Selected quad for the lemma: faith_n

Word A Word B Word C Word D Occurrence Frequency Band MI MI Band Prominent
faith_n catholic_n church_n unity_n 4,815 5 9.7580 5 false
View all documents for the selected quad

Text snippets containing the quad

ID Title Author Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication) STC Words Pages
A31089 A treatise of the Pope's supremacy to which is added A discourse concerning the unity of the church / by Isaac Barrow ... Barrow, Isaac, 1630-1677. 1683 (1683) Wing B962; ESTC R16226 478,579 343

There are 25 snippets containing the selected quad. | View lemmatised text

do belong although really Hypocrites and bad men do not belong to the Church nor are concerned in its Vnity as St. Austin doth often teach The places therefore of Scripture which do represent the Church one as unquestionably they belong in their principal notion and intent to the true universal Church called the Church mystical and invisible so may they by analogy and participation be understood to concern the visible Church Catholick here in Earth which professeth Faith in Christ and Obedience to his Laws And of this Church under due reference to the other the question is Wherein the Unity of it doth consist or upon what grounds it is called one being that it compriseth in it self so many Persons Societies and Nations For resolution of which Question we may consider that a Community of men may be termed one upon several Accounts and Grounds as For special Unity of nature or as Vnum genus so are all men one by participation of common rationality 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Humanum genus For Cognation of bloud as Gens una so are all Jews however living dispersedly over the World reckoned one Nation or People so all Kinsmen do constitute one Family and thus also all Men as made of one Bloud are one People For Commerce of language so Italians and Germans are esteemed one People although living under different Laws and Governments For Consent in opinion or Conformity in manners and practices as Men of the same Sect in Religion or Philosophy of the same Profession Faculty Trade so Jews Mahometans Arians so Oratours Grammarians Logicians so Divines Lawyers Physicians Merchants Artizans Rusticks c. For Affection of mind or Compacts of good-will or for Links of peace and amicable correspondence in order to mutual interest and aid as Friends and Confederates For being ranged in order under one Law and Rule as those who live under one Monarchy or in one Commonwealth as the People in England Spain France in Venice Genoa Holland c. Upon such Grounds of Unity or Union a Society of men is denominated One and upon divers such accounts it is plain that the Catholick Church may be said to be One. For I. It is evident that the Church is One by Consent in faith and opinion concerning all principal matters of Doctrine especially in those which have considerable influence upon the Practice of Piety toward God Righteousness toward Men and Sobriety of Conversation to teach us which the Grace of God did appear As he that should in any principal Doctrine differ from Plato denying the Immortality of the Soul the Providence of God the natural difference of Good and Evil would not be a Platonist so he that dissenteth from any Doctrine of importance manifestly taught by Christ doth renounce Christianity All Christians are delivered into one form of doctrine to which they must stiffly and stedfastly adhere keeping the Depositum committed to them They must strive together for the faith of the Gospel and earnestly contend for the faith which was once delivered to the Saints They must hold fast the form of sound words in faith and love which is in Christ Jesus that great salvation which at first began to be spoken by the Lord and was confirmed unto them by his hearers God also bearing them witness with signs and wonders and with divers miracles and gifts of the Holy Ghost according to his own will They are bound to mind or think one and the same thing to stand fast in one spirit with one mind to walk by the same rule to be joined together in the same mind and in the same judgment with one mind and mouth to glorify God the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ. They are obliged to disclaim Consortship with the Gain-sayers of this Doctrine to stand off from those who do 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or who do not consent to the wholsome Words of our Lord Jesus Christ and to the Doctrine which is according to Godliness to mark those who make divisions and scandals beside the Doctrine which Christians had learnt and to decline from them To reject Hereticks To beware of false Prophets of Seducers of those who speak perverse things to draw disciples after them To pronounce Anathema upon whoever shall preach any other Doctrine Thus are all Christians one in Christ Jesus thus are they as Tertullian speaketh confederated in the society of a Sacrament or of one Profession This preaching and this faith the Church having received though dispersed over the world doth carefully hold as inhabiting one house and alike believeth these things as if it had one soul and the same heart and consonantly doth preach and teach and deliver these things as if it had but one mouth As for Kings though their Kingdoms be divided yet he equally expects from every one of them one dispensation and one and the same sacrifice of a true Confession and Praise So that though there may seem to be a diversity of temporal ordinances yet an Vnity and Agreement in the right Faith may be held and maintained among them In regard to this Union in Faith peculiarly the body of Christians adhering to it was called the Catholick Church from which all those were esteemed ipso facto to be cut off and separated who in any point deserted that Faith such a one saith Saint Paul 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is turned aside or hath left the Christian way of life He in reality is no Christian nor is to be avowed or treated as such but is to be disclaimed rejected and shunned He saith Saint Cyprian cannot seem a Christian who doth not persist in the Vnity of Christ's Gospel and Faith If saith Tertullian a man be a Heretick he cannot be a Christian. Whence Hegesippus saith of the old Hereticks that they did divide the Vnity of the Church by pernicious speeches against God and his Christ. The Vertue said the Pastour Hermes cited by Clemens Alexan. which doth keep the Church together is Faith So the Fathers of the Sixth Council tell the Emperour that they were members one of another and did constitute the one body of Christ by consent in opinion with him and one another and by faith We ought in all things to hold the Vnity of the Catholick Church and not to yield in any thing to the enemies of faith and truth In each part of the world this faith is one because this is the Christian faith He denies Christ who confesses not all things that are Christ's Hence in common practice whoever did appear to differ from the common Faith was rejected as an Apostate from Christianity and unworthy the communion of other Christians There are Points of less moment more obscurely delivered in which Christians without breach of Unity may dissent about which they may dispute in which they may err without breach of Unity
such a kind Unity which is a sufficient Proof that it hath no firm ground We may say of it as Saint Austin saith of the Church it self I will not that the Holy Church be demonstrated from humane reasonings but the Divine Oracles Saint Paul particularly in divers Epistles designedly treating about the Unity of the Church together with other Points of Doctrine neighbouring thereon and amply describing it doth not yet imply any such Unity then extant or designed to be He doth mention and urge the Unity of Spirit of Faith of Charity of Peace of Relation to our Lord of Communion in Devotions and Offices of Piety but concerning any Union under one singular visible Government or Polity he is silent He saith One Lord one Faith one Baptism one God and Father of all not one Monarch or one Senate or one Sanhedrin which is a pregnant sign that none such was then instituted otherwise he could not have slipped over a Point so very material and pertinent to his Discourse 2. By the Apostolical History it may appear that the Apostles in the Propagation of Christianity and founding of Christian Societies had no meaning did take no care to establish any such Polity They did resort to several places whither Divine instinct or reasonable occasion did carry them where by their Preaching having convinced and converted a competent number of persons to the embracing Christian Doctrine they did appoint Pastours to instruct and edifie them to administer God's Worship and Service among them to contain them in good order and peace exhorting them to maintain good correspondence of Charity and Peace with all good Christians otherwhere this is all we can see done by them 3. The Fathers in their set Treatises and in their incidental Discourses about the Unity of the Church which was de facto which should be de jure in the Church do make it to consist onely in those Unions of Faith Charity Peace which we have described not in this political Union The Roman Church gave this reason why they could not admit Marcion into their Communion they would not doe it without his Father's consent between whom and them there was one faith and one agreement of mind Tertullian in his Apologetick describing the Unity of the Church in his time saith We are one body by our Agreement in religion our Vnity of discipline and our being in the same Covenant of hope And more exactly or largely in his Prescriptions against Hereticks the breakers of Unity Therefore such and so many Churches are but the same with the first Apostolical one from which all are derived thus they become all first all Apostolical whilst they maintain the same Vnity whilst there are a Communion of peace names of brotherhood and contributions of hospitality among them the rights of which are kept up by no other means but the one tradition of the same Mystery They and we have one Faith one God the same Christ the same Hope the same Baptism in a word we are but one Church And Constantine the Great in his Epistle to the Churches Our Saviour would have his Catholick Church to be one the members of which though they be divided into many and different places are yet cherisht by one Spirit that is by the will of God And Gregory the Great Our Head which is Christ would therefore have us be his members that by the joints of Charity and Faith he might make us one body in himself Clem. Alex. defineth the Church A people gathered together out of Jews and Gentiles into one Faith by the giving of the Testaments fitted into Vnity of Faith This one Church therefore partakes of the nature of Vnity which Heresies violently endeavour to divide into many and therefore we affirm the ancient and Catholick Church whether we respect its constitution or our conception of it its beginning or its excellency to be but one which into the belief of that one Creed which is agreeable to its own peculiar Testaments or rather to that one and the same Testament in times however different by the will of one and the same God through one and the same Lord doth unite and combine together all those who are before ordained whom God hath predestinated as knowing that they would be just persons before the foundation of the world Many Passages in the Fathers applicable to this Point we have alledged in the foregoing Discourses 4. The constitution of such an Unity doth involve the vesting some Person or some number of Persons with a Sovereign Authority subordinate to our Lord to be managed in a certain manner either absolutely according to pleasure or limitedly according to certain Rules prescribed to it But that there was ever any such Authority constituted or any Rules prescribed to it by our Lord or his Apostles doth not appear and there are divers reasonable presumptions against it It is reasonable that whoever claimeth such Authority should for assuring his Title shew Patents of his Commission manifestly expressing it how otherwise can he justly demand Obedience or any with satisfaction yield thereto It was just that the Institution of so great Authority should be fortified with an undoubted charter that its Right might be apparent and the Duty of Subjection might be certain If any such Authority had been granted by God in all likelihood it would have been clearly mentioned in Scripture it being a matter of high importance among the establishments of Christianity conducing to great effects and grounding much duty Especially considering that There is in Scripture frequent occasion of mentioning it in way of History touching the use of it the acts of Sovereign Power affording chief matter to the History of any Society in way of Direction to those Governours how to manage it in way of Exhortation to Inferiours how to behave themselves in regard to it in way of commending the Advantages which attend it it is therefore strange that its mention is so balkt The Apostles do often speak concerning Ecclesiastical Affairs of all natures concerning the Decent administration of things concerning preservation of Order and Peace concerning the furtherance of Edification concerning the Prevention and Removal of Heresies Schisms Factions Disorders upon any of which occasions it is marvellous that they should not touch that Constitution which was the proper means appointed for maintenance of Truth Order Peace Decency Edification and all such Purposes for remedy of all contrary Mischiefs There are mentioned divers Schisms and Dissensions the which the Apostles did strive by instruction and persuasion to remove in which Cases supposing such an Authority in being it is a wonder that they do not mind the Parties dissenting of having recourse thereto for decision of their Causes that they do not exhort them to a Submission thereto that they do not reprove them for declining such a Remedy It is also strange that no mention is made of any Appeal made by
no more than Humane Thus in effect we see that it hath succeeded from the Pretence of this Unity the which hath indeed transformed the Church into a mere worldly State wherein the Monarch beareth the garb of an Emperour in external splendour surpassing all worldly Princes crowned with a triple Crown He assumeth the most haughty Titles of Our most holy Lord the Vicar general of Christ c. and he suffereth men to call him the Monarch of Kings c. He hath Respects paid him like to which no Potentate doth assume having his Feet kissed riding upon the backs of men letting Princes hold his Stirrup and lead his Horse He hath a Court and is attended with a train of Courtiers surpassing in State and claiming Precedence to the Peers of any Kingdom He is encompassed with armed Guards He hath a vast Revenue supplied by Tributes and Imposts sore and grievous the exaction of which hath made divers Nations of Christendom to groan most lamentably He hath raised numberless Wars and Commotions for the promotion and advancement of his Interests He administreth things with all depth of Policy to advance his Designs He hath enacted Volumes of Laws and Decrees to which Obedience is exacted with rigour and forcible constraint He draweth grist from all Parts to his Courts of Judgment wherein all the formalities of suspence all the tricks of squeezing money c. are practised to the great trouble and charge of Parties concerned Briefly it is plain that he doth exercise the proudest mightiest subtlest Domination that ever was over Christians 8. The Union of the whole Church in one Body under one Government or Sovereign Authority would be inconvenient and hurtfull prejudicial to the main designs of Christianity destructive to the Welfare and Peace of Mankind in many respects This we have shewed particularly concerning the Pretence of the Papacy and those Discourses being applicable to any like Universal Authority perhaps with more advantage Monarchy being less subject to abuse than other ways of Government I shall forbear to say more 9. Such an Union is of no need would be of small use or would doe little good in balance to the great Mischiefs and Inconveniences which it would produce This Point also we have declared in regard to the Papacy and we might say the same concerning any other like Authority substituted thereto 10. Such a Connexion of Churches is not any-wise needfull or expedient to the Design of Christianity which is to reduce Mankind to the Knowledge Love and Reverence of God to a just and loving Conversation together to the practice of Sobriety Temperance Purity Meekness and all other Vertues all which things may be compassed without forming men into such a Policy It is expedient there should be particular Societies in which men may concur in worshipping God and promoting that Design by instructing and provoking one another to good practice in a regular decent and orderly way It is convenient that the Subjects of each temporal Sovereignty should live as in a civil so in a spiritual Uniformity in order to the preservation of Goodwill and Peace among them for that Neighbours differing in opinion and fashions of practice will be apt to contend each for his way and thence to disaffect one another for the beauty and pleasant harmony of Agreement in Divine things for the more commodious succour and defence of Truth and Piety by unanimous concurrence But that all the World should be so joined is needless and will be apt to produce more mischief than benefit 11. The Church in the Scripture sense hath ever continued One and will ever continue so notwithstanding that it hath not had this political Unity 12. It is in fact apparent that Churches have not been thus united which yet have continued Catholick and Christian. It were great no less folly than uncharitableness to say that the Greek Church hath been none There is no Church that hath in effect less reason than that of Rome to prescribe to others 13. The Reasons alledged in proof of such an Unity are insufficient and inconcluding the which with great diligence although not with like perspicuity advanced by a late Divine of great repute and collected out of his Writings with some care are those which briefly proposed do follow together with Answers declaring their invalidity Arg. I. The name Church is attributed to the whole body of Christians which implieth Unity Answ. This indeed doth imply an Unity of the Church but determineth not the kind or ground thereof there being several kinds of Unity one of those which we have touched or several or all of them may suffice to ground that comprehensive Appellation Arg. II. Our Creeds do import the belief of such an Unity for in the Apostolical we profess to believe the Holy Catholick Church in the Constantinopolitan the Holy Catholick and Apostolick Church Answ. 1. The most ancient Summaries of Christian Faith extant in the first Fathers Irenaeus Tertullian Cyprian c. do not contain this Point The word Catholick was not originally in the Apostolical or Roman Creed but was added after Ruffin and Saint Austin's time This Article was inserted into the Creeds upon the rise of Heresies and Schisms to discountenance and disengage from them Answ. 2. We do avow a Catholick Church in many respects One wherefore not the Unity of the Church but the Kind and Manner of Unity being in question the Creed doth not oppose what we say nor can with reason be alledged for the special kind of Unity which is pretended Answ. 3. That the Unity mentioned in the Constantinopolitan Creed is such as our Adversaries contend for of external Policy is precariously assumed and relieth onely upon their interpretation obtruded on us Answ. 4. The genuine meaning of that Article may reasonably be deemed this That we profess our adhering to the Body of Christians which diffused over the World doth retain the Faith taught the Discipline setled the Practices appointed by our Lord and his Apostles that we maintain general Charity toward all good Christians that we are ready to entertain communion in Holy Offices with all such that we are willing to observe the Laws and Orders established by Authority or Consent of the Churches for maintenance of Truth Order and Peace that we renounce all heretical doctrines all disorderly practices all conspiracy with any factious combinations of people Answ. 5. That this is the meaning of the Article may sufficiently appear from the reason and occasion of introducing it which was to secure the Truth of Christian Doctrine the Authority of Ecclesiastical Discipline and the common Peace of the Church according to the Discourses and Arguments of the Fathers Irenaeus Tertullian St. Austin Vincentius Lirinensis the which do plainly countenance our Interpretation Answ. 6. It is not reasonable to interpret the Article so as will not consist with the State of the Church in the Apostolical and
