to taxe all those of Socinianisme who denie or doubt of the received Authours of the Creed so this I may safely say that unawares they may make way for it as they doe also who decry or debilitate the Authority of the Church and Fathers I have endeavoured therefore in this following Treatise to vindicate as well the Authours as the Authority of the Apostles Creed as being the maine Basis of the Christian Religion to which all succeeding Creeds are in the nature of Paraphrases or Superstructures a worke I conceive too suitable unto the Disease of this Age and so most unhappily requisite an Age wherein the very Principles of Christianity are called in Question and Faith derided as the Portion of deluded Fooles and Idiots An Age wherein some have taken upon them to Correct the Old Creed and others to frame new Ones An Age wherein some accuse our Mother the Church of England for Beleeving too much as the Socinian with some other Sectaries and others for Beleeving too little as the Romane Catholick whose Church hath added to the Creed severall other Articles to be beleeved by all Christians as of necessity to Salvation a Catalogue whereof we may find in the Bull of PIUS 4th among the Acts of their late Tridentine Councill as also in the Romane Catechisme Wherefore I shall indeavour withall to cleare my much honoured Mother from this double crosse-imputation by asserting as well the sufficiency as the necessity of the Creed for Salvation This is the summe and end of my Thoughts which I never intended to make publick when I first composed these notes some yeares agoe for my Collegiate Catechisticall Lectures But when I since daily found many little or nothing to regard the Authority of the Creed and some of no meane note to write against both the Authority and the Authours I reviewed and enlarged them by farther Testimonies of Divines both Ancient and Moderne amongst whom finding an unexpected Harmony and Consent in this matter I undertook to examine the Reasons produced to the contrary which as I hope upon due triall will not be found so weighty and convincing as to overthrow so Old so Generall so Received a Tradition Now having proceeded thus farre and taken no small paines in the Search I presumed to expose them to a more publick view not knowing any who hath hitherto handled this Argument Polemically and in a set Discourse wherein if I have any way failed the Truth I hope will not suffer by my weake Defence but meet hereafter with an abler Patron But if I have so handled it that I can revoke any erroneous Christian fixe the wavering or confirme him that stands I shall have great Cause and good opportunity to rejoyce in contributing the least Mite to the profit of the Christian Church or the praise of Christ our common Saviour who is stiled by the Apostle The Author and finisher of our Faith Heb. 12. 2. To whose blessed Guidance and Protection I commit both thee and my selfe in these darke dangerous and unsetled Times 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Symbolum D. Athanasii QVicunque vult salvus esse ante omnia opus est ut teneat Catholicam fidem quam nisi quisque integram inviolatamque servaverit absque dubio in aeternum peribit Fides autem Catholica haec est ut unum Deum in Trinitate Trinitatem in unitate veneremur neque confundentes Personas neque substantiam separantes Alia est enim Persona Patris alia Filii alia Spiritus Sancti sed Patris Filii Spiritus Sancti una est Divinitas aequalis Gloria coaeterna majestas Qualis Pater talis Filius talis Spiritus Sanctus Increatus Pater increatus Filius increatus Spiritus Sanctus Immensus Pater immensus Filius immensus Spiritus Sanctus Aeternus Pater aeternus Filius aeternus Spiritus Sanctus Et tamen non tres Aeterni sed unus Aeternus sicut non tres Increati nec tres Immensi sed unus Increatus unus Immensus Similiter Omnipotens Pater omnipotens Filius omnipotens Spiritus Sanctus tamen non tres Omnipotentes sed unus Omnipotens Ita Deus Pater Deus Filius Deus Spiritus Sanctus tamen non tres Dii sed unus est Deus Ita Dominus Pater Dominus Filius Dominus Spiritus Sanctus tamen non tres Domini sed unus est Dominus Quia sunt sigillatim unamquamque Personam Deum Dominum confiteri Christiana veritate compellimur Ita tres Deos aut Dominos dicere Catholicâ Religione prohibemur Pater a nullo est factus nec creatus nec genitus est Filius à Patre solo est non factus nec creatus sed genitus Spiritus Sanctus à Patre Filioque non factus nec creatus nec genitus est sed procedens Unus ergò Pater non tres Patres unus Filius non tres Filii unus Spiritus Sanctus non tres Spiritus Sancti Et in hac Trinitate nihil prius aut posterius nihil majus aut minus sed totae tres Personae coaeternae sibi sunt coaequales ita ut per omnia sicut jam dictum est unitas in Trinitate Trinitas