of the Emperour he could dispose of their persons so as not to suffer them to continue in a place or to put them from it as they demeaned themselves to his satisfaction or otherwise in reference to publick utility It is reasonable if they were disloyal or disobedient to him that he should not suffer them to be in places of such influence whereby they might pervert the people to disaffection It is fit that he should deprive them of temporalties The example of Solomon deposing Abiathar Constantine M. commanded Eusebius and Theogonius to depart out of the Cities over which they presided as Bishops Constantius deposed Paulus of Constantinople Constantius ejected all that would not subscribe to the Creed of Ariminum The Emperour Leo deposed Timotheus Aelurus for which Pope Leo did highly commend and thank him The Emperours discarded divers Popes Constantius banished Pope Liberius and caused another to be put in his room Otho put out John the Twelfth Justinian deposed Pope Silverius and banished Pope Vigilius Justinian banished Anastasius Bishop of Antioch extruded Anthimus of Constantinople and Theodosius of Alexandria Neither indeed was any great Patriarch effectually deposed without their power or leave Flavianus was supported by Theodosius against the Pope Dioscorus subsisted by the power of Theodosius Junior The Deposition of Dioscorus in the Synod of Chalcedon was voted with a reserve of If it shall please our most sacred and pious Lord. In effect the Emperours deposed all Bishops which were ordained beside their general Laws as Justinian having prescribed conditions and qualifications concerning the Ordinations of Bishops subjoineth But if any Bishop be ordained without using our forementioned Constitution we command you that by all means he be removed from his Bishoprick 14. The Instances alledged to prove the Pope's Authority in this case are inconcludent and invalid They alledge the case of Marcianus Bishop of Arles concerning whom for abetting Novatianism St. Cyprian doth exhort Pope Stephanus that he would direct Letters to the Bishops of Gaul and the people of Arles that he being for his schismatical behaviour removed from communion another should be substituted in his room The Epistle grounding this Argument is questioned by a great Critick but I willingly admit it to be genuine seeing it hath the style and spirit of St. Cyprian and suteth his Age and I see no cause why it should be forged wherefore omitting that defence I answer that the whole matter being seriously weighed doth make rather against the Pope's cause than for it for if the Pope had the sole or Sovereign authority of rejecting Bishops why did the Gaulish Bishops refer the matter to St. Cyprian why had Marcianus himself a recourse to him St. Cyprian doth not ascribe to the Pope any peculiar authority of Judgment or Censure but a common one which himself could exercise which all Bishops might exercise It is saith he our part to provide and succour in such a case for therefore is the body of Priests so numerous that by joint endeavour they may suppress heresies and schisms The case being such St. Cyprian earnestly doth move Pope Stephanus to concur in exercise of Discipline on that Schismatick and to prosecute effectually the business by his Letters persuading his fellow-Bishops in France that they would not suffer Marcianus to insult over the College of Bishops for to them it seemeth the transaction did immediately belong To doe thus St. Cyprian implieth and prescribeth to be the Pope's special duty not onely out of regard to the common Interest but for his particular concernment in the case that schism having been first advanced against his Predecessours St. Cyprian also if we mark it covertly doth tax the Pope of negligence in not having soon enough joined with himself and the community of Bishops in censuring that Delinquent We may add that the Church of Arles and Gaul being near Italy the Pope may be allowed to have some greater sway there than otherwhere in more distant places so that St. Cyprian thought his Letters to quicken Discipline there might be proper and particularly effectual These things being duly considered what advantage can they draw from this Instance doth it not rather prejudice their cause and afford a considerable objection against it We may observe that the strength of their argumentation mainly consisteth in the words quibus abstento the which as the drift of the whole Epistle and parallel expressions therein do shew do signifie no more than quibus efficiatur ut abstento which may procure him to be excomunicated not quae contineant abstentionem which contain excommunication as P. de Marca glosseth although admitting that sense it would not import much seeing onely thereby the Pope would have signified his consent with other Bishops wherefore de Marca hath no great cause to blame us that we do not deprehend any magnificent thing in this place for the dignity of the Papal See indeed he hath I must confess better eyes than I who can see any such mighty things there for that purpose As for the substitution of another in the room of Marcianus that was a consequent of the excommunication and was to be the work of the Clergy and people of the place for when by common judgment of Catholick Bishops any Bishop was rejected the people did apply themselves to chuse another I adjoin the Resolution of a very learned writer of their communion in these words In this case of Marcianus Bishop of Arles if the right of excommunication did belong solely to the Bishop of Rome wherefore did Faustinus Bishop of Lyons advertise Cyprian Bishop of Carthage who was so far distant concerning those very things touching Marcianus which both Faustinus himself and other Bishops of the same Province had before sent word of to Stephen Bishop of Rome who lived nearest being moreover of all Bishops the chief It must either be said that this was done because of Stephen's negligence or what is more probable according to the discipline then used in the Church that all Bishops of neighbouring places but especially those presiding over the most eminent Cities should join their Counsels for the welfare of the Church and that Christian Religion might not receive the least damage in any of its affairs whatsoever Hence it was that in the case of Marcianus Bishop of Arles the Bishop of Lyons writ Letters to the Bishop of Rome and Carthage and again that the Bishop of Carthage as being most remote did write to the Bishop of Rome as being his brother and Collegue who by reason of his propinquity might more easily know and judge of the whole matter The other Instances are of a later date after the Synod of Nice and therefore of not so great weight yea their having none more ancient to produce doth strongly make against the antiquity of this right it being strange that no memory should be of any deposed
bounds of Papal Authority This disagreement of the Roman Doctours about the nature and extent of Papal Authority is a shrewd prejudice against it If a man should sue for a piece of Land and his Advocates the notablest could be had and well payed could not find where it lieth how it is butted and bounded from whom it was conveyed to him one would be very apt to suspect his Title If God had instituted such an Office it is highly probable we might satisfactorily know what the Nature and Use of it were the Patents and Charters for it would declare it Yet for resolution in this great Case we are left to seek they not having either the will or the courage or the power to determine it This insuperable Problem hath baffled all their infallible methods of deciding Controversies their Traditions blundering their Synods clashing their Divines wrangling endlesly about what kind of thing the Pope is and what Power he rightly may claim There is saith a great Divine among them so much controversie about the plenitude of Ecclesiastical Power and to what things it may extend it self that few things in that matter are secure This is a plain argument of the impotency of the Pope's power in judging and deciding Controversies or of his Cause in this matter that he cannot define a Point so nearly concerning him and which he so much desireth an Agreement in that he cannot settle his own Claim out of doubt that all his Authority cannot secure it self from contest So indeed it is that no Spells can allay some Spirits and where Interests are irreconcilable Opinions will be so Some Points are so tough and so touchy that no-body dare meddle with them fearing that their resolution will fail of success and submission Hence even the anathematizing Definers of Trent the boldest undertakers to decide Controversies that ever were did wave this Point the Legates of the Pope being injoined to advertise That they should not for any cause whatever come to dispute about the Pope's Authority It was indeed wisely done of them to decline this Question their Authority not being strong enough to bear the weight of a Decision in favour of the Roman See against which they could doe nothing according to its Pretences as appeareth by one clear instance For whereas that Council took upon it incidentally to enact that any Prince should be excommunicate and deprived of the dominion of any City or place where he should permit a Duel to be fought the Prelates of France in the Convention of Orders Anno 1595. did declare against that Decree as infringing their King's Authority It was therefore advisedly done not to meddle with so ticklish a point But in the mean time their Policy seemeth greater than their Charity which might have inclined them not to leave the world in darkness and doubt and unresolved in a Point of so main importance as indeed they did in others of no small consequence disputed among their Divines with obstinate Heat viz. The Divine Right of Bishops the Necessity of Residence the immaculate Conception c. The Opinions therefore among them concerning the Pope's Authority as they have been so they are and in likelihood may continue very different § II. There are among them those who ascribe to the Pope an universal absolute and boundless Empire over all Persons indifferently and in all Matters conferred and settled on him by Divine immutable sanction so that all men of whatever degree are obliged in conscience to believe whatever he doth authoritatively dictate and to obey whatever he doth prescribe So that if Princes themselves do refuse obedience to his will he may excommunicate them cashier them depose them extirpate them If he chargeth us to hold no Communion with our Prince to renounce our Allegeance to him to abandon oppose and persecute him even to death we may without scruple we must in duty obey If he doth interdict whole Nations from the exercise of God's Worship and Service they must comply therein So that according to their conceits he is in effect Sovereign Lord of all the World and superiour even in Temporal or Civil matters unto all Kings and Princes It is notorious that many Canonists if not most and many Divines of that Party do maintain this Doctrine affirming that all the Power of Christ the Lord of Lords and King of Kings to whom all Power in Heaven and Earth doth appertain is imparted to the Pope as to his Vice-gerent This is the Doctrine which almost 400 years agoe Augustinus Triumphus in his egregious Work concerning Ecclesiastical Power did teach attributing to the Pope an incomprehensible and infinite Power because great is the Lord and great is his Power and of his Greatness there is no end This is the Doctrine which the leading Theologue of their Sect their Angelical Doctour doth affirm both directly saying that in the Pope is the top of both Powers and by plain consequence asserting that when any one is denounced excommunicate for Apostasie his Subjects are immediately freed from his dominion and their Oath of Allegeance to him This the same Thomas or an Authour passing under his name in his Book touching the Rule of Princes doth teach affirming that the Pope as Supreme King of all the world may impose taxes on all Christians and destroy Towns and Castles for the preservation of Christianity This as Card. Zabarell near 300 years agoe telleth us is the Doctrine which for a long time those who would please Popes did persuade them that they could doe all things whatever they pleased yea and things unlawfull and so could doe more than God According to this Doctrine then current at Rome in the last Laterane Great Synod under the Pope's nose and in his ear one Bishop styled him Prince of the World another Oratour called him King of Kings and Monarch of the Earth another great Prelate said of him that he had all Power above all Powers both of Heaven and Earth And the same roused up Pope Leo X. in these brave terms Snatch up therefore the two-edged sword of Divine Power committed to thee and injoyn command and charge that an universal Peace and Alliance be made among Christians for at least 10 years and to that bind Kings in the fetters of the great King and constrain Nobles by the iron manacles of Censures for to thee is given all Power in Heaven and in Earth This is the Doctrine which Baronius with a Roman confidence doth so often assert and drive forward saying that there can be no doubt of it but that the Civil Principality is subject to the Sacerdotal and that God hath made the Political Government subject to the Dominion of the Spiritual Church § III. From that Doctrine the Opinion in effect doth not differ which Bellarmine voucheth for the common Opinion of Catholicks that by reason of the Spiritual Power the Pope at least indirectly hath a Supreme
to receive his commands or authoritative instructions from him it being as we shall afterwards see the design of Saint Paul's discourse to disavow any such dependence on any man whatever So doth St. Chrysostome note What saith he can be more humble than this Soul after so many and so great exploits having no need at all of Peter or of his discourse but being in dignity equal to him for I will now say no more he yet doth go up to him as to one greater and ancienter and a sight alone of Peter is the cause of his journey thither And He went saith he again not to learn any thing of him nor to receive any correction from him but for this onely that he might see him and honour him with his presence And indeed that there was no such deference of the Apostles to St. Peter we may hence reasonably presume because it would then have been not onely impertinent and needless but inconvenient and troublesome For 13. If we consider the nature of the Apostolical Office the state of things at that time and the manner of Saint Peter's Life in correspondence to those things he will appear uncapable or unfit to manage such a jurisdiction over the Apostles as they assign him The nature of the Apostolical Ministery was such that the Apostles were not fixed in one place of residence but were continually moving about the World or in procinctu ready in their gears to move whither Divine suggestions did call them or fair occasion did invite them for the propagation or furtherance of the Gospel The state of things was not favourable to the Apostles who were discountenanced and disgraced persecuted and driven from one place to another as our Lord foretold of them Christians lay scattered about at distant places so that opportunities of dispatch for conveyance of instructions from him or of accounts to him were not easily found Saint Thomas preaching in Parthia Saint Andrew in Scythia Saint John in Asia Simon Zelotes in Britain Saint Paul in many places other Apostles and Apostolical men in Arabia in Aethiopia in India in Spain in Gaul in Germany in the whole world and in all the Creation under Heaven as Saint Paul speaketh could not well maintain correspondence with Saint Peter especially considering the manner of his Life which was not setled in any one known place but moveable and uncertain for he continually roved over the wide World preaching the Gospel converting confirming and comforting Christian people as occasion starting up did induce how then could he conveniently dispense all about his ruling and judging influence how in cases incident could direction be fetched from him or reference be made to him by those subordinate Governours who could not easily know where to come at him or whence to hear from him in any competent time To send to him had been to shoot at rovers affairs therefore which should depend on his resolution and orders must have had great stops he could but very lamely have executed such an office so that his jurisdiction must have been rather an extreme inconvenience and encombrance than any-wise beneficial or usefull to the Church Gold and Silver he had none or a very small Purse to maintain Dependents and Officers to help him Nuncio's Legates à latere Secretaries Auditours c. Infinity of affairs would have oppressed a poor helpless man and to bear such a burthen as they lay on him no one could be sufficient 14. It was indeed most requisite that every Apostle should have a complete absolute independent Authority in managing the concerns and duties of his Office that he might not any-wise be obstructed in the discharge of them not clogged with a need to consult others not hampered with orders from those who were at distance and could not well descry what was fit in every place to be done The direction of him who had promised to be perpetually present with them and by his Holy Spirit to guide to instruct to admonish them upon all occasions was abundantly sufficient they did not want any other conduct or aid beside that special Light and powerfull influence of Grace which they received from him the which 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 did as Saint Paul speaketh render them sufficient Ministers of the New Testament Accordingly their discourse and practice do throughly savour of such an independence nor in them is there any appearance of that being true which Bellarmine dictateth that the Apostles depended on Saint Peter as on their head and commander 15. Particularly the discourse and behaviour of Saint Paul towards Saint Peter doth evidence that he did not acknowledge any dependence on him any subjection to him Saint Paul doth often purposely assert to himself an independent and absolute power inferiour or subordinate to none other insisting thereon for the enforcement or necessary defence of his Doctrine and Practice I have become a fool in glorying ye have compelled me saith he alledging divers pregnant arguments to prove and confirm it drawn from the manner of his call the characters and warrants of his Office the tenour of his proceedings in the discharge of it the success of his endeavours the approbation and demeanour toward him of other Apostles As for his call and commission to the Apostolical Office he maintaineth as if he meant designedly to exclude those pretences that other Apostles were onely called in partem solicitudinis with Saint Peter that he was an Apostle not from men nor by man but by Jesus Christ and God the Father that is that he derived not his Office immediately or mediately from men or by the ministery of any man but immediately had received the grant and charge thereof from our Lord as indeed the History plainly sheweth in which our Lord telleth him that he did Constitute him an Officer and a chosen instrument to him to bear his name to the Gentiles Hence he so often is carefull and cautious to express himself an Apostle by the will and special grace or favour and appointment and command of God and particularly telleth the Romans that by Christ he had received grace grace and Apostleship For the warrant of his Office he doth not alledge the allowance of Saint Peter or any other but those special gifts and graces which were conspicuous in him and exerted in miraculous performances Truly saith he the signs of an Apostle were wrought among you in all patience in signs and wonders and mighty deeds and I will not dare to speak of any of those things which Christ hath not wrought by me to make the Gentiles obedient by word and deed through mighty signs and wonders by the power of the Spirit of God To the same purpose he alledgeth his successfull industry in converting men to the Gospel Am I not an Apostle saith he are ye not my work in the Lord If I am not an Apostle to others I am surely one to
had such a right it is not probable that Saint Peter by his fact would have deprived it thereof or willingly done any thing in prejudice to it there being apparently so much equity that the Church should have a stroke in designation of its Pastour In ancient times there was not any small Church which had not a suffrage in the choice of its Pastour and was it fitting that all the Church should have one imposed on it without its consent If we consider the manner in ancient time of electing and constituting the Roman Bishop we may thence discern not onely the improbability but iniquity of this pretence how was he then chosen was it by a General Synod of Bishops or by Delegates from all parts of Christendom whereby the common interest in him might appear and whereby the World might be satisfied that one was elected fit for that high Office No he was chosen as usually then other particular Bishops were by the Clergy and People of Rome none of the World being conscious of the proceeding or bearing any share therein Now was it equal that such a power of imposing a Sovereign on all the grave Bishops and on all the good people of the Christian world should be granted to one City Was it fitting that such a charge importing advancement above all Pastours and being entrusted with the welfare of all Souls in Christendom should be the result of an election liable to so many defects and corruptions which assuredly often if not almost constantly would be procured by ambition bribery or partiality would be managed by popular faction and tumults It was observed generally of such Elections by Nazianzene that Prelacies were not rather by vertue than by naughtiness and that Episcopal Thrones did not rather belong to the more worthy than to the more powerfull And declaring his mind or wish that Elections of Bishops should rest onely or chiefly in the best men not in the wealthiest and mightiest or in the impetuousness and unreasonableness of the people and among them in those who are most easily bought and bribed whereby he intimateth the common practice and subjoineth but now I can hardly avoid thinking that the popular or civil governances are better ordered than ours which are reputed to have divine grace attending them And that the Roman Elections in that time were come into that course we may see by the relation and reflexions of an honest Pagan Historian concerning the Election of Pope Damasus contemporary of Gregory Nazianz. Damasus saith he and Vrsinus above humane measure burning with desire to snatch the Episcopal See did with divided parties most fiercely conflict in which conflict upon one day in the very Church 130 persons were slain so did that great Pope get into the Chair thus as the Historian reflecteth the wealth and pomp of the place naturally did provoke ambition by all means to seek it and did cause fierce contentions to arise in the choice whence commonly wise and modest persons being excluded from any capacity thereof any ambitious and cunning man who had the art or the luck to please the multitude would by violence obtain it which was a goodly way of constituting a Sovereign to the Church Thus it went within three ages after our Lord and afterwards in the declensions of Christian simplicity and integrity matters were not like to be mended but did indeed rather grow worse as beside the reports and complaints of Historians how that commonly by ambitious prensations by Simoniacal corruptions by political bandyings by popular factions by all kinds of sinister ways men crept into the place doth appear by those many dismal Schisms which gave the Church many pretended Heads but not one certain one as also by the result of them being the choice of persons very unworthy and horribly flagitious If it be said that the Election of a Pope in old times was wont to be approved by the consent of all Bishops in the world according to the testimony of St. Cyprian who saith of Cornelius that he was known by the testimony of his fellow-Bishops whose whole number through all the world did with peacefull unanimity consent I answer that this consent was not in the Election or antecedently to it that it was onely by Letters or messages declaring the Election according to that of St. Cyprian that it was not any-wise peculiar to the Roman Bishop but such as was yielded to all Catholick Bishops each of whom was to be approved as St. Cyprian saith by the testimony and judgment of his Collegues that it was in order onely to the maintaining fraternal communion and correspondence signifying that such a Bishop was duly elected by his Clergy and People was rightly ordained by his neighbour Bishops did profess the Catholick Faith and was therefore qualified for communion with his Brethren such a consent to the Election of any Bishop of old was given especially upon occasion and when any question concerning the right of a Bishop did intervene whereof now in the Election of a Pope no footstep doth remain We may also note that the Election of Cornelius being contested he did more solemnly acquaint all the Bishops of the world with his case and so did obtain their approbation in a way more than ordinary 13. If God had designed this derivation of Universal Sovereignty it is probable that he would have prescribed some certain standing immutable way of Election and imparted the right to certain Persons and not left it at such uncertainty to the chances of time so that the manner of Election hath often changed and the power of it tossed into divers hands And though in several times there have been observed several ways as to the Election of the Roman Pontifs according as the necessity and expediency of the Church required Of old it was as other Elections managed by nomination of the Clergy and suffrage of the People Afterward the Emperours did assume to themselves the nomination or approbation of them For then nothing was done by the Clergy in the choice of the Pope unless the Emperour had approv'd his Election But he seeing the Prince's consent was required sent Messengers with Letters to intreat Mauritius that he would not suffer the Election made by the Clergy and People of Rome in that case to be valid Leo VIII being tired out with the inconstancy of the Romans transferred the whole power and authority of chusing the Pope from the Clergy and People of Rome to the Emperour At some times the Clergy had no hand in the Election but Popes were intruded by powerfull Men or Women at their pleasure Afterwards the Cardinals that is some of the chief Roman Clergy did appropriate the Election to themselves by the Decree of Pope Nicholas II. in his Lateran Synod Sometimes out of course general Synods did assume the Choice to themselves as at Constance Pisa and Basil.
