speaches of Pope Leo against him B. C. The Fathers of the Councell of Chalcedon made suite to the Pope to confirme their Decrees T. B. I answere first that this Epistle is like to the other of the Nicene Fathers that is to say a bastard and counterfeite This is soundly prooued in the fift Aphorisme in the first sixt and seauenth Obiections Let them be well remembred Secondly that the suite which the Fathers of the Councell made to Pope Leo did argue onely a prerogatiue of Honour not any soueraigntie of Power Which I prooue by a triple meane For first these are the wordes of the request Rogamus igitur et tuis Decretis nostrum honera iudicium We therefore desire you to honour our iudgement with your Decrees Hee was the chiefe Patriarch and Byshop of that Citie which at that time raigned and was reputed Caput mundj and so his consent was of great authoritie in that behalfe Secondly his Messengers would not agree to that prerogatiue of honour which the Councell had confirmed to the Byshoppe of Constantinople and therefore they requested him to consent thereto because the Emperour Theodosius had so commaunded them Thirdly the Fathers say plainely that the Emperour confirmed the Councell these are the wordes Opportunum credidimus esse honoris eâ—us confirmationem ab vniuersalj Concilio celebrarj Wee thought it meete and conuenient that the whole Councell should celebrate his Honours confirmation To which I adde that seeing the Fathers of this Chalcedon Councell did approue and confirme the Canons both of the Nicene and of the Constantinopolitane Synode in which Synodes this pretended Prerogatiue is condemned it must follow of necessitie that the sayd Epistle or relation is a counterfeit B. C. It can not truly be called a Decree of the Councell which was not confirmed by the Head no more then that an Act of Parliament which is not confirmed by the King T. B. I answeere first with the famous popish Byshoppe Melchior Canus that it is not in these affaires as in humane assemblies Which the holy Prophet doth plainely insinuate while in the person of God he vttereth these wordes For my cogitations are not your cogitations neither are your wayes my wayes sayth the Lord. Secondly that there is great disparitie betweene the Pope and the King concerning the subiect now in hand For first the King hath a sacred soueraigntie ouer all the people within his dominions as ouer his naturall Subiectes and loyall Seruantes But the Pope hath no soueraigntie ouer transmarine and forraigne Christians as I haue already prooued Secondly the King though negatiuely he forbid Lawes to be enacted yet doth he not make any new Lawes affirmatiuely to tie all his Subiectes without the consent of his Lordes spirituall Lordes temporall and the Commons of his Kingdomes But the Pope challengeth Power though most impudently and against sacred Canons to make Lawes to tie all Christians in the whole world no way subiect to him Thirdly the King taketh not vpon him solely of himselfe to abrogate cassiere or disanull any act of Parliament to which he formerly gaue his consent But the Pope taketh roundly though fondly vpon him solely of himselfe to abrogate cassiere disanull any Decree of Councell though formerly approoued by himselfe Fourthly no text of holy Writ no Canon of any auncient Councell no Father of approoued antiquitie denyeth to Kinges sacred soueraigntie within their Kingdomes Territories and Dominions ouer any persons whatsoeuer borne within the precincts thereof But all the foure first most famous generall Councelles of Nice Constantinople Ephesus and Chalcedon all which S. Gregorie reuerenced as the foure Gospels denie the Popes falsely pretended Primacie in all forraigne and transmarine Kingdomes and confine his iurisdiction to the Citie of Rome and to the suburbican territories of the same All which is soundly and plentifully prooued in the Conclusions and Aphorismes next aforegoing B. C. But it may bee Bell will say that the confirmation of the Councell belonged not to the Pope It is not possible that he dare offer it T. B. I answere first that seeing the Pope as is alreadie prooued taketh vpon him to change the nature of thinges by applying the substantiall partes of one thing to an other to make some thing of nothing the proper action of God in creation to depose Kinges to translate Empires and to bestow the same at his good pleasure to make it Sacriledge to dispute of his power to terrifie men so with Fire and Faggot and with thunderboltes of cursing Excomunications that though hee carry thousandes to Hell yet may no man say Why doest thou so It may seeme no maruell if Bell poore soule be afrayde to anger his Holinesse Neuerthelesse because the trueth is neuer ashamed but will in time preuayle Bell post deosculationem pedum and to prooue our Jesuite in this as in many other thinges a most impudent and notorious lyer dare boldly tell the Pope that the Confirmation of Councels belongeth not vnto him Yea Bell will not barely say it but he will produce such strong arguments such waightie authorities and such inuincible reasons as will make the Popes eares to tingle when hee shall read or heare the same Marke well this my Discourse vnto the end I purpose in God to proceed by way of Sections for the better illustration of the businesse now in hand The first Section of reasons in generall concerning the subiect now in hand I haue alreadie prooued in my Booke of Motiues that euery Monarch hath supreame soueraigntie ouer all Persons and causes within his Dominions and consequently that no Lawes can be of force in his Kingdomes without his royall assent approbation and confirmation of the same King Josaphat appoynted in Hierusalem Leuites Priestes and Princes of the families of Israel that they should iudge the iudgement cause of the Lord to the inhabitants thereof And he commanded them saying Thus shall ye doe in the feare of the Lord faythfully and