is Soveraign inact it By consequence must needs deny that any Act of the Apostles could be Law to the Church whose office was onely to publish the newes of the coming and rising again of Christ and to induce men to submit themselves to his kingdome of the world to come Much lesse can there be any Power to give Lawes to the Church but that which is in the Soveraigne of each State which therefore when it is Christian is called the Church of such a Kingdome Though hee acknowledge also that before the Empire was Christian the Body of Christians in every City is called in the Scriptures the Church of such or such a City pag. 275 But denying that there can be upon earth any such universal Church as all Christians are tied to obey because they are lyable to other Powers of this world according to the States of which they are pag. 248. and before pag. 206. As for the Power of bunding and loosing very properly hee understands it to be a consequence of the Apostles commission to baptize unto forgivenesse of sins But so that supposing they have nothing to do either to loose them that repent not or to binde them that do and that no mans repentance is visible but by our outward signes there must be some Power to judge of the truth of those fignes because they may be counterfeit And this Power as it is expresly given by our Lord to the Church Mat. XVIII 16. when hee saith Tell the Church So doth S. Paul 1 Cor. V. 11 12 and 3 4 5. acknowledge the power of casting out the incestuous persons and other finners to be in the Congregation reserving to himself onely the pronouncing of the sentence Supposing this Church to be now the Soveraign Power that representeth the people but when S. Paul writ the Body of Christians in such or such a City pag. 275. In like maner the appointing of Persons either to officiate the Service of God or to wait upon the necessities of the Church hee also gives unto the Church that is then to the respective Bodies of Christians but now to the Soveraign Power into which all Rights of the People resolve by the establishment of it But the consecrating of them by Imposition of hands as to the Apostles for their time so to the worlds end to their Successors For thus were Maâ—thias Paul and Barnabas made Apostles Act. I. 15 23. XIV 1 2 3. XIV 14. Thus the seven Deacons thus the Elders of Churches were constituted Acts VI. 3. XIV 23. the Congregation chusing the Apostles declaring the choice as in binding and loosing As for the maintenance of Persons thus appointed it is no marvail if hee make it meer almes and benevolence without any Law of God to make the purses of Christians lyable to it who acknowledgeth not Christianity to be any Law For how shall hee be bound to contribute towards the maintenance of such persons that is not bound to be a Christian But that Tithes under the Law were due onely by the Civil Power which God had upon the people having made God their Soveraign by their Covenant with him in which right Moses and Aaeron and the High Priests that succeeded him were but his Lieutenants so that when this Power was translated and settled upon their Kings it held meerly by their sufferance this is an imagination that no mans brain ever teemed with till now And truly in the point of giving Law to the Church by determining Controversies of Faith and by interpreting difficulties of Scripture call it what you please as also by deciding that which becomes questionable in any thing that concerns the community of Christians It had been a necessary consequence of this opinion that as hee owneth the Soveraign Powers right to decree so hee should assign the Persons thereby appointed for the Church a Right to declare publish or pronounce the same as in Excommunicating and Ordaining hee doth For which hee hath found no ground no pretense in the Scriptures Besides whereas by the Act of the Apostles laying a burden upon believers Acts XV. 28. and by the practice of their successors practising the holding of Councils which common sense would make ridiculous if they had no effect upon the Church hee is convinced to acknowledge that they were able to binde themselves though not the Church It will be impossible for him to render a reason either why this power should cease or how it should continue when the Soveraign Power becomes Christian and all right in the Church is resolved into it I must not leave this point before I have taken notice of one presumption wherein both these Authors seem to agree For the Leviathan in several places pag. 285 286 282 205 206 322. taketh for granted that there is no Law in the world but the Law of Nature and the Civil Lawes of Commonwealths And therefore that hee which makes Ecclesiastical Power not to depend upon the Civil must indow it both with right and means to constrain men to obey it and thereupon inferrs all the inconvenience which hee so much aggravates That then all Civil Power must of necessity be swallowed up and resolved into the Power of the Church in as much as all Christians even Soveraignes are members of it Which to avoid it is necessary to grant that the Church is nothing else but a Christian Commonwealth and the Clergy ministers of the Soveraign Power deriving all their authority from it pag. 209 249 296. In like maner the first book de Synedriis Ebraeorum in defining Excommunication pag. 105. takes it for granted that those who challenge the power of it in behalf of the Church would have the Civil estate and condition of him that is excommunicate in regard of his reputation of freedom changed and abated by it Which must needs inferre the Church to be indowed with such a power as is able by outward force to constrain obedience For otherwise the estate of no man that is protected in all right by the Civil Power could be changed or abated by it Accordingly in several places hee presumes that those who maintain the Power of the Church and the right of Excommunicating which is a prime part of it to stand by Gods Law are obliged by consequence to maintain the Power of the Church in maters of the world in Ordine ad spiritualia And hereupon follow the reasons whereby these Authors have disputed the one à priori that this constitution of the Church is destructive to the peace and safety of all States Kingdomes and Commonwealthes in as much as a Power not depending upon them may lawfully be used against them by giving the people a title of executing the commands of it by force The other à posteriori from the practice of all Christian States Kingdomes and Commonwealthes Who by limiting the exercise and effect of all kindes of acts which the Church hath done or pretended to inforce by Excommunication have
