two Bishops in a Church at a time from whence Schism of course must arise 29. Neither is this the onely aggravation of the present Schism that Bishops of an indisputable Title without being either previously heard or judicially sentenced are deprived but that the Primate of all England is one of those Bishops The Canon is alike against multiplying of Metropolitans in a Province as of multiplying Bishops in a Diocess Statutum est it is ordained saith Gratian referring us to the twelfth Canon of the Council of Chalcedon quod duo Metropolitani in una eadem provincia Dist 101. esse non dâ—bent that two Metropolitans ought not to be had in one and the same Province and therefore when Augustin the Monk by Authority from the Pope would have thrust himself upon the British Bishops they would not submit saith Bede to any of his orders neque illum pro Hist l. 2. c. 2. Edit Lovaâ— 1566. Archiepiscopo habiturum nor receive him for their Archbishop as having an Archbishop of their own And Huntington relating the mâ—tter as cited by Baziere adds that neither the Britains nor the Irish would communicate Hist l. 36. Lib. Brit. Chur. with him or with the English that were governed by him more than with Pagans giving this for their reason because he did seem to deal uncanonically by them in constraining them to take him for their Archbishop when they had an Archbishop before And if we do but consider the high standing the Primate hath in the Church and the reason of his being set there which was as Spalato speaks ut unitas de Repub. Ec. lib. 3. cap. 2. concordia inter Episcopos servaretur that Vnity and Concord might be preserved among the several Bishops of the Province it must every way be held as reasonable to have but one Primate in a Province as one Bishop in a Church And hence it is that the Apostolical Canon enjoyns the Can. Apost 34. Conc. Aut. Can. 9. the Bishops of every Nation or Province 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to have always a regard to him who is the chief among them and to esteem him as their head yea and so far to be headed by him as to come under his Precedency by virtue whereof the whole Province becomes but one Church the Deacons and Presbyters acting under their Bishop the Bishops under their Metropolitans and the Metropolitans under their Primate or Patriarch And it is the breaking this Chain and the going off from this Subordination that begets a Schism but never proves it so fatal as when the Primate suffers in it This holy Synod say the Constantinoplitan Fathers perceiving 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Temp. Apost Can. 13. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that the Devil is busie through the fury of Schismaticks to divide the Church doth for the prevention of the same determine that if any Presbyter or Deacon suspecting or knowing his Bishop to be faulty shall presume to separate himself from him and forbear naming of him in the Church's Prayers as it is customary to do 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 before a Synodical Hearing Examination and perfect Judgment shall be had in the case he for so doing be deposed 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and for the future deprived of all their Sacerdotal Honour and the like They decree to those Can. 14. Bishops that upon the same account 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 separate themselves from the Communion of their Metropolitan And the Can. 15. like again to those Metropolitanes that shall separate themselves from their Primate or Patriarch thereby making a Schism and breaking the Unity of the Church 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 though guilty of no other fault than such separation 30. The old Rule was that nothing be done in the Church without him meaning as it is a Provincial Church And Balsamon in his Commentaries upon the aforesaid Apostolical Canon which commands the Bishops Can. 34. of every Nation to observe the Primate 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and to transact nothing in the Church of the more weighty affairs thereof without him tells us wherein these weighty affairs consist and that they are 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 such as relate to Ecclesiastical Constitution 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and cannot otherwise be transacted by the respective Bishops in their respective Diocesses And whence it is that one of the chief Branches of his superintended Authority arises and that is to call and convene all the Bishops of the Province into a Synod in order to have all such matters debated stated and provided for that all Irregularities may be amended and all Schisms prevented Now we are told by the Council of Antioch that that and that only is a true and right Synod 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 wherein the Metropolitan Can. 16. presides and that it is not lawfull for any 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Can. 20. of their own heads or by a separate Authority from him to call Synods Insomuch that if the present Metropolitan be usurped upon and not rightfully deposed all Synods that are and shall be called and all matters that are or shall be debated