with a perfect heart Yea he distinguished limitted the offices and functions both of Zabadias the ciuill Magistrate and of Amarias the Hie Priest thereby insinuating euidently that the chiefest power iurisdiction rested in the King not in Amarias the Hie Priest The same King to gather the Church which was decayed sent Preachers into sundry partes of his Kingdome appoynting Noble-men to accompany assist theÌ„ to couÌ„tenance their ministerie to compel the people to heare theÌ„ K. Asa vsed his authority in coÌ„manding Iudah to seek the Lord threatning them with death that should refuse so to do King Josias after he had abolished Idolatry compelled all his Subiectes to serue the true God to liue in his feare Ezechias commanded all Israel Judah to come to the house of the Lord at Jerusalem there to keepe the Passeouer which had been a long neglected and not obserued in such sort perfect maner as God had
Reges Domino seruiunt in timore nisi ea quae contra iussa Domini fiunt religiosa seueritate prohibendo atque plectendo Aliter N. seruit quia homo est aliter quia etiam et rex est Quia homo est ei seruit viuendo fideliter quia vero etiam Rex est seruit leges iusta praecipientes et contraria prohibentes conuenienti vigore sanctiendo sicut seruiuit Ezechias Lucos et Templa Idolorū et illa excelsa quae contra praecepta Dei fuerant constructa destruendo sicut seruiuit Iosias talia et ipse faciendo sicut seruiuit rex Niniuitarum vniuersam Ciuitatem ad placandum Dominum compellendo sicut seruiuit Darius Idolum frangendum in potestatem Danieli dando et inimicos eius Leonibus ingerendo sicut seruiuit Nabuchodonosor omnes in regno suo positos a blasphemando Deo lege terribili prohibendo In hoc ergo seruiunt Domino Reges in quantum sunt Keges cum ea faciunt ad seruiendum illi quae non possunt facere nisi Reges How doe Kinges serue God in feare but by punishing with religious seueritie such thinges as are against Gods lawes For the King serueth God one way as he is man an other way as he is King As he is man he serues God in lyuing as becommeth an honest Christian as he is King he serues God in making sharpe Lawes to the furtheraunce of Vertue and to the suppressing of Vice As Ezechias serued God while he destroyed the Groues and Temples of Idols and those Hie places which were erected against Gods lawes As Josias serued God while he performed the same or like dueties As the King of the Niniuites serued God in compelling the whole Citie to serue God As Nabuchodonosor serued God while he with very sharpe Lawes terrified all his subiectes from blaspheming the euerliuing God In this therefore Kings serue God as they are Kinges when they doe that for the seruice of God which none but Kinges can doe Thus writeth S. Austin that auncient Father that holy Writer that learned Doctor that strong Piller that worthy Champion of Christes Church Out of whose Discourse I obserue many thinges well worthy to be engrauen in Marble with Golden letters in perpetuam rei memoriam First that Kinges serue God when they religiously punish sinne Secondly that Kinges serue God as they be men when they liue as it becommeth faythfull and honest Christians Thirdly that Kinges serue God as they be Kinges when they make Godly lawes to aduance Vertue and to suppresse Vice Fourthly that it belongeth to the office dutie and charge of Kings to purge the Church and House of God from Heresies Errours Superstition and Idolatrie Fiftly that it appertaineth to the charge and office of Kinges to punish Blasphemie and to cause their Subiectes to liue religiously and in the feare of God Sixtly that this holy Father and great learned Doctor vtterly condemneth the Popes Fayth and Doctrine while he denyeth all authoritie to Kinges in Church causes and Ecclesiasticall affaires and maketh them onely executors of his Lawes Will and good Pleasure For which respect the same holy Father soone after addeth these expresse wordes Quis mente sobrius Regibus dicat Nolite curare in regno vestro a quo teneatur vel oppugnetur Ecclesia Domini vestri non ad vos pertineat in regno vestro quis velit esse siue religiosus siue sacrilegus Who well in his Wittes will say thus to Kinges Haue no regard neither take any care who within your Kingdome either protect or oppugne the Church of God you haue no charge neither doth it pertaine to your office who in your Kingdome be Religious or who be Sacrilegious Seuenthly that Kinges haue charge not onely of the bodyes of their Subiectes but much more of their soules Which not onely S. Austen fayth but the whole course of Scripture teacheth the same For the godly Kinges as well in time of the Law of Moyses as in the time of the New Testament and law of Grace did manage all matters both of Church and Common-weale For which cause the Ciuill Magistrate was commaunded to read the whole Booke of the Law as well of the first as of the second Table and to studie the same night and day For which cause the Ciuill Magistrate was commaunded to goe out and in before the people and to lead them out and in that the congregation of the Lord should not be as Sheepe without a Shepheard For which cause the Booke of the Law was deliuered into the Kings handes at such time as he receiued the Crowne and was annoynted King Lastly and this striketh dead that Kings as Kings serue God when they doe those things which none but Kinges can doe If this golden Periode were soundly vnderstood and perfectly kept in memorie it alone would be enough to trample Pope and Poperie vnder foote For I pray you sir Frier did not Constantinus surnamed the great Theodesius the elder Theodosius the younger and Martianus gather the foure first generall Councels of Nice Constantinople Ephesus and Chalcedon which Pope Gregorie did reuerence as the foure Ghospels did they not call the same Synodes as they were Emperours Kinges and Monarches I wote they did it is already prooued it can not be denyed What