Churches settled in them agreeably to the ancient Canons of the Church Universal There are those who assert to General Councils a power of Reforming the Church without or against the Pope's consent There are those who as Bellarmine telleth us do allow the Pope to be no more in the Ecclesiastical Republick than as the Duke of Venice in his Senate or as the General of an Order in his Congregation and that he therefore hath but a very limited and subordinate Power There are consequently those who conceive the Pope notoriously erring or misdemeaning himself to the prejudice of the Christian State may be called to an account may be judged may be corrected may be discarded by a General Synod Such notions have manifestly prevailed in a good part of the Roman Communion and are maintained by most Divines in the French Church and they may be supposed every-where common where there is any liberty of judgment or where the Inquisition doth not reign There have been seasons wherein they have so prevailed as to have been defined for Catholick Truths in great Synods and by them to have been applied to practice For In the first great Synod of Pisa it was declared that Councils may reform the Church sufficiently both in Head and Members and accordingly that Synod did assume to judge two Popes Gregory XII and Benedict XIII contending for the Papacy whereof one was the true Pope and deposing them both did substitute Alexander V. who for one year as Antoninus reporteth according to the common opinion did hold the Seat of Peter The Synod of Constance declared that the Synod lawfully assembled in the Holy Ghost making a General Council representing the Catholick Church militant hath immediately power from Christ to which every one of whatever state or dignity he be although it be Papal is bound to obey in those things which belong to Faith and the extirpation of the said Schism and the general reformation of the Church of God in Head and Members The which Doctrine they notably put in practice exercising jurisdiction over Popes and for Errours Misdemeanours or Contumacies discarding three of whom it is hard if one were not true Pope and chusing another who thereafter did pass for a right Pope and himself did confirm the Acts of that Council So that this Semi-heresie hath at least the authority of one Pope to countenance it Our most holy Lord the Pope said in answer thereunto that he would maintain and inviolably observe all and every of those things that were conciliarly determin'd concluded and decreed by the present Council in matters of Faith The Synod of Basil declared the same Point that Councils are superiour to Popes to be a truth of Catholick Faith which whoever doth stiffly oppose is to be accounted a Heretick Nor say they did any skilfull man ever doubt the Pope to be subject to the judgment of General Synods in things concerning Faith In virtue of which Doctrine and by its irresistable authority the Synod did sentence and reject Pope Eugenius as criminal heretical and contumacious These Synods although reprobated by Popes in Counter-synods are yet by many Roman Catholick Divines retained in great veneration and their Doctrine is so current in the famous Sorbonne that if we may believe the great Cardinal of Lorrain the contrary is there reputed heretical § XVI Yet notwithstanding these oppositions the former Opinion averring the Pope's absolute Sovereignty doth seem to be the genuine Doctrine of the Roman Church if it have any For those Divines by the Pope and his intimate confidents are looked upon as a mongrel brood or mutinous faction which he by politick connivence doth onely tolerate because he is not well able to correct or suppress them He is afraid to be violent in reclaiming them to his sense lest he spend his artillery in vain and lose all his power and interest with them Nor indeed do those men seem to adhere to the Roman Party out of entire judgment or cordial affection but in compliance with their Princes or upon account of their Interest or at best with regard to peace and quiet They cannot conveniently break with the Pope because his Interest is twisted with their own so as not easily to be disentangled For how can they heartily stick to the Pope whenas their Opinion doth plainly imply him to be an Usurper and a Tyrant claiming to himself and exercising authority over the Church which doth not rightfully belong to him to be a Rebel and Traitour against the Church invading and possessing the Sovereignty due to it for such questionless the Duke of Venice would be should he challenge and assume to himself such a Power over his Commonwealth as the Pope hath over Christendom to be an Impostour and Seducer pretending to infallible conduct which he hath not How can they honestly condemn those who upon such grounds do shake off such yokes refusing to comply with the Pope till he correct his Errours till he desist from those Usurpations and Impostures till he restore to the Church its Rights and Liberties How are the Doctrines of those men consistent or congruous to their practice For they call the Pope Monarch of the Church and Universal Pastour of Christians by God's appointment indefectibly yet will they not admit all his Laws and reject Doctrines which he teacheth particularly those which most nearly touch him concerning his own Office and Authority They profess themselves his loyal Subjects yet pretend Liberties which they will maintain against him They hold that all are bound to entertain Communion with him yet confess that he may be heretical and seduce into Errour They give him the name and shadow of a Supremacy but so that they can void the substance and reality thereof In fine where should we seek for the Doctrine of the Roman Church but at Rome or from Rome it self where these Doctrines are Heterodoxies § XVII We shall not therefore have a distinct regard to the Opinion of these Semi-romanists nor consider them otherwise than to confirm that part of Truth which they hold and to confute that part of Errour which they embrace allowing at least in word and semblance more power to the Pope than we can admit as due to him Our discourse shall be levelled at him as such as he pretendeth himself to be or as assuming to himself the forementioned Powers and Prerogatives § XVIII Of such vast Pretences we have reason to require sufficient Grounds He that demandeth assent to such important Assertions ought to produce clear proofs of them He that claimeth so mighty Power should be able to make out a good Title to it for No man may take this more than Pontifical honour to himself but he that is called by God as was Aaron They are worthily to be blamed who tumultuously and disorderly fall upon curbing or restraining those who by no law are subject to them We cannot well be justified
add If an Angel from Heaven should tell you beside what you have received in the Legal and Evangelical Scriptures let him be anathema in which words we have St. Austin's warrant not onely to refuse but to detest this Doctrine which being nowhere extant in Law or Gospel is yet obtruded on us as nearly relating both to Christ and his Church as greatly concerning both our Faith and Practice 2. To enforce this Argument we may consider that the Evangelists do speak about the propagation settlement and continuance of our Lord's Kingdom that the Apostles do often treat about the state of the Church and its edification order peace unity about the distinction of its Officers and Members about the qualifications duties graces privileges of Spiritual Governours and Guides about prevention and remedy of Heresies Schisms Disorders upon any of which occasions how is it possible that the mention of such a Spiritual Monarch who was to have a main influence on each of those particulars should wholly escape them if they had known such an one instituted by God In the Levitical Law all things concerning the High-Priest not onely his Designation Succession Consecration Duty Power Maintenance Privileges but even his Garments Marriage Mourning c. are punctually determined and described and is it not wonderfull that in the many descriptions of the New-Law no mention should be made concerning any Duty or Privilege of its High-Priest whereby he might be directed in the administration of his Office and know what observance to require 3. Whereas also the Scripture doth inculcate duties of all sorts and doth not forget frequently to press duties of respect and obedience toward particular Governours of the Church is it not strange that it never should bestow one precept whereby we might be instructed and admonished to pay our duty to the Universal Pastour especially considering that God who directed the Pens of the Apostles and who intended that their Writings should continue for the perpetual instruction of Christians did foresee how requisite such a precept would be to secure that duty for if but one such precept did appear it would doe the business and void all contestation about it 4. They who so carefully do exhort to honour and obey the temporal Sovereignty how come they so wholly to wave urging the no less needfull obligations to obey the Spiritual Monarch while they are so mindfull of the Emperour why are they so neglectfull of the Pope insomuch that divers Popes afterward to ground and urge obedience to them are fain to borrow those precepts which command obedience to Princes accommodating them by analogy and inference to themselves 5. Particularly Saint Peter one would think who doth so earnestly injoin to obey the King as Supreme and to honour him should not have been unmindfull of his Successours or quite have forborn to warn Christians of the respect due to them surely the Popes afterward do not follow him in this reservedness for in their Decretal Epistles they urge nothing so much as obedience to the Apostolical See 6. One might have expected something of that nature from St. Paul himself who did write so largely to the Romans and so often from Rome that at least some word or some intimation should have dropped from him concerning these huge Rights and Privileges of this See and of the regard due to it Particularly then when he professedly doth enumerate the Offices instituted by God for standing use and perpetual duration for the perfecting of the Saints for the work of the Ministery for the edifying of the Body of Christ till we all come in the Vnity of Faith c. He commendeth them for their Faith which was spoken of through the whole world yet giveth them no advantage above others as St. Chrysostome observeth on those words for obedience to the Faith among all Nations among whom also are ye this saith St. Chrysostome he saith to depress their conceit to void their haughtiness of mind and to teach them to deem others equal in Dignity with them When He writeth to that Church which was some time after Saint Peter had setled the Popedom he doth onely style them 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 called Saints and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 beloved of God which are common adjuncts of all Christians He saith their Faith was spoken of generally but of the fame of their Authority being so spread he taketh no notice that their obedience had come abroad to all men but their commands had not it seemeth come anywhere He wrote divers Epistles from Rome wherein he resolveth many cases debated yet never doth urge the Authority of the Roman Church for any point which now is so ponderous an Argument 7. But however seeing the Scripture is so strangely reserved how cometh it to pass that Tradition is also so defective and staunch in so grand a case We have in divers of the Fathers particularly in Tertullian in St. Basil in St. Hierome Catalogues of Traditional Doctrines and Observances which they recite to assert Tradition in some cases supplemental to Scripture in which their purpose did require that they should set down those of principal moment and they are so punctual as to insert many of small consideration how then came they to neglect this concerning the Papal Authority over the whole Church which had been most pertinent to their design and in consequence did vastly surpass all the rest which they do name 8. The designation of the Roman Bishop by succession to obtain so high a degree in the Church being above all others a most remarkable and noble piece of History which it had been a horrible fault in an Ecclesiastical History to slip over without carefull reporting and reflecting upon it yet Eusebius that most diligent Compiler of all passages relating to the original Constitution of the Church and to all transactions therein hath not ●ne word about it who yet studiously doth report the Successions of the Roman Bishops and all the notable occurrences he knew concerning them with favourable advantage 9. Whereas this Doctrine is pretended to be a Point of Faith of vast consequence to the subsistence of the Church and to the Salvation of men it is somewhat strange that it should not be inserted into any one ancient Summary of things to be believed of which Summaries divers remain some composed by publick consent others by persons of Eminency in the Church nor by fair and forcible consequence should be deducible from any Article in them especially considering that such Summaries were framed upon occasion of Heresies springing up which disregarded the Pope's Authority and which by asserting it were plainly confuted We are therefore beholden to Pope Innocent III. and his Laterane Synod for first Synodically defining this Point together with other Points no less new and unheard of before The Creed of Pope Pius IV. formed the other day is the first as I take it
had been then as commonly known and avowed 23. Whereas divers of the Fathers purposely do treat on methods of confuting Hereticks it is strange they should be so blind or dull as not to hit on this most proper and obvious way of referring debates to the decision of him to whose Office of Universal Pastour and Judge it did belong Particularly one would wonder at Vincentius Lirinensis that he on set purpose with great care discoursing about the means of setling points of Faith and of overthrowing Heresies should not light upon this notable way by having recourse to the Pope's Magisterial sentence yea that indeed he should exclude it for he after most intent study and diligent inquiry consulting the best and wisest men could find but two ways of doing it I saith he did always and from almost every one receive this answer that if either I or any other would find out the frauds and avoid the snares of up-start Hereticks and continue sound and upright in the true Faith he should guard and strengthen his Faith God helping him by these two means viz. First by the Authority of the Divine Law and then by the Tradition of the Catholick Church And again We before have said that this hath always been and is at present the custome of Catholicks that they prove their Faith by these two ways First by Authority of the Divine Canon then by the Tradition of the Vniversal Church Is it not strange that he especially being a Western man living in those parts where the Pope had got much sway and who doth express great reverence to the Apostolick See should omit that way of determining points which of all according to the modern conceits about the Pope is most ready and most sure 24. In like manner Tertullian professeth the Catholicks in his time to use such compendious methods of confuting Hereticks We saith he when we would dispatch against Hereticks for the Faith of the Gospel do commonly use these short ways which do maintain both the order of times prescribing against the lateness of impostours and the Authority of the Churches patronizing Apostolical tradition but why did he skip over a more compendious way than any of those namely standing to the judgment of the Roman Bishop 25. It is true that both he and St. Irenaeus before him disputing against the Hereticks of their times who had introduced pernicious novelties of their own devising when they alledge the general consent of Churches planted by the Apostles and propagated by continual successions of Bishops from those whom the Apostles did ordain in doctrines and practices opposite to those devices as a good argument and so indeed it then was next to a demonstration against them do produce the Roman Church as a principal one among them upon several obvious accounts And this indeed argueth the Roman Church to have been then one competent witness or credible retainer of tradition as also were the other Apostolical Churches to whose Testimony they likewise appeal but what is this to the Roman Bishop's judicial Power in such cases why do they not urge that in plain terms they would certainly have done so if they had known it and thought it of any validity Do but mark their words involving the force of their argumentation When saith Irenaeus we do again after allegation of Scripture appeal to that tradition which is from the Apostles which by successions of Presbyters is preserved in the Churches and That saith Tertullian will appear to have been delivered by the Apostles which hath been kept as holy in the Apostolical Churches let us see what milk the Corinthians did draw from Paul what the Philippians the Thessalonians the Ephesians do reade what also the Romans our nearer neighbours do say to whom both Peter and Paul did leave the Gospel sealed with their Bloud we have also the Churches nursed by John c. Again It is therefore manifest saith he in his Prescriptions against Hereticks that every doctrine which doth conspire with those Apostolical Churches in which the Faith originally was planted is to be accounted true as undoubtedly holding that which the Churches did receive from the Apostles the Apostles from Christ and Christ from God but all other doctrine is to be prejudged false which doth think against the truth of the Churches and of the Apostles and of Christ and of God their argumentation then in short is plainly this that the conspiring of the Churches in doctrines contrary to those which the Hereticks vented did irrefragably signifie those doctrines to be Apostolical which discourse doth no-wise favour the Roman pretences but indeed if we do weigh it is very prejudicial thereto it thereby appearing that Christian Doctrines then in the canvasing of points and assuring tradition had no peculiar regard to the Roman Churche's testimonies no deference at all to the Roman Bishop's Authority not otherwise at least than to the Authority of one single Bishop yielding attestation to tradition 26. It is odd that even old Popes themselves in elaborate tracts disputing against Hereticks as Pope Celestine against Nestorius and Pelagius Pope Leo against Eutyches do content themselves to urge testimonies of Scripture and arguments grounded thereon not alledging their own definitive Authority or using this parlous argumentation I the Supreme Doctour of the Church and Judge of controversies do assert thus and therefore you are obliged to submit your assent 27. It is matter of amazement if the Pope were such as they would have him to be that in so many bulky Volumes of ancient Fathers living through many ages after Christ in those vast treasuries of learning and knowledge wherein all sorts of truth are displayed all sorts of duty are pressed this momentous point of doctrine and practice should nowhere be expressed in clear and peremptory terms I speak so for that by wresting words by impertinent application by streining consequences the most ridiculous positions imaginable may be deduced from their Writings It is strange that somewhere or other at least incidentally in their Commentaries upon the Scripture wherein many places concerning the Church and its Hierarchy do invite to speak of the Pope in their Treatises about the Priesthood about the Unity and Peace of the Church about Heresie and Schism in their Epistles concerning Ecclesiastical Affairs in their Historical narrations about occurrences in the Church in their concertations with heterodox adversaries they should not frequently touch it they should not sometimes largely dwell upon it Is it not marvellous that Origen St. Hilary St. Cyril St. Chrysostome St. Hierome St. Austin in their Commentaries and Tractates upon those places of Scripture Tu es Petrus Pasce oves whereon they now build the Papal Authority should be so dull and drowsie as not to say a word concerning the Pope That St. Austin in his so many elaborate Tractates against the Donatists wherein he discourseth so prolixly about the Church its Unity Communion
