vs see how they prooue that they say That they who ordained our Ministers in the beginning of the alteration of Religion had no power so to doe thus they prooue No Bishop may be esteemed and taken as lawfully ordained vnlesse he be ordained of three Bishops at the least and they such as haue beene ordained in like sort and so ascending till we come to the first whom the Apostles did constitute by their Apostolike authority receiued immediatly from Christ the Sonne of God whom the Father sent into the world But the Pastors and Bishops of the reformed Churches had no such ordination therefore they wanted that calling which should make them lawfull Bishops and Pastours It is true that the auncient Canons regularly admit no ordination as lawfull wherein three Bishops at the least doe not concurre But Bellarmine and his fellowes doe not thinke this number of Bishops imposing hands to bee absolutely and essentially necessary For they confesse that by dispensation growing out of due and just consideration of the present occasions and state of things one Bishop alone may ordain assisted with Abbots which are but Presbyters and no Bishops nay which by the course of their profession and originall of their order are lesse interessed in the government of the Church than the meanest Presbyter hauing care of soules Monachus plangentis non docentis officium habet A Monke is a mourner hee is no teacher in the Church of GOD. The Romanists thinking therefore that in some cases the ordination which is made by one Bishoppe alone assisted with Presbyters is lawfull and good cannot generally except against the ordination of the Bishops and Pastours of all reformed Churches For in England Denmarke and some other places they which had beene Bishoppes in the former corrupt state of the Church did ordaine Bishops and Ministers though perhaps precisely three did not alwayes concurre in euery particular ordination But they will say whatsoeuer may bee thought of these places wherein Bishoppes did ordaine yet in many other none but Presbyters did impose handes all which ordinations are clearely voyde and so by consequent many of the pretended reformed Churches as namely those of France and others haue no ministerie at all The next thing therefore to be examined is whether the power of ordination bee so essentially annexed to the order of Bishops that none but Bishops may in any case ordaine For the clearing whereof we must obserue that the whole Ecclesiasticall power is aptly divided into the power of order and jurisdiction Ordo est rerum parium dispariumque vnicuique sua loca tribuens congrua dispositio that is Order is an apt disposing of things whereof some are greater and some lesser some better and some meaner sorting them accordingly into their seuerall ranckes and places First therefore order doth signifie that mutuall reference or relation that things sorted into their seuerall ranckes and places haue betweene themselues Secondly that standing which each thing obtaineth in that it is better or worse greater or lesser then another and so accordingly sorted and placed aboue or below other in the orderly disposition of things The power of holy or Ecclesiasticall order is nothing else but that power which is specially giuen to men sanctified and set apart from others to performe certaine sacred supernaturall and eminent actions which others of another rancke may not at all or not ordinarily meddle with As to preach the word administer the Sacraments and the like The next kind of Ecclesiasticall power is that of Iurisdiction For the more distinct and full vnderstanding whereof wee must note that three things are implyed in the calling of Ecclesiasticall Ministers First an election choyce or designement of persons fitte for so high and excellent imployment Secondly the consecrating of them and giuing them power and authority to intermeddle with things pertaining to the seruice of God to performe eminent actes of gracious efficacie and admirable force tending to the procuring of the eternall good of the sonnes of men and to yeeld vnto them whome Christ hath redeemed with his most precious blood all the comfortable meanes assurances and helpes that may set forward their eternall saluation Thirdly the assigning and diuiding out to each man thus sanctified to so excellent a worke that portion of Gods people which hee is to take care of who must be directed by him in things that pertaine to the hope of eternall saluation This particular assignation giueth to them that had only the power of order before the power of Iurisdiction also ouer the persons of men Thus then it is necessary that the people of God bee sorted into seuerall portions and the sheepe of Christ diuided into seuerall flockes for the more orderly guiding of them yeelding to them the meanes assurances and helpes that may set them forward in the way of eternall life and that seuerall men bee seuerally and specially assigned to take the care and ouersight of seuerall flocks and portions of Gods people The Apostles of Christ and their successours when they planted the Churches so diuided the people of God conuerted by their minsterie into particular Churches that each Citty and the places neere adioyning did make but one Church Now because the vnity and peace of each particular Chuch of God and flock of his sheepe dependeth on the vnity of the Pastour and yet the necessities of the many duties that are to bee performed in Churches of so large extent require more Ecclesiasticall Ministers then one therefore though there bee many Presbyters that is many fatherly guides of one Church yet there is one amongst the rest that is specially Pastor of the place who for distinction sake is named a Bishop to whom an eminent and peerelesse power is giuen for the avoiding of Schismes and factions and the râ—…st are but his assistants and coadiutours and named by the generali name of Presbyters So that in the performance of the acts of Ecclesiasticall Ministry when he is present and will do them himselfe they must giue place and in his absence or when being present hee needeth assistance they may doe nothing without his consent and liking Yea so farre for orders sake is he preferred before the rest that some things are specially reserued to him onely as the ordaining of such as should assist him in the worke of his ministerie the reconciling of Penitents confirmation of such as were baptised by imposition of hands dedication of Churches and such like These being the diuerse sorts and kinds of Ecclesiasticall power it will easily appeare to all them that enter into the due consideration thereof that the power of Ecclesiasticall or sacred order that is the power and authority to intâ—…ddle with things pertaining to the seruice of God and to performe emiâ—…t actes of gracious efficacie tending to the procuring of the eternall good of thâ—… sonnâ—…s of men is equall and the same in all those whom we call Presbyters that is fatherly guides of Gods Church and people that only for orders sake and the preseruation of peace there is a limitation of the vse and exercise of the same Heerevnto agree all the best learned amongst the Romanists themselues freely confessing that that wherein a Bishop excelleth a Presbyter is â—…t a distinct higher order or power of order but a kind of dignity office 〈◊〉 imployment onely Which they proue because a Presbyter ordained
force of this decree first we must marke that it was made after the diuision and parting of the Bishops of the East from them of the West and so by the Westerne Bishops alone as it may seeme respectiuely to the Prouinces of the West ouer which the Bishop of Rome was Patriarch Secondly that the Africans tooke no notice of it and yet there were Bishops of Africa at the Councell so that in likely-hood this decree was not confirmed by subsequent acceptation execution and practise Thirdly that the Councell of Chalcedon which was absolutely Oecumenicall and wholly approued so of greater authority then this that was not an approued Generall Councell but in a sort onely decreeth the contrary and referreth the finall determination of all causes of Bishops to the Primate or Patriarch which the Emperour also confirmeth and will haue no man to haue power to contradict the end which the Primate or Patriarch shall make Lastly that this canon maketh rather against them that alleage it then any way for them For by this Canon all matters must bee ended at home or in the next Province to that wherein they arise and the Pope may not call matters to Rome there to bee heard but is onely permitted in some cases to send a Presbyter hauing his authoritie and to put him in commission with the Bishops of the Province that so hee and they jointly may reexamine things formerly judged If this Canon were now obserued I thinke there would not bee so great exception taken to the court of Rome in respect of appeales as now there is Quousque saith Saint Bernard to Eugenius non evigilat consideratio tua ad tantam appellationum confusionem Ambitio in Ecclesia per te regnare molitur Praeter ius fas praeter morem ordinem fiunt repertum ad remedium reperitur ad mortem Antidotum versum est in venenum murmur loquor querimoniam communem Ecclesiarum Truncari se clamant 〈◊〉 Vel nullae vel paucae admodum sunt quae plagam istam aut non doleant aut non timeant that is How long will it bee before thou awake to consider this so great confusion of appeales Ambition striueth and seeketh busily to raigne in the Church by thy meanes They are entred prosecuted and admitted beside right law besides custome and order That which was first found out for a remedie is now found to bee vnto death I doe but expresse the murmuring and common complaint of the Churches They cry out that they are mangled and dismembred and there are few or none found that doe not either already grieue at this plague or feare the smart of this euill Yet would not the Africans admit the canon of the councell of Sardica but willed the Pope to send no more any of his clearkes to dispatch causes at any mans suite For that this was to bring in the smoakie puffe of worldly pride into the Church and in very earnest sort besought him not to bee too easie in admitting any appeales brought from them If within a little time after the Bishops of Rome prevailed so farre as that Bishops were suffered to appeale out of Africa to Rome which was the thing claimed by Zozimus but denied vnto him by the Africans it is not to bee marvailed at seeing they still enlarged the extent of their power till they had ouerthrowne the jurisdiction of all the Bishops of the West and alienated the affections of all other from them So that there was a schisme in the church the other foure Patriarches dividing themselues from the Bishop of Rome and at their parting vsing these or the like words as it is reported Thy greatnesse wee know thy covetousnesse wee cannot satisfie thy encroaching we can no longer endure liue by thy selfe But here we shall find a great contrariety of judgment among the greatest Rabbies of the Romish church touching these Africans that thus withstood the claimes of Zozimus Bonifacius and Celestinus For Harding against Bishop Iewels challenge in the Article of the supremacie saith that the whole church of Africa withdrew it selfe from the church of Rome by reason of this difference through the enticement of Aurelius Archbishop of Carthage and continued in schisme by the space of an hundred yeares during which time by Gods punishment they were brought into miserable captiuity by the barbarous cruell Vandales who were Arrians till at length when it pleased Almighty God of his goodnesse to haue pitty of his people of that Province hee sent them Belisarius that valiant Captaine that vanquished and destroyed the Vandales and Eulabius that godly Bishop of Carthage that brought home the Africanes againe and joyned those divided members to the whole Body of the Catholique church A publique instrument containing their submission being made and offered to Bonifacius the second by Eulabius in the name of the whole Province Which was joyfully receiued and whereof Bonifacius writeth to Eulabius Bishop of Thessalonica desiring him to giue thankes to God for the same But Bellarmine proueth at large that notwithstanding this resistance and opposition of the Africans against the claimes of Zozimus Bonifacius and Caelestinus yet there neuer was any apparant breach betweene the Romanes and them And for the Epistle of Bonifacius the second to Eulabius wherein he saith very harshly as Cusanus well noteth that Aurelius sometimes Bishop of the church of Carthage with his colleagues beganne to waxe proude and insolent against the church of Rome by the instigation of the divell in the dayes of his predecessours so condemning Augustine Alipius and two hundreth twenty fiue Bishops more as set on by the diuell to resist the claimes of his predecessors and the Epistle of Eulabius Bishop of Carthage wherein hee condemneth his predecessours and submitteth himselfe to the Bishop of Rome he professeth he greatly suspecteth they are forged counterfeit First because that which is contayned in them cannot stand with that which is most certainely proued known to be true touching the amity and friendship that was betweene the Romane Church and Augustine Eugenius Fulgentius and other Africans after the opposition about the matters of appeales Secondly for that there was no such Eulabius Bishop of Alexandria at that time to whom Bonifacius might write as it appeareth by the Chronologie of Nicephorus of Constantinople Thirdly for that Bonifacius in his Epistle doth signifie that hee wrote in the time of Iustinus the Emperour whereas Iustinus was dead before Bonifacius was Bishop as appeareth by all histories So that we may see what grosse forgeries there haue beene in former times deuised onely to abuse the simple and make the world beleeue that all Bishops and churches subiected themselues vnto the church of Rome And how shamelesse a defender of Antichristian tyrannie Doctour Harding was that could not escape this censure of Bellarmine the Iesuite But it is lâ—…sse to be maruailed at that he should so harden
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
satisfied in any thing vnder God And so generally and absolutely denie that the Image of God can bee lost or blotted out These make a difference betweene the Image of God thus restrained to the largnesse and and admirable perfection of the naturall faculties of the soule and the similitude or likenesse of God which appeareth in the qualities and vertues of it making him that possesseth them partaker of the diuine nature which they confesse to be lost Now this similitude is all one with the Image of God in the second consideration set down by Aquinas and therefore in this matter Caluin erreth not but writeth that which is consonant vnto the truth Touching the second part of this imputation it is true that Origen erred thinking hell to be nothing else but horror of conscience But he that looketh in the place in Caluin cited by the Iesuite shall see that he saith no such thing but the cleane contrary So that the Reader shall finde Bellarnne to be constant and stil like himselfe adding one calumniation to another CHAP. 25. Of the heresie of the Peputians making women Priests THe fourth Heresie imputed vnto vs by our adversaries is that of the Peputians who gaue women authoritie to intermeddle with the sacred ministerie of the Church That we doe so likewise they indeavour to proue by misreporting the words of Luther There are two things therefore which Luther saith in the place alleadged by them First that in absolution and remission of sinnes in the supposed Sacrament of Penance a Bishop or ordinary Presbyter may doe as much as the Pope himselfe which Alphonsus à Castro writing against Heresies confesseth to bee true The second that when and where no Presbyter can be found to performe this office a Lay man yea or a woman in this case of necessitie may absolue which our adversaries neede not to thinke so strange seeing themselues giue power to women to baptise in case of necessitie which I thinke is as much a ministeriall acte as to absolue the penitent in such sort as absolution is giuen in the Church of Rome And yet they would thinke themselues wronged if from hence it should bee inferred that they make women Priests and Bishoppes But Bellarmine reporteth the wordes of Luther as if hee should say absolutely that a woman or childe hath as much power and authority from God in these things as any Presbyter or Bishop wherein hee is like himselfe Absolution in the Primitiue Church was the reconciling and restoring of penitents to the peace of the Church and to the Communion of the Sacraments from which during the time of their penitencie they were excluded This in reason none could doe but they to whom the dispensation of the Sacraments was committed and who had power to deny the Sacraments The Popish absolution is supposed to bee a Sacramentall acte Sacramentally taking away sinne and making the party absolued partaker of the remission of it This is a false and erronious conceite LVTHER thinketh it to bee a comfortable pronouncing and assuring of good to the humble penitent and sorrowfull sinner which though ordinarily and ex officio the Minister bee to doe yet may any man doe it with like effect when none of that ranke is or can be present Thus when the matter is well examined it is meerely nothing that Bellarmine can proue against Luther But that which hee addeth touching our late dread Soueraigne ELIZABETH of famous memorie that shee was reported and taken as chiefe Bishop within her dominions of England c. is more then a Cardinall lye and might beseeme the father of lyes better then any meaner professour of that facultie For the Kings and Queenes of England neither doe nor haue power to doe any ministeriall act or act of sacred order as to preach administer Sacraments and the like But that power and authority which we ascribe vnto them is that they may by their princely right take notice of matters of Religion and the exercise of it in their kingdomes That they may and in duty stand bound to see that the true Religion bee professed and God rightly worshipped That God hath giuen them the sword to punish all offenders against the first or second Table yea though they be Priests or Bishops That neither the persons nor the goods of Churchmen are exempted from their power That they holde their Crownes immediatly from God and not from the Romish Antichrist That it was the Lucifer-like pride of Antichrist which appeared in times past in the Popes wheē they shamed not to say that the Kings of England were their villanes vassalls and slaues Thus then the fourth supposed heresie we are charged with proueth to be nothing but a diuelish slander of this shamelesse Iesuite Wee say therefore to silence this slanderer that we all most constantly hold the contrary of that he imputeth vnto vs And that wee thinke there is no more daungerous or presumptuous wicked boldnesse then for any man not called set a part and sanctified therevnto to intermeddle with any part of the sacred ministerie of the Church CHAP 26. Of the supposed heresie of Proclus and the Messalians touching concupiscence in the regenerate THe fift heresie which hee endevoureth to fasten vpon vs is he saith the heresie of Proclus of whom Epiphanius maketh mention But what was the heresie of Proclus Let Bellarmine tell vs for our learning It was sayth he that sin doth alwayes continue and liue in the Regenerate for that concupiscence is truely and properly sin which is not taken away by Baptisme but only allaied stilled and brought as it were into a kind of rest and sleepe by force thereof and the working of faith In this Bellarmine sheweth his intolerable either ignorance or impudence or both For Epiphanius in the place cited by him refuteth the heresie of Origen who denied the resurrection of the bodies of men as thinking such bodily substances which we see are continually subject to alteration here in this world not capable of immortality And that God did put these bodies vpon Adam and Eue after their sin at that time when he is said to haue made them coates of skinnes This Epiphanius refuteth shewing that God who only hath immortality made man though out of the earth yet by the immediate touch of his owne hands that he breathed into him the breath of life for that he meant he should be immortall that man had flesh and blood and a true bodily substance before his fall as is prooued by that of Adam concerning Eue This is now flesh of my flesh and bone of my bone that there was no euill found in the World such as death is in the beginning that man voluntarily sinned against God and therevpon God brought in death that euen as the Schoolemaster vseth correction not for any delight he hath in it but for that thereby he intendeth to bring his Schollers to forsake their negligent and disordered courses and to
persaltum that neuer was consecrated or ordained Deacon may notwithstanding doe all those actes that pertaine to the Deacons order because the higher order doth alwaies imply in it the lower and inferiour in an eminent and excellent sort But a Bishoppe ordained per saltum that neuer had the ordination of a Presbyter can neither consecrate and administer the sacrament of the Lords body nor ordaine a Presbyter himselfe being none nor doe any acte peculiarly pertaining to Presbyters Whereby it is most euident that that wherein a Bishoppe excelleth a Presbyter is not a distinct power of order but an eminencie and dignity onely specially yeelded to one aboue all the rest of the same ranke for order sake and to preserue the vnitie and peace of the Church Hence it followeth that many things which in some cases Presbyters may lawfully doe are peculiarly reserued vnto Bishops as Hierome noteth Potius ad honorem Sacerdotij quam ad legis necessitatem Rather for the honour of their Ministery then the necessity of any lawe And therefore wee reade that Presbyters in some places and at some times did impose hands and confirme such as were baptized which when Gregory Bishop of Rome would wholly haue forbidden there was soe great exception taken to him for it that he left it free againe And who knoweth not that all Presbyters in cases of necessity may absolue reconcile Penitents a thing in ordinary course appropriated vnto Bishops and why not by the same reason ordaine Presbyters Deacons in cases of like necessity For seing the cause why they are forbidden to do these acts is because to Bishops ordinarily the care of all churches is committed and to them in all reason the ordination of such as must serue in the Church pertaineth that haue the chiefe care of the Church and haue Churches wherein to imploy them which only Bishops haue as long as they retaine their standing and not Presbyters being but assistants to bishops in their Churches If they become enmies to God and true religion in case of such necessity as the care and gouerment of the Church is deuolued to the Presbyters remaining Catholique being of a better spirit so the duty of ordaining such as are to assist or succeede them in the work of the Ministrie pertaines to them likewise For if the power of order and authority to intermedle in things pertaining to Gods seruice bee the same in all Presbyters and that they be limited in the execution of it onely for order sake so that in case of necessity euery of thē may baptise confirme them whom they haue baptized absolue reconcile Penitents doe all those other acts which regularly are appropriated vnto the Bishop alone there is no reason to be giuen but that in case of necessity wherein all Bishops were extinguished by death or being fallen into heresie should refuse to ordaine any to serue God in his true worship but that Presbyters as they may do all other acts whatsoeuer speciall challenge Bishoppes in ordinary course make vnto them might do this also Who then dare condemn all those worthy Ministers of God that were ordained by Presbyters in sundry Churches of the world at such times as Bishops in those parts where they liued opposed themselues against the truth of God and persecuted such as professed it Surely the best learned in the Church of Rome in former times durst not pronounce all ordinations of this nature to bee void For not onely Armachanus a very learned and worthy Bishop but as it appeareth by Alexander of Hales many learned men in his time and before were of opinion that in some cases and at some times Presbyters may giue orders and that their ordinations are of force though to do so not being vrged by extreame necessity cannot be excused from ouer great boldnesse and presumption Neither should it seeme so strange to our aduersaries that the power of ordination should at some times be yeelded vnto Presbyters seeing their Chorepiscopi Suffragans or Titular Bishops that liue in the Diocesse and Churches of other Bishops and are no Bishops according to the old course of discipline do dayly in the Romish Church both confirme Children and giue orders All that may be alledged out of the Fathers for proofe of the contrary may be reduced to two heads For first whereas they make all such ordinations voide as are made by Presbyters it is to bee vnderstood according to the strictnesse of the Canons in vse in their time and not absolutely in the nature of the thing which appeares in that they likewise make all ordinations sine titulo to be voide All ordinations of Bishops ordained by fewer then three Bishops with the Metropolitane all ordinations of Presbyters by Bishoppes out of their owne Churches without speciall leaue whereas I am well assured the Romanists will not pronounce any of these to be voide though the parties so doing are not excusable from all fault Secondly their sayings are to bee vnderstood regularly not without exception of some speciall cases that may fall out Thus then we see that obiection which our adnersaries tooke to bee vnanswerable is abundantly answered out of the grounds of their owne Schoole-men the opinion of many singularly learned amongst them and their owne daily practise in that Chorepiscopi or Suffragans as they call them being not Bishops but onely Presbyters whatsoeuer they pretend and forbidden by all old Canons to meddle in ordination yet doe daily with good allowance of the Romane Church ordaine Presbyters and Deacons confirme with imposition of hands those that are baptized and doe all other Episcopall acts whiles their great Bishops Lord it like princes in all temporall ease and worldly bravery The next thing they object against vs is that our first Ministers what authority soeuer they had that ordained them yet had no lawfull ordination because they were not ordained placed in voide places but intruded into Churches that had lawfull Bishops at the time of those pretended ordinations and consequently did not succeede but encroach vpon other mens right To this wee answere that the Church is left voyde either by the death resignation depriuation or the peoples desertion and forsaking of him that did precede In some places our first Bishoppes and Pastours found the Churches voydby death in some by voluntarie relinquishment in some by depriuation and in some by desertion in that the people or at least that part of the
and when Paul and Barnabas were companions and their trauels were equall yet Paul is noted to haue beene the chiefe speaker so that though both were worthy of double honour yet Paul especially Some interprete the words in this sort There were some that remained in some certaine places for the guiding and gouerning of such as were already wonne by the preaching of the Gospell other that travayled with great labour and paines from place to place to spread the knowledge of God into all parts and to preach Christ crucified to such as had neuer heard of him before Both these were worthy of double honour but the later that builded not vpon another mans foundation more especially then the former that did but keepe that which others had gotten and governe those that others had gained Thus wee see that these words may haue a very good and true sense without pressing of them to confirme the late conceipt of some few men touching Lay-elders Which construction wee haue no reason to admitte seeing the circumstances of the place doe not enforce it nor no Ecclesiasticall writer did euer so interprete the words before our age So that to conclude this point the name of Presbyter one place onely in the first of Timothy and the fifth excepted where it is a name of age and not of office in the writings of the Apostles doth euer note out vnto vs a Minister of the Word and Sacraments The reason why the Apostles chose this word rather then the name of Sacerdos which wee commonly translate Priest though the English word Priest come of Presbyter was lest there should be a confusion of the Ministers of the old Testament who were to offer sacrifices vnto God figuring the comming of Christ with those of the new and to shew that none should be appointed Ministers but men of ripe age and confirmed judgment But some man will say the auncient Writers mention Seniours without whose advice nothing was done an Ecclesiasticall Senate and a Presbytery or company of Presbyters which gouerned the Church together with the Bishop therefore the matter is not so cleare against Lay-elders as some would make it Wee deny not but that there were Presbyters in the primitiue Church constituted and ordained by the Apostles and their Successours not onely to preach and minister Sacraments but to gouerne direct and guide the people of God also but that they were Lay-men it cannot bee proued The Bishops in the greater Churches and in the Citties had a great number of Clergy-men seruing in diuers sorts as it appeareth by Cyprian and the whole Ecclesiasticall history but out of the whole Clergie at large the Presbytery or company of Presbyters was called forth to the weightiest deliberations and to assist the Bishop for the preseruation of discipline Admonitos nos instructos sciatis dignatione diuinâ sayth Cyprian vt Numidicus Presbyter ascribatur Presbyterorum Carthaginensium numero nobiscum sedeat in Clero that is Know yee that we haue beene admonished and directed by God himselfe to choose Numidicus and to make him one of the company of the Presbyters of Carthage that he may sit together with vs as a Clergy-man by which words it appeareth that there was in Cyprians time a Colledge of Presbyters or Elders in the Church of Carthage which sate together with the Bishop for the hearing and determining of the causes of the Church but that these Elders were Clergie-men and not such Lay-seniours as some would haue Cornelius Bishop of Rome writing to Cyprian se totum Presbyterium contraxisse that is that hee drew together the whole Presbytery or companie of Presbyters for the reconciling of certaine Schismatiques to the Church and that hee called together fiue Bishops also and by common consent ended the whole matter Of this Senate and company of Presbyters Tertullian speaketh in his Apologie when he sayth with vs the most approued Seniours do sit as praesidents to censure offendours and to exercise discipline And of these likewise is it that Hierome sayth writing vpon Esay We also in the Church haue our Senate the company of Presbyters And vpon Titus The Churches were gouerned by the common aduice and councell of the Presbyters For to put it out of doubt that he meaneth not Lay-elders hee sayth in the same place Idem est ergo Presbyter qui Episcopus that is Therefore a Presbyter and Bishop are all one There is onely one place in Ambrose that hath some shew of proofe for Lay-elders His words are The Iewish Synogogue and after the Church had Seniours or Elders without whose councell nothing was done in the Church which by what negligence it grew out I know not vnlesse it were by the sloth or pride of the Teachers whilest they alone would seeme to be something Here is mention of Elders without whose aduice nothing was done but it is not sayd they were Lay-men But some man perhaps will reply that the Elders which Ambrose speaketh of ceased before his time which cannot be vnderstood of Clergie-men therefore they were Lay-men To this we say that Ambrose doth not say the elders without whose councell nothing was to be done ceased before his time and were no more but that the aduising and consulting with them ceased whilest some would doe all themselues If it be sayd that they who thus assumed more then was fitte and excluded those Seniours without whose councell anciently nothing was done are not said to haue bin Bishops but Doctours and that therefore Ambrose speaketh not of Bishops excluding other Ministers of the Word and Sacraments from their consultations but of Clergie-men refusing the aduice of Lay Seniours we answere that Ambrose by the name of Teachers whose sloath or pride hee condemneth in this place might fitly vnderstand the Bishops seeing none but bishops haue power to preach in their owne right and other but only by permission from them Hereupon it is that Possidonius in the life of Augustine saith that Valerius Bishop of Hippo gaue S. Augustine his Presbyter leaue to preach because being a Grecian hee could not very well expresse himselfe in Latine In the Councell of Vase leaue is giuen by the Councell of Bishops to Presbyters for to preach But because this question touching Lay-elders is excellently handled by sundry of our Diuines I will not trouble the Reader with any farther discourse of this matter CHAP. 27. Of the distinction of the Power of Order and Iurisdiction and the preheminence of one amongst the Presbyters of each Church who is named a Bishop CEasing to speake of supposed Lay-elders which the Church of God knoweth not let vs come to the other that were appointed to teach and gouerne the people of GOD. Where first wee are to speake of the diuerse degrees of honour and preheminence found amongst them Secondly of their calling and appointing to the same And thirdly of their maintenance For the clearing of the former of these three
leaders which they follow the Bees haue their King the Cranes fly after one in order like an Alphabet of letters there is but one Emperour one Iudge of a Prouince Rome newly built could not endure two brethren to bee Kings together and therefore was dedicated in parricide Esau Iacob were at warre in the wombe of Rebeccah euery Church hath her owne Bishop her owne Arch-presbyter her owne chiefe Deacon and all Ecclesiasticall order consisteth herein that some doe rule and direct the rest In a shippe there is but one that directeth the helme In a house or family there is but one master And to conclude in an armie if it be neuer so great yet the direction of one Generall is expected Thus then all confesse that there alwayes hath beene and must be in each Church a preëminence of one aboue the rest of the Presbyters of the same but some thinke this preëminence should be onely a priority of order in sitting before in propounding things to be thought of and in moderating the whole action of deliberation and that all things should be swayed by voyces the President or Bishop hauing no voyce negatiue or affirmatiue but as the maior part shall direct him Likewise this presidencie they thinke should bee but annuall or to end with the action about which they meete whether it be to determine a doubt to ordaine a Minister or to doe any other such like thing This new conceipt wee cannot approue of because wee finde no patterne of any such Bishop or President in all antiquity But the Fathers describe vnto vs such a Bishop as hath eminent and peerelesse power without whose consent the Presbyters canne doe nothing Hence haue heresies sprung and schismes arisen sayth Cyprian because one Priest in the Church is not acknowledged for the time to bee Iudge in Christs steed to whom if all the brethren would be subiect according to the diuine directions no man would after the diuine iudgements after the suffrages of the people after the consent of other Bishops make himselfe Iudge not of the Bishop but of God Let the Presbyter saith Ignatius doe nothing without the Bishop The Bishop saith Hierome must haue an eminent and peerelesse power or else there will be as many schismes in the Church as there are Priests And Tertullian sheweth that without the Bishops leaue and consent no Presbyter may baptize minister any Sacrament or doe any ministeriall act So that it is most cleare and euident that the Bishop in each Church is aboue and before the rest of the Presbyters of the same not in order onely but in degree also and power of Iurisdiction Yet on the other side we make not the power of Bishops to be Princely as Bellarmine doth but Fatherly so that as the Presbyters may doe nothing without the Bishop so he may doe nothing in matters of greatest moment and consequence without their presence and aduice Wherevpon the Councell of Carthage voideth all sentences of Bishops which the presence of their Clergie confirmeth not and euen vnto this day they haue no power to alienate lands and to doe some such like things without the concurrence and consent of the Presbyters of the Cathedrall and great Church It is therefore most false that Bellarmine hath that Presbyters haue no power of Iurisdiction and the proofe he bringeth of this his assertion most weake when he alledgeth that all Councels both generall and prouinciall wherein Iurisdiction is most properly exercised were celebrated and holden by Bishops as if Presbyters had had nothing to doe therein For it is most cleare and euident that in all prouinciall Synodes Presbyters did sit giue voyce and subscribe as well as Bishops And howsoeuer in generall councels none did giue voyce but Bishops alone yet those Bishops that were present bringing the resolution and consent of the prouinciall Synodes of those Churches from whence they came in which Synodes Presbyters had their voyces they had a kinde of consent to the decrees of generall Councells also and nothing was passed in them without their concurrence Thus were things moderated in the primitiue ages of the Church and though Bishops had power ouer Presbyters yet was it so limited that there was nothing bitter or grieuous in it nothing but that which was full of sweetnesse and content For if any difference grew betweene the Bishop and his Presbyters the Presbyters might not iudge their Bishop whom they were to acknowledge to be a Iudge in Christs stead but an appeale lay vnto a prouinciall Synode to which not onely the Bishops of the prouinces were to come but a certaine number of Presbyters also out of each Church to sit as Iudges of such differences Neither might the Bishop of himselfe alone depriue degrade or put from their office and dignity the Presbyters and Deacons of his Church but if there were any matter concerning a Presbyter he was to joyne vnto him fiue other Bishops of the prouince and if any matter concerning a Deacon two other Bishops before he might proceede to giue sentence against Presbyter or Deacon The causes of other inferiour Cleargie-men the Bishop might heare and determine himselfe alone without the concurrence and presence of other Bishops but not without the concurrence of his owne Cleargie without whose presence no sentence of the Bishop was of force but judged and pronounced voide by the canon Touching the preheminence of Bishops aboue Presbyters there is some difference among the Schoole-Diuines For the best learned amongst them are of opinion that Bishops are not greater then Presbyters in the power of consecration or order but only in the exercise of it and in the power of Iurisdiction seeing Presbyters may preach and minister the greatest of all Sacraments by vertue of their consecration and order as well as Bishops Touching the power of consecration or order saith Durandus it is much doubted of among Diuines whether any be greater therein then an ordinarie Presbyter For Hierome seemeth to haue beene of opinion that the highest power of consecration or order is the power of a Priest or elder so that euery Priest in respect of his priestly power may minister all Sacraments confirme the baptized giue all orders all blessings and consecrations but that for the avoiding of the perill of schisme it was ordained that one should be chosen who should bee named a Bishop to whom the rest should obey and to whom it was reserued to giue orders and to doe some such other things as none but Bishops doe And afterwards hee saith that Hierome is clearely of this opinion not making the distinction of Bishops from Presbyters a meere humane invention or a thing not necessary as Aerius did but thinking that amongst them who are equall in the power of order and equally enabled to doe any sacred act the Apostles for the avoyding of schisme and confusion and the preseruation of vnity peace and order ordained that in each Church
one should beebefore and aboue the rest without whom the rest should do nothing and to whom some things should bee peculiarly reserued as the dedicating of Churches reconciling of penitents confirming of the baptized and the ordination of such as are to serue in the worke of the Ministerie Of which the three former were reserued to the Bishop alone Potiùs ad honorem Sacerdotii quam ad legis necessitatem that is rather to honour his priestly and Bishoply place then for that these things at all may not be done by any other And therefore wee reade that at some times and in some cases of necessitie Presbyters did reconcile penitents and by imposition of hands confirme the baptized But the ordaining of men to serue in the worke of the Ministerie is more properly reserued to them For seeing none are to be ordained at randome but to serue in some Church and none haue Churches but Bishops all other being but assistants to them in their Churches none may ordaine but they onely vnlesse it bee in cases of extreme necessitie as when all Bishops are extinguished by death or fallen into heresie obstinately refuse to ordaine men to preach the Gospell of Christ sincerely And then as the care and charge of the Church is devolued to the Presbyters remaining Catholique so likewise the ordaining of men to assist them and succeede them in the worke of the Ministery But hereof I haue spoken at large elsewhere Wherefore to conclude this point we see that the best learned amongst the Schoolemen are of opinion that Bishops are no greater then presbyters in the power of consecration or order but onely in the exercise of it and in the power of Iurisdiction with whom Stapleton seemeth to agree saying expressely that Quoad ordinem Sacerdotalem ea quae sunt ordinis that is In respect of Sacerdotall order and the things that pertaine to order they are equall and that therefore in all administration of Sacraments which depend of order they are all equall potestate though not exercitio that is in power though not in the execution of things to be done by vertue of that power whence it will follow that ordination being a kinde of Sacrament and so depending of the power of order in the judgement of our Adversaries might bee ministred by presbyters but that for the avoyding of such horrible confusions scandals and schismes as would follow vpon such promiscuous ordinations they are restrained by the decree of the Apostles and none permitted to doe any such thing except it bee in case of extreme necessitie but Bishops who haue the power of order in common together with presbyters but yet so as that they excell them in the execution of things to bee done by vertue of that power and in the power of Iurisdiction also But Bellarmine sayth the Catholique Church acknowledgeth and teacheth that the degree of Bishops is greater then that of Presbyters by Gods Law as well in the power of order as jurisdiction addeth that the Schoole-men vpon the fourth of the Sentences defend the same and Thomas in his Summe which yet elsewhere he confesseth to be vntrue This his opinion he endeauoureth to confirme because none but Bishoppes doe ordaine and if they doe their ordinations are judged voyde which they could not be by the Churches prohibition or decree of the Apostles if they were equall in the power of order to Bishops Hereunto I haue answered elsewhere shewing that ordinations at large or sine titulo and ordinations in another mans charge by bishops who by the character of their order may ordaine are likewise pronounced to be voide by the ancient canons and that therefore the prohibition of the Church and decree of the Apostles for the auoyding of confusion and schisme reseruing the honour of ordaining to Bishops onely vnlesse it were in the case of extreame necessitie might make the ordinations of all other to be void though equall with them in the power of order 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 HItherto wee haue seene how the Apostles diuiding the Churches in such sort that a whole citty and the places adioyning made but one Church set ouer the same one Bishop as Pastour of the place diuers Presbyters as assistants vnto him But in processe of time we shall find certaine portions of these greater flockes of Christ and Churches of God to haue beene deuided out and distinctly assigned to seuerall Presbyters that were to take the care and charge thereof yet with limitations and reseruations of sundry preeminences to the Bishop as remaining still Pastour of those smaller particular congregations though in a sort deuided and distinguished from that greater Church wherein especially hee made his abode Two words wee find in Antiquie vsed to expresse the flockes of Christ and Churches of God thus deuided for more conuenience and yet still depending on that care of one Pastour or Bishop 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is parish and Diocese The former contained the cittizens and all such borderers as dwelt neare and repaired to any chiefe church or citie though now we vse the word Parish to signifie another thing namely some particular smaller and lesse congregation diuided out from the Mother Church the later which is Diocese both then and now importeth the villages and Churches dispersed in diuers places vnder the regiment of one Bishop The first that began thus to deuide out smaller Churches and congregations out of those great ones first founded and to assigne Presbyters distinctly to take care of thē was Euaristus Bishop of Rome whose example others did follow in al parts of the world These parts of Gods Church thus deuided assigned to the care of seuerall Presbyters were called Tituli that is Titles because God was intituled vnto them did specially claime them as the lot of his inheritance These Titles or smaller Churches and congregations were of diuerse sorts for some were more principall wherein Baptisme might be administred and the like things performed which were thereupon named Baptismall Churches and in respect of meaner in time growing out of them and depending of them Mother Churches also Other there were not hauing so great liberties To such of these Churches as he pleased the Bishop himselfe went and preached one day in one of them and another in another carrying great cōpanies with him drawing great multitudes to him which solemne assēblies meetings were named stations from their standing at prayers vsed in those times and were like the mighty armies of God keeping their watches and standing ready to encounter their furious and dangerous enemies In this sort Gregory the Great went and preached in such Churches in Rome as he thought fit whose Homilies and Sermons then preached are yet extant with the names of
passed their sentence before his comming and therevpon without delay before he had put off his cloake or shaken off the dust from his feete as the storie saith assembling the Bishops subiect to him in a Synode deposed Cyrill and Memnon Bishop of Ephesus who were chiefe agents in the proceedings against Nestorius Which deposition of Cyrill and Memnon was something hastily confirmed by the Emperour Theodosius The Synode assembled vnder Cyrill in like sort gaue sentence against Iohn and signified to Caelestinus Bishop of Rome what they had done shewing how vnaduisedly a few had presumed to condemne a great many and the Bishop of the third See Bishops of greater Sees to wit Cyrill of Alexandria and Caelestinus of Rome who was present in the Councell by his Vicegerent yet referring the finall proceeding to his consideration also hee and his Bishops being as much interessed in this businesse as they that were assembled In the end by mediation of many great and worthy ones Iohn and his Bishops that formerly were misconceited of Cyrill were satisfied and he sent the confession of his faith vnto him which he approued and so they were reconciled and made friends without any farther intermedling of the Bishop of Rome Here is nothing to be found that any way argueth or importeth an vniuersality of power in the Bishop of Rome but onely his concurrence with the other Patriarches as prime Patriarch in the waighty and important businesses of the Church and therefore the Fathers of that Councell writing to the Vicars of the Bishop of Rome and other Bishops sent by them to the Emperour to informe him concerning the differences that had arisen in the Councell and their proceedings charge and require them to doe nothing but according to their direction assuring them that if they doe otherwise they will neither ratifie that they doe nor admit them to their communion Thereby shewing that though the Romane Bishop be to concurre with the Fathers assembled in Councells yet he is not absolutely there to commaund but to follow the directions of the Maior part So that he hath a joynt interest with others but not an absolute Soueraignty ouer all others God therefore hauing ordained the high toppes of Patriarchicall dignities as it is in the eighth generall Councell that they might iointly concurre to vphold the state of the Church and the truth of Religion and that if one fell the rest might restore settle and reestablish things againe Which course Cyrill in his Epistle to Iohn of Antioche sheweth to haue beene holden by him For when he obserued that Nestorius his fellow Patriarch erred from the faith he first admonished him and threatned to reiect him from the communion of his Churches Secondly he acquainted the Bishop of Rome and the Westerne Bishops with the impieties and blasphemies of Nestorius who thereupon reiected him professing that they would admitte none to their communion but such as would condemne him Thirdly he wrote to Iuvenall Bishop of Hierusalem and to Iohn Bishop of Antioche shewing his owne dislike of Nestorius and farther professing that for his part hee was fearefull to be cast out of the communion of the Westerne Bishoppes as hee saw he must be if he accursed not Nestorius The next allegation is out of the Councell of Chalcedon where Theodorus and Ischiron Deacons in their bils of complaint exhibited to the Bishop of Rome as president and to the whole Councell call Leo the Bishop Most holy and most blessed vniuersall Arch-bishop and Patriarch of great Rome But they that presse the testimony of these two distressed Deacons flying to Leo for helpe should remember that in the Councell of Constantinople vnder Mennas not Deacons but Bishops they many are reported to haue written to the Bishop of Constantinople in this sort To our most holy Lord and most blessed Father of Fathers Iohn the Archbishop and vniuersall Patriarch and Mennas himselfe also is called Oecumenicall Patriarch Archbishop oftentimes in that Councell of Constantinople and yet I thinke they will not acknowledge the Bishops of Constantinople to haue had an vniuersall supreme commaunding power ouer the whole world Herevnto therefore they adde another proofe out of the relation of the Councell of Chalcedon made to Leo wherein the Fathers complaine of Dioscorus that as a wilde Boare he had violently entred into the vineyard of the Lord and wasted the same plucking vp the true fruitfull vines and planting vnfruitfull in their places and that hee stayed not there but reached out his hand against him to whom the keeping of the vineyard was committed by our Sauiour that is against the Bishop of Rome whom hee thought to excommunicate These words wee willingly confesse to bee words of iust complaint vpon great cause made by the Fathers of the Councell against Dioscorus but they proue not the thing in question For wee make no doubt but the keeping of the vineyard of the Lord of hosts was committed to the Bishop of Rome not onely as well as to other but in the first place as being in order and honour the chiefe But that he onely receiued from Christ this power authority charge and others from him not we onely but many learned amongst themselues doe denie as Bellarmine testifieth There are two other testimonies that may be alleaged out of the Councell of Chalcedon For Paschasinus one of the Vicegerents of the Bishop of Rome in that Councell calleth Rome the head of the churches and Leo the Bishop of Rome head of the vniuersall Church But they who presse so much the saying of the Popes Legate in fauour of the Pope must know that by head hee meant chiefe in order and honour and not one hauing all power originally in himselfe and absolutely commaunding ouer all as the Papists now teach For if he had meant so he had not been endured by the Fathers of that Councell who peremptorily pronounce that it was the greatnesse of the citie and not any power giuen by Christ or deriued to him from Peter that made the Bishop of Rome to be great that therefore they would equall the Bishop of Constantinople vnto him seeing Constantinople was now become equall vnto Rome The next testimony that they alleage is out of the Patriarchicall Councell of Constantinople vnder Mennas wherein the Fathers professe by Mennas their president that they follow and obey the Apostolique See that they communicate with them with whom that See communicateth and condemne all those it condemneth Surely this reason howsoeuer it may seeme to haue some force yet indeed hath none at all For there is no question but that the Bishop of Rome with his Westerne Synods all which according to the phrase of Antiquity are comprehended vnder the name of the Apostolique See was more to be esteemed then the particular Synode vnder Mennas and that therefore they might professe to follow it and obey the decrees of it and yet neither
Councell Therefore in the third place he addeth Ruffinus who in his preface before his translation of the recognitions of Clemens out of Greeke speaketh of an Epistle of Clement vnto Iames the brother of our Lord and sayth hee turned it out of Greeke into Latine and this sayth Bellarmime which we haue is vndoubtedly the same that he translated as may be proued out of Gennadius therefore the Epistle that is now carried about vnder the the name of Clemens is ancient and not late or counterfeit But that these Philistines may fall by their owne sword wee will oppose against Bellarmine the Cardinall Baronius the Cardinall against the Romane reader of controuersies the Romane Annalist For Baronius proueth out of Gennadius whom Bellarmine alleageth that these Epistles wee haue are not the same that Ruffinus translated because those hee translated had prefaces before them but this of Clement hath none Thus wee see the Epistles of the Popes of the first 300 yeares proue nothing because they are counterfeite Of them that were written by such as liued after the first 600 yeares I shall haue a fitte opportunity to speake in another place Wherefore let vs come to those of the middle ranke where Bellarmine produceth twelue auncient Bishoppes of Rome clayming that supreme absolute and commaunding authority ouer the whole Church which we deny The first of the twelue is Iulius the first in his Epistle extant in the second Apologie of Athanasius The witnesse is good and wee will not except against him but hee deposeth directly against them that produce him neither is there any better evidence to bee desired then this his Epistle For the Bishops of the East hauing written to Iulius and blamed him for communicating with such as they reiected going about to reuerse the acts which they had agreed on and hauing told him that the greatnesse of citties maketh not the power of Bishoppes to bee the greater and that therefore he should not takē on him to bee greater then other Bishops and to vndoe that which they had done because he was Bishop of a greater citty then any of them was hee answereth modestly in this his Epistle that hee hopeth hee offendeth not in desiring them to come to a Synode that therein their proceedings might bee examined seeing the Nicene Councell appointeth the acts of one Counecll to be reëxamined in another Secondly he sheweth that they whom they sent to informe him the Westerne Bishops touching their proceedings against Athanasius being conuicted by the Presbyters of Athanasius desired him to call a Councell of his owne Bishops and to write to Athanasius and those of Eusebius part to come vnto the same wherein they doubted not but they should proue the things they had alleaged Thirdly he sheweth that if without the sollicitation of their Agents he had desired them to meete in Councell it had beene no fault nor any way preiudiciall vnto them Fourthly that they who will not haue their proceedings reëxamined contemne Councels by admitting such as were condemned by the Nicene Councell that Athanasius was not condemned at Tyrus that he was not present when he was condemned at Mareotta and that many wrote in his defence to him the other Bishops of the West that yet he foreiudged nothing but would haue had matters defined in a Coūcel Fiftly he sheweth that though he wrote alone yet he reported not his own opinion only but of all the Bishops of Italy and the countries thereabout Lastly he telleth them that the Bishops they proceeded against being no vulgar persons but Bishops of such churches as the Apostles themselues planted before they had proceeded against them they should first haue written to him and his colleagues that from thence might haue beene defined what was right and good then which course what could be more fitting For Athanasius Bishop of the second See with other his adherents were not to be iudged by Bishops of an inferiour ranke especially in a matter concerning the faith without first consulting the Bishop of the first See his colleagues that from thence an action of such consequence might take beginning And therefore Iulius rightly telleth the Orientall Bishops that in their rash proceeding against so great worthy a Bishoppe as was Athanasius they had offended against the ordinations of Paul that the Fathers had not taught them so to doe and that he had receiued otherwise from blessed Peter Here is nothing found for any thing I see that any way proueth the Pope to haue a supreme commaunding power ouer the whole church but rather the contrary For hee doth nothing without the Synode of the Westerne Bishops Hee challengeth not the right of iudging the causes of the Orientall Bishops either by himselfe alone or with his Synode of Westerne Bishops much lesse deriueth the claime of any such right from Peter as the Iesuite vntruly misreporteth the matter but thinketh that the finall and supreme iudging of them pertaineth to a generall Councell The next allegation is out of an Epistle of Damasus wherein writing to the Bishops of the East he commendeth them that they gaue due reverence to the See Apostolique and calleth them sonnes To what purpose this allegation serueth I know not For if any man doe thinke it consequent that the Pope hath an vniversall commanding power ouer all because the Bishops of the East yeelded a kinde of due respect and reverence to the See Apostolique that is to the Bishop of Rome and his colleagues for that it was in order and honour the first See he is greatly deceiued and may bee confuted out of the Epistle of the Orientall Bishops in answere whereof Damasus writeth For they write vnto him not as to their Lord and Commaunder but as to their brother and colleague and direct not their letters to him onely but to him and the other Bishops of the West Their Epistle beginneth in this sort To their brethren and Colleagues Damasus Ambrose Britto Valerianus Acholius c. and the rest of the holy Bishops assembled in the great citie of Rome Where by the way we may obserue that howsoeuer Damasus call them sonnes as being Bishops of meaner places inferiour Sees yet they call him brother and colleague as being equall in office and power though inferiour in order and honour Besides this they refused to come to Rome though earnestly entreated by Damasus so to doe but stayed at Constantinople and there held a Councell wherein they condemned the heresies of the Eunomians Macedonians ordained sundry Bishops as the Bishops of Constantinople Antioche and Hierusalem Nectarius Flavianus and Cyrill they made the Bishop of Constantinople a Patriarch and set him in degree of honour next vnto the Bishop of Rome These ordinations of Nectarius and Flavianus especially Damasus liked not and yet was forced to giue way vnto them and to yeeld to the Bishops assembled at Constantinople being but an hundred and fiftie in number the name
against Cyprian whom hee peremptorily condemneth for this their flying to Rome as violators of the Canons disturbers of the order of the Church which requireth all matters to bee heard and determined in those places where the accusers and witnesses may be produced Vnlesse saith he a few desperate wicked companions do thinke the authority of the African Bishops to be lesse then the authority of the other Bishops elsewhere therefore carry things out of Africa by way of appeale to other places So that when hee calleth the Church of Rome the principall Church whence Sacerdotall vnity sprang his meaning is that it is the principall Church in order honour not in absolute supreme commaunding power that Sacerdotall vnity sprang from thence not as if all Bishops did receiue their power and jurisdiction from the Bishop of Rome but for that though all receiue their Bishoply commission immediatly from Christ by the hands of the Apostles ordaining them yet he is to be acknowledged as first in the commissiō succeeding Peter to whom Christ first promised that which hee meant afterwards in as ample sort to giue to all the rest For answer to the third allegatiō we must obserue that Cyprian in the Epistle cited by Bellarmine laboureth to satisfie Cornelius Bishop of Rome who was something offended with him for that presently so soone as he heard of his ordination he did not write vnto him as to his fellow Bishop To this purpose he sheweth that he refrained and forbare so to doe till he was by others assured of his due and orderly election and ordination as well as by himselfe because hee perceiued there was some opposition against him but that as soone as his ordination was approued vnto him hearing of some factious and turbulent men stirring against him hee sent certaine of his brethren and colleagues to put to their helping hands for the bringing of the devided members of the body to the vnitie of the Catholique church if by any meanes it might bee but that the obstinacie of the one part was such that they not onely refused the bosome of the roote and common mother seeking to receiue and embrace them but set vp another head or Bishop where it is plaine and euident that he speaketh not of the vniuersall church the common mother of all beleeuers but of that particular church of Rome whereof Cornelius was Bishop opposite to the divisions of such as departed from the vnity of it who being gone out of the bosome and lap of it chose a Bishop of their owne faction The fourth and last allegation will easily be answered if we doe but take a view of that which Cyprian writeth in the Epistle alleaged There is saith he one God one Christ one Church one chaire founded vpon Peter by the Lords owne voyce No other Altar may be raised nor other new Priest-hood appointed besides that one Altar and one Priesthood already appointed Whosoeuer gathereth any where else scattereth Surely it is not possible that the Cardinall should thinke as he pretendeth to do that Cyprian speaketh of one singular chaire ordained by Christ for one Bishoppe to sit in appointed to teach all the world For the question in this place is not touching obedience to be yeelded to the Bishop of Rome that Cyprian should neede to vrge that point but touching certaine Schismatiques which opposed themselues against him therefore hee vrgeth the vnity of the church and of the chaire to shew that against them that are lawfully placed with consenting allowance of the Pastors at vnity others may not bee admitted and that they who by any other meanes get into the places of Ministerie then by the consenting allowance of the Pastors at vnitie amongst themselues are in trueth and indeede no Bishops at all So that Cyprian by that one chaire hee mentioneth vnderstandeth not one particular chaire appointed for a generall teacher of all the world to sit in but the ioynt commission vnity and consent of all Pastors which is and must be such as if they did all sit in one chaire Hitherto we haue heard what can be alleaged out of Cyprians writings to proue the supreme commaunding authority of the Pope Now let vs heare what may bee alleaged out of the same for the improuing thereof First in his booke of the vnity of the church he saith There is one Episcopall office whereof euery one equally and indifferently hath his part and secondly in the Councell of Carthage holden by him and other Bishops of Africa he saith None of vs maketh himselfe a Bishop of Bishops or tyrannically enforceth his colleagues to a necessity of obeying because every Bishop hath his own free iudgment disposition may neither iudge other nor bee judged of other but must all expect the iudgement of God who only hath power to set vs over his Church and to iudge of our actions To the first of these authorities Bellarmine answereth that each Bishop hath his part in the Episcopall office communion equally as well as any other but not an equall part For Peter his successours haue that part that is as the roote head fountaine the rest those parts that are as the braunches members riuers and that therefore Peters Successours are to rule gouerne the rest But this answere is refuted by the other place where Cyprian with the whole Councell of Carthage saith None of vs maketh himselfe a Bishop of Bishops or goeth about tyrannically to inforce others to a necessity of obeying seeing each Bishop hath his liberty no one may iudge another nor be iudged of another but must all expect the iudgement of God If hee reply that this which Cyprian speaketh of the equality of Bishops is to be vnderstood of the Bishops of Carthage amongst whō none was found that had power to command ouer others not generally so as to include the Bishop of Rome he is refuted by Cyprian himselfe who in his Epistle to ' Stephen Bishop of Rome hauing freely dissented from him and shewed the reasons of his so dissenting pro communi honore simplici dilectione that is For the fellowship they haue in the same honorable calling and imployment and the simplicitie and singlenesse of his loue sayth hee hopeth Stephen will approue that which is true and right and which he hath so strongly confirmed and proued though there be some so taxing him in a sort as too stiffely cleauing to his owne opinion that will not easily alter their minds but holding communion with their colleagues stiffely maintaine what they haue once conceiued Wherein saith he Nec nos vim cuiquam facimus aut legem damus cum habeat in ecclesiae administratione voluntatis suae arbitrium liberum vnusquisque praepofitus rationem actus sui Domino redditurus that is Neither do we force any man or giue a law vnto any man whereas euery gouernour hath the free disposition of his owne
and then there is no question but all men are bound for euer to adhere to this church and to eate the Lambe within the wals of this house That this is the meaning of Hierome the very forme of his words doe perswade vs. I am ioyned saith hee to Peters chaire vpon that rocke the Church is builded out of this house of the Church doubtlesse the Lambe may not be eaten Now by the name of the Church immediatly going before is meant the vniuersall Church therefore by this house we must vnderstand that great house within the wals whereof the whole houshold of faith is contained Secondly we say that if he speake of the Romane or West Church particularly he may be thought to meane not that hee shall perpetually and alwayes bee iudged a profane person that eateth the Lambe without the wals of that house but things so standing as they did when he wrote no other partes of the Church being sound safe and free from heresies but the Westerne parts onely Which made him say hee knew not Paulinus who was then Bishop of Antioch within the compasse of whose Patriarchship he liued because there was question as well of his faith as of the lawfulnesse of his ordination For otherwise hee ought to haue knowne him sought to him and respected him Thirdly wee say it is more then probable that the whole West Church shall neuer lose or forsake the true profession and that therefore hee may rightly be iudged a profane person that eateth the paschall Lambe out of the communion of the same though sometimes the Bishop of Rome in person be an heretique other of his colleagues continuing faithfull And that Hierome was of opinion that the Bishop of Rome may become an heretique it is most cleare and euident in that he saith that both Liberius and Felix were Arrian Heretickes Thus haue we answered whatsoeuer may be alledged out of Hierome for the Papacie and shewed the weakenesse of those allegations Now let vs see what authorities may be brought out of his writings against the absolute supreme power of Popes First he saith if wee seeke authority Orbis maior est vrbe The world is greater then the greatest citty in the world and the whole Church is of greater authority then the particular Church of Rome And thereupon reprehendeth the negligence or errour of the church of Rome in permitting contrary to the manner of other churches Deacons to grow so insolent as to dare to sit in the presence of the Presbyters when the Bishoppe was away as also in ordaining Presbyters vpon the commendation of Deacons So that hee blamed not the Deacons onely as Bellarmine vntruely saith but the Romane Bishop to whom the ordaining of Presbyters pertained Neither will it followe that the insolencie of the Deacons presuming to sitte in the presence of Presbyters was vnknowne to the Bishop or not allowed by the Church as Bellarmine collecteth because they are said so to haue done when the Bishop was away For that circumstance rather insinuateth that though they had not cast off all respect to the Bishop yet they had forgotten their duty towards the Presbyters then that this their presuming was vnknowne to the Bishop Secondly he pronounceth that wheresoeuer a Bishop bee whether at Rome or Eugubium at Constantinople or Rhegium at Alexandria or Tanais hee is of the same merit and the same Priesthood the power of riches and the humility of poore estate not making a Bishop higher or lower To this place Bellarmine answereth that all Bishops are equall in the power of order but not of jurisdiction But it is certaine Hierome thought all Bishops equall not only in the power of order but of jurisdiction also For Metropolitanes in his time though in order and honour greater then the rest were bound to follow what the greater part of the Bishops of the Province consented on and might doe nothing but as the greater part should resolue howsoeuer in processe of time by positiue constitution the Metropolitanes limited and directed by Canons were trusted with the doing of many things by themselues alone rather then the Bishops would bee troubled with often meeting in Councels But saith Bellarmine it cannot bee that Hierome should thinke all Bishops equall in the power of jurisdiction seeing without all question the Bishop of Alexandria hauing vnder him three great Provinces was greater in jurisdiction then the Bishop of Tanais who had vnder him onely one poore little city For answer hereunto we say that Patriarches haue no more power ouer the Metropolitanes subject to them then the Metropolitanes haue ouer the Bishops of the Province and that therefore howsoeuer the extent of their power reach farther yet proportionably it is no greater then the power of the Metropolitanes within their narrower precincts and compasse that the Metropolitan originally is not greater in the power of jurisdictiō then any other Bishop of the Province howsoeuer he haue a preheminence of honour and sit as a President among the Bishops meeting to performe the acts of jurisdiction and by cōmon consent to manage the affaires of the Province so that notwithstanding any thing the Cardinall can say to the contrary the testimonies and authorities of Hierome stand good against the Popes proud claime of vniversall power Wherefore leauing Hierome who witnesseth not for them but against them let vs heare whether Augustine will say any thing for them Out of Augustine sundry things are alleadged as first that hee saith The principality and chiefetie of the Apostolicall chaire did euer flourish in the Romane Church and secondly that to Bonifacius he saith Thou disdainest not to be a friend of the humble and those of the meane sort and though thou sit in higher place yet thou art not high minded And againe The watch tower is common to vs all that are Bishops although thou hast a higher roome in the same Surely it is strange to what purpose these places of Augustine are alleaged For wee neuer denied a principality or chieftie of order and honour to haue belonged anciently to the Bishops of Rome whilest they rested contented therewith and sought not to bring all vnder them by claime of vniversall power and this is all that can be collected out of Augustine But saith Bellarmine In his Epistle to Optatus speaking of a meeting of Bishops at Caesarea he saith an Ecclesiasticall necessitie laid vpon them by the reverend Pope Zozimus Bishop of the Apostolicall See drew them thither therefore he thought the Bishop of Rome superiour vnto other Bishops not in order honour onely but in power of commaunding also For answer hereunto first wee say that a great part of Africa was within the precincts of the Pat◅archship of Rome and that therefore the Bishop of Rome might call the Bishops of those parts to a Synodall meeting as euery Patriarch may doe the Bishops vnder him though hee had no commaunding power ouer all the world Secondly