Be it therefore granted that the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 with such additions as the place where they stand requires signifie that Body which at the time when our Lord spoke was Gods ancient people This signification if I mistake not descending from the first bodying of them into a Commonwealth in the Wildernesse when they might and were all called and assembled together to take resolution in what concerned their posterity as Commonwealths are presumed to be everlasting Bodies as well as themselves When after the return from the Captivity of Babylon they became dispersed into Aegypt Syria Mesopotamia Asia and elswhere owning still or challenging the same Lawes by owning which they first became one Body such Bodies of them as lived in Alexandria Antiochia Ephesus Nearda Sora Pombeditha or other Cities and their respective territories are by the same reason to be called the Synagogues of Alexandria Ephesus and so forth Being by that name sufficiently distinguished from the Gentile Inhabitants of the same Cities and Territories Neither is it pretended that there is any thing in the original force of the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 why they should not both signifie the same But suppose our Lord Christ declare an intent of instituting a New people upon condition of imbracing his Gospel and use the old word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to signifie this New people as well hee may use it for the near correspondence between them necessary it is that his hearers understanding him understand by that terme something else than the Law had deâ—clared afore And very convenient it was afterwards that when there fell out not onely distinction but opposition between the two Bodies they should be divided by names as they were by affections As the one is signified in all Church Writers by the name of the Synagogue the other by the name of the Church to signifie the distance which ought not to be between them but is For though nothing is more odious than to quarrel about words Yet as in divers things else the not appropriating the term of Synagogue to the Jewes as of Church to the Church which the Fathers throughly observe is an argument of not well distinguishing between the Law and the Gospel Which gives them a privilege in understanding the Scriptures above our times because as I said afore this is in my judgment the prime point of it notwithstanding all the advantages wee have above them for learning and a means to convey the same confusion to the minds of our hearers When therefore wee reade in the Apostles Writings of the Churches of Judaea and Samaria the Churches of Syria Asia Macedonia and Achaia when wee reade of the Church of Rome of Corinth Ephesus Philippi or Thessalonica And again in other places finde the name of the Church absolutely put without any addition to signifie the whole that containeth all the Churches named in other places so often do wee meet with so many demonstrations to common sense of several bodies signified by those that so speak as intended to constitute one whole Body of the Church After which nothing can be demanded but whether the intention of the Apostles prove them to be so onely in point of fact or in point of right which demand a Christian cannot make Our Lord in particular when hee answereth Mat. XVI 18. Thou art Peter and upon this rock will I build my Church and the gates of Hell shall not prevail against it cannot be understood to speak of building the Synagogue which Moses had built so long afore Here I would desire him that thinks it so strange that our Lord should understand by the Church something else than the Jewes signified by it to ask the Author of the Leviathan what reason hee had when hee acknowledged that the Church of Corinth Ephesus and Thessalonica is the Body of Christians living in those respective Cities And whether hee had reason to affirm that the Church so signified did do those acts of right which onely Bodies can do and which hee affirmeth the Church under the Apostles did do For if these reasons be not reconcileable it will be worth the considering what truth there is in that position which is maintained by two that cannot agree about the reasons upon which they maintaine it Neither let any difficulty be made from the difference that may arise who they be to whom our Lord conmands there to resort whom hee bids tell the Church one or more or all For when it is resolved that the Church is a Body or a Society it will be by the nature of the subject manifest that the right of acting in behalf of this Body must by the constitution thereof be reserved either to one or to a few or to the whole in some principal acts in others referring themselves to their Deputies as in popular Governments And whosoever they are that this right is reserved to hee that resorts to them is properly said to resort to the Church though our Lord declaring here the purpose of instituting a Church declare not whom hee will trust the power of acting for the Church with Before I go further I must inferre against the Leviathan that seeing the whole Church is signified by the name of the Church absolutely put without addition by