be derogated from persons dying in the peace and communion of the universal Church by his condemning that perverse opinion Yet did the Synod in smart terms reflecting on the Pope and giving him the lie not regarding his opinion or authority decree that persons deceased were liable to be anathematized they did anathematize Theodorus they did expresly condemn each of the Chapters they threatned deposition or excommunication on whoever should oppose their Constitutions they anathematize whoever doth not anathematize Theodorus But Pope Vigilius did refuse to approve their Doctrine and Sentence and therefore which was the case of many other Bishops as Baronius himself doth confess and argue was driven into banishment wherein he did expire Yet posterity hath embraced this Synod as a legitimate and valid General Synod and the Popes following did profess the highest reverence thereto equally with the preceding General Synods so little necessary is the Pope's consent or concurrence to the validity of Synodical definitions Upon this Baronius hath an admirable reflexion Here stay saith he O Reader and consider the matter attently Ay do so I pray That it is no new thing that some Synod in which the Pope was not even present by his Legates but did oppose it should yet obtain the title of an Oecumenical Synod whenas afterward the Pope's will did come in that it should obtain such a title So in the opinion of this Doctour the Pope can easily change the nature of things and make that become a General Synod which once was none yea which as it was held did not deserve the name of any Synod at all O the virtue of Papal Magick or rather O the Impudence of Papal Advocates The Canons of the sixth General Council exhibited by the Trullane or Quinisext Synod clearly and expresly do condemn several Doctrines and Practices of Rome I ask whether the Pope did confirm them they will to be sure as they are concerned to do answer No and indeed Pope Sergius as Anastasius in his Life reporteth did refuse them yet did they pass for legitimate in the whole Church for in their general Synod the second Nicene without contradiction one of them is alledged out of the very original paper wherein the Fathers had subscribed as a Canon of the Holy General Sixth Synod and avowed for such by the Patriarch Tarasius both in way of argument of defence and of profession in his Synodical Epistle to the Patriarchs where he saith that together with the divine doctrines of the Sixth Synod he doth also embrace the Canons enacted by it of which Epistle Pope Adrian in his Answer thereto doth recite a part containing those words and applaud it for Orthodox signifying no offence at his embracing the Trullane Canons And all those 102 Canons are again avowed by the Synod in their Antithesis to the Synod of Constantinople In fine if we believe Anastasius Pope John VII did being timorous out of humane frailty direct these Canons without amendment by two Metropolites to the Emperour that is he did admit them so as they stand But it may be instanced that divers Synods have asked the Popes consent for ratification of their Decrees and Acts. So the Fathers of the Second General Synod having in an Episstle to Pope Damasus and the Western Bishops declared what Constitutions they had made in the close speak thus In which things being legally and canonically settled by us we do exhort your reverence to acquiesce out of spiritual charity and fear of the Lord So the Synod of Chalcedon did with much respect ask from Pope Leo the confirmation of its Sanctions That you may know how that we have done nothing for favour or out of spite but as guided by the divine direction we have made known to you the force of all that has been done for your concurrence and for the confirmation and approbation of the things done Of the Fifth Synod Pope Leo II. saith that he agrees to what was determin'd in it and confirms it with the authority of the Blessed Saint Peter To these allegations we reply That it was indeed the manner of all Synods for notification of things and promulgation of their Orders for demonstration and maintenance of concord for adding weight and authority to their determinations for engaging all Bishops to a willing complyance in observing them for attestation to the common interest of all Bishops in the Christian truth and in the governance and edification of the Church having framed Decrees concerning the publick State to demand in fairest terms the consent to them of all Catholick Bishops who were absent from them to be attested by their subscription So did Constantine recommend the Nicene Decrees to all Bishops undertaking that they would assent to them So more expresly the Synod of Sardica in their Epistle to all Bishops of the Catholick Church Do ye also our brethren and fellow-ministers the more use diligence as being present in spirit with our Synod to yield consent by your subscription that concord may be preserved every where by all the fellow-ministers So did Pope Liberius request of the Emperour Constantius that the faith delivered at Nice might be confirmed by the subscription of all Bishops So did Athanasius procure a Synod at Alexandria to confirm the Decrees at Sardica and in Palestine concerning him So the Macedonian Bishops are said to have authorized their Agents to ratifie the faith of Consubstantiality Many such Instances occur in story by which it may appear that the Decrees of Synods concerning Faith or concerning any matters of common interest were presented to all Bishops and their consent requested or required because say the Roman Clergy in Saint Cyprian a decree cannot be firm which has not the consent of many Whence it is no wonder if any Synods did thus proceed toward so eminent a Bishop as was he of Rome that they should endeavour to give him satisfaction that they should desire to receive satisfaction from him of his conspiring with them in Faith of his willingness to comply in observing good Rules of Discipline that as every vote had force so the suffrage of one in so great dignity and reputation might adjoin some regard to their judgment The Pope's confirmation of Synods what was it in effect but a declaration of his approbation and assent the which did confirm by addition of Suffrage as those who were present by their Vote and those who were absent by their Subscription are said to confirm the Decrees of Councils every such consent being supposed to encrease the authority whence the number of Bishops is sometimes reckoned according to the subscriptions of Bishops absent as the Council of Sardica is sometimes related to consist of three hundred Bishops although not two hundred were present the rest concurring by subscription to its definitions Other Bishops in yielding their suffrage do
of Rome under Pope Silvester of Rome under Sixtus III. but they are palpably spurious and the learned among them confess it But antiquity was not of this mind for it did suppose him no less obnoxious to judgment and correction than other Bishops if he should notoriously deviate from the faith or violate canonical discipline The Canons generally do oblige Bishops without exception to duty and upon defailance to correction why is not he excepted if to be excused or exempted It was not questioned of old but that a Pope in case he should notoriously depart from the faith or notably infringe discipline might be excommunicated the attempting it upon divers occasions do shew their opinion although it often had not effect because the cause was not just and plausible the truth and equity of the case appearing to be on the Pope's side St. Isidore Pelusiota denieth of any Bishop's office that it is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 an uncontrollable government In the times of Polycrates and Pope Victor the whole Eastern Church did forbear communion with the Pope Firmilian told Pope Stephanus that by conceiting he might excommunicate all other Bishops he had excommunicated himself The Fathers of the Antiochene Synod did threaten to excommunicate and depose Pope Julius They did promise to Julius peace and communion if he did admit the deposition of those whom they had expelled and the constitution of those whom they had ordained but if he did resist their decrees they denounced the contrary The Oriental Bishops at Sardica did excommunicate and depose him St. Hilary did anathematize Pope Liberius upon his defection to the Arians Dioscorus did attempt to excommunicate Pope Leo. Acacius of Constantinople renounced the communion of Pope Felix Timotheus Aelurus cursed the Pope The African Bishops did Synodically excommunicate Pope Vigilius Pope Anastasius was rejected by his own Clergy Pope Constantine by the people and so was Pope Leo VIII Divers Bishops of Italy and Illyricum did abstain from the Pope's communion for a long time because they did admit the fifth Synod Photius did excommunicate and depose Pope Nicholas I. Maurus Bishop of Ravenna did anathematize Pope Vitalianus The Emperour Otho II. having with good advice laboured to reclaim Pope John XII without effect did indict a Council calling together the Bishops of Italy by the judgment of whom the life of that wicked man should be judged and the issue was that he was deposed Pope Nicholas I. desired to be judged by the Emperour The fifth Synod did in general terms condemn Pope Vigilius and the Emperour Justinian did banish him for not complying with the decrees of it The sixth and seventh General Synods did anathematize Honorius by name when he was dead because his heresie was not before confuted and they would have served him so if he had been alive Divers Synods that of Worms of Papia of Brescia of Mentz of Rome c. did reject Pope Gregory VII Pope Adrian himself in the VIII Synod so called did confess that a Pope being found deviating from the faith might be judged as Honorius was Gerbertus afterward Pope Sylvester II. did maintain that Popes might be held as Ethnicks and Publicans if they did not hear the Church The Synod of Constance did judge and depose three Popes The Synod of Basil did depose Pope Eugenius affirming that The Catholick Church hath often corrected and judged Popes when they either err'd from the faith or by their ill manners became notoriously scandalous to the Church The practice of Popes to give an account of their faith when they entred upon their office to the other Patriarchs and chief Bishops approving themselves thereby worthy and capable of communion doth imply them liable to judgment Of the neglect of which practice Euphemius Bishop of Constantinople did complain Of this we have for example the Synodical Epistles of Pope Gregory I. XII To the Sovereign in Ecclesiastical affairs it would belong to define and decide controversies in faith discipline moral practice so that all were bound to admit his definitions decisions interpretations He would be the supreme Interpreter of the divine law and Judge of controversies No point or question of moment should be decided without his cognizance This he therefore doth pretend to taking upon him to define points and requiring from all submission to his determinations Nor doth he allow any Synods to decide questions But the ancients did know no such thing In case of Contentions they had no recourse to his judgment they did not stand to his opinion his authority did not avail to quash disputes They had recourse to the Holy Scriptures to Catholick Tradition to reason they disputed and discussed points by dint of argument Irenaeus Tertullian Vincentius Lirinensis and others discoursing of the methods to resolve points of Controversie did not reckon the Pope's authority for one Divers of the Fathers did not scruple openly to dissent from the opinions of Popes nor were they wondred at or condemned for it So Saint Paul did withstand Saint Peter So Polycarpus dissented from Pope Elutherius So Polycrates from Pope Victor So St. Cyprian from Pope Stephen So Dionysius Alex. from Pope Stephen all which persons were renowned for wisedom and piety in their times Highest Controversies were appeased by Synods out of the Holy Scripture Catholick Tradition the Analogy of faith and common Reason without regard to the Pope Divers Synods in Africk and Asia defined the Point about rebaptization without the Pope's leave and against his opinion The Synod of Antioch condemned the doctrine of Paulus Samosatenus without intervention of the Pope before they gave him notice In the Synod of Nice the Pope had very small stroke The General Synod of Const. declared the Point of the Divinity of the H. Ghost against Macedonius without the Pope who did no more than afterward consent This the Synod of Chalcedon in their compellation to the Emperour Marcian did observe The Fathers met in Sardica to suppress the reliques of Arianism communicated their decrees to the Eastern Bishops and they who here discovered the pestilence of Apolinarius made known theirs to the Western The Synod of Africk defined against Pelagius before their informing Pope Innocentius thereof not seeking his judgment but desiring his consent to that which they were assured to be truth Divers Popes have been incapable of deciding Controversies themselves having been erroneous in the questions controverted as Pope Stephanus in part Pope Liberius P. Felix P. Vigilius P. Honorius c. And in our opinion all Popes for many ages It is observable how the Synod of Chalcedon in their allocution to the Emperour Marcian do excuse P. Leo for expounding the faith in his Epistle the which it seems some did reprehend as a novell method disagreeable to the Canons Let not them say they object to us the Epistle of the marvellous Prelate
Christians If he claimeth exorbitant Power and exerciseth Oppression and tyrannical Domination over his Brethren cursing and damning all that will not submit to his Dictates and Commands If instead of being a Shepherd he is a Wolf worrying and tearing the Flock by cruel Persecution He by such behaviour ipso facto depriveth himself of Authority and Office He becometh thence no Guide or Pastour to any Christian there doth in such case rest no obligation to hear or obey him but rather to decline him to discost from him to reject and disclaim him This is the reason of the case this the Holy Scripture doth prescribe this is according to the Primitive Doctrine Tradition and Practice of the Church For 10. In reason the nature of any spiritual Office consisting in Instruction in Truth and Guidance in Vertue toward attainment of Salvation if any man doth lead into pernicious Errour or Impiety he thereby ceaseth to be capable of such Office As a blind man by being so doth cease to be a Guide and much more he that declareth a will to seduce for Who so blind as he that will not see No man can be bound to follow any one into the ditch or to obey any one in prejudice to his own Salvation to die in his iniquity Seeing God saith in such a case 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 In vain do they worship me teaching for Doctrines the Precepts of men They themselves do acknowledge that Hereticks cease to be Bishops and so to be Popes Indeed they cease to be Christians for 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 such a one is subverted 11. According to their Principles the Pope hath the same relation to other Bishops and Pastours of the Church which they have to their people he being Pastour of Pastours But if any Pastour should teach bad Doctrine or prescribe bad Practice his people may reject and disobey him therefore in proportion the Pastours may desert the Pope misguiding or misgoverning them In such cases any Inferiour is exempted from obligation to comply with his Superiour either truly or pretendedly such 12. The case may be that we may not hold communion with the Pope but may be obliged to shun him in which case his Authority doth fail and no man is subject to him 13. This is the Doctrine of the Scripture The High Priest and his fellows under the Jewish Oeconomy had no less Authority than any Pope can now pretend unto they did sit in the Chair of Moses and therefore all their True Doctrines and Lawfull Directions the people were obliged to learn and observe but their false Doctrines and impious Precepts they were bound to shun and consequently to disclaim their Authority so far as employed in urging such Doctrines and Precepts 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Let them alone saith our Saviour they are blind leaders of the blind Under the Christian dispensation the matter is no less clear our Lord commandeth us to beware of false Prophets and to see that no man deceive us although he wear the cloathing of a Sheep or come under the name of a Shepherd coming in his name Saint Paul informeth us that if an Apostle if an Angel from heaven doth preach beside the old Apostolical Doctrine introducing any new Gospel or a Divinity devised by himself he is to be held accursed by us He affirmeth that even the Apostles themselves were not Lords of our faith nor might challenge any power inconsistent with the maintenance of Christian Truth and Piety We saith he can doe nothing against the truth but for the truth the which an ancient Writer doth well apply to the Pope saying that he could doe nothing against the truth more than any of his Fellow-priests could doe which S. Paul did in practice shew when he resisted Saint Peter declining from the truth of the Gospel He chargeth that if any one doth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 teach heterodoxies we should stand off from him that if any brother walketh disorderly and not according to Apostolical tradition we should withdraw from him that if any one doth raise divisions and scandals beside the doctrine received from the Apostles we should decline from him that we are to refuse any heretical person He telleth us that grievous Wolves should come into the Church not sparing the flock that from among Christians there should arise men speaking perverse things to draw disciples after them but no man surely ought to follow but to shun them These Precepts and Admonitions are general without any respect or exception of Persons great or small Pastour or Lay-man nay they may in some respect more concern Bishops than others for that they declining from truth are more dangerous and contagious 14. The Fathers in reference to this case do clearly accord both in their Doctrine and Practice St. Cyprian telleth us that a people obedient to the Lord's commandments and fearing God ought to separate it self from a sinfull Bishop that is from one guilty of such sins which unqualifie him for Christian Communion or Pastoral charge and Let not addeth he the common people flatter it self as if it could be free from the contagion of guilt if it communicate with a sinfull Bishop whose irreligious Doctrine or Practice doth render him uncapable of communion for how saith he otherwhere can they preside over integrity and continence if corruptions and the teaching of vices do begin to proceed from them They who reject the commandment of God and labour to establish their own tradition let them be strongly and stoutly refused and rejected by you St. Chrysostome commenting on Saint Paul's words If I or an Angel saith that Saint Paul meaneth to shew that dignity of persons is not to be regarded where truth is concerned that if one of the chief Angels from heaven should corrupt the Gospel he were to be accursed that not onely if they shall speak things contrary or overturn all but if they preach any small matter beside the Apostolical doctrine altering the least point whatever they are liable to an anathema And other-where very earnestly persuading his Audience to render due respect and obedience to there Bishop he yet interposeth this exception If he hath a perverse opinion although he be an Angel do not obey him but if he teacheth right things regard not his life but his words Ecclesiastical Judges as men are for the most part deceived For neither are Catholick Bishops to be assented to if peradventure in any case they are mistaken so as to hold any thing contrary to the canonical Scriptures of God If there be any Church which rejects the faith and does not hold the fundamentals of the Apostolical doctrine it ought to be forsaken lest it infect others with its heterodoxy If in such a case we must desert any Church then the Roman if any Church then much more any Bishop particularly him of