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
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
detestable Beast of pride hath crept vp euen to the seate of Peter Prouide alwayes well for the peace of the Church and fare you alwayes well Thus wee see how the popes not contenting themselues with the fulnesse of Ecclesiasticall jurisdiction though they had no just title vnto it proceeded yet further partly by the fauour of Christian princes and partly by fraud and violence got to be great princes in the world stayed not till they made challēge to be ouer the mightiest Emperors to dispose of their crowns dignities So shewing thēselues to haue the perfect marke and character of him of whom the Apostle speaketh Who sitteth in the temple of God as God and is lifted vp aboue all that is called God Yet could they not so prevaile in these their hellish practises nor so carry away the truth of GOD and the liberty of his Church into captiuity but that there were euer found both Christian Emperours and learned Diuines to resist them in their vniust claimes CHAP. 48. Of generall Councels and of the end vse and necessity of them HAuing examined what may be said for proofe of the Vniuersality of the Bishop of Romes power and iurisdiction first we finde that the Sonne of GOD gaue him no power in the common-wealth but a Father-hood onely in the Church Secondly that in the Church hee neither gaue him an illimited power of commaunding nor infallible iudgement in discerning but that the greatest thing that either hee canne challenge or wee yeeld vnto him is to be the prime Bishop in order and honour the first and not of himselfe alone or out of the fulnesse of his owne power but with the joynt concurrence of others equall in commission with him to manage the great affaires of Almighty God and to gouerne the Christian Church so that the fulnesse of Ecclesiasticall power and iurisdiction is in the companies assemblies and Synodes of Bishoppes and Pastors and not in any one man alone I shewed before that in the churches founded and established by the Apostles contayning whole Citties and places adjoyning though there were many ministers of the word and sacraments yet one was so the Pastour of each of these Churches that the rest were but his assistants and might doe nothing without him and that therefore there was an inequality established euen from the beginning not of order onely but of degree also betweene such as are Pastours of Churches are named Bishops and such as are but their assistants named by the common name of Presbyters yet is the power of him that excelleth the rest in degree in each Church fatherly not Princely for things were so ordered in the beginning that as the Presbyters could do nothing without the Bishoppe so the Bishop in matters of moment might doe nothing without his Presbyters and thereupon the Councell of Carthage decreeth that the Bishoppe shall not presume to heare and sententiate any mans cause without the presence of his Clergie And though it bee said that the Bishop alone may heare and determine the causes of such Cleargy men as are below the degree of Presbyters Deacons yet that alone excludeth not his Cleargy but the concurrence of other Bishops which in the causes of Presbyters Deacons is necessarily required For without the presence and concurrence of his Cleargy the Bishop may proceede to no sentence at all If any difference grew betweene the Bishop and his Cleargy or if consenting any one found himselfe grieued with their proceedings there was a prouinciall Synode holdentwise euery yeare in which the acts of Episcopall Synodes might be re-ëxamined These prouinciall Synodes were subordinate to Nationall Patriarchicall Synodes wherein the Primate of a Nation or Kingdome or one of the Patriarches sat as President And in these Nationall or Patriarchicall Synodes the acts of prouinciall Synodes might bee re-ëxamined and reuersed Of all which I haue spoken before in due place and vpon fit occasion haue shewed at large of whom these Synodes doe consist So that it is euident that the power of Ecclesiasticall iurisdiction resteth not in Bishoppes alone but in Presbyters also beeing admitted to Prouinciall and Nationall Synodes and hauing decisiue voyces in them as well as Bishops nor in any one Metropolitane Primate or Patriarch within their seuerall precincts and diuisions but in these and their fellow Bishops joyntly and that much lesse there is any one in whom the fulnesse of all Ecclesiasticall power and the right to command the whole Church doth rest So that this fulnesse of power is found only in the generall assembly of Pastors called a generall Councell Wherefore now it remaineth that wee speake of Generall Councels Wherein first wee are to consider the vtility and necessity of such Synodall assemblies and meetings Secondly of whom they must consist Thirdly what assurance they haue of diuine assistance direction and Fourthly who must call them Toucing the first the causes why generall Councels are called are three The first is the suppressing of new heresies formerly not condemned The second a generall vniforme reformation of abuses crept into the Church The third the taking away of Schismes growing in Patriarchicall Churches about the election of their Pastors the reiecting of intruders violently and disorderly possessing themselues of those Patriarchicall Thrones And so wee finde that the Councell of Nice was called by Constantine for the suppressing of the damnable heresie of the Arrians the eight generall Councell by Basilius for the ending of the difference that was growne in the Church of Constantinople about Ignatius and Photius contending for the Episcopall chaire and that all Generall Councels intended and sought the reformation of abuses there being scarce any one wherein Canons were not made for the reformation of disorders in so much that the Fathers of the sixth Generall Councell hauing only condemned the Heresie of the Monothelites and made no Canons met afterwards againe many of them and made those Canons that are now extant and are the chiefe directiō of the Greeke Church vnto this day These being the causes for which Councels are called it is euident that the holding of them is not absolutely and simply necessary but in a sort onely For Heresies may bee suppressed by the concurrence of Prouinciall Synodes holden in the seuerall parts of the world as they were in the first 300. yeares when there were no Generall Councells But one part of the Christian Church seeking the helpe of another in common dangers and one part readily concurring with another as for the extinguishing of a dangerous fire threatning all or the repressing repelling of a common enemy by mutuall intelligence passing from one to another they abandoned Heresies newly springing vp and preserued the vnity of the common faith Neither was this course holden onely in the time of persecution during the first 300. yeares but afterwards also in the time of the Churches peace wee finde the same course to
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
Generall councell taketh order that the Patriarch shall haue power to convocate the Metropolitanes that are vnder him and that they shall not refuse to come when he calleth them vnlesse they be hindered by vrgent causes And to this purpose it was that the Bishops within the Patriarchship of Rome were once in the yeare to visite the Apostolicall thresholds which to do they take an oath still euen to this day as Cusanus noteth so that it is evident that there is a power in Bishoppes Metropolitanes Primates and Patriarchs to call Episcopall Provinciall Nationall and Patriarchicall Synodes and that neither so depending of nor subiect to the power of Princes but that when they are enemies to the Faith they may exercise the same without their consent and privity and subiect them that refuse to obey their summons to such punishments as the canons of the Church doe prescribe in cases of such contempt or wilfull negligence But that wee may see to whom the calling of Generall Councels doth pertaine in the times of persecution and when there are no Christian Princes we must obserue that among the Patriarches though one bee in order before another As the Patriarch of Alexandria is before the Patriarch of Antioch and the Patriarch of Rome before the Patriarch of Alexandria yet is not one of them superiour to another in degree as Bishops are to Presbyters nor so in order honour and place as Metropolitanes are to Bishops or Patriarches to Metropolitanes whom they are to ordaine or at the least to confirme And therefore no one of them singly and by himselfe alone hath power to call vnto him any Patriarch or any Bishop subiect to such Patriarch But as in case when there groweth a difference betweene the patriarches of one See and another or betweene any of the patriarches and the Metropolitanes and Bishops subiect to them the superiour patriarch not of himselfe alone but with his Metropolitanes and such particular Bishops as are interessed may judge and determine the differences between them if without danger of a further rent it may be done as in the case of Chrysostome and Theophilus it could not So if there be any matter of Faith or any thing concerning the whole state of the Christian church wherein a common deliberation of all the pastors of the church is necessary he that is in order the first among the patriarches with the Synodes of Bishops subiect to him may call the rest together as being the principall part of the church whence all actions of this nature doe take beginning And this is that which Iulius Bishop of Rome hath when writing to the Bishops of the East he telleth them that the manner and custome is that they should write to him and the Westerne Bishops first that from thence might be decreed the thing that is just and againe that they ought to haue written to them all that so that which is just might bee decreed by all And hence it is that Damasus Ambrose Brito Valerianus and the rest of the holy Bishops assembled in the great city of Rome out of their brotherly loue sent for the Bishops of the East as their owne members praying and desiring them to come vnto them that they might not raigne alone So that the power of calling Generall Councels when the church hath no princes to assist her is not in the Pope but in the Westerne Synode and yet hath not this Synode any power ouer all the other Churches as a supreme Commaunder but is onely as a principall part among the rest to beginne procure set forward as much as in her lyeth such things as pertain to the cōmon good neither may it by vertue of any canon custome or practise of the church excōmunicate the rest for refusing to hearken when it calleth as it appeareth by the former example in that they of the East came not when they were called and intreated to come to Rome by Damasus Ambrose and the rest but stayed at Constantinople did some things which they disliked and yet were forced to giue way vnto them and as being greater in authority then they bare the name of the generall Councell though they were assembled at Rome at the same time in a very great number But if the greater part concurre with them they may excommunicate those few that shall wilfully and causelesly refuse to obey them If it be said that hence it will follow that there is no certaine meanes of hauing a generall Councell at all times as there is of Prouinciall or Patriarchicall which may seeme absurde it will be answered that there is not the like necessitie of hauing Generall Councels as there is of hauing those more particular Synodes and that therefore it is not absurd to grant that the Church hath not at all times certaine and infallible meanes to haue a Generall Councell as it hath to haue the other Nay that it hath not it most plainely appeareth in that in the case of Chrysostome greatly distressed greiuously wronged Innocentius professed vnto him he knew no meanes to helpe him but a Generall Councell which to obtaine he became an humble futer to the Emperour but was so farre from preuailing that the messengers hee sent were returned backe againe vnto him with disgrace Thus wee see to whom the calling of Councels pertaineth when there is no Christian Magistrate to assist the Church but when there is a Christian Magistrate it pertaineth to him to see that these assemblies be duly holden accordingly as the necessity of the Church requireth and the Canons prescribe And therefor wee shall finde that though Christian Emperours Kings and Princes within their seuerall dominions oftentimes permitted Bishops Metropolitanes and Patriarches to hold Episcopall Prouinciall Nationall or Patriarchicall Councels without particular intermedling therein when they saw neither negligence in those of the Cleargy in omitting to hold such Councels when it was fit nor intrusion into their office yet soe often as they saw cause they tooke into their owne hands the power of calling these more particular Synodes And touching generall there was neuer any that was not called by the Emperour That Emperours Kings and Princes in their seuerall dominions respectiuely called particular Councels is proued by innumerable examples For Constantine the great called the first Councell of Arle as it appeareth by his Epistle to Crestus and Binnius confesseth it The Councell of Aquileia was called by the Emperours as it appeareth by the Epistle of the Councell to Gratian Valentinian and Theodosius the Emperours in the first Tome of the Councells The Councell of Burdegalis was called by the Emperour against Priscillian The Councell of Agatha by the permission of the King as as appeareth in the second Tome of the Councels The first of Orleans was called by Clodoueus The Epaunine Councell by Sigismund the sonne of Gundebald The second of Orleans by the command of Childebert the
appointed both as it seemed good vnto himselfe Three other proofes the Iesuite hath yet behinde The first is out of Socrates out of whom hee saith it may bee proued that Iulius the Pope called the Councell of Sardica but how I cannot tell For Socrates saith expressely that the Councell of Sardica was called by the two Emperours Constance and Constantius whereof the one raigned in the East the other in the West the one by his Letters desiring it the other most willingly performing that hee desired But of Iulius calling it hee maketh no mention If the Iesuite thinke it may bee proued that Iulius called it because among them that sought to excuse themselues from comming vppon fained pretences some complained of the shortnesse of the time appointed for this meeting and cast the blame thereof vpon Iulius he is greatly deceiued seeing Iulius might be blamed for procuring the Emperor Constance by his Letters directed to Constantius his brother to set so short a time as he did though hee did not call the Councell himselfe And that it was not the Authority of the Pope that brought the Bishops together in this Councell it is most euident in that when he wrote to them to restore Athanasius to his place they reiected his Letters with contempt maruailing that he medled more with their matters then they did with his Neither is it likely that Constantius would be commanded by Iulius to call this Councell Seeing when the Councell had commanded Athanasius to be restored to his place yet hee refused to giue way till his brother threatned to make warre vpon him for it But it this proofe faile Bellarmine hath a better For hee sayth Sixtus the third in an Epistle to those of the East writeth That Valentinian the Emperor called a Synode by his authority whence it followeth that the calling of Generall Councels pertaineth in such sort to the Popes that the Emperours may not call them but by warrant and authority from them If the Reader will bee pleased to cōsider of this proofe he shall easily discerne how litle credit is to be giuen to Iesuited Papists in their allegations For first Sixtus doth not say the Emperour Valentinian called a Synode by his authority but that hee commaunded a Synode should be called by his authority that is commaunded him to call it And the author of the Pontificall speaking of the calling of the same Synode sayth the Emperour commanded that the Councell and holy Synode should bee congregated Secondly it was but a Diocesan Synode consisting of the Presbyters and Cleargy of Rome called together about certaine crimes obiected to Sixtus whereof hee purged himselfe before them Now I thinke it will not follow that if the Bishoppe of Rome might call together the Cleargie of his owne Diocesse the calling of Generall Councels pertained to him onely or that if the Emperour thought fit rather to command the Romaine Bishoppe to call together his Cleagie then to doe it immediately by his owne authority therefore hee would haue done the like in summoning Generall Councells consisting of all the Bishops of the World Wherefore let vs passe to the last of his proofes taken out of the Epistle of Adrian the second to Basileius the Emperour prefixed before the eighth Generall Councell which vndoubtedly vpō proofe wil be foūd to be no better then the rest For first it is groūded on the saying of a Pope that liued many hundred yeares after Christ and long after the diuision of the Empire and the withdrawing of the Church of Rome from the obedience of the Emperours of the East and so not much to be regarded in a question concerning the right of the Emperour Secondly hee speaketh not in his owne name but in the name of all the West Church And thirdly that he saith Wee will that by your industry a great assembly be gathered proueth not that the Pope tooke vpon him peremptorily to command the Emperour For seeing in the whole Epistle hee vseth words of exhorting praying intreating these words may seeme to import no more but Our desire is that there should be such an assembly by your industrie in which our Legates sitting as Presidents matters may be examined and all things righted Or we though no way subiect to your Empire yet at your request are content that such a Councell be called and that our Legates do sit in it with the Bishops subiect to your Imperiall command For that Basileius called the Councell appeareth by his words to the Bishops in the beginning of it But if none of these exceptions against the Emperours ancient practice of calling Councels will hold our Aduersaries rather thē they will suffer the Pope to be a looser will not sticke to charge the Emperours with vsurpation and taking more on them then pertained to them Whosoeuer saith Andradius shall thinke that the power and authority of Emperours is to bee esteemed and iudged of by the things done by them in the Church rather then by Christs institution the Decrees of the Elders and the force and nature of the Papall dignity it selfe hee shall make vnbridled pride and head-long fury to be chiefe commaunder and to sway most in the Ecclesiastical Hierarchy Thus doth Andradius censure the auncient Christian Emperours and exemplifieth not onely in Constantius the Arrian but Iustinian also as himselfe confesseth a good Emperor For refutatiō of which most vnjust exception wee say that howsoeuer it bee not to bee doubted but that ill affected or ill directed Emperours did some-times that which was not fit yet that in calling Councels by their Princely authority and commaunding all Bishoppes to come or send vnto them they exceeded not the bounds and limites of their commission it is evident in that neuer any Bishop durst blame them for it But all sought vnto them euen the Bishops of Rome themselues praying them so to doe as I shewed before by the examples of Liberius Innocentius and Leo which thing also Bellarmine himselfe confesseth Wherefore seeing it is evident by the allowed practise of former times that the calling of Generall Councels belonged to the Emperours after they became Christians let vs see what they tooke on them in these Councels after they had called them and consequently what right power and authority Christian Princes haue to manage the affaires and commaund the holy Bishops and Ministers of the church CHAP. 53. Of the power and authority exercised by the auncient Emperours in Generall Councels and of the supremacie of Christian Princes in causes and ouer persons Ecclesiasticall THe first thing that Christian Emperours in auncient times assumed to themselues in Generall Councels was to be present in them when they pleased as we reade of Constantine the Great that hee not onely called the Councell of Nice but was present in it of Martian that hee was present in the Councell of Chalcedon with Pulcheria the Empresse of Constantine the fourth that hee was present
the Councell of Constance Wherefore seeing so many Councells Popes yeelded the power of electing or at least of allowing and confirming the Popes to the Emperours and seeing so good effects followed of it and so ill of the contrary there is no reason why our Aduersaries should dislike it For seeing the people aunciently had their consent in these affaires Fredericke the Emperour had reason when hee said that himselfe as King and ruler of the people ought to bee chiefe in choosing his owne Bishop Neither had the Emperours onely this right in disposing of the Bishopricke of Rome and other dignities Ecclesiasticall but other Christian Kings likewise had a principall stroake in the appointing of Bishops For as Nauclere noteth the French Kings haue had the right of Inuestitures euer since the time of Adrian the first and Duarenus sheweth that howsoeuer Ludouicus renounced the right of choosing the Bishop of Rome yet hee held still the right of Inuestiture of other Bishops into the place whereof came afterwards that right which the King vseth when in the vacancie of a Bishopricke hee giueth power to choose and some other royalties which the Kings of France still retaine It appeareth by the twelfth Councell of Toledo that the Kings had a principall stroake in elections in the Churches of Spaine and touching England Matthew Paris testifieth that Henry the first by William of Warnaste his agent protested to the Pope he would rather loose his kingdome then the right of Inuestitures and added threatning words to the same protestation Neither did he onely make verball protestations but hee really practised that hee spake and gaue the Arch bishopricke of Canterbury to Rodolphe Bishoppe of London inuesting him by Pastoral staffe ring Articuli cleri prescribe that elections shall be free frō force feare or intreaty of Secular powers yet so as that the Kings license bee first asked after the election done his royall assent and confirmation bee added to make it good Whereupon the Statute of prouisors of Benefices made at Westminster the fiue and twentith of Edward the third hath these wordes Our Soueraigne Lord the King and his heires shall haue and enioy for the time the collations to the Archbishoprickes and other dignities electiue which bee of his aduowry such as his progenitors had before free election was granted sith that the first elections were granted by the Kings progenitours vpon a certaine forme and condition as namely to demaund licence of the King to choose after choyce made to haue his royall assent Which condition being not kept the thing ought by reason to returne to his first nature So that we see that at first the Cleargy people were to choose their Bishops Ministers yet so that Princes by their right were to moderate things and nothing was to be done without them But when they endowed Churches with ample revenewes possessions disburdened the people of the charge of maintaining their Pastors they had now a farther reason to sway things then before And thence it is that the Statute aboue-mentioned saith the Kings gaue power of free elections yet vpon condition of seeking their licence confirmation as hauing the right of nomination in themselues in that they were Founders Likewise touching Presbyters the auncient Canon of the Councel of Carthage which was that Bishops should not ordain clearks without the consent of their Cleargie that also they should haue the assent and testimony of the Citizens held while the Cleargy liued together vpon the common contributions and divident but when not onely titles were divided distinguished and men placed in rurall Churches abroad but seuerall allowance made for the maintenance of such as should attend the seruice of God by the Lords of those Countrey townes out of their owne lands and the lands of their tennants they that thus carefully provided for the Church were much respected And it was thought fit they should haue great interest in the choosing and nominating of Clearkes in such places Iustinian the Emperour to reward such as had beene beneficiall in this sort to the Church and to incourage others to doe the like decreed That if any man build a Church or house of Prayer and would haue Clearkes to be placed there if hee allow maintenance for them and name such as are worthy they shall be ordained vpon his nomination But if he shall choose such as bee prohibited by the Canons as vnworthy the Bishop shall take care to promote some whom he thinketh more worthy And the Councell of Toledo about the yeare of Christ 655 made a Canon to the same effect The words of the councell are these We decree that as long as the Founders of Churches doe liue they shall be suffered to haue the chiefe and continuall care of the said Churches shall offer fit Rectors to the Bishop to be ordained And of the Bishop neglecting the Founders shall presume to place any others let him know that his admission shall be voyde and to his shame but if such as they choose be prohibited by the Canons as vnworthy then let the Bishop take care to promote some whom he thinketh more worthy Whereby we see what respect was anciently had to such as founded Churches gaue lands and possessions to the same yet were they not called Lords of such places after such dedication to God but Patrons onely because they were to defend the rights thereof and to protect such as there attended the seruice of God though they had right to nominate men to serue in these places yet might they not judge or punish them if they neglected their duties but onely complaine of them to the Bishop or Magistrate Neither might they dispose of the possessions thus giuen to the Church and dedicated to God but if they fell into poverty they were to be maintained out of the revenewes thereof This power and right of nomination and presentation resting in Princes and other Founders can no way prejudice or hurt the state of the Church if Bishops to whō examination and ordination pertaineth doe their duties in refusing to consecrate ordaine such as the Canons prohibite but very great confusions did follow the Popes intermeddling in bestowing Church-liuings and dignities as wee shall soone finde if wee looke into the practise of them in former times CHAP. 55. Of the Popes disordered intermedling with the elections of Bishoppes and other Ministers of the Church their vsurpation intrusion and preiudicing the right and liberty of others THe Popes informer times greatly preiudiced the right and liberty of other men and hurt the estate of the Church of God three waies first by giuing priuiledges to Fryers a people vnknowne to all antiquity to enter into the Churches and charges of other men to do Ministeriall acts and to get vnto themselues those things which of right should haue beene yeelded to other Secondly by Commendams and Thirdly by reseruations
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 doe originally signifie that kinde of election which is made by many expressing their consent and giuing their voyces or suffrages by lifting vp of their handes yet may it bee extended more generally to signifie any election of many expressing their consent by writing by liuely voyce or by going to one side of the place where they are yea any choyce whatsoeuer though made by one alone as it appeareth in that the Apostles are said to haue beene witnesses formerly designed and appointed by 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 whereas Christ only chose them and they were not elected by the voyces of many or any but himselfe alone And in Ecclesiasticall writers the same word signifieth Ordination that is by Imposition of handes as it were easy to proue by many testimonies of Antiquity CHAP. 56. Of the Ordination of Bishoppes and Ministers FROM the Election of Ministers whereof wee haue sufficiently spoken let vs proceede to their Ordination with which none but the Guides of the Church are trusted And therefore howsoeuer the people may sometimes elect yet they are charged not to lay hands hastily on any man nor to communicate with other mens sinnes So that the moderation of all things in this kinde resteth in them this is all that the Scripture prescribeth touching the designing and appointing of Ministers namely whom and how they that haue power of ordaining must ordaine Ordination is the setting of men a part to the worke of the Ministery the commending of them with fasting and prayer to the grace of God and the authorizing of them to performe things pertayning to God which others without such sanctification neither may nor can doe Wherein the Ceremony of Imposition of handes is vsed First to expresse the setting of them apart for sacred imployment Secondly to let them knowe that the hand of God is with them in all that they doe in his name and by his authority to guide direct strengthen protect them Thirdly to note out the person vpon whom the Church by her prayers desireth the blessings of Almighty God to bee powred in more plentifull sort then vpon others as being to take charge of others This Ordination is either of Bishoppes to whome the care and gouernment of the Church is principally committed or of other inferiour Cleargy-men Touching the Ordination of Bishoppes the Councell of Nice decreeth that a Bishop must be ordained by all the Bishops in the Prouince and that if it seeme hard either in respect of some vrgent necessity or the length of the wayes that they should all meete yet there must bee three at the least to concurre in all such ordinations the rest by their letters testifying their consent and the Metropolitane confirming that they doe The Councell of Antioch in like sort decreeth That a Bishoppe shall not bee ordayned without a Synode and the presence of the Metropolitane That the Metropolitane by his letters shall call vnto him all the Bishops in the Prouince if conveniently they may come together if not that at the least the greater part be present or giue their consent by writing And that if at any time there grow any difference among the Bishoppes of the Prouince about the person that is to bee ordayned the greater part of voyces shall sway all In the Second Councell of Carthage all the Bishops with one consent said It seemeth good to vs all that without consulting the Primate of each Prouince no man easily presume though with many Bishoppes to ordaine a Bishoppe in what place soeuer without his commaund but if necessity shall require that three Bishoppes in what place soeuer they bee with the commaund of the Primate shall haue power to ordaine a Bishoppe And because the concurrence of the Metropolitane was to bee sought and his presence or direction had in euery ordination therefore least by his fault there might be too long and dangerous delayes it was ordered that vnlesse it were in case of necessity all ordinations should bee within three monthes after the voydance of any place and that if by the fault of the Metropolitane there were any longer delay he should be subiect to Ecclesiasticall Censure and punishment In latter times vnder the Papacy they permitted by speciall dispensation one Bishop assisted with two mitred Abbots to ordaine a Bishoppe contrary to all the old Canons requiring three Bishoppes at the least The forme and manner of ordination we finde in the Fourth Councell of Carthage which prescribeth that when a Bishoppe is to bee ordained two Bishops must hold the booke of the Gospels ouer his head and that one powring forth the blessing vpon him all the other Bishoppes that are present must touch his head with their handes This is the forme of Episcopall ordination But touching Presbyters Deacons the Councell of Hispalis saith That the Bishop alone may conferre Ecclesiasticall honour vpon them but that alone he cannot take it from them which yet is not so to bee vnderstood as if the Bishop alone without his Presbyters might ordaine Presbyters but that hee may without the concurrence of other Bishops giue that honour of Presbyteriall order which without them he cannot take away againe For otherwise the Councell of Carthage prouideth that in the ordination of a Presbyter the Bishoppe holding his hand on his head and blessing him all the Presbyters that are present shall holde their handes by the handes of the Bishoppe Whereas in the ordination of a Deacon it sufficeth that the Bishop alone put his hands vpon the head of him that is ordained because he is not sanctified to Priestly dignity but to the seruice of the Church So that other Ministers are to concurre in the ordination of the Ministers of the Word and Sacraments as well as the Bishoppe being equall to him in the power of Order and Ministery and his assistants in the worke of it yet hath the Bishop a great preheminence aboue them in the Imposition of hands For regularly no number of Presbyters imposing hands can make a Minister without the Bishoppe The reason whereof is because no Ordinations are to be made sine titulo that is without title or place of employment and none but Bishops haue Churches wherein to employ men seeing they onely are Pastours of Churches all other are but their assistants and coadiutors not because the power of order which is giuen in Ordination is lesse in them then in Bishops So that Bishops alone haue the power of Ordination and no man may regularly doe it without them Whereupon ordinarily and according to the strictnesse of the old canons all Ordinations made otherwise are pronounced voyde as wee reade of one Coluthus whose ordinations were therefore voyded because he tooke on him to ordaine being no Bishop but a Presbyter onely But seeing Bishops and Presbyters are in the power of order the same as when the Bishops of a whole Church or countrey fall from the Faith
or consent to them that so doe the care of the church is devolued to the Presbyters remaining Catholicke and as in the case of necessity they may doe all other things regularly reserued to Bishops only as Ambrose sheweth that the Presbyters of Egypt were permitted in some cases to confirme the baptized which thing also Gregory after him durst not condemne So in case of Generall defect of the Bishops of a whole countrey refusing to ordaine any but such as shall consent to their Heresies when there appeareth no hope of remedy or helpe from other parts of the Church the Presbyters may chuse out one among themselues to be chiefe and so adde other to their numbers by the imposition of his and their hands This I haue proued in my third booke out of the authorities of Armachanus and sundry other of whom Alexander of Hales speaketh To which wee may adde that which Durandus hath where he saith That Hierome seemeth to haue beene of opinion that the highest power of consecration or order is the power of a Priest or Elder So that euery Priest in respect of his Priestly power may minister all Sacraments confirme the baptized and giue all Orders howsoeuer for the avoydiug of the perill of Schisme it was ordained that one should bee chosen to haue a preheminence aboue the rest who was named a Bishop and to whom it was peculiarly reserued to giue Orders and to doe some such other things And afterwards he saith that Hierome is clearely of this opinion Neither can the Romanists deny this justifie their owne practise For their Chorepiscopi or Titular Bishops are no Bishops as I haue proued at large out of Damasus not disputing or giuing his private opiniō but resoluing the point and prescribing to other what they must beleeue practise yet doe they of the Church of Rome permit these to ordaine not onely Sub-deacons and other inferiour Cleargy-men but Priests and Deacons also and holde their Ordinations to be good and of force If any man haply say that 〈◊〉 Bishop when he is old and weake or otherwise imployed may haue a Coadiutor and consequently that it is no such absurdity to admit these Suffragan and Titular Bishops and that therefore they may haue power to ordaine as being truely Bishops and yet Presbyters in no case bee permitted so to doe for answer herevnto let him reade what I haue written in the 29. chapter of this booke concerning this matter CHAP. 57. Of the things required in such as are to be ordained Ministers and of the lawfulnesse of their Marriage FRom the election and ordination of Ministers we are to proceede to the things required in them that are to be chosen and ordayned If any man saith the Apostle desire the office of a Bishop he desireth a worthy worke A Bishop therefore must be vnreproueable the husband of one wife watching sober modest harberous apt to teach not giuen to wine no striker not giuen to filthy lucre but gentle no fighter not couetous no young scholler but well reported of euen of those that are without The canons of the church require the same things and adde some other as that no man may be chosen and ordained a Minister of the Word and Sacraments till he be thirty yeares of age nor none that was baptized in his bed and the like The Papists proceed further and not contenting themselues with the moderation of the Apostle and the Primitiue Fathers admit none into the holy Ministery but those that are vnmarried or being married promise to liue frō their wiues yet not so neither if either they haue beene twice married or if they married with a widow Wherefore letting passe the things the Apostle prescribeth and those other which the Canons adde of which there is no question let vs come to the marriage of them that are to bee admitted into the holy Ministery of the Church It is clearely confessed by the best learned in the Romane Church that Bishops Presbyters and other Cleargy-men are not forbidden to marry or being married before they enter into the Ministery to continue in matrimoniall society with their wiues by any law of God and therefore there is little feare of offending against God eyther by admitting such into the Ministery as will not liue single or by entring into it with purpose of marriage Non est essentialiter annexum debitum continentiae ordini sacro sayth Aquinas sed ex statuto Ecclesiae vnde uidetur quod per Ecclesiam possit dispensari in voto continentiae solemnizato per susceptionem sacri ordinis that is It is not essentially annexed vnto holy order that men should containe and liue single that enter into the Ministry but by the Decree of the Church onely So that it seemeth that the Church may dispence in the vow of continency though made solemne by taking holy orders And in another place hee sayth that it is from the Churches constitution that they who are entred into the holy orders of the Church may not marry which yet is not the same among the Graecians that it is among the Latines For the Graecians make no vow and do liue with their wiues that they married before they entred into orders of the same opinion is Bonauentura who acknowledgeth that in the Primitiue Church it was otherwise touching this matter then now it is in the Church of Rome and endeauoureth to giue reasons of the difference Scotus and Occam are of the same iudgement and all the rest of the Schoole men of note agree with them And Caietane a great learned Diuine and a Cardinall in our time pronounceth confidently that it cannot be proued either by reason or authority setting aside the Lawes that are positiue and vowes which men make to the contrary that a Priest doth sinne in contracting marriage And that therefore the Pope with good conscience may dispense with such a one and giue him leaue to marry though there be no inducement of publike profit or benefit leading him so to do And addeth that reason seemeth to bee strong on the contrary side for the lawfulnesse of such dispensation because as it appeareth by Peter Lombard in the fourth of the Sentences neyther Order in that it is Order nor holy Order in that it is holy crosseth or hindereth marriage And as it is in the Decrees Deacons in auncient times might marry euen in the West Church and as it is in the same Decrees they of the East Church are ioyned in marriage euen after they are entered into holy Orders Neither is that glosse to bee admitted which expoundeth their coupling or ioyning in marriage of the liuing in marriage formerly contracted Seeing the whole course coherence of the Text speaketh of the Contract of Marriage as by the opposition of the practise of the West Church the Priests whereof are saide not to marry it may bee confirmed These are the wordes of
seeing there are alwaies some right-beleeuers but a right iudgment of men by their power of iurisdiction maintaining truth suppressing error may be wanting Nay that somtimes there was no such iudgmēt in the Church it is most euident For Vincentius Lyrinensis sayth the Arian heresie infected not some part onely but almost the whole Christian world soe that almost all the Bishoppes of the Latine Church were misled by force or fraud Yea Athanasius and Hierome report that Liberius Bishoppe of ROME was carryed away in that tempestuous whirlewinde and subscribed to heresie soe that there was noe sette Tribunall on earth in those dayes to the determinations whereof it was safe to stand §. 2. IN the next place the Treatiler chargeth Mee that whereas Luther defendeth that infants in Baptisme actually beleeue I endeauour to wrest his words to habituall faith which sence he sayth Luthers discourses will not admit and for proofe hereof referreth the reader to certaine places in Luther and to the positions of his followers but as Festus sayd vnto Paul thou hast appealed to Caesar to Caesar shalt thou goe so seeing this Treatiser referreth the Reader to Luthers discourses and the doctrine of his Disciples to these I will send him which will turne greatly to the Treatisers disaduantage For the reader cannot but finde by Luthers discourses and the doctrine of his Schollers that I haue rightly deliuered his opinion to bee that infants are filled with habituall fayth when they are regenerate and not that they haue any such acts of faith or knowledge of God as men of yeares haue Let vs therefore heare what Luther himselfe will say some men saith hee will obiect against that which I haue said touching the necessity of faith in such as are to receiue the Sacramērs with profit that infants haue no faith nor apprehension of Gods mercies that therefore either faith is not so necessarily required to the due receiuing of the sacramēt or that infants are Baptised in vaine Here I say that which all say that other mens faith euen the faith of such as present thē to Baptisme steedeth litle children For as the word of God is mightie when the sound therof is heard euen to the changing of the heart of a wicked man which is no lesse vnapt to heare the voyce of God to listen vnto it thē any litle babe so by the prayer of the Church which out of faith to which all thinges are possible presenteth it to baptisme the child is changed cleansed and renued by the infusion of faith or by faith which is infused and powred into it Thus doth Luther expresse his owne meaning touching this poynt Now let vs heare what his followers will say It was agreed vpon saith Chemnitius amongst the followers of Luther that when we say infants beleeue or haue faith wee must not imagine that they do vnderstand or feele the motions of faith But their errour is rejected who suppose that infants baptized please God and are saued without any operation or working of the holy spirit in them whereas Christ pronounceth that vnlesse a man bee borne a new of water and of the spirit hee cannot enter into the kingdome of heauen So that this is all that Luther and the rest meant that children cannot be made partakers of those benefits that God offereth to men in Baptisme nor inherit eternall life by vertue of the faith of the Church without some change wrought in them by the spirit fitting them to be joyned to God which change or alteration in them they call faith not meaning to attribute vnto them an actuall apprehension of Gods mercies for they constantly deny that they feele any such motions of faith but a kinde of habituall faith onely there being nothing in faith but such an act of beleeuing as they deny or the seede roote and habit whence actual motions in due time do flow With whom Calvine agreeth for whereas the Anabaptists obiect against him defending that infants are capable of regeneration that the Scripture mentioneth no regeneration but by the incorruptible seed of the word of God which infants cannot heare he answereth that God by his diuine power may renue and change them by some other meanes Secondly hee addeth that it is not absurde to thinke that God doth shine into the hearts of those infants which in infancie hee calleth out of this world to himselfe and that hee doth make himselfe knowne vnto them in some sorte seeing they are presently after to be receiued and admitted to the cleare and open view and sight of his glorious face and countenance and yet saith he will not rashly affirme that they are indued with the same faith which wee finde in our selues or that they haue knowledge like vnto that of faith And in the next section speaking more generally and not restraining himselfe to such as die in infancy hee saith that they are Baptized into future repentance and faith which vertues though they bee not presently formed in them yet a seede of either of them lieth hid in them The Papists are distracted into contrary opinions touching this point For some thinke that grace the roote of faith and other vertues is infused into children in Baptisme but not faith other that not onely grace but the habit of faith hope and charity is powred into them likewise which opinion as more probable was admitted in the Councell of Vienna and is embraced by vs as true Wherefore let the Reader judge whether I haue wrested the words of Luther or the Treatiser wronged Mee SECT 3. IN the third place hee laboureth to demonstrate and proue that there is a contradiction betweene the reuerend Bishop of Lincolne and Doctour Morton my selfe touching the power of ordination which that learned Bishoppe appropriateth vnto Bishops and we communicate in some cases to Presbyters But this silly obiection is easily answered for his meaning is that none but Bishoppes regularly may ordaine which we confesse to be true as likewise none but they onely may confirme the baptized by imposition of hands and yet thinke that in case of necessity Presbyters may performe both these things though of ordinary right belonging to Bishops only Part. 1. Sect. 1. LEt vs passe therefore from the preface to the booke it selfe the first thing that he objecteth in the booke it selfe is that I giue Apostolicke power to the present Church whence he thinketh it may be inferred that the Church cannot erre in matters of faith or ceremonies That I giue Apostolique power to the present church he endeavoureth to proue because I say She hath authority to dispense with some constitutions of the Apostles touching order and comelinesse which he thinketh She might not doe if she had not the same Authority by force whereof they were made but he could not but know that this proofe is too weake if he were not very weake in vnderstanding For the Apostles made these constitutions
Schismatikes are they that breake the vnitie of the Church and refuse to submit themselues and yeeld obedience to their lawfull Pastours and guides though they retaine an entire profession of the trueth of God as did the Luciferians some others in the beginning of their Schisme though for the most part the better to justifie their Schismaticall departure from the rest of Gods people Schismatikes doe fall into some errour in matters of faith This is the first sort of them that depart and goe out from the Church of God and company of his people whose departure yet is not such but that notwithstanding their Schisme they are and remaine parts of the Church of God For whereas in the Church of God is found an entire profession of the sauing trueth of God order of holy Ministery Sacraments by vertue thereof administred and a blessed vnitie and fellowship of the people of God knit together in the bond of peace vnder the commaund of lawfull Pastours and guides set over them to direct them in the wayes of eternall happinesse Schismatikes notwithstanding their separation remaine still conioyned with the rest of Gods people in respect of the profession of the whole sauing trueth of God all outward actes of Religion and Diuine worship power of order and holy Sacraments which they by vertue thereof administer and so still are and remaine parts of the Church of God but as their communion and coniunction with the rest of Gods people is in some things onely and not absolutely in all wherein they haue and ought to haue fellowship so are they not fully and absolutely of the Church nor of that more speciall number of them that communicate intirely and absolutely in all things necessary in which sense they are rightly denied to be of the Church which I take to be their meaning that say they are not of the Church CHAP. 14. Of the second sort of them that voluntarily goe out from the people of God HEretikes are they that obstinately persist in error contrary to the Churches faith so that these doe not onely forsake the fellowship but the faith also and therefore of these there may be more question whether notwithstanding their hereticall division they still continue in any sort parts of the Church of God But this doubt in my opinion is easily resolued For in respect of the profession of sundry diuine verities which still they retaine in common with right beleeuers in respect of the power of order and degree of ministery which receiuing in the Church they carry out with them and sacraments which by vertue thereof they doe administer they still pertain to the Church But for that they hold not an entire full professiō of all such sauing trueths as to know and beleeue is necessary vnto saluation for that their Pastours and Priests though they haue power of order yet haue no power of jurisdiction neither can performe any acte thereof for that they retaine not the vnity of the spirit in the bond of peace they are rightly denied to be of the Church not for that they are not in any sort of it but for that they are not fully and absolutely of it nor of that more speciall number of them which communicate in all things wherein Christians should This more speciall number of right beleeuing Christians is for distinction sake rightly named the Catholike Church because it consisteth of them only that without addition diminution alteration or innouation in matter of doctrine hold the common faith once deliuered to the Saints and without all particular or priuate diuision or faction retaine the vnitie of the spirit in the bond of peace To this purpose is it that Saint Augustine against the Donatists who therefore denied the baptisme of Heretikes to be true Baptisme and did vrge the necessity of rebaptizing them that were baptized by them for that they are out of the Church doth shew that all wicked ones feined Christians and false hearted hypocrites are secluded from the Church of God considered in her best and principall parts and in the highest degree of vnitie with Christ her mysticall head aswell as ◅retikes and Schismatikes As therefore all they that outwardly professe the trueth and hold the faith of Christ without schisme or heresie are of the Church and are within as the Scripture speaketh yet are not all ofthat more speciall number of them that are intrinsecus in occulto intus but in more generall sort So likewise Heretikes and Schismatikes though they be not of that speciall number of them that in vnity hold the entire profession of diuine trueth are of the Church generally considered and of the number of them that professe the trueth of God reuealed in Christ. And this surely Augustine most clearely deliuereth For when the Donatists did obiect that Heresie is an harlot and that if the baptisme of Heretikes bee good sonnes are borne to God of heresie and so of an harlot than which what can be more absurde impious his answere was that the conuenticles of Heretikes doe beare children vnto God not in that they are diuided but in that they still remaine conjoyned with the true and Catholike Church not in that they are Heretikes but in that they professe and practise that which Christians should and doe professe and practise It is not therefore to be so scornefully rejected by Bellarmine Stapleton and others of that faction that we affirme that both Heretikes and Schismatikes are in some sort though not fully perfectly and with hope of saluation of the Church seeing Augustine in the iust and honourable defence of the Churches cause against Heretikes did long since affirme the same not doubting to say that Heretikes remaine in such sort conioyned to the Church notwithstanding their Heresie that the true Church in the midst ofthem and in their assemblies by Baptisme ministred by them doth beare and bring forth children vnto God The not conceiuing whereof gaue occasion to Cyprian and the African Bishops of errour and afterwards to the Donatists of their heresie touching the rebaptization of them that were baptized by Heretikes For seeing there is but ◅e Lord one faith one Baptisme seeing God gaue the power of the keyes and the dispensation of his word and sacraments onely to his Church if Heretikes bee not of the Church they doe not baptise This their allegation they amplified and enlarged from the nature and condition of heresie and Heretickes and the high pretious and diuine qualitie force and working of the sacraments thereby endeauouring to shew that so excellent meanes pledges and assurances of our saluation cannot be giuen by the hands of men so farre estranged from God There is say they one faith one hope one Baptisme not among heretikes where there is no hope and a false faith where all things are done in lying false and deceiueable maner where he adiureth Sathan that is the vassall of Sathan and possessed of the diuell
the Patriarch of Constantinople the second which conclusion was not of such force but that the succeeding Bishops of Constantinople cōtinued the same challeng their predecessors made as any oportunity was offered sought to aduance their pretended title till at length there growing some difference between thē in the matter of the proceeding of the holy G whome the Latines affirmed to proceede from the Father and the Sonne the GREEKES from the Father only either pronounced the other to be heretickes schismatickes Wherefore let vs see what the religion of the Greeke Church is and whether these Christians be so farre forth orthodoxe that wee may account them members of the true Catholicke Church of God or so in errour that we may reject them as schismaticks hereticks though in number never so many Bernard speaking of them sayth nobiscum sunt non sunt iuncti fide pace diuisi quanquam fide ipsa claudicaverint à rectis semitis That is they are with vs and they are not with vs they are of the same profession with vs touching matters of faith but they hold not the vnity of the spirit in the band of peace although they haue halted also and in some sort declined from the straight pathes in matters pertayning to the Christian faith Touching the state of these Christians the Romanists lay downe these propositions First that there is a double separation from the Church of God the one by heresie ouerthrowing the fayth the other by schisme breaking the vnity The second that schismaticks though they fall not into heresie are out of the Church cut off from being members of the same and consequently in state of damnation Beleeue certainely and no way doubt sayth St Augustine that not onely all Pagans but all Iewes hereticks schismaticks also dying out of the communion of the Catholicke Church shall goe into everlasting fire The third that the Graecians are Schismatically divided from the Roman Church that they haue long continued so that they are excommunicate with the greater excommunication thundred out against all Schismaticks in bulla coenae Domini and consequently are in state of damnation But whether they bee not only Schismaticks but haereticks also as some feare not to pronounce they are not yet agreed Azorius thinketh they are not to bee censured as hereticks and yeeldeth a reason of his so thinking because in those articles of the faith where they are thought to erre they differ verbally onely and not really from those that are vndoubtedly right beleevers and giueth instance first in the question touching the proceeding of the holy Ghost wherein hee thinketh they differ but in forme of words from them that seeme to bee their opposites and secondly in the questions touching the Pope his power priviledges and authority concerning all which hee affirmeth they haue no other opinion then Gerson the Parisians who were neuer yet pronounced heretickes for they yeeld a primacie to the Bishop of Rome but no supremacy They acknowledge him to bee Patriarch of the West amongst all the Patriarches in order honour the first as long as hee continueth orthodoxe and seeketh not to encroach vpon the jurisdiction of others But they deny as also the Parisians doe that his judgement is infallible or his power authority supreame absolute they teach that hee must doe nothing of himselfe in things pertayning to the state of the vniversall Church but with the concurrence of others his colleagues and that hee is subject to a generall Councell All which things were defined in the Councells of Constance and Basil and the contrary positions condemned as haereticall Neither want there at this day many worthy Diuines liuing in the Communion of the Roman Church who most strongly adhere to the decrees of those Councells and peremptorily reject those of Florence and Trent wherein the contrary faction prevayled For the whole kingdome and state of France admit those and reject the other and would no lesse withdraw themselues from all communion with the Roman Bishoppe then the Grecians doe if they should once bee pressed to acknowledge that his power and authority is supreame and absolute that hee cannot erre and that hee may dispose the kingdomes and depose the kings soveraigne princes of the world as the Iesuites and other the Popes flatterers affirme and defend Whence it will follow that they are not onely free from heresie as Azorius resolueth but frō schisme also So that after so great clamours and so long contendings they must of necessity bee forced in the end to confesse they haue done them infinite wrong and sinned grievously against God in condemning to hell for no cause so many millions of Christian soules redeemed with the most precious blood of his dearest Sonne There are sayth Andreas Fricius who thinke that the Russians Armenians and other Christians of the East part pertaine not to the Christian Church but seeing they vse the same sacraments which wee doe seeing they professe to fight vnder the banner of Christ crucified and rejoyce in their sufferings for his sake farre bee it from vs ever to thinke that they should bee cast off and rejected from being fellow citizens with the Saints and of the houshold of God having borne the burden endured the heate of the day so many ages in the vineyard of the Lord. Nay rather I thinke there can be no perfect cōsociation vnion of the whole Church without them For the Latine Church alone cānot be takē for the vniversall Church that which is but a part cānot be the whole But some man happily will say whatsoeuer we think of these differēces touching the power authority of the B. of Rome yet in the article of the proceeding of the holy ghost they erre damnably so are hereticks that Azorius was deceived when hee thought otherwise Wherefore for the cleering of this poynt first I will make it evident that not onely Azorius but sundry other great and worthy Divines thinke the difference about the proceeding of the holy Ghost to bee meerely verball Secondly I will shew how the seeming differences touching this poynt may bee reconciled Thirdly I will note the beginnings and proceedings in this controversie The Grecians sayth Peter Lombard affirme that the holy Ghost proceedeth from the Father onely not from the Sonne yet wee must know that the Greekes doe acknowledge the holy Ghost to bee the spirit of the Son aswell as of the Father because the Apostle sayth the spirit of the Son And trueth it selfe in the Gospell the spirit of trueth Now seeing it is no other thing to bee the spirit of the Father and the Son then to bee from the Father the Son they seeme to agree with vs in judgement touching this article of faith though they differ in words Grosthed the famous and renowned Bishop of Lincolne writing vpon a part of Damascen deliuereth his opinion touching this controuersie
the Christian Church to wit the Bishop of Rome Constantinople Alexandria Antioch and Hierusalem and amongst these they yeeld a primacy of order and dignity to the Bishop of Rome So that in all Councels and meetings hee is to haue the first place in sitting or giving voyce in subscribing or defining and determining things concerning the faith and state of the Church but not any power or commaunding authority over them Wee sayth Marcus Ephesinus thinke the Pope to bee one of the fiue Patriarches if hee bee Orthodoxe But they that mette in the Florentine Councell and subscribed to the vnion there made do teach that hee is the Vicar of Christ the father and teacher of all Christians Secondly in the ministring of baptisme they differ much from the Roman Church For first the words of forme with them are let the servant of the Lord be baptized in the name of the Father and of the Sonne and of the holy Ghost and not I baptize thee as in the Latine Church 2ly they dippe the baptized thrice in the water whereas many among the Latines doe onely powre water vpon the top of the head 3ly they vse not salt spittle and the like as the Latinos doe 4l l they anoynt them with chrisom or holy oyle in the forehead so as in the Latine Church they are anoynted in confirmation And in some other parts also saying sigillum obsignatio donispiritus sancti that is the seale and obsignation of the gift of the holy Ghost and vse no other confirmation Whereas the Latines make it a sacrament to bee ministred by none but a Bishop 5ly According to the old custome vsed in the Primitiue Church they minister the Sacrament of the Eucharist to children when they baptize them 3ly They differ much more from the Latines touching the sacrament of the eucharist For first they vse leavened bread and some of them proceede so farre as that they thinke it no sacrament if it bee ministred in vnleavened bread 2ly They consecrate one loafe which they devide into many parts and giue to the communicants 3ly They keepe the bread and wine covered vntill they come to blesse and then drawing aside the curtaine they bring them into sight and lift them vp from the mysticall table that the people may see what heavenly foode is prepared for them And to this purpose with them serveth the elevation 4ly They thinke the consecration is made by the prayers and blessing and that the reciting of the words of Christ this is my body c. serveth onely to put vs in minde what was then done when he first instituted this Sacrament and to giue a power or aptnesse to the sacramentall elements to be chaunged mystically into his body and blood whereas the Latines thinke the bare recitall of the words of Christ doe worke the consecration 5ly They pronounce the words of Christ aloud that all may heare and vnderstand the Latines so that they are not heard 6ly They giue the sacrament to the hands of the communicants the Latines put it in their mouthes 7ly They condemne private masses as appeareth by Marcus Ephesinus who sayth the Priest in the Latine Church eateth all and drinketh all himselfe giving no part to any that are present no not to the Deacon that assisteth him and yet cryeth aloud take and eate So doe they many things sayth he in the celebration of this holy mystery contrary to the tradition receiued from the fathers contrary to the words of Christ and contrary to themselues and their owne words 8ly They minister the communion in both kinds to all communicants and thinke it necessary so to doe the Latines minister it onely in one kinde to the lay people and such Priests and cleargie men as consecrate not but are present onely to communicate 9ly They teach that there is a cōversion of the bread wine into the body blood of Christ. But such as that is whereby the iron is turned into fire or rather into a fiery nature being whence it becōmeth burning iron In which there is no abolishing of the substance but such a change that it is no longer meerely iron but the nature and properties of fire appeare in it rather then of iron So that as iron is turned into fire not by an absolute ceasing to be or loosing of former properties but by a suspension of them for a time so that they appeare not and by becomming one in such sort with the fire that it hath all the properties and actiōs of it so the bread is turned into the body of Christ not by an absolute ceasing to bee but by becomming one in such sort with Christs body thorough the presence of the spirit descending and comming downe vpon it as that the communicating in the one is the partaking in the other and an imparting of all such graces as may or doe flow from any vnion with the same The bread and wine sayth Damascen are so chaunged into the body blood of Christ by the presence of the spirit descending and comming downe vpon them as that they are no longer two but one and the same thing And as the coale is no longer meere wood or iron but so vnited to the fire that it is become one with it so the bread wherein wee communicate is no longer meere bread but vnited vnto the deity Hee doth not say the bread ceaseth to bee or is abolished but that it ceaseth to be that it was meere bread What kind of conversion this is we may learne out of Cyrill Vosvncti estis sayth he vnguento facti participes consortes Christi caeterum vide ne illud putes vnguentum tantum Quemadmodum enim panis eucharistiae post sancti spiritus invocationem non amplius est 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 sed corpus Christi sic sanctum hoc vnguentum non amplius est vnguentum nudum post invocationem neque siquis it a malit appellare commune sed donum Christi Heere wee see hee maketh the consecrated and holy oyntment to bee the gift of Christ as the bread is the body of Christ and so to cease to be meere oyle or oyntment as the bread which wee breake ceaseth to bee meere bread whereas yet no man imagineth any such transubstantiation of the oyle or holy oyntment as to abolish the nature and substance of it But that the Greckes neuer dreamed of any such conversion of the bread and wine as should vtterly abolish the former substance it is evident by Theodoret in his dialogues For whereas the Eutichian hereticke objects that as the outward signes in the Sacrament of the eucharist are chaunged after they are consecrated so the body of Christ after it was assumed was changed into the divine substance The Orthodoxe and right beleeuer answereth that he is taken in that snare which he layd for others For the mysticall signes doe not chaunge their nature after consecration but remaine and continue in the same
