it was superfluous for expressio eorum quae tacite insunt nihil operatur It doth but argue he is covetous and ambitious covetous in that he hereby makes himself master of anothers Interest and ambitious in that he would be thought the Author of Princes dignities As for King Hen. 8. his adding that stile to his other distinguishments of Dignity it did not proceed from any conceit that he could not have stiled himself so had not the Pope saluted him with that courteous appellation But only in respect it was grown into fashion to adde to their temporall Styles some denotement of their ecclesiasticall power as the Emperour of Ethiopia stiles himself the Pillar of Faith without deriving that dignity from Rome It is true the French embrace the stile of Christian and the Spaniard of Catholick King from Rome yet I suppose they might without that be so dignified As for England it is plain that her King may without any donation thereof from Rome for that it is warranted by her antient Lawes and Eleutherius called Lucius Gods Vicar the King was stiled Persona mixta cum sacerdote which was many hundred years known before Hen. 8. Ante 37. Cap. 4. and therefore sith by the antient Lawes of the Land the King is Vicarius sūmus infra Regnas He must nominate or ought to Authorise some by vertue of his power all forrain provinciall Jurisdiction being lockt up by consent of Councels within its proper provinciall precincts to appoint Bishops this antient right being grounded upon Gods Word in that I have proved that the Temporall Magistrate did elect such as should be ordained and therefore for the Doctor to deny us to be a Church because we want succession of Bishops the new ones being appointed by the Temporall Magistrate when as they wanted nothing to compleat their Order seemes to me strange and unreasonall If the Doctor when he denies our succession of Bishops No discontinuance of Succession of Bishops in England when Queen Elizabeth turned out the old ones could prove that the new ones had no Imposition of Hands by Bishops then his Argument touched us something though it be not absolute necessary that Bishops ordain Bishops Ante 33.4 chap. For what if all the Bishops should die so neer at one time that none were left ordained by them shall not the Presbytery make Bishops they have right to the Keyes which are called Claves ecclesiae non episcoporum and they are the remaining Pillars of the Church and certainly may confer the Order of Bishop upon others and that the rather because the Councells forbid Bishops of another Province to ordain in a forrain Province and though it may seeme strange to some that Ministers which are subordinate should ordain Bishops and so confer Superiour Orders it is not if rightly examined contradictory to reason For in this first ordination of Priests and Deacons they are infra ordines majores which orders are called Holy and Sacramentall and are the Highest Orders witness Pope Vrban decret dist 60. sum Sacr. Ro. Eccl. 226. as for the Order of Bishops it is no more then a Priest as to the Holy and Sacramentall Order onely more excellent in respect of the Order of Governing which is rather of Humane then Divine right Priests ordain Bishops for as it is Divine it is no more then what every Priest hath by the Sacramentall order but as it is Humane it is transcendent in relation to Discipline Ante 33.4 chap. and therefore the Presbytery may agree to ordain one over them to govern them in ecclesiasticall Rites as the people may choose a Prince to Govern in civill affairs Hence it was that the Apostles sent John to Ephesus Peter to Antioch and appointed James over the Churches at Hierusalem which before such their Consignations were but equal with the other Apostles in every respect but after that if any other of the Apostles came where they had the over-sight they were observant of them Hence was it that James was prolocutor of the Councel at Hierusalem and not Peter because James was Bishop there I may from thence infer that if Peter came to Rome for the same reason he was observant of Paul and therefore it is conceived that in case of necessity Priests may ordain Bishops for that Bishops in relation to their Jurisdiction are not a Sacramentall Order but onely as they are Priests But if this opinion be by the learned condemned I shall submit and yet with confidence affirme that we may in England claim a Church notwithstanding For when Queen Elizabeth turned out some Popish Bishops those that were put into their roomes were ordained by the remaining part of the old Bishops For all the old Bishops were not turned out then nor in Hen. 8. his time For first in Hen 8. time the controversie was about Supremacy which question the Insolencies of the Pope occasioned though I doe not justifie that Prince for all he did and being once started it gave occasion of further scrutiny into the primitive Fathers and Councels Reformation of England Infra 55.5 chap. which did so far perswade the Consciences of the then Clergy that many of them did adhere to the Prince against the Pope and by that and other after inquisitions they found they had primitive right of calling Councels and reforming things amisse in their Church without appealing to Rome and thereupon having the authority of Scriptures Councells and Fathers they restored to themselves their just rights and shook off their servile obedience to the See of Rome which the Popes continued over them by keeping them up in ignorance not allowing them their own judgements and illumination ecclesiasticall to understand the plain letter of any thing be it never so far demonstrated to the easiest capacity without his Holinesse interpretation and having thus shaken off that slavish yoke of Rome the scales of blind obedience fell from their eyes and they clearly perceived the Popes false cunning and damnable abusings of Scriptures Fathers Councels and what not thorow his unjust usurpations of universality and infallibility whereby he became a new Legislator of Divine rules of Faith which had in them too much of grosse and fleshly compositions tending meerly to enslave Christendome and to set up the Popes triple Crown for all the people to worship thereby making them forsake Christ and his Truth for the fables and traditions of that abominable Idoll And as In Hen. 8. time all the Bishops were not turned out so neither at the coming of Queen Elizabeth to the Crown but continued in their Bishopricks excercising their function ordaining others as formerly onely the Archbishop of York the Bishops of Elie Lincoln Bath Worcester and Excester were outed and the Bishops of Saint Asaph Bangor London and Chester fled the rest continued and ordained others The Queen her self being Enaugurated by Bishop Oglethorp one of Queen Maries Bishops and Bishop of Carlisle and Parker the Arch-bishop
Council at Ravenna and sentenced the Acts of Pope Steph. which were in a Synod by him decreed to be burned The Council of Constantinople took away the cup which another Council restored and which decree of the Council of Constantinople and the now present practice of Rom's Church in that point is utterly against the doctrine of Christ and the practice of the Apostles and the Primitive Church as I shall shew in the sixteenth Chap. The Council of Nice declared Angels to be circumscriptible and the souls of men and that they have bodies and are visible and circumscriptible which is against the rules of our faith for we believe that God is the Creator of all things visible and invisible and if Angels and Spirits be visible then are there no invisible things as one argues upon this point But I do not much urge this in regard some hold that spirits may assume visible shapes nor doth my argument much rely upon this mistake in that Council I need not rifle much into Councels to pick out contradictory Canons sith the Councils themselves declare they are not infallible insomuch that the whole Council prayeth at the end of every Council in a set form of prayer that God would pardon their ignorance and errors quia conscientia remordente fabescimus c. and because our own conscience accusing us we do faint lest either ignorance hath drawn us into error and hasty will driven us to decline from thy will and pleasure of heavenly Father c. In which it appears that they confess the frailty of that Assembly that it may not onely err in matter of fact through ignorance but in faith also by declining from justice Lame and frivolous therefore are those distinctions Alledged that the contrary decrees of later are but the explications of former Councils by which the Papists would deceive the world that Councils do but declare and explain the meaning of former Councils but do never gainesay any by a contrary decree for the contrary is absolutely proved to you already in that they are diametrically opposite one to another and besides the four first Councils were reputed and taken to be so holy that Gregor the Gr. in regist primo libr. 24. and Masilius def pac dict 2. fol. 229. affirm they are to be believed sacred tanquam quatuor Evangelia and if a later council shall decree any thing contrary to them it shall not be received into the Church How then can the Church of Rome for shame claim universality to her self and supream jurisdiction the Church of Rome being but equal with Alexandria and declared to those Councils sicut Alexandria as I have proved in the second chapter But the Church of Rome by vertue of her new-acquired attributes of universality infallibility and supremacy may declare as she please and none to question her for it and she has her champions with Sophistry to make good whatsoever she proposes and therefore whereas those first councils were accounted sacred by the ancient Fathers even as the four Evangelists and therefore none might add to or diminish from them notwithstanding Rome may by her new prerogatives being declared above Councils do what she please and so upon the matter all Religion is by her made arbitrary we having neither Scripture Fathers nor Councels but must be interpreted by her after her own fancy and no other sence to be received of any thing though never so plaine but what she gives and whatsoever interpretation she makes through never so repugnant to the plaine text words and sense of Scripture Councils and Fathers must not be denyed but understood to be growings and explanations of the first faith spun out of the stock or depositum Ecclesiae with which delusive pretences of her strange contexture drawn from her own Spiders womb she entangles the lesser and small flies but the more sollid break the net of her artificial cunning and leave her in the snare she prepares for others and hereupon she has in the Council of Milan added a new Symbole of faith to the Nicene Creed which she cals new rules of faith which indeed are new articles of faith Explanations of Councils as common under one kind worshiping images supremacy c. which cannot be as they would have them understood explanations for explanations are declarative illustrations of a truth involved in some former article and not additions of a doctrine newly conceived for truth I allow that out of the depositum Ecclesiae Depositum Ecclesiae as the Doctor says fol. 123. there may be growings in faith and knowledge and new articles imposed upon the people by representatives in collective or Provincial Councels which upon new questions and disputes may resolve being the proper interpreter and reconciler of differences and by the authority of Scriptures frame new articles which before were not thought of as occasion to that purpose may be administred and having framed such articles by authority of the Church may deliver them to be received as matters of faith by which the people by the approbation of the civil magistrate of the respective jurisdictions are bound But if those be contrary to what former Councils have resolved it proves their decrees peccant as Romes supremacy by the Laterne and Trent Councils as against the first Councils of Nice and Constontinople or if those new rules or articles of faith be not warranted by Scripture they are not binding to absent provincials as I shall shew in the twelfth Chapter for it is cleer and evident that the Scripture is above the authority of any Council that ever was since the Apostles Council at Jerusalem and it self doth in matters of points necessary judge it self Infra 102.112 as is in that Chapter plainly proved though all those points were not at first digested into a Symbole of faith Scriptures above Councils For if by authority of explanation the Church represented in ordinary councils shall not be bound by Scripture so that she shall not frame new rules contrary to the plaine letter of those points of our salvation the Holy Ghost has set down in the Scriptures we do then submit the whole matter of our salvation unto the power of humane judgements and so make void the dictates of the Holy Ghost in the Scriptures at the wils and discretions of mortal men which though they were Angels sent from heaven in that case are not to be believed shall they teach contrary to that the Apostles here delivered therefore I say because all points of salvation may not be methodized into a certaine Symbole and rule of faith the Church as occasion may require may out of the treasure of the Scriptures take new rules but those rules must not impugne the plain letter of Scripture which because such a Council is fallible must be made the square and rule to judge that Council by Now because God has promised his Spirit to his Church and Councils are the representation of
