inferred that vnlesse men depart hence in state of grace all the world cannot releeue them afterwardes These being the principall and most materiall partes and circumstances of D. Humphrey his discourse touching Aerius let vs see what are the exceptions that Maister Higgons take against him The first is that he sayth there is no Scripture for that prayer for the dead that was ancienily vsed in the Church and that Augustine seemeth to confesse as much which hee goeth about to improue because Augustine alleageth the booke of Machabees for the practise of praying for the dead But for answere here-vnto 1. wee say that D. Humphrey denyeth that there is any precept requiring vs to pray for the dead found in Scripture speaketh nothing of exāples And therefore the allegation of the book of Machabees is impertinent 2. that the praier of Iudas Machabaeus mentioned in that booke was not for the reliefe of the dead but for the remission or not imputing of their sins to the liuing least God should haue smitten them for the trespasse committed by those wicked ones that displeased God and perished in their sin though the author of that book make another construction of it 3. that the booke of Machabees is not Canonical and though Augustine seeme to incline to an opinion that it is yet hee is not resolued that it is so yea some are of opinion that he thought it Canonicall only in respect of the Canon of manners and not of faith but Mr Higgons will proue that in the iudgement of Augustine prayer for the dead is plainely expressed or sufficiently deduced from the Scriptures of the new Testament in that S. Augustine hauing alleadged the bookes of Machabees to proue that prayer was made for the dead sayth if this were no where read in the old Scriptures the authority of the Church were greatly to be regarded which shineth in this custome which is a very silly inferēce For neither doth it follow that if it be not in the old it must be in the new neither would Augustine haue presently vrged the authority of the Church vpon the supposition of not finding it in the old Scriptures but the bookes of the new Testament if hee had thought it to be found in the new seeing he seeketh first and principally to proue it by Scripture His second exception is that Augustine vrgeth the custome of the Vniuersall Church for the commendation of the dead and pronounceth that without intollerable insolency and madnesse this authority cannot be reiected whence he inferreth that both these must ineuitably fall vppon D. Humphrey and his Church but the poore fellow that chargeth other men with madnesse if hee were in his right wittes might easily haue found that Doctor Humphrey doth not condemne the commemoration and commendation of the dead for he saith
fitte to expose such a Father to detractions and wrongs but to hide his turpitude as much as may bee Notwithstanding in the third place I deliuer vnto thee that if this Vicegerent thorough frigiditie or other impediment become vnfitte for the spirituall generation of children hee may not bee esteemed a fitte husband for the Church nor Vicegerent for her husband Now the seede of this generation is the holy word of God and not the variable traditions of the sonnes of this world Againe I deliuer that the Church if this Vicegerent of her husband become a Fornicator or Adulterer marrying a widdow a woman put away from her husband a woman of vile and base condition and a Harlotte contrary to the commaundement of Almighty God in Leviticus If hee hardly intreat the Church if hee spoyle and robbe her of her Roabes by Dilapidation or goe about to abuse her by Symonie if hee smother her children either in the wombe or after they are come out of the wombe by ill example if hee slay them with the sword of scandalous Doctrine and such as killeth the soule or pestiferous wicked courses of life or hurtfull dissembling and winking at faults and heresies that should be suppressed that the Church I say in these cases may giue him a bill of Diuorce especially if hee adde incorrigibility to his fault least the keeping of him still turne to the disgrace and dishonour of her husband and the hurt of her children If it had pleased Maister Higgons to suffer Iohn Gerson thus fully to vtter his minde his Superiours I thinke would neuer haue permitted him to produce a witnesse to depose soe directly against them in Print for what could Luther say more then Gerson doth if the Pope who is the chiefe Bishop of the world will doe his duty hee is to be honoured as chiefe of all Bishops but if hee become scandalous if he be vnable to performe the dutie of teaching the people of God if hee teach false doctrine or wilfully neglect to reforme things amisse and shew himselfe incorrigible he may nay he must be reiected by the Church and a bill of Diuorce must be giuen vnto him This I thinke will be censured as hereticall by our Romanistes But howsoeuer Maister Higgons had no cause to exclaime as hee doth that Luther whom hee calleth the Cham of Saxonie did not demeane him-selfe towards the Pope as hee ought to haue done and thereupon to compare him to furious Aerius and to say that I likewise approximate to them both when I say we haue not receiued the marke of the Antichrist childe of perdition in our fore-heads nor sworne to take the foame of his impure mouth and the froath of his wordes of blasphemy for infallible Oracles of heauenly trueth For Luther did hide the the turpitude and shame of this holy Father as long as it was lawfull so to doe but when the turpitude of this Noah neither could nor would bee hidde any longer when he became vnfit to beget sonnes vnto God when he became a Fornicatour and an adulterer when he married a woman refused by her husband a base woman nay a harlotte when hee choaked and smothered the children of the Church before and after they came out of her wombe when hee slew them with the sword of scandalous doctrine and such as killeth the soule when hee spoyled the Church and stript her out of all her Roabes when hee abused and wronged her in most shamefull and vile manner to the dishonour of Christ her husband what remained for Luther and such other sonnes of the Church as had any care of their Mothers well-fare to doe but to cast him off with disgrace that in so shamefull manner dishonoured the sonne of God their Father and wronged the Church their Mother But if this testimonie of Gerson serue not the turne Master Higgons produceth another that will better satisfie vs touching the opinion hee held of the Pope his wordes are these Nolo de sanctissimo Domino nostro Christo Domini velut os in coelum ponendo loqui that is I will not speake of our most holy Lord and the Lords anointed as it were setting my face against heauen These words follow not in the same place where the other are found And Master Higgons directeth vs to no other pla◅ as if they were found there who yet is wont to complaine against mee for that I cite in thē same page thinges found in diuerse parts of Gersons workes and not all together the Reader may finde them in the third part of his workes in his Apologeticall Dialogue The occasion of these his wordes is this hee complaineth in that Apologie of the partialities and sinister courses hee saw to be holden in the Councell of Constance by reason whereofthe French King and other Christian Princes with their Bishops and Diuines could not obtaine nor procure the condemning of certaine wicked and scandalous assertions of Iohannes Paruus and some other preiudiciall to the state of Princes and more pestilent and dangerous as he sayth whether we respect the prosperity of the Kingdomes of the world or the good manners and honest conuersation of men then those of Wickliffe and the Bohemians that were condemned in that Councell After this complaint one of the speakers in that Apologeticall Dialogue asketh if things went not better in that Councell after a Pope was chosen and the Schisme ended then before whereunto the other speaker answereth in this sort I I will not speake of our most holy Lord and the Lords annointed as it were setting my face against Heauen not-withstanding hee had some sitting by his side who some say proceeded not with that due care and diligence which they should haue vsed in the matter concerning the state of Princes and the things concerning the Lordsof Polonia these men feare not to say that they were so backward that they could not be stirred vp sufficiently to the zeale fauouring of Catholike verity nor bee moued either by words of exhortation or writing to determine such things as were proposed vnto them Thus doth hee in mannerly sort decline the direct taxing of the Pope which might haue bin some-thing offensiue to some at that time and yet spareth him not but condemneth his negligence and want of zeale in suppressing heresie and defending and maintaining Catholique veritie and addeth that hee would haue them that are zealous of Christian Religion the honour of the Pope and the holy Councell to consider whether if care be not had for the extirpation of heresies especially in matters solemnely denounced prosecuted and handled some will not impute it to negligence other to ignorance other to a direct refusall to doe right other to the couetousnesse of Prelates seeking their own things not those of Christ other to the contempt of the Princes and Vniversities that sought the condemnation of such errours others to the weakenesse of the Ecclesiasticall power in rooting out heresies and
