him Secondly Christ saith Simon louest thou me more then these Why doth he examine him of his loue more then the rest but that he intended him more authoritie I answer to make him see his fault who hauing lately vndertooke more then all euen to die with him though all should forsake him yet when it came to triall performed lesse then any denying him thrise which none else did And possible also to let him know his sinne was pardoned x Luc. 7.47 because more is forgiuen to him that loueth more Thirdly he not onely examineth him of his loue but also thereby draweth out of him a feruent confession of it I answer this he did also in regard of his former sinne y Isid Pelusiot l. 1. Ep. 103. by a threefold confession to heale his threefold deniall and to assure his fellow disciples of his repentance and to shew by his example how deare the loue of Christ should be to them that meddle with feeding Christs flocke Fourthly he biddeth him Feed and feeding is Ruling with fulnesse of power I answer he biddeth him feed his sheepe and lambes which are the people and not the Apostles properly which proueth that feeding hath no such meaning Besides feeding signifieth ruling not euery way but in such maner as appertaineth to the persons that do feed And therefore in kings it is to rule with fulnesse of power but in Pastors with the word and discipline onely as appeareth by this that all Bishops and teachers are called z Eph 4.11 Pastors and bidden a Ier. 3.15 Ezec 34 Act. 20.28 1. Pet. 5.1 feede the flocke of Christ and yet no man thinketh they are made Popes thereby Lastly Peter is bidden Feed the sheepe the Apostles are a part of Christs sheep therefore he must feed them I answer this is granted but then feeding signifieth no more but edifying by word and example and so as Peter must feed the Apostles the Apostles must feed him againe by the same commandement of Christ b Marc. 16. that bade them preach the Gospell to euery creature as c Gal. 2. Paul fed him at Antioch by reproofe And whereas some vrge that the sheepe signifie the vniuersall Church because Christ saith not these are those sheepe in particular but my sheeepe in generall and so Peter is set ouer the vniuersall Church this is but a speculation for if the Church be strained into so wide a signification he could not feed it because he could feed no more then that part which was in his time or followed after him wherein the other Apostles fed in community with him and feeding was not Poping Thus we see that vnlesse the Papists may be allowed to racke the words of Scripture beyond all compasse of ordinary vnderstanding and bring to them the sence which they should fetch from them there is nothing in all the Bible sufficient to vphold any part of that wherein they are so confident § 37. So that this difference may be assigned betweene any sort of heretickes and the Romane Church that they are a companie not vnited among themselues by anie linke which is able to containe and continue them in the vnitie of faith whereas the Romane Church is as S. Cyprian speaketh Plebs sacerdoti adunata grex pastori suo adhaerens A people conioyned to their priest and a flocke cleauing to their chiefe Pastor Whom whilest it heareth as it is bound to do it is vnpossible but it should retaine vnitie of faith Like contrarie according to the saying of the same S. Cyprian lib. 1. epist 5. ad Cornel. contra Haeret. Non aliunde haereses obortae sunt aut nata schismata quà m inde quòd Sacerdoti non obtemperatur nec vnus in Ecclesia ad tempus sacerdos vnus iudex vice Christi cogitatur Nor from any other roote haue heresies and schismes sprong vp but from this that men do not obey the priest of God neither do they consider how that in the Church there is one Priest and one iudge for the time in stead of Christ The Answer 1 How well the Romane Church is linked together I haue said in the former section and therefore if the Iesuit will assigne a difference betweene it and heretickes which will be the same that is betweene fish and herrings he must do it by somthing else then by their vnitie wherunto Saint Cyprian giueth no testimony in the words alledged but that it pleased the Iesuite thereby to impose vpon his ignorant reader For first he speaketh not in any of both places concerning the Church of Rome but of euery part of the Church whersoeuer saith It is a company adhering to their Pastour c. Next by this one Pastor and iudge whereto the Church adhereth he meaneth not the Bishop of Rome ouer all the world for himselfe dissented from him in the cause of appeales and rebaptization but euery Bishop in his owne circuit Thirdly supposing he had conceited the Pope and by these words immediatly meant him yet what is that to the Pope now who is degenerate into another creature then at that time he was whereby it cometh to passe that many good things might be said of him then that cannot now and of his Church then which since that time are perished 2 But the truth is that saying the Church is a people cleauing to their Priest he meaneth it not of al Gods Church cleauing to the Pope but of euery particular Church obeying their Pastour according to Saint Pauls admonition a Heb. 13.17 Obey and submit your selues to such as haue the ouersight of you And the want hereof he saith is the roote of schisme not the dissenting from the Pope And this is proued to be his meaning because in b Lib. 4. Ep. 9. ad Florent another Epistle he hath the same words applying them to himselfe and complaining thereby that some had vnderhand refused him and communicated with others For the Nouatians at Carthage in a schisme had made them a Bishop of their owne and written to the Church of Rome falsly that he was lawfully elected the which being against the custome and peace of the Church moued him to vrge as you see the vnitie of one Bishop and to defend the Church-gouernment of that time c Hiero. comment in Tit c. 1. Chrysost hom 1 ad Philipp which was to haue but one Bishop in one citie Hence proceed his words touching euery Bishop in his owne place as the Iesuite hath alledged them Whereby you see how wel he proueth the vnitie of his Church and authoritie of his Pope euen as well as if a man should make that proper to the Bishop of Rome and his Church which appertaineth to euery Bishop and euery Church and expound that of the supremacie which importeth no more but ordinary gouernment vsed by Pastors in their owne charge This kinde of disputing is called inclosing of commons § 38. Secondly the Protestants Church is
And Tertullian lib. de praescript And Optatus lib. 2. contra Parmen The Answer 1 The ancient Fathers affirme not one word of all this First they affirme not that the Romane Church was then gouerned by Popes as now it is For they saw not how it is gouerned now and therefore could not affirme it And that it was not in their time thus gouerned I haue shewed Digression 27. and 49. num 6. and 51. num 9. The Bishops of Rome in their time I graunt were called Popes and Occumenicall as a Ep. Arsen apud Athan. apol 2. Basil ep 52. Iustin Nouell 3. 5. in tit Balsam respons in iure Graecorsi Ioan. Aquipont de Antichr p. 107. other Bishops also were but they had no such authoritie as now they vsurpe Their owne b Concord l. 2. c. 12. Cusanus may teach them that he is gotten beyond the ancient obseruations not hauing that power belonging to him which certaine flatterers giue him And Duarenus a Papist likewise yet c De sacris eccles benef l. 1. c. 16. confesseth as much as I say that Phocas made him the vniuersall Bishop which authority his successors haue maruellously increased 2 Next albeit they affirme the Church of Rome to be the lawfull and Apostolike Church yet they affirmed not the present Romane Church which they neuer saw so to be He that affirmed Lais to be a virgine when she was ten yeares old did not say she was so at tweÌ„tie Rome since their death hath plaied the whore and lost that name and reputation which the fathers had of her Which answereth all the places cited out of Irenaeus Austine Ambrose Hierome and Cyprian For calling Rome the Apostolike Church they spake of their owne time and not of ours 3 Thirdly they do not affirme the Romane Church in their dayes to be lawfull and Apostolike for no other reason but because it had a lineall succession from the primitiue Church but as I haue answered d Sect. 53. n. 2. inde before because it had withall the succession of doctrine which the present Papacie hath not Neither did they thinke that therefore it had succession of doctrine because it had succession of Priests as if the former must needs be inseparably ioyned with the later For their words expresse no such thing as I haue shewed They reuoke schismatickes to the succession indeed of the Romane Church as they did likewise of others and obiect it against them but not it alone nor so as they would assume all succession for euer to be ioyned with the true faith though then in the Churches named it was Neither did they beleeue the Priests whom they so called to be sacrificers or Massing Priests They vsed the name but they gaue it not the definition which the Church of Rome now vseth Vpon all which it followeth that the ancient fathers affirmed not the Romane Church at this day to be the true Apostolicke Church though you see into the places cited an hundred times the which are answered Sect. 53. principally for this cause that the reasons whereupon they so commended it then hold not now in our dayes as they did in theirs If our aduersaries will take benefite by that which the fathers say in commendation of the Romane Church in their dayes they must proue their succession as inuiolated and their doctrine as sound as then it was which they can neuer do § 57. Now to make an end considering all this which I haue said and proued to wit that there is but one infallible and entire faith the which is necessarie to saluation to all sorts of men the which faith euerie one must learne by some knowne infallible and vniueâ—sall rule accommodate to the capacitie of euerie one the which rule can be no other but the doctrine and teaching of the true Church which Church is alway to continue visible to the worlds end and is to be knowne by these foure markes aforesaid agreeing onely to the Romane Church whereupon it followeth that it only is the true Church of which euery one must learne that faith which is necessarie to saluation considering I say all this I would demaund of the Protestants who will not admit the authoritie or doctrine of the Church how they can perswade themselues to haue that faith whereby they may be saued or by what right they can chalenge vnto themselues the title of the true Church since as I now haue proued they haue neuer a one of these foure markes which by the common consent of all are the true markes of Christs true Church How can theirs be the true Church which neither is one because it hath no meanes to keepe it in vnitie nor holy because neither was there euer man of it which by miracle or by some other vndoubted testimonie can be proued to be truly holy Neither is their doctrine such as those that most purely obserue it do without faile become holy nor catholike because it teacheth not all true things which haue bin held in former times but denieth many of them Neither is it spread ouer all the Christian world but euery particular sect is contained in some few corners therof neither hath it bene euer since Christ but sprong vp of late the first founder being Martin Luther an apostata Frier a man after his apostasie knowne both by his writings words and deeds and maner of his death to haue bene a notable euill liuer nor Apostolike because the preachers thereof cannot deriue their pedegree lineally without interruption from anie Apostle but are forced to begin their line if they will haue anie from Luther or Caluin or some later How can they then bragge that they only haue the true holy Catholike and Apostolike faith Since this is not found but only in the true holy Catholike Apostolike Church and remaining alwayes as S Augustine said in ventre Ecclesiae in the bellie of the Church It is vnpossible that they which are not of this Church should haue the true faith according to the saying of the same Augustin afore cited Quisquis ab hoc ventre separatus est necesse est vt falsa loquatur whosoeuer is separated from this bellie of the Church he must needs speake false For who can once haue true faith vnlesse he first heare it because fides est ex auditu Rom. 10. Faith cometh of hearing But how can one heare it sine praedicante without one to preach it truly vnto him The Answer 1 That which the Iesuite hath said and proued is granted him to wit that there is indeed but one true faith which is necessarie to saluation to all sorts of men the which as it must so it may be learned by that rule which God hath left infallible vniuersall and accommodate to the capacitie of euery one the which rule is the Scriptures contained in the bookes of the old and new Testament and not that which the Iesuit meaneth by the doctrine and teaching of the
Romish multitude and though their persons were not the rule yet when they followed that which is the rule we beleeued them § 13. The fourth and last conclusion of this question is that this infallible rule which we ought obediently to follow in all points of faith is the doctrine and teaching faith and beliefe of the true Church This I proue Because to this agree all the conditions which I said to be requisite in the rule of faith First this is a thing infallible as shal be proued Secondly it is a thing easie to be knowne Thirdly it is such a thing as may vniuersally resolue and determine vs in all questions and doubts and instruct all sorts of men in all points of faith And consequently whosoeuer will obediently yeeld assent to this rule in all points as we all professe in our Creed saying Credo Ecclesiam catholicam shall not erre in anie point That these three conditions of the rule of faith agree to the doctrine and teaching of the vniuersall or catholike Church I proue The Answer 1 We would not stand with the Iesuite about this conclusion but freely grant it if no more were meant thereby then the words make shew of that the doctrine and faith of the vniuersall Church is the rule of faith For that doctrine is onely the contents of the Scripture which we yeeld to be the rule For a In 1. Ep. Ioh. tract 3. Austin saith Our mother the Church giueth her children milk out of her two brests the old and new Testament But he hath a further reach and meaneth a higher matter First that the Churches word and authoritie is the rule without referring the same to the Scripture Secondly that the Church of Rome is this true and vniuersall Church Thirdly that all the authoritie and efficacy therof is in the Pope alone This is the plaine English of the conclusion howsoeuer the words be faire and cleanely and the Iesuite defending it must shew all the properties of the rule to appertaine to the present Church and Pope of Rome or else he doth but trifle and spend time Digression 16. Shewing how the Papists pretending at euerie word the Catholicke Church meane nothing thereby but the Popes determination 2 First howsoeuer these words be tollerable the doctrine teaching faith and beliefe of the true Church is the infallible rule in all points to be followed yet the Popish meaning is absurd that whatsoeuer the Church teacheth though it be not contained in the Bible must be accepted as matter of faith and that vpon her owne authoritie Yet thus they hold as I haue b Digress 1. c. 6.9 shewed and may further be perceiued by the Iesuites words in this section Whosoeuer will yeeld assent to the Church in all points as we professe in our Creed saying I beleeue the Catholicke Church shall not erre in any point Which words of the Creed meaning no more but c Ruffin expos Symbo that we beleeue there is one holy Catholicke Church whereof our selues are members he expoundeth of yeelding assent in all points to it which exposition may be further vnderstood by that which d Staplet def eccles potest adu Whitak l. 1. cap 9. Rhem. annot 1. Tim. 3.15 Bristo dem 44. other Papists say more fully I beleeue the Catholicke Church the literall sence whereof is that thou beleeuest whatsoeuer the Catholicke Church holdeth and teacheth are to be beleeued Which exposition is a glosse beside the text And yet this is tollerable in comparison of the next 3 For hauing deuolued all power ouer to the Church in the next place they define this Church to be the Romane company For e Mot. 12. in marg Bristo saith The Romane Church is the Catholicke Church and f Annot. Rom. 1 8. idem B. roÌ„ Annal. tom 1. an 58. nu 49. See Posseu bibl select lib. 4. c. 13. â— Interdum quoqueâ—aud sâ—â—iâ— the Rhemists The Catholicke and Romane faith is all one Wherein their meaning is to win authoritie to the Romish faction perswading men there is no saluation but in that religion and making roome for themselues in all those places of Scripture which commend vnto vs the Catholicke Church of Christ Which is a iest so grosse that it deserueth to be smiled at rather then confuted And yet it stayeth not here neither but goeth a degree further which me thinketh is a note aboue éla 4 For as they take all authoritie and sufficiency from the Scripture and giue it the Church so all the Churches authoritie they giue to the Pope So saith Gregory of Valence g Dispuâ— theo tom 3 â—isp 1. â—u 1. punct 1. p. 24. Item Cater 22 q. 1. art 9. 