had been then as commonly known and avowed 23. Whereas divers of the Fathers purposely do treat on methods of confuting Hereticks it is strange they should be so blind or dull as not to hit on this most proper and obvious way of referring debates to the decision of him to whose Office of Universal Pastour and Judge it did belong Particularly one would wonder at Vincentius Lirinensis that he on set purpose with great care discoursing about the means of setling points of Faith and of overthrowing Heresies should not light upon this notable way by having recourse to the Pope's Magisterial sentence yea that indeed he should exclude it for he after most intent study and diligent inquiry consulting the best and wisest men could find but two ways of doing it I saith he did always and from almost every one receive this answer that if either I or any other would find out the frauds and avoid the snares of up-start Hereticks and continue sound and upright in the true Faith he should guard and strengthen his Faith God helping him by these two means viz. First by the Authority of the Divine Law and then by the Tradition of the Catholick Church And again We before have said that this hath always been and is at present the custome of Catholicks that they prove their Faith by these two ways First by Authority of the Divine Canon then by the Tradition of the Vniversal Church Is it not strange that he especially being a Western man living in those parts where the Pope had got much sway and who doth express great reverence to the Apostolick See should omit that way of determining points which of all according to the modern conceits about the Pope is most ready and most sure 24. In like manner Tertullian professeth the Catholicks in his time to use such compendious methods of confuting Hereticks We saith he when we would dispatch against Hereticks for the Faith of the Gospel do commonly use these short ways which do maintain both the order of times prescribing against the lateness of impostours and the Authority of the Churches patronizing Apostolical tradition but why did he skip over a more compendious way than any of those namely standing to the judgment of the Roman Bishop 25. It is true that both he and St. Irenaeus before him disputing against the Hereticks of their times who had introduced pernicious novelties of their own devising when they alledge the general consent of Churches planted by the Apostles and propagated by continual successions of Bishops from those whom the Apostles did ordain in doctrines and practices opposite to those devices as a good argument and so indeed it then was next to a demonstration against them do produce the Roman Church as a principal one among them upon several obvious accounts And this indeed argueth the Roman Church to have been then one competent witness or credible retainer of tradition as also were the other Apostolical Churches to whose Testimony they likewise appeal but what is this to the Roman Bishop's judicial Power in such cases why do they not urge that in plain terms they would certainly have done so if they had known it and thought it of any validity Do but mark their words involving the force of their argumentation When saith Irenaeus we do again after allegation of Scripture appeal to that tradition which is from the Apostles which by successions of Presbyters is preserved in the Churches and That saith Tertullian will appear to have been delivered by the Apostles which hath been kept as holy in the Apostolical Churches let us see what milk the Corinthians did draw from Paul what the Philippians the Thessalonians the Ephesians do reade what also the Romans our nearer neighbours do say to whom both Peter and Paul did leave the Gospel sealed with their Bloud we have also the Churches nursed by John c. Again It is therefore manifest saith he in his Prescriptions against Hereticks that every doctrine which doth conspire with those Apostolical Churches in which the Faith originally was planted is to be accounted true as undoubtedly holding that which the Churches did receive from the Apostles the Apostles from Christ and Christ from God but all other doctrine is to be prejudged false which doth think against the truth of the Churches and of the Apostles and of Christ and of God their argumentation then in short is plainly this that the conspiring of the Churches in doctrines contrary to those which the Hereticks vented did irrefragably signifie those doctrines to be Apostolical which discourse doth no-wise favour the Roman pretences but indeed if we do weigh it is very prejudicial thereto it thereby appearing that Christian Doctrines then in the canvasing of points and assuring tradition had no peculiar regard to the Roman Churche's testimonies no deference at all to the Roman Bishop's Authority not otherwise at least than to the Authority of one single Bishop yielding attestation to tradition 26. It is odd that even old Popes themselves in elaborate tracts disputing against Hereticks as Pope Celestine against Nestorius and Pelagius Pope Leo against Eutyches do content themselves to urge testimonies of Scripture and arguments grounded thereon not alledging their own definitive Authority or using this parlous argumentation I the Supreme Doctour of the Church and Judge of controversies do assert thus and therefore you are obliged to submit your assent 27. It is matter of amazement if the Pope were such as they would have him to be that in so many bulky Volumes of ancient Fathers living through many ages after Christ in those vast treasuries of learning and knowledge wherein all sorts of truth are displayed all sorts of duty are pressed this momentous point of doctrine and practice should nowhere be expressed in clear and peremptory terms I speak so for that by wresting words by impertinent application by streining consequences the most ridiculous positions imaginable may be deduced from their Writings It is strange that somewhere or other at least incidentally in their Commentaries upon the Scripture wherein many places concerning the Church and its Hierarchy do invite to speak of the Pope in their Treatises about the Priesthood about the Unity and Peace of the Church about Heresie and Schism in their Epistles concerning Ecclesiastical Affairs in their Historical narrations about occurrences in the Church in their concertations with heterodox adversaries they should not frequently touch it they should not sometimes largely dwell upon it Is it not marvellous that Origen St. Hilary St. Cyril St. Chrysostome St. Hierome St. Austin in their Commentaries and Tractates upon those places of Scripture Tu es Petrus Pasce oves whereon they now build the Papal Authority should be so dull and drowsie as not to say a word concerning the Pope That St. Austin in his so many elaborate Tractates against the Donatists wherein he discourseth so prolixly about the Church its Unity Communion
Scripture And also receives and venerates with the like pious respect and reverence the Traditions themselves which have been preserved by continual succession in the Catholick Church Among which Traditions they reckon all the tricks and trumpery of their Mass-service together with all their new notions about Purgatory Extreme unction c. He also used several ceremonies as mystical benediction lights incensings garments and many other such things from Apostolical discipline and tradition The Scriptures affirm themselves to be written for common instruction comfort edification in all piety they do therefore recommend themselves to be studyed and searched by all people as the best and surest means of attaining knowledge and finding truth The fathers also do much exhort all people even women and girles constantly to reade and diligently to study the Scriptures But the Pope doth keep them from the people locked up in Languages not understood by them prohibiting Translations of them to be made or used The Scripture teacheth and common sense sheweth and the Fathers do assert nothing indeed more frequently or more plainly that all necessary points of faith and good morality are with sufficient evidence couched in Holy Scripture so that a man of God or pious men may thence be perfectly furnished to every work But they contrary-wise blaspheme the Scriptures as obscure dangerous c. Common sense dictateth that devotions should be performed with understanding and affection and that consequently they should be in a known tongue And Saint Paul expresly teacheth that it is requisite for private and publick edification from this Doctrine of Paul it appears that it is better for the edification of the Church that publick prayers which are said in the audience of the people should be said in a tongue common to the Clergy and the people than that they should be said in Latin All ancient Churches did accordingly practise and most others do so beside those which the Pope doth ride But the Pope will not have it so requiring the publick Liturgy to be celebrated in an unknown tongue and that most Christians shall say their devotions like Parrots He anathematizeth those who think the Mass should be celebrated in a vulgar tongue that is all those who are in their right wits and think it fit to follow the practice of the ancient Church The Holy Scripture teacheth us that there is but one Head of the Church and the Fathers do avow no other as we have otherwhere shewed But the Pope assumeth to himself the headship of the Church affirming all power and authority to be derived from him into the subject members of the Church We decree that the Roman Pontife is the true Vicar of Christ and the head of the whole Church The Scripture declareth that God did institute marriage for remedy of incontinency and prevention of sin forbidding the use of it to none who should think it needfull or convenient for them reckoning the prohibition of it among heretical doctrines implying it to be imposing a snare upon men But the Pope and his Complices do prohibit it to whole Orders of men Priests c. engaging them into dangerous vows Our Lord forbiddeth any marriage lawfully contracted to be dissolved otherwise than in case of adultery But the Pope commandeth Priests married to be divorced And that marriages contracted by such persons should be dissolved He dissolveth matrimony agreed by the profession of monkery of one of the espoused If any shall say that matrimony confirmed not consummate is not dissolved by the solemn profession of religion of either party let him be Anathema Our Saviour did institute and enjoin us under pain of damnation if we should wilfully transgress his order to eat of his body and drink of his bloud in participation of the Holy Supper The Fathers did accordingly practise with the whole Church till late times But notwithstanding Christ's institution as they express it Papal Synods do prohibit all Laymen and Priests not celebrating to partake of Christ's bloud so maiming and perverting our Lord's Institution and yet they decline to drink the bloud of our redemption In defence of which practice they confound body and bloud and under a curse would oblige us to believe that one kind doth contain the other or that a part doth contain the whole Whereas our Lord saith that whoso eateth his flesh and drinketh his bloud hath eternal life and consequently supposeth that bad men do not partake of his body and bloud yet they condemn this assertion under a curse The Holy Scripture and the Fathers after it commonly do call the elements of the Eucharist after consecration bread and wine affirming them to retain their nature But the Popish Cabal anathematizeth those who say that bread and wine do then remain If any shall say that in the Holy Sacrament of the Eucharist the substance of bread and wine remain let him be Anathema The nature of the Lord's Supper doth imply communion and company but they forbid any man to say that a Priest may not communicate alone so establishing the belief of non-sense and contradiction The Holy Scripture teacheth us that our Lord hath departed and is absent from us in body untill that he shall come to judge which is called his presence that heaven whither he ascended and where he sitteth at God's right hand must hold him till the times of the restitution of all things But the Pope with his Lateran and Tridentine Complices draw him down from heaven and make him corporally present every day in numberless places here The Scripture teacheth us that our Lord is a man perfectly like to us in all things But the Pope and his adherents make him extremely different from us as having a body at once present in innumerable places insensible c. devested of the properties of our body thereby destroying his humane nature and in effect agreeing with Eutyches Apollinarius and other such pestilent Hereticks The Scripture representeth him born once for us but they affirm him every day made by a Priest uttering the words of consecration as if that which before did exist could be made as if a man could make his Maker The Scripture teacheth that our Lord was once offered for expiation of our sins but they pretend every day to offer him up as a propitiatory Sacrifice These devices without other foundation than a figurative expression which they resolve to expound in a proper sense although even in that very matter divers figurative expressions are used as they cannot but acknowledge they with all violence and fierceness obtrude upon the belief as one of the most necessary and fundamental Articles of the Christian Religion The Scripture teacheth us humbly to acknowledge the rewards assigned by God to be gratuitous and free and that we after we have done all must acknowledge our selves unprofitable