the notorious negligence of the Court of Rome in omitting to doe that which is fitte other to base corruption and therevpon sheweth that an appeale was put in on the behalfe of the Lords of Polonia to the next Generall Councell against which exception was taken that it was not lawfull to appeale from the Pope in any case or to decline his iudgement in matters of faith contrarie to the lawes of God and the decrees of the same Conncell and to the vtter ouerthrowing of all those thinges that were done in the Councell of Pisa and Constance in reiecting the pretenders and electing a new Pope professing that hee is well assured there will neuer be any reformation of the Church by a Councell without the presidency of a guide well affected and prudent stout and constant of which sort he insinuateth the Pope then beeing was not Thus wee see Gerson thought it no impiety in modest sort to taxe the Popes negligence and in most resolute manner to condemne as impious against the Lawes of God and man his pride in denying appeales from himselfe as if no man might decline his iudgement in matters of faith Which things being so let the reader iudge whether that one poore sentence of Gerson mangled and rent from that which went before and followeth after doe bring more aduantage to Master Higgons his cause then it doth preiudice the same when it is ioyned with the other parts of his discourse in the same place But thus doe these Madianites slay themselues with their owne swordes and turne their weapons vpon themselues to the vtter ouerthrow of their bad cause From this particular of the Popes supremacy wherein Master Higgons hath foyled himselfe and hurt his cause hee proceedeth to some generall euidences whence as hee saith it may be proued that Gerson neuer fauoured the Protestanticall reformation The first is for that speaking of the Romish Church he saith Wee must r◅ue the certainty of our faith from it The second for that hee preached zealously at Constance against the articles of Wicklife and the Bohemians For answere to the first of these allegations the reader must remember that Gerson doth clearely resolue that the Pope may erre not onely personally but Episcopally and iudicially also and consequently that wee must not ground our faith vpon his resolutions as certaine and vndoubted The like may be said of the Romane Church that is the Romane Diocesse Prouince or Patriarchship for if it haue any more infallibility of iudgement then other particular Churches it hath it from the Bishoppe which it cannot haue seeing he is not free from errour himselfe the meaning therefore of Gerson is not that wee may or must take whatsoeuer the Romane Diocesse Prouince or Patriarchship deliuereth vnto vs to be vndoubtedly true but speaking of the Indians who are Christians and yet doubting whether they hold the faith of Christians sincerely or not hee saith it may be feared least they doe not seeing ◅ey are diuided from the Roman Church from which the certainty of faith is to ◅e sought to shew that the truth certainty of faith is to be sought in the vnity of the vniuersal or Catholique Church the beginning being taken frō that which of all others is the first and chiefest and hathhitherto beene most free from damnable heresies For otherwise that he is no way resolued that the determinations of the particular Roman Church Diocesan Provinciall or Patriarchicall doe absolutely binde all to receiue them it is most cleare and euident in that in his discourse of the meanes of procuring vnitie betweene the Greekes and Latines one speciall cause of the breach betweene them being the determination passed by the Latines touching the proceeding of the Holy Ghost without the consent of the Greekes he wisheth men to consider whether as we are wont to say of the Articles of Paris that they binde none but such as are within the Diocesse of Paris so it may not be saide that the determinations of the Latine Church binde none but those that are within the compasse of the same which he could not nor would not doe if he thought the infallible direction of all the rest to bee in the Romane Church alone and that all euery-where were bound to receiue as vndoubtedly true whatsoeuer it deliuereth as the Romanists at this day doe thinke Besides this it is to be obserued that by the name of the Romane Church the person of the Pope whom the Romanists name the Virtuall Church is not meant nor the Diocesse or Prouince of Rome alone but the whole Latine or West Church subiect to the Bishop of Rome as Patriarch of the West which wee are perswaded neuer yet erred from the Faith but had alwayes in it many worthy men professing and maintaining the trueth of Religion howsoeuer some erred damnably in the midst of it and a separation be now growne betweene the true members of that Church and such as were but a faction in the same So that that which Gerson hath of fetching the certainty of our faith from the Church of Rome proueth not that hee would haue beene an enemy to the Protestanticall reformation for he speaketh not of our fetching the certaintie of our Faith from the Pope or Court or Diocesse of Rome but of the Indians fetching the certainty of their Faith from the Roman that is the Westerne Church But that he neuer thought that all Christians and Churches of the West are to fetch the certainty of their Faith from the Pope or Court of Rome it is evident In that he commendeth the French King that condemned the heresie of Iohn the two and twentieth touching the soules not seeing God till the Resurrection with sound of trumpets the Nobles and Prelats of France being present and beleeued rather the Vniuersitie of Paris then the Court of Rome Neither is the next proofe of Gersons preaching against the Articles of Wickliff and the Bohemians any better then this for hee preached against such Articles as were brought to the Councell of Constance by the English and Bohemians now those Articles were many of them impious and hereticall nay hellish and blasphemous in such sort as they were proposed by them that brought them as that God must obey the Diuel that Kings or Bishops if they be reprobates or if they fall into mortall sinne cease to be Kings or Bishops any longer and that all they doe is meerely voide whereas Wickliffe neuer deliuered any such thing nor had any such impious conceipt as they sought to fasten on him neither is it to be maruailed at that impious things were falsly slanderously imputed to him seeing we are wronged in like sort at this day For there are who shame not to write that we affirme God to be the author of fin that we teach that God doth sin that man sinneth not that God onely sinneth and that God is worse then the diuell with many other like
