Bishop and Pastor as not being true Pope and cleaueth to one opposite vnto him men dying in the state of this Disobedience cannot possibly be true Martyrs nor be saued Thirdly there is Disobedience moral in matter of good life manners against precepts enacted by the Church for the better auoyding punishing of ill behauiour Now in the state of this kind of Disobedience men may be saued for the disobeying of these kind of orders and commands may proceed either from contumacy and contempt or from errour and ignorance If out of contempt then is it damnable so that none dying therin can be Martyrs or goe to heauen But with Disobedience of the second kind caused by ignorance Saluation and Martyrdome may stand for their ignorance may be inuincible or else probable and grounded vpon good seeming reasons Or if it be vincible and faulty yet may it be abolished by their contrition for all their sinnes or falce Martyrij by the sickle of Martyrdome done away This supposed I say the Disobedience of the African Bishops was not Heretical because in all matters of sayth they were conforme to the Church of Rome and by manifold practise shewed that about doubts and controuersies of this kind they held it necessary to haue recourse to (n) Ep. Concil Mileuit 92. inter Epist August the Pastorall Chayre and care of Peter to the (o) Cypr. l. 2. Ep. 10. l. 4. ep 8. Roote and matrice of the Catholike Church to the Rocke which the (p) August Psal cont part Donat. proud gates of Hell do neuer ouercome to the maine indeficient fountaine which with the streames of wholesome doctrine watereth all Christians ouer the whole world The ancient rules say they the foure Primates of Afrike (q) Ep. ad Theodor. Papam Extat in Concil Lateran 1. consult 2. Bin. to 2. p. 1075. haue ordayned that whatsoeuer is treated in Prouinces distant and farre of should not be deemed to be ended vntill first it were come to the knowledge of the See Apostolike to the en that the sentente which should be found iust might be confirmed by the authority of the same See and that from thence all other Churches as streames flowing from their mother source might take the beginning of their preaching and the Sacraments of Saluation Their Disobedience then could not be Heretical nor was it Schismatical because they acknowledged the Pope euen that Pope with whome they did disagree to be their Pastor and Superior whose (r) August Epist. 157. Iniuncta nobis à Venerabili Papa Zozimo Ecclesiastica necessitas lawfull Commaunds they were bound to obey that all Maior causes all matters controuersies aboue Iurisdiction of greater moment to wit such as concerne sayth and the life and gouernment of Bishops are to be referred vnto him and to be finally and infallibly decided by him Neither thirdly was their Disobedience ioyned with contumacy and contempt because though they refused to deferre vnto the Appeales which Priest infertour Clergymen might make to the Pope yet they do it with great humility and respect and by way of submissiue intreaty in their (s) Ep. ad Caelestin apud Sur. Tom. l. Coucil pag. 520. letter to Pope Celeftine Praefato debitae Salutationis officio impendio deprecamur vt deinceps ad aures vestrashinc venientes non facilius admittatis The behoofe of due Salutation or Reuerence being premised we humbly beseech you that those which come from hence with their Appeales you will not admit them vnto audience ouer-easily Therefore their disobedience was out of ignorance for they did not doubt but the Pope had power to command the Bishops of Africa to yield vnto the Appeales that were made vnto him but they esteemed the practise of that power not to be in those circumstances for the good of the Church of Africa They saw by appealing to Rome that dissolute and vnruly Clergymen would cause much vexation vnto the Bishops their lawfull Iudges prolonge the cause differre the sentence and many times escape deserued punishment which impunity might easily grow into liberty and audacity and extreme disorder Wherefore the power giuen of Christ to his Church and Vicar on earth being giuen (t) â— Cor. 1â— 10 for edifying not for destroying they were persuaded that the Pope could not prudently command them to deferre vnto such Appeales and if he did that they should not be bound to obey therein You demand (u) Pag. 150â— whether the Pope of Rome whom we entitle Monarch of the Church Catholike and Bishop of Bishops would accept it as a matter of subiection for Protestants with S. Augustine and those other African Bishops to deny that any ought to be called Bishop of Bishop and not to yield to his demands in point of Iurisdiction vpon any pretence of Diuine Law but to exact of him proofe by a Canon of an ancient Councell I answere The African Bishops deny the title of Prince of Bishops to any Arch-bishop or Primate within Africke but not to the Roman Bishop yea they entitle him in expresse termes (x) Aruob in Psal 138. Tertullian lib. de pudicit c. 1. Stephanus Mauritaniae in Africa Episcopus Epist. ad Damasum Bishop of Bishops the Holy Father of Fathers the soueraigne Bishop of all Bishops and Pastors they call his Authority the Princedome of the Apostolike Chayre euer vigent in the Roman Church they acknowledge that they are bound to obey all his iust commandes that all Christians may and must Appeale to him about Controuersies of Religion and the Catholike Fayth August ep 1â—2 A postolitae Cathedrae principatum Item the foure Primates of Afrike in their Synodical Epistle to Pope Theodor in Conc. Lateran 1. Consul 2. Bintom 2 pag. 1078. Patri Patrum summo omnium Praesulum Pontifici Theodoro By which is answered what you alleage pag. 46. out of the 26. Canon of the Councell of Carthage yea Bishops also in criminal causes from the condeÌ„nation giuen against them by their fellow-Bishops But that the Pope should admit the Appeales so easely of euery African Priest and Clergyman hereof they doubt whether it be expedient for the African Church Now Bishops may be sometimes excused if they do not obey the Pope in matters that are extremely burthensome and hard specially when they haue probable reasons that it is not prudently commanded nor will proue for the good of soules But Protestants you are disobedient vnto the See of Peter and the Soueraigne Bishop of all Bishops in points of Iurisdiction allowed vnto him by ancient Councells Your disobedience is ioyned with Contumacy contempt contumely and base language You deny Appeales vnto him in matters and doubts about Christian Fayth Wherefore you want that dutifull subiection to Peters chayre without which none can be of the number of Christ his sheepe nor consequently be saued yea you are guilty of that damnable disobedience whereof S. Leo sayth (y) Epist 93. c.
wholly on falshood imposture as likewise is your affirming that the Africans from the time of Celestine Pope to Boniface the second were separated from the communion of the Roman Church for setting aside all other Arguments since you cannot deny that she in her Kalendar of Saints placeth many most glorious African Martyrs and Confessors of that time what man euen of common sense can persuade himselfe that she would honor them as Saints if they had died out of her Communion and obedience CHAP. XXIX Of the great Reuerence of ancient Christian Emperors and Kings to the Pope BELLARMINE (f) De officio Principis Christia l. 1. c. 4. 5. proueth that Emperors and Kings owe subiection to Bishops in sprirituall affaires as to their Pastors and especially to the Pope as to the supreme Couernor of the vniuersall Church and Father of all Christians And lest he might seeme by this Doctrine to derogate from the Maiesty of Emperors or Kings or any way to lessen the reuerence due to their persons and dignity he proueth by the vndoubted testimonies of Scripture of S. Chrysostome S. Ambrose S. Gregory and other learned Fathers as also by the acknowledgment of the most godly Christian Emperors and Kings themselues that the Episcopall and Sacerdotall dignity excelleth the Imperial as farre as gold surpasseth lead and the Soule the body that not only Constantine the great but God himselfe honoreth Bishops and Priests with the name of Angells and Gods that the Bishop is the Father the Doctor Pastor aswell of the Prince as of the people and that Christian Princes when they speake of the B. of Rome or write to him expresse their acknowledgment of his supreme dignity by giuing him the title of Holy Father and Most Blessed Father From whence it must follow that as Disciples owe obedience to their Doctor Children to their Father sheepe to their Pastor so Christian Princes in the affaires of their soules owe obedience to their Prelates and Pastors and especially to the Pope who is the Father the Archpastor chiefe Doctor of all Christians Vpon this ground S. Gregory Nazianzen for his profound learning surnamed The Deuine feared not to say to the Emperor (g) Orat. ad ciues suos timo percul Princip irascent Will you heare me with patience to speake my mind freely vnto you which truly you ought to do for so much as the law of Christ hath made you subiect to my power and to my tribunall for we Bishops haue an Empire also and that more perfect then yours vnlesse you will plead that the spirit is inferior to the flesh and heauenly things to earthly But I doubt not but that you will take in good part this my freedome of speach you being a sacred sheepe of my holy flock and a Disciple of the Grand Pastor rightly instructed by the holy Ghost euen from your yong yeares And vpon the same ground it was that holy S. Bernard gaue this admonition to Conradus the Emperor (h) Ep. 183. I haue read Let euery soule he subiect to higher powers and he that resisteth power resisteth the ordinance of God Which sentence I greatly desire and by all meanes admonish you to obserue in yelding reuerence to the soueraigne and Apostolike See and to the Vicar of blessed Peter as you will haue it exhibited to you by the whole Empire These learned Fathers did vnderstand right well the honor due to Emperors and Kinges that by reason of their dignity they are to be held in great Veneration and yet neuerthelesse conceaued it no vilifiyng of their Maiesty nor abasing of their Persons to require from them obedience in spirituall affaires to their Bishops and Pastors especially to the Successor of S. Peter the supreme Bishop of Bishops and Pastor of all Pastors This is Bellarmines Doctrine and the summe of his discourse which puts you so farre out of patience that not being able to confute what he hath so solidly proued you begin to raile at the Pope (i) Pag. 160.164 for permitting his feete to be kissed as tasting rankly of Luciferian pride Which though it be no Argument either against the fayth or supremacy of the Pope and Church of Rome but a friuolous cauill no way pertinent to the question in hand hath bene already satisfied to the full (k) Chap. 10. 2. You goe on in the same streame telling vs (l) Pag. 160. that we make a barbarous boast our Popes in not admitting of two Emperors Henry the fourth and Frederick Barbarossa to their presence without aâ—â—â—â—â—â—me kind of subuission the one by appoathing vpon his bare seet the other by subiecting his neck vnto the Popes feet while as the Popes one may brag of more fauor then the first and his asse thou the second So you but your scoffes rebound vpon your owne head and turne to your shame for Henry the fourth a most flagitious Emperor was excommunicated by Gregory the seauenth moued and solicited therto by the many complaints and extreme importunity of all the Princes Ecclesiasticall and secular of Germany Henry seeing himselfe for saken by them all and fearing least they would depriue him of his Empire vnlesse he reconciled himselfe to the Church and procured absolution from the excommunication he had incurred came of his owne accord to the Pope and presented himselfe vnto him in a penitentiall habit and bare-foot crauing absolution which after three dayes instance the Pope granted him hauing inuited him to dinner courteously dismissed him This in briefe is the story related more at large by Baronius (m) Anno 1077. who hauing proued that this pennance was no way extorted by the Pope but freely done by the Emperor conuinceth Ben no that affirmed the contrary of a most impudent lye told reclamantibus omnibus Authoribus against the agreeing consent of all Authors Wherfore you in alleaging Baronius for your author that we make a barbarous boast of the Popes not admitting this Emperor without approaching on his bare feet impose falsly on Baronius as Benno did on the Pope And as litle truth do I find in that your other tale of Fredericus Barbarossa for we are so farre from making any boast therof that we know it to be a mere fable in proofe wherof you bring nothing but the bare testimony of Massonius who whether he report it or no I know not nor is it worth the examining for you know him to be a moderne fabulous and forbidden Author (n) In indice lib. prohib and that this fable of his is disproued by Baronius (o) Anno 1177. n. 86.87 and Bellarmine (p) in Apol. c. 16. out of the testimonies of Roger Houeden an historian of that time Romualdus Archbishop of Salernum who being present and an eye witnesse of all that passed writeth that Frederick falling downe prostrate at the Popes feet the Pope with teares did most courteously lift him vp in his armes But
confirmed by the B. of Rome (b) Ibid. l. 3. c. 5.8 30. that all former Councells haue required their doctrines to be confirmed and authorized by him Why do you then produce him as a witnesse for the contrary Gerson and Canus are both falsified by you for Gerson in the place you cite hath no such doctrine but the contrary which els where he expresseth (c) To. 1. in Consider de paâ—â— Consid 1. saying Constat quod in materijs fidei terminandis error non cadit in Concilio generali c. It is manifest that in deciding controuersies of fayth a generall Councell cannot erre And the Doctors yeild the reason because of the speciall assistence of the holy Ghost and of Christ gouerning the Church and not permitting it to erre in those things which it cannot attaine by humane industry Canus sayth that generall Councells lawfully gathered may erre in fayth as the second of Ephesus did This is his second conclusion which you lay hold of concealing that in his third conclusion which he presently addeth he sayth That a generall Councell confirmed by the Pope cannot erre and condemneth your doctrine as absolutely hereticall Is it not then extreme perfidiousnesse to Father on him the contrary and to make Catholike Doctors Patrons of your Errors But to declare what is necessary that a generall Councell may not erre you adde (d) Pag. â—66 fin 367. The difference betweene the Roman Church and the Church of the Protestants is no more but this that the Romanists say that all generall Councells may erre except they be confirmed and authorized by the Pope but Protestants say that all generall Councells may erre except they be directed by the spirit of Gods word This indeed you say and yet leaue the question vnansweared for we likewise say that euery Councell which is not directed by the spirit of Gods word may erre The question is how it may be knowne when a Councell defineth according to Gods word and when not for Gods word may be misinterpreted Wherof Tertullian speaking truly said (e) L. de praescrip An adulterate glosse doth as much outrage to the truth as a false pen. And S. Hilary (f) L. 2 de Triâ— init There haue bene many who haue interpreted the heauenly words otherwayâ—â— then the truth did require according to the sense of their own will not for the establishing of truth for heresy is not in the writing but in the vnderstanding the fault is not in the word but in the sense And doth not S. Hierome likewise say (g) In Ep. ad Gal. c. 1. The Ghospell is not in the words but in the sense And doth not S. Augustine cry out (i) In Ioan. tract 13. Heresies and peruerse doctrine which entangle soules cast them headlong into hell haue their birth nowhere but from good Scriptures ill vndeestood And againe (k) De Gen. ad lit l. 7. c. 9. Heretikes were not heretikes but that misunderstanding the Scripture they defend obstinatly their owne false opinions against the truth therof And in another place (l) Ep. 2â—â— All heretikes which receaue the Scriptures thinke they follow them when they follow their owne Errors Of the same subiect Lyrinensis discourseth largely and learnedly (m) Chap. 1â— 30.37 shewing that the Diuel alleaged Scriptures against Christ that all Heretikes alleage them against the Church in defence of their errors which made S. Hierome say (n) In Ep. ad Gal. c. 1. that there is great daÌ„ger in speaking in the Church for feare lest by a wrong interpretation the Ghospell of Christ be made the Ghospell of man or which is worse the Ghospell of the Diuell And speaking of the Luciferians (o) Aduers Lucifer versus fin who boasted of the Scriptures as Protestants doe Let them not statter themselues to much because they seeme to haue Scripture for what they affirme for euen the Diuell hath alleaged Scriptures which consist not in reading but in vnderstanding Wherfore it is not sufficient to alleage Scriptures We alleage them and you alleage them but we disagree concerning the true sense and meaning of them from whom shall we learne it If Luther may as your fore-man speake for you all you and none but you and that by your priuate spirit must deliuer the true sense of them We sayth Luther (p) L. de serâ—â— arbit receaue nothing but the Scriptures and them so also that we our selues only haue certaine authority to expound them As we vnderstand them so was the meaning of the Holy Ghost what others bring be they neuer so great neuer so many preceedeth from the spirit of Sathan and from a mad and alimated mind So Luther And as he challenged to himselfe this priuiledge of deliuering the true sense of Scripture so his disciples haue challenged the same to themselues This spirit it is which hath hatched so many viperous sects no lesse disagreeing among themselues then all of them straying from the truth And yet you all boast of Scripture and all proclaime that you follow the word of God And no maruaile for the Diuell sayth Lyrinensis (q) Cap. 37 3â— knoweth right well that when wicked errors are to be broached the readiest way to deceaue is to alleage stifly the authority of diuine Scripture What then shall Catholike men Children of our Mother the Church do Let them interpret the diuine Canon according to the tradition of the vniuersall Church The truth of Scripture sayth S. Augustine (r) Cont. Crescon l. 1. c. 33. is held by vs when we do that which pleaseth the vniuersall Church whom the authority of the same Scriptures recommendeth And againe (s) Ibid. c. 31. Whosoeuer feareth to be deceaued through the obscurity of this question let him consult with that Church which the holy Scripture hath designed without any ambiguity This Church it is of which God pronounced by the mouth of Isay (t) Isa 54.17 Thou shalt iudge euery tongue that resisteth thee in iudgment Of this Christ hath promised (u) Math. 16.18 that the gates of hell which are Errors shall not preuâ—ile against her Of this he hath said (x) Math. 18.17 that whosoeuer heares her not is to be held as a Heathen a Publican In this he hath placed (y) Ad Ephes 4.11 17. Apostles Prophets Euangelists Pastors and Doctors c. that we may not be litle Children wauering and carried away with euery blast of doctrine This Church these Pastors these Doctors all Christians must heare and imbrace their exposition of Scripture as the true meaning of the holy Ghost Christ himselfe hauing said (z) Luc. 10.6 that who heareth them heareth him and S. Iohn (a) â— Ioan. 4.6 by this marke distinguisheth Orthodoxe people from Heretikes that the Orthodoxe heare and obey the Pastors and Doctors of Gods Church which heretikes refuse to do We are sayth he of God he that knoweth God heareth vs He
from error in their definitions of fayth hath bene the beliefe of all Orthodoxe antiquity (m) See aboue Chap. 12. sect 1. 2. Nor do you produce here any thing to the contrary which hath not bene proued to be imposterous excepting only that here you charge the new Church of Rome for so you call it with belieuing the conclusion of the Pope in matters of fayth to be infallible albeit he vse no diligence at all for the directing of his iudgment which is say you the strong breath of an Anabaptisticall and Enthusiasticall spirit We are well assured what spirit guydeth your pen. Do you find this doctrine authorized by the Church of Rome In what Councell By what Pope In your margent you cite Valentia in the seauenth Chapter of his Analysis which is to cite at randome and falsly for that worke of Valentia consisteth of eight bookes you specify none of them nor are the words you obiect to be found in the seauenth Chapter of any one of those eight bookes I find some such in the third Chapter of his last booke where as also afterwards againe (n) Analy l. 8. c. 10. he professedly disputeth what meanes the Pope is bound to vse in his definitions of fayth and whether the infallibility of his iudgment depend vpon those meanes In which question Valentia teacheth nothing but what is the most receaued opinion of Deuines and most agreeable to truth There seemeth to be some disagreement in this point among the Schoole-Doctors some saying that the Pope cannot erre if he proceed maturely hearing the counsell of Pastors and Learned men Others of which number Valentia is affirming that he cannot erre though he define alone without deliberation and consultation But these two opinions differ in words only not in reality of truth for when the authors of the former opinion say that to define the Pope is bound to proceed maturely taking the aduice of a Councell or of men wise learned and skilfull in the matter which is to be determined to the end he may not erre they say not this to signify that the infallibility of his definition consisteth in or proceedeth from the wisdome and learning of his Counsellors but only to shew that he is bound to proceed prudently and maturely And so likewise when Valentia and authors of the second opinion say that if the Pope should define alone without a Councell of Bishops or aduice of other learned men he could not erre they say it not to deny that he is bound to vse such meanes but to signify that the infallibility of his definition consisteth not in them but in his owne authority and warrant which he hath from Christ of not erring And this is the meaning of Valentia as in that very place he expresly declareth Nor do I see what you can find therin either absurd or vntrue But if you curiously demand Whether the Pope may erre in case he proceed to define inconsideratly and rashly Valentia and all Catholike Doctors will answeare that your Question implieth a Condition impossible for the Pope in his definitions cannot proceed immaturely The Philosophers say Qui dat formam dat consequentia ad formam He that giues the forme giues also the dispositions necessary for the forme And he that giueth the end giueth also such meanes as are necessary for the attaining of the end Wherfore Christ hauing made promise to the See Apostolike that the gates of hell shall not preuaile against her and that the successors of S Peter shall not faile in confirming their brethren it belongeth to his diuine prouidence so to direct gouerne and assist him that he proceed not to define without sufficient deliberation and maturity If sayth S. Augustine (o) De vtil ered c. 10. the prouidence of God be not the Gouernesse of humane affaires no regard is to be bad of religion But if all this variety of Creatures do I know not with what interior knowledge mooue vs to seeke God and to serue God surely we ought not to be diffident but that there is some authority constituted by the same God wheron we relying as vpon a certaine step may ascend vnto God SECT VII Whether there be in the Scripture any Prophesy that the Church of Rome shall fall from the fayth THat Christ hath prophesied of the Church of Rome that she shall neuer fall from the fayth hath bene alredy proued (p) Chap 12. sect 1. 2. Your third Thesis to the contrary is that there is not in all the Scripture any prophesy of the fall of any Church Christian from the fayth Pag. 377. but only of the Church of Rome from which it may somtime be necessary to depart Which is in effect to say that there is in the Scripture a prophesy that the Church of Rome shall fall from the fayth In proofe of this you remit vs to the testimony of two Iesuits Ribera and Viegas that the city of Rome shall in the end of the world be the seat of Antichrist which is not their doctrine but a calumnious slander of yours They hold with the ancient Fathers that not Rome but Hierusalem shall be the Seat of Antichrist The Euangelist sayth Ribera (r) Ad cap. 11. Apocalyp n. 20. fin 21. init calling Hierusalem a great city signifieth not obscurely that she shall be great at that time in power and in number of Citizens to wit when Antichrist shall raigne in her being receaued of the Iewes and honored as the true Messias This city both because she killed our Lord and because then she shal be the Court of Antichrist full of all wickednesse and impiety he calleth Sodome and Aegypt c. for what sinne and impiety will she not be guilty of Antichrist raigning in her So Ribera from whom Viegas dissenteth not Say now Can there be a more shamfull imposture then to impute to these learned Authors your owne falsities theron to ground your calūnies against the Church of Rome as vpon truthes asserted by them Such Arguments are indeed fit proofes to iustify your departure from her But were it true that the City of Rome in the end of the world shall be the Seat of Antichrist doth that any way iustify your present departure from the Roman Church Looke back vpon what hath bene sayd you shall find how little those words Goe out of Babilon my people make for you and that euen according to your Protestant Expositors they are wholly against you In your fourth Thesis (s) Pag. 378. which is That the Church of Rome hath long bene and still is the most schismaticall Church of all other Churches Christian that carry in them a visible face of a Church you bring nothing but what hath bene already answeared point by point SECT VIII Whether Luther were iustly excommunicaeed TO proue that he was iniustly excōmunicated you say (t) Pag. 381. Luthers excommunication by Pope Leo must haue bene either for manners or
Doctor Mortons late Sermon preached in the Cathedrall Church of Durham answeared pag. 495. The sense of S. Pauls words which Doctor Morton tooke for his text declared Sect. 1. pag. 496. Ancient Popes obiected and falfified by Doctor Morton Sect. 2 pag. 501. Other Fathers and Catholike authors obiected by Doctor Morton Sect. 3. pag. 507. Doctor Morton slaundereth Vrban Pope and with him all Catholikes Sect. 4. pag. 510. Doctor Morton obiecteth the Bull of Maundy-thursday Sect. 5. pag. 512. Other slanderous accusations of Doctor Morton answeared Sect. 6. pag. 514. The same matter prosecuted Sect. 7. pag. 517. CHAP. XXXIV Doctor Mortons doctrine condemneth the Saints and Martyrs of God pag. 522. S. Policarpe obiected by Doctor Morton Sect. 1. ibid. S. Cyprian obiected by Doctor Morton Sect. 2. pag. 523. S. Athanasius obiected by Doctor Morton Sect. 3. pag. 525. S. Basils beliefe of the supreme authority of the B. of Rome proued and Doctor Mortons obiections answeared Sect. 4. pag. 528. Whether S. Hilary excommunicated the Pope Sect. 5. p. 533. S. Hieroms iudgment concerning the necessity of vnion with the Church of Rome and subiection to the Bishop therof Sect. 6. pag. 536. S. Ambrose his iudgment concerning the necessity of Vnion and subiection to the Bishop and Church of Rome Sect. 7. pag. 545. S. Augustines iudgment concerning the necessity of Vnion with the Church of Rome and subiection to the Bishop therof Sect. 8 pag. 552. S. Hilary B. of Aries acknowledged himselfe subiect to the B. of Rome Sect. 9. pag. 558. CHAP. XXXV Of titles attributed to the Pope p. 561. CHAP. XXXVI The nullity of Doctor Mortons answeares to the testimonies of ancient Fathers discouered pa. 571. Some of his answeares examined Sect. 1. ibid. Others of Doctor Mortons answeares to the Ancient Fathers examined Sect. 2. pag. 574 Doctor Mortons answeare to the testimony of Acacius examined Sect. 3. pag. 577. Doctor Mortons answeare to Vincentius Lyrinensis confuted Sect. 4. pag. 581. Doctor Morton in his answeare to Optatus contradicteth himselfe Sect. 5. pag. 582. Other vntruthes of Doctor Morton discouered his cauilling against the title of Holinesse giuen to the Pope Sect. 6. pag. 583. CHAP. XXXVII Of the authority of the Epistles of ancient Popes pag. 587. Of the Epistles of Popes liuing within the first 300. yeares after Christ Sect. 1. pag. 588. The nullity of Doctor Mortons answeares to the testimonies of Popes that liued in the second 300. yeares after Christ Sect. 2. pag. 592. CHAP. XXXVIII The vniuersall iurisdiction of the B. of Rome proued by the exercise of his authority ouer other Bishops pag. 600. The Popes vniuersall authority proued by the institution confirmation of Bishops And of the vse and signification of the Pall or mantle granted to Archbishops Sect. 1. p. 601. A shift of Doctor Morton reiected Sect. 2. pag. 604. The Popes power of instituting and confirming Bishops proued by examples Sect. 3 pag. 605. The Popes power of deposing Bishops without a Councell proued by examples Sect. 4. pag. 608. The Popes power of restoring Bishops without a Councell Sect. 5. pag. 611. Doctor Morton to Crosse the Popes authority in restoring Bishops deposed takes part with the Arians and iustifies their impious proceedings against S. Athanasius other Catholike Bishops Sect. 6. pag. 612. Other passages of Doctor Morton examined Sect. 7. pa. 618. Doctor Mortons ignorance concerning excommunication And of Heretikes excommunicating the Pope Sect. 8. p. 621. Adrian and Nicolas Popes obiected by Doctor Morton Sect. 9. pag. 623. Of the deposition of Flauianns Patriarke of Antioch Sect. 10. pag. 624. Doctor Morton in defence of his doctrine chargeth ancient Bishops which exercising Acts of authority out of the limits of their owne iurisdiction Sect. 11. pag. 631. CHAP. XXXIX Of Appeales to Rome decreed in the Councell of Sardica pag. 635. Whether the Councell of Sardica were a generall Councell Sect. 1. ibid. Other obiections of Doctor Morton against Appeales to Rome answeared Sect. 2. pag. 637. Examples of innocent Appellants Sect. 3. pag. 638. Doctor Mortons ignorance concerning the antiquity of appealing to Rome from remote nations Sect. 4. pag. 639. That S. Athanasius appealed to Iulius Pope and Theodoret to Leo as to absolute Iudges and that by their authority both of them were restored to their Churches Sect. 5. p. 641. That S. Chrysoftome appealed to Innocentius Pope as to an absolute Iudge and by his authority was restored to his Church of Constantinople Sect. 6. pag. 643. That Flauianus appealed to Leo Pope as to an absolute Iudge Sect. 7. pag. 648. Of Nilus equalling the B. of Constantinople with the Pope in his right of Appeales Sect. 8. pag. 650. The rest of Doctor Mortons Arguments against Appeales to Rome Sect. 9. pag. 653. CHAP. XL. Whether the Easterne Churches be at this day accordant in Communion with Protestants pag. 654. The state of the question Sect. 1. ibid. Whether the Grecians of the primitiue and successiue times agreed in Fayth and Communion with the Bishop and Church of Rome and particularly at the Councell of Florence Sect. 2. pag. 655. That many of the Grecians at this day are of the Roman Communion and professe subiection to the B. of Rome Sect. 3. pag. 662. Of the Aegyptians Sect. 4. pag. 663. Of the Aethiopians Sect. 5. pag. 664. Of the Armenians Sect. 6. pag. 665. Of the Russians Sect. 7. pag. 666. Of the Aslyrians Sect. 8. ibid. Of the Antiochians Sect. 9 pag. 668. Of the Africans Sect. 10 pag. 669. Of the Asians Sect. 11. ibid. CHAP. XXXXI That in the forenamed countries there are no Christians that agree in fayth Communion with Protestants pag. 669. The Grecians which are not of the Roman communion are absolute Heretikes And Doctor Morton falsifieth Catholike Authors to excuse them Sect. 1. pag. 670. Of the Lutherans of Germany writing to Hieremy Patriarke of Constantinople to be admitted into the communion of the Greeke Church and his answeare to them Sect. 2. pag. 674. A particular instance of Ignatius Patriarke of Constantinople produced by Doctor Morton to proue that he dissented from the Roman Church examined Sect. 3. pag. 678. The Aegyptians Aethiopians Armenians Russians Melchites Africans and Asians which call themselues Christians and be not of the Roman communion are absolute Heretikes Sect. 4. pag. 679. CHAP. XXXXII. Doctor Mortons plea for his Protestant Church pag. 683. The small extent of the Protestant Church proueth her not to be the Catholike Church Sect. 1. ibid. Whether the Protestant Church be free from error in doctrine Sect. 2. pag. 686. Doctor Mortons pretended purity of manners in his Protestant Church ect 3. pag. 687. That Protestants by Schisme haue diuided themselues from the Catholike Church Sect. 4. pag. 688. CHAP. XXXXIII Of the Head of the Roman Church compared to the body therof pag. 691. Whether it be matter of fayth that the Pope is aboue a Councell Sect. 1. ibid. Whether it be matter of fayth that this
those monstrous Titles wherewith you slaunder our Doctrine most fitly agree to your owne deliuered in your Grand Imposture But before I come to ioyne issue with you concerning the particulers it will not be amisse to examine briefly in generall whether the ancient Fathers and Doctors of Gods Church whom you acknowledge to haue liued vpon earth in the true fayth and now to be most glorious Saints in heauen were of your beliefe concerning the Roman Church or of ours for they being lights of the world (x) Math. 5.15 whom God hath raised in all ages and placed on the candlesticke of his Church to enlighten our wayes and deliuer vnto vs the true sense and meaning of his holy word that we may not be like children wauering and caried away with euery blast of heretical (y) Ephef 4.14 Doctrine I suppose that as there is no wiseman who will not desire to be rancked among them in the next world and to stand with them at the later day so there is none that will not desire to be in this world a member of the same Church and a professor of the same fayth which brought them to that happines especially knowing as we doe that there is bur one Church in which and one fayth by which meÌ„ may be saued for to thinke that so many men so eminently learned and that vsed so great meanes both of study and prayer to attaine to the knowledge of truth and of the right way to heauen haue all erred not liuing in the true Church which leades to saluation but in an erring Synagogue that leades to euerlasting ruine and damnation is a conceipt that I thinke no Christian and I am sure no prudent man can harbour in his brest which yet he must doe that will credit your Doctrine as the ensuing proofes will declare SECT II. Whether the Roman Church be truly called the Catholike Church and in what sense ALthough the Name of Catholike Church whether we regard the etimology or the most proper and vsuall acception of the word Catholike signify not any particuler Church but the Vniuersall spread ouer the whole world yet with-all it is true that euery particuler Church may in some sense be called Catholike for as euery particuler Orthodoxe man hath the denomination of a Catholike man because he professeth the Catholike fayth and is a member of the Vniuersall Church so for the same reason and in the same sense both the particuler Church of Rome and all others orthodoxall may be called Catholike Churches In this sense the Christians of Smyrna writing to the Churches of Pontus (z) Euseb l. 4. histor c. 14. addresse their Epistle To the Church of God at Philomelium and to all other the holy Catholike Churches throughout the world In the same sense Constantine (a) In Apolog 2. Athaâ—asij the Emperour calleth the Church of Athanasius The Catholike Church of Alexandria by reason of the Catholike fayth which it preserued entire whiles many other Churches of Aegypt were infected with Arianisme And so likewise (b) Cont. ep Fund c 4. S. Augustine with whom agree (c) Epist. 1. Pacianus and Cyrill of Hierusalem (d) Cateches 18. sayth that if a stranger come into a Citty infected with Heresy and enquire for the Catholike Church euen the Heretiks themselues will not direct him to any Church of theirs but to a Church in which Catholikes meete to serue God In this sense as other particuler Churches so also the Roman euen as she is a particuler Church limited to the Dioces of Rome may haue the name of A Catholike Church But when we say No man can be saued that is not a member of the Roman Church we speake not of the Roman Church in this sense for Catholikes of other Dioceses may be saued aswell as of the Roman but by the Roman Church we vnderstand the Vniuersall Church comprehending both that of the Roman Dioces and all other particuler Churches that professe subiection to her follow her Doctrine and imbrace her communion for all these by adherence to her and vnion with her make one mysticall body of Christ and one holy Catholike or vniuersall Church of which she is the Head and the rest members For the better vnderstanding of this we are to consider seuerall dignities vnited in the person of the Bishop of Rome He is Bishop Arch-bishop Patriarke and Pope As he is Bishop his iurisdiction is confined to the Citty of Rome and other townes within her territories of which the Roman Dioces consisteth As he is Archbishop he hath subiect vnto him some few others the chiefest of which is the Bishop of Ostia As he is Patriarke the extent of his authority is ouer all the Westerne or Latin Church And finally as he is Pope that is to say the Successor of S. Peter and the chiefe Vicar or Lieutenant of Christ vpon earth he is the supreme Pastor Gouernor of the whole Church of God which is vniuersally spread ouer the face of the earth wheresoeuer the name of Christ is known which therfore is absolutely and without limitation called the Catholike Church In regard of this transcendent authority of the Bishop of Rome he is rightly stiled Bishop of the Vniuersall or Catholike Church to whom therefore all the members of the Church aswell Pastors as people by the institution of Christ owe subiection and obedience And as he is the head and Father of all Bishops so the particular Church of the Roman Dioces is the head and Mother of all Churches Now that not only the particuler Church of the Roman Dioces but also the whole body of the Catholike or vniuersall Church consisting of the Roman as head and the rest as members is likewise rightly and in a true and proper sense stiled the Roman Church I proue out of S. Augustine saying (e) De percato orig l. 2. c. 17. that against the Pelagians not only the Councels of Bishops and the See Apostolike but also vniuersam Romanam Ecclesiam the whole Roman Church and the Roman Empire were most iustly incensed where by the Roman Church he vnderstands the vniuersall or Catholike Church spread ouer the world as by the Roman Empire he vnderstands the Empire of the Romans spread ouer the world And the same I proue by examples For when we speake of the Iewish people or the Iewish Church we vnderstand not the tribe of Iuda only but all the rest of the tribes that were ioyned therwith S. Iohn Baptist was of the tribe of Leui S. Paul of the tribe of Beniamin and that holy widow Anna mentioned by S. Luke (d) Cap. 2.36 of the tribe of Aser and yet they all are rightly called Iewes parts of the Iewish people and members of the Iewish Church by reason of their adherence to and communion with the principall tribe which was that of Iuda Likewise vnder the name of the Greeke Church are not comprehended the naturall Greeks only for
