though the times would be such as that many swords would not suffice to defend them yet that these two were enough because he meant to vse none at all but to suffer all that the malice of his enemies could doe vnto him This Maldonatus deliuereth to be the literall sense of Christs wordes sheweth a mysticall sense of them also out of Beda much more apt then that of Bonifacius Duo gladii saith Beda sufficiunt ad testimonium sponte passi Salvatoris Vnus qui Apostolis audaciam pro Domino certandi evulsà ictu eius auriculâ Domino etiam morituro pietatem virtutemque doceret inesse medicandi Alter quinequaquam vaginâ exemptus ostenderet eos nec totum quod potuere pro eius defensione facere permissos that is Two swords are sufficient to giue testimony vnto our Sauiour that he suffered willingly The one of which might shew that the Apostles wanted no courage to fight for their Master and by the eare that was cut off by the stroke thereof and healed againe by the Lord that he wanted neither piety to compassionate the miserable nor vertue and power to make him whole that was hurt though now hee were ready to dye And the other which neuer was drawne out of the sheath might shew that they were not permitted to doe all that they could haue done in his defence It is not to be denyed but that S. Bernard mystically expounding the words of Christ saith the Church hath two swords of authority But he thinketh it hath them in very different sort For it hath the vse of the one and the benefite of the other The one is to bee drawne by it the other for it So that this is all that hee saith that the sword of ciuill authority is to be vsed by the Souldiers hand at the commaund of the Emperour by the direction and at the suite of the Church From Bonifacius they passe to Innocentius the third who in the vacancy of the Empire willed those that were wronged in their rightfull causes to haue recourse either to some Bishop or to himselfe And Clemens the fifth who professeth to intermeddle with certaine secular businesses affaires and to determine certaine ciuill causes vpon three seuerall grounds Whereof the first is his greatnesse making him superiour to the Emperour The second his being in steed of the Emperour in the vacancy of the Empire And the third the fulnesse of power which Christ the King of Kings and Lord of Lords gaue vnto Peter and in him to his successours Whatsoeuer wee thinke of the former of these two Popes who seemeth to ground his intermedling in ciuill affaires vpon some law of the Empire and concession of ciuill Princes accordingly as we reade of Theodosius that he permitted any Lay-men hauing ciuill differences among themselues to referre the same to Ecclesiasticall Iudges if they listed Which concession proceeding ex pietate not ex debito that is out of piety and not out of any right or necessity that it must bee soe is long since growne out of vse the state of Church-men beeing much changed from that it was when hee granted them that priuiledge as Duarenus sheweth Yet Pope Clemens can by no meanes be excused from hereticall impiety affirming that which is most vntrue as may appeare by the many fold reasons brought before to proue the contrary nor from Antichristian pride in seeking to tread vnderneath his feete the crownes and dignities of Kings and Princes and to lift himselfe vp aboue all that is called God CHAP. 45. Of the Popes vnjust claime to intermeddle with the affaires of Princes and their states if not as soueraigne Lord ouer all yet at least in Ordine ad spiritualia and in case of Princes failing to do their duties THAT Christ was no earthly King that he left no Kingly power to Peter and that the Pope hath no meere temporall power in that he is Christs Vicar or Peters successor it is most euident out of the former discourse and the Cardinall Iesuite confesseth so much and yet he thinketh the Pope hath a supreme power to dispose of all temporall states and things in ordine ad bonum spirituale that is in a kinde of reference to the procuring and setting forward of the spirituall good But this fancy is most easily refuted by vnanswerable reasons presupposing his former concession For first no man can take away limit or restraine any power or the excercise of it but he in whom it is in eminent sort and from whom it was receiued But the ciuill power that is in Princes is not in the Pope neither did it proceede and come originally from him therefore it cannot be restrained limited or taken away by him The maior proposition is euident the assumption is proued because ciuill power is in heathen infidels who no way hold of the Pope Secondly because it is agreed by all Diuines of worth and learning that the ciuill power in the first originall of it is immediately from God or if not immediately by his owne deliuery thereof yet by no other mediation then that of the law of nature and nations The Emperours know saith Tertullian who gaue them the Empire they know that it was euen the same God who gaue vnto them to be men and to haue humane soules They well perceiue that he onely is God in whose onely power they are à quo sunt secundi post quem primi ante omnes super omnes Deos that is After whom they are in order the second but among all other the first before and aboue all Gods And againe Inde est Imperator vnde homo antequam Imperator inde potest as illi vnde spiritus that is From thence is the chiefe ruler and Emperor whence he was a man before hee was an Emperour from thence hath hee his power from whence he receiued the spirit of life The Author of the answer to the reports of a great and worthy Iudge among vs who hath lately written in the defence of the Popes ouerspreading greatnesse seemeth in part to agree with Tertullian and telleth vs that ciuill power is receiued from God not immediately by his owne deliuery thereof but mediately rather by the mediation of the law of nature and nations For by the law of nature God hath ordained that there should be politicke gouernment which the law of nations assuming hath transferred that gouernment to one or more according to the diuers formes thereof And Occam proueth at large that Imperiall power is not from the Pope and that it is hereticall to say that all lawfull ciuil power is from the Pope Our second reason is this Absolute soueraigne ciuill Princes while they were infidels had true dominion rule and authority holding it as immediatly from God not depending on any ruler of the church as hath beene shewed before But when they become Christians they still remaine in the
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
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
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
Chap. 2. Of the sufficiencie of the Scripture 232. Chap. 3. Of the originall text of Scripture of the certainty and truth of the originals and of the authority of the vulgar translation 238. Chap. 4. Of the translating of the Scripture into vulgar languages and of the necessitie of hauing the publique liturgie and prayers of the Church in a tongue vnderstood ibid. Chap. 5. Of the three supposed different estates of meere nature grace and sinne the difference betweene a man in the state of pure and meere nature and in the state of sinne and of originall sinne 250. Chap. 6. Of the blessed virgins conception 264. Chap. 7. Of the punishment of originall sin and of Limbus puerorum 270. Chap. 8. Of the remission of originall sinne and of concupiscence remaining in the regenerate 272. Chap. 9. Of the distinction of veniall and mortall sinne 277. Chap. 10. Of free will 279. Chap. 11. Of iustification 290. Chap. 12. Of merit 324. Chap. 13. Of workes of supererogation and Counsels of perfection 331. Chap. 14. Of Election and Reprobation depending on the foresight of something in the parties elected or reiected ibid. Chap. 15. Of the seauen Sacraments 332. Chap. 16. Of the being of one body in many places at the same time ibid. Chap. 17. Of transubstantiation 333. Chap. 18. Touching orall Manducation 334. Chap. 19. Of the reall sacrificing of Christs body on the Altar as a propitiatory sacrifice for the quicke and dead 335. Chap. 20. Of remission of sinnes after this life ibid. Chap. 21. Of Purgatory 336. Chap. 22. Of the Saints hearing of our prayers 337. Chap. 23. Of the superstition and idolatrie committed formerly in the worshipping of Images 338. Chap. 24. Of Absolution ibid. Chap. 25. Of Indulgences and Pardons 339. Chap. 26. Of the infallibility of the Popes iudgment 340. Chap. 27. Of the power of the Pope in disposing the affaires of Princes and their states ibid. The fourth Booke is of the Priuiledges of the Church CHAP. 1. OF the diuerse kindes of the priuiledges of the Church and of the different acceptions of the name of the Church 343. Chap. 2. Of the different degrees of infallibility found in the Church 344. Chap. 3. Of the meaning of certaine speaches of Caluine touching the erring of the Church 345. Chap. 4. Of their reasons who thinke the present Church free from all error in matters of faith 346. Chap. 5. Of the promises made vnto the Church how it is secured from errour of the different degrees of the obedience wee owe vnto it 348. Chap. 6. Of the Churches office of teaching and witnessing the truth and of their errour who thinke the authority of the Church is the rule of our faith and that shee may make new articles of faith 350. Chap. 7. Of the manifold errors of Papists touching the last resolution of our faith and the refutation of the same 351. Chap. 8. Of the last resolution of true faith and whereupon it stayeth it selfe 355. Chap. 9. Of the meaning of those words of Augustine that he would not beleeue the Gospell if the authority of the Church did not moue him 358. Chap. 10. Of the Papists preferring the Churches authority before the Scripture ibid. Chap. 11. Of the refutation of their errour who preferre the authority of the Church before the Scripture 359. Chap. 12. Of their errour who thinke the Church may make new articles of faith 361. Chap. 13. Of the Churches authority to iudge of the differences that arise touching matters of faith 362. Chap. 14. Of the rule of the Churches iudgment 364. Chap. 15. Of the Challenge of Papists against the rule of Scripture charging it with obscurity and imperfection 365. Chap. 16. Of the interpretation of Scripture and to whom it pertaineth 366. Chap. 17. Of the interpretation of the Fathers and how farre wee are bound to admit it 368. Chap. 18. Of the diuerse senses of Scripture 369. Chap. 19. Of the rules we are to follow and the helpes wee are to trust to in interpreting the Scriptures 372. Chap. 20. Of the supposed imperfection of Scriptures and the supply of Traditions 373. Chap. 21. Of the rules whereby true Traditions may be knowne from counterfeit 378. Chap. 22. Of the difference of bookes Canonicall and Apocryphall ibid. Chap. 23. Of the Canonicall and Apocryphall bookes of Scripture 379. Chap. 24. Of the vncertainty and contrariety found amongst Papists touching books Canonicall and Apocryphall now controuersed 382. Chap. 25. Of the diuerse editions of the Scripture and in what tongue it was originally written 385. Chap. 26. Of the Translations of the old Testament out of Hebrew into Greeke 387. Chap. 27. Of the Latin translations and of the authority of the vulgar Latine 388. Chap. 28. Of the trueth of the Hebrew Text of Scripture 390. Chap. 29 Of the supposed corruptions of the Greeke text of Scripture ibid. Chap. 30. Of the power of the Church in making Lawes 393. Chap. 31. Of the bounds within which the the power of the Church in making lawes is contained and whether shee may make lawes concerning the worship of God 394. Chap. 32. Of the nature of Lawes and how they binde 397. Chap. 33. Of the nature of Conscience and how the conscience is bound ibid. Chap. 34. Of their reasons who thinke that humane Lawes do binde the Conscience 399. The fifth booke is concerning the diuers degrees orders and callings of those men to whom the gouernment of the Church is committed CHAP. 1. OF the Primitiue and first Church of God in the house of Adam the Father of all the liuing and the gouernement of same 409. Chap. 2. Of the dignity of the first borne amongst the sonnes of Adam and their Kingly and Priestly direction of the rest 410. Chap. 3. Of the diuision of the preeminences of the first borne amongst the sonnes of Iacob when they came out of Aegypt and the Church of God became Nationall 411. Chap. 4. Of the separation of Aaron and his sonnes from the rest of the sonnes of Leui to serue in the Priests office and of the head or chiefe of that company 412. Chap. 5. Of the Priests of the second ranke or order 413. Chap. 6. Of the Leuites 414. Chap. 7. Of the sects and factions in religion found amongst the Iewes in latter times ibid. Chap. 8. Of Prophets and Nazarites 416. Chap. 9. Of Assemblies vpon extraordinary occasions 417. Chap. 10. Of the set Courts amongst the Iewes their authority and continuance 418. Chap. 11. Of the manifestation of God in the flesh the causes thereof and the reason why the second Person in the Trinity rather tooke flesh then either of the other 423. Chap. 12. Of the manner of the vnion that is between the Person of the Sonne of God and our nature in Christ and the similitudes brought to expresse the same 429. Chap. 13. Of the communication of the properties of eyther nature in Christ consequent vpon the vnion of them in his Person
of rest till the day of the resurrection Yea it is knowne to all them that haue perused the monuments of Antiquitie that Iraeneus Iustin Martyr Tertullian and sundry others were of opinion that none of the iust are in Heauen till the end and consummation of all things but that they are below in some part of hell or in some hidden inuisible place sequestred from the presence of God till the second comming of the sonne of man Now seeing the inuocation of Saints presupposeth that they pray for vs in particular and particular prayer for vs knowledge of our wants which the presence and sight of God is supposed to afford them if they do not yet enioy the presence of God as many of the Auncient though falsely did thinke wee see not how in their iudgment there should be any safe and fruitfull inuocating of them For the absence from GOD and the not enioying of his sight and presence is the reason alleaged by our adversaries why the Fathers in the time before Christ neither prayed in particular for the Church on earth nor were prayed vnto as being in Lymbus and not in heauen Howsoever it is most certaine if we looke into the auncient practise of the Church that the Saints in their anniuersarie solemnities and holy daies were not prayed vnto but remembred only proposed for imitation rather prayed for then prayed vnto as it appeareth by that Innocentius reporteth that in the Feast of blessed Leo the auncient custome was to pray that the solemnitie of that day and the oblations then offered might bee auaileable to his soule for the encrease and consummation of his glory which since hath beene altered the prayer is now that by his mediation this Festivall solemnity may availe and be to the good of them that obserue and keepe it So that it cannot be shewed by our adversaries that before the auncient Liturgies were abandoned and those brought in by Gregory had gotten into their place there was any invocation of the Saints found in the publique prayers of the Church but when their names were remembred men prayed only to God that he would giue them grace to follow their examples make them partakers of that happinesse which those blessed ones already enjoy And at that time when this alteration began the invocation was not brought into the Liturgie and publique prayers of the Church in direct forme but men prayed still vnto God only though desiring him the rather to respect them for that not only their brethren on earth but they also that are in heauen cease not prostrate before his sacred Majestie to pray for them Neither is there any other forme of prayer found in the Missall but in the sequences and Litanies onely Wherefore to conclude this matter concerning the invocation and adoration of Saints and Angels seeing the Fathers did not in their sette courses of devotion make prayers to the Saints but when they had particular occasions to speake or thinke of them vsed doubtfull compellations desiring them if they had sense of these things to be remembrancers for them vnto God seeing for ought we know the Saints are not particularly acquainted with the state of things here below seeing no degree of spirituall worship is to bee giuen to any creature we invocate them not but pray vnto God onely assuring our selues that if they can heare vs or any way further our suites they will doe it when we pray vnto God as Augustine rightly obserueth We adore them not but rest in the judgment of the same Augustine that the Saints are to be honoured for imitation but not to be adored for Religion that they doe not seeke desire or accept any such honour but will haue vs to worship God onely being glad that we are their fellow-servants in well-doing The Romanists evasion that God is onely to bee adored with that highest kinde of religious worship which is named Latria which yeeldeth to him that is worshipped infinite greatnesse but the Saints may be adored with an inferiour kinde of religious worship named Doulia is directly contrary to Augustine who speaking of Saints Angels saith Honoramus eos charitate non servitute Wee honour them with the honour of loue but not of Doulia or service If they say they haue this distinction frō Austine it is true but he doth not vse it to this purpose to make difference of two sorts of religious or spirituall worship the highest degree whereof should be Latria the lowest Doulia neither doth he anywhere call the honour giuen to Saints Doulia but nameth it the honour of loue and fellowship but he vseh to distinguish religious worship euery degree whereof he calleth Latria from that externall and ciuill worship dutie and seruice that men yeeld to their Princes Masters and Rulers which is fitly named Doulia a seruice but it is servitus corporis non animae a seruice of the body and not of the minde For men notwithstanding this servitude haue their mindes and their thoughts free as being knowne to none nor ouerruled by none but GOD onely But the service of the spirit and minde in the lowest degree that can be imagined is due vnto GOD onely and not to bee giuen to any creature for no creature knoweth the secrets of our hearts no creatute can prescribe lawes touching the inward actions thoughts of the mind not hauing knowledge of them nor power to punish them that should offend It is therefore an impious conceipt of the Papists that the Saints both can and doe know all our inward actions and secret thoughts approuing or reprouing excusing or accusing them and that as presidents of our whole life and conuersation and that therefore they are to bee honoured and worshipped with spirituall service or seruice of the spirit and minde Thus then it is true the Centurie writers report that in the third and fourth age after Christ there were some beginnings of that superstition which afterwards grew to be intolerable in the adoration and inuocation of Saints and Angels but neither they nor wee are so ignorant as to thinke that the inuocation of Saints or the adoration of them preuailed in the Church within the compasse of the first six hundred yeares neither doe they as Bellarmine is pleased to slaunder them taxe that as idolatry in the Romane Church which they find to haue beene the practise of all the Fathers for they finde nothing of the Romish Idolatry in these glorious lights of the Christian world CHAP. 21. Of Martyrdome and the excessiue prayses there◅f found in the Fathers THe next allegation against them is touching Martyrdome which Bellarmine saith they suppose the Fathers did too immoderately and excessiuely magnifie and extoll The reason of this their censure hee thinketh is because they will not admitte it to bee a kinde of Baptisme and to wash away sinne as both the Romanists and the Fathers teach For the better
