that in a matter of faith concerning the whole state of the Church Zozimus as in order and honour first amongst Bishops might vrge them by vertue of the Canons appointing such meetings to meete together in a Synode for the suppressing of such heresies as he found to arise amongst them and might justly threaten if they should refuse so to doe to reject them from the communion of the Bishops and Churches adhering to him and thereby lay an Ecclesiasticall necessity vpon them without any claime of vniversall power Neither doth the next place wherein Augustine and the Bishops assembled in the Councell of Mileuis desire Innocentius to concurre with them in suppressing the heresies of the Pelagians which sought to spread themselues into all parts of the world and to vse his pastorall care and diligence for the preventing of the dangers of the weake members of Christ yeeld any better proofe that they reputed him vniversall Bishop For what doe they here attribute to the Bishop of Rome that Cyprian writing to Stephen in the case of Martianus Bishop of Arle doth not assume to himselfe other his colleagues saying of himselfe thē that they are bound to vse all diligence to gather together and call backe the erring sheepe of Christ to apply the medicine of fatherly piety for the curing of the wounds and hurts of such as are fallen to recollect and cherrish al the sheepe that Christ purchased with his precious bloud to know that though they be many Pastours yet they feed but one flocke But sayth Bellarmine why do they not rather write to the Patriarch of Hierusalem to the Metropolitane of Palaestina or to the Primate of Africa in which parts of the world Pelagianisme specially seemed to preuaile then to the Bishop of Rome if they did not thinke him to haue an vniuersall power Surely this question of the Cardinall sheweth that either he knoweth not or careth not what he writeth for the cause of Pelagius had beene often heard and examined by Synodes of Bishops in Palaestina and the Primate of Africa with his Africane Bishops did write to Innocentius as well as Augustine and those assembled in the Councell of Mileuis as well to informe him of the guilefull fraudulent and slipperie dealings of Pelagius that hee might no way be induced to fauour him as some feared not to giue out that he did as also that he might be perswaded to put to his helping hand for the suppressing of this heretique who though condemned by many Synodes ceased not to flie from place to place seeking to spread his heresies therefore there was no cause that they should write to either of these Thus haue our Aduersaries found nothing in Augustine and the Africanes that any way fauoureth the Popes proud claime of vniuersall power Neither do the rest of the witnesses who are next brought forth to giue testimonie for the Pope depose any more to the purpose then the former haue done For that Prosper saith Rome the See of Peter being made the head of Pastorall honour to the world holdeth by religion whatsoeuer it possesseth not by force of armes and that by reason of the principality of Priestly or Bishoply dignity it became greater in respect of the high tower of religion then the throne of princely power that Victor Vticensis calleth the Church of Rome the head of all Churches Hugo de Sancto Victore sayth the Apostolique See is preferred before all the Churches in the world is no more then that wee euer granted For they all speake of a chieftie and principality of order and honour and not of absolute commanding power And the place which our Aduersaries bring out of Vincentius Lirinensis to proue the Pope to be head of the world is strangely missealleaged For hauing spoken of the letters of Faelix the Martyr and holy Iulius Bishop of Rome he addeth that blessed Cyprian was produced out of the South and holy Ambrose out of the North that so not only Caput orbis the head of the world but the sides of it also might giue testimony to that iudgment by the head and sides of the world vnderstanding the parts of the world whence these witnesses were produced and not the witnesses themselues So that there is no more reason to inferre from hence that the Bishop of Rome is head of all the world then that Cyprian and Ambrose were the sides of the world Neither doe the testimonies of Cassiodore who attributeth to the Bishop of Rome a generall care of the whole Christian world and Beda who sayth Leo excercised the Priestly office in the Christian world make any more for proofe of the Popes vniuersall jurisdiction then the rest that went before For their sayings argue not an absolute vniuersall commaunding power ouer all but such a care of the whole as beseemeth him that is in order and honour the chiefe of Bishops from whom all actions generally concerning the Christian Church are either to take beginning or at least to be referred before finall ending that so his aduice may be had therein And surely howsoeuer Anselmus sayth the custodie of the faith of Christians and the regiment of the Church is committed to the Bishop of Rome and Bernard writeth of him that he is chiefe of Bishops heire of the Apostles in primacie Abel in gouernement Noah in Patriarchicall honour Abraham in order Melchizedek in dignity Aaron in authoritie Moses in iudgment Samuel in power Peter and in vnction Christ that others haue particular flockes assigned to them but that his charge hath no limits with such like Hyperbolical amplificatiōs of the Popes greatnes sauouring of the corruptiō of those late times wherein he liued yet wil it neuer be proued that either he or diuers others speakinges he did were of the Papall faction or beleeued that the Pope hath that vniuersall power and iurisdiction that is by the Iesuits and other Romanists at this day giuen vnto him For as Iohn Bacon a learned Schooleman and countriman of ours hath fitly noted some attributed all those things whereof Bernard and Anselmus speake to the Pope as thinking all fulnesse of Ecclesiasticall power and jurisdiction to be originally found in him and that by himselfe alone hee might doe all things in the gouernment of the Church and all other were to receiue of his fulnesse which is the opinion of our aduersaries at this day Other attributed these thinges vnto him not as hauing all power in himselfe alone but as head chiefe of Bishops together with their ioynt concurrence and assent So that hee had power to iudge of the faith to determine controuersies in religion as Patriarch of the West with the ioynt consent of his Westerne Bishops and as prime Bishoppe of the world with an Oecumenicall Synode wherein he was to sitte as an honourable president moderatour pronouncing according to the resolution of the Bishops and
vttered many things in your leters concerning Peters chaire saying that he yet sitteth in it in his successours I truely doe acknowledge my selfe to be vnworthy not onely to be in the number of those that sit as rulers but of them that stand to bee ruled But I therefore willingly accept whatsoeuer you say because he hath spoken to me of Peters chaire that sitteth in Peters chaire and although it no way pleaseth or delighteth me to be specially honoured yet I greatly reioyced because what you attributed to me you gaue to your selues For who knoweth not that the holy Church is firmely established in the soundnesse of the Prince of the Apostles whose firmenesse his name doth shew for he is named Peter of Petra a Rocke to whom the voyce of Verity saith I will giue to thee the Keyes of the Kingdome of Heauen and thou being converted confirme thy brethren and againe Simon Ioanna Louest thou mee feede my sheepe Wherefore though there were many Apostles yet in respect of the chiefty he had the chaire of Peter chiefe of the Apostles grew to be in greater authority then the rest which is the chaire of one Apostle in three places For he exalted the See in which he was pleased to rest and to end this present life he beautified that See wherein he left the Evangelist his Disciple and he firmely established that See in which he sate seuen yeares though with purpose in the end to leaue it and to depart from it Whereas therefore there is the See of one and that but one wherein three Bishops by Gods appointment doe sit to rule whatsoeuer good I heare of you I account it mine owne and what you perswade your selues of mee thinke that you also are worthy of the same If this Epistle proue that the Pope cannot erre it proueth likewise that the Bishoppes of Alexandria and Antioche are free from errour For all these succeede that great Apostle Saint Peter to whom Christ saide To thee will I giue the Keyes of the Kingdome of Heauen and thou being turned confirme thy brethren And againe Louest thou me feede my sheepe as well as the Pope All these sit in Peters chaire Peters chaire is in Alexandria and at Antioche as well as at Rome and whatsoeuer they that are Bishops of Alexandria and Antioche attribute to the Bishop of Rome they may lawfully assume to themselues seeing they are worthy of the same as Gregory in this place telleth vs. Wherefore seeing not onely Fathers and Councels but euen Popes also in whose defence he writeth faile him the Cardinall flieth for helpe to the Priests of Aarons order and goeth about to proue that the Pope cannot erre because the high Priest had in his brest-plate Vrim and Thummim light and perfection or doctrine and trueth as hee will haue the Hebrew word translated importing as hee supposeth that he could not erre in the vnderstanding of the Law of God Whereupon as he thinketh God commaunded all those that any way doubted of the meaning of his Law to goe vp to the high Priest and to seeke to bee satisfied by him saying They shall iudge true iudgment vnto thee Lyra in his Annotations vpon this place reporteth that there was a certaine Glosse of the Hebrewes that if the High Priest should tell them that their right hand were their left or their left their right they were to hold it good and right The like opinion it seemeth the Romanists haue of the Pope But Lyra in that place condemneth the folly of those Iewes that so thought because the sentence of no man of what authoritie soeuer hee bee is to bee admitted if it containe a manifest vntruth and errour which hee saith is euident out of the very text it selfe in that it is said They shall iudge vnto thee true iudgement and thou shalt doe whatsoeuer they shall say vnto thee that are ouer the place that the Lord hath chosen and whatsoeuer they shall teach thee according to his lawes Whereby it appeareth that if they speake that which is vntrue or manifestly depart from the law they are not to be heard The Author of the ordinary Glosse agreeth with Lyra saying Note that the Lord requireth thee to doe whatsoeuer the Priests doe teach thee according to the Law because otherwise thou art not to obey them vnlesse they teach thee according to the Law Whereupon Christ saith the Scribes and Pharisees sit vpon Moses chaire who yet as the Author of the Interlineall Glosse noteth are not generally without exception to be hearkned vnto but then onely when they vtter and deliuer pertinentia ad Cathedram that is such things as beseeme him to vtter that sitteth in Moses chaire So that to conclude this point neither the Vrim and Thummim in Aarons breast-plate nor the Mandate of Almighty God to goe vp to the sonnes of Aaron to secke iudgement iustice proue that they could not erre and therefore the Pope is still in as bad case as euer he was Wherefore finding no helpe in the Tribe of Leui nor in the house of Aaron they betake themselues to experience and are in good hope to proue out of the experience of former times that the Pope cannot erre First because as they say whatsoever the Pope condemned at any time as hereticall was euer holden to bee so by the whole Church and many heresies were neuer condemned any otherwise but by his iudgement onely Secondly because neuer any Pope was an Heretique whereas all other principall Sees and Churches haue had Bishoppes not onely erring but teaching and professing heresie The instances that Bellarmine giueth of heresies and heretiques condemned by the Pope and reiected for such by the Church onely because hee condemned them are the Pelagians Priscillianists Iouinian and Vigilantius and their heresies It is hard I see for a Blackamoore to change his skinne for a Leopard to put away his spots or for a man that hath long acquainted himselfe with false and vnfaithfull dealing to learne to deale sincerely and truely For touching the heretickes mentioned by the Cardinall all the world knoweth they were condemned in Synodes by many Bishops and not by the priuate censure of the Bishoppe of Rome alone Nay it is most certaine that others shewed more care diligence in suppressing some of these heretickes and their errours then euer the Romane Bishop did which I will make to appeare in the particulars beginning with the Pelagians Pelagius the founder of these hereticks was borne in great Britaine and becomming a Monke in the East parts of the world after hee had sparsed his errours in other places abroad returned home into his owne countrey and infected it almost wholly with his heresie Heereupon the Britaines sought helpe and direction of the French Bishoppes because learning at that time flourished more among them then it did among the Britaines who willing to reach forth their helping hands to their neighbours and brethren in this time of their
Chap. 2. Of the sufficiencie of the Scripture 232. Chap. 3. Of the originall text of Scripture of the certainty and truth of the originals and of the authority of the vulgar translation 238. Chap. 4. Of the translating of the Scripture into vulgar languages and of the necessitie of hauing the publique liturgie and prayers of the Church in a tongue vnderstood ibid. Chap. 5. Of the three supposed different estates of meere nature grace and sinne the difference betweene a man in the state of pure and meere nature and in the state of sinne and of originall sinne 250. Chap. 6. Of the blessed virgins conception 264. Chap. 7. Of the punishment of originall sin and of Limbus puerorum 270. Chap. 8. Of the remission of originall sinne and of concupiscence remaining in the regenerate 272. Chap. 9. Of the distinction of veniall and mortall sinne 277. Chap. 10. Of free will 279. Chap. 11. Of iustification 290. Chap. 12. Of merit 324. Chap. 13. Of workes of supererogation and Counsels of perfection 331. Chap. 14. Of Election and Reprobation depending on the foresight of something in the parties elected or reiected ibid. Chap. 15. Of the seauen Sacraments 332. Chap. 16. Of the being of one body in many places at the same time ibid. Chap. 17. Of transubstantiation 333. Chap. 18. Touching orall Manducation 334. Chap. 19. Of the reall sacrificing of Christs body on the Altar as a propitiatory sacrifice for the quicke and dead 335. Chap. 20. Of remission of sinnes after this life ibid. Chap. 21. Of Purgatory 336. Chap. 22. Of the Saints hearing of our prayers 337. Chap. 23. Of the superstition and idolatrie committed formerly in the worshipping of Images 338. Chap. 24. Of Absolution ibid. Chap. 25. Of Indulgences and Pardons 339. Chap. 26. Of the infallibility of the Popes iudgment 340. Chap. 27. Of the power of the Pope in disposing the affaires of Princes and their states ibid. The fourth Booke is of the Priuiledges of the Church CHAP. 1. OF the diuerse kindes of the priuiledges of the Church and of the different acceptions of the name of the Church 343. Chap. 2. Of the different degrees of infallibility found in the Church 344. Chap. 3. Of the meaning of certaine speaches of Caluine touching the erring of the Church 345. Chap. 4. Of their reasons who thinke the present Church free from all error in matters of faith 346. Chap. 5. Of the promises made vnto the Church how it is secured from errour of the different degrees of the obedience wee owe vnto it 348. Chap. 6. Of the Churches office of teaching and witnessing the truth and of their errour who thinke the authority of the Church is the rule of our faith and that shee may make new articles of faith 350. Chap. 7. Of the manifold errors of Papists touching the last resolution of our faith and the refutation of the same 351. Chap. 8. Of the last resolution of true faith and whereupon it stayeth it selfe 355. Chap. 9. Of the meaning of those words of Augustine that he would not beleeue the Gospell if the authority of the Church did not moue him 358. Chap. 10. Of the Papists preferring the Churches authority before the Scripture ibid. Chap. 11. Of the refutation of their errour who preferre the authority of the Church before the Scripture 359. Chap. 12. Of their errour who thinke the Church may make new articles of faith 361. Chap. 13. Of the Churches authority to iudge of the differences that arise touching matters of faith 362. Chap. 14. Of the rule of the Churches iudgment 364. Chap. 15. Of the Challenge of Papists against the rule of Scripture charging it with obscurity and imperfection 365. Chap. 16. Of the interpretation of Scripture and to whom it pertaineth 366. Chap. 17. Of the interpretation of the Fathers and how farre wee are bound to admit it 368. Chap. 18. Of the diuerse senses of Scripture 369. Chap. 19. Of the rules we are to follow and the helpes wee are to trust to in interpreting the Scriptures 372. Chap. 20. Of the supposed imperfection of Scriptures and the supply of Traditions 373. Chap. 21. Of the rules whereby true Traditions may be knowne from counterfeit 378. Chap. 22. Of the difference of bookes Canonicall and Apocryphall ibid. Chap. 23. Of the Canonicall and Apocryphall bookes of Scripture 379. Chap. 24. Of the vncertainty and contrariety found amongst Papists touching books Canonicall and Apocryphall now controuersed 382. Chap. 25. Of the diuerse editions of the Scripture and in what tongue it was originally written 385. Chap. 26. Of the Translations of the old Testament out of Hebrew into Greeke 387. Chap. 27. Of the Latin translations and of the authority of the vulgar Latine 388. Chap. 28. Of the trueth of the Hebrew Text of Scripture 390. Chap. 29 Of the supposed corruptions of the Greeke text of Scripture ibid. Chap. 30. Of the power of the Church in making Lawes 393. Chap. 31. Of the bounds within which the the power of the Church in making lawes is contained and whether shee may make lawes concerning the worship of God 394. Chap. 32. Of the nature of Lawes and how they binde 397. Chap. 33. Of the nature of Conscience and how the conscience is bound ibid. Chap. 34. Of their reasons who thinke that humane Lawes do binde the Conscience 399. The fifth booke is concerning the diuers degrees orders and callings of those men to whom the gouernment of the Church is committed CHAP. 1. OF the Primitiue and first Church of God in the house of Adam the Father of all the liuing and the gouernement of same 409. Chap. 2. Of the dignity of the first borne amongst the sonnes of Adam and their Kingly and Priestly direction of the rest 410. Chap. 3. Of the diuision of the preeminences of the first borne amongst the sonnes of Iacob when they came out of Aegypt and the Church of God became Nationall 411. Chap. 4. Of the separation of Aaron and his sonnes from the rest of the sonnes of Leui to serue in the Priests office and of the head or chiefe of that company 412. Chap. 5. Of the Priests of the second ranke or order 413. Chap. 6. Of the Leuites 414. Chap. 7. Of the sects and factions in religion found amongst the Iewes in latter times ibid. Chap. 8. Of Prophets and Nazarites 416. Chap. 9. Of Assemblies vpon extraordinary occasions 417. Chap. 10. Of the set Courts amongst the Iewes their authority and continuance 418. Chap. 11. Of the manifestation of God in the flesh the causes thereof and the reason why the second Person in the Trinity rather tooke flesh then either of the other 423. Chap. 12. Of the manner of the vnion that is between the Person of the Sonne of God and our nature in Christ and the similitudes brought to expresse the same 429. Chap. 13. Of the communication of the properties of eyther nature in Christ consequent vpon the vnion of them in his Person
and the two first kindes thereof 432. Chap. 14. Of the third kind of communication of properties and the first degree thereof 434. Chap. 15. Of the third kind of communication of properties and the second degree thereof 438. Chap. 16. Of the worke of Mediation performed by Christ in our nature 441. Chap. 17. Of the things which Christ suffered for vs to procure our reconciliation with God 445. Chap 18. Of the nature and quality of the passion and suffering of Christ. 450. Chap. 19. Of the descending of Christ into hell 453. Chap. 20. Of the merit of Christ of his not meriting for himselfe his meriting for vs. 464. Chap. 21. Of the benefites which we receiue from Christ. 469. Chap. 22. Of the Ministery of them to whom Christ committed the publishing of the reconciliation between God and men procured by him 471. Chap. 23. Of the Primacie of power imagined by our Aduersaries to haue beene in Peter and their defence of the same 479. Chap. 24. Of the preeminence that Peter had amongst the Apostles and the reason why Christ directed his speeches specially to him 486. Chap. 25. Of the distinction of them to whom the Apostles dying left the managing of Church-affaires and particularly of them that are to performe the meaner seruices in the Church 488. Chap. 26. Of the orders and degrees of them that are trusted with the Ministery of the word and Sacraments and the gogouernment of Gods people and particularly of Lay-elders falsely by some supposed to bee Gouernours of the Church 493. Chap. 27. Of the distinction of the power of Order and Iurisdiction and the preeminence of one amongst the Presbyters of each Church who is named a Bishop 497. Chap. 28. Of the diuision of the lesser titles and smaller Congregations or Churches out of those Churches of so large extent founded and constituted by the Apostles 501. Chap. 29. Of Chorepiscopi or Rurall Bishops forbidden by old Canons to encroach vpon the Episcopall office and of the institution necessary vse of Archpresbyters or Deanes 504. Chap. 30. Of the forme of the gouernement of the Church and the institution and authority of Metropolitanes and Patriarches 510. Chap. 31. Of Patriarches who they were and the reason why they were preferred before other Bishops 515. Chap. 32. How the Pope succeedeth Peter what of right belongeth to him and what it is that he vniustly claimeth 518. Chap. 33. Of the proofes brought by the Romanists for confirmation of the vniuersality of the Popes iurisdiction and power 521. Chap. 34. Of the pretended proofes of the Popes vniuersall iurisdiction taken out of the decretall Epistles of Popes 524. Chap. 35. Of the pretended proofes of the Popes Supremacie produced and brought out of the writinges of the Greeke Fathers 533. Chap. 36. Of the pretended proofes of the Popes Supremacie taken out of the writings of the Latine Fathers 539. Chap. 37. Of the pretended proofes of the Popes vniuersall power taken from his intermedling in ancient times in confirming deposing or restoring Bishops deposed 550. Chap. 38. Of the weakenesse of such proofes of the supreame power of Popes as are taken from their lawes Censures dispensations and the Vicegerents they had in places farre remote from them 556. Chap. 39. Of Appeales to Rome 561. Chap. 40. Of the Popes supposed exemption from all humane iudgment as beeing reserued to the iudgement of Christ onely 571. Chap. 41. Of the titles giuen to the Pope and the insufficiencie of the proofes of his illimited power and iurisdiction taken from them 582. Chap. 42. Of the second supposed priuiledge of the Romane Bishops which is infallibility of iudgement 585. Chap. 43. Of such Popes as are charged with heresie and how the Romanists seeke to cleare them from that imputation 593. Chap. 44. Of the Popes vniust claime of temporall dominion ouer the whole world 602. Chap. 45. Of the Popes vniust claime to intermedle with the affaires of Princes and their States if not as Soueraign Lord ouer all yet at least in ordine ad Spiritualia and in case of Princes failing to do their duties 609. Chap. 46. Of the examples of Church-men deposing Princes brought by the Romanists 618. Chap. 47. Of the ciuill dominion which the Popes haue by the gift of Princes 632. Chap. 48. Of generall Councels and of the end vse and necessity of them 642. Chap. 49. Of the persons that may be present in generall Councels and who they are of whom generall Councels do consist 645. Chap. 50. Of the President of generall Councels 649. Chap. 51. Of the assurance of finding out the truth which the Bishops assembled in generall Councels haue 660. Chap. 52. Of the calling of Councels and to whom that right pertaineth 667. Chap. 53. Of the power and authority exercised by the ancient Emperours in generall Councels and of the Supremacie of Christian Princes in causes and ouer persons Ecclesiasticall 677. Chap. 54. Of the calling of Ministers and the persons to whom it pertaineth to elect and ordaine them 686. Chap. 55. Of the Popes disordered intermedling with elections of Bishops and other Ministers of the Church their vsurpation intrusion and preiudicing the right and liberty of others 696. Chap. 56. Of the ordinations of Bishops and Ministers 702. Chap. 57. Of the things required in such as are to be ordained Ministers and of the lawfulnesse of their Marriage 704. Chap. 58. Of Digamie and what kind of it it is that debarreth men from entring into the Ministerie 727. Chap. 59. Of the maintenance of Ministers 733. What things are Occasionally handled in the Appendix to the fifth Booke THat Protestants admit triall by the Fathers 749. Of Purgatory and Prayer for the dead 750. 764. 776. 783. 787. 792. Whether generall Councels may erre 761. The opinion of the Greekes concerning Purgatory 764. Of Transubstantiation 770. The opinion of some of the Schoolemen thinking that finall Grace purgeth out all sinfulnesse out of the soule in the moment of dissolution 772. Of the heresie of Aerius 789. Nothing constantly resolued on concerning Purgatory in the Romane Church at Luthers appearing 790. Abuses in the Romane Church disliked by Gerson 795. Grosthead opposing the Pope 809. The agreement of diuers before Luther with that which Protestants now teach 813. Of the difference betweene the German Diuines and vs concerning the Vbiquitary presence and the Sacrament 819. The differences of former times amongst the Fathers and of the Papists at this day compared with the differences that are found amongst Protestants 823. Of the Rule whereby all controuersies are to be ended 827. That the Elect neuer fall totally from grace once receiued 833. What manner of faith is found in infants that are baptised 837. Of the saying of Augustine that hee would not beleeue the Gospell if the authority of the Church did not moue him 841. Of the last resolution of our faith 844. 856. Of the sufficiency of the Scripture 847. Of Traditions 849. 892. Of the merit of works
wee are of wee will most willingly listen vnto them But this they doe not and therefore their talking of the Fathers reasoning from succession when they dare not reason as the fathers did is most vaine and idle CHAP. 41. Of Vnity the kindes of it and that Communion with the Romane Bishoppe is not alwayes a note of true and Catholike profession THe next note of the Church assigned by them is Vnity The Vnity of the Church consisteth principally in three things First in obseruing and holding the Rule of faith once deliuered to the Saints Secondly in the subiection of the people to their Pastours and thirdly in the due connexion of many Pastours and the flockes depending on them among themselues All these kinds and sorts of vnity wee thinke necessarily required in some degree in all those societies of Christians that will demonstrate themselues to bee the true Churches of God and deny not but that vnity in this sort expressed and conceiued is a most apt note of the true Church The papists suppose that besides these kinds and sorts of vnity before expressed there is also required another kind of vnity to the being of the Church namely subiection to and vnion with that visible head which as they thinke Christ hath left in his steade to gouerne the whole body of the Church and to rule both Pastors and people This head as they suppose is the Bishoppe of Rome from whose communion sith wee are fallen they inferre that wee are diuided from the vnity of the true Church This last kinde of vnity deuised by the Papists wee deny to bee necessarily required to the beeing of the true Church First therefore let vs see what may bee said for or against the necessity of this kinde of vnitie and in the next place consider what our aduersaries can conclude for themselues or against vs from that kind of vnity which wee acknowledge to be necessarily required to the being of the true Church If the vnion of all Christians with this supposed visible head which is the Bishop of Rome were necessarily required as a perpetuall dutie then was there no true Church in the time of the Anti-Popes when the wisest knew not who were the true Popes and who were vsurpers If they shall reply that it is necessary to hold Communion with the true if hee may bee knowne this hath no more warrant of reason than the former seeing the best learned amongst thēselues thinke that not only the Pope but also the whole cleargy people of Rome may erre and fall into damnable heresies in which case it is the part of euery true Christian to disclaime all communion with them and to oppose himselfe against them and all their hereticall impieties That it is possible for the Pope to erre and become an heretique so many great Divines in the Church of Rome haue at all times most constantly defended that the greatest patrons of the infallibility of the Popes judgement at this day are forced to confesse it is not necessary to beleeue that the Pope cannot erre but that it is onely a matter of probable dispute Thus then it is evident to all that will not wilfully oppose themselues against the truth that consent with the Romane Bishoppe cannot bee made a perpetuall and sure note of the true Church Nay the Grecians most constantly affirme that the Popes taking all to himselfe and challenging to bee head of the vniversall Church hath beene the cause of the Churches division But because Bellarmine is so excellent a Sophister that he is able to proue any thing to bee true though neuer so false and absurde Let vs see how hee proueth that consent with the Bishop of Rome is a note of the true Church in such sorte that whosoeuer holdeth Communion with him is a Catholike and contrarily whosoeuer forsaketh his Communion is an Heretique or Schismatique This hee endeavoureth to make good by the testimonies of sundry of the auncient Fathers wrested against their knowne meanings and vndoubted resolutions in other parts of their workes and writings His first allegation is out of Irenaeus in his third booke and third Chapter against heresies But if wee consider the circumstances of the place and the occasion of the wordes ci◅d by Bellarmine wee shall easily see they proue no such thing as hee laboureth to enforce For Irenaeus in that place sheweth how all heresies may bee refuted by opposing against them the tradition of the Apostles which hee saith wee may easily finde out and discerne how contrary it is to the franticke conceites of heretiques by taking a view of them which were ordained Bishoppes by the Apostles in the Churches of Christ and their successours to this present time which neuer taught nor knew any such thing as these men dreame Now because it would bee tedious to reckon all the successions of Bishoppes succeeding one another in euery Church therefore he produceth the succession of the Bishops in the Romane Church in steede of all because that being the most famous and renowned Church of the world constituted and founded by the two most principall and glorious Apostles Peter and Paul whatsoeuer was successiuely taught and receiued in that Church and consequently deliuered vnto it by those blessed Apostles must needes be the doctrine and tradition of the rest of the Apostles deliuered to all other Churches of the World For what was there hidden from these Apostles that was revealed vnto any of the rest and what would they hide from this principall Church that was any way necessary to bee knowne Therefore saith Irenaeus the producing of the Romane succession is in stead of all For it must needes bee that what this most principall Church receiued from these great Apostles that nothing else the other did receiue from their Apostles first preachers which he expresseth in these words Ad hanc Ecclesiam propter potentiorē principalitatē necesse est omnem convenire Ecclesiā hoc est cos qui sunt vndique fideles Bellarmines sense of these words that all Churches must frame themselues to beleeue what the Church of Rome beleeueth and prescribeth to others to bee beleeued no way standeth with the drift of Irenaeus in this place as may appeare by that which hath beene sayd and therefore this allegation might haue beene spared His next authorities are out of Cyprians Epistles in the first of which Epistles we shall finde that there were certaine Schismatikes that fled from their owne lawfull Bishop and superiours with complaints to other Bishops and Churches and amongst the rest to the Church and Bishop of Rome not knowing sayth Cyprian or at least not considering that the Romanes are such as will not giue entertainement to such perfidious companions nor listen to lying and false reports For that is the meaning of those words Ad quos perfidia non possit habere accessum But Bellarmine wresteth the words to another sense to wit that infidelitie and
their own ascension and going vp into heauen For though vvhen one substance is turned into another not being before the conuersion but by the conuersion beginning to bee that into vvhich the conuersion is made occupieth and possesseth the place the other held as vvhen Lots wife was conuerted into a pillar of salt the pillar stood in that place where she vvas vvhen shee vvas conuerted yet if one substance should bee changed into another preexistent the conuerted should get the place of that into vvhich it vvere conuerted so that the bread and vvine on the mysticall table being conuerted into the body and bloud of Christ sitting in heauen at the right hand of God should goe vp into heauen and not bring him to the table And yet this vvas the principall reason that moued the authours of Transubstantiation to like better of that than of any other construction of Christs vvords For that they supposed thereby the body of Christ might be made present in the Sacrament without any change of place or locall motion in respect of it selfe Which yet Scotus Occam and the latter Schoolemen doe vtterly reiect So sweetely do these men agree that talke so much of vnity Verily I am perswaded there are more materiall and reall differences amongst them touching this one sacrament then there are appearing differences or controuersies amongst those of our religion touching all points of Religion For is it not so that there are foure opinions touching the presence of Christ in the sacrament and three of them different from Transubstantiation So that notwithstāding the decree of the Laterane Councell many of the wisest and best learned were of opinion that Transubstantiation cannot be deduced from the scripture or the Churches determination Did. not Thomas Aquinas and the rest of that time deny that one body may be locally in more places than one at one time and reiect it as a thing impossible and implying contradiction and doe not the Papistes at this day iudge vs haereticks for being of the same opinion Did they not in Berengarius time thinke that the very body of Christ is torne with teeth and yet without hurt by a strange miracle And was not Berengarius in his recantation forced to say so much yet at this day this conceipt is holden most absurd and foolish Do not some of them say that the body of Christ goeth downe into the stomacke and belly and is eaten of mice and dogges and do not others detest this blasphemous impiety Do not some of them say there are accidents in the Sacraments without substance and do not others affirme that those accidents are inherent in the aire Do not some of them say that when the Priest breaketh that which he holdeth in his hands after consecration it is no true breaking but a deceiuing of the sense Others that hee truely breaketh and yet nothing is broken Others that Christs body is broken and others that the accidents are broken Such a broken religion haue these men deuised that neither the Fathers nor any before Barbarisme had possessed all euer thought of Do not some of them say that Christ in the Sacrament retaineth his owne proportion of parts figure and fashion and do not others say and demonstratiuely proue that if he be in the Sacrament hee hath no distance of parts no figure no fashion nor organicall disposition of body and consequently no life The rest of the infinite mazes that these men turning out of the direct way haue lost themselues in I haue no pleasure to treade out But those fewe examples may suffice to shewe that their whole doctrine is full of vncertainty contrariety and contradiction and doth testifie against it selfe that it is not of God It were easie to shewe that all Popish doctrine is nothing else but a masse of vncertainties and contradictions shewing that they are out of the way that pro◅esse it and know not how to finde either it or themselues If any Papist dare deny this it shall bee proued against him in particulars But they will say notwithstanding all these differences yet they submitte their iudgements to the censure of the Pope and Councell and therefore their diuisions are not daungerous nor hereticall How false and shamelesse this answere is the infinite number of them that haue euer iudged that the Pope may erre and become an Hereticke doth apparantly demonstrate If they shall say that though they dare not relye vpon the infallibility of the popes iudgement yet they rest in the determination of generall Councelles it will bee found that they are as doubtfull touching the authority of Councelles as they are concerning the Pope some saying they are meere humane inuentions others that they are nothing if the Pope confirme them not others that they are though hee refuse to confirme them and others that both may erre some reiecting one Councell and some another as appeareth by the contrarie iudgment of Papists of the Councelles of Constance Basill Pisa and Florence But they will say they all hold that which the Catholike Romane Church doth hold and in other things not yet agreed vppon thinke euery man at his pleasure This is as much as if they should haue sayd that wherein soeuer they all agree they all agree and wherein soeuer they differ each faction doth differ from another and carefully prouideth that nothing shall passe against it by publike consent as appeareth in the matter of Maries conception sundry other things which no Councell durst euer determine for feare of offendinge the contrarie factions dissenting about these things Thus then I hope it appeareth out of that which hath beene spoken that by the note of vnity and diuision the Romanistes are found to bee in errour and not wee What degree of vnity is necessarily required in the true Churches of God and what divisions may be found among the societies of Christians and yet not cause them to cease to be the true Churches of God I haue sufficiently cleared in that part wherein I shewed what is the nature of schisme and heresie CHAP. 43 Of Vniuersalitie THe next note of the Church is vniuersality concerning which many things haue beene spoken in the former part touching the notes of the Church in generall Wherefore passing by those things let vs in this place obserue only these fewe things following First therefore to the Vniuersality of the Church it is required that it extend to all times places and sorts of men Secondly this Vniversality is not found in any one Church limited either in respect of time or place Thirdly from hence it followeth that it is no where found but in that blessed number of Christians that haue beene are and shall bee Fourthly it cannot bee a note of the true Church that is the multitude of men now liuing in the world as being found in it For that multitude is not vniuersall but limited in respect of time being onely the number of them that
