Pope so narrowly that he did it not without the daunger of his life How be it he choose rather to hazard his life for the good of Christes Church then with his silence to bewray and betray the trueth The whole subiect of his Booke the argument which he there handleth is nothing else but this in very deed viz. to lay open to the eyes of all christiaÌ„ readers the false reportes miserable shiftes and plaine coozening trickes which the Byshops of Rome set abroach by false Bookes and fabulous Decrees to aduaunce them selues aboue all Royall and Imperiall power and to be thought equall with Christ the Sonne of God Hee soundly confuteth euery Period Sentence Clause Word of the fabulous and lying Decree published vnder the name of Constantine the great Yea hee prooueth and plainely conuinceth out of the very wordes of the Decree that it is nothing else but a false lying and counterfeit imagination inuented to aduance the Byshops of Rome aboue the Emperours of Rome and all Power vpon Earth To recite his large and manifolde authoritie proofes argumentes and reasons would both be tedious to the Reader and needlesse in the thing it selfe It may suffice to lay open to the gentle and thankfull Reader some speciall poynts conteyned in the said learned and worthy Declamation The first poynt is this viz. That Melchiades who was the next Byshop before Siluester confuteth the sayd Donation falsely fathered vpon Constantine the great For Melchiades affirmeth plainely sayth Laurentius Valla two thinges of great consequence Th' one that Constantine was a very zealous Christian in his time gaue licence throughout the whole world to all within his dominions not onely to become Christians but also to builde Churches euery where Th' other that the Emperour Constantine gaue Melchiades the Pallace of Lateran and those Grounds of which Gregorie maketh often mention in his register And this great learned Roman confirmeth the same in his wordes immediately afore-going which are these Omnis ferè Historia quae nomen Historiae meretur Constantinum a puâ—ro cum patre Constantio Christianum refert multo etiam ante Pontificatum Siluestri Euery Historie almost which is worthy the name of an Historie telleth vs that Constantine of a child was a Christian with his father Constantius euen long before Siluester was the Byshop of Rome This Valla affirmeth constantly as wee see And consequently the Donation pretended to be giuen to Siluester and the curing of Constantines supposed Leprie can not stand togeather with the same The Second poynt is this viz. That the words of the Decree do plainely conuince that Constantine neuer gaue any such gyft to Siluester These are his expresse words O furcifer Ecclesiaene id est templa Roma erant Petro et Paulo dicatae quis eas extruxerat quis aedisicare ausus fuisset quum nusquam foret vt Historia ait Christianis locus nisi secreta et latebrae O verlet were Churches that is Temples dedicated to Peter and Paul at Rome Who built them Nay who durst be so bold as to builde them seeing as Histories doe relate there was no place for Christians any where but Caues Dennes Groues to hide them in The third poynt is this viz. that the Decree fathered vpoÌ„ Constaâ—tine calleth the Bishop of Rome Pope which name for all that was not yet peculiarly ascribed to the Byshoppes of Rome These are Valla his expresse words O tuam singularem stultitiam Constantine modo dicebas coronam super-caput Papae ad honorem facere beati Petri nunc ais non facere quia Siluester illam recusat et quum factum recusantis probes tamen iubes eum aurea vti corona et quod hic non debere se agere existimat id tu ipsius successores dicis agere debere transeo quod rasuram coronam vocas et Papam pontificem Romanum qui nondum peculiariter sic appellari erat caeptus O Constantine great is thy follie afore thou sayd'st that the Crowne of Gold vpon the Popes head made for the honour of S. Peter now thou sayes it doth nor because Siluester refuseth it and thou approouing the fact of Siluester refusing it doest for all that commaunde to weare it and what he thinkes he may not doe that thou commaundes his successours for to doe I let passe that thou calles his Shauing a Crowne and the Byshop of Rome Pope who had not yet peculiarly gotten that name The fourth poynt is this viz. That the most Christian and worthy Emperour became the Popes Footman and helde his Stirroppe These are the wordes Tenentes fraenuÌ„ equi pro reuerentia beati Petri Apostoli dextratoris officium illi exhibuimus Wee held the Bridle of his Horse and for the reuerence of S. Peter the Apostle wee became his Foot-man or waighter at his Stirroppe Thus writeth Valla and thus is the counterfeite Decree which Valla very sharpely reprooueth and learnedly confuteth So that this counterfeite Donation with Constantines departure was the first steppe of the Popes Ladder of which I haue disputed at large in the Downe-fall of Popery The fift poynt is this viz. That what so euer the Emperours of latter time gaue to the Byshops of Rome concerning the Romane Empire the dominion and territories thereof they were induced to doe the same by the coozening trickes and deceitfull reportes of the Byshops of Rome which they falsely fathered vpon the most Christian and worthy Emperour Constantine the great Let vs heare attentiuely what Laurentius Valla deliuereth from his Penne. His first place which I meane to stande vpon is this Haec dicta sint vt nemo miretur si donationem Constantini coÌ„mentitiam fuisse Papae multi non potuerunt deprehendere tametsi ab aliquo eorum ortam esse hanc fallaciam reor at dicitis cur Imperatores quorum detrimento res ista redebat donationem Constantini non negant sed fatentur affirmant conseruant Ingens argumentuÌ„ mirifica defensio nam de quo tu loqueris Imperatore Si de Graeco qui verus fuit Imperator negabo confessioneÌ„ fin de Latino libenter etiam confitebor etenim quis nescit Imperatorem Latinum gratis esse factum a summo Pontifice vt opinor Stephano qui Graecum Imperatorem quod auxilium non ferret Italiae priuauit latinumque fecit ita vt plura Imperator a Papa quam Papa ab Imperatore acciperet These thinges are written to this end that no man thinke it strange if many Popes could not perceiue Constantines supposed Donation to be counterfeit although I thinke that some of them inuented this coozening tricke But yee will say Why doe not the Emperours who sustayned the losse deny the gyft of Constantine but rather graunt and support the same A great argument a marueylous defence For of what Emperour doest thou speake If of the Greeke who was the true Emperour in deed
speaches of Pope Leo against him B. C. The Fathers of the Councell of Chalcedon made suite to the Pope to confirme their Decrees T. B. I answere first that this Epistle is like to the other of the Nicene Fathers that is to say a bastard and counterfeite This is soundly prooued in the fift Aphorisme in the first sixt and seauenth Obiections Let them be well remembred Secondly that the suite which the Fathers of the Councell made to Pope Leo did argue onely a prerogatiue of Honour not any soueraigntie of Power Which I prooue by a triple meane For first these are the wordes of the request Rogamus igitur et tuis Decretis nostrum honera iudicium We therefore desire you to honour our iudgement with your Decrees Hee was the chiefe Patriarch and Byshop of that Citie which at that time raigned and was reputed Caput mundj and so his consent was of great authoritie in that behalfe Secondly his Messengers would not agree to that prerogatiue of honour which the Councell had confirmed to the Byshoppe of Constantinople and therefore they requested him to consent thereto because the Emperour Theodosius had so commaunded them Thirdly the Fathers say plainely that the Emperour confirmed the Councell these are the wordes Opportunum credidimus esse honoris eâ—us confirmationem ab vniuersalj Concilio celebrarj Wee thought it meete and conuenient that the whole Councell should celebrate his Honours confirmation To which I adde that seeing the Fathers of this Chalcedon Councell did approue and confirme the Canons both of the Nicene and of the Constantinopolitane Synode in which Synodes this pretended Prerogatiue is condemned it must follow of necessitie that the sayd Epistle or relation is a counterfeit B. C. It can not truly be called a Decree of the Councell which was not confirmed by the Head no more then that an Act of Parliament which is not confirmed by the King T. B. I answeere first with the famous popish Byshoppe Melchior Canus that it is not in these affaires as in humane assemblies Which the holy Prophet doth plainely insinuate while in the person of God he vttereth these wordes For my cogitations are not your cogitations neither are your wayes my wayes sayth the Lord. Secondly that there is great disparitie betweene the Pope and the King concerning the subiect now in hand For first the King hath a sacred soueraigntie ouer all the people within his dominions as ouer his naturall Subiectes and loyall Seruantes But the Pope hath no soueraigntie ouer transmarine and forraigne Christians as I haue already prooued Secondly the King though negatiuely he forbid Lawes to be enacted yet doth he not make any new Lawes affirmatiuely to tie all his Subiectes without the consent of his Lordes spirituall Lordes temporall and the Commons of his Kingdomes But the Pope challengeth Power though most impudently and against sacred Canons to make Lawes to tie all Christians in the whole world no way subiect to him Thirdly the King taketh not vpon him solely of himselfe to abrogate cassiere or disanull any act of Parliament to which he formerly gaue his consent But the Pope taketh roundly though fondly vpon him solely of himselfe to abrogate cassiere disanull any Decree of Councell though formerly approoued by himselfe Fourthly no text of holy Writ no Canon of any auncient Councell no Father of approoued antiquitie denyeth to Kinges sacred soueraigntie within their Kingdomes Territories and Dominions ouer any persons whatsoeuer borne within the precincts thereof But all the foure first most famous generall Councelles of Nice Constantinople Ephesus and Chalcedon all which S. Gregorie reuerenced as the foure Gospels denie the Popes falsely pretended Primacie in all forraigne and transmarine Kingdomes and confine his iurisdiction to the Citie of Rome and to the suburbican territories of the same All which is soundly and plentifully prooued in the Conclusions and Aphorismes next aforegoing B. C. But it may bee Bell will say that the confirmation of the Councell belonged not to the Pope It is not possible that he dare offer it T. B. I answere first that seeing the Pope as is alreadie prooued taketh vpon him to change the nature of thinges by applying the substantiall partes of one thing to an other to make some thing of nothing the proper action of God in creation to depose Kinges to translate Empires and to bestow the same at his good pleasure to make it Sacriledge to dispute of his power to terrifie men so with Fire and Faggot and with thunderboltes of cursing Excomunications that though hee carry thousandes to Hell yet may no man say Why doest thou so It may seeme no maruell if Bell poore soule be afrayde to anger his Holinesse Neuerthelesse because the trueth is neuer ashamed but will in time preuayle Bell post deosculationem pedum and to prooue our Jesuite in this as in many other thinges a most impudent and notorious lyer dare boldly tell the Pope that the Confirmation of Councels belongeth not vnto him Yea Bell will not barely say it but he will produce such strong arguments such waightie authorities and such inuincible reasons as will make the Popes eares to tingle when hee shall read or heare the same Marke well this my Discourse vnto the end I purpose in God to proceed by way of Sections for the better illustration of the businesse now in hand The first Section of reasons in generall concerning the subiect now in hand I haue alreadie prooued in my Booke of Motiues that euery Monarch hath supreame soueraigntie ouer all Persons and causes within his Dominions and consequently that no Lawes can be of force in his Kingdomes without his royall assent approbation and confirmation of the same King Josaphat appoynted in Hierusalem Leuites Priestes and Princes of the families of Israel that they should iudge the iudgement cause of the Lord to the inhabitants thereof And he commanded them saying Thus shall ye doe in the feare of the Lord faythfully and with a perfect heart Yea he distinguished limitted the offices and functions both of Zabadias the ciuill Magistrate and of Amarias the Hie Priest thereby insinuating euidently that the chiefest power iurisdiction rested in the King not in Amarias the Hie Priest The same King to gather the Church which was decayed sent Preachers into sundry partes of his Kingdome appoynting Noble-men to accompany assist theÌ„ to couÌ„tenance their ministerie to compel the people to heare theÌ„ K. Asa vsed his authority in coÌ„manding Iudah to seek the Lord threatning them with death that should refuse so to do King Josias after he had abolished Idolatry compelled all his Subiectes to serue the true God to liue in his feare Ezechias commanded all Israel Judah to come to the house of the Lord at Jerusalem there to keepe the Passeouer which had been a long neglected and not obserued in such sort perfect maner as God had
praecedenteÌ„ SynoduÌ„ Episcopos earuÌ„ haeresum conuocauit sequitur cum autem conuenissent accersito ad se Nectario Imperator cuÌ„ eo de futura Synodo coÌ„municat iubetque vt quaestiones ex quibus natae fuerant haereses in disputationeÌ„ proponat quo vna fieret in ChristuÌ„ credentiuÌ„ Ecclesia et constitueretur dogma consonuÌ„ ad quaÌ„ religio conformaretur The Emperour not long after the precedent Synode calleth the Byshops of those Heresies togeather When they were assembled the Emperour calleth Nectarius the Byshop of Constantinople to him and consulteth with him concerning the future Synode and coÌ„maundeth him to propound in disputation those questions from whence the Heresies did spring to the ende that there might be one Church of the faythfull a consonant rule of fayth which might be as a paterne of religion Sigâ—bertus a famous Popish Monke writeth in this manner Secunda Synodus vniuersalis 150. PatruÌ„ congregatur Constantinopoli iubente Theodosio et annuente Damaso Papa quae MacedoniuÌ„ neganteÌ„ spirituÌ„ sanctuÌ„ DeuÌ„ esse coÌ„demnans consubstantialeÌ„ patri et filio spirituÌ„ sanctuÌ„ esse docuit The second generall Councell of an hundred fiftie Byshops is assembled at Constantinople by the commaundement of Theodosius Damasus the Pope agreeing thereunto in which Synodâ— Macedonius who denied the Holy Ghost to be God was condemned and the consubstantiabilitie of the Holy Ghost with the Father and the Sonne was confirmed in the same Theodoretus is consonant and vttereth many worthy periods The fourth Section of the Councell of Ephesus The third generall Councell being the first Ephesiue of two hundred Byshoppes was proclaymed by the commaundement of the Emperour Theodosius the younger against Nestorius denying the virgin Mary to be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and affirming Christ to haue persons twaine proouing that two natures did subsist in one onely person of Christ Jâ—sus in the yeare of our Lord God 433. Euagrius hath these wordes Cum ista Cyrillus venerandae memoriae Alexandrinorum Episcopus literis suis reprehendisset Nestorius vero reprehensioni illius restitisset et neque illius neque Celestini veteris Romae Episcopi monitis acquiauisset sed temulentiam suam aduersus vniuersam Ecclesiam nihil veritus effudisset haud praeter rationem a Theodosio iuniore Orientis Imperatore petijt vt ipsius nutu Synodus colligeretur Imperialibus itaque literis cum ad ipsum Cyrillum tum ad omnium vbique Ecclesiarum Episcopos missis