10. Dom. Ban ibid. apud D. Tho nam Pro eodem omnino reputatur authoritas Ecclesiae vniuersalis authoritas concilij authoritas sum mi pontificis By the Church we meane her head that is to say the Romane Bishop h Analys fidei pag. 136. In whom resideth that full authoritie of the Church when he pleaseth to determine matters of faith whether he do it with a Councell or without Thomas saith i 22. q 1. art 10. The making of a new Creed belongeth to the Pope as all other things do which belong to the whole Church k 22. qu 1 â— art 2.3 Yea the whole authoritie of the vniuersall Church abideth in him l Defens fid Triâ—ent lib. 2. Andradius saith All power to interpret the Scripture and reueale the hidden mysteries of our religioÌ„ is giuen from heauen to the Popes and their Councels Yea m Decis aur cas part 2 l. 2. c 7 nu 40 saith Graffius The common opinion is he may do it without them And so n De Christ l. 2 c. 28. saith Bellarmine Himselfe without any Councell may decree matters of faith And o Sum Syluest verbo fides nu 2. Syluester The power of the Catholicke Church remaineth all in him And p De Planctu Eccl. lib. 1. artic 6. Aluarus Pelagius We are bound to stand to his iudgement alone rather then to the iudgement of all the world beside And the canon Law saith q In Sext. extt. Ioh. 22 tit 14 c. cum inter in gloss It were heresie to thinke our Lord God the Pope might not decree as he doth r Dist 19. in Canonicis glos ibid. Yea his rescripts and decretall Epistles are canonicall Scripture Stapleton Å¿ Praefat. Princip fidei doctrinal saith The foundation of our religion is of necessitie placed vpon the authoritie of this mans teaching in which we heare God himselfe speaking And finally the Iesuite himselfe t §. hereafter saith All Catholicke men must necessarily submit their iudgement and opinions either in expounding the Scripture or otherwise to the censure of the Apostolicke seate and God hath bound his Church to heare the chiefe Pastor in all points By all which we see what is
5 when he said I would not beleeue the Gospell vnlesse the authoritie of the Church did moue me For though the testimonie of the Church by reason of mens infirmitie afore they beleeue be requisite to draw them on to consent to the Scriptures as children afore they can go hold themselues by the side of a stoole and so learne to go yet is not the credite of the Church or authority of men the thing whereby we know and distinguish the Scripture from other writings but the authoritie of Gods spirit is it that by the help of the Church worketh faith in vs. Digression 19. Touching the place of S. August cont epist. fundam cap. 5. and the matter which the Papists gather from it 4 The Papists haue a principle among them that the Scriptures receiue all their authoritie from the Church meaning thereby g Rhem. Gal. 6.2 that they are not knowne to be true neither are Christians bound to receiue them without the attestation of the Church h Ioan. de Turrecr suê‘ dist 9. Noli meis nu 4. Which testimonie declareth vnto vs which be the Scriptures and which not i Baron annal tom 1. an 53. nu 11. so that by the tradition of the Church all the Gospel receiueth his authority and is built therupon as vpon a foundatioÌ„ and cannot subsist without it Yea k Bosius de sign eccl tom 2 pag. 439. some of them write that the Scripture is not to be reckoned among such * Principia principles as before all things are to be credited but it is proued confirmed by the church * Quasi per quoddam principium as by a certain principle which hath autority to reiect allow Scripture And l D. Standish Treat of the Script c. 6. probat 3. a countriman of ours hath left written that in three points the authoritie of the Church is aboue the authoritie of the Scripture The second is for that the Church receiued the Gospel of Luke and Marke and did reiect the Gospels made by his high Apostles Thomas and Bartlemew The which speeches of theirs when the Papists haue expounded how they can yet this will be the vpshot that in all discourses concerning religion the last resolution of our faith shall be into the Churches authoritie 5 For confirmation whereof they bring you see this of Austine I would not haue beleeued the Gospel vnlesse the Churches authority moued me In which words he speaketh of the time past afore he was conuerted and according to the phrase of his countrey putteth the preterimperfect tense for the preterpluperfect tense meaning thus I had not now beleeued the Gospell and bene a Christian but that the Church by her reasons perswaded me thereunto speaking onely of the practise of Christians who by their perswasions conuert many to the Gospell And that he speaketh of the time pâ—st when he was an vnbeleeuer it is plain not onely by viewing the place but by the testimonie of a learned Papist m Can loc l. 2. c. 8. pag. 34. who saith Austine had to do with a Manichee who would haue a certaine Gospell of his owne without controuersie admitted therefore Austine asketh what they will do if they chance to meet with one * Qui ne Euangelio quidem credat which beleeueth not the Gospell and by what arguments they will draw him into their opinion n Certè se affirmat non aliter potuisse adduci vt Euangeliâ—m amplectâ—retâ—â— quà m Ecclesiae authoritate victum Verily he affirmeth that â—e for his part could not otherwise be drawne to embrace the Gospel but being ouercome with the authorie of the Church therefore he doth not teach that the credite of the Gospell is founded on the Churches authoritie Whereby it is plaine that Austine propoundeth himselfe as an instance of one that beleeueth not which he could not be when he wrote this but by speaking of the time past And though it were throughly proued that he spake of himselfe being a Christian and in that estate said he would not beleeue the Gospell vnlesse the authoritie of the Church moued him yet were it not proued hereby that he meant the present Church as it runneth from time to time or the Church of Rome or any other place as it now standeth For if some Papists misse it not he meant the Church which was in the Apostles times which saw Christs miracles and heard his preaching Durand o 3. d. 24. q. 1. in litera o. saith That which is spoken concerning the approbation of the Scripture by the Church is meant onely of that Church which was in the Apostles time Of the same mind are p Dried de var. dogm l. 4. c. 4. Gers de vita anima Occham dial l. 1. part 1. c 4. others whereby he may see that Austine giueth a kind of authoritie to the Church but it is not that Church which should serue his turne Neither is the authoritie giuen large enough to reach the Popish conceit or the Iesuites conclusion if we had not the testimony of the Church we could not be infallibly sure that there were any Gospell at all nor know these bookes to be Scripture for Canus a Doctor of his owne q Vbi supra confesseth I do not beleeue that the Euangelist saith true because the Church telleth me he saith true but because God hath reuealed it And r Triplicat incho 〈◊〉 uers Whitak in Admon Stapleton The inward testimonie of the spirit is so effectuall for the beleeuing of any point of faith that by it alone any matter may be beleeued though the Church hold her peace or be neuer heard And Å¿ Comment theol tom 3. pag. 31 Gregorie of Valence The reuelation of the Scripture is beleeued not vpon the credit of any other reuelation but for it selfe And t qâ—â— Sent. 1 q. 1. art 3. pag 50. liâ—eta C. â—â—ce Greg. Arimin prolog n sent q. 1. art 3. pag. 4. Cardinall Cameracensis The verities contained in the Canon of the Bible onely are the principles and foundation of Diuinitie and receiue not their authority by other things whereby they may be demonstrated And therefore this testimonie of Austine proueth not that he beleeued the Gospel through the Churches authoritie as by a Theologicall principle whereby the Gospel might be proued true but onely as it were by a cause mouing him to credite it as if he should say I would not beleeue the Gospell vnlesse the holinesse of the Church or Christs miracles did moue me In which saying though some cause of his beleeuing the Gosp ll be assigned yet u Compare this wâ—â— the place of Bozius alledged in the beginning of this Digress letter a. no former principle is touched whose credite might be the cause why the Gospell should be beleeued These speeches of our very aduersaries which the truth it selfe hath wroong from them deserue to be obserued the more because
faith The Answer 1 The Iesuite hauing immediatly before propounded the vnitie of his Romane Church affirming that therein onely the vnitie of faith and concord of the learned is to be found now proceedeth to proue it by shewing the meanes which they haue for the preuenting of discord which he thinketh so all-sufficient that it were impossible there should be any dissention among them The summe of that which he saith is briefly this They which acknowledge one chiefe Pastor to wit the Pope to whose definitiue sentence in all matters they submit themselues cannot possibly dissent But all Catholickes acknowledge this chiefe Pastor and submit themselues to his definitiue sentence Therefore how is it possible they should dissent The second proposition he assumeth as granted though indeed it be vntrue as I will shew the first he proueth thus They cannot dissent who submit themselues to him that hath authoritie and infallibilitie of iudgement But the Pope hath this authoritie and infallibilitie Therefore they which submit themselues to the Pope cannot dissent The second proposition he confirmeth thus We know that to S. Peter and his successors Christ promised the keyes and sayd vpon them as vpon a rocke he would build his Church praying for them that their faith should not faile and bidding them strengthen their brethren and feede his sheepe which importeth this authoritie in ruling and infallibilit it in iudging But the Pope is S. Peters successor The Pope therefore hath this authoritie and infallibilitie This being the summe of his discourse I answer first to that which he assumeth so confidently that all Catholicke men submit themselues to the Popes definitions acknowledging the same to be of infallible truth For whatsoeuer his authoritie and iudgement be yet the Catholickes do not so vniformly as the Iesuite pretendeth submit their opinions to him but contrariwise when occasion is offered they vtterly refuse both him and his definitions and this is so true that he which will denie it must be reputed ignorant of all sense and experience the which manifestly shew that not onely the Christian Catholicks of the Primitiue Church but the Popish Catholickes of the Romish Church this day themselues haue reiected his determinations and held opinion against him Digression 25. Wherein it is shewed that in the Primitiue Church the Popes determination was not thought an infallible truth neither did the Christians for the maintenance of vnitie submit themselues thereunto 2 For many Catholicke Bishops in those dayes dissenting from the Bishop of Rome and refusing his decrees were not thought therefore to breake any vnitie in the Church For Aeneas Syluius who was himselfe a Pope about seuen score yeares since a Epist 301. writeth that before the Councell of Nice euery man liued to himselfe and small respect was had to the Church of Rome b Sozom. l. 3. c. 8. The Bishops of the East withstood Iulius in the cause of Athanasius and charged him that he had done against the lawes of the Church c Theod l. 5. c. 23. Sozom l. 7. c. 11. Flauianus the Patriark of Antioch about his succeeding Meletius in that sea against Paulinus resisted foure Popes one after another when they would haue had him giue roome to Paulinus d Epi. ad Vrsac Valent. Germin apud Baron annal to 3. ann 357. nu 44. Liberius who was Pope in the yeare 360. confessed that Athanasius was separated from the communion of the Church of Rome Yea e Baron ibid. nu 43. 46. the Papists themselues acknowledge this Liberius condemned Athanasius and entred communion with the Arrians which sheweth against all exception that in those dayes the godly Christians did not thinke either that the Pope was the head of vnitie or that all were of the true Church that held communion with him for then the Arrians had bene good Catholickes and Athanasius with all that tooke part with him had bene hereticks which no man dareth say About the yeare 450. f Act. 16. the Councel of Chalcedon wherein were 630. Bishops withstood Leo then Pope of Rome in the question of his supremacie Concerning which matter g Concor Cathol l. 2. c. 20. pag 748. Cusanus a Cardinall beareth witnesse It is manifest saith he that Pope Leo would not in certaine points receiue the constitutions of the Chalcedon Councell specially that the Church of Constantinople should go before the Church of Alexandria but alwayes gainsaid them as some other Popes did after him and yet the decree of the Councell alwayes preuailed Which experience proueth that in those times the Bishops ouer all the world would as occasion serued refuse the Popes iudgement and yet they were counted good Catholickes for all that So likewise in the yeare 418. h Cap. 105. the sixt Councell of Carthage hauing in it 217. Bishops resisted three Popes one after another decreeing things contrary to the authoritie of the Church of Rome as i Contaré sum Concil magis illustr pag. 263. the Papists themselues expound the Councell whereof Cusanus k Vbi supra writeth thus The Councell of Affricke withstood Celestin in that he would do against the Councell of Nice and Celestin replied not that he might do it but alledged for himselfe the Councell though corrupted Which opposition made against the Pope is so apparent that many Papists indeed labour to excuse it but none denie it and l Sic vndique CarthagineÌ„ses patres constringuntur vt elabi nullo modo possint quis iam ferat crassissimae ignoâ—antiae illam vocem in tot tantis patribus vbi illa Augustini reliquorum prudentia Alan Cope dial pag 76. 77. the despitefull speeches of some Papists against S. Austine and the Bishops bewray that they discouer the same resistance made by the Councell against the Pope that I mention 3 Againe in the yeare 167. m Euseb hist l. 5. c. 23. inde Niceph. l. 4. c. 37. inde there arose a contention in the Church about the keeping of Easter whereby the Bishops of the East and West were deuided in which contention the Popes definitiue sentence was not receiued but refused without any offence against the vnitie of the Church For first Polycarpe coming to Anicetus that was Bishop of Rome in his time would not yeeld to him neither could Anicetus perswade Polycarpe to lay by his maner of obseruation n Euseb li. 5. c. 26. saith the story and yet both sides retained vnitie About thirtie yeares after the question was renewed o Cap. 25. and Victor the Bishop of Rome being earnest against the Easterne Bishops excommunicated them But this saith Eusebius pleased them not for they wrote vnto him reprouing him sharply and bitterly as namely Polycrates the bishop of Ephesus and Irenaeus the bishop of Lyons here in the West These had many on their side that stood against the Bishop of Rome and that which afterwards tooke vp the controuersie was not his