proue the old to him that is perswaded of the new and doubteth of the old but to him that doubteth of both we must not alledge the authority of either of these but some other thing so likewise we may proue the authority of the Scripture by the Church to him that is already perswaded of the Church of the Church by the Scripture to him that is perswaded of the Scripture but to him that doubteth of both we must bring other reasons For no man proveth a thing doubtfull by that which is as much doubted of as it selfe So that to proue the authority infallibility of the Church by the testimony and authoritie of the Church which is the thing doubted of is as if one taking vpon him to be a Lawgiuer whose authority is doubted of should first make a law and publish his proclamation and by vertue there of giue himselfe power to make lawes his authority of making the first lawe being as much doubted of as the second Thus then it being cleare and euident that it is one of the things that are to bee beleeued that the Church is guided by the spirit if Stapleton be asked why he beleeueeth it to bee soe guided hee sayth hee soe beleeueth because the spirit mooueth him so to beleeue But he should knowe that three things concurre to make us beleeue that whereof we are doubtfull The light of Diuine vnderstanding as that whereby wee apprehend the things of God The spirit as the author of this illumination and the reasons and motiues by force whereof the spirit induceth mooueth and perswadeth vs. Euen as in the apprehension of things within the compasse of the light of nature when wee are to be perswaded of a thing seeming doubtfull unto vs not only the actiō of him that perswadeth vs and the light of naturall vnderstanding are required to the effecting of it but also the force of reasons winning vs to assent to that we are to be perswaded of Wee therefore demand not of Stapleton who it is that perswadeth vs to belieue or what that light of vnderstanding is that maketh him capable of such perswasion but what those reasons or motiues are by force whereof the spirit settleth his minde in the perswasion of the truth of those things he formerly doubted of Surely he sayth the highest and last reason that moueth a man to beleeu the things that partaine to faith is the authority of the Church Let vs suppose it to be so touching all other things yet can it not be so in respect of those things we are to beleeue touching the authority of the Church it selfe What is the motiue then whereby the spirit moueth vs to beleeue that the Church hath diuine authority Hee sayth because it is so contained in the Scripture and in the Articles of the Creed See then if he be not forced to runne round in a circle He beleeueth other matters of faith because contained in the Scripture and the Scripture because it is the word of God and that it is the word of God because the Church deliuereth it to be so and the Church because it is ledde by the spirit and that it is ledde by the spirit because it is so contained in the Scripture and the Creede This kind of circulation Campian reckoneth amongst the Sophismes he wrongfully imputeth vnto vs but it will euer be found true that the Prophet pronounceth of the wicked Impij ambulant in circuitu The wicked runne round till they be giddie and are in the end where they were when they began Out of this maze Stapleton cannot get himselfe vnlesse hee flye to humane motiues and inducements and make them the highest and last reason of his faith and soe indeede hee doth For fearing that hee hath not sayd well in saying he beleeueth the Church is guided by the spirit because it is contained in the Scripture hee addeth another reason why hee so beleeueth because it is the generall opinion and conceipt of all Christian men that it is so guided and so indeed his perswasion stayeth it selfe vpon humane grounds though hee bee vnwilling that men should so thinke and conceiue Th◅se mazes and labyrinths other Papists seeking to avoyd runne without any such shewe of feare as Stapleton bewrayeth into most grosse absurdities some thinking that the authority of the Church is the reason moouing vs to beleeue all other things and that we beleeue that the Church is ledde and guided by the spirit and that the truth of God which the Church teacheth vs moued thereunto by humane motiues namely for that that must needes be the truth which so many miracles haue confirmed which a few weake and silly men contemptible in the eyes of the world haue wonne all the world to belieue haue holden out the defence of it against all the furies of enemies whatsoeuer which they could not haue done had not the spirit and power of the most high beene with them making them more then conquerours This is the opinion of Durandus who maketh humane motiues and inducements the highest and last reason of his faith to which also Stapleton flyeth though vnwillingly Others thinke that wee beleeue by the sole and absolute commaund of the will either finding nothing or nothing of sufficient force to perswade vs. Both these conceipts are to be examined by vs. Concerning the first wee are to obserue that the Schoolemen make two kindes of faith calling the one fidem infusam an infused faith wrought in vs by the inlightning spirit of God and staying it selfe vpon the truth of God the other fidem acquisitam a humane and naturall faith grounding it selfe vpon humane authoritie and wrought by humane motiues and perswasions So that according to the opinion of these men we beleeue the Articles of our Christian faith and whatsoeuer is contayned in the bookes of the Prophets and Apostles because wee are perswaded that they were revealed by Almighty God and this pertaineth to infused faith as they thinke but that they were reuealed there is nothing that perswadeth vs but the authority of the Church and because wee haue so learned receiued of our forefathers and this pertaineth to humane faith and is meerely a naturall and humane perswasion like that the Saracens haue touching the superstition of Mahomet who therefore beleeue them because their Auncestors haue deliuered them vnto them If this opinion were true as Melchior Canus rightly noteth the finall stay of our infused faith and the first reason moouing vs so to beleeue should not be the truth of God but humane authority For wee should beleeue the Articles of our faith because they were revealed and beleeue they were revealed because our Auncestours so deliuered vnto vs and the Church so beleeueth And from hence it would farther follow that seeing the assent yeelded to the conclusion can be no greater nor more certaine then that which is yeelded to the premisses whence it is deduced inferred
manner of hauing the truth is inferiour vnto it neither are we bound to receiue her doctrines as the sacred Scriptures Besides though the Church taken in this sort be free from errour yet not from ignorance of many things wherein we may be instructed by the scripture So that it is possible for a man to vnderstand the naturall literall sense of some parts of Scripture and from thence some things that were not in such sort knowne and deliuered by any that went before as Andradius and Caietanus do proue at large If the comparison be made betweene the Church consisting of all the belieuers that are and haue beene since Christ appeared in the flesh so including the Apostles and their blessed assistants the Euangelists we deny not but that the Church is of greater authority antiquity and excellencie than the Scripture of the new Testament as the witnesse is better then his testimonie and the Lawgiuer greater then the Lawes made by him as Stapleton alleageth But he is to proue the present Church greater in authority than the Scripture which hee vndertaketh but performeth not His reason that the Scripture was giuen for the good of the Church and that therefore the Church is better than the Scripture proueth not the thing intended For as the people are more excellent in degree of being and nature of things than the lawes that be made for their good yet are the lawes of more authority and must ouer-rule and direct the people so though the Scriptures being but significations declarations and manifestations of diuine truth be not better in degree of things than the Church yet in power of prescribing directing and ouer-ruling our faith they are incomparably greater That which the Rhemists adde to shew the greatnesse of the Church aboue the Scripture because the Church hath judiciall power to determine doubts and controuersies whereof as they suppose the Scripture is not capable I will examine in the next part when I come to speake of the power of judging which the Church hath This errour of the Romanists imagining the authority of the Church to bee greater than the Scripture all the best learned in the Church of Rome euer resisted as Waldensis Occam Gerson and sundry others CHAP. 12. Of their errour who thinke the Church may make new articles of faith VNto this errour is joyned and out of this hath growne another not vnlike that the Church may make new articles of faith which though Stapleton and some other of our time seeme to disclaime yet do they indeede fall into it For the better vnderstanding whereof we must obserue as Occam fitly noteth that an Article of faith is sometimes strictly taken onely for one of those diuine verities which are contained in the creede of the Apostles sometimes generally for any Catholike verity This question is not meant of articles of faith in the first sense but in the second and so the meaning of the question is whether the Church that now is may by her approbation make those assertions and propositions to be Catholike verities that were not before or those hereticall that were not A Catholike vetity is a diuine truth which euery Christian is bound to beleeue The things which Christian men are bound to beleeue are of two sorts and consequently there are two sorts of Catholike verities to wit some so neerely touching the matter of eternall saluation that a man cannot be saued vnlesse hee expressely knowe and beleeue them others farther remooued which if a man beleeue implicitè and in praeparatione animi it sufficeth These must bee beleeued expressely and distinctly if their coherence with or dependance on the former do appeare vnto vs so that the manifest deduction of them from the former will make them such as must be expressely beleeued Our aduersaries confesse that the approbation and determination of the Church cannot make that a truth which was not nor that a Diuine or Catholike truth that was not so before but they thinke that the Church by her bare and sole determination may make that verity to be in such sort Catholike that euery one vnderstanding of such determination must expressely beleeue it that was not so and in such degree Catholike before But wee thinke that it is not the authority of the Church but the cleare deduction from the things which we are bound expressely to beleeue that maketh things of that sort that they must be particularly and distinctly known beleeued that were not necessarily so to bee beleeued before and therefore before and without such determination men seeing cleerely the deduction of things of this nature from the former and refusing to beleeue them are condemned of hereticall pertinacy and men not seeing that deduction after the decree of a Councell hath passed vpon them may still doubt and refuse to beleeue without hereticall pertinacy We cannot therefore condemne the Grecians as heretickes as the Romanists doe because wee cannot perswade our selues of them generally that they see that which they deny touching the proceeding of the holy Ghost deduced from the indubitate principles of our Christian faith or that they impiously neglect the search of the trueth What is it then will some men say that the decree of a Councell doth effect Surely nothing else but the rejecting of such as are otherwise minded from the societies of those men and Churches with whom the decree of the Councell doth prevaile and with all wise men the more wary and fearefull pronouncing any thing of those matters concerning which so graue authority hath passed her sentence The Papists proceed further and thinke it hereticall pertinacie to gainsay the decrees of a Councell though they finde the reasons by which they of the Councell were mooued so to thinke and determine to bee too weake and not to conclude the thing intended as in the matter of Transubstantiation they thinke it heresie to gainesay the decrees of those Councels that haue defined it and yet many of them judge all the reasons alleaged to proue it too weake to proue it In deed if it were certaine as they suppose that a generall Councell could not erre this were a sufficient deduction These things are decreede in a generall Councell Therefore ture because it is consequent that that is true which is affirmed by him that cannot erre Thus wee see what it is to bee thought touching this question whether the Church may make new Articles of faith onely one thing must be added for the further clearing hereof The Papistes thinke that the Church may adde to the Canon of the Scripture bookes not yet admitted as the bookes of Hermas the Scholler of Paul intituled Pastor and the constitutions of Clement which if it should doe we were to receiue them with no lesse respect then the Epistle of Iames and other bookes of the New Testament This we thinke to be a most grosse heresie and contrrry to their owne principles who making the number
themselues to another not of falsehood but of superfluitie the first instance whereof that they giue is the sixt of Mathew where the Lords prayer in the vulgar Latine endeth with that petition deliuer vs from euill leauing out for thine is the Kingdome the power and the glory which they suppose to bee superfluously added in the Greeke But these men should know that though it were granted that these words were superfluous yet nothing is thereby derogated from the Greeke seeing some Greeke Copies and they very auncient omit them as Beza sheweth Their next instance is Rom. 11. where the vulgar Latine hath If of grace not of workes otherwise grace should be no more grace to which is added by way of Antithesis and opposition in the Greeke If of workes not of grace otherwise workes should be no more workes It will be very hard for our adversaries to proue that these latter words are superfluously added being found not onely in the most Greeke Copies but in the Syriacke translation But if it were granted yet there is one Greeke Copie of great antiquity that omitteth these words as well as the vulgar Latine The next instance is the sixt of Marke and the 11. Verily I say vnto you it shall be easier for Sodome and Gomorrha c. If it were granted that these wordes were superfluously added which yet there is no reason to doe seeing besides very many Greeke Copies the Syriacke translation hath them also yet would this make nothing for the improuing of the credite of the Greeke seeing as Beza professeth there are three Greeke Copies that omit them The like may bee said touching the next allegation of Mathew the 20 22 23. where these wordes and bee baptised with the baptisme that I am baptised with are supposed to bee superfluous for there are some Greeke Copies that omit them as well as the vulgar Thus hauing examined the seuerall allegations of our adversaries against the authoritie and credite of the Greeke Text of the New Testament wee see that they faile in them neither being able to convince it of falsehood nor superfluitie Wherefore to conclude this matter wee say with Hierome that the Latine editions are to be corrected by the Greeke that by the providence of GOD the verity of the Scriptures of the New Testament hath euer beene preserued in the originall That those faults and errours which are crept into some Copies may easily by the helpe of others be corrected and that there is no difference in matter of substance in so great variety of Copies as are found in the world If any man say the Greeke hath beene corrupted since the dayes of Hierome and that therefore though hee in his time thought the translations might bee corrected by the originals yet now wee may not take the same course we answere it may easily be proued that all those supposed corruptions which they now finde in the Greeke were found in it in Hieromes time For there are but two places to wit 1. Corinth 15. and 1. Iohn 4. 3. where all Greeke Copies haue otherwise then they say the truth is and these places were corrupted if there bee any errour in the present reading before Hieromes time Thus much touching the sufficiencie of the Scriptures and the editions wherein the authenticall veritie of the same is to bee sought CHAP. 30. Of the Power of the Church in making Lawes NOw it remaineth that wee come to the next part of our diuision touching the power of the Church in making lawes As the will of God willing and purposing the being of each thing is the first and highest cause of things so the same will of God determining what is fitte to bee what of what kinde in what sort each thing must bee that it may attaine and possesse the vttermost degree of perfection the orderly disposition of things requireth to bee communicated to it is the first and highest lawe to the whole world And as the will of God determining what is fitte defining what ought to bee and what must bee if the Creatures attaine their highest perfection is a generall lawe to all Creatures soe when he maketh knowne to creatures rationall and of an vnderstanding nature which haue power to doe or omitte thinges thus fitte to bee done that though hee leaue it in their power and freedome of choise to doe or omitte them yet they shall be tyed either to doe them or to loose the good they desire to enjoy incurre the euils they would avoyd It is more specially named a lawe of commandement precept or direction binding them vpon whom it is imposed to the performance of that it requireth The Precepts and Commandements of Almighty God are of two sorts for either they are such as in respect of the nature and condition of the things themselues are good and soe binde all men at all times or else they are positiue prescribing things variable according to the diuersities of times and the different condition of men liuing in them The former kinde of lawes God imposed vpon men in the day of their creation or redemption and restauration together with the very nature and being which hee gaue them the later prescribing things not naturally and perpetually good but good onely at some time to some men and to some purposes and vses to which they serue were not imposed at first together with the institution of nature or the restauration of the same by grace but are then imposed when the things they prescribe are iudged good and beneficiall Soe God prescribed before the comming of Christ his sonne those sacrifices and offerings which now hee regardeth not and hath now instituted those Sacraments Ceremonies and rites of Religion which before were not knowne in the world Thus wee see that the originall of all lawes is the will of God who as hee reserueth for himselfe the honor of being the supreame first and highest cause of all thinges and yet communicateth part of his Diuine power to subordinate and inferiour causes so though he alone be the great lawegiuer to euery creature yet hee communicateth part of his authority to such among the sonnes of men as he is pleased to make greater than others giuing them power to command and prescribe lawes vnto them Touching this matter thus generally deliuered there is noe difference betweene vs and our aduersaries For it is confessed on both sides that God who is the great lawgiuer to the whole world hath chosen out some from amongst the rest of the sonnes of men whom hee hath beene pleased to honour with his owne name to set vpon his owne seat and to make rulers and lawgiuers vnto his people but the question is within what bounds this power is contained and how farre the band of lawes made by such authority extendeth CHAP. 31. Of the boundes within which the power of the Church in making lawes is contayned and whether shee may make lawes concerning the worshippe of God TOuching