Can. pag. 199. The same appeares by the testimony which Venerable Bede giues of Oswin King of Northumberland who by meanes of a famous disputation held between Colman a Scottish Abbot and Wilfrid a learned Priest of the Britans for the decision of certaine points of Religion wherein the Britans and Scots at that tyme disagreed was conuerted to the Roman Church and thereupon with the aduice of Egbert king of Kent sent Wigandus a Priest to Rome to be ordained Archbishop there to the end that returning he might ordayne Bishops throughout all Britany for sayth Bede Oswin though brought vp by the Scots (y) L. 3. hist. Angl. c. 29. had rightly vnderstood that the Roman Church is the Catholike and Apostolike Church These testimonies sufficiently proue that the most holy and learned Fathers as also the Orthodox Christians of former ages did belieue that the Roman Church was the Catholike Church and that to be deuided from the Roman Church was to be no Catholike but a Schismatike And that it may appeare how like you that deny this truth are to the Arian Heretikes it will not be amisse to shew that they knew Catholike and Roman to be all one and that because they would not grace Catholikes with the name of Catholikes they called them Romans or Romanists as at this day you call vs shewing your selues to be of the same spirit with the Arians Victor that famous African Bishop of Vrica writeth to this (z) L. 2. de persecut Vandal purpose that Iocundus an Arian speaking to king Theodoricus sayd Thou maiest make an end of Armogastus with diuers afflictions for if thou put him to death by the sword the Romanists will proclayme him a Martyr And of another Martyr he reporteth (a) Ibid. that being questioned by the Arians concerning his fayth he professed himself to be a Catholike saying Romanus sum I am a Roman (b) Apud Baron amo 471. In like manner Ermodius reporteth of the Nobility of the Ligures that proposing to Ricimer an Arian Goth a man fit to sollicite a peace they said Si Catholicus est Romanus if he be a Catholike then is he a Romanist And S. Gregory of Tours reporteth of an Arian Prince (c) De glor Mars c. 25. that thinking within himself be sayd It is the fashion of the Romans so they call men of our religion to attribute it to chance and not to the power of God And againe he reporteth this speach of one Arian to â—n (d) Ibid. c. 361 other If thou wilt but harken to my Counsell we will this day make our selues merry laughing hartily at this Romish Priest And speaking of the Arians that were in France (e) Ibid. c. 79. what thinke you sayd one of them will these Romanists now say And what thinke you now Doctor Morton what will you say Do not these testimonies conuince that in the language and beliefe of antiquity Catholike and Roman did signify the same Church the same fayth and the same Orthodoxall people Or what may we thinke of you that either are so ignorant as not to know this Or if you know it so malicious as to deny it to call it an insultation of ours and to censure it as Schismaticall hereticall temerarious impious sacrilegious Antichristian c. SECT IV. That whosoeuer is out of the Roman Church is out of the state of Saluation THis truth is euidently deduced out of the premises already proued by this syllogisticall argument Whosoeuer is out of the Catholike Church is out of the state of Saluation This maior Proposition you grant and it hath beene already proued (f) Hoc cap. sect 1. But whosoeuer is out of the Roman Church is out of the Catholike Church This also hath bene (g) Hoc cap. sect 3. and shall be throughout this whole Apology effectually proued The consequent then is euident in Barbara Ergo whosoeuer is out of the Roman Church is out of the state of Saluation But yet in further confirmation of this consequent it will not be amisse to heare the ancient Fathers themselues speake and testify the truth therof in their owne language For so teacheth that ancient and learned Bishop S. Irenaeus who liued soone after the Apostles and was Disciple to their Disciples He prescribing a certaine rule to know and distinguish the Catholike Church from the conuenticles of Heretikes sayth (h) L. 3. c. 3. that All Churches and all the faithfull from all places must necessarily agree with the Roman Church by reason of her more powerfull principality that is by reason of the soueraignety of the See Apostolike and the neuer-interrupted succession of Bishops in that See which succession sayth he is (i) Ibid. a conuincing demonstration that the same fayth which was preached by the Apostles is still conserued in that Church and therefore (k) L. 4. c. 43. that all such as withdrawe themselues from this principall succession we ought sayth he to hold them as Heretikes of a peruerse iudgement or as Schismatikes and selfe-liking presumptuous fellowes And as S. IrenÄ™us alleaged this neuer interrupted succession of twelue Bishops vntill his tyme in the Roman Church as in the head Church of the world which therfore he calleth the principall succession if I say he alleaged this against the heretikes of those primitiue tymes as a conuincing demonstration to proue that they hauing departed from the Roman Church in which that principall succession was to be found had therby departed from the Catholike Church and forsaken true fayth deliuered by the Apostles far greater reason had Tertullian (l) De praescrip Eusebius (m) L. 5. hist. c. 6. S. Epiphanius (n) Haeres 27. S. Ierome (o) Dial. cont Lucifer Optatus S. Augustine (p) Lib. 2. cont Parm. and other Fathers of after ages to all eage the same succession of longer Continuance against the Heretikes of their tymes to conuince them to be such And (q) Ep. 165. Psal contra part Donati â—f diuers of these Fathers as Irenaeus Tertullian Eusebius S. Epiphanius Optatus and S. Augustine haue reckoned vp by name all the Bishops of the Roman Church against the Heretikes of their tymes we may now iustly reckon a â—ar greater number of them coÌ„tinued vntill these our dayes â—gainst Protestants to proue them to be out of the true Church in which only this neuer interrupted succession is to be found and wish them as S. Augustine (r) Psal contra part Donati did the Donatists not to lye cut of from this succession that being â—he Rock against which the proud gates of hell preuaile â—ot So teacheth S. Cyprian saying (s) L. 1. ep 8. There is one God and â—ne Christ. one chayre built vpon Peter out of which whosoeuer gathereth scattereth that is maketh a Schisme in the Church â—s the Nouatians did against whom he writeth And why did he reioyce (t) L. 4. ep â— to heare that Antonianus
which there is a continued Succession of Bishops from S. Peter cannot be the Protestant Church which hath no such succession but the Roman it followeth that S Augustine held the Roman Church to be the Catholike Church and therefore he grieued to see the Donatists lye cut off from her as branches from the vine Be yee ingraffed on the Vine sayth he to the (m) Psal contra part Donati Donatists It is a griefe to vs to see you so lye cut of number the Priests euen from the See of Peter and consider in that ranke of Fathers who succeeded whom That is the Rocke which the proud gates of hell ouercome not And as in these words S. Augustine sheweth the miserable estate of those then that are diuided from the Roman Church so on the contrary he declareth the happinesse and security of all that are in coÌ„munion which her when speaking of Cecilianus Archbishop of Carthage who had bene condemned by a numerous Councell of Donatist Bishops in Africa he sayth (n) Ep. 162. Cecilianus might haue contemned the conspiring multitude of his enemies because he knew himself to be vnited by communicatory letters both to the Church of Rome in which the Soueraygnty of the See Apostolike hath alwayes florished and to other Countreys from whence the Ghospell came first into Africa So teacheth Possidius Bishop of Calama a familiar friend to S. Augustine whose life he writ and therein reporteth (o) Cap. 18. that when Innocentius and Zozimus had condemned the Pelagians the most religious Emperor Honorius hearing of this sentence of the Catholike Church pronounced against them obeyed it condemning also by his lawes ordayned that they should be ranked among heretikes By which it appeares that the Roman Church was then held to be the Catholike Church her iudgment in matters of fayth to be infallible and that the Emperors by their lawes seconded her iudgment comdemning as Heretikes those whom she had condemned So teacheth S. Cyril Patriarke of Alexandria explicating those words of our (p) Math. 16. Sauiour Thou art Peter and vpon this Rock I will build my Church and the gates of hell shall not preuaile against it According to this promise of our Lord sayth (q) Apud S. Thom. in Caten ad cap. 16. Math. he â—he Apostolical Church of Peter perseuereth in her Bishops pure free from all seduction circumuention aboue all Prelats bishops aboue all Primats of Churches and people most perfect in the fayth and authority of Peter And whereas other Churches haue bene stayned with the errors of some she alone remayns established firmely vnconquerably silencing and stopping the mouthes of all Heretikes we vpon necessity of saluation neither deceiued nor drunke with the wyne of pryde togeather which her confesse and preach the forme of truth and of holy Apostolicall tradition And (r) Apud S. Thom. Opusc 1. againe Let vs remayne as members in our head the Apostolicall throne of the Bishops of Rome from which it is our part to inquire what we ought to belieue and what to hold And lastly It is sayth the Angelicall (s) Ibid. Doctor proued necessary for saluation to yeild obedience to the Bishop of Rome for Cyril sayth in his booke of Treasures Therefore Brethren if we will imitate Christ let vs as his sheep heare his voyce remayning in the Church of Peter and let vs not be puffed vp with the wynd of pride least peraduenture the crooked serpent for our contention cast vs out as long since he cast Eue out of Paradyse So teacheth S. Peter for his golden eloquence surnamed Chrysologus exhorting Eutyches the Arch-heretike to leaue his heresy and learne the true fayth from the Church of (t) Epist. ad Eutych Rome We exhort thee Reuerend Brother to lend an obedient eare to the letters of the most holy Pope of the City of Rome for as much as the Blessed Peter who liues and rules in his owne seate exhibits the true fayth to those that seeke it So teacheth (u) L. de promiss prodict Dei part 4. c. 5. S. Prosper The Apostles Peter and Paul founded the Church of the Gentiles in the Citty of Rome where they taught the Doctrine of Christ our Lord and deliuered it to their Successors A Christian communicating with this generall Church is a Catholike but if he be separated from it he is an heretike and Antichrist So teacheth Arnobius (x) In psal 106. explicating the necessity of remayning in the Roman Church in these few but effectuall words He that goeth out from the Church of Peter perisheth for thirst Whereupon Erasmus sayth (y) Praefat. instruct Comment in Psalterium Arnobius seemes to yeild this honor to the Roman Church that whosoeuer is out of her is out of the Catholike Church So teacheth Iohn an ancient Patriarke of Constantinople (z) In ep ad Orientales who making profession of his fayth to Hormisdas (a) In ep ad Hormisd Pope acknowledged that in the See Apostolike the Catholike Religion is alwayes conserued inuiolable and that they who consent not fully with the See Apostolike are out of the communion of the Catholike Church So likewise teacheth S. Fulgentius Bishop of Ruspa and a famous Doctor of the African Church who togeather which other Bishops his Collegues made this answer to Peter a Deacon that had bene sent out of the (b) L. de incarnat grat c. 11. East The Roman Church enlightned with the words of the two great lights Peter Paul as with radiant beames and honoured with their bodies and which is also the top of the world without hesitation belieues so to iustice and doubtes not to Confesse so to saluation So he teaching that no Christian ought to make doubt of the fayth of the Roman Church Againe a Disciple of his that writ and dedicated his life to Felicianus his Successor reporteth that when Fulgentius going to the (c) Vita S. Fulgent c 11. Extat in Biblioth Pat. Edit Colon. tom 6. wildernes of Thebais to fast arriued at Syracusa Eulalius Bishop of that City dissuaded him with these words Thou doest well in aspiring to greater perfection but thou knowest that without fayth it is impossible to please God and that a perfidious dissention hath separated those Countreyes into which thou art trauelling from the communion of blessed Peter wherfore Sonne returne home least by seeking a more perfect life thou runne hazard of loosing the true fayth By which it is euident that the Roman Church was then held to be the Catholike Church and that all such as dissented from her Doctrine were out of the true fayth and incapable of Saluation So teacheth S. Leo the first Pope of that name for his admirable learning wisdome and sanctity surnamed The Great who writing to the Bishops of Vienne sayth (d) Epist. 89. Christ from the See of Peter as from a certaine Head powreth his gifts vpon the
whole body of his Church to the end that whosoeuer should be so bold as to depart from the solidity of that See might know himself to be no way partaker of the diuine mysteries And (e) Ibid. that whosoeuer goeth about to diminish the power of the Bishop of Rome endeauoreth with most impious presumption to viâ—late the most sacred strength of the Rock Peter framed by the hand of God And speaking against Hilary Bishop of Arles and all such as are refractary and disobedient to the Successors of Peter and in them to Peter himselfe he (f) Ibid. addeth To whom whosoeuer thinketh the primacy to be denied can no way diminish their authority but puffed vp with the spirit of pride plungeth himselfe headlong into hell And (g) Epist 75. that he who dare oppose the Roman Church built by the voyce of our Sauiour vpon the most blessed Peter Prince of the Apostles as vpon a rock is either Antichrist or a Diuel All these sayings of so learned a Doctor and so great a Saint I wish the Protestant reader duly to consider So teacheth the holy Councell of Chalcedon (h) Act. 3. affirming Peter the Apostle to be the rock and head of the Catholike Church and foundation of the true Fayth From whence it followeth that whosoeuer buildeth not vpon the foundation of Peters See is not in the Catholike Church nor in the true fayth without which no man can be saued So teacheth S. Gregory the Great who writing to Bonifacius (i) L. 3. ep 41. sayth I admonish you that whiles you haue tyme of lyfe remayning your soule be not found diuided from the Church of blessed Peter to whome the keyes of the kingdome of Heauen were committed and the power of binding and losing giuen lest his fauour be contemned here he there exclude you from the entrance into lyfe So teacheth S. I sidore a learned Doctor and Archbishop of Seuill (k) Ep. vltima ad Eugenium Episcop Toletanum saying that albeit the Episcopall dignity and power descend from S. Peter to all Catholike Bishops yet especially and by a fingular priuiledge it remayneth for euer to the Bishop of Rome as to a Head higher then the rest of the members whosoeuer therfore sayth he yelds not obedience reuerently to him is separated from the head and makes himself guilty of the schisme of the Acephalists that is of certain heretikes who acknowledged no one particular Head And he addes that the Church belieues this as the Creed of S. Athanasius and as an article of fayth and that whosoeuer belieues it not cannot be saued So teacheth S. Maximus Martyr the greatest Diuine of his age that writ learnedly against the Monothelites pestilent Heretikes that held but one will and operation in Christ and were anathematized in the sixth generall Councell He among other Elogies of the Roman Church hath (l) Epist ad Marinum Diac. this All the bounds of the earth and whosoeuer in any place of the world do confesse Christ our Lord with a pure hart and Orthodox fayth looke vpon the most holy Roman Church and her confession and fayth attentiuely as vpon a Sunne of euerlasting light receauing from her the shining light of spirituall and holy Doctrines c. For from the first comming of the Word Incarnate all the Churches of Christians throughout the world haue had from her their beginning their only and surest foundation against which the gates of hell shall no way preuaile according to the promise of our Sauiour himself that she shold haue the Keyes of Orthodoxall fayth and Confession and open to them that religiously come to the same Roman Church seeking true reall and only piety and contrariwise shut and stop euery hereticall mouth that speaks iniquity against heauen So teacheth S. Aldelmus an ancient Bishop of the Scots whom Venerable Bede highly commendeth for his eloquence for his great knowledge of humane literature of Scripture and Ecclesiasticall rites Among other his works which Bede reckoneth he writ an excellent booke against the error of the Britans who at that tyme differed from the Roman Church in the celebration of Easter And of the same subiect he writ an epistle to Geruntius in which he sheweth the Britans by reason of that their separation from the Roman Church to be in error (m) Epist ad Gerunt If sayth he the keyes of the heauenly kingdome were by Christ giuen to Peter of whom the Poet sayth He is the Porter of heauen that opens the gate to the stars who is he that despising the principall statutes of that Church and condemning the Doctrine which she commands to be obserued can enter into the gate of heauenly paradise And if Peter by a happy lot and a peculiar priuiledge deserued to receyue the power monarchy of binding both in heauen and earth who refusing to obserue the Roman rite of Easter can thinke that he is not rather to be straitly tied with in soluble bonds then any way to be absolued And the same he further proueth out of the priuiledge of not erring granted to the Roman Church when Christ promised to build his Church vpon Peter as vpon an impregnable rock So teacheth Venerable Bede (n) Homil. in die Apost Petri Pauli saying Therfore the blessed Peter confessing Christ with true fayth and following him with true loue receaued specially the keyes of the kingdome of heauen and the soueraignty of iudiciall power that all the faythfull throughout the world might vnderstand that whosoeuer do any way separate themselues from the Vnity of his fayth and society can neither be losed from the bonds of their sins nor come within the gate of the heauenly kingdome And speaking of a conference held betwene Colmannus an Abbot and Wilfridus a learned Priest concerning the celebration of Easter Colmannus defending the Iewish rite and Wilfridus the custome of the Roman Church Wilfridus said (o) Beda in histor gent. Ang. l. 3. c. 25. If you disdaine to follow the decrees of the See Apostolike yea and of the vniuersall Church they being confirmed by the holy Scriptures without all doubt you sinne for be it that your Columba was a holy man and of Christ likewise your Fathers yet is their smal number in a corner of a remote Iland to be preferred before the vniuersall Church of Christ And hauing in proofe of the Authority of the Roman Church alleaged the words of Christ promising to build his Church vpon Peter and to giue him the keyes of the kingdome of Heauen Of win king that was present at the conference demanded of the disputants whether both of them agreed in this that those words of our Sauiour were principally spoken to Peter and whether the keyes of the kingdome of heauen were giuen to him And they answering Yes the king (p) Ibid. concluded And I say to you that because Peter is that porter I will not gainsay him but so far forth as I
for if Luther had said nothing els Leo would not haue condemned him And to the same end you corrupt Philiarchus who say you will hâ—ue vs to take head of the heresies of Luther teaching that the Church hath no power to create new articles of fayth That word new is an addition of your owne to Philiarchus his text as his Latin words in your margeÌ„t conuince but what wonder since your worke is a Grand Imposture CHAP. V. That the word Roman is no deprauation but a true declaration of the article of the Catholike Church TO declare which is the catholike Church mentioned in the Apostles Creed we say it is the holy Apostolike Roman Church Against this you (g) Pag. 8. 9. 10. obiect that the word Roman is no true exposition and declaration but a notorious alteration and deprauation of the article of the Catholike Church This you proue with eight seuerall arguments set downe in so many sections SECT I. Your first Argument YOVR first is (h) Pag. 9. that because the Catholike Church mentioned in the Apostles Creed by the accordance of S. Augustine and other our Diuines comprehendeth both the triumphant and the militant Church the word Roman which caÌ„not be a declaration of the Catholike Church as she is triumphant but only as she is militant can no way be a declaration of the Catholike Church mentioned in the Apostles Creed So you forgetting your selfe for heere you hold that the Catholike Church mentioned in the Apostles Creed comprehendeth both the triumphant Church and the militant but els where contradicting your (i) Pag. 365. selfe you define the Church properly Catholike set downe in the Symbolor Creed of the Apostles to be the Church militant videlicet the multitude of Christian belieuers whensoeuer and wheresoeuer dispersed throughout the world and the congregation of Christians assembled in a generall Synod to be the representatiue body of the Church in the Symbol properly called Catholike From whence it followeth against your selfe that the word Roman may be a true declaration of the Catholike Church mentioned in the Apostles Creed which by your owne definition is the multitude of all Christian belieuers dispersed throughout the world for this definition can no way agree to the Church triumphant where the cleare vision of the diuine essence excludeth fayth but to the militant only consisting of all Christian belieuers And because true Christian beliefe is to be found only in the Roman Church it followeth that the woro Roman is a true declaration of the Catholike Church mentioned in the Apostles Creed 2. Be it that the Catholike Church mentioned in the Creed taken in her whole latitude comprehendeth both the militant and the triumphant yet in your argument you mistake the state of the question for when we declare the Catholike Church to be the Roman Church we speake not of her taken in her whole latitude but only as she is militant And this you know right well for whiles in this Imposture you so often rayle at vs for holding the Roman Church to be the Catholike Church out of which there is no hope of saluation you sufficiently declare that you know vs to speake of the Catholike Church as she is militant only for she only is in hope of saluation the triumphant already enioyeth it I conclude therfore that your argument is grounded on a wilfull mistake of the question which as you cannot defend without contradicting your selfe so neither without wronging S. Augustine for when he sayth that the Catholike Church comprehendeth both the militant and the triumphant he speaketh of her taken in her whole latitude but that the may and euen in the Apostles Creed be taken for the militant only he expresly declareth in his explication of the same Creed where teaching the Catechumenists which is the Catholike Church mentioned in the Creed he (k) De Symb. ad Catechum l. 1. c. 6. sayth We belieue the Catholike Church She is the holy Church one Church the true Church the Catholike Church fighting against all heresies she may be opposed but she caÌ„not be ouerthrowne All heresies are gone eut from her as vnprofitable branches cut of from the Vine but she remaynes in her roote in her Vine in her charity the gates of hell shall neuer ouercome her In these words S. Augustine teacheth the catechumenists to belieue that the Catholike Church mentioned in the Apostles Creed is the Church militant built vpon S. Peters Chayre as vpon a rock against which the gates of hell can not preuaile And the same he declareth when speaking to the Donatists he denounceth vnto them that because they were out of the Roman Church they were out of the Catholike Church and out of the state of Saluation Be yee ingrafted sayth (*) Psal cont part Donati he on the Vine It grieueth vs to see you lye so cut of Number the Priests euen from the See of Peter and consider in that ranke of Fathers who succeeded ech other That is the rock which the proud gates of hell ouercome not That Church therfore in which there is a neuer interrupted succession of Bishops from S. Peter is in S. Augustines beliefe the Catholike Church Do not you then abuse S. Augustine producing his authority to proue that the catholike church mentioned in the Creed cannot be the Church militant since he so expresly teacheth the contrary yea and not only that she is the militant Church but in particular that she is the Roman Church built vpon S. Peter and his successors and that whosoeuer is diuided from her is an vnprofitable branch cut of from the Vine which is Christ our Lord and therfore no lesse deuoyd of spirituall life then the dead branch is of naturall SECT II. Your second argument YOur second argument (l) Pag. 10 1â—.12 is grounded on a false principle with is that the Catholike Church in her essentiall state is inuisible We know that the essentiall forme of the Church which is Fayth is inuisible to corporall eyes But the Church as you (m) Pag. 36â— confesse is the multitude of all Christian belieuers whensoeuer and whersoeuer dispersed throughout the world and that the congregation of Christians assembled in a generall Synod is the representatiue body therof Wherfore as it were ridiculous to affirme that a multitude of men ioyned in one Common-wealth or the representatiue body therof assembled in Parliament is essentially inuisible because their soules are inuisible or that Christ liuing on earth was inuisible because his Diuinity was inuisible so it is no lesse ridiculous to affirme that the Church in her essence is inuisible because fayth is inuisible for fayth is not the Church but the essentiall forme of the Church as the soule of man is not man but the essentiall forme of man Man consisteth essentially of body aswell as of soule and by reason of his body he is visible for according to the axiome of Philosophers Actiones passiones sunt
here by the way I must aduertise you of a sleight which you often vse and it is that when in the explication of any point of Doctrine you finde diuersity of opinions among Catholike Diuines some speaking more probably or properly and others lesse you conceale the former and set downe the latter as here you do calling it the accordance of our owne Doctors and from thence frame arguments against vs as from a ground which we are not to deny But who seeth not this manner of arguing to be fraududulent For by denying that opinion or manner of speech as any Catholike may do such arguments need no solutions but of themselues fall to the ground For example I may refuse to allow the opinioÌ„ of those Diuines which say sinners are not members but partes of the Church I may also reiect Costerus his manner of speach tearming them superfluous humors and therby it will appeare that your obiecting these authors to proue that sinners are not members of the Church is an argument of no force especially since they differ not from other Diuines which hould wicked men and reprobats to be members of the Church really but only in manner of speach as hath bene shewed To the testimonies of Scripture you adde (m) Pag. 1â— some Fathers who so expresly condeÌ„ne your doctrine that no man but your selfe could be so inconsiderate as to make them patrons of it S. Ambrose teacheth and proueth out of S. Paul (n) 1. Tim. 2.20 that as in a great house there are some vessels of siluer and gold and some of wood and earth so in the Church there are some good and perfect signified by the siluer and gold and some bad and reprobate signified by the vessels of wood and earth And of this truth saith he I thinke no man to doubt The same Doctrine he like wise expresseth in other his workes S. Augustine whom in the second place you obiect condemneth your Doctrine in these words (o) Tract 6. in Ioan. We confesse that in the Catholike Church there are both good and bad the good are corne the bad chaffe The Church hath in her strong men and weake she hath iust and iniust (p) Serm. 107. de temp In the Church there are many reprobates mingled with the good and both of them are gathered as into a net and swimme together in this world without difference vntill they come to the shore where the euill shall be seuered from (q) De Ciuit. Deil. 18 c. 49. the good With S. Augustine accordeth S. Bernard prouing out of the same parable of the Net contayning good and bad fishes that in the Church militant there are iust men and sinners elect and (r) Serm de conuers ad cleriâ—os c. 17. eoist 11. reprobate S. Gregory sayth (s) Hom. 11. in Euangel That the holy Church on earth is rightly compared to ten Virgins of which some are wise and some foolish because in her the good are mingled with the wicked the elect with the reprobate These testimonies conuince that wheras you here confesse (t) Pag. 13. your Doctrine in this poynt to be one of the Tenents for which Iohn Husse was burned in the Councell of Constance you by making the Fathers guilty of the same Tenet do what you can to cast them into the same fier with him that so they may be burnt for heresy as he was The accusations you being against them to proue them guilty of Iohn Husse his heresy are First because S. Ambroses words say you are (u) Pag. 12. All that are in the Church fight for Christ intimating that the wicked fight against Christ. Why do you wrest S. Ambroses words to a false sense his words are Omnes qui sunt in Ecclesia Deo militant which signify nothing els but that all which are in the Church are Gods soldiars and fight vnder his colours But all that fight vnder Gods colours fight not as good soldiars many suffer themselues to be ouercome and lose that crowne which no man shall gaine but he that ouercometh These are the reprobats of whom it is true that albeit for the present many of them be in gods campe which is his Church yet before their death they shall runne away as Iudas did and be damned with him Out of S. Augustins worke de Genesi ad literam c. 2. you obiect these words (x) Pag. 12. The Catholike Church is so called because it is in euery part perfect But S. Augustine in that place hath no such words And you are very forgetfull for a litle before you told (y) Pag. 9. vs out of S. Augustine that to hold the Catholike Church here vpon earth to consist of them that are perfect was the heresy of the Pelagians And yet now speaking of the same Church you set downe as S. Augustins words that the Catholike Church is so called because it is in euery part perfect which is to make S. Augustine say and vnsay as you doe but the truth is that these later words are not his but yours and so the contradiction must rest vpon you not vpon him In like manner you say (z) Pag. 12. that the Church of Christ consisteth only of the predestinate and sanctified elect of God But els where you tell vs (a) Pag 340. that the Aegyptians Aethiopians Armenians Russians and others among whom there are some guilty of some fundament all heresies are partes of the Catholike Church and in state of saluation And againe both in this Grand Imposture (b) Pag. 330. and in your Treatise of the kingdome of Israel in the Tract of the Church (c) Sect. 4. pag. 8. your Tenet is that those who professe Iesus Christ to be the Sauiour of the world although they do indirectly by wickednesse of life or heresy in doctrine deny their owne profession yet are they to be accounted Christians true members of the Church consist only of the predestinate and sanctified elect of God how can it be verified that heretikes are true members of the Catholike Church since it is the constant Doctrine of S. Augustine and all the fathers that heretikes are wholy out of the Church and neither sanctified nor predestinate but miscreant reprobates and out of the state of saluation Your doctrine therfore is that the Church consisteth of the sanctified and predestinate only and yet withall that it consisteth also of Arians and other heretikes who are damnable reprobates Reconcile these two Againe you Protestants esteeme your selues to be all true members of the Church yet among you there are some drunkards adulterers vsurers and theeues If therfore you be all in the number of the sanctified and elect of God some of you be strange Saints But to returne to your obiections out of S. Augustine the other two testimonies which you (e) Pag. 12. lit 0. bring are nothing to your purpose for he only sayth that the predestinate cannot be seduded nor diuided
it is that S. Maximus Martyr said (p) Spond anno 657. n. 8. All the Churches of Christians had their beginning from the holy Roman Church and the Primates of Africa (q) Ep. ad Theod. Papam that all other Churches were to learne from her as from their natiue fountayne what they ought to belieue and Innocentius the first in his Epistle (r) Epist. 9. highly commended by S. Augustine (s) Epist 106. that from the Roman Church other Churches as springs proceeding from their mother source and running with the purity of their originall through the diuers regions of the whole world are to take what they ought to ordaine And the holy Councell of Chalcedon (t) Epist ad Leonem that the fountaine and source of our religion is from the See Apostolike And finally for diuers other respects the Roman Church is iustly called The most ancient Church as Bozius learnedly proueth (*) Desig Eccles to 1. l. 3. cap. 10. To him I remit you Wherfore the mother-hood of the Roman Church which we defend consisteth in her supreme authority and iurisdiction ouer all other Churches This you should disproue which here you do not but inferre that Hierusalem Caesarea Antioch the Brittish Church the Greeke Church in generall are all Mothers to the Roman because they were founded before her which is a false cōsequent drawne out of a wilfull mistake of the state of the question for though the Church of Hierusalem was founded before that of Caesarea yet who knoweth not that as the famous Councell of Nice (*) Can. 7. hath declared S. Hierome (†) Ep. 61. testifieth and you here confesse the Church of Caesarea was the Metropolitan or mother Church of all Palestine and that both the Church of Hierusalem and all others of that prouince were for aboue foure hundred yeares subiect to her Againe who knoweth not that the Bishops of Caesarea of Hierusalem and of all the East were subiect to the Bishop of Antioch as to their Patriarke notwithstanding that the Church of Antioch was founded after some of the Easterne Churches And who knoweth not that albeit the Church of Antioch was founded before that of Rome it was neuerthelesse subiect to the Church of Rome for why els did Iuuenal Bishop of Hierusalem say (u) In Concil Ephes Act. 4. in the presence of the whole Councell of Ephesus that the ancient custome and Apostolicall tradition was that the Church of Antioch is to be ruled and iudged by the Roman Syr a man of your reading ought to haue knowne that in the mysteries of Christ the yonger are preferred before the elder Abel before Cain Iacob before Esau Iudas before Ruben Dauid before Eliab Salomon before Adonias and so likewise of Christians the Gentils were preferred before the Iewes the Latines before the Greekes and the west before East for as the Apostle sayth (x) 1. Cor. 15.46 that is naturall which is first and spirituall that which is afterward and he that by his birth-right shall exalt himselfe as being the elder shall by the right hand of God be humbled that so the fauors he bestoweth on his Church may be knowne to proceed from no other root but his gracious vocation So we see among the Apostles that although in the opinion of S. Epiphanius (y) Haeresi 51. which is followed by Baronius (z) Anno 32. n. 23. Lorinus (a) In ca. 1. Act. 5.13 Serarius (b) Tract de Apost and many others Andrew were elder then Peter and as S. Ambrose (c) In c. 12.2 ad Corinth sayth followed Christ before Peter yet Andrew receaued not the primacy but Peter And therfore though the Churches of Hierusalem of Antioch and others of the East were founded before that of Rome yet not they but she obtayned the primacy Wherfore you produce in vaine the testimonies of S. Hierome S. Augustine and S. Basil affirming that the Ghospell was first preached at Hierusalem and other partes of the East and that from thence it came into the West for this proueth that the Church of Hierusalem and some others were founded before that of Rome and therfore were mothers to her in antiquity not in iurisdiction and authority But S. Chrysostome say (d) Pag. 30. you affirmeth that S. Iames was the first that obtayned a Bishopricke namely at Hierusalem You ought to haue added that the same S. Chrysostome likewise sayth (e) In Ioan. Hom. vltima that he was made Bishop of Hierusalem by S. Peter mayster of the whole world If therfore Iames was chosen Bishop of Hierusalem by Peter that sufficiently sheweth his authority ouer Iames and the other Apostles And what els did S. Chrysostome signify saying that Iames was made Bishop of Hierusalem by Peter Mayster of the world but that as much as the Bishop of the whole world surpasseth in authority the Bishop of one See so much did Peter surpasse Iames in authority which Euthymius hath also expressed in the same words with Chrysostome And no lesse effectually S. Bernard The rest of the Apostles sayth he (f) L. 2. de consid c. 9. obtayned ech of them their peculiar flocks Iames contented with Hierusalem yelds the vniuersality to Peter And S. Gregory (g) L. 4. epist 38. Peter surely is the chiefe member of the holy and Vniuersall Church Paul Andrew Iohn what were they but heads of particular Dioceses Impertinent therfore is your alleaging of S. Chrysostome to proue that Iames was the first that obtained a Bishopricke at Hierusalem for both he and these other Fathers testify that Peter was Bishop of the whole Church and consequently also of Hierusalem which was a part of the Church And who knoweth not that of all the Apostles S. Peter first preached the Ghospell to the Iewes and also to the Gentils first in the East and then in the West and that by his authority he instituted the three Patriarkcall seats of Rome Antioch and Alexandria by which all other Churches of the world were gouerned and that as Bozius (h) De sign Eccles l. 4. c. 2. 3. obserueth the whole world was conuerted by those which either were sent by S. Peter and his Successors in the Roman See hauing their mission and authority from them or els by such as were made Bishops by them whom S. Peter had ordayned And so likewise wheras here (i) Pag. 33. you make the Church of Caesarea mother to that of Rome who knoweth not that S. Peter founded that Church and made Cornelius the Centurion Bishop therof which therfore remained subiect to S. Peters See Impertinent likewise and fraudulent is your obiection (k) Pag. 34. out of Sozomene (l) L. 3. c. 7. that the Eastern Greeke Churches challenged this prerogatiue in their letters to Pope Iulius that they came from the East who first brought Christian Religion to Rome for if they came from the East their ordination and authority was from S.