in them and in them to dispatch the principal affairs concerning that precinct to ordain Metropolitanes to confirm the Ordinations of Bishops to decide Causes and Controversies between Bishops upon appeal from Provincial Synods Some conceive the Synod of Nice did establish it but that can hardly well be for that Synod was held about the time of that division after that Constantine was setled in a peacefull enjoyment of the Empire and scarce could take notice of so fresh a change in the State that doth not pretend to innovate but professeth in its sanctions specially to regard ancient custome saving to the Churches their privileges of which they were possessed that onely mentioneth Provinces and representeth the Metropolitanes in them as the chief Governours Ecclesiastical then being that constituteth a peremptory decision of weighty causes in Provincial Synods which is inconsistent with the Diocesan Authority that taketh no notice of Constantinople the â—rincipal Diocese in the East as seat of the Empire and the Synod of Antioch insisting in the footsteps of the Nicene doth touch onely Metropolitanes Can. 19. and the Synod of Laodicea doth onely suppose that Order In fine that Synod is not recorded by any old Historian to have framed such an alteration which indeed was so considerable that Eusebius who was present there could not well have passed it over in silence Of this opinion was the Synod of Carthage in their Epistle to Pope Celestine I. who understood no jurisdiction but that of Metropolitanes to be constituted in the Nicene Synod Some think the Fathers of the Second General Synod did introduce it seeing it expedient that Ecclesiastical administrations should correspond to the Political for they did innovate somewhat in the form of Government they do expresly use the new word Diocese according to the civil sense as distinct from a Province they do distinctly name the particular Dioceses of the Oriental Empire as they stood in the civil establishment they do prescribe to the Bishops in each Diocese to act unitedly there not skipping over the bounds of it they order a kind of appeal to the Synod of the Diocese prohibiting other appeals The Historians expresly do report of them that they did distinguish and distribute Dioceses that they did constitute Patriarchs that they did prohibit that any of one Diocese should intrude upon another But if we shall attently search and scan passages we may perhaps find reason to judge that this form did soon after the Synod of Nice creep in without any solemn appointment by spontaneous assumption and submission accommodating things to the Political course the great Bishops who by the amplification of their City in power wealth and concourse of people were advanced in reputation and interest assuming such authority to themselves and the lesser Bishops easily complying And of this we have some Arguments Cyril Bishop of Jerusalem being deposed and extruded by Acacius Metropolitan of Palestine did appeal to a greater Judicatory being the first as Socrates noteth who ever did use that course because it seemeth there was no greater in being till about that time which was some years before the Synod of Constantinople in which there is a mention of a greater Synod of the Diocese There was a convention of Bishops of the Pontick Diocese at Tyana distinguished from the Asian Bishops whereof Eusebius of Caesarea is reckoned in the first place as President in the time of Valens Nectarius Bishop of Constantinople is said by the Synod of Chalcedon to have presided in the Synod of Constantinople A good Argument is drawn from the very Canon of the Synod of Constantinople it self which doth speak concerning Bishops over Dioceses as already constituted or extant not instituting that Order of Bishops but supposing it and together with an implicit confirmation regulating practice according to it by prohibiting Bishops to leap over the bounds of their Diocese so as to meddle in the affairs of other Dioceses and by ordering appeals to the Synod of a Diocese Of Authority gained by such assumption and concession without law there might be produced divers instances As particularly that the See of Constantinople did assume to it self Ordination and other acts of Jurisdiction in three Dioceses before any such power was granted to it by any Synodical Decree the which to have done divers instances shew some whereof are alledged in the Synod of Chalcedon as St. Chrysostome of whom it is there said That going into Asia he deposed fifteen Bishops and consecrated others in their room He also deposed Gerontius Bishop of Nicomedia belonging to the Diocese of Pontus Whence the Fathers of Chalcedon did aver That they had in a Synod confirmed the ancient custome which the Holy Church of God in Constantinople had to ordain Metropolitanes in the Asian Pontic and Thracian Dioceses The which custome consistent with reason and becoming the dignity of the Empire and gratefull to the Court that great Synod did establish although the Roman Church out of jealousie did contest and protest against it But the most pertinent instances are those of the Roman Alexandrine and Antiochene Churches having by degrees assumed to themselves such power over divers Provinces in imitation of which Churches the other Diocesan Bishops may well be thought to have enlarged their Jurisdiction This form of government is intimated in the Synod of Ephesus by those words in which Dioceses and Provinces are distinguished and the same shall be observed in all Dioceses and all Provinces every were However that this form of Discipline was perfectly setled in the times of the Fourth General Synod is evident by two notable Canons thereof wherein it is decreed that if any Bishop have a controversie with his Metropolitan of his Province he shall resort to and be judged by the Exarch of the Diocese or by the See of Constantinople This was a great privilege conferred on the Bishop of Constantinople the which perhaps did ground to be sure it did make way for the plea of that Bishop to the Title of Oecumenical Patriarch or Vniversal Bishop which Pope Gregory did so exagitate and indeed it soundeth so fairly toward it that the Pope hath nothing comparable to it to alledge in favour of his pretences this being the Decree of the greatest Synod that ever was held among the Ancients where all the Patriarchs did concur in making these Decrees which Pope Gregory did reverence as one of the Gospels If any ancient Synod did ever constitute any thing like to Vniversal Monarchy it was this wherein a final determination of greatest Causes was granted to the See of Constantinople without any exception or reservation I mean as to semblance and the sound of words for as to the true sense I do indeed conceive that the Canon did onely relate to causes emergent in the Eastern parts and probably it did onely respect the three Dioceses of Asia Pontus and Thrace which were
be deaf to the complaints of the whole World or make as if you were so why sleep you when will the consideration of so great confusion and abuse in appeals awake in you they are made without right or equity without due order and against custome Neither place nor manner nor time nor cause nor person are considered they are every where made lightly and for the most part unjustly with much more passionate language to the same purpose But in the Primitive Church the Pope had no such power 1. Whereas in the first times many causes and differences did arise wherein they who were condemned and worsted would readily have resorted thither where they might have hoped for remedy if Rome had been such a place of refuge it would have been very famous for it and we should find History full of such examples whereas it is very silent about them 2. The most ancient Customs and Canons of the Church are flatly repugnant to such a power for they did order causes finally to be decided in each Province So the Synod of Nice did Decree as the African Fathers did alledge in defence of their refusal to allow appeals to the Pope The Nicene decrees said they most evidently did commit both Clergymen of inferiour degrees and Bishops to their Metropolitans So Theòph in his Epistle I suppose you are not ignorant what the Canons of the Nicene Council command ordaining that a Bishop should judge no cause out of his own district 3. Afterward when the Diocesan administration was introduced the last resort was decreed to the Synods of them or to the Primates in them all other appeals being prohibited as dishonourable to the Bishops of the Diocese reproaching the Canons and subverting Ecclesiastical Order To which Canon the Emperour Justinian referred For it is decreed by our Ancestours that against the Sentence of these Prelates there should be no Appeal So Constantius told Pope Liberius that those things which had a form of Judgment past on them could not be rescinded This was the practice at least in the Eastern parts of the Church in the times of Justinian as is evident by the Constitutions extant in the Code and in the Novels 4. In derogation to this pretence divers Provincial Synods expresly did prohibit all Appeals from their decisions That of Milevis Let them appeal onely to African Councils or the Primates of Provinces and he who shall think of appealing beyond Sea let him be admitted into communion by none in Africk For if the Nicene Council took this care of the inferiour Clergy how much more did they intend it should relate to Bishops also 5. All persons were forbidden to entertain communion with Bishops condemned by any one Church which is inconsistent with their being allowed relief at Rome 6. This is evident in the case of Marcion by the assertion of the Roman Church at that time 7. When the Pope hath offered to receive Appeals or to meddle in cases before decided he hath found opposition and reproof Thus when Felicissimus and Fortunatus having been censured and rejected from communion in Africk did apply themselves to Pope Cornelius with supplication to be admitted by him Saint Cyprian maintaineth that fact to be irregular and unjust and not to be countenanced for divers reasons Likewise when Basilides and Martialis being for their crimes deposed in Spain had recourse to Pope Stephanus for Restitution the Clergy and People there had no regard to the judgment of the Pope the which their resolution Saint Cyprian did commend and encourage When Athanasius Marcellus Paulus c. having been condemned by Synods did apply themselves for relief to Pope Julius the Oriental Bishops did highly tax this course as irregular disclaiming any power in him to receive them or meddle in their cause Nor could Pope Julius by any Law or Instance disprove their plea Nor did the Pope assert to himself any peculiar authority to revise the Cause or otherwise justifie his proceeding than by right common to all Bishops of vindicating Right and Innocence which were oppressed and of asserting the Faith for which they were persecuted Indeed at first the Oriental Bishops were contented to refer the cause to Pope Julius as Arbitratour which signifieth that he had no ordinary right but afterward either fearing their Cause or his Prejudice they started and stood to the canonicalness of the former decision The contest of the African Church with Pope Celestine in the Cause of Apiarius is famous and the Reasons which they assign for repelling that Appeal are very notable and peremptory 8. Divers of the Fathers alledge like reasons against Appeals Saint Cyprian alledgeth these 1. Because there was an Ecclesiastical Law against them 2. Because they contain iniquity as prejudicing the right of each Bishop granted by Christ in governing his flock 3. Because the Clergy and People should not be engaged to run gadding about 4. Because Causes might better be decided there where witnesses of fact might easily be had 5. Because there is every where a competent authority equal to any that might be had otherwhere 6. Because it did derogate from the gravity of Bishops to alter their Censure Pope Liberius desired of Constantius that the Judgment of Athanasius might be made in Alexandria for such reasons because there the accused the accusers and their defender were St. Chrysostome's Argument against Theophilus meddling in his case may be set against Rome as well as Alexandria 9. St. Austin in matter of appeal or rather of reference to candid Arbitration more proper for Ecclesiastical causes doth conjoin other Apostolical Churches with that of Rome For the business says he was not about Priests and Deacons or the inferiour Clergy but the Collegues Bishops who may reserve their cause entire for the judgment of their Collegues especially those of the Apostolical Churches He would not have said so if he had apprehended that the Pope had a peculiar right of revising Judgments 10. Pope Damasus or rather Pope Siricius doth affirm himself incompetent to judge in a case which had been afore determined by the Synod of Capua but says he since the Synod of Capua has thus determined it we perceive we cannot judge it 11. Anciently there were no Appeals properly so called or jurisdictional in the Church they were as Socrates telleth us introduced by Cyril of Hierusalem who first did appeal to a greater Judicature against Ecclesiastical rule and custome This is an Argument that about that time a little before the great Synod of Constantinople greater Judicatories or Diocesan Synods were established whenas before Provincial Synods were the last resorts 12. Upon many occasions Appeals were not made to the Pope as in all likelihood they would have been if it had been supposed that a power of receiving them did belong to him Paulus Samosatenus did appeal to the Emperour The Donatists did not appeal to the Pope
but to the Emperour Their Cause was by the Emperour referred not to the Pope singly as it ought to have been and would have been by so just a Prince if it had been his right but to him and other Judges as the Emperour's Commissioners Athanasius did first appeal to the Emperour St. Chrysostome did request the Pope's Succour but he did not appeal to him as Judge although he knew him favourably disposed and the Cause sure in his hand but he appealed to a General Council the which Innocent himself did conceive necessary for decision of that Cause There are in History innumerable Instances of Bishops being condemned and expelled from their Sees but few of Appeals which is a sign that was no approved remedy in common opinion Eutyches did appeal to all the Patriarchs Theodoret did intend to appeal to all the Western Bishops 13. Those very Canons of Sardica the most unhappy that ever were made to the Church which did introduce Appeals to the Pope do yet upon divers accounts prejudice his claim to an original right and do upon no account favour that use of them to which to the overthrow of all Ecclesiastical liberty and good discipline they have been perverted For 1. They do pretend to confer a Privilege on the Pope which argueth that he before had no claim thereto 2. They do qualifie and restrain that Privilege to certain Cases and Forms which is a sign that he had no power therein flowing from absolute Sovereignty for it is strange that they who did pretend and intend so much to favour him should clip his power 3. It is not really a power which they grant of receiving Appeals in all Causes but a power of constituting Judges qualifyed according to certain conditions to revise a special sort of causes concerning the Judgment and Deposition of Bishops Which considerations do subvert his pretence to original and universal Jurisdiction upon Appeals 14. Some Popes did challenge Jurisdiction upon Appeals as given them by the Nicene Canons meaning thereby those of Sardica which sheweth they had no better plea and therefore no original right And otherwhere we shall consider what validity those Canons may be allowed to have 15. The General Synod of Chalcedon of higher authority than that of Sardica derived Appeals at least in the Eastern Churches into another chanel namely to the Primate of each Diocese or to the Patriarch of Constantinople That this was the last resort doth appear from that otherwise they would have mentioned the Pope 16. Appeals in cases of Faith or general Discipline were indeed sometimes made to the consideration of the Pope but not onely to him but to all other Patriarchs and Primates as concerned in the common maintenance of the common Faith or Discipline So did Eutyches appeal to the Patriarchs 17. The Pope even in later times even in the Western parts hath found rubs in his trade of Appeals Consider the scuffle between Pope Nicholas I. and Hincmarus Bishop of Rhemes 18. Christian States to prevent the intolerable vexations and mischiefs arising from this practice have been constrained to make Laws against them Particularly England In the Twelfth Age Pope Paschal II. complained of King Henry I. That he deprived the oppressed of the benefit of appealing to the Apostolick See It was one of King Henry I. Laws none is permitted to cry from thence no judgment is thence brought to the Apostolick See Foreign judgments we utterly remove there let the cause be tried where the crime was committed It was one of the Grievances sent to Pope Innocent IV. That Englishmen were drawn out of the Kingdom by the Pope's authority to have their causes heard Nor in after-times were Appeals by Law in any case permitted without the King's leave although sometimes by the facility of Princes or difficulty of times the Roman Court ever importunate and vigilant for its profits did obtain a relaxation or neglect of Laws inhibiting Appeals 19. There were Appeals from Popes to General Councils very frequently Vid. The Senate of Paris after the Concordaâ—s between Lewis XI and Pope Leo X. 20. By many Laws and instances it appeareth that Appellations have been made to the Emperours in the greatest Causes and that without Popes reclaiming or taking it in bad part St. Paul did appeal to Caesar. Paulus Samosatenus did appeal to Aurelianus So the Donatists did appeal to Constantine Athanasius to Constantine The Egyptian Bishops to Constantine Priscillianus to Maximus Idacius to Gratian. So that Canons were made to restrain Bishops from recourse ad Comitatum 21. Whereas they do alledge Instances for Appeal those well considered do prejudice their Cause for they are few in comparison to the occasions of them that ever did arise they are near all of them late when Papal encroachments had grown some of them are very impertinent to the cause some of them may strongly be retorted against them all of them are invalid If the Pope originally had such a right known unquestionable prevalent there might have been producible many ancient clear proper concluding Instances All that Bellarmine after his own search and that of his Predecessours in Controversie could muster are these following upon which we shall briefly reflect adding a few others which may be alledged by them He alledgeth Marcion as appealing to the Pope The truth was that Marcion for having corrupted a Maid was by his own Father Bishop of Sinope driven from the Church whereupon he did thence fly to Rome there begging admittance to communion but none did grant it at which he expostulating they replied We cannot without the permission of thy honourable Father doe this for there is one faith and one concord and we cannot cross thy Father our good fellow-Minister this was the case and issue and is it not strange this should be produced for an Appeal which was onely a supplication of a fugitive criminal to be admitted to communion and wherein is utterly disclaimed any power to thwart the Judgment of a particular Bishop or Judge upon account of unity in common faith and peace should the Pope return the same answer to every Appellant what would become of his Privilege So that they must give us leave to retort this as a pregnant Instance against their pretence He alledgeth the forementioned address of Felicissimus and Fortunatus to Pope Cornelius the which was but a factious circumcursation of desperate wretches the which or any like it St. Cyprian argueth the Pope in law and equity obliged not to regard because a definitive Sentence was already passed on them by their proper Judges in Africk from whom in conscience and reason there could be no Appeal So Bellarmine would filtch from us one of our invincible Arguments against him He also alledgeth the case of Basilides which also we before did shew to make against him his application to the Pope being disavowed by St. Cyprian
