was the chiefe and surmounted all the rest Cassiodorus hath these wordes Non multo post tempore iussio principis Episcopos vndique Ephesum conuenire praecepit No long time after the commaundement of the Emperour charged the Byshops to come from euery place to Ephesus Nicephorus writeth thus Theodosius Imperialibus literis in metropoli Epheso locorum omnium Episcopos conuenire iussit sacram Pentecostes diem qua conuenirent constituens Theodosius by vertue of his Emperiall Letters commaunded the Byshops in all places to come to the Metropolitane Church of Ephesus designing the holy Feast of Pentecost for the day In which assertion two thinges are to be marked Th' one that the Byshops come togeather at the Emperours commaundement Th' other that the Emperour appoynted both the place and the time of their meeting Sigebertus hath these wordes Tertia Synodus vniuersalis Ephesina prima ducentorum Episcoporum iussu Theodosij iunioris Augusti aedita est The third vniuersall Synode of two hundred Byshoppes was celebrated at Ephesus by the commaundement of the Emperour Theodosius the younger Loe euery Historiographer relateth the Emperours Commaundement but no mention is made of the Pope at all The fift Section of the Councell of Chalcedon The fourth generall Councell of Chalcedon of sixe hundred and thirtie Byshops against Eutyches for denying two natures in Christ after his humane assumption although he graunted him to haue had two Natures before the hypostaticall vnion was celebrated by the commaundement of the Emperour Martianus in the yeare 454 after Christ. Nuephorus hath these expresse wordes Earum rerum gratia Imperatorum literis locorum omnium Episcopis conuocatis Synodus Chalcedone est coacta quae quidem primum Nicaeae conuenerat quo etiam Romanae vrbis Episcopus Leo per Pascasini et Lucentij et aliorum Ministerium liter as miserat sed ea Chalcedonem Bythyniae est translata quod Imperator ipse Synodo ei adesse vellet magnum Constantinum imitatus In regard of these matters a Councell was gathered at Chalâ—edon and all Byshoppes sent for thither by force of the Emperours Letters which Synode at the first was assembled at Nice whither Leo the Byshoppe of the Citie of Rome sent Letters by Pascasinus Lucentius and others but it was remooued thence to Chalcedon in Bithyniae that the Emperour might be present at the Synode after the example of Constantine the great Thus writeth Nicephorus a man greatly deuoted to the Pope Out of whose wordes I note these memorable poyntes First that the Councell was assembled by the commandement of the Emperour Secondly that the Emperour appoynted where the Synode should be kept Thirdly that the Emperour translated it to Chalcedon at his owne good pleasure Fourthly that Leo is barely tearmed the Bishop of the Citie of Rome neither the Vniuersall Patriarch nor Byshopp of the Whole World Sigebertus is consonant to Nicephorus his wordes are these Instantia Leonis Papae iubente Jmperatore Martiano congregata et habita est quarta vniuersalis Synodus sexcentorum et triginta Episcoporum apud Chalcedonem The fourth generall Councell of sixe hundreth and thirtie Byshoppes was holden at Chalcedon by the commaundement of the Emperour Martian at the request of Pope Leo. Thus writeth Sigebertus the Popes owne deare Monke who was willing euery way to aduance the Pope so farre as might stand with the trueth And yet he telleth vs plainely concerning the assemblies of Byshoppes in Councelles that the Pope could onely request and that to commaund the same was in the Emperours power Euagrius in his Historie in the second Chapter and second Booke teacheth the selfe same veritie To be briefe Pope Leo in his Epistle to the Emperour Theodosius togeather with the whole Synode make humble suite vnto him to commaunde a Generall Councell within Italy his wordes and the whole Synodes are verbatim set downe in the first Aphorisme aforegoing But doubtlesse if the gathering and confirming of Councels belonged to the Byshoppe of Rome neither would the Pope nor the Romish Synode haue made suite to the Emperour in that behalfe especially for a Councell to be kept in Italy where the Popes now a dayes challenge all power both Ecclesiasticall and Secular To which I adde that the Emperours for the space of more then 450. yeares after Christ confirmed the Councels with their royall edicts This is so liuely set downe before our eyes in the most honourable fact of the Noble Spanish King Reccaredus as it is able to penetrate