confined and circumscribed with in his boundes and limits But the authority of the Bishop of Rome is like vnto the Ocean inuironing the earth or to the highest heauens incompassing all therefore in such cases wee must haue recourse to the Bishop of Rome ORTHOD. To whom had Frumentius recourse for the conuerting of India The Story whereof is this A Tyrian Philosopher arriuing in India was slaine by the Barbarians with all his company except two little children which were gone out of the shippe and were learning their lessons vnder a tree These children were brought vp by the King and aduanced by him one of them that is Adesius beeing made his Steward the other that is Frumentius his Secretary Afterward the King dying and leauing his sonne in his nonage the Queene intreated them both but especially Frumentius to assist her in the Gouernement of the kingdome While Frumentius was in this authority hee inquired among the Romane Merchants for Christians hee shewed them all fauour and countenance and admonished them to haue their assembles for praier and the seruice of God When the King came to age they deliuered him the kingdome and departed Adesius to Tyre Frumentius to Alexandria where hee went to Athanaesius and told him what was done intreating him to send some worthy Bishop to those multitudes of Christians and to those Churches which were built in that barbarous place Then Athanasius calling an assembly of Priests said Where shall we finde such a man in whom is the spirit of God to performe these things so hee made Frumentius Bp. sent him into India and the Lord blessed his labours signes and wonders were wrought by him and an infinite company of those barbarous people were conuetted to the faith This Story is recorded by Ruffinus who liued at the same time not out of the rumors of the people but by the relation of Adesius himselfe the companion of Frumentius who was afterward a Priest of Tyre And Socrates Theodoret and Sozomen doe all borrow the same from Ruffinus Thus Athanasius sent a Bishop to conuert India without consulting with the Bishop of Rome which verely he would haue done if hee had thought it necessary But the Pope then did challenge no such thing neither did that age ascribe it to him Wherefore the Kings sending to Eleutherius was not of necessity but because it stood most with his conueniencie PHIL. You are vnthankefull and vnwilling to acknowledge your obligation to Rome ORTHOD. We confesse a singular blessing from thence deriued vnto vs. For Eleâ—therâ—us sent Fugatius and Danatianus otherwise called Damianus by whom ioyning with Eluanus and Meduinus Christian Religion was aduanced Then King Lucius was baptised and many of his people Then the Druides were remoued and in their roomes christian Preachers placed Then the Temples which had beene founded to the honour of their many Gods were dedicated to the one and onely true God thus Idolatry was dispoiled of her pray and Dagon did fall downe before the Arke of Israel For the better vnderstanding whereof it must be obserued that the Romanes before this time had diuided Britaine into three Prouinces one of them was called Maxima Caesariensis the Metropolis wherof was Yorke Another Britannia prima the Metropolis wherof was London the third Britannia secunda the Metropolis wherof was Caerlegion Now in other cities they had their Flamines In these three noble Cities were the seates of the Arch flamines so there were 28. Flamines and three Archiflamines in stead of which so many Bishops Arch-bishops were appointed This is denied by Gultelmus Paruus but Lelandus confuteth him first by Asserius Meneuensis who was schoolemaster to King Alfred secondly by Geraldus in Dialogo Syluestri thirdly by Ptolomeus Lucensis who saith in the life of Eleutherius that the three Protoflamines of Britaine were conuerted into so many Archbishops Concerning their seates Lelandus addeth London of the Trinobantes and Yorke of the Brigantes did vndoubtedly shine with this dignitie therefore where is the third seate where but in Wales in which point though I hold my peace Trithemius is an euident witnesse Hitherto Lelandus Now although Britaine was after the Nicen Councell diuided into fiue Prouinces Valentia and Flauia Caesariensis being added to the former yet there were no new Archbishoprickes erected The reason whereof was because those two new Prouinces were taken out of the former and consequently could not haue Bishoprickes without the diminishing of the authoritie of the former in whose iurisdiction originally they were which was not sufferable because it was against the Canon of the Nicen Councell decreeing that in Antioch and in other Prouinces the dignities prerogatiues and authorities of Churches should be maintained PHIL. Were not all these Bishoprickes erected or at least confirmed by the authoritie of the Bishop of Rome ORTHOD. When the King desired to receiue from him the Romane Lawes hee returned this answere That there were already in Britaine the olde and new Testament out of which by the Councell of his kingdome hee might take a Law to gouerne his people For he was the Vicar of Christ in his owne Kingdome And as hee did not interpose himselfe in matters temporall so neither doth it appeare that hee did in matters spirituall or ecclesiasticall Hee sent not one Preacher into Britaine before hee was entreated by the King Neither doe wee finde that hee assumed to himselfe any authoritie in erecting of Bishoprickes Neither did that age ascribe it vnto him as may appeare by the former example of Athanasius but it seemeth that the King being supreme Gouernour euen in religious causes within his owne Kingdome and assisted by learned Preachers established such gouernment and in such places as was most conuenient Yet make we no doubt but Eleutherius both gaue them instructions what hee thought fittest to be done if the Lord should blesse their labours and likewise approued it with ioy of heart when hee heard it was done not by vertue of any iurisdiction but out of a Christian deuotion Their diuersitie of ceremonies and their reiecting of Austin may induce vs to think that they had neuer beene vnder the Romane Patriarch And it is most likely that as the Churches of Cyprus had a gouernment within themselues exempt from the Iurisdiction of all others so the Churches of Britaine a little world without the world might bee gouerned by Primates of their owne and exempt from all forraine Iurisdiction PHIL. DId not the Bishop of Rome deliuer them from Arianisme and Pelagianisme ORTHO If it were so yet this would not argue any Papall Iurisdiction but onely Christian compassion But indeed it was not so We read in Bede that the land was infected with these heresies That Rome did recouer it we reade not He telleth how that at the request of the Britaines the French met in a Synod and sent Germanus and Lupus two reuerend Bishops by whose
videtur c. It seemeth we may say seeing an Abbot gouerneth his Monastery by ordinary Iurisdiction and an Abbatesse is equall vnto him in freedome of administration that she hath ordinarie Iurisdiction as well as the Abbot Yea the same Stephen striueth to attibute vnto her the power of excommunication which is more then the Church of England ascribeth to Princes For it attributeth vnto them onelie that prerogatiue which wee see to haue beene giuen alwayes to godly Princes in the holy Scripture by God himselfe that is that they should rule all estates and degrees committed vnto their charge by God whether they be Ecclesiasticall or temporall and restraine with the ciuil sword the stubborne euill doers When the B hath vsed his spirituall censures he can proceed no further but as Iosias compelled all that were found in Israel to serue the Lord So may euery Prince by his royall authority compell all his subiects to do their duty and those which refuse to be reformed by the Church he may restraine with the ciuil sword inflicting tēporal punishments as the qualitity of the offence requireth When Paulus Samosatenus was excommunicate and deposed in the Councell of Antioch he did notwithstanding hold his Church and chaire by violence whereupon the Councell knowing that of themselues they could proceed no further were forced to seeke the aide of Aurelian the Emperour by whose commandement he was expelled PHIL. IF the Iurisdiction of the Prince and the Prelate be so different how then is the Prelates deriued from the Prince ORTHOD. Heere wee must consider the matters handled in the consistories of Bishops and the manner The matters originally and naturally belonging to those Courts are onely such as are originally and naturally Ecclesiasticall the manner to ratifie their iudgements is not properly vnder any corporall mulct but onely by spirituall censures as suspension excommunication and such like In both which respects the Iurisdiction of Bishops hath beene much inlarged by the fauour and indulgence of Christian Princes Concerning the matter Constantine the Great gaue libertie to Clerkes to decline the iudgement of ciuill Iudges and to bee iudged by their owne Bishops By occasion whereof many Ciuill Causes were brought to the cognisance of Ecclesiasticall Courts Hee made also a law to ratifie those iudgements As though they had beene pronounced by the Emperour himselfe Now all the Iurisdiction which Bishops haue in Ciuill Causes is meerely from the Prince Concerning the manner it seemeth sometimes expedient to annex coactiue power to the Episcopall office both for the honour of Prelacie and also to make their spirituall censures the more regarded which also without controuersie must bee acknowledged to proceede from the Prince For as the Lord hath compacted the light into the body of the Sunne that thence it might be communicated to Moone and Starres So hee hath put all ciuill and coactiue Iurisdiction into the person of the Prince from whom as from a glorious Sunne or fountaine all other inferiour lampes doe borrow their light But if wee speake of that Episcopall Iurisdiction which both in respect of matter and manner is meerely spirituall the immediate fountaine of it is God himselfe as our most learned and religious King with his royall Penne hath thus witnessed to the world That Bishops ought to bee in the Church I euer maintained it as an Apostolicke institution and so the ordinance of God contrary to the Puritanes and likewise to Bellarmine who denyeth that Bishops haue their Iurisdiction immediately from God If his Maiesties iudgement bee contrary to Bellarmines who holdeth the negatiue then his Princely wisedome embraceth the affirmatiue to wit that Bishops haue their Iurisdiction meerely spirituall immediately from God Notwithstanding for so much as they exercise the same in a Christian Common wealth at the holy direction and command and vnder the gracious protection of a religious King within the kings dominions vpon the Kings subiects according to the Canons and statutes established by the Kings authoritie wee may iustly call those Courts the Kings Ecclesiasticall Courts and the Archbishops and Bishops the kings Ecclesiasticall iudges Wherefore though this spirituall power in regard of it selfe be immediately from God yet in these respects it may rightly be said to be deriued from the king So it is a Christo tanquam ab authore conferente a Rege tanquam a iubente dirigente promouente protegente PHIL. If your Bishops haue their spirituall Iurisdiction immediately from God when doe they receiue it ORTHO When they are made Bishops that is in their Consecration For the partie to be Consecrated is presented to the Archbishop in these words Most reuerend Father in God wee present vnto you this godly and well learned man to be Consecrated Bishop Where the word Bishop is taken in the vsuall Ecclesiasticall sense for a Timothy or a Titus an Angel or gouernour of the Church And the Archbishop with other Bishops present imposeth hands saying f Take the holy Ghost that is such ghostly and spirituall power as is requisite to aduance a Presbyter to the office of a Bishop so here is giuen him whatsoeuer belongeth to the Episcopall office as the prayers going before the pronouncing of these words and following after doe declare wherein humble petition is made for Gods blessing and grace that hee may dulie execute the office of a Bishoppe faithfullie serue therein and minister Episcopall discipline PHIL. If it be giuen in Episcopall Consecration how then is it giuen immediatly from God ORTHOD. I will answere you if you will answere me a few questions And first I demaund whence is the power of Order PHIL. It is immediatly from God because it requireth a Character and grace which onely God can effect For though it be said to be giuen with Imposition of hands yet the meaning is not that either the Imposer or the Imposition of hands doeth giue it but God himselfe while hands are Imposed To which purpose it is excellently said of S. Ambrose O brother who giueth the Episcopall grace God or man Thou answerest without doubt God but yet God giueth it by man Man imposeth hands God giueth the grace The Priest imposeth an humble hand and God blesseth with a mightie hand ORTHOD. And whence commeth the grace of Baptisme PHIL. This also without question is immediatly from God ORTHOD. And whence commeth faith in the hearing of the Gospel PHIL. It is likewise immediatly from God ORTHOD. And doeth not God in all these vse the ministerie of man PHIL. There is no doubt of it ORTHOD. Then you see a thing may be giuen immediatly from God though in giuing it he vse the meanes and ministery of man for in such like speeches the word Immediatly is not so taken as excluding meanes but as distinguishing the action of God from the meanes When the children of Israel were stung of the fierie serpents God in healing them vsed the
