to the whole Church of God to aske forgiuenesse for him because he saw the end of his life was neare at hand And besides all this in great haste put on him an Angelicall vesture or robe and released brake in sunder the bands of all those bitter curses whereunto hee had subiected the Emperour These were the turbulent proceedings of this cursed Hildebrand indeede a brand taken out of the very fire of hell to set on fire the course of nature and to put the whole world into a combustion whereof if this report mentioned by Sigebertus be true it repented him not a little before his death But howsoeuer it is most certaine that his best friends in the end beganne wholy to dislike him when they saw whither his violent and furious passions carried him and what wofull effects followed the same Gerochus saith Auentinus then whom no man was found more earnestly to defend Hildebrand by bookes written to iustifie his proceedings and who published to the world diuers crimes obiected to the Emperour mentioned by no other writer at the last constrained by the force of trueth taxed the pertinacy if not the tyranny of the Pope his adherents in this sort Romani inquit sibi diuinum vsurpant honorem rationem actorum reddere nolunt nec sibi dici aequo animo ferunt cur ita agis Illud Satyricum inculcant Sic volo sic iubeo sit pro ratione voluntas that is The Romanes take vnto themselues the honour that is proper vnto God they will giue no account for any thing they doe they will be subiect to no controll neither canne they endure with any patience that any man should say to any of them sir why doe you so That Satyricall saying they haue often in their mouthes so I will haue it so I command it to bee Let my will stand for a reason for so it shall Thus we see how ill a beginning the Popes made of deposing Emperours and how bad successe they had Which is not to bee maruailed at seeing in these attempts and practises they were contrary to Christ and his Apostles For these as Auentinus noteth acknowledged the Emperours as also all the holy Fathers did to be in the second place and ranke after God and before all mortall men giuen appointed and chosen by the immortall God and honoured them as hauing the crowne set vpon their heads by God himselfe they prayed daily for their prosperity they paid tribute vnto them and proclaimed them rebels against God that refused to bee subiect to them After this bad beginning some two or three other Popes succeeding attempted in like sort as Hildebrand had done to depose such Emperours as they were offended with Concerning whose attempts and practises let the Reader consider the censure of Cardinall Cusanus His words are these Let it suffice the Pope that he excelleth the Emperor as much as the Sun doth the Moone and the soule the body and let him not challenge that which pertaineth not to him neither let him affirme that the Empire is not but by him and in dependance on him and if haply the deposing of some kings Emperours the translation of the Empire moue him so presumptuously for to thinke let him know that if the respect of religion and due consideration of humility hindered not it were easie to answere all those thinges truly most clearely and so that haply these things should no way argue so great a power in the Pope as Pope without the consent or willing acceptation of the parties contending as is imagined For there wanted not in ancient times men to defend Henry the fourth crowned at Basil by the Legates of Rome from the excommunication of Gregory or Hildebrand Yea such there were that were Cardinals at that time and a certaine Councell holden at Rome nay which more is the Generall Councell at Basil holden at that time did the same things concerning the chusing of Honorius Pope for which Henry the Emperour was pronounced excommunicate And in like sort there are found things excellently and strongly written in defence of Fredericke the second a most valiant man and a most constant defender of the Faith as also in defence of other Emperours How much the Popes proceedings against Fredericke the second hindered the course of the sacred warre vndertaken at that time against the Infidels how many things the Pope charged him with which hee vtterly disclaimed how much all Christian Princes in the end beganne to dislike the pride of the Romane Court the Histories of those times do sufficiently make knowne vnto vs. Wherefore to conclude this point touching the Popes pretended power of deposing Princes seeing the first that euer attempted to exercise the same was that brand of hell Gregory the 7. seeing he had so ill successe in this his proud attempt and caused such confusions in the Christian world as the like had seldome or neuer bin before seeing the best learned about those times since condēned the opinion of thē that thinke the Pope may depose Princes as new strange if not hereticall we may safely resolue that the Pope taking vpon him to giue and take away kingdomes which is proper to God is that Antichrist that sitteth in the temple of God as if he were God CHAP. 47. Of the Ciuill dominion which the Popes haue by the gift of Princes HAuing proued that the Popes neither directly nor indirectly haue power ouer Princes the Kingdomes of the world or any thing to do in the managing and disposing of ciuill affaires by vertue of any grant from Christ let vs proceed to see what temporall dominion and ciuill power they haue by the grant of Princes It is the resolued opinion almost of all men saith Cusanus that Constantine the Emperour gaue the whole Empire of the West to Sylvester Bishop of Rome and to his successours for euer so that there can bee no Emperour of the West but such a one as must wholly depend of the Pope and acknowledge that hee holdeth the Imperiall Crowne of him Neither were there many found in auncient times that durst make question of this donation of Constantine yet doth this great Cardinall worthy Diuine professe that hauing sought diligently to find out the original of this supposed grant the certainty of it presupposing that Constantine might make such a grant which yet will neuer be proued he greatly wōdereth if euer there were any such thing For that there is no such thing to be foūd in authenticall bookes approued Histories I haue read ouer saith he againe and againe all the Acts of Popes and Emperours that by any meanes I could meete with the Histories of Saint Hierome who was most diligent in collecting all things the workes of Augustine Ambrose and other learned Fathers and the Acts of Generall Councels which haue beene since the Councell of Nice and can finde no such thing as this supposed donation nor
sort was diuided vpon a meere mistaking and that Athanasius by making either part rightly to vnderstand the other procured a reconciliation Neither neede this to seeme strange for oftentimes controversies are multiplied and by ill handling made intricate that in trueth indeede are no controversies and might easily bee cleared if there were a due proceeding in the discussing of the same So that the Treatiser had no reason to say that an indifferent reader will hardly excuse me frō error in this behalfe Wherefore let vs goe forward and see what other proofes hee bringeth to proue that my assertiō cannot be true First whereas I say there is no difference touching the Sacramēt the vbiquitary presence the like between the Lutherans Sacramētaries as he maketh me to speak he saith I may easily be cōvinced of vntruth because Caluin avoucheth that by the vbiquitary presence Marcion an anciēt heretick is raised vp out of hell a thousand bookes are written about the same point shewing how great dissentions there haue beene in the world touching the same But this proofe is easily disproued for though it bee true that Caluine hath that to imagine that the body of Christ hath no finite dimensions but such as are extended as farre as heauen earth and that it is euery where by actuall position or locall extension is to make it a fantasticall body and to raise vppe the old hereticke Marcion out of hell yet to thinke that Christs body is personally euery where in respect of the conjunction and vnion it hath with God by reason whereof it is no where seuered from God who is euery where neither Calvine nor any other Oxthodoxall Diuine euer condemned So that the Diuines of Germany condemning that kinde of vbiquitary presence that Caluine doth and Caluine allowing that other whereof they speake they must of necessity agree together notwithstanding any thing the Treatiser can say to the contrary but because I haue largely handled this matter touching the vbiquitary presence and the Sacrament in my fifth Booke of the Church and in my answere to Higgons I will no longer infist vpon it but referre the Reader to the former places Secondly whereas I affirme that none of the differences betweene Melancthon and Illyricus except about certaine ceremonies were reall hee sayth whosoeuer readeth the actes of the Synode holden by the Lutherans at Altenberge and the writings of the Flaccians against the Synergists and Adiaphorists shall finde dissentions touching greater matters For the cleering of this objection it must bee obserued that the supposed differences betweene those whom the Treatiser calleth Flaccians and the other whom he nameth Synergists were touching the co-operation of the wil of man with the grace of God in her first conuersion vnto GOD and the necessity of good workes to saluation Concerning the former of these two poynts it was euer agreed on between both these sorts of men that after the first conuersion there is a co-operation of the will of man altered renewed by the worke of Gods Spirit with grace in all ensuing actions of piety and vertue and in this sence both of them as defending a Synergy or co-operation of mans wil with Gods grace might rightly bee named Synergists 2ly It was likewise agreed on by both sorts that man by the fall of Adam and in the state of sinne is not onely wounded in the powers of his soule in respect of things naturall externall and politicall so that hee cannot performe any action so well in any of these kindes of thinges as before hee could but that hee is vtterly spoyled of all power strength and ability to doe any spirituall and supernaturall actions of true vertue and piety and is not onely halfe dead but wholly dead hauing no more power of himselfe to doe any thing that is good then a dead man hath to performe the workes of life Thirdly it was agreed on that there is not left in men corrupted by Adams fall the least sparke of morall or spirituall good desire or inclination which being blowed vpon and stirred may concurre with Gods grace for the bringing forth of any good worke So that neither of them were Synergists in this sense though Illyricus Museus and other supposed that Victorinus and some other did thinke so Fourthly it was with like vnanimous consent agreed on that there remaineth still in man after the fal a desire of good and of that good wherein there is no defect of good no mixture of euill no mutability nor feare of being lost though such be the infelicity of sinfull man that hauing his vnderstanding darkned and his will peruersly inclined he seeketh and supposeth he may finde this good where it is not to be found So that when God commeth to conuert and turne a sinfull man to himselfe he needeth not newly to put a desire of good into him for that is naturally found in him but by inlightning the vnderstanding that it may discerne and see what true good is and where it is to bee found and by turning the will from desiring that as good which is not or not in such degree as is supposed he maketh him a good and happie man that was euill and miserable before Neither doth he create a will in man but changeth the will he findeth in him that it may affect that which it did not and so createth a new will and heart in him that is frameth him to the desire of that from which hee was most averse before There is then no spirituall nor morall good in man when he is to bee conuerted vnto God no knowledge of true and spirituall good nor no desire of the same which being stirred vp may concurre with the grace of God and therefore no synergy or co-operation of any such good knowledge or desire of good with the grace of God in our first conuersion but that confused knowledge of good and naturall inclination to desire it that is found in man before his conuersion when good desires are to be raised in him concurreth with the grace of God directing the vnderstanding to seeke that good where it is to bee found and turning bending and bowing the heart to the loue and liking of it For that man desireth that which seemeth good vnto him he hath of nature that he desireth that which seemeth and is not hee hath from the corruption of nature and it argueth sinfull defect and that hee desireth the true good and rightly it is of grace directing the vnderstanding and turning the will from affecting that which before peruersly it did desire to seeke that which it should and in such sort as it should And so in that hee doth desire and pursue that which he thinketh to be good out of the naturall inclination of his will but that which indeede is and he should thinke to be good out of the motions of the spirit there is a kinde of Synergy or co-operation of the naturall powers of man
Schismatikes are they that breake the vnitie of the Church and refuse to submit themselues and yeeld obedience to their lawfull Pastours and guides though they retaine an entire profession of the trueth of God as did the Luciferians some others in the beginning of their Schisme though for the most part the better to justifie their Schismaticall departure from the rest of Gods people Schismatikes doe fall into some errour in matters of faith This is the first sort of them that depart and goe out from the Church of God and company of his people whose departure yet is not such but that notwithstanding their Schisme they are and remaine parts of the Church of God For whereas in the Church of God is found an entire profession of the sauing trueth of God order of holy Ministery Sacraments by vertue thereof administred and a blessed vnitie and fellowship of the people of God knit together in the bond of peace vnder the commaund of lawfull Pastours and guides set over them to direct them in the wayes of eternall happinesse Schismatikes notwithstanding their separation remaine still conioyned with the rest of Gods people in respect of the profession of the whole sauing trueth of God all outward actes of Religion and Diuine worship power of order and holy Sacraments which they by vertue thereof administer and so still are and remaine parts of the Church of God but as their communion and coniunction with the rest of Gods people is in some things onely and not absolutely in all wherein they haue and ought to haue fellowship so are they not fully and absolutely of the Church nor of that more speciall number of them that communicate intirely and absolutely in all things necessary in which sense they are rightly denied to be of the Church which I take to be their meaning that say they are not of the Church CHAP. 14. Of the second sort of them that voluntarily goe out from the people of God HEretikes are they that obstinately persist in error contrary to the Churches faith so that these doe not onely forsake the fellowship but the faith also and therefore of these there may be more question whether notwithstanding their hereticall division they still continue in any sort parts of the Church of God But this doubt in my opinion is easily resolued For in respect of the profession of sundry diuine verities which still they retaine in common with right beleeuers in respect of the power of order and degree of ministery which receiuing in the Church they carry out with them and sacraments which by vertue thereof they doe administer they still pertain to the Church But for that they hold not an entire full professiō of all such sauing trueths as to know and beleeue is necessary vnto saluation for that their Pastours and Priests though they haue power of order yet haue no power of jurisdiction neither can performe any acte thereof for that they retaine not the vnity of the spirit in the bond of peace they are rightly denied to be of the Church not for that they are not in any sort of it but for that they are not fully and absolutely of it nor of that more speciall number of them which communicate in all things wherein Christians should This more speciall number of right beleeuing Christians is for distinction sake rightly named the Catholike Church because it consisteth of them only that without addition diminution alteration or innouation in matter of doctrine hold the common faith once deliuered to the Saints and without all particular or priuate diuision or faction retaine the vnitie of the spirit in the bond of peace To this purpose is it that Saint Augustine against the Donatists who therefore denied the baptisme of Heretikes to be true Baptisme and did vrge the necessity of rebaptizing them that were baptized by them for that they are out of the Church doth shew that all wicked ones feined Christians and false hearted hypocrites are secluded from the Church of God considered in her best and principall parts and in the highest degree of vnitie with Christ her mysticall head aswell as ◅retikes and Schismatikes As therefore all they that outwardly professe the trueth and hold the faith of Christ without schisme or heresie are of the Church and are within as the Scripture speaketh yet are not all ofthat more speciall number of them that are intrinsecus in occulto intus but in more generall sort So likewise Heretikes and Schismatikes though they be not of that speciall number of them that in vnity hold the entire profession of diuine trueth are of the Church generally considered and of the number of them that professe the trueth of God reuealed in Christ. And this surely Augustine most clearely deliuereth For when the Donatists did obiect that Heresie is an harlot and that if the baptisme of Heretikes bee good sonnes are borne to God of heresie and so of an harlot than which what can be more absurde impious his answere was that the conuenticles of Heretikes doe beare children vnto God not in that they are diuided but in that they still remaine conjoyned with the true and Catholike Church not in that they are Heretikes but in that they professe and practise that which Christians should and doe professe and practise It is not therefore to be so scornefully rejected by Bellarmine Stapleton and others of that faction that we affirme that both Heretikes and Schismatikes are in some sort though not fully perfectly and with hope of saluation of the Church seeing Augustine in the iust and honourable defence of the Churches cause against Heretikes did long since affirme the same not doubting to say that Heretikes remaine in such sort conioyned to the Church notwithstanding their Heresie that the true Church in the midst ofthem and in their assemblies by Baptisme ministred by them doth beare and bring forth children vnto God The not conceiuing whereof gaue occasion to Cyprian and the African Bishops of errour and afterwards to the Donatists of their heresie touching the rebaptization of them that were baptized by Heretikes For seeing there is but ◅e Lord one faith one Baptisme seeing God gaue the power of the keyes and the dispensation of his word and sacraments onely to his Church if Heretikes bee not of the Church they doe not baptise This their allegation they amplified and enlarged from the nature and condition of heresie and Heretickes and the high pretious and diuine qualitie force and working of the sacraments thereby endeauouring to shew that so excellent meanes pledges and assurances of our saluation cannot be giuen by the hands of men so farre estranged from God There is say they one faith one hope one Baptisme not among heretikes where there is no hope and a false faith where all things are done in lying false and deceiueable maner where he adiureth Sathan that is the vassall of Sathan and possessed of the diuell
that should bee in the will but is not when it faileth to bring forth that action that in duty it is bound to doe But some man will say this must not be granted for if wee admitte not the distinction of that which is formall that which is materiall in the sin of commission the difformity the substance of the act that the one is positiue and the other priuatiue God hauing a true efficiency in respect of the substance of the act that which is positiue in it we must acknowledg that he hath a true efficiency in respect of the whole euen the difformity aswell as the substance consequently make him the author of sin They who make this objection seeme to say some thing but indeed they say nothing for this distinction will not cleere the doubt they moue touching Gods efficiency working in the sinful actions of men Whensoeuer sayth Durandus two things are inseperably ioyned together whosoeuer knowing them both that they are so inseperably ioyned together chooseth the one chooseth the other also because though happily he would not choose it absolutly as being evill yet in that it is ioyned to that which he doth will neither can be seperated frō it it is of necessity that he must will both As it appeareth in those voluntary actions that are mixt as when a man casteth into the sea those rich commodities which he hath dearly bought brought from a farre to saue his owne life which he would not doe but in such a case Hence it followeth that the act of hating God sinfull difformity being so inseperably ioyned together that the one cannot bee diuided from the other for a man cannot hate God but he must sin damnably if God doth will the one he doth will the other also This of Durand is confirmed by Suarez who saith he shall neuer satisfie any man that doubteth how God may be cleared from being author of sin if hee haue an efficiency in the sinfull actions of men that shall answere that all that is sayd touching Gods efficiency concurrence is true in respect of the euill motions actions of mens wills materially considered not formally in that they are evill sinfull For the one of these is consequent vpon another For a free and deliberate act of a created will about such an obiect with such circumstances cannot be produced but it must haue difformity annexed to it There are some operations or actions saith Cumel that are intrinsecally euill so that in them we cannot separate that which is materiall from that which is formall wherein the sinfulnes of sin consisteth as it appeareth in the hate of God in this act when a man shall say resolue I will do euill So that it implyeth a contradiction that God should effectually worke our will to bring forth such actions in respect of that which is materiall in them not in respect of that which is formall And this seemeth yet more impossible if wee admit their opinion who think that the formall nature being of the sin of commission consisteth in some thing that is positiue as in the manner of working freely so as to repugne to the rule of reason law of God So that it is cleare in the iudgment of these great diuines that if God haue a true reall efficiency in respect of the substance of these sinful actiōs he must in a sort produce the difformity or that which is formall in thē Wherefore for the clearing of this point we must obserue that there are 3 opiniōs touching Gods cōcurrence with 2d causes in producing their effects The 1st that God hath no immediate influence but mediate only in respect of volūtary agēts And according to this opiniō it is casie to cleare God frō the imputatiō of being author of sin yet to acknowledg his cōcurrence with 2d causes in producing their defectiue effects If the will of the creature saith Scotus were the totall and immediate cause of her action that God had no immediate efficiency but mediate only in respect thereof as some think it were easie according to that opinion to shew how God may bee freed from the imputation of being author of sin and yet to acknowledge his concurrence with second causes for the producing of their effects For whether we speake of that which is materiall or formall in sinne the will onely should be the totall cause of it and God should no way be a cause of it but mediatly in that hee caused and produced such a will that might at her pleasure doe what shee would Durandus seemeth to incline to this opinion supposing that 2d causes do bring forth their actions operations by of themselues that God no otherwise concurreth actiuely to the production of the same but in that he preserueth the 2d causes in that being power of working which at first he gaue them But they that are of sounder judgment resolue that as the light enlightneth the aire with the aire all other inferior things so god not only giueth being power of working to the 2d causes preserueth them in the same but together with them hath an immediate influence into the things that are to be effected by the God saith Caietan being the first cause worketh produceth the effects of all 2d causes immediatly tum immediatione virtutis tum immediatione suppositi that is not onely so as that the vertue power of God the first agent immediatly sheweth it self in the production of the effect but so also that he is an immediate agent between whom the effect produced no secondary agent intercedeth Yet are we not to conceiue that he is an immediate agent immediatione suppositi as he is immediatione virtutis for hee produceth immediatly euery effect of euery 2◠cause in respect of all that is found in any such effect immediatly immediatione virtutis that is so as that his vertue and power more immediatly effectually sheweth it self in the production of euery such effect then the power and vertue of the 2d cause but hee produceth euery effect of euery 2d cause immediatly immediatione suppositi that is as an immediate agent betweene whom and the effect no secondary agent intercedeth not in respect of all that is found in such an effect but of some things only as existence and the last perfection of actuall being For to giue being is proper to God as to make fire is proper to fire So that between God the supreme agent and being communicated to the effects of 2d causes there is nothing that commeth betweene that by force and power of it owne can produce any such effect So that God as an immediate agent bringeth forth such effects and all 2 causes in respect thereof are but instruments only But in respect of those things found in the same effects into which the 2d causes haue an influence by