ad sacrum Penticostes diem in quo venit ad nos spiritus S. Conuentus indicitur When Cyrillus the venerable Byshoppe of Alexandria had by his Letters reproued the wicked blasphemie of Nestorius and Nestorius had withstood the same neither yeelding to his admonition nor to Celestines the Byshop of old Rome but still malepertly powred out his drunken conceites against the whole Church then Cyrill not without cause requested the Emperour Theodosius the younger that by his authoritie a Synode might be called by the Letters therefore of the Emperour directed to Cyrill and to all other Byshops euery where the Synode is appoynted vpon the sacred day of Penticost at what time the Holy Ghost came downe vpon vs. Thus writeth this famous Historiographer Out of whose wordes I gather many worthy instructions First that neither Cyâ—illus the Byshoppe of Alexandria nor Celestinus the Byshoppe of Rome could by any meanes reclaime or diswade Nâ—storius from his cursed and blasphemous opinions Secondly that Cyrillus lamenting the harme that thereby did redound to the Church sought to the Emperour for redresse thereof humbly requesting him that a generall Councell might be gathered for the peace of the Church and for the condemnation of the Heresie of Nestorius Thirdly that Cyrillus that holy and learned Byshoppe who was reputed a Saint in his life-time did not make suite to the Byshoppe of Rome for calling of the Councell which doubtlesse he would haue done if the gathering of Councels had belonged vnto him Fourthly that S. Cyrill sought immediatly to the Emperour not once acquainting the Byshop of Rome therewith Fiftly that the Byshoppe of Rome himselfe was commaunded to come to the Synode euen in such sort as other Byshoppes were Which I prooue by a double meane First because the Storie sayth That the Emperour called omnium vbique Ecclesiarum Episcopos the Byshoppes of all Churches euery where Secondly because Nicephorus sayth that Celestinus the Byshoppe of Rome was absent but appoynted Cyrillus in his stead These are the words Celestinus autem Roma Episcopus propter nauigationis pericula Synodo adesse detrectauit ad Cyrillum tamen vt locum suum ibj obtineret scripsit But Celestine the Byshoppe of Rome was absent from the Synode by reason of the danger of Nauigation yet he wrote to Cyrillus that he might supply his place Touching the Popes absence from Councelles the Iesuiticall Cardinall Bellarmine giueth better and sounder reasons though vnawares both against the Pope himselfe which I willingly admit wishing the Reader to obserue and marke them seriously with mee as which are both memorable and of great consequence This Cardinall yeeldeth two reasons why the Pope was neuer present at Councels in the East-churches by himselfe and in his owne person the one forsooth because it was not conuenient that the Head should follow the members the other because the Emperour would euer sit in the highest place Out of whose wordes I must needes note two important poyntes by the way The one that in the auncient Church the highest place in Councels was euer reserued to the Emperour The other that the East-churches did neuer acknowledge the Popes Primacie which he this day arrogantly challengeth ouer all Kingdomes and Regalities To which twaine this pleasant adiunct must of necessitie be annexed viz. that our humble Father the Pope who hypocritically calleth himselfe seruus seruorum Dej would neuer come to Councels in the East partes because forsooth his charitie was so great that he could not endure to see the Emperour sitting in the highest place And it is not amisse for the benefite of the Reader if I heere adioyne the maner how the Emperour Constantine sate in the Councell of Nice Sozomenus that graue Historiographer who liued more then a thousand one hundred seuentie yeares agoe hath these wordes Congregatis itaque in vnum locum per medium sacerdotuÌ„ ad caput conuentus transeundo in throno quodam qui ipsi paratus erat confedit ac Synodus sedere iussa est Erant N. vtrinque ad parietes Palatij multa posita subsellia hic vero thronus maximus erat et reliquas sedes excellebat Therefore when the Byshoppes were come togeather the Emperour passing through the midst of them to the head of the assembly sate downe in a Throne prepared for him and willed the Byshops to sit downe There were many Seates on both sides to the walles of the Pallace but the Emperours
Reges Domino seruiunt in timore nisi ea quae contra iussa Domini fiunt religiosa seueritate prohibendo atque plectendo Aliter N. seruit quia homo est aliter quia etiam et rex est Quia homo est ei seruit viuendo fideliter quia vero etiam Rex est seruit leges iusta praecipientes et contraria prohibentes conuenienti vigore sanctiendo sicut seruiuit Ezechias Lucos et Templa Idolorū et illa excelsa quae contra praecepta Dei fuerant constructa destruendo sicut seruiuit Iosias talia et ipse faciendo sicut seruiuit rex Niniuitarum vniuersam Ciuitatem ad placandum Dominum compellendo sicut seruiuit Darius Idolum frangendum in potestatem Danieli dando et inimicos eius Leonibus ingerendo sicut seruiuit Nabuchodonosor omnes in regno suo positos a blasphemando Deo lege terribili prohibendo In hoc ergo seruiunt Domino Reges in quantum sunt Keges cum ea faciunt ad seruiendum illi quae non possunt facere nisi Reges How doe Kinges serue God in feare but by punishing with religious seueritie such thinges as are against Gods lawes For the King serueth God one way as he is man an other way as he is King As he is man he serues God in lyuing as becommeth an honest Christian as he is King he serues God in making sharpe Lawes to the furtheraunce of Vertue and to the suppressing of Vice As Ezechias serued God while he destroyed the Groues and Temples of Idols and those Hie places which were erected against Gods lawes As Josias serued God while he performed the same or like dueties As the King of the Niniuites serued God in compelling the whole Citie to serue God As Nabuchodonosor serued God while he with very sharpe Lawes terrified all his subiectes from blaspheming the euerliuing God In this therefore Kings serue God as they are Kinges when they doe that for the seruice of God which none but Kinges can doe Thus writeth S. Austin that auncient Father that holy Writer that learned Doctor that strong Piller that worthy Champion of Christes Church Out of whose Discourse I obserue many thinges well worthy to be engrauen in Marble with Golden letters in perpetuam rei memoriam First that Kinges serue God when they religiously punish sinne Secondly that Kinges serue God as they be men when they liue as it becommeth faythfull and honest Christians Thirdly that Kinges serue God as they be Kinges when they make Godly lawes to aduance Vertue and to suppresse Vice Fourthly that it belongeth to the office dutie and charge of Kings to purge the Church and House of God from Heresies Errours Superstition and Idolatrie Fiftly that it appertaineth to the charge and office of Kinges to punish Blasphemie and to cause their Subiectes to liue religiously and in the feare of God Sixtly that this holy Father and great learned Doctor vtterly condemneth the Popes Fayth and Doctrine while he denyeth all authoritie to Kinges in Church causes and Ecclesiasticall affaires and maketh them onely executors of his Lawes Will and good Pleasure For which respect the same holy Father soone after addeth these expresse wordes Quis mente sobrius Regibus dicat Nolite curare in regno vestro a quo teneatur vel oppugnetur Ecclesia Domini vestri non ad vos pertineat in regno vestro quis velit esse siue religiosus siue sacrilegus Who well in his Wittes will say thus to Kinges Haue no regard neither take any care who within your Kingdome either protect or oppugne the Church of God you haue no charge neither doth it pertaine to your office who in your Kingdome be Religious or who be Sacrilegious Seuenthly that Kinges haue charge not onely of the bodyes of their Subiectes but much more of their soules Which not onely S. Austen fayth but the whole course of Scripture teacheth the same For the godly Kinges as well in time of the Law of Moyses as in the time of the New Testament and law of Grace did manage all matters both of Church and Common-weale For which cause the Ciuill Magistrate was commaunded to read the whole Booke of the Law as well of the first as of the second Table and to studie the same night and day For which cause the Ciuill Magistrate was commaunded to goe out and in before the people and to lead them out and in that the congregation of the Lord should not be as Sheepe without a Shepheard For which cause the Booke of the Law was deliuered into the Kings handes at such time as he receiued the Crowne and was annoynted King Lastly and this striketh dead that Kings as Kings serue God when they doe those things which none but Kinges can doe If this golden Periode were soundly vnderstood and perfectly kept in memorie it alone would be enough to trample Pope and Poperie vnder foote For I pray you sir Frier did not Constantinus surnamed the great Theodesius the elder Theodosius the younger and Martianus gather the foure first generall Councels of Nice Constantinople Ephesus and Chalcedon which Pope Gregorie did reuerence as the foure Ghospels did they not call the same Synodes as they were Emperours Kinges and Monarches I wote they did it is already prooued it can not be denyed What Did not Reccaredus as King commaunde all the Byshops of Spaine and Gallicia to assemble themselues before him at Toledo there to decide and determine causes ecclesiasticall did he not tell them the cause why he sent for them did he not sit downe among them did he not define with them did he not subscribe before all the Byshops did he not confirme the Decrees and Canons of the Councell with his royall edict we haue already seene it wee haue viewed the very wordes it is prooued most manifestly Now let vs duely ponder and throughly vnderstand what of necessitie must be inferred heereupon S. Austin affirmeth constantly that when Kinges serue God as Kings then doe they that which none but Kings can doe But so it is that Reccaredus and the other Kings both called confirmed Councels as they were Kings for it is already prooued ergo Kinges and none but Kings can call and confirme holy Councels and sacred Synodes The reason is S. Austens when he resolutely auoucheth that while Kinges serue God as Kinges they doe that which none but Kinges can doe for if Kinges as Kinges call and confirme Councels none doubtlesse which are no Kinges can doe the same And consequently no Byshop no not the Pope of Rome hath authoritie to gather Councels or to confirme the same Two thinges onely the Pope may in shew of wordes seeme to obiect for himselfe obiection 1 Th' one that Kinges doe not call or confirme Councels as they be Kinges but rather as the Seruantes or Deputies of the Pope obiection 2 Th' other that the Pope is not onely a Byshoppe but a King also To
addidit etiam hoc quod vsque ad illa tempora virgo munda et immaculata permanset ecclesia sequitur Vt vero et apostolorum chorus et omnis illa aetas quae a domino susceperat viuae vocis auditum de hac luce discessit tum velut in vacuam domum falsae doctrinae impius se error immersit After these things the same writer Egesippus added this also That vnto those dayes the Church continued a pure immaculate virgin but after the death of the Apostles and all that age which had heard our Lord speake in liue voyce vnto them false and erronious doctrine began to intrude her selfe as into a voyde house or desart place Thus writeth Eusebius in that very Booke and Chapter where our Jesuite impudently auoucheth that no such thing can be found no not so much as Egesippus once named albeit both the whole matter and the wordes be in very deed as I haue heere truely put them downe yea Egesippus is named in the very beginning of the sayd Chapter as the relator of the Storie and in these words the same writer eftsoones insinuated to the reader Is it now true sir Frier Jesuite that I haue powdred mine assertion with lyes Is it true sir lyer that I vsed Iugling trickes therein Is it true that I haue done the same thicke and threefold Haue I belyed both Egesippus and Eusebius Can no such thing be found in Eusebius Is not Egesippus once named in that Chapter Is he not once named expressely and twise virtually If all this be true as it is must true in deed what shall I say or what can I say to this shamelesse and impudent Fryer Apagè apagè Out vpon rotten Poperie out vpon lying Jesuites out vpon the new Romish Religion which can be defended by no better meanes then by impudencie falsehood and flat lying What shall or what can the Reader expect at the handes of this shamlesse impudent and lying Jesuite in the rest of his Pamphlet who intertayneth him in the very beginning with such leasings such iugling trickes and such diabolicall accusations What hath this shamelesse and impudent Jesuite deserued the Whetstone nay rather with Chore Dathan and Abyram to goe downe quick into Hell This doubtlesse if nothing els should be said were enough to proue Poperie to be the new Religion I woonder how the Jesuite durst publish such notorious slaunders but on the one side being at a non-plus and not able in truth to say any thing for the antiquitie of Poperie and on the other side choosing rather to consecrate his soule to the Diuell by lying slaundering and deceitfull dealing then to graunt Poperie to be the new Religion He thought to face out the matter by imputing that to mee which most iustly and properly pertayneth to him-selfe And withall he very politikely considered the maister Diuell of Hell suggesting it vnto him that his best course was to doe the same in the beginning These thinges thus standing all wise Papistes I trow will looke more carefully into the matter and from hence foorth not giue credite to such lying Doctors such false Teachers such notorious slaunderers of the innocent If all Jesuites in England all Dominicans in Spaine all Franciscans in France and all Cardinals in Rome should conspire togeather how to accuse the innocent I know not it is aboue my reach and capacitie how they could surpasse this impudent lying Jesuite in such kind of treacherie This one thing I will now say which will appeare before the end of this Discourse that as he here beginneth so he continueth vnto the end For if his lyes slaunders cauils coozening trickes false dealing ridiculous sophistications be once taken away very litle or rather nothing at all will remaine in this his pretenced answere to the triall of the new Religion It woundeth the Pope and his Jesuites to heare Poperie tearmed the New Religion they are not able to endure the sound thereof The Iesuites first Chapter of this name and word Pope B. C. ALbeit the name Pope was attributed also to other Byshoppes yet was it in such speciall maner giuen to him that it sufficiently declared his Supreame authoritie ouer all other T. B. I answere First that S. Epiphanius called Athanasius Pope in these expresse wordes Eusebius praedictus Nicomedia episcopus erat totius ipsorū collectionis administrator ac concinnator detrimenti in ecclesia et aduersus papam Athanasiū Eusebius the forenamed Byshop of Nicomedia was the administrator of their whole collection and the contriuer of the detriment in the Church and against Pope Athanasius Secondly that S. Hierome called S. Augustine Pope in sundry Epistles written to him in these wordes Domino verê sancto et beatissimo Papae Augustino Hieronimus in domino salutem Hierom to the truly holy and most blessed Pope Augustyne sendeth salutations in our Lord. Thirdly that S. Austyn called Aurelius Pope who was but his fellow-Byshop in many things far inferiour to him Fourthly that not onely S. Austyn but Alipius also called the same Aurelius Pope Fiftly that S. Hierom callen not onely S. Austyn Pope but also S. Epiphanius Pope in like manner Sixtly that the Priestes Moses and Maximus with the Deacons Nicostratus and Ruffinus and sundry confessours did all with one vniforme assent call S. Cyprian most blessed Pope Seuenthly that the Clergie of Rome writing to the Clergie of Carthage called the same Cyprian Pope But doubtles neither would neither durst the Clergie of Rome haue called Cyprian the Byshop of Carthage Pope if the name had then been proper or any way peculiar to the Byshop of Rome Eightly that Laurentius Valla a very learned and famous Writer yea and a Romane borne is Consonant to the Clergie of Rome in that most excellent and learned Declamation which hee published against the counterfeit Donation of Constantine these are the expresse wordes of that great Learned Roman Transeo quod rasuram coronam vocas et Papam pontificem Romanū qui nondū peculiariter sic appellari erat captus I let passe that thou calles his shauing a Crowne and the Byshop of Rome Pope who began not yet to haue that name peculiarly Loe for more then 330. yeares the Byshop of Rome did not begin to chalenge that name B. C. Which appeareth first because when any was called Pope without further addition it was vnderstood onely of the Bpshops of Rome as is euident out of the Councell of Chalcedon where it is sayd The most blessed and apostolicke man the Pope doth commaunde vs this thing Secondly because the Byshop of Rome was called Pope of the whole Church as we read in the same Councell where Leo is called Pope of the vniuersall Church And Liberatus affirmeth that there is no Pope ouer the Church of the whole world but the Byshop of Rome Thirdly because he is called the Pope or Father of generall