in unitate veneranda sit Qui vult ergò salvus esse ita De Trinitate sentiat Sed necessarium est ad aeternam Salutem ut Incarnationem quoque Domini nostri Jesu Christi fideliter credat Est ergò fides recta ut credamus confiteamur quia Dominus noster Jesus Christus Dei filius Deus Homo est Deus est ex substantiâ Patris ante Secula genitus Homo est ex substantiâ matris in Seculo natus Perfectus Deus Perfectus Homo ex animâ Rationali humanâ Carne subsistens aequalis Patri secundùm Divinitatem minor Patre secundùm Humanitatem qui licet Deus sit Homo non duo tamen sed unus est Christus unus autem non conversione Divinitatis in Carnem sed assumptione Humanitatis in Deum unus omninò non confusione substantiae sed unitate Personae nam sicut anima Rationalis Caro unus est Homo ita Deus Homo unus est Christus Qui passus est pro Salute nostrâ descendit ad Inferos tertiâ die resurrexit à mortuis ascendit in Coelos sedet ad dextram Dei Patris Omnipotentis Inde venturus est judicare vivos mortuos ad cujus adventum omnes Homines resurgent cum corporibus reddituri sunt de factis propriis rationem qui bona egerunt ibunt in vitam aeternam qui verò mala in ignem aeternum Haec est fides Catholica quam nisi quisque fideliter firmiterque crediderit salvus esse non poterit 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Of the Authours and Authority of the APOSTLES CREED CAP. I. The Dogmaticall part
more especially from the two Creeds of Marcellus and Chrysostome to which we may adde that of Arius 1. That the Greeke Church received the Apostles Creed by Tradition as well as the Latine Church therefore it was no composure of the Romane Clergy as some invidiously affirme 2. That this Creed was extant amongst them long before the yeare 400 contrary to the assertion of some for both Marcellus and Chrysostome flourished before that time especially Marcellus who convinced the Arians in the Councill of Nice as Epiphanius tells us in the fore cited place Haer. 72. 3. That these Creeds are found upon record after that the Nicene Creed was framed which shewes that the Nicene as it was not the first so it was not the only Creed of the Greeke Church yea it shewes that the Apostles Creed was of publike use amongst them rather then the Nicene which was made but upon a particular occasion viz. The detection and suppression of the Arian heresy Afterwards indeed when a full Creed was composed in the second Generall Councell held at Constantinople wherin the foure last Articles of the Apostles Creed were added to the Nicene and some of them amplified more at larg partly for Illustration of the Faith partly in opposition to Hereticks then that Creed began to be publickly used in the Greeke Church and inserted in their liturgy yet not as a Creed contradistinct to that of the Apostles but as one including or containing it so that we may not unfitly call it the Apostles Creed growne Bigger the parts or Limbs the same the Quantity only augmented 4. That the Greeke Particle 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which S. Cyrils Creed addes to the foure last Articles redounds by a Pleonasme as also in that of Arius for neither Marcellus nor Chrysostome prefixe it to those Articles CAP. V. Testimonies of the Creed and the composure thereof by the Apostles taken out of the Latine Fathers who beare witnes for the Westrne Churches Some objections to the contrary Answered YOU have heard what the Greek Fathers say concerning the Creed and its Originall its Frame and Authors let us now come neerer home and examine what the Fathers of the Westerne Church and other Doctors of note famous for learning and Antiquity have delivered concerning the same Argument and we shall find I hope an unanimous Consent a joynt agreement in their Testimonies which will not a little confirme this Truth to the impartiall Reader when he shall find both East and West to bring in their suffrages in the cause These Witnesses shall be fourteene viz Clemens Romanus Irenaeus Turtullian Ambrose Ierome Austin Maximus Taurinensis Crysologus Leo the Great Cassianus Eusebius Gallicanus Venantius Fortunatus Isidore of Sevil and Rabanus Maurus 1. Clemens Romanus contemporary to the Apostles and mentioned by St Paul as his fellow-worker Phil. 4. 