Pope sought to ouerthrow the order of the Ecclesiasticall Hierarchie to encroach vpon all Bishoppes and guides of the Church and to vsurpe such an illimited vniversall and absolute authority as no way pertained to him feared not to call him Antichrist to compare him and his Courtiers to that Behemoth that putteth his mouth to the Riuer of Iordan thinking he can drinke it vp to pronounce that it is most true that before his time was said of him and his execrable Court Eius avaritiae totus non sufficit orbis Eius luxuria meretrix non sufficit omnis That the Church was holden in Babylonicall captivity by this Antichrist and that her deliuerance would neuer be wrought but by the edge of the sword that must be bathed in blood This is the true report concerning Grosthead in all which there are neither fictions nor exaggerations as Higgons pretendeth by which it is evident that there was as little Communion between the Pope challenging as he did then and doth now infallibility of judgement vniversality of illimited and vncontrouleable power right to dispose the Kingdomes of the World as there is betweene light and darknesse the Temple of God and Idols CHRIST and Antichrist So that he was no Papist seeing he ouer-threw the Papacie and if in any thing he erred as liuing in corrupttimes it is not to be marvayled at neither did his errour in some particular thing so much prejudice his piety and sanctity as that he may not bee called a worthy and renowned Bishop seeing hee held the foundation and stroue for the truth as farre as hee knew it euen to death And therefore the exceptions of the Author of the booke of the Three Conversions against Master Foxe touching this Bishoppe and some other mentioned by him and recorded in the number of Martyrs and Confessors are little to be regarded for that men might be members of that true Church whereof we are holding the foundation and carefully seeking out and maintaining the truth as farre as they knew it though they were otherwise perswaded in some things then either Master Foxe or we are which need not to seeme strange to Master Higgons nor any other of that side seeing they thinke many to haue beene members of their Church and Catholiques that dissented from them in all the questions concerning the Pope to which all other as Master Higgons telleth vs are subordinate and besides in the questions of originall sin free-will justification merite satisfaction the number of the Sacraments and sundry other like things Thus wee see how zealously Grosthead the worthy renowned Bishop of Lincolne opposed himselfe against the tyrannicall vsurpations and incroachments of the Pope and feared not to call him Antichrist for the same Neither was he alone in this opposition but we shall finde that the whole state of England after many complaints against the Popes incroachments vsurpations and tyrannicall intermedling in things no way pertaining to him to the ouerthrow of the Hierarchy of the Church told him in the end that if these courses were continued they should bee forced to doe that which would make his heart to ake Thus faith Mathew Paris at last the poore Church of England that had bin long vsed as an Asse to carry the Popes burdens in the end grew weary opened her mouth as Balaams Asse did to reproue the folly of the Prophet that not without just cause in the judgement of all the world for howsoeuer the church of Rome challenged to be the Mother of all churches and the Popeto be the Father of all Christians yet the one proued a cruell stepmother the other an vnkind vnnaturall Father so that they both lost the hearts of all men But what did the Pope vpon the complaints of so great a church nation as this of England did he ease her burthens or any way listen to her most reasonable suits no verily but was so vnmercifull as the same Paris testifieth that hauing so sore beaten vs he beate vs againe in more cruel sort then euer before onely because we cryed therefore let him not be angry with vs because we haue kept our word with him that neuer kept any with vs haue indeed done that which maketh his heart to ake as our fore-fathers threatned him long before these groanes of our wrōged Mother her often renewed bitter complaints before any was found to worke her deliuerance doe iustifie that which we haue done to be no more then in duty we stood bound to do neither is there any better proofe of the goodnes of our cause then that that which we haue done in the reformation of the church was long before wished for expected fore-tolde by the best men that liued in former times in the corrupt state of the church But because Mr Higgons is pleased to tell vs that if there be no better proofe the cause is bad the patrons worse because these best men we speak of will not speake for vs I will take a litle paines to shevv the goodnes of this proof vvhich I doubt not but the Reader vvill find to be better then that Mr Higgons or any other of his Romanists shall euer be able to vveaken it All that vvhich vve haue done in the reformation of the church cōsisteth in 3 things the first is the condemning of certain erronious opiniōs in matters of doctrine the 2d the shaking off of the yoake of Papall tyranny the 3 the remouing of abuses superstitious observatiōs Novv then if it be proued that the best best learned in former times thought as vvee doe in matters doctrinall that they complained of the heauie yoake vvhich the Pope laide on them and desired the remoouing of such abuses as vvee haue remooued I thinke this proofe vvill bee found very strong and good I vvill therefore first beg◅ vvith matters of doctrine and so proceede to the other points not intending to run through all the controversed points of doctrine but some onely for example and because the question is onely of the judgment of men liuing in latter times in the corrupt state of the Church vnder the Papacie I will passe by the Fathers and speake of such as liued since their time Touching the Canon of Scripture which is the rule of our faith wee deny the bookes of Tobit Iudith Ecelesiasticus Wisdome Machabees the song of the three Children and the story of Bell and the Dragon to bee Canonicall Scriptures So did Hugo de Sancto Victore Richardus de Sancto Victore Petrus Cluniacensis Lyranus Dionysius Carthusianus Hugo Cardinalis Thomas Aquinas Waldensis Richardus Armachanus Picus Mirandula Ockam Caietan and Driedo to say nothing of Melito Bishop of Sardis Origen Athanasius Hilarius Nazianzen Cyrill of Ierusalem Epiphanius Ruffinus Hierome Gregory and Damascen Here wee see a cloud of witnesses deposing for vs. And what better proofe of the goodnesse of our cause canne there be then that so
the whole composition and forme of the sacred prayer called the Canon agreeth onely to a publike ministration there being often mention made in it of the people standing round about offering and communicating so that some ancient expositors of the Roman order thinke the Canon ought not to bee vsed but in a publike ministration To which purpose Micrologus obserueth that the prayers vsed after the communion are appliable onely to such as haue communicated and therefore willeth them not to neglect to communicate that desire to enioy the blessing of these praiers Clichthoueus vppon the Canon of the Masse sayth that which some note that the Priest soe often as hee celebrateth should giue the Sacrament to all that stand by is Auncient and agreeable to the custome of the Primitiue Church when the faithfull did euery day receiue the Sacrament according to that Sanction of Calixtus the Pope After the consecration let all communicate and that of Anacletus who willeth them to bee excommunicated that beeing present at the consecration communicate not which Andradius will not haue to be restrained to the Ministers assisting but extended to all the people and that by the authority of Dionysius and Iustine Martyr Cochlaeus against Musculus de sacrificio missae hath these wordes In olde time both Priest and people as many as were present at the sacrifice of the Masse after the oblation was ended communicated with the Priest as it is evident by the Canons of the Apostles and the Epistles of the most ancient Doctors c. Afterwards the devotion of the people decayed yet the Cleargy and Ministers communicated still when all they did not communicate yet at least the Deacons and Subdeacons communicated as the Authour of the Romane Breviary testifieth Whereupon saith Cassander some godly and learned men doe wish that this ancient custome were restored that at least the Ministers might communicate with him that celebrateth as agreeable to the practise of the Primitiue Church and making much for the dignity and gravitie of this Mystery In the Churches of Aethiopia all communicate in both kindes twise euery weeke to this day Iohn Hofmeister expounding certaine prayers of the Masse hath these wordes the thing it selfe proclaimeth it that as well in the Greeke as Latine Church not the Priest that celebrateth onely but the rest of the Presbyters and Deacons the whole people or at least some part of the people was wont to communicate which custome how it ceased and grew out of vse may seeme strange but it were greatly to be wished that it were restored againe which thing might easily be effected if the Pastors of the Churches would do their duty for the Priests themselues are in fault that few or none of the people are found to communicate in that they doe not invite stirre them vp to communicate more often as appeareth by the writing of a certaine Diuine not vnlearned in the former age in which he reprehendeth certaine Pastours of that age wherein hee liued who tooke it ill that some of their Parishioners though liuing very laudably desired to communicate euery Sunday That the Sacrament was ministred in former times in loafe bread as we minister it at this day it is evident by the booke called Ordo Romanus by Durandus sundry other authorities In auncient times the manner was to giue the holy Sacrament into the hands of the communicants as wee