that in a matter of faith concerning the whole state of the Church Zozimus as in order and honour first amongst Bishops might vrge them by vertue of the Canons appointing such meetings to meete together in a Synode for the suppressing of such heresies as he found to arise amongst them and might justly threaten if they should refuse so to doe to reject them from the communion of the Bishops and Churches adhering to him and thereby lay an Ecclesiasticall necessity vpon them without any claime of vniversall power Neither doth the next place wherein Augustine and the Bishops assembled in the Councell of Mileuis desire Innocentius to concurre with them in suppressing the heresies of the Pelagians which sought to spread themselues into all parts of the world and to vse his pastorall care and diligence for the preventing of the dangers of the weake members of Christ yeeld any better proofe that they reputed him vniversall Bishop For what doe they here attribute to the Bishop of Rome that Cyprian writing to Stephen in the case of Martianus Bishop of Arle doth not assume to himselfe other his colleagues saying of himselfe thē that they are bound to vse all diligence to gather together and call backe the erring sheepe of Christ to apply the medicine of fatherly piety for the curing of the wounds and hurts of such as are fallen to recollect and cherrish al the sheepe that Christ purchased with his precious bloud to know that though they be many Pastours yet they feed but one flocke But sayth Bellarmine why do they not rather write to the Patriarch of Hierusalem to the Metropolitane of Palaestina or to the Primate of Africa in which parts of the world Pelagianisme specially seemed to preuaile then to the Bishop of Rome if they did not thinke him to haue an vniuersall power Surely this question of the Cardinall sheweth that either he knoweth not or careth not what he writeth for the cause of Pelagius had beene often heard and examined by Synodes of Bishops in Palaestina and the Primate of Africa with his Africane Bishops did write to Innocentius as well as Augustine and those assembled in the Councell of Mileuis as well to informe him of the guilefull fraudulent and slipperie dealings of Pelagius that hee might no way be induced to fauour him as some feared not to giue out that he did as also that he might be perswaded to put to his helping hand for the suppressing of this heretique who though condemned by many Synodes ceased not to flie from place to place seeking to spread his heresies therefore there was no cause that they should write to either of these Thus haue our Aduersaries found nothing in Augustine and the Africanes that any way fauoureth the Popes proud claime of vniuersall power Neither do the rest of the witnesses who are next brought forth to giue testimonie for the Pope depose any more to the purpose then the former haue done For that Prosper saith Rome the See of Peter being made the head of Pastorall honour to the world holdeth by religion whatsoeuer it possesseth not by force of armes and that by reason of the principality of Priestly or Bishoply dignity it became greater in respect of the high tower of religion then the throne of princely power that Victor Vticensis calleth the Church of Rome the head of all Churches Hugo de Sancto Victore sayth the Apostolique See is preferred before all the Churches in the world is no more then that wee euer granted For they all speake of a chieftie and principality of order and honour and not of absolute commanding power And the place which our Aduersaries bring out of Vincentius Lirinensis to proue the Pope to be head of the world is strangely missealleaged For hauing spoken of the letters of Faelix the Martyr and holy Iulius Bishop of Rome he addeth that blessed Cyprian was produced out of the South and holy Ambrose out of the North that so not only Caput orbis the head of the world but the sides of it also might giue testimony to that iudgment by the head and sides of the world vnderstanding the parts of the world whence these witnesses were produced and not the witnesses themselues So that there is no more reason to inferre from hence that the Bishop of Rome is head of all the world then that Cyprian and Ambrose were the sides of the world Neither doe the testimonies of Cassiodore who attributeth to the Bishop of Rome a generall care of the whole Christian world and Beda who sayth Leo excercised the Priestly office in the Christian world make any more for proofe of the Popes vniuersall jurisdiction then the rest that went before For their sayings argue not an absolute vniuersall commaunding power ouer all but such a care of the whole as beseemeth him that is in order and honour the chiefe of Bishops from whom all actions generally concerning the Christian Church are either to take beginning or at least to be referred before finall ending that so his aduice may be had therein And surely howsoeuer Anselmus sayth the custodie of the faith of Christians and the regiment of the Church is committed to the Bishop of Rome and Bernard writeth of him that he is chiefe of Bishops heire of the Apostles in primacie Abel in gouernement Noah in Patriarchicall honour Abraham in order Melchizedek in dignity Aaron in authoritie Moses in iudgment Samuel in power Peter and in vnction Christ that others haue particular flockes assigned to them but that his charge hath no limits with such like Hyperbolical amplificatiōs of the Popes greatnes sauouring of the corruptiō of those late times wherein he liued yet wil it neuer be proued that either he or diuers others speakinges he did were of the Papall faction or beleeued that the Pope hath that vniuersall power and iurisdiction that is by the Iesuits and other Romanists at this day giuen vnto him For as Iohn Bacon a learned Schooleman and countriman of ours hath fitly noted some attributed all those things whereof Bernard and Anselmus speake to the Pope as thinking all fulnesse of Ecclesiasticall power and jurisdiction to be originally found in him and that by himselfe alone hee might doe all things in the gouernment of the Church and all other were to receiue of his fulnesse which is the opinion of our aduersaries at this day Other attributed these thinges vnto him not as hauing all power in himselfe alone but as head chiefe of Bishops together with their ioynt concurrence and assent So that hee had power to iudge of the faith to determine controuersies in religion as Patriarch of the West with the ioynt consent of his Westerne Bishops and as prime Bishoppe of the world with an Oecumenicall Synode wherein he was to sitte as an honourable president moderatour pronouncing according to the resolution of the Bishops and
famous in all ages the testimony of the Pastors of an Apostolique church successiuely deliuered frō the beginning not the present testimony of an Apostolicall church Thirdly we will neuer admit any pretended traditions vnlesse they may be confirmed vnto vs by one of these rules if our Adversaries can proue any of their supposed traditions by these rules wee will willingly acknowledge them and therefore I know no reason why we may not make claime vnto them He addeth that I condemne priuate interpretations as if euer any Protestant had allowed any priuate interpretation in that sense that I dislike it or as if our Religion were grounded vpon priuate interpretations But the good man might haue beene pleased to remember that in the place cited by him I distinguish three kindes of private interpretations whereof one is named priuate for that they that so interprete neglect the common rules of direction rely vpon secret revelations knowne to none but themselues and despise the iudgment of other men Another because the person so interpreting is priuate and yet presumptuously taketh vpon him to force all others to embrace the same hauing no authority so to do The 3d is whē as the person is of private conditiō so he seeketh only to satisfie himself in it no way presumeth to prescribe to others to follow that he resolueth on farther then by reason higher authority he can inforce the same The first kind of private interpretations we detest accurse The 2. we condemne as presumptuous The 3d we approue so do our Adversaries for ought I know and therefore I know not to what purpose hee citeth this saying of mine that priuate men may not so propose their interpretations as if they would bind all other men to embrace and receiue them That which followeth that I make three kindes of interpretation and affirme that none haue authority so to interprete Scripture as that they may subject all that dissent from the same to excommunication and censures of like nature but Bishops assembled in a generall Councell is so true that neither hee nor any other in his right wits will euer deny it For who hath authority so to interprete Scripture as to subiect them to excommunication that dissent but the gouernors of the church and who so as to subject all that dissent but they that are the gouernors of the whole as are the Bishops of the whole Christian church assembled in a generall Councel But saith he Protestants haue neuer had any generall Councell therefore they haue no warranted interpretations of Scripture If this consequence be good the Christians for the space of 300 yeares after Christ had no warranted interpretations of Scripture for till the reigne of Constantine there was no generall councell But the Protestants can haue no generall councell therefore they haue not amongst them the highest supreme binding authority judgment Surely wee confesse that being but a part of the Christian church they cannot haue a Councell absolutely generall out of themselues alone and therefore not hauing the highest binding authority amongst them it being found only in the whole vniuersall church they do not take vpon thē so to interprete Scriptures as to subiect all to excommunication that refuse their interpretations but such particular churches persons only as are vnder their jurisdiction The Papists indeede in the heigth of their pride being but a part contemning all other interessed in the supreame binding judgement as well as themselues assume and appropriate it to themselues alone in which claime we may rather see the height of their pride thē the cleernesse of their right and therefore the Grecians impute all the diuisions and breaches of the Christian world vnto them in that they presumed of themselues without them to interprete the Scriptures and to define certain questions touching the faith in such sort that they subjected them to Anathema excommunication so