Did not Reccaredus as King commaunde all the Byshops of Spaine and Gallicia to assemble themselues before him at Toledo there to decide and determine causes ecclesiasticall did he not tell them the cause why he sent for them did he not sit downe among them did he not define with them did he not subscribe before all the Byshops did he not confirme the Decrees and Canons of the Councell with his royall edict we haue already seene it wee haue viewed the very wordes it is prooued most manifestly Now let vs duely ponder and throughly vnderstand what of necessitie must be inferred heereupon S. Austin affirmeth constantly that when Kinges serue God as Kings then doe they that which none but Kings can doe But so it is that Reccaredus and the other Kings both called confirmed Councels as they were Kings for it is already prooued ergo Kinges and none but Kings can call and confirme holy Councels and sacred Synodes The reason is S. Austens when he resolutely auoucheth that while Kinges serue God as Kinges they doe that which none but Kinges can doe for if Kinges as Kinges call and confirme Councels none doubtlesse which are no Kinges can doe the same And consequently no Byshop no not the Pope of Rome hath authoritie to gather Councels or to confirme the same Two thinges onely the Pope may in shew of wordes seeme to obiect for himselfe obiection 1 Th' one that Kinges doe not call or confirme Councels as they be Kinges but rather as the Seruantes or Deputies of the Pope obiection 2 Th' other that the Pope is not onely a Byshoppe but a King also To
the former Obiection this is my answere response 1 First that Kinges of late yeares are in deed so brought into thraldome by the Pope where Poperie beareth the sway as they may truely be sayd to doe the office not of Kinges as Kinges but rather of Seruantes and Slaues to the disholy Father the Pope of Rome response 2 Secondly that the Pope will not this day permit Kinges to make Lawes in Ecclesiasticall causes but onely to execute those vnchristian execrable tyrannicall Lawes which by Popes of late yeares are with Fire and Faggot framed to their handes To the latter I answere in this maner First that how and in what sort the Pope is King it is plenteously prooued in the tenth Conclusion of this present Chapter To which place I referre the Reader for his full satisfaction in this behalfe Secondly that by the Popes owne Law whosoeuer is Possessor malae fidei in the beginning can haue no iust title by prescription in the ending Thirdly that if we suppose and graunt him to be the true and lawfull King of Jtaly yet can no more be rightly inferred therevpon saue onely that hee can call and confirme Councels within Jtaly and make Lawes to his subiectes of the same Kingdome In which case I for my part will not contend with him as who onely denie his vsurped authoritie in other transmarine and forraigne Kingdomes Now let vs heare the Frier once againe to recreate our spirits with his merrie conceites B. C. Surely it were meâ—re madnesse to thinke that Anatolius would euery way haue had equall authoritie in all Ecclesiasticall causes as the Minister affirmeth seeing then we must graunt that he desired Jurisdiction in Italy and Rome it selfe Nay what were it else but to condemne Anatolius of grosse foolerie in suing for that superextrauagant grace of the Pope to the iniurie of his owne Sea and Dignitie T. B. I answere first that our Jesuite heere vnawares condemneth rather their famous Pope Gregorie of meere foolerie then Anatolius to whom he imputeth it For if Gregories report be true the Councell of Chalcedon offered him the name of Vniuersall Byshoppe and yet did the same Gregorie obiect the desire thereof against the Patriarch of Constantinople as a proud name derogating from the right of all other Byshoppes Yea your owne sweete selfe sir Iesuite doe in this very Chapter ascribe no lesse vnto your Pope and withall admit other Byshoppes beside his Holynesse Secondly that Anatolius might truly haue had equall authoritie with the Byshoppe of Rome in all Ecclesiasticall causes and for all that not haue desired iurisdiction in Jtaly and Rome it selfe For our Iesuite must know that these three are intrinsecally distinguished one from an other viz. Identitie Equalitie and Similitude There is often Similitude where Equalitie wanteth and many times equalitie where no Identitie can be found Thirdly that the Councell of Chalcedon approoueth whatsoeuer the Nicene Synode hath decreed and consequently it taketh not away from any Byshoppe his proper dignitie Lastly that this which our Fryer heere obiecteth and whatsoeuer else where to the like effect is soundly confuted in the Aphorismes aforegoing especially in the third and fift of the same And for further proofe marke well my next Answere folowing B. C. Nothing is determined in the Councell of Nice touching the Church of Rome but that is made the rule of other Churches as Pope Nicholas the first noteth who also affirmeth that the Authoritie of the Romane Church was not from Men but from God T. B. I answere first that neither Pope Nicholas nor any other Pope is a sufficient witnesse in his owne cause as is already prooued Secondly that if God had giuen such authoritie to the Church of Rome sixe hundred and thirtie holy and learned Byshoppes in one Synode 217. in an other 200. in an other 150. in an other 318. in an other all which is already prooued in the Aphorismes aforegoing would neuer haue limitted or once offered to alter the same These expresse words of the Fathers of the Chalcedon Councell may for the present be sufficient Etenim sedi senioris Romae propter Imperium Ciuitatis illius Patres consequenter priuilegia reddiderunt For the Fathers consequently gaue Priuiledges to the Sea of old Rome for the Empire of that Citie Loe Men not God gaue Priuiledges to the Sea of Old Rome And they yeeld this reason for the same because forsooth the Citie of