themselves so as it be done by lawfull authority upon good grounds with due moderation without excesse or the violation of Charity And so as the separation from them be not total but onely in their errours and innovations nor perpetual but onely during their distempers As a man might leave his fathers or his brothers house being infected with the Plague with a purpose to return thither again so soon as it was cleansed This is no more then what Gerson hath taught us in sundry places It is lawful by the Law of nature to resist the injury and violence of a Pope And if any one should convert his Papal dignity to be an instrument of wickednesse to the destruction of any part of the Church in temporalities or spiritualities And if there appeares no other remedy but by withdrawing ones self from the obedience of such a raging power untill the Church or a Councel shall provide otherwise it is lawful He addes further That it is lawful to sleight his sentences yea to tear them in pieces and throw them at his head Bellarmine in effect saith as much As it is lawful to resist the Pope is he should invade our bodies So it is lawful to resist him invading of soules or troubling the Common-Wealth And much more if he should endeavour to destroy the Church I say it is lawful to resist him by not doing that which he commands and by hindering him from putting his will in execution We ask no more The Pope invaded our soules by exacting new Oaths and obtruding new Articles of faith He troubled the Common-Wealth with his extorsions and usurpations He destroyed the Church by his provisions reservations exemptions c. we did not judge him or punish him or depose him or exercise any jurisdiction over him but onely defended our selves by guarding his blowes and repelling his injuries I may not here forget Saint Ignatius the Patriarch of Constantinople whom Pope Iohn the eighth excommunicated for detaining the Jurisdiction of Bulgaria from the See of Rome But he disobeyed the Popes censures as did also his Successours and yet was reputed a Saint after his death whom Baronius excuseth in this manner Neque est ut qui ob litem hanc c. Let no man think that for his controversie Ignatius was either disaffected to the Roman See or ingrateful seeing he did but defend the rights of his own Church to which he was bound by oath under pain of eternal damnation If it be not only lawful but necessary in the Judgment of Baronius yea necessary under the pain of damnation for every Bishop to defend the rights of his particular See against the incroachments and usurpations of the Roman Bishop and to contemn his censures in that case as invalid How much more is it lawful yea necessary for all the Bishops in the world to maintain the right of their whole order and of Episcopacy it self against the oppressions of the Court of Rome which would swallow up or rather hath swallowed up all original Jurisdiction and the whole power of the Keyes From this Doctrine Doctour Holden doth not dissent Non tamen is ergo sum c. Yet I am not he who dare affirm that diseases and bad manners and humours may not sometimes be mingled in any Society or body whatsoever yea I confesse that such kinds of faults are sometimes to be plucked up by the roots and the over-luxurious branches to be pruned away with the hook It is true he would not have this reformation in Essential Articles we offered not to toâ—ch them nor without the consent of lawful Superiours we had the free and deliberate consent of all our Superiours both Civil and Ecclesiastical A little after he addes I confesse also that particular and as it were private abuses which have onely infected some certain personâ— or Church whether Episcopal or Archiepiscopal or National may be taken away by the care and diligence of that particular Congregation we attempted no more We see then what meer Schisme is a culpable rupture or breach of the Catholick communion A loosing of the band of peace a violation of Christian charity a dissolving of the unity and continuity of the Church And how this crime may be committed inwardly by temerarious and uncharitable judgment when a man thinks thus with himself Stand from me for I am holier thou thou By lack of a true Christian Sympathy or fellow-feeling of the wants and sufferings of our Christian brethren By not wishâ—ng and desiring the peace of Christendome and the reunion of the Catholique Church By not contributing our prayers and endeavouâ—s for the speedy knitting together and consolidating of that broken bone And outwardly by rejecting the true badges and cognisances of Christians that is the ancient Creeds By separating a mans self without sufficient ground from other Christians in the participation of the same Sacraments or in the use of the same divine Offices and Leiturgies of the Church and publick worship and service of Almighty God or of the same common rites and ceremonies By refusing to give communicatory Letters to Catholique Orthodox Christians By not admitting the same discipline and by denying or withdrawing our obedience unlawfully from lawful Superiours whether it be the Church universal or particular essential or representative or any single Superiour either of divine or humane institution By separating of themselves from the communion of the Catholick Church as the Novatians or by restraining the Catholique Church unto themselves as the Donatists of old and the Romanists at this day What the Catholique Church signifies was sufficiently debated between the Catholique Bishops and the Schismatical Donatiâ—ts at the Colloquie of Carthage Neither the Church of Rome in Europe nor the Church of Cartenna in Afrique with the several Churches of their respective communions but the whole Church of Christ spread abroad throughout the whole world Afrorum Christianorum catholicorum haec vox est c. This is the voyce of the African catholick Christians we are joyned in communion with the whole Christian world This is the Church which we have chosen to be maintained c. Now the Catholique Church being totum homogeneum every particular Church and every particular person of this Catholique communion doth participate of the same name inclusively so as to be justly called Catholique Churches and Catholick Christians But not exclusively to the prejudice or shutting out of other Churches or other persons As the King of Spain stiles himself and is stiled by others the Catholick King not as if he were an universal Monarch or that there were no other Soveraign Princes in the world but himself So the Church of Rome is called a Catholick Church and the Bishop of Rome a Catholique Bishop And yet other Churches and other Bishops may be as Catholick and more Catholick then they I like the name of Catholick well but the addition of Roman is in truth a
A IVST VINDICATION OF THE Church of England FROM The unjust Aspersion of Criminal SCHISME WHEREIN The nature of Criminal Schisme the divers sorts of Schismaticks the liberties and priviledges of National Churches the rights of Sovereign Magistrates the tyranny extortion and Schisme of the Roman Court with the grievances Complaints and opposition of all Princes and States of the Roman Communion of old and at this very day are manifested to the view of the World By the Right Reverend Father in God Iohn Bramhall Dr. in Divinity and Lord Bishop of Derry Pacian in ep ad Sempron My name is Christian my sirname is Catholique By the one I am known from Infidels by the other from Hereticks and Schismaticks LONDON Printed for Iohn Crook at the sign of the Ship in S. Paul's Church-Yard 1654 THE Contents of the particular CHAPTERS CHAP. I. THe Scope and summe of this Treatise Pag. 1. CHAP. II. The stating of the question what is Schisme who are Schismaticks and what is signified by the Church of England in this question p. 6. CHAP. III. That the Separation from the Court of Rome was not made by Protestants but Roman Catholicks themselves p. 31 CHAP. IV. That the King and Kingdome of England in their Separation from Rome did make no new Law but vindicate the ancient Law of the Land pag. 54. CHAP. V. That the Britannick Churches were ever Exempted from all forreign Iurisdiction And so ought to continue pag. 87 CHAP. VI. That the King and Church of England hâ—d both sufficient authority and sufficient grounds to withdraw their obedience from Rome p. 1â—6 CHAP. VII That all Kingdomes and Republicks of the Roman Communion Germany France Spain Portugal Sicilly Brabant Venice do the same thing in effect when they have occasion p. 160 CHAP. VIII That the Pope and Court of Rome are many waies guilty of Schisme and the true cause of the Dissensions of Christendome Pag. 229 CHAP. IX An Answer to the Objections of the Romanists p. 245 CHAP. X. The Conclusion of the Treatise p. 275. Courteous Reader BY reason of the Authour's Absence and difficulty of the written Copy severall Errata's have past the Presse which you are desired to amend and among the rest these following Page 7. in Margine Act. leg Art p. 13. line 17. Lyne leg kind p. 13. in marg Manrit leg Maurit p. 14 l 1 Schimse leg Schisme p. 15 l. 15 Creed leg Creeds p. 18 l. ult legemachies leg logomachies p. 21 l. 8. qui leg quis p. 22 l. 4. teach for touch p. 35 l. 8. these for those p. 39. l. 31. dele little p. 42 in margine modo for nodâ— p. 65 in margine 78 for 787 p. 67 Hesâ—is for Hosius in marg p. 74 l. 1 sepultura for sepulchra p. 79 l. 4 Asseâ—tie for Asserio p. 85 l. 30 the for his Legates p. 102 l. 25 as for or p. 113 in marg lais for Caiet p. 119 l. 2 novum for nonum p. 121 l. 11 no for had p. 140 for 138 p. 141 for 139 p. 144 for 142 p. 145 for 143 p. 914 for 149 p. 129 l. 23 chink for klink and l. 25 despensations for dispensations p. 130 l. 10 Simoniae for Simonia and l. 20 21 aliam and nummam for alium and nummum p. 131 l. 1 conscivit for consuevit p. 132 l. 16 singulta for singultu and lin 20 speculiem for speculum p. 133 l. 28 papale for papali l. 29 rigarâ— for rigore line 30 praecipient for praecipiente p. 138 l. 6. for then the oath read then that the oath p. 142 l. 5 sweare for sware And in the margent Hoops for Harps p. 153 l. 15 provisos for provisors And in the marg theops for the copy p. 164 l. 10 deest not p. 165 l. 30 thar for that p. 186 l 32 which leg wherewith p. 199 l. 14 Redimendum leg Redimendam p. 214 l. 4 leg Placaert l. 27 but for but p. 217 in marg Imprss. leg Impress A JUST VINDICATION OF THE Church of England CHAP. I. The Scope and summe of this Treatise 1. NOthing hath been hitherto or can hereafter be objected to the Church of England which to strangers unacquainted with the state of our affaires or to such of our Natives as have onely looked upon the case superficially hath more Colour of truth at first sight then that of Schisme that we have withdrawn our obedience from the Vicar of Christ or at least from our lawful Patriarch and separated our selves from the Communion of the Catholick Church A grievous accusation I confesse if it were true for we acknowledge that there is no salvation to be expected ordinarily without the pale of the Church 2. But when all things are Judiciously weighed in the Ballance of right reason when it shall appear that we never had any such forrein Patriarch for the first six hundred years and upwards And that it was a grosse Violation of the Canons of the Catholick Church to attempt after that time to obtrude any forrein Jurisdiction upon us That before the Bishops of Rome ever exercised any Jurisdiction in Brittain they had quitted their lawful Patriarchate wherewith they were invested by the authority of the Church for an unlawful Monarchy pretended to belong unto them by the institution of Christ That whatsoever the Popes of Rome gained upon us in after-ages without our own free consent was meer tyranny and usurpation That our Kings with their Synods and Parliaments had power to revoke retract and abrogate whatsoever they found by experience to become burthensome and insupportable to their Subjects That they did use in all ages with the consent of the Church and Kingdom of England to limit and restrain the Exercise of Papal power and to provide remedies against the daily incroachments of the Roman Court so a Henry the Eighth at the reformation of the English Church did but tread in the steps of his most renowned Ancestours who flourished whilest Popery was in its Zenith And pursued but that way which they had chalked out unto him a way warranted by the practise of the most Christian Emperours of old and frequented at this day by the greatest or rather by all the Princes of the Roman Communion so often as they find occasion When it shall be made evident that the Bishops of Rome never injoyed any quiet or settled possession of that power which was after deservedly cast out of England so as to beget a lawful prescription And lastly that we have not at all separated our selves from the Communion of the Catholick Church nor of any part thereof Roman or other qua tales as they are such but only in their innovations wherein they have separated themselves first from their Common Mother and from the fellowship of their own Sisters I say when all this shall be cleared and the Schisme is brought home and laid at the right door then we may safely conclude that by how much we should turn more Roman
then we are whilest things continue in the same condition by so much we should render our selves lesse Catholique and plunge our selves deeper into Schisme whilest we seek to avoid it 3. For the clearer and fuller discussion and demonstration whereof I shall observe this method in the Ensuing discourse First to state the question and shew what is Schisme in the abstract who are Schismatiques in the Concrete and what we understand by the Church of England in this question Secondly I will lay down six grounds or propositions every one of which singly is sufficient to wipe away the stain and guilt of Schisme from the Church of England how much more when they are all joyned together My six grounds or Propositions are these First that Protestants were not the authors of the late great separation from Rome but Roman Catholicks themselves such as in all other points were chief Advocates and Pillars of the Roman Church and so many that the names of all the known dissenters might be written in a little ring Secondly that in abandoning the Court of Rome they did not make any new Law but onely declare and restore the old Law of the Land to its former Vigour And vindicate that liberty left them as an inheritance by their Ancestours from the incroachments and usurpations of the Court of Rome Thirdly that the ancient Brittish and Scottish or Irish Churches were evermore exempted from the Patriarchal Jurisdiction of the Roman Bishops untill Rome thirsting after an universal unlawful Monarchy quitted their lawful Ecclesiastical power And so ought to continue free and exempted from all forrein Jurisdiction of any pretended Patriarch for evermore according to the famous Canon of the General Councel of Ephesus which Gâ—egory the Great reverenced as one of the four Gospels Fourthly that though the Authors of that Separation had not themselves been Roman Catholicks and though the Acts or Statutes made for that end had not been meerly declarative but also operative And although Brittain had not been from the beginning both de jure and de facto exempted from Roman Jurisdiction yet the King and Church of England had both sufficient authority and sufficient grounds to withdraw their obedience as they did Fifthly that all the Soveraign Princes and Republicks in Europe of the Roman Communion whensoever they have occasion to reduce the Pope to reason do either practise or plead for the same right or both Sixthly that the Papacy it self qua tâ—lis as it is now maintained by many with universality of Jurisdiction or rather sole Jurisdiction Iure divino with superiority above General Councels with infallibility of Judgment and temporal power over Princes is become by its rigid censures and new Creeds and Exorbitant decrees in a great part actually and altogether causally guilty both of this and all the greater Schismes in Christendome 3. Lastly I will give a satisfactory answer to those objections which those of the Roman Communion do bring against us to prove us Schismaticks CHAP. 2. The stating of the question what is Schisme who are Schismaticks and what is signified by the Church of England in this question EVery suddain passionate heat or misunderstanding or shaking of Charity amongst Christians though it were even between the principal Pastors of the Church is not presently Schisme As that between Saint Paul and Barnabas in the Acts of the Apostles who dare say that either of them were Schismaticks or that between Saint Hierome and Ruffinus who charged one another mutually with Heresie Or that between Saint Chrysostome and Epiphanius who refused to Joyn in prayers Saint Chrysostome wishing that Epiphanius might never return home alive And Epiphanius wishing that Saint Chrysostome might not dye a Bishop both which things by the just disposition of Almighty God fell out according to the passionate and uncharitable desires of these holy persons who had Christian Charity still radicated in their hearts though the violent torrent of sudden passion did for the time bear down all other respects before it These were but personal heats which reflected not upon the publick body of the Church to which they were all Ever ready to submit and in which none of them did ever attempt to make a party by gathering disciples to himself such a passionate heat is aptly stiled by the Holy Ghost 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a paroxisme or a sharp fit of a feverish distemper which a little time without any other application will infallibly remedy Secondly every premeditated clashing of Bishops or Churches about points of doctrine or discipline long and resolutely maintained is not presently criminous Schisme so long as they forbear to censure and condemn one another and to expel one another from their Communion and are ready to submit to the determinations of a general Councel Such were the contentions of the Roman and African Bishops about rebaptization and appeals It were hard to say that those two blessed Saints Cyprian and Austine and all those pious Prelates who joyned with them lived and dyed Schismaticks With this general truth agrees that of Doctor Holden fully that when there is a mutual division of two parts or members of the mystical body of the Church one from the other yet both retein Communion with the Vniversal Church which for the most part springs from some doubtful opinion or lesse necessary part of divine worship quamcunque partem amplexus fueris Schismaticus non audies quippe quod universa ecclesia neutram damnarit whatsoever part one take he is no Schismatick because the universal Church hath condemned neither part Whether he hold himself to this principle or desert it it is not my purpose here to discusse But this is much sounder doctrine then that of Mr. Knott that the parts of the Church cannot be divided one from another except they be divided from the whole because these things which are united to one third are united also between themselves Which errour he would seem to have sucked from Doctor Potter whom he either would not or at least did not understand That whosoever professeth himself to forsake the Communion of any one member of the body of Christ must confesse himself consequently to forsake the whole Of which he makes this use That Protestants forsake the Communion of the Church of Rome And yet do confesse it to be a member of the body of Christ therefore they forsake the Communion of the whole Church The answer is easie that whosoever doth separate himself from any part of the Catholique Church as it is a part of the Catholick Church doth separate himself from every part of the Catholick Church and consequently from the Universal Church which hath no existence but in its parts But if one part of the Universal Church do separate it self from another part not absolutely or in Essentials but respectively in abuses and innovations not as it is a part of the Universal Church but only so far as it is
the reformation and the Church of England after the reformation are as much the same Church as a garden before it is weeded and after it is weeded is the same garden or a vine before it be pruned and after it is pruned and freed from the Luxuriant branches is one and the same vine yet because the Roman Catholiques do not object Schisme to the Popish Church of England but to the reformed Church Therefore in this question by the Church of England we understand that Church which was derived by lineal succession from the Brittish English and Scottish Bishops by mixt ordination as it was legally established in the daies of King Edward the sixth and flourished in the raigns of Queen Elizabeth King Iames and King Charles of blessed memory and now groanes under the heavy yoke of persecution whether this Church be Schismatical by reason of its secession and separation from the Church of Rome and the supposed withdrawing of its obedience from the Patriarchal Jurisdiction of the Roman Bishop As for other aspersions of Schisme of lesser moment we shall meâ—â— with them in our answers to their Objections CHAP. III. That the separation from Rome was not made by Protestants but by Roman Catholicks themselves THis being the state of the Question I proceed to examine the first ground or proposition That the English Protestants were not the first authors of the separation but principall Roman Catholiques great Advocates in their dayes and Pillars of the Roman Church Whether the Act or Statute of Separation were operative or declarative creating new right or manifesting or restoring old right whether the power of the Roman Court in England was just or usurped absolute and immutable or conditional and changeable whether the possession thereof was certain and settled or controverted and unquiet though no man throughly versed in our Lawes and Histories can reasonably doubt of these things This is undeniably true that the secession and substraction of obedience was not made by our reformers or by any of their friends or favourers but by their capital Enemies and persecutors by Zelots of the Roman Religion And this was not done secretly in a corner but openly in the sight of the Sun disputed publickly and determined before-hand in both our Universities which after long deliberation and much disputation done with all diligence zeal and conscience made this final resolution and profession Tandem in hanc sententiam unanimiter convenimus ac concordes fuimus videlicet Romanum Episcopum majorem aliquam Iurisdictionem non habere sibi à deo collatam in sacra Scriptura in hoc Regno Angliae quam alium quemvis externum Episcopum That the Roman Bishop had no greater Iurisdiction within the Kingdome of England confeâ—red upon him by God in holy Scripture then any other forrein Bishop After this the same was voted and decreed in our National Synods and lastly after all this received and established in full Parliament by the free consent of all the Orders of the Kingdom with the concurrence and approbation of four and twenty Bishops and nine and twenty Abbats then and there present To passe by many other Statutes take the very words of one of the main Acts it self That England is an Empire and that the King as Head of the body politick consisting of the spirituality and temporalty hath plenary power to render final Iustice for all matters c. First England is that is originally not shall be by vertue of this Act what is it an Empire If it be an Empire then the Soveraignes thereof have the same priviledges and prerogatives within their own Dominions which the old Emperours had in theirs If the King be head of the body politick consisting of the spiâ—ituality and temporalty then in England the King is the political head of the Clergy as well as of the Laity So he ought to be and not he onely but all the Soveraign Princes throughout the World by the very Law of Nature What becomes now of that grand exception against Protestants for making their King the Head or Soveraign Governour for these two are convertible terms of the English Church or Clergy A title first introduced by Roman Catholicks and since waved and laid aside by Protestants not so much for any malignity that was in it as for the ill sounds sake because it seemed to intrench too much upon the just right of our Saviour and being subject to be misunderstood gave offence to many well affected Christians And what doth this Law say more then a great Cardinal said not long after One that was as near the Papacy as any that ever mist it and was thought to merit the Papacy as well as any that had it in his daies I mean Cardinal Pool in his Book de concilio Hoc munus Imperatoribus Christi fidem professis Deus ipse Pater assignavit at Christi filii dei vicaâ—ias partes gerant God the Father hath assigned this office to Christian Emperours that they should act the part of Christ the Son of God in General Councels And yet more fully in his answer to the next question Pontifex Romanus ut caput sacerdotale Vicarias Christi veri capitis partes gerit at Caesar ut caput regale c. The Pope as a Priestly head doth execute the Office of Christ the true Head but we may also truly say that the Emperour doth execute the office of Christ as a Kingly Head And so he concludeth Christ said of himself All power is given me both in heaven and earth In utraque ergo potestate c. Therefore we cannot doubt but Christ hath his Deputies for both these powers The Pope in the Church the Emperour in the Common-Wealth Thus writes the Popes own Legate to his Brother Legates in the Tridentine Councel when he desired to favour his Master as much as he could But I proceed to our Statute The King of England hath that is already in present by the fundamental constitution of the Monarchy not shall have from henceforth plenary power without the License or help or concurrence of any forrain Prelate or Potentate pleâ—ary not solitary To render final Iustice that is to receive the last appeales of his own Subjects without fear of any review from Rome or at Rome for all matters Ecclesiastical and temporal Ecclesiastical by his Bishops Temporal by his Judges There is great difference between a Kings administring Justice in Ecclesiastical causes by himself and by his Bishops Listen to the Canon of the Milevitan Councel It hath pleased the Synod that what Bishop soever shall request of the Emperour the cognisance of publick judgment in some cases he be deprived of his honour But if he petition to the Emperour foâ— Episcopal judgment that is to make Bishops his Deputies or Commissioners to hear it it should â—not prejudice him They forbid a Bishop of his own accord in these daies and in some cases to make his first