according to the ancient and holy Ecclesiasticall lawes Moreouer his noble successours what did they When the rebell Rodolph was slaine in the field they armed the sonnes against their owne father First Conrade the◠Henry who tooke his owne father prisoner and brought him to such misery that hee was glad to begge for victuals in a Church which he himselfe had founded promising to earne them by doing the dutie of a Clerke in seruing the quier which not obtaining he pined away and dyed for sorrow Was this according to the ancient and holy Ecclesiasticall lawes Neither did the Popes malice stay here their successour Pope Paschall the second caused him to be digged out of his graue and to lye vnburied by the space of fiue yeeres Was this according to the ancient and holy Ecclesiasticall lawes Yet after all these exploits so valiantly performed Pope Paschall was glad to restore againe the priuiledge of inuestitures to his sonne Henry being the fift King and the 4 Emperour of that name PHIL. This priuiledge may be called a prauiledge For the Emperour tooke him prisoner and constrained him to it by force and violence but when he was inlarged he cursed both the priuiledge and the Emperour in two Romane Councells the one holden in the yeere 1112. the other in the yeere 1116. ORTHO The Emperour inforced him not to any thing vnlawfull but to obserue the ancient Canons acording to the custome both of the Church and Empire this the Emperour might iustly require and the Pope might yeeld vnto with a good conscience so Paschal with sixeteene of his Bishops and Cardinals whose names Baronius setteth downe out of Petrus Diaconus bound themselues by a solemne oath sub anathemate to performe it Notwithstanding when he was once set at libertie the Pope played the Pope cursed the Emperour and reuoked his grant with open periurie PHIL. The Emperour himselfe had no great confidence in this grant and therefore he relinquished it to Calixtus the second ORTH. What should he do It was now commonly taught that Inuestitures belonged not to lay men It was imbraced as an article of faith that the Pope might depose Princes for denying whereof Vecilo Archbish. of Mentz was condemned for an Hereticke He saw his fathers example fresh bleeding before his eies he was in danger euery day to be turned out of his kingdome the Popes were continually flashing their excommunications in his face first Pope Paschall then Gelasius after him Calixtus So at last wearied and tired out hee was compelled to redeeme his peace and rather to loose Inuestitures then the Empire it selfe Thus the authoritie which was for many hundreds of yeeres practised by the Greeke Romane and Germaine Emperours ratified by Clement the 2. with a councel by Leo the 8. with a councel by Adrian the 1. with a councel and before them all by Pope Vigilius and before him by the approbation of those ancient and better times was now wrested and extorted from him by periury cursing and banning And as they excluded the Emperour reducing elections to the Clergie and people so afterward they excluded the people and brought them onely to the Clergie after that they excluded the Clergie and brought them onely to the Cardinalls Since which time they haue beene as monstrous Popes as euer were before namely Boniface the eighth who entred like a fox raigned like a lyon and dyed like a dogge Iohn the 23. who was called a diuell incarnate and Alexander the sixt who was worse then they both Of all the Schismes which were in the Church of Rome the 29. saith Onuphrius was the worst and the longest continuing 50. yeares sometimes two Popes sometimes three raigning at once which proceeded frō the ambition of the Cardinals the Emperor being excluded who should haue repressed them and if at last the Emperour Sigismund had not interposed his authoritie calling the Councell of Constance and putting downe 3. Popes by this time as a learned man saith your Church might haue had as many Popes at once as the scarlet coloured beast hath heads Hitherto of Rome CHAP. IX Of the Election of the Bishops of Constantinople WHen Nazianzen had refused the Bishopricke of Constantinople Theodosius the elder commaunded the Bishops to giue him in writing the names of such as they thought fit for the place reseruing to himselfe the power of Electing one out of all It fell out that there was at that time at Constantinople an ancient and reuerend old man Nectarius by name who being about to returne to Tarsus came to Diodorus the Bishop thereof to know whether he would haue any thing thither Diodorus on a sudden liking the behauiour of the man though a stranger vnto him shewed him to the Bishop of Antioch praying him to remember him in the catalogue of names The Bishop of Antioch smiled at the conceit of Diodorus because many men of eminent note were nominated for this Election yet for fashion sake to please Diodorus he put Nectarius in among the rest and placed him last The Emperour hauing read ouer the catalogue made a pause at the name of Nectarius and making a marke with his finger he read them ouer againe and chose Nectarius And when euery man inquired who this Nectarius was it appeared that he was not as yet baptized a thing which was vnknowne to the Emperour vnknowne to the Bishop of Antioch vnknowne to Diodorus Yet the Emperour hauing made his choice would not be remoued and the Councell then assembled pronounced him Bishop of Constantinople euen while he was yet in his Christening vesture After the death of Nectarius the Clergie and people chose Chrysostome the Emperour approued the Election and sent to fetch him from Antioch After the death of Sisinnius though many made sute for Philip and many for Proclus yet it was the Emperours pleasure because of some vain glorious persons to choose none of that Church but to send for a stranger Nestorius from Antioch After the death of Maximianus Theodosius the Emperour lest any tumult should be raised in the Church procured the Bishops then present to install Proclus in the Bishops seat euen while the corps of Maximianus was as yet aboue ground which Socrates commendeth in the Emperour as a point of wisdome PHIL. You should marke what followeth in Socrates to wit that Celestinus Bishop of Rome did consent to these proceedings ORTHOD. When Nestorius Bishop of Constantinople was deposed and Proclus in faire possibilitie to obtaine the place some stood vp alledging against him that it was not lawfull to be translated from one See to another whereupon Proclus was repelled and Maximianus chosen Wherefore after the death of Maximianus when Celestine heard that Proclus was installed he wrote to Cyrill and others signifying that translations of Bishops was lawful and not against the Canons So Celestine onely giueth his iudgement but assumeth no authoritie in the Election which was
whole Ecclesiasticall order the 2. a desolation of their country the 3. the impouerishing of the kingdome by wasting their treasure the 4. the ruine and subuersion of Churches The consideration of which things so preuailed with the King that Pope Pius was disapointed of his purpose PHIL. That which Pius could not performe in the daies of Lewis videlicet that the pragmaticall Sanction should be taken cleane away was afterward effected by Leo the 10. in the reigne of King Francis the first therefore in the councell of Lateran the pragmaticall Sanction was abrogated by a publique Decree ORTH. King Francis to vse the words of Duarenus made choice rather to serue the stage and the time with his owne profit as hee himselfe confesseth and remit somewhat of the publique right then to striue so oft with the Popes about this Helena especially seeing he perceiued that some danger from them did hang ouer his head Yet for al this the Sanction cannot be said to bee cleane taken away For the vniuersity of Paris did interpose an appeale to the next general councell which appeale stood with iustice equity for 3. reasons first because the fact of the king was not voluntary but by compulsion Secondly because the Parisians whom it must concerned were neither called nor heard Thirdly because there is no reason that the councell of Lateran and constitution of Leo should derogate from the authority of the councel of Basil. And if we should suppose that it did not onelie derogate from it but also abrogate it yet the verie constitution of Pope Leo yeeldeth to the King the power of nomination in these wordes VVhen a Cathedrall or Metropoliticall Church is vacant let not the Bishoppe bee chosen by the Colledge of Canons but let the King within sixe monethes offer and nominate a graue and fit man to the Pope Thus it is euident that the French Kings retained their right and authoritie in making of Bishoppes euer since their first embracing of the Christian faith And had they this by the indulgence of the Pope Let the Councell of Basill be witnesse let Charles the seuenth bee witnesse let the Court of Paris bee witnesse yea let King Francis himselfe who confessed that when hee went against the sanction hee remitted of the publique right be witnesse And thus much for France CHAP. XII Of the Election of the Bishops of England PHILOD COncerning England King Henry the first did pretend to challenge Inuestitures as vsed by his father and brother before him whereof yet notwithstanding wee finde no expresse proofe or example in any of our histories that they vsed them much lesse that they were lawfully granted vnto them ORTHOD. I will prooue both that they vsed them and that they vsed them lawfully That his brother William Rufus vsed them may appeare by William of Malmesbury who declareth that the King being sicke made mention of the Archbishopricke of Canterbury which was then voide and willed the Bishops to consider of it who answered that whom the King should thinke worthy they all would accept willingly Itaille cubito se attollens hunc ait sanctum virum Anselmum eligo ingenti subsecuto fragore fauentium so he raising himselfe vp vpon his elbowe saide I elect this holy man Anselmus whereupon followed a great applause Now that Bishoprickes in those dayes were giuen by deliuering of a ring and a staffe may appeare by Rafe Bishop of the South Saxons who being threatened by the same King baculum protendit annulum exuit vt si vellet acciperet held out his Crosier put off his ring that the King might take them if hee would intending thereby to resigne his Bishoprick That William the Conquerour vsed the like authoritie is also manifest by the same authour saying Nondum ille efflauerat cum a Gulielmo Rege Lanfrancus Cadomensis Abbas ad Archiepiscopatum electus est Stigandus had not yet breathed out his Ghost when Lanfranck Abbot of Saint Steuens in Cane was elected by King William the Conquerour to the Archbishoprick The like may be shewed before the Conquest where by the way let me tell you that wee stand not so much vpon the ring and the staffe as vpon the thing it selfe that is the Princes power and authoritie for which I will produce some examples as it were a few clusters of a great vintage beginning with Edward the Confessour of whom Malmsbury faith Rex Robertum quem ex Monacho Gemiticensi Londoniae fecerat Episcopum Archiepiscopum creauit the King Edward the Confessour created Robert Archbishop whom before of a Monke he had made Bishop of London And before that King Alfred made Asserio Bishop of Shierburne and Denewulfus Bishop of Winchester and more then two hundred yeeres before that Edelwalke King of the South Saxons promoted Wilfrid to an Episcopall See Thus it is euident that as in other Kingdomes so in England Inuestitures were anciently practised by Princes Wherefore King Henrie the first might haue challenged them not onely as vsed by his father and brother but also as the ancient custome of the Kingdome in the time of the Saxons Wherein onely this was the difference that in ancient time Princes vsed them without contradiction but now the Popes perceiuing that if Princes should haue the bestowing of them after the olde custome it would abate that power to which they themselues aspired beganne to spurne excommunicating both the giuers and takers This was done in the fifth and seuenth Romane Councels vnder Gregory the seuenth but Pope Vrban went further decreeing that not onely the giuers and takers but also all such as consecrated any man so promoted should bee excommunicate At this Councell Anselmus was present by whose aduise and perswasion the decree was made Whereupon when after the death of William Rufus King Henry the first not knowing of this decree much lesse imagining that it was concluded by the meanes of Anselmus had called him home hee well rewarded the kindnesse of so gracious a Prince for first hee would not bee induced to doe his homage to his Lord and Soueraigne was not this a good subiect did hee not well deserue to be canonized for a Saint then he refused to consecrate those whom the King did inuest to Bishoprickes by a staffe and a ring so the King commanded Gerard Archbishop of Yorke to performe that office as Malmsbury Matthew Paris and Roger Houeden doe testifie PHIL. But what followeth in the same authours William Gifford Elect of Winchester refused to receiue Consecration from him and was therefore by the king banished the land Rinelmus Elect of Hereford resigned his Bishopricke into the kings hands being troubled in conscience because hee receiued inuestiture from a lay Prince by occasion of which broiles the rest to whom the king had giuen inuestitures remained vnconsecrated ORTHOD. Whose fault was that not the kings who required no more then was confirmed
