See below § 16. n. 6 8. This in the third place from § 12. of the Churches subjecting both Ecclesiastical Persons and Councils One to Another the less to the greater in point of Judicature and Authority for preventing of Schismes 4ly When the two Ecclesiastical Courts or Officers that are subordinate §. 15. n. 2. do dissent the obedience of the Subjects of both in such case being once apparent was to be rendred to the Superior So if a Diocesan or Provincial Council ought to yield to a National the Subjects of such Province or Diocess when these two Councils clash ought to conform in their Obedience to the National not to a Diocesan or Provincial Council against it Now §. 16. n. 1. for such a subordination of the several Church-Officers and Synods forenamed and for Obedience when these dissent due to the Superior the two points last mentioned I will to save the labour of further proof give you the Concessions of Learned Protestants though this be done with some limitations accomodated to the better legitimating of their Reformation of which limitations see below § 16. n. 4. n. 7. and again § 28. desiring you also to peruse those set down already to the same purpose in the second Discourse § 24. n. 1. c. Of this matter then thus Dr. Ferne. in the Case between the Church of England and Rome p. 48. The Church of Christ is a society or company under a Regiment Discipline Government and the Members constituting that Society are either Persons taught guided governed or Persons teaching guiding governing and this in order to preserve all in unity and to advance every Member of this visible Society to an effectual and real participation of Grace and Vnion with Christ the Head and therefore and upon no less account is obedience due unto them Eph. 4.11 12 13 16. and Heb. 13.17 And he that will not hear the Church is to be as a Heathen and a Publican Mat. 16. And applying this to the Presbyterians and other Sects dividing from the English Bishops and Synods ‖ p. 46. They have incurred saith he by leaving us and I wish they would sadly consider it no less than the guilt of Schisme which lies heavily on as many as have of what perswasion or Sect soever wilfully divided themselves from the communion of the Church of England whether they do this by a bare separation or by adding violence and Sacriledge unto it And thus Dr. Hammond §. 16. n. 2. somewhat more distinctly in his Book of Schism c. 8. p. 157. The way saith he provided by Christ and his Apostles for preserving the Vnity of the Faith c. in the Church is fully acknowledged by us made up of two Acts of Apostolical Providence 1st Their resolving c. 2. Their establishing an excellent subordination of all inferior Officers of the Church to the Bishops in every City of the Bishops in every Province to their Metropolitans of the Metropolitans in every Region or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to Patriarchs or Primates allowing also among these such a primacy of Order or Dignity as might be proportionable to the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in Scripture and greeable to what is by the ancient Canons allowed to the Bishop of Rome and this standing subordination sufficient for all ordinary uses And when there should be need of extraordinary remedies there was then a supply to be had by congregating Councils Provincial Patriarchal General Again Ib. c. 3. he declares Schism in withdrawing obedience from any of these beginning at the lowest and so ascending to the highest Those Brethren or People saith he ‖ 7. which reject the Ministry of the Deacons or Presbyters in any thing wherein they are ordained or appointed by the Bishop and as long as they continue in obedience to him and of their own accord break off and separate from them refuse to live regularly under them they are by the ancient Church of Christ adjudged and looked on as Schismaticks †8. In like manner if we ascend to the next higher Link that of the Bishop to whom both Presbyters and Deacons as well as the Brethren or People are obliged to live in obedience the withdrawing or denying this obedience in any of these will certainly fall under this guilt Next For the higher Ranks of Church-Prelates §. 16. n. 3. § 20. he goes on thus It is manifest That as the several Bishops had prefecture over their several Churches and over the Presbyters Deacons and People under them such as could not be cast off by any without the guilt and brand of Schisme so the Bishops themselves of the ordinary inferior Cities for the preserving of unity and many other good uses were subjected to the higher power of Archbishops or Metropolitans he having shewed in § 11.12 the first Institution thereof Apostolical in Titus and Timothy nay we must yet ascend saith he one degree higher from this of Archbishops or Metropolitans to that supreme of Primates or Patriarchs Concerning whose authority having produced several Canons of Councils § 25. he concludes thus All these Canons or Councils deduce this power of Primates over