servants But the Papists curse those who although out of humility and modesty will not acknowledge the good works of justified persons to be truly meritorious deserving the encrease of grace eternal life and augmentation of glory so forcing us to use saucy words and phrases if not impious in their sense The Scripture teacheth one Church diffused over the whole world whereof each part is bound to maintain charity peace and communion with the rest upon brotherly terms But the Romanists arrogate to themselves the name and privilege of the onely Church condemning all other Churches beside their own and censuring all for Apostatical who do not adhere to them or submit to their yoke Just like the Donatists who said that the world had apostatized excepting those who upon their own terms did communicate with them onely the communion of Donatus remained the true Church The Holy Scripture biddeth us take care of persons pretending to extraordinary Inspirations charging on the Holy Spirit their own conceits and devices Such have been their Synods boldly fathering their Decrees on God's Spirit And their Pope is infallible by virtue of inspiration communicated to him when he pleaseth to set himself right in his Chair Whence we may take them for bodies of Enthusiasts and Fanaticks the difference onely is that other Enthusiasts pretend singly they conjunctly and by conspiracy Others pretend it in their own direction and defence these impose their dreams on the whole Church If they say that God hath promised his Spirit to his Church it is true but he hath no less plainly and frequently promised it to single Christians who should seek it earnestly of him The ancient Fathers could in the Scriptures hardly discern more than two Sacraments or Mysterious Rites of our Religion by positive Law and Institution of our Saviour to be practised But the Popes have devised others and under uncharitable curses propound them to be professed for such affirming them to confer grace by the bare performance of them Every Clergy-man and Monk is bound by Pius IV. to profess there are just seven of them and the Tridentine Synod anathematizeth all those who do say there are more or fewer although the Ancients did never hit on that number But these our Sacraments both contain grace and also confer it upon those who worthily receive them They require men to believe under a curse that each of those were instituted of Christ and confer grace by the bare performance Particularly they curse those who do not hold matrimony for a Sacrament instituted by Christ and conferring grace What can be more ridiculous than to say that marriage was instituted by Christ or that it doth confer grace Yet with another anathema they prefer Virginity before it and why forsooth is not that another Sacrament And then they must be comparing the worth of these Sacraments condemning those heavily who may conceive them equal as being Divine Institutions If any say that these seven Sacraments are so equal one to another that one is in no respect of more worth than another let him be Anathema The first as it seemeth who reckoned the Sacraments to be seven was Peter Lombard whom the Schoolmen did follow and Pope Eugenius IV. followed them and afterward the Trent men formed it into an Article back'd with an Anathema Upon which rash and peremptory Sentence touching all ancient Divines we may note 1. Is it not strange that an Article of Faith should be formed upon an ambiguous word or a term of art used with great variety 2. Is it not strange to define a Point whereof it is most plain that the Fathers were ignorant were in they never did agree or resolve any thing 3. Yea whereof they speak variously 4. Is it not odd and extravagant to damn or curse people for a point of so little consideration or certainty 5. Is it not intolerable arrogance and presumption to define nay indeed to make an Article of Faith without any manner of ground or colour of Authority either from Scripture or the Tradition of the ancient Fathers The Holy Scripture forbiddeth us to call any man Master upon earth or absolutely to subject our Faith to the dictates of any man It teacheth us that the Apostles themselves are not Lords of our faith so as to oblige us to believe their own inventions It forbiddeth us to swallow whole the Doctrines and Precepts of men without examination of them It forbiddeth us to admit various and strange doctrines But the Pope and Roman Church exact from us a submission to their Dictates admitting them for true without any farther enquiry or discussion barely upon his Authority They who are provided of any Benefices whatever having cure of Souls let them promise and swear obedience to the Roman Church They require of us without doubt to believe to profess to assert innumerable Propositions divers of them new and strange no-wise deducible from Scripture or Apostolical Tradition the very terms of them being certainly unknown to the Primitive Church devised by humane subtilty curiosity contentiousness divers of them being in all appearance to the judgment of common sense uncertain obscure and intricate divers of them bold and fierce divers of them frivolous and vain divers of them palpably false Namely all such Propositions as have been taught by their Great Junto's allowed by the Pope especially that of Trent Moreover all other things delivered defined and declared by the Sacred Canons and Oecumenical Councils and especially by the Holy Synod of Trent I undoubtedly receive and profess and also all things contrary thereunto and all heresies whatsoever condemned and rejected and anathematized by the Church I in like manner do condemn reject and anathematize This is the true Catholick Faith out of which there can be no Salvation This Usurpation upon the Consciences of Christians none like whereto was ever known in the world they prosecute with most uncharitable censures cursing and damning all who do not in heart and profession submit to him obliging all their consorts to join therein against all charity and prudence The Scripture enjoineth us to bear with those who are weak in faith and err in doubtfull or disputable matters But the Popes with cruel uncharitableness not onely do censure all that cannot assent to their devices which they obtrude as Articles of Faith but sorely persecute them with all sorts of punishments even with death it self a practice inconsistent with Christian meekness with equity with reason and of which the Fathers have expressed the greatest detestation They have unwoven and altered all Theology from head to foot and of Divine have made it Sophistical The Pope with his pack of mercenary Clients at Trent did indeed establish a Scholastical or Sophistical rather than a Christian Theology framing Points devised by the idle wits of latter times into Definitions and peremptory Conclusions back'd with Curses and Censures concerning
as well in the places and bounds of Ecclesiastical Jurisdiction as of Secular Empire Wherefore Saint Peter's Monarchy reason requiring might be cantonized into divers spiritual Supremacies and as other Ecclesiastical Jurisdictions have been chopp'd and chang'd enlarged or diminished removed and extinguished so might that of the Roman Bishop The Pope cannot retain power in any State against the will of the Prince he is not bound to suffer correspondences with Foreigners especially such who apparently have interests contrary to his honour and the good of his people 5. Especially that might be done if the continuance of such a Jurisdiction should prove abominably corrupt or intolerably grievous to the Church 6. That power is defectible which according to the nature and course of things doth sometime fail But the Papal Succession hath often been interrupted by contingencies of Sedition Schism Intrusion Simoniacal Election Deposition c. as before shewed and is often interrupted by Vacancies from the death of the Incumbents 7. If leaving their dubious and false suppositions concerning Divine Institution Succession to Saint Peter c. we consider the truth of the case and indeed the more grounded plea of the Pope that Papal preeminence was obtained by the wealth and dignity of the Roman City and by the collation or countenance of the Imperial authority then by the defect of such advantages it may cease or be taken away for when Rome hath ceased to be the Capital City the Pope may cease to be Head of the Church When the Civil powers which have succeeded the Imperial each in its respective Territory are no less absolute than it they may take it away if they judge it fit for whatever power was granted by humane Authority by the same may be revoked and what the Emperour could have done each Sovereign power now may doe for it self An indefectible power cannot be settled by man because there is no power ever extant at one time greater than there is at another so that whatever power one may raise the other may demolish there being no bounds whereby the present time may bind all posterity However no humane Law can exempt any Constitution from the providence of God which at pleasure can dissolve whatever man hath framed And if the Pope were devested of all adventitious power obtained by humane means he would be left very bare and hardly would take it worth his while to contend for Jurisdiction 8. However or whencesoever the Pope had his Authority yet it may be forfeited by defects and defaults incurred by him If the Pope doth encroach on the rights and liberties of others usurping a lawless domination beyond reason and measure they may in their own defence be forced to reject him and shake off his yoke If he will not be content to govern otherwise than by infringing the Sacred Laws and trampling down the inviolable Privileges of the Churches either granted by Christ or established by the Sanctions of General Synods he thereby depriveth himself of all Authority because it cannot be admitted upon tolerable terms without greater wrong of many others whose right out-weigheth his and without great mischief to the Church the good of which is to be preferred before his private advantage This was the Maxime of a great Pope a great stickler for his own dignity for when the Bishop of Constantinople was advanced by a General Synod above his ancient pitch of dignity that Pope opposing him did say that whoever doth affect more than his due doth lose that which properly belonged to him the which Rule if true in regard to another's case may be applied to the Pope for with what judgment ye judge ye shall be judged and with what measure ye mete it shall be measured to you again On such a supposition of the Papal encroachment we may return his words upon him It is too proud and immoderate a thing to stretch beyond ones bounds and in contempt of antiquity to be willing to invade other mens right and to oppose the Primacies of so many Metropolitans on purpose to advance the dignity of one For the privileges of Churches being instituted by the Canons of the holy Fathers and fixt by the Decrees of the venerable Synod of Nice cannot be pluckt up by any wicked attempt nor altered by any innovation Far be it from me that I should in any Church infringe the Decrees of our Ancestours made in favour of my Fellow-priests for I do my self injury if I disturb the rights of my brethren The Pope surely according to any ground of Scripture or Tradition or ancient Law hath no Title to greater Principality in the Church than the Duke of Venice hath in that State Now if the Duke of Venice in prejudice to the publick right and liberty should attempt to stretch his power to an absoluteness of command or much beyond the bounds allowed him by the constitution of that Common-wealth he would thereby surely forfeit his Supremacy such as it is and afford cause to the State of rejecting him the like occasion would the Pope give to the Church by the like demeanour 9. The Pope by departing from the Doctrine and Practice of Saint Peter would forfeit his Title of Successour to him for in such a case no succession in place or in name could preserve it The Popes themselves had swerved and degenerated from the example of Peter They are not the Sons of the Saints who hold the places of the Saints but they that doe their works Which place is rased out of St. Hierome They have not the inheritance of Peter who have not the faith of Peter which they tear asunder by ungodly division So Gregory Nazianzene saith of Athanasius that he was Successour of Mark no less in piety than presidency the which we must suppose to be properly succession otherwise the Mufti of Constantinople is Successour to St. Andrew of St. Chrysostome c. the Mufti of Jerusalem to St. James If then the Bishop of Rome instead of teaching Christian Doctrine doth propagate Errours contrary to it If instead of guiding into Truth and Godliness he seduceth into Falshood and Impiety If instead of declaring and pressing the Laws of God he delivereth and imposeth Precepts opposite prejudicial destructive of God's Laws If instead of promoting genuine Piety he doth in some instances violently oppose it If instead of maintaining true Religion he doth pervert and corrupt it by bold Defalcations by Superstitious additions by Foul mixtures and alloys If he coineth new Creeds Articles of Faith new Scriptures new Sacraments new Rules of Life obtruding them on the Consciences of Christians If he conformeth the Doctrines of Christianity to the Interests of his Pomp and Profit making gain godliness If he prescribe Vain Profane Superstitious ways of Worship turning Devotion into Foppery and Pageantry If instead of preserving Order and Peace he fomenteth Discords and Factions in the Church being a Make-bate and Incendiary among
Christians If he claimeth exorbitant Power and exerciseth Oppression and tyrannical Domination over his Brethren cursing and damning all that will not submit to his Dictates and Commands If instead of being a Shepherd he is a Wolf worrying and tearing the Flock by cruel Persecution He by such behaviour ipso facto depriveth himself of Authority and Office He becometh thence no Guide or Pastour to any Christian there doth in such case rest no obligation to hear or obey him but rather to decline him to discost from him to reject and disclaim him This is the reason of the case this the Holy Scripture doth prescribe this is according to the Primitive Doctrine Tradition and Practice of the Church For 10. In reason the nature of any spiritual Office consisting in Instruction in Truth and Guidance in Vertue toward attainment of Salvation if any man doth lead into pernicious Errour or Impiety he thereby ceaseth to be capable of such Office As a blind man by being so doth cease to be a Guide and much more he that declareth a will to seduce for Who so blind as he that will not see No man can be bound to follow any one into the ditch or to obey any one in prejudice to his own Salvation to die in his iniquity Seeing God saith in such a case 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 In vain do they worship me teaching for Doctrines the Precepts of men They themselves do acknowledge that Hereticks cease to be Bishops and so to be Popes Indeed they cease to be Christians for 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 such a one is subverted 11. According to their Principles the Pope hath the same relation to other Bishops and Pastours of the Church which they have to their people he being Pastour of Pastours But if any Pastour should teach bad Doctrine or prescribe bad Practice his people may reject and disobey him therefore in proportion the Pastours may desert the Pope misguiding or misgoverning them In such cases any Inferiour is exempted from obligation to comply with his Superiour either truly or pretendedly such 12. The case may be that we may not hold communion with the Pope but may be obliged to shun him in which case his Authority doth fail and no man is subject to him 13. This is the Doctrine of the Scripture The High Priest and his fellows under the Jewish Oeconomy had no less Authority than any Pope can now pretend unto they did sit in the Chair of Moses and therefore all their True Doctrines and Lawfull Directions the people were obliged to learn and observe but their false Doctrines and impious Precepts they were bound to shun and consequently to disclaim their Authority so far as employed in urging such Doctrines and Precepts 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Let them alone saith our Saviour they are blind leaders of the blind Under the Christian dispensation the matter is no less clear our Lord commandeth us to beware of false Prophets and to see that no man deceive us although he wear the cloathing of a Sheep or come under the name of a Shepherd coming in his name Saint Paul informeth us that if an Apostle if an Angel from heaven doth preach beside the old Apostolical Doctrine introducing any new Gospel or a Divinity devised by himself he is to be held accursed by us He affirmeth that even the Apostles themselves were not Lords of our faith nor might challenge any