the Byshop of Rome for the excellencie of that Citie is the chiefest Patriarke and so may be called the Father of Fathers that is the chiefest Father or Byshop of all Fathers or Byshops in Christes Church It is one thing to call the Byshop of Rome Father of Fathers an other thing to call him vniuersall Byshop or vniuersall Father The former our Church of noble England admitteth while shee approoueth two Primates th' one of England th' other of all England Euen so doe wee repute our two Arch-byshops of Canterbury and Yorke to be the Byshops of Byshops or Fathers of Fathers which is all one for either of them is Byshop of Byshops within his prouince that is the Chiefest of all the rest But this is nothing to that superroyall power of which wee are to intreate in the next Chapter which I wish the reader to marke with such attention as apperteyneth thereunto But the latter both we and great learned Popish writers doe vtterly disclaime In the Popes owne decrees I finde these expresse wordes Primae sedis Episcopus non appelletur princeps sacerdotuÌ„ vel suÌ„mus sacerdos aut aliquid huiusmodj sed tantuÌ„ primae sedis Episcopus Vniuersalis auteÌ„ nec etiaÌ„ Romanus pontifex appelletur Let not the Byshoppe of the chiefe Seate be called the Prince of Priestes or the Hie Priest or haue any such like name but onely the Byshop of the first Seate And Vniuersall Byshop none may be called no not the Byshop of Rome himselfe What doth Gratianus that famous Champion of the Romish Church tell vs soe We haue read the Popes Decree which was taken out of the Affrican Councell the wordes of Gratianus haue sounded in our eares Nay you shall heare a greater wonder Pope Pelagius doth constantly deliuer the selfe same doctrine and defineth it for the trueth to be receiued and beleeued these are his expresse wordes Nullus Patriarcharum vniuersalitatis vocabulo vnquam vtatur quia si summus Patriarcha vniuersalis dicit Patriarcarum nomen caeteris derogatur Sed absit hoc a fidelibus hoc sibi velle queÌ„piam arripere vnde honorem fratrum suorum imminuere ex quantulaecunque parte videatur Quapropter charitas vestra neminem vnquam etiam suis in epistolis vniuersalem nominet ne sibi debitum subtrahat cum alteri honorem infert indebitum Let no Patriarke euer vse the word of Vniuersalitie because if the chiefest Patriarke be called Vniuersall the name of Patriarkes is derogated from the rest But be this farre from the faythfull that any should willingly snatch that to himselfe which may any way seeme to diminish the honour of this breathren though in neuer so small a degree Wherefore let not your charitie in your Epistles name any Patriarcke at any time Vniuersall least while ye giue to an other that honour which is not due yee take from your selues that which is due To which I adde this Epigramme set downe as the contentes of the Decree in the beginning thereof Nec etiam Romanus pontifex vniuersaâ—is est appellandus Neither may the Byshoppe of Rome be called Vniuersall Pope Gregorie is consonant to Pope Pelagius in these expresse wordes Ecce in presatione Epistolae quam ad meipsum qui prohibui direxistis superbae appellationis verbum vniuersalem me Papam dicens imprimere curastis Quod peto mihi dulcissima sanctitas vestra vltra non faciat quia vobis subtrahitur quod alteri plus quam ratio exigit praebetur Sequitur sin me vniuersaleÌ„ PapaÌ„ vestra sanctitas dicit negat se hoc esse quod me fatetur vniuersum sed absit hoc recedant verba quae veritateÌ„ inflant et charitateÌ„ vulnerant Behold in the Preface of your Epistle which you addressed to mee forbidding it you laboured to impose vpon me a word of proud appellatioÌ„ calling me Vniuersall Pope which I pray your sweet holynesse not to do to me any more because that is taken from you which is giuen to an other more then reason doth require For if your Holynesse call mee Vniuersall Pope you denie your selfe to be so seeing you call mee Vniuersall But God forbid away with wordes that puffe vp the trueth and wound charitie Thus writeth Gratianus the compiler of the Decrees thus Pope Pelagius thus Pope Gregorius Out of those Positions thus constantly deliuered I obserue sundry very profitable and necessarie documentes First that none no not the Byshop of Rome may be called Vniuersall Pope Secondly that the giuing of Vniuersall to one taketh away that which is due to all the rest Thirdly that Gregorie who lyued more then 590. yeares after Christ vtterly refused the name of Vniuersall Byshop or Pope calling it a proude name and sharply reprooued Enlagius the Patriarke of Alexandria for ascribing the same vnto him Fourthly that Pope Pelagius the predecessour of Gregorie detested and abhorred the same proud arrogant name So then I may lawfully conclude that the name Pope in popish sense and meaning was not proper and peculiar to any Byshop of Rome for the space of 591. yeares after Christ. How impudent therfore is our Fryer when he auoucheth the Councell of Chalcedon to haue called Leo the Vniuersall Pope Liberatus to haue tearmed him Pope ouer the Church of the whole world Pope Damasus and Theodoretus to haue done the same All which are meere lyes notorious slaunders and irksome falsifications inuented by the Father of lyes and his deare children the Iesuiticall crew to defend late vp-start Poperie if it were possible from the imputation of the New religion B. C. And this may be the reason that albeit sometime in the primatiue Church the name was also giuen to other Byshops yet seeing in foresayd manner it agreed peculiarly to the Byshop of Rome as declaring his sone raigne authoritie ouer others the former custome ceased and so it remayned alone to him T. B. Three things our Fryer freely graunteth in these words all which such is the force of trueth are altogeather against him selfe First he confesseth the trueth vnawares that the name Pope was giuen to other Byshoppes in the primitiue Church and consequently he must graunt volens nolens that to chalenge that name as the Byshop of Rome this day doth is a rotten ragge of the New religion Secondly he sayth it peculiarly agreed to the Byshop of Rome as declaring his Soueraigne authoritie ouer others In which his assertion a notable absurdity is implyed viz. that the name Pope was aralogon and consequently was giuen to other Byshops but improperly analogically and by way of similitude as euery meane Logician can tell or Iesuâ—te Thirdly he graunteth that the name Pope did in processe of time cease to be giuen to other Bishops and so remayned to the Byshop of Rome alone Which doubtlesse is that very doctrine which I in the tryall doe defend To which I must needes adde this one thing though litle to
all then hee doth in setting one onely at libertie as it is already prooued by Syluester and Viguerius Secondly Plenarie Pardons are so common at the houre of death as none that either haue friendes or money are or can be destitute thereof which notwithstanding is a more vndiscreet poynt then the other Thirdly the three conditions required for the legitimation of Popish pardoning concurre as sweetly in deliuering all togeather ioyntly as in deliuering one by one seuerally The Popes inordinate affection of lucre is hereby conuinced in that albeit hee can with one onely Pardon set open the gates of Purgatorie and set all the prisoners there at libertie yet will hee not extende that compassion to them but taketh this course with them that they shall appoynt Ptalegata by their last Willes and Testamentes for Masses Diriges and Trentals to be sayd yearely or rather perpetually if their abilitie will extend so farre with which Masses Diriges Trentals his Pardons shal concur so deliuer theÌ„ by policie discretion By reasoÌ„ of which couetously deuised policie we may this day behold in Spaine Rome Italy so many Alters erected so many Churches sumptuously decked so many Priestes richly maintayned especially in S. Gregories Church at Rome for which Masses Diriges Trentals huge summes of money are giuen dayly yearely perpetually not for the Masses formally concedo but yet formally for the Priestes panis and materially for the Masses constanter assero The fourth Conclusion The Pope hath often by his most wicked and execrable Dispensations taken vpon him to dissolue that Matrimonie which is firme stable by Christes owne institution The former part is prooued by the popish learned Canonist and great Diuine Martinus Nauarrus in these expresse wordes Diuiditur MatrimoniuÌ„ ante consummationem per dispensationem Papae iusta de causa sactam Matrimonie is dissolued before Consummation by the Popes Dispensation vpon iust cause graunted Now to prooue that the Pope may this doe Nauarre taketh it for a good ground that the same hath been often practised by the Pope Thus doth he write Quorum opinio adeo obseruatur quod etiam ter vel quater ad petitiones meo consilio antequaÌ„ in vrbem venissem oblatas Paulus 3. et Pius 4. per suas dispensationes dissoluerunt quaedam matrimonia omnino clandestina nondum consummata in remedium animarum alioquin probabiliter periturarum Whose opinion he speaketh of the Canonistes is so obserued that three or foure times before my comming to Rome vpon petitions made by mine aduise Paulus the third and Pius the fourth with their Dispensations dissolued certaine secret Matrimonies not yet consummate for the sauegard of soules which by likelyhood would otherwise haue perished Couarruuias an other very learned and most famous popist Canonist doth confirme the same while he telleth vs constantly that Pope Paulus the fourth and Pope Julius the third dispensed in like maner Now for proofe of the latter viz. that holy Matrimonie before consummation or copulation is firme and perfect and cannot be dissolued by the power of man our Sauiour himselfe teacheth vs when he sayth Quod Deus coniunxit homo non separet That which God hath conioyned let not man put asunder Againe in an other place thus Omnis qui dimittit vxorem suam et alteram ducit maechatur Euery one that putteth away his Wife and marryeth an other committeth adulterie Yea S. Paul sayth plainely That if the Wife depart from her Husband she must either remaine vnmarried or else be reconciled to him againe But our holy Father the Pope in his Decretals doth answere this matter very lustily though nothing clerkely in these words Non enim homo sed Deus separat quos Romanus pontifex qui non puri hominis sed veri Dei vicem gerit in terris ecclesiarum necessitate vel vtilitate pensata non humana sed diuina potius authoritate dissoluit For not man but God doth separate those whom the Byshop of Rome who beareth the person not of pure man but of the true God heere on earth dissolueth not by humane but rather diuine authoritie as the necessitie or vtilitie of the Church requireth The popish Saint and angelicall Doctor Aquinas proceedeth further vttering these expresse wordes Christus poterat relaxare ergo et Paulus potuit ergo et Papa poâ—est qui non est minoris potestatis in Ecclesia quâ—m Paulus suit Christ could pardon or dissolue Matrimonie therefore Paul could pardon therefore the Pope also can pardon as who is of as great authoritie in the Church as Paul himselfe was So then a primo ad vltimum by Aquinas his doctrine the Pope can doe as much as Christ. Hee can no doubt make the deafe to heare the dumbe to speake the lame to walke the blind to see and the dead to rise againe to life But our holy Father must pardon mee if I beleeue not these thinges before I see them done And yet doe these thinges follow by an ineuitable and irrefragable consequence of that Doctrine which the Pope and his angelicall Doctor haue taught vs. The Fift Conclusion The Pope can Dispense with a Monke already professed that he may become a married man Nauarrus that famous popist Canonist is and may be a witnesse sufficient of this popish Theame these are his expresse wordes Papa potest dispensare cum Monacho iam professo vt contrahat matrimoniuÌ„ imo de facto multi Papae dispensarunt The Pope can dispense with a Monke already professed that he may be a married man yea many Popes haue de facto dispensed so indeed Hereof see more at large in the 3. Chapter and the eleuenth Proposition The Sixt Conclusion The Pope can Dispense with the full Brother to marry his owne naturall and full Sister of the same Father the same Mother This may seeme very strange to the Christian reader But I haue prooued it plentifully in the Popes Funerall Pope Martin the fift of that name did Dispense as is already sayd but for the better contentation of the Reader let him ponder seriously the 14. Chapter following Where God willing Pope Martins Dispensation shal be examined to the bottome The Seuenth Conclusion The Pope may doe whatsoeuer pleaseth his Holinesse as whose bare will is a sufficient warrant so to doe The Popes owne deare glose vpon his Decretals telleth vs peremptorily without blushing that this Conclusion is true these are the expresse wordes Quia in his quâ— vult et est pro ratione voluntaâ— For in those thinges which the Pope will doe his will is a reason sufficient And it followeth in the same place Nec est qui eâ— dicat cur ita facis Neither may any say to him Why doest thou so Pope Boniface in his Decrees yeeldeth the reason hereof if wee will beleeue him pleading for himselfe these are his wordes Quia cunctos
