History of Monothelism Pope Honorius willing to agree both parties writes Letters to Patriarch Sergius which the Monothelites made use of for Authorising their Heresie The Popes John IV. Theodore and St. Martin follow a contrary conduct to his The Emperor Constantine Pogonatus with consent of Pope Agatho calls the sixth Council The History of that Council The Letters of Sergius and Honorius are examined there They are condemned of Heresie and that Pope is Anathematised He is also condemned in the Emperors Edict in the Letter of Leo II. to the Emperor In the Ancient diurnal Book of Rome in the Ancient Breviaries and in the VII and VIII Councils Convincing Arguments that the Acts of the sixth Council have not been falsified and that it cannot be said that the Fathers of that Council understood not well the meaning of Honorius All Antiquity which hath received that Council as we have it hath believed that the Pope is not infallible p. 143 CHAP. XIII Of the Popes Clement III. Innocent III. Boniface VIII and Sixtus V. THE Error of Clement in his Decretal Laudabilem recalled by Innocent III. The Error of Innocent concerning the secret of Confession He condemns that Error in the Council of Lateran That of Boniface in his Bull unam Sanctam recalled at the Council of Vienna That of Sixtus V. in the Edition of his Bible A ridiculous Answer of some Moderns p. 165 CHAP. XIV The instance of John XXII WHAT he did for Establishing his Error concerning the beatifick vision The sacred Faculty of Paris declares the Doctrin of that Pope heretical It had been condemned by Clement IV and was since in the Council of Florence King Philip of Valois obliges that Pope to recant p. 173 CHAP. XV. The tradition of the Church of Rome as to that THE Popes themselves have acknowledged that for ending difference in Religion by a Sovereign and infallible sentence there was a necessity of a Council The Heresies which Popes have condemned without a General Council have been so condemned by the consent of the Church Popes who have confessed that they had not the gift of Infallibility p. 179 CHAP. XVI The state of the question concerning the Superiority of the Council over the Pope or of the Pope over a Council WHether after a Council is lawfully Assembled the Pope being present in it or not that Council has or has not Supreme Authority over the Head as well as over the other Members of the Church or whether or not all its Authority depends on the Pope p. 187 CHAP. XVII That it is the Holy Ghost which in the definitions of Faith pronounces by the mouth of the Council WHAT is to be concluded from that Principle What it is according to the Doctrin of Antiquity to approve and confirm a Council p. 190 CHAP. XVIII That the Ancient Councils have examined the Judgments of Popes to give a last and definitive sentence upon them THE History of the Patriarch Flavian and the Pope St. Leo who submits his Judgment to that of a General Council An instance of the fifth Council that rescinds a sentence solemnly pronounced by the Pope and of the sixth which examines the sentences of Martin I. and Honorius I. approves the one and rejects the other The History of Constantine of the Donatists and of the first Council of Arles which examines the sentence given by Pope Melchiades in his first Council of Rome p. 199 CHAP. XIX That the Ancient Popes have always acknowledged and protested that they were subject to Councils THE History of Pope Sicicius and of the Council of Capona Of St. Leo in the case of St. Chrysostom against the Patriarch Theophilus Of Innocent III. in the case of the Marriage of Philip the August Instances of Pope St. Agapetus and Silvester II. p. 213. CHAP. XX. That the Ancient Popes have believed that they were subject to the Canons PRoofs of this from the conduct and protestations of the Popes Celestin I. St Leo St. Martin St. Gregory the Great John VIII Eugenius III. and Silvester II. What the Council of Florence hath defined as to that The true sense of these words against a false interpretation that hath been made of them Popes are obliged to govern the Church according to the Canons In what case they can dispense with them That they may abuse their Power Of an Appeal to a Council and of an Appeal as abusive to a Parliament p. 225 CHAP. XXI What General Councils have decided as to that Point THE History of the Council of Pisa where that question was first canvassed The debates that arose upon that Subject in the Council of Constance which is a continuation of that of Pisa The Decrees of that Council of Constance and of that of Basil upon the same Point The approbation of these Decrees by the Popes Martin V. and Eugenius IV. p. 241 CHAP. XXII Of the Writing of the Sieur Emmanuel Schelstrate against the two Decrees of the Council of Constance THE Declaration which the Clergy of France met in the Year 1682. made of their Opinion touching these two Decrees which they hold to be of infallible Authority approved by Popes and for those times when there is no Schism as well as during a Schism The Sieur Emmanuel Schelstrate undertakes to refute these three Articles in the three Chapters of his Dissertation p. 256 CHAP. XXIII A Refutation of the first Chapter of the Dissertation of M. Schelstrate THE Decree of the fourth Session hath not been falsified by the Fathers of Basil The Manuscripts of M. Schelstrate are defective and ours are true A demonstration of this Truth by two Sermons of John Gerson who rehearses that Decree before the whole Council of Constance word for word as we have it The Manuscripts by which these two Sermons have been reviewed and the other places were Gerson relates the same Decree An other demonstration of that truth by Pope Eugenius IV. and even by the Manuscripts of M. Schelstrate That question was sufficiently examined The Council consisted of the greatest and soundest part of the three obediences and the absence of others hinders not the Council from being lawful p. 261 CHAP. XXIV A Refutation of one of the two other Chapters of M. Schelstrate PRoofs of the approbation of these two Decrees of Constance The true interpretation of that word Conciliariter The abuse that may be made of the Appeal to a Council is condemned but not the Appeal it self All the Authority of Councils proceeds not from the Pope but chiefly from the Catholick Church p. 297 CHAP. XXV A Refutation of the other Chapter of M. Schelstrate THese two Decrees of the Council of Constance are for all times whilst there was a Schism and when there is none An Ecumenical Council is a whole whereof the Pope is but a part The Pope is the Head but not the Master of the Church The difference betwixt the Power of Popes and of Kings An authentick act of the Superiority of a
rest by the spirits that they send over all and some for distributing the nourishment which the rest receive for growth and for perseverance in the perfection of their state So amongst the multitudes of believers that make up the Church and who cannot all be immediately governed instructed and edified by one single man for edification of the body of Jesus Christ there must be as the great Apostle speaks a great diversity of Ministers and many Pastours subordinate one to another in an holy Hierarchy Act. 20. v. 28. to the end the people may have the Sacraments administred unto them be instructed and governed And that 's the reason that there are in the world so vast a number of particular Churches which have their several Bishops and which are all subordinate to a Principal Church of which the Bishop is the head of all the rest And these being assembled in name of their Churches in an Oecumenical Council represent the Universal Church which we believe to be infallible for absolutely deciding the points of Faith when her Bishops who are the Pastours and Teachers of Christians being one and the same as well as she say in her name to all her members in perfect unity Visum est Spiritui Sancto vobis For as the Universal Church is a whole consisting of all believers and of all particular Churches which are one by the Communion which they have with one Principal Church that is the source principle root and centre of their Unity as Saint Cyprian speaks So according to the doctrine of the same holy Father Episcopatus unus est multorum Episcoporum concordi numerositate diffusus Cypr. l. de unit Eccl. Epist 55. there is but one Episcopacy in the Church whereof each Bishop fully possesses a part and by consequent there is but one Chair wherein all Bishops sit by virtue of the Union which they have with him Episcopatus unus est cujus à singulis in solidum pars tenetur Cypr. Ep. 52. Ecclesia una Cathedra una Domini voce fundata Cyp. Ep. 40. Ad Trimitatis instar cujus una est atque individua potestas unum esse per diversos antistites sacerdotium Sym. Ep. ad Aeon Arclat whom they ought to acknowledge for their Head This Pope Symmachus explains in a very sublime manner by an excellent comparison taken from the Trinity In the same manner saith he as there is but one Omnipotence by the Unity of Essence and Nature which so unites the three Persons that they are but one God So amongst the many Orthodox Churches throughout all Christendom there is but one onely Priesthood that is to say but one Episcopacy through the unity not onely of Faith and Belief but also of communion of all the Bishops with a Head whence results that unity which is inseparable from the Church of Jesus Christ This being presupposed in which all Catholicks do agree Aug. on Ps 101. it is certain that Jesus Christ himself hath established his Church which he purchased by his own bloud and unto which he hath given the Faith Act. 20. v. 28. the Sacraments the Law of Grace in his Gospel and a visible Head to represent him as his Vicar upon Earth And as from a very small beginning it hath enlarged it self according to the Prophecies over the whole earth So also the Apostles and their Successours after the departure of Jesus Christ have founded particular Churches establishing them themselves or ordaining Bishops for governing the believers distributed into several Dioceses in all the quarters of the World Now seeing that particular Church which within a few years after the Ascension of Jesus Christ was setled in the Capital City of the Empire is without doubt the most illustrious of all others that on the one hand Hereticks not being able to endure its splendour and greatness have always furiously risen up and conspired to destroy it and that on the other all Catholicks who are sensible of the real advantages that distinguish it from all others are nevertheless divided about certain prerogatives which some attribute to it and others dispute I shall shew without speaking of other Churches what hath been the first establishment of that of Rome what is the excelling dignity thereof and what are the prerogatives rights and privileges of its Bishops And because a subject of this nature is not to be handled by Philosophical reasonings but by matters of fact drawn from Scripture interpreted according to the Fathers Councils and ancient Traditions which are the two principles of true Theology therefore you are not to expect any speculation or Philosophy in this Treatise which is purely Historical I do in the very entry declare that there is nothing of mine in this work For I doe no more but as a sincere and exact Historian barely alledge by uncontroverted matters of fact drawn from the one or other of those two sources what venerable Antiquity believed concerning that important matter This method we usefully employ against our Protestants We make it clearly out to them that what we believe of the Eucharist the Sacrifice of the Mass the Invocation of Saints prayer for the dead and other controverted points is the ancient Doctrine of the Church and that so their belief contrary to ours being new is false We force them to acknowledge that what they hold with us concerning Infant Baptism the Baptism of Hereticks and the change of the Sabbath into Sunday of which Scripture makes no mention they have it onely from Tradition and the ancient Practice of the Church and that therefore they reject the anabaptists because of the Novelty of their Doctrine And this is also the great Principle that the ancient Fathers made use of against the Hereticks of their times Let us onely consult the order of time Ex ipso ordine manifestatur id esse dominicum verum quod sit prius traditum id autem extraneum falsum quod sit posterius immissum Tertull de praescr c. 32. and we shall know that that which hath been first taught us cometh from the Lord and that it is truth but that on the contrary what new thing hath since been introduced cometh of the Stranger and is false And in his fourth Book against Marcion Quis inter nos determinabit nifi temporis ratio ei praescribens autoritatem quod antiquius reperietur ei praejudicans vitiationem quod posterius revincetur l. 4. cont Marci c. 4. Who can put an end to our differences unless it be the order and decision of time which Authorizes the Antiquity of Doctrine and declares that defective which comes not till after that ancient Belief Upon the same ground St. Jerome who flourished about the end of the fourth Century said to one of his Adversaries who would have made a new Party in the Church Why do you offer after four hundred years Cur post quadringentos annos docere nos
of the Pagans in Antiquity that Porphyrius one of their greatest Philosophers upbraided the Christians as St. Jerome informs us that their St. Paul was so rash as to have dared to reprove the Prince of the Apostles and his Master Hieron Ep. 89. Since then all venerable Antiquity hath believed the Primacy of St. Peter which our Protestants contest by the novelty of their Doctrine we have reason once more to say to them Desinat incessere novitas vetustatem After all it is so evident that Jesus Christ who will have his Church to continue to the end of the World hath given St. Peter the Primacy and Supreme dignity of visible Head of the Church for himself and Successours in that Principal Chair which that great Apostle fixed at Rome that it would be superfluous to attempt to prove it For if it had been so confined to his Person that it descended not to his Successours it would follow that after the death of St. Peter the Church was fallen that it had no longer that Principle of unity which makes it one that it was no more but a body without a head and a ruinous building without a foundation Besides Is it not well known that it is an order naturally fixed in lawfull Successions that Kings and other Princes and their Officers in the Civil State Bishops Metropolitans Primates and Patriarchs nay and Ministers amongst our Protestants succeed to the rights and powers of their Predecessours But though we had no such convincing reasons Concil Sardic Ep. ad Jul. in frag Hil. Con. Constant ad Dam. Conc. Ephes Conc. Calcedon ad Leon. Conc. 6. Act 18. Ep. ad Agath Iren. l. 3. cont Valent Cyprian ad Corn. Ep. 55. l. de unitat Optat. contra Parm. l. 2. Vincent Lirin lib. contra Haer. c. 3. Hier. ad Dam. August de duab Ep. Pelag. l. 1. c. 1. Ep. 92.162 Chrysost Ep. 1. ad Innoc. Prosper de voc gent. l. 8. c. 6. St. Leo. St. Gregor Theodoret. Socrates Sozom. alii passim yet it would be enough to say that all the same evidences of Antiquity that have given testimony to the Primacy of St. Peter and to his supreme power in the Universal Church have also by common consent attributed it upon the same words of Jesus Christ to the Bishops of Rome who are the Successours of the Prince of Apostles There is nothing more ordinary in the Councils and Fathers where the same things that are said of the Primacy of St. Peter and of the Prerogatives of his Chair at Rome are in formal terms most frequently found repeated to express the Primacy of the Popes their super-intendance in the Universal Church and the superiority of their Chair and of the Church of Rome to which they declare that all the rest ought to be united as Lines to their Centre and as to the source of Sacerdotal Unity And that 's the reason why we call the Universal Church the Roman-Catholick and Apostolick Church because all particular Churches of which that great body is constituted must be united in communion with the Pope of Rome their Head that so they may be Members of the true Church of Jesus Christ which is no ways one but by that union which maketh its perfect unity I have me thinks made it hitherto clear enough according to all Antiquity opposite to the novelty of our Protestants what is the belief of Catholicks concerning St. Peter and of his Successours in his Bishoprick of Rome We must now in order examine sticking close to Antiquity against all Novelty what Prerogatives and Rights that Primacy gives to Popes what it is that all Catholicks agree in and wherein it is that they differ about that point and prove by uncontroverted matters of Fact without disputation what Antiquity which ought to direct our belief in spight of all the attempts of Novelty hath believed concerning points of that importance CHAP. V. Concerning the rights and advantages that the Primacy gives to the Bishop of Rome over all other Bishops I Think that point cannot better be decided than by the Decree of the Council of Florence in the year 1439. when that famous re-union was made betwixt the Latin and Greek Churches after many celebrated conferences and great contests that happened there during the space of fifteen months betwixt the learnedst men of both Churches about that Subject and other controverted points This is the definition of the Council Item we define that the Holy Apostolick See and the Pope of Rome have the Primacy over all the world that the Pope of Rome is the Successour of St. Peter Prince of the Apostles that he is the true Vicar of Jesus Christ and Head of all the Church the Father and Teacher of all Christians and that our Lord Jesus Christ hath given him in the person of St. Peter full power of feeding ruling and governing the universal Church in the manner specified in the Acts of Councils and holy Canons For it is precisely so in the Greek 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and in the Latin Juxta eum modum qui in Actis Conciliorum in Sacris Canonibus continetur As it is to be read in Blondus Secretary to Pope Eugenius Decad. 3. l. 10. who presided in that Council In Ekius his Treatise of the Primacy of the Pope Lib. 1. in the Bishop of Rochester's five and twentieth Article against Luther Cap. Vlt. and in Albertus Pighius his fourth Book of the Hierarchy That is to say in English To govern the Church in the manner which is found expressed in the Acts of the Councils and in the Holy Canons not as Abraham of Candie hath very ill rendered it quemadmodum etiam which gives it a quite contrary sense to the intention and words of the Council as will manifestly appear in another place of this Treatise At present it is enough that we know according to that Council that the Primacy of the Pope entitles him to the inspection of all that concerns the government and welfare of the Church in general which is more than any Bishop of what dignity soever he may be can challenge For the power that other Bishops have by Divine Right to govern the Church reaches not beyond their Dioceses but that of the Pope as Head of the Church Universal extends every where when the good of all Believers in general is concerned of whom he is to take the care And that supreme dignity gives him a great many rights which none but he alone can enjoy To him application is made to have resolutions in difficulties that may arise in matters concerning Faith Hieron ad Ageruch Ep. 2. Innoc. 1. apud Aug. Epist 93. August Epist 106. Jul. apud Athan. Apol. 1. manners or general Customs Of this we have evident proofs in the Holy Fathers and an illustrious instance of it hath been seen in our days in that famous letter which the Bishops of France wrote to Pope