if it be hid it is hid unto them that are lost whom the God of this world hath blinded â—hat the light of the Gospel of the glory of Jesus Christ should not shine unto them 2 Cor. 4. For it is plain by the Scripture that Jesus was the Christ Acts 18.28 And Joh. 5. The Father hath sent the Son and his works bear witness of him and the Scriptures testifie of him God the Father God the Son and God the holy Ghost the Comforter his Passion Resurrection Ascension and the coming of the holy Ghost being so plainly preached and set down that a man may read them running and this Word endureth for ever and this Word is preached unto us 1 Pet. 1.25 And Joh. 3.16 God so loved the world that he gave his onely begotten Son that whosoever believeth on him should not perish but have everlasting life and what need we any more This is eternal life to know the Father and Jesus Christ whom thou hast sent Joh. 17.3 He is the Way the Truth and the Life We believe that thou art Christ the Son of the ever-living God and thou hast the words of eeternal life Joh. 5.68 Hence S. Austin lib. de doctr Christianae cap. 9. did affirm that all things pertaining to mans salvation are plain and easie to be understood And Chrysostome upon 2 Thessal 2. Hom. 3. Omnia plana sunt sunt eÌ„x divinis Scripturis quaecunque necessaria sunt manifesta sunt It is not therefore an idle and presumptuous doctrine in the Church of England to maintain this since we have both authority of Scripture and the Fathers for the same Nor do we hereby rob the Church of her authority to judge of and determine controversies and those things that are doubtful in the Scriptures There are some things of Discipline and pertaining to Manners in which the Scriptures may be doubtful or not easie for every capacity to understand and for those it is fit the Church should determine them and having determined them to impose them by the Princes authority as Rules of faith upon the people and so teaches the Church of England in the twentieth Article Lay-men to read Scripture But the main things necessary to our salvation concerning our faith to be grounded upon Jesus the Son of the ever-living God the author and finisher of our faith those as I said before are clear and manifest and though Angels from heaven should teach any other doctrine they are to be accursed Gal. 1. Wherefore sith this is plain and manifest in Scripture that Jesus gave himself for our sins and whosoever believeth in him shall not perish but have everlasting life and for that this faith is given by the Spirit of God 1 Cor. 12. Phil. 1.29 2 Pet. 1.3 and Matth. 16.17 and is the gift of God and no man hath it of himself for flesh and blood doth not reveal it and for that Christ has prescribed the way how and by what means we shall obtain this gift even by searching the Scriptures Rom. 10 It must needs be a grievous and intolerable sin in the Church of Rome to debar the people of this means to attain this precious jewel the salvation of their souls Upon these grounds do we allow the Laytie to read the Scripture but we do not hereby give them liberty to interpret it according to their will and humour They may in them finde Jesus to be the life everlasting the Spirit giving them faith and therefore must not be debarred the means But they are not allowed in points of difficulties to be their own interpreter but to repair to the Fathers of the Church to declare the meaning of those Oracles of God to whom it is given by the power of the holy Ghost to know the mysteries of the kingdom of God Matth. 13.11 For which end Christ has commended the Scriptures to the Church that she may discern keep and publish them Christ opened the Scriptures to his disciples Luke 24. and they preached it to all nations The Apostle Paul 1 Tim. 3. calls the Truth the fountain of the Church and the Church the pillar of Truth as Solomon made his Chariots to have a golden axletree and pillars of silver understanding by the axletree says one sound doctrine by the pillars the faithful teachers of the same The Scripture is the truth of God and the Church the house of God the Scripture the foundation the Church the pillar and the foundation is not sustained by the pillar but the pillar supported of the foundation Truth makes the Church not the Church the Truth We are to observe the Scripture as it were the Candle the Church as the Candlestick according as S. Austin upon Gal. 1. says Church how to interpret The Scriptures are not true because the Church says they are the Word of God but the testimony of the Church is true because they are the Word of God Now as we ascribe to our Church this priviledge of interpretation of difficult and obscure places Scriptures above Councels â—nte Chap. 9. we do not either deprive Rome of her right or too much extol our own Church Nor do we hereby make void the Laytie's reading of Scripture The Laytie may read it because the main points are easie and it is the means to obtain faith as well as by hearing the Church in those points that are easie and it is the way enjoyned by God to attain faith as well as by preaching and he has promised his Spirit to those that seek him earnestly and with unfeigned lips And when it shall please God by their reading to give them of his holy Spirit that Spirit will guide them to come to the Church to be informed in those things they understand not or shall the Church understand that through weakness they misunderstand any point in those Scriptures and she shall reprove them the same Spirit guiding them into the way of Truth will lead them to hearken to the dispensers of the sacred Oracles And if the Church shall deliver any thing which to other Churches may seem strange and not satisfactory she as I said before in the precedent Chapter will call a Synod and if there the business receive not an absolute and satisfactory resolution to submit the business to a General Council rightly constituted and free in it self And in the mean time if our Church offend the Church of Rome for that she differs from her in any particular let her make her self capable to reform by a General Councel by taking off the slavery that lies upon it by the Popes Canonical Law and we shall submit our Church to the free debate in a perfect Council to decide the points wherein we differ otherwise the Church of Rome might seem to have just cause to accuse us for that we cast off the discipline of the Primitive Churches as to that particular but in the mean time upon the former recited texts of Scripture upon the authority of
that of S. Paul Galat. 2.8 He that was mighty by Peter in the Apostleship over the Circumcision was also mighty by me towards the Gentiles but do and hope still to hold out the truth they have received against any innovation of the Romish See whatsoever and particularly the Church of England When the first Councell of Nice was called England not subject to Rome we had a Church planted here and publike profession of the Faith of Christ 120. years before that Councell and had Bishops and Metropolitans of London and York and although it might tacitly be inferred from the sixth Canon of that Councell that we were within the Jurisdiction of Rome as being within the West yet in the second Canon thereof is mention made of many Provinces and power of Jurisdiction reserved to every Metropolitan which by the next generall Councell 2. Can. is further enlarged Ecclesias in longinquis Gentibus constiâ—utas gubernari convenijtuxta consuetudinem quae est à patribus observata By which Canon we may justly claim provincial Jurisdiction to the Church of England having at that time a Metropolitan of our own however it is confirmed to us in the Chalcedon Councell 19. Can. Episcopos in unaquaque Provincia bis in anno Metrapolitano istius provinciae provinciales Episcopos admonente convenire licet which was afterwards confirmed and declared in a Councell at Antioch 20. Can. Provincial Councels that it was lawfull for Metropolitans of Provinces to call Counsells propter utilitates ecclesiasticas absolutiones earum rerum quae dubitationem controversiamque recipiunt and by the said Councell of Antioch the nineth Can. and the Councell of Carthage the seventeenth Can. it is decreed that in every Province there be a Metropolitan so that had we had none before we might by these two Canons claime one but having one it is confirmed to us to be distinct of our selves and for one Metropolitan to govern and call Councells without any appeal to Rome having the authority of Councells to confirm this unto us nor is this to arrogate to our selves any more then what of right belongs to us and what other Provincials may justly challenge to themselves and what has beeh practised of old both by the French Germans Spaniards c. as shall be shewed more at large in the chapter of Councells If I should argue like the Doctor Possession infra chap. 4. I must plead possession of this priviledge as he doth for Universality and say it were jus Gentis but I dare not in cases of this nature stand to that humane Plea possession for hold and prescription for time is no good Plea in cases of Religion though in civill matters for peace sake and avoiding contentions it be admitted in bar of after too busie Inquisitors for the first may be a claim by intrusion which is the point in question and the other antiquity of error malus usus est abolendus let custome yeeld to truth is a sound axiom of Divinity I will not therefore stand so much upon possession of this immunity as upon the right of that possession though whilest I prove a possession from these Councells I destroy Romes prescription to Universality in that these records are above her Donor Phocas and so annihilate her puisne title It was the Decree of the Councell of Carthage 28. Can. that Priests if they thought themselves agrieved at the censures of their Diocesans to appeal to the primate of their own Province and not to Rome or any other See over Sees and if they did they stood excommunicate from the rest of the Churches in Africa and shall we being as free and having as good right to this priviledge subject our selves to a forraign See at Rome sith we may call a Councell of our own which may upon serious debate judge of things maintained and done by other Churches and resolve whether to admit of them into their own provinciall Churches without being branded for Heretikes and Schismatikes upon which score the Church of England did in her full and lawfull assembles heretofore cast off some usurpations of the See of Rome and did retain what she conceived Apostolical what she cast off we offer to the world to maintain the action by authority of Scripture Fathers and Councells and what we retain Rome cannot blame for we being provinciall and having a Metropolitan of our own and a lawfull Succession of Bishops as I shall shew anon even from Apostolicall Ordination to this day we might well reform propter utilitates ecclesiasticas absolu iones controversiae infra provinciam without either appealing to Rome or she questioning what we do herein yet in those things we differ we would willingly submit them to the sentence of a generall Councell might it be free and rightly constituted of which in the chapter of Councells In the mean time we may with confidence affirm that Rome is not the only Catholique Church and for the better satisfaction of the Reader of the justnesse of this our claim and to acquit us of all presumption in this point I will crave pardon though it do not much conduce to the subject matter of this chapter any further then what is already spoke to give him a brief relation of the planting of the Christian Faith in this Island of Britain It is recorded by the ancient Writers and preservers of antiquity in this Isle England converted to the Faith that the Gospell was planted here by Joseph of Arimathea who was sent hither out of France by Philip who was sent thither by Paul some affirm it was Philip the Apostle upon dispersion of the Jews to have come to France but for my part I rather encline to think it was Philip the Deacon who was ordained by Paul Acts 6. and that Paul sent him into France and that he planted the Gospell here and it is agreed by all that Joseph of Arimathea was here and did preach the Gospell to the Britains about the year of our Lord 63. and here remained in this land all this time and died here and was buried at Glassenbury and was the first that preached to the Britains but whether he was sent of Paul from Rome or came from Philip out of France who came thither directly from the East and not from Rome as some suopose the histories do not plainly declare nor is it much materiall for whether Philip came from the East or from Rome and sent Joseph hither it is certain Joseph had his Mission from Apostolicall order besides presently after Simon Zelotes was sent out of France hither as Nicephorus lib. 2. cap. 40. reporteth and here the Gospell was received and nourished though not publikely professed before Lucius time which was Anno 169. after Christ for as a City upon a hill cannot be hid so the Gospell having been preached here though but in some obscure corners of the Isle did so spread by Gods blessing upon the labours of them that