their own Bishops from the Apostles and first Planters of the Churches wherein that which is pertinent to this place is only this that there may be a disobedience and irregularity and so a Schism even in the Bishops in respect of their Metropolitans and of the authority which these have by Canon and Primitive Custom over them And the obedience due to these several ranks of Ecclesiastical Superiors he affirms also due on the same account to their several Synods †Answ to Catholick Gent. c. 3. p. 29. It is evident saith he That the power which severally belongs to the Bishops is united in that of a Council where these Bishops are assembled and the despising of that Council is an offence under the first sort of Schism and a despising of all ranks of our Ecclesiastical Superiors whereof it is compounded Thus Dr. Hammond ascending in these subordinations as high as Primates But Dr. Field Bishop Bramhal and others §. 16. n. 4. rise one step higher to the Proto-primates or Patriarchs 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 so called and their Councils And strange it is if it were not from an engagement to the present English Interest that Dr. Hammond could pass by these in his speaking of the remedies of Schism with so much silence not mentioning Patriarchs but only as taken for Primates or their Councils See * Answ to Cathol Gent. c. 3. n. 9 10 11. Where he speaks of the authority of Provincial National Oecumenical Councils but passeth by Patriarchal and * Schism p. 158 where he names Provincial Patriarchal General but useth Patriarchal there for National or the Council presided-in by the Primate to which Primate sometimes was applied the name of Patriarch Strange I say considering not only the clear evidence of ancient Constitutions and
practice relating to these Patriarchs and their Synods but the great necessity thereof as to the Vnity of the Churches Faith and Conservation of her Peace and that much more since the division of the Empire into so many Kingdoms by reason of which secular contrary Interests the several parts and members of the Catholick Church dispersed amongst them are more subject to be disjointed and separated from one another Which unity and peace if we reflect on * the great rarity of General Councils not above 5 or 6 in the Protestant account in 1600. years and * the multiplicity of Primates that are in Christendom all left by Dr. Hammond Supreme and independent of one another or of any other person or Council when a General one not in being and * the experience of their frequent Lapses into gross Errors For almost what great Heresie or Schism hath there been in the Church whereof some Primate was not a chief Abettor and * The Rents in the Church made by these apt to be much greater as the person is higher and more powerful is not sufficiently provided for though much pretended in Dr. Hammonds Scheme Come we then to Dr. Fields Model yet more enlarged The actions saith he ‖ Of the Chur. p. 513. of the Bishop of each particular Church of a City §. 16. n. 5. and places adjoining were subject to the censure and judgment of the rest of the Bishops of the same Province amongst whom for order sake there was one Chief to whom it pertained to call them together to sit as Moderator in the midst of them being assembled and to execute what by joint consent they resolved on The actions of the Bishops of a Province and of a Provincial Synod consising of those Bishops were subject to a Synod consisting of the Metropolitans and other Bishops of divers Provinces This Synod was of two sorts For either it consisted of the Metropolitans and Bishops of one Kingdom and Nation only as did the Councils of Affrica or of the Metropolitans and Bishops of many Kingdoms If of the Metropolitans and Bishops of one Kingdom and State only the chief Primate was Moderator If of many one of the Patriarchs and chief Bishop of the whole world was Moderator every Church being subordinate to some one of of the Patriarchal Churches and incorporate into the Vnity of it Here you see that roundly confest which Dr. Hammond concea'ld Again Ib. p. 668. It is evident That there is a power in Bishops Metropolitans Primates and Patriarchs to call Episcopal Provincial National and Patriarchal Synods Synods Patriarchal answering to Patriarchs National to Primates and that neither so depending of nor subject to the power of Princes but that when they are enemies to the Faith they may exercise the same without their consent and privity and subject them that refuse to obey their Summons to such punishments as the Canons of the Church do prescribe in cases of such contempt or wilful negligence And Ib. p. 557. That the Decrees of Popes made with the consent and joint concurrence of the other Western Bishops did bind the Western Provinces that were subject to him as Patriarch of the West Bind them so as that these had no liberty to contradict the judgment of the Patriarch and this Council for which see Ib. c. 39. p. 563. where he quotes the Emperors Law Novel 123. c. 22. Patriarcha Dioceseos illius huic causae praebeat finem nullâ parte ejus sententiae contradicere valente confirming the 9th Canon of Conc. Chalced. Again p. 567. 