Church may be restored Ludovicus Pius convocated a Councel at Aquisgrane to reform the abuses of the Clergy and confirmed the same and commanded the constitutions thereof to be put in execution as appeareth by his own Epistle to Arno Archbishop of Salzburge Otho the first called a Councel at Rome and caused Iohn the 12th to be deposed and Leo the eighth to be chosen in his place The sentence of the Councel was Petimus magnitudinem Imperii vestri c. VVe beseech your Imperial Majestie that such a Monster may be thrust out of the Roman Church And the Emperour confirmed it with a placet we are pleased Henry the fourth called a German Synod at VVormes And another of Germans and Italians at Brixia wherein sentence of deprivation was given against Gregorie the seventh and confirmed by the Emperour Quorum sententiae quòd justa probabilis coram Deo hominibúsque videbatur c. egoâ—quoque assentiens omne tibi Papatûs jus quod habere visus es abrenuncio c. Ego Henricus Rex Dei gratiâ cum omnibus Episcopis nostris tibi dicimus Descende descende To whose sentence because it seemed just and reasonable before God and men I also assenting do declare thee to have no right in the Papacy as thou seemest to have I Henry by the Grace of God King of the Romans with all our Bishops do say unto thee Descend from thy Seat descend So Frederick the first called a Councel at Papia to settle the right succession of the Papacy wherein Roland the Cardinal was rejected and Victor declared lawful Bishop of Rome And all this was done with due submission to the Emperour Christianissimus Imperator c. The most Christian Emperour in the last place after all the Bishops and Clergy by the advice and upon the petition of the Councel received and approved the election of Victor I will conclude this first part of the parallel with the words of the same Emperour in the same Councel Quamvis noverim officio ac dignitate Imperii penes nos esse potestatem congregandorum Conciliorum c. Although I know that by vertue of our office and Imperial dignity the power of calling Councels rests in us especially in so great dangers of the Church For both Constantine and Theodosius and Justinian and of fresher memory Charles the Great and Otho Emperours are recorded to have done this Yet I do commit the authority of determining this great and high businesse to your wisdome and power that is to the Bishops there assembled But it may be objected that the Emperours with their Synods never made any such Schismatical reformation as that which was made by the Protestants in England I answer First that the Schisme between the Roman Court and the English Church other Schisme I know none on our parts was begun long before that reformation in the daies of Henry the eighth and the breach sufficiently proclaimed to the world both by Romish Bulls and English Statutes We could not be the first separatours of our selves from them who had formerly thrust us out of their doors It is not Schismatical to substract obedience from them to whom it is not due who had extruded us out of their Society but it is Schismatical to give just cause of substraction Secondly I answer That there was a great necessity of Reformation both in Germany and England For proof whereof I produce two witnesses beyond exception the one a Pope the other a Cardinal The former is Adrian the sixth in his instructions to his Legate in the year 1522. which the Princes of the Empire take notice of in their auswer His words are these Scimus in hac Sancta sede aliquot jam annis multa abhominanda fuisse c. VVe know that for some by-past yeares many things to be abominated have been in this holy See abuses in spiritual matters excesses in commands and to conclude all things out of order c. wherein for so much as concerns us thou shalt promise that we will use all our endeavour that first this Court from whence peradventure sure enough all the evil did spring may be reformed that as corruption did flow from thence to the inferiour parts of the Church so may health and Reformation To procure which we do hold our selves so much more strictly obliged by how much we do see the whole world greedily desire such a Reformation O Adriane si nunc viveres The other witnesse is Cardinal Pool who makes two main ends of the Councel of Trent The one the reconciling of the Lutherans The other quo pacto ipsius Ecclesiae praecipua vel potiùs omnia ferè membra ad veterem disciplinam instituta à quibus non parùm declinârunt revocentur To consider how the principal members of the Church or rather almost all the members might be reduced to their ancient discipline and Ordinances from which they had swerved much Yet when himself was sent afterwards by Paul the fourth to reform the Church of England it seemeth that he had forgotten those great deviations of the principall members and those very representations which he himself with eight other selected Cardinals and Prelates had made upon oath to Paul the third Then he saw that this lying flattering principle that The Popâ— is the Lord of all benefices and therefore cannot be a Simoniack was the fountain ex quo tanquam ex equo Trojano irrupere in Ecclesiam Dei tot abusus et tam gravissimi morbi c. from which as from the Trojan horse so many abuses and so grievous diseases had broken into the Church of God and brought it to a desperate condition to the derision of Christian Religion and blaspheming of the Name of Christ And that the cure must begin there from whence the disease did spring by taking away all abuses in dispensations of all kinds and ordinations and collations and provisions and pensions and permutations and reservatitions and coadjutorships and expectative graces and unions and non-residence and exemptions and absolutions and all such pecuniary artifices because it is not lawful by any means to reap any gain from the exercise of the power of the Keyes Tollantur say they hae maculae c. Let these spots be taken away to which if any entrance be given in any Common-wealth or Kingdom whatsoever it must needs fall headlong instantly or very shortly to ruine Thirdly I answer that the Emperours and the German Church did not onely desire a reformation as appeareth by the Letter of Sigismond the Emperour to the King of France Maximo desideâ—io jamdudum tenebamur c. We have long desired greatly to see the onely Spouse of Christ the Catholick Church happily reformed in our daies but after we were assumed to the Imperial Government our desire passed into command c. And the advises of Constance conceived by the Deputies of the German Nation in
as in justice he is bound he is not to be reputed a Schismatick If men might not be saved by a general and implicite repentance they were in a woful condition for who can tell how oft he offendeth Cleanse thou me from my secret faults And if by general and implicite repentance why not by general and implicite faith why not by general and implicite obedience So as they do their uttermost indeavours to learn their duties and are ready to conform themselves when they know them God looks upon his creatures with all their prejudices and expects no more of them then according to the talents which he hath given them If I had books for that purpose I might have cited many Lawes and many Authors to prove that the final separation from Rome was made long before the reformation of the Church of England But it is a truth so evident and so undeniable by all these who understand our affaires that I seem to my self to have done overmuch in it already I do expect that it should be urged by some that there was a double separation of the Church of England from Rome The former from the court of Rome The second from the Church of Rome The former in point of discipline The latter in point of Doctrine The former made in the daies of Henry the Eighth The other in the daies of Edward the sixth That if the Protestants were not guilty of the former yet certainly they were guilty of the later To this I give two answers first that the second separation in point of Doctrine doth not concern this question Whether the Church of England be Schismatical but another whether the Church of England be Haereticall or at least Heterodox for every error doth not presently make an haeresy which cannot be determined without discussing the particular differences between the Church of Rome and the Church of England It is an undeniable principle to which both parties do yeeld firm assent that they who made the first separation from the primitive pure Church and brought in corruptions in faith Leiturgy or use of the Sacraments are the guilty party Yea though the separation were not local but onely moral by introducing errours and innovations and making no other secession This is the issue of our controversie If they have innovated first then we are innocent and have done no more then our duties It is not the separation but the cause that makes a Schismatique Secondly I answer that as Roman Catholicks not Protestants were the authors of the Separation of England from the Court of Rome so the Court of Rome it self not Protestants made the Separation of England from the communion of the Church of Rome by their unjust and tyrannical censures excommunications and interdictions which they thundred out against the Realm for denying their spiritual Soveraignty by divine right before any reformation made by Protestants It was not Protestants that left the communion of the Church of Rome but the Court of Rome that thrust all the English Nation both Protestants and Roman Catholicks together out of their doores and chased them away from them when Pope Paul the third excommunicated and interdicted England in the daies of Henry the eighth before ever any reformation was attempted by the Protestants In that condition the Protestants found the Church and Kingdom of England in the daies of Edward the sixth So there was no need of any new separation from the communion of the Church of Rome The Court of Rome had done â—hat to their hands So to conclude my first Proposition Whatsoever some not knowing or not weighing the state of our affaires And the Acts and Records of those times have rashly or ignorantly pronounced to the contrary it is evident that the Protestants had no hand either in the separation of the English Church from the Court of Rome or in their separation from the Church of Rome The former being made by professed Roman Catholicks the later by the Court of Rome it self both before the reformation following in the dayes of Edward the sixth both at a time when the poor Protestants suffered death daily for their conscience upon the six bloody Articles CHAP. IV. That the King and Kingdom of England in the separation from Rome diâ— make no new Law but vindicate their ancient Liberties THe second Conclusion upon examination will prove as evident as the former that Henry the eighth and those Roman Catholicks with him who made the great separation from the Court of Rome did no new thing but what their predecessors in all ages had done before them treading in the steps of their Christian Ancestors And first it cannot be denyed but that any person or Society that hath an eminent reputation of learning or prudence or piety or authority or power hath ever had and ever will have a great influence upon his or their neighbours without any legal Jurisdiction over them or subjection due from them Secondly it is confessed that in the primitive times great was the dignity and authority of the Apostolical Churches as Rome Antiâ—ch Ephesus Hierusalem Alexandria which were founded by the Apostles themselves And that those ancient Christians in all their differences did look upon the Bishops of those Sees as honourable Arbitrators and faithful Depositaries of the genuine Apostolical traditions especially wherein they accorded one with another Hence is that of Tertullian Constat omnem doctrinam quae cum illis Ecclesiis Apostolicis matricibus et originalibus conspi at c. Whatsoever doctrine agrees with those Apostolical original mother Churches is to be reputed true And in this sense and no other Saint Cyprian a great admirer and imitater both of the matter and words of Tertullian whom he honoured with the title of his Master doth call the Church of Rome a Matrix and a root But if the tradition varied as about the observation of Easter between Victor Bishop of Rome and Polycrates Bishop of Ephesâ—s the one prescribing from St. Peter and S. Paul the other from S. Iohn The respective Churches did conform themselves to their Superiours or if they were free as the Britannique Churches were to their own judgment or to the example of their neighbour Churches or kept them to the tradition delivered unto them by their first converters As in this very controversie about Easter and some baptismal rites the Brittish and Scottish Bishops alwaies adhered to the Eastern Church A strong presumption that thence they received the faith and were not subordinate to the Patriarchal See of Rome But yet all this honourable respect proceeded from a free prudential compliance without any perpetual or necessary subjection Afterwards some Churches lost some gained the place and dignity of Apostolical Churches either by custome so Ephesus lost it or by the Canons of the Fathers so Constantinople did get it or lastly by Imperial priviledges so Iustiniana and Carthage obtained it Thirdly it