Rome was the Seate of the Empire and reputed Caput Mundi the Head of the World Thirdly that when Pope Nicholas sayth that they tooke example of the forme of the Church of Rome for that which they would giue to the Church of Alexandria he graunteth in very deed that as the Bishope of Alexandria had but the preheminence of all there about no more had the Byshope of Rome And so it followeth that the Councell thereby did decree that the Byshop of Rome should keepe himselfe within those limittes Cardinall Cusanus and Ruffinus doe so vnderstand the Canon of the Nicene Councell Yea other Canons of the same Councell doe plainely insinuate the same sense as at large it is alreadie prooued Fourthly that if the Byshoppe of Rome had vniuersall soueraigntie from God as Pope Nicholas vntruely auouched then could no Byshop of Rome nor yet the holy Councell of Nice haue giuen or permitted such custome to the Byshoppe of Alexandria The reason is euident because whatsoeuer is De Jure Diuino no Mortall Man can dispense with the same This is so cleere and certaine as no learned Papist either doth or can denie the same Fiftly that no Custome may be admitted against the knowne Trueth The Popes owne Decrees out of S. Austen doe so teach vs these are the very wordes Qui contempta veritate praesumit consuetudinem sequi aut circa fratres inuidus est et malignus quibus veritas revelatur aut circa Deum ingratus est inspiratione cuius Ecclesia eius instruitur nam Dominus in Euangelio ego sum inquit Veritas non dixit ego sum Consuetudo itaque Veritate manifestata cedat Consuetudo Veritati Hee that contemneth Veritie and presumeth to follow Custome is either enuious and iniurious toward his Brethren to whom the trueth is reuealed or else vngratefull to God-ward with whose inspiration his Church is instructed for our Lord saith in his Ghospell I am the Trueth he said not I am Custome therefore when Trueth is manifest let Custome giue place to the same Againe in an other place thus Hoc planè verum est quia ratio et veritas consuetudini praeponenda sunt This is true in deed that Reason and Trueth must be preferred before Custome The same Decrees out of S. Cyprian teach vs the same these are the wordes Non debemus attendere quid aliquis ante nos faciendum putauerit sed quid prius qui ante omnes est Christus prior fecerit
neque N. hominis consuetudinem sequi oportet sed Dei veritatem Wee must not regard what any before vs thought should be done but what Christ first did who is more to be respected then all others Againe in an other place thus Nam Consuetudo sine Veritate vetustas erroris est propter quod relicto errore sequamur Veritatem Custome without Trueth is the antiquitie ef Errour wherefore let vs leaue Errour and follow the Trueth Pope Gregorie is consonant and plainely auoucheth the same Trueth Vsus qui Veritati est contrarius est abolendus Vse contrary to Trueth must be abolished Sixtly that where there is Law Custome can haue no place For Custome I finde thus defined in the Popes owne Decrees Consuetudo est ius quoddam moribus institutuÌ„ Custome is a certaine Law instituted by the frequent actions of men It followeth in the same Decrees Quod pro Lâ—ge suscipitur cum deficit Lex Which is receiued as Law when Law can not be had And in the Glosse I finde this exposition Hic videtur quod tunc demum recurrendum est ad Consuetudinem cum Lex deficit et sic est argumentum quod nunquam secundum Consuetudinem est iudicandum si ius contrarium praecipiat Heere it seemeth that then we must haue recourse vnto Custome when Law is wanting and so we haue an argument that we must neuer iudge according to Custome if Law commaunde the contrary Sequitur in Glossa resp quod non secundum consuetudinâ—m sed secundum iura est iudicandum I answere that Iudgement must not be giuen according to Custome but according to Law And consequently I conclude against Pope Nicholas and against all Jâ—suites and Iesuited Papistes that seeing the sacred Councels of Nice Constantinople Ephesus Chalcedon and Aphrican yeelded no prerogatiue to the Byshoppes of Rome saue onely in respect of Custome and seeing withall that Pope Sozimus Celestinus and Bonifacius did challenge their falsely pretended Primacie and Prerogatiues onely by the Canons of the Nicene Councell as I haue alreadie soundly prooued and for that end Pope Sozimus falsified the same Canons and the other Popes vrged the same for the furtheraunce of their falsely pretended Title Primacie and Prerogatiues but were therefore in the ende roundly controlled and vtterly reiected of the Fathers of the Aphrican Councell the Popes or Byshoppes of Rome must hold them selues contented and satisfied with that iurisdiction which the holy Synodes haue allotted them B. C. The true meaning therefore of the Canon is that the Byshoppe of Rome before the definition of any Councell vsed to commit the gouernment of Egypt Libia and Pentapolis to the Byshoppe of Alexandria as Pope Nicholas the first doth expound T. B. The Iesuite should haue named the Pope that first gaue such gouernment to the Byshoppe of Alexandria and in what yeare it first beganne Which doubtlesse hee would haue done if possibly hee had been able to performe the same The trueth therefore is as I haue prooued euidently and Pope Nicholas is like to Sozimus and others of that vngodly 〈◊〉 They 〈◊〉 neither tell where when or by what Pope such gouernement was first committed to the Byshoppe of Alexandria and yet doe they neuer cease to demaunde the like of vs but I hope this Catholike Triumph will stop all their mouthes Yea two other Canons of the Nicene Councell are flatte contrary to Pope Nicholas his expositioÌ„ for the seuenth Canon giueth honour to the Byshop of Hierusalem yet not by reason of any Commission from the Byshop of Rome but for an old Custome Tradition The same seuenth Canon in like maner ascribeth a proper dignity to euery Metropolitane And the fourth Canon