ipse iudicaturus a nemine est iudicandus For the Pope is to iudge all others but none may iudge him God saue our holy Father the Pope The Eight Conclusion The Pope hath Vniuersall Iurisdiction ouer all Kingdomes Empires and fulnesse of Power in as ample and large maner as Christ himselfe had The popish famous Frier Augustinus de Ancoua hath these expresse words Papa tanquam vicarius Dej filij caelestis Imperatoris iurisdictionem habet vniuersalem super omnia Regna et Imperia The Pope as he that is the Vicar of the Sonne of God the heauenly Emperour hath vniuersall iurisdiction ouer all Kingdomes and Empires Pope Nicholas after hee hath told vs many fables of the Church of Rome doth at length tell vs that S. Peter and the Byshops of Rome his successours haue all Power both earthly and heauenly these are his wordes in the Booke of Popish decrees Christus Beato Petro aeternae vitae clauâ—gero terreni simul et caeâ—estis imperij iura commisit Christ committed to S. Peter the Porter of heauen gates the rightes both of earthly and heauenly regalitie And the popish glosse annexed to this Decree of Pope Nicholas deliuereth the matter in more gallant tearmes these are the wordes ArgumentuÌ„ quod Papa habet vtrumque gladium viz. spiritualem et temporalem This is an argument that the Pope hath both Swordes to weet the Spirituall and the temporall And in the Margent it confirmeth the same in these plaine tearmes Papa habens vtrumque gladium transtulit Imperiâ—m The Pope hauing both the Swordes translated the Empire Yea the Pope Boniface the eight made a flat Decree for the confirmation of his pretended right to both Swords as is to be seene in his extrauagant Vnam sanctam de maioritate et obedientia set downe in the sixt Booke annexed to the Decretals Appendix Fuldensis vnfouldeth this arrogant and brutish Decree in these plaine tearmes Hic Papa Bonifacius 8. constitutionem fecerat in qua se dominum spiritualem et temporalem in vniuerso mundo asserebat Vnde requisiuit Philippum regem Franciae vt a se regnum suum cognosceret quod rex facere contempsit The Pope he speaketh of Boniface the eight made a constitution in which he affirmed himselfe to be both spirituall and temporall Lord in the whole world Whereupon hee would haue had Phillip king of France to haue acknowledged his Kingdome from him but the King laughed him to scorne for his paines Johannes Gersonus a very learned Papist sometime Chancellor of the famous Vniuersitie of Paris affirmeth wonderfull power to be ascribed to the Pope thus doth hee write Sicut non est potestas nisi a Deo sic nec aliqua Temporalis vel Ecclesiastica Imperialis vel Regalis nisi a Papa in cuius faemore scripsit Christus Rex reguÌ„ Dominus Dominantium Like as there is no Power but of God so is there neither any Temporall nor Eccesiasticall neither Imperiall nor Regall but of the Pope in whose thigh Christ hath written the King of Kings the Lord of Lords Loe heere gentle Reader two thinges are proper to God alone the one to be King of Kinges and Lord of Lordes the other to be the author of all Power both which the Papistes ascribe vnto their Pope Thus writeth M. Gerson of the Popes Superroyall power which his flattering Parasites haue with his good liking giuen him although the same Gerson being otherwise a very zelous Papist did vtterly dislike and deride the same The Pope himselfe from his owne penne Gregorie the ninth deliuereth vs this doctrine Ad firmamentum caeli hoc est vniuersalis Ecclesiae fecit Deus duo magna Luminaria id est duas instituit dignitates quae sunt pontificalis authoritas et regalis potestas Sequitur vt quanta est inter Solem et LunaÌ„ tanta inter Pontifices et Reges differentia cognoscatur To the firmament of Heauen that is of the vniuersall Church God made two Lightes that is Pontificall authoritie and power Royall that we may know there is as much difference betweene Popes and Kinges as there is betweene the Sunne and the Moone The Popes glose vpon this goodly Text setteth downe precisely how farre a King is inferiour to a Pope that is to any Byshop of Rome in these wordes Restat vt Pontificalis dignitas quadragesies septies sit maior regali dignitate It remayneth that the dignitie of the Pope is fourtie times seauen times greater then is the power of the King Thus writeth the glose disputing out of Ptolomaeus that the Pope must be infinitely greater then any King in the whole world Well let vs heare the Clerkely sentence of Pope Gelasius in his owne behalfe these are his wordes Honor et sublimitas episcopalis nullis poterit comparationibus adaequari si regum fulgori compares et principum diademati longe erit inferius quam si plumbi metallum ad auri fulgorem compares The honour dignitie of a Byshop can not be equalized by any comparison If it be compared to the excellencie of Kinges and to the Diademes of Princes it shall be found farre more inferiour then if thou compare a peece of Lead with bright shyning Gold So then the Popes owne Decrees make it cleere and euident that the Lordly and more then Royall titles ascribed to them doe sound well in their eares The Ninth Conclusion The Pope can by his supereminent excellencie and fulnesse of Power change the nature of things apply the substantiall partes of one thing to another and of nothing make some thing The Popes deare glose vpon his Decretals doth plainely deliuer the truth of this Conclusion in these most golden wordes Papa naturam rerum immutat substantialia vnius rei applicando alij et de nihilo potest aliquid facere quia in his quae vult ei est pro ratione voluntas et plenitudinem obtinet potestatis The Pope changeth the nature of thinges by applying the substantiall partes of one thing to another and he can make of nothing some thing for in those thinges which he hath a minde to doe his bare Will is to him a sufficient warrant and he hath the fulnesse of Power Antonius that famous popish Arch-byshop and canonized Saint comming as Ambassadour from the Pope telleth vs if we may beleeue him that the Pope is Christes Vicar vpon earth and of equall power with God omnipotent these are his expresse wordes Cum autem vicarius Christi sit Papa nullus potest seipsum subtrahere ab obedientia eius de iure sicut nullus de iure potest se subtrahere ab obedientia Dei. et sicut recepit Christus a patre ducatum et sceptrum ecclesiae gentiuÌ„ ex Israel egrediens super omnem principatuÌ„ et potestatem et super omne quodcuÌ„que est vt ei genua cuncta curuentur sic ipse Petro
et successoribus eius plenissimaÌ„ potestatem commisit For seeing the Pope is the Vicar of Christ none can lawfully withdraw himselfe from his obedience as none can lawfully withdraw himselfe from Gods obedience And as Christ receiued of his Father the Dukedome and Scepter of the Church of the Gentiles ouer all Principalitie and power and aboue euery thing that hath beeing that to him euery knee may bend euen so Christ hath committed most full Power to Peter and to his successours the Byshops of Rome Out of these Popish authorities I obserue to the confusion of the Pope and Poperie these golden Lessons First that the Pope hath Fulnesse of power euen as largely as Christ himselfe hath it Secondly that the Pope may doe whatsoeuer pleaseth him his bare Will being a law so to doe Thirdly that he can change the nature of thinges Fourthly that he can apply the essentiall partes of one thing to another and consequently of a Pigge make an Oxe of a Gosling a Lyon and so foorth yea of a Peece of Bread the Body of our Sauiour accidents remayning without subiectes Fiftly and this surpasseth all the rest that the Pope is aboue GOD himselfe Which Collection or Obseruation though it be very strange and woonderfull is truly deduced out of these wordes Super omne quodcunque est vt ei genua cunctae curuentur forasmuch as it must needes be graunted euen of the Pope himselfe that God hath not onely a beeing but such a supereminent beeing as of which all other beeings depend and from thence receiue their beeings Sixtly that the Pope can make of nothing some thing and so create new creatures in the world as also new worldes to receiue them Which Obseruations being true as they are most true I can not but needes I must conclude that the Pope at the least is the fore-runner of Antichrist it can not with any reason be denied The Tenth Conclusion The first occasion and Popish falsely pretended foundation of all the forenamed Arrogant Lordly Superroyal and plaine diuine tytles ascribed to the late Byshoppes of Rome was a counterfeite and falsely pretended Donation of the Emperour Constantinus surnamed the great at his departure from the West into the East about 327. yeares after Christ that is to Constantinople from the citie of Rome Behold the proofe The Popes Decrees compiled and gathered togeather by his deuoted vassall Gratianus beare the world in hand and tell the Readers that the Emperour Constantine the great gaue great Power royall Excellencie and imperiall Maiestie euen the royall Crowne of pure Gold from off his head with all his tytle right prerogatiues royall authoritie power and dignitie whatsoeuer not only in Rome but also in Italie in all the West parts to the Byshop of Rome and his successours for euer And the rather to perswade all people that Constantine gaue to the Byshops of Rome as is already sayd the sayd popish Decree setteth downe the worthy motiue by which the Emperour was induced to translate the Westerne Empire with all his royall right there and to bestow the same vpon the Byshoppes of Rome These amongst many other long periods doe plainely intimate his motiue Vnde congruuÌ„ perspeximus nostruÌ„ imperiuÌ„ et regni potestatem orientalibus transferri regionibus et in Bizantiae prouinciae optimo loco nomini nostro ciuitateÌ„ aedificari et nostruÌ„ illiâ— imperium constitui quoniaÌ„ vbi principatus SacerdotuÌ„ et Christianae religionis caput ab Imperatore caelesti constitutuÌ„ est iustuÌ„ non est vt Imperator terrenus habeat potestatem Wherevpon we haue thought it meete that our Empire power of our kingdome should be remooued to the Easterne regions and that a Cittie should be built for our name at Bâ—zantiuÌ„ a place most fit for vs and that our Empire should be appointed there Because where the Prince of Priest-hood and the head of christian religion was appointed by the Heauenly Emperour it is not meete that an earthly Emperour should haue power Thus disputeth the Pope for his Primacie and Golden Crowne insinuating himselfe if we will beleeue his Antichristian pleading to be the Emperour of the westerne World This falsely pretended Donation of which I haue written more at large in the Downefall of Poperie the latter Popes did euer obiect and violently obtrude it vpon the Church neuer ceasing with importunitie to sollicite the succeeding Emperours to confirme the sayd supposed Donation and to make Rome the head of all Churches vntill such time as Pope Boniface the third of that name did with much adoe obtaine of the cruell and bloody tyrant Phocas then the Emperour who rauished many vertuous Matrones and murdered the good Emperour Mauritius with his wife and children that Rome should be the Head of all Churches This was effected about 607. yeares after Christ. So then the Maiestie of the Byshops of Rome was not heard of in Christes Church for the space of 327. yeares after Christ at which time a counterfeit and false Donation was fetched from Hell in the name of the Emperour Constantine the great Neither could the Byshops of Rome perswade any one of the Emperours for the space almost of three hundred yeares after that supposed Donation either to confirme the same or to make Rome the Head of all Churches One onely Phocas that wicked Emperour gaue some credite to it and made Rome Head of all Churches Of which subiect I haue else where disputed more at large both in the Downe-fall of Poperie and in my Suruay Now that it is a counterfeit and falsely pretended Donation albeit the Byshops of Rome haue with many coozening trickes made vse thereof for their aduancement I will euidently prooue and plainely conuince by the cleere testimonies of many learned and famous Writers who all are of high esteeme in the Church of Rome Nicolaus de Cusa a famous and learned Cardinall wrote to to the Councell of Basill his opinion concerning the falsely supposed Donation of Constantine these are his expresse wordes Sed in veritate super modum admiror sires ita est eo quâ—d in autenticis libris et in historijs approbatis non inuenitur Relegi omnia quae potui gesta Imperialâ—a ac RomanoruÌ„ pontificuÌ„ historias sancti Hier onymj qui ad cuncta colligendum diligentissimus fuit Augustinj Ambrosij ac alioruÌ„ opuscula peritissimoruÌ„ Reuelui gesta sacroruÌ„ conciliorum quae post Niconumfuere et nullam inuenio concordantiam ad ea quae de illa donatione leguÌ„tur Sanctus Damasus Papa ad instantiam beati Hieronymj actus et gesta praedecessorum dicitur annotasse in cuius opere de Siluestro Papa non ea inueniuntur quae vulgo dicuntur But in truth I greatly admire if it be so seeing it can not be found in any authenticall Bookes and approoued Histories I haue read all the Actes of the Emperours and the Histories of the Byshops of Rome which
Thalassius the reuerend Byshoppe of Caesaria did the like in these expresse wordes His quae per consensum ordinata sunt inter amantissimâ—s Episcopos Maximum et Iuuenalâ—m et nos consentimus To these thinges which are ordered by consent betweene the most beloued Byshops Maximus and Juuenalis wee also giue our consent Diogenes the reuerend Byshop of Cyzice did the like in these expresse wordes Consentio his quae a Paetrebus factae sunt I giue my consent to that which the Fathers haue decreed Sixtly all the Fathers of the Councell did the same these being their expresse wordes Omnes reuerendissimj Episcopj clamauerunt nos ita dicimus et consentimus his quae a Patribus dicta sunt All the most reuerend Byshoppes showted Wee say so and wee giue our consentes to those things which the Fathers haue decreed By these manifold testimonies it is cleare and euident that the Fathers who were assembled in Councell at the Emperours commaund decreed and confirmed peace betweene Maximus and Iuuenalis as also that they sought to the Emperour not to the Pope for the decision of their controuersies Neither is Pope Leo so much as once named in that action of the holy Councell What therefore shall wee or what can wee say to our lying Iesuite but that as hee began with lying and deceitfull dealing so he meaneth to continue his falsehood his lying his falsifications and his conny-catching trickes vnto the end Secondly that our Jesuite seemeth not to haue read Sâ—zomenus himselfe but to haue mistaken the Chapter by some note sent him from his best aduisors for to heare that Poperie is prooued the New religion doth so gall and trouble them that they can not sleepe quietly in their beddes for thinking how to withstand the same Many of their deepest heades haue conspired against the trueth and Robert Parsons that brazen-faced Fryer was put in trust to gather their instructions and to publish the same in the English tongue Leonem ex vnguibus I know the Lyon by his pawes The Narration of Sozomenus is in the eight not in the seuenth Chapter No no Sozomenus in the 7. Chapter cutteth the Popes throate and striketh the Jesuite starke dead these are the expresse wordes Romanae vero Ecclesiae Episcopus et sacerdotes per occidentem haec in suaÌ„ contumeliaÌ„ vergere duxerunt etenim sententiaÌ„ eoruÌ„ qui Nicaeae conuenerant quaÌ„ inde ab initio per omnia approbabant nec dum reliquerant sed ad illius normaÌ„ sentiebant et AthanasiuÌ„ ad se venientem amicè susceperunâ— causamqueillius ad se traxerunt But the Byshop of the Church of Rome and the Priestes throughout the West iudged the things to tende to their reproch for they had not yet forsaken their Sentence and Decree who were assembled at Nice which from the beginning they approoued in all thinges but followed it in their iudgements as the rule and friendly receiued Athanasius when he came to them and tooke his cause into their handes Thus writeth Sozomenus by whose relation it is euident that not the Pope alone but all the Byshoppes assembled togeather in a lawfull Synode effected that which our lying Jesuite would deceitfully father vpon the Pope Athanasius of Alexandria Paulus of Constantinople and Marcellus of Ancyra being vniustly molested by the Easterne Arrianizing Bishops sought to Julius then Byshop of Rome for his helpe and countenance as to the chiefest Patriarch who by reason of his place was of great authority and highly esteemed Pope â—ulius willing to afforde the sayd Byshops the best helpe he could called together the Byshops of the West and with their Decrees in a lawfull Synode declared the Easterne Byshops to haue offended against the Councell of Nice whose Canons all the faythfull in the Christian world