Command or permission And after permission onely by authority of the King and not by authority of the Pope to shun confusion and mixture of Jurisdictions 10. Neither the King nor his Realm nor his Officers can be excommunicated or interdicted by the Pope nor his Subjects absolved from their Oath of Allegiance 11. The Pope cannot impose Pensions in France upon any benefices having cure of soules nor upon any others but according to the Canons according to the expresse condition of the resignation or ad redimendum vexationem 12 All Bulls and Missives which come from Rome to France are to be seen and visited to try if there be nothing in them prejudicial in any manner to the estate and liberties of the Church of France or to the Royal authority 13 It is lawful to appeal from the Pope to a future Councel 14 Ecclesiastical persons may be convented judged and sentenced before a secular Judge for the first grievous or enormious crime or for lesser offences after a relapse which renders them incorrigible in the eye of the Law 15. All the Prelates of France are obliged to swear feaâ—ty to the King and to receive from him their investituâ—es for their fees and manours 16. The Courts of Parliament in case of appeales as from abuse have right and power to declare null void and to revoke the Popes Bulls and Excommunications and to forbid the execution of them when they are found contrary to sacred decrees the liberties of the French Church or the prerogative Royal. 17. Generall Councels are above the Pope and may depose him and put another in his place and take cognisance of appeals from the Pope 18. All Bishops have their power immediately from Christ not from the Pope and are equally successours of Saint Peter and the other Apostles and Vicars of Christ. 19. Provisions reservations expectative graces c. have no place in France 20. The Pope cannot exempt any Church Monastery or Ecclesiastical body from the Jurisdiction of their Ordinary nor erect Bishopricks into Archbishopricks nor unite them nor divide them without the Kings Licence 21. All those are not hereticks excommunicated or damned who differ in some things from the doctrine of the Pope who appeal from his decrees and hinder the execution of the ordinances of him or his Legates These are part of the liberties of the Gallicane Church The ancient British Church needed no such particular priviledges since they never knew any forreign Jurisdiction The English British Church which succeeded them in time in place and partly in their members and holy orders ought to have injoyed the same freedom and exemption But in the daies of the Saxon Danish and Norman Kings the Popes did by degrees insinuate themselves into the mesnagery of Ecclesiastical affaires in England Yet for many ages the English Church injoyed all these Gallicane priviledges without any remarkable interruption from the Roman Court. As in truth they do of right by the Law of nature belong to all Sovereign Princes in their own Dominions Otherwise Kingdomes should be destitute of necessary remedies for their own conservation And in later ages when the Popes having thrust in their heads did strive to draw in their whole bodies after the whole Kingdome opposed them and made Lawes against their several grosse intrusions as we have formerly seen in this discourse And never quitted these English as well as Gallicane liberties untill the Reformation But perhaps we may find more loyalty and obedience to the Court of Rome in the Catholick King Not at all Whatsoever power King Henry or any of his Successours did ever assume to themselves in England as the Political Heads of the Church the same and much more doth the Catholique King not onely pretend unto but exercise and put in practice in his Kingdome of Sicily both by himself by his Delegates whom he substitutes with the same authority to judge and punish all Ecclesiastical crimes to excommunicate and absolve all Ecclesiastical persons Lay-men Monks Clerks Abbats Bishops Archbishops yea and even the Cardinals themselves which inhabit in Sicily He suffers no appeals to Rome He admits no Nuncio's from Rome Atque demum respâ—ctâ— Ecclesiasticae Iurisdictionis neque ipsam Apostolicam sedem recognoscere hâ—bâ—re superiorem nisi in casu praevenâ—ionis And to conclude he acknowledgeth not any superiority of the Sâ—e of Rome it sâ—lf but onely in case of prevention What saith Baronius to this He complains bitterly that praetensa Apostolica authoritate contra Apostolicam ipsam sedem grande piaculum perpetratur c. Vpon pretence of Apostolique authority a grievous offence is committed against the Apostolick See the power whereof is weaknâ—d in the Kingdome of Sicily the authority thereof abrogated the Iurisdiction wronged the Ecclesiastical Lawes violated and the rights of the Church dissipated And a little after he declaimes yet higher Quid in ad ista dixeris lector What wilt thou say to this Reader but that under the name of Monarchy besides that one Monarch which all the faithful have ever acknâ—wledged as the onely visible Head in the Church Another head it risen up and brought into the Kingdome of Sicily for a Monster and a prodigy c. But for this liberty which he took the King of Spain fairly and quietly without taking any notice of his Cardinalitian dignity caused his books to be burned publickly It will be objected That the King of Spain challengeth this power in Sicily not by his Regal authority as a Sovereign Prince but by the Bull of Vrbanus the second who constituted Roger Earl of Sicily and his heires his Legates à latere in that Kingdome whereby all succeeding Princes do challenge to be Legati nati with power to substitute others and qualifie them with the same authority But first if the Papacy be by Divine right what power hath any particular Pope to transfer so great a part of his office and authority from his Successours for ever unto a Lay-man and his heires by way of inheritance If every Pope should do as much for another Kingdom as Vrbanus did for Sicily the Court of Rome would quickly want imployment Secondly if the Bull of Vrbanus the second was so available to the succeeding Kings of Sicily which yet is disputed whether it be authentick or not whether it be full or defective and mutilated why should not the Bull of Nicholas the second his predecessour granted to our Edward the Confessour and his Successours be as advantagious to the succeeding Kings of England why not much rather seeing that they are thereby constituted or declared not Legates but Governours of the English Church in the Popes place or rather in Christs place seeing that without all doubt Sicily was a part of the Popes ancient Patriarchate but Britaigne was not And lastly seeing the situation of Sicily so much nearer to Rome renders the Sicilians more capable of receiving Justice from thence then the English
and of the South Saxons under Kingils their King who did unite the heptarchy into a Monarchy were converted by the preaching of Berinus an Italian by the perswasions of Oswald King of Northumberland Oswâ—ld King of Northumberland was baptized in Scotland and Religion luckily planted in that Kingdome by Aidan a Scottish Bishop Penda King of Mercia was converted and christened by Finanus Successour of Aidan by the means of a marriage with a Christian Princesse of the Royal Family of Northumberland Sigibert King of the East Angles in whose daies and by whose means Religion took root among the East Saxons was converted and christned in France All these Saxons which were converted by Britons or Scots may as justly plead for their old immunities as the Britons themselves We acknowledge Saint Gregory to have been the first that did break the ice And yet we see how small a proportion of the inhabitants of the British Islands do owe their conversion to Rome in probability not a tenth part Fourthly consider that the conversion of a Nation to the Christian faith is a good ground in equity all other circumstances concurring why they should rather submit themselves or a General Councel assign them to that See that converted them then to any other Patriarchate As was justly pleaded in the case between the Bishops of Rome and Constantinople about the right of Jurisdiction over the Bulgarians But the conversion of a Nation is no ground at all to invest their converter presently with Patriarchal authority over them or any Ecclesiastical superiority especially where too great a distance of place doth render such Jurisdiction uselesse and burthensome And most especially where it cannot be done without prejudice to a former owner thrust out of his just right meerly by the power of the sword as the British Primates were Or to the subjecting of a free Nation to a forreign Prelate without or beyond their own consent In probability of reason the Britons ought their first conversion to the Eastern Church as appeareth by their accord with them in baptismal rites and the observation of Easter Yet never were subject to any Eastern Patriarch Sundry of our British and English Bishops have converted forreign Nations yet never pretended to any Jurisdiction over them Fifthly and lastly consider That whatsoever title or right S. Gregory did acquire or might have acquired by his piety and deserts towards the English Nation it was personal and could not descend from him to such Successours who both forfeited it many waies and quickly within four or five years after his death quitted their Patriarchate and set an higher title to a spirituall Monarchy on foot whilest the most part of England remained yet Pagan when Pope Boniface did obtain of Phoeas the usurper an usurping Pope from an usurping Emperour to be universal Bishop Their Canon-shot is past that which remains is but a small volly of Muskets They adde that we have schismatically separated our selves from the Communion of our Ancestours whom we believe to be damned That we have separated our selves from our Ecclesiastical predecessours by breaking in sunder the line of Apostolical succession whilest our Presbyters did take upon them to Ordain Bishops and to propagate to their Successours more then they received from their predecessours That our Presbyters are but equivocall Presbyters wanting both the right matter and form of Presbyterial ordination To extinguish the order is more schismatical then to decline their authority And lastly that we derive our Episcopal Jurisdiction from the Crown First for our natural Fathers the answer is easie We do not condemn them nor separate our selves from them Charity requires us both to think well and speak well of them But prudence commands us likewise to look well to our selves We believe our fathers might partake of some errours of the Roman Church we do not believe that they were guilty of any heretical pravity but held alwaies the truth implicitely in the preparation of their minds and were alwaies ready to receive it when God should be pleased to reveal it Upon these grounds we are so far from damning them that we are confident they were saved by a generall repentance He that searcheth carefully into his own heart to find out his errours and repenteth truly of all his known sins and beggeth pardon for his unknown errours proceeding out of invincible or but probable ignorance in Gods acceptation repenteth of all Otherwise the very best of Christians were in a miserable condition For who can tell how oft he offendeth The second accusation of Priests consecrating Bishops is grounded upon a senselesse fabulous fiction made by a man of a leaden heart and a brazen forehead of I know not what assembly of some of our Reformers at the sign of the Nags-head in Cheapside or rather devised by their malicious enemies at the sign of the Whetstone in Popes-head-Alley Against which lying groundlesse drowsie dream we produce in the very point the authentick records of our Church of things not acted in a corner but publickly and solemnly recorded by publick Notaries preserved in publick Registers whither every one that desired to see them might have accesse And published to the world in Print whilest there were thousands of eye-witnesses living that could have contradicted them if they had been feigned There is no more certainty of the Coronation of Henry the eighth or Edward the sixth then there is of that Ordination which alone they have been pleased to question done not by one as Austine consecrated the first Saxon Prelates but by five consecrated Bishops Let them name the person or persons And if they were Bishops of the Church of England we will shew them the day the place the persons when and where and by whom and before what publick Notaries or sworn Officers they were ordained And this not by uncertain rumours but by the Acts and instruments themselves Let the Reader chuse whether he will give credit to a sworn Officer or a professed adversary to eye-witnesses or to malicious reporters upon hearsay to that which is done publickly in the face of the Church or to that which is said to be done privately in the corner of a Tavern These authentick evidences being upon occasion produced out of our Ecclesiasticall Courts and deliberately perused and viewed by Father Oldcorn the Jesuit he both professed himself clearly convinced of that whereof he had so long doubted that was the legitimate succession of Bishops and Priests in our Church and wished heartily towards the reparation of the breach of Christendome that all the world were so abundantly satisfied as he himself was Blaming us as partly guilty of the grosse mistake of many for not having publickly and timely made known to the world the notorious falshood of that empty but far spread aspersion against our succession As for our parts we believe Episcopacy to be at least in Apostolical institution approved by Christ himself in