568. he saith That it is a Rule in Church-government that the lesser and inferior may not judge the greater and superior That if any Bishop have ought against his Metropolitan he must go as I shewed before to the Patriarch and his Synod to complain as to fit and competent Judges That the great Patriarchs of the Christian Church are to be judged by some other of their own rank in order before them assisted by inferior Bishops that the Bishop of Rome as first in order among the Patriarchs assisted with his own Bishops and the Bishops of him that is thought faulty though these later are not found always necessary or present at such judgments nor more of his own Bishops than those whom he can at such time conveniently assemble and consult with as appears in the Appeals of those persons named before § 13. n. 1. may judge any of the other Patriarchs That such as have complaints against them may fly to him and the Synod of Bishops subject to him and that the Patriarchs themselves in their distresses may fly to him and such Synods for relief and help See the same §. 16. n. 6. p 668 Nor doth he acknowledge such an authority of Judicature in these Church Prelates only as joined w th their Synods but also in them single and without them For since it is manifest that the constant meeting of the Provincial Synods twice as it was ordered at the first or once in the year as afterward did very early cease either by the Clergies neglect or the great trouble and charge of such Assemblies and so later Councils accordingly appointed such Synods to be held in stead of twice yearly once in 3. years nor yet are in this well obeyed Hence either all such Causes and Appeals to their Superious still multiplied as Christianity is increased must be for so long a time suspended and depending which would be intolerable and a quick dispatch though less equitable rather to be wished or the hearing of them must be devolved to these single standing Judges as directed by former Church-Canons Concerning this therefore thus the same Doctor goes on ‖ l. 5. p. 514. quoting the Canons of the 6th and 7th Council At the first saith he there was a Synod of Bishops in every Province twice in the year But for the misery and poverty of such as should travel to Synods the Fathers of the 6th Council †Can. 8. decreed it should be once in the year and then things amiss to be redressed which Canon was renewed by the 7th General Council ‖ Can. 6. But afterwards many things falling out to hinder their happy Meetings we shall find that they met not so often and very early may this be found and therefore the Council of Basil appointed Episcopal Synods to be holden once every year and Provincial at the least once in three years And so in time Causes growing many and the difficulties intolerable in coming together and in staying to hear these Causes thus multiplied and increased it was thought fitter to refer the hearing of complaints and appeals to Metropolitans and such like Ecclesiastical Judges limited and directed by Canons and Imperial Laws than to trouble the Pastors of whole Provinces and to wrong the people by the absence of their Pastors and Guides Thus He. And if this rarer meeting of Provincial Synods transferred many Causes on the
you of That if the Acts of Pius the Fourth if the proceedings of that Council in his time be justifiable though those of and under Paul and Julius should be proved some way faulty the number of Prelates insufficient their decisions factiously carried c. yet this Tridentine Council will stand universally in force as to all the decrees thereof because this Council under Pius reviewed and ratified and made their act all the Decrees made before with what supposed defect or culpableness of their proceedings you please for that may be right that is not done rightly under Paul and Julius So that who so justifieth this Council save only for Pius his times doth somewhat more than what is necessary 2ly For the place I desire these things may be considered § 83 1 st That no place can be chosen any where so absolutely free but that he under whose temporal Dominion it is 1. may infer some violence to the Council or to some party therein with whom he is offended and so whereas the Church and the Pope as well as Temporal Princes have their rights and priviledges which may be violated the place of the Council in any Secular State may seem not free enough for the Pope and the Church and again since the Secular Princes have often differences and several interests as it happened frequently in the time of the Council of Trent the place of the Council in ones Dominions will not seem free enough to another Unless it may be thought a sufficient remedy for such unavoidable inconvenience that when such violence appears the Council may cease acting or be suspended or dâ—ssolved or injured