casting them all into hell as much as lay in them These inconsiderate proceedings and rash censures did such harme that the wisest most religious moderate in the Latine Church wished they had neuer beene passed or that they were reuersed called backe again But saith he let any man enter into a serious consideration of Protestant doctrine in this point that vnder paine of damnation we are bound to find and follow the truth that generall Councels as before may subiect euery man disobeying their determinations to excommunication and censures of like nature the most terrible and fearefull punishment of this world and all iudgments Ecclesiasticall euen generall Councels may erre haue erred even in things pertayning to God as is defined in their Articles and is commonly taught beleeued with them this consideration is able to put men not regardlesse of saluation into more then a quaking palsey What the meaning of the good man is in this passage I doe not well conceiue For I see not but all these considerations may well stand together that the trueth is to be found out followed vpon paine of damnation that Councels may erre and yet haue power to subiect such as disobey their determinations to excommunication the most terrible and fearefull punishment of this world without any danger of causing men to fall into a quaking palsey For are they all in state of damnation that are excommunicated whether iustly or vniusty or may no man subiect men to excommunication but hee that cannot erre Surely all men knowe that not onely Popes and particular Bishops but euen generall Councels may erre in matters of fact and excommunicate a man vniustly for resisting their determinations And doth not Saint Augustine shew that by the meanes of preuailing factions men may be vniustly excommunicated and neuer restored to the outward communion of the church againe and yet die in state of saluation nay bee rewarded for the patient enduring of the wrongs offered them by them by whom they were excommunicate It is no such absurd thing then that they may erre who haue authority to excōmunicate But perhaps his meaning is that if Coūcels may erre there is no certaine way to find out the truth which yet euery man is bound vpon perill of damnation to find and follow and that it is the consideration hereof that is able to put a man into a quaking palsey Surely this man seemeth to feare where there is no feare for are there no other meanes to find out the truth when questions and doubts trouble the church and distract the mindes of men but generall Councels How did the Fathers in the Primitiue Church during the time of the first three hundred yeares satisfie themselues and such as depended of them in the midst of so many so horrible and damnable heresies as then rose vp Doth not Bellarmine from hence inferre that though generall Councells be a very fit and good meanes to end controversies and settle the differences that may arise in the church
Chap. 2. Of the sufficiencie of the Scripture 232. Chap. 3. Of the originall text of Scripture of the certainty and truth of the originals and of the authority of the vulgar translation 238. Chap. 4. Of the translating of the Scripture into vulgar languages and of the necessitie of hauing the publique liturgie and prayers of the Church in a tongue vnderstood ibid. Chap. 5. Of the three supposed different estates of meere nature grace and sinne the difference betweene a man in the state of pure and meere nature and in the state of sinne and of originall sinne 250. Chap. 6. Of the blessed virgins conception 264. Chap. 7. Of the punishment of originall sin and of Limbus puerorum 270. Chap. 8. Of the remission of originall sinne and of concupiscence remaining in the regenerate 272. Chap. 9. Of the distinction of veniall and mortall sinne 277. Chap. 10. Of free will 279. Chap. 11. Of iustification 290. Chap. 12. Of merit 324. Chap. 13. Of workes of supererogation and Counsels of perfection 331. Chap. 14. Of Election and Reprobation depending on the foresight of something in the parties elected or reiected ibid. Chap. 15. Of the seauen Sacraments 332. Chap. 16. Of the being of one body in many places at the same time ibid. Chap. 17. Of transubstantiation 333. Chap. 18. Touching orall Manducation 334. Chap. 19. Of the reall sacrificing of Christs body on the Altar as a propitiatory sacrifice for the quicke and dead 335. Chap. 20. Of remission of sinnes after this life ibid. Chap. 21. Of Purgatory 336. Chap. 22. Of the Saints hearing of our prayers 337. Chap. 23. Of the superstition and idolatrie committed formerly in the worshipping of Images 338. Chap. 24. Of Absolution ibid. Chap. 25. Of Indulgences and Pardons 339. Chap. 26. Of the infallibility of the Popes iudgment 340. Chap. 27. Of the power of the Pope in disposing the affaires of Princes and their states ibid. The fourth Booke is of the Priuiledges of the Church CHAP. 1. OF the diuerse kindes of the priuiledges of the Church and of the different acceptions of the name of the Church 343. Chap. 2. Of the different degrees of infallibility found in the Church 344. Chap. 3. Of the meaning of certaine speaches of Caluine touching the erring of the Church 345. Chap. 4. Of their reasons who thinke the present Church free from all error in matters of faith 346. Chap. 5. Of the promises made vnto the Church how it is secured from errour of the different degrees of the obedience wee owe vnto it 348. Chap. 6. Of the Churches office of teaching and witnessing the truth and of their errour who thinke the authority of the Church is the rule of our faith and that shee may make new articles of faith 350. Chap. 7. Of the manifold errors of Papists touching the last resolution of our faith and the refutation of the same 351. Chap. 8. Of the last resolution of true faith and whereupon it stayeth it selfe 355. Chap. 9. Of the meaning of those words of Augustine that he would not beleeue the Gospell if the authority of the Church did not moue him 358. Chap. 10. Of the Papists preferring the Churches authority before the Scripture ibid. Chap. 11. Of the refutation of their errour who preferre the authority of the Church before the Scripture 359. Chap. 12. Of their errour who thinke the Church may make new articles of faith 361. Chap. 13. Of the Churches authority to iudge of the differences that arise touching matters of faith 362. Chap. 14. Of the rule of the Churches iudgment 364. Chap. 15. Of the Challenge of Papists against the rule of Scripture charging it with obscurity and imperfection 365. Chap. 16. Of the interpretation of Scripture and to whom it pertaineth 366. Chap. 17. Of the interpretation of the Fathers and how farre wee are bound to admit it 368. Chap. 18. Of the diuerse senses of Scripture 369. Chap. 19. Of the rules we are to follow and the helpes wee are to trust to in interpreting the Scriptures 372. Chap. 20. Of the supposed imperfection of Scriptures and the supply of Traditions 373. Chap. 21. Of the rules whereby true Traditions may be knowne from counterfeit 378. Chap. 22. Of the difference of bookes Canonicall and Apocryphall ibid. Chap. 23. Of the Canonicall and Apocryphall bookes of Scripture 379. Chap. 24. Of the vncertainty and contrariety found amongst Papists touching books Canonicall and Apocryphall now controuersed 382. Chap. 25. Of the diuerse editions of the Scripture and in what tongue it was originally written 385. Chap. 26. Of the Translations of the old Testament out of Hebrew into Greeke 387. Chap. 27. Of the Latin translations and of the authority of the vulgar Latine 388. Chap. 28. Of the trueth of the Hebrew Text of Scripture 390. Chap. 29 Of the supposed corruptions of the Greeke text of Scripture ibid. Chap. 30. Of the power of the Church in making Lawes 393. Chap. 31. Of the bounds within which the the power of the Church in making lawes is contained and whether shee may make lawes concerning the worship of God 394. Chap. 32. Of the nature of Lawes and how they binde 397. Chap. 33. Of the nature of Conscience and how the conscience is bound ibid. Chap. 34. Of their reasons who thinke that humane Lawes do binde the Conscience 399. The fifth booke is concerning the diuers degrees orders and callings of those men to whom the gouernment of the Church is committed CHAP. 1. OF the Primitiue and first Church of God in the house of Adam the Father of all the liuing and the gouernement of same 409. Chap. 2. Of the dignity of the first borne amongst the sonnes of Adam and their Kingly and Priestly direction of the rest 410. Chap. 3. Of the diuision of the preeminences of the first borne amongst the sonnes of Iacob when they came out of Aegypt and the Church of God became Nationall 411. Chap. 4. Of the separation of Aaron and his sonnes from the rest of the sonnes of Leui to serue in the Priests office and of the head or chiefe of that company 412. Chap. 5. Of the Priests of the second ranke or order 413. Chap. 6. Of the Leuites 414. Chap. 7. Of the sects and factions in religion found amongst the Iewes in latter times ibid. Chap. 8. Of Prophets and Nazarites 416. Chap. 9. Of Assemblies vpon extraordinary occasions 417. Chap. 10. Of the set Courts amongst the Iewes their authority and continuance 418. Chap. 11. Of the manifestation of God in the flesh the causes thereof and the reason why the second Person in the Trinity rather tooke flesh then either of the other 423. Chap. 12. Of the manner of the vnion that is between the Person of the Sonne of God and our nature in Christ and the similitudes brought to expresse the same 429. Chap. 13. Of the communication of the properties of eyther nature in Christ consequent vpon the vnion of them in his Person