auoucheth constantly that nothing done in any Prouince is of any force or strength vnlesse the same be confirmed by the Metropolitane As for the Popes Vniuersall soueraigntie no Canon yet extant in rerum natura neither of the Councell of Nice Constantinople Ephesus Chalcedon or Aphrican maketh any mention thereof B. C. The word Superroyall I suppose slyly mocketh at that which venerable antiquitie confesseth I will content my selfe with the testimonie of S. Chrysostome who speaking not onely of Byshoppes but inferiour Clergie-men instructeth them how to deale with secular Potentates comming vnworthily to the Sacramentes in this manner If a Duke quoth he if a Consull if hee that weareth a Crowne come vnworthily stoppe and hinder him thou hast greater power then hee And the Minister denieth that the late Queene might preach the Ghospell or administer the Sacramentes Which functions notwithstanding other of their Clergie might execute whereof it ensueth that in these Spirituall poyntes their power was aboue that of the Queenes and so truely in a good sense may be called Superroyall which so much his superscoffing grauitie seemeth to deride and taunt T. B. I answere first that the Superroyall counterfeite Power which I deride in your Pope is the deposing of Kinges the translating of Empires the making of some thing of nothing the applying of the substantiall partes of one thing to an other the aduauncing of himselfe aboue euery thing that hath beeing and such like whereof I haue spoken and intreated very plentifully in the Conclusions of this present Chapter Secondly that albeit in the preaching of the Word and administration of the Sacramentes the chosen Minister hath onely the charge and authoritie to execute them yet hath Gods annoynted Prince the supreame charge and soueraigne authoritie to commaunde the execution thereof as also to correct and to punish the Minister for the neglect of his duetie in that behalfe For though the execution perteyne to the Ministers yet the prouision direction appoyntment care ouersight which is the Supreme gouernement indeed perteyneth onely solely wholly to the Prince For which cause King Ezechias highly renowned in holy Writ though he were but very young in yeares did for all that in regard of his prerogatiue Royall Supreame authoritie in causes Ecclesiasticall call the Priestes Leuites his Sonnes charging them to heare him and to follow his Commaundement for so are the wordes of the Text. Yea Josias that famous King did sundry times commaund the Hie Priest But of this subiect I haue intreated so copiously in other Bookes as it is heere a thing needlesse to stand longer vpon the same Thirdly that I graunt freely willingly that Ministers in the action of their Ecclesiasticall function Church-ministerie are aboue all Christians aboue Queenes Kinges and Monarches representing the person of God teaching admonishing rebuking them as others following the godly example therein of S. Iohn the Baptist. Yea I further graunt that if the vices of Princes Kinges and Monarches be notorious scandalous to the whole Church then the Byshops may denounce such Potentates to be enemies to the trueth aduersaries to God and no true members of the Church but to be holden for forlorne people and as
Which circumstaunce can by no meanes agree to Cornelius seeing he was not three yeares Byshoppe there Fourthly because he writeth the same to an other expressely of himselfe Thence sayth hee haue Heresies and Schismes sproung and yet do spring because the Byshop which is one and ruleth the Church is despised by the proud presumption of certaine men obiection 10 They say tenthly that S. Ambrose calleth Damasus the Ruler of the Catholike Church But I answere first that those Commentaries are falsely fathered vpon S. Ambrose that holy and famous Byshoppe of Millan The Diuines of Louan haue well obserued and freely testified the same Secondly that these wordes Cuius hodie rector est Damasus can inferre or conclude no more saue this onely that Damasus was not the Ruler but a Ruler of the Church Damasus might rightly be called a Ruler of the Church in that he was Byshoppe of the Church of Rome though not the Ruler of the Vniuersall Church The word Rector may fitly be englished a Ruler but not the Ruler Thirdly that these wordes at this day haue a semblance and relation to the dayes of Timothee viz that as Timothee did gouerne the Church in S. Pauls time so was Damasus in his time Ruler of the same So then this is the true sense and meaning thereof to weete that as Timothee was placed at Ephesus to set that Church in order and to rule it not to rule the whole so was Damasus appoynted to rule the Church of Rome but not all other Churches in the world For as S. Cyprian truely sayth Episcopatus vnus est cuius in solidum a singulis pars tenetur There is one Byshopricke part whereof euery Byshoppe holdeth wholly in solidum This word in solidum must be well marked and faythfully remembred For doubtlesse if there be but one onely Byshopricke whereof euery Byshoppe hath one part wholly to himselfe it followeth by a necessarie an ineuitable illation that there can be but one onely part thereof remaine to the Byshoppe of Rome For he can not possibly haue that whole of which euery other Byshoppe hath a part wholly Let this be well marked and neuer forgotten For if these Aphorismes and the Conclusions aforegoing be seriously pondered throughly vnderstood all that the Iesuite heere sayth or possibly can be said by the Jesuiticall seditious crew will soone appeare very childish and of no force at all Howbeit for the better helpe of the simple Reader I will answere in particular to all such poyntes as shall but seeme to haue any colour of the trueth Proceede therefore sir Fryer and plead couragiously for the Pope B. C. If Bell can prooue that this surreptitious Decree of the Easterne Byshoppes was euer confirmed then were it something