as in justice he is bound he is not to be reputed a Schismatick If men might not be saved by a general and implicite repentance they were in a woful condition for who can tell how oft he offendeth Cleanse thou me from my secret faults And if by general and implicite repentance why not by general and implicite faith why not by general and implicite obedience So as they do their uttermost indeavours to learn their duties and are ready to conform themselves when they know them God looks upon his creatures with all their prejudices and expects no more of them then according to the talents which he hath given them If I had books for that purpose I might have cited many Lawes and many Authors to prove that the final separation from Rome was made long before the reformation of the Church of England But it is a truth so evident and so undeniable by all these who understand our affaires that I seem to my self to have done overmuch in it already I do expect that it should be urged by some that there was a double separation of the Church of England from Rome The former from the court of Rome The second from the Church of Rome The former in point of discipline The latter in point of Doctrine The former made in the daies of Henry the Eighth The other in the daies of Edward the sixth That if the Protestants were not guilty of the former yet certainly they were guilty of the later To this I give two answers first that the second separation in point of Doctrine doth not concern this question Whether the Church of England be Schismatical but another whether the Church of England be Haereticall or at least Heterodox for every error doth not presently make an haeresy which cannot be determined without discussing the particular differences between the Church of Rome and the Church of England It is an undeniable principle to which both parties do yeeld firm assent that they who made the first separation from the primitive pure Church and brought in corruptions in faith Leiturgy or use of the Sacraments are the guilty party Yea though the separation were not local but onely moral by introducing errours and innovations and making no other secession This is the issue of our controversie If they have innovated first then we are innocent and have done no more then our duties It is not the separation but the cause that makes a Schismatique Secondly I answer that as Roman Catholicks not Protestants were the authors of the Separation of England from the Court of Rome so the Court of Rome it self not Protestants made the Separation of England from the communion of the Church of Rome by their unjust and tyrannical censures excommunications and interdictions which they thundred out against the Realm for denying their spiritual Soveraignty by divine right before any reformation made by Protestants It was not Protestants that left the communion of the Church of Rome but the Court of Rome that thrust all the English Nation both Protestants and Roman Catholicks together out of their doores and chased them away from them when Pope Paul the third excommunicated and interdicted England in the daies of Henry the eighth before ever any reformation was attempted by the Protestants In that condition the Protestants found the Church and Kingdom of England in the daies of Edward the sixth So there was no need of any new separation from the communion of the Church of Rome The Court of Rome had done â—hat to their hands So to conclude my first Proposition Whatsoever some not knowing or not weighing the state of our affaires And the Acts and Records of those times have rashly or ignorantly pronounced to the contrary it is evident that the Protestants had no hand either in the separation of the English Church from the Court of Rome or in their separation from the Church of Rome The former being made by professed Roman Catholicks the later by the Court of Rome it self both before the reformation following in the dayes of Edward the sixth both at a time when the poor Protestants suffered death daily for their conscience upon the six bloody Articles CHAP. IV. That the King and Kingdom of England in the separation from Rome diâ— make no new Law but vindicate their ancient Liberties THe second Conclusion upon examination will prove as evident as the former that Henry the eighth and those Roman Catholicks with him who made the great separation from the Court of Rome did no new thing but what their predecessors in all ages had done before them treading in the steps of their Christian Ancestors And first it cannot be denyed but that any person or Society that hath an eminent reputation of learning or prudence or piety or authority or power hath ever had and ever will have a great influence upon his or their neighbours without any legal Jurisdiction over them or subjection due from them Secondly it is confessed that in the primitive times great was the dignity and authority of the Apostolical Churches as Rome Antiâ—ch Ephesus Hierusalem Alexandria which were founded by the Apostles themselves And that those ancient Christians in all their differences did look upon the Bishops of those Sees as honourable Arbitrators and faithful Depositaries of the genuine Apostolical traditions especially wherein they accorded one with another Hence is that of Tertullian Constat omnem doctrinam quae cum illis Ecclesiis Apostolicis matricibus et originalibus conspi at c. Whatsoever doctrine agrees with those Apostolical original mother Churches is to be reputed true And in this sense and no other Saint Cyprian a great admirer and imitater both of the matter and words of Tertullian whom he honoured with the title of his Master doth call the Church of Rome a Matrix and a root But if the tradition varied as about the observation of Easter between Victor Bishop of Rome and Polycrates Bishop of Ephesâ—s the one prescribing from St. Peter and S. Paul the other from S. Iohn The respective Churches did conform themselves to their Superiours or if they were free as the Britannique Churches were to their own judgment or to the example of their neighbour Churches or kept them to the tradition delivered unto them by their first converters As in this very controversie about Easter and some baptismal rites the Brittish and Scottish Bishops alwaies adhered to the Eastern Church A strong presumption that thence they received the faith and were not subordinate to the Patriarchal See of Rome But yet all this honourable respect proceeded from a free prudential compliance without any perpetual or necessary subjection Afterwards some Churches lost some gained the place and dignity of Apostolical Churches either by custome so Ephesus lost it or by the Canons of the Fathers so Constantinople did get it or lastly by Imperial priviledges so Iustiniana and Carthage obtained it Thirdly it
Dominions Witnesse the lawes of Ercombert Ina Withred Alfrede Edward Athelstan Edmond Edgar Athelred Canutus and Edward the Confessor among whose lawes one makes it the office of a King to govern the Church as the Vicar of God Another implyes a power in the King and his Judges to take cognisance of wrong done in Ecclesiastical Courts It was to this Holy King Edward the Confessor that Pope Nicholas the second by his bull for him and his Successours granted this ensuing priviledge to the Kings of England for ever Namely the Advocation and protection of all the Churches of England and power in his stead to make just Ecclesiastical constitutions with the advise of their Bishops and Abbats This grant is as full or fuller then that which Vrban the second made to Roger Earl of Sicily from whence the Kings of Spain at this day do not onely Challenge but enjoy in a manner all Ecclesiastical power in Sicily If the Pope had ever had any such right as he pretends this onely Bull were sufficient to justifie our Kings But they injoyed this very power from the beginning as an essential flower of their Crownes without any thanks to the Pope To make just Ecclesiasticall constitutions in the Popes stead saith the Bull. To govern the Church as the Vicar of God saith the law of the Land The Bishops of Rome have ever been very kind in granting those things which were none of their own and in making deputations and delegations to them who stood in no need of their help being lawfully invested before hand by another title in that power and dignity which the Popes pretended out of their goodnesse to confer upon them but in truth did it onely for the reputation of their See and for maintaining the opinion of their own Grandeur Whether the deputation were accepted or not they did not much trouble themselves So they dealt with 〈◊〉 president in the Councell of Nice So they dealt with the Patriarch of Iustiniana Prima so they served Good King Edward and many others This Legislative power in Ecclesiastical causes over Ecclesiasticall persons the Norman Kings after the conquest did also exercise from time to time with the advice and consent of their Lords spiritual and temporal Hence all those Statutes concerning Benefices Tythes Advowsons Lands given in Mortmain prohibitions consultations praemunires quare Impedits priviledge of Clergy extortions of Ecclesiasticall courts or officers and regulating their due fees wages of Priests Mortuaries Sanctuaries Appropriations and in summe all things which did belong to the externall subsistence regiment and regulating of the Church and this in the raigns of our best Kings long and long before the reformation Othobone the Popes Legate under Vrban the fifth would have indowed Vicars upon appropriated Rectories but could not But our Kings by two Statutes or Acts of Parliament did easily effect it With us the Pope could not make a Spiritual corporation but the King The Pope could not exempt from the Jurisdiction of the ordinary but the King who by his charter could convert Seculars into Regulars The Pope could not grant the Priviledge of the Cistercians and other orders to be free from the payment of Tyths but the King The Pope could not appropriate Churches but the King we find eight Churches appropriated to the Abby of Crowland by the Saxon Kings three Churches appropriated to the Abby of Battell by the Conquerour and twenty by Henry the first to â—â—e Church of Sarisbury The King in his great Councel could make void the certificates of Ordinaries in cases of Ecclesiasticall cognisance and command them to absolve those persons who were judged by his authority to be unjustly excommunicated The Pope could not translate an Arch Bishoprick or a Bishoprick but the King The disposition of Ecclesiastical preferments upon lapse accrued not to the Pope but to the King a plain evidence that he was the Lord Paramount And the King onely could incurre no lapse Nullum tempus occurrit Regi because the law supposed that he was busied about the weightie affaires of the Kingdom The revenewes of a Bishoprick in the vacancy belonged not unto the Pope but to the King which he caused to be restored sometimes from the time of the first vacancy sometimes from the time of the filling of the Church with a new Incumbent according to his good pleasure The Canons of the Pope could not change the Ecclesiastical Lawes of England but the King whose lawes they were He had power in his great Councel to receive the canons if they were judged convenient or to reject them and abrogate them if they were judged inconvenient When some Bishops proposed in Parliament the reception of the Ecclesiastical Canon for the Legitimation of Children born before marriage without such a reception the Canon was of no force in England All the Peers of the Realm stood up and cryed out with one voice Nolumus leges Angliae mutari We will not have the lawes of England to be changed The King and Parliament made a Legislative exposition of the Canon of the Councel of Lyons concerning Bigamy which they would not have done unlesse they had conceived themselves to have power according to the fundamental constitutions of the kingdom either to receive it or reject it Ejus est legem interpretari cujus est condere He that hath authority to expound a law Legislatively hath power to make it The King and Parliament declared Pope Vrban to be the right Pope in a time of Schisme that is in relation to England their own Kingdom not by determining the titles of the Popes but by applying the matter to the one and substracting it from the other All these are so many evidences that when Popery was at the highest the Bishops of Rome had no such absolute Ecclesiasticall Soveraignty in the Church and Realm of England And that what power they exercised at any time more then this was by connivence or permission or violent usurpation And that our Primates had no forraign Superiour Legally established over them but onely the King as he was the Supream head of the whole body politick To see that every one did his duty and injoyed his due right Who would not suffer one of his Barons to be excommunicated from Rome without his privity and consent No Legate de latere was allowed by the law in England but the Archbishop of Canturbury And if any was admitted of courtesy he was to take his oath to do nothing derogatory to the King and his Crown If any man did denounce the Popes excommunication without the assent of the King by the law he forfeited all his goods Neither might any man appeale to Rome without the Kings License In the year 1420 the Pope translated the Bishop of Lincolne to York But the Dean and Chapter absolutely refused to admit him and justified their refusal by the Laws of the Land And
that â—aught them this lesson certainly their prudence to prevent dangers was very commendable A third custome was that the revenues of all Ecclesiastical dignities belonging to the Kings demeisne during the vacancy were to be received by the King as freely as the rents of his own demeisnes Tell me who was then the Patron and Political Head of the Church A fourth Custome was that when an Arch-Bishoprick Bishoprick Abbacy or Priory did fall void the election was to be made by such of the principal dignitaries or members of that respective Church which was to be filled as the King should call together for that purpose with the Kings consent in the Kings own Chappell And there the person elected was to do his homage and fealty to the King as to his Liege Lord. That later form of Dei Apostolicae sedis gratia had taken no root in England in those daies The rest are of the same nature as that Controversies concerning Advowsons ought to be determined in the Kings Court Benefices belonging to the Kings patronage could not be appropriated without his grant When a Clergy man was accused of any Delinquency the Kings Court ought to determine what part of his accusation was of Civil and what part of Ecclesiastical cognisance And the Kings Justice might send to the Ecclesiastical Court to see it ordered accordingly None of the Kings Servants or Tenants that held of him in capite might be excommunicated nor their Lands interdicted before the King was made acquainted When it was questioned whether a Tenement were of Ecclesiastick or Lay fee the Kings Justice was to determine it by the oathes of twelve men All Ecclesiasticall persons who held any possessions from the King in capite were to do suit and service for the same as other Barons did and to joyn with the Kings Barons in the Kings Judgments untill it came to sentence of death or diminution of member To this memorial all the Nobility and Clergy of the English Nation did swear firmly in the word of truth to keep all the customes therein contained and observe them faithfully to the King and his heires for ever Among the rest Thomas Becket the Archbishop of Canterbury himself was carried along with the crowd to take this Oath Though shortly after he fell from it and admitted the Popes absolution By the Statute of Carlile made in the daies of Edward the first it was declared That the holy Church of England was founded in the estate of Prelacy within the Realm of England by the Kings and Peeres thereof And that the several incroachments of the Bishop of Rome specified in that Act did tend to the annullation of the state of the Church the disinheriting of the King and the Peeres and the destruction of the Lawes and rights of the Realm contra formam collationis contrary to the disposition and will of the first founders Observe in the estate of Prelacy not of Papacy within the Realm not without it By the Kings not by the Popes of whose exorbitant and destructive usurpations as our Ancestors were most sensible so they wanted neither will nor power to remedy them To corroborate this Law by former presidents and thereby to shew that our Kings were ever accounted the right Patrons of the English Church King Edelwalk made Wilfride Bishop of the South Saxons now Chichester King Alfrede made Assertie Bishop of Sherburn And Oenewulphus Bishop of Winchester Edward the Confessor made Robert Archbishop whom before from a Monk he had made Bishop of London Thus the Saxon Kings in all ages bestowed Bishopricks without any contradiction The Norman Kings followed their example No sooner was Stigand dead but William the Conquerour elected Lanfrank Abbat of Saint Stephens in Caen to be Archbishop William Rufus upon his death-bed elected Anselme to be Archbishop of Canterbury And untill the daies of Henry the first the Popes never pretended any right nor laid any claim to the Patronage of the English Churches The Articles of the Clergy do prescribe that elections be free so as the Kings conge d'eslire or License to elect be first obtained and afterwards the election be made good â—y the Royal assent and confirmation And the Statute of provisors Our Soveraign Lord the King and his heires shall have and enjoy for the time the collations to the Archbishopricks and other dignities elective which be of his Advowry such as his progenitors had before free election was granted Sith the first elections were granted by the Kings progenitors upon a certain form and condition as namely to demand License of the King to choose and after choise made to have his Royal assent Which condition not being kept the thing ought by reason to return to its first nature Further by the same Statute of provisors it is declaratively enacted That it is the right of the Crown of England and the Law of the Realm that upon such mischiefs and dammages happening to the Realm by the incroachments and oppressions of the Court of Rome mentioned in the body of that Law The King ought and is bound by his oath with the accord of his people in Paâ—liament to make remedy and Law for the removing of such mischiefs We find at least seven or eight such Statutes made in the Raigns of several Kings against Papal provisions reservations and collations and the mischiefs that flowed from thence Let us listen to another Law The Crown of England hath been so free at all times that it hath been iâ— no earthly subjection but immediately subjected to God in all things touching its regality and to no other and ought not to be submitted to the Pope Observe these expressions free at all times free in all things in no earthly subjection immediately subjected to God not to be submitted to the Pope And all this in Ecclesiastical affaires for of that nature were all the grievances complained of in that Law as appears by the view of the Statute it self Then if the Kings of England and the representative body of the English Church do reform themselves according to the word of God and the purest Patterns of the primitive times they owe no account to any as of duty but to God alone By the same statute it is enacted That they who shall procure or prosecute any popish Bulls and excommunications in certain cases shall incurre the forfeiture of their estates or be banished or put out of the Kings protection By other statutes it is enacted That whosoever should draw any of the Kings Subjects out of the Realm to Rome in plea about any cause whereof the cognisance belongeth to the Kings Court or should sue in any forrain court to defeat any judgment given in the Kings court That is by appealing to Rome they should incur the same penalties The body of the Kingdom would not suffer Edward the first to be cited before the Pope Henry the sixth by the Councel of Humphry
Duke of Glocester the Protector protested against Pope Martin and his Legate That they would not admit him contrary to the lawes and liberties of the Realm and dissented from whatsoever he did So we see plainly that the King and Church of England ever injoyed as great or greater liberties then the Gallican King and Church And that King Henry the eighth did no more in effect then his progenitors from time to time had done before him Onely they laboured to damme up the stream and he thought it more expedient to stop up the fountain of papal Tyranny not by limiting the habitual Jurisdiction of the Roman Bishop which was not in his power to do but by substracting the matter and restraining the actual exercise of it within his own dominions And it is observable that in the greatest heat of these contentions the Praelates of the Realm being present in Parliament disavowed the Popes incroachments and offered the King to stand with him in these and all other cases touching his Crown and regality as they were bound by their allegiance That is according to the law of Feâ—ds according to their homage done and according to the oath which they had taken at their Investitures into their Bishopricks Indeed of later daies during those bloudy wars between the houses of York and Lancaster the Popes sometimes invaded this undoubted right of our Kings de facto not de jure as was easie for them to do And tendered to the Bishops at their investitures another oath of their own making at first modest and innocent enough that they should observe regulas Sanctorum Patrum the rules of the Holy Fathers But after they altered the oath and falsified their Pontificall as well as their faith changing regulas Sanctorum Patrum into Regalia Sancti Petri that they should maintain the Royalties of St. Peter A shamelesse forgery and admitting them to be the interpreters of their own forms opening a gap to rob Kings of the fairest Jewels of their crownes and Bishops not onely of their Jurisdictions but also of their loyalty and allegiance to their lawful Soveraigns unlesse they take the oath with a protestation as our Arch-Bishop Cranmer did That he would not bind himself to any thing contrary to the Lawes of God or the Realm or the benefit thereof Nor yet limit himself in the reformation or Government of the Church Before which time two opposite and repugnant oathes were administred to the Bishops as Henry the eighth made it appear plainly in Parliament Many things in prudence might be done but for fear of such like alterations and incroachments Our Kings gave Peterpence to Rome as an almes But in processe of time it was exacted as a tribute The Emperours for more solemnity chose to be sworn by the Pope at Rome as the Kings of France at Rhemes and the Kings of England at Westminster And this was misinterpreted as a doing homage to the Pope Rex venit aâ—te fores jurans prius urbis honorâ—â— Post homo fit Papae sumit quo dante coronam The King doth come before the gate first swearing to the Cities state The Popes man then doth he become And of his gift doth take the Crown Poets might be bold by authority But it rested not there Good Authors affirm the challenge in good earnest And Clement the fifth in one of his Canons or Decrees doth conclude it declaramus juramenta praedicta fide litatis existere eâ— cerseâ—i debere We declare that the aforesaid oathes are and ought to be esteemed oathes of allegiance Lay these particulars together Our Kings from time to time called Councels made Ecclesiastical Laws punished Ecclesiastical persons and see that they did their duties in their callings prohibited Ecclesiastical Judges to proceed received appeals from Ecclesiastical Courts rejected the Lawes of the Pope at their pleasure with a nolumus we will not have the Lawes of England to be changed or gave Legislative interpretations of them as they thought good made Ecclesiastical corporations appropriated benefices translated Episcopal Sees forbid appeales to Rome rejected the Popes Bulls protested against his Legates questioned both the Legates themselves and all those who acknowledged them in the Kings Bench I may adde and made them pay at once an hundred and eighteen thousand pounds as a composition for their estates condemned the excommunications and other sentences of the Roman Court would not permit a Peer or Baron of the Realm to be excommunicated without their consents enjoyed the patronage of Bishopricks and the investitures of Bishops inlarged or restrained the priviledge of Clergy prescribed the indowment of Vicars set down the wages of Priests and made acts to remedy the oppressions of the Court of Rome What did King Henry the eighth in effect more then this He forbad all suites to the Court of Rome by proclamation which Sanders calls the beginning of the Schisme divers Statutes did the same He excluded the Popes Legates so did the Law of the Land without the Kings special License He forbad appeals to Rome so did his predecessors many ages before him He took away the Popes dispensations what did he in that but restore the English Bishops to their ancient right and the Lawes of the Country with the Canons of the Fathers to their vigour He challenged and assumed a political Supremacy over Ecclesiastical persons in Ecclesiastical causes So did Edward the Confessour govern the Church as the Vicar of God in his own Kingdome So did his predecessours hold their Crowns as immediately subjected to God not subjected to the Pope On the other side the Pope by our English Lawes could neither reward freely nor punish freely neither whom nor where nor when he thought fit but by the consent or connivence of the State He could neither do justice in England by the Legates without controllment nor call English men to Rome without the Kings License Here is small appearance of a good legal prescription nor any pregnant signs of any Soveraign power and Jurisdiction by undoubted right and so evident uncontroverted a title as is pretended I might conclude this my second proposition with the testimonies of the greatest Lawyers and Judges of our land Artists ought to be credited in their own Art That the lawes made by King Henry on this behalf were not operative but declarative not made to create any new law but onely to vindicate and restore the ancient law of England and its ancient Jurisdiction to the Crown There had needed no restitution if there had not been some usurpation And who can wonder that the Court of Rome so potent so prudent so vigilant and intent to their own advantage should have made some progresse in their long destined project during the raigns of six or seven Kings immediately succeeding one another who were all either of doubtful title or meer usurpers without any title Such as cared not much for the
