Romanae Ecclesiae Caelestino primus mittitur Episcopus ibid. NUM XLVII Matthaeus Westmonasteriensis Audita verò morte Palladii Patricius Theodosio Valentiniano imperantibus à Papa Caelestino ad partes occiduas missus est ut vexillum S. Crucis Gentibus praedicaret Cumque ad Britanniam pervenisset praedicavit ibi verbum Dei à Genti-incolis gratanter est susceptus Deindè ad Scotos se conferens praedicavit verbum Dei quod non potuit alligari ibid. NUM XLVIII Jocelinus in vita S. Patricii Illique inquit vices suas committens atquen legatum suum constituens quaecumque in Hibernia gesserat constituerat disposuerat auctoritatis suae munimine confirmavit Pag. 101 NUM XLIX Auctor vitae Gregorii Magni Gregorius cum primum in toto Orbe gereret Pontificatum conversis jamdudum ad fidem veritatis esset praelatus Ecclesiis ibid. NUM L. Venerab Beda lib. 2. Hist cap. 2. In multis quidem nostrae consuetudini imò Universalis Ecclesiae contraria geritis tamen si in tribus his mihi obtemperare vultis ut Pascha suo tempore celebretis ut ministerium baptizandi quo Deo renascimur juxta morem Sanctae Romanae Ecclesiae Apostolicae Ecclesiae compleatis ut Genti Anglorum una nobiscum praedicetis verbum Domini caetera quae agitis quamvis moribus nostris contraria aequanimiter cuncta tolerabimus At illi nihil horum se facturos neque illum pro Archiepiscopo habituros esse respondebant Pag. 103 NUM LI. Ibid. Qui cum longa disputatione habita neque precibus neque hortamentis neque increpationibus Augustini ac sociorum ejus assensum praebere voluissent sed suas potius traditiones universis quae per Orbem sibi in Christo concordant Ecclesiis praeferrent Sanctus Pater Augustinus hunc laboriosi ac long◠certaminis finem fecit ut diceret obsecremus Deum qui habitare facit unanimes in domo Patris sui ut ipse nobis insinuari caelestibus signis dignetur quae sequenda traditio quibus sit viis ad ingressum Regni illius properandum Adducatur aliquis aeger per cujus preces fuerit curatus hujus fides operatio Deo devota atque omnibus sequenda credatur Quod cum adversarii inviti licet concederent allatus est quidam de genere Anglorum oculorum luce privatus qui cum oblatus Britonum Sacerdotibus nil curationis vel sanationis horum ministerio perciperet tandem Augustinus justa necessitate compulsus flectit genua sua ad Patrem Domini nostri Jesu Christi deprecans ut visum caeco quem amiserat restitueret per illuminationem unius hominis corporalem in plurimorum cordibus fidelium spiritualis gratiae lucem accenderet Nec mora illuminatur caecus ac verus summae lucis praeco ab omnibus praedicatur Augustinus Tum Britones confitentur quidem intellexisse se veram esse viam Justitiae quam praedicaret Augustinus c. Pag. 104 NUM LII Gregorius Magnus lib. 4. Epist 32. Cunctis enim Evangelium scientibus liquet quod voce Dominica Sancto omnium Apostolorum Petro Principi Apostolo totius Ecclesiae cura commissa est Pag. 105 THE INDEX A. WHat Provinces there were in Aegypt and to whom they were Subject p. 87. The Aegyptians did in the third Age acknowledge the Authority of the Roman Bishop as Supreme p. 79 Aethiopia appertains to the See of Alexandria because Athanasius sent a Bishop thither who planted the Aethiopic Church p. 30 The Epistle of Agatho shewing of what Bishops the Patriarchal Synod of the Bishop of Rome consists p. 54 Agricola first brought the Pelagian Heresie into Britain p. 98 The Bishop of Alexandria had the care over all Aegypt committed to him 82. The Nicene Council intrusted him also with the Computation of Easter day 68. He had Metropolitan Bishops under him p. 84 The Bishop of Antioch had also Metropolitan Bishops under him before the time of the Nicene Council p. 84 Appeals to the Bishop of Rome as being Successor to Peter are to be admitted of p. 81 It appears from the Testimony of the Council of Aquileia that the Roman Church is the Head of the whole Roman World. p. 96. The first Canon of the Council of Arles is recited from several Manuscripts p. 66 The Council of Arles refers the determination of Easter day to Pope Sylvester 59. How the defect in the citation concerning the publishing of the Feast of Easter is to be supplyed p. 59 The Testimony of Augustine the Bishop concerning the Roman Patriarchs Authority over all the West 22. Augustine the Monk was Gregory the Great 's Legate 101. he institutes Metropolitans by Authority receiv'd from the Apostolic See. 102. he proves the truth of Catholic Religion by miracle p. 105 B. What Testimonies prove Britain to have been converted to the Faith by Peter 4. Severus Sulpitius affirms that Britains first Conversion to the Faith was in the third Age. 11. Bede and Tertulian testifie the same 12. Britain was longer preserv'd from the Pelagian Heresie than the other Western Regions 98. Faith and Discipline were restored in it by Augustine the Monk under Gregory the Great The Acts of the British Synod concerning those things which Augustine wrought for the restoring of Religion in England p. 103. The British Bishops did acknowledg in the Council or Arles that the greater Dioceses did belong to Sylvester the Bishop of Rome and that the Apostles did daily sit in the Roman See. 94. They profess'd in the Council of Sardica that the Memory of Peter was to be honoured 95. They acknowledg'd that they appertain'd to the Patriarchal Synod of the Bishop of Rome 55. When they began to deviate from truth and Ecclesiastical Discipline 101. How bad a cause they endeavoured to defend against Augustine Legate of the Apostolic See. p. 106 C. The Bishop of Caesarea being Metropolitan of the Chief part of Palestine was Subject to the Patriarch of Antioch p. 85 Pope Caelestine sent his Legates into Britaem p. 99 The Catholic Church is the Pillar and ground of truth the Faith of which Church never fails p. 109 The Testimony of Clemens Romanus concerning Paul the Apostles Preaching p. 9 Caelestine was of opinion that appeal was to be made from the judgment of the African Synod to the examen of the Roman Bishop p. 97 The Fragments of the Council of Palestine concerning Easter p. 72 The 8th general Council hath taught us in the 17th Canon that the Metropo itans of the West did appertain to the Roman Patriarchate p. 35 The Council of Arles c. See Arles c. What Customs were introduced by the Apostles and how they may be known to have been so p. 53 The Church was chiefly governed by Custom before the time of the Nicene Council p. 53 The Testimony of Cyril of Alexandria concerning the Computation of Easter-day p. 71 D. Pope Damasus constituted a Vicar in Illyricum and why he did
the English Author which are here summ'd up together with the Truths by which they are confronted that the Reader may observe them all at one view THE ERRORS Which are Confuted in this DISSERTATION ARE Here set down together with the TRUTHS Confronting them ERRORS TRUTHS ERRORS 1. THat Peter rather Preached the Gospel in Britain than Gaul depends upon slight Testimonies viz. Those of Simeon Metaphrastes the Legendary Writers or the Monkish Visions Origines Britannicae chap. 1. p. 45. TRUTHS 1. That St. Peter preached the Gospel in Britain depends upon the the Testimonies of Eusebius Innocent the first Gildas the Wise John the V. Kenulphus King of the Mercians and Metaphrastes chap. 1 2. Of this Dissertation ERRORS 2. That St. Paul declared the Faith to the Britains is had from the Testimonies of Clemens Romanus Eusebius Theodoret and St. Jereme who in his Commentary upon the 5 chap. Of the Prophet Amos says that St. Paul having been in Spain went from one Ocean to another and that his diligence in Preaching extended as far as the Earth it self chap. 1. p. 37. TRUTHS 2 The Testimonies of Clement Eusebius and Theodoret either relate not at all to Paul's coming into Britain or else may be equally understood of Peter and Paul's coming thither St. Jerome upon the 5. Chapter of Amos says that Paul was called by the Lord to go from Jerusalem even to Spain and to take his course from the Red-Sea and even from Ocean to Ocean which does not signisie that he preacht the Gospel from the Spanish Ocean to the British Ocean but from the Arabic Ocean which is adjacent to the Red-Sea to that Ocean which washeth upon the Spanish Coasts chap. 1. num 4. ERRORS 3. When Sulpitius Severus asserts that Martyrdoms were first seen in Gaul in the time of Marcus Aurelius Antoninus the Christian Religion being more lately receiv'd beyond the Alpes he relates the former of these things as certain the latter as doubtful chap. 2. p. 55. TRUTHS 3. Sulpitius Severus lib. 2. Historiae saith that the fifth Persecution was carried on under Aurelius the Son of Antoninus and that then Martyrdoms were first seen in Gaul the Christian Religion being more lately received beyond the Alpes He relates both these things as equally certain neither doth he doubt more of the latter than of the former chap. 1. num 6. ERRORS 4. Lucius King of the Britains sent his Embassadors to Rome as to the place whither as Irenaeus argues in the like case resort was made from all places because of its being the Imperial City so saith our Author chap. 2. p. 69. TRUTHS 4. St. Irenaeus lib. 3. cap. 3. asserts not of the Roman Imperiality but of the Roman Apostolical Church that it is necessary that all Churches that is the Faithful from all parts resort to it by reason of its more powerful Principality So that King Lucius sent his Embassadors to Pope Eleutherius at Rome by reason of the Principality of that Church and upon no other account chap. 1. num 9. ERRORS 5. The Council of Arles in their Synodical Epistle to Pope Sylvester have writ who holdest a greater Diocese For so that place is to be read chap. 2. p. 83. chap. 3. p. 130. TRUTHS 5. The Council of Arles in their Synodical Epistle to Pope Sylvester set forth first by Pythaeus afterwards by Sirmondus from the Gallican M. S. S. say who holdest the greater Dioceses and so that place is to be read chap. 4. ERRORS 6. It is doubtful whether the distribution of the Empire into Dioceses were made by Constantine at the time of the Council of Arles and it seems more probable not to have been done in the time of the Council of Nice Dioceses not being mentioned there but only Provinces Chap. 3. p. 130. TRUTHS 6. In the time of the Nicene Council Constantine in his Epistle to all the Churches makes mention of the Pontic and Asian Dioceses so that it is not probable but plainly false that in the time of the Council of Nice there was no mention made of Dioceses For in the time of the Synod of Arles the name of Greater Diocese was known as even our Author himself confesses whilst he affirms that instead of Greater Dioceses we ought to read Greater Diocese Chap. 4. ERRORS 7. The Authority of publishing Easter-day in all parts which the Council of Arles in its first Canon allowed as the right of the Bishop of Rome was taken away from him by the Nicene Council which committed this Affair to the Bishop of Alexandria