maine and principall grounds vpon the authoritie of the Bishop of Rome and vpon the authoritie of generall Councils ONVPHRIVS to vphold the one vndoeth the other and to cleare HONORIVS of all suspition of heresie he bringeth the generall Councill vnder a suspition of falsification Then let ONVPHRIVS either produce the true and vncorrupt acts of the sixt generall Councill which he will neuer be able to doe or else for all his fectlesse apologie HONORIVS name is spotted with the blame of heresie And of late dayes the Romaine chaire hath not onely renued but also doubled the heresie of the Collyridians damned in the dayes of EPIPHANIVS For the Collyridians gaue onely some piece of diuine honour to the blessed virgin the mother of our Lorde but the Romaine Bishops in suffering by their toleration conniuence or rather allowance the Psalter of our Lady as they call it to be printed diuulgat and vsed by Christian people wherein all the honour due to Christ not excepting the sitting at the right hand of the Father Psal. 110. is all attributed vnto the virgine MARIE In so doing I say they haue not onely renued but also doubled the heresie of the Collyridians In the Councill of Basil gathered Ann. 1431. EVGENIVS 4 then B. of Rome was deposed by the general Councill of Basil as a notable schismaticke and perturber of the peace of Christes Church Yet his name is in the roll of the succession of Romaine Bishops and all these who haue sitten in the chaire of Rome since the dayes of EVGENIVS 4. are successors to a perjured schismaticke justly deposed by the generall Councill of Basil with consent of the Emperour SIGISMVND Now let Romanists advise whether they will blame the generall Councill or the Bishop of Rome EVGENIVS 4. If they blame the general Councill then the generall Councill may erre euen in great fundamentall points of their owne faith for it leaneth vpon the authoritie of the B. of Rome Councils And if they wil blame EVGENIVS 4. as a schismaticke worthy of deposition then is their succession whereof they glorie so much vtterly cut off since the dayes of EVGENIVS the fourth As touching idolatrie I dare boldly set the Romaine chaire in higher degree then the idolarrous Jewes of old of whom IEREMIE speaketh that according to the number of their cities was the number of their gods Ier. 2. ver 28 Nowe there are not so many cities in Juda as there are Angels Apostles martyres and Saints in heauen to whom the Romaine chaire giueth the glory of Christ maketh them mediators of intercestion Therefore it is an impudent presumption to brag of Apostolicke succession when as by heresie schisme and idolatrie they haue so oft fallen and yet continue in falling away from the footsteps of the Apostles Now because commonly like errours haue like grounds let vs consider what was the ground of the error of the succession of AARON and thereby may easily be discerned the ground of the error of the alledged Apostolicke succession The posteritie of AARON beeing reprooued by IEREMIE the Prophet tooke the reproofe in a very euill part supponing that they were exeemed from errour in maters of religion because of the promises of God made to the tribe of LEVI therfore they say Come and let vs imagine some deuise against Jeremiah for the Lâ—…w shâ—…ll not perish from the Priest nor counsell from the wise nor the word from the Prophet Cone and let vâ—… smite him for his tongue and let vs not takâ—… heede to his words Ier. 18. ver 18. The promises made to the tribe of LEVI are contained Deut. 33 ver 8. 9 10. 11. And after the captiuitie of Babylon MALACHI making an ample declaration of the promises made to LEVI saith My couenant was with him of life peace Igaue him feare he feared me was afraid before my name The Lawe of trueth waâ—… in his mouth and there was none iniquitie found in his l ps he walked with me in peace and equitie did turne many away from iniquitie For the Priests lips should preserue knowledge and they should secke the Law at his mouth for he is the messenger of the Lord of hosts Mal. 2. ver 5. 6. 7. Of this promise of God spoken by MOSES and long after amplified by the Prophet MALACHI many did collect that the successors of AARON LEVI could not erre in religion but how erroneous false this conclusion was the wordes of the Prophet MALACHI immediatly after following do declare But ye are gone out of the way ye haue caused many to fall by the Lawe ye haue broken the couenant of Leui saith the Lord of Hostes Mal. 2. ver 8. If we had no further to alledge but these two testimonies that IEREMIE MALACHI did reprooue the successors of LEVI AARON of great errours defection notwithstanding of the promises made to them their posteritie yet these two witnesses being Prophets of God doe aboundantly prooue that promises made to LEVI and AARON do not exeeme their succession from error in religion But marke another circumstance in the ground of this errour of AARONS succession which was this God made a promise conditionall which they supposing to be absolute tooke