Schisme is an exteriour breach or a solution of continuity in the body Ecclesiastick Consider then by what nerves and Ligaments the body of the Church is united and knit together and by so many manner of ruptures it may be schismatically rent or divided asunder The Communion of the Christian Catholick Church is partly internal partly external The internal Communion consists principally in these things To believe the same intire substance of saving necessary truth revealed by the Apostles and to be ready implicitly in the preparation of the mind to embrace all other supernatural verities when they shall be sufficiently proposed to them To judge charitably one of another To exclude none from the Catholick Communion and hope of salvation either Eastern or Western or Southern or Northern Christians which professe the ancient faith of the Apostles and primitive Fathers established in the first general Councels and comprehended in the Apostolick Nicene and Athanasian Creed To rejoyce at their well-doing To sorrow for their sins To condole with them in their sufferings To pray for their constant perseverance in the true Christian Faith for their reduction from all their respective errours and their re-union to the Church in case they be divided from it that we may be all one sheepfold under that one great Shepherd and Bishop of our Soules And lastly to hold an actual external Communion with them in Votis in our desires and to endeavour it by all those means which are in our power This internal Communion is of absolute necessity among all Catholicks External Communion consists first in the same Creeds or Symbols or Confessions of Faith which are the ancient badges or cognisances of Christianity Secondly in the participation of the same Sacraments Thirdly in the same external worship and frequent use of the same divine offices or Leiturgies or Forms of serving God Fourthly in the use of the same publick Rites and Ceremonies Fifthly in giving communicatory Letters from one Church or one person to another And lastly in admission of the same discipline and subjection to the same supream Ecclesiastical authority that is Episcopacy or a general Councel for as single Bishops are the heads of particular Churches so Episcopacy that is a general Councel or Oecumenical Assembly of Bishops is the head of the universal Church Internal communion is due alwaies from all Christians to all Christians even to those with whom we cannot communicate externally in many things whether credenda or agenda opinions or practises But external actual communion may sometimes be suspended more or lesse by the just censures of the Church clave non errante As in the primitive times some were excluded a coetu participantium Only from the use of the Sacraments others moreover a coetu procumbentium both from Sacraments and Prayers others also a coetu audientium from Sacraments Prayers and Sermons and lastly some a coetu fidelium from the society of Christians And as external communion may be suspended so likewise it may sometimes be waved or withdrawn by particular Churches or persons from their neighbour Churches or Christians in their innovations and errours Especially when they go about to obtrude new fancies upon others for fundamental truths and old Articles of faith Christian charity is not blind so as not to distinguish the integral and essential parts of the body from superfluous wens and excrescences The Canons do not oblige Christians to the arbitrary dictates of a Patriarch or to suck in all his errours like those servile flatterers of Dionysius the Sicilian Tyrant who licked up his very spettle and protested it was more sweet then Nectar Neither is there the like degree of obligation to an exact Communion in all Externals There is not so great conformity to be expected in Ceremonies as in the Essentials of Sacraments the Queens daughter was arrayed in a garment wrought about with divers colours nor in all Sacraments improperly and largely so called by some persons at some times as in Baptisme and the holy Eucharist which by the consent of all parties are more general more necessary more principal Sacraments Neither is so exact an harmony and agreement necessary in all the explications of articles of faith as in the Articles themselves nor in superstructions as in fundamentals nor in Scholastical opinions as in catechetical grounds Nor so strict and perpetual an adherence required to a particular Church as to the Universal Church nor to an Ecclesiastical constitution as to a divine Ordinance or Apostolical tradition Humane priviledges may be lost by disuse or by abuse And that which was advisedly established by humane authority may by the same authority upon sufficient grounds and mature deliberation be more advisedly abrogated As the limits and distinctions of Provinces and Patriarchates were at first introduced to comply with the civil government according to the distribution of the Provinces of the Roman Empire for the preservation of peace and unity and for the ease and benefit of Christians so they have been often and may now be changed by Soveraign and Synodical authority according to the change of the Empire for the peace and benefit of Christendom Neither the rules of prudence nor the Lawes of Piety do oblige particular Churches or Christians to communicate in all opinions and practises with those particular Churches or Christians with whom they hold Catholick communion The Roman and African Churches held good communion one with another whilest they differed both in judgment and practise about rebaptization Cannot one hold communion with the Fathers that were Chiliasts except he turn Millenary The British Churches were never judged Schismatical because they differed from the rest of the West about the observation of Easter We see that all the famous and principal Churches of the Christian World Graecian Roman Protestant Armenian Abissene have their peculiar differences one with another and each of them among themselves And though I am far from believing that when Lâ—gâ—machies are taken away their real dissensions are half so numerous or their errous half so â—oul as they are painted out by their adversaries aemulation was never equal Judge And though I hope Christ will say Come ye blessed to many whom fiery Zelots are ready to turn away with Go ye cursed yet to hold communion with them all in all things is neither lawful nor possible Yea if any particular Patriarch Prelate Church or Churches how eminent soever shall endeavour to obtrude their own singularities upon others for Catholique verities or shall injoyn sinful duties to their Subjects or shall violate the undoubted priviledges of their inferiours contrary to the Canons of the Fathers It is very lawful for their own Subjects to disobey them and for strangers to separate from them And if either the one or the other have been drawn to partake of their errours upon pretence of obedience or of Catholique communion they may without the guilt of Schisme nay they ought to reform
themselves so as it be done by lawfull authority upon good grounds with due moderation without excesse or the violation of Charity And so as the separation from them be not total but onely in their errours and innovations nor perpetual but onely during their distempers As a man might leave his fathers or his brothers house being infected with the Plague with a purpose to return thither again so soon as it was cleansed This is no more then what Gerson hath taught us in sundry places It is lawful by the Law of nature to resist the injury and violence of a Pope And if any one should convert his Papal dignity to be an instrument of wickednesse to the destruction of any part of the Church in temporalities or spiritualities And if there appeares no other remedy but by withdrawing ones self from the obedience of such a raging power untill the Church or a Councel shall provide otherwise it is lawful He addes further That it is lawful to sleight his sentences yea to tear them in pieces and throw them at his head Bellarmine in effect saith as much As it is lawful to resist the Pope is he should invade our bodies So it is lawful to resist him invading of soules or troubling the Common-Wealth And much more if he should endeavour to destroy the Church I say it is lawful to resist him by not doing that which he commands and by hindering him from putting his will in execution We ask no more The Pope invaded our soules by exacting new Oaths and obtruding new Articles of faith He troubled the Common-Wealth with his extorsions and usurpations He destroyed the Church by his provisions reservations exemptions c. we did not judge him or punish him or depose him or exercise any jurisdiction over him but onely defended our selves by guarding his blowes and repelling his injuries I may not here forget Saint Ignatius the Patriarch of Constantinople whom Pope Iohn the eighth excommunicated for detaining the Jurisdiction of Bulgaria from the See of Rome But he disobeyed the Popes censures as did also his Successours and yet was reputed a Saint after his death whom Baronius excuseth in this manner Neque est ut qui ob litem hanc c. Let no man think that for his controversie Ignatius was either disaffected to the Roman See or ingrateful seeing he did but defend the rights of his own Church to which he was bound by oath under pain of eternal damnation If it be not only lawful but necessary in the Judgment of Baronius yea necessary under the pain of damnation for every Bishop to defend the rights of his particular See against the incroachments and usurpations of the Roman Bishop and to contemn his censures in that case as invalid How much more is it lawful yea necessary for all the Bishops in the world to maintain the right of their whole order and of Episcopacy it self against the oppressions of the Court of Rome which would swallow up or rather hath swallowed up all original Jurisdiction and the whole power of the Keyes From this Doctrine Doctour Holden doth not dissent Non tamen is ergo sum c. Yet I am not he who dare affirm that diseases and bad manners and humours may not sometimes be mingled in any Society or body whatsoever yea I confesse that such kinds of faults are sometimes to be plucked up by the roots and the over-luxurious