Rome from Carthage but rather that there was a Canon to controll it they descended in the end to a flat and peremptory resolution Yet before wee set downe their Conclusion faine would we know how your Aduocates can quit and free your three Popes from forgery of a Canon of Nice They tell vs first that the Two Greeke Patriarchs were deceiued by giuing credit vnto their Greeke Copies which were Corrupted by Heretikes Next that the Popes themselues were deceiued in alleaging the Councell of Nice instead of the Councell of Sardis wherein saith your Cardinall The Canon was extant And lastly that the Bishops of Africke were deceiued in not acknowleging any Generall and Catholike Councell of Sardis by name S. Augustine affirming that He knew no Sardican Councell which was not Hereticall I. CHALLENGE WHich Answer of your Cardinalls importeth thus much to wit that we are to belieue that two hundred and seuenteene Bishops two Reuerend Patriarchs and three ancient Popes erred in their ignorance of a Generall Councell of Sardis in those daies wherein the matter was aduisedly and exactly discussed rather than these Two Cardinals which are but of yesterdaies birth in their coniecturall presumptions which is in effect as much as to tell vs that those Archers canot discerne so well of a true aime who are an hundred and fifty paces distant from the marke as they who are of a thousand and two hundred for such was the difference betwâ—ene the yeeres of those ancient Fathers and of these Cardinalls from the time of the Councell of Nice Which Answer wee haue else-where proued to be no solution but a fiction rather and meere Illusion Yet that we may deale liberally with you so as not onely to suppose but if you will to confesse also that there was a Generall Councell called Sardican as such your Testimonies delare and therefore to yeeld so farre to Baronius and Binius as to thinke that Augustine and the Africane Bishops could not be ignorant of the Sardican Councell which Saint Augustine himselfe calleth Plenarium vniuersae Ecclesiae Concilium An Vniuersall Councell Neuerthelesse heereupon must we likewise make bold to tell you that the Canons which you cite for your Appeales must bee iudged fictions because else the African Bishops with Saint Augustine could not haue answered your Pope that No Synod had ordained that any might come from his Holinesse to order these matters Nor could those Popes haue omitted the mention of such a Canon if any such had been when now it so much stood them vpon both for keeping themselues free from crime of forging a false Canon of the Councell of Nice and also for aduantaging their pretended Claime of Appeales by virtue of a Canon of Sardis Howsoeuer let vs proceed to that which followeth III. The decision and peremptory resolution of the Africans in Opposition against the Papall Claime of Appeales SECT II. FIrst 217 Bishops Saint Augustine being a principall one doe addresse their letters to the Pope of Rome shewing the false-hood of the Claime of Appeales made by your Three Popes Zozimus Boniface and Celestinus that it had no Patronage from the Councell of Nice but rather that there was in that Councell another Canon making much against such Appeales by determining that Popes being so farre remote from Africk could not be so competent Iudges in such Causes l Except say the Africans Some will thinke that God will inspire some One singular man with Iustice and denie that grace to innumerable persons assembled together in one Synod And therefore in plaine termes they desire the Pope not to admit heereafter of any such Appeale and in conclusion they call that Papall presumption a Smoakie secular arrogancy which say they we will not indure Furthermore the same Councell of Africk made Two Canons by the one as it were taking the Crowne of Pope-dome from the Head of your Bishop of Rome by the other piercing and wounding the Papall Primacie to the very heart For what fairer Crowne can you put vpon that Head than the Supreme title of Monarch ouer the whole Church or of Chiefe Priest and Bishop of Bishops wherewith you professedly adorne and in a manner adore your Romane Pope But these African Fathers vpon occasion of this contention with your Popes decreed That the Bishop of the Primary Sea should not bee called the Head of Bishops or chiefe Priest but onely the Bishop of the Primary Sea Secondly what greater Prerogatiue or higher token of Monarchie could your Popes couet than that which you challeng as A matter knowne to the Catholike Church which is that Appeales are to bee made to Rome from all the coasts of the world against which the same holy Bishops made this peremptory decree viz. If any Priest shall thinke that hee ought to Appeale beyond the Sea meaning to Rome let him not bee receiued any longer into the Communion of the Church of Africk So they All that your Cardinals can say to helpe your Popes at a dead lift is that the former pretended Canon of Nice insisted vpon was to be found in the Councell of Sardis which Antiquity hath denied And yet if that were granted your Monarchy standeth still vpon humane Authority For that Synod of Sardis sheweth plainely that their grant of Appeales to Iulius Pope of Rome was but vpon fauour and not vpon duty being not an old Custome but a new Constitution If it please you say they so much to honour the memory of Peter let vs write to Iulius Bishop of Rome c. And againe If you all bee pleased whence nothing can be gathered but that the same pretended Grant was no more than Ad placitum and might by the same Authority be as easily repealed We add that albeit you challenge a right that All causes of great moment among which these of Appeales is a principall one should bee Reserued to the Bishop of Rome you notwithstanding confesse that In the dayes of Saint Cyprian there was no Reseruation of any such Cases in vse II. CHALLENGE HEre haue we a faire and cleare glasse wherein any one that doth not wilfully close his eyes may see the full face of the vsurped and conunterfeit Monarchie of the Church of Rome For in your Romane profession your latter Popes proclaimed the Papall Monarchie to bee founded vpon Diuine Authority Whereas your ancient Romane Popes at the time of the African Councell when if euer they were to make good Appeales from all the parts of Christendome to Rome their principall part of Supreme power they themselues notwithstanding argued not from any diuine Law but onely from the humane decree of the Canon of Nice which the Fathers of that Councell discouered to be notoriously false For if the then Popes had thought that they could for this Papall pretension draw a sharpe two-edged sword ex iure diuino what needed they to haue fought with this wooden
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as it is in the Greek because also the Bishop of Rome hath 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the same custome thereby distinguishing and limiting their Prouinces so as the Bishop of Alexandria may still haue gouernment within his Prouinces As also the Bishop of Rome hath in his And that because of prescription of Custome 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 say they that is LET THE ANCIENT COVRSE HOLD and adde As also let Antioch and other Prouinces hold their ancient Priuiledges c. Which taketh away all Subordination of the authoritie of Alexandria to Rome This was the current sence of this Canon in the dayes of Antiquitie vntill the boldnesse of your Authors thinking to carry the matter by out-facing deuised a strange Answer The sence is saith Bellarmine that the Bishop of Alexandria should haue these Prouinces there mentioned because the Bishop of Rome was accustomed to permitt it so to be So he As though they were not words of Comparison that the Bishop of Alexandria should enioy his Priuileges accordingly as the Bishop of Rome held anciently his but that the Prerogatiue forsooth of the Bishop of Rome was and had beene then to Permitt or dispose of the Prouinces of the Patriarkes of Alexandria and Antioch and of other Bishops at his owne pleasure A Glosse both sencelesse and shamelesse Sencelesse for that it carrieth with it a Confluence of Absurdities First because it had beene an impietie for the Accusers to haue called the Case of the Bishop of Alexandria and Antioch into question to be determined in that Councell if it had beene the Catholike faith then to beleeue that it was in the power of the Bishop of Rome to order all such matters of Iurisdiction of other Patriarks as he should thinke good Next the Councell had bene guilty of vnpardonable remissenesse when they heard a Case so preiudiciall to the Authority of the Monarch of the Church the Pope of Rome and yet would not seuerely rebuke the Accusers as scandalous and Schismaticall fellowes nor reiect the Case it selfe with indignation and detestation as that which they could not take vpon them to decide without the danger of their soules against the Ordinance of Christ in the Bishop of Rome But much more for determining contrarily as they did saying LET ANCIENT CVSTOMES HOLD whereas they should rather haue expresly acknowledged in the Bishop of Rome the Ordinance of Christ as the life and soule of euery Custome which comprehendeth any matter of Faith necessary to Saluation And that this Answer is also shamelesse is prooued by the Sun-shine light of storie For that those words Because also the Bishop of Rome hath the same Custome are words of Comparison betwixt the Churches of Alexandria and Rome in the point of maintaining their ancient Priuileges Which not onely the words 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Because also do plainly prooue As when one shall say I will giue this man a Crowne because also I gaue a Crowne to his fellow but furthermore the three Editions now set downe in the body of your Councels by your Binius wherein the words are Because the Church of Rome hath the like Custome without any word of Permission Yet were all this but a kind of Modesty if you did not know that the Fathers of the Councell of Chalcedon vpon the same ground namely that it was but matter of Custome and no Diuine Ordinance did against the will of the Bishop of Rome aduance the Prerogatiue of the Bishop of Constantinople If you did not know that three of your Popes of Rome for the giuing of an high point of Dominion euen the Prerogatiue of Appeales to Rome from other Prouinces alleaged though forgedly and fraudulently the authority of the Councell of Nice And if you did not further know it Confessed by a Cardinall of farre more ancient note and greater ingenuity than his fellowes that the direct Sence of the Nicene Canon is that As the Bishop of Rome had power and authority ouer all his Bishops so the Bishop of Alexandria according to Custome should haue thorow-out Lybia c. The same Cardinall proceeds in shewing how much Rome hath since encroached beyond her ancient limits Wee see saith he how much the Bishop of Rome by vse and custome of Subiectionall Obedience hath at this day got beyond the ancient Constitutions But how shall we expect good conscience from your Bellarmine in acknowledging the true iudgement of the Councell of Nice who when it is obiected against the latter Romane Councels to prooue them bastardly and illegitimate that it is required as a necessary Condition in a Councell in all Diuine Constitutions to stand vpon Diuine grounds the holy Scriptures onely answereth that This is no equall condition And notwithstanding that the thrice-renoumed Emperour Constantine the GREAT required in this Synod of Nice that Because the bookes of the Apostles do plainly instruct vs in Diuine matters therefore we ought to make our Determinations vpon questions from words which are so diuinely inspired yet answereth the same Bellarmine thus Constantine saith he was a great Emperour indeed but yet no great Doctour of the Church who was yet vnbaptized and therefore vnderstood not the mysteries of Religion Thus doth this your Cardinall twit and taunt the iudgement of that godly Emperour witnessed by Theodoret where expressing his testimonie and citing the place yet as the Steward in the Gospell vniustly concealeth from his Reader that which followeth in Theodoret namely that The greater part of that Councell of Nice obeyed the voice of Constantine and Concluded matters accordingly So little regard haue the now Romanists to the authority of the Councell of Nice which hath bene euer since worthily honourable in the memorie of all true worshippers of Christ Iesus By which notwithstanding we see two Articles of Popery quite ouerthrowne One of the pretended Papall Dominion ouer the whole Church the oâ—her the Equalling of Traditions with Scriptures for the deciding of matters of Faith CHALLENGE THe Canons of those CCCXVIII Fathers of that Generall Councell of Nice who haue thus infirmed your Article of Vniuersall Subiection to the Romane Church found beleefe with all the syncere Professors throughout the Christian world Whether therefore you will haue your Article to damne so many Catholike Bishops the admirable lights of Gods Church or rather to esteeme your Romane Article Damnable and blasphemous in it selfe iudge you II. That the beleefe of the Romish Article The Catholike Romane Church c. Damneth the CL. Catholike Bishops in the second Generall Councell being the first at Constantinople Anno 380. SECT 3. WEE present before you the CL. Catholike Bishops in the second Generall Councell of Constantinople whereunto it may seeme that both you and we do willingly referre our selues First then we shall heare Your Obiections The second Generall Councell saith your Cardinall in their Epistle to Pope Damasus say that they
so they say Both by the Canons and also by your letters and both these had relation to another part of Reasons and inducements premised in that place And is not this then slie Sophistrie to conclude an whole from a Part Yea but the same Councell say that They durst not iudge Iohn the Bishop of Antioch and therefore reserued him to the iudgement of Pope Celestine which plainly sheweth the supreme authority of the Pope So you What signifie these words that They durst not iudge Iohn of Antioch why they do plainly relate in the same Epistle that they had already deposed him We haue say they deuested him of all his Sacerdotall power So after this referring him to the iudgement of the Pope That for so they say they might with lenity ouercome his rashnesse This was not to preferre him to another Censure for there had bene no lenity in that but to the aduise of Celestine that by his perswasion he might be first reclaimed from error and afterwards restored to his place For a further discouerie of the Ecclipse of the Conscience in your Cardinall let vs consider what Supreme authority he would insinuate to wit that if the Councell could not depose Nestorius Patriarch of Constantinople without the Popes Mandate nor durst depose Iohn Patriarch of Antioch but referred the Cause to the iudgement of the Pope the issue hereof must be directly this viz. That the Pope is absolutely aboue a Generall Councell as the Cardinall defendeth else-where This were a Supreme authority indeed but in truth it is a falshood and long since condemned as you know by your owne Councels of Constance and Basil for a flat Heresie Which your Doctors of Paris haue alwaies disclaimed as contrary to antiquity and which no Councell since the beginning of the Christian Faith did as yet expresly decree as your Doctor Stapleton a great Champion in this Cause doth not denie and therefore betaketh himselfe to the Late tacit and silent consent of the Doctors of your Church Was not this then more than boldnesse in your Cardinall to inferre this Supreme authority out of this Councell Our Opposition First this Councell called Celestine Bishop of Rome Fellow-Minister and did as you haue heard Excommunicate and depose the Patriarch of Antioch before they made any Relation thereof vnto Celestine the Bishop of Rome Ergo It did not acknowledge the now pretended Supreme authority and priuilege of the Pope which is to haue Cases of that nature soly Reserued to his owne Determination Secondly looke into the Councell it selfe and into the Epistle alleaged wherein concerning the points which Pope Celestine had constituted Wee say they haue iudged them to stand firme wherefore we agree with you in one sentence and doe hold them meaning Pelagius and others to be deposed Ergo Consent to the Confirmation of the Popes sentence doth gaine-say his Supreme authority But principally we oppose the Acts of this Councell of Ephesus in decreeing that Neither the Patriarch of Antioch who made claime Nor any other should assume authority of ordaining any Bishop within the Isle of Cyprus The Arguments and Reasons whereupon the Synod made this Decree shew that as well the Authority of the Bishop of Rome as of any other is thereby excluded And they adde more peremptorily It is to be obserued say they in all Prouinces and Dioces that no Bishop drawe vnder his subiection any Prouince which was not his from the beginning lest that vnder pretence of Priest-hood he bring into the Church Arrogance and Pride The very selfe-same disease which Saint Basil and Saint Augustine with the whole Councell of Africke haue both expressely noted and openly detested in the Romane Popes euen of their times CHALLENGE NOne of you euer doubted that this Councell of Ephesus was Generall and the Bishops therein truely Catholikes wherein notwithstanding you see diuers Arguments although not of disunion yet of no Subiection And therefore You except you will condemne CC. holy Bishops must needs iudge your Romane Article to be damnably false IV. That the Beleefe of the Romane Article of The Catholike Romane Church without subiection whereunto there is no saluation Damneth aboue CCCC Catholike Bishops in the fourth Generall Councell of Chalcedon SECT 5. FOure hundred and thirty Bishops were assembled in this Councell of Chalcedon with whom we are to aduize concerning your Article of Necessary Subiection to the Bishop of Rome and his Church But first wee are ready to answer and then to replie Your Obiection THis Councell saith your Cardinall said that The custodie of the Vine that is of the Catholike Church is committed to the Pope by God It saith so and so doth that godly primitiue Pope Eleutherius say to the Bishops in France as you know that The whole Catholike Church is committed by Christ vnto them Were They therefore thinke you all Popes What say you The meaning of Eleutherius is say you that for as much as Heretikes doe oppugne the Catholike and Vniuersall Church it belongeth vnto euery Bishop to haue an vniuersal care to defend support it And this is a true Answer indeed else must you grant that Saint Paul was a Pope ouer Saint Peter because he tooke vpon him The cure or care of the whole Church and that Athanasius Bishop of Alexandria was Pope aboue the then Bishop of Rome because Gregory Nazianzene saith of him that He hauing the presidence of the Church of Alexandria may be said thereby to haue the Gouernement of the whole Christian World By these Euidences we are compelled to aske with what Conscience you could make such Obiections in good earnest to busie your Aduersaries and seduce your Disciples with all whereunto you-your-selues could so easily make answer But thus Catchitiue haue you beene at the shadow let vs trie whether we can apprehend the substantiall Truth Our Opposition For what is that which you will say belongeth really to the Supreame and Papall Dominion of the Bishop of Rome Because say you with common consent the Pope hath supreme authority in gouerning the Church therefore can hee change the Canons and decrees of General Councels So you But what then say you to the equalling of other Patriarchall Seates with Rome The Fathers of the Councel of Chalcedon say you did giue Priuileges to the Patriarkeship of Constantinople equall to the Church of Rome but Pope Leo did oppose against the Decree of the Councell and disclaimed it You say true but yet let vs come to the ground of beleefe as well of the Fathers of that Councell in opposing your pretended Papall dignity and authority as of your Doctors in contradicting them Secondly therefore The Pope of Rome say you hath his Monarchie and sole gouernment of the Church from diuine right And The Romane Church was founded by God What Prouince then in the world is free from her Iurisdiction So
you and such is your now Romane Faith But the Fathers of the Generall Councell of Chalcedon were of a contrary beleefe because their reason of withstanding the Pope was as you know For that they held that the See of Rome was founded by humane authority Thinking that the Church of Rome got the Primacie namely of Order by reason onely that it was the chiefe Imperiall Seate So you We haue heard of Oppositions enough Gladly would we vnderstand how you can reconcile these oddes so that wee may not iustly condemne your now Romane Faith of Nouelty by the iudgement of a Generall Councell This was indeed say you the Decree of a great Councell but the Decree was not lawfully proceeded in because the Legates of the Pope were absent and afterwards protested against it And Pope Leo himselfe would not approue it saying that hee did allow onely those Decrees and Canons in that Synod which concerned matters of Faith So you And now vpon this Euidence heare our Verdict CHALLENGE IN these Premisses we finde a Councell in your owne opinion and in the Iudgement of the Christian World lawfull and Generall consisting of more than 400 Fathers without exception Catholike and Orthodoxe These haue opposed your Article of the Necessity of Subiection to the Pope razing the very foundation thereof by beleeuing that his Primacie is not by diuine Authority Vpon this beleefe they easily cast downe the roofe of your Papall building denying the Popes power of gaine-saying the Positiue and humane Decrees and Canons of Generall Councels and by erecting a Patriarch whom They adorne with a Priuilege of power excepting priority of Order in taking place giuing voice c. Equall to the Bishop of Rome What is if this bee not to ruinate your Romane Article Yet much more stand you entangled in your owne Answers For if that so many and so Reuerend Fathers determined against the pretended Prerogatiue of Rome notwithstanding the Contrarie protestation of the Popes Legates they teach vs thereby another crosse point to your Article viz. that the voice of the Pope by his Legates is of no more virtue in a Synod than the suffrage of any other Bishop And what though the Legates of the Pope were absent at the making of this Act in the Councell because they would not bee present and were notwithstanding present the next day and disclaimed the Act yet could nothing preuaile And againe what was the nullity of authority in the Popes Legates whensoeuer they contended against the Maior part of a Synod But Pope Leo say you gainesaid the former Decree of that Councell albeit he did approue of all Canons in the same so farre as concerned marters of Faith This Answer also proueth you faithlesse in all your defence euen by the iudgement of Pope Leo. For if he therefore opposed the Decree of that Synod which oppugneth the Papall Primacie and Dominion because it was no matter of Faith he thereby plainely confesseth your Article which maintaineth the Dominion of the Romane Church without which there is no saluation not to be at all an Article of Faith We conclude Therefore either must those 430 godly most Reuerend Fathers together with Leo the Pope himselfe be damned by your Romane Article or else must your Article be condemned by their contrarie iudgement and Decree Which notwithstanding the Popes Contradiction was afterwards sufficiently confirmed in other parts of Christendome by the vse thereof which as you confesse Continued a long time So large and long a false-hood is that which your Article of Necessary Subiection to Rome doth exact of the whole Church of Christ. V. That the beleefe of the Article of an Vniuersall Subiection to Rome as the Catholike Church damneth the 165 Fathers of the first Generall Councell at Constantinople being the second of that name Anno 553. SECT 6. LEt your owne most priuileged albeit most partial Authors Baronius Binius relate the whole Cause 1. Concerning the authority of this Councell whether it deserue the Title of Vniuersall Councell or no They answer that It was a General Councell and so approued by all Popes Predecessors and Successors to Saint Gregory and by himselfe saying I doe reuerence the fift Councell of Constantinople Now come we to the relation of the Cause First of Pope Agapetus The cause of Anthimius which he had condemned was afterwards ventilated in the Councell of Constantinople This argueth the No-Dominion of the Pope ouer that Councell which will take vpon them to examine that cause which the Pope had before condemned After Agapetus succeedeth Vigilius At what time In the Councell of Constantinople that which they called Tria Capitula was condemned The summe of their Answer is this Pope Vigilius before this Generall Councell of Constantinople defended the Cause of the Tria Capitula which the Councell being gathered together condemned The Pope resisted the Decree of the Councell the Councell endeth Pope Vigilius for not consenting to this Councell is banished by the Emperour Iustinian After that this Councell had so concluded Vigilius confirmed the sentence of the Councell of Constantinople and was thereupon released out of Banishment by the Emperour In all this say you the Popes change of his minde cannot be preiudiciall to him or his See for that the cause being no matter of Faith but onely of Persons he did it vpon iust reason least the East Church and the the West should fall into Schisme and be rent in sunder Thus farre your Authors CHALLENGE BE the Cause matter of Faith or onely of Fact or Persons it mattereth not nor to what end it was done Wee are not to inquire into the doctrines but the dispositions of this Councell nor to respect the point of Vnion of Churches but that which you haue created for a new Article of Faith the point of Necessary subiection to the Romane Church and Bishop thereof First by your owne Confession the Pope defendeth that which afterward the Councell gain-sayeth Next the Pope contradicteth the Decree of the Councell to wit of the same Councell determinately concluding and persisting in their Sentence against the same Pope euen to his Banishment for the same Cause Yet in the end he is glad for Vnions sake to yield vnto the former Decree of the Councel So They who in their Annotations conceale that which the Text expressely deliuereth We condemne say they all that haue defended Tria Capitula But Vigilius say you had before this Councell defended those Tria Capitula Therefore was your Pope also condemned by this Councell Behold now forsooth your Romane Faith Behold your Monarch Behold his Dominion Behold the necessary Subiection of his Subiects If it be called Dominion to Command and be glad to yeeld or accounted Subiection of that Councell to prescribe Decrees against the sentence of your Pope or esteemed Faith of your Article of Necessary subiection to the Romane Church vpon losse of Saluation to persist in