Innocent X. He alone hath the right of calling Councils for Spiritual Affairs and to preside in them personally or by his Legates I say he hath that right without speaking of matter of Fact which is under debate in respect of some Councils and cannot prejudice his Primacy For though he hath not presided in the first Council of Constantinople which perhaps neither did he call and that it be most certain that he did not call the fifth nor presided in it though he was at Constantinople where that Council was held yet it is not to be doubted but he might have done both the one and the other if he had pleased seeing that in the Letter which the Patriarch Entychius wrote to him for obtaining of that Council Concil 5. Act. 1. he prayed him to preside in it and that he onely presided therein upon his refusal For thus it is in the Original praesidente nobis vestrâ beatitudine and not residente nobiscum as the Minister Junius hath corrupted it by a correction made of his own head against the clear sense of the following words Besides is it not past all controversie that the Pope presided by his Legates in the Council of Chalcedon as he hath done in almost all the others which have been held since For I speak not here of the great Council of Nice nor of that of Ephesus because as I conceive I have elsewhere proved by invincible Arguments not onely against our Protestants but also against the sentiments of some Catholick Doctours that the Popes by their Legates presided in them nay and that they called them as to what relates to the Spiritual Authority which they have over the Bishops as the Emperours to whose rights Kings and Christian Princes have succeeded may call Councils in regard of Temporals by that sovereign power which they have received from God over their Subjects in virtue whereof they may oblige their Bishops to assemble in a certain place either within or without their Territories there to treat of matters purely spiritual wherein they meddle not but as protectours of the Church in causing the Decrees and Canons of these Councils which strike not at the Rights of their Crown to be put in execution It is certain then that the Popes as Heads of the Church have right to call general Councils and to preside in them Moreover seeing the Pope in that quality Concil Sardic Can. 3.4.7 Gelas Epist ad Epis Dardan Innoc. Epist ad Victric St. Leo. Ep. 82. Cap. Car. Mag. lib. c. 187. Hincmar ad Nicol. 1. Flodo Hist Eccl. Rom. l. 3. Gerson de Protestant Eccl. Cons 8. is without dispute above every Bishop of what Dignity soever he may be and above all particular Churches and Synods Appeals may be made from all these Bishops and Synods to his Tribunal It belongs to him to judge of greater Causes such as those which concern the Faith and that are doubtfull universal Customs the deposing of Bishops and some others which I have observed elsewhere the decision whereof belongs and ought to be referred to him In that manner the Inferiour Judges appointed by Moses according to the advice of Jethro Exod. 18. judged of causes of less importance and the greater were reserved to that great leader of the People of God Hence it is also that the Pope hath right to judge yet always according to the disposition of the Canons of the causes of Bishops Metropolitans Primates and Patriarchs This appears clearly by the judgment in the case of St. Athanasius Athan. Apol. 2. Theodoret. l. 2. Socr. l. 2. c. 15. Sozom. l. 3. c. 81. Paul Patriarch of Constantinople Marcellus Primate of Ancyra Asclepas Bishop of Gaza and Lucius Bishop of Adrianople whom Pope Julius restored to their Sees from which they had been illegally Deposed and by the case of Denis Patriarch of Alexandria who being accused Athan. de sent Dionys defended himself in writing before the Pope in a word by an infinite number of other instances in all ages of the Church which may be seen in my Treatise of the judgment of the causes of Bishops I shall onely mention one which wonderfully sets off that supreme Authority of the Pope After the death of Epiphanins Liberat. c. 10. Patriarch of Constantinople the Empress Theodora one of the wickedst Women that ever was and above all a great Eutychian in her heart and a great enemy to the Council of Chalcedon prevailed so far by the great power that she had got over the mind of the Emperour Justinian her Husband who could not resist her Artifices that Anthimius was made Patriarch though he was Bishop of Trebizonde by that means possessing at the same time two Episcopal Chairs against the manifest constitution of the holy Canons without any Precedent and without lawfull dispensation Besides that naughty man was both a frank Heretick and great Cheat. For though he was not onely Eutychian but also the head of those Hereticks Justin Nov. 42. Niceph. l. 17. c. 9. yet he always professed that he might deceive the Emperour who at that time was a good Catholick that he received the Doctrine of the four Councils but without ever condemning Eulyches who had been condemned by the holy Council of Chalcedon That occalioned a great deal of scandal and trouble in the East and seeing when matters were in this state Concil Constant sub Men. Act. 1. St. Agapetus the Pope was come from Rome to Constantinople whither Theodatus King of the Goths had obliged him to go that he might endeavour to obtain of Justinian the peace which the Goths demanded The Monks of Syria and many other zealous Catholicks presented him Petitions against that Intruder and Heretick This without doubt is one of the most illustrious marks and one of the strongest proofs of the Authority of the Holy See and of the Primacy of the Pope that ever was seen in the Church The Emperour who loved Anthimius and thought himself obliged in honour to protect him as being his Creature solicited on his behalf and by his earnestness in the Affair made it apparent that he intended to maintain him Theodora who was more concerned still than the Emperour in the preservation of her Patriarch employed all her Artifices and spared neither offers prayers nor threats to shake the constancy of a Pope whom she saw resolved to make use of the power which he had received from Jesus Christ for the good of the Church The Empire was then in a most flourishing state the Emperour shining in glory After the defeat of the Vandals in Africa Constantinople in great splendour Anthimius most powerfull through the favour of his Prince and the Grandeur and Majesty of the Patriarchal See of the Imperial City where he thought himself too well fixed to fear that he could be turned out Rome on the contrary being no more the Seat of the Empire since it was fallen under the Dominion of the Herules and
Character and Mark of Catholicity nay more by receiving the most obstinate Arians into his Communion and in a word by subscribing to the scandalous Formulary of Sirmium which was presented to him by the Head of the Semi-Arians And at length that it might not be doubted but that he acted as Pope who makes known to the whole Church what Men ought to believe for that was the thing the Arians pretended to who were willing it might be known that the Head of the Church was on their side He Wrote two long Letters which were made publick all over the Empire one to the Emperour Constantius the great Protectour of Arianism and the other to the Arian Bishops wherein he declares his intention in terms most significant and most advantagious for the Arians Vbi cognovi quando Deo placuit Juste vos illum condemnasse mox consensum meum commodavi sententiis vestris Lib. Epist 7. ad Episc Orientales Amoto Athanasio à communione omnium cujus nec Epistolia à me suscipienda sunt dico me cum omnibus vobis pacem unanimitatem habere ut sciatis me veram fidem per hanc Epistolam meamloqui hanc ego libenti animo suscepi in nullo contradixi c. For there he saith That having known when it pleased God to illuminate him that they had justly condemned Athanasius he presently consented to their Judgment that he had Excommunicated him that he would not so much as receive his Letters and that he would have them to know that he was perfectly united with them in mind and heart that he professes in that Letter the true Faith which Demophilus had made known unto him which they had declared and received at Sirmium and that he most willingly embraces it without the least contradiction This methinks may be said to be an Authentick Declaration for Arianism and a falling from on high into the Abyss of Heresie And it cannot be known by a more unquestionable evidence than his own that he fell so unfortunately And therefore St. Hilary In fragment à Pithaeo editis Liberius taedio victus exilii in haereticâ pravitate subscribens Romam victor intraverat Hieron in Chron. de scrip Eccles in Fortunati who lived in that time most positively calls him Heretick pronouncing three or four Anathema's against him one upon the heels of another And St. Jerome in more than one passage of his Works says That that Pope subscrib'd to the Arian impiety and that the vexation he lay under for his Banishment having made him subscribe to Heresie in a Victorious manner he again entered Rome But not to mention all the others who have spoken of that deplorable fall of Liberius Auxili l. 1. de ordinati c. 25. l. 2. c. 1. alii we need no other proof fully to persuade us of it than Rome her self and all her Clergy or to say better the Church of Rome which so abhorred that scandalous Declaration of Liberius that on the spot she deposed him from his Papacy as an Arian Heretick of publick notoriety Nor was he chosen and acknowledged of new for true Pope till that after his Successour St. Felix had suffered Martyrdom he abjured his Heresie and was again become the same Liberius that he was before his fall a wise generous and zealous Pope This being so Is it not clear that the Church of Rome her self in the fourth age did not believe the Pope to be Infallible CHAP. XI The instance of Pope Vigilius THE Second instance that I produce is that of Pope Vigilius I have already related that example upon occasion of St. Peter's being reproved by St. Paul and shall at present apply it in a few but decisive words to the subject whereof I treat in this Chapter This Pope before the fifth Council made a Constitution Vigilii Constitutum ad Justin Imper. Ex verbis Epistolae viri venerabilis Ibae rectissimo ac piissimo intellectu perspectis c. Nec quemquam hoc nostro constituto permittimus aliquando praesumere super ejusdem Epistolae negotium ..... quoquo modo aliquid temerariae novitatis inferre which he addressed to the Emperour Justinian wherein amongst other things undertaking the defence of the Letter of Ibas Bishop of Edessa he declares that according to the words of that Letter understood in the sound sense that might be given unto them it seemed to be Orthodox and strictly prohibits any whosoever to innovate any thing touching that Letter in what manner soever it might be nor to condemn it seeing Ibas had been absolv'd and received as a Catholick in the Council of Chalcedon The Fifth Council which was held sometime after Ann. 553. and at which Vigilius would never assist though he was then at Constantinople where that Synod was celebrated decides exactly the contrary For having well examined the Letter of Ibas Si quis defendit Epistolam quam dicitur Ibas ad Marim Persam scripsisse quae abnegat Deum verbum de sancta Dei genitrice semper virgine Maria incarnatum hominem factum esse dicit autem c. ..... defendit Theodorum Nestorium impia eorum dogmata conscripta Si quis igitur memoratam impiam Epistolam defendit non Anathematizat eam c. .... qui praesumit eum defendere vel infertam ei impietatem nomine sanctorum patrum vel Concilii Chalcedonensis ..... Anathema sit Synod 5. Coll. 3. c. 14. concerning which the Council of Chalcedon had pronounced nothing it solemnly declares the same Heretical and impious as containing the Blasphemies of Theodore of Mopsuestia and Nestorius against Jesus Christ and his holy Mother and pronounces Anathema against all those who Anathematise it not and dare undertake the defence thereof as if it had been approved in the Council of Chalcedon There you have two decrees quite contrary one to another Whence it must follow that either the Council in its decision or the Pope in his constitution are deceived and maintain an errour Or whether that Pope did at length consent to that Council as I have said upon the credit of very good vouchers or that he never consented to it as there are some who affirm It is certain that his Successours Pelagius II. and St. Gregory the Great have approved it and that it hath always been received since without contradiction by all the Western Church as a true Ecumenical Council which cannot err It is then most certain that Vigilius decided wrong in his constitution and that by consequent even according to the Popes and Church of Rome in the fifth Age The Popes for all they are heads of the Church are not therefore Infallible CHAP. XII The Condemnation of Honorius in the Sixth Council THE same appears clearly also in the case of Pope Honorius of whom so much hath been Written in these later times I am not for contesting with any body I shall onely produce matter of Fact
Churches And seeing it was not doubted but that Pope John XII in the manner he set about it acted with all his Authority and Force to introduce and establish that Error in the Church so also was it believed in that Fourteenth Age that the Pope teaching the Church might err and that he is not Infallible but when he pronounces from the Chair of the Universal Church as Head of it in a general Council or with consent of the principal Members of the Church who are the Bishops CHAP. XV. The Tradition of the Church of Rome as to that IT will be no difficult Task for us to prove that that Doctrine is conform to the constant Tradition of the Church of Rome as appears by the conduct of ancient Popes who in great Controversies about Faith after that they themselves had pronounced against Error have thought that for condemning it by a sovereign and infallible Sentence there was need of a Council or at least by another way the consent of the Church Vt pleniori Juâ—acio omnis possice ror aboleri Ep. 15. ad Ephes concil to the end that Error might be abolished by a more solemn and decisive judgment said the great St. Leo writing to the second Council of Ephesus though he himself had already condemned Eutyches in his particular Council which for that end he held at Rome This hath been confirmed by the Popes of the last Age when that after Leo X. had published his Bull against the Errors of Luther Solumque Concilium generale remedium à nostris praedecessoribus in casu simili usurpatum superesse Clem. VII in Bull. indict Concil 1533. Tam necessarium opus Pius IV. in Bull. confirm they declared in their Bulls speaking of the Council of Trent which was called for the supreme Decision of that Controversie that that was the last and necessary Remedy which had always been made use of by their Predecessors on the like Occasions Wherein all the Popes perfectly well agree with the fifth Council which for proving that necessity alledges the Example of the Apostles who decided in common with St. Peter the Question touching the Observation of the Law of Moses Nec enim potest in communibus de fide disceptationibus aliter veritas manifestari and then declares that otherways Truth cannot be found in Controversies that arise about the Faith It is evident by that that the Popes and that Council did not believe that the Pope was infallible for had they believed him infallible they would also have been persuaded that it was sufficient to consult that Oracle or that after his Responses and Decisions it would not have been necessary for abolishing Error entirely to have recourse to the determination of the Church represented by a Council But if it be said that there are some Heresies which the Popes alone have condemned and which have always been reckoned lawfully condemned without the Interposition of a Council it is easily granted but at the same time it may be said that that concludes nothing at all because in the three first Ages of the Church there were Heresies such as that of Cerinthus of the Ptolemaits the Severians Bardesanites Noetians Valesians and many others that single Bishops or particular Synods have condemned and which we are obliged to account Heresies tho neither Popes nor General Councils have had any hand in their Condemnation Not that these Bishops and Synods are infallible but because all the other Bishops who abominated these Heresies as much as they condemned them as they had done by approving all that they had done So when Popes have decided against any Doctrine which is afterward to be esteemed heretical it is so because they have defined with consent of the Church which hath received their Constitutions as we have in our days seen an illustrious Instance of it That which more confirms that ancient Tradition of the Roman Church is the great number of Popes who condemning some of their Predecessors after Oecumenical Councils have thereby declared that they themselves no more than others have not received of God the gift of Infallibility which he hath only bestowed upon his Church And indeed two great Popes of the last Times were so fully persuaded of this that they would not accept of it from the hands of men that would have attributed it unto them The first is Adrian VI. who in his Commentaries upon the fourth of the Sentences Art 3. de Mines confirm says positively and in a most decisive manner Certum est quod Pontifex possit err are etiam in iis quae tangunt fidem haeresiâ—â— per suam determinationem aut decretalem asserendo that he is certain the Pope may err even in matters belonging to the Faith teaching and establishing a Heresie by his Definition or by his Decretal which afterwards he proves by many Instances and very far from following Pius II. and changing Opinion as he did when he came to be Pope he persisted in it so constantly that he thought fit during his Pontificat that a new Edition of his Book should be printed at Rome exactly conform to that which he published when he was Doctor and Dean of Louvain wherein that Passage is entire without the Omission or Alteration of one single Word The second is Paul IV. who before his promotion to the Papacy had been great Inquisior Relat. Joann Hay Paris Theol. Addit aux mem de Casteluam c. 2. b. 6 the most severe and zealous that ever was for the preservation of the purity of the Catholick Faith against all Heresies Num matrimonium per verba de prasenti contractum quod est verum matrimonium verum sà cramentum juxta sanclorum Theolegorum sententiam authoritate nâ—stra dissolvi possit intelligo cum carnalis nulla conjunctio intercessit This Pope in the Year One thousand five hundred and fifty seven held a great Congregation of Cardinals Bishops and Doctors at Rome for the examining that important question Whether by the power of the Keys which Jesus Christ had given him as Successor to St. Peter he could dissolve the Marriage which the Mareschal of Montmorency had contracted in formal terms de praesenti with the Lady de Piennes Having proposed the matter to them by giving them to understand that the Question was about the deciding of a Point of very great Importance concerning a Sacrament he declared to them that he would not have them alledge to him the Examples of his Predecessors Non dubito quin ego decessores mei errare aliquando potuerimus non solum in koc sed etiam in pluribus aliis rerum generibus that he would not follow them but in so far as they were conform to the Authority of Holy Scripture and solid Reasons of Divinity For I make no doubt added he but that my Predecessors and may fail not only in this but in many other things Which he even proved by Testimonies
declared in relation to the same Controversie in his Epistles to Sergius Patriarch of Constantinople one of the chief Authors of that Heresie The Judgment of St. Martin was approved in that Council and that of Honorius so severely censured that the Pope was there anathematised Whether these Letters were well or ill understood it makes nothing to our present purpose The Council passes Judgment upon him and no body ever objected against it in Antiquity This is sufficient to conclude invincibly that the Council is superiour to the Pope But is there any thing more convincing and decisive for fixing of this Truth than what was done in the case of the Donatists who by their Schism troubled all the Church of Africa Optat. Milevit l. 1. contr Parmen Euseb Eccles hist l. 10. c. 5. They applied themselves to the Emperour Constantine who was then in Gallia and desired of him Judges chosen from among the Bishops of the Gallican Church against Cecilian Bishop of Carthage because they would shun the Judgment of the Pope whom they distrusted August Ep. 162. ad Gelor Eleus Ep. 165. ad Generos 166. ad Donatist 167. alib saepe The Emperour nevertheless having protested that it belonged not to him to meddle in Ecclesiastical matters sent them back to the Pope to whom as Head of the Church it belongs to judge of greater Causes Pope Miltiades took for Assessors in this Judgment fifteen Bishops of Italy to whom he joyned three famous Bishops of the Gallican Church Maternus of Cologne Rheticius of Autun and Marinus of Arles whom the Emperour had sent him to be of the number of the Judges that the Donatists might not have cause to say that every thing had been refused them That Cause was solemnly judged in that Council of Rome Donatus Head of the Schismaticks appeared there with ten Bishops of his Party and alledged all that he had to say against gainst Cecilian who appeared also accompanied with ten other African Bishops and defended his Cause and that of the Church so well against the Authors of that Schism that they were condemned They were very willing to be judged by this Council imagining as St. Austin observes Ep. 162. that either they might gain their Cause by Artifices and Calumnies or that if they lost it yet they might still maintain their Party by complaining loudly in all places that the Pope and his Bishops who were prejudiced against them had judged partially The truth is they did so and pressed the Emperour so hard to give them new Judges and in greater number that that good Prince overcome by their extream Importunity Orabida furoris audacia Opt. loc cit which he called extream Fury granted their desine and seeing he passionately desired to restore Peace to the Church and utterly to abolish so fatal a Schism by a supreme Sentence that might for ever put an end to that great Contest he called the great Council of Arles Apud Arelatum eandem causam diligentius examinandam terruinandamque curasse August Ep. 162. Euseb l. 10. c. 5. August Ep. 167. ad Fest which St. Austin calls a full and universal Council because as Eusebius assures us and after him that holy Doctor there was there an infinite number of Bishops of all the Provinces of the Empire Ex omnibus mundi partibus praecipue Gallicanis Concil Arelat 11. Ganls The Legates of Pope Sylvester with the eighteen Bishops who had been at the Council of Rome were present there The Cause of the Donatists was examined there afresh with the Judgment which Pope Melchiades the Predecessor of St. Sylvester had given against them and they were again condemned by a definitive Sentence and without appeal in regard of the Ecclesiastical Tribunal for the Appeal which these Schismaticks who observed no measures brought to the Tribunal of Constantine August Ep. 162. was most unjust as was frankly acknowledged by that Emperour who said that if he at length took cognizance of that Cause to stop the mouth of these Hereticks and arrest the course of their Fury he humbly begg'd pardon of the Bishops whose Authority in what concerns the spiritual he should invade Whereupon St. Austin answering the Complaints that the Donatists of his time always made of Pope Melchiades Quae vox est omnium malorum litigatorum cum fuerint etiam manifestissimâ veritate superati Ibid. as their Ancestors had done jeered them pleasantly saying that they acted like bad Lawyers who having lost their Cause blame their Judges and complain to all men that they have been unjustly condemned when they have even been convicted by the most manifest discovery of the Truth Ecce putemus illos Episcopos qui Romae judicarunt non bonos Judices fuisse restabat adhuc plenarium Ecclesiae Vniversalis concilium ubi etiam cumipsis judicibus causa posset agitari ut si male judicasse convicti essent torum sententiae solverentur Ibid. Then to confound them he adds these great Words which plainly decides the Question that we examine and to which nothing can be replied Suppose that the Judges who condemned your Ancestors at Rome had judged amiss was not there still the full Council where that Cause might be again examined with the same Judges who had already judged it that if it had been found that their Judgment was not just their Sentence might have been rescinded I freely confess that I cannot see how it can be better made out that the Pope's Tribunal is subject to that of a full and general Council which may confirm or rescind a Sentence past at Rome as a supreme Court can confirm or rescind the Judgment of an inferiour So when the same St. Austin says in another place speaking of the Pelagians Jam enim do hac causâ duo concilia missa sunt ad sedem Apostolicam inde etiam rescripta venerunt causa finita est August Serm. 2. de Verb. Dom. c. 10. We have Rescripts come from Rome the Cause is ended that 's to be understood that it is ended at Rome whither these Hereticks after they had been condemned in the Councils of Africa appealed to the Pope and thought to have gained their Cause by their Artifice which had once succeeded with them It was not judged supremely but in the Council of Ephesus We must then of necessity conclude that it cannot more clearly he seen than in those Instances which I have now alledged of universal Councils which have judged the Sentences of Popes That it was believed in the ancient Church before Saint Austin and in his Time and after him without the least doubting that a general Council is above the Pope And that 's the thing I was to prove CHAP. XIX That the ancient Popes have always acknowledged and protested that they were subject to Councils BUT that I may farther prove it upon as solid a ground and which ought to be the more plausible and