hee beleeueth whatsoeuer the judgement of the Pope bee And yet the same men which thus teach doe say it is no matter of faith to acknowledge or not to acknowledge the infallibility of the Popes judgement and that a man may bee a true Catholicke that thinketh the Pope may erre These two assertions are directly contradictorie The first they embrace because they find the authoritie Papall to be the surest stay of all their false faith and Antichristian profession and the second they are forced vnto because they dare not condemne so many famous renowned and great Divines as haue beene of that opinion as Durandus Gerson Cameracensis Almaine Waldensis and innumerable moe By this their contradicting of themselues not yet knowing whereon to ground their faith it is evident they haue no faith at all Secondly if wee should graunt them to haue any faith yet will it bee found to be Sophisticall or meerely humane For the reason ground and cause of their perswasion touching things Divine is the testimony of the Church infallibly led into all truth and that there is a Church thus ledde into all trueth whose testimony is vndoubtedly certaine and true they beleeue because the Church telleth them so as if a man should beleeue the reports of such a man because he is wise faithfull and honest and beleeue him to be so onely because he saith so To avoide this Sophisticall circulation sundry of the Schoolemen doe freely confesse that the ground of their faith is nothing else but the multitude and consent of men nations and people agreeing in the profession of it and consequently that it is meerely an humane perswasion and that they haue no faith at all which alwayes stayeth it selfe vpon the certainty of the first trueth Thirdly they teach that mortall men are neuer bound to giue GOD thankes for the greatest benefite that is bestowed on them in this world Nay that to giue him thankes for it were grievous sinne This is most evident for the greatest benefite of all other is justification but for this no man may giue God thankes because no man knoweth whether hee hath receiued it or not nor can assure himselfe of it without intollerable and inexcusable presumption Nay some of these seducers are not ashamed to write that euery man is bound to doubt of it with so fearefull doubting as may cause trembling applying that place of the Apostle to that purpose Worke out your saluation with feare and trembling Now I thinke hee which should come to God and giue him thankes for that which whether hee hath receiued or not hee is so doubtfull that he trembleth for feare should but mocke God and mistake his owne meaning Fourthly they hold that Paul and so many more as knew certainely they were in state of justification did sinne damnably in saying the Lords Prayer and that they did as foolishly as if a man should come to God and aske of him the creation of the world which was made long agoe CHAP. 46. Of the efficacie of the Churches doctrine THus were it most easie for vs to shew in many other particulars that the course of their doctrine is full of palpable absurdities But let these few instances suffice and let vs passe from the sanctity of the Churches doctrine to that the Iesuite addeth touching the efficacy of it where he affirmeth two things the first that heretickes neuer conuert any from infidelity to the faith the second that the Church of Rome hath conuerted This which the Iesuite so confidently deliuereth is partly false and partly to no purpose at all For whereas hee sayth heretickes neuer convert any from infidelity to Christianity the conuersion of the Moscouites by the Greeke Church at that time when it was in his iudgment hereticall and schismaticall abundantly refuteth him besides some other examples that might be alleadged Touching the other part of his speech that the Church of Rome hath conuerted many nations to the faith it maketh nothing to the purpose For wee haue already shewed that wee doubt not but the Church in which the Bishop of Rome with more than Lucifer-like pride exalted himselfe was notwithstanding the true Church of God that it held a sauing profession of the trueth in Christ and by force thereof did conuert many from errour to the way of trueth yet was not the state of that Church such but that a damnable faction of wicked ones was found in the midst of it who being the vassals of that cursed Antichrist adulterated the trueth of God and brought his people into a miserable estate holding men in worse then Babylonical captiuity These men the Romanists succeed at this day For the clearing of this matter see that which I haue noted before to this purpose CHAP. 47 Of the Protestants pretended confession that the Romane Church is the true Church of God THe next note whereby Bellarmine endeuoureth to proue the Romish Synagogue to be the true Church of God is our owne confession Surely if he can proue that we confesse it to be the true Church he needeth not vse any other arguments Let vs see therefore how hee proueth that we confesse the Romane Church to be the true Church of God Luther sayth he clearely yeeldeth it Caluin and others in effect acknowledge the same This wee deny for neither Luther nor Calvin nor any of vs doe acknowledge that the Popish religion is true religion or the Romish faction the Orthodoxe Church of God It is true indeede that Luther writing against the Anabaptists doth affirme that the life of true Christianity was preserued in the middest of those Churches wherein the Pope did formerly tyrannize which thing we haue more fully cleared before But that any part of that doctrine the reformed Churches haue reiected was to be accounted the doctrine of the Church or that those wicked ones in whose steppes the Romanists at this day doe insist peruerting the strait wayes of God and adulterating his heauenly trueth were liuely members of the Church Luther did neuer so much as dreame That which is alleadged out of Caluin touching Bernard and other holy men liuing dying in the Romane Church is to no purpose For we neuer doubted but that the Churches wherein those holy men did liue and die were the true Churches of God and held the sauing profession of heavenly trueth though there were innumerable in the middest of them that adulterated the same to their endlesse perdition whose successours the Romanists are at this day There is therefore a great difference to be made betweene the Church wherein our Fathers formerly liued and that faction of the Popes adherents which at this day resist against the necessary reformation of the Churches of God and make that their faith and religion which in former times was but the priuate and vnresolued opinion of some certaine onely In former times a man might hold the generall doctrine of those Churches wherein our Fathers liued and be
by Gerson disliking the honour then giuen to Images their number and fashion as being occasions of Idolatry in the simple which to be true the words of Augustine are proof sufficient who demaundeth who it is or where he may bee found that adoreth or prayeth beholding an Image as the manner was in the Romane Church is not in such sort affected that he perswadeth himselfe it heareth him and is able and ready to grant him the things he desireth and seeketh in his prayer CHAP. 24. Of Absolution ABsolution is now supposed by those of the Church of Rome to be a Sacramentall Acte giuing grace ex opere operato and so remitting sinne both quoad culpam poenam but in the Primitiue Church it was nothing else but a restoring of men formerly put from the Sacrament cast out of the Church to the Churches peace and vse of the Sacraments again as appeareth by Cyprians Epistles Neither was Absolution giuen in those times till pennance were first performed Amongst the ancient sayth Lindan Absolution was seldome giuen but after penance performed onely in time of persecution pestilence warre or dangerous sicknesse of the party the manner was sometimes to giue absolution presently at the suit of the penitent to require of him the performance of pennance afterward if hee escaped those dangers Hence in time it came that ordinarily they gaue Absolution first and then imposed penance to be performed afterward Now because they could not conceiue from what this Absolution should free them not being formerly subjected to any censure of the Church some began to thinke that it freeth them from the staine of sinne and the punishments due vnto the same thereby making it a Sacramentall Acte yet so as many retayned a right perswasion still The Priest saith Alexander of Hales is a Mediatour betweene God man to God he ascendeth as an inferiour by way of petition and as a suiter to man he descendeth as a Commaunder and Iudge In the first sort hee obtayneth for men by his prayer and procureth acceptation with God in the second hee reconcileth them to the Church his prayer obtayneth grace his absolution presupposeth it so that the Keyes of the Church extend to the remission of sin by way of request obtayning it not by way of authority giuing it CHAP. 25. Of Indulgences and Pardons TOuching Indulgences or Pardons they were originally nothing else but the releasing of some part of that penance that had beene enioyned as appeareth by the whole course of antiquity Wherevpon it was a long time the opinion of many in the Romane Church that Indulgences are of force onely in indicio Ecclesiae not in iudicio Dei and that they free men only from injoyned penance which the forme of them was wont to import it being euer added in those relaxations ab iniunctis poenitentiis and Caietan sheweth the same affirming that an Indulgence is principally an acte of jurisdiction and the freeing from enjoyned penance That which bred another conceit in the Romane Church in later times was an errour in practise for whereas aunciently they neuer remitted any part of the penance they had enjoyned but out of the consideration of the extraordinary signes of repentance appearing in the penitent arguing that to bee performed in shorter time than was expected which was intended in later times they granted these relaxations and remissions in favour when there was no inducement in respect of any thing appearing in the parties Now because to free them from these penitentiall exercises tending to the preventing of Gods Iudgements before so much was performed as was necessary for the turning away of his displeasure might seeme hurtfull rather than beneficiall to them to whom such favours were shewed in that they were left to Gods judgements into whose hands it is fearefull to fall they began to bethinke them how they might supply the defects of penitentiall conversion vnto God in those they thus pardoned and not leaue them to the danger of his future judgement This they could not otherwise devise to doe but by casting the ouerplus of other mens satisfactions vpon them and releeuing them out of the treasury of the Church which groweth as they suppose out of the satisfactorie sufferings of Christ and his Saints multis tamen doctoribus aduersantibus as Caietan noteth where hee sheweth that Durandus teacheth that the Saints had no superfluous merits not rewarded in themselues Touching Indulgences Durandus sayth little can bee sayd of any certainety or as vndoubtedly true seeing the Scripture speaketh not expresly of them neither the Fathers as Augustine Hillarie Ambrose Hierome and the rest so that in speaking of them wee must follow the common course Touching the force of these pardons how vncertainly and vnconstantly their greatest doctours dispute it is not vnknowne for Bonaventura noteth that many were of opinion that pardons haue no other vse nor haue any further force or vertue but onely to remit certaine dayes penance if the cause in respect whereof they be granted bee equivalent vnto the penance which was to haue beene performed so making them to bee but onely a commutation of penance and not a relaxation or remission Gerson sayth the judiciall and publike power of the keyes extendeth not it selfe principally or directly to the diminishing or taking away of any punishments but such as it selfe inflicted or might haue inflicted as are the punishments of Excommunication irregularity and other disablings to performe Ciuill or Ecclesiasticall actes And in another place he sayth the granting of Indulgences extendeth not it selfe to punishments following the corruption of nature and flowing from originall sinne for it is certaine that the Pope doeth not absolue and free men from thirst hunger infirmities and death so that such absolutions extend only to the punishments aboue mētioned such as may be inflicted by the just Iudgment and prescription of him that imposeth penance for actuall sins Whe ther the power of the Keyes extend only to such as are on earth or to them also that are in Purgatory the opinions hee sayth of men are contrary vncertaine but howsoeuer this he pronounceth confidently that onely Christ can giue such pardons for thousands of dayes and yeares as many Popes assume to themselues power to graunt CHAP. 26. Of the Infallibility of the Popes judgment TOuching the infallibility of the Popes judgment it was so farre from being a thing resolued of in the Church of God before our time that Stapleton confesseth it is yet no matter of faith but of opinion onely because so many famous and renowned Deuines haue euer holden the contrary as Gerson Almaine Occam allmost all the Parisians all they that thought the councell to be aboue the Pope Adrianus Sextus Durandus Alfonsus à Castro and many moe CHAP. 27. Of the power of the Pope in disposing the affaires of Princes and their states LAstly Touching the power of the Pope in
that place which the Lord hath chosen shew thee thou shalt obserue to doe according to all that they informe thee according to the Law which they shall teach thee and according to the iudgement which they shall tell thee shalt thou doe thou shalt not decline from the thing which they shall shew thee neither to the right hand nor to the left And that man that will doe presumptuously not hearkning to the Priest that standeth before the Lord thy God to minister there or vnto the Iudge that man shall die and thou shalt take away euill from Israel This was the highest Court amongst the Iewes from this there was no appeale and this Court some thinke to haue enjoyed so great and ample priviledges as that it could not erre and thereupon inferre that Popes in their Consistories cannot erre to whom Christ hath made as large promises of assistance and direction as euer he did to the high Priests and Rulers in the time of Moses Law That the Priests and Rulers in the time of the Law could not erre they indeavour to proue because he was to answer it with hisbloud whosoeuer disobeyed the sentence decree of those Iudges God required euery man without declining to the right hand or the left to doe that they commanded If it be objected that the words of Almighty God requiring all men so strictly to obey the sentence and decree of those Rulers are not to bee vnderstood concerning matters of faith but Causes Ciuill and Criminall and that therefore this place maketh not any proofe of the infallibilitie of their judgment in matters of faith it will bee answered that there is no reason to doubt of their judgment in matters of faith of whose right judgment in matters Ciuill and Criminall wee are assured Surely it is true that if those Iudges in the time of the Law could not erre in matters Ciuill and Criminall they were vndoubtedly much more freed from danger of erring in matters of faith but it is one of the strangest paradoxes as I thinke that euer yet was heard of that the Priests and Iudges in the time of the Law were priviledged from danger of erring in matters of fact and that they were so assisted in their proceedings as that they could not bee mis-led by any passions or sinister affections to pervert judgement and doe wrong For besides that it is refuted by sundry instances of sinister and wicked judgments passed by those Iudges against the Seruants and Prophets of Almighty God it maketh the Ministery and government vnder the Law incomparably more glorious and excellent then the Ministerie of the Gospell For it is by all confessed that the Popes and Councels may erre in things of this nature But that the Priests in the time of the Law did sometimes erre in judgment condemning them whō God would not haue had condemned appeareth evidently by that we read in the booke of the Prophesies of Ieremy where when Ieremy had made an end of speaking all that the Lord commanded him to speake then the Priests and the Prophets and al◅ the people took him and said Thou shalt dye the death And when the Princes of Iudah heard of these things they came vp from the Kings house into the house of the Lord sate down in the entry of the new gate of the Lords House Then spake the Priests the Prophets vnto the Princes to all the people saying This man is worthy to dye but the Princes said This man is not worthy to dye for he hath spoken vnto vs in the Name of the Lord our God Here we see the Priests erred and were resisted by the Princes of the Land but elsewhere we reade that the Princes also were angry with Ieremy smote him and layde him in prison in the house of Iehonathan the Scribe and saide unto the King Wee beseech thee let this man be put to death for he weakneth the hands of the men of war that are in the Citie and the hands of all the people So that both Priests and Princes might did sometimes erre in judgment But some man perhaps will say that howsoeuer they might erre in matters of fact yet they could not erre in any matter of substance pertaining to the worship seruice of God This also is clearely demonstrated to be false their errours in things pertaining to the worship and seruice of God proued by sundry examples In the second booke of Kings wee reade that Ahaz k◅ng of Iudah walked in the waies of the kings of Israel made his sonnes goe through the fire after the abominations of the heathen and offered burnt incense in the high places and on the hils and vnder euerie greene tree This wicked Ahaz sent from Damascus to Vrias the Priest the patterne of the Altar he saw at Damascus and the fashion of it and all the workemanship thereof and Vrias the Priest made an Altar in all points like to that which King Ahaz sent from Damascus So did Vrias the Priest before King Ahaz came from Damascus and the King commanded Vrias to offer sacrifice on the Altar and Vrias did whatsoeuer the King commanded him Yea we reade of many Priests especially about the time of the Maccabees that forsooke the law of God and followed the abominations of the heathen Idolaters and many Iudges and Kings likewise so that Dauid Hezekiah Iosias only excepted there was none of the Kings that did not decline more or lesse to Idolatry The meaning therefore of Almighty God according to the iudgment of the best Diuines was not that Priests and Iudges in the the time of the law should be obayed in all things without exception but when they commanded and iudged according to the diuine law and verity and in the same sort must wee vnderstand the words of Christ when he sayth The Scribes and Pharisees sit on the Chaire of Moses and commandeth the people to obserue and doe whatsoeuer they prescribe to be obserued and done For otherwise Christ should be contrary to himselfe who elsewhere willeth men to beware of the leauen of the Pharisees which S. Mathew interpreteth to bee their doctrine teacheth men by his own example to cōtemn their traditiōs Yea it is most certaine that the Pharisees erred dangerously and damnably in many things notwithstanding their sitting on Moses chaire and therefore Christ doth oftentimes sharpely reproue them for mis-interpreting the law of God Some man perhaps will say they taught lesse then is implied in the Law in that they condemned murther adultery and the like crimes but not lust hatred and such other sinister affections of the heart and that therefore Christ did not reproue them as teaching any thing contrary to the Law but as teaching lesse then is contained in it and comming short of it This euasion will not serue for it appeareth euidently that they did not only come
that if the Apostles were equall in the respect they had to the people as gouernours of the same they were so far forth in that respect equall amongst thēselues But they will say perhaps that the Apostles were indeed equall amongst themselues in the power office of teaching directing guiding gouerning the Christian World but that yet amongst themselues there was an inequality one was superior had power ouer the rest not in respect of the acts of their office of teaching gouerning the world but in respect of their personall actions This surely is one of the strangest paradoxes that euer was heard of For who can imagine that God would trust the Apostles with the managing of the weightiest affaires of his Church the gouernment of the whole world without being any way accountant in respect thereof vnto any one amongst thē as superiour that he would appoint an head chief subject them to his censure in their personall actions Nay this is impossible cannot be For if in their office of teaching gouerning the rest of the Church they were equall could not therein be limited or restrained one by another then was there none amongst them that could put any of the rest from his office dignity and imployment Now it is most cleare and certaine that he who hath not power to suspend another from the execution of his office in the Church hath no power to suspend him frō the Sacraments or to excōmunicate him whatsoeuer his personall misdemeanours be For as to be a Minister of the Church presupposeth to bee a member of it soe to be put from being a member of the Church implyeth and presupposeth a putting from all office and dignity in the Church soe that there neither was nor could bee any amongst the Apostles that had power to put any of the rest out of the Church or to suspend them from the vse of the Sacraments seeing there was none found amongst them that had authority to limit restraine or debarre any of the rest from the execution of his office and therefore all that any one of them could do in respect of another was but to admonish him vpon his rejecting of such admonitions to refuse to communicate with him which thing any one may doe in an absolute equality as well as when one is superiour to another as we see by the example of Paul reprouing Peter and resisting him to his face and likewise by that of Paul and Barnabas parting the one from the other vpon such dislikes and differences as grew betweene them Wherefore I suppose our Aduersaries will not much insist vpon this their first shift and evasion Let vs see therefore if their second be any better It is true say they that all power Ecclesiasticall and all degrees of the same are included and implyed in the Apostolique office and dignity that the Apostles as Apostles were all equall and consequently that there was no one amongst the Apostles but in his time had as much to doe in gouerning of the Church as Peter without receiuing any thing from him or being any way subiect to his controule and to be restrained limited or directed by him But this amplitude of power whicch all the Apostles had in common the rest had onely for themselues and as a personall priuiledge that was to end with them but Peter had the same in such sort that he might leaue it to to his Successours Soe that that power which in the rest was Apostolique and temporary and to end with them was ordinary Pastorall and perpetuall in Peter and to be deriued from him to his Successours and after-commers Surely this second evasion will be found much worse then the first for it is absurd to say that Peter left all the dignity and Ecclesiasticall power he had in common with the rest of the Apostles to his successours for then all Popes should be immediately chosen by God not by the Cardinals then should they all be consecrated and ordained immediately by Christ not by Bishops then should they all see Christ in the flesh then should they all haue power to write bookes of Canonicall Scripture and be free from danger of erring whensoeuer they either preach or write for so the Apostles were yea then should they confirme their doctrine by miracles and giue the Holy Ghost by imposition of their Hands Whereas yet noe Pope dareth challenge any one of these preeminences If they say that all the dignity and power that was in the Apostles vvas not ordinary Pastorall and perpetuall in Peter and soe to be passed ouer to his Successours but some part of it onely it is just nothing they say For then this is all that they affirme that some part of that dignity and power that was in Peter is in Peters Successours and so there is in the silliest Priest in the world But they will say immediate vocation the seeing of Christ in the flesh infallibility of judgment power to write Canonicall bookes of Scripture and the confirmation of doctrine by miracles together with the giuing of the holy Ghost by imposition of hands were fitting to the first beginnings of Christianity and not of perpetuall necessity and vse and therefore to cease after things were established but that vniversality of jurisdiction and a kind of infallibility of judgment are perpetually necessarie and therefore these were to passe from Peter to others though the rest of the Apostolique preeminences were not Thus then first they amplifie the excellent dignities of Peter as if the rest had not had the like but being conuinced that hee had nothing the rest had not they make shew as if they would proue that the Apostle S. Peter had all those things in such sort that hee might leaue them to his Successours which the rest had as personall priuilidges onely because hee is described to be a Pastour of the Church in that CHRIST sayth vnto him Feed my sheepe and the office of a Pastour is of perpetuall necessity But being vrged that there are many excellent dignities found in Peter and the rest that are not communicable to any other as immediate vocation seeing of CHRIST in the flesh absolute infallibilitie in word and writing speaking in diuerse tongues power to doe miracles and power to giue the visible giftes of the holy Ghost by the imposition of hands they confesse that precisely Peters being a Pastour of the Christian Church will not proue that anie dignitie of his mentioned in the Scripture is perpetuall pastorall and to continue for euer vnlesse the necessity of the perpetuity of it bee made to appeare otherwise Whence it will follow that they cannot proue that any speciall preeminences in Peter which hee had in common with the rest as namely infallibility of judgment and vniuersality of Iurisdiction were Pastorall and perpetuall in him and to bee passed from him to his after-commers and thereby entitle the Pope vnto them For
Clergie-men from the execution of their offices but farther they might not goe But in case of obstinate continuance of disordred persons in their misdemeanors notwithstanding these proceedings they were to complaine to the Bishop if the matter required hast or otherwise to the next Episcopall Synode For the Bishop in each diocese hauing certaine thus appointed to assist and helpe him in the superuision of the rest as well of the Clergie as the people was once in the yeare to hold a Synode with the chiefe of his Prelates Deanes rurall and other worthy men Annis singulis saith Gratian Episcopus in suá Diocesi Synodum faciat de suis Clericis Abbatibus 〈◊〉 alteros Clericos Monachos that is Let the Bishop euery yeare hold a Synode in his Diocese of his Clerkes and Abbots and let him therein discusse and examine the learning conuersation behauiour of other Clerkes Monkes The Synode of Coleiâ—…e vnder Adolphus confirmed by Charles the fifth appointed this Diocesane Synode to be holden twise euery yeare according to the old manner custome And the Synode of Coleine vnder Hermannus ordaineth that the Bishop or his Officiall generall with the Prelateâ—… of the Metroropoliticall Cathedrall Collegiate Churches especially the Arch-deacons Deanes rurall who in some part are taken into the fellowship of the Bishops cares shall enquire into things out of order what he shall find by their iudgment to need reformation he shall with their aduice amend reforme The like doth Laurentius the Popes Legate decree and ordaine Yea the Councell of Tâ—… confirmeth the same also and the Councell of Coleine vnder Adolphus taketh order that Deanes of colledges comming to the Episcopall Synode in the name of their colledges rurall Deanes in the name of the parish ministers within their diuisioÌ„s shall haue their charges borne by such their colledges ministers according to the nuÌ„ber of daies the Synode endureth seeing they go on warfare for God The forme of holding a Diocesane Synode Iouerius out of Burchardus describeth in this sort At a coÌ„uenieÌ„t hower wheÌ„ it seemeth good to the B or his vicegerent all other doores being locked let the Ostiaries staÌ„d at that by which the Presbyters are to enter coÌ„ming together let theÌ„ go in sit according to their ordinatioÌ„ after these the approued Deacons which order shall require to be present let some lay-men also of good coÌ„uersation be brought in and then let the Bishop or his substitute enter who entring into the Synode is first to salute the clergie and people and then turning towards the East to say a certaine prayer the Deacons to read the Gospel When it was late the first day of the 〈◊〉 and the dores were shut c after which reading and praiers all are to go out saue the Presbyters and clerkes only after departure of the rest another prayer being made the Bishop shall will the Presbyters to propose their doubts and either to learne or teach and to make known their complaints that so they may receiue satisfaction This is all that is done the first day The second day if the clergie haue no matter of complaint or doubt let the Laitie bee let in to propose their doubts and make knowne their grieuances or otherwise let their comming in be deferred till some other day Besides this Synode which euery Bishoppe was to hold once euery yeare he was to goe from Church to Church and see all the Churches in his Diocese The secoÌ„d councell of Bracar appointeth that the Bishop shall go through all his Churches enforming both Presbyters and people and the third councell of Arles prescriâ—…th that he shall enquire take notice of the wrongs offered to those of meane poore estate by them that are great and in authoritie and first seeke to reforme such euils by Episcopall admonition and counsell but if he cannot so prevaile hee shall acquaint the King with it The Bishop saith the fourth Councell of Toledo must goe euery yeare through his Diocese and see all his Churches and parishes that he may enquire what reparations the churches doe neede and what other things bee amisse But if he be either detained by sicknesse or so intangled with businesse that he cannot goe let him send some approued presbyters or Deacons which may not onely consider of the ruines of each church and the needfull reparations thereof but enquire also into the life and conversation of the clergie and ministers According to the decree and direction of this Councell we shall finde that Bishops hindered by other employments sicknesse weaknes or age so that they could not go in person to visite their churches sent some of their chiefe Presbyters or Deacons but especially the chiefe Deacons to performe the worke of visitation for them because they being the chiefe among the Deacons which are but church-seruants were more attendant about them for dispatch of all publicke businesses then presbyters These chiefe Deacons or Arch-Deacons at first they sent onely to visite and to make report but not to sententiate any mans cause or to meddle with the correcting or reforming of any thing but afterwardes in processe of time they were authorized to heare and determine the smallest matters and to reforme the lighter and lesser offences and therefore in the Councell of Laterane vnder Alexander the third it is ordered that the Arch-deacon shall not giue sentence against any one But in the Councell of Rhoane it is appointed that the Arch-Deacon and Arch-presbyter shall bee fore-runners to the Bishoppe and shall reforme the lighter and smaller things they finde to bee amisse Hence in time it came that Arch-Deacons much vsed by Bishops as most attendant on them in the visitation of their churches and reforming some smaller disorders at length by prescription claimed the correction of greater things as hauing of long time put themselues into the exercise of such authoritie And thus the Deacons or at least the chiefe of them the Arch-Deacons which at first might not sit in the presence of a presbyter but being willed by him so to doe in the end became by reason of this their imployment by the Bishoppe to bee greater not onely then the ordinary presbyters but then the Arch-presbyters themselues And therefore it is confessed by all that the Arch-deacon hath no authoritie or power of Iurisdiction by vertue of his degree order but by prescription onely neither can hee claime more then hee can prescribe for which his prescription is thought reasonable because the Bishop is supposed to haue consented to his intermedling in such parts of gouernement as by prescription hee may claime Yet lest it might seeme absurd for him that is onely a Deacon to exercise Iurisdiction ouer presbyters the canon of the Church prouideth that no man shall possesse the place of an Arch-Deacon vnlesse he haue the ordination of a presbyter Besides the Deanes or Arch-presbyters which