doe and not to put it into their mouthes as the Papists doe What shall I speak saith Andradius of the vse of the holy Eucharist which now no man may lawfully touch but the Priests whereas it was wont to be carryed by the Deacons to such as were absent and to be giuen to Laymen into their hands whence proceeded that exhortation of Cyrill of Hierusalem full of piety and religion that each communicant should fasten his eyes vpon those hands that receiued the holy Eucharist and kisse them with the kisses of his mouth that so he might communicate to the rest of the members the holynesse of the Eucharist The custome of circumgestation saith Cassander is contrary to the manner of the Auncient and would neuer haue beene liked of them who held this mysterie in so great respect that they admitted none to the sight of it but such as they thought worthy to be partakers of it whereupon all such as might not communicate were ejected before the consecration and therefore it seemeth that this circumgestation might be omitted Crantzius praiseth Cusanus who being the Popes Legate in Germany tooke it away vnlesse it were within the Octaues of the feast of Corpus Christi the Sacrament being instituted for vse and not for ostentation Touching the honour of Saints Gerson Contarenus and others reprehend sundry superstitious obseruations wish they were wisely abolished Whether the Saints particularly know our estate and heare our cryes groanes not onely Augustine the Author of the Interlineall Glosse but Hugo de sancto Victore also will tell vs it is altogether vncertaine cannot be knowne whence it followeth that howsoeuer being assured they pray for vs in a generality wee may safely desire to bee respected of God the rather for their sakes yet it is not safe to pray to them Neither is this a new conceipt of ours but Guilielmus Altisiodorensis saith it was a common opinion in his time that neither we doe properly pray to Saints nor they in particular pray for vs but that improperly we are said to pray to thē in that we pray vnto God that the rather for their sakes at their suite we may finde fauour and acceptation with him Touching the abuse of Images and how much it was disliked in former time let the Reader see Cassander How great complaints were made long since against the forced single life of the Cleargy and how many and great men desired the abrogation of the law that forced men so to liue I haue shewed at large else-where That in the Primitiue Church they had their prayers in the vulgar tongue Lyra confesseth and Caietane professeth that he thinketh it would be more for edification if they were so now and confirmeth his opinion out of the Apostle Saint Paul Thus haue I giuen the Reader a taste of the iudgement of those that liued in former times both concerning matters of doctrine now controuersed the Popes incroachments now by vs restrained and also such abuses as we haue remoued by which I thinke it will appeare to be most true that amongst many good proofes of the equitie of our cause there can no better be desired then that what wee haue done in the reformation of thinges amisse the worthiest men in the Church wished to be done before wee were borne And therefore Master Higgons hath little cause to say Our cause is bad and the Patrons worse That which hee addeth that
in a sort ouer them who though they giue not the name of Bishops nor so much authority to these Presidents as Antiquity did yet is not their errour in this point matchable with the errours that are amongst Papists contradicting one another touching the Pope and his gouernment in things most essentially concerning the power and authority of that supposed Ministeriall head of the Church Wherefore let vs come to my last allegation excepted against by Master Higgons which is that we want not a most certaine rule to end all controversies by which is the written word of God interpreted according to the rule of faith the practise of the Saints from the beginning the conference of places and all light of direction that either knowledge of tongues or any parts of good learning can yeeld In excepting against this rule Master Higgons sheweth the weakenesse of his braine for what if Luther Zuinglius and other complained against such as they thought to bee opposite to them in opinion touching some particular points that they had not due regard to this rule or that they vsed it not aright What if all bee not presently of one minde and judgement in all things will that improue the rule of judging which wee propose and not rather argue the imperfection of such as should judge according to it But hee craueth leaue to except against the rule proposed by Mee for three respects first because the principles of our religion exclude the meanes of reconciliation to wit the gravity of Councels the dignity of Fathers and the authority of the Church For answer wherevnto wee say that wee exclude not the gravity of Councels for wee absolutely without all restriction receiue all the lawfull Generall Councells that euer were holden touching matters of faith and though wee make God speaking in his word to bee the onely judge authentically defining and prescribing what men shall beleeue vnder paine of condemnation yet wee thinke Councells haue a judgement of jurisdiction and that they may subject all gaine-sayers to excommunication and like censures Neither doth it any way derogate from the authority of Bishoppes assembled in Councels that we make them iudges to determine according to the word of God the resolutions of the Church from the beginning not the rule it selfe for what man in his right wits will attribute any more vnto them and make them iudges at liberty tied to the following of no rule of direction or like God that is a rule to himselfe in all his actions and hath no Law prescribed to him by any other Yet because Master Higgons willeth the reader to compare Campians fourth reason with my assertion I will likewise intreat him to see a worthy discourse of Clemangis wherein he proueth at large that Bishoppes assembled in Generall Councels must proue and confirme their determinations by other arguments then by their own authority and giueth many reasons by which a man may reasonably perswade himselfe that such Councels are not absolutely generally free from danger of erring whence it followeth that they neither are the rule that is to be followed in determining controuersies nor after they are determined Touching the dignity of Fathers authority of the Church wee esteeme them both as beseemeth vs for whatsoeuer the Fathers generally with one consent deliuer in matters of faith we admit receiue as true without father examination as likewise whatsoeuer the Church consisting of all Christians not noted for heresie or singularity that are and haue beene since the Apostles times but of particular Fathers parts of the Church we iudge according to the rule of Gods word and the generall resolution of the Fathers and the whole Church that hath beene since the Apostles times His next exception against our rule is because wee admitte not the Pope to bee iudge of all controuersies in CHRISTS steed which hee must frame in this sort The Pope is supreame iudge of controuersies in religion therefore the Word of GOD interpreted in sorte before expressed is not the rule that is to bee followed in determining thinges doubtfull and then the consequence will be naught and the antecedent false for though we should grant the Pope to be appointed judge of controuersies in Christs stead yet I hope his Holinesse is bound to follow some rule of direction in iudging and if any what other then that mentioned by Mee I cannot conceiue But whatsoeuer become of the consequence the antecedent is false for he shall neuer proue while his name is Higgons that the Pope is supreame iudge of cōtrouersies And the ignorance or impudencie of the man deserueth iust reproofe in that hee feareth not to abuse the authority of Cyprian to that purpose who was so far frō taking the Pope for his iudge that he freely disséted frō him and professed that one Bishop is not to judge another but that they are to be iudged of God onely and the whole company of Bishoppes neyther doth the place produced by him out of Cyprians Epistles proue any such thing as hee would enforce for it is most euidēt that Cyprian speaketh of one Bishop in each Diocesse not of one Bishop in the whole Christian Church when he sayth Heresies arise from no other cause then that the Priest of God is not obeyed and that men think not of one Priest iudge in Christs steed as it will easily appeare to any one that will take the paines to see the place But saith Higgons the Lutherans seeke to predominate and the Caluinistes will not obey therefore there