the King protests before God Innoc. III. in l. 3. Regest 15. Ep. 104. ad Philip. Reg. Franc. Non auderemus in hujusmodi casu de nostro sensu pro te aliquid definire that if he could in Conscience grant what he demanded he would do it with all his Heart but that tho he would stand by that which the Queen had answered Cardinal Robert Cortzeon in favour of the dissolution of that Marriage who had interrogated her judicially yet he could not of himself determine any thing about so important an Affair as that and that Si super hoc absque deliberatione Concilii determinare aliquod tentaremus praeter divinam offensam mundanam insamiam quam ex eo possumus incurrere forsan ordinis officii nostri periculum immineret If he offered to do it without a Council besides offending of God and the Disgrace that he should draw upon himself in the World he might perhaps be in danger of being deposed and of losing his Pontifical Dignity There was a Pope and one of the most learned that ever sat in St. Peter's Chair who twice and in few Words confesses with much Sincerity that the Council is above him once by saying that he could determine nothing in that Affair proposed to him without the Definition of a Council and then if he offered to do so that he should run a hazard of being deposed from the Popedom By whom Without doubt by a Power that was superiour to his which as it is evident could be none other upon Earth but that of a Council Pope Agapetus long before said the same upon an occasion where the Question however was not about a matter of so great Importance as this and of which it is fit I should give my Reader an Account in few words In one of the Councils which Pope Symmachus held at Rome there was a prohibition made That no Pope for ever should alienate the Goods of the Church and especially of the Church of Rome which at that time were not Cities and Provinces as they were after the Donations of the Kings of France but some Lands and Farms which it held of the Bounty of Believers besides the Oblations which in those days made up the greatest part of it I give you here the most considerable terms of the Decree which prohibits that Alienation Ann. 500. We ordain in the Presence of God Mansuro cum Dei consideratione decreto sancimus ut nulli Apostolicae sedis praesuli à praesenti die donec disponente domino Catholicae Fidei manserit doctrina salutaris liceat praedium rusticum quantaecunque fuerit magnitudinis vel exiguitatis sub perpetuâ alienatione vel commutatione ad cujustibet jura transferre nec cujusquam excusentur necessitatis obtentu by this Decree that from this present day so long as the Doctrine of the Faith continues in the World by the Disposition of divine Providence that it be never lawful for any Pope to alienate any farm great or small nor to transfer the same by way of Exchange to any whosoever under pretext and excuse of any necessity that may happen Now seeing about thirty six years after there was a Permission desired of Pope St. Agapetus to alienate some of these Lands Concil Rom. sub Symmach de bon Eccles non alien c. 4. under a very specious pretext of relieving the poor he made Answer that the venerable Constitutions of his Predecessors that had prohibited such kinds of Alienations tied him from granting it that he thought they would not take it ill that he did nothing contrary to those Decrees whatever the occasion might be for any Respect in the World Nor would I have you think adds he in his Epistles to Caesarius Bishop of Arles Nec tenacitatis studio aut saecularis utilitatis causâ hoc facere vòs credatis sed divini consideratione Judicii necesse nobis est quicquid sancta synodalis decrevit authoritas inviolabiliter custodire that I do so out of Covetousness or any temporal Interest But considering the strict Account that I must give at the last Judgment I think my self obliged to observe inviolably what the holy Council hath enjoyned us Yet all this while this was but a National Council of Italy which had made that Decree to which Pope Agapetus says that he was obliged to submit upon stronger Reason without doubt would he have said the same if it had been a Decree of an Oecumenical Council There are a great many Popes who have expressed themselves as plainly as these that they were subject to a Council I 'll mention no more but one who delivers his Mind upon that Subject in such a manner as no man is able to reply to And that is the famous Gerbert Silvester II. who filled three Sees successively of Reims Ravenna and lastly of Rome and was a most Learned Pope whom I have characterized in some of my Histories For that purpose he makes use of this passage in the Gospel where our Saviour says to his Disciples That if your Brother offend you reprove him privately and then in presence of two or three Witnesses and if he amend not tell the Church of him and if he obey not the Church let him be as a Publican and as a Heathen Defensor p. c. c. 29. The famous and learned Tostatus Bishop of Avila employs that Passage to prove that the supreme and highest Tribunal of the Church is that of a Council to which Jesus Christ referred all his Disciples and by conquent St. Peter who is therefore subject to it as to his lawful Judge from whom he is to expect the Justice that he may demand against his Brother Pope Silvester makes use of it in another manner but for the same end for he pretends what is true that these Words spoken to St. Peter by our Saviour in relation to his Brethren were also spoken to the same Brethren in regard St. Peter as well as of the rest Whereupon that Pope writing to Seguinus Archbishop of Sens Constanter dico quod si ipse Romanus Episcopus in fratrem peccaverit saepiusque admonitus Ecclesiam non audierit hic inquam Romanus Episcopus praecepto Dei est habendus sicut Ethnicus Publicanus Sylvest 2. Epist ad Seguin Senon hath made no difficulty to express himself in these very pithy and significant Words I say it boldly that if even the Bishop of Rome offend against you and that being often admonished he obey not the Church that Bishop of Rome I say ought to be look'd upon by the Command of God himself as a Publican and as a Heathen Could that Pope have expressed himself more clearly That he thought the Popes for all they are Heads of the Church are still subject to a Council that represents it CHAP. XX. That the ancient Popes have believed That they were subject to the Canons IT is another invincible Argument that Antiquity hath always
the Spirit of God hath made and which are consecrated by the Veneration of all the World and the Decrees of the Apostolick See which are not contrary to these Canons Ex Art Concilii Florent è Sesi 25. Antiq. Eâ—ition cum aâ—â—rob Clement VII And that is the very same that was defined in the Council of Florence after long debate betwixt the Latins and Greeks concerning the primacy and power of the Pope in the Universal Church It was agreed upon on both sides That the Pope as Successor of St. Peter was Head of the Church the Father and Teacher of all Believers who had received from Jesus Christ in the person of St. Peter full power to govern the Church The difficulty only rested in expressing the manner how he might and ought to govern it The Latins would have the Definition run thus That he had above all others the priviledge and full power of governing the whole Church according to the Sayings and Sentences of the holy Fathers Juxta determinationem sacrae Scripturae dicta sanctorum The Emperour John Paleologue and Greek Prelates An siquis inquit sanctorum in Epistola honoret Papam accipiet hoc pro Privilegio vigorously oppos'd that Clause dicta sanctorum How said he if any of the Holy Fathers writing to the Pope says to him what he thinks fit for rendering him greater Respect and more Honour shall the Pope take these Expressions of Complement and Civility for Priviledges that belong to him Besides in the draught of the Bull of Union of the two Churches the Pope having only put his own name Eugenius Bishop Servant of the Servants of God as if he alone had made these Decrees the Emperour and the Greeks would by all means have that amended and that there should no mention be made of the Pope in it unless the other Patriarchs were also named At length after that these two considerable Clauses had been well examinâ—d the Union was made in the manner that the Greeks desired it to which the Latins agreed Then the Bull was framed which began thus Eugenius Servant of the Servants of God c. Our death beloved Son John Paleologue illustrious Emperour of the Romans those who hold the place of our venerablâ— Brethren the Patriarchs and all the rest who represent the Eastern Church consenting to all the Decrees which anâ— in this Bull c. And then amongst other Articles it was defined 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. 〈◊〉 mâ—dâ—m qui in â—â—â—tiâ— conciâ—iâ—â—â— in canonibus conâ—â—â— That Jesus Christ hath given to the â—ope in the person of St. Peter full power to govern the Universal Church in the manner as is contained both in the Acts of Oecumenical Councils and in the sacred Canons and not according to the false Translation Quemadmodum etiam in gestis Conciliorum c. as if it were said that the Canons of Councils attribute also to the Pope the power of governing the Universal Church It is a quite contrary Sense to the Words of the Council which says only that the Pope hath received from Jesus Christ the power of governing the Church in the manner as is prescribed to him by the Canons Juxta eum modum qui in gestis Conciliorum in Canonibus continetur Which comprehends all because it is supposed as it is very true that the Canons of Oecumenical Councils are conform to holy Scripture Tradition and the true Sayings of the holy Fathers from whom we derive our Tradition From those two Clauses of the Bull wherein both the Eastern and Western Churches after they had well examined them agreed two things may be unquestionably concluded the one that the Pope can determine nothing in his Constitutions of infallible Authority without the Consent of the Church and the other that the Exercise of his power which is not infinite and unlimited ought to be moderated according to the Rules prescribed to him by the Canons of the Councils to which all Believers are subject What the Popes have over others is the Care they ought to take to see them observed not only by their Authority but by their Example which is of greater force and efficacy than their Ordinances and if they themselves violate them acting arbitrarily as they please without regard to the Canons which ought to be their measures or suffer them to be violated by others without punishment they become culpable before God who hath made them not the Masters but the Stewards of the Church to act according to her Orders and cause them to be obeyed This the great St. Leo expressed admirably well in those rare words which he wrote to the Emperour Martian With the Assistance of Jesus Christ I must constantly continue my Service In quo opere auxiliante Christo fideliter exequendo necesse est me perseverantem exhibere famulatum quoniam dispensatio mihi credita est ad meum reatum tendit si paternarum regulae sanctionum quae in Synodo Nicenâ ad totius Ecclesiae regimen spiritu Dei instruente sunt conditae me quod absit connivente violentur Ep. 54. ad Martian Dum tamen evidens utilitas vel necessuas id expoâ—cunt Greg. IX In talibus eadem utilitas urgens necessitas secundum instituta canonum debet attendi Innoc. III. Ep. ad Episc Favent in faithfully executing what I am commanded because he has trusted me with the Care and Dispensation of his House and I make my self guilty of great Vnfaithfulness if by my Connivance which God preserve me from I suffer the Rules and Canons to be violated which have been made by the Inspiration of the Holy Ghost in the Council of Nice for the Government of the whole Church Not but that the Pope who ought to take the care of the general Good of the Church may on certain Occasions dispense with the Canons but in that thing it self he is subject to the Canons seeing he cannot dispense with them as he pleases and without any other reason save that of his Will but only in Cases prescribed by the Canons when urgent necessity Vbi necessitas non est inconvertibilia maneant sanctorum patrum institâ—ta Gelas Vbi necessitas non est nullo modo violentur sanctorum patrum constituta St. Leo. or manifest advantage makes it appear according to the Canons that the Church intended not to oblige to them Except in such cases the ancient Popes say openly that the Canons and holy Decrees must be inviolably kept and that they cannot dispense with them Whereupon St. Bernard writing to a Pope Quid Prohibes dispensare non sed dissipare c. ubi necessilas urget excu abilis diâ—pensatio est ubi utilitas provâ—cat dispensatio laudabilâ—s est utilitas dico con munu non propria nam cum borum nih lâ— est non plane fideâ—is dâ—â—sheâ—satio est sed câ—â—eussima dissipation Bern. de cons ad Eugen
assembled by order of the Cardinals to consult about that matter were all unanimously of the Judgment of the University of Paris and he affirmed that besides the Universities of France it was also the Judgment of the famous University of Bologna 1 June from which they had Letters and of that of Florence who had given it in writing under the Hands of sixscore Doctors Six days after the Process that was brought against Gregory and Benet having been proved and made out in a judicial manner the Council past a definitive Sentence whereby it declares Pietro de la Luna and Angelo Corario heretofore called Popes Benet XIII and Gregory XII obstinate Schismaticks and Hereticks convicted of enormous Crimes of Perjury Impiety and of Collusion to deceive Believers and to keep up the Schism which so long had rent the Church and as such deposes them from the Papacy This the Council did pursuant to the Decree whereby it had before determined that that Council represented the Church universal and that it was the only supreme Judge upon Earth to whom the Judgment of that Cause belonged though it was most certain that one of these two Pretenders was the true Pope After wards they chose Alexander V. who was acknowledged by the Universal Church except those two wretched Remains of Obedience who held out still for the two Antipopes and that Pope approved all the Decrees of the Council even a moment before his Death which was most holy and precious in the sight of God I have heretofore proved according to the Judgment of almost all the Churches of Christendom of that of Rome in particular nay and of the Universal Church represented by the Council of Constance which was but a continuation of this that it ought to be reckoned without contradiction lawful But since on the one hand it hath pleased some Doctors beyond the Alpes to doubt of it and that on the other I decline all dispute in this Treatise I will only stick to matter of Fact which cannot be contested to wit that this Council of Pisa hath been one of the greatest Assemblies that was ever seen in the Church For there were in it five and twenty Cardinals four Patriarchs six and twenty Archbishops an hundred fourscore and two Bishops either in person or by Proxy two hundred fourscore and ten Abbots amongst whom were all the Heads of the Orders the Generals of the Carthusians and of the four Mendicant Orders the great Masters of Rhodes of the Holy Sepulchre and the Teutonick Knights the Deputies of the Universities of Paris Tholouse Orleans Anger 's Montpellier Bologna Florence Cracovia Vienna Prague Cologne Oxford and Cambridge and of some others and those of the Chapters of above an hundred Metropolitan and Cathedral Churches above three hundred Doctors of Divinity and of the Law the Ambassadors of the Kings of France England Poland Bohemia Sicily and Cyprus of the Dukes of Burgundy and Lorrain Brabant Bavaria of the Marquess of Brandenburg Lantgrave of Thuringe and of almost all the other Princes of Germany besides that the Kings of Hungary Sweden Denmark Norway and in a word those of Spain except Arragon shortly after adhered to that Council and by consequent all these Prelates all these Doctors all these Orders all these Universities all these Kingdoms all these States that 's to say in a word almost all Christians in the beginning of the fifteenth Century when that Dispute was started concerning the Superiority of the Council or of the Pope believed conform to the Belief of Antiquity That a Council is above the Pope But you are to take notice of somewhat more particular and convincing still When five years after the Council of Constance was opened for continuing that of Pisa as it had been decreed in that Council which was rather interrupted than concluded the Dispute concerning the Superiority of the Pope or of the Council was started again with greater Heat than before For some Cardinals being arrived from Scaffhausen whither the Pope who had escaped from Constance had retired attempted in full Assembly where Sigismund the Emperour was present to prove that the Council was dissolved because John XXIII who had abandoned it being owned for true Pope by all that were present was above the Council which could have no Authority without him Then was there a general murmuring in the Assembly and many of those who had greatest Authority and Reputation by reason of their Dignity and Knowledge Et iis responsum fuit alacriter per plures de ipso concilio viros magnae authoritatis scientificos scilicet quod Papa non esset supra Concilium sed sub concilio facta est illie contentio magna hinc inde Niem in vit Joann J. Gers Serm. coram Concil undertook to refute them and to prove on the contrary That the Council was superiour to the Pope conform to the Sermon that the famous John Gerson had made to the Council a few days before wherein he had made it out in twelve propositions That a general Council representing the Universal Church is above the Pope not only in the doubt whether or not he be true Pope but also in the Assurance that is to be had whether he be lawfully chosen or not Etiam ritè electi as they did undoubtedly hold John XXIII to have been Wherefore that Question both before and after the Sermon of Gerson having been examined in the Conferences of Nations according to the Order appointed by the Council a Report of it was made in the fourth Session Act. Concil Constan t. 12. con Ed. Paris Anton. tit 22. c. 6. §. 2. where nine Cardinals and two hundred Bishops were present with the Emperour Sigismund the Ambassadors of the Kings of France England Poland Norway Cyprus Navarr and many Princes of Germany and there seeing it had been already declared in the preceding Session that the Council subsisted and still retained all its Force and Authority tho the Pope had withdrawn himself it was by common Consent thus concluded and defined That the Holy Council lawfully assembled and representing the Church Militant hath received immediately from Jesus Christ a Power which all and every one even the Pope himself are obliged to obey in all that concerns the Faith the extirpation of Schism and the general Reformation of the Church of God in its Head and Members And to the end that it might not be said what some have said since without having carefully read the Council of Constance that that is only to be understood during the time of a Schism it is added to the Decree in the following Session That whatever Pope refuses to obey the Decrees not only of this Council but also of any other that shall be lawfully called ought to be punished if he amend not The Council afterward exercises its sovereign Authority over Pope John XXIII acknowledged by them for true Pope by the Church of Rome and by all Christian