presume of a fair and favourable hearing so did Athanasius Flavianus St. Chrysostome Theodoret apply themselves to the same Bishops flourishing in so great reputation and wealth So did the Monks of Egypt Ammonius and Isidorus from the persecutions of Theophilus fly to the protection and succour of St. Chrysostome which gave occasion to the troubles of that incomparable Personage the which is so illustrious an instance that the words of the Historian relating it deserve setting down They jointly did endeavour that the trains against them might be examined by the Emperour as Judge and by the Bishop John for they conceived that he having conscience of using a just freedom would be able to succour them according to right but he did receive the men applying to him courteously and treated them respectfully and did not hinder them from praying in the Church He also writ to Theophilus to render communion to them as being Orthodox and if there were need of judging their case by law that he would send whom they thought good to prosecute the cause If this had been to the Pope it would have been alledged for an Appeal and it would have had as much colour as any Instance which they can produce 4. And when men either good or bad do resort in this manner to great friends it is no wonder if they accost them in highest terms of respect and with exaggerations of their eminent advantages so inducing them to regard and favour their cause 5. Neither is it strange that great persons favourably should entertain those who make such addresses to them they always coming crouching in a suppliant posture and with fair pretences it being also natural to men to delight in seeing their power acknowledged and it being a glorious thing to relieve the afflicted for Eminence is wont to incline toward infirmity and with a ready good will to take part with those who are under So when Basilides when Marcellus when Eustathius Sebastenus when Maximus the Cynick when Apiarius were condemned the Pope was hasty to engage for them more liking their application to him than weighing their cause 6. And when any person doth continue long in a flourishing estate so that such addresses are frequently made to him no wonder that an opinion of lawfull power to receive them doth arise both in him and in others so that of a voluntary Friend he become an authorized Protectour a Patron a Judge of such persons in such cases X. The Sovereign is fountain of all Jurisdiction and all inferiour Magistrates derive their Authority from his warrant and Commission acting as his Deputies or Ministers according to that intimation in St. Peter whether to the King as Supreme or to Governours as sent by him Accordingly the Pope doth challenge this advantage to himself that he is the fountain of Ecclesiastical Jurisdiction pretending all Episcopal power to be derived from him The rule of the Church saith Bellarmine is Monarchical therefore all authority is in one and from him is derived to others the which Aphorism he well proveth from the form of creating Bishops as they call it We do provide such a Church with such a person and we do prefer him to be Father and Pastour and Bishop of the said Church committing to him the administration in temporals and spirituals in the name of the Father Son and Holy Ghost Pope Pius II. in his Bull of Retractation thus expresseth the sense of his See In the militant Church which resembleth the triumphant there is one moderatour and Judge of all the Vicar of Jesus Christ from whom as from the Head all power and authority is derived to the subject members the which doth immediately flow into it from the Lord Christ. A Congregation of Cardinals appointed by Pope Paulus III. speaking after the style and sentiments of that See did say to him Your Holiness doth so bear the care of Christ's Church that you have very many Ministers by which you manage that care these are all the Clergy on whom the service of God is charged especially Priests and more especially Curates and above all Bishops Durandus Bishop of Mande according to the sense of his Age saith The Pope is head of all Bishops from whom they as members from an head descend and of whose fulness all receive whom he calls to a participation of his care but admits not into the fulness of his power This pretence is seen in the ordinary Titles of Bishops who style themselves Bishops of such a place By the grace of God and of the Apostolick See O shame The men of the Tridentine Convention those great betrayers of the Church to perpetual slavery and Christian truth to the prevalency of falshood till God pleaseth do upon divers occasions pretend to qualifie and empower Bishops to perform important matters originally belonging to the Episcopal Function as the Pope's Delegates But contrariwise according to the Doctrine of Holy Scripture and the sense of the Primitive Church the Bishops and Pastours of the Church do immediately receive their Authority and Commission from God being onely his Ministers The Scripture calleth them the Ministers of God and of Christ so Epaphras so Timothy in regard to their Ecclesiastical function are named the Stewards of God the Servants of God Fellow-servants of the Apostles The Scripture saith that the Holy Ghost had made them Bishops to feed the Church of God that God had given them and constituted them in the Church for the perfecting of the Saints for the work of the Ministery for the edifying of the body of Christ that is to all effects and purposes concerning their Office for the work of the Ministery comprizeth all the duty charged on them whether in way of Order or of Governance as they now do precariously and groundlesly in reference to this case distinguish And edifying the body doth import all the designed effects of their Office particularly those which are consequent on the use of Jurisdiction the which Saint Paul doth affirm was appointed for edification according saith he to the authority which God hath given me for edification and not for destruction They do preside in the Lord. They allow no other Head but our Lord from whom all the body c. The Fathers clearly do express their Sentiments to be the same St. Ignatius saith that the Bishop doth preside in the place of God and that we must look upon him as our Lord himself or as our Lord 's Representative that therefore we must be subject to him as unto Jesus Christ. St. Cyprian affirmeth each Bishop to be constituted by the judgment of God and of Christ and that in his Church he is for the present a Judge in the place of Christ and that our Lord Jesus Christ one and alone hath a power both to prefer us to the government of his Church and to judge of our acting St. Basil A
to him so many Dependents what might not he say or doe Pope Gregory VII being a man of untameable Spirit and taking advantage from the distractions and corruptions of his Times did venture to pull a feather with the Emperour and with success having mated him did set up a peremptory claim to Sovereignty over all Persons in all Causes In his footsteps his Successours have trodden being ever ready upon occasion to plead such a title and to practise according to it No Pope would foregoe any Power which had been claimed by his Predecessours And Popes would ever be sure to have dancers after their pipe numberless abetters of their pretences No wonder then that persons deferring much regard to the Authority of Popes and accommodating their conceits to the Dictates of them or of persons depending on them should in their opinions vary about the nature and extent of Papal Authority it having never been fixed within certain bounds or having in several Ages continued the same thing § XI Wherefore intending by God's help to discuss the pretended Authority of the Pope and to shew that He by no Divine institution and by no immutable right hath any such Power as he doth claim by reason of this perplexed variety of Opinions I do find it difficult to state the Question or to know at what distinct mark I should level my Discourse § XII But seeing his pretence to any Authority in Temporals or to the Civil Sword is so palpably vain that it hardly will bear a serious dispute having nothing but impudence and sophistry to countenance it seeing so many in the Roman Communion do reject it and have substantially confuted it seeing now most are ashamed of it and very few even among those Sects which have been its chief Patrons will own it seeing Bellarmine himself doth acknowledge it a Novelty devised about 500 years ago in St. Bernard's time seeing the Popes themselves what-ever they think dare now scarce speak out and forbear upon sufficient provocation to practise according to it I shall spare the trouble of meddling with it confining my Discourse to the Pope's Authority in Ecclesiastical affairs the pretence whereto I am persuaded to be no less groundless and no less noxious than the other to Christendom the which being overthrown the other as superstructed on it must also necessarily fall § XIII And here the Doctrine which I shall contest against is that in which the Cordial partizans of that See do seem to consent which is most common and current most applauded and countenanced in their Theological Schools which the Popes themselves have solemnly defined and declared for standing law or rule of jurisdiction which their most authentick Synods whereby their Religion is declared and distinguished from others have asserted or supposed which the tenour of their Discipline and Practice doth hold forth which their Clergy by most solemn professions and engagements is tied to avow which all the Clients and Confidents of Rome do zealously stand for more than for any other point of Doctrine and which no man can disclaim without being deemed an enemy or a prevaricator toward the Apostolick See § XIV Which Doctrine is this That in the words of the Florentine Synod's Definition the Apostolical Chair and the Roman High-Priest doth hold a Primacy over the Vniversal Church and that the Roman High-Priest is the Successour of Saint Peter the Prince of the Apostles and the true Lieutenant of Christ and the Head of the Church and that he is the Father and Doctour of all Christians and that unto him in Saint Peter full Power is committed to feed and direct and govern the Catholick Church under Christ according as is contained in the Acts of General Councils and in the Holy Canons That in the words of Pope Leo X. approved by the Laterane Synod Christ before his departure from the world did in solidity of the Rock institute Peter and his Successours to be his Lieutenants to whom it is so necessary to obey that who doth not obey must die the death That to the Pope as Sovereign Monarch by Divine Sanction of the whole Church do appertain Royal Prerogatives Regalia Petri the Royalties of Peter they are called in the Oath prescribed to Bishops Such as these which follow To be Superiour to the whole Church and to its Representative a General Synod of Bishops To convocate General Synods at his pleasure all Bishops being obliged to attend upon summons from him To preside in Synods so as to suggest matter promote obstruct over-rule the debates in them To confirm or invalidate their Determinations giving life to them by his assent or subtracting it by his dissent To define Points of Doctrine or to decide Controversies authoritatively so that none may presume to contest or dissent from his Dictates To enact establish abrogate suspend dispense with Ecclesiastical Laws and Canons To relax or evacuate Ecclesiastical Censures by indulgence pardon c. To void Promises Vows Oaths Obligations to Laws by his Dispensation To be the Fountain of all Pastoral Jurisdiction and Dignity To constitute confirm judge censure suspend depose remove restore reconcile Bishops To confer Ecclesiastical Dignities and Benefices by paramount Authority in way of Provision Reservation c. To exempt Colleges Monasteries c. from Jurisdiction of their Bishops and ordinary Superiours To judge all persons in all Spiritual Causes by calling them to his cognizance or delegating Judges for them with a final and peremptory Sentence To receive Appeals from all Ecclesiastical Judicatories and to reverse their Judgments if he findeth cause To be himself unaccountable for any of his doings exempt from judgment and liable to no reproof To erect transfer abolish Episcopal Sees To exact Oaths of Fealty and Obedience from the Clergy To found Religious Orders or to raise a Spiritual Militia for propagation and defence of the Church To summon and commissionate Souldiers by Croisade c. to fight against Infidels or persecute Infidels Some of these are expressed others in general terms couched in those words of P. Eugenius telling the Greeks what they must consent unto The Pope said he will have the Prerogatives of his Church and he will have Appeals to him and to feed all the Church of Christ as Shepherd of the Sheep Beside these things that he may have authority and power to convoke General Synods when need shall be and that all the Patriarchs do yield to his will That the Pope doth claim assume and exercise a Sovereignty over the Church endowed with such Prerogatives is sufficiently visible in experience of fact is apparent by the authorized dictates in their Canon-law and shall be distinctly proved by competent allegations when we shall examine the branches of this pretended Authority In the mean time it sufficeth to observe that in effect all Clergy-men do avow so much who bonâ fide and without prevarication do submit to take the Oaths and Engagements prescribed to them
do style their Peter The truth is then among Christians there was little standing upon punctilio's private considerations and pretences to power then took small place each one was ready to comply with that which the most did approve the community did take upon it to prescribe unto the greatest persons as we see again in another instance where the Brethren at Antioch did appoint Paul and Barnabas the most considerable persons among them to go up unto Jerusalem They were then so generous so mercifull so full of charity as rather than to cause or foment any disturbance to recede or go whither the multitude pleased and doe what was commanded by it 10. In all relations which occur in Scripture about Controversies incident of Doctrine or Practice there is no appeal made to Saint Peter's Judgment or allegation of it as Decisive no Argument is built on his Authority dissent from his Opinion or disconformity to his Practice or disobedience to his Orders are not mentioned as ground of reproof as aggravation of any errour any misdemeanour any disorder which were very strange if then he was admitted or known to be the Universal Prince and Pastour of Christians or the Supreme Judge and Arbitratour of Controversies among them for then surely the most clear compendious and effectual way to confute any errour or check any disorder had been to alledge the Authority of Saint Peter against it who then could have withstood so mighty a prejudice against his cause If now a question doth arise about any Point of Doctrine instantly the Parties at least one of them which hopeth to find most favour hath recourse to the Pope to define it and his Judgment with those who admit his pretences proveth sufficiently decisive or at least greatly swayeth in prejudice to the opposite Party If any Heresie or any Opinion disagreeing from the current sentiments is broached the Pope presently doth roar that his voice is heard through Christendom and thundreth it down if any Schism or disorder springeth up you may be sure that Rome will instantly meddle to quash it or to settle matters as best standeth with its Principles and Interests such influence hath the shadow of Saint Peter's Authority now but no such regard was then had to poor Pope Peter himself he was not so busie and stirring in such cases the Apostles did not send Hereticks to be knocked down by his Sentence nor Schismaticks to be scourged by his Censure but were fain to use the long way of Disputation striving to convince them by Testimonies of Scripture and rational discourse If they did use authority it was their own which they challenge as given to them by Christ for edification or upon account of the more than ordinary gifts and graces of the Divine Spirit conferred on them by God Saint Peter no-where doth appear intermedling as a Judge or Governour paramount in such cases yea where he doth himself deal with Hereticks and disorderly persons confuting and reproving them as he dealeth with divers notoriously such he proceedeth not as a Pope decreeing but as an Apostle warning arguing and persuading against them It is particularly remarkable how Saint Paul reproving the factions which were among Christians at Corinth doth represent the several parties saying I am of Paul I am of Apollos I am of Cephas I am of Christ Now supposing the case then had been clear and certain and if it were not so then how can it be so now that Saint Peter was Sovereign of the Apostles is it not wonderfull that any Christian should prefer any Apostle or any Preacher before him as if it were now clear and generally acknowledged that the Pope is truly what he pretendeth to be would any body stand in competition with him would any glory in a relation to any other Minister before him It is observable how Saint Clemens reflecteth on this contention Ye were saith he less culpable for that partiality for ye did then incline to renowned Apostles and to a man approved by them but now c. If it be replyed that Christ himself did come into the comparison I answer that probably no man was so vain as to compare him with the rest nor indeed could any there pretend to have been baptized by him which was the ground of the emulation in respect of the others but those who said they were of Christ were the wise and peaceable sort who by saying so declined and disavowed faction whose behaviour Saint Paul himself in his discourse commendeth and confirmeth shewing that all indeed were of Christ the Apostles being onely his Ministers to work faith and vertue in them None saith Saint Austin of those contentious persons were good except those who said but I am of Christ. We may also here observe that Saint Paul in reflecting upon these contentions had a fair occasion of intimating somewhat concerning Saint Peter's Supremacy and aggravating their blameable fondness who compared others with him 12. The consideration of the Apostles proceeding in the conversion of people in the foundation of Churches and in administration of their spiritual affairs will exclude any probability of Saint Peter's Jurisdiction over them They went about their business not by Order or Licence from St. Peter but according to special instinct and direction of God's Spirit being sent forth by the Holy Ghost going by revelation or according to their ordinary prudence and the habitual wisedom given unto them by those aids without troubling St. Peter or themselves more they founded Societies they ordained Pastours they framed Rules and Orders requisite for the edification and good Government of Churches reserving to themselves a kind of paramount inspection and jurisdiction over them which in effect was onely 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a paternal care over them which they particularly claimed to themselves upon account of spiritual parentage for that they had begotten them to Christ If saith St. Paul to the Corinthians I am not an Apostle to others I am however so to you why so because he had converted them and could say As my beloved sons I warn you for though ye have ten thousand instructours in Christ yet ye have not many fathers for in Christ Jesus I have begotten you through the Gospel This paternal charge they did exercise without any dependence or regard to Saint Peter none such appearing it not being mentioned that they did ever consult his pleasure or render him an account of their proceedings but it rather being implyed in the reports of their actions that they proceeded absolutely by virtue of their universal Office and Commission of our Lord. If it he alledged that Saint Paul went to Jerusalem to Saint Peter I answer that it was to visit him out of respect and love or to confer with him for mutual edification and comfort or at most to obtain approbation from him and the other Apostles which might satisfy some doubters but not