merites of Christ was neuer knowne in the Primitiue Church nor any such forme of exorcising or blessing as they now vse That which the Rhemists alleadge touching the Liuer of a fish vsed by Tobie the piece of the holy earth where Christ was buried preseruing a mans chamber from the infestation of diuels and the force of holy reliques tormenting them maketh nothing to this purpose all these examples being miraculous Touching the harpe of Dauid quieting Saul there is a reason for it in Nature though the repressing of Sathans rage were miraculous That Infidels haue sometimes driuen away diuels by the signe of the Crosse it was by the speciall dispensation of Almighty God who would thereby glorifie his Sonne whose Crosse the world despised and not as if this Ceremonie had force ex opere operato to worke such effects That the name of Iesus did miraculously cast out Diuels in the Primitiue Church which is the next allegation who euer made doubt but what maketh this to the purpose That which they alledge that Saint Gregory did vsually send his benediction and remission of sins in and with such tokens as were sanctified by his blessing and touch of the Martyrs reliques as now his successours doe the like hallowed remembrances of religion is very vaine For Gregory did not send any such blessing of of his owne or remission of sinnes by force of it as nowe his successours do but onely certaine things that had pertained to Christ or his Apostles as part of the wood of the crosse of Christ or of the chaines wherewith the Apostles were bound and with them the blessing of Christ and those Apostles to such as should conforme themselues to his sufferinges or their faith That which they alledge out of the third Councell of Carthage touching the blessing of milke honey grapes and corne bewrayeth their ignorance For that Canon speaketh not of any such blessing but forbiddeth any thing besides bread and wine mingled with water for the matter of the Sacrament and grapes and corne to bee presented on the Altar The Canon of the Apostles is to the same effect forbidding any thing but newe grapes and corne in their season and oyle for the lights incense to be vsed in the time of the oblation to be presented on the Altar willing the first fruites to be carried to the Bishops house and prescribing what shall be done with such presents The sixt generall Councell finding that some did giue to the people with the Sacrament these grapes c forbad it and prescribed that being blessed they should be deliuered priuately to the Catechumens and others that they might praise God who hath giuen so good and pleasing things for the nourishment of mens bodies but speaketh nothing of blessing of them to be instruments of remission of sinnes and of the like spirituall and supernaturall effects Thus wee see our aduersaries cannot proue that the Church hath power to annexe vnto such Ceremonies and obseruations as shee deuiseth the remission of sinnes and the working of other spirituall and supernaturall effects which is the only thing questioned betweene them and vs touching the power of the Church So that all the power the Church hath more then by her authority to publish the Commaundements of Christ the sonne of God and by her censures to punish the offenders against the same is onely in prescribing things that pertaine to comelinesse and order Comelinesse requireth that not only that grauity and modesty doe appeare in the performance of the workes of Gods seruice that beseemeth actions of that nature but also that such rites and ceremonies be vsed as may cause a due respect vnto and regard of the things performed and thereby stirre men vppe to greater feruour and deuotion Caeremoniae Ceremonies are so named as Liuie thinketh from a Towne called Caere in the which the Romans did hide their sacred thinges when the Gaules inuaded Rome Other thinke Ceremonies are so named a Carendo of abstaining from certaine things as the Iewes abstained from swines slesh and sundrie other things forbidden by God as vncleane Ceremonies are outward acts of religion hauing institution either from the instinct of nature as the lifting vp of the hands and eyes to heauen the bowing of the knee the striking of the breast and such like or immediately from God as the sacraments or from the Churches prescription and either onely serue to expresse such spirituall and heauenly affections dispositions motions and desires as are or should be in men or else to signifie assure and conuey vnto them such benefits of sauing grace as God in Christ is pleased to bestowe on them To the former purpose and end the Church hath power to ordaine Ceremonies to the later God onely Order requireth that there be sette howres for prayer preaching and ministring the sacraments that there be silence and attention when the things are performed that womē be silent in the Church that all things be administred according to the rules of discipline Thus we see within what bounds the power of the Church is contained and how farre it hath authority to command and prescribe in things pertaining to the worship and seruice of God CHAP. 32. Of the nature of Lawes and how they binde Now it remaineth that wee examine how farre the band of such lawes extendeth as the Church maketh and whether they binde the conscience or onely the outward man For the clearing whereof first wee must obserue in what sense it is that lawes are sayde to binde and secondly what it is to binde the conscience Lawgiuers are sayd to binde them to whome they giue lawes when they determine and sette downe what is fitte to be done what things they are the doing whereof they approoue and the omission whereof they dislike and then signifie to them whom they command that though they haue power and liberty of choyse to doe or omitte the things prescribed yet that they will soe and in such sort limitte them in the vse of their libertie as that either they shall doe that they are commanded or be depriued of the good they desire and incurre the euils they would auoyd None can thus tye and limit men but they that haue power to depriue them of the good they desire and bring vpon them the contrary euils So that no man knowing what hee doth prescribeth or commandeth any thing vnder greater penalties then he hath power to inflict nor any thing but that whereof hee canne take notice whether it be done or not that so hee may accordingly reward or punish the doing or omission of it Hence it followeth that mortall men forget themselues and keepe not within their owne boundes when either they commaund vnder paine of eternall damnation which none but God can inflict according to that of our Sauiour Feare not them that can kill the body but feare him rather that hath power to cast both body and soule into hell fire
or take vpon them to prescribe inward actions of the soule or spirit or the performance of outward actions with inward affections whereas none but God that searcheth the heart canne either take knowledge of things of this kind or conuent the offenders and judge and trye them Thus then wee see what it is to binde and that none can binde men to the performance of any thing but by the feare of such punishments as they haue power to inflict CHAP. 33. Of the nature of Conscience and how the Conscience is bound IN the next place wee are to see what the nature of Conscience is and how the Conscience is bound Conscience is the priuity the soule hath to things known to none but to God her selfe Hence it is that conscience hath a fearefull apprehension of punishments for euills done though neither knowne nor possible to be knowne to any but God and the offendour alone The punishments that men can inflict wee neuer feare vnlesse our euill doings be known to them For though we haue conscience of them be priuy to them yet if they bee hidden from them vve knovv they neither vvill nor can punish vs. To binde the conscience then is to bind the soule and spirit of man with the feare of such punishments to bee inflicted by him that so bindeth as the conscience feareth that is as men feare though none but God themselues be privie to their doings Now these are onely such as God alone inflicteth therefore seeing none haue power to binde but by feare of such punishments as they haue power to inflict none can binde the conscience but God alone Neither should the question be proposed whether humane lawes binde the conscience but whether binding the outward man to the performance of outward things by force feare of outward punishments to be inflicted by men the not performance of such things or the not performance of them with such affections as were fit be not a sinne against God of which the conscience will accuse vs hee hauing commaunded vs to obey the Magistrates and Rulers hee hath set ouer vs. For answere whereunto wee say there are three sorts of things commaunded by Magistrates First euill and against God Secondly injurious in respect of them to whom they are prescribed or at least vnprofitable to the Common-wealth in which they are prescribed Thirdly such as are profitable and beneficiall to the societie of men to whom they are prescribed Touching the first sort of things God hath not commaunded vs to obey neither must we obey but rather say to them that cōmand vs such things with the Apostles whether it be fit to obey God or men judge you Yet wee must so refuse to obey that we shew no contempt of their office and authoritie which is of God though they abuse it Touching the second sort of things all that God requireth of vs is that we shew no contempt of sacred authoritie though not rightly vsed that we scandalize not others and that wee be subject to such penalties and punishments as they that commaund such things doe lay vpon vs so that God requireth our willing and ready obedience onely in things of the third sort The breach violation of this kinde of lawes is sin not for that humane lawes haue power to binde the conscience or that it is simply and absolutely sinfull to breake them but because the things they commaund are of that nature that not to performe them is contrary to justice charitie and the desire wee should haue to procure the common good of them with whom wee liue Wee are bound then sometimes to the performance of things prescribed by humane lawes in such sort that the not performance of them is sinne not ex sola legislatoris voluntate sed ex ipsa legum vtilitate as Stapleton rightly obserued But some man will say What doe the lawes then effect seeing it is the Law of Iustice and charitie that doth binde vs and not the particularitie of Lawes newly made To this wee answere that many things are good and profitable if they be generally obserued vvhich vvithout such generall obseruation vvill doe no good as for one man to pay tribute or for one man to stay his goods from transportation is no vvay beneficiall to the Common-vvealth vvhich vvould bee very profitable if all did so Novv the Lavv procureth a generall obseruation vvhence it commeth that a man is bound by the Lavv of charity and justice to that after the making of a Lavv vvhich before he vvas not bound vnto And this is it that Stapleton meaneth vvhen hee sayth that humane Lavves doe binde the conscience not ex voluntate legislatoris sed ex ipsa legum vtilitate ratione Not because they prescribe such things but because the things so prescribed if they bee generally obserued are profitable to the Common-vvealth By this vvhich hath been said it appeareth that they doe impiously vsurpe and assume to themselues that vvhich is proper to God vvho vvill haue all their Lavves taken for diuine Lavves and such as binde the conscience no lesse then the Lavves of GOD vvho publish all their Canons and constitutions in such sorte that they threaten damnation to all offenders Whereas no creature hath power to prescribe commaund or prohibite any thing vnder paine of sinne and eternall punishment vnlesse the partie so commaunded were formerly either expressely or by implication either formally or by force and vertue of some generall dutie bounde vnto it by Gods lawe before because God onely hath power of eternall life or death The soule of man as it receiueth from GOD onely the life of grace so it loseth the same when hee for the transgression of his lawes and precepts forsaketh it For as none but hee can giue this life so none but hee canne take it away hee onely hath the keyes of DAVID hee openeth and no man shutteth hee shutteth and no man openeth Hence it followeth that no law-giver may commaund any thing vnder paine of eternall punishment but God onely because he onely hath power to inflict this kinde of punishment And that no man incurreth the guilt of eternall condemnation but by violating the lawes of God Wherevpon Augustine defineth sinnes to be thoughts words and deedes against the law of God That men doe sinne in not keeping and obseruing the lawes of men it is because being generally bound by Gods lawe to doe those things which set forward the common good many things being commaunded and so generally obserued grow to bee beneficiall which without such generall observation flowing from the prescript of law were not so and so though not formally yet by vertue of generall duety men are tyed to the doing of them vnder paine of sinne and the punishments that deseruedly follow it CHAP. 34 Of their reasons who thinke that humane Law es doe binde the Conscience THe reasons which Bellarmine and other of that faction bring
to proue that humane lawes doe binde the conscience are so vaine and friuolous that they deserue no answere yet least our aduersaries should thinke wee therefore passe them ouer without examination because wee feare the force and weight of them I will breefely take a view of them and let the Reader see their weakenesse To binde sayth Bellarmine is either the essence or essentiall property of a lawe therefore all lawes whether they bee of God or of men doe binde in the same sort Hee should haue sayd therefore all lawes doc binde whether they bee of God or of men For to say It is the essentiall property of a lawe to binde therefore all lawes doe binde in the same sorte is as if a man should thus reason It is essentiall to all naturall bodies to haue motion therefore the same kinde of motion whereas yet the fire goeth vpward and the earth downewards thinges without life mooue but one way either towards or from the center of the worlde thinges liuing euery way His next reason is more childish then this for hee reasoneth thus If lawes doe binde onely in that they are diuine then all diuine lawes should equally binde This reason concludeth nothing against vs. For first no man sayth that lawes binde onely because diuine for it is essentiall to euery lawe to binde but that they binde the conscience because they are diuine And secondly wee adde that all diuine lawes doe equally binde the conscience For the conscience doth as much feare Gods displeasure and eternall punishment for one sinne as for another though not so great displeasure nor so greiuous punishment And so they equally binde the conscience though there bee no equality either of the sinnes or of the punishment the conscience feareth and seeketh to decline His third reason that Gods commandement maketh those actions that were before indifferent to be actions of vertue therefore men by their precepts doe so likewise is very strange and therefore hee endeauoureth to confirme it The reason sayth hee why Gods precepts and commandements make actions that were indifferent as to eate swines flesh or not to eate it to be actions of vertue is because they are rules of mens manners and conuersation but mens lawes likewise are rules of mens liues manners and conuersation therefore they in like sort make those actions that were before indifferent to be actions of vertue To this wee answere that there are many great differences betweene these two rules First for that the one containeth a certaine and infallible direction the other oftentimes leadeth out of the way Secondly that the lawes of God are rules in such sort that the very thoughts of the heart diuerting from that which they prescribe are sinfull but mens lawes are kept and fullfilled with how bad affections soeuer the things bee done that are prescribed Thirdly because the vse of nothing being lawfull vnto vs in respect of conscience longer nor farther then God the supreme Lord of all alloweth the same it is an action of vertue to abstaine from things denyed vnto vs by GOD either in the first institution of nature or by his positiue lawe but men hauing no such power no such thing is consequent vpon their commaundements or prohibitions Lastly Gods lawe both that which is naturall that is giuen when nature was first instituted and that which is positiue is the rule of mens liues absolutely which if they bee conformed vnto they are morally good if they varie from they are euill and wicked but the lawes of men are rules onely in respect of outward conuersation framing it to the good of the commonwealth Soe that a man euen according to the rules of Philosophy may bee a good Cittizen that is not a good man His next reason is taken from the comparison of a King and his Viceroy the Pope and his Legate and the lawes and edicts of these binding in the same sort To this wee answere that the comparison holdeth not first because the King and his Viceroy command the same things and to the same ends but if wee compare God and men the lawes of God and the lawes of men wee shall finde a great difference betweene them both in the things they commaund and the ends for which they command the one requiring inward actions and the performance of outward with inward affections the other outward onely Secondly because both the King and his viceroy haue power to take notice of all kind of offences committed against both the one and the other and to punish them with the same kind of punishment but there are many offences committed against God by every man whereof men can take no notice and if they could yet haue no power to inflict such punishments as God doth His last reason is taken from that place of the Apostle where he requireth vs to bee subject to power and authority for conscience sake To this wee answere first that it is a matter of conscience to be subject in all things for subjection is required generally and absolutely where obedience is not Secondly we say that it is a matter of conscience to seeke and procure the good of the common-wealth and that therefore it is a matter of conscience to obey good and profitable lawes so farre as we are perswaded our obedience is profitable Thus haue we breefely examined their reasons who thinke that humane lawes binde the conscience the weakenesse whereof I hope all men of any judgment will easily discerne Wherefore to conclude this matter touching the Churches power in making lawes there are three things which we dislike in the doctrine practise of the Romane Church First that they take vpon them to prescribe Ceremonies and observations hauing power to conferre grace for the remission of veniall sinnes and the working of other spirituall supernaturall effects Secondly that they assume vnto themselues that which is proper vnto God seeke to rule in the conscience Thirdly that by the multiplicitie of lawes they dangerously insnare the consciences of men and oppresse them with heauy burdens To this purpose is the complaint that Gerson long since made that the Lawes of the Church were too many and in a great part childish and vnprofitable bringing vs into a worse estate then that of the Iewes as Augustine to Ianuarius complained when things were much better than in latter times they haue beene Neither sayth Gerson are they content to burden vs with the multiplicitie of their lawes but as if they preferred their owne inventions before the Lawes of God they most rigorously exact the performance of the things their owne lawes prescribe neglect the Lawes of God as Christ told the Pharisees and hypocrites of his time pronouncing against them that by their vaine traditions they made the lawes of God of none effect To shew how vnjust and vnreasonable the Romane Lawgiuers are in burdening men with so many traditions the same Gerson fitly obserueth that Adam in