3. Successour also to St Peter in the Bishoprick of Rome in his first Epistle Ad Fratrem Domini translated into Latine by Ruffinus hath these words Apostoli collatâiis scientiâ linguarum adhuc in uno positi symbolum quod fidelis nunc tenet ecclesia unusquisque quod sensit dicendo condiderunt ut discedentes ab inuicem hanc Regulam per omnes Gentes praedicarent that is the Apostles having the gift of Tongues confered upon them being assembled together framed that Creed which the Christian Church now keepeth every one of them contributing thereto that so departing each from other they might publish this Rule amongst all Nations And alittle after Hoc praedicti Sancti Apostoli interse per Spiritum Sanctum salubriter condiderunt This Creed the said Holy Apostles joyntly and profitably composed through the Assistance of the Holy Ghost But least we should doubt whether the Creed he heere makes mention of were the same which we now have he thus breifly Sumes up the Heads of it Summam ergò totius fidei Catholicae recensentes in qua integritas credulitatis ostenditur unius Dei omnipotentis id est Sanctae Trinitatis aequalitas declaratur mysterium Incarnationis Filii Dei qui pro Salute humani Generis a Patre de Coelo descendens de virgine nasci dignatus est quoque ordine quando mortem pertulerit quomodo sepultus surrexerit in carne ipsa Coelos ascenderit ad dexteramque Patris consederit Judex venturus sit qualiter Remissionem Peccatorum sacro Baptismo renatis contulerit Resurrectionem humani Generis in eadem Carne in vitam aeternam futuram sic docuerunt That is The Apostles recounting the summe of the Catholick Faith wherin the whole Beleefe of a Christian is declared viz. The Equality of one Almighty God the Holy Trinity and the mystery of the Incarnation of the Sonne of God who for the Salvation of mankind descended from the Father out of Heaven deigned to be borne of a Virgin how and when he suffered Death how after his Buriall he arose and in the same Body ascended into Heaven and sate on the right hand of the Father and shall come as Judge and how he conferred remission of sinnes on those who were regenerated by holy Baptisme and that there shall be a resurrection of mankind in the same Body unto life Everlasting thus have they taught us And alittle after Et quod in primordio ejusdem Symboli praeponitur Credo in Deum Patrem Omnipotentem praeclarum fidei Testimonium Fundamentum in prima fronte monstratur that is That which is set in the begining of the Creed I believe in God the Father Almighty shewes in the very front a renowned Testimony and Foundation of the Faith I am not ignorant that not a few among the Learned doubt of this Epistle whether it truly belong to Clemens or be a counterfeit set forth under his name as many Decretal Epistles have beene falsly ascribed to severall of the Ancient Bishops of Rome and they bring this for the cheife if not only reason of their Doubt that the Author of this Epistle which is entituled unto Iames the Brother of the Lord makes mention therein of the Death of Peter whereas Peter survived Iames Iames being Martyred at Ierusalem about the midest of Nero's Empire as both Iosepus and Eusebius witnesse but Peter was Crucified at Rome in the latter end thereof For the satisfaction of which doubt I shall desire my Reader to consider what followes First that the stile of this Epistle relisheth of the Ancient primitive Simplicity and that it is entitled To the Brother of the Lord with this Addition Episcopo Episcoporum regenti Hebraeorum sanctam Ecclesiam Hierosolymis sed omnes Ecclesias quae ubique Dei Providentiâ fundatae suut In which words the Author of this epistle gives this Iames two eminent Titles namely Bishop of Bishops and Vniversall Bishop and both of them I conceive in regard of his See Ierusalem where he was constituted the first Bishop that ever was in the Christian World the Bishop of that
command for the observation of these in holy writ nor for many other Church ordinances that might be named Our Church indeed justly blames the Romish for obtruding upon us and other Churches her owne Rituall Traditions as of necessity to Salvation some of which are uncertain others frivolus burthenous superstitious and even contrary to Gods word so did St Augustin long agoe sharply taxe Vrbicus a Romane Presbyter for pressing the Weekly Fast one Saturday as necessary to be observed by all Christian Churches whereas the vsuall Fasting-dayes at that time in all Churches were Wensday Fryday the Saturday fast being a peculiar custome of the Church of Rome But our Church abolisheth not all Traditions as appeares by this of the Creed which she with other Reformed Churches retaines as also by her 34th Article which was on purpose framed touching this subject wherein she intreateth only of Rituall not Doctrinall Traditions telling us that they need not to be alwayes and every where alike but may be diversified according to Times Countries and mens Manners so that nothing be ordained against Gods Word that what soever Private Person purposey and openly breaketh such ought to be openly rebuked and that every particular or nationall Church hath Authority to ordaine change and abolish Cerimonies or Rites of the Church ordained only by mans authority so that all Things be done to Edifying CAP. VIII Severall Objections which