Hosius proposed in the Occidental Councel of Sardis in favour of the See of Rome Doth it please you that we should honour the memory of St. Peter Or from the more powerfull principallity of the City which is alledged by the Councel of Chalcedon as a reason of the greatnesse both of the Sees of Rome and Constantinople because they were the seats of the Emperours Secondly the Canons of the Fathers either without custome or against custome Thus the Bishop of Hierusalem an Apostolical See was raised above the Bishop of Cesarea an Imperial City notwithstanding the contrary custome Thus Constantinople because it was newly made the seat of the Empire was equalled to an Apostolical See that is Rome and preferred before all the rest by the general Councels of Constantinople and Chalcedon notwithstanding the opposition of the Bishop of Rome by his Legats who grieved the more to see Thracia which he conceived to belong to his own Jurisdiction to be annexed to a rival See Lastly the Edicts of Soveraign Princes who out of favour either to the place of their Birth or of their residence or of their own foundation or forthe Weal-publick and better accomodation of their subjects have enlarged or restrain 〈◊〉 Patriarchates within their own Territories and raised up new Primats or Patriarchs as they thought fit But of this more in my next conclusion Fifthly notwithstanding the preheminence of the five great Patriarchs of Rome Constantinople Alexandria Antioch and Hiâ—rusalem and their great power and authority in the Church especially in general Councels yet there were many other Protarchs or Patriarchs who had no dependance upon them at all out of Councel nor ought them any obedience but onely a precedence and honourable respect Ruffinus a Priest of the Romane Church who lived not long after the councel of Nice And one who understood the ancient proper bounds of the Romane Patriarchate as well as any man doth limit it to the Suburbicary Churches that is a part of Italy and three Islands Sicily Sardinia and Corsica Africk had a Primate of their own at Carthage the rest of Italy at Millaine France at Arles or Lions Germany at Vienna Brittaine was removed far enough out of this account But this appears most clearly in the case between the Patriarch of Antioch and the Cyprian Bishops sentenced in the general Councel of Ephesus The Patriarch of Antioch challenged the ordination of the Cyprian Bishops and consequently a Patriarchal Jurisdiction over them for all other Rights do follow the right of ordination They denied both his right of ordination and jurisdiction The difference was heard The witnesses were examined for matter of fact And a sentence was given not onely in favour of the Cyprian Bishops but of all others which were in the same condition Among which number were our Brittannique Churches as shall evidently appear in this ensuing discourse But first let us listen to the words of the Councel Since common diseases do need greater remedies because they bring greater damage If it be not the ancient custome that the Bishops of Antioch ordain in Cyprus as the Councel is sufficiently satisfied The Cyprian Praelates shall hold their rights untouched and unviolated according to the Canons of the holy Fathers and the ancient custome ordaining their own Bishops And let the same be observed in other Diocesses and in all Provinces That no Bishop occupy another Province which formerly and from the beginning was not under the power of him or his predecessors If any do occupy another Province or subject it by force let him restore it that the Canons of the Fathers be not sleighted nor pride creep into the Church under the praetext of worldly power lest by little and little that liberty be lost which Christ purchased for us with his blood Therefore it hath pleased the Holy Synod that every Province injoy its rights and customs unviolated which it had from the beginning These words from the beginning 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 are twice repeated It is no marvel if some addicted to the interest of Rome have gone about by Slight of hand but very unsuccessefully to shuffle this Canon out of the Acts of the Councel If the Fathers in that Holy and oecumenical Councel were so tender and sensible of pride creeping into the Church in those daies and of the danger to lose their Christian liberty in the case of the Bishop of Antioch who neither pretended Divine right nor universal Jurisdiction nor superiority above Councels what would they not have said or done in this present case of the Bishop of Rome who challengeth not onely the right of ordaining but the grace of ordination and Soveraign Jurisdiction not over Cyprus only but over the whole Christian world not from custom or Canons or edicts but from the institution of Christ who makes all the validity of the decrees of those oecumenical Councels which his Predecessours received and reverenced as the Gospell to depend upon his own confirmation To apply this home to the question The Generall Councel of Ephesus declared that no Bishop should occupie any Province which before that Councell and from the beginning had not been under the Jurisdiction of him or his Predecessours And that if any Patriarch usurped any Jurisdiction over a free Province he should quit it for so it pleased not the Pope but the Holy Synod that every province should injoy its ancient rights pure and inviolate Now if it shall evidently appear that the Bishops of Rome never exercised any manner of Jurisdiction over the Britannique Churches from the beginning no nor yet before the general Councel of Ephesus nor for six hundred years after Christ that is untill they themselves had disowned their Patriarchal right when Pope Boniface the third who entred into the Roman See about three years after the death of Gregory the great obtained from Phocas an usurping Emperour to be universal Bishop that is to say an usurping Monarch over the Church which fell out so soon after the arrivall of Austin in England that there wanted time to have settled the Roman Patriarchate in Brittain though the Brittons had been as willing to receive it as they were averse from it and if no true general Councel since that time hath ever subjected Brittain unto the Roman Court Then the case is clear that Rome can pretend no right over Brittain without their own consents nor any further nor for any longer time then they are pleased to oblige themselves Then the subsequent and violent usurpations of the Roman Bishops cannot render them Bonae fidei possessores lawfull owners but that they are alwaies bound to quit their incroachments and the Brittannique Churches and those who derive by succession from them are alwaies free to vindicate and reassume their ancient rights and priviledges In this controversy by law the burthen of the proof ought to rest upon them who affirm a right and
challenge a Jurisdiction not upon us who deny it Men are not put to prove negatives Let them produce their Registers and shew for the first six hundred years what Ecclesiastical Courts the Roman Bishops or their Legates have held in Brittain what causes they have removed from thence to Rome upon appeals what sentences given in Brittain they have repealed there what British subjects they have excommunicated or summoned to appear at Rome let them shew what Bishopricks they have conferred in Brittain in those daies what British Bishops did then intitle themselves to their Bishopricks by the Grace of God and of the Apostolique See let them declare to the world how many of our British Primates or Patriarchs of York London or Caerleon have constantly or at all repaired to Rome to be ordained or have received Licenses or dispensations thence for their ordination at home or elsewhere for ordinationis jus caetera jura sequuntur He who is necessarily by law obliged to have recourse to a forraign Prelate for his ordination is thereby implyed to be inferiour or subject to his ordainer If they can say nothing to any of these points they may disclaime their Patriarchall right in Brittain and hold their peace for ever The reasons why I set York before London in the order of our British Patriarchs or Primates are these First because I find their names subscribed in that order in the Councel of Arles held in the year 314. consisting as some say of 200. as others say of 600. Bishops convocated by Constantine the great before the first Councel of Nice to hear and determine the appeal of the Donatists from the sentence of the Imperiall delegates whereof Melchiades the Bishop of Rome was one It were a strange sight in these daies to see a Pope turn Legate to the Emperours in a cause of Ecclesiasticall cognisance Secondly for the same reason that Rome and Constantinople in those daies of the Roman Puissance were dignified above all other Churches because they were then the seats of the Emperours York was then an Imperial City the Metropolis of the chief Britannick Province called at that time maxima Caesariensis where Severus the Emperour died and had his funerall pile upon Severs hill a place adjoyning to that City where Constantine the great was born in domo Regali vocata Pertenna in the Royal Palace whereof some poor remainders are yet to be seen then called Pertenna now a small part of it called vulgarly Bederna a very easy mistake if we consider that the Brittish Pronounce P. for B. and T. like D. situate near Christs Church in Curia Regis or in the Kings Court on the one hand and extending it self near to St. Helens Church upon the walls now demolished on the other hand Although their silence alone to my former demand at least of so many whom I have seen that have written upon this Subject be a sufficient conviction of them and a sufficient vindication of us yet for further manifestation of the truth Let us consider first that if we compare the ages and originals of the Roman and Britannique Churches we shall find that the Britannique is the more ancient and Elder Sister to the Roman it self The Britannique Church being planted by Ioseph of Arimathea in the raign of Tiberius Caesar where as it is confessed that Saint Peter came not to Rome to lay the foundation of that Church untill the second year of Claudius secundo Claudii anno in Italiam venit So if we look to the beginning according to the direction of the Councel of Ephesus the Britannique Church in its first original was free from the Jurisdiction of the Bishop and Court of Rome where there was neither Bishop nor Court nor Ecclesiastick Jurisdiction at that day Secondly that it continued free in ensuing ages appears evidently by that opposition which the Church of Britain maintained against the Church of Rome siding with the Eastern Churches about the question of those times concerning the observation of Easter and the administration of Baptisme wherein Austine about the six hundreth year laboured to conform them but in vain Is it credible that the whole Brittish and Scottish Church should so unanimously have dissented from Rome for many hundred years together if they had been subject to the Jurisdiction of the Roman Bishop as of their lawfull Patriarch or that the Bishop of Rome in all that time should never so much as question them for it if they had been his Subjects Even then when Pope Victor durst attempt to deny or withdraw his communion from all the Asiatick Churches about the same businesse Neither were the Brittish Churches at last conformed to Rome by any Patriarchall power but by many conferences by the necessity of their civill affaires and by long tract of time some sooner some later A long tract of time indeed when some in the most Septentrionall parts of these Provinces were not reduced until a little before the late reformation Thirdly among the principal priviledges of patriarchall power is the right of ordination That all Metropolitans at least should either be ordained by the Patriarch or by License from the Patriarch This appears clearly in the dispute between the Patriarch of Antioch and the Cyprian Bishops But where the Bishops were 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 independent upon not subject unto any forrain Prelate there they ordained at their own pleasures needed no License Such were our British Primates ordained alwaies or ordinarily at Rome according to the Cyprian priviledges creating new Bishopricks ordaining new Bishops at their own pleasures without giving any account to Rome So we read of St. Telaus who had been driven out of his own Country by an Epidemical sicknesse for a long time that at his return he consecrated and ordained Bishops as he thought fit That he made one Hismael Bishop of St. Davids And in like manner advanced many other men of the same order to the same degree sending them throughout the country and dividing the parishes for the best accommodation of the Clergy and of the People And if there were no other proofe of our exemption but onely the small number of the Bishops that were ordained by all the succeeding Popes for about the first three hundred years untill the death of Marcellinus It were sufficient to shew that the Bishops of Rome in those daies had little or nothing to do out of their owne Province and that their jurisdiction extended nothing near so far as Britain Saint Peter Ordained but three in his supposed five and twenty years that is Linus and Cletus ut sacerdotale Ministerium Romano populo advenis benè sentientibus exhiberent and Clement to whom he bequeathed his Episcopal Chair Linus but eleven Clement but fifteen Anacletus but six Evaristus but five Alexander but five Sixtus but four c. These were few enough for their own Province and none to
respect of their errours and especially their tyrannical exactions and usurpations but unwillingly and with reluctation in respect of their persons and much more in respect of our common Saviour As if we were to depart from our fathers or our brothers house or rather from some contagious sicknesse wherewith it was infected Not forgetting to pray God daily to restore them to their former purity that they and we may once again enjoy the comfort and contentment of one anothers Christian Society We pray for their conversion publickly in our Letany in general And expressely and solemnly upon Good Friday though we know that they do as solemnly curse us the day before If this be to be Schismaticks it were no ill wish for Christendome that there were many more such Schismaticks Thirdly we do not arrogate to our selves either a new Church or a new Religion or new holy orders for then we must produce new miracles new revelations and new cloven tongues for our justification Our Religion is the same it was our Church the same it was our holy orders the same they were in substance differing onely from what they were formerly as a garden weeded from a garden unweeded or a body purged from it self before it was purged And therefore as we presume not to make new Articles of faith much lesse to obtrude such innovations upon others so we are not willing to receive them from others or to mingle Scholastical opinions with fundamental truths Which hath given occasion to some to call our Religion a negative religion Not considering that our positive articles are those general truths about which there is no controversie Our negation is onely of humane controverted additions Lastly we are ready in the preparation of our mindes to believe and practise whatsoever the Catholick Church even of this present age doth universally and unanimously believe and practice Quod apud multos unum invenitur non est errâ—tum sed traditum And though it be neither lawful nor possible for us to hold actual communion with all sorts of Christians in all things wherein they vary both from the truth and one from another yet even in those things we hold a communion with them in our desires longing for their conversion and re-union with us in truth CHAP. VII That all Princes and Republiques of the Roman Communion do in effect the same thing when they have occasion or at least do plead for it SO we are come to our fifth Conclusion That whatsoever the King and Church of England did in the separation of themselves from the Court of Rome it is no more then all Sovereign Princes and Churches none of whatsoever communion excepted do practise or pretend as often as they have occasion And first for all Protestant Kings Princes and Republicks it admits no deniall or dispute Secondly for the Grecian and all other Eastern Churches it can be no more doubted of then of the Protestants since they never acknowledged any obedience to be due from them to the Bishop of Rome but onely an honourable respect as to the prime Patriarch and beginning of unity Whose farewell or separation is said to have been as smart as ours and upon the same grounds in these words We acknowledge thy power we cannot satisfie thy covetousnesse live by your selves But my aim extends higher to verifie this of the Roman Catholick Princes and Republicks themselves as the Emperour the most Christian and Catholick Kings the Republick of Venice and others To begin with the Emperours I do not mean those ancient Christian Primitive Emperours who lived and flourished before the daies of Gregory the Great Such a Court of Rome as we made our secession from was not then in being nor the Colledge of Parish Priests at Rome turned then into a Conclave of Cardinals as Ecclesiastical Princes of the Oecumenical Church So long there was no need of any separation from them or protestation against them But I intend the later Emperours since Gregorie's time after the Popes sought to usurp an universal Sovereignty over the Catholick Church and more particularly the Occidental that is to say the French and German Emperours Yet the Reader may be pleased to take notice that the case of our Kings is much different from theirs in two respects First they believed the Roman Bishop to be their lawful Patriarch whether justly or not is not the subject of this present discourse But we do utterly deny his Patriarchal authority over us And to demonstrate our exemption do produce for matter of right that famous Canon of the General Councel of Ephesus made in the case of the Cyprian Bishops and for matter of fact the unanimous Votes of two British Synods and the concurrent testimonies of all our Historiographers Some have been formerly cited We might adde to them the ancient British history called by the Author thereof Brutus wherein he relates this answer of the British to Augustine Se Caerleonensi Archiepiscopo obedire voluisse Augustino autem Romano Legato omninâ— noluisse nec Anglis inimicis paulò antè Paganis à quibus suis sedibus pulsi erant subesse se qui semper Christianifuerunt voluisse That they would obey the Archbishop of Caerleon that was their British Primate or Patriarch but they would not obey Austine the Bishop of Romes Legate Neither would the Britanes who had evermore been Christians from the beginning be under the English who were their enemies and but newly converted from Paganisâ—e by whom they had been driven out of their ancient habitations The same history is related by sundry other very ancient Authours A second difference between our English Kings and the later German Emperours is this that our Kings by the fundamental constitutions of the Kingdome are hereditary Kings and never die So there is an uninterrupted succession without any vacancy But the Emperours are elective and consequently not invested in the actual possession of their Sovereignty without some publick solemnities Whereof some are essential as the votes of the Electours some others ceremonial as the last Coronation of the Emperour by the Bishop of Rome which was really and is yet titularly his Imperial City But the Popes who had learned to make their own advantage of every thing sacred or civil took occasion from hence to make the world believe that the Imperial Crown was their gift and the Emperours their Liegemen So Adrian the fourth doubted not to write to Frederick Barbarossa the Emperour Insigne corona beneficium tibi contulimus which was so offensively taken that as the German Bishops in their letter to the same Pope do affirm the whole Empire was moved at it the eaâ—es of his Imperial Majestie could not hear it with patience nor the Princes endure it nor they themselves either durst of could approve it Whereupon the Pope was forced to expound himself that by beneficium he meant nothing but bonum factum a good deed and by contulimus
the Roman Church to be a top-â—ranch unlesse it may be the root of Christian Religion or at least of all that Jurisdiction which Christ left as a Legacy to his Church In all which claime by the Church of Rome they understand not the essential Church nor yet the representative Church a Roman Synod but the virtual Church which is invested with Ecclesiastical power that is the Pope with his Cardinals and Ministers When any member how eminent soever scorns its proper place in the body whether Natural or Political or Ecclesiastical and seekes to usurpe the Office of the head it must of necessiâ—y produce a disorder and disturâ—ance and confusion and schisme of the respective members This is one degree of schismatâ—cal pravity But in the second place we presse the crime of schisme more home against the Court of Rome then against the Church of Rome It is the Court of Rome which partly by obtruding new Creeds and new Articles of faith And especially this doctrine That it is necessary for every Christian under pain of damnation to be subject to the Bishop of Rome as the vicar of Christ by divine Ordination upon earth that is in effect to be subject to themselves who are his Councel and Officers yea even those who by reason of their remotenesse never heard of the name of Rome without which it will profit them nothing to have holden the Catholick faith intirely And partly by their tyraninical and uncharitable censures have seperated all the Asiaâ—ick African Grecian Russian and Protestant Churches from their communion not onely negatively in the way of Christian discretion by withdrawing of themselves for fear of infection But privatively and authoritatively by way of Jurisdiction excluding them so much as in them lieth from the Communion of Christ Though those Churches so chased away by them contain three times more Christian souls then the Church of Rome it self with all its dependents and adherents many of which do suffer more pressures for the testimony of Christ then the Romanists do gain advantages and are ready to shed the last drop of their blood for the least known particle of saving truth Onely because they will not strike topsaile to the Popes crosse-keys nor buy indulgences and such like trinkets at Rome It is not passion but action that makes a schismatick to desert the communion of Christians voluntarily not to be thrust away from it unwillingly For divers years in the beginning of Queen Elizabeths reign there was no Recusant known in England But even they who were most addicted to Roman opinions yet frequented our Churches and publick assemblies and did joyn with us in the use of the same prayers and divine offices without any scruple untill they were prohibited by a Papal Bull meerly for the interest of the Roman Court This was the true beginning of the schisme between us and them I never yet heard any of that party charge our Leiturgy with any errour except of omission that it wanted something which they would have inserted I wish theirs as free from exception to trie whether we would shunne their communion in the publick service of God Charity would rather chuse to want something that was lawful then willingly to give occasion of offence But to lay the axe to the root of schisme in the third place the Papacy it self quâ— talis as it is now maintained by many with superiority above general Councels and a Sovereign power paramount to confirme or reject their sanctions is the cause either procreant or conservant or both of all or the most part of the schismes in Christendom To rebell against the Catholick Church and its representative a general Councel which is the last visible Judge of controversies and the supreme Ecclesiastical Court either is grosse schisme or there is no such thing as Schismatical pravity in the world I say the Bishops of Rome have exempted themselves and their Court from the Jurisdiction of an Oecumenical Councel and made themselves Sovereign Monarches and universal Bishops in totius Ecclesiae injuriam discissionem to the wrong of the Church and renting it in peeces making themselves to be not onely fathers but Masters of all Christians It is the Popes own expression in his letter to his Legate Contrary to their former professions of obedience to the Ecclesiastical constitutions of Sovereign Princes and Synods contrary to their own Lawes which allow appeales from them so often as they transgress the Canons and subject them to the judgment of the Church not onely in case of heresie which the most of themselves do acknowledge and Schisme and Simony which many of them do not deny But also of Scandal contrary to so many appellations from them by Christian Princes Prelates and Universities contrary to the judgement of almost all the Cisalpine Prelats Spanish French Dutch assembled at Trent contrary to the decrees of so many Councels both general and provincial which have limited their Jurisdiction set down the true reason of their greatnesse rescinded their sentences forbidden appeales to them condemned their pragmatical intrusion of themselves into the affairs of other Churches as being contrary to the decrees of the Fathers which have judged them and condemned them of heresie schisme Simony and other misdemeanours which have deposed them by two or three at â— time whereof one was undoubtedly the true Pope These things are so obvious in the history of the Church that it were vanity and lost labour to prove them But especially contrary to the Councel of Constance and Basile which have decreed expresly that the Pope is subject to a General Councel as well in matter of faith as of manners So as he may not onely be corrected but if he be incorrigible â—e deposed This is determined in the Councel of Constance and confirmed in the Councel of Basil with this addition that whosoever opposeth this truth pertinaciously is to be reputed an heretick This decree of the Councel wounds deep because it is so evident and clear in the point and because the decrees thereof were confirmed by Martine the fifth But the Romanists have found out a salve for it That Pope Martine confirmed onely those decrees which were conciliarly made that is with the influence and concurrence of the Pope As the condemnation of Wickliff and Hus But not those decrees which were not conciliarly made that is which wanted the influence of the Pope As the decree of the Superiority of the Councel above the Pope Which ought to be understood say they onely of dubious Popes For clearing of which doubt I propose several considerations First that it is not material whether the decree were confirmed by the Pope or not There are two sorts of confirmation Approbative and Anthoritative Approbative confirmation is by way of testimony or suffrage or reception And so an inferiour may confirm the acts of his Superiour As it is said that the Saints shall judge the world
Bishop of the world Which sense was far enough from the intention either of Gregory the Great or Iohn of Constantinople who had both of them so many true Archbishops and Bishops under them But this sense agrees well enough with the extravagant ambition of the later Popes and of the Roman Court who do appropriate all original Jurisdiction to themselves So many waies is the Court of Rome guilty of Schismatical pravity Besides these branches of Schisme there are yet two other novelties challenged by the Popes and their Parasitical Courtiers But neither these nor the other yet defined by their Church both destructive to Christian unity both apt to breed and nourish to procreate and conserve Schisme An infallibility of judgment and a temporall power over Princes either directly or indirectly General and Provincial Councels are the proper remedies of Schisme But this challenge of infallibility diminisheth their authority discrediteth their definitions and maketh them to be superfluous things What needs so much expence so many consultations so much travel of so many poor old fallible Bishops from all the quarters of the world when there is an infallible Judge at Rome that can determine all questions in his own conclave without danger of errour Was Marcellinus such an infallible Judge when he burned incense to Idols Or Liberius when he consented to the Arrians and gave his suffrage to the condemnation of blessed Athanasius Or Honorius when he was condemned and accursed in the sixth General Councel for a Monothelite Or Iohn the 22th when he was condemned by the Theologues of Paris before the King with sound of Trumpets for teaching that the soules of the just shall not see God untill the general resurrection were those succeeding Popes Iohn and Martine and Formosus and Stephen and Romanus and Theodorus and Iohn and Benedictus and Sergius who clashed one with another and abrogated the decrees one of another over and over again such infallible Judges Neither is it meer matter of fact to decree the Ordinations of a lawful Bishop to be void To omit many others But howsoever they tell us That the first See cannot be judged I will not trouble my self about the credit of the authorities whether they be true or counterfeit Nor whether the first See signifie Rome alone or any other of the five Proto-Patriarchates Thus much is certain that by judgment of discretion any private man may judge the Pope and withdraw from him in his errours and resist him if he invade either the bodies or the soules of men as Bellarmine confesseth That in the Court of Conscience every ordinary Pastour may judge him and bind him and loose him as an ordinary man And by their leaves in the external Court by coercive power if he commit civil crimes the Emperour if Ecclesiastical a Councel or the Emperour with a Councel may judge him and in some cases declare him to be fallen from his Papal dignity by the sentence of the Law in other cases if he be incorrigible depose him by the sentence of the Judge But there is a great difference between the judgment of Subjects aâ— those Ecclesiasticks were and the judgment of a Sovereign Prince between the judgment of a General Councel and the judgment of an assembly of Suffragans and inferiours And yet the Roman Clergy are known to have deposed Liberius their own Bishop and justly Or otherwise Foelix their Martyr had been a Schismatick Their other challenge of temporal power whether directly or indirectly and in ordine ad spiritualia cannot chuse but render all Christians especially Sovereign Princes jealous and suspicious of their power and averse from the communion of those persons who maintain so dangerous positions so destructive to their propriety The power of the keâ—es doth not extend it self to any secular rights neither can Ecclesiastical censures alter or invalidate the Lawes of God and Nature or the municipal Lawes of a Land All which do injoyn the obedience of children to their Parents and of Subjects to their Sovereignes Gregory the seventh began this practice against Henry the fourth But what Gregory did bind upon earth God Almighty did not bind in heaven His Papal blessing turned to a curse And instead of an Imperial Crown Rodolph found the just reward of his treason The best is that they who give these exorbitant priviledges to Popes do it with so many cautions and reservations that they signifie nothing and may be taken away with as much ease as they are given The Pope say they is infallible not in his Chamber but in his Chair not in the premisses but in the conclusion not in conclusions of matter of fact but in conclusions of matter of faith Not alwaies in all conclusions of matter of faith but onely when he useth the right means and due diligence And who knoweth when he doth that So every Christian is infallible if â—e would and could keep himself to the infallible rule which God hath given him Take nothing and hold it fast So likewise for his temporal power over Princes they say the Pope not as Pope but as a spiritual Prince hath a certain kind of power temporal but not meerly temporal not directly but indirectly and in order to spiritual things Quo tencam vultus mutantem Protea nodo CHAP. IX An Answer to the Objections brought by the Romanists to prove the English Protestants to be Schismaticks BUt it is not enough to charge the Church of Rome unlesse we can discharge our selves and acquit our own Church of the guilt of Schisme which they seek to cast upon us First they object that we have separated our selves Schismatically from the communion of the Catholick Church God forbid Then we will acknowledge without any more to do that we have separated our selves from Christ and all his holy Ordinances and from the benefit of his Passion and all hope of salvation But the truth is we have no otherwise separated our selves from the communion of the Catholick Church then all the primitive Orthodox Fathers and Doctours and Churches did long before us that is in the opinion of the Donatists as we do now in the opinion of the Romanists because the Romanists limit the Catholick Church now to Rome in Italy and those Churches that are subordinate to it as the Donatists did then to Cartenna in Africk and those Churches that adhered to it We are so far from separating our selves from the communion of the Catholick Church that we make the communion of the Christian Church to be thrice more Catholick then the Romanists themselves do make it and maintain Communion with thrice so many Christians as they do By how much our Church should make it self as the case stands more Roman then it is by so much it should thereby become lesse Catholick then it is I have shewed before out of the Canons and Constitutions of our Church that we have not separated our selves simply and absolutely from the