People except a very few who still adhered to the Schismaticks Martin V. who was chosen Pope in place of John XXIII in the forty fifth Session approved the Decrees which had solemnly been made in that Council and protested that he would observe them inviolably In fine in the Bull wherein he enjoyns what is to be asked of Hereticks who return from their Heresie amongst others this Article is put Whether they believe not that all Believers ought to approve and hold what the holy Council of Constance representing the Vniversal Church holds and approves for the Integrity of the Faith and the Salvation of Souls and whether they condemn not and repute not condemned what the same holy Council hath condemned and condemns as contrary to the Faith and good Manners This without doubt is one of the most authentick Approbations that a Pope can give to a Council Now seeing in compliance with a Decree of this Council the Pope had called another at Pavia afterward at Sienna and lastly at Basil where it was held fourteen Years after that of Constance under Eugenius IV. who caused the Cardinal Julian of St. Angelo named by his Predecessor for that Function to preside in it in his place that Council in the second Session when without contradiction it was very lawful the Pope presiding therein by his Legate renewed those two Decrees and defined the same thing in the same terms touching the Superiority of General Councils to which Popes were obliged to submit in matters concerning the Faith the extinction of Schism and the Reformation of the Church in its Head and Members This was not all for sometime after Eugenius having sent the Archbishops of Colossis and Taranto to the Council to represent the Reasons and Authority that he had to dissolve it and to transfer it to another place The Fathers in a general Assembly made a Synodal Respons Synod Sess 6. Answer by way of Constitution containing more than twenty four large Pages wherein having refuted all the Reasons whereby one of these Archbishops would have proved the Superiority of the Pope over a Council Septemb. 1432. they on the contrary evince by many Reasons and by the Authority of the Council of Constance and of the Gospel which remits St. Peter to the Church that the Council which represents her hath all her Authority and again define once more that the Council is above the Pope However Eugenius dissolved it contrary to the Advice of Cardinal Julian who presided therein But when he perceived that that began to produce very bad Effects Ann. 1433. he made the Year following a new Constitution whereby annulling and rescinding all that he had done for dissolving it Illas alias quascunque quicquid per nos aut nestro nomine in praejudicium derâ—gationem sacri Concilii B siliensis seu contra ejus authoritatem factum attentatum seu assertum est cassamus revocamus nullas irritas esse declaramus that that Council had lawfully continued till then from the Beginning and approves whatever had been done in it even so far as to declare null certain Constitutions in one whereof he declared that in matters belonging to the Government of the Church he had power over all Councils And that was so authentick and solemn that Pius II. even in the Bull of his Retractation ingenuously confesse that Pope Eugenius consented to the Decrees of that Council Accessit iâ—sias Eâ—gâ—nit consenâ—us qui dissolutionem Conâ—â—â—ii à se sactam revocavit progressam eâ—â—e approbavit approved its progress and continuation and recalled the Bull whereby he had dissolved it There are two Councils then without speaking of that of Pisa whereof the Council of Constance was a continuation and two Councils in formal terms approved by two Popes Martin V. and Eugenius IV. and these Councils determine the one during the Schism and the other after the Schism was extinct that every Council representing the Universal Church is superiour to the Pope Now all the Doctors of that party which hold for the Pope's Superiority acknowledge that a Council universal and approved cannot err in its Decisions whence it may easily be concluded that since the Decrees of these Councils one is obliged to believe what all Antiquity before these Councils believed that is that an Oecumenical Council lawfully assembled is above the Pope I don't see how one can avoid this without finding ways to invalidate the Authority of the Councils and particularly of that of Constance which is held for the sixteenth General Council And this a modern Author hath attempted to do in a Book written on purpose and last Year printed at Antwerp by John Baptista Verdussen We are now to see how he hath succeeded in it CHAP. XXII Of the Writing of the Sieur Emmanuel Schelstrate against these two Decrees of the Council of Constance THree years since Ann. 1682. Cleri Gallicani de Ecclesiasticâ potestate declaratio the Clergy of France representing the Gallican Church being by Order of the King assembled at Paris made an authentick Declaration in four Articles of what they believe and define concerning Ecclesiastical Power conform to the Holy Scriptures Tradition and the practice of the whole Church and particularly of that of France Amongst other things they declare in the second Article That the Popes Successors of St. Peter have in such manner full power over the spiritual That the Decrees of the holy Council of Constance approved by the Holy Apostolick See and contained in the fourth and fifth Session concerning the Authority of General Councils must also remain in their full force and not at all be infringed And they add That the Gallican Church approves not the Opinion of those who would weaken these Decrees and rob them of all their force saying that their Authority may be called in question that they are not sufficiently approved or that they extend not beyond the time when there is a Schism in the Church Doubtless there is nothing more authoritative and at the same time more modest than that Declaration of a Church so venerable in all Ages as the Gallican hath been and which next to that of the Apostles hath always maintained and made the Catholick Faith to flourish in France in its full Integrity without having been ever suspected of the least Error Nevertheless there is a late Writer to wit the Sieur Emmanuel Schelstrate Canon of Antwerp and Under-Library-keeper of the Vatican who as he declares at first in the Scheme of his Dissertation undertakes to overthrow all that the Clergy of France hath asserted concerning these Decrees and to shew in three Chapters first that one may and ought rationally to doubt of their Authority secondly that it is only to be understood during the time of a Schism and in regard of controverted Popes and lastly that they are so far from being approved that they have been manifestly rejected by an express Bull. Now
seeing the authentick Acts which we have of the Councils of Constance and Basil are in the hands of every Body and owned for true for above two hundred and threescore Years and no man ever dream'd to call them into question he hath bethought himself of disputing us that lawful and peaceable possession authorised by the long Prescription of almost three hundred Years And this he pretends to do by opposing to us certain old Manuscripts that he hath raised out of the Grave which contain the Register and Acts of the Council of Constance which had never been seen as they are there and which God by a singular Providence as he saith hath suffered to be found almost at the same time when the Gallican Church made her Declaration as if he would afford means of confounding it at the very Instant that it was published This without doubt is an Undertaking magnificently projected But what is it founded upon Upon the most ruinous Foundation in the World and which I might easily overturn and by consequent all the Superstructure by saying in one word which is most true that the pretended good Manuscripts that he produceth against us after a Possession of two hundred threescore and ten Years are not more to be received and are not near so good as those from which the Decrees that we have of the Council of Constance have been taken Should I answer him in this manner it would lie at his door to prove that his Manuscripts are better than ours which he will never be able to do as we shall presently see But to do him a favour I am content not to handle them according to Rigour only will clearly and calmly make it out to him with all the respect that is due to his Character that the Consequences which he draws from what he finds there are false and that after his way of arguing all Oecumenical Councils might be strip'd of the Authority which they ought to have and which they have had in the Church to this present CHAP. XXIII A Refutation of the first Chapter of the Dissertation of M. Schelstrate THIS Author undertakes to prove in this Chapter against the Gallican Church That the Decrees of the fourth and fifth Session of the Council of Constance are of dubious Authority first because the Decree of the fourth Session hath been corrupted by the Fathers of the Council of Bâ—sil who in the Extract that they caused to be made in the Year 1442. of the Decrees of the Council of Constance omitted in the first Decree the words ad fidem and added thereunto these words Et ad reformationem generalem Ecclesiae Dei in capite in membris That all men even the Pope are obliged to obey that Council in what concerns the Reformation of the Church in its Head and Members As to the Omission of the word ad fidem he is so favourable as to excuse it for it appears only to have been done by the fault of the Transcriber because that word is generally to be found every where and indeed ought to be there As to the words which he pretends have been added he confesses that they are in all the Editions of the Councils that have been hitherto made because as he says they have all followed the first that was made in the Year One thousand four hundred fourscore and nineteen at Haguenau from a Copy of that Extract of the Fathers of Basil but he pretends that it is not lawful and that those Fathers have added these Words upon no other proof but that they are not to be found in the ancient Manuscripts which he hath seen Well must it be allowed then upon a proof of this Nature and a bare negative Argument which does not conclude to accuse a whole Assembly of Prelates of an Imposture in which a Cardinal presided a man of a very austere Virtue whom Pope Clement VII hath canonized Let him be accused of Head-strongness and of abounding in his own Sense in what he thought to be just I consent to that there was his weak side but that he should be taken for an Impostor and a Falsary and be treated so upon so bare a conjecture is a thing that honest men can hardly suffer The Manuscripts which M. Schelstrate hath seen contain not these last Words of the Decree be it so we take it upon his Word reckon him an honest man and shall never accuse him of having imposed upon us but only of having reasoned ill in concluding from thence that the Fathers of Basil have falsified that Decree for who hath told him that the Manuscript from which the Fathers of Basil made their Extract contained not these words Why does he without being well assured of it accuse them of Imposture Don't we daily see that there is difference amongst several manuscript Copies of one and the same work that there is to be found in one what hath been omitted in another and that therefore ancient Editions are corrected Witness that true and famous History of St. Austin which the Fathers of Saint German des Prez cause to be made from a great many Manuscripts the differences whereof they mark and from some of which they take what they add to the ancient Editions which want certain words that are not to be found in the Copies from which they have been printed Ought he not to presume that that Copy of Basil hath been taken from a Manuscript that had these last Words which he hath not found in his own that ought to be reckoned defective And to prove to him that they are so I declare that those which I have seen and which are very ancient have the same Words at the end of the Decree of the fourth Session And at the very Instant that I am writing this in my Apartment in the Monastery of St. Victor at Paris where the Canons regular of that Royal Abbey have done me the favour to let me chuse an honourable Retirement suitable to my Profession and way of Living I have before me that famous Manuscript of their celebrated Library from which Monsieur de Sponde hath taken all that is most rare in his History of the Council of Constance which is certainly the finest part of his work Now in this Manuscript which is the most ancieat that can be seen I read that Decree word for word as it stands in the printed Acts and in the last Editions the most exact and most correct of all But there 's one thing still more observable We have in these Manuscripts of St. Victor the Extract of the Sessions which they who were at the Council for the French Nation sent to Paris as fast as they got them and that Decree of the fourth Session is to be found therein in express terms as we have it Will M. Schelstrate say that the Council of Basil which was not held till many Years after the Council of Constance hath falsified these Extracts What can he answer to
in Capite in Membris and seeing the Council was lawfully assembled Qui nimo praefatam dissolutionem irritam inanem declarantes ipsum sacrum Concitium purè simpliciter cum effectu ac omni devotione favore prosequimur prosequi intendimus it hath still continued and so ought to be continued for procuring those three ends as if it had never been dissolved Then he rescinds all that he had done for the dissolution of it protesting that he approves it and will have it to continue purely simply and with all Devotion and Favour Thus the Pope speaks who when he was Cardinal was present at the Council of Constance whose Decrees he could not be ignorant of and by consequent if the Decree of the second Council of Basil related in the same Council as being that of Constance had not been the same in proper terms it is not to be doubted but that Eugenius would have affirmed it to be false and have rejected it In fine in the very same Manuscript which M. Schelstrate produces there is to be found in the Preface of the Decree as in our Acts that This Holy Council of Constance lawfully assembled for the Extirpation of the present Schism for the Vnion and for the Reformation that ought to be made of the Church in its Head and Members to the end that that Union and Reformation of the Church may the more easily more surely more amply and more freely be obtained ordains declares and defines as follows to wit That all men of whatsoever Dignity they be even Papal are obliged to obey the Council in all things belonging to the Faith and the Extirpation of this Schism And who does not see that for compleating the Sense according to the Intention and express words of the Council one must not stop there but that it must necessarily follow and to the Reformation of the Church in the Head and Members thereof So it is in our Copies which are true and is wanting in his which unjustifiable Omission makes them clearly appear to be defective But says M. Schelstrate one of my Manuscripts affirms that the day before and the very same day of the fourth Session there were great Debates concerning the matters to be put into the Decree and that at length by a sudden Inspiration of the Holy Ghost all agreed that nothing should be put into it but the Points that are to be seen in that Copy and the other Manuscript informs me that the Emperour made them all agree by finding a moderation to which he brought the Cardinals to consent Now that is exactly what we would be at I 'll tell ye how There were four Points to be examined relating to that Decree first Whether the Council hath received immediately from Jesus Christ a full Power to which the Pope himself is obliged to submit in what concerns the Faith and the Extirpation of Schism secondly and if it ought to be put into it in what concerns the Reformation of the Church in the Head and Members thirdly whether in case the Pope would not obey it he might be punished and fourthly if all that ought to be understood of any other Council as well as of that of Constance As to the first since all the Nations agreed upon it it easily past but as to the three others some and especially the Cardinals who at least would therein gratifie the Pope opposed them Now the mean and moderation which the Emperour Sigismund found out to unite all dissenting minds was that in the Decree of the present fourth Session the two first Points only should be inserted and that for the other two they might afterwards consider what was to be done about them in the following Senssion That appears manifestly by our Acts by our Manuscripts and even by that of M. Schelstrate wherein as I have just now proved there is a necessity considering that Proceeding for making a rational and compleat Sense that these Words which have been omitted in it be added And as to what concerns the Reformation of the Church in the Head and Members This is more clearly still to be seen in the fifth Session which was held eight days after and wherein for putting an end wholly to that Affair and for proposing without Interruption and at one glance what men ought to believe concerning that Point they put in the first place the Decree of the fourth Session word for word as we have it and then made a Decree by which the two other Points were defined and declared to wit that the Pope himself is obliged to obey not only that Council of Constance that was held during the Schism but also all others and that if he refuse to submit to them he may be punished And this is to be seen not only in our Acts and Copies but likewise in the Manuscript of M. Schelstrate as he himself confesses and therefore he must acknowledge that even though these Words for the reformation of the Church in the Head and Members had not been put into the Decree of the fourth Session as he pretends yet that would not at all reach the bottom of the Affair because they are actually in the Decree of the fifth Session For to render a Decree authentick what matters it in what Session it hath been made After all it must necessarily be concluded from what I have now said as to these uncontroverted matters of Fact that we ought not to correct the Council of Constance according to the Manuscripts of M. Schelstrate But on the contrary it is his part to correct them according to ours and according to the Council as we have it And so the first Argument that he alledges why we should doubt of the Authority of these Decrees is null The other two are of the same force and in a few words may without any difficulty be overthrown Seeing he cannot deny but that these two Decrees are in the fifth Session he saith what he hath learned from those Vltramontanian Authors who have written for the Superiority of the Pope against that Council to wit that they were made in a hurry without sufficient Deliberation and against the Judgment of many who opposed them This is the very same thing that the Nestorians nay and some of our Protestants have said against the Council of Ephesus and against St. Cyril whom they accuse of having caused Nestorius to be condemned with extream Precipitation without hearing him and without possibility of having the cause sufficiently examined All Hereticks might say as much and do indeed say so of all Councils which have condemned their Heresie But not to rest on that I maintain to M. Schelstrate that there never was a Question better examined than that which was moved in this Council For since the Council of Pisa where it was first started had decided in favour of the Council it was almost the whole Subject of Disputes and Conferences and was tossed to and froâ—
