this p. 48 Which were the greater and which the lesser Dioceses p. 60 61 The name of Diocese was known in the time of the Nicene Council p. 62 E. The Bishop of Rome publisht Easter day after the time of the Nicene Council p. 69 71 The charge of computing Easter day was imposed upon the Patriarch of Alexandria by the Nicene Synod p. 71 Pope Eleutherius receiv'd an Epistle from King Lucius 13. Britain was Converted to the Faith under him p. 12 The Epistles of the Bishops of Rome concerning the Roman Patriarchal Power over Illyricum p. 40 41 42. The Testimony of Eusebius shewing where the Gospel was Preach'd by the Apostles p. 7 The Eusebians vainly attempted to draw Julius the first to their party 80. they were the first in the World that ever dreamt that the judgment of the Eastern Council was supreme p. 80 81 F. France vid. Gaul Frumentius Bishop of Aethiopia had his Mission from Athanasius p. 32 G. Gaul when converted to the Faith. p. 10 The Catholic Writers of Gaul defended the Roman Bishops Patriarchal Authority over the West against the Hereticks p. 21 Germanus Bishop of Auxerre came as Vicar of Pope Celestine into Britain p. 99 The Testimony of Gildas the Wise concerning the Preaching of the Gospel in the time of Tiberius 2 his Testimony concerning Peter See in Britain p. 4 The Schismatic Greeks acknowledge the Bishop of Rome to be Patriarch of the West p. 21 H. A very clear Testimony of Henry the Eighth concerning the Popes Primacy 111. he was the first King of England that fell into Schism p. 111 The Epistle of Honorius the Emperor to Theodosius concerning the preserving the priviledges of the Apostolic See. p. 51 I. What Iames King of England believ'd concerning the Institution of Patriarchs and concerning the Roman Patriarchate in particular p. 20 The testimony of Ierome concerning Paul's preaching the Gospel from Ocean to Ocean 8. his testimony concerning the Authority of the Patriarch of Antioch over the Metropolitan of Cesarea p. 86 Illyricum though converted to the Faith by Paul the Apostle was notwithstanding Subject to the Roman Patriarchate as appears from many Epistles of ancient P. P. p. 38 c. The testimony of Ireneus concerning the more powerfull Principality of the Roman Church p. 14 Iuiius the first reprehends the Eusebians for declining the judgment of the Apâ—stolic See. p. 81 Iustinian the Emperor acknowledges the Roman Bishops Patriarchate over the West p. 55 L. Launoy opposes the authority of Clements Epistle to the Romans without any ground 10. he gave occasion to the Ministers of the English Church to defend their Schism with the greater obstinacy See Preface Lucius was the first King of England that was Converted to the Faith. 12 he sends Embassadors to Pope Eleutherius 13. Whether leaving his Kingdom he went into Germany and converted Bavaria to the Faith. p. 31 M. The English Manuscript set forth by Spelman is of no credit or authority p. 102 Meletius was Second in dignity to the Bishop of Alexandria in Aegypt 87. he was a Metropolitan under Alexander Patriarch of Alexandria p. 88 The Metropolitical Authority was instituted by the Apostles Preface It is not suprem p. 78 The Metropolitan of Cesarea was in ancient time subject to the Patriarch of Antioch 85. the Institution of Metropolitans in Britain in the time of Gregory the Great p. 34 It is necessary that those who plant Churches should have a true Mission p. 29 N. The 6. Canon of the Council of Nice 82. it doth not treat of the authority of Metropolitans as Supreme p. 86 O. The Testimony of Optatus Milevitanus concerning the Roman Church p. 110 How the Ordination of Metropolitans belonged to the Patriarchs p. 33 P. The Pall when first received and by whom p. 33 There were Patriarchs in the Primitive Church p. 20 They had their Original from Apostolical institution 53. there are three Patriarchal rights p. 18 The Patriarchal right over Illyricum p. 50 S. Patrick Legate to Celestine I. p. 100. Where Paul the Apostle preach't the Gospel 8. he was not the firft Planter of the Roman Church 25. whether he Preach't in Britain p. 6 It was most just that the cause of Paulus Samosatenus should be remov'd to the tribunal of the Bishop of Rome p. 80 Pelagius consented that his cause should be brought before Innocent the first after it had bin heard in the Eastern Synod 96. how his Heresy was condemn'd by Zosimus and the censure that Zosimus passed against it was approv'd by every Church under Heaven p. 98. Who determin'd in the cause of Perigenes and when p. 48 c. The cause of Perrevius different from that of Perigenes p. 47 Peter head of the Apostles 109 110. his memory to be honour'd 81. he instituted three Patriarchal Sees 30. he and his Successors instituted all the Churches in the West 24. he had instituted the Roman Church before Paul came to Rome 26. his See in Britain p. 4 c. R. The Roman Church hath the more powerful Principality for which cause it is necessary that every Church should have resort unto it 14 15. the whole World hath intercourse with it by communicatory Letters 110. the Principality of the Apostolic See always prevail'd in it 1â— as the imperial Seat had its Principality so likewise had Priesthood its Principle in it ibid. The Roman Bishop is Patriarch of the West 89. he had Metropolitans under him 89. he is the Head of the Institutions in the West 30. Britain appertains to his Patriarchate 38. the Roman Bishop had always the right of promulgating Easter day 72. his Authority is shew'd from those things which happened concerning Easter in the time of Victor 73 74. all Provinces are to refer their Causes to him as Head of the Church p. 95. S. The Testimonies of the Council of Sardica for the Primacy of the Bishop of Rome p. 95 The Authority of Severus Sulpitius for the preaching the Gospel in Gaul in the third Age. p. 12 Divers Errors of Stillingfleet Dean of St. Pauls set down Prolegom p. 7. 9. 11. 14. 19. 20. 27. 43. 45. 46. 48. 60. 61. 64. 68. 77. 78. 79. 82. 83. 84. 92. T. Theodosius junior being circumvented by the Bishop of Constantinople withdraws Illiricum from the Roman Patriarchate 48 49. he repeals the Law that he made concerning this matter p. 52 Thule an Island in Iceland p. 9 V. Pope Victor judg'd that the Question concerning the Feast of Easter was to be decided by him 72. he terrifies the Astatic Churches that withdrew their Obedience with the censure of Excommunication p. 73 FINIS Post-script SInce this Dissertation which the Author not being acquainted with the English Tongue was obliged to write in Latin is an Answer to what the Dean of Paul's hath Written in English 't was thought convenient it should be Translated that both Writers might appear in the same Language And it was the part of the Interpreter to render the true Sence of the Latin Treatise which he hath carefully endeavour'd to do Leaving it now to the Reader to Judge of the Works of these two Authors and Intreating him either to Excuse or Correct some Errata of this Impression in the manner following Some Errors Corrected REad Venantius pag. 9. Pausianus p. 36. Nectarius p. 48. ad Theodosium p. 5 in margine Anastasium p. 54 in marg Dieceses p. 60. Praefecti Pretorio p. 61. Chap. V. p. 89. Britain instead of Great Britain 112. c. BY HIS MAJESTY's Letters Patents under His Great Seal of England dated the tenth day of November in the 3d. Year of his Majesties Reign there is Granted to Matthew Turner of Holborn Bookseller and his Assigns only full and sole Power Licence Priviledge and Authority to Print and Reprint either in Latin or English and also to Vtter and Sell at any Place within His Majesties Kingdom of England Dominion of Wales and Town of Berwick upon Tweed the several Books Following viz. I. The Canons and Decrees of