the Emperor cōcerning the necessary reformation of the Church one was that Happily it were to be permitted that in some places prayers faithfully translated into the vulgar tongue might be intermingled with those things that are sung in latine Likewise in the articles of reformation exhibited to the councell of Trent by Charles the 9◠In sacrificio paraecialibus Euangelium apertè dilucidè pro populi captu copiose ex suggestu exponatur quo in loco quae plebano praeeunte fient preces linguâ fiant vernaculâ peractâ autem re diuinâ latine mysticis precibus lingua etiam vernacula publicae ad Deum preces fiant ibidem plura Which thing if it had bin granted by the councell no new nor strang thing had bin brought in for as Hosius testifieth the Church neuer forbad to sing in the Churches in the vulgar tongue in time and place It were to be wished sayth Erasmus that the whole service of God might be celebrated and performed in a tongue vnderstood of the whole people as in auncient times it was wont to bee and that all things should bee soe plainely and distinctly sounded out that they might bee vnderstood of all that list to attend And Cassander fully agreeing with Erasmus and alleadging to this purpose the Popes permitting of it to the Slauonians vpon the hearing of a voice frō heauen the authority of Caietan sayth It were to be desired that according to the mandate of the Apostle and the auncient custome of the Church consideration might be had of the people in the publike praiers of the Church and in the hymnes and lessons which are there read and sung for the peoples sake and that the ordinary and vulgar sort of beleeuers might not for ever bee wholly excluded from all communion of prayers and diuine readings and hee addeth that vnlesse there bee a reformation in this and other things there is no hope of any durable peace or consent of the Church and professeth hee cannot see but that they to whom the government of the Church is committed shall one day giue an account why they suffered the Church to bee thus miserably disquieted and rent in sunder and neglected to take away the causes whence heresies schismes do spring as in duety they should haue done So that in this poynt as in the former we see the Church wherein our Fathers liued and died was a true Protestant Church CHAP. 5. Of the three supposed different estates of meere nature grace and sinne the difference betweene a man in the state of pure and meere nature and in the state of sinne and of originall sinne THey of the Church of Rome at this day imagine that God might haue created a man in the state of pure nature or nature onely aswell without grace as sinne and that in this state of pure or meere nature without any addition of grace hee might haue loued God aboue all and haue kept all the commaundements of God collectiuely so as to breake none of them at the least for a short time though happily hee could not haue holden on constantly so to keepe them all as neuer to breake any of them seeing there would haue beene a contrariety betweene reason and that appetite that followeth the apprehension of sense in that state of pure or meere nature So that according to this conceipt grace was added not to inable man to loue God aboue all to keepe the severall cōmaundements which hee hath giuen to doe the workes of morall vertue For all these hee might haue beene able to performe out of the power of nature without any such addition but to make him able constantly to keepe all the commaundements of God collectiuely so as neuer to breake any one of them and to keepe them so as to merit eternall happines in heauen Hence they inferre diverse things First that the losse of grace or originall righteousnes that was given to Adam doth not depriue those of his posterity of the power of louing God their Creator aboue all of keeping his commaundements divisiuely and doing the seuerall workes of morall vertue though happily not with that facilitie that in the state of grace hee might haue done them Secondly That Infidels and such as haue no fellowship with the Saints people of God nor any part in his grace may decline sinne and doe the workes of morall vertue Thirdly That all the contrariety that is found in the powers of the soule the rebellion of the inferiour faculties against the superiour the pronenesse to euill and difficultie to doe good would haue beene the conditions of meere nature without addition of grace or sinne and consequently that they are not sinne in the state wherein wee are that these evills are not newly brought into the nature of man by the fall that as man would haue beene mortall in the state of meere nature because compounded of contraries so out of the contrariety of sensitiue and rationall desire hee would haue found a rebellion in himselfe of the inferiour faculties against the superiour that as a heauy thing falleth not downeward while it is stayed but falleth so soone as the stay is taken away by reason of the same nature it had while it was stayed and as a ship that lay quietly while it was stayed with an anchor vpon the remouing of the same is driuen with the windes yet in no other sort then it would haue beene before if it had not beene stayed so all these contrarieties differences and pronenesse to desire things contrary to the prescript of right reason would haue beene in meere nature as the conditions of it would haue shewed themselues if grace had not hindered them and that there is no other difference betweene a man in the state of pure or meere nature and in the state of originall sinne then there is betweene a man that neuer had any cloathing and him that had but by his owne fault and folly is stript out of all betweene whom there is no difference in the nature of nakednesse but all the difference standeth in this that the one is in fault for not hauing cloathes the other not so For they suppose man would haue beene carried as strongly to the desire of sinfull things in the state of pure nature as now that freewill is not made more weake then in that state it would haue beene nor the flesh become more rebellious then it would haue beene without grace before the entrance of sinne This opinion ◠Bellarmin followeth and professeth that though some of excellent learning thinke that both Thomas and the best and most approued of the schoolmen were of a contrary iudgment yet they are deceiued in so thinking and that this is the opinion of them all Against these erroneous conceipts that are indeede the ground of all the points of difference betweene them and vs touching originall sinne freewill the power of nature the workes
of infidels and the like we oppose this proposition That no state of pure or meere nature can be conceiued but that either a man must be lifted aboue himselfe by grace or fall below himselfe by sin And this proposition is proued by vnanswerable reasons For if the principall powers of the soule cannot performe their owne proper actions by any naturall facultie nor without the addition of grace and a kinde of divine force and helpe then can there be no conceipt of a state of pure or meere nature seeing the nature of a thing implieth the powers pertaining to it and a possibility to bring forth the actions of such powers But it is evident that the principall powers of mans soule cannot by any naturall facultie performe their proper actions because the first trueth and chiefest good are the obiects of the reason and the will and these are infinite and the naturall capacitie of reason and the will is finite so that whatsoeuer we vnderstand and conceiue concerning God is so much lesse and commeth so much short of his infinite perfection as the capacitie of our vnderstanding is lesse then the infinite being of God But how then will some man say can man attaine his good beeing so high excellent farre remoued from him and so infinitely beyond without the cōpasse of his naturall facultie The answer hereunto is that though nothing can be lifted vp to be any thing aboue the nature of it yet by forrain helpe a thing may bee carried or lifted aboue it selfe or aboue the nature of it that is aboue that to which the naturall facultie of it extendeth it selfe as a stone may by the hand of man be cast vp on high whether it hath no facultie to moue it selfe so the soule may be raysed and lifted by grace in the acts of her powers aboue that to which by any naturall facultie they can extend themselues For though by nature men cannot know God as he is in himselfe but onely so farre forth as by his effects and glorious workes he may be knowne yet God may present himselfe vnto them in the light of grace as he is in himselfe and make his infinite greatnesse to appeare vnto them and so he must or else man can neuer attaine that which is is his proper good Actus rationalis creaturae sayth Alensis p 3 q 61 memb 1. oportet quod ordinetur ad bonum quod est supra naturam quod est summum bonum infinitum quia ergo non est possibilis extensio rationalis creaturae supra seipsam ideo non est eipossibile per naturā vt ordinet suum actū siue perueniat in suum finem ideo necesse est quod iuuetur à gratiâ The act of a reasonable creature must be directed to a good aboue nature which is the chiefe good and infinite because therefore a reasonable creature cannot raise it selfe aboue it selfe therefore it is not possible that by the power of nature it should order its act or attaine its end and therefore it must be holpen by grace So then there is no immediate knowledge of God as hee is in him selfe no knowledge that in time for his owne sake he made all things of nothing no knowledg how and in what sort wee depend on him how his prouidence reacheth to vs how hee guideth us in all our wayes and consequently how wee should loue him feare him and trust in him and depend vpon him And if within the compasse of nature there bee no such knowledge of God then is there no right loue of God For no man can rightly loue God vnlesse hee rightly know him And if we doe not rightly loue God wee can do nothing well nay wee cannot but continually doe evill For euery thing that a man willeth and affecteth is either God or some other thing besides God If a man loue God not for himselfe but for some other thing this act is sinfull and culpable and not morally good If a man loue any other thing besides God and loue it not finally for God the act of his loue resteth finally in some other thing that is not God and hee loueth it for it selfe without any further reference and soe inioyeth some other thing besides God as if it were the vttermost and most principall good which act is culpable Now if a man remaining within the compasse of nature withour addition of grace cannot but doe euill then can there bee noe state of nature that is not sinnefull without grace and consequently there can bee no state of pure or meere nature seeing euerie thing that is culpable and faulty in any kind is contrary to the nature of the thing wherein it is found and a corruption of nature But that all the principall actions of men without grace are culpable and faulty it is euident because they loue God for some other thing and not for himselfe neuer coming to any knowledge of him as hee is in himselfe and they loue other things for themselues and finally without any reference to God So that grace is necessarily required in man for the performance of his actions so as not to sinne And it is true that Gregorius Ariminensis hath that Adam in the state of his creation was not sufficiently inabled to performe any act morally good or soe to doe any good thing as not to sinne in doing it by any thing in nature if hee had not had speciall grace added Whence it will follow that there is no power to doe good or not to sinne in the nature of a man but from grace that when grace is lost there is an impossibility of doing good and a necessity of doing euill The Papists and wee agree that originall sinne is the privation of original righteousnesse but they suppose there was in nature without that addition of grace a power to doe good and that it was not giuen simply to make man able to do good but constantly and so as to merit heauen so that it being taken away a man may decline each particular sinne and doe the seuerall workes of vertue though neither so as neuer to sinne nor soe as to merit heauen thereby But wee say there neither was nor could be any power in nature as of it selfe to doe any act morally good or not sinnefull that grace was giuen to inable men to performe the actions of their principall powers about their principall obiects and to do good and that it being taken away there is found in them an impotencie to doe any act of vertue and a necessity of sinning in all their morall actions till they be restored again to the state of grace that the difficulty to do good pronenesse to euill contrariety betweene the powers and faculties of the soule and the rebellion of the meaner against the superiour and better are not the conditions of nature as it was or might haue beene in it selfe before the entrance of sinne but that all
entrance of sin precisely by the strength of his naturall faculties to do an act morally good then hee might haue made him selfe good of not good supposing that sometimes in the state of meere nature he had no act of will or at the least he might haue made himselfe of good better without the speciall helpe of God but this consequent must not be admitted for if Adam might thus haue done the good Angels might haue done soe but that is contrary to St Augustine his words are these Si boni Angeli fuerunt prius sine bonâ voluntate eamque in seipsis deo non operante fecerunt ergo meliores à seipsis quam ab illo facti sunt Absit At si non potuerunt seipsos facere meliores quaÌ„ eos ille fecerat quo nemo melius quic quam facit profecto bonam voluntatem quà meliores essent nisi operante adiutorio creatoris habere non possent that is If the good Angells were first without any good motion of will or the goodnesse of the will and afterwards God not working wrought it in themselues then they made themselues better then they were made of him which God forbid wee should euer thinke But if they could not make themselues better then he made them then whom no man can do any thing better truly vnles the helpe of their Creator wrought them to it they could not haue that goodnesse of wil whereby they might become better then they were before That which hee thus proueth touching the state of man before the fall is vndoubtedly true in the state of the fall and therefore all the most pious and iudicious men in euery age haue taught as wee now do that since the fall of Adam there is no power left in any of his posterity before they be renewed by grace to decline sinne or to doe any worke morally good and that may be truly named a worke of vertue And these cannot but farther agree with Ariminensis and vs touching the impotencie of nature before the entrance of sin to do any good act or act of vertue of it selfe without the addition of grace For if grace had not bin giuen in the state of the creation simply to inable to do good but that there had bin a power of doing good in nature without and before the addition of grace then vpon the losse of it there had followed no such impotencie in the present state as these men affirme there did and they that hold the other opinion denie All these affirme that all the posterity of Adam are plunged into such an estate of ignorance by this fall that without speciall illumination of grace they know not sufficiently concerning any thing that is to bee done or committed that it is to be done or committed and wherefore in what sort into such an estate of infirmity impotencie in respect of the will that they cannot will any thing that is to be willed for such cause and in such sort as it is to be willed and withsuch circumstances as are required to make an act to be morally good and truly vertuous St Austine sayth that Adam and Eue so soone as they had sinned were cast headlong into error misery and death that it was most iust they should soe be for what sayth hee is more iust then vt amittat quisque quo bene vti noluit cum sine vlla posset difficultate si vellet id est vt qui sciens rectè non facit aâ—…ittat scire quid rectuÌ„ sit qui rectè facere cum posset noluit amittat posse cuÌ„ velit that euery one should loose that which when with ease he might hee would not vse well that is that he that hauing knowledge doth not right should loose the knowledge of that which is right that he that would not do well when he might should loose the power of doing well when hee would And elsewhere speaking of the first sinne of the Angells and men hee sayth that when they fell Subintrauit ignorantia rerum agendarum concupiscentia noxiarum that is there entred in ignorance of things to bee done and desire of things hurtfull that are to be declined Prosper in his booke in defence of the preachers of grace against Cassian reprehendeth him because he had said in his collation de protectione Dei that Adam gained the knowledge of euill after his fall but lost not the knowledge of good which he had receiued telleth him that both these propositions are vntrue so that hee thinketh that Adam lost the knowledge of good Hugo de sancto Victore saith the first man was indued with a threefold knowledge cognitione scilicet creatoris sui ut cognosceret à quo factus erat cognitione sui ut cognosceret quid factus erat quid sibi faciendum erat deindè cognitione quoque illius quod secum factum erat quid sibi de illo in illo faciendum erat That is he was indued with knowledge of his Creator that he might know of whom he was made with knowledge of himself that he might know what he was made and what he was to doe lastly with knowledge of that which was made together with him what he was to doe with in it For no man is to doubt but that man had perfect knowledge of all those visible things that were made for him with him as much as pertained either to the instruction of his soule or the necessity of bodily vse This knowledge man hath not lost by the fall neither that whereby hee was to prouide things necessarie for the flesh and therefore God was not carefull afterwards to instruct him touching these things by the Scriptures but he was to bee taught that knowledge that concerneth the soule onely when hee was to be restored because he had lost that only by sinning And in the same place hee excellently describeth the knowledge of God that Adam had to haue bin not by hearing only from without as now but by inspiration within not that whereby now beleeuers by faith seeke after God as absent but that whereby by presence of contemplation he was more manifestly seene of him as knowing him And concludeth it is hard to expresse the manner of the diuine knowledge the first man had but that onely this is certaine that being taught visibly by inward inspiration he could no way doubt of his Creator In like sort the same Hugo sheweth most excellently that man hath lost all rectitude of will for whereas there was giuen to man a double desire iusti commodi of that which is just and that which is pleasing the one voluntary the other necessary that by the one he might merite or demerite by the other he might be punished or rewarded for if he had no desire of that is pleasing hee could neither be rewarded by hauing nor punished by being depriued He hath lost the one
quae in suo genere sunt bona sed ex affectu sunt mala But he sayth there are others of another opinion making the actions of men to be of three sorts denying all the actions of infidels to be sinne Opera cunsta quae ad naturae subsidium siunt semper bona esse astruunt Sed quod Augustinus mala esse dicit si malas habeant causas non ita accipiendum est quasi ipsa mala sint sed quia peccant mali sunt qui ea malo fine agunt Thomas Bradwardin in his summe against the Pelagians of his time cleerely resolueth that the will of man since the fall hath noe power to bring forth any good action that may bee morally good ex fine circumstantiâ—…s And Aluarez though hee thinke that all the actions of infidels are not sinne yet sayth that none of them is truly an act of vertue noe not in respect to the last naturall end CASSANDER sayth that the article of the Augustane confession touching originall sinne agreeth with the doctrine of the Church when as it teacheth that the will of man hath some kinde of liberty to bring forth a kinde of ciuill iustice and to make choyce in things subiect to reason but that without the spirit of God it hath no power to doe any thing that may bee just before God or anything spiritually iust And all orthodoxe divines agree against the Pelagians that it is the worke of grace that wee are made iust of vnjust truely and before God that this grace createth not a new will nor constraineth it against the liking of it but correcteth the depravation of it and turneth it from willing ill to will well drawing it with a kinde of inward motion that it may become willing of vnwilling and willingly consent to the divine calling The Pelagians the enemies of Gods grace being vrged with those texts of Scripture wherein mention is made of grace sought to avoyde the evidence of them affirming that by grace the powers faculties and perfections of nature freely given by God the Creator at the beginning are vnderstood when this would not serue the turne they vnderstood by grace the remission of sins past and imagined that if that were remitted wherein wee haue formerly offended out of that good that is in nature wee might hereafter so bethinke our selues as to doe good decline euill Thirdly When this shift failed likewise they began to say that men happily will not bethinke themselues of that duety they are bound to doe or will not presently and certainely discerne what they are to doe without some instruction or illumination but that if they haue the helpe of instruction and illumination they may easily out of the strength of nature decline evill and doe that they discerne to be good Against this it is excellent that Saint Bernard hath Non est eiusdem facilitatis scire quid faciendum sit facere Quoniam diversa sunt caeco ducatum ac fesso praebere vehiculum Non quicunque ostendit viam praebet etiam viaticum itineranti aliud illi exhibet qui facit ne deviet aliud qui praestat ne deficiat in viâ Itanec quivis doctor statim dator erit boni quodcunque docuerit Porro duo mihi sunt necessaria doceri ac iuvari tu quidem homo rectè consulis ignorantiae sed si verum sentit Apostolus spiritus adiuvat infirmitatem nostram Immo vero qui mihi per os tuum ministrat consilium ipse mihi necesse est ministret per spiritum suum adiutorium quo valeam implere quod consulis When they were driven from this device also they betooke themselues vnto another to vvit that the helpe of grace is necessary to make vs more easily more constantly and vniuersally to doe good then in the present state of nature vve can and to make vs so to doe good as to attaine eternall happines in heauen And this is and vvas the opinion of many in the Roman Church both aunciently and in our time For many taught that men in the present state of nature as now it is since Adams fall may decline each particular sinne doe vvorkes truely vertuous good fulfill the severall precepts of Gods law according to the substance of the vvorke commaunded though not according to the intention of the lavv-giver that they may loue God aboue all as the authour and end of nature So that to these purposes there vvas no necessity of the gift of grace but that grace is added to make vs more easily constantly vniversally to doe good and to merit heaven And therefore Stapleton confesseth that many vvrote vnaduisedly aswell amongst the Schoolemen heretofore as in our time in the beginnings of the differences in religion but that novv men are become vviser I vvould to God it vvere so but it vvill bee found that hovvsoeuer they are in a sort ashamed of that they doe yet they persist to doe as others did before them for they teach still that men may decline each particular sinne doe the true vvorkes of morall vertue doe things the lavv requireth according to the substance of the things commaunded though not so as to merit heauen or neuer to breake any of them Bellarmine indeede denyeth that vvee can loue God aboue all in any sorte vvithout the helpe of grace But Cardinall Caietan saith that though vvee cannot so loue God aboue all as to doe nothing but that vvhich may be referred to God as the last end yet so as to doe many good things in reference to him as the last end And Bellarmine if he deny not his owne principles must say so for first he defendeth that man may doe a worke morally good without grace and doe it to obey God the author of nature And elsewhere he proueth that man cannot perpetually doe well in the state of nature without grace because it is so turned away from God to the creature by Adams sinne specially to himselfe that actually or habitually or in propension hee placeth his last end in the creature not in God so cannot but offend if he bee not watchfull against this propension Whence it followeth that seeing a man must place his chief good in God if he doe good that naturally he can doe good he can naturally place the same in God That which he some-where hath that it is enough to intend the next end explicitè that it will of it selfe be directed to GOD the last end seeing euery good end moueth virtute finis ultimi is idle for it moueth not but virtute finis ultimi amati nam finis non movet nisi amatus ergo amat finem ultimum So that many formerly almost all presently in the Church of Rome are more then Semipelagians not acknowledging the necessitie of grace to make vs decline euill doe good but to doe so constantly