States withdrraw from it their Bishops § 84 2 ly That the place of former Councils appointed at Rome or in some other City in Italy as it was in the Roman Lateran Florentine Pisan Councils was not accounted therefore to render them not free because of the nearer influence from Pope though in all those Councils there was something to be decided wherein the Popes judgment stood not in aequilibrio but was inclined more to one side than another and wherein one side might pretend him a Party as in the controversies of the Waldenses of Beâ—engarius of the Grecians c. § 85 3 ly That the Imperour took sufficient care that thâ—s Council should not be coâ—vâ—â—ed in any place of Italy 3. which was under the Temporal Dominâ—on of the Pope or where himself had not the câ—â—ef command He consented indeed that the Council should be kept in Mantua but see what he declared first to the Protestants concerning this place in Soave l. 1. p 80. That the Duke thereof was vassâ—l to the Empire so that the Pope had no power there and that if they desired any further caution himself was ready to give it them To which they answered how rationally I leave it to you That no safe-conduct could there free them from danger for the Pope having adherents throughout all Italy who bitterly hated them there was great danger of treachery and sâ—cret plots †Sâ—â— Soavâ— p. 77. And as little reason as these had Henry the Eight to protest against the Council at Mantua for fear of the Pope § 86 4 ly That the Pope had indeed no reason to allow the Council to be kept in any City of Germany 4 that was near the Protestants not to avoid their pleas but * for fear of their Arms of which fear whether he had any just cause we shall see more by and by as likewise * for the too great distance from Rome whereby he could not so easily from time to tâ—me give directions to his Legats in those many controversies which were likely to be agitated in that Council and in all which it was impossible for him to give them a precedent information with a sufficient foresight § 87 5 ly That this Council was celebrated in a place to which the Emperour and the major part of Christian Princes namely all the Catholick 5. gave their consent and sent some sooner some later their Bishops and Embassadours too which was enough to legitimate it though perhaps they would rather have chosen another and not all the same See Soave p. 101 and p. 702. Where the King of France desiring a translâ—tion of the Council form Trent to Constance Wormers c. for the more convenience of the Dutch English and part of the French Prelats Soave reports the King of Spain returning this answer That the Council was assembled in Trent 〈◊〉 all the solemnities with consent of all Kings Princes and at 〈…〉 â—â—nce of Francis the French King that the Emperour had superiority in that City as in the others that were named and might give full security to all in case the former safe conduct were not sufficient § Again celebrated in a place confining on Germany and nearer to the Protestants there than it was to the Catholicks of France or Spain and of which the Emperour was the châ—ef Lord. § Therefore Soave p. 309. represents the Emperour dâ—scoursing thâ—s to the Protestants concerning this City That they should leave all to his care who knew how to handle the business that they should suffer other Nations to mâ—et and that himself would go in person if not thither yet to some near place and would take ordâ—r nâ—t by words but dâ—eds that all should pass with goâ—d termâ— And below that he as Advocate to the holy Chuâ—ch and Dâ—fender of the Councils will do what â—elongeth to his charge as he hath promis d. And p. 669 reâ—â—tâ—s How the Cardinal of Lorraine sent a Gentleman to the Empercur to desire him that he would not remove further from the Council in regard of the fruit which thâ—y hoped forby means â—f his vicinity which will kâ—ep every one in his duty and hinder the attempts of thosâ— who would translate it into another place c. And p. 30â— relates the Popes fears That he could not take all suspicion from the King of France if the Council should be celebrated in Frent a place subject to the Emperour and near unto his Army Again a place it was * not accessible by the Popes Forces unless marching first through anothers Dominions and trespassing on the Emperour who was in Italy it self a Prince much more powerful than he and a place which either the Emperours or Protestant Forces might at any time surprize with a much shorter march And therefore was not the Pope free from fears concerning it though he had more of Germany as may be seen in Soave l. 5. p. 436. where he saith That the Pope was troubled because the Protestants of Germany unto whom a great part of France was united would demand exorbitant things which he could not grant them and doubted they might be able to disturb the Council with Arms that He confessed that the dangers were great and the remedies small and was perplexed and troubled in mind Thus Soave § 90 Nor