that time with the Patriarke of Rome in all things touching iurisdiction and he restrained within certaine bounds beyond the which he might not go And so others had allowed theÌ„ as ample authotie in their circuits as he had in his This appeareth by the expresse decrees of sixe Councels the first is the first generall Councell of Nice holden ann 325. wherin were 318. Bishops z Can. 6. The words are these Let the ancient customes continue in force that are in Aegypt Lybia and Pentapolis that the Bishop of Alexandria haue the gouernment of all these forsomuch as the Bishop of Rome also hath the like custome and so likewise throughout Antioch and in the other Prouinces let the Churches haue their prerogatiues vpholden them Where we see the Councell intending to confirme the preeminence of Alexandria against the Arrians that began to vexe it maketh the Popes gouernment in his Prouince a Ex cius forma quod Alexandrinae Ecclesiae tribuerit particulariter sumpsit exemplum Epist Nicol. ad Michael the forme of that gouernment which should be in the Prouince of Alexandria Which sheweth that the Popes gouernment reached but to his owne Prouince For had it stretched it selfe all ouer the world then would it haue bene no forme for Alexandria which was to abide in one Prouince and no more Besides the Councel saying the Bishop of Rome hath the like custome sheweth plainly he of Alâ—xandria was to be equall with him else it could not be the like For there is no b Parilis mos est paritie betweene an vniuersall Bishop and a prouinciall The second and third are the first generall Councels of c Can. 2. 3. Constantinople ann 381. of 150. Bishops and of d Cap 8. sentent super petit Cyprio Ephesus ann 431. of 200. Bishops in both which the prouinces of the world are distinguished and Patriarks restrained to their own circuits and he of Constantinople by name is made equall with the Pope in all Ecclesiasticall matters whatsoeuer All the difference was that he of Rome had the chiefe honour e Consistebat hic honor in hoc videlicet quod ad locum in sedendo primo post Rom. pontificem in responsionibus hâ—beâ—et secundam voceÌ„ in subscriptionibus Turrecrem d. 22. Constantinopolita which consisted not in iurisdiction but sitting in the first place and such like titles The fourth is the Councell of Chalcedon an 451 wherin were 630. Bishops the words wherof are these f Act. 16. Following the decrees and rules of the holy fathers and of those 150. Bishops assembled vnder Theodosius the elder of blessed memorie in the royal citie of Constantinople and acknowledging the same we also decree and ordaine the same things concerning the priueledges of the said Church of Constantinople which is new Rome For our fathers gaue the priuiledges to the seat of elder Rome because that citie had the Empire and the 150. Bishops moued with the same intent gaue the same priueledges to the most sacred throne of new Rome thinking it reason the citie which is honoured with the Empire and Senate should also haue equall priuiledges with elder Rome and in ecclesiasticall matters be aduanced alike with her being the next vnto her The fift is another Councell of Constantinople ann 686. where were 280. Bishops g Sext. Syn. in Trull Can. 36. who renewed and confirmed the former decree of Chalcedon repeating it in a manner verbatim as that had renewed and explaned the former Councels of Nice and Constantinople Whereby it expresly appeareth that Constantinople had as much authoritie in Church matters as Rome and that Rome first obtained the primacy of honour by reason it was the Imperiall Citie and this was the meaning of the first Nicen and Constantinopolitan Councels this the fathers would not haue said and done if they had thought Christ himselfe had giuen the Pope the Supremacy questioned Whereupon h Concord l. l. c. 13. Cusanus thinketh that what of right belongeth to him was giuen him by the Church and Marsilius i Defens part 2. c. 18. writeth That he hath no power ouer other Bishops and Churches either by God or mans law but such as was giuen him either absolutely or for a time by the Nicen Councell The Sixt is the Councell of Carthage ann 418. of 217. Bishops k c. 92. 105. In this Councell when Sozimus the Bishop of Rome had claimed a right to receiue appeales from all parts of the world and pretended a certaine canon of the Nicen Councell that should giue it him the Bishops thereof by the space of foure yeares debated the matter against him and Boniface and Celestin his successours and hauing searched the originall copyes of the Nicen Councell whereby the vntruth of his claime was discouered they wrote sharply to him that he should not meddle with the people of their prouinces nor admit into his fellowship such as they had excommunicated telling him that he had nothing to do in their causes either to bring them to Rome or to send Legates to heare them at home for this were against the Nicen Councell The euidence of this Councell is such against the Supremacy that no art of our aduersaries can auoid it and therefore they are driuen to vse such shifts for the answering thereof as it is pitie to see and I dare say griefe to themselues to be forced to them 27 The second experience to be obserued is touching appeales for the Church did alway constantly forbid the Bishops of Rome medling with meÌ„ or their appeals to him that were not of the Romane Patriarchy This is cleare by the practise of the sixt Councell of Carthage before mentioned the fathers whereof among many other things l C. 105. Ep. conc ad Celest write thus to Celestine The fathers of Nice did wisely see that all businesse should be determined in the places where they began and that the holy Ghost wonted not to be wanting to assist the Priests of Christ both in seeing and holding the right specially seeing it was free for euery man if he misliked the iudgement of the arbitratours to appeale to a CouÌ„cell either prouinciall or generall Where this is to be marked that by the Church-gouernment of that time a Councell was the last and highest iudge of all controuersies arising And before this when certaine persons being iudged in Affricke had fled to the Pope for reliefe marke what Cyprian m Lib. 1 Ep. 3. writeth to him Seeing it is rightly and iustly decreed vnto vs al that euery mans cause should be heard where the fault was committed and euery Pastor hath a portion of the flocke committed to him which he must gouern as he wil giue account of his deed to the Lord it behooueth truly such as are vnder our gouernment not to runne vp and downe and by their cunning rashnesse to breake the concord of Bishops but there to follow the cause
Catholicke Church professeth that mortall men are to worship God not by images and Angels but by Christ the Lord. Epiphanius x L. 3. aduerâ—us haeret saith the virgin Mary was a virgin and honorable but not giuen for vs to worship but her selfe worshipped him that tooke flesh of her Finally many learned Papists are of our side in this point For y Peres de trad part 3. some condemne all diuine adoration giuen vnto them z Gers compend Theol. praecep 1. Holk in Sap. lect 157. b. Some condemne all worship whatsoeuer euen the bowing before them a Polyd. inuent l 6. c. 13. Some acknowledge that all the ancient fathers condeÌ„ned theÌ„ b Duran ration l. 1. c. 3. n. 4. Cathar tract de cult imag Polyd ibid. Some thinke their vse to be dangerous And they which haue gone furthest in defending them yet confesse d Can. 6. Nilus primat that they which teach they may be worshipped with diuine honour are constrained to vse such nice distinctions as neither themselues nor the people vnderstand and if they conceiue them yet they cannot but erre in doing it c Peres vbi supra Bell de imag c. 22. 6 Sixtly touching the supremacy For d Can. 6. Nilus primat the Councell of Nice appointed bounds and limits as well for the Popes iurisdiction as for other Bishops and the Councels e Act. 16. of Chalcedon and f Sext. Synod iâ— Tâ—ull can 36. Constantinople make the B. of Constantinople equall in all things that concerne authoritie and iurisdiction with the Bishop of Rome And g Cusan conce l. 2 c 12. Maâ—sil defen pac part 2. c. 18. Duaren de benefic l. 3. c. 2. some Papists do not deny but the Popes Primacy is much larger then it was in the Primitiue Church wherein they say the truth For the Councels of h Cap. 9. Chalcedon i Cap. 105. Affricke k Can. 22 Mileui and l Synod 8. can 26. Constantinople forbid all appeales to him from forren places yea that of Affricke reiected his claime and writ vnto him that he should forbeare the taking vpon him any such preheminence Lest say they the smokie pompe of the world be brought into Christs Church and Gregory who himselfe was Pope of Rome m Regist l. 6. ep 194. writeth that he dares confidently say he is the forerunner of Antichrist in his pride whosoeuer he be that calleth himselfe the vniuersall Bishop or desireth so to be called because he putteth himself before others For at that time n Harmenop epit sacr cano tit 7. de Synod the name of vniuersall was forbidden all the Patriarkes as it signified the chiefe aboue the rest And 1000. yeares after Christ it was thought o Glab Rodolf quem refert taxat Baro. an 996. n. 24. that although the Bishop of the Romane Church for the dignitie of the Apostolicke sea were more reuerenced then the rest yet it was not lawfull for him in any thing to go beyond the tenour of the Canons For as euery Bishop in his owne sea vniformly beareth the image of our Sauiour so generally it befitteth none busily to do any thing in anothers diocesse And when the Pope but 500. yeares since practised against the Emperour as now he doth against kings p Sigeb chron pag. 129. ann 1088. the stories noted it as nouelty and heresie that Priests should teach the people to yeeld no subiection to euill Princes and should absolue them from sinne and periury that practised against them whereas now q Decretal Greg. 9. de Maior obed c. Solitae Extrauag Commun c. Vnam sanctaÌ„ de maior obed the authoritie to depose and molest Princes and absolue subiects from their obedience is made one of the principall parts of the supremacy And touching his temporalties which he now possesseth the stories haue obserued how by fraud and treason he cousened secular Princes of them from time to time as occasion serued And so his whole Primacy gat in by steps into the Church and yet r Turrecrem tract 73. qu. è Tho. q. 5. they would make vs beleeue the deniall thereof were heresie 7 In the seuenth place I name the communion in one kind For the Church of Rome vseth and defendeth it contrary to Å¿ Cyrill catech mystag 5. Liturg Marc pag. 62. Constitur Clement pag. 145. graec ordo Rom. pag. 23. all antiquitie and the very forme of their owne Lyturgies For the most ancient Liturgies that they haue shew how the people receiued the wine as well as bread And Caietan t 3. part Thom. qu 80. art 12. q. 3. faith This custome indured long in the Church and that they had ministring cups for the nonce to serue the people with wine And I thinke no Papist will deny this And some u Ouand 4 p. 221. say It were better if this custome were renewed againe 8 Lastly I name transubstantiation For x Censur Colo. pag. 267. our aduersaries say The true Church hath alway taught that as soone as the Priest hath pronounced the words of consecration the former substance of bread wine is changed into the body blood of Christ so that no other substance remaines but only Christs body and blood the accidents by a supernaturall power abiding without a subiect The which how false it is appeareth by the word of God y Luc. 22.18 1. Cor. 10.16 11.26 calling it bread the fruit of the vine after the blessing and z Luc. â—2 20 saying of the cup in the same forme of words that is vsed of the bread This cup is the new Testament in my blood and teaching that without bread there can be no sacrament and that Christ had a body of the same nature that ours is which cannot be without his dimensions in many places at once And it is plaine that herein they haue altered the faith of the ancient fathers For Saint Austin a De Doctr. Christ l. 3. c. 16. saith These words vnlesse ye eate the flesh of the son of man and drinke his blood are a figure coÌ„manding vs to partake the passion of Christ and profitably to remember that his flesh was crucified for vs. Chrysostom b Ad Caesar Monach. saith The bread before it be sanctified we call bread but when the diuine grace sanctifieth it it is deliuered from the name of bread and is thought worthy the name of the Lords body though the nature of bread remaine still Gelasius a Bishop of Rome c De duabus nat Christi saith The bread and wine passe into the substance of the body and blood of Christ yet so as the nature of bread wine ceasseth not they are turned into the diuine substance yet the bread wine remain still in the property of their nature Theodoret saith d Dial. immuta Our Sauior in deliuering the sacrament called his body bread and