Prophets or Bishops which aduanced Saul and Barnabas from the Presbyteral to the Episcopal office ORT. These are doting dreames not worth the answering For seeing the text faith only that there were in the Church which was at Antioch Prophets and Doctors among whom were Barnabas Simeon Lucius Manahen and Saul why should not we thinke Barnabas to be called a Prophet as well as Simeon Lucius and Manahen seeing hee is first named A point so cleere that it is confessed by Lorinus the Iesuite ascribing the titles of Prophets and Doctors as well to Saul and Barnabas as to the rest If these Prophets were Bishops as Turrian imagineth then it will follow that Barnabas was a Bishop before they laid hands vpon him And consequently that he was reordeined which is absurd Moreouer as it cannot bee proued that those three were Bishops so it is certaine that they did not ordaine Paul and Barnabas Bishops For Paul being an Apostle could not receiue any Episcopal grace from man as hath been declared Wherefore this imposition of hands was not to giue them any new power but as the text saith To set them apart for the worke wherevnto the Lord had called them which when they had fulfilled they sayled backe to Antioch whence they had beene commended to the grace of God It is not said they failed to Antioch where they were made Bishops or where they receiued Episcopall grace but whence they had beene commended with fasting and praier to the grace of God To which truth Suarez the Iesuite giueth testimonie affirming that this imposition of hands was onely precaâ—ory and denying that Saul or Barnabas were heere ordained either Priests or Bishops which seemeth also to bee the opinion of Aloysius de Leon and other late writers These are the onely examples which you produce out of the Scripture yet neither of them is pregnant for your purpose and if they were what then An example may not be vrged as an vnchangeable rule when the matter discouereth it selfe to be contingent and variable CHAP. VII That the presence of three Bishops is not required of absolute necessitie NOw that it is no substantiall point of absolute necessitie may be concluded out of your owne positions and practise For the declaration whereof first I demaund whether Episcopall consecration be a Sacrament or no PHIL. That Ordination is a Sacrament truely and properly is rightly defined by the Councel of Trent For there are three things onely required to a Sacrament as your selues confesse an externall signe a promise of grace and a commandement or diuine institution All which are found in ordination as our learned Cardinall hath proued out of the Scripture who hath also declared that those Scriptures whereby Catholickes doe prooue Ordination to bee a Sacrament are vnderstood of Episcopall Ordination Whereupon he affirmeth that if Episcopall Ordination bee not a Sacrament wee cannot proue euidently out of the Scriptures that Ordination is a Sacrament ORTHOD. If the word Sacrament bee taken somewhat largely for any externall signe instituted of God whereto is annexed a promise of grace then wee will grant with Saint Austine that Order may bee called a Sacrament but if it bee taken strictly for such a signe as is a seale of the righteousnesse of faith whereto is annexed a promise of the grace of Iustification and Remission of sinnes in which sense Baptisme and the Lords Supper are Sacraments then wee may not admit it for a Sacrament For in Baptisme and the Lords Supper the sauing grace of Iustification and Remission of sinnes is signified sealed and exhibited to the worthy receiuer but the grace giuen in Ordination is of another nature respecting not so much the good of the receiuer as of the flocke for which hee receiueth it For the Ministers of the Gospell are salt to season others candles to shine vnto others pipes and conduits to conueigh the water of life vnto others But did you not say that though three Bishops were ordinarily required to the Consecration of a Bishop yet the Pope might dispense with two of the three PHIL. I said so out of Cardinall Bellarmine and Binius ORTHOD. What authoritie hath the Pope to dispense in Sacraments PHIL. That may appeare by the Councell of Trent Moreouer the holy Synod declareth that this power hath alwayes beene in the Church that in the Dispensation of Sacraments it might appoint or change such things as it should iudge to bee most expedient for the profit of the receiuers or the reuerence of the Sacraments themselues according to the varietie of things times and places Salua illorum substantia so the substance of the Sacraments be preserued Whereby it appeareth that the Pope can dispense onely with circumstances and not with substance ORTHOD. Why then did the Church of Rome dispense with the Cuppe in the Communion Can you take away one halfe not diminishing the substance But to let this passe doe you not marke the conclusion which floweth from your premises If Episcopall Consecration bee a Sacrament and the Pope may not dispense with the Substance of a Sacrament and yet hee may dispense with two of the three Bishops required in a Consecration then it followeth that two of the three are not of the Substance of Consecration Secondly your owne present practise doeth proue the same For you professe that in your Church sometimes one Bishop alone assisted with two mitred Abbots doth performe it If this bee sufficient then three Bishops are not required of absolute necessitie Now let vs a little looke backe to former times and consider the iudgement of better ages I Will beginne with the fourth Councell of Carthage and the very place which you your selfe alleadged wherein are prescribed the offices to bee performed by the Bishops when one is to bee consecrated to wit how two should holde the Booke of the Gospels ouer his head one powre out the blessing that is pronounce the words whereby the spirituall power grace and blessing is giuen and all the rest touch his heade with their hands When one alone pronounceth the wordes thenone alone ordaineth For the wordes are confessed on all sides to bee the very essentiall forme of Ordination This is agreeable to the collection of your owne Cardinall Tenent librum c. Ergo videtur quod nihil agatur per illos Episcopos quod sit ad substantiam consecrationis pertinens Ergo eorum assistentia non pertinet ad substantiam consecrationis sed magis ad quandam solennitatem i. They hold the booke c. Therefore it seemeth that nothing is done by these two Bishops which is pertaining to the substance of Consecration Therefore their assistance doth not belong to the substance of the consecration but rather to a certaine solemnitie IN the yeere of our Lord 441. there was a Councell holden at Orenge in France where it was thus decreed Duo si presumpserint
in the election of Conon wherefore if the people gaue Suffrages by subscription in those times wee neede not doubt that they gaue Suffrages in the time of S. Cyprian neither was it by the Popes permission For S. Cyprian maketh no mention of the Pope but declareth that almost in all Prouinces after the death of a Bishop the Bishops next adioyning did meet about an election in the citie of the Bishop deceased and so the election was performed in their presence by the Suffrages of the whole fraternitie that is both of the Clergie and like wise also of the people Wherefore that which you say concerning the Pope is but a voluntary speech without any ground And surely seeing God hath set downe no certaine rule nor precept in holy Scripture but left it as a thing indifferent it was most fit that in those primatiue times the people should haue a Suffrage for by this meanes it came to passe that they did not only more quietly receiue diligently heare and heartily loue but also more willingly and bountifully maintaine their Bishop wherefore their Suffrage was grounded vpon right and reason PHIL. The Church of God hath had dolefull experience of the tumults which arise from popular elections Euagrius declareth what vprores were at Alexandria about Proterius when the people beate the souldiers into the Church and destroyed a number of them with fier yea they slew Proterius in the Temple vpon Easter day drew his body along the citie hewed it in most miserable manner burned that which was left and scattered his ashes in the wind And Amianus reporteth that at the election of Damasus the people slew in the Church in one day 137. persons so that the holy places did flow with streames of Christian blood These are the fruites of popular elections CHAP. V. An answere to certaine obiections against the election of Bishops by Christian kings and Emperours out of the Councells and other authorities ORTH. IF popular elections bee so dangerous vnto whom should their ancient right rather be translated then vnto the Prince who by the law of God is their Soueraigne to rule them and the Father both of Church and Common wealth to prouide for their good PHIL. The Councell of Paris saith that if any man by ouermuch rashnesse presume to inuade the height of this honour by the Princes commandement let him in no wise be receiued by the Bishops ORTHO The meaning of the Councell appeareth by the words going before let not a Bishop be intruded by the Princes commandement nor by any other meanes against the consent of the Metropolitane and the Bishops of the Prouince so this Councell maketh nothing against our kings of England who vse most orderly lawfull and Canonicall proceeding neuer intruding any against the consent of the Metropolitane and comprouincialls PHIL. In the yere 566. there was a Councell holden at Santonia in France where d Emerius was deposed from his Bishopricke because hee was intruded by King Clotharius ORTHO He was put in contrary to the Canons For he had the decree of the King that he should be consecrated without the aduise of the Metropolitane so this is no paralel for our Princes PHIL. By the second Nicen Councel All elections of Bishops Priests and Deacons made by the Magistrates are voide And the ground of their assertion is that Canon of the Apostles If any obtaine a Church by secular powers let him be deposed and all that communicate with him ORTHO That Canon is to be expounded of secular powers excluding the Clergie or inuading the Church by force and violence and so the Councell tooke it neither did they vrge it any otherwise as may appeare plainely by the very title of their Canon Electiones Episcoporum quae vi Principum procedunt infirmari debent i. the elections of Bishops which proceed by the violence of Princes ought to be infringed PHIL. But you cannot so delude the 22. Canon of the eighth generall Councell being the fourth at Constantinople which is most pregnant to this purpose For there it was decreed That no Lay. Prince or Potentate should interpose themselues in the Election or promotion of a Patriarch Metropolitane or any Bishop especially seeing it is not conuenient that they should haue any power in such things but rather bee silent till the Election bee finished by the Ecclesiasticall Colledge ORTHOD. The 22. Canon is a counterfeit not found in the Greeke copies And the true Canons of the same Councell grounding vpon the Canons of the Apostles and ancient Councels doe iustifie my former answere in these wordes If any Bishop shall receiue the Consecration of Episcopall dignitie by the fraud and tyrannie of Princes let him be deposed Wherefore the intention of the ancient Councels was not to exclude Princes but onely to remooue fraude and compulsion that all things might be done according to the Canons That Hildebrandicall doctrine was not yet knowne to the world PHIL. Athanasius asketh where there is any such Canon that a Bishop should be sent out of a Palace ORTHOD. Athanasius speaketh of the proceedings of Constantius who so farre contemned all Canons that hee would haue had his owne will to bee for a Canon And whereas in those dayes Bishops vsed to be chosen by the consent of the people and Clergie openly created in the Church and ordained if it were possible by all the Bishops of the Prouince at least by three with the consent of the Metropolitane Constantius in stead of the Church would haue it done in his Palace In place of the people there were present three of his Eunuches and for the Bishops of the Prouince three which Athanasius calleth not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is Bishops but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is spies Thus was one Felix created a Bishop This sending of Bishops out of a Palace was against all Canons this Athanasius misliked neither can any man of wisdome speake well of it But such proceedings as are vsed in the Church of England shall be iustified as agreeable both to the Councels and stories of antiquitie PHIL. Valentinian when the Bishops would haue had him to elect a Bishop of Millan said It is a greater matter then is conuenient for vs but you being indued with diuine grace and shining with the brightnesse thereof shall make the election ORTHOD. The Bishops did shew their duety to their Prince and the Prince shewed his elemencie to his Subiects But what is this to your purpose There is no doubt but a Prince may if it please him relinquish his right for a time and he or his successours may resume it againe when it seemeth good to their Princely wisedomes For that this was anciently acknowledged to be the right of Christian Princes will appeare if we consider the election of Bishops in the Imperiall Cities of Rome and Constantinople as also in the Kingdomes of France and Spaine CHAP. VI.