which he bringeth But the Byshoppe of Rome his Legates withstood that their indirect proceeding pronouncing it to be contrary to the Decrees of the Nicene Councell And Lucentius in particular spake confidently saying That the Apostolicke Sea ought not to be abased in their presence And Pope Leo himselfe did bitterly inueigh against Anatolius for this his presumption and going against the Nicene Canons T. B. I answere first that the Popes Sozimus Bonifacius and Celestinus falsified and vrged the Canons of the Nicene Councell for the falsely pretended Primacie of the Church and Byshoppe of Rome But the holy learned and famous Byshoppes of the Aphrican Councell whereof S. Austin that rare light of the Christian world was one did roundly controll that their forgerie and naughtie dealing calling it Fumosum typhum seculi the smoakie statelinesse of the world This is already prooued very copiously in all the precedent Aphorismes especially in the third and fourth Secondly that no maruell it is if the Popes Messengers to the vttermost of their power pleaded ridiculously for their owne gaine For so did Demetrius the Siluer-smith for the like end plead for the Temple of the Goddesse Diana Yea so pleaded Pope Boniface the eight about three hundred yeares agoe against Philippe the faire then King of France The Pope challenging Superroyall power would needes excomunicate Philippe the French King but there was neuer excomunication which cost Pope so deare as that did him for his Messengers were committed prisoners his Bulles burnt and Boniface himselfe being taken by Naueret Chauncellour of France presently after dyed for very sorrow Wherein King Philippe did nothing but by the Councell and consent of the whole Clergie of France So Bennet the 13. otherwise called Petrus de Luna interdicted Charles the sixt and his Realme but the King sitting in his Throne of Iustice in the Parliament or high Court of Paris the 21. of May 1408. gaue sentence openly that the Bull should be rent in peeces and that Gonsalue and Conseleux the bearers thereof should be set vpon a Pillorie and publikely notified and traduced in the Pulpit Which Decree was accordingly put in execution in the moneth of August with the greatest scorne that could be deuised the two Messengers hauing this inscription vpon their Miters These men are disloyall to the Church and to the King These wordes are put downe by the French Papistes in their Booke called The Jesuites Catechisme translated into English by the Secular Priestes Thirdly that Pope Leo is a partie and so can not be a competent Witnesse in his owne cause For as one of your owne Popes truely said in euery triall there must be foure distinct persons the accuser the accused the witnesses and the Iudge Fourthly that the holy wise and graue Fathers of that famous Councell which S. Gregorie reuerenced as one of the foure Gospelles laughed the Popes Messengers to scorne and concluded with all their seuerall subscriptions against the Pope yea they protested publikely and zealously that no Byshoppe was compelled to any thing but that they all decreed as they beleeued These are the expresse wordes of the Holy Synode Gloriosissimj Iudices dixerunt Hj quj relecto tomo subscripserunt Asianj et Pontj sanctiss Epispopj dicant si voluntate propria vel imposita sibj aliqua necessitate coactj subscripserunt Let the most holy Byshops of Asia and Pontus which haue subscribed to the Articles openly read declare vnto the Councell whether they subscribed of their owne free accord or by compulsion of Anatolius or any other The holy and most reuerende Fathers answered seuerally protesting before God that they subscribed voluntarily according to their knowledge and as they constantly beleeued no one or other any way constrayning them therevnto It would be a thing tedious to the Reader and laborious to my selfe otherwise I would set downe the seuerall subscriptions of the Byshops For though they be long yet do they conteyne such Christian varietie of wordes as are able to touch the heart of euery honest Reader This may suffice to confound our Iesuite and to cleare Anatolius that blessed Patriarch of the immodest
appointed King Dauid King Salomon did in like maner shew their supreame authoritie both ouer all their Subiectes and in all maner of causes For larger discourse whereof I referre the Reader to my Golden Ballance of Tryall Now if euery King haue within his Dominions the chiefe Power Soueraigntie ouer all persons causes it must needes follow it can not be denyed that the Confirmation of Councels belongeth not to the Pope Which consequence will appeare most euidently throughout the Sections following To which I adde that seeing there is but one Bishopricke whereof euery Byshop hath a part in solidū as is already prooued the Confirmatiō of Councels can belong no more to the Byshop of Rome then it doth to other Byshops For with that whole to which many haue equall title and right no one of them hath more to doe then an other This in generall may suffice I haste to the particulars The second Section of the Councell of Nice The first generall Councell of Nice of 318. Byshops in which Arius denying the consubstantialitie of the Sonne of God was condemned was celebrated in the yeare 327. after Christ not by the appoyntment of the Pope who in those dayes was but reputed as other Byshops but by the flat and expresse commaundement of the Emperour Constantinus worthily surnamed the great All the Fathers assembled in the sacred Councell of Nice wrote to the Church of Alexandria and to the inhabitants of Egypt Lybia and Pentopolis in these expresse wordes Quoniam per gratiam Dei et pientissimum Imperatorem Constantinum qui nos ex varijs ciuitatibus et Prouincijs congregauit magna ac sancta a Synodus Nicaeae collectae est omnino necessarium visum est vt ad vos quoque a sacro Synodo darentur literae quo cognoscere possitis cum quae mota et