large Epistle wherein like a good Bishop and charitable Christian brother he doth earnestly by manifold inducements persuade them to charity and peace but no-where doth he speak imperiously like their Prince In such a case one would think if ever for quashing such disorders and quelling so perverse folks who spurned the Clergy it had been decent it had been expedient to employ his Authority and to speak like himself challenging obedience upon duty to him and at their peril How would a modern Pope have ranted in such a case how thundring a Bull would he have dispatched against such outragious contemners of the Ecclesiastical Order how often would he have spoken of the Apostolick See and its Authority we should infallibly have heard him swagger in his wonted style Whoever shall presume to cross our will let him know that he shall incur the indignation of Almighty God and his blessed Apostles Peter and Paul but our Popes it seemeth have more wit or better mettle than Pope Clement that good Pope did not know his own strength or had not the heart to use it 21. Among the Epistles of St. Cyprian there are divers Epistles of him to several Popes to Cornelius to Lucius to Stephanus in the which although written with great kindness and respect yet no impartial eye can discern any special regard to them as to his Superiours in Power or Pastours in Doctrine or Judges of Practice he reporteth matters to them he conferreth about Points with all freedom he speaketh his sense and giveth his advice without any restraint or awe he spareth not upon occasion to reprove their practices and to reject their opinions he in his addresses to them and discourses of them styleth them Brethren and Collegues and he continually treateth them as such upon even terms When saith he to the Clergy of Rome dearest Brethren there was among us an uncertain rumour concerning the decease of the good man my Collegue Fabianus upon which words Rigaltius had cause to remark How like an equal and fellow-citizen doth the Bishop of Carthage mention the Bishop of Rome even to the Roman Clergy but would not any man now be deemed rude and sawcy who should talk in that style of the Pope Pope Cornelius also to Saint Cyprian hath some Epistles wherein no glimpse doth appear of any Superiority assumed by him But of St. Cyprian's judgment and demeanour toward Popes we shall have occasion to speak more largely in a way more positively opposite to the Roman pretences Eusebius citeth divers long passages out of an Epistle of Cornelius to Fabius Bishop of Antioch against Novatus wherein no mark of this Supremacy doth appear although the magnitude and flourishing State of the Roman Church is described for aggravation of Novatus his Schism and ambition Pope Julius hath a notable long Epistle extant in one of Athanasius's Apologies unto the Bishops assembled at Antioch wherein he had â—he fairest occasion that could be to assert and insist upon this Sovereign Authority they flatly denying and impugning it questioning his proceedings as singular supposing him subject to the Laws of the Church no less than any other Bishop and downrightly affirming each of themselves to be his equal about which Point he thought good not to contend with them but waving pretences to Superiority he justifieth his actions by reasons grounded on the merit of the cause such as any other Bishop might alledge But this Epistle I shall have more particular occasion to discuss Pope Liberius hath an Epistle to St. Athanasius wherein he not onely for his direction and satisfaction doth inquire his opinion about the Point but professeth in complement perchance that he shall obediently follow it Write saith he whether you do think as we do and just so about the true faith that I may be undoubtedly assured about what you think good to command me was not that spoken indeed like a courteous Sovereign and an accomplished Judge in matters of Faith The same Pope in the head of the Western doth write to a knot of Eastern Bishops whom they call their beloved Brethren and fellow Ministers and in a brotherly strain not like an Emperour In the time of Damasus Successour to Liberius St. Basil hath divers Epistles to the Western Bishops wherein having represented and bewailed the wretched state of the Eastern Churches then overborn with Heresies and unsettled by Factions he craveth their charity their prayers their sympathy their comfort their brotherly aid by affording to the Orthodox and sound Party the countenance of their Communion by joining with them in contention for Truth and Peace for that the Communion of so great Churches would be of mighty weight to support and strengthen their Cause giving credit thereto among the People and inducing the Emperour to deal fairly with them in respect to such a multitude of adherents especially of those which were at such a distance and not so immediately subject to the Eastern Emperour for If saith he very many of you do concur unanimously in the same opinion it is manifest that the multitude of consenters will make the doctrine to be received without contradiction and I know saith he again writing to Athanasius about these matters but one way of redress to our Churches the conspiring with us of the Western Bishops the which being obtained would probably yield some advantage to the publick the secular power revering the credibility of the multitude and the people all about following them without repugnance and You saith he to the Western Bishops the farther you dwell from them the more credible you will be to the people This indeed was according to the ancient Rule and Practice in such cases that any Church being oppressed with Errour or distracted with Contentions should from the Bishops of other Churches receive aid to the removal of those inconveniences That it was the Rule doth appear from what we have before spoken and of the Practice there be many instances for so did St. Cyprian send two of his Clergy to Rome to compose the Schism there moved by Novatian against Cornelius so was St. Chrysostome called to Ephesus although out of his Jurisdiction to settle things there so to omit divers instances occurring in History St. Basil himself was called by the Church of Iconium to visit it and to give it a Bishop although it did not belong to his ordinary inspection and he doth tell the Bishops of the Coasts that they should have done well in sending some to visit and assist his Churches in their distresses But now how I pray cometh it to pass that in such a case he should not have a special recourse to the Pope but in so many addresses should onely wrap him up in a community why should he not humbly petition him to exert his Sovereign Authority for the relief of the Eastern Churches laying his charge and inflicting censures on the dissenters why should he
exclaimed against as tyrannical When Primates did begin to swell and encroach good men declared their displeasure at it and wished it removed as is known particularly by the famous wish of Gregory Nazianzene But we are discoursing against a Superiority of a different nature which soundeth it self in the Institution of Christ imposeth it self on the Church is not alterable or governable by it can endure no check or controll pretendeth to be endowed with an absolute power to act without or against the consent of the Church is limited by no certain bounds but its own pleasure c. IV. Farther this pretence may be impugned by many Arguments springing from the nature and reason of things abstractedly considered according to which the exercise of such an Authority may appear unpracticable without much iniquity and great inconvenience in prejudice to the rights of Christian States and People to the interests of Religion and Piety to the peace and welfare of Mankind whence it is to be rejected as a pest of Christendom 1. Whereas all the world in design and obligation is Christian the utmost parts of the earth being granted in possession to our Lord and his Gospel extending to every creature under heaven and may in effect become such when God pleaseth by acceptance of the Gospel whereas it may easily happen that the most distant places on the Earth may embrace Christianity whereas really Christian Churches have been and are dispersed all about the World it is thence hugely incommodious that all the Church should depend upon an Authority resident in one Place and to be managed by one Person the Church being such is too immense boundless uncircumscribed unweildy a bulk to be guided by the inspection or managed by the influence of one such Authority or Person If the whole World were reduced under the Government of one Civil Monarch it would necessarily be ill governed as to Policy to Justice to Peace The skirts or remoter parts from the Metropolis or centre of the Government would extremely suffer thereby for they would feel little light or warmth from Majesty shining at such a distance They would live under small awe of that Power which was so far out of sight They must have very difficult recourse to it for redress of grievances and relief of oppressions for final decision of causes and composure of differences for correction of offences and dispensation of justice upon good information with tolerable expedition It would be hard to preserve peace or quell seditions and suppress insurrections that might arise in distant quarters What man could obtain the knowledge or experience needfull skilfully and justly to give Laws or administer Judgment to so many Nations different in Humour in Language in Customs What mind of man what industry what leisure could serve to sustain the burthen of that care which is needfull to the weilding such an Office How and when should one man be able to receive all the addresses to weigh all the cases to make all the resolutions and dispatches requisite for such a charge If the burthen of one small Kingdom be so great that wise and good Princes do grown under its weight what must that be of all Mankind To such an extent of Government there must be allowed a Majesty and power correspondent the which cannot be committed to one hand without its degeneration into extreme Tyranny The words of Zosimus to this purpose are observable who saith that the Romans by admitting Augustus Caesar to the Government did doe very perillously for If he should chuse to manage the Government rightly and justly he would not be capable of applying himself to all things as were fit not being able to succour those who do lie at greatest distance nor could he find so many Magistrates as would not be ashamed to defeat the opinion conceived of them nor could he sute them to the differences of so many manners Or if transgressing the bounds of Royalty he should warp to Tyranny disturbing the Magistracies overlooking misdemeanours bartering right for money holding the Subjects for slaves such as most Emperours or rather near all have been few excepted then it is quite necessary that the brutish Authority of the Prince should be a publick calamity for then flatterers being by him dignifyed with gifts and honours do invade the greatest commands and those who are modest and quiet not affecting the same life with them are consequently displeased not enjoying the same advantages so that from hence Cities are filled with seditions and troubles And the Civil and Military employments being delivered up to avaritious persons do both render a peaceable life sad and grievous to men of better disposition and do enfeeble the resolution of Souldiers in war Hence St. Austin was of opinion that it were happy for mankind if all Kingdoms were small enjoying a peacefull neighbourhood It is commonly observed by Historians that Rome growing in bigness did labour therewith and was not able to support it self many distempers and disorders springing up in so vast a body which did throw it into continual pangs and at length did bring it to ruine for Then saith St. Austin concerning the times of Pompey Rome had subdued Africk it had subdued Greece and widely also ruling over other parts as not able to bear it self did in a manner by its own greatness break it self Hence that wise Prince Augustus Caesar did himself forbear to enlarge the Roman Dominion and did in his Testament advise the Senate to doe the like To the like inconveniences and much greater in its kind Temporal things being more easily ordered than Spiritual and having secular Authority great advantages of power and wealth to aid it self must the Church be obnoxious if it were subjected to the government of one Sovereign unto whom the maintenance of Faith the potection of Discipline the determination of Controversies the revision of Judgments the discussion and final decision of Causes upon appeal the suppression of disorders and factions the inspection over all Governours the correction of Misdemeanours the constitution relaxation and abolition of Laws the resolution of all matters concerning Religion and the publick State in all Countries must be referred 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 what Shoulders can bear such a charge without perpetual miracle and yet we do not find that the Pope hath any promise of miraculous assistence nor in his demeanour doth appear any mark thereof what mind would not the care of so many affairs utterly distract and overwhelm who could find time to cast a glance on each of so numberless particulars what sagacity of wit what variety of learning what penetrancy of judgment what strength of memory what indefatigable vigour of industry what abundance of experience would suffice for enabling one man to weigh exactly all the controversies of Faith and cases of Discipline perpetually starting up in so many Regions What reach of skill and ability would serve for
accommodation of Laws to the different humours and fashions of so many Nations Shall a decrepit old man in the decay of his age parts vigour such as Popes usually are undertake this May we not say to him as Jethro did to Moses Vltra vires tuas est negotium The thing thou doest is not good thou wilt surely wear away both thou and this People that is with thee for this thing is too heavy for thee thou art not able to perform it thy self alone If the care of a small Diocese hath made the most able and industrious Bishops who had a Conscience and sense of their duty to grown under its weight how insupportable must such a thing be The care of his own particular Church if he would act the part of a Bishop indeed would sufficiently take up the Pope especially in some times whenas Pope Alex. saith Vt intestina nostrae specialis Ecclesiae negotia vix possemus ventilare nedum longinqua ad plenum extricare If it be said that Saint Paul testifieth of himself that he had a care of all the Churches incumbent on him I answer that he and other Apostles had the like questionless had a pious solicitude for the welfare of all Christians especially of the Churches which he had founded being vigilant for occasions to edifie them but what is this to bearing the charge of a standing government over all Churches diffused through the world that care of a few Churches then was burthensome to him what is the charge of so many now to one seldom endowed with such Apostolical graces and gifts as Saint Paul was How weak must the influence of such an Authority be upon the circumferential Parts of its Oecumenical Sphere How must the outward branches of the Churches faint and fade for want of sap from the root of Discipline which must be conveyed through so many obstructions to such a distance How discomposed must things be in each Country for want of seasonable resolution hanging in suspence till information do travell to Rome and determination come back thence How difficult how impossible will it be for him there to receive faithfull information or competent testimony whereupon to ground just decisions of Causes How will it be in the power thence of any malicious and cunning person to raise trouble against innocent persons for any like person to decline the due Correction laid on him by transferring the Cause from home to such a distance How much cost how much trouble how much hazard must parties concerned be at to fetch light and justice thence Put case a Heresie a Schism a Doubt or Debate of great moment should arise in China how should the Gentleman in Italy proceed to confute that Heresie to quash that Schism to satisfie that Doubt to determine that Cause how long must it be ere he can have notice thereof to how many cross accidents of weather and way must the transmitting of information be subject how difficult will it prove to get a clear and sure knowledge concerning the state of things How hard will it be to get the opposite parties to appear so as to confront testimonies and probations requisite to a fair and just decision how shall witnesses of infirm sex or age ramble so far how easily will some of them prepossess and abuse him with false suggestions and misrepresentations of the case how slippery therefore will the result be and how prone he to award a wrongfull sentence How tedious how expensive how troublesome how vexatious how hazardous must this course be to all parties Certainly Causes must needs proceed slowly and depend long and in the end the resolution of them must be very uncertain What temptation will it be for any one how justly soever corrected by his immediate Superiours to complain hoping thereby to escape to disguise the truth c. who being condemned will not appeal to one at distance hoping by false suggestions to delude him This necessarily will destroy all Discipline and induce impunity or frustration of Justice Certainly much more convenient and equal it should be that there should be near at hand a Sovereign Power fully capable expeditely and seasonably to compose differences to decide causes to resolve doubts to settle things without more stir and trouble Very equal it is that Laws should rather be framed interpreted and executed in every Countrey with accommodation to the tempers of the People to the circumstances of things to the Civil State there by persons acquainted with those particulars than by strangers ignorant of them and apt to mistake about them How often will the Pope be imposed upon as he was in the case of Basilides of whom St. Cyprian saith going to Rome he deceived our Collegue Stephen being placed at distance and ignorant of the fact and concealed truth aspiring to be unjustly restored to the Bishoprick from which he was justly removed As he was in the case of Marcellus who gull'd Pope Julius by fair professions as St. Basil doth often complain As he was in aiding that versatile and troublesome Bishop Eustathius of Sebastia to the recovery of his Bishoprick As he was in rejecting the man of God and most admirable Bishop Meletius and admitting scandalous reports about him which the same Saint doth often resent blaming sometimes the fallacious misinformation sometimes the wilfull presumption negligence pride of the Roman Church in the case As he was in the case of Pelagius and Celestius who did cajole Pope Zosimus to acquit them to condemn Eros and Lazarus their accusers to reprove the African Bishops for prosecuting them How many proceedings should we have like to that of Pope Zosimus I. concerning that scandalous Priest Apiarius whom being for grievous crimes excommunicated by his Bishop that Pope did admit to communion and undertake to patronize but was baffled in his enterprize This hath been the sense of the Fathers in the case St. Cyprian therefore saith that seeing it was a general statute among the Bishops and that it was both equal and just that every one's cause should be heard there where the crime was committed and that each Pastour had a portion of the Flock allotted to him which he should rule and govern being to render unto the Lord an account of his doing St. Chrysostome thought it improper that one out of Egypt should administer justice to Persons in Thrace and why not as well as one out of Italy The African Synod thought the Nicene Fathers had provided most prudently and most justly that all affairs should be finally determined there where they did arise They thought a transmarine judgment could not be firm because the necessary persons for testimony for the infirmity of sex or age or for many other infirmities could not be brought thither Pope Leo himself saw how dilatory this course would be and that longinquity of region doth cause the examination of truth
