of Judging Soveraignly in all Ecclesiastical Affairs they in their 4th Session made this following Canon The General Council lawfully Assembled in the name of the Holy Ghost and representing the Catholick Church militant holdeth immediately its power from Jesus Christ to which Council all manner of Persons of what estate or quality soever nay the Pope himself is bound to obey in things which concern the Faith the extirpation of Schisms and the General Reformation of the Head and Members And for as much as in the 39th Session this Council did ordain that for time to come there should be held a General Council at the end of every Ten years and that the next Council should be called in Five years and the following one in Seven the Council accordingly was called together at Pavia where it began and was afterward continued at Siena and finally in 1431. it was transferred to Basil where it was decided according to the Council of Constance that it was a most Catholick truth that Councils were above Popes and that Popes could not by their own wills either dissolve or prorogue Councils from place to place P. Have you no other proof which justifieth this Opinion And have not there been Popes who have acknowledged the superiority of Councils Phil. There are many other proofs which might be made use of which are even of the same kind as those whereof we have already spoken for we might remember several examples of the Ancient Bishops of Rome who have suffered their judgments to be examined in General Councils and have submitted themselves to their Decrees nay there are some who have desired that the Decrees which they had made might be examined in Council and amongst others Leo the Great who demanded of Theodosius that what he had decreed as well as what had been decreed in the pretended Council of Ephesus should be examin'd in a Gen. Council There have been also many other Popes that have acknowledged the Tribunal of particular Councils and amongst others the Pope Damasus who disputing with Vrsicinus concerning the Pontificate submits himself to the judgment of a Synod which decided this Affair and when this Pope was accused of Adultery by two Deacons Concordius and Castorius he justified himself before a Council of 44 Bps. Assembled at Rome in the year 378. I could add the evidence of several Popes upon this subject and amongst others that of Zozimus who in his 1st Ep. says That the Authority of his See cannot add nor change any thing against the Ordinances of the Holy Fathers which is a mark of subjection and of dependence And also that of Gregory the Great who in some place protested that he reverenced the Authority of the four Great Councils like that of the four Gospels Philér Were I not afraid of trespassing upon your patience I would desire you to give me some particular account of our Gadican Church and to let me know whether she always believed the Superiority of the Councils above the Popes Phila. I will do it my dear Philéréne but it shall be but very short that I may not tire you It cannot be doubted but that in the first Centuries our Churches of France acknowledged the Authority of Councils as superior to all others since that in the question concerning the day of Celebrating Easter our Prelates without the knowledg and participation of the Pope called a Synod wherein St. Irenaeâ—s presided who by order of the Synod wrote a Letter extreamly pressing to Pope Victor about this Affair as may be seen in Eusebius which this Bishop would never dare to have done if the Pope had been considered in the Gallican Church as the Supreme Magistrate of the Church and the Decretal Epistles attributed to the first Bishops of Rome cannot be objected to the contrary because that these Epistles have such visible characters of being counterfeited that it is beyond all doubt And in the Council of Arles above mentioned our Bishops of France shewed sufficiently that the Pope was subject to the Authority of Councils since that they examined an Appeal brought before them from the Popes Sentence Since that time divers Synods have been held in France by the order and permission of our Kings to treat of things concerning the Faith or Discipline of the Church wherein they judged of â—aith by the Oracles of the Scripture and by Tradition and of Discipline by the Canons of the Church that is to say of Councils Such was for example that which was held in the reign of our K Clovis at Orleance c. Also the second Council of Mascon Ordained that Provincial Councils should be called by the Metropolitans and that of the whole Kingdom by the Bishop of Lions with the Kings permission It is true that the Gallican Church received a great abridgment of its Liberties in the year 445 by the