laid before the holy Fathers Est firmamentum columna Ecclesiae Evangelium It onely is infallible in it self all other Councils and Traditions may erre saith Tom. lib. 2. contra Donatistos cap. 3. And though an Angel from heaven teach another doctrine no faith is to be given thereunto Tertullian contra Hermogen pag. 373. I reverence saith he the fulness plenitude and perfection of Scriptures as that which shews to me both the Maker and the things which are made Austin confesseth the authority of Scripture to be above the authority of the Church in his Epistles contra Manich. tom 6. cap. 4. The consent of people and nations the authority of the Church begun by miracles nourished with hope increased with charity established with antiquity succession of Priests and the name of Catholike saith he are great motives to keep me in the unity of the Church but above these he prefers the truth of Scripture in regard whereof he promiseth Manicheus to give more credit to his doctrine then to the Church if he be able to prove it out of Scripture These and many more authorities in this point might be produced to manifest what credit and reverence the Fathers of the Primitive Church did attribute to the sacred Oracles of God Now what may we think of those that count them a bare letter Inkie Divinity a matter of strife and ground of Heresies And by the Doctor fol. 255 the light of the Gospel is termed Ignis fatuus because not borrowed from Rome's dark lanthorn Others affirming that if any contemn the authority of the Romane Church that he shall not be able to assure himself of Scripture any more then of a Robinhood-tale To which I answer The Council of Laodicea can 59. which Council was held long before ever Rome's Bishop claimed a Supremacie over other Churches hath declared which shall be taken and accepted for Canonical Scripture and hath decreed that none else should be read in the Churches besides them we according to that Canon accept and embrace them and according to the ancient copies doth our Clergie retain them in the Church nor are we altogether beholding to Rome for the Translations 'T is true she hath a glorious Library as many witness the onely ornament of her Vatican Hill And in some competent measure is our Oxford replenished with the ancient Manuscripts of the Primitive Fathers and of old approved Translations of the Scriptures both after the Hebrew Syriack Rome not the onely dispenser of the Scripture Chaldee Greek and Latine Translations which the Fathers and the Reverend Governours of the Primitive Churches have permitted to be transmitted to other parts and in these later days we have been beholding to Rome for some Translations But she was not the first that sent the Gospel hither as may appear by Eleutherius his Epistle to Lucius You have heretofore saith he received the law and faith of Christ ye have within your Realm both the parts of Scripture out of which by the counsel of your Realm take a law and by that law rule your kingdom for you be Gods Vicar within your own kingdom c. And in this particular I think Rome as well as we is beholding to other Churches why then should she boast that we know not what is Scripture but that which she has delivered Had not the Apostles equal authority to teach all nations Doth not Peter direct his Epistle to the Saints which are dwelling about Cappadocia Galatia Asia and Bithynia and S. James to the twelve tribes which are scattered abroad and S. Jude to all which are sanctified and called of God And S. Paul writes as well to the Corinthians Galatians Ephesians Philippians Colossians and Thessalonians as to the Romans wherefore how comes it that the Church of Rome should be the onely Monopolizer of Scripture Was not the holy Ghost given to them which Philip Paul and Barnabas did ordain as well as those Peter did ordain And admit that Peter was Bishop of Rome had not the rest of the Apostles received the holy Ghost as well as Peter did it not sit upon each of them like cloven tongues of fire And why should the Church of Rome boast her self to be onely and alone endowed with an onely spirit of interpretation Let none understand more then is meet to understand was S. Paul's instructions to the Romanes But such is the uncharitableness and presumption of the present Church of Rome that she accounts her self the onely wise interpreter and no other Church to have the spirit of discerning the Truth unless she have received that spirit mediately from her I must needs tell her that she has no warrant to arrogate this transcendency and super-excellencie in this point of wisdom from any divine precept it is but her own humane institution no other Church approving of it and so it is but the wisdom of this world which as S. Paul says 1 Cor. 1.20 is found foolishness before God and according to that saying of Solomon Prov. 12.15 The way of a fool is right in his own eyes The treasure of the holy Writ is no common or ordinary bank That the Scripture contains things necessary to salvation but a precious store of eternal happiness in them is laid up life everlasting according to that of S. Paul Rom. 1.16 It is the power of God unto salvation to every one that believeth to the Jew first and also to the Greek and 2 Tim. 3.14 Timothy had known the Scriptures from a childe which were able to make him wise unto salvation It is profitable to teach to improve to correct to instruct in righteousness that a man of God may be absolute being made perfect to all good works Therefore are we bidden Joh. 4.39 to search the Scriptures for in them is eternal life and they are they which testifie of Christ It is true All things that Jesus did are not written saith S. John but saith he these things are written that ye might believe that Jesus is the Christ the Son of God and believing ye might have life through his Name Joh. 20.31 Cyril lib. 2. upon that place of S. John saith Non omnia quae Dominus facit transcripta sunt sed quae Scriptores tam ad mores quam ad dogmata sufficere putarunt ut recta fide operibus ad regnum coelorum perveniamus And Saint Austin likewise says that all things were not written but onely so much was written as was thought to be sufficient to the salvation of the faithful And whereas in the 20 of the Acts ver 27. it is said I have not spared to shew unto you the whole counsel of God Lyranus and Carthusianus expound it onely to be understood of things pertaining to our salvation which S. Austin lib. de doctr Christian 2. cap. 6. plainly affirms that all things necessary to our salvation are plainly contained in the written Word And Irenaeus lib. 3. cap. 1. We know saith he
must we admit that they taught any thing contrary to what they writ they had the Holy Ghost that never-erring Spirit that did lead them into all truth and could not at one time write one thing and after teach another We allow that they did deliver traditions to the people but Saint Peter in his 1 Epist 1.25 tells us it was the word of the Lord that was preached amongst them for nothing contrary to that was preached and delivered and that the people were bound to observe all things they did teach by the commandment of God Mat. 28.20 and therefore Saint Paul enjoynes the Thessalonians 2 Thess 2.15 to hold fast the traditions they had learned whether by word or Epistle The old Testament was delivered by the Jews and confirmed by Christ and his Apostles and therefore the Church of Rome did embrace that and reject the other traditional books of the Jews which were not by Moses written or by Christ approved of Now we make bold in this to follow her example if the Church of Rome have any traditions which are not repugnant to the written word we shall not disallow of them but if they make against that with the Evangelists and the Apostles have delivered to us in writing which writing we approve in our Judgement as the infallible oracles of God we by her own eâ—ample as rejecting those traditions of the Jews which were not consonant to the written law of Moses or approved of by Christ and likewise by warrant of Christ not to leane to the traditions of men and to cast off the commandments of God desire to be excused for not embracing every tradition the Church of Rome would obtrude upon us and we perswade our selves that sith she hath rejected the traditions of the Jews because not warranted by the written word she cannot be so impartial to deny us the same liberty to reject her traditions upon the same score and that the rather because she hath not so good a ground for her traditions as the Jews had in respect Moses talked with God face to face Exod. 33. Besides the Jews traditions were certaine and reduced into writing by the late Rabbins and therefore the Church of Rome might better have embraced them then think that we shall follow hers which are daily of new invention After the destruction of Jerusalem and scattering of the Jews Papist traditions uncertaine one Rabbi Juda Hannasi got leave of Antoninus to assemble the people and because the books of their old traditions were utterly lost and perished they then being met writ all that they could remember The Jews Talmud calling it Mischna that is Deuteronomy or a Law reiterated which was a memorial of their Cabala or traditional law which collections of theirs were afterward Anno Christi 219. by Rabbi Jochanan enlarged and called the Talmud which Talmud was after Anno Christi 500. perfected and received as a Rule in all cases Ecclesiastical and civil So that the Jews having thus reduced their traditions into certainty it were more reasonable for the Church of Rome to embrace them then to think that we shall hand over head accept of her ever-growing traditional rules which are not held forth in any certainty to us but every day upon colour of Church-traditions she plays an Affrican trick and brings out new monsters so that I may say it is as easie to make a gown for the Moon as for any man to think he can keep and observe her traditional rules The variety of her strange production in this particular might serve to cloy the appetite of any that should desire to render himself obedient to her rules but the vanity of them and their contrariety to Gods word doth more especially and justly detaine every good Christian for being her superstitions proselyte to embrace them and eâ—pecially those Christians which are not within her jurisdictions nor belonging unto his charge Amongst whom I may rank our English Church which being of Apostolical foundation and in power and Church-authority equal with the Church of Rome and for that the Law of God was as well extended to other Churches and particularly