vain pray for Kings and all that are in authority that we may lead a quiet and peaceable life in all godliness and honesty For suppose the two powers Spiritual and Temporal to be co-ordinate and independent each of other then must all Christians be put into that perplexed state of repugnant and incompatible obligations concerning which our Lord saith No man can serve two Masters for either he will hate the one and love the other or else he will hold to the one and despise the other They will often draw several ways and clash in their designs in their laws in their decisions one willing and commanding that which the other disliketh and prohibiteth It will be impossible by any certain bounds to distinguish their Jurisdiction so as to prevent contest between them all temporal matters being in some respect spiritual as being referible to spiritual ends and in some manner allyed to Religion and all spiritual things becoming temporal as they conduce to the secular peace and prosperity of States there is nothing which each of these Powers will not hook within the verge of its cognizance and jurisdiction each will claim a right to meddle in all things one pretending thereby to further the good of the Church the other to secure the interest of the State and what end or remedy can there be of the differences hence arising there being no third Power to arbitrate or moderate between them Each will prosecute its cause by its advantages the one by instruments of temporal power the other by spiritual arms of censures and curses And in what a case must the poor people then be how distracted in their consciences how divided in their affections how discordant in their practices according as each pretence hath influence upon them by its different arguments or peculiar advantages How can any man satisfie himself in performing or refusing obedience to either How many by the intricacy of the point and contrary pulling will be withdrawn from yielding due complyance on the one hand or the other What shall a man doe while one in case of disobedience to his Commands doth brandish a Sword the other thundreth out a Curse against him one threatneth death the other excision from the Church both denounce damnation What animosities and contentions what discomposures and confusions must this Constitution of things breed in every place and how can a Kingdom so divided in it self stand or not come into desolation Such an advantage infallibly will make Popes affect to invade the temporal Power It was the reason which Pope Paschal alledged against Henry IV. because he did Ecclesiae regnum auferre It is indeed impossible that a co-ordination of these Powers should subsist for each will be continually encroaching on the other each for its own defence and support will continually be struggling and clambring to get above the other there will never be any quiet till one come to subside and truckle under the other whereby the Sovereignty of the one or the other will be destroyed Each of them soon will come to claim a Supremacy in all causes and the power of both Swords and one side will carry it It is indeed necessary that men for a time continuing possessed with a reverence to the Ecclesiastical Authority as independent and uncontrollable it should at last overthrow the temporal by reason of its great advantages above it for The Spiritual Power doth pretend an Establishment purely Divine which cannot by any accidents undergoe any change diminutions or translation to which Temporal dominions are subject Its power therefore being perpetual irreversible depending immediately of God can hardly be checked can never be conquered It fighteth with Tongues and Pens which are the most perillous Weapons It can never be disarmed fighting with Weapons that cannot be taken away or deprived of their edge and vigour It worketh by most powerfull considerations upon the Consciences and affections of men upon pain of damnation promising heaven and threatning hell which upon some men have an infinite sway upon all men a considerable influence and thereby will be too hard for those who onely can grant Temporal Rewards or inflict Temporal Punishments It is surely a notable advantage that the Pope hath above all Princes that he commandeth not onely as a Prince but as a Guide so that whereas we are not otherwise bound to obey the commands of Princes than as they appear concordant with God's Law we must observe his commands absolutely as being therefore lawfull because he commandeth them that involving his assertion of their lawfulness to which without farther inquiry or scruple we must submit our understanding his words sufficiently authorizing his commands for just We are not onely obliged to obey his commands but to embrace his doctrines It hath continual opportunities of conversing with men and thereby can insinuate and suggest the obligation to obey it with greatest advantage in secrecy in the tenderest seasons It claimeth a power to have its instruction admitted with assent and will it not instruct them for its own advantage All its Assertions must be believed is not this an infinite advantage By such advantages the Spiritual Power if admitted for such as it pretendeth will swallow and devour the Temporal which will be an extreme mischief to the world The very pretence doth immediately crop and curtail the natural Right of Princes by exempting great numbers of Persons the participants and dependents of this Hierarchy from subjection to them By withdrawing Causes from their Jurisdiction By commanding in their Territories and drawing people out of them to their Judicatories By having influence on their Opinions By dreigning them of Wealth c. To this discourse Experience abundantly doth yield its Attestation for How often have the Popes thwarted Princes in the exercise of their power challenging their Laws and Administrations as prejudicial to Religion as contrary to Ecclesiastical Liberty Bodin l. 9. observeth that if any Prince were a Heretick that is if the Pope could pick occasion to call him so or a Tyrant that is in his opinion or any-wise scandalous the Pope would excommunicate him and would not receive him to favour but upon his acknowledging himself a feudatory to the Pope So he drew in most Kingdoms to depend on him How often have they excommunicated them and interdicted their people from entertaining communion with them How many Commotions Conspiracies Rebellions and Insurrections against Princes have they raised in several Countries How have they inveigled people from their Allegiance How many Massacres and Assassinations have they caused How have they depressed and vilified the Temporal Power Have they not assumed to themselves Superiority over all Princes The Emperour himself the chief of Christian Princes they did call their Vassal exacting an Oath from them whereof you have a Form in the Canon Law and a declaration of Pope Clement V. that it is an Oath of Fealty
for his actions to any other Judge but God That this notion of liberty did continue a good time after in the Church we may see by that Canon of the Antiochene Synod ordaining that every Bishop have power of his own Bishoprick govern it according to the best of his care and discretion and provide for all the Country belonging to his City so as to ordain Priests and Deacons and dispose things aright The Monks of Constantinople in the Synod of Chalcedon said thus We are sons of the Church and have one Father after God our Archbishop they forgot their Sovereign Father the Pope The like notion may seem to have been then in England when the Church of Canterbury was called the common mother of all under the disposition of its Spouse Jesus Christ. VI. The Ancients did hold all Bishops as to their Office originally according to Divine Institution or abstracting from humane Sanctions framed to preserve Order and Peace to be equal for that all are Successours of the Apostles all derive their Commission and Power in the same tenour from God all of them are Ambassadours Stewards Vicars of Christ entrusted with the same Divine Ministeries of instructing dispensing the Sacraments ruling and exercising Discipline to which Functions and Privileges the least Bishop hath right and to greater the biggest cannot pretend One Bishop might exceed another in Splendour in Wealth in Reputation in extent of Jurisdiction as one King may surpass another in amplitude of Territory but as all Kings so all Bishops are equal in Office and essentials of Power derived from God Hence they applied to them that in the Psalm Instead of thy Fathers shall be thy Children whom thou mayst make Princes in all the earth This was St. Hierome's Doctrine in those famous words Whereever a Bishop be whether at Rome or at Eugubium at Constantinople or at Rhegium at Alexandria or at Thenis he is of the same worth and of the same Priesthood the force of wealth and lowness of poverty doth not render a Bishop more high or more low for that all of them are Successours of the Apostles to evade which plain assertion they have forged distinctions whereof St. Hierome surely did never think he speaking simply concerning Bishops as they stood by Divine Institution not according to humane Models which gave some advantages over other That this notion did continue long in the Church we may see by the Elogies of Bishops in later Synods for instance that in the Synod of Compeigne It is convenient all Christians should know what kind of Office the Bishops is who 't is plain are the Vicars of Christ and keep the Keys of the Kingdom of Heaven And that of the Synod of Melun And though all of us unworthy yet are the Vicars of Christ and Successours of his Apostles In contemplation of which verity St. Gregory Nazianzene observing the declension from it introduced in his times by the ambition of some Prelates did vent that famous exclamation O that there were not at all any presidency or any preference in place and tyrannical enjoyment of prerogatives which earnest wish he surely did not mean to level against the Ordinance of God but against that which lately began to be intruded by men And what would the good man have wished if he had been aware of those pretences about which we discourse which then did onely begin to bud and peep up in the World 1. Common practice is a good Interpreter of common sentiments in any case and it therefore sheweth that in the primitive Church the Pope was not deemed to have a right of Universal Sovereignty for if such a thing had been instituted by God or established by the Apostles the Pope certainly with evident clearness would have appeared to have possessed it and would have sometimes I might say frequently yea continually have exercised it in the first Ages which that he did not at all we shall make I hope very manifest by reflecting on the chief passages occurring then whereof indeed there is scarce any one which duly weighed doth not serve to overthrow the Roman pretence but that matter I reserve to another place and shall propound other considerations declaring the sense of the Fathers onely I shall add that indeed 2. The state of the most primitive Church did not well admit such an universal Sovereignty For that did consist of small bodies incoherently situated and scattered about in very distant places and consequently unfit to be modelled into one political Society or to be governed by one Head Especially considering their condition under Persecution and Poverty What convenient resort for Direction or Justice could a few distressed Christians in Egypt Ethiopia Parthia India Mesopotamia Syria Armenia Cappadocia and other Parts have to Rome what trouble what burthen had it been to seek Instruction Succour Decision of Cases thence Had they been obliged or required to doe so what offences what clamours would it have raised seeing that afterward when Christendom was connected and compacted together when the state of Christians was flourishing and prosperous when passages were open and the best of opportunities of correspondence were afforded yet the setting out of these pretences did cause great oppositions and stirs seeing the exercise of this Authority when it had obtained most vigour did produce so many grievances so many complaints so many courses to check and curb it in Countries feeling the inconveniences and mischiefs springing from it The want of the like in the first Ages is a good Argument that the cause of them had not yet sprung up Christendom could not have been so still if there had been then so meddlesome a body in it as the Pope now is The Roman Clergy in their Epistle to St. Cyprian told him that because of the difficulty of things and times they could not constitute a Bishop who might moderate things immediately belonging to them in their own precincts how much more in that state of things would a Bishop there be sit to moderate things over all the World when as Rigaltius truly noteth the Church being then oppressed with various vexations the communication of Provinces between themselves was difficult and unfrequent Wherefore Bellarmine himself doth confess that in those times before the Nicene Synod the authority of the Pope was not a little hindred so that because of continual persecutions he could not freely exercise it The Church therefore could so long subsist without the use of such Authority by the vigilance of Governours over their Flocks and the friendly correspondence of neighbour Churches And if he would let it alone it might do so still That could be no Divine Institution which had no vigour in the first and best times but an Innovation raised by Ambition VII The Ancients when occasion did require did maintain their equality of Office and Authority particularly in respect to the Roman Bishops not onely interpretatively by practice but directly and
immediately subjected to his Patriarchal Jurisdiction Pope Nicholas I. doth very jocularly expound this Canon affirming that by the Primate of the Diocese is understood the Pope Diocese being put by a notable figure for Dioceses and that an appeal is to be made to the Bishop of Constantinople onely by permission in case the Party will be content therewith We may note that some Provincial Churches were by ancient custome exempted from dependence on any Primacy or Patriarchate Such an one the Cyprian Church was adjudged to be in the Ephesine Synod wherein the privileges of such Churches were confirmed against the invasion of greater Churches and to that purpose this general Law enacted Let the same be observ'd in all Dioceses and Provinces every where that none of the Bishops most beloved of God invade another Province which did not formerly belong to him or his Predecessours and if any one have invaded one and violently seiz'd it that he restore it Such a Church was that of Britain anciently before Austin did introduce the Papal Authority here against that Canon as by divers learned Pens hath been shewed Such was the Church of Africk as by their Canons against transmarine appeals and about all other matters doth appear It is supposed by some that Discipline was scrued yet one peg higher by setting up the Order of Patriarchs higher than Primates or Diocesan Exarchs but I find no ground of this supposal except in one case that is of the Bishop of Constantinople being set above the Bishops of Ephesus Caesarea and Heraclea which were the Primates of the three Dioceses It is a notable fib which Pope Nicholas II. telleth as Gratian citeth him That the Church of Rome instituted all Patriarchal Supremacies all Metropolitan Primacies Episcopal Sees all Ecclesiastical Orders and Dignities whatsoever Now things standing thus in Christendom we may concerning the interest of the Roman Bishop in reference to them observe 1. In all these transactions about modelling the spiritual Discipline there was no Canon established any peculiar Jurisdiction to the Bishop of Rome onely the 2. Synod of Nice did suppose that he by custome did enjoy some Authority within certain precincts of the West like to that which it did confirm to the Bishop of Alexandria in Egypt and the Countries adjacent thereto 3. The Synods of Constantinople did allow him honourary privileges or precedence before all other Bishops assigning the next place after him to the Bishop of Constantinople 4. In other privileges the Synod of Chalcedon did equall the See of Constantinople to the Roman 5. The Canons of the two First and Fourth General Synods ordering all affairs to be dispatched and causes to be determined in Metropolitan or Diocesan Synods do exclude the Roman Bishop from meddling in those concerns 6. The Popes out of a humour natural to them to like nothing but what they did themselves and which served their Interests did not relish those Canons although enacted by Synods which themselves admitted for Oecumenical That subscription of some Bishops made above sixty years since as you boast does no whit favour your persuasion a subscription never transmitted to the knowledge of the Apostolick See by your Predecessours which from its very beginning being weak and long since ruinous you endeavour now too late and unprofitably to revive So doth Pope Leo I. treat the Second Great Synod writing to Anatolius and Gregory speaking of the same says That the Roman Church has not the acts of that Synod nor receiv'd its Canons 7. Wherefore in the West they did obtain no effect so as to establish Diocesan Primacies there The Bishops of Cities which were Heads of Dioceses either did not know of these Canons which is probable because Rome did smother the notice of them or were hindred from using them the Pope having so winded himself in and got such hold among them as he would not let go 8. It indeed turned to a great advantage of the Pope in carrying on his Encroachments and enlarging his worldly Interests that the Western Churches did not as the Eastern conform themselves to the Political frame in embracing Diocesan Primacies which would have engaged and enabled them better to protect the Liberties of their Churches from Papal Invasions 9. For hence for want of a better the Pope did claim to himself a Patriarchal authority over the Western Churches pretending a right of calling to Synods of meddling in Ordinations of determining Causes by appeal to him of dictating Laws and Rules to them against the old rights of Metropolitans and the later Constitutions for Primacies Of this we have an Instance in St. Gregory where he alledging an Imperial Constitution importing that in case a Clergy-man should appeal from his Metropolitan the cause should be referred to the Archbishop and Patriarch of that Diocese who judging according to the Canons and Laws should give an end thereto doth consequentially assume an appeal from a Bishop to himself adjoyning If against these things it be said that the Bishop had neither Metropolitan nor Patriarch it is to be said that this cause was to be heard and decided by the Apostolical See which is the head of all Churches 10. Having got such advantage and as to extent stretched his Authority beyond the bounds of his sub-urbicarian precincts he did also intend it in quality far beyond the privileges by any Ecclesiastical Law granted to Patriarchs or claimed or exercised by any other Patriarch till at length by degrees he had advanced it to an exorbitant omnipotency and thereby utterly enslaved the Western Churches The ancient Order did allow a Patriarch or Primate to call a Synod of the Bishops in his Diocese and with them to determine Ecclesiastical Affairs by majority of suffrages but he doth not doe so but setting himself down in his Chair with a few of his Courtiers about him doth make Decrees and Dictates to which he pretendeth all must submit The ancient Order did allow a Patriarch to ordain Metropolitans duly elected in their Dioceses leaving Bishops to be ordained by the Metropolitans in their Provincial Synods but he will meddle in the Ordination of every Bishop suffering none to be constituted without his confirmation for which he must soundly pay The ancient Order did allow a Patriarch with the advice and consent of his Synod to make Canons for the well ordering his Diocese but he sendeth about his Decretal Letters composed by an infallible Secretary which he pretendeth must have the force of Laws equal to the highest Decrees of the whole Church The ancient Order did suppose Bishops by their Ordination sufficiently obliged to render unto their Patriarch due observance according to the Canons he being liable to be judged in a Synod for the transgression of his duty but he forceth all Bishops to take the most slavish oaths of obedience to him that can be imagined The ancient Order did appoint that Bishops accused for