servants But the Papists curse those who although out of humility and modesty will not acknowledge the good works of justified persons to be truly meritorious deserving the encrease of grace eternal life and augmentation of glory so forcing us to use saucy words and phrases if not impious in their sense The Scripture teacheth one Church diffused over the whole world whereof each part is bound to maintain charity peace and communion with the rest upon brotherly terms But the Romanists arrogate to themselves the name and privilege of the onely Church condemning all other Churches beside their own and censuring all for Apostatical who do not adhere to them or submit to their yoke Just like the Donatists who said that the world had apostatized excepting those who upon their own terms did communicate with them onely the communion of Donatus remained the true Church The Holy Scripture biddeth us take care of persons pretending to extraordinary Inspirations charging on the Holy Spirit their own conceits and devices Such have been their Synods boldly fathering their Decrees on God's Spirit And their Pope is infallible by virtue of inspiration communicated to him when he pleaseth to set himself right in his Chair Whence we may take them for bodies of Enthusiasts and Fanaticks the difference onely is that other Enthusiasts pretend singly they conjunctly and by conspiracy Others pretend it in their own direction and defence these impose their dreams on the whole Church If they say that God hath promised his Spirit to his Church it is true but he hath no less plainly and frequently promised it to single Christians who should seek it earnestly of him The ancient Fathers could in the Scriptures hardly discern more than two Sacraments or Mysterious Rites of our Religion by positive Law and Institution of our Saviour to be practised But the Popes have devised others and under uncharitable curses propound them to be professed for such affirming them to confer grace by the bare performance of them Every Clergy-man and Monk is bound by Pius IV. to profess there are just seven of them and the Tridentine Synod anathematizeth all those who do say there are more or fewer although the Ancients did never hit on that number But these our Sacraments both contain grace and also confer it upon those who worthily receive them They require men to believe under a curse that each of those were instituted of Christ and confer grace by the bare performance Particularly they curse those who do not hold matrimony for a Sacrament instituted by Christ and conferring grace What can be more ridiculous than to say that marriage was instituted by Christ or that it doth confer grace Yet with another anathema they prefer Virginity before it and why forsooth is not that another Sacrament And then they must be comparing the worth of these Sacraments condemning those heavily who may conceive them equal as being Divine Institutions If any say that these seven Sacraments are so equal one to another that one is in no respect of more worth than another let him be Anathema The first as it seemeth who reckoned the Sacraments to be seven was Peter Lombard whom the Schoolmen did follow and Pope Eugenius IV. followed them and afterward the Trent men formed it into an Article back'd with an Anathema Upon which rash and peremptory Sentence touching all ancient Divines we may note 1. Is it not strange that an Article of Faith should be formed upon an ambiguous word or a term of art used with great variety 2. Is it not strange to define a Point whereof it is most plain that the Fathers were ignorant were in they never did agree or resolve any thing 3. Yea whereof they speak variously 4. Is it not odd and extravagant to damn or curse people for a point of so little consideration or certainty 5. Is it not intolerable arrogance and presumption to define nay indeed to make an Article of Faith without any manner of ground or colour of Authority either from Scripture or the Tradition of the ancient Fathers The Holy Scripture forbiddeth us to call any man Master upon earth or absolutely to subject our Faith to the dictates of any man It teacheth us that the Apostles themselves are not Lords of our faith so as to oblige us to believe their own inventions It forbiddeth us to swallow whole the Doctrines and Precepts of men without examination of them It forbiddeth us to admit various and strange doctrines But the Pope and Roman Church exact from us a submission to their Dictates admitting them for true without any farther enquiry or discussion barely upon his Authority They who are provided of any Benefices whatever having cure of Souls let them promise and swear obedience to the Roman Church They require of us without doubt to believe to profess to assert innumerable Propositions divers of them new and strange no-wise deducible from Scripture or Apostolical Tradition the very terms of them being certainly unknown to the Primitive Church devised by humane subtilty curiosity contentiousness divers of them being in all appearance to the judgment of common sense uncertain obscure and intricate divers of them bold and fierce divers of them frivolous and vain divers of them palpably false Namely all such Propositions as have been taught by their Great Junto's allowed by the Pope especially that of Trent Moreover all other things delivered defined and declared by the Sacred Canons and Oecumenical Councils and especially by the Holy Synod of Trent I undoubtedly receive and profess and also all things contrary thereunto and all heresies whatsoever condemned and rejected and anathematized by the Church I in like manner do condemn reject and anathematize This is the true Catholick Faith out of which there can be no Salvation This Usurpation upon the Consciences of Christians none like whereto was ever known in the world they prosecute with most uncharitable censures cursing and damning all who do not in heart and profession submit to him obliging all their consorts to join therein against all charity and prudence The Scripture enjoineth us to bear with those who are weak in faith and err in doubtfull or disputable matters But the Popes with cruel uncharitableness not onely do censure all that cannot assent to their devices which they obtrude as Articles of Faith but sorely persecute them with all sorts of punishments even with death it self a practice inconsistent with Christian meekness with equity with reason and of which the Fathers have expressed the greatest detestation They have unwoven and altered all Theology from head to foot and of Divine have made it Sophistical The Pope with his pack of mercenary Clients at Trent did indeed establish a Scholastical or Sophistical rather than a Christian Theology framing Points devised by the idle wits of latter times into Definitions and peremptory Conclusions back'd with Curses and Censures concerning
which Conclusions it is evident That the Apostles themselves would not be able to understand many of them That ancient Fathers did never think any thing about them That divers of them consist in application of artificial terms and phrases devised by humane subtilty That divers of them are in their own nature disputable were before disputed by wise men and will ever be disputed by those who freely use their judgment That there was no need of defining many of them That they blindly lay about them condemning and cursing they know not who Fathers Schoolmen Divines c. who have expresly affirmed points so damned by them That many Truths are uncharitably back'd with Curses which disparageth them seeing a man may err pardonably 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in many things we offend all For instance what need was there of defining what need of cursing those who think concupiscence to be truly and properly sin upon Saint Paul's Authority calling it so That Adam presently upon his transgression did lose the sanctity and justice in which he was constituted What need of cursing those who say that men are justified by the sole remission of sins according to Saint Paul's notion and use of the word Justification What need of cursing those who say the grace of God by which we are justified is onely the favour of God whereas it is plain enough that God's grace there in Saint Paul doth signifie nothing else applied to that case Or that Faith is nothing else but a reliance in God's mercy remitting sins for Christ seeing it is plain that Saint Paul doth by Faith chiefly mean the belief of that principal point of the Gospel Or that good works do not cause an encrease of justification seeing Saint Paul doth exclude justification by works and it is a free work of God uncapable of degrees Or that after remission of sin in justification a guilt of paying temporal pain doth abide Or that a man cannot by his works merit encrease of grace and glory and eternal life seeing a man is not to be blamed who doth dislike the use of so sawcy a word the which divers good men have disclaimed What need of cursing those who do not take the Sacraments to be precisely Seven or who conceive that some one of their seven may not be truly and properly a Sacrament seeing the word Sacrament is ambiguous and by the Fathers applied to divers other things and defined generally by St. Austin Signum rei sacrae and that before Peter Lombard ever did mention that number What need of damning those who do conceive the Sacraments equal in dignity What need of defining that Sacraments do confer grace ex opere operato which is an obscure Scholastical phrase What need of cursing those who say that a Character is not impressed in the soul of those who take Baptism Confirmation or Orders seeing what this Character is or this spiritual and indeleble mark they do not themselves well understand or agree What need of cursing those who do not think that the validity of Sacraments and consequently the assurance of our being Christians dependeth on the Intention of the Minister What need of cursing those who think that a Pastour of the Church may change the Ceremonies of administring the Sacraments seeing St. Cyprian often teacheth that every Pastour hath full authority in such cases within his own precinct What need of defining the Second Book of Maccabees to be Canonical against the common opinion of the Fathers most expresly of St. Austin himself of the most learned in all Ages of Pope Gelasius himself in decret which the authour himself calling his work an Epitome and asking pardon for his errours disclaimeth and which common sense therefore disclaimeth Their new Creed of Pius IV. containeth these novelties and heterodoxies 1. Seven Sacraments 2. Trent Doctrine of Justification and Original sin 3. Propitiatory Sacrifice of the Mass. 4. Transubstantiation 5. Communicating under one kind 6. Purgatory 7. Invocation of Saints 8. Veneration of Reliques 9. Worship of Images 10. The Roman Church to be the Mother and Mistress of all Churches 11. Swearing Obedience to the Pope 12. Receiving the Decrees of all Synods and of Trent A DISCOURSE Concerning the UNITY OF THE CHURCH By ISAAC BARROW D. D. late Master of Trinity College in Cambridge Aug. de Bapt. 3. Non habet Charitatem Dei qui Ecclesiae non diligit Vnitatem LONDON Printed for Brabazon Aylmer at the Three Pigeons against the Royal Exchange in Cornhill 1683. A DISCOURSE Concerning the UNITY OF THE CHURCH EPHES. 4.4 One Body and one Spirit THE Vnity of the Church is a Point which may seem somewhat speculative and remote from Practice but in right Judgments it is otherwise many Duties depending upon a true notion and consideration of it so that from ignorance or mistake about it we may incur divers offences or omissions of Duty hence in Holy Scripture it is often proposed as a considerable Point and usefull to Practice And if ever the Consideration of it were needfull it is so now when the Church is so rent with Dissentions for our satisfaction and direction about the Questions and Cases debated in Christendom for on the Explication of it or the true Resolution wherein it doth consist the Controversies about Church-Government Heresie Schism Liberty of Conscience and by consequence many others do depend yea indeed all others are by some Parties made to depend thereon Saint Paul exhorting the Ephesians his disciples to the maintenance of Charity and Peace among themselves doth for inducement to that Practice represent the Unity and Community of those things which jointly did appertain to them as Christians the Unity of that Body whereof they were members of that Spirit which did animate and act them of that Hope to which they were called of that Lord whom they all did worship and serve of that Faith which they did profess of that Baptism whereby they were admitted into the same state of Duties of Rights of Privileges of that one God and universal Father to whom they had all the same relations He beginneth with the Vnity of the Body that is of the Christian Church concerning which Unity what it is and wherein it doth consist I mean now to discourse In order to clearing which Point we must first state what the Church is of which we discourse for the word Church is ambiguous having both in Holy Scripture and common use divers senses somewhat different For 1 Sometimes any Assembly or Company of Christians is called a Church as when mention is made of the Church in such a house whence Tertullian saith Where there are three even Laicks there is a Church 2. Sometimes a particular Society of Christians living in spiritual Communion and under Discipline as when the Church at such a Town the Churches of such a Province the Churches all the Churches are mentioned
be disposed to live innocently quietly and lovingly together so that they should not hurt or destroy in all God's holy mountain for that would be a Duty incumbent on the Disciples of this Institution which all good Christians would observe The Evangelical Covenant as it doth ally us to God so it doth confederate us together The Sacraments of this Covenant are also symbols of Peace and Amity between those who undertake it Of Baptism it is said that so many of you as have been baptized into Christ have put on Christ and thence Ye are all one in Christ Jesus All in one Spirit have been baptized into one Body And in the Eucharist by partaking of one individual Food they are transmuted into one Body and Substance We saith Saint Paul being many are one bread one body for all of us do partake of one bread By which Sacraments also our people appears to be united for as many grains collected and ground and mingled together make one bread so in Christ who is the bread of heaven we may know our selves to be one body that our company or number be conjoined and united together With us there is both one Church and one mind and undivided concord Let us hold the peace of the Catholick Church in the unity of concord The bond of concord remaining and the individual Sacrament of the Catholick Church continuing c. He therefore that keeps neither the unity of the Spirit nor the conjunction of Peace and separates himself from the bond of the Church and the college or society of Priests can have neither the power of a Bishop nor the honour Thus in general But particularly All Christians should assist one another in the common Defence of Truth Piety and Peace when they are assaulted in the Propagation of the Faith and Enlargment of the Church which is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to contend together for the faith of the Gospel to be good souldiers of Christ warring the good warfare striving for the Faith once delivered to the Saints Hence if any where any Heresie or bad doctrine should arise all Christians should be ready to declare against it that it may not infect or spread a doubt arising as in the case of celebrating Easter They all with one consent declared by letters the Decree of the Church to all every where Especially the Pastours of the Churches are obliged with consent to oppose it While we laboured here and withstood the force of envy with the whole strength of our faith your Speech assisted us very much Thus did the Bishops of several Churches meet to suppress the Heresie of P. Samosatenus This was the ground of most Synods So they who afterward in all places and several ways were gathered together against the innovations of Hereticks gave their common opinion in behalf of the faith as being of one mind what they had approved among themselves in a brotherly way that they clearly transferred to those who were absent and they who at the Council of Sardis had earnestly contended against the remainders of Arius sent their judgment to those of the Eastern Churches and they who had discovered the infection of Apolinarius made their opinions known to the Western If any Dissention or Faction doth arise in any Church other Churches upon notice thereof should yield their aid to quench and suppress it countenancing the peaceable checking and disavowing the factious Thus did St. Cyprian help to discountenance and quash the Novatian Schism Thus when the Oriental Churches did labour under the Arian Faction and Dissentions between the Catholicks St. Basil with other Orthodox Bishops consorting with him did write to the Western Bishops of Italy and France to yield their succour For this my brother we must earnestly endeavour and ought to endeavour to have a care as much as in us lies to hold the Vnity delivered to us from the Lord and by the Apostles whose successours we are and what lies in us c. All Christians should be ready when opportunity doth invite to admit one another to conjunction in offices of Piety and Charity in Prayer in communion of the Eucharist in brotherly conversation and pious conference for edification or advice So that he who flies and avoids communion with us you in your prudence may know that such a man breaks himself off from the whole Church Saint Chrysostome doth complain of Epiphanius Then when he came to the great and holy City Constantinople he came not out into the Congregation according to custome and the ancient manner he joined not himself with us nor communicated with us in the Word and Prayer and the Holy Communion c. So Polycarp being at Rome did communicate with P. Anicetus If Dissention arise between divers Churches another may interpose to reconcile them as did the Church of Carthage between that of Rome and Alexandria If any Bishop were exceedingly negligent in the discharge of his Office to the common damage of Truth and Piety his neighbour Bishops might admonish him thereto and if he should not reform might deprive him of Communion All Christians should hold friendly correspondence as occasion doth serve and as it is usefull to signifie consent in Faith to recommend Persons to foster Charity to convey Succour and Advice to perform all good offices of Amity and Peace Siricius who is our companion and fellow-labourer with whom the whole world by mutual commerce of canonical or communicatory Letters agree together with us in one common Society The Catholick Church being one body 't is consequent thereto that we write and signifie one to another c. In cases of doubt or difficulty one Church should have recourse to others for Advice and any Church should yield it Both common charity and reason requires most dear brethren that we conceal nothing from your knowledge of those things which are done among us that so there may be common advice taken by us concerning the most usefull way of ordering Ecclesiastical affairs One Church should acquaint others of any extraordinary transaction concerning the common Faith or Discipline requesting their approbation and countenance Thus did the Eastern Churches give account to all other Churches of their proceedings against P. Samosatenus Which letters are sent all the world over and brought to the notice of all the Churches and of all the Brethren When any Church or any Pastour was oppressed or injured he might have recourse to other Churches for their assistence in order to relief Let him who is cast out have power to apply himself to the neighbouring Bishops that his cause may be carefully heard and discussed Thus did Athanasius being overborn and expelled from his See by the Arian faction goe for refuge to the Church of Rome St. Chrysostome had recourse to the Bishop of Rome and to those of the West as also to the Bishop
of Antioch VI. Now because in the transacting of these things the Pastours have the chief hand and act in behalf of the Churches which they inspect therefore is the Church united also by their consent in Doctrine their agreement in Peace their maintaining entercourse their concurrence to preserve Truth and Charity We ought all to be vigilant and carefull for the body of the whole Church where members are dispersed through many several Provinces Seeing the Church which is one and Catholick is not rent nor divided but truly knit and united together by the bond of Priests united one to another This agrees with the modesty and discipline and the very life of all that many of the Bishops meeting together might order all things in a religious way by common advice That since it having pleased God to grant us peace we begin to have greater meetings of Bishops we may also by your advice order and reform every thing Which that with the rest of our Collegues we may stedfastly and firmly administer and that we may keep the peace of the Church in the unanimity of concord the divine favour will vouchsafe to accomplish A great number of Bishops we met together Bishops being chosen did acquaint other Bishops with it It was sufficient saith St. Cyprian to Cornelius that you should by your Letters acquaint us that you were made a Bishop Declare plainly to us who is substituted at Arles in the room of Marcian that we may know to whom we should direct our brethren and to whom we should write All Churches were to ratifie the Elections of Bishops duly made by others and to communicate with those And likewise to comply with all reasonable Acts for Communion To preserve this Peace and Correspondence it was a Law and Custome that no Church should admit to Communion those which were excommunicated by another or who did schismatically divide We are believed to have done the same thing whereby we are found to be all of us associated and joined together by the same agreement in censure and discipline The Decrees of Bishops were sent to be subscribed VII All Christian Churches are one by a specifical Unity of Discipline resembling one another in Ecclesiastical administrations which are regulated by the indispensible Sanctions and Institutions of their Sovereign They are all bound to use the same Sacraments according to the forms appointed by our Lord not admitting any substantial alteration They must uphold that sort of Order Government and Ministery in all its substantial parts which God did appoint in the Church or give thereto as Saint Paul expresseth it it being a temerarious and dangerous thing to innovate in those matters which our Lord had a special care to order and settle Nor can they continue in the Church that have not retained Divine and Ecclesiastical Discipline neither in good conversation nor peaceable life In lesser matters of Ceremony or Discipline instituted by humane prudence Churches may differ and it is expedient they should do so in regard to the various circumstances of things and qualities of persons to which Discipline should be accommodated but no Power ought to abrogate destroy or infringe or violate the main form of Discipline constituted by Divine appointment Hence when some Confessours had abetted Novatianus