of rest till the day of the resurrection Yea it is knowne to all them that haue perused the monuments of Antiquitie that Iraeneus Iustin Martyr Tertullian and sundry others were of opinion that none of the iust are in Heauen till the end and consummation of all things but that they are below in some part of hell or in some hidden inuisible place sequestred from the presence of God till the second comming of the sonne of man Now seeing the inuocation of Saints presupposeth that they pray for vs in particular and particular prayer for vs knowledge of our wants which the presence and sight of God is supposed to afford them if they do not yet enioy the presence of God as many of the Auncient though falsely did thinke wee see not how in their iudgment there should be any safe and fruitfull inuocating of them For the absence from GOD and the not enioying of his sight and presence is the reason alleaged by our adversaries why the Fathers in the time before Christ neither prayed in particular for the Church on earth nor were prayed vnto as being in Lymbus and not in heauen Howsoever it is most certaine if we looke into the auncient practise of the Church that the Saints in their anniuersarie solemnities and holy daies were not prayed vnto but remembred only proposed for imitation rather prayed for then prayed vnto as it appeareth by that Innocentius reporteth that in the Feast of blessed Leo the auncient custome was to pray that the solemnitie of that day and the oblations then offered might bee auaileable to his soule for the encrease and consummation of his glory which since hath beene altered the prayer is now that by his mediation this Festivall solemnity may availe and be to the good of them that obserue and keepe it So that it cannot be shewed by our adversaries that before the auncient Liturgies were abandoned and those brought in by Gregory had gotten into their place there was any invocation of the Saints found in the publique prayers of the Church but when their names were remembred men prayed only to God that he would giue them grace to follow their examples make them partakers of that happinesse which those blessed ones already enjoy And at that time when this alteration began the invocation was not brought into the Liturgie and publique prayers of the Church in direct forme but men prayed still vnto God only though desiring him the rather to respect them for that not only their brethren on earth but they also that are in heauen cease not prostrate before his sacred Majestie to pray for them Neither is there any other forme of prayer found in the Missall but in the sequences and Litanies onely Wherefore to conclude this matter concerning the invocation and adoration of Saints and Angels seeing the Fathers did not in their sette courses of devotion make prayers to the Saints but when they had particular occasions to speake or thinke of them vsed doubtfull compellations desiring them if they had sense of these things to be remembrancers for them vnto God seeing for ought we know the Saints are not particularly acquainted with the state of things here below seeing no degree of spirituall worship is to bee giuen to any creature we invocate them not but pray vnto God onely assuring our selues that if they can heare vs or any way further our suites they will doe it when we pray vnto God as Augustine rightly obserueth We adore them not but rest in the judgment of the same Augustine that the Saints are to be honoured for imitation but not to be adored for Religion that they doe not seeke desire or accept any such honour but will haue vs to worship God onely being glad that we are their fellow-servants in well-doing The Romanists evasion that God is onely to bee adored with that highest kinde of religious worship which is named Latria which yeeldeth to him that is worshipped infinite greatnesse but the Saints may be adored with an inferiour kinde of religious worship named Doulia is directly contrary to Augustine who speaking of Saints Angels saith Honoramus eos charitate non servitute Wee honour them with the honour of loue but not of Doulia or service If they say they haue this distinction frō Austine it is true but he doth not vse it to this purpose to make difference of two sorts of religious or spirituall worship the highest degree whereof should be Latria the lowest Doulia neither doth he anywhere call the honour giuen to Saints Doulia but nameth it the honour of loue and fellowship but he vseh to distinguish religious worship euery degree whereof he calleth Latria from that externall and ciuill worship dutie and seruice that men yeeld to their Princes Masters and Rulers which is fitly named Doulia a seruice but it is servitus corporis non animae a seruice of the body and not of the minde For men notwithstanding this servitude haue their mindes and their thoughts free as being knowne to none nor ouerruled by none but GOD onely But the service of the spirit and minde in the lowest degree that can be imagined is due vnto GOD onely and not to bee giuen to any creature for no creature knoweth the secrets of our hearts no creatute can prescribe lawes touching the inward actions thoughts of the mind not hauing knowledge of them nor power to punish them that should offend It is therefore an impious conceipt of the Papists that the Saints both can and doe know all our inward actions and secret thoughts approuing or reprouing excusing or accusing them and that as presidents of our whole life and conuersation and that therefore they are to bee honoured and worshipped with spirituall service or seruice of the spirit and minde Thus then it is true the Centurie writers report that in the third and fourth age after Christ there were some beginnings of that superstition which afterwards grew to be intolerable in the adoration and inuocation of Saints and Angels but neither they nor wee are so ignorant as to thinke that the inuocation of Saints or the adoration of them preuailed in the Church within the compasse of the first six hundred yeares neither doe they as Bellarmine is pleased to slaunder them taxe that as idolatry in the Romane Church which they find to haue beene the practise of all the Fathers for they finde nothing of the Romish Idolatry in these glorious lights of the Christian world CHAP. 21. Of Martyrdome and the excessiue prayses there◅f found in the Fathers THe next allegation against them is touching Martyrdome which Bellarmine saith they suppose the Fathers did too immoderately and excessiuely magnifie and extoll The reason of this their censure hee thinketh is because they will not admitte it to bee a kinde of Baptisme and to wash away sinne as both the Romanists and the Fathers teach For the better
to their after-commers by succession but in steed of immediate calling wee haue now succession in steed of infallibility of judgment the direction of their writings guiding vs to the finding out of the truth in steede of Generall commission particular Assignation of seuerall Churches to rule and parts of Christs flocke to feed in steed of miraculous gifts and the Apostles power to conferre them a setled course of Schooles and Vniuersities fitting men for the worke of the Ministery insteed of their Miracles wherewith they confirmed their doctrine the Faith already receiued and by so many generations recommended vnto vs as confirmed by the Apostles Miracles at the first Neither was it fit as Saint Augustine noteth that these miraculous courses should still haue continued For euen as a man that neuer had seene the seede cast into the earth and there rotting and the trees dead in Winter after reuiuing and flourishing againe in their appointed time would wonder no lesse at it then if he should see a blind man receiue sight or a dead man life but now that these things are ordinary wee little esteeme them so if those miraculous things appearing in the Apostles and first Ministers of Christ which with their newnesse and strangenesse moued much at the first should haue beene continued still they would haue grown into contempt and not haue beene regarded at all All that which hath beene sayd touching the dignity Apostolicall and the things properly pertaining to it is so cleare and euident that wise and judicious men make no question of any part thereof Yet are there some that seeme to doubt whether the Apostles generally had immediate calling or vniuersality of commission supposing that Peter onely was immediately designed by Christ and the rest by him that he onely had an illimited commission without all restraint and the rest an inferiour commission to that of Peter bounded and stinted Touching the first of these doubts Bellarmine whose manner it is not to conceale the diuisions and differences that are or haue beene amongst the Friends and Louers of the Church of Rome but to write them in the forehead of euery controuersie sheweth that there are three opinions amongst the Diuines of the Romish Church touching this point The first that as well the Apostles as succeeding Bishops receiued their power and and jurisdiction from Peter and his supposed successour the Bishop of Rome The second that both Apostles and Bishops receiued their Ecclesiasticall power and jurisdiction immediately from Christ and not from Peter nor his Successours The third that Bishops receiue their jurisdiction from the Pope but that the Apostles receiued all their power and jurisdiction immediately from CHRIST and not from Peter The Second of these opinions is wholly true and I will in due place confirme the same The third in part true and in part false which Bellarmine followeth and the first wholly false which hee largely and substantially confuteth prouing first that the Apostles receiued all their jurisdiction and power immediately from Christ and not from Peter as well out of the words of our Sauiour when hee sayth As my Father sent mee soe send I you as out of the election of Matthias who was not chosen by Peter or the other Apostles but designed immediatly by God himselfe shewing by direction of the Lot falling on Matthias that it was hee whom hee would haue to succede into the void roome of Iudas the Traytour adding that the Apostles gaue him no authority and that Paul professeth the same touching himselfe protesting that hee receiued all his power and Iurisdiction immediately from Christ and thereby prouing himselfe to be an Apostle Secondly he proueth that the fullnesse of all Ecclesiasticall power was committed to all the Apostles in as large and ample sort as to Peter by the testimonies of Chrysostome and Theophylact and that Christ by those words As my Father sent mee so send I you made all the Apostles his Vicars or Vicegerents yea gaue them his owne office and authority and out of Cyrill that by these words he made them Apostles and Doctours of the whole world and that to let them know that in Apostolique power hee gaue them all Ecclesiasticall power he sayd vnto them As my Father sent me so send I you it being certaine that the Father sent the Sonne with all fulnesse of power Farther he addeth out of Cyprian that the same fulnesse of power was giuen vnto the rest of the Apostles by those words As my Father sent me so send I you that was promised to Peter by those I will giue thee the keyes of the Kingdome of Heauen performed by those other Feed my Sheep feed my Lambes Now saith he it is certain that by those words I will giue thee the keyes of the Kingdome of Heauen and by those other Feed my sheep c. is vnderstood all fulnesse of