Chap. 2. p. 84. TRUTHS 7. The Authority of publishing Easter-day in all Parts was not taken away from the Bishop of Rome by the Nicene Council the burdensom charge of computing Easter-day was laid upon the Bishop of Alexandria by the Nicene Fathers the Authority of proposing the certain day to the Churches was left to the Roman Bishop Cyril Patriarch of Alexandria in the Preface to his Paschal Cycle says that the Patriarch of Alexandria ought to intimate Easter-day every year by his Letters to the Roman Church from whence by Apostolic Authority the Universal Church might know without any further dispute the determin'd day of Easter throughout the whole World. Which Rule seeing they had observ'd for many Ages c. Chap. 4. ERRORS 8. The Council of Nice in the fourth and fifth Canons hath established the Authority of Provincial Synods as Supreme the Securing of which the Fathers have provided for in the sixth Canon neither did they acknowledge any Authority to be above that of a Metropolitan Chap. 3. p. 100. c. TRUTHS 8. The Council of Nice in the fourth and fifth Canons never so much as dream't of the Supreme Authority of Provincial Synods and hath acknowledg'd in the sixth Canon that the Patriarchal Power of the Bishops of Rome Alexandria and Antioch was Superior to that of Metropolitans Chap. 5. ERRORS 9. The sixth Nicene Canon decrees that the Bishop of Alexandria hath Power over Aegypt Libia and Pentapolis because the Bishop of Rome had a like custom But the likeness did consist in this that as the Roman Patriarch hath no Metropolitan under him so there was no other Metropolitan in all Aegypt but the Metropolitan of Alexandria Chap. 3. p. 104. TRUTHS 9. Before the time of the Council of Nice there were Metropolitans subject not only to the Patriarch of Antioch but likewise to the Patriarch of Alexandria S. Athanasius and S. Epiphanius declare Meletius to have been an Archbishop before the Nicene Council so that the parallel between the Patriarchs of Alexandria and Rome mentioned by the Nicene Council did not lye in this that neither of them had Metropolitans under them Chap. 5. ERRORS 10. That the Patriarchal Power of the Roman Pishop was confined to the Suburbicarian or Neighbouring Proviâ—ces and that the Roman Bishops First began to Usurp the Provinces of Illyricum by constituting the Bishop of Thessalonica as his Vicar after the Second
General Synod had given the Second place of Dignity to the Constantinopolitan See least the Bishop of Constantinople should encroach upon these Illyrican Provinces Chap. 3. p. 114. c. TRUTHS 10. The Metropolitical Authority of the Roman Bishop was limited to the Suburbicarian Provinces as the Author Terms them his Patriarchal Authority extended to the Greater Dioceses of the West after the Constantinopolitan Council Damasius first constituted the Archbishop of Thessalonica Vicar of the Patriarchal See of Rome in the Provinces of Illyricum that the Bishop of Constantinople might not encroach upon them Before the time of Damasius the Roman See had a right to exercise Patriarchal Power by it self or by its Legates as appears in that Legates were sent by Clements the First to Corinth at the end of the First Age wherefore Honorius the Emperor did require that the priviledge of the Roman See which was long since established by the Fathers and confirm'd by the Canons should be preserv'd in Illyricum and Theodosius the Emperor commanded the Ancient Apostolical Discipline and Order by which the Roman Bishop presided over Illyricum to be kept up Chap. 3. ERRORS 11. When Perigenes the Bishop Elect was rejected at Patrae and put into the See of Corinth by the Bishop of Rome without the consent of the Provincial Synod the Bishops of Thessaly amongst whom the Chief were Pausianus Cyriacus and Calliopus look upon this as a notorious invasion of their Rights and therefore in a Provincial Synod they appoint another person to succeed there Chap. 3. p. 116. TRUTHS 11. Perigenes the Metropolitan of Corinth in the Province of Achaia was one Person Perrevius Bishop of a See in the Province of Thessaly not well known to us another Pausianus Cyriacus and Calliopus Bishops of the Province of Thessaly had no Jurisdiction ever Perigenes the Metropolitan of another Province neither doth Bonifacius the first testifie that they acted against him but against Perrevius that was lawfully ordained who appeal'd from their Sentence to Rome and was restored to his See by the Sentence of the Roman Bishop Chap. 3. ERRORS 12. The British Church did not acknowledge any Authority Superior to that of a Metropolitan during the Six First Ages so that when Augustine the Monk was sent to them at the beginning of the Seventh Age Seven British Bishops who were found there and many other learned Men of the Monastery of Banchor refused to be Subject to the Apostolic See or to acknowledge Augustine but remain'd under their own Metropolitan So it appears from Bede and some Monuments set forth by Spehnan which last although the Author doth not think them necessary for the proof of what is above mention'd yet he declares that he approves of them Chap. 5. p. 357. c. TRUTHS 12. The British Church acknowledg'd an Authority Superior to that of a Motropolitan in the Six First Ages and this is so manifest that the Pests of the World Pelagius and Caelestius who were born in Britain confess'd this very thing whilst they either permitted their causes which had been decided in the Provincial Synods to be referr'd to the tribunal of the Apostolic See or did by their own proper Appeal refer them thither What Spelman cites out of the English Monument concerning the Monks of Banchor is Supposititious What Bede Relates does not shew that the British Bishops acknowledged the Metropolitical Authority as Supreme and if it did shew this it discovers that their Error was reprov'd by Miracle from Heaven so that those who persist obstinately to defend this Error are guilty of a double fault of resisting the Truth and being shameless Chap. 6. THE HEADS OF THE CHAPTERS OF THIS DISSERTATION CHAP. I. THat the British Church was instituted either by St. Peter or his Successors Pag. 1 CHAP. II. That the Bishop of Rome is Patriarch of the West and therein even of England and that this follows from the British Church's having receiv'd her Institution either from him or from his Priests as is prov'd by the Testimony of Innocent p. 16 CHAP. III. Although the British Church had not received its Institution from the Roman yet it is shew'd from the Example of the Illyrican Church that by ancient Custom time out of mind it might be subject to it and moreover that it ought to be so p. 36 CHAP. IV. Concerning the Greater Diocesses attributed to Pope Sylvester by the Council of Arles p. 57 CHAP. V. Whether the Nicene Canons establish the Metropolitan Dignity as Supreme and what is decreed in the Sixth of these Canons concerning the Patriarchal Authority p. 76 CHAP. VI. That the British Church acknowledged an Authority Superior to that of a Metropolitan from the time that the Christian Religion was first planted there till such time as it was again restored by Augustine the Monk under Gregory the Great p. 91 Imprimatur si videbitur Reverendissimo Patri Magistro Sacri Palatii Apostolici 19. Octobris 1686. Pro Eminentissimo Cardinali CARPINEO Vicario H. Cardinalis CASANATE Imprimatur Fr. Dominicus M. Puteobonellus Sacri Apostolici Palatii Magister Ordinis Praedicatorum A DISSERTATION Concerning the AUTHORITY OF Patriarchs and Metropolitans ALthough there is something spoken in the Preface to the Reader concerning the Occasion and Design of this Dissertation yet it is so little that I think it will not be amiss if at the entring upon it I give you a more full Account of the Occasion of it and add something for the more clear Understanding of its Design This Dissertation hath its Origin from what I had written in the first Part of Antiquitas Illustrata Dissertation the Second For when I had there shew'd from many Monuments of the Ancients that was true of the whole West which Theodosius Bishop of Echinus in Thessaly said above eleven hundred and fifty years since before Boniface the Second in the Roman Synod concerning the Churches of Illyricum viz. that the Roman Bishops besides their Principality over the Churches of the whole World more especially claim'd to themselves the Government of the Western Churches this special Authority of the Roman Bishop over the West did not please a Modern English Writer that styles himself Dean of St. Paul's and Chaplain in Ordinary to His Majesty and he took it ill that the English Church which is rent from the Communion of the Apostolic See should be concluded by me within the Bounds of the Western Patriarchate He explains his Sense of the thing in a Book intituled Origines Britannicae or The Antiquities of the British Churches which he set forth at London Anno 1685. wherein as a Minister of the English Church he takes upon him its Defence and contends that the Hierarchy of the English Church which since the Schism hath own'd Subjection only to Bishops and Metropolitans as the Superior Clergy is conformable in this to the Ancient Church Therefore he endeavours not only to shew that the English Church was Acephalic that is without a
Persons by whose means Lucius desired of Eleutherius to be instructed in the Faith and by whose aid Eleutherius did not only convert Lucius but also most of the Britains to the Faith and instituted a Church in that Country Our Author admits that Eluanus and Medroinus were sent by Lucius and he gives this Account of the Embassie Eluanus and Edwinus were British Christians themselves and therefore sent to Eleutherius Pag. 68. having been probably the Persons employ'd to convince King Lucius but he knowing the great Fame of Rome and it being told him not only that there were Christians there but a Bishop in that City the twelfth from the Apostles had a desire to understand how far the British Christians and those of Rome agreed and he might reasonably then presume that the Christian Doctrine was there truly taught at so little distance from the Apostles and in a place whither as Irenaeus argues in this Case a resort was made from all Places because of its being the Imperial City These were reasonable considerations which might move King Lucius and not any Opinion of St Peter's having appointed the Head of the Church there of which there was no imagination then 9. But since our Author confesses that Ambassadors were therefore sent by Lucius to Rome that they might perform that which the Faithful from all parts as Irenaeus testifies were then used to perform I would know this one thing of him where he finds that they observ'd this by reason of the Principality of the Roman City Certainly he could not find this in the Words of Ireneus Ireneus Lib. 3. Cap. 3. Ad hanc enim Ecclesiam inquit propter potentiorem principalitatem necesse est omnem