those dayes was not esteemed to be The Catholike or Vniuersall Pope not The Catholike Bishop of Bishops his Iurisdiction not to haue any Catholike or Vniuersall Right for Appeales his Iudgement not to be a Catholike Rule of Faith his Church not to be The Catholike Mother-Church his Excommunication not to be a Separation from the properly called Catholike Church and much lesse a Catholike and Vniuersall Separation from the state of life So damnable is your Article of The Catholike Roman Mother-Church without subiection whereunto as you say there is no Saluation whereby with one breath you damne not onely Cyprian that glorious Saint of Christ but also all other his Associates and Colleagues Bishops in Africa Numidia and Mauritania of whom some were Martyrs some Confessors all Professors of the true Faith of Christ against the persecuting Infidels of those times It would nothing now auaile you to obiect that Cyprian in his Contention against Pope Stephen was in an Error in the Question of Rebaptization because euery error is not eradicant to roote out or cut off a Member from the Bodie of the Church Catholike else what shall we think of Pope Stephen himselfe who was in an error in the other Question concerning the vsurpation of the Right of Appeales to Rome which not onely Cyprian in his Councell of Carthage but Augustine also in the Councell of Africke resolutely withstood But what need many words Cyprian say you was alwaies held a Catholike Wee adde that if this Obiection were of force it would much more fortifie the Cause of Protestants For if Cyprian being Excommunicated by the Pope for an error was notwithstanding still held for a Catholike as hath beene confessed and hath euer since bene Registred for a Saint then doubtlesse Protestants stand much more secure who are excommunicate for withstanding not onely the grosse Idolatry but also as many Heresies of that Church of Rome as she hath new Articles of Faith among which this to wit The Catholike Roman Church without Vnion whereunto there is no Saluation 〈◊〉 not be held the least being as you see so Imposterous Schismaticall and Execrable as euery Instance yet giuen doth manifestly conuince Our third Instance in the Churches of Africke in the dayes of Saint Augustine in two Councels fully preiudiciall to this now Article viz. The Romane Catholike Church without which there is no Saluation SECT 8. THE first Councell was that of Mileuis Anno 402. concluding against the pretended Prerogatiue of Appeales to Rome This Case is handled at large afterwards The summe of all is This Councell wherein Saint Augustine was present consisted of threescore Bishops which had beene esteemed alwaies Orthodoxe in the Catholike Church albeit that their conclusion of denying any Right of Appeales from Africke to the Church of Rome which Iurisdiction of Appeales is held to be a principall part of the Article viz. The Romane Catholike Church in the Church of Rome at this day Which one Article consisting of foure points of Necessitie first Necessity of Vnion with the Church of Rome secondly Necessity of Subiection vnto it thirdly Necessity of Beleefe of both the former fourthly Necessitie of Saluation in them All is now rent in pieces by that one Prohibition of that Councell which denying any Right of Appeales from Africke to Rome did thereby deny the pretended Catholike Subiection to the Romane Chaire Secondly decreeing Excommunication against those African Priests that should dare to Appeale to Rome thereby they deny an absolute Necessity of Vnion with Rome Thirdly this Excommunication being to be extended against them that should Thinke it necessary to Appeale to Rome they thereby deny Necessity of Beliefe of the Prerogatiue of Rome And lastly condemning this Beliefe among themselues they thereby deny it to be an Vniuersall Right necessary to be belieued of all Others All this is euidently prooued in the place alleaged The second Instance in the Churches of Africke in the daies of Saint Augustine was the African Councell by name against the Church of Rome in the Case of Appeales concerning which for methods sake we are to lay open first the Occasion of Opposition betweene the Churches of Africke and Rome secondly the Discussion thereof thirdly the Separation of the Church of Afrike from Rome fourthly the honorable estimation had of the African Bishops as of the Saints of God notwithstanding their not acknowledging of Subiection to the Romane Church I. The Occasion of the Opposition by Saint Augustine and the Africans against the Iurisdiction of the Church of Rome in the supreme Case of Appeales SECT 9. COnsult you with your owne Chronologers in the body of the Councels of old and you shall find that the Case standeth thus One Apiarius a leud Priest and as you know of a scandalous flagitious and abhominable life being Excommunicated by the Bishops of Africke fleeth to Rome and as it were taketh Sanctuary there by Appealing to Pope Boniface then Bishop of that Sea The Pope sought by his owne Authority to haue this infamous Priest restored againe auouching for the ground of his Authority the Canon of the Councell of Nice which as he pretended declared the power due to the Bishop of Rome to take hold of all Appeales made vnto the Pope from all other Christian Churches and Prouinces and to order matters according to his owne wisedome II. The Discussion of the Cause SECT 10. THE Bishops of Africke and among them Saint Augustine hauing read the Popes Claime of Appeale by virtue as was alleaged of a Canon of the Councell of Nice fell first to demurre with themselues suspecting that the Pope had suggested a false pretence and therefore sought first to satisfie themselues by sight of the Copies of the Councell of Nice before they would returne the Pope any full answer and after diligent search into all the ancient Copies which they could finde they yeelded this Answer to the Bishop of Rome We haue read say they manie Copies of the Canons of Nice both Greeke and Latine and yet finde we among them no such Canon for Appeales to Rome as you alleage In this case of doubt it was agreed on both sides that messengers should be sent vnto Cyrill Patriarch of Alexandria and vnto Atticus Patriarch of Constantinople to the end that vpon search of their Records they might bee certified of the Truth of this matter These two Patriarchs send them faithfull Transcripts which they themselues did auouch to be The most true and authenticall Copies wherein that Canon which Three Popes to wit Boniface Zozimus and Caelestinus successiuely had alleaged as their onely euidence for their right of Appeales could not be found nor any syllable therof Vpon this Answer of those graue Patriarchs these Africane Bishops in number 217 perceiuing the falshood of the Popes Allegation and finding that no such Canon appeared in those ancient Copies of the Councell of Nice which could aduantage that their pretence of Appeales to
was the Councell of Arimine So he And why must not this be true if you will allow your Cardinall Bellarmine to make this Greeke Father to speake what Papall Romane Language he shall impose by his Sophisticall translation But your Cardinall Baronius one otherwise as partiall as any Writer euer was and catching at euery shadow of proofe for the aduancement of Papall Monarchy hath made another interpretation of the words of Saint Basil which may be a iust confutation of your other Cardinall from point to point For Bellarmine talketh of the Popes Seeing the Easterne Bishops by a Visitation of Iurisdiction But Baronius alloweth no more than a Seeing by Consideration of their estate but euery Care and Consideration of other mens estate doth not inferre a Iurisdiction ouer them Secondly Bellarmine will needs haue Saint Basil to desire the Popes Decree another tenure of Papall Authority Baronius readeth the word Councell or Aduise which may agree with a Co-equall Thirdly Bellarmine interpreteth Basil as though he yeelded to the Pope a peremptory power of Cutting off and disanulling the Acts of Generall Councels such as was that of Arimine Baronius saith that the motion of Basil was they should Bring with them such things as had bene done namely by some Orthodox at Arimine which might make for the necessary solution of that Councell which all Catholikes haue iudged Hereticall But this argueth not an Authoritatiue power proper to the Pope of dissoluing of Decrees of any Generall Councell which for the space of sixe hundred yeares he neuer had but an Arbitrary Authority granted vnto him by consent of the Easterne Bishops to exercise his fatherly and graue iudgement for the better establishing of the East-Churches which were now rent into sixe seuerall Schismes through the difference of sixe diuerse Heresies Howsoeuer what Authority this was we may best know from Saint Basill himselfe who deploring the State of the East-Churches now pestered with diuers pernitious Heretikes desireth helpe from the Bishops of the West how To comfort the afflicted and to set right and restore those that are broken Helpe then of Confortation it was not of Dominion Secondly shewing that he desireth no more helpe from the Westerne Bishops than the Bishops of the East both ought and would requite in the like case he calleth it A mutuall helpe of louing and brotherly Visitation or Consideration Thirdly his reason why he is so importunate to haue the helpe of the Westerne Bishops he expresseth to be this Because that priuate grudges among the Bishops of the East hindered the fruit of their doctrine and therefore the Westerne Bishops the farther distant they were so much the more Authority would they haue with the people and he addeth that Accustomed speach is not so preualent as that which proceedeth from Strangers chiefly if they were such as were more specially indued with Gods grace as you are euery where knowne to be saith Saint Basil speaking of the Westerne Bishops because you haue preserued the Faith in all sincerity among you So Saint Basil who would neuer haue vsed so often so great and sometimes indeed so crosse and thwarting reasons to moue the Westerne Bishops to compassionate their case and helping them for composing of such and so pernicious distractions by reasons taken onely from Brotherly loue Mutuall duty and Facility of effectuating that great good because of the Remotenesse of their dwelling and therefore to be esteemed persons more indifferent because of their Constancie in preseruation of sincere Faith and consequently beetter witnesses for the ancient Truth without any mention at all of the Prerogatiue of the Bishop of Rome as their Pope or of their Church of Rome as their Mother and Mistresse as you haue pretended if he had any beleefe of this Article Because this one reason taken from the Papall Romane Iurisdiction and dominion if it had bene a matter of Faith had bene more perswasiue and would haue bene more preualent than whatsoeuer hath hitherto bene mentioned by S. Basil. Besides which will be worthy your remarking after fowre seuerall Legations and Messages from the Greeke Church deliuered vnto the Bishops of the Latine Church for their help the Greekes as Baronius is perswaded neuer receiued any Answer Now therefore consult with your best iudgments whether the Church of Rome and her Chiefe Bishop whom Saint Basil more than once condemneth of Pride which Pride was also condemned by a Councellin Africke vnder Saint Cyprian and another wherein Saint Augustine was present for intruding craftily and iniustly vpon the Iurisdiction of other Churches would in humility refuse the offer of Subiection of the whole Greeke Church or he not haue exercised his Visitation ouer them if any such authority had beene intended by Saint Basil. For so should Rome haue beene marked with a greater note of infamy than was her Pride euen her deserting of the flocke of Christ committed vnto her and in a manner betraying the Cause of Catholikes vnto their many and most mischieuous Aduersaries the Sects of Heretikes But wee shall shew that Saint Basil was of a flat contrarie Faith Our Opposition shewing that Saint Basil did not beleeue your Article of Necessity of Subiection to the Romane Pope or Church Baronius would you should know that Saint Basil hauing written diuers letters and sent many Messages vnto Pope Damasus and to other Westerne Bishops yet receiuing no Answer from them in so vexatious and perilous times when the Greeke Church seemed as a ship almost split asunder by the continuall billowes of most pestilent Heresies He thereupon fell into distrust and if he might so say hatred with the Church of Rome So he We had rather you should heare Saint Basil expressing his owne Cordolium and hearts-griefe What helpe can we expect saith he from the supercilious Pride and haughtinesse of the Westerne Bishops who neither know the truth themselues nor yet will Baronius negligently rendereth it Tell learne it Againe I meant to write vnto the Chiefe of them meanig Pope Damasus to signifie by letters that Pride ought not to be accompted a Dignity And againe the same holy Father Saint Basil speaking of the Church of Rome as you know said I hate the Pride and arrogancie of that Church Yea but wee heare him call the Bishop of Rome CHIEFE True but with this limitation their Chiefe And yet if it had beene Chiefe of all others could this inferre a Popedome and Dominion aboue others Then must you confesse that Athanasius was more Pope than Damasus For Basill that calleth Damasus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 calleth Athanasius 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifying The Crowne of the Head The chiefe of all Wee are saith he to flie vnto thy integrity as to the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Top or Crowne of All others CHALLENGE SAint Basil Bishop of Caesarea speaking of the Bishops of the West saith distinctly I meant to write
yet hee might allow that power vnto other Patriarkes and Primates as it seemeth hee did some-where Marke Hee might that is to say peraduenture hee did and As it seemeth which is as if hee had said It is but probable Doe you not see with what rotten Timber this your Master-builder frameth the Arch-pillar of your Romane Faith and with what vntempered morter hee daubeth it when hee hath done Notwithstanding it be without all Peraduenture that if wee must beleeue Pope Agapet There was not from the Ascention of Christ vntill the yeare 535. any one Bishop in all the East ordained by the hands of any Bishop of Rome before Mennas who was now so ordained by Agapetus Secondly know that your Cardinall to proue that the Bishop of Rome exercised his Authoritie of Instituting Deposing and Restoring of Bishops within the Bishopricks of other Patriarkes giueth instance in some Bishops which the Popes themselues haue challenged to be within their owne Romane Dioces as namely the Bishops of Thessaly of France of Spaine of Africke of Salonia and some others If any should take vpon him to proue the Bishop of Durham to be Primate of the Prouince of Yorke and to haue authoritie ouer the Bishop of Chester because he exerciseth his Episcopall Iurisdiction of Instituting Admonishing Suspending and Restoring Ministers within his owne Bishopricke of Durham were this tolerable arguing trow you Thirdly there is not a greater degree of futilitie saith Tullie than for any man to obiect that to which when it shall be retorted vpon himselfe he shall not tell what to say We shall therefore deale with you herein by the Art of Retorsion Cyprian as Primate of the Primates within Africke did as Pamelius witnesseth of him Institute whom he would within the Prouinces of the other Primates The same Cyprian Constituted Sabinus Bishop instead of Basilides whom hee had deposed without the consent of Stephen the Pope of Rome and after professed to hold the same Sabinus in his Bishopricke notwithstanding the dislike and as it were in despight of the same Pope Nor thus onely but Cyprian againe will bee knowne to haue Confirmed the Election of Pope Cornelius whose Communion both hee as himselfe speaketh and his Collegues and Fellow-Bishops gaue approbation vnto Besides Pope Gregorie the First vpon his Election sent his Synodicall and Communicatorie Letters vnto the Foure Patriarks viz. Iohn of Constantinople Eulogius of Alexandria Gregorie of Antioch and Iohn of Hierusalem with testification of his Orthodox Faith in beleeuing the Foure First Generall Councels And lest that you may thinke hee was the First Pope that sought this kinde of Approbation by such Synodicall and Circular Epistles you are to obserue with your Baronious how hee in expresse words confesseth that hee did this According to the ancient Custome of his Predecessours as was also obserued by the Bishop of Segouia in the Councell of Trent As for Excommunicating of Others this being but a denying to haue Communion with them other Patriarks and Churches thought it as proper to themselues to denie their Communion to the Pope as the Pope could by dis-uniting himselfe from them Else could not the Easterne Bishops among whom there were many Orthodoxe Capitulate with Pope Iulius to haue Communion with him but vpon this Condition that he should haue Communion with those Bishops whom they had ordeined otherwise they professed Contrarily to haue no Communion with him Not to tell you that Dioscorus did Excommunicate Pope Leo. Yea will you say an Heretike an Orâ—hodoxe It is true yet did hee this vpon the knowne iudgement of the East-Church vpon a Common right and abilitie in all Churches to denie their Communion to what other Churches soeuer that they were perswaded to deserue their dis-union Vpon which ground Mennas Patriarch of Constantinople Excommunicated Vigilius Bishop of Rome which though it were in an vniust Cause such as in the Papall Excommunications often happen to be yet doth it inferre this Truth that vpon a iust cause it was lawfull so to doe We leaue other Examples of Retorsion and come to the last Answer by Opposition of your owne Popes against you and such as were most zealous Exactors of all Rights belonging to the Papall Sea The matter standeth thus After the period of iust Antiquitie which we prefix about the yeare Six hundred after Christ Pope Hadrian the First about the yeare 777. writing to the Emperour Constantine and to his Empresse Irene layeth Claime to Two things First to the Temporall Patrimonie of Saint Peter Secondly to an Ecclesiasticall Iurisdiction within some part of the Patriarkship of Constantinople which hee desireth them to restore to the See of Rome and he expresseth in his Petition the Consecration of Bishops Archbishops Fourescore yeeres after him succeedeth Pope Nicolas the First who reneweth the same Claime in his Epistle vnto Michael the Emperour propounding vnto him the Challenge formerly made by his Predecessour Hadrian and specially and by name hee setteth downe the particular Prouinces and Dioces which were with-held or as your Iesuite out of Leo Sapiens saith had bin pulled away from the Bishopricke of Rome to wit the Bishopricke of Thessalonica the Bishop whereof had bin but the Popes Vicar therein together with the Regions of Achaia Mysia Dardania c. wherein were the Metropolitanes of Thessalie Corinth Athens Nicopolis and Patarae But to what end maketh all this his Plea namely that hee might exercise therein as from his owne Authoritie the Consecration of Bishops and Arch-Bishops and to vse the words of your Iesuite moderate all things throughout all those Regions according to his owne Institutions and Ordinances And for further Confirmation of his Right hee pleadeth the Ancient possession which his Ancestours had held from the time of Pope Damasus vnto Pope Hormisda that is to say for the tearme of 154. yeares so that now they had bin aboue Three hundred yeares depriued of these Bishopricks Wee now hereupon demand Doe your Popes after so long processe of time require a Restitution of Right and power of Ecclesiasticall Iurisdiction in certaine Prouinces Christian then doubtlesse all this time was not their power Vniuersall in All others wheresoeuer And furthermore the Patriarcke of Constantinople hauing Iurisdiction ouer the Metropolitanes of Pontus Asia and Thracia consisting of 28. Prouinces and your Popes making claime onely vnto Eight of those for the execution of their Ecclesiasticall and Papall power is it not euident that they outted themselues from all such Iurisdiction in any of the rest And what shall be further said of the other Patriarkships of Alexandria Antioch and Ierusalem Some of them hauing Seauen and some Ten Metropolitanes vnder them and were as exempt from the Iurisdiction of the Pope of Rome as any within the Patriarkship of Constantinople could be CHALLENGE NOW from your former Argument according to the lawes of a Syllogisme It must be thus
What Bishop soeuer doth exercise any Authoritie ouer others to Institute them by Confirmation of their Election by Letters Communicatorie or otherwise and to Depose them he hath Ecclesiasticall power ouer them and they are vnder his Iurisdiction But Popes of Rome haue accordingly Instituted Deposed and Restored Bishops in all Prouinces in the Christian world Therefore are they to be acknowledged the Vniuersall Monarchs therein and are not subiect to Any nor are any-way to be equalled with Others So you Now apply the Examples which haue bin granted and then see how often you shall vn-Monarke your Popes and set vp many vnexpected Anti-popes First by the power exercised by Cyprian both in Confirming the Popes Election and in withstanding dis Restitution next by the power assumed by those Patriarks which Excommunicated your Popes but principally by the Testimonies of your owne Popes Pope Gregorie confessing it to haue bin an Ancient custome in your Popes to submit their Elections to the Approbation of other Patriarks by their Synodicall letters and so to be acknowledged to be in their Communion and lastly by the Claime made by Two Popes Hadrian and Nicolas for the Restoring vnto them a power of exercising their Ecclesiasticall Functions in certaine Prouinces within the Patriarkship of Constantinople If A. B. challenge absolute Royaltie in Eight Towneships onely within the Manor of C. D. that Manor consisting of 28. Towneships wherein saith A. B. my Predecessours haue long since had Fishing Fowling Waifes Strayes Deodants and such like Prerogatiues what can be the issue of this Plea but that whatsoeuer his Right hath bin to these Eight yet his power for Fishing Fowling and the like hath not of a long time bin exercised accordingly and againe that pleading but for Eight it is an acknowledgement that he renounceth all Claime to any of the Twentie besides So then your Popes Monarchicall Prerogatiue of Instituting Deposing and Restoring of all Bishops and Patriarkes throughout the Christian World is now come to be somewhat abated being confined within his owne Peculiars as well as A. B. by his Plea for Fishing and Fowling To conclude whatsoeuer example of the Popes Confirmation of Bishops of other Dioces can be brought in such Cases is not an Act essentiall or proper vnto him but accidentall and of common Congruitie rather than of Necessitie Your Fifth ground of Obiections taken from a pretended Vniuersall Right of Appeales to the Church and Pope of Rome as a Principall part of your Romane Article Our first Discouerie of the Falsehood and Vanitie of the First Pretences taken from the Councell of Sardice SECT 15. POwer of Appeale in any is indeede as your Cardinall saith A most certaine Argument of Dominion to wit if it be right and proper otherwise it is not Power but Oppression nor Right but Vsurpation There were many Causes why the Catholike Bishops in the East should yeeld great Authoritie to the Bishops of Rome in the West before others but specially because of the Distractions and Schismes among themselues by manifold Heretikes and of the Vnion which in the Romane Church had continued and beene maintained by the Bishops thereof with great wisedome and constancie besides the aduantage that the See of Rome had gotten in the time of the Imperialtie of that Citie Notwithstanding neuer shall you proue your Article of Necessitie of Subiection to the Church of Rome vpon Necessitie of Saluation by any Right of Appeale to the Bishop thereof which is the maine scope of your Cardinall in this place The First Testimonie which hee propoundeth is out of the Councell of Sardis This Councell he produceth in this place as a sound Argument which else-where hee ranketh among those Councels that are to be partly allowed and partly reiected As if Coyne partly mixed and Counterfeit ought to be taken for good paiment Againe in this hee alleageth such a Canon which another Cardinall questioneth saying Wee may lawfully doubt whether there be any such Constitution extant And this againe is vrged to proue your Article of an Absolute Monarchicall power and Diuine Right thereunto in the Pope of Rome concerning the Prerogatiue of Appeales from all Christian Churches A doctrine quite ouerthrowne by the same Witnesse whom your Proctor hath produced for this Cause euen the Synod of Sardis it selfe and that Two manner of wayes as your Cardinall Cusanus will testifie One is that the same Synod doth limit his power giuing him Authoritie to approue any thing concluded by a Particular Synod but not to disallow it without the assistance of a new Synod the Other that the Right which the Pope can claime for Appeales dependeth Greatly vpon humane Constitutions Hee might as truely haue said Altogether as wee haue already proued and the Tenor of the Councell of Sardis it selfe doth fully purport If it please you say they speaking of a new Constitution let it be Ordeined c. Would it haue become Orthodox Fathers so to haue spoken if in their iudgement they had conceiued that power of Appeales to Rome to haue beene the Ordinance of God Wee confesse that the Supreame Right of Appeales is proper to a Monarrh it being as Essentiall a part of his Monarchie to haue the Right of Appeales as it is for him to be a Monarch Wherefore bethinke your selues if the Nobles in any Kingdome should write vnto their Soueraigne concerning the Exercising of his Authoritie receiued from his Ancestors as the Pope pretendeth to haue from Saint Peter and should say Wee are pleased and contented that Appeales should be made vnto your Maiestie whether this would not imply in the eares of the Monarch as much as Laesa Maiestas as though he were now to receiue an Authoritie from their Grant and beneuolence wherein hee was inuested and established by his Primarie Right vnto the Crowne By this your Cardinals beginning you may guesse with what conscience hee is like to proceede Examine well the Marginals First If you remoue from his witnesses Parties themselues many being the Testimonies of your Popes themselues For if Adoniah say hee is King will Solomon or any wise and faithfull Counsellour of State take his word for it and yet he was a Kings Sonne whereas the Pope neuer was either Sonne or Successour to such a Monarch as hee faineth to himselfe Secondly If you except the Examples of those who Appeale to the Bishop of Rome as being within his Patriarkship and therefore rather subiect vnto him than others this is as though a Procter would say My Client had Tithe in his owne Parish therefore doe the next Parishes adioyning owe their Tithes vnto him Thirdly If you passe by Appeales that were notoriously Impious such as were made by Fortunatus Felix and Basilides in this Case you that plead so much for the Romane Bishop could not haue allowed Romulus to say thus Fugitiues and Runnagates flye vnto mee for succour in Opposition to their naturall Kings