branches to be pruned away with the hook It is true he would not have this reformation in Essential Articles we offered not to toâ—ch them nor without the consent of lawful Superiours we had the free and deliberate consent of all our Superiours both Civil and Ecclesiastical A little after he addes I confesse also that particular and as it were private abuses which have onely infected some certain personâ— or Church whether Episcopal or Archiepiscopal or National may be taken away by the care and diligence of that particular Congregation we attempted no more We see then what meer Schisme is a culpable rupture or breach of the Catholick communion A loosing of the band of peace a violation of Christian charity a dissolving of the unity and continuity of the Church And how this crime may be committed inwardly by temerarious and uncharitable judgment when a man thinks thus with himself Stand from me for I am holier thou thou By lack of a true Christian Sympathy or fellow-feeling of the wants and sufferings of our Christian brethren By not wishâ—ng and desiring the peace of Christendome and the reunion of the Catholique Church By not contributing our prayers and endeavouâ—s for the speedy knitting together and consolidating of that broken bone And outwardly by rejecting the true badges and cognisances of Christians that is the ancient Creeds By separating a mans self without sufficient ground from other Christians in the participation of the same Sacraments or in the use of the same divine Offices and Leiturgies of the Church and publick worship and service of Almighty God or of the same common rites and ceremonies By refusing to give communicatory Letters to Catholique Orthodox Christians By not admitting the same discipline and by denying or withdrawing our obedience unlawfully from lawful Superiours whether it be the Church universal or particular essential or representative or any single Superiour either of divine or humane institution By separating of themselves from the communion of the Catholick Church as the Novatians or by restraining the Catholique Church unto themselves as the Donatists of old and the Romanists at this day What the Catholique Church signifies was sufficiently debated between the Catholique Bishops and the Schismatical Donatiâ—ts at the Colloquie of Carthage Neither the Church of Rome in Europe nor the Church of Cartenna in Afrique with the several Churches of their respective communions but the whole Church of Christ spread abroad throughout the whole world Afrorum Christianorum catholicorum haec vox est c. This is the voyce of the African catholick Christians we are joyned in communion with the whole Christian world This is the Church which we have chosen to be maintained c. Now the Catholique Church being totum homogeneum every particular Church and every particular person of this Catholique communion doth participate of the same name inclusively so as to be justly called Catholique Churches and Catholick Christians But not exclusively to the prejudice or shutting out of other Churches or other persons As the King of Spain stiles himself and is stiled by others the Catholick King not as if he were an universal Monarch or that there were no other Soveraign Princes in the world but himself So the Church of Rome is called a Catholick Church and the Bishop of Rome a Catholique Bishop And yet other Churches and other Bishops may be as Catholick and more Catholick then they I like the name of Catholick well but the addition of Roman is in truth a
the Roman Church to be a top-â—ranch unlesse it may be the root of Christian Religion or at least of all that Jurisdiction which Christ left as a Legacy to his Church In all which claime by the Church of Rome they understand not the essential Church nor yet the representative Church a Roman Synod but the virtual Church which is invested with Ecclesiastical power that is the Pope with his Cardinals and Ministers When any member how eminent soever scorns its proper place in the body whether Natural or Political or Ecclesiastical and seekes to usurpe the Office of the head it must of necessiâ—y produce a disorder and disturâ—ance and confusion and schisme of the respective members This is one degree of schismatâ—cal pravity But in the second place we presse the crime of schisme more home against the Court of Rome then against the Church of Rome It is the Court of Rome which partly by obtruding new Creeds and new Articles of faith And especially this doctrine That it is necessary for every Christian under pain of damnation to be subject to the Bishop of Rome as the vicar of Christ by divine Ordination upon earth that is in effect to be subject to themselves who are his Councel and Officers yea even those who by reason of their remotenesse never heard of the name of Rome without which it will profit them nothing to have holden the Catholick faith intirely And partly by their tyraninical and uncharitable censures have seperated all the Asiaâ—ick African Grecian Russian and Protestant Churches from their communion not onely negatively in the way of Christian discretion by withdrawing of themselves for fear of infection But privatively and authoritatively by way of Jurisdiction excluding them so much as in them lieth from the Communion of Christ Though those Churches so chased away by them contain three times more Christian souls then the Church of Rome it self with all its dependents and adherents many of which do suffer more pressures for the testimony of Christ then the Romanists do gain advantages and are ready to shed the last drop of their blood for the least known particle of saving truth Onely because they will not strike topsaile to the Popes crosse-keys nor buy indulgences and such like trinkets at Rome It is not passion but action that makes a schismatick to desert the communion of Christians voluntarily not to be thrust away from it unwillingly For divers years in the beginning of Queen Elizabeths reign there was no Recusant known in England But even they who were most addicted to Roman opinions yet frequented our Churches and publick assemblies and did joyn with us in the use of the same prayers and divine offices without any scruple untill they were prohibited by a Papal Bull meerly for the interest of the Roman Court This was the true beginning of the schisme between us and them I never yet heard any of that party charge our Leiturgy with any errour except of omission that it wanted something which they would have inserted I wish theirs as free from exception to trie whether we would shunne their communion in the publick service of God Charity would rather chuse to want something that was lawful then willingly to give occasion of offence But to lay the axe to the root of schisme in the third place the Papacy it self quâ— talis as it is now maintained by many with superiority above general Councels and a Sovereign power paramount to confirme or reject their sanctions is the cause either procreant or conservant or both of all or the most part of the schismes in Christendom To rebell against the Catholick Church and its representative a general Councel which is the last visible Judge of controversies and the supreme Ecclesiastical Court either is grosse schisme or there is no such thing as Schismatical pravity in the world I say the Bishops of Rome have exempted themselves and their Court from the Jurisdiction of an Oecumenical Councel and made themselves Sovereign Monarches and universal Bishops in totius Ecclesiae injuriam discissionem to the wrong of the Church and renting it in peeces making themselves to be not onely fathers but Masters of all Christians It is the Popes own expression in his letter to his Legate Contrary to their former professions of obedience to the Ecclesiastical constitutions of Sovereign Princes and Synods contrary to their own Lawes which allow appeales from them so often as they transgress the Canons and subject them to the judgment of the Church not onely in case of heresie which the most of themselves do acknowledge and Schisme and Simony which many of them do not deny But also of Scandal contrary to so many appellations from them by Christian Princes Prelates and Universities contrary to the judgement of almost all the Cisalpine Prelats Spanish French Dutch assembled at Trent contrary to the decrees of so many Councels both general and provincial which have limited their Jurisdiction set down the true reason of their greatnesse rescinded their sentences forbidden appeales to them condemned their pragmatical intrusion of themselves into the affairs of other Churches as being contrary to the decrees of the Fathers which have judged them and condemned them of heresie schisme Simony and other misdemeanours which have deposed them by two or three at â— time whereof one was undoubtedly the true Pope These things are so obvious in the history of the Church that it were vanity and lost labour to prove them But especially contrary to the Councel of Constance and Basile which have decreed expresly that the Pope is subject to a General Councel as well in matter of faith as of manners So as he may not onely be corrected but if he be incorrigible â—e deposed This is determined in the Councel of Constance and confirmed in the Councel of Basil with this addition that whosoever opposeth this truth pertinaciously is to be reputed an heretick This decree of the Councel wounds deep because it is so evident and clear in the point and because the decrees thereof were confirmed by Martine the fifth But the Romanists have found out a salve for it That Pope Martine confirmed onely those decrees which were conciliarly made that is with the influence and concurrence of the Pope As the condemnation of Wickliff and Hus But not those decrees which were not conciliarly made that is which wanted the influence of the Pope As the decree of the Superiority of the Councel above the Pope Which ought to be understood say they onely of dubious Popes For clearing of which doubt I propose several considerations First that it is not material whether the decree were confirmed by the Pope or not There are two sorts of confirmation Approbative and Anthoritative Approbative confirmation is by way of testimony or suffrage or reception And so an inferiour may confirm the acts of his Superiour As it is said that the Saints shall judge the world
