one Will neither Now what was the business of all these zealous Fathers but to confirm the Apostles Creed which had been handed down to them from the beginning They look't upon it to contain all things necessary to be believed they reckoned it the saving and the Only short Rule of Faith the Faith that is Immovable as Ignatius the Martyr call'd it the unmovable and Irreformable Faith as Tertullian the Perfect Faith that unites all Ignat. Ep. ad Smyr Tertul. de veland verg Iren. l. 1. c. 3. Churches throughout the whole World into one body as Irenaeus thought the Right Catholick Faith as Athanasius and the rest of the Ancients did esteem it This was the reason why they were so very industrious and careful to keep Super haec autem iidem in Chalcedone sancti Patres anathematizaverunt eos qui aliud Symbolum tradiderunt aut tradunt praeter hoc quod expositum est a trecentis decem octo sanctis Patribus explanatum a centum quinquaginta sanctis Patribus Justinian in Quintae Synodi Collat. prima Concil Tom. 4. part 2. pag. 47. Edit Bin. the common Creed inviolable So that as Justinain the Emperor tells us the Fathers of the Council at Chalcedon anathematiz'd all those that had delivered or do deliver any other Symbol besides that Creed of the Apostles which was explained by the two first general Councils that at Nice of 318 Fathers and the next at Constantinople consisting of an hundred and fifty I know not what the Men of Trent thought of this heavy Anathema when they Added to the Ancient Creed a great many New Articles of their own as equally Necessary to Salvation But by this Sir you may see that the Apostles Symbol as it was explicated in the first General Councils was that and that only which the Primitive Fathers so zealously contended to maintain which you cannot conceive why it should have been had not they concluded it to be a Perfect Summary And this I note not only to shew their great and most unreasonable uncharitableness who condemn all that stick to this Primitive Creed only But moreover to vindicate our selves who own and teach the very same Articles of Faith and necessary principles of Christianity which was the only thing contended for by the old Catholick Fathers Upon which account we are no more Hereticks than They were our Creed being the very same with Theirs So that there can be no colour of Reason for any to forsake our Communion as if our Faith were unsound or Defective or to be dissatisfied in their minds as if there were any danger of their Happiness if they be but careful to adorn this Faith with a sutable conversation And hence I cannot but look upon it as a strange piece of weakness at least in the Divines of that party that they are so grosly mistaken in their notion of of the Catholick Faith. For they quite over-look the Common Creed as if that were not it whereas in Truth that alone is the Catholick Faith and give that Title to the Trent-confession which is the Roman Faith only and yet whoever denieth any part of that Confession though he owns the Apostles Symbol must be hooted at presently as an Heretick Nor can it be thought any less than strange Inconsideration in Mr. Sclater that he should leave our Church for that of Rome upon an Idea he hath formed in his own fancy of that Churches Vnity in the Faith. For is not our Church in most perfect Vnity as to the Christian Faith Were the Apostles Creed profest only in the Roman Church we might all go thither But is not our Faith the same with Hers in those points wherein 't is truly Primitive and Catholick If Mr. Sclater can shew us wherein we contradict any of those principles of Christianity which so many Ancient councils confirm'd as the One Catholick Faith we will not blame him for thinking that we have broken the Unity thereof But we are so far from offering an hundred Faiths as he unworthily Page 5. insinuates that we teach but One and the same which is Common to all the Churches in the World. Therefore his little quotations out of Ignatius Cyprian and the supposititious Clemens Romanus are nothing at all to his purpose But his Allegation out of Irenaeus pag. 8 is grosly impertinent For Irenaeus evidently speaks of the Apostles Creed and of that alone Pray consult the place and see if Irenaeus doth not expresly and distinctly repeat the substance of that Confession the Articles whereof we repeat daily in our Churches and then he presently subjoyns in the very next Chapter This Doctrine and Faith the Church keeps with all care as if she dwelt in one House although she be disseminated over the whole World. Her Faith is agreeable to these Doctrines as if she had one Soul and one and the same Heart These Articles she doth consonantly preach teach and deliver as if she had but one mouth For though there be different Languages yet the Faith delivered is one and the same Neither do the Churches in Germany believe or teach any other Faith nor do those Churches in Spain nor those in France nor those in the East nor those in Egypt nor those