convenire Ecclesiam which he mentions and which are taken out of his third Book Chap. 3. where this Holy Bishop of Lions directs all the Faithful to the Roman Church For to this Church saith he it is necessary that all Churches resort by reason of its more powerful Principality But where in that place doth Ireneus say that there must be resort made to Rome because of its being the Imperial City The Author here find that in the Words of Ireneus which that Father never in the least meant by them For Ireneus writes not that the City but the Church of Rome which was consecrated by the Blood of Peter and Paul was to be consulted in Controversies of Faith and that all the Faithful under Heaven ought to agree with the Roman Church because of its more powerful Principality not because of the Principality of the Imperial City its necessary saith Ireneus that resort be made to this Church by all other Churches that is by the Faithful from all parts because of its more powerful Principality Therefore the Supremacy of the Ecclesiastical Principality at Rome was the cause of Lucius's sending an Embassie thither not the Principality of the Imperial City For in the City of Rome that I may use the Words of Honorius the Emperor not only the Imperial Seat was planted but the Principle of the Priesthood And there also as * Honorius Imperator Epist ad Theodosium Augustum In urbe Roma non solum Romanum Principatum Domus Augusta obtinuit sed Principium quoque Sacerdotium accepit Augustine Epist 162. affirms The Principality of the Apostolic See ever prevail'd This Principality over the Church Christ gave to Peter and Peter left it to his Successors in the Roman See which when our Author denies he opposeth a Truth which Peron the Glory of France in his Answer to James King of England Chap. 23. proves from very many Canons of the Church and Testimonies of the Councils and Ancient Fathers I should cite more of them were not the present Question chiefly concerning the Roman Bishops Patriarchal Authority over the West not his Supremacy over the Catholic Church Divus Augustinus Epist 162. therefore that we may keep close to that which we have undertaken to treat of let us conclude with our Author that Lucius sent Embassadors to Eleutherius that they might be inform'd of him in Matters of Faith and let us acknowledg with Ireneus that the Britains no less than the Faithful in other parts of the World ought to agree with the Roman Church because of its greater Principality to which let us add with English Writers that Eleutherius the Roman Bishop made use of his Authority when he ordain'd those Legats who being sent into Britain baptised Lucius setled Churches and consecrated Bishops and from hence we may conclude that to be true which I have in the Title of this Chapter taken upon me to prove viz. That the British Church was instituted either by St. Peter or by those whom his Successors ordained Priests CHAP. II. That the Bishop of Rome is Patriarch of the West and therein even of England and that this follows from the British Church's having receiv'd her Institution either from him or from his Priests as is prov'd by the Testimony of Innocent 1. The Roman Patriarchate over the whole Western Church which is asserted in the 17th Canon of the Eight General Council our Author likes not His words are recited 2. He saith that the way of proving the Patriarchal right from the exercise of it and the exercise fromthe right is ridiculous although he confesses that it is of force against de Marca and other Catholics who admit that the Pope is Patriarch over the whole West against whom only I have used that way of proof so that it cannot be ridiculeus as I use it 3. Against such Heretics who deny the Bishop of Rome to be Patriarch over the West I have not used that but another way of proof viz. the perpetual Tradition of the Ancients which the very Schismatic Greeks themselves have not been so bold as to deny 4. One of the ancient Testimonies which I have brought for that Tradition is out of S. Augustine who hath plainly deliver'd that Innocent the First had not only a Supremacy of order and dignity over the Western Church but also of Jurisdiction 5. Another of them is that of Innocent the First himself who relates that Churches were Instituted through all France Spain Africa Sicily Italy and the interjacent Islands by Peter only or his Successors or else by those whom they ordain'd Priests and affirms that all these Countries ought to acknowledge the Apostolic See as the Head of their Institutions 6. How Paul having preacht at Rome and it may be in other of the Western parts proves nothing against this is shewed from Paul himself who reckons only such Churches amongst those which were instituted by his Preaching whom himself first taught the Faith of which sort the Roman is not as having been planted by Peter before Pauls coming into Italy the same may be said of other Western Churches supposing that Paul Preach'd in them 7. Two things are objected by our Author the first in relation to matter
of Fact whilst he denies that the Churches in the West and especially in Britain were instituted only by Peter or by Priests which had their mission from the Apostolic See. The second to invalidate the reason alledged by Innocent viz. That there is no connexion between the Institution of a Church and its Subjection and so that a Patriachal right over Churches doth not accrue from the instituting of them 8. The first Objection is answered and it is shew'd that we ought rather to believe Innocent then the Author about this matter of Fact. For Innocent tells us that Churches were Instituted in the Islands that lay between Italy Africa Spain and France by Peter only Now Britain may be reckon'd amongst these Islands since it is not only adjacent to France but interjacent as to some part moreover it ought to be accounted in the number of these since it is made to appear that a Church was instituted in Britain if not by Peter yet by the Priests that were sent by Eleutherius Peters Successor 9. The second Objection is answer'd and the reason drawn from matter of Fact is made good also the connexion between the Institution of a Church and its Subjection is shew'd since a Church can be instituted by none but him that hath a true mission and that hath jurisdiction which properly appertains to a Superior so that Innocent doth rightly call the Apostolic See the Head of the Institutions 10. It is shew'd that what is objected by the Author coucerning Churches being instituted through all Bavaria and Rhetia by King Lucius depends upon weak Testimonies which if they were true would make nothing for the Authority of the English Church over Bavaria and Rhetia unless it could be made out that Lucius was sent into those parts by Authority of the English Church and that he ordain'd Bishops by the same Authority which will never be proved 11. For the Subjecting of Bishops of a Country to any Patriarch by virtue of their Ordination it is sufficient that their first Bishop be Ordained by this Patriarch as is proved from the the example of Frumentius the first Bishop of Aethiopia the Testimonies of Nicolaus the first Gregory the Great and the eighth general Council 1. HAving treated in the foregoing Chapter of the Origin or first Institution of the British Church we are now to treat of its Subjection to the Roman Bishop as Patriarch of the West concerning which our Author in his Third Chapter states the Question against me in these words Author p. 112. The present Keeper of the Vatican Library having endeavoured in a set Discourse to assert the Popes Patriarchal Power over the Western Churches I shall here examin the strength of all that he produceth to that purpose He agrees with us in determining the Patriarchal Rights which he saith lie in these three things 1. In the right of Consecration of Bishops and Metropolitans 2. In the right of summoning them to Councils 3. In the right of Appeals All which he proves to be just and true Patriarchal Rights from the Seventeenth Canon of the eighth general Council And by these we are contented to stand or fall So this Author in the very beginning of his Disputation who if he would hear the Rule of the Eighth general Council might plainly be shew'd to have been vanquish'd before he began to fight For that Canon was made to renew the Bishop of Romes Patriarchal authority over the Metropolitans in the West which doth not at all promote our Authors design but quite overthrows it as we shall see hereafter 2. In the mean time let us proceed to the Authers Pleas by which he contends I have not rightly prov'd that the three Patriarchal Rights above mention'd belong to the Roman Bishop over all the West For when I had confirm'd the Right from the use of those Countries in which the Roman Bishop had exercis'd it I shew'd from the Right it self that the exercise or use thereof did belong to him even in those other Regions of the West where by reason of some certain priviledges granted them he often abstain'd from the exercise of this Right But our Author complains of this as an absurd way of arguing For this way of proving saith he is ridiculous viz. Author p. 119 to prove that the Pope had Patriarchal Rights because he exercised them and then to say though he did not exercise them yet he had them and so prove that he had them because he was Patriarch of the West And as it folloâ—s Author p. 12â— this way of proving may be good against de Marca who had granted the Pope to be the Western Patriarch but it is ridiculous to those that deny it Here again the Author stumbles and makes himself a laughing-stock whilst he endeavours to expose me as so for the way of proof which I have used He confesses that the way of proof which I have taken is good against de Marca and all those that call the Pope the Patriarch of the West which all Catholics did until the year 1678 wherein I publish'd my Book intitled Antiquitas Illustrata although all Catholics did not agree that there was a perpetual exercise of the Patriarchal Jurisdiction in all the Western Provinces I did therefore treat Disert 2. Antiquitatis Illustratae cap. 4. in three Articles concerning the threefold Patriarchal Right above mention'd against those Catholics who allow'd the Roman Bishop to be Patriarch of the West but notwithstanding contended that he ought not to exercise a Patriarchal Jurisdiction in all the Western Parts using that way of Proof which the Author himself confesses of force against them so that it cannot be at all ridiculous 3. And I know not upon what account he can object to me that this way of arguing is not of force against him who at this time undertakes to deny the Bishop of Romes Patriarchal Right over the whole West For to speak the truth could I divine seven years since that six years after that an English Author should oppose the Roman Bishops Patriarchate which James King of England Jacobus Rex Anglie In Apologia pro Juramento Fidelitatis plainly admitted I know saith he that there were Patriarchs in the Primitive Church And afterwards there was great contention amongst them for the Supremacy then he adds But if the Question were still about this matter the Roman Bishop should have my suffrage for the Precedence I being a Western King would adhere to the Western Patriarch Here both the former and the latter words of King James are to be observ'd He affirms in the former that there were Patriarchs in the Primitive Church that is when a Church began first to be propagated in the latter that if the Question were now put concerning the chief Patriarch he would adhere to the Roman as being Patriarch of all the West Which is exprest in those words I being a Western King would adhere to the Western Patriarch Which