communion of any particular Church whatsoever even the Roman it self so far forth as it is Catholick but onely from their errours wherein they had first separated themselves from their predecessours To this I adde that it was not we but the Court of Rome it self that first separated England from the communion of the Church of Rome by their unjust censures excommunications and interdictions which they thundered out against the Realm for denying their spiritual Sovereignty by Divine right before the Reformation made by Protestants Secondly we are charged with Schismatical contumacy and disobedience to the decrees and determinations of the General Councel of Trent But we believe that Convent of Trent to have been no General nor yet Patriarchal no free no lawfull Councel How was that General where there was not any one Bishop out of all the other Patriarchates or any Proctours or Commissioners from them either present or summoned to be present except peradventure some tltular Europaean Mock-Prelates without cures such as Olaus Magnus intituled Archbishop of Vpsala Or Sir Robert the Scottish-man intituled Archbishop of Armagh How was that Generall or so much as Patriarchal where so great a part of the West was absent wherein there were twice so many Episcopelles out of Italy the Popes professed Vassals and many of them his hungry Parasitical pensioners as there were out of all other Christian Kingdoms and Nations put together How was that general wherein there were not so many Bishops present at the determination of the weightiest controversies concerning the rule of faith and the exposition thereof as the King of England could have called together in his own Dominions at any one time upon a moneths warning How was that general which was not generally received by all Churches even some of the Roman Communion not admitting it We have seen heretofore how the French Ambassadour in the name of the King and Church of France protested against it And untill this day though they do not oppose it but acquiesce to avoid such disadvantages as must insue thereupon yet they did never admit it Let no man say that they rejected the determinations thereof onely in point of discipline not of doctrine for the same Canonical obedience is equally due to an acknowledged General Councell in point of discipline as in point of Doctrine And as it was not General so neither was it free nor lawfull Not free where the place could afford no security to the one party where the accuser was to be the Judge where any one that spake a free word had his mouth stopped or was turned out of the Councel where the few Protestants that adventured to come thither were not admitted to dispute where the Legates gave auricular Votes where the Fathers were noted to be guided by the spirit sent from Rome in a male where divers not only new Bishops but new Bishopricks were created during the sitting of the Convent to make the Papalins able to over-vote the Tramontains Nor yet lawfull in regard of the place which ought to have been in Germany Actor debet rei forum sequi A guilty person is to be judged in his Province And the cause to be pleaded where the crime was committed And likewise in regard of the Judge In every Judgment there ought to be four distinct persons The accuser the witnesse the guilty person and the Judge But in the Councel of Trent the Pope by himself or his Ministers acted all these parts himself He was the right guilty person and yet withall the accuser of the Protestants the witnesse against them and their Judge Lastly no man can be lawfully condemned before he be heard But in this Councel the Protestants were not allowed to propose their case much lesse to defend it by lawful disputation Thirdly it is objected and here they think they have us sure locked up that we cannot deny but that the Bishop of Rome was our Patriarch and that we have rebelled against him and cast off our Canonical obedience in our Reformation To this supposed killing argument I give three clear solutions First That the Bâ—itish Islands neither were nor ought to be subject to the Jurisdiction of the Roman Patriarch as hath been sufficiently demonstrated in my third conclusion For all Patriarchal Jurisdiction being of humane institution must proceed either from some Canon or Decree of a General Councel or of such a Provincial Councell as had power to oblige the Britons to obedience Or from the grant or concession of some of their Sovereign Princes or from the voluntary submission of a free people Or lastly from custom and prescription If they had any such Canon or Grant or submission they would quickly produce it but we know they cannot If they plead custome and prescription immemorial the burthen must rest upon them to prove it But when they have searched all the Authours over and over who have written of British affaires in those daies and all their Records and Registers they shall not be able to find any one Act or so much as any one footstep or the least sign of any Roman Patriarchal Jurisdiction in Britaigne or over the Britons for the first 600 years And for after-ages the Roman Bishops neither held their old Patriarchate nor gained any quiet settled possession of their new Monarchy Secondly I answer That Patriarchal power is not of Divine right but humane institution And therefore may either be quitted or forfeited or transferred And if ever the Bishops of Rome had any Patriarchal Jurisdiction in Britaigne yet they had both quitted it and forfeited it over and over again and it was lawfully transferred To separate from an Ecclesiastical authority which is disclaimed and disavowed by the pretenders to it and forfeited by abuse and rebellion and lawfully transferred is no Schisme First I say they quitted their pretended Patriarchal right when they assumed and usurped to themselves the name and thing of universal Bishops Spiritual Sovereigns and sole Monarchs of the Church and masters of all Christians To be a Patriarch and to be an universal Bishop in that sense are inconsistent and imply a contradiction in adjecto The one professeth humane the other challengeth divine institution The one hath a limited Jurisdiction over a certain Province the other pretendeth to an unlimited Jurisdiction over the whole World The one is subject to the Canons of the Fathers and a meer executour of them and can do nothing either against them or besides them The other challengeth an absolute Sovereignty above the Canons besides the Canons against the Canons to make them to abrogate them to suspend their influence by a non-obstaâ—te to dispence with them in such cases wherein the Canon gives no dispensative power at his own pleasure when he will where he will to whom he will Therefore to claime a power paramount and Sovereign Monarchical Royalty over the Church is implicitely and in effect to disclaime a Patriarchal
Aristocratical dignity So Non tellus cymbam tellurem cymba reliquit It was not we that deserted our pretended Patriarch but our pretended Patriarch deserted his Patriarchal office So long as the Popes contented themselves with Patriarchal rights they soared no higher then to be the executours of the Canons When Acacius complained that he was condemned by the sole authority of the Roman Bishop without a Synodal sentence Gelssius the Pope then pleaded for himself that Acacius was not the beginner of a new errour but the follower of an old And therefore it was not necessary that a new Synodal sentence should be given against him but that the old should be executed Therefore saith he I have onely put an old sentence in execution not promulged a nâ—w And as they had quitted their title so likewise they had forfeited it both by their Rebellion and by their exorbitant abuses First by their notorious rebellion against General Councels The authority of an inferiour ceaseth when he renounceth his loyalty to his superiour from whom he derives his power A General Councel is the Supreme Ecclesiastical power to which Patriarchal power was alwayes subordinate and subject General Councels with the consent of Sovereign Princes have exempted Cities and Provinces from Patriarchal Jurisdiction with the consent of Sovereign Princes they have erected new Patriarchates as at Hierusalem and Constantinople And made the Patriarch of Constantinople equal in all priviledges to the Patriarch of old Rome Against this Supreme Ecclesiastical power the Popes have not onely rebelled themselves but have compelled all Bishops under their Jurisdiction to take an oath to maintain their rebellious usurpations When a President of a Province shall rebell against his Sovereign Prince and seek to usurpe the whole Empire to himself and impose new oathes of allegiancc upon his fellow-subjects it is not Treason but Loyalty in them to thrust him by the head and shoulders out of the gates of their City When a Steward not imposed upon the family by the Master but chosen in trust by his fellow-servants during their Masters absence shall so far violate his trust that he will by force make himself the Master of the family and usuâ—pe a dominion not onely over his fellowes but over his Masters Wife and Children and oblige his fellow servants to acknowledge an independent Sovereign power in him it is not want of duty but fidelity to substract their obedience from him This is our case with the Roman Bishops They have sought to usurpe a dominion over the Catholick Church the spouse of Christ and all their fellow-servants Then ought not all good Christians to adhere to the Catholick Church and desert a schismatical Patriarch They have rebelled against the representative Church a general Councel should we involve our selves in their rebellion and perjury by swearing to maintain and make good their usurpations I confesse inferiours are not competent Judges of their Superiours But in this case of a subordinate Superiour and in a matter of Heresie or Schisme already defined by the Church the sentence of the Judge is not necessary the sentence of the Law and the notoreity of the fact are sufficient It is not we that judge him but the Councels of Constance and Basile Neither could our Ancestours hope to have a General Councel suddenly whilest so great a part