vniversally so as to merite heauen But Augustine Prosper Fulgentius Gregory Beda Bernard Anselme Hugo many worthy Divines mentioned by the Master of Sentences yeaâ—…he Master himselfe Grosthead Bradwardine Ariminensis the Catholique Divine that Stapleton speaketh of those that Andradius noteth Alvarez and other agree with vs that there is no power left in nature to avoide sin to doe any one good action that may be truely an action of vertue therefore they say grace must change vs and make vs become new men Cardinall Contarenus noteth that the Philosophers perceiuing a great inclination to euill to be found in the nature of mankind thinking it might bee altered put right by inuring them to good actions gaue many good precepts directions but to no purpose for this euill being in the very first spring of humane actions that is the last end chiefly desired which they sought not in God but in the creature no helpe of Nature or Art was able to remedie it as those diseases of the body are incurable which haue infected the fountaine of life the radicall humiditie GOD onely therefore who searcheth the secret most retired turnings of our soule spirit by the inward motion of his holy spirit changeth the propension inclination of our will and turneth it vnto himselfe And in another place he hath these wordes Wee must obserue that at this present the Church of God by the craft of the diuell is divided into two sects which rather doing their owne busines then that of Christ seeking their owne glory more then the honour of GOD the profite of their neighbours by stiffe pertinacious defence of contrary opinions bring them that are not wary and wise to a fearefull downefall For some vaunting themselues to be professours of the Catholique Religion enemies to the Lutherans while they goe about too much to maintaine the libertie of mans will out of too much desire of opposing the Lutherans oppose themselues against the greatest lights of the Christian Church and the first principall teachers of Catholique verity declining more then they should vnto the heresie of Pelagius Others when they haue beene a little conversant in the writings of S. Augustine though they haue neither that modestie of minde nor loue towards God that he had out of the pulpit propose intricate things such as are indeed meere paradoxes to the people So that touching the weakenes of nature the necessitie of grace we haue the consent of all the best and worthiest in the Church wherein our Fathers liued and died The nextthing to be considered is the power of freewill in disposing it selfe to the receipt of grace Durandus is of opinion that a man by the power of free will may dispose and fitte him selfe for the receipt of grace by such a kind of disposition to which grace is to be giuen by pact and diuine ordinance not of debt Amongst the latter diuines there are that thinke that as one sinne is permitted that it may be a punishment of another soe God in respect of almes and other morall good workes done by a man in the state of sinne vseth the more speedily and effectually to helpe the sinner that hee may rise from sinne and that God infallibly and as according to a certaine lawe giueth the helpes of preuenting grace to them that doe what they can out of the strength of nature this is the merit of congruence they are wont to speake of in the Roman Schooles But as I noted before Gregorius Ariminensis resolutely rejects the conceipt of merit of congruence Stapleton saith it is exploded out of the Church And Aluarez that S. Augustine Prosper whom Aquinas the Thomists follow reiect the same August l. 2. contra duas epistolas Pelagii c. 8. Si sine Dei gratià per nos incipit cupiditas boni ipsum caeptum erit meritum cui tanquam ex debito gratiae veniat adiutorium ac sic gratia Dei non gratis donabitur sed meritum nostrum dabitur c. 6. lib. 4. lib. de praedest sanctorum de dono perseuerantiae Et Prosper lib de gratiâ libero arbitrio ad Ruffinum ait Quis ambigat tunc liberum arbitrium cohortationi vocantis obedire cum in illo gratia Dei affectum credendi obediendique generauerit Alioquin sufficeret moneri hominem non etiam in ipso nouam fieri voluntatem sicut scriptum est Praeparatur voluntas à domino Neque obstat sayth Aluarez quod idem Salomon Prouerb cap. 16. inquit hominis est praeparare animam Intelligit enim hominis esse quia libere producit consensum quo praeparatur ad gratiam sed tamen id efficit supposito auxilio speciali Dei inspirantis bonum interius mouentis sic explicat istum locum August lib. 2. contra duas epistolas Pelag. cap. 8. And so those words are to be vnderstood If any one open the doore I will enter in Reuela 3 and Isaâ—… 30. The Lord expecteth that he may haue mercy on you for he expecteth not our consent as comming out of the power of nature or as if any such consent were a disposition to grace but that consent hee causeth in vs. Fulgentius lib de incarnatione cap. 19. Sicut in nativitate carnali omnem nascentis hominis voluntatem praecedit operis diuini formatio sic in spirituali natiuitate quâ veterem hominem deponere incipimus Bernard de gratiâ libero arbitrio in initio Ab ipsâ gratiâ me in bono praeuentum agnosco provehi sentio spero perficiendum Neque currentis neque volentis sed dei miserantis est Quid igitur agit ais liberum arbitrium breuiter respondeo saluatur tolle liberum arbitrium non erit quod saluetur tolle gratiam non erit vnde saluetur opus hoc sine duobus effici non potest uno á quo fit altero cui vel in quo fit Deus author est salutis liberum arbitrium tantum capax nec dare illam nisi Deus nec capere valet nisi liberum arbitrium quod ergo a solo Deo soli datur libero arbitrio tam absque consensu esse non potest accipientis quam absque gratiâ dantis ita gratiae operanti salutem cooperari dicitur liberum arbitrium dum consentit hoc est dum saluatur consentire enim saluari est Yet must we not thinke that God moueth vs and then expecteth to see whether wee will consent Concilium Arausicanum Can. 4. Si quis vt a peccato purgemur voluntatem nostram Deum expectare contendit non autem vt etiam purgari velimus per sancti spiritus infusionem operationem in nos fieri confitetur resist it ipsi spiritui sancto per Salomonem dicenti praeparatur voluntas a domino Apostolo salubriter praedicanti Deus est qui operatvr in nobis
disposing the affaires of Princes their States there were euer many worthy men that opposed themselues against his vnjust and Antichristian claimes There are some sayth Waldensis that erre supposing that the roote of all terrene power dependeth in such sort of the Pope that it is deriued vnto Princes by commission from him and that if they abuse the same hee may take the disposing of such affaires as belong vnto them into his own hands This they indeauour to proue because the Ecclesiasticall power is more eminent and excellent than the power of Princes but this their proofe is too weake for let vt runne through all examples of things which are different in degree of excellencie and one of them more worthy than another wee shall see that the Sunne is better than the Moone yet the power and vertue of moystening that is in the Moone is not imparted to it from the Sunne the soule is more excellent than the body yet the body was before the soule came into it and in it many workes of sense are performed which the spirit by it selfe cannot performe gold is better then leade yet doth it not giue being vnto it so that though it were granted that Episcopall dignity is more high and eminent then the authority of Princes yet the first spring of Regall power is in the King from God and not from the Pope There is sayth Waldensis one doctor Adam a Cardinall who in a dialogue betweene a Bishoppe and a King indeauoureth altogether to deriue the authority of Kings from the Papall power both in the being and excercise of it and reserueth onely a power of execution to Princes at the commaund of the high bishop this errour hee condemneth and sayth that howsoeuer the solemnities of the oath vnction crowning and the like are performed to Kings by Bishoppes yet hath not kingly dignity her beginning from Priesthood but by the ministery of Priests Kings receiue it from God and are put in possession of it Fawning and deceitfull flattery sayth Gerson whispereth in the eares of Ecclesiasticall persons especially of the Pope in shamelesse manner saying vnto them O sacred Clergie how great how great is the height and sublimity of thy Ecclesiasticall power how is all secular authority compared thereunto altogether nothing For as all power in heauen and earth was giuen to Christ soe Christ left it all to Peter and his Successours soe that Constantine the Emperour gaue nothing to Pope Syluester that was not his before but onely restored that which had bin vnjustly detayned besides as there is no power but of God so is there none whether Temporall or Ecclesiasticall Imperiall or Regall but from the Pope in whose thigh CHRIST hath written King of Kings and Lord of Lords of whose power to dispute is sacrilegious boldnesse to whom no man may say Sir why doe you so though he alter over-turne waste and confound all States Rules Dominions and Possessions of men whether Ciuill or Ecclesiasticall let me be judged a Lyar saith he if these things bee not found written by them that seeme wise in their owne eyes and if some Popes haue not giuen credit to such lying and flattering wordes Nay I am greatly deceiued if before the holding of the sacred Synode of Constance this tradition did not so farre forth possesse the mindes of very many men rather literall then literate that whosoeuer should haue taught the contrary should haue beene noted and condemned for heresie THE FOVRTH BOOK OF THE PRIVILEDGES OF THE CHVRCH CHAP. 1. Of the divers kindes of the priviledges of the Church and of the different acceptions of the name of the Church NOw it remayneth that wee proceede to the other parts of our first generall diuision to wit the priviledges that pertaine to the Church the diverse and different degrees orders and callings of them to whom the gouernement of it is committed The priviledges that pertaine to the Church are of two sorts The first proper to the best and most essentiall parts of it to wit the elect and chosen of God as are the promises and assurances of euerlasting loue and happinesse the second such as are communicable vnto others not partaking in that highest degree of vnitie the partes of the Church haue amongst themselues or with Christ their head These are specially foure the first the possession of the rich treasure of heauenly trueth whence it is called by Irenaeus Depositoriū diues by the Apostle the pillar and ground of truth The second is the office of teaching and witnessing the same truth The third the authority to iudge of such differences as arise amongst men concerning any part of it The fourth is power to make lawes for the better guiding gouerning of them that professe this truth Touching the first that wee may the better vnderstand in what degree and sort and vpon what assurances the Church is possessed of the knowledge and profession of the truth reuealed in Christ wee must obserue the diverse acceptions of the name of Church for accordingly more or lesse in this kinde is attributed to it and verified of it The Romanistes make the Church to bee of three sorts For there is as they say Ecclesia virtualis repraesentativa essentialis By the name of virtuall Church they vnderstand the Bishoppe of Rome who being by Christes appointment as they suppose chiefe Pastor of the whole Church hath in himselfe eminently and virtually as great certainty of truth infallibility of iudgement as is in the whole Church vpon whom dependeth all that certainety of truth that is found in it By the name of representatiue Church they vnderstand the assembly of Bishops in a generall Councell representing the whole body of the Church from the seuerall parts whereof they come By the name of the essentiall Church they vnderstand the whole multitude of the beleeuers This essentiall Church either comprehendeth all the faithfull that are and haue beene since CHRIST appeared in the flesh or all that are and haue beene since the Apostles time or onely those that now presently liue in the world CHAP. 2. Of the different degrees of infallibility found in the Church IF we speake of the Church as it comprehendeth the whole number of beleeuers that are and haue beene since CHRIST appeared in the flesh it is absolutely free from all errour and ignorance of Diuine things that are to be knowne by revelation Quid enim latuit Petrum c. For as Tertullian sayth rightly and aptly to this purpose What was hidden and concealed from Peter vpon whom Christ promised to build his Church and to whom hee gaue the keyes of the Kingdome of Heauen from Iohn the Disciple hee so dearely loued which leaned on his breast at the mysticall Supper and the rest of that blessed company that should after bee manifested to succeeding generations so that touching the Church taken in this sort there is no question but it is absolutely led
or take vpon them to prescribe inward actions of the soule or spirit or the performance of outward actions with inward affections whereas none but God that searcheth the heart canne either take knowledge of things of this kind or conuent the offenders and judge and trye them Thus then wee see what it is to binde and that none can binde men to the performance of any thing but by the feare of such punishments as they haue power to inflict CHAP. 33. Of the nature of Conscience and how the Conscience is bound IN the next place wee are to see what the nature of Conscience is and how the Conscience is bound Conscience is the priuity the soule hath to things known to none but to God her selfe Hence it is that conscience hath a fearefull apprehension of punishments for euills done though neither knowne nor possible to be knowne to any but God and the offendour alone The punishments that men can inflict wee neuer feare vnlesse our euill doings be known to them For though we haue conscience of them be priuy to them yet if they bee hidden from them vve knovv they neither vvill nor can punish vs. To binde the conscience then is to bind the soule and spirit of man with the feare of such punishments to bee inflicted by him that so bindeth as the conscience feareth that is as men feare though none but God themselues be privie to their doings Now these are onely such as God alone inflicteth therefore seeing none haue power to binde but by feare of such punishments as they haue power to inflict none can binde the conscience but God alone Neither should the question be proposed whether humane lawes binde the conscience but whether binding the outward man to the performance of outward things by force feare of outward punishments to be inflicted by men the not performance of such things or the not performance of them with such affections as were fit be not a sinne against God of which the conscience will accuse vs hee hauing commaunded vs to obey the Magistrates and Rulers hee hath set ouer vs. For answere whereunto wee say there are three sorts of things commaunded by Magistrates First euill and against God Secondly injurious in respect of them to whom they are prescribed or at least vnprofitable to the Common-wealth in which they are prescribed Thirdly such as are profitable and beneficiall to the societie of men to whom they are prescribed Touching the first sort of things God hath not commaunded vs to obey neither must we obey but rather say to them that cōmand vs such things with the Apostles whether it be fit to obey God or men judge you Yet wee must so refuse to obey that we shew no contempt of their office and authoritie which is of God though they abuse it Touching the second sort of things all that God requireth of vs is that we shew no contempt of sacred authoritie though not rightly vsed that we scandalize not others and that wee be subject to such penalties and punishments as they that commaund such things doe lay vpon vs so that God requireth our willing and ready obedience onely in things of the third sort The breach violation of this kinde of lawes is sin not for that humane lawes haue power to binde the conscience or that it is simply and absolutely sinfull to breake them but because the things they commaund are of that nature that not to performe them is contrary to justice charitie and the desire wee should haue to procure the common good of them with whom wee liue Wee are bound then sometimes to the performance of things prescribed by humane lawes in such sort that the not performance of them is sinne not ex sola legislatoris voluntate sed ex ipsa legum vtilitate as Stapleton rightly obserued But some man will say What doe the lawes then effect seeing it is the Law of Iustice and charitie that doth binde vs and not the particularitie of Lawes newly made To this wee answere that many things are good and profitable if they be generally obserued vvhich vvithout such generall obseruation vvill doe no good as for one man to pay tribute or for one man to stay his goods from transportation is no vvay beneficiall to the Common-vvealth vvhich vvould bee very profitable if all did so Novv the Lavv procureth a generall obseruation vvhence it commeth that a man is bound by the Lavv of charity and justice to that after the making of a Lavv vvhich before he vvas not bound vnto And this is it that Stapleton meaneth vvhen hee sayth that humane Lavves doe binde the conscience not ex voluntate legislatoris sed ex ipsa legum vtilitate ratione Not because they prescribe such things but because the things so prescribed if they bee generally obserued are profitable to the Common-vvealth By this vvhich hath been said it appeareth that they doe impiously vsurpe and assume to themselues that vvhich is proper to God vvho vvill haue all their Lavves taken for diuine Lavves and such as binde the conscience no lesse then the Lavves of GOD vvho publish all their Canons and constitutions in such sorte that they threaten damnation to all offenders Whereas no creature hath power to prescribe commaund or prohibite any thing vnder paine of sinne and eternall punishment vnlesse the partie so commaunded were formerly either expressely or by implication either formally or by force and vertue of some generall dutie bounde vnto it by Gods lawe before because God onely hath power of eternall life or death The soule of man as it receiueth from GOD onely the life of grace so it loseth the same when hee for the transgression of his lawes and precepts forsaketh it For as none but hee can giue this life so none but hee canne take it away hee onely hath the keyes of DAVID hee openeth and no man shutteth hee shutteth and no man openeth Hence it followeth that no law-giver may commaund any thing vnder paine of eternall punishment but God onely because he onely hath power to inflict this kinde of punishment And that no man incurreth the guilt of eternall condemnation but by violating the lawes of God Wherevpon Augustine defineth sinnes to be thoughts words and deedes against the law of God That men doe sinne in not keeping and obseruing the lawes of men it is because being generally bound by Gods lawe to doe those things which set forward the common good many things being commaunded and so generally obserued grow to bee beneficiall which without such generall observation flowing from the prescript of law were not so and so though not formally yet by vertue of generall duety men are tyed to the doing of them vnder paine of sinne and the punishments that deseruedly follow it CHAP. 34 Of their reasons who thinke that humane Law es doe binde the Conscience THe reasons which Bellarmine and other of that faction bring
vnion the other of vnction or habituall and doe teach that the grace of vnion in respect of the thing giuen which is the personall subsistence of the Sonne of God bestowed on the nature of man formed in Maries wombe whence that which was borne of her was the Sonne of God is infinite howsoeuer the relation of dependance found in the humane nature whereby it is vnited to the person of the Sonne of God is a finite created thing Likewise touching the grace of vnction they teach that it is in a sort infinite also for that howsoeuer it be but a finite and created thing yet in the nature of grace it hath no limitation no bounds no stint but includeth in it selfe whatsoeuer any way pertayneth to grace or commeth within the compasse of it The reason of this illimited donation of grace thus without all stint bestowed on the nature of man in Christ was for that it was giuen vnto it as to the vniuersall cause whence it was to be deriued vnto others Frō the fulnesse of grace in Christ let vs proceed to speake of the perfection of his vertues also Vertue differeth from grace as the beame of light frō light for as light indifferently scattereth it self into the whole aire all those things vpon which it may come but the beame is the same light as it is directed specially to some one place or thing so grace replenisheth filleth perfecteth the whole soule spirit of man but vertue more specially this or that faculty or power of the soule to this or that purpose or effect In respect of both these the soule of Christ was perfect being full of vertue as wel as grace wherevpon the Prophet Esay saith The Spirit of the Lord shall rest vpon the flowre of Ishai the Spirit of wisedome and vnderstanding the Spirit of counsell strength the Spirit of knowledge of the feare of the Lord. Wisedome is in respect of things diuine vnderstanding of the first principles science of conclusions counsell of things to be done feare maketh men decline from that which is ill and strength confirmeth them to ouercome the difficulties wherewith weldoing is beset So that seeing the spirit that is the giuer of all these vertues within the compasse whereof all vertue is confined is promised to rest on our Sauiour Christ we may vndoubtedly resolue that there is no vertue pertayning to man neither including in it imperfection as Faith Hope nor presupposing imperfection in him that hath it as Repentance which presupposeth the penitent to bee a sinner but it was found in Christs humane nature reasonable soule that euen from the very moment of his incarnation How is it then will some man say that the Scripture pronounceth that he increased in the perfections of the mind to wit both in grace wisedome as hee grew in stature of body And here that question is vsually proposed handled whether Christ did truly and indeede profit and growe in knowledge as not knowing all things at the first as he grew in stature of body from weake beginnings or only in the farther manifestation of that knowledge hee had in like degree of perfection from the beginning For the clearing whereof wee must note that there were in Christ two kinds of knowledge the one diuine and increate the other humane and created Touching the first there is no doubt but that being the eternall Wisdome of the Father by whom all things were made hee knew eternally all things that afterwards should come to passe and therefore the Arrians impiously abused those places of Scripture which they brought to proue that Christ grew in knowledge and learned something in processe of time which he knew not before in that they vnderstood them of his diuine knowledge which he had in that he was God and thereby went about to proue that he was not truly and properly God nor consubstantiall with the Father but soe only and in such a sense as that wherein the Apostle sayth There are many Lords and many Gods The later kind of knowlege found in Christ which is humane the Schoolemen diuide into two kinds the one in verbo the other in genere proprio that is the one in the eternall Word wherein he seeth all things the other that whereby he seeth things in themselues for he hath an immediate and cleare vision of the Godhead and in it of all things and hee hath also the knowledge and sight of things in themselues By vertve of the first of these two kinds of humane knowledge the soule of Christ beholding the diuine Essence in it seeth all things in respect of that they are and taketh a perfect view of the Essence and nature of euery thing that is may be or is possible to be as in that sampler according to which God worketh all things but the actuall being of things it cannot know by the vision and sight of Gods Essence but meerely by his voluntary reuelation and manifestation of the same seeing though the Essence of God be naturally a sampler of all things that are or may be according to which all things are wrought yet he produceth things voluntarily and according to the good pleasure of his will not naturally necessarily so that that kind of knowledge which consisteth in the vision of God is more perfect then any other onely maketh men happie because it is in respect of the best and most noble object Yet the other kind of knowledge that maketh vs take a view of things in themselues is more perfect in that it maketh knowne vnto vs the actuall being of things and particular facts which that happie kind of knowledg of things seen in the glasse of the diuine Essence doth not These things thus distinguished it is easie to conceiue how and in what sort Christ grew and increased in grace and wisdome and how hee was full of the same from the moment of his incarnation soe that nothing could bee afterwards added vnto him For concerning his diuine knowledge the perfection of it was such and so infinite from all eternitie that it is impious once to thinke that hee grew and increased in the same Touching the humane knowledge he had of things seene in the eternall word and in the cleare glasse of the diuine Essence it is most probably thought by some of excellent learning that though the soule of Crist had at the first and brought with it into the world a potentiall hability and aptnesse to see all things in God soe soone as it should conuert it selfe to a distinct view of them that yet it did not actually see all things in the Essence of God at once from the beginning but afterwards in processe of time and for the other kind of knowledge and apprehension of things which he had as beholding them in themselues they thinke it was perfect in habit from the first moment of his incarnation but