was the 35. yeare of Christ before S. Peter founded either the Church of Rome or of Antioch is your addition falsly imposed on them For though according to the computation of Baronius Lazarus with his sisters Mary and Martha were driuen out of Hierusalem in the 35. yeare of Christ and together with Ioseph of Arimathia by the prouidence of God came to Marsils in France yet nether Baronius nor Suarez nor any one of the authors ancient or moderne which you obiect sayth that Ioseph planted that yeare a Church in Brittaine You name Gildas but he neither mentioneth Ioseph of Arimathia nor saith that Christian religion was planted in Brittaine in the tyme of Tiberius Caesar as you by misplacing his words make him say but speaketh of the great calamities and desolation of that Iland caused by the warres which the Romans made vpon the Brittans not in the tyme of Tiberius nor of Caius for in their tymes the Romans had no warres with the Brittans but of Claudius in the third yeare of whose Empire those warres began and continued 40. yeares togeather vntill the tyme of Domitian Interea c. In the meane tyme sayth (y) In epist de excidia Britan c. 6. Gildas that is during those warres there appeared and imparted it selfe to this cold Iland more remote from the visible sunne then other Nations that true and inuisible sunne which in the tyme of Tiberius Caesar had manifested himselfe by the fame of his preaching and miracles to the whole world I meane Christ vouchsafed to impart his precepts Gildas then is wholly against you for although he say that in the tyme of Tiberius Caesar Christ manifested himselfe and imparted his precepts to the world yet he discribeth the first planting of Christian Religion in Brittaine not in the tyme of Tiberius but of the Roman warres in tyme of Claudius by occasion wherof there was continuall going and comming from Rome to Brittaine and as Christian Religion was then planted did daily increase in Rome so from thence it was also kindled in Brittaine especially there being many Brittains at that tyme inhabiting in Rome some for their pleasure some to flye the warres and vnquiet state of their owne Countrey and some taken by force and caried thither for hostages as Caractacus King of the Silures and much Nobility with him as Cornelius Tacitus reporteth (z) Annal. l. 12. And from hence it is that Holin shead (a) In descrip Britan. to 1. c. 9. and Cambden (b) In sua Britan. p. 162. Protestant historians affirme that one Claudia Ruffina a noble Brittish Lady wyfe to Pudens the Senator and the first hostesse of S. Peter in Rome sent from thence diuers bookes and messages to her frendes in Brittaine and was therby a great helpe to their conuersion To which I add that S. Peter being come to Rome in the second yeare of Claudius to teach and conuert the Western parts of the world when all the Iewes were by publike proclamation banished from Rome he tooke that occasion to goe into France and preached the Ghospell to the French and from thence passing into Brittaine as Metaphrastes (c) Apud Sur. die 23. Iun. pag. 862. out of Greeke antiquities recordeth preached founded Churches and ordained Priests Deacons there which is also testified by that famous holy Pope Innocentius the first saying (d) In epist. ad Decen The first Churches of Italy France Spayne Affrica Sicily and the bordering Ilands were founded by S. Peter or by his Schollers or successors Which caused Guilielmus Eysengrenius (e) Cent. 1 p. 7. d. 8. to affime that the first Christian Churches of England were founded by S. Peter And finally S. Peter himselfe appearing to a holy man in the tyme of King Edward the Confessor shewed him how he had preached in England and the care he had of that Church and Nation as Alredus Rhieuallis (f) Apud Sur. 5. Ianuar. pag. 131. left written 500. yeares since And from that care it proceeded that as Dorotheus (g) In Synopsi Mirmanus (h) In theâ—â—ro de conuers gent. pag. 4â— and Baronius (i) Martyrol 15. Martij out of the Greeke Martyrologe affirme Aristobulus his disciple and a knowne Christian in Rome was sent by him into Brittaine and there made Bishop By all which it appeares that the Brittish Church was not first founded by Ioseph of Arimathia the 35. yeare of Christ in the raigne of Tiberius but by S. Peter in the time of Claudius after he had founded the Church of Rome placed his seat there and consequently that the Church of Rome is most truly and properly Mother of the Church of Brittaine not only by reason of the second conuersion of our nation by Fugatius and Damianus sent by Eleutherius the 13. Pope after S. Peter and also of the third conuersion by S. Augustine and his companions sent by S. Gregory the Great whom therfore Bede calleth the Apostle of England but also in respect of the first preaching and founding of a Christian Church in this Iland it hauing bene wrought by S. Peter his disciples other Roman Christians cooperating therto And so much the more if it be true that S. Paul assisted S. Peter therin going from Rome into Brittaine to preach as Theodoret (k) In psal 106. l. 5. de curandis Graec. affect Sophronius (l) Serm. de Natali Apost Venantius Fortunatus (m) In carm and others affirme As for Ioseph of Arimathia his comming into England I grant it to be true though it be not affirmed by any ancient writer but only by Capgrauius Polydore Virgil other late historians Tradition is sufficient to confirme me in the beliefe therof Yet withall it is certain that he came not the yeare of Christ 35. as you without any proofe at all suppose but hauing come out of Iury into France with S. Mary Magdalen and her company after he had liued there sometime and seene her great austerity of contemplatiue and solitary life and rigor of pennance which she vsed went ouer into Brittaine either sent by S. Peter or by his owne free election And though it be likely that by preaching the Ghospell he increased the number of Christians in the Brittish Church yet the chiefe intention of his comming was to begin that kind of solitary and heremiticall life which he had seene practised by S. Magdalene in France as Cambden (n) In descrip Brit. pa. 162. obserueth Ioseph sayth he and his companie did take vpon them a solitary life that with more tranquillity they might attend to holy learning and with a seuere kind of conuersation exercise themselues to the bearing of Christs Crosse From hence it followeth that the Roman Church is Mother to that of Brittaine not only by reason of the supereminent authority and power which she hath ouer her aswell as ouer all other Churches of the world but also in antiquity she being planted
at Hierusalem (s) Act. 15.7 seqq which as it was the first Christian Councell so was it the pattern of all others that since that tyme haue bene held in the Church of Christ For from this Councell it proceeded and euer since hath bene the custome of generall Councells that the Pope presiding by himselfe or by his legates first declareth the fayth of the Roman Church all Bishops subscribing and condemning the contrary And this is done to the imitation of this Apostolicall Synod in which Peter spake first and the rest following him confirmed his sentence Paul and Barnaby by relating the great signes and wonders God had done among the Gentils by them and Iames both by shewing the sentence giuen by Peter to accord with the words of the Prophets and by giuing this verdit of his owne (t) Act. 15.19 I iudge that they which of the Gentils are conuerted to God are not to be disquieted c. These are the wordes which you obiect (u) Pag. 64. to proue that not Peter but Iames gaue sentence in the Apostolicall Synod but without ground for the word I iudge contaynes no definitiue sentence not expresseth any authority but only signifieth It seemes to me or my verdict is the contrary were to make Iames Superiour to Peter which no man euer said Besides that the definitiue sentence was giuen by Peter the ancient Fathers expresly affirme none of them so much as insinuating that is was giuen by Iames. All the multitude sayth S. Hierome (x) Ep. 89. ad Aug. c. 2. held their peace and into his Peters sentence Iames the Apostle and all the Priests togeather did passe And long before him Tertullian (y) L. de pudicitia In that controuersy of keeping the law Peter by instinct of the holy Ghost spake of the vocation of the Gentils And hauing set downe S. Peters words he addeth This sentence both losed those things that were omitted of the law and bound those that were reserued It was therfore the authority of Peter that did bind and lose in that Councell for which cause S. Hierome (z) Ibid. calls S. Peter The Prince or author of the decree And finally the sentence of Peter was confirmed and ratified by the whole Councell and sent to Antioch by Paul and others chosen to that purpose to the end they might publish it as an Ordinance of the holy Ghost 6. Peter exercised his pastorall function by promulgating the Ghospell both to the Iewes and Gentils To the Iewes for he first of all the Apostles vpon the very day of Pentecost immediatly after the receauing of the holy Ghost preached vnto them Iesus Christ (a) Act. 2.14 seqq and exhorting them to pennance at that one Sermon conuerted about 3000. soules He spake sayth S. (b) Ad cap. 2. Act. Chrysostome as the month of all and the other eleuen stood by approuing with their testimony what he sayd Peter also was the man that first preached to the Gentils and that by speciall Commission from God as he declared in the Councell of Hierusalem saying (c) Act. 15.7 Men brethren you know that of old dayes God among vs chose that by my mouth the Gentils shold heare the word of the Ghospell and beleeue And to this end when God sent Cornelius the Centurion vnto him to be instructed he shewed vnto him that maruelous vision (d) Act. 10 1◠which is described in the Acts of the Apostles to declare that the tyme of founding the Church among the Gentils was now come And by bidding him kill and eat he declared him to be the Head of the Church for eating is an action that belongs to the head Hereupon Peter out of hand preached the Ghospell to Cornelius and other his friends and kindred and baptized them (e) Act. 10.35 seqq Againe who but Perer foūded the Churches of Pontus Galatia Cappadocia Asia and Bithinia in which Constantinople is who founded the Patriarchall seates of Antioch where the faythfull were first called Christians but Peter Who the other seates of Alexandria and Rome the one by S. Marke his Disciple and the other by himselfe but Peter For Christ according to his promise chose him to found his Church and as S. Ambrofe sayth (f) Serm. 47. first of all to begin it both amongst the Iewes and Gentils giuing him therby the same place in his Church which the foundation hath in a materiall building and by that meanes notifying his supereminent dignity vnto vs for as S. Chrysostome wisely obserueth (g) In cap. 2. Act. One thing it is to open a gate that is shut giue begining to a worke as S. Peter did and another thing to prosecute the same worke after it is begun as the rest of the Apostles did 7. Peter of all the Apostles wrought the first miracle after the ascension of Christ in confirmation of the Ghospell which he had promulgated curing a man that was lame from the wombe of his mother (h) Act. 3.7 which S. Ambrose interpreteth to be an act of his supreme Pastorall power the healing and consolidating the lame mans feete betokening him to be the firme and solide foundation of the Church Because Peter sayth S. Ambrose (i) Serm. 68. is the Rock on which the Church is built with great reason he first healeth the feete that as he holdeth the foundation of fayth in the Church so likewise in man he may confirme the foundations of his limbes It was Peter also that raised Tabitha from death (k) Act. 9.40 working that kind of miracle first before any other of the Apostles And that aswell in working these first miracles as by performing other admirable things in the first place before the other Apostles he exercised his iurisdiction and authority S. Chrysostome expresseth in these words (l) Hom. 21. in Acta Peter walking as a Captaine in his army did consider which part was vnited and well ordered and which wanted his presence See how diligently he runnes vp and downe and is found to be the first in euery place When an Apostle is to be chosen he 's the first When the Iewes are to be certified that the Apostles are not druncke when the lame man is to be cured when the Ghospell is to be preached he is before others When the Princes and Ananias are to be proceeded against and when cures are to be made by a shadow Peter is the man and when miracles are to be wrought he steps out first where there is danger and where gouerment is necessary there Peter is but when things are in peace and tranquility they are left to all the Apostles indifferently Lastly Peter by the iudgment of our Lord was appointed to feed his flock whē he said vnto him (m) Ioan. 2◠26.27 feed my lambes feed my sheep By lambes he vnderstandeth the faythfull people by sheep which are the dammes of the lambes the Bishops and other Pastors of the
same iorney is both a going and a mission a going as it is performed by him that vndertakes the iorney and a mission as it proceeds from those that sent him euen as the same lesson is both doctrina and disciplina doctrina as it is deliuered by the Maister that teacheth and disciplina as it is receaued by the Scholler that learneth and as in Philosophy the same production is called Actio as it proceeds from the Agent Passio as it is receaued in the subiect And to say that the sending of Iohn with Peter argueth Iohn to be equall in authority with Peter is a great Non sequitur as if you should argue a Chanon to be of equall authority with the Deane or a Cardinall with the Pope if they be sent togeather CHAP. XI Sleights and falsifications of Doctor Morton to shift off the testimonies of Ancient Fathers teaching S. Peters supremacy BELLARMINE to proue S. Peters primacy ouer the other Apostles produceth conuincing testimonies of many Fathers both Greeke and Latin (p) L. 1 de Pont. c. 25. These you vndertake to answer or rather to elude by diuers sleights Some of them as being so cleare that you knew not how to deuise any answer vnto them you wholly omit without any mention of them as of S. Prosper Arator and Aetherianus Others you mention as of S. Leo the great of S. Gregory of Venerable Bede and S. Bernard but put them of with deuises We pretermit say (q) Pag. 50. marg n. 20. you the testimony of Pope Leo wherof reason is giuen hereafter but wheras Bellarmine alleageth two vnanswerable testimonies of S. Leo you are so far from giuing any reason of them that for ought I can find you neuer after mention eyther of them The testimonies of Bede and S. Bernard you reiect as not truly ancient wheras Bede liued almost 1000. and S. Bernard aboue 500. yeares since But the true reason indeed why you reiect them is not want of antiquity but because they clearely conuince your Doctrine of falshood For when S. Bernard the later of these two hath any thing which by misinterpreting his meaning or falsifying you can wrest to your purpose as afterwards you do (r) Pag. 170. 182. S. Bernard is ancient inough S. Gregory you shift of promising to speake of him largely afterwards S. Gregory did disclaime from the title of Vniuersall Bishop in that sense in which Iohn Patriarch of Constantinople did arrogate the same to himselfe Of this indeed you treate at large (s) Pag. 92. seqq but his testimonie which Bellarmine vrgeth in proofe of S. Peters pastorall power ouer the whole Church you neither answere nor so much as mention afterwards 3. Bellarmine citeth out of Eusebius his Chronicon these words Petrus natione Galilaeus Christianorum Pontifex primus Peter a Galilean borne the first chiefe Bishop of Christians He sayth not Peter the first Bishop of the Romans as in the same place he sayth Iames the first of Hierusalem and Euodius the first Bishop of Antioch but Peter the first chief Bishop of Christians which differēce of expression she weth that wheras Iames and Euodius were Bishops of two particular Dioceses Peter was the Bishop of all Christians This is one of the testimonies of Eusebius alleaged by Bellarmine which you conceale without giuing any answer vnto it though you name the place out of which he alleageth it The second is out of Eusebius his history which you are contented to mention that you may pick a quarrell against Bellarmine for you say (t) Pag. 49. marg he miscites the Chapter the 14. for the 13. But by desiring to carpe you discouer your ignorance for in the different versions of Eusebius the Chapters are differently diuided and though the passage which Bellarmine citeth be in the 13. Chapter according to the version of Christophorson yet in that of Ruffinus which he followeth it is in the 14. as he cites it And wheras Eusebius there calleth Peter Reliquorum omnium Apostolorum Principem The Prince of all the other Apostles you answere That it is with this restriction omitted by Bellarmine 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for his singular vertues sake But what doth this omission auaile your cause or hurt ours The Fathers agree in this that when Christ promised to make Peter the foundation of his Church it was for that excellent confession of his Diuinity and in reward therof as hath bene proued (*) Aboue Nu 11. and so likewise when he actually conferred on him the dignity of supreme Pastor it was a reward of his feruent loue But doth it follow that because this supereminent dignity was promised to Peter and conferred on him for his singular vertues it was nor therfore a primacy of Magistracy and iurisdiction but of order only Is not the office of Pastor of Christs flock an office of Magistracy and iurisdiction but such are the answers which you giue to insoluble arguments yet shame not to charge Bellarmine with vnconscionable dealing in vrging this place of Eusebius against you 4. He vrgeth S. Gregory Nazianzen saying Vides c. You see how among the Disciples of Christ all truly great and high and worthy to be chosen this to wit Peter is called a Rock and hath the foundations of the Church committed to his charge And he that is Iohn is loued more and reposeth on the brest of our Lord and the other-disciples did not take it in ill part that these were preferred before them These are the words of Nazianzen and these very words Bellarmine truly and punctually setteth downe whom therfore you vniustly traduce (u) Pag. 49. marg as deprauing Nazianzen whose words as he corrupteth not so neither doth he peruert his sense for out of them it is euident that as Christ preferred Iohn by louing him more then the rest so in far higher degree he preferred Peter before them and before Iohn also For who seeth not that Nazianzen acknowledgeth a far greater dignity in Peter then in Iohn or any other of the Apostles when he sayth that Christ called Peter a Rock and committed to his charge the foundations of the Church for that is to say that he made him Head and Gouernor therof it being a knowne truth that the foundation in a building is the same that the Head in a politicall body from whence it is that the famous Councell of Chalcedon (x) Act. 3. calleth Peter The foundation of true fayth and the rock and top of the Catholike Church which is a far greater dignity then to leane on Christs brest or any other that was conferred on Iohn or any of the other Apostles 5. Bellarmine (y) L. 1. de Pont. c. 25. vrgeth 3. testimonies out of S. Augustines workes The second you passe ouer without any answer to it or mention of it The third you reiect as taken out of a booke which Bellarmine himselfe and others acknowledge not to be
his owne name of Shepheard and togeather which the name that power which he alone had to to wit of being Pastor of his whole flock what els S. Cyril saying (m) In l. thesau apud S. Thom. Opuse 1. that as Christ receaued of his Father the scepter of the Church ouer all Princedome and most full power ouer all that all be subiect vnto him so also he committed the same power to Peter and his Successors and that what was his he fully committed to Pâ—ter and to none els but to him alone what S. Leo affirming (n) Serâ—â— 3. dâ— Assamp sua that albeit in Gods people there be many Priests and many Pastors yet Peter gouerneth them all as Christ also doth principally rule them what Euthymius and Theophilact (o) In c. 21. Ioan. that Christ committed to Peter the charge and gouerment of his flock throughout the whole world what Oecumenius (p) Adc. 1. Act. that the gouerment of the Disciples was committed to Peter what S. Bernard (q) L. 2. de confiderat that euery one of the other Apostles receaued their seuerall ships but that Peter receaued the gouerment of the whole world and that to him was committed grandissima nauis that maruelous great ship to wit the vniuersall Church spread ouer the whole world and that to him the pastorall charge of the whole Church was committed Finally and what S. Eucherius that ancient Bishop of Lyons saying (r) In vigil S. Pet. Extat in Bibliothee Pat. edit Colon to 5. par 1 pag. 712. that Christ first committed to Peter his lambes and then his sheep because he made him not only a Pastor but Pastor of Pastors Peter therfore sayth he feedeth the lambes and the sheep he feedeth the yong ones and the dammes he gouerneth the subiects and the Prelates and is therfore Pastor of all for besyde lambes and sheep there is nothing in the Church What thinke you Doctor Morton do these Fathers acknowledge in Peter no other primacy but of order Can there be any thing more cleare then that they belieue him to haue authority power and iurisdiction ouer the whole Church as President and Gouernor therof were these men of your beliefe But you obiect (s) Pag. 51. Iames and Iohn whom S. Paulcalleth chiefe Apostles S. Chrysostome interpreteth Princes Oecumenius Heads Ergo they were also Gouernors ouer the other Apostles and Monarkes ouer the whole Church or els Peter was not How followeth this In the Empyre there are many Princes Ferdinand the Emperor and many others Ergo they are all equall to Ferdinand and all Emperors or els Ferdinand is no Emperor In the kingdome of Naples there are many Heads the Viceroy and the Gouernors of diuers Prouinces and Cities ergo these Heads are all equall in authority haue power ouer the whole kingdome or els the Viceroy hath not These consequences are absurd and yours is no lesse It is true that ech of the Apostles are Princes ouer the whole earth by reason of their Apostolicall power but as Bishops they are only Heads of their seuerall flocks and therfore in iurisdiction not equall to Peter Paul Andrew and Iohn sayth S. Gregory (t) L. 4. epist. 38. what are they but Heads of seuerall flocks but Peter is the chiefe member of the holy and vniuersall Church And S. Bernard (u) L. 2. de considerat Iames contented with the Bishopricke of Hierusalem yeldes the vniuersality to Peter And againe speaking to Eugenius Pope of his authority receaued from S. Peter (x) Ibid. Thou alone art Pastor of all Pastors Dost thou aske how I proue this By the words of our Lord for to which I will not say of the Bishops but euen of the Apostles were all the sheep so absolutely and without exception committed If thou louest me Peter feed my sheep what sheep the people of this or that City or countrey or kingdome he sayth My sheep who seeth not manifestly that he designed not some but assigned all Nothing is excepted where no distinction is made And so likewise the other title Prince of all the Apostles is an attribute which agreeth not to Iames nor to Iohn nor to any other of the Apostles for though Iames Iohn be chiefe Apostles and Princes in respect of that transcendent authority which as Apostles they had from Christ to preach and ordaine Bishops throughout the whole world yet neither the one nor the other is nor euer is called seuerally by himselfe Prince of all the Apostles as Peter is And so likewise when Peter and Paul togeather are called Principes Apostolorum Princes of the Apostles it is not in respect of any authority and iurisdiction common to them both ouer all the other Apostles but in respect of their great labors in preaching and propagating the fayth of Christ for when there is speach of the extent of their authority and iurisdiction Paul seuerally by himselfe is neuer called Prince of the Apostles as Peter is All the Apostles being silent sayth (y) Cathâ—c 11. S. Cyril of Hierusalem Peter Prince of the Apostles sayth c. And S. Ephrem (z) Serm. de Transfigu Dom. As Moyses by the commandment of God was Prince of the congregation of the Hebrewes so is Peter of the Church of the Christians And as Moyses was Prince of the old testament so is Peter of the new And Cassianus (a) L. 3. de Incarnat c. 12. Let vs aske that chiefe Disciple amongst the Disciples and Mayster amongst Maysters which gouerning the Roman Church as he had the Princedome of fayth so likewise of Priesthood Speake therfore and tell vs O Peter Prince of the Apostles c. In which words Peter is called Prince of the Apostles because he was the chiefe among them and had the soueraignty of Episcopall and Sacerdotall dignity aboue the rest But by the way I must aduertise you of your abusing S. Ambrose and S. Cyprian In your Margen (b) Pag. 10 you obiect certaine words of S. Ambrose in Latine and comming to english them in your text you set downe in lieu of them others of your owne in a different character as of S. Ambrose which neither are his nor of the same sense with his as the iudicious reader will perceaue if he compare S. Ambrose his Latin with your English With S. Cyprian you deale in the same manner for you make him say that Christ before his resurrection did build his Church vpon Peter An ignorance of which S. Cyprian was not guilty He sayth that Christ speaking to Peter said vpon this Rock I will build my Church which words he spake before his resurrection and they containe no more but a promise of building his Church vpon Peter for the future which promise he fulfilled not vntill after his resurrection when he gaue to Peter the actuall charge of feeding his lambes and his sheep (c) Ioan. 21.16.17 Nor doth S. Cyprian contradict this in the
the solidity of the Prince of the Apostles who with his name receaued the constancy of his minde being called Peter of a Rock to whom by the voyce of truth it is said I will giue thee the keyes of the kingdome of Heauen S. Maximus a famous Martyr the greatest Diuine of his age and a stout Champion of the Church against the Monothelites (k) Epist. ad Marin Diac. Apud Spond Anno 657. n. 2. All the Churches of Christians had their beginning and surest foundation from the Roman Church against which the gates of hell shall no way preuaile according to the promise of our Sauiour himselfe that she should haue the keyes of Orthodoxe fayth and confession and open to them that come to her religiously seeking true piety and contrarily shut and stop all hereticall mouthes that breath out iniquity against heauen Theodorus Studites a man very famous for his learning and constancy in defending the Catholike fayth writing togeather with other his Colleagues to Paschalis Pope (l) Ep. ad Pashal ep ad Naucrat calleth him Porter of the kingdome of Heauen and Rock of the fayth vpon whom the Catholike Churches built And the Roman See The supreme throne in which Christ hath placed the keyes of fayth against whom the gates of hell which are the mouthes of Heretikes haue neuer preuailed nor shall euer preuaile according to the promise of our Lord which cannot faile To these testimonies I adde others of Theodoret and Gelasius alleaged by Bellarmine (m) L. 4. de Pont. c. 3. which make vp more then a full Iury to pronounce you guilty of a solemne vntruth in denying (n) Pag. 55. that what was here spoken to Peter doth accordingly belong to the Pope by the right of Succession for you haue heard the Fathers teaching the contrary Their exposition I embrace and follow as the true sense of holy Scripture detest yours who haue nothing to say against it but to outface it by calling it An error to obiect against it the comment of Abulensis who say you (o) Pag. 55. teacheth that by those words Blessed art thou Simon there was granted to S. Peter an infallible certainty of his soules eternall blessednes which is an excellent priuiledge but no promise of authority made vnto him If Abulensis comment so his comment makes nothing to your purpose for he denies not the Church to be built vpon Peter nor grants that the gates of hell which are heresies shall preuaile against her Againe if he say for I haue not seene him that Christ by saying Blessed art thou Simon granted to S. Peter an infallible assurance of his eternall happines it followeth not that the same assurance passeth to his Successors as the office of Foundation Head and Gouernor of the Church doth for the assurance of eternall happinesse was for his owne peculiat good and therfore granted to him alone and not to his Successors But the office of Head and Gouernor of the Church was promised to him for the good of the whole Church and therfore to passe to his Successors according to the nature of priuiledges which is that when a prerogatiue is granted to a Gouernor for the good of the Community of which he is Gouernor as the office of Head and foundation of the Church was to S. Peter it dieth not with him but still liueth in his Successors Againe that comment of Abulensis if it be his I approue not for it is disproued out of the words themselues which being of the present tense import nothing els but a present blessednes in hauing so great a fauor bestowed on him as by the speciall reuelation of Almighty God to know the Diuinity of Christ and to be the first that made so illustrious a confession therof and as S. Basill (p) Orat. 3. de peccato in proem de iudicio Dei expoundeth to haue his confession rewarded with a promise of building the Church on him and of hauing the keyes of the kingdome of heauen committed to him which sayth he was a far greater blessednes then the other Apostles obtained And in the same sense expound S. Hierome (q) Ad c. 16. Math. and S. Augustine (r) Serm. 10. de verb. Do. serm 31. de verb. Apost But wheras out of the comment of Abulensis be it his or whose you please you charge vs (r) Pag. 56 with lack both of conscience and modesty in violating the sacred writ vnlesse to make good the iurisdiction of our Popes deriuatiuely from S. Peter we can shew that all of them by vertue of their succession from him are so blessed now in their hopes as to be infallibly persuaded that no temptation of Satan shall preuaile against their persons but that they shall be blessed euerlastingly you cannot be excused from fraud folly fraud in changing the state of the question for our assertion is that out of these words of Christ S. Peter and his Successors are secured from erring in their publike decrees and definitions of fayth But that Popes may not erre in manners to the damnation of their soules we neither deduce out of this nor any other place of holy writ nor is it true nor asserted by any Catholike nor necessary for the defence of their iurisdiction or priuiledge of not erring ex cathedra for Christ sayth S. Augustin (s) Ep. 166. hath placed in the chaire of Vnity the doctrine of Verity and secured his people that for ill Prelates they forsake not the Chayre of holsome Doctrine in which chayre euen ill men are inforced to speake good things And els where (t) Ep. 165. hauing reckoned all the Popes from S. Peter to Anastasius who then possessed his chayre he addeth If in all this tyme any traytor had come in by surreption it cold not breed any preiudice to the Church nor to innocent Christians for whom our Lord making prouision sayth of euill Prelates What they say do yee but what they doe do it not for they say and do not And as it is fraud in you to change the state of the question so is it folly to inferre that because Popes may be vicious in their liues they may erre in their publike definitions of fayth or manners to the seduction of others S. Augustine (u) Ep. 137. obserueth it to be an old tricke of Heretikes because they cannot calumniate the Scripture in which they find the Church commended to calumniate those by whom she is defended gouerned to make them odious And Tertullian long before (x) L. de Praescrip obserued the same in the heretikes of his tyme to whom he answered that what they obiected were vitia conuersationis non pradicationis faults of manners not of Doctrine and for this S. Augustine reprehendeth Petilianus the Donatist saying (y) Cont. lit Petil. l. 2. c. 51. Why dost thou call the Apostolike See the chayre of pestilence if for men whom thou thinkest to professe