offences should be judged in their Provinces or upon appeal from them in Patriarchal Synods but he receiveth appeals at the first hand and determineth them in his Court without calling such a Synod in an age for any such purpose The ancient Patriarchs did order all things as became good Subjects with leave and under submission to the Emperour who as he pleased did interpose his confirmation of their Sanctions but this man pretendeth to decree what he pleaseth without the leave and against the will of Princes Wherefore he is not a Patriarch of the Western Churches for that he acteth according to no Patriarchal Rule but a certain kind of Sovereign Lord or a tyrannical Oppressour of them 11. In all the transactions for modelling the Church there never was allowed to the Pope any dominion over his Fellow-patriarchs or of those great Primates who had assumed that name to themselves among whom indeed for the dignity of his City he had obtained a priority of honour or place but never had any power over them setled by a title of Law or by clear and uncontested practice Insomuch that if any of them had erred in Faith or offended in Practice it was requisite to call a General Synod to judge them as in the cases of Athanasius of Gregory Nazianzene and Maximus of Theophilus and St. Chrysostome of Nestorius and of Dioscorus is evident 12. Indeed all the Oriental Churches did keep themselves pretty free from his encroachments although when he had swollen so big in the West he sometimes did take occasion to attempt on their Liberty which they sometimes did warily decline sometimes stoutly did oppose But as to the main those flourishing Churches constantly did maintain a distinct administration from the Western Churches under their own Patriarchs and Synods not suffering him to interlope in prejudice to their Liberty They without his leave or notice did call and celebrate Synods whereof all the first great Synods are instances their Ordinations were not confirmed or touched by him Appeals were not with publick regard or allowance thence made to him in causes great or little but they decided them among themselves they quashed Heresies springing up among them as the Second General Synod the Macedonians Theophilus the Origenists c. Little in any case had his Worship to doe with them or they with him beyond what was needfull to maintain general communion and correspondence with him which they commonly as piety obliged were willing to doe And sometimes when a pert Pope upon some incidental advantage of differences risen among them would be more busie than they deemed convenient in tampering with their affairs they did rap his fingers so Victor so Stephanus so Julius and Liberius of old did feel to their smart so afterward Damasus and other Popes in the case of Flavianus Innocent in the case of St. Chrysostome Felix and his Successours in the case of Acacius did find little regard had to their interposals So things proceeded till at length a final rupture was made between them and they would not suffer him at all to meddle with their affairs Before I proceed any farther I shall briefly draw some Corollaries from this Historical account which I have given of the original and growth of Metropolitical Primatical and Patriarchal Jurisdiction 1. Patriarchs are an humane Institution 2. As they were erected by the power and prudence of men so they may be dissolved by the same 3. They were erected by the leave and confirmation of Princes and by the same they may be dejected if great reason do appear 4. The Patriarchate of the Pope beyond his own Province or Diocese doth not subsist upon any Canon of a General Synod 5. He can therefore claim no such power otherwise than upon his invasion or assumption 6. The Primates and Metropolitans of the Western Church cannot be supposed otherwise than by force or out of fear to have submitted to such an authority as he doth usurp 7. It is not really a Patriarchal Power like to that which was granted by the Canons and Princes but another sort of power which the Pope doth exercise 8. The most rightfull Patriarch holding false Doctrine or imposing unjust Laws or tyrannically abusing his power may and ought to be rejected from communion 9. Such a Patriarch is to be judged by a free Synod if it may be had 10. If such a Synod cannot be had by consent of Princes each Church may free it self from the mischiefs induced by his perverse doctrine or practice 11. No Ecclesiastical Power can interpose in the management of any affairs within the Territory of any Prince without his concession 12. By the Laws of God and according to ancient Practice Princes may model the bounds of Ecclesiastical Jurisdiction erect Bishopricks enlarge diminish or transfer them as they please 13. Wherefore each Prince having Supreme Power in his own Dominions and equal to what the Emperour had in his may exclude any foreign Prelate from Jurisdiction in his Territories 14. It is expedient for peace and publick good that he should doe thus 15. Such Prelate according to the rules of Christianity ought to be content with his doing so 16. Any Prelate exercising power in the Dominion of any Prince is eatenus his Subject as the Popes and all Bishops were to the Roman Emperours 17. Those joints of Ecclesiastical Discipline established in the Roman Empire by the confirmation of Emperours were as to necessary continuance dissolved by the dissolution of the Roman Empire 18. The power of the Pope in the Territories of any Prince did subsist by his authority and favour 19. By the same reason as Princes have curbed the exorbitancy of Papal power in some cases of entertaining Legats making Appeals disposing of Benefices c. by the same they might exclude it 20. The practice of Christianity doth not depend upon the subsistence of such a form instituted by man Having shewed at large that this Universal Sovereignty and Jurisdiction of the Bishop of Rome over the Christian Church hath no real Foundation either in Scripture or elsewhere it will be requisite to shew by what ways and means so groundless a claim and pretence should gain belief and submission to it from so considerable a part of Christendom and that from so very slender roots from slight beginnings and the slimmest pretences one can well imagin this bulk of exorbitant power did grow the vastest that ever man on earth did attain or did ever aim at will be the less wonderfull if we do consider the many causes which did concur and contribute thereto some whereof are proposed in the following Observations 1. Eminency of any kind in wealth in honour in reputation in might in place or mere order of dignity doth easily pass into advantages of real power and command over those who are inferiour in those respects and have any dealings or common transactions with such Superiours For to persons endowed with such eminency by
onely bring much grist to his Mill but did enable him highly to oblige divers persons especially great ones to himself For to him they owed the quiet of their Conscience from scruples To him they owed the satisfaction of their desires and legitimation of their issue and title to their possessions 36. So the device of Indulgences did greatly raise the veneration of him for who would not adore him that could loose his bands and free his Soul from long and grievous pains SUPPOSITION VI. The next Supposition is this That in Fact the Roman Bishops continually from Saint Peter's time have enjoyed and exercised this Sovereign Power THIS is a Question of Fact which will best be decided by a particular consideration of the several Branches of Sovereign Power that so we may examine the more distinctly whether in all Ages the Popes have enjoyed and exercised them or not And if we survey the particular Branches of Sovereignty we shall find that the Pope hath no just title to them in reason by valid Law or according to ancient practice whence each of them doth yield a good argument against his pretences 1. If the Pope were Sovereign of the Church he would have power to convocate its supreme Councils and Judicatories and would constantly have exercised it This power therefore the Pope doth claim and indeed did pretend to it a long time since before they could obtain to exercise it It is manifestly apparent saith Pope Leo X. with approbation of his Laterane Synod that the Roman Bishop for the time being as who hath authority over all Councils hath alone the full right and power of indicting translating and dissolving Councils and long before him To the Apostolical authority said Pope Adrian I. by our Lord's command and by the merits of Saint Peter and by the decrees of the Holy Canons and of the Venerable Fathers a right and special power of convocating Synods hath many-wise been committed and yet before him The authority saith Pope Pelagius II. of convocating Synods hath been delivered to the Apostolical See by the singular privilege of Saint Peter But it is manifest that the Pope cannot pretend to this power by virtue of any old Ecclesiastical Canon none such being extant or produced by him Nor can he alledge any ancient custome there having been no General Synod before Constantine and as to the practice from that time it is very clear that for some Ages the Popes did not assume or exercise such a power and that it was not taken for their due Nothing can be more evident and it were extreme impudence to deny that the Emperours at their pleasure and by their authority did congregate all the first General Synods for so the oldest Historians in most express terms do report so those Princes in their Edicts did aver so the Synods themselves did declare The most just and pious Emperours who did bear greatest love to the Clergy and had much respect for the Pope did call them without scruple it was deemed their right to doe it none did remonstrate against their practice the Fathers in each Synod did refer thereto with allowance and commonly with applause Popes themselves did not contest their right yea commonly did petition them to exercise it These things are so clear and so obvious that it is almost vain to prove them I shall therefore but touch them In general Socrates doth thus attest to the ancient practice We saith he do continually include the Emperours in our history because upon them ever since they became Christians Ecclesiastical affairs have depended and the greatest Synods have been and are made by their appointment and Justinian in his prefatory type to the Fifth General Council beginneth thus It hath been ever the care of Pious and Orthodox Emperours by the assembling of the most religious Bishops to cut off Heresies as they did spring up and by the right faith sincerely preached to keep the Holy Church of God in peace and to doe this was so proper to the Emperours that when Ruffin did affirm Saint Hilary to have been excommunicated in a Synod Saint Hierome to confute him did ask tell me What Emperour did command this Synod to be congregated implying it to be illegal or impossible that a Synod should be congregated without the Imperial command Particularly Eusebius saith of the first Christian Emperour that as a common Bishop appointed by God he did summon Synods of God's Ministers so did he command a great number of Bishops to meet at Arles for decision of the Donatists cause so did he also command the Bishops from all quarters to meet at Tyre for examination of the affairs concerning Athanasius and that he did convocate the great Synod of Nice the first and most renowned of all General Synods all the Historians do agree he did himself affirm the Fathers thereof in their Synodical remonstrances did avow as we shall hereafter in remarking on the passages of that Synod shew The same course did his Son Constantius follow without impediment for although he was a favourer of the Arian Party yet did the Catholick Bishops readily at his call assemble in the great Synods of Sardica of Ariminum of Seleucia of Sirmium of Milan c. Which he out of a great zeal to compose dissentions among the Bishops did convocate After him the Emperour Valentinian understanding of dissensions about divine matters to compose them did indict a Synod in Illyricum A while after for settlement of the Christian State which had been greatly disturbed by the Persecution of Julian and of Valens and by divers Factions Theodosius I. did command saith Theodoret the Bishops of his Empire to be assembled together at Constantinople the which meeting accordingly did make the Second General Synod in the congregation of which the Pope had so little to doe that Baronius saith it was celebrated against his will Afterwards when Nestorius Bishop of Constantinople affecting to seem wiser than others in explaining the mystery of Christ's Incarnation had raised a jangle to the disturbance of the Church for removing it the Emperour Theodosius II. did by his edict command the Bishops to meet at Ephesus who there did celebrate the Third General Council in the beginning of each Action it is affirmed that the Synod was convocated by the Imperial decree the Synod it self doth often profess it the Pope's own Legate doth acknowledge it and so doth Cyril the President thereof The same Emperour upon occasion of Eutyches being condemned at Constantinople and the stirs thence arising did indict the Second General Synod of Ephesus which proved abortive by the miscariages of Dioscorus Bishop of Alexandria as appeareth by his Imperial Letters to Dioscorus and the other Bishops summoning them to that Synod We have decreed that the most holy Bishops meeting together c. After the same manner the other most reverend Bishops were written to to come
that you would command a General Synod to be celebrated within Italy to which request although back'd with the desire of the Western Emperour Theodosius would by no means consent for as Leontius reporteth when Valentinian being importuned by Pope Leo did write to Theodosius II. that he would procure another Synod to be held for examining whether Dioscorus had judged rightly or no Theodosius did write back to him saying I shall make no other Synod The same Pope did again of the same Emperour petition for a Synod to examin the cause of Anatolius Bishop of Constantinople Let your clemency saith he be pleased to grant an Vniversal Council to be held in Italy as with me the Synod which for this cause did meet at Rome doth request Thus did that Pope continually harp upon one string to get a General Synod to be celebrated at his own doors but never could obtain his purpose the Emperour being stiff in refusing it The same Pope with better success as to the thing though not as to the place did request of the Emperour Marcian a Synod for he concurring in opinion that it was needfull did saith Liberatus at the petition of the Pope and the Roman Princes command a General Council to be congregated at Nice Now if the Pope had himself a known right to convocate Synods what needed all this application or this supplication to the Emperours would not the Pope have endeavoured to exercise his Authority would he not have clamoured or whined at any interruption thereof would so spiritfull and sturdy a Pope as Leo have begged that to be done by another which he had authority to doe of himself when he did apprehend so great necessity for it and was so much provoked thereto would he not at least have remonstrated against the injury therein done to him by Theodosius All that this daring Pope could adventure at was to wind in a pretence that the Synod of Chalcedon was congregated by his consent for it hath been the pleasure of whom I pray that a General Council should be congregated both by the command of the Christian Princes and with the consent of the Apostolick See saith he very cunningly yet not so cunningly but that any other Bishop might have said the same for his See This power indeed upon many just accounts peculiarly doth belong to Princes It suteth to the dignity of their state it appertaineth to their duty they are most able to discharge it They are the Guardians of publick tranquillity which constantly is endangered which commonly is violated by dissensions in religious matters whence we must pray for them that by their care we may lead a quiet and peaceable life in all godliness and honesty they alone can authorize their Subjects to take such Journeys or to meet in such Assemblies they alone can well cause the expences needfull for holding Synods to de exacted and defrayed they alone can protect them can maintain Order and Peace in them can procure Observance to their Determinations they alone have a Sword to constrain resty and refractory persons and in no cases are men so apt to be such as in debates about these matters to convene to confer peaceably to agree to observe what is settled They as nursing Fathers of the Church as Ministers of God's Kingdom as encouragers of good works as the Stewards of God entrusted with the great Talents of Power Dignity Wealth enabling them to serve God are obliged to cause Bishops in such cases to perform their duty according to the example of good Princes in Holy Scripture who are commended for proceedings of this nature for so King Josias did convocate a General Synod of the Church in his time then saith the Text the King sent and gathered together all the Elders of Judah and Jerusalem In this Synod he presided standing in his place and making a covenant before the Lord its Resolutions he confirmed causing all that were present in Jerusalem and Benjamin to stand to that Covenant and he took care of their Execution making all present in Israel effectually to serve the Lord their God So also did King Hezekiah gather the Priests and Levites together did warn did command them to doe their duty and reform things in the Church My Sons said he be not now negligent for the Lord hath chosen you to stand before him to serve him and that ye should minister unto him and burn incense Beside them none other can have reasonable pretence to such a Power or can well be deemed able to manage it so great an Authority cannot be exercised upon the Subjects of any Prince without eclipsing his Majesty infringing his natural right and endangering his State He that at his pleasure can summon all Christian Pastours and make them trot about and hold them when he will is in effect Emperour or in a fair way to make himself so It is not fit therefore that any other person should have all the Governours of the Church at his beck so as to draw them from remote places whither he pleaseth to put them on long and chargeable Journeys to detain them from their charge to set them on what deliberations and debates he thinketh good It is not reasonable that any one without the leave of Princes should authorize so great conventions of men having such interest and sway it is not safe that any one should have such dependencies on him by which he may be tempted to clash with Princes and withdraw his Subjects from their due obedience Neither can any success be well expected from the use of such Authority by any who hath not Power by which he can force Bishops to convene to resolve to obey whence we see that Constantine who was a Prince so gentle and friendly to the Clergy was put to threaten those Bishops who would absent themselves from the Synod indicted by him at Tyre and Theodosius also a very mild and religious Prince did the like in his summoning the two Ephesine Synods We likewise may observe that when the Pope and Western Bishops in a Synodical Epistle did invite those of the East to a great Synod indicted at Rome these did refuse the journey alledging that it would be to no good purpose so also when the Western Bishops did call those of the East for resolving the difference between Flavianus and Paulinus both pretending to be Bishops of Antioch what effect had their summons and so will they always or often be ready to say who are called at the pleasure of those who want force to constrain them so that such Authority in unarmed hands and God keep Arms out of a Pope's hands will be onely a source of discords Either the Pope is a Subject as he was in the first times and then it were too great a presumption for him to claim such a power over his fellow-Subjects in prejudice to his Sovereign nor indeed did he presume so far untill he