power inconsistent with the maintenance of Christian Truth and Piety We saith he can doe nothing against the truth but for the truth the which an ancient Writer doth well apply to the Pope saying that he could doe nothing against the truth more than any of his Fellow-priests could doe which S. Paul did in practice shew when he resisted Saint Peter declining from the truth of the Gospel He chargeth that if any one doth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 teach heterodoxies we should stand off from him that if any brother walketh disorderly and not according to Apostolical tradition we should withdraw from him that if any one doth raise divisions and scandals beside the doctrine received from the Apostles we should decline from him that we are to refuse any heretical person He telleth us that grievous Wolves should come into the Church not sparing the flock that from among Christians there should arise men speaking perverse things to draw disciples after them but no man surely ought to follow but to shun them These Precepts and Admonitions are general without any respect or exception of Persons great or small Pastour or Lay-man nay they may in some respect more concern Bishops than others for that they declining from truth are more dangerous and contagious 14. The Fathers in reference to this case do clearly accord both in their Doctrine and Practice St. Cyprian telleth us that a people obedient to the Lord's commandments and fearing God ought to separate it self from a sinfull Bishop that is from one guilty of such sins which unqualifie him for Christian Communion or Pastoral charge and Let not addeth he the common people flatter it self as if it could be free from the contagion of guilt if it communicate with a sinfull Bishop whose irreligious Doctrine or Practice doth render him uncapable of communion for how saith he otherwhere can they preside over integrity and continence if corruptions and the teaching of vices do begin to proceed from them They who reject the commandment of God and labour to establish their own tradition let them be strongly and stoutly refused and rejected by you St. Chrysostome commenting on Saint Paul's words If I or an Angel saith that Saint Paul meaneth to shew that dignity of persons is not to be regarded where truth is concerned that if one of the chief Angels from heaven should corrupt the Gospel he were to be accursed that not onely if they shall speak things contrary or overturn all but if they preach any small matter beside the Apostolical doctrine altering the least point whatever they are liable to an anathema And other-where very earnestly persuading his Audience to render due respect and obedience to there Bishop he yet interposeth this exception If he hath a perverse opinion although he be an Angel do not obey him but if he teacheth right things regard not his life but his words Ecclesiastical Judges as men are for the most part deceived For neither are Catholick Bishops to be assented to if peradventure in any case they are mistaken so as to hold any thing contrary to the canonical Scriptures of God If there be any Church which rejects the faith and does not hold the fundamentals of the Apostolical doctrine it ought to be forsaken lest it infect others with its heterodoxy If in such a case we must desert any Church then the Roman if any Church then much more any Bishop particularly him of
the state of men canonizing them declaring them to be Saints and proposing them to be worshipped and on the other side he damneth curseth and censureth his Fellow-servants God in his Law doth command us not to bow down our selves unto any image or worship the likeness of any thing in heaven or earth or under the earth the which Law whether Moral or Positive the Gospel doth ratifie and confirm charging us to keep our selves from idols and to fly worshipping of idols that is to observe the Second Commandment the validity whereof the Fathers most expresly assert and divers of them were so strict in there opinion about it that they deemed it unlawfull so much as to make any Image But the Pope and his Adherents in point-blank opposition to Divine Law and Primitive Doctrine doth require us to fall down before and to worship Images Moreover we decree that the Images of Saints be especially had and retain'd in Churches and that due honour and veneration be imparted to them so that by those Images which we kiss and before which we uncover the head and fall down we adore Christ and venerate the Saints whose likeness they bear Neither is he satisfied to recommend and decree these unwarrantable venerations but with a horrible strange kind of uncharitableness and ferity doth he anathematize those who teach or think any thing opposite to his decrees concerning them so that if the ancient Fathers should live now they would live under this curse The Holy Scripture under condition of Repentance and amendment of life upon recourse to God and trust in his Mercy through Jesus Christ our Saviour doth offer and promise Remission of sins Acceptance with God Justification and Salvation this is the tenour of the Evangelical Covenant nor did the Primitive Church know other terms But the Pope doth preach another Doctrine and requireth other terms as necessary for Remission of sins and Salvation for he hath decreed the confession of all and each mortal sin which a man by recollection can remember to a Priest to be necessary thereto anathematizing all who shall say the contrary although the Fathers particularly St. Chrysostome frequently have affirmed the contrary The which is plainly preaching another Gospel forged by himself and his abettours as offering Remission upon other terms than God hath prescribed and denying it upon those which Christianity proposeth He teacheth that no sin is pardoned without absolution of a Priest He requireth satisfaction imposed by a Priest besides repentance and new obedience as necessary Which is also another Gospel He dispenseth pardon of sin upon condition of performances unnecessary and insufficient such as undertaking Pilgrimages to the Shrines of Saints Visiting Churches making War upon Infidels or Hereticks Contributing money Repeating Prayers undergoing Corporal Penances c. Which is likewise to frame and publish another Gospel These Doctrines are highly presumptuous and well may be reputed heretical God hath commanded that every soul should be subject to the higher powers temporal as to God's Ministers so as to obey their Laws to submit to their Judgments to pay Tribute to them And the Fathers expound this Law to the utmost extent and advantage If every soul then yours if any attempt to except you he goes about to deceive you But the Pope countermandeth and exempteth all Clergy-men from those duties by his Canon Law excommunicating Lay-Judges who shall perform their Office in regard to them Because indeed some Lay-persons constrain Ecclesiasticks yea and Bishops themselves to appear before them and to stand to their judgment those that henceforth shall presume to doe so we decree that they shall be separate from the communion of the faithfull The Scriptures do represent the King or Temporal Sovereign as Supreme over his Subjects to whom all are obliged to yield special respect and obedience The Fathers yield him the same place above all next to God and subject to God alone The ancient good Popes did acknowledge themselves Servants and Subjects to the Emperour But later Popes like the man of sin in Saint Paul have advanced themselves above all Civil power claiming to themselves a supereminency not onely of Rank but of Power over all Christian Princes even to depose them Christ has committed the rights both of terrestrial and celestial government to that blessed man who bears the keys of eternal life If the secular power be believers God would have them subject to the Priests of the Church Christian Emperours ought to submit and not prefer the execution of their Laws to the Rulers of the Church God by indispensable Law hath obliged us to retain our obedience to the King even Pagan charging us under pain of damnation to be subject to him and not to resist him But the Pope is ready upon occasion to discharge Subjects from that obligation to absolve them from their solemn Oaths of Allegiance to encourage Insurrection against him to prohibit obedience We observing the Decrees of our holy Predecessours by our Apostolical Authority absolve those from their Oath who were bound by their Fealty and Oath to excommunicated persons and we forbid them by all means that they yield them no Allegiance till they come and make satisfaction Thus doth he teach and prescribe Rebellion Perjury together with all the Murthers and Rapines consequent on them which is a far greater Heresie than if he should teach Adultery Murther or Theft to be lawfull For they are enjoined by no authority to perform the Allegiance which they have sworn to a Christian Prince who is an adversary to God and his Saints and contemns their commands Not onely the Holy Scripture but Common Sense doth shew it to be an enormous presumption to obtrude for the Inspirations Oracles and Dictates of God any writings or Propositions which are not really such This the Pope doth notoriously charging us to admit divers writings which the greatest part of learned men in all Ages have refused for such as Sacred and Canonical anathematizing all those who do not hold each of them for such Even as they are extant in a Translation not very exact and framed partly out of Hebrew partly out of Greek upon divers accounts liable to mistake as its Authour St. Hierome doth avow According to which Decree all who consent with St. Hierome St. Austin St. Athanasius c. with common sense with the Authour of the Second of Maccabees himself must incur a curse what can be more uncharitable more unjust more silly than such a Definition He pretendeth to Infallibility or encourageth them who attribute it to him which is a continual Enthusiasm and profane bold Imposture The Scripture doth avow a singular reverence due to it self as containing the Oracles of God But the Pope doth obtrude the Oral Traditions of his Church divers of which evidently are new dubious vain to be worshipped with equal reverence as the Holy
special Revelations from God or upon personal graces his great Faith his special love to our Lord his singular zeal for Christ's Service or upon personal gifts and endowments his courage resolution activity forwardness in apprehension and in speech the which advantages are not transient and consequently a preeminency built on them is not in its nature such 2. All the pretence of Primacy granted to Saint Peter is grounded upon words directed to Saint Peter's Person characterized by most personal adjuncts as name parentage and which exactly were accomplished in Saint Peter's personal actings which therefore it is unreasonable to extend farther Our Lord promised to Simon Son of Jona to build his Church on him accordingly in eminent manner the Church was founded upon his Ministery or by his first preaching testimony performances Our Lord promised to give him the Keys of the Heavenly Kingdom this Power Saint Peter signally did execute in converting Christians and receiving them by Baptism into the Church by conferring the Holy Ghost and the like administrations Our Lord charged Simon Son of Jonas to feed his Sheep this he performed by preaching writing guiding and governing Christians as he found opportunity wherefore if any thing was couched under those promises or orders singularly pertinent to Saint Peter for the same reason that they were singular they were personal for These things being in a conspicuous manner accomplished in St. Peter's Person the sense of those words is exhausted there may not with any probability there cannot with any assurance be any more grounded on them whatever more is inferred must be by precarious assumption and justly we may cast at those who shall infer it that exposâ—ulation of Tertullian What art thou who dost overturn and change the manifest intention of our Lord personally conferring this on Peter 3. Particularly the grand promise to Saint Peter of founding the Church on him cannot reach beyond his person because there can be no other foundations of a Society than such as are first laid the successours of those who first did erect a Society and establish it are themselves but superstructures 4. The Apostolical Office as such was personal and temporary and therefore according to its nature and design not successive or communicable to others in perpetual descendence from them It was as such in all respects extraordinary conferred in a special manner designed for special purposes discharged by special aids endowed with special privileges as was needfull for the propagation of Christianity and founding of Churches To that Office it was requisite that the Person should have an immediate designation and commission from God such as Saint Paul so often doth insist upon for asserting his title to the Office Paul an Apostle not from men or by man not by men saith St. Chrysostome this is a property of the Apostles It was requisite that an Apostle should be able to attest concerning our Lord's Resurrection or Ascension either immediately as the twelve or by evident consequence as Saint Paul thus Saint Peter implyed at the choice of Matthias wherefore of those men which have companyed with us must one be ordained to be a witness with us of the Resurrection and Am I not saith Saint Paul an Apostle have I not seen the Lord according to that of Ananias The God of our Fathers hath chosen thee that thou shouldest know his will and see that just one and shouldest hear the voice of his mouth for thou shalt bear witness unto all men of what thou hast seen and heard It was needfull also that an Apostle should be endowed with miraculous gifts and graces enabling him both to assure his Authority and to execute his Office wherefore Saint Paul calleth these the marks of an Apostle the which were wrought by him among the Corinthians in all patience or perseveringly in signs and wonders and mighty deeds It was also in St. Chrysostome's opinion proper to an Apostle that he should be able according to his discretion in a certain and conspicuous manner to impart Spiritual Gifts as Saint Peter and Saint John did at Samaria which to doe according to that Father was the peculiar gift and privilege of the Apostles It was also a privilege of an Apostle by virtue of his commission from Christ to instruct all Nations in the Doctrine and Law of Christ He had right and warrant to exercise his function every where His charge was universal and indefinite the whole world was his Province he was not affixed to one place nor could be excluded from any he was as St. Cyril calleth him an Oecumenical Judge and an Instructour of all the Subcelestial World Apostles also did govern in an absolute manner according to discretion as being guided by infallible assistence to the which they might upon occasion appeal and affirm It hath seemed good to the Holy Ghost and us Whence their Writings have passed for inspired and therefore Canonical or certain Rules of Faith and Practice It did belong to them to found Churches to constitute Pastours to settle orders to correct offences to perform all such Acts of Sovereign Spiritual Power in virtue of the same Divine assistence according to the Authority which the Lord had given them for edification as we see practised by Saint Paul In fine the Apostleship was as St. Chrysostome telleth us a business fraught with ten thousand good things both greater than all privileges of grace and comprehensive of them Now such an Office consisting of so many extraordinary privileges and miraculous powers which were requisite for the foundation of the Church and the diffusion of Christianity against the manifold difficulties and disadvantages which it then needs must encounter was not designed to continue by derivation for it containeth in it divers things which apparently were not communicated and which no man without gross imposture and hypocrisie could challenge to himself Neither did the Apostles pretend to communicate it they did indeed appoint standing Pastours and Teachers in each Church they did assume Fellow-labourers or Assistents in the work of Preaching and Governance but they did not constitute Apostles equal to themselves in Authority Privileges or Gifts For who knoweth not saith St. Austin that principate of Apostleship to be preferred before any Episcopacy and the Bishops saith Bellarmine have no part of the true Apostolical Authority Wherefore Saint Peter who had no other Office mentioned in Scripture or known to Antiquity beside that of an Apostle could not have properly and adequately any Successour to his Office but it naturally did expire with his Person as did that of the other Apostles 5. Accordingly whereas the other Apostles as such had no Successours the Apostolical Office not being propagated the Primacy of Saint Peter whatever it were whether of Order or Jurisdiction in regard to his Brethren did cease with him for when there were no Apostles extant there could be no Head or Prince of