some things agrees with the Dutch yet gave me so much trouble that I was forc'd to make use of an Interpreter for the understanding of it That therefore which I could not understand by my self I learn'd by the help of a Learned English man and when he had translated the principal Places which relate to the Patriarchal Authority of the Bishop of Rome into Latine it plainly appear'd that the Author did not only write against me but also against other Catholics who either in this present Age or in former Times had treated upon this Subject He hath therefore taken upon him to confute for Italy Baronius the Parent of Annals and Lucas Holstenius For France Cardinal Perron Petrus de Marca Johannes Morinus Jacobus Sirmondus and Johannes Garnerius Christianus Lupus and me the least of them all for the Low-Countries Of these such as did not understand English if they were yet alive would as I conceive joyn with me in this request to the Author that if he should hereafter write of Ecclesiastical matters he would either forbear to impugn our Writings or else express himself in a Language we could understand But since none of the forementioned Writers besides my self are now living and our Authors Book sent out of England was brought to me by a Noble Person that I might return a brief Confutation of it I thought it necessary to examine some of his Allegations I shall not here Answer all the Objections he hath thought fit to make for since he hath written against those things which I had deduced from ancient Testimonies concerning the Patriarchal Power of the Roman Bishop over the West in my Book intitled Antiquitas illustrata I will refute what he hath writ in answer to it when I publish my Book de Antiquitate c. with the addition of three or four Ages to it I had been for some months time diligently bestowing my pains about this Work when our Authors Book call'd me off and requir'd a Confutation And about the time that I began to examine it little thinking that I should ever have any dispute with Catholic Writers concerning this Point loe another Book comes to my hands intitled de Disciplina Ecclesiae which was divided into seven Dissertations the first whereof treats de forma distributione Ecclesiarum and Sect. 6. the Question is put whether either Metropolitical Authority Card. Perronius in responso ad Jacobum Angliae Regem cap. 30. fol. 171. seq or Patriarchal Dignity were instituted by Christ or his Apostle Cardinal Perron that great light of France had shew'd that the Patriarchal Dignity was of Apostolical Institution Petrus de Marca Archbishop of Paris had asserted the same concerning Metropolitical Authority in his Book de concordia Sacerdotii Imperii De Marca lib. 1. de concordia Sacerdotiy Imperij cap. 3. § 7. seq against the Innovators of this our Age. A late French Author contends that neither of them proceeded from the Apostles and hath recourse to the Arguments of Heretics and Schismatics to prove what no Catholic to this very day ever yet durst that both these Authorities were introduced by a later Custom and the Patriarchal Dignity was first enlarged by invading the Rights of others and established by the Synodical Decrees of the fourth and fifth Ages This is the opinion of that Author which being repugnant not only to the Canons of the present but also to the Monuments of the ancient Church he hath not been ashamed to wrest the Sanctions of the Councils which do not favor his purpose to a perverse sence to ridicule the Writings of the ancient Bishops that do not please him to elude the eminent Testimonies of the Fathers that overthrow his Opinion by his cavils lastly to tax the Practice of the peresent Church as novel because it suits not with his humors In the year 1662. Launoy a Divine of Paris set forth a small Treatise intitled de recta intelligentia Sexti Canonis Nicaeni in which after the Disputes of Sirmondus and other Catholics against Salmasius and the Heretics that were his followers he proposes two principal things which he thought gave most light for the finding out of the true sense of the sixth Canon of the Council of Nice One was that it did not treat of Patriarchs and their Rights The other that it only referr'd to Metropolitans and the right which they have in the Ordination of Bishops He hath many Arguments to this purpose and that as be there forespeaks saving the Authority of the Apostolic See which the Heretics impugn'd from this Nicene Canon Henricus Valesius Dissert de Canone 6. Nicaeno Tom. 2. Hist Eccles post Socratem Zosomenum But in France he was opposed by Henricus Valesius who shew'd from the Decrees of the Synods and the Writings of the Fathers that the sixth Canon of the Council of Nice was to be understood of Patriarchs and could no ways be interpreted as referring to Metropolitans only so that the Patriarchal Authority of the Bishop of Rome depended very much upon the true sense of it This Dissertation of the Learned Valesius displeas'd Launoy he therefore in the year 1671 sets forth a Defence of his Treatise in which he so admits of Patriarchs at the time of the Nicene Council that he hath plainly shew'd them though against his will to be a more eminent sort of Metropolitans Hadrianus Valesius treats of this Book of Launoy in the life of Henricus his Brother which Guilielmus Batesius lately set forth at London amongst the lives of Choice men and he attests that Launoy made a sort of cavelling answer which saith he Valesius would not have to be read to him Hadrianus Valesius affirming that there was no further matter for a dispute and being fully perswaded that his Writings could no ways be confuted or invalidated by Launoy Valesius therefore despis'd the Answer of Launoy accounting it a mere Cavil William Beverege the English Writer did not so esteem of it but the year after Tomo 2. Pandectarum in Annotationibus ad Canonem Sextum Nicaenum undertook to defend Launoy and answer the Arguments of Valesius The chief reason that mov'd Beverege was the Schism of the English Church which hitherto unjustifiable seem'd now to have some foundation from the opinion of Launoy England acknowledged no Power superior to that of a Metropolitan and because this Error might easily be confuted from the sixth Canon of the Council of Nice in which the Dignity of the three Patriarchs is explained Beverege undertook to defend Launoy's Allegation and lays it down for a Truth that the Institution of Patriarchs was after the Nicene Council For thus the English Church had a President for Ecclesiastical Hierachy in the three first Ages to defend their modern Schism Launoy was yet living when Beverege's Work was publisht and seeing the Hereties drew a far different consequence from his Opinion then he thought they would
Head but also Autocephalic that is under its own proper Jurisdiction only and subject to no Patriarch from the time that the Faith first began to be planted there till the coming of Augustine the Monk. There are therefore two things which the Author hath undertaken to prove against me one that the Bounds of the Roman Patriarchate ought to be restrain'd so as not to extend to Britain the other that the Hierarchy of the English Church which acknowledges no Authority Superior to that of a Metropolitan is Ancient 'T is chiefly for the Proof of these things the Author hath made use of his utmost Endeavours Industry and Ability not treading in the Foot-steps of the Ancients but walking in new Paths which lead from the Truth as I shall endeavour briefly to shew in this Dissertation For whereas this Author hath brought those things for the Proof of his Opinions which have been lately invented partly by him and partly by Launoy I thought it might be profitable to lay them before you and to shew in the following Discourse how far different they are from the true Discipline of the Church from the Judgment of the Ancient Fathers from the Decrees of Councils and from the Sense of all Antiquity I shall therefore divide this Dissertation into six Chapters in the four first of which I shall alledg those things which relate to the Origin of the British Church and the Patriarchal Rights over it in the two last I shall examine those things that the Dean of St. Paul's hath written to prove that the Metropolitical Authority is Supreme and confute them by the Testimonies of those very Authors which he alledges He thought that the Patriarchal and Papal Authority was unknown to the British Church in the six first Ages and that this was manifestly prov'd from the Answer of Dinoth the Abbot and the Sayings of the Monks of Banchor I shall shew that there was no doubt at all made concerning the Supreme Authority of the Bishop of Rome but that Britain did venerate the Authority of the Apostolic See from the time that King Lucius First embraced the Catholic Religion till the breaking in of the Saxons and the coming of Augustine the Monk. And when I shall have made this appear from several Monuments of the British Church and by the Histories of that Nation I shall conclude with an Exhortation to the Ministers of the English Church in which I shall plainly shew them how far those Err from the Truth who think that the Church fail'd thoughout the whole World and was afterwards found by a few Persons in a narrow Corner of the Earth I shall bring the Testimony of Optatus Milevitanus wherein he reproves the Donatists for the like Error because they heretofore reduc'd the Catholic Church to a small number and confin'd the large Extent of Kingdoms as it were to a narrow Prison I shall bring other Testimonies of the Ancients by which it will appear that the true Church is to be found diffused throughout the whole World because it is Catholic and that it is one because it agrees in the Society of one Communion under One visible Head and that none can obtain Salvation who is either divided from that Head by Schism or separated by Heresie So that St. Jerom did not write by way of Exaggeration as a certain Person of late hath rashly given out but truly to Pope Damasus I saith he following none but Christ in the first place do consociate in Communion