of Christendom was under the Turk nor a free Occidental Councel whilest the usurper had all Ecclesiasticall power in his hands What remained then but to reform themselves According to the sage advice of Gerson I see that the Reformation of the Church will never be effected by a Councel without the presidence of a well affected wise and constant guide Let the Members therefore provide for themselves thâ—oughout the Kingdomes and Provinces when they shall be able and know hâ—w to compasse this work Moreover as they have forfeited their power by their Rebellion so they have most justly also by their rapine extortions and terrible and exorbitant abuses the most shamefull abuses that ever were committed by persons trusted To passe by the hundred grievances of Germany the complaints and protestations and pragmatical Sanctions of France the memorials of Castile the sobbes of Portugal and to confine my discourse to the sufferings of our own Nation which have been more particularly related already in this Treatise when I set down the grounds of our Reformation They robbed the King of his investitures of Bishops which Henry the first protested to the Pope himself by his Proctour that he would not lose for his Kingdome and added threatenings to his protestations Yet to gratifie Anselme who though otherwise most deserving was the first violater of the ancient customes of our Kingdome in that kind he waved his right But soon after resumed it made Rodolph Bishop of London Archbishop of Canterbury and invested him by a crosier and a ring The like he did to many others They robbed the King of his patronages by their collations and provisions and expectative graces Two or three or ten benefices were not accounted sufficient for a Roman Courtier in those daies but an hundred or two hundred or more They robbed him of the last appeales of his Subjects contrary to the ancient Lawes of England They fomented the rebellion of his own Subjects at home sometimes of his Barons sometimes of his Bishops playing fast and loose on both sides for advantage They dis-inherited him of his Crown They gave away his Kingdome for a prey to a forreign Prince They incited strangers to make war against him And they themselves by meer collusion and tricks had well near thrust him out of his Throne They robbed the Clergy in a manner of their whole Jurisdiction by their exemptions and reservations and visitations and suspensions and appeales and Legantine Courts and Nunciatures thrusting their sickles into every mans harvest They robbed them of their estates and livelihoods by their provisions and pensions by their coadjutorships and first-fruits and tenths by the vast charge of their investitures and palles and I know not how many other sorts of exactions and arbitrary impositions The most ancient of these was the pall whereof our King Canutus complained long since at Rome and had remedy promised They robbed the Nobility and Commonalty many waies as hath been formerly related If all these were not a sufficient cause of forfeiture certainly abuse did never forfeit office And though they had sometimes had a just Patriarchal power and had neither forfeited it by rebellion nor abuse Yet the King and the whole body of the Kingdome by their Legislative power substracting their obedience from them and erecting a new Patriarchate within their own Dominions it is a sufficient warrant for all English-men to suspend their obedience to the one and apply themselves to the other for the welfare and tranquillity of the whole body politick as hath before been declared Thirdly
then we are whilest things continue in the same condition by so much we should render our selves lesse Catholique and plunge our selves deeper into Schisme whilest we seek to avoid it 3. For the clearer and fuller discussion and demonstration whereof I shall observe this method in the Ensuing discourse First to state the question and shew what is Schisme in the abstract who are Schismatiques in the Concrete and what we understand by the Church of England in this question Secondly I will lay down six grounds or propositions every one of which singly is sufficient to wipe away the stain and guilt of Schisme from the Church of England how much more when they are all joyned together My six grounds or Propositions are these First that Protestants were not the authors of the late great separation from Rome but Roman Catholicks themselves such as in all other points were chief Advocates and Pillars of the Roman Church and so many that the names of all the known dissenters might be written in a little ring Secondly that in abandoning the Court of Rome they did not make any new Law but onely declare and restore the old Law of the Land to its former Vigour And vindicate that liberty left them as an inheritance by their Ancestours from the incroachments and usurpations of the Court of Rome Thirdly that the ancient Brittish and Scottish or Irish Churches were evermore exempted from the Patriarchal Jurisdiction of the Roman Bishops untill Rome thirsting after an universal unlawful Monarchy quitted their lawful Ecclesiastical power And so ought to continue free and exempted from all forrein Jurisdiction of any pretended Patriarch for evermore according to the famous Canon of the General Councel of Ephesus which Gâ—egory the Great reverenced as one of the four Gospels Fourthly that though the Authors of that Separation had not themselves been Roman Catholicks and though the Acts or Statutes made for that end had not been meerly declarative but also operative And although Brittain had not been from the beginning both de jure and de facto exempted from Roman Jurisdiction yet the King and Church of England had both sufficient authority and sufficient grounds to withdraw their obedience as they did Fifthly that all the Soveraign Princes and Republicks in Europe of the Roman Communion whensoever they have occasion to reduce the Pope to reason do either practise or plead for the same right or both Sixthly that the Papacy it self qua tâ—lis as it is now maintained by many with universality of Jurisdiction or rather sole Jurisdiction Iure divino with superiority above General Councels with infallibility of Judgment and temporal power over Princes is become by its rigid censures and new Creeds and Exorbitant decrees in a great part actually and altogether causally guilty both of this and all the greater Schismes in Christendome 3. Lastly I will give a satisfactory answer to those objections which those of the Roman Communion do bring against us to prove us Schismaticks CHAP. 2. The stating of the question what is Schisme who are Schismaticks and what is signified by the Church of England in this question EVery suddain passionate heat or misunderstanding or shaking of Charity amongst Christians though it were even between the principal Pastors of the Church is not presently Schisme As that between Saint Paul and Barnabas in the Acts of the Apostles who dare say that either of them were Schismaticks or that between Saint Hierome and Ruffinus who charged one another mutually with Heresie Or that between Saint Chrysostome and Epiphanius who refused to Joyn in prayers Saint Chrysostome wishing that Epiphanius might never return home alive And Epiphanius wishing that Saint Chrysostome might not dye a Bishop both which things by the just disposition of Almighty God fell out according to the passionate and uncharitable desires of these holy persons who had Christian Charity still radicated in their hearts though the violent torrent of sudden passion did for the time bear down all other respects before it These were but personal heats which reflected not upon the publick body of the Church to which they were all Ever ready to submit and in which none of them did ever attempt to make a party by gathering disciples to himself such a passionate heat is aptly stiled by the Holy Ghost 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a paroxisme or a sharp fit of a feverish distemper which a little time without any other application will infallibly remedy Secondly every premeditated clashing of Bishops or Churches about points of doctrine or discipline long and resolutely maintained is not presently criminous Schisme so long as they forbear to censure and condemn one another and to expel one another from their Communion and are ready to submit to the determinations of a general Councel Such were the contentions of the Roman and African Bishops about rebaptization and appeals It were hard to say that those two blessed Saints Cyprian and Austine and all those pious Prelates who joyned with them lived and dyed Schismaticks With this general truth agrees that of Doctor Holden fully that when there is a mutual division of two parts or members of the mystical body of the Church one from the other yet both retein Communion with the Vniversal Church which for the most part springs from some doubtful opinion or lesse necessary part of divine worship quamcunque partem amplexus fueris Schismaticus non audies quippe quod universa ecclesia neutram damnarit whatsoever part one take he is no Schismatick because the universal Church hath condemned neither part Whether he hold himself to this principle or desert it it is not my purpose here to discusse But this is much sounder doctrine then that of Mr. Knott that the parts of the Church cannot be divided one from another except they be divided from the whole because these things which are united to one third are united also between themselves Which errour he would seem to have sucked from Doctor Potter whom he either would not or at least did not understand That whosoever professeth himself to forsake the Communion of any one member of the body of Christ must confesse himself consequently to forsake the whole Of which he makes this use That Protestants forsake the Communion of the Church of Rome And yet do confesse it to be a member of the body of Christ therefore they forsake the Communion of the whole Church The answer is easie that whosoever doth separate himself from any part of the Catholique Church as it is a part of the Catholick Church doth separate himself from every part of the Catholick Church and consequently from the Universal Church which hath no existence but in its parts But if one part of the Universal Church do separate it self from another part not absolutely or in Essentials but respectively in abuses and innovations not as it is a part of the Universal Church but only so far as it is