the Pope with him in his actings He thereby might pretend to the first place of sitting and subscribing which kind of advantages it appeareth that some Bishops had in Synods by the virtue of the like substitution in the place of others but he thence could have no authoritative Presidency for that the Pope himself could by no delegation impart having himself no title thereto warranted by any Law or by any Precedent that depended on the Emperour's will or on the Election of the Fathers or on a tacit regard to personal eminence in comparison to others present This distinction Evagrius seemeth to intimate when he saith that the divine Cyril did administer it and the place of Celestine where a word seemeth to have fallen out and Zonaras more plainly doth express saying that Cyril Pope of Alexandria did preside over the Orthodox Fathers and also did hold the place of Celestine and Photius Cyril did supply the seat and the person of Celestine If any latter Historions do confound these things we are not obliged to comply with their ignorance or mistake Indeed as to Presidency there we may observe that sometime it is attributed to Cyril alone as being the first Bishop present and bearing a great sway sometimes to Pope Celestine as being in representation present and being the first Bishop of the Church in Order sometimes to both Cyril and Celestine sometimes to Cyril and Memnon Bishop of Ephesus who as being very active and having great influence on the proceedings are styled the Presidents and Rulers of the Synod The which sheweth that Presidency was a lax thing and no peculiarity in right or usage annexed to the Pope nor did altogether depend on his grant or representation to which Memnon had no title The Pope himself and his Legats are divers times in the Acts said 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to sit together with the Bishops which confidence doth not well comport with his special right to Presidency Yea it is observable that the Oriental Bishops which with John of Antioch did oppose the Cyrillian Party in that Synod did charge on Cyril that he as if he lived in a time of Anarchy did proceed to all irregularity and that snatching to himself the Authority which neither was given him by the Canons nor by the Emperours Sanctions did rush on to all kind of disorder and unlawfulness whence it is evident that in the judgment of those Bishops among whom were divers worthy and excellent persons the Pope had no right to any authoritative Presidency This word Presidency indeed hath an ambiguity apt to impose on those who do not observe it for it may be taken for a privilege of Precedence or for Authority to govern things the first kind of presidence the Pope without dispute when present at a Synod would have had among the Bishops as being the Bishop of the first See as the Sixth Synod calleth him and the first of Priests as Justinian called him and in his absence his Legates might take up his Chair for in General Synods each See had its Chair assigned to it according to its order of dignity by custom And according to this sense the Patriarchs and chief Metropolitans are also often singly or conjunctly said to preside as sitting in one of the first Chairs But the other kind of Presidency was as those Bishops in their complaint against Cyril do imply and as we shall See in practice disposed by the Emperour as he saw reason although usually it was conferred on him who among those present in dignity did precede the rest this is that authority 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which the Syrian Bishops complained against Cyril for assuming to himself without the Emperour's warrant and whereof we have a notable Instance in the next General Synod at Ephesus For In the Second Ephesine Synod which in design was a General Synod lawfully convened for a publick cause of determining truth and settling peace in the Church but which by some miscarriages proved abortive although the Pope had his Legates there yet by the Emperour's order Dioscorus Bishop of Alexandria did preside We said Theodosius in his Epistle to him do also commit to thy godliness the authority and the preeminency of all things appertaining to the Synod now assembled and in the Synod of Chalcedon it is said of him that he had received the authority of all affairs and of judgment and Pope Leo I. in this Epistle to the Emperour saith that Dioscorus did challenge to himself the principal place insinuating a complaint that Dioscorus should be preferred before him although not openly contesting his right The Emperour had indeed some reason not to commit the Presidency to Pope Leo because he was looked upon as prejudiced in the cause having declared in favour of Flavianus against Eutyches whence Eutyches declined his Legate's interessing in the judgment of his cause saying they were suspected to him because they were entertained by Flavianus with great regard And Dioscorus being Bishop of the next See was taken for more indifferent and otherwise a person however afterward it proved of much integrity and moderation He did saith the Emperour shine by the grace of God both in honesty of life and orthodoxy of faith and Theodoret himself before those differences arose doth say of him that he was by common fame reported a man adorned with many other kinds of vertue and that especially he was celebrated for his moderation of mind It is true that the Legates of Pope Leo did take in dudgeon this preferment of Dioscorus and if we may give credence to Liberatus would not sit down in the Synod because the presession was not given to their Holy See and afterwards in the Synod of Chalcedon the Pope's Legate Paschasinus together with other Bishops did complain that Dioscorus was preferred before the Bishop of Constantinople but notwithstanding those ineffectual mutinies the Emperour's will did take place and according thereto Dioscorus had although he did not use it so wisely and justly as he should the chief managery of things It is to be observed that to other chief Bishops the Presidency in that Synod is also ascribed by virtue of the Emperour's appointment Let the most reverend Bishops say the Imperial Commissaries in the Synod of Chalcedon to whom the authoritative management of affairs was by the Royal Sovereignty granted speak why the Epistle of the most Holy Archbishop Leo was not read and You say they again to whom the power of judging was given and of Dioscorus Juvenalis Bishop of Jerusalem Thalassius of Caesarea Eusebius of Ancyra Eustathius of Beristus Basilius of Selencia it is by the same Commissioners said that they had recieved the authority and did govern the Synod which was then and Elpidius the Emperour's Agent in the Ephesine Synod it self did expresly style them Presidents and Pope Leo himself calleth them Presidents and Primates of the Synod Whence it
in their generations accommodating their discourse to the state of times and places 11. It is also to be observed that often the Popes are supposed to speak and constitute things by their own authority which indeed were done by Synods consisting of Western Bishops more closely adhering to that See in regard to those Regions the Decrees of which Synods were binding in those places not so much by virtue of Papal authority as proceeding from the consent of their own Bishops how ready soever He were to assume all to himself pretending those Decrees as precepts of the Apostolical See Whence all the Acts of modern Popes are invalid and do not oblige seeing they do not act in Synod but onely of their own Head or with the advice of a few Partizans about them men linked in common interest with them to domineer over the Church 12. Yet even in the Western Countries in later times their Decrees have been contested when they did seem plainly to clash with the old Canons or much to derogate from the Liberties of Churches nor have there wanted learned Persons in most times who so far as they durst have expressed their dislike of this Usurpation For although the Bishop of Rome be more venerable than the rest that are in the world upon account of the dignity of the Apostolical See yet it is not lawfull for him in any case to transgress the order of Canonical governance for as every Bishop who is of the Orthodox Church and the Spouse of his own See doth intirely represent the Person of our Saviour so generally no Bishop ought pragmatically to act any thing in anothers Diocese 13. In the times of Pope Nicolas I. the Greeks did not admit the Roman Decrees so that Pope in an Epistle to Photius complains that he did not receive the Decrees of the Popes whenas yet they ordained nothing but what the Natural what the Mosaical and what the Law of Grace required And in another Epistle he expostulates with him for saying that they neither had nor did observe the Decrees made by the Holy Popes of the Prime See of the Roman Church 14. That which greatly did advance the Papal Jurisdiction and introduced his Usurpation of obtruding new Decrees on the Church was the venting of the forged Decretal Epistles under the name of Old Popes which when the Pope did alledge for authorizing his practices the French Bishops endeavouring to assert their Privilege did alledge that they were not contained in the whole body of their Canons 15. The power of enacting and dispensing with Ecclesiastical Laws touching extoriour Discipline did of old belong to the Emperour And it was reasonable that it should because old Laws might not conveniently sute with the present state of things and the publick welfare because new Laws might condâ—ce to the good of Church and State the care of which is incumbent on him because the Prince is bound to use his power and authority to promote God's Service the best way of doing which may be by framing Orders conducible thereto Accordingly the Emperours did enact divers Laws concerning Ecclesiastical matters which we see extant in the Codes of Theodosius and Justinian These things saith the Council of Arles we have decreed to be presented to our Lord the Emperour desiring his clemency that if any thing be defective it may be supplied by his prudence if any thing be unreasonable it may be corrected by his judgment if any thing be reasonably ordered it may by his help the Divine Grace assisting be perfected We may observe that Popes did allow the validity of Imperial Laws Pope Gregory I. doth alledge divers Laws of divers Emperours concerning Ecclesiastical affairs as authentick and obligatory Rules of practice 16. Divers Churches had particular rights of independency upon all power without themselves Such as the Church of Cyprus in the Ephesine Synod did claim and obtain the confirmation of Such was the ancient Church of Britain before Austin came into England The Welch Bishops are consecrated by the Bishop of St. Davids and he himself in like manner is ordained by others who are as it were his Suffragans professing no manner subjection to any other Church V. Sovereign power immediately by it self when it pleaseth doth exercise all parts of Jurisdiction setting it self in the Tribunal or mediately doth execute it by others as its Officers or Commissioners Wherefore now the Pope doth claim and exercise Universal Jurisdiction over all the Clergy requiring of them engagements of strict submission and obedience to him demanding that all causes of weight be referred to him citing them to his bar examining and deciding their causes condemning suspending deposing censuring them or acquitting absolving restoring them as he seeth cause or findeth in his heart He doth encourage people to accuse their pastours to him in case any doth infringe his Laws and Orders But in general that originally or anciently the Pope had no such right appropriate to him may appear by arguments by cross instances by the insufficiency of all pleas and examples alledged in favour of this claim For 1. Originally there was not at all among Christians any Jurisdiction like to that which is exercised in Civil Governments and which now the papal Court doth execute For this our Saviour did prohibit and Saint Peter forbad the Presbyters 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 And St. Chrysostome affirmeth the Episcopal power not to be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 And Ecclesiastical History doth inform us that such a Jurisdiction was lately introduced in the Church as by other great Bishops so especially by the Bishop of Rome For saith Socrates from that time the Episcopacy of Alexandria beyond the Sacerdotal Order did assume a domineering power in affairs The which kind of power the Roman Bishops had long before assumed for saith he the Episcopacy of Rome in like manner as that of Alexandria had already a great while agoe gone before in a domineering power beyond that of the Priesthood At first the Episcopal power did onely consist in Paternal admonition and correption of offenders exhorting and persuading them to amendment and in case they contumaciously did persist in disorderly behaviour bringing them before the Congregation and the cause being there heard and proved with its consent imposing such penance or correction on them as seemed needfull for the publick good or their particular benefit All things saith St. Cyprian shall be examin'd you being present and judging And elsewhere according to your divine suffrages according to your pleasure 2. Originally no one Bishop had any Jurisdiction over another or authority to judge his actions as St. Cyprian who well knew the current judgment and practice of his age in many places doth affirm who particularly doth reflect on the Roman Bishop for presuming to censure his brethren who dissented from him Let us all saith he
expect the judgment of our Lord Jesus Christ who onely hath power to prefer us to the government of his Church and to judge of what we doe 3. Even the community of Bishops did not otherwise take notice of or intermeddle with the proceedings of any Bishop in his precinct and charge except when his demeanour did concern the general state of the Church intrenching upon the common faith or publick order and peace In other cases for one or more Bishops to meddle with the proceedings of their brother was taken for an 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a pragmatical intrusion upon anothers business and an invasion of that Liberty which did belong to each Bishop by the grant of our Lord and the nature of his Office As by those passages of St. Cyprian and the declaration of the Synod with him doth appear 4. In cases needing decision for the publick good of the Church the Law and custom of the Church confirmed by the Nicene Synod did order that jurisdiction should be exercised and all causes finally determined in each Province so that no regard is had to the Pope no exception in favour of him being expressed or implyed The which Constitution if we believe Pope Leo himself cannot in any case by any power be revoked or infringed That is most expresly confirmed by the Synod of Antioch in the Code of the Universal Church If any Bishop accused of certain crimes shall be condemned by all the Bishops in the Province and all shall unanimously vote against him he shall not be judged again by others but the unanimous sentence of the Bishops of the Province shall remain valid Here is no consideration or exception from the Pope 5. Accordingly in practice Synods without regard or recourse to the Pope did judge Bishops upon offences charged against them 6. The execution of those judgments was entrusted to Metropolitan Bishops or had effect by the peoples consent for it being declared that any Bishop had incurred condemnation the people did presently desert him Every Bishop was obliged to confer his part to the execution as Pope Gelasius affirmeth 7. If the Pope had such judicial power seeing there were from the beginning so many occasions of exercising it there would have been extant in History many clear instances of it but few can be alledged and those as we shall see impertinent or insufficient 8. Divers Synods great and smaller did make Sanctions contrary to this pretence of the Pope appointing the decision of Causes to be terminated in each Diocese and prohibiting appeals to him which they would not have done if the Pope had originally or according to common law and custom a supreme judicial power 9. The most favourable of ancient Synods to Papal interest that of Sardica did confer on the Pope a power qualified in matter and manner of causing Episcopal causes to be revised which sheweth that before he had no right in such cases nor then had an absolute power 10. The Pope's power of judging Bishops hath been of old disclaimed as an illegal and upstart encroachment When the Pope first nibbled at this bait of ambition St. Cyprian and his Bishops did reprehend him for it The Bishop of Constantinople denied that Pope Gelasius alone might condemn him according to the Canons The Pope ranteth at it and reasoneth against it but hath no material argument or example for it concerning the Papal authority peculiarly beside the Sardican Canon 11. The Popes themselves have been judged for Misdemeanour Heresie Schism as hereafter we shall shew 12. The Popes did execute some judgments onely by a right common to all Bishops as Executours of Synodical Decrees 13. Other Bishops did pretend to Judicature by Privilege as Juvenalis Bishop of Jerusalem did pretend that to him did belong the Judgment of the Bishop of Antioch 14. The Popes were subject to the Emperours who when they pleased did interpose to direct or qualifie all Jurisdiction commanding the Popes themselves wherefore the Popes were not Judges Sovereign but subordinate Pope Gregory I. did refer the great Question about the title of Oecumenical Bishop to the judgment of the Emperour Mauricius These things will more fully appear in the discussion of the particulars concerning the chief Branches of Jurisdiction more especially under the Tenth Branch of Sovereignty They alledge that passage of Valentinian in his Epistle to Theodosius That the most blessed Bishop of Rome to whom Antiquity hath given a Priesthood over all hath a See and Power to judge both of Faith and Priests This was suggested by Pope Leo and his adherents to the young Emperour but it signifieth no more but that in the Judgment of Priests as of Faith he was to have his share or at most to be a leading person therein Theodosius a mature grave pious Prince did not regard that pretence of Leo nor the appeal of Flavianus VI. To the Sovereign of any State belongeth the Choice Constitution Confirmation Commissionating of all inferiour Magistrates that none uncapable unworthy or unfit for Offices or disaffected to the State be entrusted with the management of Affairs Wherefore the Pope doth claim and exercise these Prerogatives so far as he can pretending at least that no Bishop can be constituted without his designation or his licence and his confirmation of the nomination collation or election And these Privileges by the great Advocates are upon highest terms asserted to him In this matter may be distinguished 1. The Designation of the Person by Election or otherwise 2. The Confirmation of that 3. The Ordination or Consecration of him to his Office the which conferreth on him his Character and Authority 4. The Authority by which he acteth Into all these the Pope hath intruded himself and he will have a finger in them 1. He gladly would have drawn to himself the collation and disposal of all Benefices challenging a general right to dispose of all at his pleasure but not having been able wholly to deprive Princes and Patrons of their Nominations and Corporations of their Election yet he hath by Reservations Provisions Collations of Vacancies apud Sedem Resignations Devolutions and other such tricks extremely encroached on the rights of all to the infinite vexation damage and mischief of Christendom 2. He pretendeth that no Bishop shall be ordained without his Licence 3. He obligeth the person Ordained to swear obedience to him 4. He pretendeth that all Bishops are his Ministers and Deputies But no such Privileges have any foundation or warrant in Holy Scripture in Ancient Doctrine or in Primitive Usage they are all Encroachments upon the original Rights and Liberties of the Church derived from Ambition and Avarice subsisting upon Usurpation upheld by Violence This will appear from a Survey of Ancient Rules and Practices concerning this matter The first constitution after our Lord's decease of an Ecclesiastical person was that of Matthias into the vacant Apostolate or Bishoprick