preached to the spirits in prison sometimes disobedient in the dayes of Noe. But as Saint Augustine fitly noteth this preaching of Christ in spirit mentioned by the Apostle was not after his death in his humane Soule but in the dayes of Noe in his eternall Spirit Deity And as Andradius rightly obserueth they that he preached vnto are named spirits in prison because they were spirits in prison when Peter wrote of them not when Christ preached to them though if they should be vnderstood to be named Spirits in prison as being such when Christ preached vnto them yet we might rightly conceiue as Saint Augustine doth that he preached to the Soules and Spirits of Men shut vp in the prison house of their sinfull bodies and the darke dungeons of ignorance and sin and not in the prison of hell Thus then our Diuines deny the descending of Christ into Purgatory Limbus puerorum and Limbus patrum perswading themselues that there are no such places But his descending into the Hell of the damned they all acknowledge though not to deliuer men thence yet to fasten condemnation to them that are there to bind Sathan the Prince of darkenesse that hee may not prevaile against them that beleeue in Christ and to keepe them from sinking downe into that deuouring piâ—… into which he went and out of which hee soe triumphantly returned Onely this difference may seeme to be amongst them that some of them thinke he went personally and locally others onely vertually in power and operation Which diuersity of opinions is likewise amongst the Papists Bellarmine and some other in our time teaching that hee went locally into the lowest Hell and the Schoole-men that he went not locally into the lowest Hell but vertually onely in the manifestation of his vertue and power and into Limbus Patrum locally and personally soe that all the controuersie betweene them and vs standeth in two points The descending of Christ into Limbus Patrum and the suffering of Hellish paines For whereas Cardinall Bellarmine laboureth to proue a locall Hell he busieth himselfe in vaine no man denying it But sayth he Beza and others do say the words vsed in the Hebrew and Greeke Sheol and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 doe alwaies signifie the Graue in holy Scripture and not Hell whence it may seeme to follow that there is no other Hell then the Graue and soe consequently noe locall Hell for damned soules Surely this is a most vnjust and vntrue imputation For Beza and the other learned Diuines he speaketh of do not affirme that Sheol and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 doe precisely and alwayes in holy Scripture signifie the graue but as Arias Montanus Andradius and sundry other excellently learned amongst our aduersaries do that Sheol which the Septuagint translate 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 doth not precisely and immediatly signifie the place of damned soules but in an indifferencie and generality of signification noteth out vnto vs the receptacles of the dead And that seeing there are two parts that are sundered one from another in them that are dead there are likewise two kinds of receptacles of death or dwelling places for them on whom death hath her full force the one prouided for their bodies putrifying and rotting and the other for their soules tormented euerlastingly Soe that when these words thus indifferently signifying either of these receptacles of death do note out vnto vs the one or the other of these two places either the graue for the body or hell for the soule cannot be gathered out of the words themselues but the circumstances of those places of Scripture where they are vsed In like sort they say that the word Nephesh translated 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and anima doth not alwaies signifie the spirituall substance of man that is immortall but the whole person the life yea and some times that which hath beene aliue though now dead euen a dead carcasse according as wee reade in Leuiticus where God pronounceth that whosoever toucheth Nephesh that is a deade corpes shall be vncleane And in this sense it is that Arias Montanus translateth not that place in the Psalme Non derelinques animam meam in inferno that is Thou shalt not leaue my soule in Hell but Non derelinques animam meam in sepulchro that is Thou shalt not leaue my Soule Life or Person or that Body that sometimes was aliue in the Graue For it it cannot be vnderstood that the reasonable soule or immortall Spirit of Christ was euer in the graue either to be deliuered thence or left there If it be sayd that the Greeke and Latine words vsed by the Translators signifie more precisely hell and the reasonable Soule or Spirit then those Hebrew words Sheol and Nephesh doe we answere that whatsoeuer their vse and signification be in prophane Authors yet they must be enlarged in the Scriptures to signifie all that which the Hebrew words doe that so the translation may be true and full Bellarmine to confute this explication and construction of the Hebrew words made by Beza and the rest vrgeth that the Septuagint neuer translateth Sheol by 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which properly signifies the graue but by 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and that therefore Sheol doth not properly signifie the Graue Hereunto we answere that the word of it selfe being indifferent to signifie any receptacles of the dead whether of their bodies or soules must not be translated by a word precisely noting the graue as 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 doth and that therefore it is not to be marvailed at that the Septuagint neuer translate the Hebrew word by this Greeke word of a narrower compasse straiter significatioÌ„ Secondly we say that seeing Sheol when by the circumstances of the places where it is vsed it is restrained to signifie onely the place of dead bodies yet doth not precisely note that fitting receptacle provided for them to be laide in as in their beds of rest by the liuing as 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 doth but any other receptacle whatâ—…er euen of such as want that honourable kind of buriall whether they be devoured by wilde beasts swallowed vp of the Sea or receiued into any other place of stay and abode till the time of the generall resurrection the Translators vsed not the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of too narrow compasse straight signification but the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 enlarged by them to expresse all that the Hebrew word importeth in this sense Iacob said he would go down mourning into Sheol or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to his son not into a place of soules sequestred from God or into hell sor he neuer thought his sonne to bee gone thither nor into the graue properly so named for he thought his son had bin devoured of a wilde beast but into the receptacles of the dead and into the chambers of death wherein there are many very different
to him THAT there was no more power and authoritie in Peter then in any of the rest I hope it appeareth by that which hath beene said and therefore it remaineth that now wee examine what was the reason why so many thinges were specially spoken to him why so many wayes hee may seeme to haue beene preferred before the rest and what in trueth and in deede his preeminence and primacie was Touching the speeches of Christ for the most part specially directed to Peter it is most certaine by that which hath beene said that they did giue no singular and speciall power to Peter that was not giuen to euery of the rest And therefore the Diuines doe obserue the difference of the speeches of Christ and note that Christ sometimes directed his speech to particular men precisely in their owne persons as in the remission of sinnes healing the sicke and raising the dead sometimes in the person of all or many others as when he saith Goe and sinne no more which hee is intended to haue done so often as there is the same reason of speaking a thing to one and to others as when a man is induced to doe or not to doe a thing to beleeue or not to beleeue a thing which other in like sort are bound to doe or not to doe to beleeue or not to beleeue as well as hee So it being as necessary for one to watch as another Christ saith That I say vnto you I say vnto all Watch. And so here seeing it is confessed and proued by our Aduersaries themselues that there was nothing promised or performed to Peter that was not in like sort intended vnto and bestowed on euery of the rest it must be graunted that what he spake to him he meant to all and would haue his words so vnderstood and taken The reason why more specially notwithstanding this his generall intendment he directed his speech to Peter then to any of the rest was either because he was more auncient and more ardent in charitie then the rest thereby to signifie what manner of men they should be that should be chosen Pastours of the Church namely men of ripe age and confirmed judgement and full of charitie or lest hee might seeme to bee despised for his deniall of Christ which the Glosse seemeth to import when it saith Trinae negationi redditur trina confessio ne minus amori lingua seruiat quám timori that is Therefore he was induced by Christ thrice solemnly to protest and professe his loue vnto him as he had thrice denied him that his tongue might shew it selfe no lesse seruiceable vnto loue that rested in him then it had done vnto feare or else because he first confessed Christ to bee the Sonne of the liuing God consubstantiall with his Father because he was much conuersant with Christ and acquainted with his secrets counsels or lastly because Christ meant there should bee a certaine order amongst the guides of his Church and some to whom the rest in all places should resort in all matters of importance as to such as are more honourable then other of the same ranke degree who are first to be consulted from whom all actions must take their beginning therefore he so specially spake to Peter whom hee meant in this sort to set before the rest Thus then there is a primacie of power when one hath power to doe that act of ministerie another hath not or not without his consent and when one may by himselfe limite restraine or hinder another in the performance of the acts of ministery and such primacie wee haue shewed not to haue beene in Peter But there is another of order honour which he had whereby he had the first place the first and best employment the calling together of the rest in cases where a concurrence of many was required as for the better sorting out of the worke they had in hand the ioynt decreeing of things to be euery where alike beleeued and practised and in these assemblies thus called the sitting speaking first the moderation and direction of each mans speaking and the publishing and pronouncing of the conclusion agreed vpon if so he pleased In this sense Cyprian saith Erant vtique caeteri Apostoli quod fuit Petrus pari consortio praediti honoris potestatis fed exordium ab vnitate proficiscitur that is The other Apostles doubtlesse were that which Peter was hauing the same fellowship both of power and honour but the beginning proceedeth from vnity that the Church may be shewed to be one And in the same sense Hierome saith against Iouinian Thou wilt say the Church is founded vpon Peter it is true it is so and yet in another place the same frame of the Church is raised vpon all the Apostles and all receiue the keyes of the kingdome of heauen and the firmenesse of the Church stayeth it selfe equally vpon them all but therefore doth Christ more specially promise to build his Church vpon Peter that hee being constituted and appointed head chiefe amongst them all occasion of Schisme might bee taken away To the same purpose it is that Leo writeth to Anastasius where hee saith Inter beatissimos Apostolos in similitudine honor is fuit quaedam discretio potestatis cum omnium par esset electio vni tamen datum est vt caeteris preemineret that is Amongst the most blessed Apostles like in honour there was a certaine difference of power and when all were equally elected yet it was giuen to one to haue a preeminence amongst the rest In which saying of Leo that it bee not contrary to that of Cyprian who saith that the Apostles were companions and consorts equall both in honour power wee must not vnderstand that one Apostle had more power then another or that power another had not but that in the same power one was so before the rest that hee was the partie to whom they were to resort and without consulting whom first and before all other they might attempt nothing generally concerning the state of the whole Church by vertue of this power In which sense he saith in another place Petro praecaeteris soluendi ligandi tradita est potestas that is The power of binding and loosing was so giuen to Peter that therein hee was before the rest and againe Siquid cum eo commune caeteris Christus voluit esse principibus nunquam nisi per ipsum Petrum dedit quicquidaliis non negavit that is If Christ would haue any thing to be common to the rest of the Princes that is Apostles with Peter he neuer gaue that which he vouchsafed vnto them any otherwise then as by Peter which words must not so bee vnderstood as if Peter had first receiued the fulnesse of power and others from him for all the Apostles receiued their power and commission immediatly from Christ not from Peter as I haue largely
things the Schoole-men note that there is a two-folde power found in the Ministers of the Church of GOD the one of Order the other of Iurisdiction The power of Order is that whereby they are sanctified and enabled to the performance of such sacred acts as other men neither may nor can doe as is the preaching of the Word and ministration of the holy Sacraments This power is to bee exercised orderly and the acts of it to bee performed in such sort that one disturbe not another Whereupon the Apostles the first Ministers of CHRIST IESVS though equall in the power of Order and Iurisdiction yet for the better and more orderly dispatch of the great worke of converting the world which they had in hand and that they might not hinder one another divided amongst themselues the parts and Provinces of the World but when for the assisting of them while they liued and succeeding them dying they were to passe ouer part of their power to other they so gaue authoritie to such as they made choyce of for this worke to preach baptize and doe other acts of sacred Ministery which are to bee performed by vertue of the power of order that before they invested them with this power they divided the parts of the world converted to Christianity into seuerall Churches and when they ordained them assigned each of them to that particular Church wherein he should preach and minister Sacraments So that these successours of the Apostles had not an illimited commission but were confined within certaine bounds that they were not to preach nor minister Sacraments but onely within the limits and compasse of those places which were assigned vnto them vnlesse it were with the consent desire and liking of other willing to draw them at sometimes for speciall causes to performe such sacred acts within the limites and bounds of their charge This assigning of men hauing the power of order the persons to whom they were to minister holy things and of whom they were to take the care and the subjecting of such persons vnto thē gaue them the power of jurisdiction which they had not before And thus was the vse of the power of order which is not included within any certain boūds limited in those the Apostles ordained their power of Iurisdictiō included within certain bounds so that the one of these kinds of power they haue not at all without the extēt of their own limits nor the lawful vse of the other Hence is that resolutiō of the Diuines that if a Bishop adventure to do any act of Iurisdictiō out of his own Diocese as to excōmunicate absolue or the like all such acts are vtterly voide of no force but if hee shall doe any act of the power of order in another mans charge as preach or minister Sacraments though he cannot be excused as not offending if he doe these things without his consent yet are the Sacraments thus ministred truly Sacraments and of force When the Apostles first founded Churches and assigned to such as they ordained to the worke of the ministery the seuerall parts of the flocke of Christ and people of GOD of which they appointed them to take care and charge they so sorted divided out particular Churches that a Cittie and the places neere adioyning made but one Church Wherevpon wee shall finde in the holy Scriptures that to ordaine Presbyters 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is in euery Church and in euery Citty are all one Now because Churches of so large extent required many Ministers of the Word and Sacraments and yet of one Church there must be but one Pastour the Apostles in setling the state of these Churches did so constitute in them many Presbyters with power to teach instruct and direct the people of God that yet they appointed one onely to be chiefe Pastour of the place ordaining that the rest should be but his assistants not presuming to doe any thing without him so that though they were all equall in the power of order yet were the rest inferior vnto him in the government of that Church whereof hee was Pastour and they but his assistants onely As another of my ranke cannot haue that Iurisdiction within my Church as I haue but if hee will haue any thing to doe there he must be inferiour in degree vnto me So wee reade in the Reuelation of Saint Iohn of the Angell of the Church of Ephesus to whom the Spirit of God directeth letters from heauen as to the Pastour of that Church It is not to be doubted but that there were many Presbyters that is Ministers of the Word and Sacraments in so large a Church as that of Ephesus was nay wee reade expressely in the Acts that there were many in that Church that fed the flocke of Christ and consequently were admitted into some part of pastorall office employment yet was there one amongst the rest to whom onely the Lord did write from heauen to whom an eminent power was giuen who was trusted with the government of that Church and people in more speciall sort then any of the rest and therefore challenged by name by Almighty God for the thinges there found to bee amisse the rest being passed ouer in silence The like wee reade of the rest of the seven Churches of Asia compared to seuen golden candlestickes in the midst whereof the Sonne of God did walke hauing in his hand seuen starres interpreted to haue beene the seuen Angels of those seuen Churches Neither was this orderly superiority of one amongst the Presbyters of the Church found onely in the seuen Churches of Asia but in other Churches also For Saint Hierome testifieth that in the Church of Alexandria from the time of Marke the Evangelist there was euer one whom the Presbyters of that Church chose out of themselues to be ouer the rest Neither was this proper to the Church of Alexandria but wee can shew the successions of Bishops in all the famous Churches of the world euen from the Apostles times and therefore all admitte and allow a kinde of preëminence of one aboue the rest in each Church Heresies haue sprung saith Cyprian and schismes risen from no other fountaine then this that Gods Priest is not obeyed nor one Priest in the Church acknowledged for the time to bee Iudge in Christs steed If one saith Hierome in each Church be not aboue and before the rest of the Presbyters there will be as many Schismes as Priests and the best learned in our age that affect presbyteriall government ingenuously confesse it to be an essentiall perpetuall part of Gods ordinance for each presbytery to haue a chiefe amongst them the necessity whereof wee may learne from all Societies both of men indued with reason and of other thinges also to which God hath denied the light of vnderstanding The dumbe beasts saith Hierome and wilde Heards haue their
leaders which they follow the Bees haue their King the Cranes fly after one in order like an Alphabet of letters there is but one Emperour one Iudge of a Prouince Rome newly built could not endure two brethren to bee Kings together and therefore was dedicated in parricide Esau Iacob were at warre in the wombe of Rebeccah euery Church hath her owne Bishop her owne Arch-presbyter her owne chiefe Deacon and all Ecclesiasticall order consisteth herein that some doe rule and direct the rest In a shippe there is but one that directeth the helme In a house or family there is but one master And to conclude in an armie if it be neuer so great yet the direction of one Generall is expected Thus then all confesse that there alwayes hath beene and must be in each Church a preëminence of one aboue the rest of the Presbyters of the same but some thinke this preëminence should be onely a priority of order in sitting before in propounding things to be thought of and in moderating the whole action of deliberation and that all things should be swayed by voyces the President or Bishop hauing no voyce negatiue or affirmatiue but as the maior part shall direct him Likewise this presidencie they thinke should bee but annuall or to end with the action about which they meete whether it be to determine a doubt to ordaine a Minister or to doe any other such like thing This new conceipt wee cannot approue of because wee finde no patterne of any such Bishop or President in all antiquity But the Fathers describe vnto vs such a Bishop as hath eminent and peerelesse power without whose consent the Presbyters canne doe nothing Hence haue heresies sprung and schismes arisen sayth Cyprian because one Priest in the Church is not acknowledged for the time to bee Iudge in Christs steed to whom if all the brethren would be subiect according to the diuine directions no man would after the diuine iudgements after the suffrages of the people after the consent of other Bishops make himselfe Iudge not of the Bishop but of God Let the Presbyter saith Ignatius doe nothing without the Bishop The Bishop saith Hierome must haue an eminent and peerelesse power or else there will be as many schismes in the Church as there are Priests And Tertullian sheweth that without the Bishops leaue and consent no Presbyter may baptize minister any Sacrament or doe any ministeriall act So that it is most cleare and euident that the Bishop in each Church is aboue and before the rest of the Presbyters of the same not in order onely but in degree also and power of Iurisdiction Yet on the other side we make not the power of Bishops to be Princely as Bellarmine doth but Fatherly so that as the Presbyters may doe nothing without the Bishop so he may doe nothing in matters of greatest moment and consequence without their presence and aduice Wherevpon the Councell of Carthage voideth all sentences of Bishops which the presence of their Clergie confirmeth not and euen vnto this day they haue no power to alienate lands and to doe some such like things without the concurrence and consent of the Presbyters of the Cathedrall and great Church It is therefore most false that Bellarmine hath that Presbyters haue no power of Iurisdiction and the proofe he bringeth of this his assertion most weake when he alledgeth that all Councels both generall and prouinciall wherein Iurisdiction is most properly exercised were celebrated and holden by Bishops as if Presbyters had had nothing to doe therein For it is most cleare and euident that in all prouinciall Synodes Presbyters did sit giue voyce and subscribe as well as Bishops And howsoeuer in generall councels none did giue voyce but Bishops alone yet those Bishops that were present bringing the resolution and consent of the prouinciall Synodes of those Churches from whence they came in which Synodes Presbyters had their voyces they had a kinde of consent to the decrees of generall Councells also and nothing was passed in them without their concurrence Thus were things moderated in the primitiue ages of the Church and though Bishops had power ouer Presbyters yet was it so limited that there was nothing bitter or grieuous in it nothing but that which was full of sweetnesse and content For if any difference grew betweene the Bishop and his Presbyters the Presbyters might not iudge their Bishop whom they were to acknowledge to be a Iudge in Christs stead but an appeale lay vnto a prouinciall Synode to which not onely the Bishops of the prouinces were to come but a certaine number of Presbyters also out of each Church to sit as Iudges of such differences Neither might the Bishop of himselfe alone depriue degrade or put from their office and dignity the Presbyters and Deacons of his Church but if there were any matter concerning a Presbyter he was to joyne vnto him fiue other Bishops of the prouince and if any matter concerning a Deacon two other Bishops before he might proceede to giue sentence against Presbyter or Deacon The causes of other inferiour Cleargie-men the Bishop might heare and determine himselfe alone without the concurrence and presence of other Bishops but not without the concurrence of his owne Cleargie without whose presence no sentence of the Bishop was of force but judged and pronounced voide by the canon Touching the preheminence of Bishops aboue Presbyters there is some difference among the Schoole-Diuines For the best learned amongst them are of opinion that Bishops are not greater then Presbyters in the power of consecration or order but only in the exercise of it and in the power of Iurisdiction seeing Presbyters may preach and minister the greatest of all Sacraments by vertue of their consecration and order as well as Bishops Touching the power of consecration or order saith Durandus it is much doubted of among Diuines whether any be greater therein then an ordinarie Presbyter For Hierome seemeth to haue beene of opinion that the highest power of consecration or order is the power of a Priest or elder so that euery Priest in respect of his priestly power may minister all Sacraments confirme the baptized giue all orders all blessings and consecrations but that for the avoiding of the perill of schisme it was ordained that one should be chosen who should bee named a Bishop to whom the rest should obey and to whom it was reserued to giue orders and to doe some such other things as none but Bishops doe And afterwards hee saith that Hierome is clearely of this opinion not making the distinction of Bishops from Presbyters a meere humane invention or a thing not necessary as Aerius did but thinking that amongst them who are equall in the power of order and equally enabled to doe any sacred act the Apostles for the avoyding of schisme and confusion and the preseruation of vnity peace and order ordained that in each Church