must be an vmpier betweene them and consequently the Pope must end the quarell Whereunto I answere in a word that howsoeuer the violent humors of some men make a rent in the Church yet there is no difference in iudgement amongst those whom he calleth Lutherans and Caluinists in any matter of faith and therefore the mediation of moderate men interposing themselues or the authority of Princes professing the reformed Religion may in that good time that God shall think fitte easily make an end of these contentions without seeking to the Romish Babilonicall Monarch His third exception is a meere begging of that which is in controuersie which shal neuer be graunted him For I say confidently as before that the matters wherein the followers of Luther and the rest professing the reformed religion seeme to differ are neyther many in number reall in euidence nor substantiall in waight as he vainely braggeth hee can proue out of Luther Hunnius and Conradus on the one part and Zuinglius Sturmius Clebitius c. on the other part And therefore here is noe reproofe of that I haue sayd of the reconciling of these differences but a proofe of his vanity in bragging of that which hee will neuer be able to performe That which I haue written touching the reconciling of these men in shew so opposite in the matter of the Vbiquitary presence and the
then matchable with the greatest Rabbins of the Romish Synagogue wheras Bernard some other were matchable with them For answere whereunto let the reader obserue that I neuer call the whole Latin Church by the name of the Romish Synagogue out the faction that prevailed in it therefore I meane not all the Doctours of the Latin Church by the name of the Rabbins of the Romish Synagogue but such onely as serued as vile instruments to advance Papall tyranny superstition error So that though Bernard Alexander of Hales Bonaventura Scotus Lyranus Gerson some other should be granted to haue bin matchable with Damascen Theophylact Oecumenius yet will it not follow that I haue vttered any vntruth for I deny that any of these were of the Papall faction The next supposed crimination is a most iust reproofe of the grosse ouer-sight of Bellarmine where he saith none of the Churches separated from Rome or none of the Churches of Asia and Africa as Higgons restraineth his words could euer hold any councell after their separation which cannot be avoyded by Higgons though it seemeth he would willingly doe the Cardinall some good seruice that he might become fellow Chaplaine with Mathew Tortus For if the Cardinall meane Generall Councels it is not to be marvailed at seeing they are but a part if Nationall or Provinciall it is too childish and may be refuted by sundry instances Whereunto Higgons hath nothing to say but that if Bellarmines wordes be extended to the Greeke Church his fault is vnexcusable seeing that Church hath holden Provinciall Councels since her separation whereof as Master Higgons thinketh he speaketh and not of Generall but that his words are restrained to the Churches of Asia and Africa which could neuer hold any such after their separation In this Apology of Master Higgons there are more absurdities then words For first he can giue no reason why the supposed Schismaticall Churches of Asia and Africa should be lesse able to hold Nationall or Provinciall Synodes then those of Europe Secondly the Greeke Church is principally in Asia so that if the Greeke Church had the power of convocating Provinciall Synodes some of the Churches of Asia were not excluded from partaking in it Thirdly if this were not the common misery of all diuided Churches this infelicity grew not from their separation but from some other cause and then it maketh nothing for proofe of the necessity of adhering to the Church of Rome as to an head to which purpose Bellarmine bringeth it Fourthly that other Churches may hold Provinciall Synodes namely those of Asia Africa it is most evident For first touching the Aethiopian Christians h Damianus à Goes out of the report of a learned Bishop of those parts sheweth that they haue Councels and that they make Lawes in them Of a Synode holden by the Nestorians wee reade in Onuphrius in the life of Iulius the Third In the Councell of Florence we reade of certaine Orators sent thither from the Armenians in the name of the Patriarch of Armenia his Cleargy which could not be done without some Synodall meeting Lastly seeing many Councels were holden in auncient times in shew Generall by such as were Heretiks what reason can Higgons giue why these Churches hauing a subordination of inferiour Cleargy-men Bishops Metropolitans cannot so much as call a poore Provinciall Synod If this be not childish trisling to say no more let the reader iudge how partial soeuer he be And therfore I say now againe as at first that if Bell. mean general coūcels when he saith the diuided churches could hold none after their separatiō it is not to be marvailed at seeing they are but a part if National or Provincial it is childish seeing it is most evidēt they might hold such Councels neither can his yeares dignity or other ornaments Master Higgons speaketh of priuiledge him so farre but that wee may and will taxe his wilfull ouersights as they deserue notwithstanding the boyish pratling of Theophilus Higgons The conclusion of this chapter touching our want of good manners towardes Bellarmines grace and other such lights of the world as shine in the darknesse of Popish blindnesse and superstition sorteth so well with the next part of this chapter which is concerning my inciuility towardes the Cardinall that one answere may suffice for both That I haue not wronged him by imputation of false crimes I hope the Reader will beare Mee witnesse vpon view of that I haue answered in my owne defence The 2. part of the third Chapter §. 1. WHerefore let vs see wherein my inciuility consisteth It is forsooth in aggeration of base odious and vnworthy names as Cardinall Heretike Hereticall Romanist Impious Idolater Shamelesse Iesuite Shamelesse Companion with his idle braine and sencelesse fooleries This is Master Higgons proofe of my inciuility If I make it not appeare to all men that haue their sences that I haue reason to phrase the Iesuite as Higgons speakes so as I haue done let Mee bee condemned of inciuility But if I had just cause to vse him as I did let this foolish flatterer hold his peace Wherefore to begin with the first Shall he charge vs with twenty execrable damnable Heresies all which he knowes we accurse to the bottomlesse pit of Hell may not I call him a Cardinall Hereticke or Hereticall Romanist without note of inciuility Shall he at his pleasure because he weareth a red Hat charge vs with Heresie Impiety for impugning the adoration of Images forbidden by Almighty God and may not I call him an impious Idolater Shall it bee lawfull for him to say that Elizabeth our late Queene of blessed memory tooke vpon her and was reputed to bee chiefe Priest in these her dominions and shall it not bee lawfull for me in reproofe of so impudent a slander and defence of my late dread Soueraigne the Lords annoynted and the wonder of the world to tell the Iesuiticall Friar that he is a shamelesse Iesuite that durst so say Shall he without conscience or feare of God against his own knowledge charge vs with the hellish Heresies of the Maniches touching two originall causes of things the one good of thinges good the other euill of thinges euill and shall it not be lawfull for me to aske the question whether hee be not a shamelesse companion in so charging vs Shall a Iesuiticall Frier be freely permitted in so vile sort to wrong so many mighty Monarches States people of the world as professe the reformed religion may a man say nothing to him without incurring the note of inciuility and want of good manners Shall he charge vs with palpable grosse senselesse absurdities may not we tell him the grosse absurdities which hee vntruly imputeth vnto vs are but the fancies of his owne idle braine Shall hee bee suffered to vtter senselesse fooleries in wronging Caluine other men as good as