in the Council of Constance even before and after the Sermon of John Gerson Besides after that Assembly wherein all that the Cardinals who were sent from the Pope objected had been convincingly refuted it was so well examined that all the four Nations acquiesced in the Point I know very well there were great Debates about it and that the Cardinals opposed it I even grant him what he hath found in his Manuscript and which he confesses had never been known before and which perhaps is not true that the Cardinals nay and the Ambassadours of France made a private Protestation in the Chamber of Presence that it was only for avoiding of Scandal that they assisted at the fifth Session and not for consenting to what they knew was to be defined in it What can he conclude from thence Hath not he read the History of the Conclaves where after a thousand Intrigues a thousand Oppositions and a thousand other things more than I can tell at length a lawful Election is made to which all the Cardinals who were so divided before consent Let him read the Histories of the Council of Trent written by Fra. Paolo and Cardinal Pallavicini there he will find a great many Debates about Points that were to be decided in the Sessions and nevertheless the Holy Ghost which unites all minds into one Judgment made all the Decrees of that Council to pass with the unanimous Consent of all the Fathers who had been so divided before It is just so with this Council of Constance I grant there may have been Oppositions Contests private Protestations and whatever M. Schelstrate pleases to inform us of from his Manuscripts yet when all is done these Cardinal and all they who debated and protested privately were present at the fifth Session and seeing the Holy Ghost unites all minds in a Council to the end they may say Visum est spiritui sancto nobis the two Decrees of that Session past by common Consent as the Acts say to which M. Schelstrate has nothing at all in his Manuscripts that can be objected Quibus articulis sive constitutionibus lectis concilium cos cas uniformiter approbavit conclusit This is the Language of the Acts These Articles and Decrees having been read the Council with a common Consent approved them In fine the third Argument he makes use of to weaken the Authority of the Decrees of these two Sessions is that the Council being then only made up of those of the Obedience of John XXIII could not represent the Universal Church Now to convince him of the Insignificancy of that Argument which without doubt is the weakest of all I need only tell him in two words that what he supposes after Bellarmine who hath supplied him with all his weak Objections is very false For almost all the Cardinals of the two Obediences of Gregory XII and Benet XIII were united in the Council of Pisa where these two pretended Popes who by Collusion played upon all Christendom were declared Schismaticks and Antipopes and Alexander V. chosen who was acknowledged for true Pope by most Churches without any Competition and especially by the Church of Rome Now the same Cardinals and Bishops who constituted that numerous Council continued it at Constance as Pope John XXIII owned by the same Council for true Pope declares in express terms in the Bull whereby he calls that Council according as it had been decreed at Pisa five Years before So that the Obedience of John XXIII besides the Concurrence of almost all the Kingdoms of Christendom nay and of the Church of Rome also was over and above composed of the greater and sounder part of the two other who were re-united at Pisa and continued that Council at Constance If M. Schelstrate pretend that the Absence of those who held for the one or other of those two who had been declared Schismaticks and Antipopes hinders the Council from being Oecumenical he must know that his unjust Pretence would ruine most of the Oecumenical Councils for the Hereticks that have been condemned in them might say that those of their Party who had right to be present in them either were not there or would not own them for lawful and Oecumenical Councils And Protestants might say the same especially of the Council of Trent where neither the Bishops of the Church of England nor of Denmark Norway Sweden and that part of Germany who followed the Confession of Ausbourg nor the Bishops of Greece of the East and of Egypt who own not the Pope for Head of the Church and who are no more of his Obedience than those at the time of the Council of Constance who held for Pietro de la Luna or Angelo Corario were present All these Bishops I say of so great a part of the Christian World were absent from the Council of Trent when it made its Decrees and would not own it Is there any thing more certain And nevertheless M. Schelstrate is obliged to confess with all other Catholicks that their Absence could not hinder that Council from being Oecumenical because for making it universal it is enough that all be invited to it as they were and that they might be present there if they pleased or if the Princes on whom they depend gave them leave So that the Absence of the Prelates who were the Dregs of those two Obediences hinders not but that the Decrees of Constance are the Definitions of an Universal Council and that they have an infallible Authority But there is still somewhat that presses more home for if it were not so and if it were to be approved which Bellarmine says before M. Schelstrate that these Decrees have no Authority by reason of that Absence and that there was no Pope in Council when they were made strange things would follow from thence In the first place the Condemnation of the Errors of Wicleff and John Huss would be null because they were condemned in the fifteenth Session Sess 15. before the Union of the remnant of those two Obediences and when as yet there was no Pope there in the Council Secondly that detestable Proposition of John Petit that any private man might meritoriously kill a Tyrant any way whatsoever would not be lawfully condemned of Heresie by the same reason And lastly that the Condemnation and afterwards the Deposition of John XXIII Sess â— which happened long before the Union of the two Obediences must have been made without any lawful Power Cardinal Julian who presided in the Council of Basil for Pope Eugenius wrote this to him to take him off of his design of dissolving it because of the Decrees of the second Session And would to God Cardinal Bellarmine and M. Schelstrate had read and considered that Letter before they made an Objection that draws after it so dangerous Consequences Nam â—quis dixerit decreta illius concilii non esse valida neâ—essâ— babet sateri privationem oliâ—â— Joannis
Matter having been diligently examined Now it is sure adds he with the greatest Confidence imaginable and as if no body could doubt of the truth of what he says without so much as bringing any proof for it the thing being clear in it self It is then says he most certain that that Decree of the Superiority of a Council was made by the Council of Constance without any Examination sine ullo examine I have two things to say to that first that a manifest Falshood was never asserted with so much Boldness for never was there a Question examined nor debated in the Council with greater heat than this as I have already made it appear and as it even appears by the Manuscript of M. Schelstrate For there it is to be seen that before the fourth Session the Deputies of the Nations and the Cardinals after many Contests and Oppositions of the same Cardinals all agreed Habita fuit non modica disceptatio inter D. Regem D. D. Cardinales deputatos nationum c. by a sudden Inspiration of the Holy Ghost in one Judgment concerning that Point of the Superiority of a Council over the Pope who ought to obey it in what relates to Faith and the Extirpation of Schism And he adds that before the fifth Session Die Sabbati 6 Aprilis cum per prius inter D. D. Cardinales Nations altercatum fuisset tandem ordinatum conclusum est c. which was not held till eight days after and wherein according to himself it was defined that the Pope ought to obey the Council in what concerns the Reformation of the Church in the Head and Members there fell out again great Debates betwixt the Cardinals and the Deputies of the Nations How can it then be said so boldly without bogling as Cardinal Bellarmine hath done Nullo facto examine I declare that it is a thing I cannot comprehend after the unquestionable Testimonies that I have before alledged to the contrary The next thing that I have to say against the Answer of Bellarmine is that that word Conciliariter signifies not only as he hath interpreted it the matter in question having been well examined but also being afterwards solemnly decided in a Session of the Council without which nothing is defined In the Council of Constance Votes went by Nations There were at first four the Italian English French and German and afterward the Spanish was added The Deputies of every Nation consulted first severally and then all the Nations communicated their Opinions after which all these Nations held an Assembly where every private Person had liberty to speak and give his Voice yet all the Voices made but one Suffrage for each Nation though they differed in the number of Prelates and Doctors In fine when they were all agreed after much disputing and debate that was no more but preliminary and a necessary Condition to a final Decision which was only made in a General Assembly of Cardinals Archbishops Bishops Generals of Orders Ambassadors of Princes and in a word of the whole Council with great Ceremony after high Mass Litanies and other Prayers in the publick Session held in the Cathedral Church where after that a Cardinal or Bishop having from the Pulpit read the Decrees and Articles framed in the Assembly of the Nations demanded if they approved them it was still free to every one to say what he pleased concerning them And when they had all unanimously said Placet We consent to them as they never failed to do after these previous Deliberations shorter or longer according to the greater or less difficulty of the matters that they had examined then was the Decree authentically made and had its full force and that in the terms of Martin V. is called a Decree made Conciliariter In this manner the Errors of Wickleff were condemned in the eighth Session that of John Huss and the damnable Proposition of John Petit in the fifteenth definitive Sentence pronounced against John XXIII who was deposed in the twelfth and the Decrees of the Superiority of the Council made in the fourth and fifth Session Before that the Council had determined nothing at all nor laid any Obligation upon Believers This the Pope like a very knowing man expresses in the terms he makes use of approving the Council in the five and fortieth Session The Colledge of Cardinals and of the Nations concluded that a certain Book of F. John Falkenberg full of Heresies ought to be condemned The Ambassadors of the King of Poland and of the great Duke of Lithuania who concerned themselves in that Condemnation publickly besought the Pope to condemn it in full Session before the conclusion of the Council according to the Resolution taken by the Cardinals and the Nations and they pressed him to it in so offensive a manner that they protested in name of those Princes their Masters that in case of a refusal they appealed to the next Council Seeing these Ambassadors had spoken so haughtily and in so disobliging a manner under the specious Pretext of an extraordinary Zeal for the Faith and that besides it was not at all to the purpose that the Pope in the present Juncture should give cause to think that he thought himself obliged to submit to what the Cardinals and Nations had determined in their Assemblies he weighed his Words and answered very prudently making it by his Answer appear that on the one hand he was not wanting to comply with his Obligations and on the other that he knew very well how to preserve his Rights and Liberty For he told them that he would always inviolably observe and stick to what the Council had decided in matter of Faith Conciliariter That shews that he had at least as much Zeal for the Faith as these Ambassadors had who pressed him in so disrespectful a manner to condemn a Book And at the same time he adds that he approves all the Decrees which the Council had made authentically and according to the forms Conciliariter but not at all what was done otherwise as if he would give them to understand that tho he be obliged to obey the Council and inviolably to approve and observe what hath been defined in the Sessions yet he is not at all bound to submit to what the Cardinals and Nations might conclude in their Assemblies without the Authority and Approbation of the Council in their Sessions This I think may undeceive M. Schelstrate who pretends that the Pope by speaking so makes it appear that he is above the Council he ought to say above not the Council but the Colledge of Cardinals and the Assemblies of the Nations when they are not authorised in the Sessions And therefore when one of the Ambassadors of the King of Poland would still appeal to the next Council the Pope commanded him Silence upon pain of Excommunication and he did very well because that Appeal was manifestly rash abusive and unwarrantable it being most evident that a
the whole General Council whence it follows that the most pernicious and dangerous Error to the Church of some men ought to be condemned who to flatter the Pope so rob the Council of its Authrity that they have the Boldness to say that the Pope is not of necessity obliged to follow the Decisions of the Council and that on the contrary we should test upon the Judgment of the Pope if he oppose that of the Church or of a General Council Thus that great Cardinal from the chair of Truth before the whole Council of Constance conform to its Decrees and in presence of the Pope himself who found no fault with it and seemed not at all displeased that that Opinion was called an Error most pernicious and most dangerous invented by the Flatterers of Popes Decr. Facult Ann. 1429. Kal. April So also the sacred Faculty following so good an Example about twelve years after made F. John Sarasin retract that Proposition which he had put into one of his Theses All the Authority that gives force to the Decrees of a Council Tota authoritas dans vigorem statutis residet in solo summo pontisice resides in the Pope alone He was obliged to make a publick recantation and to change his Proposition into this All the Authority that gives force to the Decrees of a Council Toâ—â— authoritas dans vigorem statutis residet non in solo summo pontifice sed principaliter in spiritu Sancto in Catholica Ecclesia resides not in the Pope alone but chiefly in the Holy Ghost and Catholick Church And certainly it is very rational that the Pope should depend upon the Will of the Holy Ghost who teaches as it pleases him all Truth to the Church and to the Council which represents it and not that the Holy Ghost should depend upon on the Will of the Popes as it must needs do if after that divine Spirit hath by the Council defined the Consubstantiality of the Word the Divinity of the Holy Ghost the Unity of Person and the Plurality of Natures Wills and Operations â—n Jesus Christ and such other Truths concerning the Faith his Decisions had no Authority if it pleased not the Pope to consent to â—hem And this I think is sufficient in relation to the Approbation of the Decrees of Constance one word more as to what M. Schelstrate pretends that they were only made for the time of a Schism CHAP. XXV A Refutation of the other Chapter of M. Schelstrate THis Objection that is made against us is of an old ruinous Engine ready to fall of it self tho we set no strong hand to it to push it down The truth is the Council of Constance which foresaw that it might be made use of to weaken the supreme Authority of Oecumenical Councils did anticipate and overthrow it even before it was made and for that end in the fifth Session wherein it declared that all men of what Dignity soever are obliged to obey the Decrees and Ordinances of that sacred Council of Constance these words are added And of any other General Council lawfully assembled Et cujuscunque alterius Concilii Generalis legitimè congregati He that speaks of any other Council without Restriction comprehends all times both out of Schism and during a Schism So the Council of Basil which was a long time lawful when there was no Schismâ— declared that the Pope was obliged to obey it and every other Council and the Reasons given for it in that long Synodal Answer approved by Pope Eugenius necessarily comprehend all times as may be seen in the two Reasons which only I shall alledge The first is That an Oecumenical Council is a whole and a Body whereof the Pope or he that presides in it in his place is the Head For there is no Acephalous Council as M. Schelstrate speaks that is to say without a Head calling that of Constance so in the Absence of the Pope Nay if he refuse to preside when he might or withdraw himself from it there is always some body that presides therein in his place and represents him in that quality of Head as the whole Council represents the Universal Church and it will be acknowledged without difficulty that the Head is no more but the chief Member and principal Part of that great Body Certè Petrus Apostolus primum membrum universalis Ecclesiae est Gregor l. 4. Ep. 8. as Saint Gregory speaking of Saint Peter positively affirms Not as Jesus Christ who is not only the Head but also the Master of the Universal Church which he hath purchased with his own Blood and by consequent it is his Church it properly belongs unto him and he can dispose thereof as he thinks fit as an Owner can do with his Estate Dominus est Hence it is that he cannot be said to be but a part of the Church Domious Vniverss noâ— est pars universiâ—â—â— Arist 12 Meâ—aph he is over all as God who is the absolute Master of the World is not a part of that whole of that Universe whereof he is the Master as Aristotle himself hath acknowledged It is not so with the Pope who is indeed Head of the Church Universal but not Master Jesus Christ having said to St. Peter as well as to all the other Apostles Matth. 20. Mark 12. Luke 22. The Princes of the Gentiles exercise Dominion over them but it shall not be so among you And that entirely ruines that odious Comparison that some would make between our Kings who are over the States of their Kingdom and the Popes whom they would place over the whole Church There is a great deal of Difference Our Kings are the Masters in their States exercise Dominion over them but not the Popes in the Church but it shall not be so with you The Pope then is but a part of the Church and of a General Council that represents it and not the Master Now it is evident by the light of Nature that the whole is more noble than every part and carries it over them according to that sentence of St. Austin L. de Bapt. c. 4. Vniversum partibus semper optimo Jure praeponitur And upon that Maxim received of all Men without contradiction St. Jerome in one word derides that question when he saith Ep. ad Evagr. Major est Authoritas orbis quam urbis Thus the Pope as the chief part and Head of the universal Church is above every part and his power regulated according to the Canons extends over all the Churches taken particularly and none are exempt from his Jurisdiction but no ways over all the Churches assembled in a General Council unless it be for calling of them and presiding therein And in this manner is to be understood what is to be found in the Bulls of Eugenius IV. and Leo X. in the Councils of Florence and the Lateran besides that this last is not agreed upon to be
an universal Council The other reason of the Council of Basil in its Synodal Answer is that an Ecumenical Council hath received the gift of Infallibility as well as the universal Church which it represents and that the Pope may err as I have proved it to have been the belief of all Antiquity But to avoid disputing This reason may be set off in a stronger and more convincing manner by saying They who hold an opinion contrary to that of the Superiority of a Council are still ready to grant that during a Schism it is above the Pope who is controverted because what is certain ought always to be preferred before the uncertain This is a Principle then agreed upon on both sides from whence it may be thus argued It is certain that a general Council representing the Universal Church is Infallible no Catholick can doubt of this On the other hand it is not certain that the Pope is so seeing many very able and Catholick Doctors and most famous Universities not only doubt of it but teach and vigorously maintain that he is not Hence it must necessarily be concluded that seeing what is certain ought to be preferred before the uncertain The tribunal of a Council which as it is certainly known cannot err in its determinations is over that of the Pope who perhaps may be deceived there being no certainty of his Infallibility It is evident that those two reasons of the Council of Basil when it was very lawful and approved by Pope Eugenius make it appear that every General Council is above the Pope both in the time of a Schism and when there is no Schism seeing in both times the Council is a whole of which the Pope is but a part and that it is certain that in both these times the Council is alike Infallible and that at least it is not certain that the Pope is neither in the one nor other of these times Having said so much I think I have fully answered M. Schelstrate as to what he hath alledged in the dissertation that he hath made against one of the chief Articles of the Declaration of the Clergy of France For as to the long discourse which that Author makes in one of his Chapters to persuade us upon the credit of his Manuscript that after great debates among the Nations it was at length resolved by common consent that the Reformation of the Church in the Head and Members should not be attempted 'till after the election of the Pope It is without doubt pitiful and deserves not any answer Can it be concluded from thence that a Pope lawfully elected who is present and presides in the deliberations of a Council is not a part of that whole and of that Body which represents the Universal Church whose Authority ought to be preferred before that of any of its Members in particular by that reason which proves that the whole is greater and more noble than any of its parts And by what Philosophy does he pretend to make us acknowledg that from the presence of a Pope in a Council it follows that that Pope is not obliged to submit to the Decrees that may be made in it even contrary to his own Judgment when they are carried by the plurality of Voices whether it be of individual Persons or of Nations That is the very thing in question to wit if a Council whether the Pope be there or not is above the Pope How will he make out his proof Besides it was not concluded in that Assembly of the Nations that no Decrees concerning Reformation could be made before the Election of a Pope but only that before that time they should not all be made and especially such as moderated the Power of the Pope and confined it to just limits it being very reasonable that he should be present at those deliberations wherein he was so much concerned The truth is not to speak of the other Decrees of Reformation that were already made in the Council there was a very considerable one made relating to the Pope in the nine and thirtieth Session before the Election of Martin V. who was not chosen till after the one and fourtieth It is appointed by that Decree that the Popes being so much the more obliged to make the light of their Faith conspicuous by how much they are raised in Dignity above all others shall for the future make in presence of those who have elected them and before their Election be Published their Confession of Faith according to the Form prescribed to them by the Council in the same Session That without doubt was a pretty important Reformation seeing thereby was revived what heretofore had been practised and what King Childebert demanded of Pope Pelagius I. to inform himself of his belief because it was thought that that Pope had too much favoured the Eutichyans who had surprised him by their Artifices The Council then might have made the other Decrees of Reformation before the Election of the Pope but they were willing they should not be made till after that the Pope was elected and the manner how they appoint that Reformation to be made is so far from favouring M. Schelstrate that it infers a conclusion quite contrary to what he pretends and manifestly proves that the Pope even when not questioned is inferiour to a Council Statuit decernit And indeed the Council wills and ordains in the fourtieth Session that the Pope either with the Council or with the Deputies of the Nations do reform the Church in the Head and Members as to the Points that were to be given him and that he make that Reformation before the dissolution of the Council Was there ever a more authentick act of supreme Authority than this When there was no more Schism after the union of the three obediences as M. Schelstrate owns The Council ordains that an undoubted Pope such as certainly he that was to be elected must be do reform the Church in the Head and Members but it will have it to be done with consent of the Council Any Bishop may do as much the difference is that he shall not be President of the Assembly where he shall give his Vote as all the rest do Now if the Council will not in Body set about that work it refers it to the care of the Pope in conjunction with the Deputies of the Nations He doth not act then in that Reformation but by the authority of the Council that deputes him and all the advantage that he is to have over the rest is that he shall be the first Deputy at the Head of all the others In fine they prescribe to him both the Articles upon which they would have the Decrees of Reformation made and the time wherein they should be expeded If that be not to ordain prescribe command and consequently if these be not evident marks and Authentick acts of Authority and Superiority I know none in the World What will