the time of Tho Aquinas for he saith they did eat nothing in his time on their fasting daies till the 9th houre in which houre Christ gaue vp the ghost 14 they think it not lawfull to carry the Eucharist to them that are sicke 15 Touching marriage they haue these opinions 1 they think the state of marriage is not inferiour to virginity 2 they thinke if the son contract without consent of the father the father may voide the marriage so likewise the father of the wife 3 they think the bond of marriage is dissolued by adulterie that the parties separated may marry again 4 they permit not the father the son to marry with the mother the daughter nor 2 bretheren with 2 sisters 5 they dislike the marriage of widdowes of 60 yeares of age 6 they allow not the 4th marriage whereas Hierom saith non damno bigamos imò nec trigamos ac si dici potest octogamos that is I dare not condemne theÌ„ that marry the 2d 3d or 8th time 16 touching orders 1 they ordain children of 5 or 6 years of age deacons 2 no man is ordained a Priest or deacon amongst theÌ„ except he haue first contracted matrimony that with a virgin not with a widow or woman dishonoured but neither of these is permitted to marry a 2d wife 17 they think it vnlawfull to eat of things strangled or bloud 18 they judge it vnlawfull to fast Saturday or Sunday Lastly they teach that no man entreth into the kingdome of heauen vntill the generall judgement These Maronites are now said to bee joyned in Communion with the Church of Rome since the time of Clemens the eight but how far forth they haue changed either their opinions or their rites and ceremonies it doth not appeare These onely and the Indians of all the Christians of the Orient hold Communion with the Church of Rome Out of all that which hath beene said two things are obseruable First that by the mercifull goodnes of God all these different sortes of Christians though distracted and dissevered by reason of diuersity of ceremonies and outward obseruations different manner of deliuering certaine poynts of faith mistaking one another or variety in opinion touching things not fundamentall doe yet agree in one substance of faith and are so far forth orthodox that they retaine a sauing profession of all diuine verities absolutely necessary to saluation and are all members of the true Catholicke Church of Christ. The second that in all the principall controuersies touching matters of religion betweene the Papists and those of the reformed Churches they giue testimony of the trueth of that wee professe For first they all deny and impugne that supreame vniuersality of ecclesiasticall jurisdiction which the Bishop of Rome claimeth Secondly they thinke him subject to errour as all other Bishops are Thirdly they deny that hee hath any power to dispose the principalities and kingdomes of the world or depose kings Fourthly they acknowledge all our righteousnesse to be imperfect and that it is not safe to trust therevnto but to the meere mercy and goodnesse of God Fiftly they admit not the merit of congruence condignitie nor works of supererogation Sixtly they teach not the doctrine of satisfactions as the Romanists do 7 They beleeue not Purgatorie neither pray to deliuer men out of temporall punishments after this life 8 They reject the doctrine of the Romanists touching indulgences and pardons 9 They beleeue not there are seaven Sacraments 10 They omit many ceremonies in baptisme which the Roman Church vseth as spittle c. 11. They haue no priuate masses 12 They minister the communion in both kindes to all communicants 13 They beleeue not transubstantiation nor the new reall sacrificing of Christ. 14 They haue the diuine service in the vulgar tongue 15 Their priests are married and though they permit them not to marry a second wife without speciall dispensation yet if any doe they doe not voyde nor dissolue the marriage 16 They make no image of God 17 They haue no massie images but pictures onely 18 They thinke that properly God onely is to be invocated and howsoeuer they haue a kinde of invocation of Saints yet they thinke that God only heareth them and not the Saints CHAP. 2. Of the harsh and vnaduised censure of the Romanistes condemning all these Churches as Schismaticall and hereticall ALL these Churches societies of Christians in number many in extent large in multitudes of men and people huge and great in continuance most auncient in defence of the Christian faith constant and vndaunted though enduring the malice and force of cruell bloody potent enemies the Bishop of Rome with his adherents judgeth to be hereticks or at least Schismaticks consequently to haue no hope of eternall saluation for that it is on the perill of euerlasting damnation imposed vpon euery soule to bow do reuerence at the sight of his triple crowne to kisse his sacred feet to beleeue nothing more nor longer then his holinesse shall decree define And therefore the most part of the Christian world is plunged into hell abandoned into vtter darkenes reserued in chaines vnto the judgment of the last day euer since that schismaticall acte of the base ignoble contemptible Councel of 600 Bishops assembled at Chalcedon who forgetting themselues presumed to equall another B. to the peerelesse and incomparable Vicar of Christ his Vicegerent generall on earth in comparison of whose greatnesse all other Episcopall and Patriarchicall dignity regall or Imperiall maiestie is no more then the light of a candle at midday when the sunne shineth in strength But because wee haue not receiued the marke of this Antichrist and child of perdition in our foreheades nor sworne to take the foame of his impure mouth and froath of his words of blasphemie wherein hee extolleth himselfe aboue all that is named God for oracles and infallible certainty and the rule of our faith Let vs therefore see what that heresie schisme is that cutteth of from the company of right beleeuers in such sort that whosoever is convinced of it is thereby clearely without all hope of eternall life CHAP. 3. Of the nature of heresie of the diuerse kinds of things wherein men erre and what pertinacie it is that maketh an heritique HEresie is not every errour but errour in matter of faith nor every eâ—…ror in matter of faith For neither Iewes nor Pagans are said to bee heritickes though they erre most damnably in those things which every one that will be saued must beleeue and with all the malice fury and rage that can be imagined impugne the Christian faith and verity but it is the errour of such as by some kind of profession haue beene Christians so that only such as by profession being Christians depart from the trueth of Christian religion are named heritickes These are of two sorts For there are haeretici scientes and there are haeretici
that vpon his bare word wee should beleeue so shamelesse a lye For Augustine which was before this Persian in his booke De moribus Ecclesiae libro primo capite tricesimo quarto hath the same heresie as it pleaseth these heretikes to call it Nolite inquit consectari turbas imperitorum qui in ipsà verâ religione superstitiosi sunt Novi multos esse sepulchrorum picturarum adoratores quos mores Ecclesia condemnat quotidiè corrigere studet And Gregory after the time of this supposed Persian doth condemne the adoration of Images And the Councell of Frankford likewise after his time as appeareth by Hincmarus and others Besides if Nicephorus follow the judgement of the Fathers of the second Nicene Councell hee meaneth nothing else by that adoration of Images which hee approoueth but the embracing kissing and reverent vsing of them like to the honour wee doe the Bookes of holy Scripture not that Religious worshippe which consisteth in spirit and trueth which the Papists yeelde to their Idoles And so there is as great difference of judgement betweene him and Bellarmine as betweene him and vs. That which Bellarmine addeth against Caluine and others touching the time that Images were first brought into the Church if this place did require the examination of it wee should finde him as notable a trifler therein as in all the rest CHAP. 37 Of the errour of the Lampetians touching vowes THe errour of the Lampetians was as Alphonsus à Castro supposeth that it is not lawfull for men to vowe and by vowing to lay a necessity vpon themselues of doing those things which freely and without any such tye might much better bee performed If they disliked simply all vowing wee doe not approue their opinion as may appeare by that which Kemnisius Zanchius and others haue written to this purpose and therefore wee are vniustly said to fauour their errour That which Bellarmine addeth for the strengthening of this his vniust imputation is a meere calumniation For Luther doth not say that a man should vow to do a thing as long as hee shall bee pleased and then to be free againe when hee shall dislike that which before hee resolued on but that all vowes should be made with limitation to bee so farre performed as humane frailty will permitte that it is better after a vow made to breake it to discend to the doing of that which is lawfull good though not carrying so great show of perfection as that which by vowe was promised than under the pretence of keeping it to liue in all dissolute wickednesse as the manner of the Popish votaries is whereupon the Fathers are cleare that marriage after a vow made of single life is lawfull and that it is better to marry than continuing single to liue lewdly and wantonly CHAP. 38. Of the heresie of certaine touching the verity of the body and blood of Christ communicated to vs in the Sacrament THe last heresie might well haue beene omitted For those heretikes condemned by Theodoret Ignatius and others denied the verity of Christs humane nature and thereupon condemned the Sacrament of his body and blood So that it was not the impugning of Popish Transubstantiation as Bellarmine idlely fancieth that was reprooued in them but the denying of the trueth of that body and blood which all true Christians doe know to bee mystically communicated to them in the Sacrament to their vnspeakeable comfort How then can we be charged with the heresie of these men seeing wee neither deny the verity of Christs humane nature nor make the Sacrament to be a naked figure or similitude only but acknowledge that it consisteth of two things the one earthly and the other heauenly and that the body of Christ is truely present in the Sacrament and communicated to vs though neither Capernaitically to be torne with the teeth nor popishly to bee swallowed and carried downe into the stomacke and belly Thus then wee see how fondly this Cardinall heretike hath indeuoured to prooue vs heretikes and to hold the old condemned heresies of those cursed Arch-heretikes whose frensies wee condemne much more than he and his fellowes doe So that he is so farre from demonstrating either our consent with condemned heretikes that were of old or their consent with the auncient Fathers and consequently the antiquity of their profession that contrarily all that are not blinded with partiality may easily see that the whole course of Popish doctrine is nothing but a confused mixture of errours and all that they write against vs nothing but meere calumniation slander CHAP. 39. Of Succession and the exceptions of the aduersaries against vs in respect of the supposed want of it THus then hauing taken a view of whatsoeuer they can or do alleage for proofe of the antiquity of their doctrine which is the first note of the Church assigned by them let vs come vnto the second which is Succession and see if they haue any better successe in it than in the former In what sense Succession may bee granted to bee a note of the true Church I haue shewed already let vs therefore see how and what our aduersaries conclude from thence against vs or for themselues By this note say they it is easie to prooue that the reformed Churches are not the true Churches of God Ecclesia non est quae non habet sacerdotem saith Hierome against the Luciferians It can be no Church that hath no Ministery And Cyprian to the same purpose pronounceth that the Church is nothing els but Plebs episcopo adunata Thus therefore from these authorities they reason Where there is no ministery there is no Church But amongst the Protestants there is no Ministerie therefore no Church The Minor proposition or assumption of this argument wee deny which they endeuour to prooue in this sorte There is no lawfull calling to the worke of the Ministery amongst the Protestants therefore no Ministery The defects they suppose to bee in the calling of our Bishops and Ministers are two fold first for that they that ordained them in the beginning of this alteration of things in the state of the Church had no power so to doe Secondly for that no man may be ordained but into a voide place either wherein there neuer was any Pastour or Bishop before as in Churches in their first foundation or wherein there hauing beene their place is now voide by the death depriuation or voluntary relinquishment of them that possest it before that so they who are newly elected and ordained may succeede into the void roomes of such as went before them and not intrude vpon their charge wherevnto they are still iustly intituled Our Bishops and Pastours were ordayned and placed in the beginning of the reformation of religion where there were Bishops already in actuall possession These being the defects which they suppose to be in the calling of our Bishops Ministers let
people that adhered to the Catholique verity who haue power to choose their Pastour to admitte the worthy and refuse the vnworthy did forsake the former that were wolues and not Pastours and submitted themselues to those of a better spirit Of the three first kindes of voidance there can bee no question of this fourth there may and therefore I will proue it by sufficient authoritie and strength of reason Cyprian Cecilius Polycarpus and other Bishoppes writing to the Cleargie and people of the Churches in Spaine whereof Basilides and Martialis were Bishoppes who fell in time of persecution denyed the fayth defiled themselues with Idolatry perswade them to separate themselues from those Bishoppes assuring them that the people beeing holy religious fearing God and obeying his lawes may and ought to separate themselues from impious and wicked Bishoppes and not to communicate with them in the matters of Gods service quando ipsa plebs maximè habeat potestatem vel eligendi dignos sacerdotes vel indignos recusandi that is seeing the people hath authority to choose the worthy and to refuse the vnworthy And Occam to the same purpose sayth on this sorte Si Papa maximè celebres episcopi incidant in haeresin ad Catholicos deuoluta est potestas omnis iudicandi If the Pope the principall Bishoppes of the Christian world doe fall into heresie the power of all Ecclesiasticall iudgement is deuolued to the inferiour Cleargie and people remaining Catholique This opinion of Cyprian and the rest if our aduersaries shall dislike or except against may easily be confirmed by demonstration of reason For if it do fall out that the Bishoppes and a great part of the people fall into errour heresie and superstition I thinke our aduersaries will not deny but that the rest are bound to maintaine and vphold the auncient veritie who being not so many nor so mighty as to bee able to eiect those wicked ones by a formall course of iudiciall proceeding what other thing is there left vnto them but either to consent to their impieties which they may not doe or to seperate themselues which is the thing our aduersaries except against in the people of our time Now hauing separated themselues from their former supposed and pretended Pastours what remaineth but that they make choise of new to bee ordained and set ouer them if not by the concurrence of such and so many as the strictnesse of the Canon doth ordinarily require to concurre in ordinations yet by such as in cases of necessity by all rules of equity are warranted to performe the same CHAP. 40. Of Succession and the proofe of the trueth of their doctrine by it THus hauing examined the allegation of the Papists endeuouring to prooue against vs that wee haue not the true Church amongst vs because as they falsely suppose wee lacke the visible Succession of Pastours and Bishops let vs see what they can conclude from this note of Succession for themselues In this part Bellarmine sheweth himselfe to be a notable trifler For first hee sayth that if there bee no Church where there is no succession then where there is succession continued the true Church doth remaine still Secondly being pressed with the example of the Graecians amongst whom a continuall succession of Bishops hath euer beene found hee answereth that succession doth not proue affirmatiuely that to bee the true Church where it is found but negatiuely that not to bee the true Church where it is wanting contrary to himselfe who requireth in the notes of the Church amongst which he reckoneth succession to be one of the prinpall that they be not only inseparable without which the true Church cannot bee but proper also and such as cannot be found in any other society but that which is the true Church of God Thirdly againe forgetting himselfe hee maketh succession proper to the true Church and such a note as may proue all those societies of Christians true Churches which haue it disliketh Calvin for saying that more is required to finde out the true Church than personall succession and that the Fathers did not demonstrate the Church barely by personall succession but by shewing that they that succeeded held the faith of those that went before them Thus he sheweth plainely that he knoweth not what he writeth This matter of succession Stapleton hath much more aptly delivered than Bellarmine confessing that not bare and personall succession but lawfull succession is a note of the true Church And defineth that to be lawfull succession when not only the latter succeede into the voide roomes of those that went before them being lawfully called therevnto but also hold the faith their predecessours did In this sort the Fathers were wont to reason from succession in the controuersies of Religion First they reckoned vp the successions of Bishops from the Apostles times then shewed that none of them taught any such thing as was then called in question but the contrary and consequently that the Apostles deliuered no such thing but the contrary To Bellarmines disiunction that either the Fathers made it appeare to Catholickes or to Heretickes that the succeeding Bishops held the same faith the former did we answere They made it appeare to both For so doth Irenaeus proue the tradition of the Apostles to be for him and against the Heretickes he refuteth because he can number all the Bishops in the principall Churches from the Apostles times downeward none of which euer taught any such thing as those heretiques dreamed but the contrary That which Bellarmine addeth that if it had appeared to heretiques that the true faith had beene kept by succeeding Bishops they would haue yeelded to it is as little to the purpose as the rest For we do not say it did apeare vnto them they held the truth but that they held the same faith their predecessours held Now though the Fathers made this appeare vnto them yet they feared not to oppose themselues as the same Irenaeus witnesseth affirming that when it was prooued against the heretiques of those times that in the succession of Bishoppes those that succeeded held the same faith the former did without any alteration and consequently the Apostles doctrine was still continued in their Churches they thought themselues wiser then the Apostles thēselues affirming that they mingled the Law and the Gospell together taking exceptions of ignorance and imperfection against them and their doctrine Thus then wee see the Fathers did not reason barely from personall sucession but by shewing affirmatiuely the faith they defended to haue beene receiued by all those Bishops whose succession they vrged against their aduersaries and negatiuely by proouing that none of them euer beleeued any such things as their adversaries dreamed If the Romanists wil dispute against vs in this sort and demonstrate that the Fathers successiuely held those opinions they do and that none of them were of that iudgment in matter of faith that
disposing the affaires of Princes their States there were euer many worthy men that opposed themselues against his vnjust and Antichristian claimes There are some sayth Waldensis that erre supposing that the roote of all terrene power dependeth in such sort of the Pope that it is deriued vnto Princes by commission from him and that if they abuse the same hee may take the disposing of such affaires as belong vnto them into his own hands This they indeauour to proue because the Ecclesiasticall power is more eminent and excellent than the power of Princes but this their proofe is too weake for let vt runne through all examples of things which are different in degree of excellencie and one of them more worthy than another wee shall see that the Sunne is better than the Moone yet the power and vertue of moystening that is in the Moone is not imparted to it from the Sunne the soule is more excellent than the body yet the body was before the soule came into it and in it many workes of sense are performed which the spirit by it selfe cannot performe gold is better then leade yet doth it not giue being vnto it so that though it were granted that Episcopall dignity is more high and eminent then the authority of Princes yet the first spring of Regall power is in the King from God and not from the Pope There is sayth Waldensis one doctor Adam a Cardinall who in a dialogue betweene a Bishoppe and a King indeauoureth altogether to deriue the authority of Kings from the Papall power both in the being and excercise of it and reserueth onely a power of execution to Princes at the commaund of the high bishop this errour hee condemneth and sayth that howsoeuer the solemnities of the oath vnction crowning and the like are performed to Kings by Bishoppes yet hath not kingly dignity her beginning from Priesthood but by the ministery of Priests Kings receiue it from God and are put in possession of it Fawning and deceitfull flattery sayth Gerson whispereth in the eares of Ecclesiasticall persons especially of the Pope in shamelesse manner saying vnto them O sacred Clergie how great how great is the height and sublimity of thy Ecclesiasticall power how is all secular authority compared thereunto altogether nothing For as all power in heauen and earth was giuen to Christ soe Christ left it all to Peter and his Successours soe that Constantine the Emperour gaue nothing to Pope Syluester that was not his before but onely restored that which had bin vnjustly detayned besides as there is no power but of God so is there none whether Temporall or Ecclesiasticall Imperiall or Regall but from the Pope in whose thigh CHRIST hath written King of Kings and Lord of Lords of whose power to dispute is sacrilegious boldnesse to whom no man may say Sir why doe you so though he alter over-turne waste and confound all States Rules Dominions and Possessions of men whether Ciuill or Ecclesiasticall let me be judged a Lyar saith he if these things bee not found written by them that seeme wise in their owne eyes and if some Popes haue not giuen credit to such lying and flattering wordes Nay I am greatly deceiued if before the holding of the sacred Synode of Constance this tradition did not so farre forth possesse the mindes of very many men rather literall then literate that whosoeuer should haue taught the contrary should haue beene noted and condemned for heresie THE FOVRTH BOOK OF THE PRIVILEDGES OF THE CHVRCH CHAP. 1. Of the divers kindes of the priviledges of the Church and of the different acceptions of the name of the Church NOw it remayneth that wee proceede to the other parts of our first generall diuision to wit the priviledges that pertaine to the Church the diverse and different degrees orders and callings of them to whom the gouernement of it is committed The priviledges that pertaine to the Church are of two sorts The first proper to the best and most essentiall parts of it to wit the elect and chosen of God as are the promises and assurances of euerlasting loue and happinesse the second such as are communicable vnto others not partaking in that highest degree of vnitie the partes of the Church haue amongst themselues or with Christ their head These are specially foure the first the possession of the rich treasure of heauenly trueth whence it is called by Irenaeus Depositoriū diues by the Apostle the pillar and ground of truth The second is the office of teaching and witnessing the same truth The third the authority to iudge of such differences as arise amongst men concerning any part of it The fourth is power to make lawes for the better guiding gouerning of them that professe this truth Touching the first that wee may the better vnderstand in what degree and sort and vpon what assurances the Church is possessed of the knowledge and profession of the truth reuealed in Christ wee must obserue the diverse acceptions of the name of Church for accordingly more or lesse in this kinde is attributed to it and verified of it The Romanistes make the Church to bee of three sorts For there is as they say Ecclesia virtualis repraesentativa essentialis By the name of virtuall Church they vnderstand the Bishoppe of Rome who being by Christes appointment as they suppose chiefe Pastor of the whole Church hath in himselfe eminently and virtually as great certainty of truth infallibility of iudgement as is in the whole Church vpon whom dependeth all that certainety of truth that is found in it By the name of representatiue Church they vnderstand the assembly of Bishops in a generall Councell representing the whole body of the Church from the seuerall parts whereof they come By the name of the essentiall Church they vnderstand the whole multitude of the beleeuers This essentiall Church either comprehendeth all the faithfull that are and haue beene since CHRIST appeared in the flesh or all that are and haue beene since the Apostles time or onely those that now presently liue in the world CHAP. 2. Of the different degrees of infallibility found in the Church IF we speake of the Church as it comprehendeth the whole number of beleeuers that are and haue beene since CHRIST appeared in the flesh it is absolutely free from all errour and ignorance of Diuine things that are to be knowne by revelation Quid enim latuit Petrum c. For as Tertullian sayth rightly and aptly to this purpose What was hidden and concealed from Peter vpon whom Christ promised to build his Church and to whom hee gaue the keyes of the Kingdome of Heauen from Iohn the Disciple hee so dearely loued which leaned on his breast at the mysticall Supper and the rest of that blessed company that should after bee manifested to succeeding generations so that touching the Church taken in this sort there is no question but it is absolutely led
commissions they authorized others to preach the Gospell administer Sacraments to binde and loose and to performe other like pastorall duties sanctifying and ordayning them to this worke by the imposition of hands These they honoured with the glorious title of Presbyters that is fatherly guides of Gods Church and people and knowing the weight of the burden they layd on their shoulders added vnto them as assistantes other of an inferiour degree and rancke whom they named Deacons or Ministers Amongst these fatherly guides of Gods Church and people for the preuenting of dissention the avoyding of confusion and the more orderly managing of the important affaires of Almighty God they established a most excellent diuine and heavenly order giuing vnto one amongst the Presbyters of each Church an eminent fatherly power so that the rest might doe nothing without him whom for distinctions sake and to expresse the honour of his degree and place afore and aboue other wee name a Bishoppe And farther by a most wise disposition provided that amongst Bishoppes all should not challenge all things vnto themselues but that there should be in seuerall provinces seuerall Bishops who should be first and chiefe amongst the brethren and againe constituted and placed certaine other in greater cities who might take care of more then the former The former of these were named Metropolitanes the later were knowen by the name of Patriarchs or chiefe Fathers who also in order and honour were one before and after another By meanes of this order established by the Apostles of Christ among the guides of Gods people and receiued and allowed by the first and Primitiue Christians vnity was preserued the parts of the Church holden fast together in a band of concordant agreement questions determined doubtes cleared differences composed and causes aduisedly deliberately heard with all indifferencie and equity Fow how could there bee any breach in the Christian Churches when none were ordained Presbyters in any Church but by the Bishop the rest of the Presbyters imposing their hands on them together with him None admitted to the degree and order of a Bishop but by the Metropolitane and other Bishops of the Prouince sufficiently approuing that they did to the people ouer which they set him None receiued as a Metropolitane vnlesse being ordained by the Bishops of the Province vpon notice giuen of their orderly proceeding the sincerity of his faith and profession he were confirmed by the Patriarch Nor none taken for a Patriarch though ordained by many neighbour Bishops till making knowne the soundnesse of his profession and the lawfulnesse of his election and ordination to the rest of the Patriarches hee were allowed receiued by them as one of their ranke and order Or what feare could there be of any wrong injustice or sinister proceedings in the hearing of causes and determining of controversies vnlesse there were in a sort a generall failing When if there grew a diffence betweene a Bishop and his Presbyters or if either Presbyter Deacon or inferiour Cleargy-man disliked the proceedings of his Bishop there lay an appeale to the Metropolitane who had power to re-examine the matter in a Synode and to see they were not wronged And if either Clearke or Bishop had ought against the Metropolitane it was lawfull for them to appeale to the Primate or Patriarch who in a greater and more honourable Synode was to heare the matter and to make a finall end When if any variance rose between any of the Patriarchs and their Bishops or amongst themselues it was lawfull for the Patriarchs that were aboue and before them in order and honour to interpose themselues and with their Synods to judge of such differences and in such cases as could not so be ended or that cōcerned the faith the state of the whole vniuersall Church there remained the judgment and resolution of a generall Councell wherein the Bishop of the first See was to sit as President and Moderatour and the other Bishops of the Christian world as his fellow Iudges and in the same commission with him This order continued in the Church from the Apostles times and wrought excellent effects till the Bishop of Constantinople first sought and after him the Bishop of Rome obtained to be not only in order and honour before the rest as anciently he had beene but to haue an absolute and vniuersall commaunding power ouer all that either by fraud or violence he could bring into subjection Whence followed horrible confusion in the Christian Church and almost the vtter ruine and desolation of the same For after that this childe of pride had in this Lucifer-like sort advanced himselfe aboue his brethren hee thrust his sickle into other mens haruests hee encroached vpon their bounds and limits hee pretended a right to confer all dignities whether electiue or presentatiue to receiue appeales of all sorts of men out of all parts of the world nay without appeale or complaint immediatly to take notice of all causes in the Diocesses of all other Bishops so ouerthrowing their jurisdiction and seizing it in his owne hands Hee exempted Presbyters from the jurisdiction of their Bishops Bishops of their Metropolitans and Metropolitanes of their Primates and Patriarches and leauing vnto the rest nothing but a naked and empty title tooke vpon him to determine all doubts and questions of himselfe alone as out of the infallibility of his judgment to excommunicate degrade depose againe to absolue reconcile and restore to heare and judge of all causes as out of the fulnesse of his power Neither did he there stay but hauing subjected vnto him as much as in him lay all the members of Christs body and trampled vnderneath his feete the honour dignity of all his brethren and collegues hee went forward and challenged a right to dispose of all the kingdomes of the world as being Lord of Lords and King of Kings To this height he raised himselfe by innumerable sleights and cunning devices taking the advantage of the ignorance superstition negligence and base disposition which hee found to be in many of the guides of the Church in those dayes and by their helpe and concurrence preuailing against the rest that were of another spirit Neither did he demeane himselfe any better after he had attained to this his desired greatnesse for such was his pride insolencie and tyrannie and such soe many and vnsupportable were the burthens he layd on the shoulders of them that were noe way able to beare them that the voyces of complaint and murmuring were euery where heard and the mindes of all men filled with discontentment and desire of alteration which after many longing desires of our ancestours hath beene effected in our time God at the last hearing the cryes of his people and stirring vp the heroicall spirits of his chosen seruants to worke our deliuerance to take the burthens from our shoulders the yoake from our necke and to bring vs out of that Babylon wherein
to their after-commers by succession but in steed of immediate calling wee haue now succession in steed of infallibility of judgment the direction of their writings guiding vs to the finding out of the truth in steede of Generall commission particular Assignation of seuerall Churches to rule and parts of Christs flocke to feed in steed of miraculous gifts and the Apostles power to conferre them a setled course of Schooles and Vniuersities fitting men for the worke of the Ministery insteed of their Miracles wherewith they confirmed their doctrine the Faith already receiued and by so many generations recommended vnto vs as confirmed by the Apostles Miracles at the first Neither was it fit as Saint Augustine noteth that these miraculous courses should still haue continued For euen as a man that neuer had seene the seede cast into the earth and there rotting and the trees dead in Winter after reuiuing and flourishing againe in their appointed time would wonder no lesse at it then if he should see a blind man receiue sight or a dead man life but now that these things are ordinary wee little esteeme them so if those miraculous things appearing in the Apostles and first Ministers of Christ which with their newnesse and strangenesse moued much at the first should haue beene continued still they would haue grown into contempt and not haue beene regarded at all All that which hath beene sayd touching the dignity Apostolicall and the things properly pertaining to it is so cleare and euident that wise and judicious men make no question of any part thereof Yet are there some that seeme to doubt whether the Apostles generally had immediate calling or vniuersality of commission supposing that Peter onely was immediately designed by Christ and the rest by him that he onely had an illimited commission without all restraint and the rest an inferiour commission to that of Peter bounded and stinted Touching the first of these doubts Bellarmine whose manner it is not to conceale the diuisions and differences that are or haue beene amongst the Friends and Louers of the Church of Rome but to write them in the forehead of euery controuersie sheweth that there are three opinions amongst the Diuines of the Romish Church touching this point The first that as well the Apostles as succeeding Bishops receiued their power and and jurisdiction from Peter and his supposed successour the Bishop of Rome The second that both Apostles and Bishops receiued their Ecclesiasticall power and jurisdiction immediately from Christ and not from Peter nor his Successours The third that Bishops receiue their jurisdiction from the Pope but that the Apostles receiued all their power and jurisdiction immediately from CHRIST and not from Peter The Second of these opinions is wholly true and I will in due place confirme the same The third in part true and in part false which Bellarmine followeth and the first wholly false which hee largely and substantially confuteth prouing first that the Apostles receiued all their jurisdiction and power immediately from Christ and not from Peter as well out of the words of our Sauiour when hee sayth As my Father sent mee soe send I you as out of the election of Matthias who was not chosen by Peter or the other Apostles but designed immediatly by God himselfe shewing by direction of the Lot falling on Matthias that it was hee whom hee would haue to succede into the void roome of Iudas the Traytour adding that the Apostles gaue him no authority and that Paul professeth the same touching himselfe protesting that hee receiued all his power and Iurisdiction immediately from Christ and thereby prouing himselfe to be an Apostle Secondly he proueth that the fullnesse of all Ecclesiasticall power was committed to all the Apostles in as large and ample sort as to Peter by the testimonies of Chrysostome and Theophylact and that Christ by those words As my Father sent mee so send I you made all the Apostles his Vicars or Vicegerents yea gaue them his owne office and authority and out of Cyrill that by these words he made them Apostles and Doctours of the whole world and that to let them know that in Apostolique power hee gaue them all Ecclesiasticall power he sayd vnto them As my Father sent me so send I you it being certaine that the Father sent the Sonne with all fulnesse of power Farther he addeth out of Cyprian that the same fulnesse of power was giuen vnto the rest of the Apostles by those words As my Father sent me so send I you that was promised to Peter by those I will giue thee the keyes of the Kingdome of Heauen performed by those other Feed my Sheep feed my Lambes Now saith he it is certain that by those words I will giue thee the keyes of the Kingdome of Heauen and by those other Feed my sheep c. is vnderstood all fulnesse of Iurisdiction both inward and outward therefore the fulnesse of Ecclesiasticall power and Iurisdiction was giuen to euery one of the Apostles Thus then the Cardinall confesseth first that all the Apostles were immediately taught of God without learning any thing of Peter or needing in any thing to be confirmed by him Secondly that their commission was generall so that there was not any act of Ecclesiasticall Ministery to which their commission did not extend nor any places in which nor persons towardes whom they might not performe the acts of their Ministery Thirdly that they receiued all this authority and power immediatly from Christ and not from Peter and that therefore they could neither be limited nor wholly restrained by him in the vse and exercise of the same Thus doth hee ouerthrow the whole frame and fabrique of their building who ground the pretended supremacy of the Pope vpon Christs words spoken to Peter For to what purpose doe they vrge that to Peter onely Christ said Feede my Sheepe c that to him onely he gaue the keyes of the Kingdome of Heauen and vpon him onely promised to build his Church seeing they are forced to confesse that the commission of feeding Christs sheepe was giuen in as ample sort to the rest as to Peter that they all receiued the whole power of the keyes that the Church was builded vpon the rest as well as vpon Peter and equally founded vpon them all If the Cardinall shall shrinke from this his confession we can easily force him to it againe and make him acknowledge that whatsoeuer Christ promised intended or performed by any of his speeches directed vnto Peter he performed to all Christ said specially to Peter Feede my sheepe yet had the rest our Adversaries being Iudges the same commission Hee promised to him the keyes of the Kingdome of Heauen so that what hee should binde on Earth should bee bound in Heauen hee named him Peter and promised vpon that Rocke to build his Church yet all receiued the same keyes as well as he the same power of binding and
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
PETERS being a Pastor which is the onely thing they canne alleage to proue that what hee had was pastorall and perpetuall proueth it not and the proofe of the necessitie of the continuance of any preeminence found in Peter and the rest of the Apostles sheweth that such a preeminence must continue but not in what person or persons it must continue But let vs see whether infallibility of judgment and vniversality of Iurisdiction bee amongst the things that were proper to the beginnings of Christianity or amongst those that are perpetually necessary Surely touching the first Bellarmine seemeth to confesse that the being taught immediately of GOD and the being absolutely free from errour soe that their writings and sayings were Canonicall were temporarie in the Apostles as necessary onely in those first beginnings of Christianity and whether hee confesse it or not it is most vndoubtedly true that that absolute infallibility that was in Peter for whose faith Christ prayed that it might not faile was temporary and not to bee communicated to any after-commers for hee was so lead into all trueth that hee could not erre in any of his writings and preachings whereas all confesse that euen Popes may erre in both these and that they are free from errour onely when they determine those things wherein the whole Church seeketh their resolution Touching the second which is vniuersality of jurisdiction the same Cardinall hath these words Fuit in illis Ecclesiae primordijs necessarium ad fidem in toto orbe terrarum disseminandam vt primis praedicatoribus Ecclesiarum fundatoribus summa potestas libertas concederetur That is in those first beginnings of the Church it was necessary for the quicke dispersing of the Faith throughout the whole world that the first Preachers and founders of Churches should haue a most ample power and free commission without that streightning and limitation of the same that is in their after-commers that soe euery one of them might truely vse those words of the Apostle Instantia mea quotidiana sollicitudo omnium Ecclesiarum that is my dayly instance is the carefulnesse of all Churches or as some other translate it I am cumbred dayly and haue the care of all Churches And therefore howsoeuer the Apostles diuided amongst themselues the seuerall parts of the world to which each one of them should more specially preach the word of the Lord yet did they not shut vp and inclose their cares within the bounds and compasse of any one prouince but euery one of them did soe take care of the whole Church as if that care had pertained vnto him alone Thus farre Bellarmine clearely confessing that the illimited comission of the Apostles was fitted to those first beginnings of Christianity and the condition of those first times soe that the same reason that excludeth the other dignities and preeminencies of the Apostles as namely their being fitted to the first beginnings excludeth both these from being perpetuall likewise But let vs let this aduantage go and take a view of those proofes which they bring of the power of Peters Successours aboue other Bishops whereas Peter himselfe had noe power more then any of the rest It is true say they that Peter had noe power which the rest had not but he had that amplitude of Ecclesiasticall power as an ordinary Pastour which they had onely as Apostles and Delegates by speciall fauour and personall priviledge Against this distinction few of our Diuines say any thing many of them confessing they vnderstand it not so deepe is the learning of our Adversaries that euery Man cannot bee so happie as to vnderstand what they write Which is the lesse to be marvailed at seeing many of them scarce vnderstand themselues and yet contemne vs as if we were silly idiots But if without offence wee may conjecture what the meaning of this their riddle is surely vnder correction I thinke this it is The rest of the Apostles had as great authoritie and power and as large a commission as Peter had but they had it onely for terme of life and could leaue none to succeed them in the same He had it for himselfe and such as hee would leaue it vnto Besides he was first invested with all the plenitude of Ecclesiasticall power jurisdiction so that none could haue any thing to doe in this businesse but such as should receiue commission from him saue onely that Christ reserued power to himselfe to giue commission to such as by speciall fauour hee should be pleased to honour as were the Apostles separated to the worke of the Ministerie by his owne immediate designement without receiuing any thing from Peter but afterwards all were either to receiue of him or of them to whom hee should leaue his office and charge This their conceipt they illustrate by a similitude A Bishop say they hath authoritie to preach in his Diocese as Pastour of the place and whosoeuer succeedeth him in his Bishoplie office succeedeth him in the same power likewise A Fryer by speciall fauour from the Pope may preach in the same Diocese wheresoeuer the Bishop may and cannot be silenced or restrained by him because hee receiued nothing from him but his superiour the Pope but another desiring to succeed the Fryer not so fauoured and priviledged by the Pope must fetch his commission and allowance from the Bishop and be subject to him in the performance and execution thereof So heere Peter was first constituted Pastour of all the World the Apostles were by speciall fauour authorized immediately by Christ to preach in Peters charge and to gouerne the Church whereof he was Bishop as well as he but yet so that all they that were to follow after were to deriue their commission from Peter or his Successour if they would meddle in the Church which was his charge Many things are said by Caietan Bellarmine Stapleton and others to this purpose but this is the substance of all Wherfore let vs see how they proue that they say Touching the first of these two points thus they proue it Peter was a Pastour and had that amplitude of illimited commission before described as a Pastour but the office of a Pastour is of perpetuall necessitie and vse and therefore this his illimited power and commission was to be perpetually continued That Peter was a Pastour they proue because Christ said vnto him expressely Feede my Sheepe Feed my Lambes This is the frame of their whole building which may very easily be throwne to the ground if any man will put his hand vnto it First because it is certaine the other Apostles were Pastours also so that if Peters being a Pastour proue the necessitie of the continuance of those ample preheminences hee had and that hee might leaue them to whom he pleased it would follow that the rest of the Apostles also had their preheminences which were equall with those of Peter not as things temporarie but perpetuall and such as they might
leaue to whom they pleased That the other Apostles were Pastours first the Hymne of the Church wherein they are expressely saide to haue bin constituted Pastours by Christ proueth Secondly the confession of Bellarmine acknowledging that what was giuen to Peter by those wordes Feede my sheepe was giuen vnto all by those other wordes As my Father sent me so send I you confirmeth the same And thirdly the enumeration of the seuerall kindes of feeding euery of which the Diuines doe shew to agree to the rest as well as to Peter demonstrateth that they were all Pastours Secondly whereas they say that the office of a Pastour is a thing of perpetuall vse and necessitie and consequently perpetuall and that the amplitude of power which was in Peter agreed vnto him in that hee was a Pastor and as a Pastor they bewray notable ignorance and folly For it is true indeed that the office of a Pastor is of perpetuall vse and necessity and soe to continue for euer but the amplitude of power and jurisdiction and the great preëminences that were in Peter did not agree vnto him as to a Pastour or in that hee was a Pastor For if they had then must they agree to euery Pastor so euery Bishop must haue the same not the Pope only For as whatsoever agreeth to a man in that he is a man agreeth to every man so whatsoeuer agreeth to a Pastor in that he is a Pastor agreeth to euery one that is a Pastor If they shall say that the great and ample preëminences that were in Peter did not agree vnto him as a Pastor but in some other respect then his beeing a Pastor which is an office of perpetuall necessity vse and continuance will not proue the same perpetuall no more then other things which this Pastour had in that he was an Apostle If they shall say these things agreed vnto him not in that he was a Pastor but in that he was such a Pastor as was to feed the flocke of Christ and people of God by deliuering vnto them the doctrine of truth without all mixture of any the least errour to confirme the same by miracles following to giue the visible gifts of the holy Spirit by the only imposition of his hands it is true that they say but such a Pastour they confesse is necessary onely in the beginnings of the Christian Church and not afterwards and therefore from hence it cannot be concluded that the ample preëminences that were in Peter as his infallibility of judgement and illimited Commission were to be passed ouer from him to his Successors and after-commers Their second conceipt is more fond then the first For if Peter were by Christ constituted sole supreme Pastour and Bishoppe of the whole vniuersall world and yet his meaning was that others should likewise receiue immediatly from himselfe power to doe as much in the governing of the Church as Peter he meant to giue him something and presently to take it from him againe For as if the Pope shall make a man Bishop of such a cittie or countrey and thereby giue vnto him that supreme direction that nothing shall be done within that compasse without his authoritie and consent and shall presently send another with full authority to doe any thing that the former may do and no way to bee subiect to his controule or restraint in the performance thereof or accomptant for it hee reuoketh and maketh voyde his first graunt so here if Christ make Peter supreme Bishoppe and Pastour of the whole Christian world and presently constitute eleuen other Apostles with power and commission to doe any thing that Peter may doe in all parts of the world and towards all persons which as they haue not from him so he cannot take it from them or limit them in the vse of it hee absolutely voideth his first graunt made to Peter But they will say perhaps that Christ meant little fauour to Peter more then to one of the rest of the Apostles but that all his care was for the good of the Pope whom hee meant to make a great man in the world and that therefore he constituted the other Apostles immediatly as well as Peter put them into equall commission with him and would not haue them beholding to him for any honour or power they had but appointed that all other Bishops should receiue their mission calling commission and authority from Peter during the short time of his life and after his departure in all succeeding ages to the end of the world from his Successours the Bishoppes of Rome This truly is well said in fauour of the Pope if it were as truly said as it is kindly meant but we shall find that there is no truth in that they say For it is cleare and evident that each Apostle by his commission hee had from Christ without being any way beholding to Peter for it had authority to preach the Gospell to such as neuer heard of it before to plant Churches and ordaine constitute in them Pastours and Bishops and out of his more large and ample commission to make other though somewhat more restrained and limited whence it will follow that they whom any of the other Apostles ordained and constituted Pastours and Bishoppes which were innumerable in all parts of the world receiued nothing from Peter nor his pretended Successour Now they whom the Apostles thus constituted and ordained might constitute and ordaine other by vertue of their office and calling they had from the Apostles and those other other againe to succeede them so that none of these to the end of the world one succeeding another should euer receiue any thing frō Peter or his pretended Successor And therefore it is absurd that Bellarmine saith that the Apostles receiued all their jurisdiction immediately from Christ that yet notwithstanding all Bishops receiue the same frō the Pope And those Papists are better aduised that say that the Bishops of other Churches receiue not their jurisdiction from the Pope but from Christ by those Apostles that constituted their Churches and planted their predecessours in the same setting them the bounds of their Bishop-like charge whence it will follow as Bellarmine wisely foresaw and therefore declined this opinion that the Pope cannot either take away or diminish their authority vnlesse any man can shew where Christ gaue him power to limite restraine or take away that power from men which they haue from himselfe by the hands of the other Apostles and their after-commers without being any way beholding to Peter for the same Wherefore they haue yet one more strange conceipt behind to helpe the matter then any of those we haue hitherto heard which is that Peter being not onely an Apostle but supreme Pastour and Bishop of the whole world constituted by Christ made the other Apostles Bishops and Pastours and that they ordained Bishops not by vertue of their Apostolique power which they receiued immediately from
Christ without being beholding to Peter for it or inferiour to him in it but by vertue of their Bishoply authority and offīce which they receiued from Peter Alioqui enim sayth Bellarmine cum omnes Apostoli plurimos Episcopos in varijs locis constituerint si Apostoli ipsi non sint facti Episcopi à Petro certè maxima pars Episcoporum nondeducit originem suam à Petro that is For otherwise seeing all the Apostles constituted exceeding many Bishops in diuerse places if the Apostles themselues were not made Bishops by Peter certainely the greatest part of Bishoppes will not fetch their originall from Peter This his fancie of Peters making the other Apostles Bishoppes immediately after as his manner is like an honest man hee contradicteth confessing that the Apostles were all Bishops and the first Bishops of the Church in that they were Apostles without any such ordination Omnes Apostoli sayth he fuerunt Episcopi imò etiam primi Episcopi Ecclesiae tametsi non sunt ordinati that is All the Apostles were Bishops nay which more is the first Bishops of the Church without any other or new ordination besides their Apostolique mission and calling And in another place he pronoūceth perēptorily that by vertue of these words As my Father sēt me so sēd I you the Apostles were made Vicars of Christ nay that they receiued the very offīce authority of Christ and that in the Apostolique power all Ecclesiasticall power is contained and though in the former place he sayd expressely Non eo ipso quòd aliquis est Apostolus est Episcopus that is A man is not therefore a Bishop because an Apostle for the twelue were Apostles before they were either Bishops or Priests yet in the later place hee sayth it is not to be maruailed at that they were Apostles before the passīon of Christ and yet neither Priests nor Bishops for that the Lord at diuerse times gaue the Apostles diuerse kindes and degrees of power but especiallie in the twentith of Iohn perfected that hee beganne before his passīon Soe that an Apostle perfectly constituted and authorised hath both Priestlie and Episcopall dignitic and power though in the beginning when the Apostles were rather designed then fully constituted not hauing receiued their full Commissīon they vvere neither Priests nor Bishoppes But to leaue BELLARMINE lost in these mazes it is most easie demonstratiuely to proue that the Apostles in that they were Apostles perfectly and fully constituted had both Priestlie and Bishoply dignity and power in most eminent sort For did not CHRIST giue the Apostles power to doe any Ecclesiasticall act that a Bishoppe can doe Did hee not giue them power to preach and baptize vvhen hee sayd vnto them Go teach all nations Baptizing them c to minister the holy Eucharist vvhen hee sayd Doe this as est as ye shall doe it in remembrance of mee Did hee not giue them the power of the Keyes of binding loosing of remitting retaining sinnes consequently all that commeth within the compasse of Ecclesiasticall office and Ministerie doubtlesse hee did Neither is there any that dareth to deny any part of that which hath beene saide And therefore it is an idle fansie that Peter made the rest of his fellowes Bishops the Apostolique power implying in it eminently Episcopall as the greater the lesser But they will say Peter made Iames the lesser Bishop of Hierusalem Indeed Baronius falsifieth Chrysostome and maketh him say that the Doctour of the world made Iames Bishop of Hierusalem whereas hee saith no such thing but asking the question why Peter whom Christ so much fauoured was not preferred to bee Bishop of Hierusalem answereth that Christ made him Doctour of the world which was a greater honour then to haue beene fastened to the Church of Hierusalem to haue beene set in the Episcopall Throne there But it is cleare by the testimonies of Antiquity that Peter Iames the greater Iohn ordained Iames Bishop of Hierusalem So saith Anacletus in his second Epistie if any credit be to be giuen vnto it where hee hath these words A Bishop must be ordained of three Bishops as Peter Iames the greater and Iohn ordained Iames the lesser Bishop of Hierusalem Clemens Alexandrinus also as we reade in Eusebius saith the very same and Hierome de viris illustribus attributeth the ordaining of Iames not to Peter alone but to the Apostles His words are Iacobus statim post passionem Domini ab Apostolis Hierosolymorum Episcopus ordinatur that is Iames presently after the passion of the Lord is ordained Bishop of Hierusalem by the Apostles If any man aske how the Apostles did ordaine or make Iames being an Apostle a Bishop if the Apostolique office imply in it the office and dignitie of a Bishop as the greater the lesser we answere that a Bishop differing from an Apostle as in other things so in this that he is fixed to some certaine place whereof specially hee taketh the care whereas the care imployment of an Apostle is more at large When the Apostles after the conversion of Nations and people began to retire themselues to certaine places there to rest and specially to take care thereof they were in that respect rather Bishops then Apostles and in this sort Iames the lesser being appointed by the Apostles to make his principall abode at Hierusalem a chiefe city of the world whence the faith spread it selfe into all other parts and more specially to take care thereof is rightly said to haue beene constituted Bishop of that place by them not as if they had giuen him any new power and authority that he had not before or not in so perfect sort but that they limited and restrained him more specially to one certaine place where he should vse the same The place in the Acts maketh nothing for the confirmation of the Popish errour for Paul and Barnabas formerly designed by Christ to be Apostles were againe by the ministerie of Prophets revealing the will and pleasure of Almighty GOD separated more specially to bee Apostles of the Gentiles and put forth into that employment with fasting prayer and imposition of hands not thereby receiuing any new power but a speciall limitation and assignation of those parts of the world wherein principally they should be employed Besides these were not Apostles but Prophets such as Agabus was that are mentioned in this place inferiour in degree to Apostles and such as might not make an Apostle to be a Bishop but did onely signifie and reueale what the will of God was and whither he meant to send these worthy Apostles and so with prayer and fasting commended them to the grace of God and therefore this place maketh nothing for proofe of Peters ordaining and appointing the rest of the Apostles to be Bishops CHAP. 24. Of the preeminence that Peter had amongst the Apostles and the reason why Christ directed his speeches specially
proued and all confesse but that what hee gaue to others it did so passe vnto them as that in the first place it was giuen to Peter and hee thereby set in order and honour before the rest put in the same commission with him so that Peter receiued not a different or more large commission from Christ then the other Apostles but onely a kinde of honourable precedence preëminence and priority such as the Duke of Venice hath amongst the great Lords of that state to whom all Embassies and messages are directed from forreine Princes and in whose name all letters warrants and mandates are sent out as representing the whole State yet can hee doe nothing without the rest nor crosse the consenting resolution of those noble Senators And in this sense it is that Augustine saith of Peter that he was by nature one particular man by grace a christian man by more ample and abundant grace a chiefe Apostle but that when hee receiued the Keyes hee represented the whole vniuersall Church not as a legate that representeth the person of his Prince and receiueth honours dignities and titles for him and not for himselfe but as chiefe of the company of the Apostles receiuing for himselfe in the first place that which in him and together with him was intended to them all This primacie of honour and order found in blessed Peter who is therevpon named by the Fathers Prince and head of the Apostles is the originall of all that superiority that Metropolitanes haue ouer the Bishops of their prouinces and Primates and Patriarches ouer Metropolitanes and in a word of all that order that is in the Church and amongst her guides whereby vnitie is preserued 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 HAuing spoken of the Apostles power and office and the largenesse of that commission it remaineth that wee come to speake of them to whom they recommended the managing of Church affaires and the ministerie of holy things when they left the world They to whom they recommended the care of these things when hauing finished their course they were called hence to receiue the Crowne laid vp for them in Heauen were of two sorts first such as they trusted with the ministerie of the Word and Sacraments and government of Gods people and secondly such other as they appointed to be assistant to them and to performe the meaner seruices though necessary also The former sort are all comprehended vnder one common name of Presbyters that is fatherly guides of Gods Church and people the latter are Deacons and such other inferiour Ministers as attend the necessities of the Saints and assist the principal Guides of the Church In the ordination of a Presbyter saith Durandus there is a certaine power conferred on him and assigning of him to an employment whereby after his ordination hee may doe something which hee could not haue done before etiam quoad genus facti no not in the kinde and nature of the thing it selfe as hee that is ordained a Presbyter may consecrate the Lords Body and absolue in the Court of Penitencie neither of which things without such ordination can be done but to them that are in the inferiour orders there is no power giuen neither haue they any assignement to doe any thing which they could not doe before and without such ordination but to doe such things as they could not lawfully doe nay in many of them there is no designement of them that are so ordained to the performance of any thing but that which according to the vse of the vniuersall Church men without such ordination may lawfully doe So that the ordination of men to the performance of such things and the execution of such offices seemeth to haue proceeded from the institution of the Church for the greater solemnitie of Diuine worship and seruice and therefore such inferiour orders are neither simply orders order being a sacred signe or character by vertue whereof a power is giuen to the ordained not onely to doe that hee could not otherwise lawfully doe but to doe that which otherwise hee could not doe at all neither are they Sacraments but Sacramentall solemnities onely seeing the Church can institute no Sacraments Hitherto Durandus These being the sorts of them to whom the Apostles recommended the managing of Church affaires and this the difference of their orders I will first speak of the diuers orders degrees of them that performe the meaner seruices in the Church and then come to speake of them that haue the gouernement of the Church The Master of Sentences saith that the order of Subdeacons and other minor orders below the degree of Deacons as Acoluthes Exorcists Lectors Ostiaries were brought in by the Church and that they were not in the Apostles times and Thomas Aquinas and other are of the same minde Notwithstanding there is no question but these minor orders and degrees were very ancient For Cyprian maketh mention of one Mettius a Subdeacon and Nicephorus an Acoluthe In another place hee writeth that he had ordained Aurelius and Celerinus Lectors and in a third place hee mentioneth Exorcists and Lectors Cornelius Bishop of Rome in his Epistle recorded by Eusebius describing the Clergie of the Romane Church in his time sheweth that there were in the same 46 Presbyters 7 Deacons 7 Subdeacōs 42 Acoluthes 52 Exorcists Lectors Ostiaries Widowes with distressed people more then 1500. Ignatius in his Epistle to the Antiochians omitting Acoluthes reckoneth the rest as Subdeacons Lectors Ostiaries and Exorcists adding to them Cantores and Laborantes or Copiatae whose imployment was to bury the dead of whom also Epiphanius speaketh Whereupon Bishop Lindan sayth that howsoeuer in these times they make or account but seauen orders yet in the Primitiue Church there were more now scarce knowen But let vs see what the office employment and manner of the admission of these men was in former times Touching Ostiaries the Councell of Carthage ordayneth thus Let the Ostiary after he hath beene instructed by the Arch-deacon how to behaue himselfe in the house of God at the suggestion of the Arch-deacon be ordained and let the Bishop take the Keyes frō the Altar and giue them to him saying So demeane thy selfe as being to giue an accoūt to God for the things that these Keyes locke vp The Lectors were to reade in the Church whatsoeuer was to be read out of the old or new Testament whereupon Cyprian hauing ordained Aurelius the confessour a Lector giueth a reason why he had so done Quia nihil magis congruit voci quae Dominum gloriosa praedicatione confessa est quam celebrandis diuinis Lectionibus personare that is Because nothing doth more fitte or better beseeme the voyce that by a glorious publique testimony hath
contrary side there are so many examples proposed that it ought not so to be done With Clemens Alexandrinus and Optatus Hierome agreeth who vpon the 44. of Ezekiel saith in expresse words that Priests must neither nourish their haire nor be shaued but so polled that their skinne may still remaine hid and couered and Bellarmine himselfe confesseth that Dionysius Epiphanius Hierome Athanafius Palladius Augustine Isidore Bede and the Councels of Carthage Toledo doe speake of tonsure onely and neuer mention rasure and that the Epistle of Anicetus the Pope alledged for rasure is not indubitate What then will the Cardinall bring for defence of the contrary custome now prevayling in the Church of Rome and what will he answer to these authorities of the ancient We reprehend not saith he the customes of those times neither do they of those times condemne our obseruation For howsoeuer tonsure and not rasure was anciently vsed yet were not they of the Clergie forbidden to vse rasure or to shaue their heads A strange answer of so great a Rabbi and contrary to that he knoweth to be vndoubtedly true For Optatus directly condemneth rasure as wee haue heard and Hierome writing vpon the 44 of Ezekiel hath these words Quod autem sequitur Caput autem suū non radent neque comam nutrient sed tondentes attondebunt capita sua perspicuè demonstratur nec rasis capitibus sicut Sacerdotes cultoresque Isidis atque Serapis nos esse debere nec rursum comam dimittere quod propriè luxuriosorum est barbarorumque militantium c. That is that which followeth They shall not shaue their heads nor let their haire grow long but polling they shall polle their heads doeth clearely demonstrate that wee should neither shaue our heads like the Priests and worshippers of Isis and Serapis nor on the other side let our haire grow long as wantons barbarous men and Souldiers are wont to doe that that which is fitting honest and seemely may appeare in the faces of the Priests The Septnagint reade the wordes of the Prophet somewhat otherwise in this sort They shall not shaue their heads nor cut their haire too neere sed operientes operient capitasua that is but hiding they shall hide their heads whereby wee learne that wee must neither make our selues bald by shauing nor cut the haire of our heads so neere as if wee were shauen but let our haire grow so that the skinne may be hid couered These are the words of Hierome whereby it appeareth that the absurd and ridiculous ceremony of the Romanists in shauing the heads of those of their Clergie is condemned by the Fathers and that Bellarmine speaketh against his owne conscience when hee sayth the contrary Wherefore ceasing any longer to insist vpon the refutation of the absurditie of so ridiculous a ceromonie and leauing those inferiour orders and degrees of Ministerie in the Church of God wherein men in auncient times were trained vp vnder the rules of strict and seuere gouernment discipline and fitted for higher and greater employments let vs come to the office of the Deacons The office of Bishops Presbyters was from Christs owne immediate institution but the institution of Deacons was from the Apostles as Cyprian deliuereth These the Bishop alone may ordaine neither is it necessarie that other impose their hands with him as in the ordination of Presbyters seeing they are consecrated onely to bee assistants to the Bishop Presbyters not admitted into the fellowship of the same power and order with them The Deacons according to the intendment of their first institution were to take care of the poore and the treasure of the Church and therevpon Chrysostome and after him the Fathers of the sixth generall Councell doe thinke they were not the same wee now haue ours being busied in other affaires of the Church But I am of opinion that they were the same and that the end of their first institution being principally to ease the Apostles of the care of prouiding for the poore and to take the charge of the Church-treasure when the treasure of the Church encreasing was committed to certaine Stewards and the poore otherwise provided for they were more specially vsed for the assisting of the Bishoppe and Presbyters in things pertaining to Gods seruice and worship Whereupon wee shall finde in some cases they might baptize reconcile penitents preach and doe sundry other things pertaining to the office of the Bishop and Presbyters That in some cases they might baptize u Tertullian witnesseth That they might reconcile penitents wee haue the authoritie of Saint Cyprian That they might preach wee haue the testimony of Saint z Gregory And that they assisted the Bishops and Presbyters in ministring the Sacrament of the Lords body and bloud and ministred the cup it appeareth by Cyprian And hereupon Hierome amplifieth the dignity of them exceedingly shewing that for avoyding presumption the Presbyters may not take the cup of the Lord from the holy Table vnlesse it be deliuered vnto them by the Deacons These are they saith hee of whom we reade in the Revelation Septem Angeli Ecclesiarum hi sunt septem candelabra aurea hi sunt voces tonitruorum virtutum operatione praeclari humilitate praediti quieti Euangelizantes pacem annunciantes bona dissentiones rixas scandala resecare docentes soli Deo colloquentes in templo nihil penitus de mundo cogitantes dicentes Patri Matri non noui vos filios suos non agnoscentes Sine his Sacerdos nomen non habet ortum non habet officium non habet that is These are the seauen Angels of the Churches these are the seauen golden Candlestickes these are the voyces of the thunders these are renowned for the operation of vertues humble quiet preaching peace publishing good things teaching how to cut away dissentions brawles and scandals communing with God alone in his holy temple hauing no thought of the world saying to Father and Mother I know you not and not acknowledging their own sons without these the priest hath not the name not the beginning not the office of a Priest And a litle after he addeth Sacerdotibus etiam propter praesumptionem non licet de mensa Domini calicem tollere nisi eis traditus fuerit à Diaconis Leuitae componunt mensam Domini Leuitae Sacerdotibus cum Sacramenta benedicunt assistunt Leuitae ante Sacerdotes orant vt aures habeamus ad Dominum Diaconus acclamat that is Euen the Priests themselues for the auoiding of presumption must not take the holy cup from off the Table of the Lord vnlesse it be deliuered to them by the Deacons The Deacons or Leuites prepare the Table of the Lord and make all things ready on the same The Leuites assist the Priests when they blesse and sanctifie the sacramentall elements The Leuites pray before the Priests The Deacon crieth out aloud vnto vs to open our eares and