some have alleadged against the fore-assigned Authors of the Creed answered at large Certain Creeds compared together whereby their conformity appears to one another and to that of the Apostles HAving thus confirmed the first of the Five Poynts which I proposed to my selfe in the beginning namely that the Apostles were the Framers or Composers of the Creed which commonly bears their name I should now proceed in order to the Rest but that I conceive it necessary to cleare my passage as I goe on by the removall of such Doubts and Objections which like so many rubbs or stumbling-blocks hinder my farther proceeding and obstruct the way The Truth though sufficiently cleare in it selfe yet will shine forth unto others more gloriously when these mists are scattered though firmely establisht yet her strength will appeare more formidable in the overthrow of her Adversaries For there be some and those of no vulgar ranke who have taken great Paines and still delight themselves in overthrowing those ancient fabricks which our forefathers left us building in their roome some slight painted Toy without either strength or use to please the fancy of the contriver not satisfy the judgement or conduce to the profit of the sober Christian A course if prosecuted which will ere long bring the Doome of the Jewish Temple upon the Christian Church that shee will not have one stone left upon another that shall not be thrown downe Math. 24. 2. As for this present Argument though the Reasons which some have brought against it seeme to the objectors more then probable yet I suppose that upon due triall they will appeare lesse then necessary so that they will prove unsufficient to overthrow the constant Tradition of so many Ages and to sway against the streame of so maine a current the joynt Authority and Testimony of so many Doctors of the Church as well Moderne as Ancient I shall therefore set downe their Reasons fully and faithfully yea somewhat more distinctly than they have done and then subjoyne their Answers in severall Object 1. Were the Creed compiled by the Apostles it is not likely that S. Luke writing the history of their Acts would have omitted so principall a matter Sundry other things of farre lesse consequence he hath carefully recorded as the Apostles Decree concerning Ceremonies and things indifferent but of this so important and weighty a businesse the Decree concerning the Rule of Faith he makes not so much as one word mention which certainly he would never have failed to doe had they made any such At least if S. Luke had omitted it in the Acts yet it cannot be conceived how S. Paul and the rest of the Apostles should not speake a word of it in their Epistles I answer First that this is but a negative argument and concludeth not S. Luke makes no mention thereof in the Acts therefore it was never done To give a like instance or two S. Mathew undertakes to write the History of our Saviours Life and Death with the Precedents of the one and the Consequents of the others and yet there be many weighty Passages omitted by him which we find afterwards related by S. Luke and S. Iohn S. Iohn especially composed his Gospell of those particular Actions and Speeches of our Saviour which were left unmentioned by the three former Evangelists yet he himselfe tells us in the conclusion of his Book that There were many other things which Iesus did the which if they should be written every one he supposed that even the World it selfe could not containe the Bookes that should be written Ioh. 21. 25. But to come closer yet to the Argument S. Luke in that Booke of his which is entituled The Acts of the Apostles mentions very few Acts of the Apostles in generall yet hath large Digressions concerning S. Stephen and S. Philip who were no Apostles but Deacons Then he prosecutes the story of S. Peter and S. Barnabas but more at large that of S. Paul whose companion he was in his Apostolicall Peregrinations and yet how many materiall Passages even touching S. Paul doth he omit some of which we find afterwards occasionally recorded by himselfe in his Epistles especially in those of his to the Churches of Galatia and Corinth As for example his Travailes into Arabia after his conversion his Coming to Ierusalem three yeares after and communicating his Gospell with Peter Iames and Iohn his withstanding Peter at Antioch his rapture into Paradise and unto the third Heaven together with many other particulars things sure of greater consequence than his making of Tents at Corinth or the signe of the Ship wherein he sailed to Italy and yet these are exprest the other excluded If it be replyed that this Argument is produced only as probable and yet will hold good unlesse some probable cause of the omission can be assigned why a poynt of so great importance and so necessary is not mentioned when others of lesse weight are and that the Evangelists omit indeed diverse Things which Christ said and did yet set downe all Things necessary to Salvation which was their main end I rejoyne That whosoever goes about to overthrow so old and received a Tradition may justly be required to bring more than probabilities and conjectures if he expect to be believed that this Probability grounded on S. Lukes omission is sufficiently overthrowne by the positive Testimonies of the Ancients which I haue produced to the Contrary that the Composure of the Creed by the Apostles was a businesse confessedly of great importance but the mentioning of it by S.