spare for Britain In the whole term of three hundred years there were few above two hundred Bishops Ordained at Rome Italy alone may brag well near of as many Bishops at one time as many succeeding Popes did ordain in all their ages Let them not tell us of the scarcity of Christians in those dayes The writings of Tertullian and Saint Cyprian and the Councels held within the time limited do evince the contrary No the first badge of their Patriarchal authority in Britain was sending of the Pall as the onely badge during the times of the Britons and Saxons And the first Pall that came into Britain was after six hundred years But this doth yet appear much more clearly from the answer of Dionothus the Reverend and learned Abbot of Bangor which according to the manner of those times was an University or Seminary of Learning and piety among the Britons and he the well deserving Rector of it made in his own name and in the name of the Britons when they pressed him to submit to the Romaen Bishop as his Patriarch that he knew no obedience due to him whom they called the Pope but the obedience of love And that under God they were to be governed by the Bishop of Caerleon Observe first what strangers the Britons were to the Papacy That man whom you call the Pope Secondly that they acknowledged no subjection or subordination no obedience whatsoever due from them to Rome but onely the reciprocal duty of love that was just the same that Rome did owe to them Thirdly that under God that is immediatly without any Forrein Prelate or Patriarch intervening they were to be governed by the Bishop of Caerleon as their onely Primate and Patriarch Which priviledge continued to the succeeding Bishops of that See for many ages afterwards saving that the Archiepiscopal Chair was removed from Caerleon to St. Davids in the Raign of King Arthur And lastly observe the time when this answer was made after the first six hundred years were expired So it is a full demonstrative convincing proof for the whole term prefixed But lest any man should cavil and say that Dionothus was but one man and that the body of the British Clergy might be of another mind that which followes strikes the question dead That Austin Saint Gregories Legate proposing three things to the Britons First that they should submit to the Roman Bishop Secondly that they should conforme to the customes of the Roman Province about the observation of Easter and the administration of Baptisme And Lastly that they should joyn with him in Preaching to the Saxons all the British Clergy assembled themselves together Bishops and Priests in two several Synods one after another to deliberate hereupon and after mature consideration they rejected all his propositions Synodically and refused flatly and unanimously to have any thing to do with him upon those terms Insomuch as St. Austin was necessitated to return over the Seas to obtain his own consecration and after his return to consecrate the Saxon Bishops alone without the assistance of any other Bishops They refused indeed to their own cost twelve hundred innocent Monks of Bangor shortly after lost their lives for it Rome was ever builded in blood Howsoever these words quamvis Augustino prius mortuo have since been forged and inserted into venerable Bede to palliate the matter which are wanting in the Saxon Copy The concurring Testimonies of all our Historiographers witnessing the absolute and unanimous refusal of the Britons to submit to Rome and the matter of fact it self do confirm this for an undoubted truth beyond all exception So clear a truth it is that the British Churches for the first three hundred years neither ought nor paid any subjection to Rome Whence might well proceed that answer of Elutherius to King Lucius if that Epistle be not counterfeit when he desired him to send over a Copy of the Roman Lawes That he should chuse a Law Ecclesiastical out of holy writ by the Councel of his Kingdom that is principally of his Bishops for saith he you are the Vicar of Christ in your Kingdom The same in effect which is conteined in the Lawes of Edward the Confessor Hence it is that both our Histories and our Lawes do stile our Archbishops Priâ—ates which in the Language of the Primitive times signifies as much as Patriarchs And sometimes call them expresly by the very name of Patriarchs it self Hence Vrban the second intertained and welcomed Anselm our Archbishop of Canterbury into the Councel of Barre tanquam alterius orbis Papam as the Pope of another world Or as others relate the passage as the Apostle of another world and a Patriarch worthy to be reverenced CHAP. VI. That the King and Church of England had both sufficient authority and sufficient grounds to withdraw their obedience from Rome and did it with due moderation SO from the persons who made the separation from the Lawes and Statutes of our Realm which warranted the separation and from the ancient Liberties and priviledges of the Britannick Churches I proceed to my fourth ground drawn from the Imperial prerogatives of our Soveraign Princes That though we should wave all the other advantages yet they had power to alter in the external discipline and regiment of the Church whatsoever was of humane institution for the benefit and advantage of the body politick Doctor Holden proposeth the case right by way of Objection But peradventure the Protestants will say that the King or supream Senate of every Kingdome or Common-Wealth have power to make Lawes and statutes by which either directly or at least indirectly as well the Clergy as the Laity of that Kingdom or Common-Wealth are bound to reject all forrain Iurisdiction superiority and dependance And that his Legislative power is essentially annexed to every Kingdom and Commonwealth seeing that otherwise they cannot prevent those dangers which may spring and issue from that fountain to their destruction and ruine The Protestants do say indeed without all peradventure upon that very ground which is alledged in the objection Neither do the Protestants want the suffrage of Roman Catholicks therein Because humane nature saith one cannot be destitute of necessary remedies to its own preservation And another To whom a Kingdome is granted of necessity all things are esteemed to be granted without which a Kingdome cannot be governed And a Kingdom cannot be governed unlesse the King enjoy this power even over Clerks c. Necessary remedies are no remedies unlesse they be just but worse then the disease And being just the Subject is obliged to active obedience But let us see what the Doctour pleads in answer to his own objection First he passeth by the native power of civil Soveraign Empire which ought not to have been omitted for therein consists the main force of the argument But as to the Ecclesiastical part he saith he could
demonstrate clearly if it were needful that the dependence of Bishops and other Orthodox Christians upon the Pope being rightly conceived as it is and as it is really necessary according to the certain and true princâ—ples of Catholick Religion doth not bring any the least shadow of danger to the Common-Wealth though in hostility with the Pope or of a different communion from the Pope If we lived in Plato's Common-Wealth where every one did his duty this reason were of more force Far be it from us to imagine that the right exercise of any lawful power grounded upon the certain and true principles of Catholick Religion should be dangerous to any Society But this is not our case What if the Bishops and Court of Rome have swerved from those certain and true principles of Catholick Religion or have abused that power which was committed to their trust by Christ or by his Church Or have usurped more authority then did belong unto them Or have Engrossed all Episcopal Jurisdiction to themselves leaving the Bishops of the Land but Cyphers in their own Diocesses Or have hazarded the utter ruine and destruction of the Church by their Simony extortion provisions reservations and exemptions Or have obtruded new unwarrantable Oathes upon the Subjects inconsistent with their allegiance Or have drained the Kingdome of its treasure by pecuniary avaricious arts Or have challenged to themselves a negative voice against the right heir of the Crown Or authority to depose a crowned King and absolve his Subjects from their Oathes and allegiance to their Soveraignes And have shewed themselves incorrigible in all these things This is our case In any one of these cases much more in them all conjoyned it is not onely lawful but very necessary for Christian Princes to reform such grosse abuses and to free themselves and their Subjects from such a tyrannical yoke if they can by the direction of a general Councel if not of a Provincial And it is not Schisme but Loyalty in their Subjects to yeild obedience The same Author proceeds That no civil power how Soveraign soever can correct the fundamental articles of Christian faith nor pervert the order of sacred rites received by universal tradition as instituted by Christ nor justifie any thing by their Edicts which is against Christian charity To all this we do readily assent and never did presume to arrogate to our selves or to exercise any such power But still this is wide from our case What if the Bishop of Rome have presumed to coyn and attempted to obtrude upon us new Articles of Faith as he hath in his new Creed and to pervert the sacred rites instituted by Christ as in his with-holding the Cup from the Laity Then without doubt not we but he is guilty of the Schisme Then it is lawful to separate from him in his innovations without incurring the crime of Schisme This is laid down by the Author himself as an evident conclusion and we thank him for it That it is necessary for every Christian to acknowledge no authority under heaven either Ecclesiastical or Civil that hath power to abrogate those things that are revealed and instituted by Christ or to determine those things which are opposite unto them quod Schismatis origo foret which should be the original of Schisme But where that Author