and broiles between the Emperours with other Christian Princes and States and the Popes We have seen that from the excesses abuses innovations and extortions of that Court have sprung all the Schismes of the Eastern and Western Church and of the Occidentall Church within it self We have heard the confession of Pope Adrian that for some yeares by-past many things to be abominated had been in that holy See abuses in spiritual matters excesses in commands and all things out of order We have heard his promise to endeavour the Reformation of his own Court from whence peâ—adventure all the evil did spring that as corruption did flow from thence to the inferiour parts so might health and Reformation To which he accounted himself so much more obliged by how much he did see the whole world greedily desire a Reformation We have viewed the representation which nine selected Cardinals and Prelates did make upon their oathes to Paul the third That this lying flattering priâ—ciple that the Pope is the Lord of all benefices and therefore could not be Simoâ—iacall was the fountain from whence as from the Trojan horse so many abuses and so griâ—vou diseases had 〈…〉 into the Church and brought it to a desperate condition to the dâ—rision of Christian Religion and blaspâ—eming of the Name of Christ and that the cure must begin there from whencâ— the disease did spâ—ing We may remember the memorial of the King of Spain and the whole Kingdome of Castile That the abuses of the Court of Româ— gave occasion to all the Reformations and Schismeâ— of the Church And the complaint of the King and Kingdom of Portugal That for these reasons many Kingdomes had withdrawn their obedience and reverential respect from tâ—e Church of Rome These were no Protestants The first step to health is to know the true cause of our disease It hath been long debated whether the Protestant and Roman Churches be reconciliable or not Far be it from me to make my self a Judge of that Controversie Thus much I have observed that they who understand the sewest controversies make the most and the greatest If questions were truly stated by moderate persons both the number and the height would be much abated Many differences are grounded upon mistakes of one anothers sense Many are meer logomachies or contentions about words Many are meerly Scholastical above the capacity and apprehension of ordinary brains And many doubtlesse are real both in credendis and agendis both in doctrine and discipline But whether the distance be so great or how far any of these are necessary to salvation or do intrench upon the fundamentals of Religion requires a serious judicious and impartial consideration There is great difference between the reconciliation of the persons and the reconciliation of the opinions Men may vary in their judgments And yet preserve Christian unity and charity in their affections one towards another so as the errours be not destructive to fundamental Articles I determine nothing but onely crave leave to propose a question to all moderate Christians who love the peace of the Church and long for the re-union thereof In the first place if the Bishop of Rome were reduced from his universality of Sovereign Jurisdiction jure Divino to his principium unitatis and his Court regulated by the Canons of the Fathers which was the sense of the Councels of Constance and Basile and is desired by many Roman Catholicks as well as we Secondly if the Creed or necessary points of faith were reduced to what they were in the time of the four first Oecumenical Councels according to the decree of the third General Councel Conc. Eph Part. 2. Act. 6. c. 7. Who dare say that the faith of the primitive Fathers was insufficient Admitting no additional Articles bur onely necessary explications And those to be made by the authority of a General Councel or one so general as can be convocated And lastly supposing that some things from whence offences either given or taken which whether right or wrong do not weigh half so much as the unity of Christians were put out of divine offices which would not â—e refused if animosities were taken away and charity restored I say in case these three things were accorded which seem very reâ—sonable demands whether Christians might not live in an holy communion and joyn in the same publick worship of God free from all Schismatical separation of themselves one from another notwithstanding diversities of opinions which prevail even among the members of the same particular Chrches both with them and us FINIS Nothing more probably objected to the Church of England then Schisme But nothing more unjustly The method observed in this Discourse Every passionate heat not Schisme Acts 15. 〈◊〉 39. Ecclesiastical quarrels of long continuance not alwaies Schisme Hen Holden Append. de Schis Act. 1. pag 484. Infidelity unmasked Sect. 176. pag. 591. Idem pag. 516. The Separaters may be free from Schisme and the other party guilty Act. 19. 9. 1 Tim. 6. 5. Infid unmasked Ch. 7. Sect. 112. pag. 534. To withdraw obedience is not alwaies criminous Schisme Idem pag. 481. Theod. l. 4. c. 14. Cyril ep 18. ad Coelestinum Tâ—m 1. Conc. lib. Rom. Pâ—â—t in Anast. Libel ad mancit apud Bar. to 8. an 590. nu 39. 8. Syn. c. 10. What is single Schisme 1 Cor. 1. 10. 1 Cor. 3. 3 Wherein internal Communion doth consist Wherein External Communion doth consist External Communion may be suspended And withdrawn There is not the like necessity of communicating in all Externals Christian Communion â—mplies not unity in all opinions Reg. mor. tit pâ—aec decal lib. de A. P. Cons. 14. â—e unit eccl cons. 10. Lib. 2. de Rom. pont c. 29. Bar tom 10. an 878. Append. de Schismat Art 4. p. 516. The soâ—â—â— of Schisme What the Catholick Church signifies Collat. Carth. Col. 3. Each member of the Catholick Church is Catholick inclusively Schisme is changeable And for the most part complicated with heretical pravity Four waies to become heretical Who are Catholiques Aug. l. 2. cont casâ— Who are Schismaâ—cks What is understood by the Church of England Roman Catholicks first authors of the separation from Rome Act. and Mon p. 965. Râ—gist epist. Vni Oxon. ep 210. Sac. Syn. an 1530. et an 1532. 24 Hen. 8. c. 12. Romanists first gave the King the title of Head of the Church Resp. ad quaest 74. Râ—sp ad qu. 75. Conc. Mil. 2. Henry the 8th no friend to the Protestants Hist. Conc. Trid. 23. H. 8. 24. H. 8. 25. H. 8. 26. H. 8. 28. H. 8. The Authors opâ—nion of Monasteries Supplication of beggars Henry the 8th no friend to Protestants 31. Hen. 8. Much lesse those who joyned with him in the separation from Rome Act. Mon. an 1510. Conc. Tonst et Longlands Hist. aliquot mart et edit an 1550. Apol. sac Reg. pro jur fidel p. 125. England unanimous in casting out the Pope de verâ—â— obed Câ—ted
corrupted and degenerated it doth still retein a Communion not onely with the Catholick Church and with all Orthodox Members of the Catholick Church but even with that corrupted Church from which it is separated except onely in corruptions We may well inlarge the former ground that if two particular Churches shall separate themselves one from another And the one retein a communion with the Universal Church and be ready to submit to the determinations thereof And the other renounce the Communion of the Universal Church and contumaciously despise the Jurisdiction and the decrees thereof the former continues Catholick and the later becomes Schismatical To shew that this is our present condition with the Church of Rome is in part the Scope of this Treatise They have subjected Oecumenical Councels which are the Soveraign Tribunals of the Church to the Jurisdiction of the Papal Court And we are most ready in all our differences to stand to the judgment of the truly Catholick Church and its lawful Representative a free general Councel But we are not willing to have their virtual Church that is the Court of Rome obtruded upon us for the Catholick Church nor a partial Synod of Italians for a free general Councel Thirdly there may be an actual and criminous separation of Churches which formerly did joyn in one and the same Communion And yet the Separaters be innocent and the persons from whom the separation is made be nocent and guilty of Schisme because they gave just cause of separation from them It is not the separation but the cause that makes the Schisme Saint Paul himself made such a separation among his disciples And Timothy is expresly commanded that if any man did teach otherwise and consented not to wholsome words even to the words of our Lord Iesus Christ and to the doctrine which is according to godlinesse 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 withdraw thy self stand aloof or separate thy self from such persons It is true that they who first desert and forsake the Communion of their Christian brethren are Schismaticks but there is a moral defection as well as local It is no Schisme to forsake them who have first themselves forsaken the common faith wherein we have the confession of our adversaries They who first separated themselves from the primitive pure Church and brought in corruptions in faith practice Leiturgy and use of Sacraments may truly be said to have been hereticks by departing from the pure faith and Schismaticks by dividing themselves from the external communion of the true uncorrupted Church It is no Schisme to separate from hereticks and Schismaticks in their heresie and Schisme This is all the Crime which they can object to us The Court of Rome would have obtruded upon us new articles of faith we have rejected them They introduced unlawful rites into the Leiturgies of the Church and use of the Sacraments we have reformed them for our selves They went about to violate the just liberties and priviledges of our Church we have vindicated them And for so doing they have by their Censures and Bulls separated us and chased us from their communion where lies the Schisme Fourthly to withdraw obedience from a particular Church or from a lawful Superiour is not alwaies criminous Schisme Particular Churches may sometimes erre and sometimes clash with the universal Church Patriarchs and other subordinate Superiours may erre and sometimes abuse their authority sometimes forfeit their authority sometimes disclaim their authority or usurp more authority then is due unto them by the Canons They would perswade us that obedience is to be yeelded to a Church determining errours in points not fundamental But they confound obedience of acquiescence with obedience of conformity They forget willingly that we acknowledge not that they ever had any lawful authority over us par in parem non habet potestatem Equals have no Jurisdiction over their equals The onely difficulty is that this seems to make Inferiours Judges of their Superiours the flock of their Pastour the Clergy of their Bishop the Bishop of his Metropolitan the Metropolitan of his Patriarch whereas in truth it onely gives them a Judgment of discretion and makes them not to be Judges of their Superiours but onely to be their own Judges salvo moderamine inculpatae tutelae to preserve themselves from sin or heresie obtruded upon them under the specious pretences of obedience and Charity This is not deficere but prospicere not to renounce due obedience to their lawful Superiours but to provide for their own safety Some things are so evident that the Judgment of the Church or a Superiour is not needfull Some things have been already judged and defined by the Church and need no new determination If a Superiour presume to determine contrary to the determination of the Church it is not rebellion but loyalty to disobey him When Eunomius the Arrian was made Bishop not one of his flock rich or poor young or old man or woman would communicate with him in the publick service of God but left him to officiate alone When Nestorius did first publish his heresie in the Church in these words If any man call the Virgin Mary the Mother of God let him be accursed the people made a noise run out of the Church and refused ever after to communicate with him Valentinian the Emperour shunned the communion of Sixtus the third Many of the Roman Clergy withdrew themselves from the communion of Anastasius their Bishop because he had communicated with the Acatians Rusticus and Sebastianus two of the Popes chiefest Deacons did not onely themselves forbear the Communion of Vigilius but drew with them a good part of the Church of Rome and other Occidental Churches It cannot be denied but that among many examples of this Lyne some are reprehensible not because they did arrogate to themselves a liberty which they had not but because they abused that liberty which they had either by mistaking the matter of fact or by presuming too much upon their own judgments To prevent which inconveniencies â—he eighth Synod decreed not by way of censure but of caution as a preservative from such abuses for the future that no Clerk before diligent examination and Synodical sentence should separate himself from the communion of his proper Bishop no Bishop of his Metropolitan no Metropolitan of his Patriarch Then what is Schisme Schimse signifies a criminous scissure rent or division in the Church an Ecclesiastical Sedition like to a mutiny in an Army or 〈◊〉 in a State Therefore such ruptures are called by the Apostle indifferently 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Schismes or seditious segregations of an aggregate body into two opposite parties And there seems to me to be the same difference between heresie properly so called and Schisme which is between an inward sicknesse and an outward wound or ulcer Heresie floweth from the corruption of faith within
resolutely oppose so many Sentences and Messages from Rome and condemn him twice whom the Pope had absolved Consider that Wilfride was an Arch-Bishop not an inferiour Clerk And if an appeal from England to Rome had been proper or lawful in any case it had been so in his case But it was otherwise determined by those who were most concerned Malmesbury supposeth either by inspiration or upon his own head that the King and the â— Arch-Bishop Theodore were smitten with remorse before their deaths for the injury done to Wilfride and the slighting of the Popes Sentence Letter and Legates But the contrary is moâ—â— apparently true for first it was not King Alfrede alone but the great Councel of the Kingdom also nor Theodore alone but the main body of the Clergy that opposed the Popes Letter and the restitution of Wilfride in that manner as it was decreed at Rome Secondly after Alfrede and Theodoret were both dead we find the Popes sentence and Wilfrides restitution still opposed by the surviving Bishops in the Raign of Alfredes son To clear the matter past contradiction let us consider the ground of this long and bitter contention Wilfride the Archbishop was become a great pluralist and had ingrossed into his hands too many Ecclesiastical dignities The King and the Church of England thought fit to deprive him of some of them and to confer them upon others Wilfride appealed from their sentence unto Rome The Pope gave sentence after sentence in favour of Wilfride But for all his sentences he was not he could not be restored untill he had quitted two of his Monasteries which were in question Hongesthill deane and Ripon which of all others he loved most dearly and where he was afterwards interred This was not a conquest but a plain waving of his sentences from Rome and a yeelding of the question for those had been the chief causes of the controversie So the King and the Church after Alfredes death still made good his conclusion That it was against reason that a person twice condemned by the whole Councel of the English should be restored upon the Popes Bull. And as he did not so neither did they give any assent to the Popes Legation So unfortunate were appeales to Rome in those daies And as unfrequent as unfortunate for from that time untill Anselmes daies after the Norman Conquest in the Raign of Henry the first we do hardly meet with another appeal Then Pope Paschalis the second had devised a new Oath for Arch-Bishops when they received their Pall An oath much wondered at in all places as a strange innovation Significasti reges Regni majâ—res admiratione permotos c. You signified unto me that Kings and Nobles were moved with admiration that the Pâ—ll was offered unto you by our Ministers upon condition that you should take an oath which they brought you written from us c. This oath was that which animated Anselme to contest so hotly with the King The main controversie was about this very question of Appeales to Rome The King pleaded the fundamental Lawes and Customes of the Land consuetudo Regni mâ—i est à Patrâ— meo instituta ut nullius praeter licentiam Regis appelletur Papa Qui consuetudines regni tollit potestatem quoque coronam Regis violat c. It is a custome of my Kingdome instituted by my Father that no Pope may be appealed unto without â—the Kings License He that takes away the Customes of the Kingdome doth violence to the power and Crown of the King It is to be noted that the Lawes established by his Father that was William the Conquerour were no other then the Lawes of Edward the Confessor that is to say the old Saxon Lawes So he might justly say both that it was an ancient immemorial custome of the Kingdom and also that it was instituted or established by his Father So Hoveden tells us that at last he yeelded to the request of his Barons c. that was by his authority to confirm the Lawes of King Edward But the best was that though Anselme the Archbishop was obliged by oath to the Pope yet the Bishops were not so soon brought into the same bondage And therefore the former Authour tells us that In his exequendis omnes Episcopi Angliae Primati suo suffragium negarunt In the execution of these things all the Bishops of England did deny their suffrage to their Primate So unanimous were they in this point Which unanimity of the whole Realm both Clergy and Laity doth appear yet more evidently by the Statute of Clarendon made in the Raign of the grand-child of this King when all the Prelates and Peeres of the Realm did confirm the former ancient Brittish English custome not onely by their consents but by their oathes whereof we shall have occasion to speak more hereafter And upon this custome was that Law grounded which our Histories do make mention of Si quis inventus fuerit literas vel mandatum ferens Domini Papae c. capiatur et de eo sicut de Regis traditore regni sine dilatione fiat justitia If any one be found bringing in the Popes Letter or Mandate let him be apprehended and let justice passe upon him without delay as a traitor to the King and Kingdom And generally every man is interdicted or forbidden to appâ—al to the Pope And the Legations from Rome were almost as rare as appeals to Rome during the raigns of all the Brittish and Saxon Kings untill the Norman conquest As Gregory Bishop of Ostium the Popes own Legate did confess That he was the first Roman Priest that was sâ—nâ— into those parts of Bâ—iâ—tain from the time of S. Austin And those Legates were no others then ordinary messengers or Embassadors sent from one Neighbour to another Such a thing as a Legantine Court or a Nuncios Court was not known in the Brittish world in those ages and long after It is not enough to shew that one Roman Bishop did once send over one or two Doctors to help to propagate or confirm the faith or to lend their helping hands to Religion fainting This may well set forth their devotion and our obligation But further as to the present question it signifies just nothing Favours cease to be favours when they are done on purpose to deprive men of their ancient liberties The Brittish Bishops and English also have done as much for other Nations over whom they did never challenge any Jurisdiction The French Church sent over Germanus Lupus to help to root up the relicks of Pelagianisme in Brittain yet did never pretend thereby to any authority over the Brittaines Add to this that during all the time from St. Gregory to the conquest it was usual for the Brittish Saxon and Danish Kings with their Clergy or great Councel to make Ecclesiastical lawes and to regulate the external discipline of the Church within their
flowers of the Crown so they might but hold the Diademe it self from their competitors Therefore our Ecclesiasticall law was called the Kings law because the edge and validity of it did proceed from authority royal our Ecclesiasticall Courts were stiled the Kings Courts by his Judges It is true the habitual Jurisdiction of Bishops flowes from their Ordination But the actual exercise thereof in Publick courts after a coercive manner is from the gracious concessions of Soveraign Princes In a word the law being meerly intended as a remedy against usurpation it cannot be a new Law but onely a Legislative declaration of the Old Common Law of England I will conclude this Chapter with the words of Bishop Bilson As for his Patriarchate by Gods law he hath nonâ— in this Realm for Six hundred years after Christ he had nonâ— for the last Six hundred years looking after greater matters he would have none Above or against the Princes Sword he can have none to the Subversion of the Faith or oppression of his Brethreâ— he ought to have none you must seek further for Subjection to his Tribunall This Land â—weth him none CHAP. V. That the Britanick Churches were ever exempted from forraign Iurisdiction for the first six hundred years And so ought to continue THirdly supposing that the reformed Church of England had separated it self from Rome and supposing that the municipal laws of the Realm then in force had not warranted such a separation yet the British Churches that is the Churches of the British Islands England Scotland and Ireland c. by the constitution of the Apostles and by the solemne sentence of the Catholique Church are exempted from all forraign Jurisdiction and cannot be Schismatical in the lawful vindication of a just priviledge so well founded for the clearer manifestation whereof let us consider First that all the twelve Apostles were equall in mission equall in commission equall in power equall in honour equal in all thingâ— except priority of order without which no Society can well Subsist So much Bellarmine confesseth that by these words As my father sent me so send I you Our Saviour endowed them with all the fulnesse of power that mortall men were capable of And therefore no single Apostle had Jurisdiction over the rest par in parem noâ— habet potestatem but the whole Colledge of Apostles to which the supream Mesnagery of Ecclesiasticall affaires did belong in common whether a new Apostle was to be ordained or the office of Deaconship was to be erected or fit persons were to be delegated for the ordering of the Church as Peter and Iohn Iudas and Sylas Or informations of great moment were to be heard as against Peter himself Though Peter out of Modesty might condescend and submit to that to which he was not obliged in duty yet it had not become the other Apostles to sit as Judges upon their Superiour placed over them by Christ. Or whether the weightier questions of the calling of the Gentiles and circumcision the law of Moses were to be determined still we find the Supremacy in the Colledge Secondly that drousy dream that the plenitude of Ecclesiastical power and Jurisdiction was given by Christ to Saint Peter as to an ordinary Pastour to be derived from him to his Successours but to the rest of the Apostles as delegates for tearm of life to die with themselves as it is lately and boldly asserted without reason without authority either divine or humane so it is most repugnant to the doctrine of the Fathers who make all Bishops to be the Vicars and Embassadours of Christ not of the Pope and successours of the Apostles indifferently Vicaria ordinatione who make but one Episcopacy in the world whereof every Bishop hath an equal share St. Peter was a Pastor and the Pastoral office is of perpetual necessity in the Church True But so were all the rest of the Apostles Pastors as well as he And if we examine the matter more narrowly cui bono for whose advantage this distinction was devised it was not for S. Peters own advantage who setting aside his principallity of order is confessed to have had but an equall share of power with his fellow Apostles but fo rs the Popes advantage and the Roman courts whom they desire to invest solely with the key of all originall Jurisdiction And if we trace on this Argument a little further to search out how the Bishop of Rome comes to be Saint Peters heire ex assâ— to the exclusion of his Elder Brother the Bishop of Antioch they produce no authority that I have seen but a blind ill grounded legend out of a counterfeit Hegâ—sippus of Saint Peters being about to leave Rome and Christs meeting him upon the way and admonishing him to return to Rome where he must be crucified for his name which reason halts on both sides The foundation is Apocryphal and the superstruction is weak and unjointed without any necessary connexion Thirdly it appeareth not to us that the Apostles in their daies did either set up any universall Monarchy in the Church or so much dilate the borders or bounds of any one mans single Jurisdiction as to subject so great a part of the Christian World as the Western Patriarchate to his obedience The highest that they went if any of those Canons which bear their names be genuine was to nationall or provincial Primates or Patriarchs for a Protarch or Primate and a Patriarch in the language of the ancient Church signified one and the same thing in whose praeheminence there was more of order and care then of single Jurisdiction and power Read their three and thirtieth Canon It behooves the Bishops of every distinct Nation to know him who is their first or Primate and to esteem him as their head And to do nothing that is of difficulty or great moment contrary to his opinion But neither let him do any thing without the opinion of all them This Nationall Primacy or Protarchatâ— or Patriarchate under which the Britannique Churches flourished for many ages is the very same which we contend for Fourthly it is worthy of our inquiry how in processe of time some Primates did obtain a much more eminent degree of honour and a larger share in the government of the Church then others And of this their adventitious Grandeur we find three principal fountaines First ancient customes Secondly the Canons of the Fathers And thirdly the edicts of Christian Princes First ancient customes Upon this ground the first generall Councel of Nice settled the authority and priveledges of the three Patriarchal Sees of Rome Alexandria and Antioch Let ancient customes prevail And these customes commonly proceeded either from the memory of the Apostles who had founded such Churches from whence as from Apostolical fountaines their neighbours did fetch sound doctrine and reciprocally paid to them due respect So