great a multitude to admit and maintain so many other Priests assistant as may be sufficient and also where the Bishop finds an illiterate Rector who is otherwise of a good life may add a Coadjutor partaker of the Profits See Sess 21. c. 6. § 230 5ly Ordered also Sess 23. c. 18. That for the better supply of the Ecclesiastical Ministry in all Cathedral Churches be erected a Seminary for the educating a certain number of children of poor people or also of rich if maintained by themselves arrived to twelve years of age in studies and a discipline fitting them for the Ministry Which children at their first entrance shall receive tonsure and alwaies wear a Clergy habit for the maintainance of whom the Bishop with four of the Clergy joyned with him are to detract a certain portion from the Bishops Revenue and all the Benefices of the Diocess and the care of seeing this Order executed by the Bishop committed to the Provincial Council § 231 6. Again It is ordered Sess 5. c. 1. Ne Coelestis ille sacrorum librorum Thesaurus quem spiritus sanctus summâ liberalitate hominibus tradidit neglectus jaceat saith the Council that Divinity-Lectures for the expounding of the Holy Scriptures where these yet wanting should be set up in all Cathedral and Collegiate Churches in the Convents of Regulars and publick Schooles of learning and in poorer Churches at least a School-Master founded to teach Grammar All such Lectures to be approved by the Bishop And for their Maintainance the first vacant Prebend or a simple Benefice or a Contribution from all the Benefices of such City or Diocess to be applied to this use All these Constitutions made for a better Provision for the future of a learned and vertuous Clergy 7. Lastly For introducing amongst this Clergy a greater strictness and Holiness of Life This Council revives and gives vigour to all the former rigid ancient Canons notwithstanding whatever present contrary customs with the same or greater penalties to be inflicted on offenders at the arbitrement of the Ordinary and that without admitting any appeales from his Censures See Sess 22 c. 1. de Reform Statuit S. Synodus ut quae alias à summis Pontificibus à sacris Conciliis de Clericorum vitâ honestate cultu doctrinâque retinendâ ac simul de luxu comessationibus choreis aleis lusibus ac quibuscunque criminibus nec non saecularibus negociis sugiendis copiose ac salubriter sancita fuerunt eadem in posterum iisdem paenis vel majoribus arbitrio Ordinarii imponendis observentur nec Appellatio executionem hanc quae ad morum correctionem pertinet suspendat Si qua vero ex his Sancitis in desuetudinem abiisse compererint Ordinarii ea quamprimum in usum revocari ab omnibus accurate custodiri studeant non obstantibus consuetudinibus quibus cunque ne subditorum neglectae emendationis ipsi condignas Deo vindice paenas persolvant This heavy charge have the Bishops in this Council laid upon Bishops concerning reformation of the inferior Clergy § 232 To λ. To λ. Pluralities and possessing superfluous wealth It is ordered Sess 24. c. 17. That no person for the future Cardinals themselves not excepted shall hold two Bishopricks or other Ecclesiastical Benefices either simple if one of them sufficient to maintain him or with Cure and requiring residence on any terms whatever and that all having such Pluralities shall within six moneths quit one all former Dispensations or unions for life notwithstanding and if this not done within such time they to lose both pronounced then to be vacant and disposed of otherwise A rule in Benefices requiring Residence still Religiously observed saith Pallavic †23. c. 11. n. 8. one who well knew the Popes Court replying to Soave †p. 792. who saith this Canon was too good to be kept save in the poorer sort And for other simple Benefices without Cure as it is granted that many are still possessed by one and the same Person so is this a thing permitted by this Rule where one such living is insufficient for his maintainance § 233 Mean while For the Moderation also of this Clergy-maintenance the Council Sess 25. c. 1. layes a charge ascending from Parish Priests to Bishops and Cardinals that according to the ancient Canons †Conc. Car. 4. c 15. Can. Apostol 39 40.75 con Antioch c. 21 Gratian Caus 12 9.1 2. De Rebus Ecclesus dispensandis none spend more of the Church-Revenue upon themselves than their Condition necessarily requires nor bestow the remainder thereof on any of their Secular Relations further than the relieving them when and as poor but expend it on those pious uses viz. for maintainance of Holy Persons and things and the poor to which it is dedicated Its words there are Sancta Synodus exemplo Patrum nostrorum in Concilio Carthaginensi non solum jubet ut Episcopi modestâ supellectile mensâ ac frugali victu contenti sint verum etiam in reliquo vitae genere ac tota ejus domo caveant ne quid appareat quod à sancto hoc Instituto sit alienum quodque non simplicitatem Dei zelum ac vanitatum contemptum prae se ferat Omnino vero eis