that euery mans Cause be heard where the crime is committed And which words your Cardinall thought good to pretermit euery Pastor hath committed vnto him a portion of the flocke of Christ which he is to gouern wherof he is to giue an account vnto God And doubtlesse they who are vnder our gouernment ought not to gad and wander nor rashly and cunningly to make a difference betweene Bishops that are at Vnity and Concord but they should pleade their cause there where both accusers and witnesses may be had except some few desperate and naughty fellowes thinke the Authority of the Bishops of Africke to be of lesse power or might who haue iudged and by the grauity of their iudgement haue condemned men whose consciences are fettered in the cords of their owne offences their cause is already knowne and tried and iudgement is giuen already vnto them nor can it agree with the censure of Bishops to deserue the reprehension of lightnesse and inconstancy So he Than which what could be said more to the strangling of your pretended Right of Appeales to Rome Your Cardinals Answeres are many and various it will be the most expedite way for vs to follow him step by step 1. Cyprian saith he albeit he did vnwillingly endure yet did he not altogether abrogate Appeales True if you meane simply the Abrogation of All Appeales within Africke but if you vnderstand that he abrogated not All Appeales beyond the Seas and consequently to Rome then is your Answer most false Secondly your Cardinall instanceth in an Example of One Appealing from Spaine vnto Rome many hundred miles distant yet Cyprian writing hereof saith he said Non tà m quà m the Pope was not so much too blame who was deceiued by the Appellant as was the Appellant himselfe that deceiued him As though this were not a full Reprehension of both If one say that he is not so fellonious that receiueth stolne goods as the man that did steale them your Non tà m quà m doth distinguish them in the degree of more or lesse fellony but maketh no difference in their nature and kind for both are felonies So then the Pope was lesse blameable Ergo he was blameable but the other more because the Appellant would needs Appeale in the consciousnes of his Crime but the Pope entertained it in a presumption of the mans integrity and therefore Both blameable because as Cyprian argueth against equity and iustice Thirdly but The decree which Cyprian speaketh of saith your Cardinall was against the First iudgement which is to be made in the place where the crime is committed but he forbiddeth not Second iudgements else-where by way of Appeale Than which what can be more false I had almost said faithlesse for the Cardinall himselfe knoweth that Cyprian vseth this as a Reason against their flying to Rome for a second Iudgment euen Because saith Cyprian they had bene already iudged by me and my Bishops by whom they were condemned Fourthly but Cyprian saith he argueth from this Decree as it implyeth most notorious and manifest crimes What did your Cardinall meane by this his Ipse dixit to infascinate his Reader and to depriue him both of reason and sense For ordinary reason teacheth in points of Law first that A man must not distinguish where the Law doth not distinguish although then it happened that these Crimes of the Appellant were indeed notorious yet in the Decree it selfe there is no such Distinction Secondly it is a vaine thing to thinke that any Crime can appeare so Notorious to a Iudge who is many hundred miles off but one report will encounter another and the Appellant will still make faire pretence of innocency for himselfe vntill the matter be tryed And that we may Appeale to common sense in reading of the Canon and Decree it selfe it is Generall thus It is iust that euery mans Cause be heard there where the crime is committed It seemeth then that your Cardinall dreamed of a Cause implyed in this Decree which could not be any mans Cause else he would haue considered that where Euery mans Cause is expressed No cause of any man could be excepted Fifthly but If Cyprian saith he should here deny Appeales then should he take away all Appeales not onely to Rome but euen to euery place else which Answer how vnworthy it is the iudgement of any man of learning you will easily perceiue Cyprian as your Pamelius noteth was the Chiefe Primate in Africke who held a Councell of his Bishops to Excommunicate Fortunatus and to depose him the Councell fore-seeing the factiousnesse of Fortunatus that he would seeke to Rome to trouble the Church of Christ by working distraction betweene the Churches of Rome and Carthage made the former Decree expressing the iniquity of any Appeale to Remote places where the Cause could not be iustly tryed Heereby the said Councell tooke not away All Appeales within Africke for it was then lawfull for a Clerke to Appeale from his Bishop to an Arch-Bishop from a Metropolitan to a Councell and behold here was a Councell of Bishops which put the Period to all further Appeales expressely forbidding Appealing to places so remote as Rome was which none in Africke could come vnto without Transmigration ouer Sea Your Cardinal's Answer would teach a man to argue thus There lyeth an Appeale from th◠Bishop of Chester to the Arch-Bishop of York and from the Court of York to the Delegates but the State of England denieth Transalpinari Appeales from England ouer the Alpes to Rome Ergò the State of England abrogateth all manner of Appeales whether from Chester to York or from York to the Delegates Moreouer Cyprian speaking of those Schismaticall Appellants Except saith he some few desperate and wretched fellowes thinke the Authority of the Bishop of Africke lesse Insinuating as we may truly iustly and according to their Intention interpret it than the Authority of the Bishop of Rome thereby impairing the power of the Bishop of Rome in respect of the iudgement of a Nationall Councell No saith your Cardinall but the words lesse Authority haue Relation to the Cause and not to the Bishop of Rome as signifying that the Bishops of Africke had authority sufficient to iudge that Cause Here againe he feigneth Cyprian to haue thought those few desperate and wretched Appellants to haue beene so absurd as to thinke they could not be iudged by a Prouinciall Councell whereunto they were subiect An absurdity which none i◠Christianitie could truely imagine Besides the words Lesse Authoritie of them that haue iudged haue Relation to him whom those Fellowes desired to re-iudge their Cause namely the Pope therefore it was as much as if Cyprian had said Least those few naughty fellowes may thinke the Bishops of Africke haue lesse Authority than is that which they Appeale vnto and their Appeale was to the Bishop of Rome So apparant it is that Cyprian thus twitting those Few desperate
the Case whether shall we call the Schismatikes for so the one party necessarily must be That in this Case the Pope is the Schismaticke SECT 20. SOme would thinke that the Pope could not be the Schismatike because which is your common Argument the Head although it be diseased yet it is not separated without the destruction of the Body If there be any peircing sharpnesse in the point of this Reason it may to your owne mischiefe easily be turned backe into your owne bowels as the Fathers of the same Councell wisely did because say they If the Case could be the same in a Naturall Body as it is in a Body Ecclesiasticall that assoone as one Head is remoued another might be had then in many head-aches would men make often changes of their Heads And indeed if there were not this difference betweene the Ecclesiasticall and Naturall Head it should follow that as oft as the Ecclesiasticall Head the Pope should die the Ecclesiasticall Body and Church of Christ should perish also So they Come we to their other Reason That which Christ promised to his Church doth more especially agree to a Generall Councell now Christ said vnto Peter if he should take any offence Dic Ecclesiae Tell the Church the Complainant is not of equall Authority with the Iudge It were ridiculous to interpret that by Church was meant Peter himselfe and as fond to send him vnto any Inferiour to himselfe and no lesse absurd had it bene to send him to the whole Church diffused euery-where therefore Christ meant the assembly in a Councell Besides The Pope is Minister and but one part in Comparison to the whole therefore lesse yea in Authority for the greatnesse of the Authority dependeth vpon the Maior pars the greater part of suffrages and voyces So that Synod of Basil. We might adde hereunto the Argument of Nilus the Greek Arch-Bishop of Thessalonica If that saith he the Pope had Infallibility of Iudgement to what end were the cost and labour of troubling all parts of Christendome for gathering Generall Councels Nor he alone but another more Romish than he could be If so saith he why should the learned in Lawes be sought for Why so many Vniuersities vexed by discussing of Questions belonging to Faith c. So he CHALLENGE AFter your perusall of these Premises remember but your Iesuites Assertion If the Pope should diuide himselfe from the whole Church Hee should be iudged a Schismatike But whether the guilt of Schisme be in Pope or Councell your owne guilt in such a Case can be no lesse than Periury who by your Article are bound to belieue that both Subiection and Vnion vnto both Romane Church and Pope are Necessary to Saluation You haue now a Woolfe by the eares whether you hold him or let him loose you are sure to be bit Thus much of the Dis-union betweene the Head and Body of the Romane Church The fourth Instance of the Dis-union betweene the Romane Church and some Members thereof in the Examples of France and England SECT 21. AN Appeale was made about the same time of the Councell of Basil against Pope Leo the tenth by the Vniuersitie of Paris in Defence of the Authority of the same Councell wherein the same Vniuersity taxeth the Session of the Pope and his Cardinalls as Not gathered together by the Spirit of God professing herein that Not the Popes particular Assembly in the Citie but the Congregation in the publicke Councell is to be called The Church of Rome And this Right of Appeale from the Pope is a liberty which the Vniuersity of Paris hath alwaies challenged to this day yea and the whole Church of France whose King by his Orator in the Councell of Trent made knowne the Vniuersall Tenet of that Church namely that The Pope is not Superiour to a Councell Which they still maintaine notwithstanding Pope Pius the fourth his contention by Arguments in his letters to the contrary And how little accompt they make of the Trent-Canons which are the Articles of Faith whereunto you are sworne is more than manifest seeing they haue not yet admitted of that Councell within the Kingdome of France and therefore are yet at libertie to beleeue as much thereof as they list Not long after this in the dayes of Henry the Eight then King of England Stephen Gardiner being of the Romane Religion yet withstood the Romane Dominion in this kingdome saying as followeth The Authority which the Bishop of Rome would be thought to haue by Gods Law is no Authoritie with vs like as no manner of forraine Bishop hath Authority among vs. Afterwards he descanteth vpon the Title of Head as it is attributed to the Church and Pope of Rome and denyeth him to be the Head by Dominion but by Order in like respect as Appelles was called the Head of Painters and Lutetia or Paris the Head of Vniuersities As for the other Supremacy which the Pope challengeth it is that which Pope Boniface the second begged of the Emperour Phocas It is an ambitious vanity for them to be called Supremes who are Postremes in that which is least All sorts of people in England are agreed vpon this point with most stedfast consent learned and vnlearned both men and women that no manner of person bred or brought vp in England hath ought to do with Rome So he This was the Faith of the Church of England then notwithstanding the Excommunication of the Pope against the King and All his Adherents CHALLENGE IN these Examples to omit others you haue two most potent Kingdomes excepting the Article now in Question vnited in Faith and the one also professing Subiection to your Church of Rome as noble Members thereof who all in all the time of their Opposition if your Article of Necessary Subiection and Vnion to the Church of Rome and Pope thereof bee of Faith are made liable with all their people vnto eternall Damnation Wherefore as we do complaine of the maliciousnesse of your Romane Article which denounceth Curses vpon all Protestants and Others of a different Religion from Rome so may wee cry out vpon the madnesse thereof by which she strangleth the children of her owne wombe yea and her whole Representatiue Bodie in her late Generall Councels as hath bene proued CHAP. XV. The Determination of the whole Controuersie betweene the Church of Rome and the Church of England together with other Protestant Churches concerning the CHVRCH CATHOLIKE to discerne whether Side is rather to be accounted Schismaticall or may more iustly pleade Soule 's Saluation First by Generall THESES SECT 1. THE word CATHOLIKE CHVRCH is that which you oppose vnto vs in euery Dispute as it were a Gorgons head able to terrifie Protestants at the first mention thereof Which name as it is appropriated to the Romane Church we haue prooued to be but a bare name and indeed Medusa's head painted in a shield a meere delusion able to feare
very Baud of all Impietie Whence to vse your owne words Adulteries Incests Periuries Homicides and the spawne of all euils did arise THESIS II. LVTHER had necessary Cause to Depart from the Church of Rome SECT 15. IT is not as you haue heard the corruption of a Doctrine which can alwaies driue a man out of the Church except other properties of necessary Remoouing do concurre What these are you may call to your remembrance Which may be obserued in this Case of Luther and iustifie him before God and Man As first the generall Obstinacie of contrary Teachers such as were the Romish of whom Luther complained saying They Alto fastu with high disdaine contemned my Preaching against Indulgences Secondly Luthers hearing if he had stayed the way of Truth often blasphemed Thirdly Luthers complaining of violent forcing of men to subscribe vnto New Articles this is Tyrannie And lastly he further chargeth them with Compelling him to submit to Satanicall Doctrines speaking both of the vilenesse of Indulgences and the Idolatrie of and in the Romish Masse Albeit any One of all these had bene a sufficient cause for him to warrant his Departure out of Romish Babylon THESIS III. LVTHER and his Followers were farre more safe for their Soules state in that Separation from the Church of Rome and lesse Schismatikes than They whom he forsooke SECT 16. ALL sound knowledge is by vnderstanding of the true Causes of things It is the Cause that distinguisheth a Martyr from an Heretike and the same iust Cause also truely and essentially vniteth one with the true Catholike Church discerneth him both from an Excommunicate properly so called and from a Schismatike Attend then to that which your Cardinall would haue you to MARKE Marke saith he that an vniust sentence of Excommunication is of no force at all Accordingly Saint Augustine Iniusta vincula iustitia disrumpit Vniust bonds are more iustly broken then kept Of this somewhat more hath bene said in a former Thesis This knowne it wil be no hard matter to find out the true Schismatike For as it is the vnlawfull Agent and not the Innocent Patient that maketh the Fray so in Excommunication Whosoeuer Excommunicateth another vniustly condemneth not that other but himselfe Accordingly in Separation from any Church the Actiue if vniust and not the partie Passiue is the Schismatike vpon which Suppositition Firmilianus Concluded against Stephen Pope of Rome that the said Stephen was the Schismatike by his Excommunicating and separating S. Cyprian with many Others in the Africane Chuches and else-where from his Communion In like Case well said once your Cardinall Benno that Eusebius did binde Liberius by forsaking his Communion Euen as did also the Africane Bishops in their Synod by Excluding Pope Vigilius out of their Communion in the dayes of Iustinian Now that Luther was vniustly Excommunicate by your Pope the first Thesis hath fully prooued And that Luther was a Passiue in this Separation appeareth not onely by his owne Complaints saying I was Compelled Constrained c. but also by the Proceedings of Pope Leo against him Else why is it that your owne Thuanus speaking of this Separation said that Some in those dayes layd the fault vpon Pope Leo More fully your Cassander an Author selected in those dayes by the King of the Romanes as the chiefest Diuine of his time and one most fit to be Consulted with concerning the same Separation of Protestants I cannot saith he denie many of them in the beginning to haue bene mooued and prouoked with a pious zeale to a sharpe reprehension of manifest Abuses and that the principall cause of this calamity and Disunion is to be imputed to them who superciliously and disdainefully contemned such godly Admonitions Neither yet euer had there bene as I am perswaded any Contention about the externall Vnitie of the Church except the Popes had abused their authority to an ambitious and Domineiring manner of Rule aboue the limits which Christ prescribed to his Church So He. But it will be said Why did not Luther seeke remedie and redresse of his wrong somewhere where we pray you should he haue sought it can you tell By Appealing to a Generall Councell why that meanes was barred by the Popes Extrauagant denouncing him to be Anathema whosoeuer shall so much as consult or deliberate to Appeale from the Pope to a future Generall Councell Albeit this preferring the Popes iudgement before a Councel's is by the sentence of two Romish Councels as namely Constance and Basil held a Doctrine of all others most Schismaticall Oh! but he being but a Sheepe cited to Rome should haue appeared before Leo his Pastor notwithstanding the Popes high indignation against him As though you could be ignorant of the Apologue of the Sheepe and the Lion at their meeting the end whereof could be no other then this Ora Leonis habes for the sheepe to run head-long into the Lions mouth A Fable which of later times the Venetian Fulgentius the French Abbot of Boys and after them the Dalmatian Spalatensis verified seelie Sheepe with the losse of their liues THESIS IV. The Romish Obiections vrged against this Separation of LVTHER are notably friuolous SECT 17. STill we say that an ill Cause oftentimes bewrayeth it selfe as much by the friuolous Obiections of an Opponent as it is discouered by the iust Euidences of a Defendant There are but foure kinde of Obiections besides such as haue bene alreadie answered which you do usually vrge against Luther THESIS V. The I. Obiection in respect of LVTHER'S former Vow to the Pope or Church of Rome is vaine and idle SECT 18. IT is true Luther had bene a Vowed and if you will a sworne Vassall to the Pope and to the Romane Church And so was once your owne Stephen Gardiner sometimes Bishop of Winchester whose answer in like case may satisfie your Curiositie and controlle your scurrilitie in this point Hee in his booke of True Obedience to the King notwithstanding the Popes Breeues to the contrary enlargeth himselfe in his Answer after this manner following Some saith he pull me backward asking why I enterprize so to teach Obedience as that I do disclose my owne Disobedience to the authority and power meaning of the Pope for whose Defence I was bound by my Oath to defend his authority to my possible Power Where is his keeping of Oaths become say they where is his fidelitie He was sworne to defend the Rights of the Church of Rome and now professeth himselfe an open enemie ther-unto But this their talke no more mooueth me than the bumbling sound of an old barrell because where vnlawfull Oathes there also vnlawfull Vowes are not to be kept for none are to sweare to any wickednesse Thus your owne Bishop and after illustrateth this by an elegant Similitude A certaine married man saith he when he thought by iust likely-hoods his first wife was dead
Departure of Protestants from the Church of Rome occasioned by M. Luther I. Thesis Luther was vniustly Excommunicated out of the Romane Church Sect. 15. II. Thesis Luther had necessary Cause to depart from the Church of Rome Sect. 15. III. Thesis Luther and his Followers are farre more safe for their Soules state in that Separation from the Church of Rome and lesse Schismatikes than They whom they forsooke Sect. 16. IV. Thesis The Romish Obiections vrged against the Separation of Luther are notably friuolous Sect. 17. V. Thesis Their first Oiection in respect of Luthers former Vow to the Pope or Church of Rome is vaine and idle Sect. 18. VI. Thesis The second and most Popular Obiection against Luther in his Opposition to the Romane Church vrging him to prooue his Doctrine by immediate Succession and by naming his Teachers before him is as fond as the other Sect. 19. VII Thesis The Obiection That all Changes of Doctrines haue bene notorious in the Persons and Places of their Beginnings is false Sect. 20. VIII Thesis The last Obiection Of Cōtinuall and personall Succession in all ages is frustrate Sect. 21. The fourth and last Part of this Determination concerneth the state of the Churches of Protestants after the daies of Luther and their more iust Cause of continuing this Separation from the Church of Rome Sect. 22. I. Thesis Protestants are Generally Excommunicated by the Church of Rome Sect. 23. II. Thesis Protestants are vniustly Excommunicated Sect. 24. III. Thesis In the Continuance of this Separation Papists are rather Schismatikes than Protestants and consequently in the Heresie of the Donatists Sect. 25. IV. Thesis In the Continuance of this Separation the Vnion of the Protestants with the Catholike Church is both more true and more Vniuersall thā is the Vnion of the Romanists § 26 V. Thesis The Protestants granting it possible for some to be saued within the Church of Rome and the Papists denying that any can be saued in the Churches of the Protestants is but a Sophisticall proofe that there is more safety in the Romane Church Sect. 27 VI. Your common Obiection what is then become of the soules of our fore-Fathers more iustifieth the Protestants Separation from Papists than it can the Separation of Papists from Protestants Sect. 28. VII The Protestants at this day stand more Iustifiable in their Separation from Rome than did either the ancient Primitiue Churches in her Excommunicating of Them or yet Luther and his Followers in their Departure from Her Sect. 29. THE GRAND IMPOSTVRE Of the now Church of Rome Manifested in this ARTICLE of the new Romane Creed Viz. The Catholike Romane Church c. Without which there is no SALVATION THat this is the fundamentall ARTICLE of your Romane Church as it is called Romane We cannot bee better enformed than by the Bishops of Rome Heads of the same Church than by the Bodie thereof which is the Church of Rome it selfe in her Councell of Trent together with the Confirmation of the same by Pope Pius the IV than by your publike Catechisme ratified by the like authority Lastly than by her principall Doctors and Diuines in their most approoued and priuileged Books written vpon this Argument of THE CATHOLIKE CHVRCH All which you may read in their owne expresse words CHAP. I. The expresse Profession of the now Church of Rome concerning this her Article vz. The Catholike Romane Church c. without Subiection whereunto there is no Saluation is absolutely and peremptorily proclaimed by the Authority of the Popes SECT 1. IT wil be a good Decorum that in this case we begin to consult with the Heads of your Church the Popes of Rome themselues Gregory the VII in the yeere 1073 decreed thus The Church of Rome saith he was founded only by God and the Pope thereof is rightly stiled The vniuersall Bishop insomuch that whosoeuer consenteth not with the Church of Rome cannot be a Catholike After him in the yeere 1192. Pope Innocēt the 3. distinguishing of the Word Catholike or Vniuersall decreed as followeth If the Church saith he be called Catholike as a cōpany consisting of al Christian Churches so the Church of Rome is not to be termed The Catholike Church but a part therof but take the word Catholike a◠God is called vniuersall Lord because al things are vnder his dominiō so we say that the Church of Rome only hath al other Churches vniuersally subiect vnto it So he More than an hundred yeeres after him Boniface the 8. would needs be heard not speake but roare thunder by peremptory decree in this tenor viz. We declare define pronounce that it is Necessary for euery one that is to be saued to be subiect to the Pope of Rome Thus much for the testimonies of the Popes The iudgement of the late Romane Church SECT 2. SInce those times the Church of Rome her selfe in her Councell of Trent and by the Bull of Pope Pius the IV. set forth for the Confirmation of the same Councell in the yeere 1556. did impose vpon her Professors a new CREED consisting of more than twentie Articles of the now Romane Faith which shee hath prescribed vnto you and all other Ecclesiasticall persons of what denomination or Title soeuer to be professed vnder the tenor and forme of an Oath to wit I N. doe firmely beleeue sweare and professe that the Catholike and Apostolique Romane Church is the Mother and Mistresse of all Churches and I doe vowe promise and sweare true obedience to the Pope of Rome the Vicar of Christ Successour of S. Peter c. And this I hold to be the true Catholike Faith which whosoeuer beleeueth not cannot bee saued So your new Creed The now Romane Catechisme SECT 3. VPon this ground was founded that which you call the Romane Catechisme and published by the authoritie of the same Pope Pius and his Councell of Trent whereby yours as well as other Catechumenists are instructed to beleeue that The Catholike Church is One both because of one Faith also for that it is subiect to one inuisible Gouernour which is Christ and to one visible Head the Pope So your Catechisme The iudgement of Romane Doctors of singular Note SECT 4. IN the last place we are to consult with your publicke Readers in Schooles where by the testimonies of Three you may iudge of the faith of the rest especially these being as fully accomplished with all furniture of learning as any other The first thus The Church of Rome is the vniuersall Catholike Church not as it is a particular Bishopprick but as it comprehendeth all Beleeuers vnder the subiection of the Bishop of Rome And againe Wee must saith he hold it as a point of our Catholike Faith that this indiuiduall Congregation which professeth the Romane Faith and is vnited to the Pope of Rome is the true Catholike Church which I proue first by the Apostles Creed c. The Second thus We define saith
Peter We adde that S. Paul whom all the Romanists teach to haue beene a Co-founder with Saint Peter of the Church of Rome had been before that time A Persecuter of the Church of Christ as he himselfe confesseth when Saint Steuen suffered Martyrdome But the Church of Christ as it is called Catholike comprehendeth say you all times CHALLENGE THe addition of a word which betokeneth onely a part of Time of the Churches being cannot be a Declaration of the Church which is called Catholike on respect of the whole and vniuersall Time of the being of the Church But the addition of the word ROMANE doth betoken but a part of Time of the being of the Church namely after the first constitution of the Church of Christ Catholike Ergo It cannot be any true Explication of the Article properly called the Catholike Church except you will exclude out of the Church of Christ without which there is no saluation S. Stephen the first Christian Martyr and all other blessed primitiue Martyrs and Confessors who died the faithfull members of Christ before the Church of Rome had receiued her first life or breath Wherefore the word ROMANE cannot be added to our Christian Creed as a Declaration of that Article The Catholike Church without which there is no saluation without intolerable blasphemie against Apostles Martyrs and other Confessors and blessed Saints of God vnder the persecution of Saul afterwards Paul who because they were before the Church of Rome and consequently without it must be iudged by your Article to haue beene at that time without the state of Grace Of whom notwithstanding our Sauiour Christ gaue testimonie by this voice from heauen saying to Saul in their behalfe Why persecutest thou Mee So false and impious is your Addition of the word ROMANE to that Catholike Church mentioned in the Apostles Creed The sixt Argument to proue that the Addition of the word ROMANE cannot be a Declaration of that Article in the Apostles Creed The Catholike Church In respect of the Time to come SECT 9. AGaine the word Catholike or vniuersall mentioned in the Apostles Creed as it comprehendeth as you haue said the Time past so doth it you know implie The time to come vntill the ends of the world according to the promise of Christ Mat. 28.20 Whereâ—ore our next Question must be whether the Church of Rome which will needs be the Catholike Church can infallibly professe a Prerogatiue of continuing the the same pretended Catholike Church vntill the ends of the world and whether her owne principles doe not vtterly confute this vsurpation It is a generall principle of your Doctors aswell Iesuites as others that If the succession in the gouernement of the Catholike Church were not allotted to the Bishop of Rome by diuine authority then the same gouernement may bee transported from the same Bishop and the Church of Rome may depart from the Faith as well as other Churches and by name the Church of Constantinople haue done This Consequence being so vniuersally receiued and approued in your owne Schooles our next endeauour will be to proue that it cannot appeare infallibly that the Church of Rome hath a Priuiledge of continuing The Catholike Church to the end of the world by any diuine authority This hath bene briefly touched already but here is the place to handle it more at large Your Canus with some Others lest they should bee compelled to confesse that the Church of Rome may possibly Apostate in future times haue contended to defend that It was constituted the Catholike Church by the Institution of Christ. Which if it were true then would there appeare some euidence thereof either before or else after the Ascension of Christ. But Before the Ascention of Christ saith your Iesuite Suarez Nothing appeareth of any such Ordinance either in Scripture or from Tradition And that which is commonly alledged out of Egesippus of Christ his appearance after his Ascension vnto Peter Commanding him to fixe his seate at Rome vntill his death in the iudgement of your Iesuite Valentianus is of no force to proue that the Romane Church was to continue Catholike We draw nearer our marke There is no certaintie of faith saith Bellarmine with whom the Iesuite Suarez consenteth that the Sea Apostolike is so fixed at Rome as that it cannot be separated and remoued from that Church because there is neither Scripture nor Tradition to proue this Nor these onely but Sotus with diuers other Schoole-men directly and peremptorily consent that The Priuilege which Rome doth challenge is onely by the ordinance of Saint Peter and therefore from humane authority Yea and Some yeeld not so much as the Institution by S. Peter but by the Church so farre that If the Church in a Councell should choose the Arch-bishop of Treuers or of any other place to be Head of the Church he should be rather the Successor of Peter than the Bishop of Rome Furthermore we reserue vnto it's due place your Confession that The Citie of Rome shall vndoubtedly bee the Seate of Antichrist CHALLENGE AN Addition which notifieth a Church that may possibly be translated else-whither and depart from the Faith cannot bee a Declaration of that Article in our Christian Creed which signifieth a Church infallibly continuing in the Faith to the end of the world But the word ROMANE as it signifieth the Romane Church betokeneth a Church which may possibly be Translated and depart from the Faith Ergo it cannot be a Declaration of the Catholike Church mentioned in the Apostles Creed So then to make the word Catholike hereditarie to that Romane Church which possibly may be as truly Antichristian as Rome it selfe is sure to be by your owne Confessions The Seate of Antichrist doth plainly discouer an Article New False Antichristian and Blasphemous The seuenth Argument to proue that the Addition of the word ROMANE to the Catholike Church cannot be a Declaration of the Christian Faith mentioned in the Apostles Creed in respect of any Present Time SECT 10. THe Certainty whatsoeuer it is of your Article The Catholike Romane Church is built vpon this foundation that the Pope of Rome is the Catholike and Vniuersall Bishop of the Church of Christ as the Popes themselues haue formerly defined Now because no structure can be more firme than is the foundation vpon which it is built wee make bold to demand with what faith any of you can beleeue any Pope whatsoeuer he be that is elected to be the True Pope that is as you call him The Catholike Bishop of Rome without which the Church of Rome cannot be acknowledged The Catholike Church This Consequence Two of your Iesuites did truly discerne which made Them resolue thus As the visible Church saith the one is this indiuiduall Church so the visible Head thereof must needs be this visible Pope who by the common consent is so ordained vnto whom we owe obedience as