Iurisdiction both inward and outward therefore the fulnesse of Ecclesiasticall power and Iurisdiction was giuen to euery one of the Apostles Thus then the Cardinall confesseth first that all the Apostles were immediately taught of God without learning any thing of Peter or needing in any thing to be confirmed by him Secondly that their commission was generall so that there was not any act of Ecclesiasticall Ministery to which their commission did not extend nor any places in which nor persons towardes whom they might not performe the acts of their Ministery Thirdly that they receiued all this authority and power immediatly from Christ and not from Peter and that therefore they could neither be limited nor wholly restrained by him in the vse and exercise of the same Thus doth hee ouerthrow the whole frame and fabrique of their building who ground the pretended supremacy of the Pope vpon Christs words spoken to Peter For to what purpose doe they vrge that to Peter onely Christ said Feede my Sheepe c that to him onely he gaue the keyes of the Kingdome of Heauen and vpon him onely promised to build his Church seeing they are forced to confesse that the commission of feeding Christs sheepe was giuen in as ample sort to the rest as to Peter that they all receiued the whole power of the keyes that the Church was builded vpon the rest as well as vpon Peter and equally founded vpon them all If the Cardinall shall shrinke from this his confession we can easily force him to it againe and make him acknowledge that whatsoeuer Christ promised intended or performed by any of his speeches directed vnto Peter he performed to all Christ said specially to Peter Feede my sheepe yet had the rest our Adversaries being Iudges the same commission Hee promised to him the keyes of the Kingdome of Heauen so that what hee should binde on Earth should bee bound in Heauen hee named him Peter and promised vpon that Rocke to build his Church yet all receiued the same keyes as well as he the same power of binding and
generall state of the Church or of the principall most eminent highest parts members of the same none of which things might bee proceeded in without the Bishop of Rome and his Colleagues but otherwise he was not to intermeddle with inferiour persons and causes within the Iurisdiction of other Patriarches neither immediatly nor vpon appeale and complaint The 7 t◠Roman Bishop brought to testifie for the absolute supreme power of Popes is Gelasius out of whom two things are alledged The first is that he saith the See of Peter hath power to loose that which the Bishops of other Churches haue bound The second that it hath power to judge of euery Church that no Church may judge of the judgment of it For answer to this testimony of Gelasius first we say that the Church of Rome may not meddle with reviewing re-examining or reversing the acts of other Churches proceeding against Lay-men or inferiour Cleargy-men Secondly that in the case of a Bishop complaining of wrong by the authority of the Councell of Sardica she might interpose her selfe not so as to bring the matter to Rome there to be heard but so farre forth onely as to commaund and appoint a review to be taken by the Bishops of the next bordering Province or at the most to send some Cōmissioners to sit with such second Iudges Thirdly that in cases which concerned the principall Patriarches whether they were differences between them their Bishops or between themselues the chiefe See as the principall part of the whole Church might interpose it self Neither was this proper to the See of Rome for other Patriarchs likewise of the higher thrones might interpose thēselues in matters concerning the Patriarchs of inferiour thrones whence it is that Basil writing to Athanasius Bishop of the second See telleth him that the ordering of the Church of Antioch which was the 3d See did pertain to him that he was to see to the setling of things there though the quieting of the whole East required the helpe of the Occidentall Bishops Cyril in the case of Nestorius not yet fully established in the right of a Patriarch intermedled proceeded so far as to reject him his adherents frō the cōmunion of the churches of Egypt Lybia Pentapolis But the B. of the inferior thrones might not judge the superior therfore Iohn of Antioch of the 3d See is reprehended reproued for judging Cyril Bishop of the 2d See Dioscorus Bishop of the 2d See is condemned in the councel of Chalcedon as for other things so for this amōg other that he presumed to judge the first See So that this is it which Gelasius saith that the See of Rome that is the Bishop of Rome and the Bishops of the West may iudge and examine the differences betweene Patriarches or between Patriarches and their Bishops but neither so peremptorily nor finally but that such iudgement may be reuiewed and reexamined in a generall Councell and that no other particular Church or See may iudge the Church of Rome seeing euery other See is inferiour to it no way denying but that a generall Councell may review reēxamine and reuerse the acts iudgements of the Romane See as being greater and of more ample authority Neither truely can there be any better proofe against the pretended supremacie of the Popes then this Epistle the circumstances whereof are these Acatius Bishop of Constantinople for communicating with certaine Eutichian Heretickes was by the See of Rome condemned some disliked his proceeding against him because a Synode was not specially summoned for the purpose especially seeing he was Bishop of the Princely citty Gelasius standeth not vpon the claime of vniuersall power thereby to iustifie his proceeding but aunswereth First that Eutiches being condemned in the Councell of Chalcedon all such were accursed likewise as should either by defence of such errour or communicating with men so erring fall into the fellowship of the same heresie and that therefore there needed no Synode but the See Apostolique might execute that was there decreed Secondly that the Catholicke Bishops in the East being deposed and Heretickes thrust into their places there was no reason why hee should haue consulted with them Thirdly that hee did nothing of himselfe but with a Synode of the Westerne Bishops The next foure Bishops produced by the Cardinall are Iohn the second Anastasius the second Felix the fourth and Pelagius the second out of whom hee alleageth nothing but this that the See of Peter holdeth the chiefty assigned of the Lord in the vniuersall Church and that the church of Rome is the head of all churches Wherevnto wee briefly answere that the See of Peter euer held the chiefty that the church of Rome was euer the head of all churches not in vniuersality of absolute supreme power commanding authority but in order honour in sort before expressed that by the See of Peter and church of Rome is meant the whole West church not precisely the Diocese of Rome as likewise we haue noted before and therefore these allegations to proue the Popes supremacie ouer all Bishops are nothing to the purpose The last of the twelue Bishops brought by Bellarmine is Gregorie the first out of whom foure things are alledged the first is that he required the Africanes to permit appeales to Rome from the Councell of Numidia and blamed the Bishops of Africa for that after letters written vnto them they had degraded Honoratus the Arch-deacon The second that he sent a Pall to the Bishop of Corinth The third that he saith Eusebius Bishop of Constantinople acknowledged the Church of Constantinople to be subiect to the See Apostolique The fourth that the Bishop of Constantinople professeth his subiection to the See Apostolique To these obiections we answer First that it is contrary to the resolution of the ancient Councels of Carthage Mileuis that the Bishop of Rome should admit appeales of inferiour Clergy-men out of Africa that therefore by some positiue constitution or later agreement Gregory might bee permitted to heare the complaints of an Arch-deacon appealing vnto him out of Africa yet from the beginning it was not so though some parts of Africa were euer within the compasse of the Patriarchship of Rome Secondly that he sent the Pall to the Bishop of Corinth because hee was within his Patriarchship all Patriarches being to confirme their Metropolitanes by imposition of hands or by sending the Pall. 3◠That there was no such Eusebius Bishop of Constantinople in Gregories time as is mentioned in the Epistle alledged and that they that were as Iohn Cyriacus stroue and contended with Gregory to be aboue him and to haue the first place in the Church that not without the help furtherance of the Emperour so that it may be doubted whether Gregory wrot this or not it being so contrary to that wee know to
in the West had iudged and condemned him ioyned his authority with Cyril the principall of the Bishops that were present that so nothing might be wanting to the perfection of a generall Councell So that it is most certaine that Cyril was president of the Councell of Ephesus not as a Vicegerent onely to the Bishop of Rome but in his owne right though he had the authority direction and consenting concurrence of the Bishop of Rome and all the Westerne Bishops ioyned with the power and authority which he and the rest of the Bishops present had of themselues And therefore Leo saith in expresse wordes that Cyril was President of the Councell of Ephesus as likewise Photius and others affirme The same answer may serue for Acacius For he was not Vicegerent of the Bishop of Rome in hearing and determining the cause of Peter Bishop of Alexandria who was an Eutychian Heretique as hauing none authority of his owne but there was a ioynt concurrence of the Bishop of Rome and the Bishop of Constantinople the later hauing besides his owne right and interest the full power and authority of the other and being likewise to vse the helpe of the Emperour for the reducing of the Church of Alexandria to the vnity of the faith againe in which businesse he failed for though at first he condemned Peter Bishop of Alexandria yet afterwards he was content to cōmunicate with him For which cause he was iustly reprehended as not answering the trust that was reposed in him and as being a fauourer of heretiques and so in a sort an heretique himselfe To these allegations which we haue already heard Harding in his answer to Bishop Iewels challenge addeth another of a Bishop of Alexandria being Vicegerent to the Bishop of Rome out of the Epistle of Bonifacius the second to Eulalius or Eulabius But Bellarmine refuteth that Epistle and sheweth that it is