what the most holy and learned Doctors of Gods Church from tyme to tyme haue done And as out of this passage of S. Paul we shew you that the fayth of the Roman Church was pure in the Apostles tyme so we require of you as S. Augustine (f) L. de vnto Eccles c. 12. 13. did of the Donatists to shew vs out of Scripture that after 600. yeares she was to fall from the true fayth as you pretend her to haue done Let them sayth S. Augustine reade vs this in the Scripture and we yeild but if they reade not this in the Scripture but seeke to persuade it by their contentions wrangling I belieue those things which are read in the holy Scriptures but I belieue not those which are affirmed by vaine heretikes And in requiring this at your hands we require no other prose for the truth of your Protestant Church fayth but what we are able to shew for ours for that the Roman Church cannot erre in sayth I haue already proued (g) Hoc cap. sect 1. 2. out of Scriptures and Fathers which therfore conuince her to be the true Catholike Church in which the spirit of truth dwelleth for euer (h) Ioan. 14.16 And that the Catholike Church the Roman Church are termes conuertible denoting one and the same thing hath also bene proued (i) Aboue Chap. 1. sect 3. But because you seeme to thinke that out of this text of S. Paul it cannot be proued that the fayth which S. Peter deliuered to the Romans is hereditary to the Church of Rome or that the Catholike fayth and the Romen fayth are all one it will not be amisse to let you heare what the ancient Fathers the best interpreters of Scripture haue belieued in this point That holy and renowned Martyr S. Cyprian (k) L. 1. ep 3. out of this text proueth that the Roman Church cannot fall from that fayth which she once receaued They to wit the Nouatian heretikes hauing set vp a false Bishop presume to carry letters from Schismatikes and heretikes to the chayre of Peter and the principall Church from whence Sacerdotall vnity is deriued not considering that the Romans are they whose fayth was praysed by the mouth of the Apostle and to whom vnfaithfulnes can haue no accesse If vnfaithfulnes can haue no accesse to the RomaÌ„ Church it followeth that she retaineth still the same fayth which was commended by S. Paul and that whosoeuer belieueth at this day as she belieues is free from all error in fayth The same is confirmed by an other testimony of the same Father who writing to Cornelius Pope and diuers of the Romans suffering banishment in the persecution of Decius and praysing their constancy and fayth sayth (l) Ep. 57. It was fore-seene in spirit and prophetically foretold by the Apostle My dearest brethren whiles you are of one hart and one voyce it is the confession of all the Roman Church that fayth hath shined in you which the Apostle praysed He did euen then foresee in spirit this prayse of your vertue and strength of your constancy and by prediction of future things gaue testimony of your desertes and commâ—nding the parents incouraged their Children With S. Cyprian accordeth S. Hierome When sayth he to Demetrias (m) Ep. 8. thou wast litle and the Bishop Anastasius of happy and holy memory gouerned the Roman Church a cruell tempest of heretikes risen out of the Easterne parts attempted to pollute and corrupt the sincerity of that fayth which had bene commended by the mouth of the Apostle but this personage Pope Anastasius rich in a most plentifull pouerty and in an Apostolicall care brake the pestilent head and stopped the hissing mouth of that Hydra And because I feare yea haue heard say that the buds of this most renemous plant do still liuâ— and spring vp in some I thought it my duety to admonish thee in a deuout zeale of Charity that thou keepe fast the fayth of S. Innocentius his sonne and successor in the Apostolicall chayre And writing to Theophilus Patriarke of Alexandria (n) Ep. 68. Know that we haue nothing in greater recommendation then to conserue the statutes of Christ and not to transgresse the bounds of our Fathers and alwayes to haue in mynde the Roman fayth praysed by the mouth of the Apostle wherof the Church of Alexandria glories to partake And impugning Ruffinus his errors as being contrary to the Catholike fayth (o) Lib. 1. Apol aduers Ruffin Know thou that the Roman fayth commended by the Apostle receaues not such delusions though an Angell should denounce otherwise then it hath hene once preached it cannot be altered being fensed by Pauls authority If therfore S. Hierome be to be credited the Roman fayth in his tyme was conserued pure as it was preached and cannot be altered as you pretend it to haue bene since that tyme. And therfore as it were speaking to you (p) Ep. 6. ad Pammach Ocean he further sayth Who-euer thou art that auouchest new sects I pray thee haue respect to the Roman eares spare the fayth which was commended by the voyce of the Apostle And to Paula and Eustochium (q) Proem lib Comment in ep ad Galat. Will you know how the Apostle hath noted euery prouince with their proprieties the fayth of the people of Rome is praysed where is so great concourse to Churches and to Martyrs sepulchers c. Not that the Romans haue any other fayth then the rest of the christian Churches but that in them there is more deuotion and simplicity of fayth To which place of S. Hierome the Angelicall Doctor S. Thomas alluding sayth (r) In vers 8. cap. 1. ad Rom. The Romans are commended for their fayth because they receaued it easily and perseuered in it constantly from whence it is that to this day are shewed very many signes of their fayth in the visitation of holy places as S. Hierome sayth vpon the Epistle to the Galathians And a litle after The Apostle reioyceth and giueth thankes to God for their fayth not only for their sake but for the profit that followed therof because they being Lords of nations other countreys were moued to belieue by their example for as the Glosse sayth The inferior doth readily what he sees done by his Superior which last words are also of S. Ambrose And S. Augustine speaking of Pelagius the Arch-heretike (s) L. 2. de peccat orig cont Pelag. c. 8. sayth He deceaued the Palestine Councell and therfore seemeth to haue bene absolued there But he was not able to deceaue the Roman Church though be endeauored to do is because the most blessed Pope Zozimus called to minde what opinion Innocentius his predecessor worthy to be imitated had of his proceeding and be considered likewise what iudgment the fayth of the Romans worthy of prayse in our Lord did make of him for he perceaued them with vnited endeauors to
striue earnestly against his error for the Catholike truth The reason therfore why Pelagius after he had deceaued the Councell of Palestine endeauored also to deceaue the Roman Church by a feigned profession of his fayth sent to Innocentius Pope was because it was the constant beliefe of all Christians in those dayes that the Roman Church as being heyre of the fayth commended by S. Paul could not approue any doctrine but what was truly orthodoxall and Catholike as Pelagius in that his profession acknowledgeth saying (t) In fin Symb. ad Dâ—â—â— apud Hieron to 4. Baron anno 417 This o most blessed Pope is the fayth which I haue learned in the Catholike Church and which I haue alwayes held and do bold Wherin if I haue said any thing ignorantly or vnwarily I desire to be corrected by you that hold the fayth and chayre of Peter If this my confession be approued by the iudgment of your Apostleship whosoeuer layes an aspersion on me shall shew himselfe to be ignorant or malicious or els not to be a Catholike but he shall not proue me to be an heretike With this profession Pelagius sought to deceaue the Roman Church but could not because Zozimus sayth S. Augustine (u) Proximè cit considered what iudgment the fayth of the Romans commended by the Apostle had made of him in the tyme of Innocentius his predecessor For which cause Procopius truly said (x) L. 1. de bello Goth. If euer any surely the Romans chiefly are they that haue had the Christian fayth in veneration I conclude therfore that if the holy Fathers haue vnderstood the Scriptures aright the fayth of the Roman Church is proued to be infallible not only by the Scriptures formerly alleaged (y) Supra hoc â—ap but by this very passage of the Apostle Nor do Tolet or Sà whome heere you obiect (z) Pag. 66. say ought to the contrary for if they obserue that when the Apostle sayth to the Romans your fayth is published euery where it is an hyperbole because the sense is not that the fayth which they belieued was then actually preached throughout the whole world but that is was a thing knowne and published throughout the whole world that they had belieued they say nothing but what is true for the Apostle cold not say that the Roman fayth which was the fayth of Christ was then actually preached in all partes of the world as neither it is yet at this day but that it was publikely knowne throughout all the world that the Romans had receaued the fayth of Christ because in common speach and morall reputation that which is diffused ouer a great part of the world and famously knowne is said to be euery where And this publike fame was of great moment for the conuersion of other nations for Rome being the Head of the world whither all sorts of people vnder that vast Empyre had recourse for discharg of their tributes and accompts of their offices they cold not but haue knowledge that the Romans belieued in Christ And as Tolet noteth out of S. Chrysostome but you to detract from the Romans what prayse you can conceale it this publike same and knowledg of their beliefe was an example and a great motiue for other nations to receaue the fayth of Christ Now wheras you adde (a) Pag. 60. It is an obiection now a dayes breathed into the mouth of euery vulgar Papist that at that day Catholike and Roman were all one the testimonies of antiquity which I haue formerly brought in profe therof shew that none but he which is not so much as vulgarly read in Ecclesiasticall history can be ignorant of so certaine a truth Wherfore you speake vntruly when you say it is an insultation of ours easily checked with a paralell of the like if not of a larger commendation of the Church of Thessalonica by the same Apostle 1. Thessal 1.2 We giue thankes alwayes to God for you all making mention of you in our prayers remembring without ceasing your worke of fayth And againe v. 8. From you sayth he sounded out the word of the Lord not only in Macedonia and Achaia but also in euery place your fayth to Godward is spread abroad c. This is your paralell which is easily disparalelled for as Baronius obserueth (c) Anno 58. out of S. Chrysostome the Romans being Head of the world their fayth was a forcible motiue to bring other nations to belieue in Christ And therfore S. Leo (d) Serm. 1. in Nat. Apost Pet. Paul had reason to say that S. Peter Prince of the Apostles not by humane counsell but by diuine ordination came from Antioch to Rome to preach the Ghospell and fixe his chayre in that Citty that so the chiefe seat of religion might be where the Head of superstition had bene and that the fayth from thence as from the top of the Empyre might be diffused throughout the world And S. Anselme (e) â—n c. 1. ad Rom. that S. Paulgiuing thankes to God for the fayth of the Romans sayth I giue thanks to God for all the faithfull in the first place for all you because you are the chiefest the Roman Church hauing the primacy among all Churches And wheras the Apostle sayth The fayth of the Romans is published throughout the whole world the same S. Anselme noteth (f) In c. 1. ad Thessal that he sayth not so to the Thessalonians but You are made a paterne to all that belieue in Macedonia and Achaia and from you the word of our Lord was bruted not only in Macedonia and Achaia but also in â—uery place that is sayth he in euery place neare to you And hereby it appeareth that the Romans for the example of their fayth and the profit that redounded therby to others were preferred by S. Paul before the Thessalonians as farre as the whole world ouer which the conuersion of Rome was quickly spread exceedeth Macedonia Achaia with a few bordering Prouinces which only had notice of the Thessalonians And therfore S. Paul giueth a further prayse to the Romans (g) Rom. 15.15 I am assured of you that you are also full of loue replenished with all knowledge so that you are able to admonish one another And againe (h) Rom. 16.19 Your obedience is published into euery place none of which prayses he gaue to the Thessalonians But lest we should gather any preeminence of the Roman Church because the Epistle to the Romans among all S. Pauls epistles hath the first place you preoccupate this obiection telling vs (i) Pag. 67. that the epistle to the Thessalonians and others were written before that to the Romans Be it so but we aduertise you with S. Anselme (k) Praefat. in ep ad Rom. It is to be belieued that they which collected S. Pauls epistles into one body iudged that the epistle to the Romans ought to haue the first place because it was
their Bishop with the multitude of Saints being departed out of it shall be consumed with fire before the reigne of Antichrist or in the very beginning therof as (r) Riber a cap. 17 n. 20. in vers 16. Ex hoc quod nunc ait Apostolus intelligitur Roman euertendam antequam Antichristus regnare incipiat vel certè ipso initio regni eius Ribera and (s) Viegas in cap 17. n. 5. Viegas reach In this supposition why may not the Pope with that multitude of holy Christian Romans be truly and verily the Bishop and Church of Rome Why should that multitude of Roman Christian and Saints be titulus sine re and not a very glorious and venerable Church Why should the Pope then cease to be Bishop more then the Bishop of Canterbury should in case Canterbury should be destroyed into ashes Will you say vpon this contingent that the Bishop of Canterbury shall be the man in the moone the sheepheard of Vtopia to wit 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 You might haue learned from Cusanus (t) Epist 2. ad Bohemos whome you cite often and highly commend that if by any accident the Citty of Rome should fayle the truth of the Church shall remaine there where the Principality and seat of Peter shal be Nor is your example of the Emperor of Rome (u) Pag. 77. any helpe to your Argument For albeit the Roman Empyre be now in part decayed or weakned in respect of that power and greatnesse which anciently it had yet it still remayneth so that the name succession of the Roman Emperors at this day is famous in the world els why did our late Soueraigne King Iames inscribe his Monitory Prefation Sacratissimo atque inuictissimo Principi ac Domino Rodulpho secundo Romanorum Imperatori semper Augusto c. And why els doth the Church of Rome in her Office (x) In die Parasceues Sabbatho Sancto pray for the Roman Emperor Nor the Authors which you alledge for the contrary do say ought els though you falsify Salmeron to make his words found otherwise for wheras he speaking of the Roman Empire as it anciently was sayth Imperium illud Romanum iamdiu euersum est that Empire of Rome to wit with that ancient splendor maiesty and power which once it had is long since destroyed you leaue out illud and make him say absolutely The Roman Empire is long since destroyed wheras in the words next following he expresly affirmeth that there is still a Roman Emperor and that he is so called although what now be possesseth be but a very small shadow of the ancient Empire Lastly I will not omit to put you in minde of your weake manner of arguing throughout all this Section for how doth it follow that because Ribera and Viegas hold that Babylon out of which the faythfull are commanded to depart is the City of Rome as she shall be idolatrous in the end of the world you may now lawfully reuolt from the Church of Rome Againe who obligeth me to allow of their exposition I might retort your Argument vpon your selfe and tell you that Babylon signifies not Rome but Geneua and proue it by the testimony of Castalio a prime brother of yours who liued there and was a speciall friend of Beza They sayth he speaking of the Geneuian brethren (y) Apud Rescium pag. 54. are proud puft vp with glory and reuenge We may with lesse danger offend Princes then exasperate these fiery Caluinists their life is infamous and villanous they are Maisters of art in reproches lyes cruelty treachery and insufferable arrogancy They name their Geneua The holy City and their assembly Hierusalem but in very truth we should call it O Babylon Babylon O infamous Sodome and children of Gomorrha If you like not this exposition yet I know no reason why if you will belieue Ribera and Viegas expounding Babylon in the Apocalyps to be Rome you may not as well belieue your brethren Vdalricus Velenus (z) Lib. de hac r◠and Henricus Buntingus (a) It iner de it iner Petri. denying it and so much the more because S. Augustine Tyconius Bede Arethas Primasius Ansbertus Haymo S. Anselme and S. Thomas (b) Apud Riber in vers 8. cap. 14. Apoc by Babylon vnderstand not Rome but the society of all the wicked in generall from whose vices the faithfull are commanded to depart (c) S. August Breuic Collat. collat 3. Others vnderstand Paganisme which because it adoreth a confused multitude of Gods is rightly named Babylon that signifies Confusion others Mahometisme the mother of fornication and all filthinesse Others Constantinople the Metropolitan of Turcisme And others the chiefe City of the Chaldaeans which is properly called Babylon These expositions with their Authors and reasons you may read in Cornelius à Lapide (d) Ade 17. Apoc. Suarez (e) Defens fid l. 5. c. 7. and Peron (f) Replic Chapit 15. But the truth is that all these senses as likewise that of Ribera being purely allegoricall afford no solid foundation to build matter of fayth vpon but are merely coniecturall And therfore if S. August say (g) Ep. 48. Who dares with an vnbridled licence produce for himselfe that which is couched in an allegory vnlesse he haue places more cleare by whose light to illustrate that which is obscure we may with iust reason reproue you for grounding your departure from the Roman Church vpon the allegoricall sense of those words of the Apocalyps Get forth of Babylon my people and so much the more because the Authors whose exposition you take for your ground admonish you that by Babylon is not vnderstood the Church of Rome but the City that not as it is Christian but as it was idolatrous in S. Iohns tyme and shal be againe in the end of the world But any thing will serue your turne be it true or false if by sleights you can wrest it against the Pope and Church of Rome SECT II. Whether S. Iohn suruiuing S. Peter were subiect to the Bishop of Rome S. Peters Successor SVarez treating of the authority of S. Peter and his Successors moueth this question (h) De trip virtute disp 10. sect 1. Whether the Apostles that suruiued S. Peter were subiect to S. Peters successor in the See of Rome His answeare is I remember not that I haue read any thing of this point in Authors but it seemes to me to follow out of what hath bene said that they were inferior in iurisdiction and consequently subiect therin to the Bishop of Rome although in other excellencies and prerogatiues they were superior to him For the same power and iurisdiction that was in S. Peter descended to his Successours who therfore in three things surpassed the Apostles there liuing 1. In the obiect of their power for the charge and gouerment of the whole Church belongeth primarily to the Successor of S. Peter which as I haue
the See Apostolike is made the Head of Pastorall honor to the world Why did the Bishops of the East say to Pope Symmachus (t) In volum Orthodoxograph impres Basileae You are taught dayly by Peter your sacred Doctor to feed the flock of Christ which is committed to you throughout the whole world Why did Amator an African Bishop write to Siluerius Pope in banishment (u) Ep. ad Siluer What do you thinke becomes of vs when such things are done to the chiefe Pastor Why did that Emperor Leo surnamed the wise say (x) Serm. de S Petro. that Christ made Peter Prince of Pastors and required of him the care of feeding his flock as a returne of his loue Why did the Emperor Constantine Pogonate and the sixth Councel generall call Agatho the vniuersall Arch-pastor (y) Ep. ad synod Apost in ◠synodo Act. 18. You say they to the Councell of the West and the vniuersall Arch-pastor by your procurators haue bene present at our Councell Why did the second generall Councell of Lions (z) Sext. decret C. Vbi peric call Gregory the tenth Gouernor of the vniuersall Church and guyde of our Lords flock And finally why did S. Bernard (a) L. 2. de considerat say to Eugenius Pope To you are committed the sheep not of one City or countrey but all the sheep of Christ without exception What thinke you M. Doctor These Fathers and Councels found the Pope among the Pastors reckoned by S. Paul and beleeued him to be the Arch-pastor and Pastor of all Pastors vnder Christ but you that shut your eyes against the light cold not discerne him The same I say of the name and title of Doctor which all antiquity hath acknowledged to be due to S. Peter and in him to his Successors S. Hypolitus Martyr sayth (b) Orat de consummat mundi Peter the Prince the Rock of fayth he the Doctor of the Church the chiefe of the Disciples S. Chrysostome calleth him (c) Orat. Encom in Pet. ac Paul Doctor of the Apostles and Mayster of the world And the Councell of Florence (d) In lit vnion with the accord both of the Latin and Greeke Church defineth the Bishop of Rome to be The Successor of blessed Peter Prince of the Apostles the true Vicar of Christ the Head of the whole Church the Father and Doctor of all Christians Nor doth this title agree to him as it doth to others but in a far more noble and excellent manner for S. Augustine speaking of his Chayre sayth (e) Ep. 160. The heauenly Mayster hath placed in the Chayre of Vnity the Doctrine of verity To you sayth S. Basil to Damasus Pope (f) Ep. 69. per Sabin Diac it is giuen by our Sauiour to discerne betweene what is counterfiete and what is pure and without any diminution to teach the fayth of our Ancestors And S. Hierome (g) L. 1. Apol. aduers Ruffin That though an Angell should preach otherwise then the Roman Church teacheth he were not to be beleeued Wherof Maximianus Patriarke of Constantinople yeldeth the reason saying (h) Ep. ad Oriental The Creator of the world among all the men of the world selected S. Peter to whom he granted the Chayre of Doctor to be principally possessed by a perpetuall right of priuiledge that whosoeuer is desirous to know any profound and diuine thing may haue recourse to the oracle and Doctrine of this instruction Nor is there any man that can deny this truth if he credit the auncient Fathers teaching that the priuiledge giuen to S. Peter of confirming his Brethren did not dye with him but was in him grāted to his Successors In regard wherof the Councels haue sent their decrees to the Pope to be cōfirmed by him S. Hierome S. Augustine Theodoret S. Cyril Venerable Bede S. Anselme S. Bernard and many other of the most learned Doctors of Gods Church haue submitted their writings to the seuerall Popes of their tymes to be examined approued or reproued according to their iudgment SECT IV. Doctor Mortons rayling against the Inquisition YOu obiect (i) Pag. 83. 84 that S. Peter as an Elder exhorteth the Elders or Bishops feede the flock of God not dominiering ouer Gods heritage What may be inferred from hence say you we may vnderstand in your second Challenge But you must giue vs leaue not to learne the sense of this Scripture from your Challenge but from the Ancient Doctors of Gods Church who out of it shew that S. Peter had practised the authority of Supreme Pastor and Gouernor of the vniuersall Church But because S. Peter writing to Bishops commanded them not to dominiere in the Clergy (k) See aboue Chap. 9. fin you take occasion to raile against the Romish Inquisition first by making a relation of your owne (l) Pag. 85. no lesse false then spitefull of imprisonment famishment torment and ropes to strangle prisoners and all in tenebris workes of darknesse employed against all beleeuers receyuers defenders and fauorers of heretikes And to this your relation you add another like of Cornelius Agrippa (m) Ibid. whom you know to be a Magician an heretike and a forbidden author and yet you are not ashamed to call his lyes Our Confession And to the same purpose you bring Thuanus (n) Ibid. whom we owne not but bequeath him to you as one who by praysing the Huguenots and theyr Doctrine and by speaking against the Pope and Church of Rome sufficiently declareth what he is Now as for the thing it selfe who seeth not the absurdity of your argument which reduced to a few words is The inquisition is seuere in punishing heretikes especially such as hauing abiured their heresy before a Iudge relapse into the same againe and are in danger to infect others Ergo saluation may behad out of the Roman Church or Ergo it is lawfull to depart from her fayth communion or Ergo the Roman Church is not the Head of all Churches for these are the poynts in proofe wherof your grand Imposture wholly insisteth That you know all these illations to be absurd t' is not to be doubted but you are contented that men of learning and iudgment should know you to be absurd so that therby you may make the Roman Church hatefull to simple soules that want learning and iudgment to discerne your Impostures That Iews Mahumetans and Heretikes hate the Inquisition t' is no wonder Malefactors hate their Iudges theeues the gallowes How sayth S. Augustine (o) Ep. 166. can he that hath an ill suite prayse the Iudges by whom he hath bene conuicted And els where (p) Tract 11. in Ioan. ep 48. 50. he declareth that as they which blasphemed the God of Sidrach Misach and Abdenago were iustly punished by the Edict of Nabuchodonosor so heretikes because they draw men from Christ are in like manner iustly punished according to the lawes made against
it selfe but one Church gouerneth another as the Metropolitan doth the Suffragans the Roman Church as being the Head and Mother Church ruleth all others of the world Nor is this explication of lesse force becauss he sayth that she gouerneth in the region of the Romans for he sayth it not to limit her gouerment but to expresse the place in which she is seated and from whence she gouerneth all other Churches I conclude therfore that by calling her the Church that gouerneth and not limiting her gouerment to anyone Church or nuÌ„ber of Churches he declareth her to be Head Gouernesse absolutely of all Churches for as S. Bernard speaking of this subiect sayth (m) L. 2. de consider at Where there is no limitation nothing is excepted And in this sense Theodoret long before had said (n) Ep. ad Leon. The Roman See hath the sterne of gouerment of all the Churches of the whole world This to be the genume sense of S. Ignatius his words Casaubon and you peraduenture did see and therfore to giue an expedite solution you reiect the whole Epistle saying (o) Pag. 100. marg No man skilfull in Greeke would belieue it to be written by S. â—gnatius But this solution is exploded by Euscbius (p) L. 3. hist. c. 30. and S. Hierome (q) L. de Scriptor who might be Casaubons and your Maysters in Greeke and yet affirme S. Ignatius to be the Author of this Epistle and transcribe a part therof yeÌ„t to be found in it as also doth S. Irenaeus (r) L. 4. aduers haeres apud Baron anno 109. to shew the admirable spirit and feruor of that holy Bishop Hauing proposed these arguments of Casaubon you obiect out of your owne obseruations (s) Pag. 100. that S. Ignatius exhorting the Trallians vnto obedience to Bishops instanceth equally in Timothy S. Pauls scholler as in Anacletus Successor to S. Peter Answere You may by the like argument proue that S. Ignatius equalleth Priests in authority with Bishops for exhorting the Trallians to obedience he instanceth as well in Priests as in the Bishop Obey sayth he (*) Ep. ad Trallianos the Bishop the Priests Who then seeth not your argument to be a childish Sophisme SECT VI. S. Irenaeus his iudgment of the Roman Church I Renaeus say you (t) Pag. 100. for direction in the right of Traditions referreth as well to Polycarpe Bishop of Smyrna as to Linus Bishop of Rome Tertullian also to secure Christians in the Doctrine of the Apostles prescribeth vnto them that they consult with the Mother Churches immediatly founded by the Apostles naming as well Ephesus in Asia and Corinth in Achaia as Rome in Italy and for the persons mentioning as well Polycarpe ordayned by S. Iohn as Clemens by Peter The like argumeÌ„t you make out of Vincentius Lyrinensis But all of them imposterously and against your selfe And first to begin with S. Irenaeus these words Discite ab Apostolicis Ecclesijs Habetis Romae Linum which you alleage as of S. Irenaeus (u) L. 2. c. 3. I find not in him It is true that both he and Tertullian teaching the Christians of their tyme to auoyd heresy warned them that the true fayth was to be learned from the Apostolicall Churches that is from the Churches founded by the Apostles themselues or by Apostolicall men as Timothy Polycarpe and other their disciples that preached the same fayth they learned from the Apostles their Maysters But withall they taught them that the chiefe Church they were to adhere vnto and by whose authority they were to confound all Heretikes was the Roman Church All men sayth S. Irenaeus (x) L. 3. c. 3. may behold the tradition of the Apostles that is the fayth deliuered by them to their Successors in euery Church if they be desirous to heare the truth and we can number the Bishops that were made by the Apostles in Churches and their Successors euen vnto vs who neither taught nor knew any such thinge as rauing heretikes do broach c. But because it were a long businesse to number the Successions of all Churches we declare the tradition of the most great most ancient and most knowne Church founded by the two most glorious Apostles Peter and Paul which tradition and fayth it hath from the Apostles coÌ„ming to vs by Succession of Bishops and thereby we confound all them that any way ether by euill complacence of themselues or vaine-glory or blindnesse or ill opinion do gather otherwise then they ought Lo here how Catholikes in S. Irenaeus tyme did confound all heretikes by the fayth of the Roman Church and by the Succession of Bishops in that See And he yeldeth the reason saying (y) Ibid. for to this Church by reason of her more powerfull Principality all Churches must necessarily agree that is to say all the faythfull of what place soeuer in which Church the tradition and fayth of the Apostles hath bene alwayes conserued And in confirmation of this he reckoneth by name all the Popes from S. Peter to Eleutherius who at that tyme gouerned the Church (z) Ibid. And by that orderly and neuer-interrupted Succession he proueth the Roman Church to haue conserued vnto his daies the fayth pure and entyre as it was preached by the Apostles By this Succession that Doctrine and truth which the Apostles preached in the Church hath come to vs And this is a demonstration conuicing that it is one and the same quickening fayth which from the Apostles tyme vntill this day is conserued and delinered in truth And againe relating to this place and speaking of the same Succession of Bishops in the Roman Church which he calleth the principall Succession he declareth all those that withdraw themselues from it to be Schismatikes or heretikes They that are in the Church sayth he (a) L. 4. c. 41. ought to obey those Priests which haue their Succession from the Apostles which togeather with the Succession of their Bishoprikes haue receaued the assured grace of truth according to the good will of the heauenly Father And we ought to hold suspected all others that withdraw themselues from the like Principall Succession and ioyne togeather in some other place We ought I say to hold them as heretikes of a peruerse iudgment or as Schismatikes and selfe-liking presumptuous fellowes or els as Hypocrites that worke for lucre and vaine-glory If then S. Irenaeus in his dayes thought it an argument sufficient to conuince all Heretikes that they had fallen from the true fayth preached by the Apostles because they had fallen from the Succession of Bishops in Peters See to which all the Churches and faythfull of the world must necessarly agree how much more conuincing is the same Argument against Protestants to whom we shew not the Succession of twelue Popes in S. Peters See as S. Irenaeus did to the heretikes of his tyme but almost of 240. You were not ignorant of the force
much that he hath left an especiall Constitution as a perpetuall monument therof to the world (b) Apud Gratis d. 19. c. 30. in Conc. Triburieu c. 30. He could haue told you that Basilius Macedo being present at the eight generall Councell in his Oration to the Fathers there assembled made (c) Act. 6. append open profession of his obedience to be Bishop and Church of Rome and that he gaue this memorable aduice to the Laity (d) Oras in fine Conc. that whereas not they but Bishops haue the charge of gouerment in the Church with the power of binding and loosing the dignity of Pastors belongs to them and that as well himselfe as all lay-men are sheep to be fed to be sanctified to be bound and losed from their bonds by them And if from Emperors he had passed to Kings he could haue told you that howbeit in the time of Lucius the first Christian King of this Iland there were many Churches sounded in Germany France and Spaine yet he desiring to be made a Christian required not the Sacrament of Baptisme from any Bishop of those Countries nearer at hand but writ and sent Embassadors to Eleutherius Pope that from him as from the supreme Pastor and Gouernor of the vniuersall Church himselfe his Queene and people might receaue so necessary a Sacrament as they did by the hands of Fugatius and Damianus whom Eleutherius sent for that purpose into Britaine (e) Bed hist. Augl l. 1. c. 4. de sex aesat He could haue told you that Of win King vnderstanding that the keyes of Heauen were giuen to S. Peter and that the Bishop of Rome was his Successor resolued not to oppose him but so farre forth as he knew and was able to obey his decrees in all things (f) Bed hist. Augl l. 3. c. 25. He could haue told you that Pope Adrian the first being dead and Leo chosen in this place Kenulphus King of the Mercians writ to him (g) Continuat histor Bode l. 1. c. 12. giuing thankes to God that he had prouided for his flock so solicitous a Pastor to whose commands said he I thinke fit to lend humbly an obedient eare And hauing asked his benediction he addeth This benediction all the Kings of the Mercians which haue gone before me haue obtained And that which I humbly craue and desire to obtayne from you O most holy is that you accept of me as your adopted Child as I choose and with all obedience reuerence you in the place of a Father He could haue told you that S. Edward the Confessor writing to Nicolas Pope (h) Alred Rieual in vita S. Edward addressed his letter to him with this inscription To the soueraigne Father of the vniuersall Church Nicolas Edward by the grace of God King of England due subiection If from England he had passed to other Countries he could haue told you that the most Christian King of France Lewis the eleauenth writing to Pius the second saluted him with this title (i) Ep. ad Pium 2. To our most blessed Father Pius the second Pope filiall obedieuce And in the Epistle We haue you that are the Vicar of the liuing God in so great veneration that with a willing minde we are ready to heare your sacred admonitions especially in Ecclesiasticall affaires as the voyce of our Pastor for we professe and know you to be the Pastor of our Lords flock and we obey your commands And among the documents which this holy King S. Lewis on his death-bed left in writing to Philip his Sonne this was one (k) Nangius de gest S. Ludou Surius 25. Aug. Be thou deuout and obedient to the Roman Church as to a Mother and shew thy selfe dutifull to the Bishop therof as to thy spirituall Father It were not difficult to adde more testimonies in the same kind of other Kings of France as of Charles and Hugh of Alphonsus the wise and Ferdinand the Catholike of Spaine of Leo King of the Armenians of Sigismund of Poland c. But these may suffice to persuade any iudicious reader that the most wise and godly Christian Emperors and Kings that Christendome hath bred haue belieued the Pope to be their Pastor and spirituall Father and themselues bound to yeld obedience to him in the affaires of their soules and withall to shew the falshood of your contrary Tenet CHAP. XXX Whether Christian Emperors haue inuested themselues in Ecclesiasticall affaires YOV maintaine the affirmatiue which you proue with seuerall examples all of them directly against your selfe SECT 1. Constantine the Great inuested not himselfe in Ecclesiasticall Causes IN the first place you alleage the example of Constantine the great who was so farre from medling with Ecclesiasticall causes that being solicited in the Councel of Nice to heare and determine certaine controuersies of Bishops he answeared (l) Ruffin l. 1 c. 1.8 Greg. l. 4 〈◊〉 72. Baron an 32â— God hath constituted you Priests and giuen you power to iudge of vs and therfore we are rightly iudged by you but you cannot be iudged by men Wherefore expect yee the iudgment of God alone and let your quarrels whatsoeuer be referred to his diuine iudgment for God hath giuen you to vs as Gods and it is not fit that man should iudge Gods but he alone of whom it is written (m) Psal 81.1 God stood in the congregation of Gods and iudgeth Gods in the middest of them In these words Constantine acknowledgeth the Episcopall power to be aboue the Imperiall and that a Priest in Ecclesiasticall causes hath power to iudge of an Emperor if he be in his Parish wheras contrariwise the Priest cannot be iudged by the Emperor more then the Pastor by his sheep or God by men But you obiect (n) Pag. 161. Constantine iudged the cause of Cecilian B. of Carthage And this you esteeme to be so choice an Argument that afterwards you repeate it twice againe (o) Pag. â—21 327. but very vnaduisedly this very example alone being of it selfe an abosolute demonstration of the falshood of your Doctrine for first the Donatists that required iudges from Constantine in the cause of Cecilian were heretikes who as they had forsaken the communion of Gods Church and as S. Augustine sayth (p) Ep. 1â—â— were guilty of the horrible crime of erecting Altar against altars so in their recourse to Constantine they violated the lawes of the Church for it is said S. Martin (q) Seuer Sulpititius â—ist sâ—â—â—cra l. 2. to the Emperor Maximus a new and neuer heard of impiety that a secular iudge should iudge a cause of the Church And S. Athanasius (r) Ep. ad Solit What hath the Emperor to do with the iudgments of Bishops Hath it euer heue heard since the beginning of the world that the iudgments of the Church did take their force from the Emperor (s) Ep. ad Constant extat aâ—ud Baron anno 355.