the very heart and throughly to perswade euery one that shall seriously ponder the same and in the feare of God This religious King Reccaredus in the yeare of our Lord God 585. commaunded all the Byshoppes within his dominions of Spaine and Gallicia being 72. in all to come togeather in his royall Citie of Toledo there to confute and condemne the Arian heresie When they were come thither the King sate downe in the middest of them and declared the cause that moued him to sende for them After that he enacted a publike Edict for the inuiolable obseruation of all the Decrees of the Councell straightly charging as well the Clergie as the Laytie to obey and keepe the same Lastly he subscribed his owne name and that before all the Byshoppes who in their due places subscribed after the King These are the expresse wordes of the Kinges subscription set downe in the end of the sayd Edict Flauius Reccaredus rex hanc deliberationem quaÌ„ cum sancta definiuimus Synodo confirmans subscripsi I Flamus Reccaredus the King confirming this Consultation which we haue defined with the holy Synode haue subscribed thereunto The next that subscribed after the King was Mausona the Metropolitane in the Prouince of Lusitania after him subscribed Euphemius the Arch-byshop of Toledo The residue followed in order as in the second Tome of Councels is to be seene These particular subscriptions I note as a matter of great moment against the Papists who will graunt no Prerogatiue or Royall place to Kinges in time of Ecclesiasticall Synodes Out of the wordes contayned in the Kinges subscription I obserue sundry golden Lessons First that the King confirmed the Councell Secondly that the King subscribed to the decrees of the Councell Thirdly that the King subscribed before all the Byshops Fourthly that the King decreed and defined the controuersies and other necessary matters togeather with the Byshops Which last Obseruation is prooued two wayes First by these words of the Councell in the 18. Canon Ex decreto Domini nostri Reccaredi regis simul cuÌ„ Sacerdotali concilio by the Decree of our soueraigne Lord Reccaredus the King togeather with the Councell of the Byshoppes Secondly by these wordes of the Kinges subscription Quam cum sancta definiuimus Synodo Which we defined with the holy Synode To all which I thinke it not amisse to adde these golden wordes of S. Augustine Quomodo ergo
possibly I could find the workes of S. Hierome who was a most diligent searcher out of Antiquities of Augustine of Ambrose and of other most learned Writers I haue reuolued the Actes of the sacred Councels which were after the councell of Nice and I finde nothing agreeable to those thinges which are read in the Popes Decrees of that Donation Holy Damasus the Pope at the request of S. Hierome gathered the Actes and doinges of his predecessours in whose worke those thinges can not be found which commonly are fathered vpon Pope Siluester Thus writeth Cardinall Cusanus affirming the supposed Donation of Constantine to be counterfeit He addeth withall in the same place many long Periodes to the same effect viz. That Constantine gaue neither the West Empire to the Pope nor yet Rauennas no nor the Citie of Rome Yea he plainely auoucheth that the Byshops of Rome acknowledged the Emperours for their Lordes that Pope Agatho graunted the Citie of Rome to belong to the Emperour Constantine who summoned the sixt generall Synode and liued more then 340. yeares after Constantine the great who is falsely reported to haue giuen away Rome Italie and the whole Westerne Empire to the Byshops of Rome Hee also affirmeth constantly that Pope Bonifacius acknowledged the Citie of Rome to pertaine to the Emperour Honorius To bee briefe Cardinall Cusanus addeth these expresse wordes Et vt breuiter dicam nullibi contrarium legi quin vsque ad illa prefata Pipini tempora Imperator remanserit in possessione locorum pretactorum nec vnquam legi aliquē Romanorum pontificum vsque ad tempora Stephani secundi in illis locis nomine sancti Petri aliquid iuris praesumpsisse habere haec credo vera esse non obstante famigera opinione de contrario quae Palea habetur quoniam absque dubio si non fuisset illud dictamen apocryphum Gratianus in veteribus codicibus et Canonum collectionibus inuenisset et quia non inuenit non posuit And to be briefe I haue no where read the contrary but that the Emperour was still in the possession of the aforenamed places vntill the dayes of Pipinus Neither did I euer read