counterfeit and that there neuer was any such Eulabius to whom Bonifacius might write and therefore we will no longer insist vpon the examination of the same but proceed to the proofes which our Aduersaries bring from appeales made to Rome CHAP. 39. Of Appeales to Rome FOR the clearing of the matter of Appeales we must obserue that they are of three sorts Of Lay-men of inferiour Clergie-men and of Bishops Of the appeales of Lay-men there is noe mention in all Antiquity and yet now the Bishops of Rome reserue all the greater causes euen concerning the Laitie to thēselues alone forbidding the ordinary guides of the Church to intermedle with them and very ordinarily admitte appeales of Lay-men to the infinite vexation of men and the great hinderance of the course of all Iustice. Whereas it is most wisely and rightly ordered each Bishop hauing his portion of the flocke of Christ committed to him as Cyprian obserueth that they that are committed to their charge should not bee permitted to runne hither and thither but bee iudged there where the thinges for which they are called in question were done and where the accusers and witnesses may bee present Concerning inferiour Clergy-men the holy Bishoppes in the Councell of Mileuis speake in this sort It hath seemed good vnto vs that if Presbyters Deacons other inferiour Clergi-men complaine of the iudgements of their own Bishops the neighbour Bishops intreated by them with the consent of their Bishoppes shall heare them and make an end and if they thinke good to appeale from their iudgement it shall not be lawfull for them to appeale but onely to the Councels of Africa or to the Primates of their owne Provinces And if they shall make their appeale beyond the seas no man in Africa shall receiue them to the Communion This whole Councell Innocentius the first approued as it appeareth by his Epistle which we finde in the booke of the Epistles of S. Augustin Hereunto Bellarmine saith some answere with Gratian who addeth to the Canon of this Councell forbidding appeales to be made beyond the seas an exception vnlesse it be to the Sea Apostolique But this exception saith Bellarmine seemeth not fitting seeing the Africanes made this decree that men should not appeale beyond the seas especially in respect of the Church of Rome and to restraine the making of appeales thither there neuer being any appeale from the Africans to any other church but to the church of Rome only And yet Stapleton answereth the authority of this Councell as Gratian doth and that out of Iulius and Fabianus Bishops of Rome as he saith The Councell of Sardica saith Bellarmine decreed that the causes of Presbyters and inferiour clergy-men appealing from the iudgements of their owne Bishops should be determined and ended by the neighbour-Bishops and Pope Zozimus as appeareth by the sixth Councel of Carthage and the Epistle of the same Councell to Bonifacius the Pope required the same canon to be reuiued Augustine likewise sheweth that it was not lawfull for those of the clergie vnder the degree of Bishops to appeale out of Africa Neither was this the peculiar priuiledge of Africa alone For the Councell of Chalcedon ordained that if a clergie-man haue ought against another of the clergy the matter shall be heard by the Bishop or by arbitrators chosen by both parties with the Bishops allowance But if he haue ought against his Bishoppe he shall prosecute the same complaint in the Synode of the province This canon of the Councell of Chalcedon the Emperour confirmed saying if any of the clergy complaine against his Bishop for any matter let the cause be iudged by the Metropolitane according to the sacred rules and the imperiall lawes And if any man appeale from his sentence let the cause be brought to the Arch-bishoppe or Patriarch of that Diocese and let him according to the canons make a finall end And yet notwithstanding these canons aboue recited precisely forbidding inferiour clergy-men to appeale to Rome we finde that the Bishops of Rome admitted the appeale of one Apiarius iudged condemned in Africa which caused a great difference betweene the Africanes and him Whereupon the Fathers in the Councell of Africa wish the Bishop of Rome as it beseemeth him to reiect and repell the wicked and vnlawfull appeales as well of Presbyters as of other inferiour clergy-men seeing the ending and determining of their causes is by no decree of any Synode denied to the church of Africa and the Nicene canons most clearely committe both inferiour clergy-men and Bishops to their owne Metropolitanes Bellarmine to cleare the Pope from intrusion and to avoide the testimonies authorities of the holy Bishops and Pastours of the church which we haue produced to shew the vnlawfulnes of appeales to Rome answereth first that though they of the inferiour clergy were prohibited to appeale to the Pope yet hee was not forbidden to admit their appeales which is a most strange answere For if they in appealing did
of a Bishop in Pontus hee embraced virginitie in his first times and seemed to liue a retired solitarie and Monasticall kinde of life but in the end casting the feare of God behinde his backe hee abused a certaine virgin and not onely fell himselfe but drew her also away from the course of vertue and well-doing into the fellowship of sinfull wickednesse Heereupon hee was excommunicated and put out of the Church by his owne Father For his Father was a right good and vertuous man and carefull of the things that concerned his calling and though after he was put out of his Church hee sought very earnestly to be admitted to penitency that so he might bee restored to the Church againe yet his Father exceedingly grieued not onely in respect of his fall but also in respect of the dishonour and shame hee had brought on him would by no meanes be induced to yeelde vnto it Whereupon hee left that Citie whereof his Father was Bishop and went to Rome in the time of the vacancie of that See after the death of Hyginus and after he had stayed there a certaine space and conferred with the Presbyters of that Church hee desired to be admitted to their assemblies But they tolde him they could not so doe without the consent of his honourable Father For say they wee have one faith and one consent and wee may not contrary our good fellow-minister thy Father Which their answere when hee heard hee was filled with fury and madnesse and professed in great rage that hee would rent their Church in peeces and cast a schisme into it that should neuer haue an end This is the narration wee finde in Epiphanius concerning Marcion his going to Rome Wherein there is nothing that any way proueth that it was alwayes lawfull to appeale from all other Bishops to the Bishop of Rome For first it doth not appeare that Marcion went thither to complaine of his Father but being put from the communion by him and not obtaining reconciliation by any intreaty as a runnagate he sought to other places and among other went to Rome hoping there to bee receiued into the Church But the guides of that church knowing the canon which forbiddeth one church to admit them another hath reiected and cast out vtterly refused to permit and suffer him to communicate with them And secondly if hee had gone to Rome by way of appeale it would most strongly ouerthrow all such courses and proue that the Romane Bishop may not reverse and make voide the Acts and proceedings of other Bishops seeing the gouernours of the Romane church at that time freely professed vnto Marcion and told him peremptorily that it was not lawfull for them to admit him to their communion without his Fathers consent by whom hee was excommunicated But the truth is he did not seeke by their authoritie as superiours to reverse his Fathers censure and iudgement or to bee restored to the communion of that church out of which he was eiected which had beene to appeale but being in Rome desired onely to bee admitted to ioyne in prayers and other exercises of Religion with them of that Church which yet as Epiphanius reporteth was denied vnto him The next example is of Fortunatus and Faelix in Africa deposed by Cyprian as Bellarmine would make vs beleeue and appealing to Cornelius Bishop of Rome for releefe But there is no word of trueth in that which this Cardinall writeth For these men did not goe to Rome to complaine that they were vniustly deposed as hee vntruely reporteth but these are the circumstances of the matter as we may reade in the Epistles of Cyprian A company of wicked ones hauing made Fortunatus one of the Presbyters that were suspended by Cyprian and a great number of other Bishops a Bishop in opposition to Cyprian hasten to Rome to Cornelius with false reports of the number of Bishops that concurred in the ordination of Fortunatus that so hee might be induced to admit of him as a true Bishop and hold communion with him Which when Cornelius wisely refused to doe he feared not to threaten grieuous things vnto him With the suddennesse and strangenesse whereof Cornelius much moued maruailed greatly that Cyprian had not before certified him of this schismaticall ordination that so hee might haue beene the better prepared Whereunto Cyprian answered That it was not necessarie to be so carefull about the vaine proceedings of heretiques that he had before giuen him the names of such Bishops as were found to whō and from whom hee might write and receiue letters And that howsoeuer false ill dealing by haste and preuention thinketh to gaine all yet that is but for a little time till trueth overtake it and discouer it euen as the darknesse of the night continueth till the Sunne arise And farther hee sheweth that these schismaticall companions had no reason to make such haste to Rome to publish it and make it knowen that they had set vp a false Bishop against a true For that either it pleased them that they had so done and then they continued and went forward in their wickednesse or they repented of that they had done and then they knew whither to returne and needed not to haue gone to Rome For saith he whereas it is agreed among vs and it is both iust and right that euery man shall be heard there where his fault was committed and all Pastours haue a part of the flocke of Christ assigned to them which euery one is to rule governe as being to giue an account vnto the Lord of his actions it is not fitte nor to be suffered that they ouer whom we are set should runne vp and downe and by craftie and deceitfull rashnesse shake in sunder the coherent concord of brethren but that they should haue their causes handled where they may haue both accusers and witnesses of their crimes Vnlesse a few desperate and wicked companions doe thinke the Bishops of Africa that iudged them haue lesser authority then others A more cleare testimonie or pregnant proofe against appeales to Rome then this cannot be had And yet this is one of the principall authorities the Cardinall bringeth to proue the lawfulnesse of appeales to Rome To the next place alleaged out of Cyprian touching Basilides and Martialis Bishoppes of Spaine I haue answered already and made it most cleare that nothing could be alleaged more preiudiciall to the Popes claimes and more for the aduantage of the trueth of that cause which wee defend So that it seemeth our Aduersaries haue turned their weapons against themselues and whetted their swords and made readie their arrowes to wound themselues to death How the facts of Athanasius Chrysostome Flauianus and Theodoret appealing to the Bishop of Rome with his Western Synodes for reliefe and helpe when they were oppressed and wronged by the Easterne Bishops proue not the illimited and vniuersall power of the Pope I haue at large shewed before to the satisfaction I