haue preferred the Emperors in place aboue the Popes which was not to be endured So you But is this all Doth not Bellarmine giue another reason of far more weight Why do you conceale it But be it as Bellarmine coniectureth that if the Popes had bene personally present the Greeke Bishops would haue giuen priority of place to their Emperors how do you proue that in so doing they should haue done well for they would likewise haue placed Epiphanius Patriarke of Constantinople in a seate equall to Iohn the first Pope of that name but that the supreme dignity of the See Apostllike enforced them to desist from that attempt and to set the Pope in a more eminent throne exalted aboue that of Epiphanius in his owne Church (e) Nicephoe l. 17. c. 27. Nor is it likely that the most religious Emperors of the East who haue professed themselues dutifull and obedient Children to the See Apostolike wold haue taken place of the Popes their spirituall Fathers Pastors if it had bene offered vnto thē by their Bishops But beside Bellarmines reasons there are others As 1. That the Popes being aged men and separated by a large distance of sea and land from the East in which the eight first Generall Councels were held were not fit to vndertake so long iourneys 2. Because as the Fathers of the first Councell of Arles sayd to Siluester (f) Ep. ad Syluestr expressing their griefe that they could not haue his presence at their Coūcell his residence was more necessary at Rome where the Apostles continually sit and where their bloud without intermission giues testimony to the glory of God 3. And for that before the holding of those Easterne Councels the Pope did vsually hold Councels in the West and send his Legates into the East with the votes of the Westerne Bishops arming thē with authority to preside in his place and with direction how to order things in those Easterne Councels As for Vigilius Pope though he were present at Constantinople when the fifth generall Councell was held in that City he would not assist in person because he being then lawfull Pope by election of the Clergy of Rome would giue no occasion of renewing the memory of his entrance into the Papacy by intrusion simony whiles Siluerius his predecessor was liuing and chiefly because seeing the Emperor violently bent to haue the Three Chapters which were the subiect of that Councell condemned though in his particular he condemned them yet for feare of breeding a schisme in the Church he would not be personally present at a Councell in which they should be publikely condemned without the assistance of the Westerne Bishops who earnestly withstood their condemnation CHAP. XXXII Whether Popes haue challenged ciuill subiection from Emperors and Kings Christian or Heathen YOV set downe (g) Pag. 169. as an vndoubted principle of Catholikes that Popes of after ages challeng ciuil subiection of Princes not only Christian but also Ethinck and Heathen vnto them This you proue by examples of Popes and other arguments which I shall briefly examine SECT I. Your first Argument out of Innocent the third examined POpes of after ages say you (h) Pag. 169. haue challenged an absolute power directly or indirectly ouer all secular Princedome not only Christian but also of Ethnick and Heathen Emperors as well by corporall as by spirituall punishments euen to the depriuing them of their Kingdomes and liues And that they may seeme to exact this plenitude of authority by diuine Law Pope Innocent the ihird maketh this Papall Decree concluding the Emperors to be subiect to the Popes because it is written God made two great lights the Sunne to rule the day and the Moone to gouerne the night This argument you take out of an epistle of Innocent written to the Emperor of Constantinople who conceauing that Innocent in a letter had reprehended him for his irreuerence to the Patriarke of Constantinople wondred therat And the cause of his wonder was because S. Peter sayth (i) 1. Pet. 2.13 Be ye subiect to euery humane creature whether it be to the King as excelling or to the rules sent by him to the reuenge of those that do ill Innocent in his answere hauing proued euidently that the Emperor misunderstood S. Peters words addeth that he might haue learned the prerogatiue of Priesthood by what God himselfe spake not to a King but to a Priest Behold I haue constituted thee ouer kingdomes and nations c. But in that whole Epistle he maketh no decree either for deposing or excommunicating Kings or Emperors or for punishing them corporally or spiritually or for depriuing them of their Kingdomes and liues or concerning any other matter but only proueth the receaued doctrine of the ancient Fathers that the Episcopall dignity excelleth the Imperial as for as the Sunne surpasseth the Moone the soule the body Which sayth he to the Emperor if your Imperiall Highnesse did prudently consider you would not cause nor permit the Patriarke of Constantinople a great and honorable member of the Church to sit on the left syde at your footstoole being that other Princes rise with reuerence to their Archbishops and Bishops as is fit they should and appoint them a Venerable seate neare to their owne persons Nor did I write to you by way of reprehension though I might with reason haue reprehended because as there he explicates Christ made Peter and in him his Successors Pastors of his whole flock not exempting Kings or Emperors This is the summe of Innocents Epistle in which you see he doth not so much as check the Emperor but in a sweet and Fatherly way admonish him of his want of respect to the Patriarke of Constantinople Is it not then intolerable falshood to say this Epistle is a Papall decree wherby Innocent and other Popes of after ages challenge an absolute power by diuine Law ouer all Christian and Heathen Kings and Emperors to punish them as well by corporall as by spirituall punishments euen to the depriuing them of their Kingdomes and liues Is any such thing mentioned in that Epistle If this be not dishonest dealing and excessiuely imposterous what is But to iustify this imposture you say (k) Pag. 170. Vpon this Glosse the Deuines and Canonists the popes Parats and Parasites conclude that euery Emperor borroweth his power from the Pope as doth the Moone her light from the Sunne be the Emperor Christian or Ethnick and therfore is to submit himselfe to the Pope and that Not by the order of Charity but by duety of subordination and subiection The Authors whom you are pleased to call The Popes Parats and Parasites and to produce as witnesses of these your falsities are Bozius Bellarmine and Carerius Of which three the two first Bozius and Bellarmine where you cite them are so far from drawing any such conclusion from that Glosse that they make no mention at all of the Glosse And the later sentence
Councell of Hierusalem and reported in that of Constantinople vnder Menas (a) Act. 4. to iustify their sentence of deposition against Anthymus B. of Trebizond And Theophilus Patriarke of Alexandria (b) Ep. ad Epiphan apud S. Hieron Ep. 67. a familiar friend to S. Hierome as their mutuall Epistles declare out of the same text proueth the power of condemning heresies giuen by Christ to his Church which sayth he we see now performed for the Church of Christ with the Euangelicall sword hath cut off the heads of Origens serpents And finally this text is alleaged to the same purpose by Petrus Cluniacensis (c) L. 6. ep 14. Alexander of Hales (d) Part. 3. q. 40. memb 2. the Irrefragable Doctor and Maister to S. Thomas of Aquine All which sheweth that either the Fathers and Councells vnderstood not the words of the Prophet or els that you deny the true sense misinterpreting them in fauor of your false Doctrine But returning to S. Bernard That which most of all discouereth your ignorance if not rather fraud is that you say Boniface the eight prophaneth the word of God notoriously for patronizing of rebellions and murders making from pretence of Scripture a Decree to dispossesse Emperors Christian and heathen of their kingdomes depriue them of their lines It is to be noted that this decree of Boniface on which you are pleased to inflict so seuere a censure are the very words of S. Bernard taken out of his fourth booke of Consideration to Eugenius Wherfore you must confesse that S. Bernard prophaned the word of God notoriously for patronizing rebellions and murders and dispossessing Kings of their kingdomes and liues or els you must acknowledge that you wrong and slander Pope Boniface who sayth nothing but what S. Bernard said before him and in S. Bernards owne words I cannot but vehemeÌ„tly suspect that a man of your reading could not but know that the words were S. Bernards but because you durst not for shame of the world impute such horrible wickednesse to so glorious a Sainct and whom Caluin himselfe (e) L. 4. de Consid c. 11. §. 11. acknowledgeth to speake in those his bookes of Consideration as if Truth herselfe did speake you lay it on Boniface Pope that so you may haue some colour to raile freely at him in his name to charge S. Bernard with that impiety of which neither of them both was guilty The second Father whom you alleage is S. Gregory who as he is frequent in Moralls so he explicateth these words of Hieremy in a morall sense of pulling vp Vices and planting vertues by preaching in the soules of the hearers But that they may haue another more litterall sense the Fathers and Councells haue informed you Nor was S. Gregory so ignorant as to thinke he had no other way to reforme the disorders of Bishops and others vnder his charge but by preaching only for his writings his practise and your owne confessions beare witnesse to the contrary (f) See aboue Chap. 15. sect 3. Your third profe is out of Lyra to whose words you adde gratis the aduerbe Tantùm to inferre that Bishops haue no other meanes to represse vices and remedy disorders in their subiects but only by preaching which if it were true how could the Councels of Ephesus and Chalcedon haue deposed Nestorius and Dioscorus not to mention a thousand such exaÌ„ples of which Ecclesiasticall histories are full Yea the word denuntiare which Lyra vseth doth not obscurely import so much for not only preachers but ecclesiasticall Prelates denounce punishment to offenders to deterre them from sinne And so do secular Iudges when they threaten them with corporall chastisements SECT III. Your third Argument out of the examples of Popes examined SOme Popes say you (g) Pag. 171. haue not bene idle but haue put their positions in practise by deposing Kings and Emperors sporting themselues with tossing the crownes from their heads not for any note of heresy but only for not subiecting themselues to the Popes dignity and dominion Why do you not tell vs that when 200. Bishops in the Councell of Ephesus and 630. in the Councell of Chalcedon deposed Nestorius and Dioscorus they did it to sport themselues with tossing the myters of Patriarkes from their heads If any Popes haue deposed Kings or Emperors my assumpt is not either to defend or dispute by what right they did it The first Pope whom you accuse (h) Pag. 171. 174. is Zacharias who being chosen by diuine ordination (i) See Anestasius Platiâ—a Yllescas in his life performed heroical acts for the publike good of the Church He bare singular loue to the clergy and people of Rome and generally to all Christians being ready to spend his life for them He built repaired and adorned with rich furniture many Churches within without Rome He reduced to peace all Italy which he found in combustion of warrs going himselfe in person to effect it He established confirmed Bishopricks and setled the affaires of Christian religion in Germany He was of a most sweet and malde disposition adorned with all vertue and goodnesse slow to anger most ready to mercy and compassion rendring to no man euill for euill but to the imitation of Christ ouercoming euill with good in so much that being made Pope he aduanced to honors those who formerly had bene his enimies and bestowed rewards on them And finally for his singular vertues he is reuerenced as a Saint and his feast yearely celebrated by the whole Church of God (k) Martyrol Roman 15. Martij The second Pope you traduce is Gregory the seauenth who say (l) Pag. 171. 174. you deposed Henry the third Now this Gregory whom you so often and so intemperatly reuile (n) Pag. 40. 171. 174. 179. was one of the most admirable Prelates that hath possessed the chaire of S. Peter A man sayth Nauclerus (o) Chronol genral 37. religious fearfull of God a louer of iustice and equity constant in aduersity and that for God feared not to enterprise whatsoeuer was iust A man sayth Schafnaburgensis (p) Hist. rerum German an 1977. of great constancy and inuincible courage against auarice The signes and wonders which God did worke by the prayers of Gregory and his most feruent zeale for God and the lawes of the Church did sufficiently defend him against the poysoned tongues of his detractors He was sayth Otho Frisingensis (q) L. 6. hist c. 32.34.36 alwayes most constant in Ecclesiasticall rigor a paterne to his flock shewing by his example that which in words he taught a valiant champion that feared not to oppose himselfe as a wall for the house of God and whose death bred no small griefe to the Church because she saw herselfe depriued of so worthy a Pastor who among all Priests and Bishops of Rome was of most especiall zeale and authority A man in whose defence S. Anselme that
pag. 297. Suauissimus erat in Gallijs famae odor grauitatis saenctitatis ac rerum gestarum eius Pontificis The fame and sweet odor of this Popes grauity holinesse of life and greatnesse of his actions was most fragrant through out all France And as Blondus reporteth that he writ libros doctrina plenos so others witnesse (d) Geneb in Chronico anno 1198. Cicarollus Platina in vita Innocent 3. that he writ more then almost all the Popes before his time put togeather And finally Clement the fixth as you may reade in Plation Yllescas and others (e) In vita Clementis 6. was a man of great learning and eloquence liberall to all of most courteous and sweet conuersation and adorned with many excellent vertues From whence euery man of iudgement will easily vnderstand how vntruly you charge him with tossing the Emperors crowne from his head to sport himselfe c. SECT IV. Doctor Morton contradicteth himselfe TO shew your splene yet more against Gregory the seauenth of whom beside what hath bene said Martinus Polonus writeth (f) Apud Gened an 1087. that by his prayers he wrought great miracles and Lambertus Schafnaburgensis (g) A pud Geneb ibid. that he was endowed with the gift of prophesy you say (h) Pag. 174. sin 175. It is confessed that no Pope in all the succession of S. Peter did depose any Emperor before Gregory the seauenth that is vntill a thousand and sixty yeares after Christ You bring for your author Otho Frisingensis who though otherwise a learned and pious Bishop yet being grand-child to Henry the Fourth whom Gregory deposed writeth partially in his fauor and contradicteth himselfe for he confesseth (i) L. 5. c â—3 l. 4. c. 34.35.36 that Zacharias Pope who liued 300. yeares before Gregory the seauenth deposed Childericus King of France And the same you likewise contradicting your selfe acknowledge (k) Pag. 171.174 producing the same example of Zacharias which Otho doth Nor could you be ignorant of others more ancient alleaged by Bellarmine in that place (l) L. 5. dâ— Pent. c. 8. from whence you toke this of Gregory the seauenth but you mention not them that you may haue the better colour to inueigh against him CHAP. XXXIII Doctor Mortons late Sermon preached in the Cathedrall Church of Durham answeared AS the maine drift of your writings is to make Catholike religion odious and to exasperate the mindes of Protestants against all the professors therof so there is nothing more frequent with you then to slander Catholikes in generall with seditious Tenets which are not theirs but the knowne Principles of your brerhren Luther Caluin Beza Buchanam Knox Goodman Gilby and others (m) See M. Patison Monarchomacbia per toi and Brereley Prot. Apol. Preface to the Reader The answeare giuen you by your ancient friend (n) P. Persons in his Treatise tending to mitigation against the seditious writings of Thomas Morton Minister might haue seemed sufficient to make you ashamed of opening your mouth againe in that kind But I find that in your later writings you are as bitter as euer and to that end haue lately preached a Sermon before the Kings most Excellent Maiesty in the Cathedrall Church of Durham which is nothing but a peece of your Grand Imposture printed long since now againe newly preached and reprinted vnder the name of a Sermon which I suppose some of your Auditors that had read your booke could not but marke and thinke it a thing vnworthy of so great a Rabbin to present his Maiesty with a peece of an old Imposture insteed of a new Sermon Because I haue vndertaken the confutation of your Grand Imposture I will in like manner answere the particulars of your Sermon noting withall the places of your Grand Imposture out of which you haue borrowed them SECT I. The sense of S. Pauls words which Doctor Morton tooke for his text declared THe text of your Sermon are these words of the Apostle which you call A sacred and diuine Canon Omnis anima c. Let euery soule be subiect to higher Powers c. In these words the Apostle speaketh not of all soules and all Powers vniuersally els he should command all higher Powers for they also are soules to be subiect to other higher Powers v. g. the King of France to the King of Spaine the King of Spaine to the King of England and the Emperor to the great Turke Wherfore by higher powers be vnderstandeth Superiors and by euery soule all subiects But since there be Superiors of seuerall kindes the next question will be what Superiors he meaneth by higher powers and what subiects by euery soule You by higher powers vnderstand (o) Serm. pag. 4. the Temper all Magistrate that carieth the sword I deny not but that diuers learned expositors seeme to be of opinion that the Apostle speaketh wholly or chiefly of temporall Princes and other secular Powers subordinate to them But then it is euident against you that as S. Paul speaketh to the Christians of Rome and in them to all others so he doth not command them to obey secular Princes in matters of Religion but in temporall affaires only for the Roman Emperors to whom the Christians of Rome were then subiect being Heathens enemies to Christ and Persecutors of his Church to bid the Christians obey them in matters of religion had bene to bid them disobey Christ and renounce their sayth And this you must confesse to be true for you say (p) Serm. pag. 7. Imposture pag. 175. 176. 276. 278. that Popes and other Christians for the space of 600. yeares performed this Obedience commanded by S. Paul and yet they neuer yielded to Nero vnder whom S. Paul writ his Epistle to the Romans or to any other Heathen Prince Obedience in Religion but in temporall affaires only And of this Obedience the Greeke Fathers Chrysostome Oecumenius Euthymius Theodoret and Theophilact speake when they say that S. Paul excepteth not from this Obedience Apostles Euangelists or Prophets for all Christians Ecclesiastiks and Laicks are bound to obey the Lawes of temporall Princes in whose dominions they liue And this Obedience was performed by the Popes of Rome whiles they were not temporall Princes themselues But now being and hauing bene for many yeares temporall Monarkes as absolute in their estates as other Princes in theirs it can no more be inferred out of your text that Popes are subiect to Kings then that the King of Spaine is subiect to the King of France There is not say you out of Tully (q) Pag. 289. a greater degree of futility then for any man to obiect that to which when it shall be retorted vpon himselfe he shall not tell what to say If when you came downe from the pulpit some prudent man that had heard you inferre from this text that the Pope is subiect to temporall Princes had desired to learne of you to what temporall Prince
owne house and the Citizens of Paris breaking into the houses of Huguenots killed many of them The like they did at Lions Roan Orleans and diuers other places This is the history of the Massacre of Paris reported by Surius (k) Comment rerum in or be gest anno 1572. out of the relation printed at Paris and out of the King of France his letters written with his owne hand to the Princes of Germany Which though it be a liuely expession of the barbarous cruelty of your French brethren yet they are not ashamed in their printed bookes to reuile the most Christian King and exaggerate his cruelty for this facts when as they witnesse Surius (l) Ibid. in the space of a few yeares by their owne priuate authority without and contrary to all order of Law haue murdered many thousand Catholikes in France and would peraduenture reioyce if by their hands the King had likewise dispatched all the rest And what your loue to the Catholikes of England is these obiections are a sufficient testimony which serue for nothing els but to exasperate the King and State against them SECT VII The same matter prosecuted YOu goe on obiecting (m) Pag. 172. 176. Tolosanus a Lawier who writeth He had not read in any history that for the space of 300. yeares after Christ Christians euer rebelled against Kings or plotted against their gouerment which Barklay extendeth to a longer time of 1000. yeares We ioyne with Tolosanus Barklay therin And if any Christians before or after those times haue rebelled or held it lawfull to rebell against their Soueraignes we disclaime from them as from furies and plagues of the Christian Common wealth We detest their Doctrine as impious and hartily wish that all your new Reformers and some others more ancient not vnlike to them and well liked of by you were of the same mind for who knoweth not that Wickliffe a predecessor to you in many pointes of your doctrine and a Foxian Saint (n) Ianuar. 2. teacheth that if a Prince gouerne ill or fall into sinne he is no longer a Prince but that his subiects may take armes against him and punish him at their pleasure Who hath not heard of Luthers Doctrine in his Articles condemned by the Catholike Church (o) In bulla Leonis 10. that Christians are free exempted from all Princes Lawes and that therupon immediatly followed in Germany that tumultuous rebellion of the Pesants against their Lords wherin were slaine aboue an hundred thousand (p) Surâ—is Comment rerum in or be gest anno 1525. And who is ignorant of Caluins Doctrine that Princes Lawes oblige not in conscience but only for externall and temporall respects (r) L. 4. instit c. 10. §. 5. You I know haue labored to excuse him from these and other seditious Tenets But I likewise know that Brerely hath truly told you (s) Prot. Apol praefa sect 11. that your excuse consisteth vpon violent comparing of phrases vnworthy your iudgment vnworthy your learning vnworthy of reply therto Caluins words are (t) In Daniel c. 6. vers 22.25 Apud Brerel cit Abdicant se potestate terrent Principes dum insurgunt contra Deum c. Earthly Princes do bereaue themselues of authority when they erect themselues against God They are vnworthy to be accompted in the number of men and we must rather spit vpon their faces then obey them Can these words admit any glosse Are they not euidently seditious Doth not Doctor Wilkes (u) Brereley ibid. obiect them to the Puritanes as such They were sayth he (x) Brereley ibid. your Teachers who accompt those Princes who are not refined by their spirit vnworthy to be accompted amongst the number of men and therfore rather to be spitted vpon then obeyed They were your Teachers who defend rebellion against Princes of a different Religion c. But what need haue we of Caluins or his Brethrens words when we haue the vnanswearable proofe of his deeds Doth not M. Sutcliffe confesse (y) Brereley ibid. sect 11. that they of Geneua at the instigation of Caluin and Farellus deposed their Liege Lord and Prince from his temporall right albeit he was by right of succession the temporall Lord and owner of that City territory And doth not M. Bancroft speaking of the chiefe Ministers of Geneua which were Caluin Farellus and Beza say (z) Brereley ibid. It hath bene a principle with them that if Kings and Princes refuse to reforme Religion the inferior Magistrates or people by direction of the Ministery may lawfully and ought if need require euen by force and armes to reforme it themselues From whence but from these Principles haue Caluin Beza and other their Successors to this day conuinced the same vnlawfull vsurpation And to come nerer home did not King Iames of famous memory in his 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 complain (a) L. 2. c. 40. 41. of the perturbation and confusion of the kingdom of Scotland wrought by the fiery spirits of your Ministers in particular of the calamities brought vpon his Grand-Mother and Mother by them and of their seditious plots against himselfe in his yonge age And from whence did the late rebells of Scotland learne their lesson but out of the same Schoole and from the same Maisters Do not you acknowledge (b) Serm. pag. 38. that they defend their rising in armes against his Maiesty by the authority of Luther Caluin and Beza I know your pretend to quit them from that imputation but the Scots were to conuersant with their doctrine not to vnderstand it And besides what hath bene said it were easy if worth the labor to shew that notwithstanding your defence of their innocency all the water of the Ocean is not able to wash them cleane from the filth of those doctrines But if you please to be further satisfied in this point read M. Parison (c) Monarchomachia per tot Breerley (d) Prot. Apol praef tot and Endaemon Ioannes (e) Apol. pro Henr. Garn. c. 3. who set down so many particulars of the acknowledged doctrines and practises of Protestants in that kind in the expresse words of your owne writers that impudency it selfe cannot gainesay them And as it is certaine that you can neuer free your brethren from these doctrines so it is no lesse that you charge Catholikes falsly with the same for who knoweth not the constant doctrine of all our Diuines to be that rebellion of subiects against their Liege Lords and Soueraignes is vnlawfull in any case in any occasion vnder any pretence or to any end whatsoeuer This is taught by the Angelicall Doctor S. Thomas of Aquine not in one but in many places of his workes This is the doctrine of Caietan of Sotus Valentia Bellarmine Tolet Serarius Becanus Richeome Salmeron Lessius Gretserus Hessius Eudaemon Ioannes and in a word of all Catholike Diuines (f) Of this see Patison
pag. 367. and Eudaemon Ioan. Paralell Torti ac Tortoris c. 5 pag. 224. seqq This they proue out of the holy Scripture out of S. Augustine out of the practise of the Catholike Church and that with solid and forcible reasons (g) See Valent in 212 d. 5. q. 8. punct 3. But you tell vs (h) Serm. pag. 24. of a principle of ours That subiects must obey whiles they cannot resist In proofe of this you alleage (i) Serm. p. 35. Alane In his moderate defence but you neither mention any words of his nor any Chapter in particular and with good reason for Alane hath no such doctrine You produce (k) Serm. pag. 24. Creswell in his Philopater and Bellarmine The one you slander falsly The other you vnderstand not or els which I feare wittingly misconstrue his meaning For Creswell Eudaemon Ioannes (l) Apol. pro Henr. Garn. c. 3. pag. 58. hath made answeare long since to Syr Edward Cooke who cited Creswell in his Philopater as you do borrowing your obiection from him The answeare is and of certaine knowledge I know it to be true that you temerariously vent the fictions of your owne braine for truthes Philopater was not Creswell He neuer writ any such booke And who-euer Philopater was the booke is of a competent bulke and you cite out of it some nine or ten words cut off from the frame of their contexture diuided into two different sentences and this also at randome for the booke being diuided into Chapters and the Chapters into numbers you neither specify Chapter nor number which if you had done Philopater might haue spoken for himselfe and shewed the wrong you do him And no lesse is the iniury you offer to Bellarmine (m) Serm. pag. 24. His opinion is that the Church had authority to depose Nero Dioclesian or other heathenish Tyrants that persecuted Christ but did prudently abstaine from the vse therof for wanting forces the vse of her authority could no way auaile Christians but giue occasion of raising greater stormes of persecution against them Which opinion of his canot quit you from accusing slandering him wrongfully for doth he euer say or insinuate that those Emperors were not lawfull Princes or that they being so it was lawfull for Christians or any other their subiects to rebell against them This is the Doctrine you impute to him and this you should haue proued to be his but cannot therfore change the state of the Question to father on him the seditious Doctrine of your Lutheran and Caluinian brethren and to suggest to his Maiesty that the Scots haue learned the Principles of their rebellion from vs which by their owne confession (n) Serm pag. 38. they professe to haue learned from Luther Caluin and Beza Lastly as I haue admonished you of slandering Vrbane Pope and other Catholikes so must I aduertise you of the like wrong done to Garnet the Iesuit whom say you (o) Serm. Ibid. I knew at his arraignement to confesse that he heard of the powder-treason out of Confession Belike you knew it by hear-say from some one that was deafe or if he were not deafe made no scruple of lying for no man that was present and had his hearing would be so shamelesse as to say he heard him confesse that which it is certaine he neuer spake but directly the contrary and toke it vpon his death which may yet be proued by the attestation of so many and such witnesses that if it were as free for Garnets friends and kinsfolkes to sue you with an action of slander as it is free for you with controlement to write your pleasure against them that haue not freedome to answeare for themselues your accusation of Garnet wold proue aswell to your cost as to your shame you cōfesse (p) Ibid. that at his death he publikely exhorted the Romish professors to auoid all acts of treason And it is no lesse certaine that in his life time he neuer taught other Doctrine that when he heard of that damnable plot in Confession he enioyned him of whom he heard it to vse his vttermost endeauor to diswade and hinder it yea moreouer as Eudaemon Ioannes (q) Apol. pro Henr. Garn. c. 1. pag. 8. 9. reporteth from relation of them that had best meanes to know the truth the very hearing of it in Confession was so great a torment to his mind that he could not sleep nor take any rest for many dayes and that with prayers and sacrifices he did beg of the diuine goodnesse most earnestly to prouide some remedy for so execrable a designe which he could not disclose to the Magistrates without violating the seule of Sacramentall secrecy which Christ himselfe hath commanded to be kept inuiolable I conclude therfore that Garnet Cardinall Alane Bellarmine Creswell and other Catholikes whom you defame with false accusations are in the number of them of whom our Sauiour said (r) Math. 5.11.12 Blessed are yee when they shall reuile you and persecute you and speake all that naught is against you vntruly for my sake be glad and reioice for your reward is very great in heauen CHAP. XXXIV Doctor Mortons doctrine condemneth the Saintes and Martyrs of God HAVING now gone through your Sermon preached to his Maiesty out of your grand Imposture I returne to the continuance of my answere to the same Imposture You had before obiected some Fathers and hauing parted with them lōg since now after many Chapters you come to scrape acquaintance with some of them againe But their Doctrine is to ancient to haue any commerce with your Nouelties SECT I. S. Polycarpe obiected by Doctor Morton YOu beginne your twelth Chapter opposing (s) Pag. 183. that S. Polycarpe going to Rome in tyme of Anicetus Pope to consult with him about the celebration of Easter would not yeild to forsake the Asian custome contrary to that of the Roman Church and yet neuerthelesse Anicetus and Polycarpe did still communicate with ech other True but if the Asian custome had bene then condemned by the Church and the mantayners therof anathematized as heretikes as afterwards they were by Victor Pope and the holy Councell of Nice Anicetus would not haue held Polycarpe in his communion vnlesse he had forsaken the Asian custome and conformed himselfe to the Roman practised by all other Churches in the world Nor would Polycarpe haue stood out in defence of the Asian custome had he not seene that Anicetus though he misliked it yet did not condemne it but permit him still the practise therof vntill the Church defined otherwise Which Anicetus did being desirous to giue him all content for the great reuerence due vnto him as well for his yeares as also because he had bene disciple to S. Iohn Euangelist and was then actually Bishop of Smyrna a principall Church of Asia But how great reuerence Polycarpe bare to Anicetus and to the Church of Rome appeareth in this that being
other Popes Those words Away with enuy let the ambition of the Roman height depart were not spoken by S. Hierome to taxe the person of Damasus or his Seate of pride but to signify that albeit his Seat were placed in Rome which being the imperiall City head of the world gloried in her owne greatnesse yet he was and ought to be free from pride as being Successor to a fisher man and a disciple of the Crosse In regard wherof he deemed it no presumption in himselfe to write vnto him that by his authority he might know whose communion to imbrace and whose to auoyd Your second obiection (k) Pag. 206. is a repetition of what you haue formerly sayd of Liberius his fall from the Catholike fayth into heresy by subscribing to the condemnation of Athanasius communicating with the Arians You haue bene answeared that Liberius assented to his condemnatiō not for any error in fayth but for crimes forged against him by the Arians in so much that Athanasius himselfe euen in that excuseth him saying (l) Ep. ad Solit He was compelled therto by force of torments and therfore that which terrors and feares extorted from him ought not to bethought his sentence but that which he pronounced freely when no violence was offered vnto him Thirdly you obiect S. Hierome in despight and indignation calleth Rome Babylon and land of captiuity and tearmeth it a purple whore and strange land wherin he could not sing the Lords song concerning the holy Ghost yea he bespots the whole Clergy of that City with the note of ignorance and at last after the death of Damasus he quit Rome as a land of bondage that he might enioy his liberty in Iudaea among the Christian Iewes Could this be said of a City priuiledged with a perpetuall residence of the holy Ghost and deseruing the title of Motherhood ouer the whole Catholike Church This is your question and my answeare is That S. Hierome when he calleth Rome Babylon a land of captiuity and a purple whore giues those names to Rome not as to the seat of Religion but of the Empire not to the Church but to the Imperiall Court and Senat not to the ecclesiasticall but to the politike state of Rome to the troopes of Courtiers solicitors negotiants finally not so much in regard of secular Christians as of Monkes by reason of the distractions that the noyse confusion and tumult of men and affaires in so great a city brought to Monastical silence recollection for so it is plaine out of his Epistle to Marcella (m) Ep. 16. in which though inuiting her to leaue Rome and go to Hierusalem he call Rome Babylon yet he presently addeth It is true that in that City is the holy Church there are the trophies of the Apostles and Martyrs there is the true confession of Christ there is the fayth celebrated by the Apostle the Christian name euery day exalted by the depression of Paganisme troden vnder foot But the ambition the power and greatnesse of that City to visit and to be visited to salute to be saluted to flatter and detract to heare and speake nay to see though vnwillingly so great a multitude of men are things farre from the purpose and quiet of those that would follow a monasticall life This sheweth that when S. Hierome cals Rome Babilon purple whore he speakes not of the Church but of the temporall state of Rome And when he cals it a land of captiuity he speakes it in regard of the noyse confusion and tumult not suiting with the retirement of Monkes which inconuenience he noteth also in the City of Hierusalem which otherwise sayth (n) Ep. 13. ad Pauli de instit Monachis he by reason of the places of the Crosse and Resurrection were a dwelling much to be desired by Monkes The second part of your obiection that S. Hierome bespote the whole Clergy of that City with the note of ignorance is your false comment He complaineth only of a few Priests and Deacons of Rome who being iealous of his faour with Pope Damasus and enuiyng the great reuerence which the deuout Ladies of Rome bare to his person Damasus being dead toke boldnesse to raise slanders against him accusing him that he had translated Didymus an hereticall Author that he had conuersed too familiarly with the great Ladies of Rome and persuaded them to quit their Countrey children and friends to leaue the world and shut themselues vp as recluses in the Monasteries of Palestine Which complaint no way toucheth the fayth of the Roman Church nor the succession of S. Peter nor the communion of the See Apostolike nor maketh against the perpetuall residence of the holy Ghost in that Church S. Hierome himselfe crying out (o) Aduers Ruffin l. 3. that her fayth suffereth no delusions and being fensed by S. Pauls authority cannot be altered Your fourth obiection (p) Pag. 207. out of his Epistle to Euagrius of the Deacons of Rome sitting in presence of the Priests is already answeared (q) Aboue Chap. 15. sect 2 But you adde to it (r) Pag. 208. 218. as a fifth Argument that euery Patriarke hath a principality height of a pastorall watch-tower by reason of the greatnesse and dignity of his Patriarkship aboue all Metropolitans and Bishops whatsouer and yet haue they not ouer all Bishops power of iurisdiction but only principality of order If by principality of order you vnderstand priority of place euery Patriarke hath in that sense priority of order ouer all Bishops that are not Patriarkes And in the same sense the Pope hath priority of order ouer all Bishops Patriarkes But if by principality of order you vnderstand the Sacerdotall and Episcopall dignity conferred on them by their ordination consecration your Doctrine is vntrue for the inequality of Bishops cōsisteth not in any principality of Sacerdotall or Episcopall orders which one Bishop hath ouer another but in the inequality of Pastoral power and iurisdiction A Bishop in his orders is equall to his Metropolitan the Metropolitan to his Patriarke and the Patriarke to the Pope himselfe In this sense S. Hierome sayth (s) Ep. ad Euag Whersoeuer there shall be a Bishop either at Rome or at Eugubium at Constantinople or at Rhegium at Alexandria or at Tanais he is of the same merit and Priesthood because all Bishops if we consider only the dignity of their orders and Priesthood are equall euen he of Eugubium a small City in Italy to the Pope Erasmus his Comment vpon this passage of S. Hierome which you bring (t) Pag. 208. to proue that the inequality of Episcopall iurisdiction is not measured by the amplitude of Diocesses I approue not And much lesse do I allow your inference out of his comment that according to the diuine Law the Pope hath not any greater iurisdiction then whatsoeuer other inferior Bishop for Christ when he gaue to S. Peter