the Romanists for confirmation of the vniversality of the Popes iurisdiction and power IT is euident by that which hath beene said that that vniuersality whereof Gregory speaketh in his Epistles and which he so peremptorily condemneth is claimed by the Popes his successours at this day and consequently that they are in his judgment the fore-runners of Antichrist and in pride like Lucifer Yet because there is nothing so absurd that some will not defend nothing so false which some will not endeauour to proue true let vs see what the Romanists can say for proofe and confirmation of the vniuersall Iurisdiction of their Popes Surely as men carefull to vphold the state of the Papacy vnder the shadow of the boughes of which tree they so sweetly rest and repose themselues they haue turned ouer their bookes to see what may bee said and out of them alleage against vs the testimonies of Councels Popes Fathers Greeke and Latine and the practise of Popes whence such a peerelesse power may bee proued and inferred The first testimony that they bring out of any Councell is out of the Epistle written by the Fathers of the second generall Councell to Damasus Bishop of Rome the other Bishops of the west wherein the Fathers say if we beleeue these men that they came together to Constantinople by the mandate of the Pope whose letters the Emperour sent vnto them and confesse that the Romane Church is the head and they the members Truely this is a very ill beginning and may make vs justly feare that we shall find little good dealing in that which followeth For there is no part of this true which in the front of all their proofes is by them so confidently alleaged For thus the matter standeth betweene the Fathers of that Councell and the Bishop of Rome The Bishops assembled at Constantinople writ to the Bishop of Rome and the rest of the Bishops of the West assembled in a Councell at Rome signifying that they had beene invited by them out of their brotherly loue as their owne members to come to their Councell and that they wished nothing more then that they had the wings of doues that they might flye away and rest with them but that the state of their Churches not permitting them to be so long absent and that intending at the time they vnderstood of their letters to come no farther then Constantinople they could not come but had sent notwithstanding certaine vnto them This is all that is contained in the letter of those Fathers written to the Bishop of Rome in all which there is no word of any mandate of the Pope but of a friendly and louing entreatie of the Westerne Bishops desiring the presence of their brethren of the East no word of head and members but of fellow members nor any thing that may proue a commaunding power in the Pope Nay the contrary is most strongly from hence to be proued For it was the Emperour and not the Pope that called them to Constantinople they refused to come to Rome though they had receiued the letters of the Romane Bishop and his colleagues intreating and desiring them to come to Rome they abode at Constantinople and were esteemed to bee the Generall Councell though the Pope held a Councell in the West at the same time which should haue beene accounted generall rather then this if all assurance of finding out the trueth and making good Lawes did rest in the Pope onely And lastly they ordained Bishoppes of the greatest and most famous Churches of the world such and in such sort as the Pope did not greatly like and yet was forced to giue way to their doings and to ratifie that which they had done The 2d allegation to proue the vniversalitie of the Popes jurisdiction is that the Fathers of the 3d general Councell holden at Ephesus professed that they deposed Nestorius by force of the mandatory letters of Caelestinus B. of Rome that in their epistle to Caelestinus they say they reserued the judgement of the cause of Iohn Patriarch of Antioch to him as being more doubtfull The former of these two things they endeauour to proue out of Euagrius the later out of the Epistle written by the Fathers of that Councell extant in the Councell it selfe For the clearing of this objection wee must obserue that Nestorius Patriarch of Constantinople hauing vttered certaine hereticall and impious speeches touching the personall vnion of the natures of God and Man in Christ whereby many were scandalized the first amongst the Patriarches that tooke notice of it was Cyrill Bishop of Alexandria in Aegypt who after he found that Nestorius would not bee reclaimed by admonitions called a Synode of his Bishops and condemned the absurd and hereticall positions of Nestorius and required him to anathematize them otherwise threatning that hee and his Bishops would reiect him from their communion and hold them as brethren who vnder his iurisdiction resisted against him This his proceeding hee signified to the Bishop of Rome who approved and commended the same with his whole Synode of westerne Bishops encouraged him to goe forward wishing him not to doubt of his concurrence with him but as hauing all the authority and power hee and his Bishops had to prouide for the church of Constantinople and to let Nestorius know that he was cut off from the vnity of the body of their Churches if hee should not within a certaine number of dayes anathematize his wicked doctrine and professe the faith touching the generation of Christ the Sonne of God which the Romane Church the Church of Alexandria and Christian religion euery where preacheth Hereupon Nestorius fearing the course that Cyrill would take against him desired the Emperour to summon a generall Councell To this Councell came Nestorius and the Bishops that were vnder him and Cyrill with his Bishops assisted with the concurrence of the resolution and direction of the Bishop of Rome and other Bishoppes of the West though absent But Iohn the Patriarch of Antioche and his Bishops were not come Whereupon after a while the Bishops that were present being wearie of staying there beganne to proceede without him requiring Nestorius to appeare in the Synode and to answere to such things as should bee obiected to him Which when hee refused to doe the Fathers assembled finding by manifest proofe that hee had taught impiously condemned and deposed him compelled so to doe by the Canons and the letters of the Bishop of Rome and his westerne Bishops who had set a time within which if hee submitted not himselfe they would reiect him from their communion Fiue dayes after the condemnation and deposition of Nestorius came Iohn the Patriarch of Antioche with his Bishops excusing himselfe for his long tarrying in respect of the distance of the place from whence he came as also for that his Bishops could not sooner be gathered together Hee was much offended that they who were come before him had
thinke the Pope to bee vniuersall Bishop nor that the Bishop of Rome with his Westerne Bishops is more to be listned vnto and obeyed then all the other Bishops of the Christian World That Adrian the Bishop of Rome in his Epistle to Tharasius inserted into the seuenth generall Councell saith that the See of Rome hath the primacie throughout the whole world and is the head of all Churches which is the last allegation of Bellarmine out of Councels is no more then wee granted before if it be rightly vnderstood of a primacie of order and honour and not of an vniversall supreme commaunding power ouer all This is all that Bellarmine can alledge out of any auncient Councell in which his allegations it will not be amisse for the Reader to obserue his guilefull cunning who vndertaking to produce the testimonies of auncient Councels for confirmation of the Papacie bringeth nothing for the most part but the words of particular men and they either sutors to the Pope agents for him or Popes To that which hee hath out of latter Councels as that of Laterane vnder Innocentius and that of Lyons and Florence I will answere when I come to shew the opinions of latter times touching the Popes vniversality of jurisdiction and power and therefore will passe them ouer in this place CHAP. 34. Of the pretended proofes of the Popes Iurisdiction taken out of the Decretall Epistles of Popes THE next proofes that are brought for confirmation of the vniversalitie of Papall jurisdiction are the sayings of Popes in their Decretall Epistles These Epistles Bellarmine sorteth into three rankes placing in the first the Epistles of those Popes that liued within the first 300 yeares in the second the Epistles of those that liued after the first 600 yeares and in the third the Epistles of such as came in the midst betweene these Touching the first he confesseth that certaine errours haue crept into them and that he dareth not pronounce them to be indubitate but Cardinall Cusanus a man of great learning reading and judgement minseth not the matter as Bellarmine doth but plainely and in direct words professeth that he thinketh these Epistles that goe vnder the names of auncient Popes are counterfeit His words are these In my opinion the things that are written of Constantine and his donation are Apocryphall as also perhaps some other long and large writings attributed to the holy men Clemens and Anacletus the Pope on which they that desire to magnifie the Romane See which is worthy of all honour and to exalt it more then either is expedient for the Church or is any way fit doe either altogether or in some sort ground themselues For assuredly if any man would diligently reade ouer and peruse all the writings attributed to those holy men and compare the times wherein they liued with those writings and then would be conversant in the workes of all the holy Fathers which were till the time of Augustine Hierome and Ambrose and in the bookes of Councels wherein authenticall writings are alleaged committing them to memory making vse of thē he would find this to be true that neither any mētion is made of those forenamed Epistles in any of those writings nor that the epistles compared with the times wherein their supposed authors liued can be made to agree with the times of their life but by the very circumstance of time bewray themselues to be counterfeit It is written in the Epistles of Clemens how he was made Pope and succeded Peter and after the death of Peter the author of these Epistles writeth vnto Iames who was brother of our Lord and Bishop of Hierusalem and yet it is most manifest that the same Iames died eight yeares before Peter which was one of the causes as Beda writeth in his commentaries vpon the Canonicall Epistles why the Epistle of Iames is set first among the Catholique Epistles Neither is this the censure of Cusanus onely but Contius a learned Canonist in his annotations vpon Gratian feareth not to pronounce all the decretall Epistles that go vnder the names of such Bishops as liued before Syluester to be false and counterfeit Besides these censures of learned men there want not strong and effectuall reasons to disproue these Epistles For first they will easily appeare to be counterfeit because they are barbarously and rudely written and are not like the writings of those men that liued in the times wherein the supposed authors of those Epistles did liue but like the writings of such as liued in later and worse times after Barbarisme had preuailed and ouerflowne all Secondly because the style is so different from those indubitate remainders of the Epistles of the same Popes found in Cyprian Eusebius and Athanasius that they cannot be but counterfeit For whosoeuer shall compare them shall find them to differ as much as gold and drosse Thirdly for that all these supposed Epistles are soe like one another in style and oftentimes haue the verie same sentences that it is very likely they came all from one and the same forge Fourthly because neither Eusebius Hierome nor any other auncient writer maketh any mention of them Fiftly because they follow not the old translatiō in their allegations of Scripture but that of Hierome which was not in being in those times wherein the supposed Authors of these Epistles did liue Lastly which is the reason before vsed by Cusanus because the Epistle to Iames written after the death of Peter as appeareth in the front of it and soe consequently after the twelfth yeare of Nero could not be written to Iames the brother of our Lord who as Hierome testifieth was slaine at Hierusalem in the seauenth yeare of Nero. But whatsoeuer become of the censure of learned men branding these Epistles with the note of forgery and the reasons brought to disproue them which cannot easily be answered yet Bellarmine will proue that these Epistles are mentioned by the ancient and consequently that the Centurie-writers say vntruly that hardly any shall be found before the time of Charles the great that speaketh any thing of them To this purpose he produceth Isidore in his preface before his collection of the Councels affirming that he gathered Canons out of the Epistles of Clemens Anacletus Euaristus and the rest of the Romane Bishops by the aduice of eightie Bishops but this is to justifie one counterfeit by another For this preface is thought to be counterfeit because in it there is mention made of the sixt generall Councell vnder Agatho whereas Isidore was dead forty yeares before the holding of that Councell Wherefore he alleageth the Councell of Vase as mentioning the same decretals But the decrees of that Councell are vncertaine as Binnius noteth by reason of the great confusion that is found in them and truly I thinke there is noe man that can make any sence of that which is cited out of Clements Epistles by that
generall state of the Church or of the principall most eminent highest parts members of the same none of which things might bee proceeded in without the Bishop of Rome and his Colleagues but otherwise he was not to intermeddle with inferiour persons and causes within the Iurisdiction of other Patriarches neither immediatly nor vpon appeale and complaint The 7 t◠Roman Bishop brought to testifie for the absolute supreme power of Popes is Gelasius out of whom two things are alledged The first is that he saith the See of Peter hath power to loose that which the Bishops of other Churches haue bound The second that it hath power to judge of euery Church that no Church may judge of the judgment of it For answer to this testimony of Gelasius first we say that the Church of Rome may not meddle with reviewing re-examining or reversing the acts of other Churches proceeding against Lay-men or inferiour Cleargy-men Secondly that in the case of a Bishop complaining of wrong by the authority of the Councell of Sardica she might interpose her selfe not so as to bring the matter to Rome there to be heard but so farre forth onely as to commaund and appoint a review to be taken by the Bishops of the next bordering Province or at the most to send some Cōmissioners to sit with such second Iudges Thirdly that in cases which concerned the principall Patriarches whether they were differences between them their Bishops or between themselues the chiefe See as the principall part of the whole Church might interpose it self Neither was this proper to the See of Rome for other Patriarchs likewise of the higher thrones might interpose thēselues in matters concerning the Patriarchs of inferiour thrones whence it is that Basil writing to Athanasius Bishop of the second See telleth him that the ordering of the Church of Antioch which was the 3d See did pertain to him that he was to see to the setling of things there though the quieting of the whole East required the helpe of the Occidentall Bishops Cyril in the case of Nestorius not yet fully established in the right of a Patriarch intermedled proceeded so far as to reject him his adherents frō the cōmunion of the churches of Egypt Lybia Pentapolis But the B. of the inferior thrones might not judge the superior therfore Iohn of Antioch of the 3d See is reprehended reproued for judging Cyril Bishop of the 2d See Dioscorus Bishop of the 2d See is condemned in the councel of Chalcedon as for other things so for this amōg other that he presumed to judge the first See So that this is it which Gelasius saith that the See of Rome that is the Bishop of Rome and the Bishops of the West may iudge and examine the differences betweene Patriarches or between Patriarches and their Bishops but neither so peremptorily nor finally but that such iudgement may be reuiewed and reexamined in a generall Councell and that no other particular Church or See may iudge the Church of Rome seeing euery other See is inferiour to it no way denying but that a generall Councell may review reēxamine and reuerse the acts iudgements of the Romane See as being greater and of more ample authority Neither truely can there be any better proofe against the pretended supremacie of the Popes then this Epistle the circumstances whereof are these Acatius Bishop of Constantinople for communicating with certaine Eutichian Heretickes was by the See of Rome condemned some disliked his proceeding against him because a Synode was not specially summoned for the purpose especially seeing he was Bishop of the Princely citty Gelasius standeth not vpon the claime of vniuersall power thereby to iustifie his proceeding but aunswereth First that Eutiches being condemned in the Councell of Chalcedon all such were accursed likewise as should either by defence of such errour or communicating with men so erring fall into the fellowship of the same heresie and that therefore there needed no Synode but the See Apostolique might execute that was there decreed Secondly that the Catholicke Bishops in the East being deposed and Heretickes thrust into their places there was no reason why hee should haue consulted with them Thirdly that hee did nothing of himselfe but with a Synode of the Westerne Bishops The next foure Bishops produced by the Cardinall are Iohn the second Anastasius the second Felix the fourth and Pelagius the second out of whom hee alleageth nothing but this that the See of Peter holdeth the chiefty assigned of the Lord in the vniuersall Church and that the church of Rome is the head of all churches Wherevnto wee briefly answere that the See of Peter euer held the chiefty that the church of Rome was euer the head of all churches not in vniuersality of absolute supreme power commanding authority but in order honour in sort before expressed that by the See of Peter and church of Rome is meant the whole West church not precisely the Diocese of Rome as likewise we haue noted before and therefore these allegations to proue the Popes supremacie ouer all Bishops are nothing to the purpose The last of the twelue Bishops brought by Bellarmine is Gregorie the first out of whom foure things are alledged the first is that he required the Africanes to permit appeales to Rome from the Councell of Numidia and blamed the Bishops of Africa for that after letters written vnto them they had degraded Honoratus the Arch-deacon The second that he sent a Pall to the Bishop of Corinth The third that he saith Eusebius Bishop of Constantinople acknowledged the Church of Constantinople to be subiect to the See Apostolique The fourth that the Bishop of Constantinople professeth his subiection to the See Apostolique To these obiections we answer First that it is contrary to the resolution of the ancient Councels of Carthage Mileuis that the Bishop of Rome should admit appeales of inferiour Clergy-men out of Africa that therefore by some positiue constitution or later agreement Gregory might bee permitted to heare the complaints of an Arch-deacon appealing vnto him out of Africa yet from the beginning it was not so though some parts of Africa were euer within the compasse of the Patriarchship of Rome Secondly that he sent the Pall to the Bishop of Corinth because hee was within his Patriarchship all Patriarches being to confirme their Metropolitanes by imposition of hands or by sending the Pall. 3◠That there was no such Eusebius Bishop of Constantinople in Gregories time as is mentioned in the Epistle alledged and that they that were as Iohn Cyriacus stroue and contended with Gregory to be aboue him and to haue the first place in the Church that not without the help furtherance of the Emperour so that it may be doubted whether Gregory wrot this or not it being so contrary to that wee know to
diminished much lesse tooke away the liberty of other inferiour Sees but that they might resist and gainesay till they were satisfied and made to see the equity of the iudgement of the first See accordingly as we finde they did in the Councell of Chalcedon reiecting him as an Heretique whom the Bishop of Rome had receiued till vpon more full particular examination they found him to be catholicke and acquited him in their owne iudgement So that here we see there is nothing to proue the Pope to bee an absolute supreme iudge of all as Bellarmine vntruly alledgeth But happily hee will say that Theodoret intreateth Renatus to perswade Leo to vse his authority and to require the Bishoppes that had proceeded against him to come to his Synode in the West seeing the See of Rome hath a direction of all Churches and that therefore hee seemeth to acknowledge an absolute supreme power in the Pope For answere herevnto we say that the circumstances of this Epistle doe clearely conuince and proue he had no such conceipt For first he speaketh not of Leo alone as if of himselfe hee could determine the matter of difference betweene him and his Aduersaries but of him and his Westerne Councell Secondly hee doth not say that he his Councell alone may determine the matter but that his See being the first See hee and his Bishops may call all other Bishops to their Councell and this is that direction or government which he saith the first See or Westerne Church hath of other Churches namely in going before them and inuiting and calling them to publique deliberations not in peremptory and absolute commanding without them and ouer them The tenth witnesse produced out of the Greeke church is Sozomene out of whom two things are alledged The first is that he saith Iulius Bishop of Rome restored Athanasius Bishop of Alexandria and Paulus Bishop of Constantinople to their churches from which they were violently and vniustly expulsed by certaine Orientall Bishops The second that he did this because the care of all pertained to him in respect of the dignity of his See How the words of Sozomene reporting that Iulius restored these Bishops to their churches are to bee vnderstood we may learne of Iulius himselfe who in his Epistle mentioned by Athanasius in his second Apologie hauing blamed the Orientall Bishoppes for proceeding in a matter of so great consequence concerning the faith and the Bishops of the principall Churches of the world without him and his Bishops and as he vnderstood very irregularly telleth them that he durst not confirme that they had done that he communicated still with Athanasius and Paulus not foreiudging any thing but desirâ—…ng them to come to a Synode where thinges might bee fully debated and determined and that though hee alone wrote for them yet he wrote in the name and with the consent of all the Bishops of the West Vpon which his letter they were so farre from restoring them to their places that they tooke it in ill part that hee did write vnto them telling him that when hee proceeded against certaine Nouatians they intermedled not and that therefore hee should not meddle with their proceedings seeing the greatnesse of citties maketh not the power of one Bishop greater then the power of another By which their peremptory reiecting of his motion it appeareth that hee neither did nor could put the expulsed Bishops into their places againe which thing Sozomene himselfe testifieth also telling vs that they could neuer recouer their places till the Emperour by his mandatory letters preuailed So that when he saith Iulius restored them his meaning is that hee restored them as much as lay in him as likewise it may be said of Cyrill and Iohn of Antioche that after many and bitter contentions they were in the end reconciled and restored each to other their Churches from which yet they were neuer driuen indeed but in the censures of the one of them passed against the other But Sozomene saith the care of all Churches pertained to the Bishop of Rome therefore he acknowledgeth that hee had an vniversalitie of power ouer all Surely this consequence will neuer be made good For the Metropolitane or he that is Bishop of the first See in each Province in respect of the dignitie of his See hath the care of the whole Province yet can he doe nothing but as hee is directed by the maior part of the Bishops So that the care of all is said to pertaine to him not because he hath power to dispose of all things by himself but because all publike proceedings concerning the whole Province must take their beginning from him nothing of that nature may be taken in hand without consulting him In like sort and in the same sense and meaning Sozomene saith that for the dignity of his See the care of all pertained to the Bishop of Rome not as if the absolute disposing of all things did rest in him but for that he as prime Bishop of the world was first to be consulted before any thing concerning the common faith and the whole state of the Christian Church were determined and for that by the assistance and concurrence of other Bishops he as first in order and honour amongst them was to beginne and set forward allthings of greatest consequence tending to the common good Three more witnesses Bellarmine hath yet behinde Acatius the Bishop of Patara and Iustinian the Emperour out of whom three things are alledged The first that the Bishop of Rome beareth about with him the care of all Churches The second that the Pope is ouer the Church of the whole world The third that the Pope is the Head of all holy Churches To the first of these allegations taken out of Acatius his Epistle to Simplicius Bishop of Rome I haue answered before as likewise in what sense the Pope may be said to be ouer the Church of the whole world to wit in respect of a primacie of order and honour but not of power in which sense also Iustinian the elder writing to Iohn the second saith his See is the Head of all Churches And thus hauing examined the testimonies of the Greeke Fathers we are now to proceed to the authorities of the Latine Church CHAP. 36. Of the pretended proofes of the Popes supremacie taken out of the writings of the Latine Fathers THe first among the Latine Fathers that Bellarmine produceth is Cyprian who of all other most clearely ouerthroweth the error of the Romanists touching the Papacie therefore is very vnadvisedly produced by them in the first place and appointed to marshall and conduct the rest of their witnesses yet let vs heare what he will say Out of Cyprian foure places are alledged The first is in his booke de vnitate Ecclesiae The second in the third Epistle of his first book written to Cornelius The third in the tenth Epistle of his second booke to the same
in the West had iudged and condemned him ioyned his authority with Cyril the principall of the Bishops that were present that so nothing might be wanting to the perfection of a generall Councell So that it is most certaine that Cyril was president of the Councell of Ephesus not as a Vicegerent onely to the Bishop of Rome but in his owne right though he had the authority direction and consenting concurrence of the Bishop of Rome and all the Westerne Bishops ioyned with the power and authority which he and the rest of the Bishops present had of themselues And therefore Leo saith in expresse wordes that Cyril was President of the Councell of Ephesus as likewise Photius and others affirme The same answer may serue for Acacius For he was not Vicegerent of the Bishop of Rome in hearing and determining the cause of Peter Bishop of Alexandria who was an Eutychian Heretique as hauing none authority of his owne but there was a ioynt concurrence of the Bishop of Rome and the Bishop of Constantinople the later hauing besides his owne right and interest the full power and authority of the other and being likewise to vse the helpe of the Emperour for the reducing of the Church of Alexandria to the vnity of the faith againe in which businesse he failed for though at first he condemned Peter Bishop of Alexandria yet afterwards he was content to cōmunicate with him For which cause he was iustly reprehended as not answering the trust that was reposed in him and as being a fauourer of heretiques and so in a sort an heretique himselfe To these allegations which we haue already heard Harding in his answer to Bishop Iewels challenge addeth another of a Bishop of Alexandria being Vicegerent to the Bishop of Rome out of the Epistle of Bonifacius the second to Eulalius or Eulabius But Bellarmine refuteth that Epistle and sheweth that it is counterfeit and that there neuer was any such Eulabius to whom Bonifacius might write and therefore we will no longer insist vpon the examination of the same but proceed to the proofes which our Aduersaries bring from appeales made to Rome CHAP. 39. Of Appeales to Rome FOR the clearing of the matter of Appeales we must obserue that they are of three sorts Of Lay-men of inferiour Clergie-men and of Bishops Of the appeales of Lay-men there is noe mention in all Antiquity and yet now the Bishops of Rome reserue all the greater causes euen concerning the Laitie to thēselues alone forbidding the ordinary guides of the Church to intermedle with them and very ordinarily admitte appeales of Lay-men to the infinite vexation of men and the great hinderance of the course of all Iustice. Whereas it is most wisely and rightly ordered each Bishop hauing his portion of the flocke of Christ committed to him as Cyprian obserueth that they that are committed to their charge should not bee permitted to runne hither and thither but bee iudged there where the thinges for which they are called in question were done and where the accusers and witnesses may bee present Concerning inferiour Clergy-men the holy Bishoppes in the Councell of Mileuis speake in this sort It hath seemed good vnto vs that if Presbyters Deacons other inferiour Clergi-men complaine of the iudgements of their own Bishops the neighbour Bishops intreated by them with the consent of their Bishoppes shall heare them and make an end and if they thinke good to appeale from their iudgement it shall not be lawfull for them to appeale but onely to the Councels of Africa or to the Primates of their owne Provinces And if they shall make their appeale beyond the seas no man in Africa shall receiue them to the Communion This whole Councell Innocentius the first approued as it appeareth by his Epistle which we finde in the booke of the Epistles of S. Augustin Hereunto Bellarmine saith some answere with Gratian who addeth to the Canon of this Councell forbidding appeales to be made beyond the seas an exception vnlesse it be to the Sea Apostolique But this exception saith Bellarmine seemeth not fitting seeing the Africanes made this decree that men should not appeale beyond the seas especially in respect of the Church of Rome and to restraine the making of appeales thither there neuer being any appeale from the Africans to any other church but to the church of Rome only And yet Stapleton answereth the authority of this Councell as Gratian doth and that out of Iulius and Fabianus Bishops of Rome as he saith The Councell of Sardica saith Bellarmine decreed that the causes of Presbyters and inferiour clergy-men appealing from the iudgements of their owne Bishops should be determined and ended by the neighbour-Bishops and Pope Zozimus as appeareth by the sixth Councel of Carthage and the Epistle of the same Councell to Bonifacius the Pope required the same canon to be reuiued Augustine likewise sheweth that it was not lawfull for those of the clergie vnder the degree of Bishops to appeale out of Africa Neither was this the peculiar priuiledge of Africa alone For the Councell of Chalcedon ordained that if a clergie-man haue ought against another of the clergy the matter shall be heard by the Bishop or by arbitrators chosen by both parties with the Bishops allowance But if he haue ought against his Bishoppe he shall prosecute the same complaint in the Synode of the province This canon of the Councell of Chalcedon the Emperour confirmed saying if any of the clergy complaine against his Bishop for any matter let the cause be iudged by the Metropolitane according to the sacred rules and the imperiall lawes And if any man appeale from his sentence let the cause be brought to the Arch-bishoppe or Patriarch of that Diocese and let him according to the canons make a finall end And yet notwithstanding these canons aboue recited precisely forbidding inferiour clergy-men to appeale to Rome we finde that the Bishops of Rome admitted the appeale of one Apiarius iudged condemned in Africa which caused a great difference betweene the Africanes and him Whereupon the Fathers in the Councell of Africa wish the Bishop of Rome as it beseemeth him to reiect and repell the wicked and vnlawfull appeales as well of Presbyters as of other inferiour clergy-men seeing the ending and determining of their causes is by no decree of any Synode denied to the church of Africa and the Nicene canons most clearely committe both inferiour clergy-men and Bishops to their owne Metropolitanes Bellarmine to cleare the Pope from intrusion and to avoide the testimonies authorities of the holy Bishops and Pastours of the church which we haue produced to shew the vnlawfulnes of appeales to Rome answereth first that though they of the inferiour clergy were prohibited to appeale to the Pope yet hee was not forbidden to admit their appeales which is a most strange answere For if they in appealing did
doubt not of all indifferent Readers And therefore there remaineth but onely one allegation of Bellarmine touching appeales to be examined Gregory the first saith he put Iohn the Bishop of Iustiniana the first from the communion for that he presumed to iudge the Bishop of Thebes hauing appealed to Rome The case was this The Bishop of Thebes wronged by his fellow-Bishops made his appeale to Rome Hereupon Iohn Bishop of Iustiniana the first who was the Bishop of Romes Vicegerent for certaine Prouinces neare adioyning was appointed by the Emperour to heare the cause which he did accordingly But without all indifferencie and in sort contrarie to the Canons and though vpon the discerning of his vniust and partiall proceeding an appeale were tendered to him yet gaue he sentence against the poore distressed Bishop Gregory hearing hereof putteth him from the communion for thirty dayes space inioyning him to bewaile his fault with sorrowfull repentance and teares Truely this allegation maketh a very faire shew at the first sight But if wee remember that the Bishop of Iustiniana the first and the distressed Bishop of Thebes wronged by him were within the Patriarchship of Rome as Cusanus sheweth they were you shall finde it was no more that the B of Rome did then any other Patriarch in like case might haue done within his owne precincts and limits Neither can the Cardinall euer proue that the Bishop of Rome had any such Vicegerent as the Bishop of Iustiniana the first was but onely within the compasse of his owne Patriarchship But saith hee it was a Greeke Bishop that Gregory thus proceeded against It is true it was so But what will hee inferre from thence Is it not knowne that many Greeke Bishops were subiect to the Bishop of Rome as Patriarch of the West was not the Bishoppe of Thessalonica a Greeke Bishop and yet I thinke no man doubteth but that hee was within the compasse of the Patriarchship of Rome as many other also were howsoeuer in time they fell from it adhered to the Church of Constantinople after the diuision of the Greeke and Latine Churches CHAP. 40. Of the Popes supposed exemption from all humane Iudgement as being reserued to the Iudgement of Christ onely OVR Adversaries finding their proofes of the Popes illimited power taken from such appeales as were wont in auncient times to bee made to Rome to bee too weake flie to another wherein they put more confidence which is his exemption from all humane Iudgement Christ whose Vicar he is having reserued him to his owne iudgement onely If this exemption could bee as strongly proued as it is confidently affirmed it would be an vnanswerable proofe of the thing in question But the proofe hereof will be more hard then of the principall thing in controuersie betweene vs. Touching this point I finde great contrarietie of opinions among Papists as men at their wits ends not knowing what to affirme nor what to denie For first there are some among them that thinke that the Pope though hee violate all lawes diuine and humane though hee become publickly scandalous and therein shew himselfe incorrigible yea though hee be a professed and damnable hereticke yet neither is deposed ipso facto by the sentence of the canon nor may be deposed by all the men in the world Which opinion if we admit to bee true the condition of the church the beloued spouse of Christ and mother of vs all is most woefull and miserable in that hereby shee is forced to acknowledge a denouring wolfe making hauocke of the sheepe of Christ redeemed with his precious bloud to be her Pastor and guide Secondly some are of opinion that the Pope if hee become an open and professed hereticke is deposed ipso facto by the sentence of the canon and that the church may declare that he is so deposed Thirdly there are that thinke that an hereticall Pope is not deposed ipso facto but that he may be deposed by the church Fourthly many worthy Diuines in the Romane church heretofore haue beene of opinion that the Church or generall Councell may depose the Pope not onely for heresie but also for other enormous crimes Of this opinion was Cardinall Cusanus Cardinall Cameracensis Gerson Chauncellour of Paris Almaine and all the Parisians with all the worthy Bishops Diuines in the Councels of Constance and Basill Yet the Papists at this day for the most part dislike and condemne this opinion and acknowledge no deposition of any Pope how ill soeuer vnlesse it be for heresie And Bellarmine to make all sure telleth vs farther that the church doth not by any authoritie depose an hereticall Pope but whereas he is deposed ipso facto in that hee falleth into heresie onely declareth the same and thereupon largely refuteth the opinion of Cardinall Caietane who thinketh that the Pope when he falleth into heresie is not deposed ipso facto but that deseruing to bee deposed the Church doth truely and out of her authority depose him First because as he saith if the Church or Councell may depose the Pope from his Papall dignity against his will for what cause soeuer it will follow that the Church is aboue the Pope which yet Caietane denieth For as it will follow that the Pope is aboue other Bishops and of more authority then they if he may depose them so if the councell of Bishops may depose the Pope they are greater then hee Secondly he saith to be put from the Papacie vnwillingly is a punishment so that if the Church may depose the Pope though vnwilling to leaue his place it may punish him and consequently is aboue him For hee that hath power to punish hath the place of a Superiour and Iudge Thirdly he that may restraine and limit a man in the vse and exercise of his ministerie and office is in authority aboue him therefore much more he that may put him from it By these reasons it is clearely demonstrated and proued that if the Church or generall Councell haue authority in case of heresie to depose the Pope at least in some sort it is of greater authority then the Pope And therefore to avoide this consequence as Gerson rightly noteth they that too much magnifie the greatnesse and amplitude of Papall power say that an hereticall Pope in that he is an Hereticke ceaseth to be Pope and is deposed by Almighty God So that the Church doth not by vertue of her authority and jurisdiction depose him but onely denounce and declare that he is so deposed by God to be taken for such a one by men and not to be obeyed This they endeauour to proue because all Heretickes are condemned by their owne iudgment as the Apostle saith and stay not as other euill doers till the Church cast them out but voluntarily depart of themselues from the fellowship of Gods people and cut themselues off from the vnity of the Body of the Church