doubt not of all indifferent Readers And therefore there remaineth but onely one allegation of Bellarmine touching appeales to be examined Gregory the first saith he put Iohn the Bishop of Iustiniana the first from the communion for that he presumed to iudge the Bishop of Thebes hauing appealed to Rome The case was this The Bishop of Thebes wronged by his fellow-Bishops made his appeale to Rome Hereupon Iohn Bishop of Iustiniana the first who was the Bishop of Romes Vicegerent for certaine Prouinces neare adioyning was appointed by the Emperour to heare the cause which he did accordingly But without all indifferencie and in sort contrarie to the Canons and though vpon the discerning of his vniust and partiall proceeding an appeale were tendered to him yet gaue he sentence against the poore distressed Bishop Gregory hearing hereof putteth him from the communion for thirty dayes space inioyning him to bewaile his fault with sorrowfull repentance and teares Truely this allegation maketh a very faire shew at the first sight But if wee remember that the Bishop of Iustiniana the first and the distressed Bishop of Thebes wronged by him were within the Patriarchship of Rome as Cusanus sheweth they were you shall finde it was no more that the B of Rome did then any other Patriarch in like case might haue done within his owne precincts and limits Neither can the Cardinall euer proue that the Bishop of Rome had any such Vicegerent as the Bishop of Iustiniana the first was but onely within the compasse of his owne Patriarchship But saith hee it was a Greeke Bishop that Gregory thus proceeded against It is true it was so But what will hee inferre from thence Is it not knowne that many Greeke Bishops were subiect to the Bishop of Rome as Patriarch of the West was not the Bishoppe of Thessalonica a Greeke Bishop and yet I thinke no man doubteth but that hee was within the compasse of the Patriarchship of Rome as many other also were howsoeuer in time they fell from it adhered to the Church of Constantinople after the diuision of the Greeke and Latine Churches CHAP. 40. Of the Popes supposed exemption from all humane Iudgement as being reserued to the Iudgement of Christ onely OVR Adversaries finding their proofes of the Popes illimited power taken from such appeales as were wont in auncient times to bee made to Rome to bee too weake flie to another wherein they put more confidence which is his exemption from all humane Iudgement Christ whose Vicar he is having reserued him to his owne iudgement onely If this exemption could bee as strongly proued as it is confidently affirmed it would be an vnanswerable proofe of the thing in question But the proofe hereof will be more hard then of the principall thing in controuersie betweene vs. Touching this point I finde great contrarietie of opinions among Papists as men at their wits ends not knowing what to affirme nor what to denie For first there are some among them that thinke that the Pope though hee violate all lawes diuine and humane though hee become publickly scandalous and therein shew himselfe incorrigible yea though hee be a professed and damnable hereticke yet neither is deposed ipso facto by the sentence of the canon nor may be deposed by all the men in the world Which opinion if we admit to bee true the condition of the church the beloued spouse of Christ and mother of vs all is most woefull and miserable in that hereby shee is forced to acknowledge a denouring wolfe making hauocke of the sheepe of Christ redeemed with his precious bloud to be her Pastor and guide Secondly some are of opinion that the Pope if hee become an open and professed hereticke is deposed ipso facto by the sentence of the canon and that the church may declare that he is so deposed Thirdly there are that thinke that an hereticall Pope is not deposed ipso facto but that he may be deposed by the church Fourthly many worthy Diuines in the Romane church heretofore haue beene of opinion that the Church or generall Councell may depose the Pope not onely for heresie but also for other enormous crimes Of this opinion was Cardinall Cusanus Cardinall Cameracensis Gerson Chauncellour of Paris Almaine and all the Parisians with all the worthy Bishops Diuines in the Councels of Constance and Basill Yet the Papists at this day for the most part dislike and condemne this opinion and acknowledge no deposition of any Pope how ill soeuer vnlesse it be for heresie And Bellarmine to make all sure telleth vs farther that the church doth not by any authoritie depose an hereticall Pope but whereas he is deposed ipso facto in that hee falleth into heresie onely declareth the same and thereupon largely refuteth the opinion of Cardinall Caietane who thinketh that the Pope when he falleth into heresie is not deposed ipso facto but that deseruing to bee deposed the Church doth truely and out of her authority depose him First because as he saith if the Church or Councell may depose the Pope from his Papall dignity against his will for what cause soeuer it will follow that the Church is aboue the Pope which yet Caietane denieth For as it will follow that the Pope is aboue other Bishops and of more authority then they if he may depose them so if the councell of Bishops may depose the Pope they are greater then hee Secondly he saith to be put from the Papacie vnwillingly is a punishment so that if the Church may depose the Pope though vnwilling to leaue his place it may punish him and consequently is aboue him For hee that hath power to punish hath the place of a Superiour and Iudge Thirdly he that may restraine and limit a man in the vse and exercise of his ministerie and office is in authority aboue him therefore much more he that may put him from it By these reasons it is clearely demonstrated and proued that if the Church or generall Councell haue authority in case of heresie to depose the Pope at least in some sort it is of greater authority then the Pope And therefore to avoide this consequence as Gerson rightly noteth they that too much magnifie the greatnesse and amplitude of Papall power say that an hereticall Pope in that he is an Hereticke ceaseth to be Pope and is deposed by Almighty God So that the Church doth not by vertue of her authority and jurisdiction depose him but onely denounce and declare that he is so deposed by God to be taken for such a one by men and not to be obeyed This they endeauour to proue because all Heretickes are condemned by their owne iudgment as the Apostle saith and stay not as other euill doers till the Church cast them out but voluntarily depart of themselues from the fellowship of Gods people and cut themselues off from the vnity of the Body of the Church
were holden in the East that in some of them neither the Bishop of Rome nor any of his Westerne Bishos were present and in others very few For there were onely three out of the West in the name of all the rest in the great Councell of Chalcedon wherein 630 Bishops met Now seeing the authority of generall Councels is from the consent of all other Bishoppes of the Christian Church as well as those that meete in them it was necessary that the Bishop of Rome as Patriarch of the West and the Bishops subject to him though they were no more infallible in iudgement then the other yet should by consenting with the rest confirme that was done seeing they were not present to giue consent when it was done If it besaid that in diuerse of them there were some for the Bishop of Rome and some in the name of the Synodes subject to him who hauing instructions from them gaue consent in their names and that therefore there needed no further confirmation it will be easily answered First that it was possible for those Legates being but few to forsake their instructions and to do contrary to them as Rodoaldus and Zachary the Legates of Pope Nicholas did in the Councell vnder Michaell the Emperour wherein Photius was set vp and Ignatius put downe Secondly that it was necessary that the Fathers should wholly follow those instructions that they brought and absolutely agree vnto them and therefore when things were concluded it was fit there should bee a signifying of that which was done and a desire of the confirmation of the same Thirdly some things might be concluded to which the instructions reached not and in respect of them a confirmation was necessary as the Councell of Chalcedon decreed certaine things wihout the compasse of Leos instructions and therefore sought his confirmation Besides all this we must note that the confirmation which the ancient Councels sought was not from the person of the Bishop of Rome alone but from him and his Synodes as I haue proued before And Bellarmine himselfe confesseth saying that in the second and third Synodes there were no Bishops of the West present but that the Bishop of Rome in his owne name and in the name of the Bishops and Synodes subiect to him did confirme them So that this confirming of Councels by the Pope proueth no more that hee is infallible in iudgment or that all the assurance of finding out the trueth is originally in him and from him communicated to generall Councels then that all the Bishops and Synodes subject to him are free from possibility of erring and that Nationall or Prouinciall Synodes in the West are more infallible in their iudgments then those that are Generall in the East The next allegation to proue that the Councell is nothing without the Pope is that a promise was made to Peter