in Lybia nor those in the middle parts of the World But as the Sun is one the same in the whole World so the Doctrine of Truth every where shines and enlightens all men that are willing to come to the knowledge of the Truth He adds too which Mr. Sclater disingenuously conceals that none of the Governours of the Church though never such able men do teach any other Doctrines than these for no man is above his Master nor doth the weakest diminish the Faith delivered But the Creed being one and the same the greatest man doth not add more no doth the meanest man believe less And now Sir what is all this for the advantage of the present Roman Faith which is superadded to the Apostles Symbol This passage is so far from countenancing that it utterly condemns that Addition Or what is all this against Vs who believe teach that very same Faith which all Christian Churches did adhere to in Irenaeus time Or what encouragement is all this for any man to leave our Communion as if we had violated the Vnity of the Faith The truth is Irenaeus the rest of the Ancients said as we do that Christ hath but one Catholick Church on Earth that all Churches make up this Catholick Church that they are all united in one by one common Faith and that the Apostles Creed is that one and only Faith. Now this Faith is uniformly believed by us and therefore Mr. Sclater needed not to say as he doth pag. 10. What would I have once given to have found such Vnity among Protestants Let him but give us our Due and we desire no more and this he cannot deny without denying us our due that in England Scotland
branded himself or his See with so many Vgly and Infamous Characters The true account of it therefore seems to be this Some Roman Bishops longed for Superiority over the other Churches and might Hope in time to accomplish their desires But in Gregory's days and somewhat before Rome began mightily to sink by the great Oppression of the Lombards and by the Translation of the Imperial Seat. Constantinople flourisht at a great rate the Court was there the Emperor favour'd it the Patriarch of it had now gotten a very High Title and the Bishops of Rome might fear that Universal Authority would follow by degrees and that their Cause was going apace Therefore they might think it in vain for them to smother and conceal the truth any longer so to be Revenged upon the growing Patriarch they speak at last their thoughts freely In short if these Three Bishops of Rome where sincere in what they said their memory is the more valuable for asserting the Truth if they looked upon any Sinister ends of their own the Glory of Truth is the greater for being justified even by those who were no friends to it You will perhaps wonder now how this Title should go unexpectly and so suddenly from Constantinople to Rome For it was obtained of the Usurper Phocas by Boniface the 3 d. who was the next Successor but one to that Gregory who had condemned the Title with so much bitterness Why thus it was in short Phocas had barbarously Murther'd his Prince Mauritius the Emperour and his Children Cyriacus then Bishop of Constantinople hated and oppos'd him for his execrable Villany Boniface of Rome presently strikes in makes use of this Opportunity sues for the Title of Universal Bishop hoping now to invade the Church by the help of a Tyrant that had invaded the State and Phocas grants his request partly out of Hatred to his enemy Cyriacus partly for fear lest Boniface should raise up some evil against him in the West and partly too because he saw the Bishops of Rome were ready to crouch and sneak to him though a bloudy Vsurper as long as they could gain any thing by their base Submission of which he found a plain experiment in Gregory himself who wrote a flattering Letter to him which begins thus Gloria in excelsis c. Glory to God in the highest and so he goes on Let the Heavens rejoyce and the Greg. Regist Lib. 11. Ep. 38. aa Phocam Earth be glad and let all the People that have hitherto been much afflicted be chearful for your kind actions This he thought might very well Merit something at the hands of Phocas and so Boniface obtain'd the Title of Vniversal Bishop and that too just about the time when Mahomet stept into Christendom then it was that Oppression got into the Church God punishing the Pride and Factions of Christians with Two Scourges at once which ever since have made the Christian World to Smart severely By this account you may see the Rise and Progress of the Popes Supremacy What an Innovation it is and how strongly it was opposed by the Catholick Church in the Primitive times for above 200 years together after it was first pretended to Before I pass from this Topick I shall lay hold on this opportunity to satisfie you touching those Allegations which the Author of the Nubes Testium hath collected to prove if he could that the Bishop of Rome has the Primacy over the whole World and that by Divine Right too and by Commission granted him by Christ himself in the Person