spare for Britain In the whole term of three hundred years there were few above two hundred Bishops Ordained at Rome Italy alone may brag well near of as many Bishops at one time as many succeeding Popes did ordain in all their ages Let them not tell us of the scarcity of Christians in those dayes The writings of Tertullian and Saint Cyprian and the Councels held within the time limited do evince the contrary No the first badge of their Patriarchal authority in Britain was sending of the Pall as the onely badge during the times of the Britons and Saxons And the first Pall that came into Britain was after six hundred years But this doth yet appear much more clearly from the answer of Dionothus the Reverend and learned Abbot of Bangor which according to the manner of those times was an University or Seminary of Learning and piety among the Britons and he the well deserving Rector of it made in his own name and in the name of the Britons when they pressed him to submit to the Romaen Bishop as his Patriarch that he knew no obedience due to him whom they called the Pope but the obedience of love And that under God they were to be governed by the Bishop of Caerleon Observe first what strangers the Britons were to the Papacy That man whom you call the Pope Secondly that they acknowledged no subjection or subordination no obedience whatsoever due from them to Rome but onely the reciprocal duty of love that was just the same that Rome did owe to them Thirdly that under God that is immediatly without any Forrein Prelate or Patriarch intervening they were to be governed by the Bishop of Caerleon as their onely Primate and Patriarch Which priviledge continued to the succeeding Bishops of that See for many ages afterwards saving that the Archiepiscopal Chair was removed from Caerleon to St. Davids in the Raign of King Arthur And lastly observe the time when this answer was made after the first six hundred years were expired So it is a full demonstrative convincing proof for the whole term prefixed But lest any man should cavil and say that Dionothus was but one man and that the body of the British Clergy might be of another mind that which followes strikes the question dead That Austin Saint Gregories Legate proposing three things to the Britons First that they should submit to the Roman Bishop Secondly that they should conforme to the customes of the Roman Province about the observation of Easter and the administration of Baptisme And Lastly that they should joyn with him in Preaching to the Saxons all the British Clergy assembled themselves together Bishops and Priests in two several Synods one after another to deliberate hereupon and after mature consideration they rejected all his propositions Synodically and refused flatly and unanimously to have any thing to do with him upon those terms Insomuch as St. Austin was necessitated to return over the Seas to obtain his own consecration and after his return to consecrate the Saxon Bishops alone without the assistance of any other Bishops They refused indeed to their own cost twelve hundred innocent Monks of Bangor shortly after lost their lives for it Rome was ever builded in blood Howsoever these words quamvis Augustino prius mortuo have since been forged and inserted into venerable Bede to palliate the matter which are wanting in the Saxon Copy The concurring Testimonies of all our Historiographers witnessing the absolute and unanimous refusal of the Britons to submit to Rome and the matter of fact it self do confirm this for an undoubted truth beyond all exception So clear a truth it is that the British Churches for the first three hundred years neither ought nor paid any subjection to Rome Whence might well proceed that answer of Elutherius to King Lucius if that Epistle be not counterfeit when he desired him to send over a Copy of the Roman Lawes That he should chuse a Law Ecclesiastical out of holy writ by the Councel of his Kingdom that is principally of his Bishops for saith he you are the Vicar of Christ in your Kingdom The same in effect which is conteined in the Lawes of Edward the Confessor Hence it is that both our Histories and our Lawes do stile our Archbishops Priâ—ates which in the Language of the Primitive times signifies as much as Patriarchs And sometimes call them expresly by the very name of Patriarchs it self Hence Vrban the second intertained and welcomed Anselm our Archbishop of Canterbury into the Councel of Barre tanquam alterius orbis Papam as the Pope of another world Or as others relate the passage as the Apostle of another world and a Patriarch worthy to be reverenced CHAP. VI. That the King and Church of England had both sufficient authority and sufficient grounds to withdraw their obedience from Rome and did it with due moderation SO from the persons who made the separation from the Lawes and Statutes of our Realm which warranted the separation and from the ancient Liberties and priviledges of the Britannick Churches I proceed to my fourth ground drawn from the Imperial prerogatives of our Soveraign Princes That though we should wave all the other advantages yet they had power to alter in the external discipline and regiment of the Church whatsoever was of humane institution for the benefit and advantage of the body politick Doctor Holden proposeth the case right by way of Objection But peradventure the Protestants will say that the King or supream Senate of every Kingdome or Common-Wealth have power to make Lawes and statutes by which either directly or at least indirectly as well the Clergy as the Laity of that Kingdom or Common-Wealth are bound to reject all forrain Iurisdiction superiority and dependance And that his Legislative power is essentially annexed to every Kingdom and Commonwealth seeing that otherwise they cannot prevent those dangers which may spring and issue from that fountain to their destruction and ruine The Protestants do say indeed without all peradventure upon that very ground which is alledged in the objection Neither do the Protestants want the suffrage of Roman Catholicks therein Because humane nature saith one cannot be destitute of necessary remedies to its own preservation And another To whom a Kingdome is granted of necessity all things are esteemed to be granted without which a Kingdome cannot be governed And a Kingdom cannot be governed unlesse the King enjoy this power even over Clerks c. Necessary remedies are no remedies unlesse they be just but worse then the disease And being just the Subject is obliged to active obedience But let us see what the Doctour pleads in answer to his own objection First he passeth by the native power of civil Soveraign Empire which ought not to have been omitted for therein consists the main force of the argument But as to the Ecclesiastical part he saith he could
that by which it was acquired I say in this our case there can be no doubt at all And yet it can much lesse be doubted whether a Soveraign Prince with a National Synod may remedy the incroachments and usurpations of the Roman Court within his own dominions or exclude new Creeds and new Articles of faith lately devised and obtruded contrary to the determination of the General Councel of Ephesus of which let us hear what is Doctor Holdens opinion Notum est inter Catholicos omnes tanquans axioma certissimum c. It is known that all Catholicks do hold this as a most certain axiome that nothing ought or may be maintained for a Christian revealed truth but that which was received by our Ancestors and delivered from one generation to another by continued succession from the times of the Apostles This is all that we have done and done it with due submission to the highest Judge of Ecclesiastical controversies upon earth that is a general Councel If the Court of Rome will be humorous like little children who because they cannot have some toy that they have a mind to do cast away all that their parents have given them we cannot help it Over and above all the former grounds which the Romanists themselves do in some sort acknowledge I propose this further that Patriarchal power in external things is subject and subordinate to Imperial When Mauritius the Emperour had made a Law that no Souldier should turn Monk untill his warfare were accomplished St. Gregory Bishop of Rome disliked the Law and represented his sense of it to the Emperour but withall according to his duty published it Ego quidem missioni subjectus eandem legem per diversas terrarum partes transmitto quia lex ipsa omnipotenti deo minime concordat Ecce per suggestionis meae paginam dominis nunciavi utrobique ergo quae debui exolvi qui Imperatori obedientiam praebui pro deo quid sensi minime tacui I being subject to your command have transmitted your Law to be published through diverse parts of the world And because the Law itself is not pleasing to Almighty God I have represented my opinion thereof to my Lords wherefore I have performed my duty on both sides in yeelding obedience to the Emperour and not concealing what I thought for God A most rare and Christian president of that great Patriarch and fit for our observation and imitation in these dayes He acknowledged the Emperour to be his Lord and himself to be subject to his commands And though no humane invention can warrant an act that is Morally evil in it self yet if it be onely impeditive of a greater good as that blessed Saint did take this Law to be the command of a Soveraign doth weigh down the scale and obligeth a Patriarch to obedience in a matter that concerns Religion How much more doth the command of the English Monarch and the English Church disoblige an English subject from a forrein Patriarch whose Original right is but humane at the most and in the case in question between Rome and England none at all But to come up yet closer to the question The general Councels of Constantinople and Chalcedon with the presence concurrence and confirmation of Theodosius the great Martian the Emperours notwithstanding the opposition of the Roman Bishop by his Legates did advance the Bishop of Constantinople from being a poore Suffragan under the Metropolitan of Heraclea to be the second Patriarch and equal in dignity power and all manner of priviledges to the first and assigned unto him for his Patriarchate Pontus and Asia the lesse and Thracia and some other countries part of which territories they substracted from the obedience of the Roman Bishop at least over which the Roman Bishops challenged Jurisdiction and part from other Patriarchs And the reason of this alteration was the same for which Caesarea of old was a long time preferred before Hierusalem and Alexandria before Antioch and Rome before all others to conform the Ecclesiasticall regiment to the Politicall because Constantinople was made of a mean City the seat of the Eastern Empire and had as many Diocesses and Provinces subject unto it as old Rome it self But lest it may be conceived that this was not done at all by Imperial power but by the authority of the Oecumenical Synods we may observe further that Iustiniâ—n the Emperour by his sole Soveraign Legislative power did new-found the Patriarchate of Iustiniana prima and assign a province unto it and indow it with most ample priviledges freeing it from all appeals and all acknowledgment of superiority giving the Bishop thereof equal power with that which the Bishop of Rome had in his Patriarchate The same priviledges and prerogatives were given by the same Emperour by the same Legislative authority to the Bishop of Carthage notwithstanding that the Bishops of Rome did alwayes pretend that Carthage was under their Jurisdiction I deny not that Vigilius and Gregory succeeding Popes did make deputations to the Bishop of Iustiniana to supply their places But this was but an old Roman fineness The Bishops of Iustiniana needed none of their Commissions Iustinian the Father and founder of the Imperial Law knew well enough how far his Legislative power did extend And though the Act was notorious the whole world and inserted into the body of the Law yet the Fathers of that age did not complain of any innovation or usurpation or breach of their priviledges or violation of their rights King Henry the Eight had the same Imperial power and was as much a Soveraign in his own Kingdomes as Iustinian the Emperour in his larger Dominions as William Rufus Son and successor of the Conqerour said most truly that the Kings of England have all those liberties in their own Kingdomes which the Emperours had in the Empire and had as much authority to exempt his own subjects from the Jurisdiction of one Patriarch and transferre them to another especially with the advise consent and concurrence of a National Synod So King Arthur his predecessor removed the Primacy from Caâ—rleon to Saint Davids and another of them to Canterbury for the advantage of their subjects according to the exigence of the times If the Pope had been the King of Englands Subject as former Popes were the Emperours he might have served him as they did some of his predecessours called a Councel regulated him and reduced him to order and reason or if he proved incorrigible have deposed him But the Pope being a stranger all that he could justly do was what he did rather then to see his royall prerogative daily trampled upon his Lawes destroyed his Subjects oppressed rather then to have new Articles of faith daily obtruded upon the English Church rather then to incur the peril of willful Idolatry against conscience and therefore formal to Cashier the Roman Court with all their pardons and
indulgences and other Alchymistical devices out of his Kingdoms until time should teach them to content themselves with moderate things which endure long Or untill either a free Oecumenical Councel or an Europaean Synod should settle controversies and tune the jarring strings of the Christian world In the mean time we pitty their errours pray for their amendment and long for a re-union Now the just grounds of such subduction or separation are of two sorts either the Personal faults of the Popes or their Ministers as in the case of Simony and Schisme which ought in justice to reflect upon none but the persons who are guilty Or else they are faulty principles and rules as well in point of Doctrine as of Discipline such as the obtruding of new Creeds the pressing of unlawful oathes and the palpable usurpation of the undoubted rights of others And these do justifie and warrant a more permanent separation that is untill they be reformed Wherefore having taken a view of the sufficiency of the authority of our Princes to reform In the next place it is worthy of our serious consideration what were the true grounds of the separation of the Kingdom and Church of England from the Court of Rome And secondly whether in the subduction or substraction of their obedience or Communion they observed due moderation The grounds of their separation were many first the intolerable extortions and excessive Rapine of the Court of Rome committed in that Realm by their Legates and Nuncios and Commissioners and Collectors and other inferiour Officers and harpies enough to impoverish the kingdom and to drain out of it all the treasure that was in it and leave it as bare as a Grashopper in winter by their indulgences and pardons for all kind of sin at a certain rate Registred in their penitentiary taxe Yea as Ticelius the Popes pardoner made his bragg in Germany though a man had ravished the Mother of God yet so soon as the money did but chink in the bottom of the Bason presently the soul flew out of Purgatory To these we may add their despensations of all sorts and Commutations and Absolutions and Contributions and Reservations and Tenths and first Fruits and Appeals and Palles and a thousand other Artifices to get money As Provisions Collations Exemptions Canonisations Divolutions Revocations Unions Commendams Tolerations Pilgâ—images Jubilees Nulla hic arcana revelâ— saith Mantuan Venalia nobis Templa Sacerdotes altaria Sacra coronae Ignis thura preâ—es coelum est venale deusqque Temples Priests Altars Myters holy Orders Prayers Masses Heaven and God himself are salable at Rome It is no marvel they that buy must sell And whilest I am writing these things comes fresh intelligence of a Book lately set forth de Simoniae praesentis Pontificis they say not penned but dictated by such as know right well the most secret Cabales and Intriques of the Conclave Nam propius fama est hos tangere Divos which I can easily impute more to the fault of the place then of the man The oblation of the body and blood of Christ is sold fastings and penitentiary works are sold qui non potest jejunare per se potest jejunare per aliam vel potest darâ— nummam pro jejunio The merits of the Saints being alive are sold their relicks being dead are sold Scapulars and Monastick garments are sold. The Iewes with their Oxen Sheep and Doves were but petty Merchants in comparison of these great bankers Did any man desire a pall the Law it self did direct them what to do pallium non datur nisi fortiter postulanti The Pall would not be given but to those that knocked hard with a silver hammer Was any man a Suppliant to the Court of Rome Matthew Paris puts him into a right way Tunc sedes clementissima quae nulli deâ—sse conscivit dummodo albi aliquid vel rubei intercedat prescriptos Pâ—ntifices Abbates ad pristinas dignitates misericorditer revocavit Then the most pittiful See which is not accustomed to be wanting to any suppliants so they bring white or yellow advocates along with them did mercifully restore the said Bishops and Abbats to their former dignities It is almost incredible what a masse of treasure they collected out of England in a short time onely from investitures and some other exactions from Bishops in foure years no lesse then an hundred and sixty thousand pounds sterling as was â—ound by inquisition Archbishop Cranmer paid for his Bulles that concerned his Consecration and Pall nine hundred Ducats To such an height were the extortions of the Roman Court mounted Ex ungue leonem Judge by this what the Popes yearly income or revenue out of England might be by all these arts which we have formerly mentioned and many more Sometimes under pretense of recovering the holy Land Sometimes to relieve the poverty of the Roman Court Sometimes in palfries Sometimes in forged bills of Exchange Sometimes in extorted subsidies Sometimes to a certain summe Sometimes to the fift part of their goods Sometimes to the third part of Residents and the half of non-residents Sometimes in yearly revenues as two Prebends of every Bishop and the value of the maintenance of two Monks from every Abbat Sometimes out of the goods of rich Clergy men who died intestate Sometimes a years wages for paiment of Souldiers some five some ten some fifteen according to their estates Sometimes in Jewels of all which he that desires to be more fully informed needs but to read Matthew Paris who describes the abuses and extortions of the Roman Bishops Graphically throughout his History And in one place he bemones the condition of England in these words Erat igitur videre dolorem praecordialem genas sanctorum irrigare querelas erumpere suspiria multiplicare dicentibus multis cum singulta cruentato melius est nobis mori quam videre malagentis nostrae Sanctorum Vae Angliae quae quondam princeps provinciarum domina gentium speculiem Ecclesiae religionis exemplum nunc facta est sub tributo conculcaverunt eam ignobiles facta est in praedam de generibus c. Therrfore a man might see sorrow of heart water the eielids of holy men complaints break out and grones multiplied many saying with bloody sighs It is better for us to die then to see the misery of our Nation and of holy persons Wo be to England which once was the Princess of Provinces the Lady of Nations the glasse of the Church a pattern of Religion but now is become tributary Ignoble fellowes have troden her under foot And she is made a prey to base persons Neither was this the complaint of the Vulgar onely All conscientious men were of the same mind Who hath not heard of the bitter complaints and free declamations of Grosthead the learned and Religious Bishop of Lincolne against the Tyranny and Rapine of the Roman Courts both in
the time of his health and upon his death-bed for which he was stiled Romanorum malleus The hammer of the Romans whereby he so much irritated the Pope that he would have deposed him and accursed him in his life time if he had not been disswaded by his Cardinals in respect of the learning and holinesse and deserved reputation of the Bishop And after his death would have had his Corps disinterred and buried in a dunghill but that the Bishop appeared to him the night before and gave him or seemed to give him such a shrewd remembrance partly with words and partly with his crosier staffe that the Pope was much terrified and half dead so that he could neither eat nor drink the day following The Pope excommunicated Sewalus the Archbishop of York with Bell Book and Candle But non curavit voluntati papale relicto Iuris rigare muliebriter obedire Quapropter quantâ— magis praecipient Papa maledicebatur tanto plus a populo benedicebatur tacite tamen propter metum Romanorum He cared not to submit womanishly to the Popes will leaving the streight rule of the Law wherefore the more he was accused by the Popes command the more he was blessed of the People but secretly for fear of the Romans In his last sicknesse he summoned the Pope before the Tribunall of the high and incorruptible Judge and called Heaven and Earth to be his witnesses how unjustly the Pope had oppressed him Dixit Dominus Petro c. The Lord said unto St. Peter feed my sheep not clip them not flea them not unbowell them not devoure them They who desire to know what opinion the English had of the greedinesse and extortion of the Court of Rome may find them drawn out to the life by Chaucer in sundry places Such thriving Alchymists were never heard of in our daies nor in the daies of our fore-Fathers that with such ease and dexterity could change an ounce of lead into a pound of gold So they had great reason to say of England that it was a Well that could not be drawn dry And England had as much reason to whip these Buyers and Sellers out of the Temple This complaint is neither new nor particular as we shall see further in due place The second ground of our Ancestors separation of themselves from the Court of Rome were their most unjust usurpations and daily incroachments and intrenchments and extream violations of all sorts of rights civill and Ecclesiastical sacred and prophane They indeavoured to rob the King of the fairest flowers of his Crown As of his right to convocare Synods and to confirm Synods within his own dominions of his Legislative and judiciary power in Ecclesiasticall causes of his Politicall Jurisdiction over Ecclesiastical persons of his Ecclesiasticall Feuds and Investitures of Bishops of his just Patronages of Churches founded by his Ancestors and of the last appeals of his subjects And as if all this had been too little taking advantage of King Iohns troubles they attempted to make the royall Scâ—pter of England Feudotary and tributary to the Crosier staffe of Rome at the annuall rent of a thousand marks Neither is this the case of England alone seeing they make the like pretensions in matter of fact almost to all Europe To say nothing now of that Dominion which some of them have challenged indirectly others directly over Soveraign Princes Nos imperia regna principatus et quicquid habere mortales possunt auâ—erre et dare posse We have power to take away and to give Empires Kingdoms Principalities and whatsoever mortal men can have because I confesse that it is not generally received by the Roman Church Mr. Blackwell made Archpriest of England by Clement the eighth cites Cardinall Allen with much honour to his memorie but much scandalized at his doctrine that none can be admitted King of England without the Popes leave His words are these Without the approbation of the See Apostolique none can be lawfull King or Queen of England by reason of the ancient accord made between Alexander the third the year 1171. and Henry the second then King when he was absolved for the death of St. Thomas of Canterbury That no man might lawfully take that Crown nor be accounted as King till he were confirmed by the Soveraign Pastor of our souls which for the time should be This accord afterwards being renewed about the year 1210. by King Iohn who confirmed the same by oath to Pandulphus the Popes Legate at the speciall request and procurement of the Lords and Commons as a thing most necessary for preservation of the Realm from unjust usurpation of Tyrants and avoiding other inconveniences which they had proved and might easily fall again into by the disorder of some wicked King To which he adds with the like disapprobation a like testimony of Stanislaus Christa novic a Polonian author who infers upon the former ground that the Pope may depose the King of England as being but a tributary King his words are these Illud impie Legislatores per jusjurandum extorquent a Catholicis c. The law-makers do impiously by an oath extort this from Catholicks to deny that the King may be deposed by the Pope and his Kingdomes and Countries by him disposed of For if by an Honourable and pious grant the Kingdome hav become tributary to the Pope why may he not dispose of it Why may he not depose the Prince being refractory and disobedient Thus a bold stranger altogether ignorant of our histories and of our lawes shoots his bolt at all adventures upon the credit of a shamefull fiction but from whom did they learn this lesson even from the Pope himself Bishop Grosthead had been a little bold with the Pope for his extorting courses calling him Antichrist and murtherer of Souls and comparing the Court of Rome to Behemoth that putteth his mouth to the river Jordan thinking to drink it up and stiling the oppression of the English Nation an Aegiptian Bondage He had good reason for the Court of Rome in those daies was grown past shame rubore deposito and consequently past grace The Pope irritated with this usage breaks out into this passionate expression Nonne Rex Anglorum noster est Vasallus et ut plus dicam mancipium Is not the King of England our Vassal or rather our Slave Or rather are these fit guests to be entertained in a Kingdom that make no more of our Soveraign Princes then their Vassals and Slaves who can neither be admitted to the Crown without their leave nor hold it but by their grace This relation of Cardinal Allen brings to my remembrance the question of Neoptolemus to Vlisses when he should have taught him the Art of lying how it was possible for one to tell a lie without blushing The Arch-Priest is much more ingenuous affirming that the assertions touching both the said Kings for matter of fact