the Apostles in any sense 6. If some privileges of Saint Peter were derived to Popes why were not all why was not Pope Alexander VI. as holy as Saint Peter why was not Pope Honorius as found in his private judgment why is not every Pope inspired why is not every Papal Epistle to be reputed Canonical why are not all Popes endowed with power of doing miracles why doth not the Pope by a Sermon convert thousands why indeed do Popes never preach why doth not he cure men by his shadow he is say they himself his shadow what ground is there of distinguishing the privileges so that he shall have some not others where is the ground to be found 7. If it be objected that the Fathers commonly do call Bishops Successours of the Apostles to assoil that objection we may consider that whereas the Apostolical Office virtually did contain the functions of Teaching and ruling God's people the which for preservation of Christian doctrine and edification of the Church were requisite to be continued perpetually in ordinary standing Offices these indeed were derived from the Apostles but not properly in way of succession as by univocal propagation but by Ordination imparting all the power needfull for such Offices which therefore were exercised by persons during the Apostles lives concurrently or in subordination to them even as a Dictatour at Rome might create inferiour Magistrates who derived from him but not as his Successours for as Bellarmine himself telleth us there can be no proper succession but in respect of one preceding but Apostles and Bishops were together in the Church The Fathers therefore so in a large sense call all Bishops Successours of the Apostles not meaning that any one of them did succeed into the whole Apostolical Office but that each did receive his power from some one immediately or mediately whom some Apostle did constitute Bishop vesting him with Authority to feed the particular Flock committed to him in way of ordinary charge according to the sayings of that Apostolical person Clemens Rom. The Apostles preaching in Regions and Cities did constitute their first Converts having approved them by the Spirit for Bishops and Deacons of those who should afterward believe and having constituted the foresaid Bishops and Deacons they withall gave them farther charge that if they should dye other approved men successively should receive their Office thus did the Bishops supply the room of the Apostles each in guiding his particular charge all of them together by mutual aid conspiring to govern the whole Body of the Church 8. In which regard it may be said that not one single Bishop but all Bishops together through the whole Church do succeed Saint Peter or any other Apostle for that all of them in union together have an universal Sovereign Authority commensurate to an Apostle 9. This is the notion which St. Cyprian doth so much insist upon affirming that the Bishops do succeed Saint Peter and the other Apostles by vicarious ordination that the Bishops are Apostles that there is but one chair by the Lord's word built upon one Peter One undivided Bishoprick diffused in the peacefull numerosity of many Bishops whereof each Bishop doth hold his share One Flock whom the Apostles by unanimous agreement did feed and which afterward the Bishops do feed having a portion thereof allotted to each which he should govern So the Synod of Carthage with St. Cyprian So also St. Chrysostome saith that the Sheep of Christ were committed by him to Peter and to those after him that is in his meaning to all Bishops 10. Such and no other power Saint Peter might devolve on any Bishop ordained by him in any Church which he did constitute or inspect as in that of Antioch of Alexandria of Babylon of Rome The like did the other Apostles communicate who had the same power with Saint Peter in founding and settling Churches whose Successours of this kind were equal to those of the same kind whom St. Peter did constitute enjoying in their several precincts an equal part of the Apostolical power as St. Cyprian often doth assert 11. It is in consequence observable that in those Churches whereof the Apostles themselves were never accounted Bishops yet the Bishops are called Successours of the Apostles which cannot otherwise be understood than according to the sense which we have proposed that is because they succeeded those who were constituted by the Apostles according to those sayings of Irenaeus and Tertullian we can number those who were instituted bishops by the Apostles and their Successours and All the Churches do shew those whom being by the Apostles constituted in the Episcopal Office they have as continuers of the Apostolical seed So although Saint Peter was never reckoned Bishop of Alexandria yet because 't is reported that he placed Saint Mark there the Bishop of Alexandria is said to succeed the Apostles And because Saint John did abide at Ephesus inspecting that Church and appointing Bishops there the Bishops of that See did refer their Origine to him So many Bishops did claim from Saint Paul So St. Cyprian and Firmilian do assert themselves Successours of the Apostles who yet perhaps never were at Carthage or Caesarea So the Church of Constantinople is often in the Acts of the Sixth General Council called this great Apostolick Church being such Churches as those of whom Tertullian saith that although they do not produce any of the Apostles or Apostolical men for their authour yet conspiring in the same faith are no less for the consanguinity of doctrine reputed Apostolical Yea hence St. Hierome doth assert a parity of merit and dignity Sacerdotal to all Bishops because saith he all of them are Successours to the Apostles having all a like power by their ordination conferred on them 12. Whereas our Adversaries do pretend that indeed the other Apostles had an extraordinary charge as Legates of Christ which had no succession but was extinct in their persons but that Saint Peter had a peculiar charge as ordinary Pastour of the whole Church which surviveth To this it is enough to rejoyn that it is a mere figment devised for a shift and affirmed precariously having no ground either in Holy Scripture or in ancient Tradition there being no such distinction in the Sacred or Ecclesiastical Writings no mention occurring there of any Office which he did assume or which was attributed to him distinct from that extraordinary one of an Apostle and all the Pastoral charge imaginable being ascribed by the Ancients to all the Apostles in regard to the whole Church as hath been sufficiently declared 13. In fine If any such conveyance of power of power so great so momentous so mightily concerning the perpetual state of the Church and of each person therein had been made it had been for general direction and satisfaction for voiding all doubt and debate about it for stifling these pretended Heresies
and Schisms very requisite that it should have been expressed in some authentick Record that a particular Law should have been extant concerning it that all posterity should be warned to yield the submission grounded thereon Indeed a matter of so great consequence to the being and welfare of the Church could scarce have scaped from being clearly mentioned somewhere or other in Scripture wherein so much is spoken touching Ecclesiastical Discipline it could scarce have avoided the pen of the first Fathers Clemens Ignatius the Apostolical Canons and Constitutions Tertullian c. who also so much treat concerning the Function and Authority of Christian Governours Nothing can be more strange than that in the Statute-book of the new Jerusalem and in all the Original Monuments concerning it there should be such a dead silence concerning the succession of its chief Magistrate Wherefore no such thing appearing we may reasonably conclude no such thing to have been and that our Adversaries assertion of it is wholly arbitrary imaginary and groundless 14. I might add as a very convincing Argument that if such a succession had been designed and known in old times it is morally impossible that none of the Fathers Origen Chrysostome Augustine Cyril Hierome Theodoret c. in their exposition of the places alledged by the Romanists for the Primacy of Saint Peter should declare that Primacy to have been derived and setled on Saint Peter's Successour a point of that moment if they had been aware of it they could not but have touched as a most usefull application and direction for duty SUPPOSITION III. They affirm That Saint Peter was Bishop of Rome COncerning which Assertion we say that it may with great reason be denyed and that it cannot any-wise be assured as will appear by the following Considerations 1. Saint Peter's being Bishop of Rome would confound the Offices which God made distinct for God did appoint first Apostles then Prophets then Pastours and Teachers wherefore Saint Peter after he was an Apostle could not well become a Bishop it would be such an irregularity as if a Bishop should be made a Deacon 2. The Offices of an Apostle and of a Bishop are not in their nature well consistent for the Apostleship is an extraordinary Office charged with instruction and government of the whole world and calling for an answerable care the Apostles being Rulers as Saint Chrysostome saith ordained by God Rulers not taking several Nations and Cities but all of them in common entrusted with the whole world but Episcopacy is an ordinary standing charge affixed to one place and requiring a special attendance there Bishops being Pastours who as St. Chrysostome saith do sit and are employed in one place Now he that hath such a general care can hardly discharge such a particular Office and he that is fixed to so particular attendance can hardly look well after so general a charge Either of those Offices alone would suffice to take up a whole man as those tell us who have considered the burthen incumbent on the meanest of them the which we may see described in St. Chrysostome's Discourses concerning the Priesthood Baronius saith of Saint Peter that it was his Office not to stay in one place but as much as it was possible for one man to travel over the whole world and to bring those who did not yet believe to the faith but thoroughly to establish believers if so how could he be Bishop of Rome which was an Office inconsistent with such vagrancy 3. It would not have beseemed Saint Peter the prime Apostle to assume the charge of a particular Bishop it had been a degradation of himself and a disparagement to the Apostolical Majesty for him to take upon him the Bishoprick of Rome as if the King should become Mayor of London as if the Bishop of London should be Vicar of Pancras 4. Wherefore it is not likely that Saint Peter being sensible of that superiour charge belonging to him which did exact a more extensive care would vouchsafe to undertake an inferiour charge We cannot conceive that Saint Peter did affect the Name of a Bishop as now men do allured by the baits of wealth and power which then were none if he did affect the Title why did he not in either of his Epistles one of which as they would persuade us was written from Rome inscribe himself Bishop of Rome Especially considering that being an Apostle he hid not need any particular Authority that involving all power and enabling him in any particular place to execute all kinds of Ecclesiastical Administrations there was no reason that an Apostle or Universal Bishop should become a particular Bishop 5. Also Saint Peter's general charge of converting and inspecting the Jews dispersed over the World his Apostleship as Saint Paul calleth it of the Circumcision which required much travel and his presence in divers places doth not well agree to his assuming the Episcopal Office at Rome Especially at that time when they first make him to assume it which was in the time of Claudius who as Saint Luke and other Histories do report did banish all the Jews from Rome as Tiberius also had done before him He was too skilfull a Fisherman to cast his Net there where there were no Fish 6. If we consider Saint Peter's life we may well deem him uncapable of this Office which he could not conveniently discharge for it as History doth represent it and may be collected from divers circumstances of it was very unsetled he went much about the World and therefore could seldom reside at Rome Many have argued him to have never been at Rome which opinion I shall not avow as bearing a more civil respect to ancient Testimonies and Traditions although many false and fabulous relations of that kind having crept into History and common vogue many doubtfull reports having passed concerning him many notorious forgeries having been vented about his travels and acts all that is reported of him out of Scripture having a smack of the Legend would tempt a man to suspect any thing touching him which is grounded onely upon humane Tradition so that the forger of his Epistle to Saint James might well induce him saying If while I do yet survive men dare to feign such things of me how much more will they dare to doe so after my decease But at least the discourses of those men have evinced that it is hard to assign the time when he was at Rome and that he could never long abide there For The time which old Tradition assigneth of his going to Rome is rejected by divers learned men even of the Roman Party He was often in other places sometimes at Jerusalem sometimes at Antioch sometimes at Babylon sometimes at Corinth sometimes probably at each of those places unto which he directeth his Catholick Epistles among which Epiphanius saith that Peter did often visit Pontus and Bithynia And that he seldom