one should beebefore and aboue the rest without whom the rest should do nothing and to whom some things should bee peculiarly reserued as the dedicating of Churches reconciling of penitents confirming of the baptized and the ordination of such as are to serue in the worke of the Ministerie Of which the three former were reserued to the Bishop alone Potiùs ad honorem Sacerdotii quam ad legis necessitatem that is rather to honour his priestly and Bishoply place then for that these things at all may not be done by any other And therefore wee reade that at some times and in some cases of necessitie Presbyters did reconcile penitents and by imposition of hands confirme the baptized But the ordaining of men to serue in the worke of the Ministerie is more properly reserued to them For seeing none are to be ordained at randome but to serue in some Church and none haue Churches but Bishops all other being but assistants to them in their Churches none may ordaine but they onely vnlesse it bee in cases of extreme necessitie as when all Bishops are extinguished by death or fallen into heresie obstinately refuse to ordaine men to preach the Gospell of Christ sincerely And then as the care and charge of the Church is devolued to the Presbyters remaining Catholique so likewise the ordaining of men to assist them and succeede them in the worke of the Ministery But hereof I haue spoken at large elsewhere Wherefore to conclude this point we see that the best learned amongst the Schoolemen are of opinion that Bishops are no greater then presbyters in the power of consecration or order but onely in the exercise of it and in the power of Iurisdiction with whom Stapleton seemeth to agree saying expressely that Quoad ordinem Sacerdotalem ea quae sunt ordinis that is In respect of Sacerdotall order and the things that pertaine to order they are equall and that therefore in all administration of Sacraments which depend of order they are all equall potestate though not exercitio that is in power though not in the execution of things to be done by vertue of that power whence it will follow that ordination being a kinde of Sacrament and so depending of the power of order in the judgement of our Adversaries might bee ministred by presbyters but that for the avoyding of such horrible confusions scandals and schismes as would follow vpon such promiscuous ordinations they are restrained by the decree of the Apostles and none permitted to doe any such thing except it bee in case of extreme necessitie but Bishops who haue the power of order in common together with presbyters but yet so as that they excell them in the execution of things to bee done by vertue of that power and in the power of Iurisdiction also But Bellarmine sayth the Catholique Church acknowledgeth and teacheth that the degree of Bishops is greater then that of Presbyters by Gods Law as well in the power of order as jurisdiction addeth that the Schoole-men vpon the fourth of the Sentences defend the same and Thomas in his Summe which yet elsewhere he confesseth to be vntrue This his opinion he endeauoureth to confirme because none but Bishoppes doe ordaine and if they doe their ordinations are judged voyde which they could not be by the Churches prohibition or decree of the Apostles if they were equall in the power of order to Bishops Hereunto I haue answered elsewhere shewing that ordinations at large or sine titulo and ordinations in another mans charge by bishops who by the character of their order may ordaine are likewise pronounced to be voide by the ancient canons and that therefore the prohibition of the Church and decree of the Apostles for the auoyding of confusion and schisme reseruing the honour of ordaining to Bishops onely vnlesse it were in the case of extreame necessitie might make the ordinations of all other to be void though equall with them in the power of order CHAP. 28. Of the diuision of the lesser Titles and smaller Congregations or Churches out of those Churches of so large extent founded and constituted by the Apostles HItherto wee haue seene how the Apostles diuiding the Churches in such sort that a whole citty and the places adioyning made but one Church set ouer the same one Bishop as Pastour of the place diuers Presbyters as assistants vnto him But in processe of time we shall find certaine portions of these greater flockes of Christ and Churches of God to haue beene deuided out and distinctly assigned to seuerall Presbyters that were to take the care and charge thereof yet with limitations and reseruations of sundry preeminences to the Bishop as remaining still Pastour of those smaller particular congregations though in a sort deuided and distinguished from that greater Church wherein especially hee made his abode Two words wee find in Antiquie vsed to expresse the flockes of Christ and Churches of God thus deuided for more conuenience and yet still depending on that care of one Pastour or Bishop 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is parish and Diocese The former contained the cittizens and all such borderers as dwelt neare and repaired to any chiefe church or citie though now we vse the word Parish to signifie another thing namely some particular smaller and lesse congregation diuided out from the Mother Church the later which is Diocese both then and now importeth the villages and Churches dispersed in diuers places vnder the regiment of one Bishop The first that began thus to deuide out smaller Churches and congregations out of those great ones first founded and to assigne Presbyters distinctly to take care of thē was Euaristus Bishop of Rome whose example others did follow in al parts of the world These parts of Gods Church thus deuided assigned to the care of seuerall Presbyters were called Tituli that is Titles because God was intituled vnto them did specially claime them as the lot of his inheritance These Titles or smaller Churches and congregations were of diuerse sorts for some were more principall wherein Baptisme might be administred and the like things performed which were thereupon named Baptismall Churches and in respect of meaner in time growing out of them and depending of them Mother Churches also Other there were not hauing so great liberties To such of these Churches as he pleased the Bishop himselfe went and preached one day in one of them and another in another carrying great cōpanies with him drawing great multitudes to him which solemne assēblies meetings were named stations from their standing at prayers vsed in those times and were like the mighty armies of God keeping their watches and standing ready to encounter their furious and dangerous enemies In this sort Gregory the Great went and preached in such Churches in Rome as he thought fit whose Homilies and Sermons then preached are yet extant with the names of
Clergie-men from the execution of their offices but farther they might not goe But in case of obstinate continuance of disordred persons in their misdemeanors notwithstanding these proceedings they were to complaine to the Bishop if the matter required hast or otherwise to the next Episcopall Synode For the Bishop in each diocese hauing certaine thus appointed to assist and helpe him in the superuision of the rest as well of the Clergie as the people was once in the yeare to hold a Synode with the chiefe of his Prelates Deanes rurall and other worthy men Annis singulis saith Gratian Episcopus in suá Diocesi Synodum faciat de suis Clericis Abbatibus 〈◊〉 alteros Clericos Monachos that is Let the Bishop euery yeare hold a Synode in his Diocese of his Clerkes and Abbots and let him therein discusse and examine the learning conuersation behauiour of other Clerkes Monkes The Synode of Coleiâ—…e vnder Adolphus confirmed by Charles the fifth appointed this Diocesane Synode to be holden twise euery yeare according to the old manner custome And the Synode of Coleine vnder Hermannus ordaineth that the Bishop or his Officiall generall with the Prelateâ—… of the Metroropoliticall Cathedrall Collegiate Churches especially the Arch-deacons Deanes rurall who in some part are taken into the fellowship of the Bishops cares shall enquire into things out of order what he shall find by their iudgment to need reformation he shall with their aduice amend reforme The like doth Laurentius the Popes Legate decree and ordaine Yea the Councell of Tâ—… confirmeth the same also and the Councell of Coleine vnder Adolphus taketh order that Deanes of colledges comming to the Episcopall Synode in the name of their colledges rurall Deanes in the name of the parish ministers within their diuisioÌ„s shall haue their charges borne by such their colledges ministers according to the nuÌ„ber of daies the Synode endureth seeing they go on warfare for God The forme of holding a Diocesane Synode Iouerius out of Burchardus describeth in this sort At a coÌ„uenieÌ„t hower wheÌ„ it seemeth good to the B or his vicegerent all other doores being locked let the Ostiaries staÌ„d at that by which the Presbyters are to enter coÌ„ming together let theÌ„ go in sit according to their ordinatioÌ„ after these the approued Deacons which order shall require to be present let some lay-men also of good coÌ„uersation be brought in and then let the Bishop or his substitute enter who entring into the Synode is first to salute the clergie and people and then turning towards the East to say a certaine prayer the Deacons to read the Gospel When it was late the first day of the 〈◊〉 and the dores were shut c after which reading and praiers all are to go out saue the Presbyters and clerkes only after departure of the rest another prayer being made the Bishop shall will the Presbyters to propose their doubts and either to learne or teach and to make known their complaints that so they may receiue satisfaction This is all that is done the first day The second day if the clergie haue no matter of complaint or doubt let the Laitie bee let in to propose their doubts and make knowne their grieuances or otherwise let their comming in be deferred till some other day Besides this Synode which euery Bishoppe was to hold once euery yeare he was to goe from Church to Church and see all the Churches in his Diocese The secoÌ„d councell of Bracar appointeth that the Bishop shall go through all his Churches enforming both Presbyters and people and the third councell of Arles prescriâ—…th that he shall enquire take notice of the wrongs offered to those of meane poore estate by them that are great and in authoritie and first seeke to reforme such euils by Episcopall admonition and counsell but if he cannot so prevaile hee shall acquaint the King with it The Bishop saith the fourth Councell of Toledo must goe euery yeare through his Diocese and see all his Churches and parishes that he may enquire what reparations the churches doe neede and what other things bee amisse But if he be either detained by sicknesse or so intangled with businesse that he cannot goe let him send some approued presbyters or Deacons which may not onely consider of the ruines of each church and the needfull reparations thereof but enquire also into the life and conversation of the clergie and ministers According to the decree and direction of this Councell we shall finde that Bishops hindered by other employments sicknesse weaknes or age so that they could not go in person to visite their churches sent some of their chiefe Presbyters or Deacons but especially the chiefe Deacons to performe the worke of visitation for them because they being the chiefe among the Deacons which are but church-seruants were more attendant about them for dispatch of all publicke businesses then presbyters These chiefe Deacons or Arch-Deacons at first they sent onely to visite and to make report but not to sententiate any mans cause or to meddle with the correcting or reforming of any thing but afterwardes in processe of time they were authorized to heare and determine the smallest matters and to reforme the lighter and lesser offences and therefore in the Councell of Laterane vnder Alexander the third it is ordered that the Arch-deacon shall not giue sentence against any one But in the Councell of Rhoane it is appointed that the Arch-Deacon and Arch-presbyter shall bee fore-runners to the Bishoppe and shall reforme the lighter and smaller things they finde to bee amisse Hence in time it came that Arch-Deacons much vsed by Bishops as most attendant on them in the visitation of their churches and reforming some smaller disorders at length by prescription claimed the correction of greater things as hauing of long time put themselues into the exercise of such authoritie And thus the Deacons or at least the chiefe of them the Arch-Deacons which at first might not sit in the presence of a presbyter but being willed by him so to doe in the end became by reason of this their imployment by the Bishoppe to bee greater not onely then the ordinary presbyters but then the Arch-presbyters themselues And therefore it is confessed by all that the Arch-deacon hath no authoritie or power of Iurisdiction by vertue of his degree order but by prescription onely neither can hee claime more then hee can prescribe for which his prescription is thought reasonable because the Bishop is supposed to haue consented to his intermedling in such parts of gouernement as by prescription hee may claime Yet lest it might seeme absurd for him that is onely a Deacon to exercise Iurisdiction ouer presbyters the canon of the Church prouideth that no man shall possesse the place of an Arch-Deacon vnlesse he haue the ordination of a presbyter Besides the Deanes or Arch-presbyters which
doubt not of all indifferent Readers And therefore there remaineth but onely one allegation of Bellarmine touching appeales to be examined Gregory the first saith he put Iohn the Bishop of Iustiniana the first from the communion for that he presumed to iudge the Bishop of Thebes hauing appealed to Rome The case was this The Bishop of Thebes wronged by his fellow-Bishops made his appeale to Rome Hereupon Iohn Bishop of Iustiniana the first who was the Bishop of Romes Vicegerent for certaine Prouinces neare adioyning was appointed by the Emperour to heare the cause which he did accordingly But without all indifferencie and in sort contrarie to the Canons and though vpon the discerning of his vniust and partiall proceeding an appeale were tendered to him yet gaue he sentence against the poore distressed Bishop Gregory hearing hereof putteth him from the communion for thirty dayes space inioyning him to bewaile his fault with sorrowfull repentance and teares Truely this allegation maketh a very faire shew at the first sight But if wee remember that the Bishop of Iustiniana the first and the distressed Bishop of Thebes wronged by him were within the Patriarchship of Rome as Cusanus sheweth they were you shall finde it was no more that the B of Rome did then any other Patriarch in like case might haue done within his owne precincts and limits Neither can the Cardinall euer proue that the Bishop of Rome had any such Vicegerent as the Bishop of Iustiniana the first was but onely within the compasse of his owne Patriarchship But saith hee it was a Greeke Bishop that Gregory thus proceeded against It is true it was so But what will hee inferre from thence Is it not knowne that many Greeke Bishops were subiect to the Bishop of Rome as Patriarch of the West was not the Bishoppe of Thessalonica a Greeke Bishop and yet I thinke no man doubteth but that hee was within the compasse of the Patriarchship of Rome as many other also were howsoeuer in time they fell from it adhered to the Church of Constantinople after the diuision of the Greeke and Latine Churches CHAP. 40. Of the Popes supposed exemption from all humane Iudgement as being reserued to the Iudgement of Christ onely OVR Adversaries finding their proofes of the Popes illimited power taken from such appeales as were wont in auncient times to bee made to Rome to bee too weake flie to another wherein they put more confidence which is his exemption from all humane Iudgement Christ whose Vicar he is having reserued him to his owne iudgement onely If this exemption could bee as strongly proued as it is confidently affirmed it would be an vnanswerable proofe of the thing in question But the proofe hereof will be more hard then of the principall thing in controuersie betweene vs. Touching this point I finde great contrarietie of opinions among Papists as men at their wits ends not knowing what to affirme nor what to denie For first there are some among them that thinke that the Pope though hee violate all lawes diuine and humane though hee become publickly scandalous and therein shew himselfe incorrigible yea though hee be a professed and damnable hereticke yet neither is deposed ipso facto by the sentence of the canon nor may be deposed by all the men in the world Which opinion if we admit to bee true the condition of the church the beloued spouse of Christ and mother of vs all is most woefull and miserable in that hereby shee is forced to acknowledge a denouring wolfe making hauocke of the sheepe of Christ redeemed with his precious bloud to be her Pastor and guide Secondly some are of opinion that the Pope if hee become an open and professed hereticke is deposed ipso facto by the sentence of the canon and that the church may declare that he is so deposed Thirdly there are that thinke that an hereticall Pope is not deposed ipso facto but that he may be deposed by the church Fourthly many worthy Diuines in the Romane church heretofore haue beene of opinion that the Church or generall Councell may depose the Pope not onely for heresie but also for other enormous crimes Of this opinion was Cardinall Cusanus Cardinall Cameracensis Gerson Chauncellour of Paris Almaine and all the Parisians with all the worthy Bishops Diuines in the Councels of Constance and Basill Yet the Papists at this day for the most part dislike and condemne this opinion and acknowledge no deposition of any Pope how ill soeuer vnlesse it be for heresie And Bellarmine to make all sure telleth vs farther that the church doth not by any authoritie depose an hereticall Pope but whereas he is deposed ipso facto in that hee falleth into heresie onely declareth the same and thereupon largely refuteth the opinion of Cardinall Caietane who thinketh that the Pope when he falleth into heresie is not deposed ipso facto but that deseruing to bee deposed the Church doth truely and out of her authority depose him First because as he saith if the Church or Councell may depose the Pope from his Papall dignity against his will for what cause soeuer it will follow that the Church is aboue the Pope which yet Caietane denieth For as it will follow that the Pope is aboue other Bishops and of more authority then they if he may depose them so if the councell of Bishops may depose the Pope they are greater then hee Secondly he saith to be put from the Papacie vnwillingly is a punishment so that if the Church may depose the Pope though vnwilling to leaue his place it may punish him and consequently is aboue him For hee that hath power to punish hath the place of a Superiour and Iudge Thirdly he that may restraine and limit a man in the vse and exercise of his ministerie and office is in authority aboue him therefore much more he that may put him from it By these reasons it is clearely demonstrated and proued that if the Church or generall Councell haue authority in case of heresie to depose the Pope at least in some sort it is of greater authority then the Pope And therefore to avoide this consequence as Gerson rightly noteth they that too much magnifie the greatnesse and amplitude of Papall power say that an hereticall Pope in that he is an Hereticke ceaseth to be Pope and is deposed by Almighty God So that the Church doth not by vertue of her authority and jurisdiction depose him but onely denounce and declare that he is so deposed by God to be taken for such a one by men and not to be obeyed This they endeauour to proue because all Heretickes are condemned by their owne iudgment as the Apostle saith and stay not as other euill doers till the Church cast them out but voluntarily depart of themselues from the fellowship of Gods people and cut themselues off from the vnity of the Body of the Church