that his faith should not faile but that no promise was made to the Councell that promise of Christ that where two or three are gathered together in his name he will be in the middest of them beeing no way proper to Councels and Bishops hauing no authority when they are assembled which they haue not when they are single and deuided This allegation is contradictory to the resolution and contrary to the practise of all times For first that promise of Christ that where two or three are gathered together in his name he will bee in the middest of them was euer thought to assure his presence in a lawfull Generall Councell in very speciall sort and otherwise then any where else and that vpon very good ground of reason For if God be present with priuate men meeting together in his feare about the things that concerne them and with a few particular Pastors of Churches for the direction of them in things that concerne them there is no question but in Generall meetings wherein all the variety of the gifts of God bestowed on men is gathered together and things concerning the state of the whole Christian Church treated of hee is present in most peculiar sort manner Secondly though Christ the sonne of God gaue no authority to the whole vniuersality of Christian men and therein the Church and Common-wealth may seeme to differ yet he gaue Commission to the Generality of pastors more then to each one apart and being assembled they haue that power which seuerally they haue not as to ordaine iudge suspend and depose pastors and Bishops And howsoeuer in each Prouince the rest are to know him that is the first among them and to do nothing pertayning to the whole Prouince without consulting him first yet may he doe nothing without them And as this is the Canon and Law of the Church in particular Prouinces so in Churches of larger extent comprehending whole countries subiect to one Patriarch and much more in the whole Church wherein there is no one hauing so much power in respect of the rest as the Metropolitane hath in respect of the Bishoppes of the Prouince and the Patriarch in respect of the Metropolitanes For the Bishoppes are to bee ordained by the Metropolitane and the Metropolitanes are to be ordained or at least confirmed by the Patriarch whereas among the Patriarches there is no one to whom it pertayneth to ordaine the rest or to confirme them in any speciall sort or otherwise then they are to confirme him Thus then it beeing proued by conuincing reasons and the confession not onely of such Papists as make the Pope among Bishoppes to be but as the Duke of Venice among the great Senators of that State greater then each one but inferiour to the whole company of them but of such also as attribute much more vnto him that he hath no such Presidentship in Generall Councels as that hee may determine what he will against the liking of all or the greater part of Bishoppes but that he is bound to follow the greater part and that Generall Councels are of force not from the absolute authority of the Pope onely aduising with other Bishoppes but from their consents as wel as his Let vs proceede to see if the practise of former times proue not the same I finde saith Cusanus that in all the first Eight Generall Councels the Popes or the Legates of the Popes for themselues were neuer present in person did euer subscribe in the very same sort that the other Bishoppes did without note of any singularity For euery Bishoppe was wont to subscribe in this forme Anâ—…ens vel consentiens vel statuens vel definiens subscripsi and this was the forme the Legates of the Bishoppe of Rome obserued But saith Cusanus that no man may doubt but that all things were determined by the joynt consent of such as met in Generall Councels and not by the sole authority of the Bishoppe of Rome alone wee finde in the Actes of the Councell of Chalcedon that Dioscorus being the third time warned to
communicating with the Priest in the Sacrament into a priuate masse which indeede if wee will speake properly is no masse or that hee helde it to bee a new reall sacrificing of CHRIST as the Iesuited Papistes doe at this day A sacrifice wee confesse it to bee of praise and thankes-giuing and a commemoration of the bloudy sacrifice of CHRIST vpon the Altar of the Crosse say that therefore it may bee named a sacrifice because signes haue the names of the things whereof they are signes as also for that there is in this Sacrament an offering or presenting of CHRIST and his passion to GOD by the faith of the Church that by it wee may obtaine grace and remission of sinnes but a new reall sacrificing of CHRIST wee denye and thinke with Luther that it is a hellish abomination so to doe That Gerson thought that there is a Purgatory doth no more prejudice his being a worthy guide of Gods Church then the errour of Cyprian and other before-mentioned Touching invocation of Saints though hee did not absolutely condemne it yet hee reprehended the abuses and superstitious observations then prevailing in the worshipping of Saints very bitterly as I shewed before sought to bring men to a truer sense of piety in that point then was ordinarily found amongst men in those times The like he did for indulgences restraining them more then was pleasing to the Popes faction and for the communion vnder one kinde howsoeuer hee thought the Church might lawfully prescribe the communicating in one kinde alone which wee cannot excuse yet hee acknowledgeth that the communion in both kindes was aunciently vsed and that when it may bee had with the peace of the Church it is to bee allowed But to what purpose doth Master Higgons alledge these things shall it bee lawfull for him and his to repute Iohn Gerson a worthy and godly man notwithstanding that he held that the Pope may erre that he is subiect to Generall Councels that he medleth with things no way pertayning to him when hee taketh vpon him to dispose the Kingdomes of the world that all our inherent righteousnesse is imperfit and as the polluted ragges of a menstruous woman that all sins are by nature mortall and the like and may not wee take him to haue beene a member of the true Church a good man and one that desired the reformation of things amisse notwithstanding his errour in some things and his not discerning all that was amisse The insufficiencie of this allegation it seemeth Master Higgons himselfe perceived and therefore saith hee will come to the supreame difference to which all other points as hee conceiueth are subordinate and inferiour that is to say the soueraigne primacy of the Romane Bishop and bringeth two very effectuall testimonies as hee thinketh of Gerson to proue the Popes soueraigne primacie The First is out of his booke De auferibilitate papae his words are these The formes of ciuill government are subiect to mutability and alteration but it is otherwise in the Church for her gouerment is Monarchicall and is so appointed by the institution of our Lord if any man will violate this sacred ordinance and persist obstinately in his contempt hee is to bee iudged an Hereticke as Marsilius of Padua and some other consorting with his fancie The second is out of his tract De vnitate Graecorum where prescribing many directions for the composing of the differences betweene the Greeke and Latine Churches hee layeth it downe as a foundation that there must bee one head on earth vnto which all men must bee vnited In these sayings Master Higgons saith Gerson shewed himselfe a worthy guide of Gods Church and a singular enemy of the Protestanticall reformation which violently impugneth the supremacie of the Pope in so much that Luther affirmeth that a man cannot be saued vnlesse from his heart hee hate the Pope and Papacie These things truely carrie a very faire shew and may deceiue such as cannot or will not throughly looke into them But whosoeuer knoweth what Gersons opinion of the Pope is and what Luther hath written against the Papacie will soone perceiue there is no contradiction betweene them or at least not in any essentiall and materiall point For Gerson was of opinion that the Pope is subiect to a Generall Councell and that hee is not free from daunger of erring and this hee thought to bee a matter of faith defined in the Councell of Constance and therefore would haue detested all claimes of infallible iudgement and vncontrouleable power of Popes as much as Luther did and would haue accursed his words of blasphemie if once hee should haue heard him say as wee doe and as before the holding of the Councell of Constance he did All the world cannot iudge mee though I ouerturne the whole course of nature no man may say vnto mee why doe you so I onely haue power to make lawes and to voide them againe I haue authority to dispence with the Canons of all Councels as seemeth good vnto mee and which is more to dispose of all the kingdomes of the world the assurance of finding out the trueth and not erring is not partly in mee and partly in the Councell but wholy in mee whatsoeuer all the world shall consent on is of no force if I allow it not Hee would haue said doubtlesse as I haue done if hee had heard him thus speake that wee are not bound to take the foame of his impure mouth and froath of his words of blasphemie as infallible Oracles This is that Pope and this is that Papacie which Luther saith euery one that will be saued must hate from his heart for otherwise if hee would onely claime to bee a Bishoppe in his precinct a Metropolitane in a prouince a Patriarch of the West and of Patriarches the first and most honourable to whom the rest are to resort in cases of greatest moment as to the head and chiefe of their company to whom it specially pertaineth to haue an eye to the preseruation of the Church in the vnity of faith and religion and the actes and exercises of the same and with the assistance and concurrence of the other by all due courses to effect that which pertaineth thereunto without clayming absolute and vncontrouleable power infallibilitie of iudgement and right to dispose the Kingdomes of the world and to intermeddle in the administration of the temporalties of particular Churches and the immediate swaying of the iurisdiction thereof Luther himselfe professeth hee would neuer open his mouth against him This kind of Primacie the Grecians likewise professed they would bee content to yeeld vnto him if other differences betweene them might be composed Cassander saith Hee is perswaded there had neuer beene any controuersies about the Popes power if the Popes had not abused their authority in a Lordly and ouer-ruling manner and through couetousnesse and ambition stretched it beyond the bounds and