l. 11. c. 3. Ecclesiam esse regulam infallibileÌ„ proponendi explican li veritates fidei non potest reduci ad authoritateÌ„ ipsius Ecclesiae Hoc enim esset idem per idem confirmare sed necesse est reducere hunc assensum ad testimonium Spiritus sancti in â—linantis per â—umen fidei â—d â—oc credibile â—ccleâ—ia non â—otest errate Dom. Ban 22. q. 1. art 1 pag. 17. Austin be wel considered Moses that writ these things O God is gone to thee if he were now before me I would desire him to open them to me and I would heare him if he spake Hebrew I could not vnderstand him if he spake Latin I could know what he said but how should I know whether he spake the truth And if I did know it could I know it from him For within me in the inner parlour of my thought there is neither Hebrew nor Latin â—or Barbarian truth that could say Moses saith true that I should presently being certaine and confident say to him thy seruant thou sayest the truth Therefore seeing I cannot aske him I aske thee the truth by whose fulnesse he spake the truth thee O my God I beseech pardon my sin and which gauest him power to speake these things giue me also power to vnderstand them Austine would neuer haue enquired thus how he should know whether Moses spake the truth if he had thought the testimonie of the Church could secure vs he could not beleeue the Scripture vpon Moses word then much lesse could he beleeue it on the Churches Yea his words do wholy exclude the authoritie of Moses both totall and partiall 20 The Papists therefore are the patrons of Atheisme t Bellarm de effect Sacram. l. 2. c. 25. who teach that if we take away the authoritie of the present Church and of the Councell of Trent then the whole Christian faith may be called in question for the truth of all ancient Councels and of all points of faith depend vpon the authoritie of the present Church of Rome How much better said u De doctrin Christian l. 1. c. 37. Austin Our faith shall reele and totter if the authority of the Scriptures stand not fast Let these assertions of Papistry be well noted § 9. Thirdly they erre in the third condition For the Scriptures are not so vniuersall as the rule of faith had need to be For this rule ought to be so vniuersall that it may absolutely resolue and determine all points questions and doubts of faith which either haue bene or may hereafter fall in controuersie But the Scriptures alone are not thus vniuersall * Non inficiamur praecipua illa fidei dogmata ad saluteÌ„ omnibus necessaria perspicuè satis comprehendi in Scriptura Coster ench c. 1. For there be diuerse questions of faith and those also touching verie substantiall points which are not expresly set downe and determined in the Scripture As namely that those books which are generally holden for Scripture are euery one the true word of God For this in particular of euery booke holden for Scripture we shall not find expresly written in anie part of the Scripture This part therefore whereupon dependeth the certaintie of euery other point proued out of Scripture cannot be made infallibly sure vnto our vnderstanding or beliefe vnlesse we put some other infallible rule whereupon we may ground an infallible beliefe which infallible rule if we admit to assure vs that there is at all anie Scripture and that those bookes and no other are canonicall Scripture why should we not aswel admit it to assure vs infallibly which is the true sence and meaning in all points of the same Scripture The Answer 1 The Iesuits first exception against the Scripture was that it was too difficult now followeth his next that it containeth not all things needfull to be knowne Thus his argument may be concluded The rule must be vniuersall containing all points of faith But such is not the Scripture for many substantiall points are not expresly set downe therein Therefore it is not the rule Whereto I answer denying the assumption for euery point of faith and whatsoeuer else is needfull either to be knowne or done is contained in the scripture so far forth that there is no point question or doubt concerning faith but by the scriptures alone it may absolutely be determined For a 2. Tim. 3.15 it is profitable to teach to reproue to correct and to instruct in all righteousnesse that the child of God may be absolute being made perfect to all good workes 2 But the Iesuite saith there be diuers things not expresly set downe or determined reseruing this word expresly for a starting hole to creepe out at because they be not written word for word in so many syllables But I answer him three things first that the Popish diuinitie is that many points are contained in the Scripture neither thus expresly nor yet at all to be concluded thence by collection for else why make they that opposition betweene the scripture and tradition Secondly if this be his mind then he hath put more into the assumption then was in the proposition for the rule is not bound to containe all things thus expresly Thirdly that is expresly in the scripture which is there set downe either plainly in so many words as b De doctrin Christian l. 2. c. 9. Austine saith All things are that concerne our faith and manners or by analogie when it is necessarily implied in the text For c Alliaco 1. sen qu. 1. art 3. euery such conclusion is a theologicall discourse and hath his warrant from the text and so still the scripture containeth all things needfull 3 Against this the Iesuit hath one argument that it is no where written that these bookes of scripture that we haue are the true word of God Wherto I answer first though this were granted yet would it not follow that all points of faith are not contained in the scripture because in euery profession the principles are indemonstrable assented to without discourse and the scriptures are the principles of religion and therefore first we must grant them to be the very word of God and then say they are such as containe all points needfull to be knowne This then which the Iesuite requireth to be shewed out of the text it selfe is first to be supposed yea beleeued that it is the true word of God whereto we are perswaded by the heauenly light it selfe Secondly I wonder at the Iesuites confidence that dareth so boldly say that of euery booke holden for scripture we find it not expresly written that they are the true word of God for Saint Paul d 2. Tim. 3.16 saith expresly All Scripture is giuen by inspiration of God and Saint Peter e 2. Pet 1.20 Luc. 1.70 saith No prophecie in the Scripture is of priuate interpretation but the holy men of God spake as they were moued by
Apostles if it reach to the Church so that if that be the sence which the Iesuite setteth downe then all the Apostles had equall priuiledges from error with Peter and particular Churches and men should be as infallible as the whole Church it selfe which I am sure the Iesuite will not grant Thirdly Saint Austine i Tract 96. in Ioh. tom 9. expoundeth the words as I do He shall teach or leade you into all truth this I think cannot be fulfilled in any mans mind in this life for who is he liuing in this bodie so corrupt and loading the soule that can know all truth when the Apostle saith we know but in part But forasmuch as by the holy Ghost it cometh to passe whose earnest we haue receiued that hereafter we may come to the fulnesse it self whereof the same Apostle saith then shall we see him face to face and now I know but in part but then I shall know as I am knowne not that which shall be in this lâ—fe onely but all that which shall befall vs till the perfection come the Lord by the loue of his spirit hath promised saying He shall teach you all truth As for the Iesuites exposition that he may remaine with you for euer not onely for sixe hundred yeares it smelleth either of his malice or ignorance For which of vs euer yet said the holy Ghost departed from the Church after sixe hundred yeares Let the Papists deale sincerely and leaue their coyning 6 The fourth place is Math. 28.19 Go teach all nations Whereto I answer first these words were spoken to the Apostles onely and not to that which the Iesuite calleth the Catholike Church Now I grant their teaching was infallible and all men were bound to heare it for they taught that which afterward they writ in the Scripture yet so they taught and with such commission that k Act 17.11 the people are commended which examined their teaching by the Scriptures Secondly we grant the Pastors of the Church in all ages haue commission to teach likewise but that proueth not all their teaching to be alway infallible because naturall corruption hanging on them they may faile in that which is committed to them Neither is this any inconuenience binding vs sometime to beleeue that which is false for the bond hath a limitatioÌ„ that we heare them so farre as they teach agreeable with the scriptures and no further and by those scriptures we may relieue our selues if they chance to teach falsly 7 The fift place is Luk. 10.16 He that heareth you heareth me Which words were spoken to the Apostles all whose teaching and writing was true infallibly and therefore were sufficient warrant to the hearers to accept it But being applied to the Church and ordinary Pastors therein l Ferus lib. 3 in Math. cap. 23. they must be vnderstood with this caution if they hold them to the instructions that Christ giueth them if they come in the name of Christ deliuering his words truly and consonant to the scripture for such are to be heard as Christ himselfe else m 1. Ioh. 4.1 1. Cor. 14.32 we must trie the spirits and iudge of the Prophets This place therefore being to be vnderstood conditionally proueth not that which the Iesuite concludeth absolutely and vniuersally 8 The sixt place is Math. 23.2 The Scribes and Pharises sit in Moses chaire all therefore whatsoeuer they bid you obserue that obserue and do Which words I grant must be vnderstood of the Ministers of the Gospel that succeed the Apostles as wel as of the Pharises that sate in Moses chaire therefore I answer three things 1. I mislike it not that he compareth the Priests and Bishops of his Church to the Scribes and Pharises 2. By Moses chaire is meant neither outward succession nor iudiciall authoritie but the profession of Moses law 3. n Si quae cuÌ„que dixerint nobis ea facere iubemur cur alio loco Christus cauere voluit à feâ—mento Pharisaeorum cur rursum eorum traditiones exemplo etiam proprio coÌ„temnere docuit aliquid ergo doctrinae propriae puritati euangelij admiscere possunt in quo non solùm non sunt audiendi sed sunt etiam refutandi Id ergo prae cauit Christus ne plebs malis docentium exemplis ad contemptionem verae doctrinae inducatur Nunc ergo quae dixetint nobis Pharisaei eadem facere iubet Christus cum super Cathediam Mosis federint hoc est legem enarrauerint docucrint proposuerint Can. loc l. 5. c. 4. Our Sauior doth not simply commaund the people to obey the Pharisees in all points of their doctrine or teach them that their locall succession did priuiledge them from error but onely that they should not for their euill life be offended at that which they might at any time teach well because though their life were wicked yet that which they taught out of Moses chaire that is to say according to Moses law must be followed Now this was far from enioyning them in all points to do according to the doctrine of the Scribes and Pharises as I proue by foure reasons first o Iansen concord euang cap. 120. Em. Sa. notat in Math. 23. v. 3. the Popish expositors say this place bindeth vs not to obey them if they teach that which is euill for that is to teach against the chaire Which exposition granteth we are not bound to heare them in all points without limitation as p Ecce sine limitatione aliqua Martin Peres de tradit part 3. pag. 328. a Popish Bishop speaketh with the Iesuite and supposeth they may teach vntruly in some points Secondly if I may refuse them in some points then hence it followeth vnanswerably that there is another rule whereby I may be directed in hearing for else how should a man be able to distinguish those points wherein he must follow his teachers from those wherein he must not Thirdly the Pharisees taught many errors and blasphemies both q Math. 5.20 25.3 23.13 against the law of Moses and r Marc. 14.64 Ioh 7.48 8 13. 9.22.24 19.7.15 against the diuinitie of Christ in which regard our Sauiour bad his disciples Å¿ Mat. 26.6.12 to beware of the leauen of the Pharises which was their doctrine Wherein he had gainsaid himselfe if by Moses chaire he had meant any thing but the prescript of the law or by those words had commaunded vs in all points to do according to the Prelates doctrine for then the Iewes must not haue honored parents nor loued their enemies nor beleeued in Christ because the Pharises taught against these things Lastly t Gloss in Mat. 23.2 Nicol. Gorr ibid. Arias Mâ—ntâ—n elucid ibid. the Papists themselues expounding the place write that to sit in Moses chaire is to teach according to the doctrine and rule of Moses law and to commaund things agreeable thereunto that is to say true doctrine and the same
u See Digr 16. meaning also by the Church nothing but the Pope They would neuer make themselues ridiculous by such incredible assertions had not their apostasie from the word of God made them desperate 7 Fiftly their mouthes are full of bitter and blasphemous speeches against the Scripture which is a signe they find it contrary to their humor and therefore hate it x Pigh Hier. l. 1. c. 2. contro 3. de eccl One of them saith The Gospels were written not to rule our faith but to be ruled by it y Censur Colō pag. 112. Pigh contro 3. Others call the Scripture a nose of waxe that may be writhed this way or that way Sometime they terme it z Peres de tradit praefat Dead inke and a Pigh contro 3 a dumbe iudge Sometime they say b Bell. de verbo Dei l. 4. c. 4. it is not necessarie and that c Durae resp pag. 148. God gaue not it to his people but Pastors and Doctors Sometime d Eck. enchir c. 1. Caes Baron ann 53 nu 11. they say it receiueth all the authoritie it hath from the Church and from tradition without which it were of no credit Sometime e Eck. vbi supra We must liue more according to the authority of the Church then after the Scripture Sometime f Eck. vbi supra Christ neuer commanded his Apostles to write any scripture Sometime they receiue the Popes Decretals as the Scripture it selfe reuerencing them so farre that therefore they breake out into blasphemie against the Scripture g Princip in cursum Bibl. See d. 9. in canonicis saith Cameracensis Sometime they denie the text it selfe pretending it is not Scripture as h L. aduer noua dogmat Caiet pag. 1 inde Catharinus testifieth of Cardinal Caietane that he denied the last chapter of Marks Gospel some parcels of Saint Luke the Epistle to the Hebrewes the Epistle of Iames the second Epistle of Peter the second and third of Iohn and the Epistle of Iude. This man was of great reckoning among thē no man of more they say of him i Sixt. Sen. bibl l. 4. in Tho. Vius he was an incomparable diuine and the learnedst of all his age k Andrad defēs Trid. l. 2. who by his study did much enlarge diuinitie which is to be noted that men may see a tricke of the Papists first to commend their learned men and fill their people with a good opinion of them and then to send abroad their bookes full of such stuffe as this that may slide into the minds of men yet so that when it is obiected against them they may answer as they ordinarily do it was but the writers priuate opinion and so thinke to escape from the shame of it though still at home and secretly they loue it 8 Now I demaund and require the most resolued Papist that is to answer directly from what beginning this grudge against the Scriptures and deuotion to their Churches soueraignetie proceedeth whether they be not inwardly guiltie of some reuolt from the doctrine thereof which causeth them vnder hand as they may to worke their discredite and crush their authoritie Digression 23. Wherein by fiue examples it is shewed that the moderne Church of Rome is varied in points of faith from that which it beleeued formerly and since the time it began to be the seate of Antichrist 9 I do not say it hath altered euery thing which in former times it held it being sufficient for the disproofe of the Iesuites assertion if it haue altered some and those also esteemed among themselues dogmaticall points of faith or belonging thereunto and this alteration to haue bin not from the truth onely which the Primitiue Rome embraced but euen from those articles which Rome declining into heresie either in the beginning or processe of this declination professed that so she may appeare to haue varied from her owne selfe 10 The first example shall be in the Popes supremacie for the Councels of l Sess 4. 