the Apostles as the body which all particular Churches constitute therefore the Church is understood and intended by them as a Body capable of right and able to act though not by all that are of it yet by persons trusted for it A thing which hee that had remembred his Creed could not have doubted of For though the name of a Church may be said to rest in a number of men not united by any right into a visible Body yet one holy Catholick and Apostolick Church cannot consist of all persons maintaining the profession thereof in opposition to all Societies claiming that name but not holding the profession requisite but it must be distinguished by something which it acknowledgeth for Law to oblige it they do not Again if the Name of Church in the Apostles rest upon the bodies of Christians in the Cities of Rome Coriâ—th and Ephesus then can it not now as of divine right signifie the several States Kingdomes and Commonwealths wherein Christianity subsisteth Not onely because the bounds of Christendom are not either materially or formally the same with the bounds of those States under which it is now maintained But chiefly because the signification of that name in the Apostles once resting by divine right upon those Congregations can never be transferred upon those Commonwealths which subsiâ—t not by the same right but necessarily descendeth upon those Bodies which derive their succession from them by visible acts of humane right Against both I further inferre that the Church being signified as one by divine right in the Scriptures can never be understood now to consist in all those
Christo Deo ad confederandam Disciplinam Homicidium Adulterium Fraudem Perfidiam caetera scelera prohibentes That hee had discovered nothing of their Sacraments or Mysteries besides obstinacy not to sacrifice but assemblies before day to sing praises to Christ and to God and to confederate their Discipline prohibiting Murther Adultery violation of Faith and other hainous deeds For the Eucharist is the Sacrament by which this discipline of Christianity is established But farr from being voluntary to those whom wee suppose Christians As for Origen in Celsum I. pag. 4. It is manifest that those private Contracts which Celsus calumniateth that the Christians made among themselves as against the State are acknowledged by him to have been those that were solemnized at their Feasts of Love That is at the Eucharist which from the beginning was a part of them whether then it were so or not And therefore the confederacy of Christians among themselves whom these Authors speak of was no otherwise voluntary than Christianity and therefore not voluntary supposing it The words of Origen 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Which I do not admit to be well corrected 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 As being too obscure an expression for so clear a Writer as Origen to say that it was of force to do more mischief than the Bacchanalia which for that jealousie were put down as wee understand by Livy besides that hee must have said 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and not have used a general word for a particular And therefore I suppose hee alludes to the Verse of Homer 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 meaning 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 dissolving by private confederacy that publick League and Bond wherein the peace of every Commonwealth consisteth Thus then saith Origen And hee seeks to calumniate the Love so called of Christians towards one another as subsisting at the peril of the Publick and able to do the mischief of disloyalty If this will not serve the turn but it be demanded that the Communion of the Church was then frequented by voluntary agreement let mee demand whether the authority of the Apostles in the Church subsisted upon no other title For as to the credit of them in delivering the Gospel believing what God had given them to evidence it with it is not possible for any man that pretends to be a Christian to question it If then it be said that they who were tyed to believe them concerning the truth of the Gospel were not bound to receive them as chief Governors of the Church let mee demand how it came to passe that those were received all over the Church whom it was believed that they had granted their authority to or what part soever of it There being no obligation to tye them to receive such afore others and the variety of judgment which all men are subject to being such as never to agree in the same reason where nothing obliges So likewise whereas it is manifest that the Church then both had and must needs have many Rules the general importance whereof was received by all though with particular differences according to times and places I demand how any such could come in force when neither the Jewes deserved that love that all should imbrace them for their sake nor the judgments of all Christians so different in all things could concurr in any thing which their Christianity imported not Especially I demand this concerning the indowment of the Church because it is evident that as Constantine first made good by the Empire all the acts of them that had given whatsoever was ravished away by the persecution of Diocletian then gave much more of his own So all Kingdoms and Commonwealths after the example of that Empire have proceeded to indow it with the first-fruits of their goods in Houses and Glebes and Tithes and Oblations I demand then what imposture could have been then so powerfull as to seduce all the Christian world in a mater so nearly concerning their interest had they not stood convict by the constant practice of Christendom before Constantine that it was no imposture more than the Christianity brought in by the same Apostles Lastly whereas it is acknowledged what strange severity of discipline the Primitive Church was under by the Rules of Penance which