of St. Peter Now I observe in general that this Author hath wholly omitted that Historical account which has been now given you because it evidently clears the point against him but instead of that he has pickt up some ends shreds out of some of the Ancients which may seem Specious to Ignorant people but signifies nothing with a man that is rightly acquainted with the Series of the Controversie Whereas he pretends to give us an History of the Donatists of the Gnosticks of Berengarius of the Iconoclasts c. which I shall take notice of hereafter he takes no notice at all of those Fathers and Councils in Africa and the East which resisted the first incroachments that tended to the introduction of an Usurped Supremacy He knew that such an History would burn his Fingers and therefore thought fit not so much as to touch it but throws the whole matter and that very briefly upon the Donatists as if the Pag. 22. Donatists were the onely men that denyed the Popes Supremacy and broke with him upon that account whereas indeed the Donatists were They who gave the Bishop of Rome the first unlucky occasion to claim Juridiction out of their due bounds by their Appeals at Rome and by their running from their proper Judges in Africk witness their Appeals in the Papacy of Melchiades So that it was not those Schismaticks that were the first or the onely men that opposed the Popes Usurpations but the Catholick Fathers who were forced to stand up in defence of their own just priviledges Now it is not imaginable that any of the Fathers would especially during that Controversie say any thing that might really serve to strengthen the unlawful pretences of the Bishops of Rome against themselves and therefore you may very rationally conclude that those passages which are gather'd out of the Fathers in favour of the Popes Supream Authority are forced wrested to a sence which they cannot naturally bear But to examine particulars If you please to peruse for 't is tedious to Transcribe all the Authorities this Man cites you will find that they are concerning Four things 1. Concerning those high Characters which some of the Ancients gave of S. Peter himself 2. Concerning those honourable Titles which they gave to the Bishops and See of Rome 3. Concerning those Applications which were sometimes made to the Bishops of Rome upon emergent occasions 4. Concerning the Acts of the Bishops of Rome upon such Applications And upon a full and impartial consideration of these several things you will easily find what false grounds they go upon who endeavour so eagerly from these Observations to prove the Universal supream power of the Pope especially by Divine Right 1. These Authorities are concerning the high Characters which some of the Ancients gave of S. Peter himself as that he was the Prince the Head of the Apostles and the like Now what doth this mean but that S. Peter was the most Eminent Apostle in respect of his age in respect of his zeal in respect of his couragious Professions of his Constancy and Love to his Master in respect of the Precedency he might have for Order-sake and in respect too of the Honour he had in Founding Christ's Church for the First Converts were made by his Preaching 'T was he that gather'd at once those Three thousand Souls which were call'd The Church Act. 2. 42 and
because he was the first Founder of the Church he was very fitly called a Rock But doth all this import that he was above all the other Apostles in Power Or that he had Supream Authority and Jurisdiction over them S. Paul speaks twice of the very chiefest Apostles and what if S. Peter was the chiefest of all Doth it follow that he was the chiefest in Authority No S. Paul's power was as great as His and therefore he saith in one place I was not a whit behind the very chiefest Apostles 2 Cor. 11. 15. and in another place in nothing am I behind the very chiefest Apostles 2 Cor. 12. 11. So the Ancients allow'd S. Peter a preheminence of Honor but not a Supremacy of Power as 't is clear from that single passage which our Author cites out of S. Jerome and I wonder he did not better consider it As Plato was Prince of the Philosophers Pag. 34. so was Peter of the Apostles Had Plato any Authority or Jurisdiction over the Rest No all that is meant is that Plato was the most Eminent and Renowned Philosopher S. Gregory call'd Peter the chief Greg lib. 4. Ep. 38. Member of the Holy and Vniversal Church and saith he Paul Andrew and John What were They but the Heads of particular Churches If the word Head always imports Authority then had those three Apostles as much Authority over Peter as Peter had over Them. But the Truth is the Ancients ever thought all the Apostles had authority alike And so St. Cyprian for instance tells us that what Peter was that were the rest of the Apostles too endued with an equal Partnership Hoc erant utique ceteri Apostoli quod fuit Petrus pari consortio praediti honoris potestatis S. Cyprian de Vnit Eccles Ep. ad Quintum in Honour and Power