already performed by Imperiall authoritie Thus you see the practise of the Emperours in the Church of Constantinople no man contradicting them and the very last of these examples was aboue 300. yeeres before the grant of Adrian yea aboue 100. yeeres before Vigilius Now from the Imperiall Cities let vs come to the kingdome of Spaine CHAP. X. Of the Election of the Bishops of Spaine IN the 16. Councell at Tolledo it was concluded That if a Bishop did not set his helping hand to the extirpation of Idolatrie he should be deposed Alio ibidem Principali Electione constituto Another being appointed there by the Princes Election This Councell was holden in the yeere 693. fourescore yeeres before Inuestitures were granted to the Emperour Charles by Pope Adrian And before that it was decreed in the 12. Councel of Tolledo as followeth It hath pleased all the Bishops of Spaine and Galicia That sauing the priuiledge of euery Prouince it shall hencefoorth be lawfull for the Bishops of Tolledo to set vp such Prelates in the Sees of their predecessours and to choose such successours for Bishops departed as the Princely power shall Elect and finde worthy by the iudgement of the foresaid Bishops of Tolledo This Councell was holden in the yeere 681. almost an 100. yeeres before Pope Adrian And yet the Kings of Spaine had authoritie to Elect before this Councel which may appeare by these wordes of Baronius Wee must not be ignorant of this point that the Kings of the Gothes in Spaine did challenge to themselues the nomination of such Bishops as were to bee made which nomination of them made by the King was referred to a Councell that they might iudge of the qualitie of the person whether he were worthy of a Bishoprick These things are euident by the Monuments of ancient writers Now because much time passed before they could be dispatched by reason whereof the Sees were long vacant therefore the Councell made the decree Thus it is euident that the authoritie of the Councell was translated to the Archbishop but the Kings authoritie was the same as before and had so bene from the time of the Gothes PHIL. Indeed in the time of the Gothes it was in the Kings and so hath continued in the Kings of Spaine to this present age by the indulgence of the Popes ORTHOD. The ancient Kings of the Gothes were Arrians and enemies to Christ did they elect Bishops by indulgence of Popes PHIL. They did it by tyrannie will you take a paterne from Arrians and Tyrants ORTHOD. The Arrians of Spaine were conuerted in the yeere 589. and professed the faith in the third Councell of Toledo Yet the Orthodox Kings continued their authoritie in Elections Shall we say that they tooke a patterne from Tyrants and Arrians Neither did the Arrian Kings offend in that they elected Bishops but in that they elected Arrian Bishops Neither is an Orthodox Prince bound to relinquish his owne right because it hath bene abused by hereticall Princes For the right of Princes is most ancient deriued neither from Pope nor Arrian but from the patterne of Salomon who chose Sadok high Priest aboue 1000 yeeres before either Arrian or Papist was borne Hitherto of Spaine CHAP. XI Of the Election of the Bishops of France IN France the Kings had the choise of Bishops almost 300. yeeres before the Empire came to their hands For their first Christian King Clodoueus conuerted in the yeere 499 elected Dinifius Bishop of Turone After him succeeded Childibertus who made his brethren Clodomer Theodorick and Clotharius partakers of his Kingdome all which vsed the same authority for by the commandement of Clodomer Omasius was made Bishop of Turone after Dinifius by the commandement of Theodorick Quintianus was made Bishop of Aruerne by the commandement of Clotharius Cato was appointed to be Bishop of Turone which when he refused and afterward would haue had it the King repelled him After the death of Clotharius raigned his sonne Cheribert who made Pascentius Bishop of Poictiers But why should I reckon vp any moe There is a world of examples recorded by Gregorius Turonensis collected from him by one of our learned Bishops all which were aboue a thousand yeeres agoe Afterward when the French Kings became Roman Emperours Pope Adrian decreed and defined that they should haue not only Inuestitures but also the disposing of the Roman See as hath beene declared And although Lodowick the sonne of Charles bee said to haue renounced the right of choosing the Bishop of Rome yet as the Court of Paris affirmeth He alwaies retained Inuestitures Neither had the Kings of France of ancient time authority in Bishopricks onely but in benefices also Si ad priscorum institutorum normam saith Duarenus omnia exigere velimus nullum est in Gallia beneficium nullum Ecclesiae ministerium quod absque regis consensu cuiquam deferri possit if wee will examine all things according to the rule of ancient constitutions there is in France no benefice no ministry of any Church which can bee conferred vpon any man without the consent of the King Notwithstanding it came to passe in processe of time that the Pope by his prouisions reseruations and expectatiue graces made lamentable desolation in the Church of God for redresse whereof when the councell of Basill had published most worthy decrees Pope Eugenius went about to disanull them VVherefore Charles the 7. king of France at the supplication of the councell and by the aduice of his owne Bishops assembled in Synod vndertooke to protect them to which purpose hee set out that noble constitution called the pragmaticall sanction which was receiued with such an applause of all good men that the like was neuer heard of in the kingdome of France This pragmatical sanction was fitly called by a great learned man the Palladium of France for as the image of Pallas was said to fall downe from heauen among the Troianes so this sanction seemed to be sent from heauen by diuine prouidence among the Frenchmen And as Apollo did prophesie that the remouing of the Palladium would be the destruction of Troy so wise men presaged that the taking away of this Sanction would portend great calamity to the Church of France Yet for al this the Popes would neuer be quiet till they had if not wholly vanquished yet wonderfully weakened it especially Pius the 2. who was one of the Bishops in the councel of Basil but now beeing Pope hee is become another man neither wanted there some which to please the Pope opposed themselues against it whose subtilties and Sophismes are answered by that famous Canonist Archbishop Panormitan who was himselfe also one of the Bishops in the councel of Basil. Yea the court of Paris offered a booke to Lodowick the eleuenth wherein they declared how by the abrogation of the Sanction foure mischiefs would follow the first A confusion of the
Vniuersall Patriarch was giuen and that by a Councell to Iohn Patriarch of Constantinople In what sence trow you You produced but two sences of it out of Bellarmine In the first which prophanely excludeth all other Bishops they did not giue it for then they should deny themselues to be Bishops contrary to their own subscriptions If in the latter then it was common to him with the Bishops of Rome and so cannot proue your Monarchicall iurisdiction PHIL. How proue you that this title was giuen him by a Councell ORTHOD. Binius saith How oft Iohn Bishop of Constantinople is named in the acts of the Councell of Constantinople vnder Hormisda so oft the title of Vniuersall Patriarch is found added vnto him PHIL. Binius in the same place ascribeth this to the imposture of the latter Grecians which he proueth because though two Popes Pelagius and Gregory condemned this title in the Bishop of Constantinople yet no man obiected against them the authoritie of this Councell which had beene very materiall because the greater part of it was approued by the Church of Rome Wherefore it is certaine that this was not originally in the Councell but foisted in afterward ORTHO But Pope Adrian the first in his Epistle to Tharasius recorded in the second Nicen Councell intitleth him a generall Patriarch PHIL. This seemeth also to be added by some Grecian which I rather thinke because the same Epistle translated by Anastasius hath no such title prefixed ORTHOD. As though Anastasius were not as likely to put it out as the Grecians to put it in But Iustinian in the Authentickes giueth Mennas the very selfe same title of Oecumenicall Patriarch PHIL. It must be affirmed that this also crept in vnlesse we say that he is called Vniuersall in respect of the Orientall Bishops and Priests ORTHOD. So Holoander taketh it when hee translateth it Vniuersi eius tractus Patriarchae i. to the Patriarch of all that circuit But are you now aduised Was he called Vniuersal and yet had not the iurisdictiō of the whole world but was onely an Orientall Patriarch then you must confesse that this title might be giuen to the B. of Rome and yet not imply that hee had iurisdiction ouer the whole world but ouer the whole West and so was the Occidentall Patriarch Wherefore the decree of Pope Pelagius requiring all Metropolitanes to send to Rome to professe their faith and receiue the Pall extendeth not to them of the East but onely to them of the West PHIL. Then you grant that hee was Patriarch of the West and that is sufficient to inferre my conclusion for the Westerne Patriarch must needes haue iurisdiction ouer the Metropolitanes of the West in which compasse is Brittany I need not here speake of the ancient diuision of the Prouinces nor of Saint Peter nor of Eleutherius It is famously knowne that Saint Austin was sent hither by the Bishop of Rome receiued a pall from him and apparently submitted himselfe to his iurisdiction so did his successours for almost a thousand yeeres together Wherfore seeing the Bishop of Rome was in lawfull possession you must tell vs vpon what reason you put him from it ORTHOD. By what title doth the Pope challenge his iurisdiction in England By the law of God you cannot iustifie it By reason of the first conuersion of the Island by Saint Peter You cannot make it manifest that euer he was here Will you fetch it from Eleutherius He onely sent at the kings request and challenged no such authority Wil you deriue it from Austin It was then made appeare by many reasons that the Brittans ought him no subiection And it is euident that he and his associates had first their assemblies in Saint Martins Church in Canterbury by the Kings permission afterward when the king himselfe was conuerted they receiued to vse the words of Bede more ample licence both to Preach through all his dominions and also to build and repaire Churches So you see all was receiued from the king It is true that Gregory sent a supply of Preachers and gaue his aduise for the erection of Bishopricks and sent palls hither yet there can bee no question but all this was done by the kings licence Afterward in succeeding ages when the Popes did play the wild boares in the Church in executing Church censures and giuing Church liuings the kings of England made lawes against them euen in the time of Popery For as it was defended by Cyprian and afterward also by the African councell vnder Celestinus that causes should bee ended where they begunne and not bee carried to tribunalls beyond the sea So it was decreed in England in the raigne of Henry the second as witnesseth Mathew Paris De appellationibus si emerserint ab Archidiacono debet procedi ad Episcopum ab Episcopo ad Archiepiscopum si Archiepiscopus defuerit in iustitia exhibenda ad dominum regē perueniendū est postremò vt praecepto ipsius in curia Archiepiscopi controuersia terminetur ita quod non debeat vltra procedi absque assenssu domini regis i. Cōcerning appeals if any shall spring they ought to proceed from the Archdeacon to the Bishop from the Bishop to the Archbishop if the Archb. shal be defectiue in doing iustice they must come at last to our Lord the king that by his cōmandement the controuersie may bee determined in the Archbishops Court so that there ought not to be any further proceedings without the assent of the Lord the king Thus it is cleare that the Pope could not take to himselfe the handling of causes without the kings license It might also be declared how little his cēsures were here respected vnlesse they receiued strength by the kings permission And whereas hee tooke vpon him to dispose of Church liuings hee was censured for it in the time of Edw. the 3 euen in the high Court of Parliament as an vsurper These points might bee much inlarged but this little touch is sufficient to shew that whatsoeuer iurisdiction hee had in England was by the courtesie of the King whatsoeuer hee tooke vpon him otherwise was by vsurpation Now his challenge by custome is repelled by custome For these sixe hundred yeeres last past hee affecting to bee that which he was not disdained to bee that which he was and aspyring to a Popedome neglected his Patriarchdome so that which he had gotten by vse he hath lost by disusing and by his owne fact hath extinguished his former title Secondly whereas Pope Pelagius required onely a profession of the faith according to the Scriptures and the holy ancient generall councels Pius the fourth hath framed vs a new forme of faith without which no man can bee saued consisting of traditions transubstantiations merits Images reliques and such rotten Romish ragges-which he hath clapt to the Nicen creed as it were a beggers patch to a golden garment And