against Cornelius thereby against a fundamental Rule of the Church necessary for preserving of Peace and Order therein that but one Bishop should be in one Church St. Cyprian doth thus complain of their proceeding To act any thing against the Sacrament of Divine ordination and Catholick unity once delivered makes an adulterate and contrary head out of the Church Forsaking the Lord's Priests contrary to the Evangelical discipline a new Tradition of a sacrilegious Institution starts up There is one God and one Christ and one Church and one See founded upon Peter by the word of the Lord besides one Altar and one Priesthood another Altar cannot be erected nor a new Priesthood ordained Hence were the Meletians rejected by the Church for introducing Ordinations Hence was Aerius accounted a Heretick for meaning to innovate in so grand a point of Discipline as the Subordination of Bishops and Presbyters VIII It is expedient that all Churches should conform to each other in great matters of prudential Discipline although not instituted or prescribed by God for this is a means of preserving Peace and is a Beauty or Harmony For difference of Practice doth alienate Affections especially in common People So the Synod of Nice That all things may be alike ordered in every Diocese it hath seemed good to the holy Synod that men should put up their Prayers to God standing viz. between Easter and Whitsontide and upon the Lord's-day The Church is like the World for as the World doth consist of men all naturally subject to one King Almighty God all obliged to observe his Laws declared by natural Light all made of one bloud and so Brethren all endowed with common Reason all bound to exercise good Offices of Justice and Humanity toward each other to maintain Peace and Amity together to further each other in the prosecution or attainment of those good things which conduce to the Welfare and Security of this present Life even so doth the Church consist of persons spiritually allied professing the same Faith subject to the same Law and Government of Christ's heavenly Kingdom bound to exercise Charity and to maintain Peace toward each other and to promote each others good in order to the future Happiness in Heaven All those kinds of Unity do plainly agree to the universal Church of Christ but the Question is Whether the Church is also necessarily by the design and appointment of God to be in way of external policy under one singular Government or Jurisdiction of any kind so as a Kingdom or Commonwealth are united under the Command of one Monarch or one Senate That the Church is capable of such an Union is not the Controversie that it is possible it should be so united supposing it may happen that all Christians may be reduced to one Nation or one civil Regiment or that several Nations spontaneously may confederate and combine themselves into one Ecclesiastical Commonwealth administred by the same Spiritual Rulers and Judges according to the same Laws I do not question that when in a manner all Christendom did consist of Subjects to the Roman Empire the Church then did arrive near such an Unity I do not at present contest but that such an Union of all Christians is necessary or that it was ever instituted by Christ I cannot grant and for my refusal of that opinion I shall assign divers Reasons 1. This being a Point of great consideration and trenching upon Practice which every one were concerned to know and there being frequent occasions to declare it yet the Holy Scripture doth no where express or intimate
Aeneas Sylvius his Account hereof Ibid. Catholick How much the abuse of that Word hath conduced to the Pope's Pretences 264. Censures Ecclesiastical Censures the great advantages made from them by the Pope 182. Ceremonies Why multitude of them in the Church of Rome 139. Charity Want thereof in the Church of Rome 286. Charity among Christians 299 301. breach thereof denominates a man to be no Christian 300. Charity to the Poor of other Churches in primitive Times no Argument of Unity of Church Government 320. Church Unity thereof 293. The various acceptations of the Word Church 294. The Titles and Privileges thereof 295. Church Government and Discipline in ancient times 162 c. Church Government No necessity of one kind onely of external Admistration thereof 306 307. The contrary shewed to be most proper and convenient in seq Church of Rome An Account of them who by voluntary Consent or Command of Princes do adhere in Confederation to the Church of Rome 325. Civil Magistrates Authority 271. Clergy Romish Clergy's Exemption from secular Jurisdiction whence 138. Communion Church Communion 296. Community of Men on several accounts may be termed One 297. Confession Auricular Confession 139. Confirmation of Magistrates belongs not to the Pope 269. Conscience The Usurpations made thereupon by the Popish Doctrines 288. Constantine M. His Judgment of Eusebius 86. No General Synod before his Reign 185. Controversies in the Church how in ancient times determined 115 149 264 303 304. Council of Trent Their Character 2. Enjoyned the Pope's Supremacy should not be disputed 18. Councils Their Authority above the Pope's 25. Councils Their Infallibility why pretended 139. Councils General Councils which so esteemed 188 first called by the Emperours ibid. when first celebrated 209 Use of them proves not there was Unity of Government in the Primitive Church 320 the proper occasion of General Councils assigned ibid Cup in the Sacrament why with-holden from the Laity 139. S. Cyprian's Account of S. Peter's primacy of Order 33 his Epistle concerning the deposing Marcianus examined 235 c. S. Cyril's supplying the Place of P. Celestine in the General Council 203 204. Cyril of Hierusalem the first according to Socrates who did introduce Appeals 249. D. POpe Damasus An Epistle of his in Theodoret whence Bellarmine's pretence for the Pope's Supremacy adjudged spurious 156 157. Decrees of Popes when contested against the ancient Canons 214. Whence their new Decrees introduced ibid. Decretal Epistles Their forgery and great advantage to the Church of Rome 184. Discipline and Order of the Primitive Church 211. Discipline The enacting and dispensing with Ecclesiastical Laws about the same belong'd of old to Emperours 214. Discipline of the Church 305. main Form thereof not to be violated ibid. Dispensations 184. the Pope no power to grant them 270 281. Dissentions The Mischiefs arising from them 175 18● The Profits accrewing from hence to the Romanists ibid. Dissentions How reconciled among Christians 323. E. ECclesiastical Jurisdiction not impugn'd by disclaiming S. Peter's Superiority 40. Emperours not Popes did first con●●●gate General Synods 185. Testimonies of Popes owning the same 193. Emperours themselves or Honourable Persons authorized by them did heretofore preside in General Synods 203. Empires Their Original and Increase 174. Episcopacy The Ends assigned of that Order 87. Eusebius Constantine M. his Character of him 86. Excommunicated Persons not admitted into Communion by other Churches 305 324 325. Exemptions The Pope no Power to grant them 270. F. FAith Unity of the Church preserved by it 299. Fathers What regard to be given to their account of S. Peter's Primacy of Order or bare Dignity 32. Fathers A Censure of their Writings 71. Bellarmine's account of the same ibid. The latter Fathers most guilty in Expressions 72. Fathers A Character of their Writings 119. Feed my sheep The Romish Interpretation rejected and the true established ibid. G. GLosses of the Romanists on Scripture 70 their Corruptions and Partiality herein 73. Gregory M. his Character and Authority against the Pope 123. H. HEresie of Simony Popes guilty of it 266. Hereticks How confuted in ancient times 115 c. Humility strictly enjoyned to Christ's Apostles and Followers 39. I. JEsuites Their Character 182. Jesus according to common notion of the Jews did imply his being the Son of God 30. Ignorance of Popes in Divinity 267. Ignorance How serviceable to the Church of Rome 182. Image Worship 139 280. Indulgences 184. Infallibility Pretence to it the greatest Tyranny 137. Whence pretended 139. The mother of Incorrigibility and Corruption of Manners 140. v. 265. Inspiration The Popes and Synods bold pretensions to it 286. Jurisdiction Universal Jurisdiction over the Clergy the Pope's Presumption herein and when begun 215. Jurisdiction Temporal and Ecclesiastical nature thereof 271. K. KEys Power thereof as also all other Authority communicated to all the Apostles equally 42 64. Kings have the Power onely of calling General Councils 191. The unreasonableness of the contrary 192. v. Emperours L. LEgends of the Church of Rome the Profits arising from them 184. Laws Ecclesiastical Laws In whose Power to enact them 212. The Pope subject to them ibid. M. MArriage The Romanists abuse thereof 284. Why forbidden to their Priests 139. Mass. Doctrine thereof ibid. Merit Doctrine thereof in the Chur. of Rome 138 286. Miracles Why pretended to by the Romanists 139. Monarchy Universal Monarchy not politick nor convenient 130 neither in Church nor State 152. Monarchy less subject to abuse than other ways of Government 315. Monastries why exempted by the Pope from secular Jurisdiction 138. Monkery 140. N. POpe Nicholas the first who excommunicated Princes secundum Bodin 146. O. OAth of Bishops of Rome at their Election 22. Obedience Blind Obedience 177. Order and Discipline of the Primitive Church 211. v. Discipline Ordination Priority therein did anciently ground a Right to Precedence 34. Orthodox Who such in the Primitive Church 299. P. PAstours of the Church Their duty to maintain Peace and Charity 304. Patriarchs not an higher Order than Primates 169 their Institution and Authority 170 171. Peace to be inviolable among Christians 301 the Sacraments conducive to the same 302 as also Convocation of Synods ibid. S. Peter in personal accomplishments most eminent among the Apostles 32 It is probable he was first called to the Apostolical office 33 his Zeal and Activity 30 34 his Superiority in Power rejected 35 was no Priest at the Celebration of our Lord's Supper contra Concil Trid. 36 not Bishop of Rome 82 whether ever at Rome 83 whence his Primacy asserted 27. Popes Supremacy The Controversies about it 1 The great Disturbances it hath caused 2 pretended authority to depose Princes 3 their behaviour according to their circumstances 17 pretended Supremacy in Spirituals 20 their imperious arbitrary Government 40 the insolent Titles given them 41 no Judge of Controversies 115 c. their Character before and after Constantine 142 Usurpation on Princes 145 Causes of the growth of pretended Supremacy 172
sayings to that purpose by suggestion of Hildebrand by whom he was much governed Pope Stephanus VI. told the Emperour Basilius that he ought to be subject with all veneration to the Roman Church Pope John VIII or IX did pretend Obedience due to him from Princes and in default thereof threatned to excommunicate them Pope Nicolas I. cast many imperious sayings and threats at King Lotharius these among others We do therefore by Apostolical authority under obtestation of the Divine judgment injoin to thee that in Triers and Colen thou shouldst not suffer any Bishop to be chosen before a report be made to our Apostleship Was not this satis pro imperio And again That being compelled thou mayst be able to repent know that very soon thou shalt be struck with the Ecclesiastical Sword so that thou mayst be afraid any more to commit such things in God's holy Church And this he suggesteth for right Doctrine that Subjection is not due to bad Princes perverting the Apostle's words to that purpose Be subject to the King as excelling that is saith he in vertues not in vices whereas the Apostle meaneth eminency in power Pope Gregory VII doth also alledge Pope Zachary who saith he did depose the King of the Franks and did absolve all the French from the Oath of fidelity which they had taken unto him not so much for his iniquities as because he was unfit for such a Power This indeed was a notable act of jurisdiction if Pope Gregory's word may be taken for matter of fact but divers maintain that Pope Zachary did onely concur with the rebellious deposers of King Chilperick in way of advice or approbation not by authority It was pretty briskly said of Pope Adrian I. We do by general decree constitute that whatever King or Bishop or Potentate shall hereafter believe or permit that the Censure of the Roman Pontifes may be violated in any case he shall be an execrable Anathema and shall be guilty before God as a betrayer of the Catholick Faith Constitutions against the Canons and Decrees of the Bishops of Rome or against good manners are of no moment Before that Pope Gregory II. because the Eastern Emperour did cross the worship of Images did withdraw Subjection from him and did thrust his Authority out of Italy He saith Baronius did effectually cause both the Romans and Italians to recede from Obedience to the Emperour This was an act in truth of Rebellion against the Emperour in pretence of Jurisdiction over him for how otherwise could he justify or colour the fact So as Baronius reflecteth he did leave to posterity a worthy example forsooth that Heretical Princes should not be suffered to reign in the Church of Christ if being warned they were found pertinacious in errour And no wonder he then was so bold seeing the Pope had obtained so much respect in those parts of the World that as he told the Emperour Leo Is. all the Kingdoms of the West did hold Saint Peter as an earthly God of which he might be able to seduce some to uphold him in his rebellious practices This is the highest source as I take it to which this extravagant Doctrine can be driven For that single passage of Pope Felix III. though much ancienter will not amount to it It is certain that in causes relating to God 't is the safest course for you that according to his institution ye endeavour to submit the will of the King to the Priests c. For while the Emperour did retain any considerable Authority in Italy the Popes were better advised than to vent such notions and while they themselves did retain any measure of pious or prudent Modesty they were not disposed to it And we may observe divers Popes near that time in word and practice thwarting that practice For instance Pope Gelasius a vehement stickler for Papal Authority doth say to the Emperour Anastasius I as being a Roman born do love worship reverence thee as the Roman Prince And he saith that the Prelates of Religion knowing the Empire conferr'd on him by Divine Providence did obey his Laws And otherwhere he discourseth that Christ had distinguished by their proper acts and dignities the offices of Ecclesiastical and Civil Power that one should not meddle with the other so disclaiming Temporal Power due to himself being content to scrue up his Spiritual Authority After him as is well known Pope Gregory I. as became a pious and good man did avow the Emperour for his Lord by God's gift superiour to all men to whom he was subject whom he in duty was bound to obey and supposed it a high presumption for any one to set himself above the honour of the Empire by assuming the title of Universal Bishop After him Pope Agatho in the Acts of the sixth General Council doth call the Emperour Constantine Pogonatus his Lord doth avow himself together with all Presidents of the Churches servants to the Emperour doth say that his See and his Synod were subject to him and did owe Obedience to him Presently after him Pope Leo II. who confirmed that General Synod doth call the Emperour the prototype Son of the Church and acknowledgeth the body of Priests to be servants meanest servants of his Royal Nobleness After him Pope Constantine the immediate Predecessour of Pope Greg. II. when the Emperour did command him to come to Constantinople The most holy man saith Anastasius in his Life did obey the Imperial Commands Yea Pope Gregory II. himself before his defection when perhaps the circumstances of time did not animate him thereto did in his Epistle to Leo Isaurus acknowledge him as Emperour to be the Head of Christians and himself consequently subject to him This Gregory therefore may be reputed the Father of that Doctrine which being fostered by his Successours was by Pope Gregory VII brought up to it s robust pitch and stature I know Pope Gregory VII to countenance him doth alledge Pope Innocent I. excommunicating the Emperour Arcadius for his proceeding against St. Chrysostome and the Writers of St. Chrysostome's Life with others of the like age and credit do back him therein But seeing the Historians who lived in St. Chrysostome's own time and who write very carefully about him do not mention any such thing seeing that being the first Act in the kind must have been very notable and have made a great noise seeing that story doth not sute with the tenour of proceedings reported by those most credible Historians in that case seeing that fact doth no-wise sort to the condition and way of those Times that report cannot be true and it must be numbred among the many fabulous narrations devised by some wanton Greeks to set out the Life of that excellent Personage The same Pope doth also alledge St. Gregory M. denouncing Excommunication and Deprivation of honour to all Kings Bishops Judges
of Ecclesiastical Affairs concerning the publick state of the Church the defence of the common Faith the maintenance of order peace and unity jointly to belong unto the whole body of Pastours according to that of St. Cyprian to Pope Stephanus himself Therefore most dear brother the body of Priests is copious being joined together by the glue of mutual concord and the bond of unity that if any of our College shall attempt to make heresie and to tear or waste the flock of Christ the rest may come to succour and like usefull and mercifull shepherds may recollect the sheep into the flock And again Which thing it concerns us to look after and redress most dear brother who bearing in mind the divine clemency and holding the scales of the Church-government c. So even the Roman Clergy did acknowledge For we ought all of us to watch for the body of the whole Church whose members are digested through several Provinces Like the Trinity whose power is one and undivided there is one Priesthood among divers Bishops So in the Apostolical Constitutions the Apostles tell the Bishops that an universal Episcopacy is entrusted to them So the Council of Carthage with St. Cyprian Clear and manifest is the mind and meaning of our Lord Jesus Christ sending his Apostles and affording to them alone the power given him of the Father in whose room we succeeded governing the Church of God with the same power Christ our Lord and our God going to the Father commended his Spouse to us A very ancient Instance of which administration is the proceeding against Paulus Samosatenus when the Pastours of the Churches some from one place some from another did assemble together against him as a pest of Christ's flock all of them hastning to Antioch where they deposed exterminated and deprived him of communion warning the whole Church to reject and disavow him Seeing the Pastoral charge is common to us all who bear the Episcopal Office although thou fittest in a higher and more eminent place Therefore for this cause the Holy Church is committed to you and to us that we may labour for all and not be slack in yielding help and assistence to all Hence Saint Chrysostome said of Eustathius his Bishop For he was well instructed and taught by the grace of the Holy Spirit that a President or Bishop of a Church ought not to take care of that Church alone wherewith he is entrusted by the Holy Ghost but also of the whole Church dispersed throughout the world They consequently did repute Schism or Ecclesiastical Rebellion to consist in a departure from the consent of the body of the Priesthood as St. Cyprian in divers places doth express it in his Epistles to Pope Stephen and others They deem all Bishops to partake of the Apostolical Authority according to that of St. Basil to St. Ambrose The Lord himself hath translated thee from the Judges of the Earth unto the Prelacy of the Apostles They took themselves all to be Vicars of Christ and Judges in his stead according to that of St. Cyprian For Heresies are sprung up and Schisms grown from no other ground nor root but this because God's Priest was not obeyed nor was there one Priest or Bishop for a time in the Church nor a Judge thought on for a time to supply the room of Christ. Where that by Church is meant any particular Church and by Priest a Bishop of such Church any one not bewitched with prejudice by the tenour of Saint Cyprian's discourse will easily discern They conceive that our Saviour did promise to Saint Peter the Keys in behalf of the Church and as representing it They suppose the combination of Bishops in peaceable consent and mutual aid to be the Rock on which the Church is built They alledge the Authority granted to Saint Peter as a ground of claim to the same in all Bishops jointly and in each Bishop singly according to his rata pars or allotted proportion Which may easily be understood by the words of our Lord when he says to blessed Peter whose place the Bishops supply Whatsoever c. I have the sword of Constantine in my hands you of Peter said our great King Edgar They do therefore in this regard take themselves all to be Successours of Saint Peter that his power is derived to them all and that the whole Episcopal Order is the Chair by the Lord's voice founded on Saint Peter thus St. Cyprian in divers places before touched discourseth and thus Firmilian from the Keys granted to Saint Peter inferreth disputing against the Roman Bishop Therefore saith he the power of remitting sins is given to the Apostles and to the Churches which they being sent from Christ did constitute and to the Bishops which do succeed them by vicarious ordination 4. The Bishops of any other Churches founded by the Apostles in the Fathers style are Successours of the Apostles in the same sense and to the same intent as the Bishop of Rome is by them accounted Successour of Saint Peter the Apostolical power which in extent was universal being in some sense in reference to them not quite extinct but transmitted by succession yet the Bishops of Apostolical Churches did never claim nor allowedly exercise Apostolical Jurisdiction beyond their own precincts according to those words of St. Hierome Tell me what doth Palestine belong to the Bishop of Alexandria This sheweth the inconsequence of their discourse for in like manner the Pope might be Successour to Saint Peter and Saint Peter's universal power might be successive yet the Pope have no singular claim thereto beyond the bounds of his particular Church 5. So again for instance Saint James whom the Roman Church in her Liturgies doth avow for an Apostle was Bishop of Jerusalem more unquestionably than Saint Peter was Bishop of Rome Jerusalem also was the root and the mother of all Churches as the Fathers of the Second General Synod in their Letter to Pope Damasus himself and the Occidental Bishops did call it forgetting the singular pretence of Rome to that Title Yet the Bishops of Jerusalem Successours of Saint James did not thence claim I know not what kind of extensive Jurisdiction yea notwithstanding their succession they did not so much as obtain a metropolitical Authority in Palestine which did belong to Caesarea having been assigned thereto in conformity to the Civil Government and was by special provision reserved thereto in the Synod of Nice whence St. Jerome did not stick to affirm that the Bishop of Jerusalem was subject to the Bishop of Caesarea for speaking to John Bishop of Jerusalem who for compurgation of himself from errours imputed to him had appealed to Theophilus Bishop of Alexandria he saith Thou hadst rather cause molestation to ears possessed than render honour to thy Metropolitan that is to the Bishop of Caesarea By which