the Council of Trent II. The Works of Lewis de Granada III. The Works of S. Francis de Sales IV. The Devotional Treatises of St. Augustin V. The Works of Thomas of Kempis VI. The Devotional Treatises of St. Bonaventure VII Father Person 's Christian Directory or Book of Resolution VIII Father Person 's Treatises of the Three Conversions of England IX A Journal of Meditations for each day in the Year By N. B. X. Meditations used at Lisbon Colledge XI The Christians Daily Exercise by T.V. XII Paradisus Animae Christianae XIII The Key of Paradise XIV Stella's Contempt of the World. XV. The Works of Hieremias Drexelius XVI The Devotional Treatises of Cardinal Bona. XVII Beda's Ecclesiastical History of England XVIII Turbervil's Manual of Controversies XIX Vane's Lost Sheep Returned XX. The true Portraicture of the Church XXI The Catholic Scripturist XXII Historical Collections of the Reigns of Henry the Eighth Edward the Sixth Queen Mary Queen Elizabeth and King James XXIII The Devotional Treatises of Cardinal Bellarmin XXIV The Question of Questions XXV The Works of Lewis de Puente XXVI The Works of Alphonsus Roderiguez XXVII The Poor Man's Devotion As by the said Letters patents doth more fully appear
Church and receded as Schismatics from the center of Ecclesiastical Communion What else can we conclude but that God was willing to shew the falshood of the Schismatical Church of Britain by the Miracle which he wrought upon Augustine's intercession Do not the Acts of the British Synod recorded in Bede testifie that Augustine did by so manifest a Miracle demonstrate the truth of those things which he proposed to the Britains that they were forc'd to confess it was the true way of Justice which Augustine Preach'd If these things cannot be denied as it is most certain they cannot what do the modern English Authors mean when they object against Catholics the answer of the Britains and the Monks of Banchor Will they not at length be convinc'd that they oppose nothing but their own Errors which are the vain Forgeries of Men against that Truth which hath been confirm'd by a Divine Testimony and that the rest of the Church hath just reason to condemn them for having lost both Truth and Modesty at the same time I am weary of vainly spending my time in matters so clear so manifest so perspicuous and of being again forc'd when Religion is the subject to bring a new Evidence of that Truth which all the English Writers of former Ages all men that have been eminent in Britain for Sanctity and Learning and lastly even the Bishops who have been present in the several Councils that have been held in England Scotland and Ireland have acknowledg'd and defended I will therefore conclude my Discourse with the following Exhortation AN EXHORTATION TO THE MINISTERS OF THE English Church WHen Philo the most Eloquent of the Hebrews address'd his Oration to Caius the Emperor Philo in Oratione pro Gente Hebraeorum ad Caium Caligulam and the Roman Senate How long saith he shall we old Men be Children as to the Body gray indeed through Age but as to the Mind through want of Knowledge very Infants whilst we believe Fortune the most inconstant thing in the World to be stable but Nature to be unstable whereas it is most constant Pardon me I beseech you most excellent Ministers of the English Church if I make my Address to you in the Words of Philo tho somewhat alter'd How long will you who are ancient in Body be Children in Minds and meer Infants for want of knowledg of Religion whilst you think the Catholic Church unstable which is yet most constant and your own which is rent from the Body of the Catholic Church will be stable You have chang'd the true Estimate of things attributing that to a part which is only the Property of the whole and imagining with your selves that the Catholic Church is defectible Matthaei 16 cap. 1. ad Timoth 3. which the eternal Truth hath promised shall never fail and which the Doctor of the Gentiles hath called the Pillar and Ground of Truth You thought that the true Faith was lost in the Catholic Church spread over the Face of the whole World but found again by you in England little considering how truly that Objection might be made against you which Henry the Eighth your King in the Age before this made against Luther that like the Donatists you reduce the Catholic Church to a very small number whispering of Christ in a Corner It was the Judgment of the great Augustine and of St. Optatus Milevitanus Optat. Melcvit Lib. 2. contra Parmenianum Quasi in carcerem latitudo Regnorum that the Church was not to be shut up in some Corner but to extend it self to the utmost Bounds of the World the latter of these Holy Fathers Lib. 2. reprehends Parmenianus the Chief of the Donatists for endeavouring to make void that Promise of God the Father of giving to the Son the uttermost parts of the Earth for his Possession whereas he had confined the large Extent of his Dominions as it were to a narrow Prison Then he asserts the Church that it may be Catholic ought to be extended to all parts of the World and that the first Mark to distinguish it by was Vnity which consists in the Communion it holds with St. Peter's See which is but one and this he believ'd so manifest that he thought Permenianus himself could not deny it Negare non potes inquit loco supracitato Stire te in Vrbe Roma Petro Primo Cathedram Episcopalem esse callatam in qua sederit emnium Apostolorum Caput Petrus undè Cephas appellatus est in qua una Cathedra uni as ab â—mâ—â—bus servaretur ne caeteri Apostoli singulas sibi quisque defenderent ut jam schismaticus peccater esset qui contra singularem Cathedram alteram collâ—caret Ergo Cathedra unica que est prima de dotibus sedit prior Petrus cui successit Linus enumerata longa Romanorum Pontificum serie usque ad Siricium sub quo scribebat Siriâ—â—us inquit hodie qui noster est Sociuâ— cum quo nobis totus Orbis commercio formatarum in una Communionis Societate concerdat You cannot deny saith he in the place above cited but that you know that the Episcopal See of the City of Rome was granted to Peter as the Chief in which Peter the Head of all the Apostles sate from whence he was called Cephas in which one See Unity was to be preserved by all least the rest of the Apostles should claim a Superiority to any of their Sees So that now he would be a Schismatic and a Sinner who should set up another See in opposition to this peculiar See. Therefore in this one See only which is its chief Dowry Peter first sate to whom Linus succeeded and so reckoning up a long Series of Roman Bishops till he came to Siricius in whose time he wrote who saith he is our Fellow-Bishop with whom the whole World agrees as we do in one Society of Communion by intercourse of Communicatory Letters There was then a true Church in time past which diffused throughout the whole World made Peter's one See the Center of its Vnity and communicated with the Roman Church as a Sign of one Faith and Religion by Communicatory Letters This was the Sentence of Optatus Milevitanus and the rest of the Fathers which because the Donatists durst not deny they had constituted a Bishop of their own in the City of Rome who as St. Augustine tells us was called Rupensis and Montensis a Rupe vel Monte from the Rock or Hill wherein he conceal'd himself If therefore the Popes Authority was so manifest in former Ages that the Schismatical Affricans themselves could neither be ignorant of it nor deny it how comes it to pass that you in England now do not at all acknowledg it was perhaps the Knowledge of it so obliterated in the latter Ages that it could not be discovered by your Ancestors when they separated from the Communion of the Apostolic See Henricus Octavus libro de 7.