him by not doing that which hee commaundeth and by hindring him from executing his will yet it is not lawfull to iudge him or punish him or depose him which belongeth to none but the superiour ORTHOD. And you must consider that it is one thing to punish by vertue of Iurisdiction ouer a partie and another thing to hinder the iniuries which the partie endeauoreth actuallie to inferre as the Venetian Doctours haue prooued out of Caietan Turrecremata and Bellarmine Now King Henry did challenge no iurisdiction but ouer his owne subiects and within his owne dominions yet it was fit that in his owne necessary defence hee should remoue papall iniuries by prouiding as it became a vertuous Prince for the quiet of his owne conscience and the good of his subiects Which blessings could neuer haue beene procured if the Pope had still enioyed his vsurped authority in England PHIL. You shall not perswade mee but that King Henry was guiltie both of Schisme and heresie Onuphrius saith that Paul the third did thinke him vnworthie to bee accounted in the number of Christians ob inauditum heresis crimen that is For such a crime of heresie as had not beene heard of ORTHOD. What meant the Pope thinke you when hee condemned him for heresie Sigonius recordeth that in a Councell at Mentz in the presence of the Emperor there was a disputation Vtrum Henricus Regio titulo a Gregorio spoliari potuisset that is VVhether Henry the Emperour might bee depriued of the title of a King by Pope Gregorie Wherein most of the Bishops assented to Geberardus defending the Popes authority So it came to passe that Vecilo Archbishop of Mentz beeing of the contrarie opinion was branded for heresie in an other councell wherein Otho Bishop of Ostia the Popes Legat was present And the same Sigonius saith that the Emperour Henry the fourth renouncing his Fathers heresie did imbrace the obedience of the Pope Not to performe obedience to the Pope was his Fathers heresie but his sonne was a gracious Catholicke for shewing obedience to the Pope though therein hee were an vngracious sonne against his owne father PHIL. Onuphrius saith That king Henry the eight followed Noua nefaria Lutheri dogmata the new and wicked opinions of Luther Bellarmine saith that in England in the reigne of Henry and afterwards in the reigne of Edward the whole kingdome did after a sort slide backe from the faith ORTHOD. That which you call Heresie and Apostacy is true religion and that which you honour with the name of true religion is full of Heresie and idolatry Many papall abuses were discouered in the daies of King Henry moe in the daies of King Edward so the Gospell was like to the light which shineth more and more to the perfect day the brightnesse whereof abolished both the Pope the Popish religion Afterward when Queene Mary had restored both the Lord stirred vp the spirit of Queene Elizabeth who with an inuincible courage reformed religion And that which shee happily begunne our gracious Soueraigne King Iames hath happily continued Neither can any man accuse them of Schisme vnlesse they will accuse the holy Apostle Saint Paul who When certaine were hardened and disobeyed speaking euill of the way of God before the multitude hee departed from them and separated the Disciples As the Apostle practised this in his owne person so hee gaue the like commaundement to others If any man teach otherwise and consenteth not to the wholesome words of our Lord Iesus Christ and to the Doctrine which is according to godlinesse c. From such separate thy selfe And the Lord crieth by his Prophet Goe not vp to Bethauen This Bethauen was Bethel but her idolatry made her Bethauen therefore goe not vp to Bethauen If Rome which was sometimes Bethel the house of God become Bethauen the house of vanitie then thou must not goe vp to Bethauen Goe out of Babylon my people goe out of Babylon if Rome which was some times a pure virgine become the whore of Babylon then go out of Babylon my people least you be partakers of her plagues Wherefore al Christian Kingdomes were bound to separate themselues from the erronious and idolatrous Church of Rome PHIL. Thus you say But I rather account of the iudgement of the Church of Rome which noteth both them and you for schismatickes and heretickes CHAP. IX Whether Schisme and Heresie annihilate a Consecration ORTHO WHether we or you be guiltie of those crimes God the righteous iudge will one day reueale In the meane time let vs admit though for al your brags you are neuer able to proue it that Cranmer vpon his reuolte from the Pope did presently become a schismatick and an hereticke Yet tell mee in good sooth Philodox doeth a Bishop falling into schisme and heresie cease to be a Bishop doth hee loose his power of giuing orders PHIL. It is a disputable point and I can tell you that great Clerkes seeme to bee of that opinion Pope Innocent saith that those which are Baptized of heretickes are receiued with their Baptisme but the ordained of heretickes are not receiued with their order And againe the ordained of Heretickes haue their head wounded And againe it is affirmed that hee which hath lost the honour cannot giue the honour and that hee which receiued receiued nothing because there was nothing in the giuer which hee could receiue Which he sealeth vp with this conclusion Aquiescimus verum est We yeeld and it is true Pope Iohn the twelfth caused those which were ordained of Leo 8. a schismaticall Pope to say Pater meus nihil habuit sibi nihil mihi dedit that is my father had nothing to himselfe and nothing he gaue to me Pope Nicolas the first saith No reason doth teach how Gregory who was Canonically and Synodically deposed and excommunicated can promote or blesse any man therefore Photius receiued nothing of Gregory but that which he had but he had nothing he therefore gaue nothing He which stoppeth his ears from hearing the law his prayer shal be abhominable if abhominable then not to be heard if not to be heard then vneffectuall if vneffectuall then verily it bringeth nothing to Photius Wherefore though Cranmer had a lawfull consecration yet it seemeth when hee fell into schisme and heresie hee lost his order and power of ordination Therefore the Bishops in King Edwards time consecrated by Cranmer receiued nothing because Cranmer had nothing to giue And the Bishops in Queene Elizabeths time consecrated by those whom Cranmer did consecrate receiued nothing because their consecrators had nothing to giue And those which now succeede them receiued nothing because their predecessours had nothing to giue ORTHO Take heed Philodox least while you goe about to put out our eyes you put out your owne For if your allegations be sound what shall become of Bonner Bishop of London what shall become of
hoc regno Angliae quam alium quemuis externum Episcopum i. At the length we all agreed with one minde and one heart vpon this conclusion to wit That the Bishop of Rome hath not any greater iurisdiction giuen him of God in holy Scripture ouer this kingdome of England then any other forraine Bishop And Bellarmine himselfe telleth vs out of Cheynie the Carthusian Monke that in the yeere 1535. there was a Parliament wherein it was Enacted That all should renounce the Pope and all other forraine powers and acknowledge the King to be head of the Church vpon their oath Thus it is manifest that the Bishops and Clergie did then both approue the Title and take the oath which Bishops were such as your selues commend to bee inferiour to none in Europe for vertue and learning And truely excepting their opinions in Religion wherein they were caried away with the streame of the time it cannot be denied but that generally they were very well learned Erasmus inuited into England by William Warham Archbishop of Canterbury when he had considered what difference there was betweene the Bishops of England and other Nations he published to the world in Print That onely England had learned Bishops Moreouer most of these learned Bishops did openly in the Pulpit at Pauls-Crosse defend the Kings Title and sundry of them by their published writings maintained the same The selfe-same oath was taken againe in the â—aigne of K. Edward PHIL. They changed their minds in the dayes of Q. Mary ORTHOD. Very true But their inconstancie cannot abolish the soliditie of their former confession and though they recalled their opinions yet they neuer answered their owne Arguments which remaine still in Print as a witnesse to the world that their former iudgement was grounded vpon Gods Veritie and that the Princes Title did stand with right and equitie PHIL. THese were Bishops and Synods of our owne nation onely but was there euer any learned man else-where that did approue this Title was there euer any King or Queene Christian or Heathen Catholicke or Hereticke in all the world beside before our age that did practise challenge or accept it ORTHOD. Looke into the godly Kings of Iuda Looke into the proceedings of Christian Emperours Constantine Gratian Theodosius and such like Looke into the Lawes of Charles and Lodowicke and you shall see that they practised as much as euer we ascribed to the Queene in this oath When the Councell of Ephesus by the packing of Dioscorus had allowed the cursed opinion of Eutyches and deposed Flauianus Bishop of Constantinople Pope Leo vpon this occasion wrote thus vnto the Emperour Theodosius Behold most Christian and reuerend Emperour I with the rest of my fellow Bishops make supplication vnto you That all things may stand in the same state in which they were before any of these Iudgements vntill a greater number of Bishops may be gathered out of the whole world Who made this supplication Pope Leo a holy and learned Pope To whom To the Emperour Theodosius For what That the Emperour would command not intreat but command So this is an action of Royall authoritie What should he command That all things might stand in their former state What things meaneth he The highest mysteries of Religion concerning the Natures and person of Christ. But what is it to stand in the former state That it might be lawfull for all men so to iudge and speake of these holy Mysteries as they did before the springing vp of the Eutychian Heresie for then they held the Trueth according to the Apostolicke faith And this he beseecheth the Emperour to command notwithstanding the contrary determination of the Councell of Ephesus The second Councell of Ephesus which apparantly subuerted the faith cannot rightly bee called a Councell which your Highnes for very loue to the Trueth will make voyd by your Decree to the contrary most glorious Emperour I therefore earnestly request and beseech your Maiestie by our Lord Iesus Christ the founder and guider of your Kingdome That in this Councell of Chalcedon which is presently to be kept you will not suffer the Faith to be