earnest and promised confidently to pacifie Ambrose he bade him goe with speede and himselfe followed after in hope of reconciliation trusting vpon the promises of Ruffinus But when Ambrose saw Ruffinus he sayd vnto him O Ruffinus thou doest imitate the impudencie of shamelesse dogges for hauing beene the aduiser and counsellor to so vile murthers thou hast hardned thy forehead and hauing cast away all shame blushest not after the committing of so great and horrible outrages against men made after the image of God And when he was importunate with him and told him the Emperour was comming full of fierie zeale he brake forth into these words I tell thee Ruffinus I will not suffer him to passe the thresholds of Gods house and if of an Emperour he become a tyrant I will ioyfully suffer death Whereupon Ruffinus caused one to runne to the Emperour to desire him to stay within the Court But the Emperour being on the way when the messenger met him resolued to come forward and to endure the reproof of the Bishop So hee came to the sacred railes but entred not into the Temple and comming to the Bishoppe besought him to vnloose him from the bands wherewith hee was bound The Bishop somewhat offended with his comming told him the manner of his comming was tyrant-like and that being mad against God he trampled vnder his feete the lawes of God Not so said the Emperour I presse not hither in despite of order neither doe I vniustly striue to enter into the house of God But I beseech thee to vnloose me to remember the mercifull disposition of our common Lord and not to shut the doore against me that hee would haue opened to all that repent What repentance therefore saith the Bishoppe hast thou shewed after so grieuous an offence what medicines hast thou applied to cure thy wounds It pertaineth to thee sayth the Emperour to prepare the medicines that should heale mee and to cure my wounds and to me to vse that thou prescribest Then sayd Ambrose seeing thou makest thy displeasure iudge and it is not reason that giueth sentence when thou sittest vpon the throne to doe right but thy furious proceedings make a law that when sentence of death and confiscation of goods shall bee passed there may passe thirty dayes before the execution of the same that so if within that space it be found vniust it may be reuersed or otherwise it may proceede This law the Emperour most willingly consented to make and thereupon Ambrose vnloosed him from his bands and he entred into the Temple and prayed vnto God not standing nor kneeling but prostrate vpon the earth and passionately vttering these words of Dauid My soule cleaueth to the pauement Lord quicken me according to thy word Here we see an excellent patterne of a good Bishoppe and a good Emperour and it is hard to say whether Ambrose were more to be commended for his zeale magnanimous resolution and constancie or the Emperour for his willing and submissiue obedience But of deposing Princes here is nothing Ambrose being so farre from any thought of lifting vp his hand against the Emperour that he resolued to subiect himselfe vnto him euen to the suffering of martyrdome if neede should require But saith Bellarmine Ambrose exercised ciuill authority in that hee tooke notice of this murther of the Emperour beeing a criminall cause and forced him to make a ciuill law for the preuenting of furious and bloodie proceedings in iudgment This surely is a weake collection for the Church hath power by vertue of her Ecclesiasticall iurisdiction to take notice of such horrible crimes as murther to punish them with spirituall punishments Neither was the inducing of Theodosius to make a ciuill law for the preuenting of such like euils as he was now censured for before he would reconcile him to the Church an act of ciuill authoritie But such testimonies as this is they that haue no better must be forced to vse That which followeth of Gregories confirming the priviledges graunted to the Abbey of Saint Medardus in such sort that whatsoeuer Kings Iudges or secular persons should go about to violate them should be depriued of their honour proueth not the thing in question For it is evident that the confirmation of these priviledges was passed not by S. Gregory alone but by a whole Councell and more specially by Theodoricus the King and Brunichildis the Queene who might binde their successours and other inferiour secular Rulers vnder paine of deprivation though neither Gregory of himselfe nor yet a councell of Bishops could doe any such thing by their authoritie alone Wherefore let vs proceede to the next example Gregory the second saith Bellarmine excommunicated the Emperour Leo the third who was an enemy to Images he forbade any tribute to be payde him out of Italy and consequently depriued him of part of his Empire Surely if Greg. the second of himself alone had had such power as to forbid all Italy vpon his dislike to pay any more tribute to the Emperour there were some good shew of proofe in this allegation But if wee examine the stories we shall finde the case to haue beene farre otherwise then Bellarmine would beare vs in hand it was For first Gregory did not excommunicate Leo of himselfe but called a Synode to doe it Secondly he did not forbid the paying of tribute out of Italy to the Emperour but the circumstances of the History are these Leo seeking to win the Bishop of Rome and the people of Italy to the casting downe of Images in the West as he had done in the East Gregory the Bishop did not onely refuse to obey him but admonished all other to take heed they did no such thing for feare of any Edict of the Emperour By which exhortation the people of Italy already mis-conceited of the Emperours governement were so animated that they were likely to haue proceeded to the election of a new Emperour and Nauclerus sheweth that the decrees of the Bishop of Rome disswading the people of the West from obeying the Emperour in casting downe of Images were of so great authoritie that the people and souldiers of Ravenna first and then of Venice beganne to make shew of rebellion against the Emperour and his Exarche or Lieutenant and to inforce the Bishop of Rome and the other people of Italy to disclaime the Emperour of Constantinople and to chuse another in Italy And that this rebellion proceeded so farre that euery city putting downe the Magistrates of the Exarch set vp Magistrates of their owne whō they named Dukes but that the Bishop of Rome at that time pacified thē and by his perswasions stayed them from chusing any new Emperour in hope that he would amend So that we see the Bishop of Rome with his Bishops by their authority did nothing but stay the people from obeying the Emperours vnlawfull Decrees as they iudged them but no way went about to depose the
Generall councell taketh order that the Patriarch shall haue power to convocate the Metropolitanes that are vnder him and that they shall not refuse to come when he calleth them vnlesse they be hindered by vrgent causes And to this purpose it was that the Bishops within the Patriarchship of Rome were once in the yeare to visite the Apostolicall thresholds which to do they take an oath still euen to this day as Cusanus noteth so that it is evident that there is a power in Bishoppes Metropolitanes Primates and Patriarchs to call Episcopall Provinciall Nationall and Patriarchicall Synodes and that neither so depending of nor subiect to the power of Princes but that when they are enemies to the Faith they may exercise the same without their consent and privity and subiect them that refuse to obey their summons to such punishments as the canons of the Church doe prescribe in cases of such contempt or wilfull negligence But that wee may see to whom the calling of Generall Councels doth pertaine in the times of persecution and when there are no Christian Princes we must obserue that among the Patriarches though one bee in order before another As the Patriarch of Alexandria is before the Patriarch of Antioch and the Patriarch of Rome before the Patriarch of Alexandria yet is not one of them superiour to another in degree as Bishops are to Presbyters nor so in order honour and place as Metropolitanes are to Bishops or Patriarches to Metropolitanes whom they are to ordaine or at the least to confirme And therefore no one of them singly and by himselfe alone hath power to call vnto him any Patriarch or any Bishop subiect to such Patriarch But as in case when there groweth a difference betweene the patriarches of one See and another or betweene any of the patriarches and the Metropolitanes and Bishops subiect to them the superiour patriarch not of himselfe alone but with his Metropolitanes and such particular Bishops as are interessed may judge and determine the differences between them if without danger of a further rent it may be done as in the case of Chrysostome and Theophilus it could not So if there be any matter of Faith or any thing concerning the whole state of the Christian church wherein a common deliberation of all the pastors of the church is necessary he that is in order the first among the patriarches with the Synodes of Bishops subiect to him may call the rest together as being the principall part of the church whence all actions of this nature doe take beginning And this is that which Iulius Bishop of Rome hath when writing to the Bishops of the East he telleth them that the manner and custome is that they should write to him and the Westerne Bishops first that from thence might be decreed the thing that is just and againe that they ought to haue written to them all that so that which is just might bee decreed by all And hence it is that Damasus Ambrose Brito Valerianus and the rest of the holy Bishops assembled in the great city of Rome out of their brotherly loue sent for the Bishops of the East as their owne members praying and desiring them to come vnto them that they might not raigne alone So that the power of calling Generall Councels when the church hath no princes to assist her is not in the Pope but in the Westerne Synode and yet hath not this Synode any power ouer all the other Churches as a supreme Commaunder but is onely as a principall part among the rest to beginne procure set forward as much as in her lyeth such things as pertain to the cōmon good neither may it by vertue of any canon custome or practise of the church excōmunicate the rest for refusing to hearken when it calleth as it appeareth by the former example in that they of the East came not when they were called and intreated to come to Rome by Damasus Ambrose and the rest but stayed at Constantinople did some things which they disliked and yet were forced to giue way vnto them and as being greater in authority then they bare the name of the generall Councell though they were assembled at Rome at the same time in a very great number But if the greater part concurre with them they may excommunicate those few that shall wilfully and causelesly refuse to obey them If it be said that hence it will follow that there is no certaine meanes of hauing a generall Councell at all times as there is of Prouinciall or Patriarchicall which may seeme absurde it will be answered that there is not the like necessitie of hauing Generall Councels as there is of hauing those more particular Synodes and that therefore it is not absurd to grant that the Church hath not at all times certaine and infallible meanes to haue a Generall Councell as it hath to haue the other Nay that it hath not it most plainely appeareth in that in the case of Chrysostome greatly distressed greiuously wronged Innocentius professed vnto him he knew no meanes to helpe him but a Generall Councell which to obtaine he became an humble futer to the Emperour but was so farre from preuailing that the messengers hee sent were returned backe againe vnto him with disgrace Thus wee see to whom the calling of Councels pertaineth when there is no Christian Magistrate to assist the Church but when there is a Christian Magistrate it pertaineth to him to see that these assemblies be duly holden accordingly as the necessity of the Church requireth and the Canons prescribe And therefor wee shall finde that though Christian Emperours Kings and Princes within their seuerall dominions oftentimes permitted Bishops Metropolitanes and Patriarches to hold Episcopall Prouinciall Nationall or Patriarchicall Councels without particular intermedling therein when they saw neither negligence in those of the Cleargy in omitting to hold such Councels when it was fit nor intrusion into their office yet soe often as they saw cause they tooke into their owne hands the power of calling these more particular Synodes And touching generall there was neuer any that was not called by the Emperour That Emperours Kings and Princes in their seuerall dominions respectiuely called particular Councels is proued by innumerable examples For Constantine the great called the first Councell of Arle as it appeareth by his Epistle to Crestus and Binnius confesseth it The Councell of Aquileia was called by the Emperours as it appeareth by the Epistle of the Councell to Gratian Valentinian and Theodosius the Emperours in the first Tome of the Councells The Councell of Burdegalis was called by the Emperour against Priscillian The Councell of Agatha by the permission of the King as as appeareth in the second Tome of the Councels The first of Orleans was called by Clodoueus The Epaunine Councell by Sigismund the sonne of Gundebald The second of Orleans by the command of Childebert the
hundred yeares and the Popes on the other side thinking it vnlawfull for the Emperors in this sort to bestow either Bishopricke or Abbey forbidding them so to doe vnder paine of the great curse But Henry the fifth forced â—…ope Paschall to confirme vnto him the ancient right again and to accurse all such as should dislike resist or seeke to disanull it which yet not long after bee reuersed againe in another Councell and in the dayes of Calixtus the Emperour resigned his right and the Pope allowed that within his kingdome of Germany elections should be made in his presence and that with the aduice of the Metropolitane and Bishops of the Prouince he might assist and strengthen the better part and that the elected should receiue from him all things belonging to the King by the reaching forth of his Scepter Matthew Paris sayth the contention betweene Pope Paschall and Henry the Emperour about the inuestiture of Bishops and Abbots which the Emperors had enioyed three huÌ„dred yeares in the times of threescore Popes was so ended that both Bishops and Abbots should first sweare Canonicall obedience to their Ecclesiasticall superiors and be consecrated and then receiue Institution from the Emperour by rod and ring Thus wee see what right and interest ancient Emperours challenged to themselues in the election of the Bishop of Rome and in conferring other dignities of the Church and that the latter Popes condemned that as euill and wicked which their Predecessors not onely allowed but prescribed vnder great and grieuous paines and curses Whereupon Auentinus noteth that among the Popes Eadem facta modò superstitionis modò pietatis modò Christi modò Antichristi modò iusticiae modò tyrannidis nomina accipiunt that is That the same factes deedes and things are at one time branded with the marke of superstition and at another time set out with the glorious title of Piety at one time attributed to Christ at another time to Antichrist at one time iudged iust and righteous and at another time tyrannicall and vnjust Genebrard acknowledging that there haue beene many vile monsters that haue gotten into Peters chaire and that there were fiftie Popes rather Apotacticall and Apostaticall then Apostolicall layeth the blame vpon the Romaine Emperours as if they had placed those monsters in Peters chaire It is well hee confesseth that such beastes haue entred into the Church of Rome but if hee did not wee would easily proue the same For to omit Hildebrand whom some called a monster and an enemy to mankinde who caused more Christian bloud to be shed and more grieuous confusions to rent and shake in sunder the Christian world then any heretickes or persecutors had euer done before soe that hee was forced to confesse at his death to God to holy Church and blessed Peter that hee had grieuously offended in his Pastorall office and Ioane the Whore because as Onuphrius thinketh shee was not Pope but the harlot of Iohn the twelfth the Stories mention such vile monsters sitting in that Chaire that Benedict the fourth is highly commended for that though hee did nothing memorable yet hee liued an honest and a good life But that the Emperours were the cause of the placing of these Monsters as Genebrard would make vs beleeue it may not be yeldeed For betweene the time of Adrian the third who tooke the power of confirming popes from the Emperours and the raigne of Otho the first to whom it was restored by pope Leo there entred Formosus Bonifacius Stephen Romanus Theodorus Iohn the ninth Christopher and Sergius all men of ill note and Iohn the twelfth then whom the earth did neuer beare a more prodigious and vile monster This wretch Otho at the earnest suite of the Romanes caused to be deposed by a Councell of Bishoppes and Leo to bee chosen Whereupon the power of choosing the pope and ordering the See Apostolique was againe by consent of Leo the pope and the people and Cleargy of Rome giuen and confirmed to him and his successors for euer in sort before expressed For as Sigonius sayth Leo rightly considered that after the time of Adrian the third the ambition of the Romanes filled the Church with beasts disordered these elections and set all in a tumult therefore thought no meanes so fit to reforme these disorders to represse these insolencies and preuent these mischiefes as to put the bridle into the Emperours hands againe Yet not long after the Romanes casting off the yoake and breaking the bands in sunder put in Boniface the seauenth Benedict the ninth and Syluester who sold the Popedome to Gregory the sixt all which popes were soe intollerably wicked that Platina calleth them teterrima monstra that is most vile hideous and ougly monsters And Henry the second called a Councell and deposed Gregory the last of them and placed Twideger a Germane in his place who was afterwards named Clemens who againe restored the right of choosing the Pope to him his successours for that as Sigonius noteth after the law prescribing requiring the Emperours consent to bee had in such elections was taken away the state of the church was newly put in great danger So that Henry the second was forced to come into Italy to set thinges in order And therefore it is more then ordinary impudency in Genebrard to impute all the confusions in the elections of the Romane Bishops to the Emperours who were not the causes of them but oftentimes staide them by their Princely power Neither is it lesse strange that hee other dare condemne that authority in the Emperours as vnlawfull which had continued from the time of Iustinian to Benedict and was againe confirmed by Adrian Leo other Popes with their Councells of Bishoppes and by vertue where of Saint Gregory other possessed the Episcopall chaire who are vniustly censured by Genebrard as entring by the Posterne gate in this respect Neither haue the Popes beene better or the election freer from faction since the Emperours were wholy and finally excluded then they were before For what shall we say of Bonifacius the Eigth of whom it is said that he entered like a Foxe and died like a Dog that hee coosened poore Caelestinus his predecessour and by false practises wonne him to resigne the Popedome to him and resting not contented herewith tooke vpon him to dispose of all the Kingdomes of the world at his pleasure of Iohn the three and twentith a vile man and a Diuell incarnate and Alexander the sixt of whom so many horrible things are reported by Onuphrius Volaterran others And touching factions schismes whereas there haue bin thirty of them in the church of Rome neuer any endured so long as the last which was since the Emperours were wholy excluded from intermedling with Papall elections For it continued forty yeares and could neuer be ended but by the helpe of Sigismund the Emperour in
the true Catholicke Church as admit not all the things before specified so that I lay no foundation of Babell as this Babylonian is pleased to say I doe but pitying the breaches of Sion endeauour as much as in me lieth to make them vp that Hierusalem may be as a citie at vnity wit hin it selfe But the Romanistes indeede build Babell and their tongues are confounded euery one almost dissenting from other and that in most materiall and essentiall points Pighius and Catharinuâ—… haue a strange fancie touching originall sinne contrary to the Doctrine of other Papists Pighius is of Caluins opinion touching iustification Catharinus defendeth against the common tenent that men in ordinary course without speciall reuelation may be certaine by the certainty of Faith that they are in the state of grace yea M Higgons himself saith Our faith in Christ must be trustfull liuely and actiue by a speciall application of his merites vnto our selues as he was wont to preach in Saint Dunstans Church So vrging a necessity of special Faith which the Romanists condemne as hereticall in the Doctrine of our Church and innumerable like differences they haue yet all these are of one Church Faith Communion nothing it seemeth being necessary to the vnity of their Church but the acknowledging of the Supremacie of the Pope And yet which is most strange they that thinke he may erre they that thinke he cannot erre they that make him to be but Prime Bishop they that make him vniversall Bishop they that attribute to him power to depose Princes dispose of their states they that deny that hee bath any such power are of one the same Church But it is a Babylonicall Church §. 2. FRom the perpetual visibilitie vndoubted assurance the Church hath of holding the true Faith he proceedeth to shew our zeale in impugning condemning the opinion of Purgatory that yet notwithstanding the whole vniversal Church receiued it And thervpoÌ„ saith â—…he was misinformed by me others that the Greeks neuer intertained this doctrine that now he findeth that we erre not knowing or 〈◊〉 the truth assuring himselfe that howsoeuer some Greeks did not or do not admit the doctrine of Purgatory precisely vnder this name with some other circuÌ„stances yet the church of Greece generally doth retaine the thâ—…ig it selfe But whatsoeuer this goodfellow say to the coÌ„trary we know the Greek 〈◊〉 neuer 〈◊〉 the 〈◊〉 thing There is extant a most excelleÌ„t learned Apollogy of the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 â—…o the couÌ„cel of Florence or Basil as it is thought In this apology first 〈◊〉 clearly 〈◊〉 that there is no purging after this life by â—…e especially materiall c 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Papists imagine Secondly they insâ—…te that some a longst 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that such as are of a middle condition and so depart hence are after death in a certaine obscurity without enioying the light of Gods countenance or holden as it were in a prison or in a state of sorrow till by the goodnesse of God and the prayers of the Church they be deliuered and thus much some professed in the Councell of Florence for there was a diuision amongst them Thirdly they incline to an opinion that the lesser sinnes of men dying in the state of grace are remitted after death without any punishment at all either by fire or in any other kind by the meere mercy goodnesse of God And whereas some bring proofes of remission of sinnes after this life thereby to confirme their conceit of Purgatory they say there is no agreement betweene remission and purging by fire and punishment for that eyther punishment or remission is needfull and not both and againe they confidently pronounce that neither Scripture nor the fifth Generall Councell deliuered vnto vs a double punishment or a double fire after this life This iudgment resolution they confirme proue by very excellent reasons authorities for first thus they argue It more beseemeth the goodnes of God to suffer no good though neuer so litle to passe away vnrespected vnrewarded theÌ„ to punish small sins offences but some litle good in them that haue great sins hath no reward because of the preuayling of the euil that is fouÌ„d in theÌ„ therefore smal euils in them that haue great works of vertue are not to be punished the better things ouercomming Secondly as is a little good in those that are mainely euill so is a little euill in those that are otherwise mainely good But a little good in those that are otherwise euill can procure no reward but onely causeth a difference in the degree of punishment making it the lesse therefore a little euill causeth no punishment but a difference in the degree of glory and happinesse which it maketh to bee lesse then otherwise it would bee whence it followeth that there is no Purgatory Thirdly either the wils of men departed hence are mutable or immutable if they be mutable then they that are good may become euill and they that are euill may become good whence it will follow according to Origens opinion that neyther the good are vnchangeably happy nor the the euill vnchangeably miserable but that men may fall from happinesse to misery and rise from misery to the heighth of all happinesse And soe wee shall make the punishments of all cast-awaies euen of the diuels themselues to be temporary as endeed supposing the mutability of the Will to continue after death iustly they may for the reason why in Iustice the punishment of sinne in the damned is to be eternall is because they are immutably vnchangeably and etâ—…nally euill if they bee immutable then are they not capable of any correction for he who is corrected is sette right by being brought to iust dislike and forsaking of that he formerly affected ill which chaunge from loue to hate froÌ„ liking to disliking from pursuing and following to forsaking and flying from cannot be found in a Will that is immutable Bonauentura disputeth the matter how afflicting fire purgeth the soule and answereth that some thinke that this fire besides the punishing vertue and power it hath hath also a spirttuall purging vertue such as sacraments haue which hee thinketh to be absurd especially seeing Gregory out of visions and apparitions of the dead sheweth that soules are purged in diuerse places and by diuerse other meanes as well as by fire and therefore there are other who thinke that what this purging fire worketh it worketh by punishing and afflicting which helpeth and strengtheneth grace that it may be able to purge out sinne Now punishment and affliction canne noe way helpe grace or strengthen it to the expulsion of sinne but in that by the bitternesse of it it maketh vs know how much it offendeth GOD and hurteth vs and thereby causeth a dislike of it or at least an increase of the dislike of it which dislike the Will cannot newly