Christopher who thrust Leo the Fift out of his Chaire in the yeare 908. and after seaven Moneths was in like manner dejected by Sergius But Baronius gives a reason to the contrary Anno 888. Nullo pacto possunt tribui ista Christophoro qui invasor Apostolicae Sedis mox sede pulsus perbrevi tempore eam tenuit tumultuosè That is This Addition cannot be ascribed to Pope Christopher who having invaded the Apostolick See was quickly thrust out againe having held it but a very little while and that in great troubles Wherefore with more probability we may attribute this Addition to Pope Sergius his Successour who made this businesse of the Procession his first and chiefe work and sent unto the French Bishops to gather the most solid Arguments they could find against the Errour of the Greekes upon the Receipt of which letters a Synod was called at Soissons 6 Cal. Jul. Aº 909. Wherein Herivaeus Archbishop of Rheimes earnestly exhorts the Clergy to prosecute the question against the Photian Errours and Blasphemies Hortamur vestram Fraternitatem saith he ut unà me cum secundum admonitionem Domini Romanae sedis presidis singuli nostrum perspectis Patrum Catholicorum sententiis de divinae Scripturae pharetris acutas proferamus sagittas ad conficiendam belluam monstri renascentis ad terebrandum Caput nequissimi Serpentis And this may be the reason why the ancient Romane writers never delivered to posterity the name of that Pope who contrary to the Precept and Practise of his Predecessor Leo 3. undertook to adde this Particle to the Creed namely because they were ashamed of such an Author as Sergius an usurper of the See and one of a most infamous life whom if they had alleadged they had laid both themselves and their cause open to the scoffes and railings of the Greekes who would greedily have laid hold on such an advantage Otherwise it were a Thing extreamly improbable that the Clergy and Notaries of the Romane Church should be so grossely negligent as not to insert a matter of this consequence into their publique Registers and that all the Ecclesiasticall Writers of that and the next Age should quite passe over it in silence Especially it being done in a great Synod of Westerne Bishops as the forenamed Bishop of Colosse witnessed in the Councell of Florence when he there disputed in this cause on behalfe of the Romane Church His words are these Cyrillus literis mandavit Sanctum spiritum esse per Filium ac Filii esse ab ipso profluere quam profecto sententiam non dixisset nisi coactus fuisset haereticorum ipsorum opinionem evertere quemadmodum etiam Romanae Ecclesiae contigit nam maximo in Gallia in Hispaniis Schismate imminente cum jam ex filioque passim celebraretur Romano Pontifici fuit necesse in multorum Occidentalium amplae Dignitatis magnique Consilii Patrum Conventu addito ex Filioque Symbolum magis illustrare That is Cyril hath wrote that the Holy Ghost is by the Sonne and of the Sonne and that he proceedeth from him which he had not declared unlesse he had been compelled thereby to overthrow the opinion of the Hereticks as it fell out also in the Romane Church for a great Schisme being now ready to breake forth in the Churches of France and Spaine when as the particle Filioque was commonly used it was necessary for the Bishop of Rome to illustrate the Creed by the Addition of that particle which he did in an Assembly of many Westerne Bishops and those of the greatest Dignity and judgement Sess 7a. About 165 years after the ejection of the Patriarch Photius Michael Cerularius vehemently set himselfe against the Latines accusing them not only concerning the Procession of the Holy Ghost but also concerning Traditions and Ceremonies as for Communicating in unleavened bread fasting on Saturday c. Leo Achridenus Metropolitan of Bulgaria seconded him Michael Psellus Tutor to Michael Ducas the Emperour surnamed Paropinaceus pursued the quarrell and so did Theophylact who flourished about the yeare 1070. Thus began and thus continued the deplorable Schisme between the Churches of East and West the causes whereof were these that follow 1. The