General Synod had given the Second place of Dignity to the Constantinopolitan See least the Bishop of Constantinople should encroach upon these Illyrican Provinces Chap. 3. p. 114. c. TRUTHS 10. The Metropolitical Authority of the Roman Bishop was limited to the Suburbicarian Provinces as the Author Terms them his Patriarchal Authority extended to the Greater Dioceses of the West after the Constantinopolitan Council Damasius first constituted the Archbishop of Thessalonica Vicar of the Patriarchal See of Rome in the Provinces of Illyricum that the Bishop of Constantinople might not encroach upon them Before the time of Damasius the Roman See had a right to exercise Patriarchal Power by it self or by its Legates as appears in that Legates were sent by Clements the First to Corinth at the end of the First Age wherefore Honorius the Emperor did require that the priviledge of the Roman See which was long since established by the Fathers and confirm'd by the Canons should be preserv'd in Illyricum and Theodosius the Emperor commanded the Ancient Apostolical Discipline and Order by which the Roman Bishop presided over Illyricum to be kept up Chap. 3. ERRORS 11. When Perigenes the Bishop Elect was rejected at Patrae and put into the See of Corinth by the Bishop of Rome without the consent of the Provincial Synod the Bishops of Thessaly amongst whom the Chief were Pausianus Cyriacus and Calliopus look upon this as a notorious invasion of their Rights and therefore in a Provincial Synod they appoint another person to succeed there Chap. 3. p. 116. TRUTHS 11. Perigenes the Metropolitan of Corinth in the Province of Achaia was one Person Perrevius Bishop of a See in the Province of Thessaly not well known to us another Pausianus Cyriacus and Calliopus Bishops of the Province of Thessaly had no Jurisdiction ever Perigenes the Metropolitan of another Province neither doth Bonifacius the first testifie that they acted against him but against Perrevius that was lawfully ordained who appeal'd from their Sentence to Rome and was restored to his See by the Sentence of the Roman Bishop Chap. 3. ERRORS 12. The British Church did not acknowledge any Authority Superior to that of a Metropolitan during the Six First Ages so that when Augustine the Monk was sent to them at the beginning of the Seventh Age Seven British Bishops who were found there and many other learned Men of the Monastery of Banchor refused to be Subject to the Apostolic See or to acknowledge Augustine but remain'd under their own Metropolitan So it appears from Bede and some Monuments set forth by Spehnan which last although the Author doth not think them necessary for the proof of what is above mention'd yet he declares that he approves of them Chap. 5. p. 357. c. TRUTHS 12. The British Church acknowledg'd an Authority Superior to that of a Motropolitan in the Six First Ages and this is so manifest that the Pests of the World Pelagius and Caelestius who were born in Britain confess'd this very thing whilst they either permitted their causes which had been decided in the Provincial Synods to be referr'd to the tribunal of the Apostolic See or did by their own proper Appeal refer them thither What Spelman cites out of the English Monument concerning the Monks of Banchor is Supposititious What Bede Relates does not shew that the British Bishops acknowledged the Metropolitical Authority as Supreme and if it did shew this it discovers that their Error was reprov'd by Miracle from Heaven so that those who persist obstinately to defend this Error are guilty of a double fault of resisting the Truth and being shameless Chap. 6. THE HEADS OF THE CHAPTERS OF THIS DISSERTATION CHAP. I. THat the British Church was instituted either by St. Peter or his Successors Pag. 1 CHAP. II. That the Bishop of Rome is Patriarch of the West and therein even of England and that this follows from the British Church's having receiv'd her Institution either from him or from his Priests as is prov'd by the Testimony of Innocent p. 16 CHAP. III. Although the British Church had not received its Institution from the Roman yet it is shew'd from the Example of the Illyrican Church that by ancient Custom time out of mind it might be subject to it and moreover that it ought to be so p. 36 CHAP. IV. Concerning the Greater Diocesses attributed to Pope Sylvester by the Council of Arles p. 57 CHAP. V. Whether the Nicene Canons establish the Metropolitan Dignity as Supreme and what is decreed in the Sixth of these Canons concerning the Patriarchal Authority p. 76 CHAP. VI. That the British Church acknowledged an Authority Superior to that of a Metropolitan from the time that the Christian Religion was first planted there till such time as it was again restored by Augustine the Monk under Gregory the Great p. 91 Imprimatur si videbitur Reverendissimo Patri Magistro Sacri Palatii Apostolici 19. Octobris 1686. Pro Eminentissimo Cardinali CARPINEO Vicario H. Cardinalis CASANATE Imprimatur Fr. Dominicus M. Puteobonellus Sacri Apostolici Palatii Magister Ordinis Praedicatorum A DISSERTATION Concerning the AUTHORITY OF Patriarchs and Metropolitans ALthough there is something spoken in the Preface to the Reader concerning the Occasion and Design of this Dissertation yet it is so little that I think it will not be amiss if at the entring upon it I give you a more full Account of the Occasion of it and add something for the more clear Understanding of its Design This Dissertation hath its Origin from what I had written in the first Part of Antiquitas Illustrata Dissertation the Second For when I had there shew'd from many Monuments of the Ancients that was true of the whole West which Theodosius Bishop of Echinus in Thessaly said above eleven hundred and fifty years since before Boniface the Second in the Roman Synod concerning the Churches of Illyricum viz. that the Roman Bishops besides their Principality over the Churches of the whole World more especially claim'd to themselves the Government of the Western Churches this special Authority of the Roman Bishop over the West did not please a Modern English Writer that styles himself Dean of St. Paul's and Chaplain in Ordinary to His Majesty and he took it ill that the English Church which is rent from the Communion of the Apostolic See should be concluded by me within the Bounds of the Western Patriarchate He explains his Sense of the thing in a Book intituled Origines Britannicae or The Antiquities of the British Churches which he set forth at London Anno 1685. wherein as a Minister of the English Church he takes upon him its Defence and contends that the Hierarchy of the English Church which since the Schism hath own'd Subjection only to Bishops and Metropolitans as the Superior Clergy is conformable in this to the Ancient Church Therefore he endeavours not only to shew that the English Church was Acephalic that is without a
Persons by whose means Lucius desired of Eleutherius to be instructed in the Faith and by whose aid Eleutherius did not only convert Lucius but also most of the Britains to the Faith and instituted a Church in that Country Our Author admits that Eluanus and Medroinus were sent by Lucius and he gives this Account of the Embassie Eluanus and Edwinus were British Christians themselves and therefore sent to Eleutherius Pag. 68. having been probably the Persons employ'd to convince King Lucius but he knowing the great Fame of Rome and it being told him not only that there were Christians there but a Bishop in that City the twelfth from the Apostles had a desire to understand how far the British Christians and those of Rome agreed and he might reasonably then presume that the Christian Doctrine was there truly taught at so little distance from the Apostles and in a place whither as Irenaeus argues in this Case a resort was made from all Places because of its being the Imperial City These were reasonable considerations which might move King Lucius and not any Opinion of St Peter's having appointed the Head of the Church there of which there was no imagination then 9. But since our Author confesses that Ambassadors were therefore sent by Lucius to Rome that they might perform that which the Faithful from all parts as Irenaeus testifies were then used to perform I would know this one thing of him where he finds that they observ'd this by reason of the Principality of the Roman City Certainly he could not find this in the Words of Ireneus Ireneus Lib. 3. Cap. 3. Ad hanc enim Ecclesiam inquit propter potentiorem principalitatem necesse est omnem convenire Ecclesiam which he mentions and which are taken out of his third Book Chap. 3. where this Holy Bishop of Lions directs all the Faithful to the Roman Church For to this Church saith he it is necessary that all Churches resort by reason of its more powerful Principality But where in that place doth Ireneus say that there must be resort made to Rome because of its being the Imperial City The Author here find that in the Words of Ireneus which that Father never in