vexed with false Apostles who as Saint Hierome you know commenteth Affirmed that Peter Iames and all the Churches of the Iewes did mingle the Ceremoniall Law and Gospell together and all to this end that they might lessen and vilifie the authoritie of S. Paul in respect of them as though they had bene the Disciples of Christ and he the Disciple of the Apostles Hereupon Saint Paul who was otherwise the most humble among men in so much that he standing vpon comparison would be held the Greatest but yet of sinners and The least of all the Apostles notwithstanding when it stood him vpon to maintaine his Calling which he had from Christ against all malicious Detractors he professeth saying In as much as I am an Apostle of the Gentiles 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 I magnifie mine office So that vpon a Compulsarie comparison prouoked by the Calumniation of others he esteemed it no arrogancie but direct iustice to auouch his owne worthinesse for the aduancing of the worke of his Ministrie A long time after the exercise of his Apostleship he would not Go to Hierusalem to Peter or any of the Apostles lest he might haue seemed to haue bene authorized by them yet three yeares after that he taketh a iourney thither To see Peter doubtlesse for honor sake as one in order of Apostleship most eminent but this he did voluntarily in discretion and brotherly communion and not in subiection as the Context sheweth Foureteene yeares also after this he maketh a second voyage to Ierusalem where he meeteth with Peter and others What then I conferred or communicated vnto them saith he that Gospell which I preached It is one thing to conferre saith Saint Hierome another thing to learne for among them that conferre there is Equalitie We heare not as yet of any authotitie which he receiued either from Peter alone or ioyntly together with the College of the other Apostles or of any thing that might betoken his subiection No he vtterly disclaimeth this for speaking of the Chiefest he saith Those who seemed to be somewhat in conference added nothing vnto me NOTHING namely Neither concerning doctrine nor authoritie as very well saith Aquinas In a word I saith Saint Paul am not inferiour vnto the chiefe of the Apostles What then obtained Paul of Peter and of the other chiefe Apostles Heare S. Paul himselfe They gaue vnto me the right hand of fellowship which was onely a testimonie of Communion in one Profession and Apostleship no imposition of subministration or subjection Hitherto we haue kept in the Negatiue of his not Inferioritie but Saint Paul doth further instance in the Affirmatiue of his Equalitie They saw that the Gospell of the vncircumcision was committed vnto me as the Gospell of the Circumcision was vnto Peter Where to seeke no further than your Rhemists Notes It is plaine by this place and others that to them that is Peter and Paul as the most renouned Apostles the charge of all Nations was giuen as diuided into two parts that is Iewes and Gentiles So they Their Dioces therefore was diuided yet not exclusiuely for the authoritie of the Apostles was vnlimited and often did as well Peter notwithstanding this diuision preach to the Gentiles as S. Paul to the Iewes but yet differently namely so that the ordinarie course of their Ministration was distinguished Peter to the Iewes and Paul to the Gentiles which was of infinite extent larger than the other In which respect Saint Chrysostome doth not sticke to say that The Vniuersall dispensation was committed to Saint Paul I. CHALLENGE from Reason IN all this we see not in Saint Paul any acknowledgement of Subiection or Substitution to Saint Peter but a plaine Plea of Equalitie or else tell vs what Pope since Gregorie the first would not hold it a Derogation from his Popedome to heare any Bishop in the Church stand in Contestation and say that The Pope could adde nothing to his authoritie nor that he was any whit inferiour to the chiefe of all the Bishops in Rome among whom the Pope himselfe was one What boldnesse and indeed contumely would this be iudged not onely to make many Chiefes with your Monarch but also to account himselfe Nothing inferior to the Chiefe of them Adde hereunto his next Assumption that he had as good and absolute right in his Dioces as the Pope had in his Your Iesuite Azorius saith that When there were two Emperours one in the East the other in the West both of them holding equall authoritie throughout the whole Empire it could not be but the authoritie of the one must needs diminish the authoritie of the other in some part and yet neither should be subiect to the other So he And indeed it could not otherwise be Neuer was there heard of Monarch as you instile the Pope in Imperio Diuiso that is in an Empire diuided in an equalitie with any other For Diuision and Equalitie is of moe whereas Monarchie can be but of one So impossible it is that Saint Paul should haue bene of the now Romane Faith concerning Subiection to the Pastor of the Romane Church II. CHALLENGE from the Fathers MVch time need not be spent in collecting the Testimonies of Antiquitie among whom Saint Ambrose saith that Paul was not lesse in dignitie than Peter Saint Maximus that Whether Paul or Peter were to be preferred it is vncertaine Chrysostome saith Paul that I say no more was equall to Peter Saint Hierome The titles of these two Apostles are equall saith he they are Chiefe of the Church S. Basil They are the Pillars of the Church Eucherius Peter and Paul two Princes of the Christians You will not we presume so much preiudice these Fathers as to thinke that they could not discerne betweene a Monarch such as you held Saint Peter to haue bene ouer all the other Apostles and a Subiect or so vniust as to haue thus equalled these Two if they had beleeued All the Apostles to haue bene subiect to the Dominion and Iurisdiction of Saint Peter much lesse could they haue attributed to S. Paul Titles of so great eminence as to instile him One To whom was committed the administration of the whole Church and One obeying the gouernment of the Church Vniuersall and One made the Head of Nations Saint Pauls Comparison of Others with S. Peter against the pretended Primacie of Peter his Iurisdiction ouer the other Apostles SECT 10. FIrst Saint Paul distinguisheth Iames Peter and Iohn from the other Disciples and ioyneth them in one Chiefedome among themselues saying I conferred with them of reputation and againe in the title They that seemed to be Pillars and yet againe They that were Chiefe of the Apostles Lastly his last vale with them They gaue to me the right hand of societie and fellowship Ergo he accounted them Equall in authoritie
which ancient Fathers haue collected from thence yet so as in alleaging their names Iames Peter and Iohn he preferreth Iames before Peter Do you aske why You can answer your selues Because say you Iames was Bishop of Hierusalem where the Apostles were at this time when S. Paul writ Be it so It must then follow that Iames was in that respect superior to Peter Lastly whiles Paul is earnest in vindicating the dignitie of his Pastorship euen then when he would stop the mouthes of false Apostles who obiected that he had no sufficient Commission to preach as not hauing bene authorized by the other Apostles hee answereth that hee had receiued his Calling Not of men neither by man but immediatly from and by Iesus Christ. And for proofe hereof he addeth a reason saying of the time when he was at Ierusalem I indeed saw Peter but other of the Apostles saw I none saue Iames the Lords brother His Consequent is Ergo he receiued not any authoritie of his Ministration from the Apostles Which had bene a seelie and indeed a sencelesse Reason if the spirit of Papistry had reigned in those dayes because his Aduersaries might readily haue replyed What is that you say Saw you none but Peter as though Peter were not sufficient in himselfe to authorize you seeing that Peter being the Vicar of Christ and the Ordinarie and Vniuersall Pastor of his Church is All in all because the Gouernor of all others without exception But Saint Paul we know spake by the Spirit of God the Author and Fountaine of Diuine reason and could not therefore argue absurdly yet notwithstanding he answered saying I saw none but Peter except Iames. Plainly signifying that Peter at that time could not challenge Iurisdiction ouer the College of all the other Apostles I. CHALLENGE SEt before your eyes any Bishop as for example the Bishop of Toledo who should defend that he was a Bishop extraordinarie and needed not at all to be authorized from Rome and when it should thereupon be obiected that he had bene at Rome with the Pope and other Bishops and Cardinals there and therefore it must needs be thought that he was established in his Calling by them then the Bishop of Toledo should answer semblably as did Saint Paul saying I confesse indeed that I went to Rome to visite the Pope and aboad with him certaine daies but other of the Bishops or Cardinals there I saw none except the Bishop of Cullen and therefore you may not obiect vnto me that I receiued any authoritie from the Conclaue and College at Rome Can you conceiue that any answer could more derogate from the now Popedome than to BVT and except against his authoritie in ordaining or establishing that Bishop of Cullen Yet such like was the Answer and Apologie of Saint Paul for himselfe II. CHALLENGE THe Cause is waightie and may require a further application as thus whiles you giue to the Pope an absolute Iurisdiction cum plenitudine potestatis ouer all other Bishops how can you suffer him to be mated or equalled with other Bishops as Paul did Peter by ioyning in societie with him Iames Iohn Much lesse would you permit that the name of the Bishop of Cullen should be preferred before the name of the Bishop of Rome whose Dioces you extend To the ends of the world as to marshall them thus viz. The Bishop of Cullen the Bishop of Rome and the Bishop of Millan as Saint Paul did in alleaging the name of Iames before Peter For for you to say that this was done In respect that Iames was Bishop of Ierusalem and the Cause had relation to his Dioces is as much as to feigne that the Arch-bishop of Auignon whilest the Pope resided there had beene put in Catalogue before the Pope himselfe or that the name of some King must bee placed before the name of the Emperour euen within his owne Empire Next to talke that the Bishop of Toledo or any other Bishop came to visit the Pope and was dismissed by receiuing from him The right hand of fellowship as Paul did of Peter how if perhaps the phrase had such a literall sence would you thinke this good manners in a Bishop since you do tutor and instruct your Kings and Emperours to do homage to the Pope In kissing his foote But especially to heare any Bishop with a BVT to intimate the No-authoritie of the Pope in his Creation and Ordination as S. Paul did of Peter might this seeme tolerable vnto you who still honour him with the supreme Titles of n The Vniuersall Father The Catholike Bishop and Pastor ouer the whole Christian world III. CHALLENGE WIllingly shall we passe by other Obiections taken from the comparison of Paul or other Apostles with Saint Peter although we know that if Saint Peter had giuen sentence in the Apostolicall Synod at Hierusalem as Iames did in his presence If Peter had beene a Sender of any of the Apostles as he was himselfe one that was Sent by others If Peter had leaned on Christ his brest as Iohn did and had therefore beene solicited by Iohn to aske a question of secrecie as Iohn was by Peter If Peter had beene called by a voice from heauen as Saint Paul was If Peter had made as bold with Paul as Paul did with Peter by Reprouing him publikely 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 before them all which farre differs from the Papall Prerogatiue set downe in the Canon Law saying If the Pope be negligent c. So as thereby innumerable are led to Hell yet is there none that may say Why doe you soe If Peter alone as did Saint Paul had written To the Romanes If it had beene said of Peter's ship as it was of that wherein S. Paul was God hath giuen vnto thee all them that Saile with thee And Except those remaine in the ship you cannot be saued Finally and principally if Saint Peter had written of himselfe as Saint Paul did saying I haue the care of all the Churches This one to omit the rest would haue seemed to you a firmer Foundation than the word ROCKE and haue caused you to lay downe your former iô paean and insultation raised from the depraued sence of those Scriptures Blessed art thou Simon or I haue prayed for thee or Feede thou my Flocke or any other the like whereby you labour to erect a Monarch of Peter and by your Consequence vpon the Pope ouer all Churches in the world Wherein we challenge you of preiudice and rashnes Hitherto we haue spoken of the Faith of Saint Paul concerning the authority of Saint Peter and but consequently of the Romane Bishop We are in the next place to trie S. Paul's Faith directly concerning the Romane Church it selfe That Saint Paul was not of the now Romane Faith concerning the former Article viz. The Catholike Romane Church c. as may appeare by
Church and inscribed his Epistle CATHOLIKE Secondly the Inscription of that Epistle standeth thus To all that are at Rome the Beloued of GOD Saints by calling c. Wherein wee cannot discerne so much as one Syllable of the word Church as wee finde in his Prefaces to the Corinthians To the Church that is at Corinth To the Galathians To the Churches of Galatia to the Thessalonians To the Church of the Thessalonians But in this Epistle hee saith onely To them at Rome Saints by calling to wit the same tenure which hee vsed in his Epistles to the Ephesiaâ—â— Philippians and Colossians Whereunto your Iesuitâ— Salmeron giues this answer There was at this time saith he Factions in Rome betweene Iewes and Gentiles both Christians when Peter the Pastor thereof was expelled out of Rome so that it had scarce the forme of a Church and therefore may it fitly bee said that Paul forbore to call the Romanes a Church If this were the meaning of Saint Paul then are wee sure that hee who would not vouchsafe to call it a Church did thinke Rome to bee as other Churches subiect to the alterations and Changes of Schismes and Factions so farre as not to deserue the name of a Church how much lesse of The Catholike Church Now bethinke your selues what the Apostle would haue called your Rome of after-times when not onely your Professors among themselues but also Popes and Antipopes were distracted into tedious and pernicious Schismes and Factions one against another so that the true Pope sometimes could not bee knowne Which thing your owne deuout Doctors haue greatly deplored One reckoning the number of these Schismes to haue beene Twenty Another accounting the Continuance of one of them to haue endured Fifty yeeres when as the Pope quitting the Citie of Rome for many yeeres together kept his residence at Auignon in France Our third Proofe of Saint Pauls indifferent estimation of the Church of Rome SECT 13. THe third point concerneth the Prerogatiue which you assume to your Romane Church before others Wee shall desire you to consult once againe with Saint Paul in the same Epistle Chap. 1. Ver. 13. saying I haue oftentimes purposed to come vnto you Romanes that I might haue some fruite among you â—lso 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 euen as also among other Gentiles That one wor◠〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 euen as also among Others must needs prooue a prick in your eye who can looke vpon nothing that can more equall the condition of other Churches with the Church of Rome than that word doth by the confession of your Cardinall Tolet and he would haue you to Marke it and we also pray you to Marke what he saith MARRKE saith he the indifferencie of the Gospel because although the Romanes were farre more eminent than other Nations and had the Primacie neuerthelesse in the preaching of the Word and soules-businesse belonging to saluation the Apostle maketh Others equall with the Romanes Among you saith the Apostle as also among other Gentiles of what Nation soeuer So he Heere your Cardinall not to dissemble maketh the Comparison to stand betweene the Romanes and the Grecians as they were before their calling vnto Christianity namely in the equality of Sinne not any one deseruing to be partaker of Grace by the Gospell more than another Neuerthelesse if you shall Marke a little better nothing can be more cleare than that the Apostle compareth these Romanes as they were Christians with other Christian Gentiles conuerted to the Faith because of the same Romanes to whom he said Ver. 6. You are called of Iesus Christ and Ver. 8. You whose Faith is spoken of through-out the World and Ver. 11. I long to see you that I may impart vnto you some spirituall gift to the end you may be established of the Same he saith here in this 13 Verse That I might haue some fruit among you these you know could not bee other than Christians whom he thus commended as already called to the Faith therefore in the next words 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as of other Gentiles he meant the Churches of the Gentiles committed vnto Christ Those saith Aquinas vnto whom he had preached So that the labour of the Apostle was vnpartiall vnto the Churches of Christ further than they should bring forth the Fruites of the Gospell of Christ CHALLENGE TWo things there are by which the estimation which Writers haue of Persons or Incorporations to whom they Dedicate their Epistles may bee discerned to wit Inscriptions and Comparisons The Apostle by the Inscription of his Epistle to the Romanes hath giuen vs iust presumption to thinke that he held not the Church of Rome then The Catholike Church which as then he had cause to forbeare to call so much as a Church and that the said Church by Comparison is subiect to alteration as well as Others And so much the rather because the Indifferencie of the Gospell is such as is not to be tied to one place or people more than to another but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 equall to all Churches so farre forth as they shall walke worthie of the same Gospell of Christ accordingly as we haue beene directed by the Epistle of Saint Paul to the Romanes The Confirmation of the same Faith of Saint Paul by your owne Confessions equalling Saint Paul and Saint Peter in their diuers Relations to the Church of Rome SECT 14. WHat shall we say to your owne free grants 1. That Saint Peter and Saint Paul were both Co-founders of the Romane Church 2. That both were called Bishops of the same Church by Epiphanius 3. That the Authority of Both is cited in the Popes Breeues for Confirmation of Papall Ordinances 4. That both haue their Images ingrauen in your Popes Bulls yea and that in such sort that Paul sometime hath the right hand of Peter as well as other while Peter of Paul Thus farre your Popes and Iesuites CHALLENGE WHich being so how may it not perswade you that your Popes anciently iudged that Saint Paul did not beleeue himselfe subiect to the Iurisdiction of Saint Peter and his Roman See except you will thinke it possible to extract a Primacy of Authoritie out of Aequalitie as well of Titles as of Ordinances or else to conceiue one to be subiect vnto him of whom he hath the vpper-hand especially knowing that to be placed on the Right hand was held an Argument of greater honour among all people the Persians onely excepted If your Popes at this day should see any Bishops picture stamped ioyntly on his Seale that wee may appeale to your selues in this Case guesse wee pray you whether hee could behold any other matched in such an equipage with himselfe without high indignation and extreame Cause of Anathematization So iustly is your new Faith of your now Popes condemned by ancient Attributes Authorities and Seales Thus farre of the faith of Saint Paul your supposed Co-founder of the
and auoiding of Antichrist Christians ought to subiect themselues to the Pope of Rome as the Vicar of Christ. Finally nor yet that for the preuenting of dissentions and Schismes in the Church Christians ought to adhere and to be vnited to the same Monarchicall Head of the same Romane Church All which those holy Apostles the faithfull Embassadours of our Lord Christ without Controuersie ought and would haue done if according to the now Romane Faith either the name CATHOLIKE had bene then Antonomastically to be appropriated to Rome or the Infallibilitie of Faith to be ascribed to the iudgement of her Bishop or that the Necessitie of Vnion and Subiection to the authoritie of the same Head had bene so necessarie as without which no Christian could be saued To begin at the word CATHOLIKE We desire to vnderstand why the Epistles of Iames and Iohn and Iude were called Catholike or Vniuersall as well as the two Epistles of Peter if the word Catholike were so proper to the Romane Chaire Seeing that the Epistle of Saint Iames and so of the rest was no more sent to or from Rome nor had any relation to Peter there than the Epistles of Peter had to Iames at Hierusalem Secondly why Paul was so sole as of himselfe to Anathemize the false Apostles saying If wee or an Angell from heauen preach any other Gospell vnto you let him be accursed or in admonishing the Irresolute saying Behold I Paul tell you and I testifie againe vnto you And that no otherwise than he did in absoluing the penitent Incestuous saying I haue pardoned him in the person of Christ that is to say As the Vicar of Christ as your Rhemists obserue in their Annotations vpon this place If so as you pretend The name of Vicar of Christ be wholly belonging to the Pope as an argument of his Succession from Saint Peter in the Monarchie ouer the whole Church But principally doth Saint Paul shew himselfe in preuenting and repressing of Schismes once among the people whom he will not haue to adhere to any one man no more to Cephas that is Peter than to Paul or Apollos Whereas your Roman Cephas would haue taught Saint Paul a contrarie lesson saying that They who adhere vnto Cephas cannot be called Schismatikes as those who hold of Apollos because Cephas was that ROCKE whereupon the Church was built and such a Visible Head is now as necessary on earth to auoide Schisme as to beleeue on Christ the inuisible Head now glorious in heauen Againe among the Ecclesiasticall Orders twice first to the Corinthians where he alleageth them thus First Apostles then Prophets after Doctors and accordingly to the Ephesians He gaue some Apostles and some Prophets and some Euangelists c. Here wee should haue had good reason to haue expected the mention of Saint Peter as the visible Head among the Apostles if we had bene of your Faith to beleeue that the Pope of Rome as Successor of Saint Peter is the Head of the visible Church and that therefore The vnion with the Bishop of Rome as the Head thereof is a true Note of the Church Whereby it may be infallibly discerned whether or no a Christian man be a member of the Catholike Church without which there is no Saluation Which what were it but to call into question the iudgement of Saint Paul the most profoundest Disputant that euer writ as though he had bene ignorant of the maine and onely Argument for the confuting of Schismatikes and auoyding of Schisme by keeping forsooth the Vnion with the Pope and Church of Rome As for the Seauen Churches in Asia vnto whom Saint Iohn writ concerning the dayes of Antichrist when the great Departure from the sincere Faith of Christ must be herein notwithstanding you could neuer yet find one particle to prooue either the Right of Monarchie in the Pope or Infallibilitie of his iudgement or Necessitie that the Faithfull be Vnited and Subiected vnto him But many Characters may you find at least of an Antichrist as well of his person in the Pope as you haue done of his particular Seate confessing ingenuously that it must be at Rome Saint Peter in his Catholike Epistle To the dispersed Christians in Pontus Galatia Cappadocia Asia Bithynia exhorting the Presbyters whom he after calleth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Superintendents or Byshops saith The Elders which are among you I exhort who am also an Elder Feede the flocke of God not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 domineiring ouer Gods heritage that when our chiefe Shepheard shall appeare c. What may be inferred from hence you may vnderstand in the third Challenge I. CHALLENGE NOne will make doubt but that the Churches to whom the Apostles haue written were of the same faith with their Teachers the holy Apostles and that therefore in the point of Heresie it was not more requisite that the Church of Thessalonîca should subscribe to the Faith of the Church of Rome than that the Romanes should be guided by the Faith of the Thessalonians or that in the point of Schisme the Church of Corinth should be compelled to keepe Vnion with the Church Romane more than the Romane with the Colossian or yet that among the Churches to whom the Catholike Epistles of Peter Iude Iohn and Iames were directed some should be thought to owe more Subiection to the Letters of Peter than to the other of Iames or Iohn Else would some Items haue bene giuen out to signifie your pretended respects due to the Romane Church especially euery one of them being required in your Faith vpon Necessitie of saluation All men would wonder for example sake that the Bishops of Italy being al within the Romane Iurisdiction should write letters farre and neare vpon all occasion of Heresie and Schisme to diuerse Churches within the same Romane Dioces and yet neuer make mention nay nor so much as giue intimation of the necessary dependance they haue and ought to acknowledge themselues to haue of the Pope and Sea of Rome II. CHALLENGE IF it had bene as manifestly reuealed by Saint Iohn that England was Prophesied off to be the Seate of Antichrist in the latter times as according to your Iesuites Expositions and Demonstrations he did of Rome in the word Babylon from whence all the faithfull are commanded to depart except they will be Partakers of her plagues sure we are that your Iesuites and Professors would neede no seueritie of Lawes to quit England and to abhorre it especially now when the Controuersie whether Antichrist be alreadie come is so daily and duly debated III. CHALLENGE SAint Peter albeit an Apostle of Iesus Christ yet in the exercise of his Iurisdiction in the ordaining the Bishops of Pontus Cappadocia and other Churches doth intitle himselfe A Fellow-Priest or Bishop a stile not to be found in your Popes Breues For we speake not now of termes of Humiliation as that of SERVVS SERVORVM but of Office and