Addition of this particle Filioque to the Nicene or Constantinopolitan Creed not only without but against the Consent of the Easterne Churches who had composed that Creed but were never called to that Synod wherein this Alteration was made yea still protested against it But which was more this Addition was made in contempt of the third generall Councell held at Ephesus which expressely forbad it and denounced an Anathema against him whosoever should dare to alter this Creed by Addition or Diminution cap. 7. For though an Oecumenicall Synod cannot absolutely prescribe to another Oecumenicall whence the first Councell of Constantinople added much by way of explication to the Nicene Creed yet it may prescribe Lawes to Inferiour Synods whether Provinciall or Nationall so that nothing ought to be done in the common cause of the Faith but by the common Judgment and determination of the Catholick Church Thus did the Greeks complaine And when the Latines afterward urged the Authority of the Romane See now growing daily greater that the Bishop of Rome by a peculiar priviledge derived from St Peter the Prince of the Apostles was to take care that the Church received no Damage that he had an infallible Judgment by the speciall Gift of the holy Ghost in all controversies of Faith and authority to decide them so that there was no necessity he should expect the judgment of the Easterne Churches and that this was the Priviledge of the first See which had received the Primacy from S. Peter Christs vicar on Earth The Greeks replyed First that S. Peter never chalenged that priviledge to himselfe to judge alone and to be judged of none for being called in question that he had conversed with the Gentiles he was faine to make an Apology for himselfe in the publick audience of the Church Act. 11. And when the Controversy arose whether the Gentiles should be circumcised and observe the Ceremoniall Law no Appeale was made to S. Peter but a Synod was called wherin though he spake first yet Iames as Bishop of Jerusalem the place where the Synod was called decided the question and seemes to have sate therein as President Besides S. Paul resisted him to his face at Antioch and publickly rebuked him for causing others to Judaize by his example as we Read Galatians 2. 14. Which he would not have presumed to doe if he had conceived him endued with such a supereminent priviledge So then there appeares nought in Peter above the rest of the Apostles but a Primacy of order or of Dignity at the most such as is acknowledged to be fit in the Church of God and this Primacy conferred on him either for that he was first called or for his Age or Zeale or that he was commonly the first Speaker
and so rather the Mouth than the Head of the Apostles but there appears no Primacy of order or Jurisdiction over his fellow-Apostles But suppose we should grant said they that Peter had such an unerring paramount privilege yet this might well be personall and annext to his Apostleship not derivable to any Episcopall successour and if derivable why should the Bishop of Rome rather arrogate it to himselfe than the Bishop of Antioch in which City S. Peter first sate Or the Bishop of Alexandria a See instituted by the same Apostle under S. Marke before he ever appointed any Bishop at Rome As for the Grounding of this priviledge on S. Peters martyrdome at Rome where appears any such Dependance or legacy bequeathed by S. Peter that his Infallibility and Supremacy should be annexed to that Chaire alone as to the place of his Death and Buriall 'T is true they confest that the Bishop of Rome was of old accounted Primae Sedis Episcopus The Bishop of the Principall See but withall they said that there was a vast difference between Primacy and Power for if by this pretence he should challenge any Authority or Jurisdiction over the Bishop of Constantinople the Second See Why should not he of Constantinople likewise claime the same Power over the Bishop of Alexandria which is the third And so in like manner Alexandria over Antioch Antioch over Ierusalem An opinion never heard of or entertained in the Church of God The Bishop of Rome therefore had this primacy not by divine right but by humane or Ecclesiasticall that is not from any Apostolicall Priviledge derived from S. Peter but by the graunt of Emperours and Decrees of Councells It was fit that one Bishop should be chiefe for order sake this Honour was given to the Bishop of Rome for the Dignity of his Seat Rome beeing the Head of the Roman Empire For which cause Alexandria had of old the Second place as beeing Praefectura Augustalis the Peculiar of the Romane Emperour so ennobled by Augustus Caesar Antioch the third as the Metropolis of Syria and the Eastern Countryes adjoyning whereas if the preeminency of Sees had