therein and determined thereby must necessarily fall to the ground and have no Virtue or Solidity in them I am sensible a Man may bear up the Name and hold the State of a Bishop answerably habited with his Pastoral Staff in his hand and a Mitre upon his head he may call a Synod and have his Bishops and Clergy about him bestowing his Prebendaries to some his Archdeaconries to others nay reditus census capones he may receive Rents Services Capons c. whilst his Regency holds All this did the Episcopus Puerorum as he is described and deciphered by Mr. Gregory of Christ-Church Oper. Posth p. 117. Edit 1665. and yet he was but a mock Bishop and so he died without any farther Character of a Bishop upon him notwithstanding he be buried in the Pontifical Ornaments of a Bishop and had a Dragon under his feet with a Motto as great and as proud as ever Bishop usurped conculcabis Leonem Draconem 31. Another of his unquestionable Prerogatives and Priviledges as he is Primate of the Province an Office according to Petrus de Marca of Lib. 6. c. 1. Part 3. Apostolical Tradition and coaeval with Christianity it self is that no Bishop ought to be ordained or taken for a Bishop within the Province that is not ordained by him or with his approbation and consent Insomuch that if a thousand Bishops be made without his consent and much more against it they can be no Bishops And this is evident from the first Nicene Council 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Can. 6. if any one be made a Bishop without the allowance and good liking of the Metropolitan this great Council decrees 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that such an one shall be no Bishop at all and so it was decreed in the first Council at Antioch
despising the Church shall presume to perform the Offices of the Church * * In the Orig. It is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 instead of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as the Printed Canons have it the officiating Presbyter not being thereunto licensed by the Bishop let him be Anathema 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The 5. Canon of the Synod of Antioch If any Presbyter or Deacon despising his own Bishop hath withdrawn himself from the Church and set up an Altar in a private Meeting and shall disobey the admonitions of the Bishop and will not be persuaded by him nor submit to him exhorting of him again and again he is absolutely to be deposed and ought no longer to be treated as a curable person neither as one who can retain his honour and if he shall persevere to make tumults and disturbances in the Church he is to be turned over as a seditious person to the Secular Power 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The 15 Canon of the same Synod If any Bishop accused of any Crimes be condemned by all the Bishops of the Province who have all with one accord denounced the same sentence against him such an one by no means ought to be judged again by others but the concordant sentence of the Provincial Bishops ought to remain firm 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The 10 Canon of the Synod of Carthage If any Presbyter being puffed up against his own Bishop shall make a Schism let him be Anathema 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The 13 Canon of the Synod of Constantinople called the first and second Synod The Devil having sown the seeds of Heretical Tares in the Church of Christ seeing them cut up by the roots by the Sword of the Spirit hath betaken himself to a new way and method viz. to divide the Church by the madness of Schismaticks but the holy Synod being also willing to obviate this Stratagem of his hath decreed as followeth If any Presbyter or Deacon under pretence of accusing his own Bishop of any Crimes shall presume to withdraw from his Communion and not to mention his Name in the holy Prayers of the Liturgy according to the Tradition of the Church * * 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 before Synodical Judgment and Trial such a one shall be deposed and deprived of all Sacerdotal honour For he that is in the Order of a Priest and shall usurp the power of judging bâ—longing to the Metropolitanes and as much as in him lies shall condemn his own Father and Bishop before sentence pronounced by them he is worthy neither of the honour nor appellation of a Presbyter and those who are followers of such an one if they are in Holy Orders even any of them shall be degraded from his proper honour but if they are Monks or Laicks they shall by all means be excommunicated from the Church untill abhorring the conversation of Schismaticks they shall return unto their proper Bishop 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The 14 Canon of the same Synod If any Bishop pretending an accusation against his Metropolitane ††〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 before Synodical Judgment shall withdraw himself from Communion with him and shall not recite his Name according to custom in Divine Service the holy Synod hath decreed that such an one shall be deposed if after private admonition he shall depart from his own Metropolitane and make a Schism For it behoves every one to know his own proper bounds and that neither the