infers as a corollary from the former Proposition That no Edict of a Soveraign Prince can Iustifie Schisme because all Schisme is destructive to Christian charity I must crave leave with all due respect to his person to his learning to his moderation and to his charity to rectifie that mistake If by Schisme he understand criminal Schisme that which he saith is most true That were not onely to Justifie the wicked which is an abhomination to the Lord but to justifie wickednesse it self But every separation or Schisme taken in a large sence is not criminal nor at all destructive to Christian Charity Sometimes it is a necessary Christian charitable duty In all the cases that I have supposed above and shall prove hereafter they that make the Separation continue Catholiques and they that give the cause become the Schismatiques But it may be urged That this proceeds from the merit of the cause not from the authority of the Soveraign Prince I answer It proceeds from both Three things are necessary to make a publique reformation lawful Just grounds due moderation and sufficient authority There may be just grounds without sufficient authority and sufficient authority without just grounds and both sufficient authority and just grounds without due moderation But where these three things concur it justifies the reformation before God and man and renders that separation lawful which otherwise were Schismatical Lastly it is alledged That the power of the Soveraign Magistrate is not so absolute that he can command any thing at his pleasure so as to oblige his Subjects to obedience in things repugnant to the Law of nature or the positive Law of God No Orthodox Christian can doubt of this truth The authority of the inferiour ceaseth where the Superiour declareth his pleasure to the contrary Da veniam Imperator tu carcerom ille gehennam minatur Pardon me O Emperour thou threatenest me with imprisonment but God Almighty with hell-fire But this is nothing to our case neither the Law of Nature nor the Law of God doth injoyn Brittish Christians to buy pardons and indulgences and dispensations and Bulls and Palls and priviledges at Rome contrary to the fundamental Laws of the Realm Boniface the eighth by his Bull exempted the University of Oxford from the Jurisdiction of the Archbishop of Canterbury whereupon did grow a controversie between Thomas Arundel Archbishop and the University And the said Bull was decreed to be void by two succeeding Kings Richard the second and Henry the fourth in Parliament as being obtained in praejudicium Coronae suae Legum consuetudinum Regni sui enervationem to the prejudice of his Imperial crown and to the weakning of the Lawes and Customes of his Realm But this disobedience to the decrees of Soveraign Princes must be joyned with passive obedience it must be onely when and where their commands are evidently unjust such as Phaâ—aohs commanding the Hebrew Midwives to kill all the Male children or Sauls injoyning his guard to slay the Priests of the Lord or like Nâ—buchadnezzars idolatrous edict charging all men to fall down and worship his golden Image For otherwise if the case be doubtful it is a rule in Case divinity Subditis tenentur in favorem Legis judicare Subjects are bound to judge in favour of the Law Otherwise they run into a certain crime of disobedience for fear of an uncertain A War may be unjust in the Prince and yet the Souldier be guiltlesse Nor is the Subject obliged to sift the grounds of his Soveraigns commands too narrowly It happens often that reum facit Principem iniquitas
respect of their errours and especially their tyrannical exactions and usurpations but unwillingly and with reluctation in respect of their persons and much more in respect of our common Saviour As if we were to depart from our fathers or our brothers house or rather from some contagious sicknesse wherewith it was infected Not forgetting to pray God daily to restore them to their former purity that they and we may once again enjoy the comfort and contentment of one anothers Christian Society We pray for their conversion publickly in our Letany in general And expressely and solemnly upon Good Friday though we know that they do as solemnly curse us the day before If this be to be Schismaticks it were no ill wish for Christendome that there were many more such Schismaticks Thirdly we do not arrogate to our selves either a new Church or a new Religion or new holy orders for then we must produce new miracles new revelations and new cloven tongues for our justification Our Religion is the same it was our Church the same it was our holy orders the same they were in substance differing onely from what they were formerly as a garden weeded from a garden unweeded or a body purged from it self before it was purged And therefore as we presume not to make new Articles of faith much lesse to obtrude such innovations upon others so we are not willing to receive them from others or to mingle Scholastical opinions with fundamental truths Which hath given occasion to some to call our Religion a negative religion Not considering that our positive articles are those general truths about which there is no controversie Our negation is onely of humane controverted additions Lastly we are ready in the preparation of our mindes to believe and practise whatsoever the Catholick Church even of this present age doth universally and unanimously believe and practice Quod apud multos unum invenitur non est errâ—tum sed traditum And though it be neither lawful nor possible for us to hold actual communion with all sorts of Christians in all things wherein they vary both from the truth and one from another yet even in those things we hold a communion with them in our desires longing for their conversion and re-union with us in truth CHAP. VII That all Princes and Republiques of the Roman Communion do in effect the same thing when they have occasion or at least do plead for it SO we are come to our fifth Conclusion That whatsoever the King and Church of England did in the separation of themselves from the Court of Rome it is no more then all Sovereign Princes and Churches none of whatsoever communion excepted do practise or pretend as often as they have occasion And first for all Protestant Kings Princes and Republicks it admits no deniall or dispute Secondly for the Grecian and all other Eastern Churches it can be no more doubted of then of the Protestants since they never acknowledged any obedience to be due from them to the Bishop of Rome but onely an honourable respect as to the prime Patriarch and beginning of unity Whose farewell or separation is said to have been as smart as ours and upon the same grounds in these words We acknowledge thy power we cannot satisfie thy covetousnesse live by your selves But my aim extends higher to verifie this of the Roman Catholick Princes and Republicks themselves as the Emperour the most Christian and Catholick Kings the Republick of Venice and others To begin with the Emperours I do not mean those ancient Christian Primitive Emperours who lived and flourished before the daies of Gregory the Great Such a Court of Rome as we made our secession from was not then in being nor the Colledge of Parish Priests at Rome turned then into a Conclave of Cardinals as Ecclesiastical Princes of the Oecumenical Church So long there was no need of any separation from them or protestation against them But I intend the later Emperours since Gregorie's time after the Popes sought to usurp an universal Sovereignty over the Catholick Church and more particularly the Occidental that is to say the French and German Emperours Yet the Reader may be pleased to take notice that the case of our Kings is much different from theirs in two respects First they believed the Roman Bishop to be their lawful Patriarch whether justly or not is not the subject of this present discourse But we do utterly deny his Patriarchal authority over us And to demonstrate our exemption do produce for matter of right that famous Canon of the General Councel of Ephesus made in the case of the Cyprian Bishops and for matter of fact the unanimous Votes of two British Synods and the concurrent testimonies of all our Historiographers Some have been formerly cited We might adde to them the ancient British history called by the Author thereof Brutus wherein he relates this answer of the British to Augustine Se Caerleonensi Archiepiscopo obedire voluisse Augustino autem Romano Legato omninâ— noluisse nec Anglis inimicis paulò antè Paganis à quibus suis sedibus pulsi erant subesse se qui semper Christianifuerunt voluisse That they would obey the Archbishop of Caerleon that was their British Primate or Patriarch but they would not obey Austine the Bishop of Romes Legate Neither would the Britanes who had evermore been Christians from the beginning be under the English who were their enemies and but newly converted from Paganisâ—e by whom they had been driven out of their ancient habitations The same history is related by sundry other very ancient Authours A second difference between our English Kings and the later German Emperours is this that our Kings by the fundamental constitutions of the Kingdome are hereditary Kings and never die So there is an uninterrupted succession without any vacancy But the Emperours are elective and consequently not invested in the actual possession of their Sovereignty without some publick solemnities Whereof some are essential as the votes of the Electours some others ceremonial as the last Coronation of the Emperour by the Bishop of Rome which was really and is yet titularly his Imperial City But the Popes who had learned to make their own advantage of every thing sacred or civil took occasion from hence to make the world believe that the Imperial Crown was their gift and the Emperours their Liegemen So Adrian the fourth doubted not to write to Frederick Barbarossa the Emperour Insigne corona beneficium tibi contulimus which was so offensively taken that as the German Bishops in their letter to the same Pope do affirm the whole Empire was moved at it the eaâ—es of his Imperial Majestie could not hear it with patience nor the Princes endure it nor they themselves either durst of could approve it Whereupon the Pope was forced to expound himself that by beneficium he meant nothing but bonum factum a good deed and by contulimus