libertie to doe what they lifted The conditions are clearely set downe by the Prophet MALACHI cap. 2. If they feared God conuerted others from their wicked waies kept the key of knowledge then they should be counted the Ambassadours of the Lord of hostes but these conditions being broken they hauing gone out of the way hauing caused many to fall by the law hauing broken the couenant of LEVI they were so far from being counted the Ambassadours of God that God made them vile before al the people ver 9 Yea the Lord cursed them cast doung vpon their faces euen the doung of their solemne feastes made them like vnto it ibid. ver 3. This was the tragicall euent of AARONS successours who opened one of their eares to heare the promise of God but closed the other eare from hearing and marking the conditions that were required of them to whom the promise was made The Romaine Church not vnlike to the successors of AARON haue their eare opened to heare the promise of God made to the Apostles their successors in these words Behold I am with you vnto the end of the world Mat 28 ver 20. but they close their eares from hearing the condition required of the Apostles their successours contained in the same verse in these words teaching them to obserue all things whatsoeuer I command you Although they teach a doctrine repugnant to Christs commandement yea and a doctrine of deuils as PAVL speaketh 1. Tim. 4. yet must they be counted the Apostles successors and that Christ is with them that they do not erre But God wil cast their doung in their faces and make them like to
to be counted of according to the greatnes of the promises annexed to the succession as namely the succession of DAVID of whom God said His seede also will I make to endure for euer his throne as the dayes of heauen Psal. 89. 29 againe ver 35. 36. I haue sworne once by my holynesse that I will not faile Dauid saying his seede shal endure for euer and his throne shall be as the Sunne before me Here are ample promises to DAVID his succession confirmed by the Lordes oath by the Sun Moone as faithfull witnesses in heauen And that which was more then all the rest this succession of DAVID was a line leading to the great King Christ Iesus who should sit in the throne of his father DAVID of his kingdome there should be none end Luc. 1. for all these causes the succession of DAVID was greatly regarded Yet it is to be marked that all the promises othes testimonies honors did not carie with them a necessity that euery successour of DAVID should be in faith and religion like vnto DAVID but rather God foreseeing the contrarie faith If his ch◅ldren forsake my Law and walke not in my Judgements if they breake my statutes and keepe not my ordinances then w◅ll I visit their transgression with the rod and their iniquitte with strokes ibid ver 30. 31. 32. I suppone that no succession euer had more glorious and ample promises then the succession of DAVID yet these promises inferred no necessitie that euery king sitting on the throne of DAVID should bee heire also of the religion and faith of DAVID as well as of his kingdome And therfore to inferre vpon this ground that ample promises are made to the Apostles their successours that euery one who succeedeth to the Apostolick chaire shall keepe the true faith of the Apostles it is but a foolish and impertinent conclusion If any man shall replie that this was a succession of ciuill gouernours but the question now contrauerted is anent succession of Bishops and men in a spirituall calling True it is that DAVIDS successors succeeded to a ciuill gouernment yet seeing this succession was ratified by the oath of God and led also to Christ who is soueraine Lorde both of soule and body whatsoeuer priuiledge of standing in a good estate can be alledged in any succession the patterne of it is to be found in the succession of DAVID But this priuiledge that the successors of DAVID cannot erre in the true faith is not found no not in the great succession of DAVID Now to come to ecclesiasticall succession The priesthood of AARON was institute by God Numb 17. ver 5. It was confirmed by the miracle of the budding rodde ibid. ver 23. The vsarpers of AARONS office without a calling were also miraculously destroyed by fire that came downe from heauen Numb 16. Others were debarred from it euen in the dayes of NEHEMIAH Nehem. 7. ver 64. This succession of AARON was personall the son succeeding to the father in the Priesthood except some mutilation of a member or impotencie did hinder or any such like cause After AARON ELEAZAR and his son PHINEAS ABISHVA PHINEAS son and BVKKI HVZZI ZERACHIA MERAIOTH AMARIA ACHITVB ZADOK AHIMAAZ 1. Chron. 6. ver 50. 51. 52. 