that any Byshop of Rome presumed to challenge any right in those places in the name of S. Peter vntill the time of Pope Stephanus the second This I beleeue is the trueth notwithstanding the opinion to the contrary in the Popes Decrees For without doubt if that report were not apocryphall Gratianus would haue found it in the old Bookes and collections of Canons but because he did not finde it he did not set downe the same Yea the sayd Cardinall addeth yet further that he found the same report of Constantines Donation in an other Booke in farre larger manner then it is set downe in the Popes Decrees which when he examined diligently he found by the very words thereof many argumentes of falsehood and deceitfull dealing too long to be rehearsed Much more hath the sayd Cardinall touching this feigned Donation which in regard of breuitie I omit Antonius that famous Arch-byshop and popish canonized Saint confirmeth the opinion of Cardinall de Cusa in these wordes Tertium dubium est de donatione facta ecclesiae a Constantino de qua habetur in decretis dict 96. Constantinus Sed illud cap. non habetur in antiquis decretis quid ergo et quantum donauerit non est bene certum The third doubt is of the Donation which Constantine made to the Church of which mention is made in the Decrees in the 96. Distinction and chapter Constantinus But that Chapter can not this day be found in the old Decrees What therefore and how much he gaue it is not very certaine But this is certaine by S. R. that learned Iesuites confession that the Pope was neuer personally in any Councell of the East least he being then the Emperours temporall subiect should be placed vnder the Emperour O humble Pope Raphael Volateranus a famous and graue Historiographer iumpeth with Cardinall Cusanus and Antonius in these wordes De dono Constantini aut concessione apud nullos extat authores praeter quam in libro decretorum Concerning the gyft or graunt of Constantine it can be found no where in any Writer saue onely in the booke of Decrees Paulus Cathalanus vtriusque iuris doctor and Chamberlaine to Pope Alexander the sixt who was as likely as any to know what possessions the Pope had and helde doth affirme the supposed Donation of Constantine to be a forged false and counterfeit thing of which no approoued Historiographer maketh any mention Not Eusebius sayth he who was a most diligent searcher out of Christian Antiquities He addeth that neither Hieronymus nor Augustinus nor Ambrosius nor Basilius nor Chrysostomus nor Ammianus nor the tripartite Historie nor yet Pope Damasus in his Chronicle nor Beda nor Orosius haue made any mention of the same After which large pithy and constant Narration hee addeth these expresse wordes Et constat per plures quam tercentum annos post Constantinum Imperatores tenuisse gubernacula vrbis et Italiae per duces praesides et exarchos et vrbis Romanae vsque ad tempora Innocentij secundi Sequitur et in vita Phocae Imperatoris legitur impetrasse Pantheon Bonifacium Papam ab eo Vnde ergo habuerit terras Ecclesia vide gesta Caroli magni et Pipini et Pium Papā in dicto dialogo And it is euident sayth this great learned Writer highly deuoted to the Pope that the Emperours for more then 300. yeares after Constantine kept in their handes the gouernment of the Citie and of Italie by their Chieftaines Presidentes and Exarchates and of the Citie of Rome vntill the time of Jnnocentius the second And in the life of the Emperour Phocas Pope Boniface as we read got Pantheon of him by request From whence therefore the Church of Rome had her possessions we must gather out of the Actes of Charles the great and of Pippin and of the Dialogue of Pope Pius To which I adde that Pope Pius wrote a Dialogue against the pretensed Donation For in the margent I finde these wordes Papa Pius dialogum scripsit contra donationem Constantini Pope Pius wrote a Dialogue against Constantines Donatiō Againe an other Margent following hath these wordes Argumentū forte Ca. M. Et Pipinus spoliatis veris Imperatoribus ecclesiam Romanam ditarunt Charles the great and Pipine spoyling the true Emperours enriched the Citie of Rome Marke well this is wonderfull The Popes were enriched by the robberie and spoyle of the true Emperours A thing incredible if a Papist had not reported it Laurentius Valla a very learned Writer and Citizen of Rome hath published a large Booke in print in which hee onely zealously and learnedly declameth against the falsely pretended Donation of Constantine the great His declamation touched the