interdicit ne ex reditibus Ecclesiae consanguineos familiaresve suos augere studeant cum Apostolorum Canones prohibeant ne res Ecclesiasticas quae Dei sunt consanguineis donent sed si pauperes sint iis ut pauperibus distribuant Eas autem non distrahant nec dissipent illorum causa Imo quam maxime potest eos sancta Synodus monet ut omâ—â—â—â— humanum hunc erga fratres nepotes propinquosque carnis affectum unde multorum malorum in ecclesia seminarium extitit penitus deponant Quae vero de Episcopis dicta sunt eadem non solum in quibuscunque Beneficia Ecclesiastica tam saecularia quam regularia obtinentibus pro gradus sui conditione observari sed ad sanctae Romanae Ecclesiae Cardinales pertinere deâ—cornit c. And see Sess 22. c. 11. Therefore also it was anciently decreed ‖ Canon Apost 40. Concil Agatheni c. 48. Gratian caus 12. q. 1. That a Clergiman having an Estate of his own It and the profits thereof should be kept distinct from their Church means That in leaving their own to their Secular Heirs the rest whether Lands Rents Tithes or Oblations should be preserved for the uses of the Church Where occasionally may be considered the great difficulty married Priests would undergo to be faithful in such a trust and to spend no more of the Churches Revenue on so near Relations as Wife and Children than what may relieve their necessities in such a manner as he doth those of the poor § 234 To the same end the Council Sess 14. c. 6. prescribes to the Clergy not to wear any Laical Habit Pedes in diversis ponentes unum in divinis alterum
in the greater nearness of several Christian Bishops in France yet addressed himself to the Pope as the common Father of the Western Church Afterward * Of S Germanus about A. D. 430. sent by Pope Celestine saith Prosper †In Chronico one who lived also in these times accompanied with Lupus another French Bishop who also consecrated Dubritius that was the first Archbishop of Caer-Leon * of Palladius and Nenius and Patricius all made Bishops at Rome and sent thence to the Picts Scots and Irish Concerning which see the Church-History in Bede Baronius Spelman And besides this * when the Irish Bishops yielded all obedience to this Roman Bishop at this very time that the British are said to deny it as appears both for that they are said by Bede ‖ l. 3. c. 3. the South Irish at least to have returned very early to a right observation of Easter * ad admonitionem Apostolicae Sedis Antistitis and also for that about this time they sent Letters to S. Gregory then Bishop of Rome to know after what manner they ought to receive into the Church such as were converted from Nestorianisme to whom he sends his Orders concerning it directed Quirino Episcopo caeteris Episcopis in Hiberniâ Catholicis l. 9. Epist 61. § 57 Hence also is discovered the unreasonableness of the said Abbot's denial of his obedience to the Pope or pleading subjection only to the Archbishop of Caerleon exclusive to any other superior whatever For waving here the Question whether the Pope by his single authority could subject the Archbishop of Caerleon and his Province to S. Austin Archbishop of Canterbury done afterward in Henry the first his time with the approbation of Protestants and therefore which might have been done in S. Austin's yet subjected was this Britain-Clergy to the Canons of Arles and Sardica of which Councils their Representatives were Members and so subjected to the Western Patriarch also for any authority which these Canons peclare to be invested in him and from the same obligation of obedience was their Conformity in the celebration of Easter with the rest of the Western Churches which was required by the first Canon of the Council of Arles in this Abbot's time most unjustly refused § 58 Mean while whatever independence can be shewed to have been challenged or Unconformity practised by the Abbot of Bangor and others within the Province of the Archbishop of Caerleâ—n yet there is no reason that the same should be extended or applied to the Nâ—tional Church of the Britans in General For the first Archbishop of Caerleon is Dubritius who being a Disciple of S. German sent from Rome and being consecrated Archbishop of this City by him and Lupus it is probable was for his time conformable to the Customs of the Roman See and contrary to those owned in Austin's t me by these Britains But however This of Caerleon was but an Archbishoprick of a late erection the 3 d. or 4 th from which Duâ—ritius probably must possess that Chair when Austin came But the Britains had long before Dubritius his time other Bishops much preeminent to Caerleon * The Archbishop of York the chief Bishop of the whole Nation as that City then was the principal City the Roman Praetorium being there see Spelm. Appar p. 22. â—a Bishop of London and Bishops of some other places appearing formerly in several Councils Of which Bishops Todiacus Archbishop of York and Theonus Bishop of London being persecuted by the Saxons fled into Wales with their Clergy A. D. 586. within