And elsewhere he saith plainly that Peter whom the Lord chose first and on whom he built his Church in his dispute with Paul about Circumcision did not insolently claim or arrogantly assume any thing to himself as if he held the Primacy or ought to be obeyed rather then those Disciples who were called after him Whence it is clear that though some of the Ancients styled him the Prince and Head of the Apostles yet they did not ascribe to him any Superiour Authority or Power but onely an Honorary Precedency like that which is given to the Chair-man of a Committee who is above the rest in Eminence but in Power the same with the rest that are equally and jointly in Commission with him And thus all our Authors Collections touching St. Peter's great Characters are answer'd in short 2. Other of his Authorities are concerning those Honourable Titles which some of the Ancients gave to the Church and Bishops of Rome as that There was the most potent Principality or the Imperial Seat of the Emperor that the First Chair and the principal Church was There that it was the Head Church that the Bishop of it was a Great Pastour and the Head to whom Antiquity had Given a Preheminence of Priesthood or the Precedency before all other Bishops And what is all this and Ten times more to the Popes pretended Authority over all Churches and all Bishops and that by Divine Right too Antiquity bestowed upon the Bishop of Rome a Preheminence saith our Author out Pag. 45. of the Emperor Valentinian's Letter and who doubts it But it was nothing but a Civil Respect and an Honourable yet voluntary Deference to him because he was Bishop of the Chief City and was near the Emperor and was capable of doing the Catholick Church by his Interest in the Emperor more good Offices then other Bishops could do therefore they were willing to Complement him with great Titles and to give him the upper hand and the precedency for Order and Peace-sake To the Episcopal Chair at Old Rome because it was 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Concil Calced Can. 8. the Imperial City the Fathers very fitly gave an Honourable preheminence as those 630 Fathers profest at the Council of Chalcedon But this was a Frank-gift a voluntary Act and Courtesie of the Catholick Church and from these Respectful compellations and Honorary Grants of Precedency to argue that the Bishop and See of Rome had Authority over the rest is the same thing as if you should say that because among our Magistrates the Mayor of London hath the Title of Lord therefore all other Majors and Headboroughs are under his Command Or because among our Cities London is the Chief and Head-city therefore all other Cities and Corporations are under its Jurisdiction Or because among our Peer's there is a Primier Duke or a First Earl therefore all other Peers are in subjection to him Or because amongst our Bishopricks that of Durham hath some singular Favours granted to it therefore the Prelate of that Diocess is in his Episcopal Power and Authority Superior to all the rest The Ancients did not begrudge that fair Preheminence which upon the New moduling of the Roman Empire they found it necessary for them to give to some Patriarch or other and for some special Reasons thought it best and most proper for them to give to the Patriarch of Rome but they did not give away their own Authority or that Power they had at home in respect whereof all Bishops were his Equals No saith St. Cyprian The Episcopal Authority is one and the same Episcopatus unus est cujus a Singulis in solidum pars tenetur S. Cyprian de Vnitate Ecclesiae whereof all particular Bishops are equal and joint-possessors like joint-Heirs in Fee. And St. Austin whom our Author cites saith clearly against him that though the Bishop Pag. 41. of Rome had the Preheminence yet the Episcopal power was common to all that were of that Function and therefore Optatus call'd Pope Siricius his Fellow Socius is the word which our Author hath very ignorantly or very disingenuously rendred Contemporary but the plain meaning is our Fellow or Equal The Ancients distinguisht between Priority in point of Honour and Supremacy or Primacy in point of Jurisdiction The former they denyed not the Bishop of Rome but when once he went about to take advantage by their free concessions to incroach upon their due priviledges they resolutely opposed his Vsurpations though at the same time they gave him an Honourable deference This was the ground of that Controversie whereof I have given you a short account and for your further satisfaction you may consult the vehement Epistles of St. Cyprian to the Bishops of Rome and particularly that to Cornelius where he stoutly defends the priviledges of foreign Churches and their Right of judging matters at home against all Appeals to the Roman See and if anything be needful to be added it shall be onely what St. Cyprian said afterwards at Neque enim quisquam nostrum Episcopâ—… se Episcoporum constituit aut Tyrannico terrore ad