to glorifie God as much as he dishonoured him before and God accepteth weake indeauours as sufficient in this kind CHRIST hauing perfectly satisfied for us as a publicke person may accept of a meane and weake satisfaction for the wrong done to him but must inflict punishment answerable to the fault to satisfie publique justice offended by that wrong Wherefore passing from this kinde of satisfaction let vs speake of that other that God requireth standing in the suffering of punishments due to sinne Some define this kind of satisfaction to be the suffering of the punishments that God inflicteth or wherewith a man voluntarily punisheth himselfe but this is not a good definition For as a thiefe or murtherer may not lay violent hands on himself be his owne executioner when he hath offended to satisfie publique Iustice but must submit himself to that which authority will lay on him so it is so farre frō being any satisfaction to Gods Iustice for a man when he hath sinned to become his own executioner to punish himselfe for his sin to satisfie the Iustice of God that it highly displeaseth God It is true indeede that we may lawfully afflict our selues not to satisfie Gods Iustice but to purge out the drosse of that sinfull impuritie that cleaueth to vs and to cure the wounds of our soules as wee may afflict our selues by fasting watching and abstaining from many things otherwise lawfull for the freeing of our selues from the remaines of our former excessiue and immoderate delight in eating drinking surfeiting and riot other abuses of the good creatures of God So that we must not define satisfaction to bee the suffering of those punishments that God inflicteth or wherewith the sinner punisheth himself for it is only the sustaining of those that God in Iustice doth inflict And in this sort Christ satisfied his Fathers wrath not by punishing himself but by being obedient to his Father euen vnto the death Wherefore let vs proceed more particularly to consider the satisfactory sufferings of Christ see first what punishments Christ suffered to pacifie his Fathers wrath and secondly what the manner of his passion was Touching the punishments that Christ suffered they were not ordinary but beyond measure grievous bitter insupportable yea such as would haue made any meere creature to sinke down vnder the burthen of thē to the bottome of Hell For he suffered grieuous things from all the things in Heauen Earth Hell in all that any way pertained to him He suffered at the hands of God his Father and of Men of Iewes of Gentiles of enemies insulting of friends forsaking of the Prince of darknes all his cruell mercilesse instruments of the elements of the world the Sun denying to giue him light the aire breath the earth supportance Hee suffered in all that pertained to him In his name being condemned as a blasphemer as an enemy to Moses the Law the Temple worship of God to his own Nation to Caesar the Romans a glutton a cōpanion with Publicans sinners a Samaritan one that had a Diuell did all his miracles by the power of Beelzebub In the things he possessed when they stripped him out of his garments cast lots on his seamelesse coate In his friends greatly distressed discomforted with the sight of those things that fell out vnto him according to that which was prophesied before The Shepheard shall be smitten the sheep shall be scattered In his body when his hands feete were nailed his sides goared his head pierced with the crown of thorns his cheeks swollen with buffering his face defiled with spitting vpon his eyes offended with beholding the scornefull behauiour of his proud insulting enemies his eares with hearing the wordes of their execrable blasphemy his taste with the myrrhe gall that they gaue him in his drinke his smell with the stinch and horrour of the place wherein he was crucified being a place of dead mens skuls Lastly in his soule distressed with feares compassed about with sorrowes besetting him on euery side that euen vnto death In so wofull sort did he take on him our defects and suffer our punishments But because we may as well enlarge and amplifie Christs passions and sufferings too much as extenuate them too much let vs see if it bee possible the vttermost extent of that he suffered For the clearing hereof some say that he suffered all those punishments that were beseeming him or behoofefull for vs that hee suffered all those punishments that neither prejudice the plenitude of sanctitie nor science But that wee may the better informe our selues touching this point wee must obserue that the punishments of sinne are of three sorts First Culpa Secondly ex culpa ad culpam Thirdly ex culpa sed nec culpa nec ad culpam that is First sinne Secondly something proceeding from sinne and inducing to sin Thirdly things proceeding from sin that neither are sins nor incline and induce to sinne Examples of the first are Enuie afflicting the mind of the proud man grieuous disorders accompanying the drunkard and a reprobate sense following the contempt of Gods worshippe and seruice Of the second naturall concupiscence pronenesse to euill difficulty to doe good contrariety in the faculties of the soule and repugnance and resistance of the meaner against the better Examples of the third which are things proceeding from sin but neither sinnes nor inclinations to sinne are hunger thirst weakenesse nakednesse and death it selfe The punishments of this last sort onely Christ suffered and neither of the former two for neither was there sin in him nor any thing inclining him to euill or discouraging him from good The punishments of this kinde are of two sorts Naturall and Personall Naturall are such as follow the whole nature of man as hunger thirst labour wearinesse and death it selfe Personall are such as grow out of some imperfection and defect in the vertue and faculty forming the body disorder in diet or some violence offered and these are found but in some particular men and not in all men generally as Leprosies Agues Gowts the like All those punishments that are punishments only that are from without and that are common to the whole nature of Men Christ suffered that came to bee a Redeemer of all without respect of persons but such as flow from sin dwelling within or proceed from particular causes or are proper to some and not common to all hee suffered not The punishments that are punishments onely and not sinne and are common to the whole nature of man are likewise of two sorts for either they are suffered for sinne imputed or sinne inherent For one may bee punished either for his owne fault or the fault of another in some sort imputed to him When a man is punished for his owne fault hee hath remorse of conscience blaming and condemning him as hauing brought such euils vpon himselfe by
and tying them to the performance of certaine duties Secondly of sinnes Thirdly of punishments to be inflicted by Almighty God and Fourthly of punishments to be inflicted by men The bond of Lawes is of two sorts For there are diuine lawes and there are humane Lawes God bindeth men to the doing of what hee pleaseth and Men that are in authority either Ciuill or Ecclesiasticall to such things as they thinke fit Touching these bonds none haue power to loose but they that haue power to binde so that what God by precept bindeth vs to doe none but God can free vs from the necessity duty of doing it and what the Church or Magistrate binde vs to no inferiour power can loose vs or free vs from Loosing in this sense opposed to binding by law and precept is in two sorts By Reuocation and by Dispensation Reuocation is an absolute Abrogation of a Law in respect of all places times persons and conditions and that either by expresse and direct Repeale or by generall neglect and long continued disuse Dispensation is in respect of certaine persons times places and conditions of Men thinges so that a dispensation permitting the Law to retaine her wonted authority onely freeth some particular person or persons at some times in some places and in some condition of thinges from the necessity of doing or leauing vndone that which vnlesse it be in consideration of such particular circumstances the Law-giuer meant should be obserued but in such cases not so Heere the question is moued by occasion of that kinde of loosing which is by reuersing Lawes formerly in force whether God the giuer of the morall Law may revoke the same and dispense with men for the not doing of things there prescribed of the doing of things there forbidden The answere is that these Lawes are imposed vpon men by the very condition of their nature and creation as the very condition and nature of a man created by GOD requireth that he should honour loue feare and reuerence him that made him and therefore touching the precepts of the first Table that concerning the Sabaoth excepted it is cleare and euident that they cannot be altered nor Man by God himselfe discharged from the duty of honouring loving and fearing God so long as he hath any beeing Touching the precepts of the second Table it is resolued that GOD cannot dispense with man or giue him leaue to doe the thinges therein forbidden as to steale murther or lie For all these imply and involue in them that which is simply euill and to bee disliked but by some alteration in the doer or matter of action he may make that not to bee euill that otherwise would bee euill and consequently not forbidden as namely that to bee no theft or murther which otherwise would be as when hee commanded the Israelites to spoyle the Aegyptians they did not commit the act of robbery for robbery is the taking away of a thing from the owner against his will but these thinges which the Israelites tooke away were the Aegyptians no longer after God the supreme Lord had spoyled them of the title they had therevnto and assigned the same to the Israelites So likewise for one man to take away the life of another hauing no authority so to doe is murther and no man can be dispensed with lawfully to doe any such act but for a Magistrate to take away the life of an offender is a lawfull act and no act of murther and so if Abraham had slaine his sonne Isaac it had not beene murther being authorized so to doe by God who hath supreme authority in the world and may justly as a Iudge for sinne found in men take away the liues of whom he pleaseth and as supreme and absolute Lord bring all to nothing that for his wills sake he made of nothing though there were no sinne nor fault at all But touching Ceremoniall Iudiciall and Positiue Lawes of God concerning Sacraments and obseruations of what kinde soeuer seeing they are imposed after vpon the being of nature wee thinke that God may alter them at his pleasure so that at one time it may bee lawfull to doe that was forbidden at another The Gouernours that God hath set ouer his Church and people by commission from him may interprete what is doubtfull in these Lawes of God or in those of the other sort but yet according to the Law but they may not abrogate or dispense with any Law of God either naturall and morall or positiue established concerning the vse of Sacraments and things pertaining to Gods worship and seruice But concerning those Lawes that were made by the Apostles and Primitiue Fathers touching matters of outward obseruation the succeeding Guides of the Church may either dispense with them or reverse them vpon the due consideration of the difference of times Men and things And so wee see to whom it pertaineth to binde men with their lawes and to loose them from the bonds thereof The bond of sin which is the second kinde of those bonds I mentioned is two-fold for there is Vinculum captivitatis and Vinculum servitutis that is a man that is a sinner is so bound that hee can neither returne to doe good nor leaue off to doe euill for sinne holdeth him in a bond of captivitie that hee shall not returne to doe good and with a bond of seruitude that he shall not cease to doe euill And though God hath so ordered the nature of Man that hee who will doe euill shall thus bee entangled yet it is man that thus entangleth wrappeth and bindeth himselfe and not God But for the bond of eternall condemnation and the punishments following euill doers which is the third kinde of those bonds wherewith I shewed that men are tyed and bound it is of GOD. From these bonds of sin and punishment inflicted by GOD none but hee alone can free men by his fauour and the worke of his grace as the supreme and highest cause none but Christ by Merite Satisfaction The Ministers of the Church by the Ministery of the Word and Sacraments may convert Men to God instrumentally making them partakers of his graces bringing thē into such an estate wherein they shall be sure for Christs sake to finde mercie with GOD for the remission taking away of their sinnes They may pray for them and out of the knowledge of their estate assure them of remission But other power to vnloose and vntie these direfull horrible bonds of sinne and punishment they haue none only the punishments which they haue power to inflict they haue authoritie to diminish lessen or take away so that whom they bind with the bonds of Ecclesiasticall censures punishments those by the same authoritie they may vnloose For as the Guides of Gods Church may prescribe enjoyne and impose certaine actions of Mortification and penitentiall conversion vnto GOD so when they see cause they may release from the same as by
excommunication they may restraine from vse of Sacraments societie of Beleeuers and benefite of the Churches praiers so by Absolution they may free from all these bonds againe Neither is this kinde of binding and loosing lightly to bee esteemed of or little regarded for he that for his contempt and disobedience is debarred from the vfe of the Sacraments from enjoying the societie of the beleeuers and partaking in the benefite of the Churches prayers is vndoubtedly excluded from all accesse to the Throne of grace in Heauen all acceptation there so consequently no lesse bound in Heauen then in Earth and he that is vnloosed from these bonds on Earth is vnloosed and set free in Heauen that without all restraint he may goe boldly to the Throne of Grace to seeke helpe in the time of neede Thus wee see the diuerse kindes of binding and loosing that the Guides of Gods Church haue power and authority by Lawes and precepts censures and punishments to binde those that are committed to their care and trust and when they see cause by reuersing such Lawes and precepts wholly or in part and by diminishing releasing taking away such censures and punishments to vnty them and set them free againe The bond of Diuine Lawes they may no otherwise meddle with then by letting them know who are so bound how straightly they are tyed The bonds of sinne and punishments by Diuine Iustice to be inflicted they haue no power and authoritie to vnloose but they concurre as helpers to the vnloosing of them by the Ministery of the Word vvinning and persvvading men to convert vnto God to cast their sinnes from them and by the Sacraments instrumentally communicating vnto them the grace of repentant conversion and the assurance of remission and pardon In all these kindes of binding and loosing the Apostles were equall seeing our Aduersaries themselues confessing they had the same power of Order and jurisdiction in like extent within the compasse whereof all these kinds of binding and loosing are confined Wherefore let vs proceede to speake of the power of remitting and retaining sinnes giuen to the Apostles by Christ our Sauiour To remit sinne properly is nothing else but to resolue not to punish sinne and therefore hee onely may properly be sayd to remit sinne that hath power to punish it Now as sinne is committed against the prescript of God our Conscience and Men in authority soe GOD the conscience of the Sinner and the Magistrate and Minister haue power to punish sinne GOD with punishments temporall and eternall of this life and that which is to come the Conscience with remorse the Magistrate with death banishment Confiscation of goods imprisonment and the like and the guides of the Church with suspension excommunication degradation and such other censures Hence it followeth that GOD onely is sayd properly to remitte the punishments that his justice doth inflict that the conscience onely vpon repentance canne take away that bitter and aflictiue punishment of remorse wherewith shee is wont to torment and disquiet the minde of the offendour and that the Magistrate and Minister onely haue power to take away those punishments that in their seuerall courses they may and doe inflict Notwithstanding the Minister by the Word perswading men to repentance procuring remission and out of his prudent obseruation of the parties conuersion vnto GOD assuring him that it will goe well vvith him as also by the Sacrament instrumentally communicating to him as well the grace of repentant conuersion as of free remission that soe hee may heare the very sound and voyce of GOD in mercy saying to the heart and spirit of the