thereby ceasing to be members of it and consequently losing all authority commaund they formerly had For the clearing of this point wee are to obserue that there are some who runne into errours so directly contrary to all Christianity the sense and judgment of all Christians that by the very proposing thereof they abandon and driue from them all such as dissent and are abandoned of all Secondly there are some that runne not into errours so directly contrary to the sense and judgement of all Christians as the former but with such fury madnes pertinacy that they vtterly reject forsake and depart from all such as doe dissent or are otherwise minded Thirdly there are some who though they be not carried with such violent fury into errour as to condemne reject and depart from all that dissent yet they runne into olde heresies formerly condemned and so by force of the former condemnation are rejected put out of the lap and bosome of the Church Fourthly there are some who fall into hereticall and dangerous errours but neither directly contrary to the common sense of all right beleeuing Christians nor formerly condemned by the consenting voice of the whole Church of God nor with such pertinacy as either to refuse to communicate with them that think otherwise or to seeke to depriue depose degrade or otherwise violently vexe and molest them that are vnder them for not consenting to them in their errour The three former sorts of men falling into errour and heresie voluntarily cut themselues off from the vnity of the Body of the Church depart from the fellowship of Gods people and ipso facto cease to bee members of the Church and lose all authority and commaund they formerly had So that they neede not the Churches censure or sentence to cast them out departing of themselues but it sufficeth that their breaches and divisions from the maine body of the Christian Church be published and made knowne that so they may be avoided So Caelestinus in his Epistle to Iohn of Antioch saith that if any one haue beene excommunicated or depriued by Nestorius or any of his adherents since the time they first began to publish their impieties he still continueth in the cōmunion of his Churches neither doth he judge him to be remoued from his place and the like hee hath in his Epistle to the Clergy of Constantinople But the fourth sort of men erring doe not cease to be members of the Church nor lose their places by so erring till both the point of doctrine wherein they are deceiued be tryed and examined and by lawfull highest authority be found faultie and their pertinacie such as rather to suffer themselues to be rejected and put from the communion of all that are otherwise minded then to alter their judgements Cyprian fell into an hereticall opinion that the Baptisme of Heretiques is voyde and that all that haue beene baptized by Heretiques are to be rebaptized Yet because this point was not examined and condemned in a generall Councell nor his pertinacie therein vpon such examination and condemnation found such as rather to suffer himselfe to bee reiected from the communion of all them that thought otherwise then to giue way and alter his iudgment hee was no hereticke neither did he lose his place of ministery in the Church of God The question therefore is whether if the Pope fell into such an errour as that of Cyprian by which he doth not actually and ipso facto divide and cut off himselfe the Church may examine it and judge him to be rejected and put from the communion if he alter not his iudgement If they say it may then hath the Church power to iudge a Pope that is not an Heretique For he is not an Hereticke till after such determination he chooseth rather to be reiected from the cōmunion of the faithfull then to alter his iudgement If it may not iudge the Pope so erring then might the Popes in former times haue taught rebaptization with Cyprian the errour of the Chiliastes with sundry of the Fathers that all right beleeuers how wickedly soeuer they liue shall in the end be saued with some of the Ancient that the just shall not see God till the resurrection and the like and yet the Church haue had noe power to force them to forsake and condemne such errours or to cease from perswading and inducing men both by doctrine example to erre in like sort And then we may runne into their errour who thinke that though the Pope be an hereticke yet hee is neither deposed ipso facto nor may be deposed but that the Church must acknowledge a deuouring wolfe making hauock of the flocke of Christ to be her Pastor which Bellarmine himselfe thinketh to be very absurd Thus then we see that all who fall into heresies do not cut off themselues from the vnity of the body of the Church nor lose the iurisdiction and authority they formerly had ipso facto as the Papists to auoid the deposing of Popes by the authority of the Church seeme to imagine but that many doe soe fall into heresies that they goe not out of themselues till they be rejected and cast out But howsoeuer our Aduersaries must not defend that Popes falling into heresies are deposed ipso facto for if they do they ouerthrow the whole building and fabricke of Popery The constant opinion of almost all later Papists is that howsoeuer the Pope may personally erre and fall into heresie or become an Hereticke yet the prouidence of God ouer him is such because he is Christs Vicar Peters Successour heire of the Apostles and head of the vniuersall Church that hee cannot define or decree any heresie or prescribe vnto all Christians to belieue amisse Which conceipt cannot stand but falleth to the ground is clearely ouerthrowne if the Pope by becōming an hereticke be deposed ipso facto For doubtlesse if the Pope becomming an hereticke ipso facto cease to bee Pope and to be soe much as a member of the Church then doth not the prayer of Christ for the not failing of Peters faith extend to him any longer neither is hee any longer any way priuiledged by vertue of his succeeding blessed Peter but that hee may runne into all extremities in most damnable sort seeke to subuert the faith to force all to belieue as he doth and define and determine that all shall professe the same doctrine of Diuels that himselfe doth seeing when God forsaketh him and putteth him out of his protection the Diuell entreth into him as he did into Iudas the traytor And how violent and strange the mouings of the euill spirit are wee are not ignorant for sometimes he casteth them that are possessed by him into the fire and sometimes into the water sometimes into one extremity and sometimes into another Wherefore either the Papists must confesse that the Pope may define for heresie then all their religion is ouerthrown
Emperours charges But there are many things that bewray it to be a mere counterfeit For first it hath a sencelesse title for it is named another Romane Councell vnder Syluester the first whereas no man can tell of any besides this Secondly it is fronted with a briefe Epilogue in steed of a Preface Thirdly there is scarce any sence to bee made of any one sentence throughout the whole Fourthly it is sayd to consist of 139 Bishops out of the citty of Rome or not farre from it and the rest out of Greece whereas all men know the citty of Rome had but one Bishop so that it was sencelesse to say there were in that Councell 139 Bishops out of the citty of Rome or not farre from it And besides all men see how silly a thing it was to muster so many names of Bishops without specifying the places whereof they were Bishops Fiftly whereas it is said to haue consisted of 284 Bishops out of the citty of Rome and places neere to it and out of Greece as if it had beene a generall Councell it is strange that the Histories reporting farre meaner Councels then this is supposed to haue beene should neuer make any mention of this nor the occasion of calling it Sixtly whereas the supposed Fathers of this Councel do condemne though in very sencelesse manner certaine vnknowne heretickes it is strange they should make no mention of the Arrians who were famous and at that time troubled all the East Seuenthly the end why these supposed Fathers met was ridiculous For thus it is expressed i Vt Ecclesiae regia non vatieinentur sed sit fiâ—…ma claudat ostium propter persecutorem Or as another Edition hath it Vt Ecclesia regia non vacilletur sed sit firma claudat ostium propter persecutorem For why should these good men forbid the kingly Churches to prophecie or why should they feare the shaking or tottering of them or shut the doore for feare of the persecutor after Constantine was become a Christian baptized by Syluester and in requitall of his kindnesse had giuen him all the Empire of the West Lastly whereas the manner of Councels was that the Bishops sate round in a compasse the Presbyters sate behind them and the Deacons stood before them the Councell of Carthage forbiddeth a Bishop to sit suffer a Presbyter to stand Hierome sheweth that euen in Rome the manner was that Presbyters did sit and Deacons stand here it is noted that none sate but Bishops These things being obserued touching the credit of this Councel let vs come to the Decrees of it by which the Pope would exempt himselfe from all iudgment of men whatsoeuer villanyes he should chance to commit Thus then the Decrees of this sacred Synode are passed in fauour of the Pope First it is decreed that no Presbyter à die onus Presbyterij latine fitter for Hog-heards then Bishops shall marry and that if he do hee shall loose his honour for 12. yeares Secondly it is ordered thus That if any one shall do against this present hand-writing hee shall be condemned for euer For let no man iudge the first See for neither shall the Iudge be iudged of Augustus nor of all the Clergy nor of Kings nor People These sencelesse Decrees of a fained ridiculous Synode our aduersaries such is their pouerty in this cause bring forth as good authorities for the Pope But I thinke the reader will not much be moued with them vnlesse it be to pitty those that liued before vs who were abused with such fooleries and shamelesse forgeries and to giue thankes to God that hath giuen vs meanes to descry the cozening deuices of Satans Agents Neither doth it any thing assure vs of the truth of this Councel that Pope Nicholas was coÌ„tent to make vse of it in his Epistle to Michael the Emperor of Constantinople seeing he citeth also in the same Epistle the Romane Synode vnder Sixtus the third in the cause of Polychronius Bishop of Hierusalem whereas yet not withstanding Binnius saith confidently that euery learned man wil pronounce the acts of it to be counterfeit if he attend the names of the Consuls in whose times it is supposed to haue bin holden the name of him that was accused and other things described in those supposed pretended acts To these they adde another authority as it may seeme of the same stamp out of the Councell of Rome vnder Sixtus the third which they endeuour to strengthen with certaine sayings out of a booke of one Euodius a Deacon admitted and allowed in the fifth Councell vnder Symmachus The Romane Councell vnder Sixtus was called to examine a very foule fact wherewith Sixtus was charged which was the abusing of one Chrysogonet a professed and consecrated virgin In this Councell Sixtus presented himselfe and professed that it was in his power choice either to submit himselfe to the iudgment of the Councell or to refuse it yet voluntarily referred his cause to be there heard whence our Auersaries suppose they may inferre that all the world may not iudge the Pope against his will The Barbarismes manifold senceles absurdities that are found in this Councell may iustly make us suspect it of forgery But admitting it to haue bin a lawfull Synode no such thing can be concluded out of it as our aduersaries dreame of For it was but a Diocesan Synode there was neuer a Bishop in it besides Sixtus whom they went about to iudge And therefore it was not to be maruailed at if Sixtus said it was in his power and choice whether hee would be iudged by the Presbyters Deacons of his owne Church or not seeing no Bishop be he neuer so meane may be judged by the Clergy of his own Church but by the Synode of the Bishops of the prouince and therefore I greatly feare they wil hardly draw a good argument froÌ„ hence to proue that the Pope may not at all be iudged For I think it will not follow Maximus the exconsul said it was not lawful for those Lay-men inferiour Clergy-men theÌ„ assembled to giue sentence against the B of Rome the B himselfe protested that he might chuse whether he would be judged by them or not therefore the whole Christian world may not judge the Pope Wherefore let vs come to the sayings of Euodius see whether they confirme the Romish conceipt any better The occasioÌ„ of the writing of this booke of Euodius was this Symmachus the Bishop of Rome being charged with certaine grieuous crimes was to bee judged in a Synode called by Theodoricus the King not without his own coÌ„sent To this Councel he was willing to come and to submit him selfe to the judgement of it onely hee desired restitution of such things as had beene taken from him till he were convicted which he could not obtaine and yet presented himselfe in the Synode But such was the
might not nor did not iudge any B. of himselfe alone 2 That being B. of the first See he with his associates might iudge any other B. or Patriarch but no particular Patriarch with his Bishops might iudg him his because there is no particular person or company of men greater then he and his being chiefe Patriarch of the world but that both hee and his may bee iudged by a generall Councell it appeareth by the eight generall Councell wherein the words now vrged are recited For that Councell taketh order that all the Patriarches shall bee honoured and respected and especially the Bishop of Rome and forbiddeth any man to compose any billes or writings against him vnder pretence of some crimes wherewith they will charge him as Dioscorus did but that if there bee a generall Councell and any question bee moued touching the Romane Church they may in reuerent and due sort determine the same though they may not proceede contemptuously against the Romane Bishop And so first the Councell of Nice gaue lawes as to the other two Patriarches so likewise to the Bishoppe of Rome and included him within his owne bounds and limits Secondly the Councell of Chalcedon made the Bishoppe of Constantinople a Patriarch and the Bishoppe of Romes Peere notwithstanding the resistance of those that were there present on the behalfe of Leo then Bishop of Rome and the other Bishops of the West And this decree in the end preuailed so that after much contradiction and long continued opposition the Bishops of Rome were forced to yeeld vnto it Thirdly generall Councels reexamined and iudged againe thinges iudged by the Bishop of Rome and his Bishops as the Councell of Chalcedon reexamined the iudgement of Leo against Dioscorus and for Theodoret. And the sixth generall Councell the iudgement of Pope Martine with his Synodes against Pyrrhus and Sergius and the eighth the judgments of Nicholas and Adrian against Photius Augustine speaking of the sentence of the 70. Bishoppes against Caecilianus retracted and reuersed by Melchiades Bishop of Rome and his colleagues whom vpon the suites of the Donatists Constantine appointed to heare the matter sayth they therefore appealed to the judgements of the Bishops beyond the Seas that if by any falsehood and slaunders they could preuaile they might gaine the cause if not they might say as all men that haue ill causes are wont to do that they met with bad judges But sayth hee let vs grant that those Bishops that judged the matter at Rome were not good Iudges yet there remained a generall Councell of the whole Church for them to flye vnto where the matter might anew haue beene handled with the former Iudges that their sentences might be reuersed if they should haue beene conuinced to haue judged ill Which thing if they did let them make it appeare vnto vs. Wee proue they did not because all the world communicated with Caecilianus and not with Donatus and his adherents So that either they neuer brought the matter to be scanned in a generall Councell or else they were therein condemned also Here wee See hee clearely acknowledgeth the generall Councell to haue power to reexamine and reuerse the judgement of the Bishoppe of Rome and his colleagues Saint Gregory likewise acknowledgeth the vniuersall Church to be greater then hee and his For professing to follow the direction of Christ in the matter betweene him and the Bishop of Constantinople who willeth vs if our brother offend against vs to go and admonish him betweene him and vs if then he heare vs not to take two or three with vs that in the mouth of two or three witnesses euery word may stand and if he heare not them then to tell the Church he sayth that he had first sent to the Bishop of Constantinople and by his messengers admonished him in all gentle and louing sort and that now he writeth vnto him omitting nothing that in all humility he ought to doe but that seeing hee is thus despised there remaineth nothing but that he vse the helpe of the Church for the repressing of the insolencie of this man soe preiudiciall to the state of the whole Church Fourthly generall Councels haue by their decrees ordained many things concerning the See of Rome either enlarging or limitting the power of it and the exercise of the same as it seemed good vnto them as we see in the Councell of Sardica Hosius with the Bishops there assembled resolued in the honour of the memory of Peter to make a Decree that Bishoppes condemned by the Bishoppes of their owne Prouinces might appeale to the Bishop of Rome and that it might be lawfull for him vpon such appeale to write to the Bishops of the next Prouince to reexamine the matter againe And if hee pleased to send some from himselfe to sit with them in joynt commission Neither did the Bishoppes of Rome Zozimus Bonifacius and Caelestinus vrge the law of Christ or the right of Saint Peter to justifie their claime of receiuing appeales out of Africa but the Decrees of the Nicene Councell And this is farther confirmed in that the Bishops in the Councell of Chalcedon say the Fathers gaue the preheminence to the Bishop of Rome in ancient times because it was the seat of the Empire and that therefore now they would giue the like to Constantinople now become the seat of the Empire and named new Rome And as generall Councels gaue preheminences to the Romane Bishops so also they restrained and limited them in the vse of their jurisdiction when they saw them to incroch too much as the Councell of Sardica tooke order that they should not meddle with the causes of Presbyters and inferiour Clergy-men vpon any appeale but leaue them to to their owne Bishops and the Synodes of the Prouinces and in the case of Bishops appealing not to reuerse the acts of the Synode of any prouince without another Synode of the Bishops of the next Prouince And the Councels of Chalcedon and Constantinople the eighth decreed that the Bishop Rome and the other Patriarches shall confirme the Metropolitanes subject vnto them by sending the Pall or by imposition of handes but shall not intermeddle in the ordination of Bishoppes Fifthly it appeareth that the Romane Bishops are inferiour to the whole Church First in that their Legates rise vp when they speake in generall Councels And secondly in that in the councell of Ephesus when they with others were sent by the councell to the Emperour they were willed precisely to follow the directions and instructions giuen them For that if they did not all their proceedings should bee voided and they rejected from the communion of the rest Sixthly in that the sixth generall councell particularly giueth lawes to the Church of Rome For in the thirteenth canon it reprehendeth the Romane Church because it forbiddeth Presbyters Deacons and Subdeacons to liue in matrimoniall society with their wiues
and commaundeth it to leaue them to their owne libertie in this behalfe And in the 55 canon it reprehendeth the same Romane Church for fasting on Saturdayes in Lent and forbiddeth the continuing of that obseruation any longer Seuenthly the Pope is but a Bishop as appeareth in that hee is ordained by Bishops and in that Dionysius acknowledgeth no higher dignity in the Ecclesiasticall Hierarchy then that of a Bishop Now all Bishops as Bishops are equall For howsoeuer Metropolitanes in Provinces and Primates or Patriarches in their larger circuites are in all common businesses to be first sought vnto that actions of that nature may take beginning from them yet haue they no voyce neither affirmatiue nor negatiue in determining or concluding things otherwise then as the maior part of those Bishops among which they are in order first shall sway them and therefore they haue not a more ample jurisdiction then other Bishops but in the administration and exercise of the power of jurisdiction common to them and other they haue the first place and are in honour before others Wherefore seeing the Pope hath not any dignity or ordination Ecclesiasticall greater then that of a Bishop and all Bishops by Gods Law are equall in the power of jurisdiction howsoeuer in the execution and exercise thereof some be before other there is no question to be made but that the Pope is subject to some censure and judgment Eightly tbe Pope being a Bishop the Councels making lawes generally to binde Bishops it is not to be doubted but that the same Lawes and Canons doe binde him Now many of those lawes and canons doe depriue them that shall offend against them ipso facto and other make them depriueable Therefore he is subject to censure and judgement To this our Adversaries answer That the lawes and canons of generall councels doe not extend to the Pope but only to such as are subject to them as inferiour Bishops and such as are below the condition of Bishops But this answer is easily refuted because the Popes anciently at the time of their admission did by a solemne profession binde themselues to the obseruation of the Decrees of generall councels in as precise and strict sort as any other Bishops The forme of their profession was this Sancta octo vniversalia Concilia usque ad unum apicem immutilata servare pari honore veneratione digna habere quae praedicaverunt statuerunt modis omnibus sequi praedicare quaeque condemnaverunt ore corde condemnare profiteor that is I professe to keepe inviolable the sacred eight general Councels euen to the vttermost title and iota and to esteeme them worthy of equall honour and reuerence and by all meanes to follow and publish those things which they published and decreed and to condemne with mouth and heart whatsoeuer things they condemned But they will say perhappes the Pope is in such sort bound to keepe the lawes of the church and the canons of generall councels that hee offendeth God and shall bee punished by him if hee keepe them not But that no man hath power to punish him for the not keeping of them or to force him to keepe them And that therefore though he neglect his owne saluation and the saluation of his brethren yea though hee draw innumerable multitudes with him into hell there to perish euerlastingly with the diuell and his angels yet no councel nor company of mortall men vpon earth may presume to censure him vnlesse he erre from the faith because hee being to judge all must bee judged of none This answer wil be found very insufficient and weake for seeing as it is before proued all Bishops are equall in the power of jurisdiction one hath no more power to make lawes then another neither can any one actiuely bind other to the observation of any thing more then any other may binde him And therefore if other Bishops cannot bind the Pope by their lawes he cannot bind them by his and so by this meanes all shall be left free to doe what they will For it is true of all Bishops that Cyprian speaketh of himselfe and the Romane Bishop that none of them seuerally hath power to iudge other but they are accountant onely to God yet is euery Bishoppe subject to the cōpanies of Bishops whereof he is but a part if any one hauing none other dignity or ordination but that of a Bishop may exempt himself from being subject to the Synodes of Bishops euery one may and so all shall be set loose and at liberty to doe what they list But here perhaps some man will say the Metropolitanes cannot bee judged by the Bishoppes of the prouinces as being in a sort heads of those companies of Bishops but by greater Synodes therefore the Romane Bishop being Primate of the chiefe part of the Christian world as Patriarch of the West and president of a generall Councell as being the first among the Patriarches is not to be iudged at all there being no greater company of Bishoppes to judge him then those of which hee is in a sort head and president For answere whereunto first wee say that the Bishoppes of the Prouinces may judge the Metropolitanes in all those cases wherein their places are made voide and they put from all Ecclesiasticall honour ipso facto by force of the canon it selfe that is they may declare that they are by the sentence of them that made the canon voided out of their places and consequently the Bishops of the West subiect to the Pope as their Primate or Patriarch may iudge him that is declare and pronounce that hee is deposed by the sentence of the canon in all such cases wherein Bishops are deposed ipso facto Secondly wee say that though ordinarie Bishops may not be deposed without consulting the Metropolitane nor the Metropolitane without consulting the Patriarch nor the Patriarch of a meaner See without consulting them of greater and superiour Sees because still there is an higher to whom to goe yet hee that is the first and in order before all other if by no other meanes he may bee induced to reforme himselfe or voluntarily to relinquish his place if his offence so require may in case of grieuous and scandalous wickednesse wherein hee is found incorrigible be deposed by them that are in a sort inferiour to him Neither neede this to seeme strange in the deposition of Bishops seeing the same falleth out in their ordinations For ordinary Bishops may not be ordained without the Metropolitanes who are in order and honour greater then they nor Metropolitanes without the Patriarches from whom they are to receiue imposition of hands or confirmation by a Pall sent vnto them But the Patriarches are ordained by their owne Bishops and haue no imposition of hands of any that are greater then themselues nor other confirmation then that which the meanest is to giue to the greatest as well as the
Paulus Andreas Iacobus quid aliud quà m singularum plebium sunt capita omnes tamen sub uno capite membra Ecclesiae sunt that is Peter is the first and in honour the chiefest member of the holy and vniversall Church Paul Andrew Iames what other thing are they then heads of seuerall parts of Gods people Yet so that all notwithstanding are members of the Church vnder one Head So that a Head of the Church besides Christ must not be acknowledged because no one hath an vniversall commaunding power ouer all but hee onely Yet in a certaine sense the Romane Church is named the Head of all Churches that is the first and chiefest of all Churches as the city of London may bee named the Head of all cities in this state kingdome though it hath not a commaunding authority ouer them neither is the chiefe Magistrate thereof head ouer all other Magistrates in the kingdome The authority of the Florentine Councell naming the Bishop of Rome Father and teacher of all Christians and the Councell of Lyons naming him the bridegroome of the Church is not so great that wee should neede much to insist vpon any thing that is alleadged out of them And touching the latter title wee know Saint Bernard in his Epistles wisheth the Pope not to take it on him as being proper to Christ but to thinke it honour enough to be a friend of the bridegroome And yet if we should yeelde it vnto him wee know what Gerson hath written to shew how this bridegroome may bee taken away from the Church the spouse of Christ and yet the Church remaine entire and perfect The next glorious title of the Romane Bishop is Bishop of an Apostolique See But this is common to him with many others as some of the rest also are For as not only the Romane Church but the Churches of Ephesus Antioch Hierusalem and Alexandria which the Apostles founded and in which they sate as Bishops are named Apostolicall Churches so the Bishoppes of all these are named Bishops of Apostolique Sees Neither doe men know which of the Apostolicke Churches is expressed by the name of the Apostolique See or which of the Bishops by the name of the Bishop of the Apostolique See vnlesse by some circumstance the same be specified As when Augustine said there were relations made from the Councell of Carthage and Mileuis to the Apostolique See all men vnderstood what Apostolique See he meant because it was knowne to what Apostolique Church they vsed to make such relations Neither doth the principalitie of the Apostolique chaire which Augustine affirmeth to haue euer flourished in Rome argue the supremacie of the Pope seeing the principality or chieftie of the Apostolique chaire mentioned by Saint Augustine may seeme to import the chieftie that the Apostolike chaire hath aboue those that are not Apostolique or in which blessed Peter the chiefe of the Apostles did not sit For though the chaires of the Apostles were in diverse places yet Peters chaire was esteemed the principall of all the rest which being the See and chaire of one yet was in three places and three Bishops did sit in it Namely the Bishops of Rome Alexandria and Antioche as I haue shewed before out of Gregory yet was the principalitie or chieftie of this chaire of Peter more specially in Rome then in the other places and the Bishop of Rome in order and honour the first and greatest of the three The last title brought to proue the supremacie of the Pope is that of Vniuersall Bishoâ—… which though it be not giuen to Leo Bishop of Rome by the whole Councell of Câ—…alcedon yet is it giuen to him in the Epistles of three seuerall Grecians writing to hâ—… as wee may read in the third action of that Councell and Saint Gregory saith it â—…s offered to his predecessours in that Councell and that they refused it This title â—…ill proue the supremacy of the Pope no better then the rest being common vnto oâ—…er with him and therefore no way arguing any thing peculiarly found in him alone â—…or wee shall finde that the Bishops of Constantinople are named vniuersall Bishops â—…nd Oecumenicall Patriarches as well as the Bishoppe of Rome and that not by one or two particular men but by whole Councels by Emperours and Popes and though Saint Gregorie justly disliked this name or title as profane and prejudiciall to the dignitie of all other Bishoppes and Patriarches when it importeth an vniuersalitie of jurisdiction and generall commanding authoritie ouer all yet might any one of the Patriarches be named an vniversall Bishoppe as being one of those fiue principall Bishoppes to whom all the Bishops and Metropolitanes in the world were subject CHAP. 42. Of the second supposed priuiledge of the Romane Bishops which is infallibilitie of judgment SEEING our Aduersaries cannot proue the vniversall and illimitted power and jurisdiction of their Popes but the contrary is most clearely deposed by those witnesses which they produce to speake for them affirmed by those Diuines whom they cannot but acknowledge to be Catholique and inferred out of their owne principles let vs proceed to see whether they haue any better proofes of the infallibility of their judgment which is the next supposed priuiledge of the Romane Bishops Touching this point I finde foure opinions in the Church of Rome The first is that the Pope is so led into all truth that hee cannot erre in such sort as to become an hereticke And of this opinion was Albertus Pighius The second leaueth it doubtfull whether he may be an hereticke or not but pronounceth confidently that whether hee may or not yet hee cannot define and decree any thing that is hereticall And this is the opinion of almost all Papists at this day The third that the Pope not onely as a particular Doctour but euen as Pope may bee an heretique and teach heresie if he define without a generall Councell This was the opinion of Gerson Almayne and other Parisians of Alfonsus à Castro Pope Adrian the sixth Cardinall Cameracensis Cusanus Occam Durandus the Fathers of the Councels of Constance and Basill and many moe The fourth that hee may erre and define for heresie though he be assisted with a generall Councell Of this opinion was Waldensis and sundry other as appeareth by Picus Mirandula in his Theorems So that it is not true that Bellarmine saith that all Catholiques consent that the Pope with a generall Councell cannot erre For these teach that onely the resolutions of the vniuersall Church which is the multitude of beleeuers that are and haue beene are to be receiued without any farther question or examination as vndoubtedly true These are the differences of opinions found among them that brag so much of vnity and make the ground thereof to be the submitting of their iudgments to the Pope But because in so great vncertainty and contrariety of judgments almost
all Papists at this day endine to that opinion that the Pope whether he may erre personally or not yet cannot define for falshood and erre let vs first see how they indeauour to confirme the same and secondly how they can cleare those Popes from heresie and decreeing for heresie that are charged therewith To proue that the Pope cannot decree for heresie they alleage in the first place the saying of Christ who professeth that he prayed for Peter that his faith should not â—…ile and least we should mis-understand the words of Christ they bring vs the interpretations of Augustine Chrysostome and Theophylact whereof the first saith 〈◊〉 when Christ prayed that Peters faith might not faile he prayed that he might haue 〈◊〉 free couragious inuincible and resolute will to continue in the true faith The secoâ—… that Christ did not say to Peter Thou shalt not deny mee but I haue prayed that 〈◊〉 faith shall not faile For by his care and fauour it was brought to passe that Peters faiâ—… should not faile though for feare he denied his master The third bringeth in Chriâ—… speaking to Peter in this sort Although for a little time thou shalt be shaken thou haâ—… notwithstanding the seedes of faith hid in thee although the winde and violent blast of hiâ—… that setteth on thee shall shake off the leaues yet the roote shall liue and thy faith shall not faile So that all these so vnderstand the prayer of Christ for Peter as that he should not onely rise againe after his fall and be found faithfull in the end but that he should neuer fall in respect of the perswasion of faith that was to rest immoueably in him even in that most dangerous time of the temptation and triall of the Apostles when Christ was deliuered into the hands of wicked men to bee crucified For howsoeuer he denied Christ with bitter imprecations yet hee did it out of feare and not out of infidelity the perswasion of his heart remaining the same that it was before Wherefore hauing the words of Christ and the meaning of them let vs see whether the opinion which our aduersaries haue of the Pope his infallible discerning and constant defending of the trueth may bee confirmed out of them If they could proue the contrary to that which was found in Peter to bee found in the Pope by vertue of Christs prayer for Peter they might easily make good their opinion But otherwise neuer out of these words For thus they must reason if they will confirme the conceit they haue of the infallibility of the Popes iudgment by Christs prayer for Peteâ—… Peters faith by vertue of Christs prayer for him remained firme immoueable and most constantly setled in inward perswasion and affection though it failed for a little time in outward profession Therefore howsoeuer the faith of the Pope may faile in respect of the perswasion of his heart yet it shall neuer faile in respect of outward profession For though he become an heretique in heart yet hee shall euer professe rightly concerning Christ to all men that shall come vnto him to enquire of him to bee resolued by him This kinde of reasoning I thinke is not very forcible and therefore it is much to be doubted that the Romanists will neuer be able to perswade men that the Pope cannot erre by vertue of Christs prayer for Peter Nay that no such thing can be proued out of Christs words vnto Peter it is most plaine and euident because the words that Christ spake vnto Peter when hee said vnto him I haue prayed for thee that thy faith faile not and when thou art conuerted confirme thy brethren are no way appliable to Peters successours For that if they were first they must euer bee right beleeuers in heart notwithstanding whatsoeuer failings in outward confession Secondly they must deny Christ as he did and afterwards repent of such deniall and conuert and turne vnto God that so they may confirme their brethren For so it was in Peter And. Theophylact doth not attribute the confirmation of the brethren by Peter which he is commaunded to performe to his constancy in the true faith and in the profession of it but to the experience that hee had of the tender mercy and goodnesse of God towards him Out of which hee was able tâ—… strengthen them that were weake to comfort them that were sorrowfull to put then in assured hope of finding mercie that otherwise might despaire and to confirmâ—… them that were doubtfull For who will not as the same Theophylact fitly obserueth be confirmed by Peter in the right perswasion of the mercies and goodnesse of Goâ—… towards repentant sinners when he seeth him whom Christ had so much honoureâ—… after so shamefull a fault and so execrable a fact of the abnegation of his Lord and Master the Lord of life not onely receiued to mercy but restored to the dignity of the prime and chiefe Apostle To this obiection as wee thinke vnanswerable Bâ—…llarmine answereth first that it is not absurd to referre the conuersion of Peter meâ—…tioned by Christ after which he is to confirme his brethren not to his turning froâ—… sinne but to his brethren to aduise admonish and direct them not making the sence to bee thou being turned from sinne by repentance confirme thy brethren bâ—… thou whose faith shall neuer faile when thou seest any of thy brethren wauering turne thy selfe vnto them and confirme them Secondly that it followeth not that the successours of Peter must first fall and after repent of their fall if the wordes of Christ bee applyed vnto them of confirming the brethren seeing Peters fall was personall but his confirming of his brethren is of office wherein they are to succeede him and not in the things that are personall This answer of the Cardinall is insufficient First because the current of almost all Interpreters vnderstandeth the conversion of Peter mentioned by our Sauiour of his turning from sinne and not of his turning of himselfe to them whom he was to advise comfort and confirme And secondly because in this his answer he contrarieth himselfe For elsewhere which it seemeth in making this answer he had forgotten he denieth that the words of Christ directed to Peter of confirming his brethren may be vnderstood of the vniversall Church or the Bishops of it and faith Hoc certè non potest Ecclesiae toti convenire nisi dicamus totam Ecclesiam aliquando esse pervertendam ut posteà iterum convertatur that is This saying of Christ cannot agree to the whole Church vnlesse we say the whole Church shall at sometime be perverted that afterwards it may be converted Whereby it is cleare hee thinketh that the latter part of Christs speech of confirming the brethren can agree to none to whom the former doth not So that we see the wordes of Christ spoken to Peter are no sufficient warrant vnto vs that the Pope cannot erre and therefore