the least meant by them For Ireneus writes not that the City but the Church of Rome which was consecrated by the Blood of Peter and Paul was to be consulted in Controversies of Faith and that all the Faithful under Heaven ought to agree with the Roman Church because of its more powerful Principality not because of the Principality of the Imperial City its necessary saith Ireneus that resort be made to this Church by all other Churches that is by the Faithful from all parts because of its more powerful Principality Therefore the Supremacy of the Ecclesiastical Principality at Rome was the cause of Lucius's sending an Embassie thither not the Principality of the Imperial City For in the City of Rome that I may use the Words of Honorius the Emperor not only the Imperial Seat was planted but the Principle of the Priesthood And there also as * Honorius Imperator Epist ad Theodosium Augustum In urbe Roma non solum Romanum Principatum Domus Augusta obtinuit sed Principium quoque Sacerdotium accepit Augustine Epist 162. affirms The Principality of the Apostolic See ever prevail'd This Principality over the Church Christ gave to Peter and Peter left it to his Successors in the Roman See which when our Author denies he opposeth a Truth which Peron the Glory of France in his Answer to James King of England Chap. 23. proves from very many Canons of the Church and Testimonies of the Councils and Ancient Fathers I should cite more of them were not the present Question chiefly concerning the Roman Bishops Patriarchal Authority over the West not his Supremacy over the Catholic Church Divus Augustinus Epist 162. therefore that we may keep close to that which we have undertaken to treat of let us conclude with our Author that Lucius sent Embassadors to Eleutherius that they might be inform'd of him in Matters of Faith and let us acknowledg with Ireneus that the Britains no less than the Faithful in other parts of the World ought to agree with the Roman Church because of its greater Principality to which let us add with English Writers that Eleutherius the Roman Bishop made use of his Authority when he ordain'd those Legats who being sent into Britain baptised Lucius setled Churches and consecrated Bishops and from hence we may conclude that to be true which I have in the Title of this Chapter taken upon me to prove viz. That the British Church was instituted either by St. Peter or by those whom his Successors ordained Priests CHAP. II. That the Bishop of Rome is Patriarch of the West and therein even of England and that this follows from the British Church's having receiv'd her Institution either from him or from his Priests as is prov'd by the Testimony of Innocent 1. The Roman Patriarchate over the whole Western Church which is asserted in the 17th Canon of the Eight General Council our Author likes not His words are recited 2. He saith that the way of proving the Patriarchal right from the exercise of it and the exercise fromthe right is ridiculous although he confesses that it is of force against de Marca and other Catholics who admit that the Pope is Patriarch over the whole West against whom only I have used that way of proof so that it cannot be ridiculeus as I use it 3. Against such Heretics who deny the Bishop of Rome to be Patriarch over the West I have not used that but another way of proof viz. the perpetual Tradition of the Ancients which the very Schismatic Greeks themselves have not been so bold as to deny 4. One of the ancient Testimonies which I have brought for that Tradition is out of S. Augustine who hath plainly deliver'd that Innocent the First had not only a Supremacy of order and dignity over the Western Church but also of Jurisdiction 5. Another of them is that of Innocent the First himself who relates that Churches were Instituted through all France Spain Africa Sicily Italy and the interjacent Islands by Peter only or his Successors or else by those whom they ordain'd Priests and affirms that all these Countries ought to acknowledge the Apostolic See as the Head of their Institutions 6. How Paul having preacht at Rome and it may be in other of the Western parts proves nothing against this is shewed from Paul himself who reckons only such Churches amongst those which were instituted by his Preaching whom himself first taught the Faith of which sort the Roman is not as having been planted by Peter before Pauls coming into Italy the same may be said of other Western Churches supposing that Paul Preach'd in them 7. Two things are objected by our Author the first in relation to matter
of Fact whilst he denies that the Churches in the West and especially in Britain were instituted only by Peter or by Priests which had their mission from the Apostolic See. The second to invalidate the reason alledged by Innocent viz. That there is no connexion between the Institution of a Church and its Subjection and so that a Patriachal right over Churches doth not accrue from the instituting of them 8. The first Objection is answered and it is shew'd that we ought rather to believe Innocent then the Author about this matter of Fact. For Innocent tells us that Churches were Instituted in the Islands that lay between Italy Africa Spain and France by Peter only Now Britain may be reckon'd amongst these Islands since it is not only adjacent to France but interjacent as to some part moreover it ought to be accounted in the number of these since it is made to appear that a Church was instituted in Britain if not by Peter yet by the Priests that were sent by Eleutherius Peters Successor 9. The second Objection is answer'd and the reason drawn from matter of Fact is made good also the connexion between the Institution of a Church and its Subjection is shew'd since a Church can be instituted by none but him that hath a true mission and that hath jurisdiction which properly appertains to a Superior so that Innocent doth rightly call the Apostolic See the Head of the Institutions 10. It is shew'd that what is objected by the Author coucerning Churches being instituted through all Bavaria and Rhetia by King Lucius depends upon weak Testimonies which if they were true would make nothing for the Authority of the English Church over Bavaria and Rhetia unless it could be made out that Lucius was sent into those parts by Authority of the English Church and that he ordain'd Bishops by the same Authority which will never be proved 11. For the Subjecting of Bishops of a Country to any Patriarch by virtue of their Ordination it is sufficient that their first Bishop be Ordained by this Patriarch as is proved from the the example of Frumentius the first Bishop of Aethiopia the Testimonies of Nicolaus the first Gregory the Great and the eighth general Council 1. HAving treated in the foregoing Chapter of the Origin or first Institution of the British Church we are now to treat of its Subjection to the Roman Bishop as Patriarch of the West concerning which our Author in his Third Chapter states the Question against me in these words Author p. 112. The present Keeper of the Vatican Library having endeavoured in a set Discourse to assert the Popes Patriarchal Power over the Western Churches I shall here examin the strength of all that he produceth to that purpose He agrees with us in determining the Patriarchal Rights which he saith lie in these three things 1. In the right of Consecration of Bishops and Metropolitans 2. In the right of summoning them to Councils 3. In the right of Appeals All which he proves to be just and true Patriarchal Rights from the Seventeenth Canon of the eighth general Council And by these we are contented to stand or fall So this Author in the very beginning of his Disputation who if he would hear the Rule of the Eighth general Council might plainly be shew'd to have been vanquish'd before he began to fight For that Canon was made to renew the Bishop of Romes Patriarchal authority over the Metropolitans in the West which doth not at all promote our Authors design but quite overthrows it as we shall see hereafter 2. In the mean time let us proceed to the Authers Pleas by which he contends I have not rightly prov'd that the three Patriarchal Rights above mention'd belong to the Roman Bishop over all the West For when I had confirm'd the Right from the use of those Countries in which the Roman Bishop had exercis'd it I shew'd from the Right it self that the exercise or use thereof did belong to him even in those other Regions of the West where by reason of some certain priviledges granted them he often abstain'd from the exercise of this Right But our Author complains of this as an absurd way of arguing For this way of proving saith he is ridiculous viz. Author p. 119 to prove that the Pope had Patriarchal Rights because he exercised them and then to say though he did not exercise them yet he had them and so prove that he had them because he was Patriarch of the West And as it folloâ—s Author p. 12â— this way of proving may be good against de Marca who had granted the Pope to be the