then were in force though I have showed in another place that they were yet stricter under the Apostles and that the severity of them necessarily abated as the zele of Christianity under them did abate I demand what common sense can allow that all Christians should agree to make themselves fools by submitting themselves to such Rules which nothing but their own consent could oblige them to imbrace For neither can it be said that they had them from the Jews nor had they been extant among them that the Christians would have received them for their sake CHAP. XIX That Power which was in Churches under the Apostles can never be in any Christian Soveraign The difference between the Church and the Synagogue in that regard The interest of Secular Power in determining maters of Faith presupposeth the Society of the Church and the act of it No man can be bound to professe the contrary of that which hee believeth Every man is bound to professe that Christianity which hee believeth The Church is the chief Teacher of Christianity through Christendom as the Soveraign of Civil Peace thorough his Dominions Why the Church is to decide maters of Faith rather than the State neither being infallible I Shall not now need to say much to those terms which the Leviathan holds beside that which hath been already said to evidence the Society of the whole Church and the foundation thereof by the Scriptures Hee that acknowledges in the Church a Power to judge of true repentance and accordingly to binde and to loose and that upon the same score and therefore to the same effect as it baptizes together with the Power of appointing publick persons in the Church and the Church in which hee acknowledges the Power to be the Body of Christians in each City by what Title doth hee suppose the Church to hold this Power or this Right the evidence whereof hee fetches from the Scriptures whereby hee proveth it For those Scriptures do not import by what Act it is established but onely that it was in force or use at the doing of those things which they relate Can it be imagined to be any thing else than the act of the Apostles declaring the will of God in that behalf If then by divine right that is by Gods appointment and ordinance imported by those Scriptures the Church that is the Body of Christians in each City stands indowed with those rights how shall the Church that is the Soveraign Power of each State stand indowed with the same rights by the same Title that is by Gods appointment evidenced by the same Scriptures How shall Gods Law that inableth the Body of the Church to binde and to
loose to nominate and elect publick persons in the Church but requireth the Apostles and those that hold under them to pronounce the sentence and to impose hands inable the Soveraign Power to do the same and yet require those that claim from the Apostles to execute If Philosophers have the privilege to justifie such contradictions as these then may this opinion passe for a truth In the mean time to men of common reason how reasonable it will sound that the Apostles being imployed by God to order these things in the Church and that for the maintenance of Christianity received should tye themselves to execute those acts which the Body of Christians in each City should determine to be for the maintenance of that Christianity which they knew nothing what belonged to but what they had learned from them the Apostles I am well content to referr my self to judgment But alwayes there remains or may remain a difference between the Bodies of Christians in several Cities and the Soveraign Powers over them So that the rights of both cannot be derived from one and the same Title Sad experience shows that Churches may continue where the Soveraign Powers are not Christians as they subsisted before they were Shall these Soveraign Powers give sentence of binding and loosing and appoint persons to be ordained and those that claim under the Apostles be bound to execute Shall the Great Turk have Power to officiate and minister the Sacraments of divine service in the Church because whatsoever a man may do by his minister hee may do in his own person much more as this opinion pag. 297. 298 299. expresly disputes that the Soveraign may do and that imployment or more publick consequence is the onely reason why hee doth not It is said indeed pag. 299. that hee that had Power to Teach before hee was a Christian being Baptized retains the same Power to teach Christianity And so every Soveraign being the Chief Master to teach all his Subjects whatsoever the peace of his State requires by being Baptized hee gets no new right but is directed how to use that which wee had afore But if the premises be true the assumption is ridiculous A Doctor of the Synagogue duely qualified is not a Doctor of the Church because the Church stands not upon the same terms with the Synagogue Doctors and Disciples being relatives terms of a relation grounded upon the Society of the Church or Synagogue The Soveraign Power teaches by Lawes to keep the Publick peace though that it should do no more than teach were ridiculous The Church teaches the way to heaven and for that reason the bond of Publick peace not the mater of it And therefore as no man by being Baptized getteth the right of teaching by Civil Laws So hee that hath the right of teaching by Civil Laws by being baptized getteth no right to teach Christianity The Law of Moses was given to one people which had covenanted with God to be ruled by it and upon that condition to be maintained in the Land of Promise So the Covenant of the Law and the obligation of that people to it was presupposed before God had declared whom hee would make Soveraign of that people after Moses But in as much as the determination of all things that became questionable concerning the Law was to come from those Powers which were under the Soveraign it is manifest that the act of such Power secured the consciences