repentant Sinner I am thy Saluation may bee sayd in a sort to remitte sinne euen in that it is an offence against GOD not by way of authority and power but by winning and perswading the sinner to that conuersion which obtaineth remission from GOD and by the Sacrament instrumentally making him partaker as well of the grace of remission of sinne from GOD as of conuersion from sinne to GOD. There are but foure things in the hand of the Minister the Word Prayer Sacraments and Discipline By the word of Doctrine hee frameth winneth and perswadeth the sinner to repentant conuersion seeking and procuring remission from God By Prayer he seeketh and obtaineth it for the sinner By Sacraments he instrumentally maketh him partaker as well of the grace of remission as conuersion And by the power of Discipline he doth by way of authority punish euill doings and remit or diminish the punishments he inflicteth according as the condition of the party may seeme to require By that which hath beene sayd it appeareth that to bind and loose to remit to retaine sins are equiualent the same saue that to bind and loose is of more ample large extent in that it implyeth in it the binding by precepts lawes the loosing which is by reversing or dispensing with the same And therefore hauing shewed that the Apostles were equall in the power ofbinding and loosing we need ad no farther proofe that they were equall in power of remitting retaining sins Wherefore let vs proceede to the promise of Christ made to Peter that vpon the Rocke mentioned by him he would build his Church and let vs see whether any peculiar thing were promised vnto Peter in that behalfe The Church of God we know is compared in Scripture to a City an House and a Temple and therefore the beginning proceeding and increasing of the same is rightly compared to building Now in building there must be a foundation vpon which all may rest and stay that is put into the same building and the foundation must be sure firme immoueable for otherwise it wall faile and so alll other parts of the building wanting their stay will fall to the ground Now nothing is so firme sure and immoueable as a Rocke and consequently no building so strōg as that which is raised vpon a rockie foundation wherevpon our Sauiour sheweth that a House builded on the sand is easily ruinated soone shaken to pieces but that an House builded vpon a rocke standeth firme notwithstanding the furie and violence of the flouds winds and tempests and compareth a Man rightly grounded and established in his perswasion and resolution to an house so built By a Rocke therefore in this place is meant a sure foundation that will not faile nor be moued or shaken how great a weight soeuer be laid vpon it In a foundation there are three things required The first is that it bee the first thing in the building the second that it beare vp all the other parts of the building the third that it be firme and immoueable For as Christ saith If the eye that is the light of the bodie be darknesse how great is that Darknesse So if that which is to support and beare vp all doe faile shrinke all must needs be shaken and fall a
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
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
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
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
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
chiefe-fathers of Israel they came to Ierusalem and all the congregation made a couenant with the King said The Kings sonne must reigne as the Lord hath said of the sons of Dauid Hereupon the King is proclaimed Athaliah is slaine the house of Baal destroied the Altars and idols that were in it broken down In all this narration there is nothing that maketh for the chiefe Priests power of deposing lawfull kings if they become heretiques For first Athaliah was an vsurper no lawfull Queene Secondly here was nothing done by Iehoiada alone but by him and the Captaines of hundreths and the chiefe Fathers of Israel that entred into couenant with him Thirdly there is great difference betweene the high Priest in the time of the Lawe and in the time of Christ. For before the comming of Christ the high Priest euen in the managing of the weightiest ciuill affaires and in iudgement of life and death sate in the Councell of State as the second person next vnto the King by Gods owne appointment Whereas our Aduersaries dare not claime any such thing for the Pope And therefore it is not to bee maruailed at if the high Priest beeing the second person in the kingdome of Iudah by Gods owne appointment and the Vnckle and Protectour of the young king whom his wife had saued from destruction bee the first mouer for the bringing of him to his right and when things are resolued on by common consent take on him not onely to commaund and direct the Priests and Leuites but the Captaines souldiers also for the establishing of their King the suppressing of a bloody tyrant and vsurper For all this might be done by Iehoiada as a chiefe man in that state and yet the Pope be so farre from obtaining that he claimeth which is to depose lawfull kings for abusing their authority that hee may not presume to do all that the high Priests lawfully did and might doe as not hauing so great preeminence from Christ in respect of matters of ciuill state in any kingdome of the world as the high Priest had by Gods owne appointment in the kingdome of Iudah Israel In the old Law saith Occā the high Priest meddled in matters of warre in the judgment of life and death the losse of members vengeance of blood it beseemed him well so to do But the Priests of the new Law may not meddle with things of this nature Wherefore from the power dominion which the high Priest of the old Law had it cannot be concluded that the Pope hath any power in tēporal matters The fifth example is of Ambrose repelling Theodosius the Emperour from the communion of the Church after the bloody and horrible murther that was committed at Thessalonica by his commandement The story is this The coach-man of Borherica the Captaine of the souldiers in that towne for some fault was committed to prison Now when the solemne horse-race and sporting fight of horsemen approched the people of Thessalonica desired to haue him set at liberty as one of whom there would be great vse in those ensuing solemne sports which being denied the citty was in an vprore and Botherica and certaine other of the magistrates were stoned to death and most despitefully vsed Theodosius the Emperour hearing of this outrage was exceedingly moued and commaunded a certaine number to be put to the sword without all iudiciall forme of proceeding or putting difference betweene offendors and such as were innocent So that seauen thousand perished by the sword and among them many strangers that were come into the citty vpon diuerse occasions that had no part in the outrage for which Theodosius was so sore displeased were most cruelly and vniustly slaine Saint Ambrose vnderstanding of this violent and vniust proceeding of the Emperour the next time he came to Millaine and was comming to the Church after his wonted manner met him at the doore and stayd him from entring with this speech Thou seemest not to know O Emperour what horrible and bloudy murthers haue beene committed by thee neither dost thou bethinke thy selfe now thy rage is past to what extremities thy fury carried thee perhaps the glory of thine Imperiall power will not let thee take notice of any fault thy greatnesse repelleth all checke of reason controlling thee but thou shouldest know the frailty of mans nature and that the dust was that beginning whence we are taken and and to which we must returne Let not therefore the glory of thy purple robes make thee forget the weakenesse of that body of flesh that is couered with them Thy subjects O Emperour are in nature like thee and in seruice thy fellowes for there is one Lord and commander ouer all the maker of all things Wherefore with what eyes wilt thou behold his temple or with what feete wilt thou treade on the sacred pauement thereof wilt thou lift vp to him those hands from which the bloud yet droppeth wilt thou receiue with them the sacred body of our Lord or wilt thou presume to put to thy mouth the cup replenished with the precious bloud of Christ which hast shed so much innocent bloud by the word of thy mouth vttering the passion of thy furious minde Depart therefore adde not this iniquity to the rest and decline not those bands which God aboue approueth With these speeches the Emperour was much moued and knowing the distinct duties both of Emperours and Bishops for that he had bin trained vp in the knowledge of heauenly doctrine returned to the Court with teares sighes A long time after for eight moneths were first past the solemne feast of the Natiuity of Christ approached and all prepared themselues to solemnize the same with triumphant ioy But the Emperor sate in the Court lamenting powring out riuers of teares which when Ruffinus maister of the pallace perceiued he came vnto him and asked the cause of his weeping to whom weeping more bitterly then before he said O Ruffinus thou makest but a sport of these things for thou art touched with no sence of those euils wherewith I am afflicted but the consideration of my calamity maketh me sigh and lament for that whereas the doores of Gods Temple are open to slaues and beggars and they goe freely into the same to make prayers vnto their Lord they are shut against me and which is yet worse the gates of heauen are shut against me also for I cannot forget the words of our Lord who saith Whomsoeuer ye shall bind on earth shall be bound in heauen To whom Ruffinus replied I will runne if it please thee O Emperour to the Bishop and intreate him to vnloose these bands wherewith hee hath bound thee No saith the Emperour it is to no purpose so to doe for he will not bee intreated I know his sentence is right and iust and that he will not transgresse the law of God for any respect of imperiall power Yet when Ruffinus was
earnest and promised confidently to pacifie Ambrose he bade him goe with speede and himselfe followed after in hope of reconciliation trusting vpon the promises of Ruffinus But when Ambrose saw Ruffinus he sayd vnto him O Ruffinus thou doest imitate the impudencie of shamelesse dogges for hauing beene the aduiser and counsellor to so vile murthers thou hast hardned thy forehead and hauing cast away all shame blushest not after the committing of so great and horrible outrages against men made after the image of God And when he was importunate with him and told him the Emperour was comming full of fierie zeale he brake forth into these words I tell thee Ruffinus I will not suffer him to passe the thresholds of Gods house and if of an Emperour he become a tyrant I will ioyfully suffer death Whereupon Ruffinus caused one to runne to the Emperour to desire him to stay within the Court But the Emperour being on the way when the messenger met him resolued to come forward and to endure the reproof of the Bishop So hee came to the sacred railes but entred not into the Temple and comming to the Bishoppe besought him to vnloose him from the bands wherewith hee was bound The Bishop somewhat offended with his comming told him the manner of his comming was tyrant-like and that being mad against God he trampled vnder his feete the lawes of God Not so said the Emperour I presse not hither in despite of order neither doe I vniustly striue to enter into the house of God But I beseech thee to vnloose me to remember the mercifull disposition of our common Lord and not to shut the doore against me that hee would haue opened to all that repent What repentance therefore saith the Bishoppe hast thou shewed after so grieuous an offence what medicines hast thou applied to cure thy wounds It pertaineth to thee sayth the Emperour to prepare the medicines that should heale mee and to cure my wounds and to me to vse that thou prescribest Then sayd Ambrose seeing thou makest thy displeasure iudge and it is not reason that giueth sentence when thou sittest vpon the throne to doe right but thy furious proceedings make a law that when sentence of death and confiscation of goods shall bee passed there may passe thirty dayes before the execution of the same that so if within that space it be found vniust it may be reuersed or otherwise it may proceede This law the Emperour most willingly consented to make and thereupon Ambrose vnloosed him from his bands and he entred into the Temple and prayed vnto God not standing nor kneeling but prostrate vpon the earth and passionately vttering these words of Dauid My soule cleaueth to the pauement Lord quicken me according to thy word Here we see an excellent patterne of a good Bishoppe and a good Emperour and it is hard to say whether Ambrose were more to be commended for his zeale magnanimous resolution and constancie or the Emperour for his willing and submissiue obedience But of deposing Princes here is nothing Ambrose being so farre from any thought of lifting vp his hand against the Emperour that he resolued to subiect himselfe vnto him euen to the suffering of martyrdome if neede should require But saith Bellarmine Ambrose exercised ciuill authority in that hee tooke notice of this murther of the Emperour beeing a criminall cause and forced him to make a ciuill law for the preuenting of furious and bloodie proceedings in iudgment This surely is a weake collection for the Church hath power by vertue of her Ecclesiasticall iurisdiction to take notice of such horrible crimes as murther to punish them with spirituall punishments Neither was the inducing of Theodosius to make a ciuill law for the preuenting of such like euils as he was now censured for before he would reconcile him to the Church an act of ciuill authoritie But such testimonies as this is they that haue no better must be forced to vse That which followeth of Gregories confirming the priviledges graunted to the Abbey of Saint Medardus in such sort that whatsoeuer Kings Iudges or secular persons should go about to violate them should be depriued of their honour proueth not the thing in question For it is evident that the confirmation of these priviledges was passed not by S. Gregory alone but by a whole Councell and more specially by Theodoricus the King and Brunichildis the Queene who might binde their successours and other inferiour secular Rulers vnder paine of deprivation though neither Gregory of himselfe nor yet a councell of Bishops could doe any such thing by their authoritie alone Wherefore let vs proceede to the next example Gregory the second saith Bellarmine excommunicated the Emperour Leo the third who was an enemy to Images he forbade any tribute to be payde him out of Italy and consequently depriued him of part of his Empire Surely if Greg. the second of himself alone had had such power as to forbid all Italy vpon his dislike to pay any more tribute to the Emperour there were some good shew of proofe in this allegation But if wee examine the stories we shall finde the case to haue beene farre otherwise then Bellarmine would beare vs in hand it was For first Gregory did not excommunicate Leo of himselfe but called a Synode to doe it Secondly he did not forbid the paying of tribute out of Italy to the Emperour but the circumstances of the History are these Leo seeking to win the Bishop of Rome and the people of Italy to the casting downe of Images in the West as he had done in the East Gregory the Bishop did not onely refuse to obey him but admonished all other to take heed they did no such thing for feare of any Edict of the Emperour By which exhortation the people of Italy already mis-conceited of the Emperours governement were so animated that they were likely to haue proceeded to the election of a new Emperour and Nauclerus sheweth that the decrees of the Bishop of Rome disswading the people of the West from obeying the Emperour in casting downe of Images were of so great authoritie that the people and souldiers of Ravenna first and then of Venice beganne to make shew of rebellion against the Emperour and his Exarche or Lieutenant and to inforce the Bishop of Rome and the other people of Italy to disclaime the Emperour of Constantinople and to chuse another in Italy And that this rebellion proceeded so farre that euery city putting downe the Magistrates of the Exarch set vp Magistrates of their owne whō they named Dukes but that the Bishop of Rome at that time pacified thē and by his perswasions stayed them from chusing any new Emperour in hope that he would amend So that we see the Bishop of Rome with his Bishops by their authority did nothing but stay the people from obeying the Emperours vnlawfull Decrees as they iudged them but no way went about to depose the
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