dayes the Roman Church held it canonicall (e) Pag. 222. are all repetitions of your former Arguments which in their due places haue bene answeared (f) Chap. 22. sect 3. Chap. 25.26 tot Chap. 30. sect 1. Chap. 34. sect 6. But to them you adde here a Consideration of your iudicious Casaubon (g) Pag. 223. requiring vs who accompt the only note of Schisme to be diuided from the Roman Church and Pope thereof to answeare Why S. Augustine who in seauen Bookes besides many other places confuted the Schismaticall Donatists yet neuer spake word of the Monarchy of the Pope or of the infallibility of his iudgement whereby to reduce them to the vnity of the Church and truth Your iudicious Casaubon shewed great lack of iudgment in making this Argument and that he had not read S. Augustine or if he had that he did not vnderstand him or if he had read did vnderstand him then you know what he sheweth in concealing the truth For throughout all those seauen Bookes against the Donatists there is nothing which S. Augustine so often obiecteth nor so much vrgeth against them as their separation from the Roman Church repeating the same not once or twice but almost in euery Chapter of some of those bookes For when the Donatists did striue to defend their heresy of rebaptization by the authority of S. Cyprian S. Augustine answeared (h) L. 1. de Bapt. c. 18.19 l. 2. c. 1.5.6.7.9 Contra Crescon l. ◠c. 32. l. 2. c. 3. alibi saepè that Cyprians patronage could not auaile them because they were out of the Communion of the Roman Church in which S. Cyprian liued died And doth he not in other his writings against the Donatists often vrge the succession of Bishops in the Roman Church If sayth (i) Ep. 165. he the order and succession of Bishops be to be obserued how much more assuredly and safely indeed do we begin our accompt from S. Peter himselfe to whom as he represented the whole Church our Lord sayd (k) Math. 16.18 Vpon this Rock I will build my Church For Linus succeoded to Peter Cletus to Linus c. And so reckoning all the Popes vnto Anastasius who then sate in the chaire of S. Peter he concludeth against the Donatists In this order of succession there is not one Donatist to be found to which I adde no nor yet one Protestant And reckoning the motiues that held him in the Church among them he setteth downe the succession of Bishops in the See of Rome There are sayth he (l) Cont Ep. Fundam c. 4. many thinges which with greatest reason hold me in this Catholike Church 1. The vniforme consent of people and nations which is not to be found in the Protestant Church confined to a few Northern countreyes in a corner of the world 2. A certaine authority begun by miracles which Protestants confesse themselues not to haue 3. The succession of Priests euen from S. Peter vntill this present Bishop Wherfore since that Church in which there is a continued succession of Bishops from S. Peter cannot be the Protestan Church which hath no such succession but the Roman it followeth that S. Augustine held the Roman Church to be the Catholike Church And therefore expressing to the Donatists how much he grieued to see them ly cut of from this Church he said (m) Psal cont part Donati It greeueth vs to see you ly so cut of Number the Priests euen from the See of Peter and consider in that ranck of Fathers who succeeded whom That 's the Rock which the proud gates of hell ouercome not Here againe S. Augustine sheweth the Roman Church to be the Catholike Church built vpon Peter and his successors as vpon a rock against which heresies schismes which are the proud gates of hell shall neuer preuaile and all that are out of her communion to be as branches out of from the Vine and deuoid of all spirituall life And as he held all that are out of the Roman Church to be in miserable state so contrarily he held all that liue in her Communion to be most hapy and secure from error in fayth for so he deemed Cecilian Archbishop of Carthage to be notwithstanding all the plots and conspiracies of the Donatists against him He might sayth S. Augustine (n) Ep. 162. contemne the conspiring multitude of his enemies because he knew himselfe to be vnited by communicatory letters both to the Church of Rome in which the soueraignty of the See Apostolike hath alwaies florished and to other Countries from whence the Ghospell came first into Africa These few passages among many others shew that your iudicious Casaubon failed much in iudgment and truth when he aduentured to say that S. Augustine in his workes against the Donatists neuer spake word of the Monarchy of the Pope nor of the infallibility of his iudgment wherby to reduce them to the vnity of the Church and truth And as he vrged the authority of the See Apostolike against the Donatists so hath he testified that by the same authority taken from the authority of holy Scriptures (o) Aug. Ep. 91. the Pelagians were condemned who therfore seeing themselues esteemed as Heretikes throughout all the Westerne Church in which they liued sought to the Churches of the East hoping to be admitted into their Communion as the Protestants of Germany writing to Hieremy Patriarke of Constantinople did (p) See Iustus Caluinus Apol. pro Eccl. Rom. pag. 10. whom therfore we may check with S. Augustines words written against Iulian a chiese mantainer of the Pelagian heresy I thinke sayth he (q) Cont. Iulia l. 1. c. 4. that part of the world ought to suffice thee in which our Lord would haue the chiefe of the Apostles to be crowned with a most glorious Martyrdome To the Gouernor of which Church Blessed Innocentius if thou woldst haue giuen care thou hadst ere this freed thy dangerous youth from the Pelagian snares for what answeare could that holy man giue to the African Councells but that which from ancient times the Roman Church with all others perseuerantly holdeth And els where he noteth (r) L. 2. de grat Christi pecc orig c. 8. that albeit Pelagius had drawne others into error he could neuer deceaue the Roman Church for the most Blessed Pope Sozimus considered what opinion his predecessor worthy to be imitated had of his proceedings and what iudgment the fayth of the Romans to be commended in our Lord had made of him But you obiect (s) Pag. 225. It is mere sophistry to inferre a necessity of vnion with the Church of Rome to be professed of all Christians at all times because the Fathers required it in their times By this Argument a Pelagian a Donatist an Eutychian or any other Heretike may iustify his departure from the Roman Church pretending as you do that the necessity of vnion with her was not for all times
Charity only this euery Bishop and euery Christian is bound to haue according to the measure of his ability Or it may be of Iustice and such is the care or charge which euery Bishop hath of his owne Dioces and the Pope of the Vniuersall Church for to him by reason of his office of supreme Pastor belongeth not only a charitable care but the rule gouerment of the vniuersall Church (r) See this proued Chap. 17. sect 2. Chap. 19. sect 3. In this sense Acacius spake when he said (s) Ep. ad Simplic Simplicius Pope had the care of all Churches And the Fathers euermore speake in this sense when they say that to Peter and his Successors in the See of Rome was committed the care of the vniuersal Church In this sense S. Chrysostome said (t) Hom. 87. in Ioan. The care of the whole world was committed to Peter and what he meaneth by Care he explicateth saying (u) Hom. 80. ad pop The gouerment of the Church throughout the whole world was committed to Peter Euthymius (x) Ad c. 21. Ioan. Christ committed to Peter pascendi curam gubernationem the care of feeding and gouerning his flock So Sozomenus (y) L. 3. c. 7. Iulius Pope restored to their seates Athanasius and other Bishops banished by the Arians because the care of all belonged to him by reason of the dignity of his See S. Leo speaking to Anastasius B. of Thessalonica (z) Ep. 84. and making him his Vicar in the East To the end sayth he thou maiest supply the place of my gouerment and help me in that care which by diuine institution I owe to all Churches and in person visit those Prouinces remote from the See Apostolike And to Anatolius Patriarke of Constantinople (a) Ep. 46. If they who haue so grieuously offended against Flauianus offer satisfaction let relation therof be made to the See Apostolike that our solicitude may ordayne what is to be obserued S. Gregory (b) L. 4. ep 32. To all that know the Ghospell it is manifest that by the voyce of our Lord the Care and Princedome of the whole Church was committed to Peter Prince of the Apostles And againe (c) L. 7. ep 70. indict 2. By the care of our vndertaken gouerment we are enforced to extend with vigilancy the solicitude of our office S. Bernard (d) Serm. 3. de 7. misericord frag Witnesse Peter to whom the Pastorall care of the whole Church was committed These and a thousand more testimonies conuince that when the ancient Fathers speake of the care of all Churches committed to the B of Rome by Care they vnderstand the Pastorall charge and obligation of ruling and gouerning the Vniuersall Church and therby condemne you of falsity who to the testimony of Victor Vâ—iconsis calling the Roman Church the Head of all Churches answeare (e) Pag. 271. that he calls it not Head of all Churches in power and iurisdiction and that we could neuer proue this out of any ancient Father for you haue heard it proued by their most expresse and vnanswearable words (f) Aboue Chap. 17. sect 2. Chap. 19. sect 3. Yf the fore to expresse this vniuersall authority and iurisdiction of the Pope ouer all Churches they vse somtimes the word Care rather then Gouerment it is because as S. Chrysostome (g) Hom. 3. in Act. speaking of the Pastorall authority of S. Peter ouer the other Apostles hath noted Eminency of spirituall power is a care of subiects not a Lord-like dominion And this sheweth the wrong you do to Costerus (h) Pag. 235. when to disproue the Popes vniuersall iurisdiction you alleage him calling it Care for with what conscience could you possesse your reader that by Care he vnderstands not power and iurisdiction but only a charitable solicitude knowing as you do that in the same Chapter (i) Eâ—chirid Tract de Pont. solut 7. he proueth out of Scripture and Fathers the Pastorall charge of ruling and gouerning the vniuersall Church committed by Christ to S. Peter and his Successors He that readeth this in Costerus and alleageth him for the contrary what can his intention be but to deceaue his readers You (1) Pag. 262. obiect Acacius his deedes full of pride and arrogancy against the Roman Church so that Baronius for his defending Peter Mogg by him established in the Bishopricke of Alexandria against the will of the same Pope Simplicius calleth him a Francirke man violently opposite vnto the Bishop of Rome I answere that Acacius so long as he continued Catholike did both by word and deed acknowledge the supreme authority of the Roman Bishop but it is grosse ignorance in you not to know that afterward he fell to be (2) Euagr. lib. 3. c. 20. Liberatus in Breu. c 18. Niceph. l. 16. c. 17. Spondom An. 484.488 a stiffe mantayner of the Entychian Heretikes namely of Peter Mogg in those dayes the chiefe defender pillar and Patriarke of that damnable Sect for which cause he was excommunicated by the Pope dying obstinate in his sinne his name was blotted out of the Dyptiches euen (3) Spond An. 51â— with the consent of the Bishops of Constantinople his successors wherby we learne this lesson that men so longe as they be Orthodoxe Christians still honor obey the Pope and Roman Church so they are no sooner blasted with the spirit of heresy but they become Frantike opposers therof as your Luther was And wheras to make men belieue that this Acacius was of great authority and esteeme euen in the Latin Church you bid vs remember (4) Pag. 263. that the two Patriarkes Cyrill and Acacius were they that sent the Copies of the Canons of Nice vnto the African Bishops by which our Popes were conuinced of fraude c. We can remember no such matters but wonder how a man so learned as you would be thought could be so childishly mistaken seing Acacius was made Patriarke in the yeare 472. that is fourty eight yeares after the sending of the Nicen CanoÌ„s to the African Bishops the Copies wherof sent by Atticus not by Acacius to haue been imperfect wherein many Canons were wanting we haue already demonstrated As for the decree and sanction of Leo Emperour in behalfe of the Church of Constantinople and Acacius the then Patriarke thereof wherein he termeth the Church of Constantinople the mother of all Christians of the Orthodox Religion whatsoeuer might be the meaning of these wordes in Acacius who moued the Emperour to make that decree his ambitious conceits which Baronius censureth yet according to the mind of the Godly Emperour they import no more then Mother of all Orthodoxe Christians in the Church of Constantinople as is cleere by the text Mother sayth he vnto our Piety and vnto all Orthodoxe Christians and of this Royall Citty the most sacred See You make the Emperor say (5) Pag. 263. the Mother of all Orthodoxall Churches
noting the wordes in a distinct letter as the very phrase of his Sanction manifestly against his meaning For in that very Sanction or Decree he declareth that the cause that moued him to publish it was to disanull the attentats and Innonations against the Venerable Churches aswell those wherof the Patriarke Acacius hath the Priesthood as those placed in other sundry Prouinces which second part about other Churchs and Prouinces you (6) Pag. 26â— leaue out in your Marginal Latin to deceiue the Reader in making him to thinke that Constantinople is stiled absolutely Mother of all Orthodoxall Churches that thereby you may more colourably elude the like Titles attributed vnto the Roman Church So as nothing is related or alleaged by you without fraudulency and falshood SECT IV. Doctor Mortons Answeare to Vincentius Lyrinensis confuted VIncentius to proue that the Latine Churches agreed in Doctrine with the Churches of the East produceth as witnesses Felix and Iulius Popes calling them the Head of the world and S. Cyprian and S. Ambrose The sides of the world You to put off this testimony offer violence to Vincentius his words (k) Pag. 271. interpreting him to meane by Head of the world not the Bishop but the City of Rome But knowing this to be a false comment you adde as a second answeare (l) Ibid. that if he vnderstood the B. of Rome to be the Head of the Catholike Church we must also belieue that Cyprian of Carthage and Ambrose of Milan were alwayes to continue the sides of the Catholike Church This we deny for the Churches of Charthage and Milan haue no promise from Christ that the gates of Hell shall not preuaile against them nor that their fayth shall not faile as the Roman hath (m) See aboue Chap. 1. sect 1. 2. But to bolster vp one falsity with another you say (n) Pag. 271. If Lyrinensis by Head of the world vnderstood the Ecclesiasticall Orbe he cold meane no more then that the Pope is Head of the Westerne part therof But this hath bene already disproued (o) See Chap. 17. sect 2. Chap. 19. sect 3. Chap. 3â— by the testimonies of Councells and Fathers Greeke and Latine directly affirming that the B. of Rome is Head of all Churches and faythfull whatsoeuer throughouth the whole world and that his spirituall power extends euen to them whom the temporall forces of Rome could neuer subdue And to goe no further for proofes Lyrinensis himselfe declared this (p) Cap. 9.10.11 when he said that all Priests in all places made resistance to the doctrine of Rebaptization defended by Agrippinus Cyprian but Stephen B of Rome more then the rest thinking it reason to excell all others in deuotion towards the fayth so much as he was superior to them in the authority of his place And what els doth he throughout that whole Treatise but declame against you who haue brought nouelties into the Church contrary to that ancient truth which you found in it when Luther began and when as Caluin professeth you made a separation from the whole world SECT V. Doctor Morton in his Answeare to Optatus contradicteth himselfe OPtatus proueth the Roman Church to be the Catholike Church by the succession of Bishops in the chaire of Rome numbring them all from S. Peter to Siricius that liued in his time (r) L. 2. cont Parmen and defineth all them to be schismatikes and sinners that are separated from the communion of that only singular chaire You answeare (s) Pag. 269. that Optatus by One chaire meant not the particular chaire of Rome but the whole vniuersall Church But the contrary is euident for he reckoneth not the succession of Bishops in any other Church but only in the Roman and sayth (t) L. 2. cont Parmen that the Episcopall chaire was set vp in Rome for Peter to the end that in that chaire vnity might be preserued to all and that he might be a schismatike and a sinner that against this only chaire should set vp another What expression can be more effectuall to proue you to be a schismatike and a sinner then these words of Optatus who condemned the Donatists (u) Ibid. of bold and sacrilegious presumption for fighting against this Chaire of Peter as you do But you reply (x) Pag. 269. The particular Church of Rome is but a portion of the vniuersall Church and therfore Optatus obiecteth against the Donatists their want of vnion with the Churches of Asia commended by S. Iohn in the Reuelation as well as with Rome This you repeate afterwards againe (y) Pag. 273. and had obiected the same before (z) Pag. 100. 101. 229. 230. Your answere you haue receaued already (a) Chap. 15. sect 9. Chap. 34. sect 8. to which I adde that as he who should obiect to rebells their want of vnion with their Prince his loyall subiects doth not therby deny the supreme authority of the Prince ouer all the subiects of his dominions so Optatus obiecting to the rebellious Donatists the want of vnion with the Roman Church and other Orthodoxall Churches of Asia subiect to her doth not therby deny her authority ouer all the Churches of the world But you say (b) Pag. 270. Rome hauing departed from the sincerity of the Apostolicall profession as Asia hath done the departure from that must dissolue necessity of Vnion with Rome You grant then that the Asians haue fallen from the Apostolicall profession as Rome hath done and Rome if we belieue you hath fallen so far that her doctrine is false impious hereticall blasphemous damnable sacrilegious Antichristian Satanicall c. Ergo the Asians hauing fallen from the Apostolicall profession as Rome hath done their doctrine is also damnable hereticall blasphemous Satanicall c. And yet afterwards you say (c) Pag. 407. the Asians haue continued visible partes of the Catholike Church and Protestants stand in Christian vnity with them I conclude therfore that when it is for your purpose the Asians are truly professed Christians and partes of the Catholike Church and Protestants stand in Christian Vnion with them and when it is not for your purpose they haue fallen from the sincerity of the Apostolicall profession as Rome hath done from whence it must follow that it is as vnlawfull to be in vnion with them as with Rome whose doctrine to you is Hereticall blasphemous c. SECT VI. Other vntruthes of Doctor Morton discouered his cauilling against the Title of Holinesse giuen to the Pope YOu set downe (d) Pag. 273. this Thesis as of Bellarmine When the Fathers say that the Church of Rome cannot erre the word cannot is not to be taken absolutely and simply but with this cantion so long as the Apostolicall See continueth at Rome This is not a Thesis of Bellarmine but of a few other Deuines who hold that S. Peter fixed his See at Rome not by diuine ordination but by his owne
free election and therfore that if the Successors of S. Peter should remoue their See from Rome the Roman Church in that case might erre This opinion sayth Bellarmine (e) L. 4. de Pont. c. 4. is not hereticall nor manifestly erroneous but he holdeth and proueth the contrary namely that the See of S. Peter was fixed at Rome by especiall command from Christ and cannot be remoued from thence and therfore that when the Fathers say The Roman Church cannot erre the word cannot is to be taken simply and absolutely without the caution which you falsly ascribe to him You adde (f) Pag. 273. Bellarmine should haue said with you that the Roman Church cannot erre so long as the ancient and sincere fayth is preserued at Rome which is to say that she cannot erre as long as she erres not Bellarmine was of more iudgment then to proue idem per idem But you say (g) Pag. 276. The list of all the Fathers which Bellarmine in the strength of his learning and iudgment hath produced to guard defend the Monarchy of the Church and B. of Rome is of the Greeke Fathers but thirteene of the Latin not aboue eleuen within the space of the first 600. yeares This is notoriously vntrue for in the two Chapters immediatly preceding he produceth the testimonies of aboue 1340. Fathers in the foure first Generall Councells and that vnder Menas and of 26. Popes the greater part of them glorious Martyrs and the rest holy Confessors as S. Iulius S. Damasus S. Siricius S. Zozimus S. Innocentius S. Leo S. Gelasius S. Gregory Were not all these Fathers that liued within the first 600. yeares which you call the primitiue times But what if Bellarmine had produced no more but thirteene Greeke eleauen Latin Fathers Doth not Cardinal Baronius throughout his learned Annals Doth not Iodocus Coccius (h) To. 1. thesau l. 7. art 4.5.6.7.8 Do not Doctor Sanders (i) Visic Monar tot Clau. Dauid tot and other Catholike writers produce testimonies of Popes Councells and of the most religious Emperors and Kinges that haue liued since Christ in great numbers all of them professing their beliefe of the vniuersall iurisdiction of the Pope and necessity of vnion with the Church of Rome Why do not you subscribe to so great a cloud of witnesses rather then to Martin Luther and a few Sectaries broaching Nouellisme opposing all Orthodoxe antiquity Lastly to close vp your answeres to the Fathers you produce Tertullian (k) Pag. 277. after his defection into Montanisme calling the Pope The blessed Pope and the chiefe Bishop of Bishops but that he did it by Irony and scorne So indeed sayth Massonius a forbidden author But be it true that he spake it by Irony yet that very manner of speach sheweth it was then the custome of the faythfull to giue those titles to the Pope If Tertullian called him so by Irorny and scorne it was because he was an heretike And so you imitating him cauill at vs for instiling the Pope Your Holinesse which title say you (l) Ibid. being first giuen to Pope Leo for his Holinesse sake and sanctity of life is continued to Popes who haue bene most wicked and retayned only in respect of their functions The case is this Benedict the cleauenth (m) Extrau l. 5. C. Dudum calleth Boniface the eight his Predecessor bona memoria of good memory The glosse sayth If a Pope haue defiled the Church with exactions simonies and filthy speaches he is not therfore to be instiled mal◠memoriae not of euill but of good memory according to the ciuill Law determining that regard is not to be had to what he did but to what it was fit for him to do that is sayth the glosse not to his person but to his dignity for although his person haue offended his dignity hath not and his personall offence is not to redound to the domage of the Church And howsoeuer Prelates haue offended they are Presidents and Fathers of the whole community and therfore to be honored as the Philosopher teacheth also the Ciuill Law calling them Gods for the Excellency of their Order and dignity of their office And for the same cause Kings albeit wicked in their liues are instiled Clara memoria vel Inclyta memoria of famous or renowned memory and Emperors Dina memoria of soueraigne or diuine memory To which I adde (n) Act. 24.25 that S. Paul called Festus President of Iury Optime Fest◠Most excellent Festus and this nor for his Vertue or Honesty for he was a wicked man but for his Office the custome being that all Presidents of Prouinces were so instiled (o) Baron Anno 58. n. 33. All this I suppose you will allow for hauing read most of it in the Glosse you except not against it or if you do your exception is without ground Other Prelates therfore although they be of vicious liues may be instiled Bonae memoriae Kings Clarae vel Inclytae memoriae Emperors Diuae memoriae Temporall gouernors may haue the title of Optimi yea and be called Gods for so you call Kings (p) Serm before his Ma. at Durham pag. 14. The Pope only forsoth who is the Vicar of Christ on earth because it displeaseth you must not be saluted by the title of Your Holinesse whiles he liues nor be said to be Bonae memoriae after he is dead Other gouernors must be honored by reason of their dignities and offices The Pope only must be excepted and Doctor Morton to helpe out the matter must falsify the Glosse making it say that an ill Pope after his death is to be intituled Of blessed Memory which words howsoeuer you (q) Pag. 277. set them downe as of the glosse and in great letters to make your falsification more remarkable are not of the glosse but feigned by you And finally whether an ill Pope after his death be or be not to be intituled Bonae or Malae memoriae what makes it to your intent which is to proue that Saluation may be had out of the Roman Church But if your volume had not bene stuffed with such impertinencies it cold not haue risen to so Grand an Imposture CHAP. XXXVII Of the authority of the Epistles of ancient Popes AS the Arians and other Heretikes haue contemned the Epistles of the Bishops of Rome so all orthodoxe Christians haue euer held them in great veneratiō Eusebius Caesariensis (r) L. 3. hist c. 12. writeth that the epistle of Clement Pope to the Corinthians was so highly esteemed that the custome was to reade it publikely in the Churches which also he reporteth (s) L. 4. hist. c. 22. of the Epistle of Soter Pope And how greatly these Epistles were reuerenced may appeare out of S. Irenaeus who highly commending the Epistle of Clement (t) L. 3. c. 3. setteth downe a summary therof And in like manner Clemens Alexandrinus (u) Serm. l.
to goe and Siricius successor to Damasus gaue to Theophilus Patriarke of Alexandria power to iudge his cause And notwithstanding all the Emperors fauor he was not confirmed in the Patriarkship vntill at the intreaty of Theophilus Chrysostome the Pope had pardoned his offence and he himselfe had sent Legates to obtaine his confirmation If this be not sufficient to proue the Popes authority ouer the Bishops of Antioch what is And when you aske (g) Pag. 297. Whether the Christian Churches could be good Catholikes and in state of samation that communicated with Flauianus at the time of his opposition to the Pope it is a question sprung from ignorance for the cause of Flauianus being in agitation it was so far from being vnlawfull to communicate with him or with them that adhered either to him or Paulinus and Euagrius that for auoyding of further schisme the Councel of Capua ordained that Communion should be denied to neither party SECT XI Doctor Morton in defence of his Doctrine chargeth ancient Bishops with exercising Acts of authority out of the limits of their owne iurisdiction VVE haue proued the Popes to be supreme Gouernors of the vniuersall Church because they haue exercised acts of iurisdiction ouer the greatest Bishops of the East and West You make your apposition as you say (h) Pag. 297. by parallels and examples of other Bishops in antiquity executing Acts of confirming and deposing Bishops without the limits of their owne iurisdiction which is tacitly to contradict your selfe confessing that the Popes haue confirmed and deposed Bishops out of their owne Patriarkship to which you confine their authority but that they had no iurisdiction our those Bishops The falsity of this answeare who seeth not for confirming and deposing of Bishops is an act of iurisdiction which no Bishop hath power to exercise out of the limits of his iurisdiction And therfore to say that either the Popes or other Bishops haue executed acts of confirming or deposing Bishops without the limits of their owne iurisdiction is to accuse them of pride and iniustice in arrogating to themselues liberty to transgresse the limits of their iurisdiction executing acts of authority where they had no right But as to deny the vniuersall iurisdiction of the Popes you wrong them so to make good your deniall of their authority you wrong the other Bishops in whom you instance The first is S. Athanasius B. of Alexandria who say you (i) Pag. 300. appointed a Bishop ouer the Indians This Bishop though you name him not was Frumentius who hauing liued among the Indians and returning from thence informed S. Athanasius of the great hope he conceaued of their Conuersion to Christ if preachers were sent vnto them The fayth which Frumentius preached was the Roman fayth and he serued God after the manner of the Roman Church and induced all Christians that traded with the Indians to do the like (k) Ruffin l. 2. c. 9. Sozom. l. 2. c. 2.3 S. Athanasius with the aduice of his Clergy created him Bishop at Alexandria and sent him with other Priests to preach the Ghospell to the Indians and reduce them to the Communion of the Roman Church Where do you find in all this that S. Athanasius instituted or confirmed any Bishop without the limits of his owne iurisdiction Did he not consecrate Frumentius Bishop in his owne Church at Alexādria Did he send him to preach or exercise iurisdiction within the Dioces of any other Bishop No. He sent him to a barbarous people to reduce them to the fayth of Christ and obedience of the Roman Church which was then and is still lawfull for any Bishop in like case to do that being no where forbidden nor contrary to any Law diuine or humane nor any way derogating from the authority of the B. of Rome but most gratefull to him whose greatest desire is to reduce the whole world to the fayth of Christ and whose approbation for such enterprises is alwayes iustly presumed especially since therby the glory of the Roman Church is increased and her iurisdiction enlarged as by the conuersion of both Indies in these later tymes we see Your second example (l) Pag. 300. is of Theophilus B of Alexandria laboring to ordaine Chrysostome to be the B. of Constantinople For this you alleage Sozomen who sayth (m) L. 8. c. 2. that Chrysostome being famous for his Vertue learning throughout all the Roman Empire by voyce of the Clergy and people of Constantinople and of the Emperor himselfe was chosen Archbishop of that Imperiall City but that Theophilus Patriarke of Alexandria resisted his ordination laboring to promote to that dignity Isidore a Chaplaine of his owne This is the relation of Sozomen why do you report it vntruly Your third example (n) Ibid. is of S. Gregory Nazianzen vnto whom say you Meletius B. of Antioch and Petrus of Alexandria confirmed the See and Patriarkship of Constantinople For this you bring Theodoret (o) L. ◠hist. c. 8. and Gregorius Presbyter Theodoret sayth no such thing but only that albeit the Canons to preuent ambition forbid the remouing of Bishops from one See to another yet the opinion of Meletius was that in those circumstances Gregory might hold the Bishoprick of Constantinople by reason of the great domage that Church sustained for want of a Bishop in so dangerous a time But that Meletius designed or ordained him Bishop Theodoret sayth it not nor is it true for he was created Bishop by the Councell of Constantinople which Theodoret in that Chapter mentioneth And the same is verified by other historians Gregory sayth Socrates (p) L. 5. c. 5. by the common consent of many Bishops was transferred from the Bishoprike of the City of Nazianzum to the Bishoprike of Constantinople And Sozomen (q) L. 6. c. 17. Gregory by the voices of many Bishops was designed B. of Constantinople for no Catholike Bishop nor Church of Orthodoxe people being in that City the doctrine of the Councell of Nice was in danger to be wholly exploded How then could you say that Meletius and Petrus of Alexandria confirmed vnto Gregory Nazianzen the See of Constantinople Especially since Theodoret in that very Chapter expresseth the names of diuers of those Bishops which in the generall Councell of Constantinople conferred that dignity on him and repressed the insolency of Maximus whom Timothy B. of Alexandria would haue intruded into that See Your fourth example (r) Pag. 300. is Moyses who being a man famous for miracles was ordained Bishop by certaine exiles It is true for the Romans vpon agreement of peace with Mauia Queene of the Saracens who desired to haue Moyses created Bishop of her Nation brought him to Alexandria to be consecrated by Lucius then Patriarke of that city who being an Arian heretike Moyses refused to be consecrated by him and therfore the Arians were enforced to permit him to be consecrated by the Catholike Bishops of the Roman
thing vncertaine Many thinke it to be of Damasus and his you will haue it to be But the contrary is manifest for the epistle speaketh of Bonosus an Arch-heretike who had bene condemned by Iudges appointed in thē Councell of Capua which was not held in time of Damasus but of Siricius successor to Damasus It is therefore euident that the request of Bouosus which you obiect out of this epistle to haue his cause heard againe could not be to Damasus his first condemnation being not vntill after Damasus his death When you can shew this epistle to be of Damasus you shall receaue an answeare which it were easy to giue you now if I listed to spend time in refuting your tedious discourse of racking the verbe Competit to a strict sense and which not one but many wayes is deficient as all your arguments for the most part are Your addition (e) Pag. 318. marg l. that if the epistle be not of Damasus it is certainly of some Pope and that all hold it so is affirmed by you gratis and as easely denied by me CHAP. XL. Whether the Easterne Churches be at this day accordant in Communion with Protestants SECT I. The state of the Question THE nine first Sections of your fourtenth Chapter you spend in prouing that the Grecians Aegyptians Aethiopians Assyrians Armenians Russians Melchites and other remote nations at this day dissent from the Roman Church and are accordant in Communion with Protestants The foundation of your whole discourse you lay in these words (f) Pag. 330. Whatsoeuer Christians haue not ruinated any fundamental article of sauing fayth set downe in our ancient Creeds and are vnited vnto the true Catholike Head Christ Iesus our Lord by a liuing fayth all Protestants esteeme them as true members of the Catholike Church and notwithstanding diuers their more tolerable errors and superstitions to be in state of saluation albeit no way subiect or subordinate to the Roman Church These are your words which containe in themselues open implication namely that one may be vnited to the true Catholike Head Christ Iesus by a liuing fayth and be in state of saluation and yet be out of the Catholike Church which to be none els but the Roman and that out of her there is no saluation hath bene already proued (g) Chap. 1. sect 2.3.4 From this false principle you deduce that the Grecians Asians Aegyptians Assyrians Aethiopians Africans Melchites Russians and Armenians notwithstanding their separation from the Roman Church are at this day truly professed Christian Churches (h) Pag. 379. partes of the Catholike Church (i) Pag. 406. fin 407. init faythfull Christians professing the fayth of the ancient Fathers (k) Pag. 417. in state of saluation and raile bitterly at the Church of Rome for denying the same But how great ignorance and impiety you shew and how many most shamefull vntruthes you vtter in the prosecution of this Argument it is easy to declare Some of them I shall present to the Readers view And to proceed methodically I will reduce what I am to say to two heades 1. I will proue that as the Christians of these remote nations anciently were so many of them at this day are accordant in beliefe and communion with the Roman Church yeild obedience to the Pope as to the Vicar of Christ on earth and as to the supreme Pastor and Gouernor of the vniuersall Church 2. That the inhabitants of these nations which are not Roman Catholikes are not of one beliefe or Communion with Protestants but wholly dissent from them holding most blasphemous and damnable heresies acknowledged for such by Protestants themselues From whence it will follow that you affirming them to be faythfull Christians of the same beliefe with the ancient Fathers charge the ancient Fathers with blasphemous heresies and make them incapable of saluation SECT II. Whether the Grecians of the primitiue and successiue times agreed in fayth and Communion with the Bishop and Church of Rome and particularly at the Councell of Florence THat the Greekes in the first Councell of Constantinople and afterwards in that of Calcedon endeauored to giue to their Patriarke of Constantinople the second place of dignity in the Church next after the Pope and before the other Patriarkes we acknowledge But that they sought therby to exempt themselues from their obedience and subiection to the Pope hath bene effectually disproued (l) Chap. 17. sect 5. Chap. 19. sect 4. I speake not this to deny that anciently there were of the Grecians many Heretikes which opposed the Roman Church and by her authority were condemned and that eight Patriarkes of Constantinople in particular as also Eutyches an Arch-heretike of the same City were anathematized and east out of the Church for heresy And wheras the Westerne Church by the example and diligence of the Bishops of Rome was preserued from heresy the Churches of the East new heresies daily springing vp were so pitifully torne and ten in peeces that S. Hierome complaining therof to Pope Damasus said (m) Ep. 57. Because the East striking against it selfe by the ancient fury of the people teares in litle morsells the vndeuided coate of our Lord wouen on high and that the foxes destroy the vine of Christ in such sorte that it is difficult among the drie pits that haue no water to discerne where the sealed fountaine and the inclosed garden is I haue therfore thought that I ought to consult with the Chaire of Peter and the fayth praised by the mouth of the Apostle This was the miserable state of the Easterne Churches in those dayes being gouerned somtimes by Catholike Bishops that acknowledged subiection to the Church of Rome and somtimes by Heretikes that opposed her authority vntill at length Photius hauing iniustly driuen Ignatius Patriarke of Constantinople from his See and intruded himselfe into his place and being for that cause often excommunicated by Nicolas the first and Iohn the eight Popes of Rome to mantaine his iniust title withdrew himselfe from their obedience and to the end he might haue some colour to perseuer in that separation cauilled at the doctrine of the Roman Church which teacheth that the holy Ghost proceeds from the Father and the Sonne and writ against it And the Greekes following him in this error separated themselues from the Communion of the Roman man Church Yet not so but that they haue often eleauen times sayth S. Antoninus (n) Hist. par 2. tit 22. c. 23. acknowledged their error and reconciled themselues to her and especially thrice in most solemne manner in three seuerall Councells of Barium in Apulia of Lions in France and of Florence in Tuscany but still returning to their error against the holy Ghost and disobedience to the Church of Rome as dogs to their vomit Almighty God punished them with a heauy hand deliuering them vp to a miserable captiuity seruitude vnder the Turke And that they might know the