to her as to Rome as I have proved in the second and fourth Chapters may in that respect as well prescribe traditional law to the Church of Rome as she should send forth her historical edicts to England Yet lest some may think that if uppon this score we cast off her traditions we do but thereby evade the question of validity and authority of her traditions in themselves as they are by her held forth unto the world I will therefore make it evident that neither those of her own Church and province nor the Romane Catholicks of other Kingdomes are bound or ought to receive and embrace whatsoever traditions the Church of Rome shall hold forth to them as being so imposed upon them to be received for matter of faith I have in some measure in the former Chapter treated upon the authoâ—ity and excellency of Scriptures wherein I have shewed that she is the ground and foundation of the Church and if so then it follows that whatsoever tradition the Church shall deliver as matter of Doctrine must either stand upon this ground-work or else â—t is a paper-building an airey peece a black cloud of humane condensing hurried to and fro by contrary winds â—ill the loosly-contracted vapour dash â—t self upon this rock of Christ and â—â—ke smoak vanish into nothing She â—s the touchstone must distinguish the gold from the drossy and courser peeces of Rom's treasure she is the Fan must winnow and purge the floor of the Churches granary from all chaff and light corn and from those Tares which being cast into her field by Satan sprung together with her better graine And hereupon the good Emperor Constantine as it is recorded in the Ecclesiastical History lib. 1. cap. 7. did say That seeing the Evangelical and Apostolical books and the Oracles of the Old Testament do plainly teach us any thing that we ought to know or learn concerning God whether concerning his Divine Nature as Saint Luke useth the words Acts 17.25 Or his attributes and qualities as Saint Peter applies it 2 Pet. 1.5 Or his Law and Religion as the penner of Maccabees takes it 2 Mac. 4.7 Away therefore with all strife and seek for the solution of these matters out of the Scriptures inspired by God himself And herewith agreeth Bellarmine Tom. 1. Col. 2. saying That the books of the Prophets and Apostles are the true word of God and the sure and true rule of our faith And as I said before in the precedent Chapter All things necessary to our salvation are contained in the Scriptures It is true indeed that in the Scriptures we do not finde any mention of Peter being Bishop of Rome or of the Assumption of Mary the mother of Jesus nor can we finde by Scriptures that Saint Luke was a Painter or that Nicodemus had so much
skill in Appelles Art that he drew that exquisite picture of Christ which Rome has representing unto us his posture whilst the Jews whipt him I must confess that for these matters of importance we must submit to the traditions of Rome But all things touching God and the means to attaine faith in him are plentifully therein to be found Chrysostome sayes in his 41 Hom. upon the 22 of Matth. Quicquid queritur ad salutem totum eam ademptum est in Scripturis and upon the 95 Psalm Si quid dicatus absque Scriptura c. If any thing be spoken without the Scripture the cogitation of the Auditors faile but so soon as the Testimony of Gods voice is heard out of the Scripture it confirmeth both the word of the speaker and the mind of the hearer Saint Hierom upon the 9 of Jeremy Nec parentum ne majorum error sequendus est sed author it as Scripturarum Dei docenti imperium Saint Cyprian who writ almost 1400 yeers ago would not yeeld to Stephanus Bishop of Rome but reproved him for leaning to tradition and demanded of him by what Scripture he could prove his tradition Cyprian Epist ad Pompeium 74. So then if in his time it was not enough to alleadge tradition for the proof of the Doctrine of the Church of Rome much less is it lawful to follow the Popes definitive sentence in matters of faith and doctrine When the Arrians would not admit the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 because it could not be found in Scripture Athanasius did not plead tradition for it but said Although the express words be not found in the Scripture yet have the Scriptures that meaning and sense in them as every one that readeth the Scriptures may plainly understand and therefore by warrant thâ—eof that word might be maintained Saint Austine de unitat Eccl. cap. 10. Nemo mihi dicat quid dixit Donatus quid dixit Parmenianus quid Paulus aut quillibet illorum quid nec catholicis episcopis consentiendum est sicubi forte falluntur ut contra canonicas Dei Scriptures aliquid sentiant Methinks the very word Canonical which the Church of Rome having approved Canonical Scripture disprove â—raditiods what Scriptures shall be Canonical what not is sufficient of it self to prove this point for signifies a rule and thereupon those books are called Canonical because they are the rules of our faith and consequently whatsoever is not consonant to the Scripture ought to be rejected as pernicious and swerving from the rules of our faith For as whatsoever is not of faith is sin and as faith comes by hearing and hearing by the word of God therefore whatsoever is extra Scripturam cum ex fide non sit peccatum est This was the saying of Basil one of the Church of Rome's Saints in his Ethicks difinit ult prope finem And for my part I shall not be so harsh with her as this St. was I should be willing to allow of her traditions if they do not impugne the Scriptures and not to be so rigid against her traditional power as upon Basil's rule utterly to reject all if not expresly contained in Scripture I say for my part I should allow of such and approve of them as to be cerdited for the matter of fact but if she enjoyn them as doctrinal and to be rules of faith then â—ith Cyprian I desire to examine them by this Touchstone of truth the Scriptures For if once she propound traditions to be rules of faith then with Hierome Cyprian and Austin I must examine the truth of them by the rule of Scripture and with Saint Chrysostome in his 13 Hom. upon the 2 Cor. 7. do pray and beseech the Church of Rome to reject what this or that man says and search the truth out of the Scriptâ—re that learning true riches we may follow them and so attain life everlasting neither let any Church be wedded with her own traditions or give her self to believe the traditions of other Churches unless saith he she can bring authority from these truths to a warrant her doctrine and not to receive for doctrine the commandments of men and with Saint Cyprian examine from whence such tradition came whether it descended from authority of our Lord Jesus Christ or his Gospel or whether it came from the Mandates of the Apostles or their Epistles If so saith he let such divine and holy tradition be observed if no let it be rejected especially any tradition that shall contradict the written verities of God for such certainly proceed from spirits of error Here is a cloud of witnesses all agreeing in one that no traditions are to be embraced that have not warrant from the word of God so that for the Church of Rome to put her traditions upon the people for rules of faith upon that score that it is the power and authority of the Church that awarrants those traditions is vain and not binding to the conscience of men unless she can justifie and maintaine them warrantable by the word according to Saint Pauls saying to the Galat. 1.9 Though an Angel from heaven come and teach any other doctrine then what we have preached let him be accursed For the Testimony of no Church whatsoever is to be received if it be contrary to the Scripture Sâ—riptures above the Church Ante 73. Chapter 9. according to that of Saint Austin upon that text The Scriptures are not true because the Church sayes they are the word of God but the testimony of the Church is true because they are the word of God and should Rome or any other Church teach contrary to the holy Scripture it is to be rejected as that which hath nothing of verity in it Now sith the Scriptures are the onely rules of our faith The vanity and falseness of the traditions of the Church of Rome and do containe in themselves the necessary points of our faith what shall we think of the traditions of the Church of Rome which have no warrant from the holy Scriptures but many of them being repugnant and utterly contrary to those Scriptures which therefore by the rule of Christ himself in the 7 of Matthew and by the general consent of the fathers of the primitive Church are to be rejected yet notwithstanding are by her enjoyned upon her pretended authority of universality and infallibility to be rules of faith unto others And lest any should think me injurious to the Church of Rome in this particular I wiâ—l give you a smal taste for I delight not to lay open her infirmities thereby to draw a scandal upon her of such of her traditions as are not warranted by the holy word of God only maintained out of self interest and to warrant her claim of universal power Spiritual and Temporal by these ensuing examples and further refer you to the 7 Chapter The Church of Rome that she might perswade the world of Peters being Bishop of Rome by
is a figure of the Testament of Christ which was to be sealed with his blood For his blood is not the Testament but the thing that confirms the new Testament This is so evident a place to disprove the tenents of Romes Church in this particular that her champions are forced to their last refuge of abusing Scripture and therefore they render that text thus This blood is a new Testament in my blood which translation I submit to the judicious Reader whether it be not more strange then any figurative speech Christ saith we must be baptized with the holy Ghost this is a figurative speech So likewise Except a man be born again c. that was a figurative speech intending thereby spiritual regeneration S. Paul saith that in Baptism we cloathe us with Christ and be buried with him Rom. 6. which are figurative speeches of our newness of life and mortification of sin The Paschal Lamb without spot signified Christ the effusion of that blood signified Christ's passion and the sprinkling of the posts with blood whereby the first-born escaped death is a type of those which at the last day shall be saved being sprinkled with the blood of Jesus As in the Old Testament Exod. 12. God said This is the Lords passeover which was not the Lords Passeover but a figure representing the Lords passing by so Christ in the New Testament says of the bread and wine This is my body This is my blood which is not so in substance but in signification A figure hath the name of a thing that is signified thereby as we say a mans image is called a man the figure of a tree a tree or the like So we say Let us go to S. Peter of Millain to S. James in Compestella c. not meaning thereby the things themselves but understanding by the things representive the things represented Even so the bread and wine though Christ call them his body and blood yet they are not verily so but the elementary parts and outward signes of the invisible grace his flesh and blood thereby signified Nor is this a strange interpretation but according to Christs own figurative speech saying Luk. 22. I have much desired to eat this passeover with you Which words none can deny to be figurative God himself used that figurative speech and Jesus the onely Son of that Father to ssure us of his unity with the Godhead breathes out the same Spirit to his Apostles This is my passeover This is my body This is my blood As the shedding of that Lamb's blood was a token of the shedding of Christs blood then to come and forasmuch as the Sacraments of the Old Testament ceased and ended in Christ lest we should through corrupâ—ion and depravity forget the accomplishment of those Types and not take heed to print in our memories the benefits we receive by Christ Therefore Christ at his last Supper when he took leave of his disciples being shortly to depart out of the world according to the will of the Father did make a new Will He did make a new Will and Testament wherein he bequeathed clear remission of sins which he sealed next day with his blood and instituted this holy Sacrament in remembrance thereof and ordained the same in bread and wine saying This is my body This cup is my blood which is shed for remission of sins Do this in remembrance