Function such as is Priest or Bishop And in what terme I BESEECH not but that he had authoritie to command as an Apostle of Christ like as Saint Paul and euery Apostle had yet now taking vpon him the person of an Elder to Elders he doth not vse that which you know is the proper and ordinary stile of the Bishop of Rome WEE VVILL AND COMMAND The matter of his Beseeching is hortatiue and dehortatiue for he exhorteth them to Feed their flocke thus he whom Christ charged vpon all loues to Feed his flocke But not so Hee who for the space of many hundred yeares is not knowne to haue preached at all euen your Bishop of Rome The dehortatiue part is in beseeching them Not to domineire ouer the heritage of God What meaneth this The Greeke word signifieth Tyrannicall rule whereas meekenesse and moderation is required in Ecclesiasticall Officers So your Rhemists And they say true and therefore Saint Peters words wee thinke do iustly condeme your Romish Tyrannie especially in two points The first Instance of Tyrannous Romish Crueltie SECT 2. THe first is your Romish Inquisition wherein there is imprisonment famishment torment and ropes to strangle your prisoners and all in tenebris workes of darknesse against all Beleeuers Receiuers Defenders and Fauourers of Heretikes This word FAVOVRERS also hath a great latitude it may be if they chance to commend their learning wit zeale constancie or simplicitie which any Christian may do in a Pagan And how they proceed in the Inquisition it is knowne best to your selues This we find Confessed that The Inquisitors of Heretikes deale most cruelly whilest they relinquish all meanes of triall by Tradition or Scripture which they reiect as a dead letter which say they the Heretikes vse as their bulwarke whereas they themselues obiect and prefixe as the shield of their faith onely the Church of Rome which they hold cannot erre in the faith whose Head is the Pope And if the partie examined shall offer to prooue his opinion by Scripture and other Reasons then with swelling and angrie cheeks they tell him that he is not now to deale with Schollers in their Schooles but with Iudges before their tribunall and therefore he must answer directly whether he will stand to the Decrees of the Romane Church or not If he refuse then they conclude saying that they are not to dispute with him by Arguments and Scripture but and then they shew them with fier and fagot So he And is not this a barbarous crueltie Notwithstanding Pope Paul the III. and no maruaile when he was going out of the world Left this Inquisition as a Legacie to his Successor Anno 1559. when as your Thuanus storieth Calling vnto him his Cardinals he exhorted them in the last place to entertaine as he called it the most Sacred Office of Inquisition whereby onely said he the Authoritie of his Holinesse was supported So he And so now you see that vast house standing onely vpon one pillar which is founded vpon crueltie and bloud The second Instance of Barbarous Romish Crueltie SECT 3. IT happeneth sometime that a man after he hath Abiured Heresie before a Iudge may relapse into the same againe which may be say you By talking with an Hereticke or doing him reuerence or visiting him or giuing him a reward or else by commending him c. The question is how your Church ought to proceed with this man Your generall resolution is To condemne him of Heresie and to deliuer him to the Secular Magistrate without all hope of pardon yet so that if the partie shall continue Obstinate he shall be immediatly burnt but if he do repent then shall he be first strangled and afterwards burnt And whereas it may be obiected that no Penitent Child ought to be kept out of the Bosome of the Church your answer is that The Church doth admit them into her bosome because though they must be burned and loose their goods yet are they allowed the Sacraments of Absolution and the Eucharist But is this reasonable Yes say you because They by their relapse are held morally as Persons incorrigible What shall we say of this Church what Namely that neuer Bubalus was so stupid as to iudge them Morally incorrigible which do repent so as to make themselues Capable of Absolution Nor euer was there any Rhadamanthus so extreme as at once to pardon and kill Therefore Cursed be her mercie for it is cruell If the Sonnes of thunder were rebuked by Christ as not knowing what spirit they were of for calling for fire from heauen to consume obstinate sinners how farre worse are these Spirits that will needs destroy their Penitents with fire A practise by your owne Confession not heard of in Antiquitie Thus haue we finished the second Part concerning the Time at and about which the Church of Rome was first founded CHAP. VI. Of the TIME AFTER the Church of Rome had her first foundation SECT 1. FRom the Consideration of the Article of our Christian Creed viz. The Catholike Church and Of the Catholike and Apostolike Church it selfe as well Before as At the Time when the Church of Rome was first founded hath bene discouered and refuted that Article of The Romane Catholike Church without Vnion and Subiection whereunto there is no Saluation By proouing it False Hereticall Schismaticall c. Which we are now to confirme from other Euidences taken from the Profession of the Catholike Church it selfe SINCE the foundation of the Romane Church Of the more Primitiue Times AFTER the foundation of the Romane Church SECT 2. OVr easiest Course in the disquisition and discussion of this great Mysterie of Popedome by the iudgement of the Church Catholike will be to follow the seuerall tracts of Times beginning at the more ancient and proceeding to Successiue and later Times vntill we come to the last Ages of the Church Our first Argument is taken from the ancient Sence of this Article The Catholike Church condemning the now Romish Article viz. The Romane Catholike Church SECT 3. OFten haue we pleaded Logicke with you about this Terme Catholike Romane Church desiring to know of you seeing it is Romane that is a Particular Church how it can be called Catholike that is Vniuersall or the whole Church And if it be the whole Church how can it be a Particular Church distinct from the Church of Greece or Church of France Will you make vs beleeue that the thumbe of the hand can be the whole bodie Pope Innocent the third as though he had foreseene this Obiection doth preocupate as you haue heard saying If the Church be called Catholike as Consisting of all Christian Churches so the Church of Rome is not the Catholike Church but a part thereof but in respect of the authoritie which she hath as an Head ouer the body ouer the whole Church so is she called Vniuersall because of her Dominion Answerable hereunto your Iesuite Suarez The
Church of Rome saith he not as a particular Dioces or Bishopricke is called the Catholike Church but as it comprehendeth and containeth all Beleeuers in Christ vnder the obedience of the Pope of Rome So they This counterfeit Glosse vpon these termes The Catholike Church as vnder the Obedience of the Pope as Catholike and Vniuersall Head wee shall bring to the Test of the Antient Faith by the witnesse of more than three Fathers I. The iudgement of Saint Augustine SECT 8. WHat was meant by the Catholike Church in the Sence of Antiquity Saint Augustine may be vnto vs herein as the mouth of the whole Church seeing that he had more occasions to discusse this Article than any Other especially because in his time the Donatists did no lesse falsly than arrogantly appropriate the name of the Whole Church vnto their Church in Africke euen as you although in a different Sence hold it proper to the Church of Rome at this day But Saint Augustine The word in Greeke saith he is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in Latine Totum aut Vniuersale that is whole or vniuersall 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is not one but the whole whence the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or Catholike is deriued Thus by distinguishing Whole Church from One Church he sheweth that it is as vnconceiuable that the Catholike Vniuersall or Whole should bee but one One part as it is impossible for one part to be the Whole Which is your Paradoxe to call the Head the whole Body whilest as in your Article you make ROMANE as the Head The Catholike and Vniuersall Church it selfe Thus haue we heard Saint Augustine will you now see him Then behold Rem gestam For when by that busie fellow Petilian the Donatist a publike Conference was held at Carthage betweene seuen Orthodoxe Bishops on the one part and seuen Donatists on the other concerning the Catholike Church Saint Augustine was singled out by the Disputer and posed in these words Whence art thou Who is thy Father Is the Bishop Caecilian he This was the Obiection challenging Augustine to answer whence hee receiued his Religion and vpon whom he depended Heare now his answer My communion saith he began first at Hierusalem and from remote places came nearer vntill it entred into Africke and so disperst it selfe through-out all the World From this my Father God and my Mother-Church will I neuer be separated for the calumnies of any man CHALLENGE SAy now if either Petilian the Heretike could haue questioned Saint Augustine professing himselfe a Catholike whether hee had his dependance vpon CAECILIAN Bishop of Carthage as his spirituall Father if it had beene a currant profession among the Churches of those times to haue held the Bishop of Rome The Catholike Father or the Church of Rome The Catholike Mother-Church without which there is no saluation Or whether it could haue stood with the Conscience of Saint Augustine if he had beene of your now Romish Faith in a question about the Father-hood What Bishop and Mother-hood what Church he professed fo◠to passing by all mention of the B. of Rome acknowledge no Head but Christ and neglecting the Romane Church adhere to the Whole Church dispersed throughout the whole Christian World as indeed the properly called Mother-Church How should not Saint Augustine although neuer so admirable a Saint haue beene held a Schismatike and Heretike if he had liued in these daies either for his ignorance or Contempt of the now Romish resolution of Faith in all such Questions to wit that the Spirituall Father of the Church is the Pope of Rome and the Church of Rome is the Catholike Church is selfe because Head of all the rest As for the prime Mother-Church by spirituall procreation wee see that Saint Augustine acknowledgeth no other than Hierusalem which verefieth that which hath been largely prooued to wit that although the ancient Romane Church might in many respects be called A Mother Church of many other Churches in Christendome especially in respect of her admirable care for the preseruation of diuine truth and peace in the Christian world Yet now since first by vsurping an Originall Prerogatiue of the Vniuersall Mother she is become the Mother of Arrogance and Falsehood 2. By preiudicing the Birth-right of other Churches more ancient than her selfe She may be called the Mother of Schisme 3. By excluding All from hope of Saluation that beleeue her not to bee the Mother-Church shee may iustly bee iudged the Mother of damnable Heresie Of Saint Augustines iudgement more hereafter II. The Iudgement of Saint Hierome concerning the Church Catholike SECT 5. SAint Hierome was a professed and deuoute Childe of the Church of Rome when Rome was yet a true and naturall Mother and no Step-dame who notwithstanding when the Custome of Rome was obiected against him in a Case of difference betweene Deacon and Priest calling the Aduerse part An arrogant paucity he maketh an answer full of indignity As though sayth he there were more authority in Vrbe quà m in Orbe that is in one Citie the Seate of the Bishop of Rome than in the whole Catholike Church besides This is the Testimonie of Saint Hierome wherein the Fathers of the Councell of Basil did in a manner triumph in opposition to the Papall Claime saying O Hierome what meane you Is there therefore greatnes in the Pope because he gouerneth the Church His authority is great indeed but not so great as the authority of the Catholike Church which is not conteined in one Citie but comprehendeth in it selfe the whole World CHALLENGE APply you to this former sentence of Saint Hierome if you can your former distinction namely that the Church of Rome is a Particular Church in it selfe but Catholike as the Head hauing Vniuersal Dominion ouer the whole Church and see whether it will abide the test of Saint Hierome who speaking of the Customes of the Church of Rome calleth the Custome of that Church Vrbem meaning the custome but of one Particular Church whose seate is at Rome and opposeth vnto it the Custome of the Catholike Church which hee calleth Orbem the whole world Shewing thereby with whom also doth accord the iudgement of the Fathers of the Councell of Basil that the Authority of the Church Catholike and of the Church of Rome are not equiualent much lesse the same for in Identity there can be no opposition or comparison None can compare a mans head with it selfe And what furthermore Saint Hierome did conceiue heereof will afterwards appeare in due Place III. The Iudgement of Saint Gregory Bishop of Rome Concerning the Head Catholike In denying the Title of Vniuersall Bishop as did likewise Pelagius and Leo both Bishops of the same See SECT 6. ALthough it can be no sufficient Argument for concluding a Papall authority to obiect vnto vs the testimonies of Popes which is your ordinarie guize in their owne Cause yet will it be vnto vs Armour of Proofe to oppose
were gathered by the Mandate of Pope Damasus and confesse also that the Church of Rome is the Head and they the members So he And this is all that is obiected but vpon a mistake the Cardinall himselfe confessing that It was not the Epistle of the Councell but of certaine Bishops that had bene at the Councell And therefore for the first part of the Popes Mandate he referreth himselfe to another Councell against the Vniuersall Current of Histories which with generall consent set downe the Mandates of Emperours as the supreme and first compulsarie Causes for the collecting of Councels But that which he looseth in mis-citing his true Authors he studieth to gaine by mis-interpreting of the testimonie of Theodoret. For whereas Theodoret saith 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which is letters the yeare past He against all Lexâ—cons readeth The Mandate of letters Is not this fine art trow yee For take your owne Translation of 2. Cor. 8. ver 10. whether the vulgar Latine or the English This is profitable for you who haue begun not onely to do but also to be willing Gr. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Vulg. Ab anno superiori Rhemists English from the yeare past If any should translate the yeare past into Mandate might it not be suspected that the mans wits were now in the waine as being ignorant of the common Prouerb 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Last yeare the better to signifie the more and more worthie Is there here any sound of a Commander As for the Similitude of the Head and Members it hath no more colour of Superiority than that which we haue alwaies acknowledged namely of Order that is of Priority of Place of Voice and the like but neuer of Dominion That which the Inscription of the Epistle doth coÌ„fute which was not to Damasus alone but ioyntly to others thus Most honourable and Reuerend Brethren and Colleagues This is the Inscription and the Epistle it selfe is of the same thred We declare say they our selues to be your proper members but how that your raigning we may raigne with you Members therefore of Colleagueship as Cor-regnants We haue heard your Pretence be you as ready to heare our contrary proofe Our Opposition The said Generall Councell of Constantinople in the second Canon decreeth thus The Bishop of the Citie of Constantinople ought to haue the honour of Primacie next after the Bishop of Rome because it is new Rome Yeelding to Rome her birth-right of Primacie which whatsoeuer it was they iudge to haue bene established not by any Diuine Ordinance but by occasion of the Imperiall Seate which was at first the Citie of Rome as your Binius acknowledgeth to be collected from that ground Who therefore cannot digest this Canon but why This Canon saith he out of Baronius was not receiued by the Church of Rome Truly it were more then maruaile that the Church of Rome should admit any Canon that may any way derogate from her presumption Albeit your owne Cardinall Cusanus hath confessed her former Encroachments But to proceed punctually Which of the Fathers for the space of 60. yeares after opposed against this Canon what one Bishop before Pope Leo thought it not most equall Albeit there were present in that Councell Cyril Bishop of Hierusalem Timothy Bishop of Alexandria and Miletus Bishop of Antioch Bishops of three seuerall Patriarchall Seas who consented vnto it notwithstanding that they themselues receiued some preiudice by that Decree This Canon you know is of great force to beate downe your whole bul-warke which is your Article of Romane-Catholike and Vniuersall Dominion ouer the whole Church and therefore we must expect some Obiection against it One we find and that a foule one too that namely This is a surreptitious Canon without the generall consent of that Synod Which we shall then confesse as soone as you shall perswade any reasonable man to thinke thâ—t to be a Supposititious and forged Canon purposely against the dignitie of the Church of Rome which the Bishops of Rome themselues when they oppugned it as being vnequall yet neuer excepted against as Surreptitious and false Not Leo not Gelasius not Gregorie although that they tooke the Sanction of that Canon indignely Or that the Legates of the Pope in the Councell of Chalcedon stifly opposing against the subiect matter of this Canon would not haue branded it with the Note of Forgerie when they made expresse mention of it if they had so conceiued thereof Or which is beyond all that can be opposed that the Fathers of the Councell of Chalcedon in their letters to Leo Pope of Rome would be there knowne vnto him that they with mutuall consent Confirmed the Rule and Canon of the CL. Bishops in the Councell of Constantinople notwithstanding standing that his Bishops and Legates Paschasinus and Lucentius did dissent therefrom if they had not iudged the said Canon to be absolutely true So false is your obiection of Falshood against that Canon of the Councell of Constantinople CHALLENGE A Canon then you see of a Generall Councell albeit neuer receiued as you say by the Church of Rome because preiudiciall thereunto which is an euident argument of their No Subiection to the Bishop of Rome Execrable therefore is your Article of The Catholike Romane Church without subiection whereunto there is no Saluation whereby C L. Bishops accounted Catholikes throughout the Christian world must be necessarily excluded from Saluation That the beleefe of the Article viz. The Catholike Romane Church without subiection whereunto there is no Saluation damneth the C C. Bishops in the third Generall Councell at Ephesus Anno 434. SECT 4. IN this Generall Councell CC. Bishops at Ephesus some things there are which you obiect and some things which you must haue the patience to haue obiected vnto you Your Obiections You would proue out of this Councell an acknowledgement of The supreme authoritie of the Popes aboue them but how first They confessed that they deposed Nestorius by the command of Pope Celestine False there is not the word Command vsed by the Councell If that word had beene vsed you should haue proued it out of the Popes owne Letters themselues which we should not haue needed to put you to if any such word could appeare in the Councell obiected No you well know that to Command was not the stile of Popes in primitiue and ancient times Saint Gregory Bishop of Rome about an C L. yeares after Celestine did vtterly abhorre it I COMMAND saith he away with the word COMMAND I haue not commanded Yet thus you labour to frame and fashion your old Popes after the models of your new to the end your new ones may not seeme to haue degenerated from the old Yet something there is in the words of the Councell namely that They were mooued and compelled by his letters meaning by the perswasions of that Orthodoxe Bishop and that but onely tùm tùm in part for
of faith Now wee haue proued by your owne Witnesses as by your owne eyes that aboue 2280. Bishops in their VIII Generall Councels and euery Generall Councell you call the Catholike Church haue opposed your Article of pretended Subiection The first by proportioning aswell the limits of the Romane Dioces as of other Patriarks The second by iudging the Romane Primacie not to stand vpon any Diuine authoritie and setting vp a Patriarke of Constantinople contrary to the Popes will The third by inhibiting any Bishop whatsoeuer from Ordaining Bishops within the Isle of Cyprus The fourth by aduancing the Bishops of Constantinople and establishing them in equall Priuiledges with the Bishops of Rome notwitstanding the Popes earnest opposition against it The fift in Condemning the Sentence of Pope Vigilius albeit one extreamely vehement in that Cause The Sixt and Seauenth in condemning Pope Honorius of Heresie And the Eighth by imposing a Canon vpon the Church of Rome and challenging Obedience thereunto Any man therefore although destitute of good Conscience if but endued with common ingenuitie will iudge and confesse that this Article which thus Condemneth aboue 2280. Bishops of the first Eighth Generall Councels whereof most were as Catholike as they were ancient and learned together with all their Beleeuers for the space of aboue 540. yeares Professours of the Christian faith is iustly to be condemned as Scandalous Schismaticall Hereticall Blasphemous Respectiuely and euery way damnable CHAP. IX Our fourth Argument taken from the Examples of particular Churches Catholike which contemning the Excommunication of the Bishop of Rome were notwithstanding acknowledged to be in the state of Saluation SECT 1. THree things there are which your new Romane Article requireth as Necessary to Saluation of Christians throughout the World I. Is to haue Vnion with the Church of Rome and Head thereof II. Because there are two kindes of Vnions one in Equalitie as is betweene the Members of the same Body and another in an Inequalitie like as is betweene the Head and the Body your Article exacteth Vnion of subiection also The III. is the Necessitie of faith concerning both these as namely that euery Christian doe beleeue the truth of the Article in both to wit that they are indeede Necessary to Saluation Therefore haue wee singled out Examples of ancient Churches which you your selues note as Excommunicate by the Popo which notwithstanding all the Christian world haue held to haue beene in the state of Saluation Our first Instance is in the ancient Churches of Asia which notwithstanding the Excommunication of Pope Victor were in the state of Saluation SECT 2. YOur owne Authors boastingly relate that in the yeare 197. Pope Victor did excommunicate all the Easterne Churches for not obseruing the feast of Easter vpon the Lords day which Excommunication say they is not found to haue beene afterwards reuoked or retracted wherein notwithstanding those that were auerse continued a long time So they A storie certainly worthy your double consideration whereof you cannot be ignorant it being recorded by Eusebius at large that namely Polycrates Bishop of Ephesus in Asia pleaded the Cause of the Churches of Asia against the Excommunication of Victor in that his Epistle whereunto the other Bishops in Asia gaue their Consent Prouing that their Custome contrary to the Romane was receiued from Saint Iohn who leaned vpon our Lords brest that it was practised by Philip the Apostle who died in Asia that it was continued by Saint Polycarpus Martyr and Bishop of Smyrna by Thraseas Bishop and Martyr by Sagonius Bishop and Martyr and that then Polycrates being animated by these so worthy Examples and the vnanimous Consent of their Bishops in Asia stood in defiance with that Pope Victor and contemned his Excommunications saying I who haue now liued sixtie fiue yeares in the Lord and haue had communion in the faith with all the Brethren dispersed 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 throughout the world and nothing moued with these terrors meaning of Ezcommunication which are vrged against vs. Thus farre the Ecclesiasticall Storie wherein appeareth this Conclusion as manifest as if it had beene deliuered in expresse termes viz. That a Christian may haue Communion generally with the Catholike Church else-where throughout the world notwithstanding the Excommunication of the Pope and See of Rome and therefore cannot the Romane Church be called the Catholike Church as the Head whereunto all others ought to professe Vnion and yeeld Subiection Yea but your Question will be whether these Asian Churches being thus Excommunicate by the Pope of Rome and so without the Vnion of your Church could therefore be said to be without the state of Saluation This is the maine point for satisfaction whereunto first if you will respect the faith of those Churches it is plaine that they beleeued that the Excommunication of the Bishop of Rome had no further power than to seperate them from his owne Romane Societie and Communion but extended not to the Church Catholike and Separation from it And this will appeare to bee true by better testimonies from the same knowne Storie it selfe where you may read that This Act of Victor did not well please all other Bishops who did greatly reproue him for troubling the peace of the Church And among others Father Irenaeus in the person of his Brethren in France wrote Letters to Pope Victor Dehorting him from his purpose This is enough to proue that Pope Victor was the Schismatike that troubled the peace of the Church and not the Asian Bishops whom these other holy Bishops did so far iustifie as not to deserue Excommunication But to appeale to your owne Consciences shew vnto vs in all your reading if you can that Polycrates and other Asian Bishops so Excommunicate by Pope Victor were held by any other Catholike Bishops of those times to be thereby without the state of Saluation For this you know is the very soule of your Article viz. The Catholike Romane Church without which there is no Saluation Nay but you full well know that Contrarily Saint Hierome in his Catalogue of Ecclesiasticall Writers numbred Polycrates among those who did aduance the Catholike faith And againe relating this his opposition against Victor This I therefore mention saith hee to make knowne what was his meaning Polycrates Authoritie And yet againe Reporting the behauiâ—ur of Irenaeus and other Bishops in the same Case These saith hee albeit they differed in opinion from the Asian Bishops yet did they not consent to Pope Victor in the act of Excommunication So hee Where Not Consenting to the Popes Excommunication doth plainly inferre their inward Communion with the Bishops of Asia CHALLENGE THis one Case if there were no other were enough to strangle your Romane faith in that Article viz. The Romane Church without vnion wherewith there is no Saluation Wherein we finde the Bishops and Churches of Asia Excommunicated by the Romane Bishop and so separated from the Communion of his See