with your Beatitude that is the See of Peter I know the Church is built upou that Rock Whoever eats the Lamb out of this House is prophane If any one is not in the Ark of Noah he shall perish when the Deluge reigns CHAP. I. That the British Church was instituted either by St. Peter or his Successors 1. The Opinion of an English Author who contends that the British Church was instituted by Paul rather than Peter The Testimony of Gildas the wise is not alledged by him it may be because he foresaw that it proved the Institution of the British Church by Peter 2. The Testimony of Eusebius brought out of Metaphrastes by which it appears that the British Church owes its Institution to Peter The same thing is proved by Metaphrastes asserted by John V. and affirmed by Kenulphus King of the Mercians 3. The Testimonies of Eusebius Theodoret and S. Jerome are produced out of which the Author is confident he shall clearly prove that the Islands scituated in the Ocean were first instructed in the true Faith by Paul. 4. The foresaid Testimonies of Eusebius are weighed the two former of which make nothing for Paul's coming into Britain rather than Peter's and the third of Jerome intimates not that Paul preach'd the Faith from the Spanish to the British Ocean as our Author believes but from the Arabic to the Spanish Ocean which is nothing at all to the purpose 5. The Testimony of Clemens Romanus is cited in which it is asserted that Paul came to the Borders of the West it is not said that he came to Britain 6. The Opinion of Launoy who questions the Authority of this Epistle of Clemens is disapproved of and the Testimony of Severus Sulpitius is brought wherein it is said that the Religion of God was received more lately beyond the Alpes and the distinction of our Author for avoiding the difficulty mov'd from the Testimony of Severus is rejected 7. Venerable Bede agrees with Severus Sulpitius whilst he puts us in mind that King Lucius was converted to the Faith about the time Sulpitius tell us that the Faith was receiv'd beyond the Alps with whom Tertullian seems to concur in Opinion who liv'd almost at the same time that Luclus King of Britain was converted under Pope Elcutherius 8. Other Testimonies of the Ancionts concerning the Conversion of King Lucius are brought likwise the Opinion of our Author concerning the Embassie that Lucius sent to Pope Eleutherius at Rome viz. That this Embassie was sent to Rome because it was the Imperial City as he asserts out of Irenaeus 9. The Testimony of Irenaeus is cited and it is shewed that our Author miss-interprets him Irenaeus asserts that all the Faithful ought to consent to the Roman Faith not because of the more powerful Principality of the Roman City but of the Roman Church The Emperor Honorius 's Testimony concerning the Principality of the Imperial Seat and the Principle of Priesthood's being establish'd at Rome the Authority of Augustin is added who tells us that the Principality of the Apostolic See ever prevail'd at Rome which when our Author denies he opposes a manifest Truth IN treating concerning the Antiquities of the British Church its Primitive Institution is to be enquired after which Modern Writers have attributed to divers Apostles and divers Disciples of Christ I have not leisure to recite all their Opinions in this Dissertation but shall only weigh that of our Author who to exclude the
Britain which heretofore was called Caledonia and now Scotland much less that he made a Voyage to Iceland the most remote of the Northern Islands Tacitus Hane or am novissimi maris tunc primum Râ—mana classis circumvecta insidam esse Britanniam affâ—rmavit ac simul incognitas ad id tempus insulas quas Orcadas vocant invenit demuitque dispecta est Thyle quam hactemis nix hyems abdebat which Tacitus in the Life of Agricola is believ'd to have call'd Thyle neither is there extant in Antiquity any Testimony of this 6. These things being premised I cannot sufficiently wonder with our Author what should move Joh. Launoy a Parisian Divine when he was prest by his Adversaries with the forecited place of Clement for the deriving of the Antiquity of the Gallic Church from the time of the Apostles to reject Clement's Epipistle when saving its Authority he might have defended his Opinion of the Gospels being first preach'd in France after the time of the Apostles It is not my Intention to defend Launoy's Opinion who would not have the Gospel to have been preach'd either in France or Britain in the time of the Apostles but when our Author had said that he could certainly prove the contrary concerning Britain it was allowable for me as I conceive to expose to the View of the Reader the weakness of those Arguments by which he thought to have manifested the truth of this his Assertion And it will be allowed me if I am not mistaken to propose a Testimony which the Learned have brought to prove that France receiv'd the Gospel long after the time of the Apostles Which is that of Severus Sulpitius Severus Sulpitius Lib. 2. vid. num VI. who after the beginning of the fifth Age wrote Lib. 2. Historiae Sacrae that the fifth Persecution was carried on under Aurelius the Son of Antoninus and that then Martyrdoms were first seen in Gaul the Christian Religion having been more lately received beyond the Alpes Here are two things which Severus testifies One which hath relation to France that before the time of Aurelius the Son of Antoninus there were no Martyrdoms seen in France The other which seems to have reference to England also that the Christian Religion was more lately receiv'd beyond the Alpes This latter because it thwarts his Opinion our Author eludes by a Distinction for he thinks fit to distinguish between the thing which is asserted by Severus viz. that Martyrdoms were then first seen and the reason of the thing which follows because the Catholic Religion was more lately preached beyond the Alpes He tells us that Severus was certain of the first but doubtful concerning the second but there is no body but sees that this is feigned by the Author against the express Testimony of Severus which confirms both these things to be of the same certainty He says that Martyrdom was first seen in France in the time of Aurelius and he says further that the Christian Religion was more lately receiv'd beyond the Alpes Both these things he tells as Truths of which he intimates himself to be equally certain since therefore Britain is situated on the further side of the Alpes it follows according to the Authority of Severus Sulpitius that the Christian Religion was more lately receiv'd there 7. Severus was by Nation a Gaul and wrote about the Year 420. to whom if we will joyn an English Writer we have Venerable Bede who composing an Ecclesiastical History of England above 1000. years since hath recorded that the Christian Religion was in Britain about the very same time that Severus tells us it was received beyond the Alpes You may read the History of Venerable Bede and you shall find nothing in it of the Gospels being preach'd by the Apostles in Britain The first mention that he makes of the Christian Religion hath relation to the time of Pope Eleutherius Venerabilis Beda Lib. 1. Hist Gentis Anglorum vid. num VII In the Year of our Lord 156 saith he Marcus Antonius Verus the Fourteenth from Augustus reign'd together with his Brother Aurelius Commodus in whose time when the Holy Man Eleutherius was Pope Lucius King of Britain sent an Epistle to him beseeching him that by his Authority he might be made a Christian and soon after this his Holy Request obtain'd effect and the Britains peaceably retain'd the Faith they had receiv'd inviolate and intire till the time of Dioclesian the Emperor Martyrdoms were first seen in Gaul under Aurelius the Son of Antoninus Severus Sulpitius as Severus testifies Bede venerable for his Antiquity and Holiness testifies that the Christian Religion was receiv'd in Britain under Aurelius to which Testimony Tertullian seems to have shewn the way who liv'd near the time of Aurelius the Emperor and in his Book contra Judaeos hath declar'd that the Places heretofore inaccessible to the Romans Tertullianus â—â—ntra judaeos Brtrannorum inquit inaccessa Romanis lâ—â—a Christo veâ—e subâ—â—ta were subject to Christ The places of the Britains inaccessible to the Romans saith he were subdued to Christ As if he should have testified that the Britains receiv'd the Faith of Christ not long before the time he wrote which very well agrees with their having embraced the Faith in the time of Eleutherius seeing that Eleutherius under whom Lucius was converted to the Faith liv'd not long before the time that Tertullian wrote 8. Venerable Bede therefore rightly places the conversion of Britain under Lucius which is confirm'd by a Manuscript History of the Kings of England Manuscriptus Codex Bsbl Vat. Lucius mâ—sit litteras Ercutherio Papâ—e pro Chrâ—stianitate suserpienda abtinuit kept in the Vatican Library in these Words Lucius sent a Letter to Pope Eleutherius that he might be made a Christian and he obtain'd his Request The same thing is testified not only by all the Writers of that Nation together with Marianus Scotus but also by the German Writers the French the Italian Among which Sigebertus Gemblacensis in Chronico Hermannus Contractus in Chronici Compendio Ado Viennensis in Martyrologio may be consulted Anastasius Bâ—bhoth in Pontisicati as also Anastasius Bibliothecarius in Pontificiali Romano where he testifies concerning Pope * Hic accepit epistolam à Lucio Britanico Rege uâ— Christianus efficeretur per ejus mandatum Eleutherius That he received a Letter from Lucius King of Britain that he might be made a Christian by his Command This is taken out of the †Catalâ—gus Romanorum Pontificum tempore Justâ—iani imperatoris conscriptus ancient Catalogue of the Popes that was writ in Justinian the Emperor's time which is extant in the Library of the Queen of Sweden where under Eleutherius the very same Words are found so that there can be no doubt made of the Conversion of Lucius under Pope Eleutherius concerning which all agree although they do not so well agree about the