5. Constance and m Sess 2. 18. Basil decreed that a generall Councell was of greater authoritie then the Pope and that he ought to be subiect therunto and n Cusan concord l. 2. c. 20. 34. Panorm de elect c. Significasti Pet. de Alliaco Gerson Almain Abulensi◠quos refert Bellarm. de Concil l. 2. c. 14. many learned Papists beleeued this to be true yet since that time this point is altered and the Councels of o Concil Later sub Leon. ses 11. Lateran and Trent haue set downe the contrary and now the Church is bound to follow that determination 11 The second example shall be in the Sacrament for p Geo. Cassand def lib. de offic pij viri at the first the people receiued the cup as well as the bread for the space of a thousand yeares and afterward q Lib. de eccle obseruat c. 19. saith Micrologus The Romane order commandeth the wine also to be consecrated that the people may fully communicate and this was approued for good by r Tho. in 1. Cor. 11. lect 5. Claud. de Saints repet 10. c. 4. Alb. de offic missae c. 5. many learned Papists yet in time the Councell of Constance ſ Sess 13. forbad it and then the Papists began to change their minds and afterward the Councell of Basil t Bohemis concessit cam facultatem teste Aen. Sylu. in hist Bohē c. 52 Bell. de Euchar. l. 4 c. 26. released the decree of Constance and u Sess 21. c. 2. the Councell of Trent againe reuoked the release made at Basil and forbad the cup as they had done at Constance 12 The third example shal be likewise in the Sacrament for x Sco. 4. d. 10 11. Biel. lect 41. in canon Transubstantiatiō is acknowledged to be but lately brought in and first made a matter of faith by Innocent the third in the Lateran Councell within these 400. yeares y Scot. vbi supr Biel. ibid. before which time no man was bound to beleeue it but all men were left to their owne will to do as they would whereas now it is counted heresie to denie it though z Pet. de Alliac 4. q. 6. art 2. Dur. 4. d. 11. q 1. many learned Papists themselues misdoubt it of all which matter I shall intreat more fully in the 49. Digression 13 The fourth example shall be in the worship of Images for at the first the Church admitted no image at all neither painted nor grauen a In Cateches saith Erasmus no not the Image of Christ himselfe to be set vp in Churches and this appeareth to be true by the testimony of b Epiph. ep ad Ioan. Concil Elib c. 36. Clē Alexand. protrept pag. 14. Graec. the auncient themselues next when they began to be vsed yet the Church of Rome forbad the worship of them as
authoritie but the Councell of Nice Now it is very probable that if these Bishops had thought the subiection mentioned by the Iesuit to the Bishop of Rome were necessarily required to the essence of vnitie they would haue yeelded wheras by their resistance it is plaine they thought themselues bound to his determination no more then he might thinke himselfe bound to theirs 4 About the yeare 258. there arose a question whether they whom heretickes had baptized if they returned to the Catholicke Church should be baptized againe Here no doubt the Popes iudgement was to be followed if it were true that the authoritie and certaintie of iudgement were his and all true Catholicks should yeeld vnto him But mark what fell out p Euseb l. 7. c. 5. Cypr. ep 74. ad Pomp. August de vnic bapt c. 14. Stephen the Bishop of Rome forbad rebaptization and thought them worthy excommunication that vsed it but Cyprian the Bishop of Carthage and a Martyr of the Church withstood him and would neuer accept his decree With him tooke part Firmilianus the Metropolitan of Caesarea confuting the decree that Stephen had made whom q Apud Cypr. ep 75. in a certaine epistle he thus reproueth What can be more base or vaine then to hold contention with so many Bishops throughout the world breaking peace with euery one through diuers kinds of discord sometime with the Easterne people sometime with you of the South not suffering the Bishops sent from them so much as to come to his speech but forbidding the brethren to giue them roome and lodging Is this to hold the vnitie of the spirit in the bond of peace to cut himselfe from the vnitie of loue and in all things to make himself strange vnto his brethren yea and through the fury of contention to rebell against faith and Sacrament See how this man r Menolog Graec. in Octobr 28. whom the Church so honored that they put his name into the Kalender taketh vp the Pope and setteth at nought his definitiue sentence With these tooke part also a Å¿ Concil Carth. apud Cyprian Councell of 87. Bishops yea many great Synodes t Euseb l. 7. c. 5. saith Dionysius Alexandrinus and whole countries who yet were not therefore reputed to liue out of the vnitie of the Church And Dionysius himselfe the Patriark of Alexandria consented herein with Cyprian and the Synods of Affrik as Ierom u De Script eccle in Dionysio testifieth Here theÌ„ we see the Pope at one time resisted by 3. Metropolitans many Councels and by the most Bishops in Affricke Cappadocia Egypt Cilicia Galatia and other countries and yet the Iesuite will needs perswade that all Catholicke men haue acknowledged one chiefe Pastor the Pope and yeelded themselues euermore to his censure when these examples shew the contrary and make it more then plaine that till now of late subiection to the Romish Church was neuer esteemed appertaining to the essence of vnitie nor put into the definition thereof Digression 26. Shewing that the Papists themselues do not so constantly and vniformly submit themselues to the Popes iudgement nor beleeue his infallible authoritie as is pretended 5 Indeed the Iesuite reporteth it of the Church of Rome this day that all the learned men and people thereof submit their opinions and iudgement in all things to the Pope and this is generally boasted among them and obiected as a matter fully prouing their vnitie but they onely say it for we know the contrary * A memorable example hereof is the moderne conclusions published by the Venetians against the present Pope Paâ—lus Quintus and his supremacie and discouer dayly as much headinesse among them against their Popes and Councels as euer was in any gouernment Marke else their owne words It were a great matter indeed saith x De certitud gratiae assert 13. Catharinus an Archbishop among them and in verie truth too hard a case to binde the vnderstanding of the wise with euery answer of the Popes that may be produced for the holy Ghost doth not alway and in euery word assist them And y Q. in Vesper pag. 133. printed at the end of his Morals in 8â— Almaine a great Doctor in their schooles It is not necessarie that men beleeue things determined by the Pope although the contrary be not publickly to be taught And Bellarmine though vnaduisedly possible yet saith plainly touching Cyprians withstanding of Pope Stephen that z De Ro. Pont. l. 4 c. 7. after the Popes definition yet it was free to thinke otherwise yea he holdeth that a De Ro. Pont. l. 2. c. 29. arg 7. as it is lawfull to resist the Pope assaulting our bodie so may we resist him when he inuadeth our soule or troubleth the commonweale and much more if he practise the destruction of the Church in this case I say it is lawfull to resist him by not doing what he commaundeth and hindring that his will be not executed Caietan b De authorit Pap. Concil c. 26. holdeth that in case of heresie he may be deposed c Cap. 27. ad 2. and when he rendeth the Church in sunder he may be resisted to his face And Franciscus Victoria d Relect. 4. de potest Pap. Concil pag. 133 saith If a Councell declare a thing to be matter of faith or belonging to diuine right the Pope herein cannot declare otherwise or change any thing specially if such a matter pertaine to faith or the manners of the vniuersall Church See how these men all resolued Papists and the learnedst of that sort yet assume it as out of question that the Popes iudgement is not alwayes of vndoubted truth but he may erre yea be an heretick and make hauocke of the Church and therefore may be resisted And in very deed the conceit of his infallible iudgement being the beginning and foundation of his authoritie it cannot be denied but they which call the former in question must needs doubt of the later 6 And let the most resolute Papist that is but thinke seriously of this point and answer how it is possible they should so willingly obey his decrees and yeeld their opinions to his iudgement when it is a ruled case among them all that the Pope may erre yea as e De sign eccl to 2. l. 18. c. 6. Bozius affirmeth be an hereticke writing teaching and preaching heresie For will they obey him in error and scandall or do they thinke his decree can alter the nature of that which is false and make it true that they might with securitie of conscience entertaine it They dare not say so Franciscus Victoria f Relect. 4. de potest Pap. Concil disputeth at large against his dispensations affirming that a Councell should do well to bridle him and that they which vse such immoderate dispensations as he giueth are not thereby secured in conscience that they may vse them lawfully No doubt they which
are driuen to yeeld the keyes to all the Apostles as well as to Peter and yet they thinke he alone had the primacie which sheweth clearly that the keyes containe it not Fourthly they which expound the power of the keyes to shew what they containe mention therein no more but as I haue answered The Councell of Colen vnder Hermannus x Bell. de poen l. 1 c. 1. penned by Gropper y Defens of the Cens whom the Papists cal the rare man of our age proceedeth thus z Enchir. concil Colon. de sacr confess But what keyes Christ when he departed hence left the Apostles and their successors in the Church that is to be explicated And truly this is plain that he committed to them his owne keyes and no other euen the keyes of the kingdome of heauen as himselfe said to Peter Whatsoeuer thou shalt bind on earth shall be bound in heauen and whatsoeuer thou shalt loose on earth shal be loosed in heauen These keyes the Fathers deuided into the key of order and the key of iurisdiction And againe each key into the key of knowledge and of power The key of order is the power of priestly ministery which containeth power to preach the Gospell consecrate the bodie of Christ remit and retaine sinnes and to minister the sacraments The key of iurisdiction is power to restraine the faultie this is that power of excommunicating such as offend openly and absoluing them againe In which explanation of the power mentioned in the keyes we see nothing touched but onely the ministery of the word and Sacraments and the execution of discipline But Marsilius a Defens part 2 c. 6. speaketh more fully that the authoritie of the keyes according to Saint Austin and Hierom is that iudiciarie power that standeth in dispensing the word sacraments and discipline although the opinion and title of the fulnesse of power which the Bishop of Rome ascribeth to himselfe tooke his beginning from these words Whose sinnes ye remit they are remitted and whatsoeuer you shall bind vpon earth shall be bound in heauen 20 The second text alledged is Luk. 22.32 where Christ saith to Peter I haue praid for thee that thy faith faile not and thou being conuerted strengthen thy brethrē which the Iesuit expoundeth as if our Sauiour had specially prayed for S. Peter and the Pope that their faith should not faile at least so farre as to teach the Church a false faith to the intent they might alway be able to confirme their brethren if at any time they should faile in the doctrine of faith which all Catholicke men knowing do confesse the Popes definitiue sentence to be always an infallible truth and thereupon submit themselues thereunto and so liue in vnitie But this exposition is soone confuted for first here is no mention of the Pope but of Peter onely whereby it is plaine that no certaintie can be concluded out of the words for any but for the Apostles onely or if they reach to any besides Peter then according to the opinion of the most iudicious Papists the Church is it and not the Pope So saith b Qu. Vesper d. 3. art 3. prob 1. lit G. Cameracensis That which in Scripture is promised to the whole must not be attributed to any part but alway to hold the true faith and neuer to erre against it is promised by Christ to the whole company of beleeuers alone It is plaine therefore that Christ promised Peter his faith should not faile vnderstanding it not of his personall faith but of the generall faith of Gods Church committed to his regiment And Frier Walden c Doctr. fid l. ◠c. 19. saith Peter bare the type of the Church not of the particular Romane Church but of the vniuersall Church not gathered together in a generall Councell but dispersed through the world from Christ to our times Of the same mind are d Concord l. ◠c. 11. Cusanus and e Defen part 2. c. 28. Marsilius So that in the iudgement of foure of the learnedst among our aduersaries the purpose of Christ was not by this text to indow Peter or the Pope but the whole Catholick Church and so accordingly the right of gouernment and freedome from erring should remaine not in the Pope but in the vniuersall Church cleane cōtrary to that which the Iesuit here supposeth 21 Secondly the direct and immediate purpose of Christ in these words is to forewarne Peter of the sinne whereinto he fell afterward by denying him and the meaning is that though Satan desired thereby to destroy him yet he had prayed that his faith might not by the temptation be vtterly extinguished admonishing him that as by his fall he would weaken his brethren the members of the Church so by the example of his true conuersion he should strengthen them againe vnderstanding this faith for which he prayed not of Peters teaching or directing the Church in doctrine but of the habit of faith abiding in his heart whereby he beleeued in Christ and confessed his name and f Confirmandi vocabulo authoritatem in docendo significari saith Greg. de Valen. to 3. pag 197. e. by strengthening his brethren not that he should be supreame head ouer his fellow Apostles but that g Esto a his poenitentiae exemplar ne desperent Theophyl Infirmiores fiatres exemplo tuae poenitentiae comforta ne de venia desperēt Gloss by the exāple of his repentance experience of Gods mercy to him in his infirmitie he should encourage all people against temptation This exposition is proued to be true because first there is no word in the text importing either all infalliblenesse of faith or any authoritie ouer the other Apostles See h Comment in Luc. 22. saith Caietan how Christ biddeth Peter account the Apostles not his subiects but his brethren see how he putteth him in office not to rule ouer them but to confirme them in faith hope and charitie Secondly the words going immediatly before forbid all absolute power of one ouer another The Kings of the nations beare rule and exercise authoritie ouer them but it shall not be so among you Thirdly Bellarmine acknowledgeth i Ex quibus priuilegiis primsi fortasse non manauit ad posteros De Rom. Pont. l. 4. c. 3. § Alterum priuilegium Quoad prima non agit Petri successorē Boz de sign eccl tom 2. l. 18. c. vlt. pag. 594. that to persist alway in the faith without falling from it is a prerogatiue that possible is not deriued from Peter to the Pope which being so it followeth that the Iesuites exposition is false and no Papist can be certain that by vertue of this text the Pope can teach no error any more then he is assored he cannot erre himselfe but it is cleare he may erre himselfe and all Papists yeeld it therefore it is also vncertaine whether he be enabled to teach the Church so that in teaching he