the better to perswade vs of the same our Adversaries bring the sayings of some great Divines who conceiued that some such thing may be inferred out of the wordes as they dreame of as Lucius Felix and Marke ancient Bishops of Rome and great Lights of the world in their times If they could indeede bring vs the judgement and resolution of these ancient Bishops they would doubtlesse greatly prevaile with vs. But seeing vnder these names they bring forth vnto vs the Authours of shamelesse forgeries wee are thereby induced more to dislike their conceits then before Now that they who masked vnder the names and titles of ancient Romane Bishops magnifie the greatnesse of the Romane Church and pleade for the not erring of the Bishoppes thereof are nothing else but ignorant authors of absurd and shamelesse forgeries it will easily appeare out of that which I haue elsewhere largely discoursed to shew that the Epistles attributed to the ancient Popes are forged and counterfeit not onely by the judgements and opinions of the best learned on both sides so censuring them but by many reasons inducing vs so to thinke among which one is the likenesse of the stile found in these Epistles arguing that they came all out of the same mint and were not written by those different Popes liuing at diuerse times to whom they are attributed Which similitude of stile will bee found in these Epistles that our Adversaries alleadge to proue that the Pope cannot erre as much or more then in any other For in these wee shall finde the very same words The agreeing of witnesses in the same substance of matter with some difference of wordes argueth that they speake truely but their precise agreement in words and formes of speaking argueth rather a compact and agreement to speake the same things then a desire to vtter the trueth So here the precise vsing of the very same words by all these Popes liuing at diuers times argueth that it was one man that taught them all to speake But they will say Pope Leo in his third Sermon of his Assumption to the Popedome saith as much as they doe and that therefore wee may not discredite their testimony Surely if they can proue that Leo saith any such thing as the former Popes are taught to say wee will most willingly listen vnto them For wee acknowledge Leo to haue beene a most worthy Bishop and the things that goe vnder his name to bee his indubitate workes Let vs heare therefore what he saith His wordes in the place cited by the Cardinall are these Christ tooke speciall care of Peter and prayed specially for him because the state of the rest is more secure when the minde of him that is chiefe is not ouercome In Peter therefore the strength of all is surely established and God doth so dispence the helpe of his diuine grace that the same firmenesse that he giueth to Peter is by Peter conferred and bestowed on all Here is nothing to proue that the pope cannot erre which is that our Adversaries vndertake to demonstrate nor that the Romane church cannot erre which is that the former Popes affirme in their coūterfeit Epistles but that the state of the rest is more secure when he that is chiefe is not ouercome which no man euer doubted of and that Christ gaue or at least promised to giue that assistance of his grace to Peter which he meant to the rest and to passe it by him vnto them so as they should receiue it after him but not from him For thus the words of Leo must be vnderstood seeing it is most certaine which thing also Bellarmine himselfe confesseth that the Apostles receiued their infallibility of judgment and their commission or authority immediately from Christ and not from Peter From Leo they passe to Agatho who in his Epistle to Constantine the Emperour read and approued in the sixth generall Councell sayth that by the grace of God such hath beene the felicity and happinesse of the Romane Church that it can neuer be proued to haue erred from the path of the Apostolicall tradition nor to haue fallen being depraued with hereticall nouelties but the same faith it receiued at first it holdeth still according to Christs promise which he made to Peter willing him to confirme his brethren Which thing saith Agatho my predecessors haue euer done as is well knowne to all These words of Agatho are not so farre to be vrged as if simply neuer any of his predecessors had failed to defend the truth and confirme his brethren but that the Romane Church was euer so preserued from heresie that howsoeuer some fewe in it for a time might neglect to do their duty yet neither soe long nor in such sort but that that Church and the Bishops of it were alwaies a stay to the rest in all the dangerous tryals that fell out in ancient times euen as in the question concerning the two wils of Christ about which the Councell was called it was wherein though Honorius failed yet the rest that gouerned the Apostolicall throne with him did not and Agatho who soone after succeded shewed himselfe an orthodoxe and right beleeuer For that all the predecessors of Agatho did not alwaies confirme their brethren in the true faith of Christ it is most euident in that Marcellinus sacrificed vnto Idols if we may beleeue the Romish stories and was forced being conuicted thereof to professe himselfe vnworthy of the Papall office and dignity in a Synod of Bishops in that Liberius and Felix communicated with heretiques and subscribed to the vnjust condemnation of worthy Athanasius which was not to confirme the brethren but to discourage disharten and weaken them and in that Agatho himselfe doth anathematize his predecessor Honorius as a Monothelite with whom Leo the second concurreth in his Epistle to Constantine the Emperour who anathematizing Theodorus Syrus Sergius Pyrrhus Paulus and other Monothelites addeth to them Honorius Bishop of Rome his predecessor saying we accurse also Honorius who did not lighten this Apostolicall Church with the doctrine deliuered by the Apostles but sought to subuert the vndefiled faith by prophane perfidiousnesse With whom also Pope Adrian agreeth who in the Synode of Rome called about the businesse of Photius of Constantinople saith that the Romane Bishop hath judged of the Bishops of all Churches but that wee reade not of any one that hath iudged him For though Honorius were accursed after his death by those of the East yet it was because he was accused of heresie in which only case the lesser may iudge the greater yet euen there it had not beene lawfull for any of them to giue sentence against him had not the consent of the first See gone before So that wee see the Epistle of Agatho doth not sufficiently proue that the Popes cannot erre Let vs therefore consider whether they haue any better proofes Nicholas the first saith Bellarmine in
his Epistle to Michael the Emperour pronounceth that the priuiledges of the See of Rome are perpetuall rooted and planted by Almighty God in such sort that men may stumble at them but cannot remoue them may pull at them but cannot pull them vp therefore he thinketh the Pope cannot erre which is a very bad consequence For the infallibility of iudgment in the Pope is not mentioned among the inuiolable priuiledges of the Church of Rome and therefore the priuiledges of that Church may be inuiolable and yet the Pope subiect to errour neither hath Nicolas one word of the Popes not erring The testimonies of Leo the ninth and Innocentius the third as being late and partiall in their own cause may iustly be excepted against yet do they not proue the thing in question For they speake of the See and throne of Peter in which the faith may continue without failing though the Popes erre and seeke to subuert the same so long as any other that are to gouerne the throne with them perseuere in the true faith Wherefore from the prayer of Christ made for Peter that his faith should not faile they descend to other proofes taken from the promise made to Peter by Christ that vpon him he would build his Church and his mandate requiring him to feede his sheepe and to feede his Lambes which are too weake to perswade vs that the Pope cannot erre or is more priuiledged then other Bishops in this respect First because it is most cleare and euident and confessed by our aduersaries themselues that the Church was builded vpon all the Apostles as well as vpon Peter and there is no kind of feeding of Christs sheepe and flocke that commeth not within the compasse of that office and commission which the other Apostles had in common with him as I haue elsewhere shewed at large Secondly because Peter and his colleagues were foundation stones vppon which the Church was builded in that their doctrine was receiued by immediate and vndoubted reuelation without mixture of errour vpon which the faith of all after-commers was to stay it selfe none of which things agree to the Romane Bishop So that it is no way necessary that there should be the same infallibility of judgment in him that was in Peter and in his colleagues Thirdly because we know and all that are in their right wits do acknowledge that a man may be a Pastor in the Church of God and yet subject to errour and that therefore Christs requiring Peter to do the duty of a Pastor will not proue that the Pope cannot erre Wherefore from the Scriptures they passe to the Fathers and among them first they produce Theodoret who in his Epistle to Renatus a Presbyter saith that among other things the reason why the Romane Church hath a kind of chiefety among other Churches is because it hath euer remained free from heresie From whence I thinke hardly any good proofe can be drawne of the Popes not erring For how will this consequence euer be made good There are many things that make the See of Rome great as the greatnesse of the city the Empire the sepulchers of those common Fathers and Doctors of truth Peter and Paule those two great lights that rose in the East cast forth their beames into all parts of the world but set in the West and sundry other things and among them the felicity and happinesse of it that till the time of Theodoret no heresie euer preuailed in it therefore the Bishop of Rome can neuer erre Seeing Theodoret doth not dispute what may be but sheweth only what by the happy prouidence of God had beene and besides speaketh not precisely of the Bishop of Rome but of the Romane See including the whole company of the Bishops of the West adhering to him which was a great part of the whole Christian Church and more glorious then the rest for that it was more free from hereticall novelties in those times then they To Theodoret they adde Saint Augustine who saith the succession of Bishops from Peters chaire to his time is that rocke against the which the proud gates of hell cannot preuaile His meaning is that what all those Bishops haue constantly and successiuely taught as true must needes be true and what they haue impugned as false must needes be false seeing it is impossible that any errour or the impugning of any trueth should haue bin found successiuely in all the Bishops of that or any other Apostolicall Church whatsoeuer But what is this to the Popes not erring Surely as litle as that of Gelasius in his Epistle to Anastasius the Emperour that the glorious confession of the Apostle Peter thou art the Christ the Son of the liuing God is the roote of all the faith and piety of the whole world that therefore the Apostolique See carefully looketh vnto it that no chinke be made in it that it be not spotted with any contagion for that if it should there were no meanes of resisting any errour But because this maketh not for them the Cardinall helpeth the matter with an vntruth saying that Gelasius proueth that the See of Rome cannot erre because the confession of it is the roote of al the faith piety that is in the world whereas he neither goeth about to proue the one nor speaketh any word of the other but of the excellencie of the confession that Peter made the necessity of preseruing it inuiolable and the care of the See of Rome in and before his time for the safe keeping of the same Wherefore let vs come to the places that are cited to this purpose out of Gregories Epistles which shew plainly they are past shame that manage the Popes affaires defend his cause For whereas Gregory saith that if he that claimeth to be vniuersal B doe fall all the whole Church is ouerthrowne and that therefore there must bee no such vniversall Bishop and particularly sheweth by the grieuous heresies that prevailed in the Church of Constantinople how ill it would haue beene for the Churches of God if the Bishops thereof had beene vniversall Bishops as they sought to be they bring this place to proue that the Pope cannot erre whereas they should haue brought it to shew how dangerous it is that there should bee any one vniversall Bishop such as their Pope desireth to be and that therefore as Cyprian obserueth Almighty God wisely foreseeing what euils might follow such vniversality of power and jurisdiction in one man ordained that there should bee a great number of Bishops joyned in equall commission that so if some fell the rest might stand and keepe the people from a generall downefall The next allegation is out of the Epistle to Eulogius Bishop of Alexandria whereby the Reader may see with what conscience these Iesuited Papists doe cite the writings of the Fathers The wordes of Gregory are these Your most sweete Holinesse hath
like For with money they themselues may not meddle Pope Iohn the two and twentieth following Nicholas and finding by experience that these Fryers did but abuse the world with their faire shewes of perfection condemned their hypocrisie and would be no patron of it as his predecessour was First therefore hee shewed that perfection consisteth essentially in charity wich Paule nameth the bond of perfection that the abandoning of propriety in things maketh nothing to perfectiō farther thē it excludeth the care that is wont to be found in men in getting keeping disposing of them weakning the act of diuine loue So that if there be as much carefulnesse in men after the disclaiming of propriety in things as before their seeming pouerty maketh nothing to Christian perfection Now he sayth that after the ordination of his predecessour these Fryers were no lesse carefull in getting and keeping things both by begging judiciall suing and the like meanes then any other mendicants that haue some things as their owne in common And that therefore howsoeuer they pleased themselues their obseruation was of no more perfection then theirs that had something of their owne in common Secondly he shewed that these mendicants hauing the vse of such things as are giuen to them and the Church of Rome the propriety in name and title but not in deede being onely to secure them in the vse thereof and to make no benefit that it is but a single right the Church hath and that they are in trueth and indeede no poorer then they that haue thinges of their owne seeing they may change the vse of one thing for another or at least cause the procurator designed by the Church of Rome to change things into money and buy for them such as they rather desire to haue making vse of all things that come to their hands at their pleasure as much as they that haue them of their owne Thirdly hee pronounced that to thinke that Christ and his Apostles had nothing of their owne in speciall or common and that they had no right to vse such things as they had to sell them giue them or with them to buy other is contrary to the Gospell condemneth Christ and his Apostles of iniustice and ouerthroweth the whole Scripture Yet Pope Nicholas defined that Christ his Apostles had nothing of their own either in speciall or common and that the hauing of a common bagge no way contrarieth this conceit seeing that was but by a kinde of dispensation in the person of the weake and imperfect and to shewe that he disliketh not them that come short of his perfection Thus we see Pope Nicolas erred in a matter of faith patronized hypocrites in their faignes shewes of counterfeit perfection was disliked and contraried by his owne successour Iohn the two and twentieth for the same by reason whereof there grew a maine difference betweene Pope Iohn and the Franciscan Fryers hee charging them with heresie and persecuting them from place to place and they likewise disclaiming him as a damnable heretique and no Pope The principall men on the Fryers part were Michael Caesenas and Occam the great Schoole-man who hath written much against Pope Iohn touching this argument Neither is Pope Iohn though in this point of Christian perfection hee were of a sounder better judgment then his predecessor any happier thē he For he is likewise charged with errour in matter of faith that not vniustly by the same Friers that he so much hated persecuted For as Occam testifieth in his Dialogues hee taught that the soules of the just shall not see God till the generall resurrection and that not faintly or doubtingly but in such passionate and violent manner as not to endure those that thought otherwise Gerson likewise in his sermon vpon Easter day before the French King and his Nobles sayth That the theefe on the crosse in that very hower that Christ spake vnto him was made happy and sawe God face to face according to the promise of Christ made vnto him This day shalt thou bee with mee in Paradice and that thereby the doctrine of Iohn the two and twentieth is proued false that was coudemned by the Diuines of Paris with the sound of trumpets before King Philip vncle to the King before whom then he spake the King rather believing the Diuines of Paris then the Court of Rome Bellarmine to deriue the hate of this matter from the Pope to others would willingly fasten this errour on Caluine and to that purpose alleageth two places out of him But neither of them proueth any such thing For in the first he speaketh not of any stay of the Saints departed without in outward courts out of heauen till the resurrection as the Cardinall strangely misunderstandeth him but sheweth by a most apt comparison that as in the time of MOSES Law the high Priest onely entred into the Holiest of all to make an attonement and all the people stayed without So none but Christ goeth into the presence of God to make peace and to worke the great worke of reconciliation and that all the sonnes of men are to expect without till hee bring them assurance of fauour and acceptation And in the second place where saith that the dead are joyned with vs that liue in the vnity of the same faith his meaning is not that faith opposite to sight is found in the Saints after death as it is in vs but that they haue a cleare view and present enjoying of those things which we beleeue Neither is there any thing found in Caluine that may any way excuse the errour of Pope Iohn Thus then I hope it doth appeare by that which hath beene saide that Popes are subiect to errour that they may become Heretiques and define for heresie and that therefore the second supposed priviledge of the Roman Bishop which is infallibility of judgment is found to haue no proofe at all Wherefore let vs proceede to the third which is his power to dispose of the kingdomes of the World and to ouer-rule the Princes and Potentates thereof CHAP. 44. Of the Popes vniust claime of temporall dominion ouer the whole world TOuching the right and interest of Popes in intermeddling with secular affaires and disposing of the Kingdomes of the world there are three opinions among the Romanists The first is that the Pope is soueraigne Lord of all the world or at least of all the Christian world and that the Princes of the Earth are but his Vicegerēts and Lieuetenants The second that the Pope is not soueraigne Lord of the world nor of any part thereof and that therefore hee may not at his pleasure intermeddle with the affaires of Princes but only in case of some defect foūd in them as when they faile to doe their duty or seeke to hinder the common good especially of the Church The third that hee may not at all
chiefe-fathers of Israel they came to Ierusalem and all the congregation made a couenant with the King said The Kings sonne must reigne as the Lord hath said of the sons of Dauid Hereupon the King is proclaimed Athaliah is slaine the house of Baal destroied the Altars and idols that were in it broken down In all this narration there is nothing that maketh for the chiefe Priests power of deposing lawfull kings if they become heretiques For first Athaliah was an vsurper no lawfull Queene Secondly here was nothing done by Iehoiada alone but by him and the Captaines of hundreths and the chiefe Fathers of Israel that entred into couenant with him Thirdly there is great difference betweene the high Priest in the time of the Lawe and in the time of Christ. For before the comming of Christ the high Priest euen in the managing of the weightiest ciuill affaires and in iudgement of life and death sate in the Councell of State as the second person next vnto the King by Gods owne appointment Whereas our Aduersaries dare not claime any such thing for the Pope And therefore it is not to bee maruailed at if the high Priest beeing the second person in the kingdome of Iudah by Gods owne appointment and the Vnckle and Protectour of the young king whom his wife had saued from destruction bee the first mouer for the bringing of him to his right and when things are resolued on by common consent take on him not onely to commaund and direct the Priests and Leuites but the Captaines souldiers also for the establishing of their King the suppressing of a bloody tyrant and vsurper For all this might be done by Iehoiada as a chiefe man in that state and yet the Pope be so farre from obtaining that he claimeth which is to depose lawfull kings for abusing their authority that hee may not presume to do all that the high Priests lawfully did and might doe as not hauing so great preeminence from Christ in respect of matters of ciuill state in any kingdome of the world as the high Priest had by Gods owne appointment in the kingdome of Iudah Israel In the old Law saith Occā the high Priest meddled in matters of warre in the judgment of life and death the losse of members vengeance of blood it beseemed him well so to do But the Priests of the new Law may not meddle with things of this nature Wherefore from the power dominion which the high Priest of the old Law had it cannot be concluded that the Pope hath any power in tēporal matters The fifth example is of Ambrose repelling Theodosius the Emperour from the communion of the Church after the bloody and horrible murther that was committed at Thessalonica by his commandement The story is this The coach-man of Borherica the Captaine of the souldiers in that towne for some fault was committed to prison Now when the solemne horse-race and sporting fight of horsemen approched the people of Thessalonica desired to haue him set at liberty as one of whom there would be great vse in those ensuing solemne sports which being denied the citty was in an vprore and Botherica and certaine other of the magistrates were stoned to death and most despitefully vsed Theodosius the Emperour hearing of this outrage was exceedingly moued and commaunded a certaine number to be put to the sword without all iudiciall forme of proceeding or putting difference betweene offendors and such as were innocent So that seauen thousand perished by the sword and among them many strangers that were come into the citty vpon diuerse occasions that had no part in the outrage for which Theodosius was so sore displeased were most cruelly and vniustly slaine Saint Ambrose vnderstanding of this violent and vniust proceeding of the Emperour the next time he came to Millaine and was comming to the Church after his wonted manner met him at the doore and stayd him from entring with this speech Thou seemest not to know O Emperour what horrible and bloudy murthers haue beene committed by thee neither dost thou bethinke thy selfe now thy rage is past to what extremities thy fury carried thee perhaps the glory of thine Imperiall power will not let thee take notice of any fault thy greatnesse repelleth all checke of reason controlling thee but thou shouldest know the frailty of mans nature and that the dust was that beginning whence we are taken and and to which we must returne Let not therefore the glory of thy purple robes make thee forget the weakenesse of that body of flesh that is couered with them Thy subjects O Emperour are in nature like thee and in seruice thy fellowes for there is one Lord and commander ouer all the maker of all things Wherefore with what eyes wilt thou behold his temple or with what feete wilt thou treade on the sacred pauement thereof wilt thou lift vp to him those hands from which the bloud yet droppeth wilt thou receiue with them the sacred body of our Lord or wilt thou presume to put to thy mouth the cup replenished with the precious bloud of Christ which hast shed so much innocent bloud by the word of thy mouth vttering the passion of thy furious minde Depart therefore adde not this iniquity to the rest and decline not those bands which God aboue approueth With these speeches the Emperour was much moued and knowing the distinct duties both of Emperours and Bishops for that he had bin trained vp in the knowledge of heauenly doctrine returned to the Court with teares sighes A long time after for eight moneths were first past the solemne feast of the Natiuity of Christ approached and all prepared themselues to solemnize the same with triumphant ioy But the Emperor sate in the Court lamenting powring out riuers of teares which when Ruffinus maister of the pallace perceiued he came vnto him and asked the cause of his weeping to whom weeping more bitterly then before he said O Ruffinus thou makest but a sport of these things for thou art touched with no sence of those euils wherewith I am afflicted but the consideration of my calamity maketh me sigh and lament for that whereas the doores of Gods Temple are open to slaues and beggars and they goe freely into the same to make prayers vnto their Lord they are shut against me and which is yet worse the gates of heauen are shut against me also for I cannot forget the words of our Lord who saith Whomsoeuer ye shall bind on earth shall be bound in heauen To whom Ruffinus replied I will runne if it please thee O Emperour to the Bishop and intreate him to vnloose these bands wherewith hee hath bound thee No saith the Emperour it is to no purpose so to doe for he will not bee intreated I know his sentence is right and iust and that he will not transgresse the law of God for any respect of imperiall power Yet when Ruffinus was
Rauenna and the Exarchate to the Empire whereunto of right it pertayned and not to giue them to the Romans or Pope Whereunto Pipine answered That he was now the second time come into Italy not for gaine but for his soules health and to represse the insolencies of the Lombards that they might not hurt the Church and that therefore hee meant to take Rauenna and the Exarchate and other parts of Italy out of the Lombards hand and to giue them to the Pope and Romane Church and so he did Now the Exarchate was diuided into two regions the one named Pentapolis containing fiue citties to wit Rauenna Caesena Classis Forum Liuii and Forum Popilii the other Aemilia wherein were Bononia Rhegium Parma Placentia and whatsoeuer land there is from the bounds of those of Placentia and Ticine to Adria and from Adria to Ariminium But the state of things was not so setled by Pipine but that Desiderius who succeeded Aistulphus in the kingdome of the Lombards began a fresh to wrong the Church of Rome againe therefore in the time of Adrian the Pope Charles the Great was intreated to come into Italy which thing hee willingly yeelded to performe and came to relieue them whom his father before had set free and rested not till hee had subdued the Lombards and restored to the Church of Rome all that which Pipine had giuen confirming his gift with more ample priuiledges then before and therefore to shew their thankfulnesse to him the Romans did him all the honour that possibly they could deuile and a Synode was holden in Rome called by Adrian consisting of an hundred fifty and three Bishops religious men and Abbots and Adrian the Pope and the Bishoppes assembled in Councell with vnanimous consent yeelded to Charles right and power to choose the Pope and to order the Apostolique See they granted vnto him also the dignity of being a Patrician that is a noble man of Rome and besides all this decreed that Arch-bishops and bishops in all prouinces should receiue inuestiture from him and that no man should be consecrated a Bishop vnlesse hee were first approued and commended by the King and inuested by him subjecting all such as should dare to go against this decree to excommunication and confiscation of goods if they should not speedily repent and shew themselues sory for so doing This priuiledge the French Kings enjoy in a sort vnto this day especially in certaine Prouinces of France After this the second time Charles the Great was occasioned to come to Rome by reason of some violences offered to Leo Bishop thereof at what time the Bishop of Rome considering that the Emperours of Constantinople did hardly hold the title of Emperours that they were able to yeeld litle reliefe in time of neede and that they did in a sort forsake the Westerne part of the Empire and besides all this differed in some matters of religion and on the other side considering that Charles was a most mighty Prince and one that deserued well of the Church as Pipine and Martell had done before him with the consent of the people of Rome taking from him the title of a Patrician proclaimeth him Emperour Thus we see Pipine gaue certaine countries to the Pope and Church and Charles confirmed the same gift But they did not so giue them but that they retained as Sigonius noteth Ius principatum ditionem that is the right soueraignty and royalty to themselues and their successors so that the Romanes were to do the Emperor seruice and pay him tributes they were by an oath of fealty to oblige themselues vnto him and hee by his princely power might appoint Magistrates to judge and rule the people yet such was the encroching of the Romane Bishops that they could not endure long to be in this subiection but sought wholy to cast off the yoake of the Emperors Whereupon Fredericke Barbarossa as Nauclerus reporteth out of Frisingensis some differences growing betweene him and the Pope and Citties of Italy inquired of the Princes and Lawyers in what sort and how farre forth the Citties of Italy were subject to the Empire they with one consent did al adiudge vnto him all royalties as coynes tolles shippings confirmation of dignities of Iudges and Consuls tributes and judgments anciently established besides such other things as hee might require when the Empire should stand in neede But the Pope alleaged at the same time that the Emperour might send to Embassadors to Rome without his conniuence and that they of his Eschequer might make no collection of money in the Castles Villages or townes subiect to the Pope but onely at that time when first he putteth on the Emperiall Crowne in Rome And Otho Frisingensis addeth that these articles were proposed to the Emperour by the Popes Legates to wit that no messengers or Embassadours should be sent to the citty without the Popes priuity seeing all the Magistrates of that towne are the officers of Saint Peter with all royalties that no money should be collected out of the Popes Lordships but only at the time of the Emperours Coronation that the Bishops of Italy should onely take the oath of fealtie and do no homage to the Emperour and lastly that the Emperours Embassadours should not challenge any entertainement in Bishops Pallaces To these Articles the Emperour answered in this sort I truly desire not the homage of the Bishops of Italy if they please to renounce those royalties that do belong vnto vs who if they willingly heare from the Pope What hast thou to do with the King they must be content to heare from the Emperour also What hast thou to do with mundane possessions That our Embassadours are not to abe receiued and intertained I will easily graunt if any Bishop may be found whose Pallace stands vpon his owne ground and not vpon ours But whereas the Pope pretendeth that the Emperour may send no Embassadors to Rome without his priuity that all Magistrates there are the officers of Saint Peter this matter I confesse is of moment and consequence and will require a more graue and mature deliberation For seeing by the prouidence and ordinance of God I am the Emperor of Rome and so called I shall but only carry a shew of a Soueraigne Lord and haue the empty title without the thing if the Soueraignty and command of the Citty of Rome be taken from mee Thus did the good Emperour seeke to maintaine the right of the Empire yet out of a good and Christian disposition was willing to referre all differences between the Pope and him to the tryall of law or of arbitrement But the Pope would not consent to any such thing Wherein hee shewed more policy then good disposition as knowing that hee must needes fall in this suite if the matter came to tryall For it is most euident that Lotharius appointed Magistrates euen in Rome it selfe to judge the people that the Nobles of