parts of this Church and Catholiques that thinke the Pope may iudicially erre vnlesse a generall Councell concurre with him which in their opinion is an error and neare to heresie Yea the same Bellarmine sayth that the particular Romane Church that is the cleargy and people of Rome subiect to the Pope cannot erre because though some of them may yet all cannot It is true therefore which I haue deliuered not withstanding any thinge the Treatiser can say to the contrary that the Church including all the faithfull that are and haue beene since the Apostles may be sayd to bee free from error because in respect of her totall vniuersality she is so it being impossible that any errour should bee found in all her parts at all times though in respect of her seuerall parts shee be not For sometimes and in some parts she hath erred and in this sense can no more be sayd to be free from error then a man may be sayd to bee free from sicknesse that in some parts is ill affected But as a man that hath not beene alwaies nor in all parts ill may bee said to be free from perpetuall and vniuersall sicknesse so the Church is free from perpetuall and vniuersall error This the Treatiser saith is a weake priuiledge and not answerable to the great and ample promises made by Christ whereas the Fathers knew no other whatsoeuer this good man imagineth For Vincentius Lyrinensis confesseth that error may infect some parts of the Church yea that it may sometimes infect almost the whole Church so that he freeth it only from vniuersall perpetuall error But sayth the Treatiser what are poore Christians the nearer for this priuiledge how shall such a Church be the director of their faith and how shall they know what faith was preached by the Apostles what parts taught true doctrine and when and which erred in subsequent ages Surely this question is easily answered For they may know what the Apostles taught by their writings and they may know what parts of the Church teach true doctrine by comparing the doctrine each part teacheth with the written word of God and by obseruing who they are that bring in priuate and strange opinions contrary to the resolution of the rest But if happily some new contagion endeauour to commaculate the whole Church together they must looke vp into Antiquity and if in Antiquity they finde that some followed priuate and strange opinions they must carefully obserue what all not noted for singularity or heresie in diuerse places and times constantly deliuered as vndoubtedly true and receiued from such as went before them This course Vincentius Lyrinensis prescribeth But the Treatiser disclaimeth it not liking that all should be brought to the letter of holy Scripture and the workes of Antiquity which setting aside the authority of the present Church he thinketh yeeld no certaine and diuine argument So that according to his conceipt wee must rest on the bare censure and iudgement of the Pope for he is the present Church Antiquity is to be contēued as little or nothing worth Hauing iustified the distinctiō of the diuerse cōsiderations of the Church impugned by the Treatiser that which he hath touching the two assertions annexed to it will easily bee answered For the one of them is most true his addition of not erring being taken away and the other is but his idle imagination for wee neuer deliuered any such thing §. 3. IN the third place he excepteth against Mee because I say the words of the Apostle in the Epistle to Timothy touching the house and Church of God are originally vnderstood of the Church of Ephesus wherein Paul directeth Tymothy how to demeane and behaue himselfe but because I haue cleared this exception in my answere to Higgons I will say nothing to him in this place but referre him thither §. 4. FRom the Apostle the Treatiser passeth to Saint Augustine and chargeth Me th I wrest his words when he sayth he would not beleeue the Gospell if the authority of the Church did not moue him to a sense neuer meant by him These words of S. Augustin are vsually alleadged by the Papists to proue that the authority of the Church is the ground of our faith reason of beleeuing in answere whereunto I shew that the Diuines giue two explications of them For Ockam and some other vnderstand them not of the multitude of beleeuers that now are in the world but of the whole number of them that are and haue beene since Christ appeared in the flesh so including the Apostles and in this sense they confesse that the Church because it includeth the writers of the bookes of the new Testament is of greater authority then the books themselues Other vnderstand by the name of the Church onely the multitude of beleeuers liuing in the world at one time and thinke the meaning of Augustine is that the authority of this Church was an introduction vnto him but not the ground of his faith and principall or sole reason of beleeuing The former of these explications this graue censurer pronounceth to be friuolous First because if wee may beleeue him Saint Augustine neuer vsed these words Catholique Church after this sort in that sense Secondly because he speaketh of that Church which commanded him not to beleeue Manicheus which vndoubtedly was the present Church Thirdly because as he supposeth I can alleadge no Diuine that so interpreted the words of Augustine that which I cite out of Ockam being impertinent To euery of these reasons I will briefly answere And first that Augustine doth vse the words Catholique Church in the sense specified by Me it is euident For writing against Manicheus he hath these words Palám est quantū in re dubia ad fidem certitudinem valent Catholicae Ecclesiae authoritas quae ab ipsis fundatissimis sedibus Apostolorū vsque ad hodiernū diem succedētibus sibimet Episcopis tot populorū cōsensione firmatur that is it is apparant what great force the authority of that Church hath to settle the perswasion of faith cause certainty in things doubtfull that from the most surely established seats of the Apostles by succession of Bishops euen till this present cōsent of people is most firmely setled To the second reason wee answere that the Church including the Apostles and all faithfull ones that haue beene since comprehendeth in it the present Church and so might commaund Augustine not to listen to Manicheus So that this commaunding proueth not that he speaketh precisely of the present Church To the third I say that the Treatiser is either strangely ignorant or strangely impudent when hee affirmeth that I can alledge no Diuine that vnderstandeth the words of Augustine of the Church including in it the Apostles such as liued in their times For first Durandus vnderstandeth them of the Primitiue Church including the Apostles Secondly Gerson will tell him that when
or inducement to make vs beleeue things we know not but it must be the report of such an one as we know cannot be deceiued nor will not deceiue It must therefore be evident to euery one that firmely and without doubting beleeueth things not knowne vnto him vpon the report of another that he that reporteth them vnto him neither is deceiued nor can deceiue Whence it followeth necessarily that things are as he reporteth These things presupposed I demaund of this Treatiser whether he and his consorts assent to the Articles of the Christian Faith induced so to doe by the evidence of the things in thēselues or by the report of another That they assent not vnto thē induced so to do by the evidence of the things in thēselues they all professe but by the report of another I demand therefore who that other is whether God or man if man then haue they nothing but anhumane perswasion very weakly grounded wherein they may be deceiued for euery man is a lyar If God let them tel me whether it be evident in it self that God deliuereth these things vnto thē pronounceth them to be as they beleeue or not If not but beleeued only then as before by reasō of authority that either of God or man Not of God for it is not evident in it self that God deliuereth any thing vnto thē not of men for their report is not of such credit asthat we may certainly vndoubtedly stay vpon it seeing they may be deceiued deceiue other They answere therefore that it is no way evident vnto them in it selfe that God deliuereth the things they beleeue but that they perswade themselues hee deliuered such things vpōthe report of men but such men as are infallibly led into all truth See then if they doe not runne round in a circle finding no stay They beleeue the resurrection of the dead and the like things because God revealed it they beleeue that God revealed it because it is so contained in the Scripture and the Scripture because it is the Word of God and that it is the Word of God because the Church so delivereth and the Church because it is a multitude of men infallibly led into all truth and that there is a Church infallibly led into all truth because it is so contained in Scripture and the Scripture because it is the word of God and so round without euer finding any end Out of this circle they cannot get vnles they either groūd their Faith vpon the meere report of men as men humane probabilities or confesse that it is evident vnto them in it selfe that God speaketh in the Scripture and revealeth those things which they beleeue which if they doe it must bee in respect either of the manner matter there vttered or consequent effects In