Ordinance of Valentinian the 3d who made the judgments of all the French Prelates subject to the Pope But this Ordinance of Valentinian received divers oppositions in France as it were easie to justifie by many famous examples In the 8. Century the Churches of France received another blow by introducing the Code of the Roman Canons which Charlemaign obliged himself to receive in France as well as the Roman Office in acknowledgment of the good turns which Po. Adrian had done him who in an Assembly of 15 Bishops and many Abbots declared Charlemaign Patrician or a Nobleman of Rome and acknowledged that it was in his power to Elect Popes to regulate the Apostolick See to institute through all the Provinces Archbishops and Bishops in a word he invested him with all the Rights which the Roman Emperors enjoyed Nevertheless this great Prince found in the exceution of his promise great opposition from the Clergy whom he forced to receive the Code of these aforesaid Canons by constraint Minis Suppliciis says the Original nor were these Canons received but by the Authority of our Kings having been published but under the name of Charlemaign and as Ordinances made by him His Successors have trod in the same footsteps always ordering that the Laws which they made by the advice of the Prelates of their Kingdoms and which are to be read in their Capitulars should be published under their Majesties Names and that the Popes themselves should be subject to them C. de Capi destin 10. and C. nos de Compet 2. Quest 7. But whatever increase the Authority of the Pope had gained in France by this Ordinance of Valentinian and by this Introduction of Charlemaign this did not hinder our Bishops from shewing upon all occasions a great deal of vigor in maintaining their Privileges and the Authority of the Church It is manifest by divers Examples which History affordeth and chiefly by that of Hincmare B. of Laon this Prelate was censured and condemned for his ill actions by a Synod held at Vervins he would have appealed to Rome but far from having any regard to his appeal
The 19th in the Morning they spoke every man in this turn upon the Subject of their Commission and at Night the Company being re-assembled they by a general Consent approved of a Declaration which contains these following Propositions The First is That neither the Pope nor the Church it self hath any Power directly nor indirectly over the Temporality of Kings That they cannot be deposed and that their Subjects cannot be absolved from their Oaths of Allegiance to them upon any account whatsoever The Second is That the Council is above the Pope according to the Doctrine established in the 14th Session of the Council of Constance which the Assembly declares to have had the full Power and Approbation of the Church The Third is That the Use of the Pope's Power ought to be limited by the Canons and that he can do nothing to the Prejudice of the Ancient Customs and Liberties of the Gallicane Church The Fourth is That the Pope hath the Chief or Principal Authority in things which concern the Faith but so that his Decisions are not certain without the Churches Consent The Assembly ordered at the same time That this Declaration should be written in Latine and sent to all the Prelates of France to be Signed by them and that the King should be petitioned to make an Edict for the Execution of it throughout the whole Kingdom Philalethe This is Brave and looks like the Apostolical Vigour and Heroick Courage of our Ancient Prelates Philér This is not all These Lords Commissioners were dispatched away to the King and having given an exact Account of the Behaviour of the Clergy they demanded an Edict in the Kings Name for the Execution of their Declaration His Majesty granted them the Edict which was made as followeth And by this Edict the King ordains That this Declaration shall be Registred in all the Courts of Parliament of the Kingdom and in all the Faculties of Divinity and of the Canon-Law And his Majesty doth Prohibit under grievous Penalties even Foreigners within his own Kingdom and all as well Seculars as Regulars to teach any thing contrary to what is contained in this Declaration This Edict hath been executed The Parliament of Paris hath Registred this Declaration of the Clergy with that Zeal and Readiness that cannot be too much commended and which all other Parliaments of the Kingdom ought to imitate Phila. It cannot be denied but that our Prince is incomparable in all his Actions that France never saw upon the Throne a Monarch of so High a Character and of so great a Power that he maintains most worthily upon all occasions the Glorious Title of Lewis the Great which his Heroick Actions have acquired him And that the