be present in Generall Councels and who they are of whom generall Councels do consist HAuing spoken of the necessity profit and vse of Generall Councels it remaineth that wee proceede to see who they are that may bee present in such Councels and of whom they do consist The persons that may be present are of diuerse sorts For some are there with authority to teach define prescribe and to direct others are there to heare set forward and consent vnto that which is there to be done In the former sort none but only Ministers of the word and sacraments are present in Councels and they onely haue deciding and defining voyces but in the latter sort * Lay-men also may be present whereupon we shall find that Bishops and Presbyters subscribe in this sort Ego N. definiens subscrips◅ that is I as hauing power to define and decree haue subscribed But the Emperour or any other Lay-person Ego N. consentiens subscripsi that is I as one giuing consent to that which is agreed on by the spirituall Pastors haue subscribed That the Emperor and other Lay-men of place and sort may be present in Generall Councels no man maketh doubt For though Pope Nicholas seeme to deny that the Emperours may be presēt in other Councels where matters of faith are not handled yet he cōfesseth they may be presēt in general Conncels where the faith which is cōmon to all pertaineth not to Clergy-men alone but to Lay-men and all Christians generally is treated of it being a rule in nature reason Quod omnes tangit ab omnibus tractari debere that is that that which concerneth all may be handled and medled with by all so farre forth as conueniently it may and as there is no manifest reason in respect of the disturbance and hinderance of the deliberation to repell them from such intermedling for in such cases there may bee a repelling of men hauing interest in such businesses and affaires and therefore Pulcheria the Empresse Commanded the Captaine of Bythinia with violence to driue out of the Councell of Chalcedon such Monkes Clerkes and Lay-men as being of no vse did but pester the Councell and to leaue none there but such as the Bishops brought with them But our aduersaries say the Protestants affirme that Lay-men ought not only to be present in generall Councels but also to haue decisiue yoyces as well as they of the Cleargy and thereupon charge vs with great absurdity Wherefore for the answering of this obiection wee must obserue that there is a threefold decision of things doubtfull and questionable The one such as euery one vpon the knowledge of it must yeeld vnto vpon perill of damnation vpon the bare word of him that decideth The second to which euery one must yeeld vpon like perill not vpon the bare word of him that decideth but vpon the euidence of proofe he bringeth The third such as euery one must yeeld vnto not vpon perill of damnation but of excommunication and the like censure Ecclesiasticall In the first sort the Protestants say that onely Christ the sonne of God hath a decisiue voyce In the second sort that any Lay-men as well as Clergy-men for whosoeuer it is that bringeth conuincing proofes decideth a doubt in such sort as that no man ought to resist against it Whereupon Panormitan sayth that the iudgment of one priuate man is to be preferred before the sentence of the Pope if hee haue better authorities of the Old and New Testament to confirme his iudgment And Gerson saith that any learned man may and ought to resist against a whole Councell if hee discerne it to erre of malice or ignorance and whatsoeuer Bishops determine their determinations binde not the conscience further then they approue that they propose some other way then by their authoritie onely Soe that in this sence the Protestants truely say that Bishoppes must not proceede Praetor-like but that all that they doe must bee but in the nature of an inquiry and their Decrees no farther of force then reason doth warrant them For howsoeuer the Son of God hath promised to be with his Church to the end of the world which shall bee fulfilled in respect of his elect and chosen who cannot erre damnably and finally yet hath he not tyed himselfe to any one sort or company of men neither is it certainely knowne but that all they that meete in a Councell may erre notwithstanding Christes promise To which purpose it is that Brentius and other say We cannot be certaine of the determination of Councells because euery company of men professing CHRIST is not the true Church seeing all that so professe are not Elect neither doe they deny all authority and iurisdiction to such as are not knowne to be Elect nor giue it all to such as no man canne knowe who they be as Bellarmine vntruly saith they doe for in the third sort they willingly acknowledge that Bishops haue deciding voyces power so to iudge of things as to subiect all those that shall thinke and teach otherwise then they doe to excommunication and censures of like nature And that therefore they are properly Iudges that their course of proceeding is not a bare Inquiry and search but a binding determination and that they haue a Pretorlike power to binde men to stand to that they propose decree and in this sort we all teach that Lay-men haue no voyce decisiue but Bishops Pastors onely which may be confirmed by many reasons First because when the question is in what pastures it is fitte the sheepe of CHRIST should feede in what pastures they may feede without danger the duty of consulting is principally and the power of prescribing wholy in the Pastours though the sheepe of CHRIST being reasonable haue and must haue a kinde of discerning whether they bee directed into wholesome pleasant pastures or not Secondly none but they whom Paul saith CHRIST going vp into heauen gaue for the gathering together of the Saintes for the worke of the Ministery haue authority to teach and to prescribe vnto others what they shall professe beleeue of whom the LORD said by Ieremy the Prophet I will giue you Pastors that shall feede you with knowledge and doctrine Thirdly because in all Councels Bishops Pastors onely are found to haue subscribed to the decrees made in them as defining decreeing howsoeuer other men testified their consent by subscription and Princes and Emperours by their royall authority confirmed the same and subiected the contemners and violaters thereof to imprisonment banishment confiscation of goods and the like ciuill punishments as the Bishops did to excommunication and censures Spirituall So that it is agreed on that Bishoppes and Ministers onely haue decisiue voyces in Councels in sort before expressed but the question is onely whether all Ministers of the Word and Sacraments haue such decisiue voyces or none but Bishops The Papists
subscribed in this sort First Eutychius Bishop of Constantinople then Apollinarius of Alexandria after him Domninus of Antioch and last of all the Legates of Eustochius of Ierusalem for the Bishop of Rome was not there in person nor by his Legates In the sixth the Emperour sate in the highest place in the middest His great men and the Consuls sate by him on the left side the Legates of the Bishop of Rome the Vicars of the Bishop of Ierusalem the Bishops that were present out of the Romane Synode On the right side sate first the Bishop of Constantinople next him the Bishop of Antioche then hee that supplied the place of the Bishoppe of Alexandria and so in order the Bishoppes subiect to them yet in subscribing the Bishop of Rome was first Constantinople second Alexandria third Antioch fourth and Ierusalem last In the seauenth the Legates of Adrian Bishop of Rome had the first place and subscribed first after them the Bishop of Constantinople Tharassius and then they that supplyed the roomes of the other three Patriarchicall Thrones But Tharassius rather performed the duty of a President Moderator then the Legates of Rome as I shewed before These are all the Generall Councels that the Greeke and Latine Churches jointly acknowledge by this view which we haue taken of them wee may see how diuersly things haue beene carried both concerning the Presidentship in Generall Councels and the preheminences of the chiefest Bishops in the same Yet as the Graecians were content in the Councell of Florence that the Bishoppe of Rome should haue all such preheminences againe as hee had before the division of the Churches if other matters might bee agreed on So if the Bishoppe of Rome would disclaime his claime of vniuersall jurisdiction of infallible judgement and power to dispose at his pleasure the Kingdomes of the World and would content himself with that all Antiquity gaue him which is to bee in order and honour the first among Bishoppes wee would easily grant him to bee in such sort President of Generall Councels as to sit and speake first in such meetings but to bee an absolute commaunder wee cannot yeeld vnto him Cardinall Turrecremata rightly noteth that the Presidentship of Councels whereof men doe speake is of two sorts the one of honour the other of power Presidentship of honouris to haue preheminence in place to propose things to bee debated to direct the actions and to giue definitiue sentence according to the voyces and judgement of the Councell Presidentshippe of power is to haue the right not onely of directing but of ruling their doings also that are assembled in Councell and to conclude of matters after his owne judgement though the greater part of the Councell like it not yea though no part like it A Presidentshippe of the former sort Antiquity yeelded to the Bishop of Rome when hee was not wanting to himselfe And if there were no other differences betweene vs and him wee also would yeeld it him But the latter kinde of presidentshippe wee cannot yeeld vnlesse wee ouerthrow the whole course of Councels and goe against the streame of all Antiquity This seemeth saith Duarenus to bee consonant vnto the Law of GOD that the Church which the Synode doth represent should haue the fulnesse of all power and that the Pope should acknowledge himselfe subject vnto it For Christ did not giue the power of binding and loosing to Peter alone whose successor the pope is said to bee but to the whole church Although I doe not deny but that hee was set before the rest of the Apostles yet so often as any one was to bee ordained either Bishoppe or Deacon or any thing to bee decreed that concerned the church Peter neuer tooke it to himselfe but referred it to the whole church But heerein did his preheminence stand and consist that as prince of the Apostles it pertained to him to call the rest together and to propose vnto them the things that were to bee handled as with vs at this day the president of the court of parliament calleth together the whole Senate and when occasion requireth beginneth first to speake and doth many other things which easily shew the greatnesse of the person which he sustaineth and yet notwithstanding hee is not greater or superiour to the whole court neither hath hee power ouer all the Senatours neither may hee decree any thing contrary to their judgements But the judgement of all controversies pertaineth to the court it selfe whose Head the president is said to be nay which is more the court commaundeth judgeth and punisheth the president as well as any other if there be cause so to doe And these things truely were likewise in the Ecclesiasticall state heretofore but I know not by what meanes it is now brought about that supreme power ouer all Christians is giuen to one and that hee is set free from all Lawes and canons after the example of the Emperours This is the judgement of the learned and worthy Duarenus yet the Iesuites and Iesuited papists at this day will needs haue the pope to be president of General councels in such sort that hee may conclude of matters after his owne judgement and liking though the greater part of the councell like it not yea though no part like it But this their conceit is easily refuted first by reason then by the practise of the church from the beginning For first either Bishops are assembled in Generall Councels onely as the Popes Counsellers to giue him aduise or they are in joynt Commission with him and sitte as his fellow Iudges of all matters of faith and discipline If onely as Counsellers to aduise him Councels should not consist only or principally of Bishops For as they say commonly that many a doting old woman may be more deuout and many a poore begging Frier more learned thē the Pope himself so there is no questiō but that many other may be as learned and iudicious as Bishops Though saith Austine according to the titles of honour which the custome of the Church giueth men Austine a Bishop be greater then Hierome a Presbyter yet Hierome in worth and merite is greater then Austine In the late Councell of Trent there is no question but that Andradius Vega and other Doctors that were there were euery way comparable with the greatest Bishop or Cardinall yet Bishoppes onely as of ordinary right and some few other by speciall priuiledge gaue decisiue voyces in that Councell other how learned soeuer being admitted onely to discusse and debate matters and thereby to prepare and ripen them that the Bishops might more easily iudge of them and therefore the current of most Papists is against that conceit of making Bishops to bee but the Popes Counsellers onely as appeareth by Andradius Canus Bellarmine and many moe That Bishops saith Melchior Canus are not Counsellers onely to advise but Iudges to determine all matters doubtfull touching
Councell as Iudges may decree and determine and yet the power of re-examining and reuersing all if neede be may rest in the Pope as superiour Iudge vnto them which yet no way cleareth the doubt For howsoeuer it be true in Iudges and Iudgements distinct separate and subordinate one to another that one may dash that the other doth and doe the contrary without the consent of the other yet of Iudges ioyned in one Commission and of the same iudgment it cannot be so conceiued Now the Iudgement of the Generall Councell includeth in it the Iudgement of the Pope the Pope and Councell make one Iudge and are not separate distinct and subordinate Iudges and therefore no such thing can bee said of them If it be said that he who is joyned in commission with others in some inferiour Court and hath a Negatiue voyce in it onely and no absolute affirmatiue may in a superiour Court haue both and that therefore the Pope who hath no absolute voyce affirmatiue and negatiue in a Generall Councell may haue such a voyce in some higher Court it will be found to be too shamelesse a saying For there neither is nor can be any higher Court then that of a Generall Councell consisting of the Bishop of Rome and all the other Bishops of the World So that all answers failing wee may safely conclude that if Bishops bee Iudges Ecclesiasticall truely and properly as wee haue proued them to bee by vnanswerable reasons and our Adversaries confesse the Pope hath no absolute voyce affirmatiue and negatiue in Generall Councels that is to dash what the Maior part would doe and to doe that they by no meanes like of This Andradius saw and therefore hee disclaimeth the position of Bellarmine that all the assurance the Councell hath of finding out the truth is Originally in the Pope and from him cōmunicated to the Councell and holdeth that the Councell hath as good assurance of finding out the trueth and better then the Pope himselfe And therefore hee saith that though he thinketh it impossible the Pope should dissent frō the councell so as to define contrary to it yet if it should so fall out as hee thinketh it not impossible that the Bishop of Rome should altogether dislike in his opinion that which the Councell resolueth on and which hee should consent vnto and though he define not the contrary yet despise the Decrees of the Councell and in his priuate opinion gainsay them he thinketh in such a case men were to conceiue none otherwise of him then if hee should depart from the faith and profession of the ancient Councels which the consent of all ages hath confirmed and Gregory professeth to honour and esteeme as the foure Gospels seeing the power and authority is as great in all Councels as in those which the same Gregory saith that whosoeuer holdeth not their certaine resolutions though he seeme to be a stone elect and precious yet he lyeth besides the foundation And because the authority of Cardinall Turrecremata is great with all those that defend the dignity of the Pope against the Bishops that were assembled in the Councell of Basil such as are of their judgement therefore he produceth his opinion in these words If such a case should fall out saith Cardinall Turrecremata that all the Fathers assembled in a Generall Councell with vnanimous consent should make a decree concerning the faith which the person of the Pope alone should contradict I would say according to my judgement that men were bound to stand to the judgement of the Synode and not to listen to the gainsaying of the person of the Pope for the judgment of so many and so great Fathers in a Generall Councell seemeth worthily to bee preferred before the judgement of one man In which case that Glosse vpon the Decrees is most excellent that when the faith is treated of the Pope is bound to require the Counsell of Bishops which is to bee vnderstood to bee necessary to bee done as often as the case is very doubtfull and a Synode may be called and then the Synode is greater then the Pope not truely in the power of jurisdiction but in the authority of discerning judgment and the amplitude of knowledge This is the opinion of this great champion who so mainely in defence of the Popes vniversall jurisdictiō impugned the Fathers that were assembled in the Councell of Basil. Whereby it is evident that the pope may not go against the consent of a Generall Councell that he may not dissent from it being greater in the authority of discerning and judgement then hee is and consequently that hee hath no negatiue voyce in Councels Which may further bee proued for that if he had a negatiue voyce as the Councell hath then were there two absolute negatiues but where there are two absolute negatiues it is vncertaine whether any thing shall be resolued on or not whereas yet the state of the Church requireth resolution and certain concluding of matters that men may know what they are to beleeue Therefore the Pope hath none but the onely negatiue is that of the Councell a part whereof the Pope is giuing a voyce as others doe And this the manner of other Synodes confirmeth For in Provinciall Nationall and Patriarchicall Councels the Metropolitanes Primates and Patriarches haue no absolute negatiue but giue only a single voyce and the absolute negatiue as also the affirmatiue is onely in the Maior part and as Cardinall Turrecremata learnedly and rightly maketh the authority of the Generall Councell in discerning and defining what is to be belieued greater then the authority of the Pope and that the Councel is ratherto be listened vnto then the Pope dissenting from the Councell so there is no doubt but that the authority of Councels being as great in making necessary lawes for the good of the Church as in resoluing doubtes and clearing controuersies the Councell is greater then the Pope in the power of making lawes and consequently in the power of jurisdiction which he denieth and they of Basil affirme The greatest allegation on the contrary side is the confirmation that ancient Councels sought of the Bishop of Rome for that may seeme to import that their decrees are of no force vnlesse they be strengthened by his authority whereunto Andradius answereth out of Alfonsus á Castro and others that Generall Councels carefully sought to be confirmed by the Bishop of Rome not as if in themselues without his confirmation they were weake and might erre nor for that they thought him to haue as much or more assurance of not erring then they but that it might appeare that he that hath the first place in the Church of God and the rest did consent and conspire together in the deliuery and the defence of the trueth But because happily this answer may seeme too weake therefore for the clearing of this doubt we must obserue that all the ancient Councels
the two and twentith were of the opinion I speake of to whom I might haue added Irenaeus Bernard Theophylact and many more That all these should be charged with this opinion or with this folly as hee will haue it it neuer troubleth him onely he is much moued that Ambrose should be charged with any such thing It seemeth he is not of the Gregorian but of the Ambrosian Church in that hee is carelesse what becommeth of his Popes Clement and Iohn so all bee well with Ambrose Hee was tormented he saith with a necessary suspicion rather of my vnfaithfulnesse in this report then of Saint Ambrose his folly in this matter Surely if hee were as wise as hee is wilfull hee would not passe his censures as he doth for it is no such folly but that as wise a man as S. Ambrose might fall into it to thinke as so many learned worthy and renowned Diuines did and therefore Alfonsus á Castro hauing charged the Graecians and Armenians with this error saith that after these Iohn the two and twentith rose vp and embraced the same opinion and least any man might giue lesse credit to his words hee sayth hee will report the words of Pope Adrian who writeth thus Last of all it is reported of Iohn the 22 that he publikely taught declared and commanded all to hold that soules though purged from sinne haue not that stole which is the cleare vision of God face to face before the last iudgement and it is sayd that hee brought the vniuersity of Paris to that point that no man could take any degree in Diuinitie there vnlesse first he did sweare to defend this error and to adhere to it for euer thus far Pope Adrian Besides these there are other Patrons of this errour men of renowne and famous both for sanctity and science to witte the most blessed Martyr of Christ Irenaeus Theophylact Bishoppe of Bulgaria and blessed Bernard Neither should any man maruaile that soe great men fell into so pestilent an errour seeing as blessed Iames the Apostle sayth Hee that offendeth not in words is a perfit man Notwithstanding the Reader is here to be admonished that hee thinke not that this error detracteth any thing from the holynesse or learning of so great men so that it is no such imputation of folly to attribute this opinion to Ambrose as wise M Higgons maketh it for whereas at that time the Church had defined nothing touching that matter neyther had it euer bin called in question the testimonies of Scripture for that which is now defined were not soe expresse but that they might bee wrested into another sence they might teach the one or the other without note of heresie especially seeing there wanted not testimonies of Scripture that seemed in some sort to fauour them Thus farre Alfonsus a Castro But let vs see how Maister Higgons will conuince mee that I haue wronged Ambrose which in soe clamorous manner hee vndertaketh to doe Surely this is the ground of his quarrell against mee that hauing imputed this opinion to Iustine Martyr Tertullian Clemens Romanus Lactantius Victorinus and Ambrose in the margent I referre the reader to Sixtus Senensis who yet excused Ambrose from this error But the silly Nouice should know that I doe not say Sixtus Senensis attributeth that opinion to Ambrose and that I put not his name in the margent as if I grounded my imputation vppon his authority For if I would haue done soe I could haue mustered together a farre greater number then I haue done But because it had bin tedious to haue sette downe the words of all those I mention wherein they expresse their opinion in the margent I referre the reader to Sixtus Senensis who reporteth their wordes at large according to the course of times wherein they flourished that the reader within the compasse of one page may see what they say without turning ouer their large volumes and among other the wordes of Ambrose which I thinke will strongly perswade him hee was of that opinion which I impute vnto him howsoeuer Sixtus Senensis by a fauourable construction labour to excuse him Let vs see therefore if Ambrose will not witnesse for mee that I haue done him no wrong but truly reported his opinion The first thing I imputed vnto him is that hee thinketh as many other did before and after him that there is no iudgement to passe vpon men till the last day If this be not cleerely prooued out of Ambrose his owne wordes lette the Reader thinke I haue wronged him In his second booke of Caine and Abell he hath these words The Maister of a Shippe when hee hath brought his Shippe into the hauen scarce thinketh hee hath ended his labour before hee beginne to seeke the beginning of a newe the soule is loosed from the body and after the end of this life it is still holden in suspence vpon the vncertainty and doubtfulnesse of the future iudgement soe is there no end where there is thought to be an end The second thing I attribute to Ambrose is that hee thinketh the soules of men are kept in some place appointed for that purpose soe that they come not into heauen till the generall iudgment Let vs heare him speake him-selfe and then lette the Reader iudge whether hee say not all that I impute vnto him In his booke de boâ—… mortis he hath these words In the bookes of Esdras wee read that when the day of iudgement shall come the earth shall restore the bodies of the dead and the dust shall restore those reliques and remaines of the dead which rest in the graues and the secret habitations shall restore the soules which haue beene committed to them and the most High shall be revealed vpon the Seate of Iudgement From hence hee saith the Gentiles tooke those things which they admire in the bookes of Philosophers and blaming them that they mingled superfluous and vnprofitable things with those that are true as the demigration of soules into bees birds and the like fancies saith it had been sufficient for them to haue said that soules deliuered out of mortall bodies petunt Haden that is goe into an invisible place which place in Latine is called Infernus and farther addeth that the Scripture calleth these secret habitations of soules Store-houses Heere we see Ambrose saith there are certaine secret habitations of soules which though they be higher then the receptacles of dead bodies yet are rightly called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in Greek Infernus in Latin that these are Storehouses keeping those soules that are committed to them till the Resurrection and then restoring them If M. Higgons doe thinke that Infernus is Heauen then I haue no more to say to him otherwise I thinke the evidence of this place cannot be avoyded The third thing I impute to Ambrose is that the soules of the Iust receiue not the reward of their labours till the Generall Iudgement Touching which point
communicating with the Priest in the Sacrament into a priuate masse which indeede if wee will speake properly is no masse or that hee helde it to bee a new reall sacrificing of CHRIST as the Iesuited Papistes doe at this day A sacrifice wee confesse it to bee of praise and thankes-giuing and a commemoration of the bloudy sacrifice of CHRIST vpon the Altar of the Crosse say that therefore it may bee named a sacrifice because signes haue the names of the things whereof they are signes as also for that there is in this Sacrament an offering or presenting of CHRIST and his passion to GOD by the faith of the Church that by it wee may obtaine grace and remission of sinnes but a new reall sacrificing of CHRIST wee denye and thinke with Luther that it is a hellish abomination so to doe That Gerson thought that there is a Purgatory doth no more prejudice his being a worthy guide of Gods Church then the errour of Cyprian and other before-mentioned Touching invocation of Saints though hee did not absolutely condemne it yet hee reprehended the abuses and superstitious observations then prevailing in the worshipping of Saints very bitterly as I shewed before sought to bring men to a truer sense of piety in that point then was ordinarily found amongst men in those times The like he did for indulgences restraining them more then was pleasing to the Popes faction and for the communion vnder one kinde howsoeuer hee thought the Church might lawfully prescribe the communicating in one kinde alone which wee cannot excuse yet hee acknowledgeth that the communion in both kindes was aunciently vsed and that when it may bee had with the peace of the Church it is to bee allowed But to what purpose doth Master Higgons alledge these things shall it bee lawfull for him and his to repute Iohn Gerson a worthy and godly man notwithstanding that he held that the Pope may erre that he is subiect to Generall Councels that he medleth with things no way pertayning to him when hee taketh vpon him to dispose the Kingdomes of the world that all our inherent righteousnesse is imperfit and as the polluted ragges of a menstruous woman that all sins are by nature mortall and the like and may not wee take him to haue beene a member of the true Church a good man and one that desired the reformation of things amisse notwithstanding his errour in some things and his not discerning all that was amisse The insufficiencie of this allegation it seemeth Master Higgons himselfe perceived and therefore saith hee will come to the supreame difference to which all other points as hee conceiueth are subordinate and inferiour that is to say the soueraigne primacy of the Romane Bishop and bringeth two very effectuall testimonies as hee thinketh of Gerson to proue the Popes soueraigne primacie The First is out of his booke De auferibilitate papae his words are these The formes of ciuill government are subiect to mutability and alteration but it is otherwise in the Church for her gouerment is Monarchicall and is so appointed by the institution of our Lord if any man will violate this sacred ordinance and persist obstinately in his contempt hee is to bee iudged an Hereticke as Marsilius of Padua and some other consorting with his fancie The second is out of his tract De vnitate Graecorum where prescribing many directions for the composing of the differences betweene the Greeke and Latine Churches hee layeth it downe as a foundation that there must bee one head on earth vnto which all men must bee vnited In these sayings Master Higgons saith Gerson shewed himselfe a worthy guide of Gods Church and a singular enemy of the Protestanticall reformation which violently impugneth the supremacie of the Pope in so much that Luther affirmeth that a man cannot be saued vnlesse from his heart hee hate the Pope and Papacie These things truely carrie a very faire shew and may deceiue such as cannot or will not throughly looke into them But whosoeuer knoweth what Gersons opinion of the Pope is and what Luther hath written against the Papacie will soone perceiue there is no contradiction betweene them or at least not in any essentiall and materiall point For Gerson was of opinion that the Pope is subiect to a Generall Councell and that hee is not free from daunger of erring and this hee thought to bee a matter of faith defined in the Councell of Constance and therefore would haue detested all claimes of infallible iudgement and vncontrouleable power of Popes as much as Luther did and would haue accursed his words of blasphemie if once hee should haue heard him say as wee doe and as before the holding of the Councell of Constance he did All the world cannot iudge mee though I ouerturne the whole course of nature no man may say vnto mee why doe you so I onely haue power to make lawes and to voide them againe I haue authority to dispence with the Canons of all Councels as seemeth good vnto mee and which is more to dispose of all the kingdomes of the world the assurance of finding out the trueth and not erring is not partly in mee and partly in the Councell but wholy in mee whatsoeuer all the world shall consent on is of no force if I allow it not Hee would haue said doubtlesse as I haue done if hee had heard him thus speake that wee are not bound to take the foame of his impure mouth and froath of his words of blasphemie as infallible Oracles This is that Pope and this is that Papacie which Luther saith euery one that will be saued must hate from his heart for otherwise if hee would onely claime to bee a Bishoppe in his precinct a Metropolitane in a prouince a Patriarch of the West and of Patriarches the first and most honourable to whom the rest are to resort in cases of greatest moment as to the head and chiefe of their company to whom it specially pertaineth to haue an eye to the preseruation of the Church in the vnity of faith and religion and the actes and exercises of the same and with the assistance and concurrence of the other by all due courses to effect that which pertaineth thereunto without clayming absolute and vncontrouleable power infallibilitie of iudgement and right to dispose the Kingdomes of the world and to intermeddle in the administration of the temporalties of particular Churches and the immediate swaying of the iurisdiction thereof Luther himselfe professeth hee would neuer open his mouth against him This kind of Primacie the Grecians likewise professed they would bee content to yeeld vnto him if other differences betweene them might be composed Cassander saith Hee is perswaded there had neuer beene any controuersies about the Popes power if the Popes had not abused their authority in a Lordly and ouer-ruling manner and through couetousnesse and ambition stretched it beyond the bounds and
the notorious negligence of the Court of Rome in omitting to doe that which is fitte other to base corruption and therevpon sheweth that an appeale was put in on the behalfe of the Lords of Polonia to the next Generall Councell against which exception was taken that it was not lawfull to appeale from the Pope in any case or to decline his iudgement in matters of faith contrarie to the lawes of God and the decrees of the same Conncell and to the vtter ouerthrowing of all those thinges that were done in the Councell of Pisa and Constance in reiecting the pretenders and electing a new Pope professing that hee is well assured there will neuer be any reformation of the Church by a Councell without the presidency of a guide well affected and prudent stout and constant of which sort he insinuateth the Pope then beeing was not Thus wee see Gerson thought it no impiety in modest sort to taxe the Popes negligence and in most resolute manner to condemne as impious against the Lawes of God and man his pride in denying appeales from himselfe as if no man might decline his iudgement in matters of faith Which things being so let the reader iudge whether that one poore sentence of Gerson mangled and rent from that which went before and followeth after doe bring more aduantage to Master Higgons his cause then it doth preiudice the same when it is ioyned with the other parts of his discourse in the same place But thus doe these Madianites slay themselues with their owne swordes and turne their weapons vpon themselues to the vtter ouerthrow of their bad cause From this particular of the Popes supremacy wherein Master Higgons hath foyled himselfe and hurt his cause hee proceedeth to some generall euidences whence as hee saith it may be proued that Gerson neuer fauoured the Protestanticall reformation The first is for that speaking of the Romish Church he saith Wee must r◅ue the certainty of our faith from it The second for that hee preached zealously at Constance against the articles of Wicklife and the Bohemians For answere to the first of these allegations the reader must remember that Gerson doth clearely resolue that the Pope may erre not onely personally but Episcopally and iudicially also and consequently that wee must not ground our faith vpon his resolutions as certaine and vndoubted The like may be said of the Romane Church that is the Romane Diocesse Prouince or Patriarchship for if it haue any more infallibility of iudgement then other particular Churches it hath it from the Bishoppe which it cannot haue seeing he is not free from errour himselfe the meaning therefore of Gerson is not that wee may or must take whatsoeuer the Romane Diocesse Prouince or Patriarchship deliuereth vnto vs to be vndoubtedly true but speaking of the Indians who are Christians and yet doubting whether they hold the faith of Christians sincerely or not hee saith it may be feared least they doe not seeing ◅ey are diuided from the Roman Church from which the certainty of faith is to ◅e sought to shew that the truth certainty of faith is to be sought in the vnity of the vniuersal or Catholique Church the beginning being taken frō that which of all others is the first and chiefest and hathhitherto beene most free from damnable heresies For otherwise that he is no way resolued that the determinations of the particular Roman Church Diocesan Provinciall or Patriarchicall doe absolutely binde all to receiue them it is most cleare and euident in that in his discourse of the meanes of procuring vnitie betweene the Greekes and Latines one speciall cause of the breach betweene them being the determination passed by the Latines touching the proceeding of the Holy Ghost without the consent of the Greekes he wisheth men to consider whether as we are wont to say of the Articles of Paris that they binde none but such as are within the Diocesse of Paris so it may not be saide that the determinations of the Latine Church binde none but those that are within the compasse of the same which he could not nor would not doe if he thought the infallible direction of all the rest to bee in the Romane Church alone and that all euery-where were bound to receiue as vndoubtedly true whatsoeuer it deliuereth as the Romanists at this day doe thinke Besides this it is to be obserued that by the name of the Romane Church the person of the Pope whom the Romanists name the Virtuall Church is not meant nor the Diocesse or Prouince of Rome alone but the whole Latine or West Church subiect to the Bishop of Rome as Patriarch of the West which wee are perswaded neuer yet erred from the Faith but had alwayes in it many worthy men professing and maintaining the trueth of Religion howsoeuer some erred damnably in the midst of it and a separation be now growne betweene the true members of that Church and such as were but a faction in the same So that that which Gerson hath of fetching the certainty of our faith from the Church of Rome proueth not that hee would haue beene an enemy to the Protestanticall reformation for he speaketh not of our fetching the certaintie of our Faith from the Pope or Court or Diocesse of Rome but of the Indians fetching the certainty of their Faith from the Roman that is the Westerne Church But that he neuer thought that all Christians and Churches of the West are to fetch the certainty of their Faith from the Pope or Court of Rome it is evident In that he commendeth the French King that condemned the heresie of Iohn the two and twentieth touching the soules not seeing God till the Resurrection with sound of trumpets the Nobles and Prelats of France being present and beleeued rather the Vniuersitie of Paris then the Court of Rome Neither is the next proofe of Gersons preaching against the Articles of Wickliff and the Bohemians any better then this for hee preached against such Articles as were brought to the Councell of Constance by the English and Bohemians now those Articles were many of them impious and hereticall nay hellish and blasphemous in such sort as they were proposed by them that brought them as that God must obey the Diuel that Kings or Bishops if they be reprobates or if they fall into mortall sinne cease to be Kings or Bishops any longer and that all they doe is meerely voide whereas Wickliffe neuer deliuered any such thing nor had any such impious conceipt as they sought to fasten on him neither is it to be maruailed at that impious things were falsly slanderously imputed to him seeing we are wronged in like sort at this day For there are who shame not to write that we affirme God to be the author of fin that we teach that God doth sin that man sinneth not that God onely sinneth and that God is worse then the diuell with many other like