M. Schelstrate then say now with his long discourse about the five Nations agreeing that the Reformation should not be made 'till after the Election of a Pope But once more What does he mean with the great mystery he makes of this that after much debate in the Assembly of these Nations concerning the manner how the Decree should be made whether by obliging the Pope with these Deputies to make the Reformation formation before his Coronation Postea fuerunt factae diversae formae decreti ad h. c Tandem dictum fuit quod Papa electus ligari non poterat or after it was at length said Papa electus ligari non poterat that when a Pope is chosen he cannot be bound Does he by that then pretend that we are obliged to believe that a Pope lawfully elected as St. Silvester was is not obliged to subscribe to the Decrees of an Ecumenical Council as that of Nice was And that when such a Council hath decided the consubstantiality of the word and forbidden Priests to marry the Pope is not bound by these Decrees as well as the rest of Christians are and that he is still at liberty to believe of the one what he thinks fit and to act in regard of the other as he pleases But does he not see that to have the true meaning of those words they are to be applied to the Subject in question to wit whether it should be put into the Decree that the Pope who was to be chosen Ante Coronationem Pape Administrationem aliquam should be obliged to make the Reformation before his Coronation nay and before he could have any part in the Government of the Church and to give good security for it as the German Nation demanded Whereupon they had reason to say that a Pope could not be obliged to a thing so unbeseeming the Pontifical Majesty nor so tied up as to deprive him of the Power he hath by Divine Right to Govern the Church by virtue of his Primacy from the very instant that he is Canonically elected Successor of St. Peter Thus ought these words to be understood in relation to what goes before and not that the Pope is not obliged to any thing The truth is in the Decree that was made after that Conciliariter in the fourtieth Session The Pope was not obliged in that manner as the Germans had proposed nevertheless he was bound in another most reasonable manner if I may say so that is to say he was obliged to reform the Church in the Head and Members with consent of the Council or with the Deputies of the Nations before the end of the Council But if M. Schelstrate will still be opinionative and pretend that the Nations understood something else by these words Quod Papa electus ligari non poterat there need no other answer to be made unto him but that we must not stick to what hath been said in the Assembly of the Nations as he doth but to what hath been defined Conciliariter in the Session as we have just now mentioned I am apt to believe now that M. Schelstrate will be fully satisfied with me seeing I have exactly answered Point for Point all that he hath said upon his Manuscripts unknown to the whole World for near three hundred years and which at present he thinks fit to object to us as most Authentick Pieces in the dissertation he hath made against the Declaration of the Gallican Church and against the perpetual Edict of the King who as Protector of the Church and of her Canons makes it to be observed in all his Territories and in fine against the Council of Constance received by all Christendom and especially by France which looks upon and reverences it as its Palladium the prop support and defender of its liberties This being so there remains no more but in a few words to conclude what I have hitherto said of the superiority of a Council over the Pope I made it out in the beginning that all Antiquity believed it without the least dispute as to that Subject as there happened about the time of the Council of Pisa Then I clearly shew'd what that Council and the two following of Constance and Basil even approved by the Popes Alexander V. Martin V. and Eugenius IV. determined on that Subject in favours of Councils As to the times that have succeeded these three Councils it is certain that all those great Men those Bishops Cardinals Popes those Universities and Learned Doctors of all Nations who as I have said have taught that Popes are not Infallible have by consequent maintained that an Ecumenical Council which cannot be doubted but to be Infallible is above the Pope But in a particular manner it is a Doctrin which the more renowned Doctors of Paris have always taught I say of that learned University the ancientest and most famous of all others of whom if I should make a List with the quotations of their Opinions it would easily fill up a whole Book It is enough for me to mention here what the great Cardinal of Lorraine fearing that some term might be slipt in the Council of Trent that might be interpreted against that Doctrine of all France caused his Secretary to represent to Pope Pius IV. in the year 1563. These are the proper terms that he put into his instructions concerning that Point I cannot deny but that I am a French Man and have been bred in the Vniversity of Paris where it is held that the Pope is subject to a Council and they who teach the contrary there are looked upon and noted as Hereticks The French will sooner lose their lives than renounce that Doctrin It would be folly to think that there is one Bishop in France that ever would consent to the opinion contrary to that truth The truth is Edit Card. Borom 9. Jan. 1563. Pallabicin Hist conc Trid. l. 19. c. 12. n. 10. c. 13. n. 2. The Legates of the Council being instructed from Rome that they should endeavour so to bring it about that in the Canon concerning the Pope the terms of the Council of Florence should be used by putting into it that the Pope hath received the Power of Governing the Universal Church Ibid. n. 7. inesse summo Pontifici potestatem regendi Ecclesiam universalem the Bishops of France opposed it and were followed by most of the Fathers of the Council Not that these words regendi Ecclesiam universalem signifie any thing else but that general Jurisdiction of the Pope which reaches all the parts of the Church in what concerns the Publick good of all Christendom that he may see to it according to the Canons as the Council of Florence expresses it so as we have made it appear But they would not have these words Ecclesiam universalem so much as abused to insinuate thereby that the Pope is above the Church universal taken altogether assembled and represented by an Ecumenical
Council And therefore to remove all ambiguity and to prevent the wresting of these words to a sense contrary to the Superiority of a Council they said that instead of Regendi Ecclesiam universalem it ought to be put into the Canon Potestatem regendi omnes fideles omnes Ecclesias that the Pope hath the Power of Governing all Believers and all Churches which is to be understood of all not Assembled in Council but taken severally and in particular none of them being exempted from the Jurisdiction of the Pope in what relates to the publick good the general Government and the cases limited by the Canons So careful even to a scruple have our Ancestors been to stand upon their guard on that side that no attack in the least might be made against the ancient Doctrin always inviolably observed in this Kingdom And it is most remarkable that at that time when the Doctors of Paris most strenuously maintained that Doctrin after the Councils of Constance and Basil against those that strove to invalidate their Decrees Innoc. VIII Litter ad Theol. Paris 7. iâ— Sept. Ann. 1486. Innocent VIII sent them a Brief wherein he makes their Elogy and amongst other things magnifies the greatness of their zeal which they expressed for maintaining the honour and rights of the Holy Roman Church and for defending the Catholick faith against the Heresies which they incessantly confuted After all that I may end where I began to handle this question I shall conclude with the testimony of another Pope whom the Authors who will have it as M. Schelstrate will that Popes are above Councils can never reject And that is Pius II. who when he was no more but Aeneas Sylvius Picolomini Clerk to the Council of Basil whereof he hath given us the History maintained with all his might as well as the Doctors of Paris that the Authority of a General Council is Superior to that of a Pope But when he himself was promoted to be Pope he thought for a reason that may easily be guessed at that he ought to make known to the World that he had changed his Opinion and that then he thought the quite contrary of what before he had maintained with all the heat that a Man ought to have who is well persuaded of the Justice of the Cause whereof he undertakes the defence And that he solemnly did by a Bull wherein he retracts and in that Recantation that he might declare that he followed another Opinion he would not stiffle the manifest truth concerning the nature of the Opinion which he forsook and of the other that he embraced For in this manner he speaks in his Bull hinting at the Conferences and Disputes that were had with Juliano Cesarini Cardinal of St. Angelo who stood up for the interest of the Pope as much as he could and yet for all that agreed in Judgment with the Council wherein he presided Tuebamur antiqaam seutentiam i le novam defendebat Extollebamus generalis concilii autoritatem ille Apostolicae sedis potestatem magnopere commendabat He defended says that Pope the Ancicient Doctrin and he took the part of the new We extolled the Authority of the Vniversal Council and he magnified extreamly the Power of the Apostolick See This now is plain dealing Pius II. in Bull. retract That Pope who was willing to change his Opinion with his condition which after him Adrian VI. did not declares fairly and honestly in his Bull that the Doctrin whereof he had formerly undertaken the Defence concerning the Superiority of a Council is the Doctrin of Antiquity and that the other is new And that is all I would be at I need no more to gain my cause For all that I have pretended to in this Treatise is to shew what Antiquity hath believed concerning the Points in hand So that after so authentick a Declaration of Pope Pius II. I have ground to say as to this Article what I have already oftener than once said in relation of the others with Pope Celestin I. writing to the Bishops of the Gallican Church Desinat incessere novitas vetustarem CHAP. XXVI The state of the question touching the Power that some Doctors have attributed to Popes over the Temporal I Have if I mistake not made it clearly appear in all the preceding Chapters of this Treatise how far the Ancient Church hath believed that the Power over Spirituals which Jesus Christ gave to St. Peter and his Successors as Heads of the Universal Church extended I am now to shew whether according to the Judgment of venerable Antiquity they have also any Power over the Temporal of any person whatsoever and especially of Kings and other Sovereigns by virtue of the primacy that by Divine right belongs to them Heretofore there have been some so passionately concerned for the Grandieur of the Apostolical See or rather so blindly devoted to the Court of Rome that differs much from the Holy See that they have dared to publish that the Pope representing the person of Jesus Christ who is King of Kings Lord of Lords and Universal Monarch who hath an absolute Power over all Kingdoms from which he may even depose Kings if they fail in their duty as these Kings may turn off their Officers who behave not themselves as they should And this is called the direct Power which Boniface VIII thought fit to take to himself in his Tuae unam Sanctam that his Successor Clement V. was obliged to recal That is not the question here For I cannot think that now a days there is any Man who hath the boldness to maintain so palpable and odious a falshood But there are a great many beyond the Alps who by the Philosophical distinction of an indirect Power which they have invented teach that the Pope may dispose of Temporals depose Kings absolve Subjects from their Oath of Allegiance that they have taken to them and transfer their Dominions to others when he judges it to be necessary for the good of Religion because say they since he hath the inspection over every thing that concerns it so hath he Power to remove destroy and exterminate every thing that may annoy the same and by that clinch they cunningly enough come home to their Point though they would seem to forsake it For a Pope will always take the pretext of the welfair of Religion when he has a mind to undo a Prince as all these Popes have done who after Gregory VII deposed Emperors and since them Julius II. who transferred the Kingdom of John King of Navarre to Ferdinand King of Arragon because that King would not declare against Louis XII whom this Pope persecuted Now seeing that Opinion which the Gallican Church and all our Doctors have always reckoned very dangerous and inconsistent with publick tranquillity hath still vouchers amongst some Modern Doctors especially beyond the Alps I must now make it appear according to the method which I have
that the contrary opinion has not so much as the least appearance of any rational ground in Scripture For of all the passages that are cited for maintaining it there is not so much as one that is interpreted by the Church in Councils nor by any of the Holy Fathers in that most erroneous sense that they put upon them Wherein these Modern Authors who in that manner do interpret them act directly contrary to the Decree of the Council of Trent fourth Session and against the Confession of Faith enjoyned by Pius IV. which will have Scripture never to be interpreted but according to the sense that Holy Church gives it and according to the common Interpretation of the Fathers These new Doctors in that most dangerously follow the conduct of Hereticks who for maintaining their Errors interpret as they please and not as the Church pleases the Scriptures that they may wrest them to their sense Bellar. l. 5. de Rom. Pont. c. 7. Suarez l. 3. de Prim. Sum. Pont. c. 3. l. 6. de form Jur. fidel c. 4. Becan Anglico contr c. 3. qu. 3. This appears manifestly in those two passages upon which Bellarmin Suarez and after them Becanus and all the others who as these have copied or abridged them chiefly ground their opinion John Last The first passage is that where Jesus Christ saies to St. Peter Feed my Sheep Feed my Lambs Is there so much as one of the Holy Fathers who hath understood these words of the Power which St. Peter hath received over the Temporal of Princes There is none of them who hath not expounded them as they ought to be of the Spiritual Pasture which Popes are bound to give to Believers by Doctrin Example and good Government and never one of these Doctors and Masters in the Church ever let it enter into his Head to wrest them to a Temporal meaning as these new Divines have done And more Ambres l. de dig Sacer c. 2. Chrys hom 79. in Matth. c. 24. August de Agen. Christian c. 30. Tractat. 47. in Joan. in Ps 108. alii most part of these Holy Fathers having said what is most true that Jesus Christ applies these words in the person of St. Peter to the whole Church in general and to all its Pastors in particular if the new sense that these new Doctors give to them were to be followed it must be said that all Bishops and all Curates had right to dispose of the Temporals of those who by their bad Doctrin or scandalous deportment do injury to the Spiritual good of their Churches And as to that comparison which they make betwixt the Shepherd in respect of the Wolf which he may dispatch omni modo quo potest and the Pastor of the Church in regard of a Prince who may have fallen into Heresie it is not only a base Sophism contrary to the rules of right Logick but also impious and detestable which leads Men in a full career to Parricide and for which the Books that contain it have been justly condemned to the fire The second passage is taken out of St. Matthew Chapter sixteenth where the Son of God saies to St. Peter That whatever he shall bind upon Earth shall be bound in Heaven and whatever he shall loose upon Earth shall be loosed in Heaven Whence these new Rabbies conclude that the Successors of St. Peter have Power to dissolve the obligation that binds Subjects to their Prince by the Oath they have made to him and by the tie of Allegiance which binds them in fidelity to him Is it not strange that Catholicks should take this liberty of wresting the sense of Scripture to what they list without any respect to the common interpretation of the Fathers to which the Council of Trent obliges them For of all the Holy Fathers who have expounded that passage there is not so much as one to be found who hath so understood it all of them have interpreted it of the Power that that Apostle received of loosing and absolving Penitents from their sins Nor do the Popes themselves expound it otherways Paul 1 Ep. â—0 ad procem Fran. Adâ—i Ep. 1. ad Carol Magn. as it may be seen in the Epistle of Pope Paul I. to the French Lords and in that of Adrian I. to Charlemagne To absolve Men from their sins is it to absolve them from their Allegiance And that whatever which signifies only any sort of sin and censure and some obligations that are not of Divine Right can that Power I say be extended to ths Temporal and to the duty that Subjects owe to Kings To persuade us of the contrary we need only read the words that go before these I shall give thee the Keys of the Kingdom of Heaven saies Jesus Christ and not of the Kingdoms of the Earth for deposing of Kings And those that follow comprehend the use of the Power of the Keys that he giveth him for opening the Kingdom of Heaven by forgiving Men their sins or for shutting it by not absolving them John 20. as he in another place expresses himself speaking to all the Apostles after his Resurrection But that we may not swerve from the words in question we need no more but read the Eighteenth Chapter of the same Gospel of St. Matthew There it is to be seen that Jesus Christ repeats them to all his Disciples and gives them the whole Power that they import by saying to them Verily I say unto you that whatever ye shall bind upon Earth shall be bound in Heaven and whatever ye shall loose upon Earth shall be loosed in Heaven If these words comprehend the sense that the new Authors give them and that their meaning is also of the Temporal it must needs be said that all the Bishops who are the Successors of the Apostles nay and all Priests who have the Power of binding and loosing may depose Kings and dispence their Subjects from the Oath of Allegiance which is the highest extravagance Or else let these Gentlemen tell us by what Authority of the Church or Holy Fathers they find that when they were said to St. Peter they have a different meaning from that which they ought to have when they were spoken to St. Peter and to all the Apostles Now that is a thing they 'll never be able to find out Miss Rom. An. 1520. Paris apud Francis Renaud Miss Rom. à Paulo III. nefar Ann. 1543. Diurn Monast Congrez Cassin à Greg. XIII confir Venet. ap Juris And this is so true that the Church of Rome her self sticking to the sense wherein all the Holy Fathers have expounded these words which Jesus Christ said to St. Peter will not understand them but of the Power which he hath given him of binding and loosing Souls For in all the ancient Missals Breviaries and Diurnals in this manner was read that Prayer which is said in the Feastival of St. Peter's Chair at Antioch Deus qui