the free and just speech of a French Bishop When Henry the fourth had in a manner ended the civill Wars of France by changing from the Protestant to the Roman Catholique Communion Yet the Pope who favoured the contrary party upon pretence of his dissimulation and great dangers that might ensue thereupon for a long time deferred his reconciliation untill the French Prelates by their own authority did first admit him into the bosome of the Church At which time one of them used this discourse Was France all on fire and had they not Rivers enough at home but they must run as far as Rome to Tybur to fetch water to quench it Since that in Cardinal Richlieu's daies it is well known what books were freely printed and publickly sold upon pont neuf of the lawfulnesse of erecting a new or rather restoring an old proper Patriarchate in France as one of the liberties of the Gallicane Church It was well for the Roman Court that they became more propitious to the French affaires Take one instance more which happened very lately The Pope refused to admit any new Bishops in Portugal upon the nomination of the present King because he would not thereby seem to acknowledge or approve his title to the Crown in prejudice of the King of Spain whereby the Episcopal order in Portugal and the other Dominions belonging to that Crown was well near extinguished and scarcely so many Bishops were left alive or could not be drawn together as to make a Canonical Ordination The three Orders of Portugal did represent to the Pope that in the Kingdomes of Portugal and the Algarbians wherein ought to have been three Metropolitans and ten Suffragans there was but one left and he by the Popes dispensation non-Residenâ— And in all the Asâ—atique Provinces but one other and he both sickly and decrepit And in all the African and American Provinces and the Islands not one surviving But the Pope continued inexorable whereupon theyâ— present their request to their neighbours and friends the French Prelates beseeching them to mediate for them with his Holinesse And if he continue still obstinately deaf to their just petition to supply his defect themselves and to Ordain them Bishops in case of necessity The French did the Office of Neighbours and Christians The Synode of the French Clergy did write to the Pope on their behalf in April 1651. But that way not succeeding they sent one of their Bishops as an expresse Envoié to his Holinesse to let him know that if he still refused they cannot nor will be wanting to themselves to their neighbours but would supply his defect what the issue of it is since I have not yet heard But to leave matter of fact and to come to the fundamental Lawes and Customes of France Every one hath heard of the liberties of the French Church but every one understands not what those liberties are as being better known by their practice at home then by Books abroad I will onely select some of them out of their own authentique authorities And when the Reader hath considered well of them let him judge what authority the Pope hath in France more then discretionary at the good pleasure of the King or more then he might have had in other places if he could have contented himself with reason Protestants are not so undiscreet or uncharitable as to violate the peace of Christendom for a primacy or headship of order without superiority of power or for the name of his Holinesse Or for a Pall if the price were not too high Or for a few innocent formalities 1. The Pope cannot command or ordain any thing directly or indirectly concerning any temporal affairs within the dominions of the King of France 2. The spiritual authority and power of the Pope is not absolute in France but limited and restrained by the Canons and Rules of the ancient Councâ—ls of the Church received in that Kingdom Where observe first that the Pope can do nothing in France as a Sovereign Spiritual Prince with his non obstantes either against the Canons or besides the Canons Secondly that the Canons are no Canons in France except they be received This â—ame priviledge was anciently radicated in the fundamental Lawes of England This priviledge the Popes indeavoured to pluck up by the roots And the contentions about this priviledge were one principal occasion of the separation 3. No command whatsoever of the Pope can free the French Clergy from their obligation to obey the commands of their Sovereign 4. The most Christian King hath had power at all times according to the occurrence and exigence of affairs to assemble or cause to be assembled Synods Provincial or National and therein to treat not onely of such things as concern the conservation of the Civil estate but also of such things as concern Ecclesiastical order and discipline in his own dominions And therein to make Rules Chapters Lawes Ordinances and pragmatique sanctions in his own name by his own authority Many of which have been received among the decrees of the Catholick Church and some of them approved by general Councels 5. The Pope cannot send a Legate à latere into France with power to reform judge collate dispense or do such other things accustomed to be specified in the authoritative Bull of his Legation except it be upon the desire or with the approbation of the most Christian King Neither can the said Legate execute his charge untill he hath promised the King in writing under his oath upon his holy orders not to make use of his Legantine power in the Kings Dominions longer then it shall please the King And that so soon as he shall be admonished of the Kings pleasure to forbid it he will give it over And that whilest he doth use it it shall be exercised conformably to the Kings will without attempting any thing to the prejudice of the decrees of Generall Councels or the liberties and priviledges of the Gallicane Church and the Universities of France 6. The Commissions and Bulls of the Popes Legates are to be seen examined and approved by the Court of Parliament And to be registred and published with such Cautions and modifications as that Court shall judge expedient for the good of the Kingdome and to be executed according to the said cautions and not otherwise 7. The Prelates of the French Church although commanded by the Pope for what cause soever it be may not depart out of the Kingdom without the Kings Commandment of License 8. The Pope can neither by himself nor by his Delegates judge of any thing which concerneth the state preheminence or priviledges of the Crown of France nor of any thing pertaining to it Nor can there be any question or processe about the state or pretensions of the King but in his own Courts 9. Papal Bulls Citations Sentences Excommunications and the like are not to be executed in France without the Kings
Bishop of the world Which sense was far enough from the intention either of Gregory the Great or Iohn of Constantinople who had both of them so many true Archbishops and Bishops under them But this sense agrees well enough with the extravagant ambition of the later Popes and of the Roman Court who do appropriate all original Jurisdiction to themselves So many waies is the Court of Rome guilty of Schismatical pravity Besides these branches of Schisme there are yet two other novelties challenged by the Popes and their Parasitical Courtiers But neither these nor the other yet defined by their Church both destructive to Christian unity both apt to breed and nourish to procreate and conserve Schisme An infallibility of judgment and a temporall power over Princes either directly or indirectly General and Provincial Councels are the proper remedies of Schisme But this challenge of infallibility diminisheth their authority discrediteth their definitions and maketh them to be superfluous things What needs so much expence so many consultations so much travel of so many poor old fallible Bishops from all the quarters of the world when there is an infallible Judge at Rome that can determine all questions in his own conclave without danger of errour Was Marcellinus such an infallible Judge when he burned incense to Idols Or Liberius when he consented to the Arrians and gave his suffrage to the condemnation of blessed Athanasius Or Honorius when he was condemned and accursed in the sixth General Councel for a Monothelite Or Iohn the 22th when he was condemned by the Theologues of Paris before the King with sound of Trumpets for teaching that the soules of the just shall not see God untill the general resurrection were those succeeding Popes Iohn and Martine and Formosus and Stephen and Romanus and Theodorus and Iohn and Benedictus and Sergius who clashed one with another and abrogated the decrees one of another over and over again such infallible Judges Neither is it meer matter of fact to decree the Ordinations of a lawful Bishop to be void To omit many others But howsoever they tell us That the first See cannot be judged I will not trouble my self about the credit of the authorities whether they be true or counterfeit Nor whether the first See signifie Rome alone or any other of the five Proto-Patriarchates Thus much is certain that by judgment of discretion any private man may judge the Pope and withdraw from him in his errours and resist him if he invade either the bodies or the soules of men as Bellarmine confesseth That in the Court of Conscience every ordinary Pastour may judge him and bind him and loose him as an ordinary man And by their leaves in the external Court by coercive power if he commit civil crimes the Emperour if Ecclesiastical a Councel or the Emperour with a Councel may judge him and in some cases declare him to be fallen from his Papal dignity by the sentence of the Law in other cases if he be incorrigible depose him by the sentence of the Judge But there is a great difference between the judgment of Subjects aâ— those Ecclesiasticks were and the judgment of a Sovereign Prince between the judgment of a General Councel and the judgment of an assembly of Suffragans and inferiours And yet the Roman Clergy are known to have deposed Liberius their own Bishop and justly Or otherwise Foelix their Martyr had been a Schismatick Their other challenge of temporal power whether directly or indirectly