in Bonif. 3. Marian. Scot. an 608. Martin Polon an 607. Vrsperg in Phoca Naucler gener 21. in Bonif. 3. all Historiographers with one consent haue left written in these words Boniface with great ado obtained of the Emperour Phocas that he might be made the vniuersall Bishop of the world the which authoritie his successors not onely held fast euen with their teeth but also wonderfully increased The Reader by all this that I haue touched may soone discerne the Popes moderne authoritie exercised among his owne and claimed ouer all to be swolne farre bigger then it was in ancient times But after swelling cometh bursting whereof I reade his followers beware in time Digression 28. Shewing that the Pope is not of infallible iudgement but may erre and fall into heresie as any other man may 32 This point is certaine enough to vs who haue cast off both him and his teaching for no other cause but this that we are assured he is Antichrist and his faith heresie But it may be shewed in another sort also that the Papists themselues may not denie it by making demōstration of his errors in such cases as they allow to be the truth Which they skilfully foreseeing haue lately inuented the distinction vsed here by the Iesuite that he may fall into heresie but he cannot teach it è cathedra that is by way of definition to offer it the vniuersall Church he may erre in his owne person but not as Pope to define and teach error The which is a sensles ridiculous shift though the desperatenesse of their cause haue put them to it For they think their Pope to be a publick person and his whole office to teach the Church wherupon his priuate errors as they cal them cannot but go with him into the chaire and Consistory For he that erreth in iudgement must of necessitie erre also in his determinations because no man can determine otherwise then he thinketh Neither is it likely that God will put him in trust with the faith of his Church that cannot guide his own For the rule must not only make straight that which is crooked but be straight it selfe Therefore if the Popes faith cannot direct himselfe much lesse shall it be able to preserue others Besides n Tom. 2. de sign eccl l. 18. c. vlt. Bozius saith He may be an hereticke yea write teach and preach heresie Which is all one as if he had said he may erre iudicially è cathedra because these three writing teaching or preaching are iudicial exercises of the chaire directed and reaching themselues to the Church for this speciall end to informe men Againe they haue erred in Church canons dispensations Decretals and matters defined by them in Councels therefore they haue erred è cathedra The consequence is proued o D. 19. in Canonicis Et si Romanorum because all these tend to the teaching of the Church and are the meanes whereby he publisheth his iudgement Of his dispensations Franciscus Victoria p Relect. 4. nu 6 saith The Pope in dispensing against the decrees of Councels and former Popes may erre and grieuously sinne Would it were so that we might doubt of this conclusion but we see dayly such large and dissolute dispensations proceed from the court of Rome to the ruine of small and great that the world is not able to beare them Thus Pius Quartus q Sess 8. can 3. sub Pio 4. decreed at Trent that it should be lawful for him to allow those degrees to marry together which God in Leuiticus had forbidden and to forbid those which God had allowed This was an hereticall decree è cathedra and according to it diuers Popes haue taught their people to marrie against the faith r Sum. Angel verbo Papa nu 1. Martin the fift allowed one to marry his owne sister germaine Another allowed K. Henrie the eight to marrie his brothers wife ſ Osor de gest Eman. l. 2. A third taught Emanuel the King of Portugall to marry two sisters Touching decrees t Alphon. adue heres l. 1. c. 4. Celestin ordained for example the mariage to be void when either of the parties fall into heresie u Sigeber chro an 768. 902. Sigon de Reg. Ital. l. 6. an 896. Baron tom 10. an 897. nu 6. Stephen the sixt decreed in a Councell that such as were ordained Bishops by Formosus his predecessor were not ordained lawfully because Formosus was an euill man This is plaine Donatisme x De consecr d. 4. A quodam Pope Nicolas decreed that to baptize onely in the name of Christ is good baptisme contrary to the decrees of y Ibid. Hi vero Gregorie and z Ib. Multi sunt Pelagius a 32. q. 7. Quod proposuisti Pope Gregorie decreed that a man might take another wife in case his wife were so diseased that she could not yeeld him the debt of mariage the which b Ib. §. Sed illud Ambr. saith Gratian is altogether contrary both to the sacred Canons and to the doctrine of the Apostles and Euangelists But what need we be curious in reckoning vp instances when it is a thing granted c D. 4. Si Papa that he may be found negligent of his owne and his brethrens saluation drawing innumerable people by troupes with himselfe to be damned in hell For doth not he erre perniciously enough that may thereby damne himselfe and others or were it possible he should do thus if Christ had priuiledged him as the Papists fancie 33 Moreouer it is granted by the Papists themselues that he may erre in faith not in manners or opinions onely For Occham d Q. 1 de potes sum Pont. c. 9. saith and sheweth that many things are contained in the Decretals which sauour of heresie And Almaine e Qu. in Vesper that the power of not erring in the faith is not alway in the Pope And I haue shewed out of Bozius that he may write and preach heresie and heresie is in matter of faith whereupon it followeth that his iudgement cannot be infallible when he cometh to proceed in determining because the true faith wherein he erreth is it that should rectifie the determination The which consequence f Relect. cont 3 q. 4. concl 4. arg 4. Doctor Stapleton granteth yeelding that if he erre in faith the whole Church also should with him be led into error and so the vnitie of faith should be vncertaine But granting this he denieth that he can erre in faith which is contrary to that which all others confesse and dayly experience demonstrateth 34 The last reason to shew he may erre euen when he teacheth the Church is this that there may be diuers instances giuen when the Church refused to heare him yea cast him out and deposed him as an hereticke which was needlesse if there had not bin a purpose in him to seduce the Church and danger lest his teaching should
for the most part also neglecting such exercises of religion by praier contemplation and repentance as of right ought to be ioyned with the outward abstinence yea they place and practise fasting e Dicimus quod de essentia iciunij quoad mo dum sunt duo scil vna comestio in spacio 24 horarum abstinentia à carnibus quis lacticinijs Llamas Sum. Eccl. p. 390. onely in forbearing flesh and things coming of flesh on certaine daies allowing themselues in steed thereof not onely fish which is as good as flesh but that which is daintier wine conserues sweet meates and such like in as great measure as can be as the experience of this our countrey sheweth among such as are Popishly affected 3 And suppose we had omitted all fasting indeed and allowed no time for it yet some Papists would haue borne vs company herein that so themselues might be guilty of breaking fasting daies as well as we For f Catharin adu noua dogm Caietan p. 262. Caietan holdeth It is no where commanded but onely by custome was brought in and is necessary neither for the seruice of God nor the loue of our neighbour Wherin though we refuse his iudgment yet touching our putting away the distinction of meates and daies we are not to be blamed For what libertie or loosenes can possibly be imagined to proceed froÌ„ eating flesh more theÌ„ froÌ„ eating of fish sweet meats spices other things finer theÌ„ flesh which the g Tho. 22 qu. 147. art 6. 7. 8. Llam method part 3. c. 5. §. 24. 26. Church of Rome alloweth And how may it be conceiued to be such disorder on a Friday or in Lent or on a Saints euen to eate butter or egs or a bit of vndainty flesh when they that are busiest in controlling it the same daies will drinke strong wine and other drinkes and eate confections of better stuffe and warmer operations Or why should a man be censured for eating his meate on an Ember day that fasts carefully and zealously vpon any day without respect of difference Especially h Fran. Victo relect 9. de temperant p. 132. our aduersaries confessing There is no kinde of nourishment either of plants or liuing creatures but by the law of God and nature we may lawfully vse it Nothing can be obiected but the precept of the Church for i Rational l. 6. c. 7 nu 22. p. 268. Durands reason is too grosse that fish is eaten and not flesh because God cursed the earth but not the waters in that his spirit moued on them But what such authoritie hath a particular Church to make a generall law against that which God and nature left at large and what such iurisd ction hath Rome of late obtained that it should forbid that which the Church in old time permitted 4 For k Theoâ— epit diuin decret c. vlt. Niceph l. 12 c. 34. all antiquitie can witnesse that in the Primitiue Church fasting was held an indifferent thing euery maÌ„ was left to his owne mind therein * Laxus ac liber modus abstinendi ponitur eúctis neque nos seuerus terror impellit sua queâ—que cogit velle potestas Prâ—d Cathem hym 8. no law binding him to this or that maner as l Comment in Act. c. 13. quem refert Catha adu Caiet p. 262. Caietan confesseth Montanus a condemned hereticke being the first that euer brought in the lawes of fasting from whom the Papists haue borrowed them For Irenaeus that liued 1400. yeares ago m Euseb hist l. 5. c. 26. Niceph. l. 4. c. 39. testifieth concerning the keeping of Lent in his time that some fasted before Easter one day onely some two daies some more and the vnitie of faith was well maintained notwithstanding all this varietie n 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 hom 2. de ieiun p. 135. Basil mentioneth onely fiue daies And Socrates o Hist l 5 c. 22. writeth how it was obserued one way in one place and another way in another They in Rome fasted three weekes onely and excepted Saterdaies and Lords daies The Illyrians and Greekes sixe weekes Others began seuen weekes before Easter yet so as they fasted but a few daies of all that time The like varietie they obserued in meates For in some places they eat no liuing thing at all some onely fish some fish and foule some dry bread some would eate no berries or egges and some not so much as bread For in these matters the Apostles left euery man to his owne will p 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Sozom. l. 1. c. 11. Spiridion the Bishop of Cyprus though he kept Lent yet was it but vpon certaine daies that he fasted and when a stranger came to him vpon one of those same daies he set swines flesh before him and eat thereof with him Yea q Câ—ropâ—lat de 〈◊〉 sic p 118. iâ—i Pacius annot p. 322. graec they kept a Lent before the feast of Christs natiuity also which we do not And touching Saterdaies r Ignat. ep ad Philip. Sext. Syn. in Trul. c. 55. some vtterly condemned fasting that day yet Å¿ Aug. ep 86. other obserued it And t Haeres 75. Epiphanius thought it an Apostolicall tradition to fast Wednesdaies and Fridaies excepting those betweene Easter and Whitsontide which yet the Church of Rome obserueth not And as for Ember daies and Saints euens we finde no vse of them for fasting till of late times And touching this whole question of fasting dayes let it be marked what t Ep 86. ad Casulan pa nò ante finem Saint Augustine writeth to a friend of his If saith he you aske my opinion concerning this matter I find in the writings of the Euangelists and Apostles and all the new Testament that we are commaunded to fast but what dayes we must fast and what dayes we must not I find it not determined by any commandement of Christ or his Apostles So that if we be faultie because we fast not after the Romish manner then themselues are likewise faultie because they fast not after the Primitiue order there being no greater reason why they should condemne vs for neglecting their fasts then why we should condemne them for neglecting the fasts of the auncient Church nor any cause why our libertie in the vse of meates and dayes should be taken in worse part now then the same libertie vsed of old in the Primitiue Church when these things depended vpon the will of him that fasted 5 And possible our accusers breake fasting dayes in the same maner that we do For first they eate as often and as good as we do when they fast Next they haue dispensations u Dispensati ieiuniuÌ„ non frangunt Llam metho pag. 395. which exempt them from fasting so commonly and of course that any man may see the Pope defined fasting by meates and dayes for no other cause but to vtter his pardons