Western Patriarch but it is ridiculous to those that deny it Here again the Author stumbles and makes himself a laughing-stock whilst he endeavours to expose me as so for the way of proof which I have used He confesses that the way of proof which I have taken is good against de Marca and all those that call the Pope the Patriarch of the West which all Catholics did until the year 1678 wherein I publish'd my Book intitled Antiquitas Illustrata although all Catholics did not agree that there was a perpetual exercise of the Patriarchal Jurisdiction in all the Western Provinces I did therefore treat Disert 2. Antiquitatis Illustratae cap. 4. in three Articles concerning the threefold Patriarchal Right above mention'd against those Catholics who allow'd the Roman Bishop to be Patriarch of the West but notwithstanding contended that he ought not to exercise a Patriarchal Jurisdiction in all the Western Parts using that way of Proof which the Author himself confesses of force against them so that it cannot be at all ridiculous 3. And I know not upon what account he can object to me that this way of arguing is not of force against him who at this time undertakes to deny the Bishop of Romes Patriarchal Right over the whole West For to speak the truth could I divine seven years since that six years after that an English Author should oppose the Roman Bishops Patriarchate which James King of England Jacobus Rex Anglie In Apologia pro Juramento Fidelitatis plainly admitted I know saith he that there were Patriarchs in the Primitive Church And afterwards there was great contention amongst them for the Supremacy then he adds But if the Question were still about this matter the Roman Bishop should have my suffrage for the Precedence I being a Western King would adhere to the Western Patriarch Here both the former and the latter words of King James are to be observ'd He affirms in the former that there were Patriarchs in the Primitive Church that is when a Church began first to be propagated in the latter that if the Question were now put concerning the chief Patriarch he would adhere to the Roman as being Patriarch of all the West Which is exprest in those words I being a Western King would adhere to the Western Patriarch Which
France Spain or the interjacent Islands but Peter the Apostle or those which he or his Successors have ordain'd Priests so that 't is in vain for our Author to presume that England after so many Ages teaches otherwise and to affirm that this Testimony of Innocent doth not comprehend the British Churches De Marca understood Innocent quite in a different sense supposing that the British Islands were understood by the Islands mention'd by Innocent the Reason is because Innocent did not mention by name those Islands of the Mediterranean Sea which lye between Italy France and Africa but only mentions the interjacent Islands in general under which the British Islands adjacent to France and partly interjacent might and if we will believe antient Writers ought to be comprehended For from them it appears as is before prov'd that the Churches in the British Islands were instituted if not by Peter the Apostle or by Preachers sent by him yet at least by the Priests which his Successor Eleutherius constituted 9. Thus have I answer'd the Objection concerning Matter of Fact and now proceed to the Second which the Author urges against the Reason drawn from the Matter of Fact. Innocent so manifestly concludes from the Institution of the Western Churches that they ought to be subject to the Roman Patriarch that our Author confesses it cannot be denied Yet saith he let that be granted what connexion is there between receiving the Doctrine at first by those who came from thence and an Obligation to be subject to the Bishops of Rome in all their Orders and Traditions He asks the Reason of this Connexion let him hear it from Christ who would not have his Apostles to preach through the World unless they were sent for being about to ascend into Heaven he spake to them in these Words as we find in the last Chapter of Mark Go ye into all the World Mark. Chap. Last and preach the Gospel to every Creature And let him answer the Apostle Paul thus asking in his Epistle to the Romans For how shall they preach unless they are sent Epist to the Romans Doth not the Apostle here affirm that Mission is necessary in order to preaching of the Gospel Ought not all to acknowledg that there ought to be a special Authority when Churches are to be instituted by preaching and Priests and Bishops to be ordain'd So the Apostles having receiv'd Power from Heaven undertook to instruct the World by their preaching and dividing amongst themselves the Regions of the whole Earth instituted Churches of which those only obtain'd Patriarchal Dignity in which Peter either by himself or by Mark his Disciple had placed Sees He himself presided at Antioch where he erected a See which govern'd the Eastern Patriarchate He sent Mark the Evangelist his Disciple to Alexandria whose See there erected constituted a Patriarchate which in St. Athanasius's time extended its Borders as far as India interior Carolus à S. Paulo in Geographia Sacra For as Carolus à S. Paulo in his Geographia Sacra truly observes This Custom prevail'd amongst the Ancients that the Provinces which were converted to Christianity should remain subject to that Patriarch by whose Industry and Vigilance they were first converted and so Aethiopia and India interior appertain'd to the See of Alexandria because Frumentius being sent thither by St. Athanasius preach'd the Gospel instructed the People in the Faith and ordain'd their Bishops as Ruffinus testifies he had learned from Aedesius So that it ought not to seem strange to us that the See of Rome should have obtain'd the Patriarchate of the West since the Prince of the Apostles chose that City for himself and instituted Churches throughout the West and no other Apostle ordained Bishops or Priests there but he reserved this Power to himself and his Successors This therefore is the Connexion between the receiving of their Doctrine from those which were sent from Rome and the Subjection of such who were converted by them which had their Mission from the Apostolic See because those Churches owe their Institution to the special Authority of the Roman Bishop so that Innocent the First rightly said that the Churches which had their Institution from the Apostolic See ought not to attend to the Instruction of Strangers but to consult the Roman Bishop * Ne caput Institutionum videantar omittere least they might seem to omit a chief point of their Institutions 10. The Author obviates this argument p. 68 by asserting from antient Tradition out of Notkerus Notkerus Balbulus 8 Calend. Junii Author p. 59. that Lucius after he was converted leaving his Kingdom converted all Rhetia and part of Bavaria to the Christian Faith by his Preaching and Miracles If so saith our Author the British Church on the account of King Lucius his converting their Country hath as much Right to challenge Superiority over Bavaria and Rhetia as the Church of Rome hath over the British Church on the account of the Conversion of Lucius by Eleutherius The first words of the Author here are to be observed If so saith he so that he seems very much to doubt of the truth of the thing Neither can it be said that the matter of fact is evident for whether we consult Regino Abbas Prumiensis Hermannus Contractus Sigebertus Gemblacensis or other German Historians Or Galfridus Monemuthensis Mattheus Westmonasteriensis and other English Writers these latter write that Lucius died in Britain the former do not tell us that he Preach'd the Gospel in Germany and there suffer'd Martyrdom And if we look into the more ancient Martyrologies we shall not find one word in them of Lucius his dying in Germany Venerable Bede may be consulted who hath nothing either at the Third of November or any other day concerning this matter Also a more ancient Martyrology of the Western Church attributed to St. Jerom lately Printed at Lucca makes no mention of Lucius his being buried in Germany An old Martyrology set forth by Rosweidus since Baronius died no where makes mention of Lucius King of England his being the Apostle of Bavaria and Rhetia Nor is he remembred in the Martyrologies of Rhabanas Maurus Vsuardus and Ado Viennensis And Notkerus is the first of all men who hath made mention of the Apostleship of Lucius in a Martyrology who notwithstanding doubted whether Lucius King of England were the Apostle of Bavaria and Rhetia or some other Holy man named Lucius Whether saith he ad 5. Kal. Jun. it was he that was heretofore King or whatsoever servant of God it was So that the thing was doubted of in Germany it self where Notkerus wrote Notkerius in Martyrologio Sive Rex quondam ille sive quicunque servus Dei fuerit even in Notkerus his time And if it were another Lucius and not the King of England who was Apostle of Bavaria if I mistake not our Authors argument for Englands Authority over Bavaria falls to the ground which