in the Church of Christ as those that stood in the state of Saluation The Subiestion required by you from Emperours to the Bishop of Rome SECT 2. MAny words of Introduction neede not your Conclusions are as followeth That Princes and whatsoeuer Potentates are not to meddle in Ecclesiasticall affaires They May not gather Councels by their owne Authoritie They Ought to yeeld Prioritie of Place especially to the Pope And To professe Reuerence this being a signe of Superioritie and also Obedience vnto him But how farre must this Reuerence extend if you your selues may prescribe namely sauing your Reuerence to the Kissing of the Popes feet which in your iudgement is An honour which the Pope may not refuse and which Pope Gregorie the Seuenth reckoneth in the Ninth place of those Priuileges which he challenged as properly belonging to him as Pope of Rome Not to insist vpon the barbarous boast which you make of your Popes In not admitting of two Emperours to their presence without an extreame kinde of Submission the one by approaching vpon his bare feet the other by subiecting his necke vnto the Popes feet While-as the Popes Oxe may bragge of more fauour than the first and his Asse than the second Much more might be added out of the last worke of Bellarmin entitled The Dutie of a Christian Prince wherein such is the spirit of that Cardinall that whatsoeuer any example of honour he could rake out of the ashes of Princes Kings or Emperours yeelded to either Popes Bishops or Priests in the superlatiue excesse of their humilitie zeale and deuotion that doth hee violently wrest to make of it a Generall Rule of Office and Dutie euen to the Dedignifying and abasing of Princes to the yeelding of praeeminence to Bishops and inferior Priests in Precedence and going first in Presidence and sitting aboue yea and they exact also very soberly I wisse a Prebibition and drinking before them A Doctrine wherein that old Cardinall hath beene sufficiently I hope conuinced of extreame dotage The Opposition of the former Emperours against the pretended Subiection SECT 3. THe First point of their Opposition may be discerned in their Interesting themselues in Ecclesiasticall affaires The Emperour Constantine as Saint Augustine witnesseth at large committed the Cause of Caecilian Bishop of Carthage vnto Pope Meltiades Obserue Ergò it was by the Emperors Commission and not to him alone but to him with others who are called in that Commission the Popes Colleagues Secondly Obserue Ergo the Pope was not Monarch or sole Actor herein nay after that the Pope had giuen his iudgement the same Emperor referred the same Cause to be more diligently examined and ended to the Bishops of Arles Thirdly Obserue Ergo the Iudgement of the Pope will suffer an higher Appeale for after in the Case of Athanasius the same Emperour chargeth all the Bishops of the Prouince of Tyre what to doe To appeare before mee saith hee without delay and to shew how sincerely and truely you haue giuen your iudgements And not thus onely but when the Cause Ecclesiasticall requireth hee proceedeth to denounce punishment by his owne Authoritie against whomsoeuer that shall honor the memory of those Bishops Theognis and Eusebius Other the like Demonstrations might be brought of Constantne his Authority in Causes Ecclesiasticall Of the Emperour Theodosius we reade that he gaue to the Bishop Dioscorus Authority and Superiority of place to moderate Causes in a Councell Can this consist thinke you with your pretended Subiection No He giueth say you that which he hath not to giue but doth it out of Ignorance of the Canon vsurping that Authority Oh you are angrie and no maruell though men fancie not that fruite which setteth their teeth on edge But we cannot be sparing in this kind For Theodosius the younger and Honorius both Emperours Say as you know that the Patriarch of Constantinople hath the same right ouer those in subiection vnder him which the Pope hath ouer his Where diuers Subiects must needs argue different Subiections and equality of Right must as nessarily dissolue Monarchie which can be but of One. And Iustinian the Emperour will hardly please you with whom you quarrell at the first hearing He authorized vnder his owne hand The Code or Bookes of Constitutions and Pandects for the Regulating of the Clergie as well as of the Laity Whereat you fret not a little Herein he is say you iustly reprooued of many as one inuading vpon and intruding into the Office of diuine causes The same Emperour taketh vpon him the Confirmation of the Election of the Bishop of Rome and behold againe you brand him withe the note of an Vsurper Finally in generall you shape vs this Answer These Emperours haue passed the bounds of their Authority You furthermore told vs of another Character of due Subiection which is the yeelding vnto the Pope the Prerogatiue of gathering Generall Councels albeit nothing is more obuious to Any conuersant in Ecclesiasticall reading than that which your owne Cardinall Cusanus hath confessed long since The first eight generall Councels saith he were gathered by Authority of Emperours and not of Popes insomuch that Pope Leo was glad to intreat the Emperour Theodosius the younger for the gathering of a Councell in Italy and could not obtaine it But can we forget your next Prerogatiue of Subiection viz. the Popes Precedency and Priority of place aboue euen Emperours themselues Surely if he had any ancient claime hereunto it should haue bene in that wherein he challengeth the greatest praeeminence to wit in a Generall Councell But when we aske the Question why no one of your Popes were euer personally present in any of the first Generll Councels if he must be thought to be the sole Head of the Church and he alone to haue an infallible iudgement in himselfe no not though they were in the same City as was Vigilius where the Councell was celebrated You answer that the reason why the Popes would not present themselues in these Councels was this Because the Greeke Bishops who were in those Easterne Councels wherein also the Emperours were present would haue preferred the Emperours in place aboue the Popes So you And we cannot but belieue you and thereupon make bold to conuince your new Doctors of egregious impudency who dare extend the height of the praeeminency of Popes aboue Emperours euen in defiance as it were of all Antiquity and of the Consent of all those Catholike Bishops in Generall Councels As for your last and basest point of Subiection of Kissing the Popes feet it tasteth so ranckly of Luciferian pride in the now Popes that we thinke it an exceeding iniury to the memory of holy Popes of the Primitiue times to belieue that they could affect or would admit such an homage and honour a lesse than which Saint Peter refused as too much if it had bene offered
shall wee denie the truth of Their Martyrdome namely of those ancient Bishops of Rome who wee are assured dyed for the same Truth which we professe as in other points of Religion and diuine worship so also most apparantly for this our particular defence of not exacting Temporall Subiection of Kings and Emperours wherein we finde a vast gulfe of difference betwixt This your and That their Romane Faith For they as you haue heard would rather bee killed than trouble States and violate Temporall Powers and Authorities but your Popes in their Bulls proclaime that their Professors and Beleeuers ought rather to kill and be killed than not resist The determination of this point will bee according to the sense of your Romane Article a requiring vpon losse of saluation a beleefe of Temporall Subiection from all Kings and Emperours to your Popes whereby all these 27. godly Popes the faithfull Martyrs of Christ are damned who as is testified professed Obedience and Subiection vnto them euen to death Whom therefore we contrarily produce as so many Martyrs that is Witnesses by their blood that your now Article of Subiection in the Popish sense thereof is iustly to be condemned and those whom you call Martyrs for dying in defence thereof may bee your Popes Martyrs but nothing lesse than the Martyrs of Christ. A Memoriall concerning all Christian Emperours which haue receiued Baptisme the badge and Character of Christianitie SECT 3. PAsse we from gazing vpon the flagge with the Red-Crosse dyed in the blood of Martyrs to the Ensigne with the Crosse partly bloody Red as before as in the daies of Iulian the Apostate partly Blacke through the ignominies which Popes and other holy Professors sustained by Emperours whether Hereticall or Orthodoxe and partly white through the peace of Emperours euery way Catholike What will your Article concerning Subiection determine against all these You distinguish them either into Woolues such you call all Emperors which of Catholikes turne either Apostates or Heretikes of these you conclude that your Pope hath power to driue them away by all meanes possible Or else into Rammes signifying such Kings and Emperours who notwithstanding they be in profession true Catholikes yet doe any way oppresse or destroy the Church of whom you determine that your Pope As Shepheard by his power ought to compell these as furious Rammes by all meanes conuenient And what you hold Conuenient meanes we haue learned already by your obiected practises in dispossessing of Kings Emperors by force of Armes as namely these Childericke King of France the Emperour Henry the Third the Emperour Otho the Fourth and the Emperour Lodowicke the Fourth not for any note of Heresie but onely for not Subiecting themselues to the Popes Dignity and Dominion For we are now to confute the double presumption of your now Popes the one is their Violence agaist Emperours the other their not Reuerence vnto them as vnto their Superiours and that by the Examples of godly Popâ—â— of former Ages I. Examples of no-Violence vsed by Ancient Popes a-against Kings and Emperours SECT 4. WE are to speake of those times when their raigned among Christians not onely Tygers such as were Heathenish Tyrants but Woolues as Constantius and Valens both persecuting Hertikes and Iulian the Apostate who raised the Twelfth persecution besides Iustinian who as you haue heard dealt so hardly with your Two Popes Syluerius and Vigilius to omit others of the like boldnesse whom you may reckon among your Rammes In which cases Pope Boniface the Eighth requireth Both swords viz. Temporall and Spirituall Authority to be in his owne power so that the Temporall be subiect to the Spirituall As though the Churh could not possibly subsist without such a predominant power Ecclesiasticall ouer whatsoeuer Temporall Ordinance that shall any way afflict her or any of her members We are now in a Question of Fact and finde that as then in particular Syluerius and Vigilius both Popes being sent into Banishment by the Emperour Iustinian did not make resistance but petitioned for fauour and peace so now generally that as is confessed No Pope in all the Succession of Peter did Depose any Emperour before Pope Gregory the Seuenth that is not vntill a Thousand and Sixty yeeres after Christ. Wee faine would know what Answer you can make to this to quit your latter Popes from an inexcusable Innouation and intollerable Vsurpation and Inuasion vpon the Iurisdiction of Princes whether Ethnickes or Christians and of these whether Heretikes or Catholikes and of these whether Peaceable or Turbulent and obnoxious and the onely satisfaction your Cardinall will affoord vs is this If Christians saith he in antient times did not depose Dioclesian an Heathen Emperour Iulian an Apostate Valens an Heretike and others meaning Disturbers of the Church which were otherwise Catholikes the reason was because they wanted force and power So hâ—â—han which Answer for we must thinke your Cardinall was greatly learned none could be more vnconscionable all Antiquity prouing it to be agregiously false Tertullian and Cyprian two ancient Fathers being vnder the persecution of Heathen Emperours doe make their Apologies in the behalfe of the Christian and Catholike Church Tertullian thus God forbid that our Christian Profession should bee reuenged by humane power or should grieue to suffer that whereby we are tried albeit if we would become either secret or else open Reuengers of our owne wrongs could we want either number or power What Warre is there that we are not fit for yea and ready also to vndertake if that our Religion taught vs not rather to bee killed than to kill for the profession thereof Accordingly Saint Cyprian Our Professors saith he doe not take reuenge against vniust violence albeit our people be more in number Saint Ambrose was vexed vnder the hand of an Heretike and slyeth to his weapons but wot you what My prayers and teares saith he are my weapons I neither may nor can make any other resistance Not as you confesse that Ambrose had not power to resist with whom the people and greatest part of the Souldiers tooke part but because hee would not defend himselfe by Armes A Case so euident vniuersall and indeed honorable that your owne Authors do record it for the credit and glory of the Catholike Church in those ages saying that Christians neuer plotted against the secular gouernement no not when they were equall in strength They neuer conspired against Tyrants although for multitude they might easily haue made resistance because they were commanded namely in Scripture to performe Obedience And which is as much as can be said Not one ancient Father saith Another nor any one Writer albeit otherwise Orthodoxe and Catholike for more than a thousand yeeres space whilest yet the Church abounded in power of Armes was euer read to teach the contrarie So they II. CHALLENGE A Thousand yeeres space from Christ in the whole Church
Saint Saint Athanasius was Excommunicated by Pope Liberius and notwithstanding remained a Saint The very names of Baronius and Bellarmine we know carry such Authority with you that they will preponderate whatsoeuer can be said against them who ioyntly consent in this that followeth Pope Liberius say they through the faction of Arian Heretikes is by the Authority of Constantius the Emperour sent into banishment By the same Hereticall Arian Bishops is Felix made Bishop and placed in the Romane Sea When Liberius perceiued Felix to be intruded into his Chaire he after two yeares Banishment enuying and grieuing hereat doth ioyne communion with those Heretikes and gaue consent to the condemnation of Athanasius So they Our Assumption will be this that Athanasius neither before nor after the death of Felix did regard this Excommunication of Liberius Immediatly after this you esteeme Felix to be the Legitimate Pope but pronounce Liberius a Schismatike and one remooued from the societie of Catholikes and from his Papall function Which your Conclusions do notably fight against your owne Principles First this that There cannot be two Popes together in one Sea because this were as horrible a monster as a body with two heads One Pope then must be acknowledged Your next Principle is that No Pope can be deposed except he appeare to be a manifest Heretike whereby he ceasseth ipso facto to be a Pope without any other iudgement at all Yet grant you concerning Liberius that He was a Catholike in his inward iudgement notwithstanding his outward communion with Heretikes Your last Principle is that The Pope cannot be iudged of any on earth because he is Prince and therefore superior vnto the whole Church Catholike throughout the earth All these Premises being reduced into a Logicall forme will make vp our Conclusion thus No Catholike Bishop of Rome can be iudged or deposed But Liberius notwithstanding his consenting to the Condemnation of Athanasius and Communicating with Heretikes was a Catholike Bishop Ergo He could not be iudged or deposed from his Popedome If therefore Athanasius being Excommunicated by Liberius neuer sought as you all know any Vnion either with him or yet with Felix in his stead it must follow that he all that time contemned his Excommunication After the death of Felix who was Pope one yeare and some few moneths Liberius obtaineth againe your good reputation for presenly he was accompted the Legitimate Pope Why It is euident saith your Cardinall that Felix being dead Liberius vnited the Church of Rome which was then rent and diuided into a Schisme and became one Sheapheard of one sheepefold So they Where it will be as euident that during the time of Felix Athanasius if hee would haue sought Vnion with the Church of Rome could not know where to find it because the Catholike Church being but One Body One Spouse One Sheepfold how could now the Romane Church be called the Catholike which was as is confessed rent by a Schisme from it selfe But why stand wee wrestling with you for that which of your owne accord you are ready to grant willingly vnto vs It is a matter worthy consideration saith your Cardinall and so indeed it is to know what Liberius did after the death of Felix about the time of the Councell of Arimine which happened to be some two yeares after the departure of Felix And what this is he will haue vs vnderstand from the Epistle of Liberius vnto Athanasius principally thus This is our Confession most wished Athanasius wherein if you consent with me I pray you euen before our Iudge God and Christ to subscribe thereunto that I may be made the more secure thereby and readily performe your Command So the Pope to Athanasius Which Profession of Liberius saith your Cardinall was a solliciter for the repayring of the rent of that Communion which had bene formerly betweene them So he CHALLENGE IF therefore you will not regard our Inferences yet Liberius his owne Epistle and your Cardinall his Comment must giue light to any that shall not wilfully stupifie and blindfold himselfe namely to discerne That there was a breach of Communion betweene Pope Liberius and Athanasius That this continued two yeares for so long it was betweene the death of Felix and that Councell of Arimine whilest that Liberius was throughout the Church of Rome vniuersally acknowledged the Ligitimate Pope That the Seeker for this Communion was not Athanasius who had bene Excommunicate but Liberius who was the Excommunicator euen now being the true Pope That the tenor of the same Epistle is written in all submission both of his vnderstanding to the iudgment of Athanasius if he should happily consent also in the same behalfe to his will whatsoeuer he should Command If the like Epistle had bene written by Athanasius to Liberius we know how diligently and exactly and with what boldnesse you would haue pressed euery syllable thereof scarce could you examine any one word which should not haue seemed to weigh the weight of a Pope We conclude Athanasius being diuided from the Communion of the Pope so long time and not seeking to be reconciled before he was sought vnto by the Pope himselfe doth euidently shew that he belieued not at all your Article of Vnion with the Pope of Rome as with the Head of the Catholike Church vpon Necessity of Saluation Must we therefore iudge Athanasius therein damned nay rather damned be this your Article as Imposterous Scandalous Schismaticall and Hereticall whereby such a Saint should be damned who as your Author confesseth was so excellent an Organ of Truth that If all the commendations of ancient Fathers should be gathered together yet were they not sufficient to set forth the conflicts which this one hath had for defence of the Faith because no one I speake confidently sayth your Lippelous hath after the Apostles vndergone more continuall and grieuous conflicts for the patronage of Truth than he whom Gregory Nazianzene therefore calleth the Eie of the world the chiefe Captaine and Master of Priests and the stay and pillar of Faith So he So admirable was his Faith and Constancy in impugning their Obiections and induring their infinite Calumniations and persecutions IV. Saint Basil Bishop of Caesarea belieued not the Article of necessary Subiection to Rome SECT 4. LOoke againe into your Romane Calendar and you shall reade thus Saint Basil Bishop and Confessor A Saint then he was without exception in whom you will seeme to haue some Interest as though he would beare witnesse to the Antiquity of your Article of Vniuersall Romish Iurisdiction ouer all other Churches of Christ. Your Obiection SAint Basil writ an Epistle to Saint Athanasius whence if we belieue your Cardinall you may conclude that Saint Basil attributed vnto the Bishop of Rome authority of visiting the Churches in the East by whom he pleased and of making Decrees by his Authority and disanulling Generall Councels such as
for the persons of al Popes at all times Againe if the bare Title of Rector of the Catholike Church ascribed to Damasus must needs argue your Pope to be Head of the Church then must you inlarge the Catalogue of your Popes and inrolle among them as many other Bishops as haue receiued Titles equiualent if not more excellent than that For as you your-selues well know Athanasius was intitled the Propp and Foundation of the Church Saint Basil the Mouth of the Church Saint Nazianzene the golden Pillar and Foundation of the whole Church and Saint Ambrose himselfe was commended by the Emperour Theodosius as THE ONELY BISHOP VVHOME HE KNEVV VVORTHY THE NAME OF A BISHOP These few Parallells may serue to allay your appetite vntill we shall be occasioned to satisfie you in this sort to the full In which kinde of Ascriptions there is not any acknowledgement of Authority but a commendation of their care and diligence iudgement and directions in behalfe of the whole Catholike Church Concerning the Second Saint Ambrose addeth a reason of his speach wisely dissembled by your Cardinall to wit The Bishopricke of that Bishop was in a Region diuided into diuers Schismes by Hereticall Spirits whereas the Church of Rome professed constantly the Catholike Faith No maruell therefore though Satyrus aske of a Bishop whose Faith hee suspected whether hee beleeued as that Church did whose Faith was knowne to be truely Catholike As it sometimes cometh to passe in the Common-Wealth in cases of violent ruptures into many Factions repugnant each to other and all to the Loyall and faithfull Subiects of the King among whom some one City as for Example YORK shall bee knowne more generall than any others to professe loyaltie to their Soueraigne if thereupon an honest man aske of a Souldier liuing in one of the factious Countries whether he were a true Subiect and consented with the Citizens of Yorke would you iudge it a Politicke Inference to say that therefore Yorke is the Head ouer all other Cities in the Kigdome And that you may know the due proportion of this Comparison remember we pray you that euen in the same age of Pope Damasus and in the time of the same Schismes many Greeke Bishops were as truly Catholike as was Pope Damasus and yet were not subiect vnto his Iurisdiction as hath beene manifestly proued out of Saint Basil and is heereafter to bee more copiously yea and Confessedly declared Our Opposition from the Example of Saint Ambrose his Opposing against the Church of Rome Sixe hundred and seuenty yeares after the death of Saint Ambrose his Church of Milan was visited by Petrus Damianus Legat vnto Pope Leo the ninth assuming Iurisdiction ouer them when the Clergie of Milan withstood the Legat alleaging that The Church of Ambrose had bene alwaies free in it selfe and neuer was subiect to the lawes of the Pope of Rome The veines of those Clergie-men must haue bene voyd of all tincture of bloud in making a most shamelesse Answer if that it had bene a knowne Catholike Article then that all Churches Christian are necessarily Subordinate vnto the Authority of the Papall and Romane Iurisdiction And why did they in challenging their libertie call their Bishopricke of Milan Ambrose his Church but onely that they knew that Saint Ambrose did preserue the liberty thereof neuer acknowledging Subiection vnto the Bishop of Rome Whereof we haue more than a presumption in the writings of Ambrose himselfe in the Question touching Washing of the feet of Infants baptized which the Church of Rome iudged to be superfluous but contrariwise Ambrose and the Church of Milan held to be necessary The same Father lest the Authority of that Church might preiudice their custome pre-occupateth in this manner I wish in all things saith Ambrose to follow the Church of Rome but yet be it knowne that we being Men haue sense also in continuing this Custome which is likewise more rightly obserued else-where CHALLENGE THis one short sentence is as a Canon full charged to batter downe your great Bulwarke that we may to call your Article of Papall Monarchy For first Ambrose speaking of his owne Church of Milan in opposition vnto the Church of Rome and saying Sed tamen Nos c. BVT YET VVEE c. Ergò he held not his Church of Milan to be a member subordinate to the Romane Church as to the Head thereof But wherein is he opposite Tamen nos homines sensum habemus But we men haue sense As if he had said We in Milan hold this Ceremony necessary They of Rome iudge it superfluous and ridiculous as though we were Asses or Blocks but neither so for we are men nor so for we haue sense and hold that which is more rightly obserued Ergò Ambrose held no Necessity of inthralling his iudgment to the Pope of Rome which is a part of your Article of Faith And in that he saith Cupio I wish to follow the Church of Rome in all things yet this TAMEN or Non obstante doth againe confirme both our former Collections because by calling it The Church of Rome he maketh it no Vniuersall Church in essence and in refusing to follow it where he thinketh hee hath iust cause so to do prooueth that he belieued not her iudgement to be Vniuersally and Necessarily Catholike nor her power and Iurisdiction absolute The Prouerbe is A Lyon is knowne by his claw As well may we discerne Saint Ambrose his Faith by this Clause who in this one Resolution teacheth all Christian Churches to follow the Church of Rome in nothing wherein they are perswaded as Saint Ambrose was in this Case that the Church of Rome hath denyed to follow the Church of Christ. Now for you to answer that his meaning was To follow the Church of Rome in all things necessary though not in a Rite This Answer as it is false for Saint Ambrose held this Rite Necessary so it is also friuolous because if it be iust to withstand the Church of Rome in a Rite and Ceremony as it were in a Mite then how much more may it be lawfull not to follow or belieue her in her many new Articles of Faith whereof among other this is a Principall to wit The Catholike Romane Church without Subiection whereunto there is no Saluation which can neuer be credible as long as Saint Ambrose is belieued to haue bene a Saint VIII Saint Augustine belieued not the now Romane Article of Necessary Subiection to the Church of Rome and Pope thereof SECT 8. SAint Augustine as All will confesse deserued to haue his memory Registred not onely as it is in your Romane Calendar in paper monuments but in the minds and hearts of all Christians so excellent a Saint was He. It is not long since one of your Priests published a booke entituled Saint Augustines Religion wherein he will needs be thought to haue himselfe collected all the materials of