they were subject to the Roman Patriarch 2. The Epistles to the Bishops of Rome to the Bishops of Thessalonica and Illyricum which the Legates of Adrian the Second and Nicholaus the Frist have made mention of were not set forth in the time of De Marca Archbishop of Paris but have been publish'd since his Death by Lucas Holstenius 3. Out of these the Testimonies of Innocent the First to Anysius Caelestine the First to Perigenes Sixtus the Third to the same as also to the Synod of Thessalonica are produced from whence it is made to appear that Theodosius Echiniensis hath rightly concluded for the Roman Bishop's Patriarchal Authority over Illyricum 4. Now least any one should conclude from the foresaid Testimonies that the British Churches were equally subject to the Roman Patriarchate with those of Illyricum the Author strives to prove that the Bishop of Thessalonica was first made Vicar of the Apostolic See in Illyricum that it might the better withstand the Bishop of Constantinople who took upon him to hear the Cause of Perigenes and that Pausanius Cyriacus and Calliopus Bishops of Thessaly opposed Pope Damasus in this thing and were therefore condemn'd by Bonifacius 5. Against which it is shew'd that the Cause of Perigenes was one thing and the Cause of Perevius another and that the three forementioned Bishops of Thessaly were not excommunicated because they withstood the Pope in the Cause of Perigenes but in that of Perevius who had been rightly ordain'd 6. The Cause of Perigenes is another thing and there might a Controversie arise by reason of this between the two Churches of New and Old Rome because the Bishop of New-Rome had assumed to himself the deciding of it and had obtain'd a Law from Theodosius the Emperor to justifie this his Vsurpation 7. The Law of Theodosius was made not against the Patriarchal Right of the Bishop of Rome but against the Vsurpation of the Bishop of Constantinople and supposes the ancient Roman Patriarchal Right over Illyricum which also Bonifacius hath not omitted to urge against the Vsurpation of the Bishop of Constantinople 8. Bonifacius desired nothing against the Vsurpation of the Constantinopolitan See but what was agreeable to the Canons and according to the ancient Order as appears by the Epistle of Honorius to Theodosius and is confirm'd by the Rescript of Theodosius wherein he revokes his above mention'd Edict 9. It may be prov'd from the Example of Illyricum that Britain is subject to the Roman Patriarchate although it had not been first instituted in Christianity by the Bishop of Rome for besides the Institution of Churches there is an ancient Custom which since we are ignorant when it first began is believed to have been derived from the time of the Apostles as is proved by the Testimony of Leo the First 10. Vpon this Apostolical Institution is founded the British Churches Subjection to the Roman Patriarch of which Agatho the Pope a hundred and five Western Bishops and all the Eastern Prelates in the sixth Synod made no doubt when they admitted the British Synods to be subordinate to the Patriarchal Synod at Rome Which Justinian the Emperor hath shew'd before Pope Agatho 's time affirming that the Roman Patriarch was the Primate of all Hesperia and long before Justinian the Synod of Arles said the same as shall be shewed in the following Chapter 1. I Have shew'd in the last Chapter that the English Church appertains to the Roman Patriarchate by Right of Institution In this Chapter I am to shew that it is subject to it although it had not receiv'd its first Institution from the Apostolic See for the Confirmation of which Truth we are to observe that the Argument for the Subjection of Churches is not only drawn from their Institution but also from the ancient Custom of the Church which since we know not the first beginning of is believ'd to have proceeded from Apostolical Prescript A great part of Illyricum was converted to the Faith by the preaching of Paul the Apostle of the Gentiles who instituted Churches and ordain'd Bishops there from whence it comes to pass that Innocent hath not reckon'd the Provinces of Illyricum amongst those which were instituted by Peter or his Successors notwithstanding the Illyrican Diocess was not exempted from the Jurisdiction of the Roman Patriarchate For it may be collected even from Innocent himself though he hath not named the Illyrican Church amongst those which were instituted by the Apostolic See yet that it was subject to the Roman Patriarchate According as De Marca Archbishop of Paris hath collected Lib. 1. de concordia Sacerdotii Imperii Cap. 4. Num. 3. where having related the Testimony of Innocent concerning the Churches in the West that were instituted by the Apostolic See De Marca The Diocesses saith he of the Illyrican Church are only wanting to our Account which Innocent hath not made mention of in this place It is notwithstanding certain that these no less than the rest of the Western Provinces did obey the Apostolic See and honoured it as the Head of the Churches Do not take the thing upon my Credit Let Innocent speak for himself in that Epistle which he wrote to Rufus Bishop of Thessalonica which was the Metropolis of Illyricum and to the rest of the Bishops of Macedonia Innocentius Epistola ad Rufum Adverti sedi Apostolicâ—e ad quam relatio tanquam ad caput Ecclesiarum missa currebat aliquam fieri injuriam cujus adbuc in ambiguum sententia duceretur when he answer'd their Letters which were brought to him by Vitalis the Arch-Deacon I have taken notice that there hath been some Injury offer'd to the Apostolic See to which there came an Appeal being sent to it as the Head of Churches concerning which Injury the Sentence was yet accounted ambiguous And moreover in another place Innocent exercised the Patriarchal Authority in retracting the Sentence of Bubalius and Taurianus Illyrican Bishops so that there can remain no doubt but the Patriarchal Authority of the Bishop of Rome extended as well to the Illyrican as to the rest of the Diocesses of the West 2. De Marca writ forty years since when other Epistles of Innocent and many other Roman Bishops concerning the Power of the Roman Patriarchate over Illyricum were not yet set forth of which the Legates that were sent by Adrian the Second to Constantinople in the Dissertation against the Vicars of the Orientals who contended that Bulgaria did not appertain to the Ordination of the Roman Church Apud Anastatium Biblioth Legati Adriani II. Vid. num XIII have made mention The Apostolic See say they as you may learn from the Decretals of the most Holy Roman Prelates hath from antient time canonically ordained and exercised Authority over both the Epiruses viz. the New and the Old all Thessaly and Dardania in which the City Dardania is now to be seen the country in which it is being now from these
Bulgarians called Bulgaria Nicholaus the First gives us the Names of those Roman Bishops which the Lagates sent by Adrian the Second to Constantinople makes mention of without reciting their Names Epist 2 Nicholaus primus Epist ad Michaclem Imperatâ—râ—m Vid. â—um XIV when he wrote to Michael the Emperor concerning the Illyrican Diocess Which was in the time of our Ancestors enlarged by the Sacred Dispositions of the Holy Popes Damasus Siriciuâ— Innocentius Bonifacius Coelestinus Sixtus Leo Hilarius Simplicius Faelix Hormisda Whose Institutions sign'd by them in those Parts we have taken care to direct to your Imperial Majesty by our Legates to the intent that you may know the truth of this Matter And the Decretal Epistles of these Popes which were extant in the times of Adrian the Second and Nicholaus the First are those which De Marca never saw and which the learned Men of his Time lamented the loss of as a great Damage to Ecclesiastical Learning the Apostolic See it self not being able to produce them Because it had lost those Decretals formerly kept in its Registry as either burnt or torn upon the Incursion of Enemies or spoil'd by the Injury of Time. Wherefore they were to be fetch'd from some other place were they any where to be found as Lucas Holstenius really did near thirty years since who having made search amongst the Manuscripts of divers Countries found the Acts of the Roman Synod under Boniface the Second in which it is related that Theodosius Bishop of Ecchinus cited many of the Epistles of the foresaid Popes which manifestly demonstrated the Roman Patriarchal Power over Illyricum 3. I omit the Epistles of Damasus and Siricius and begin with those of Innocent the First whom I before mention'd in that which is fourth in order according to Holstenius he makes mention of his Predecessors in these Words To you saith he speaking to Anysius Bishop of Thessalonica Innocentius primus Epistola inter Holstenianas 4. Vid. num XV. Vicar of the Apostolic See in Illyricum Such and so great Men my Predecessors heretofore in this See that is to say Damasus Siricius and the above mention'd viz. Anastasius of blessed Memory have shew'd so much deference that they have given your Holiness who are most just a Power to take cognisance of all things that were done in those Parts I give you again to understand that I the least of them am of the same Judgment and desire the same thing Which is also confirm'd by Innocent in his Epistle to Rufus Successor to Anysius and by Caelestinus who writing to Perigenes Reynatus Basilius and other Illyrican Bishops told them that he did not appoint any new thing Neither saith he Coâ—leâ—â—inus primus Epistola 13. meer Holsten Vid. num XVI is this Care new which the Apostolic See takes of you this Experiment we make use of has been often order'd by our Ancestors the watchful Superintendence over you was ever given in charge to the Church of Thessalonica And afterwards there are some Faults not of a light nature which being innate to those Provinces cannot come to us who are at so great a distance or all being now so remote they are not related unto us after some space of time as they were first acted All which by the Intercession of our Brother and Fellow-bishop Rufus whose Experience 't is clear has been approv'd in all Causes and Acts of his Life our Will is be rescinded To whom we have delegated our Authority over your Province that to him most dear Brethren all your Causes may be refer'd let none be ordain'd without his Advice let none enter upon his Province without consulting him let them not presume to call an Assembly of Bishops without his Consent if there be any thing to be refer'd to us let it be done by him Sixtus the Third in his Epistle to Perigenes confirms the same to Anastasius Successor to Rufus testifying that he knew of no new thing that was granted to him but that saith he Sixtus III. Epist ad Perigenem inter Holsten Vid. num XVII Ejusdem ad Episcopes Illyrici inter Holsten Epistola 17. Vid. ibid. which our Predecessors delegated to his Predecessors having regard to Ecclesiastical Discipline is now again constituted He confirms the same things in his Epistle to the Synod of Thessalonica as also in his Epistle to all the Bishops of Illyricum where he saith thus All the Illyrican Churches as we have receiv'd from our Ancestors and we our selves have confirm'd are now under the charge of the Archbishop of Thessalonica that by his care he may determine those Controversies which sometimes arise amongst his Brethren and that all things which are done by any particular Priests may be refer'd to him Let there be a Council call'd when it is needful and as often as he having regard to emergent necessities shall order it that the Apostolic See being inform'd by his Relation as in good reason it ought to be may confirm its