Parliament of Paris hath done well to express the great Zeal which they have always had for the Rights of the Crown and for the Liberty of the Gallican Church against the Enterprizes of the Court of Rome You may have read in our Histories what heretofore Philip the August Philip the Fair Charles the 6th 7th and 8th Lewis the 9th 11th and 12th did You know also the Conduct of the same Parliament under all these Great Princes to maintain according to their Will and Pleasure the Rights of the Crown and the Privileges of the Gallican Church And I believe also that you have heard of the Decrees which this Honourable House hath sent forth under Lewis the 13th against the Scandalous Books of Saâ—terel and of Bellarmin But we may say without excess That Lewis the Great in this Conjuncture hath shewed more stedfastness and greatness of Mind in the Opposition which he hath made against the Attempts of the Court of Rome than all his Illustrious Predecessors ever did And it cannot also be denied but that the Parliament of Paris hath gone on worthily in the Footsteps of their Glorious Ancestors Philér It is not in this single Affair only that this Honourable House of Parliament have shewed their Zeal to Second the Intentions of his Majesty and to maintain the Rights of the Crown and the Privileges of the Gallican Church They have also given notable Proofs of it in the Affair of Father Buhi the Carmelite Phila. I have also heard of a Thesis which this Father had maintained the 4th of December last and it was said that they had caused him some Trouble about it at Rome but I do not precisely know what were the Propositions which this Father did maintain Philér If my Memory doth not fail me I think there were Six The First of them is That there are some Ecclesiastical Laws to which the Pope himself is subject The Second is That he cannot upon all occasions dispence with the Canons of General Councils The Third is That he cannot Depose Kings nor impose Tributes upon their Estates without their Consent The Fourth That Bishops hold their Jurisdiction from God. The Fifth That the Faculty of Divinity at Paris doth not esteem the Pope to be Infallible And the Sixth That the Right of the Regale is neither a Fancy nor an Usurpation These Propositions greatly stirred up the Pope against this Father he ordered the Commissary General of the Carmelites to declare him deprived of the privileges of his Order and uncapable of performing any function either Administration of the Sacraments or Preaching This Command was sent to the Superior of the Carmelites of the place Maubert * A Street in Paris so called to whom this Commissary General had given advice of the Noise that this Thesis of Father Buhi had made at Rome and of the misfortune wherewith the whole Order was threatned This Father demanded a Copy of the Letter of his Superior that he might consult his Friends about it which was granted him The Affair coming at length to the King's ear there came forth a Letter under the Seal to the Superior forbidding him to execute any Order from Rome against Father Buhi without the King's knowledg and consent Yet notwithstanding this the Superior caused the Order to be Registred which he had received from the Commissary General of the Carmelites the 18th of February last But the Parliament shewed the same vigour in this Affair as in that of the Declaration of the Clergy for after many proceedings made at the instance of the Attorny General the Parliament ordered that the Superior of the Carmelites should be admonished for his Disobedience and expresly forbad the execution of the Order against Father Foelix Buhi to which they added That he should continue in his Function of Divinity Reader expresly forbidding any person to molest him and at length they Order that the Commissary General 's Letter should be razed out of the Register and laid aside And this by order of Parliament the 14th day of April 1682. Phila. The Parliament did very bravely in this Affair and shewed that the same spirit of Zeal and Courage still reigns in that Honourable Assembly Thilér But ought not we to fear that this should