things the Schoole-men note that there is a two-folde power found in the Ministers of the Church of GOD the one of Order the other of Iurisdiction The power of Order is that whereby they are sanctified and enabled to the performance of such sacred acts as other men neither may nor can doe as is the preaching of the Word and ministration of the holy Sacraments This power is to bee exercised orderly and the acts of it to bee performed in such sort that one disturbe not another Whereupon the Apostles the first Ministers of CHRIST IESVS though equall in the power of Order and Iurisdiction yet for the better and more orderly dispatch of the great worke of converting the world which they had in hand and that they might not hinder one another divided amongst themselues the parts and Provinces of the World but when for the assisting of them while they liued and succeeding them dying they were to passe ouer part of their power to other they so gaue authoritie to such as they made choyce of for this worke to preach baptize and doe other acts of sacred Ministery which are to bee performed by vertue of the power of order that before they invested them with this power they divided the parts of the world converted to Christianity into seuerall Churches and when they ordained them assigned each of them to that particular Church wherein he should preach and minister Sacraments So that these successours of the Apostles had not an illimited commission but were confined within certaine bounds that they were not to preach nor minister Sacraments but onely within the limits and compasse of those places which were assigned vnto them vnlesse it were with the consent desire and liking of other willing to draw them at sometimes for speciall causes to performe such sacred acts within the limites and bounds of their charge This assigning of men hauing the power of order the persons to whom they were to minister holy things and of whom they were to take the care and the subjecting of such persons vnto thē gaue them the power of jurisdiction which they had not before And thus was the vse of the power of order which is not included within any certain boūds limited in those the Apostles ordained their power of Iurisdictiō included within certain bounds so that the one of these kinds of power they haue not at all without the extēt of their own limits nor the lawful vse of the other Hence is that resolutiō of the Diuines that if a Bishop adventure to do any act of Iurisdictiō out of his own Diocese as to excōmunicate absolue or the like all such acts are vtterly voide of no force but if hee shall doe any act of the power of order in another mans charge as preach or minister Sacraments though he cannot be excused as not offending if he doe these things without his consent yet are the Sacraments thus ministred truly Sacraments and of force When the Apostles first founded Churches and assigned to such as they ordained to the worke of the ministery the seuerall parts of the flocke of Christ and people of GOD of which they appointed them to take care and charge they so sorted divided out particular Churches that a Cittie and the places neere adioyning made but one Church Wherevpon wee shall finde in the holy Scriptures that to ordaine Presbyters 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is in euery Church and in euery Citty are all one Now because Churches of so large extent required many Ministers of the Word and Sacraments and yet of one Church there must be but one Pastour the Apostles in setling the state of these Churches did so constitute in them many Presbyters with power to teach instruct and direct the people of God that yet they appointed one onely to be chiefe Pastour of the place ordaining that the rest should be but his assistants not presuming to doe any thing without him so that though they were all equall in the power of order yet were the rest inferior vnto him in the government of that Church whereof hee was Pastour and they but his assistants onely As another of my ranke cannot haue that Iurisdiction within my Church as I haue but if hee will haue any thing to doe there he must be inferiour in degree vnto me So wee reade in the Reuelation of Saint Iohn of the Angell of the Church of Ephesus to whom the Spirit of God directeth letters from heauen as to the Pastour of that Church It is not to be doubted but that there were many Presbyters that is Ministers of the Word and Sacraments in so large a Church as that of Ephesus was nay wee reade expressely in the Acts that there were many in that Church that fed the flocke of Christ and consequently were admitted into some part of pastorall office employment yet was there one amongst the rest to whom onely the Lord did write from heauen to whom an eminent power was giuen who was trusted with the government of that Church and people in more speciall sort then any of the rest and therefore challenged by name by Almighty God for the thinges there found to bee amisse the rest being passed ouer in silence The like wee reade of the rest of the seven Churches of Asia compared to seuen golden candlestickes in the midst whereof the Sonne of God did walke hauing in his hand seuen starres interpreted to haue beene the seuen Angels of those seuen Churches Neither was this orderly superiority of one amongst the Presbyters of the Church found onely in the seuen Churches of Asia but in other Churches also For Saint Hierome testifieth that in the Church of Alexandria from the time of Marke the Evangelist there was euer one whom the Presbyters of that Church chose out of themselues to be ouer the rest Neither was this proper to the Church of Alexandria but wee can shew the successions of Bishops in all the famous Churches of the world euen from the Apostles times and therefore all admitte and allow a kinde of preëminence of one aboue the rest in each Church Heresies haue sprung saith Cyprian and schismes risen from no other fountaine then this that Gods Priest is not obeyed nor one Priest in the Church acknowledged for the time to bee Iudge in Christs steed If one saith Hierome in each Church be not aboue and before the rest of the Presbyters there will be as many Schismes as Priests and the best learned in our age that affect presbyteriall government ingenuously confesse it to be an essentiall perpetuall part of Gods ordinance for each presbytery to haue a chiefe amongst them the necessity whereof wee may learne from all Societies both of men indued with reason and of other thinges also to which God hath denied the light of vnderstanding The dumbe beasts saith Hierome and wilde Heards haue their
were ordained of three Bishops like the Suffragan Bishops of our time the later were but Presbyters The second that the Councell appointing the rurall Bishop to be ordained by the Bishop of the Citty meant to forbid that there should be any more such rurall Bishops as haue Episcopall ordination whereunto the concurrence of three Bishoppes at the least is required thereupon hee thinketh the Councell of Antioche permitting rurall Bishops to ordaine Sub-deacons and the Decretall of Damasus forbidding them so to do may be reconciled for that the Councell permitting the ordination of Sub-deacons to rurall Bishops speaketh of such as were ordained of three Bishops and the Decretall of Damasus forbidding them to meddle in such ordination of such as were but meere Presbyters But whosoeuer shall take a view of the Decretall epistle of Damasus shall finde that hee condemneth the intermedling of any rurall Bishops whatsoeuer in ordination and shutteth them out of the Church as men that neither haue nor can haue any place in the same What is Chorepiscopus sayth Damasus but a country Bishop and if hee be a country Bishop what doth he in the citty the Canon altogether forbidding that there should be two Bishops in one city If he be not in the city but in some countrey village and in such place where there neuer was any Bishop before the canon forbidding Bishops to be ordained in meane cities villages or forts or in any place whatsoeuer were bishops haue not bin placed in former times least the authority name of Bishops grow into contēpt what I pray you shall he be For behold neither doth the place agree with his ordination nor his ordination with the place because if such rural Bishops haue receiued the imposition of the hands of many Bishops haue bin ordained as Bs they should not haue bin consecrated in a country village such as the Greek word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 importeth the canon forbidding Bishops to be placed in villages small forts or litle citties Giue me therefore a reason sayth he I pray you of the constituting of these men or if you cannot as I know you cannot lay your hand on your mouth and assure your selues that they haue no place nor authority in the Church of God diuers things making voyd their ordination and whatsoeuer thing they attempt to doe by vertue of such ordination Whereof the first is for that they are wont to bee ordained by one Bishop wherein their ordination is against the canons concerning Bishops which will haue Bishops ordained by the imposition of the hands of 3 Bishops at the least The 2◠for that if they be ordained by many bishops yet they are placed in some village litle fort or smal city or at least in some such place where lawfully Bishops may not be ordained or formerly haue not bin where the authority and name of a Bishop wil grow into contempt or if they be placed in a city they are placed there with another Bishop whereas the canons permit not 2 Bishops in one city The third is for that if they haue bin ordained at large neither placed in city nor country village as it hath bin reported vnto vs of some their ordination is voyd because the canons do voyd all ordinaons at large so that which way soeuer we turne vs we shal find that these men neither haue nor can haue any Episcopal authority or place This is the resolution of this great Romane Bishop who wholly rejecteth this kinde of rurall Bishops and will not haue them at all to intermeddle in any thing peculiarly pertaining to the Episcopall office But some man will say May not a Bishop when he is growne aged infirme and vnable to sustaine and beare the weight of that great office haue a Coadiutor or assistant Surely there is no doubt but that he may haue one joyned vnto him to beare part of his burthen but that that other should haue Episcopall ordination the Canons permit not whereupon S. Augustine now aged and distracted with multiplicitie of manifold businesses concerning the state of the whole Church desirous with the consent of his Cleargie and people to haue Eradius a Presbyter of his Church joyned vnto him as a Coadiutor while he liued designed to succeede him after his death would by no meanes haue him ordained a Bishop but to continue a Presbyter still though himselfe had beene ordained a Bishop while Valerius yet liued His words are these Adhuc in corpore po sito beatae memoriae Patre Episcopo meo Valerio Episcopus ordinatus sum sedi cum illo quod Concilio Niceno prohibitum fuisse nesciebam nec ipse sciebat Quod ergo reprehensum est in me nolo reprehendi in filio meo erit Presbyter ut est quando Deus voluerit futurus Episcopus Obsecro vos obstringo per Christum ut huic Iuveni huic Presbytero Eradio quem hodiè in Christi nomine designo Episcopum successorem mihi patiamini refundere onera occupationum mearum c. that is While my Father Bishop Valerius yet liued I was ordained a Bishop and sate together with him which I knew not to haue bin forbidden in the Nicene Councell neither did he know it What therfore was disliked in me I will not haue to be blamed in my sonne hee shall continue a Presbyter as he is when God will hee shall bee a Bishop I beseech you and earnestly entreate you for Christs sake that you will giue mee leaue in some sort to ease my selfe and to cast the burthen of my employments vpon the shoulders of this yong man this Presbyter Eradius whom this day in the name of Christ I appoint and designe the Bishop that shall succeede mee My counsell shall nót bee wanting to him neither will I faile to supply what shall be any way defectiue or wanting in him Thus wee see a Coadiutor was allowed but yet such a one as should be but a Presbyter and therefore long after the time of Augustine when Zacharias Bishop of Rome associated another Bishop as a Coadiutor to Bonifacius the Bishop of Mentz he confessed it to be a thing that was forbidden and worthy reprehension but that vpon his importunity of speciall fauour he had yeelded so much vnto him that he might haue such a Coadiutor whom with the advice of his brethren hee might appoint to succeede him when hee should die But notwithstanding the Canons forbidding any such thing to bee done and the dislike of many the greatest Bishoppes of the world yet in the later ages of the Church the Bishops giuing themselues to ease or attending secular businesses and greatly neglecting their Episcopall function again reduced into the Church these rurall Bishops whom they named Suffraganes To these they committed the doing of such things as are most proper vnto Bishops as ordination confirmation but kept the power of Iurisdiction to themselues or gaue it to some
other and not to these contrary to the example of S. Augustine that put ouer to Eradius the hearing of causes and the performing of things pertaining to Iurisdiction himselfe onely directing and ouerseeing him but held still himselfe that which is most properly Episcopall Such Bishoppes Melchior Canus entreating of Councels and the persons whereof Councels consist sayth are so farre from hauing any place or voyce in the Councels that they neither haue nor ought to haue any place in the Church at all But whatsoeuer wee thinke of these the Bishops in former times for the better governing of their Churches chose out certaine of their Presbyters to assist them in the supervision and direction of the rest whom they first named Arch-presbyters and afterwardes Deanes The name of Decanus or Deane being first vsed to note out such a Prefect or Governour of Monkes as had the rule of tenne Monkes liuing together in common And in this sense the name of a Deane is found in S. Augustine The Arch-presbyters which Bishops anciently appointed to assist them were of 2 sorts Vrbaâ—…i Vicani that is such as liued in the great Church in the City and such as liued abroad in the country were therevpon named Rurall Arch-presbyters or Rurall Deanes Touching the former who liued in the great church in the citie because the Bishop alone either in respect of absence or employments could not execute all things that pertained to the service belonging to his place nor giue particular direction to every other what he should doe they were chosen out of the whole number of Presbyters partly to execute and performe what the Bishoppe in his owne person should haue done and partly to prescribe to others what they should doe The Rurall Arch-presbyters had the ouersight and direction of the Presbyters that were placed in the lesser Titles or meaner churches abroad in the countrey Concerning these wee finde it thus decreed Vt singulae plebes Archipresbyterum habeant qui non solùm imperiti vulgi sollicitudinem gerat sed etiam Presbyterorum qui per minores Titulos habitant vitam iugi circumspectione custodiat quâ quisque industriâ diuinum opus exerceat Episcopo enunciet nec contendat Episcopus non egere plebem Archipresbytero quasi ipse eam gubernare valeat quia etsi valde idoneus sit decet tamen vt sua onera partiatur vt sicut ipse matrici Ecclesiae praeest ita Archipresbyteri praesint plebibus vt in nullo titubet Ecclesiastica sollicitudo cunctatamen referant ad Episcopum nec aliquid contra eius decretum ordinare praesumant that is That each division of the people of God in their seuerall limits haue their Arch-presbyter who may not only take care of the rude and ignorant multitude but may also with continuall circumspection obserue looke vnto the life conuersation of the Presbyters which dwell in the lesser Titles and shew vnto the Bishop with what diligence each of them performeth the worke of God Neither let the Bishoppe contend and say that the people committed to his charge need no Arch-presbyter as if he himselfe were able sufficiently to gouerne the same because though he be exceeding worthy yet it is fit hee should deuide his burthens that as he is ouer the Mother church so the Arch-presbyters may bee ouer the people abroad that the Ecclesiasticall care stagger not or be not two weake in any thing Yet notwithstanding let them referre all things to the Bishop neitâ—…r let them presume to order any thing against his liking decree These rurall Arch-presbyters were to be chosen by the clergie confirmed by the Bishop and being so placed might not be remoued without the consent of the clergie Archipresbyterum saith the second Councell of Turone sine omnium Presbyterorum consensu de loco deiicere Episcopus non praesumat quem autem negligentia eijcit cum omnium Presbyterorum consilio refutetur that is Let not the Bishop presume to remoue or put an Arch-presbyter froÌ„ his place without the consent of all the Presbyters but when the negligence of any one of these maketh him worthy to be eiected put out let him be reiected with the counsell and aduice of all the Presbyters Touching the power authority of these Arch-presbyters first they were to admonish such as they saw to liue scandalously or any way to offend as well Lay-men as clergie-men and the Councell of Antisiodorum decreeth that if any lay or secular man shall contemne and despise the information admonition of the Arch-presbyter he shall be kept from entring or setting his feete within the thresholds of the holy church till hee shall submit himselfe to the wholesome information admonition Secondly they were twise in the yeare to visite all the churches within the limits subiect to them to see what was there amisse defectiue or weake that so they might either reforme supplie or strengthen confirme the same Thirdly they were to receiue warrants from the Bishop or his substitute and by vertue thereof to cite all such to make their appearance before the chiefe Pastour or Bishop as were vpon any occasion to be conuented before him and this their citation of such parties to be conuented vnder the seale of their office they were to certifie the Bishop of Fourthly they were to hold Chapiters in a set course foure times in the yeare and at other times as often as vrgent occasions should require and all parish Ministers within a yeare after their being possessed of their liuings were to sweare to the Deane and so to be admitted as brethren to sit in Chapiter with him to be bound to come to the yearely Chapiters and otherwise also when as vpon vrgent cause the Deane should call a Chapiter and to beare part of the charge This oath which the Ministers were to take before they were admitted to sit in Chapiter was not simple but with this limitation Saluis juribus Capituli that is No way to prejudice the rights of the Chapiter In these Chapiters the Arch-presbyters were to publish the decrees of prouinciall and Episcopall Synodes excluding Lay-men at such times as they published things precisely concerning the Clergie which otherwise might bee present at the publication of things generally concerning all Neither were they onely to publish such decrees in their Chapiter but to vrge the execution of the same to take notice of all places of ministery void vpon what occasion and by whose fault they continued voyd of all intrusion into places of ministery and of the inuestiture of all such as newly entred into the charge of ministery and the authority by which substitutes supply the places of other men And besides they were to admonish such as either by their visitation or other information they found to be faulty And if by other good meanes they could not win them to suspend Lay-men from the Sacraments
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
either of them The gouernment of a prouince is principally Aristocraticall resting in the Bishops of the prouince their assistants but it hath a kinde of chiefty of one hauing a primacie of order and honour amongst the rest who being placed in the Metropolis or Mother cittie is named a Metropolitane This gouernment is so mixed that the Bishops may doe nothing concerning the state of the whole Prouince or out of the limits of their owne Churches without consulting the Bishop of the mother citty nor he without them and if they differ in judgement and opinion he is bound to follow the maior part of voices for the ending and determining of all controuersies that may or doe arise concerning matters of faith or of fact Neither is this the forme of gouernment of one prouince only but the gouernment of larger circuits is altogether like vnto it and in proportion the same For looke what the Metropolitane is in respect of the Bishops of the prouince that and no more is the primate or Patriarch in respect of the Metropolitans Bishops of diuerse prouinces so that as the Metropolitan canne doe nothing out of his owne Diocese without the concurrence of the maior part of the Bishops of the province though he be in order and honour the first and greatest amongst them who must bee consulted before they canne doe any thing so in like sort the Primate or Patriarch may doe nothing without the aduice and consent of the Metropolitanes Bishops subiect vnto him So that wee see the forme of Church gouernment is mixt in such sort that in respect of a Diocese or particular Church there is a speciall authority resting in one though not excluding nor neglecting the assistance and concurrence of more but the gouernment of many particular Churches and prouinces is principally Aristocraticall all thinges being swayed by the maior part of the voyces of the Bishops and Metropolitanes yet admitting a primacie of order and honour of one amongst the rest who must be first consulted from whom all deliberations must take beginning and who sitteth in all their meetings as a president and moderatour This Bellarmine endeavoureth to improue and therefore laboureth to shew that the supreme power of the Church is not in the company of Bishops His first reason is because Christ as he supposeth gaue no authority to his Apostles and Disciples but that which he gaue to euery one of them apart as to preach baptize binde and loose remitte and retaine sinne But this silly argument is easily answered and the absurditie of Bellarmines confident affirmation is too too apparant For to ordaine Bishops to depose Bishops or Presbyters and to determine the differences and controversies that arise amongst them is as I thinke a great part of Ecclesiasticall power and jurisdiction yet may no one Bishop doe any of these things but the company of Bishops onely To the ordination of a Bishop the presence of the Metropolitane and of three other Bishoppes at the least with the consent of the rest that are absent signified in writing is by the olde Canons required neither did the Church euer admit lesse then three Bishops to ordaine vnlesse in certaine cases of necessitie And touching the depriuing or degrading of Bishoppes Presbyters and Deacons the auncient Canon requireth the concurrence and consent of three Bishoppes for the censuring and depriuing of a Deacon of sixe for the depriuing of a Presbyter of twelue for the censuring judging and deposing of a Bishop Wherefore let vs see if the Cardinall haue any better reason behinde His second reason is that it cannot bee imagined that CHRIST committed the gouernement of the Church to the company of Bishoppes for that then the Church should oftentimes lacke Gouernours for that the Bishoppes are seldome assembled by joint consent to decree and determine things Surely this reason hath farre lesse strength then the former for in the beginning all the Bishoppes of each Province met to the ordination of euery Bishoppe newly elected and twice in the yeare besides there was a Synode holden consisting of all the Bishoppes of the Province the Metropolitane not onely hauing power but also being straightly bound to convocate his brethren and they as surely tyed and obliged to come when he called them His third reason which he bringeth to proue that the gouernement of the church was not by Christ committed to the company of Bishoppes but to some one chiefe and supreme amongst them is for that the whole multitude of right beleeuing Christians is one church and therefore must haue one chiefe Ruler For answere hereunto wee say that a church may bee named one either in respect of the same faith hope profession meanes of saluation and communion or fellowship of Saints and so the whole multitude of right beleeuers throughout the world is but one church or in respect of the same immediate communicating together in Sacraments and in the actions and exercises of Gods worship and seruice The vnitie of the church of God in this later sort implyeth and requireth a necessitie of the vnity of one chief Pastour but the vnity of the church in the former sort may stand without the vnity of one Pastour Christian men saith Ockam in Scripture are compared to sheepe and the church of God to a fold Now though it bee expedient that these sheepe so many as belong to the same particular fold that goe out to the same pastures to feed to the same riuers of water to drinke and doe remaine and abide together should be fed directed and guided by the same Pastour yet the sheepe of diuerse folds led out to diverse pastures to feede in and riuers of water to drinke may haue their diuersitie of Pastours vnder the same chiefe Sheepheard Christ Iesus neither is there any vnitie implyed in the whole Church or in the Churches of diuerse Provinces which may not be preserued as well by the multitude and diversitie of Pastours bound knit together in the bond of conspiring consent and agreement as by the vnitie of one chiefe Pastour And in this sort wee shall finde the Church of God to haue stood in perfect vnitie in the first and best ages thereof without finding any want of the helpe of one chiefe Pastour For how could there bee a more perfect vnitie in the whole Church then when the Pastour of each particular Church chosen by the Cleargie and people of the same was appointed by the Metropolitane and all the rest of the Bishops of the province for his sincerity in profession and godlinesse of conversation and ordained to the worke of the Ministery by the joint imposition of all their hands when the Metropolitanes of seuerall provinces were confirmed by the Primate or Patriarch but ordained by the Bishops of their provinces when the Patriarches elected by the Cleargie and people and ordained by their Metropolitanes sent their Synodall letters one to another testifying and expressing
their faith and profession before they were receiued and allowed one of another and before tehy were accounted and reputed for lawfull Patriarches Wherefore presupposing that the gouernment of the Church is not Monarchicall in respect of any one supreame Pastour on earth but mixt and hauing seene how notwithstanding the diuersitie of many Pastours the Church may be preserued in peace and vnity let vs more exactly and distinctly consider what the auncient forme of Church policie and gouernment was If we looke into the monuments of Antiquity wee shall finde that there were aunciently three Subordinations in the Church For the actions of the Bishoppe of each particular Church of a citty and places adjoyning were subject to the censure and judgment of the rest of the Bishops of the same prouince amongst whom for order sake there was one chiefe to whom it pertained to call them together to sit as moderator in the midst of them being assembled and to execute what by joynt consent they resolued on The actions of the Bishoppes of a prouince and a prouinciall Synode consisting of those Bishoppes were subject to a Synode consisting of the Metropolitanes and other Bishoppes of diuerse prouinces This Synode was of two sorts For either it consisted of the Metropolitanes and Bishoppes of one kingdome and nation onely as did the Councels of Africa or of the Metropolitans and Bishoppes of many kingdomes If of the Metropolitanes and Bishoppes of one kingdome and state onely the chiefe Primate was mederator If of many one of the Patriarches and chiefe Bishops of the whole world euery Church being subordinate to some one of the Patriarchicall Churches and incorporate into the vnity of it Thirdly the actions of the Bishops of a whole kingdome and Patriarchship were subject to an Oecumenicall Synode consisting of all the Patriarches and the Metropolitanes and Bishops subject to them Touching prouinciall Councells to the censures whereof the actions of particular Churches are subject they were by the auncient Canons of the Church to be holden in euery prouince twice euery yeare It is very necessary say the Fathers of the Councell of Nice that there should be a Synode twice euery yeare in euery prouince that all the Bishops of the prouince meeting together may in common thinke vpon those thinges that are doubtfull and questionable For the dispatch of Ecclesiasticall businesses and the determining of matters in controuersie Wee thinke it were fit say the Fathers in the Councell of Antioche that in euery prouince Synodes of Bishops should be assembled twice euery yeare The first councell of Constantinople decreeth the same and the Fathers assembled in the Councell of Chalcedon complaine that in some prouinces the Synodes of Bishops are not holden and that thereby many Ecclesiasticall matters needing reformation are neglected and therefore they appoint that the Bishops of euery prouince shall assemble euery yeare twice at that place which the Bishoppe of the mother Citty shall thinke fit to amend all thinges that shall be found to bee amisse in the prouince Here we see the necessity of holding these Synodes and by whom they were to bee called and moderated Wherefore let vs now proceede to see of whom they consisted what causes they examined and determined what the power of the Metropolitane originally was and what in processe of time by positiue constitution vpon due and just considerations it grew to be Touching the persons that prouinciall Synodes consisted of it is cleare and euident that not onely Bishops but Presbyters also were present in these Assemblies and had decisiue voyces whereupon the Councell of Antisiodorum sayth Let all the Presbyters being called come to the Synode in the Citty The Councell of Tarracon Let letters bee sent by the Metropolitane to his brethren that they bring with them to the Synode not onely some of the Presbyters of the Cathedrall Church but also of each Diocese And the fourth Councell of Toledo describing the forme of celebrating prouinciall Synodes hath these words Let the Bishops assembled goe to the Church and sit according to the time of their ordination and after all the Bishops are entred and set let the Presbyters be called and the Bishops sitting in compasse let Presbyters sit behind them and the Deacons stand before them In the first Councell of Toledo we find these words Considentibus Presbyteris astantibus Diaconis caeteris qui intererant Concilio congregato Patronus Episcopus dixit c. that is The Presbyters sitting together with the Bishops the Deacons standing before them and the rest which were present in the Councell assembled Patronus the Bishop said c. The like we reade of a Synode holden by Gregory the Pope The words are these Gregorius Papa coram sacratissimo corpore Beati Petri Apostoli cum Episcopis omnibus Romanae Ecclesiae Presbyteris residens assistentibus Diaconis cuncto Clero dixit c. that is Gregory the Pope sitting before the most sacred body of blessed Peter with all the Bishops of the Romane Church and the Presbyters also the Deacons standing before them and all the Clergie said c. And that Presbyters were not only present in Provinciall Synodes but had decisiue voyces as well as Bishops it appeareth by their subscribing to the Decrees of such Synodes in the very same forme and manner that Bishops did So that it will be found most false and vntrue that Bellarmine hath that Presbyters haue no voyces in Synodes and the auncient forme of our Convocation here in England wherein not onely the Arch-bishops and Bishops but sundry Presbyters also as well out of Cathedrall Churches as Dioceses at large are present and haue decisiue voices will clearely refute the same The causes that were wont to be examined and determined in the meeting of the Bishops of the prouince were the ordinations of Bishops when any Churches were voyd and the depriving and reiecting of all such as were found vnworthy of their honour and place and in a word any complaint of wrong done in any Church was there to be heard Let the prouinciall Synodes be holden twice euery yeare saith the Councell of Antioch and let the Presbyters and Deacons bee present and as many as thinke they haue beene any way hurt or wronged there expect the determination of the Synode The power of the Metropolitane was in calling the rest of the Bishops to the Synode in appointing the place of their meeting and in sitting as President in the midst of them and so were things moderated that neither the rest might proceede to doe any thing without consulting him nor hee to doe any thing without them but was tyed in all matters of difference to follow the maior part and if hee neglected his dutie in convocating his brethren that so things might bee determined by common consent hee was by the Canons subiect to censure and punishment Thus at first all matters were to be heard determined and
quicquid ego de vobis boni audio mihi imputo that is Whereas there were many Apostles yet in respect of the chiefty that Peter had as being Prince of the Apostles his Sea only grew to be in chiefe authority which in three places is yet the See but of one and the same Apostle For he exalted that Sea in which he pleased to rest and end this present life Hee beautified that Sea in which he placed Marke his Scholer and he firmly and strongly setled that Sea in which hee sate seauen yeares though with purpose in the end to leaue it When as therefore there is one See of one Apostle in which by diuine authority three sit as presidents whatsoeuer good I heare of you I impute it to my selfe And againe in the same place to Eulogius hauing spoken to him of the dignitie of Peters chaire in which he sate he saith He hath spoken to me of Peters chaire who himselfe sitteth on Peters chaire This is the opinion of these Romane Bishops touching the reason of the exaltation of the Seas of Rome Alexandria and Antioche aboue other Episcopall Seas who how partially soeuer they may be thought to be affected to the chaire of Peter yet herein do they mainly crosse the conceipt of the Romanists at this day in that they teach that other Bishops succeede Peter in the chaire and that chiefty and primacy he had as well as the Bishop of Rome The dignity of these 3 Apostolicall Churches was cōfirmed in the Nicene Councell and each of them confined within the ancient bounds and limits thereof Let the ancient custome say the Nicene Fathers continue in Aegypt Lybia and Pentapolis that the Bishop of Alexandria may haue power ouer all these seeing the Bishop of Rome hath the like custome In like sort in Antioche and other prouinces let euery Church retaine and keepe her owne degree and honour Bellarmine much troubleth himselfe about this limitation and bounding of these Patriarches as preiudiciall to the illimited iurisdiction of the Romane Bishop and therefore though it be most cleare that there was a particular assignation of Churches to euery of these Patriarches yet hee seeketh to auoyd the euidence of these words For whereas Ruffinus sayth it was decreede by the Councell of Nice that the Bishop of Alexandria should haue care and charge ouer Aegypt as the Bishop of Rome hath of the Churches neere that city and Theodorus Balsamon in the explication of the Nicene canons with Nilus in his booke against the primacie interpreteth the words of the Nicene decree in this sense that the Bishoppe of Alexandria should haue the charge of Aegypt Lybia and Pentapolis and the confirming of the Metropolitanes in those parts because the Bishop of Rome who hath a care of the West confirmeth the Metropolitanes of the West hee maketh this construction of the words of the councell Let the Bishop of Alexandria haue the charge of Aegypt seeing the Bishoppe of Rome was wont to permitte him soe to haue before any Councell had decreed it And soe hee sayth Nicolas the Pope in his Epistle to Michael the Emperour vnderstandeth the words which yet is most vntrue for Nicolas sayth no such thing but onely that the Councell maketh the custome of the Romane Church the patterne for others to follow But the eight generall Councell which no doubt vnderstood the words of the Nicene Fathers farre better then Bellarmine sheweth plainely that the meaning of the Nicene Canon was that the Bishop of Alexandria should haue power ouer Aegypt and the prouinces pertaining to it to confirme the Metropolitanes in the same seeing the like custome preuaileth in the Romane Church And this Councell confirmeth the same distinction of the bounds of iurisdiction within which euery Patriarch is to containe himselfe both for old Rome and new and for the other Churches of Alexandria and Antioche The Canons of the Nicene Councell translated out of the Arabian tongue and published by Turrian Pisanus and Binnius will fully cleare this point if our Aduersaries giue any credit vnto them For in the eighth of those Canons the decree about the meaning whereof wee contend is thus set downe Constitutum est vt Episcopus Aegypti id est Patriarcha Alexandrinus praesideat habeat potestatem totius Aegypti that is It is ordained that the Bishop of Aegypt that is the Patriarch of Alexandria shall sit as President and haue power ouer all Aegypt and ouer all places Citties and Townes which are round about it because soe it is fit and because likewise the Bishop of Rome that is the Successour of Peter the Apostle hath power ouer all the Citties and places which are about Rome And in like sort let the Bishop of ANTIOCH haue power ouer that whole prouince c. But because perhaps these Canons though published by themselues as rare secrets of Antiquity lately brought to light will be of litle credit with them I will adde one reason more which to me seemeth very forcible to confirme our interpretation of the words of the Nicene Fathers There was aunciently a great contention betweene the Church of Rome and the Church of Constantinople about the Churches of Bulgaria either of these Churches making claime thereunto and seeking to bring them within the compasse of their owne Iurisdiction which contention could not haue beene if the one of these two Churches had had an illimited extent of Iurisdiction But that neither of them had any such illimited Iurisdiction it is euident in that neither Constantinople nor Rome vrge any such thing for iustification of their claime but stand vpon their conuerting of the people of Bulgaria to the Christian faith and the planting of religion amongst them Which either of these pretending rather then other sought thereby to iustifie a title of iurisdiction and authority ouer them Wherefore resoluing that we haue the true meaning of the Nicene canon let vs returne thither whence we haue a litle digressed namely to the discourse of Patriarchical Churches and Bishops set in order and honour before all other These as I haue already shewed were at first but three to which afterwards two other were added First Constantinople and afterwards Hierusalem Touching the Church and Bishop of Constantinople after that city was by Constantine made the seate of the Empire and thereby as much or more honoured then any city in the world the Bishop thereof before little esteemed grew exceeding great and in the second Councell which was the first of Constantinople was made a Patriarch in degree of honour next the Bishop of Rome and before the other two And againe in the Councell of Chalcedon confirmed in the same And though Leo resisted against this act of the Councell of Chalcedon and peremptorily protested that he would not suffer the Church of Alexandria to loose the dignity of the second See and the Church of Antioch of the third and his successours many of them persisted in the
same resistance yet they were forced in the end to giue way to the exaltation of the Constantinopolitane Church so that after the time of Iustinian the Emperour they neuer made any more words about this matter Whereby we see that to be true of Hierome Orbis maior est vrbe that is The world is greater then any one city of the world though Rome it selfe The Church of Hierusalem as being the place of Christs passion whence the preaching of the Gospell tooke beginning was euer much honoured yet was it not so much as a Metropolitane Church at the first but the B Clergy there of were subiect to the Bishop of Caesarea as their Metropolitane the Bishop of Antioch as their Patriarch as Hierome writing to Pammachius against Iohn of Hierusalem testifieth And thereupon Leo writing to Maximus Bishop of Antioch blameth Iuuenall Bishop of Hierusalem for seeking to subiect Palaestina to himselfe chargeth him with insolent boldnesse for that attempt But the Fathers of the fifth generall Councell thought good to honour the Church of Hierusalem where Christ suffered and rose againe from death and therefore whereas the Bishoppe thereof had formerly but a bare title and a preeminence in sitting before other they made him a Patriarch in order the fifth and that hee might haue Metropolitanes subject vnto him they tooke some parts of the Diocese of Alexandria and Antioche from the Bishops of those Churches and put them vnder him So that now we haue fiue Patriarches of the Christian Church Touching these the eighth generall Councell taketh order that no man shall offer any indignity to any of them To these they were wont to wish all prosperitie and long life in the conclusion of their Councels Without these no Councell was holden to bee full and perfect These might convocate the Metropolitanes of their seuerall divisions and holde a Patriarchicall Councell which was of greater authoritie then either those in the seuerall provinces or of a whole Nation formerly mentioned because it consisted of more and more honourable Bishops yet had the Patriarches no greater authoritie ouer the Metropolitanes within their larger circuites then the Metropolitanes within their lesser compasse These were by the order of the eighth generall Councell to confirme the Metropolitanes subject vnto them either by imposition of hands or giuing the Pall but inferiour Bishops they might not meddle with but were to leaue them to the ordering of their Metropolitanes CHAP. 32. How the Pope succeedeth Peter what of right belongeth to him and what it is that he vniustly claimeth VVE deny not but that blessed Peter had a kinde of primacie of honour and order that in respect thereof as all Metropolitanes doe suceede him as being greater then other Bishops in honour and place so the Patriarches yet more specially and amongst them the Romane Bishops in the first place We will not therefore put our Adversaries to so much paines as some other haue done to proue that Peter was at Rome that he dyed there and that the Bishop of Rome succeedeth him But this is it which we say that he succeeded him in the Bishopricke of that Citie and in the honour of being one of the prime Bishops of the world as the Bishops of Alexandria and Antioche likewise did but not in the condition of being vniversall Bishop that is such a one in whom all Episcopall power and authority is originally invested from whom it is deriued to others and who may limite and restraine the vse of it in other as seemeth good vnto himselfe Por Peter was not such an Apostle but had only a joint commission with the rest who were put into it immediatly by Christ as well as he though hee were in some sort the first man in it We deny not therefore to the Romane Bishop his due place among the prime Bishops of the World if therewith he will rest contented but vniuersall Bishop in sort before expressed we dare by no meanes admit him to be knowing right well that euery Bishop hath in his place and keeping his owne standing power and authority immediatly from Christ which is not to be restrained or limited by any but by the company of Bishops wherein though one be chiefe for order sake and to preserue vnity in such sort that all things must take their beginning from him yet he can do nothing without them The Bishop of Constantinople as I haue alreadie noted in the time of the second generall Councell obtained to be one of the foure Patriarches by reason of the greatnes of his Church and citie and in the fourth holden at Chalcedon to haue equall priviledges with the Bishop of Rome but not contenting himselfe long with this equality soone after he sought to be aboue him and would be called vniversall Bishop seeking thereby to subiect to himselfe all other Bishops and Churches in which proud claime he was resisted by Gregory the 1 who professeth that whosoeuer assumeth this title ouerthroweth the dignity honour of all other Bishops in his pride is like Lucifer may rightly be thought to be a fore-runner of Antichrist Paul the Apostle saith Greg. when he heard certain men say I am of Paul I am of Apollo I of Cephas trembling quaking exceedingly to heare and see this tearing and renting asunder of the Lords body through which his members joyned themselues in companies factiously vnto other heads cryed out aloud saying Was Paul crucified for you or were yee baptized in the name of Paul In such sort therefore did hee decline the particular subiecting of the members of the Lords body to certaine Heads as it were besides Christ yea though they were the Apostles themselues And what wilt thou be able to answere to Christ the Head of the vniuersall Church in the tryall of the last Iudgement which goest about by assuming the title of vniuersall Bishoppe to put vnder thy selfe all the members of his mysticall body Who is it I pray thee whom thou proposest to thy selfe for imitation in taking to thee so perverse a title but hee who despising the Legions of Angells joyned with him in society as companions sought to climbe vp aboue them to the heighth of singularity that neither hee might seeme to bee vnder any nor any might bee found ouer whom hee was not who also said I will ascend into heauen I will exalt my throne aboue the Starres of heauen I will sit in the mountaine of the testament in the sides of the North I will ascend aboue the heighth of the cloudes and will bee like vnto the most high For what are thy brethren all the Bishoppes of the vniuersall Church but the starres of Heauen whose life and tongue or speech doe shine in the midst of the sinnes and errours of men as it were in the midst of the darkenesse of the night whose name and honour while thou seemest to trample vnder thy feete in that thou seekest by this title
of pride to preferre thy selfe before them what else doest thou say but I will ascend into heauen and exalt my seate aboue the Starres of heauen Are not all the Bishoppes of the Church cloudes who by the wordes of their preaching powre downe the graces of GOD like showers of raine and shine through the light of good workes whom whiles your brotherhood despising seeketh to bring vnder it selfe what other thing doth it say but this which is said of the old enemy I will ascend aboue the heighth of the cloudes And a little after the same Gregory addeth Surely Peter the Apostle was the first member of the holy and vniuersall Church Paul Andrew and Iohn what other thing are they but heads of particular parts of the people and Church of God and yet notwithstanding they are all members of the Church vnder one head Thus doth this holy man and worthy Bishop dislike that any amongst the Bishops of the Christian Church should bee so proud and insolent as to seeke to bee ouer all and subiect to none to subiect vnto himselfe all the members of Christ as to a head and to challenge vnto himselfe to bee vniuersall Bishoppe for that if any such bee if hee fall into errour or heresie hee draweth all other with him and ouerthroweth the state of the whole church Yet doe the Romane Bishoppes at this day take all these thinges vnto themselues for they subiect all Christs members to themselues as to Heads of the vniuersall church vpon perill of euerlasting damnation they will bee subiect to none or haue any to bee ouer them so that all depends of them their standing is the stay of all and their fall the ruine of all and if they erre all erre But perhaps it will be said that the name of vniuersall Bishop is not simply euill nor these claimes simply to be disliked but when they are made by them to whom it pertaineth not to make them such as the Bishops of Constantinople were Surely this evasion will not serue the turne For Gregory saith in the same place that no Bishop of Rome euer assumed this title ne dum priuatum aliquid darétur vni honore debito Sacerdotes priuarentur vniuersi that is Lest while some singular thing were giuen to one all Bishops should be depriued of their due honour thereby shewing that this title and the claimes accompanying it are simply to bee disliked as preiudiciall to the state of the whole Church the honour dignity of all other Bishops by whomsoeuer they be made Some man perhaps will be desirous to know how our Aduersaries seeke to decline the evidence of this cleare testimony of so great a Romane Bishoppe witnessing against them in a matter of so great consequence I will therefore set downe briefly in this place what I find any where said by any of them in answere to this authority The credit of the Author is such that they dare take no exception a-against him and the generality of his speech is such that what he disliketh in the Constantinopolitane Bishop he confesseth to be euill in any other and particularly in the Bishop of Rome And therefore the onely thing that they can deuise whereby to darken the cleare light of truth is this that the Bishop of Constantinople did so and in such sence challenge to be vniuersall Bishop that hee onely would haue beene a Bishop and there should haue beene no more then which nothing could be more absurdly sayd For the thing that the Romane Bishops disliked in those of Constantinople was not the putting of all other from being Bishops but the preferring themselues before other the subjecting of other to themselues the incroching vpon the priuileges and rights of other and the challenging of the power of ordination and confirmation of them whom it pertained not to them to ordaine or confirme as appeareth by the Epistles of Leo blaming Anotolius for subjecting all vnto himselfe for depriuing other Metropolitanes of their due honour by encroaching vpon their rights and for taking vpon him to ordaine the Bishop of Antioch who was one of the Patriarches That the Bishops of Constantinople sought not so to be vniuer all Bishops that there should be no other Bishops but they only is most euident by the Epistles of Leo and Gregorie in that they ordained Bishops themselues and are blamed by them for presuming to ordaine such as they should not haue ordained Wherefore the most that they can be conceiued to haue desired and sought in assuming the title of vniuersality is no more but the inuesting of the fulnesse of all power and jurisdiction Ecclesiasticall originally in themselues and thereby the subjecting of all other to a necessity of deriuing ministeriall power and authority from them of seeking ordination at their hands and being in all things pertaining to Episcopall office subiect to them all which things are challenged by the Bishop of Rome For the Romanists at this day teach that the fulnesse of all power and jurisdiction Ecclesiasticall is originally in the Pope that he communicateth a part thereof vnto others with such limitations as seemeth best vnto himselfe that all other Bishops receiue their jurisdiction from him that all the Bishops of the world cannot iudge him that hee may dispose of all the kingdomes of the world that his standing is the stay of all that his fall would be the ruine of all and that therefore we must perswade our selues hee cannot erre And hence indeed it followeth that he onely is Bishop in truth and that there are no other For if the Pope may take from any Bishop so often as he seeth cause as many as he pleaseth of them that are subject to him if hee may reserue vnto himselfe what cases he will and inhibite Bishops to meddle with them if hee may giue leaue to preach minister Sacraments and to do all other Ecclesiasticall duties to whom he will within any Diocese of the world if in generall councels where the power of jurisdiction is principally exercised where the great affaires of the Church are treated of where doubts are resolued controuersies determined articles of faith defined and lawes made that bind the whole Church he haue so absolute power that he is neither bound to follow the greater nor the lesser part of Bishops there present but may determine what hee pleaseth when they haue all done sayd what they can If the assurance of finding out the truth and decreeing that which is good behoofefull rest not partly in him partly in them but only in him as our Aduersaries teach then are Bishops indeed no Bishops no judges of controuersies but counsellers only to aduise the Pope no Law-giuers to the Church but such as must receiue lawes from the Pope no commaunders in their own right in the Church in any degree but meere Lieuetenantes or to speake more truly and properly vassals to the Pope CHAP. 33. Of the proofes brought by
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
of the generall Councel though about the same time hee and all the Bishops of the West were assembled at Rome Wherefore this testimony might well haue beene spared The next allegation out of the Epistle of Damasus to the Bishops of Numidia is lesse to be esteemed then the former seeing that Epistle hath many things in it which cannot agree with the state of things in those times For if the Africans had bin so willing to refer all greater matters by way of appeale to Rome as the Epistle of Stephen in answere whereunto this of Damasus is written importeth how could it haue come to passe that in Zozymus his time appeales to Rome should seeme so strange as it appeareth they did That which is alleaged out of the Epistle of Syricius to Himericus Bishop of Tarracon and of Zozymus to Hesychius Bishop of Salona is to little purpose for that Syricius saith he is more zealous of true Religion then all other Christians and that he beareth the burthen of all that are grieued is no more then is attributed to Athanasius Bishop of Alexandria Neither is it to be marvailed at that he saith the Bishop of Tarracon referred certaine matters to the Church of Rome as to the head of his body seeing he was one of the Bishops that were subiect to the Bishop of Rome as Patriarch of the West Which also is the reason why Zozymus giueth directions to the Bishop of Salona touching the time they of the Clergie were to continue in euery of the lower degrees before they might be preferred to higher wishing him to acquaint others neare vnto him with the same and to assure them that he should answere it with the losse of his place whosoeuer should contemne the authority of the Fathers and neglect his prescriptions The next Pope that is produced as a witnes is Innocentius the first in his Epistles to the Bishops of Macedonia the Fathers assembled in the councels of Mileuis Carthage out of which Epistles foure things are alleaged for proof of the Popes supremacie The first is that the Church of Rome is by him called head of Churches yea the wellspring and head of all Churches The second that doubtfull cases were referred to the See of Rome by the Bishops of Macedonia The third that all the Bishops of the world were wont to consult the Romane Bishop in doubtfull questions touching matters of faith The fourth that the Romane Bishops haue the care of all Churches To these seuerall obiections framed out of the Epistles of this Romane Bishop we answer briefly First that the Church of Rome was head of all Churches that is first in order and honour amongst them but not in absolute supreme commanding power Secondly that the Church of Rome was in more speciall sort head of such Churches as were within the Patriarchship of Rome as Macedonia was in Innocentius his time and that this was the reason why the Bishops of Macedonia referred their doubts to the determination of the See of Rome Thirdly that all the Bishops of the world consulted the Apostolique See of Rome and the Bishop thereof in controuersies of Faith and Religion not as an absolute supreme judge to whose determinations they were bound to stand but as their most honourable Collegue interessed as much as any of them in the maintenance of the truth of Religion and the determination of things questioned concerning the Faith Fourthly that they did not consult the person of the Bishop of Rome alone but all the Bishops of the West together with him who were a great and principall part of the Christian world though sometimes hee onely be named as beeing the President of all the Synodes of Bishoppes throughout the West Fiftly that the Bishops of Rome had the care of all Churches not as absolute supreame commanders but as most honourable amongst the Bishops and Pastours of Churches who were first to be sought vnto in matters requiring a common deliberation and from whom all things generally concerning the state of the whole Church were either to take beginning or at the least to seeke confirmation before they were generally imposed and prescribed that so being rightly determined by the Bishops of the chiefe and principall Churches other Churches might receiue the same like waters flowing from a fountaine and running in puritie in all Churches according to the purity of the head and beginning The sixt Bishop of Rome that is produced to giue testimonie for the Popes supremacie is Leo the first out of whom seauen things are alleaged whereof the first is that he appointed Anastasius the Bishop of Thessalonica to be his Vicegerent for the gouernement of the Prouinces farre off from him whence it may be inferred as our Aduersaries thinke that the Bishops of Rome had an vniuersall commanding power ouer all the world The second that he commaundeth Anatolius Patriarch of Constantinople The third that he wisheth the Bishop of Antioch to write often to him touching the affaires and state of the Churches The fourth that Cyril the Patriarch of Alexandria besought him not to permit Iuuenall Bishop of Hierusalem to prejudice the right of the Church of Antioch and to subject Palestina to himselfe The fifth that hee commaunded Dioscorus Bishop of Alexandria The sixt that hee intermeddled in Africa And the last that hee sayth that Rome had a larger extent of Presidence in that by Peters chaire she was made the head of all Churches then in that in respect of earthly dominion she was Lady and Mistresse of a great part of the world To all these objections thus mustered together out of the writings of Leo we answere in this sort First that Thessalonica was within the Patriarchship of Rome and that therefore the Bishop of Rome might haue a Vicegerent there to dispatch some of those things that pertained to him as Patriarch and yet haue no vniuersall commanding power ouer all the world Secondly we say that Leo did not acknowledge Anatolius Bishop of Constantinople to be a Patriach and that therefore it followeth not that he would haue presumed to haue commanded a Patriarch if he had commanded him but that indeed he did not cōmand him For thus the case stood After the Councel of Ephesus wherein diuers Bishops compelled by Dioscorus subscribed to impious decrees Leo besought the Emperour that a generall Councell might be called but because by reason of warres in many parts of the world such a Councell could not conueniently be presently called he sent certaine commissioners to Constantinople who taking to them the Bishop of Constantinople and being assisted by him and the Bishops thereabout might vpon repentance and due satisfaction reconcile and againe admitte to the communion of their Churches such as they should thinke fit These commissioners Leo directed and commanded as in right he might But that he specially commanded the Bishop of Constantinople it cannot be proued Thirdly we say that Leo
in brotherly sort wished the Bishop of Antioch to resist heretiques and to let him vnderstand of the state of the Churches and to be a consort of the Apostolique See in this care to see that the priuiledges of the third See were not deminished by any mans ambition assuring him that whensoeuer he will do any thing for the aduancing of the dignity of the See of Antioch he also will be ready to concurre with him In all which passages betweene Leo and the Bishop of Antioch there is nothing found that hath any shew of proofe of the Popes supremacie Fourthly we say that Cyrill the Patriarch of Alexandria besought Leo to giue noe consent to the attempts of Iuuenall Bishop of Hierusalem seeking to prejudice the Church of Antioch to subject Palaestina to himselfe but that he besought Leo not to permit nor suffer Palaestina to be taken from Antioch and subjected to the Church of Hierusalem as if the whole power of permitting or hindring this thing had rested in Leo is but the false report of the Cardinall according to his wonted manner of misse-alleaging authors for the the aduantage of his cause So that the disposition of this matter rested not wholly in Leo but his concurrence with the Bishops of Antioch and Alexandria was necessary for the withstanding of the attempts of Iuuenall which his concurrence and helpe hee promised the Bishop of Antioch as we haue already heard and was euer ready to yeeld the same vnto him Fiftly we say that Leo did not command Dioscorus the Patriarch of Alexandria but whereas the manner was when the Patriarches were first elected ordained that they should mutually consent one to another and that hee who was newly ordained should send vnto the rest his Synodall letters and testimonies of his lawfull election and ordination Dioscorus being newly elected appointed Patriarch of Alexandria sendeth his Synodall letters to Leo Bishop of Rome that so he might giue his consent receiue embrace him as his fellow Patriarch Leo that these beginnings of Dioscorus might be more sure and firme nothing wanting to perfection fatherly as more ancient and brotherly as of the same ranke with him putting him in mind of some differences betweene their two Churches about the time of the ordination of Ministers and for that it seemed not likely vnto him that Marke the scholler of Peter tooke any other order in this behalfe then Peter did saith vnto him Wee will haue you to obserue that which our Fathers euer obserued making this a condition of the allowance consent he was to yeeld vnto him and vrging the practice of the Apostles sayth hee shall do well if obeying these Apostolicall institutions he shall cause that forme of ordination to be kept in the Churches ouer which God hath set him which is obserued in the Churches of the West that Ministers of the Church may be ordained onely on the Lords day on which day the creation of the world was begun in which Christ rose in which death was destroyed and life after which there is no death tooke beginning in which the Apostles receaued frō the Lord the trūpet of preaching the Gospel the ministration of the Sacrament of regeneration Sixtly we say that Leo intermedleth in the Churches of Africa and requireth some ordained contrary to the Canons to be put from their places tollerateth others and willeth the cause of Lupicinus a Bishop who had appealed vnto him to be heard there because he was Patriarch of the West and these parts of Africa were within his Patriarchship and that yet this his intermedling in so particular sort with the affaires of the Africane Churches was not very pleasing vnto those of Africa as shall appeare by that which followeth Lastly we say that the Church of Rome was the head of all Churches in the sence before expressed and had a presidence of order and honour amongst them and had in that sort as Leo truly saith more subject to it then euer were vnder the Romane Empire but vnder any absolute supreme commanding power of the Church of Rome they were not But saith Bellarmine if the former testimonies of Leo be auoided there is one more yet behind so cleare and full for the supremacie of the Pope that nothing can be sayd in answere vnto it in his Epistle to Anastasius Bishop of Thessalonica His words are these Amongst the most blessed Apostles like in honour there was a certaine difference and distinction of power and whereas they were equally chosen yet notwithstanding it was giuen to one of them to haue a preeminence amongst the rest from which forme the distinctiō and difference that is amongst Bishops hath taken beginning and by a most wise disposition it hath beene prouided that all without difference shall not challenge all vnto thēselues but that there should be in seuerall prouinces seuerall Bishops whose sentence judgment should be first and chiefe amongst the brethren and againe certaine other constituted and placed in greater cities who might take the care of more then the former by whom the care of the whole Church might flow vnto that one seate of Peter and nothing any where might dissent from the head These words truely make a goodly shew and may seeme most strongly to proue the supremacie that the Popes now challenge but in very deede they most powerfully ouerthrow it For the Bishops of Rome will neuer be perswaded in proportionable sort as is expressed in the words of Leo to challenge no more in respect of the whole Church then the Metropolitane Bishops doe in respect of their Provinces and the Patriarches in respect of their Churches of a larger extent For then they must doe nothing but accordingly as they shall bee swayed by the major part of the voyces of the Bishops of the Christian Church For the Metropolitane may doe nothing in his province nor the Patriarch in his larger extent but as they shall be directed swayed by the major part of the voices of their Bishops and yet surely the meaning of Leo was not to giue so much to the Bishop of Rome in respect of all Christian Bishops as pertaineth to the Metropolitanes and Patriarches in respect of their Bishops For the Metropolitane is to ordaine the Bishops of the Province and the Patriarch to ordaine and confirme the Metropolitanes by imposition of hands or mission of the Pall but the Pope neuer had any such power in respect of the Patriarches who were onely to send their Synodall Epistles to him testifying their faith as he likewise to them without expecting any other confirmation then that mutuall consent whereby one of them assured of the right faith and lawfull ordination of another receiued and embraced each other as fellowes and colleagues So that that care of the vniversall Church which Leo saith floweth together and commeth vp to that one chaire of Peter is to be vnderstood only in respect of things concerning the common faith
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
haue bin attempted sought by the Bishops of Constantinople that liued in his time But granting that Gregory did so write that Eusebius a B. of Constantinople did acknowledge his Church to be subject to the See of Rome yet he meant nothing else thereby but that it was an inferiour See and so subject in such sort as I haue declared the inferiour Sees to be subject to the superiour which subjection will no way proue the supremacie that the Popes now claime Fourthly that Gregory doth not say that the Bishop of Constantinople acknowledged himselfe subject to the Bishop of Rome For it was not Primas Byzanzenus the Primate of Byzantium that Gregory reporteth to haue confest himselfe subject to the Bishop of Rome and whose cause the Emperour commanded Gregory to heare but Primas Byzanzenus that is the Primate of the Byzazene prouince of Africa So that this confession of the Primate mentioned by Gregory brought to proue that the Bishop of Rome had a commanding power ouer the Bishop of Constantinople is meerly mistaken by Bellarmine as it was before him by Gratian. But some man wil say howsoeuer there be a mistaking of this allegation yet it is strong and forcible to proue the thing intended For Gregory saith expressely that howsoeuer all Bishops in respect of humility be equall yet there is no Bishop but if he be found faulty is subject to the See of Rome That this saying of Gregory may be foūd true certaine limitations must be added vnto it For the Bishop of Rome might not immediatly punish euery Bishop that he found to offend nor vpon appeale take notice of the faults and misdemeanours of all Bishops but the Councell of Chalcedon ordereth that if any inferiour Clergy-man haue ought against another inferiour Clerke the matter shall be heard and determined by the Bishop or such as with the liking of the Bishop shall by the parties be chosen arbitratours and if he go against their determination hee shall be punished If a Clerke haue ought against his owne or another Bishop it shall be inquired of in the audience of the Synode of the Prouince If either Clerke or Bishoppe haue ought against the Metropolitane of the prouince hee shall goe to the Primate of the Diocese or to the throne and See of the Regall citty of Constantinople This Canon of the great Councell of Chalcedon was confirmed by the decree of Iustinian the Emperour If any man sayth the Emperour accuse a Bishop for whatsoeuer cause let the cause be judged by the Metropolitane and if any man gainsay the Metropolitane let the matter be referred to the Arch-bishop and Patriarch of that Diocese and let him end it according to the canons and Lawes So that wee see the Bishops of Rome might not intermedle in judging inferiour Bishops subject to other Patriarches neither immediatly nor vpon complaint and appeale whatsoeuer their faults be but they haue other supreme Iudges who haue power finally to determine such matters and from whom there lyeth noe appeale This canon of the Councell of Chalcedon and the Emperours decree confirming the same Gregorie alleageth and alloweth onely adding that if there be no Metropolitane or Patriarch such things as otherwise should be finally determined and ended by them are to be brought to the Bishop of Rome Wherefore it seemeth that Gregory speaketh of the Bishops within his owne Patriarchship whom sometimes he calleth his own Bishops when he sayth there is no Bishop but if he be found faulty is subject to the See of Rome Of these hee speaketh when he sayth I impute it to my sinnes that my owne Bishops should thus despise me And againe if the causes of bishops committed to mee be thus dealt with alas what shall I doe And in this sense he willeth Iohn of Palermo to whom hee sendeth a Pall not to suffer the reuerence of the Apostolique See to be troubled by any mans presumption for that the state of the members is then entire and safe when the canons are kept and no iniurie hurteth the head of the faith not naming the Church of Rome the head of the Faith for that the Bishop of Rome hath an infallible iudgment and absolute command in matters of faith vpon which all the world must depend as some ignorantly construe him but because it was the head that is the beginning and wel-spring whence the doctrine of Faith the knowledge of GOD and all Christian institution flowed to sundry other Churches which therefore are in a sort to depend on it to haue recourse to it and to hold conformity with it No other faith Innocentius established and founded the Churches of Italy France Germany Spaine Africke and the Isles that lye betweene but Peter and his Successours and therefore the Bishoppes of these Churches must keepe such obseruations as the Romane Church from which they tooke their beginnning receiued from the Apostles ne caput institutionum omittere videantur that is Lest they seeme to forsake the Head well-spring of all the institutions and ordinances they haue This is the reason why the Churches of these parts haue beene so subiect to the Church of Rome namely for that from thence they receiued the light of Christian knowledge but to all Churches it is not an head in this sort seeing they receiued the faith not from Rome but from some other Apostolicall Church as Antioche or Alexandria CHAP. 35. Of the pretended proofes of the Popes supremacie produced and brought out of the writings of the Greeke Fathers HAuing examined the proofes they bring for confirmation of the Popes supremacie out of Councels and the writings of ancient Bishops of Rome let vs come to the testimonies of the Fathers Greeke and Latine The first that they produce amongst the Greeke Fathers is Ignatius who writeth to the Holy Church which hath the presidence in the Region of the Romans or sitteth before other in the Region of the Romans from which wordes nothing can be inferred that wee euer doubted of For wee most willingly confesse the Romane Church to haue beene in order and honour the first and chiefest of all Churches and he saith nothing out of which any other thing may be concluded The next is Irenaeus who being to shew against Heretiques that the Tradition of the Church is against them and for him and thinking it very tedious to run through the successions of all Churches saith he will content himselfe with that which is the greatest ancientest best knowne to all founded by the two most glorious Apostles Peter and Paul at Rome for that the whole Church that is the company of all faithfull ones that are euery-where in which the Tradition hath beene euer preserued must of necessity agree in her tradition with this propter potentiorem principalitatem that is For that it is the principall of all other This testimony of Irenaeus no way proueth the thing in question For heere is