done by euery one Wherevnto we answere according to their owne groundes that those partes of divine and canonicall Scripture which particularly wee haue not read or considered are onely implicitè and vertually beleeued of vs as likewise the thinges that are contayned in them neither should this seeme strange to the Romanists for they thinke it pertayneth to the faith of each Christian man to beleeue all the bookes of holy Scripture to bee vndoubtedly true and indited by the Spirit of God Yet are there many amongst them that neyther know how many nor which these bookes are but beleeue them vertually onely as it appertayneth to the fayth to beleeue that Iesus Mary Ioseph fledde into Aegypt and that Paul mediated for the reconciling of Onesimus to Philemon but it is sufficient for men that neuer read or considered these particulars to beleeue them vertually Thirdly he chargeth vs with contrariety in our sayings in that we make the Scripture to bee the ground and rule of our fayth and yet make the light of faith a meane whereby we come to the knowledge of Scripture because as hee thinketh the Scripture cannot bee a rule of our fayth vnlesse it bee certainely knowne to bee diuine before we beleeue But the good man should knowe that the Scripture may bee the rule of our fayth directing vs touching such particular things as wee are to beleeue though it be not knowne to bee diuine before we beleeue For first God giueth vs the eyes of fayth and openeth our vnderstandings that wee may see and discerne in generall heauenly trueth to bee contayned in Scripture then it becommeth a rule of direction in all particular poynts of faith Fourthly he imputeth to vs that wee relie vpon illuminations and inspirations in the things wee beleeue as if wee beleeued them without any other proofe or demonstration vpon bare imagined inspirations whereas wee beleeue nothing without such proofes and motiues as all men may take notice of and yet knowe right well that none doe make right vse thereof but such as haue their vnderstandings enlightned So that his reasoning against the certainty of this illumination is idle seeing we doe not make illumination or inspiration the ground of our perswasion touching things to be beleeved but a disposition of the mind making vs capable of the apprehension of thinges that are diuine and heauenly This illumination is in some more and in some lesse but in all the chosen seruants of God such as sufficeth for the discerning of all sauing trueth necessary to bee knowne of each man according to his estate and condition Fiftly besides idle repetition of thinges going before to which hee referreth himself and some vntruths mingled with the same First he chargeth Me that I am contrary to my selfe in deliuering the opinions of Papists The first supposed contradiction is in that I affirme that it is the ordinary opinion of Papists that the articles of faith are beleeued because God reuealeth them and yet say in another place that they make the authority of the Church the rule of our fayth and reason why we beleeue The second in that I charge the Papistes in one place that they giue authority to the Church to make new articles of faith and in another place free them from the same This latter supposed contrariety I shewed before to bee none at all but in the Treatisers imagination onely and touching the first if hee were a man of any common vnderstanding or knew what contrariety is hee vvould not charge Mee with any such thing For it is true that all Papists thinke the articles of faith are to be beleeued because reuealed but they thinke also that wee knowe not that they are reuealed but beleeue so onely and that not by reason of any diuine reuelation testimony or authority but because the Church so telleth vs and wee haue many humane inducements mouing vs so to perswade our selues So that they make the authority of the Church and humane inducements the last and finall reason of beleeuing whatsoeuer they beleeue This the Treatiser knew well enough and therefore hee requireth Mee to shew how I know that God reuealeth the things beleeued by Christians If I will not fall into the same fault for which I blame them Whereunto I answere that I know the Scriptures to bee inspired of God by the diuine force and majesty that sheweth it selfe in them in which sence I say the bookes of Scripture win credit of themselues and yeeld sufficient satisfaction to all men of their diuine truth For as the colour in each thing maketh it visible and to be seene so the diuine power vertue that sheweth it selfe in the Scripture maketh vs to beleeue that it is of God But the Treatiser will not thus leaue Mee but still goeth on adding one vniust imputation to another For whereas we say only the Scriptures are not discerned to be diuine and inspired of God vnlesse we be inlightned by grace and not that they are proued to bee diuine by the certaintie of that illumination he maketh vs whether we wil or not to proue the Scriptures by our inspirations and that we are inspired by the Scriptures whereas we proue neither the one nor the other of these things in any such sort For touching the Scripture I haue sufficiently shewed before how we know it to be diuine and for the other the Treatiser should know that we doe not proue by Scripture that we are divinely inlightned and inspired but that as naturall reason hath a direct act whereby she apprehendeth things without a reflexed act whereby taking a view of the former direct acts she findeth out her selfe so the light of Faith first discouereth Heauenly verities in the Scripture such as naturall reason could neuer find out then by reflexion findeth it selfe to be of another nature kind then that rationall vnderstanding that was before Wherefore let vs goe forward Did not mine eyes see and my hands handle the palpable absurdities of this Treatiser I would not beleeue any mans report that one so voide of all sense reason as he euery way sheweth himselfe to be should be permitted to write For whereas I bring a most cleare sentence out of Augustine to proue that howsoeuer the authoritie of the Church serue as an introduction to bring vs to the spirituall discerning of diuine things yet men rest not in it hee answereth that Augustine in the chapter cited by Me affirmeth onely that because all men are not capable at first to vnderstād the sincere wisdome truth taught in the church God hath ordained in it a motiue which may first moue them to seeke it to wit the authority of the Church which partly through miracles partly through multitudes is of force to moue which no way taketh any thing from but rather addeth strength to my proofes for if these motiues be necessary onely at the first before men bee purged made pure in
groūded vpon it is ouerthrown If this be all I hope the worst is past for if I should grant as he maketh me absurdly to doe that we haue neither Scripture nor tradition but by tradition yet cannot those rules I assigne to know true traditions by propose vnto vs false Scriptures or traditions For what are they but the constant practise of the whole Christian church from the beginning the consent of the most famous learned in all ages or at least in diuerse ages no man contradicting or doubting and the constant testimony of the pastors of Apostolicall churches from their first establishment successiuely witnessing the same things Indeed if these rules could propose vnto vs false traditions false Scriptures or expositions of the difficulties thereof our faith could not be certaine all religion were ouerthrowne but neither he nor all the Diuels in hell shall euer force vs to acknowledge any such thing neither is there any point of Romish superstition proued by any such traditions as are found to bee true traditions by these rules But will some man say doth he make no shew of proofe that we acknowledge these rules may propose vnto vs false traditions false Scriptures expositions of the difficulties in them Doubtlesse he doth For thus he concludeth very terribly against vs. The testimony and iudgment of the Patriarches or Bishops of Apostolicall Sees is one of the rules assigned to know true traditions by but wee acknowledge that the Patriarches of Apostolicke Sees did erre in the Councell of Florence propose vnto vs false expositions of Scripture therefore we must confesse whether we will or not that the rules we assigne may propose vnto vs false Scriptures false expositions of Scripture Vnto this concluding argument wherein the force of the whole chapter lieth we answere briefly and peremptorily First that the maior proposition is most false as hee well knoweth for I neuer make the judgement and opinion of the present Bishops of Apostolicall churches to be the rule to know true traditions by but deny it and professe the contrary against the Papists and make onely the testimony of the Pastours of Apostolicall churches successiuely from the beginning witnessing the same things to bee a rule in this kinde Secondly that the Patriarches of the Apostolicke Sees hee speaketh of were not at the councell of Florence in their owne persons but had others to supply their places whose proceedings they disclaimed and voyded whatsoeuer they did in their names because they presumed to discusse and determine diuers matters of controuersie without directions and instructions from them But howsoeuer we thinke of the proceedings in this Councell yet he sayth no Protestant church can shew any such authority for their cause as that of the Councels of Florence Constance and Trent It had beene well if hee had beene better aduised before hee had so much disenabled vs for he shall finde that we can and will shew farre greater authority for our cause then the late Councels of Florence Constance and Trent and that in the weightiest points of all other For did not the Bishops in the great Councell of Chalcedon professe openly that the reason why the Fathers gaue the preëminence to the Bishoppe of Rome was the greatnesse of his city being the seate of the Emperours and that they thought it fit to giue equall priuiledges to the Bishop of Constantinople for the same cause seeing it was become the seate of the Emperors and named new Rome Did not the 6. generall Councell in Trullo confirme the same parity of the B. of Constantinople with the B. of Rome and doe not the decrees of these two Councells shake in peeces the whole frame fabricke of the Papacy Did not the second fourth and sixth Councels c. make the B. of Constantinople a patriarch and set him in degree of honour before the other two of Alexandria and Antioche notwithstanding the resistance of the Romane Bishops their claime from Peter Did not the sixth generall Councell blame the Church of Rome for sundry things and particularly among other for forcing married mē entring into the orders of ministery to forsake the matrimoniall society of their wiues Did not the Councell of Nice referre both Bishops and other inferiour clergy-men to be ordered by their owne Metropolitanes and the Councels of Africa therevpon condemne appeales to Rome Did not the Councell of Eliberis forbid the lighting of tapers in the Coemiteries or places of buriall to the disquieting of the spirits of the Saintes departed and did it not abolish those pernoctations in the places of buriall which Hierome vrged so violently against Vigilantius and forbid the hauing of any pictures in churches Ne quod colitur aut adoratur in parietibus depingatur Doth not the Canon of the Apostles prescribe that all the faithfull that come together in the Church and communicate not in the Sacrament shall be excommunicate which also the Councell of Antioche reuiveth and confirmeth Doth not Gelasius command all them to bee excommunicated that receiuing the Sacrament of the Lords body abstaine from the participation of the cuppe Did not the church of Rome thinke it so farre necessary that the people should communicate in both kindes that Ordo Romanus prescribeth on good Friday when they consecrate not but receiue that which was reserued being consecrated the day before they should take wine consecrate it by putting or dipping the body of the Lord into it with pronouncing the Lords prayer that so the people might receiue the whole Sacrament and yet now the halfe communion is sufficient Did not the Mileuitane and Arausicane Councels condemne those errours touching the strength of nature and power of free-will to performe the workes of vertue without assistance of speciall grace which since haue beene receiued in the Romane Schooles as if they had beene catholicke verities The like might bee shewed in many other particulars but these may suffice Wherefore let vs proceed to his eigth chapter CHAP. 8. IN this chapter first hee sheweth that generall Councels are of highest authority in the Church of God and secondly laboureth to proue that they testifie for Romish Religion To proue that Councels are of highest authority in the Church of God which no man denyeth he produceth the testimonies of the Bishop of Winchester Doctour Morton the Protestant Relator of Religion and Doctour Sutcliffe And lastly addeth that I am clearely of the same opinion assuring all men that the interpretations of Scripture proposed by priuate men are not so proposed and vrged by them as if they would binde all others to receiue them and that none but Bishops assembled in a Generall Councell may interprete Scriptures in such sort as by their authority to suppresse all them that gaine-say such interpretations For so are my words which hee hath altered to make men thinke I allow none in any sort to interprete Scriptures but generall Councels wherein he wrongeth me as he well knoweth seeing I
the Bishop of Rome without any breach of the Canon alleaged I haue shewed my opinion in the fifth Booke of the Church And therefore seeing the Authour of these proofes proceedeth no farther in alleaging any thing out of that which I haue written I will here leaue him not doubting but others whom he hath wronged will make him know hee hath dealt no better with them then he hath with me and that therefore the plausible conclusion hee maketh in the end of it selfe falleth to the ground the premises vpon which it should stay it selfe being taken away For we neither acknowledge thrt Papists holding the infallibility of the popes iudgement the vniversalitie of his iurisdiction and power to dispose the kingdomes of the world beleeuing free-will to performe do the actions of vertue without assistance of speciall grace perfection of inherent righteousnesse satisfactions merit of condignitie propitiatorie sacrifice of the Masse and the like can euer be saued so liuing dying nor that the present Roman Church is the true church of Christ nor that the preeminence they now giue to the Pope was either claimed or practised ouer the whole church from S. Peter to these our dayes as this namelesse and shamelesse Author saith we doe nor that all the bookes which the Romane church now receiueth for canonicall Scriptures were deliuered for such by the Apostles or receiued for such by the church nor that the true and best translations of holy Scripture with the lawfull supreme binding exposition of them together with Apostolicall traditions generall Councels or primitiue Fathers giue any testimony that the present Romane church is that company of holy ones that houshold of faith that Spouse of Christ and church of the liuing God which is so diligently to be sought after whose communion wee must embrace whose directions we must follow and in whose judgement wee must rest but contrariwise we are well assured all these doe witnesse against her that shee is an erring hereticall and apostaticall church that shee hath forsaken her first faith departed from her primitiue sincerity plunged those that adhere vnto her into many grosse and damnable errours and defiled her selfe with intolerable superstition and idolatrie so that as well in respect of her errours in faith superstition and idolatry in diuine worship as of her slanderous treacherous bloudy and most horrible hellish practises to ouerthrow and destrow all that doe but open their mouthes against her abominations wee may justly account her to bee the Synagogue of Sathan the faction of Antichrist and that Babylon out of which wee must flie vnlesse wee will be partakers of her plagues FINIS a Exod. 3. 14. and 6. 3. b Reve. 1. 8. c Revel 5. 1â—… 4. 11. d Gasper Contarenus lib. 7. primae Philosophiae e Quis fecisti nos â—…d te inquietum est cor nostrum donec requiescat in te Aug. lib. 1. Confess in â—…tio f Contarenus lib. de libero Arbitrio a Virtus naturae ordinat actâ—…â—…um in bonum per naturam quia non est supra naturam ideo potest in illum ordinem sine dispositione nova ferre adâ—…ocum Actus rationaliâ—… creaturae meritorius oportet quòd oâ—…dmetur ad bonum quod est suprâ—… ipsam quod est summum bonum infinitum Quia ergo non 〈◊〉 possibilis extensio rationals creaturae supra seipsam ideo non est ei possibile per naturam vt ordinet suum actum siue perveniat in suum finem ideo necesse est vt invetur gratia Et post Duplex est cognitio de Deo Vna per effectus suâ—… haec est fine gratia alia per praesentiam sui apud animam haec est peâ—… gâ—…atiam Praesenâ—… autem est in quantum pâ—…sentat seu pâ—…sentemfacit beatitudinem quae est in ipso in habitu tantum vt in parâ—…ulis in affectu tantum vt in adultis in habitu affectu intellectu vt in beatis Alex. de Hâ—…es part 3. â—…61 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 1. b Oftendam tibi oâ—…e bonâ—… Exo. 33. 19. c Ioan Picus Heptapli l. 7. in proâ—…mio d Iohn 6. 44. d August de Civitate Dei lib. 12. c. 8. e August de libero Arbitrio lib. 3. cap. 15. a Ierem. 8. 4. b Alex. de Hales part 3. q. 1. memb 2. c Damasc. lib. 2. Orthodoxae fidei cap. 4. d 1. Tim. 〈◊〉 21. et Iude verse 6. e Maior libertas est necessaria adversus tot tantas tentationes quae in Paradiso non fuerunt dono perseverantiae munita et firmata vt cuÌ„ omnibus amoribus terroribus erroribus suis vincatur hic mundus Hoc Sanctorum martyria docuerunt denique ille Adam terrente nullo insuper contra Dei terrentis imperium libero vsus arbitrio non stetit in tanta felicitate in tanta non peccandi facilitate Isti autem non dico terrente mundo sed saeuiente ne starent steterunt in fide cum videret ille bona praesentia quae erat relicturus isti futuâ—…a quae acceptuti fuerunt non viderent vnde illud Nisi donante illo c. Aug. de Correp gratia Cap. 12. a Wisd. 10. 1. b Gen. 3. 9. c Gen. 3. 1 5. d Gen. 4. 4. e Gen. 4. 8. f Gen. 4. 25. g Gen. 6. h Gen. 7. i Gen. 10. 21. k Hieron in Epist ad Evagrium 1. Gen. 9. 26. l Gen 12. 1. m Gen 15. 5. n Gen. 12. 3. o Gen. 17. 9. p Gen. 15. 4. 17. 21. 2. 3. q Gen. 25. 23. r Malac. 1. 2. 3. s Gen. 32. 28. 〈◊〉 Gen. 49. 8. 10 u Rom. 3. 2. x Rom. 9. 4. 5. y Luke 2. 32. a Philip. 2. 9. 10 b Nazianz. Orat 4. de filio 〈◊〉 c Iohn 4. 23. a Mat. 28. 19. 20. b Luke 24. 45. 46. 47. 48. c Acts 1. 4. d Acts 2. 1. e Catech. Trident in explicatione Symboli f Quimvâ—… proprie dicatur synâ—…ga Iudâ—…corum Ecclesia verò Christianorum quia Congregatio magis pecâ—…um Convocatio magis hominum intelligi solet taâ—…en illam dictam invenimus Ecclesiam nobis fortassis magis convenit dicere Salva noâ—… Domine noster congrega noâ—… de Gentibus ut consiteâ—…mur nomini sancto tuoâ—…neque dedignari noâ—… oportet imo gratias incffabiles agere quia famous oves 〈◊〉 eius quas praevidebat cum dicereâ—… Habeo alias over Aug. in Psal. 77. g Synagoga dicitur populus Israel cum vtique quamvis vero Deo mancipâ—…us viderâ—…tur pro magnis tamen sumâ—…is bonis ab illo carâ—…lia 〈◊〉 temporalia requirâ—…bat Aug. in Psal. 8â—… Sed in Psal. 72. ostendit vtâ—…que multi animadertentes quae promiserit Deus populo sito â—…empe 〈◊〉 â—…sum terrenâ—… patriam pâ—… 〈◊〉 â—…errenam non considerantes in his omnibus figurâ—… esse 〈◊〉 intelligentes quid ibi laterer paâ—…rent non habere Deum melius quod
vertue of their owne proper for me Caietan confesseth that God doth not so produce them as an immediat agent but that the 2d causes doe mediate between him and them as secondary principal agents bring forth their effects Yet are not these that is the first the 2d causes partiall but totall causes of all those effects which they produce For the cleering whereof we must obserue that a cause may bee said to be totall either totalitate effectus that is because it bringeth forth the whole effect though some other cause haue such efficiencie also in respect of the same that without the helpe of it it cannot bring forth any such effect as when 2 men draw a ship either of them produceth the whole effect and moueth the whole ship but yet not so wholly but that either hath need of the others helpe and concurrence Or secondly a cause may bee said to bee totall totalitate causoe and that in 2 sorts either so as to produce the whole effect without any concurrence of any other cause in which sense neither God nor the creature neither the first nor the 2d cause must be said to be a totall cause or so as that though some other do concurre yet the being power of working and actuall cooperation of it is wholy from the agent with which it doth concurre and so God is a totall cause of all those effects that he produceth by and together with the 2d causes So that the opinion of them who thinke that God hath no immediat influence into the effects of 2d causes nor immediate concurrence with such causes in producing their effects is to be exploded out of all Christian schools Churches as profane heathnish Wherfore there are who finding that this first opiniō is not to be admitted flie to a 2d little better then the former For they acknowledge that God hath an immediate influence into the effects of all 2d causes but they think it to be general indefinit to be ◅ted determined by the different concurse of 2d causes It is true indeed that God worketh all things as an vniversall cause but this may bee vnderstood wayes For first a cause may be sayd to be vniuersall in the vniuersality of predication as opposit to speciall or particular as an artificer in respect of this that speciall kinde of artificers is generall and is an vniuersall cause of all workes of arte and they of such speciall workes as are incident to their seuerall kinds Secondly a cause may bee sayd to bee vniversall in that it extendeth it selfe to effects of all sorts in respect of something common to them all and not in respect of that which is proper to each of them vnlesse the working of it bee limited and directed by something else The fire warmeth the water with which poison is mingled in the same sorte that it doth any other water and without any difference of it own action And the actions of the sun fire are such as that men make vse of thē to vvhat purposes they please accordingly as their vvorking is differently applied bring forth differēt effects Thirdly a cause may be sayd to be vniversall because the efficiencie and vvorking of it extendeth it selfe to many things according to the seuerall differences of them without being limited and determined by any other thing These men suppose that God is an vniversall cause in the second sense and that his concurrence influence is indefinit generall and such as may be taken and applied by second causes in what sort they will So that the actions of free vvill the actions of euery other second cause haue from the freedome of the wil the particular quality of the second causes that they are of this or that sort good or bad not from the concurse or influence of the first cause which is finde◅init as is the concurse influence of the sun vvith other inferiour causes and as one man may make offer of his helpe concurrence to whatsoeuer another vvill make vse of it So they suppose that God offereth his concurse to second causes to be vsed by them to what purpose in what sort they will According to this conceipt they suppose they can easily cleere the doubt and free God from all imputation of being authour of sin though he concurre immediatly with second causes in to the producing of those actions that are sinfull For say they his concurse influence is indefinit and is by them applied in ill sorte to ill purposes But first this conceipt cleereth not God from being authour of sin And secondly it cannot stand with the grounds of Philosophie or diuinity That it cleereth not God from being authour of sin but rather layeth this imputation on him it is euident For if the concurse of God be generall indefinit indifferent and to be determined by the creature to the producing of good or euill it followeth that when the will of the creature determineth it selfe to the specificall act of sin God also determinately concurreth with it in particular to the producing of such an acte in kinde That this consequence is good it is evident because whosoeuer shall offer his help concurrence cooperation to another indifferently for the producing of good or euill the actes of sin or vertue as it shall please him he concurreth in trueth indeede to the producing of the acte of sin in particular as it is such an act if by the will of the other his concurrence cooperation bee determined to such an acte in particular Wherefore if God for his part offer onely a generall concurse such as is indifferent to the producing of actes of vertue or sinne accordingly as the will of the second cause shall determine it it will follow that God concurreth determinately or in particular to the producing of the acte of sin as being determined to the producing of such an act in particular by the will of the creature before he come to actuall cooperation or concurrence Secondly this conceipt cannot stand with the grounds of true Philosophie or diuinitie For if Gods concurse were onely generall and indefinit to bee determined by the will of the creature the will of the creature should bee before the will of God in respect of the particularity of things yea in respect of some reall acte as an acte it should be simply the first agent For according to this fancie because the creature inclineth to such an acte to put a thing in being therefore God cooperateth Whence it will follow that there are 2 beings of things that God is not simply the first cause of all those things that haue being 2ly It pertaineth to diuine prouidence determinately to will aforehand to appoint what afterwards shall be to moue second causes to certaine and determinate effects so to dispose all things that they may attaine the ends for which they were created But this could