of me And Saint Paul says 1 Cor. 11. As often as we eat this bread and drink this cup we shew the Lords death till he come Therefore when we come to be made partakers of this heavenly food we should seriously call to minde the wonderful sufferings great goodness and marvelous kindness of Christ he offering himself for our redemption and by a lively faith apply the merits of his Passion to our souls and so we verily receive Christ he to be in us and we in him The Scriptures do sufficiently set forth this truth That when Christ said Hoc est corpus it was a figurative speech and the Church of England holds forth this truth against all adversaries and opposers thereof And that in this she may not seem arrogant to assume a self-self-interpretation of the Scriptures to maintain this her assertion I will bring in some ancient Fathers to bear witness for her Saint Augustine How to interpret Scrip ure de doctrina Christiana lib. 3. advising us how to interpret Scripture bids us beware how we take literally any thing that is spoken figuratively and figuratively any thing that is spoken literally And he therefore gives this Rule in way of caution If the thing saith he that is spoken be to the furtherance of Charity then it is a proper speech and no figure as when it commands any good or forbids any evil act then it is no figure but if it command any evil thing or forbid that that is good then it is a figurative speech Now this saying of Christ Except ye eat my flesh and drink my blood ye have no life in you seems to enjoyn a hainous and vicked thing and therefore upon S. Austin's rule it is a figurative speech But I will not onely conclude it upon that general rule to be so But I will likewise for better clearing this truth â—t down the express opinions of the Fathers in this point The ancient Fathers agree that it was a figurative speech Irenaeus contr Valent. lib. 4. c. 32. â—aith Christ confessed bread which is creature to be his body and the cup to be his blood And in cap. 57. he â—â—ith that Christ taking bread of the â—ame sort that ours is of confessed that â—t was his body It was saith he maâ—erial bread and therefore a figurative â—peech Cyprian ad Magn. lib. 1. Epist 6. Christ called bread made of many corns and wine pressed out of many grapes his body and blood Cyril in Johan lib. 4. cap. 14. Christ gave to his disciples pieces of bread saying Take eat this is my body And herewith agree Austin de Trinit lib. 3. cap. 4. Theodoret. dialog 1. all concurring that when Christ took bread and wine and spake these words This is my body This is my blood that it was bread and wine which he gave and not any other substance And Origen in Levit. Hom. 7. declareth the eating and drinking of Christs flesh and blood to be figurative therefore saith he understand them as spiritual not as carnal men Tertul. contra Marcion lib. 1. calls bread broken by Christ a figure of his body and wine his blood because saith he in the Old Testament bread and wine were figures of his body and blood And Chrysostome upon Psal 22. saith that Christ ordained the Table of his holy Supper for this purpose that in that Sacrament he should shew unto us bread and wine for a similitude of his body and blood So that all agree it is a figurative speech S. Ambrose upon 1 Cor. 11. saith that in eating and drinking the bread and
significantly there present then they agree with us but if really in the bread then we do not concur in opinion with them for the reasons afore in pare rehearsed and for other reasons hereafter following I might instance many particular reasons against this Romish errour of Transubstantiation as that 1. Nothing was broken eaten drunken and chawed but the accidents of the body because they deny the bread and wine to be the visible elements which is against Reason and all authority or else if they will have a body there That it is without accidents and so they must either make accidents without substances or substances without accidents 2. When the bread mouldeth and turneth into worms or the wine sowreth or turneth into vinegar it is the bread mouldeth and the wine that sowreth Christ is the same yesterday to day and for ever Therefore are the bread and wine substantially there and if they were but accidents then no body could be made thereof as worms or material vinegar 3. Let a dog or cat c. eat of that bread and he is nourished thereby which could not be if the substance remained not 4. The Scripture calleth them bread and wine after consecration which are names of substance not of accidents which if substance remained not it were a meer illusion of our senses and so we with the Jews make Christ a Jugler making things appear to our outward senses which are not 5. The Sacrament had a beginning and hath an end put to it it is to be received in remembrance of Christs death till he come and then to cease Wherefore there can be no real transubstantiated presence of Christ for he is from eternity to eternity 6. If there be a transubstantiated body of Christ then is Christ every day new made and as many Wafers as many Christs which is impossible for his substantial body to be in several places either in the several Wafers or the several places of consecration at one and the same instant of time 7. This doctrine doth impugn the consent of the ancient Catholike Church which de fide professeth and believeth Christ to be made of the nature and substance of his blessed mother and therefore not every day to be made anew of the substance of bread and wine for if it were so then the same body that was crucified is not eaten or else that body which was crucified was made of bread and wine which is flat blasphemy against the holy Ghost by whose operation Christ was made and born of the flesh of his mother and suffered upon the Cross for the salvation of all believers Which Christ is no otherwise joyned to the elements in this Sacrament but Sacramentally as the holy Ghost in Baptism is joyned to the water not that the holy Spirit is made of the substance of the water or the water turned into the holy Ghost 8. It is against the express Scripture and Symbole of Faith grounded upon that Scripture which teaches that Christ concerning his body and humane nature is in heaven We believe that he was conceived of the holy Ghost born of the Virgin Mary suffered under Pontius Pilate was crucified dead buried that he descended into hell the third day he rose again from the dead and ascended into heaven and sits at the right hand of God the Father from whence he shall come to judge both quick and dead Christ said to his disciples I leave the world Joh. 16. and Mat. 26. Ye shall ever have poor folks with you but me ye shall not have always Mark 16. He was taken up into heaven and sits at the right hand of his Father Col. 1.3 Heb. 8. and Heb. 10. He sits continually at the right hand of God And Saint Peter Act. 3. faith that the heavens shall contain him until the time that all things shall be restored And Christ himself gave warning of this errour aforehand in Matth. 24. saying The time will come when there shall be many deceivers in the world which shall say Here is Christ and there is Christ but believe them not Thus the whole current of the Scripture makes against this Romish errour of Transubstantiation And because the Papists may not object against us that it is a novel interpretation or our mis-understanding of Scripture in this point I will make it manifest that the Primitive Church never taught this doctrine of Transubstantiation but were utterly against it as may appear by the testimony of these ancient Fathers Origen upon Matthew Tract 33. The Fathers against Transubstantiation saith Christ hath two natures God and Man as God he is with us always unto the end of the world as man he is not He is gone hence and absent in his Humanity but is always present in his Divinity S. Austin in his Epist 55. ad Dardanium Christ as concerning his Manhood is now there from whence he shall come to judge both quick and dead and as he ascended so shall he come in the self-same form and substance to the which he gave immortality but thereby did not change the nature Now saith he after this form we must not say that he is everywhere for we must take heed saith he that we do not so stablish his Divinity that we take away the verity of his body Cyril upon S. John lib. 6. cap. 14. Christ took away from hence the presence of his body but in the majesty of his Godhead he is everywhere he according to his promise is with his disciples even unto the end of the world S. Ambrose upon Luke lib. 10. cap. 24. We must not seek Christ upon earth but in heaven where he sits at the right hand of God And S. Gregory in Hom. Pasch saith Christ is not here in the presence of his flesh and yet as he is God he is absent nowhere by the presence of his majestie all unanimously and Apostolike being of one consent in this that Christ as touching his humanity is onely in heaven at the right hand of God And particularly these Fathers following are absolutely against this very point of Transubstantiation Justinus The Fathers against Transubstantiation an ancient Writer and holy Martyr who wrote about an hundred yeers after Christ in his second Apologie saith that the bread and wine in the Sacrament are not to be taken as other meats and drinks be they being purposely ordained to give thanks to God in and therefore be called Eucharistia and be called the body and blood of Christ and yet the same meat and drink be changed into our flesh and blood and nourish our bodies By which it is plain that the substance of the elements remain because saith he they are changed into flesh and blood and nourish our bodies Irenaeus contr Valent. lib. 1. c. 4. who wrote about 150 yeers after Christ and was a disciple of Polycarpus who was a disciple of John the Evangelist says The bread wherein we give thanks to God hath two things
Churches founded by them equall as so many members of the mysticall Head Christ Jesus and as to one was given by the Spirit of God Faith to another gifts of healing to another Prophecie to another interpretation of Tongues destributing to every one severally by the same spirit yet this is but to make up one body compleat for the gathering together of the Saints for verse 27. ye are the body of Christ and members for your part so that he that thinks he hath the greatest gift must not because he thinks himself the head say he hath no need of the other members for all are not Apostles all are not Prophets wherefore let the Church of Rome remember what S. Paul said to the Romans chap. 12. that none presume to understand above that which is meet to understand â—ut that he understand according to sobriety for as we have many members in one body and all members have not the same office so we being many are one body in Christ and every one anothers members wherefore then shall the head say unto the feet I have need of thee will the Church of Rome cast off all other Churches because she supposes her Bishop is Peters Successor will she be the Rock and Foundation of the Church and leave others as built upon the sand S. John in his Revelations ch 21. sayes the Apostles are counted the twelve Foundations or twelve stones of the house of God and will the late Popes allow no other Foundation but Rome The Apostles are called Builders and Foundations but none the chief Stone but Christ elect and precious 1 Peter 2. Behold I put in Sion a chief Corner-stone elect and precious and he is the Head of the body of the Church Colos 1.18 Bellarmine being ingaged to maintain the Popes Supremacy is not ashamed to ascribe the Prophecy of Esay cited by S. Peter to be meant of the Pope which S. Peter himself expounds of Christ I much wonder that so great a Schollar should commit so great an absurdity he strains the Scriptures to maintain the Supremacy of Rome because of Peter being there expounding Babylon from whence Peter directs his Epistle to be meant of Rome and yet he against S. Peters interpretation wil expound the chief Corner-stone Elect and precious to be put in Sion to be the Pope of Rome and so he makes Rome to be both Sion and Babylon he will have it Babylon to prove Peter there and Sion to exclude Christ from being Head of the Church contrary to S. Peters own interpretation and contrary to the interpretation of Cyprian Bede and severall Fathers upon the 21. of John who agree that Christ was the Rock upon which Foundation even Peter himself was built