Council over the Pope What in signifies in M. Schelstrates Manuscript That the Pope Elected cannot be bound The Judgment of the Vniversity of Paris and of the Gallican Church concerning the superiority of a Council over the Pope p. 317 CHAP. XXVI The state of the Question touching the Power that some Doctors have attributed to Popes over the Temporal THE distinction of the direct and indirect Power p. 341 CHAP. XXVII What Jesus Christ and his Apostles have taught us as to that A False distinction of Buchanans refuted It was upon an obligation of Conscience and not through weakness that Christians obeyed infidel Emperors and Persecutors The Allegiance that Subjects owe to their Sovereigns is of Divine Right with which Popes cannot dispence All the passages cited for the contrary opinion are understood contrary to the interpretation of the Fathers of the Church which is forbidden by the Council of Trent p. 345 CHAP. XXVIII What hath been the Judgment of the Ancient Fathers of the Church as to that Point THE distribution that God hath made of the Spiritual for the Church and her Pastors and of the Temporal for Kings An Exhortation of the passage Here are two Swords Dominion forbidden to the Popes and how p. 359 CHAP. XXIX The Judgment of Ancient Popes touching the Power over Temporals that some Doctors of late times attribute to the Pope THE Testimony of Gelasius Of Gregory II. That Pope offered not to depose Leo Isauricus nor to make Rome revolt against him Testimonies of Pelagius I. Stephen II. St. Gregory the Great and of Martin I. supposititious Bulls of St. Gregory Pope Gregory VII is the first that offered to depose Emperors Pope Zachary deposed not Childerick and Leo III. transferred not the Empire to Charlemagne p. 370 CHAP. XXX What hath always been the Opinion of the Gallican Church and of all France as to that The Conclusion of this Point and of the whole Treatise HOW the Bishops of France opposed the attempts of Gregory IV. against Louis the Debonnaire They have always done the like upon all occasions What the Chamber of the Clergy declared concerning the absolute independence of our Kings in the Estates Assembled in 1914. Their Declaration in the year 1682. in relation to the same Subject The sentences of Parliament and the Edicts of Kings upon the same occasion Conclusion of this Treatise p. 387 AN Historical Treatise Concerning the FOUNDATION AND PREROGATIVES OF THE CHURCH of ROME And of her BISHOPS CHAP. I. The Design and Draught of this Work and the Principle on which it moves TO maintain a State in peace and tranquillity which makes Subjects happy according to the scope that true Policie proposes to it self The first thing that is to be done is to beat off the enemy that hath taken up Arms for the ruine of it and then to take care that the quarrels and troublesome contests which sometimes arise amongst the chief members of the State proceed not so far as to occasion a Civil War All Christians agree that the true Church of Jesus Christ is that Spiritual Kingdom which he came to establish in this world and which nevertheless as he himself hath said is not of this world because the whole end of it is to procure us eternal happiness a thing no ways to be attained to upon Earth Hereticks and Schismaticks have often risen against the Lord and his Christ that they might overturn that beautifull kingdom and establish their particular Churches upon its ruines every one pretending that his is the Church of the Lord though indeed they be no more all of them but the Synagogue of Satan and the Kingdom of him who in the Gospel is called the Prince of this world Besides it falls out many times that amongst Catholicks who alone are members of the true Church disputes and controversies arise which may trouble the tranquillity and peace that Jesus Christ hath left unto them for securing their happiness in his Kingdom It is necessary then for the service of the Church and for maintaining it always in the flourishing state wherein Jesus Christ hath established it to fight and beat off the enemies that attack it and to compose and calme the quarrels that arise amongst the children of the Church about points that are disputed with heat on all hands and which might in the end disturb the repose and peace of the Kingdom of the Son of God As I have wholly devoted my self to the service of the Church so have I endeavoured as much as lay in my power to acquit my self of the former of those two duties in my Treatises of Controversie and especially in that of The true Church I think I have been pretty successfull in that engagement and repelled all the efforts of our Protestants in making it appear by evident and unanswerable Arguments That there is no true Church but ours which is enough without more dispute to put an end to all our Controversies since they acknowledge with us that the true Doctrine is always that of the true Church of Jesus Christ I discharge my self also as well as I can of that obligation in one part of that Treatise where I maintain against Hereticks the declared enemies of the Holy See the primacy rights power and authority of the visible head of the Church At present then that I may fulfill my duty in its full extent I must labour to prevent the springing up of any dangerous division amongst Catholicks by reason of some private opinions that divide them as to that important subject of the Church into which they are all equally incorporated Now that I may solidly carry on so laudable and necessary an undertaking It is at first to be presupposed that according to Catholick doctrine the Universal Church which ought allways to be visible and to continue without Interruption untill the consummation of all things is the Society of Christians dispersed all over the World united together by the profession of the True Faith the participation of the True Sacraments by the bond of the same Law and under one and the same Head Because the Church Joh. 10. v. 16. Ephes 1. v. 22. August Ep. 50. whose first and principal property is to be perfectly one is the mystical body of Jesus Christ and that the members of a living body may receive the influences of life they must be united to the Head Hence it is that according to Saint Austin Epist 48. p. 151. l. de un Eccl. c. 4. though one may have all the rest yet if he be separated from the Head and by consequent from the body which is united to him he is out of the Church Catholick by Schism as Hereticks are cut off from it because of the want of True Faith And as all the members of the body have not the same functions but the parts that constitute it being subordinate one to another in a lovely order there are some which are for giving motion to the
union with one principal or chief Church the principle and centre of their unity So there is but one general Chair in the Church and one Episcopacy Cathedra una super Petrum Domini voce fundata Cypr. Epist 40. Optat. contra Parmen l. 2. composed of all the Episcopal Chairs by the communication which they have with the Head of that Church and with that chief Chair whence their unity proceeds So that as all Believers are members of the same Church when they are united to its Head so all Bishops taken in general and every one in particular sit in the same Chair by the communion which they have with him that sits in that principal Chair from whence by that union which they preserve with it results the unity of the Chair and of Episcopacy in the Church But besides that every one of them hath his particular Chair wherein none of the rest have any share as they have all a share in that Chair which is but one in the Universal Church And because Saint Peter is head of it as we shall presently make it appear not onely his particular Chair of Rome but likewise that of the whole Church is by the holy Fathers often called the Chair of St. Peter It is in that sense then that all Bishops sit in St. Peter's Chair as all the Doctours of the old Law sate in the Chair of Moses But for all that all Bishops sit not in St. Peter's particular Chair no more than his Successours in that Chair sit in the Chairs of other Bishops every one possessing entirely his own as a part of the Universal Episcopacy And thus also is to be understood what is said that all Bishops are the Successours of St. Peter Take it in this manner I have clearly made it out in my Treatise of the true Church even according to Calvin and the ablest of our Protestants that the true mark of the true Church which distinguishes her from all others is the perpetuity that will make her continue without ever failing to the end of the World And seeing she is that great Sheep-fold wherein all believers who are the sheep of Jesus Christ are gathered together into one flock she cannot subsist in that unity without there be Pastours and Sheep some to teach and others to receive the truths which they are to believe guides and people to be guided and unless these pastours and guides succeed one another without interruption to the end for governing and guiding believers Now that is not to be seen but in the Catholick Church by the Union that all these particular Churches and their Bishops have with him whom they own for their Head For in what time soever these Churches began to be planted some sooner some later they may ascend by virtue of that Union through a perpetual Succession from Pastours to Pastours and from Bishops to Bishops till they come to him whom Jesus Christ hath given them for Head And because St. Peter is he as we shall presently see it is evident that it is by that that they are his Successours since by the Union which they have with the Bishop of Rome their Head who in a streight line succeeds to St. Peter they mount up without interruption by a continuity and collateral Succession even to that Apostle as all the branches of a Tree are united to the root in oblique and indirect lines by the union with the trunk and body of that Tree But we must now consider the rights and prerogatives of St. Peter who was the first Bishop of Rome CHAP. IV. Of the Primacy of St Peter and that he hath been established by Jesus Christ head of the Vniversal Church I Shall not enlarge in a long discussion of this point which the great and large volumes that so many learned men of the past and present age have composed for clearing of it have drained in alledging all that solidly can be said as to this Article of our Faith on which depends that perfect unity which we avow to be essential to the Church I shall onely say what all Catholicks agree in that Jesus Christ chose St. Peter amongst all his Apostles to give him not onely the Primacy of order honour and rank by assigning him the first place as one chief in dignity amongst his equals and in those gifts talents and graces which are inseparable from the Apostleship and Episcopacy but also the Primacy of Jurisdiction Power and Authority over all believers in the whole Church of whom he appointed him head This they learn from the Gospel in that famous passage of the sixteenth Chapter of St. Matthew where St. Peter having answered for all the Apostles to our Saviour who had asked them what they thought of him Thou art the Christ the Son of the living God our heavenly Lord commending his faith said to him Blessed art thou Simon Bar-jona for flesh and bloud hath not revealed it unto thee but my father which is in heaven And I say unto thee that thou art Cephas that is to say in the Syriack Tongue a Stone and upon this rock I will build my Church and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it And I will give unto thee the Keyes of the kingdom of heaven and whatsoever thou shalt bind on earth shall be bound in heaven and whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven Most of the holy Fathers especially those that were before the Council of Nice interpret to the person of St. Peter these words and upon that rock I will build my Church according to the reference that they must necessarily have to those which go before I say unto thee that thou art Cephas that is to say a Stone or Rock Tertul. de praescr c. 32. Origen in Ep. 14. hom 5. Cypr. Epist 71. p. 73. ad Jabaium Hilar. lib. 6. de Trinit Greg. Nist in opera de adv Domini Ambros in cap. 2. Ep. ad Eph. Chrysost in Matt. 15.83 in cap. 1. Ep. ad Gal. Hier. in Matth. c. 6. August in Joan. Tract 124. There are others particularly since the Council of Nice who to confute the impiety of the Arians have understood them of that illustrious confession of Faith that St. Peter made when he said Thou art the Christ the Son of the living God and some have referred them to Jesus Christ himself who is the foundation and corner Stone of which St. Paul saith That no man can lay another than that which is already laid which is Jesus Christ But besides that the same Authours say elsewhere that the Church is founded on St. Peter it is easie to reconcile all these opinions together which without any difficulty may be reduced to one that results from all the three by saying that these words ought to be understood of the person of St. Peter confessing Jesus Christ to be the Son of the living God It is evident that these three interpretations naturally resolve
into this which comprehends the Faith of the Divinity of Jesus Christ the confession of that Faith and the person who made that confession Now seeing the Church is the Society of true Christians and that the first object of the Faith of Christians as Christians Ephes 2. is Jesus Christ by the same it is that Jesus Christ is the first foundation of the Church and that no other than he can be laid for grounding and establishing the Faith of Christianity Moreover as it is not enough to be a true Christian to believe in Jesus Christ Rom. 11. and to preserve that Faith in the heart if we do not also confess that we believe in him therefore it is that the Church again is founded upon the confession of the Divinity of Christ In fine besides Faith and the publick profession of it the Church also which is the Kingdom of Jesus Christ must be well governed For that purpose he hath appointed in it Apostles Ephes 4. v. 11.12 Prophets Evangelists Pastours and Teachers that they may labour in perfecting the Saints according to the functions of their Ministery for edifying of the body of Jesus Christ And thence it is that because of that illustrious confession of the Divinity of the Son of God which St. Peter made in name of all the Apostles he established him the foundation of the Ministery and Government of the Church by giving him the oversight and authority over all the rest who are subordinate to him in their functions and inferiour Ministeries as to their Head Wherefore Jesus Christ immediately after said to him giving him that supream power and authority in his Church I will give unto thee the Keyes of the kingdom of heaven and whatever thou shalt bind upon earth shall be bound in heaven and whatsoever thou shalt loose upon earth shalt be loosed in heaven And that promise which could not fail of being accomplished was then fulfilled when the Son of God after his resurrection said to him thrice Feed my sheep John 20. I know that according to the sentiment of the Fathers and principally of St. Augustine he spake these words unto him as to one who was the Figure of the Church with relation to all the Apostles and their Successours the Bishops who are also the foundations and pillars of the Church according to St. Paul and to whom Jesus Christ hath said Cypr. Ep. 27. de laps Hier. l. 1. cont Jovin August Con. 2. in Psal 30. in Psal 86. that whatsoever they shall bind upon Earth shall be bound in Heaven and whatsoever they shall loose upon Earth shall be loosed in Heaven But there is this difference betwixt Saint Peter and all the rest that when he speaks to all in common he gives them that which is common to all the Apostles and wherein they are all equal as the power of administring Sacraments teaching all Nations baptizing forgiving sins and what belongs to the other Apostolical functions And when he applies himself particularly to Saint Peter Cypr. lib. de unit Eccles Ep. 55. 73. Hieronym adv Jovinian l. 2. Optat. cont Parmen l. 2. he gives him that which is proper to himself speaking to him in the singular number for setling in his Church the unity whereof he makes him the principle and foundation to which all the rest must have a reference that they may be but one by the union which they ought necessarily to have with their Head without which they neither are nor can doe any thing For as St. Peter was the first that publickly confessed the Divinity of Jesus Christ which he had by revelation and that the rest knew it not but by his means and that they answered onely by his mouth joyning with him on that great occasion So Jesus Christ in consideration of that primacy of Confession hath given him the primacy over all the rest making him their head and that one that original foundation and principle of unity upon which he hath built the Church in regard of its government So that although all the rest received Immediately from Christ the power of binding and loosing and of governing their Churches yet they cannot exercise it but by virtue of the union which they have with St. Peter without which they would continue no longer in unity nor by consequent in the Church And it is upon that that the Primacy of Saint Peter is founded and that he is next to Jesus Christ and not as he is by his own power and virtue but by commission the foundation and head of the Church The Protestants who by a deplorable Schism not without Heresie have gone out of the unity of the Church by making separation from the Chair of St. Peter which is the principle original and centre thereof have in vain disputed this Doctrine with all their force untill this present I shall not here undertake a refutation of their objections whereby they pretend to overthrow it and whereof the weakness hath been made appear in a vast number of great and learned Answers that have been made to them But to avoid disputing which is unseparable from the opposing of arguments to arguments for refuting adversaries and that I may onely make use of that great maxime which alone I am to employ in this Treatise I shall onely say in one word that if we consult Antiquity we shall find by tracing it to the first Ages of the Church that it hath ever constantly believed that Primacy of St. Peter This is easily proved by the testimonies of almost all the holy Fathers Hippolyt Martyr de consum mundi Tertul. de praes c. 22. Iren. Origen in Ep. ad R. c. 6. Cypr. lib. de unti Eccl. Epiph. in Anchor Amb. in Luc. c. 10. Greg. Naz. or 26. Hilar. in Matth. c. 16. Hier. adv Jovin l. 2. Optat. Melev cont Parmen l. 2. Cyrill Alex. in Joan c. 12. August in Joan. tr 11.36 Ep. 161. who in an infinite number of places in their Works say That he is the Rock and Foundation of the Church that his Chair is the chief Chair to which all the rest must unite that he hath the Supreme power to take care of the flock of the Son of God that he hath received the Primacy to the end that the Church might be one that he is the first the chief and the head of the Apostles that he is the inspectour of all the Universe he to whom Jesus Christ hath committed the disposition of all things Chrysost hom 13. in Matth. in Joan. hom 87. de beat Ignat. St. Leo Serm. in Anniversar su Assumpsit to whom he hath given the rule over his brethren who is preferred before all the Apostles and who governs all Pastours with many other encomium's of that nature all which magnificently express his Primacy and which have been often repeated and approved in General Councils And that supereminent dignity of St. Peter was so well known even
condemn it may be seen that the ancient Church believed and did what Catholicks believe and practise concerning the Eucharist the Sacrifice of the Mass the seven Sacraments the Consistency of Grace with Free-will the Authority of Tradition the Invocation of Saints Churches dedicated and consecrated to God in memory of them the Veneration of their Relicks and Images Prayer for the dead the Fasts of Lent and of the Ember weeks the distinction of Holy days and working days that of the Habits of Lay-men and Church-men the single life of the Clergy Vows Sacred Ceremonies in the administration and use of the Sacraments and in publick Worship Divine Worship in Greek all over the East and in the Latine Tongue in the West though in most Provinces this was not understood but by the Learned in a word concerning all that distinguishes us from Protestants but especially Calvinists This the famous Cardinal Perron made out by unquestionable testimonies in his Reply to the King of Great Britain where he shews the conformity of the Ancient Catholick Church with ours in the Eighteenth Chapter of the first Book and throughout the whole Third Fourth Fifth and Sixth Books of that Learned Work And to which also David Blondel a Man incomparably more able than Calvin especially in the knowledge of Antiquity thought it not fit to make an Answer in that overgrown Volume which he wrote against the Reply and wherein he thought it convenient to begin his pretended refutation onely at the Three and twentieth Chapter of the first Book and to end it with the Four and thirtieth of the same Book But to pass by the Protestants against whom I pretend not to Dispute It is enough to me that hitherto without any disputation I have proved by Antiquity alone the Primacy of St. Peter and of the Popes his successours in the Chair of Rome and the Prerogatives and Rights which are inseparable from that Primacy wherein all Catholicks agree However it is very well known that at present they are not all of the same mind as to certain other Prerogatives which some grant and others will not allow to him and especially these four which are Infallibility Superiority over a General Council the Absolute Power of Governing the Church independantly of the Canons and the Direct or Indirect Power over Temporals And therefore I must now without deviating from my Principle drawn from Antiquity make appear without disputing and reasoning but as a bare Relater of the sentiments of the Councils and Fathers nay and of the Popes themselves what venerable Antiquity hath always believed concerning these points CHAP. VI. The Question stated concerning the Infallibility of the Pope THE Question here is not to know whether the Pope as a private Doctour and onely giving his opinion and thought of a point of Doctrine concerning Faith and Manners may be deceived for it was never doubted but that in that quality he speaks onely as another Man and that by consequent through the weakness and infirmity which is incident to all Men he is subject to Errour according to the saying of the Psalmist Omnis homo mendax Nor is it the question neither to enquire whether he be infallible when he pronounces from the Chair of the Universal Church jointly with the Members that are subject to him as to their head whether it be in a General Council where he presides in person or by his Legats or with the consent of the greatest part of Catholick Churches and Bishops For as we all allow that Jesus Christ hath given the gift of Infallibility to his Church and to a Council which represents it for determining Sovereignly by the Word of God the differences that might arise amongst Catholicks concerning these points of Doctrine so we do confess that when the Pope speaks and decides in that manner according to which he may say Visum est Spiritui Sancto nobis his words and decisions are Oracles and he can in no ways be deceived As to this there is no disagreement amongst Catholicks The question then that may be debated is to know whether when he speaks from his Chair of Rome as the Master and Teacher of all Believers and having well examined the point in hand in several Congregations his Consistory or his Synod of his Suffragans of his Cardinals and Doctours nay and having consulted Universities and by most publick and solemn Prayers begg'd the assistance of the Holy Ghost he teaches all Christians defines proposes to the whole Church by a Bull or Constitution what Christians are to believe whether I say when he pronounces in this manner he be Infallible or not and whether his Judgment given and declared in that manner may not be corrected by an Universal Council And this methinks is all that can be said in clear and formal terms as to the state of this formal question And it is the very same about which all Catholick Doctours do not agree For most part of the Doctours on t'other side of the Alpes especially the famous Cardinals Cajetan Baronius and Bellarmine and all the Authours who have followed them will have the Pope in that case when he declares solemnly to all Believers by his Constitutions what they are to believe as to any controverted point to be no ways liable to a mistake On the contrary an infinite number of the most noted Doctours of their time as Gerson Major Almanus the Faculty of Theologie of Paris so often and so publickly praised by the Popes and all France as it is even acknowledged by the Doctours Navarr Victoria and John Celaia Spaniards Denis the Carthusian Tostatus Bishop of Avila in his Commentaries upon St. Matthew and in the second part of his Defensorium Thomas Illyrius a Cordelier in his Buckler against Luther which he dedicated to Pope Adrian VI. The Cardinals of Cusa of Cambray and of Florence the Bishops of France in their Assembly representing the Gallican Church Aeneas Sylvius before he was Pope Pope Adrian VI. when he was Professour at Louvain in his Commentary upon the Fourth of the Sentences which he caused to be reprinted at Rome when he was Pope without any alterations and a thousand other most Catholick Doctours of the Universities of France Germany Poland and of the Low Countries who have all very well defended the Primacy of the Pope all these I say maintain that he is not Infallible if he do not pronounce in a General Council or with the consent of the Church The diversity of Sentiments amongst Catholicks about that Subject is then a matter of fact not to be question'd But what part are we best to take in this dispute as the most rational and best grounded that 's a question which I ought not to answer according to the design I have taken and the method that I have proposed to my self in this Treatise I shall onely then barely relate what hath been believed as to that in Antiquity and I shall do it without touching at the