leaue to whom they pleased That the other Apostles were Pastours first the Hymne of the Church wherein they are expressely saide to haue bin constituted Pastours by Christ proueth Secondly the confession of Bellarmine acknowledging that what was giuen to Peter by those wordes Feede my sheepe was giuen vnto all by those other wordes As my Father sent me so send I you confirmeth the same And thirdly the enumeration of the seuerall kindes of feeding euery of which the Diuines doe shew to agree to the rest as well as to Peter demonstrateth that they were all Pastours Secondly whereas they say that the office of a Pastour is a thing of perpetuall vse and necessitie and consequently perpetuall and that the amplitude of power which was in Peter agreed vnto him in that hee was a Pastor and as a Pastor they bewray notable ignorance and folly For it is true indeed that the office of a Pastor is of perpetuall vse and necessity and soe to continue for euer but the amplitude of power and jurisdiction and the great preëminences that were in Peter did not agree vnto him as to a Pastour or in that hee was a Pastor For if they had then must they agree to euery Pastor so euery Bishop must haue the same not the Pope only For as whatsoever agreeth to a man in that he is a man agreeth to every man so whatsoeuer agreeth to a Pastor in that he is a Pastor agreeth to euery one that is a Pastor If they shall say that the great and ample preëminences that were in Peter did not agree vnto him as a Pastor but in some other respect then his beeing a Pastor which is an office of perpetuall necessity vse and continuance will not proue the same perpetuall no more then other things which this Pastour had in that he was an Apostle If they shall say these things agreed vnto him not in that he was a Pastor but in that he was such a Pastor as was to feed the flocke of Christ and people of God by deliuering vnto them the doctrine of truth without all mixture of any the least errour to confirme the same by miracles following to giue the visible gifts of the holy Spirit by the only imposition of his hands it is true that they say but such a Pastour they confesse is necessary onely in the beginnings of the Christian Church and not afterwards and therefore from hence it cannot be concluded that the ample preëminences that were in Peter as his infallibility of judgement and illimited Commission were to be passed ouer from him to his Successors and after-commers Their second conceipt is more fond then the first For if Peter were by Christ constituted sole supreme Pastour and Bishoppe of the whole vniuersall world and yet his meaning was that others should likewise receiue immediatly from himselfe power to doe as much in the governing of the Church as Peter he meant to giue him something and presently to take it from him againe For as if the Pope shall make a man Bishop of such a cittie or countrey and thereby giue vnto him that supreme direction that nothing shall be done within that compasse without his authoritie and consent and shall presently send another with full authority to doe any thing that the former may do and no way to bee subiect to his controule or restraint in the performance thereof or accomptant for it hee reuoketh and maketh voyde his first graunt so here if Christ make Peter supreme Bishoppe and Pastour of the whole Christian world and presently constitute eleuen other Apostles with power and commission to doe any thing that Peter may doe in all parts of the world and towards all persons which as they haue not from him so he cannot take it from them or limit them in the vse of it hee absolutely voideth his first graunt made to Peter But they will say perhaps that Christ meant little fauour to Peter more then to one of the rest of the Apostles but that all his care was for the good of the Pope whom hee meant to make a great man in the world and that therefore he constituted the other Apostles immediatly as well as Peter put them into equall commission with him and would not haue them beholding to him for any honour or power they had but appointed that all other Bishops should receiue their mission calling commission and authority from Peter during the short time of his life and after his departure in all succeeding ages to the end of the world from his Successours the Bishoppes of Rome This truly is well said in fauour of the Pope if it were as truly said as it is kindly meant but we shall find that there is no truth in that they say For it is cleare and evident that each Apostle by his commission hee had from Christ without being any way beholding to Peter for it had authority to preach the Gospell to such as neuer heard of it before to plant Churches and ordaine constitute in them Pastours and Bishops and out of his more large and ample commission to make other though somewhat more restrained and limited whence it will follow that they whom any of the other Apostles ordained and constituted Pastours and Bishoppes which were innumerable in all parts of the world receiued nothing from Peter nor his pretended Successour Now they whom the Apostles thus constituted and ordained might constitute and ordaine other by vertue of their office and calling they had from the Apostles and those other other againe to succeede them so that none of these to the end of the world one succeeding another should euer receiue any thing frō Peter or his pretended Successor And therefore it is absurd that Bellarmine saith that the Apostles receiued all their jurisdiction immediately from Christ that yet notwithstanding all Bishops receiue the same frō the Pope And those Papists are better aduised that say that the Bishops of other Churches receiue not their jurisdiction from the Pope but from Christ by those Apostles that constituted their Churches and planted their predecessours in the same setting them the bounds of their Bishop-like charge whence it will follow as Bellarmine wisely foresaw and therefore declined this opinion that the Pope cannot either take away or diminish their authority vnlesse any man can shew where Christ gaue him power to limite restraine or take away that power from men which they haue from himselfe by the hands of the other Apostles and their after-commers without being any way beholding to Peter for the same Wherefore they haue yet one more strange conceipt behind to helpe the matter then any of those we haue hitherto heard which is that Peter being not onely an Apostle but supreme Pastour and Bishop of the whole world constituted by Christ made the other Apostles Bishops and Pastours and that they ordained Bishops not by vertue of their Apostolique power which they receiued immediately from
Christ without being beholding to Peter for it or inferiour to him in it but by vertue of their Bishoply authority and offīce which they receiued from Peter Alioqui enim sayth Bellarmine cum omnes Apostoli plurimos Episcopos in varijs locis constituerint si Apostoli ipsi non sint facti Episcopi à Petro certè maxima pars Episcoporum nondeducit originem suam à Petro that is For otherwise seeing all the Apostles constituted exceeding many Bishops in diuerse places if the Apostles themselues were not made Bishops by Peter certainely the greatest part of Bishoppes will not fetch their originall from Peter This his fancie of Peters making the other Apostles Bishoppes immediately after as his manner is like an honest man hee contradicteth confessing that the Apostles were all Bishops and the first Bishops of the Church in that they were Apostles without any such ordination Omnes Apostoli sayth he fuerunt Episcopi imò etiam primi Episcopi Ecclesiae tametsi non sunt ordinati that is All the Apostles were Bishops nay which more is the first Bishops of the Church without any other or new ordination besides their Apostolique mission and calling And in another place he pronoūceth perēptorily that by vertue of these words As my Father sēt me so sēd I you the Apostles were made Vicars of Christ nay that they receiued the very offīce authority of Christ and that in the Apostolique power all Ecclesiasticall power is contained and though in the former place he sayd expressely Non eo ipso quòd aliquis est Apostolus est Episcopus that is A man is not therefore a Bishop because an Apostle for the twelue were Apostles before they were either Bishops or Priests yet in the later place hee sayth it is not to be maruailed at that they were Apostles before the passīon of Christ and yet neither Priests nor Bishops for that the Lord at diuerse times gaue the Apostles diuerse kindes and degrees of power but especiallie in the twentith of Iohn perfected that hee beganne before his passīon Soe that an Apostle perfectly constituted and authorised hath both Priestlie and Episcopall dignitic and power though in the beginning when the Apostles were rather designed then fully constituted not hauing receiued their full Commissīon they vvere neither Priests nor Bishoppes But to leaue BELLARMINE lost in these mazes it is most easie demonstratiuely to proue that the Apostles in that they were Apostles perfectly and fully constituted had both Priestlie and Bishoply dignity and power in most eminent sort For did not CHRIST giue the Apostles power to doe any Ecclesiasticall act that a Bishoppe can doe Did hee not giue them power to preach and baptize vvhen hee sayd vnto them Go teach all nations Baptizing them c to minister the holy Eucharist vvhen hee sayd Doe this as est as ye shall doe it in remembrance of mee Did hee not giue them the power of the Keyes of binding loosing of remitting retaining sinnes consequently all that commeth within the compasse of Ecclesiasticall office and Ministerie doubtlesse hee did Neither is there any that dareth to deny any part of that which hath beene saide And therefore it is an idle fansie that Peter made the rest of his fellowes Bishops the Apostolique power implying in it eminently Episcopall as the greater the lesser But they will say Peter made Iames the lesser Bishop of Hierusalem Indeed Baronius falsifieth Chrysostome and maketh him say that the Doctour of the world made Iames Bishop of Hierusalem whereas hee saith no such thing but asking the question why Peter whom Christ so much fauoured was not preferred to bee Bishop of Hierusalem answereth that Christ made him Doctour of the world which was a greater honour then to haue beene fastened to the Church of Hierusalem to haue beene set in the Episcopall Throne there But it is cleare by the testimonies of Antiquity that Peter Iames the greater Iohn ordained Iames Bishop of Hierusalem So saith Anacletus in his second Epistie if any credit be to be giuen vnto it where hee hath these words A Bishop must be ordained of three Bishops as Peter Iames the greater and Iohn ordained Iames the lesser Bishop of Hierusalem Clemens Alexandrinus also as we reade in Eusebius saith the very same and Hierome de viris illustribus attributeth the ordaining of Iames not to Peter alone but to the Apostles His words are Iacobus statim post passionem Domini ab Apostolis Hierosolymorum Episcopus ordinatur that is Iames presently after the passion of the Lord is ordained Bishop of Hierusalem by the Apostles If any man aske how the Apostles did ordaine or make Iames being an Apostle a Bishop if the Apostolique office imply in it the office and dignitie of a Bishop as the greater the lesser we answere that a Bishop differing from an Apostle as in other things so in this that he is fixed to some certaine place whereof specially hee taketh the care whereas the care imployment of an Apostle is more at large When the Apostles after the conversion of Nations and people began to retire themselues to certaine places there to rest and specially to take care thereof they were in that respect rather Bishops then Apostles and in this sort Iames the lesser being appointed by the Apostles to make his principall abode at Hierusalem a chiefe city of the world whence the faith spread it selfe into all other parts and more specially to take care thereof is rightly said to haue beene constituted Bishop of that place by them not as if they had giuen him any new power and authority that he had not before or not in so perfect sort but that they limited and restrained him more specially to one certaine place where he should vse the same The place in the Acts maketh nothing for the confirmation of the Popish errour for Paul and Barnabas formerly designed by Christ to be Apostles were againe by the ministerie of Prophets revealing the will and pleasure of Almighty GOD separated more specially to bee Apostles of the Gentiles and put forth into that employment with fasting prayer and imposition of hands not thereby receiuing any new power but a speciall limitation and assignation of those parts of the world wherein principally they should be employed Besides these were not Apostles but Prophets such as Agabus was that are mentioned in this place inferiour in degree to Apostles and such as might not make an Apostle to be a Bishop but did onely signifie and reueale what the will of God was and whither he meant to send these worthy Apostles and so with prayer and fasting commended them to the grace of God and therefore this place maketh nothing for proofe of Peters ordaining and appointing the rest of the Apostles to be Bishops CHAP. 24. Of the preeminence that Peter had amongst the Apostles and the reason why Christ directed his speeches specially
and then there is no question but all men are bound for euer to adhere to this church and to eate the Lambe within the wals of this house That this is the meaning of Hierome the very forme of his words doe perswade vs. I am ioyned saith hee to Peters chaire vpon that rocke the Church is builded out of this house of the Church doubtlesse the Lambe may not be eaten Now by the name of the Church immediatly going before is meant the vniuersall Church therefore by this house we must vnderstand that great house within the wals whereof the whole houshold of faith is contained Secondly we say that if he speake of the Romane or West Church particularly he may be thought to meane not that hee shall perpetually and alwayes bee iudged a profane person that eateth the Lambe without the wals of that house but things so standing as they did when he wrote no other partes of the Church being sound safe and free from heresies but the Westerne parts onely Which made him say hee knew not Paulinus who was then Bishop of Antioch within the compasse of whose Patriarchship he liued because there was question as well of his faith as of the lawfulnesse of his ordination For otherwise hee ought to haue knowne him sought to him and respected him Thirdly wee say it is more then probable that the whole West Church shall neuer lose or forsake the true profession and that therefore hee may rightly be iudged a profane person that eateth the paschall Lambe out of the communion of the same though sometimes the Bishop of Rome in person be an heretique other of his colleagues continuing faithfull And that Hierome was of opinion that the Bishop of Rome may become an heretique it is most cleare and euident in that he saith that both Liberius and Felix were Arrian Heretickes Thus haue we answered whatsoeuer may be alledged out of Hierome for the Papacie and shewed the weakenesse of those allegations Now let vs see what authorities may be brought out of his writings against the absolute supreme power of Popes First he saith if wee seeke authority Orbis maior est vrbe The world is greater then the greatest citty in the world and the whole Church is of greater authority then the particular Church of Rome And thereupon reprehendeth the negligence or errour of the church of Rome in permitting contrary to the manner of other churches Deacons to grow so insolent as to dare to sit in the presence of the Presbyters when the Bishoppe was away as also in ordaining Presbyters vpon the commendation of Deacons So that hee blamed not the Deacons onely as Bellarmine vntruely saith but the Romane Bishop to whom the ordaining of Presbyters pertained Neither will it followe that the insolencie of the Deacons presuming to sitte in the presence of Presbyters was vnknowne to the Bishop or not allowed by the Church as Bellarmine collecteth because they are said so to haue done when the Bishop was away For that circumstance rather insinuateth that though they had not cast off all respect to the Bishop yet they had forgotten their duty towards the Presbyters then that this their presuming was vnknowne to the Bishop Secondly he pronounceth that wheresoeuer a Bishop bee whether at Rome or Eugubium at Constantinople or Rhegium at Alexandria or Tanais hee is of the same merit and the same Priesthood the power of riches and the humility of poore estate not making a Bishop higher or lower To this place Bellarmine answereth that all Bishops are equall in the power of order but not of jurisdiction But it is certaine Hierome thought all Bishops equall not only in the power of order but of jurisdiction also For Metropolitanes in his time though in order and honour greater then the rest were bound to follow what the greater part of the Bishops of the Province consented on and might doe nothing but as the greater part should resolue howsoeuer in processe of time by positiue constitution the Metropolitanes limited and directed by Canons were trusted with the doing of many things by themselues alone rather then the Bishops would bee troubled with often meeting in Councels But saith Bellarmine it cannot bee that Hierome should thinke all Bishops equall in the power of jurisdiction seeing without all question the Bishop of Alexandria hauing vnder him three great Provinces was greater in jurisdiction then the Bishop of Tanais who had vnder him onely one poore little city For answer hereunto we say that Patriarches haue no more power ouer the Metropolitanes subject to them then the Metropolitanes haue ouer the Bishops of the Province and that therefore howsoeuer the extent of their power reach farther yet proportionably it is no greater then the power of the Metropolitanes within their narrower precincts and compasse that the Metropolitan originally is not greater in the power of jurisdictiō then any other Bishop of the Province howsoeuer he haue a preheminence of honour and sit as a President among the Bishops meeting to performe the acts of jurisdiction and by cōmon consent to manage the affaires of the Province so that notwithstanding any thing the Cardinall can say to the contrary the testimonies and authorities of Hierome stand good against the Popes proud claime of vniversall power Wherefore leauing Hierome who witnesseth not for them but against them let vs heare whether Augustine will say any thing for them Out of Augustine sundry things are alleadged as first that hee saith The principality and chiefetie of the Apostolicall chaire did euer flourish in the Romane Church and secondly that to Bonifacius he saith Thou disdainest not to be a friend of the humble and those of the meane sort and though thou sit in higher place yet thou art not high minded And againe The watch tower is common to vs all that are Bishops although thou hast a higher roome in the same Surely it is strange to what purpose these places of Augustine are alleaged For wee neuer denied a principality or chieftie of order and honour to haue belonged anciently to the Bishops of Rome whilest they rested contented therewith and sought not to bring all vnder them by claime of vniversall power and this is all that can be collected out of Augustine But saith Bellarmine In his Epistle to Optatus speaking of a meeting of Bishops at Caesarea he saith an Ecclesiasticall necessitie laid vpon them by the reverend Pope Zozimus Bishop of the Apostolicall See drew them thither therefore he thought the Bishop of Rome superiour vnto other Bishops not in order honour onely but in power of commaunding also For answer hereunto first wee say that a great part of Africa was within the precincts of the Pat◅archship of Rome and that therefore the Bishop of Rome might call the Bishops of those parts to a Synodall meeting as euery Patriarch may doe the Bishops vnder him though hee had no commaunding power ouer all the world Secondly
that in a matter of faith concerning the whole state of the Church Zozimus as in order and honour first amongst Bishops might vrge them by vertue of the Canons appointing such meetings to meete together in a Synode for the suppressing of such heresies as he found to arise amongst them and might justly threaten if they should refuse so to doe to reject them from the communion of the Bishops and Churches adhering to him and thereby lay an Ecclesiasticall necessity vpon them without any claime of vniversall power Neither doth the next place wherein Augustine and the Bishops assembled in the Councell of Mileuis desire Innocentius to concurre with them in suppressing the heresies of the Pelagians which sought to spread themselues into all parts of the world and to vse his pastorall care and diligence for the preventing of the dangers of the weake members of Christ yeeld any better proofe that they reputed him vniversall Bishop For what doe they here attribute to the Bishop of Rome that Cyprian writing to Stephen in the case of Martianus Bishop of Arle doth not assume to himselfe other his colleagues saying of himselfe thē that they are bound to vse all diligence to gather together and call backe the erring sheepe of Christ to apply the medicine of fatherly piety for the curing of the wounds and hurts of such as are fallen to recollect and cherrish al the sheepe that Christ purchased with his precious bloud to know that though they be many Pastours yet they feed but one flocke But sayth Bellarmine why do they not rather write to the Patriarch of Hierusalem to the Metropolitane of Palaestina or to the Primate of Africa in which parts of the world Pelagianisme specially seemed to preuaile then to the Bishop of Rome if they did not thinke him to haue an vniuersall power Surely this question of the Cardinall sheweth that either he knoweth not or careth not what he writeth for the cause of Pelagius had beene often heard and examined by Synodes of Bishops in Palaestina and the Primate of Africa with his Africane Bishops did write to Innocentius as well as Augustine and those assembled in the Councell of Mileuis as well to informe him of the guilefull fraudulent and slipperie dealings of Pelagius that hee might no way be induced to fauour him as some feared not to giue out that he did as also that he might be perswaded to put to his helping hand for the suppressing of this heretique who though condemned by many Synodes ceased not to flie from place to place seeking to spread his heresies therefore there was no cause that they should write to either of these Thus haue our Aduersaries found nothing in Augustine and the Africanes that any way fauoureth the Popes proud claime of vniuersall power Neither do the rest of the witnesses who are next brought forth to giue testimonie for the Pope depose any more to the purpose then the former haue done For that Prosper saith Rome the See of Peter being made the head of Pastorall honour to the world holdeth by religion whatsoeuer it possesseth not by force of armes and that by reason of the principality of Priestly or Bishoply dignity it became greater in respect of the high tower of religion then the throne of princely power that Victor Vticensis calleth the Church of Rome the head of all Churches Hugo de Sancto Victore sayth the Apostolique See is preferred before all the Churches in the world is no more then that wee euer granted For they all speake of a chieftie and principality of order and honour and not of absolute commanding power And the place which our Aduersaries bring out of Vincentius Lirinensis to proue the Pope to be head of the world is strangely missealleaged For hauing spoken of the letters of Faelix the Martyr and holy Iulius Bishop of Rome he addeth that blessed Cyprian was produced out of the South and holy Ambrose out of the North that so not only Caput orbis the head of the world but the sides of it also might giue testimony to that iudgment by the head and sides of the world vnderstanding the parts of the world whence these witnesses were produced and not the witnesses themselues So that there is no more reason to inferre from hence that the Bishop of Rome is head of all the world then that Cyprian and Ambrose were the sides of the world Neither doe the testimonies of Cassiodore who attributeth to the Bishop of Rome a generall care of the whole Christian world and Beda who sayth Leo excercised the Priestly office in the Christian world make any more for proofe of the Popes vniuersall jurisdiction then the rest that went before For their sayings argue not an absolute vniuersall commaunding power ouer all but such a care of the whole as beseemeth him that is in order and honour the chiefe of Bishops from whom all actions generally concerning the Christian Church are either to take beginning or at least to be referred before finall ending that so his aduice may be had therein And surely howsoeuer Anselmus sayth the custodie of the faith of Christians and the regiment of the Church is committed to the Bishop of Rome and Bernard writeth of him that he is chiefe of Bishops heire of the Apostles in primacie Abel in gouernement Noah in Patriarchicall honour Abraham in order Melchizedek in dignity Aaron in authoritie Moses in iudgment Samuel in power Peter and in vnction Christ that others haue particular flockes assigned to them but that his charge hath no limits with such like Hyperbolical amplificatiōs of the Popes greatnes sauouring of the corruptiō of those late times wherein he liued yet wil it neuer be proued that either he or diuers others speakinges he did were of the Papall faction or beleeued that the Pope hath that vniuersall power and iurisdiction that is by the Iesuits and other Romanists at this day giuen vnto him For as Iohn Bacon a learned Schooleman and countriman of ours hath fitly noted some attributed all those things whereof Bernard and Anselmus speake to the Pope as thinking all fulnesse of Ecclesiasticall power and jurisdiction to be originally found in him and that by himselfe alone hee might doe all things in the gouernment of the Church and all other were to receiue of his fulnesse which is the opinion of our aduersaries at this day Other attributed these thinges vnto him not as hauing all power in himselfe alone but as head chiefe of Bishops together with their ioynt concurrence and assent So that hee had power to iudge of the faith to determine controuersies in religion as Patriarch of the West with the ioynt consent of his Westerne Bishops and as prime Bishoppe of the world with an Oecumenicall Synode wherein he was to sitte as an honourable president moderatour pronouncing according to the resolution of the Bishops and