The Papists when that text of Matthew 16.18 will not serve their turn for to warrant their pretended title to lord it over all other Churches they then fly to the 21. of Iohn to the treble pasce construing to feed to signifie to govern and because generally spake to feed my Sheep to govern all not some The word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is not to rule but to feed An answer to the treble pasce and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 are not Rectors but Pastors wherefore to me it seems a strange interpretation But why should I think it strange it is but like that other interpretation of S. Peter afore mentioned The grand Doctor and Conclave of Rome have the Keys of the Scripture in their Cabinet and can by a word of their mouth make the dead letter speak as they please and like an Italian Padlock open at a private kue of their own invention they make Scripture like the Fish Popile which turns it self into the similitude of every object and they make the leafs of the holy Bible as it were a pair of Cards which they can so pack by false gaming that they can cut Christendome the head and make the Knave of the Clubs trump when they please I hope Christians in these later times when as deceivers are come abroad will be more wise then to be insnared by the novell Doctrines of Rone which she holds forth to the people for her self-interest and not their good and welfare and doth quite forsake the Primitive truth exalting her own Traditionall rules above Christ the Apostles or the ancient Fathers as it were to fascinate the people under a colour of Holinesse to become slaves to her new acquired Prerogatives though inconsistent with her See and function The Fathers severally concur upon this place of the 21. of Iohn that it was not said to Peter whereby to exclude the power of governing and feeding the flock of Christ from the rest of the Apostles not for any honor but rather comfort to Peter or if for honor not that it was hereby enlarged to Peter above the rest but that it was restored to Peter of whom Christ required a threefold confession of love that with his threefold confession he might blot out his threefold deniall Besides the words are my Sheep not thy Sheep as my sheep seek my glory in them not thine own my gain not thine Ezechiel 34. Woe to the shepheards of Jsrael that feed themselves not my flock Christ here demands if he loved him then he should shew that love to them feed them not thy self Chrysostome lib. 2. de sacerdot when Christ said to Peter feed my sheep it was to teach Peter and all the rest how much he loved the Church not to teach Peter alone but all the rest and fo S. Austin liber de agon cap. 3. it was spoken to all when it was spoken to Peter dost thou love me feed my sheep to him to put him in mind of his threefold deniall to the rest to make them mindfull of their charge that the same love they bare to their Master Christ they should now henceforth extend that love towards his Flock And whereas the Church of Rome doth urge that Christ gave this power to Peter after his Resurrection which should therefore carry more efficacy as coming from immortall Christ I may answer that this was the third time he appeared after his resurrection but after this he gathered them together and commanded them not to depart from Jerusalem but to watch for the coming of the Holy Ghost Acts 1. which when they were together with one accord it came and sate upon each of them Acts 2. After this the Lord Jesus appeared to Paul Acts 9. in a shining fire about him and he was thereupon converted and ordained an Apostle and Minister oâ— the Gentiles So that admit Peter did receive by the treble pasce a generall Jurisdiction which cannot from thence plainly be evinced yet Christ did after restrain this power that it should not extend to the Churches of the Gentiles Paul only being appointed an Apostle and Minister over them Successor of Peter not equall to Peter I might for Argument sake grant that Peter had not only a Primacy but
or if the Popes genius cannot see far enough to advance the Papal Throne they will in his name and by his authority make Scriptures Infra 12 Chap. Councils and Fathers noses of wax make the dead Fathers speak things they never thought or uttered and put new faces upon the old Fathers and Councils As for example S. Fathers Councils a bused by the Popes Parasites Austin de civitate Dei lib. 15. cap. 23. speaking of Canonical Scripture says Those Scriptures are to be taken for Canonical which the most part of the Christian churches so take amongst which those Churches be that deserve to have Apostolike Sees and to receive Epistles from the Apostles the word Sees is turned into See as I have already alleadged Ante Ch. 2 The sixth canon of the first Council of Nice which made Rome equal with Alexandria is corrupted and fifty false canons are added to the twenty canons of the same Council and the Jesuites would hereby perswade the world that his Holiness supremacie which was shortened by the Fathers of the Nicene Council being alive is enlarged by his Holiness they being dead and contrary that Council his Holiness gives leave to Abbots to consecrate Bishops which Abbots are not quatenus Abbots infra sacros ordines and contrary to the fifth canon he absolveth those that are excommunicated by other Bishops Contrary to the sixth canon he invades the Diocesses of other Patriarchs which Eutiches condemned in the Council of Chalcedon He believeth that Christ hath a body neither solid nor palpable nor like to ours for such is that transubstantiated body he maintains to be in the Sacrament He has further abused the Fathers of the Chalcedon Council who being alive said Let the See of Constantinople be as well advanced as the See of Rome being the next unto it which words are filthily corrupted by a negative added to the last words Let her not be advanced in matters Ecclesiastical as she let her be the next unto it So in like manner he hath abused the eight and twentieth canon of the Council of Carthage speaking how the Churches of Africa should not appeal beyond seas he has added this clause Vnless it be to the See of Rome I might instance a thousand more of the like nature but these particulars may serve to give a light unto their dark proceedings Hercules is known by his foot and by this brief epitome of the Church of Rome's tricks and juglings for note Reader where thorowout the Book I name the Pope I thereby generally understand the Church of Rome with Fathers and Councils you may ghess what multitudes of errours and wrongs she daily commits not making conscience to abuse the dead Fathers which were they alive could not think much at it because the dictates of the holy Ghost the Scripture it self is not free from his abuses in points that contradict his new profitable tenents and to make the Rules of Councels stand upon new pantables which his Holiness has shod them with to make them tread Papal measures in To this pass are general Councels come those of old speak new language those of later times teach things contrary to the old nor are these modern Councels free in their Constitutions every member thereof must be engaged by Oath to maintain the Pope in his new-usurped priviledges and should they freely debate and decree any thing yet it is to no purpose being subject to alteration controlment or denial of his Holiness and therefore since they are brought to this pass who will give ear to their Edicts or honour them as a Representative of several Churches united in that body sith thus by the practice of the Church of Rome general Councels are brought into this servile condition and made subordito the Pope it behoves Provincials to reform themselves and to call Provincial councils to that purpose and no longer to expect the decision of Controversies from a General Council which is thus made servile to the Pope to decree to please the people but in no ways to displease the Pope Sith then General Councils are brought to this pass I say it behoves Provincials as they tender the purity of doctrine delivered by Christ and the dictates of the holy Ghost by the mouth of the Apostles to be preserved in the several Churches of Christ without being perverted to please the humours of men To cast off these wicked designers of the Churches slavery and introducers of errour and innovation and to desire the assistance of the holy Spirit of God to direct them in their own respective Provincial Councils which they may by the example of the Primitive Churches and by authority of the first Councils lawfully convene without any Rule or Order from the See of Rome for their so doing and no longer unless those things may be amended and that they have sufficient assurance thereof from the See of Rome to appeal to any General Councels called by the Pope CHAP. XI That there may be Provincial Councils called without the Popes approbation which councils have power to reform Schisms and Heresies and may enjoyn Rules of Faith which the people by the consent of the civil Magistrate are bound to obey and especially that the church of England hath this power THat the Metropolitanes of distinct Provinces have power to call Councils for reformation of any Schisms or decision of any Questions or Doubts in Religion it was the practice of the Primitive Churches and if the Pope of Rome have any preeminence of Jurisdiction in order to Councils it was but derived from the power of Councels as I have proved before and therefore the same power giving authority to other Provincials to call Councils they are not debarred of this priviledge by any Order or Decree of the Church of Rome they not being under her jurisdiction or power especially those Provincials which were not by Suffragans represented in the late Laterane and Trent-Councils which gave this supremacy over Councils to the Pope And that this was granted to all Metropolitanes of distinct Provinces may appear by these ensuing presidents and warrants so to do By the General Councils of Chalcedon the 19 Canon it is decreed Quod oporteat per Provinciales bis in anno Concilia celebrare and this is likewise agreed by the Council of Antioch can 20. and by the first Council of Nice and by the the 18 Canon of the Council of Antioch that one Bishop should not meddle in the Diocess of another and herewith agrees the first Council of Constantinople Can. 2. Provincial Councils and several Provincials to meet in one with out the Popes approbation By the Council of Carthage Can. 19. if any difference arose it was to be referred to the Metropolitan of the Province who should call the Bishops of his Province together and if they could not resolve the doubt it was to be transmitted to a General Council and if any party thought himself agrieved at