the foremention'd Epistle of Agatho and inserting it into their Synodical Acts. The Western Bishops sent this Epistle to those of the East and which is chiefly to be here considered the British Bishops made it their own by subscribing to it And all the Eastern Bishops gave their Approbation to it by inserting it into their Acts. So that all who contradict this Epistle may be said to oppose the Judgment both of the Eastern and Western Bishops and that the English whilst they deny its Authority recede from the Judgment of their Ancestors and affect to be wiser than their Fore-fathers Neither is the Authority of Agatho's Epistle of the less force because it was written after Augustin's coming into England for there is no Innovation in that Epistle but the ancient Custom of the Church is kept up according to which Justinian the Emperor declar'd before Agatho's time that the Roman Patriarch had presided over the whole West and so consequently over Britain as appears from his 109th Novel in which he mentions five Patriarchates and the Roman as the only Western Patriarchate the rest as Eastern Justinianus Imperator Totius Oâ—bis terrarum Patriarchae seilicet Hesperiae Romae hujus Regiae civitatis Alexandriae Theopoleâ—â— Hierosolymorum omnes qui sub eis constituti sum Sanctissimi Episâ—â—pi Aposcolicam praedicant fidem atque traditionem The Patriarchs saith he of the whole World viz. of Hesperia and Rome and of this Imperial City and of Alexandria and Theopolis and Jerusalem and all the most Holy Bishops that are constituted under these preach the Apostolic Faith and Tradition The whole World is here by Justinian divided into five Patriarchates four of which were said to preside over the various Eastern Diocesses only the Roman over Hesperia that is the Western Diocesses and their most Holy Bishops so that the British Bishops which are contain'd here as being in one of the Western Diocesses did belong to the Hesperian or Western Patriarchate as the first Synod of Arles long before Justinian hath consecrated to Posterity which we shall see in the next Chapter CHAP. IV. Concerning the Greater Dioceses attributed to Pope Sylvester by the Council of Arles 1. The Fathers of the Council of Arles in the year 314. did not only refer the first Canon concerning the observation of Easter but also all the rest to Sylvester whom they have affirmed to hold the Greater Dioceses not the Greater Diocese as our Author would have it 2. A Diocese of old signified a Tract of several Provinces under the administration of one as is shewn from the Notitia Imperii which was written before the time of Honorius and Arcadius so that when the Fathers of the Council of Arles wrote that Sylvester held the Greater Dioceses they signified thereby that he presided over the Dioceses of the West to avoid the admission of which the Author Substitutes the the word Diocese in the place of Dioceses 3. Our Author shews the reasons which mov'd him to do this and this among the rest because the Empire was not only not divided into Dioceses by Constantine at the time of the Council of Arles but also because the name of Diocese doth not seem to have been known at the time of the Council of Nice In the latter of which his great mistake is prov'd from the Epistle which Constantine sent to all the Churches in the time of the Nicene Council since in that Epistle there is mention made of the Pontic and Asian Dioceses 4. Although it might so fall out that in the time of the Council of Arles the Empire was not as yet divided into thirteen Dioceses under four Praefecti Praetorio by Constantine yet it doth not follow from thence that the name of Dioceses was not known before Onuphrius Panuinus affirms that the Provinces were known by the name of lesser Dioceses from the time of Adrian the Emperor so that there is no reason why those might not have been called Greater Dioceses which Sextus Rufus and the Fathers of the Council of Arles contradistinguished from the lesser Dioceses 5. Although our Authors seem in words to deny that the Fathers of the first Council of Arles had any knowledge of the Greater Dioceses yet he in effect proves the thing whilst he affirms that the words Greater Diocese should be inserted in the place of Greater Dioceses 6. The Fathers of Italy France Africa Spain and Britain being assembled at Arles in the first Canon refer the Decree for the observing of one and the same day for Easter throughout the whole World or according as others read it throughout every City to Sylvester that he might Send Letters to them all by which Decree they acknowledge him to be their Superior 7. Our Author is of opinion that the Authority of declaring when Easter day should be observ'd was taken from Sylvester by the Nicene Synod and given to the Patriarch of Alexandria But the grossness of his Errors is discover'd from the Testimony of Leo the Great and Innocent the Third 8. Although it be granted that the first Canon of the Council of Arles saith that Sylvester ought to have given notice throughout the whole World on what day Easter should be observ'd yet it is made good from the Testimony of Cyril Patriarch of Alexandria that the Popes Power was not at all diminished in the Council of Nice since from that Testimony it appears that the computation of the Paschal Solemnity was committed to the Bishop of Alexandria but the publication of it was left to the Bishop of Rome 9. It is therefore false to say that the Nicene Synod did at all detract from the Pontifical Authority which Victor long before exercised upon the occasion of the celebration of Easter as appears from that part of the Synod of Palestine which is left us and by the Testimony of Polycrates the Ephesian 10. Victor either endeavour'd to Excommunicate or did indeed Excommunicate those of Asia who refused to obey his command concerning the observation of Easter-day from whence his Pontifical Authority is evinced which that it extends it self over the whole World as likewise his Patriarchal doth over the whole West our Author even against his will is forced to acknowledg from the first Canon of the Synod of Arles AMongst the various Monuments of Antitiquity which make proof of the Patriarchal Authority of the Roman Bishop over all the West that is not of small moment which the Fathers of the first Council of Arles have consecrated to the memory of Posterity For when they were Assembled together from France Spain Britainy Africa and Italy at the very beginning of the flourishing state of the Church they made twenty two Canons in the first of which they treat concerning the observation of the Feast of Easter upon one and the same day in all parts of the World and adds that Pope Sylvester ought according to Custom to direct his Letters to all
indeed could not have been urged by him to any purpose though he had been sure that King Lucius had Preach'd to Bavaria and Rhetia unless he could first have proved that Lucius his Mission was by the Authority of the British Church and that his Episcopacy ow'd its Original to the British and not to the Roman Church which he will never be able to prove it being as easy to contradict this as to assert it 11. But the better to clear this matter we are to take notice that for the subjecting a Province to any certain Patriarchate it is not required that its Bishops should be always ordained by the Patriarch but it sufficeth that they owe their Original institution to him that is that the first Bishop of such Region by whom others were afterwards ordain'd Ruffinus was instituted by this Patriarch So as we have seen above Aethiopia was â—ddâ—d to the Patriarchate of Alexandria in the time 〈◊〉 â—â—stantine the Great because as Ruffinus 〈…〉 Frumentius was ordain'd first as 〈…〉 dom by St. Athanasius For 〈…〉 of Aethiopia from that time did not go to Alexandria for Ordination Nicolaus 1. num 73. epist ad Bulgar Vid. num IX yet they all remain'd Subject to the Patriarch of Alexandria to whom they owe the Original of their Episcopacy and so Nicolaus the first answer'd the Bulgarians when it was put to him num 73. this order is to be observ'd by you you are now to have a Bishop consecrated for you by the Prelate of the Apolic See who if the number of Christians are increased through his industry may receive from us the Priviledge of being an Archbishop and so at length may constitute Bishops himself who may choose a Successor to the Archbishoprick when it shall become void by his death and he which is new elected needs not come hither to be consecrated because the journey would be long but let the Bishops which were consecrated by the late Archbishop assemble together and constitute him who notwithstanding is not to be inthronised neither to consecrate any thing but the body of Christ before he receive the Pall from the See of Rome as it is prov'd to be the practice of all he Archbishops of France Germany and other Regions Nicolaus the first speaks here of the Bulgarians newly to be converted to the