subscribed in this sort First Eutychius Bishop of Constantinople then Apollinarius of Alexandria after him Domninus of Antioch and last of all the Legates of Eustochius of Ierusalem for the Bishop of Rome was not there in person nor by his Legates In the sixth the Emperour sate in the highest place in the middest His great men and the Consuls sate by him on the left side the Legates of the Bishop of Rome the Vicars of the Bishop of Ierusalem the Bishops that were present out of the Romane Synode On the right side sate first the Bishop of Constantinople next him the Bishop of Antioche then hee that supplied the place of the Bishoppe of Alexandria and so in order the Bishoppes subiect to them yet in subscribing the Bishop of Rome was first Constantinople second Alexandria third Antioch fourth and Ierusalem last In the seauenth the Legates of Adrian Bishop of Rome had the first place and subscribed first after them the Bishop of Constantinople Tharassius and then they that supplyed the roomes of the other three Patriarchicall Thrones But Tharassius rather performed the duty of a President Moderator then the Legates of Rome as I shewed before These are all the Generall Councels that the Greeke and Latine Churches jointly acknowledge by this view which we haue taken of them wee may see how diuersly things haue beene carried both concerning the Presidentship in Generall Councels and the preheminences of the chiefest Bishops in the same Yet as the Graecians were content in the Councell of Florence that the Bishoppe of Rome should haue all such preheminences againe as hee had before the division of the Churches if other matters might bee agreed on So if the Bishoppe of Rome would disclaime his claime of vniuersall jurisdiction of infallible judgement and power to dispose at his pleasure the Kingdomes of the World and would content himself with that all Antiquity gaue him which is to bee in order and honour the first among Bishoppes wee would easily grant him to bee in such sort President of Generall Councels as to sit and speake first in such meetings but to bee an absolute commaunder wee cannot yeeld vnto him Cardinall Turrecremata rightly noteth that the Presidentship of Councels whereof men doe speake is of two sorts the one of honour the other of power Presidentship of honouris to haue preheminence in place to propose things to bee debated to direct the actions and to giue definitiue sentence according to the voyces and judgement of the Councell Presidentshippe of power is to haue the right not onely of directing but of ruling their doings also that are assembled in Councell and to conclude of matters after his owne judgement though the greater part of the Councell like it not yea though no part like it A Presidentshippe of the former sort Antiquity yeelded to the Bishop of Rome when hee was not wanting to himselfe And if there were no other differences betweene vs and him wee also would yeeld it him But the latter kinde of presidentshippe wee cannot yeeld vnlesse wee ouerthrow the whole course of Councels and goe against the streame of all Antiquity This seemeth saith Duarenus to bee consonant vnto the Law of GOD that the Church which the Synode doth represent should haue the fulnesse of all power and that the Pope should acknowledge himselfe subject vnto it For Christ did not giue the power of binding and loosing to Peter alone whose successor the pope is said to bee but to the whole church Although I doe not deny but that hee was set before the rest of the Apostles yet so often as any one was to bee ordained either Bishoppe or Deacon or any thing to bee decreed that concerned the church Peter neuer tooke it to himselfe but referred it to the whole church But heerein did his preheminence stand and consist that as prince of the Apostles it pertained to him to call the rest together and to propose vnto them the things that were to bee handled as with vs at this day the president of the court of parliament calleth together the whole Senate and when occasion requireth beginneth first to speake and doth many other things which easily shew the greatnesse of the person which he sustaineth and yet notwithstanding hee is not greater or superiour to the whole court neither hath hee power ouer all the Senatours neither may hee decree any thing contrary to their judgements But the judgement of all controversies pertaineth to the court it selfe whose Head the president is said to be nay which is more the court commaundeth judgeth and punisheth the president as well as any other if there be cause so to doe And these things truely were likewise in the Ecclesiasticall state heretofore but I know not by what meanes it is now brought about that supreme power ouer all Christians is giuen to one and that hee is set free from all Lawes and canons after the example of the Emperours This is the judgement of the learned and worthy Duarenus yet the Iesuites and Iesuited papists at this day will needs haue the pope to be president of General councels in such sort that hee may conclude of matters after his owne judgement and liking though the greater part of the councell like it not yea though no part like it But this their conceit is easily refuted first by reason then by the practise of the church from the beginning For first either Bishops are assembled in Generall Councels onely as the Popes Counsellers to giue him aduise or they are in joynt Commission with him and sitte as his fellow Iudges of all matters of faith and discipline If onely as Counsellers to aduise him Councels should not consist only or principally of Bishops For as they say commonly that many a doting old woman may be more deuout and many a poore begging Frier more learned thē the Pope himself so there is no questiō but that many other may be as learned and iudicious as Bishops Though saith Austine according to the titles of honour which the custome of the Church giueth men Austine a Bishop be greater then Hierome a Presbyter yet Hierome in worth and merite is greater then Austine In the late Councell of Trent there is no question but that Andradius Vega and other Doctors that were there were euery way comparable with the greatest Bishop or Cardinall yet Bishoppes onely as of ordinary right and some few other by speciall priuiledge gaue decisiue voyces in that Councell other how learned soeuer being admitted onely to discusse and debate matters and thereby to prepare and ripen them that the Bishops might more easily iudge of them and therefore the current of most Papists is against that conceit of making Bishops to bee but the Popes Counsellers onely as appeareth by Andradius Canus Bellarmine and many moe That Bishops saith Melchior Canus are not Counsellers onely to advise but Iudges to determine all matters doubtfull touching
Councell as Iudges may decree and determine and yet the power of re-examining and reuersing all if neede be may rest in the Pope as superiour Iudge vnto them which yet no way cleareth the doubt For howsoeuer it be true in Iudges and Iudgements distinct separate and subordinate one to another that one may dash that the other doth and doe the contrary without the consent of the other yet of Iudges ioyned in one Commission and of the same iudgment it cannot be so conceiued Now the Iudgement of the Generall Councell includeth in it the Iudgement of the Pope the Pope and Councell make one Iudge and are not separate distinct and subordinate Iudges and therefore no such thing can bee said of them If it be said that he who is joyned in commission with others in some inferiour Court and hath a Negatiue voyce in it onely and no absolute affirmatiue may in a superiour Court haue both and that therefore the Pope who hath no absolute voyce affirmatiue and negatiue in a Generall Councell may haue such a voyce in some higher Court it will be found to be too shamelesse a saying For there neither is nor can be any higher Court then that of a Generall Councell consisting of the Bishop of Rome and all the other Bishops of the World So that all answers failing wee may safely conclude that if Bishops bee Iudges Ecclesiasticall truely and properly as wee haue proued them to bee by vnanswerable reasons and our Adversaries confesse the Pope hath no absolute voyce affirmatiue and negatiue in Generall Councels that is to dash what the Maior part would doe and to doe that they by no meanes like of This Andradius saw and therefore hee disclaimeth the position of Bellarmine that all the assurance the Councell hath of finding out the truth is Originally in the Pope and from him cōmunicated to the Councell and holdeth that the Councell hath as good assurance of finding out the trueth and better then the Pope himselfe And therefore hee saith that though he thinketh it impossible the Pope should dissent frō the councell so as to define contrary to it yet if it should so fall out as hee thinketh it not impossible that the Bishop of Rome should altogether dislike in his opinion that which the Councell resolueth on and which hee should consent vnto and though he define not the contrary yet despise the Decrees of the Councell and in his priuate opinion gainsay them he thinketh in such a case men were to conceiue none otherwise of him then if hee should depart from the faith and profession of the ancient Councels which the consent of all ages hath confirmed and Gregory professeth to honour and esteeme as the foure Gospels seeing the power and authority is as great in all Councels as in those which the same Gregory saith that whosoeuer holdeth not their certaine resolutions though he seeme to be a stone elect and precious yet he lyeth besides the foundation And because the authority of Cardinall Turrecremata is great with all those that defend the dignity of the Pope against the Bishops that were assembled in the Councell of Basil such as are of their judgement therefore he produceth his opinion in these words If such a case should fall out saith Cardinall Turrecremata that all the Fathers assembled in a Generall Councell with vnanimous consent should make a decree concerning the faith which the person of the Pope alone should contradict I would say according to my judgement that men were bound to stand to the judgement of the Synode and not to listen to the gainsaying of the person of the Pope for the judgment of so many and so great Fathers in a Generall Councell seemeth worthily to bee preferred before the judgement of one man In which case that Glosse vpon the Decrees is most excellent that when the faith is treated of the Pope is bound to require the Counsell of Bishops which is to bee vnderstood to bee necessary to bee done as often as the case is very doubtfull and a Synode may be called and then the Synode is greater then the Pope not truely in the power of jurisdiction but in the authority of discerning judgment and the amplitude of knowledge This is the opinion of this great champion who so mainely in defence of the Popes vniversall jurisdictiō impugned the Fathers that were assembled in the Councell of Basil. Whereby it is evident that the pope may not go against the consent of a Generall Councell that he may not dissent from it being greater in the authority of discerning and judgement then hee is and consequently that hee hath no negatiue voyce in Councels Which may further bee proued for that if he had a negatiue voyce as the Councell hath then were there two absolute negatiues but where there are two absolute negatiues it is vncertaine whether any thing shall be resolued on or not whereas yet the state of the Church requireth resolution and certain concluding of matters that men may know what they are to beleeue Therefore the Pope hath none but the onely negatiue is that of the Councell a part whereof the Pope is giuing a voyce as others doe And this the manner of other Synodes confirmeth For in Provinciall Nationall and Patriarchicall Councels the Metropolitanes Primates and Patriarches haue no absolute negatiue but giue only a single voyce and the absolute negatiue as also the affirmatiue is onely in the Maior part and as Cardinall Turrecremata learnedly and rightly maketh the authority of the Generall Councell in discerning and defining what is to be belieued greater then the authority of the Pope and that the Councel is ratherto be listened vnto then the Pope dissenting from the Councell so there is no doubt but that the authority of Councels being as great in making necessary lawes for the good of the Church as in resoluing doubtes and clearing controuersies the Councell is greater then the Pope in the power of making lawes and consequently in the power of jurisdiction which he denieth and they of Basil affirme The greatest allegation on the contrary side is the confirmation that ancient Councels sought of the Bishop of Rome for that may seeme to import that their decrees are of no force vnlesse they be strengthened by his authority whereunto Andradius answereth out of Alfonsus á Castro and others that Generall Councels carefully sought to be confirmed by the Bishop of Rome not as if in themselues without his confirmation they were weake and might erre nor for that they thought him to haue as much or more assurance of not erring then they but that it might appeare that he that hath the first place in the Church of God and the rest did consent and conspire together in the deliuery and the defence of the trueth But because happily this answer may seeme too weake therefore for the clearing of this doubt we must obserue that all the ancient Councels
were holden in the East that in some of them neither the Bishop of Rome nor any of his Westerne Bishos were present and in others very few For there were onely three out of the West in the name of all the rest in the great Councell of Chalcedon wherein 630 Bishops met Now seeing the authority of generall Councels is from the consent of all other Bishoppes of the Christian Church as well as those that meete in them it was necessary that the Bishop of Rome as Patriarch of the West and the Bishops subject to him though they were no more infallible in iudgement then the other yet should by consenting with the rest confirme that was done seeing they were not present to giue consent when it was done If it besaid that in diuerse of them there were some for the Bishop of Rome and some in the name of the Synodes subject to him who hauing instructions from them gaue consent in their names and that therefore there needed no further confirmation it will be easily answered First that it was possible for those Legates being but few to forsake their instructions and to do contrary to them as Rodoaldus and Zachary the Legates of Pope Nicholas did in the Councell vnder Michaell the Emperour wherein Photius was set vp and Ignatius put downe Secondly that it was necessary that the Fathers should wholly follow those instructions that they brought and absolutely agree vnto them and therefore when things were concluded it was fit there should bee a signifying of that which was done and a desire of the confirmation of the same Thirdly some things might be concluded to which the instructions reached not and in respect of them a confirmation was necessary as the Councell of Chalcedon decreed certaine things wihout the compasse of Leos instructions and therefore sought his confirmation Besides all this we must note that the confirmation which the ancient Councels sought was not from the person of the Bishop of Rome alone but from him and his Synodes as I haue proued before And Bellarmine himselfe confesseth saying that in the second and third Synodes there were no Bishops of the West present but that the Bishop of Rome in his owne name and in the name of the Bishops and Synodes subiect to him did confirme them So that this confirming of Councels by the Pope proueth no more that hee is infallible in iudgment or that all the assurance of finding out the trueth is originally in him and from him communicated to generall Councels then that all the Bishops and Synodes subject to him are free from possibility of erring and that Nationall or Prouinciall Synodes in the West are more infallible in their iudgments then those that are Generall in the East The next allegation to proue that the Councell is nothing without the Pope is that a promise was made to Peter that his faith should not faile but that no promise was made to the Councell that promise of Christ that where two or three are gathered together in his name he will be in the middest of them beeing no way proper to Councels and Bishops hauing no authority when they are assembled which they haue not when they are single and deuided This allegation is contradictory to the resolution and contrary to the practise of all times For first that promise of Christ that where two or three are gathered together in his name he will bee in the middest of them was euer thought to assure his presence in a lawfull Generall Councell in very speciall sort and otherwise then any where else and that vpon very good ground of reason For if God be present with priuate men meeting together in his feare about the things that concerne them and with a few particular Pastors of Churches for the direction of them in things that concerne them there is no question but in Generall meetings wherein all the variety of the gifts of God bestowed on men is gathered together and things concerning the state of the whole Christian Church treated of hee is present in most peculiar sort manner Secondly though Christ the sonne of God gaue no authority to the whole vniuersality of Christian men and therein the Church and Common-wealth may seeme to differ yet he gaue Commission to the Generality of pastors more then to each one apart and being assembled they haue that power which seuerally they haue not as to ordaine iudge suspend and depose pastors and Bishops And howsoeuer in each Prouince the rest are to know him that is the first among them and to do nothing pertayning to the whole Prouince without consulting him first yet may he doe nothing without them And as this is the Canon and Law of the Church in particular Prouinces so in Churches of larger extent comprehending whole countries subiect to one Patriarch and much more in the whole Church wherein there is no one hauing so much power in respect of the rest as the Metropolitane hath in respect of the Bishoppes of the Prouince and the Patriarch in respect of the Metropolitanes For the Bishoppes are to bee ordained by the Metropolitane and the Metropolitanes are to be ordained or at least confirmed by the Patriarch whereas among the Patriarches there is no one to whom it pertayneth to ordaine the rest or to confirme them in any speciall sort or otherwise then they are to confirme him Thus then it beeing proued by conuincing reasons and the confession not onely of such Papists as make the Pope among Bishoppes to be but as the Duke of Venice among the great Senators of that State greater then each one but inferiour to the whole company of them but of such also as attribute much more vnto him that he hath no such Presidentship in Generall Councels as that hee may determine what he will against the liking of all or the greater part of Bishoppes but that he is bound to follow the greater part and that Generall Councels are of force not from the absolute authority of the Pope onely aduising with other Bishoppes but from their consents as wel as his Let vs proceede to see if the practise of former times proue not the same I finde saith Cusanus that in all the first Eight Generall Councels the Popes or the Legates of the Popes for themselues were neuer present in person did euer subscribe in the very same sort that the other Bishoppes did without note of any singularity For euery Bishoppe was wont to subscribe in this forme Anâ—…ens vel consentiens vel statuens vel definiens subscripsi and this was the forme the Legates of the Bishoppe of Rome obserued But saith Cusanus that no man may doubt but that all things were determined by the joynt consent of such as met in Generall Councels and not by the sole authority of the Bishoppe of Rome alone wee finde in the Actes of the Councell of Chalcedon that Dioscorus being the third time warned to