importunitie to confirme the supposed Donation of Constantine obtayned with much a doe vnderpretence of the sayd Donation not the confirmation of the pretended gyft but that the Church of Rome should be the Head of all Churches Twelfely that the Byshoppes of Rome now called Popes 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 neither did nor could perswade any one of the Emperours for the space almost of three hundred yeares after that supposed Donation either to confirme the same or to make Rome the Head of all Churches Thirteenthly that neither S. Hierome nor S. Augustine nor S. Ambrose nor any approoued Historie doth make any mention of the sayd Donation Foureteenthly that of right the People of Rome not the Pope should set the Crowne vpon the Emperours head Fifteenthly that the Emperour had euer in his possessioÌ„ both Rome Italy the whole Westerne Empire vntill the dayes of King Pippine as also that Pope Boniface acknowledged the Citie of Rome to pertaine to the Emperour Honorius Sixteenthly that Cardinall Cusanus a great learned man a zealous Papist auoucheth constantly that he neuer read of any Bishop of Rome vntill the time of Stephanus the second who durst in the name of S. Peter presume to challenge any right in the aforenamed places Seauenteenthly that the Decree vpon which the Popes would ground their Superroyall pretended Prerogatiues is a false and counterfeit Narration and can not be found in the old Decrees Eighteenthly that Charles and Pippine spoyled the true Emperours so enriched the Citie of Rome Nineteenthly that Melchiades who was the next Byshop of Rome before Syluester doth roundly confute the sayd Donation as a thing falsely fathered vpon Constantine the great Twentethly that the Byshops of Rome were not peculiarly called Popes for the space of many hundred yeares after Christ. Furthermore that the Emperour is reported by the Popes counterfeit Decree to haue holden the Bridle of his Horse and to haue wayted at his Stirrope Where I wish the Reader to obserue seriously with me that the late Byshoppes of Rome haue vsed many coozening trickes especially the false Donation of Constantine and his pretensed seruice to the Pope so to aduance their state and superroyall Pompe and to cause Kinges and Emperours to kisse their feete Yet further that what so euer the Emperours of latter time gaue to the Church and Byshoppes of Rome that wholy proceeded from a sandy and rotten foundation with which the said Byshoppes and their flattering parasites seduced them viz. from a counterfeite and falsely supposed Donation of Constantinus surnamed the great Lastly that the late Popes or Byshoppes of Rome with their deuoted Popelinges are the cause of all kind of mischiefe and naughtinesse To all which so to cheere vp the Pope and his Popelinges I will adde a fine and graue testimonie of the Popes deare Fryer learned Schoole-doctor Franciscus a Victoria his wordes are these Et paulatim ad hanc intemperantiam dispensationuÌ„ deuentum est et hunc talem statum vbj nec mala nostra nec remedia pati possumus et ideo necesse est aliam rationem excogitare ad conseruandas leges Da mihi Clementes Lines Syluestros et omnia permittem arburio eorâ—m sea vt nihil grauius dicatur in recentiores Pontâ—fices certè multis partibus sunt prisâ—is illis inferiores By little and little we are brought to these inordinate Dispensations and to this so miserable state where we are neither able to endure our owne griefes nor the remedies assigned by Popes for the same And therefore we must perforce inuent some other way for conseruation of the Lawes Giue me Clements Lines Syluesters and I will commit all thinges to their charge But to say nothing grieuously against latter Popes they are doubtlesse inferiours to the old Byshoppes of Rome and that by many degrees Thus writeth this learned Fryer who if hee durst haue spoken his minde freely would haue told vs mirabilia First he exclaymeth against popish Dispensations Secondly he pitifully lamenteth the state of the Church Thirdly he cryeth out that the Popes doe lay such intollerable burthens vpoÌ„ them as they are no way able to endure the same Lastly he commendeth the old Byshoppes of Rome but vtterly so farre foorth as hee dareth condemneth the latter Popes or Byshoppes of Rome Whose assertion in very deed iumpeth with the doctrine which I defend and plainely conuinceth late Romish fayth and superstition to be but a rotten