were bound to reuerence and obey And thus the holy Byshoppes vniustly deposed from their seates were againe restored to their places by force in deed of the Nicene Canons For neither could the Pope alone nor yet the whole Synode of Westerne Byshops haue restored them but that their definitions were firmely grounded vpon the holy Nicene Canons For as we see by Sozomenus his Narration the Byshoppe of Rome with the Byshoppes of the West followed the Nicene Canons as their rule in all their Decrees resolutions and proceedinges whatsoeuer B. C. In his argumentes against the Superioritie of the Byshop of Rome this is one Seuenthly the famous Councell of Chalcedon gaue the Byshoppe of Constantinople equall authoritie with the Byshoppe of Rome in all Ecclesiasticall affayres In which wordes is one vntrueth cunningly couched For he calleth that heere the decree of the Councell which was by the ambition of Anatolius Byshoppe of Constantinople effected in the absence of the Romane Legates If Bell can prooue that this surreptitious Decree of the Easterne Byshoppes was euer confirmed then were it some thing which he bringeth But the Byshoppe of Rome his Legates withstood that their indirect proceeding pronouncing it to be contrary to the Decrees of the Nicene Councell T. B. Though it be the meere trueth that the Romish fayth and doctrine this day taught beleeued and violently with Fire Faggot obtruded vpon many thousands of people is the New religion yet doth that trueth so gall pierce and wound the Pope and his Iesuited Popelings that they can not endure the noyse or sound thereof For which respect our Jesuite turning himselfe this way that way and euery way but to the trueth omitteth sixe truethes by me briefely touched in my Triall but prooued at large in my Suruay and beginneth to cauill and scornefully to bicker with the seuenth thinking by meanes of confusion and disordered proceeding to couer and hide the nakednesse and newnesse of rotten Poperie and to dazell the eyes of his Readers that they shall not behold and discerne the trueth But it will in time preuaile maugre the malice of the Pope of his Iesuited vassals and of the greatest Diuell of Hell Two thinges the Iesuite heere toucheth in which the maine poynt and issue euen prora et puppis of the controuersie of the Popes falsely pretended Soueraigntie doth consist Th' one concerneth the Councell of Nice th' other the Councell of Chalcedon For the exact examination of which difficulties I put downe certaine Aphorismes hoping by Gods holy assistaunce to hit the nayle on the head and to make the heartes of the Pope and his Popish crew as heauie as any Lead Aphorisme first The most famous generall Councell of Nice did confine and limit the iurisdiction of the Byshop of Rome as well as of other Byshoppes euery where Behold the proofe and marke it well First the Nicene Councell in the first Canon hath these expresse wordes De his qui communione priuantur seu ex clero seu ex laico ordine ab Episcopis per vnamquamque Prouinciam sententia regularis obtineat vt hi qui abijciuntur ab alijs non recipiantur
requiratur autem ne pusillanimitate aut contentione aeut alio quolibet Episcopi vitio videatur a congregatione seclusus Vt hoc ergo decentius inquiratur bene placuit annis singulis per vnamquamque Prouinciam bis in anno concilia celebrari vt cōmuniter simul omnibus Episcopis congregatis Prouinciae discutiantur huiusmodi quaestiones et sic qui suo peccauerunt Episcopo euidenter excommunicati rationabiliter ab omnibus extimentur vsquequo vel in communi vel Episcopo placeat humaniorem pro talibus ferre sententiam Concilia vero celebrentur vnum quidem ante quadragesimam Paschae vt omni dissensione sublata munus offeratur Deo purissimum Secundum vero circa tempus Autumni Concerning those who are put from the Communion whether they be of the Clericall or Laicall order let the sentence of Byshoppes throughout euery Prouince giuen according to the Canon be of force that they who are reiected be not receiued of others Let examination be had least any be secluded through pusillanimitie or contention or other fault of the Byshop That this therefore may be duly examined it hath pleased the Councell well that yearely in euery Prouince Councels should be kept twise in the yeare that when all the Byshops of the Prouince shall meete togeather in one place then such questions may be duely examined And so they that haue offended their Byshop manifestly may be iudged by all to be excomunicated not without a cause vntill it please the Byshop of the place or all in the Prouince to shew them fauour Let the Councels be kept one before Lent that all dissention being taken away a most pure Oblation may be presented vnto God The second about Autumne Thus this holy and most famous Councell out of whose definition two thinges are cleered th' one that the Byshops of the Prouince should end and determine all appeales no mention at all made or any regard had of or to the Byshop of Rome Th' other that the auncient Canon ought to be kept which commaundeth that none should receiue them to the Communion who were excomunicated and condemned by others So then the Councell of Nice did curbe the Pope and kept him vnder in his former state And withall the holy Councell prouided a very Christian remedie that none should be vniustly oppressed by his Byshoppe Which remedie was this viz. That hee who found himselfe grieued might appeale from his Byshop yet to the Byshops of the Prouince but to none else Secondly the same Councell ordayned in an other Canon that none should be created Byshoppes but by the Byshoppes of their owne Prouince as also that the Metropolitane of the Prouince not the Byshop of Rome should haue authoritie and power to confirme those who were made Byshoppes within the Prouince Thirdly that the Byshoppe of Rome had no prerogatiue of power but onely within his owne Diocesse is constantly auouched by the sayd Councell in the sixt Canon thereof These are the wordes of the Councell as Ruffinus an auncient and learned Writer about 1200. yeares agoe so within eightie yeares of the time of the Nicene Councell hath interpreted the same Et vt apud Alexandriam et in Vrbe Romae vetusta consuetudo seruetur vt vel ille Aegypti vel hic suburbicariarum Ecclesiarum sollicitudinem gerat And that in Alexandria and in the citie of Rome the old custome be kept that the one haue the sollicitude of Egypt the other of the Churches adioyning and about Rome Thus writeth Ruffinus shewing very plainely that the Byshop of Alexandria had as great iurisdiction or rather more as the Byshop of Rome Yea Cusanus a popish Cardinall vnderstandeth the Canon after the same manner with Ruffinus And it is confirmed by the fourth Canon of the same Councell as Ruffinus citeth it these are the wordes Absque quo ordinationē irritam esse voluerunt Without whose authoritie he meaneth the Metropolitane the Councell decreed the ordination to be voyde and of none effect But this sacred Decree of a Councell so holy and so famous the Pope this day contemneth and challengeth the right of all Metropolitanes to himselfe Fourthly the famous Councelles both of Constantinople and of Chalcedon did make the Byshop of Constantinople equall with the Byshoppe of Rome in all Ecclesiasticall affaires excepting onely the Primacie of honour as we haue already seene See and note well the 30. Chapter of this present Booke Aphorisme second The Canons of the holy Nicene Councell are but only twentie though the Pope and his Jesuites would haue them to be foure-score For first onely twentie are this day extant in the common Volumes of Councels Secondly no approoued Councell did euer admit or receiue any more This is very cleere and euident by the testimonie of the famous Affrican Councell as by and by God willing I shall vnfold Thirdly the famous Councels of Constantinople and Chalcedon haue flatly decreed against the falsely pretended Primacie of the Byshoppe of Rome which Councels for all that did in euery respect highly reuerence the Decrees and Canons of the Nicene Councell and consequently the sayd Councels did not acknowledge any Canon of the Nicene Synode which made for the pretended Primacie of the Byshoppe of Rome But this Aphorisme shall be further prooued by an euident demonstration in the Aphorismes immediatly following and therefore there is no need now to stand longer about the same Aphorisme third The Councell of Sardica is not a legitimate and lawfull Synode but a bastard and counterfeite conuenticle I prooue it first because S. Augustine doth acknowledge no Councell of Sardica saue one onely which was Hereticall Secondly because Cardinall Cusanus who was a great Champion of the Romish Church is of the same opinion Thirdly because the Councell of Sardica is against the Councell of Nice concerning Appellations to the Pope Fourthly because the Fathers of the famous Affricane Councell in their Epistle to Caelestine then Byshop of Rome doe most constantly affirme with vniforme assent that the Councell of Nice forbiddeth Appeales to the Church of Rome these are their expresse wordes Praefato itaque debitae salutationis officio impendiò deprecamur vt deinceps ad vestras aures hinc venientes non facilius admittatis nec a nobis excommunicatos in communionem vltra velitis excipere Quia hoc etiam Niceno Concilio definitum facilè aduertet venerabilitas tua Nam etsi de inferioribus Clericis vel Laicis videtur ibi praecaueri quanto magis hoc de Episcopis voluit obseruari ne in sua prouincia communione suspensi a tua sanctitate vel festinatò vel praeproperè vel indebitè videantur cōmunioni restitui Presbyterorum quoque et sequentium clericorum improba refugia sicuti te dignum est repellat sanctitas tua quia et nulla patrum definitione hoc Ecclesiae derogatum est Aphricanae et decreta Nicaena siue
of Italy to appeale vnto him as to the chiefe Patriarch and Metropolitane of the citie of Rome but not as to the Vniuersall Byshop of the whole Christian world For no such thing is decreed by any Synode as these Fathers doe affirme Aphorisme fourth All that can be sayd for the Popes falsely pretended Primacie is fetched and deriued from the authoritie of Man I prooue it two wayes First because the Byshop of Rome to aduaunce himselfe aboue his breathren and fellow-Byshoppes inuented by the helpe of his flattering Parasites a forged and counterfeit Donation of Constantine that famous Emperour Which certes hee would neuer haue done if he could by the holy Scriptures haue exalted himselfe or otherwise haue magnified his estate Of which counterfeit Donation I haue discoursed at large in the tenth Conclusion Secondly because whensoeuer his proud attempt and falsely challenged Primacie was withstood he neuer alleadged holy Writte for the proofe thereof for that he knew he could not so preuaile but falsified the Canons of Nicene Councell thinking so in time to attaine his heartes desire which in these last worst dayes came so to passe in deed But the famous Councelles of Constantinople and Chalcedon made no reckoning of such falsifications and proud attempts And the Fathers of the Affrican Synode albeit for a time they answered very modestly that they could find no such prerogatiue in the Nicene Canons and yet were content to expect true Copies from the East and in the interim for charitie sake to admit Appellations to Rome did for all that in the end come roundly vpon the Pope and told him flatly that no Synode had so decreed and that they could no longer endure such smoakie statelinesse and so foorth as in the third and second Aphorisme is alreadie prooued in the 30. Chapter of this Booke all now lyuing Papistes are prooued flat Heretiques Aphorisme fift The reasons which the Pope and his Pope-lings vse to prooue that the Nicene Councell made more Canons in which the Popes falsely pretended Primacie is stablished albeit they be with Papistes reputed as inuincible Bulworkes will for all that after due and full examination thereof be found as strong as a Copwebbe and as heauie as a Feather obiection 1 They say first that Isidore being requested by 80. Byshoppes to gather the Nicene Canons togeather found out many more euen fourescore in all But I answere first that the varietie found in Isidore in the Epistle of the Byshoppes of Aegypt to Pope Marcus and in the answere of Marcus to them doe euidently conuince the same writinges to be false forged and counterfeit Jsidorus telleth vs forsooth that they are more but how many he knoweth not Mary hee addeth withall that by the Decrees of Pope Julius they must be Seauentie Athanasius and the rest of the Byshoppes of Egipt affirme constantly to Pope Marcus that the Councell of Nice had foure-score Canons Yet Pope Marcus in his rescript to the said Byshops clippeth off Tenne from that number Now what Horse would not breake his Halter to come to this pleasant harmonie Secondly that the very wordes of the Preface fathered vpon Jsidorus doe prooue it to be forged and counterfeit for there I finde mention made of the generall Councell of Constantinople which was holden in the time of the Emperour Constantine and Pope Agatho against Macarius Stephanus and other Byshoppes But so it is that the said Councell was celebrated sixe hundred seuentie and eight yeares after Christ True it is likewise that Isidorus died in the yeare 637. after Christ and consequently true it must be thirdly that Jsidorus was dead at the least 40. yeares before that generall Councell and so he could not possibly tell those foure-score Byshoppes of it vnlesse perhappes he rose againe after he was dead To which I must needes adde that though Jsidorus be feigned in that Preface to haue interlaced all the decretall Epistles of the Byshops of Rome which he could any where find viz. of Clemens Anacletus Euaristus and the rest vnto Pope Siluester yea vnto Pope Gregorie the great yet doth not Isidores authoritie though he were an holy Byshop winne or bring any credite to the same Epistles And why I pray you Because forsooth it is a bastard and counterfeit Preface begotten in the Popes forge of falsifications euen like to Constantines Donation and many other Popish coozening trickes as is already prooued obiection 2 They say secondly that Athanasius and other Bishops of Egypt did send to Pope Marcus for the true Copies of the Nicene Canons as also that the same Pope sent 70. Canons Nicene to the sayd Byshoppes of Egypt But I answere first that though Pope Marcus affirmed them to be onely seauentie yet did Athanasius and the other holy so supposed Byshoppes constantly auouch them to be foure-score Secondly that though the Byshoppes of Rome boast and babble much of their Prerogatiues and extraordinarie Graces yet can small credite be giuen vnto them seeing they haue made away by their owne confessions no lesse then 50. Canons of the holy Nicene Councell Thirdly that the forgerie is discouered both by the writinges of Marcus and of Athanasius for Athanasius and the Byshoppes of Egypt sent not to Pope Marcus for the Copies vntill the Arrians had burnt them at Alexandria Yet so it is that they were burnt in the time of Constantine the Emperour as it doth and may appeare to euery indifferent reader by the complaint of Athanasius when he was driuen from Alexandria into exile And true it is likewise that Pope Marcus was dead in the time of Constantine many yeares before the Copies were burnt at Alexandria And consequently true it is thirdly that both the rescript of Pope Marcus and the Epistle of Athanasius with the other Fathers of Egypt are like to the forged Donation of Constantine viz. false and counterfeit obiection 3 They say thirdly that the Popes Supremacie is prooued by the Appeales of many Fathers viz. of Athanasius of Alexandria Paul of Constantinople Asclepas of Gaza Marcâ—llus of Ancyra Lucina of Adrianople and of many others who all being dryuen out of their Churches by the Arians were restored by Pope Julius to the same But I answere that the Dignitie and Prerogatiue of the Sea of Rome in restoring them was onely of credite and honour not of power and iurisdiction This is alreadie prooued so soundly and plentifully as more can not be wished Peruse the first second and third Aphorismes and marke them well Which being truely performed all that possibly can be said for Appeales to the Church of Rome will be as light as a Feather and passe away as Smoake from the fire The iurisdiction force efficacie and power of hearing restoring and iudging the causes of the Appellantes rested wholly in the Councell then at Rome assembled This both Athanasius and Iulius himselfe doe plainely testifie Athanasius discoursing thereof doth most