of Inferiors For the promise of the Law being the temporal happinesse of the Land of Promise and the body of the people being by the Law to depend upon the determination of their Superiors they practising the Law according to such determination the promise thereof must needs remain indefeisible As for the inward obedience to Gods spiritual Law whereupon as I said they might and did ground a firm hope of everlasting life under the Law it concerned not the consciences of the people how the outward Laws were determined seeing howsoever they were determined this inward obedience to Gods spiritual Law received no hinderance Though the consciences of Superiors from whom those determinations proceeded were so much concerned in them that those who should violate that obedience due to the carnal commandement by determining it to an unjust intent could no wayes pretend any inward and spiritual obedience But Christianity covenanting for this inward and spiritual obedience and expressing everlasting life as the consideration of it and particular Churches being constituted upon these terms and constituting the whole Church which is nothing but the Communion of all Churches whatsoever rights are acknowledged to be in particular Churches which the precept of preaching to and the promise of calling the Gentiles shows might be under several Soveraignties being settled in them already by divine right can never accrue to a Soveraignty though constituted by right but such as God onely alloweth by commanding Government in general but appointeth not by revealing it self in particular And therefore necessarily tend to the constituting of the whole Church by the concurrence of all Churches though of several Soveraignties to the maintenance of that Christianity in which all had equal interest before any Soveraign was Christian And now I cannot mervail if hee that believes not the Scriptures to be Law to Christians otherwise than as they are injoyned by Christian Powers acknowledge no Power in the Apostles of obliging the Church or in any body else beside the Soveraign My mervail is that hee who had pretended all this should neverthelesse acknowledge a right in several Churches that is in the Bodies of Christians dwelling within several Cities the Power of Excommunications and Ordinations and that by the Scriptures that is by divine right For whatsoever act it was or whose act soever it was whereby those rights were settled upon those Churches will hee or will hee not was a Law to those that stood bound to acknowledg such right which was really nothing if no man were bound to acknowledg and to yield effect to it Neither is it mervail if hee acknowledg no Law for the indowment of the Church that acknowledgeth not the judgment of the Levitical Priesthood to have been a Law to the Jewes but by the will of the Soveraign under the Kings But those that acknowledg that indowment to be Gods act not to be voided so long as the Covenant was in force will have seen as good an argument for the like provision to be made for the Church as the correspondence between the Law and the Gospel will allow any point of Christianity from the old Scriptures And then as it hath appeared that several Churches are by Gods appointment several Bodies capable of indowment constituting one whole Church which is the Body of all Churches So by the same means it appears that what the Church is once indowed with is as much the Churches as any mans cloak is his own And as the giving of alms in general is not arbitrary
nothing For what Jurisdiction had any civill Magistrate that govâ—rnâ—d Rome over other Cities without the Precinct oâ— it And yet shall we be so â—iâ—â—â—ulous the Canon describing the priviledges of the Church of Rome by those of Alexandria which extended as far as the Government of Aegypâ— â—o confine those of the prime Church of the Empire within the 〈…〉 I suppose therefore they have farre the best cause who suppose 〈◊〉 to be called Regiones suburbicariae which were under the Lieutenant of Rome in oppoâ—tion to the Lieutenant of Italy resident a Milane having under him seven of those Provinces into which that Government was then divided In which regard the other ten Provinces which were under the Lieutenant of the City resident at Rome are properly called Suburbicariae though pâ—rt of them were the Isles of Sicilia Sardinia and Corsica c. And here lies the greatest question nothing else bearing water in my judgement For by this Canon â—ll the right and title of the Church of Rome is to be measured by the right oâ— any one of those Churches which were the Heads of Dioceses taking Dioceses for the residences of Lieutenants all which are to be suppoâ—ed equall in power granting onely Rome the precedence which all Order requiâ—es For what right can the Church of Rome challenge which this Canon acknowleges not Is it right or wrong which the decree of the whole Church alloweth not Strongly argued I confess which notwithstanding I am not satisfied with For the intent of the Ganon being to setle the lights of Alexandria is satisfied by rehearsing the like rights in the Churches of Rome and Antiochiâ— which by supposing as in force of old it setleth for the future But is this to declare and limite the Title thereof in regard of the rest especially for the Western Church which the Councill had no occasion to meddle with Judge first by that which appears In the greatest concernments of the Church concerning Montanus concerning the keeping of Easter concerning the cause of the Novatians of rebaptizing Hereticks of Paulus Samosatenus of the Donatists of Dionysius Alexandrinus In fine concerning those which I mentioned out of S. Cyprians Epistles What one Church can there be named to the concurrence whereof the like respect hath been had in things concerning the Faith and Unity of the Whole as that of Rome For that which follows I think there remains no dispute the priviledges thereof