Ragge of the New religion Now let vs heare what the Iesuite is able to say for him selfe for the sauegard of the life of late start-vp Poperie B. C. To season the beginning of his Chapter with a litle of his mendatious powder he writeth thus Bonifacius Byshop of Rome and third of that name aboue sixe hundred yeares after Christ obtained of Phocas then Emperour of Rome that Rome should be the Head of all Churches Before which time no authenticall Writer can be named who euer ascribed the Headship vniuersall Gouernement of all Churches to the Church of Rome This is a manifest vntrueth In the Councell of Chalcedon Maximus Byshop of Antioch was confirmed by Leo the first Pope Iulius the first restored Athanasius Patriarch of Alexandria to his seate Paulus Patriarch of Constantinople and Marcellus Byshop of Ancyra deposed vniustly by an Easterne Synode as writeth Sozomenus whose wordes be these For as much as the care of all did belong to him for the dignitie of his Seate hee restored to euery of them their Church T. B. I answere first that is lying slaundering and false dealing were once set apart our Jesuites irkesome fond disputation would soone haue an end For first the famous Councell of Chalcedon was conuented holden by the commandement of Martianus the Emperour and not of Pope Leo as is euident and manifest to euery child in the very beginning of the 7. Action quoted by our Jesuite Againe the Fathers of that famous Councell acknowledge them-selues to haue come thither at the Emperours commaundement to make peace betweene Maximus byshop of Antioch and Juuenalis Byshop of Hierusalem These are the expresse wordes of the Iudges themselues Gloriosissimj Iudices dixerunt diuiniss et pijss noster Dominus Jmperator rogatus a Maximo et Juuenale sanctissimis Episcopis praecopit nos agnoscere de motis inter eos capitulis The most glorious Iudges said The most holy and religious Emperour our Lord being intreated of the most holy Byshops Maximus and Juuenalis commaunded vs to examine the coÌ„trouersies betweene them Thirdly it was the Councell not Pope Leo that confirmed Maximus and concluded a peaceable vnitie betweene him and Iuuenalis Fourthly no mention is made at all of Pope Leo who is not so much as once named in the said action of the holy and famous Councell Fiftly Anatolius the most reuerend Arch-byshop of New Rome confirmed by expresse wordes the aforenamed Vnitie
Reges Domino seruiunt in timore nisi ea quae contra iussa Domini fiunt religiosa seueritate prohibendo atque plectendo Aliter N. seruit quia homo est aliter quia etiam et rex est Quia homo est ei seruit viuendo fideliter quia vero etiam Rex est seruit leges iusta praecipientes et contraria prohibentes conuenienti vigore sanctiendo sicut seruiuit Ezechias Lucos et Templa Idolorū et illa excelsa quae contra praecepta Dei fuerant constructa destruendo sicut seruiuit Iosias talia et ipse faciendo sicut seruiuit rex Niniuitarum vniuersam Ciuitatem ad placandum Dominum compellendo sicut seruiuit Darius Idolum frangendum in potestatem Danieli dando et inimicos eius Leonibus ingerendo sicut seruiuit Nabuchodonosor omnes in regno suo positos a blasphemando Deo lege terribili prohibendo In hoc ergo seruiunt Domino Reges in quantum sunt Keges cum ea faciunt ad seruiendum illi quae non possunt facere nisi Reges How doe Kinges serue God in feare but by punishing with religious seueritie such thinges as are against Gods lawes For the King serueth God one way as he is man an other way as he is King As he is man he serues God in lyuing as becommeth an honest Christian as he is King he serues God in making sharpe Lawes to the furtheraunce of Vertue and to the suppressing of Vice As Ezechias serued God while he destroyed the Groues and Temples of Idols and those Hie places which were erected against Gods lawes As Josias serued God while he performed the same or like dueties As the King of the Niniuites serued God in compelling the whole Citie to serue God As Nabuchodonosor serued God while he with very sharpe Lawes terrified all his subiectes from blaspheming the euerliuing God In this therefore Kings serue God as they are Kinges when they doe that for the seruice of God which none but Kinges can doe Thus writeth S. Austin that auncient Father that holy Writer that learned Doctor that strong Piller that worthy Champion of Christes Church Out of whose Discourse I obserue many thinges well worthy to be engrauen in Marble with Golden letters in perpetuam rei memoriam