nothing of the dependance of all other Churches on the Church of Rome in their faith and profession nor that all Churches haue kept the faith in that Church that is in cleauing to it as to their Head and Mother as Bellarmine vntruly fansieth But all that is heere saide is nothing else but that vndoubtedly the same faith was giuen and deliuered to all other Churches that was deliuered by blessed Peter and Paul to the Church of Rome the chiefest of all The two next Greeke Fathers that are produced to testifie for the supremacie are Epiphanius and Athanasius who report that Vrsacius and Valens sworne enemies of Athanasius repenting them of their former errours came to Iulius Bishop of Rome to giue an account and to seeke fauour and reconciliation Surely the producing of such testimonies as these are is nothing else but meere trifling and they that bring them know right well that they no way proue the thing questioned the circumstances of this narration touching Vrsacius and Valens are these The cause of Athanasius as himselfe testifieth was first heard in his own Province by an hundred Bishops and he there acquitted Secondly at Rome by more then fiftie Bishops at the desire of Eusebius his Adversary and lastly at Sardica by three hundred Bishops where he was likewise acquitted To the decrees of this Synode Vrsacius and Valens his enemies making shew of repentance subscribed confessing they had played the Sycophants neither rested they there but they wrote to Iulius Bishop of Rome to testifie their repentance and to desire reconciliation and likewise to Athanasius himselfe It were strange if any man could proue the absolute supreme power cōmanding authority of the Bishop of Rome ouer all the world by this testimony wherin nothing is foūd of submissiō to Iulius or of seeking his fauor cōmuniō more then the fauour and communion of Athanasius and all other Catholique Bishops adhering to him The Epistle of Athanasius to Felix Bishop of Rome is a meere counterfeit as that worthy and renowned Iuel hath proued at large by vnanswerable demonstrations and therefore it needeth no answere The allegation of the accusation of Dionysius of Alexandria to Dionysius of Rome joyned with it by Bellarmine is of the very same stampe and yet if it were not proueth nothing against vs. For there is no question but that in matter of faith men may accuse any erring Bishop to the Bishop of Rome and his Westerne Bishops and that they may iudge and condemne such a one though the Pope be not supreme head of the Church The fifth Greeke Father that they alledge is Basil who as they say in an Epistle to Athanasius attributeth to the Bishop of Rome authority to visit the Churches of the East to make decrees and to reuerse the decrees of generall Councels such as that of Ariminum was Truly to say no more the alledging of this testimony sheweth they haue very little conscience that alledge it For these are the circumstances of Basils Epistle whereof let the Reader iudge Basil writing to Athanasius whom hee highly commendeth for that whereas other thinke it well if they take care of their owne particular churches his care was no lesse for the whole church then for that which was specially committed to him aduiseth him that the onely way to settle things put out of order in the Easterne churches by the Arrians were the procuring of the consent of the Westerne Bishops if it were possible to intreat them to interpose themselues for that vndoubtedly the rulers would greatly regard and much reuerence the credit of their multitude and people euery where would follow them without gainesaying But seeing this which was rather to be desired would not in likelihood easily be obtained he wisheth that the Bishop of Rome might be induced to send some of good discretion and moderation who by gentle admonitions might pacifie the mindes of men and might haue all things in readinesse that concerned the Arimine Councell necessary for the dissoluing and shewing the inualidity of the acts of that Councell I doubt not but the Reader vpon the bare view of these circumstances will easily perceiue that this Epistle of Basill maketh very much against their opinion that alledge it For hee preferreth and rather wisheth a Councell then the Popes owne interposing of himselfe if there had beene any hope of a Councell Besides these whom the Pope was to send were not to proceed iudicially and by way of authority but by intreaty and gentle admonitions to pacifie the mindes of men therefore here is nothing of visiting the Churches of the East or voiding the acts of the Councell of Ariminum by way of sentence and formall proceeding as Bellarmine vntruly reporteth but onely a reaching forth of the hand of helpe to the distressed parts of the Church by them that were in better state and a manifesting or declaring of the inualidity of that Councell the vnlawfull proceedings of it and the reasons why it neither was nor euer ought to be admitted The sixth Greeke Father brought to be a witnesse of the Popes supremacie is Gregorie Nazianzen who saith that the Romane Church did euer hold the right profession as it becommeth the citty which is ouer all the world This testimony is no lesse abused then the former as it will easily appeare to him that will take the paines to view the place alledged Nature saith Nazianzene doth not affoord two Suns yet are there two Romes the lights of the whole world the old and the new seate of the Empire The one of these lights appeareth at the rising and the other at the setting of the Sunne and both iointly send forth a most excellent glittering brightnesse The faith of the one was a long time and now is right knitting and ioyning the West to the sauing word of Life as it is fitte the Mistresse and Lady of the world should be In which words it is euident that hee speaketh of the greatnesse of the cittie of Rome in respect of her ciuill and temporall soueraignty and not in respect of the spirituall power of the Church and therefore it is strange that Bellarmine should deny the same For though in the time of Nazianzen the Emperour made his abode for the most part at Constantinople and not at Rome yet he calleth Rome the Mistresse of the world in respect of the ciuill state thereof as appeareth in that he speaketh of two famous cities two lights of the world and nameth the one the old Seate and the other the new Seate of the Empire The seuenth Greeke Father is Chrysostome who if we may beleeue Bellarmine being deposed by Theophilus Bishoppe of Alexandria and put from the Bishopricke of Constantinople in a Councell of Bishops writeth to the Bishop of Rome by his authority to voyde the sentence of Theophilus and to punish him whence it will follow that Chrysostome acknowledged the Romane Bishop to bee supreme Iudge of
as being against the Canons and yet tolde Chrysostome there was no helpe nor no meanes to releeue him but in a generall Councell which by all possible meanes he will labour to procure till which time hee must be content and referre all to God who taketh care of these things But with how ill successe hee sought to procure a generall Councell for the restoring of him to his place againe wee may finde in k Sozomene who reporteth that being desirous that Chrysostome might returne he sent with those Orientall Bishops that came to him to intreate his helpe and assistance fiue Bishops and two Presbyters to Honorius Arcadius to obtaine a Councell and to haue the time appointed who were so farre from prevailing and obtaining that they sought that they were sent away with disgrace as forreine and outlandish disturbers of the state of the Empire These are the principall and most materiall circumstances of the narration and report of the vniust deposition of Chrysostome his writing to the Bishop of Rome and the answer hee had from him and the other Bishops of the West which make most strongly against the pretended supremacie of Popes For Innocentius telleth Chrysostomes friends that it lyeth not in him to helpe him but in a generall Councell And though hee and the Bishops of the West pronounce the proceedings of Theophilus voide as against the Canons and do make them voyd as much as by their dissenting they can yet they confesse that the absolute voyding of them and the punishing of Theophilus was not in them but in a generall Councell But sayth Bellarmine Chrysostome in another Epistle giueth Innocentius thankes for his fatherly care and kindnesse intreateth that his enemies may not be excluded from the communion if by any meanes they may be reclaimed therefore it seemeth Chrysostome thought hee had an absolute supreame commanding power What it is in this Epistle that argueth that supreame power which Bellarmine dreameth of I cannot tell For I know no reason why Chrysostome now a deposed and distressed Bishop might not vse so respectiue a forme of speech to the Bishop of the first See and esteeme of him as a father without acknowledging him to haue any absolute supreame power ouer all And all the other circumstances and parts of the Epistle most clearely make against the Papacie For he sayth Innocentius had done what he could but that his enemies notwithstanding went still forward in their ill courses and for the auoyding of greater scandals distractions confusions desireth him not to reiect them from his communion considering the greatnesse of the worke for that this was the contention almost of all the world So that the Churches were brought vpon their knees the people dispersed the Cleargy vexed Bishops banished and the constitutions of the holy Fathers violated and broken The eighth Greeke Father is Cyril Bishop of Alexandria out of whom Bellarmine alleageth noe new thing but the very same which hee brought out of the Councell of Ephesus whereof he was president and therefore I will make no new answere here to this renued allegation but referre the Reader to the answere already made The ninth Greeke Father is Theodoret out of whom Bellarmine seeketh to confirme the Papacie for that though he were a Bishop of Asia and had vnder him eight hundred Churches yet he acknowledgeth the Bishop of Rome to be his supreme Iudge and in an Epistle written to Renatus a Presbyter of the Church of Rome sayth that that holy See hath the gouernment and direction of the Churches throughout the world For answere vnto this objection we must obserue that Theodoret being deposed banished and grieuously vexed for matters of faith seeketh to haue his cause reexamined and heard againe by the Bishop of Rome and the Bishops of the West which thing he obtained and was by Leo and the rest of the Bishops of the West judged Catholique receiued to their communion and as much as lay in them restored to his Bishopricke againe yet could he not repossesse his place till the Councell of Chalcedon put him into it which though it were informed by the deputies of Leo that hee had long before receiued him to his communion yet admited him not till he was reexamined and at the first many of the Fathers disliking his answeres as imperfect cryed out aloud that he was a Nestorian and desired that the Heretique might be cast out censuring him as Cyril and other Catholique Bishops had done before But when hee fully and peremptorily accursed Nestorius with all his adherents they all with one consenting voyce pronounced him worthy of his place and admitted him to sit in Councel with them Whereby it apeareth that howsoeuer the Westerne Bishops pronounced him Catholique receiued him to their communion and as much as in them lay restored him to his place yet of themselues they neither could nor did perfect that worke but were forced to leaue it to the generall Councell all which Leo himselfe in his Epistle to Theodoret acknowledgeth Adiutorium nostrum sayth he in nomine Domini qui fecit coelum terram qui nullum nos in nostris fratribus detrimentum sustinere permisit sed quae nostro prius ministerio definierat vniuersae fraternitatis irretractabili firmauit assensu vt verè à se prodijsse ostenderet quod priùs à prima omnium sede formatū totius Christiani orbis iudicium recepisset vt in hoc quoque Capiti membra concordent Nā ne aliarum sedium ad eam quam caeteris omnium Dominus statuit praesidere consensus assentatio uideretur inuenti priùs sunt qui de iudicijs nostris ambigerent that is Our helpe is in the name of the Lord who made both heauen and earth who suffered vs not to sustaine any losse in our brethren but confirmed established by the irreuocable assent of the whole brotherhood what things he had before defined by our ministery that he might clearly shew that thing vndoubtedly to haue proceeded frō himselfe which being formerly framed by the first See the iudgment of the whole Christian world received So that herein the head mēbers conspire together For lest the consenting of other Sees to that which the Lord of all appointed to be the first of all might seeme to bee but flattery there were some found that at first doubted of our iudgements whether they were right or not And he addeth that multum Sacerdotalis officij meritum splendescit vbi sic summorum servatur authoritas vt in nullo inferiorum putetur imminuta libertas that is that the excellent worthinesse of the Priestly office doth then most appeare in shining brightnesse when the authority of the highest is so retained that the liberty of the inferiour and lesser be thought in nothing to be diminished or empaired Thereby insinuating that hee and his Westerne Bishops did so goe before in their resolution touching the case of Theodoret that they no way
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
Cornelius The fourth in the eighth Epistle of the first booke ad plebem vniversam Out of the first of these places they will proue that hee maketh Peter Head of the whole Church Out of the second that there is one High Priest one supreme Iudge in the Church whom all men are bound to obey Out of the third that Cornelius was Head of all Catholiques Out of the fourth that there is one singular Chaire in the Church wherein he sitteth that must teach all To euery of these allegations I will answere in order and make it most cleare and evident that none of the things imagined by the Cardinall can possibly bee concluded out of any of the fore-named places For to beginne with the first whosoeuer will but reade ouer Cyprians booke of the vnity of the Church shall most certainely and vndoubtedly finde that hee speaketh not in that book of Peters headship of the vniuersall Church as the Iesuite fansieth but of the head originall and first beginning of Pastorall commission Which that it may the better appeare I will as briefely as possibly I can lay downe the most principall and materiall circumstances of the whole discourse of that booke written vpon occasion of the Schisme of the Nouatians The first thing that occurreth in the whole discourse of the booke is the authors obseruation of the endlesse malice of Satan who when he found the Idols of the Gentiles wherein he was wont to be worshipped to be forsaken his Seates Temples deserted almost all professing to belieue in Christ Haereses inuenit Schismata quibus subuerteret fidem veritatem corrumperet scinderet vnitatem that is Found out Heresies and Schismes by which he might subvert the Faith corrupt the verity and cut in sunder the vnity so that Quos detinere non potest in viae veteris coecitate circumscribit decipit noui itineris errore that is Whom he cannot hold in the blindnesse and darkenes of the old way those he circumuenteth and beguileth by making them erre goe aside and not hold on the right course of their journey in the new way that leadeth to life In the second place he sheweth that this so falleth out and that men are soe beguiled and misse-led into Schismes Heresies because they returne not backe to the first origine of truth because they seeke not the head nor keepe the doctrine of the heauenly Maister which if a man would consider and thinke of he should not neede to seeke out many arguments nor fetch any great compasse about but the truth would easily without any great search offer it selfe vnto him For therefore did Christ when hee was to lay the foundations of the Christian Church say specially to Peter Thou art Peter vpon this Rocke will I build my Church I will giue to thee the keyes of the kingdome of heauen and againe after his resurrection Feede my sheepe because though rising againe from the dead he gaue like power to all the Apostles when he sayd As my Father sent me so send I you whose sinnes ye remit they are remitted whose sinnes ye retaine they are retained yet he would by speaking specially to one by appointing one chaire shew what vnity should be in the Church The rest of the Apostles sayth Cypriā were vndoubtedly the same that Peter was equall in honour power but therefore did Christ in the first place giue or at least promise to giue specially particularly to one that Apostolique cōmissiō which he meant also to giueto the rest that hee might thereby shew that the Church must be one and that there must be but one Episcopall chaire in the world All the Apostles say the Cyprian are Pastours but the flock of Christ is but one which they are to feed with vnanimous cōsent There is but one body of the Church one spirit one hope of our calling one Lord one Faith one baptisme one God This vnity all men must endeauour to keepe especially Bishops that they may make it appeare that there is but one Bishoply commission in the Christian Church Cuius a singulis in solidum pars tenetur that is Whereof euery one indifferently and in equall sort hath his part Here is nothing that proueth the vniuersality of the Papall power or that Peter was by Christ made head of the whole Church But this place most mainely ouerthroweth that supposed Headship For Cyprian teacheth that Christ meant to giue equall power and authority to all his Apostles and that the reason why intending no more to one then to the rest yet he more specially directed his speech to one then to the rest was onely to shew that there must be an vnity in the Church which he settled in that beginning with one from him he proceeded to the rest not meaning that the rest should receiue any thing from him but that from himselfe immediately they should receiue that in the second place which he had first and that they should receiue the same commission together with him into which he was first put that they might know him to be the first of their company In this sense Innocentius sayth A Petro ipse Episcopatus tota authoritas nominis huius emersit that is The Bishoply office and the whole authority of this name and title tooke beginning from Peter whom he sayth all Bishops must respect as Sui nominis honoris authorem that is as the first and originall of their name and honour And Leo in like sort Huius muner is sacramentum ita Dominus ad omnium Apostolorum officium voluit pertinere vt in beatissimo Petro Apostolorū omnium summo principaliter collocaret v◅ ab ipso quasi quodam capite dona sua velut in corpus omne diffunderet that is The Lords will was that the mystery of this heauenly gift commission and imployment should so pertaine to the ministery office of all the Apostles that yet he would first and principally place it in most blessed Peter the greatest of all the Apostles that soe beginning with him as the head and first hee might proceede from him to poure forth his gifts into all the body But sayth Bellarmine Cyprian speaketh of another head of the Church besides Christ and maketh the Church that so enlargeth it selfe and hath so many parts yet to be one in this roote and head as the beames are many but the light is one as the boughes are many but the tree is one the riuers are many but the fountaine is one It is strange that a man of his learning and judgement should so mis-conceiue things as he seemeth to doe For it is most euident to any one that will but take the paines to peruse the place that Cyprian speaketh not of a distinct head of the Church different from Christ and appointed by him to gouerne the Church but of the originall first beginning and head of the commission the Pastours of the Church haue
will in the administration of the Church being to giue an account of his actions vnto the Lord. Here wee see Cyprian speaketh in the very same sort in the case between him and Stephen as he did in the Councell of Carthage and that generally hee maketh all Bishops equall and no one subject to the judgment of another but to the judgement of God only and the company of their fellow Bishops And that he did not thinke the Bishop of Rome to haue an infallibility of judgment or a commanding authority ouer other Bishops it appeareth in that writing to Pompeius of Stephens answere to his letters and sending him a copy of the same answere he telleth him that by reading it hee may more and more note his errour in maintaining the cause of heretiques against Christians and the Church of God and feareth not to pronounce of him that he writeth many things proudly impertinently vnskilfully improuidently and contrary to himselfe and which more is contemning his prescription that heretiques should not be rebaptized but bee receiued with the imposition of hands onely hee chargeth him with hard stiffe and inflexible obstinacie Firmilianus with the Bishops of Phrygia Galatia Cilicia and other regions neere adioyning assembled in a Synode at Iconium consented with Cyprian and Firmilianus writing to him telleth him of their resolution and chargeth Stephen with folly who bragging of the place of his Bishoprique and pretending to succeed Peter on whom the Church was founded yet bringeth in many other rockes and new buildings of many Churches in that hee supposed heretiques to be truly baptized who are out of the communion of the true Church whereas the Church was specially promised to be builded on Peter to shew that it must be but one And in great dislike and reprehension of Stephen he saith he was not ashamed in fauour of heretiques to deuide the brotherhood and to call Cyprian the worthy seruant of God a false Christ a false Apostle and a deceiptfull and guilefull workeman whereas all these things might much more truly bee sayd of him and therefore guilty to himselfe Praeuenit vt alteri ea per mendacium objiceret quae ipse ex merito audire deberet that is By way of preuention hee falsely and lyingly obiected those things to another which himselfe truly and deseruedly might haue had objected to him by others Such and so great were the oppositions of Cyprian and his consorts against Stephen and his adherents in the matter of rebaptization whereupon Bellarmine saith it seemeth that Cyprian sinned mortally in that hee obeyed not the commandement of Stephen nor submitted his judgement to the judgement of his superiour That hee erred in the matter of rebaptization we willingly confesse but that he knew not the power authority and commission of the Bishoppe of Rome or that he would euer haue dissented from him or opposed himselfe against him in a question of faith if hee had thought his power to bee vniuersall and his iudgment infallible we vtterly deny For then hee should not onely haue erred in the matter of rebaptization but haue beene a damnable heretique and and haue perished euerlastingly whereas yet the Church of God hath euer reputed him a holy Bishop and a blessed Martyr Thus hauing examined the testimonies of Cyprian vsually alleaged for and against the supremacy of the Pope let vs proceed to the rest of Bellarmines witnesses The next that followeth is Optatus out of whom it is alleaged that there was one Episcopall Chaire in the whole Church appointed by Christ. But because this is the same which was formerly alleaged out of Cyprian already answered in the answers to the allegations brought out of him therefore without farther troubling of the Reader I referre him to that which went before The next vnto Optatus is Ambrose out of whom three seuerall places are produced in the first his words are these as Bellarmine citeth them Though the whole world bee Gods yet the Church onely is called his house the Gouernour whereof at this day is Damasus For answer hereunto we say that this testimony rather witnesseth their forgery then confirmeth their errour For the Commentaries attributed to Ambrose wherein these words are are not his and besides this addition the gouernour whereof at this day is Damasus may be thought to haue beene put in in fauour of their fancie touching the Papall vniversalitie of jurisdiction it is so sudden causelesse and abrupt In the second place Ambrose reporteth of Satyrus that before he would receiue the Sacrament of the Lords body he asked of the Bishop by whose hands hee was to receiue it whether he held communion with the Catholick Bishops and namely with the Romane Church To the inference of our Adversaries and the conclusion they seek to deriue draw from these words in fauour of the Papacie I haue answered elsewhere whither I referre the Reader Wherefore let vs come to the third and last place of Ambrose His words are Wee follow the type and forme of the Romane Church in all things and againe I desire to follow the Romane Church in all things Surely this place of all other most clearely confuteth the errour of the Romanists touching the infallibility of the judgement of the Roman Church and Bishop and the necessitie of absolute conformity with the same For in this place Saint Ambrose sheweth that in the Church of Millaine whereof he was Bishop the manner in his time was that the Bishop girding himselfe about with a towell in imitation of Christ did wash the feete of such as were newly baptized and after great commendation of the same custome objecting to himselfe that the Romane Church had it not first he saith that perhaps the Church of Rome omitted this washing because of the difficultie and great labour in performing it by reason of the multitude of those that were baptized Secondly whereas some said in defence and excuse of the omission of this washing in the Romane Church that it is not to be vsed as a mysticall right in the regeneration of them that are new borne in Christ but in the ciuill entertainment of strangers the offices of humilitie and ciuill courtesie being very farre different from the mysteries and sacred rights of sanctification he reproueth them for so saying and endeauoureth to shew that this kinde of washing is a sacred and mysticall right tending to the sanctification of them that are newly baptized and that out of the words of Christ to Peter Vnlesse I wash thee thou shalt haue no part in me and then addeth the wordes alleaged by Bellarmine I desire in all things to follow the Romane Church but notwithstanding we also are men and haue our sense and iudgment and therefore what we finde to be rightly obserued any where else we also rightly obserue keepe we follow the Apostle Peter wee cleaue fast vnto his devotion and hereunto what can the Church of Rome answer Whereby wee
may see with what conscience these men alleage the testimonies of the Fathers Ambrose saith Other men haue judgement to discerne what is fit to be done as well as the Romanes that if any where else they finde better obseruations then in the Church of Rome they may lawfully embrace them that S. Peter Bishop of Rome was authour of his assertion and that the Church of Rome hath nothing to answer in her own defence or whereby to justifie her omitting of this sacred washing and they produce his testimonie to proue that he thought it necessary to be like in all things to the Church of Rome Neither doth Bellarmines answer that he thought it necessary to follow the Church of Rome in all things necessary to saluation though he dissented in this observation satisfie vs seeing he thought this obseruation necessary to the perfect regeneration of the baptized consequently to saluation as appeareth in the place it selfe Wherefore when Ambrose saith of himselfe and those of Millaine that they follow in all things the type forme of the Romane Church it is not to be vnderstood without all limitatiō but that as other daughter-Churches do follow the custome of their mother-churches so the church of Millaine conformeth her selfe to the church of Rome in all things so farre forth as shee can perswade her selfe it is fitte and right so to doe otherwise out of her judgement and discretion receiuing from other churches that which they haue in better sort then shee euenas Gregorie Bishop of Rome professed that he was not ashamed to learne of those churches that were meaner then his owne From Ambrose the Cardinall passeth to Hierome out of whose writings he produceth two testimonies The first out of his Epistle to Ageruchia de Monogamiâ the other out of his Epistle to Damasus touching the vse of the word Hypostasis The first of these two testimonies might well haue beene spared For what canne any man inferre from this that Hierome saith hee did helpe Damasus in writing answeres to the Synodall consultations of the East and West was there euer any man that doubted of the consulting of the Bishop of Rome and his Bishops by the Synodes of the East and West in matters concerning the faith and state of the vniuersall Church Or may it bee concluded from hence that the Pope hath an absolute supreme power in the Church Surely I thinke not Wherefore let vs passe to the second testimonie Ego saith Hierome to Damasus nullum primum nisi Christum sequens beatitudini tuae idest Cathedrae Petri communione consocior super illampetram aedificatam Ecclesiam scio Quicunque extra hanc domum agnum commederit profanus est Si quis in arcâ Noae non fuerit peribit regnante diluuio that is I following no first and chiefe but Christ am ioyned in communion to your blessednesse that is to Peters chaire Vpon that rocke I know the Church to bee builded whosoeuer shall eate the Paschall Lambe out of this house he is a profane person If any man shall be out of Noahs arke hee shall vndoubtedly perish when the floud prevaileth and drowneth all It is true that Cyprian hath obserued in his Epistle to Stephen Bishop of Rome that therefore almighty God appointed a great number companie of Bishops ioyned together by the glew and bond of vnity that if some fall into heresie and seeke to wast the flocke of Christ the rest may gather the dispersed sheepe into the fold againe and therefore euen as if one hauen be dangerous they that saile will seeke to another more safe and if one Inne vpon the way be possessed by theeues and wicked persons wayfaring men will turne into another so in the Church when the Pastours of one part of it are infected with errour and heresie men must flie to them that are right-beleeuers in other parts This was the case of Hierome as it appeareth by this his Epistle Hee liued at the time of the writing of it in the East parts where Arrianisme had strangely and dangerously prevailed but the West churches were sound Hee was vrged to confesse and acknowledge that there are three Hypostases or subsistences in the Godhead This forme of speaking he suspected as fearing some ill meaning especially because he suspected them that tendered it to him and therefore flieth for direction to Damasus and the Westerne Bishops For it appeareth that hee sought the resolution of them all though the manner was to write onely to the chiefe amongst them Let vs heare therefore what it is that he saith and what the Iesuite inferreth from his saying He admitteth saith Bellarmine no originall teacher but Christ yet is ioyned in communion with Damasus that is with Peters chaire and professeth that vpon that rocke the Church was builded Therefore he acknowledgeth the vniuersality of Papall power and iurisdiction This argument of the Cardinall is too weake to proue the intended conclusion For though there bee no question but that in a true sense the Church may be said to haue beene builded on Peters chaire that is vpon his office and Ministery yet it will not follow that they who succeed him in that chaire haue vniversality of power and iurisdiction seeing Hierome himselfe teacheth that the Church is builded as well vpon the rest of the Apostles as vpon Peter consequently that their chaires are that rocke vpon which the Church is builded as well as Peters And yet besides all this Gregory sheweth that Peters chaire being but one is in three seuerall places and three Bishops doe sit in it For Peters chaire is at Alexandria where he taught and ruled by Marke his scholler at Antioch where he remained for a time and at Rome where in his body he yet still abideth expecting the second comming of Christ. Vpon this chaire as on a rocke the Church is builded But this chaire and throne implieth not onely the office and ministery of them who most specially succeed Peter as the Bishops of Rome Alexandria and Antioch but of such other also as in ioynt commission with them gouerne the Church Wherevpon according to the phrase of Antiquity the iudgement of the Romane See and the iudgement of the Bishop of Rome with his fellow Bishops of the West is all one But some man will say that Hierome pronounceth him to be a profane person that eateth the lambe out of this house speaking of the Church of Rome therefore hee thinketh all men and Churches bound for euer to hold communion with the Romane Church For answere to this obiection first we say it may very probably be thought that by the house he speaketh of out of which the Lambe may not be eaten he meaneth not particularly the Romane Church but the true Catholique Church of Christ which is equally builded vpon all the Apostles in respect of the same firmenesse found in them all but more specially vpon Peter as in order and honour the chiefest of them
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
not absolutely disposing thinges according to his owne liking Neither is it to be doubted but that very many followed this latter opinion consequently neuer gaue that fulnesse of power to the Pope that is now claimed howsoeuer they attributed that vnto him as president of Ecclesiasticall meetings which rested not in him alone but in the whole meetings and Assemblies as it is an ordinary thing to attribute that to the president of any company that is done by the whole company and as all the great actions of State are attributed to the Duke of Venice whereas yet he can do nothing but as he is swayed directed by the noble Senatours of that State CHAP. 37. Of the pretended proofes of the Popes vniuersall power taken from his intermedling in auncient times in confirming deposing or restoring Bishops deposed HAuing examined the testimonies of Councels Popes and Fathers Greeke and Latine brought to proue the vniuersality of Ecclesiasticall power claimed by the Pope and found their insufficiencie and weakenesse let vs proceed to see by what other proofes our Aduersaries endeavour to demonstrate and confirme the same The absolute supreme power of Popes they labour to proue by the authority they exercised ouer other Bishops by their lawes dispensations and censures by their Vicegerents which they appointed in places farre remote from them by Appeales brought vnto them by their exemption from beeing subiect to any judgement and by the names and titles that are giuen vnto them Of all these I will entreat in order and first of the authority the Bishoppes of Rome are supposed to haue exercised ouer other Bishops in confirming deposing or restoring them Of confirmation Bellarmine bringeth some few examples but such as will neuer confirme the thing he desireth to proue For touching the confirmation of Maximus in the Bishopricke of Antioch which is the first example that hee bringeth first it was not any confirmation of himselfe in his Bishoply office but onely the determining of certaine differences betweene him and Iuvenall about their limits and the confirmation of the same end and conclusion Secondly this end was not made by Leo alone but by the whole Councell of Chalcedon Neither is the second proofe that the confirmation of the chiefe Bishoppes of the world pertained aunciently to the Pope any better then this For these are the circumstances of that Leo writeth whom Bellarmine citeth in the second place as challenging the right of confirming the Bishop of Constantinople Anatolius the Bishop of Constatinople ambitiously aspâ—…red to be greater then was fit as Leo thought Leo writeth to the Emperour in reprehension of his presumption and saith that he might haue forbornethus ambitiously to aspire higher seeing hee obtained the Bishopricke of Constantinople by the Emperours helpe and his favourable assent The favour that Leo speaketh of was in that Anatolius not hauing passed through the lower degrees of Ecclesiasticall Ministery was somewhat irregularly preferred to bee Bishop of so great a city which he was content to winke at at the Emperours entreaty And as the manner was that the foure Patriarches should vpon notice giuen of their due ordination and Synodall letters containing a profession of their faith mutually giue assent one to another before they were accounted Patriarches and fully possessed of their places by his allowance in the same sort as others were to allow of him as much as in him lay he was content to confirme and make good his ordination though somewhat irregular and defectiue which no way proueth that the confirming of the great Bishops of the world pertained any otherwise to the Bishop of Rome then the right of confirming him pertained vnto them Yet this is in effect all they can say For that Leo willeth the Bishop of Thessalonica to take knowledge of the Metropolitanes chosen in the Provinces subject to him as Vicegerent to the Patriarch of Rome and by his assent to confirme their ordination as likewise that writing to the Bishops of Africa subject to him as Patriarch he telleth them hee is content the Bishop of Salicen turned from Novatianisme shall keepe his place if hee send vnto him the confession of his faith and that Gregory complaineth that the Bishop of Salona within his Patriarchship was ordained without his privity and consent doth no more proue the Pope to be vniversall Bishop then the other Patriarches without whose assent none of the Metropolitanes subject to them might be ordained And this was it that so much grieued Gregory namely that his Bishops thereby putting a difference betweene such as were subject to him in that he was Patriarch of the West and others should so despise and contemne him But let our Aduersaries proue that either Gregory or any of his predecessours euer challenged the confirmarion of Metropolitanes subject to any of the other Patriarches and we will confesse they say something Otherwise all that they bring is idle and to no purpose prouing nothing that wee euer doubted of For we know the Bishop of Rome had the right of confirming the Metropolitanes within the precincts of his owne Patriarchship as likewise euery other Patriarch had and that therefore hee might send the Pall to sundry parts of Greece France and Spaine as Bellarmine alleadgeth being all within the compasse of his Patriarchship and yet not bee vniversall Bishop as Bellarmine would willingly from hence inferre Wherefore seeing our adversaries haue so little to say for the Popes right of confirming Bishops let vs proceede to see what proofes they can produce of his power and authority in deposing them Their first allegation is touching Stephen Bishop of Rome deposing as they suppose Martianus Bishop of Arle in France who had joined himselfe with Novatianus denying reconciliation and the Churches peace to such as hauing fallen and denyed the faith afterwardes repented and turned againe vnto God This allegation is too weake to proue their intended conclusion For it is most certaine by all circumstances of the Epistle of Cyprian cited by Bellarmine that Stephen the Bishop of Rome did not depose Martianus by himselfe alone and therefore Cyprian doth not say to Stephen therefore hath God appointed thee to bee ouer all Bishops that if they fall into heresie or faile in the performance of their duty thou mightst set all right againe but therefore hath God appointed a great number of Bishops that if any one of that company and society fall into here sie and beginne to teare rent and waste the flocke of Christ the rest may helpe and as good and pittifull Pastours gather the scattered sheepe of Christ into the fold againe Neither doth he say to Stephen that hee should suspend Martianus but that he should write to the Bishops of France to doe it and not to suffer him any longer to insult vpon the company of Catholique Bishoppes for that hee was not yet suspended and rejected from their communion But some man perhaps will aske why Cyprian desireth
Stephen to write to the Bishops of France and writeth not himselfe as if the power of deposing Martianus were no more in Stephen then in himselfe Surely there may bee three reasons giuen of his so doing the first because hee was nearer to them then Cyprian The second because hee as Patriarch of the West with his Bishoppes was more likely to prevaile then Cyprian with his Africanes alone The third for that as Cyprian himselfe obserueth in the end of this Epistle it more concerned him then any other to maintaine the reputation of LVCIVS and CORNELIVS his predecessours and to oppose himselfe against Martianus who joyned himselfe with Nouatianus that had schismatically and heretically rent and diuided himselfe from them and made a schisme in their Church Neither doth that which followeth where he desireth Stephen to write vnto him who is appointed in the roome of Martianus that so he may know whom to write vnto and with whom to communicate import that hee should by himselfe alone constitute the Bishoppe of Arle but that writing to the people to choose and the Bishoppes of the prouince to direct them in choosing and to consecrate him they should choose hee should require to be certified from them of their proceedings accordingly that so he might impart the same vnto him The next proofe that the Pope hath authority to depose any Bishop of the world deseruing to be deposed is out of the Epistle of Nicholas the first to Michael the Emperour of Constantinople But whosoeuer shall peruse the place shall finde that noe such thing can be concluded out of it For the drift of Nicolas in that Epistle is to shew that the inferiours may not iudge their superiours as the prouinciall Bishops their Metropolitanes or the Metropolitanes their Patriarch but that still the greater must judge the lesser If a Clerke sayth the Councell of Chalcedon haue ought against his Bishoppe let the matter bee heard in the Synode of the prouince but if a Bishop or Clerke haue a complaint against the Metropolitane let him go to the Primate of the Diocese or to the See of Constantinople So that euer the greater must judge the lesser and the lesser may neuer presume to judge the greater so long as there is any greater to flye vnto And therefore Iohn of Antioch in the Councell of Ephesus was reproued for that being but Bishop of the third See he presumed to judge Cyril Bishop of the second See Dioscorus Bishop of the second See was condemned in the Councell of Chalcedon for that he iudged Leo Bishop of the first See This he insisteth vpon to shew that the Bishops subiect to Ignatius Patriarch of Constantinople had vnjustly proceeded against him then to shew that this their proceeding was strange new he saith there hath scarce beene any of the Bishops of Constantinople deposed whose deposition hath bin holden iust and good without the concurrence of the See of Rome Now how will this proue that the Pope hath power in himselfe alone to depose all Bishops worthy to be deposed is it consequent that if the Bishops of Patriarchicall Sees may not be judged by their owne Bishops alone nor by those that are in degree of honour inferiour to them and that the Patriarches of higher Sees with their Bishops must concurre with the Bishops of those Patriarches that are judged and that neuer any Bishop of Constantinople being next in honour to the Bishop of Rome was deposed but by such a Synode whereof the Bishop of Rome was president that the Bishoppe of Rome hath in himselfe alone the fulnesse of all Ecclesiasticall power Surely I thinke not our Aduersaries themselues being judges But Gelasius in his Epistle to the Bishops of Dardania sayth the See Apostolique by her authority condemned Dioscorus Bishop of the Second See therefore the Pope hath all Ecclesiastical power originally seated in himselfe alone Truely this cōsequence is no better then the former For by the See Apostolique Gelasius vnderstandeth the Romane Bishop and the Bishops of the West subject to him who Synodically condemned Dioscorus and yet not without the concurrence of many other Bishops nor so as that the iudgement was thought perfect till an Oecumenicall Synode confirmed it as it appeareth by the course of histories The next example is the deposition of Flauianus Bishop of Antioch by Damasus Bishop of Rome But this example might haue beene spared For it is most certaine that Damasus did not depose Flauianus The circumstances of the history are these Eustathius that worthy Bishop of Antioch who made that excellent Oration in the prayse of Constantine in the Councell of Nice and was so earnest and zealous a defender of the true faith against the Arrians being by certaine Arrians cast out of his Bishoprique and banished vpon the occasion of a lewd woman charging him to haue committed adultery with her but afterward confessing she had wronged him and that shee had beene suborned by those Arians so to accuse him Eulalius was chosen into his place whom Euphronius succeeded and after him Placitus obtained the Bishoprique All these did secretly fauour Arrianisme and therefore many both of the people and Priests forsaking the publique assemblies had their priuate meetings and were called Eustathians for that after the banishment of Eustathius they began thus to assembe together Stephen succeeded Placitus Leontius Stephen and Eudoxius Leontius who obtaining to be Bishop of Constantinople left the Church of Antioche voide Whereupon the Bishops of the prouince assembled together and chose Milesius to be Bishop some of them hoping that he would fauour Arrianisme and other knowing that he was an Orthodoxe the errour of the one side mis-perswaded of the man and the true knowledge the other had of him made both willingly to consent to his election and ordination But so soone as the Arrians perceiued what he was they deposed him and sent him into banishment placing Euzoius in his place which when the people and Priests that were Catholique perceiued who had long endured the insolencies of the Arrians they diuided themselues and refused to communicate with him After a while Milesius in the time of Iulian returneth from banishment to whom though such Catholiques as diuided themselues vpon dislike of Euzoius presently cleaued yet would not they that first diuided themselues in respect of Eustathius neither at the first ordination of Milesius though Eustathius were then dead nor now vpon his returne by any meanes be induced to hold communion with him and his which Lucifer one of them that had beene in banishment with Athanasius seeing and pittying laboured with them what he could to bring them to vnity But when he saw they would not be induced to joyne with Milesius and that Paulinus was their leader hee made him their Bishop which act of his made the Schisme more dangerous then before and of longer continuance then otherwise happily it would haue beene for it
continued 85. yeares Milesius perceiuing Paulinus to be ordained Bishop ouer them that were diuided from his communion seemed noe whit therewith to be offended or displeased but spake peaceably to Paulinus desiring him that they might joyne their flockes and feede them together and if sayd hee the throne diuide vs let mee lay the Gospell in it and then do thou sit in it sometimes and I will sit in it at other times and if I dye before thee thou shalt haue the care and charge of all if thou dye before mee the care and charge of all shall be deuolued to mee This counsell Paulinus would not harken vnto and therefore the Emperours officer adiudged the Churches to Milesius and the guiding of the diuided sheepe to Paulinus Whereupon when Milesius dyed though Paulinus would haue had the place yet hee was refused because hee had refused to harken to the Counsell of Milesius and the Bishoppes chose Flauianus a man verie conspicuous for his great labours and one that had exposed himselfe to many dangers for the good of the Church Yet this ordination greatly displeased the Aegyptians and Romanes The reason of which their soe great dislike was for that when there was much contention betweene Milesius and Paulinus it was so agreed that all they that were fit for that Bishopricke or might in likelyhood bee in any hope or expectation of it should sweare neither to seeke it nor accept it while either of these liued nor noe way to hinder but that after the death of the one the other might haue the full and entire gouernement of the whole of which number it was thought that Flauianus was one that therefore not without periury contrary to his vow and oath hee had hindred the reuniting of the diuided parts of the Church This dislike conceiued against Flauianus dyed not when Paulinus dyed but though Euagrius most vnlawfully and against the Canons had gotten the Bishoprique hauing noe ordination but from his predecessour whereas the Canons allow no such nomination of a Successour and besides require the presence of the Bishoppes of the prouince yet would they that at first disliked the ordination of Flauianus take noe knowledge of any of these things but cōmunicated with Euagrius incited the Emperour against Flavianus who being vrged continually by the Bishop of Rome and others no longer to suffer Flavianus to enjoy his place and told that suppressing Tyrants he did ill to suffer the violatours of the Lawes of the Church to escape vnpunished sent for Flavianus thinking to send him to Rome there to be judged in a Synode of Bishops who when hee came into the presence of the Emperour tolde him confidently that if any man would object against his doctrine or life he would desire to be tryed by no other Iudges but his greatest enemies but if the matter were for his Episcopall chaire he would willingly relinquish it that the Emperour might commit it to whom hee would vpon which his confident answere the Emperour dismissed him and bade him to goe home and feed the flocke committed to him Yet long after many complaints were againe renewed against him to the Emperour by sundry Bishops being at Rome fearing to taxe the Emperour himselfe for that he suppressed not the tyranny of Flavianus but the Emperour bade them say what that tyranny was as if he were Flavianus for that he had vndertaken the defence of him Which when they refused to doe professing themselues vnwilling to stand vpon termes with the Emperour he exhorted them to lay aside their foolish quarrellings and to reunite the Churches that had long without cause beene divided for that Paulinus was now dead and Euagrius came vniustly to the Bishopricke and the ordination of Flavianus was so farre forth allowed of that all the Churches of the East with the Churches of Asia Pontus Thracia and Illyricum held Flauianus to be lawfull Bishop of the East Hereupon the Bishops promised to surcease and that if Flavianus would send Legates vnto them they would kindly intreate them and hold communion with him Howsoeuer it appeareth by Socrates that after the death of Euagrius hee procured there should be no Bishop chosen in opposition to him and first pacified Theophilus and afterwards by his meanes Damasus Sozomen reporteth that Chrysostome after he was made Bishop of Constantinople finding that the Aegyptian westerne Bishops dissented from those of the East in respect of Flavianus and that all the Churches throughout the whole Empire were divided about him besought Theophilus to bee pacified towards him and to assist him for the reconciling of Damasus also To this suite of Chrysostome Theophilus yeelded sent certaine to Rome who prevailing sailed into Aegypt and from thence as also from Rome brought letters of reconciliation peace both from the Aegyptian and Westerne Bishops This History I thinke will neuer proue that the Bishop of Rome deposed Flavianus Bishop of Antioche and that hee could not hold his Bishopricke till the Bishop of Rome consented to him For the thing that was sought was not his holding of his Bishopricke as Bellarmine vntruly reporteth but the peace and concord of the Churches divided about him Neither was the difference onely betweene him and Damasus but all the Bishops of Aegypt the West dissented from him likewise and therefore Ambrose sheweth that the examining of the matter betweene Euagrius and him was committed to Theophilus the Bishops of Aegypt and desireth him to make relation of the end he should make to the Bishop of Rome that he also agreeing thereunto an vniversall peace might be concluded So that nothing can bee concluded out of this history for proofe of the vniversall power of Popes Seeing Damasus could neither of himselfe alone nor with the concurrence of the Westerne Bishoppes depose Flavianus nor by any meanes perswade the Emperour to thrust him out of his place but was sharply reprooued by the Emperour for quarrelling with him and required to bee at peace with him that so the Churches formerly divided without cause might be revnited The next instance of the Popes deposing Bishops is that of Sixtus the third who deposed Polychronius Bishop of Hierusalem if wee may beleeue Bellarmine but in truth there was neuer any such thing The circumstances of the whole proceeding against Polychronius Bishop of Hierusalem if there be any credite in the report of Pope Nicholas and the acts of the Councell vnder Sixtus the third were these Two things specially were objected to him the one that hee went about to violate the ancient bounds of the Ecclesiasticall Iurisdiction of Bishops set and limited by the Fathers to preferre himselfe before the other principall Bishops and to make his See the first whereas in trueth it was the last amongst the Patriarchicall Sees the other that Simoniacally he conferred Ecclesiasticall honours vpon such as would purchase the same Hereupon the Bishops subiect to him not willing to proceede
against him themselues alone complained to the Bishop of Rome and shewed him how much he was wronged by the vndue claimes of this Bishop The Bishop of Rome tooke not vpon him to doe any thing of himself but called a Synode of the Bishops of the West and by their aduice with the concurrence of the Emperour directed certaine out of the West authorized by the whole Synode to goe and sitte in Councell with the Bishoppes of those parts who together with them examining the crimes obiected to Polychronius and finding that hee was truely charged with them deposed him from his Bishopricke so that the Bishoppe of Rome did not depose him of himselfe but onely called a Synode as in such a case it was fitte hee should and the Synode deposed him but in trueth it is rather to bee thought that the acts of the Councell vnder Sixtus the third are counterfeit and of no credite For Binnius sheweth that there was no such Polychronius Bishop of Hierusalem in those times bringeth many other reasons to disproue the acts of this supposed Councell besides that the absurdity in the proceedings bewrayeth them to be counterfeit For what can be more absurd then that the accuser of Polychronius making good his accusation should bee condemned for accusing him and he first condemned and then presently vpon slender or no reasons at all restored againe Thus we see how little our Adversaries are able to say for proofe of the Popes vniversall power exercised in deposing Bishoppes Wherefore let vs now proceede to see if they can produce any better proofes of his restoring such as were deposed by others The first example they bring is the restitution of Basilides a Bishop in Spaine but they know right well that the Bishop of Rome did not restore him to his Bishopricke and that therefore this allegation serueth to no purpose but to abuse the Reader to make him beleeue they say something when they say nothing The circumstances of the matter concerning Basilides are these layed down in Cyprians Epistles Basilides Martialis had defiled themselues with some kind of consenting to Idolatry therefore the Clergy people subiect to them fearefull to communicate with them write to Cyprian the African Bishops for counsaile helpe they returne answer that they are to withdraw themselues from them to proceede to the election of new Bishops Hereupon the Bishops of the prouince comming to the place where Basilides was Bishop Sabinus was elected Bishop by the Clergy people with the liking of all the Bishops of the province and ordained by them Bishop in the place of Basilides After this Basilides goeth to Rome mis-informeth Stephen the Bishop and seeketh by his meanes the help of his Bishops to recouer his place againe they communicate with him so as much as in them lyeth restore him to his former place dignity againe Cyprian condemneth the false ill dealing of Basilides and reproueth also the negligence of Stephen that suffered himselfe so easily to be misled taxing him such as consented with him for cōmunicating with such wicked ones and shewing that they are partakers of their sins that they violate the Canon of the Church which the Bishops of Africa and all the Bishops of the world yea euen Cornelius the predecessour of this Stephen had consented on to wit that men so defiled with idolatry as Martialis Basilides were should be receiued to penitency but bee kept from all Ecclesiasticall honour Hereupon he exhorteth the brethren not to bee moued if in these last times the faith of some men be shaken or the feare of God faile in them or if they hold not peaceable concord with their brethren for that both the Apostle and the Lord himselfe foretold that such things should come to passe in the last times the world decaying Antichrists reuelation drawing on cōforteth encourageth thē to hold on in the good course they were in for that the vigor of the Gospell and the strength of Christian vertue faith do not so wholly fall away in these last times vt non super sit portio Sacerdotū quae minimè ad has rerum ruinas fidei naufragia succūbat that is that no remnant of Bishops should remaine which should no way sinke or fall in these ouerthrowes of things and shipwrackes of faith but full of the feare of God couragiously maintaine the honour of the diuine maiesty and the dignity of the Priests We know saith he that when the rest yeelded Mattathias valiantly maintained the law of God and that Elias stood and stroue zealously when others forsooke the law of his God Wherefore let them that either violate the Canons or treacherously behaue themselues looke to it there are many who still retaine a sincere and good minde What if some haue fallen away from the faith doth their infidelity make the truth of God of none effect God forbid For God is true and euery man a lyer and if euery man be a lyer and God only true what should the seruants and Priests of God do but leaue the errours and lyes of men and keepe the precepts of the Lord and remaine in the truth of God Wherefore though some of our Brethren and Colleagues thinke they may neglect the discipline of God and rashly communicate with Basilides and Martialis let it not trouble nor shake our faith seeing the spirit of God threatneth in the Psalmes saying Thou hast hated discipline and cast my words behind thy backe If thou sawest a thiefe thou rannest with him and hadst thy portion with the adulterers These are the circumstances of Cyprians Epistle wherein he relateth the proceedings against Basilides and Martialis and the inconsiderate course held by the Bishop of Rome hastily communicating with them whereby wee may see how wisely and aduisedly our Aduersaries alleage Cyprian to proue that in ancient times the Bishops of Rome had power to restore such Bishops to their places againe as were deposed by other For thus they must reason from this place of Cyprian if they will make any vse of it Basilides Martialis iustly put from their office and dignity and others rightly and in due sort chosen into their places flye to Stephen Bishop of Rome hoping by his meanes to procure the reuersing of that which was done against them He with such as adhered to him though they could not restore them to their places yet communicated with them Cyprian offēded herewith chargeth Basilides Martialis with execrable wickednesse for abusing Stephen and misse-informing him Stephen with intollerable negligence vnexcusable violatiō of the Canōs for partaking with such wicked persons wisheth all his Brethren and colleagues cōstantly to hold on their course against them notwithstanding the failing of Stephen and his adherents Therefore the ancient Bishops of Rome restored to their places such as were judicially deposed by others and were thought by the Fathers to haue power
authority so to do Which kind of reasoning I thinke the Reader will not much like of Touching Athanasius Bishop of Alexandria Paule Bishop of Constantinople and Marcellus Bishop of Ancyra deposed by the Orientall Synode their complaints to the Bishop of Rome and other Bishops of the West of the wrongs done vnto them how the Bishop of Rome with the Westerne Bishops fought to relieue them with how ill successe and how litle this instance serueth to proue the thinge in question I haue shewed before as likewise Theodorets desiring Leo with his Westerne Synodes to take knowledge of his cause Soe that it is a vaine bragge of Bellarmine that to these and the like testimonies of Antiquity nothing is nor can be answered CHAP. 38. Of the weakenesse of such proofes of the supreme power of Popes as are taken from their Lawes Censures Dispensations and the Vicegerents they had in places farre remote from them HAVING examined the pretended proofes of the illimited vniversality of the Popes authority and jurisdiction taken from the power they are supposed to haue exercised in former times ouer other Bishops by confirming deposing or restoring them let vs come to their Lawes Dispensations Censures see if frō thence any thing may be cōcluded If they could as strongly proue as they cōfidētly endertake that Popes in ancient times made Lawes to bind the whole Christian Church dispensed with such as were made by general Coūcels cēsured al men as subject to them of necessity we must be forced to acknowledge the fulnesse of all power to rest in the Romane Bishops But their proofes are too weake to make vs beleeue any such thing For first touching the decrees of Popes they did not binde the whole Christian Church but the Westerne Provinces onely that were subject to them as Patriarches of the West And secondly they were not made by them without the consent and joint concurrence of the other Bishops of the West assembled in Synodes and sitting with them as their fellow Iudges with equall power of defining and determining things concerning the state of the Church as appeareth by the Decrees of Gregory the first who sitting in Councell with all the Bishops of the Roman Church the Deacons and inferiour Clergy-men standing before them made Decrees and confirmed them by their subscriptions the rest of the Bishops and the Presbyters also who sate in Councell with them subscribing in the very same sort that Gregory did And of Decrees in such sort made Leo speaketh when he requireth the Bishops of Campania Picene Thuscia to keepe and obserue the Decretall constitutions of Innocentius and all other his predecessours which they had ordained as well touching Ecclesiasticall orders as the Discipline of the Canons or otherwise to looke for no fauour or pardon And in the very same sort are the words of Hilarius to be vnderstood when he saith That no man may violate either the divine constitutions or the Decrees of the Apostolique See without danger of losing his place For this he spake sitting as President in a Councell of Bishops assembled at Rome of things decreed by Synodes of Bishops wherein his predecessours were Presidents and Moderatours as he was now but not absolute commaunders But Bellarmine saith that Pope Anastasius the yonger in his Epistle to Anastasius the Emperour willeth him not to resist the Apostolicall precepts but obediently to performe what by the Church of Rome and Apostolicall authority shall be prescribed vnto him if hee desire to holde communion with the same holy Church of GOD which is his Head Therefore the Pope had power to command and giue lawes to the Emperour and consequently had an absolute supreme authority in the Church Surely this allegation of the Cardinall is like the rest For Anastasius doth not speake in any such peremptory and threatning manner to the Emperour but acknowledging his breast to bee a Sanctuary of happinesse and that he is Gods Vicar on earth telleth him in modest and humble sort that hee hopeth hee will not suffer the insolencie of those of Constantinople proudly to resist against the Evangelicall and Apostolicall precepts in the cause of Acatius but that he will force them to performe and doe what is fit and in like humble sort beseecheth him when he shall vnderstand the cause of them of Alexandria to force them to returne to the vnity of the Church The last instance of the Popes Law-giuing power brought by Bellarmine is the priviledge granted to the Monastery of Saint Medardus by Gregory the first in the end whereof we finde these words Whatsoeuer Kings Bishops Iudges or secular persons shall violate the Decrees of this Apostolicall authority and our commaundement shall be depriued of their honour driuen from the society of Christians put from the communion of the Lords body and bloud and subjected to Anathema and all the wofull curses that Infidels Heretikes haue beene subject to from the beginning of the world to this present time A strong confirmation of the priviledges graunted is found in these wordes but a weake confirmation of the thing in question for the priuiledges were graunted and confirmed in this sort not by Gregory alone out of the fulnesse of his power but by the consenting voyce of all the Bishops of Italy and France by the authority of the Senate of Rome by Theodoricus the King and Brunichildis the Queene So that from hence no proofe possibly can be drawne of the Popes absolute power of making lawes by himselfe alone to binde any part of the Christian Church much lesse the whole Christian world Wherfore let vs passe from the Popes power of making lawes to see by what right they claime authority to dispense with the Lawes of the Church and the Canons of Generall Councels The first that is alleadged to haue dispensed with the Canons of Councels is Gelasius But this allegation is idle and to no purpose For first it cannot bee proued that by dispensing he sought to free any from the necessity of doing that the strictnesse of the Canon required but those onely that were subiect to him as Patriarch of the West And secondly he did not dispense but vpon very vrgent cause and driuen by necessity so to doe and yet not of himselfe alone but with the concurrence of other Bishops of the West assembled in Synode The other instances that are brought of the dispensations of Gregory the first are nothing else but the instances of the ill consciences of them that bring them For Gregory did not dispense with the English to marry within the degrees prohibited as the Cardinall vntruely reporteth but only aduised Austine not to put them that were newly conuerted from such wiues as they had married within some of the degrees prohibited in the time of their infidelity lest hee might seeme to punish them for faults committed in the daies of their ignorance and to discourage other from becomming Christians Neither
did he dispense with them of Sicilia for the not keeping of the canon of the Nicene councell requiring prouinciall Synodes to be holden twice euery yeare but whereas they held not such Councels so much as once in the yeare hee commaunded that they should not faile to meete in Councell once at the least every yeare seeing the Canons require that these meetings should bee twice These truly are very weake and insufficient proofes of the Papall power in dispensing with the lawes of the Church and the canons of generall Councels and yet these are the best nay these are all that they canne make shew to bring out of all Antiquity Let vs therefore proceede to the censures that the ancient Bishops of Rome are reported to haue exercised and see if they proue the vniuersality of power now claimed The first allegation to this purpose is the intent of Victor Bishop of Rome resoluing to haue reiected from his communion all the Churches of Asia for keeping the feast of Easter on the same day the Iewes did For saith Bellarmine howsoeuer Irenaeus and others disswaded him from executing that hee intended yet it appeareth his obseruation was right in that it was afterwards confirmed by the Nicene Councell and that hee had authority ouer all in that hee went about to excommunicate those of Asia for dissenting from him in the obseruation of that Feast and keeping it with the Iewes though hee were content for the avoiding of some inconueniencies at the intreaty of Irenaeus to forbeare proceeding against them For answere hereunto wee must obserue that by reason of the custome of those of Asia that kept the feast of Easter precisely at the same time the Iewes did there was moued not a little contention throughout the whole world and many Synodes in euery place called For in Palestina a Synode was holden whereof Theophilus of Caesarea and Narcissus of Hierusalem were Presidents another at Rome whereof Victor was President and another of the Bishoppes of Pontus whereof Palmas as most auncient was President and in sundry other places other Synodes were called But the Synode of the Bishops in Asia whereof Polycrates was President stiffely maintayned the auncient custome that had long prevailed in those parts and wrote an Epistle to Victor and those of the Romane Church to iustifie themselues in this behalfe Victor and his Bishops much offended with this their pertinacy as they construed it would for this cause haue reiected them from their communion But Irenaeus with some other of a milder spirit and better temper stayed them from such rash and violent proceedings and Irenaeus wrote his letters to this purpose to the Bishop of Rome and other his colleagues so that here is nothing to proue the power of the Pope For what was resolued on both touching the right of the observation and the proceedings against them that disliked it was resolved by the Synodes of Bishops and not by Victor alone as likewise Irenaeus was not alone but many other ioyned with him in the reprehension of Victor whose number and multitude prevayled much with him and stayed his proceedings as well as the perswasions of Irenaeus And yet did not the Westerne Bishops take vpon them to excommunicate those of Asia as the Cardinall vntruely affirmeth but onely to reiect them from their communion and fellowshippe there being a very great difference betweene excommunication properly so named and the reiecting of men from our communion or fellowship For excommunication properly so named is a resolution to deny the Sacraments to such as are to receiue them of vs the abandoning of all fellowship with them and the requiring and commanding of others to refraine from all communicating with them in priuate or publique and argueth him that so excommunicateth to be superiour in authority and greater in place then they are whom he excommunicateth But reiecting from communion or refusing to communicate with men may bee found among them that are equall So Cyril wrote to Nestorius that if hee reuoked not certaine dangerous positions hee would communicate no longer with him So the Bishops of the East told Iulius Bishop of Rome that if hee communicated with Athanasius they would no longer communicate with him And such was the proceeding that Victor intended against those of Asia and therefore proueth not that he was their superiour or had a commaunding authority ouer them And yet surely howsoeuer it be true that his manner of observation was better then theirs whom he disliked his intention vpon such an occasion to haue made a breach in the Christian Churches was justly with some bitternesse reprehended by Irenaeus and his brethren For howsoeuer Bellarmine would make the Reader beleeue by alledging that of Blastus who vrged the keeping of Easter with the Iewes and sought to bring in Iudaisme that Victor had reason to bee violent as hee was as perceiuing some ill meaning in them that helde the Iewish observation yet farre be it from vs to thinke that Polycarpus and so many worthy and holy men as aunciently kept that observation were any way inclinable to Iudaisme But this difference may be thought to haue growne not from any diuersity of Iudgement touching matters of faith but for that in some places they thought it fit to keep this feast on the Lords day for very important reasons mouing them so to doe and in other places though they could haue beene content to haue done so likewise vpon the same reasons yet kept they it after the old manner for the avoyding of the scandall of the Iewes for the easier winning of them that were not yet gained to Christianity and the holding of them in the loue liking of Christian profession that were already of Iewes become Christians The next instance is of Innocentius the first who after that he heard of the death of Chrysostome whom Theophilus had deposed the Emperour Arcadius banished excommunicated the Emperour Empresse and anathematized Theophilus in such sort that he should vtterly be excluded haue no place among Christians But this report may very justly bee doubted of the credit thereof resting onely on the authority of Nicephorus Seeing the auncient Historians that report the proceedings of Theophilus and Arcadius against Chrysostome his complaints to the Bishop of Rome and other Bishops of the West of the wrongs that had beene done vnto him report also the answere of the Romane Bishop to haue beene that hee greatly pittied his case but saw no hope of remedy nor meanes to releeue him vnlesse a generall Councell might be called to which purpose he would do his best with the Emperour and that Chrysostome himselfe wished him not to proceede so farre as to reiect them from his communion that were his aduersaries for feare of further inconueniences this being the contention almost of the whole world and the Churches by occasion heereof every where brought vpon their knees Yea all auncient Historians are silent and