Paul reproved him St. Austine then St. Ambrose St. Cyprian Pope Pelagius and even St. Paul speak positively to the contrary of what Baronius says as I have just now demonstrated This has made learned men argue from St. Austine who they think cannot be answered Either Saint Paul spoke truth when he said St. Peter was to be blamed that he walked not uprightly according to the truth of the Gospel and compelled the converted Gentiles to Judaize or what he said was false If he spoke truth it is then true that St. Peter was not Infallible since he actually erred in that particular If he did not speak truth it must then be concluded that the Epistle to the Galatians which makes a part of H. Scripture is not the Word of God which is a manifest errour in matter of Faith Again when St. Paul spake in that manner either he thought as he spoke or did not If he believed what he said to be true it was his opinion then that St. Peter was not Infallible If he believed it not then must he in the same Epistle to the Galatians wherein he protests before God that he lied not have told a lie which is not to be said without Blasphemy since what he writes in that Epistle is the Word of God who cannot lie And thus it is made out that according to St. Paul those great Saints and that wise Pope who understood himself very well St. Peter was guilty of a notable mistake at that time when he insinuated to the Jews and Gentiles that they were obliged to keep the Law of Moses which the Church immediately after condemned in the Council of the Apostles held at Jerusalem For it is to be observed which a great many have not minded that as that Pope whose words I have cited does expresly say it was before that Council of the Apostles that St. Peter did that action which rendred him blame-worthy And who does not see that he had been incomparably more worthy of blame and reproof if as Cardinal Baronius will have it he had done it immediately after the Decree of the Council which had just then defined he himself having subscribed to the Decree that Christians were no more obliged to observe those legal Rites excepting in one small point and that for a certain time and that after he had spoken so well on that subject to free Christians from that Yoke he should have again endeavoured to subject them to it by obliging them to Judaize That would have been so strange a thing and so unbeseeming an Apostle and the Prince of Apostles that I make no doubt but that for the honour that is due to him it is far better to follow in that the judgment of that ancient Pope than the Opinion of this Cardinal who lived but in the last age It follows then from these matters of Fact which I have now most faithfully related that a great Pope and those Holy Fathers the most venerable and learned of Antiquity have not believed even according to St. Paul that St. Peter was infallible nor by consequent that the Popes who have no greater privilege and prerogative than St. Peter had have received that gift of Infallibility Inter omnes Apostolos hujus Ecclesiae Catholicae personam sustinet Petrus huic enim Ecclesiae claves regni coelorum datae sunt cum ei dicitur ad omnes dicitur amas me pasce oves meas August de Agon Christ lib. 30. Ita Ambrose l. de dign Sacerd. c. 2. Chrys hom 79. in Matth. 24. Cypr. de unit Eccles Hier. contra Jovin lib. 1. Vt Petrus quando ei dictum est tibi dabo claves in figura personam gestabat Ecclesiae quando dictum est pasce oves meas Ecclesiae quoque personam in figura gestabat August in Psal 108. Tract 1.118.129 in Joan. Ser. de 4. quaest apud poss c. 5. 6. Serm. 13. sup Matth. c. 2. As to the objections that are drawn from the words of Jesus Christ spoken to St. Peter Vpon that Rock will I build my Church I will give thee the Keys of the Kingdom of Heaven I have prayed for thee that thy faith fail not feed my sheep It is easie to answer them by saying that according to the common interpretation of the Fathers and especially of St. Austine they were spoken to St. Peter as representing the Church by the union of its Pastours with him as with their Head and who by virtue of that union make with him but one universal Episcopacy And the better to express that unity he applies himself and speaks to one onely that is to the head to whom he gave the Primacy over the rest So that when in that union or rather that unity he pronounces and defines jointly with them in a Council or with consent of the Church by her Bishops he cannot err the foundation stands always sure and the sheep are always well governed and well fed But because Cardinal Bellarmine and those who follow him will have these words I have prayed for thee Peter that thy faith fail not to be applied absolutely to the Person of St. Peter and without relation to the Church which he represents by virtue of his Primacy we must grant them what they pretend For the truth is they may be understood also in that sense but then they have a very natural and literal meaning which is that of almost all the ancient Fathers and Interpreters of Holy Scripture who say that in this place our Saviour onely spake of the time of his Passion when the Apostles were to be terribly tempted as he himself foretold them Then addressing himself to St. Peter told him that he had prayed for him not that he might not commit any sin of Infidelity for he committed a fearfull one against the confession of Faith by denying his Master thrice but that being recovered from his fall he might not lose the Faith for ever that by the example of his Repentance he might confirm therein his Brethren who were much startled and shaken and that afterwards he might persevere unto the end Non dixit non negabis sed ut non deficiat fides tua curâ enim illias factum est ne omnino Petri fides evanesceret Ne deficiaet fides tua hoc est ne in fine pereas humanam arguens naturam cum ex se nihil sit Chrys hom 63. Quid enim rogavit nisi perseverantiam usque in finem Aug. de Cor. Ge. c. 6. Vt non periret finaliter Hug. in c. 22. Luc. Non ut Petrus non caderet sed ut non deficeret quia quamvis reciderit resurrexerit Bonav in Luc. Ne penitus extirpetur aut finaliter deficiat Dion Carth. in Luc. Vt non finaliter deficiat fides tua Albert. Mag. in hunc locum This is the common interpretation of the Holy Fathers and particularly of St. Chrysostome and Saint Austine who often make use of
contradiction which that great Cardinal had not leisure to mind For the Patriarch Denis speaks onely here of what these Bishops had done under the Pontificate of Pope Cornelius and he prays Stephen the Successour of that Pope not to use them harshly for the Judgment they are of that the Baptism of Hereticks is null Them says he who under his Predecessour condemned the Heresie of Novatian Is there any thing clearer than that Baronius without minding it hath taken the Counter-sense and besides Denis of Alexandria would have had care not to call an opinion which he believed to be true an Heresie Firmilian then and the Asiaticks persisted still in their opinion as well as St. Cyprian the Africans and their successours till the decision of a General Council as may be clearly seen in an hundred passages of the Books of St. Austine which he Wrote concerning Baptism against the Donatists I know that St. Jerome says in the Dialogue against the Luciferians that the Bishops of Africa returned to the ancient custome saying What do we doe and that abandoning St. Cyprian they made a new Decree conform to that of Saint Stephen But all the Learned agree that that holy Doctour who Wrote that Dialogue before the most part of his other Works had taken that out of some Apocryphal Writings such as that which bears for Title The Repentance of St. Cyprian and was declared false and supposititious in a Synod held at Rome Threescore and fourteen years before the death of St. Jerome For to be short the quite contrary is to be seen in the Books of St. Austine that I have just now alledged in the Letter of Saint Basil to Amphilochius and in the Eighth Canon of the first Council of Arles Now if during the life of Saint Stephen there were so many Bishops who refused to obey his Decree there were as many that opposed it after his death For the Patriarch Denis of Alexandria Wrote in a high strain to Pope Sixtus the Successour of St. Stephen Euseb l. 7. hist c. 4. exhorting him to follow a conduct contrary to that of his Predecessour and not to break as he had done with so many Bishops for a constitution contrary to his own since it had been approved in several Councils Hic in Cypriani Africanae Synodi dogma consentiens de Haereticis Re-baptizandis ad diversos plurimas mifit epistolas quae usque hodie extant Hieron de script Ecclesias in Dionys and St. Jerome himself in his Treatise of Ecclesiastical Writers which he made long after his Dialogue against the Luciferians assures us that that great Man declared openly for the Doctrine of Saint Cyprian and African Bishops and that he thereupon Wrote many Letters which were still extant in his time That was the cause that the Successours of Sixtus entertained Peace with the African and Asiatick Bishops every one freely following their custome and opinion as to that Point without being blamed for it untill that a General Council had pronounced Supremely in the matter This we learn from St. Austine in his Books of Baptism against the Donatists These August l. 1. de Bapt. contra Donatis c. 7. who began their Schism against Cecilian Bishop of Carthage in the year Three hundred and two alledged continually the example of St. Cyprian and of his fellow Bishops to justifie the conduct which they held as well as those in Re-baptizing all Hereticks It is most evident that they durst not have made use of that instance if St. Cyprian and those Bishops had retracted For St. Austine would have confounded these Schismaticks upon the spot by saying that all these Bishops had condemned their former opinion Yet he never did so On the contrary he confesses that they always believed that Hereticks must be Re-baptized but he adds that it was lawfull for them to believe it and for all who have succeeded them to doubt of that point which was then in controversie and to dispute about it As indeed there were many conferences great disputes and debates on Church decided that difference and all submitted to that Sovereign Authority Cui ipse cederet si jam eo tempore quaestionis hujus veritas eliquata declarata per plenarium concilium solidaretur Ibid. c. 4.89 as St. Cyprian would have done without doubt saith St. Austine if the whole Church in a full and general Council had in his time pronounced concerning that point And because the Donatists would not submit to the Decree of that Council in that they added Heresie to their Schism Now before we come to shew what that General Council decided as to that point we must make a serious and solid reflexion upon what we have now said which will suffise to make it clearly out to us what Antiquity hath believed concerning the Infallibility of the Pope Here then we have a Pope of famous memory in the Church who makes a Decree whereby he instructs all Believers concerning a point of highest importance where the question is about the validity or nullity of Baptism without which one cannot be saved and by that Decree he pretends to oblige the whole Church to believe that Hereticks who are converted ought not to be Re-baptized and does so pretend it that he cuts off from his communion great Bishops who would not submit to his Decree And nevertheless St. Cyprian all the Bishops of Africa Mauritania and Numidia those of Cappadocia Cilicia Galatia and Phrygia Denis Patriarch of Alexandria and the Bishops of his Patriarchate will not receive that so solemn a Decree of Stephen Pope of Rome Besides St. Austine and all the African Catholicks united with that great Doctour of the Church against the Donatists say that before the decision of the Council that came not till long after that Decree of the Pope it might freely without making a separation from the Church be held what St. Cyprian had believed concerning the Baptism of Hereticks In fine St. Athanasius St. Optatus Melevitanus Athanas Or. 3. contra Arian St. Cyril of Jerusalem Optat. l. 4. Cont. Parmen St. Basil and some others Cyril Hieros praef in Catech. who have Written as well as they after that General Council Basil Epist 3. Con. 47. whereof St. Austine speaks and before that of Constantinople have believed that all Hereticks who have not the true Faith of the Trinity ought to be Re-baptized who in those first Ages of the Church were incomparably more numerous than the other Hereticks who believed that great Mystery These are not bare conjectures that may be doubted of but uncontroverted matters of fact A Man needs no more but eyes in his head to prove them by Reading the testimonies alledged It must necessarily then follow seeing they submitted to a Council because they knew it to be Infallible which was not done in regard to the Pope St. Stephen that St. Cyprian Firmilian of Caesarea Denis of Alexandria St. Athanasius Saint
been in that Belief that the ancient Popes have always protested in their true Epistles for I speak not of those which are supposititious that they were obliged in the Exercise of their Power and in the Government of the Church to square their Conduct according to the Canons and holy Decrees of Councils against which they could undertake nothing Is there any thing plainer as to that point than what is to be seen in the Epistle of Pope Gelasus to the Bishops of Dordany Vniuscujusque Synodi constitutum quod universalis Ecclesiae probavit assensus non aliquam magis exequi sedem prae caeteris oportere quam primam That no man ought more exactly to execute what is ordained by the Universal Council than the Bishop of the chief See In that of Celestin I. to the Bishops of Illyrium The Regulation of Councils must be our Rules and have dominion over us Dominentur nobis regulae non regulis dominemur â—imus subjecti canonibus dum canonum praecepta servam 〈◊〉 and not that we should raise our selves above these holy Rules that we may dispose of them at our Pleasure let us submit our selves to the Canons by observing what they enjoyn In what St. Leo wrote to Anatolius Nimis haec improba nimis sunt prava quae sacratissimis canonibus inveniantur esse contraria Whatsoever is contrary to the most holy Canons is too wicked and d praved to be tolerated In the Letter of Simplicius to the Patriarch Acacius Per universum mundum indissolubili observatione retiâ—etur quod à sacerdotum universitate est constitutum What is established by an Vniversal Council is retained throughout the whole World by an inviolable Observation In that of Pope St. Martin to Jâ—hn Bishop of Philadelphia Defensores divinorum canonum custodes sumus non Fravaricatores quandoquidem Praevaricatoribus conjunctae sunt retributiones We are the Defenders and Guardians of the holy Canons and not the Prevaricators of them for we know that great Correction is reserved for those that betray thâ—m St. Gregory the Great speaks with as much force as these in an hundred places of his Epistles as when he says in the thirty seventh of his first Book Absit hoc à me â—t statuta majorum in qualibet Ecclesiâ infringam Far be it from me that I should infringe the Statutes of our Predecessors in any Church whatsoever And writing to John Patriarch of Constantinople Dum concilia universali sunt consensu constituta se non illa destruit quis â—uts praesumit aut solvere quos ligant aut lâ—gare quos solvunt He that presumes to loose those whom General Councils have bound or to bind those whom they have loosed destroys himself and not the Councils He was so well persuaded of his Duty that obliged him to observe the Canons that he even thought that that Obligation extended to matters which he found to be established by an ancient Custom and Tradition in his Church For the Empress Constantina having entreated him to send her either the Head or some other considerable part of the Body of St. Paul to be put in a Church which she had built to the Memory of that great Apostle that holy Pope wrote back to her Illa praecipitis quae facere nec possum nec audeo c. In Romanis vel totius occidentis partibus intolerabile est atque sacrilegium si sanclorum corpora tangere quisquam â—ortasse volucrit quod si praesumpserit câ—â—ium est quia haec temeritas impunita nullo modo remanebit lib. 3. Indic 12. Ep. 30. ad Constant Augusâ—am That he could have passionately desired that her Serenity had commanded him in any thing wherein he could have served and obeyed her but as to what she ordered him to do he neither could nor durst do it because said he it is at Rome nay in all the West looked upon as unsupportable and a great Sacriledge to touch the Bodies of the Saints and if any one have the boldness to attempt it his rashness will never pass unpunished Perhaps if at Rome they had made any Reflexion on this Epistle when it was resolved there to have an Arm of the Body of St. Francis Xavier the Apostle of the Indies which was then to be seen at Goa in his stately Monument above threescore years after his Death as fresh and ruddy as when he was alive they would not have given Orders to have it cut off and that if he who obeyed that Command had read that Letter he would have answered with as much respect as St. Gregory did Nec possum nec audio For besides that that Arm which is now to be seen at Rome is all withered and that since that time the holy Body is not so fresh as it was before they who were employed in that Office and had the boldness to lay hands upon that sacred Body died within the Year And I have learned of a very honest Gentleman of Quality who lately returned from the Indies that those of Goa attribute to that Action all the Evils they have been afflicted with since that time and all the Losses which the Portuguese have sustained in the East-Indies Thus the holiest Popes when they were desired any thing to the prejudice of the Canons or even of the ancient Customs which pass for so many Laws have not scrupuled to confess that their power extended not so far For besides the Instances that I have just now alledged Ne in aliquo patrum terminos praeterire videamâ—r contra majorum statuta agâ—re neqâ—iviâ—us Joan. VIII Epist ad Carol. Reg. John VIII speaks in the same manner to one of the Kings of France We could not act against the Decrees of our Predecessors lest it should seem that we transgress the Bounds set to us by our Fathers Contra Deum sacrâ—rum câ—nonum sanctiâ—es nulli omniâ—o petitioni possumus praeberâ— consâ—â—sum And Eugenius III. to the Bishops of Germany We can grant no Demand against God and against the Decrees of the sacred Canons The meaning of that is that as the Pope can grant nothing against the Service of God because he is inferiour to God so neither can he grant any thing against the Canons of Oecumenical Councils because he is under them In fine that we may not alledge an infinite number of other Testimonies which may be seen in the true Epistles of the Popes since Syricius I shall conclude with that of Silvester II. to the Archbishop of Sens Sit lex communis Eâ—â—â—â—sie Catholinae Evanâ—â—lium Aposâ—oli Prophetâ— Canones spirâ—tu Dâ—i condati 〈◊〉 totius mundi reverentia consâ—â—erati decretâ— seâ—as Apostolicae oh his non disâ—oâ—dantia Epist ad Seguin Arch. Senon wherein he says This is the Law according to which the Catholick Church is to be governed The Gospel the Writings of the Apostles and Prophets the Canons which