no more than acknowledging a person although rejected by undue Sentence to be de jure worthy of communion and capable of the Episcopal Office upon which may be consequent an Obligation to communicate with him and to allow him his due Character according to the Precept of Saint Paul Follow righteousness faith charity peace with them that call upon the Lord with a pure heart This may be done when any man notoriously is persecuted for the Truth and Righteousness Or when the iniquity and malice of pretended Judges are apparent to the oppression of Innocence Or when the Process is extremely irregular as in the cases of Athanasius of St. Chrysostome And this is not an act of Jurisdiction but of Equity and Charity incumbent on all Bishops And there are promiscuous Instances of Bishops practising it Thus Socrates saith that Maximus Bishop of Jerusalem did restore communion and dignity to Athanasius And so Cyril of Alexandria and John of Antioch being reconciled and reduced to a good understanding of each other did restore to each other their Sees rescinding the Censures which in heat they had denounced each on other Which sheweth that Restitution is not always taken for an act of Jurisdiction wherein one is Superiour to another for those persons were in rank and power co-ordinate 2. Restitution sometime doth import no more than a considerable influence toward the effects of restoring a person to communion or Office no judicial act being exercised about the case The Emperour writing that Paulus and Athanasius should be restor'd to their Sees availed nothing That was a Restitution without effect Thus a Pope's avowing the Orthodoxy or Innocence or Worth of a person after a due information about them by reason of the Pope's eminent rank in the Church and the regard duely had to him might sometimes much conduce to restore a person and might obtain the name of Restitution by an ordinary scheme of speech 3. Sometimes persons said to be restored by Popes are also said to be restored by Synods with regard to such instance or testimony of Popes in their behalf In which case the Judicial Restitution giving right of Recovery and completion thereto was the act of the Synod 4. When Cases were driven to a legal debate Popes could not effectually resolve without a Synod their single acts not being held sufficiently valid So notwithstanding the Declarations of Pope Julius in favour of Athanasius for the effectual resolution of his case the great Synod of Sardica was convened So whatever Pope Innocent I. did endeavour he could not restore St. Chrysostome without a General Synod Nor could Pope Leo restore Flavianus deposed in the Second Ephesine Synod without convocation of a General Synod the which he did so often sue for to the Emperour Theodosius for that purpose Pope Simplicius affirmed that Petrus Moggus having been by a common decree condemned as an adulterer or Usurper of the Alexandrian See could not without a common Council be freed from condemnation 5. Particular instances do not ascertain right to the Person who assumeth any power for busie bodies often will exceed their bounds 6. Emperours did sometimes restore Bishops Constantine as he did banish Eusebius of Nicomedia and others so he did revoke and restore them so says Socrates They were recall'd from banishment by the Emperour's command and receiv'd their Churches Theodosius did assert to Flavianus his right whereof the Popes did pretend to deprive him which did amount to a Restitution at least to the Romanists who do assert Flavianus to be deposed by the Popes Instantius and Priscillianus were by the rescript of the Emperour Gratianus restored to their Churches Justinian did order Pope Silverius to be restored in case he could prove his Innocence 7. Commonly Restitution was not effectual without the Emperour's consent whence Theodoret although allowed by the great Synod did acknowledge his Restitution especially due to the Emperour as we shall see in reflecting on his case Now to the particular Instances produced for the Pope we answer 1. They pretend that Pope Stephanus did restore Basilides and Martialis Spanish Bishops who had been deposed for which they quote St. Cyprian's Epistle where he says Basilides going to Rome imposed upon our Collegue Stephen who lived a great way off and was ignorant of the truth of the matter seeking unjustly to be restored to his Bishoprick from which he had justly been deposed But we answer The Pope did attempt such a Restitution by way of Influence and Testimony not of Jurisdiction wherefore the result of his act in St. Cyprian's judgment was null and blameable which could not be so deemed if he had acted as a Judge for a favourable Sentence passed by just Authority is valid and hardly liable to Censure The Clergy of those places notwithstanding that pretended Restitution did conceive those Bishops uncapable and did request the judgment of St. Cyprian about it which argueth the Pope's judgment not to have been peremptory and prevalent then in such cases St. Cyprian denieth the Pope or any other person to have power of restoring in such a case and exhorteth the Clergy to persist in declining the communion of those Bishops Well doth Rigaltius ask why they should write to St. Cyprian if the judgment of Stephanus was decisive and he addeth that indeed the Spaniards did appeal from the Roman Bishop to him of Carthage No wonder seeing the Pope had no greater authority and probably St. Cyprian had the fairer reputation for wisedom and goodness Considering which things what can they gain by this Instance which indeed doth considerably make against them 2. They alledge the Restitution of Athanasius and of others linked in cause with him by Pope Julius He says Sozomen as having the care of all by reason of the dignity of his See restored to each his own Church I answer the Pope did not restore them judicially but declaratively that is declaring his approbation of their right and innocence did admit them to communion Julius in his own Defence did alledge that Athanasius was not legally rejected so that without any prejudice to the Canons he might receive him and the doing it upon this account plainly did not require any Act of Judgment Nay it was necessary to avow those Bishops as suffering in the cause of the common Faith Besides the Pope's proceeding was taxed and protested against as irregular nor did he defend it by virtue of a general power that he had judicially to rescind the acts of Synods And lastly the Restitution of Athanasius and the other Bishops had no complete effect till it was confirmed by the Synod of Sardica backed by the Imperial authority which in effect did restore them This instance therefore is in many respects deficient as to their purpose 3. They produce Marcellus being restored by the same Pope Julius But that Instance beside the forementioned defects hath this that the
Pope was grievously mistaken in the case whence St. Basil much blameth him for his proceeding therein 4. They cite the Restitution of Eustathius Bishop of Sebastia by Pope Liberius out of an Epistle of St. Basil where he says What the most blessed Bishop Liberius proposed to him and to what he consented we know not onely that he brought a Letter to be restored and upon shewing it to the Synod at Tyana was restored to his See I answer That Restitution was onely from an invalid Deposition by a Synod of Arians at Melitine importing onely an acknowledgment of him upon approbation of his Faith professed by him at Rome the which had such influence to the satisfaction of the Diocesan Synod at Tyana that he was restored Although indeed the Romans were abused by him he not being sound in Faith for He now saith Saint Basil doth destroy that faith for which he was received 5. They adjoin that Theodoret was restored by Pope Leo I. for in the Acts of the Synod of Chalcedon it is said that be did receive his place from the Bishop of Rome I answer The act of Leo did consist in an approbation of the Faith which Theodoret did profess to hold and a reception of him to communion thereupon which he might well do seeing the ground of Theodoret's being disclaimed was a misprision that he having opposed Cyril's Writings judged Orthodox did err in Faith consenting with Nestorius Theodoret's state before the Second Ephesine Synod is thus represented in the words of the Emperour Theodoret Bishop of Cyrus whom we have before commanded to mind onely his own Church we charge not to come to the Holy Synod before the whole Synod being met it shall seem good to them that he come and hear his part in it He was not perfectly deposed as others were who had others substituted in their places He was deposed by the Ephesine Synod The Pope was indeed ready enough to assume the Patronage of so very learned and worthy a man who in so very suppliant and respectfull a way had redressed to him for succour for whom doth not courtship mollifie And the majority of the Synod being inflamed against Dioscorus and the Eutychian Party was ready enough to allow what the Pope did in favour of him Yet a good part of the Synod the Bishops of Egypt of Palestine of Illyricum notwithstanding the Pope's Restitution that is his approbation in order thereto did stickle against his admission into the Synod crying out have pity on us the faith is destroyed the Canons proscribe this man cast him out cast out Nestorius his Master So that the Imperial Agents were fain to compromise the business permitting him to sit in the Synod as one whose case was dependent but not in the notion of one absolutely restored Theodoret's presence shall prejudice no man each one's right of impleading being reserved both to you and him He therefore was not entirely restored till upon a clear and satisfactory profession of his Faith he was acquitted by the judgment of the Synod The effectual Restitution of him proceeded from the Emperour who repealed the proceedings against him as himself doth acknowledge All these things says he has the most just Emperour evacuated to these things he premised the redressing my injuries and the Imperial Judges in the Synod of Chalcedon join the Emperour in the Restitution Let the most reverend Theodoret enter and bear his part in the Synod since the most holy Archbishop Leo and sacred Emperour have restored his Bishoprick to him Hence it may appear that the Pope's Restitution of Theodoretus was onely opinionative dough-baked incomplete so that it is but a slimme advantage which their pretence can receive from it IX It belongeth to Sovereigns to receive Appeals from all lower Judicatures for the final determination of Causes so that no part of his Subjects can obstruct resort to him or prohibit his revision of any Judgment This Power therefore the Pope doth most stifly assert to himself At the Synod of Florence this was the first and great Branch of Authority which he did demand of the Greeks explicitely to avow he will said his three Cardinals to the Emperour have all the Privileges of his Church and that Appeals be made to him When Pope Alexander III. was advised not to receive an Appeal in Becket's Case he replied in that profane allusion This is my glory which I will not give to another He hath been wont to encourage all People even upon the slightest occasions iter arripere as the phrase is obvious in their Canon Law to run with all haste to his Audience Concerning Appeals for the smallest causes we would have you hold that the same deference is to be given them for how slight a matter soever they be made as if they were for a greater See if you please in Gratian's Decree Caus. 2. quaest 6. where many Papal Decrees most indeed drawn out of the spurious Epistles of ancient Popes but ratified by their Successours and obtaining for current Law are made for Appeals to the See of Rome It was indeed one of the most ancient encroachments and that which did serve most to introduce the rest inferring hence a title to an universal Jurisdiction They are the Canons says Pope Nicholas I. which will that all Appeals of the whole Church he brought to the examination of this See and have decreed that no appeal be made from it and that thus she judge of the whole Church but her self goes to be judged by none other and the same Pope in another of his Epistles says The holy statutes and venerable decrees have committed the causes of Bishops as being weighty matters to be determined by us As the Synod has appointed and usage requires let greater and difficult cases be always referred to the Apostolick See says Pope Pelagius II. They are the canons which will have the appeals of the whole Church tryed by this See saith Pope Gelasius I. But this power is upon various accounts unreasonable grievous and vexatious to the Church as hath been deemed and upon divers occasions declared by the ancient Fathers and grave persons in all times upon accounts not onely blaming the horrible abuse of Appeals but implying the great mischiefs inseparably adherent to them The Synod of Basil thus excellently declared concerning them Hitherto many abuses of intolerable vexations have prevailed whilst many have too often been called and cited from the most remote parts to the court of Rome and that sometime for small and trifling matters and with charges and trouble to be so wearied that they sometime think it their best way to recede from their right or buy off their trouble with great loss rather than be at the cost of suing in so remote a Countrey Saint Bernard complaineth of the mischiefs of Appeals in his times in these words How long will you
for a Bishop to forsake his Church and to neglect the Flocks of God Oportet enim Episcopâ—s curis secularibus expeditos curam suorum agere populorum nec Ecclesiis suis abesse diutiús P. Paschal II. Ep. 22. For Bishops ought to be disentangled from secular cares and to take charge of their people and not to be long absent from their Churches Praecipimus nè conductitiis ministris Ecclesiae committantur unaquaeque Ecclesia cui facultas suppetit proprium habeat Sacerdotem Conc. Lat. 2. sub Innoc. II. Can. 10. We enjoyn that Churches be not committed to hired Ministers but that every Church that is of ability have its proper Priest Cum igitur Ecclesia veâ— Ecclesiasticum ministerium committi debuerit talis ad hoc persona quaeratur quae residere in loco curam ejus per seipsum valet exercere quòd si aliter fuerit actum qui receperit quod contra Sanctos Canones accepit amittat Conc. â—at 3. sub Alexandro III. Cap. 13. Therefore when a Church or the Ecclesiastical Ministry be to be committed to any man let such a person be found out for this purpose who can reside upon the place and discharge the cure by himself but if it prove otherwise then let him who has received lose that which he has taken contrary to the holy Canons 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Epiph. haer 27. Apost Can. 14. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Theodor. Ep. 86. The great City of the Antiochians hath the throne of the great Saint Peter 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Theod. 5.6 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Athanas. Apol. 2. p. 726. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Syn. Alex. apud Athan. p. 727. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Ibid. p. 765. Syn. Nic. Can. 15. Syn. Chalc. Can. 5. Syn. Ant. Can. 21. Syn. Sard. Can. 1. Syn. Arel Can. 22. Grat. Caus. 8. qu. 1. cap. 4. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Conc. sub Menn p. 9. P. Jul. I. apud Athan. in Apolog. 2. p. 744. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Theod. 5.11 Those that pass from their own Churches to other Churches we esteem so long excommunicate or strangers from our communion till such time as they return to the same Cities where they were first ordained Si quis Episcopus mediocritate Civitatis suae despectâ administrationem loci celebrioris ambierit ad majorem se plebem quacunque occasione transtulerit non solìon à Cathedra quidem pellatur aliena sed carebit propriâ c. P. Leo I. Ep. 84. c. 4. If an Bishop despising the meanness of his City seeks for the administration of a more eminent place and upon any occasion whatsoever transfers himself to a greater people he shall not onely be driven out of another's See but also lose his own c. Euseb. de Vit. Const. 3.61 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Sozom. 7.7 Illud praeterea commoneo dilectionem vestram nè patiamini aliquem contra Staâ—uta majorum nostrorum de Civitate alia ad aliam transduci deserere plebem sibi commissam c. P. Damasi Epist. apud Holsten p. 41. R. Marc. 5.21 Moreover this I advise you that out of your charity you would not suffer any one against the Decrees of our Ancestours to be removed from one City to another and to forsake the people committed to his charge c. Quis enim unquam audet dicere S. Petrum Apostolorum Principem non benè egisse quando mutavit sedem de Antiochia in Romam Pelag. II. Ep. 1. Contra Ecclesiasticam dispositionem contra Evangelicam legem contra Institutionis Catholicae unitatem Cypr. Ep. 44. ut Ep. 46 52 55 58. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Soz. 4.15 Syn. Nic. Can. 8. Cornelius apud Euseb. 6.43 Cypr. Ep. 46. P. Innocentius apud Sozom. 8.26 Opt. I. Cathedra una In remedium Schismatis Hier. à gloriofissimis duobus Apostolis Petro Paulo Romae fundaeta constituta Ecclesia Iren. 3.3.3.1 Haer. 27. Act. 28.30 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Iren. apud Euseb. 5.6 Romanorum Ecclesiae Clementem à Petro ordinatum edit Tert. de Praescr 32. Ex quìbus electum magnum plebique probatum Hâc Cathedrâ Petrus quâ sederat ipse locatum Maxima Roma Linum primum considere jussit Tert. in Marc. 3.9 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Const. Apost 7.46 Euseb. 3.4 13. Aug. Ep. 165. Epiph. Haer. 27. Opt. 2. Tertull. poem in Marc. 3.9 Phot. Cod. 112. p. 290. N. Eusebius 3.2 saith that Linus did sit Bishop after the Martyrdom of Saint Peter but this is not so probable as that which the Authour of the Constitutions doth affirm which reconcileth the dissonancies of Writers 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 P. Inn. I. apud Soz. 8.26 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Syn. Ant. Can. 23. Cùm post primum secundus esse non possit quisquis post unum qui solus esse debeat non jam secundus ille sed nullus est Cypr. Ep. 52. Theod. hist. 2.17 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Adhuc in corpore posito beatae memoriae patre Episcopo meo sene Valerio Episcopus ordinatus sum sedi cum illo quod concilio Niceno prohibitum fuisse nesciebam nec ipse sciebat Aug. Ep. 110. While my Father and Bishop of blessed memory old Valerius was yet living I was ordained Bishop and held the See with him which I knew not nor did he know to be forbidden by the Council of Nice Ipse sublimavit Sedem in qua etiam quiescere praesentem vitam finire dignatus est Greg. I. Ep. 6.37 Innoc. I. Ep. 21. P. Nic. I. Ep. 9. p. 509. Grat. caus 8. q. 1. cap. 1. He advanced that See wherein he vouchsafed both to set up his rest and also to end this present life Bell. 2.12 § At verò Petrum Apostolum successisse in Episcopatu Antiocheno alicul ex discipulis quod est planè intolerandum Bell. 2.6 Quidam enim requirunt quo modo cùm Linus Cletus in urbe Roma ante Clementem hunc fuerint Episcopi ipse Clemens ad Jacobum Scribens sibi dicat à Petro docendi Cathedram traditam cujus rei hanc accepimus esse rationem quòd Linus Cletus fuerunt quidem ante Clementem Episcopi in urbe Roma sed superstite Petro videlicet ut illi Episcopatûs curam gererent ipse verò Apostolatûs impleret Officium Ruffin in praef ad Clem. Recogn Const. Apost 7.46 Iren. 3.3 Tertull. Fundantes igitur instruentes beati Apostoli Ecclesiam Lino Episcopatum administrandae Ecclesiae tradiderunt Iren. 3.3 The Blessed Apostles therefore founding and instructing the Church delivered the Episcopal power of ordering and governing the Church to Linus Euseb. 3.4 13 15. Iren. 3.3 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Euseb. 4.1 Iren. 1.28.3.3 4. Euseb. 4.10 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Euseb. Chron. p. 7. Hist. 3.22 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Pseud. Ignat. ad Ant. Euseb. counteth Anniaâ—â—s the first Bishop of Alexandria 3.21 Celebris mos est Apostolos pro potestate