say nothing of this excommunication but report the repulse which the messengers the Romane Bishop sent to the Emperour to procure a Councell receiued and Theophilus for ought I know was euer holden a catholicke Bishop both by Hierome and others to his dying day notwithstanding these quarrells betweene him and Chrysostome The excommunication of Leo the Emperour by Gregory the third whereof Zonaras writeth in the life of Leo Isaurus which is a third instance of Papall censures against the great men of the world proueth not the matter in question For Gregory did not anathematize Leo of himselfe alone but with a Synode of Bishops neither was he able by his owne authority to stay the Tribute that was wont to be payd to the Emperour but by his sollicitation procured a confederacie of the French and Germans against the Emperours of Constantinople and by their meanes stayed the Tribute that was wont to be paid wherevpon the Germans and French possessed Rome and became Lords of it The last example is that of Nicholas the first excommunicating Lotharius King of France and his concubine Valdrada together with the Arch-bishops of Coleyn Treuers But the answere herevnto is easie For first this example proueth not the thing in qâ—…estion to wit that the Pope hath an vniuersall power ouer all the world seeing all these were within the Patriarchship of the Bishop of Rome And secondly wee say these circumstances of this proceeding are vntruely reported by Bellarmine For this is the true report which wee finde in Rhegino and others Lotharius King of Lorrayne falling in loue with Valdrada which had beene his concubine while hee was yet a young man in his fathers house beganne to dislike Thietberga his wife Hereupon hee laboureth with the Bishops of Treuers and Coleyn to finde some meanes to put her away They call a Synode wherein Thietberga is charged to haue committed incest with her owne brother and thereupon pronounced an vnfit wife for the King The King thus freed from his wife professeth hee cannot liue single they pronounce it lawfull for him to marry another wife and he taketh Valdrada to wife whom he had formerly kept as his concubine Nicholas the first Bishop of Rome hearing of this sendeth into France to learne the certainty The Legates hee sendeth come to the King to expostulate the matter with him The King answereth that he did nothing but what the Bishoppes of his kingdome in a generall Councell had assured him was lawfull to bee done Whereupon the Bishops of Coleyn and Treuers were sent for to Rome and the Pope called a Councell in which the opinions and proceedings of these Bishops were condemned and they degraded by all the Bishops Presbyters Deacons that were assembled in Councell In all which narration there is no circumstance found that any way proueth the Pope to haue the fulnesse of all Ecclesiasticall iurisdiction but the contrary rather may from hence bee concluded because nothing is done against these two Bishops but by a Synode of Bishops assembled by their owne Patriarch But saith Bellarmine Pope Nicholas excommunicated the King and Valdrada his supposed wife therefore he is vniuersall Bishop The former part of this saying is most vntrue for the Pope did not excommunicate the King but Valdrada onely And I thinke the excommunicating of one silly harlot that had so grievously scandalized the Church of God and whose cause was iudged before in a Synode being brought thither and there examined by reason of the vniust proceedings of the Bishops of Coleyn and Treuers against a lawfull Queene in favour of her will neuer by any good consequence proue the Pope to bee vniuersall Bishop yet these are all the proofes the Cardinall canne bring from the censures the auncient Bishops of Rome are reported to haue vsed and therefore he proceedeth to shew demonstrate the Amplitude of the Popes illimited power iurisdiction by the Vicegerents hee appointed in all partes of the Christian world that were farre remote from him to doe things in his name by his authority But for answere herevnto we say that neither this Cardinall nor any other canne proue that the Bishops of Rome had any such Vicars Vicegerents or Substitutes but onely within the compasse of their owne Patriarchships and that therefore from the hauing of them nothing can be inferred for confirmation of their illimited power authority So Leo as we reade in his Epistles constituted Anastasius Bishoppe of Thessalonica his Vicegerent for the parts thereabouts as other his predecessours had done former Bishops of that Church Whâ—…ch causing great resort thither vpon diuers occasions may bee thought to haue beene the reason why the Councell of Sardica prouideth that the Clergy-men of other churches shall not make too long stay at Thessalonica So the same Leo made Potentius the Bishop his Vicegerent in the parts of Africa Hormisda Salustius Bishop of Hispalis in Boetica and Lusitania and Gregory Virgilius Bishop of Arle in the regions of France all these places being within the compasse of the Patriarchship of Rome as Cusanus sheweth And the same may be sayd of the Bishop of Iustiniana the first who was appointed the Bishop of Romes Vicegerent in those parts vpon signification of the Emperours will and desire that it should be so Neither doth the Cardinall proue any other thing whatsoeuer he maketh shew of For though Cyril Bishop of Alexandria were the Vicegerent of Caelestinus in the cause of Nestorius Bishop of Constantinople yet was he not his Vicegerent in such sort as they were that were within his owne Patriarchship as if he had had none authority of his owne but that onely which Caelestinus gaue vnto him But Caelestinus hauing beene informed by Cyril of the impieties of Nestorius and hauing in his Synodes of the West condemned the same joyned his authority with the authority of Cyril that so he might proceed against him not onely as of himselfe and out of the iudgments of his own Bishops but also out of the consenting resolutions of them of the West And therefore Euagrius sheweth that at or before the time appointed by the Emperour Nestorius and Cyril came to Ephesus where a Councell was to be holden and that Iohn of Antioch with his Bishops being not come after fifteene dayes stay Cyril Bishop of Alexandria the greatest of all the Bishops that were present who also supplied the place of Caelestinus with the rest of the Bishops thought good to send for Nestorius and to require him to appeare in the Synode to answere to the crimes obiected to him Whereby it is euident that Nestorius being to be iudged in a generall Councell Cyril being the greatest of the Bishops that were present the Bishop of Rome neither comming nor sending at the first was in his owne right President of that assembly But the Bishop of Rome who could not come but hauing assembled his Bishops
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
his forehead as not to blush when he brought into the light and presented to the view of the world such rotten forgeries that was not ashamed to become a proctor of the filthy stewes Wherefore leauing him his counterfeit and apocryphall stuffe which he sought to vent vnto the world let vs proceede from the appeales of Lay-men inferiour Clergy-men Bishops to speake of the appeales of the chiefe Primates or Patriarches For the clearing of which point we must obserue that it is a rule in Church-government that the lesser and inferior may not iudge the greater superiour And therefore the Bishops of the Prouince may not iudge the Metropolitane but may only declare in what cases he is iudged excommunicated suspended or deposed ipso facto by the sentence of the Canon it selfe and by separating themselues from him withdrawing themselues from being subiect to him put him in a sort from his place and depose him But otherwise if any Bishop haue ought against his Metropolitane he must goe as I shewed before to the Patriarche and his Synode to complaine as to fit and competent Iudges For against the gâ—…eater person wee complaine to the greater Iudge we must flie If a Clerke haue ought against a Bishop the matter may bee iudged in the Synode of the Prouince but if Clerke or Bishoppe haue any complaint against the Metropolitane the Canon of the Councell of Chalcedon prouideth as I noted before that they shall goe to the Primate of the Diocese or to the See of the Princely City of Constantinople From whence in like proportion it is consequent that thòugh the Metropolitanes and Bishoppes subiect to a Patriarche may declare in what cases hee incurreth the sentence of suspension excommunication deposition or degradation pronounced by the very Law and canon it selfe and so withdraw themselues from his obedience yet may they not by way of authority proceede against him but must flie to another Patriarche who in a Synode consisting of his owne Bishops and the Bishoppes of that Patriarch that is complained of may iudge and censure him so that hee bee a Patriarch in order and honour greater then hee against whom they complaine seeing the lesser may not iudge the greater And therefore we finde that in the differences that fell out between Cyrill of Alexandria and Iohn of Antioche Iohn was blamed for that beeing but Bishoppe or Patriarche of the third See hee tooke vpon him to judge Cyril that was Patriarche of the second and hauing but a fewe Bishoppes joyned with him to judge Cyril with many Soe likewise Dioscorus was condemned not onely for fauouring the wicked heresie of Eutiches and his violent proceedings in the second Councell of Ephesus but specially for that being but Bishop of the second See hee tooke vpon him to judge Leo that was Bishop of the first See And this was that which Iulius in his Epistle reported by Athanasius in his second Apologie blamed in the Bishops of the East namely that they proceeded to the judging of Bishops of such Sees as were Athanasius of Alexandria and Paulus of Constantinople without making him first acquainted with the same that so their proceedings might haue taken beginning from him as beeing in order the first among the Patriarches And hence it was that Theophilus Bishop of Alexandria taking himselfe to be Bishop of the second See came to Constantinople and there with other Bishops judged Chrysostome and that Chrysostome as being by vertue of the Canon of the Councell of Constantinople made Bishop of the second See and set in order and honour before the Bishops of Alexandria and Antioche would haue taken vpon him to judge some matters concerning Theophilus and in this sort did sundry Bishops of Rome in Synodes consisting of their owne Bishops and the Bishops subject to the Patriarch of Constantinople judge and depose certaine Bishops of Constantinople Whereupon Nicholas the first in his Epistle to Michael the Emperour sayth that scarce any Bishop of Constantinople can be found that was orderly deposed and driuen from his Bishopricke and whose deposition held as good and lawfull without the consent of the Bishop of Rome and therefore protesteth against the deposition of Ignatius as vnlawfull and vnjust for that he was condemned by his owne Bishops comparing the Synode that deposed him to the second of Ephesus and affirming that it was much worse then that For that there Dioscorus Bishop of Alexandria with his colleagues judged Flauianus though most violently and disorderly But here there was none of the Patriarches nor any one Biof any the meanest cittie that was not his owne Suffragan By that which hath beene sayd it is euident that the great Patriarches of the Christian Church are not to bee judged but by some other of their owne ranke in order before them assisted by inferiour Bishops that the Bishoppe of Rome as first in order among the Patriarches assisted with his owne Bishoppes and the Bishoppes of him that is thought faulty may iudge any of the other Patriarches that such as haue complaints against them may flye to him and the Synodes of Bishoppes subject to him and that the Patriarches themselues in their distresses may flye to him and such Synodes for reliefe and helpe though of himselfe alone he haue no power to do any thing Wherefore let vs proceed from the distinction and explication of the diuerse and different kinds of appeales lawful and vnlawfull permitted and forbidden to examine the allegations of our Aduersaries and to see whether from any allowed practise and approued course of appeales made to Rome in the Primitiue Church they can inferre the Vniversality of Papall power and jurisdiction The first example that Bellarmine bringeth is very impertineÌ„t For whereas he should proue that the Bishops subject to any of the foure Patriarches might lawfully appeale to Rome that there lay appeales from any part of the world thither hee bringeth forth the testimony of Leo telling the Bishoppes of France subject to him as Patriarche of the West that of ancient time appeales were wont to be made out of France to Rome which no way proueth the Bishoppe of Rome to bee vniuersall Bishoppe vnlesse wee will acknowledge euery one of the Patriarches to haue beene soe too it being lawfull to appeale vnto them out of any the remotest Prouinces subiect to theÌ„ From this ill-chosen example hee proceedeth to a worse of Marcion the heretique who being excommunicated by his owne Bishoppe in Pontus fledde to Rome that hee might be absolued of the Romane Church as he telleth vs out of Epiphanius But surely it is most strange that he can be content thus to abuse himselfe and others For he knoweth right wel that Marcion did not appeale to Rome and that if hee had so done the act of a vile and execrable heretique should not bee drawne into example The historie of Marcion as we finde in Epiphanius is this Marcion was the sonne
of a Bishop in Pontus hee embraced virginitie in his first times and seemed to liue a retired solitarie and Monasticall kinde of life but in the end casting the feare of God behinde his backe hee abused a certaine virgin and not onely fell himselfe but drew her also away from the course of vertue and well-doing into the fellowship of sinfull wickednesse Heereupon hee was excommunicated and put out of the Church by his owne Father For his Father was a right good and vertuous man and carefull of the things that concerned his calling and though after he was put out of his Church hee sought very earnestly to be admitted to penitency that so he might bee restored to the Church againe yet his Father exceedingly grieued not onely in respect of his fall but also in respect of the dishonour and shame hee had brought on him would by no meanes be induced to yeelde vnto it Whereupon hee left that Citie whereof his Father was Bishop and went to Rome in the time of the vacancie of that See after the death of Hyginus and after he had stayed there a certaine space and conferred with the Presbyters of that Church hee desired to be admitted to their assemblies But they tolde him they could not so doe without the consent of his honourable Father For say they wee have one faith and one consent and wee may not contrary our good fellow-minister thy Father Which their answere when hee heard hee was filled with fury and madnesse and professed in great rage that hee would rent their Church in peeces and cast a schisme into it that should neuer haue an end This is the narration wee finde in Epiphanius concerning Marcion his going to Rome Wherein there is nothing that any way proueth that it was alwayes lawfull to appeale from all other Bishops to the Bishop of Rome For first it doth not appeare that Marcion went thither to complaine of his Father but being put from the communion by him and not obtaining reconciliation by any intreaty as a runnagate he sought to other places and among other went to Rome hoping there to bee receiued into the Church But the guides of that church knowing the canon which forbiddeth one church to admit them another hath reiected and cast out vtterly refused to permit and suffer him to communicate with them And secondly if hee had gone to Rome by way of appeale it would most strongly ouerthrow all such courses and proue that the Romane Bishop may not reverse and make voide the Acts and proceedings of other Bishops seeing the gouernours of the Romane church at that time freely professed vnto Marcion and told him peremptorily that it was not lawfull for them to admit him to their communion without his Fathers consent by whom hee was excommunicated But the truth is he did not seeke by their authoritie as superiours to reverse his Fathers censure and iudgement or to bee restored to the communion of that church out of which he was eiected which had beene to appeale but being in Rome desired onely to bee admitted to ioyne in prayers and other exercises of Religion with them of that Church which yet as Epiphanius reporteth was denied vnto him The next example is of Fortunatus and Faelix in Africa deposed by Cyprian as Bellarmine would make vs beleeue and appealing to Cornelius Bishop of Rome for releefe But there is no word of trueth in that which this Cardinall writeth For these men did not goe to Rome to complaine that they were vniustly deposed as hee vntruely reporteth but these are the circumstances of the matter as we may reade in the Epistles of Cyprian A company of wicked ones hauing made Fortunatus one of the Presbyters that were suspended by Cyprian and a great number of other Bishops a Bishop in opposition to Cyprian hasten to Rome to Cornelius with false reports of the number of Bishops that concurred in the ordination of Fortunatus that so hee might be induced to admit of him as a true Bishop and hold communion with him Which when Cornelius wisely refused to doe he feared not to threaten grieuous things vnto him With the suddennesse and strangenesse whereof Cornelius much moued maruailed greatly that Cyprian had not before certified him of this schismaticall ordination that so hee might haue beene the better prepared Whereunto Cyprian answered That it was not necessarie to be so carefull about the vaine proceedings of heretiques that he had before giuen him the names of such Bishops as were found to whō and from whom hee might write and receiue letters And that howsoeuer false ill dealing by haste and preuention thinketh to gaine all yet that is but for a little time till trueth overtake it and discouer it euen as the darknesse of the night continueth till the Sunne arise And farther hee sheweth that these schismaticall companions had no reason to make such haste to Rome to publish it and make it knowen that they had set vp a false Bishop against a true For that either it pleased them that they had so done and then they continued and went forward in their wickednesse or they repented of that they had done and then they knew whither to returne and needed not to haue gone to Rome For saith he whereas it is agreed among vs and it is both iust and right that euery man shall be heard there where his fault was committed and all Pastours haue a part of the flocke of Christ assigned to them which euery one is to rule governe as being to giue an account vnto the Lord of his actions it is not fitte nor to be suffered that they ouer whom we are set should runne vp and downe and by craftie and deceitfull rashnesse shake in sunder the coherent concord of brethren but that they should haue their causes handled where they may haue both accusers and witnesses of their crimes Vnlesse a few desperate and wicked companions doe thinke the Bishops of Africa that iudged them haue lesser authority then others A more cleare testimonie or pregnant proofe against appeales to Rome then this cannot be had And yet this is one of the principall authorities the Cardinall bringeth to proue the lawfulnesse of appeales to Rome To the next place alleaged out of Cyprian touching Basilides and Martialis Bishoppes of Spaine I haue answered already and made it most cleare that nothing could be alleaged more preiudiciall to the Popes claimes and more for the aduantage of the trueth of that cause which wee defend So that it seemeth our Aduersaries haue turned their weapons against themselues and whetted their swords and made readie their arrowes to wound themselues to death How the facts of Athanasius Chrysostome Flauianus and Theodoret appealing to the Bishop of Rome with his Western Synodes for reliefe and helpe when they were oppressed and wronged by the Easterne Bishops proue not the illimited and vniuersall power of the Pope I haue at large shewed before to the satisfaction I
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
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
greatest to the meanest But some man will say is there then no difference betweene him that is the first among Bishops and them that are of an inferiour condition Is he no more exempted from judgement then they surely no yet as some thinke there is some difference between him and them because they may be judged though not incorrigible but he as being in order and honour the first is not to be iudged if by any other meanes he may be induced to reforme himselfe or voluntarily to relinquish his place if his fault so require And that in this case as well as for heresie the Pope may be deposed we haue many of the best learned Papists consenting with vs as Ockam Cusanus Cameracensis Gerson Almaine the Bishops and Diuines in the Councells of Constance and Basill Driedo and in a word all those that thinke the Councell to be of greater authority then the Pope CHAP. 41. Of the titles giuen to the Pope and the insufficiencie of the proofes of his illimited power and Iurisdiction taken from them SEEING the vniuersality of the Popes power and jurisdiction cannot be proued from any exemption hee hath from being judged let vs proceede to consider the next proofe taken from the names titles giuen to him which is more weake then any other For we shall finde that other Bishops in auncient times writing to the Romane Bishop sometimes call him brother sometimes fellow-bishop and colleague sometimes Bishop sometimes Arch-bishop sometimes Patriarch but that they neuer gaue him any title whence he may bee proued to haue an vniuersality of illimited iurisdiction ouer all The first title that our Adversaries vrge is that of Pope which as I thinke will hardly proue the Romane Bishop to haue power ouer all For whereas Papa or Papas among the Greekes signifieth a father and is the appellation that little children beginning to speake are wont to giue to their parents and in like sort among the Latines noteth a father or grandfather hence the Christians in auncient times did vse to call their spirituall Fathers and Bishops Papes or Popes So that the name of Pape or Pope was a common name to all Bishoppes Wherevpon Hierome writing to Augustine calleth him Pope and writeth To the most honourable Pope whereas yet hee was not vniuersall Bishoppe but Bishop of little Hippo onely and therefore the name of Pope doth no way proue every one that is so called to be vniuersall Bishop But they say the Bishop of Rome is named absolutely Pope and none other Bishop that whensoeuer the name of Pope was vsed absolutely without addition all men vnderstood thereby the Romane Bishop to bee meant Whence it may bee inferred that hee was greater then all the rest as being esteemed a common father of all But for answere hereunto we say that the Romane Bishoppe was neuer in auncient times named absolutely the Pape or Pope without specification of his name or the place whereof hee was Pope but when by some other circumstance it might be knowne what Pape or Pope it was men speake of accordingly as men are wont to say no more but the Bishop did this or that when by things going before it may be knowne what Bishop they meane and so the Vicars of Leo in the Councell of Chalcedon said The most blessed and Apostolique man the Pope gaue them such directions as they there specify without adding of Rome or the name of Leo because all men knew from what Pope they came and whose Vicegerents they were in that Councell For otherwise without some circumstances specifying the party men would neuer haue vnderstood whom they had meant if they had only named the Pope indefinitely But the same vicars of Leo in the Councell of Chalcedon call him Pope of the vniuersall Church Therefore saith Bellarmine we may conclude him to be supreme and absolute commaunder ouer all out of the titles given vnto him If the Cardinall would but remember that euery Bishoppe is interessed in the care and gouernment of the whole Church as I haue elsewhere shewed out of Cyprian he would easily find the weakenesse of this consequence Wherefore let vs passe from the title of Pope to the next which is Pater Patrum that is Father of Fathers which Bellarmine saith is giuen to the Romane Bishoppe and to none else whereas yet hee knoweth the contrary to bee most true For the relation made to Iohn the Patriarch of Constantinople by the whole Synode assembled beginneth in this sort Domino nostro sanctissimo beatissimo Patri Patrum Oecumenico Patriarchae Synodus c. Where wee see that the Patriarch of Constantinople is called by a whole Synode most holy Lord most blessed Father of Fathers Oecumenicall Patriarch And the Epistle of the Bishoppes of the second Syria to the same Iohn the Patriarch beginneth thus To our most holy Lord and to the most blessed Father of Fathers Oecumenicall Arch-bishop and Patriarch So that the Title of Father of Father's is not proper to the Romane Bishop as Bellarmine vntruly affirmeth The title of summus Sacerdos or high Priest giuen to him by Saint Hierome is common to all Bishops in respect of Presbyters and all Metropolitanes in respect of Bishops although the third Councell of Carthage to shew that Metropolitanes haue not an absolute command will not haue them called high Priests or chiefe priests but onely Bishops of the first See and therefore though the Pope should bee named most holy Father chiefest Pope chiefe of Priests or high Priest yet nothing could be concluded from hence that either we deny or they affirme The title of Vicar of Christ is new and not found in all Antiquity the first in whom wee reade it being Bernard and therefore not much to bee stood on seeing the Auncient make all Bishops the Vicars of Christ and doe neuer appropriate it vnto the Bishop of Rome Yet will not Bernards appropriating of it proue the thing in question seeing hee may bee thought to haue had an eye in so doing to the chiefty of order and honour in respect whereof he is in more speciall sort a Vicar of Christ then some other rather then to any vniversality of commission and authority Head of the Church the Pope is neuer called among the Ancient though the Cardinall be pleased vntruely so to report But the Bishops assembled in the Councell of Chalcedon writing to Leo who by Vicars was President of that assembly say he was ouer them as the head ouer the members not in respect of absolute commaunding authority but of honourable presidencie onely as it appeareth in that notwithstanding the resistance of his Vicegerents they passed a decree for the advancement of the Bishop of Constantinople For otherwise Saint Gregory Bishop of Rome alloweth no man to be called Head of the Church Petrus saith he primum membrum sanctae vniversalis Ecclesiae est
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
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
intermeddle with the disposition of earthly kingdomes or restraine or depose Princes how much soeuer they abuse their authoritie The first of these three opinions had anciently and hath presently great patrons and followers Yet Bellarmine very confidently and learnedly refuteth the same First shewing that the Pope is not soueraigne Lord of the whole world Secondly that he is not Lord of the Christian world And thirdly that hee is Lord of no part of the world That he is not Lord of the whole world he proueth because not of those Provinces that are possessed by Infidels which hee demonstrateth First because Christ committed none but onely his sheepe to Peter and therefore gaue him no authoritie ouer Infidels which are not his sheepe whereunto Saint Paul agreeth professing that hee hath nothing to doe to iudge them that are without Secondly because dominion and the right of Princes is not founded in grace or faith but in free will and reason and hath not sprung from the written Law of Moses or Christ but from the law of Nations and Nature VVhich is most cleare in that God both in the Olde and New Testament approueth the Kingdomes of the Gentiles and Infidels as appeareth by that of Daniel to Nebuchadnezzar O King thou art King of Kings For the God of Heauen hath giuen thee a kingdome power and strength and glory and in all places where the children of men dwell the beasts of the field and the fowles of the heauen hath hee giuen into thine hand and hath made thee a ruler ouer them all And that of Christ Giue vnto Caesar the things that are Caesars With whom the Apostle agreeth requiring the Christians of his time not only to pay tribute to Heathen kings but also to obey them for conscience sake which men were not bound to if they had no authority and right to commaund Neither can it be said that heathen princes are the Popes Lieuetenants and theresore to be obeyed for his sake though not for their owne seeing the Pope would haue no such Lieutenants if it lay in him to place them or displace them Lastly hee proueth that the Pope hath no such soueraigne right of commaunding ouer all as is pretended seeing it had beene vaine for Christ to giue him a right to that whereof hee should neuer get the possession And hauing thus proued that Infidels were truely and rightly Lords of the countries subiect to them before the comming of Christ that he found no nullitie in their titles nor euer seized their kingdomes and dominions into his owne hands as some fondly imagine that he did hee proceedeth to proue that Princes when they become Christians lose not the right that they formerly had to their kingdomes but get a new right to the kingdome of heauen For that otherwise Christs grace should destroy nature and his benefits be preiudiciall to such as are made partakers of them Whereas Christ came not to destroy and ouerthrow things well setled before but to perfect them nor to hurt any but to doe good to all For confirmation whereof hee alleageth part of the Hymne of Sedulius which the whole Church doth sing Hostis Herodes impie Christum venire quid times Non eripit mortalia Qui regna dat coelestia that is O impious enemie Herod why doest thou feare Christs comming He will not depriue thee of thy transitorie kingdome vpon earth that giues an eternall kingdome in heauen Whence it followeth that Christ imposed no such hard condition on those kings that were to become Christians as to leaue their crownes dignities And so he commeth to his second proposition that the Pope is not temporall Lord of the Christian world which he confirmeth First because if the Pope were soueraigne Lord of all the Christian world Bishops should be temporall Lords of their cities the places adioyning subiect to them Which neither they will graunt that contend for the soueraigntie of the Pope nor can stand with that of Saint Ambrose who saith If the Emperour aske tribute we deny it him not The Church lands doe pay tribute And againe Tribute is Caesars it is not denied him but the Church is Gods and may not be yeelded to Caesar. And that of Hosius Bishop of Corduba who as we reade in Athanasius telleth the Emperour that God hath giuē him the Empire but that he hath committed to Bishops those things that pertaine to the Church Secondly out of the confession of Popes Pope Leo confessing that Martianus the Emperour was appointed to the Empire by God and that God was the authour of his Empire And Gelasius writing to Anastasius the Emperour and acknowledging that there are two thinges by which principally the world is guided to wit the sacred authority of Bishoppes and the regall power of Princes with whom Gregorie agreeth when hee saith Power ouer all is giuen from heauen to the piety of my Lord. And from hence hee inferreth his third proposition that the Pope is temporall Lord of no part of the world in the right of Peters successour and Christs Vicar For if there were no nullitie in the titles of infidell kings and princes nor no necessity implied in their conuersion of relinquishing their right when they became Christians but that both infidels christians notwithstanding any act of Christ continued in the full possession of princely power right it could not be that Christ should inuest Peter or his successours with any kingly authority seeing hee could giue them none but such as he should take from others Nay hee proceedeth farther and sheweth that Christ himselfe while hee was on the earth was no temporall Lord or King and therefore much lesse gaue any temporall dominion or kingdome to his Apostles That he was no temporall king he proueth because the right to bee a King or Lord in such sort as men are Kings or Lords is either by inheritance election conquest or speciall donation and gift of Almighty God Now that Christ according to the flesh was a King by right of inheritance hee saith it cannot be proued because though hee came of the kingly familie yet it is vncertaine whether he were the next in bloud to Dauid or not And besides the kingdome was taken away from Dauids house before Christ was borne God had foretold that of the house of Ieconiah of which Christ came as we may reade in the first of Saint Matthew there should neuer be any temporall King such as David and the rest that succeeded him were saying Write this man barren a man that shall not prosper in his dayes for there shall bee no man of his seede to sitte vpon the throne of Dauid to haue power any more in Iudah And whereas it might be obiected that the Angell prophecied that the Lord God should giue vnto Christ the seat of Dauid his father the Cardinall answereth out of Hierome vpon the place of Hieremie and
himselfe was no temporall or earthly king and therefore much lesse Peter or the Pope that pretendeth to be Christs Vicar and Peters successour Notwithstanding they that are otherwise minded endevour to proue that Christ was a temporall king and that hee left a kingly power to Peter and his successours First out of Scripture strangely wrested Secondly out of the testimonies of Popes For better authorities they haue none The principall text of Scripture which they alleage is in the Gospell of Saint Matthew where our Sauiour saith All power is given me in heauen and in earth But Bellarmine telleth them and the best Diuines agree with him that that place is not to bee vnderstood of a temporall power such as earthly kings haue but either of a spirituall whereby Christ so raigneth in earth in the hearts of men by faith as hee doth in heaven in the presence of his glorie among the Angels or a diuine power ouer all creatures not communicable to mortall men The former of these interpretations the Authour of the Interlineall Glosse followeth the later Lyra vpon this place his words are Licèt Christus quantum ad diuinitatem ab aeterno haberet hanc potestatem in quantum homo ab instanti conceptionis haberet potestatem in coelo in terra authoritativè tamen executivè non habuit ante resurrectionem suam sed voluit esse passibilitati subiectus propter nostram redemptionem that is Although Christ in that he was God had this power from all eternity and in that hee was man had power both in heauen and in earth from the first moment of his conception in respect of authority yet in respect of the execution and performance of the acts of it he had it not before his resurrection but was pleased to bee subiect to passibilitie for our redemption Let vs come therefore from the Scripture to the testimonies of later Popes for Fathers auncient Councells or auncient Bishops of Rome they haue none to speake for them The first Pope that they alleage is Pope Nicholas in a certaine Epistle of his where he saith as they tell vs that Christ committed and gaue vnto blessed Peter the Key-bearer of eternall life the rights both of the earthly and heauenly Empire To this authority first wee answere that Pope Nicholas hath no such words in any Epistle howsoeuer Gratian who citeth them as the words of Nicholas mistooke the matter Secondly that supposing the words to be the words of Nicholas his meaning may bee that the spirituall power of binding and loosing which Christ left to Peter is not onely of force in earth but in heauen also that being bound in heauen that is bound on earth and they beeing repulsed from the throne of grace in heauen and excluded from Gods fauours that are reiected from the holy Altars and put from the Sacraments of the Church Wherevpon Chrysostome saith that the power of the church directeth and commaundeth the very Tribunall of heauen and addeth that heauen taketh authority of judging from the earth For that the Iudge sitteth on earth and the Lord followeth the sentence of his servants according to that of Christ Whatsoeuer you shall binde on earth shall be bound in heauen Others expound the supposed words of Pope Nicholas of the spirituall power of Peter ouer the good and bad in the visible church the good being named the kingdome of heauen and the bad an earthly kingdome or company But howsoeuer it is most certaine that Pope Nicholas in his Epistle to Michael the Emperour hath the cleane contrary to that which some would charge him with For there hee sheweth that howsoeuer before Christ some were both kings and priests as was Melchisedeck and as likewise some other among the Pagans were yet after Christ none were so Neither did the Emperour take vnto him the rights of the chiefe Priesthood nor the chiefe Priest the name of the Emperour Sed mediator Dei hominum homo Christus sic actibus propriis dignitatibus distinctis officia potestatis vtriusque discreuit vt Christiani Imperatores pro aeterna vita pontificibus indigerent Pontifices pro cursu temporalium tantummodò rerum Imperialibus legibus vterentur that is But the Mediatour of God and men the man Christ did so distinguish and seuer the duties and offices of either of these kinds of power by their proper actions distinct dignities that both Christian Emperours should stand in neede of Bishops for the attaining of eternall life and that Bishoppes should vse the lawes of Emperours for the course of temporall things onely that so both the spirituall action and employment might be free from carnall turmoyles and that he who goeth on warfare vnto God might not at all bee entangled with secular businesses and that on the other side he might not seeme to bee set ouer the things that are Diuine whom the businesses of this world should possesse that both the modestie of each of these orders and degrees might bee preserued and that also no one hauing both these kindes of power should be lifted vp too high The next authoritie is that of Bonifacius the eighth who hath these words speaking of the Church which is one and whereof he supposeth the Bishop of Rome to be the head Wee are instructed by the Evangelicall sayings that in this Church and in the power of it there are two swords to wit a spirituall and a temporall For when the Apostles said Beholde heere are two swords to wit in the Church because they were the Apostles that spake the Lord did not answere that it was too much but that it was enough and therefore surely whosoeuer denyeth the temporall sword to be in the power of Peter seemeth not well to consider the word of the Lord commaunding him to sheathe his sword The answer vnto this authority is easie For Bonifacius as Duarenus noteth was a vaine busie turbulent arrogant and proud man presuming aboue that which was fit and challenging that which no way pertained vnto him and therefore we may justly reject both him and his sayings But for the words of our Sauiour it is euident that they proue no such thing as this Pope would inforce out of them Some saith Maldonatus frō these words would proue that the Church hath two swords the one spirituall the other temporall which whether it haue or haue not cannot be proued out of this place where other swords are meant then either of Ciuill or Ecclesiasticall authority Our Sauiour telleth his Disciples the times approaching will be such as that a man had neede for his owne defence to sell his coate to buy a sword Whereupon the Disciples supposing they should vse materiall swords in their owne defence answere that they haue two swords To whom Christ replyeth that it is enough not confirming their erring opinion but answering them Ironically as Theophylact and Euthymius thinke Or otherwise letting them vnderstand that
the influence thereof more powerfull yet is there a kind of influence vpon the waters wherein the Moon is more excellent then the Sun In like sort the power which is spirituall may do greater things then that which is temporall yet the temporall may do those things the spirituall cannot do And therfore it will not follow that the Ecclesiasticall state the principall Ministers of the Church may take vnto themselues the authority of Kings or take vpon them to do the things that pertaine to Kingly offices because they are greater in dignity and haue a greater power vnlesse they had a greater dignity power in the same kind Nowthey who most amplifie the greatnes of Ecclesiasticall power preferring it before the other which is ciuill neuer make the greatnes of it to consist in that in ciuill affaires it may do more then that but in that it hath a more noble object more wonderfull effects We also saith Nazianzen haue power and authority that farre more ample and excellent then that of ciuill Princes insomuch as it is fit the flesh should yeeld to the spirit things earthly to things heauenly Priesthood saith Chrysostome is a Princedome more honourable great then a Kingdome tell not mee of the purple diademe scepter or golden apparell of Kings for these are but shadowes and more vaine then flowres at the spring time If you will see the difference betweene them how much the King is inferiour to the Priest cōsider the manner of the power deliuered to them both you shall see the Priests tribunall much higher then that of the King who hath receiued only the administratiō of earthly things But the Priests tribunal is placed in heauē he hath authority to pronoūce sentence in heauēly affairs And again Earthly Princes haue power to bind but our bodies onely but the bands which Priests can lay vpō vs do touch the soul it self reach euen vnto the heauēs so far forth as that whatsoeuer Priests shal determin here beneath that God doth ratifie aboue in heauen and confirme the sentence of his seruants vpon earth When king Richard the first returning from the holy land was taken and holde as a prisoner by Duke Leopold of Austria and the Emperour Henry the sixth Queene Elenor his mother seeking all meanes to procure his deliuerance among other thinges wrote a letter to the Bishop of Rome intreating him to interpose his authority The words of her letter are these expressing the passion and earnest desire of her heart This onely remaineth ô Father that you draw forth the sword of Peter against malefactors which sword God hath appointed to be ouer nations and kingdomes The Crosse of Christ doth excell the Eagles that are in Caesars Banners the spirituall sword of Peter is of more power then was the temporall sword of Constantine the Emperour and the See Apostolicke is more potent then any Imperiall power or authority and I would aske whether your power be of God or of men did not the God of Gods speake to you in Peter the Apostle saying Whatsoeuer you shall binde vpon earth shall be bound in heauen and whatsoeuer you shall loose on earth shall bee loosed in heauen and why then do you so negligently or rather cruelly delay for a long time to lose my sonne or why dare you not do it perhaps you will say that the power giuen you by God of binding and losing is for soules and not for bodies Let it bee so truly it is sufficiont for vs if you will binde the soules of those that hold my sons body bound in prison By all these sayings of them that most admired the excellency of Priesthood it appeareth that the excellencie thereof aboue princely power is in respect of the object thereof which is more noble the effects thereof which are more wonderfull not in respect of greater power authority right to dispose of temporal affaires businesses either simply or vpon any abuse or negligence of ciuil Princes So that from hence it cannot be inferred that the chiefe ministers of the Church may depose the Princes of the world Hugo de sancto Victore sayth There are two kinds of power the one terrene the head whereof is the King the other spirituall the head whereof is the pope To the Kings power those things pertaine that are terrene to the Popes those that are spirituall and looke how much the spirituall life is better then the earthly so much doth the spirituall power excell the earthly in honour and dignity For the spirituall power doth constitute the terrene power that it may be and iudgeth it whether it proceede aright or not But it selfe was first instituted of God and when it goeth aside can bee judged of none but of God onely From hence as Waldensis sheweth some men tooke an occasion of errour affirming that the roote of terrene power doth so farre fotrh depend vpon the Pope that by commission from him the execution of things pertaining thereunto is deriued vnto the Prince and that when the Prince goeth aside or faileth to do his duty the chiefe Bishop may manage the ciuill affaires because hee saith the spirituall power doth institute the ciuil power that it may be But these men presume too farre and in so doing offend because the terrene power of Kings is not reduced into any other originally as hauing authority ouer Kings but vnto Christ onely and yet notwithstanding as the Priest joyneth the man and his wife in marriage and blesseth them that they may be man and wife and joyfull parents of happy children and judgeth afterwards whether they performe the duties of marriage or not So the chiefe Priest setteth the crowne vpon the head of the Empreor anointeth him with holy oyle taketh an oath of him for the defence of the Christian faith and religion putteth vpon him the royall robes and thereby inuesteth him with royall power putteth him in possession of his Imperiall state and dignity But it is not to be imagined saith Waldensis that the imperiall power is from the power of the Church or dependeth of it though certaine solemnities bee vsed by Bishops in the inauguration of Kings and Emperours neither may the chiefe Ministers of the Church any more challenge the disposing or managing of ciuill affaires vpon any defect or failing of ciuill Princes then they may the administration and dispensation of holy things vpon the defect or failing of the Ecclesiasticall Ministers Yet in case of necessity either of these two states may and ought to helpe and succour the other not as he sayth vt vtens potestate sed fraternitatis accessu that is Not as hauing authority or by vertue thereof presuming to doe any thing but as one brother maketh hast to helpe another in danger reaching forth the hand to stay him that is standing and to raise him that is fallen Both the brethren sayth Waldensis both
Emperour or to depriue him of any thing that of right pertained to him But the people of Italy moued against the Emperour proceeded further then the Bishop of Rome would haue had them to haue done For they put downe the Magistrates appointed by the Emperour and set vp other of their owne and would haue forced the Bishop of Rome and the other people of Italy who yet consented not vnto them to disclaime the Emperour of Constantinople and to chuse another in Italy And therefore if at that time they forbare to pay any more tribute as Zonaras saith they did it was not because the Pope forbade them so to doe as hauing supreme power in ciuill things but being averse from the Emperour as for other dislikes so by the Popes perswasions they stayed the tribute of themselues as of themselues they put downe the Magistrates of the Emperour without the liking of the Bishop of Rome That which Otho Frisingensis hath that the Pope hauing often admonished the Emperour and found him incorrigible perswaded the people of Italy to depart from the Empire seemeth to bee contrary to the reports of the Authour of the great Chronicle Nauclerus Rhegino and others but yet maketh the Pope onely a perswader and the people of Italy the doers of that was done And in like sort it must bee vnderstood that Zonaras saith the Bishop of Rome stayed the paying of tribute to the Emperour namely that his dislike of the Emperours courses together with their owne distast of his actions did so auert the minds of the Italians from the Emperour that they refused to pay him tribute that being attributed to him as done by him which his perswasions though tending to another purpose did worke without his liking and against his will And in the same sence it is that Sigebert saith Gregory charged the Emperour with errour blamed him for it and turned away the people of Rome and the tribute of the West from him The third instance of Popes intermedling in the disposition of the kingdomes of the world is that of Zacharias the Pope of whom Gregory the seuenth in his Epistles writeth thus Another Romane Bishop also to wit Zacharias deposed the French King from his kingdome not so much for any fault done by him as for that he was vnfit to sway so great power and put Pipine the father of Charles the great afterwards Emperour into his place freeing and absoluing all the Frenchmen frō their oath of feaultie Which words of Gregory are found likewise in the decrees To this allegation Occam answereth that Zacharias did not depose Childericke the French King as Gregory the seuenth vntruly reporteth but onely gaue allowance of the Peeres doposing of him And to that purpose alleageth the Glosse vpon the decrees wich sayth Dicitur deposuisse quia deponentibus consensit that is The Pope is said to haue deposed the King because hee gaue consent to those that did depose him and allowed their act But he noteth also that there are others that doe not soe excuse the Pope but do thinke he put his sickle into another mans haruest and tooke vpon him to do that hee had no authority to doe which other Popes likewise haue not feared to doe in prejudice of the right of the laity as they shew out of another Glosse Soe that the Century writers are not alone in the reprehension of this fact of Zacharias as Bellarmine vntruly anoucheth notwithstanding I rather follow the judgment of the author of the Glosse and thinke that he did but giue his opinion what might be done and approue the act when it was done For confirmation whereof I will lay downe the circumstances of the narration touching the proceedings in this matter as I find them reported by ancient writers First all Historians agree that the Kings of France in those times giuing themselues to idlenesse and pleasures wholly neglected the gouernment that they were seene but only once in the yeare of their subjects and that the gouernor of the Kings house ruled all Neither did things stand thus for a short space but Sigebert saith they continued so 88 yeares In this office of a prefect or gouernor Pipine incceeded his auncesters but exceeded them in the greatnesse of worthy exploits neither did any thing hinder the course of his great and honourable actions but that hee was forced to suffer endure a king almost witlesse mad with diuers sencelesse fooleries Wherefore they who write the histories of France report that the Nobles and people of that nation duely weighing the vertue of Pipine and the witlesse follies of Childericke the King consulted Zachary then Bishop of Rome desired him to tell them whether he thought so foolish and vnworthy a King were any longer to be endured or Pipine to be defrauded of royall dignity which he deserued was right worthy of Who when they had receiued answere from the Pope that he was to be estemed the King who knew best how to performe kingly duties the French by the publique and common aduice and counsell of the whole nation proclaimed Pipine King and shore the head of Childericke and made him a Clearke Nauclerus saith the French men anciently had their kings descended of an ancient stocke who of Meroueus the sonne of King Clodius the second were called Merouingians the race of which kings continued till Childericke and in him ended For long before they were of no esteeme or authority neither had they any thing but the vaine and empty title of Kings for the riches and power of the kingdome were in the hands of the prefects of the pallace who were called the chiefe of the Kings house and swayed the vvhole kingdome vvho at that time vvere the successors of Charles Martell and vvere named Dukes Neither vvas there any other thing permitted to the King but that contenting himselfe vvith the bare name of a King hauing long haire and a long beard hee should sit vpon the throne and haue some shew of a ruler and heare Embassadors comming from all parts and giue such answers vnto them as out of his owne power which he was taught and commanded to giue Hee had nothing to liue on but such a stipend and allowance as the Prefect was pleased to allow vnto him Hee possessed nothing but one little village once onely in the yeare hee was seene of his subiects in a publique and solemne assembly hauing saluted them all returned againe into his priuate course of life leauing the gouernment of all to the Prefect Pipine therefore who then supplied that place as succeeding his ancestors in the same considering the slouth and idlenesse of these Kings who neglecting the common-wealth did hide themselues in their owne priuate houses and that both the Nobles people tooke notice as well of his vertues as of the sencelesse follies of Childericke consulted the Pope as we heard
the great he dyed and Ludouicus his sonne succeeded him Lotharius succeeded Ludouicus and Ludouicus his sonne succeeded him Carolus Caluus his vncle succeeded Ludouicus Carolus Crassus his brother Ludouicus son succeeded him This Carolus Crassus for his vnfitnesse was put from the Empire and Arnulphus his nephew son of Carlomaine was chosen in his place who was the last of the race of Charles the great that was crowned Emperour whom Ludouicus his son succeeded but was neuer crowned In whom dying without childrē the race of Charles did wholy cease After him Otho the Duke of Saxony was greatly desired but refusing to bee Emperour in respect of his old age the French by his aduice chose Conradus and Conradus when he dyed named Henry the sonne of Otho Duke of Saxony who reigned in East-France But vpon the death of Ludouicus the third the Lombards possessed themselues of the Empire in Italy eight of them successiuely holding it for the space of 50 yeres till Otho the sonne of Matilda daughter of Theodoricus king of the Saxons Henry the king who succeeding his father being very famous for the things he had done in France Germany was desired by Agapetus the Pope many nobles of Italy now weary of the tyranny of the Lombards to come and releeue them which he did and entring Italy with 50000. armed men put Berengarius the Lombard from the Empire and Albertus from the kingdome of all Italy was crowned Emperour in Rome by Iohn the twelfth who died Emperour and Otho the second his son succeeded him and Otho the third his sonne succeeded him This third Otho as Nauclerus saith hauing no heires male by the aduice with the consent of the Princes of Germany made a Decree that after the death of the Emperour an election of the new Emperour to succeede should for euer bee made in the citty of Franckford and appointed electors three Arch-bishops of Mentz for Germany of Coleyn for Italy and of Treuers for France and with these foure other secular Princes to wit the Palatine of Rhene who by office should be the Emperors Pantler the Duke of Saxony who should be his Marshall the Marquesse of Branderburge who was to be his Chamberlaine the King of Boheme who was to be chief Butler This ordinance greatly displeased the Romanes yet notwithstanding Gregory the fifth then Pope who was a Germane borne of the Emperours house seeing how hardly Otho the Emperour came to the Empire though it were his inheritance called a Synode and with the consent of the Princes of Germany confirmed the ordinance of the Emperour decreed that these 7 electors should for euer haue power to chuse the Emperor in the name of all who being chosen should bee called Caesar king of Romanos after his coronation by the Pope be named Augustus Emperour Cardinall Cusanus saith the Emperor Otho with the consent of the nobles Primates and both the states of the Clergy people ordained electors in the time of Gregory the 5. who was a Germane decreed that they should haue power for euer to chuse the Emperor in steed of all It is not therefore to be granted saith hee that the Princes electors haue their power of chusing the Emperor from the Pope so that without his consent they should not haue it or that he might take it from them if he would Who therefore gaue the people of Rome power to chuse the Emperor but the law of God nature whence the Electors appointed by the cōmon consent of all the Germanes and other subiect to the Empire in the time of Henry the second haue their power originally from the common consent of them all who by natures right had power to constitute them an Emperour and not from the Bishop of Rome who hath no power to giue to any prouince of the world a King or Emperour without the consent thereof But the consent of Gregory the 5. who as Bishop of Rome in his degree and place had interest to giue voyce in the chusing of the Emperour concurred with the resolution of the Princes people The sixt instance is of Gregory the 7. deposing Henry the 4. who indeed was the first Pope that euer tooke vpon him to depose Emperour or King Wherefore for the better vnderstanding of the whole course of the proceedings of this Pope wee must obserue that in the time of Henry the 3. about the yeare of our Lord 1040. there was an horrible confusion of Gods Church and people in the citty of Rome three seuerall pretenders inuading the chaire of Peter and challenging the name of his successours and which more increased the misery the reuenues of the Church were diuided among these three and seuerall Patriarchicall places assigned to them one of them sitting at S. Peters another at S. Mary the greater and the third named Benedict in the palace of Lateran and all of them liued very lewdly wickedly as Otho saith the Romanes reported vnto him being in Rome A certaine religious Presbyter named Gratian considering this miserable state of the Church taking pitty on his distressed mother moued with the zeale of piety went to the three pretenders and perswaded them for money to leaue the holy seate of Peter assigning to Benedict as being of greater esteeme among them the reuenues of England for his maintenance and as a recompence of his voluntary relinquishing the claime to the Popedome The citizens of Rome admiring the happy atchieuement of this Presbyter chose him to bee Pope as being the deliuerer of the Church from so great a schisme and changing his name called him Gregory the 7. But when Henry the King heard of it he passed into Italy Gratian vnderstanding of his comming met him at Sutrium and to pacifie his wrath offered him a precious Diademe The King at the first honorably receiued him but afterwards calling a Councell of Bishoppes induced him to giue ouer the Popedome as hauing by Symony obtayned it at the first and with the consent of the Romane church placed Suidegerus Bishop of Babenberge in the Papal chaire who was named Clemens This Clemens dyed Popio Patriarch of Aquileia succeeded him and was named Damasus Damasus dyed and Bruno Bishop of the Tullians succeeded him and was named Leo. This man being of a noble race in France was appointed Pope by the authority of the Emperour and hauing put on the Papall purple robe journeyed through France til he came to Cluniack where one Hildebrand was Priour This Hildebrand moued with zeale came to Leo and told him hee did ill to assume the Papall office by vertue of the Emperours nomination being a Lay-man but that if hee would be aduised by him he would direct him into a course whereby he might without offending the Emperour preserue the liberty of the Church in chusing her chiefe Bishop This aduice Leo hearkned vnto and putting off his purple robe put on the weede of
Pope perceiuing his dislike promised that both the writing and the painting should bee taken away that it might giue no occasiō of contention discord These Romish practises making the Emperour and his Nobles to vnderstand the wordes of the Popes Letter in the worst sense caused the message of these Cardinals to bee very offensiue and a generall murmuring against them was heard among the Princes which growing more lowde and being heard and discerned by the Legates one of them adventured in the quarrell of his Master to demaund of whom the Emperour hath his Empire if hee haue it not of the Lord Pope Which speach of the Cardinall so inraged the Princes that one of them to wit Otto the County Palatine of Boiaria had with his sword runne him through had not Fredericke the Emperor interposed his authority pacified the present rage The Emperor seeing in what termes things stood tooke the best course he could for the security of the Legates and commaunded that they should presently bee had to their lodgings that the next morning they should be gon returne directly to him that sent them and not to wander vp downe in the Territories of Bishops Abbots as he thus happily dispatched them away in safety so after they were gonne providently by letters he caused it to be made known throughout the whole Empire what had passed betweene him the Pope The Tenor of his letters was this Whereas the diuine power from which all power proceedeth both in heauen and earth hath committed to vs his annoynted the rule of the Kingdome and Empire and ordayned that by Imperiall armes wee should preserue the peace of the Churches we are forced not without great griefe of heart to complaine vnto you that from the head of the holy Church in which Christ imprinted the Character of his peace loue the causes of dissention the seminary of euils and the poyson of a most pestiferous disease doe seeme to flow by meanes whereof if God turne not away this euill there is danger least the vnity betwixt the Priest-hood kingdome be broken and a schisme follow For of late as we were in the Court of Bisuntium consulting about things concerning the honour of the Empire good of the Churches there came vnto vs certain Legates from the Pope who professed to bring such a message as tended greatly to the increase of the honour of the Empire But when we had the first day honorably entertained them as the manner is and the second day sat with our Princes to heare their message They as it were puffed vp by reason of the Mammō of iniquity out of the height of their pride out of the haughtinesse of their arrogant mindes and out of the execrable elation of their swelling hearts presented vnto vs an Embassage contained in letters written by the Pope the tenor whereof was That wee should alwayes haue before the eyes of our mind in what sort the Lord Pope had conferred vpon vs the Ensigne of the Imperiall crowne and that yet notwithstanding it would no way repent him if he had done vs greater fauours and wee had receiued more benefits of him These thinges not onely much affected but so moued the Princes and inraged them in such sort that if we had not stayed them by our Princely authority the two wicked Priestes the Legates had neuer returned aliue Wherefore seeing they had many schedules sealed to be written in at their pleasure by which as formerly they were wont to doe they might scatter the poyson of their iniquity throughout all the Churches of the Germane kingdome make bare naked the holy Altars carry away with them the vessels of the house of God as a prey that they might proceede no farther in mischief we cōmanded them without wandring or going aside to returne the same way they came For whereas we haue our kingdome by the election of the Princes from God only who in the passion of his son subiected the world to 2 sword◅ and the Apostle Peter informed the world with the same doctrine saying Feare God honour the King We are well assured that whosoeuer shall say that we receiue our Imperiall crowne as a benefit from the Pope he is contrary to the institution of God the doctrine of blessed Peter is a lyar and therefore our hope is that you will not suffer the honor of the Empire which hath continued from the Constitution of the Citty and the Institution of Christian Religion inviolable till our times to be diminished by such vnheard-of nouelties presumptuous pride But howsoeuer know yee that we will rather run into perill of death it self then suffer such a shamefull confusion to fall out in our times After the returne of the Cardinals their complaints made the Pope wrote letters to the Arch-bishops and Bishops of Germany telling them with what indignity the Emperour dismissed his Legates and how he forbad any to come to Rome out of his kingdome and prayed them to aduise him better and to let him know that the Church which is builded vpon a most firme sure rocke shall continue for euer howsoeuer it may bee shaken with windes and tempests The Bishoppes of Germany hauing receiued these letters from the Pope writ backe vnto him that howsoeuer the Church cannot bee moued yet they were greatly shaken by reason of these differences betweene him and the Emperour and tell him that the words of his letter were such as that neither the Emperor and Princes could indure them nor they knew how to defend them as being strange and vnheard-of before these times Notwithstanding they let him know that after the receipt of his letters they communed with the Emperour about these affaires and receiued from him such an answere as beseemed a Catholique Prince to wit that there are two things whereby his Empire must be swayed the Lawes of Emperors and the vse and custome of his ancestors These limits he is resolued not to passe and whatsoeuer will not stand with these he will vtterly refuse and reject he is willing to giue all due reuerence vnto his ghostly father but that he ascribeth the crown of his Empire to the diuine fauour onely the first voyce in the election to the Arch-bishop of Mentz and the rest to the other Princes in order that hee acknowledgeth to haue receiued the vnction of a King from the Arch-bishop of Coleyn and the supreme vnction which is that of an Emperour from the Pope and that whatsoeuer is besides these is more then ynough and proceedeth from that which is euill that hee had not sent away the Cardinals in contempt but forbad them to proceede any further with such writings as they had tending to the dishonour and scandall of the Empire and that hee had not restrained the going of men into Italy vpon necessary occasions to be allowed by their Bishops nor simply inhibited the comming of men from thence
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