First that Kinges serue God when they religiously punish sinne Secondly that Kinges serue God as they be men when they liue as it becommeth faythfull and honest Christians Thirdly that Kinges serue God as they be Kinges when they make Godly lawes to aduance Vertue and to suppresse Vice Fourthly that it belongeth to the office dutie and charge of Kings to purge the Church and House of God from Heresies Errours Superstition and Idolatrie Fiftly that it appertaineth to the charge and office of Kinges to punish Blasphemie and to cause their Subiectes to liue religiously and in the feare of God Sixtly that this holy Father and great learned Doctor vtterly condemneth the Popes Fayth and Doctrine while he denyeth all authoritie to Kinges in Church causes and Ecclesiasticall affaires and maketh them onely executors of his Lawes Will and good Pleasure For which respect the same holy Father soone after addeth these expresse wordes Quis mente sobrius Regibus dicat Nolite curare in regno vestro a quo teneatur vel oppugnetur Ecclesia Domini vestri non ad vos pertineat in regno vestro quis velit esse siue religiosus siue sacrilegus Who well in his Wittes will say thus to Kinges Haue no regard neither take any care who within your Kingdome either protect or oppugne the Church of God you haue no charge neither doth it pertaine to your office who in your Kingdome be Religious or who be Sacrilegious Seuenthly that Kinges haue charge not onely of the bodyes of their Subiectes but much more of their soules Which not onely S. Austen fayth but the whole course of Scripture teacheth the same For the godly Kinges as well in time of the Law of Moyses as in the time of the New Testament and law of Grace did manage all matters both of Church and Common-weale For which cause the Ciuill Magistrate was commaunded to read the whole Booke of the Law as well of the first as of the second Table and to studie the same night and day For which cause the Ciuill Magistrate was commaunded to goe out and in before the people and to lead them out and in that the congregation of the Lord should not be as Sheepe without a Shepheard For which cause the Booke of the Law was deliuered into the Kings handes at such time as he receiued the Crowne and was annoynted King Lastly and this striketh dead that Kings as Kings serue God when they doe those things which none but Kinges can doe If this golden Periode were soundly vnderstood and perfectly kept in memorie it alone would be enough to trample Pope and Poperie vnder foote For I pray you sir Frier did not Constantinus surnamed the great Theodesius the elder Theodosius the younger and Martianus gather the foure first generall Councels of Nice Constantinople Ephesus and Chalcedon which Pope Gregorie did reuerence as the foure Ghospels did they not call the same Synodes as they were Emperours Kinges and Monarches I wote they did it is already prooued it can not be denyed What Did not Reccaredus as King commaunde all the Byshops of Spaine and Gallicia to assemble themselues before him at Toledo there to decide and determine causes ecclesiasticall did he not tell them the cause why he sent for them did he not sit downe among them did he not define with them did he not subscribe before all the Byshops did he not confirme the Decrees and Canons of the Councell with his royall edict we haue already seene it wee haue viewed the very wordes it is prooued most manifestly Now let vs duely ponder and throughly vnderstand what of necessitie must be inferred heereupon S. Austin affirmeth constantly that when Kinges serue God as Kings then doe they that which none but Kings can doe But so it is that Reccaredus and the other Kings both called confirmed Councels as they were Kings for it is already prooued ergo Kinges and none but Kings can call and confirme holy Councels and sacred Synodes The reason is S. Austens when he resolutely auoucheth that while Kinges serue God as Kinges they doe that which none but Kinges can doe for if Kinges as Kinges call and confirme Councels none doubtlesse which are no Kinges can doe the same And consequently no Byshop no not the Pope of Rome hath authoritie to gather Councels or to confirme the same Two thinges onely the Pope may in shew of wordes seeme to obiect for himselfe obiection 1 Th' one that Kinges doe not call or confirme Councels as they be Kinges but rather as the Seruantes or Deputies of the Pope obiection 2 Th' other that the Pope is not onely a Byshoppe but a King also To