53. Many others after them were Priests of the stock of AARON yet did not all keepe fast the faith and religion of AARON yea some Priestes of AARONS stocke were notable Idolaters men-pleasers such as VRIAH in the dayes of AHAZ king of Juda who set vp an altar at the kings commandement according to the similitude of the altar of Damascus and offered sacrifices thereon 2. Reg. 16. Anent the succession of the Prophets euen when one good man succeeded to another good man the historie of scripture clearely declareth that men pointed out by God himselfe successours to an office yet by this are they not made succ◅ssours to their giftes for ELIZEVS was pointed out by God as successor to ELIAS in his prophetical office 1. Reg. 19. ver 16. yet by this was he not successor to his gifts as ELIZEVS petition of a double measure of the spirit of ELIAS clearely declareth 2. Reg. 2 ver 9 If the gift did necessarly accompany the succession what needed ELIZEVS to be carefull of the gift seeing he was sure of the succession The holy Apostles of Christ haue had a successiō shal haue vnto the end of the world to whō belōgeth the promise of Christ Behold I am with you vnto the end of the world Mat. 28. 20 But who are to be called true successors of the Apostles we haue declared already in the 1. Centurie taking our groūd out of scripture Act. 20 29. And out of Nazian in laudem Athanasii that darknes succeeding to light is not counted the true successor of lignt for the dissimilitude that is betweene darknes light But heere the question ariseth whether or not al Churches keeping the holy Apostolicke doctrine are bound to shew in write their succession from the Apostles◅ as the Priestes of the stocke of AARON after the captiuitie produced in write their lineal descent from AARON Nehem. 7. To this Tertul answereth lib. de pres◅ript adversus baret that Churches truely keeping the Apostolicke doctrine albeit they could not shew in write their succession from the Apostles yet are they to be counted Apostolicke Churches propter consang uinitatem doctrinae that is for their consanguinitie of doctrine But to come neerer and to examine whether the Romaine church hath kept Apostolicke doctrine in their succession without all spot of heresie as they affirme or not And first the chaire of Rome was not free of the heresie of EVTYCHES as clearly appeareth by the sixt generall Councill which was the third of those Councils which were gathered at Constantinople in the 12. yeere of the empire of CONSTANTINVS POGONATVS Ann. 681. Buco◅ In this Councill MACARIVS Patriarch of Antiochia and STEPHANVS his disciple stood vp pertinaciously defended the error of EVTYCHES were excommunicate by the Councill yet they had defended their opinion by the Synodicke letter of HONORIVS sometime B. of Rome written to SERGIVS B. of Constantinople Wherein it was clearely knowne that HONORIVS was infected with the errour of EVTYCHES for the which cause HONORIVS B. of Rome after his death in the sixt generall Councill was also excommunicat as an Heretique Tom Concil hist. Magdeb. This is not vnknown to some writers who notwithstanding defend this opinion that the Bishop of Rome cannot erre in maters of ◅aith ONVPHRIVS saith that the Acts of the sixt generall Councill containing a condemnatory sentence against HONORIVS Bishop of Rome were corrupted by the Grecians and that the Canons of this Councill as they are set foorth are supposititious and false Forsooth ONVPHRIVS is a worthy aduocate to pleade such a bad and reprobat cause The faith of the Romanists leaning vpon two
the Essenes a sect of the Iewes of whose customes Iosephus accurately writeth And indeede the similitude of the maners of the Monkes and the Essenes conuerted to Christian Religion agreeth in many points for they had all things common they laboured with their hands were men accustomed with long abstinence from meate and drinke Eusebius reserreth the beginning of the Monasticke forme of liuing to the auditors of the Euangelist Marke in Alexandria for a number of them inclined their minds to the contemplation of diuine mysteries and separated themselues from the companie of the multitude who dwelt in townes and they had their habitation in the wildernes about the lake Maria or Maris This place was called the Wildernesse of Nitria Eusebius confirmeth this opinion by the testimonie of Philo. Finally some referre it to the time of the tenne Persecutions at what time many fled to the Mountaines to the Wildernesse and to solitary places wherein they contracted such a custome and habite of solitary liuing that euen in time of peace and when Persecutions were ended they continued still liuing in the Wildernesse Whatsoeuer was the originall of the Monasticke life it is certaine there was a greater show then substance of Religion in it for bodily exercises they profite little the not sparing the bodie is counted by the Apostle 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is a voluntary Religion which men haue inuented to themselues and GOD hath not commanded it True it is that men doe well if they subdue their bodies as Paul did to bring it in subjection lest by any meanes when he had preached to others he himselfe should be reproued And as true it is on the other part that incase men repose vpon these outwarde exercises as thinges in themselues meritorious