in his place Which refusall though it were ill taken at the first yet were the fathers in the end perswaded by the mediation of the Iudges to forbeare their subscription till they might haue time to choose a new Patriarch so that it is not the personal presence or cōcurrēce precisely of those chiefe Bishops or Patriarches to whom all other Bishops are subject that is required to the fulnesse and perfection of a General Councell but the comming of some from the seuerall Synodes subject to the Patriarches or from the Patriarchicall synode where some out of all these doe meete or at the least the sending of Synodall letters that so the consent of all may be had The Prouinces that are neare the place where the Synode is holden sending the greater number and they that are most remote sending some few with instructions from the rest or at the least their Synodall letters expressing their opinion judgment resolution So in the Councell of Nice there were many Bs out of the East but out of the West only two Presbyters out of Italy one Bishop out of Spaine one Bishop out of France one out of Africa But in the second and third Councels there were many out of the East and none out of the West But the Bishops of Rome Damasus and Caelestinus as Patriarches of the West confirmed those Councels and gaue consent vnto them in their owne names and in the names of all the Bishoppes of the West whome they had gathered together in Synodes In the Councell of Chalcedon there were none present out of the West but the Legates of Leo but he sent by them the consent of the Bishops of Spaine France Italy and other parts of the West who hauing holden Synodes in their seuerall Prouinces wrote vnto him that they approued his judgment touching the point in controuersie which was to be debated in the generall Councell and that they would most willingly concurre with him in the forme of instruction which he meant to send to the Councell Touching the order that must be kept in generall Councels First the Booke of God must be layd in the middest of them that are present Secondly the meeting must be openly and not in secret Thirdly it must bee free and euery man must bee permitted boldly to speake what hee thinketh Whereupon Pope Nicholas when some obiected to him the number of Bishoppes that mette in the Councell of Photius answered that the great concurse of Bishops in the Councels of Nice and Chalcedon was not so much respected as their free and religious vttering of their iudgments and resolutions and Agatho writing to Constantine the Emperour touching the Bishops that were to meete in the sixt generall Councell hath these words Grant free power of speaking to euery one that desireth to speake for the faith which he beleeues and holdes that all men may most clearely see and know that no man desirous and willing to speake for the trueth was fobidden hindred or reiected by any terrors force threatning or any other thing that might auert and turne him away from so doing And as there must bee a liberty and freedome of speech in Generall Councels soe there must be a desire of finding out the trueth and an intending and seeking of the common good that priuate respects purposes and designes be not set forward vnder pretence of religion and therefore Leo the first writing to the Emperour of the error of the second Ephesine Counsell hath these words While priuate intendments and designes were set forward vnder pretence of religion that was effected by the impiety of a few that wounded the whole vniuersall Church wee finde by certaine report that a great number of Bishops came together vnto the Synode who being come together in such great multitudes might very profitably haue beene employed in deliberating and discerning what was fit to be resolued if hee who challenged vnto himselfe the chiefe place would haue obserued such Priestly moderation as that according to the manner and custome of such meetings all men hauing freely vttered their opinions that might peaceably and rightly haue beene decreed that might both agree with faith and bring them into the right way that were in error But here wee finde that when the Decree was to bee passed all they who were come together were not permitted to bee present for wee haue beene informed that some were rejected and others brought in who at the pleasure of the foresayd Bishoppe were brought to yeeld captiue hands to those impious subscriptions for that they knew that it would bee preiudiciall to their state vnlesse they did such things as were inioyned them Which kinde of proceedings our substitutes sent from the Apostolicall See discerned to be so impious and contrary to the Catholique faith that by no violent meanes they could bee inforced to consent thereunto but constantly protested and professed as beseemed them that that which was there agreed on and decreed should neuer bee admitted or receiued by the Apostolicall See And a little after hee hath these words All the Bishops of those parts of the Church that are subiect vnto vs as suppliants in most humble manner with sighes and teares beseech your most gratious Maiesty that seeing both those Substitutes which wee sent did most constantly resist against such impious and bad proceedings and Flauianus the Bishop offered a bill of appeale vnto them you would bee pleased to command a generall Councell to be holden in Italy Thus wee see what things are essentially required to the being of a Councell and what order is to be obserued in it The next thing that followeth in order to bee intreated of is the Presidentship of such and soe sacred an assembly CHAP. 50. Of the President of Generall Councels TOuching the Presidentship of Generall Councels it pertained in a sort to all the Patriarches and therefore Photius in his discourse of the seauen Synodes in diuers of them nameth all the Patriarches and their Vice-gerents Presidents as hauing an honourable preheminence aboue and before other Bishops in such assemblies yet wee deny not but that as these were ouer all other Bishops so euen amongst these also there was an order so that one of them had a preheminence aboue and before another For the Bishop of Alexandria was before the Bishop of Antioch and the Bishop of Rome before him anciently euen before the time of the Nicene Councell and afterwards the Bishop of Constantinople made a Patriarch was set before the other two next vnto the Bishop of Rome And as these were thus one before another in order and honour so they had preheminence of honour in Synodall assemblies accordingly in sitting speaking and subscribing though this were not alwayes precisely obserued For in the Councell of Nice there being two rankes of seates the one in the one side of the hall the other in the other where the Councell mette the Emperour sitting in the middest
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
But concerning the Generall Councels of this sort that hitherto haue beene holden wee confesse that in respect of the matter about which they were called so neerely and essentially concerning the life and soule of the Christian Faith and in respect of the manner and forme of their proceeding and the euidence of proofe brought in them they are and euer were expresly to bee beleeued by all such as perfectly vnderstand the meaning of their determination And that therefore it is not to bee maruailed at if Gregory professe that hee honoureth the first foure Councels as the foure Gospels and that whosoeuer admitteth them not though hee seeme to bee a Stone elect precious yet hee lyeth beside the foundation and out of the building Of this sort there are onely sixe the first defining the Sonne of GOD to be co-essentiall co-eternall co-equall with the Father The second defining that the holy Ghost is truely God co-essentiall co-eternall and co-equall with the Father and the Sonne The third the vnity of Christs person The fourth the distinction and diuersity of his natures in and after the personall vnion The fifth condemning some remaines of Nestorianisme more fully explaining thinges stumbled at in the Councell of Chalcedon and accursing the Heresie of Origen and his followers touching the temporall punishments of Diuells and wicked Cast-awayes and the Sixth defining and clearing the distinction of operations actions powers and wils in Christ according to the diuersity of his natures These were all the lawfull Generall Councells lawfull I say both in their beginning and proceeding and continuance that euer were holden in the Christian Church touching matters of Faith For the Seauenth which is the second of Nice was not called about any question of Faith but of manners In which our Aduersaries confesse there may be something inconueniently prescribed and so as to bee the occasion of great grieuous euils and surely that is our conceit of the Seauenth Generall Councell the second of Nice for howsoeuer it condemne the religious adoration and worshipping of Pictures and seeme to allow no other vse of them but that which is Historicall yet in permitting men by outward signes of reuerence respect towards the Pictures of Saints to expresse their loue towards them and the desire they haue of enioying their happie society and in condemning so bitterly such as vpon dislike of abuses wished there might be no Pictures in the Church at all it may seem to haue giuen some occasion and to haue opened the way vnto that grosse Idolatrie which afterwards entered into the Church The Eigth Generall Councell was not called about any question of Faith or Manners but to determine the question of right betweene Photius Ignatius contending about the Bishopricke of Constantinople So that there are but seauen Generall Councels that the whole Church acknowledgeth called to determine matters of Faith and Manners For the rest that were holden afterwardes which our Aduersaries would haue to bee accounted Generall they are not onely reiected by vs but by the Grecians also as not Generall but Patriarchicall onely because either they consisted onely of the Westerne Bishoppes without any concurrence of those of the East or if any were present as in the Councell of Florence there were they consented to those thinges which they agreed vnto rather out of other respects then any matter of their owne satisfaction And therefore howsoeuer we dare not pronounce that lawfull Generall Councels are free from danger of erring as some among our Aduersaries doe yet doe wee more honour esteeme more fully admit all the Generall Councels that euer hitherto haue beene holden then they doe who feare not to charge some of the chiefest of them with errour as both the Second and the Fourth for equalling the Bishop of Constantinople to the Bishop of Rome which I thinke they suppose to haue beene an errour in Faith CHAP. 52. Of the calling of Councells and to whom that right pertaineth FROM the assurance of Trueth which lawfull Generall Councells haue let vs proceede to see by whom they are to bee called The state of the Christian Church the good thinges it enioyeth and the felicity it promiseth being spirituall is such that it may stand though not onely forsaken but grieuously oppressed by the great men of the world and doth not absolutely depend on the care of such as manage the great affaires of the World and direct the outward course of thinges here below and therefore it is by all resolued on that the Church hath her Guides and Rulers distinct from them that beare the Sword and that there is in the Church a power of conuocating these her Spirituall Pastours to consult of thinges concerning her wel-fare though none of the Princes of the World doe fauour her nor reach forth vnto her their helping handes neither need wee to seeke farre to find in whom this power resteth for there is no question but that this power is in them that are first and before other in each company of spirituall Pastors and Ministers seeing none other canne be imagined from whom each action of consequence each common deliberation should take beginning but they who are in order honour and place before other and to whom the rest that gouerne the Church in common haue an eye as to them that are first in place among them Hereupon we shall find that the calling of Diocesan Synodes pertaineth to the Bishop of Prouinciall to the Metropolitane of Nationall to the Primate and of Patriarchicall to the Patriarch in that they are in order honour and place before the rest though some of these as Bellarmine truely noteth haue no commanding authority ouer the rest Touching Diocesan Synodes I shewed before that the Bishop is bound once euery yeare at least to call vnto him the Presbyters of his Church and to hold a Synode with thē and the Councell of Antioch ordaineth that the Metropolitane shall call together the Bishops of the Prouince by his letters to make a Synode And the Councell of Tarracon in Spaine decreeth that if any Bishoppe warned by the Metropolitane neglect to come to the Synode except hee be hindered by some corporall necessity he shall be depriued of the communion of all the Bishops vntill the next Councell The Epaunine Councell in like sort ordereth that when the Metropolitane shall thinke good to call his Brethren the Bishops of the same Province to a Synode none shall excuse his absence without an evident cause Touching Nationall Councels and such as consist of the Bishops of many Provinces such as were the Councels of Africa the calling of them pertained vnto the Primate as it appeareth by the second councell of Carthage in that the Bishop of Carthage being the Primate of Africa by vertue of particular canons concerning that matter by his Letters called together the rest of the Metropolitanes and their Bishops And concerning Patriarchicall councels the eighth
Canon of the Church that without the liking iudgment and will of the Bishop of Rome no Councell may be holden mentioned by Socrates and Zozomen For first the Canon is not to be vnderstood of the person of the Bishop of Rome but of him and his Westerne Bishops Secondly it is not so to be vnderstood as if simply without him and his Bishops no Generall Councell could bee holden but that without consulting him and first seeking to him and his no such Councell may bee holden as I haue largely shewed before For otherwise wee know that Vigilius Bishoppe of Rome refused to haue any part in the deliberations of the Fifth Generall Councell or to confirme the Actes of it when it ended Yet was is euer holden to be a lawfull Generall Couucell hee and his being sufficiently sought vnto and their presence desired As likewiso Leo consented to the calling of the Councell of Chalcedon only for the determination of that question of faith that was then debated gaue no consent to the Decree therein passed touching the see of Constantinople yet did this Councell preuaile and the succeeding Bishops of Rome were forced to giue way to that Canon their predecessors so much disliked And therefore whereas the Bishop of Romes Legates in the Councell of Chalcedon do except against Dioscorus for presuming to hold a Synode without the authority of the Apostolicke See wich they say neuer was lawful nor neuer was don their meaning is not that in no case a Councell may be holden without the Bishop of Rome the Bishops of the West but that there neuer was any such Synod holden without requiring admitting the concurrence of the Bishop of Rome the Bishops of the West And that therefore Dioscorus was iustly to be condemned who not onely tooke vpon him by the fauour of one neere about the Emperour to bee President of the Second Councell of Ephesus whereof they speake and sit before the Bishoppe of Romes Legates being but Bishop of the Second See but also reiected the Synodall letters of Leo and the Bishops of the West not suffering them to be read and as if all the power had beene in him alone depriued the Bishoppes of Constantinople and Antioch notwithstanding the Protestation of the Romane Legates against such proceedings and their appeale from the same and still carried on with his furious passions rested not till hee had pronounced sentence of excommunication against blessed Leo and all the Bishoppes of the West The next testimony which Bellarmine bringeth no way proueth that for proofe whereof it is brought for it is not sayd in the place cited by him that the Councell holden at Constantinople against the painting of those things that are reported in the story of the Bible and for the defacing of such pictures made for Historicall vse was therefore voyd because it was called without the consent of the Romane Bishoppe as hee vntruely reporteth but that it was no Generall Councell seeing many that were present consented not but disliked the proceedings of it and besides it neither had the Bishoppe of Rome to concurre nor his Bishoppes neither by their Vicegerents nor by Prouinciall letters neither yet the Patriarches of the East to wit Alexandria Antioch and Hierusalem nor their Bishoppes It is true indeede that the Bishoppes assembled at Rome by the command of Theodoricus to examine the matters obiected to Symmachus the Pope told him the Councell should haue beene called by the Pope and not by him but they spake of particular Councels which oftentimes by the permission of Princes were wont to be called by Metropolitans Primates or Patriarches and not of generall whereof our question is and yet I haue shewed before by many testimonies that Princes when they saw cause did call Councels of this sort also So that the speech of these Bishops affected to their Patriarche and vnwilling to come to any scanning of his actions is not much to be esteemed The next testimony out of the Epistles of Leo testifieth the Cardinall careth not what he saith so he say something for it is true indeed that Leo saith Hee directed his Letters to his Brethren and fellow-bishops and summoned them to a Generall Councell but meaneth not a Councel absolutely General consisting of all the Bishops of the world of which our question is but of all the Bishops of those parts to which hee writeth being subiect to him as Patriarch of the West as appeareth by the circumstances of the Epistle cited But Pelagius the Second in his Epistle to those that Iohn of Constantinople called to his Synode as Generall saith The authority of calling general Coūcels was by singular priuiledge of blessed Peter giuen to the Apostolicke See that no Synode was euer reputed lawfull that was not strengthened by the authority of the See Apostolicke and againe that Councels may not be holden without the iudgement and liking of the Bishop of Rome therefore all is true that the Cardinall hath hitherto alleadged Hereunto though Pelagius may seeme somewhat partiall in his owne cause wee answere first with Bellarmine himselfe that the calling of Generall Councels is not so proper to the Bishop of Rome but that another may do it if he cōsent or if he ratifie the indiction Secondly that though he refuse to ratifie it if his resence concurrence be sufficiently sought and desired it may be lawfull and of orce as it appeareth by the Fift Generall Councel which Vigilius refused to haue any part in The last testimony that Bell. produceth to proue that the power of calling Councels doth not properly belong to the Emperours is a saying of Valentinius reported by Zozomen but it maketh clearely against himselfe The circumstances of Zozomens report are these The Bishops of Hellespont Bithynia and some other professing to beleeue that CHRIST the Son of GOD is con-substantial with his Father sent a Legate to Valentinian the Emperour and desired him to giue them leaue to meete about matters concerning the Faith To whom the Emperour answered that it was not lawfull for him being one of the Laity to intermeddle in these Businesses but willed that the Priests and Bishoppes to whom the care of these things pertayneth should meete in one place where-soeuer it should please them for heere wee see that the Bishops durst not presume to assemble themselues without the Emperors leaue which mainely crosseth the conceit of the cardinall neither doth the Emperour say the calling of councels pertaineth nothing to him but the intermeddling with the matters that are brought in question in them and therefore biddeth them meete by themselues not intending to bee present among them not meaning that it was not lawfull for him to be present for then he should condemne Constantine and other that were present either in person or by Deputies nor that it was simply vnlawfull for him to intermeddle for they intermeddled as I will shew in that
to doe all these things this power the Princes of the World haue not at all much lesse the supreame authority to doe these things but it is proper to the Ministers of the church And if Princes meddle in this kinde they are like to Vzziah that offered to burne incense for which he was stricken with Leprosie The power of Iurisdiction standeth first in prescribing making Lawes Secondly in hearing examining and judging of opinions touching matters of Faith And thirdly in judging of things pertaining to Ecclesiastical order ministery and the due performance of Gods diuine worship seruice Touching the first the making of a Law is the prescribing of a thing vnder some paine or punishment which hee that so prescribeth hath power to inflict Whence it is consequent that the Prince hauing no power to excommunicate put from the Sacraments and deliuer to Satan can of himselfe make no canons such as Councels of Bishoppes doe who commaund or forbid things vnder paine of excōmunication and like spiritual censures but hauing power of life and death of imprisonment banishment confiscation of goods and the like he may with the advice and direction of his Cleargy commaund things pertaining to Gods worship and seruice vnder these paines both for profession of Faith ministration of Sacraments and conversation fitting to Christians in general or men of Ecclesiastical order in particular by his Princely power establish things formerly defined and decreed against whatsoeuer errour and contrary ill-custome and obseruation And herein hee is so far forth supreame that no Prince Prelate or Potentate hath a commaunding authority ouer him yet doe we not whatsoeuer our clamorous Aduersaries vntruly report to make us odious make our Princes with their Ciuill States supreame in the power of commanding in matters concerning God and his Faith and religion without seeking the direction of their Cleargy for the Statute that restored the title of Supremacie to the late Queene Elizabeth of famous and blessed memory prouideth that none shall haue authority newly to judge any thing to be Heresie not formerly so iudged but the high Court of Parliament with the assent of the Cleargy in their Conuocation nor with them soe as to command what they thinke fitte without aduising with others partakers of like precious Faith with them when a more generall meeting for farther deliberation may bee had or the thing requireth it Though when no such generall concurrence may bee had they may by themselues prouide for those parts of the Church that are vnder them From the power and authority wee giue our Princes in making lawes and prescribing how men shall professe and practise touching matters of Faith and Religion let vs proceed to treat of the other part of power ascribed vnto them which is in judging of errors in Faith disorders or faults in things pertaining to Ecclesiasticall order and ministery according to former determinations and decrees And first touching errors in faith or aberrations in the performance of Gods worship and seruice there is no question but that Bishops and Pastors of the Church to whom it pertaineth to teach the trueth are the ordinary and fittest Iudges and that ordinarily and regularly Princes are to leaue the iudgement thereof vnto them But because they may faile either through negligence ignorance or mallice Princes hauing charge ouer Gods people and beeing to see that they serue and worship him aright are to iudge and condemne them that fall into grosse errours contrary to the common sence of Christians or into any other heresies formerly condemned And though there be no generall fayling yet if they see violent and partiall courses taken they may interpose themselues to stay them and cause a due proceeding or remoue the matter from one company and sort of Iudges to another And hereunto the best learned in former times agreed clearely confessing that when some thing is necessary to be done and the ordinary guides of the Church do faile or are not able to yeeld that helpe that is needfull wee may lawfully flye to other for reliefe and helpe when these two things do meete in the state of the Church sayth Waldensis to witte extreame necessity admitting no delay and the want of ability to yeeld reliefe in the ordinary Pastor or Guide wee must seeke an extraordinary Father and Patron rather then suffer the frame fabricke and building of the Lord Christ to bee dissolued If any man happily say that Ambrose a most worthy Bishop refused to come to the Court to be judged in a matter of faith by Valentinian the Emperour and asked when euer hee heard that Emperours iudged Bishops in matters of faith seeing if that were granted it would follow that Lay-men should dispute and debate matters and Bishoppes heare yea that Bishoppes should learne of Lay-men whereas contrarywise if wee looke ouer the Scriptures and consider the course of times past wee shall finde that Bishoppes haue iudged of Emperours in matters of faith and not Emperours of Bishoppes and that therefore it cannot bee without vsurpation of that which no way pertaineth to them that Princes should at all medle with the iudging of matters of faith This obiection what shew soeuer it may seeme to carry is easily answered for first the thing that Valentinian took on him was not to iudge according to former definitions but he would haue iudged of a thing already resolued on in a generall Councell called by Constantine the Emperor as if it had bin free and not yet indged of at all whereas we do not attribute to our Princes with their Ciuill Estates power newly to adiudge any thing to be heresie without the concurrēce of the State of their Clergy but only to Iudge in those matters of faith that are resolued on according to former resolutiōs And besides this Valentinian was known to be partiall he was but a nouice and the other iudges he ment to associate tohimselfe suspected therefore Ambrose had reason to do as he did Wherefore let vs proceed to the other part of the power of jurisdictiō that cōsisteth in iudging of things pertaining to Ecclesiastical Order Ministery Concerning which point first it is resolued that none may ordaine any to serue in the worke of the Ministery but the spirituall Pastours and Guides of the church Secondly that none may judicially degrade or put any one lawfully admitted from his degree and order but they alone Neither doe our Kings or Queenes challenge any such thing to themselues but their power standeth first in calling together the Bishoppes and Pastours of the Church for the hearing determining of such things and in taking all due care that all thinges bee done orderly in such proceedings without partiality violence or precipitation according to the Canons and Imperiall lawes made to confirme the same Secondly when they see cause in taking things from those whom they iustly suspect or others except against and appointing others in their places Thirdly
and not these for being sent by men that haue authority though abusing the same they haue a true and lawfull Ministery till they be put from it by superiour authority else were all Ministration of Sacraments and other sacred things voyde performed by such as simoniacally or by sinister meanes get into these holy places The fourth are such as neither are sent of GOD nor of men nor by men but of them-selues of whom our Sauiour Christ saith all that came before me were theeues robbers and of whome almighty GOD pronounceth and sayth by the Prophet Ieremy I sent them not they 〈◊〉 I spake not to them they prophecied This euill is carefully to bee declined and therefore CHRIST would not suffer the diuels to speake that which was true least vnder the pretence of trueth errour might creepe in seeing hee that speaketh of him-selfe cannot but speake lyes These are the foure sortes of them that serue in the worke of the Ministery whereof the last haue no calling at all and all they doe is voide the Third haue a lawfull commission though they obtayned it by sinister meanes and bee vnworthy of it so that they could not bee put into it without the faulte of the ordayners The First had a lawfull but extraordinary calling needefull onely in those first beginnings of Christianity and not longer to continue The second haue that calling which is Ordinary and to continue whereof wee are now to speake In this calling there are three things implied Election Ordination and Assignation to some particular Church whereof men elected and ordained are appointed to take charge In ancient times there was no ordination at large without particular Assignation and sine titulo allowed as it appeareth by the Councell of Chalcedon forbidding any such thing to be done and voyding any such Act if it should bee done and therefore in those times the very electing and ordayning was an assigning of the elected ordayned to the place of Charge they were to take and a giuing of them the power of iurisdiction as wel as of order But this Canon in latter times grew out of vse whence ensued great confusions in the state of the Church as Duarenus rightly noteth yet are we not of opinion that all such ordinations are voyde in the nature of the thing whatsoeuer the Ancients pronounced of them according to the strictnesse of the Canons For seeing Ordination which is the sanctifying of men to the worke of the holy Ministery is a diffeernt thing in nature from the placing of them where they shal do that holy worke and a man once ordained needeth not any new Ordination when he is remoued from one Church to another it is euident that in the nature of the thing Ordination doth not so depend on the title and place of Charge the Ordayned entereth into as that Ordinations at large should bee voyd yet are they not to bee permitted neither are they in our Church For the Ordinations of Ministers in Colledges in our Vniuersities are not within the compasse of those prohibited Ordinations at large and sine titulo and none other by the order of our Church may bee Ordayned vnlesse he be certainly prouided of some definite place of charge imployment And as the Auncient were thus precise in admitting none into the holy Ministery but with assignation of the particular place of his imployment so they tooke as strict order that men once placed should not sodainly be remoued and translated to any other church or charge In the Councell of Sardica Hosius the President of that Councell sayd That same ill custome and pernicious corruption is wholy to be plucked vp by the rootes that it may not be lawfull for a Bishoppe to passe from his citie to any other city For the cause why they doe so is knowne to all seeing none is found to passe from a greater citie to a lesser whence it appeareth that they are inflamed with ardent desires of couetousnesse and that they serue their owne ambitious designes that they may exercise dominion and grow great If therefore it seeme good to you all that such an euill as this is may be more seuerely punished lette him that is such a one bee reiected from all communion euen such as Lay-men inioy To whom all the Bishoppes answered it pleaseth vs well To whom Hosius replyed Though any shall bee found so ill aduised as haply in excuse of himselfe to affirme that hee receiued letters from the people to draw him from his owne city to another yet I thinke seeing it is manifest that some few not sincere in the Faith might be corrupted by reward and procured to desire his translation all such fraudes should altogether bee condemned So that such a one should not bee admitted so much as to the communion which Lay-men enioy no not in the end which thing if it seeme good vnto you all confirme and settle it by your Decree And the Synode answered it pleaseth vs well Leo to the same purpose writeth thus If any Bishoppe despising the meanenesse of his owne citie shall seeke to gette the administration gouernment of some more noted and better respected place and shall by any meanes translate remoue himselfe to a greater People and more large and ample charge let him bee driuen from that other chaire which hee sought and lette him bee depriued also of his owne So that hee bee neither suffered to rule ouer them whom out of a couetous desire hee would haue subiected to himselfe nor ouer them whom g in pride hee contemned and scorned And the like is found in other but as Theodoret sheweth it was ambition and such other like euils that these Holy Fathers sought to stoppe and preuent rather then generally to condemne all Translation of Bishops from one Church and cittie to another For these changes may sometimes bring so great and euident vtility that they are not to be disliked And therefore the same Theodoret sheweth that notwithstanding this Canon Gregory Nazianzen was remoued from his Church and constituted Bishop of Constantinople And Socrates reporteth that Proclus was remoued thither from Cyzicum Wherefore passing by these matters as cleare and resolued of Let vs proceed to see first to whom it pertaineth to Elect Secondly to whom it belongeth to ordaine such as are duly elected and chosen to the worke of the Ministery Touching Election wee thinke that each Church and People that haue not by lawe custome or consent restrayned themselues stand free by Gods law to admitte maintaine and obey no man as their Pastor without their liking and that the peoples election by themselues or their rulers dependeth on the first principles of humane fellowships and assemblies for which cause though Bishops by Gods lawe haue power to examine and ordaine before any may be placed to take charge of soules yet haue they no power to impose a Pastor on any Church against their
Dioscorus Bishoppe of Alexandria was deposed by the Councell of Chalcedon Proterius sette in his place a mighty intollerable sedition grew among the people for it some affecting Dioscorus some cleauing to Proterius The people opposed themselues against the Magistrates and when they thought with strong hande to suppresse the vprore the multitude with stones beat the souldiers into the church besieged theÌ„ in it destroyed a number of them with fire and vpon the death of Martian the Emperour they chose a new B. and brought him into the church on Easter day They slew Proterius and sixe other with him in the Temple and drew his body wounded and mangled along through the quarters of the citie The like dissention grewe in the Church of Millaine after the death of Auxentius the Arrian Bishoppe but the issue was very happy for Ambrose at that time a secular Magistrate seing the diuision to be very dangerous and threatning the ouerthrow of the state of the citty entred into the Church and made an excellent Oration perswading them to peace wherwith all sides were so well pleased that with one consent they desired to haue Ambrose for their Bishoppe who was not yet baptized and the Emperour was carefull to satisfie their desire and commaunded that it should be as they had desired In the Church of Rome after Liberius Damasus succeeded in the Episcopall office whom Vrsinus a certaine Deacon of that Church not enduring to bee preferred before him waxed so madde that hauing perswaded and drawne vnto him a certaine ignorant rude Bishop and gathered together a company of turbulent and seditious persons in the church of Sicinius hee procured himselfe to be made Bishop against all order law and auncient custome From which fact proceeded so great sedition nay so great warre some of the people defending Damasus as lawfull Bishop and some Vrsinus that the places of prayer were filled with the bloud of men The people in this sort abusing their authority power were restrained by the decrees of Coucels and by the lawes of Princes and their right and power to choose their Pastours many waies limited and straitned till in the end it was wholy taken from them For first the Councell of Laodicaea forbad that elections of such as were to serue in the holy Ministery of the Church and execute the Priests office should bee left to the multitudes But that Councell was but particular and could prescribe no lawes to the whole world and therefore after this the people swayed things very much still and Leo Bishoppe of Rome after this time charged the Bishoppes to thrust none vpon the people without their consent And euen in the Romane church the election of the people continued a long time after this decree of the Councell of 〈◊〉 For Pope Nicholas the second in the Councell of Laterane in the yeare of our Lord 1059. with the consent of the whole Synode decreeth on this sorte Instructed guided by the authority of our predecessours and other holy Fathers wee decree and determine that when the Bishoppe of this Vniuersall Church of Rome dyeth first of all the Cardinall Bishops shall most diligently consult together about the election of a new and soone after they shall take vnto them the Cardinall Cleargy-men and so the rest of the Cleargie and people shall come to giue consent to the new election And because the See Apostolick is preferred before all the Churches in the world and therefore canne haue no Metropolitane ouer or aboue it the Cardinall Bishops doubtlesse supply the place of the Metropolitane and are to promote and lift vp the new elected Bishop to the top of Apostolicke heigth Yea the presence and testimony of Lay-men was not excluded in such elections a longtime after For Gregory the seuenth was elected by the Cardinals of the church of Rome Clearkes Acoluthes Subdeacons and Presbyters many Bishops Abbots others both of the Cleargy Laity being present But Christian Princes Kings and Emperours being chiefe among those of the Laity and so hauing a soueraigne consent among and ouer the rest in such elections as pertained vnto them by the right of humane fellowship and gouernment interposed themselues in these businesses and sundry wayes abridged that liberty that the people in some places tooke vnto them Zozomen noteth that after the death of Nectarius Bishoppe of Constantinople the Cleargy and people resolued to haue Chrysostome a Presbyter of Antioch a man famously renowned throughout all the Empire to bee their Bishop Which their resolution the Emperour confirmed by his assent sent and fet him and called a Councell to make his election more authenticall Likewise after the death of Sicinius though some would haue had Philip others Pâ—…clus Presbyters of that church to succeed yet the Emperour by the perswasion of certaine vaine men called a stranger thither to wit Nestorius who afterward proued an Arch-hereticke After the death of Maximianus successor to Nestorius the Emperour tooke order without delay that Proclus might bee placed in the Bishoppes chaire by the Bishops present before the body of Maximianus was buried least any variance and quarrelling might ensue Neither did the Emperours medlelesse with the election of the Bishop of Rome then of Constantinople For as Onuphrius rightly obserueth after the Gothes were driuen out of Italy by Narses the Lieutenant of the Emperour and the country subjected againe to the Empire of the East in the dayes of Iustinian the Emperour there beganne a new custome in the election of the Romane Bishoppes which was that so soone as the Bishop of that See should be dead the Cleargie and people as formerly they had done should presently choose another to succeede into his place but that he might not bee confecrated ordained by the Bishoppes till his election were confirmed by the Emperour and till he gaue leaue to ordaine him by his Letters Pattents For which confirmation a certaine summe of money was paide which it is likely Iustinian did or by his authority caused Vigilius the Bishop of Rome to doe it that the Emperor might be assured of the conditions of the newly elected Bishoppe least a factious and busie man being chosen hee might conspire with the barbarous people that then sought to encroch vpon the Empire and so cause a reuolte of the citie of Rome and the country of Italy from the Easterne Empire the Bishoppe growing great and the Emperour being farre off Vpon which constitution it came to passe that the Romanes chose for the most part such a one as they thought would be acceptable to the Emperour and of whom hee might bee perswaded that hee would attempt nothing preiudiciall to the state of the Empire the Lombards about that time or presently after troubling Italy This custome was continued till the time of Benedict the Second in whose time Constantine the Emperour for the good opinion hee had of him and loue
he bare to him gaue commandement that the election of the Bishop of Rome being resolued on the Bishops should presently proceede to the ordination of him without expecting any confirmation from the Emperour But the power of confirming the newly elected Bishoppe of Rome before hee might bee ordayned or execute the Bishoppely office was againe restored to Charles the great his successours Kings of France and Emperours of the West in more ample sort then it had beene before by Adrian the First which being againe taken from his successours by Adrian the Third was restored to Otho the First King of the Germanes Emperour of the West by Leo the Eigth From which time it continued till Gregory the Seauenth who though hee was glad to seeke the Emperours confirmation himselfe when hee first entred into the Popedome yet afterwards he disclaymed it as vnlawfull so condemning many of his Predecessours that had allowed and confirmed this part of Imperiall power vnder great paines and curses to fall vpon such as should euer goe about to violate the same After whose times other Popes reserued the whole power of electing the Romane Bishoppe to the Cardinalls alone as wee see the manner is vnto this day Thus writeth Onuphrius professing that hee carefully looked ouer all the auncient monuments of the Romane Church to finde out the certainety of these things Neither neede we to doubt of the trueth of that hee writeth yet for farther proofe least any man should doubt I will produce the reports of Historians the Acts of Councels to confirme that hee saith Platina in the life of Pelagius the 2d saith nothing was done in the election of the Romane B. in those dayes without the Emperours consent and confirmation and sheweth that the reason why Pelagius was created Bishoppe without the commaund of the Emperour was for that they could send no messenger to him the Citty being besieged And touching Gregory the First hee reporteth that when he was chosen Bishoppe of Rome knowing the Emperours consent necessarily to bee required in the election and constitution of the Bishoppe unwilling to possesse that place and roome hee sent vnto him earnestly intreating him to make voyde the election of the Cleargy and people which his suite the Emperour was so farre from graunting that hee sent to confirme the Election and to enforce him to take the Pastorall charge vpon him in that most daungerous and troublesome time Whereby wee see how farre the Emperours intermedled in the election and constitution of the Romane Bishoppes in those daies It is true indeede that the same Platina reporteth that Constantine admiring the sanctity vertue of Benedict the second sent vnto him a sanction that euer after all men should presently take him for Bishop without expecting the concurrence of the authority of the Emperour of Constantinople or the Exarch of Italy whomsoeuer the Cle◅rgy people and armies of the Romanes should chuse Not-with-standing this freed◅me and libertie continued not long for as wee may reade in the Decree◅ Charle◅ the Great and Adrian the first held a Synode in the Church of Saint Sauiour in Rome wherein met 153 Bishops religious men and Abbottes in which Synod Adrian with the consent of the Bishops there assembled gaue vnto Charles power to choose the Bishop of Rome and to order the Apostolicall See together with the dignity of being a Patrician or Nobleman of Rome and besides decreed that all Arch-bishoppes and Bishops in the Provinces abroad should seeke investiture of him and that no man should bee esteemed a Bishoppe or bee consecrated till he were allowed and commended by the King This Decree the councell published anathematizing all that should violate it and confiscating their goods yet did Adrian the third as Platina reporteth take so good heart vnto him that whereas Nicholas the first did but attempt such a thing rather then performe it hee in the very beginning of his Papall dignity made a Decree that without expecting the Emperours consent or ratification the election of the Cleargy Senate and People should bee good But Leo the Eight in a Synode gathered together in the Church of Saint Sauiour in Rome following the example of Adrian the first with the consent of the whole Synode restored vnto the Emperour that power and authority which Adrian the first had yeelded vnto him and Adrian the third had sought to depriue him of The wordes of that councell are these I Leo Bishop and seruant of the seruants of God with the whole Cleargy and people of Rome doe constitute confirme and strengthen and by our Apostolicall authority graunt and giue to our Lord Otho the first King of Germaines and to his successours in this Kingdome of Italy for euer power to choose a successour and to order the Bishop of this highest See Apostolicke as also Arch-bishoppes and Bishoppes that they may receiue investiture from him and consecration whence they ought to haue it those onely excepted which the Emperour himselfe hath graunted to the Popes and Arch-bishops and that no man hereafter of what dignity or religious profession soeuer shall haue power to chuse a Patrician or a chiefe Bishoppe of the highest See Apostolicke or to ordaine any Bishop whatsoeuer without the consent of the Emperour first had which consent and confirmation notwithstanding shall be had without money So that if any Bishop shall be chosen by the cleargy people he shall not bee consecrated vnlesse hee bee commended and invested by the fore-named King And if any man shall attēpt to do any thing against this rule Apostolicall authority We decree that he shal be subiect to excommunication and that if he repent not he shall bee perpetually banished or be subiect to the last most grievous deadly and capitall punishments Hence it came that when any Bishop was dead they sent his staffe and ring to the Emperour and hee to whom the Emperour was pleased to deliuer the same after a solemne fashion and manner was thereby designed and constituted Bishop of the voyde place Thus wee see how authentically vnder great paines and curses the Pope and councell yeeld that right to the Emperor subjecting all that euer should goe about to disanull their Decree to the great curse perpetuall banishment and grievous punishments Yet Pope Hildebrand who as if he had beene a fire-brand of hell set all the world in a Combustion disanulled this Law as impious and wicked and Victor Vrbanus and Paschalis succeeding him were of the same minde By reason whereof there grew a great dissention betweene the Popes and Emperours Henry the fourth and after him Henry the fifth challenging not onely the right of confirming the election of the Popes but power also to conferre Bishoprickes and Abbeyes by Investiture of staffe and ring as the Popes Adrian and Leo had yeelded and granted to Charles and his successours which thing also had beene enioyed by the Emperour for the space of three
hundred yeares and the Popes on the other side thinking it vnlawfull for the Emperors in this sort to bestow either Bishopricke or Abbey forbidding them so to doe vnder paine of the great curse But Henry the fifth forced â—…ope Paschall to confirme vnto him the ancient right again and to accurse all such as should dislike resist or seeke to disanull it which yet not long after bee reuersed againe in another Councell and in the dayes of Calixtus the Emperour resigned his right and the Pope allowed that within his kingdome of Germany elections should be made in his presence and that with the aduice of the Metropolitane and Bishops of the Prouince he might assist and strengthen the better part and that the elected should receiue from him all things belonging to the King by the reaching forth of his Scepter Matthew Paris sayth the contention betweene Pope Paschall and Henry the Emperour about the inuestiture of Bishops and Abbots which the Emperors had enioyed three huÌ„dred yeares in the times of threescore Popes was so ended that both Bishops and Abbots should first sweare Canonicall obedience to their Ecclesiasticall superiors and be consecrated and then receiue Institution from the Emperour by rod and ring Thus wee see what right and interest ancient Emperours challenged to themselues in the election of the Bishop of Rome and in conferring other dignities of the Church and that the latter Popes condemned that as euill and wicked which their Predecessors not onely allowed but prescribed vnder great and grieuous paines and curses Whereupon Auentinus noteth that among the Popes Eadem facta modò superstitionis modò pietatis modò Christi modò Antichristi modò iusticiae modò tyrannidis nomina accipiunt that is That the same factes deedes and things are at one time branded with the marke of superstition and at another time set out with the glorious title of Piety at one time attributed to Christ at another time to Antichrist at one time iudged iust and righteous and at another time tyrannicall and vnjust Genebrard acknowledging that there haue beene many vile monsters that haue gotten into Peters chaire and that there were fiftie Popes rather Apotacticall and Apostaticall then Apostolicall layeth the blame vpon the Romaine Emperours as if they had placed those monsters in Peters chaire It is well hee confesseth that such beastes haue entred into the Church of Rome but if hee did not wee would easily proue the same For to omit Hildebrand whom some called a monster and an enemy to mankinde who caused more Christian bloud to be shed and more grieuous confusions to rent and shake in sunder the Christian world then any heretickes or persecutors had euer done before soe that hee was forced to confesse at his death to God to holy Church and blessed Peter that hee had grieuously offended in his Pastorall office and Ioane the Whore because as Onuphrius thinketh shee was not Pope but the harlot of Iohn the twelfth the Stories mention such vile monsters sitting in that Chaire that Benedict the fourth is highly commended for that though hee did nothing memorable yet hee liued an honest and a good life But that the Emperours were the cause of the placing of these Monsters as Genebrard would make vs beleeue it may not be yeldeed For betweene the time of Adrian the third who tooke the power of confirming popes from the Emperours and the raigne of Otho the first to whom it was restored by pope Leo there entred Formosus Bonifacius Stephen Romanus Theodorus Iohn the ninth Christopher and Sergius all men of ill note and Iohn the twelfth then whom the earth did neuer beare a more prodigious and vile monster This wretch Otho at the earnest suite of the Romanes caused to be deposed by a Councell of Bishoppes and Leo to bee chosen Whereupon the power of choosing the pope and ordering the See Apostolique was againe by consent of Leo the pope and the people and Cleargy of Rome giuen and confirmed to him and his successors for euer in sort before expressed For as Sigonius sayth Leo rightly considered that after the time of Adrian the third the ambition of the Romanes filled the Church with beasts disordered these elections and set all in a tumult therefore thought no meanes so fit to reforme these disorders to represse these insolencies and preuent these mischiefes as to put the bridle into the Emperours hands againe Yet not long after the Romanes casting off the yoake and breaking the bands in sunder put in Boniface the seauenth Benedict the ninth and Syluester who sold the Popedome to Gregory the sixt all which popes were soe intollerably wicked that Platina calleth them teterrima monstra that is most vile hideous and ougly monsters And Henry the second called a Councell and deposed Gregory the last of them and placed Twideger a Germane in his place who was afterwards named Clemens who againe restored the right of choosing the Pope to him his successours for that as Sigonius noteth after the law prescribing requiring the Emperours consent to bee had in such elections was taken away the state of the church was newly put in great danger So that Henry the second was forced to come into Italy to set thinges in order And therefore it is more then ordinary impudency in Genebrard to impute all the confusions in the elections of the Romane Bishops to the Emperours who were not the causes of them but oftentimes staide them by their Princely power Neither is it lesse strange that hee other dare condemne that authority in the Emperours as vnlawfull which had continued from the time of Iustinian to Benedict and was againe confirmed by Adrian Leo other Popes with their Councells of Bishoppes and by vertue where of Saint Gregory other possessed the Episcopall chaire who are vniustly censured by Genebrard as entring by the Posterne gate in this respect Neither haue the Popes beene better or the election freer from faction since the Emperours were wholy and finally excluded then they were before For what shall we say of Bonifacius the Eigth of whom it is said that he entered like a Foxe and died like a Dog that hee coosened poore Caelestinus his predecessour and by false practises wonne him to resigne the Popedome to him and resting not contented herewith tooke vpon him to dispose of all the Kingdomes of the world at his pleasure of Iohn the three and twentith a vile man and a Diuell incarnate and Alexander the sixt of whom so many horrible things are reported by Onuphrius Volaterran others And touching factions schismes whereas there haue bin thirty of them in the church of Rome neuer any endured so long as the last which was since the Emperours were wholy excluded from intermedling with Papall elections For it continued forty yeares and could neuer be ended but by the helpe of Sigismund the Emperour in
Regulars rather then Monachi Monkes of which order S. Austine is supposed to haue bin the author Afterwards in processe of time some other Cleargy-men liuing together tied to the obseruation of rules and Canons but not so strict as these nor so neere to Monkish profession were called secular canons the other for distinctions sake Canons Regular In these societies young men were trained vp as likewise they were in all Cathedrall Churches till the founding of the Vniuersities passing through all the minor orders and performing for a space the duties belonging to them that so they might be fitted for greater imployments The Monkes had one among them that commanded ouer all the rest named Coenobiarcha Archimandrita or Abbas and for the better perforformance of his duty tooke vnto him another whose helpe he might vse in the gouerning of those that were subiect to him who was named a Prior. This Prior either assisted the Abbot in the gouernment of those Monks which liued within the boūds of the Monastery and was called a Prior Claustrall or those lesser Couents that were abroad and yet subject to the Abbot and was named a Prior Conventuall By that hath bin saide wee see that the profession of Monkes in the beginning was voluntary penitency and a retired life not meddling with publique affaires either Ciuill or Ecclesiasticall as appeareth by the Decree of the councell of Chalcedon that they were meere Lay-men that they gloried not in the perfection of their estate as they that call themselues Religious in our time doe but confessed that men of action and employment who conflicted with the manifolde oppositions of the World and declined not the battell were more valiant Souldiers of Christ in his spirituall warfare then themselues who fearing their owne weakenesse did runne away They acknowledged themselues inferiour to the whole Ecclesiasticall order came to the common Prayers and Sacraments with the rest of the people and payde their Tithes and yeelded all other duties as well as the rest howsoeuer in the end they degenerated and grew out of kinde putting themselues into the Ministery intruding themselues into the government of the Church spoyling the Bishops of their Iurisdiction and inferiour Pastors of their maintenance by appropriating to themselues the liuings that formerly belonged to them But the Fryers professe an intermeddling with the publicke direction and guidance of the people of God causing great confusions in the Ecclesiasticall Hierarchie and are most vnlike the auncient Monkes and their beginning was but of latter time These were principally of foure sorts but among them all the Minorites or Franciscans seemed to be the strictest For whereas the Monkes possessed lands in common though none of them had any personall propriety in any thing and the rest of the Fryers had the right of moueable goods in cōmon though they possessed no lands these professed to haue nothing but the bare and single vse of things without all right or claime as I haue shewed before About which profession of theirs there was great contention in the time of Iohn the two and twentieth the folly and hypocrisie of which men thinking perfection to consist in pouerty is sufficiently refuted by Gerson Iohn the two and twentieth Iansenius and other who shew that perfection consisteth in the vertues of the minde that poverty or riches neither make a man better nor worse and consequently pertaine nothing to perfection otherwise then as the care and loue of them hindereth or the neglect of them furthereth the fervency of loue From this first way whereby the Pope disturbed the Ecclesiasticall order which was by giuing priuiledges to exorbitant Fryers let vs proceede to the second which is by Commendams In auncient times sayth Duarenus when a worthy Pastour was not presently found to bee set ouer a church so soone as it was voide to avoyde those euils and inconveniences which for the most part Anarchy bringeth forth the custome was that in the meane while the voyde church should bee commended and committed to some honest man who being but as a Tutor and Procurator onely should bee bound faithfully to giue an account of that hee should doe For hee was not Pastor of the church but appointed onely for a time to take care of it But in time this thing which was at first most profitable and behoouefull and devised to provide for churches in vacancie was strangely turned to the hurt and plague of them For they who by the canons may not haue the gouernement of churches or Monasteries committed to them haue both churches and Monasteries commended vnto them perpetually and as long as they liue And such is the forme of this committing or commending in the Popes grants that they to whom churches are so commended haue free power not onely to dispose of such things as belong vnto them but to consume waste and spend them without beeing subject to any account And truely it is strange that men of witte and vnderstanding who devised this fraudulent kinde of practise found not out some fairer colour of so great and grosse a corruption that so they might not haue seemed so plainely and openly to haue despised the canons and to make a mocke of them Thus farre Duarenus In this sort the Pope gaue the greatest Bishopperickes in the World in Commendam or perpetuall administration to his Cardinalls and sometimes in title also but so that they were called Bishops elect of such a place and neuer consecrated The third way whereby the Pope preiudiceth the Church is by taking on him to giue Church-liuings in all partes of the world to whom hee pleaseth a thing neuer thought of in the first ages of the church For the Bishoppe of Rome had no power to ordaine Clearkes out of his owne Diocesse or Bishoppes out of his owne Prouince the Canons prouiding that a Bishoppe should bee chosen by the Cleargy and people and ordained by the Metropolitane and other Bishoppes of the Prouince It is true indeede that as Patriarch of the West hee was to confirme the seuerall Metropolitanes subiect to him either by imposition of handes or by sending the Pall as all other Patriarches likewise were to doe but in the Patriarchshippe of any of the rest hee might not meddle as appeareth by the contention betweene Rome and Constantinople about the Bulgarians nor within his owne Precinctes further then the confirming of the Metropolitanes as it is euident by the Councell of Chalcedon forbidding the Patriarche of Constantinople to meddle in the ordinations of Bishoppes and requiring him to content himself with the confirmation of Metropolitanes to whom yet in the same Councell equall priuiledges with the Bishoppe of Rome are giuen So that it is not likely that in those times the Romane Bishoppes challenged to themselues any such power and right as now they doe Nay Duarenus pronounceth that there is no doubt but that the more auncient and holy Bishoppes of Rome
contenting themselues with their owne Church left the administration of other Churches free to their owne Bishoppes as rather thinking themselues Bishoppes of that one cittie then of the whole world which thing haply moued a certaine Bishoppe of whom Paulus Aemylius maketh mention to answere somewhat peremptorily to Gregory the Eleuenth asking him why hee went not to his Church for whereas Gregory satte at Auinion and not at Rome hee said vnto him If one should aske thee why thou goest not to Rome that hath beene so long forsaken of her Bishoppes thou wouldest haue much lesse to answere then I haue But the latter Bishoppes of Rome contented not themselues herewith neither did they thinke it enough to bee Bishoppes of Rome and prime Bishoppes amongst before the rest but they would needes bee vniuersall Bishoppes and therefore thought it no robbery to concurre with all other Bishoppes and to preuent them if they could in giuing voyde Benefices before them And because it was not easie to preuent the Bishoppes in this sort in Prouinces and Kingdomes farre remote therefore they found out a more certaine and ready way whereby to take from them their right and power for a custome grew in and preuayled vnknowne to former times of certaine Papall graunts wherein Benefices not voyde were commaunded to bee bestowed and conferred when they should be voyd vpon such as the Pope should thinke fit and specially vpon strangers These were called Gratiae expectatiuae and Mandata de prouidendo and hereof the whole state of England complayned to Innocentius the Fourth affirning that by vertue of these Prouisions there were so many Italians beneficed in England that the reuenues which they had from hence was 60000 markes which was more then the bare reuenue of the Kings and yet as if this had not beene enough there came one Martine with Commission from the Pope to wrong the poore Church of England a little more This man conferred certaine Benefices actually voyd of the value of thirty markes by the yeare vpon strangers and when they dyed hee put in others without the priuity of the Patrons and went about to assure to such as hee pleased the like Benefices not yet voyde whensoeuer they should bee voyde besides many other most vniust exactions wherewith hee vexed the poore English putting all such as resisted against him vnder the sentence of excommunication and interdiction taking more on him then euer any Legate did though he came not as a Legate to the great preiudice of the Crowne of England seeing no Legate was to come hither vnlesse he were desired by the King The Messengers that the State of England sent to the Pope to make knowne their greiuances and complaintes were greatly disliked by the Pope and their message no way acceptable to him and therefore though dissembling the matter hee gaue them some good words as if there should be no more such Prouisions made but onely for some particular persons and they not aboue twelue in number yet such was the good nature of the man as Matthew Paris noteth that he would not suffer the poore English though sore beaten with many stripes once to cry or complaine But because they published these their complaints in the Councell of Lyons which was holden at the time of their comming hee was exceeding angry and dealt with the French King to make warre against the King of England and eyther to depriue him of his Kingdome or to make him wholy to stoope to the pleasure of the pope and the Court of Rome which the French King vtterly refused to do After these things thus past betweene the Pope and the English he did worse then euer before Whereupon there was a new meeting of the States of England wherein these grieuances were made manifest and complained of First that the Pope was not content with his ordinary reuenew of Peter-pence but exacted other contributions without the Kings knowledge Secondly that the Patrons of Churches were not permitted to present Clearkes but Romanes were put into them who neyther vnderstood the Language nor euer meant to liue here but carried away the money out of the Realme So that neyther was the people instructed hospitality kept the Churches repaired nor any good done and beside the Originall Patrons were depriued of their right one Italian succeeding another in the Churches founded by them without their knowledge and that vnwelcome Messenger Non obstante too often sent vnto them These their complaints the King the Bishops Abbots Lords and Commons made knowne by their letters and messengers to the Pope with earnest desire of reformation and redresse but could receiue none other answere from him but that the King of England had his Counsell and so had he that the king began to kicke against him and to play the Fredericke And such was his displeasure that all English were repelled and driuen away as Schismatickes After this new letters were againe written to the Pope and in the end a priuiledge was graunted that noe Prouisions should be made for Italians Cardinalls or the Popes Nephewes before the King were first earnestly intreated to be content with thē only to abuse such as would be abused For the Pope went forward still in his prouisions as formerly hee had done as appeareth by his letters to the Abbot of Saint Albons and by the worthy letters of the Bishoppe of Lincolne written to the pope about these matters and his speeches against the Pope a little before his death And here by the way it is worth the noting that Matthew Paris hath that in the time of Gregory the Ninth vppon complaint of onde Robert Tewing Patron of the Church of Lathune the popes Graunt made in preiudice of his right was reuersed because it was not knowne that the Patrone of that Benefice was a Lay-man when it was giuen by the pope Soe that if it had beene in the gift of a Cleargy-mam it must haue stood so ready was the head of the Church to oppresse Church-men and their possessions of all other were most fitte for spoyle So little respect was there had to religion in those dayes and soe were all things returned to their old Chaos againe Whence it came that the heartes of all men went away from the pope and the Church of Rome whereof the one sought to bee esteemed a Father and the other a Mother to all Churches but the one of them proued a step-father and the other a step-mother Neyther did the pope like a wilde Bore make hauocke only in the Vine-yard of the Lord of Hosts planted in this Island which lay open to be spoyled by all passengers but he playd his part also in all other Kingdomes of the West though some resisted more against his intrusions then others Touching France wee read in the booke intituled Pro libertate Ecclesiae Gallicae aduersus Romanam aulam defensio Parisiensis Curiae Ludouico vndecimo Gallorum Regi
wife which hee marryed while hee was yet a Lay-man hee should bee put out of the Ministery of the Church Whereas all the most famous Presbyters and Bishoppes also in the East might if they pleased but were no way by any Law constrained to refraine from the company of their wiues So that many of them euen when they were Bishoppes did beget children of their lawfull wiues A particular and most approued example whereof wee haue in the Father of Gregory Nazianzene who beeing a Bishoppe not onely liued with his wife till death divided them but became the Father also of Gregory Nazianzen as worthy and renowned a man as any the Greeke Church euer had after he was entered into the priestly Office as appeareth by his owne wordes reported by Gregory Nazianzen For after many motiues vsed by him to Gregory Nazianzen his sonne to perswade him to assist him in the worke of his Bishoply Ministery the last that hee most insisteth on is taken from the consideration of his olde age dis-inabling him to beare that burden and performe that worke any longer that hitherto hee had done And therefore intreating him to put to his helping hand he breaketh out into thesewords Thou hast not liued so long a time as I haue spent in the priestly office therefore yeeld thus much vnto mee and helpe mee in that little time of my life that is yet behinde or else thou shalt not haue the honour to bury mee but I will giue charge to another to doe it Heere we see Gregory Nazianzens father was employed in the priestly function before hee was borne and that therefore hee became the father of so worthy a sonne after hee was a Bishoppe or at least after hee was a Presbyter Neither was the father of Gregory Nazianzene singular in this behalfe For Athanasius writing to Dracontius who beeing greatly in loue with a retyred and monasticall kinde of life refused the Bishoply Office when hee was chosen vnto it for that hee feared hee might not in that state liue so strictly as formerly hee had done controuleth this his conceit and telleth him that hee may in the Bishoppes office hunger and thirst as Paul did drinke no wine as Timothy and fast often as did the Apostle So that the Bishoppes Office is no cause of doing ill or doing lesse good then may bee done in other states of life and there-upon assureth him that hee hath knowne Bishoppes to fast and Monkes to eate Bishoppes to drinke no wine and Monkes to drinke it Bishoppes to worke miracles and Monkes to doe none lastly many Bishoppes neuer to haue married and Monkes to haue become fathers of children and on the contrary side Bishoppes to haue become fathers of children and Monkes to haue liued altogether as Monkes without desire of posterity Neither can this authority of Athanasius bee avoyded as Bellarmine seeketh to avoyde it namely that those Bishoppes did ill which hee sayth became fathers of children For Clemens Alexandrinus an auncient Greeke Father sayth expressely The Apostle admitteth the husband of one wife to bee a Bispoppe and that though hee bee a Presbyter Deacon or Lay-man if hee vse marriage aright and so as not to incurre iust reprehension hee shall be saued by the procreation of children Chrysostome accordeth with Athanasius and Clemens Alexandrinus and sayth that mariage is in so high a degree honourable that men with it may ascend into the Episcopall chayres euen such as yet liue with their wiues For though it be an hard thing yet it is possible so to performe the duties of marriage as not to be wanting in the performance of the duties of a Bishoppe wherevnto Zozomen agreeth saying of Spiridion that though hee had wife and children yet he was not therefore any whitte the more negligent in performing the duties of his calling and of Gregory Nyssene it is reported that though he were marryed yet he was no way inferiour to his worthy brother that liued single But some haply will obiect that Epiphanius is of another minde and that hee sayth where the strictnesse of the canon is obserued none but such as are vnmarried or resolued to refraine from matrimoniall society with their wiues are admitted into the ministery of the Church Wee deny not but that he sayth so But hee confesseth in the same place that many in the Church did liue with their wiues in his time and beget Children euen after their admission into the ministery Soe that the strictnesse of the Canon hee speaketh of was not generall but in some certaine places onely as I noted before out of Socrates Nay it is euident by Socrates that howsoeuer in Thessalia Thessalonica Macedonia and Hellas this strictnesse preuailed yet all the Bishoppes of the East besides were left to their owne liberty and howsoeuer some in diuerse places went about to take away this liberty yet the worthyest men the Church had stood in defence of it protesting they would not suffer themselues to bee inthralled in this behalfe to which purpose that of the famous and renowned Synesius is most excellent who when they of Ptolemais would needes haue him to be their Bishoppe which thing hee little desired hee made them acquainted with his present condition and resolued purpose for the time to come God sayth hee the Law and the sacred hand of Theophilus hath giuen vnto mee a wife I therefore tell all men afore-hand and testifie vnto all that I will neither suffer my selfe to be altogether estranged and seperated from her neyther will I liue with her secretly as an adulterer For the one of these is no way pious and godly and the other no way lawfull but I will desire and pray vnto God that exceeding many and most good and happy children may be borne vnto mee Neyther will I haue him that is to be chiefe in ordayning of mee to be ignorant hereof This liberty the councel in Trullo impeached in respect of Bishops but in respect of Presbyters it continueth in all the East Churches of the world euen till this day Greeke Armenian and Ethiopian warranted vnto them by the Canons of the Apostles Iudgment of Bishops Decrees of Councels and the consent of all other partes of the World For first the Apostle Saint Paule telleth the Corinthians hee had power to lead about a wife a sister as well as the brethen of the Lord and Cephas Which words Clemens Alexandrinus interpreteth in this sort Paul feareth not in a certaine Epistle to speake to his yoake-fellow which hee did not lead about with him because he had no neede of any great seruice Therefore hee sayth in a certaine Epistle Haue wee not power to lead about a sister a wife as the rest of the Apostles but they truely as it was meete because they could not spare their Ministery attending without distraction to preaching lead their wiues about not as wiues but as sisters which should minister together with them