Acts. And these things if I am not deceiv'd do plainly shew that Theodosius Bishop of Ecchinus did speak truth Synodus Romanus sub Bonifacio Vid. num XVIII when in the Roman Synod before Pope Boniface he said it was manifest that although the Apostolic See justly claims the principality over all Churches in the whole World it was necessary that to it alone Appeals should be made in Ecclesiastical Causes yet that the Venerable Bishops of the Roman See did in a more especial manner claim a Jurisdiction over the Illyrican Churches 4. That Illyricum was subject to the Roman Patriarchate is so manifest from the above cited Testimonies that no body can deny it seeing therefore that the Illyrican Churches had not their first institution from Peter or his Successors some may deduce from thence that it is not at all necessary for the asserting of the British Church's Subjection to the Roman Patriarchate that it should have been instituted by Peter or his Successors Our Author therefore foreseeing this since he could not deny the Testimonies of the Decretals above mentioned resolv'd to oppose them asserting that the Roman Bishops who wrote those Decretal Epistles were guilty of Innovation and Usurpation over the Rites of Metropolitans Let us hear his feigned Stories which since they abound with Errors are to be exposed to the end that they may be confuted Writing therefore concerning the Power of the Roman Patriarch over Illyricum as delegated to the Bishop of Thessalonica by the Decretal Epistles above mention'd He saith that Leo himself in his Epistle to Anastasius Author p. 115. derives this Authority no higher than from Siricius who gave it to Anysius Bishop of Thessalonica certa tum primum ratione commisit ut per illam Provinciam positis quas ad disciplinam teneri voluit Ecclesiis subveniret Siricius immediately succeeded Damasus who died according to Holstenius 11. Dec. 384. three years after the Council of Constantinople had advanced
instead of Perrevius For Boniface in the Place above mention'd doth not speak of Perigenes the Metropolitan of Achaia whom the Bishops of Thessaly had no Power either to Ordain or Consecrate but of Perrevius Lucas Hoistenius in notis whom Lucas Holstenius in his Notes upon this Epistle hath concluded from the Subscriptions of the Council of Ephesus to have been Bishop 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and I will prove from the very Acts themselves that he was of the Province of Thessaly For since Perrevius is supposed to have been lawfully elected and duly ordain'd and afterwards for some fictitious Crimes to have been deposed by his Fellow-bishops of the Province of Thessaly I cannot but think he belong'd to the Province of those Bishops who gave Judgment concerning him from which their Sentence Perrevius notwithstanding appeal'd to the Apostolic See. Boniface committed the Care of perusing the Heads of this Appeal to Rufus Bishop of Thessalonica his Vicar in Illyricum which being duly examin'd by him and sent to Rome Boniface thought fit that Perrevius should be restored to his See and that the three Bishops above named who deposed Perrevius should be excommunicated and so he made use of that Authority which belong'd to him over Illyricum and confuted by the exercise of his Power all these fictions of our Author before they were fram'd 6. Now let us clear the cause of Perigenes in which our Author mixes falsehood with truth and explicates many things untruly without any testimony of the Ancients It is indeed true that in the year 352. Nectarious in the second General Synod Canon 3. obtain'd that the Church of Constantinople which heretofore was a Suffragan should have Priority of honour after the Roman Church because Constantine having translated the Imperial Throne to that City it became the See of new Rome It is also true that from this Canon unlawfully made the Bishops of Constantinople took occasion by degrees to extend the bounds of their Jurisdiction and that having taken in the three exarchates of Thrace Pontus and Asia they began to take upon them the hearing the causes of the Eastern part of Illyricum which then was divided from the Western part Let it also be granted true that the Bishop of Thessalonica had the Authority of the Apostolic See over Illyricum first delegated to him by Pope Damasus that he might the better withstand the Usurpations of the Bishop of Constantinople yet it cannot be denied but that it was upon the occasion of the Bishop of Constantinople's drawing the cause of Perigenes before his Tribunal that there arose a Controversie between the Bishops of Rome and those of Constantinople Lex Theodosii Junioris Vid. num XX. upon which Theodosius junior Successor to Arcadius being circumvented by the Bishop of Constantinople in the year 421 made a Law which is found in the Theodosian Code lib. 16. leg 45. tit de Episcopis and in the Justinian Code lib. 1. tit 2. de Sacrosanctis Ecclesiis leg 6. to run thus Lex Theodosii Junioris Vid. num XX. We command that all innovation being laid aside the ancient custom and the Ecclesiastical Canons which have been in former ages instituted and held in force till this very time be observed throughout all the Provinces of Illyricum and if there arise any doubtful cause that be reserv'd to the Sacerdotal Synod and Sacred judicatory not without the knowledge of the most Reverend the Prelate of the Sacred Law who holds his See in the City of Constantinople which enjoys the Prerogative of old Rome Dat. prid Idus Julii Eustathio Agricola Coss 7. Hitherto we have recounted those things which are true now let us proceed to shew what falshoods the Author has intermixt with them And in the first place it is false that the foremention'd Law was made against the invasion of the Roman Bishop for it was not made against the invasion of the Bishop of Rome but to further the unlawful Usurpation of the Bishop of Constantinople They had not here regard to the Authority of Provincial Synods for the determining certain and undoubtful causes but to doubtful cases such as was that of Perigenes which could not be determined by the Synod without the judgment of the Patriarch Now there was no Controversie about a Patriarchal Power over Illyricum in the time of Perigenes the only question that was mov'd was to which of the Patriarchs it belong'd Illyricum even to the time of Valentinian the Second had belong'd to the West but the Empire being divided between Arcadius and Honorius after the Death of Valentinian the Western part of Illyricum was distinguished from that of the East and the Eastern part fell to Arcadius the Emperor of the East from whence the Bishop of Constantinople took occasion to perswade Theodosius the Son of Arcadius who was of an easie nature that he would make the Churches of the Eastern Illyricum Subject to the Constantinopolitan See which Theodosius so effected by making a new Law as plainly to shew that there was no question concerning a Patriarchal Power over Illyricum but only a difficulty started viz. whether this power should for the future appertain to the Roman Bishop or to the Constantinopolitan Theodosius his words are to be observed Theodosius Imperator Then if there arise any doubtful case that must be reserved to the Sacerdotal Synod and Sacred Judicatory not without the knowledge of the most Reverend the Prelate of the Sacred Law who holds his See in the City of Constantinople which enjoys the Prerogative of Old Rome You hear that therefore the judgment in doubtful cases was reserv'd to the Bishop of Constantinople or New Rome as it was then called because it enjoy'd the Prerogative of Old Rome Therefore before the Prerogative was Translated to the Constantinopolitan See Bonifacius Epist ad Ru tum inter Holsten num 8. Old Rome enjoy'd the Prerogative of Superiority over Illyricum And this is the Authority which the Roman Bishops contended that the Roman See could not be deprived of according to what Bonifacius the first told Rufus Bishop of Thessalonica that new attempts which can be of no force ought not to lessen the Authority of the Roman See. And speaking against those who appealed to the Bishop of Constantinople for the determination of the causes of the Illyrican Diocese Restrain saith he the Violators of the Canons Vid. num XXI and the Enemies of Ecclesiastical jurisdiction through the assistance of God who always frustrates such mens wishes exercise also that Authority which is grantd you over the rest of the contumacious For you see we have left no stone unturn'd Which last words are therefore added by Boniface because he did not only exercise his Apostolical Authority but made use of the assistance of Honorius the Western Emperor for the obtaining of Theodosius that the Law might be revoked 8. There is extant in Lucas Holstenius a transcript of the Epistle which
Church and receded as Schismatics from the center of Ecclesiastical Communion What else can we conclude but that God was willing to shew the falshood of the Schismatical Church of Britain by the Miracle which he wrought upon Augustine's intercession Do not the Acts of the British Synod recorded in Bede testifie that Augustine did by so manifest a Miracle demonstrate the truth of those things which he proposed to the Britains that they were forc'd to confess it was the true way of Justice which Augustine Preach'd If these things cannot be denied as it is most certain they cannot what do the modern English Authors mean when they object against Catholics the answer of the Britains and the Monks of Banchor Will they not at length be convinc'd that they oppose nothing but their own Errors which are the vain Forgeries of Men against that Truth which hath been confirm'd by a Divine Testimony and that the rest of the Church hath just reason to condemn them for having lost both Truth and Modesty at the same time I am weary of vainly spending my time in matters so clear so manifest so perspicuous and of being again forc'd when Religion is the subject to bring a new Evidence of that Truth which all the English Writers of former Ages all men that have been eminent in Britain for Sanctity and Learning and lastly even the Bishops who have been present in the several Councils that have been held in England Scotland and Ireland have acknowledg'd and defended I will therefore conclude my Discourse with the following Exhortation AN EXHORTATION TO THE MINISTERS OF THE English Church WHen Philo the most Eloquent of the Hebrews address'd his Oration to Caius the Emperor Philo in Oratione pro Gente Hebraeorum ad Caium Caligulam and the Roman Senate How long saith he shall we old Men be Children as to the Body gray indeed through Age but as to the Mind through want of Knowledge very Infants whilst we believe Fortune the most inconstant thing in the World to be stable but Nature to be unstable whereas it is most constant Pardon me I beseech you most excellent Ministers of the