add If an Angel from Heaven should tell you beside what you have received in the Legal and Evangelical Scriptures let him be anathema in which words we have St. Austin's warrant not onely to refuse but to detest this Doctrine which being nowhere extant in Law or Gospel is yet obtruded on us as nearly relating both to Christ and his Church as greatly concerning both our Faith and Practice 2. To enforce this Argument we may consider that the Evangelists do speak about the propagation settlement and continuance of our Lord's Kingdom that the Apostles do often treat about the state of the Church and its edification order peace unity about the distinction of its Officers and Members about the qualifications duties graces privileges of Spiritual Governours and Guides about prevention and remedy of Heresies Schisms Disorders upon any of which occasions how is it possible that the mention of such a Spiritual Monarch who was to have a main influence on each of those particulars should wholly escape them if they had known such an one instituted by God In the Levitical Law all things concerning the High-Priest not onely his Designation Succession Consecration Duty Power Maintenance Privileges but even his Garments Marriage Mourning c. are punctually determined and described and is it not wonderfull that in the many descriptions of the New-Law no mention should be made concerning any Duty or Privilege of its High-Priest whereby he might be directed in the administration of his Office and know what observance to require 3. Whereas also the Scripture doth inculcate duties of all sorts and doth not forget frequently to press duties of respect and obedience toward particular Governours of the Church is it not strange that it never should bestow one precept whereby we might be instructed and admonished to pay our duty to the Universal Pastour especially considering that God who directed the Pens of the Apostles and who intended that their Writings should continue for the perpetual instruction of Christians did foresee how requisite such a precept would be to secure that duty for if but one such precept did appear it would doe the business and void all contestation about it 4. They who so carefully do exhort to honour and obey the temporal Sovereignty how come they so wholly to wave urging the no less needfull obligations to obey the Spiritual Monarch while they are so mindfull of the Emperour why are they so neglectfull of the Pope insomuch that divers Popes afterward to ground and urge obedience to them are fain to borrow those precepts which command obedience to Princes accommodating them by analogy and inference to themselves 5. Particularly Saint Peter one would think who doth so earnestly injoin to obey the King as Supreme and to honour him should not have been unmindfull of his Successours or quite have forborn to warn Christians of the respect due to them surely the Popes afterward do not follow him in this reservedness for in their Decretal Epistles they urge nothing so much as obedience to the Apostolical See 6. One might have expected something of that nature from St. Paul himself who did write so largely to the Romans and so often from Rome that at least some word or some intimation should have dropped from him concerning these huge Rights and Privileges of this See and of the regard due to it Particularly then when he professedly doth enumerate the Offices instituted by God for standing use and perpetual duration for the perfecting of the Saints for the work of the Ministery for the edifying of the Body of Christ till we all come in the Vnity of Faith c. He commendeth them for their Faith which was spoken of through the whole world yet giveth them no advantage above others as St. Chrysostome observeth on those words for obedience to the Faith among all Nations among whom also are ye this saith St. Chrysostome he saith to depress their conceit to void their haughtiness of mind and to teach them to deem others equal in Dignity with them When He writeth to that Church which was some time after Saint Peter had setled the Popedom he doth onely style them 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 called Saints and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 beloved of God which are common adjuncts of all Christians He saith their Faith was spoken of generally but of the fame of their Authority being so spread he taketh no notice that their obedience had come abroad to all men but their commands had not it seemeth come anywhere He wrote divers Epistles from Rome wherein he resolveth many cases debated yet never doth urge the Authority of the Roman Church for any point which now is so ponderous an Argument 7. But however seeing the Scripture is so strangely reserved how cometh it to pass that Tradition is also so defective and staunch in so grand a case We have in divers of the Fathers particularly in Tertullian in St. Basil in St. Hierome Catalogues of Traditional Doctrines and Observances which they recite to assert Tradition in some cases supplemental to Scripture in which their purpose did require that they should set down those of principal moment and they are so punctual as to insert many of small consideration how then came they to neglect this concerning the Papal Authority over the whole Church which had been most pertinent to their design and in consequence did vastly surpass all the rest which they do name 8. The designation of the Roman Bishop by succession to obtain so high a degree in the Church being above all others a most remarkable and noble piece of History which it had been a horrible fault in an Ecclesiastical History to slip over without carefull reporting and reflecting upon it yet Eusebius that most diligent Compiler of all passages relating to the original Constitution of the Church and to all transactions therein hath not â—ne word about it who yet studiously doth report the Successions of the Roman Bishops and all the notable occurrences he knew concerning them with favourable advantage 9. Whereas this Doctrine is pretended to be a Point of Faith of vast consequence to the subsistence of the Church and to the Salvation of men it is somewhat strange that it should not be inserted into any one ancient Summary of things to be believed of which Summaries divers remain some composed by publick consent others by persons of Eminency in the Church nor by fair and forcible consequence should be deducible from any Article in them especially considering that such Summaries were framed upon occasion of Heresies springing up which disregarded the Pope's Authority and which by asserting it were plainly confuted We are therefore beholden to Pope Innocent III. and his Laterane Synod for first Synodically defining this Point together with other Points no less new and unheard of before The Creed of Pope Pius IV. formed the other day is the first as I take it
lay all the stress of his hopes on the consent of the Western Bishops why doth he not say a word of the dominion resident in them over all the Church these things are unconceivable if he did take the Pope to be the man our adversaries say he is But St. Basil had other notions for indeed being so wise and good a man if he had taken the Pope for his Sovereign he would not have taxed him as he doth and so complain of him when speaking of the Western Bishops whereof the Pope was the ringleader and most concerned he hath these words occasioned as I conceive by the Bishop of Rome's rejecting that excellent person Meletius Bishop of Antioch What we should write or how to joyn with those that write I am in doubt for I am apt to say that of Diomedes You ought not to request for he is a haughty man for in truth observance doth render men of proud manners more contemptuous than otherwise they are For if the Lord be propitious to us what other addition do we need but if the anger of God continue what help can we have from the Western Superciliousness who in truth neither know nor endure to learn but being prepossessed with false suspicions do now doe those things which they did before in the cause of Marcellus affecting to contend with those who report the Truth to them and establishing Heresie by themselves would that excellent Person the greatest man of his time in reputation for wisedom and piety have thus unbowelling his mind in an Epistle to a very eminent Bishop smartly reflected on the qualities and proceedings of the Western Clergy charging them with pride and haughtiness with a suspicious and contentious humour with incorrigible ignorance and indisposition to learn if he had taken him who was the leader in all these matters to have been his Superiour and Sovereign would he have added the following words immediately touching him I would not in the common name have written to their ringleader nothing indeed about Ecclesiastical Affairs except onely to intimate that they neither do know the truth of things with us nor do admit the way by which they may understand it but in general about their being bound not to set upon those who were humbled with afflictions nor should judge themselves dignifyed by pride a sin which alone sufficeth to make one God's enemy surely this great man knew better what belonged to government and manners than in such rude terms to accost his Sovereign nor would he have given him that character which he doth otherwhere where speaking of his Brother St. Gregory Nyssene he saith he was an unfit Agent to Rome because although his address with a sober man would find much reverence and esteem yet to a haughty and reserved man sitting I know not where above and thence not able to hear those below speaking the truth to him what profit can there be to the publick from the converse of such a man whose disposition is averse from illiberal flattery But these speeches sute with that conceit which St. Basil as Baronius I know not whence reporteth expressed by saying I hate the pride of that Church which humour in them that good man would not be guilty of fostering by too much obsequiousness St. Chrysostome having by the practices of envious men combined against him in a packed assembly of Bishops upon vain surmises been sentenced and driven from his See did thereupon write an Epistle to Pope Innocent I. Bishop of Rome together with his Brethren the Bishops of Italy therein representing his case complaining of the wrong vindicating his innocency displaying the iniquity of the proceedings against him together with the mischievous consequences of them toward the whole Church then requiring his succour for redress yet although the sense of his case and care of his interest were likely to suggest the greatest deference that could be neither the style which is very respectfull nor the matter which is very copious do imply any acknowledgment of the Pope's Supremacy He doth not address to him as to a Governour of all who could by his Authority command justice to be done but as to a brother and a friend of innocence from whose endeavour he might procure relief He had recourse not to his Sovereign power but to his brotherly love He informed his Charity not appealed to his bar He in short did no more than implore his assistence in an Ecclesiastical way that he would express his resentment of so irregular dealings that he would avow communion with him as with an Orthodox Bishop innocent and abused that he would procure his cause to be brought to a fair trial in a Synod of Bishops lawfully called and indifferently affected Had the good man had any conceit of the Pope's Supremacy he would one would think have framed his address in other terms and sued for another course of proceeding in his behalf but it is plain enough that he had no such notion of things nor had any ground for such an one For indeed Pope Innocent in his answer to him could doe no more than exhort him to patience in another to his Clergy and People could onely comfort them declare his dislike of the Adversaries proceedings and grounds signifie his intentions to procure a general Synod with hopes of a redress thence his Sovereign power it seems not availing to any such purposes But what saith he can we doe in such cases a Synodical cognizance is necessary which we heretofore did say ought to be called the which alone can allay the motions of such tempests It is true that the later Popes Siricius Anastasius Innocent Zozimus Bonifacius Celestinus c. after the Sardican Council in their Epistles to the Western Bishops over whom they had encroached and who were overpowred by them c. do speak in somewhat more lofty strain but are more modest toward those of the East who could not bear c. 22. Farther It is most prodigious that in the disputes managed by the Fathers against Hereticks the Gnosticks Valentinians Marcionites Montanists Manichees Paulianists Arians c. they should not even in the first place alledge and urge the sentence of the Universal Pastour and Judge as a most evidently conclusive argument as the most efficacious and compendious method of convincing and silencing them Had this point been well proved and pressed then without any more concertations from Scripture tradition reason all Hereticks had been quite defeated and nothing then could more easily have been proved if it had been true when the light of tradition did shine so brightly nothing indeed had been to sense more conspicuous than the continual exercise of such an Authority We see now among those who admit such an Authority how surely when it may be had it is alledged and what sway it hath to the determination of any controversie and so it would have been then if it