the bodie after a long time hath shaken it off and looked through it by reason the vitall parts kept out the poison we do not call it a new bodie for that were absurd as our aduersaries call the Protestants a new Church but a bodie recouered and deliuered from a leprosie In the same manner we compare the Church and the Papacie 2 To the second part wherein the Iesuite saith he can shew diuers places where our religion is scarce heard of specially the Indies Iaponia and China I answer he doth wisely to carrie his Reader into his new world because he knew the old world hath Protestants in euery part of it as I haue said and a Engl. voyage◠the Spanish Inquisition hath found some there too and may daily find more for any thing they know yet the time being vnder 120. yeares since their first discouerie And if the Iesuite were well put to it it would be exceeding hard for him to shew so many of his Romane faith in those countries as is pretended The Spaniards I grant that dwell and traffick there professe it but the questiō is of the inhabitāts For I hold him a weak man and easie of beliefe that giueth any credit to the Iesuits reports and their Indian newes concerning this matter the which I say vpon euident grounds For Franciscus Victoria in his publicke lectures at Salmantica b Relect. 5. pag. 201. affirmed that the Barbarians by warre could not be moued to beleeue but to faine they beleeued and receiued the faith which is horrible and sacrilegious c Pag. 200. and he addeth that the Christian religion was neuer yet sufficiently offered them And Bartolomaeus Casas that was a Bishop in the Indies and saw all that was done d Span. Colon◠informed the king of Spaine that the crueltie of the Spaniards toward the people and the leudnesse of the Priests was such that the Indians beleeued nothing but mocked at al that was shewed them of God being rooted in this conceit that our God is the worst and the most wicked and vniust of all gods because he hath such seruants But I will handle this point at large in the 50. Digression where I doubt not but to giue the Iesuite enough of his Indies conuersion 3 And whereas the Iesuite saith our faith was scarce euer heard of among the Indians this is rashly spoken and more then he knoweth For Bishop Iewel hath e Def. Apolog. pag. 37. shewed out of Vesputius that in the East Indies there were many godly Bishops and sundrie whole countries conuerted and baptized before the Portugals came there or the Popes name was heard of And if it be true that f Osor gest Eman l. 3. pag. 83. 107. Fred. Lumnius de extrem Indic l. 2. c. 8. Sur. cōmen an 1565. Baron an 57. n 113. the Iesuites owne histories report that the Apostle Thomas lieth buried in a citie there and that he conuerted them to the faith of Christ and that the people of the countrey by his doctrine haue Bishops and Patriarkes to this day and maried Priests and the Scriptures and the Eucharist in both kinds then belike there were at least some steps of the Protestants religiō there afore the Popes authoritie was heard of And vnlesse he can proue out of the scriptures that Saint Thomas was a Papist which is hard to do he must graunt also that their first conuersion was to our faith for Saint Thomas conuerted them and we beleeue the same that he preached § 49. Nay euen our owne Chronicles can beare witnesse that our deare countrey England was conuerted by Austin a Monke sent from S. Gregory the Pope and continued in that faith without any knowledge of the Protestants religion which then was vnhatched for diuerse hundred yeares The like record in other countreys conuerted by meanes of those onely who did communicate and were members of the Romane Church we may finde in other histories See Socrat. l. 1. c. 29. cap. 28. 30. Sozom. l. 2 c. 23. Niceph. l. 14. c. 40. Platina in vitis Pontificum Steph. 7. Adrian 4. Aeneas Syluius de origine Bohemorum cap. 16. Baronius his Annales the Indian and Iaponian histories letters other particular histories of peculiar Christian countries The Answer 1 Touching the conuersion of England by Austin the Monk wherewith our aduersaries make so much ado I answer two things First that supposing he did conuert it yet was it not to the present Romane faith but to that which was the faith at that time For neither was Gregorie that sent him such a Pope as now the Pope is inuested with his supremacie nor his doctrine in the chiefe things sutable to that which is now holden as may be shewed by that which he hath left written against a L. 4. ep 76. 80. 83. l. 6. ep 88 194. Images b L. 7. ep 109. the supremacie c Super 7 psal poenitent the merit of workes and diuers other points though I will not denie but the contagion of some errors were got in in his time and Austine arriuing in England might do his best to scatter them Which being granted our aduersaries are neuer the nearer that they shoote at because we can shew the said things so brought in to be errors and different from that which the Church beleeued long before Austins coming And for triall hereof let any man set downe what Austine taught in this his imaginated conuersion of the countrey and contrarie to our faith and I will demonstrate it to haue bene against the teaching of the Primitiue Church before him 2 Secondly I say he conuerted not our countrey at all excepting the planting of some trifling ceremonies For Gildas d An. 580. Polyd praefat ad Tonstal praefixa Gildae Austin came an 597. Baro an 597. n. 20. who liued afore Austins coming writeth that the Brittans receiued the Christian faith from the first beginning And this appeareth to be true in that the Apostles themselues or some of that time preached in the countrey Baronius e An. 58. n. 51. thinketh Saint Peter was here Theodoret f De Curand Graec. affect l. 9. saith Saint Paule Nicephorus g L. 2. c. 40. saith Simon Zelotes h Baron an 35. n. 5. Some Ioseph of Arimathea but whosoeuer they were certaine it is that very timely in the Primitiue Church the Gospell was planted for so i Tertul. aduers Iudae Origen hom 4. in Ezek. Theod. hist l. 4. c. 3. the auncient writers agree whereby it appeareth that Austine is not the Apostle of our land as k Three conuers par 1. c. 8. some vainly giue it out It is l Alan Cope l. 5. c. 18. 19. obiected that the faith thus planted at the first was extinguished againe by heresie and paganisme in that part of the land which was inhabited by the English Saxons whom Austine conuerted Whereto I answer three
stood not disputing the matter as the Iesuite doth here with quo tempore quo Pontifice qua via qua vi quibus incrementis Were the workmen all asleepe were they all so cold and negligent For by this argument the tares might haue bin proued to be good corne but it was sufficient for him to espie them when he came into the field and to discerne them from the wheate and to giue charge to his seruants that they should not bind them vp therwith And thus came the change of religion into the church of Rome as these tares were sowne in the husbandmans field 7 Thus I haue sufficiently shewed that forsomuch as we finde the Romish faith to be against the Scriptures we haue iustly condemned it as heresie against the Catholicke faith though we were not able to note any time when it began or person that first deliuered it or people that resisted it But we haue another issue with our aduersaries about the second proposition wherein the Iesuite you see with much confidence assumeth it that there can be no proofe made of any time or persons wherein his Church altered the ancient faith He biddeth vs shew who brought in the profession of a new faith and when the old failed He asketh at what time vnder what Pope what rumors what lamentations did it breed what resistance was made against it what historiographer writ it did none oppose themselues and so concludeth that no mention being made in any storie that such an alteration was it is sure there was no such at all In which words containing the summe of all that remaineth in this section he requireth vs to shew two points first when the Church of Rome changed her religion and who they were therein that brought in a new faith Next what resistance was made against her when she did so Wherein I am resolued the Iesuite speaketh against his owne knowledge onely to set a good face on the matter For is it possible he should be so ignorant as to imagine these demaunds cannot be satisfied Such as he is may speake boldly and peremptorily but they that trust them wil be deceiued as I wil plainly shew in the two next digressions wherein I will out of sufficient records make direct proofe first that the beginning of many principall points of the Romish faith may be shewed both concerning the time and the persons that began them Secondly that in all ages the corruptions of that Church haue bene resisted as they came in The shewing of which two points will fully answer all that is contained in this section Digression 51. Naming seuen points of the Popish religion with the time when and maner how they gate into the Church thereby to shew that there is sufficient record to detect the noueltie of the present Romane faith 8 This point in the matter of PARDONS is so cleare that it cannot be denied for the most learned Papists that are acknowledge the vse of them to be come very lately into the Church Which being so it must necessarily be granted there is some thing altered and begun among them since the Apostles time Durand l 4. d. 20. q. 3. saith There are few things to be affirmed for certaintie concerning Pardons because the Scripture speaketh not expresly of them and the Saints Ambrose Hilary Austin Ierome speake not of them at all Caietan m Tract de Indulg c. 1. saith there can no certaintie be found touching the beginning of Pardons there is no authoritie of the Scripture or ancient fathers Greek or Latin that bringeth it to our knowledge Alphonsus n Haeres verbo Indulgen saith Their vse seemeth to haue come but lately into the Church And Henriquez the Iesuite o Sum. moral l. 7. c. 3. Scol saith There be certaine late Diuines which affirme it is no rashnesse if a man say the vse and practise of Indulgences is not from the Apostles times If there be no mention of them in the Scriptures nor Fathers nor in the ancient Church how can it be shifted off but they had a late beginning and so are not Catholicke 9 The beginning of THE POPES SVPREMACIE vsurped ouer other Bishops was in Boniface the third For Fr. Duarenus a Papist p De sacris eccl benefic l. 1. c. 10. writeth that with great ado he obtained of Phocas that he might be made the vniuersall and oecumenical Bishop which authoritie saith he his successors haue wonderfully enlarged whereas in the beginning as q Respons de priuileg patriar charum in iure Graecoroman tom 1. Balsamon a Greeke writer witnesseth the fiue Patriarks were of equall honor and stood all in steed of one head ouer the whole bodie of the vniuersall Church The beginning of his supremacie ouer Councels was of late since the Councels of r Sess 4. 5. Constance and ſ Sess 2 18. Basil decreed within these hundred yeares in the Councell of t Sess 11. Lateran by a few Italian Bishops whereas in the ancient Church it was otherwise For Cedrenus a Greeke historiographer u Annal. p. 361. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 writeth that the oecumenicall or generall Councels were so called for that by the commaund of the Emperour the chiefe Bishops throughout the Romane Empire were assembled And x Concord l. 2. c. 25. Cusanus a late Cardinall of the Church of Rome saith how all the eight generall Councels were gathered by the Emperour The beginning of his supremacie claimed ouer Princes was but of late For Sigebert mentioning the Popes proceeding against Henry the Emperour about 300. yeares since y Chron. ann 1088. pag. 129. Idem Auentin annal Boio l. 5. pag. 470. saith Be it spoken with the leaue of all good men this noueltie that I say not heresie had not as yet sprung vp in the world that Gods Priests should teach the people that they owe no subiection to euil Princes and though they haue sworne alleageance to him yet they owe him no fidelitie neither shall be counted periured which thinke against the King yea he that obeyeth him shall be counted for excommunicate and he that doth against the King shall be absolued from the guilt of iniustice and periury In which words we see how a Frier of their owne 300. yeares since calleth that noueltie and heresie that now is cherished among our aduersaries and maintained for a peece of the Catholick faith and the Iesuite possible calleth Campian a glorious Martyr because he was tied vp for the practise thereof For it is well enough knowne that neither he nor any other Priest were euer executed in the Queenes time but onely for publishing and practising that which here you see Sigebert calleth Noueltie Besides the Popes clawbacks is it because they are beggerly both in wealth and learning as Fr. Victoria z Relect. 1. de potest eccles pag. 39. noteth of them now adayes publish in print a Carer potest Rom. Pont. l 2.
yet he condemned all worship of them as sinne which he could not haue done if the Church had beleeued the contrary And the proceeding of the Councell of Frankford against the Nicen immediatly after it was done with the mislike that most men then liuing had thereof and the generall grudge of all the Christian world against it sheweth this to be true that I say u Opus illustriss Caroli magni c. An. 1549. The booke of Charles the great x Bell. de imag c. 14. Baron an 794. nu 31. containing the acts of the Councell of Frankford and confuting that of Nice is extant And as soone as the decree of the Nicen Councell came abroade and was knowne the faithfull refused it and spake against it as against a new conceit neuer heard of before y Houeden coÌ„tinuat Bedae ann 792. a good Historiographer writeth that Charles the king of France sent ouer into England a booke containing the acts of a Synode he meaneth the second Nicen Councell directed to him from CoÌ„stantinople wherein out alas for griefe many things are found inconuenient and contrary to the true faith Specially because by the vniforme consent almost of all the Easterne Bishops no lesse then three hunndred or more it is confirmed that images should be adored Which thing Gods Church altogether detesteth Against which booke Albinus wrote an Epistle maruellously confirmed by the authority of the Scriptures and together with the booke offered it to the king of France in the name of our Bishops and Nobles The Bishop of Rhemes liuing at the same time z Refert Alan Cope dial 4. c. 18. p. 564. writeth thus In the time of the Emperour Charles by the commandement of the Apostolicke sea there was a generall Councell celebrated the said Emperour calling it wherein according to the path way of the Scriptures and tradition of our ancestors that false Synode of the Greeks was destroid and wholly abrogated And the Bishop of Orleance at the same time likewise a Ionas de cult imag lib. 1. writeth that the images of Saints and stories of diuine things may be painted in the Church not to be worshipped but to be an ornament and to bring into the minds of simple people things done and past But saith he to adore the creature or to giue it any portion of diuine honour we count a vile wickednesse and detest the doer of such a wickednesse and with open mouth we proclaime him worthy to be accursed Would so great Peers of the Church and that so vniuersally haue thus bitterly taxed the Nicen Councell if it had not brought in and begunne a new doctrine Did the Christian world thus exclaime when nothing was altered Wey their words well and you will not thinke it 13 The doctrine touching the merit of workes was begun lately by the Schoolemen for Waldensis b Sacramental tit 1. cap. 7. p. 30 saith it is Pelagianisme and chargeth them to haue inuented the termes of condignitie and congruitie thereby to vtter it And it may easily be knowne to be to by this that the said Schoolemen agree no better in it For it were not possible they should be so contrary one to another therein if it had bene a Catholicke truth receiued from the beginning without alteration 14 The Masse began not all at once but by degrees For the Latin language came not in where the people vnderstood it not till the time of Gregory six hundred yeares after Christ as c Declarat ad censur theol Paris p. 153. Erasmus affirmeth the Church in former times vsing the Seruice in the vulgar tong The transubstantiation now beleeued to be therin is acknowledged by Scotus and Biel to be no elder then the Councell of Lateran For so d Tom. 3. d 50 sâ—ct 1. p. 628. c. Suarez the Iesuite reporteth of theÌ„ which report our aduersaries are bouÌ„d to credit coming from the mouth of so great a man of their own side The sacrifice conceited to be made therin in the iudgement of diuers learned Papists was not done by Christ For e Instit moral l. 1â— c. 8. Azorius the Iesuite writeth that some Catholickes deny that Christ offered vp himselfe vnder the forme of bread