appointed King Dauid King Salomon did in like maner shew their supreame authoritie both ouer all their Subiectes and in all maner of causes For larger discourse whereof I referre the Reader to my Golden Ballance of Tryall Now if euery King haue within his Dominions the chiefe Power Soueraigntie ouer all persons causes it must needes follow it can not be denyed that the Confirmation of Councels belongeth not to the Pope Which consequence will appeare most euidently throughout the Sections following To which I adde that seeing there is but one Bishopricke whereof euery Byshop hath a part in solidū as is already prooued the Confirmatiō of Councels can belong no more to the Byshop of Rome then it doth to other Byshops For with that whole to which many haue equall title and right no one of them hath more to doe then an other This in generall may suffice I haste to the particulars The second Section of the Councell of Nice The first generall Councell of Nice of 318. Byshops in which Arius denying the consubstantialitie of the Sonne of God was condemned was celebrated in the yeare 327. after Christ not by the appoyntment of the Pope who in those dayes was but reputed as other Byshops but by the flat and expresse commaundement of the Emperour Constantinus worthily surnamed the great All the Fathers assembled in the sacred Councell of Nice wrote to the Church of Alexandria and to the inhabitants of Egypt Lybia and Pentopolis in these expresse wordes Quoniam per gratiam Dei et pientissimum Imperatorem Constantinum qui nos ex varijs ciuitatibus et Prouincijs congregauit magna ac sancta a Synodus Nicaeae collectae est omnino necessarium visum est vt ad vos quoque a sacro Synodo darentur literae quo cognoscere possitis cum quae mota et examinata tum probata sint et obtenta Because through the grace of God and by the commaundement of the most holy Emperour Constantine who hath called vs out of diuers Cities and Prouinces the great and holy Councell of Nice is assembled it seemeth necessarie that the whole Councell send Letters to you by which yee may vnderstand as well those thinges that were called into question as the things that are decided and decreed in the same Out of these wordes of the famous Historiographer Socrates I obserue these memorable documents for the good of the Reader First that this testimonie is of greatest credite and without all exception as which was not published by one or two but by more then three hundred Byshoppes as writeth Nicephorus who were the most vertuous and learned Priestes in the Christian world Secondly that these Fathers so many so holy so learned so wise doe not once name the Pope in their Letters so farre were they in those dayes from ascribing the chiefe Prerogatiue in Councels to the Byshop of Rome Thirdly that the Byshoppe of Rome himselfe was also commaunded by the Emperours Letters euen as other Byshoppes were Albeit both hee and the Byshop of Constantinople by reason of infirmities were excused and their Messengers allowed in their absence So writeth the famous Historiographer Nicephorus This Obseruation would be marked as which striketh the Pope starke dead For the Pope was so farre from being the Commaunder of all that himselfe was cōmaunded as the rest Fourthly that Pope Syluester could not confirme the Nicene Councell as the Popes flattering Popelinges tell vs because Julius as Sozomenus and others doe constantly affirme was at that time Byshoppe of Rome Fiftly that all the Fathers of this most sacred and famous Synode doe plainely confesse in their ioynt Letters that the Emperour called the Councell assigned the day and the place when and where it should be kept and charged all Byshoppes to be there present at the day by him appoynted Sozomenus hath these wordes Verum cum institutum hoc Imperatoris conceptae spei non respondisset nec conciliari contentiosi potuissent et iam qui ad conciliandam Pacem missus fuerat reuersus esset Synodum Nicaeae Bythiniae celebrandam conuocauit et omnibus vbique Ecclesiarum praesidibus vt ad indictum diem adessent scripsit But after the matter succeeded otherwise then the Emperour expected neither could the contentious persons be reconciled but Hesius that was sent to make peace was now returned he caused a Synode to be kept at Nice in Bythinia and wrote to all Byshops euery where to be present at the day appoynted Nicephorus hath these expresse words Quapropter infectis rebus ad Impetatorem redijt qui ad pacem componendam missus fuerat Hosius itaque Imperator decantatissimam illam in Bithynia Nicaenam Synodum promulgat et literis locorum omnium Episcopos ad constitutam Diem eò euocat Wherefore Hosius who went to make peace returned to the Emperour not hauing accomplished the matter the Emperour therefore doth publish the famous Synode of the world to be celebrated at Nice in Bithynia and with his Letters calleth thither the Bishops of all Countries and Prouinces to be present at the day appoynted Theodoretus in his Historie Ecclesiasticall plainely testifieth the same trueth Thus we see euidently by the vniforme testimonie of foure very graue Historiographers whereof three liued more then a thousand and one hundred yeares agoe that the Byshop of Rome had no more to doe in Generall Councels then other Byshops had They tell vs first that the Emperour sent Hosius the Byshoppe of Corduba in Spaine to make peace to bring the contentious to vnitie if it could be Secondly that when he saw that would take no place then he proclaymed a Councell to be holden at Nice in Bythinia Thirdly that he commaunded all Byshops euen the Byshop of Rome himselfe to come to Nice at the day by him appoynted The third Section of the Councell of Constantinople The second Generall Councell holden at Constantinople against Macedoneus his complices for denying the Diuinitie of the Holy Ghost was called by the commaundement of the Emperour Theodosius the great about 384. yeares after Christ. Socrates hath these wordes Impeperator vero nihil cunctatus Synodum suae fidej Episcoporū ad hoc conuocat vt Nicanam fidem confirmantes Constantinopolitanae Ecclesiae Episcopū ordinent sperans autem futurū vt illis et Macedoniani coadvnarentur etiam illius haeresis Episcopos conuocat The Emperour Theodosius with all expedition calleth a Councell of Byshops imbracing the right Fayth that aswell the Fayth of the Nicene Councell might be confirmed as that a Bishop might be appoynted at Constantinople and because he was in hope to make the Macedonians agree with the Byshops of the right Fayth he calleth also the Byshops that were of the Macedonian-sect Sozomenus is consonant to Socrates in one place and in an other place addeth these words Theodosius vero Imperator Paululū post
the former Obiection this is my answere response 1 First that Kinges of late yeares are in deed so brought into thraldome by the Pope where Poperie beareth the sway as they may truely be sayd to doe the office not of Kinges as Kinges but rather of Seruantes and Slaues to the disholy Father the Pope of Rome response 2 Secondly that the Pope will not this day permit Kinges to make Lawes in Ecclesiasticall causes but onely to execute those vnchristian execrable tyrannicall Lawes which by Popes of late yeares are with Fire and Faggot framed to their handes To the latter I answere in this maner First that how and in what sort the Pope is King it is plenteously prooued in the tenth Conclusion of this present Chapter To which place I referre the Reader for his full satisfaction in this behalfe Secondly that by the Popes owne Law whosoeuer is Possessor malae fidei in the beginning can haue no iust title by prescription in the ending Thirdly that if we suppose and graunt him to be the true and lawfull King of Jtaly yet can no more be rightly inferred therevpon saue onely that hee can call and confirme Councels within Jtaly and make Lawes to his subiectes of the same Kingdome In which case I for my part will not contend with him as who onely denie his vsurped authoritie in other transmarine and forraigne Kingdomes Now let vs heare the Frier once againe to recreate our spirits with his merrie conceites B. C. Surely it were meâ—re madnesse to thinke that Anatolius would euery way haue had equall authoritie in all Ecclesiasticall causes as the Minister affirmeth seeing then we must graunt that he desired Jurisdiction in Italy and Rome it selfe Nay what were it else but to condemne Anatolius of grosse foolerie in suing for that superextrauagant grace of the Pope to the iniurie of his owne Sea and Dignitie T. B. I answere first that our Jesuite heere vnawares condemneth rather their famous Pope Gregorie of meere foolerie then Anatolius to whom he imputeth it For if Gregories report be true the Councell of Chalcedon offered him the name of Vniuersall Byshoppe and yet did the same Gregorie obiect the desire thereof against the Patriarch of Constantinople as a proud name derogating from the right of all other Byshoppes Yea your owne sweete selfe sir Iesuite doe in this very Chapter ascribe no lesse vnto your Pope and withall admit other Byshoppes beside his Holynesse Secondly that Anatolius might truly haue had equall authoritie with the Byshoppe of Rome in all Ecclesiasticall causes and for all that not haue desired iurisdiction in Jtaly and Rome it selfe For our Iesuite must know that these three are intrinsecally distinguished one from an other viz. Identitie Equalitie and Similitude There is often Similitude where Equalitie wanteth and many times equalitie where no Identitie can be found Thirdly that the Councell of Chalcedon approoueth whatsoeuer the Nicene Synode hath decreed and consequently it taketh not away from any Byshoppe his proper dignitie Lastly that this which our Fryer heere obiecteth and whatsoeuer else where to the like effect is soundly confuted in the Aphorismes aforegoing especially in the third and fift of the same And for further proofe marke well my next Answere folowing B. C. Nothing is determined in the Councell of Nice touching the Church of Rome but that is made the rule of other Churches as Pope Nicholas the first noteth who also affirmeth that the Authoritie of the Romane Church was not from Men but from God T. B. I answere first that neither Pope Nicholas nor any other Pope is a sufficient witnesse in his owne cause as is already prooued Secondly that if God had giuen such authoritie to the Church of Rome sixe hundred and thirtie holy and learned Byshoppes in one Synode 217. in an other 200. in an other 150. in an other 318. in an other all which is already prooued in the Aphorismes aforegoing would neuer haue limitted or once offered to alter the same These expresse words of the Fathers of the Chalcedon Councell may for the present be sufficient Etenim sedi senioris Romae propter Imperium Ciuitatis illius Patres consequenter priuilegia reddiderunt For the Fathers consequently gaue Priuiledges to the Sea of old Rome for the Empire of that Citie Loe Men not God gaue Priuiledges to the Sea of Old Rome And they yeeld this reason for the same because forsooth the Citie of Rome was the Seate of the Empire and reputed Caput Mundi the Head of the World Thirdly that when Pope Nicholas sayth that they tooke example of the forme of the Church of Rome for that which they would giue to the Church of Alexandria he graunteth in very deed that as the Bishope of Alexandria had but the preheminence of all there about no more had the Byshope of Rome And so it followeth that the Councell thereby did decree that the Byshop of Rome should keepe himselfe within those limittes Cardinall Cusanus and Ruffinus doe so vnderstand the Canon of the Nicene Councell Yea other Canons of the same Councell doe plainely insinuate the same sense as at large it is alreadie prooued Fourthly that if the Byshoppe of Rome had vniuersall soueraigntie from God as Pope Nicholas vntruely auouched then could no Byshop of Rome nor yet the holy Councell of Nice haue giuen or permitted such custome to the Byshoppe of Alexandria The reason is euident because whatsoeuer is De Jure Diuino no Mortall Man can dispense with the same This is so cleere and certaine as no learned Papist either doth or can denie the same Fiftly that no Custome may be admitted against the knowne Trueth The Popes owne Decrees out of S. Austen doe so teach vs these are the very wordes Qui contempta veritate praesumit consuetudinem sequi aut circa fratres inuidus est et malignus quibus veritas revelatur aut circa Deum ingratus est inspiratione cuius Ecclesia eius instruitur nam Dominus in Euangelio ego sum inquit Veritas non dixit ego sum Consuetudo itaque Veritate manifestata cedat Consuetudo Veritati Hee that contemneth Veritie and presumeth to follow Custome is either enuious and iniurious toward his Brethren to whom the trueth is reuealed or else vngratefull to God-ward with whose inspiration his Church is instructed for our Lord saith in his Ghospell I am the Trueth he said not I am Custome therefore when Trueth is manifest let Custome giue place to the same Againe in an other place thus Hoc planè verum est quia ratio et veritas consuetudini praeponenda sunt This is true in deed that Reason and Trueth must be preferred before Custome The same Decrees out of S. Cyprian teach vs the same these are the wordes Non debemus attendere quid aliquis ante nos faciendum putauerit sed quid prius qui ante omnes est Christus prior fecerit