cause of Gods wrath against them to be their obstinacy in defending their error against the holy Ghost he ordained by his prouidence that vpon the very day of Pentecost their Citty of Constantinople should be taken by the Turke their Emperor slaine and their Empire wholly extinguished A thing which S. Brigit foretold (o) Reuel l. 7. c. 19. almost 100. yeares before it happened denouncing to them that their Empire and dominions should not stand firme vnlesse with true humility they did submit themselues to the Roman Church and fayth All this you were ignorant of or if you were not dissemble it and quarrell at vs for reporting that the Greekes in the Councell of Florence renounced their errors and submitted themselues to the Church of Rome and Bishop therof Some say you (p) Pag. 338. would scrape acquaintance with the Greeke Church in the yeare 1549. (*) You should say 1439. at the Councell of Florence as though all then had bene subiects to the Pope So you but with what conscience you know and so do we for not only Catholike writers but your Protestant brethren M. Marbeck (q) Common plac pag. 258. and Osiander (r) Epit. Centu. 15. pag. 477. testify that in the Councell of Florence the Grecians Armenians and Indians were vnited to the Church of Rome And the same is apparent out of the Councell it selfe (s) In lit vnionis in which after the Grecians had abiured their two chiefe errors the one concerning the proceeding of the holy Ghost from the Father alone and the other of Purgatory they made open profession of their obedience and subiection to the B. of Rome in these words (t) In lit vnionis Mareouer we define that the holy Apostolike See and B. of Rome hath the primacy throughout the whole world and that the same B. of Rome is the successor of Blessed Peter Prince of the Apostles and the true Vicar of Christ and Head of the whole Church and that he is the Father and Doctor of all Christian and that to him was giuen by our Lord Iesus Christ full power of feeding and gouerning the vniuersall Church as it is also declared in the Acts of the Oecumenicall Councells and in the sacred Canon Benewing moreouer the order set downe in the Canons concerning the other Venerable Patriarkes that the Patriarke of Constantinople be the second after the B. of Rome And the like profession of their beliefe they had made before in a priuat Session of their owne in the Emperors Pallace none of the Latins being present (u) Conc. Flor. sess vlt. apud Bin. to 4 pag. 474. fin 475. init To this profession subscribed the Emperor of the Grecians all their Bishops assembled in that Councell he of Ephesus only excepted and not only they that were then liuing but also Ioseph their Patriarke who before the end of the Councell finding himselfe strucken with deathes dart set downe in writing this profession of his fayth which after his death was found in his closet (x) Ibid apud Bin pa. 474. I Ioseph by the mercy of God Archbishop and Oecumenicall Patriarke of Constantinople new Rome because I am come to the end of my life by the mercies of God according to my duety I publish by this writing my verdict to my beloued Children For I professe that I hold and belieue and giue full assent to all those thinges which the Catholike and Apostolike Church of our Lord Iesus Christ of old Rome shall iudge and ordaine And I refuse not to grant that the most Blessed Father of Fathers the chiefe Bishop Pope of old Rome is the Vicar of our Lord Iesus Christ and that there is a Purgatory for soules Would you thinke gentle Reader that any Christian man could put on so brazen a face as to deny that the Grecians in the Councell of Florence were vnited to the Church of Rome or that they acknowledged themselues subiect to the Pope as to one whom the sacred Councells declare to haue the primacy throughout the whole world to be the successor of S. Peter the true Vicar of Christ the Head of the whole Church the Father and Doctor of all Christians and that to him was giuen by Christ full power of feeding and gouerning the vniuersall Church Are not these their very words And yet you Doctor Morton deny all this saying (y) Pag. 331. Vpon due examination you your selues find the Grecians there to haue bene so farre from subiection to the Pope that they would not permit him to constitute a Patriarke among them professing that they could do nothing without the consent of their owne Church So you with your wonted fidelity both for that you set downe the first part of these words in a different character as the Grecians answeare to the Pope when as they are not their but your words and contrary to truth for that the Grecians vnited themselues to the Latines and acknowledged their subiection to the Pope and Church of Rome is there testified by a publike declaration (z) In lit vnio apud Bin. to 4 pa. 476.476 in the Letters of Vnion subscribed by Ioannes Palaeologus the Emperor and by all the Prelates Greekes and Latines that were present in the Councell And after this perfect accord was made the Pope calling vnto him the Grecian Bishops not by way of command as not willing to irritate them but of perswasion to that which was most decent and conuenient exhorted them before their departure to choose a new Patriarke in place of him that was deceased that they might not returne home without a Head They answeared that the custome of the Grecians was to choose and consecrate their Patriarke at Constantinople and that the Emperor who was not ignorant of their ceremonies and customes would not permit them to doe otherwise Wherupon the Pope vrged no further but with all courtesy dismissed them How can you inferre from this that the Greeke Bishops denied subiection to the Pope It mattereth not where their Patriarke was chosen since as you haue heard they acknowledged both themselues him as being members of the vniuersall Church to be subiect to the Pope as to their Head and to be gouerned by him as sheepe by their Shepheard and as children by their Father But you say (a) Pag. 331. They were farre from subiecting themselues in doctrine for when some few points were propounded they answeared the Pope that they had no licence to treat of such matters This is an other euasion as vntrue as the former For the next day after that the Greekes being conuinced had yeilded to the Latines in that mayne controuersy concerning the Procession of the holy Ghost from the Father and the Sonne for the decision wherof that Councell was chiefly called the Pope desired to haue some of their Bishops sent vnto him They sent foure to whom the Pope said (b) Tom. 4 pag. 474. We by the grace
of the holy Ghost are vnited and so fully agreed in the chiefe question which was most in controuersy that no further speach therof is necessary But that our agreement may be so absolute firme that hereafter there be no difference betweene vs it will not be amisse that we treat of the fyre of Purgatory of the primacy of the Pope of celebrating in leauened or vnleauened bread and of Transubstantiation Those Bishops answeared We O most holy Father haue no licence to treat of these things which words you set downe as the answere of all the Greeke Prelates when as they were spoken only by foure of them who hauing receaued no commission to treat of those Questions refused to make answere vnto them in the name of all their brethren But neuerthelesse which you conceale they declared their owne iudgment concerning the three first to be conformable to the doctrine of the Roman Church adding moreouer that of the fourth which was Transubstantiation they could not treat without the authority of all the Easterne Church How doth this proue that the Greekes in the Councell of Florence agreed not in doctrine with the Roman Church especially since these foure Bishops declared to the Pope that concerning the three first points of the foure proposed by him they belieued as the Roman Church did and concerning the fourth as at that time they did not affirme it so neither did they deny it and sone after not only they but all the rest of the Greeke Bishops and Abbots together with their Emperor in the Letters of Vnion expresly declared that not only in the three first namely of the Popes supremacy of Purgatory of the lawfulnesse of celebrating Masse in vnleauened bread they belieued as the Roman Church did but also in the fourth of Transubstantiation saying that by the Priest vpon the Altar of bread is made the very body of Christ. All this you could not be ignorant of and yet blush not to deny it and to adde another vntruth saying (c) Pag. 331. fin 332. init Yea and their Emperor Palaeologus that was so earnest to peece them together was himselfe but hardly welcomed home to the Greeke Church which was now much more exasperated against the Roman Church in so much that they did now pronounce their Patriarke of Constantinople the supreme and chiefe of all Bishops These your words cannot be freed from a notable imposture for you falsify Bellarmine alleaging these words in a differeÌ„t letter as his The Greekes did now to wit after their returne from the Councell of Florence pronounce their Patriarke of Constantinople the supreme and chiefe of all Bishops Bellarmine speaketh of their fall from the Roman Church the yeare 1054. which was not after the Councell of Florence but almost 400. yeares before it You to perswade your reader that he speakes of their fall after their returne from that Councell cunningly insert into his words this aduerbe Now and falsify the yeare putting in stead of Anno 1054. which Bellarmine hath Anno 1454. Can there be more wilfull fraud then this But you shew no lesse folly then fraud for wheras you say (d) Pag. 331. the Councell of Florence was the yeare 1549. to proue that the Greekes after their returne from that Councell denied the primacy of the Pope you say (e) Pag. 332. Now to wit the yeare 1454. which was in your account 100. yeares before that Councell they did pronounce their Patriarke of Constantinople the supreme and chiefe of all Bishops I deny not that the Greeks a few yeares after the Councell of Florence returned to vomit and that a great part of them still persisteth in the errors which then they abiured I only speake here of your simplicity who to proue that they fell from the Roman Church after their returne from the Councell of Florence say (f) Pag. 332. marg they fell the yeare 1454. which according to your account was 100. yeares before that Councell With these impostures you delude your readers who not doubting of your fidelity take your doctrine vpon your word SECT III. That many of the Grecians at this day are of the Roman Communion and professe subiection to the B. of Rome THat many of the Grecians are at this day accordant in fayth and Communion with the Roman Church professe subiection and obedience to the B. of Rome is a thing notorious for who is ignorant that as in Rome there is a Seminary wherin many youthes of our English nation are trained vp in vertue and learning to the end that being ordained Priestes and returning into England they may help to reduce their Countrey to the Catholike fayth so likewise there hath bene many yeares another of Grecians for the reduction of Greece And who knoweth not that as Cardinall Peron (g) Repliqu Chap. 22. aduertised our late Soueraigne K. Iames in the Iles of Malta Cyprus Candia Xante Chios Naxos and other Greeke and Asian Islands the Roman fayth and Communion hath place euen at this day either wholly or for the greatest part And if it be true that as you affirme (h) Pag. 335. Russia a good part of Polonia Dalmatia and Croatia belong to the Greeke Church and are vnder the iurisdiction of the Patriarke of Constantinople with what forehead can you challenge the inhabitants of these Countreys in generall to dissent in fayth communion from the Church of Rome when it is notorious that in Dalmatia Croatia Polonia as also in Lituania and Transiluania the fayth and Communion of the Roman Church is not only allowed but publikely professed And for the Russians Michaell Hipation and Cyrill with the rest of the Bishops of that Nation haue lately submitted themselues to the same Church as both their Epistle and profession of fayth addressed to Clement the eight in the yeare 1595. abundantly testify (i) Apud Cocci to 1. l. 7. art â— SECT IV. Of the Aegyptians YOur second example of remote nations dissenting from the Roman Church (k) Pag. 304.342.400.409 417. is of the Aegyptians To shew your error herein these euidences may serue for as Iacobus Nauarchus (l) Ep. Asiâ—â— Coccius (m) Tom. 1. l. 7. art 6. and Doctour Sanders (n) Monar Visib l. 7. n. 1121. relate Eugenius Pope hauing actually vnited the Greekes and Latines in the Councell of Florence and wrirten to the Patriarkes of the East to the same effect they in their Epistles to him writ back Honorably Catholikely and resolutely of the Latin Church and authority of the Pope And in particular Iohn Patriarke of Alexandria that is to say of the Christians of Aegypt and of all the countreys which first belonged to the Empire of Aegypt and afterwards to the Prefecture therof styleth the B. of Rome The perfection of Priesthood the Apostolicall Father of all Churches the Prince of Priests the Guide of Pilgrimes that shews the way to the rest the Physitian of the diseased And his Vicar of
Hierusalem Andrew a Syrian Abbot (o) Nauarch Sand. ibid. calls the Pope Head and Doctor of the whole Church To which I adde out of Surius Genebrard (p) In Chron. anno 1565. that the yeare 1565. arriued at Colen an ancient man sent from Thebais in Aegypt by Alexander then Patriarke of Alexandria to present by letter his obedience to the B. of Rome The like acknowledgment of subiection extant in the end of the Councell of Florence was made by Isaias B. of Hierusalem (q) Apud Bin. to 4. pa. 495. And againe since that tyme Gabriell Patriarke of Alexandria sent Embassadors to Rome with letters to Clement the eight professing in them his beliefe of the Catholike fayth and obedience to the See Apostolike And they both in his and their owne names made solemne and publike confession thereof which together with the letter of that Patriarke Baronius hath set downe at large in the end of his sixt Tome writing it in Rome when the thing had newly passed Pope Clement being then liuing and not only the City of Rome but all Europe through which this fact was publike being ready to beare witnesse of the truth thereof against you who by carping at Baronius as hauing in this related a fable gaine nought els but to declare your folly in carping at that which you wish were false but cannot disproue SECT V. Of the Aethiopians FOr the Aethiopians whom you produce (*) Pag. 340.342.409 in the third place as Christians dissenting from the Roman Church we haue for the contrary the testimonies of Helena Empresse and Dauid her Grand-child Emperor of Aethiopia who the yeare 1524. (r) Genebrard in Chron. pag. 1â—23 Bozi de â—ig Eccles to 1. l. 4. c. 3. sent letters and Legates to Clement the seauenth then Pope of Rome promising obedience to him and crauing his blessing and withall declaring their great desire of frequent recourse to the Court of Rome if they were not hindred by the distance of place and the kingdome of Mahumetans which ly in their way These letters were turned into Latin by Paulus Iouius Petrus Aluarez as also Damianus Goes a knight of Portugall (s) Lib. de vita morib Aethiopum haue set them downe at large together with the profession of the Catholike fayth made at Rome by Zaga Zabo an Aethiopian Bishop the chiefe of these Legates And Helias Leuites (t) In lib. Bâ—bur mentioneth and setteth downe the conference he had with them The like profession was made by Nicodemus and Peter both of them Aethiopian Abbots in their epistles to Eugenius the fourth and Paul the third Bishops of Rome (u) Cocci to 1. l. 7. art 6. And who knoweth not that as Iacobus Nauarchus (x) Ep. Asiatica Doctor Sanders (y) Monar visib l. 7. n. 1057.1508 and other moderne historians record (z) Franc. Sachin hist Soc. Iesu l. 1. n. 49. after that the Portugall Marchants did not only traffick in Aethiopia but with licence of the King maried there and both liued themselues and instructed their wiues to liue in the fayth and obedience of the Roman Church the Pope at the instance of Iohn King of Portugall sent to the Abyssines with the title and dignity of Patriarke Iohn Nunnez a Priest of the Society of Iesus who had labored with great fruit in Africa among the Saracens Christians that liued there And though Andreas Ouiâ—do a man of singular prudence and fortitude whom the Patriarke by aduice of the chiefe Gouernors of the East Indies sent before him was at his ariuall entertained with all courtesy the yeare 1556. yet the King that then liued being dead both he and the Patriarke found great difficulties which they suffered with inuincible courage vntill at length by their patience industry and labour they conuerted many of the Abissines and since their death the King himselfe and his brother with a great part of that nation by their successors haue bene reduced to the fayth and obedience of the Roman Church as the Annuall relations sent from thence continually testify SECT VI. Of the Armenians YOur fourth example (a) Pag. 340.379 is of the Armenians of whom Myraeus testifieth (b) De notit Episcopat l. 1. c. 16.17.18 and especially of them which are called Franck-Armenians with the Iacobites and Georgians that they haue often and lately made profession of their obedience to the Pope of their accord in all pointes of fayth with the Roman Church And Cardinall Peron (c) Repliq. Chapit 21. speaking to King Iames of famous memory auerreth that in Armenia the greater which was formerly subiect to the King of Persia but is now vnder the Turke there were and are many Christians of the Roman communion and many Monasteries of S. Dominick And the same is testified by M. Edward Grimston your Protestant Historian in his Description of countries (d) Pag 1050 In Asia sayth he there are many Christians assisted in spirituall things by the Religious of the orders of S. Francis and S. Dominick And those of Armenia haue their Archbishop of the Order of S. Dominick who is made by the Chapter of the Religious of that Order and then confirmed by the Pope And he addeth (e) Ibid. pag. 1052. that they hold themselues to be conformable to the Roman Church celebrate Masse in vnleauened bread contrary to the Greekes and remember their first conuersion from the Church of Rome in the time of Syluester Pope And in the end of the Councell of Florence is extant the Decree of Eugenius Pope in which the Vnion of the Armenians with the Church of Rome is testified by their Legates sent to the same Councell SECT VII Of the Russians YOur fifth example (f) Pag. 340. is of the Russians no lesse false theÌ„ the former for the Bishops of Russia in the yeare 1595. submitted themselues to the Roman Church Their epistle to this purpose written vnto Clement the eight together with the profession of their fayth who pleaseth may read in Iodocus Coccius (g) To. 1. l. 7. art 6. SECT VIII Of the Assyrians YOur sixth example (h) Pag. 338. is of the Assyrians like to the rest for Abdisus their Patriarke comming to Rome in tyme of Pius the fourth to be confirmed by him in his Patriarkship made publike confession of the fayth and primacy of the Church of Rome and of belieuing whatsoeuer the holy Oecumenicall Councels and in particular what the Councell of Trent belieueth This profession he made not only in his owne name but in the names of all the Metropolitans and Bishops subiect to him many of them being in the Dominions of the great Turke diuers in the territories of the King of Persia and others in the East Indies vnder the Kingdome of Portugal The truth of this is testified by Surius and Genebrard (i) Chro. an 1562. by Doctor Sanders (k) Mon. visib l. 7.
n. 1555.1556 by Coccius (l) To. â— l. 7. art 6. and by the Protestant edition of the Acts of the Councell of Trent in which it is acknowledged that this profession of Abdisus was made in presence of two Cardinalls and subscribed by them All which notwithstanding you (m) Pag. 338.339 reiect this wholy story as a tale of Robin Hood and merely fabulous which argueth in you much vnshamefastnesse For who is so litle versed in the histories of these tymes as not to know that albeit the Christians of the East Indies liuing so many yeares vnder Heathenish or Mahumetan Princes were debarred from entercouse with the Church of Rome and runne into diuers errors yet they thought themselues still to retaine entirely that fayth which the Apostle S. Thomas had preached vnto them And when they came to be vnder the King of Portugal being instructed by Preachers sent out of Europe they reformed their errors and yielded due subiection to the Church of Rome and in particular those very places which Abdisus in his Profession nameth to wit Cuscho Cananor Goa Calicut and Carangol and many more are named by Iacobus Payua and Radius (n) L. de orig Soc. Iesu who testifieth that euen in those beginnings in his time to the number of 80000. of those Indians were reduced to the Roman Church Who likewise knoweth not that Ormus and other places vnder the Persian which both Abdisus Andradius nominate are of the Roman fayth and Communion and that the King of Persia hath giuen licence to preach the fayth of Christ and for Religious men which goe thither to that end to erect houses build Churches in his Dominions by which meanes many are conuerted and liue in the Communion and obedience of the Roman Church All which notwithstanding you boldly pronounce that these Christians acknowledge no subiection to the Church of Rome stand in Christian vnion with Protestants which to be a grand Imposture no man can deny SECT IX Of the Antiochians YOur seauenth example (o) Pag. 330. is of the Antiochians whom with their Patriarke you vntruly deny to communicate with the Church of Rome or to acknowledge any subiection to the Pope for the Patriarke of the Maronites (p) Peron Repliq. Chap. 22. which is one of the branches of the Patriarkship of Antioch with all the Bishops of his iurisdiction hath yet to this day alwayes liued and perseuered in the communion of the Roman Church wherof your Historian M. Grimston speaking (q) Descript of Countreys pag. 1053. sayth The Maronites haue for these 400. yeares made profession of following the Roman Church And the same is acknowledged by their Patriarke in his Epistle to Leo the tenth (r) Cocci to 1. l. 7. art 6. Moreouer as Genebrard recordeth (s) Chron. an 1555. Moyses Mardenns being sent out of Mesopotamia by the Patriarke of Antioch and comming to Vienna in Austria after he had procured the new Testament to be set forth in the Syriack tongue and character at the charges of the Emperor Ferdinand went to Rome and as well in his owne name as in the name of his Patriarke of Antioch made a publike and solemne profession of the Catholike fayth and Obedience to the See of Rome which Andreas Masius hath translated out of the Syriack originall into Latin and both Coccius (t) Cocc to 1. l. 7. art 6. Sanders (x) Mon. vis l 7. n. 1494. haue inserted into their workes Moreouer the Nestorians of Seleucia who belong to that Patriarkship hauing abiured their heresy by perswasion of Iulius Pope the yeare 1553. writ an Epistle to him professing their beliefe of the Catholike fayth and their subiection to the B. of Rome and sent it by three chiefe men of their nation and with them Sind a Monke whom they beseeched Iulius to ordaine and send back vnto them consecrated as their Patriarke (y) Cocc Sand. loc cit SECT X. Of the Africans YOur eight example (z) Pag. 341. 406. 407. 409. is of the Africans among whom the kingdome of Congo is of the Roman fayth and Communion (a) Peron Repliq Chap. 21. Geneb Chron. an 1503. And an Embassador that came from thence a few yeares since and died in Rome made publike profession therof from before Luthers tyme. And it is notorius that all the Christians which liue in the borders of Africa vnder the conquest of the Kings of Spaine Portugal are of the Roman fayth and Communion SECT XI Of the Asians YOur ninth example (b) Pag. 341. 406. 407. 409. is of the Asians as vntrue as the rest for the Antiochians Armenians and Maronites whome with their Patriarkes we haue already proued to be of the Roman fayth and Communion are Asians And who knoweth not that in Asia since the expulsion of Godfrey King of Palestine and of Boemond Prince of Antioch the guard of the holy Sepulcher of Hierusalem hath alwaies remained to the Christians of the Roman Communion CHAP. XLI That in the aforenamed Countries there are no Christians that agree in fayth communion with Protestants HAVING proued that in all the Churches of remote nations which you haue nominated there to be many Catholikes of the Roman fayth and Communion it resteth that your deniall of so certaine a truth either proceedeth from grosse ignorance or is a grand imposture And no lesse is your affirming the same Churches to be of your Protestant Communion for the Christians of those nations which are not Roman Catholikes are damnable heretikes and haue no communion at all with Protestants as the following sections will demonstrate SECT I. The Grecians which are not of the Roman Communion are absolute heretikes and Doctor Morton falsifieth Catholike Authors to excuse them THat the Grecians dissenting from the Roman Church whom therfore you challenge as accordant in communion with Protestants are absolute Heretikes erring fundamentally in their doctrine of the Blessed Tinity by denying the holy Ghost to proceed from the Father and the Sonne is a thing most certaine out of the Councell of Florence where the chiefe dispute betweene the Greekes and the Latines was of this subiect and the Greekes being conuinced acknowledged their error as the Letters of Vnion extant in the end of the Councell record The same is testified not only by the Latin writers but also by Laonicus Chalcondylas a Greeke Historian The Greekes sayth he (c) De reb Turcicis l. 6. in the Councell of Florence first defend that the holy Ghost proceeds from the Father alone but afterwards being conuinced with the arguments of the Latins they confesse him to proceed also from the Sonne yet after their returne inte Greece they obstinatly defend their former opinion And when Hieremy Patriarke of Constantinople sent a profession of his fayth to the Lutherans of Germany in the first Article therof which is concerning the blessed Trinity he affirmed and labored to proue that the holy Ghost
hereafter nor to write nor send to vs any writings concerning these things for you treat the Diuines which were lights of the Church otherwise then is fit you honor and extoll them in words but with your deeds reiect them seeking to wrest out of our hands their holy and diuine words with we might vse to confute you Wherfore for as much as concernes vs you haue freed vs from care and therfore going on in your owne wayes write no more to vs of your Doctrine but only for friendships sake if you please All these are the words of Iustus Caluinus related out of the Censure or Epistle of Hieremy Patriarke of Constantinople by Chytraeus and Crusius two chiefe Protestants of Germany where Iustus Caluinus liued writ Chytraeus and Crusius being then liuing who might and would haue taxed him of falshood if he had misalleaged them Wherfore I cannot sufficiently admire your boldnesse who to proue that the Grecians accord in doctrine with Protestants and dissent from the Church of Rome dare aduenture to alleage this Censure of the Patriarke out of which it is so manifest not only by the Catholike editions but euen by that of Wittemberg and by the relations of Chyrtraeus and Crusius that the Greekes in very few points of those which are in Controuersy between Protestants and vs dissent from the Roman Church and that they condemne the contrary doctrines of Protestants as hereticall auoid them as heretikes for so you haue heard the Patriarke call them But yet as Iustus Caluinus (y) Pag. 1â— fin rightly obserueth the accordance of the Greekes with the Roman Church in so many chiefe Heads of doctrine is not sufficient to excuse them from schisme and heresy for if they were not guilty of other errors their obstinate denying the holy Ghost to proceed from the Sonne is alone sufficient to make theÌ„ absolute schismatikes and heretikes incapable of saluation as S. Athanasius hath expresly declared in his Creed You therfore haue told a most solemne vntruth in saying (z) Pag. 330. that the Greekes which dissent from the Roman Church haue not ruinated any fundamentall Article of sauing truth SECT III. A particular instance of Ignatius Patriarke of Constantinople produced by Doctor Morton to proue that he dissented from the Roman Church examined FOr the corroboration of your former Arguments you produce (a) Pag. 387. Ignatius Patriarke of Constantinople as an especiall patterne of disobedience to the Roman Church The case is this The people of Bulgaria hauing sent for preachers to Rome and being instructed by them in the fayth of Christ submitted themselues voluntarily to the Pope and in spirituall things were gouerned immediatly by him as part of his Roman Diocesse (b) Spond anno 869. n. 13. Neuerthelesse because the Grecians challenged the temporall state of that Prouince to belong to the Emperor of the East Ignatius supposing the spiritualty of it to belong in right to his Diocesse vsurped it to himselfe and consecrating a Bishop by his owne authority sent him thither with other Priests for which he was checked by Adrian Pope (c) Spond anno 871. n. 1. and afterwards excommunicated by Iohn the eight if within thirty dayes after notification of the sentence vnto him he did not desist from that vsurpation He died before the arriuall of the sentence at ConstaÌ„tinople (d) Spond anno 878. n. 1. 8. which if he had receaued before his death it is not to be doubted but that he would haue surceased from that claime which he made not out of any desire or intention of opposing the See Apostolike whose authority ouer the Church of Constantinople he acknowledged both in appealing to it against Photius who had intruded himselfe into his Church and also in his epistle to Nicolas Pope (e) Extat Ep. in Syn. 8. Act. 3. And finally that he alwaies liued died in communion of the RomaÌ„ Church appeareth by diuers letters of Iohn the eight written after his death (f) Spond anno 878 n. 8. His example therfore can be no help to your cause SECT IV. The Aegyptians Aethiopians Armenians Russians Melchites Africans and Asians which call themselues Christians and be not of the Roman Communion are absolute Heretikes THe Aegyptians and Aethiopians that are not of the Roman fayth and communion imbrace the Heresy of Eutyches which holdeth but one nature one will and operation in Christ and was for that cause anathematized and cast out of the Church by the holy Councell of Chalcedon twelue hundred yeares since And they which are not of the Roman communion still persist in the same error in so much that when of late yeares Goâ—saluus Rodericius of the Society of Iesus was sent into Aethiopia (g) Pran Sachin Hist Soc. Iesu l. 1. n. 49. to prepare the way for Ioannes Nunnez whom the See Apostolike had sent thither honored with the title and dignity of Patriarke Claudius then King of Aethiopia answeared that he had no need of a Patriarke from Rome hauing in his owne kingdome men that were able to gouerne the Patriarkship of Rome it selfe Moreouer that he would by no meanes approue the Councell of Chalcedon nor allow of Leo Pope and that Dioscorus had done well in excommunicating him Finally the obstinacy of the Aethiopians and Aegyptians in this particular error of Eutyches is the sole cause of their continuance in schisme and separation from the Roman Church for as Cardinall Peron (h) Repliq. Chap. 63. answered our late Soueraigne K. Iames they haue often offered and are all ready at this day to acknowledge the Pope whom they confesse to be the Successor of S. Peter Prince of the Apostles if they might be receaued into his communion without obliging themselues to anathematize Eutyches and Dioscorus The Armenians which are not of the Roman fayth communion are guilty of many heresies They acknowledge but one Nature in Christ with the Eutychians They deny his diuinity with the Arians They affirme the holy Ghost to proceed from the Father alone with the Grecians They rebaptize them that haue bene baptized in the Roman Church with the Donatists And finally they hold many other grosse and damnable heresies related by Prateolus (i) L. 1 tit 67. out of Guido Carmelita and Nicephorus Calixtus who therfore rightly tearmeth them A sinke of all heresies The Russians agree with the Grecians in deniing the holy Ghost to proceed from the Sonne So hath confessed your Minister Thomas Rogers (k) Art 3. propos 3. pag. 25. Moreouer they defend other hereticall Tenets to the number of 40. related by Ioannes Sacranius (l) Elucid error rit Rhuten and Prateolus (m) L. 6. tit 4. Wherunto I adde that Stanislaus Socolouius in the attendance of the King of Polonia whose Diuine he was visiting those Northerne countries and coming to Leopolis the Metropolitan city of Russia reporteth of it (n) Praefat. Censura Orient that although it hath
imbraced many other errors yet it deserueth this singular praise that by the speciall gift of God it hath kept it selfe free from the heresies of this age and with greatest care diligence made resistance vnto them And how farre the Russians euen those which are not of the Roman communion are from allowing your Protestant doctrine you may learne from M. Grimston who in his Description of Countries (o) Pag. 697. 698. writeth that the Russians haue the Masse that they pray to the Virgin Mary the Saints and keep their Bodies with great reuerence that they neuer passe by any Crosse but they kneele downe pray that they often blesse themselues with the signe of the Crosse that they haue many Monasteries of Monkes of S. Basils Order who in their quires in the night sing praises to God that they vse the Sacrament of Confession and receaue absolution and pennance that they keep the holy Sacrament in their Churches in one kind for the sicke and in that kind alone administer it vnto them that they say Masses for the faythfull deceased And not to conceale what other Protestants write of the doctrine of the Russians and all the other nations which you affirme to be of your beliefe and communion Osiander (p) Epit. Centur. 16. pag. 970. speaking of all the Easterne Churches ingenuously confesseth that they haue not sincere Religion but are in most part of their articles Popish Doctor Philippus Nicolai testifieth (q) L. 1. de regno Christ. pag. 22. that not only the Greeke Churches but also the Ruthens Georgians Armenians Indians Aethiopians that acknowledge Christ hold the reall presence of his body and bloud in the Eucharist And speaking of the Armenians in particular he reckoneth (r) Pag. 35. among their errors Inuocation and intercession of Saints and oblation of the Sacrament Of the Indians he sayth (s) Ibid. pag. 45.46 that they offer the sacrifice of the body and bloud of Christ preparing themselues vnto it by confession of their sinnes that at their entrance into the Church they sprinkle themselues with holy water as the Papists do that they pray for their dead bury them with the same ceremonies the Papists vse that their Priests shaue their Crownes that they obserue strictly the fastes of the foure Ember weekes as also of Aduent Lent and that they haue Monkes and sacred Virgins reclused in seuerall Monasteries where with great religion they strictly obserue Abstinence and Chastity These doctrines though they be in themselues Orthodoxall and Catholike yet Protestants reiect them as false and superstitious and your selfe in particular censure the doctrine of the reall Presence and sacrifice of the Masse as idolatrous (t) Pag. 403. not blushing to compare Christ in the Eucharist to the Idoll Moloch and calling our adoration of him The adoration of our Romish Moloch in the Masse Wherby it appeares that albeit you condemne these doctrines in vs as hereticall and Idolatrous yet you are contented to allow them in the Russians and other nations which you claime to be of your Communion and to canonize their blasphemous errors against Christ and the holy Ghost with other their impious heresies for Orthodoxe doctrines and to tell your reader that the Russians Aethiopians and other nations which professe themselues to be Christians diffent from the Church of Rome are truly professed Christians parts of the Catholike Church in state of saluation and in accordance of communion with Protestants Of the Melchites your Historian M. Grimston in like manner reporteth (u) Pag. 1051. that they hold all the errors which were condemned in the Councell of Florence and that there are also Nestorians among them And this sheweth how vntruly (x) Pag. 341.406.407.409 you affirme that the Asians and Atricans are not guilty of fundamentall errors for the Aegyptians Aethiopians Melchites and Armenians what are they but Asians or Africans And so likewise are the Iacobites of whom M. Grimston reporteth (y) Pag. 1052. that they follow the heresy of Dioscorus and Eutiches Of the Persians he likewise writeth (z) Pag. 797. that among them there are Nestorians And of the Tartarians that they follow the heresy of Nestorius and hold him for a Saint as also Paulus Samosatenus Theodorus of Mopsuestia and Diodorus Tharsensis and that they condemne S. Cyril of Alexandria and reiect the Councell of Ephesus And yet neuerthelesse all these are to you good Christians and members of your Protestant Church But among all the vntruthes which you haue vttered in your discourse of the Churches of remote Nations there is none more remarkable then that speaking of the Christians which in those nations are not of the Roman Communion you say (a) Pag. 336. that in our owne iudgments they are not heretikes excepting for the denying of this false Romish article Of necessary Subiection and Vnion to the Church of Rome And enlarging this vntruth you adde (b) Pag. 340.341 that we dare not directly charge them with heresy and that there are scarse any among them chargeable for any fundament all heresy for to omit the error of the Grecians denying the holy Ghost to proceed from the Sonne which if you belieue the Creed of S. Athanasius makes them incapable of saluation the heresies of Nestorius and Eutiches against Christ are against the most fundamentall doctrine of the Church of which S. Paul sayth (c) 1. Cor. 3.10 None can lay any other foundation beside Christ. And S. (d) 2. Ioan. 7. If any confesse not that Iesus Christ income in flesh he is a seducer and Antichrist And againe (e) Ibid. vers 10. 12. If any one bring not this doctrine receaue him not into your houses and say not to him Well be it with thee for whosoeuer sayth to him Well be it with thee communicats in his wicked workes I conclude therfore that the heretikes of remote natios of whom we haue spoken erre fundamentally if any error can be fundamentall and that as you by professing your selfe to accorde in Communion with them shew your selfe to be of their spirit and to be out of the Church of Christ as they are so on the contrary the Roman Church by excluding them and you from her communion she weth herselfe to be the true Catholike Church and of the same beliefe with the holy Councells of Constantinople Ephesus and Chalcedon in which those heretikes were anathematized and condemned CHAP. XLII Doctor Mortons plea for his Protestant Church AS profuse as you haue bene in your inuectiues against the Church of Rome so briefe and succinct you are in setting forth your Protestant Congregation which affords you so litle matter of discourse that coming to treat professedly of her (f) Pag. 341. you confine her praises to lesse then a small leafe of paper You commend her for foure things for great Extent for the purity of her Doctrine for her freedome from Vice and from Schisme SECT I.