Discipline should never insist upon the duty of Obedience to the Pope or charge those Schismaticks with their rebellion against him or alledge his Authority against them If we consider that the Pope was Bishop of the Imperial City the Metropolis of the World that he thence was most eminent in rank did abound in wealth did live in great splendour and reputation had many dependences and great opportunities to gratify and relieve many of the Clergy that of the Fathers whose Volumes we have all well affected towards him divers were personally obliged to him for his support in their distress as Athanasius Chrysostome Theodoret or as to their Patrons and Benefactours as St. Hierome divers could not but highly respect him as Patron of the cause wherein they were engaged as Basil Gregory Nazianzene Hilary Gregory Nyssene Ambrose Austin some were his partizans in a common quarrel as Cyril divers of them lived in places and times wherein he had got much sway as all the Western Bishops that he had then improved his Authority much beyond the old limits that all the Bishops of the Western or Latine Churches had a peculiar dependence on him especially after that by advantage of his Station by favour of the Court by colour of the Sardican Canons by voluntary deferences and submissions by several tricks he had wound himself to meddle in most of their chief Affairs that hence divers Bishops were tempted to admire to court to flatter him that divers aspiring Popes were apt to encourage the commenders of their Authority which they themselves were apt to magnifie and inculcate considering I say such things it is a wonder that in so many voluminous discourses so little should be said favouring this pretence so nothing that proveth it so much that crosseth it so much indeed as I hope to shew that quite overthroweth it If it be asked how we can prove this I answer that beside who carefully peruseth those old Books will easily see it we are beholden to our Adversaries for proving it to us when they least intended us such a favour for that no clear and cogent passages for proof of this pretence can be thence fetched is sufficiently evident from the very allegations which after their most diligent raking in old Books they produce the which are so few and fall so very short of their purpose that without much stretching they signifie nothing 28. It is monstrous that in the Code of the Catholick Church consisting of the decrees of so many Synods concerning Ecclesiastical order and discipline there should not be one Canon directly declaring his Authority nor any mention made of him except thrice accidentally once upon occasion of declaring the Authority of the Alexandrine Bishop the other upon occasion of assigning to the Bishop of Constantinople the second place of honour and equal privileges with him If it be objected that these discourses are negative and therefore of small force I answer that therefore they are most proper to assert such a negative proposition for how can we otherwise better shew a thing not to be than by shewing it to have no footstep there where it is supposed to stand how can we more clearly argue a matter of right to want proof than by declaring it not to be extant in the Laws grounding such right not taught by the Masters who profess to instruct in such things not testifyed in records concerning the exercise of it such arguments indeed in such cases are not merely negative but rather privative proving things not to be because not affirmed there where in reason they ought to be affirmed standing therefore upon positive Suppositions that Holy Scripture that general tradition are not imperfect and lame toward their design that ancient Writers were competently intelligent faithfull diligent that all of them could not conspire in perpetual silence about things of which they had often fair occasion and great reason to speak In fine such considerations however they may be deluded by Sophistical Wits will yet bear great sway and often will amount near to the force of demonstration with men of honest prudence However we shall proceed to other discourses more direct and positive against the Popish Doctrine II. Secondly we shall shew that this pretence upon several accounts is contrary to the Doctrine of Holy Scripture 1. This pretence doth thwart the Holy Scripture by assigning to another the prerogatives and peculiar Titles appropriated therein to our Lord. The Scripture asserteth him to be our onely Sovereign Lord and King To us saith it there is one Lord and One King shall be King over them who shall reign over the house of David for ever and of his Kingdom there shall be no end who is the onely Potentate the King of Kings and Lord of Lords the One Law-giver who is able to save and to destroy The Scripture speaketh of one Arch-Pastour and great Shepherd of the Sheep exclusively to any other for I will said God in the Prophet set up one Shepherd over them and he shall feed the Sheep and There saith our Lord himself shall be one Fold and one Shepherd who that shall be he expresseth adding I am the good Shepherd the good Shepherd giveth his life for the Sheep by Pope Boniface his good leave who maketh Saint Peter or himself this Shepherd The Scripture telleth us that we have one High-Priest of our Profession answerable to that one in the Jewish Church his Type The Scripture informeth us that there is but one Supreme Doctour Guide Father of Christians prohibiting us to acknowledge any other for such Ye are all Brethren and call ye not any one Father upon Earth for one is your Father even he that is in Heaven Neither be ye called Masters for one is your Master even Christ. Good Pope Gregory not the seventh of that name did take this for a good argument for What therefore dearest Brother said he to John of Constantinople wilt thou say in that terrible trial of the Judge who is coming who dost affect to be called not onely Father but General Father in the World The Scripture representeth the Church as a building whereof Christ himself is the chief Corner-stone as a Family whereof he being the Pater-familias as all others are fellow-servants as one Body having one Head whom God hath given to be Head over all things to the Church which is his Body He is the One Spouse of the Church which title one would think he might leave peculiar to our Lord there being no Vice-husbands yet hath he been bold even to claim that as may be seen in the Constit. of Pope Greg. X. in one of their General Synods It seemeth therefore a Sacrilegious arrogance derrogating from our Lord's Honour for any man to assume or admit those Titles of Sovereign of the Church Head of the Church our Lord Arch-Pastour Highest-Priest Chief Doctour Master Father Judge of Christians upon what
to a Donatist his Adversary citing the Authority of St. Cyprian against him he thus replieth But now seeing it is not Canonical which thou recitest with that liberty to which the Lord hath called us I do not receive the opinion differing from Scripture of that man whose praise I cannot reach to whose great learning I do not compare my writings whose wit I love in whose speech I delight whose charity I admire whose martyrdom I reverence This Liberty not onely the Ancients but even divers Popes have acknowledged to belong to every Christian as we shall hereafter shew when we shall prove that we may lawfully reject the Pope as a Patron of Errour and Iniquity 6. It particularly doth thwart Scripture by wronging Princes in exempting a numerous sort of People from subjection to their Laws and Judicatures whereas by God's Ordination and express Command every soul is subject to them not excepting the Popes themselves in the opinion of St. Chrysostome except they be greater than any Apostle By pretending to govern the Subjects of Princes without their leave to make Laws without his permission or confirmation to cite his Subjects out of their Territories c. which are encroachments upon the Rights of God's unquestionable Ministers III. Farther because our Adversaries do little regard any allegation of Scripture against them pretending themselves to be the onely Masters of its sense or of common sense Judges and Interpreters of them we do alledge against them that this pretence doth also cross Tradition and the common Doctrine of the Fathers For 1. Common usage and practice is a good interpreter of Right and that sheweth no such Right was known in the Primitive Church 2. Indeed the state of the Primitive Church did not admit it 3. The Fathers did suppose no Order in the Church by original Right or divine Institution superiour to that of a Bishop whence they commonly did style a Bishop the Highest Priest and Episcopacy the top of Ecclesiastical Orders The chief Priest saith Tertullian that is the Bishop hath the right of giving baptism Although saith St. Ambrose the Presbyters also do it yet the beginning of the Ministery is from the highest Priest Optatus calleth Bishops the tops and Princes of all The Divine Order of Bishops saith Dionysius is the first of Divine Orders the same being also the extreme and last of them for into it all the frame of our Hierarchy is resolved and accomplished This language is common even among Popes themselves complying with the speech then current for Presbyters saith Pope Innocent I. although they are Priests yet have they not the top of High priesthood No man saith P. Zosimus I. against the precepts of the Fathers should presume to aspire to the highest Priesthood of the Church It is decreed saith Pope Leo I. that the Chorepiscopi or Presbyters who figure the sons of Aaron shall not presume to snatch that which the Princes of the Priests whom Moses and Aaron did typifie are commanded to doe Note by the way that seeing according to this Pope's mind after St. Hierome Moses and Aaron did in the Jewish Policy represent Bishops there was none there to prefigure the Pope In those days the Bishop of Nazianzum a petty Town in Cappadocia was an High-priest so Gregory calleth his Father And the Bishop of a poor City in Africk is styled Sovereign Pontif of Christ most blessed Father most blessed Pope and the very Roman Clergy doth call St. Cyprian most blessed and glorious Pope which Titles the Pope doth now so charily reserve and appropriate to himself But innumerable Instances of this kind might be produced I shall onely therefore add two other passages which seem very observable to the enforcement of this discourse St. Hierome reprehending the discipline of the Montanists hath these words With us the Bishops do hold the places of the Apostles with them a Bishop is in the third place for they have for the first rank the Patriarchs of Pepusa in Phrygia for the second those whom they call Cenones so are Bishops thrust down into the third that is almost the last place as if thence Religion became more stately if that which is first with us be the last with them Now doth not St. Hierome here affirm that every Bishop hath the place of an Apostle and the first rank in the Church doth not he tax the advancement of any Order above this may not the Popish Hierarchy most patly be compared to that of the Montanists and is it not equally liable to the censure of St. Hierome doth it not place the Roman Pope in the first place and the Cardinals in the second detruding the Bishops into a third place Could the Pepusian Patriarch or his Cenones either more over-top in dignity or sway by power over Bishops than doth the Roman Patriarch and his Cardinals Again St. Cyprian telleth Pope Cornelius that in Episcopacy doth reside the sublime and divine power of governing the Church it being the sublime top of the Priesthood He saith the Blessed man concerning Pope Cornelius did not suddenly arrive to Episcopacy but being through all Ecclesiastical Offices promoted and having in divine administrations often merited of God did by all the steps of Religion mount to the sublimest pitch of Priesthood where it is visible that St. Cyprian doth not reckon the Papacy but the Episcopacy of Cornelius to be that top of Priesthood above which there was nothing eminent in the Church unto which he passing through the inferiour degrees of the Clergy had attained In fine it cannot well be conceived that the Ancients constantly would have spoken in this manner if they had allowed the Papal Office to be such as now it doth bear it self the which indeed is an Order no less distant from Episcopacy than the rank of a King differeth from that of the meanest Baron in his Kingdom Neither is it prejudicial to this Discourse or to any preceding that in the Primitive Church there were some distinctions and subordinations of Bishops as of Patriarchs Primates Metropolitans common Bishops for These were according to prudence constituted by the Church it self for the more orderly and peaceable administration of things These did not import such a difference among the Bishops that one should domineer over others to the infringing of primitive fraternity or common liberty but a precedence in the same rank with some moderate advantages for the common good These did stand under Authority of the Church and might be changed or corrected as was found expedient by common agreement By virtue of these the Superiours of this kind could doe nothing over their subordinates in an arbitrary manner but according to the regulation of Canons established by consent in Synods by which their influence was amplified or curb'd When any of these did begin to domineer or exceed his limits he was liable to account and correction he was
Have they not challenged propriety in both Swords Ecce duo Gladii How many Princes have they pretended to depose and dispossess of their Authority Consider the Pragmatical Sanctions Provisors Compositions Concordats c. which Princes have been forced to make against them or with them to secure their Interest Many good Princes have been forced to oppose them as Henry the Second of England King Lewis the Twelfth of France that Just Prince Pater Patriae Perdam Babylonis nomen How often have they used this as a pretence of raising and fomenting Wars confiding in their Spiritual Arms interdicting Princes that would not comply with their designs for advancing the interests not onely of their See but of their private Families Bodin observeth that Pope Nicholas I. was the first who excommunicated Princes Platina doth mention some before him But it is remarkable that although Pope Leo I. a high spirited Pope Fortissimus Leo as Liberatus calleth him was highly provoked against Theodosius Junior Pope Gelasius and divers of his Predecessours and Followers Pope Gregory II. against Leo Vigilius against Justinian c. yet none of them did presume to excommunicate the Emperours All these dealings are the natural result of this Pretence and supposing it well grounded are capable of a plausible justification for is it not fit seeing one must yield that Temporal should yield to Spiritual Indeed granting the Papal Supremacy in Spirituals I conceive the high flying Zelots of the Roman Church who subject all Temporal Powers to them have great reason on their side for co-ordinate Power cannot subsist and it would be onely an eternal Seminary of perpetual discords The quarrel cannot otherwise be well composed than by wholly disclaiming the fictitious and usurped power of the Pope for Two such Powers so inconsistent and cross to each other so apt to interfere and consequently to breed everlasting mischiefs to mankind between them could not be instituted by God He would not appoint two different Vicegerents in his Kingdom at the same time But it is plain that he hath instituted the civil Power and endowed it with a Sword That Princes are his Lieutenants That in the ancient times the Popes did not claim such Authority but avowed themselves Subjects to Princes 9. Consequently this Pretence is apt to engage Christian Princes against Christianity for they will not endure to be crossed to be depressed to be trampled on This Popes often have complained of not considering it was their own insolence that caused it 10. Whereas now Christendom is split into many parcels subject to divers civil Sovereignties it is expedient that correspondently there should be distinct Ecclesiastical Governments independent of each other which may comply with the respective civil Authorities in promoting the good and peace both of Church and State It is fit that every Prince should in all things govern all his Subjects and none should be exempted from subordination to his Authority As Philosophers and Physicians of the Body so Priests and Physicians of the Soul not in exercising their Function but in taking care that they do exercise it duly for the honour of God and in consistence with publick good otherwise many grievous inconveniences must ensue It is of perillous consequence that foreigners should have authoritative influence upon the Subjects of any Prince or have a power to intermeddle in affairs Princes have a natural Right to determine with whom their Subjects shall have intercourse which is inconsistent with a Right of foreigners to govern or