A IVST VINDICATION OF THE Church of England FROM The unjust Aspersion of Criminal SCHISME WHEREIN The nature of Criminal Schisme the divers sorts of Schismaticks the liberties and priviledges of National Churches the rights of Sovereign Magistrates the tyranny extortion and Schisme of the Roman Court with the grievances Complaints and opposition of all Princes and States of the Roman Communion of old and at this very day are manifested to the view of the World By the Right Reverend Father in God Iohn Bramhall Dr. in Divinity and Lord Bishop of Derry Pacian in ep ad Sempron My name is Christian my sirname is Catholique By the one I am known from Infidels by the other from Hereticks and Schismaticks LONDON Printed for Iohn Crook at the sign of the Ship in S. Paul's Church-Yard 1654 THE Contents of the particular CHAPTERS CHAP. I. THe Scope and summe of this Treatise Pag. 1. CHAP. II. The stating of the question what is Schisme who are Schismaticks and what is signified by the Church of England in this question p. 6. CHAP. III. That the Separation from the Court of Rome was not made by Protestants but Roman Catholicks themselves p. 31 CHAP. IV. That the King and Kingdome of England in their Separation from Rome did make no new Law but vindicate the ancient Law of the Land pag. 54. CHAP. V. That the Britannick Churches were ever Exempted from all forreign Iurisdiction And so ought to continue pag. 87 CHAP. VI. That the King and Church of England hâ—d both sufficient authority and sufficient grounds to withdraw their obedience from Rome p. 1â—6 CHAP. VII That all Kingdomes and Republicks of the Roman Communion Germany France Spain Portugal Sicilly Brabant Venice do the same thing in effect when they have occasion p. 160 CHAP. VIII That the Pope and Court of Rome are many waies guilty of Schisme and the true cause of the Dissensions of Christendome Pag. 229 CHAP. IX An Answer to the Objections of the Romanists p. 245 CHAP. X. The Conclusion of the Treatise p. 275. Courteous Reader BY reason of the Authour's Absence and difficulty of the written Copy severall Errata's have past the Presse which you are desired to amend and among the rest these following Page 7. in Margine Act. leg Art p. 13. line 17. Lyne leg kind p. 13. in marg Manrit leg Maurit p. 14 l 1 Schimse leg Schisme p. 15 l. 15 Creed leg Creeds p. 18 l. ult legemachies leg logomachies p. 21 l. 8. qui leg quis p. 22 l. 4. teach for touch p. 35 l. 8. these for those p. 39. l. 31. dele little p. 42 in margine modo for nodâ— p. 65 in margine 78 for 787 p. 67 Hesâ—is for Hosius in marg p. 74 l. 1 sepultura for sepulchra p. 79 l. 4 Asseâ—tie for Asserio p. 85 l. 30 the for his Legates p. 102 l. 25 as for or p. 113 in marg lais for Caiet p. 119 l. 2 novum for nonum p. 121 l. 11 no for had p. 140 for 138 p. 141 for 139 p. 144 for 142 p. 145 for 143 p. 914 for 149 p. 129 l. 23 chink for klink and l. 25 despensations for dispensations p. 130 l. 10 Simoniae for Simonia and l. 20 21 aliam and nummam for alium and nummum p. 131 l. 1 conscivit for consuevit p. 132 l. 16 singulta for singultu and lin 20 speculiem for speculum p. 133 l. 28 papale for papali l. 29 rigarâ— for rigore line 30 praecipient for praecipiente p. 138 l. 6. for then the oath read then that the oath p. 142 l. 5 sweare for sware And in the margent Hoops for Harps p. 153 l. 15 provisos for provisors And in the marg theops for the copy p. 164 l. 10 deest not p. 165 l. 30 thar for that p. 186 l 32 which leg wherewith p. 199 l. 14 Redimendum leg Redimendam p. 214 l. 4 leg Placaert l. 27 but for but p. 217 in marg Imprss. leg Impress A JUST VINDICATION OF THE Church of England CHAP. I. The Scope and summe of this Treatise 1. NOthing hath been hitherto or can hereafter be objected to the Church of England which to strangers unacquainted with the state of our affaires or to such of our Natives as have onely looked upon the case superficially hath more Colour of truth at first sight then that of Schisme that we have withdrawn our obedience from the Vicar of Christ or at least from our lawful Patriarch and separated our selves from the Communion of the Catholick Church A grievous accusation I confesse if it were true for we acknowledge that there is no salvation to be expected ordinarily without the pale of the Church 2. But when all things are Judiciously weighed in the Ballance of right reason when it shall appear that we never had any such forrein Patriarch for the first six hundred years and upwards And that it was a grosse Violation of the Canons of the Catholick Church to attempt after that time to obtrude any forrein Jurisdiction upon us That before the Bishops of Rome ever exercised any Jurisdiction in Brittain they had quitted their lawful Patriarchate wherewith they were invested by the authority of the Church for an unlawful Monarchy pretended to belong unto them by the institution of Christ That whatsoever the Popes of Rome gained upon us in after-ages without our own free consent was meer tyranny and usurpation That our Kings with their Synods and Parliaments had power to revoke retract and abrogate whatsoever they found by experience to become burthensome and insupportable to their Subjects That they did use in all ages with the consent of the Church and Kingdom of England to limit and restrain the Exercise of Papal power and to provide remedies against the daily incroachments of the Roman Court so a Henry the Eighth at the reformation of the English Church did but tread in the steps of his most renowned Ancestours who flourished whilest Popery was in its Zenith And pursued but that way which they had chalked out unto him a way warranted by the practise of the most Christian Emperours of old and frequented at this day by the greatest or rather by all the Princes of the Roman Communion so often as they find occasion When it shall be made evident that the Bishops of Rome never injoyed any quiet or settled possession of that power which was after deservedly cast out of England so as to beget a lawful prescription And lastly that we have not at all separated our selves from the Communion of the Catholick Church nor of any part thereof Roman or other qua tales as they are such but only in their innovations wherein they have separated themselves first from their Common Mother and from the fellowship of their own Sisters I say when all this shall be cleared and the Schisme is brought home and laid at the right door then we may safely conclude that by how much we should turn more Roman
is not to be doubted of but that after the year six hundred after that Pope Boniface had quitted his Patriarchal dignity by assuming a more lofty title of universal Bishop The succeeding Popes by the connivence leave or consent of our Kings did sometimes more sometimes lesse upon pretence of their universal Jurisdiction by degrees thrust in their sickle into the Ecclesiastical affaires of England Whosoever shall ponder duly with what a depth of prudence the Roman Court hath mesnaged all occasions and occurrences to the advantage and advancement of that See and consequently to the improvement of their own authority whosoever shall weigh seriously with what art and cunning the Papacy as it now is was tacked into the Church contrary to wind and weather and how their beginning of unity was scrued up to an omnipotence and universality of power whosoever shall duly consider what advantage they made to that See and therein to themselves by the onely countenancing of Phocas his base and bloody murther or of Charles Mà rtel his more glorious and successeful revolt will not wonder to observe how they did watch their times when we had Princes of weak Judgments or necessitous or superstitious or of unjust or Litigious titles to wind themselves into Britain Nay rather he will admire that they did not radicate themselves more deeply and more firmly therein which without doubt they had effected but for their exorbitant rapines whilest they thought that like Foxes they might prey most boldly farthest from their own Kennel Anglia verè hortus noster deliciarum puteus inexhaustus est ubi multa abundant multa de multis extorqueri possunt That England indeed was his garden of delight a Well that could not be drawn dry And where many things did abound out of much much might be extorted But first this intrusion was manifest usurpation and tyranny This was the Gangrene of the Church which no subsequent possession or submission could warrant no tract of time or prescription sufficiently confirm Quod ab initio fuit invalidum tractu temporis non convalescit That which is not onely unjust but invalid in its beginning can never be made valid by the empty pretense of a following custome or prescription Neither do I find in truth that any of the petite Saxon Kings or their Subjects though some of them indebted to S. Gregory for their first conversion and all of them much weakned by their Sevenfold division for at first of Seven Kings there was but onely one who was a Christian namely the King of Kent Neither was it any of his progeny who did afterwards unite the Heptarchy into a Monarchy much lesse that any of the succeeding Kings of England or of great Brittain united did ever make any Solemne formal or obliging acknowledgment of their submission to the Bishop of Rome But on the contrary when Austin first arrived in England he staied in Isle of Thanet untill he knew the Kings pleasure and offered not to preach in Kent until he had the Kings License for him and his followers to preach throughout his Dominions So not onely their Jurisdiction but even the exercise of their pastorall function within that Realm was by the Kings leave and Authority The donation and resignation of King Iohn whereby he went about to make a free Kingdom servile and feudatary to the Pope did concern the Crown more then the Miter and was soon hissed out of the world to the perpetual shame and infamy of such mercenary Pastors yet to obtain this Ludibrious act the power of the Keyes was abused and the Kingdom of England stood interdicted by the space of six years and three Months The Popes in later times had some power in England of courtesy not of Duty but never that omnipotence which they gaped after Sometimes they sent their Nuncios or Legates into England So they did of old into other Patriarchates Sometimes they admitted appeales from England to Rome So they did of old from Africk Sometimes they excommunicated the English Subjects So did Pope Victor long since excommunicate all the Asiaticks But neither Asia nor Africk for all that did acknowledge the Popes Jurisdiction On the other side sometimes their Legates were not permitted to enter into the Realm or after their arrival thrust out of the Realm unless they woâ—ld give caution by oath for their good demesnour Sometimes their Bulls and excommunications were slighted or damned and they who procured them soundly punished for their labours Sometimes all appeales to Rome were prohibited under most severe penalties and their decrees rejected All this while our Kings and Bishops called Councells the one under civil punishments the other under Ecclesiastical made Ecclesiastical lawes and constitutions in their Synods and Parliaments yea expresse constitutions against the Court of Rome it self with as much tartnesse and vehemency as King Henry the Eighth And with this onely difference that they indeavoured to draw the people out of the Popes clawes at home and he thought it more expedient to throw the Pope over the Brittish Sea once for altogether The old and lawful Patriarchal power of the Roman Bishops within their own destricts had been renounced long before by themselves Their new universal Monarchy erected by themselves was not capable of prescription or if it had yet such a dubious unquiet possession as the Popes did hold in England at the mercy and discretion of the right owners was not sufficient to make a legal prescription or to justifie their pretended title or to render them bonae fidei possessores lawful and conscionable possessours This is that which I am now to demonstrate in this second ground The most famous I had almost said the onely appellant from England to Rome that we read of before the Conquest was Wilfride Arch-Bishop of York who notwithstanding that he gained sentence upon sentence at Rome in his favour And notwithstanding that the Pope did send expresse Nuncios into England on purpose to see his sentence executed yet he could not obtain his restitution or the benefit of his sentence for six years during the Raignes of King Egbert and Alfrede his son Yea King Alfrede told the Popes Nuncios expresly That he honoured them as his Parents for their grave lives and honourable aspects but he could not give any assent to their Legation Because it was against reason that a person twice condemned by the whole Councel of 〈◊〉 English should be restored upon the Popes Letter If they had believed the Pope to be their competent Judge either as universal Monarch or so much as Patriarch of Brittaine or any more then an honourable Arbitrator which all the Patriarchs were even without the bounds of their proper Jurisdictions how comes it to passe that two Kings successively and the great Councels of the Kingdome and the other Arch-Bishop Theodore with all the prime Ecclesiasticks and the flower of the English Clergy did so long and so