still increasing as well by the acts of Councils as by custome and use And of that I must demand a reason how they should come to be cast upon one had there not been from the beginning a stock of Title exclusive to any other of the greatest Churches acknowledging the order of the Apostles to have provided no further then that the Churches of the chiefe Cities should be the chiefe Churches leaving the rest to the Church upon consideration of the State of the World to determine One particular I must insist upon for the eminence of it I have already mentioned the generall Councils whereof how many can be counted General by number of present votes The authority of them then must arise from the admitting of them by the Western Churches And this admission what can it can it be ascribed to but the authority of the Church of Rome eminently involved above all the Churches of the West in the summoning and holding of them and by consequence in their decrees And indeed in the troubles that passed between the East and the West from the Councill of Nicâ—a though the Western Churches have acted by their Representatives upon eminent occasions in great Conncils as the Churches of Britaine had their Bishops at the I. Council of Arles at the Councils of Sarâ—ica and of Ariminum in other occasions they may justly seem to referre themselves to that Church as resolving to regulate themselves by the acts of it So that S. Jerome might very well name Rome and the West as the same paâ—ty in his LXXVII Epistle Haereticum me cum Occidente haereticum cum Aegypto hoc est cum Damaso Petroque condemnent Let them condemn me for an Heretick with the West and with Aegypt that is with Damasus Bishop of Rome and Peter Bishop of Alexandria And against Vigiâ—â—nâ—â—us he calls the Western Churches the Churches of the Apostolick See So S. Basil calls the Bishop of Rome 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The Crown of the West Epist X. and S. Austine cont Jul. Pelag. I. 2. Puto tibi eam partem Orbis sufficere debere in quâ primum Apostolorum suorum voluit dominus glorioso Martyrio coronare Cui Ecclesiae praesidentem Beatum Iâ—nocentiuâ— si audire voluisses I conceive that part of the world should serve your turn in which it pleased God to Crown with a glorious Martyrdom the first of his Apostles The President of which Church blessed Innocent if you would have heard He supposes Innocent being over the Church of Rome to be over the Western Church In the Council of Ephesus S. Cyril threatens John of Jerusalem that those who will have communion with the West must submit to the sentence of the Synod at Rome against Nestorius Part. I. cap. XXI the leter of Pope Agatho to the Emperour in the VI. General Council Act. IV. supposes the Synods of the Lombards Slaves Frankes Gothes and Britaines to belong to the Synod of Rome and that the Council was to expect account of them from it No otherwise then to the leter of the Synod of Rome to the second Generall Council ninety Bishops of Italy and Gaul concurred according to Theodoret. And Cornelius in S. Hieromes Catalogue writ to Flavianus Bishop of Antiochia from the Synods of Rome Gaul and Africk Whereby it may appear how the Western Churches alwayes went along with that of Rome Which though it give not the Church of Rome that priviledge over the Churches of eight Dioceses which the canons of Nicaea do confirm to the Bishops of Alexandria over the Diocese of Aegypt and the Church of Antiochia over the Eastern Diocâ—ses yet necessarily argueth a singular pre-eminence in it over them all in regard whereof he is stiled Patriarch of the West during the regular Government of the Church and being so acknowledged by King James of excellent memory in his leter to the Cardinall of Perrâ—n may justly charge them to be the cause of dividing the Church that had rather stand divided then own him in that quality But granting the Church of Rome to be regularly the seat of the chiefe Patriarch for so he is stiled in the Council of Chalcedon Act. III. so the Emperour Justine calls Hormisdas so Justinian calls the Bishop of Rome Nov. CIX And the VI Council Act. XVIII counts five seats of Patriarchs And if Gregory Epist XI 54. acknowledge Spain to have no Patriarch and Innocent III. C. grave de Praeb dignit C. antiqua de Privil count but four it is because they would make the Pope more
evidence the Society of the Church and the influence of it in those acts whereby Christianity hath been maintained and propagated from our Lord and his Apostles But for the present the question concerning onely the Rule of Faith that which hath been said shall suffice to ground this prescription that whatsoever the Church may appear unanimously to have agreed in and to have allowed no contradiction to it that may and doth as evidently appear to belong to the Rule of Faith as evidently it may and doth appear that the Society of the Church freely acted by it self hath given such consent And therefore this prescription will inferr nothing when it may by any means appear that the consent of the Church and the freedom which is requisite to the validity thereof hath been anticipated or over-swayed by any means intercepting that intercourse and correspondence by the which it appeareth In the mean time the interpretation of the Scriptures is to be confined within the bounds of that which the whole Church from the beginning hath taught when as by the means hitherto demonstrated it may be evidenced in things that become questionable CHAP. XXIII Two instances against the premises besides the objection concerning the beginning of Antichrist under the Apostles The general answer to it The seven Trumpets in the Apocalypse fore-tell the destruction of the Jewes The seven Vials the plagues inflicted upon the Empire for the ten persecutions The correspondence of Deniels Prophesie inferreth the same Neither S. Pauls Propheâ—â—e nor S. Johns concerneth any Christian