cause some rupture with the Pope Into what confusion and disorder might not so unfortunate an accident cast us †Greg. Naz. Orat. 12. Were we not better to Sacrifice somewhat to the good of our peace which is the greatest Legacy that our Saviour left to his Apostles * Joh. 14.27 Pacem meam do vobis What is there more precious than Union and Concord since that Jesus Christ gave so great a Character of it to his Disciples †Joh. 13.35 In hoc cognoscent omnes quia mei Discipuli estis si dilectionem habueritis ad invicem What is there more prejudicial than disunion and discord which destroy the most flourishing States Omne regnum divisum contra se desolabitur domus divisa contra se non stabit Matt. 12.25 Phila. I agree with you that we ought to do our utmost to obtain Peace that we ought to sacrifice our own Interests nay that for so great a good we ought to relinquish things that seem to us of importance Ipsum enim nomen pacis amabille says St. Austin but you must own too that we ought to do nothing for Peace to the prejudice of Truth St. Paul joyns these one with the other ‖ Eph. 4.15 Veritatem facientes in Charitate And God who calls himself Charity calls himself also Truth I know also that the Fathers of the Church exhort us greatly to avoid Schism as a mortal poison but a Peace made against the interest of Truth is not a real Peace and when we cannot make it and maintain it but at the prejudice of this Trurh it were better that a Scandal should arise than that Truth should be abandoned Satius est says St. Bernard ut scandalum oriatur quam ut veritas disceratur Philér How My dear Philal. Do you think that the Propositions of the Clergies Declaration and of Father Buhi's Thesis contain such essential and such important Truths that it would be a crime not to defend them tho it were to the disturbance of the Publick Peace Phila. Yes Dear Sir I am very well perswaded that all these Propositions are founded upon Texts of Scripture upon the Canons of Councils and upon the perpetual and constant Tradition of the Church principally of the Gallican Church and by consequence I believe that we ought not to depart from them any ways and that we cannot do it without danger But because it will be a matter of long Discourse I shall defer the examining of it to another walk The Second Dialogue PHilalethe and Phileréné who were no less desirous to entertain each other upon the subject whereon they had begun than to enjoy the fine weather of the Spring came the next day to the place appointed for their Conversation Scarce had they walked a turn or two talking of indifferent matters but Philalethe to make good the promise he had made the day before to his dear Friend began thus I told you yesterday says he that the Propositions contained in the Declaration of my Lords the Bishops and in the Thesis maintained by Father Buhi are of greater importance than you thought of and that they contained in them Truths too evident and too necessary to be let go for the motives of a deluding Peace To convince you of it we will make it the subject of our present Discourse I believe that the first and chief of these Questions and which ought to serve as a foundation to all the rest is that which concerns the Authority of Councils which hath ever been most venerable among Christians and which I believe to be of Divine Right and above the Authority of the Pope And in this I rely upon the Scripture and the perpetual and constant Tradition of the Church I believe answered Philéréne as you do That the Authority of Councils is of Divine Right and no Christian that ever I heard of hath yet disputed it But I know not whether you can so clearly prove as you hope for that this Authority of Councils is above that of the Pope for that many Learned men hold the contrary and there seems to be nothing in Antiquity decisive upon this matter The Council of Constance was the first that in this case pronounced in favour of Councils and what that Council declared about it was not in an absolute sence but in some certain respects and for some certain occasions Phila. I acknowledg that there are some famous Doctors who are of this opinion That the Pope is above the Council but it cannot also be denied but that the number of Learned men who hold the contrary Opinion is much the greater and you shall scarce find a Man of Learning in all France but he adheres to their Party Philér I am not for entring upon this particular discourse but you will oblige me to shew me by good Reasons that the Authority of Councils is the supream Authority in the Church and that Believers ought not to acknowledg any other upon Earth in things which relate to Faith and Discipline Phila. To be as good as my word to you then in what I promised you I suppose you know the Original of Councils A Man of your reading in the Divine History cannot be ignorant that God himself established them when he commanded Moses to take to him Seventy Elders for the Government and Conduct of his Ancient people and you know without doubt that the Jews had not only their Council of Twenty three which they called the Lesser House of Judgment but also their Council of Seventy wherein presided their Anaci which Council was composed of Sacrificers Priests and Scribes of the Law and was called the Greater House of Judgmen Our Councils have been formed after