judge them in any case without their leave Every Prince is obliged to employ the power entrusted to him to the furtherance of God's Service and encouragement of all good works as a Supreme power without being liable to obstruction from any other power It would irritate his power if another should be beyond his coercion It is observable that the Pope by intermeddling in the affairs of Kingdoms did so wind himself into them as to get a pretence to be Master of each Princes being his Vassals and Feudatories 11. Such an Authority is needless and useless it not serving the ends which it pretendeth and they being better compassed without it It pretendeth to maintain Truth but indeed it is more apt to oppress it Truth is rather as St. Cyprian wisely observeth preserved by the multitude of Bishops whereof some will be ready to relieve it when assaulted by others Truth cannot be supported merely by humane Authority especially that Authority is to be suspected which pretendeth dominion over our minds What Controversie being doubtfull in it self will not after his Decision continue doubtfull his Sentence may be eluded by interpretation as well as other Testimonies or Authorities The opinion of a man's great wisedom or skill may be the ground of assent in defect of other more cogent Arguments but Authority of Name or Dignity is not proper to convince a man's understanding Men obey but not believe Princes more than others if not more learned than others It pretendeth to maintain Order but how by introducing Slavery by destroying all Rights by multiplying Disorders by hindring Order to be quietly administred in each Countrey It pretendeth to be the onely means of Unity and Concord in Opinion by determining Controversies which its Advocates affirm necessary But how can that be necessary which never was de facto not even in the Roman Church Hath the Pope effected this do all his followers agree in all points do they agree about his Authority Do not they differ and dispute about infinity of questions Are all the points frivolous about which their Divines and Schoolmen dispute Why did not the Council of Trent it self without more adoe and keeping such a disputing refer all to his Oracular Decision Necessary points may and will by all honest people be known and determined without him by the clear Testimony of Scripture by consent of Fathers by General Tradition And other points need not to be determined That he may be capable of that Office he must be believed appointed by God thereto which is a question it self to be decided without him to satisfaction His power is apt no otherwise to knock down Controversies than by depressing Truth not suffering any Truth to be asserted which doth not favour its Interests Concord was maintained and Controversies decided without them in the ancient Church in Synods wherein he was not the sole Judge nor had observable influence The Fathers did not think such Authority needfull otherwise they would have made more use of it A more ready way to define Controversies is for every one not to prescribe to others or to prosecute for then men would more calmly see the Truth and consent It pretendeth to maintain Peace and Unity But nothing hath raised more fierce Dissentions or so many bloudy Wars in Christendom as it It is apt by tyrannical administration to become intolerable and so to break the
Bishop might alledge all having a like right and common interest to Vote in those Assemblies 3. Accordingly the dissent of other Bishops particularly of those eminent in dignity or merit is also alledged in exception which had been needless if his alone dissent had been of so very peculiar force 4. The Emperour and many other Bishops did not know of any peculiar necessity of his confirmation Again it may be objected that Popes have voided the Decrees of General Synods as did Pope Leo the Decrees of the Synod of Chalcedon concerning the Privileges of the Constantinopolitan See in these blunt words But the agreements of Bishops repugnant to the Holy Canons made at Nice your faith and piety joyning with us we make void and by the authority of the Blessed Apostle Saint Peter by a general determination we disanull and in his Epistle to those of that Synod For however vain conceit may arm it self with extorted compliances and think its wilfulness sufficiently strengthened with the name of Councils yet whatever is contrary to the Canons of the above-nam'd fathers will be weak and void Lastly in his Epistle to Maximus Bishop of Antioch he says He has such a reverence for the Nicene Canons that he will not permit or endure that what those holy fathers have determined be by any novelty violated This behaviour of Pope Leo although applauded and imitated by some of his Successours I doubt not to except against in behalf of the Synod that it was disorderly factious and arrogant proceeding indeed from ambition and jealousie the leading act of high presumption in this kind and one of the seeds of that exorbitant ambition which did at length overwhelm the dignity and liberty of the Christian Republick Yet for somewhat qualifying the business it is observable that he did ground his repugnancy and pretended annulling of that Decree or of Decrees concerning Discipline not so much upon his authority to cross General Synods as upon the inviolable firmness and everlasting obligation of the Nicene Canons the which he although against the reason of things and rules of Government did presume no Synod could abrogate or alter In fine this opposition of his did prove ineffectual by the sense and practice of the Church maintaining its ground against his pretence It is an unreasonable thing that the opinion or humour of one man no wiser or better commonly than others should be preferred before the common agreement of his brethren being of the same Office and Order with him so that he should be able to overthrow and frustrate the result of their meetings and consultations when it did not square to his conceit or interest especially seeing there is not the least appearance of any right he hath to such a Privilege grounded in Holy Scripture Tradition or Custom for seeing that Scripture hath not a syllable about General Synods seeing that no Rule about them is extant in any of the first Fathers till after 300 years seeing there was not one such Council celebrated till after that time seeing in none of the First General Synods any such Canon was framed in favour of that Bishop what ground of right could the Pope have to prescribe unto them or thwart their proceedings Far more reason there is in conformity to all former Rules and Practice that he should yield to all his Brethren than that all his Brethren should submit to him and this we see to have been the judgment of the Church declared by its Practice in the cases before touched IV. It is indeed a proper endowment of an absolute Sovereignty immediately and immutably constituted by God with no terms or rules limiting it that its will declared in way of Precept Proclamations concerning the Sanction of Laws the Abrogation of them the Dispensation with them should be observed This Privilege therefore in a high strein the Pope challengeth to himself asserting to his Decrees and Sentences the force and obligation of Laws so that the body of that Canon Law whereby he pretendeth to govern the Church doth in greatest part consist of Papal Edicts or Decretal Epistles imitating the Rescripts of Emperours and bearing the same force In Gratian we have these Aphorisms from Popes concerning this their Privilege No person ought to have either the will or the power to transgress the precepts of the Apostolick See Those things which by the Apostolick See have at several times been written for the Catholick faith for sound doctrines for the various and manifold exigency of the Church and the manners of the faithfull how much rather ought they to be preferr'd in all honour and by all men altogether upon all occasions whatsoever to be reverently received Those Decretal Epistles which most holy Popes have at divers times given out from the City of Rome upon their being consulted with by divers Bishops we decree that they be received with veneration If ye have not the Decrees of the Bishops of Rome ye are to be accused of neglect and carelesness but if ye have them yet observe them not ye are to be chidden and rebuk'd for your temerity All the Sanctions of the Apostolick See are so to be understood as if confirm'd by the voice of Saint Peter himself Because the Roman Church over which by the will of Christ we do preside is proposed for a mirrour and example whatsoever it doth determine whatsoever that doth appoint is perpetually and irrefragably to be observed by all men We who according to the plenitude of our power have a right to dispense above Law or right This See that which it might doe by its sole authority it is often pleased to define by consent of its Priests But this power he doth assume and exercise merely upon Usurpation and unwarrantably having no ground for it in original right or ancient practice Originally the Church hath no other General Law-giver beside our one Lord and one Law-giver As to practice we may observe 1. Anciently before the First General Synod the Church had no other Laws beside the Divine Laws or those which were derived from the Apostles by Traditional custom or those which each Church did enact for it self in Provincial Synods or which were propagated from one Church to another by imitation and compliance or which in like manner were framed and setled Whence according to different Traditions or different reasons and circumstances of things several Churches did vary in points of Order and Discipline The Pope then could not impose his Traditions Laws or Customs upon any Church if he did attempt it he was liable to suffer a repulse as is notorious in the case when Pope Victor would although rather as a Doctour than as a Law-giver have reduced the Churches of Asia to conform with the Roman in the time of celebrating Easter wherein he found not onely stout resistence but sharp reproof In St. Cyprian's time every Bishop had a free power according to his discretion
of Rome under Pope Silvester of Rome under Sixtus III. but they are palpably spurious and the learned among them confess it But antiquity was not of this mind for it did suppose him no less obnoxious to judgment and correction than other Bishops if he should notoriously deviate from the faith or violate canonical discipline The Canons generally do oblige Bishops without exception to duty and upon defailance to correction why is not he excepted if to be excused or exempted It was not questioned of old but that a Pope in case he should notoriously depart from the faith or notably infringe discipline might be excommunicated the attempting it upon divers occasions do shew their opinion although it often had not effect because the cause was not just and plausible the truth and equity of the case appearing to be on the Pope's side St. Isidore Pelusiota denieth of any Bishop's office that it is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 an uncontrollable government In the times of Polycrates and Pope Victor the whole Eastern Church did forbear communion with the Pope Firmilian told Pope Stephanus that by conceiting he might excommunicate all other Bishops he had excommunicated himself The Fathers of the Antiochene Synod did threaten to excommunicate and depose Pope Julius They did promise to Julius peace and communion if he did admit the deposition of those whom they had expelled and the constitution of those whom they had ordained but if he did resist their decrees they denounced the contrary The Oriental Bishops at Sardica did excommunicate and depose him St. Hilary did anathematize Pope Liberius upon his defection to the Arians Dioscorus did attempt to excommunicate Pope Leo. Acacius of Constantinople renounced the communion of Pope Felix Timotheus Aelurus cursed the Pope The African Bishops did Synodically excommunicate Pope Vigilius Pope Anastasius was rejected by his own Clergy Pope Constantine by the people and so was Pope Leo VIII Divers Bishops of Italy and Illyricum did abstain from the Pope's communion for a long time because they did admit the fifth Synod Photius did excommunicate and depose Pope Nicholas I. Maurus Bishop of Ravenna did anathematize Pope Vitalianus The Emperour Otho II. having with good advice laboured to reclaim Pope John XII without effect did indict a Council calling together the Bishops of Italy by the judgment of whom the life of that wicked man should be judged and the issue was that he was deposed Pope Nicholas I. desired to be judged by the Emperour The fifth Synod did in general terms condemn Pope Vigilius and the Emperour Justinian did banish him for not complying with the decrees of it The sixth and seventh General Synods did anathematize Honorius by name when he was dead because his heresie was not before confuted and they would have served him so if he had been alive Divers Synods that of Worms of Papia of Brescia of Mentz of Rome c. did reject Pope Gregory VII Pope Adrian himself in the VIII Synod so called did confess that a Pope being found deviating from the faith might be judged as Honorius was Gerbertus afterward Pope Sylvester II. did maintain that Popes might be held as Ethnicks and Publicans if they did not hear the Church The Synod of Constance did judge and depose three Popes The Synod of Basil did depose Pope Eugenius affirming that The Catholick Church hath often corrected and judged Popes when they either err'd from the faith or by their ill manners became notoriously scandalous to the Church The practice of Popes to give an account of their faith when they entred upon their office to the other Patriarchs and chief Bishops approving themselves thereby worthy and capable of communion doth imply them liable to judgment Of the neglect of which practice Euphemius Bishop of Constantinople did complain Of this we have for example the Synodical Epistles of Pope Gregory I. XII To the Sovereign in Ecclesiastical affairs it would belong to define and decide controversies in faith discipline moral practice so that all were bound to admit his definitions decisions interpretations He would be the supreme Interpreter of the divine law and Judge of controversies No point or question of moment should be decided without his cognizance This he therefore doth pretend to taking upon him to define points and requiring from all submission to his determinations Nor doth he allow any Synods to decide questions But the ancients did know no such thing In case of Contentions they had no recourse to his judgment they did not stand to his opinion his authority did not avail to quash disputes They had recourse to the Holy Scriptures to Catholick Tradition to reason they disputed and discussed points by dint of argument Irenaeus Tertullian Vincentius Lirinensis and others discoursing of the methods to resolve points of Controversie did not reckon the Pope's authority for one Divers of the Fathers did not scruple openly to dissent from the opinions of Popes nor were they wondred at or condemned for it So Saint Paul did withstand Saint Peter So Polycarpus dissented from Pope Elutherius So Polycrates from Pope Victor So St. Cyprian from Pope Stephen So Dionysius Alex. from Pope Stephen all which persons were renowned for wisedom and piety in their times Highest Controversies were appeased by Synods out of the Holy Scripture Catholick Tradition the Analogy of faith and common Reason without regard to the Pope Divers Synods in Africk and Asia defined the Point about rebaptization without the Pope's leave and against his opinion The Synod of Antioch condemned the doctrine of Paulus Samosatenus without intervention of the Pope before they gave him notice In the Synod of Nice the Pope had very small stroke The General Synod of Const. declared the Point of the Divinity of the H. Ghost against Macedonius without the Pope who did no more than afterward consent This the Synod of Chalcedon in their compellation to the Emperour Marcian did observe The Fathers met in Sardica to suppress the reliques of Arianism communicated their decrees to the Eastern Bishops and they who here discovered the pestilence of Apolinarius made known theirs to the Western The Synod of Africk defined against Pelagius before their informing Pope Innocentius thereof not seeking his judgment but desiring his consent to that which they were assured to be truth Divers Popes have been incapable of deciding Controversies themselves having been erroneous in the questions controverted as Pope Stephanus in part Pope Liberius P. Felix P. Vigilius P. Honorius c. And in our opinion all Popes for many ages It is observable how the Synod of Chalcedon in their allocution to the Emperour Marcian do excuse P. Leo for expounding the faith in his Epistle the which it seems some did reprehend as a novell method disagreeable to the Canons Let not them say they object to us the Epistle of the marvellous Prelate