Neither the opinion of the Chiliasts nor the giving of the Eucharist to Infants new Baptized Catholick BEfore I leave this point I must here take notice of two instances against that which I have said The first is the opinion of the Millenaries which is said to be the general opinion of the primitive Fathers Justine the Martyr Clemens Alexandrinus Irenaeus Tertullian Victorinus the Martyr Lactantius and I know not how many more So that universal antiquity will prescribe nothing in mater of Faith when wee see so general an error of the most ancient corrected by their successors The other in the custom of giving the Eucharist to Infants as soon as they were baptized pretended to be so general that no practice of the Church can conclude any thing to come from the Apostles to him that avoweth this to have been well and duely changed by the Church that is There is besides these a more general objection against the testimony of the Church in any mater of Christianity rising from S. Pauls Prophesie 2 Thess II. 2 7 14. that the mystery of iniquity was then on work till hee that hindred were out of the way not to be revealed Which is pretended to be the corruption of Christianity by such as professed to be of the Church then begun not to be declared till the rise of the Papacy by the fall of the Empire Or as the Socinians will have it till after the death of the Apostles at what time as Hegesippus in Eusebius witnesseth the Church that till then had continued a Virgin was defloured and defiled by mixing with adulterate doctrine This objection I have produced elswhere and repeat it here in the first place to be considered as pretending here to make fuller answer I excepted heretofore thus That unlesse they that make this objection tye themselves to demonstrate wherein that corruption consists which the Apostle sayes was then on working under-hand it will be as free for Socinians to pretend that hee means this corruption to consist in the Faith of the Trinity and the Satisfaction of Christ and Original sin as in any thing peculiar to the Papacy And that with so much the more reason because if wee make the Pope Antichrist by virtue of this Scripture wee must make him so for that which is peculiar to the Papacy whereas the corruption here spoken of concerns the whole Church as well as that of Rome Now I except more strongly that supposing the purpose of S. Paul to concern the corruption of the Church that corruption cannot consist in any thing which by sufficient testimony may appear to have been received in the Church from the beginning That is to say to this bare surmize of S. Pauls meaning I have opposed all the reason that hath been alleged to prove that whatsoever hath been received in the Church from the beginning is either of the Rule of Faith or some custome introduced by the Apostles But because still this is but an exception in bart to the objection not in resolution of the difficulty which groundeth it I will proceed further to show that neither this Prophesie nor the Revelation of S. John is meant of those that professed Christianity either in corrupting it or in persecuting Christians but of the professed enemies thereof who persecuted the profession of it to wit the Princes of the Romane Empire To which purpose having observed that the whole Prophesy of the Revelation from Chap. V. to XX. consisting in the Vision of a Book sealed with seven Seals at opening the seventh whereof seven Angels are seen to blow seven Trumpets at blowing the seventh whereof seven Angels come forth and pour forth seven viols of Gods Judgments upon the earth I now say further that the seven Trumpets signifie the Judgments of God poured forth upon the Jewes in Jewry for refusing and persecuting the Gospel The evidence hereof is first in that of Apoc. VII 4. 8. where there are sealed CXLIVM of every Tribe XII M. to be preserved from the plagues of the seven seals to wit the Christians of whom our Lord had said Mat. XXIV 31. Mar. XIII 20. that for the elects sake those dayes should be shortned For it is evident that this Vision is presented S. John upon occasion of the like which hee had read in Ezekiel IX 4 5 6. in the like case where the Angel is first commanded to mark those that should be saved from the destruction which hee prophesieth And therefore where in the beginning of the Chapter hee seeth four Angels standing at the four corners of the earth who are forbidden to hurt it till the servants of God be marked it is manifest that this earth is not the world but the land of Jewry Again when it is said XI 1 8 13. that the Gentiles shall trample the outer Court of the Temple and that therefore S. John should not measure it as hee is tyed to measure the inner Court and Temple That the carkasses of the two witnesses should lye in the streets of the great City where our Lord was crucified spiritually called Sodom and Egypt That there was a great earthquake which cast down the South part of that City and killed seven thousand hee that would see men pitifully crucifie themselves by racking the Scriptures let him look upon them that ingage themselves not to understand by all this the City of Jerusalem and the Temple there Further what is the