been derived from S. Peter the City of Antioch where he sate seven years in person should have beene preferd before Alexandria whether he only sent an other viz S. Marke and appointed him for the first Bishop And for this cause Caesarea too was made the Metropoliticall See of Palestine because it was the seat of the Roman Governor untill the Fathers of the Nicene Councel in honour of Jerusalem where S. James was made the first Bishop of the Christian world and whence the Gospell spread into the whole earth gave the Bishop therof a Patriarchall title that rather of dignity thē Authority for thus runs the seventh Canon of that Councell Quoniam mos antiquus obtinuit vetusta Traditio ut Aeliae id est Hierosolimorum Episcopo honor Deferatur habeat consequenter honorem manente tamen Metropolitanae Civitatis Caesareae propriâ Dignitate that is Because from an old Custome and Tradition honuor hath been given to the Bishop of Aelia that is of Jerusalem let him have Honour accordingly provided that the Dignity of the metropolitan City Cesarea remaine entire For the same cause also when Constantinople was reedifyed made the seat of the Empire and called new Rome by Constantine the Great it was thought fit by the Emperours and succeeding Councells that the Bishop of Alexandria should no longer have the Second but the third Place Constantinople now succeeding in that honour for thus runs the fift Canon of the first Councell of Constantinople Constantinopolitanae Civitatis Episcopum habere oportet Primatus honorem post Romanum Episcopum propter quod sit nova Roma that is The Bishop of Constantinople ought to have the next place of honour after the Bishop of Rome because his City is new Rome And because there could not be two Sedes primae two first or chief Sees the same Councell ordeined that the Bishop of Constantinople should be styled the second Patriarch but in all other things should be of equall Dignity and Authority with the Bishop of Rome So in all the rest whosoever will please to compare the Prelates Sees with the Notitia Imperii shall find that the Church still accommodated her Hierarchy of Mertropolitās Archbishops Bishops unto the state of the Empire the distinction of Provinces and the Dignity of the Cityes according to that ancient Rule Ecclesia est in Republicâ non Respublica in Ecclesiâ The Church is in the Commonwealth not the Common-wealth in the Church 2. The second cause of the Schisme was the Deposition and Excomunication of the Patriarch Photius and of the other Prelats and Abbots his adherents in a great Synod at Constantinople held under the Emperour Basiliu◠and the Patriarch Ignatius in the yeare 869 which businesse was mainly urged and furthered by two Bishops of Rome successively viz. Nicolas the first and Adrian the second 3. The third cause was the Rash and Inconsiderate Zeale of the said Patriarch Photius who first dared to accuse the Romane Church of Heresy because it held that the holy Ghost proceeded from the Sonne as well as from the Father whereas in all former disputes between the Greeks and the Latines whether by word or writing neither party accused his Adversary of Heresy for holding either opinion Yea the Latines Demōstrated that some of the Greeke Fathers spake as they did neither could the Greekes deny it And since this precipitate Censure of Photius not a few of the Romane Divines have in requitall accused the Greeke Church of the same Crime for holding the Contrary 4. The fourth cause was the contention about the Primacy between the Bishops of Rome and Constantinople For Iohn surnamed Iejunator and Cyriacus his successour Patriarchs of Constantinople were very earnest with the emperour Mauritius to obteine the Title Authority of Oecumenicall Patriarchs thereby challenging a Superiority over the Bishops of the whole Christian World from the Dignity of their City which was then the Head of the Romane Empire that of the West being utterly broken and Rome the Ancient Seate thereof for that Cause loosing its former Dignity Now against these their endeavours Gregory the great then Bishop of Rome publickly opposed himselfe and taxed them in expresse Termes of Antichristian ambition saying withall that Dato uni Episcopi universalis Titulo reliquos Sacerdotes honore debito privari The giving of the Title of Universall Bishop unto one doth deprive the other Bishops of their due Honour Yet with in lesse than two years after his Death Boniface the Third his Successour abtained the same Title of the Emperour Phocas which Gregory had so much Decried But the Greeke Prelates would never yeeld to it 5. The fift cause was the busines of Images which brake out after this contention about the Primacy For the Emperour Leo Isaurus and his sonne Constantinus Copronymus