examinata tum probata sint et obtenta Because through the grace of God and by the commaundement of the most holy Emperour Constantine who hath called vs out of diuers Cities and Prouinces the great and holy Councell of Nice is assembled it seemeth necessarie that the whole Councell send Letters to you by which yee may vnderstand as well those thinges that were called into question as the things that are decided and decreed in the same Out of these wordes of the famous Historiographer Socrates I obserue these memorable documents for the good of the Reader First that this testimonie is of greatest credite and without all exception as which was not published by one or two but by more then three hundred Byshoppes as writeth Nicephorus who were the most vertuous and learned Priestes in the Christian world Secondly that these Fathers so many so holy so learned so wise doe not once name the Pope in their Letters so farre were they in those dayes from ascribing the chiefe Prerogatiue in Councels to the Byshop of Rome Thirdly that the Byshoppe of Rome himselfe was also commaunded by the Emperours Letters euen as other Byshoppes were Albeit both hee and the Byshop of Constantinople by reason of infirmities were excused and their Messengers allowed in their absence So writeth the famous Historiographer Nicephorus This Obseruation would be marked as which striketh the Pope starke dead For the Pope was so farre from being the Commaunder of all that himselfe was cōmaunded as the rest Fourthly that Pope Syluester could not confirme the Nicene Councell as the Popes flattering Popelinges tell vs because Julius as Sozomenus and others doe constantly affirme was at that time Byshoppe of Rome Fiftly that all the Fathers of this most sacred and famous Synode doe plainely confesse in their ioynt Letters that the Emperour called the Councell assigned the day and the place when and where it should be kept and charged all Byshoppes to be there present at the day by him appoynted Sozomenus hath these wordes Verum cum institutum hoc Imperatoris conceptae spei non respondisset nec conciliari contentiosi potuissent et iam qui ad conciliandam Pacem missus fuerat reuersus esset Synodum Nicaeae Bythiniae celebrandam conuocauit et omnibus vbique Ecclesiarum praesidibus vt ad indictum diem adessent scripsit But after the matter succeeded otherwise then the Emperour expected neither could the contentious persons be reconciled but Hesius that was sent to make peace was now returned he caused a Synode to be kept at Nice in Bythinia and wrote to all Byshops euery where to be present at the day appoynted Nicephorus hath these expresse words Quapropter infectis rebus ad Impetatorem redijt qui ad pacem componendam missus fuerat Hosius itaque Imperator decantatissimam illam in Bithynia Nicaenam Synodum promulgat et literis locorum omnium Episcopos ad constitutam Diem eò euocat Wherefore Hosius who went to make peace returned to the Emperour not hauing accomplished the matter the Emperour therefore doth publish the famous Synode of the world to be celebrated at Nice in Bithynia and with his Letters calleth thither the Bishops of all Countries and Prouinces to be present at the day appoynted Theodoretus in his Historie Ecclesiasticall plainely testifieth the same trueth Thus we see euidently by the vniforme testimonie of foure very graue Historiographers whereof three liued more then a thousand and one hundred yeares agoe that the Byshop of Rome had no more to doe in Generall Councels then other Byshops had They tell vs first that the Emperour sent Hosius the Byshoppe of Corduba in Spaine to make peace to bring the contentious to vnitie if it could be Secondly that when he saw that would take no place then he proclaymed a Councell to be holden at Nice in Bythinia Thirdly that he commaunded all Byshops euen the Byshop of Rome himselfe to come to Nice at the day by him appoynted The third Section of the Councell of Constantinople The second Generall Councell holden at Constantinople against Macedoneus his complices for denying the Diuinitie of the Holy Ghost was called by the commaundement of the Emperour Theodosius the great about 384. yeares after Christ. Socrates hath these wordes Impeperator vero nihil cunctatus Synodum suae fidej Episcoporū ad hoc conuocat vt Nicanam fidem confirmantes Constantinopolitanae Ecclesiae Episcopū ordinent sperans autem futurū vt illis et Macedoniani coadvnarentur etiam illius haeresis Episcopos conuocat The Emperour Theodosius with all expedition calleth a Councell of Byshops imbracing the right Fayth that aswell the Fayth of the Nicene Councell might be confirmed as that a Bishop might be appoynted at Constantinople and because he was in hope to make the Macedonians agree with the Byshops of the right Fayth he calleth also the Byshops that were of the Macedonian-sect Sozomenus is consonant to Socrates in one place and in an other place addeth these words Theodosius vero Imperator Paululū post
was the chiefe and surmounted all the rest Cassiodorus hath these wordes Non multo post tempore iussio principis Episcopos vndique Ephesum conuenire praecepit No long time after the commaundement of the Emperour charged the Byshops to come from euery place to Ephesus Nicephorus writeth thus Theodosius Imperialibus literis in metropoli Epheso locorum omnium Episcopos conuenire iussit sacram Pentecostes diem qua conuenirent constituens Theodosius by vertue of his Emperiall Letters commaunded the Byshops in all places to come to the Metropolitane Church of Ephesus designing the holy Feast of Pentecost for the day In which assertion two thinges are to be marked Th' one that the Byshops come togeather at the Emperours commaundement Th' other that the Emperour appoynted both the place and the time of their meeting Sigebertus hath these wordes Tertia Synodus vniuersalis Ephesina prima ducentorum Episcoporum iussu Theodosij iunioris Augusti aedita