neque N. hominis consuetudinem sequi oportet sed Dei veritatem Wee must not regard what any before vs thought should be done but what Christ first did who is more to be respected then all others Againe in an other place thus Nam Consuetudo sine Veritate vetustas erroris est propter quod relicto errore sequamur Veritatem Custome without Trueth is the antiquitie ef Errour wherefore let vs leaue Errour and follow the Trueth Pope Gregorie is consonant and plainely auoucheth the same Trueth Vsus qui Veritati est contrarius est abolendus Vse contrary to Trueth must be abolished Sixtly that where there is Law Custome can haue no place For Custome I finde thus defined in the Popes owne Decrees Consuetudo est ius quoddam moribus institutuÌ„ Custome is a certaine Law instituted by the frequent actions of men It followeth in the same Decrees Quod pro Lâ—ge suscipitur cum deficit Lex Which is receiued as Law when Law can not be had And in the Glosse I finde this exposition Hic videtur quod tunc demum recurrendum est ad Consuetudinem cum Lex deficit et sic est argumentum quod nunquam secundum Consuetudinem est iudicandum si ius contrarium praecipiat Heere it seemeth that then we must haue recourse vnto Custome when Law is wanting and so we haue an argument that we must neuer iudge according to Custome if Law commaunde the contrary Sequitur in Glossa resp quod non secundum consuetudinâ—m sed secundum iura est iudicandum I answere that Iudgement must not be giuen according to Custome but according to Law And consequently I conclude against Pope Nicholas and against all Jâ—suites and Iesuited Papistes that seeing the sacred Councels of Nice Constantinople Ephesus Chalcedon and Aphrican yeelded no prerogatiue to the Byshoppes of Rome saue onely in respect of Custome and seeing withall that Pope Sozimus Celestinus and Bonifacius did challenge their falsely pretended Primacie and Prerogatiues onely by the Canons of the Nicene Councell as I haue alreadie soundly prooued and for that end Pope Sozimus falsified the same Canons and the other Popes vrged the same for the furtheraunce of their falsely pretended Title Primacie and Prerogatiues but were therefore in the ende roundly controlled and vtterly reiected of the Fathers of the Aphrican Councell the Popes or Byshoppes of Rome must hold them selues contented and satisfied with that iurisdiction which the holy Synodes haue allotted them B. C. The true meaning therefore of the Canon is that the Byshoppe of Rome before the definition of any Councell vsed to commit the gouernment of Egypt Libia and Pentapolis to the Byshoppe of Alexandria as Pope Nicholas the first doth expound T. B. The Iesuite should haue named the Pope that first gaue such gouernment to the Byshoppe of Alexandria and in what yeare it first beganne Which doubtlesse hee would haue done if possibly hee had been able to performe the same The trueth therefore is as I haue prooued euidently and Pope Nicholas is like to Sozimus and others of that vngodly 〈◊〉 They 〈◊〉 neither tell where when or by what Pope such gouernement was first committed to the Byshoppe of Alexandria and yet doe they neuer cease to demaunde the like of vs but I hope this Catholike Triumph will stop all their mouthes Yea two other Canons of the Nicene Councell are flatte contrary to Pope Nicholas his expositioÌ„ for the seuenth Canon giueth honour to the Byshop of Hierusalem yet not by reason of any Commission from the Byshop of Rome but for an old Custome Tradition The same seuenth Canon in like maner ascribeth a proper dignity to euery Metropolitane And the fourth Canon auoucheth constantly that nothing done in any Prouince is of any force or strength vnlesse the same be confirmed by the Metropolitane As for the Popes Vniuersall soueraigntie no Canon yet extant in rerum natura neither of the Councell of Nice Constantinople Ephesus Chalcedon or Aphrican maketh any mention thereof B. C. The word Superroyall I suppose slyly mocketh at that which venerable antiquitie confesseth I will content my selfe with the testimonie of S. Chrysostome who speaking not onely of Byshoppes but inferiour Clergie-men instructeth them how to deale with secular Potentates comming vnworthily to the Sacramentes in this manner If a Duke quoth he if a Consull if hee that weareth a Crowne come vnworthily stoppe and hinder him thou hast greater power then hee And the Minister denieth that the late Queene might preach the Ghospell or administer the Sacramentes Which functions notwithstanding other of their Clergie might execute whereof it ensueth that in these Spirituall poyntes their power was aboue that of the Queenes and so truely in a good sense may be called Superroyall which so much his superscoffing grauitie seemeth to deride and taunt T. B. I answere first that the Superroyall counterfeite Power which I deride in your Pope is the deposing of Kinges the translating of Empires the making of some thing of nothing the applying of the substantiall partes of one thing to an other the aduauncing of himselfe aboue euery thing that hath beeing and such like whereof I haue spoken and intreated very plentifully in the Conclusions of this present Chapter Secondly that albeit in the preaching of the Word and administration of the Sacramentes the chosen Minister hath onely the charge and authoritie to execute them yet hath Gods annoynted Prince the supreame charge and soueraigne authoritie to commaunde the execution thereof as also to correct and to punish the Minister for the neglect of his duetie in that behalfe For though the execution perteyne to the Ministers yet the prouision direction appoyntment care ouersight which is the Supreme gouernement indeed perteyneth onely solely wholly to the Prince For which cause King Ezechias highly renowned in holy Writ though he were but very young in yeares did for all that in regard of his prerogatiue Royall Supreame authoritie in causes Ecclesiasticall call the Priestes Leuites his Sonnes charging them to heare him and to follow his Commaundement for so are the wordes of the Text. Yea Josias that famous King did sundry times commaund the Hie Priest But of this subiect I haue intreated so copiously in other Bookes as it is heere a thing needlesse to stand longer vpon the same Thirdly that I graunt freely willingly that Ministers in the action of their Ecclesiasticall function Church-ministerie are aboue all Christians aboue Queenes Kinges and Monarches representing the person of God teaching admonishing rebuking them as others following the godly example therein of S. Iohn the Baptist. Yea I further graunt that if the vices of Princes Kinges and Monarches be notorious scandalous to the whole Church then the Byshops may denounce such Potentates to be enemies to the trueth aduersaries to God and no true members of the Church but to be holden for forlorne people and as
Sozimus had vnderstood and meant the Canons of Sardica when he named the Canons of Nice about which there was so much adoe as we haue already seene then doubtlesse it had been his part to haue named them though for no other end but onely for vnitie peace and charitie-sake Secondly that I willingly agree to our Jesuite when he auoucheth no new thing touching Fayth to haue been enacted in the supposed Synode of Sardica And my reason is this for that Appeales to the Church of Rome are no matters of Fayth indeed thirdly that it is a matter of Fayth with the Papistes to beleeue that the Fathers of Nice could not erre either in defining matters of Fayth or Manners And consequently seeing the Synode of Sardica in the fourth and seuenth Canons hath decreed flat contrary to the Synode of Nice in the fourth fift sixt and seuenth Canons it can not be deemed a legittimate and lawfull Synode but a bastard and plaine counterfeite as I haue already prooued in the third Aphorisme of this present Chapter To which place I referre the Reader as where he may find whatsoeuer his heart can desire This onely will I heere say for the present that not onely the other first three generall Councels after Nice viz. of Constantinople Ephesus and Chalcedon being all three after it decreed contrary to it but which is more to be admired 217. Byshoppes of which S. Austen was one assembled in the famous Councell Aphrican affirmed constantly with one vniforme assent to Pope Celestine that no Synode had made such Canons as the Byshoppes of Rome alleadged for their owne pompe and statelynesse These are the expresse words of the holy Synode Nam vt aliqui tanquam a tuae sanctitatis latere mittantur nulla inuenimus patrum Synodo constitutum For that any should be sent from your Holynesse we find it not defined by the Fathers in any Synode Now notwithstanding this vniforme assertion of so many so learned so holy and so auncient Fathers yet is that falsely supposed prerogatiue of Appeales to Rome plainely decreed in the fourth and seuenth Canons of Sardica And consequently either the Synode of Sardice was a bastard and counterfeite Conuenticle or else the two hundred and seuenteene Fathers of the Aphrican Councell auouched to the Pope a most notorious vntrueth But doubtlesse neither could so many holy Fathers for their great reading and learning haue been ignoraunt of the sayd Councell if any such lawfull Synode had been extant neither for their rare pietie would they haue gainesayd or withstood the same Fourthly that the affirmance of the Nicene Fathers to haue been also at Sardice is like to the counterfeite Donation of Constantine the rescript of Pope Julius and such like of which I haue discoursed at large in the conclusions and Aphorismes of this present Chapter Fiftly that it greatly stood the Popes in hand Sozimus Bonifacius and Celestinus during whose times the controuersie did continue to haue vrged the Canons of Sardica if any such lawfull generall Synode had been extant And consequently seeing they neuer once related them it followeth that in their dayes there was no such Councell extant in very deed Sixtly that Pope Gregorie reuerenced the foure first generall Councels as the foure holy Ghospels but for all that he neuer made mention of the Synode of Sardica which if it had been extant no counterfeite ought to haue had the second place Seuenthly that the fourth and seuenth Canons of Sardice are flat contrary to the fourth fifth sixth and seuenth Canons of Nice And yet without all peraduenture no Synode especially comming within a few yeares after Nice which Councell all the Christian world did highly reuerence at all times either would or durst haue decreed against the same To that which is here and else where sayd of the Centuristes and M. Perkins this may in generall yeeld sufficient contentation to the honest Reader viz. that albeit they doe not in euery poynt iumpe precisely with Bell yet doe they not speake any thing in defence of Poperie nor any where plead for the supposed antiquitie thereof No no they vtterly reiect Poperie and euery where condemne the same To that of Policarpus I answere that his comming to Rome was not to insinuate any soueraigntie of Anicetus ouer him as the very end did declare but to visit that famous imperiall Citie the Queene of the world and Caput mundi and to see the old Monumentes in that place euen as the Queene of the South came from farre to heare Salomons Wisedome and to beholde his glory To that of Jrenaeus I haue said sufficiently in many places of this Chapter as also to that of Policrates and the other Byshoppes of Asia That which I haue sayd of S. Cyprian doth euidently confirme the same And the testimonie of Eusebius is consonant while he writeth in this maner Sed hoc non omnibus placabat Episcopis quin potius è contrario scribentes ei iubebant vt magis qua sunt pacis ageret et concordia atque vnanimitati studeret denique extant etiam ipsorum literae quibus asperius obiurgant Victorem All Byshoppes liked not his dealing but by their Letters directed to him they commaunded marke well the word that he should rather doe those thinges which belong to peace and should indeuour himselfe to establish concord and vnitie To be briefe their Letters are extant in which they reprooue Victor the Byshoppe of Rome very sharpely Thus writeth the auntient and learned Father Eusebius cleering two thinges vnto vs. Th' one that Irenaeus and the other holy Byshoppes did chide and reproue the Pope Th' other that they did not onely rebuke him but which is much more freely in their Letters to him commaund him Marke well the word Iubebant they commaunded him For sayth our Jesuite the other Apostles sent not Peter by any authoritie of commaund but onely by request and petition as Princes and Superiours without any touch of their high Office or Dignitie may be sent by their inferiours their sending proceeding from petition nothing empeacheth their high Soueraigntie But our sir Fryer either desireth to deceiue others or knoweth not what he sayth For without all peraduenture in proper phrase of speach whosoeuer is sent by an other or others marke well my wordes the same person or persons as they be sent are inferiours For this reduplication sent as sent implyeth intrinsecally a duetie and subiection euen in him or them who otherwise may be superiours Whensoeuer one goeth to a place vpon request he is not properly sent thyther by him that made the request but freely taketh that iourney in hand of his owne accord Hee doth it willingly not by compulsion of charitie not of duetie To which I adde that it is a disloyall speach of a Subiect to affirme that the King may be sent of his Subiectes Howbeit I will not deny but the King in some matters of
to liue a single life Secondly that he wished of both sortes and sexes men and women those onely to abstaine who had the gift Thirdly that he made no Law for single life but left it free to euery ones choyce and election professing constantly that he had no commaundement from God concerning Virgins And doubtlesse if S. Paul had no warrant to inioyne Single life much lesse had the Councell of Nice such a warrant and least of all had the late Byshoppes of Rome men of dissolute life and scandalous behauiour such power and authoritie The second colour of trueth pretended by our Fryer Iesuite is of S. Epiphanius S. Hierome Eusebius and Pope Zacharie Let vs therefore heare his owne wordes and his scholasticall dispute B. C. The holy Priesthood saith Epiphanius is for the most part of Virgins or Vnmarryed folke or if those be not sufficient for the Ministerie of those which containe themselues from their owne Wikes And in an other place But the Church quoth be doth not admit the Husband of one Wife yet lyuing and begetting Children T. B. I answere first that Epiphanius speaketh not of any Law that was made in his time against Priestes Marriage but of a voluntarie vsage of some few in some few places Which mine answere is virtually implyed in these wordes for the most part Secondly that I haue prooued in the fift Proposition very plentifully euen by the Popes owne Decrees besides many other waightie important proofes that it was euer lawfull for Byshops Priestes and Deacons of the East Church to haue Wiues and to beget Children as others did To which I now adde for the complement thereof this liuely testimonie of the Councell of Agatha in these expresse wordes Presbyterj Dinconj Subdiaconj vel deinceps quibus ducendi vxores licentia modo non est etiam aliarum nuptiarum euitent conuiuia Priestes Deacons and Subdeacons and the rest who now haue not Licence to Marrie must not be present at the Feastes of other Marriages Out of these wordes of this Councell I obserue first that this Councell was celebrated about 439. yeares after Christ. Secondly that it plainely conuinceth against all cursed Iesuites and Antichristian Byshoppes of Rome that it was sometime lawfull for Priestes to Marrie Thirdly that this Councell alludeth to the time of Siricius which was about 51. yeares before it For when the Councell saith who are now debarred from Mariage it implicitely affirmeth that before they might freely haue Married If therefore Epiphanius meane not as is already sayd his bare word may not be admitted against the Canon of th'Apostles against the famous generall Councell of Constantinople against the Councell of Agatha against the Popes owne Decrees Yea S. Epiphanius graunteth that some Priestes were Married in his time And Polydorus sayth that S. Paul called his Wife Sister and reiecteth S. Hieromâ—â— exposition See and note well the fift Proposition B. C. S. Hierome likewise writing against Vigilantius sayth What shall the Church of the East doe What the Church of Egipt and the Apostolike Sea which take Virgins for their Clerkes or Continent or if they be Married giue ouer to be Husbandes Will Bell for all this tell vs that Priestes were euer Marryed in the East-Church and without all respect giue S. Epiphanius and S. Hirome the word of disgrace T. B. I answere first that this Testimonie being the same in substaunce with the former may with all congruitie receiue the same answere For it doth not relate any Law Decree or Constitution made against Priestes Marriage but barely and onely insinuateth that zeale and feruour which was wonderfull in the primatiue and auncient Church Howbeit therevpon will it neuer follow in true forme of argument that because some hauing the gift of Continencie absteyned from Marriage so to auoyde the incumbrances of which th'Apostle speaketh therefore all others must be compelled Lege lata to doe the same For as the vnmarryed Byshoppes and other inferiour Ministers in our Church of noble England doe not make a Law to the rest whose Marriages they honour and approoue so neither did the single life of some few make a generall Law for the rest in the primatiue and auncient