Presbyter depise his own proper Bishop nor the Bishop his own Metropolitane 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The 15 Canon of the same Synod These decrees concerning Presbyters Bishops and Metropolitanes agree also to Patriarchs So that if any Bishop or Metropolitane shall presume to depart from Communion with his own Patriarch and shall not mention his Name in the Divine Offices as is decreed and ordered but shall make a separation * * 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 before Synodical conviction and final condemnation of him the holy Synod hath decreed that such an one be absolutely deposed from all Sacred Orders if he offend in this kind after private admonition And these things are decreed and enacted concerning those who under pretence of any accusations revolt from their own Superiors and make a Schism ††〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 In the Prints only and break the Vnity of the Church But if any shall separate themselves from Communion with their Superior for any Heresie condemn'd by the holy Synods and Fathers he publickly Preaching the same Heresie to the People and teaching it bare-fac'd in the Church Such shall not be only free from Canonical censure for separating themselves from Communion with the Bishop so called ‡ ‡ 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 before Synodical condemnation but shall be thought worthy of the honour that is due to the Orthâ—dox because they have not condemned a Bishop but a false Bishop and a false Teacher and have not divided the Unity of the Church by Schism but have studiously endeavoured to preserve the Church from Schism and Divisions From this Collection of Canons which speaks of no Deposition or Deprivation of Bishops but what is Synodical an unprejudiced Reader will easily perceive that the Author of the Manuscript of which this Collection is the latter part ought to be understood of the former not of Secular but of Ecclesiastical Deprivations by Synods abusing their lawfull power and unjustly depriving and deposing Bishops whom they ought not to have deprived and deposed And that the Author ought to be so understood is farther evident from his citing the Synods explication of their Canons as well as the Canons themselves with respect to which they tell us that notwithstanding what is said in those Canons the People and Priests may separate from their Bishops or the Bishops from their Metropolitane or the Metropolitane from the Patriarch before Synodical condemnation if they openly and publickly Preach any Heresie which is already condemned by the holy Synods which strongly implies that he thought that they were not upon any other account to forsake them unless they were Synodically condemned and that the unjust deposions he speaks of in his Treatise are to be understood of unjust depositions by Synods i. e. of unjust depositions by the proper and competent but erring Judge As great as the decay of ancient Discipline was in the Greek Church in the Age when Master B. thinks this Manuscript was written Synodical depositions though by most degenerate and corrupt Synods was still the common practice of it and Emperors still deprived Bishops by the old way of Synodical Authority as is plain from the deposition of Arsenius Patriarch of Constantinople by the procurement of the usurping Michael Paleologus of which I will here give a short account out of Nicephorus Gregoras because it caused the greatest Schism that ever happened at Constantinople but that upon the deposition of John Chrysostom and also
si non poterat deponi tolerandus intra rete if Cacilian had been a Traditor or done any thing else against the Canons meritting a Deposition he ought to have been deposed before another Bishop had been put upon him but if he were guilty of no such thing he ought to have continued sole Bishop there non judices consederunt non Sacerdotes de more There were no Bishops as usual it was to hear and judge the matter no Accusers no Witnesses no Libel whereby his crime might have been made out but instead thereof furor dolus tumultus qui regnant in falsitate nothing but Fury Fraud Tumult which ever rule in a bad cause Now-a-days saith Pope Innocent in reference to St. Chrysostom 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Sozom. lib. 8. cap. 26. The innocent Bishops in a very preposterous manner are thrust out of their Churches for others to be put into their places having neither their crimes heard nor they so much as summoned to desend themselves A proceeding so novel and unjust that we never knew it practised by our fore-Fathers but rather forbad 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for as much as he cannot be a Bishop that is put over another unless he be deposed by due process of Law And so it was determined by the Fathers in the Constantinopolitan Council We hold it necessary say they for the avoiding of contentions and In Temp. Soph. Can. 16. tumults in the Church to decree 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 That none be made a Bishop in a Church where another presides and retains his Honour for though he may be every way faulty and justly deserve deposing 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 yet after all