English Church if I make my Address to you in the Words of Philo tho somewhat alter'd How long will you who are ancient in Body be Children in Minds and meer Infants for want of knowledg of Religion whilst you think the Catholic Church unstable which is yet most constant and your own which is rent from the Body of the Catholic Church will be stable You have chang'd the true Estimate of things attributing that to a part which is only the Property of the whole and imagining with your selves that the Catholic Church is defectible Matthaei 16 cap. 1. ad Timoth 3. which the eternal Truth hath promised shall never fail and which the Doctor of the Gentiles hath called the Pillar and Ground of Truth You thought that the true Faith was lost in the Catholic Church spread over the Face of the whole World but found again by you in England little considering how truly that Objection might be made against you which Henry the Eighth your King in the Age before this made against Luther that like the Donatists you reduce the Catholic Church to a very small number whispering of Christ in a Corner It was the Judgment of the great Augustine and of St. Optatus Milevitanus Optat. Melcvit Lib. 2. contra Parmenianum Quasi in carcerem latitudo Regnorum that the Church was not to be shut up in some Corner but to extend it self to the utmost Bounds of the World the latter of these Holy Fathers Lib. 2. reprehends Parmenianus the Chief of the Donatists for endeavouring to make void that Promise of God the Father of giving to the Son the uttermost parts of the Earth for his Possession whereas he had confined the large Extent of his Dominions as it were to a narrow Prison Then he asserts the Church that it may be Catholic ought to be extended to all parts of the World and that the first Mark to distinguish it by was Vnity which consists in the Communion it holds with St. Peter's See which is but one and this he believ'd so manifest that he thought Permenianus himself could not deny it Negare non potes inquit loco supracitato Stire te in Vrbe Roma Petro Primo Cathedram Episcopalem esse callatam in qua sederit emnium Apostolorum Caput Petrus undè Cephas appellatus est in qua una Cathedra uni as ab â—mâ—â—bus servaretur ne caeteri Apostoli singulas sibi quisque defenderent ut jam schismaticus peccater esset qui contra singularem Cathedram alteram collâ—caret Ergo Cathedra unica que est prima de dotibus sedit prior Petrus cui successit Linus enumerata longa Romanorum Pontificum serie usque ad Siricium sub quo scribebat Siriâ—â—us inquit hodie qui noster est Sociuâ— cum quo nobis totus Orbis commercio formatarum in una Communionis Societate concerdat You cannot deny saith he in the place above cited but that you know that the Episcopal See of the City of Rome was granted to Peter as the Chief in which Peter the Head of all the Apostles sate from whence he was called Cephas in which one See Unity was to be preserved by all least the rest of the Apostles should claim a Superiority to any of their Sees So that now he would be a Schismatic and a Sinner who should set up another See in opposition to this peculiar See. Therefore in this one See only which is its chief Dowry Peter first sate to whom Linus succeeded and so reckoning up a long Series of Roman Bishops till he came to Siricius in whose time he wrote who saith he is our Fellow-Bishop with whom the whole World agrees as we do in one Society of Communion by intercourse of Communicatory Letters There was then a true Church in time past which diffused throughout the whole World made Peter's one See the Center of its Vnity and communicated with the Roman Church as a Sign of one Faith and Religion by Communicatory Letters This was the Sentence of Optatus Milevitanus and the rest of the Fathers which because the Donatists durst not deny they had constituted a Bishop of their own in the City of Rome who as St. Augustine tells us was called Rupensis and Montensis a Rupe vel Monte from the Rock or Hill wherein he conceal'd himself If therefore the Popes Authority was so manifest in former Ages that the Schismatical Affricans themselves could neither be ignorant of it nor deny it how comes it to pass that you in England now do not at all acknowledg it was perhaps the Knowledge of it so obliterated in the latter Ages that it could not be discovered by your Ancestors when they separated from the Communion of the Apostolic See Henricus Octavus libro de 7.
Sacramentis contra Lutherum But it cannot be denied said Henry the Eighth at that time but every Church of the Faithful owns and reverences the Holy See of Rome as their Mother and Primate If every Church did allow of this in the time of Henry the Eighth if they all recognized this one See of St. Peter what Reason what Right what Equity could this very Henry the First of all the Kings of England have to set up another See against this peculiar See and offer to restrain the Bounds of its Primacy I know indeed that your Author against whom I have hitherto written hath made the same Answer to this that Luther did in the time of Henry the Eighth that the Pope had not obtained a Power so great and of so large an Extent as this by the Command of God or by the Consent of Men but had usurped it to himself But because he agrees with Luther in opposing the Popes Power it is but reasonable he should hear what Answer Henry the Eighth hath made to him in the Person of Luther I would have him to tell me when it was that he enter'd forcibly upon this large Possession The first beginnings of so immense a Power could not have been unknown to us especially if they had happened within the Memory of Man. But if he shall say that it is an Age or two since the thing was done let him give us an account of it from History Or else if it be so ancient that the Original of it although it be so considerable a Matter is obliterated he knows it is the wise Provision of all Laws that when the Right to any thing is so far beyond the Memory of Man that it cannot be known what a beginning it had it should be presumed to have had legitimate one and it is plainly forbidden by the consent of all Nations that those things should be unsetled which have for a long time continued in a setled State I very much admire how he could ever hope to find Readers either so credulous or so stupid as to believe an unarmed Priest all alone having no Guard to attend him no just Right to support him nor Title to rely upon could so much as hope ever to obtain so great a Dominion over so many Bishops that were his Equals in so many different and far distant Countries Much less can any one believe that all People Cities Kingdoms and Provinces were so prodigal of their Concerns Rights and Liberties as to give a Priest that was a Stranger to them and to whom they owed nothing so great a Power over them as he could scarce dare to wish for These things are manifest and the more remarkable because written by that King of Great Britain under whom your English Church separated from the Roman for a Reason which I am ashamed to relate neither is it fitting for you to hear it and contrary to the perpetual Tradition of the Ancients contrary to the Faith of your Ancestors contrary to the Consent of all Catholics broke into open Schism and fell from Schism into Heresie and from Heresie into the Abyss of those Errors which are now fresh in the Memory of Men and which Posterity will ever have cause to lament Of these Errors I need not make a Catalogue or produce any Testimony since you are too well acquainted with them only I should indeed think my Pains very well bestowed if I could by any means recal you from Heresie and Schism which are the Sourses of so many Evils to a sound Mind and move you to repent whilst you have time After the Darkness of Schism the Light of Truth shone forth to you under the Reign of Mary your Queen which Britain calling to mind its ancient Faith receiv'd with due Veneration After the Night of Heresies into which Britain fell back under the Reign of Elizabeth Faith like the Morning seems to rise again under the Government of a Catholic Prince whence we may hope the Light of Truth which your Ancestors enjoyed for so many Ages will break forth among you into open Day and again recover that Place from whence a hundred Years since it was forced into Banishment This is what all those Churches with whom you have formerly held Communion earnestly desire This is what Spain Portugal France Germany Bohemia Poland Dalmatia Italy Sicily and the other Western Regions in which the ancient Religion now flourishes with so much Splendor continually pray for This is what the Churches still remaining in Grece Asia Palestine Mesopotamia Persia Armenia and all the East will joyfully entertain This the vast Provinces of the new World inhabited by so many People so many Nations so many Families This the far distant Inhabitants of China many of which have in the former and in this present Age embraced the Christian Faith This innumerable Islands scattered every where up and down in that Sea we call the ocean will receive with joyful Acclamations This will be most acceptable to Rome the Mother Church which first brought you forth to God and Religion neither could any thing be more delightful to Her than to receive You as a kind Parent amongst so many others which at this time are returning to Her from Heresie and Schism and cherish you in her Bosom All the other above mention'd Churches throughout the World are subject to this Roman See and all these joyn'd together constitute the Catholic Church from which none can be separated who desires to be one of the Faithful and would attain Salvation Would to God therefore that you would look after the Salvation of your own Souls whilst the Catholic Church spread over the Face of the whole Earth waits earnesily for your Conversion that you would return to the Communion of that Church out of which there is no Salvation Epist ad Ephes c. 5. There is one Lord and one Faith saith Paul. That Faith is found in the Church which is but one D. Ambrosius in cap. 4. Lucae as the Apostles in their Creed have taught us This Church is the House that I may use St. Ambrose's Words of which as Damasus was at that time Rector so Innocentius is now D. Hieronymus Eâ—â—stâ—ad Damasum Whosoever eats the Lamb out of this House saith Jerome is Prophane and since he is not in the Ark of Noah he shall perish when the Deluge reigns Julianus Cardinalis apud Pium 2. in Bulla ad Vniversitatem Colomensem Latinerum Graecorum Doctorum una vox est salvari non posse qui Sanctae Romanae Ecclesiae non â—enet unitatem Nor is this the Sense of Jerome only but of the rest of the Fathers for as Julianus President of the Synod at Basil rightly observ'd The Latin and Greek Doctors say all with one Voice that he cannot be saved who lives not in Unity with the Holy Roman Church Testimonia in Idiomate quo ex Authoribus in hoc Libro citantur hic conscripta