indowed being by provisions from Rome frequently conferred upon strangers which could not speak one word of English nor did ever tread upon English ground Insomuch that at one time there were so many Italians beneficed in England that they received more money yearly out of it then all the revenues of the Crown to the high disservice of Almighty God the great scandal of Religion the decay of hospitallity and the utter ruine of the English Church But the least share of their oppressions did not light upon the Bishops who by their dispensations and reservations of cases and of pensions and exemptions and inhibitions and visitations and tenths and first fruits and provisions and subsidiary helps were impoverished and disabled to do the duties of their function They take their aime much amisse who look upon Episcopacy as a branch of Popery or a device of the Bishop of Rome to advance his own greatnesse Whereas the contrary is most certain that the Pope is the greatest Impugner of Bishops and the Papacy it self sprung from the unjust usurpation of their just rights Let it be once admitted that Bishops are by divine right and instantly all his dispensations and reservations and exemptions and Indulgences and his Conclave of Cardinalls and the whole Court of Rome shrink to nothing This was clearly perceived by both parties in the ventilation of that famous question in the Councel of Trent concerning the divine right of Bishops proposed by the Almaines Polonians and Hungarians seconded bravely by the Spaniards prosecuted home by the French owned by the Archbishop of Paris as the doctrine of Sorbone and onely crossed by the Italian faction to preserve the glorie of their own country and the advantages which that nation doth reap from the Papacy By whose frowardnesse and prevarication in all probability the re-union of the Church and the universal peace of this part of Christendom in necessary Truths was hindred at that time I presume the case was not so very ill in forrain parts but yet ill enough Or otherwise St. Bernard would not have made so bold with Eugenius adding that if the daies were not evil he would speak many more things Why do you thrust your sickle into other mens harvest c. He complaines of the confusion of appeals how they were admitted contrary to law and right besides custom and order without any distinction of place or manner or time or cause or person He complaines further of the exemption of Abbats from their Bishops Bishops from their Archbishops Archbishops from their Primates And this he stiles Murmur communem querimoniam Ecclesiarum The murmuring and common complaint of the Churches Lastly they cheated and impoverished the people by their dispensations and commutations and pardons and indulgences and expeditions to recover the holy Land and Jubilees and pilgrimages and agnus Dei's and a thousand pecuniary Artifices So as no sort of men escaped their fingers The third ground of their separation from Rome was because they found by experience that such forreign Jurisdiction so exercised was destructive to the right ends of Ecclesiastical discipline which is in part to preserve publick peace and tranquillity to retein subjects in due obedience and to oblige people to do their duties more conscienciously Farre be it from any Christian to imagine that policy is the Spring-head of Religion There never was yet any one Nation so unpolitick and brutishly barbarous but they had some Religion or other they who obeyed no governors but their parents paid religious duties to some God they who wanted Clothes to their backs wanted not their sacred Ceremonies they who were without municipal Lawes were subject of themselves to the law of conscience But where Religion hath lost its influence and vigour by contempt and much more where the influence of Religion is malignant where Policy and Religion do not support one another but interfere one with another Societies are like Castles builded in the air without any firm foundation and cannot long endure like as that single Meteor Castor appearing without Pollux portends an unfortunate voyage Let us flatter our selves as much as we please said Tully to the Romans we have not overcome the Spaniards in Number nor the Galles in Force nor the Carthaginians in Craft nor the Grecians in Art nor the Italians in Vnderstanding but the advantage which we have gained over them was by Religious piâ—ty So great an influence hath Religion upon the body Politique Wherefore our Ancestors having seen by long and costly experience that the tyrannical Jurisdiction of the Roman Court instead of peace and tranquillity did produce disunion in the Realm factions and animosities between the Crown and the Miter intestine discord between the King and his Barons bad intelligence with Neighbour-Princes and forreign Wars Having seen a stranger solicited by the Pope either to destroy them by War or to subdue them to the obedience of the Roman Court. Having seen their native Country given away as a prey to a forreign Prince Philip of France And the Pope well near seated in the Royal Chair of Estate for him and his successours for ever to the endlesse dishonour of the English name and Nation by the cheating tricks of Pandolphus his Legate having seen English Rebels canonized at Rome and made Saints it was no marvel if they thought it high time to free themselves from such a chargable and dangerous guest Fourthly besides the former bad influence of forreign Jurisdiction upon the body Politique they found sundry other inconveniences that incited them to separate from Rome They must have been daily subject to have had new Creeds and new Articles of faith obtruded upon them They must have been daily exposed to manifold and manifest peril of Idolatry and sinning against God and their own consciences They must have forsaken the Communion of three parts of Christendom which are not Roman to joyn with the fourth They must have approved the Popes apparent rebellion against the supream Ecclesiastical power that is a general Councel And their Bishops must have sworn to maintain him in these his rebellious usurpations whether they should prefer their native and Christian liberty or give them up for nothing whether they should preserve their Communion with the Catholique Church or with the Court of Rome whether they should desert the Pope or involve themselves in Rebellion Schisme Sacriledge and Perjury the choice was soon made Lastly they see that the Popes had disclaimed all that just power which they had by humane right and challenged to themselves a spiritual Monarchy or Sovereignty by divine right whereby their sufferings which in themselves were unsupportable were made also irremediable from thence Wherefore they sought out a fit expedient for themselves being neither ignorant of their old Britannick exemption and liberties of the English Church nor yet of the weaknesse of the Roman pretences Our progenitors knew well enough that their authority extended not to take away
added further That they were but granted for a certain term which was effluxed The hundred Grievances rest not here but say moreover that they were but deposited at Rome to be preserved faithfully for that use And lastly Charles the fifth in his Rescript tells the Pope That other Kings do not suffer the spoyles of the Churches and Annates to be transported out of their Kingdoms to Rome so universally and so abundantly Seventhly to draw to a conclusion Henry the eighth imposed an oath of fidelity or allegiance upon his Subjects Ecclesiastical as well as temporal So did Frederick the first Emperour of that name I swear that from henceforth I will be faithful to my Liege Lord Frederick the Emperour of the Romans against all men the Pope is included or rather intended principally as by Law I am bound And I will help him to retain his Imperiall Crown and all his honour in Italy c. Henry the eighth took away Popish pardons and indulgences and dispensations The German Nation likewise groaned under the burthen of them Among their hundred grievances that of dispensations was the first And that of Papal Indulgences the third either for sins past or to come modo tinneat dextrâ it is their own phrase They call these artifices meer impostures by which the very marrow of Germaâ—y was sucked up their ancient liberty was enervated and the merit of Christs passion became sleighted Lastly Henry the eighth abolished the usurped jurisdiction of the Bishop of Rome within his Dominions The Emperours did not so whether they thought it not fit to leave an old Patriarch Or because they did not sufficiently consider the right bounds of Imperial power especially being seconded with the authority of an Occidental Councel or because they did not so clearly distinguish between a beginning of unity and an universality of Jurisdiction or because they had other remedies wherewith to help themselves I cannot determine But this we have seen That the Emperours have deposed Popes and have appealed from Popes to General Councels And have maintained their Imperial prerogatives against Popes and made themselves the last Judges of the liberties and necessities of the whole body Politique Frederick the third in the Dyet of Nurenburg sequestred all the moneys that should be raised in three years from Indulgences and absolutions whether Papal or Conciliary towards the raising of twenty thousand men for defence of the Empire against the Turk The resolution of the Elect Arch-Bishop of Trevers against Gregory the 7th was this Ne plus per hunc Sancta quae modo extremum traâ—it spiritum periclitâ—tur Ecclesia ex me dicâ— quod nullam ei posthac obedientiam servabo c. Lest the holy Church which is now brought to the last gasp incurre more danger by his means I speak of my self that hereafter I will perform no obedience to him that is Pope Hildebrand Neither was this his resolution alone All the German Bishops were of the same mind Because thy entrance into the Papacy was begun with so great perjuries And the Church of God is brought into such a grievous storm through the abuse of thy innovations and thy life and conversation is soiled with so manifold infamy As we promised thee no obedience so we let thee know that for the future we will perform none unto thee Et quia nemo nostrum ut publice declamas tibi hactenus â—uit Episcopus ita nulli nostrum â— modo eris Apostolicus And as thou hast reputed none of us for Bishops hitherto So hereafter none of us will esteem thee for the Successour of Saint Peter Which sentence was confirmed by the Emperour Ego Henricus Rex cum omnibus Episcopis meis tibi dico Deseâ—nde descende The first Councel of Pisa did not onely substract their obedience from Peter de Luna calling himself Benedict the 13th and Angelus de Gorario calling himself Gregory the 12th But they decreed that it was lawful for all Christians and accordingly did command them to substract their obedience from them Of which Councel the Councel of Constance was a continuation The second Councel of Pisa suspended Iulius the second from the Papacy and commanded all Christians to withdraw their obedience from him The former had the consent of the Emperour The later his assistance and protection as appeareth both by the solemn promise of the Emperours Ambassadours made in Councel and the acknowledgment of the Councel it self I will conclude this first part of my parallell concerning the Empire with two answers of German Bishops The first of the German and French to Anastasius the second wherein they tell him plainly that they did not understand that new compassion which the Italian Physicians used to cure the infirmities of France They â—axe them for seeking to restrain the absolution of souls to Rome They require that Italian Bishop that is without sin to cast the first stone at them They advise them not to use their pretended authority against their Bishops lest the blow should recoile upon themselves for that theirs had not learned to fear above that which was needfull they tell them that surely they in Italy think that the Galles had lost all these three Verbum ferrum ingenium their tongues their wits and their weapons And so they conclude Etiamsi inclinata esset arca testamenti nostri nostrorum Episcoporum esset non illorum inclinatam relevare Although the arke of their Covenant was falling yet it belonged to their own Bishops and not to them to lift it up again The other answer was of the Archbishops of Colone and Triers with the Synod of Coloegne to Nicholas the first Wherein after many bitter expressions they have these words His de causis nos cum fratribus nostris collegis neque edictis tuis stamus neque vocem tuam agnoscimus nequo tuas bullas tonitruaque tua timemus For these reasons we with our brethren and collegues do neither give place to thy edicts nor acknowledge thy voyce nor fear thy thundring bulles I expect that some will be ready to object that these substractions were but personal from the present Pope not from the See of Rome which is true in part But the same equity and rule of justice which warrants a separation from the person of the Pope for personal faults doth also justifie a more durable separation from the See of Rome that is from him and his Successours for faulty rules and principles either in doctrine or discipline untill they be reformed From Germany our passe is open into France where the case is as clear as the Sun how their Kings though acknowledged by the Popes themselves to be most Christian the eldest Sons of the Church and otherwise the great Patrons and Protectours of the Romane See with their Princes of the blood their Peers their Parliaments their Ambassodours their Schools and Universities have all of them in
all ages affronted and curbed the Roman Court and reduced them to a right temper and constitution as often as they deviated from the Canons of the Fathers and incroached upon the liberties of the Gallicane Church Whereby the Popes jurisdiction in France came to be meerly discretionary at the pleasure of the King Hincmare had been condemned by three French Synods for a turbulent person and deposed Pope Adrian the second takes Cognisance of the cause at Rome and requires Carolus Calvus the King of France to send Hincmare thither with his accusers to receive justice The Kings apologetick answer will shew how he relished it Valde mirati sumus ubi hoc dictator Epistolae scriptum invenerit esse Apostolica authoritate praecipiendum ut Rex corrector iniquorum districtor reorum atque secundum leges Ecclesiasticas atque mundanas ultor criminum reum legaliter ac regulariter pro excessibus suis damnatum sua fretum potentia Roman dirigat We wondered much where he who dictated the Popes Letter hath found it written as commanded byâ— Apostolical authority that a King who is the Corrector of the unjust the punisher of guilty persons and according to all Lawes Ecclesiastical and Civill the revenger of crimes should send a guilty person legally and regularly condemned for his excesses to Rome He tells him that the Kings of France were reputed terrarum Domini not Episcoporum Vice-Domini or Villici Lords paramount within their Dominions not Licutenants or Bayliffes of Bishops Quis igitur hanc inversam legem infernus evomuit quis tartarus de suis abditis tenebrosis cuniculis eructavit What hell hath disgorged this disorderly law what bottomlesse depth hath belched it up out of its hidden and obscure holes The Kings of France have convented the Popes before them So Charles the Great dealt with Leo the third and Lotharius with Leo the fourth The Kings of France have appealed from Popes to Councels So Philip the 4th with the advise of all the orders of France and the whole Gallicane Church appealed from Boniface the eighth and commanded his appeal to be published in the great Church at Paris So Henry the great appealed from Gregory the 14th and caused his appeal to be affixed to the gates of Saint Peters Church in Rome So the School of Sorbone appealed from Boniface the eight Benedict the eleventh Pius the second and Leo the tenth The Kings of France have protested against the Popes decrees and sleighted them yea in the very face of the Councel of Trent Witnesse that protestation of the Ambassadour of France made in the Councel in the name of the King his Master We refuse to be subject to the commands and disposition of Pius the fourth we reject refuse and contemn all the judgements censures and decrees of the said Pius And although most holy Fathers your Religion Life and Learning was ever and ever shall be of great esteem with us Yet seeing indeed you do nothing but all things are done at Rome rather then at Trent And the things that are here published are rather the decrees of Pius the fourth then of the Councel of Trent we denounce and protest here before you all that whatsoever things are decreed and published in this Assembly by the meer will and pleasure of Pius neither the most Christian King will ever approve nor the French Church ever acknowledge to be decrees of a General Councel Besides this the King our Master commandeth all his Archbishops and Bishops and Abbats to leave this Assembly and presently to depart hence then to return again when there shall be hope of better and more orderly proceedings This was high and smart for the King and the Gallicane Church so publickly to reject refuse and contemn all Papal decrees and to challenge such an interest in and power over the French Archbishops and Bishops as not onely to license them but to command them to depart and leave the Councel whither they were summoned by the Pope The French Kings have made Lawes and constitutions from time to time to repress the insolencies and exorbitances of the Papal Court so often as they began to prejudice the liberties of the Gallicane Church with the unanimous consent of their Princes Nobles Clergy Lawyers and Commons As against their bestowing of Ecclesiastical dignities and benefices in France and their grosse Simony and extortions in that way against the payment of Annates and tenths to Rome and generally for all the liberties of the Church of France Against reservations and Apostolical graces and all other exactions of the Court of Rome Charlâ—s the seventh made the pragmatical Sanction to confirm all the Acts of the Councels of Constance and Basâ—l against the tyranny and usurpation of the Pope It is true that Lewis the eleventh by the flattering perswasion of Aeneas Sylvius then Pius the second did revoke this Sanction But the Kings Proctour and the Rectour of the University of Paris did oppose themselves formally to the Registring and Authorizing of this revocation Whereupon the King desired the advise of his Parliament in writing which they gave to this effect That the revocation of that Sanction tended to the confusioâ— of the whole Ecclesiastical order the depopulation of France the exhausting and impoverishment of the Kingdom and the total ruine of the French Church Hereupon the King changed his mind and made diverse declarations and edicts conformable to and in pursuance of the pragmatical Sanction After this the three Estates assembled at Towers made it their first and instant request to Charles the 8th that he would preserve inviolable the pragmatical Sanction which they reputed as the Palladium of France And in the National Councel assembled by Lewis the 12th in the same City it was again confirmed But the Pope stormed and thundered and excommunicated and interdicted Lewis the 12th Francis the first and the whole Realm and exposed it as a prey to the first that could take it And gave plenary Indulgence to every one that should kill a Frenchman King Francis fainted under such fulminations and came to a composition or accommodation with Leo the tenth which was called conventa or the concordate On the one side the Popes friends think he wronged himself and his title to a spiritual Sovereignty very much by descending to such an accommodation And exclude France out of the number of those Countries which they term pays d' obedience As if the French were not loyal obedient Subjects but Rebels to the Court of Rome On the other side the Prelates the Universities the Parliaments of France were as ill contented that the King should yeeld one inch and opposed the accord Insomuch as the University of Paris appealed from it to a future Councel and expedited Letters Patents sealed with the Universities Seal containing at large their grievances and the reasons of the appeal which after were published to the world in print I cannot here omit
the free and just speech of a French Bishop When Henry the fourth had in a manner ended the civill Wars of France by changing from the Protestant to the Roman Catholique Communion Yet the Pope who favoured the contrary party upon pretence of his dissimulation and great dangers that might ensue thereupon for a long time deferred his reconciliation untill the French Prelates by their own authority did first admit him into the bosome of the Church At which time one of them used this discourse Was France all on fire and had they not Rivers enough at home but they must run as far as Rome to Tybur to fetch water to quench it Since that in Cardinal Richlieu's daies it is well known what books were freely printed and publickly sold upon pont neuf of the lawfulnesse of erecting a new or rather restoring an old proper Patriarchate in France as one of the liberties of the Gallicane Church It was well for the Roman Court that they became more propitious to the French affaires Take one instance more which happened very lately The Pope refused to admit any new Bishops in Portugal upon the nomination of the present King because he would not thereby seem to acknowledge or approve his title to the Crown in prejudice of the King of Spain whereby the Episcopal order in Portugal and the other Dominions belonging to that Crown was well near extinguished and scarcely so many Bishops were left alive or could not be drawn together as to make a Canonical Ordination The three Orders of Portugal did represent to the Pope that in the Kingdomes of Portugal and the Algarbians wherein ought to have been three Metropolitans and ten Suffragans there was but one left and he by the Popes dispensation non-Residenâ— And in all the Asâ—atique Provinces but one other and he both sickly and decrepit And in all the African and American Provinces and the Islands not one surviving But the Pope continued inexorable whereupon theyâ— present their request to their neighbours and friends the French Prelates beseeching them to mediate for them with his Holinesse And if he continue still obstinately deaf to their just petition to supply his defect themselves and to Ordain them Bishops in case of necessity The French did the Office of Neighbours and Christians The Synode of the French Clergy did write to the Pope on their behalf in April 1651. But that way not succeeding they sent one of their Bishops as an expresse Envoié to his Holinesse to let him know that if he still refused they cannot nor will be wanting to themselves to their neighbours but would supply his defect what the issue of it is since I have not yet heard But to leave matter of fact and to come to the fundamental Lawes and Customes of France Every one hath heard of the liberties of the French Church but every one understands not what those liberties are as being better known by their practice at home then by Books abroad I will onely select some of them out of their own authentique authorities And when the Reader hath considered well of them let him judge what authority the Pope hath in France more then discretionary at the good pleasure of the King or more then he might have had in other places if he could have contented himself with reason Protestants are not so undiscreet or uncharitable as to violate the peace of Christendom for a primacy or headship of order without superiority of power or for the name of his Holinesse Or for a Pall if the price were not too high Or for a few innocent formalities 1. The Pope cannot command or ordain any thing directly or indirectly concerning any temporal affairs within the dominions of the King of France 2. The spiritual authority and power of the Pope is not absolute in France but limited and restrained by the Canons and Rules of the ancient Councâ—ls of the Church received in that Kingdom Where observe first that the Pope can do nothing in France as a Sovereign Spiritual Prince with his non obstantes either against the Canons or besides the Canons Secondly that the Canons are no Canons in France except they be received This â—ame priviledge was anciently radicated in the fundamental Lawes of England This priviledge the Popes indeavoured to pluck up by the roots And the contentions about this priviledge were one principal occasion of the separation 3. No command whatsoever of the Pope can free the French Clergy from their obligation to obey the commands of their Sovereign 4. The most Christian King hath had power at all times according to the occurrence and exigence of affairs to assemble or cause to be assembled Synods Provincial or National and therein to treat not onely of such things as concern the conservation of the Civil estate but also of such things as concern Ecclesiastical order and discipline in his own dominions And therein to make Rules Chapters Lawes Ordinances and pragmatique sanctions in his own name by his own authority Many of which have been received among the decrees of the Catholick Church and some of them approved by general Councels 5. The Pope cannot send a Legate à latere into France with power to reform judge collate dispense or do such other things accustomed to be specified in the authoritative Bull of his Legation except it be upon the desire or with the approbation of the most Christian King Neither can the said Legate execute his charge untill he hath promised the King in writing under his oath upon his holy orders not to make use of his Legantine power in the Kings Dominions longer then it shall please the King And that so soon as he shall be admonished of the Kings pleasure to forbid it he will give it over And that whilest he doth use it it shall be exercised conformably to the Kings will without attempting any thing to the prejudice of the decrees of Generall Councels or the liberties and priviledges of the Gallicane Church and the Universities of France 6. The Commissions and Bulls of the Popes Legates are to be seen examined and approved by the Court of Parliament And to be registred and published with such Cautions and modifications as that Court shall judge expedient for the good of the Kingdome and to be executed according to the said cautions and not otherwise 7. The Prelates of the French Church although commanded by the Pope for what cause soever it be may not depart out of the Kingdom without the Kings Commandment of License 8. The Pope can neither by himself nor by his Delegates judge of any thing which concerneth the state preheminence or priviledges of the Crown of France nor of any thing pertaining to it Nor can there be any question or processe about the state or pretensions of the King but in his own Courts 9. Papal Bulls Citations Sentences Excommunications and the like are not to be executed in France without the Kings