respect of the manner there being a certaine diuine vertue force and majesty in the very forme of the words of him that speaketh in the Scripture in respect of the matter which being suggested and proposed to vs findeth approbation of reason inlightned by the light of grace in respect of the consequent effects in that we finde a strange and wonderful change wrought in vs assuring vs the doctrine is of God that hath such effects which is that we say which they condemne in vs. The Treatiser would make vs beleeue that there are two opinions amongst them touching this point whereof the one is as he telleth vs that wee beleeue the Church because the Scripture teacheth vs that shee is to be beleeued the Scripture because the Church deliuereth it to vs to be the word of God And the other that by the assistance of God together with the concurrence of our naturall vnderstanding we produce an act of supernaturall Faith by which wee firmely beleeue the Articles of Christian Faith not for any humane inducements but for that they are revealed by Almighty God without seeking any further which if it be so it must be evident in it self to thē that follow this opiniō that God hath revealed deliuered the things they beleeue that by one of the 3 waies before mētioned thē they fal into our opiniō for if it be not evidēt to thē in it self that God speakes in the scriptures reveales the things they are to beleeue they must go further to be assured that he doth so speake and reueale the things that are to bee beleeued either to proofe of reason or authority For no man perswadeth himselfe of any thing but vpon some inducements Proofe of reason demonstratiue I thinke they will not seeke and probable inducements they may not rest in therefore they must proceede to some proofeby authority which can bee no other but that of the Church and then they ioyne with them that follow the other opinion and beleeue the articles of Christian faith conteyned in Scripture because God hath reuealed them and that God hath reuealed them because the Church telleth them so and the Church because the Scripture testifieth of it that it is led into all trueth which is a very grosse sophisticall circulation This the Treatiser did well perceiue and therefore to helpe the matter he distinguisheth the cause of beleeuing and the condition necessarily requisite that the cause may haue her working in shew making the Diuine Reuelation the reason or cause that we beleeue and the Churches proposing to vs the things to be beleeued a condition only and not a cause in sort as the fire alone is the cause of the burning of the wood but the putting of one of them to another is a necessary condition without which that cause can produce no such effect but this shift will not serue the turne For it is the fire onely that burneth the wood though it cannot burne vnlesse it be put vnto it so that in like sort if the comparison hold the Diuine Reuelation must of and by it selfe alone moue induce and incline vs to beleeue the things proposed by the Church as being euident vnto vs to be a Deuine Reuelation though without the Churches proposing we could take no notice of it Euen as in naturall knowledge it is the euidence of trueth appearing vnto vs originally found in the first principles and secondarily in the conclusions from thence deduced that is the sole and onely cause or reason of our assent to such principles and conclusions though without the helpe of some men of knowledge proposing them to vs and leading vs from the apprehension of one of them to another happily we should not at all attaine such knowledge But this euidence of the Diuine Reuelation in it selfe the Treatiser will not admit For it is no way euident in it selfe to him that God hath reuealed any of the things he beleeueth but the onely proofe besides humane motiues or reasons which are too weake to bee the ground of Fayth that he hath is the authority of the Church So that the Ministery of the Church is
not onely a condition but a cause of that perswasion of fayth which they haue yea the authority of the Church is the formall cause of all that faith seduced Papists haue And therefore the distinction of a cause and condition helpeth them not It is true indeed that the Ministerie of the Church proposing to men thinges to bee beleeued is onely a condition requisite to the producing of a supernaturall act of fayth in respect of them that haue some other thing to perswade them that that is true which the Church proposeth besides the authority of the Church but in respect of such as haue no other proofe of the trueth thereof it is a formall cause Now this is the condition of all Papists For let them tell Mee whether they beleeue the Scripture to be the Word of God without any motiue at all or not and if they doe not as it is most certaine they doe not whether besides such as are humane they haue any other then the authority of the Church if they haue not as doubtlesse they haue not they make the authority of the Church the formall cause of their faith and fall into that sophisticall circulation they are charged with For they beleeue the articles of religion because reuealed and that they were reuealed because it is so contayned in the Scripture and the Scripture because it is the Word of God that it is the Word of God because the Church telleth them it is and the Church because it is guided by the spirit and that it is so guided because it is so contayned in the Scripture this is such a maze as no wise man will willingly enter into and yet the Treatiser commendeth the treading of these intricate pathes and telleth vs that two causes may bee causes one of another That the cause may bee proued by the effect and the effect by the cause and that such a kinde of argumentation is not a circulation but a demonstratiue regresse that two causes may be causes either of other in diuerse respects we make no question For the end of each thing as it is desired setteth the efficient cause a worke and the efficient causeth the same to bee actually enjoyed Likewise we doubt not but that the cause may be proued by the effect and the effect by the cause in a demonstratiue regresse For the effect as better known vnto vs then the cause may make vs know the cause and the cause being found out by vs may make vs more perfitly and in a better sort to knowe the effect then before not onely that and what it is but why it is also So the death of little infants proueth them sinners and their being sinners proueth them mortall The bignesse of the footstep in the dust or sand sheweth the bignesse of his foote that made that impression And the bignesse of his foote will shew how bigge the impression is that he maketh but this maketh nothing for the justifying of the Romish circulations For heere the effect being knowne in a sort in itselfe maketh vs know the cause and the cause being found out and knowne maketh vs more perfectly to knowe the effect then at first wee did but the case is otherwise with the Papists for with them the Scripture which in it selfe hath no credit with them but such onely as it is to receiue from the Church giueth the Church credit and the Church which hath no credit but such as it is to receiue from the Scripture giueth the Scripture credit by her testimony And they endeauour to proue the infallibility of the Churches judgment out of the Scripture and the trueth of the Scripture out of the determination and judgement of the Church Much like as if when question is made touching the quality condition of two men vtterly vnknowne a man to commend them to such as doubt of them should bring no other testimony of their good and honest disposition but the testimony of each of them of the other It is true then which I haue said that to a man admitting the Old Testament and doubting of the New a man may vrge the authority of the Old and to a man doubting of the Old and admitting the New the authority of the New but to him that doubteth of both a man must alledge neither of them but must bring some other authority or proofe so likewise to him that admitteth the Scripture and doubteth of the Church a man may vrge the authority of the Scripture but to him that doubteth of both as all doe when they begin to beleeue a man must alledge some other proofe or else hee shall cause him to runne round in a Circle for euer and neuer to finde any way out Wherefore to conclude this poynt let our Aduersaries know that wee admitte and require humane motiues and inducements and amongst them a good opinion of them that teach vs as preparing fitting vs to fayth Secondly that wee require a supernaturall ayde light and habit for the producing of an act of faith Thirdly that we require some diuine motiue inducement Fourthly that this cannot be the authority of the Church seeing the authority of the Church is one of the things wee are to bee induced to beleeue Fiftly that wee require the ministery of the Church as a propounder of all heauenly trueth though her authority can be no proofe in generall of all such truth Sixtly that the Church though not as it includeth onely the beleeuers that are in the world at one time yet as it comprehendeth all that are or haue beene is an infallible propounder of heauenly truth and so acknowledged to bee by such as are assured of the trueth of the doctrine of Christianity in generall Seauenthly that the authority of this Church is a sufficient proofe of the trueth of particular things proposed by her to such as already are by other diuine motiues assured of her infallibility §. 