had such a right it is not probable that Saint Peter by his fact would have deprived it thereof or willingly done any thing in prejudice to it there being apparently so much equity that the Church should have a stroke in designation of its Pastour In ancient times there was not any small Church which had not a suffrage in the choice of its Pastour and was it fitting that all the Church should have one imposed on it without its consent If we consider the manner in ancient time of electing and constituting the Roman Bishop we may thence discern not onely the improbability but iniquity of this pretence how was he then chosen was it by a General Synod of Bishops or by Delegates from all parts of Christendom whereby the common interest in him might appear and whereby the World might be satisfied that one was elected fit for that high Office No he was chosen as usually then other particular Bishops were by the Clergy and People of Rome none of the World being conscious of the proceeding or bearing any share therein Now was it equal that such a power of imposing a Sovereign on all the grave Bishops and on all the good people of the Christian world should be granted to one City Was it fitting that such a charge importing advancement above all Pastours and being entrusted with the welfare of all Souls in Christendom should be the result of an election liable to so many defects and corruptions which assuredly often if not almost constantly would be procured by ambition bribery or partiality would be managed by popular faction and tumults It was observed generally of such Elections by Nazianzene that Prelacies were not rather by vertue than by naughtiness and that Episcopal Thrones did not rather belong to the more worthy than to the more powerfull And declaring his mind or wish that Elections of Bishops should rest onely or chiefly in the best men not in the wealthiest and mightiest or in the impetuousness and unreasonableness of the people and among them in those who are most easily bought and bribed whereby he intimateth the common practice and subjoineth but now I can hardly avoid thinking that the popular or civil governances are better ordered than ours which are reputed to have divine grace attending them And that the Roman Elections in that time were come into that course we may see by the relation and reflexions of an honest Pagan Historian concerning the Election of Pope Damasus contemporary of Gregory Nazianz. Damasus saith he and Vrsinus above humane measure burning with desire to snatch the Episcopal See did with divided parties most fiercely conflict in which conflict upon one day in the very Church 130 persons were slain so did that great Pope get into the Chair thus as the Historian reflecteth the wealth and pomp of the place naturally did provoke ambition by all means to seek it and did cause fierce contentions to arise in the choice whence commonly wise and modest persons being excluded from any capacity thereof any ambitious and cunning man who had the art or the luck to please the multitude would by violence obtain it which was a goodly way of constituting a Sovereign to the Church Thus it went within three ages after our Lord and afterwards in the declensions of Christian simplicity and integrity matters were not like to be mended but did indeed rather grow worse as beside the reports and complaints of Historians how that commonly by ambitious prensations by Simoniacal corruptions by political bandyings by popular factions by all kinds of sinister ways men crept into the place doth appear by those many dismal Schisms which gave the Church many pretended Heads but not one certain one as also by the result of them being the choice of persons very unworthy and horribly flagitious If it be said that the Election of a Pope in old times was wont to be approved by the consent of all Bishops in the world according to the testimony of St. Cyprian who saith of Cornelius that he was known by the testimony of his fellow-Bishops whose whole number through all the world did with peacefull unanimity consent I answer that this consent was not in the Election or antecedently to it that it was onely by Letters or messages declaring the Election according to that of St. Cyprian that it was not any-wise peculiar to the Roman Bishop but such as was yielded to all Catholick Bishops each of whom was to be approved as St. Cyprian saith by the testimony and judgment of his Collegues that it was in order onely to the maintaining fraternal communion and correspondence signifying that such a Bishop was duly elected by his Clergy and People was rightly ordained by his neighbour Bishops did profess the Catholick Faith and was therefore qualified for communion with his Brethren such a consent to the Election of any Bishop of old was given especially upon occasion and when any question concerning the right of a Bishop did intervene whereof now in the Election of a Pope no footstep doth remain We may also note that the Election of Cornelius being contested he did more solemnly acquaint all the Bishops of the world with his case and so did obtain their approbation in a way more than ordinary 13. If God had designed this derivation of Universal Sovereignty it is probable that he would have prescribed some certain standing immutable way of Election and imparted the right to certain Persons and not left it at such uncertainty to the chances of time so that the manner of Election hath often changed and the power of it tossed into divers hands And though in several times there have been observed several ways as to the Election of the Roman Pontifs according as the necessity and expediency of the Church required Of old it was as other Elections managed by nomination of the Clergy and suffrage of the People Afterward the Emperours did assume to themselves the nomination or approbation of them For then nothing was done by the Clergy in the choice of the Pope unless the Emperour had approv'd his Election But he seeing the Prince's consent was required sent Messengers with Letters to intreat Mauritius that he would not suffer the Election made by the Clergy and People of Rome in that case to be valid Leo VIII being tired out with the inconstancy of the Romans transferred the whole power and authority of chusing the Pope from the Clergy and People of Rome to the Emperour At some times the Clergy had no hand in the Election but Popes were intruded by powerfull Men or Women at their pleasure Afterwards the Cardinals that is some of the chief Roman Clergy did appropriate the Election to themselves by the Decree of Pope Nicholas II. in his Lateran Synod Sometimes out of course general Synods did assume the Choice to themselves as at Constance Pisa and Basil.
14. From the Premisses to conclude the Pope's Title to Saint Peter's Authority it is requisite to shew the Power demised by him to be according to God's institution and intent immutable and indefectible for Power built upon the like but far more certain principles hath in course of times and by worldly changes been quite lost or conveyed into other Chanels than those wherein it was first put and that irrecoverably so that it cannot any-wise be retrieved or reduced into the first order For instance Adam was by God constituted Universal Sovereign of mankind and into that Power his eldest Son of right did succeed and so it of right should have been continually propagated Yet soon did that Power fail or was diverted into other courses the world being cantonized into several Dominions so that the Heir at Law among all the descendents of Adam cannot so easily be found as a Needle in a bottle of Hay he probably is a Subject and perhaps is a Peasant So might Saint Peter be Monarch of the Church and the Pope might succeed him yet by revolutions of things by several defaults and incapacities in himself by divers obstructions incident by forfeiture upon encroaching on other mens rights according to that Maxime of a great Pope He loseth his own who coveteth more than his due his Power might be clipped might be transplanted might utterly decay and fail to such fatalities other Powers are subject nor can that of the Pope be exempt from them as otherwhere we shall more largely declare 15. Indeed that God did intend his Church should perpetually subsist united in any one political frame of Government is a principle which they do assume and build upon but can no-wise prove Nor indeed is it true For If the Unity of the Church designed and instituted by God were onely an Unity of Faith of Charity of Peace of fraternal Communion and Correspondence between particular Societies and Pastours then in vain it is to seek for the Subject and Seat of Universal Jurisdiction now that God did not intend any other Unity than such as those specified we have good reason to judge and shall we hope otherwhere sufficiently prove 16. We may consider that really the Sovereign Power such as it is pretended hath often failed there having been for long spaces of time no Roman Bishops at all upon several accounts which is a sign that the Church may subsist without it As 1. When Rome was desolated by the Goths Vandals and Lombards 2. In times when the Romans would not suffer Popes to live with them 3. In case of discontinuance from Rome when the Popes so calling themselves did for above seventy years abide in France when they indeed not being chosen by the Roman People nor exercising Pastoral care over them were onely titular not real Bishops of Rome They were Popes of Avignion not of Rome and Successours of God knows who not of Saint Peter no more than one continually living in England can be Bishop of Jerusalem 4. In times of many long Schisms 22 Schisms when either there was no true Pope or which in effect was the same no one certain one 5. When Popes were intruded by violence whom Baronius himself positively affirmeth to have been no Popes how then could a Succession of true Popes be continued from them by the Clergy which they in virtue of their Papal Authority did pretend to create 6. When Elections had a flaw in them were uncanonical and so null 7. When Popes were Simoniacally chosen who by their own Rules and Laws are no true Popes being Hereticks Heresiarchs The which was done for long courses of time very commonly and in a manner constantly 8. When Popes have been deposed as some by the Emperours others by General Councils in which case according to Papal Principles the Successours were illegal for the Pope being Sovereign he could not be judged or deposed and his Successour is an Usurper 9. When Popes were Heretical that is say they no Popes 10. When Atheists Sorcerers Elections in some of these cases being null and therefore the Acts consequent to them invalid there is probably a defailance of right continued to posterity And probably therefore there is now no true Pope For upon violent intrusion or Simoniacal choice or any usurpation the Cardinals Bishops c. which the Pope createth are not truly such and consequently their Votes not good in the choice of another Pope and so successively These Considerations may suffice to declare the inconsequence of their Discourses even admitting their Assertions which yet are so false or so apparently uncertain I shall in the next place level some Arguments directly against their main Conclusion it self I. My First Argument against this pretence shall be that it is destitute of any good warrant either from Divine or Humane testimony and so is groundless As will appear by the following Considerations I. If God had designed the Bishop of Rome to be for the perpetual course of times Sovereign Monarch of his Church it may reasonably be supposed that he would expresly have declared his mind in the case it being a point of greatest importance of all that concern the administration of his Kingdom in the World Princes do not use to send their Vice Roys unfurnished with Patents clearly signifying their Commission that no man out of ignorance or doubt concerning that point excusably may refuse compliance And in all equity promulgation is requisite to the establishment of any Law or exacting obedience But in all the Pandects of Divine Revelation the Bishop of Rome is not so much as once mentioned either by name or by character or by probable intimation they cannot hook him in otherwise than by streining hard and framing a long Chain of Consequences each of which is too subtile for to constrain any man's persuasion They have indeed found the Pope in the first Chapter of Genesis for if we believe Pope Innocent III. he is one of the two great Luminaries there and he is as plainly there as any where else in the Bible Wherefore if upon this account we should reject this pretence we might doe it justly and for so doing we have the allowance of the ancient Fathers for they did not hold any man obliged to admit any point of Doctrine or rule of Manners which is not in express words or in terms equivalent contained in Holy Scripture or which at least might not thence be deduced by clear and certain inference this their manner of disputing with Hereticks and heterodox People doth shew this appeareth by their way of defining and setling Doctrines of Faith this they often do avow in plain words applicable to our case for If saith St. Austin about Christ or about his Church or about any other thing which concerneth our Faith and Life I will not say We who are no-wise comparable to him who said Although we but even as he going on did
express it by I confirm I define I decree But the effectual confirmation of Synods which gave them the force of Laws was in other hands and depended on the Imperial Sanction So Justinian affirmeth generally All these things at diverse times following our above-named predecessours of pious memory corroborated and confirm'd by their Laws what each Council had determin'd and expell'd those Hereticks who attempted to resist the definitions of the aforesaid four Councils and disturb the Churches So particularly Constantine as Athanasius himself reporteth did by Law confirm the decrees of the great Synod of Nice and Eusebius assureth the same He saith he did ratifie the decrees of the Synod by his authority His Letters are extant which he sent about the world exhorting and requiring all to conform to the constitutions of that Synod So Theodosius did confirm the Decrees of the Second General Synod adding saith Sozomen his confirmatory suffrage to their decree the which he did at the supplication of the Fathers addressed to him in these terms We therefore do beseech your Grace that by your pious Edict the sentence of the Synod may be authorized that as by the letters of convocation you did honour the assembly so you would also confirm the result of things decreed The third General Synod was also confirmed by Theodosius II. as Justinian telleth us The above-named Theodosius of pious memory maintaining what had been so justly determined against Nestorius and his impiety made his condemnation valid And this Emperour asserted this privilege to himself as of right and custom belonging to him writing to the Synod in these words for all things so as may please God without contentiousness and with truth being examined ought so to be established by our religiousness The other abortive Synod at Ephesus was also confirmed by Theodosius Junior as Dioscorus in his defence alledged in these words which shew the manner of practice in this case We then indeed did judge the things which were judged the whole Synod did accord with us and gave verdict by their own votes and subscribed and they were referred to the most religious Emperour Theodosius of happy memory and he did by a general Law confirm all things judged by the Holy and Oecumenical Synod So also did the Emperour Marcian confirm the Synod of Chalcedon as himself telleth us in his Royal Edict We saith He having by the sacred Edict of our serenity confirmed the Holy Synod did warn all to cease from disputes about religion with which Pope Leo signifieth his compliance in these terms But because by all means your piety and most religious will must be obeyed I have willingly approv'd the Synodical Constitutions about confirming the Catholick faith and condemning hereticks which pleased me Justinian did with a witness confirm the Fifth Synod punishing with banishment all who would not submit to its determinations In the Sixth Synod the Fathers did request the Emperour according to custom to confirm its definitions in these very words To what we have determined set your Seal your royal ratification by writing and confirmation of them all by your sacred edicts and holy constitutions according to custom We beg that by your sacred signing of it you would give force to what we have defined and subscribed We intreat the power of our Lord guided by God's wisedom to confirm for the great strength and security of the orthodox faith the copies of our determination read in the hearing of your most serene Majesty and subscribed by us that they may be delivered to the five Patriarchal Sees with your pious confirmation Accordingly he did confirm that Synod by his Edict All these things being thus ordered by this Sixth Holy and Oecumenical Synod We decree that none whosoever trouble himself farther about this faith or advance any new inventions about it So he told Pope Leo II. in his Epistle to him This divine and venerable determination the Holy Synod has made to which we also have subscribed and confirmed it by our Religious Edicts exhorting all our people who have any Love for Christ to follow the faith there written Pope Leo tells his name-sake Leo the Emperour That he must always remember that the Imperial power was given him not onely to rule the world but more especially to protect the Church So by long prescription commencing with the first General Synod did the Emperour enjoy this Prerogative and with good reason He having an unquestionable warrant and obligation to promote the welfare of the Church designed by those Conventions He being the Guardian of Concord among his Subjects and protectour of their Liberties which might be nearly concerned in Conciliar proceedings the power of enacting Laws being an incommunicable branch of Sovereign Majesty He alone having power committed to him able to enforce the observance of Decrees without which they would in effect signifie little Because also commonly the Decrees of Synods did in a manner retrench some part of the Royal Prerogative translating or imparting to others Causes before appropriate to his Jurisdiction as in the case of appeals and of prohibiting addresses to Court ordered in the Sardican and other Synods of exempting Clergymen from secular Jurisdiction from taxes and common burthens c. which ought not to be done without his licence and authority So that the Oriental Bishops had good reason to tell the Emperour that it was impossible without his authority to order the matters under consideration with good law and order It is no-wise reasonable that any other should have this power it being inconsistent with publick peace that in one State there should be two Legislative powers which might clash the one with the other the one enacting Sanctions prejudicial to the interest and will of the other wherefore the Pope being then a Citizen of Rome and a Subject to the Emperour could not have a Legislative power or a negative Vote in Synods but that wholly did belong to the Imperial authority But it is opposed that some Synods have been declared invalid for want of the Pope's confirmation for to the Decrees of the Synod at Ariminum it was excepted that they were null because the Bishop of Rome did not consent to them There could not say the Roman Synod in Theodoret be any prejudice from the number of those assembled in Ariminum it being plain that neither the Roman Bishop whose suffrage ought first to have been received nor Vicentius who for so many years did hold his Episcopacy blameless nor others agreeing to such things To which exception I answer that 1. That which is alledged against the Synod of Ariminum is not the defect of the Pope's confirmation subsequent but of his consent and concurrence before it or in it which is very reasonable because he had a right to be present and to concur in all such Assemblies especially being so eminent a Bishop 2. The same exception every