haue done that which I ought both in performing Obedience to the Emperour namely by publishing the Decree and also to God by reuealing vnto you his will So hee Hardly shall any finde a more expresse example of direct Subiection and Obedience from any Subiect than this is of that holy Pope vnto the Emperour Mauritius Nor are all of your side so blinde as not able to discerne this Midday-light For Gregorie called the First and the Great saith your Espencaeus doth ingenuously acknowledge that Emperours haue from God a Dominion ouer Priests Your Second Title is calling the Sea of Rome HEAD yea The Head of all Churches Must they therefore meane a Monarchicall Head according to your Conclusion ouer all other Churches by way of Dominion If so to omit your Additament of Falsehood then was Chrysostome to blame to call Antioch The Head of the whole World then was Iustinian vniust to require all to Follow Constantinople the regall Citie as the Head of all Cities And so by pressing Titles you see your Monarchie turned into a Triarchie A Third Title is the calling of the Pope The Bishop of the Vniuersall Church which though they were not the words of the Councell but of Two Deacons writing to the Councell and of Paschasius the Popes Legate in the same Councell which the Councell being content with the Popes Subscription to their Act would not question for the forme Yet may you not make of this an Argument of Monarchicall power of the Church and Bishop of Rome except you will set more Heads and Monarchs than One vpon the shoulders of the Church because the Bishops of Syria instiled Iohn the Bishop of Constantinople The Vniuersall Patriarke and the Bishop of Rome also intitled Tharasius The Vniuersall Patriarke The whole errour lurketh vnder an Equiuocation in the word Bishop of the Vniuersall Church which what it may signifie your owne Authors tell you The Bishop of the Vniuersall Church say you doth signifie one possessed with a Care and studie for the good of the Vniuersall Church So they which is common to euery Religious Bishop in the Church of Christ but in a more eminent degree and larger extent it belongeth to euery Patriarke and this sense we doe approue of Or else it may signifie One hauing All the Bishops of All other Churches vnder his Subiection which sense is here seriously and zealously obiected by your Cardinall to proue the Monarchie of the Pope of Rome and which hath bin by S. Gregorie Pope of Rome as earnestly abhorred and detested and as much as his godly heart could execrated for so he speaketh of it as a New naughtie proud prophane blasphemous and Antichristian Title which saith hee none of my Predecessors euer vsed The next Title attributed vnto the Bishop of Rome by a Generall Councell is that The Vineyard of the Lord which is his Church is said to be committed vnto him which serueth for another post to support the ruinous Monarchy of the Bishop of Rome But all in vaine For Pope Eleutherius himselfe writing to the Bishops in France The Vniuersall Church of Christ saith hee is committed vnto you that you may labour for the good of all men It were more than Monstrous that this your Monarch should create so many Monarches ouer the Church Catholike as were all the Bishops of France No these kinde of Attributes haue not other signification than the Care that euery Bishop should haue in wishing and to his power endeauouring the Vniuersall good of the whole Church In which sense Saint Nazianzene speaking in the praise of Athanasius To him is committed the Praesidencie of the people of Alexandria which is as much as to say saith hee the gouernment of the whole world So hee How should not this equall if not exceede whatsoeuer can be ascribed to the Pope of Rome and yet this is no vniuersall power of Iurisdiction but onely of Prouidence and Care namely Sic quibusdam praeesse vt prodesse possit vniuersis The last Title is that which is set downe in the First and last place That the Primacie aboue all Bishops is yeelded vnto the Bishop of the Church of Rome True and this Truth was neuer denied by any Protestant But what Primacie of Monarchie and Dominion Noe but of Order and Honour For haue you neuer heard of Two Cities in one Kingdome Two Sheriffes in one Citie Two Bayliffes in one Burrough one of them being Head and Chiefe and hauing Superioritie and Prioritie that is Primacie aboue another and yet without any right of Authoritie and Dominion one ouer one another Our next Answer shall be by Retorsion Foure Generall Councels haue bin produced by your side to proue the Church of Rome and Bishop thereof to haue Monarchicall power ouer all other Churches and Bishops in an ambiguitie of phrases Albeit not onely these Foure but also Foure more haue notably impugned your pretended Monarchie as well in the Ecclesiasticall as in the Temporall power and Prerogatiue thereof For you may remember that the First Generall Councell limited the Dioces as well of Rome as of Alexandria The Second erected a new Patriarkship with the no good liking of the Church of Rome The Third excluded the Pope from all Iurisdiction in Cyprus The Fourth established the former Patriarkship erected by the Second Councell with priuileges equall to Rome and held the Romane Primacie not to be founded by any Diuine Law The Fifth condemned Pope Vigilius as Schismaticall The Sixt and Seauenth condemned Pope Honorius as Haereticall The Eight prescribed a Law to Rome inioyning her to Obserue it And againe these Eight Generall Councels were disposed at their Assemblies to preferre the Emperours of their Times in place and throne of dignitie aboue the Popes of Rome CHALLENGE IS then the Popedome of Rome a Monarchie why answer vs First is a Monarch limited of his Subiects Secondly doth a Monarch suffer others to create Honours within his kingdome Thirdly Will a Monarch indure Corriuals or Equals Fourthly Can a Monarch the supreme Iudge be subiect to the iudgement and condemnation of his people Fiftly Must not a Monarch challenge the possession of his chiefe Throne in his Parliament and be so acknowledged by the whole state If therefore you shall further obserue what hath bin opposed against your Titles you may easily vnderstand that not any one which hath bin obiected doth inferre your Conclusion to proue the Pope of Rome a Monarch except you shall acknowledge Athanasius Bishop of Alexandria Chrysostome Bishop of Antioch Iohn Bishop of Constantinople and All the Bishops of France together with all other Bishops to whom the same Titles were ascribed to haue bin which breaketh the necke of Monarchie Monarkes as well as the Bishop of Rome And if in the Second place you consider the Testimonies which we haue alleaged out of twice Foure Generall Councels directly concluding not by any speciousnesse of Words but
defect of pronouncing Shibboleth euen as the Character of a man is seene by his speach CHALLENGE IN Examination of these Premises you may finde iust matter for Challenge of your owne Proctors and Pleaders for the Popes Primacy from these Popes by reason of their fourefold Iniurie First to their Aduersaries the Protestants whom they traduce as enemies to Antiquity in not admitting the Testimonies of so holy Popes of the Primitiue age which all Christians ought to beleeue and reuerence But in this clamour they abuse their Readers by deliuering vnto them onely the names of Popes Epistles as is vsuall in false Certificates wherein a man shall reade a Catalogue of names of men whereunto the parties themselues neuer yeelded their consent or as in a Stage-play wherein are presented Personates instead of Persons themselues and to the chins of boyes are fixed the beards of old men Is not this a theatricall forgery Secondly to your Popes by vrging writings in their nameâ— which if they were theirs must proue them to haue beene foolish false and barbarous Our zeale therefore to those blessed Popes doth challenge your Obiectors of extreme iniury to their memory Thirdly to the Church of Rome as well Ancient as Successiue that when you boast so much of the truth of your Traditions as a Nuncupatiue Testament of Christ wherein your Chiefest Article is your Doctrine of Papall Monarchy yet when we are to consult with the first witnesses that should testifie this Article in tht Romane Church it selfe namely those Ancient Popes we can haue no better assurance of their Testimonies than as of such as are confessed to bee both fraught with Errors and also falsely imposed vpon those Popes Which is in effect to condemne your Romane Church of sacrilegious negligence and vnfaithfulnesse in not preseruing that sacrum Depositum as you call the Ancient Tradition of Popes from hand to hand and consequently must inferre a iust suspition of Falshood in the Chiefest ground of your Romish Faith the pretended Law of Tradition Is not this also an iniury But the greatest Iniury that we lament is the wrong which your Obiectors doe vnto their own Consciences when some will haue all those Epistles to be Authenticall and worthy of absolute Beleefe without Exception yet are condemned by the most learned among you who confesse and proue that they are mixed both with Theologicall Chronologicall falshoods Some againe especially your Cardinal obtruding Epistles in the names of Popes and yet doubting whether they be truely the Epistles of these Popes or no and some other-where also reiecting some of them as Counterfeits So foolish is his Obiection in alleaging them for Ancient who could not be ignorant that there haue beene Ancient forgeries of which stampe your owne iudicious Authors haue noted these to bee And that which exceedeth almost the highest note of to speake mildely Inconsideration to proue your Doctrine of Romish Primacy from the word Primatus mentioned sometimes by the Bishops of Rome in their Epistles which as your owne Contius teacheth is an Argument to iudge them not to be so Ancient because that that word was not of currant stampe in that age And what great iniurie can any man doe than that which he doth to his owne Conscience Finally pardon vs if we cannot impute such a degree of Impiety to those holy Popes that they who liued in the times of those bloudy Massacres wherin most of them with infinite other godly Professors in the same Church of Rome bequeathed their bodies to the sword for the Faith of Christ and their soules and spirits by Martyrdome to his armes of blessednesse should be wholly busyed in their Epistles about poynts of Ordination of Priests Inuention of Ceremonies and aduancing the Prerogatiues of the Romane Church but neuer to vtter any syllable of Exhortation and Consolation in behalfe of the Flocke of Christ dayly in the iawes of the Wooluish Persecutors of these times as those Epistles by you obiected do make appeare Your Obiections from the Testimonies of Ancient Popes of the Second Three hundred yeeres and the Vanity thereof discouered SECT 12. FOr the Second Three hundred yeeres are presented before vs a Second Iury of Twelue Popes to giue their Verdicts for proofe of the extent of their owne Papall and Monarchicall power and Iurisdiction Ecclesiasticall ouer the whole Church of Christ throughout the world Manifold haue been the Answers of Many to these Testimonies which the breuity that we haue propounded to our selues in this Treatise will not suffer vs to relate our Answers shall be no lesse plaine and yet more compendious 1. Almost all of these Testimonies may be denied in that sense of absolute Monarchie for the which they are propounded As for the first man of the Inquest viz. Pope Iulius he plainely speaketh of Document Instruction receiued from Peter and not of Dominion or Iurisdiction which may be an Answer to many of the rest 2. Some speake not but their Counterfeits as the last Iurist Pope Gregory in an Epistle wherein Eusebius Bishop of Constantinople is said to haue beene Subiect vnto him when as as our Doctor Reynolds hath proued there was no Eusebius Bishop of Constantinople in the daies of Saint Gregory This tricke of corrupting the writings of Antient Popes as you haue seene in their Epistles for the first Three hundred yeeres giue vs iuster cause to suspect the Popish Scribes in the Second Three hundred yeeres 3. Some haue beene already satisfied by Parallels 4. Reuerence say some Popes is due to the Apostolike See So you know Saint Peter doth require of the Husband Honour towards his Wife and Saint Paul of a Bishop Reuerence vnto Widowes Reuerence therefore which is nothing else but a due estimation of all persons according to their Order and Degree may bee exacted without any Note of Dominion 5. Nine of these Popes call the Church of Rome and Bishop thereof either Head of all Churches or One that hath the Care of all Churches or one hauing Principality Euery of which as you know were antiently ascribed to other Churches and Bishops besides the Romane 6. Some may be checked by Retorsion as in the first and last witnesse For the first if from the words obiected out of that Epistle of Iulius you shall inferre that he had Vniuersall Monarchy throughout the Catholike Church then may wee more iustly conclude that the same Pope being challenged by the Bishops of the East whom he calleth Most dearely beloued both for writing to them Alone and from his owne Authority and also for transgressing the Canons of the Church by admitting men vnto his Communion that had beene by them deposed and answering to the one that Although he wrote alone vnto them yet that he did it by consent of his fellow Bishops and to the other standing onely vpon his iustification in not transgressing the Canons of Ancient Councels
hee was neither accompted of them not yet esteemed himselfe the Vniuersall Pope and Monarch of the Church As for the last to wit Gregory if in some tearmes he seeme to speake somewhat lowd as though he were very great yet by confining himselfe to the Constitution of Iustinian and disclaiming as you know the Title of Vniuersall Bishop of the Church as most odious euen in the now Romane signification of Vniuersall Iurisdiction hee was too little to become in that Sense a Romane Pope Againe Damasus say you called the Easterne Bishops Sonnes belike it was in loue Yet the same Easterne Bishops called Damasus Brother and Fellow Lastly Some may be confuted and indeed confounded by as Antient Oppositions as of the Orientalls against the Authority of Pope Iulius of the Bishops of Africke against the pretended Authority of Pope Zozimus and of Cyrill against Pope Innocentius Our Generall Discouery of the Vanity of your Proofes of Papall Monarchy from the mouthes of Popes themseluos who haue beene anciently noted of Pride SECT 13. OVr Sauiour Christ obseruing the equity of humane Law applied it to himselfe saying If I giue testimony of my selfe my testimonie were not true And why then should not this Consequence vsed by Christ be of force against your Consequences taken from the testimonies of those Popes who boast themselues to be the onely Vicars of Christ Yes verily because there is such a 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is Selfe-loue in euery man so bewitching him that he can discerne Any sooner than himselfe Yea and if in all Courts of Pleas greatest exception is taken against selfe-Testimony in a mans owne Cause then ought not this our Answer seeme harsh vnto you if we should denie the Assumptions which the Popes of Rome euen of more Primitiue times haue made for the aduantage of their Romane Iurisdiction and that so much the lesse by how much the more many Popes of that age are noted to haue beene taxed for their great Arrogancy by the Ancient Fahers of their owne Times Whereupon it is that we haue heard Tertullian girding at the Pope as if hee would bee Bishop of Bishops Polycrates contemning his threats of Excommunication as Vaine Terrors Cyprian noting the Popes Pride and scorning his Tyrannicall terror The Fathers of the Councell of Africke among whom Saint Augustine was one branding Three Popes with the note of Smoakie Arrogance and Saint Augustine himselfe poynting at the vaine Boasting of Rome nay euen Saint Hierom also durst say concerning the Ecclesiasticall State of that City Away with Ambition And how did Saint Basil beard the same Church with the termes of Westerne superciliousnesse Pride Others likewise albeit more couertly and closely ' twitted other Popes Cyrill We may not saith he for the speaches of Some meaning the Pope with others suffer our Canons to bee infringed and Saint Ambrose We also haue our senses about vs speaking in Opposition to Rome and intimating that shee conceited too highly of her own Iudgement Thus these holy Fathers concerning the Popes of their daies being otherwise holy Fathers also For we forbeare to Oppose against you the iudgement of Authors of after-ages who speake against the Romane Pride as liberally as did Nicephorus who condemned Pope Vigilius of Insolency in Excommunicating Mennas the Patriarch of Constantinople Nay and did not one of your owne Prophets in defence of the Superiority of the Councell aboue the Pope say that Popes doe commonly stretch their fringes too much arrogating that to themselues which is proper to a Councell CHALLENGE WHat holy Popes wil you say and yet proud arrogant and challenging Dominion aboue others without the limits of their owne Iurisdiction Yes why not They were the holy Disciples of Christ that ambitiously wished by the solicitation of their Mother that They might sit the one on the right hand of Christ and the other on the left in his Kingdome they were also holy Apostles that sought among themselues without any Ordinance of their Lord Who should be Chiefe They were likewise zealously-holy seruants of Christ that beyond their Commission would haue had fire from heauen vpon the Samaritans And certainely many of the Popes especially of the Second Classis and rancke within the compasse of the Second Three hundred yeeres may be said to haue beene Successors of those Disciples and Apostles as in many virtues so in these kinde of defects also And if this may be said of holy and Primitiue Popes what shall we thinke of those Popes who a Thousand yeeres after them haue degenerated both from the holinesse and sincere Religion of their Predecessors What but as of Gyants in respect whose thumbs of Pride were greater than their Fathers Loynes When the particulars of these our Answers together with theis more Generall are summed vp and due subtraction made of those Obiections which are satisfied thereby you shall finde that the Remainder for your aduantage will be iust nothing at all So vaine and friuolous is the pretence for your Romane Article of Vniuersall Iurisdiction ouer the Church of Christ. Your Second kinde of Obiections from the Testimonies of Popes is from their Acts in exercising of their pretended Papall Authority and our Discouerie of the Vanity thereof SECT 14. THis Vniuersall Exercise of Papall Authority your Cardinall will haue vs discerne in three points 1. Of Confirming 2. Of Deposing 3. Of Restoring other Bishops wheresoeuer by his owne Authority Euery which act saith he may be of it selfe a sufficient proofe of his Primacy ouer all other Bishops You may take for your first Answer that anciently Institutions of Metropolitans and Patriarchs were done by Communicatory letters to the Chiefe Patriarch 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ergò for Order-sake by Communicatory Letters we say or as we may call them Letters of Correspondence to shew their agreement in the Faith in which case the Bishop of Rome sent his Pall in token of his Assent So likewise the Popes Deposing of other Bishops without the Romane Dioces was but an Expression of his Assent to others that hee thought them iustly deposed The same may be said of his power in Restitution of others that had beene deposed that it was the like manifestation of his Consent to haue such and such restored euen as other Patriarchs often did So that your Proofe fayleth in Two maine points 1. You produce no one Example wherein it can appeare that the Pope could either Institute Confirme Depose or Restore any such Bishop by his owne Authority alone without the helpe of a Councell 2. That infinite Examples are Recorded of Bishops Metropolitans and Patriarchs which haue beene Instituted Deposed and Restored without the Consent of the Bishop of Rome Your Cardinall himselfe foreseeing thus much seeketh to preuent it by a Second Opposition Although saith he the Pope did not himselfe Confirme all other Remote Bishops
and Soueraigns therfore am I the King of those Kings Fourthly If you omit such holy men as addressed their requests to the Bishop of Rome such as were Theodoret Athanasius Chrysostome Flauianus not as to a peremptory Iudge but as to a Patron and Arbitrary Dais-man and one vpon whose Authoritie and credit one of them depending acknowledgeth in expresse words his reason to wit The integritie of the Faith of the Pope and promising to abide his award with the assistance of others and to be content therewith whatsoeuer should be determined relying vpon their iudgements so Theodoret Now whom one acknowledgeth to be his Patron and Aâ—bitratour him he denieâ—h to be his Iudge If we say these many Witnesses may be forborne then is there nothing at all said for the Necessitie of your Romane Article of Papall Dominion in respect of Vniuersall Right of Appeale Nay Fifthly if you will but obserue that the Popes which are most apprehensiue of Appeales to the Church of Rome doe not plead any Right from Diuine Authoritie but onely from Ecclesiasticall Canons and Customes so then for the Church can no more create an Article of Faith for mans soule to beleeue than it can create the soule of man your Article cannot be of Faith which wanteth Diuine Ordinance the onely Foundation of Faith Our second Discouery of the Vanity of your Pretence for Vniuersall Right of Appeales to Rome by an Argument taken from the Councell of Chalcedon SECT 16. ONE whole Chapter is spent by your Cardinall in answering the Obiection of Nilus Arch-Bishop of Thessalonica in Greece proouing Appeales to haue been as generally allowed vnto the Patriarch of Constantinople as vnto the Patriarch of Rome because of the Equall Priuiledges granted by Generall Councels to the one with the other In answer whereunto your Cardinall is so miserably perplexed that we shall need no other Reply than to manifest how manifoldly he is repugnant vnto a Generall Councell to euident Truths and oftentimes vnto himselfe as may appeare by the Marginals The Canon of the Councell of Chalcedon held in the yeare 451. standeth thus If any Clerke haue a Cause against a Clerke let him be iudged by a Bishop if against a Bishop by an Arch-Bishop if against an Arch-Bishop by the Primate or by the Bishop of Constantinople The question is what is meant by 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 translated Primate He answereth by allowing the Answer of Pope Nicolas that by Primate is there meant the Bishop of Rome False for the Canon vseth a Climax or Gradation from Clerke to Bishop from Bishop to Arch-bishop from Arch-Bishop to Primate or the Bishop of Constantinople Therefore doth the word PRIMATE signifie that which is expressed namely the Bishop of Constantinople and not that which is not expressed viz. the Bishop of Rome Yet be it that it pointeth out the Bishop of Rome then beware the Popes Head of Monarchie because the Bishop of Constantinople in this Gradation hauing the last that is the most excellent place he must be confessed to be iudged by that Canon Superior or at least Equall to the Bishop of Rome As it doth appeare in the like case thus A common Souldier is subiect to a Lieutenant a Lieutenant to a Captaine a Captaine to a Colonell or to a Generall shall Generall in this place be inferior to a Colonell But the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 saith he signifieth a Prince and therefore agreeth onely with the Pope who onely is a Prince False for the Councell of Carthage applying the same word to Priests forbiddeth that any be called Prince of Priests But the Councell speaketh saith he of Appellants that were neare to Constantinople False for it speaketh Generally of Euery Church as If a Clerke If a Bishop If an Arch-Bishop not if some certaine but whosoeuer But the Canon saith he speaketh of the First iudgement and not of the Last which is by Appeale Most false for the Canon it selfe denounceth peremptorily If any whosoeuer shall do contrary hereunto let him be subiect to Canonicall punishments Thus farre appeareth your Cardinalls repugnancy to the Truth of the Canon This Obiection is a Gordian Knot he could not vntie it with his teeth and now Alexander-wise he will cut that which he cannot loose These Canons â—f Chalcedon saith he Haue no force in our Church vntill they shall be confirmed by some Pope So he Why my Masters was not this Councell one of the First and best Generall Councells Did not your Pope Gregory adore this with Three others as the Oracle of God Was there euer any ancient Orthodox Father the Popes excepted that tooke exception vnto any Canon of that Councell Oh! you the Children forsooth of Ancient Fathers who can blow away three hundred and thirty Reuerend Fathers and Bishops with one breath But how should he agree with Others who in the third place will be found at variance both with Pope Nicolas and with himselfe Nicolas saith he expounded the Canon aright that by Primate was meant the Pope of Rome and notwithstanding for a farewell to this Obiection he saith that The Canon is to be vnderstood of the First iudgement Which euidently crosseth the Popes Exposition who granting that Iudgement to be there allowed to the Bishop of Constantinople Per permissionem and extraordinarily which Per Regulam and ordinarily he challenged to belong to himselfe could not but vnderstand the Last therfore the chiefest iudgement for Nicolas was one of the first vsurping Popes But your Cardinall that saith Pope Nicolas did rightly expound it if he would haue him make his Papall Iudgement for in gradation of Appeales the Last is alwaies the highest and most excellent to be the First The Popes we thinke would iudge him no true Proctor but a plaine Praeuaricator in their Cause So easie a matter it is for any that will be repugnant to all Others to be found sometimes contradictory to himselfe Our third Discouery of the Vanity of your Pretence of Right of Appeales the Principall part of your Romane Article out of Saint Cyprian Anno 256. SECT 17. SAint Cyprian hath bene often an Actor with others in our former Scenes in this he entereth the stage alone The Argument of his Epistle vnto Pope Cornelius is 1. His Expelling Fortunatus and Felicissimus from his Communion 2. Their Appeale to the Pope 3. His Preuention by his Letters to the Pope and his Reasons to perswade the Pope not to admit of their Complaints The summe whereof is comprized in one sentence which if your Cardinall had set downe sincerely without pulling our Wiâ—nes backe at the midst of his tale by omitting a principall part of his speach the very Sentence it selfe would haue on Cyprianus part decided the whole Cause concerning the point of Appeales to Rome For seeing that it is decreed saith Cyprian to Pope Cornelius of vs all and it is likewise both equall and iust
Appellants did imply that there were in Africke but few that would so much derogate from the Authority of the Bishops within that Prouince CHALLENGE HItherto haue wee pursued our Aduersay in his owne Tract who all this while hath beene but beating of the aire and as it were catching of Butterflies as you may perceiue For this matter of Right of Appealing or Not Right of Appealing being of that importance as that it must either make or marre your Papall Monarch and Romane Article of his Vniuersall Dominion ouer all Churches The Author Saint Cyprian being so antient in time liuing in the 250 yeere after Christ so singular for his learning and iudgement and for his Sanctity and Constancie in the Faith euen vnto death for the name of Christ so admirable a Saint we shall desire you to take an exact Reuiew of the Case and to iudge accordingly You remember that the Epistle is directed vnto Pope Cornelius a godly Pope but yet very timerous and some-what dismayed at the threats of Heretickes and Schismatickes whom therefore Cyprian laboureth to support and consolidate The very scope of the letter in that part thereof is to disswade him from giuing any eare or Admission vnto Fortunatus and Felicissimus both Excommunicate persons and already condemned by a Councel in Africke and seeking now by way of Appeale to finde redresse with the same Pope His Sentence containeth no lesse than Eight Arguments sufficient to confute your pretended Right of Appeales to Rome which we may reduce to these Three Heads The First concerneth the Decree it selfe the Second the Iudges the Third the Appellants and Delinquents 1. The Decree defineth plainely that It is vnequall and vniust to haue an Ecclesiasticall Cause iudged but where the Crime is committed But the Crime was not committed in the Romane Dioces Therefore it is ment that they ought not to Appeale to Rome 2. A Reason is giuen for this Because it is vniust to iudge where Witnesses and Accusers could not be had But at Rome out of Africke whence all parties must haue taken a long iourney both by Land and by Sea Accusers and Witnesses could not bee had Therefore Cyprian meant they ought not to Appeale to Rome Next here is the Consideration of the Iudges that had condemned these Excommunicates namely Cyprian and the Bishops of Africke 1. Cyprian telleth the Pope that Euery Bishop in his owne Dioces hath a porâ—ion of the flocke of Christ committed vnto him Which being vsed as a Reason to disswade the Pope from entertainiâ—g any Appeale doth conclude that therefore the Whole Flocke of Christ is not subiect to the Pope and consequently your pretended Right of Appeale to Rome is but a Romane Pigment 2. As the charge ouer a portion of the Flocke of Christ is vpon euery Bishop so in the discharge thereof Euery Bishop saith Cyprian is to giue accompt vnto God namely as Supreme Which againe being vrged as a Motiue to withdraw the Pope from intermedling in that businesse doth proue that therefore the Pope is not Monarch of the Church to call All other Bishops to Accompt and Consequently hath not the Vniuersall power of Appeales 3. The cause of these men saith Cyprian is already iudged and wee may not incurre the reproofe of leuity in giuing our Sentence heereby intimating vnto the Pope that though hee should oppose they notwithstanding must bee found Constant in withstanding him which doth argue that although Appeales from those parts were admitted at Rome yet might they iustly bee opposed against The last Head is the Obseruation of Cyprian his Taxation of the Appellants or parties Delinquent now flying for succour to Rome 1. He telleth the Pope Those saith he whom we rule ouer oportet non circumcursitare ought not thus to gadd about calling their contumacious forsaking of the iudgement of their Ordinary and seeking Restitution at Rome a Gadding and vagrant kinde of wandering which had beene a Contumacy against the Pope by Cyprian if Appeales to Rome had beene inherent in the Romane Mitre and Monarchie 2. Hee calleth them and their Accomplices that thus laboured an Appeale A few desperate Fellowes that thereby vndermined the Authority of the Bishops of Africke ouer them being Africans as Lesse meaning as hath beene proued Lesse than the Authority of the Bishop of Rome And would not your now Pope haue held this also a Contumely if he had thought himselfe such a Monarch to heare one of his vnderlings to call men Desperate fellowes and A few for acknowleging his Soueraignty and Monarchy by Appealing vnto him and thereby to signifie that there were but Few that would thinke this power of Appeales to belong of Right to the Pope of Rome Lastly he chargeth them that by this their Act of Appealing thus irregularly to the Bishop of Rome they did but thereby goe about Episcoporum concordiam collidere to burst the Vnion and concord of Bishops But the suffering of any one to make his iust Appeale could be no breach of Vnity betweene a Substitute Bishop and a predominant Bishop to whom Appeales doe of right appertaine nay it were an iniurie and sufficient cause of breach of Concord not to suffer such Appeales to passe and take place Therefore Cyprian alleaging this vnto the Pope as a matter of their iust reproofe did not beleeue that they could iustly Appeale vnto Rome Who is ther now but must conclude that as long as the Article of your Romane Faith concerning the Monarchy of the Bishop of Rome and Appeales vnto him as the principall note of his Monarchie shall bee examined by the Decree of Cyprian and the other Bishops of Africke which thus oppose against Them who as they say Nauigârunt Romam sayled to Rome by way of Appeale your pretence of so Appealing must needs be split vpon the same Decree as vpon a Rocke and suffer shipwracke Our Fourth Discouery of the Vanity of your former Pretonce of Vniuersall Right of Appeales to Rome from the Testimonie of Pope Damasus SECT 18. ABout the yeere of our Lord God 367 one offered an Appeale to Damasus Pope of Rome and receiueth this Answer In as much saith the Pope as the Councell of Capua hath so iudged this matter already that those who were next adioyning should be Iudges both to Bonosus and his Accusers We obserue that the forme of iudging Nobis competere non potest cannot appertaine vnto vs. Whereby we conceiue the Pope confesseth his no Right of admitting an Appeale after the Sentence and Iudgement of a Prouniciall Councell And we are answered by your Cardinall thus that Non competere in this place is no more than Non conuenire it is not conuenient because that when a Prouinciall Synod had iudged a Cause it could not be conuenient for Damasus to iudge it without cause And this is all the Answer which Protestants could by whatsoeuer importunity wrest from the professed Aduocate of your Popes which say wee fighteth against all forme and