alleaged by Cusanus and greatly approued yea the same Cusanus complaining of the abuses of the Court of Rome in that thinges are carried thither that should bee determined in the Prouinces where they beginne in that the Pope intermedleth in giuing Benefices before they be voide to the preiudice of the originall Patrons by reason whereof young men run to Rome and spend their best time there carrying gold with them and bringing backe nothing but paper and many like confusions which the Canons forbid and neede reformation addeth that the common saying that the secular power may not restraine or alter these courses brought in by Papall authority should not moue any man for that though the power of temporall Princes ought not to change any thing established canonically for the honour of GOD and good of such as attend his seruice yet it may and ought to prouide for the common good and see that the auncient canons be obserued Neither ought any one to say that the auncient christian Emperours did erre that made so many sacred constitutions or that they ought not so to haue done For saith he I read that Popes haue desired them for the common good to make lawes for the punishment of offences committed by those of the cleargie And if any one shall say that the force of all these constitutions depended vpon Papall or Synodall approbation I will not insist vpon it though I haue read and collected foure score and sixe chiefe heads of Ecclesiasticall rules and lawes made by old Emperours and many other made by Charles the Great and his successours in which order is taken not onely concerning others but euen concerning the Bishoppe of Rome himselfe and other Patriarches what they shall take of the Bishoppes they ordaine and many like things and yet did I neuer finde that the Pope was desired to approue them or that they haue no binding force but by vertue of his approbation But I know right well that some Popes haue professed their due regarde of those Imperiall and Princely constitutions But though it were graunted that those constitutions had no further force then they receiued from the canons wherein the same thinges were formerly ordered or from Synodall approbation yet might the Emperor now reforme things amisse by vertue of old canons and Princes constitutions grounded on them Yea if hee should with good aduice considering the decay of piety and diuine worshippe the ouerflowing of all wickednes and the causes and occasions thereof recall the old canons and the auncient and most holy obseruation of the Elders and reiect whatsoever priuiledges exemptions or new deuices contrary therevnto by vertue whereof suites complaintes and controuersies the gifts and donations of benefices the like thinges are vnjustly brought to Rome to the great prejudice of the whole Christian Church I thinke no man could justly blame him for so doing Yea he saith the Emperour Sigismund had an intention so to doe and exhorteth him by no fained allegations of men fauouring present disorders to bee discouraged for that there is no way to preserue the peace of the Church whatsoeuer some pretend to the contrary vnlesse such lewde and wicked courses proceeding from ambition pride and couetousnesse be stopped and the old canons reuiued From that which hath beene obserued touching the proceeding of Christian Kings and Emperours in former times in calling Councels in being present at them and in making lawes for persons and causes Ecclesiasticall it is easie to gather what the power of Princes is in this kinde and that they are indeede supreame Gouernours ouer all persons and in all causes as well Ecclesiasticall as Ciuill which is that wee attribute to our Kings Queenes and the Papistes so much stumble at as if some new and strange opinion were broached by vs. Wherefore for the satisfaction of all such as are not maliciously obstinate refusing to heare what may be said I will endeauour in this place vpon so fitte an occasion to cleare whatsoeuer may bee questionable in this point will first intreat of the power and right that Princes haue in causes Ecclesiasticall then of that they haue ouer persons Ecclesiastical jn treating of causes Ecclesiasticall I will first distinguish the diversities of them the power of medling with them Causes Ecclesiasticall therefore are of two sorts for some are originally and naturally such and some onely in that by fauor of Princes out of due consideration they are referred to the Cognisance of Ecclesiasticall persons as fittest Iudges as the probations of the Testaments of them that are dead the disposition of the goods of them that dye intestat and if there be any other like Causes Ecclesiasticall of the first sort are either meerely and onely Ecclesiasticall and Spirituall or mixt Meerely Ecclesiasticall are of three sorts First matters of Faith and Doctrine Secondly matters of Sacraments and the due administration of them Thirdly the orders degrees ordination of such as attend the Ministery of the word Sacraments Mixtly Ecclesiasticall are of two sorts either such as in one respect belong to one kinde of cognisance and in another to another as marriages which are subiect to ciuill disposition in that they are politicall contracts and to spirituall in that they are ordered by the diuine law or such as are equally censurable by Ciuill Ecclesiasticall authority as murthers adulteries blasphemies the like All which in the time when there is no Christian Magistrate or when there is ouer-great negligence in the ciuill Magistrate are to bee punished by the spirituall guides of the Church Whereupon wee shall finde that the auncient Councels prescribed penance to offenders in all these kindes But when there is a Christian Magistrate doing his duty they are to bee referred specially either to the one or the other of these and accordingly to bee censured by the one or the other as wee see the punishment of adultery vsury and things of that nature is referred to Ecclesiasticall persons the punishment of murther theft the like to the ciuill Magistrate This distinction of causes Ecclesiasticall premised it is easie to see what authority Princes haue in causes Ecclesiasticall For first touching those causes that are Ecclesiastical onely in that they are put ouer to the cognisance of spiritual persons there is no question but that the Prince hath a supreame power and that no man may meddle with them any otherwise then as he is pleased to allow And likewise touching those things which in one respect pertaine to ciuill jurisdictiō in another to spiritual or which are equally censurable by both there is no question but that the Prince hath supreame power in that they pertaine to ciuill jurisdiction So that the onely question is touching things naturally and meerely spiritual The power in these is of two sorts of Order of Iurisdiction The power of Order is the authority to preach the Word minister the Sacraments to ordaine Ministers
in appointing some selected men for the visitation of the rest Fourthly in joyning temporall menincommission with the spirituall guides of the church to take view of and to censure the actions of men of Ecclesiasticall order because they are directed not onely by Canons but lawes Imperiall Fifthly when matters of fact are obiected for which the canons and lawes Imperiall judge men depriueable the Prince when hee seeth cause and when the state of things require it either in person if he please or by such other as hee thinketh fitte to appoint may heare and examine the proofes of the same and either ratifie that others did or voyd it as wee see in the case of Caecilianus to whom it was objected that hee was a Traditor and Faelix Antumnitanus that ordayned him was so likewise and that therefore his ordination was voyd For first the enemies of Caecilianus disliking his ordination made complaintes against him to Constantine and hee appointed Melchiades and some other Bishoppes to sitte and heare the matter From their judgement there was a new appeale made to Constantine Whereupon hee sent to the Proconsull to examine the proofes that might bee produced But from his iudgmēt the complainants appealed the third time to Constantine who appointed a Synode at Arle All this hee did to giue satisfaction if it were possible to these men and so to procure the peace of the Church And though he excused himselfe for medling in these businesses and asked pardon for the same for that regularly hee was to haue left these iudge ments to Ecclesiasticall persons yet it no way appeareth that hee did ill in interposing himselfe in such sort as hee did the state of things being such as it was nor that the Bishoppes did ill that yeelded to him in these courses and therefore in cases of like nature Princes may doe whatsoeuer hee did and Bishops may appeare before them and submit themselues to their iudgement though in another case Ambrose refused to present himselfe before Valentinian the Emperour for tryall of an Ecclesiasticall cause Neither is it strange in our state that Kinges should intermedle in causes Ecclesiasticall For Matthew Paris sheweth that the ancient lawes of England prouided that in appeales men should proceed from the Arch-deacon to the Bishoppe from the Bishop to the Arch-bishop and that if the Arch-bishop should faile in doing iustice the matter should be made knowne to the King that by vertue of his commandement it might receiue an end in the Arch-bishops Court that there might be no further proceeding in appeales without the Kings consent From the power which Princes haue in causes Ecclesiasticall let vs proceed to the power they haue ouer persons Ecclesiasticall and see whether they be supreame ouer all persons or whether men of the Church bee exempt from their iurisdiction That they are not exempted by GODS law wee haue the cleare confession of Cardinall Bellarmine and others who not onely yeeld so farre vnto the trueth forced so to doe by the cleare euidence thereof but proue the same by Scripture and Fathers The Cardinals wordes are these Exceptio Clericorum in rebus politicis tam quoad personas quam quoad bona iure humano introducta est non diuino that is The exemption of Cleargy-men in things ciuill as well in respect of their persons as their goods was introduced brought in by mans law and not by the law of God Which thing is proued first out of the precept of the Apostle to the Romanes Let euery soule be subiect to the higher powers and addeth Therefore pay yee tribute For when the Apostle saith Let euery soule be subiect hee includeth Cleargy-men as Chrysostome witnesseth and therefore when hee addeth for this cause pay yee tribute he speaketh of Cleargy-men also Whence it will follow that Cleargy-men are bound to pay tribute vnlesse they be exempted by the fauour and priviledge of Princes freeing them from so doing which thing Thomas Aquinas also affirmeth writing vpon the same place Secondly the same is proued out of the Ancient For Vrbanus saith The tribute money was therefore found in the mouth of the fish taken by Saint Peter because the Church payeth tribute out of her outward and earthly possessions And Saint Ambrose saith if tribute bee demaunded it is not denyed the Church-Land payeth tribute Now if Vrbanus Bishoppe of Rome and worthy Ambrose Bishop of Millaine then whom there was neuer any Bishoppe found more resolute in the defence of the right of the Church say that tribute is not to bee denyed but payed vnto Princes by men of the Church and in respect of Church-land I thinke it is evident there is no exemption by any Law of GOD that freeth the goods of Church-men from yeelding tribute to Princes For touching that text where our Sauiour sayth vnto Peter What thinkest thou Simon of whom doe the Kings of the Gentiles receiue tribute of their owne children or of strangers And Peter answereth of strangers Whence CHRIST inferreth that the children are free brought by some to proue the supposed immunity of Cleargy-men to bee from GODS owne graunt Bellarmine sufficiently cleareth the matter For first hee sheweth that CHRIST speaketh of himselfe onely making this argument Kings sonnes are free from tribute as beeing neither to pay to their owne fathers seeing their goods are common nor to strangers to whom they are not subiect therefore himselfe being the Sonne of the great King of Kings oweth no Tribute to any mortall man So that when hee saide the children are free hee meant not to signifie that any other are free but onely that himselfe was free Secondly he rightly obserueth that this place would proue that all Christians are free from Tribute if it proued any other then CHRIST to bee so for all Christians are the sonnes of GOD by adoption and grace And Hierome writing vpon this place hath these words Our Lord was the Kings son both according to the flesh and according to the spirit descending of the stocke of Dauid and being the Word of the Almighty Father and therefore as being the Sonne of the Kingdome owed no tribute but because hee assumed the humility of flesh it behooued him to fulfill all righteousnesse but vnhappy men that wee are we are called after the name of Christ doe nothing worthy so great an honour He for the great loue he bare towards vs sustained the crosse for vs and payde tribute but we for his honour pay no tribute and as Kings sons are free from tribute These words are brought by some to proue the imagined freedome we speake of but first they are so far from prouing any such thing that Erasmus thinketh Hierome reprehended it and disliked it as a thing sauouring of arrogancy that cleargymen should refuse to pay tribute which hee saith is contrary to the conceit of men in our time who thinke it the height of all piety to maintaine
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
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
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
among the women which kept the houses by whom the doctrine of the Lord might enter into the closet of women without reprehension or suspicion Neyther doth Clemens Alexandrinus only so vnderstand the wordes but a Romaine Bishoppe also Soe that our Aduersaries haue no reason to charge vs with hereticall peruersenesse for expounding the Apostles words of the Apostles wiues Neyther can their interpretation of faithfull women following the Apostles and ministring vnto them things necessary any way stand with the Apostles drift and meaning for first it is no way to be conceiued that those Apostles which had wiues would not lead them about rather then strange women Secondly the word of leading about implyeth a kinde of authority right and interest in those women which the Apostles lead about which might be verified of them in respect of their wiues but not in respect of such women as out of their deuotion followed them if any soe did Thirdly the Apostle doth not say Wee haue power to lead about a woman a sister as they reade it but a sister a woman or wife Now the addition of woman to sister is idle and needelesse seeing euery sister is vndoubtedly a woman Therefore wee must vnderstand the Apostle to say a sister a wife Hierome indeede vnderstandeth the Apostles words of strange women and not of their wiues yet denieth hee not but that other interpret them otherwise and translateth and alleageth the wordes doubtfully of the Apostles leading about women or wiues Besides this claime that the Apostle maketh of power and authority in this behalfe elsewhere prescribing what manner of men must bee chosen vnto the Bishoppes office hee sayth A Bishoppe must be the husband of one wife one that canne rule his owne house hauing children vnder obedience with all honesty Now to say they were to forsake their wiues as soone as they should enter into this calling is most absurd and contrary to the very Law of God and nature For it is not in the power of the man to withdraw himselfe from his wife with whom hee is one flesh seeing the man hath not power of his body but the wife Whereupon Thomas Aquinas resolueth that a man entering into holy Orders cannot without the consent of his wife withdrawe himselfe from her but is bound to liue with her still and to yeeld vnto her due beneuolence Neyther may man and wife part by consent perpetually but for a time onely according to that of the Apostle Defraud not one another except it bee by consent for a time that ye may giue your selues to fasting and prayer and againe come together that Satan tempt you not for your incontinency Answerable hereunto the Canons attributed to the Apostles forbid Bishoppes Presbyters and Deacons to putte away their wiues vppon any pretence of religion The wordes of the Canon are these Let no Bishoppe Presbyter or Deacon put away his wife vppon any pretence of religion if hee doe let him be put from the Communion and if hee persist let him be remoued from his Order This Canon sayth Zonaras condemneth those sacred Ministers of the Church that put away their wiues For that such putting of thē away seemeth to be done in disgrace of marriage as if the companying together of man and wife were an impure and vncleane thing Whereas the Apostle pronounceth that Mariage is honourable and the bedde vndefiled The Romanists to avoyd and decline the force of this testimony say that this Canon forbiddeth Bishoppes Presbyters and Deacons the casting away of all care of prouiding for their wiues but not the forsaking of their company but this their euasion is easily refuted First because there is no shew of euill in Cleargy-mens prouiding for the necessity of their wiues which they married while they were Lay-men nay it would seeme vnto all men most vnnaturall for them to cast off all care of them and all men would condemne them for soe doing but in the companying with them in the sinister iudgment of some men there is in respect whereof some forsake their wiues vnder a pretence of religion Secondly because the Fathers in the Sixth Generall Councell who no doubt vnderstood the meaning of these Canons farre better then the Romanists do vnderstand them as forbidding Bishops Presbyters and Deacons the refrayning from companying with their wiues and not the neglecting to prouide for their necessities In the Councell of Nice some went about to make a Law that Bishops and Ministers of the Church should not after their entring into the holy Ministery company with their wiues which they had formerly married But Paphnutius Bishop of a citty in the vpper Thebais who was a most holy man by whom miracles had beene wrought and who for confessing the faith of Christ had had one of his eies pulled out though himselfe were neuer married cryed out aloud and besought them to lay noe such heauy yoake on the neckes of them that were entered into the holy Ministry affirming that Marriage is honourable among all and the bedde vndefiled calling the company of a man with his wife by the name of chastitie and aduising them to take heede least they did greatly hurt the state of the Church by making so strict a law for that all cannot endure soe seuere a rule of Discipline and for that also this rule haply cannot bee soe easily obserued by their wiues To these speaches of Paphnutius the whole assembly of Bishoppes assented So that this controuersie was ended and each man left to his owne liberty This of Paphnutius is reported by Socrates Zozomen Suidas Nicephorus and alleadged by Gratian as true yet Bellarmine the Iesuits feare not to reject it as false as if they knew better what was done one thousand three hundred yeares agoe then all that euer haue bene since the better to discredite this poore report they charge both Socrates and Zozomen with Heresie and contemne their stories So must all goe to the ground that standeth in their way be it neuer so auncient and yet they are the men that pleade Antiquity But if this bee a fayned and counterfeit story what are the signes of the forgery whereby they discerne it to be so Surely there appeare none but it cannot bee true the Iesuite saith because it is contrary to the report of Epiphanius and Hierome Touching Epiphanius I haue shewed already that hee hath nothing contrary to this narration of Socrates and Zozomen for hee confesseth that Bishoppes and Presbyters in his time liued with their wiues and begatte children of them in such places where the strictnesse of the Canon was not admitted So that the Canon he speaketh of which was admitted in Thessalia Thessalonica Macedonia and Hellas and was proposed and rejected in the Councell of Nice was but particular and locall which may stand well enough with the narration of Socrates and Zozomen that the Councell of