scholler in the schoole of impudency a farre longer time then yet he hath beene But happily he may find vanity in these passages of mine though no vntruth Let vs see therefore what hee saith what aduantage saith hee can Doctour Field gaine from Gersons improbation of the afore-said lewd assertions preiudiciall to the states of Kinges and Princes why doth hee presse the authority of Gerson whose medicine hee knoweth to bee very sharpe against the disease of all such Princes as by the infection of Heretickes are seduced from the integrity of the Catholicke faith to wit persecution by fire and sword Surely heere Theomisus Higgons bewrayeth more then vanity for as if he meant presently to become a traytor against his Soueraigne whom he his consortes suppose to be seduced from the Catholicke verity he beginneth at the very first to talke of sharpe medicines against such Princes and those prescribed by Gerson as he telleth vs but hee will be found a lying and cogging mate for Gerson in the place cited by him hath nothing for the Popes deposing Princes for heresie or any thing else which yet is that medicine he meaneth nay wee are assured hee neuer held any such trayterous position but writing against the flatterers of Princes hee wisheth Princes to take heed they listen not to such men as will instill into them many false opinions touching their power and absolutenesse contrary to the faith and trueth of God whereby in the end they may make themselues so odious as to bee pursued by fire and sword by their subiects So that whereas Gerson speaketh of errours in faith concerning the state of Princes bringing them to doe things so odious as to bee persecuted with fire sword this good fellow turneth his words to another sence as if he had meant that for error in faith the Pope were to depose Princes and whereas to meete with certaine false and foolish suggestions made to some Princes contrarie to the doctrine of faith hee setteth downe certaine propositions whereof the first is that Princes must not iustifie themselues and thinke they offend not whatsoeuer they doe and that the Lawes Ecclesiasticall and Ciuill will auaile for the furtherance of this consideration hee turneth the words into this sence that these Lawes are auailable for the deposing of Kinges so treacherous and trayterous is this Fugitiue become already From this first obseruation he proceedeth to a second saying that if the reformation wished for by Gerson consisted onely or principally or at all in the redresse of lewd assertions preiudiciall to the states of Kings the Protestants haue not effected that which he desired their positions being dangerous likewise and therevpon breaketh out into a long and large discourse concerning the positions of Protestants touching the state and power of Princes But surely he is like a Spaniell not acquainted with his game that runneth after euery bird that riseth before him and is to bee taught better before there will be any great vse of him For I bring not the report of Gerson touching hese assertions so much to shew what he would haue reformed as to make it appeare how strangely things were carried in former times how little hope he other good men had of any reformation by a Councell seeing these positions so dangerous apparantly false could not be condemned in the Councell of Constance by reason of a mighty faction prevayling in the same so all that he saith vpon this false ground is nothing to the purpose notwithstanding if the man were worth the medling with or the matter required it it were easie to shew that Protestants are farre from holding any such trayterous opinions as Papists defend But I haue resolued to confine my selfe to the defence of my selfe against his childish exceptions and no way to follow him into any other of his idle discourses Touching Gersons condemning certaine-positions attributed to Wickliff and Hus and Husses suffering in the cause of CHRIST against Antichrist and the idlenesse of Higgons in charging Mee with contradiction in that I graunt the one and affirme the other I haue spoken already But so plentifull hee is in objections that nine thinges more remaine in this chapter not obiected before which hee obiecteth to mee The first is the extenuation of the turbulent and impious positions of Wickliff in that I say they seemed to derogate from the Cleargy Secondly that I conceale the impiety of Wickliff in other thinges Thirdly that I cite in one place things found in diuers places Fourthly that I exaggerate the seuerity of the Councell of Constance against Wickliff c. and make as if Gerson had disliked it whereas he did not Fiftly that I say Gerson desired a reformation and thought that it was to be assayed seuerally in the particular Kingdomes of the world there being little or no hope of doing any good by a Generall Councell Sixtly that the proceeding in this worke of reformation seuerally in diuerse parts of the world without a common deliberation was the cause of those differences that now appeare in the reformed Churches according as Gerson feared it would fall out 7ly That I say Gerson Grosthead others were of the true Church who yet were mēbers of the Church of Rome Eigthly that I misalleage a saying of Gerson And the nineth that whereas Gerson sayth the Popes sought to be adored as God I say they sought to bee adored and worshipped as God To euery one of these I will answere in a word To the first that I extenuate not the impious positions falsely and maliciously gathered out of Wickliffes workes as that God must obey the Diuell and if there be any other like but accurse them to the pitte of hell but speaking of those which in Gersons iudgement were not so hurtfull neither to the conuersation of men nor the state of common-weales as those against Princes which the Councell of Constance could not bee induced to condemne I say of them they seemed to derogate from the Cleargy because I know not certainely vppon what ground or in what sence many of them were vttered by him To the second I answere that I concealed not the impiety of any articles where-with Wickliffe was charged but hauing no occasion to speake of any other but such onely as were not so bad in Gersons iudgement as some they in the coūcell could not be induced to condemn I had no reason to censure thē any otherwise then I did for had they beene so bad as Maister Higgons would make them to be the Pope and Councell were not very good that could by no meanes bee induced to condemne such as were farre worse as Gerson telleth vs. To the third I say that it is lawfull for a man to cite in one place out of one author thinges found in him in diuerse places or else Maister Higgons is too blame who doth so To the fourth I say that I exaggerate not the seuerity of the
differ as much in iudgement as wee doe from the Papists at this day so that these Cardinals that opposed themselues against the furious purposes of the Pope intending to proceed against Grosthead for resisting his tyrannicall vsurpations and iustified Grosthead as a good man and the thinges hee stood vpon as right and iust and told the Pope of a departure from him which hee must looke for and by these ill courses intended by him he might hasten may be thought not to haue beene members of the Antichristian faction but of the poore Church oppressed and wronged by the same as Grosthead also was Neither is it so strange that Cardinalls who are so neere the Pope should bee auerse from his Antichristian courses For Cameracensis then whom that age had not a worthier man either for life or learning and Cusanus no way inferiour to him howsoeuer they were not free from all errours of Papisme yet wholly condemned the Papacie as wee doe at this day denying the Popes vniuersality of iurisdiction vncontroulable power infallible iudgement and right to meddle with Princes states making him nothing but the first Bishoppe in order and honour amongst the Bishops of the Christian Church And Contarenus as all men know condemned sundry errours of the Papisme and seemed no lesse to dislike the Papistes wilfull and obstinate maintayning of grosse errours abuses and confusions then the temerity of those that disorderedly as he thought sought to haue an alteration Thus is Master Higgons his great demaund easily answered Onely one great and vnexcusable fault I haue committed in that I say these Cardinals opposed themselues against the Pope when hee intended to proceede violently against Bishoppe Grosthead whereas I should haue said they interposed themselues The poore man it seemeth is very weake in his conceipt and therefore saith hee knoweth not what for did not the interposing of themselues in such sort as they did imply a contrariety of iudgement in them opposite to that of the Pope and was not their hindering crossing and stopping of him by all the meanes it was fitte for them to vse an opposing against his rash purpose and resolution Surely Master Higgons in this passage sheweth himselfe as very a babe as euer suckt a bottle For all men know that one may oppose himselfe vnto another as well by way of perswasion and entreaty as of authority or violence But to leaue these trifleling fooleries and to come to matter of substance because he saith I expresse not the matters of quarrell and differences betweene the Pope Bishop Grosthead particularly enough and that I conceale the correspondence hee held with the Romane Church in matters of faith I will relate the whole storie at large of such things as fell out betweene the Pope and this worthy Bishop whereby I doubt not but it will appeare that if Grosthead were now aliue he would detest such smattering companions as Higgons is that labour so carefully to reconcile him to that Antichrist with whom hee had warre both while he liued and after hee was dead The Popes in the time wherein Grosthead liued not contenting themselues with the preheminence of being Patriarches of the West which stood in confirming Metropolitanes by imposition of handes or by mission of the Pall and in calling Patriarchicall Synodes in certaine cases to heare and determine matters of greater consequence then could be ended in Prouinciall Synodes but taking vpon them as if the fulnesse of all Ecclesiasticall iurisdiction had rested in them alone admitted appeales out of all partes of the West not of Bishops only but of Presbyters inferiour Cleargy-men and Lay-men also reserued a great number of cases to their owne cognisance debarring the Bishoppes and Metropolitanes from medling with them exempted whom they pleased from the ordinary iurisdiction of their Bishoppes and challenged the right to conferre all kinde of dignities Ecclesiasticall whether presentatiue or electiue not onely when they were voyd but before whence came their expectatiue graces and prouisions and which much offended and grieued all good men bestowed the dignities of the Churches abroad in England and other places vpon strangers that neuer came to those Churches they were intitled to so that at one time a survay beeing taken it was found that strangers carried yearely more then threescore thousand Markes out of England which was more then the bare reuenew of the Crowne at that time Amongst others Bishoppe Grosthead receiued the Popes letters for the placing of certaine strangers in his Church of Lincolne which he refused to doe and wrote backe to the Pope to lette him know hee was opposite to Christ a murtherer of soules and an Hereticke in these his courses Vpon the receipt of which letters the Pope was halfe madde with anger and calling his Cardinals together sware by Peter and Paul that if it were not that he were ouercome by the goodnesse of his nature hee would cast downe this Bishoppe into the pitte of all confusion which thing hee said hee could easily doe for that the King of England was his Vassall and Slaue and hee could commaund him vnder paine of his high displeasure to cast him into prison or otherwise to proceede against him but that howsoeuer hee would make him an example to all such as should dare in like sort to disobey his Mandates Some of the Cardinals more aduised then the Pope sought to pacifie him what they could and to stoppe these his intended violent courses telling him Bishoppe Grosthead was in faith a Catholicke in life a most holy man of great learning and euery where much respected that the thinges hee stood vpon were iust and right and that therefore it was not safe for him to proceede against him least some tumult should follow which they besought him the rather to thinke of for that there must be a departure from the Church of Rome which they would not haue him to hasten by this meanes These perswasions prevailed so farre that Grosthead was not accursed nor deposed but dyed Bishop of Lincolne yet after his death it being easier to insult vpon a dead Lyon then a liuing dog the Pope tooke heart and was resolued to accurse him and to commaund his dead body to bee taken vp and to be buried in a dunghill But the night before this vile act should haue bin done Bishop Grosthead did appeare vnto him with his crosier staffe in his hand and so rebuked the wicked Pope for fauouring the wicked and persecuting the righteous and besides strooke him in such sort with his crosier staffe that he neuer enjoyed his Papall dignity after it This apparition happily was nothing else but the apprehension of his guilty conscience representing to him the person of him whom hee intended to wrong and terrifying him euen vnto the death Howsoeuer it appeareth by Mathew Paris that this worthy Bishop for so will I call him not-with-standing any thing prating Higgons can say to the contrary finding that the
the whole composition and forme of the sacred prayer called the Canon agreeth onely to a publike ministration there being often mention made in it of the people standing round about offering and communicating so that some ancient expositors of the Roman order thinke the Canon ought not to bee vsed but in a publike ministration To which purpose Micrologus obserueth that the prayers vsed after the communion are appliable onely to such as haue communicated and therefore willeth them not to neglect to communicate that desire to enioy the blessing of these praiers Clichthoueus vppon the Canon of the Masse sayth that which some note that the Priest soe often as hee celebrateth should giue the Sacrament to all that stand by is Auncient and agreeable to the custome of the Primitiue Church when the faithfull did euery day receiue the Sacrament according to that Sanction of Calixtus the Pope After the consecration let all communicate and that of Anacletus who willeth them to bee excommunicated that beeing present at the consecration communicate not which Andradius will not haue to be restrained to the Ministers assisting but extended to all the people and that by the authority of Dionysius and Iustine Martyr Cochlaeus against Musculus de sacrificio missae hath these wordes In olde time both Priest and people as many as were present at the sacrifice of the Masse after the oblation was ended communicated with the Priest as it is evident by the Canons of the Apostles and the Epistles of the most ancient Doctors c. Afterwards the devotion of the people decayed yet the Cleargy and Ministers communicated still when all they did not communicate yet at least the Deacons and Subdeacons communicated as the Authour of the Romane Breviary testifieth Whereupon saith Cassander some godly and learned men doe wish that this ancient custome were restored that at least the Ministers might communicate with him that celebrateth as agreeable to the practise of the Primitiue Church and making much for the dignity and gravitie of this Mystery In the Churches of Aethiopia all communicate in both kindes twise euery weeke to this day Iohn Hofmeister expounding certaine prayers of the Masse hath these wordes the thing it selfe proclaimeth it that as well in the Greeke as Latine Church not the Priest that celebrateth onely but the rest of the Presbyters and Deacons the whole people or at least some part of the people was wont to communicate which custome how it ceased and grew out of vse may seeme strange but it were greatly to be wished that it were restored againe which thing might easily be effected if the Pastors of the Churches would do their duty for the Priests themselues are in fault that few or none of the people are found to communicate in that they doe not invite stirre them vp to communicate more often as appeareth by the writing of a certaine Diuine not vnlearned in the former age in which he reprehendeth certaine Pastours of that age wherein hee liued who tooke it ill that some of their Parishioners though liuing very laudably desired to communicate euery Sunday That the Sacrament was ministred in former times in loafe bread as we minister it at this day it is evident by the booke called Ordo Romanus by Durandus sundry other authorities In auncient times the manner was to giue the holy Sacrament into the hands of the communicants as wee doe and not to put it into their mouthes as the Papists doe What shall I speak saith Andradius of the vse of the holy Eucharist which now no man may lawfully touch but the Priests whereas it was wont to be carryed by the Deacons to such as were absent and to be giuen to Laymen into their hands whence proceeded that exhortation of Cyrill of Hierusalem full of piety and religion that each communicant should fasten his eyes vpon those hands that receiued the holy Eucharist and kisse them with the kisses of his mouth that so he might communicate to the rest of the members the holynesse of the Eucharist The custome of circumgestation saith Cassander is contrary to the manner of the Auncient and would neuer haue beene liked of them who held this mysterie in so great respect that they admitted none to the sight of it but such as they thought worthy to be partakers of it whereupon all such as might not communicate were ejected before the consecration and therefore it seemeth that this circumgestation might be omitted Crantzius praiseth Cusanus who being the Popes Legate in Germany tooke it away vnlesse it were within the Octaues of the feast of Corpus Christi the Sacrament being instituted for vse and not for ostentation Touching the honour of Saints Gerson Contarenus and others reprehend sundry superstitious obseruations wish they were wisely abolished Whether the Saints particularly know our estate and heare our cryes groanes not onely Augustine the Author of the Interlineall Glosse but Hugo de sancto Victore also will tell vs it is altogether vncertaine cannot be knowne whence it followeth that howsoeuer being assured they pray for vs in a generality wee may safely desire to bee respected of God the rather for their sakes yet it is not safe to pray to them Neither is this a new conceipt of ours but Guilielmus Altisiodorensis saith it was a common opinion in his time that neither we doe properly pray to Saints nor they in particular pray for vs but that improperly we are said to pray to thē in that we pray vnto God that the rather for their sakes at their suite we may finde fauour and acceptation with him Touching the abuse of Images and how much it was disliked in former time let the Reader see Cassander How great complaints were made long since against the forced single life of the Cleargy and how many and great men desired the abrogation of the law that forced men so to liue I haue shewed at large else-where That in the Primitiue Church they had their prayers in the vulgar tongue Lyra confesseth and Caietane professeth that he thinketh it would be more for edification if they were so now and confirmeth his opinion out of the Apostle Saint Paul Thus haue I giuen the Reader a taste of the iudgement of those that liued in former times both concerning matters of doctrine now controuersed the Popes incroachments now by vs restrained and also such abuses as we haue remoued by which I thinke it will appeare to be most true that amongst many good proofes of the equitie of our cause there can no better be desired then that what wee haue done in the reformation of thinges amisse the worthiest men in the Church wished to be done before wee were borne And therefore Master Higgons hath little cause to say Our cause is bad and the Patrons worse That which hee addeth that
of actions of vertue formerly done remaine still in the elect and chosen called according to purpose when they fall into grieuous sinnes tyrannizing ouer them though during the time of their being in such grieuous sins the actuall claime to the benefit of these things and the enioying of them be suspended which vpon their repentance for those particular sinnes that caused such suspension is reuiued and set afoote againe in such sort that the repentance past sufficeth for remission of former sinnes and the good actions past shall haue their rewards So that a man elect and chosen of God and called according to purpose that hath done good vertuous actions though they be deaded in him for the present by some grieuous Sinne yet still they remaine in diuine acceptation and he still retaineth the right title he had to the reward of eternall life promised to those workes of vertue done by him though he can make no actuall claime to the same while he remaineth in such an estate of sinne but after that such sinne shall cease and bee repented of hee recouereth not a nâ—…w right or title but a new claime by vertue of the old title Wherefore if it bee demaunded whether Dauid and 〈◊〉 â—…hen they fell into those grieuous sinnes of vncleanesse and abnegation of Christ continued in a state of iustification We answer that they did in respect of the remission of their sinnes and the title they goâ—… to eternall life in their first conuersion which they lost not by those their sinnes committed afterwardes For the remission of all their former sinnes whereof before they had repented remained still and Gods acceptation of them to eternall life notwithstanding these sinnes vpon the condition of leauing them together with his purpose of rewarding their well-doings but in respect of the actuall claime to eternall good things they were not as men once iustified are notwithstanding lesser sinnes wâ—…h though they cause a dislike yet neither extinguish the right nor suspend the claime to eternall life Thus hauing runne through all those passages of Master Higgons his booke that any way concerne Mee I leaue him to be-thinke himsâ—…fe whether hee had any reason to traducâ—… Mee in such sort as hee hath done and remitte the wrongs he hath done Mee without cause to the righteous iudgement of God to whom hee must stand or fall The end of the first part THE SECOND PART Concerning the Authour of the Treatise of the grounds of the Olde and Nevv Religion and such exceptions as haue beene taken by him against the former Bookes HAuing answered the frivolous objections of Master Higgons I will leaue him and passe from him to his friend and collegue the Author of the Treatise of the grounds of the Olde and New Religion who also is pleased in his idle discourses to take some exceptioÌ„s against that which I haue writteÌ„ But because hee is a very obscure Author such a one as the world taketh little notice of I will not much trouble my selfe about him nor take so much pains in discouering his weaknesse as I haue done in dismasking the new convert a man as it seemeth of more esteeme Yet that the world may see what goodly stuffe it is that these namelesse and Apocryphall Booke-makers dayly vent amongst our seduced countrymen I will briefly and cursorily take a view of all such passages ofhis Treatise as any way concerne me Amongâ—… which the first that offereth it selfe to our view is in his Preface to the Reader where hee citeth with great allowance and approbation that which I haue in my Epistle Dedicatory That all men must carefully seeke out which is the true Church that so they may embrace her communion follow her directions and rest in her judgement but presently chargeth Mee that in my fourth Booke following I bereaue her of almost all such prerogatiues as I formerly yeelded vnto her so that men may not safely follow her directions nor rest in her judgement in that I say that Generall Councels may erre in matters of greatest consequence and free the Church her selfe from errour onely in certaine principall points and Articles of Christian Religion and not generally in all This is a bad beginning being a most shamelesse vntruth For in the places cited by him I lay downe these propositions First that the Church including in it all faithfull ones since CHRIST appeared in the flesh is absolutely free from all errour and ignorance of diuine things Secondly that the Church including all those beleeuers that are hauebeene since the Apostles times is simply free from all errour though happily not from all ignorance Thirdly that the Church including onely the beleeuers liuing at one time in the world is free not onely froÌ„ error in such things as men are precisely bound expressely to know beleeue but froÌ„ pertinaciously erring in any thing that any way pertaineth to Christian faith and religion Fourthly that wee must simply and absolutely without all doubt or question follow the directions and rest in the iudgment of the Church in eyther of the two former senses Fifthly that we must listen to the determinations of the present Church as to the instructions of our Elders and fatherly admonitions and directions but not so as to the things contained in Scripture or beleeued by the whole Vniuersal Church that hath bin euer since the Apostles times Because as Waldensis noteth the Church whose faith neuer faileth is not any particular Church as that of Africa or Rome but the Vniuersall Church neyther that Vniuersall Church which may bee gathered together in a generall Councell which is found sometimes to haue erred but that which dispersed through the world from the Baptisme of Iohn continueth to our times Sixtly that in the iudgment of Waldensis the fathers successiuely are more certaine iudges in matters of faith then a generall Councell of Bishops though it be in a sort the highest Court of the Church as the Treatiser sayth All these propositions are fouÌ„d in Waldensis who wrote with good allowance of Pope Martin the Fift and the whole consistory of Cardinals so that the Treatiser cannot charge Me with any wrong offered to the Church in bereauing her of her due prerogatiues but he must condemn him also and blame the Pope and his Cardinals for commending the writings of such a man to the world as good profitable and containing nothing contrary to the Catholike verity that forgotte himselfe so farre as to bereaue the Church of almost all her prerogatiues which he cannot doe but he must condemne Vincentius Lyrinensts likewise a man beyond all exception who absolutely concurreth in iudgement with Waldensis touching these points assuring vs that the state of the present Church at sometimes may be such as that we must be forced to flye to the iudgment of Antiquity if we desire to find any certaiue direction A iudgement of right discerning sayth OckaÌ„ there is euer fouÌ„d in the Church
parts of this Church and Catholiques that thinke the Pope may iudicially erre vnlesse a generall Councell concurre with him which in their opinion is an error and neare to heresie Yea the same Bellarmine sayth that the particular Romane Church that is the cleargy and people of Rome subiect to the Pope cannot erre because though some of them may yet all cannot It is true therefore which I haue deliuered not withstanding any thinge the Treatiser can say to the contrary that the Church including all the faithfull that are and haue beene since the Apostles may be sayd to bee free from error because in respect of her totall vniuersality she is so it being impossible that any errour should bee found in all her parts at all times though in respect of her seuerall parts shee be not For sometimes and in some parts she hath erred and in this sense can no more be sayd to be free from error then a man may be sayd to bee free from sicknesse that in some parts is ill affected But as a man that hath not beene alwaies nor in all parts ill may bee said to be free from perpetuall and vniuersall sicknesse so the Church is free from perpetuall and vniuersall error This the Treatiser saith is a weake priuiledge and not answerable to the great and ample promises made by Christ whereas the Fathers knew no other whatsoeuer this good man imagineth For Vincentius Lyrinensis confesseth that error may infect some parts of the Church yea that it may sometimes infect almost the whole Church so that he freeth it only from vniuersall perpetuall error But sayth the Treatiser what are poore Christians the nearer for this priuiledge how shall such a Church be the director of their faith and how shall they know what faith was preached by the Apostles what parts taught true doctrine and when and which erred in subsequent ages Surely this question is easily answered For they may know what the Apostles taught by their writings and they may know what parts of the Church teach true doctrine by comparing the doctrine each part teacheth with the written word of God and by obseruing who they are that bring in priuate and strange opinions contrary to the resolution of the rest But if happily some new contagion endeauour to commaculate the whole Church together they must looke vp into Antiquity and if in Antiquity they finde that some followed priuate and strange opinions they must carefully obserue what all not noted for singularity or heresie in diuerse places and times constantly deliuered as vndoubtedly true and receiued from such as went before them This course Vincentius Lyrinensis prescribeth But the Treatiser disclaimeth it not liking that all should be brought to the letter of holy Scripture and the workes of Antiquity which setting aside the authority of the present Church he thinketh yeeld no certaine and diuine argument So that according to his conceipt wee must rest on the bare censure and iudgement of the Pope for he is the present Church Antiquity is to be contēued as little or nothing worth Hauing iustified the distinctiō of the diuerse cōsiderations of the Church impugned by the Treatiser that which he hath touching the two assertions annexed to it will easily bee answered For the one of them is most true his addition of not erring being taken away and the other is but his idle imagination for wee neuer deliuered any such thing §. 3. IN the third place he excepteth against Mee because I say the words of the Apostle in the Epistle to Timothy touching the house and Church of God are originally vnderstood of the Church of Ephesus wherein Paul directeth Tymothy how to demeane and behaue himselfe but because I haue cleared this exception in my answere to Higgons I will say nothing to him in this place but referre him thither §. 4. FRom the Apostle the Treatiser passeth to Saint Augustine and chargeth Me th I wrest his words when he sayth he would not beleeue the Gospell if the authority of the Church did not moue him to a sense neuer meant by him These words of S. Augustin are vsually alleadged by the Papists to proue that the authority of the Church is the ground of our faith reason of beleeuing in answere whereunto I shew that the Diuines giue two explications of them For Ockam and some other vnderstand them not of the multitude of beleeuers that now are in the world but of the whole number of them that are and haue beene since Christ appeared in the flesh so including the Apostles and in this sense they confesse that the Church because it includeth the writers of the bookes of the new Testament is of greater authority then the books themselues Other vnderstand by the name of the Church onely the multitude of beleeuers liuing in the world at one time and thinke the meaning of Augustine is that the authority of this Church was an introduction vnto him but not the ground of his faith and principall or sole reason of beleeuing The former of these explications this graue censurer pronounceth to be friuolous First because if wee may beleeue him Saint Augustine neuer vsed these words Catholique Church after this sort in that sense Secondly because he speaketh of that Church which commanded him not to beleeue Manicheus which vndoubtedly was the present Church Thirdly because as he supposeth I can alleadge no Diuine that so interpreted the words of Augustine that which I cite out of Ockam being impertinent To euery of these reasons I will briefly answere And first that Augustine doth vse the words Catholique Church in the sense specified by Me it is euident For writing against Manicheus he hath these words Palám est quantū in re dubia ad fidem certitudinem valent Catholicae Ecclesiae authoritas quae ab ipsis fundatissimis sedibus Apostolorū vsque ad hodiernū diem succedētibus sibimet Episcopis tot populorū cōsensione firmatur that is it is apparant what great force the authority of that Church hath to settle the perswasion of faith cause certainty in things doubtfull that from the most surely established seats of the Apostles by succession of Bishops euen till this present cōsent of people is most firmely setled To the second reason wee answere that the Church including the Apostles and all faithfull ones that haue beene since comprehendeth in it the present Church and so might commaund Augustine not to listen to Manicheus So that this commaunding proueth not that he speaketh precisely of the present Church To the third I say that the Treatiser is either strangely ignorant or strangely impudent when hee affirmeth that I can alledge no Diuine that vnderstandeth the words of Augustine of the Church including in it the Apostles such as liued in their times For first Durandus vnderstandeth them of the Primitiue Church including the Apostles Secondly Gerson will tell him that when