Dominions Witnesse the lawes of Ercombert Ina Withred Alfrede Edward Athelstan Edmond Edgar Athelred Canutus and Edward the Confessor among whose lawes one makes it the office of a King to govern the Church as the Vicar of God Another implyes a power in the King and his Judges to take cognisance of wrong done in Ecclesiastical Courts It was to this Holy King Edward the Confessor that Pope Nicholas the second by his bull for him and his Successours granted this ensuing priviledge to the Kings of England for ever Namely the Advocation and protection of all the Churches of England and power in his stead to make just Ecclesiastical constitutions with the advise of their Bishops and Abbats This grant is as full or fuller then that which Vrban the second made to Roger Earl of Sicily from whence the Kings of Spain at this day do not onely Challenge but enjoy in a manner all Ecclesiastical power in Sicily If the Pope had ever had any such right as he pretends this onely Bull were sufficient to justifie our Kings But they injoyed this very power from the beginning as an essential flower of their Crownes without any thanks to the Pope To make just Ecclesiasticall constitutions in the Popes stead saith the Bull. To govern the Church as the Vicar of God saith the law of the Land The Bishops of Rome have ever been very kind in granting those things which were none of their own and in making deputations and delegations to them who stood in no need of their help being lawfully invested before hand by another title in that power and dignity which the Popes pretended out of their goodnesse to confer upon them but in truth did it onely for the reputation of their See and for maintaining the opinion of their own Grandeur Whether the deputation were accepted or not they did not much trouble themselves So they dealt with 〈◊〉 president in the Councell of Nice So they dealt with the Patriarch of Iustiniana Prima so they served Good King Edward and many others This Legislative power in Ecclesiastical causes over Ecclesiasticall persons the Norman Kings after the conquest did also exercise from time to time with the advice and consent of their Lords spiritual and temporal Hence all those Statutes concerning Benefices Tythes Advowsons Lands given in Mortmain prohibitions consultations praemunires quare Impedits priviledge of Clergy extortions of Ecclesiasticall courts or officers and regulating their due fees wages of Priests Mortuaries Sanctuaries Appropriations and in summe all things which did belong to the externall subsistence regiment and regulating of the Church and this in the raigns of our best Kings long and long before the reformation Othobone the Popes Legate under Vrban the fifth would have indowed Vicars upon appropriated Rectories but could not But our Kings by two Statutes or Acts of Parliament did easily effect it With us the Pope could not make a Spiritual corporation but the King The Pope could not exempt from the Jurisdiction of the ordinary but the King who by his charter could convert Seculars into Regulars The Pope could not grant the Priviledge of the Cistercians and other orders to be free from the payment of Tyths but the King The Pope could not appropriate Churches but the King we find eight Churches appropriated to the Abby of Crowland by the Saxon Kings three Churches appropriated to the Abby of Battell by the Conquerour and twenty by Henry the first to â—â—e Church of Sarisbury The King in his great Councel could make void the certificates of Ordinaries in cases of Ecclesiasticall cognisance and command them to absolve those persons who were judged by his authority to be unjustly excommunicated The Pope could not translate an Arch Bishoprick or a Bishoprick but the King The disposition of Ecclesiastical preferments upon lapse accrued not to the Pope but to the King a plain evidence that he was the Lord Paramount And the King onely could incurre no lapse Nullum tempus occurrit Regi because the law supposed that he was busied about the weightie affaires of the Kingdom The revenewes of a Bishoprick in the vacancy belonged not unto the Pope but to the King which he caused to be restored sometimes from the time of the first vacancy sometimes from the time of the filling of the Church with a new Incumbent according to his good pleasure The Canons of the Pope could not change the Ecclesiastical Lawes of England but the King whose lawes they were He had power in his great Councel to receive the canons if they were judged convenient or to reject them and abrogate them if they were judged inconvenient When some Bishops proposed in Parliament the reception of the Ecclesiastical Canon for the Legitimation of Children born before marriage without such a reception the Canon was of no force in England All the Peers of the Realm stood up and cryed out with one voice Nolumus leges Angliae mutari We will not have the lawes of England to be changed The King and Parliament made a Legislative exposition of the Canon of the Councel of Lyons concerning Bigamy which they would not have done unlesse they had conceived themselves to have power according to the fundamental constitutions of the kingdom either to receive it or reject it Ejus est legem interpretari cujus est condere He that hath authority to expound a law Legislatively hath power to make it The King and Parliament declared Pope Vrban to be the right Pope in a time of Schisme that is in relation to England their own Kingdom not by determining the titles of the Popes but by applying the matter to the one and substracting it from the other All these are so many evidences that when Popery was at the highest the Bishops of Rome had no such absolute Ecclesiasticall Soveraignty in the Church and Realm of England And that what power they exercised at any time more then this was by connivence or permission or violent usurpation And that our Primates had no forraign Superiour Legally established over them but onely the King as he was the Supream head of the whole body politick To see that every one did his duty and injoyed his due right Who would not suffer one of his Barons to be excommunicated from Rome without his privity and consent No Legate de latere was allowed by the law in England but the Archbishop of Canturbury And if any was admitted of courtesy he was to take his oath to do nothing derogatory to the King and his Crown If any man did denounce the Popes excommunication without the assent of the King by the law he forfeited all his goods Neither might any man appeale to Rome without the Kings License In the year 1420 the Pope translated the Bishop of Lincolne to York But the Dean and Chapter absolutely refused to admit him and justified their refusal by the Laws of the Land And
flowers of the Crown so they might but hold the Diademe it self from their competitors Therefore our Ecclesiasticall law was called the Kings law because the edge and validity of it did proceed from authority royal our Ecclesiasticall Courts were stiled the Kings Courts by his Judges It is true the habitual Jurisdiction of Bishops flowes from their Ordination But the actual exercise thereof in Publick courts after a coercive manner is from the gracious concessions of Soveraign Princes In a word the law being meerly intended as a remedy against usurpation it cannot be a new Law but onely a Legislative declaration of the Old Common Law of England I will conclude this Chapter with the words of Bishop Bilson As for his Patriarchate by Gods law he hath nonâ— in this Realm for Six hundred years after Christ he had nonâ— for the last Six hundred years looking after greater matters he would have none Above or against the Princes Sword he can have none to the Subversion of the Faith or oppression of his Brethreâ— he ought to have none you must seek further for Subjection to his Tribunall This Land â—weth him none CHAP. V. That the Britanick Churches were ever exempted from forraign Iurisdiction for the first six hundred years And so ought to continue THirdly supposing that the reformed Church of England had separated it self from Rome and supposing that the municipal laws of the Realm then in force had not warranted such a separation yet the British Churches that is the Churches of the British Islands England Scotland and Ireland c. by the constitution of the Apostles and by the solemne sentence of the Catholique Church are exempted from all forraign Jurisdiction and cannot be Schismatical in the lawful vindication of a just priviledge so well founded for the clearer manifestation whereof let us consider First that all the twelve Apostles were equall in mission equall in commission equall in power equall in honour equal in all thingâ— except priority of order without which no Society can well Subsist So much Bellarmine confesseth that by these words As my father sent me so send I you Our Saviour endowed them with all the fulnesse of power that mortall men were capable of And therefore no single Apostle had Jurisdiction over the rest par in parem noâ— habet potestatem but the whole Colledge of Apostles to which the supream Mesnagery of Ecclesiasticall affaires did belong in common whether a new Apostle was to be ordained or the office of Deaconship was to be erected or fit persons were to be delegated for the ordering of the Church as Peter and Iohn Iudas and Sylas Or informations of great moment were to be heard as against Peter himself Though Peter out of Modesty might condescend and submit to that to which he was not obliged in duty yet it had not become the other Apostles to sit as Judges upon their Superiour placed over them by Christ. Or whether the weightier questions of the calling of the Gentiles and circumcision the law of Moses were to be determined still we find the Supremacy in the Colledge Secondly that drousy dream that the plenitude of Ecclesiastical power and Jurisdiction was given by Christ to Saint Peter as to an ordinary Pastour to be derived from him to his Successours but to the rest of the Apostles as delegates for tearm of life to die with themselves as it is lately and boldly asserted without reason without authority either divine or humane so it is most repugnant to the doctrine of the Fathers who make all Bishops to be the Vicars and Embassadours of Christ not of the Pope and successours of the Apostles indifferently Vicaria ordinatione who make but one Episcopacy in the world whereof every Bishop hath an equal share St. Peter was a Pastor and the Pastoral office is of perpetual necessity in the Church True But so were all the rest of the Apostles Pastors as well as he And if we examine the matter more narrowly cui bono for whose advantage this distinction was devised it was not for S. Peters own advantage who setting aside his principallity of order is confessed to have had but an equall share of power with his fellow Apostles but fo rs the Popes advantage and the Roman courts whom they desire to invest solely with the key of all originall Jurisdiction And if we trace on this Argument a little further to search out how the Bishop of Rome comes to be Saint Peters heire ex assâ— to the exclusion of his Elder Brother the Bishop of Antioch they produce no authority that I have seen but a blind ill grounded legend out of a counterfeit Hegâ—sippus of Saint Peters being about to leave Rome and Christs meeting him upon the way and admonishing him to return to Rome where he must be crucified for his name which reason halts on both sides The foundation is Apocryphal and the superstruction is weak and unjointed without any necessary connexion Thirdly it appeareth not to us that the Apostles in their daies did either set up any universall Monarchy in the Church or so much dilate the borders or bounds of any one mans single Jurisdiction as to subject so great a part of the Christian World as the Western Patriarchate to his obedience The highest that they went if any of those Canons which bear their names be genuine was to nationall or provincial Primates or Patriarchs for a Protarch or Primate and a Patriarch in the language of the ancient Church signified one and the same thing in whose praeheminence there was more of order and care then of single Jurisdiction and power Read their three and thirtieth Canon It behooves the Bishops of every distinct Nation to know him who is their first or Primate and to esteem him as their head And to do nothing that is of difficulty or great moment contrary to his opinion But neither let him do any thing without the opinion of all them This Nationall Primacy or Protarchatâ— or Patriarchate under which the Britannique Churches flourished for many ages is the very same which we contend for Fourthly it is worthy of our inquiry how in processe of time some Primates did obtain a much more eminent degree of honour and a larger share in the government of the Church then others And of this their adventitious Grandeur we find three principal fountaines First ancient customes Secondly the Canons of the Fathers And thirdly the edicts of Christian Princes First ancient customes Upon this ground the first generall Councel of Nice settled the authority and priveledges of the three Patriarchal Sees of Rome Alexandria and Antioch Let ancient customes prevail And these customes commonly proceeded either from the memory of the Apostles who had founded such Churches from whence as from Apostolical fountaines their neighbours did fetch sound doctrine and reciprocally paid to them due respect So