and wine in his last Supper The which is true indeed and thence it followeth that the opinion of such a sacrifice is not founded on Christs deed but vpon some later inuention since him And it is very plaine that Thomas of Aquin three hundred yeares since knew it not For f Qu. 83. art 1. disputing how Christ is sacrificed in the Eucharist he answereth that he is said so to be in two respects First because the ministration of the sacrament is an image representing the passion of Christ which is his true immolation and images vse to be called by the names of those things wherof they are images SecoÌ„dly in respect of the effect of his passion because by the sacrament we are made partakers of the fruit of his passion and saith he as concerning this secoÌ„d maner it is proper to this sacrameÌ„t that Christ is immolated or sacrificed therein These reasons of his shew that he knew no such kind of sacrifice as the Church of Rome now defendeth because the celebration of the Eucharist being in his opinion but an image of the true sacrifice of Christ he could think it to be no true sacrifice vniuocally so called but onely by externall relatioÌ„ And saying again that Christ is sacrificed therin by reason we are made partakers of the fruit of his passion he sheweth clearly he knew no reall sacrifice because we are made partakers of that euen in Baptisme also where no maÌ„ imagins Christ to be sacrificed They that are acquainted with Thomas maner of writing wil soon perceiue that had he know nor beleeued such a sacrifice in the Masse as is now conceited he would haue vttered it in other more effectuall termes and expressed it as fully as the Iesuites haue done since him And touching the outward forme of the Masse I need say no more then Cusanus the Cardinall hath confessed g Ep 7. p. 857. He saith The Apostles made the sacrament of the Eucharist by saying the Pater noster as Saint Gregory affirmeth and that diuers formes were vsed before one Scolasticus came who composed that which at this day our Church vseth The which also is diuers according to the diuersitie of places But we which liue vnder the Church of Rome haue receiued the order of the Masse from the Bishops of Rome themselues who successiuely haue added thereunto one after another and so it commeth to be a perfect Seruice or liturgie This confession is enough to shew when many substantiall points were brought against former antiquitie into the Masse For at this day the Liturgie and rites thereof containe many substantiall errors inuocation of the dead commemoration and intercession for soules in Purgatorie adoration crossing c. all which by
on the South or the sea and Aethiopia the ninetie seuenth of the Patriarkes the successor of Saint Marke the Euangelist Wherein we see the outward succession to remaine in that Church as entire as it doth in Rome and yet the Iesuite will not grant the same and such as communicate with it to be the true Apostolike Church that hath the true faith 3 And touching this outward succession because it is so much stood vpon I say it is not so entire as is pretended but certaine things may be obiected against it which are sufficient to take it way and plainly proue it to haue bene interrupted The which for the satisfaction of such as are desirous to looke into this matter I will briefly set downe in the digression ensuing Digression 53. Obiecting seuen things against the succession of Popes in the Sea of Rome whereby the same is clearely demonstrated to haue bene interrupted and not to be any certaine or infallible succession 4 First I haue shewed Digression 29. nu 38. that our aduersaries themselues haue no diuine authoritie but onely such as resteth vpon vncertaine proofs to conuince that the Bishop of Rome rather then of Antioch for example is Saint Peters successor For allow them that Peter himselfe was Bishop of Rome and appointed his successor to be the head of his Church after his death which he neuer did yet is there no infallible certaintie that this successor is the Pope Canus f Loc. l. 6. c. 8. saith it is proued but either by history or tradition and g Alphons haeres l. 1. c. 9. another learned Papist coÌ„cludeth that no man is bound to beleeue this or that Pope to be Saint Peters successor The which vncertaintie sheweth the succession of the Present Pope or any other before him to be indemonstrable 5 Secondly supposing Peter were Bishop of Rome yet there is no certaintie who succeeded him and one another a good while after h Euseb châ—on an 70. Opt. l. 2. Some say Linus succeeded Peter i Hier. script eccl in Clem. c. 52. in Esa Marian Scot an 71 Some Clemens k Refert Baro. an 69. Some that neither but Cletus l 8. q. 1. Si Petr. Maria Scot. an 71. Luit prand vit Pont. in Clem. Others say Linus and Cletus were Bishops vnder Peter in his life time but had no power of binding and loosing m Disputat hoc mundus quartus fucritne secundus Gab. lect 32. Touching Clemens all things are vncertaine n Fra. Agricol de primat Some lay the succession thus Linus Clemens Cletus Anacletus o Baro. ann 69. n. 42. Some thus Linus Cletus Clemens Anacletus p Tertull. carm l. 3. Some thus Linus Cletus Anacletus Clemens q Onuph annot ad Clem. Some thus Clemens Cletus Anacletus leauing out Linus r Optat. l. 2. Aug. ep 165. Some thus Linus Clemens Anacletus Euaristus leauing out Cletus Some thus Linus Cletus Clemens Euaristus leauing out Anacletus Here we see all things are intricate and no certaintie can be had The like may be obserued in the lower parts of the succession following 6 Thirdly the Sea hath bene voide a good space together without any Pope at all Å¿ Baro. an 53. n. 28. Ann. 253. vpon the death of Fabian it was voide one yeare and some moneths t Anastas in Honor. Anno 638. when Honorius died it was void one yeare seuen moneths and seuenteene daies Ann. 682. u Anastas in Agatho vpon the death of Agatho it was void one yeare seuen moneths and fiue daies Ann. 767. x Anastas in Paul vpon the death of Paul it was void one yeare and a moneth Baronius y An. 853. n. 63. saith It hath fallen out that it hath bene void above two yeares and fiue moneths the election hauing bene delaied through contention z Suppur ann 296. And in Martinus Polonus it is noted in the margent that the Papacy ceassed seuen yeares six moneths and fifteene daies These vacations cannot be denied and therefore the succession hath bene interrupted because at that time the supposed Head that should succeed was wanting 7 Fourthly about the yeare 850 a woman succeeded that in the habit of a man continued Pope two yeares and fiue moneths vntill being gotten with child she died in trauell in the open streets as she went on procession This is recorded by so many a Marian Scot. an 854. Martin Polo an 855. Palmer Floren. an 854. Sigeb an 854. Laoâ—ic Chalcocondyl reb Tuâ—c l 6 p. 411. Anton. hist part 2. tiâ— 16 c. 1. §. 7. Coel. Rho digni lect antiqu l. 8. c. 1. Historiographers and all Papists them selues some few excepted that receiued it froÌ„ them that now it is too late for the Iesuites to controll it And I care not though Anastasius that liued in Rome the same time wheÌ„ this was and writ the Popes liues mentioneth it not in his booke b Onuph annot Ioan. 8. Bell. Ro. Pont. l. 3 c. vlt. Baron ann 85â— n. 64. which is the best argument our aduersaries haue against it For Anastasius his booke is of small credit with themselues c Praefat. ad lecto He that put it foorth saith himselfe that it is a question among the learned whether this Anastasius be the true author of all the liues contained in the booke For Platina Trithemius and Onuphrius and others thinke Damasus writ their liues that were from S. Peter to himselfe Which being true then it is not certaine that Anastasius liuing in Rome when Ioan should be Pope wrote euery thing in that booke He saith that by reason of the often contradictions contained in the booke Baronius suspecteth it was coÌ„piled by more writers then one by two at least He saith many things are affirmed contrary to the truth which can be proued by the testimony of no graue or ancient author many slips in Chronagraphy are therin and many things repugnant and not agreeing together in many places other men haue added or detracted He saith it may not be denied that in the copy there are places so intricate that there is no hope to get out And he confesseth that after the life of Hadrian the second the liues of three Popes are omitted that went betweene him and Stephen the sixth as the life of Ioan is omitted that should haue gone betweene the liues of Leo the fourth and Bennet the third Yea d an 739. n. 6. Baronius in his owne fauour can espy that many things are fouÌ„d in others which Anastasius hath omitted but we are whooped at for saying so thogh we bring the testimony of e Martin Polo Sigeb Palmer Florent Fascic temp Anton. Volateran diuers authors that say she was put not in the catologue of Popes for the turpitude of the thing which might be the reason why Anastasius or others mention not the story For what should the Popes Library keeper do writing her
where the accusers and witnesses be vnlesse peraduenture a few desperate and gracelesse persons thinke the authoritie of the Bishops in Affricke that haue iudged theÌ„ to be lesse This which Cyprian saith was afterward decreed in Councels both general and prouincial which could not haue bene if the Pope had bene supreme iudge of all the Church and head of the vnity thereof nay Cyprian saith * Oportet vtique eos quibus prae sumus non circuÌ„cursare nec Episcoporum concordiaÌ„ cohaerentem sua temeritate col lidere The vnitie of Bishops is broken when men runne from their owne to the Bishop of Rome The eight generall Councell holden at Constantinople hath this n Can. 26. decree The order of appealing shall be this that he which thinketh himselfe wronged by his owne Bishop may appeale to his Metropolitan who shall call the matter before him But if Bishops thinke they are wronged by their Metropolitan be it lawfull for them to appeale to the Patriarke who shall end the strife that in no case a Metropolitan haue any power ouer his neighbour Metropolitan or a Bishop ouer his neighbour Bishop The like was decreed long before by the Councell of Chalcedon o Cap. 9. which expresly maketh the Patriarke of Constantinople the last and highest iudge vnder the Councell for all matters falling out in Greece And p C 22. the Councell of Mileuâ— excommunicateth all that would appeale to places out of Affricke Where then was the Popes supreme authoritie in these daies when the Councels and discipline thus hemmed men in that they should not come at him This some Papists see well enough and confesse Cusanus q Concord l. 2. c. 13. saith The Pope hath it not from the Church-rule that he may hurt the iurisdiction of other Bishops because this were to disturbe order Therfore we do not reade that the ancient Popes euer put themselues into such matters and peraduenture it would not haue bene suffered For the Councell of Affricke whereto S. Austin subscribed allowed no appeale from the Synode to the Pope because it was not found allowed in the Church canons but contrariwise the Nicen Councell decreed that a Synode should end euery cause where it was begun 28 The third experience is that he had no authoritie ouer generall Councels either of his owne power to call them or being called to be sole president or hauing decreed any thing to iudge or rule or countermand them all which he now vseth but then did none of theÌ„ For first the power of assembling Councels was in temporall magistrates so r L. 5. hist prâ—oem saith Socrates When once the Emperours begâ—n to be Chrstians from that time forward the Church affaires depended vpon theÌ„ and the greatest Councels were assembled and so still are at their appointment And this appeareth to be true by going through the particulars For let all the ancient Councels be read and there is not one of them but the very Actes and Titles thereof will shew the Prince called it which is so true that Pighius a learned Papist Å¿ Hier. l 6. c. 1. writeth The assembling of generall Councels was the inuention of Constantine The first general Councell was that of Nice t Gelas Cyzic pag. 67. Euseb vit Const l. 3. c. 6. Theod. l. 1. c. 7. Sozom. l. 1. c. 17. Nicet thesau l. 5. c. 5. assembled by the authoritie of Constantine the great The second was at Constantinople u Sozo l. 7. c. 7. Theod. l. 5. c. 7. Zon. to 3. p. 30. called by Theodosius the elder The third was at Ephesus x Concil Eph. graec Euagr. l. 1. c. 3. called by Theodosius the yonger The fourth was at Chalcedon y Concil Cale act 1. Zon. tom 3. pag. 39. called by Valentinian and Martian The fift was at Constantinople z Niceph. l. 17. c. 27. called by Iustinian The sixt was againe at Constantinople a Conc. gen 6. Act. 1. called by Constantinus Pogonatus The seuenth as the Papists reckon it was at Nice b Zon. tom 3. p. 95. Sigon de regn Ital. l. 4. called by the Empresse Irene The eight was againe at Constantinople c Zon. tom 3. pag. 134. Sigon ibid. l. 5. called by Basilius Macedo The Councell of Sardica was d Theod. l. 4. c. 4 called by Constantius the Councell of Syrmium against Photinus e Socr. l. 2 c. 29. Sozo l. 4. c. 6. by Constantine the great The CouÌ„cels of f Socr l 2 c. 36. Millan g Socr. l. 2. c. 37 Ariminum and h Carol. de imag Sigon de Reg. Ital. an 794. Frankford all assembled by the Emperours More particulars may be giuen but these are enow and i Ep. 9.23.24.26 the earnest suite that Leo maketh to the Emperor and Empresse both in his time for a Councell to be holden in Italy which yet he could not obtain maketh it out of question that al power of assembling councels was in the Emperor Yea the point is so cleare that k Aen. Sylu. de Gest conc Bas l. 1. Cusan conc l. 2 c 2. Marsil def part 2 c. 21. many Papists deny it not and l Fr. Victo relect 4. p. 162. some hold that at this day in certaine cases a generall Councell may be called against the Popes mind whether he will or no. 29 Next he was president in no Councell of a long time and when he was yet others were presidents as well as he the said office importing no such command ouer the Councell as now the Pope vsurpeth the which Duarenus a learned Papist confesseth m De sacris eccl benef minist p. 39. saying The office was no more but to call the rest together and to speake vnto them concerning the matters to be handled as the speaker in the Parliament calleth the assembly c. but hath no power ouer them yea the power of determining is in the court it selfe which may also command him Thus was it in times past saith he but now I know not how it cometh to passe that the chiefest gouernment ouer all Christians is giuen to him alone that he becometh free after the manner of Emperours from all Lawes and Councell decrees The which speech of this our aduersary is to be noted because the Iesuit would make you beleeue all Catholike men haue euermore receiued him from Christs own hands as the supreme iudge of all and the refusing of his will were the violating of the Churches vnitie But that which I haue said is easily confirmed for in the Nicen Councell Hosius the Bishop of Corduba Macarius the Patriarke of Ierusalem and Eustathius the Patriark of Antioch n Athan. Ep. ad Solit. Nicet the saur l. 5. c. 6. were presidents if not the Emperor himself also with theÌ„ for o Gelas Cyzic Act. conc Nic. c. 8 Socrat. l. 1. p. 174 gr the story saith That out of his chaire