his Cause ought first to be heard and his Crimes throughly examined and if upon that he be deposed 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 then may another though he do survive be ordained and placed in his Chair But to pass Judgment against any without citing or hearing the Party accused is a procedure saith St. Chrysostom 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 without Pallad de vita Chrys p. 22. Precedent and contrary to Law and Canon never practised either by the Heathens or Barbarians in their Judicatories 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 nay the very Scythians and Sarmatans the most uncivilized Nations of all never were so unjust cruel or unreasonable 24. Now the Judgment of these matters in the more early and purer days of Christianity was altogether referred to Episcopal Audience 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Apos 74. We hold it necessary saith the Canon That Bishops should be conven'd and judg'd by Bishops and so the Carthaginian Fathers decree 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Blast Synt. tit Δ in Can. 12. ex Edit Bevereg That the faults of Bishops be discussed and determined by a Synod of Bishops or if a full Synod cannot be had in time and it appear necessary that the Criminal be try'd 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that then his Cause be referred to twelve of them at least And so far did this Canon prevail that because John Bishop of Amathus was deposed by fewer his Deposition was declared as Balsamon relates 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to be invalid and void And for this end that matters arising and Controversies between Party and In praed Can. ex Edit Bevereg Party depending might timely be decided it was farther provided by the first Canons 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 That yearly Can. Apos 37. Con. Nic. 5. Ant. 20. twice in a year such Episcopal Synods should be held afterwards 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by reason of the great fatigue expences and dangers they were put unto by their journeys that they should be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 but once in the year Can. 6 8 7 6. 25 Neither did the Emperors by becoming Christians alter the case for either they left the Judgment wholly to the Bishops as was formerly done or if they interposed it was ever in conjunction with them taking their advice and oftentimes their directions from them Thus when the Donatists petitioned Constantine the Great to grant them an hearing of the case between them and the Caecilianists he quia non est ausus de causa Episcopi judicare because he did not think it proper for him to sit Aug. Ep. 166. Judge over Bishops in Episcopal matters sent them to Melchiades Bishop of Rome and to three other Bishops from France Rheticius Marinus and Maternus to be judged by them But no ways satisfied with their judgment they desire a farther hearing whereupon he omnino cupienâ— tantam impudentiam cohibere willing to restrain and suppress so great an Aâ—â— Ep. 162. insolency dedit aliud Arelatense Concilium granted them another Synod at Arles adding that it was not for him ut de judicio Episcoporum qui Romae sederunt ipse judicaret to judge of the judgment passed by the Bishops at Rome But not yet contented because condemned as before they appeal to Constantine himself ut causam Constantinus audiret that he would be pleased to take the judgment upon himself and in some measure he did but as Bishop Parker observes it was not to judge but to Rel. and Royal. Part 1 p. 299. expose the Schismaticks or to suffer them to expose themselves For that he would not meddle with the business at all till he had the discovery of Ignatius his forgery in his pocket to confound them with And St. Austin by his charitable wish seems to insinuate something like it Vtinam ut eis ipse cessit ut de causa Episcopos judicaret would to God saith he he had accepted their Appeal and had judged the matter after the Bishops Ep. 162. à sanctis Episcopis veniam petiturus though he had excused himself afterwards for his so doing An undertaking that he ever declined and protested against quoties à me improbissimis additionibus suis sunt condigna responsione oppressi How often saith he have they been repulsed by me Coâ—st Ep. Cath. in t gest purgationis vid. Optat. Which if they would but have considered they would never have desired me to be their Judge I say and I say the truth Sacerdotum judicium ita debet haberi the judgment of Bishops ought as much to be regarded and followed as if Christ himself had sat in judgment with them neither was this the opinion of Constantine only but of all his Christian Successors I shall instance in Valentinian only though the same may be verified of Constantius Valentinian the younger Theodosius Gratian Arcadius Honorius Justinian Martian c. he was saith Sozomen a very Orthodox Hist lib. c. 20. and devout Man 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and would not suffer any thing to be innovated nor imposed upon the Bishops that was any ways contradictory to the Laws and Canons of the Church One of his Edicts as it is given us by St. Ambrose runs thus In causa fidei vel Ecclesiastici