eleven years after whose flight thither Augustine came into England and upon it their persecution in part ceased Now there being no mention of any opposition made by any of these Bishops or their Clergy which in eleven years space could not all be deceased to Austin but only by the Welsh under Caerleon what can be imagined here more reasonable than * That they conformed to the rest of the West in such submission to its Patriarch as was due to him by the Canons of those Councils which their Predecessors had allowed and as was rendered to him by their neighbour-Prelacy of Ireland see Greg. l. 9. Epist 61. as likewise * That they celebrated Easter according to those Conciliary Canons and the Roman manner and lastly * That returning into some of those parts of Britain from whence they fled they assisted Augustin in the conversion of the Saxons § 59 From the presence then of the Britain Bishop in these ancient Councils also appears the insufficiency of that Argument which would prove the ancient Britains former non-subjection to or conversion by the Western Patriarch or his Missives from their having at Austin's arrival a different observation of Easter from the rest of the West For 1 st It is manifest 1. that they followed not the practice of their Forefathers herein manifest both from the presence of the former Britain Bishops in the Council of Arles which Council determined this matter of whom Sir Henry Spelman saith ‖ A.D. 314. Qui Canones assensu suo approbabant in Britanniam redeuntes secum deferebant observandos And also from Constantine's Letter †Socrat. Hist l. 1. c. 6. to perswade the Asian Churches to uniformity with the rest of the world in the observation of it He naming there among other Churches particularly this of Britain unless any will say that whilst the most eminent Provinces of Britain kept it after the Roman manner yet the Welsh and Scots then kept it otherwise But since S. German and Lupus who came hither two several times and from whom Dubritius their first Archbishop of Caerleon received his education solemnly kept their Easter here with the Britain Clergy See Bede l. 1. c. 20. it follows either that their observation of Easter was then altogether Catholick or that if it was otherwise yet by reason that the difference happeneth not in every year it was that year by these Bishops not taken notice of § 60 2 ly It is clear also That as these Britains varied from the Roman Custom in this so did they from the Easter Quartodecimans in Asia and therefore may not for this 2. be thought to have derived their Christianity from thence The Britains keeping their Pasch constantly on the Lord's Day only when the Lord's Day happened on the 14 th day of the Moon they kept it with the Jews and Quartodecimans contrary to the Roman Custom that observed it in such year on the Sunday following for which see Bede l. 3. c. 4. 25. 3. Lastly Bede ‖ Hist l. 2. c. 19. speaks of this Errour in the Scotch Nation and the same may be presumed in the British Nuperrimè temporibus illis hanc apud eos haeresin exortam 3. non totam corum gentem sed quosdam ex iis hâc fuisse implicitos Which Honorius and other Roman Bisheps with their Letters Se Bede Ib. endeavoured as soon as
and the fear of such disturbance to the proceedings of the Council make him yield the controversie about Parma Which Controversie lasting for some time longer and the Council at Trent being dissolved within a year by reason of the Profestants in Germany taking Arms hence no French Bishops were present in the Council for its Sessions under Julius But this protestation of the King and absence of the French Bishops the Imperialists saith Soave p. 320. esteemed a vanity because the Act of the major part of the Vniversality is ever esteemed lawful when the lesser being called either cannot or will not be present Yet he saith that the Parliament of Paris was of a contrary judgment viz. that in Ecclesiastical Assemblies where the whole belongeth to all and every one hath his part the assent of every one is necessary Et prohibentis conditio potior and the absent not giving their voices are not bound to receive such a Council In answer to whom Pallavicino ‖ l. 11. c. 18. n. 7. as easily denies that Parliament to have said or held any such thing as applied to Ecclesiastical affairs else in a possession wherein there are many partners or sharers this rule is very true But whatever that Lay-Parliament held it is so exploded a conceit this that the assent of every one is necessary or else the major part of the Council doth not oblige him by which no Arrian Bishop is obliged to obey the Council of Nice that I count it lost time to confute it See again the French King in Pius the Fourth's time upon the Council's beginning to agitate the Reformation of Secular Princes as to their infringing the priviledges of the Church giving order that his Bishops should absent themselves from the Council but the King being better informed by the Card. of Lorraine's Letters to him and those Articles of Reformation of Princes because so offensive being no further proceeded in the French Bishops withdrew not themselves save some few upon their private occasions but continued in it till the end of the Council †Pallavic l. 23 c. 1. Soave p. 783 784 798. 