demonstrate clearly if it were needful that the dependence of Bishops and other Orthodox Christians upon the Pope being rightly conceived as it is and as it is really necessary according to the certain and true princâ—ples of Catholick Religion doth not bring any the least shadow of danger to the Common-Wealth though in hostility with the Pope or of a different communion from the Pope If we lived in Plato's Common-Wealth where every one did his duty this reason were of more force Far be it from us to imagine that the right exercise of any lawful power grounded upon the certain and true principles of Catholick Religion should be dangerous to any Society But this is not our case What if the Bishops and Court of Rome have swerved from those certain and true principles of Catholick Religion or have abused that power which was committed to their trust by Christ or by his Church Or have usurped more authority then did belong unto them Or have Engrossed all Episcopal Jurisdiction to themselves leaving the Bishops of the Land but Cyphers in their own Diocesses Or have hazarded the utter ruine and destruction of the Church by their Simony extortion provisions reservations and exemptions Or have obtruded new unwarrantable Oathes upon the Subjects inconsistent with their allegiance Or have drained the Kingdome of its treasure by pecuniary avaricious arts Or have challenged to themselves a negative voice against the right heir of the Crown Or authority to depose a crowned King and absolve his Subjects from their Oathes and allegiance to their Soveraignes And have shewed themselves incorrigible in all these things This is our case In any one of these cases much more in them all conjoyned it is not onely lawful but very necessary for Christian Princes to reform such grosse abuses and to free themselves and their Subjects from such a tyrannical yoke if they can by the direction of a general Councel if not of a Provincial And it is not Schisme but Loyalty in their Subjects to yeild obedience The same Author proceeds That no civil power how Soveraign soever can correct the fundamental articles of Christian faith nor pervert the order of sacred rites received by universal tradition as instituted by Christ nor justifie any thing by their Edicts which is against Christian charity To all this we do readily assent and never did presume to arrogate to our selves or to exercise any such power But still this is wide from our case What if the Bishop of Rome have presumed to coyn and attempted to obtrude upon us new Articles of Faith as he hath in his new Creed and to pervert the sacred rites instituted by Christ as in his with-holding the Cup from the Laity Then without doubt not we but he is guilty of the Schisme Then it is lawful to separate from him in his innovations without incurring the crime of Schisme This is laid down by the Author himself as an evident conclusion and we thank him for it That it is necessary for every Christian to acknowledge no authority under heaven either Ecclesiastical or Civil that hath power to abrogate those things that are revealed and instituted by Christ or to determine those things which are opposite unto them quod Schismatis origo foret which should be the original of Schisme But where that Author infers as a corollary from the former Proposition That no Edict of a Soveraign Prince can Iustifie Schisme because all Schisme is destructive to Christian charity I must crave leave with all due respect to his person to his learning to his moderation and to his charity to rectifie that mistake If by Schisme he understand criminal Schisme that which he saith is most true That were not onely to Justifie the wicked which is an abhomination to the Lord but to justifie wickednesse it self But every separation or Schisme taken in a large sence is not criminal nor at all destructive to Christian Charity Sometimes it is a necessary Christian charitable duty In all the cases that I have supposed above and shall prove hereafter they that make the Separation continue Catholiques and they that give the cause become the Schismatiques But it may be urged That this proceeds from the merit of the cause not from the authority of the Soveraign Prince I answer It proceeds from both Three things are necessary to make a publique reformation lawful Just grounds due moderation and sufficient authority There may be just grounds without sufficient authority and sufficient authority without just grounds and both sufficient authority and just grounds without due moderation But where these three things concur it justifies the reformation before God and man and renders that separation lawful which otherwise were Schismatical Lastly it is alledged That the power of the Soveraign Magistrate is not so absolute that he can command any thing at his pleasure so as to oblige his Subjects to obedience in things repugnant to the Law of nature or the positive Law of God No Orthodox Christian can doubt of this truth The authority of the inferiour ceaseth where the Superiour declareth his pleasure to the contrary Da veniam Imperator tu carcerom ille gehennam minatur Pardon me O Emperour thou threatenest me with imprisonment but God Almighty with hell-fire But this is nothing to our case neither the Law of Nature nor the Law of God doth injoyn Brittish Christians to buy pardons and indulgences and dispensations and Bulls and Palls and priviledges at Rome contrary to the fundamental Laws of the Realm Boniface the eighth by his Bull exempted the University of Oxford from the Jurisdiction of the Archbishop of Canterbury whereupon did grow a controversie between Thomas Arundel Archbishop and the University And the said Bull was decreed to be void by two succeeding Kings Richard the second and Henry the fourth in Parliament as being obtained in praejudicium Coronae suae Legum consuetudinum Regni sui enervationem to the prejudice of his Imperial crown and to the weakning of the Lawes and Customes of his Realm But this disobedience to the decrees of Soveraign Princes must be joyned with passive obedience it must be onely when and where their commands are evidently unjust such as Phaâ—aohs commanding the Hebrew Midwives to kill all the Male children or Sauls injoyning his guard to slay the Priests of the Lord or like Nâ—buchadnezzars idolatrous edict charging all men to fall down and worship his golden Image For otherwise if the case be doubtful it is a rule in Case divinity Subditis tenentur in favorem Legis judicare Subjects are bound to judge in favour of the Law Otherwise they run into a certain crime of disobedience for fear of an uncertain A War may be unjust in the Prince and yet the Souldier be guiltlesse Nor is the Subject obliged to sift the grounds of his Soveraigns commands too narrowly It happens often that reum facit Principem iniquitas
imperandi innocentem subditum ordo serviendi The Prince may be unjust in his commands and yet the Subject innocent in his obedience Take the case at the worst it must be doubtful at the least the Popes Soveraignty and the Jurisdiction of the Roman Court being rejected by three parts of the Christian world and so unanimously shaken off by three Kingdoms And in such a case who is fittest to be Judge the Pope the People or the King Not the Pope he is the person accused And frustra expectatur cujuslibet authoritas contra seipsum It is in vain to expect that one should imploy his authority against himself Not the people would a Judge take it well that a Gaoler should detain the Prisoner from execution untill he were satisfied of the justice of his sentence Or a Pilot that he may not move his Rudder according to the alterable face of the heavens but at the discretion of the ordinary Marriners No whensoever any question hath been moved between any kingdom or Republick of what Communion soever and the Court of Rome concerning the liberties and priviledges of the one or the extortions and incroachments of the other they have evermore assumed the last Judicature to themselves as of right it doth belong unto them The Romanists themselves do acknowledge that Soveraign Princes by the Law of God and nature not only may but are in justice obliged to oppose the tyranny of Ecclesiastical Judges and to protect and free their subjects from their violence and oppression Parsons himself wondreth that any man should deny this power to Kings in their own kingdomes But we are fully satisfied and assured that that universal power which the Pope claimes by Divine right over all Christians and particularly over the Britannique Churches without their consents And much more that Jurisdiction which de facto he did or at least would have exercised there and lesse then which he would not go to the destruction of their natural and Christian liberties and priviledges was and is a tyrannical and oppressive yoak If all Christians were as well satisfied of the truth of this our assumption as we are this controversie were at an end And thus far all Roman Catholicks not interessed nor prepossessed with prejudice do accord fully with us that by whomsoever Papal power was given whether by Christ or his Apostles or the Fathers of the Church in succeeding ages it was given for edification not for destruction And that the Roman Court in later dayes hath sought to impose grievous oppressive and intolerable burthens upon their subjects which it is lawful for them to shake off without regarding their censure as we shall see in the next proposition But because all are not so well satisfied about the just extent of Papal authority and power we must search a little higher Secondly we do both agree that Soveraign Princes may by enabled and authorized either by concession or by prescription for time immemoriall perhaps it were more properly said by vertue of their Soveraign authority over the whole body politique whereof the Clergy are a part â—o exercise all external acts of Ecclesiastical coercive Jurisdiction by themselves or at least by fit delegates praecipiendo suis subditis Sacerdotibus ut excommunicent rebelles contumaces And this is asserted in the case of Abbesses which being women are lesse capable of any spiritual Jurisdiction The truth is that as all Ecclesiastical Courts and all Ecclesiastical coercive jurisdiction did flow at first either from the Bounty and goodnesse of Soveraign Princes to the Church or from their connivence or from the voluntary consent and free submission of Christians Volenti non fit injuria consent takes away errour I except alwayes that jurisdiction which is purely spiritual and an essential part of the power of the Keies whereof Emperours and Kings are not capable So whensoever the Weal-publick and the common safety of their people doth require it for advancement of publick peace and tranquillity and for the greater ease and convenience of the subject in general according to the Vicissitude and conversion of humane affairs and the change of Monarchies they may upon well grounded experience in a National Synod or Councel more advisedly retract what their predecessours had advisedly granted or permitted And alter the face and rules of the external discipline of the Church in all such things as are but of humane right when they become hurtful or impeditive of a greater good in which cases their subjects may with good conscience and are bound in duty to conforme themselves to their Lawes Otherwise Kingdoms and Societies should want necessary remedies for their own preservation which is granted by both parties to be an absurdity Weigh all the parts of Ecclesiastical discipline and consider what one there is which Christian Emperours of old did not either exercise by themselves or by their delegates or did not regulate by their Lawes or both concerning the priviledges and revenues of holy Church the calling of Councels the presiding in Councels the dissolving of Councels the confirming of Councels concerning holy Orders concerning the patronage of and nomination to Ecclesiastical benefices and dignities concerning the Jurisdiction the suspension deposition and ordering of Bishops and Priests and Monks and generally all Persons in holy orders concerning Appeales concerning Religion and the Rites and Ceremonies thereof concerning the Creeds or common Symbols of faith concerning Heresie Schisme Judaisme the suppression of Sects against Swearing Cursing Blaspheming Prophanenesse and Idolatry concerning Sacraments Sanctuaries Simony Marriages Divorces and generally all things which are of Ecclesiastical cognisance wherein he that desires satisfaction and particularly to see how the coercive power of Ecclesiastical Courts and Judges did flow from the gracious concessions of Christian Princes may if he be not too much possessed with prejudice resolve himself by reading the first Book of the Code the Authentiques or Novels of Iustinian the Emperour and the Capitulars of Charles the great and his successours Kings of France We have been requested said Iustinian by Menna the Archbishop of this City beloved of God and universal Patriarch to grant this priviledge to the most reverend Clerkes c. in pecuniary causes referring them first to the Bishop and if he could not compose or determine the difference then to the secular Judge And in criminal causes if the crime were civil to the civil Magistrate if Ecclesiastical to the Bishop By the Councel of our Bishops and Nobles said Charles the great we have Ordained Bishops throughout the Cities that is we have commanded and authorized it to be done And do decree to assemble a Synod every year that in our presence the Canonical decrees and Lawes of the Church may be restored I beseech you what did our King Henry and the Church of England more at the reformation It is true Soveraign Princes are not said properly to make Canons because they do not prescribe them