had bin twice maried frâ—… entring into the Ministery had no good reason leading them so to doe For neither is he alwaies better that hath beene but once maried then he that hath beene twice maried as I haue shewed out of Hierome neither canne he alwayes better exhort to continence for how canne hee exhort others to liue continently and not to marry the second time or after the death of their wiues that himselfe in his widow-hood committed Adultery or liued as a whore-monger seeing the Apostle willeth both men and women rather to marry the second third or fourth time then to burne in lust and to commit adultery or fornication There is therefore a third reason yeelded of this pretended prohibition of marying a second wife after the death of the first which is mysticall and taken from a kinde of Sacramentall signification which must be found in them that are to be admitted into the holy Ministery of the Church And surely either this reason must preuaile or none for if it were some morall defect and imperfection that debarreth men twice maried from entering into the Ministery or for that it is a signe of incontinency to haue beene twice maried it might be washed away in Baptisme as well as Whoredome and other Crimes which yet these men deny Let vs see therefore what force there is in this Reason of mysticall signification The mariage of the Fathers in the time of the old Law saith Saint Augustine by their many wiues expressed and figured those Churches out of the many Nations People and Kinreds of the world that were to ioyne themselues vnto Christ in Spirituall mariage at his comming but the mariage of Christians figureth specially that perfect vnity that shall bee in Heauen of all faithfull and holy ones both with Christ and amongst themselues This is Augustines reason and this the Schoole-men vrge But it is strange that men of Learning should stand so confidently vpon so weake a ground For if the expressing of the vnity betweene Christ and the Church his Spouâ—…e by the vndeuided vnity that is betweene one man and one woman be necessarily required in him that is to be chosen a Bishop or Presbyter then of necessity every one that desireth to be a Bishop or Presbyter must marry a wife that so his mariage may expresse the Spirituall mariage betweene Christ and the Church Nay seeing Christ neuer withdraweth himselfe from his Church but daily begetteth sons and daughters of her vnto God each Bishop must haue a wife and company with her continually that so by the matrimoniall vnity that is betweene him and his wife hee may expresse the vnity that is betweene Christ and the Church Their answere hereunto is that as Christ is a Husband so hee is a Virgin and that therefore a man may beare an expresse resemblance and representation of Christ by Virginity as well as by Mariage So that it sufficeth if either hee bee a Virgin or haue beene but once maried that is to be thought capable of Ecclesiasticall honour But this answere vvill not serue the turne For though a man bee no Virgin as Hierome professed of himselfe that hee vvas not and as it is euident Augustine vvas not in that he had children borne vnto him yet it is not necessary in the iudgement of our Aduersaries that such a one should marry a vvife to make himselfe capable of Ecclesiasticall honour Whence it followeth that there is no necessity of Representing either the Virginity of Christ or his matrimoniall Coniunction vvith the Church by the Virginity or mariage of such as are to be admitted into the holy Ministery Besides this it is not enough to expresse the Vnity betweene Christ and the Church that a man marry but one vvife but it is required also that he defile not himselfe by being ioyned vnto harlots but that he keepe himselfe intirely to his owne vvife For so it is betweene Christ and his Church vvho not onely hath no other wife or spouse but the Church of the faithfull but also so intirely loueth her that hee giueth no part of his loue to any stranger So that hee that marying but once hath either before or after such mariage committed adultery or fornication doth not expresse the vnity that is betweene Christ and the Church And yet our Aduersaries that are so peremptorie against such as haue beene more then once maried set open the doores to let in both Whoremongers and Adulterers into the Church and house of God And therefore the wordes of Hierome may rightly be applyed vnto them That they tithe Mint and Annisseed and omitte the weightier things of the Law that they straine at a Gnat and swallow a Camell rejecting them as vnworthy that haue not offended and admitting such as haue justifying the sinner and condemning the Innocent But that wee may perceiue the weakenesse of this mysticall Reason wee must obserue that our adversaries admit none into the Ministery that haue beene maried vnlesse either their wiues bee dead or by consent of their wiues they resolue to containe renouncing that power and interest the man hath ouer the body of his wife and so indeed ceasing to bee husbands So that if their Presbyters and other Cleargy-men haue resemblance of CHRISTS mariage with the Church in respect of their mariage it is while they are no Cleargy-men but meere Laymen Now how-soeuer it may be required of them that are to bee admitted into the Ministery that they haue not beene scandalous before their enterance yet I thinke it is not required that they haue beene cleare representations or figures of CHRIST but this is to bee looked for afterwardes when they supply his place Wherefore wee may assure our selues that this was not the reason that moued those to debarre men twice maryed from entering into the Ministery that so did but partly a mis-vnderstanding of the Apostles words partly for that as Duarenus noteth though often marying bee permitted both by Gods Law and mans Law yet the olde Fathers did not greatly like it as arguing immoderate incontinency in them that so doe Whereupon we shall finde that in auncient times they were all put to penance that maryed the 2d time though Lay-men and neuer intending to enter into the Ministery The wordes of the Councell of Neocaesarea are these Concerning such as often take them wiues and such as are often marryed it is ordered that they shall obserue and fulfill the time of the penance which is prescribed vnto them yet so as that their conversation and faith may shorten the time And the same Councell forbiddeth a Presbyter to bee present at the mariage-feast of them that are the second time maryed seeing it is prescribed that they must bee put to Penance that marry the second time And asketh what Presbyter that is that will for a mariage-feast consent to such mariages And another Canon forbiddeth such mariages to be blessed in the Church
it better to giue lands vnto the Churches for the maintenance of the Ministery reliefe of the Poore entertainment of Strangers then mony as being a more sure certain settled Indowment cōsequently fitter forchurches established Of which change we may read in the epistle attributed to Vrbanus Bishop of Rome about the yeare two hundred twenty sixe And though the first course of giuing all that men possessed to the common benefite soone ceased was neuer practised for ought we read amongst the Gentiles yet great was the devotion of Christians turning from Gentilisme in those first Ages of the Church while the blood of CHRIST lately shed was yet warme in mens hearts so that they gaue many goodly ample Indowments Possessions to the Church Where-upon we shal find that the church had very anciently goods lands as well as treasure For the councel of Ancyra holden in the yeare 314 voydeth the sale of such things as the church made by Presbyters when there was no Bishop leaueth it in the choyce of the Bishop when he is chosen if he please to resume the things themselues againe The councell of Antioch in the yeare 340 maketh mention of the Fields lands and possessions of the church and taketh order how they shall bee disposed Agri Ecclesiae saith Ambrose solvunt tributa that is the fieldes and landes of the church pay tribute Constantine the Emperour made a Law that it might bee lawfull for such as pleased to leaue their goods vnto the church And Licinia a rich and wealthie Matron gaue her goods by will vnto the church of Rome when Marcellus was Bishoppe Hilary Bishop of Arle as Prosper reporteth not onely possessed such things as the church had formerly but greatly increased the possessions of it receiuing the inheritances of many who gaue that they had to the church Thus did the devout Christians of the Primitiue church religiously giue the godly Bishops take such temporalties as were giuen vnto them And therefore the conceipt of Wickliffe if that bee true that is imputed to him and some other cannot well bee excused who thought that Constantine and other Christian Emperours sinned in giuing and Syluester and other Bishops in receiuing temporall goods and possessions It is true that great was the superfluitie of Church-men in latter times and their state such as made them forgette the things that most concerned them whence grew that saying Religiopeperit diuitias filia deuorauit Matrem That is religion brought forth riches and the daughter hath deuoured the mother Nauclere reporteth that there was a common conceipt amongst many that when Constantine first began to endow the Churches with lands possessions a voyce was heard from Heauen saying Hodie venenum Ecclesiae estimmissum that is This day is poyson powred into the Church and in processe of time temporall Princes finding that the indiscreet deuotion of men giuing more then was fit to the Church preiudiced the state of their Kingdomes common-wealthes made statutes of Mortmaine to stay men from putting any more of their lands and possessions into such dead hands as would do them no seruice But such is the infelicity of the sonnes of men that commonly they run out of one extremity into another and while they seeke to avoyd one euill they fall into another as bad or worse The abuse of the riches and wealth the Church had in the time wherein Wickliffe liued made him so farre dislike the present state of things that hee thought the contrary would right all againe as the manner of men is when they goabout to straighten a thing that is crooked to bow it as much the other way But Gerson a right good religious wise man bringeth in an euen just moderation to interpose it selfe betweene these extremities that neither men giue so much to the Church as to make her sette her feete on the neckes of Emperours nor yet bring her to want and contempt which hath beene the course of some men in our times the vnhappy sequells of whose proceedings wee see already in part and it is to be feared that posterity shall feele the smart of it in more grieuous sort then we do But to returne to the matter whence we are a little digressed These Lands which deuout and good people gaue vnto the Church were at first possessed ioyntly by the Bishop and Cleargy but in processe of time a diuision was made and either knew distinctly their owne and had power to dispose of it so that they did nothing preiudiciall to the inheritance of their Churches or tending to the hurt of them that were to succeede them For to restraine them from doing any such thing the Bishop was forbidden by the lawes of the Church to let any thing belonging to his See without the confirmation of his Cleargy and the Ministers abroad to alienate exchaunge or demise any thing without the consent of the Bishop and Patrons or founders of the Churches Otherwise both the Bishop might dispose of himselfe alone of that portion that belonged vnto him and the Ministers of their Tithes Oblations Obuentions and Glebe-landes without the Bishops intermedling with them Onely three things were due to the Bishop out of the liuings of inferiour Ministers For first as Duarenus noteth the Ministers of inferior Churches were to giue yearely a certaine tribute or pension vnto the Bishoppe which Tribute or Pension was called Cathedraticum quod Cathedrae id est honori Episcopali debeatur Secondly when the Bishoppe goeth to visite his Diocesse and the parishes abroad the inferiour Ministers are to giue him entertainment and prouide for him which is called Procuratio Quia Ecclesiae Episcopum procurant 〈◊〉 curant alunt tuentur sicut pueri dicuntur procurari a nutricibus That is Procurations because the Churches abroad must take care prouide and procure all things necessary for the Bishops lodging diet and entertainment But because in these visitations some Bishops grew too chargeable therefore the Councell of Lateran limiteth what company a Bishop shall haue with him when hee goeth to visit Thirdly in former times the fourth part of the Tythes due to inferiour Churches and the fourth part of such thinges as by Will men gaue to them was by the Ministers of these Churches to be paid vnto the Bishop which thing is now growne out of vse Neither is there any other thing payable and due to the Bishop from inferiour Ministers but Procurations onely Thus were Church-lands and tithes which at first were enjoyed by the Bishop and Cleargy joyntly in time diuided and eyther of them had an entire power to dispose of the same as seemed good vnto thē without the intermedling of the other yet was there a difference made betweene such things as they had by right of inheritance or by the gift of their friendes and those thinges which they gayned and gathered vppon their Ecclesiasticall liuings For sundry
Canons prouided that Bishops and other Cleargy-men might make their last Will and Testament and giue to whom they pleased that which came to them by inheritance the gift of their friendes or which they gained vppon the same But that which they gayned vpon their Church-liuings they should leaue to their Churches But the Church of England had a different custome neither were these Canons euer of force in our Church And therefore her Bishops and Ministers might euer at their pleasure bequeath to whom they would whatsoeuer they had gained either vpon their Church liuings or otherwise And surely there was great reason it should be so for seeing The labourer is worthy of his hire why should not they haue power to giue that which was yeelded vnto them as due recompence and reward of their labours to whom they please And how can it bee excused from iniustice and wrong that men spending a great part of their owne Patrimonie in fitting themselues for the Ministery of the Church which conuerted to the best aduantage and benefitte might greatly haue enriched them should not haue right and power to dispose of such thinges as they haue lawfully gayned out of those liuings which are assigned to thē as the due reward of their worthy paines Yet are there some that are much more iniurious to the holy Ministery For Waldensis out of a Monkish humour thinketh that Cleargy-men are bound to giue away whatsoeuer commeth to thē by inheritan ce or by any other meanes that they ought not to possesse any thing in priuate and as their owne And alleageth to this purpose the saying of Origen Hierome and Bernard that the Cleargy-man that hath any part or portion on earth cannot haue the Lord for his portion nor any part in heauen But Cardinall Bellarmine answereth to these authorities That these Fathers speake of such as content not themselues with that which is sufficient but immoderately seeke the things of this world and proueth that Cleargy-men may haue and keepe lands and possessions as their owne First because the Apostle prescribeth that such a one should be chosena Bishop As gouerneth his owne house well and hath children in Obedience which presupposeth that he hath something in priuate and that is his owne Secondly hee cofirmeth the same by the Canons of the Apostles the Councell of Agatha Martinus Bracharensis in his Decrees and the first Councell of Hispalis and further addeth that a man hauing Lands Possessions and Inheritance of his owne may spare his owne liuing and receiue maintenance from the Church for proofe whereof he alleageth the Glosse and Iohn de Turrecremata a Cardinall in his time of great esteeme and confirmeth the same by that saying of Christ The Labourer is worthy of his hyre and that of the Apostle Saint Paul Who goeth to warfare at any time at his owne charge FINIS AN APPENDIX CONTAYNING A DEFENSE OF SVCH PARTES AND PASSAGES OF THE FORMER foure bookes as haue bin either excepted against or wrested to the maintenance of Romish errours Diuided into three partes THE EPISTLE TO THE READER SINCE the time I presumed good Christian Reader to offer to thy view what I had long before for my priuate satisfaction obserued touching certaine points concerning the nature definition notes visibility and authority of the Church much questioned in our times first there came forth a Pamphlet intituled The first part of Protestant proofes for Catholique Religion and recusancie After that a larger discourse bearing the name of A Treatise of the grounds of the old and new religion thirdly the first motiue of one Theophilus Higgons lately minister to suspect the integrity of his Religion The Author of the first of these worthy workes vndertaketh to proue out of the writings of Protestant Diuines published since the beginning of his Maiesties raigne ouer this Kingdome that his Romish faith and profession is Catholique The second endeauoureth to make the world belieue that Protestants haue no sure grounds of Religion And the third hauing made shipwracke of the faith and forsaken his calling laboureth to iustifie and make good that he hath done Euery of these hath beene pleased for the aduantage of the Romish cause amonst the Workes of many worthy men to make vse of that which I haue written the first seeking to draw mee into the defence of that hee knoweth I impugne and the other two taking exceptions to certaine parts and passages scattered here and there Such is the insufficiencie and weakenesse of the idle and emptie discourses of these men that I almost resolued to take no notice of them But finding that the last of these good Authors fronteth his booke with an odious title of Detection of falshood in Doctor Humfrey Doctor Field and other learned Protestants and addeth an Appendix wherein hee vndertaketh to discouer some notable vntruethes of Doctor Field and D. Morton pretending that the consideration thereof moued him to be come a Papist I thought it not amisse to take a little paynes in shewing the folly of these vaine men who care not what they write so they write something and are in hope that no man wil trouble himselfe so much as once to examine what they say yet not intending to answere all that euery of these hath said for who would mispend his time and weary himselfe in so fruitlesse a labour but that which concerneth my selfe against whom they bend themselues in more speciall sort then any other as it seemeth because I haue treatised as Maister Higgons speaketh of that subiect which is the center and circumference in all religious disputes And b◅cause Mr Higgons is pleased to let vs know his name whereas the other cōceale theirs it being no small comfort for a man to know his Aduersary I will do him all the kindnesse I can first begin with him though he shewed himselfe last and from him proceed to the rest What it is that maketh him so much offended with me I cannot tell but sure it is he hath a good vvill to offend me for hee chargeth mee vvith trifeling egregious falshood collusion vnfaithfull dealing abusing the holy Fathers and I knowe not what else But such is the shamelesse and apparant vntrueth of these horrible imputations that it is altogether needelesse to spend time bestow labour in the refutation of them Yet because in the suspicion of heresie falsehood and vfaithfull dealing in matters of faith religion no man ought to be patient I will briefely take a view of his whole booke And though his beginning bee abrupt and absurd his whole discourse confused and perplexed and all that he doth without order or method yet to giue satisfaction to all I will follow him the same way hee goeth I was vnwilling good Christian Reader to trouble thee with such discourses but the restlesse importunity of our aduersaries setting euery one a worke to say something against vs forceth mee thereunto Read
the true Catholicke Church as admit not all the things before specified so that I lay no foundation of Babell as this Babylonian is pleased to say I doe but pitying the breaches of Sion endeauour as much as in me lieth to make them vp that Hierusalem may be as a citie at vnity wit hin it selfe But the Romanistes indeede build Babell and their tongues are confounded euery one almost dissenting from other and that in most materiall and essentiall points Pighius and Catharinuâ—… haue a strange fancie touching originall sinne contrary to the Doctrine of other Papists Pighius is of Caluins opinion touching iustification Catharinus defendeth against the common tenent that men in ordinary course without speciall reuelation may be certaine by the certainty of Faith that they are in the state of grace yea M Higgons himself saith Our faith in Christ must be trustfull liuely and actiue by a speciall application of his merites vnto our selues as he was wont to preach in Saint Dunstans Church So vrging a necessity of special Faith which the Romanists condemne as hereticall in the Doctrine of our Church and innumerable like differences they haue yet all these are of one Church Faith Communion nothing it seemeth being necessary to the vnity of their Church but the acknowledging of the Supremacie of the Pope And yet which is most strange they that thinke he may erre they that thinke he cannot erre they that make him to be but Prime Bishop they that make him vniversall Bishop they that attribute to him power to depose Princes dispose of their states they that deny that hee bath any such power are of one the same Church But it is a Babylonicall Church §. 2. FRom the perpetual visibilitie vndoubted assurance the Church hath of holding the true Faith he proceedeth to shew our zeale in impugning condemning the opinion of Purgatory that yet notwithstanding the whole vniversal Church receiued it And thervpoÌ„ saith â—…he was misinformed by me others that the Greeks neuer intertained this doctrine that now he findeth that we erre not knowing or 〈◊〉 the truth assuring himselfe that howsoeuer some Greeks did not or do not admit the doctrine of Purgatory precisely vnder this name with some other circuÌ„stances yet the church of Greece generally doth retaine the thâ—…ig it selfe But whatsoeuer this goodfellow say to the coÌ„trary we know the Greek 〈◊〉 neuer 〈◊〉 the 〈◊〉 thing There is extant a most excelleÌ„t learned Apollogy of the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 â—…o the couÌ„cel of Florence or Basil as it is thought In this apology first 〈◊〉 clearly 〈◊〉 that there is no purging after this life by â—…e especially materiall c 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Papists imagine Secondly they insâ—…te that some a longst 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that such as are of a middle condition and so depart hence are after death in a certaine obscurity without enioying the light of Gods countenance or holden as it were in a prison or in a state of sorrow till by the goodnesse of God and the prayers of the Church they be deliuered and thus much some professed in the Councell of Florence for there was a diuision amongst them Thirdly they incline to an opinion that the lesser sinnes of men dying in the state of grace are remitted after death without any punishment at all either by fire or in any other kind by the meere mercy goodnesse of God And whereas some bring proofes of remission of sinnes after this life thereby to confirme their conceit of Purgatory they say there is no agreement betweene remission and purging by fire and punishment for that eyther punishment or remission is needfull and not both and againe they confidently pronounce that neither Scripture nor the fifth Generall Councell deliuered vnto vs a double punishment or a double fire after this life This iudgment resolution they confirme proue by very excellent reasons authorities for first thus they argue It more beseemeth the goodnes of God to suffer no good though neuer so litle to passe away vnrespected vnrewarded theÌ„ to punish small sins offences but some litle good in them that haue great sins hath no reward because of the preuayling of the euil that is fouÌ„d in theÌ„ therefore smal euils in them that haue great works of vertue are not to be punished the better things ouercomming Secondly as is a little good in those that are mainely euill so is a little euill in those that are otherwise mainely good But a little good in those that are otherwise euill can procure no reward but onely causeth a difference in the degree of punishment making it the lesse therefore a little euill causeth no punishment but a difference in the degree of glory and happinesse which it maketh to bee lesse then otherwise it would bee whence it followeth that there is no Purgatory Thirdly either the wils of men departed hence are mutable or immutable if they be mutable then they that are good may become euill and they that are euill may become good whence it will follow according to Origens opinion that neyther the good are vnchangeably happy nor the the euill vnchangeably miserable but that men may fall from happinesse to misery and rise from misery to the heighth of all happinesse And soe wee shall make the punishments of all cast-awaies euen of the diuels themselues to be temporary as endeed supposing the mutability of the Will to continue after death iustly they may for the reason why in Iustice the punishment of sinne in the damned is to be eternall is because they are immutably vnchangeably and etâ—…nally euill if they bee immutable then are they not capable of any correction for he who is corrected is sette right by being brought to iust dislike and forsaking of that he formerly affected ill which chaunge from loue to hate froÌ„ liking to disliking from pursuing and following to forsaking and flying from cannot be found in a Will that is immutable Bonauentura disputeth the matter how afflicting fire purgeth the soule and answereth that some thinke that this fire besides the punishing vertue and power it hath hath also a spirttuall purging vertue such as sacraments haue which hee thinketh to be absurd especially seeing Gregory out of visions and apparitions of the dead sheweth that soules are purged in diuerse places and by diuerse other meanes as well as by fire and therefore there are other who thinke that what this purging fire worketh it worketh by punishing and afflicting which helpeth and strengtheneth grace that it may be able to purge out sinne Now punishment and affliction canne noe way helpe grace or strengthen it to the expulsion of sinne but in that by the bitternesse of it it maketh vs know how much it offendeth GOD and hurteth vs and thereby causeth a dislike of it or at least an increase of the dislike of it which dislike the Will cannot newly
limits set and prescribed by Christ and the Church and professeth that the abuse of the Papall power which the flatterers of the Pope amplified enlarged and magnified beyond all measure gaue men occasion to thinke ill of the Pope and in the end to depart from him With whom Gerson agreeth saying that the Popes intermedling in some kindes and assuming more then was fit gaue occasion to the Grecians to depart from the Church of Rome writing to the Pope at their parting in this sort wee know thy power thy couetousnesse wee cannot satisfie liue by thy selfe So that I haue truely said whatsoeuer Master Higgons blattereth out to the contrarie that it was the pride of Antichrist that made all the breaches in the Christian world But saith Master Higgons Gerson maketh the forme of the Churches gouernment to be Monarchicall which thing is mainely opposite to the opinion of Protestants who will not admit the Pope to bee a Monarch in the Church It is true that Gerson maketh the gouernment of the Church to be Monarchicall but no otherwise but as the gouernment of the state of Venice is Monarchicall wherein the Duke is greater then any one Senator but subiect to the Senate and hath neither absolute negatiue nor affirmatiue therefore it is in truth and indeed according to his opinion rather Aristocratical thē Monarchical though he make it to be so in that amongst all the Bs of the world one is first and in order and honour before all other A head he maketh the Pope to bee as a president of a company not as an absolute commaunder Whereas saith Iohn Bachon the denying the Pope to haue an illimited power was condemned as hereticall in Marsilius of Padua Io. de Ianduno some say they were condemned because they denied him to haue an illimited power as head or chiefe of all Bishops and with the colledge of them and that it is not there defined that absolutely in and of himself he hath illimited power of making lawes and gouerning according to the same without the concurrence of his brethren But Gerson saith it is schismatical not to acknowledg with aldue respect the true Pope vndoubtedly known to be soe therefore he must needes be an enemie to the Protestanticall reformation We say no for let the Pope as Gerson teacheth him to doe disclaime the claime of absolute vncontroulable power infallibility of judgment right to dispose the Kingdomes of the world let him without particular intermedling suffer other Bishops to gouerne their owne diocesses as they did in the Primitiue Church without so many reseruations preuentions and appeales receiued from all parts of the world and wee will thinke as Gerson doth that as it is Schismaticall to impugne the gouernment of Bishoppes within their owne diocesses the superiorities of Metropolitans in their Prouinces and of Patriarches in their larger circuites so it is Schismaticall to deny the Bishoppe of Rome contenting himselfe therewith a primacie of order honour and a speciall interest in swaying the gouernment of the whole Church and managing the affaires thereof as first amongst the Bishoppes of the world Wherefore let vs hearken to Master Higgons his suite hee beseecheth vs to consider the resemblance and similitude of these thinges hee that reiecteth the Pope shall not be saued and hee that doth not hate him and the Popedome from his heart shall not bee saued the one of these sayings is Gersons the other Luthers thus saith Higgons they damne themselues mutually in a capitall point and exclude each other from possibility of saluation Wee haue according to Master Higgons his request diligently considered these things and doe finde that betweene these sayings in shew so opposite there is in truth and indeed no contradictions and that Luther and Gerson are farre from damning one another in this point as he falsely saith they doe for it is true as Luther saith that men are bound to hate the Papacie that is the claime of vncontrouleable and absolute power of infallible judgment and interest to dispose of the Kingdomes of the world euen in the judgement of Gerson himselfe and they both agree that for the preservation of order and peace men are bound to acknowledge the Papacie that is to yeeld to the Bishop of Rome a Primacie of order and honour if there be no other matter of difference nor no father claime made by him Neither is it communion with the Pope as prime Bishop that maketh a man a formall Papist as this formalist speaketh but with the vnjust claimes of the Pope So that Gersons communion with the Pope proueth him not a formall Papist and therefore though Master Powels judgement be of value M◅ Higgons may not vndoubtedly pronounce that Gerson is damned to the nethermost hell as he fondly saith he may neither can hee shew any good reason why wee may not truly say that Luther hath accomplished that reformation which Gerson desired therefore he might well haue spared his Risum teneatis amici insteed thereof intreated men to weepe for his pittifull ouer-sight and folly which he bewrayeth in the words immediatly following I will knit vp saith he this matter with the counsell of Gerson which he giueth to the spouse of Christ saying the Church must intreate the Pope the Vicegerent of Christ with all honour and call him Father for hee is her Lord head that she must not expose him to detractions c. Mr Higgons is wont to compare them to the Diuell who alledge any sayings of Fathers or Scriptures in shew making for them and leaue out that which followeth making against them if this course be right good as no doubt it is I will soone make the Reader know to whom Master Higgons is like in citing Gersons testimony against vs. For Gerson speaking of the respect that is due to CHRIST the Husband of the Church and his Vicegerent from her as his Spouse Wife hath these words I deliuer this first vnto thee that for the honour of CHRIST her husband the Church Synodally assembled or not so assembled ought to carrie herselfe towards the chiefe Bishoppe with reuerence and due respect in all louing sort if hee behaue himselfe towards her laudably nay if his entreating of her bee tollerable because in many thinges wee offend all and the judiciall sentence of Diuorce is to bee expected before hee bee cast off as hitherto the discretion of our Fore-fathers hath obserued towardes inferiour Bishoppes In the next place I deliuer vnto thee that the Church for the reuerence of CHRIST her husband ought to name his Vicegerent and him whom hee hath appointed her keeper Father and both in her selfe and her children to bee most ready to giue all honour and to yeelde all obedience to him as to her Lord and head and likewise to shew all due respect to the Romane Church as ioyned to her in a speciall degree of fellowshippe Neither is it
stayeth on it and our righteousnesse is as the ragges of a menstruous woman c Clicthouaeus vpon the Canon of the Masse vpon these wordes not waying our merits but pardoning our offences asketh what merit we can plead with God to whom wee owe all thinges according to that When yee haue done all say that yee are vnprofitable seruants and how wee can applaud our selues in our good workes whereas all our righteousnesse is as the polluted ragges of a menstruous woman before the Lord Whereunto Bernard agreeth There is extant an excellent Epistle of Cardinall Contarenus wherein hee sheweth what reasons moued him and the other of his side to yeelde so farre to the Protestants as to leaue out the name of merit and to acknowledge that there is no meritte of workes properly so named And as these Catholicke Diuines thought thus of iustification by imputation of Christs righteousnesse the imperfection of our inherent righteousnesse and our not meriting any thing with the merit of condignity so they taught likewise that Christs righteousnesse is to bee apprehended by a liuely faith and defined a liuely faith to bee that motion of the spirit whereby men truely repenting of their former life are raised and lifted vp to God and doe truely apprehend the mercy of God promised in Christ so that they doe indeede feele in themselues that they haue receiued remission of sinnes and reconciliation by Gods goodnesse and by the merit of CHRIST and doe cry Abba Father Thus much was expresly deliuered in the booke exhibited by the Emperour Charles to the Diuines of both sides whom he appointed to conferre together for the composing of the controversies of Religion and the Diuines agreed vnto it Likewise in the Enchiridion of Christian Religion so much approued by all the more learned Diuines of Italy France thus wee read We confesse that it is true that it is altogether required to the justification of a man that hee certainly beleeue not onely in a generalitie that for CHRISTS sake sinnes are remitted to such as truly repent but that particularly they are remitted to himselfe by faith for Christs sake With whom Contarenus agreeth in his Tract of Iustification the most reverend Canons of the Metropoliticall Church of Colein Authors of the booke called Antididagma sundry other And before them all Bernard deliuered the very same his words are these If thou beleeuest that thy sinnes cannot be done away but by him against whom only thou hast sinned who cannot sin thou doest well but adde this moreouer to beleeue that thy sinnes are remitted thee this is the testimony which the holy Spirit giueth in our hearts saying Thy sinnes are remitted thee For so the Apostle supposeth that a man is iustified freely by faith That the Pope may erre not personally onely but iudicially also wee haue the opinion of Ockam Michael Caesenas Cameracensis Cusanus Almain Gerson Waldensis Picus Mirandula Pope Adriaâ—…the 6. almost all the Parisians all them that thinke the Councel to be aboue the Pope the Fathers in the Councels of Constance Basil Alphonsus à Castro and as some thinke Durandus Cyprian and his colleagues who resisted against the determination of the Bishop of Rome and all the Christians of the East at this day This might seeme to be a good proofe yet Stapleton is so farre from yeelding to it that he condemneth them all that thus thought as ignorant and rash especially the latter of them That the Pope is onely first amongst Bishops equall with him in power not of order onely but of iurisdiction also Cusanus proueth at large as Ockam Michael Caesenas and their consorts did before and with these in effect though they expresse not the same so well Cameracensis Gerson Almaine all the rest agree who thinke the Councell to be greater in authoritie and in the power of iurisdiction then the Pope and make him to be amongst Bishops as the Duke of Venice is amongst the great Senators of that state greater then each one but inferiour to the whole company of Bishops Iohn Bacon our Countrey-man noteth that many in his time were of the same opinion who thought the Pope as Head or President of the Colledge and company of Bishops and with them to haue an illimited authority reaching to all persons and causes Ecclesiasticall but not as in of and by himselfe This opinion Duarenus followeth and sheweth that anciently the Pope tooke no more on him The same opinion doe all the Christians of the East hold the practise resolution of antiquity confirmeth the same Touching the vnlawfulnes of the Popes medling with Princes their affaires we haue the testimonies of Sigebertus Cusanus many more whom I would produce but that M Blackwell the Arch-priest in his examination hath already produced a world of witnesses deposing against the Pope in this behalfe to whom I referre the Reader The like might be shewed in other points but because I will not be tedious I will leaue these points of doctrine and come to shew what complaints were euery-where heard in the Christian world before wee were borne against the pope and court of Rome Of Bishop Grosthead and our English I haue spoken already and haue sufficiently shewed how they multiplyed complaints against the pope let vs therefore come to other The popes saith Nicholaus Clemangis as they saw themselues to bee greater then other prelates so they lifted vp themselues aboue other in desire of ruling and ouer-ruling all and finding that Peters patrimonie though exceeding any one Kingdome of the world would not suffice to maintaine their state which they would haue to be greater then that of Emperors Kings and Princes they entred into those sheepfolds of other men which they found to abound vvith milke vvooll for they took to theÌ„ the povver to confer benefices church-liuings vvhich â—…ould fal void in any part of the christian vvorld ouerthrovving al those electioÌ„s vvhich the ancient by so many Canons carefully sought to vphold and hereby drew to them an infinite masse of money neither did they soe stay but tooke away from Bishops and patrons all right of collation presentation forbidding them to place any till such should bee prouided for as they had giuen the expectatiue hope of benefices not voyd Of these men there was an infinite number not comming from the Vniuersities and schooles of learning but from the plough or base trades not knowing Alpha from Beta who liued most wickedly and dissolutely and brought the holy Ministery into so great contempt that whereas anciently nothing was more honourable now nothing is more abiect and contemptible Besides these grieuances vppon euery vacancy they exacted the benefit of a whole yeare out of euery liuing according to a taxation set by them which sometimes three yeares profit would not answere and yet not content herewith they oftentimes imposed
in a sort ouer them who though they giue not the name of Bishops nor so much authority to these Presidents as Antiquity did yet is not their errour in this point matchable with the errours that are amongst Papists contradicting one another touching the Pope and his gouernment in things most essentially concerning the power and authority of that supposed Ministeriall head of the Church Wherefore let vs come to my last allegation excepted against by Master Higgons which is that we want not a most certaine rule to end all controversies by which is the written word of God interpreted according to the rule of faith the practise of the Saints from the beginning the conference of places and all light of direction that either knowledge of tongues or any parts of good learning can yeeld In excepting against this rule Master Higgons sheweth the weakenesse of his braine for what if Luther Zuinglius and other complained against such as they thought to bee opposite to them in opinion touching some particular points that they had not due regard to this rule or that they vsed it not aright What if all bee not presently of one minde and judgement in all things will that improue the rule of judging which wee propose and not rather argue the imperfection of such as should judge according to it But hee craueth leaue to except against the rule proposed by Mee for three respects first because the principles of our religion exclude the meanes of reconciliation to wit the gravity of Councels the dignity of Fathers and the authority of the Church For answer wherevnto wee say that wee exclude not the gravity of Councels for wee absolutely without all restriction receiue all the lawfull Generall Councells that euer were holden touching matters of faith and though wee make God speaking in his word to bee the onely judge authentically defining and prescribing what men shall beleeue vnder paine of condemnation yet wee thinke Councells haue a judgement of jurisdiction and that they may subject all gaine-sayers to excommunication and like censures Neither doth it any way derogate from the authority of Bishoppes assembled in Councels that we make them iudges to determine according to the word of God the resolutions of the Church from the beginning not the rule it selfe for what man in his right wits will attribute any more vnto them and make them iudges at liberty tied to the following of no rule of direction or like God that is a rule to himselfe in all his actions and hath no Law prescribed to him by any other Yet because Master Higgons willeth the reader to compare Campians fourth reason with my assertion I will likewise intreat him to see a worthy discourse of Clemangis wherein he proueth at large that Bishoppes assembled in Generall Councels must proue and confirme their determinations by other arguments then by their own authority and giueth many reasons by which a man may reasonably perswade himselfe that such Councels are not absolutely generally free from danger of erring whence it followeth that they neither are the rule that is to be followed in determining controuersies nor after they are determined Touching the dignity of Fathers authority of the Church wee esteeme them both as beseemeth vs for whatsoeuer the Fathers generally with one consent deliuer in matters of faith we admit receiue as true without father examination as likewise whatsoeuer the Church consisting of all Christians not noted for heresie or singularity that are and haue beene since the Apostles times but of particular Fathers parts of the Church we iudge according to the rule of Gods word and the generall resolution of the Fathers and the whole Church that hath beene since the Apostles times His next exception against our rule is because wee admitte not the Pope to bee iudge of all controuersies in CHRISTS steed which hee must frame in this sort The Pope is supreame iudge of controuersies in religion therefore the Word of GOD interpreted in sorte before expressed is not the rule that is to bee followed in determining thinges doubtfull and then the consequence will be naught and the antecedent false for though we should grant the Pope to be appointed judge of controuersies in Christs stead yet I hope his Holinesse is bound to follow some rule of direction in iudging and if any what other then that mentioned by Mee I cannot conceiue But whatsoeuer become of the consequence the antecedent is false for he shall neuer proue while his name is Higgons that the Pope is supreame iudge of cōtrouersies And the ignorance or impudencie of the man deserueth iust reproofe in that hee feareth not to abuse the authority of Cyprian to that purpose who was so far frō taking the Pope for his iudge that he freely disséted frō him and professed that one Bishop is not to judge another but that they are to be iudged of God onely and the whole company of Bishoppes neyther doth the place produced by him out of Cyprians Epistles proue any such thing as hee would enforce for it is most euidēt that Cyprian speaketh of one Bishop in each Diocesse not of one Bishop in the whole Christian Church when he sayth Heresies arise from no other cause then that the Priest of God is not obeyed and that men think not of one Priest iudge in Christs steed as it will easily appeare to any one that will take the paines to see the place But saith Higgons the Lutherans seeke to predominate and the Caluinistes will not obey therefore there must be an vmpier betweene them and consequently the Pope must end the quarell Whereunto I answere in a word that howsoeuer the violent humors of some men make a rent in the Church yet there is no difference in iudgement amongst those whom he calleth Lutherans and Caluinists in any matter of faith and therefore the mediation of moderate men interposing themselues or the authority of Princes professing the reformed Religion may in that good time that God shall think fitte easily make an end of these contentions without seeking to the Romish Babilonicall Monarch His third exception is a meere begging of that which is in controuersie which shal neuer be graunted him For I say confidently as before that the matters wherein the followers of Luther and the rest professing the reformed religion seeme to differ are neyther many in number reall in euidence nor substantiall in waight as he vainely braggeth hee can proue out of Luther Hunnius and Conradus on the one part and Zuinglius Sturmius Clebitius c. on the other part And therefore here is noe reproofe of that I haue sayd of the reconciling of these differences but a proofe of his vanity in bragging of that which hee will neuer be able to performe That which I haue written touching the reconciling of these men in shew so opposite in the matter of the Vbiquitary presence and the
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
Apostles and in many places we finde the same to haue beene done rather for the honour of Priest-hood then the necessity of any Law otherwise if the Spirit descend not but onely at the prayer of the Bishop they are to be lamented who in villages castles and remote places baptized by Priests or Deacons dye before they are visited by the Bishop and then follovve these words The safety of the Church depends on the dignity of the chiefe Priest to whom if an eminent power be not giuen there will bee as many schismes in the Church as there are Priests So that this is that which he saith that it is rather for the honour of the Bishop or chiefe Priest of each Church that the imposition of hands vpon the baptized is reserued vnto him alone then the necessity of any law because if he had no such preeminences things peculiarly reserued vnto him in respect whereof he might be greater then the rest of the Priests Ministers in the Church there would be as many schismes as Priests and hence he saith it commeth that without the command of the Bishop or chiefe Priest neither Priest nor Deacon haue right to baptize So that it is manifest the chiefe Priest he speaketh of whose power is eminent peerelesse is so named in respect of other Priests in the same church that may not so much as baptize without his mandate not in respect of the pastors of the whole vniuersall church Wherefore if this pamphleter would haue dealt truly honestly he should haue said VVhereas heretofore some vnchristian Sermons books termed the Bishop of Rome the great Antichrist we shal now receiue a better doctrine more religious answer that there must be one chiefe Priest or Bishop in euery Diocesse hauing a more eminent authority then the rest then whereas men now detest his falshood they would but onely haue laughed at his folly But let vs come to his second allegation and see if there be any more truth in that then in this His wordes are these Doctor Field telleth vs from Scripture that Christ promised to build his Church vpon Saint Peter then no Christian will doubt vnlesse he will doubt of Christs truth and promises but it was so performed Let the reader peruse the place and hee shal find that I doe not tell them from Scripture that CHRIST promised to builde his Church vpon Peter as this man adding one falshood to another most vntruely sayth I doe but onely cite a place of Tertullian to proue that nothing was hid from the Apostles that was to be reuealed to after-commers where hee hath these words What was hidden and concealed from Peter vpon whom Christ promised to build his Church from Iohn the Disciple hee so dearely loued that leaned on his breast at the mysticall supper and the rest of that blessed company that should be after manifested to succeeding generations But he will say that I approue the saying of Tertullian and therefore thinke the Church was built vpon Peter Truly so I doe but I thinke also as Hierome doth that it was built no more vpon him then vpon all the rest and therefore the supremacy of Peters pretended successour will not bee concluded from thence Dicis saith Hierome super Petrum fundatur Ecclesia licet idipsum in alio loco super omnes Apostolos fiat Super omnes ex aequo Ecclesiae fortitudo solidatur that is Thou wilt say the Church was built vpon Peter It is true it was so but we shall find in another place that it was builded vpon all the Apostles Surely the firmenesse of the Church doth equally stay and settle it selfe vpon them all This is so cleare and evident that Bellarmine himselfe confesseth that all the Apostles may be said to haue beene foundations of the Church and that the Church may bee truely said to haue beene built vpon them all First because they preached Christ to such as had not heard of him before and were the first that founded Christian Churches Secondly in respect of their doctrine which they learned by immediate reuelation from the Sonne of God in which the Church is to rest as in the ground and rule of her faith Thirdly in respect of gouernmēt in that they were all heads rulers of the vniuersal Church Thus wee see if I had told them out of Scripture that Christ promised to build his Church on Peter our Aduersaries could not from thence haue inferred the supremacie of the Pope his pretended Successour Wherefore let vs come to his next allegation His words are Doctor Field and the rest doe ordinarily yeelde that the Romane Church continued the true Church of God till the yeare of Christ sixe hundreth and seauen when Bonifacius the Pope there claimed as they say supremacie first in the Church This is a meere imagination of his own for I no where speake of the Churchcōtinuing till the time of Bonifacius the Pope or till the yeare sixe hundred and seauen as if it had then ceased and therefore hee doth not here cite any page of my booke as in other places but citeth it at large But saith hee Doctor Field plainly acknowledgeth that the supremacy belonged to the Popes of Rome before the first Nicene Councell and then by the rules which hee giueth to knowe true traditions custome of the Church consent of Fathers or an Apostolicall Churches testimony this must needes bee of that first kinde and then of equall authority with Scripture as hee acknowledgeth of such traditions Such is the intollerable impudency of this man that I protest I canne scarce beleeue mine owne eyes or perswade my selfe that hee writeth that which I see hee doth For doe I any where acknowledge the supremacy belonged to the Popes of Rome before the Nicene Councell Nay doe I not in the place cited by him say that before the Nicene Councell there were three principall Bishoppes or Patriarches of the Christian Church to witte the Bishoppes of Rome Alexandria and Antioche as appeareth by the actes of the Councell limiting their bounds Had these their bounds limited and set vnto them and was there one of them an vniuersall commander If hee say I acknowledge the Bishop of Rome was in order and honour the first amongst the Patriarches before the Nicene Councell and thereupon inferre that I acknowledge his supremacie and commaunding power ouer the rest hee may as well inferre that I giue to the Bishop of Alexandria a commanding authority ouer the Bishoppe of Antioche because before the Nicene Councell he was before him in order and honour That which hee addeth as a Corollary that by the rules I giue to know true traditions this must bee of that kinde and cōsequently of equall authority with Scripture argueth in him a greater desire of saying something then care what he saith For first it no way appeareth out of any thing that I haue said touching the primacy of the Pope before the
time of the Nicene Coūcell that either custome of the Church consent of Fathers or the testimony of an Apostolical Church giue the supremacie to the Popes 2ly It is false that hee saith that I make custome of the Church or the testimony of an Apostolicall Church rules whereby to finde out which are true traditions and which are not For first I doe not say that custome of the church obseruing a thing is a proofe that that thing which is so obserued was deliuered frō the Apostles but such a custome whereby a thing hath beene obserued from the beginning So that though the Popes had beene supreame in power and commaund before the Nicene Councell which all the Papists and diuells in hell shall neuer proue yet would it not follow that this their supremacy were by tradition from the Apostles Secondly I doe not make the testimony of an Apostolicall church to be a rule whereby to know true traditions from false as hee is pleased to bely me but I disclaime it in the very place cited by him My words are these The third rule whereby true traditions may bee knowne from false is the constant testimony of the Pastours of an Apostolicall church successiuely deliuered to which some adde the present testimonie of any Apostolicall Church but this none of the Fathers admit neither doe I The Churches of Corinth Ephesus and Rome are Apostolicall Churches whatsoeuer their Pastors haue successiuely deliuered as receiued from the Apostles is vndoubtedly Apostolicall but not euery thing that the Pastours of those Churches that now presently are shall so deliuer seeing they are contrary the one to the other in things of great importance Thirdly whereas he saith I acknowledge vnwritten traditions to bee of equall authority with the Scriptures he is like himselfe For I neuer acknowledge that there is any matter of faith of which nature the Popes supremacy is supposed to be deliuered by bare tradition and not written but say onely if any thing may be proued to haue beene deliuered by liuely voyce by them that wrot the Scriptures there is no reason but it should be of as great authority as if it had beene written Two more allegations there are yet behind in this chapter that concerne mee The first that I say and Protestants generally agree with mee that the Regiment of the West Churches among which this nation is belonged to the Pope of Rome It seemeth this man hath a great desire I should say so and some hope I will say so But I protest as yet I neuer wrote any such thing and therefore here againe hee referreth his Reader to no page of my Booke as in other places but citeth it at large wherein he sheweth more wit then honesty for it is good to put a man to seeke farre for that which can no where be found But what if I had said the Bishop of Rome was Patriarch of the West would that proue an vniuersall power ouer the whole Church or such a kind of absolute authority ouer the Churches of the West as in latter times by vsurpation hee exercised ouer them Surely I thinke not But saith hee Doctour Downame saith before the grant of Phocas the Church of Rome had the superioritie and preeminence ouer all other Churches excepting that of Constantinople and Doctour Field telleth him absolutely that the title of Constantinople was but intruded and vsurped and when the first Nicene Councell gaue such honour to the Romane Church there was not so much as the name of Constantinople This is the last allegation that concerneth mee in this chapter The place that hee citeth is neither to bee found in the first booke of the Church quoted by him nor any where else For I no where euer say that the councell of Nice gaue supreame commaunding authority ouer all the Churches to the Bishop of Rome but only that it confirmed the distinct iurisdictions of the three Patriarches of Rome Alexandria and Antioche And touching the title of Constantinople where of he speaketh if hee meane the title of being vniuersall Bishop it is most true that it was intruded and vsurped as also the like is at this day by the Bishops of Rome which Gregorie their predecessour disclaimed thinking it intollerable that one man should subiect to himselfe all the members of the body of Christ which is his Church But if hee meane the title of being a Patriarch in order the second hauing equall priuiledges with the Bishop of Rome farre be it from me to thinke it was intruded or vsurped or to condemne the acts of the Councels of Constantinople and Chalcedon two of those foure which Saint Gregorie receiued as the foure Gospels as the Romanists doe because they gaue priuiledges to the Bishop of Constantinople equall to those of the Bishop of Rome Nay hereby it appeareth to be true that S. Hierome was wont to say Orbis maior est vrbe For after that Constantinople before named Byzantium was enlarged by Constantine named after his name and made the seate of the Emperours though the very name of it was not at all heard of in the time of the Nicene Councell yet in the second generall Councell holden at Constantinople the Bishop thereof was made a Patriarch and set in order and degree of honour before the other two of Alexandria and Antioche and in the great Councell of Chalcedon where there were more then 600 Bishops assembled he was again confirmed in the dignity of a Patriarch and to haue equall priviledges with the Bishop of Rome Against this decree they that supplyed the place of Leo in the councell resisted and Leo himselfe would by no meanes admit that the Bishops of Alexandria and Antioche claiming from Peter the one because Marke was there placed by him the other for that in person he abode there for a time should be put lower and the Bishop of Constantinople who had not like pretence to sit aboue them Yet the Fathers of the councell not so much respecting the claime from Peter as the greatnesse of the city and thinking it was the greatnesse of the city of Rome during the Emperours presence there that caused the Fathers formerly to giue honour to the Bishop of that city supposed they might now for the same cause giue like honour to the Bishop of Constantinople being become equall in state and magnificence to olde Rome and named new Rome as euery way matching it and howsoeuer the succeeding Bishops of Rome stroue a long while about this matter yet in the end they were forced to yeeld and to take the Bishops of Constantinople for Patriarches in degree of honour set before the other two CHAP. 4. IN this chapter hee endeavoureth to proue by testimonies of Protestants that all bookes receiued for Scripture by the Romane church are canonicall and herein are two things that concerne me The first that the Romane church being the spouse of Christ his true church and pillar of
to him THAT there was no more power and authoritie in Peter then in any of the rest I hope it appeareth by that which hath beene said and therefore it remaineth that now wee examine what was the reason why so many thinges were specially spoken to him why so many wayes hee may seeme to haue beene preferred before the rest and what in trueth and in deede his preeminence and primacie was Touching the speeches of Christ for the most part specially directed to Peter it is most certaine by that which hath beene said that they did giue no singular and speciall power to Peter that was not giuen to euery of the rest And therefore the Diuines doe obserue the difference of the speeches of Christ and note that Christ sometimes directed his speech to particular men precisely in their owne persons as in the remission of sinnes healing the sicke and raising the dead sometimes in the person of all or many others as when he saith Goe and sinne no more which hee is intended to haue done so often as there is the same reason of speaking a thing to one and to others as when a man is induced to doe or not to doe a thing to beleeue or not to beleeue a thing which other in like sort are bound to doe or not to doe to beleeue or not to beleeue as well as hee So it being as necessary for one to watch as another Christ saith That I say vnto you I say vnto all Watch. And so here seeing it is confessed and proued by our Aduersaries themselues that there was nothing promised or performed to Peter that was not in like sort intended vnto and bestowed on euery of the rest it must be graunted that what he spake to him he meant to all and would haue his words so vnderstood and taken The reason why more specially notwithstanding this his generall intendment he directed his speech to Peter then to any of the rest was either because he was more auncient and more ardent in charitie then the rest thereby to signifie what manner of men they should be that should be chosen Pastours of the Church namely men of ripe age and confirmed judgement and full of charitie or lest hee might seeme to bee despised for his deniall of Christ which the Glosse seemeth to import when it saith Trinae negationi redditur trina confessio ne minus amori lingua seruiat quám timori that is Therefore he was induced by Christ thrice solemnly to protest and professe his loue vnto him as he had thrice denied him that his tongue might shew it selfe no lesse seruiceable vnto loue that rested in him then it had done vnto feare or else because he first confessed Christ to bee the Sonne of the liuing God consubstantiall with his Father because he was much conuersant with Christ and acquainted with his secrets counsels or lastly because Christ meant there should bee a certaine order amongst the guides of his Church and some to whom the rest in all places should resort in all matters of importance as to such as are more honourable then other of the same ranke degree who are first to be consulted from whom all actions must take their beginning therefore he so specially spake to Peter whom hee meant in this sort to set before the rest Thus then there is a primacie of power when one hath power to doe that act of ministerie another hath not or not without his consent and when one may by himselfe limite restraine or hinder another in the performance of the acts of ministery and such primacie wee haue shewed not to haue beene in Peter But there is another of order honour which he had whereby he had the first place the first and best employment the calling together of the rest in cases where a concurrence of many was required as for the better sorting out of the worke they had in hand the ioynt decreeing of things to be euery where alike beleeued and practised and in these assemblies thus called the sitting speaking first the moderation and direction of each mans speaking and the publishing and pronouncing of the conclusion agreed vpon if so he pleased In this sense Cyprian saith Erant vtique caeteri Apostoli quod fuit Petrus pari consortio praediti honoris potestatis fed exordium ab vnitate proficiscitur that is The other Apostles doubtlesse were that which Peter was hauing the same fellowship both of power and honour but the beginning proceedeth from vnity that the Church may be shewed to be one And in the same sense Hierome saith against Iouinian Thou wilt say the Church is founded vpon Peter it is true it is so and yet in another place the same frame of the Church is raised vpon all the Apostles and all receiue the keyes of the kingdome of heauen and the firmenesse of the Church stayeth it selfe equally vpon them all but therefore doth Christ more specially promise to build his Church vpon Peter that hee being constituted and appointed head chiefe amongst them all occasion of Schisme might bee taken away To the same purpose it is that Leo writeth to Anastasius where hee saith Inter beatissimos Apostolos in similitudine honor is fuit quaedam discretio potestatis cum omnium par esset electio vni tamen datum est vt caeteris preemineret that is Amongst the most blessed Apostles like in honour there was a certaine difference of power and when all were equally elected yet it was giuen to one to haue a preeminence amongst the rest In which saying of Leo that it bee not contrary to that of Cyprian who saith that the Apostles were companions and consorts equall both in honour power wee must not vnderstand that one Apostle had more power then another or that power another had not but that in the same power one was so before the rest that hee was the partie to whom they were to resort and without consulting whom first and before all other they might attempt nothing generally concerning the state of the whole Church by vertue of this power In which sense he saith in another place Petro praecaeteris soluendi ligandi tradita est potestas that is The power of binding and loosing was so giuen to Peter that therein hee was before the rest and againe Siquid cum eo commune caeteris Christus voluit esse principibus nunquam nisi per ipsum Petrum dedit quicquidaliis non negavit that is If Christ would haue any thing to be common to the rest of the Princes that is Apostles with Peter he neuer gaue that which he vouchsafed vnto them any otherwise then as by Peter which words must not so bee vnderstood as if Peter had first receiued the fulnesse of power and others from him for all the Apostles receiued their power and commission immediatly from Christ not from Peter as I haue largely
Faith and manners may easily be proued by the proceedings of all ancient Councels For the Fathers of the Nicene Councell desire Syluester to confirme what they haue decreed and Leo professeth that he approueth all those things which the Councell of Chalcedon decreed touching the Faith and the Councell it selfe speaking to Leo saith Honour our iudgement with the concurrence of thy Decrees And the sixt Generall Councell saith Wee anathematize Theodorus Sergius Syrus c. And a little after All these things beeing determined by this holy Councell and confirmed by our constant subscription wee decree that no man make any farther adoe about matters of faith c. Are these the words of him that onely giueth aduice and counsell or of him that iudgeth and determineth what shall be beleeued and done and in all the rest the Fathers speake not as Counsellers that are to aduise but as Iudges that haue power to determine For the third chapter of the Nicene Synode hath thus The great Synode hath altogether forbidden c. Thus farre Melchior Canus learnedly and strongly prouing that Bishops are not present in Generall Councels as the Popes Counsellers to aduise him but as Iudges together with him to define and determine which if it be granted we may easily in the second place proue that the Pope may not determine things of himselfe contrary to the iudgement of all the rest For though the chiefe President of a Company may haue a negatiue voyce against the affirmatiue of all the rest yet neuer was there any company of Iudges hauing power to iudge and determine wherein one might not onely dashe what the rest agreed on but determine also what hee pleased though none concurred with him When in any commission some certaine number of men may determine and resolue and none hath power to contradict they are absolutely Iudges the power of iudging resteth wholy in them when in their resolutions they may bee so gain-said by others that yet others canne doe nothing without them they are Iudges in part the power of iudging resteth in part in them But when another may dash what they consent on and doe what hee pleaseth whatsoeuer they say to the contrary they may bee in the nature of Counsellers to aduise but not of Iudges to determine For wheresoeuer there are many Iudges either the power of determining both affirmatiuely and negatiuely resteth in the Maior part or else any one hath an absolute negatiue and onely the concurrence of all an affirmatiue as in Iuries here in England or thirdly either one man or some certaine men haue their negatiue and the affirmatiue is onely in the Maior part And therefore it is most fond and friuolous that Canus hath in answere to this our argument for whereas we say if Bishops be Iudges the Pope may not resolue against the Maior part of them hee hath these words I deny that it is necessary to follow the iudgement of the Maior part when we treat of matters of Faith neither doe wee here measure the sentence by the number of voyces as in humane elections or iudgements Knowing that oftentimes it comes to passe that the greater part doth ouercome the better that those things are not alwayes best which please most and that in things which pertaine to doctrine the iudgement of the wise is to bee preferred and the wise are exceeding few whereas there is an infinite number of fooles Foure hundred Prophets did lie vnto Achà b but the trueth came out of the mouth of one Michaeas alone and hee very contemptible and therefore the Iudgements of Diuine thinges are not to bee moderated by humane reasons The Lord saueth and deliuereth sometimes sooner with a few then many This saying of Canus is contrary to all course of Iudgement in the world and contradicted by his owne fellow and friend Cardinall Bellarmine who saith that in Councells things are to be carried by number of voyces and not by disputation that in the Councell mentioned in the Actes the question was defined by the voyces of the Apostles and that in the Councell of Chalcedon the tenne Bishoppes of Egypt were condemned as Heretickes because they yeelded not to the Maior part of that Councell Thus doth hee crosse his fellow Canus But let not Canus bee offended with him for so doing for he will presently crosse himselfe also for I hope he thinketh the Bishoppes of Egypt were rightly iudged Heretickes for refusing to subscribe to the Iudgement of the Maior part of Bishops in the Councell of Chalcedon seeing hee bringeth this censure to proue that the determinations of Councells doe bind the conscience and then it will follow that the greater part of Bishoppes in a Generall Councell cannot erre which yet hee presently denieth and saith the greater part of this Councell did erre and resolued that which was reuersed by the Pope If hee say that those tenne Bishoppes of Egypt refused to subscribe to that which was agreed on by the Maior part with the Legates of Rome and that therefore they might iustly bee iudged Heretickes as contradicting the Iudgement of them that cannot erre it standeth no better with his resolution else-where that the Maior part of Bishops in a Generall Councell with the Legates may erre But passing by these Contradictions and absurdities of the Cardinall let vs see if he can cleare this doubt any better which hath so much troubled Canus For the avoyding of this one poore argument hee is forced to diuide the Pope as otherwise finding no meanes to escape the force thereof The Pope therefore he saith may be considered two wayes either as hee is President of a Councell and so hee is tyed to follow the Maior part or as hee is chiefe Prince in the Church and so hee may goe against the Maior part and resolue what he pleaseth of himselfe and yet this diuided consideration no way deuideth or breaketh the force of our argument but leaueth it intire and whole as it found it For wee seeke not the difference betweene a President and a chiefe and absolute Prince but whether the Bishoppes sitting in Councell with the Pope be his fellow Iudges or not which they cannot bee if he may not onely dash what they would doe but also doe what he pleaseth without them And besides this if the Pope doe sit in Generall Councels as President and so as bound to pronounce according to the Maior part of voyces in all Decrees then hee sitteth not there as absolute Prince hauing power not onely to dash what others would doe but also to doe what he pleaseth of himselfe without them and contrary to their iudgements and so cannot define and determine contrary to the iudgement and resolution of the Maior part The onely answere that may bee imagined to this obiection is that as inferiour Iudges may determine a thing which yet by a superiour authority may bee reuersed and the contrary decreed so the Bishops in a Generall