the Fathers and the example of former ages we shall persist to affirm That the Scriptures contain all things necessary to salvation That those points necessary are plain and easie and That the Laytie may read the Scriptures And for any blemishes which the Doctor would in this particular have thrown upon our Church I hope it is but dust thrown against the winde and is flown back into his own eyes I wish the Scriptures received no more injury by the Church of Rome then it doth from our Church but that is manifest to the contrary as may appear by that which here next follows The Doctor in his Book fol. 229. Scriptures abused by the Church of Rome reckons up a great number of corruptions and errours crept into our Translations but named not any onely cites one Broughton for his author I must confess it was wisely put off for should he have named them they would have appeared to have been different from the Rhemish Translation but not dissonant from the ancient Copies and so he would in stead of faulting ours have censured their own Translations Yet he craftily imagining that those 848 corrupted places should be believed to be so if he could instance any he names four in his 22 Chapter 1. Answer to the mistranslations we are taxwith He brings in Beza and Luthers Translations adding the word onely in Rom. 3.28 And this he would have to be an errour of our Church He might as well tax Rome as England for this fault for the Church of England doth not adde that word in her Bibles which are printed by authority and by direction of the Church enjoyned to be read nor is the word to be found in Fulk and Rhemes those two quarrellers each with other Wherefore I must needs wonder that the Doctor should be so injurious to us to bring false accusations against us 2. The second place which the Doctor alleadges to be a mis-translation in our Bibles is 2 Pet. 1.10 Giving diligence by good works to make your calling and election sure He charges us with corruption for leaving out these words by good works This I must confess is different from the Rhemish Translation but I rather suspect that that Translation is to be faulted not ours for Rome to maintain her doctrine of Merits by which she cozens poor silly souls and to enrich her Clergie cheats them of what they have has added these words And I am the rather induced hereunto for that I have seen an ancienter Bible then the days of Luther and it has them not in and Erasmus his Translation has them not in So that as the Negro's blame all that 's white in others because nothing to them is more comely then their own tawny black so the Doctor quarrels against our Translation because of its innocency it is not besmeared with Romes new adulterate alterations and therefore not in fashion or to be approved and upon this score I may say the Doctor was modest that taxed us with no more then four For he might as well have named the 848. if all must be censured for corruptions wherein we differ from the Rhemish translations But let the Church of Rome remember Saint Pauls rule to the Corinthians 2 Epist 13.5 Prove your selves whether ye be in the faith Saint Paul 1 Cor. 9.27 beat down his body and put it subjection lest while he preached to others he himself might be reproved Wherefore let Rome examine the ancient Copies and try if she find those words there and till then let her forbear to tax us of error who in this follow antiquity and so upon the old rule Id verum est quod prius id adulterum quod posterius Tertul. adversus prax in prim part 3. The third errour he taxes us with is In putting and for or in the 1 Cor. 11.27 which he himself to excuse Rome of perverting the Scripture she being taxed in this very particular in another place she putting or for and and thereby to prove communion in one kind affirms that et is often rendred or and if so it may as well be taken so out of the English as out of any other tongue But I referr the reader to a fuller answer of this objection in the sixteenth Chapter 4. His fourth objection is the 15 verse of the 2 of Saint Peter 1. I will do my diligence you to have often in remembrance after my decease The English translation reads it thus I will endeavor that you may be able after my decease to have these things in remembrance For this we likewise appeal to any translation which was before the second councel of Nice and many of their own translators long after that councel did render it post exitum non post obitum Peter being to go to his See at Antioch in Syria writes to the Saints that dwell in Pontus Galatia Cappadocia Asia and Bithynia that after his departure they should strive to have in memory to make their calling and Election sure of which in the 12 verse he says He would not be negligent to put them in remembrance Now how can this be interpreted that after his decease he should put them in remembrance unless he should come againe unto them it must therefore be interpreted of his departing from amongst them to Antioch and that he would send to them to put them in mind knowing that his end drew neer when he could not and therfore says the text he would use all diligence to put them in mind Now how he should put them in mind after his decease is to expect that Peter shall not rest from his labors as if he were not dead in the Lord which is unchristian to think wherefore I submit this to the learned in the Hebrew tongue to illustrate this further to weaker capacities if there be any occasion of scruple in our translation which for my part I conceive that taking that verse with the sense of the former our translation is more genuine and carries more of integrity then that of Rhemes The Bishops of Rome having by the politick practices of their predecessors and by the unworthy complottings of the Cardinals who being in hopes to ascend the Papal Throne themselves care not what dominion and Lordship they ascribe unto the Pontifical seat gained a superiority over Kings and Councels controlling the one and ordering the other as they please did daily consult not only how to preserve what they have though their possession be utterly unjust but likewise continually study to enlarge if possible this their pomp and dignity For their ambitious minds not satisfied with these large acquisitions thinking them but an earthly soveraignty too narrow for their large souls to strut in they would perswade the world that the Pope is an angel or more and hath Commission from heaven and is sent from thence to possess the chaire and tanquam à Tripode to deliver new oracles upon earth Thus wisely casting with themselves
and reflecting upon the curiosity of some who would be over-scrutinous to examine the points of this Commission by the rule of the holy Writ at last they concluded upon this result That it must be de fide received that his holiness is the only exposito◠and by the same rule of gradation an Evangelist to deliver new Scripture of the old and new Testaments The Pope abuses the Scriptures and having perswaded some and forced others into this opinion without care for the souls upon earth without respect of Saints and Angels in Glory and without all fear of the Almighty God of heaven he commands the holy writ which was the dictates of the holy Spirit of God to be blotted wrested mangled and tortured at his will and pleasure making no more account thereof then if it were but the Embryo of a Bear which by the licking of its dam were to receive shape and perfection And if there be any text which doth impugne this his usurped unlimited power it must not be suffered to pass the Press before first it be either rubbed over with his holiness index expurgatorius or else brushed with his Ghostly interpretation As for example Josh 1.18 the people professing an unlimited power to Joshua in all things to obey him The words in all things are expunged in the Rhemish translations for it stood not with his holiness interest and prerogative to let them be for a president For if the people of God were in all things to be obedient to their Prince this spoiles his holiness claime to command in temporalibus wherefore it was thought fit to send these words to the index expurgatorius Object The Doctor in his book fol. 59. argues the truth of Romes doctrine for that she has not corrupted or extinguished the text that being easier to do then to change her doctrine To which I answer Resp The Scriptures which Rome hath she received from other churches and those Churches from whom Rome received them sending aswell to other places as to Rome copies of those holy writs it would much ashame her to alter them in respect that true original Copies would be produced against her to her condemnation but the Bishop of Rome being to teach these Scriptures within his own precincts and territories he as times served to advantage himself might and has in many places strained courtesie to wrest the sense delivering to the people doctrines not warranted by this holy writ which he might with more confidence do in respect that no other Bishop was to meddle in his diocess and he by the favour of Princes being accounted summus pontifex wherefore reason tels that his doctrine and traditions are more questionable then his translations of the Scriptures for he needed not much to alter the Scriptures in respect it matters not what they say being but dead letters without the spirit of his holiness interpretation Yet so much did they dote upon the pomp and vainty of this world and upon that lordly height they have aspired to here upon earth that the divel did bewitch them to alter that text of Joshua which did directly gainesay such their dominion and power though by reason of their new preheminence they being above councels and the onely infallible expositors of the divine oracles they needed not so to have done or rather thus that corruption of Joshua was before the late councels of Lateran and Trent which made the Pope above councels and it behoved them to blot out such words as did impugne their other power of lording it over Kings and Princes but since these councels they may now put them in againe For it is no matter what the Scripture says for his holiness will give such an exposition as shall not destroy his own interest and since those councels such exposition though it be never so contradictory to the word of God it must de fide be received O tempora O mores Saint Basil saith they which have been brought up in Gods word will not suffer one syllable of her doctrine to be betrayed what then shall we think of the fathers of Rome's Church that practice as time serves these tricks upon those sacred letters These divine writs the dictates of Gods holy Spirit 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 no marvel if they make bold with the fathers mis-translating and altering their writings and crying up their own traditions making their own mole-hills mountaines and making the fathers like unto Moles whose nature as Aristotle saith is never to open her eyes till she be dead and so they make the fathers being dead to witness things they never dreamed on or saw being living as I have shewed in the tenth Chapter If these divine oracles of God must not escape the venom of their claws if these must not be delivered to the people without corruption I know not how we may give faith or credit to her traditions the vanity of which I will briefly discover in this ensuing Chapter CHAP. XIII That because all things were not written the Church may deliver traditions such as she derives from the doctrine of the Apostles or ancient fathers That the Scriptures are to judge of those traditions That Rome is to be blamed for her traditions because they are against Scripture THe Jews say That when Moses was with God on the Mount and received the written law that he had unwritten law likewise delivered him by word of mouth for certainly say they God staid not fourty dayes and fourty nights on the mount to keep Geese nor needed he stay so long to interpret the law of the tables wherefore they conclude that Moses received traditional law which he taught Joshua Joshua the elders the elders the Prophets the Prophets taught the people Now because those their traditions were uncertaine the sects of the Pharisees sprung up and Essenes obtruding new traditions as simply necessary and a more perfect Rule of Sanctity then that that was writ whereupon our Saviour in the seventh of Mark reproves them saying They worship me in vaine teaching for doctrines the commandments of men and yet in the 23 of Mat. he hath commanded us saying All that they bid you observe that observe and do but after their works do not for they say and do not These two texts seem to impugne each other but the fathers of the premitive Church have resolved this knot and reconciled these texts by this exposition that all traditions agreeable and consonant to the holy word are to be observed but such traditions of the Scribes and Pharisees as were not agreeable to the holy word of God were to be rejected We confess that all things which Christ and his Apostles did No traditions but such as are agree able to the word of God are to be embraced were not written according as is expressed Joh. 21. vers ult And that the Apostles had order to teach the people whatsoever Christ had commanded them but as we allow this so by no meanes