this Model and the Apostles began them at Jerusalem But to remove all difficulty our Question seems to be clearly decided by our Saviour in the 18th of St. Matthew when he referreth them who had any difference to the Church if they could not decide it by another way Dic Ecclesiae you see our Saviour referreth his Disciples to the Church without excepting St. Peter himself for which reason St. Augustin says very pertinently * Ep. 112. Tra. 118. in don lib. 1. pebapt con Donat. cap. 51. That the Church is the last and supreme Judgment that St. Peter signified the Church when our Saviour said to him That whatsoever he should bind on Earth should be bound in Heaven and whatsoever he should loose on Earth should be loosed in Heaven that it is the Church which received the power of the Keys and that if any one despiseth her when she correcteth he ought to be looked upon as a Publican and a Sinner It is furthermore the Church which is called the Support and Pillar of Truth * 1 Tim. 3.15 Columna firmamentum veritatis If you take good heed to this expression of St. Paul and to the Reasons whereon he grounds it you will agree that the Church is
the depositary of Truth and that she hath the supream jurisdiction over her Children for their behaviour for it is certain in this Text that St. Paul alludes either to the Pillars which were erected in the Heathen Temples upon which were fixed the Statues and the Deities which were there worshipped or to the Two Pillars of Solomon's Temple one of which was called Jakin and the other Bohas and that he would have us understand by it that it is the Churches Office to declare to establish and to maintain the Truth Philér I see very well that the Church being the Spouse of Jesus Christ she is made partaker of the advantages and privileges which Marriage endoweth her with and that she being his Body is as it were clothed with his Majesty But St. Peter Was not he made the Head of this Church Did not Jesus Christ make him his Lieutenant and Vicar when he said to him that upon him he would build his Church †Matt. 16.18 19. Tu es Petrus super hanc Petram c. Was it not to St. Peter that he gave the Soveraign Authority when he said to him Dabo tibi claves Regni Coelorum quodcunq ligaveris super Petram c. Phila. It is true that all Catholick Divines do acknowledg St. Peter as the Ministerial head of the Church and Prince of the Society of the Apostles but this was not a principality of Dominion which our Saviour expresly forbiddeth his Apostles ‖ Matt. 16.18 19. Luke 22.25 Item Matt. 20.25 Reges gentium Dominantur eorum vos autem non sic For which reason St. Bernard says in the 3d Book of his Considerations to Eugenius Imperium interdicitur Ministerium indicitur But this is only a Primacy of Order ₠Lib. de unit Eccl. Propter bonum unitatis says St. Cyprian who assures us furthermore that all the Apostles Erant pari consortio Honoris Authoritatis praediti Besides Was not St. Peter a Member of the Church St. Augustine and St. Cyprian says he was and that with a great deal of reason since that all Believers compose but one body to whom Jesus Christ as the Head doth communicate the spirit of Life It is then manifest that the Member dependeth upon the Body and not the Body upon the Member Also St. Ambrose says upon this Subject in his Commentary upon St. Luke That the Church is above St. Peter Ecclesia est super Petrum This evidently appears by what St. Luke says in the 15th of the Acts concerning the first Council that was held among Christians in which Assembly of the Apostles and Ministers of the Church at Jerusalem the question which St. Paul and St. Barnabas related to them on the behalf of the Church of Antioch was decided but they decide it not by the Authority of St. Peter but by that of the Holy Ghost and of themselves Visum est spiritui sancto nobis c. Also in the 21st of the same Book St. James and St. Paul say that they had made this Ordinance St. Jude and St. Silas are sent not on the behalf of St. Peter but of the whole College of the Apostles Add to this That St. Peter himself was sent with St. John by the Apostles to those of Samaria after they had received the Word of God as it is related in the 8th Chapter of the same Book which proves invincibly that St. Peter was not the Soveraign Master of the Society of the Apostles but that he was in some degree their inferior whatsoever the place were that he held amongst them not unlike the first Senator in the Body of a Senate it being the right of a Superior to send an Envoy Philér I apprehend very well what you say But can it be denied but that Jesus Christ promised somewhat particularly to St. Peter in the 16th of St. Matthew when he said to him in particular Ego vero dico tibi