and referre them not vnto the right ende as Paul did yea and if they joine not with abstinence from meate an abstinence also from sinne the LORD regardeth not the outwarde affliction of the bodie as the Prophet Isai clearely declareth in these wordes â—…s it such a fasting that I haue chosen that a man should afflict his soule for a day and to bow downe his head as a bulrush and to lie downe in sacke-cloth and asshes Wilt thou call this a fasting or an acceptable day to the LORD In the very originall ground of the Monasticke life I see this infirmitie That men imagined by changing of place to bee free of the snares of the Deuill But it is otherwise Adam was tempted in Paradise CHRIST was tempted in the Wildernesse and Sathan is ready to spreade his nette both in the prison and in the palace and by changing of place we cannot be free from his malice In the Epistle written by Basilius Magnus to Gregorius this is illustrate by the fit similitude of a man who saileth in a ship and findeth himselfe to bee sicke and secretely in his owne mind blameth the greatnesse of the vessell whereinto hee saileth but when hee steppeth downe into the little bote that accompanieth the ship his sicknesse continueth and is not abated whereby hee is compelled to come to a consideration of the right cause of his sicknesse that it is neither the great vessell nor the little vessell that is the cause of his grieuance but rather the corrupt humours that lurke within his owne bodie Euen so the permutation of place will not make vs free of the tentations of the Deuill as some men imagined And like as the consolations of GOD are not tyed to any certaine place for Moses in Arabia and vpon Mount Horeb was delited with the sight of GOD and in Pisga with the long expected sight of the promised land and the Apostle Iohn in the Isle of Pathmos saw many comfortable reuclations euen so the perilous snares of Sathan are spred out euery where no lesse then the consolations of GOD are The Monkes of olde were not all of one ranke for some of them were called Coenohitae or Conventuales Others were called Anchoritae The conuentuall Monkes albeit they were separated from the fellowship of the common people yet they had a fellowship amongst themselues and some of them dwelt in the Wildernesse such as the Conuentuall Monkes of Aegypt dwelt in the Wildernesse of Nitria and Schethis but the Conuentuall Monkes of Syria Persia Armenia and other places not so neere approaching to the Equinoctiall line as those of Aegypt were they dwelt in Townes and Villages because the inclemencie of alterable weather permitted them not to dwell in the Wildernesse as the Monkes of Aegypt did Notwithstanding some of the Conuentuall Monkes of that part of Syria which is called Interamnis or Mesopotamia as it were striuing against nature ouer-went the Monkes of Aegypt in that which the Apostle calleth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is a not sparing of the bodie for the Monkes of Aegypt dwelt in little Cottages and ate some quantitie of bread after long abstinence but the Monkes fore-saide had their remaining vpon the Mountaines and were couered with no roofe of any shop or lodge defending them against the injurie of the weather except onely with the roofe of Heauen and they ate no bread but only refreshed their hungrie bodies with the rootes of hearbes which they houcked out of the ground and for this kinde of pasturing the people called them Greges Of this ranke of conuentual monks about Nisibis Mount Sigeron were the monks following famous and much renowned to wit Batthaeus Eusebius Barges Abbos and Lazarus who afterward was ordained a Bishop and Abdaleos Zenon and Hetrodorus an olde man of whom Sozomen in the place aboue specified maketh particular mention To all these Conuentuall Monkes wheresoeuer they dwelt this was common that they were diuided into Conuentes and euery Conuent was gouerned by one Gouernour whom they reuerenced as children reuerence their father The Anachorites were Monks who dwelt in the Wildernes seuerally by themselues not deliting in fellowship as the Conuentual monks did Ruffin maketh the more reuerend record of the Anachorites or Eremites of Aegypt because he visited them had the honour to be blessed by imposition of their hands such as two Eremites bearing the name of Macarius Isidorus Pambus Moses Benjamin Scyron Helias Paulus in Apeliote Paulus in Focis Poemen Ioseph in Pispiri of whom there are large treatises in the Ecclesiâ—…sticall Historie Some of the Anachorites were so rude and iâ—…mane that they bowed their faces to the ground and ate 〈◊〉 and hearbes as beastes doe and if they had seene another mâ—…n they fled from him hid themselues as if they had no bâ—…ne procreated of the race of mankind The brethreÌ„ of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of whom Plutarch writeth are to be set by as vnworthie of any further remembrance And the common people justly called them Armenta that is Cattell There was yet another ranke of Eremites