called in question which our blessed Fathers preached being deliuered vnto them from the Apostles Neither permit such things as haue bene long since condemned by them to be freshly reuiued againe but that you will rather command That the Constitutions of the ancient Nicene Councell may stand in force the interpretation of Hereticks being remooued Here the Pope ascribeth to the Emperour power to ratifie and establish those Councels which are according to the Scripture and to disanull those whose determinations are contrary to the Scripture Yea he acknowledgeth that the Emperour hath authoritie to inhibite and restraine Generall Councels that they call not the Trueth of God in question Which the Emperour Martian practised entring the Councell of Chalcedon in his owne person and forbidding the Bishops to auouch any thing concerning the birth of our Sauiour otherwise then was contained in the Nicene Creed Moreouer when the Councell of Chalcedon was concluded Pope Leo wrote thus againe to the Emperour Because I must by all meanes obey your pietie and most Religious will I haue willingly giuen my consenting sentence to those Synodall Constitutions which concerning the confirmation of the Catholicke faith and condemnation of Hereticks pleased me very well The Emperour required the Pope to subscribe And he cheerefully did so Protesting that for his part he must by all meanes obey the Princes will in those cases Now tell me whether the Pope did not acknowledge the Emperour and the Emperour shew himselfe to be Supreame gouernour ouer all persons euen in causes Ecclesiasticall AS the Emperour Martian did practise this Supremacie so the Emperour Basill did challenge the Title when he said in the Councel of Constantinople That the gouernment of the vniuersall Ecclesiasticall Ship was committed vnto him by the Diuine prouidence PHIL. The words are thus in Surius In exordio Synodi ita locutus est Basilius Cum diuina benignissima prouidentia nobis gubernacula vniuersalis Nauis commisisset c. that is In the beginning of the Synod thus said Basilius the Emperor when the diuine and most benigne prouidence had committed vnto vs the gouernment of the vniuersall ship c. Where by vniuersall ship is meant ciuill administration not Ecclesiasticall as Surius hath well obserued ORTHO Binius relating the acts of the councell telleth how the Emperours Epainagnosticum was read in the councell in these words Diuina clementique prouidentia gubernacula Ecclesiasticae nâ—uis vobis committente that is The diuine and gracius prouidence of God committing vnto you the gouernment of the Ecclesiasticall ship Where you see that he speaketh of the Ecclesiasticall ship PHIL. To whom was the gouernment of the ship committed Vobis to you that is to the Bishops what is this to the Emperour ORTH. Indeed
hostes hee ought to leaue his impieties in seducing the people and to serue God by teaching the trueth In that he is a Priest God hath armed him with a calling to deliuer his message for performance wherof he needeth no new calling but grace to vse that well which before he abused ORTHOD. Apply this to the present point and you may satisfie your selfe PHIL. To make the Prince Supreame Gouernour or head of the Church is vnnaturall for shall the sheepe feede the flocke or the sonne guide the Father ORTHO As the Priest is a father and shepheard in respect of the Prince so the Prince is a shepheard and father in respect of the Priest The Lord chose Dauid his seruant and tooke him from the sheepfolds euen from behind the ewes with young brought he him to feed his people in Iacob and his inheritance in Israel so hee fed them according to the simplicitie of his heart and guided them by the discretion of his hands And Ezechias called the Priests his sonnes If the Prince be their sheepheard then he must feede them if he be their father then hee must guide them this is naturall PHIL. THis stile of the Crowne was so distastfull to Caluin that he called it blasphemy and sacriledge ORTHOD. It is certaine that he did not differ from vs in iudgement But he was wrong informed by Steph. Gardiner who expounded it as though the king had power vt statuat pro suo arbitrio quicquid voluerit to establish at his pleasure whatsoeuer he would which Caluin exemplifieth in the words of Gardiner the king may forbid Priests to marry debar the people frō the Cup in the Lords Supper because forsooth potestas umma est penes regem the highest power is in the king This is that which Caluin calleth blasphemie and sacriledge and so will we But if Caluin had beene truely informed that nothing had beene meant by this title but to exclude the Pope and to acknowledge the kings lawfull authoritie ouer his owne subiects not in diuising new Articles of faith or coyning new formes of religion as Ieroboam did his calues but in maintaining that faith and religion which God had commanded without all question Caluin had neuer misliked it In this sense and no other that title was giuen him Neither did the king take it otherwise for ought that we can learne PHIL. If the title were not blame worthy why was it altered ORTHOD. In the beginning of the Queenes raigne the nobles and sundry of the Clergy perceiuing that some out of ignorance and infirmitie were offended at the title of supreame head of the Church humbly intreated her maiestie that it might be expressed in some plainer termes whereto her clemency most graciously condiscended accepting the title of supreame gouernour being the same in substance with the former So this alteration was not made as thogh the other were blame worthy for the phrase is according to the Scripture which calleth the king head of the tribes of Israel And the sense thereof is agreeable to the true meaning both of Scripture and also of ancient Fathers Councels and practise both of the kings of Iudah and of Christian Emperours as hath beene declared where it was as lawfull for the Parliament to exact an oath in behalfe of the Prince against the Pope as it was for Iehoiada to exact an oath in behalfe of king Ioas against the vsurper Athalia which oath being holy and lawfull the refusall of it was disloyaltie and a iust cause of depriuation Hitherto of the Bishops deposed now let vs proceed to such as succeed them CHAP. IIII. Of the Consecration of the most reuerend father Archbishop Parker PHIL. YOur Bishops deriue their counterfeit authoritie not from lawfull Consecration or Catholicke inauguration but from the Queene and Parliaments For in England the king yea and the Queene may giue their letters patents to whom they will and they thencefoorth may beare themselues for Bishops and may begin to ordaine Ministers So wee may iustly say that among the Caluinists in England there raigned a woman Pope But such was the order of Christs Church which the Apostles founded Priests to be sent by Priests and not by the letters patents of kings or Queenes ORTHOD. These shamelesse Papists would make the world beleeue that our Bishops deriue not their Consecration from Bishops but from kings and Queenes which is an impudent slaunder For our kings doe that which belongeth to kings and our Bishops doe that which belongeth to Bishops In the vacancie of any Archbishopricke or Bishopricke the king granteth to the Deane and Chapter a licence vnder the great Seale as of old time hath beene accustomed to proceed to an election with a letter missiue containing the name of the person which they shall elect and chuse which being duly performed and signified to the King vnder the common seale of the electors the king giueth his royal assent and signifying and presenting the person elected to the Archbishop and Bishops as the law requireth he giueth them commission and withall requireth and commaundeth them to confirme the said election and to inuest and Consecrat◠the said person vsing all ceremonies and other things requisite for the same Whereupon the Archbishop and Bishops proceeding according to the ancient forme in those cases vsed do cause all such as can obiect or take exception either in generall or particular either against the manner of the election or the person elected to be cited publikely and peremptorily to make their appearance When the validitie of the election and sufficiency of the person are by publike actes and due proceedings iudicially approued then followeth Consecration which is performed by a lawfull number of lawfull Bishops and that in such forme as is required by the ancient Canons PHIL. I Will prooue that your Bishops in the beginning of the Queenes reigne deriued not their authoritie from lawfull Consecration but from the Queene and Parliament For being destitute of all lawfull ordination when they were commonly said and prooued by the lawes of England to bee no Bishops they were constrained to craue the assistance of the secular power that they might receiue the Confirmation of the lay Magistrate in the next Parliament by authoritie whereof it any thing were done amisse and not according to the prescript of the Law or omitted and left vndone in the former inauguration it might be pardoned them and that after they had enioyed the Episcopall Office and Chaire certaine yeeres without any Episcopall Consecration Hence it was that they were called Parliament Bishops ORTHO The Parliament which you meane was in the eighth yeere of Queene Elizabeth wherein first they reproue the ouer much boldnesse of some which slandered the estate of the Clergy by calling into question whether their making and Consecrating were according to Law Secondly they touch such lawes as concerne the point
at Rome that the Romane Bishop might absolutely succeed him ORT. This is your owne coniecture and not Law diuine PHIL. Pope Marcellus saith that Peter came to Rome iubente Domino the Lord so commaunding ORTH. This is your owne tradition and not Law diuine And as your succession so your monarchicall iurisdiction cannot be proued to be by Law diuine This was well knowne to the Fathers of the first generall councell who confined the Bishop of Rome as well as the Bishop of Alexandria ascribing his patriarchical power vnto custome not to Law diuine This was likewise knowne to the Fathers of the second and fourth generall councels who ascribe the preheminence of the Bishop of Rome to the honour of the Imperiall City for so the Fathers of the fourth councell interpret the second and affirme it themselues Antiquae Romae throno quòd vrbs illa imperaret iure patres priuilegia tribuere eadem consideratione moti 150. Dei amantissimi Episcopi sanctissimo nouae Romae throno aequalia priuilegia tribuêre rectè iudicantes vrbem quae imperio senatu honorata sit aequalibus cum antiquissima regina Roma priuilegijs fruatur etiam in Rebus Ecclesiasticis non secus ac illam extolli ac magnifieri secundam post illam existentem The Fathers did rightly giue priuiledges to the throne of old Rome because the City then raigned and the 150. Bishops most earnest louers of God assembled in the second generall councell which was the first at Constantinople mouedâ—y the same consideration gaue equall priuileges to the most holy throne of new Rome rightly iudging that the City which was honoured both by the Empire and the Senate and enioyeth equall priuileges with Rome the most ancient Queene of Cities should bee extolled and magnified euen in things Ecclesiasticall no otherwise then Rome being the second in order after it Thus they hold the iurisdiction of the Bishop of Rome to bee not Monarchicall because they giue equall priuileges to Constantinople but Patriarchicall which they referre not to the Institution of Christ nor to Peters fact nor to the succession in Peters chaire but to the honour of the Imperiall City in that it was Imperiall therefore as Binius confesseth they hold it to be by Law humane and not diuine PHIL. Baronius Bellarmine and Binius doe tell you that this Canon was not confirmed by Pope Leo. ORTHO Eusebius Bishop of Doryleum did testifie the contrarie openly in the councell in these words Sponte subscripsi quoniam hanc regulam sanctissimo Papae in vrbe Româ relegi praesentibus clericis Constantinopolitanis eamque suscepit i. I haue subscribed