Bishop might alledge all having a like right and common interest to Vote in those Assemblies 3. Accordingly the dissent of other Bishops particularly of those eminent in dignity or merit is also alledged in exception which had been needless if his alone dissent had been of so very peculiar force 4. The Emperour and many other Bishops did not know of any peculiar necessity of his confirmation Again it may be objected that Popes have voided the Decrees of General Synods as did Pope Leo the Decrees of the Synod of Chalcedon concerning the Privileges of the Constantinopolitan See in these blunt words But the agreements of Bishops repugnant to the Holy Canons made at Nice your faith and piety joyning with us we make void and by the authority of the Blessed Apostle Saint Peter by a general determination we disanull and in his Epistle to those of that Synod For however vain conceit may arm it self with extorted compliances and think its wilfulness sufficiently strengthened with the name of Councils yet whatever is contrary to the Canons of the above-nam'd fathers will be weak and void Lastly in his Epistle to Maximus Bishop of Antioch he says He has such a reverence for the Nicene Canons that he will not permit or endure that what those holy fathers have determined be by any novelty violated This behaviour of Pope Leo although applauded and imitated by some of his Successours I doubt not to except against in behalf of the Synod that it was disorderly factious and arrogant proceeding indeed from ambition and jealousie the leading act of high presumption in this kind and one of the seeds of that exorbitant ambition which did at length overwhelm the dignity and liberty of the Christian Republick Yet for somewhat qualifying the business it is observable that he did ground his repugnancy and pretended annulling of that Decree or of Decrees concerning Discipline not so much upon his authority to cross General Synods as upon the inviolable firmness and everlasting obligation of the Nicene Canons the which he although against the reason of things and rules of Government did presume no Synod could abrogate or alter In fine this opposition of his did prove ineffectual by the sense and practice of the Church maintaining its ground against his pretence It is an unreasonable thing that the opinion or humour of one man no wiser or better commonly than others should be preferred before the common agreement of his brethren being of the same Office and Order with him so that he should be able to overthrow and frustrate the result of their meetings and consultations when it did not square to his conceit or interest especially seeing there is not the least appearance of any right he hath to such a Privilege grounded in Holy Scripture Tradition or Custom for seeing that Scripture hath not a syllable about General Synods seeing that no Rule about them is extant in any of the first Fathers till after 300 years seeing there was not one such Council celebrated till after that time seeing in none of the First General Synods any such Canon was framed in favour of that Bishop what ground of right could the Pope have to prescribe unto them or thwart their proceedings Far more reason there is in conformity to all former Rules and Practice that he should yield to all his Brethren than that all his Brethren should submit to him and this we see to have been the judgment of the Church declared by its Practice in the cases before touched IV. It is indeed a proper endowment of an absolute Sovereignty immediately and immutably constituted by God with no terms or rules limiting it that its will declared in way of Precept Proclamations concerning the Sanction of Laws the Abrogation of them the Dispensation with them should be observed This Privilege therefore in a high strein the Pope challengeth to himself asserting to his Decrees and Sentences the force and obligation of Laws so that the body of that Canon Law whereby he pretendeth to govern the Church doth in greatest part consist of Papal Edicts or Decretal Epistles imitating the Rescripts of Emperours and bearing the same force In Gratian we have these Aphorisms from Popes concerning this their Privilege No person ought to have either the will or the power to transgress the precepts of the Apostolick See Those things which by the Apostolick See have at several times been written for the Catholick faith for sound doctrines for the various and manifold exigency of the Church and the manners of the faithfull how much rather ought they to be preferr'd in all honour and by all men altogether upon all occasions whatsoever to be reverently received Those Decretal Epistles which most holy Popes have at divers times given out from the City of Rome upon their being consulted with by divers Bishops we decree that they be received with veneration If ye have not the Decrees of the Bishops of Rome ye are to be accused of neglect and carelesness but if ye have them yet observe them not ye are to be chidden and rebuk'd for your temerity All the Sanctions of the Apostolick See are so to be understood as if confirm'd by the voice of Saint Peter himself Because the Roman Church over which by the will of Christ we do preside is proposed for a mirrour and example whatsoever it doth determine whatsoever that doth appoint is perpetually and irrefragably to be observed by all men We who according to the plenitude of our power have a right to dispense above Law or right This See that which it might doe by its sole authority it is often pleased to define by consent of its Priests But this power he doth assume and exercise merely upon Usurpation and unwarrantably having no ground for it in original right or ancient practice Originally the Church hath no other General Law-giver beside our one Lord and one Law-giver As to practice we may observe 1. Anciently before the First General Synod the Church had no other Laws beside the Divine Laws or those which were derived from the Apostles by Traditional custom or those which each Church did enact for it self in Provincial Synods or which were propagated from one Church to another by imitation and compliance or which in like manner were framed and setled Whence according to different Traditions or different reasons and circumstances of things several Churches did vary in points of Order and Discipline The Pope then could not impose his Traditions Laws or Customs upon any Church if he did attempt it he was liable to suffer a repulse as is notorious in the case when Pope Victor would although rather as a Doctour than as a Law-giver have reduced the Churches of Asia to conform with the Roman in the time of celebrating Easter wherein he found not onely stout resistence but sharp reproof In St. Cyprian's time every Bishop had a free power according to his discretion
Theophanius Bishop of Antioch So the Synod of Pisa did constitute Pope Alexander V. that of Constance Pope Martin V. that of Basil Pope Felix V. 7. All Catholick Bishops in old times might and commonly did confirm the Elections and Ordinations of Bishops to the same effect as Popes may be pretended to have done that is by signifying their approbation or satisfaction concerning the orthodoxy of their Faith the attestation of their Manners the legality of their Ordination no canonical Impediment and consequently by admitting them to communion of peace and charity and correspondence in all good Offices which they express by returning 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in answer to their Synodical communicatory Letters Thus did St. Cyprian and all the Bishops of that Age confirm the Ordination of Pope Cornelius being contested by Novatian as St. Cyprian in terms doth affirm When the See of Saint Peter the Sacerdotal Chair was vacant which by the will of God being occupied and by all our consents confirm'd c. to confirm thy Ordination with a greater authority To which purpose each Bishop did write Epistles to other Bishops or at least to those of highest rank acquainting them with his Ordination and enstallment making a profession of his Faith so as to satisfie them of his capacity of the Function 8. But Bishops were complete Bishops before they did give such an account of themselves so that it was not in the power of the Pope or of any others to reverse their Ordination or dispossess them of their places There was no confirmation importing any such matter this is plain and one instance will serve to shew it that of Pope Honorius and of Sergius Bishop of Constantinople who speak of Sophronius Patriarch of Jerusalem that he was constituted Bishop before their knowledge and receipt of his Synodical Letters 9. If the designation of any Bishop should belong to the Pope then especially that of Metropolitans who are the chief Princes of the Church but this anciently did not belong to him In Africk the most ancient Bishop of the Province without election did succeed into that dignity Where the Metropoles were fixed all the Bishops of the Province did convene and with the consent of Clergy persons of quality and the commonalty did elect him So was St. Cyprian Bishop of Carthage elected So Nectarius of Constantinople Flavianus of Antioch and Cyril of Jerusalem as the Fathers of Constantinople tell us So Stephanus and Bassianus rival Bishops of Ephesus did pretend to have been chosen as we saw before And for Confirmation there did not need any there is no mention of any except that Confirmation of which we spake a consequent approbation of them from all their fellow-Bishops as having no exception against them rendring them unworthy of communion In the Synod of Chalcedon it was defined that the Bishop of Constantinople should have equal Privileges with the Bishop of Rome yet it is expresly cautioned there that he shall not meddle in Ordination of Bishops in any Province that being left to the Metropolitan For a good time even in the Western parts the Pope did not meddle with the Constitution of Metropolitans leaving the Churches to enjoy their Liberties Afterwards with all other Rights he snatched the Collation Confirmation c. of Metropolitans VII Sovereigns have a power to Censure and Correct all inferiour Magistrates in proportion to their Offences and in case of great misdemeanour or of incapacity they can wholly discharge and remove them from their Office This Prerogative therefore He of Rome doth claim as most proper to himself by Divine Sanction God Almighty alone can dissolve the spiritual marriage between a Bishop and his Church Therefore those three things premised the Confirmation Translation and Deposition of Bishops are reserved to the Roman Bishop not so much by Canonical Constitution as by Divine Institution This power the Convention of Trent doth allow him thwarting the ancient Laws and betraying the Liberties of the Church thereby and endangering the Christian Doctrine to be inflected and corrupted to the advantage of Papal Interest But such a power anciently did not by any Rule or Custom in a peculiar manner belong to the Roman Bishop Premising what was generally touched about Jurisdiction in reference to this Branch we remark 1. The exercising of Judgment and Censure upon Bishops when it was needfull for general good was prescribed to be done by Synods Provincial or Patriarchal Diocesan In them Causes were to be discussed and Sentence pronounced against those who had deviated from saith or committed misdemeanours So it was appointed in the Synod of Nice as the African Synod wherein St. Austin was one Bishop did observe and urge in their Epistle to Pope Celestine in those notable words Whether they be Clergy of an inferiour degree or whether they be Bishops the Nicene decrees have most plainly committed them to the Metropolitans charge for they have most prudently and justly discerned that all matters whatsoever ought to be determined in the places where they do first begin and that the grace of the holy spirit would not be wanting to every particular Province The same Law was enacted by the Synod of Antioch by the Synods of Constantinople Chalcedon c. Thus was Paulus Samosatenus for his errour against the Divinity of our Lord and for his scandalous demeanour deposed by the Synod of Antioch Thus was Eustathius Bishop of Antioch being accused of Sabellianism and of other faults removed by a Synod of the same place the which Sentence he quietly did bear Thus another Eustathius Bishop of Sebastia for his uncouth garb and fond conceits against marriage was discarded by the Synod of Gangra Thus did a Synod of Constantinople abdicate Marcellus Bishop of Ancyra for heterodoxy in the point concerning our Lord's Divinity For the like cause was Photinus Bishop of Sirmium deposed by a Synod there gathered by the Emperour's command So was Athanasius tryed and condemned although unjustly as to the matter and cause by the Synod of Tyre So was St. Chrysostome although most injuriously deposed by a Synod at Constantinople So the Bishops at Antioch according to the Emperour's order deposed Stephanus Bishop of that place for a wicked contrivance against the fame of Euphratas and Vincentius In all these Condemnations Censures and Depositions of Bishops whereof each was of high rank and great interest in the Church the Bishop of Rome had no hand nor so much as a little finger All the proceedings did go on supposition of the Rule and Laws that such Judgments were to be passed by Synods St. Chrysostome 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Deposed fifteen Bishops 2. In some case a kind of deposing of Bishops was assumed by particular Bishops as defenders of the Faith and executours of Canons their Deposition consisting in not allowing those to be Bishops whom for erroneous Doctrine or
disorderly Behaviour notoriously incurred they deemed incapable of the Office presuming their places ipso facto void This Pope Gelasius I. proposed for a Rule That not onely a Metropolitan but every other Bishop hath a Right to separate any persons or any place from the Catholick Communion according to the Rule by which his heresie is already condemned And upon this account did the Popes for so long time quarrel with the See of Constantinople because they did not expunge Acacius from the roll of Bishops who had communicated with Hereticks So did Saint Cyprian reject Marcianus Bishop of Arles for adhering to the Novatians So Athanasius was said to have deposed Arian Bishops and substituted others in their places So Acacius and his Complices deposed Macedonius and divers other Bishops And the Bishops of those times 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 factiously applying a Rule taken for granted then deposed one another So Maximus Bishop of Jerusalem deposed Athanasius So Eusebius of Nicomedia threatned to depose Alexander of Constantinople if he would not admit Arius to communion Acacius and his Complices did extrude Maximus Bishop of Jerusalem He also deposed and expelled Cyril of Jerusalem and deposed many other Bishops at Constantinople Cyril deposed Nestorius and Nestorius deposed Cyril and Memnon Cyril and Juvenalis deposed John of Antioch John of Antioch with his Bishops deposed Cyril and Memnon Yea after the Synod of Ephesus John of Antioch gathering together many Bishops did depose Cyril Stephanus concerning Bassianus Because he had entred into the Church with swords therefore he was expelled out of it again by the holy Fathers both by Leo of Rome the Imperial City and by Flavianus by the Bishop of Alexandria and also by the Bishop of Antioch Anatolius of Constantinople did reject Timotheus of Alexandria Acacius Bishop of Constantinople did reject Petrus Fullo 3. St. Cyprian doth assert the power of Censuring Bishops upon needfull and just occasion to belong to all Bishops for maintenance of common Faith Discipline and Peace Therefore saith he writing to Pope Stephanus himself dear brother the body of Bishops is copious being coupled by the glue of concord and the band of unity that if any of our College shall attempt to frame a heresie or to tear and spoil the flock of Christ the rest may succour and like usefull and mercifull shepherds may gather together the sheep of our Lord into the flock The like Doctrine is that of Pope Celestine I. in his Epistle to the Ephesine Synod In matter of Faith any Bishop might interpose Judgment Theophilus did proceed to condemn the Origenists without regard to the Pope Epiphanius did demand satisfaction of John of Jerusalem 4. This common right of Bishops in some cases is confirmed by the nature of such Censures which consisted in disclaiming persons notoriously guilty of Heresie Schism or Scandal and in refusing to entertain communion with them which every Bishop as entitled to the common Interests of Faith and Peace might do 5. Indeed in such a case every Christian had a right yea an obligation to desert his own Bishop So John of Hierusalem having given suspicion of Errour in Faith St. Epiphanius did write Letters to the Monks of Palestine not to communicate with him till they were satisfied of his Orthodoxy Upon which account St. Hierome living in Palestine did decline communication with the Patriarch thereof asking him if it were any where said to him or commanded that without satisfaction concerning his faith they were bound to maintain communion with him So every Bishop yea every Christian hath a kind of Universal Jurisdiction 6. If any Pope did assume more than was allowed in this case by the Canons or was common to other Bishops of his rank it was an irregularity and an usurpation Nor would Examples if any were producible serve to justifie him or to ground a right thereto any more than the extravagant proceedings of other pragmatical and factious Bishops in the same kind whereof so many instances can be alledged can assert such a power to any Bishop 7. When the Pope hath attempted in this kind his power hath been disavowed as an illegal upstart pretence 8. Other Bishops have taken upon them when they apprehended cause to discard and depose Popes So did the Oriental Faction at Sardica depose Pope Julius for transgressing as they supposed the Laws of the Church in fostering hereticks and criminal persons condemned by Synods So did the Synod of Antioch threaten Deposition to the same Pope So did the Patriarch Dioscorus make shew to reject Pope Leo from communion So did St. Hilary anathematize Pope Liberius 9. Popes when there was great occasion and they had a great mind to exert their utmost power have not yet presumed by themselves without joint authority of Synods to condemn Bishops so Pope Julius did not presume to depose Eusebius of Nicomedia his great Adversary and so much obnoxious by his patronizing Arianism Pope Innocent did not censure Theophilus and his Complices who so irregularly and wrongfully had extruded St. Chrysostome although much displeased with them but endeavoured to get a General Synod to doe the business Pope Leo I. though a man of spirit and animosity sufficient would not without assistence of a Synod attempt to judge Dioscorus who had so highly provoked him and given so much advantage against him by favouring Eutyches and persecuting the Orthodox Indeed often we may presume that Popes would have deposed Bishops if they had thought it regular or if others commonly had received that opinion so that they could have expected success in their attempting it But they many times were angry when their horns were short and shewed their teeth when they could not bite 10. What has been done in this kind by Popes jointly with others or in Synods especially upon advantage when the cause was just and plausible is not to be ascribed to the authority of Popes as such It might be done with their influence not by their authority so the Synod of Sardica not Pope Julius cashiered the enemies of Athanasius so the Synod of Chalcedon not Pope Leo deposed Dioscorus so the Roman Synod not Pope Celestine checked Nestorius and that of Ephesus deposed him The whole Western Synod whereof he was President had a great sway 11. If Instances were Arguments of Right there would be other pretenders to the Deposing power Particular Bishops would have it as we before shewed 12. The People would have the power for they have sometimes deposed popes themselves with effect So of Pope Constantine Platina telleth us at length he is deposed by the people of Rome being very much provoked by the indignity of the matter 13. There are many Instances of Bishops being removed or deposed by the Imperial authority This power was indeed necessarily annexed to the Imperial dignity for all Bishops being Subjects