Rome This hath been the Doctrine of divers Popes Which not onely the Apostolical Prelate but any other Bishop may doe viz. discriminate and severe any men and any place from the Catholick communion according to the rule of that fore-condemned heresie Faith is universal common to all and belongs not onely to Clergymen but also to Laicks and even to all Christians Therefore the sheep which are committed to the cure of their Pastour ought not to reprehend him unless he swerve and go astray from the right faith 15. That this was the current opinion common practice doth shew there being so many instances of those who rejected their Superiours and withdrew from their communion in case of their maintaining errours or of their disorderly behaviour such practice having been approved by General and Great Synods as also by divers Popes When Nestorius Bishop of Constantinople did introduce new and strange Doctrine divers of his Presbyters did rebuke him and withdraw communion from him which proceeding is approved in the Ephesine Synod Particularly Charisius did assert this proceeding in those remarkable words presented to that same Synod 'T is the wish and desire of all well affected persons to give always all due honour and reverence especially to their spiritual Fathers and Teachers but if it should so happen that they who ought to teach should instill unto those who are set under them such things concerning the faith as are offensive to the ears and hearts of all men then of necessity the order must be inverted and they who teach wrong Doctrine must be rebuked of those who are their inferiours Pope Celestine I. in that case did commend the people of Constantinople deserting their Pastour Happy flock said he to whom the Lord did afford to judge about its own Pasture St. Hierome did presume to write very briskly and smartly in reproof of John Bishop of Hierusalem in whose Province he a simple Presbyter did reside Who makes a schism in the Church we whose whole house in Bethlehem communicate with the Church or thou who either believest aright and proudly concealest the truth or art of a wrong belief and really makest a breach in the Church Art thou onely the Church and is he who offendeth thee excluded from Christ Malchion Presbyter of Antioch disputed against Paulus Samosatenus his Bishop Beatus Presbyter confuted his Bishop Elipandus of Toledo But if the Rectour swerve from the faith he is to be reproved by those who are under him 16. The case is the same of the Pope for if other Bishops who are reckoned Successours of the Apostles and Vicars of Christ within their precinct if other Patriarchs who sit in Apostolical Sees and partake of a like extensive Jurisdiction by incurring heresie or schism or committing notorious disorder and injustice may be deprived of their Authority so that their Subjects may be obliged to forsake them then may the Pope lose his for truth and piety are not affixed to the Chair of Rome more than to any other there is no ground of asserting any such Privilege either in Holy Scripture or in old Tradition there can no promise be alledged for it having any probable shew that of Oravi pro te being a ridiculous pretence it cannot stand without a perpetual miracle there is in fact no appearance of any such miracle from the ordinary causes of great errour and impiety that is ambition avarice sloth luxury the Papal state is not exempt yea apparently it is more subject to them than any other all Ages have testified and complained thereof 17. Most eminent persons have in such cases withdrawn communion from the Pope as other-where we have shewed by divers Instances 18. The Canon Law it self doth admit the Pope may be judged if he be a Heretick Because he that is to judge all persons is to be judged of none except he be found to be gone astray from the faith The supposition doth imply the possibility and therefore the case may be put that he is such and then he doth according to the more current Doctrine ancient and modern cease to be a Bishop yea a Christian Hence no obedience is due to him yea no communion is to be held with him 19. This in fact was acknowledged by a great Pope allowing the condemnation of Pope Honorius for good because he was erroneous in point of Faith for saith he in that which is called the Eighth Synod although Honorius was anathematized after his death by the Oriental Bishops it is yet well known that he was accused for heresie for which alone it is lawfull for inferiours to rise up against superiours Now that the Pope or Papal succession doth pervert the truth of Christian Doctrine in contradiction to the Holy Scripture and Primitive Tradition that he doth subvert the practice of Christian piety in opposition to the Divine commands that he teacheth falshoods and maintaineth impieties is notorious in many particulars some whereof we shall touch We justly might charge him with all those extravagant Doctrines and Practices which the high flying Doctours do teach and which the fierce Zealots upon occasion do act for the whole succession of Popes of a long time hath most cherished and encouraged such folks looking squintly on others as not well affected to them But we shall onely touch those new and noxious or dangerous positions which great Synods managed and confirmed by their Authority have defined or which they themselves have magisterially decreed or which are generally practised by their influence or countenance It is manifest that the Pope doth support and cherish as his special Favourites the Venters of wicked Errours such as those who teach the Pope's infallibility his power over temporal Princes to cashier and depose them to absolve subjects from their allegiance the Doctrine of equivocation breach of faith with hereticks c. the which Doctrines are heretical as inducing pernicious practice whence whoever doth so much as communicate with the maintainers of them according to the principles of ancient Christianity are guilty of the same crimes The Holy Scripture and Catholick Antiquity do teach and injoin us to worship and serve God alone our Creatour forbidding us to worship any Creature or Fellow-servant even not Angels For I who am a Creature will not endure to worship one like to me But the Pope and his Clients do teach and charge us to worship Angels and dead men yea even to venerate the reliques and dead bodies of the Saints The Holy Scripture teacheth us to judge nothing about the present or future state of men absolutely before the time untill the Lord come who will bring to light the hidden things of darkness and will make manifest the counsels of hearts and then each man shall have praise of God But the Pope notoriously in repugnance to those precepts anticipating God's judgment and arrogating to himself a knowledge requisite thereto doth presume to determine
offices of humanity toward their subjects travelling or trading any where in the World common Reason doth require such things But may common Unity of Polity from hence be inferr'd Arg. X. The effectuâ—â— Preservation of Unity in the primitive Church is alledged as a strong Argument of its being united in one Government Answ. 1. That Unity of Faith and Charity and Discipline which we admit was indeed preserved not by influence of any one Sovereign Authority whereof there is no mention but by the concurrent vigilance of Bishops declaring and disputing against any Novelty in Doctrine or Practice which did start up by their adherence to the Doctrine asserted in Scripture and confirmed by Tradition by their aiding and abetting one another as Confederates against Errours and Disorders creeping in Answ. 2. The many Differences which arose concerning the Observation of Easter the Re-baptization of Hereticks the Reconciliation of Revolters and scandalous Criminals concerning the decision of Causes and Controversies c. do more clearly shew that there was no standing common Jurisdiction in the Church for had there been such an one recourse would have been had thereto and such Differences by its Authority would easily have been quashed Arg. XI Another Argument is grounded on the Relief which one Church did yield to another which supposeth all Churches under one Government imposing such Tribute Answ. 1. This is a strange Fetch as if all who were under obligation to relieve one another in need were to be under one Government Then all Mankind must be so Answ. 2. It appeareth by St. Paul that these Succours were of free Charity Favour and Liberality and not by Constraint Arg. XII The use of Councils is also alledged as an Argument of this Unity Answ. 1. General Councils in case Truth is disowned that Peace is disturbed that Discipline is loosed or perverted are wholsome Expedients to clear Truth and heal Breaches but the holding them is no more an Argument of political Unity in the Church than the Treaty of Munster was a sign of all Europe being under one civil Government Answ. 2. They are extraordinary arbitrary prudential means of restoring Truth Peace Order Discipline but from them nothing can be gathered concerning the continual ordinary State of the Church Answ. 3. For during a long time the Church wanted them and afterwards had them but rarely For the first three hundred years saith Bell. there was no general assembly afterwards scarce one in a hundred years And since the breach between the Oriental and Western Churches for many Centenaries there hath been none Yet was the Church from the beginning One till Constantine and long afterwards Answ. 4. The first General Councils indeed all that have been with any probable shew capable of that denomination were congregated by Emperours to cure the Dissentions of Bishops what therefore can be argued from them but that the Emperours did find it good to settle Peace and Truth and took this for a good mean thereto Alb. Pighius said that General Councils were an invention of Constantine and who can confute him Answ. 5. They do shew rather the Unity of the Empire than of the Church or of the Church as National under one Empire than as Catholick for it was the State which did call and moderate them to its Purposes Answ. 6. It is manifest that the congregation of them dependeth on the permission and pleasure of secular Powers and in all equity should do so as otherwhere is shewed Answ. 7. It is not expedient that there should be any of them now that Christendom slandeth divided under divers temporal Sovereignties for their Resolutions may intrench on the Interests of some Princes and hardly can they be accommodated to the Civil Laws and Customs of every State Whence we see that France will not admit the Decrees of their Tridentine Synod Answ. 8. There was no such inconvenience in them while Christendom was in a manner confined within one Empire for then nothing could be decreed or executed without the Emperour's leave or to his prejudice Answ. 9. Yea as things now stand it is impossible there should be a free Council most of the Bishops being sworn Vassals and Clients to the Pope and by their own Interests concerned to maintain his exorbitant Grandeur and Domination Answ. 10. In the opinion of St. Athanasius there was no reasonable cause of Synods except in case of new Heresies springing up which may be confuted by the joint consent of Bishops Answ. 11. As for particular Synods they do onely signifie that it was usefull for neighbour Bishops to conspire in promoting Truth Order and Peace as we have otherwhere shewed Councils have often been convened for bad Designs and been made Engines to oppress Truth and enslave Christendom That of Antioch against Athanasius of Ariminum for Arianism The second Ephesine to restore Eutyches and reject Flavianus The second of Nice to impose the Worship of Babies The Synod of Ariminum to countenance Arians So the fourth Synod of Laterane sub Inn. III. to settle the prodigious Doctrine of Transubstantiation and the wicked Doctrine of Papal Authority over Princes The first Synod of Lions to practise that hellish Doctrine of Deposing Kings The Synod of Constance to establish the maime of the Eucharist against the Calistines of Bohemia The Laterane under Leo X. was called as the Arch-bishop of Patras affirmed for the Exaltation of the Apostolical See The Synod of Trent to settle a raff of Errours and Superstitions Obj. II. It may farther be objected that this Doctrine doth favour the Conceits of the Independents concerning Ecclesiastical Discipline I answer No. For 1. We do assert that every Church is bound to observe the Institutions of Christ and that sort of Government which the Apostles did ordain consisting of Bishops Priests and People 2. We avow it expedient in conformity to the primitive Churches and in order to the maintenance of Truth Order Peace for several particular Churches or Parishes to be combined in political Corporations as shall be found convenient by those who have just Authority to frame such Corporations for that otherwise Christianity being shattered into numberless shreds could hardly subsist and that great Confusions must arise 3. We affirm that such Bodies having been established and being maintained by just Authority every man is bound to endeavour the upholding of them by Obedience by peaceable and compliant Demeanour 4. We acknowledge it a great Crime by factious behaviour in them or by needless separation from them to disturb them to divide them to dissolve or subvert them 5. We conceive it fit that every People under one Prince or at least of one Nation using the same Language Civil Law and Fashions should be united in the bands of Ecclesiastical Polity for that such a Unity apparently is conducible to the peace and welfare both of Church and State to the furtherance of God's worship and