and in ordine ad spiritualia cannot chuse but render all Christians especially Sovereign Princes jealous and suspicious of their power and averse from the communion of those persons who maintain so dangerous positions so destructive to their propriety The power of the keâ—es doth not extend it self to any secular rights neither can Ecclesiastical censures alter or invalidate the Lawes of God and Nature or the municipal Lawes of a Land All which do injoyn the obedience of children to their Parents and of Subjects to their Sovereignes Gregory the seventh began this practice against Henry the fourth But what Gregory did bind upon earth God Almighty did not bind in heaven His Papal blessing turned to a curse And instead of an Imperial Crown Rodolph found the just reward of his treason The best is that they who give these exorbitant priviledges to Popes do it with so many cautions and reservations that they signifie nothing and may be taken away with as much ease as they are given The Pope say they is infallible not in his Chamber but in his Chair not in the premisses but in the conclusion not in conclusions of matter of fact but in conclusions of matter of faith Not alwaies in all conclusions of matter of faith but onely when he useth the right means and due diligence And who knoweth when he doth that So every Christian is infallible if â—e would and could keep himself to the infallible rule which God hath given him Take nothing and hold it fast So likewise for his temporal power over Princes they say the Pope not as Pope but as a spiritual Prince hath a certain kind of power temporal but not meerly temporal not directly but indirectly and in order to spiritual things Quo tencam vultus mutantem Protea nodo CHAP. IX An Answer to the Objections brought by the Romanists to prove the English Protestants to be Schismaticks BUt it is not enough to charge the Church of Rome unlesse we can discharge our selves and acquit our own Church of the guilt of Schisme which they seek to cast upon us First they object that we have separated our selves Schismatically from the communion of the Catholick Church God forbid Then we will acknowledge without any more to do that we have separated our selves from Christ and all his holy Ordinances and from the benefit of his Passion and all hope of salvation But the truth is we have no otherwise separated our selves from the communion of the Catholick Church then all the primitive Orthodox Fathers and Doctours and Churches did long before us that is in the opinion of the Donatists as we do now in the opinion of the Romanists because the Romanists limit the Catholick Church now to Rome in Italy and those Churches that are subordinate to it as the Donatists did then to Cartenna in Africk and those Churches that adhered to it We are so far from separating our selves from the communion of the Catholick Church that we make the communion of the Christian Church to be thrice more Catholick then the Romanists themselves do make it and maintain Communion with thrice so many Christians as they do By how much our Church should make it self as the case stands more Roman then it is by so much it should thereby become lesse Catholick then it is I have shewed before out of the Canons and Constitutions of our Church that we have not separated our selves simply and absolutely from the
and of the South Saxons under Kingils their King who did unite the heptarchy into a Monarchy were converted by the preaching of Berinus an Italian by the perswasions of Oswald King of Northumberland Oswâ—ld King of Northumberland was baptized in Scotland and Religion luckily planted in that Kingdome by Aidan a Scottish Bishop Penda King of Mercia was converted and christened by Finanus Successour of Aidan by the means of a marriage with a Christian Princesse of the Royal Family of Northumberland Sigibert King of the East Angles in whose daies and by whose means Religion took root among the East Saxons was converted and christned in France All these Saxons which were converted by Britons or Scots may as justly plead for their old immunities as the Britons themselves We acknowledge Saint Gregory to have been the first that did break the ice And yet we see how small a proportion of the inhabitants of the British Islands do owe their conversion to Rome in probability not a tenth part Fourthly consider that the conversion of a Nation to the Christian faith is a good ground in equity all other circumstances concurring why they should rather submit themselves or a General Councel assign them to that See that converted them then to any other Patriarchate As was justly pleaded in the case between the Bishops of Rome and Constantinople about the right of Jurisdiction over the Bulgarians But the conversion of a Nation is no ground at all to invest their converter presently with Patriarchal authority over them or any Ecclesiastical superiority especially where too great a distance of place doth render such Jurisdiction uselesse and burthensome And most especially where it cannot be done without prejudice to a former owner thrust out of his just right meerly by the power of the sword as the British Primates were Or to the subjecting of a free Nation to a forreign Prelate without or beyond their own consent In probability of reason the Britons ought their first conversion to the Eastern Church as appeareth by their accord with them in baptismal rites and the observation of Easter Yet never were subject to any Eastern Patriarch Sundry of our British and English Bishops have converted forreign Nations yet never pretended to any Jurisdiction over them Fifthly and lastly consider That whatsoever title or right S. Gregory did acquire or might have acquired by his piety and deserts towards the English Nation it was personal and could not descend from him to such Successours who both forfeited it many waies and quickly within four or five years after his death quitted their Patriarchate and set an higher title to a spirituall Monarchy on foot whilest the most part of England remained yet Pagan when Pope Boniface did obtain of Phoeas the usurper an usurping Pope from an usurping Emperour to be universal Bishop Their Canon-shot is past that which remains is but a small volly of Muskets They adde that we have schismatically separated our selves from the Communion of our Ancestours whom we believe to be damned That we have separated our selves from our Ecclesiastical predecessours by breaking in sunder the line of Apostolical succession whilest our Presbyters did take upon them to Ordain Bishops and to propagate to their Successours more then they received from their predecessours That our Presbyters are but equivocall Presbyters wanting both the right matter and form of Presbyterial ordination To extinguish the order is more schismatical then to decline their authority And lastly that we derive our Episcopal Jurisdiction from the Crown First for our natural Fathers the answer is easie We do not condemn them nor separate our selves from them Charity requires us both to think well and speak well of them But prudence commands us likewise to look well to our selves We believe our fathers might partake of some errours of the Roman Church we do not believe that they were guilty of any heretical pravity but held alwaies the truth implicitely in the preparation of their minds and were alwaies ready to receive it when God should be pleased to reveal it Upon these grounds we are so far from damning them that we are confident they were saved by a generall repentance He that searcheth carefully into his own heart to find out his errours and repenteth truly of all his known sins and beggeth pardon for his unknown errours proceeding out of invincible or but probable ignorance in Gods acceptation repenteth of all Otherwise the very best of Christians were in a miserable condition For who can tell how oft he offendeth The second accusation of Priests consecrating Bishops is grounded upon a senselesse fabulous fiction made by a man of a leaden heart and a brazen forehead of I know not what assembly of some of our Reformers at the sign of the Nags-head in Cheapside or rather devised by their malicious enemies at the sign of the Whetstone in Popes-head-Alley Against which lying groundlesse drowsie dream we produce in the very point the authentick records of our Church of things not acted in a corner but publickly and solemnly recorded by publick Notaries preserved in publick Registers whither every one that desired to see them might have accesse And published to the world in Print whilest there were thousands of eye-witnesses living that could have contradicted them if they had been feigned There is no more certainty of the Coronation of Henry the eighth or Edward the sixth then there is of that Ordination which alone they have been pleased to question done not by one as Austine consecrated the first Saxon Prelates but by five consecrated Bishops Let them name the person or persons And if they were Bishops of the Church of England we will shew them the day the place the persons when and where and by whom and before what publick Notaries or sworn Officers they were ordained And this not by uncertain rumours but by the Acts and instruments themselves Let the Reader chuse whether he will give credit to a sworn Officer or a professed adversary to eye-witnesses or to malicious reporters upon hearsay to that which is done publickly in the face of the Church or to that which is said to be done privately in the corner of a Tavern These authentick evidences being upon occasion produced out of our Ecclesiasticall Courts and deliberately perused and viewed by Father Oldcorn the Jesuit he both professed himself clearly convinced of that whereof he had so long doubted that was the legitimate succession of Bishops and Priests in our Church and wished heartily towards the reparation of the breach of Christendome that all the world were so abundantly satisfied as he himself was Blaming us as partly guilty of the grosse mistake of many for not having publickly and timely made known to the world the notorious falshood of that empty but far spread aspersion against our succession As for our parts we believe Episcopacy to be at least in Apostolical institution approved by Christ himself in