Who would not thinke that there were some grosse ouersights committed by Mee in these passages vppon such an outcrie Wherefore lette vs consider the seuerall parts of this his exception against Mee First hee sayth the Bishoppe of Constantinople was not preferred before the other two Patriarches of Alexandria and Antioch and set in degree of honour next vnto the Bishop of Rome in the first Councell of Constantinople as I haue sayd and that I say vntruly when I say hee was Let vs therefore heare the wordes of the Canon it selfe and then let the Reader iudge betweene vs. The words of the third Canon of that Councell are these Constantinopolitanus Episcopus obtineat praecipuum honorem ac dignitatem secundum ac post Episcopum Romanum ideo quòd Constantinopolis noua Roma est that is Let the Bishop of Constantinople haue the chiefest honour and dignity after the Bishoppe of Rome because Constantinople is new Rome If the words of the Canon suffice not to iustifie my assertion let vs heare the Treatiser himselfe in the same page hee citeth these words of the Bishoppes assembled in the Councell of Chalcedon in their Synodall Epistle to Leo Bishoppe of Rome Wee haue confirmed the rule of the hundred and fifty holy Fathers which were gathered together at Constantinople vnder Theodosius of happie memory which commaunded that the See of Constantinople which is ordained the second and to haue second honour after your most holy and Apostolique See c. Is not here as much sayd as I haue written Did not the holy Fathers assembled at Constantinople decree that the Bishoppe of Constantinople shall bee preferred before the Bishoppes of Alexandria and Antioch and set in degree of honour next vnto the Bishoppe of Rome and doe not the Fathers in the Councell of Chalcedon say they decreed soe Haue all these holy Fathers committed notorious vntrueths to the Print and view of the world It is well the Treatiser concealed his name for otherwise hee must haue heard further from Mee But happily I mis-reported the Councell of Chalcedon when I sayd that in that Councell the Bishoppe of Constantinople was made equall with the Bishoppe of Rome and to haue equall rights priuiledges and prerogatiues because hee was Bishoppe of new Rome as the other of old Let vs therefore heare the words of the Bishoppes assembled in that Councell The Fathers say the Bishops of that Councell did rightly giue preeminences and priuiledges to the Throne of old Rome because that â—…ittie was Lady and mistresse of the world and the hundred and fifty Bishops most deeâ—…ely beloued of God moued with the same respect gaue equall preeminences and priuiledges to the most holy throne of New Rome thinking it reasonable that that Cittie honoured with the inperiall seate and Senate and enioying equall preeminences and priuiledges with the elder Princely city should bee made great as the other in ecclesiasticall affaires being second after it Out of this decree Nilus in his booke of the Primacie of the Pope obserueth first that in the iudgement of these holy Bishoppes the Pope hath the primacie from the Fathers and not from the Apostles Secondly that he hath it in respect of the greatnesse of his Citty beeing the seate of the Empire and not by reason of his succeding Peter which vtterly ouerthroweth the Papacie And therefore this good man after all this outery raised against Mee as if I had mis-reported the Councell is forced to deny the authority of the Canon as not beeing confirmed by the Bishoppe of Rome See then how hee demeaneth himselfe First hee vrgeth that the Bishoppe of new Rome or Constantinople could not haue equall priuiledges with the Bishoppe of old Rome because hee was to bee second and next after him where-unto Nilus answereth that if that reason did hold the Bishoppe of Alexandria could not bee equall to the Bishoppe of Constantinople in power and authority nor the Bishoppe of Antioch vnto him one of these beeing after another in order and honour and thence concludeth that if the Bishop of Antioch might bee equall to the Bishoppe of Alexandria and the Bishoppe of Alexandria to the Bishoppe of Constantinople notwithstanding the placing of one of them in order and honour before another the Bishoppe of Constantinople might bee equall to the Bishoppe of Rome though he were the second and next after him Soe that that which this Treatiser alleageth that by the confession of these Fathers the Bishoppe of Rome had alwaies the Primacy is to no purpose seeing the Primacie hee had was but of order and honour which may bee yeelded to one amongst them that are equall in power in which sense the Bishoppes assembled in the Councell of Chalcedon in their relation to Pope Leo call him their head Secondly hee confesseth it may be gathered out of some Greeke copies of this Councell hee might haue sayd out of all copies Greeke and Latine that by this Canon the Bishop of new Rome or Constantinople was soe made second after the Bishop of old Rome that equall priuiledges were giuen vnto him But addeth that they were onely concerning iurisdiction to ordaine certaine Metropolitans of the East Church as the Bishoppe of Rome had the like in the West which euasion serueth not the turne For the Bishops in this Councell supposing that the reason why the Fathers gaue the preeminence to the Bishoppe of Rome was the greatnesse of the Citty doe the â—…pon giue him the like preheminences Soe that they meant to make him equall generally and not in some particular thinges onely Besides if they did equall him in iurisdiction and in the ordination and confirmation of Metropolitans it will follow that they equalled him simply and absolutely For in the power of Order there canne bee noe inequalitie betweene him and any other Bishoppe Thirdly hee sayth That the Canon of this Councellis of no authority and the like he must say of the Canons of the first Councell of Constantinople and that in Trulto and so beare downe all that standeth in his way as Binnius and other of his fellowes do who feare not to charge these holy Fathers and Bishops with lying falshood But how doth he proue that this Canon is of no authority Surely the onely reason he bringeth is because the Legates of the Bishop of Rome resisted against it and the Bishop himselfe neuer confirmed it which is of litle force For we know that notwithstanding the long continued resistance of the Romane Bishops yet in the end they were forced to giue way to this constitution So that after the time of Iustinian the Emperour who confirmed the same they neuer made any word about it any more The words of Iustinians confirmation are these Wee ordaine according to the decrees of the holy Councels that the most holy Bishop of olde Rome shall be the first of all Bishops And the most blessed Bishop of Constantinople which is new Rome shall haue the second place after
the See of olde Rome and shall be before all the rest in order and honour Neither did Martian the Emperour as the Treatiser most vntruely avoucheth voide the Canons of these Councels which in this sort were confirmed afterwards by Iustinian Wherefore seeing it is evident that almost the whole Christian world in diuerse Generall Councels feared not to make another Bishop the Bishop of Romes Peere I hope the Reader will easily discerne that I haue not passed the bounds of modestie nor fallen into any vnseemely scoffing and railing vaine as the Treatiser chargeth Mâ—… when I taxe the Antichristian and Lucifer-like pride of the Romish Antichrist who not-with-standing the contradiction of the greatest part of the Christian world sought to subject all the members of Christ to himselfe and pronounced them all to be in the state of damnation that bowe not downe before him as Vice-God and supreame commaunder on earth But it seemeth hee had a great desire at the least to seeme to say some-thing against Me. For other-wise hee would not so shamelesly be-lye Me as he doth when hee saith I would deriue the beginning of the Popes superioritie from Phocas whereas in the place cited by him I haue no such thing but the contrary For I affirme that in the first Councell of Constantinople the Bishop of that citty was set in degree of honour next vnto the Bishop of Rome and before the other two Patriarches of Alexandria and Antioche thereby confessing that the Bishop of Rome had the first place at that time Which when the Constantinopolitan Bishop sought to haue Phocas so concluded matters betweene these two Bishops that the Bishop of Rome should haue the first and chief place in the church of GOD and Constantinople the second so that the praeeminence chieftie which the Pope claimeth lawfully was ancient and not deriued from Phocas howsoeuer he might and happily did enlarge and extend it farther then was fit giuing him a kinde of vniversalitie of jurisdiction §. 11. FRom the Primacie of the Bishop of Rome the Treatiser passeth to the infallibilitie of his judgment and affirmeth that his Decrees though he define without a Generall Councell are that firme Rocke and sure ground vpon which our Faith is to bee builded and that a man may well admit his definitions as a ground of supernaturall Faith and prudently builde an act of such supernaturall Faith vpon it And yet in the same place confesseth it is not yet authentically defined that the Pope in this sort cannot erre Which thing also Bellarmine and Stapleton acknowledge professing expressely that it is no matter of faith to beleeue that the Pope cannot erre if hee define without a Generall Councell In which passages there is as I suppose a most grosse contradiction For how can the infallibilitie of the Popes iudgement bee to them a Rocke to builde an act of supernaturall Faith vpon who neither know nor beleeue that his iudgement is infallible but thinke so onely Can a man certainely and vndoubtedly builde his perswasion of any thing vpon his sayings whome hee neither knoweth nor beleeueth to bee free from errour Wherefore for the cleering of this poynt First the Treatiser saith Though the Church haue not authentically defined that the Pope cannot erre yet the Scriptures and other arguments brought to proue it are so plaine and there are so many that thinke so that a man may very well admitte his definitions to be a ground of fayth Whence it will follow that a man may build his fayth vpon the Scriptures and other arguments and reasons without expecting the resolution of the Church for the vnderstanding of the one and discerning of the force and validity of the other â— Whereas else-where hee professeth that without the resolution of the present Church the letter of holy Scripture and the workes of Antiquity yeeld no certaine and diuine argument Secondly hee contradicteth himselfe and denieth the supposed infallibility of the Popes judgement to bee the Rocke on which the Church is builded and maketh that rocke to be onely the consenting iudgement of the Pope other Bishoppes in a Generall Councell contrary to the opinion of almost all learned pious men as he telleth vs himselfe who thinke that that infallibility of judgment and assurance of trueth vpon which our faith is to be builded is not partly in the Pope and partly in other Bishops but altogether in the Pope Thus seeking to avoyd one contradiction hee runneth into many The second Part. §. 1. HAuing surueyed the first part of the Treatise and examined such objections as the Authour of it maketh against Mee I will passe to the second wherein first he goeth about to proue out of that which I haue that Bishops assembled in Generall Councels may interpret the Scriptures and by their authority suppresse them that gaine-say such interpretations as they consent vpon subjecting them to excommunication censures of like nature that according to the prouidence and wisdome of Almighty God Generall Councels should not be subject to errour in such matters for that otherwise men might be forced according to Gods ordinance to obey Generall Councels erring propounding false Doctrine Which is a very silly kinde of reasoning for in the very same sort a man may proue that particular Bishops are free from erring in their proceedings that they can impose prescribe nothing vniustly vnder paine of excommunication for that otherwise men might bee forced and that according to Gods ordinance to obey such Bishops erring in their proceedings and commanding vnjust things whereas there is no question to bee made but that they haue power to excommunicate who may abuse the same and that sometimes it is a thing most pleasing vnto God by refusing to obey them that haue power to excommunicate but abuse the same to run into the vttermost extremities of their censures yea S. Augustine pronounceth that the patient enduring of wrongs in this kinde shall be highly rewarded by almighty God Secondly in the same chapter labouring to proue that Protestants contemne reject the Fathers to that purpose wresting some sayings of Doctour Humfry and others he objecteth that I haply may seem to some one that doth not throughly looke into my words to approue the authority of the ancient Fathers as farre forth as any Catholicke but sayth that in truth I doe not For proofe whereof hee setteth downe what I haue written touching this poynt Namely first that wee must receiue as true whatsoeuer hath beene deliuered by all the Saintes with one consent which haue left their opinion and judgement in writing it not being possible that they should all haue written of any thing but that which was generally receiued in their times and toucheth the very life of Christian fayth Secondly whatsoeuer the most famous haue constantly and vniformely deliuered as a matter of fayth no man contradicting them though many bee found to haue sayd nothing of
I may be as good as my word iustifie it against the proudest Papist liuing that none of the differences between Melancthon Illyricus except about certaine ceremonies were reall Wherefore the Treatiser leaueth Illyricus commeth to Hosiander whom hee will proue to haue holden a priuate opinion touching iustification because Calvine in his Institutions spendeth almost one whole Chapter in the confutation of his conceipt touching the same Article which in the very entrance hee calleth hee wores not what monster of essentiall righteousnesse Conradus Schlusselburge placeth him and his followers in the Catalogue of heretickes But this obiection will easily be answered For it is not to be doubted but Caluine the rest iustly disliked that which they apprehended to bee his opinion and condemned it as a monster For they conceiued that heâ—… made Iustification to bee nothing else but a transfusion of the essentiall righteousnesse of Christ into vs and a mixture and confusion of it with vs. But Smidelinus sheweth at large that he neuer had any such conceipt but that distinguishing three kinds of righteousnesse in Christ whereof we are made partakers to wit actiue passiue and essentiall in that hee was the Sonne of God he taught that justification is not onely an acceptation and receiuing of vs to fauour vpon the imputation of the actiue and passiue righteousnesse of Christ but an admission of vs also to the right of the participation of the diuine nature as Peter speaketh and of that essentiall righteousnesse that was in him in that he was the sonne of God that so receiuing of his fulnesse we may be filled with all diuine qualities and graces The reason why hee thus vrged the implying of the communication of the essentiall righteousnesse of Christ in our iustification was not as the same Smidelinus telleth vs for that he thought iustification to consist wholy therein or for that hee meant to exclude the imputation of the merit and satisfaction of Christ from being causes of our iustification or receiuing fauour with God but because he saw many mistooke and abused the doctrine of free justification by the imputation of Christs righteousnesse to the carelesse neglecting of al righteousnesse in themselues therefore he taught there is no remission of sin no receiuing of any man to fauour by vertue of the imputation of the actiue and passiue righteousnes of Christ vnlesse out of dislike of sin desire of grace to auoid it he be admitted to the right of the participation of that essentiall righteousnes that dwelt in him in all fulnesse that so it may dwell in him that is to be iustified also in some degree sort Neither is this construction of Hosianders words made by Smidelinus onely but by sundry other For Stapleton sayth the followers of Brentius defended the opinion of Hosiander whereas yet neither Brentius nor any of his followers euer dreamed of any transfusion of the essentiall righteousnesse of Christ into vs any mixture or confusion of it with vs or any other communication of it to vs or in any other sort then is before expressed So that the Treatiser had no reason to write as he doth that my proceedings are rare and singular and that I feare not to affirme things apparantly false and confessed vntrue by all my brethren much lesse to say that euery man may easily perceiue by these my proceedinges that I had a good opinion of mine owne wit and learning For what haue I done that sauoureth of pride or wherein haue I bewrayed such vanitie as he speaketh of Is it a matter of pride not to condemne hastily other opinions to make the fairest and best construction of other mens words especially such as are of the same profession with vs Wherefore if the Treatiser be able to say any thing against this my defence of Illyricus and Hosiander I will heare him otherwise let him not tell me of my schoole distinctions for I am not ashamed of them Neither doe I vse them as the Romane sophisters do to auoid the euidence of that truth that is too mighty for them to encounter but to cleare that which the Romanistes desire to haue wrapped vp in perplexed and intricate disputes But it seemeth the Treatiser will not accept of this condition and therefore hee passeth from the supposed diuisions of our Churches and differences of our Diuines proceedeth to shew their inconstancie instancing particularly in Luther And wheras in my former books I haue answered the obiections of Papistes touching this supposed inconstancie he goeth about to refute that my answer which consisteth of two parts Whereof the first is that in sundry points of greatest moment as of the power of nature of free-will iustification the difference of the Law and the Gospell faith and workes Christian liberty and the like Luther was euer constant The second that it is not so strange as our Aduersaries would make it that Luther proceeded by degrees in discerning sundry Popish errours seeing Augustine and their Angelicall Doctour altered their iudgment in diuerse things and vpon better consideration disliked what they had formerly approued The former part of this my answere he pronounceth to containe a manifest vntruth for that amongst other things mentioned by me Luther was not euer constant of one iudgment touching freewil hee endeauoureth to proue because in the defence of his Articles condemned by the Pope he saith Freewil is a forged or fained thing a title without a substance it being in no mans power to think any thing good or euill but all things falling out of absolute necessity and else-where hee saith men of their owne proper strength haue free-will to doe or not to doe externall workes so that they may attaine to secular and ciuill honesty But M. Treatiser should know that between these sayings of Luther there is no contradiction in truth and in deed but in his fancy onely for in the former place two things are deliuered by Luther The first that no man by nature hath power to turne himselfe to God without grace or so much as to prepare himself to the receipt of grace which in the latter place speaking onely of externall workes and ciuill or secular honesty hee doth not contradict The second that though men in outward things and things that are below haue a kinde of freedome of will and choyce and power to doe or not to doe them yet not so free but that they are subject to the providence disposition of Almighty God bowing bending turning them whither he pleaseth and hauing them in such sort in his hand as that they can will nothing vnlesse he permit them which no way preiudiceth that liberty which else-where he attributeth to the will For the will of man is sayd to be free because it doth nothing but on liking and choice and because God permitting it hath power to doe what pleaseth it best and not because it is free and not subiect to diuine disposition and
Faith and Religion His meaning it seemeth is that all Protestantes acknowledging Puritanes to bee of one Church with them are Puritanes and therefore hee would haue all to know that howsoeuer hee make shew of blaming Puritanes onely or principally yet in truth hee equally condemneth all and that therefore hee doth but dissemble or say hee knoweth not what But do all these Protestant writers named by him teach that there is no materiall difference betweene protestants and Puritanes Surely no. For touching my selfe I neuer wrote any such thing neither in the place cited by him nor any where else so that hee beginneth with a manifest and shamelesse vntruth But I doe the more willingly pardon him this fault for that it seemeth hee doth not consider what he writeth For in the title of his booke hee professeth that hee will take the proofes of his Catholique religion and Recusancy onely from the writings of such Protestant Diuines as haue beene published since the raigne of his Maiesty ouer this kingdome for that as hee sayth they often change their opinions at the least at the comming of euery new Prince And yet page 30. hee citeth the Bishop of Winchesters booke written many yeares agoe and Doctor Couell his booke in defence of Master Hooker as often as any other which yet was written in her late Maiesties time But what if I had written that howsoeuer there are some materiall differences betweene Protestants and Puritanes as it pleaseth him to stile them yet not so essentiall or substantiall but that they may bee of one Church faith and religion What absurdity would haue followed Would it be consequent from hence as he inferreth that it is not materiall with vs whether men be of a true or false religion of any or none at all Haue there not beene nay are there not greater differences betwixt Papists who yet will be angry if they be not esteemed to be all of one Church faith and religion Did not Pope Iohn the two and twentith thinke that the soules of the just shall not see God till the generall resurrection and did not the French King that then was with the whole vniuersity of Paris condemne the same opinion as hereticall with sound of trumpet Did not Ambrosius Catharinus teach that a man may be certaine with the certainty of faith that he is in state of grace and Soto the contrary Did not Pighius Contarenus and the Authors of the booke called Antididagma Coloniense defend imputatiue justice and other Papists reiect it Did not some amongst them teach the merit of condignity doe not others moued with a sober moderation thinke there is no such merit Doe not some thinke the Pope is vniuersall Bishop others that he is not but prime Bishop onely Doe not some teach that all Bishops receiue their jurisdiction from the Pope others the contrary Doe not some thinke the Pope may papally erre and others that he cannot Doe not some of them thinke he is temporall Lord of all the world and others the contrary Doe not so 〈◊〉 them thinke he may depose Princes and others that he may not is there not a very materiall point of difference amongst Papists touching predestination Let them shew vs if they can so many and materiall differences betweene Protestants and Puritanes And yet these were all of one Church in their judgement yea Pope Stephen who reuersed all the actes of Formosus his predecessour pronounced the ordinations of all those to bee voide whom he had ordained brought his dead body out of the graue into the Councell stript it out of the Papall vesture put vpon it a lay habit and cutting off two fingers of his right hand cast it into Tyber Pope Iohn his successour who called a Councell of 74. Bishops to confirme the ordinations of Formosus the Arch-bishoppes of France and the King being present at Rauenna burned the acts of the Synod which Stephen had called to condemne Formosus and Sergius who againe condemned Formosus and pronounced all his ordinations to be voide reuersing the acts of Pope Iohn and his Synode were all of one Church of one communion faith and religion Nay which is more strange when there were three Anti-popes sitting in diuerse places accursing one another with all their Adherents and that for many yeares yet still they were of one Church of one communion faith and religion Yet may not wee inferre from hence against them as they doe against vs that it is not materiall with them whether men be of a true or false religion of any or none at all Surely they are more priuiledged then other men for some of them may take the Oath of Allegeance disclaime the Popes power and right to intermeddle with Princes states and other refuse it and yet still be Catholicke brethren in the communion of the same Church Yea a Priest may like of this Oath and perswade others to take it and afterwards goe ouer the Sea and alter his iudgement and returning choose rather to suffer death then to take it againe yet no man must take notice of it But if a Minister subscribe and afterwards vpon ill aduice refuse to doe the same againe then all the courses of our Religion are such that by no outward signes communion profession protestation or subscription a man can tell who is of what religion amongst vs. But let vs passe from the Epistle to the booke it selfe CHAP. I. IN the first chapter which is of the supreame and most preeminent authority of the true church and how necessary it is to finde it follow the directions and rest in the iudgement of it he hath these words Doctor Field a late Protestant writer beginneth his Dedicatory Epistle to the Lord Archbishop of Canterburie before his Bookes of the church in this manner There is no part of heauenly doctrine more necessary in these dayes of so many intricate controversies of Religion then diligently to search out which amongst all the societies of men in the world is that blessed company of holy ones that household of Faith that spouse of Christ and church of the liuing God which is the pillar and ground of truth that so we may embrace her communion follow her directions and rest in her iudgement And after some other things cited out of others he addeth the ioyning with the true church is so needfull a thing that D. Field concludeth There is no saluation remission of sinnes or hope of eternall life out of the church To what purpose this allegation serueth I cannot conceiue for there is nothing in any of these speeches of mine that euer any protestant doubted of or from which any thing may bee concluded against vs or for the papists The church of God saith Master Caluine is named the Mother of the Faithfull neither is there any entrance into eternall life vnlesse shee conceiue vs in her wombe vnlesse shee
professe the contrary euen in the place cited by him This allegatiō of my words might haue beene spared seeing there was neuer any man doubted of the truth of that for proofe whereof he alledgeth them Wherefore let vs come to his second part wherein he endeauoureth to shew that generall Councels make for the Romish Religion this hee proueth because when Protestants deny the authority of generall Councels they haue no excuse but because they were called by the Popes authority So saith he Doctor Field Doctor Sutcliffe M. Willet and the rest Surely it is a most shamelesse kinde of dealing to charge men with that they neuer thought spake nor wrote yet so doth the honest man vse me in this place and therefore citeth neither booke nor page as he is wont to doe but sendeth his Reader to seeke that which he shall neuer finde For I neuer denyed the authority of any councell onely because it was called by the Pope as he vntruely reporteth so that it is vaine and foolish that he vrgeth that in so doing I contradict my selfe in that the rules assigned by me to know true traditions as the testimony of the Pastors of Apostolicall Churches from the beginning the practise and consent of holy Fathers doe warrant vs that that priviledge euer belonged to the See of Rome that without the consent thereof no councell could be called none confirmed For the clearing of this point touching the calling and confirming of councels we must note that they are of diuerse sorts some Diocesan holden by each Bishop in his Diocese some Provinciall consisting of the Bishops of a Province called together or at least moderated by the Metropolitane some Patriarchicall consisting of the Metropolitans and Bishops of diuerse Provinces vnder one Patriarch and some Oecumenicall consisting of all the Bishops in the world The canon he speaketh of must bee vnderstood of Oecumenicall councels onely wherein things concerning the faith and state of the whole Catholique church are handled for otherwise each Bishop might hold a Diocesan Synode each Metropolitane a Provinciall and each Patriarch a Patriarchicall without requiring the consent of the Bishop of Rome wherefore let vs see how and in what sort the consent of the Bishop of Rome was required to the holding of generall councels and to what purpose his confirmation of their decrees was sought Cardinall Cusanus handleth this matter excellently well shewing at large that the meaning of the Canon of the primitiue church was not to giue any such absolutenesse to the Bishop of Rome that his negatiue should dash all or his affirmatiue establish what hee pleaseth without the consent and approbation of the rest but that being one of the prime Patriarches and chiefe Bishops of the Christian church nothing should be concluded without seeking requiring and expecting his presence ioynt deliberation and consent which is not to be marvailed at seeing no generall councell can be of force wherein the meanest Bishoppe in the world is purposely neglected or refused offering himselfe to such deliberation As no chapter act can bee good wherein any one hauing voyce in chapter is neglected or excluded though when he is present or at least called not excluded nor neglected things may passe though he say no euen so in like sort in a generall councell though no such assembly be lawfull and of force wherein the Bishop of Rome is neglected or his ioynt deliberation and consent not sought yet a man is rather to adhere to the Fathers in such a meeting consenting together then to the person of the Pope contradicting or refusing to assent to that they resolue on as not only those Papists do think that teach the Pope may erre is inferior to general coūcels in the power of iurisdiction but they also that are opposite to them in iudgement as Andradius sheweth out of Cardinall Turrecremata who professeth that a man should rather assent to the consenting voice of the Fathers assembled in a generall councell then to the person of the pope dissenting from them or refusing to confirme and ratifie that they agree vpon that in the power of discretiue iudgement the councell is greater then the pope Besides this we are to obserue that when the canon provided no Councell should bee holden and be of force without the Bishop of Rome the meaning of it was not precisely in respect of his person but of him and the Metropolitanes and Bishops of the West provinces subiect to him as Patriarch of the West who were a great and principall part of the Christian Church For the manner was when a generall councell was to be holden in the East as all the generall Councels that haue beene were that the Bishop of Rome as Patriarch of the West should impart the occasions of such a generall meeting in Councell to the seuerall Metropolitanes subiect vnto him and they calling their Bishops together in their seuerall provinces should send whom they thought fit to the same generall meeting with such directions and resolutions as it pleased them and as Cardinall Bellarmine hath rightly obserued it was enough if many Bishops of the East meeting and comming together some few came out of the West yea sometimes though none at all came as appeareth by the second generall Councell holden at Constantinople if the resolutions which the Bishoppe of Rome sent as agreed on in the seuerall Synodes subiect to him as Patriarch and the determinations of the Bishops and Fathers assembled concurred and consented And this doubtlesse was the reason why the confirmation of the Bishop of Rome with his Westerne Synodes was required for the ratifying of Generall Councels because neuer being present in person and very few or none of his Bishoppes being at those Councels it was necessary they should confirme ratifie what the rest in councell debated discussed and resolued on by testifying their assent For what could passe currantly as an act of a generall councell whereunto a great and principall part of the Christian World consented not So that it was not the Popes personall confirmation that was desired in auncient times as if all the Bishops in the World might erre the certainty of truth rested in him only as some men now teach but the consent of those Bishops that were subiect to him as Patriarch of the West as well as his owne who being absent were to ratifie strengthen and confirme the determinations of them that were present not as being more infallible in iudgement then they but by a ioynt concurrence and agreement This is all that can be proued out of the consent of Fathers Historians and practise of former times and therefore this man doth but trifle in this as in the rest Wherefore to conclude this matter touching Councels I dare vndertake to proue that Papists deny and reiect more councels then any of our Diuines doe Touching the right of calling Councels and in what cases they may bee called without the consent of
not perfectly extinguished that though while they remaine in the state of iustification they ◅n not with full consent to the excluding of grace and subiecting of themselues to the guilt of condemnation yet there are many sinfull euils they runne into which subiect them to Gods displeasure for which hee will not faile to iudge them if they iudge not themselues For the weakening abolishing of these sinfull euils and the averting of that displeasure wherewith God is displeased with men for them the iustified doe pray vnto God which is to aske forgiuenesse of sins as in the Lords prayer is meant For the petition is vnderstood of the sinnes of the seruants of God and such as are in state of grace as Augustine teacheth Thus then the iustified man knoweth that the dominion of his sins is taken away and that the guilt of condemnation wherevnto they subiect such as are vnder the dominion of them is already remoued and therefore he doth not desire nor aske forgiuenesse of sinnes in this sort but the inherence of sin he acknowledgeth in himselfe notwithstanding his iustification which still subiecteth him to Gods displeasure punishments accompanying the same These things hee desireth to be remoued and in this sense asketh forgiuenesse of sins If it be replyed that the remission of the sins of the iustified is full and perfect and that therefore they that know themselues to be iustified cannot aske remission which they know they haue perfectly already Wee answere that the remission of the sins of the iustified is full and perfect not for that they are already freed actually from the inherence of sinne and the displeasure of God disliking it but because they haue full title vnto right in that mercy of God which as it hath already deliuered them from the dominion condemnation of sin so it will in the end wholly free them from the inherence of it and the displeasure of God disliking it His next allegation is more friuolous than the former The Anabaptists saith he do most certainly assuredly perswade themselues that they are accepted of God therefore they haue true faith according to the doctrine of the Protestants who define faith to be the assurance of the mercifull goodnes of God yet do the Protestants deny thē to be iustified vnlesse they forsake their errors and so by consequēt do say they haue true faith yet are not iustified which is to affirme that they are iust not iust To this we answere that there is as great difference betweene true confidence and assurance which only is to be named faith and that which is found in heretickes as betweene the ioy and gladnesse that is fantasticall and is found in men dreaming and that which is true and in men waking That quietnesse of minde either proceedeth from senselesse stupidity in men hauing cauterized consciences though there be iust cause of fearefull apprehensions or frō the not finding or hauing any matter of condemning remorse euen as some men are touched with no greefe nor afflicted with any smart or paine though no part be sound or well in them because they are in a dead senseles stupidity and others feele not paine because they are perfectly well It is not therefore every assured confidence that is faith but true confidence Neither is it to be doubted but that heretickes doe oftentimes confidently perswade themselues they please God and thinke they embrace true piety as men dreaming doe perswade themseles they inioy and possesse all things though they possesse nothing But as men waking knowe the things they apprehend are soe indeede as they apprehend them and not in fancie only as men sleeping are deluded so true Christians know the perswasion they haue of Gods goodnesse towards them groweth from due iust consideration not from deceivable fancie and imagination only as in heritickes it doth This point is excellently cleared by Alexander of Hales the first and greatest of all the Schoole-men whose reasons and proofes that true Christians may be assured they are in state of grace and acceptation with God Bellarmine cannot answere Thus wee haue seene the supposed absurd positions wherewith the Iesuite chargeth all Protestants in generall In the next place hee produceth such as are proper to the Lutherans and in the last place such as are peculiar to the Caluinistes For thus it pleaseth him to tearme vs by these names of faction and diuision whereas it is Antichrists pride that hath made all the breaches in the Christian world and would haue layd all wast if God had not preserued a remnant The errour wherewith he chargeth the Lutherans is that children when they are baptised haue faith hope and loue Is this an errour are they iustified sanctified and made the temple of the holy Ghost when they are baptized and haue they neither faith hope nor loue doth not iustification imply all these in it But they haue not the act of faith noe more they haue of reason haue they not therefore the faculty of reason This then is that which these men ◅each whom it pleaseth these Antichristian sectaries odiously to name Luthe◅ans namely that children when they are adopted and made the sonnes of God when they are iustified and sanctified are filled with the habites or po◅ntiall habilities of these vertues and that they haue the beginning roote and seede of faith hope and loue For the farther clearing of this obiection reade Kemnisius in his Examen of the Tridentine Councell The errour of the Caluinists touching absolute necessity and that God is the author of sinne is but the imagination of the Romanists as I haue already sufficiently shewed For Caluin and wee all detest both these absurdities CHAP. 45. Of the Paradoxes and grosse absurdities of Romish Religion THus then the Paradoxes and grosse absurdities which this Cardinall aduersarie of Gods true religion imputeth vnto vs are but the fancies of his owne idle braine But if wee should enter into the examination of the seuerall parts of their profession it were not harde really to convince them of the most senselesse follies that euer the world was acquainted with But because it would be tedious and vnseasonable in this generall controversie of the Church to enter into the particular handling of things more fitly reserved to their owne proper places I will onely touch some few things that may seeme to concerne the whole frame and fabricke of their Religion They all hold at this day that the infallibility of the Popes judgement is the rocke on which the Church is builded and that this is the difference betweene a Catholicke and an heretique that though both beleeue many divine and supernaturall truths yet they build not themselues vpon the same grounds of perswasion For the Catholicke builds himselfe vpon the sure ground of the infallibility of the Churches chiefe Pastours judgement but the Hereticke vpon other things yeelding him satisfaction concerning the trueth of that