Command or permission And after permission onely by authority of the King and not by authority of the Pope to shun confusion and mixture of Jurisdictions 10. Neither the King nor his Realm nor his Officers can be excommunicated or interdicted by the Pope nor his Subjects absolved from their Oath of Allegiance 11. The Pope cannot impose Pensions in France upon any benefices having cure of soules nor upon any others but according to the Canons according to the expresse condition of the resignation or ad redimendum vexationem 12 All Bulls and Missives which come from Rome to France are to be seen and visited to try if there be nothing in them prejudicial in any manner to the estate and liberties of the Church of France or to the Royal authority 13 It is lawful to appeal from the Pope to a future Councel 14 Ecclesiastical persons may be convented judged and sentenced before a secular Judge for the first grievous or enormious crime or for lesser offences after a relapse which renders them incorrigible in the eye of the Law 15. All the Prelates of France are obliged to swear feaâ—ty to the King and to receive from him their investituâ—es for their fees and manours 16. The Courts of Parliament in case of appeales as from abuse have right and power to declare null void and to revoke the Popes Bulls and Excommunications and to forbid the execution of them when they are found contrary to sacred decrees the liberties of the French Church or the prerogative Royal. 17. Generall Councels are above the Pope and may depose him and put another in his place and take cognisance of appeals from the Pope 18. All Bishops have their power immediately from Christ not from the Pope and are equally successours of Saint Peter and the other Apostles and Vicars of Christ. 19. Provisions reservations expectative graces c. have no place in France 20. The Pope cannot exempt any Church Monastery or Ecclesiastical body from the Jurisdiction of their Ordinary nor erect Bishopricks into Archbishopricks nor unite them nor divide them without the Kings Licence 21. All those are not hereticks excommunicated or damned who differ in some things from the doctrine of the Pope who appeal from his decrees and hinder the execution of the ordinances of him or his Legates These are part of the liberties of the Gallicane Church The ancient British Church needed no such particular priviledges since they never knew any forreign Jurisdiction The English British Church which succeeded them in time in place and partly in their members and holy orders ought to have injoyed the same freedom and exemption But in the daies of the Saxon Danish and Norman Kings the Popes did by degrees insinuate themselves into the mesnagery of Ecclesiastical affaires in England Yet for many ages the English Church injoyed all these Gallicane priviledges without any remarkable interruption from the Roman Court. As in truth they do of right by the Law of nature belong to all Sovereign Princes in their own Dominions Otherwise Kingdomes should be destitute of necessary remedies for their own conservation And in later ages when the Popes having thrust in their heads did strive to draw in their whole bodies after the whole Kingdome opposed them and made Lawes against their several grosse intrusions as we have formerly seen in this discourse And never quitted these English as well as Gallicane liberties untill the Reformation But perhaps we may find more loyalty and obedience to the Court of Rome in the Catholick King Not at all Whatsoever power King Henry or any of his Successours did ever assume to themselves in England as the Political Heads of the Church the same and much more doth the Catholique King not onely pretend unto but exercise and put in practice in his Kingdome of Sicily both by himself by his Delegates whom he substitutes with the same authority to judge and punish all Ecclesiastical crimes to excommunicate and absolve all Ecclesiastical persons Lay-men Monks Clerks Abbats Bishops Archbishops yea and even the Cardinals themselves which inhabit in Sicily He suffers no appeals to Rome He admits no Nuncio's from Rome Atque demum respâ—ctâ— Ecclesiasticae Iurisdictionis neque ipsam Apostolicam sedem recognoscere hâ—bâ—re superiorem nisi in casu praevenâ—ionis And to conclude he acknowledgeth not any superiority of the Sâ—e of Rome it sâ—lf but onely in case of prevention What saith Baronius to this He complains bitterly that praetensa Apostolica authoritate contra Apostolicam ipsam sedem grande piaculum perpetratur c. Vpon pretence of Apostolique authority a grievous offence is committed against the Apostolick See the power whereof is weaknâ—d in the Kingdome of Sicily the authority thereof abrogated the Iurisdiction wronged the Ecclesiastical Lawes violated and the rights of the Church dissipated And a little after he declaimes yet higher Quid in ad ista dixeris lector What wilt thou say to this Reader but that under the name of Monarchy besides that one Monarch which all the faithful have ever acknâ—wledged as the onely visible Head in the Church Another head it risen up and brought into the Kingdome of Sicily for a Monster and a prodigy c. But for this liberty which he took the King of Spain fairly and quietly without taking any notice of his Cardinalitian dignity caused his books to be burned publickly It will be objected That the King of Spain challengeth this power in Sicily not by his Regal authority as a Sovereign Prince but by the Bull of Vrbanus the second who constituted Roger Earl of Sicily and his heires his Legates à latere in that Kingdome whereby all succeeding Princes do challenge to be Legati nati with power to substitute others and qualifie them with the same authority But first if the Papacy be by Divine right what power hath any particular Pope to transfer so great a part of his office and authority from his Successours for ever unto a Lay-man and his heires by way of inheritance If every Pope should do as much for another Kingdom as Vrbanus did for Sicily the Court of Rome would quickly want imployment Secondly if the Bull of Vrbanus the second was so available to the succeeding Kings of Sicily which yet is disputed whether it be authentick or not whether it be full or defective and mutilated why should not the Bull of Nicholas the second his predecessour granted to our Edward the Confessour and his Successours be as advantagious to the succeeding Kings of England why not much rather seeing that they are thereby constituted or declared not Legates but Governours of the English Church in the Popes place or rather in Christs place seeing that without all doubt Sicily was a part of the Popes ancient Patriarchate but Britaigne was not And lastly seeing the situation of Sicily so much nearer to Rome renders the Sicilians more capable of receiving Justice from thence then the English
Thirdly the King of Spain when he pleaseth and when he sees his own time doth not onely pretend unto but assume in his other Dominions that self-same power or essential right of Sovereignty which I plead for in this treatise It is not unknown to the world how indulgent a Father Vrban the eighth was sometimes to the King and Kingdom of France and how passionately he affected the interest of that Crown And by consequence that his eares were deaf to the requests and remonstrances of the King of Spain The Catholique King resents this partiality very highly and threatens the Pope if he persist to provide a remedy for the grievances of his Subjects by his own power Accordingly to make good his word he called a general Assembly of all the Estates of the Kingdome of Castile to consider of the exorbitancies of the Court of Rome in relation to his Majesties Subjects and to consult of the proper remedies thereof They did meet and draw up a memoriall consisting of ten Articles containing the chiefest abuses and innovations and extortions of the Court of Rome in the Kingdom of Castile His Majestie sends it to the Pope by Friar Domingo Pimentell as his Ambassadour The Pope returned a smart answer by Senior Maraldo his Secretary The King replied as sharply All which was afterwards printed by the special command of his Catholick Majesty The summe of their complaint was first concerning the Popes imposing of pensions upon dignities and other benefices Ecclesiastical even those which had cure of soules in favour of strangers in an excessive proportion to the third part of the full value That although benefices were decayed in many places of Spain two third parts of the true value Yet the Court of Rome kept up the Pensions at the full height That it was contrived so that the Pensions did begin long before the beneficiaries entred upon their profits insomuch as they were indebted sometimes two years pensions before they themselves could taste of the fruits of their benefices And then the charge of censures and other proceedings in the Court of Rome fell so heavy upon them that they could never recover themselves And further that whereas all trade is driven in current silver onely the Court of Rome which neither toiles nor sweats nor hazards any thing will be paid onely in Duckates of Gold not after the current rates but according to the old value That to seek for a remedy of these abuses at Rome was such an insupportable charge by reason of three instances and three sentences necessary to be obtained that it was in vain to attempt any such thing This they cried out upon as a most grievous yoak They complained likewise of the Popes granting of Coad jutorships with future succession whereby Ecclesiastical preferments were made hereditary persons of parts and worth were excluded from all hopes and a large gap was opened to most grosse Simony They complained of the Popes admitting of resignations with reservation of the greatest part of the profits of the benefice insomuch that he left not above an hundred Duckats yearly to the Incumbent out of a great benefice They complained most bitterly of the extortions of the Roman Court in the case of dispensations That whereas no dispensation ought to be granted without just cause now there was no cause at all inquired after in the Court of Rome but onely the price That a great price supplied the want of a good cause That the gate was shut to no man that brought money That their dispensations had no limits but the Popes will That for a matrimonial dispensation under the second degree they took of great persons 8000. or 12000. or 14000 Duckats They complained that the Pope being but the Churches Steward and dispenser did take upon him as Lord and Master to dispose of all the rights of all Ecclesiastical persons That he withheld from Bishops being the true owners the sole disposing of all Ecclesiastical preferments for eight monthes in the year That he ought not to provide for his own profit and the necessities of his Court with so great prejudice to the right of Ordinaries and Confusion of the Ecclesiastical order whilest he suffers not Bishops to enjoy their own Patronages and Jurisdictions They cite St. Bernard where he tells Pope Eugenius that the Roman Church whereof he was made Governour by God was the Mother of other Churches but not the Lady or Mistris And that he himself was not the Lord or Master of other Bishops but one of them They complained that the Pope did challenge and usurpe to himself as his own at their deaths all Clergymens estates that were gained or raised out of the revenue of the Church That a rich Clergyman could no sooner fall sick but the Popes Collectors were gaping about him for his goods And guards set presently about his house That by this means Bishops have been deserted upon their deathbeds And famished for want of meat to eat That they have not had before they were dead a Cup left to drink in nor so much as a Candlestick of all their goods It is their own expression That by this means Creditors were defrauded processes in Law were multiplied and great estates wasted to nothing They complained that the Popes did usurp as their own all the revenues of Bishopricks during their vacancies sometimes for divers years together all which time the Churches were unrepaired the poor unrelieved not so much as one almes given And the wealth of Spain exported into a forreign Land which was richer then it self They wish the Pope to take it as an argument of their respect to the See of Rome that they do not go about forthwith to reform these abuses by their own authâ—â—ity in imitation of other Provinces So it was not the unwarrantablenesse of the act in it self but meerly their respect that did withhold them They complained of the great inconveniences and abuses in the exercise of the Nuncio's office That it is reckoned as a curse in holy Scripture to be governed by persons of a different language That for ten Crowns a man might purchase any thing of them That the fees of their office were so great that they alone were a sufficient punishment for a grievous crime They added that self-interest was the root of all these evils That such abuses as these gave occasion to all the Reformations and Schismes of the Church They added That these things did much trouble the mind of his Catholique Majestie And ought to be seriously pondered by all Sovereign Princes qui intra Ecclesiam potestatis adeptae Culmina tenent ut per eandem potestatem disciplinam Ecclesiasticam muniant Behold our Political Supremacy They proceeded that often the heavenly Kingdome is advantaged by the earthly That Church-men acting against faith and right discipline may be reformed by the rigour of Princes Let the Princes of this world know say they that they
owe an account to God of the Church which they have received from him into their protection For whether peace and right Ecclesiastical discipline be increased or decayed by Christian Princes God will require an account from them who hath trusted his Church unto their power They tell his Holinesse it was a work worthy of him to turn all such Courtiers out of his Court who did much hurt by their persons and no good by their examples Adding this distich Vivere qui sanctè cupitis discedite Roma Omnia cum liceant non licet esse bonum And for remedy of these abuses they proposed that the Popes Nuncio's should not meddle with the exercise of Ecclesiasticall Jurisdiction but be meerly in the nature of Ambassadours That all Ecclesiastical causes should be determined at home according to the Canons That the Pope should delegate the dispensation of matters of grace to some â—it Commissioners within the Kingdome That Ecclesiastical Courts or Rota's should be â—rected within the Realm wherein all causes should be finally determined without recourse to Rome except in such cases as are allowed by the ancient Canons of the Church Lastly they represented that his Majestie was justly pressed by the continual clamours and reiterated instances of his Subjects to whose assistence and protection he was obliged to contribute whatsoever he was able as their Natural Lord and King to procure their weal with all his might by all just means according to the dictates of natural reason And to remedy the grievances which they â—uffered in their persons and in their goods by occasion of such like abuses not practised in other Kingdomes Especially this propositâ—on being so conformable to the Apostolical precepts and to the sacred Canons of Councels They tell the Pope that their first addresse is to him to whom as universal Pastour the Reformation thereof doth most properly belong that there might be no need to proceed to other remedies prescribed by the Doctours of the Church And in the margent they cite more then twenty several Authours to shew what the Magistrate might do in case the Pope should refuse or neglect to reform these abuses So you see they confessed plainly that there were other lawful remedies And intimated sufficiently that they must proceed to the use of them in case the Pope refused or neglected to do his duty That was for the Sovereign Prince with his Bishops and Estates to ease his Subjects and reform the abuses of the Roman Court within his own Dominions And this by direction of the Law of nature Upon our former ground that no Kingdom is destitute of necessary remedies for its own preservation But they chose rather to tell the Pope this unwelcome Message in the names and words of a whole cloud of Roman Catholick Doctours then in their own In fine the Pope continued obstinate And the King proceeded from words to deeds And by his Sovereign power stopped all proceedings in the Nuncio's Court. And for the space of eight weeks did take away all intercourse and correspondence with Rome This was the first act of Henry the eighth which Sanders calls the beginning of the Schisme untill the Pope being taught by the costly experience of his predecessours fearing justly what the consequents of these things might be in a little time was conâ—ented to bow and condescend to the Kings desires To shew yet further that the Kings of Spain when they judge it expedient do make themselves no strangers to Ecclesiasticall affaires we read that Charles the fifth renewed an edict of his predecessours at Madril That Bulls and Missives sent from Rome should be visited to see that they contained nothing in them prejudicial to the 〈◊〉 or Church of Spain which was strictly observed within the Spanish Dominions I might adde upon the credit of the Portugueses how Alexander Castracan was disgraced and expelled out of Spain for publishing the Popes Bulls and that the Papal censures were declared void And how the Popes Delegates or Apostolical Judges have been banished out of that Kingdom for maintaining the priviledges of the Roman Court. And when the King of Spain objected to the Pope the Pensions which he and his Court received yearly out of Spain from Ecclesiastical benefices and dignities The Popes Secretary replied that all the Papal Pensions put together did scarcely amount to so much as one onely pension imposed by the King upon the Archbishoprick of Siville Neither did the King deny the thing but justifie it as done in favour of an Infante of Castile And did further acknowledge that it was not unusual for the Kings of Spain to impose pensions upon Ecclesiastical preferments to the fourth part of the value except in the Kingdom of Galiâ—a This was more then ever any King of England attempted either before or after the reformation Before we leave the Dominions of this great Prince let us cast our eyes a little upon Brabant and Flanders who hath not heard of a Book composed by Iansenius Bishop of Ypres called Augustinus And of those great animosities and contentions that have risen about it in most Roman Catholick Countreys I meddle not with the merit of the cause whether Iansenius followed Saint Austine or Saint Austine his Ancients or whether he be reconciliable to himself in this question I do willingly omit all circumstances but onely those which conduce to my present purpose So it was that Vrbane the eighth by his Bull censured the said Book as maintaining divers temerarious and dangerous positions under the name of St. Austine forbidding all Catholicks to print it sell it or keep it for the future This Bull was sent to the Archbishop of Mechline and the Bishop of Gant to see it published and obeyed in their Provinces But they both refused And for refusing were cited to appear at Rome And not appearing by themselves or their Proctours were suspended and interdicted by the Pope and the copy of the sentence affixed to the door of the great Church in Brussels Although in truth they durst not publish the sentence of condemnation without the Kings Licence And were expresly forbidden by the Councel of Brabant to appear at Rome under great penalties as appeareth manifestly by the Proclamation or Placaâ—t of the Councel themselves dated at Brussels May 1â— 1653. Wherein they do further declare that it was Kennelick ende noâ—oix c. Well knowâ— and notoriously true that the Subjects of those Provinces of what state or condition soever could not be cited nor convented out of the land neither in person nor by their proctour selveroock niet voor het hoff van Roomen no not by the Court of Rome it self And further that the provisions spiritual censures excommunications suspensions and interdictions of that Court might not be published or put in execution without the Kings approbaâ—ioâ— after the Councels deliberation And yet further they do ordain that the said defamatory writing So they call the Copy of
the Popes sentence should be torn in pieces in the great Hall of the Court at Brussels by the door-keeper condemning and abolishing the memory thereof for ever Thus all Christendom do joyn unanimously in this truth that not the Court of Rome buâ— their own Sovereigns in their Councels are the last Judges of their National liberties and priviledges I passe from Spain to Portugal where the King and Kingdom either are at this present time or very lately were very much unsatisfied with the Pope And all about their ancient customes and essential rights of the Crown As the nomination of their own Bishops without which condition they tell the Pope plainly that they neither can nor ought to receive them That if others then the Sovereign Prince have the naming of them then suspected persons may be intruded and the Realm can have no security That it is the opinion of all good men and the judgement of most learned men that herein the Pope doth most grievously derogate from the right of the Crown That it is done in favour of the King of Castile lest he should either revolt from his obedience to the Pope or make war against him And that if provision be made contrary to justice for the private interests of the Roman Court Christs right is betrayed They advise the Pope to let the world know that he hath care of souls and leaves temporal things to Princes That if he persist to change the custome of the Church to the prejudice of Portugal Portugal may and ought to preserve its right And that if he love Castile more then Portugal Portugal is not obliged to obey him more then Castile There are other differences likewise as namely about the imprisoning of some Prelates for Treason to which they make this plea that the Law doth warrant it That Ecclesiastical immunities are not opposite to natural defence That it is he that hurts his Countrey who hurts his own immunity A third difference was about the Kings intermedling in the controversies of religious persons To which they answer that the protection of the Prince is not a violation but a defence of the rights of the Church That it is the duty of Catholick Princes to see regular discipline be observed The fourth difference is about taxes imposed upon Ecclesiastical persons and the taking up the revenues of Bishopricks in the vacancy to which they give this satisfaction that all orders of men are obliged in justice to contribute to the common defence of the Kingdom and their own necessary protection And that the revenues of the vacant Bishopricks could not be better deposited and conserved then when they are imployed by the Prince for the publick benefit cum onere restituendi In summe they wish the Pope over and over again to consider seriously the danger of these courses now when Heresie shewes it self with such confidence throughout Europe That the minds of men are inclined to suspected opinions That St. Peters ship which hath often been in danger in a Calme Sea ought not to be opposed to the violent course of just complainers who think themselves forsaken That the Chuâ—ch of Rome hath lost many kingdoms which have withdrawn their obedience and reverential respect from it for much lesser reasons That they had learned with grief by their last repulse that their submissions and iterated supplications had prejudiced their right That the Kings Ambassadour the Clergies messenger the Agent from the three orders of the Kingdom had found nothing at Rome from two Popes but neglects affronts and repulses And lastly for a farewell that Portugal and all the Provinces that belong unto it in Europe Asia Africa and America is more then one single sheep Which is as much as if they should tell him in plain down right terms that if he lose it by his own fault he loseth one of the fairest flowers in his Garland What the issue of this will be God onely knowes and time must discover I will conclude this point with the answer of the University of Lisbone to certain questions or demands moved unto them by the States or Orders of Portugal The first question was whether in case there were no recourse to the Pope the King of Portugal might permit the consecration of Bishops without the Pope in his Kingdom To which their answer was affirmative that he might do it because Episcopacy was of divine right but the reservation of the Popes approbation was of humane right which doth not bind in extreme nor in very great necessity The second question whether there was extreme necessity of consecrating new Bishops in Portugal Their answer was affirmative that there was because there was but one Bishop left in Portugal and six and twenty wanting in the rest of the Kings dominions The third question was whether Portugal had then recourse to the Pope for his approbation The answer was Negative that they had not first because the Castilians had attempted to slay their Ambassadourâ— before the eyes of Vrban the 8th and Innocent the 10th So there was no safe recourse And secondly because their Ambassadour could uot prevail with the Pope in nine years by all their solicitations So there was no hope to obtain The fourth question was whether the permission of this were scandalous The answer was Negative that it was not first because it was a greater scandal to want Bishops Secondly because the King had used all due means to obtain the Popes approbation Thirdly because it was done out of extreme necessity The fifth and last question was how Bishops were to be provided They answered that it was to be done according to Law by the election of the respective Chapters and by the presentation of the King as it was of old in Spain and Portugal and was still observed in Germany and elsewhere From Spain and Portugal it is now high time to passe over into Italy where we meet with the Republick of Venice obliged in some sort to the Papacy for that honour and grandeur and profit and advantage which the Italian Nation doth reape from it Yet have not they wanted their discontents and differences and disputes with the Court of Rome The Republick of Venice had made several Lawes As first that no Ecclesiastical person should make any claime or pretence to any bona Emphyteutica as the Lawyers call them that is waste lands that had been planted and improved by the great Charge and industry and good Culture of the Fee-farmers which were possessed by the Laity Secondly that no person whatsoever within their dominions should found any Church Monastery Hospital or other religious house without the special licence of the State upon pain of imprisonmeut and banishment and confiscation of the soile and buildings Thirdly that none of their subjects should alienate any Lands to the Church or in favour of any Ecclesiastical persons secular or Regular without the
in their power to crosse Yet straightway their Bulls did flie abroad either of concession or confirmation or Delegation to make the world believe that nothing could be done without them But how or by what right did the Venetians claim these priviledges By virtue of any Papal Bulls No such thing But by the Law of nature as an essential right of Sovereignty and by a most ancient custome of 1200 years that is a thousand years before the first Bull was dated as appeareth by a letter of the Senate of Venice to the Venetian Commons their Subjects Secondly it may be urged further that the Venetians did not make a total and perpetual separation from Rome No more did England if by Rome we understand the Church of Rome First not total but onely in particular points wherein they were fallen both from themselves in their ancient integrity and from the Apostolical Churches which were their first â—ounders Which are the very words of our Canon Secondly not perpetual but onely temporary untill their errours be amended and abuses reformed But if by Rome be understood the Roman Court the case of Veâ—ice and England is much different They acknowledge themselves to be justly subject to the Roman Patriarch we do altogether deny his Jurisdiction over us The vicinity of Venice renders them capable of receiving Justice from Rome which the distance of England being so far divided by Seas and Mountains doth hinder us of Their interest invited them to a conjunction with Rome Ours is against it But yet they take care for their own security and indempâ—ity that the Papacy which they submitted unto should be toothlesse not able to bite them or injure them If that Papacy which they sought to have obtruded upon us had been such an one in probability they had not so quickly been turned out of doores Lastly it may be objected that the points in difference between Rome and us be many more then those which were in difference between Rome and Venice This indeed is most true But not much material More or lesse do not vary the kind or nature of any thing Whether their liberties or ours be of greater or lesser extent is impertinent to our question If Venice ought to enjoy their ancient liberties and customes then so ought England also If the Venetians ought to be the last Judges of their own pretensions what their ancient customes and liberties were then so ought we to be likewise Not the Pope and his conclave of Cardinals which if Venice would not endure we have much lâ—sse reason to endure it What Canons have been received with us and how far and where our shoe did wring us none knew so well as our selves The chiefest difference between our case and that of Venice seems to me to be this That we were put to an aâ—ter-game so were not they They preserved their rights and priviledges then in question intire from the usurpations of the Roman Court we were necessitated in part to retrive and vindicate ours Theirs was properly a Conservation Ours a Reformation They might thank the unanimity of their Subjects the loyalty of their Clergy and their nearer acquaintance with Rome for their advantage we might blame the Barons Wars and the contentions between the houses of York and Lancaster and a kind of superstitious veneration of that See occasioned by our distance and want of experimental knowledge for our disadvantage But to come to the Catastrophe of this businesse Both sides grew weary of the difference Christian Princes mediated a Peace especially the most Christian King The Venetians were contented to shake hands and be friends with the Court of Rome But without any reparation or submission or confession or so much as a request to be made on their parts They refused to abrogate any one of the Lawes complained of They refused though the Pope did presse it most instantly and the Cardinal Ioieuse did assure them that it would be more acceptable to his Holinesse then the conquest of a Kingdome to re-admit the banished persons into their City They refused to take an absolution from Rome Yea they were so far from it that when the Ambassadour intreated that the Duke might receive a benediction from him publickly in the Church both the Duke and the Senate did resolutely oppose it because it had some appearance of an absolution A man would have thought that this might have sufficed to have caught the Popes more wit then to have hazarded their reputation again so near home where they are so well known But it did not They adventured after this to make their spiritual weapons subservient to their temporal ends by excommunicating and interdicting the Duke of Parma and his Subjects with little better successe I expect that it should be alledged That all the Projects of France for a new Patriarchate and the memorials of Castile and the bleatings of Portugal c. were but personated shewes to terrifie Popes into their duties And in part I do believe it to be true But withal they must yeeld thus much unto me that it is for children to be terrified with grimaces or painted vizards which signifie nothingâ— To work upon wise men there must be probable and just grounds that such things as are pretended may be and will be effected We have said enough to shew that all Christian Nations do challenge this right to themselves to be the last Judges of their own liberties and priviledges CHAP. VIII That the Pope and the Court of Rome are most guilty of the Schisme I Am come now to my sixth and last proposition which brings the Schisme home to their own doores Wherein I endeavour to demonstrate that the Church of Rome or rather the Pope and the Court of Rome are causally guilty both of this Schisme and almost all other Schisms in the Church First by seeking to usurpe an higher place and power in the body Ecclesiastical then of right is due unto them Secondly by separating both by their doctrines and censures three parts of the Christian world from their Communion and as much as in them lies from the communion of Christ. Thirdly by rebelling against general Councels Lastly by breaking or taking away all the lines of Apostolical Succession except their own First they make the Church of Rome to be not onely the sister of all other Patriarchal Churches and the Mother of many Churches but to be the Lady and Mistris of all Churches To be not onely a prime stone in the building but the very foundation to be not onely a respective foundation in relation to this or that time and place as all the Apostles and all Apostolical Churches were and all good Pastours and all orthodox Churches are but to be an absolute foundation for all persons in all places at all times which is proper to Christ alone Other foundation can no man lay then that which is laid even Iesus Christ. They hold it not enough for