interdicted the worship thereof and commanded them to be broken Both of them for this Cause being very hatefull to the Church of Rome 6. A sixt cause was the Pride Pompe and Covetous Exactions of the Popes Legates who were yearly sent from Rome to carry the Chrisme unto Constantinople 7. The seventh and last cause was the Division of East and West Empire caused by Leo 3. Bishop of Rome who seeing Italy and more especially his owne Church and City dayly vexed and in danger of imminent Ruine by the incursions of the Saracen◠on the East the oppression of the Lombardes from the West and seeing that the Greeke Emperour at his earnest solicitation either would not or could not protect him In fine he perswaded the Senate and people of Rome to elect Charlemaigne Emperour of the West which they did he accordingly crowned him at Rome in St Peters Church uppon Christmas Day Aº Dni 800. Thus this great Breach had its originall both from Prince and Prelate The Emperours became odions to the Popes for the businesse of Images and the Popes to the Greeke Emperours for the Division of the Empire Then for the Clergy The contention about the Primacy made way for the Schisme The Pride Pompe and Avarice of the Romane Legats fomented it Then the Doctrine of the Procession accōpained with the Deposition of Photius and the adding of the particle Filioque to the Nicene Creed on the one side with the retortion of Heresy wherewith Photius charged the Latine Church on the other brought it to the Height And when the Differences were thus high then every petty diversity in matter of Ceremony or opinion was a sufficient occasion of Cavill and served to make the Breach wider For to insist a little upon this last The Greeks celebrate the Eucharist in both kindes and give it to Infants presently upon their Baptisme but the Romanists doe neither They give it also in leavened bread and condemne the contrary use whereas the Church of Rome usually delivers it in light Wafer-cakes They admit of Preists marriages that is the use of those wives whom they married before ordination which the Romanists do not They prohibite the fourth mariage in any Christian as a thing intollerable They solemnize Saturday festivally in memory of the Creation and eat flesh therein forbidding as unlawful to fast any Saturday in the yeare except Easter Eve in memory of our Saviours then lying in the Grave They Eate no bloud nor any thing strangled in observation of that Decree of the Apostles Act. 15 28 29. They observe foure Lents in the yeare They reject the religious use of massy Images or statues in their Churches though they admit of Pictures or plaine Images They disallow private Masses and the sale of Indulgences and Pardons with the Adoration of the elevated Host lastly they have their service in a knowne Tongue In these and some other small particulars they differ in practise from the Romane Church And as in matter of practise so in opinion too as about Transubstantiation Purgatory the State of Soules departed c. But too much of the causes and the sad effects that followed The great head of his Church unite all his members to himselfe and each other in Verity and Unity in the same Faith and the same Love He who is the Wisdome of his Father supply his Church with that VVisdome from above which is first pure then peaceable that so it may seeke and seeking obtaine those two inestimable Blessings Truth and Peace The Great Physitian of Soules in his due time apply an effectual Salve to heale up these Wounds of his torne mangled Spouse The Great Shepheard of his Church who came to binde up that which was broken to seeke that which was lost to recollect the dispersed ones and who once brake downe the partition-wall between Iew and Gentile bring his Scatterd Sheep into one Fold heere and hereafter set them at his right Hand in his Heavenly Kingdome FINIS ERRATA PAge 3. lin 24. for sunt read sicut p. 9. l. 24. r. 2 Cor. 1. 24. p. 17. l. 21. r. Marcellus Ancyranus p. 88. l. 16. r. Contextio p. 102. l. 32. r. Heb. 6. 1. p. 105. l. 20 21. r. this testimony p. 117. l. 19. r. his comments p. 118. l. 14. r. where p. 122. l. 12. r. this p. 116. l. 25. r. discessuri p. 128. l. 19. r. confinem p. 141. l. 17. r. Melania p. 145. l. 31. r. God p. 157. l. 6. r. forme p. 159. l. 23. r. out of p. 161. l. 31. r. Test p. 173. l. 29. r. this p. 174. l. 27. r. Moscovitish p. 175. l 34. r. Act. 8. 37. p. 179. l 21. r is p. 181. l. 12. r. spake p. 183. l. 22. r. generality p. 189. l. 16. r. or p. 193. l. 15. r. words l. 25. thus p. 196. l. 20. r. ita p. 204. l. 12. r. commonly p. 205. l. 12. f. in the. r. to be p. 207. l. 34. r. unjust p. 209. l. 11. r. Areop p. 210. l 9. r. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 p. 214. l. 31. r or p. 223. l 18. Creed made by p. 245. l 34. r. Lauraeus p. 252. l 9. r Haymo