c. Phila. I could tell you as a great many Catholick Divines do That St. Peter having answered in the name of all the Apostles Jesus Christ gave him nothing in particular but what he received he received in the name of all the Apostles and of the whole Church of which he was then the Type as St. Austin says in the 1st Book of his Retractations Cap. 21. speaking of St. Peter Typum gerebat Ecclesiae cui sunt traditae claves which is founded upon the Text of the 20th of St. John where Jesus Christ gives equally to all his Apostles the power of forgiving and of retaining Sins I could say with St. Chrisostome upon this passage and with (a) De Verb. Dom. Serm. 13. Tract in Joh. 12.4 Serm. de divers 118. in Psal 86.97 c. St. Augustine That this Rock whereon Christ promiseth to build his Church was that firm and solid Confession of Faith which St. Peter had just then made or else Jesus Christ himself who was this Corner-stone whereon was placed the mystical building of the Church Et super hanc Petram quam cognovisti says St. Augustin dicens tu es Christus Filius Dei viventis edificabo Ecclesiam meam id est super me ipsum Filium Dei edificabo Ecclesiam meam super me edificabo te non me super te (a) Cyril lib. 4. de Trinit St. Cyril (b) Hil. lib. 2. 6. de Trin. St. Hilary (c) Amb. in c. 2. de Episto St. Ambrose and (d) Hiero. lib. cont Jov. c. 19. St. Hierom are of this opinion but to deal freely with you it is none of mine For I had rather take this Text as (e) Tert. lib. 1. de pud cap. 21. Tertullian and St. Cyprian and say with these other Doctors That Jesus Christ spoke in particular to St. Peter and promised him some Prerogatives above his Colleagues And to justify my Opinion I observe first That St. Peter answers in particular concerning his Faith. Now Faith is so internal a thing that nothing but the Conscience of each particular person can answer for it and by consequence we cannot say that this Apostle answered in the name of the whole Society of the Apostles When it concerned some outward thing which was obvious to the senses this Apostle might answer in the name of all his Brethren as when he says to our Saviour We have left all to follow thee Omnia c. But when the question was concerning a motion of the heart he could not answer for any but himself Secondly You must observe that our Saviour promiseth a particular recompence to the Faith of Peter for which after that the Apostle had said Tu es Christus Filius Dei vivi He Answers him Ego vero dico tibi quia tu es Petrus beatus es Simon Barjona to make him know that he would reward particularly the strength of his Faith and the fervency of his Zeal For this reason he puts him in mind of the new name he had
assuring themselves that the Grace of the Holy Spirit would never be wanting to every Province and after having shewed him the inconveniencies that would follow these sorts of Appeals they give him to understand that they had not found in the Acts of the Council of Nice which had been sent them from Constantinople and from Antioch this Canon which Faustinus had alledged Not satisfied with this Letter which contained their Opinions they make a Canon which renewed that of the Milevitan Council signifying that Priests Deacons and other inferior Clergymen should not Appeal beyond the Seas but to the Primate of their Provinces as hath been often resolved concerning Bishops Who is there now but seeth that the Fathers of this Council did not believe that the Bishop of Rome had the Supreme Authority in the Church since that not only his Legate Faustinus did not preside in it but was seated after Valentinus Bishop of the first See of Numidia that they examin over again the Affair of Apiarius as though it had not been judged by the Bishop of Rome that they give him only the name of Brother and will not at all permit that any Clergy-man of Africa should appeal to Rome Philér This indeed appears very strong but do not you know that it is generally agreed that in the Milevitan Canon there is nothing said of the Bishops and that the clause that concerns them hath been since added that besides the Canon produced by Faustinus to his Colleagues was in some respects a Canon of the Council of Nice since that it was of the Council of Sardica which is but an Addition a Supplement and as it were the Seal of the Council of Nice Phila. These Interpretations appear to me but weak for the Milevitan Canon in the Greek and in some Latin Copies doth comprehend the Clause concerning Bishops Besides the Fathers of this Council of Africa in the Epistle which they wrote to Celestin make it known sufficiently that they did not understand that Bishops could appeal beyond the Seas no more than other inferior Clerks seeing that at the