Faith who he was assured ought to be subject to his Patriarchate Now he did not think that it was requisite in order to this that their Bishops should be perpetually ordain'd by the Roman Prelates but reserv'd to himself only the Ordination of their first Archbishop and required that his Successors as an acknowledgment of the Patriarchal Authority should as in duty bound only receive the Pall from the Roman See as he testifies it to have been the custom not only of the Archbishops of France and Germany but also of other Countries Amongst which Countries Britain was so to be reckon'd Venerabilis Beda as Venerable Bede confirms lib. 1. Ecclesiast Histor Gentis Anglorum cap. 29. where he recites the Epistle of Gregory the Great to Augustine Legate of the Apostolic See in Britain Gregorius Magnus Epistiad Augustinum Monachum Londinensis Episcopus semper in posterum à Synodo propria debet consecrari atque honoris pallium à Sede Apostolica accipere Honorius 1. Epist ad Edwinum Vid. num X. to whom that most Holy Bishop gave Power to ordain the Archbishop of London and his twelve Suffragans so notwithstanding that ever for the future the Bishop of London was to be consecrated by his own Synod and to receive the honorary Pall from the Apostolic See. He writes that the Archboship of York was to be instituted after the same manner if so be that the Catholic Religion should at any time be further propagated which having come to pass in the time of Honorius the first this Pope being sent to by Edwin King of England wrote back in this manner We have directed two Palls to Honorius and Paulinus Metropolitan Bishops that when either of them shall be called out of this World to his Creator the other may by vertue of this our Authority substitute another Bishop in his place which as well by reason of your affectionate Charity as because of the length of the journey lying through so many large Provinces as are known to be between you and us we are invited to grant that we may concur with your Devotion in all things according to your desire Venerable Bede cap. 18. commenting upon these words tells us that therefore a power was indulged to one of the British Archbishops to consecrate the other that they might not be always under a necessity of taking toylsom journey 's to the City of Rome through so long spaces both of Land and Sea for the Ordaining of an Archbishop So that from these times it hath been sufficient to acknowledge the Authority of the Patriarchal See by receiving the Pall neither did the eighth General Council require any more Venerab Beda Vid. num XI decreeing Canon 17. according to the version of Anastasius Bibliothecarius that the ancient custom was to be observ'd both in old and new Rome Canon 17. Sonodi Generalis 8. Vid. num XII that their Prelates should have power over all the Metropolitans which are promoted by them and that receive confirmation of their Episcopal dignity either by imposition of hands or by delivery of the Pall viz. to call them to a Synod if need require as also to restrain and correct them if it happen that fame accuses them of any offences According to which Canon the Metropolitans of Britain who receiv'd confirmation of their Episcopal Dignity by vertue of the Pall sent from the Patriarch of old Rome are declar'd to be subject to his Power and that according to the judgment of the Nicene Fathers who in their Sixth Canon have acknowledg'd the Patriarchal Power of the Roman Bishop for so the Eighth Synod hath interpreted that Power as believing it to be ownd by the Susception of the Pall from thence whence it is plain that our Author if he will understand the Nicene Canon according to the interpretation of the Eighth General Synod hath lost the cause and that he hath nothing to produce whereby he can prove that Britain is exempted from the Roman Patriarchate CHAP. III. Although the British Church had not receiv'd its Institution from the Roman yet it is shew'd from the Example of the Illyrican Church that by ancient Custom time out of mind it might be subject to it and moreover that it ought to be so 1. The Distribution of Churches under Patriarchs had not its Original only from the Ordination of their Bishops but also from ancient Custom the beginning of which not being known is believ'd to have been from the time of the Apostles from which Principle De Marca shews that although Innocent doth not mention the Illyrican Churches as instituted by Peter yet that
Heresie came late into Britain and was first brought thither by Agricola the Son of a Pelagian Bishop about the time of Pope Celestine for it appears from Bede that Britain was free from that Heresie during the whole time that Innocent and Zosimus were Popes which cannot be thought to proceed from any other Ground than this viz. that they had receiv'd the Decrees of Innocent and Zosimus 6. But when Agricola spread the Pelagian Heresie in Britain the Apostolic See making use of its Authority sent Bishops into Britain whom Britain receiv'd and by their help was not only converted from Heresie in those parts where they were Christians but likewise from Infidelity in the Parts where the Christian Faith was extinguished Indeed Venerable Bede relates Lib. 1. Hist Gentis Anglorum Cap. 17. that the Britains implored the Aid of the French Bishops against the Pelagian Heresie and that Lupus Bishop of Troies and Germanus Bishop of Auxerre came into Britain from France whence our Author Pag. 89. deduces that the Authority of the Roman Church was not acknowledg'd by the Britains But whilst he cites Bede let him also consult that Writer from whom Bede might have borrowed his History viz. St. Prosper who ad Consulatum Florentini Dionysii gives us an account of the Matter of Fact in these Words S. Prosper in Chronico Vid. num XLIV Agricola the Son of Severianus a Pelagian Bishop being himself also a Pelagian corrupted the British Churches by the Insinuation of his Doctrine but Pope Celestine being solieited by Palladius the Deacon sends Germanus Bishop of Auxerre as his Legate and having expell'd the Heretics he instructs the Britains in the Catholic Faith. Thus St. Prosper who for his Age might have seen and spoken with Palladius Deacon to Pope Celestine who was also at Rome under Leo the Great Successor to Celestine and Notary to the said Leo and so might have read in the Registry of the Roman Church the authentic Instrument wherein Germanus was constituted Delegate of the Apostolic See for Britain so that there can be no question made of the Authority of this Fathers Testimony Nor imports it that Bede says Germanus came together with Lupus into this Island at the Instance of the Britains and that they were chosen by the Council of Verolam to dispute with the Pelagians For as Baronius the Parent of Annals rightly observes this doth not at all hinder but that Pope Celestine made Germanus Bishop of Auxerre his Delegate at the Instance of Palladius the Roman Deaconâ— and that Germanus relying upon the Apostolical Authority came to compose the differences of the British Church and went out of his own proper Diocese into the Dioceses of others which as the Monuments of those times inform us was a frequent practice 7. S. Prosper Vid. num XLV Venerab Bâ—da lib. 1. cap. 133. Vid. num XLVI Matthaeus Westmonasteriensis Vid. num XLVII For Prosper relates that two years after the mission of Germanus Antisiodorensis Bassus and Antiochus being Consuls Palladius was ordain'd by Pope Celestine and sent the first Bishop to the Scots who believ'd in Christ Venerable Bede tells us the very same thing lib. 1. cap. 13. asserting at the Eighth year of Theodosius junior that Palladius was the first Bishop that was sent by Celestine Bishop of the Roman Church to the Scots believing in Christ After Palladius Matthaeus Westmonasteriensis mentions St. Patrick as sent by the same Pope in these words Pope Celestine after he had heard of the death of Palladius Theodosius and Valentinian being Emperors sent Patrick to display the Banner of the Holy Cross to the Gentiles who when he came to Britain preach'd the word of God there and was kindly receiv'd by the Inhabitants of that Island Then going into Scotland he preach'd Gods word which could not be restrained Indeed he adds that he was advanced to the degree of a Bishop by Matthew Archbishop and this also might be done by the command of Celestine in the same manner as we shall see anon Augustine was ordain'd by the Bishop of Arles upon the Order of Pope Gregory Moreover Marianus Scotus asserts that St. Patrick was ordain'd Archbishop of Scotland by Celestine and that all Ireland was converted by him for which we have not only the testimony of Sigebert and other foreign Writers but likewise of many English Authors as the Bishop of Armagh hath observ'd p. 838 c. where he cites their testimonies and amongst the rest that of Joceline the Monk who hath placed St. Patricks life at the latter end of the Twelfth Age which Henschenius puts at the 17th day of March and doth not only mention that