stile of Law For the very word Competit in the stile of the Iudiciall Court signifieth one that is Sufficient as Iudex competens vsed by Vlpian A Competent Iudge and not onely a Conuenient Iudge And for the strict sense of the word in the point of Appeale we may iustly Appeale to all Courts to Christendome whether Ecclesiasticall or Ciuill which may challenge any Right of Appeale Because if for example the Iudge of the Audience or Arches should answer an Appellant Sir the matter hath beene iudged by the Court of York and I know the Chancellor there to be a learned and a iust man therefore to vse your Cardinalls phrase It cannot be â—onuenient for mee to iudge that which hath receiued a former iudgement might not the Appellant reioyne What Sir Not conuenient for you to receiue an Appeale Why you are therefore appointed Iudge in Cases of Appeale yea and sworne to discharge your Office of Iudgement and not to preiudice any Cause by saying you see no cause to admit it before you haue heard it For bee you assured that I shall either shew iust proofe of iniustice offered vnto me by my former Iudge or else I must submit my selfe to the Censure of your Court Such an incongruity and absurdity it is to modifie the word Competere with the bare sense of Conueniency as though it were not Conuenient for one to performe that which hee is bound in Conscience to discharge Wee therefore contend for the strict sense of Non Competere that is to say Not appertaining in the Sentence of Pope Damasus as may furthermore appeare clearely by the Sentence it selfe wherein Damasus will haue the man vnderstand Two things One is Forma iudicandi non competit The Forme of iudging doth not belong vnto me hee saith not Causa iudicandi non competit The Cause of iudging belongeth not vnto me But you know that no true Court of Appeale can say that it hath not a Forme of iudging the Second is the Cause why he said Non competit to wit because the Cause had beene iudged by a Prouinciall Synod as by those who were Finitimi Neere to the parties as well Accusers as Accused as if he had taken his reason from the very Decree of the Councell of Carthage set downe by Saint Cyprian whereof you haue heard at large calling it Vnequall and Vniust that a Cause should bee iudged in Remote Courts where the parties cannot appeare but especially that any one Iudge should take vpon him to re-iudge that which was preiudged by a Prouinciall Councell Otherwise how easie a matter had it beene for the man that tendered his Appeale to haue pushed the Popes Answer away with the hornes of a Dilemma thus Eitheir haue you a Right of iudging in this Case of Appeales after a Prouinciall Councell or you haue not If you haue then do me right and iustice to heare it If you haue not then it is but a false Delusion in men to Attribute to the See of Rome an Vniuersall power of iudging all Iudges as being the Supreme Monarch ouer all Bishops and their Prouinciall Counsells Damasus therefore in this Answering to wit The forme of Iudging Non potest nobis competere did meane that he could not in such a Cause be held a Competent sufficient or lawfull Iudge Behold now your Vniuersall Iudge behold your Monarch controlled and confuted out of the mouth of your Iudge himselfe Our Fifth Discouery of the Falshood of your Pretence of Vniuersall Right of Appeales to Rome from the Councell of Mileuis SECT 19. IN the yere of Christ 416 Threescore Bishops in a Councell at Mileuis where Saint Augustine was present decreed in the words following If Priests or Deacons or Inferior Clerkes shall haue complaint against their Bishops let their next bordering Bishops heare their Cause and determine it but if they shall Appeale from those Bishops yet let them not Appeale any whither but to an African Councell or to the Primates of the Prouinces wherein they are And whosoeuer shall thinke he may Appeale beyond the Seas let none within Africke admit him into their Communion Two points are considerable in this Inhibition of Appeales First concerneth the Place the Second the Persons Touching the Place it is at length granted by your great Aduocate in this Cause to wit that by those words If any Appeale beyond the Sea let none in Africke admit him into his communion is forbidden Appeales vnto Rome Where by the way is to bee taxed â—he impudencie of your Gratian who whereas the Canon was made purposely against Appeales to Rome yet shamed he not to add to that Canon of himselfe this exception Except the Appeale be made to the Apostolike See of Rome Which is in Musicke Discantus contra punctum and in your Law Statuimus i. e. Abrogamus But thus much being granted how is not this a prohibition against your pretended Right of Appeales to Rome Satisfie this point or else yeeld the Cause Although saith your Cardinall the Councell prohibited and forbad that Priests and inferior Clerkes should Appeale to the Bishop of Rome yet did they not forbid that the Pope of Rome should admit of Appeales made vnto him nor had they any power or authority so to doe So he This being the onely Answer which after his perusall of all other Answers hee thought to haue any colour of satisfaction in we take it to be in effect the losse of the cause For our Question is whether the Bishop of Rome haue a sole and Soueraigne Right ouer the whole Church of Christ to iudge all Causes by his absolute Prerogatiue of Popedome And an Appeale being A remouing of a Cause from an inferior Iudge to a Superior we reply that where there lieth a Prohibition against Appealing to a Iudge that Iudge is not held a Superior Iudge But this Councell granted a Prohibition against the Appealing of Priests within Africke vnto the Pope of Rome therefore was not the Pope of Rome in this Case of Priests held a Superiour Iudge much lesse the Supreme of all others as you pretend And although that Councel could not forbid the Pope who was in a Transmarine Prouince to admit of such Appeales yet in forbidding the Appeales vnto the Pope they thereby denyed that he had lawfull power to receiue them As heere in England the prohibiting of euery person to Appeale vnto any without the Kings Dominions doth by vndenyable Consequence shew that none without the Kings Dominions hath iust power to admit of any such Appellants How victorious then is Truth in this one Cause which by the euidence thereof haâ—h inforced her aduersary by necessary Sequele thus farre to professe it Which Answer of his notwithstanding hee would gladly patch vp with an Addition of a meere falshood saying Pope Zozimus did command this Canon of the non-Appeales of Priests to be confirmed False for Pope Zozimus is knowne by the whole processe of the
obiect nothing but either the parties themselues namely the Popes for Witnesses in their owne Cause or the exorbitant Examples of Factious and Criminall Persons Appellant in stead of regular and Conformable or in the Examples of some Godly Fathers that sought helpe at the Pope of Rome a power Arbitrarie for Iudicatorie or a friendly support issuing from the Estimation and grace that some Popes then had to perswade in stead of Authoritie of Iurisdiction or lastly a restrained power and that onely by humane and Ecclesiasticall Canon and Custome which is alterable instead of a pretended proper and Diuine Right Such we haue proued to be the vanitie of his Proofes As easily may you obserue that notwithstanding his Answers he furthermore lyeth open to manifold Exceptions For Anno 216. Restraint of Appeales to Rome was made by the Councell of Carthage Anno 337. a Delogation was made by a godly Emperor Constantine to Pope Iulius and transferred from him to other Bishops Anno 367. Pope Damasus disclaimeth all Right of Appeale to Rome after the Iudgement of a Prouinciall Synod Anno 416. the Councell of Mileuis denieth Appeales out of Africke to Rome and Anno 420. the Councell of Africke is as peremptorie against this pretence of Papall Priuiledge of Appeale Among which Three Councels to wit that of Carthage vnder Cyprian the other of Mileuis and the Third of Africke all African Councels are challenged by your Authors to haue bin within the Patriarkship of the Bishop of Rome and yet they denied vnto him the Prerogatiue of Right of Appeale from Africke to Rome Than which what can be a more euident Discouery of the Falsehood of your Article Wee conclude Either must 600. Bishops in the Councell of Chalcedon 87. Bishops in the Councell of Carthage 60. in the Councell of Mileuis 217. in the Councell of Africke and among them Saint Cyprian Saint Augustin who All may seeme to haue conspired to pull downe this great Pinacle of the Romanâ— Babel and principall part of her Article of Catholike Iurisdiction bee iudged depriued of Saluation or else must wee say and professe Cursed is this your Article of The Catholike Romane Church without which there is no Saluation And now haue we finished the Consideration of the Romane Church after her first Foundation in the Ancient ages thereof within the compasse of the First Six hundred years after Christ and Antiquity in Doctrine you know is of all humane proofs the best Argument for Christian Resolution This Treatise would grow into a vast Volume if we should proceed throughout all former Successiue ages we therefore rather choose for breuitie-sake to hasten to the Consideration of the Later ages of the Church CHAP. XIV Our Fourth Generall Consideration is of the Churches Catholike in the Last ages thereof manifesting thereby the Impietie of your Article The Romane Catholike Church without which there is no Saluation BY this Consideration wee shall be occasioned to giue Instances in diuers Christian Churches which professe not either that Subiection or else that Vnion with the Pope or Church of Rome as your Article viz. The Romane Catholike Church c. doth exact These Instances are of Three kinds 1. In Churches of Nations Remote from the Church of Rome 2. In Churches of neerer Countries wherein are the Churches of Protestants 3. In the Romane Church it selfe Our First Instance concerning Remote Churches not Subiect nor vnited to Rome is in the Greeke Church SECT 1. BVt First be it knowne vnto you that there are Foure Patriarkships Christian at this day dis-united from Rome to wit Constantinople Antioch Alexandria and Ierusalem the Patriarkes whereof haue of later Times their Ancient Patriarchall stile as thus Hieremias by the mercie of God Arch-Bishop of Constantinople Oecumenicall Patriarch Michael by the Mercy of God Patriarch of Great Theopolis or Antiochia Ioachim by the Mercy of God Patriarch of the Great Citie of Alexandria Sophronius by the Mercie of God Patriarch of Ierusalem and all Palaestina Whatsoeuer Christians are vnder these Patriarkships or in other remote Nations and haue not ruinated any Fundamentall Article of sauing Truth set downe in our ancient Creeds and are vnited vnto the true Catholike Head Christ Iesus our Lord by a liuing Faith all Protestants esteeme Them as true members of the Catholike Church and notwithstanding diuers their more tolerable Errors and superstitions to be in the state of Saluation albeit no-way subiect or Subordinate to the Romane Church And from this Generall Consideration wee descend vnto our Particular Instances For our more expedite passage and your expert apprehension of the Validitie of this Instance wee shall Methodically lay downe before you Fiue obseruable points First the Continuance of the No-Subiection of the Greeke Church to the Romane Secondly the Dis-union and Opposition thereof vnto this day Thirdly the Estimation which is to be had of it in respect of their Religion notwithstanding their said Dis-union from Rome Fourthly the extent of the said Greeke Church shewing the innumerable Multitudes of them and Lastly vpon these Premises a Manifestation by way of Challenge and discouery of the Iniquitie of your now Romane Article which pronounceth Damnation vpon all such as professe not Subiestion and Vnion with the Church of Rome I. The Continuance of the No-Subiection of the Greeke Church to Rome SECT 2. BEsides all that which hath bin copiously already deliuered concerning the Greek Church we shal in this place rest much vpon your Confessions Wherefore wee would First demand of you how many yeares you thinke the Church of Greece hath bin diuided from the Church of Rome as a Church distinct and not subiect to the Iurisdiction thereof Some of you indefinitely set downe Many Hundreds of yeares Whereas your Cardinall more precisely doth although in his indignation note how the Greeke Church opposed it selfe to the Latine in the yeare 381. in a Generall Councell wherein contrary to the likeing of the Pope of Rome a Hundred and Fiftie Bishops constituted a Patriarke of Constantinople and placed him next to the Bishop of Rome And being not content with this saith hee in the yeare 451. in the Fourth Generall Councell of Chalcedon by the Consent of Six hundred Bishops they endeuored to make the Patriarke of Constantinople equall with the Bishop of Rome in the Priuiledges of his Patriarkship All this argueth no Subiection of the Greeke Church vnto Rome And albeit some would scrape acquaintance with the Greek Church in the yeere 1549 at the Councell of Florence as though all then had become Subiects to the Pope yet vpon due examination you your selues finde the Grecians there to haue beene so farre from Subiection to the Pope that They would not permit him to constitute a Patriarch among them professing that they could doe nothing without the consent of their owne Church And as farre were they from Subiecting themselues in Doctrine for when some few points were propounded the Greekes answered the
the Romane Church which boasteth her selfe to be the Mistresse of all Churches and Iudge of all matters of Faith is not after a Thousand Six hundred yeares fully assured whether Comparison being made betweene her Pope and her selfe Hic or Haec Hee or Shee be the Supreme Iudge When then and how will you resolue in this so principall a Case must the Scales still stand euen that neither of them shall ouer-poise Not so for you teach if One as your fore-man may speake for you all that Although this case haue not beene decided by any absolute Decree yet it is defined saith hee by the tacit and secret censent of the Doctors of the Church scarce any one Diuine holding any other opinion herein than that which before that of late this Controuersie was moued was anciently in force namely that the Pope is aboue a Councell as the Head is aboue the Body As if he should say Sirs if the Question be whether Iohn an Oake or Iohn a Stile be heire to that Land because the Witnesses conceale their meaning without question they by a tacit Consent are for the Complainant that Iohn an Oake must carry the Land O Quacksaluer Consider you not now that the Subiect of all this Dispute is The Catholike Visible Church whose Consent likewise is to be discerned onely by Visible Characters whether it be by word or by writing And are you now come to this passe as that in a Cause of so great moment you must depend vpon the iudgement of the Tacit Consent of your Doctors Wee doe not therefore maruell why they must needes be blinde Guides who themselues haue no better Direction than dumbe Iudges All other Christian Churches in the world stand for the Authoritie of a Generall Councell against whatsoeuer Pope which the Cause of your Pope hauing now bin heard we are to proue from the Romane Church it selfe That the Romane Church is rather Iudge than the Romane Pope in all Causes of that Church by the publike Decree of the same Church in it selfe First in the Councell of Constance SECT 18. IN the yeare of Christ our Lord 1415. was celebrated the Councell of Constance in Germanie a place then most fit consisting as you know of almost a Thousand Fathers whereof more then Three hundred were Bishops This Synod with an Inprimis beginneth with this Article The Holy Synod inspired with the Holy Ghost being lawfully assembled making vp a Generall Councell which representeth the whole Catholike Church hath immediate power from Christ whereunto euery state and condition be it the Papall or whatsoeuer is bound to obey in all things which concerne either Faith or Generall reformation of the Church whether in the Head or Members thereof Thus farre that Councell which was expresly confirmed by Pope Martin to be held Inuiolable in matter of Faith CHALLENGE TEll vs now whether euer the Church of Rome had a Councell more ample for multitude of Fathers being almost a Thousand whether euer any Councell could assume more Infallibilitie to it selfe than to be congregated by the Holy Ghost thereby making her Degrees Authenticall or whether euer any Councell could Derogate more from the Papall Power as it is now beleeued and Attributed to your Popes than to subiect him to the Determination of a Councell in matters both of Direction in Faith and Reformation of manners or can any of you require a more fundamentall reason thereof than that which is intimated in the Decree it selfe saying that The Councell hath its Authoritie immediately from Christ The meaning whereof is as you are taught that the Popes Authoritie is not of Diuine but onely of Humane Institution or Lastly can you expect a stronger confirmation of all this than is the Ratification thereof by the then Lawfull Pope Now then for now wee are come to our conflict by Comparison If as your Cardinall and others answer The Pope confirmed other matters of Faith decreed in that Councell but would not ratifie this Decree as being so derogatiue to his Headship and supreme Iudicature then behold that which wee assumed to proue as great a Difference betweene that Assembly of Fathers which was as much the Representatiue Body of the Romane Church as any can be named Whence it must as well follow that your Pope if hee had hereupon Excommunicated the Fathers of that Councell had bin a Schismatike as it doth follow that diuiding himselfe from their Decree hee could by your Romane Principles be no lesse than an Haeretike For the Decree is peremptorie as a matter of Faith the Reason they gaue was concluded against the Pope namely that the Pope of Rome is not Head of the Church by any Diuine Ordinance euen as a Thousand yeares before this the Fathers of the Councell of Chalcedon anciently beleeued Another like Example in the Councell of Basil. SECT 19. IN the yeare 1431. there was a Councell gathered at Basil by the Authoritie of Pope Martin the Fift and after confirmed by Eugenius wherein were 90. Fathers who hauing confirmed the Decrees of the Councell of Constance whereby the Pope is made subiect vnto a Councell and the Censure thereof now at the length Pope Eugenius perceiuing they held this course will needes dissolue the Councell and translate it to Florence The Councell it selfe withstandeth this and Commandeth the contrary shewing thereby that The Pope sought nothing but by abrogating of Councels the destruction of the Church Therefore they fairely suspend the Pope and in the end according to the iudgement of the Councell of Constance they Decree as an Vniuersall Truth that the Pope hath no Authoritie aboue a Councell nor power of himselfe to dissolue it which truth whosoeuer say they shall obstinately contradict is to be iudged an Heretike So They. Will you now see the Pope and the Councell grapple together The Councell hath suspended the Pope and iudgeth him no better than a Schismatike The Pope pronounceth the Fathers of the Councell Schismatikes Separated from the Mother Church of Rome meaning the Conclaue of some Cardinals at Rome and the Head thereof for the space of seauen yeares last past The Councell answereth saying What will the Pope then damne for Schismatikes all the Cardinals Bishops and the Emperour himselfe with Kings and Princes there present yea and the whole Church which doth approue of this Councell In the end to end the fray The Pope saith the Councell did yeeld to the Admonition made vnto him of not dissoluing the Councell Here is presented before you the Romane Head and in the Opinion of the Fathers of that Councell the Catholike Bodie of the Romane Church in a Distraction and Separation either from the other for Seauen yeares space As for the Popes Pretence of his Romane Church which were but a few Domesticall Cardinals the Councell did not accompt them worthy the name of the Members of the Church This being
did as one that had bene freed take another wife by the authority of the Church and consent of her Parents by which wife after some yeares he had children But loe his former wife vnlooked for returneth againe and requireth to haue her husband againe that had done ill in marrying another The man maruailing hereat and being loath to be diuorced from his latter wife maketh long delaies yet at length brought into Law and being cast gaue way to the Truth and taketh his first wife againe by the iudgement of the Church When now the Parents friends of the latter wife made the like wonderment as these men do against me saying vnto him thou hel-hound thou wicked couenāt-breaker c. And if a man would consider this businesse shall he not see as it were in a glasse the very image of that Husband in me For indeed I seeing I beleeued that no such Truth of obedience had bene c. I compelled my selfe in a second Couenant and thereto plighted my troth Wherefore I thought that I had kept lawfull Companie but when the TRVTH came which is euery mans first wife maried to him in publike Baptisme which wil require the first Promise at al mens hands to her I applyed to her I cleaued and from my second knot as of none effect by the iudgement of my Church I departed And shall any man thinke it indifferent that I shall be called a Liar because I obey the Truth c. I am by most graue iudgement of the Truth diuorced from the Church of Rome which it was not lawfull for me to keepe still and am compelled to take my wife TRVTH to me when she cometh againe Thus farre B. Gardiner The right and accurate Sence of this Similitude may as the beames of the Sunne dispell the foggie myst of Romish error concerning the Question we now haue in hand it being taken from the consideration of our Christian Vow made in Baptisme Wherein we are to obserue the Parties betrothed together which are the Soule of a Christian and the Truth of God in Christ and secondly the Parties and if I may so say Parents by whose consent and Authoritie this mariage is made which in the inward is our Father euen GOD in the vnity of Three persons Father Sonne and holy Ghost and in the outward is our spirituall Mother mentioned in our Creed at the rime of our Vow in Baptisme The holy Catholike Church It especially therefore concerneth euery Votarie that hath vowed himselfe in Baptisme to learne to acknowledge his true Father his true Mother and his owne true Wife For Father he is baptized in the name of the Blessed Trinitie in the vnity of one God euerlasting not in the name of any man whatsoeuer as Saint Paul prooueth against the Schismatikes in the Church of Corinth that would seeme Some to hold of Cephas that is Peter Some of Paul as though the Gospell or Truth were Pauls or Peters he answereth them No his Reason is interrogatiuely Were you baptized in the name of Paul As much as to say He onely is essentially your spirituall Father in whose Name you are baptized Secondly the Mother is mentioned in our Vow at Baptisme to be The holy Catholike or Vniuersall Church not any particular Church though by the particular Church I am brought into the Catholike We say not any Particular Church because euery Particular Church as hath beene Confessed may possibly erre and Apostate from Truth But the Catholike is built vpon a Rocke immoueable as the earth yea or the highest heauens Lastly the Wife whereunto euery Soule is betroathed in Baptisme is onely that Truth which was first reuealed by Christ vnto his Apostles as the Apostle teacheth If any preach any other Gospell than that which you haue receiued that is to say already hold him Accursed Now giue vs leaue to trie what kind of Mariage is made by your Votaries in the Church of Rome First by beleeuing the Infallibility of the Pope in whatsoeuer Reuelations which he shall propound to be beleeued of all Christians it is to assume a new Father which is thus prooued If I saith Saint Paul or an Angel from heauen preach otherwise let him be Accursed but who in all the Church of Rome will say Though the Pope teach vs otherwise then was Apostolically and Primitiuely taught from the immediate Doctrine of Christ I shall account him Anathema Next the Partie baptized in your Church is Catechized to beleeue the Church of Rome to be The Catholike and Mother-Church of all other Churches which wee through-out this Treatise haue prooued to be an Imposterous Schismaticall and Blasphemous Article First Imposterous because The Catholike Church mentioned in the Apostles Creed was extant in the dayes of the Apostles diuerse yeares before Rome was that we may so say Baptized to haue the name of a Church Secondly Schismaticall because it being as hath bene shewed but a Particular Church and vsurping the Title of The Catholike Church doth thereby peremptorily diuide her selfe from All other Churches of Christ which both for Truth and Extent make a farre more Catholike Church than she is Thirdly Blasphemous in Damning by this Article of the Catholike Romane Church all the most glorious Christian Fathers Martyrs Professors and Churches as well Primitiue as Successiue which are infinite that haue denyed Subiection to the Romane Church All which Particulars haue bene prooued at large In the last place each Christian in Baptisme being espoused to his wife Truth which can be but One euen that whereof Saint Paul spoke saying That which you haue receiued before and accordingly Saint Iude Contend for the Faith which once was deliuered to the Saints therefore euery other New Article of Faith as it were a later Consort and wife that shall bee admitted is no true loyall wife but an vnlawfull Concubine and strumpet So then so many Concubines may the Church of Rome be said to betroath her Children vnto as she hath set downe New Articles in her Romane Creed and imposed vpon all her Ecclesiastikes vnder the bond of an Oath Among which is your Article of Indulgences from which as from a supposititious wife Luther necessarily made his diuorce returning vnto the Primitiue Truth whereunto in holy Baptisme he had formerly plighted his Troth THESIS VI. Your Second and most Popular Obiection against LVTHER in his Opposition to your Romane Church vrging in him to prooue his Doctrine by immediate Succession and by Naming his Teachers Before him is as fond as the other SECT 19. I. FOr the no-Necessitie of Name we reade first that our Sauiour Christ answering a question concerning Diuorce whether it were lawfull for the husband to put away his wife at his pleasure or no an Abuse which by the hardnesse of the Iewes hearts had continued among them many hundred yeares sendeth them to Gods first Institution of Marriage set downe in the beginning of Scripture saying From the beginning it