same time which they wrote this Epistle they had before them not only the Appeal of Apiarius but also that which Anthony Bishop of Fossat had brought against the Sentence of his Provincial Synod before the Pope Boniface who restored him for which reason †Epist 162. St. Augustin wrote a Letter to Celestin this Popes Successor concerning these pretended Additions to the Council of Nice for that of Sardica was called by different Emperors in a far distant place and after a considerable Interval of time for Motives and Reasons also different as every body knoweth that hath any knowledg of History If this Council had been a Supplement of the Council of Nice as they pretend why is it not placed in the order of Oecumenical Councils Whence comes it that the Fathers of the Council of Carthage amongst whom were St. Augustin Aurelius and Alipandus the most famous Bishops of their time were ignorant of this Canon And why did not Faustinus say plainly that this Canon was truly of the Council of Sardica rather than that it was of equal authority to the Council of Nice to which it was but the Supplement and the Seal I will not enlarge to you upon what passed in the year 397 in the Council of Turin where they judged the difference that was between Proclus Bishop of Marseilles and Metropolitan of the first Province of Narbonne and the Bishops of the second Province who would not depend upon him and the contest that there was between the Bishops of Arles and of Vienne concerning the honour of Primacy and the right of Ordination which the Fathers of this Council would not have dared to undertake had they believed that the Soveraign Authority had belonged to the Bishop of Rome You may learn the same thing from what passed in the Council of Toledo against the Priscilianists and of the conjunction which these Fathers make of Ambrose Bishop of Milan and of Siricus Bishop of Rome Nor will I entertain you with the Council of Francfort called by the Emperor Charlemagne in the year 794 wherein assisted the Bishops of France of Germany and of Italy wither the Pope Adrian sent his Legates and wherein the Canon of the second Council of Nice concerning the Religious Worship of Images was annulled though this Council had been approved of by Adrian I will not speak to you neither of the Councils which were held in France our own Country which vigorously opposed this immoderate Worship which the second Council of Nice would have established and which the Popes maintained to their utmost In good faith now if the Fathers of the Council of Francfort or if the Prelates of France had believed the See of Rome to be Soveraign would they have spoken would they have acted as they did I come now to the Council of Constance held in the year 1414. whose Authority and Decision my Lords the Bishops make use of to support their opinion He that will penetrate well into the spirit of this Council must take the thing in its original and observe that a lamentable Schism had raged near 30 years and produced a great many evil effects during the Pontificate of Peter de Luna called Benedict the 13th and under that of Angelus Corrarius called Gregory the 12th Anti-popes the Cardinals of either party being Assembled agreed for the putting an end to these Schisms to call a Council at Pisa This Council being Assembled in the year 1409. declares That this Affair belonged to them as they represented the Universal Church and they condemned Peter de Luna and Angelus Corrarius as notorious Schismaticks defenders and favourers of Schism Hereticks and as having deviated from the Faith c. After the deposing of these two Anti-popes by the Council the Cardinals who there assisted chose Peter de Candia Pope who was called Alexander the 5th and who lived but about Ten months After his death the same Cardinals elected the Cardinal Balthasar of St. Eustace who called himself John the 23. or 24. Thus there were three Anti-popes who condemned one another To find out a remedy for this disorder the Emperor Sigismond advised Pope John to order that the Council of Pisa should be continued in the City of Constance whereupon this Pope called thither all those that had a deliberative voice the Emperor and all Christian Princes Pope John opened the Assembly in the Emperors presence and in the second Session he would have renounced the Papacy provided his competitors would do the same but they refusing they were all three judged and condemned by the Council Pope John for many crimes whereof he was accused and convicted and the others for the same reasons that they had been condemned at Pisa and they chose Odo Colomna Pope who called himself Martin the 3d or the 5th And to the end that no man might doubt of the power which the Council had