S. Peter Head of the Apostles to the end that all being subiect to one occasion of schisme among them might be taken away This passage you alleaged out of S. Hierome in your laâ—e Sermon preached at Durham before his Maiesty (s) Pag. 42. to proue the necessity of Bishops against the Scots A Bishop then is necessary to appease the contentions that may happen among your Ministers But contentions and strifes may also arise among Bishops An Archbishop therfore is necessary to quiet them But they may likewise arise betweene Archbishops as they did betweene Theophilus Chrysostome Flauianus and Dioscorus Cyril and Nestorius who shall end them If you say a generall Councell who shall summon that Councell Not a temporall Prince for no one hath power ouer all nations from whence the Bishops are to be called besides that temporall Princes are often at variance among themselues And when a generall Councell is called what if the Bishops agree not or decline from the truth as in the Councel of Ariminum the second of Ephesus they did Who shall compose their differences and iudge their causes vnlesse some one Head of the whole Church be appointed by Christ whose iudgement is infallible and to whose censure all are bound to submit Wherfore the Puritans argument propounded by M. Cartwright (t) Second Reply part 1. pag. 58â— concludeth euidently against you that This point of keeping peace in the Church is one of those which requireth aswell a Pope ouer all Archbishops as one Archbishop ouer all Bishops in a Realme From this vnity of the Head the Church of Christ vniuersally spread ouer the earth takes her vnity Euen as there are sayth S. Cyprian (u) De vnit Eccles many beames of the sunne and one light many bowes of one tree and yet one strength founded in one roote and many brookes flowing from one fountaine a vnity therof conserued in the spring euen so the Church of our Lord casting forth her light displaieth her beames euery where throughout the world and yet her light is one she extends her bowes ouer the whole earth and spreads her flowing riuers farre and neere and yet there is one Head one beginning and one fruitfull and plentifull Mother And lest you might answeare that this one Head of the whole Church mentioned by S. Cyprian is none other but Christ he declareth himselfe saying (x) Ibid. Our Lord to manifest vnity hath constituted one chaire ordained by his authority that vnity should haue beginning from one And explicating who this one is he sayth (y) Ibid. Vpon Peter being one he buildeth his Church and to him commendeth his sheepe to be fed c. The primacy is giuen to Peter that the Church may be shewed to be one And therefore he cals the Chaire of Peter (z) Ep. 55. The principall Church from whence Sacerdotall vnity proceedeth S. Augustine (a) L. de pastor c. 13. Our Lord committed his sheepe to Peter to commend vnity in him There were many Apostles and to one it is sayd feede my sheepe S. Leo (b) Serm. 3. de assump sua Peter being one is chosen out of the whole world to be constitated ouer the vocation of all nations ouer all the Apostles and all the Fathers of the Church to the end that although there be many Priests and many Pastors in the people of God yet Peter may peculiarly gouerne them all whom Christ also principally ruleth And S. Bernard speaking to Eugenius Pope (c) L. 2. de consider Thou being one art Pastor not only of the sheepe but of all Pastors c. Christ committed all his sheep to one to commend vnity in one flock and in one shepheard Where there is vnity there is perfection If therfore Christ committed his whole flock to Peter being one if one Head among twelue Apostles were necessary to take away occasions of Schisme among them their number being but small how much more necessary was it that for the same cause the whole Church which by reason of the multitude of Bishops and people is more liable to schisme should be gouerned by one Head Who although he be a weake man Christ praying for him (d) Luc. 22.32 hath secured vs that his fayth shall not faile and to the end he may confirme all his brethren hath placed him (e) Aug. ep 166. in the chaire of Vnity in which euen ill men are enforced to speake good things And though he be but one yet he is assisted by other Bishops as his Coadiutors and they by inferion Pastors that so the Bishops watching ouer the inferior Pastors and the supreme Pastor ouer the Bishops the gouerment of the Church labor therof might be diuided among many and yet chiefly committed to one to whom the rest were to haue recourse as the Apostles had to Peter Among the most Blessed Apostles sayth S. Leo (f) Ep. 84. there was in the likenesse of honor a difference of power And although the election of them all was alike yet it was granted to one that he should be aboue the rest in authority from which modell the distinction of Bishops hath proceeded with great prouidence it hath bene ordained that all should not claime all things to themselues but that in seuerall Prouinces there should be seuerall Bishops whose sentence should hold the first ranck among their brethren and againe that others constituted in the greater cities should haue a more ample charge and that by them the gouerment of the vniuersall Church might flow to the seat of Peter and that none might euer dissent from their Head This was the doctrine of that renowned Father and the same hath bene the beliefe of all Orthodoxe Christians And you that oppose it by telling vs a tale of a wrens head placed vpon the sholders of a man shew your selfe not to vnderstand the things of God (g) Math. 16.13 but to measure them by your shallow capacity not considering that according to his promise the supreme Pastor to whom he hath committed the charge of his flock is gouerned by the holy Ghost in his consultations of fayth and that as without his assistance no multitude of Prelates is able to gouerne the whole Church so with his helpe one may performe it as experience teacheth But you obiect (h) Pag 350. 1. That we cannot haue certitude of any B. of Rome because his ordination dependeth vpon the intention of the Ordainer then which what can be more vncertaine This you had obiected before and haue receaued your answere (i) Chap. 5. sect 7. And S. Cyprian (k) L. 4. ep 9. hath told you that to raise such doubts is to doubt of the prouidence of God and to rebell against his ordination 2. You obiect (l) Pag. 350. Iohn the twelth wanting yeares and other conditions necessary for that dignity tooke possession of the Roman Church by intrusion and that therfore in his time the
Church had no true visible Head such as we require because of him it could not be said This is the B. of Rome This obiection you borowed from Baronius (m) Anno 955. who though he acknowledge that the electâ—on of Iohn was void because no true forme was obserued in it yet you passe ouer what he addeth as not being for your purpose namely that the Church afterwards consented to his election wherby the defects that interuened in his former election were supplied and he receaued and reuerenced as true Pope by the whole Church And wheras you say that this Pope was for his life monstrous it hath bene proued (n) Abouâ— Chap. 12. sect 2. that the ill liues of Popes or other Bishops are not Arguments to disproue their authority God is able to teach by Balaams Asse and the Euangelist tells you (o) Ioâ—â— 11.49 that notwithstanding Caiphas was a wicked man yet because he was high Priest he prophesied or rather God by him And our Blessed Sauiour foreseeing that Cauillers would arise hath by S. Augustine (p) Ep. 165. long since answered this your Argument to a wrangling Donatist and in him to you saying If any traitor in those dayes had by surreption crept into that ranck of Bishops which is deduced from S. Peter himselfe euen to Anastasius or Vrbanus who at this present sitteth in that chaire it could worke no preiudice to the Church and to innocent Christians for whom our Lord prouideth saying of wicked Prelates Do yee what they say but what they doe doe it not for they say and do not c. And speaking to Petilianus another Donatist after he had reprehended him for separating himselfe from the Roman Church with sacrilegious fury he addeth (q) Cont. lit Petil. l. 2. c. 51. Why dost thou call the Apostolike See the chaire of pestilence If in respect of the men whom thou thinkest to speake the Law and not to fulfill is did our Lord Iesus Christ for the Pharisees of whom he sayth they say and do not any way wrong the chaire in which they sate Nay did he not commend that chaire of Moyses and reprehend them preseruing entire the honor of the Chaire If you would thinke vpon these things you would not for the men whom you defame blaspheme the Apostolike Chaire with which you do not communicate So S. Augustine to Petilianus and so we to you SECT V. Whether the Roman Church at any time be diuided into many Heads HOw ill aduised you are to obiect either the multitude or the long continuance of Schismes which haue bene in the Roman Church you haue heard (r) See aboue Chap. 7. prope sin Chap. 12. sect 7. But because in time of Schisme when there are two or three that pretend right to the chaire of S. Peter the faithfull cannot certainly know which of them is true Pope you aske (s) Pag. 352. What resolution our Church can haue in such a case adding moreouer (t) Pag. 353. that our article of belieuing this only singular Roman Pope without which fayth none can be saued damneth two of the three parts of our Roman Church at that time Your question is a doubt springing from ignorance and your addition an vntruth To your question S. Antoninus (u) Part. 3 â—is 21. c. 2. seqq hath answeared who treating of the schisme which happened in time of Vrban the sixth against whom the French Cardinalls â—earing his seuerity and flying to Anagnia created a new Pope calling him Clement the seauenth prescribeth this rule that in time of Schisme when two or more at the same time hold themselues to be true Popes it is not necessary for saluation to belieue any one of them determinatly to be the true Pope but disiunctiuely him that hath bene Canonically assumpted And which of them determinatly that is faythfull people are not bound to know but may follow the iudgment of their Prelates and Superiors To which Gerson (x) De modo hab se temp Schism addeth that in this case it is temerarious iniutious and scandalous to hold as excommunicated or out of the state of saluation those that adhere to either part or that carry themselues noutrally and that it is lawfull to communicate with either party and to obey either of those Popes as occasion shall serue while the right of neither is certainely knowne And this he confirmeth by the answere which S. Ambrose gaue to S. Augustine concerning the lawfulnesse of fasting or not fasting on Saturdaies according to the diuersity of times places and persons I conclude therfore that your so often repeating as an article of our fayth that for saluation it is necessary to belieue that this determinat man is true Pope and true Head of the Church if you speake of belieuing it with diuine fayth you confesse the contrary to be held by many of our learned Diuines and that their opinion hath neuer bene censured by the Church But if you speake of belieuing it at least with morall certainty it is granted by all Catholike Diuines when there is but one determinat person whom the whole Church receaueth and obiecteth as her vndoubted Head and as the Vicar of Christ vpon earth But yet neither that is necessary in time of Schisme when of two or three it is doubtfull which is the true Pope for then it is sufficient to belieue him to be true Pope which is Canonically chosen without determining any of them in particular as S. Antoninus and Gerson haue taught instructing you how to carry your selfe in such a case But I feare you haue no desire to learne SECT VI. Whether the Roman Church be doubtfully headed TO proue that the Roman Church is doubtfully headed you alleage (y) Pag. 354.355.356 that after 1600. yeares it is not yet determined whether the supreme Iudge in our Church be the Roman Pope or a Councell collecting from thence that the Roman Church should not take vpon her to determine Controuersies of fayth against Protestants before she haue satisfied Protestants in this one whether Pope or Councell be indeed the supreme Iudge So you as you are wont for you are not ignorant that this diuision is inadequate since beside the Pope alone without a Councell and a Councell alone without the Pope there is a third member which is the Pope together with a Councell whose iudgment in matters of fayth all Catholikes hold to be infallible Nor did any euer defend that a generall Councell confirmed by the Pope can erre either in definitions of fayth or manners This is the sense and meaning of Catholike Doctors when they say The Church cannot erre for by the Church they vnderstand not the Pope alone without a Councell nor a Councell alone without the Pope but both of them together as they make one whole Church consisting of the Pope as Head and of the Councell as the representatiue body therof This is that supreme Iudge which
world ouerwhelmed in the dregs of Antichristian filthinesse abhominable traditions and superstitions of the Pope And of our English Protestants why did Iuel say (c) Apol. part 4. c. 4. The truth was vnknowne at that time and vnheard of when Martin Luther and Hulderick Zuinglius first came vnto the knowledge and preaching of the Ghospell Why Perkins (d) Expos of the Creed pag. 307. That during the space of 900. yeares the Popish heresy spread it selfe ouer the whole world and for many hundred yeares an vniuersall Apostacy ouerspread the whole face of the earth I conclude therfore that when you deny that the Church of Christ was extinguished before Luthers time you out-face and coÌ„tradict your best learned brethren domestick forraine Nor is it a sufficient answere to tell vs (e) Pag. 406. of a sentence of Caluin in which he acknowledgeth the Church not to be perished in Africke Aegypt Asia and among the Grecians for you haue heard the testimonies not of Caluin only but of many others If Caluin deny that which together with them he affirmed he contradicteth himselfe And since both he and you hold the Church to be inuisible I desire to know how you came to find out and see in Africa and Greece a Church that is inuisible and indeed that is not in being for in those nations there is no Church but of Roman Catholikes all the rest which in them beare the name of Christians being absolute heretikes (f) See aboue Chap. 41. sect 4. But you say (g) Pag. 369. To charge Protestants with holding a decay error from fayth in the whole Catholike Church vnto Bellarmine seemed in effect to be a lewd slander You vnderstand not Bellarmine or els wittingly misinterpret his meaning He rightly obserueth (h) L. 3. de Eccles milie c. 11. that Protestants hold two Churches the one visible the other inuisible wherof you speaking say (i) Pag 10. fin 11. init that by some you are slandered with making two Churches But this to be no slander Bellarmine proueth out of the Centurists whose doctrine it is And the same I proue against you out of other Protestants We say quoth Whitaker (k) Cont. 2. q. 1. c. 14. fol. 125. there are two societies of men in the world that is two Churches To the one the predestinat belong to the other the Rebrobate The one of these he affirmeth to be wholly inuisible the other visible (l) Ibid. q. 2. c. 1. q. 1. c. 3.7.8 q. 4. c. 1.3 The same is stifly mantained by Fulke (m) In cap. 3. Math sect 3. in c. 22. sect 3. When Caluin and other Protestants say The Church cannot perish they speake of the inuisible Church which Bellarmine and all Catholikes hold to be a Platonicall idea and a mere Chimaera no where existent but in your deluded fancies The true Church of Christ all Catholikes with the holy Councell of Nice hold to be One and that Bellarmine proueth to be visible And you sayth he hold that to haue perished and your inuisible Church only to haue remained which in his doctrine and in verity is to say that the true Church of Christ on earth wholly perished nothing remayning but a Chimaera of a supposed inuisible Congregation which hath no reall existence but only fantastike in your imaginations And that you wrong Bellarmine in producing him as a witnesse that an absolute decay of the Catholike Church was neuer taught by Protestants you may not deny for afterwards (n) Pag. 406. you confesse and proue out of his words that he as also Bozius parifieth you with the Donatists which held the Catholike Church to haue wholly perished throughout the world and to haue remained only in a few Professors of their Sect in a corner of Africa which doctrine differeth not from yours who hold the Catholike-Church to haue bene vtterly destroied for many yeares and now to haue no being but where your Protestant professors are Wherfore I aske you as S. Augustin (o) L. 3. contra Parmen c. 3. did the Donatists How can you vaunt to haue any Church if the haue ceased for so long time And againe (p) De bapt l. 3. c. 2. If the Church were perished so long time from whence did Donatus or Luther appeare From what earth is he sprung vp From what sea is he come forth From what heauen is he fallen I conclude therfore that we may iustly exclaime against you as S. Augustine did against the Donatists (q) In Psal 101. Gods Church of all nations is no more she is perished so say they that are not in her O impudent Voyce They say the whole Church is perished and the relickes remaine only on Donatus on Luther or Caluin his side O proud and impious tongue (r) Aug. de agon Christ. c. 29. SECT II. Whether the Catholike Church assembled in a generall Councell may erre in the definitions of Fayth IN your second Thesis (s) Pag. 369. you define The Church Catholike properly so called as it is militant to be multitude of all Christian belieuers whensoeuer and whersoeuer dispersed throughout the world This you say cannot erre But your third Thesis is (t) Ibid. that the representatiue body of this Church that is to say all the Prelates of this Church assembled in a generall Councell may erre in their decrees of fayth This thesis destroieth the former for if all the Prelates of the Church which are the lightes of the world (u) Math. 5.15 and whom God (x) Ephes 4.12.14 hath prouided as Pastors and Doctors vnto the edifiing of his Church and giuen to vs that we be not like little ones wauering carried away with euery blast of erroneus doctrine may themselues be carried away and seduced with false doctrine they may also preach the same to the people and leade them into error What meanes then is left to preserue the whole Church from erring But you say (y) Pag 366. That generall Councells may erre in their decrees of fayth some of your owne Romish Schoole haue auouched These some if we belieue you are Cusanus Occham Turrecremata Gerson and Canus But we cannot belieue you for those workes of Cusanus and Occham are forbidden (z) Ind lib. prohib and Cusanus hath retracted his Turrecremata speaketh not of the Church representatiue that is to say of Councells which consist only of the Pastors and Prelates of the Church but of the whole body of the Church as it comprehendeth all the faythfull both Pastors and people which sayth he cannot erre in fayth though some members therof may But withall he proueth against you (a) Sum. de Eccâ—e l. 4. c. 2. that the verities of fayth defined by the Church in generall Councells are to be held infallible though not expressly contained in the Canon of holy Scripture and that no definitions of Councells can be of force vnlesse they be
and of such speaches as are hardly thought to passe from the furious Diuell himselfe No meruaile theÌ„ if Oecolampadius in his answeare to Luthers Confession of fayth passe this verdict on him He began his former booke with the Diuell now he endeth this with the Diuell No wonder if Conradus Regius (r) Lib. cont Ioan. Hess de coena Dom. testify of him that God for his great pride did take from him the spirit of truth as he did from the Prophets mentioned in the third booke of Kings Chap. 22. and in place of that his spirit gaue him an angry proud and liyng spirit And to omit other testimonies Ioannes Campanus a famous Zuinglian (s) In Colloq Lat. Luth. to 2. fol. 351. passeth this censure on him Quam certum est Deumesse Deum tam certus Diabolicus mendax est Lutherus As certaine as it is that God is God so certaine it is that Luther is a lyer and belongs to the Diuell And therfore in the end he tooke him as one that belonged to him for hauing one euening eaten drunken very liberally he was the next morning found dead in a most horrible manner (t) Cochl in vita Luth. alij passim so vgly and deformed that it was not hard to ghesse at the author of his death which was such as he himselfe expected when he sayd (u) Ep. ad Spalat to 2. Epist Latin not long before I daily wait for death and for the deserued punishment of an heretike I conclude therefore with Origen (x) Hom. 3. in Exod. ante med Orandum nobis est c. We are to pray that our Lord vouchsafe to open our mouth that we may be able to conuince theÌ„ that contradict and stop that mouth which the Diuell opened SECT VI. Whether the Roman Church be as subiect to errors as any other Church YOur Thesis is affirmatiue (y) Pag. 374. your Proofes repetitions of arguments already answeared One only you adde heere repeate afterwards againe (z) Pag. 397. 400. which is The Church of Rome hath erred in matter of fayth Ergo she may possibly erre I deny your Antecedent You proue it The administration of the Eucharist vnto infants vpon necessity of saluation was taught continued in the Church of Rome for the space of 600. yeares together but you confesse there is now no such necessity Ergo in those former times the Church of Rome erred It is a knowne principle in Scholes that he argueth absurdly who proposeth an argument that makes as much against himselfe as 〈◊〉 his aduersary to which therefore himselfe in 〈…〉 is bound to answere Such iâ— this of yoâ—â—◠〈…〉 of Rome erreth not now in 〈…〉 the Eucharist to 〈…〉 â—â—testants herei◠〈…〉 no such necessâ—â—â— professe tha◠〈…〉 error in fayâ—h fo◠〈…〉 (a) Pag. 276. 178. hold now the 〈…〉 leeued the doctriâ—◠〈…〉 charist to infants vpon 〈…〉 ding to your principles â—â—red 〈…〉 you can make I know not Sure 〈…〉 denying that the reall administration 〈…〉 â—â—fants is necessary for their saluation can gâ—â—◠〈…〉 solution to this difficulty which yet in the princâ—â—â—◠〈◊〉 Catholike doctrine is easily answeared Wee haue learned two sacred principles from the mouth our Sauiour The former is (b) Ioan. 3.5 If one be not borne againe water and the spirit he cannot enter into the kingdome of Goâ—â— If therfore we will enter into the kingdome of God we muâ—â— receaue the SacrameÌ„t of baptisme really or at least i◠〈◊〉 Whosoeuer is growne to perfect age when he ca◠〈…〉 ceaue it really it is sufficient for saluation to 〈…〉 intentionally in desire by fayth and other good Actâ— of which infants are not capable and therefore the reâ—â—â—â—eceauing of the Sacrament of baptisme is necessary for them to saluation If thou wilt be a Christian Catholike sayth S. Augustin (c) De anima eius orgi l. 3. c. 9. neyther belieue nor say not teach that infants dying without baptisme can be saued And the contrary doctrine he reporteth (d) L. de haeres ad Quodvuls haer 88. as an Article of the Pelagian heresy The other principle is (e) Ioan. 6.34 Vnlesse you eat the flesh of the sonne of man and drinke his bloud you shall not haue life in you It is therfore necessary to saluation for all as well infants as others to receaue the holy Eucharist either really or at least in vow And this vow may eyther be explicit that is a desire of receauing it when it cannot really be had or els 〈◊〉 as in the Sacrament of baptisme for that in bapâ—◠〈…〉 vow of the holy Euâ—◠〈…〉 the first (f) Rescrip ad Concil Mileuit Ep. 25. S. Auguâ—◠〈…〉 â—â—omas of Aquine as 〈…〉 proued by the great 〈…〉 â—â—e two most Eminent 〈…〉 â—â—n (i) Repliq. l. 2. troiseme Obseru Chap. 11. (g) To. 3. in 3. part disp 40. sect 2. §. Hinc 4. The words of 〈…〉 â—â—s purpose It is in no 〈…〉 him (l) Tom. 6. in c. 10.1 ad Corinth Ven. (h) Tom. 3. Contr. l. 1. de Euchar c 7. Bade 〈…〉 partakerof the body 〈…〉 â—â—er of Christ in baptisme 〈…〉 of that bread of that 〈…〉 â—â—d and drinke of that cup 〈…〉 â—â—d in the vnity of the body 〈…〉 â—â—pation and benefit of that 〈…〉 which the Sacrament sigâ—◠〈…〉 â—â—ius and S. Augustine 〈…〉 â—â—essity of baptizing inâ—◠〈…〉 for them to receaue 〈…〉 â—â—ceaued before the be 〈…〉 â—â—aptisme which is the 〈◊〉 all the â—â—â—â—â—aments â—â—righâ—â—y followeth against the â—â—lagians thaâ— Baptisme is absolutely necessary for infants to the end thâ—t therby they may receaue the Eucharist at least in vow without which they cannot be saued In this sense and in no other these Fathers and the Church of Rome with them haue taught a necessity of administing the Eucharist to infants to wit so farre forth as it is contained implicitly and virtually in Vow in the Sacrament of baptismer for that a reall administration of the Eucharist vnto them was necessary for saluation she neuer taught which you and other Protestants not vnderstanding impute the contrary doctrine to her assuming it as an argument that she hath erred in varying from that doctrine which once she taught To this Thesis you adde an other (l) Pag. 375. that The Roman Church is more subiect to error then any other Church Christian which to be a shamefull vntruth appeareth out of the promise of our Sauiour made to S. Peter and his successors that the gates of hell which are errors in fayth shall not preuaile against the Church built on them and out of his prayer made for them that their fayth shall not faile for that this promise of Christ and this prayer were not made to S Peter nor for him as he was a priuat man but as he was Head of the Church and therfore extend to all his successors in the Roman See to secure them
Peter Cardinal Albert B. of Mentz and the Marquis of Brandeburg to whom the publishing of the Indulgences and collecting the almes was committed for the publishing of the indulgences made choyce of Tetzelius a famous preacher of the Order of S. Dominick Wherat the Friers of S. Augustines Order and especially Staupitius the Vicar generall and Martin Luther being offended opposed themselues hoping by fauor of Frederick Duke of Saxony to get the place for themselues But missing of that they began to reprehend the abuses committed as they pretended in the promulgation of those indulgences But Luther being of a fiery nature and of a contentions spirit rested not here but published in print 95. propositions about the nature institution end and effect of indulgences diuers of which were censured by Tetzelius as hereticall and Luther thervpon complained of to the Pope and cited to appeare at Rome But by mediation of friends which he procured the hearing of his cause being remitted to Cardinall Caietan who was then the Popes Legate in Germany Luther appeared before him and gaue vp a protestation of his submission promising to follow the holy Roman Church in all her sayings and doings present past and to come But neuerthelesse being gotten from the Cardinall he went forward in his former contentions and beside a publike disputation which he held with Eckius at Lipsia against indulgences he diuulged many other scoffing pamplets treatises to call in doubt and bring in contempt diuers other points of religion from whence hath followed all the calamity that in these parts of the world hath ensued since that time in the Church of God This was the occasion these the beginnings of Luthers reuolt proceeding merely from his couetousnesse pride enuy and grudging that the promulgation of those indulgences was not committed to him and his Order for he protested afterwards at that time he neither intended nor dreamed of any change but fell into those contentions casually and against his will not well knowing then what Indulgences meant (c) See Brerel Luthers life Chap. 1. sect 1. Now you come in to act your part (d) Pag. 381. fin 382. init and promise to proue by a cloud of witnesses the falshood and impiety of the Popes doctrine concerning indulgences and the iniquity of his practise heaping vp riches by them And first you except against the Pope (e) Pag 383. for condemning this proposition of Luther It is not in the power of the Church to make new articles of fayth This hath bene alleady answeared (f) See aboue Chap. 4. and declared what power the Church hath or hath not herein 2. To prone that the doctrine of Indulgences is a new article of fayth you produce many Authors (g) Pag. 382. 383. 384. 385. 386. 389. which may be reduced to three classes The first is of heretikes as Cornelius Agrippa a Magicians Paul a Venetian Fryer condemned a few yeares since for heresy Fasciculus rerum expetendarum Acta Concilij Tridentini Controuersiae memorabiles all of them being Treatises of Protestants set forth without names of their authors and prohibited To these you adde Thuanus (h) Pag. 385. whom you call our noble Historian but we bequeath him to you as one whose writings shew him to be yours Nor are you contented to cite him as a Catholike author but falsify him He raileth against Pope Leo for ordaining that when a Bishoprick or Abbacy in France is vacant for the auoiding of simony and other inconueniencet a person fit for those dignities be presented by the King ordained by the Pope His words in Latin as you cite them are Peccatum in sacris muneribus dispensandis Leo mox grauiore cumulauit c. In which words he makes no mention of indulgences but only of conferring sacred or Ecclesiasticall dignities and offices But you to make them serue your turne against indulgences corrupt them translating in sacris muneribus dispensandis thus of ill dispersing indulgences Leo say you to his sinne of ill dispersing indulgences added a farre greater Is not this a great imposture And the like you commit againe (i) Pag. 389. when speaking of Luthers separation from the Roman Church you say Luther was a passiue therin as appeareth out of the proceedings of Pope Leo against him Els why is it that your owne Thuanus speaking of this separation sayd That some in those dayes laid the fault vpon Pope Leo. This is a greater imposture then the former for Thuanus speaketh not those words of Luthers separation from the Church of Rome but against altering the custome formerly obserued in the election of Ecclesiasticall Prelates in France which he attributeth to Antonius Pratensis Chancellor of that kingdome though out of his owne splene against the Pope he adde that there were not then wanting some that laid the fault vpon Pope Leo. What connexion hath this with Luthers reuolt from the Church of Rome or with the doctrine of indulgences You cannot excuse it from a Grand Imposture To the second classe may be reduced Massonius Polydore Virgill and Erasmus who speake not aggainst the doctrine of Indulgences but against the abuse of them And for as much as in many other things and particularly in that very point they speake temeraiously and ouerlash those their workes you know are forbidden by the Church Why do you alleage them as of authority against vs The third classe is of approued Catholike Authors of whom you first produce (k) Pag. 384. fin Roffensis saying There was no vse of indulgences in the beginning of the Church Christian But you change the state of the question passing from the vse of indulgences of which Roffensis speaketh to the doctrine of indulgences and inferre that because Roffensis found not the vse or practise of them in the begining of the Church he denieth the doctrine and lawfulnesse of them which in that very article he effectually proueth out of the power of binding and losing giuen by Christ in the Ghospell to S. Peter and his Successors 2. He yeildeth the reason why there was not so much necessity of vsing thē in those beginings as afterwards 3. He sheweth that Catholike Deuines proue the vse of them to be most ancient out of the stations so much frequented in Rome and that S. Gregory the great granted some in his time 4. His owne opinion is that it is not certainly knowne when they began first to be vsed in the Church from whence it must follow by the rule of S. Augustine (l) L 4. de Baptism c. 24. that the practise of them is from the Apostolicall time The second author you produce (m) Pag. 135. is Alphonsus de Castro who sayth Neque tamen hac occasione sunt contemnendae indulgentiae quod earum vsus in Ecclesia videatur sero receptus which words you peruert changing videatur into fit but most of all by translating them falsly for you render them thus Indulgences are not
she is but Antioch Nor should she then haue any priuiledge of not erring in fayth as now Antioch hath not since the remouall of S. Peters See from thence But therfore to inferre that the now Roman Church against which you write this Grand Imposture being at this present the See of S. Peter or whiles hereafter she shall remaine the See of S. Peter may erre in fayth is to argue à sensu diuiso ad sensum compositum and to infer that such things as perhaps are possible but neuer shall be are already in being If I should argue thus It may possibly come to passe though it be improbable that the Metropolitan See of England may be remoued from Canterbury to Carlile Ergo the Church of Canterbury is not now the Metropolitan Church of England were not this a sophisme And so is yours Some of our Diuines grant that the See of S. Peter which maketh the Church of Rome the Mother Mistresse of all Churches and secureth her from all error in fayth may be remoued from Rome though there appeare no likelihood therof Ergo inferre you in the opinion of some of your Diuines the now Roman Church is not the Mistresse and mother Church of the world but may now fall from the fayth euen whiles she is the See of S. Peter no lesse then she might if his See were already remoued from thence Who seeth not this Argument to be sophisticall And to sophistry you ioyne fraud for to proue that the Successor of S. Peter hath not his See at Rome by diuine ordinance but only by humane election you (d) Pag. 21. alleage Suarez (e) De trip virt Theol. disp 10. sect 3. n. 10. saying that before the ascension of Christ nothing appeareth of any such ordinance either in Scripture or from tradition Here you breake of leauing out the rest of Suarez words and concealing his Doctrine for in the very same place both before and after these his words which you cull out he expresly affirmeth that it is more pious and probable that Christ after his ascension appearing to S. Peter commanded him to place his See at Rome which he ptoueth by the testimonies of many ancient Fathers and by other Arguments all which you conceale and cite him for the contrary opinion The same abuse you offer to Valentia Bellarmine and Azor. For all these prooue with many testimonies of antiquity and other forcible Arguments that it is of Diuine institution holding it for certaine and the contrary opinion not to be safe though not expresly de fide SECT VII Your seauenth Argument THAT the Successor of S. Peter in the Roman See canonically chosen is Head of the vniuersall Church all Catholikes beleeue as vndoubted matter of fayth But that this indiuiduall person v. g. Vrban the Eight is true Pope and true Head of the Church though the more probable opinion of Diuines hold it also to be of fayth yet diuers others defend that it is only of morall certaynty You not knowing how to solue the arguments of the first opinion otherwise then by rayling against it (f) Pag. 23. fine calling it a Iesuiticall fayth both grosly false wickedly blasphemous assume the second as granted which I with the authors of the first opinion do not grant but deny For the Church proposing vnto vs this indiuiduall man Vrban the eight as true Pope it is not only morally but absolutely and infallibly certayne that in the person of Vrban the eight are found all the conditions of true Baptisme Ordination Election and whatsoeuer els requisite for a true Pope and true head of the Church for as the Church being assisted by the holy Ghost cannot erre in proposing other Verities of fayth so nether in proposing this man to be the true head and lawfull gouernor of the vniuersall Church wherfore our beleefe that this man is true Pope is not humane morall and fallible but diuine and infallible vnlesse you will question the authority of the holy Ghost making it humane and fallible Yea euen in the other opinion though it be no matter of fayth that this indiuiduall man is true Pope yet the Authors thereof hold it to be a Theologicall conclusion so certayne that whosoeuer shall deny it is worthy of flames SECT VIII Your eight Argument YOVR eight argument (g) Pag. 25. 26. 27. is nothing but a repetition of what you haue sayd in the former sections without any addition of new proofes vnlesse to proue your Doctrine be to rayle against ours calling it new false scandalous pernicious hereticall blasphemous and vs periured persons all which being nothing but an empty froath of iniurious words deserue no other answere but contempt CHAP. VI. The Roman Church is the Head and Mother of all Churches IN this matter you wholly mistake the state of the question for when we demand which Church is the Head the Mother and Mistresse of all Churches the question is not which Church was first founded If you speake of priority of tyme or antiquity and call those Churches Mothers of all such as were founded after them we grant that in this sense the Church of Hierusalem is the Mother Church of all Churches and the Roman in the same sense a daughter both to the Church of Hierusalem of Antioch and all others that were founded before her And in this sense the Bishops which had bene present at the first Councell of Constantinople call the Church of Hierusalem the Mother of all other Churches (h) Theodor. l. 5. histor c. 9. But this is not the question for you know and set it downe as our Doctrine (i) Pag. 29. 38. that the Roman Church is called the Mother Church of all Churches because S. Peter was constituted by Christ the ordinary Pastor of the whole Church By which it appeares you know right well that the mother-hood which we attribute to the Roman Church is not priority of tyme but of authority and iurisdiction grounded on the supremacy of S. Peter for as by reason of his transcendent authority ouer the whole flock of Christ which is his Church he was and in his successors is the Father and Head of all Bishops so the Roman Church in which sayth S. Chrysologus (*) Epist. ad Eutych Peter still liueth and gouerneth is the Head and mother of all Churches and vnto which sayth S. (k) L. 3. c. 3. Irenaeus all Churches are necessarily to agree by reason of her more mighty Principality that is to say by reason of the soueraignty and supreme authority of the See Apostolike And in this sense she is called by S. Irenaeus (l) Ibid. and Origen (m) Apud Euseb l. 6. hist c. 12. The most ancient Church and by S. Cyprian (n) De simplicit Praelat The Root the fountayne and head of Episcopall power and The principall Church from whence Priestly vnity began (o) L. 1. ep 3. And from the same ground