willingly because I read ouer euen this Canon to the most holy Pope in the City of Rome in the presence of the Clerkes of Constantinople and hee embraced it But let vs imagine that hee did not embrace it yet I referre this point to any indifferent iudge whether wee should rather beleeue sixe hundred Bishops and vpward speaking vprightly what they thinke and grounding their iudgement vpon the decrees of former generall councels then one man with a few flattering fauorites speaking partially in his owne cause PHIL. This Canon was not made by the councel but Anatolius with the Easterne Bishops made it secretly and by stealth after the Iudges and the Popes Legate were gone out of the Councell ORTHOD. The Church of Constantinople beeing desirous to propose this matter Entreated the Popes Legats to communicate with them in the handling of it who refused because the Pope had giuen charge to the contrary then they made relation of it to the Iudges who commaunded the holy councell then present to looke into it which they did accordingly therefore though it pleased the Iudges to depart yet the councell proceeded by authority from the Iudges And the Popes Legats might haue staied if it had pleased themselues Moreouer The Decrees were read at the next meeting openly in the councell before the iudges who ratified them by their sentence and all the councell cried and redoubled againe and againe that the sentence was iust PHIL. The Popes Legats interposed a contradiction affirming that the Apostolike See ought not to be debased ORTHOD. The Iudges notwithstanding would not relent but concluded the whole businesse thus Tota Synodus approbauit i. The whole Synod hath approuedit wherefore it was the iudgement of the whole Synod that the Popes iurisdiction is not by Law diuine CHAP. IIII. Of the Election of Bishops in the primitiue Church before there were any Christian Princes PHIL. IF wee consider the practise of the Christian world in primitiue antiquitie which was nearest to the fountaine and knew best the meaning of Law Diuine wee shall finde that they were either elected or at least confirmed by the Pope or by authoritie from the Pope either expresly or by his permission or conniuencie and so receiued their iurisdiction ORTHOD. To examine these points in order let vs begin with the election of Ministers concerning which we find three varieties in the new Testament The first by lots the second by voyces the third by the spirit of prophesie Matthias was chosen by lots the Deacons by voyces Timothy and others by the spirit of prophesie For as Chrysostome saith In those dayes the pastours were made by prophesie what is by prophecie by the holy Ghost as Saul was shewed by prophecie when hee lay hid among the stuffe as the holy Ghost said separate vnto me Paul and Barnabas so was Timothie chosen Theodoret thou hast not thy calling from men but thou receiuedst that order by diuine reuelation Oecumenius by reuelation of the spirit Timothy was chosen of Paul to bee a Disciple and ordained a Bishop This kind of election seemeth to bee vsuall in the Apostles times and to haue continued so long as the gift of prophecie and discerning of spirits remained Now of these three the first and third were by God himselfe the second by all the faithfull This is all wee finde in Scripture yet here is no precept but onely example Wherefore it seemeth that the Lord hath left this point as a thing indifferent to bee ordered by the discretion of the Church so all things be done honestly and in order From the Scripture if wee come to the ages following they referred it to the Clergie and people PHIL. To the Clergy I grant by the conniuencie of the Pope but in the Councell of Laodicea elections of B. are forbidden to be made by the people ORTH. The Councell in that place nameth Priestes not Bishops and if vnder the name of Priestes you comprehend Bishops yet you must consider that it being onely prouinciall could not impose lawes to the whole Christian world That Bishops were chosen by popular elections after this Councell may appeare by the great Nicen Councell assembled as Baronius thinketh six yeeres after the Councell of
shall be lawfull for the Romanes to elect and Consecrate their Pope and that nothing should be required at the hands of the new Pope but onely to send Ambassadours to the Emperour to signifie his promotion and to make loue and peace betweene them ORTHOD. Indeed Platina saith That the keeper of the Library meaning Anastasius writeth that Lodowick gaue free power of Electing Bishops to Pope Pascall whereas before this time the Emperours were consulted withall about the matter If the Emperour gaue it then the Emperour had it And if Anastasius say so then he saith something of the Emperours MOreouer if Lodowick did resigne it surely his sonne Lotharius did resume it In whose time three Popes were created Sergius the 2. Leo the 4 and Benedict the 3 all by Imperiall authoritie To begin with the first Sigebert sheweth how Lotharius sent his sonne Lodowick to Rome to confirme the Election of Sergius PHIL. Ado Vionensis saith He sent him that he might haue the name or title of Emperour and that Sergius being already Pope did set the Crowne vpon his head so he was saluted Emperour and Augustus with the generall applause of all the people by which you may confute the impudencie of Sigebert the Schismaticke as Cardinall Baronius hath notably done ORTHOD. How doeth this confute it These things are not contrary but may stand well together The Emperour sent Lodowick to confirme the Pope the Pope being confirmed did Crowne Lodowick So notably doeth Baronius confute Sigebert The next was Leo at whose Election as the Romanes were not a little glad so Anastasius himselfe saith they began againe not to be a little sad because they durst not consecrate him that should be Pope without the Imperiall authoritie PHIL. When Lotharius and Lodowick did challenge to themselues the Confirmation of the Pope elected or what other right soeuer in his Election or Consecration Pope Leo resisted and so farre preuailed that they themselues consented it should not be done but according to the prescript of the Canons His decree is yet extant in these words Leo 4. to Lotharius and Lodowick Emperours It is decreed and confirmed betwixt vs and you in maner of a Couenant that the Election and Consecration of him that shal be Bishop of Rome ought to be done no otherwise then iustly and Canonically ORTHOD. Iustly and Canonically I hope you will say that S. Gregorie was Elected and Consecrated iustly and Canonically yet hee was confirmed by the Emperour Wherefore this Couenant did not disanull the Imperiall authoritie Which is most cleare in the next Pope Benedict the 3 after whose Election made by the ioynt consent of the Clergie and people Clerus cuncti proceres saith Anastasius decretum componentes proprijs manibus roborauere vt consuetudo prisca exposcit inuictissimis Lothario Ludouico destinauere Augustis i. The Clergie all the Nobles making a decree concerning their election they strengthened it by subscribing with their owne hands and as the ancient custome requireth they did appoint to send it to the most vnconquerable Emperours Lotharius and Lodowick And Platina sheweth how the Emperours Ambassadours were sent to Rome to confirme the Election After Benedict succeeded Nicholas the first who went about to infringe the Emperours authority but could not After him came Adrian the second At whose election the Emperours Ambassadours were in the City but could not haue accesse to enterpose the Emperours authority whereat they were in great indigantion PHIL. They were so but answere was made that it was done vpon this consideration as writeth VVilliam the library keeper who succeeded Anastasius Least a custome should grow of expecting the Ambassadors of Princes in the election of Popes which answer being receiued the Ambassadours were fully calmed and quieted ORTH. This were to cast oile into the fire to kindle not to quench their anger therefore it hath no probability Far more likely is the reason related by Platina That satisfaction was giuen by telling them that in such a tumult they could not rule the people So the Ambassadours went and saluted the Pope perceiuing plainely that the people and Clergie began to chalenge the whole authority in elections vnto themselues not expecting the Emperours consent Yet the Emperour shewed his authority in that so soone as hee heard of the election He wrote an Epistle commending the Romans for their worthy choise Whereupon Binius noteth in the margent Imperator approbat electionem factam i. The Emperour approoueth the election being made And the Canon of Adrian the first did stand vnrepealed till the time of Adrian the third who made a Decree That the authority of the Emperor should not be expected in the creation of the Bishop of Rome 6. PHIL. THe Church which had endured a long bondage vnder the Emperours was then set â—t liberty and enioyed the same till the time of Otho the Emperour the yeere 963. ORTHOD. Liberty doe you call call it or rather licentiousnesse which hath filled the Commonwealth with tumults the Church with monsters the world with iniquity For this is the time when as Baronius complaineth Most filthy harlots did beare all the sway at Rome This is the time when strumpets did thrust their louers into the seat of Peter This is the time when all Canons were put to silence the pontificall decrees choaked ancient traditions proscribed the old custome sacredrites and former vse of chusing the high Bishop vtterly extinguished In this time was Formosus chosen who had beene degraded by a Pope and got the Popedome by periury In this time was Steuen who tooke vp the body of Formosus out of the graue arrained it condemned it cut off the fingers and cast them into Tiber repealing his Decrees and Acts and causing those whom he ordained to bee re-ordained In this time was Romanus Theodorus and Iohn the tenth who disanulled the acts of Stephen and iustified Formosus In this time was Sergius who repealed their acts maintained Steuen condemned Formosus and cast his bodie into Tiber. This was that monster Sergius whom Baronius calleth a villen of all villens affirming that hee had a bad ingresse a worse progresse and the worst egresse And yet Pope Iohn the 12. exceeded him in all monstruous villany He polluted his owne Fathers concubine and made his pallace a stewes hee put out the eyes of his godfather gelded one of his Cardinals plaied at dice inuocating Iupiter and Venus and drunke a health to the diuell This was the monster of all monsters of whom Cardinal Turrecremata following Luitprandus saith Because his life was detestable maruelous offensiue to Christian people therefore Christ himselfe gaue out the sentence of condemnation against him For while he was abusing a certaine mans wife the diuell stroake him sodenly and so he died without repentance Loe these were the fruits