under pain of Excommunication or suspension or degradation or any spirituall punishment But to affirm that they cannot make Ecclesiasticall constitutions under a civill pain or that they cannot especially with the advise and concurrence of their Clergy assembled in a National Synod reform errours and abuses and remedy incroachments and usurpations and innovations either in faith or discipline and regulate the new Canons or Customes of Intruders and Upstarts by the old Canons of the primitive Fathers is contrary to the sense and practise of all antiquity King Solomon deposed Abiathar from the high Priesthood and put Sadoc in his place Nor want we Presidents of Popes themselves who have been convented before Emperours as Sixtus the third before Valentinian though Platina mince the matter a little too much damnatur Bassus calumniator iniquus annuente Valentiniano c. Leo the third before Charles the great That have been banished by Emperours as Liberius unjustly banished by Constantius and more unjustly restored Sylverius justly banished by Iustinian That have been imprisoned by Soveraign Princes as Pope Iohn the first by Theodoric That have been deposed by them As Iohn the twelfth by Otho the great and Gregory the sixth by Henry the second Henricus secundus in Italiam cum magno exercitu veniens habita Synodo cum Benedictum novum Sylvestrum tertium Gregorium sextum tanquam tria teterrima monstra abdicare se magistratu coegisset c. Henry the second coming into Italy with a great army having convocated a Synod when he had compelled Benedict the Ninth Sylvester the third and Gregory the sixth as three most filthy monsters to quit their government he created Syndeger Bishop of Bamberge afterwards Clement the second Pope Of old when any Schisme did infest the Roman Church as I think no See in the World hath been oftner rent asunder by pretenders to the Papacy the Emperours when they pleased did assume unto themselves the cognisance thereof and determine the succession either by themselves or by their Exarch or Delegates as Honorius between Boniface the first and Eulalius Theodoric the King between Symmachus and Laurentius The Exarch of Ravenna between Sergius the first and Paschalis Otho the third between Iohn the Seventeenth and Gregory the fifth But when these imperiall acts are done in Synods they are more authentique and more conform to Antiquity Thirdly our learned and ingenuous countryman Davenport under the name of Franciscus à Sancta Clara far be it from me to censure Christian charity and moderation for lukewarmnesse or Atheistical neutrality like those whose chief religion consists in crying up a faction I rather wish he had been more universally acquainted with our English Doctrine in his paraphrastical exposition of our English Articles to this question How and whether it be lawful in points of faith to appeal from the Pope and to decline his Iudgment cites the resolution of Gerson in these words following Hoc etiam practicatum est per quoscunque Reges et Principes c. This also hath been practised by all Kings Princes who have withdrawn themselves from the obedience of those whom such or such did Iudge to be Popes which substractions neverthelesse were approved by the sacred Councell of Constance some expressely some implicitly The most Christian King Lewis the twelfth convocated a Nationall Councell of the French Church at Towers wherein sundry Articles were proposed deliberated of and concluded touching these affaires The third Article was that if the Pope should invade another Prince in an hostile manner and excite other Princes to invade his territories whether that Prince might not lawfully withdraw himself from the obedience of such a Pope where observe that though this case alone be specified as being fitted to that present controversy between the King of France and the Pope yet all other cases of the same nature or consequence are included And conclusum est per Concilium principem posse ab obedienâ—ia Papae se subducere ac substrahere non tamen in totum et indistincte sed pro tuitione tantum ac defensione jurium suorum temporalium It was concluded by the Councel that the Prince might withdraw himself from the obedience of the Pope yet not totally nor indistinctly but onely for the defence of his temporal rights The fourth proposition was when such a substraction was lawfully made what the Prince and his subjects more particularly Prelates and other Ecclesiastiques ought to do in such things for which they had formerly no recourse to the Apostolique See And conclusum est per concilium servandum esse jus commune antiquum et pragmaticam Sanctionem regni ex deeretis Sacro-Sancti concilii Basiliensis desumptam It was concluded by the Councell that the ancient common right was to be preserved and the pragmaticall Sanction of the Kingdom taken out of the Decrees of the Sacred Councell of Basil. The eighth proposition was if the Pope proceeding unjustly and by force should pronounce any censures against such a Prince whether they ought to be obeied And conclusum est unanimiter per concilium talem sententiam nullam esse nec de jure vel alio quocunque modo ligare It was concluded unanimously by the Councell that such a Sentence was of no force not binding in law or any other way which opinion or resolution of theirs the above-menâ—tioned Authour saith he ought not to condemne whilest the Church doth tolerate it Behold a principall cause of the separation of the English Church from the Pope the usurpations and incroachments of the Roman Court upon the Politicall rights of the Crown which they would not let go until they were quite shaken off Anthonius de Rosellis a zealous assertour of the Papall authority concludes that the Pope being an heretick or an Apostate though but in secret it is lawful without any sentence or declaration preceding for any of his Subjects that know it Especially for Kings and Princes to depart from him and withdraw themselvs from under his power by that naturall right which they have to defend themselves This may well be doubted of in the case of private persons before sentence by those who believe him to be constituted by Christ the Soveraign Monarch of the Universall Church But in the case of Soveraign Princes with Provincial Councells when Generall Councells cannot be had and much more when General Councells have given their sentence formerly in the case as the Councells of Constance and Basil have done concerning the Papacy And with us who are sufficiently resolved that St. Peter had no preheminence above his fellowes but onely principality of order and the begining of unity And that whatsoever power the Bishop of Rome hath more then any other Bishop it is meerly from the customes of the Catholique Church or from the Canons of the Fathers or from the Edicts of Princes and may be taken away upon sufficient grounds by equall authority to
that by which it was acquired I say in this our case there can be no doubt at all And yet it can much lesse be doubted whether a Soveraign Prince with a National Synod may remedy the incroachments and usurpations of the Roman Court within his own dominions or exclude new Creeds and new Articles of faith lately devised and obtruded contrary to the determination of the General Councel of Ephesus of which let us hear what is Doctor Holdens opinion Notum est inter Catholicos omnes tanquans axioma certissimum c. It is known that all Catholicks do hold this as a most certain axiome that nothing ought or may be maintained for a Christian revealed truth but that which was received by our Ancestors and delivered from one generation to another by continued succession from the times of the Apostles This is all that we have done and done it with due submission to the highest Judge of Ecclesiastical controversies upon earth that is a general Councel If the Court of Rome will be humorous like little children who because they cannot have some toy that they have a mind to do cast away all that their parents have given them we cannot help it Over and above all the former grounds which the Romanists themselves do in some sort acknowledge I propose this further that Patriarchal power in external things is subject and subordinate to Imperial When Mauritius the Emperour had made a Law that no Souldier should turn Monk untill his warfare were accomplished St. Gregory Bishop of Rome disliked the Law and represented his sense of it to the Emperour but withall according to his duty published it Ego quidem missioni subjectus eandem legem per diversas terrarum partes transmitto quia lex ipsa omnipotenti deo minime concordat Ecce per suggestionis meae paginam dominis nunciavi utrobique ergo quae debui exolvi qui Imperatori obedientiam praebui pro deo quid sensi minime tacui I being subject to your command have transmitted your Law to be published through diverse parts of the world And because the Law itself is not pleasing to Almighty God I have represented my opinion thereof to my Lords wherefore I have performed my duty on both sides in yeelding obedience to the Emperour and not concealing what I thought for God A most rare and Christian president of that great Patriarch and fit for our observation and imitation in these dayes He acknowledged the Emperour to be his Lord and himself to be subject to his commands And though no humane invention can warrant an act that is Morally evil in it self yet if it be onely impeditive of a greater good as that blessed Saint did take this Law to be the command of a Soveraign doth weigh down the scale and obligeth a Patriarch to obedience in a matter that concerns Religion How much more doth the command of the English Monarch and the English Church disoblige an English subject from a forrein Patriarch whose Original right is but humane at the most and in the case in question between Rome and England none at all But to come up yet closer to the question The general Councels of Constantinople and Chalcedon with the presence concurrence and confirmation of Theodosius the great Martian the Emperours notwithstanding the opposition of the Roman Bishop by his Legates did advance the Bishop of Constantinople from being a poore Suffragan under the Metropolitan of Heraclea to be the second Patriarch and equal in dignity power and all manner of priviledges to the first and assigned unto him for his Patriarchate Pontus and Asia the lesse and Thracia and some other countries part of which territories they substracted from the obedience of the Roman Bishop at least over which the Roman Bishops challenged Jurisdiction and part from other Patriarchs And the reason of this alteration was the same for which Caesarea of old was a long time preferred before Hierusalem and Alexandria before Antioch and Rome before all others to conform the Ecclesiasticall regiment to the Politicall because Constantinople was made of a mean City the seat of the Eastern Empire and had as many Diocesses and Provinces subject unto it as old Rome it self But lest it may be conceived that this was not done at all by Imperial power but by the authority of the Oecumenical Synods we may observe further that Iustiniâ—n the Emperour by his sole Soveraign Legislative power did new-found the Patriarchate of Iustiniana prima and assign a province unto it and indow it with most ample priviledges freeing it from all appeals and all acknowledgment of superiority giving the Bishop thereof equal power with that which the Bishop of Rome had in his Patriarchate The same priviledges and prerogatives were given by the same Emperour by the same Legislative authority to the Bishop of Carthage notwithstanding that the Bishops of Rome did alwayes pretend that Carthage was under their Jurisdiction I deny not that Vigilius and Gregory succeeding Popes did make deputations to the Bishop of Iustiniana to supply their places But this was but an old Roman fineness The Bishops of Iustiniana needed none of their Commissions Iustinian the Father and founder of the Imperial Law knew well enough how far his Legislative power did extend And though the Act was notorious the whole world and inserted into the body of the Law yet the Fathers of that age did not complain of any innovation or usurpation or breach of their priviledges or violation of their rights King Henry the Eight had the same Imperial power and was as much a Soveraign in his own Kingdomes as Iustinian the Emperour in his larger Dominions as William Rufus Son and successor of the Conqerour said most truly that the Kings of England have all those liberties in their own Kingdomes which the Emperours had in the Empire and had as much authority to exempt his own subjects from the Jurisdiction of one Patriarch and transferre them to another especially with the advise consent and concurrence of a National Synod So King Arthur his predecessor removed the Primacy from Caâ—rleon to Saint Davids and another of them to Canterbury for the advantage of their subjects according to the exigence of the times If the Pope had been the King of Englands Subject as former Popes were the Emperours he might have served him as they did some of his predecessours called a Councel regulated him and reduced him to order and reason or if he proved incorrigible have deposed him But the Pope being a stranger all that he could justly do was what he did rather then to see his royall prerogative daily trampled upon his Lawes destroyed his Subjects oppressed rather then to have new Articles of faith daily obtruded upon the English Church rather then to incur the peril of willful Idolatry against conscience and therefore formal to Cashier the Roman Court with all their pardons and