est The third vniuersall Synode of two hundred Byshoppes was celebrated at Ephesus by the commaundement of the Emperour Theodosius the younger Loe euery Historiographer relateth the Emperours Commaundement but no mention is made of the Pope at all The fift Section of the Councell of Chalcedon The fourth generall Councell of Chalcedon of sixe hundred and thirtie Byshops against Eutyches for denying two natures in Christ after his humane assumption although he graunted him to haue had two Natures before the hypostaticall vnion was celebrated by the commaundement of the Emperour Martianus in the yeare 454 after Christ. Nuephorus hath these expresse wordes Earum rerum gratia Imperatorum literis locorum omnium Episcopis conuocatis Synodus Chalcedone est coacta quae quidem primum Nicaeae conuenerat quo etiam Romanae vrbis Episcopus Leo per Pascasini et Lucentij et aliorum Ministerium liter as miserat sed ea Chalcedonem Bythyniae est translata quod Imperator ipse Synodo ei adesse vellet magnum Constantinum imitatus In regard of these matters a Councell was gathered at Chalâ—edon and all Byshoppes sent for thither by force of the Emperours Letters which Synode at the first was assembled at Nice whither Leo the Byshoppe of the Citie of Rome sent Letters by Pascasinus Lucentius and others but it was remooued thence to Chalcedon in Bithyniae that the Emperour might be present at the Synode after the example of Constantine the great Thus writeth Nicephorus a man greatly deuoted to the Pope Out of whose wordes I note these memorable poyntes First that the Councell was assembled by the commandement of the Emperour Secondly that the Emperour appoynted where the Synode should be kept Thirdly that the Emperour translated it to Chalcedon at his owne good pleasure Fourthly that Leo is barely tearmed the Bishop of the Citie of Rome neither the Vniuersall Patriarch nor Byshopp of the Whole World Sigebertus is consonant to Nicephorus his wordes are these Instantia Leonis Papae iubente Jmperatore Martiano congregata et habita est quarta vniuersalis Synodus sexcentorum et triginta Episcoporum apud Chalcedonem The fourth generall Councell of sixe hundreth and thirtie Byshoppes was holden at Chalcedon by the commaundement of the Emperour Martian at the request of Pope Leo. Thus writeth Sigebertus the Popes owne deare Monke who was willing euery way to aduance the Pope so farre as might stand with the trueth And yet he telleth vs plainely concerning the assemblies of Byshoppes in Councelles that the Pope could onely request and that to commaund the same was in the Emperours power Euagrius in his Historie in the second Chapter and second Booke teacheth the selfe same veritie To be briefe Pope Leo in his Epistle to the Emperour Theodosius togeather with the whole Synode make humble suite vnto him to commaunde a Generall Councell within Italy his wordes and the whole Synodes are verbatim set downe in the first Aphorisme aforegoing But doubtlesse if the gathering and confirming of Councels belonged to the Byshoppe of Rome neither would the Pope nor the Romish Synode haue made suite to the Emperour in that behalfe especially for a Councell to be kept in Italy where the Popes now a dayes challenge all power both Ecclesiasticall and Secular To which I adde that the Emperours for the space of more then 450. yeares after Christ confirmed the Councels with their royall edicts This is so liuely set downe before our eyes in the most honourable fact of the Noble Spanish King Reccaredus as it is able to penetrate the very heart and throughly to perswade euery one that shall seriously ponder the same and in the feare of God This religious King Reccaredus in the yeare of our Lord God 585. commaunded all the Byshoppes within his dominions of Spaine and Gallicia being 72. in all to come togeather in his royall Citie of Toledo there to confute and condemne the Arian heresie When they were come thither the King sate downe in the middest of them and declared the cause that moued him to sende for them After that he enacted a publike Edict for the inuiolable obseruation of all the Decrees of the Councell straightly charging as well the Clergie as the Laytie to obey and keepe the same Lastly he subscribed his owne name and that before all the Byshoppes who in their due places subscribed after the King These are the expresse wordes of the Kinges subscription set downe in the end of the sayd Edict Flauius Reccaredus rex hanc deliberationem quaÌ„ cum sancta definiuimus Synodo confirmans subscripsi I Flamus Reccaredus the King confirming this Consultation which we haue defined with the holy Synode haue subscribed thereunto The next that subscribed after the King was Mausona the Metropolitane in the Prouince of Lusitania after him subscribed Euphemius the Arch-byshop of Toledo The residue followed in order as in the second Tome of Councels is to be seene These particular subscriptions I note as a matter of great moment against the Papists who will graunt no Prerogatiue or Royall place to Kinges in time of Ecclesiasticall Synodes Out of the wordes contayned in the Kinges subscription I obserue sundry golden Lessons First that the King confirmed the Councell Secondly that the King subscribed to the decrees of the Councell Thirdly that the King subscribed before all the Byshops Fourthly that the King decreed and defined the controuersies and other necessary matters togeather with the Byshops Which last Obseruation is prooued two wayes First by these words of the Councell in the 18. Canon Ex decreto Domini nostri Reccaredi regis simul cuÌ„ Sacerdotali concilio by the Decree of our soueraigne Lord Reccaredus the King togeather with the Councell of the Byshoppes Secondly by these wordes of the Kinges subscription Quam cum sancta definiuimus Synodo Which we defined with the holy Synode To all which I thinke it not amisse to adde these golden wordes of S. Augustine Quomodo ergo