St. Patrick was created Bishop by Pope Celestine but likewise that he came again to Rome in the time of Pope Hilary to give an account of his mission who Jocelinus in vâ—â—â— S. Patricii Vid. num XLVIII saith he giving him power to act in his stead and constituting him his Legate by the Sanction of his Authority confirm'd all that he had done constituted or settled in Ireland From all which it is clearly proved that the Apostolic See did make use of its Authority in governing the British Churches by its Legates and that Britain did acknowledg this Authority till the Invasion of the Saxons which was after the time of Celestine 8. After that upon the coming of the Saxons into Britain the Churches had been demolished the Altars broken down and the Priests dispersed Gregory the first sent Augustine the Monk to restore the Catholic Religion gone to decay in the chief Provinces under the Tyranny of the Heathen Princes for a long series of years and Britain receiv'd and honour'd him as their Apostle Venerable Bede lib. 7. cap. 28. testifies that Augustine was ordain'd Archbishop of the English Nation by Etherius Archbishop of Arles according to the commands he had received from the Holy Father Gregory Venerab Bede lib. 1. Hist c. 28. Auctor vitae Gregory Magni vide num XLIX Augustine was therefore ordain'd by the command of Gregory the Great because Gregory being the chief Bishop in the whole World presided over those Churches which were long since converted to the true faith as Spelman relates Tomo 1. Conciliorum Angliae ad anum Christi 597. ex vita Gregorii lib. 2. cap. 2. per Bedam conscripta Also at the beginning of the Sixth Age Augustine the first Bishop of Canterbury when he made it his business to restore the Discipline of the English Church consulted Gregory who by vertue of his Apostolical Authority gave Rules according to which the Discipline of the English Church was Established By virtue of this Authority Gregory commanded Augustine to create two Metropolitans the one at London and the other at York together with twenty four Bishops and order'd that they should be subject to Augustine so long as he continued as his Legate All which is a plain evidence that the Bishops exercised a supream
Apostolic Authority over England and that not only the ancient Britains but also the Saxons as soon aâ— they were Converted to the Faith acknowledg'd this with due veneration 9. And so much of some ancient Monuments from whence we have deduced that the British Nation did acknowledge the Popes Authority in the first Ages It now only remains that we return an Answer to the Objections raised from the Manuscript set forth by Spelman and the Acts of the British Synod which our Author cites out of Venerable Bede And first as to the Manuscript set forth by Spelman it doth not seem to be so ancient but that it might have been written since the Schism But saith Spelman at what time this Manuscript was written Spelmans Tom. 1. Conciliorum dugliae or by what Author I cannot learn either from the Manuscript it self or by any other means but I believe the Book may be found in the Cottonian Library Spelman tells us that he had no certainty concerning the Author of this Manuscript But on the contrary plainly intimates that he was in great doubt concerning the matter moreover since he confesses he was ignorant of the time when this Manuscript was written we may easily gather from hence that it was not ancient Nay the Style manifestly discovers that it is modern and could never have been Penned in the time of Augustine the Monk and of Gregory the Great Lastly it is there affirmed that the Britans and Dinoth the Abbot answer'd Augustine that they would own no Subjection to him Monumertum Anglicanum supposititium because they were under the Jurisdiction of the Bishop of Caerleon upon Usk. Whereas it is manifest that there was no Archbishop of Caerleon upon Vsk at that time and that the Metropolitan Jurisdiction had for above a hundred years before been transferr'd to Menevia As to the acts of the Synod which the Author cites against us out of Venerable Bede others have heretofore made answer that there was no dispute between Augustine and the British Bishops concerning the Primacy of the Bishops of Rome but only about some Traditions of their Church concerning which Augustine argued in this manner with the Bishops Indeed saith he to them Venerab Bedâ—â— lib. 2. Hist cap. 2. Vid. num L. you do not only act contrary to our custom but likewise to that of the Vniversal Church in many things and yet if you will comply with us in these three things the observation of Easter at the right time the administring Baptism in which we are regenerated to God according to the Rite of the Holy Roman and of the Apostolic Church and in the joyning with us to preach the Gospel to the English we will bear with you in all other things wherein you act contrary to our custom But they made answer that they would not do any of these things nor accept of him as their Archbishop Thus far Bede from whose words it is apparent if I mistake not that the question was not concerning the Primacy of the Roman Bishop but about Augustines Metropolitical jurisdiction over them and that the British Bishops only contended that they ought not to pay subjection to Augustine as their Archbishop And although upon this account they refused to receive some other things that were of Ecclesiastical Tradition yet in this they did not oppose the Roman Church only but the Churches throughout the whole World where they were said to act many things inconsistent with Ecclesiastical Unity concerning which Venerable Bede in his Second Book above mentioned gives us this relation Ibid. Vid. num LI. When after a long disputation held they could not be brought either by the supplications perswasions or reprehensions of Augustine and his Companions to give their assent but rather chose to prefer their own Traditions before those of all the Churches which agree with one another in Christ throughout the whole world besides The Holy Father Augustine put an end to this long and troublesom contention by saying thus Let us beseech God who makes men to live in unanimity in their Fathers house that he would vouchsafe to discover to us by a sign from Heaven which Tradition is to be follow'd and which way we ought to take to arrive at his Kingdom let some Person that labours under an infirmity be brought and let his faith and works be believ'd to be devoted to God and be followed by all by whose prayers he shall be cured Which when his Adversaries although with reluctancy yielded to a certain blind man of English Race was brought who being offered to the British Priests for a cure and obtaining none by their Ministry at length Augustine as obliged upon so just an occasion bends his knees to the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ beseeching him that he would restore the sight of the blind man which he had lost and by enlightning the body of one man irradiate the minds of many Believers with the light of spiritual grace The blind man forthwith had his sight restored and Augustine is by all proclaim'd a Preacher of Divine light Whereupon the Britains confess'd they had plainly found that way of Righteousness to be true which Augustine taught Thus far Venerable Bede who no where mention'd any Controversie about the Popes Supremacy but concerning Traditions viz. the observation of Easter and some certain Rites in the administration of Baptism as is above remark'd 10. But though these things are true and confirm'd to be so by the Testimony of Venerable Bede yet let us suppose that amongst other things the Bishop of Romes Primacy was also controverted who sees not that the acts reorded in Venerable Bede fully confute our Authors Plea The acts testifie that the Britains contended about Traditions which they prefer'd before all Churches which agree amongst themselves in Christ over the world so that if the question was concerning the Primacy of the Bishop of Rome it is manifest that all the Churches in the World did then ackowledge the Primacy of Peters Successor as Gregory the Great also testifies Gregorius Magnus lib. 4. Epist 32. Vid. num LII lib. 4. Epist 32. writing to Mauritius For 't is manifest saith he to all that knowthe Gospel that the care of the whole Church was by the word of our Lord committed to S. Peter the Prince of all the Apostles Therefore in the time of Gregory the Great all that were acquainted with the Gospel knew the Successor of Peter the Prince of the Apostles whom the faithful from the very first Ages of Christianity styled the Bishop of Bishops so that the Britains opposed his Primacy against the judgment of the whole Catholic World. Supposing therefore that the Britains amongst other Traditions rejected also that of the Primacy of the Roman Bishop what could be gather'd from hence but that as Baronius the Parent of Annals hath observed after the Saxons had broken in upon them they deserted the Doctrines and Rites of the Catholic