7. FRom the authority of the Scripture which he would faine make to bee wholy dependant on the Church the Treatiser passeth to the fulnesse and sufficiency of it seeking amongst other his discourses to weaken those proofes which are brought by Mee for confirmation thereof Affirming that though I make shew as if it were a plaine matter that the Euangelists in their Gospels Saint Luke in the Actes of the Apostles and Saint Iohn in the Apocalyps meant to deliuer a perfect summe of Christian doctrine and direction of faith yet I bring no reason of any moment to proue it Whereas yet in the place cited by him I haue these wordes contayning in them as I suppose a strong proofe of the thing questioned Who seeth not that the Evangelists writing the history of CHRISTS life and death St Luke in the booke of the Acts of the Apostles describing the comming of the Holy Ghost the admirable gifts and graces powred vpon the Apostles and the churches founded and ordered by them and Saint Iohn writing the Revelations
groūded vpon it is ouerthrown If this be all I hope the worst is past for if I should grant as he maketh me absurdly to doe that we haue neither Scripture nor tradition but by tradition yet cannot those rules I assigne to know true traditions by propose vnto vs false Scriptures or traditions For what are they but the constant practise of the whole Christian church from the beginning the consent of the most famous learned in all ages or at least in diuerse ages no man contradicting or doubting and the constant testimony of the pastors of Apostolicall churches from their first establishment successiuely witnessing the same things Indeed if these rules could propose vnto vs false traditions false Scriptures or expositions of the difficulties thereof our faith could not be certaine all religion were ouerthrowne but neither he nor all the Diuels in hell shall euer force vs to acknowledge any such thing neither is there any point of Romish superstition proued by any such traditions as are found to bee true traditions by these rules But will some man say doth he make no shew of proofe that we acknowledge these rules may propose vnto vs false traditions false Scriptures expositions of the difficulties in them Doubtlesse he doth For thus he concludeth very terribly against vs. The testimony and iudgment of the Patriarches or Bishops of Apostolicall Sees is one of the rules assigned to know true traditions by but wee acknowledge that the Patriarches of Apostolicke Sees did erre in the Councell of Florence propose vnto vs false expositions of Scripture therefore we must confesse whether we will or not that the rules we assigne may propose vnto vs false Scriptures false expositions of Scripture Vnto this concluding argument wherein the force of the whole chapter lieth we answere briefly and peremptorily First that the maior proposition is most false as hee well knoweth for I neuer make the judgement and opinion of the present Bishops of Apostolicall churches to be the rule to know true traditions by but deny it and professe the contrary against the Papists and make onely the testimony of the Pastours of Apostolicall churches successiuely from the beginning witnessing the same things to bee a rule in this kinde Secondly that the Patriarches of the Apostolicke Sees hee speaketh of were not at the councell of Florence in their owne persons but had others to supply their places whose proceedings they disclaimed and voyded whatsoeuer they did in their names because they presumed to discusse and determine diuers matters of controuersie without directions and instructions from them But howsoeuer we thinke of the proceedings in this Councell yet he sayth no Protestant church can shew any such authority for their cause as that of the Councels of Florence Constance and Trent It had beene well if hee had beene better aduised before hee had so much disenabled vs for he shall finde that we can and will shew farre greater authority for our cause then the late Councels of Florence Constance and Trent and that in the weightiest points of all other For did not the Bishops in the great Councell of Chalcedon professe openly that the reason why the Fathers gaue the preëminence to the Bishoppe of Rome was the greatnesse of his city being the seate of the Emperours and that they thought it fit to giue equall priuiledges to the Bishop of Constantinople for the same cause seeing it was become the seate of the Emperors and named new Rome Did not the 6. generall Councell in Trullo confirme the same parity of the B. of Constantinople with the B. of Rome and doe not the decrees of these two Councells shake in peeces the whole frame fabricke of the Papacy Did not the second fourth and sixth Councels c. make the B. of Constantinople a patriarch and set him in degree of honour before the other two of Alexandria and Antioche notwithstanding the resistance of the Romane Bishops their claime from Peter Did not the sixth generall Councell blame the Church of Rome for sundry things and particularly among other for forcing married mē entring into the orders of ministery to forsake the matrimoniall society of their wiues Did not the Councell of Nice referre both Bishops and other inferiour clergy-men to be ordered by their owne Metropolitanes and the Councels of Africa therevpon condemne appeales to Rome Did not the Councell of Eliberis forbid the lighting of tapers in the Coemiteries or places of buriall to the disquieting of the spirits of the Saintes departed and did it not abolish those pernoctations in the places of buriall which Hierome vrged so violently against Vigilantius and forbid the hauing of any pictures in churches Ne quod colitur aut adoratur in parietibus depingatur Doth not the Canon of the Apostles prescribe that all the faithfull that come together in the Church and communicate not in the Sacrament shall be excommunicate which also the Councell of Antioche reuiveth and confirmeth Doth not Gelasius command all them to bee excommunicated that receiuing the Sacrament of the Lords body abstaine from the participation of the cuppe Did not the church of Rome thinke it so farre necessary that the people should communicate in both kindes that Ordo Romanus prescribeth on good Friday when they consecrate not but receiue that which was reserued being consecrated the day before they should take wine consecrate it by putting or dipping the body of the Lord into it with pronouncing the Lords prayer that so the people might receiue the whole Sacrament and yet now the halfe communion is sufficient Did not the Mileuitane and Arausicane Councels condemne those errours touching the strength of nature and power of free-will to performe the workes of vertue without assistance of speciall grace which since haue beene receiued in the Romane Schooles as if they had beene catholicke verities The like might bee shewed in many other particulars but these may suffice Wherefore let vs proceed to his eigth chapter CHAP. 8. IN this chapter first hee sheweth that generall Councels are of highest authority in the Church of God and secondly laboureth to proue that they testifie for Romish Religion To proue that Councels are of highest authority in the Church of God which no man denyeth he produceth the testimonies of the Bishop of Winchester Doctour Morton the Protestant Relator of Religion and Doctour Sutcliffe And lastly addeth that I am clearely of the same opinion assuring all men that the interpretations of Scripture proposed by priuate men are not so proposed and vrged by them as if they would binde all others to receiue them and that none but Bishops assembled in a Generall Councell may interprete Scriptures in such sort as by their authority to suppresse all them that gaine-say such interpretations For so are my words which hee hath altered to make men thinke I allow none in any sort to interprete Scriptures but generall Councels wherein he wrongeth me as he well knoweth seeing I