Church We honour reuerence and highly commende the Single life of our Clerkes who haue the gift of Continencie wee onely and solely condemne that coacted and forced Chastitie which brought such filth shame and confusion to the Church that three most famous zealous and learned Papistes Polydorus Panormitanus and Pope Pius were mooued and as it were enforced with zeale vnto the trueth to write as sharply against the same as my selfe haue done Secondly that if this answere be not according to S. Hieromes true meaning then not Bell good M. Fryer but holy Paphuntius but the Apostolike CanoÌ„ but the Councell of Constantinople but the Councell of Agatha but Sozomâ—nus but Socrates but Gratianus but the Popish canonized Saint Antoninus and the Popes owne Decrees doe giue to Epiphanius Hierome the word of disgrace Marke well the â— 4.7 and 13. Propositions Thirdly that though the Councell of Agatha approue the Decree of Siriâ—ius to which it alludeth by adding an other absurd constitution to the same yet doth it freely and plainely tell vs that Priestes were lawfully Marryed before that time Which is a testimonie so cleare and apparant for Priestes Marriage as all the world may iustly abhorre mans Law made against the same Let the words of the Councell of Agatha neuer be forgotten because they strike the matter dead For in that the Councell saith which are now debarred from Marriage it plainely giueth vs to vnderstand it may not for shame be denied that it was sometime lawfull for Priestes to Marrie that is as I haue already prooued vntill the time of Siritius To which I must needes adde that which I haue soundly concluded in the eleuenth Proposition viz. that the Pope by popish Fayth and Doctrine can make lawfull the Marriage not onely of Secular Priestes but also of Fryers Monkes Iesuites and Nunnes And consequently that God neuer did prohibite or forbid the same But what an absurd Decree is that which the Councell of Agatha added to Pope Siritius his cursed and execrable Law this is it The Councell of Agatha chargeth all vnmarried Priestes that they be not present at the Banckets and Feastes of other Marriages Is not this absurd Our Lord Iesus himselfe vouchsafed to honour Marriage with his sacred presence Hee and his Disciples were togeather at a Wedding in Cana of Galilee where he wrought his first Miracle in changing Water into Wine and yet I trow our Papistes will not say that Christ and his Disciples were Married men Whether the Pope be Antichrist or noe viderint ipsi But that these and the like Decrees be pregnant coniectures and more then probable signes that he is the forerunner of Antichrist I constantly here
affirme and am readie to gage my life for the tryall of the same B. C. Notwithstanding it is meete that they shoud refraine themselues from the companie of their Wiues who are consecrated and busied in the Ministerie seruice of God T. B. This Testimonie with the other already answered doe tickle the Minister and fetch blood as our Fryer Jesuite prateth to the comfort of his deuoted Popelinges I answere first that the first word veruntamen notwithstanding or but hath relation to that which went before and so rather maketh against the Fryer then for him selfe Secondly that Eusebius the Author by him alleadged sayth not that any Law made either by God or man did prohibite the marriage of Priestes but onely that in his iudgement it is conuenient for Priestes to refraine from the companie of their Wiues Thirdly that if Eusebius were lyuing in these our backslyding dayes and should behold the filth and execrable fruites of coacted Single life in the Popish Clergie hee would doubtlesse change his opinion with the famous learned and zelous Papistes Polydorus Panormitanus and Pope Pâ—us and cry out aloud that coacted and forced Chastitie in the Romish Clergie was so farre from excelling chastitie in Wedlocke as no crime whatsoeuer hath brought greater shame to Priesthood more harme to Religion more griefe to Good Men then the vnchast filthy life of the vnmarried Romish Priestes And that therefore it were meete expedient to restore to Priestes the free vse of Marriage as it was in the beginning and primatiue age of the Church Now how this Assertion of Eusebius doth tickle mee and fetch blood from mee let the Reader iudge B. C. Pope Zacharie writing to Bonifacius our worthy Countriman then Byshop and the Apostle of Germanie hath these wordes speaking of Priestes From the day of taking Priesthood they are to be forbidding yea euen from their owne Wiues Of this Decree the Magdeburgians make mention True it is that they score it up for one of his errours But it giueth vs a sufficient warrant to score vp that also for a notorious vntrueth which Bell speaketh of the long lawfull libertie of Ecclesiasticall Wiuing in Germanie T. B. I answere First that this Pope Zacharie absolued the French men from their loyall obedience to Childerich their Soueraigne and confirmed Pipine the traytor in his rome and Kingdome Whereof more at large is to be seene in The Downefall of Poperie Secondly that I desire to know who gaue the Byshops of Rome authoritie to make Apostles and that I may see their Commission before I be vrged to beleeue the same Thirdly that the bare word of Pope Zacharie to his Apostle Boniface is not sufficient to debarre Husbands from their Wiues Fourthly that notwithstanding the wicked commaunde of Pope Zacharie Priestes were still Marryed in Germanie for the space of three hundred yeares and Pope Zacharies charge contemned as a most wicked and vnlawfull thing For Pope Hildebrand found them Marryed in his time in the yeare of our Lord God 1074. who labouring to separate Priestes from their Wiues was for his paines reputed a madde man and an Heretique as I haue prooued at large in the Seuenth Proposition which I wish the Reader to ponder seriously Fiftly that in euery legall tryall foure distinct persons must concurre as euery learned Diuine euery skilfull Canonist euery approoued Summonist and euery meane Legist will confesse viz. the Person accused the Accuser the Witnesse and the Iudge And consequently the Byshoppes of Rome can not be Iudges when and where they are the parties accused This is a poynt of great consequence which the Reader must euer haue in remembrance I end with the testimonie of Nicephorus that in the East Churches Byshoppes did beget children of their lawfull Wiues euen in the time of their Episcopall charge and dignitie The Iesuites fourth Chapter of the Popish execrable Pardons B. C. THis Chapter though it be but short yet it lacketh not the seale of his occupation for his conclusion is adorned with this notable vntrueth The Popes Pardon quoth hee is a rotten Ragge of the New Religion brought into the Church after a 1300. yeares by Bonifacius the eight This tale he hath told vs diuers times before and therefore the more reason I haue to challenge it for a rotten Lie of the Ragge-maister of Rascall T. B. I answere first that though this Chapter be short in wordes yet is it so full of waightie and vnanswerable matter that where it conteyneth fourtie lynes saue one our Fryer Iesuite for feare of burning durst scarcely touch three of the same Secondly that in his shortnesse hee hath heaped lye vpon lye His first lye is this viz. That I haue told this tale of the Popes Pardon that it is a rotten Ragge of the New Religion diuers times before For I told not this tale at all saue onely in this present Chapter let the Reader peruse all three Chapters aforegoing and if he doe not finde this tale once told as in trueth he can not then in charitie let him bestow the Whetstone vpon our Fryer as vpon the man who hath the best deserued it His second lye is this viz. That my saying is a rotten lye For I haue prooued it to be the meere trueth euen in this Chapter as it will better appeare God willing by this my present Answere His third lye is this viz. That I am the Rag-maister of Rascall For albeit both in the very Title of his Booke and in sundry other places he tearmes mee in that scornefull manner yet is it so farre from the trueth that the name of the Towne where I was borne is not Rascall as hee would haue it but Raskell with k and e not with c and a as his lying lippes affirme it But what if the name were as the Jesuite scornefully affirmeth must I be a Rascall because I was borne in a Towne so called Is euery Pope Holy because his name is Holinesse Was Pope Sergius an Hogge because his name was Hog-snoute Is an humble man proud because his name is Proud Is a valiant man a Coward because his name is so Is a man all good because his name is so no wise man will say so Yet must I forsooth be a Rascall because I was borne in a Towne called not Rascall but Raskell where I neuer continued saue onely during my minoritie and non-age Doth not euery child see perceiue that our Frier wanteth matter and that he is at a non plus If he were able to defend Poperie with Trueth Scriptures Councels Fathers or good Argumentes hee would neuer vse such miserable shiftes and silly euasions His third lye is this viz. That he hath prooued mine assertion to be a Lie For I haue with inuincible reasons and authorities prooued the contrarie to be the knowne Trueth Hee nameth an vnknowne Booke The dolefull Knell where hee would seeme to haue prooued
not daring indeed to accept the Challenge and to encounter me seeketh by fond cauils and shamelesse euasions to instill into the eares and heartes of their silly deuoted Vassals that I will not because I dare not performe my promise And for the better effecting of their purpose they require of me that which I neuer promised yea that whereof my selfe am altogeather ignoraunt and no way able to performe For how can I performe that which I doe not know I must forsooth procure him a safe conduct to dispute with that equitie and fauour which was graunted to the Protestantes in France Marke for Christes sake how feard our Iesuite is to accept the Challenge First hee dareth not put downe in print his name and addition A tricke of Iesuiticall or rather Diabolicall pollicie I must procure a safe conduct for B. C. Some bloody cut-throate I thinke hee be Yet I must not know whether hee be a Man or a Monster whether Pope Iohn the Woman or some Deuill incarnate of a Popish Nunne Besides this I must accept of such slye conditions as he addeth to my Challenge so as he may be at libertie to slippe the Halter when and as he list Whereby who seeth not that by all meanes he auoydeth to dispute or bicker with mee Fourthly that the Iesuite and his Jesuited complices haue a long time intended and still labour by vngodly and indirect meanes to take away my life from me and so to stoppe me from further writing against their rotten Poperie Yea in his Preface he protesteth lustily that hee hath prouided a Winding-sheete for the shrowding of my Carcase and that he will with all speed make ready my blacke Funerall And it seemeth so in very deed For vpon the 13. of Iune instant 1609. euen immediately after I had finished this Catholique Triumph there came a friendly Letter but without name vnto my handes and a Packet with Siluer in it which the man namelesse pretended he had borrowed of me c. The circumstaunces were such quae nunc non est narrandi locus that neither my selfe nor others durst open the Packet as hauing apparant inducementes to suspect Poyson Pestilence or other like infection Diabolicall Thus much I thought good in briefe to insinuate to the Readers that they may thereby see and perceiue how vnable the Papistes are to defende their late vpstart Poperie as who know no better meanes but by seeking most cruelly to murder all such as stand in their way God make me firme and constant in the trueth and God defend me and all professors of his holy trueth from Popish sauage crueltie and in the end bring vs to endlesse felicitie Amen Amen FINIS Fiue Bookes were printed but hid vnder a Pipkin least they should be seene or burnt with the Sunne My Booke of Motyues and Booke of Suruey Forerunner pag 15. To what end were they written but to be published This Church of Rome hath foulely corrupted the old Romane Religion which our Church hath reformed A.D. 527. A.D. 1084. The Papistes ascribe saluation to popish Monkry Bruno the author of a new popish sect Hence Poperie is conuinced to be the new Religion A.D. 1335. A.D. 1119. A.D. 1170. A.D. 1198. A.D. 1206. A.D. 1371. A.D. 1540. Ignatius Loyola was the father of Iesuites these proud lordly Fryers Behold the Iesuites liuelie purtrayed in their best beseeming colours Note well my Anatomy The Fathers of the African Councell did stoutly controule the Byshops of Rome for their forgerie of false Canons The Byshop of Romes authoritie limitted by the Councell of Nice Hence sprang the Byshop of Romes falsely pretended Primacie The Emperours were deceiued and so gaue away their royall prerogatiues A.D. 528. Vniuersall Byshop A.D. 607. A.D. 1550. A.D. 1418. A.D. 1566. A.D. 1161. Chap. 4. Of the Popes Pardons Chapt. 5. Of popish Purgatorie Chap. 6. Of Auricular confession Chap. 7. Of Veniall sinnes Chap. 8. Of the Popes fayth Chap. 9. Of the condigne Merite of Workes Chap. 10. Of Transubstantiation Chap. 11. Of popish inuocation of Saintes The Iesuite only snatcheth at such peeces as he thinketh he may best deale withal B.C. pag. 2. 〈…〉 apud 〈…〉 3 cap. 32. O the most monstrous lye in the world God of his mercy either conuert or confound the lyer Secundo principaliter Ioh 12. ver 41. Euseb. hist. lib. 3. cap. 32. Vpon my saluation the Iesuite hath most impudently belyed mee The Iesuite is as honest as he that hath no trueth at all in him Nomb. 16. vers 24.30 Out vpon all lying trayterous Iesuits Poperie can not in trueth be defended it is the new Religion The Iesuite beginneth continueth and endeth with lying Epiphan haer 68. p. 213. Apud Aug. epist. â—1 13.14.17.18.25.30 Aug. ep 76. Aug. ep 77. Apud CypriaÌ„ pag. 11.46.61.66 Valla. de don Constant. â—ol 34. B. Act. 16. In breuiario cap. â—1 Act. 16. Pag. 10. The Iesuite is full of notorious lyes Act. 16. pag. 21â— Liberatus cap. 13. pag. 621. in Breâ—iar Cap. 12. pag. 620. Cap. 23. pag. 630. Cap. 12. Pag. 20. A.D. 457. A.D. 327. Quinto principaliter Theod. hist. lib. 5. cap. 10. Theod. hist. lib. 5. cap. 9. A.D. 371. Sixto principaliter Notetur cap. 2 in conclus â—0 valde Fuerunt 630. episcopi in Chalcedone A.D. 457. Act. 16. pag. 212. The Byshop of Rome the chiefest Patriarke but yet vnder the Emperour as other Byshops else where Act. 16. pag. 208. Concil 1. Constant. A.D. 383. Celebratum Marke this The Byshop of Rome was made the chiefe Patriarcke because Rome was the head of the Empire Concil prim Constantinop Can. 5. et habetur dist 22. cap. Constantinop ciuitatis Honoris primatum Marke this poynt well Concil primum Constantinop A D. 383. celebratum Epist. ad Damasum The Iesuite prooueth himselfe a noddy Euery Arch-byshop is Byshop of Byshops in a godly sense meaning Marke well the next Chapter Dist. 99. cap. primae sedis Dist. 99. cap. Nullus Let these decrees of the Popes be neuer forgotten Gratian Dist 99. cap. ecce Floruit Greg. A.D. 591. The Byshop of Rome is confounded Concil Chalc. A. D 455. celebratum Our Fryer slaundreth the primitiue Church Our Fryer confuteth himselfe See the tryall and marke it well It is new for that it coÌ„meth short by more then 400. yeares of the time of S. Peters doctrine The newnesse of Religion may be considered two wayes The word or name Pope is a ragge of the new religion The name was old as coÌ„mon to al Byshops but not as proper to one O Fryer great is thy malice against the truth Ioh. 10. v. 28.29.30 Mat. 9.6 Ioh. 1. v 14. B.C. pag. 12. Let the Fryers confession be well remembred pag. 12. The protestation of the Duke of Saxonie and of the rest Read and marke well the antepast Gratian. Dist. 40. cap. si papa The Pope may not be iudged though he carry many thousands of men into Hell fire Vict. relect 4. depotest Papae