communion of any particular Church whatsoever even the Roman it self so far forth as it is Catholick but onely from their errours wherein they had first separated themselves from their predecessours To this I adde that it was not we but the Court of Rome it self that first separated England from the communion of the Church of Rome by their unjust censures excommunications and interdictions which they thundered out against the Realm for denying their spiritual Sovereignty by Divine right before the Reformation made by Protestants Secondly we are charged with Schismatical contumacy and disobedience to the decrees and determinations of the General Councel of Trent But we believe that Convent of Trent to have been no General nor yet Patriarchal no free no lawfull Councel How was that General where there was not any one Bishop out of all the other Patriarchates or any Proctours or Commissioners from them either present or summoned to be present except peradventure some tltular Europaean Mock-Prelates without cures such as Olaus Magnus intituled Archbishop of Vpsala Or Sir Robert the Scottish-man intituled Archbishop of Armagh How was that Generall or so much as Patriarchal where so great a part of the West was absent wherein there were twice so many Episcopelles out of Italy the Popes professed Vassals and many of them his hungry Parasitical pensioners as there were out of all other Christian Kingdoms and Nations put together How was that general wherein there were not so many Bishops present at the determination of the weightiest controversies concerning the rule of faith and the exposition thereof as the King of England could have called together in his own Dominions at any one time upon a moneths warning How was that general which was not generally received by all Churches even some of the Roman Communion not admitting it We have seen heretofore how the French Ambassadour in the name of the King and Church of France protested against it And untill this day though they do not oppose it but acquiesce to avoid such disadvantages as must insue thereupon yet they did never admit it Let no man say that they rejected the determinations thereof onely in point of discipline not of doctrine for the same Canonical obedience is equally due to an acknowledged General Councell in point of discipline as in point of Doctrine And as it was not General so neither was it free nor lawfull Not free where the place could afford no security to the one party where the accuser was to be the Judge where any one that spake a free word had his mouth stopped or was turned out of the Councel where the few Protestants that adventured to come thither were not admitted to dispute where the Legates gave auricular Votes where the Fathers were noted to be guided by the spirit sent from Rome in a male where divers not only new Bishops but new Bishopricks were created during the sitting of the Convent to make the Papalins able to over-vote the Tramontains Nor yet lawfull in regard of the place which ought to have been in Germany Actor debet rei forum sequi A guilty person is to be judged in his Province And the cause to be pleaded where the crime was committed And likewise in regard of the Judge In every Judgment there ought to be four distinct persons The accuser the witnesse the guilty person and the Judge But in the Councel of Trent the Pope by himself or his Ministers acted all these parts himself He was the right guilty person and yet withall the accuser of the Protestants the witnesse against them and their Judge Lastly no man can be lawfully condemned before he be heard But in this Councel the Protestants were not allowed to propose their case much lesse to defend it by lawful disputation Thirdly it is objected and here they think they have us sure locked up that we cannot deny but that the Bishop of Rome was our Patriarch and that we have rebelled against him and cast off our Canonical obedience in our Reformation To this supposed killing argument I give three clear solutions First That the Bâ—itish Islands neither were nor ought to be subject to the Jurisdiction of the Roman Patriarch as hath been sufficiently demonstrated in my third conclusion For all Patriarchal Jurisdiction being of humane institution must proceed either from some Canon or Decree of a General Councel or of such a Provincial Councell as had power to oblige the Britons to obedience Or from the grant or concession of some of their Sovereign Princes or from the voluntary submission of a free people Or lastly from custom and prescription If they had any such Canon or Grant or submission they would quickly produce it but we know they cannot If they plead custome and prescription immemorial the burthen must rest upon them to prove it But when they have searched all the Authours over and over who have written of British affaires in those daies and all their Records and Registers they shall not be able to find any one Act or so much as any one footstep or the least sign of any Roman Patriarchal Jurisdiction in Britaigne or over the Britons for the first 600 years And for after-ages the Roman Bishops neither held their old Patriarchate nor gained any quiet settled possession of their new Monarchy Secondly I answer That Patriarchal power is not of Divine right but humane institution And therefore may either be quitted or forfeited or transferred And if ever the Bishops of Rome had any Patriarchal Jurisdiction in Britaigne yet they had both quitted it and forfeited it over and over again and it was lawfully transferred To separate from an Ecclesiastical authority which is disclaimed and disavowed by the pretenders to it and forfeited by abuse and rebellion and lawfully transferred is no Schisme First I say they quitted their pretended Patriarchal right when they assumed and usurped to themselves the name and thing of universal Bishops Spiritual Sovereigns and sole Monarchs of the Church and masters of all Christians To be a Patriarch and to be an universal Bishop in that sense are inconsistent and imply a contradiction in adjecto The one professeth humane the other challengeth divine institution The one hath a limited Jurisdiction over a certain Province the other pretendeth to an unlimited Jurisdiction over the whole World The one is subject to the Canons of the Fathers and a meer executour of them and can do nothing either against them or besides them The other challengeth an absolute Sovereignty above the Canons besides the Canons against the Canons to make them to abrogate them to suspend their influence by a non-obstaâ—te to dispence with them in such cases wherein the Canon gives no dispensative power at his own pleasure when he will where he will to whom he will Therefore to claime a power paramount and Sovereign Monarchical Royalty over the Church is implicitely and in effect to disclaime a Patriarchal
by King Iames in his triplici modo triplex cunâ—us print an 1609. p. 125. and Ireland Councel book of Ireland 32 33 34. of Henry 8th The pretended Crimes of Hen. 8. no blemish to the Reformation Holins in Hen. 8. p. 923. Hall 22. H. 8. p. 199. Our Lawes are not cruel against Roman Catholicks Apol. P. 153 In Artic. 37. p. 419 420 c. Though the first separaters were Schismaticks we are free Aug. Epist. 162. Psal. 19. 12. Protestants no authors of the separation from the Church of Rome Mr. Knot Inf. num p. 534. Bulla Pauli 3. apud Sander de Schism l. 1. p. 109. Eminent persons have great influence without any Iurisdictions The dignity of the Apostolical Churchâ—s â—â—de praeser advers haeres L. 4. Epis. 8. Novel 131. c. 3. et 4. It is no marvel that the Pope winded himself into England by degrees Mat. Paâ— an 1246. No Saxon English or Brittish King ever made any obliging submission to the Pope Bedâ—l 1. c. 25. Bed l. 1. ch 26. The Popes pâ—wer in England was of courtesy Wilfride the first great Appâ—llant Spâ—lm conc an 705. De elâ—ct polest c. 4. significasti c. Bar. An. 1102. nu 8. 〈◊〉 1. de Gest. Paul Angloâ— Hoved. in Hen. 2. Malm. ibid. Math. Par. an 1164. Rog. Hoved. in Hen. 2. Legations as rare as appeals Spelm. conc an 78. Saxon Kings made Ecclesiastical Laws Chap. 15. Chap. 5. Spelm. conc An. 1066. An old Artifice of the Roman Bishops Norman Kings injoyed the same power Cap. quon de Appâ—â—pr 15. R. 2. c. 64 H. 4. c. 12. 2. H. 4. c. 3 2. H 4. c. 4. 9. H. 6. c. 11. Coâ—k Râ—port Cawdries case Canon law of no more force in England then as it was received 20. H. 3. c. 9. 4. E. 1. c. 5. Bigamy 2. R. 2. c. 6. Aedmer in initio Placit an 1. H. 7. Pl. an 1. H 7. Pl. an 32. et 34. E. 1. Ant. Brit. 279. The statute of Mortmain justified Exod. 36. 6. 〈…〉 Nicet l. 7. Consid. p. 49 Oratio ad Paul 5. pro Rep. Veneta Mat. Paâ— an 1164. 35. E. 1. Statute of Carlile Malm. de Gest. Pont. Aug. p. 257. Id. l. 2. p. 45. p. 242. Id. l. 1. p. 204. Articuli cleri 25. E. 3. 25. E. 3. 16. R. 2. C. 5. 27. E. 3. c. 1. Act. and. mon. Pontif. veâ—us Pontif. novum Ex Regist. Craâ—m P. 4. Hall in Henrico 8. fol. 206. Occh. pâ—rt 2. c. 22. de fâ—ill reâ—udic The Soveraignty of our Kings in Ecclesiastical causes over Ecclesiastical persons Antiqu. Brit. p. 325. King Henry 8. did no more then his predecessours The judgment of our English Lawyers Fitzherb Natu. brev 44. Lord Cook Cawdries â—ase The true differ Part 2. Cyp. de unit Ecclesiae Conc. Eph. in Epist. Synod ad Nâ—stor Ambr. et alij Bell de Pont. l. 4. â— C. 22. The supremacy in the whole Colledge of the Apostlâ—s Act. 1. Act. 6. â—ct 8. st 1â— Act. 11. Act. 11. Act 15. The other Apostles had Successors as well as S. Peter Why the Bishop of Rome S. Peters succâ—ssour rather then of Antioch Plat. in vita Sti. Peâ—ri The highest constitution of the Apostles exceeded not natâ—onal Primats Can. Apost 33. How some Primates came to be more respected in the Church then others Either by custom Con. Nic. Or from the Grandeur of the City Conc Chal. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. Or by decrees of Councels Or by Edicts of Princes Many Prâ—mats subject to none of the five great Patriarchs Ruff. hist. Eccl. l. 1. c. 6. The case between the Patriarch of Antioch and Cyprian Bishops Conc. Ephes. part 1. Act. 7. Greg. L. 1. Ep. 24. The case of the Cyprian Bishops applyed The proof in this cause ought to rest upon our adversaries The Brittannique Church ancienter then the Roman Gild. de eâ—id et conqâ— Brit. Plat in vita Sancti Petri. Bar. an 44. The Brittannique Churches sided with the Eastern against the Roman British Bishops ordained at home Reg. Land apud Vsh. dâ—prim Eccl. Brit. p. 56. Plat. The answer of Dionothus Spelm. Conc. An. 601. Confirme by two British Synods Spel. eon an 601. Galt mon. l. 2. c. 12. Beda omnes alii Resp. Greg. ad 8. quest Bed l. 2. c. 2. Ant. Brit p. 48. Malm. prol ad lib. de gest pont Aug. Glos. juris C. Cleros dist 21. Soveraign Princes have power to alter whatsoever is of humane institution in Ecclesiastical discipline Append. de Schism Art 4. p. 526. Suar. l. 3. de prim summi Pontificis cap. 1. num 4. Morl. in Emp. jur p. 1. tit 2. Citati à Sanc. claâ— in Art 37. Append. de Schism p. 527. P. 528. Protestants in their reformation have altered no Articles of Religion nor sacred rites nor violated Charity p. 533. p. 528. p. 530. Augustine Nor swerved from the Law of nature or positive Lawes of God Ex Archivis Turris Londinensis citat author Antiquit. Acad. Cantab In cases doubtful we may not disobey the King and the Lawes Exod. 1. 17. 1 Sam. 22. 17. August Unjust commands may be justly obeyed Prâ—nces are obliged to protect their subjects from the â—yranny of Ecclesiastical Judges Paâ—s lait c. Citati a Sancta Clara in Art 37. p. 420. 421. Sancta Clara p. 146. 417. Kings may exercise exernal acts of Ecclesiastical jurisdiction by fit delegates The Emperours of old did the same Novel 83. Lib. 5. ca. pit Popes convented imprisâ—ned deposed by Emperouâ—s Platin. in Grâ—g 6. Plat. in Bon. 1. Plat. in Sym. P. 425. An. 1110 The Councel of Towers allowes to withdraw obedience from the Pope in certain cases Conc. Turon Râ—sp ad Art 3. Resp. ad Art 4. Resp. ad Art 8. In tract de potest Papae et Imperat Princes may reform new Canâ—ns by old Part. 2. Act. 6. C. 7. de resol fid l. 1. C. 8. P. 152. Patriaâ—â—hal power subject to Impâ—rial Lib. 2. Ep. 61. Emperours have changed Patriarchaâ—s Conc. Const can 3. Conc. Chalc. Can. 8. By their authority Novel 11. et Novel 131. English Kings as Soveraign â—s the Emperouâ—s Math. Paris Two sorts of grounds for sustraction of obedience Our first grouâ—d Chemnit Exa Conc. Fred. Mant. Dist. 100. C. 2. In Hâ—n 1. an 1103. Ant. Brit. pag. 326. Math. Paris an 1237. Math. Par in H. 3. an 1253. Idem An. 1254. Idem An. 1257. Id. An. 1258. Plowmans tale and else where Our second ground Episo Eleiensis Plat. in Greg. 7. Larg Exam p. 18. Admon to the Nobility by Card. Allen. 1. 8. Exam. Cathol p. 34. Math. Paris an 1244. Idem an 1253. Ro. Houed Annal. fol. 303. Ep. Card. Bell. ad G. Blackw Archpr. Supplic of souls p. 296. Hoveden Annal. p. 292. Idem Plat. in pasch 2. Math. Paris an 1212. Math. Paris an 1253. Hoops ad saecul 14. c. 5. Citat Sanct. Clara. Math. Paris in H. 3. An. 1245. Bern. L. 3. de consideratione The
third ground The fourth ground Cone Turâ—â— an 1510. in sine Extraict des anales d' Aqui-taine Baron to 11. Greg. 9. de Elect. et Elect. potestate Math. Paris An. 1245. Idem an 1245. Ibidem Id. an 1246. Walsingh p. 161. See theopc of the â—ull in Antisanderus Memorial de sa Magest ad Carol an 1633. Lâ—sit geâ—itus p. 43. The moderation of the English Reformers Conc. Carth. de baptiz 〈◊〉 Can. 30. Protest plain confession Ch. 13. p. 151 152. Ch. 2. p. 62. Tertull. Gers. part 4. Ser. de pace et unit Graec. The case of England not the same wiâ—h Germany Cap. 98. Graius in scala Chronica Gocelinus in hist. majore c. Goldast Constit. Imper Impressae Francofurti an 1607. p. 1. pag. 62. Ibidem Dat. Avinionae an 1323. apud Gold p. 1. pag. 98. In 〈◊〉 Reinensibusâ—â—â—â— Francosurtensibus Goldast part 1. pag. 142. Plat. in Pio â—0 Carol. Molinaeus in Commentaeriis Plat. ibidem Molin ibidem Plat. ibidem Molin Emperours convocated and confirmed Synods and by them reformed the Church Apud Goldastum part 1. pag. 3. Ibidem Lib. 5. capitul Goldast p. 1. pag. 12. Idem p. 1. pag. 34. Id. p. 45 50. Goldast part 1. pag. 70. Rodevic de Gestis Fred. 1. lib. 2. c. 56. The English Reformation not Schismatical Goldast part 2. pag. 29. ct 31. Regin Polus de Concilio pag. 86. Reformatio Angliae edit Venet. 1562. Concil de lect Cardinal edit Lutet an 1612. pag. 131 c. Pag. 140. An. 1415. Goldast part 1. pag. 146. Idâ—m pag. 149. Idâ—m pag. 155. Idem p. 2 pag. 36 Idem p. 2. pag. 177. Gold p. 1. pag. 207. Id. p. 211. Idem pag. 170. Catalog testium veritatis Gold part 2. p. 109. Gold part 2. p. 197. Gold p. 1. p. 103. Idem pag. 99. The Emperours made themselves the last Judges of their liberties and necessities Goldast part 2. pag. 58. Idem p. 1. pag. 100. 〈…〉 Gold parâ— 1. pag. 58. Emperours injoyed investitures Id. p. 53. Id. p â— P. 34. Id. pag 58. 61. Emnperours have excluded Legateâ— c. Pag. 59. Ch 13. Ch. 5 6 7 8. And neglected the Popes Bulls c. An. 1459 Anno 1526. Rescript Car. 5. ad Criminal P. Clem. 7. Gold p. 1. pag. 99. P. 100. 〈◊〉 And seized upon Papal pretended rights Cap. 10. In Conclusione Sâ—ss 21. Gold pâ—rt 2. pag. 24. 〈◊〉 32. Cap. 19. Resc Num. 44. And have imposed Oaths of allegiance Gold part 1. pag. 64. The Germans against Pardons Indulgences c. Gravam 1. 3. Emperours have deposed Popes and appealed from them c. Gold part 1. pag. 214. Num. 8. Pag. 47. Et 48. Sâ—ss 8. â—t 9. Sâ—ss ultima promot Concâ—l Pâ—sani pag. 32. â—t 172. Ex schedis Ioannis Avâ—ntini apud Goldast in Rationali p. 48. Ibid. p. 50. The French no vassals of the Roman Court. Goldast Constitut. Imper. p. 1. pag. 24. Goldast 〈◊〉 3. p. 571. An. 1267. An. 1406. An. 1418. An. 1438. As that of August 16. an 1478. An. 1487. An. 1517. Fascicuius rerum expetend et fugiend impressuâ— 1535. Balatus ovium p. 2. â—â—â—3 Lusitania gemitus p. 20. Epist. Cler. Gallicani ad Innoc. Pap. 10. Traictes des 〈…〉 liberties de l'Eglâ—se Gallicane Pro libertate Ecclesiae Gallic adversus Roman aeulam defâ—nsia Parisiens Curâ—ae The libertâ—es of the French Church The King of Spain asserts the liberties of his own Churches Edict Car. 5. Decemb. 7. An. 1526. â—aron to 11. An. 1097. num 29. edit Mogunt Ibid. 〈◊〉 28. Ibid. num 29. Memorial de sa magestad Catolica Chap. 1 2 3. Chap. 4. Chap. 5. Chap. 6. Chap. 7. Lib. 4. de Consid. cap. 7. Chap. 8. Chap. 9. Chap. 10. Ibidem Chap. 10. Ibidem An. 1543. Pad Paolo Aâ—olog pag. 405. â—usitanâ—ae gemitus pag. 39. pag. 41. 〈…〉 Impâ— ess Iruxellis per Anth. Vâ—lpium typâ—graph Reâ—gium 1653. The King of Portugal doth the same Lâ—sitanâ—ae Gemitus pag. 30. Pag. 31. Pag. 32. Pag. 34. Pag. 37. Pag. 38. Pag. 40. Pag. 42. P. 23. P. 17. P. 43. P. 44. P. 45. Imprss. Olissiponae an 1649. Maii 23. An. 1602. Ian. 10. An. 1603. Martii 26. An. 1605. â—ulla Pauli quinti. dat Rom. Ap. 17. 1606. Venetian Lawes Bulla eadâ—m The Popes Bull. Sleighted by the Venetians Literae Leonardi Don. Ducis Venet. datae Maii â— 1606. Pad Paolâ— Historia partic l. 4. p. 141. Idem l. 1. p. 24. Venetian doctrines Pad Paol Hist. parâ— l. 4. p. 145. Nicomaco Philal. avertiment vâ—ri pag. 22. Raccolta degli Scâ—itâ—ti c. pag. 9. Can. 30. The conclusion of the Venetian troubles The Church but principally the Court of Rome is 4. waies guilty of schisme Gregor Hist. Con. Trid l. 7. an 1563. C. de Capitulis dist 10. C. Nos si incompetenter 2 Qu 7. Gloss. â— si Papa dist 4â— C. Nâ—mo 9. qu. 3. Hist. Conc. Trid. l. 7. 10. Conc. Const. Sess. 4. Con. Basil. Sess. 2. The Popes confirmation of Councels of no value The decree of the Councels superiority above the Pope moâ—t conciliarly made Greg. â—p l. 4. ep 34. â—t 38. Conc. 〈…〉 Plat. in Maâ—cellino Athâ—â—as in Epist. ad solit vitam agentes Hieron in Chron. et Catal. Ecclesi Script Câ—nc Gen. 6. Act. 13. Gerson Sermon on Easter-day Conc. Snuess et Rom. We have not separated our selves from the Catholick Church 〈◊〉 Paul 3. apud Sand. de Schism l. 1. p. 109. The Councel of Trent nâ—t general Not free Sleid. l. 17. Hist. con Trid. Nor lawfull Sleid. l. 23. We have not substracted our obedience from our lawful Patriarch The Roman Bishops quitted their Patriarchate Gâ—l c. 1. 24. qu. 1. And foreited it by rebellion Cone Constant C. 39. Con. Nicâ—n C. 7. 〈◊〉 c. 25. Gers. 3. parâ— Apâ—l de Conc. Constan And by abâ—se Matth. Par. an 1103. Idem an 1107. An. 1113. Nich. Clem de corrupto Ecclesiae statu Math. Paris an 1164. Baron to 11. An. 1027. Patriarchal power was lawfully transferred The power which we rejected was not Patriarchal nor Canonical Gregory the Great acquired no Patriarchal right in England by the conveâ—sion of it Bed l. 1. c. 25. Bed l. 1. c. 26. Speed in the Kings of the West Saxons An. 612. Bed l. 3. c. 4. 5. Bed l. 3. c. 21. Speed in the Kings of the East Angles An. 624. We condemn not our Fathers Our Bishops not Ordained by Presbyters Mason de Ministerio Anglicano c. Our matter and form in Presbyterial Ordination justified An. 1439. We derive no Jurisdiction from the Crown Blondel Apolog. p. 368. c. Bishops not subject to nor ordained by Presbyters of old in Britaigne P. 370. P. 367. P. 371. Unformed Churches no fit president p. 65. l. 21. for neither do you â— read moreover you do Plutarch
were untrue That Henry the second never made any such accord with Alexander the third for ought that he could ever read in any Chronicle of Credit Then the oath which Henry the second did take for himself not for his heires was this that he would not depart from him or his successours so long as they should intreat him as a Catholick King That the fact of King John is of more probability but of as little truth which he confirmes by the testimony of Sir Thomas Moore a Lord Chancellour of England a man of Extraordinary learning of great parts of so good affections to the Roman See that he is supposed to have died for the Popes Supremacy and is commended by Cardinall Bellarmine to Mr. Blackwell as a Martyr and a guide of many others to Martyrdom cum ingenti Anglica nationis gloria certainly one who had as much means to know the truth both by view of records and otherwise as any man living Thus writeth he If he the author of the beggars supplication say as indeed some writers say that King John made England and Ireland tributary to the Pope and the See Apostolique by the grant of a thousand Markes we dare surely say again that it is untrue and that all Rome neither can shew such a grant nor ever could And if they could it were nothing worth For never could any king of England give away the Realm to the Pope or make the Land tributary though he would As to that of Henry the second without doubt the Archpriest had all the reason in the world for him Cardinall Allen did not write by inspiration and could expect no more credit then he brought authority There is a vast difference between these two that no man shall be accounted King of England untill he be confirmed by the Pope And this other that the King in his own person would not desert the Pope so long as he intreated him like a Catholick King The former is most dishonourable to the Nation and Diametrally opposite to the fundamental Lawes of the Land The later we might take our selves without offence to God or our own consciences But to make our Kings their vassals aud their slaves to impoverish their Realm and to commit all those exorbitant misdemeanours against them which we have related in part and shall yet describe more fully was neither to intreat them like Catholick Kings nor like Christian Kings nor yet like political Kings And for his Saint Thomas of Canterbury we do not believe that the Popes Canonisation or to have his name inserted into the Calender in red letters makes a Saint We do abhominate that murther as Lawlesse and Barbarous to sprinkle not onely the pavements of the Church but the very altar with the blood of a Prelate And we condemn all those who had an hand in it But we do not believe that the cause of his suffering was sufficient to make him a Martyr namely to help forraignâ—rs to pull the fairest flowers from his Princes Diadem by violence and to perjure himself and violate his oath given for the observation of the Articles of Clarendon All his own Suffragan Bishops were against him in the cause and justified the Kings proceedings as appeareth by two of their letters one to himself the other to Pope Alexander the third The Barons of the Kingdom reputed him as a Traitor quo progrederis Proditor Expecta et audi judicium tuum Whither goest thou Traitor stay and hear thy judgment This is certain The first time that ever any Pope did challenge the right of investitures in England was in the dayes of Henry the first and Paschal the second was the first Pope that ever exacted an oath from any forraign Bishop above Eleven hundred years after Christ. Before that time they evermore swore fealty to their Prince de Homagiis de Feudis de sacramentis Episcoporum Laicis antea exhibitis There was great consultation about the homage and Fealty and oaths of Bishops in former ages sworn to Lay-men These new articles of faith are too young to make Martyrs Concerning the secoÌ„d instance of King Iohn though I attribute much to the authority of Sir Thomas More in that case who would never have been so confident unlesse he had supposed that he had searched the matter to the bottom yet his zeal to the Papacy and his unwillingnesse to see such an unworthy act proceed from that See might perhaps mislead him for I confesse sundry authours do relate the case otherwise That there was a Prophesie or Prediction made by one Peter an Hermite that the next day to Ascension sunday there should be no King in England That Pope Innocent the third being angry with King Iohn excommunicated him interdicted the Kingdom deprived him of his Crown absolved his subjects from their allegiance animated his Barons and Bishops against him gave away his Realm to Philip King of France sent Pandolphus as his Legate into England to see all this executed The King of France provides an Army accordingly But the crafty Pope underhand gives his Legate secret instructions to speak privatly with King Iohn And if he could make a better bargain for him and draw him to submit to the sentence of the Pope he should act nothing against him but in his favour They do meete King Iohn submits The Pope orders him to resign his Crown and Kingdomes to the See of Rome so they say he did and received them the next day of the Popes grace as a feudatary at the yearly rent of a thousand Marks for the Kingdoms of England and Ireland And did homage and swear fealty to Pope Innocent But whereas the Cardinal adds upon his own head that this was done at the special request and procurement of the Lords and Commons it is an Egregious forgery and well deserves a whetstone for all the three Orders of the kingdom Bishops Barons and Commons did protest against it in Parliament notwithstanding any private contract that might be made by King Iohn And that they would defend themselves by arms from the temporal Jurisdiction of the Pope But the other answer of Sr. Thomas More is most certain and beyond all exception that if either Henry the second or King Iohn had done any such thing it was not worth a rush nor signified any thing but the greedinesse and prophanenesse of these pretended vicars of Christ who prostituted and abused their Office and the power of the Keies to serve their base and avaritious ends and lets the world see how well they deserved to be thrust out of doores What That no man might be crowned or accounted King of England untill he were confirmed by the Pope By the Law of England Rex non moritur the King never dies And doth all acts of Soveraignty before his Coronation as well as after They robbed the Nobility of their patronages Those Churches which their Ancestours had founded and