this forsooth is the Catholick faith the profession whereof is now required to bee made of all Bishops Thirdly the Popes of latter times will haue Metropolitanes sworne to their obedience yea and Pius the fourth did cunningly conuey this oth into his new coyned creed but we find no such thing exacted in the time of Pelagius PHIL. There is yet extant an Epistle of a Bishop which tooke the oth to Saint Gregory who liued not long after Pelagius Vnde iurans dico per Deum omnipotentem per haec quatuor Euangelia quae in manibus teneo per salutē gentium atque illustrium dominorum nostrorum remp gubernantium me in vnitate sicut dixi Ecclesiae Catholicae communione Rom pontificis sēper sine dubio permanere i. Whereupon I affirme swearing by God Almighty and by the 4. Gospels which I hould in my hands and by the saluation of the Gentiles of our glorious Lords which gouerne the commonwealth that I will remaine alwaies and without doubt as I haue said in the unity of the Catholike Church in the communion of the Bishop of Rome ORTHOD. You intend to proue that Metropolitanes should sweare to the Pope before their confirmation or receiuing of the palle the example you bring concernes no such matter For first he was only a Bishop not a Metropolitan Secondly this oth was voluntary not exacted Thirdly it was not vpon a confirmation or receiuing of a palle but vpon an abiuration of his heresie Neither doth it appeare that this oth was in the time of Gregory though some haue gone about to ascribe it to the time of Pope Pelagius wherein behold and you shal see the cunning of Popish proctors For whereas Pelagius reproued some Metropolitanes because they did delay fidem suam exponere and thereupon made this decree that those which did not send within three monthes ad fidem suam exponendam should be depriued Remundus Rufus a Popish Lawier of Paris writing for the honor of the Pope doth change these words ad exponendam fidem i. To make profession of their faith into dandae fidei causa i. To make a faithfull promise or oth so the profession of the faith of Iesus Christ was by a strange Metamorphosis transformed into an oth of the Popes supremacy Now least the Spanish Lawiers should come short of the French in shewing their zeale for their Lord the Pope Franciscus Vargas king Philips Councellor and Ambassador to Pope Pius the fourth affirmeth that Pelagius declared the Popes supremacy by this decree in that he would haue all Metropolitanes sworne vnto him Marke what he saith sworne vnto him whether deceiued by Rufus or purposing to make an officious lie for his holy Fathers aduantage I cannot tell Howsoeuer this oth cannot bee referred to Pope Pelagius but rather to Pope Paschall the second who would haue forced Archbishop Panormitane to take it and vpon his refusal set out the decret all Epistle recorded by Gregory the ninth in the Canon-law the title whereof is this Electo in Archiepiscopum sedes Apostolica Pallium non tradet nisi Prius Praestet fidelitatis obedientiae iuramentum 1. The Apostolicall See shall not deliuer the Pall to an Archbishop Elect before he performe the oath of Allegeance and obedience PHIL. Though Pope Paschall made this decree yet it followeth not that he was the author of the oath it might be more anciēt though he renewed it ORTHOD. It appeareth by the Contents of the Decree that he was the authour For first he declareth that Panormitane had signified vnto him that Kings and Nobles were striken with admiration that the Pall should be offered vnder the condition of an oath and the same Pope did write in the same wordes vpon the like occasion to an Archbishop of Polonia who had signified vnto him the like admiration of the King and Nobles of Polonia This deniall of the Archbishops admiration of Princes states doth argue a noueltie 2. Whereas some did obiect that it was not decreed in the councels he reiecteth all Councels with scorn disdaine Aiunt in Concilijs statutū non inueniri quasi Romanae Ecclesiaelegē cōctlia vlla prefixerint cum omnia concilia per Romanae Ecclesiae auctoritatē facta sint robur acceperint in eorū Statutis Romani Pontificis patenter excipiatur auctoritas i. They say that it was not found decreed in Councels as though any Councels could prefix a law to the Church of Rome seeing al Councels are both made and receiue strength by the authoritie of the Church of Rome and the authoritie of the Bishop of Rome is manifestly excepted in their constitutions Thus he doth not refer the oath to former Popes and Councels but relyeth onely vpon his owne authoritie So it seemeth that this weede did spring 1100. yeeres after Christ. Neither did they stay in Metropolitanes but Innocent the third in the Councell of Lateran imposed the like oath of allegeance and obedience vpon the foure Patriarches Yea all Bishops are bound by solemne oath to promise obedience and faith to Saint Peter the Church of Rome and their Lord the Pope and to put to their helping hand which is an essentiall point of their obedience to defend and maintaine the Papacy By which pollicie it came to passe that the soueraign was defeated of his subiect the bramble did mount aloft aboue the cedars of Libanus So he which was first admitted among vs of curtesie continued by custome that is by right humane began now to challenge of dutie and by lawe diuine And not content with the honour of a Patriarch he tooke vpon him to domineer through the Christian world as Pope Parramount flashing out his excommunications like lightning interdicting kingdomes trampling Princes and Emperours vnder his feete yea and dispensing with vowes oaths and the euerlasting Commandements of God himselfe Is not this to sit in the Temple of God as though he were God Wherefore by all right reason equitie and law of God and man he was to be banished I will conclude this point with the saying of a reuerend Bishop As for his Patriarchship by Gods law he hath none In this realme for 600. yeeres after Christ he had none for the last six hundred as looking to greater matters he would haue none aboue or against the sword which God hath ordained he can haue none to the subuersion of the faith and oppression of his brethren in reason right and equitie he should haue none you must seeke further for subiection to his tribunall this landoweth him none THE FIFTH BOOKE OF THE SECOND AND third controuersie concerning Priests and Deacons CHAP. I. Wherein the second controuersie is proposed diuided into two questions the former about Sacrificing the latter about Absolution the state of the former is set downe and the methode of proceeding PHIL. WHatsoeuer you haue as
though Christ saith S. Gregorie liuing immortally now dieth not yet hee dieth in this mysterie and his flesh suffereth for the saluation of the people That is saith the Glosse his death and Passion is represented And you heard before out of the Master of the Sentences that that which is offered and Consecrated by the Priest is called a sacrifice and oblation because it is a memoriall and representation of the true sacrifice and holy oblation made vpon the Altar of the Crosse. And Bellarmine granteth that Thomas and other Schoolemen doe commonly answere that it is called an oblation because it is a representation of the oblation PHIL. Peter Lombard when he asketh the question whether that which the Priest doth be properly called a sacrifice or an oblation taketh the name of sacrifice or oblation for occision or killing as though he had asked Whether that which the Priest doth be a killing of Christ and answereth most rightly that Christ was truely offered that is slaine but once and that now he is not properly offered that is slaine but only in a Sacrament and representation ORTHOD. First I referre it to the indifferent Reader to consider whether this answere of Bellarmine be not a meere shift and cauill Secondly neither will this shift serue his turne for if the Priest doe not so he cannot be said properly to sacrifice him because in a sacrifice there must be the destruction of the thing sacrificed as is before declared out of Bellarmine PHIL. THe Councell of Trent pronounceth a curse against all those which deny that a true and proper sacrifice is offered in the Masse And they haue reason for as the Apostles so all the Fathers of the Primitiue Church were Masse-Priests For S. Ambrose testifieth That imposition of hands is certaine mysticall words whereby hee that is elected into the Priesthood is confirmed receiuing authoritie his conscience bearing him witnesse that he may bee bold to offer sacrifice to God in the Lords stead ORTHOD. S. Ambrose elsewhere expoundeth himselfe saying Quid ergo nos nonne per singulos dies offerimus offerimus quidem sed recordationem facientes mortis eius That is What therefore doe we doe we not offer dayly truely wee offer but so that wee make a remembrance of his death And againe Ipsum semper offerimus magis autem recordationem sacrificij operamur That is Wee offer him alwayes or rather we worke a remembrance of his sacrifice PHIL. S. Chrysostome saith In many places there is offered not many Christs but one Christ euery where being full and perfect both here and there ORTHOD. S. Chrysostome expoundeth himselfe in the same place Wee offer him saith he or rather 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 That is We worke a remembrance of the sacrifice Where by the way you may see that S. Ambrose did borrow his former speech from this place of Chrysostome PHIL. S. Augustine saith That Christ commaunded the Leper to offer a sacrifice according to the Law of Moses Quia nondum institutum erat hoc sacrificium sanctum sanctorum quod corpus eius est That is Because this Sacrifice the Holy of holies which is his body was not yet instituted And elsewhere Quid gratius offerri aut suscipi posset quà m caro sacrificij nostri corpus effectum sacerdotis nostri That is What can be offered or accepted more gratefully then the body of our Priest being made the flesh of our Sacrifice And Cyrill Leo Fulgentius and other Fathers haue commonly the like ORTHOD. Then the answering of Austine will be the answering of all Now what his meaning was let himselfe declare Was not Christ once offered or sacrificed in himselfe And yet he is offered in a sacrament not onely at all the solemnities at Easter but euery day to the people Neither doth he lye that being asked doth answere that he is offered For if sacraments haue not a certaine resemblance of those things whereof they are sacraments they should not be sacraments at all And for this resemblance they take the names commonly of the things themselues therefore as after a certaine maner the sacrament of the Body of Christ is the Body of Christ the sacrament of the Blood of Christ is the Blood of Christ so the sacrament of faith is faith And elsewhere The flesh and blood of the sacrifice of Christ was promised by sacrifices of resemblance before hee came was performed in trueth and in deed when he suffered is celebrated by a sacrament of remembrance since he ascâ—nded PHIL. YOu cannot so delude the ancient Fathers of the Church For the Nicen Councell in that Canon which Caluine and all other receiue saith plainely That the Lambe of God offered vnbloodily is layde vpon the holy Table ORTHOD. The Lambe Christ Iesus which was offered vpon the Crosse for the sinnes of the world is layd vpon the holy Table not substantially but Sacramentally PHIL. But the Councell meaneth substantially for they say It is come by relation to the holy Councell that in certaine places and Cities the Deacons do reach the sacraments to the Priests Neither the Canon nor the custome hath deliuered this That those which haue not the power to offer sacrifice should reach the body of Christ to those that offer it Where you may see that they doe not onely call it the body of Christ but they plainely describe a Priest by hauing a power and authoritie to offer it and distinguish him from the Deacons which haue no such power ORTHOD. Who can better tell the meaning of the Councel then those which were present and subscribed vnto it One whereof was Eusebius PHIL. Very true and hee telleth how when Constantine dedicated the Temple at Ierusalem some did pacifie the diuine Maiestie with vnbloody sacrifices and mysticall Consecrations Who were these but Masse-priests and what were the vnbloody sacrifices but the sacrifice of the Masse for the Body and Blood of Christ are there offered vnbloodily ORTHOD. Let Eusebius expound Eusebius Christ hauing offered himselfe for a soueraigne sacrifice vnto his Father ordained that we should offer a remembrance thereof vnto God in stead of a sacrifice Is not this a plaine demonstration that in the iudgement of Eusebius there is not in the Lords Supper a sacrifice properly so called but onely a remembrance in stead of a sacrifice And this remembrance hee thus describeth VVhich remembrance wee celebrate by the signes of his Body and Blood vpon his Table He calleth it not a sacrifice but a remembrance celebrated not by the substance of his Body and Blood but by the signes and that not vpon an Altar but vpon a Table and this he calleth an vnbloodie sacrifice as appeareth by his owne words And pleasing God well wee offer vnbloodie sacrifices and reasonable and acceptable to him So it is as cleere as the noone day that Eusebius knew not your Massing sacrifice but expoundeth the