in England for sundry ages following that a Dean and Chapter were able to deal with them not onely to hold them at the swords point but to soile them Lastly King Henry the eighth himself had been long a suiter unto Clement the seventh to have his Predecessor Iulius the seconds dispensation for his marriage with his Brothers wife to be declared void But though the Popes own Doctors Universities had declared the dispensation to be unlawfull and invalide and although the Pope himself had once given forth a Bull privately to his Legate Cardinall Campeius for the revocation thereof wherein he declared the marriage to be null and that the King could not continue in it without sinne yet the King found so little respect either to the condition of his person or to the justice of his cause that after long delayes to try if he could be allured to the Popes will in the conclusion he received a flat deniall This was no great incouragement to him to make any more addresses to Rome So what was threatened and effected in part in the dayes of Henry the third and Edward the third was perfected in the reign of Henry the eighth when the Jurisdiction of the Court of Rome in England was abolished which makes the great distance between them and us Different opinions are often devised or defended on purpose to maintain faction if animosities were extinguished and the mindes of Christians free from prejudice other controversies might quickly be reconciled and reduced to primitive general truths The power Paramount of the Court of Rome hath ever been and still is that insana laurus which causeth brawling and contention not onely between us and them but between them and the Eastâ—rn Churches yea even between them and those of their own communion as we shall see in the next Chapter Yea the originall source true cause of all the Separations reformations made in the Church in these last ages As all the Estates of Castile did not forbear to tell the Pope himself not long since in a printed memoriall and the Kingdom of Portugall likewise To conclude this point These former Kings who reigned in England about the years 1200. and 1300. might properly be called the first Reformers and their Lawes of Proviso's and Prâ—munire's or more properly premoneres the beginning of the Reformation They laid the Foundation and Henry the Eighth builded upon it Now having seen the authority of our Reformers and the justice of their grounds in the last place let us observe their due moderation in the manner of their separation First they did not we do not deny the being of any Church whatsoever Roman or other nor possibility of salvation in them especially such as hold firmly the Apostles Creed and the faith of the four first Generall Councels Though their salvation be rendred much more difficult by humane inventions and obstructions And by this very sign did Saint Cyprian purge himself and the African Bishops from Schisme Neminem judicantes aut à jure communionis aliquem si diversum senserit amoventes Iudging no man removing no man from our communion for difference in opinion We do indeed require subscription to our Articles but it is onely from them who are our own not from strangers nor yet of all our own but onely of those who seek to be initiated into holy orders or are to be admitted to some Ecclesiastical preferment So it is in every mans election whether he will put himself upon a necessity of subscription or not neither are our Articles penned with Anathema's or curses against all those even of our own who do not receive them but used only as an help or rule of unity among our selves Si quis diversum dixerit If any of our own shall speak or preach or write against them we question him But si quis diversum senserit if any man shall onely think otherwise in his private opinion and trouble not the peace of the Church we question him not We presume not to censure others to be out of the pale of the Church but leave them to stand or fall to their own Master We damne none for dissenting from us we do not separate our selves from other Churches unlesse they chase us away with their censures but onely from their errours For clear manifestation whereof observe the thirtieth Canon of our Church It was so far from the purpose of the Church of England to forsake and reject the Churches of Italy France Spain Germany or any such like Churches in all things which they held and practised c. that it only departed from them in those particular points wherein they were fallen both from themselves in their aâ—cient integrity and from the Apostolical Churches which were their first founders So moderate are we towards all Christians whether forreigners or domesticks whether whole Churches or single persons But because the Roman Catholicks do lay hold upon this charitable assertion of ours as tending mainly to their advantage Behold say they Protestants do acknowledge a possibility of salvation in the Roman Church But Roman Catholicks deny all possibility of Salvation in the Protestant Churches Therefore the Religion of Roman Catholiques is much safer then that of Protestants Hence proceeded their Treatise of charity mistaken and sundry other discourses of that nature wherein there are mistakes enough but little charity For answer If this Objection were true I should love my Religion never the worse Where I find little charity I look for as little faith But it is not true for when the businesse is searched to the bottom they acknowledge the same possibility of salvation to us which we do to them that is to such of either Church respectively as do not erre wilfully but use their best endeavours to find out the truth Take two testimonies of the Bishop of Chalcedon If they that is the Protestants grant not salvation to such Papists as they count vincibly ignorant of Roman errours but onely to such as are invincibly ignorant of them they have no more charity then we for we grant Church saving faith and salvation to such Protestants as are invincibly ignorant of their errours And in his book of the distinction of fundamentals and not fundamentals he hath these words If Protestants allow not saving faith Church and salvation to such as sinfully erre in not fundamentals sufficiently prâ—posed they shew no more charity to erring Christians then Catholicks dâ— for we allow all to have saving faith to be in the Church in way of salvation for so much as belongeth to faith who hold the fundamental points and invincibly erre in not fundamentals because neither are these sufficiently proposed to them nor they in fault that they are not so proposed Secondly as our separation is from their errours not from their Churches so we do it with as much inward charity and moderation of our affections as we can possibly willingly indeed in
the free and just speech of a French Bishop When Henry the fourth had in a manner ended the civill Wars of France by changing from the Protestant to the Roman Catholique Communion Yet the Pope who favoured the contrary party upon pretence of his dissimulation and great dangers that might ensue thereupon for a long time deferred his reconciliation untill the French Prelates by their own authority did first admit him into the bosome of the Church At which time one of them used this discourse Was France all on fire and had they not Rivers enough at home but they must run as far as Rome to Tybur to fetch water to quench it Since that in Cardinal Richlieu's daies it is well known what books were freely printed and publickly sold upon pont neuf of the lawfulnesse of erecting a new or rather restoring an old proper Patriarchate in France as one of the liberties of the Gallicane Church It was well for the Roman Court that they became more propitious to the French affaires Take one instance more which happened very lately The Pope refused to admit any new Bishops in Portugal upon the nomination of the present King because he would not thereby seem to acknowledge or approve his title to the Crown in prejudice of the King of Spain whereby the Episcopal order in Portugal and the other Dominions belonging to that Crown was well near extinguished and scarcely so many Bishops were left alive or could not be drawn together as to make a Canonical Ordination The three Orders of Portugal did represent to the Pope that in the Kingdomes of Portugal and the Algarbians wherein ought to have been three Metropolitans and ten Suffragans there was but one left and he by the Popes dispensation non-Residenâ— And in all the Asâ—atique Provinces but one other and he both sickly and decrepit And in all the African and American Provinces and the Islands not one surviving But the Pope continued inexorable whereupon theyâ— present their request to their neighbours and friends the French Prelates beseeching them to mediate for them with his Holinesse And if he continue still obstinately deaf to their just petition to supply his defect themselves and to Ordain them Bishops in case of necessity The French did the Office of Neighbours and Christians The Synode of the French Clergy did write to the Pope on their behalf in April 1651. But that way not succeeding they sent one of their Bishops as an expresse Envoié to his Holinesse to let him know that if he still refused they cannot nor will be wanting to themselves to their neighbours but would supply his defect what the issue of it is since I have not yet heard But to leave matter of fact and to come to the fundamental Lawes and Customes of France Every one hath heard of the liberties of the French Church but every one understands not what those liberties are as being better known by their practice at home then by Books abroad I will onely select some of them out of their own authentique authorities And when the Reader hath considered well of them let him judge what authority the Pope hath in France more then discretionary at the good pleasure of the King or more then he might have had in other places if he could have contented himself with reason Protestants are not so undiscreet or uncharitable as to violate the peace of Christendom for a primacy or headship of order without superiority of power or for the name of his Holinesse Or for a Pall if the price were not too high Or for a few innocent formalities 1. The Pope cannot command or ordain any thing directly or indirectly concerning any temporal affairs within the dominions of the King of France 2. The spiritual authority and power of the Pope is not absolute in France but limited and restrained by the Canons and Rules of the ancient Councâ—ls of the Church received in that Kingdom Where observe first that the Pope can do nothing in France as a Sovereign Spiritual Prince with his non obstantes either against the Canons or besides the Canons Secondly that the Canons are no Canons in France except they be received This â—ame priviledge was anciently radicated in the fundamental Lawes of England This priviledge the Popes indeavoured to pluck up by the roots And the contentions about this priviledge were one principal occasion of the separation 3. No command whatsoever of the Pope can free the French Clergy from their obligation to obey the commands of their Sovereign 4. The most Christian King hath had power at all times according to the occurrence and exigence of affairs to assemble or cause to be assembled Synods Provincial or National and therein to treat not onely of such things as concern the conservation of the Civil estate but also of such things as concern Ecclesiastical order and discipline in his own dominions And therein to make Rules Chapters Lawes Ordinances and pragmatique sanctions in his own name by his own authority Many of which have been received among the decrees of the Catholick Church and some of them approved by general Councels 5. The Pope cannot send a Legate à latere into France with power to reform judge collate dispense or do such other things accustomed to be specified in the authoritative Bull of his Legation except it be upon the desire or with the approbation of the most Christian King Neither can the said Legate execute his charge untill he hath promised the King in writing under his oath upon his holy orders not to make use of his Legantine power in the Kings Dominions longer then it shall please the King And that so soon as he shall be admonished of the Kings pleasure to forbid it he will give it over And that whilest he doth use it it shall be exercised conformably to the Kings will without attempting any thing to the prejudice of the decrees of Generall Councels or the liberties and priviledges of the Gallicane Church and the Universities of France 6. The Commissions and Bulls of the Popes Legates are to be seen examined and approved by the Court of Parliament And to be registred and published with such Cautions and modifications as that Court shall judge expedient for the good of the Kingdome and to be executed according to the said cautions and not otherwise 7. The Prelates of the French Church although commanded by the Pope for what cause soever it be may not depart out of the Kingdom without the Kings Commandment of License 8. The Pope can neither by himself nor by his Delegates judge of any thing which concerneth the state preheminence or priviledges of the Crown of France nor of any thing pertaining to it Nor can there be any question or processe about the state or pretensions of the King but in his own Courts 9. Papal Bulls Citations Sentences Excommunications and the like are not to be executed in France without the Kings