Bellarmine fain to dive for it deposing Anthimus Bishop of Constantinople But this Instance being scanned will also prove slender and lame The case was this Anthimus having deserted his charge at Trabisonde did creep into the See of Constantinople a course then held irregular and repugnant to the Canons and withall he had imbibed the Eutychian heresie Yet for his support he had wound himself into the favour of the Empress Theodora a countenancer of the Eutychian Sect. Things standing thus Pope Agapetus as an Agent from Rome to crave succour against the Goths pressing and menacing the City did arrive at Constantinople Whereupon the Empress desired of him to salute and consort with Anthimus But he by petitions of the Monks c. understanding how things stood did refuse to doe so except Anthimus would return to his own charge and profess the Orthodox doctrine Thereupon the Emperour joined with him to extrude Anthimus from Constantinople and to substitute Menas He say the Monks in their Libel of request to the Emperour did justly thrust this Anthimus from the Episcopal Chair of this City your Grace affording aid and force both to the Catholick faith and the divine Canons The act of Agapetus was according to his share in the common Interest to declare Anthimus in his judgment uncapable of Catholick communion and of Episcopal Function by reason of his heretical Opinions and his transgression of Ecclesiastical Orders which moved Justinian effectually to depose and extrude him You say they fulfilling that which he justly and canonicaly did judge and by your general edict confirming it and forbidding that hereafter such things should be attempted And Agapetus himself saith that it was done by the Apostolical authority and the assistence of the most faithfull Emperours The which proceeding was completed by Decree of the Synod under Menas and that again was confirmed by the Imperial Sanction Whence Evagrius reporting the story doth say concerning Anthimus and Theodosius of Alexandria that because they did cross the Emperour's commands and did not admit the decrees of Chalcedon they both were expelled from their Sees It seemeth by some passages in the Acts that before Agapetus his intermedling the Monks and Orthodox Bishops had condemned and rejected Anthimus according to the common Interest which they assert all Christians to have in regard to the common Faith As for the substitution of Menas it was performed by the choice and suffrage of the Emperour the Clergy Nobles and People conspiring the Pope onely which another Bishop might have done ordaining or consecrating him Then saith Liberatus the Pope by the Emperour's favour did ordain Menas Bishop consecrating him with his hand And Agapetus did glory in this as being the first Ordination made of an Eastern Bishop by the hands of a Pope And this said the Pope we conceive doth add to his dignity because the Eastern Church never since the time of the Apostle Peter did receive any Bishop besides him by the imposition of hands of those who sate in this our Chair If we compare the proceedings of Agapetus against Anthimus with those of Theophilus against St. Chrysostome they are except the cause and qualities of persons in all main respects and circumstances so like that the same reason which would ground a pretence of Universal Jurisdiction to one would infer the same to the other Baronius alledgeth Acacius Bishop of Constantinople deposed by Pope Felix III. But Pope Gelasius asserteth that any Bishop might in execution of the Canons have disclaimed Acacius as a favourer of Hereticks And Acacius did not onely refuse to submit to the Pope's Jurisdiction but slighted it And the Pope's act was but an attempt not effectual for Acacius dyed in possession of his See VIII If Popes were Sovereigns of the Church they could effectually whenever they should see it just and fit absolve restore any Bishop excommunicated from the Church or deposed from his Office by Ecclesiastical Censure for Relief of the Oppressed or Clemency to the Distressed are noble Flowers in every Sovereign Crown Wherefore the Pope doth assume this power and reserveth it to himself as his special Prerogative 'T is says Baronius a privilege of the Church of Rome onely that a Bishop deposed by a Synod may without another Synod of a greater number be restor'd by the Pope and Pope Gelasius I. says That the See of Saint Peter the Apostle has a right of loosing whatever the Sentences of other Bishops have bound That the Apostolick See according to frequent ancient custome had a power no Synod preceding to absolve those whom a Synod had unjustly condemned and without a Council to condemn those who deserv'd it It was an old pretence of Popes that Bishops were not condemned except the Pope did consent renouncing communion with them So Pope Vigilius saith of St. Chrysostome and Flavianus that although they were violently excluded yet were they not look'd upon as condemned because the Bishops of Rome always inviolably kept communion with them And before him Pope Gelasius saith that the Pope by not consenting to the condemnation of Athanasius Chrysostome Flavianus did absolve them But such a power of old did not belong to him For 1. There is not extant any ancient Canon of the Church nor apparent footsteps of custome allowing such a power to him 2. Decrees of Synods Provincial in the former times and Diocesan afterwards were inconsistent with or repugnant to such a power for judgments concerning Episcopal Causes were deemed irrevocable and appointed to be so by Decrees of divers Synods and consequently no power was reserved to the Pope of thwarting them by Restitution of any Bishop condemned in them 3. The Apostolical Canons which at least serve to prove or illustrate ancient Custome and divers Synodical Decrees did prohibit entertaining communion with any person condemned or rejected by canonical Judgment without exception or reservation of power of infringing or relaxing that Prohibition and Pope Gelasius himself says That he who had polluted himself by holding communion with a condemned person did partake of his condemnation 4. Whence in elder times Popes were opposed and checked when they offered to receive Bishops rejected in particular Synods So St. Cyprian declared the Restitution of Basilides by Pope Stephanus to be null So the Fathers of the Antiochene Synod did reprehend Pope Julius for admitting Athanasius and Marcellus to communion or avowing them for Bishops after their condemnation by Synods And the Oriental Bishops of Sardica did excommunicate the same Pope for communicating with the same persons Which Instances do shew that the Pope was not then undoubtedly or according to common opinion endowed with such a power But whereas they do alledge some Instances of such a power I shall premise some general Considerations apt to clear the business and then apply answers to the particular Allegations 1. Restitution commonly doth signifie
Rome This hath been the Doctrine of divers Popes Which not onely the Apostolical Prelate but any other Bishop may doe viz. discriminate and severe any men and any place from the Catholick communion according to the rule of that fore-condemned heresie Faith is universal common to all and belongs not onely to Clergymen but also to Laicks and even to all Christians Therefore the sheep which are committed to the cure of their Pastour ought not to reprehend him unless he swerve and go astray from the right faith 15. That this was the current opinion common practice doth shew there being so many instances of those who rejected their Superiours and withdrew from their communion in case of their maintaining errours or of their disorderly behaviour such practice having been approved by General and Great Synods as also by divers Popes When Nestorius Bishop of Constantinople did introduce new and strange Doctrine divers of his Presbyters did rebuke him and withdraw communion from him which proceeding is approved in the Ephesine Synod Particularly Charisius did assert this proceeding in those remarkable words presented to that same Synod 'T is the wish and desire of all well affected persons to give always all due honour and reverence especially to their spiritual Fathers and Teachers but if it should so happen that they who ought to teach should instill unto those who are set under them such things concerning the faith as are offensive to the ears and hearts of all men then of necessity the order must be inverted and they who teach wrong Doctrine must be rebuked of those who are their inferiours Pope Celestine I. in that case did commend the people of Constantinople deserting their Pastour Happy flock said he to whom the Lord did afford to judge about its own Pasture St. Hierome did presume to write very briskly and smartly in reproof of John Bishop of Hierusalem in whose Province he a simple Presbyter did reside Who makes a schism in the Church we whose whole house in Bethlehem communicate with the Church or thou who either believest aright and proudly concealest the truth or art of a wrong belief and really makest a breach in the Church Art thou onely the Church and is he who offendeth thee excluded from Christ Malchion Presbyter of Antioch disputed against Paulus Samosatenus his Bishop Beatus Presbyter confuted his Bishop Elipandus of Toledo But if the Rectour swerve from the faith he is to be reproved by those who are under him 16. The case is the same of the Pope for if other Bishops who are reckoned Successours of the Apostles and Vicars of Christ within their precinct if other Patriarchs who sit in Apostolical Sees and partake of a like extensive Jurisdiction by incurring heresie or schism or committing notorious disorder and injustice may be deprived of their Authority so that their Subjects may be obliged to forsake them then may the Pope lose his for truth and piety are not affixed to the Chair of Rome more than to any other there is no ground of asserting any such Privilege either in Holy Scripture or in old Tradition there can no promise be alledged for it having any probable shew that of Oravi pro te being a ridiculous pretence it cannot stand without a perpetual miracle there is in fact no appearance of any such miracle from the ordinary causes of great errour and impiety that is ambition avarice sloth luxury the Papal state is not exempt yea apparently it is more subject to them than any other all Ages have testified and complained thereof 17. Most eminent persons have in such cases withdrawn communion from the Pope as other-where we have shewed by divers Instances 18. The Canon Law it self doth admit the Pope may be judged if he be a Heretick Because he that is to judge all persons is to be judged of none except he be found to be gone astray from the faith The supposition doth imply the possibility and therefore the case may be put that he is such and then he doth according to the more current Doctrine ancient and modern cease to be a Bishop yea a Christian Hence no obedience is due to him yea no communion is to be held with him 19. This in fact was acknowledged by a great Pope allowing the condemnation of Pope Honorius for good because he was erroneous in point of Faith for saith he in that which is called the Eighth Synod although Honorius was anathematized after his death by the Oriental Bishops it is yet well known that he was accused for heresie for which alone it is lawfull for inferiours to rise up against superiours Now that the Pope or Papal succession doth pervert the truth of Christian Doctrine in contradiction to the Holy Scripture and Primitive Tradition that he doth subvert the practice of Christian piety in opposition to the Divine commands that he teacheth falshoods and maintaineth impieties is notorious in many particulars some whereof we shall touch We justly might charge him with all those extravagant Doctrines and Practices which the high flying Doctours do teach and which the fierce Zealots upon occasion do act for the whole succession of Popes of a long time hath most cherished and encouraged such folks looking squintly on others as not well affected to them But we shall onely touch those new and noxious or dangerous positions which great Synods managed and confirmed by their Authority have defined or which they themselves have magisterially decreed or which are generally practised by their influence or countenance It is manifest that the Pope doth support and cherish as his special Favourites the Venters of wicked Errours such as those who teach the Pope's infallibility his power over temporal Princes to cashier and depose them to absolve subjects from their allegiance the Doctrine of equivocation breach of faith with hereticks c. the which Doctrines are heretical as inducing pernicious practice whence whoever doth so much as communicate with the maintainers of them according to the principles of ancient Christianity are guilty of the same crimes The Holy Scripture and Catholick Antiquity do teach and injoin us to worship and serve God alone our Creatour forbidding us to worship any Creature or Fellow-servant even not Angels For I who am a Creature will not endure to worship one like to me But the Pope and his Clients do teach and charge us to worship Angels and dead men yea even to venerate the reliques and dead bodies of the Saints The Holy Scripture teacheth us to judge nothing about the present or future state of men absolutely before the time untill the Lord come who will bring to light the hidden things of darkness and will make manifest the counsels of hearts and then each man shall have praise of God But the Pope notoriously in repugnance to those precepts anticipating God's judgment and arrogating to himself a knowledge requisite thereto doth presume to determine
most primitive ages when evidently there was no such a political Conjunction of Christians Arg. III. The Apostles delivered one Rule of Faith to all Churches the embracing and profession whereof celebrated in Baptism was a necessary condition to the admission into the Church and to continuance therein therefore Christians are combined together in one political Body Answ. 1. The Consequence is very weak for from the Antecedent it can onely be inferred that according to the Sentiment of the Ancients all Christians should consent in one Faith which Unity we avow and who denieth Answ. 2. By like reason all Mankind must be united in one political Body because all men are bound to agree in what the Light of nature discovereth to be true and good or because the Principles of natural Religion Justice and Humanity are common to all Arg. IV. God hath granted to the Church certain Powers and Rights as Jura Majestatis namely the Power of the Keys to admit into to exclude from the Kingdom of Heaven a Power to enact Laws for maintenance of its Order and Peace for its Edification and Welfare a Power to correct and excommunicate Offenders a Power to hold Assemblies for God's Service a Power to ordain Governours and Pastours Answ. 1. These Powers are granted to the Church because granted to each particular Church or distinct Society of Christians not to the whole as such or distinct from the Parts Answ. 2. It is evident that by virtue of such Grants particular Churches do exercise those Powers and it is impossible to infer more from them than a Justification of their Practice Answ. 3. St. Cyprian often from that common Grant doth infer the Right of exercising Discipline in each particular Church which Inference would not be good but upon our Supposition nor indeed otherwise would any particular Church have ground for its Authority Answ. 4. God hath granted the like Rights to all Princes and States but doth it thence follow that all Kingdoms and States must be united in one single Regiment the Consequence is just the same as in our Case Arg. V. All Churches were tied to observe the same Laws or Rules of Practice the same Orders of Discipline and Customes therefore all do make one Corporation Answ. 1. That All Churches are bound to observe the same Divine Institutions doth argue onely an Unity of relation to the same Heavenly King or a specifical Unity and Similitude of Policy the which we do avow Answ. 2. We do also acknowledge it convenient and decent that all Churches in principal Observances introduced by humane prudence should agree so near as may be an Uniformity in such things representing and preserving Unity of Faith of Charity of Peace Whence the Governours of the primitive Church did endeavour such an Uniformity as the Fathers of Nice profess in the Canon forbidding of Genu-flexion on Lord's days and in the days of Pentecost Answ. 3. Yet doth not such an agreement or attempt at it infer a political Unity no more than when all men by virtue of a primitive general Tradition were tied to offer Sacrifices and Oblations to God that Consideration might argue all men to have been under the same Government or no more than the usual Agreement of neighbour Nations in divers fashions doth conclude such an Unity Answ. 4. In divers Customes and Observances several Churches did vary with allowance which doth rather infer a difference of Polity than agreement in other Observances doth argue an Unity thereof Answ. 5. St. Cyprian doth affirm that in such matters every Bishop had a Power to use his own discretion without being obliged to comply with others Arg. VI. The Jewish Church was one Corporation and in correspondence thereto the Christian Church should be such Answ. 1. As the Christian Church doth in some things correspond to that of the Jews so it differeth in others being designed to excell it wherefore this argumentation cannot be valid and may as well be employed for our Opinion as against it Answ. 2. In like manner it may be argued that all Christians should annually meet in one place that all Christians should have one Arch-priest on Earth that we should all be subject to one temporal Jurisdiction that we should all speak one Language c. Answ. 3. There is a great difference in the case for the Israelites were one small Nation which conveniently might be embodied but the Christian Church should consist of all Nations which rendreth Correspondence in this particular unpracticable at least without great inconvenience Answ. 4. Before the Law Christian Religion and consequently a Christian Church did in substance subsist but what Unity of Government was there then Answ. 5. The Temporal Union of the Jews might onely figure the spiritual Unity of Christians in Faith Charity and Peace Arg. VII All Ecclesiastical Power was derived from the same Fountains by succession from the Apostles therefore the Church was one political Body Answ. 1. Thence we may rather infer that Churches are not so united because the Founders of them were several Persons endowed with co-ordinate and equal Power Answ. 2. The Apostles did in several Churches constitute Bishops independent from each other and the like may be now either by succession from those or by the constitutions of humane prudence according to emergences of occasion and circumstances of things Answ. 3. Divers Churches were 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and all were so according to Saint Cyprian Answ. 4. All temporal power is derived from Adam and the Patriarchs ancient Fathers of families Doth it thence follow that all the World must be under one secular Government Arg. VIII All Churches did exercise a Power of Excommunication or of excluding Hereticks Schismaticks disorderly and scandalous people Answ. 1. Each Church was vested with this Power this doth therefore onely infer a resemblance of several Churches in Discipline which we avow Answ. 2. This argueth that all Churches took themselves to be obliged to preserve the same Faith to exercise Charity and Peace to maintain the like Holiness of conversation What then Do we deny this Answ. 3. All Kingdoms and States do punish Offenders against Reason and Justice do banish seditious and disorderly persons do uphold the Principles and Practice of common Honesty and Morality Doth it thence follow that all Nations must come under one civil Government Arg. IX All Churches did maintain entercourse and commerce with each other by formed communicatory pacificatory commendatory synodical Epistles Answ. 1. This doth signifie that the Churches did by Admonition Advice c. help one another in maintenance of the common Faith did endeavour to preserve Charity Friendship and Peace this is all which thence may be concluded Answ. 2. Secular Princes are wont to send Ambassadours and Envoys with Letters and Instructions for settlement of Correspondence and preserving Peace they sometimes do recommend their Subjects to other Princes they expect