meaning that the CXLIVM are seen standing with the Lamb upon mount Sion XIV 1. if they belong not to that people What is the meaning that afterwards XIV 19 20. when the Angel with the sickle had made the Vintage and cast it into the Wine-presse of Gods wrath this Wine-presse is trode without the City and the bloud over-flows to the space of XVI C furlongs But that the City of Jerusalem is meant and the Judgment executed in the destruction thereof expressed by the Wine-presse of Gods wrath which over-flowed all that compasse without the City If these things cannot be unlesse the sounding of the seven Trumpets Chap. VIII and IX be understood to proclaim the same vengeance Let mee ask what is the reason that having related what the founding of them produced hee addeth IX 20 21. The rest of men that were not slain with these Plagues neither repented of the works of their hands so as not to worship Devils and Idols of gold silver brasse stone and wood which can neither see nor hear nor go Nor of their murthers and witcheries and whoredoms and thefts For the Jews not being chargeable with Idolatry at that time nor the consequences thereof how should the rest be chargeable for not repenting of the same For to say that covetousnesse of silver gold and goods of brasse stone or wood is the Idolatry and these the Idols here meant is to strain the Scripture to an improper sense whereof there is no argument in the words But if wee say that the rest of men that were not slain with the Jews are the Gentiles to whom God by destroying Jerusalem sent a warning to turn them from their Idols to Christianity for persecuting whereof they saw the Jews destroyed wee say that the main scope of the whole Prophesie is touched in these words And from hence wee shall be able to give a reason why having propounded in the twelfth and thirrteenth Chapters the subject of that vengeance which hee seeth God to take by the Vision of the seven Viols in the fifteenth and sixteenth Chapters hee returneth to remembrance of those CXLIV M that were marked to be saved and of the destruction of the rest of the Jews XIV 1-5 14-20 of which I shall not easily believe that a reasonable account can be given otherwise For having fore-told the persecution of Christians in those two Chapters the twelfth and thirteenth what could be more pertinent than that hee should return to the remembrance of the saving of those that were marked and the destruction of Jerusalem as a patern of comfort to Christians to incourage them to indure and of terror to the Gentiles to refrain that fury And therefore as before IX 20. this intent had been signified so it is most expresly repeated by the proclamation of three Angels one after another XIV 6 8 9-11 warning all to worship God alone not the Beast of Chapter XIII and fore-warning of the fall of Babylon for her Idolatries Now I am to remember you that after the sealing of the CXLIVM Jewish Christians there appears before the Throne of God so great a multitude as no man could number of all Nations Tribes people and Languages cloathed in white Robes and singing praises to God Which afterwards are expounded by the Angel to be those that come out of the great tribulation and had washed their Robes white in the bloud of the Lamb VII 9. 14. that is to say Martyrs And further that these are they who are seen at opening the fifth Seal standing beneath the Altar and calling for vengeance upon their bloud VI. 9 10. Which vengeance begins to be executed by the seven Trumpets And the Angel that throws down those coals of vengeance upon the earth from the Altar above is said to put incense to the prayers of the Saints VIII 3 4 5. So that the same Censer sends up perfume that is those prayers to the throne and vengeance down upon earth Seeing then that it is manifest to all that at opening the first Seal our Lord goes forth upon a white horse to make warr VI. 2. Who after victory and revenge upon his enemies appears in the same likenesse again as triumphing over his enemies XIX 11-16 it will be requisite to understand the Vision of opening the six Seals to be a general proposition of the whole Prophesie signifying the publishing of the Gospel and the prevailing thereof through the vengeance which God would execute upon the persecutors of it Jews first and afterwards Gentiles of the Romane Empire who would not take warning by the destruction of Jerusalem to turn from persecuting the Gospel to imbrace Christianity And therefore the signification of the rest of the Seals is common to both For when hee feeth a Red Horse to signifie warr a Black Horse to signifie famine and a Pale Horse to signifie pestilence VI. 3-8 it is manifest that all this agrees wonderfully with that which our Lord had fore-told should come to passe in Jewry as a preface to the destruction of Jerusalem of warrs famines earthquakes and pessilences so as notwithstanding the end not to be yet Mark XIII 5-10 Mat. XXIV 6-15 Luke XXI 8-20 And yet it expresseth as punctually those calamities of the world which those of the Empire did impute to the sufferance of Christianity when as God indeed intended thereby to punish them that imbraced it not Antiquity is copious in this subject that when these calamities fell out the Romanes cried out upon the Christians as the onely cause of them The beginning of Arnobius his dispute against the Gentiles will satisfie you of it When as therefore the persecution of Christianity was both begun in Jewry as the Acts of the Apostles inform us and prosecuted in the Empire it will be against the truth of the case to restrain the cry of the Souls under the Altar upon the opening of the fifth Seal either to those that suffered by the Jewes or by the Empire Now hee that peruseth that which is said to have come to passe upon the opening of the sixth Seal Apoc. VII 12-17 might have cause to think that hee reads the destruction of the world but that it is evident both that the destruction of Jerusalem is prophesied by our Lord by the like expressions which the Prophets also of the Old Testament do use in describing the vengeance which God taketh upon the Nations and also that this Prophesie expresses a large time for Christianity to continue in the world after this vengeance taken by God upon the enemies of it And therefore wee must believe that those have reason who referr the effect of it no lesse to the great change that fell out in the world upon the ceasing of the persecution of Diocletian and the coming of the Empire into the hands of the Christians than to the destruction of Jerusalem For when could it be said more justly that the world was in an earthquake that the Sun became like hair