Aristocratical dignity So Non tellus cymbam tellurem cymba reliquit It was not we that deserted our pretended Patriarch but our pretended Patriarch deserted his Patriarchal office So long as the Popes contented themselves with Patriarchal rights they soared no higher then to be the executours of the Canons When Acacius complained that he was condemned by the sole authority of the Roman Bishop without a Synodal sentence Gelssius the Pope then pleaded for himself that Acacius was not the beginner of a new errour but the follower of an old And therefore it was not necessary that a new Synodal sentence should be given against him but that the old should be executed Therefore saith he I have onely put an old sentence in execution not promulged a nâ—w And as they had quitted their title so likewise they had forfeited it both by their Rebellion and by their exorbitant abuses First by their notorious rebellion against General Councels The authority of an inferiour ceaseth when he renounceth his loyalty to his superiour from whom he derives his power A General Councel is the Supreme Ecclesiastical power to which Patriarchal power was alwayes subordinate and subject General Councels with the consent of Sovereign Princes have exempted Cities and Provinces from Patriarchal Jurisdiction with the consent of Sovereign Princes they have erected new Patriarchates as at Hierusalem and Constantinople And made the Patriarch of Constantinople equal in all priviledges to the Patriarch of old Rome Against this Supreme Ecclesiastical power the Popes have not onely rebelled themselves but have compelled all Bishops under their Jurisdiction to take an oath to maintain their rebellious usurpations When a President of a Province shall rebell against his Sovereign Prince and seek to usurpe the whole Empire to himself and impose new oathes of allegiancc upon his fellow-subjects it is not Treason but Loyalty in them to thrust him by the head and shoulders out of the gates of their City When a Steward not imposed upon the family by the Master but chosen in trust by his fellow-servants during their Masters absence shall so far violate his trust that he will by force make himself the Master of the family and usuâ—pe a dominion not onely over his fellowes but over his Masters Wife and Children and oblige his fellow servants to acknowledge an independent Sovereign power in him it is not want of duty but fidelity to substract their obedience from him This is our case with the Roman Bishops They have sought to usurpe a dominion over the Catholick Church the spouse of Christ and all their fellow-servants Then ought not all good Christians to adhere to the Catholick Church and desert a schismatical Patriarch They have rebelled against the representative Church a general Councel should we involve our selves in their rebellion and perjury by swearing to maintain and make good their usurpations I confesse inferiours are not competent Judges of their Superiours But in this case of a subordinate Superiour and in a matter of Heresie or Schisme already defined by the Church the sentence of the Judge is not necessary the sentence of the Law and the notoreity of the fact are sufficient It is not we that judge him but the Councels of Constance and Basile Neither could our Ancestours hope to have a General Councel suddenly whilest so great a part of Christendom was under the Turk nor a free Occidental Councel whilest the usurper had all Ecclesiasticall power in his hands What remained then but to reform themselves According to the sage advice of Gerson I see that the Reformation of the Church will never be effected by a Councel without the presidence of a well affected wise and constant guide Let the Members therefore provide for themselves thâ—oughout the Kingdomes and Provinces when they shall be able and know hâ—w to compasse this work Moreover as they have forfeited their power by their Rebellion so they have most justly also by their rapine extortions and terrible and exorbitant abuses the most shamefull abuses that ever were committed by persons trusted To passe by the hundred grievances of Germany the complaints and protestations and pragmatical Sanctions of France the memorials of Castile the sobbes of Portugal and to confine my discourse to the sufferings of our own Nation which have been more particularly related already in this Treatise when I set down the grounds of our Reformation They robbed the King of his investitures of Bishops which Henry the first protested to the Pope himself by his Proctour that he would not lose for his Kingdome and added threatenings to his protestations Yet to gratifie Anselme who though otherwise most deserving was the first violater of the ancient customes of our Kingdome in that kind he waved his right But soon after resumed it made Rodolph Bishop of London Archbishop of Canterbury and invested him by a crosier and a ring The like he did to many others They robbed the King of his patronages by their collations and provisions and expectative graces Two or three or ten benefices were not accounted sufficient for a Roman Courtier in those daies but an hundred or two hundred or more They robbed him of the last appeales of his Subjects contrary to the ancient Lawes of England They fomented the rebellion of his own Subjects at home sometimes of his Barons sometimes of his Bishops playing fast and loose on both sides for advantage They dis-inherited him of his Crown They gave away his Kingdome for a prey to a forreign Prince They incited strangers to make war against him And they themselves by meer collusion and tricks had well near thrust him out of his Throne They robbed the Clergy in a manner of their whole Jurisdiction by their exemptions and reservations and visitations and suspensions and appeales and Legantine Courts and Nunciatures thrusting their sickles into every mans harvest They robbed them of their estates and livelihoods by their provisions and pensions by their coadjutorships and first-fruits and tenths by the vast charge of their investitures and palles and I know not how many other sorts of exactions and arbitrary impositions The most ancient of these was the pall whereof our King Canutus complained long since at Rome and had remedy promised They robbed the Nobility and Commonalty many waies as hath been formerly related If all these were not a sufficient cause of forfeiture certainly abuse did never forfeit office And though they had sometimes had a just Patriarchal power and had neither forfeited it by rebellion nor abuse Yet the King and the whole body of the Kingdome by their Legislative power substracting their obedience from them and erecting a new Patriarchate within their own Dominions it is a sufficient warrant for all English-men to suspend their obedience to the one and apply themselves to the other for the welfare and tranquillity of the whole body politick as hath before been declared Thirdly
I answer that obedience to a just Patriarch is of no larger extent then the Canons of the Fathers do injoyn it And since the division of Britaigne from the Empire no Canons are or ever were of force with us further then they were received and by their incorporation became Britannique Lawes Which as they cannot noâ— ever could be imposed upon the King and Kingdome by a forreign Patriarch by constraint so when they are found by experience prejudiciall to the publick good they may as freely by the same King and Kingdome be rejected But I shall wind up this string a little higher Suppose that the whole body of the Canon Law were in force in England which it never was yet neither the Papall power which we have cashiered nor any part of it was ever given to any Patriarch by the ancient Canons and by consequence the separation is not Schismatical nor any withdrawing of Canonical obedience What power a Metropolitan had over the Bishops of his own Province by the Canon Law the same and no other had a Patriarch over the Metropolitans and Bishops of sundry Provinces within his own Patriarchate But a Metropolitan anciently could do nothing out of his own Diocesse without the concurrence of the Major part of the Bishops of his Province Nor the Patriarch in like manner without the advice and consent of his Metropolitans and Bishops Wherein then consisted Patriarchal authority In ordaining their Metropolitans for with inferiour Bishops they might not meddle or confirming them or imposing of hands in giving the Pall in convocating Patriarchal Synods and presiding in them in pronouncing sentence according to the plurality of voices That was when Metropolitical Synods did not suffice to determine some emergent difficulties or differences And lastly in some few honorary priviledges as the acclamation of the Bishops to them at the latter end of a General Councel and the like which signifie not much In all this there is nothing that we dislike or would seek to have abrogated Never any Patriarch was guilty of those exactions extortions incroachments upon the civil rights of Princes and their Subjects or upon the Ecclesiastical rights of Bishops or of those provisions and pensions and exemptions and reservations and dispensations and inhibitions and pardons and indulgences and usurped Sovereignty which our Reformers banished out of England And therefore their separation was not any waies from Patriarchal authority I confesse that by reason of the great difficulty and charge of convocating so many Bishops and keeping them so long together untill all causes were heard and determined And by reason of those inconveniencies which did fall upon their Churches in their absence Provincial Councels were first reduced from twice to once in the year and afterwards to once in three years And in processe of time the hearing of appeales and such like causes and the execution of the Canons in that behalf were referred to Metropolitans untill the Papacy swallowed up all the authority of Patriarchs and Metropolitans and Bishops Serpens serpentem nisi ederet non fieret draco Peradventure it may be urged in the fourth place That Gregory the Great who by his Ministers was the first converter of the English Nation about the six hundreth year of our Lord did thereby acquire to himself and his Successours a Patriarchal authority and power over England for the future We do with all due thankfulnesse to God and honourable respect to his memory acknowledge that that blessed Saint was the chief instrument under God to hold forth the first light of saving truth to the English Nation who did formerly sit in darknesse and in the shadow of death whereby he did more truly merit the name of Great then by possessing the chair of Saint Peter And therefore whilest the sometimes flourishing now poor persecuted Church of England shall have any being Semper honos nomenque suum laudesque manâ—bunt But whether this benefit did intitle Saint Gregory and his Successours to the Patriarchate of all or any part of the British Islands deserves a further consideration First consider that at that time and untill this day half of Britaigne it self and two third parts of the Britannique Islands did remain in the possession of the Britons or Scottish and Irish who still continued Christians and had their Bishops and Protarchs or Patriarchs of their own from whom we do derive in part our Christianity and holy orders and priviledges Without all controversie the conversion of the Saxons by Saint Gregory could not prejudice the just liberties of them or their Successours Secondly consider that the half of Britaigne which was conquered and possessed by the Saxons was not soly and altogether peopled by Saxons A world of British Christians did remain and inhabit among the Conquerours For we do not find either that the Saxons did go about to extirpate the British Nation or compell them to turn Renegadoes from their Religion or so much as demolish their Churches But contented themselves to chase away persons of eminency and parts and power whom they had reason to suspect and fear And made use of vulgar persons and spirits for their own advantage This is certain that Britaigne being an Island whither there is no accesse by land all those who were transported or could have been transported by Sea on such a suddain could not of themselves alone in probability of reason have planted or peopled the sixth part of so much land as was really possessed by the Saxons And therefore we need not wonder if Queen Bertha a Gallâ—ise and a Christian did find a Congregation of Christians at Canterbury to joyn with her in her Religion and a Church called Saint Martins builded to her hand And stood in need of Lethargus a Bishop to order the affaires of Christian Religion before ever Saint Austine set foot upon English ground Neither did the British want their Churches in other places also as appears by that Commission which the King did give to Austine among other things to repair the Churches that were decayed These poor subdued persons had as much right to their ancient priviledges as the rest of the unconquered Britons Thirdly consider That all that part of Britaigne which was both conquered and inhabited by the Saxons was not one intire Monarchy but divided into seven distinct Kingdoms which were not so suddenly converted to the Christian faith all at once but in long tract of time long after Saint Gregory slept with his fathers upon several occasions by several persons It was Kent and some few adjacent Counties that was converted by Austine It is true that Ethelbâ—rt King of Kent after his own conversion did indeavour to have planted the Christian faith both in the Kingdomes of Northumberland and the East Angles with fair hopes of good successe for a season But alas it wanted root Within a short time both Kings and Kingdoms apostated from Christ and forsook their Religion The Kingdoms of the West Saxons