4. That in those Sessions wherein there were but few Bishops § 74 as in the fourth fifth sixth Sessions under Paul the Third yet there was besides them a choice Collection of other Divines some of the most famous for Learning and Writings which that age afforded which Divines though they had no decisive Votes in the Session yet were they constantly consulted with in the preparatory Congregations and nothing ordinarily passed without their preceding Conferences and long and diligent disquisitions such I believe as cannot be matched in the Records of any former Council See * the manner of their proceeding in Soave p 198. and * the testimony he gives them p. 150. That though at the first they seemed in the Council only to make Sermons c. yet when that controverted Doctrines were to be decided and the abuse of Learned men rather than of others to be reformed their worth began to appear Likewise beside these Bishops and other Divines in Trent there was also in the time of the forenamed Sessions a great number of Cardinals Bishops and choice Divines and Canonists at Rome assisting the Pope and consulted by him upon all new occasions of informing his Legates in Trent So that even in the meanest attendance of the Bishops in this place it was not so contemptible a Conventicle as many would make believe Nor are the persons their Resâ—â—eâ—t and acting in the Council so much vilified by one side but that they are as much exalted by another Thus Soave falls upon that part of the Council which seems most weakly guarded the Fourth Session in his p. 163. That some thought it strange that five Cardinals and forty eight Bishops should so easily define the most principal and important Points of Religion never decided before Neither was there amongst those Prelates any one remarkable for Learning some of them Lawyers perhaps Learned in their Profession but of little understanding in Religion few Divines but of less than ordinary sufficiency the greater number Gentlemen or Courtiers and for their Dignities some only titular and the major part Bishops of small Cities particularly of Germany not so much as one Bishop or Divine So Soave And Pallavicino gives him this repulse l. 6. c. 17. n. 12 c. That what the Bishops then said in the Congregations which is to be seen in many other Libraries besides the Vatican sufficiently sheweth their great Learning That there were only 48. Bishops indeed but these not of small Churches as Soave supposeth Besides that every one of the Cardinals besides Poole had noble Bishopricks and most of them more than one as was usual in those days But which is more that these Prelates were choice persons out of Italy Sicily Sardinia France and Spain sent thither by the Supreme Authority Besides whom there were some from Dalmatia Greece Sweden Scotland That the three Legates were all excelle persons and two of them greatly skilled in the Learned Languages to the ignorance of which Tongues Soave imputes the passing of the Determination made in that Session in behalf of the vulgar Translation Cervini especially who then from time to time communicated his doubts with Sirletus then Keeper of the Vatican Library afterwards Cardinal besides the Legates Madruccius and Pacecus were of the greatest and most renowned persons that were in Germany or Spain To these Bishops were adjoyned three Abbots to represent the Benedictine Order and the five Generals of the Mendicant Orders all men of great Learning as Soave frequently though against his will confesseth in his recitations of their Discourses and if we make any account of the persons represented by them it was no small matter that in this Council besides others were then the Heads of almost all the encloystered Families who are so considerable a part of the Church and in fine the chief Conservatory and Receptacle of Theology There assisted this Synod at that time for Counsellors at least forty Divines ‖ See Soave p. 194. of the ablest that were then in Christendom and many of whom have illustrated that Age with their Writings and much exalted it for Theological Learning above many preceding Such were Sotâ— Oleastro Caterino Castro vega c. It is true that there were no Germans there But what marvel if these Prelates came not to the Council who were then in a fight at that very time a Diet being held and a little before it the Colloquy at Ratisbone For whose sakes therefore it was that Madruccius and Toledo Cesar 's Embassadors opposed the Accusation in the Council of the contumacy of the Absents Yet were the matters of the Council conferred with these German Prelates by Letters and their Answers read and the aids of their Pen though not of their Tongue afforded to the Council Thus the one exalts as the other depresseth The Discourses