to say That they had no doubt reason to leade them so to doe that forbade the Marriage of Cleargy-men but that there were much greater reason now to leaue it free againe Baptista Mantuanus saith that many thought the Lawes against mariage to bee euill that they which made those Lawes had not sufficiently considered what the nature of man can beare that CHRIST neuer put so vnpleasant a Yoake vpon the neckes of men that this burden too heavie for the shoulders of men to beare hath brought forth many monstrous effects that it was a shew of Piety but indeede too great boldnesse that laide this burthen vpon the shoulders of men that it had beene more safe to haue gone that way wherein the divine Law directeth vs and to haue trode in the steppes of the Auncient Fathers whose life was better in marriage then ours that is single Ioannes Antonius saith in the time of the Primitiue Church it was lawfull for Presbyters and such as were entered into holy Orders to haue wiues so that they refrained from companying with them vpon the dayes wherein they celebrated that afterwardes in the Westerne Church they that were entred into holy Orders were commaunded to containe which commaundement hee sayth yeelded matter to ensnare the soules of many men and therefore hee verily beleeueth that as the Church brought in this precept of continencie so the time will come when the same Church will reverse and revoke it againe which revocation shall be agreeable to that of the Apostle who sayth Concerning Virgins I haue no commaundement but I giue advice With Antonius agreeth Panormitanus who proposing the question whether the Church may giue leaue to Presbyters to cōtract mariage or to liue in mariage as the Graecians doe aunswereth that hee beleeueth it may that he is assured it may in respect of them who are not tyed by vow implyed or expressed Which hee proueth because continencie in secular Cleargy-men is not of the substance of order nor prescribed by the Law of GOD. For that otherwise the Graecians should sinne and no custome could excuse them seeing no custome is of force against the Law of GOD. Neither doth hee onely thinke that the Church hath power thus to doe but professeth hee thinketh it were behoouefull and for the good and saluation of the soules of men that such as are willing to containe and to lead a life of higher perfection should be left to their owne will and that such as are not willing to containe should by the Decree of the Church be set free to contract marriage Alfonsus Veruecius as Andreas Frisius telleth vs discoursing of the words of Paul For the auoyding of fornication let euery one haue his owne wife sayth they containe no precept but a concession or graunt and affirmeth that by vertue of this grant euery one that cannot otherwise auoyde fornication may marry a wife And after certaine remedies prescribed to be obserued vsed by Presbyters that they may auoyde fornication at last confidently giueth counsell to him who hauing tryed all those meanes cannot containe rather to marry a wife and soe to prouide for his owne saluation then to commit fornication and so cast himselfe head-long into eternall death but yet perswadeth such a one to doe nothing without seeking the Popes consent hopeing that he will dispense in such a case seeing the power hee hath was giuen him for edification not for destruction I dare confidently say sayth Polydere Virgill that it hath beene soe farre from beeing true that this inforced Chastity hath excelled that which is in marriage that no sinfull crime hath brought greater disgrace to the order of the Ministery more euill to religion or made a greater and deeper impression of sorrowe in all good men then the staine of the impure lust of Priests And therefore haply it were behoouefull for the Christian common-wealth and for the good of them that are of that sacred order and ranke that at the last a publicke Lawe might bee made to giue leaue to Priestes to contract mariage Wherein rather they might liue honestly and holily without infamy then in most filthy manner defile themselues with this sinne of Nature And Bishoppe Lindan sayth Surely euen at this day it is lawfull to take chast and honest married men into the order of Priesthood which in my judgment might much better bee done in some prouinces of Germany then to set ouer them certaine most impure companions or any longer to endure and tollerate Knaues Apostataes and sacralegious Pastours With these agreeth Erasmus affirming that in his conceipt hee should not ill deserue nor take the worst course for the furthering of humane affaires the right informing of the manners of men which should procure liberty of mariage if it might bee both for Priestes and Monkes And therefore Sigismund the Emperour a lttle before the Councell of Basill began published a reformation of the Cleargy in which among other things this was one that forasmuch as more euill commeth by the forbidding of mariage then good it were better and more safe to permit Cleargy-men to liue in the state of mariage according to the custome of the Orientall Churches then to forbid them so to do In the Councell of Trent the Orator of Bauaria moued to the same purpose And Chemnitius reporteth from George the Prince of Anhault that Adolphus Bishoppe of Mersbergh his vncle would often say before euer Luther began to stirre that if there were a Councell hee would bee a perswader that Cleargy-men might be permitted to marry and professed that hee knew that many for the quiet of their consciences secretly contracted mariage with those women which they kept vnder the name of Concubines And surely euen the Popes themselues were content to winke at things in this kinde Georgius Cassander a man of infinite reading excellent iudgment and singular piety and sincerity and therefore soe much respected and honoured by Ferdinand and Maximilian the second that they held him the fittest man in the world to compose the controuersies in religion sent for him to come vnto them for the same purpose is clearely of opinion that howsoeuer some in ancient times forbad the marriage of Cleargy-men yet now it were fit and necessary that that lawe were abrogated first because it is found by wofull experience to bee the cause of many grieuous euils secondly for that the seuerity of Discipline and strictnesse in all courses of life that was in vse when this Lawe began first to bee vrged is cleane gone or much decayed euen in the opinion of all Soe that that which was fitte in those times may now bee most vnfitte Thirdly for that many godlie and learned men are thereby discouraged from entring into the Ministerie refusing to binde themselues to the obseruation of this lawe of single life whereby the Church looseth the benefitte of their labours fewe young men
These men therefore make 2. sorts of vowes naming some simple and other solemne and affirme that the latter do debarre men from mariage and voyd their mariages if they do marry but that the former do so debarre them from marrying that they cannot marry without some offence and yet if they do their mariage is good and not to be voyded The Diuines of the Church of Rome as Caietane rightly noteth differ much in opinion about the difference of these vowes For some of them thinke that they differ in such sort as that one of them is a promise onely and the other a reall and actuall exhibition that the solemnity of a mans vow consisteth in a reall and actuall exhibition of himselfe and putting himselfe into such an estate as cannot stand with marriage But this opinion as hee rightly noteth cannot bee true seeing there is no such repugnance simply and in the nature of the thinges betweene the Order of the holy Ministery and Marriage as appeareth in that the Ministers of the Greeke Church as tyed by noe vowe are judged by all to liue in lawfull Mariage notwithstanding their Ministery and also in that the entering into noe religious Order voydeth mariage vnlesse it be approued by the Church There is therefore as he sheweth another opinion that it is not from different nature of the vowes that the one voydeth mariage contracted and the other doth not but from the authority of the Church that will haue mariage after a vowe made in one sort to bee voyd and not in another The latter of these two opinions Bellarmine sayth Scotus Paludanus and Caietane follow and as Panormitan reporteth the whole schoole of Canonistes And these do answere to the authorities of the Fathers denying mariages to bee voyde after a solemne vowe that they are to bee vnderstood to deny them to be voyde by Gods Law and that there was no Law of man then passed to make them voyde when they liued that they knew of and that therefore they might rightly bee of opinion in those times that no vowes made insuing marriages to be voyde seeing no vowes doe voyde marriages by GODS Law and there was no law of man in their time making marriage voyde in respect of a vowe made to the contrary Soe that euen in the judgment of many of the best learned of our Aduersaries themselues Mariage after a vow is not voyd by Gods law but only by the positiue Constitution of the Church which will haue it so to bee But against this positiue Constitution two things may be alleaged first that it began from that erroneous conceipt which Anstine refuteth in his booke do bono viduitatis as it appeareth by the Epistle of Innocentius grounding his resolution for voyding of mariages in this kinde vpon that verie reason of their beeing espoused to Christ which haue vowed vnto GOD that they will liue continently Secondly that the Church hath no power simply to forbidde any man to marry whom Gods Law leaueth free seeing single life is one of the things that men may be counselled and advised vnto but cannot be prescribed and imposed by commandement that the Church may keepe men from mariage if they will inioy some fauours as wee see in Colledges and Societies or that She may by her Censures punish such as vnaduisedly and without just cause shall breake their vow and promise wee make no question but that She may simply forbid any one to marry how faulty and punishable soeuer otherwise wee vtterly deny Neyther is the reason that is brought to proue this power to bee in the Church of any force For though it were graunted that the Church by her authority for respectes best knowne to her selfe may forbid a man to marry with some of those with whom God permitteth him to marry yet wil it not follow that she may absolutely forbid any one to cōtract mariage seeing parents to whom it pertaineth to direct the choyce of their children may forbid them to marry with such as they iustly dislike and yet they may not simplie restraine them from marying So that though it were yeelded that the Church for causes best known to her selfe may forbid mariage with moe then the Law of God doth and that in such sort as to void it hauing greater power in this behalfe then naturall parents yet would it not follow that shee may simplie forbid any one to marry and voide his mariage if he do whereas the Law of God voideth it not And so vvee see that as mariage after a solemne vow is not void by the Lavv of God so the Church hath no power to make any law to make it voyd But because though it be so yet it may seeme that no man that had vowed the cōtrary can marry without sinne it remaineth that wee proceede to consider and see whether there be any cases wherein a man that vowed the contrary may marry without offence to God First touching this poynt the Schoole-men generally resolue that the Pope may dispence with a Priest Deacon or Sub-deacon to marry though he haue sollemnely vowed the contrary by entring into holy Orders because the duty and bond of containing is not essentially annexed vnto holy Orders but by the Canon of the Church onely Aquinas and they of that time thought hee might not dispense with a Monke to marry For that single life is essentially implyed in the profession of a Monke and cannot be seperated from the same as it may from the office and calling of a Priest But since that time the generall opinion is that he may because though single life cannot be separated from the profession of a Monke yet he that is a Monke may be freed from that profession that he hath made and cease to be a Monke Neither is this onely the opinion of the Schooles but the practise of Popes hath concurred with the same For as Petrus Paludanus reporteth a Pope reviued a Monke who was next in blood and to succeed in the Kingdome of Arragon and dispensed with him to marry a wife for the good of that Kingdome Caietan sayth the like is reported in the stories of Constantia daughter and heire of Roger King of Sicily who was a religious woman and of fifty yeares of age and yet by the dispensation of Caelestinus was called out of the Cloyster and permitted to marry with the Emperour Henry the Sixth who begatte of her Fredericke the Second And Andreas Frisius reporteth out of the Histories of Polonia that Casimirus sonne of Mersistaus King of Polonia was a Monke and ordayned a Deacon and yet when after the death of Mersistaus his father there was none to sway the Scepter of that Kingdome whence many mischiefes followed Benedict the Ninth gaue him leaue to marry a wife making him to leaue his Cloyster his Vowes and Deaconship that so there might bee a succession in that Kingdome So that there is no question but that for a
not precisely in that they were Apostles as they reported the precepts of CHRIST deliuered the Doctrine of faith but by vertue of their pastorall power in generall common to them with other Pastors of the Church though in that they were no ordinarie Pastors but Apostles they had absolute infallibilitie could make no lawes or constitutions but good profitable in which respect no other are equall to them So that the Pastors of the Church now haue that power by which the Apostles made their Ecclesiasticall constitutions touching order comelinesse but not with like assurance of not erring in making or reversing such lawes therefore the Treatiser cannot from hence inferre that the present Church the guides of it haue infallible iudgement touching matters of faith or ceremonies §. 2 IN the next place first he produceth my distinction of the Church considered as it comprehendeth all the faithfull that are haue beene since Christ appeared in the flesh or onelie such as are haue beene since the Apostles times or such alone as are at one time in the world Secondly an assertion that the present Church may be said at all times to be the pillar of truth not to erre because it euer retaineth a sauing profession of heauenlie truth that is true doctrine concerning all such principall points as are of the substance of Faith and needfull to bee knowne and beleeued expresly by euery man Thirdly he addeth that we deny so much as the virtuall beleefe of other things to be necessary which he pronounceth to be an absurd opinion For the confutation of my distinction of the Church considered in those three different sorts hee asketh if there be now presently any Church in the world including in it all the faithfull that are and haue beene since CHRIST appeared in the flesh or at least since the Apostles times which is a most childish senselesse demaund For it will easily bee answered that the Church that includeth in it all these faithfull ones is now extant in the world as he is pleased to speake in that some of her parts betweene which and the rest there is a connexion are now in the world though all be not as time whereof the parts are present past to come is now though all parts of it be not now But his inference vpon supposall of our answer is more strange then the question For if it bee granted that the Church including in it all these holy ones hath not all her parts in the world at one time he inferreth from thence that the promises of Christ cannot be verified of it As if Christs promises were verified of the church only in respect of those parts that it hath in the world at one time whereas Bellarmine himself teacheth that the promise of the churches being in all parts of the world is not verified of it at one time but successiuely in that though it be not in all parts Provinces of the world at one time yet at one time or other it spreadeth it selfe into euery part of it And Stapleton defineth the church according to the state of the New Testament to be a collectiue multitude of men professing the name of Christ beginning at Hierusalem frō thence dispersed throughout the world increasing spreading it self through all nations alwaies visible manifest mixt of good bad elect reprobate in respect of faith Sacraments holy in respect of origin successiō Apostolique in extent catholique in cōnexion order of parts one in duratiō continuance perpetuall expressing vnto vs that church that includeth all faithful ones since Christ till now nay till the end of the world Which is no doubt a reall body hath many excellent promises made vnto it though all the parts of it be not in the world at one time But let vs goe forward and wee shall see how this silly Treatiser forgetteth himselfe For first hee confesseth that the diuerse considerations of the church proposed by mee may bee in our vnderstanding and yet presently addeth that wee cannot distinguish them really one from another which hee goeth about to proue because the Church in the first consideration includeth in it the same Church as it is taken in the second and third but the proofe is to weake for euery child will tell him that these considerations may be really distinguished one from another because though the former includeth the latter yet the latter includeth not the former For as euery man is a liuing thing but euery liuing thing is not a man soe the Church consisting of all faithfull ones that are and haue beene since Christ appeared in the flesh includeth in it all those that now presently are in the world but the Church consisting of those onely that are at one time includeth not the other but is included in it as a part in the whole and consequently cannot challenge all the priuiledges belonging to it more then the part of a thing may challenge all that pertaineth to the whole soe that the Church in the former consideration may bee free from error though not in the latter But the Treatiser will proue it cannot seeing if the Church including in it all faithfull ones that are or haue beene since Christ be free from error euery part of it must be free and consequently the present Church as a man cannot be sayd to bee free from sicknesse vnlesse euery part of him be free For answere where-vnto wee say that the Church being a collectiue body may be sayd to be free from error in another sort then a man is said to be free from sicknesse for a man cannot be sayd to be free from sicknesse vnlesse euery part be free but the Church may rightly be sayd to be free from error if all her parts erre not though some doe for otherwise I would aske of this Treatiser whether the Church were free frō error in the daies of Athanasius when as Vincentius Lyrinensis sayth almost all the Bishops of the Latine Church were misled by force or fraud and when Liberius Bishop of Rome subscribed to heresie as Athanasius and Hierome testifie If the Church were not free from errour at that time where is the priuiledge of neuer erring If it were it was but in respect of some few partes whence it will follow that the Church may be sayd to bee free from errour though many partes bee not if any continue sound for here the greater and more principall partes did erre But that the Church may be sayd to be free from errour though all parts be not it is euident in that they who most stifly maintaine the not erring of the present Church yet confesse that some parts of it do erre For Stapleton and Bellarmine who both thinke the present Roman Church to be free from error yet deny that she is free in all her parts and tell vs there are some who are
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