to the voice of his Priests calling unto him in truth and sincerity yet where he is an absolute Prince he is not to be called to an account by them or the people who have submitted themselves to be governed by him but in such a case Preces lachrymae sunt arma Ecclesiae according as S. Ambrose witnesses in his Orat. contr Auxent l. 5. And this was the practice of the Priests under the Law and according to Christ's own practice whilst he was upon the earth and according to the precepts he left to his Apostles for them to walk by and according to the Rules of those Apostles prescribed to others as examples for their imitation and according to the ancient practice of the Primitive Church So that for the Pope upon any pretence to dethrone Kings is not warrantable but utterly against all truth recommended unto us by these faithful witnesses Christ Jesus our Saviour the onely Son of the ever-living God King of heaven and Priest for ever after the order of Melchizedek being both King Priest and Prophet denied all Kingship in this world Joh. 1â— 36 He was by the Jews called Jesus of Nazareth king of the Iews partly in scorn partly to justifie their putting him to death pretending he wronged Cesar and hereunto forging false witnesses Luk. 23. did give him that title But Christ in this was innocent he never wronged Cesar but commanded his Tribute and those things that belonged to Cesars to be given to Cesar Matth. 22. Shall Christ Jesus a Priest a King and a Prophet give tribute to Cesar and will not the Bishop of Rome allow it Shall the Jews be so tender of Cesars right though an Heathen and but the second over them and that by Conquest that they would not spare Christ himself upon pretence that he should call himself King and will not his Holiness vouchsafe that Christian Kings and Princes may enjoy their Rights and Prerogatives He may plead for his excuse herein the Heathens Apophthegm Si jus violandum est certe regnandi causa violandum est and by that Rule adorn his own Temples if his triple Turbant be not weight enough with all the Crowns upon earth But I am sure he cannot plead any Christian practice or president either out of the Old or New Testament to warrant his action He must not think that that late invention of the Jesuites forged upon the Anvile of their own brain to please their master his Holiness to wit That after a King is excommunicated he ceases to be a King and no subjects owe obedience to such an heretical Prince will be a sufficient excuse for his dethroning any such an one Aquinas Papists Objections for the Popes power to dethrone and a Councel of Laterane have adhered to this distinction and did to justifie their opinion cite for an evidence and proof the example of Hildebrand against H. 4. To which I answer De facto ad jus non valet consequentia Aquinas was 1200 yeers after Christ and was the Popes vassal and overtaken with the errors of his time and he did not alleadge any warrant from the Scripture for this his opinion and therefore being a thing of novelty upon the Papists own rules is to be rejected As for the Councel of Laterane Councel of Laterane call'd 1215 which set Popes above Kings it was called at the beck of Innocent the third he being at that time at odds with the Emperour Otho with John King of England with Peter King of Arragon the Earl of Tholouse and divers others and at that time this Juncto consisting of eight hundred Covent-Friars and their Vicars who ought not to have sate there to please their great master overcame four hundred Bishops not with strength of Reason but Voices where he likewise was with his Court to over-awe them And therefore when any thing of Papal interest is to be passed by Councel this place is ever pitched upon as most convenient for that his Holiness is at hand either with fair means to allure or with threats to force the opposers to condescend to his desires Hence was it that in a Councel here anno 1056 Pope Nicolas the second was not afraid to broach the doctrine of Transubstantiation And here Pope Innocent the third did ratifie that doctrine And here first was hatched that other tenent of the Popes Supremacie over Councels Wherefore this being a Laterane-Decree â—it ought to be of the less credit and that the rather because the thing in question was the Popes own parâ—cular case who being at that present in open defiance against those Princes it was for flattery to the Pope and for necessity of State thereby to divert many from joyning with those Princes against his Holiness who if the differences amongst them were not appeased were like to sit too heavie upon his Holiness skirts declared that his Holiness was above kings And for this they instance the president of Hildebrand's excommunicating H. 4. and his successor Paschalis deposing him Now these things considered I leave it to the Reader whether to give credit to that Councel or the Councel of Mentz which deposed all the Clergie which joyned with Hildebrand it being an unwarrantable act in Hildebrand to oppose the Emperour and was by Sigebert called Novellum Schisma and Sigebert wrote above five hundred yeers since and therefore according to the Papists rules that which is later is less to be credited in those points wherein it differs from the ancient profession And sith there is no warrant from Scripture for the decree of this Councel or the opinion of Aquinas I hope there is no judicious Christian but will adhere to that of Mentz and not in his judgement approve of the Laterane Councel which was of more puisne time and strave in all things to please the Pope and that the rather because Otho Frisigensis lib. 6. cap. 35. and Vincentius and divers others concurred with Sigebert and the Councel of Mentz in this opinion whose resolutions in this point are grounded on Gods Word but the Decree of Laterane on mans will and therefore none may submit his judgement to be deluded with the erroneous and unwarranted decrees thereof The Jesuites therefore thinking this too weak a prop to support so weighty a Potentate as they would fain make his Holiness to be Objections out of the Old Testament answered wave their confidence in this and flee to their last refuge to wrest and abuse the Scriptures under pretence of Ecclesiastick power of interpretation and therefore they cite some presidents out of the Old Testament which they mis-apply and would fain have them mis-understood As for example They would prove by the examples of Saul Jeroboam Joash Athaliah and Ahab being put from their kingdom by the High-Priests to be a warrant for the Popes dethroning of what Prince he pleaseth to account wicked Whenas those presidents rightly understood make nothing for the Popes pretended power herein but rather
Basil which was raised against his crown and dignity and dismounting those Canons to proclaim in a loud volley of their own artillery his holiness the Pope not only above Councels which was the former dispute but above Scripture too and that from henceforth none shall have voices in the General Councel An Oath to be enjoyned those that sit in Council but such as shall first swear obedience to the Pope and promise to defend his Canon Law which oath put Bellarmine to hunt about for an evasion and lib. 1. de concil cap. ult he would have it understood that this oath is only intended of obedience to the Pope whilst he is Pope but not against the deposing of an heretical Pope which is a mist the Cardinal would throw before the eyes of the people that a man should not see the gross violation of priviledges and grand abuse offered and henceforth to be exercised upon the liberty freedome and preheminence of so sacred and reverend a Lady as a General Councel is and of right ought to be whenas whosoever knows the Popes Canons Popes Canons which teach that the Pope cannot err in his judicial decrees of faith and mannors that no Councels are of force without the Popes confirmation that all Councels confirmed by him are approved by the holy Ghost That he can excommunicate and depose all Emperors and princet and many such like strange and horrible positions plainly understands that he is bound by this oath to maintaine those Cannons of the Popes which are in themselves another powder plot to blow up the General Councels For if they were but to obey him whilst he taught and ruled according to God and the holy Canons none would be averse from it for by that rule every one might have liberty to examine him which I believe Bellarmine would not grant wherefore it was but a meer evasion of the oath for that time whenas he knew well enough the oath was positive enjoyning obedience to the then known Canons of the Pope which in themselves are destructive to Councels had not the late Laterane and Trent Councels decreed already his holiness to be above any Councel so that since these decrees of those two Councels since this oath to be enjoyned to them that shall come to sit in Councels and since these Canons made and forced upon the consciences of them that shall be members of that Councel it may no longer be properly called a Councel but rather a conventicle of Pope Parasites who came thither forestalled in Judgement and pre-obliged by oath to maintaine the Pope in his present Canonical power whenas by this means nothing that shall reflect upon his unjust usurpations can or may there receive a free debate or if it should and be there decreed against the Pope yet he being above that decree may alter it in his closet at Rome at pleasure and till this be rectified we may all bid farewell to General Councels nay such is their impudence and vaine glory now that they have attained to this pitch of height that they may teach what they please no power being to question them that they stick not boldly to affirme that the first Councels of Nice Constant c. had not been of force had not the Pope been there and had he not been there they had erred For he is the onely head and infallible legislator of rules pertaining to faith he is the onely interpreter of the Scriptures the Sphynx that can lay one all former decrees and the holy Writ it self be it never so plaine to be a riddle to expound it according to his own sense and best a vaile He may call all Bishops of the Christian world to decide and determine controversies in Religion Abuse of General Councils but yet salvo jure they must decree nothing against what he please to decree in his chaire at Rome For as for himself he never comes at a General Councel for if he should the Emperor must sit above him and that stands not with his princely highness and magnificence besides the Easterne Churches do not acknowledge his primacy and should he come there it might give an occasion to have that questioned which the old Fox would not have brought into dispute because that thereby the unjustness of his claim to others as much transcendent prerogatives would be laid open to the world The Bishops as I said may meet at his beck fast long pray long consult gravely deliberate maturely decree soberly command strictly and accurse severely But neither they nor any other shall tell what shall be of force for all shall be as please his holiness sitting in state in his only-infallible chaire at Rome wherefore a Romane Bishop Melchior Canus lib. de locis 5. cap. 5. non itaque quod in humanis concessionibus fit plurimum apud nos sententia prevalet c. It is not saith he with us as it is with other humane assemblies where plurality of voices prevaile for lo here matters are not to be judged by number but by weight and the Councels saith he receive their weight from the gravity and sole authority of the Pope and the Papists of Rhemes upon the 15. of the Acts alledge that the determination of Councels is needless because his holiness the Pope alone is infallible and therefore say they they are but called for the contentation of the weak not for necessity sake which if this was the Religion of the primitive Church let their own Councels the fathers of the primitive times and their own consciences in the presence of God witness First Councils abused they deeree Canons in Councels under paine of Anathema and yet the Pope may withstand them salva conscientia whereupon their Angelical Doctor Thomas Aquinas 4. con pag. 422. touching that Canon of the Ephesine Councel that none under pain of damnation should frame any other Symbole or adde any other thing to that of the Nicene Council answers to excuse the new Symbole set forth in the Millain Council that that Anathema is onely to private men and doth not binde the Pope Is not this a strange exposition of a learned Doctor As if the Councils of Nice and Ephesus prefumed that private men should make new Articles of Faith and enjoyn them as canons of the Church or as if they had allowed the Bishop of Rome any Legislative power to frame new Rules without a Council I blush to see how the Popes parasites to help a lame dog over the stile will bolster up his Holiness in whatsoever he propounds and shall either receive a cloak to blinde its contradictions from former principles and practices or if they cannot easily dissemble the grosness of the Tenent will enforce it upon his Holiness score of infallibility or else by vertue of an Index expurgatorius alter the Rules and Canons of the first Councils and make them speak new doctrines sutable to the humour and present tenents of the Church of Rome