limits set and prescribed by Christ and the Church and professeth that the abuse of the Papall power which the flatterers of the Pope amplified enlarged and magnified beyond all measure gaue men occasion to thinke ill of the Pope and in the end to depart from him With whom Gerson agreeth saying that the Popes intermedling in some kindes and assuming more then was fit gaue occasion to the Grecians to depart from the Church of Rome writing to the Pope at their parting in this sort wee know thy power thy couetousnesse wee cannot satisfie liue by thy selfe So that I haue truely said whatsoeuer Master Higgons blattereth out to the contrarie that it was the pride of Antichrist that made all the breaches in the Christian world But saith Master Higgons Gerson maketh the forme of the Churches gouernment to be Monarchicall which thing is mainely opposite to the opinion of Protestants who will not admit the Pope to bee a Monarch in the Church It is true that Gerson maketh the gouernment of the Church to be Monarchicall but no otherwise but as the gouernment of the state of Venice is Monarchicall wherein the Duke is greater then any one Senator but subiect to the Senate and hath neither absolute negatiue nor affirmatiue therefore it is in truth and indeed according to his opinion rather Aristocratical thē Monarchical though he make it to be so in that amongst all the Bs of the world one is first and in order and honour before all other A head he maketh the Pope to bee as a president of a company not as an absolute commaunder Whereas saith Iohn Bachon the denying the Pope to haue an illimited power was condemned as hereticall in Marsilius of Padua Io. de Ianduno some say they were condemned because they denied him to haue an illimited power as head or chiefe of all Bishops and with the colledge of them and that it is not there defined that absolutely in and of himself he hath illimited power of making lawes and gouerning according to the same without the concurrence of his brethren But Gerson saith it is schismatical not to acknowledg with aldue respect the true Pope vndoubtedly known to be soe therefore he must needes be an enemie to the Protestanticall reformation We say no for let the Pope as Gerson teacheth him to doe disclaime the claime of absolute vncontroulable power infallibility of judgment right to dispose the Kingdomes of the world let him without particular intermedling suffer other Bishops to gouerne their owne diocesses as they did in the Primitiue Church without so many reseruations preuentions and appeales receiued from all parts of the world and wee will thinke as Gerson doth that as it is Schismaticall to impugne the gouernment of Bishoppes within their owne diocesses the superiorities of Metropolitans in their Prouinces and of Patriarches in their larger circuites so it is Schismaticall to deny the Bishoppe of Rome contenting himselfe therewith a primacie of order honour and a speciall interest in swaying the gouernment of the whole Church and managing the affaires thereof as first amongst the Bishoppes of the world Wherefore let vs hearken to Master Higgons his suite hee beseecheth vs to consider the resemblance and similitude of these thinges hee that reiecteth the Pope shall not be saued and hee that doth not hate him and the Popedome from his heart shall not bee saued the one of these sayings is Gersons the other Luthers thus saith Higgons they damne themselues mutually in a capitall point and exclude each other from possibility of saluation Wee haue according to Master Higgons his request diligently considered these things and doe finde that betweene these sayings in shew so opposite there is in truth and indeed no contradictions and that Luther and Gerson are farre from damning one another in this point as he falsely saith they doe for it is true as Luther saith that men are bound to hate the Papacie that is the claime of vncontrouleable and absolute power of infallible judgment and interest to dispose of the Kingdomes of the world euen in the judgement of Gerson himselfe and they both agree that for the preservation of order and peace men are bound to acknowledge the Papacie that is to yeeld to the Bishop of Rome a Primacie of order and honour if there be no other matter of difference nor no father claime made by him Neither is it communion with the Pope as prime Bishop that maketh a man a formall Papist as this formalist speaketh but with the vnjust claimes of the Pope So that Gersons communion with the Pope proueth him not a formall Papist and therefore though Master Powels judgement be of value M◅ Higgons may not vndoubtedly pronounce that Gerson is damned to the nethermost hell as he fondly saith he may neither can hee shew any good reason why wee may not truly say that Luther hath accomplished that reformation which Gerson desired therefore he might well haue spared his Risum teneatis amici insteed thereof intreated men to weepe for his pittifull ouer-sight and folly which he bewrayeth in the words immediatly following I will knit vp saith he this matter with the counsell of Gerson which he giueth to the spouse of Christ saying the Church must intreate the Pope the Vicegerent of Christ with all honour and call him Father for hee is her Lord head that she must not expose him to detractions c. Mr Higgons is wont to compare them to the Diuell who alledge any sayings of Fathers or Scriptures in shew making for them and leaue out that which followeth making against them if this course be right good as no doubt it is I will soone make the Reader know to whom Master Higgons is like in citing Gersons testimony against vs. For Gerson speaking of the respect that is due to CHRIST the Husband of the Church and his Vicegerent from her as his Spouse Wife hath these words I deliuer this first vnto thee that for the honour of CHRIST her husband the Church Synodally assembled or not so assembled ought to carrie herselfe towards the chiefe Bishoppe with reuerence and due respect in all louing sort if hee behaue himselfe towards her laudably nay if his entreating of her bee tollerable because in many thinges wee offend all and the judiciall sentence of Diuorce is to bee expected before hee bee cast off as hitherto the discretion of our Fore-fathers hath obserued towardes inferiour Bishoppes In the next place I deliuer vnto thee that the Church for the reuerence of CHRIST her husband ought to name his Vicegerent and him whom hee hath appointed her keeper Father and both in her selfe and her children to bee most ready to giue all honour and to yeelde all obedience to him as to her Lord and head and likewise to shew all due respect to the Romane Church as ioyned to her in a speciall degree of fellowshippe Neither is it
the notorious negligence of the Court of Rome in omitting to doe that which is fitte other to base corruption and therevpon sheweth that an appeale was put in on the behalfe of the Lords of Polonia to the next Generall Councell against which exception was taken that it was not lawfull to appeale from the Pope in any case or to decline his iudgement in matters of faith contrarie to the lawes of God and the decrees of the same Conncell and to the vtter ouerthrowing of all those thinges that were done in the Councell of Pisa and Constance in reiecting the pretenders and electing a new Pope professing that hee is well assured there will neuer be any reformation of the Church by a Councell without the presidency of a guide well affected and prudent stout and constant of which sort he insinuateth the Pope then beeing was not Thus wee see Gerson thought it no impiety in modest sort to taxe the Popes negligence and in most resolute manner to condemne as impious against the Lawes of God and man his pride in denying appeales from himselfe as if no man might decline his iudgement in matters of faith Which things being so let the reader iudge whether that one poore sentence of Gerson mangled and rent from that which went before and followeth after doe bring more aduantage to Master Higgons his cause then it doth preiudice the same when it is ioyned with the other parts of his discourse in the same place But thus doe these Madianites slay themselues with their owne swordes and turne their weapons vpon themselues to the vtter ouerthrow of their bad cause From this particular of the Popes supremacy wherein Master Higgons hath foyled himselfe and hurt his cause hee proceedeth to some generall euidences whence as hee saith it may be proued that Gerson neuer fauoured the Protestanticall reformation The first is for that speaking of the Romish Church he saith Wee must r◅ue the certainty of our faith from it The second for that hee preached zealously at Constance against the articles of Wicklife and the Bohemians For answere to the first of these allegations the reader must remember that Gerson doth clearely resolue that the Pope may erre not onely personally but Episcopally and iudicially also and consequently that wee must not ground our faith vpon his resolutions as certaine and vndoubted The like may be said of the Romane Church that is the Romane Diocesse Prouince or Patriarchship for if it haue any more infallibility of iudgement then other particular Churches it hath it from the Bishoppe which it cannot haue seeing he is not free from errour himselfe the meaning therefore of Gerson is not that wee may or must take whatsoeuer the Romane Diocesse Prouince or Patriarchship deliuereth vnto vs to be vndoubtedly true but speaking of the Indians who are Christians and yet doubting whether they hold the faith of Christians sincerely or not hee saith it may be feared least they doe not seeing ◅ey are diuided from the Roman Church from which the certainty of faith is to ◅e sought to shew that the truth certainty of faith is to be sought in the vnity of the vniuersal or Catholique Church the beginning being taken frō that which of all others is the first and chiefest and hathhitherto beene most free from damnable heresies For otherwise that he is no way resolued that the determinations of the particular Roman Church Diocesan Provinciall or Patriarchicall doe absolutely binde all to receiue them it is most cleare and euident in that in his discourse of the meanes of procuring vnitie betweene the Greekes and Latines one speciall cause of the breach betweene them being the determination passed by the Latines touching the proceeding of the Holy Ghost without the consent of the Greekes he wisheth men to consider whether as we are wont to say of the Articles of Paris that they binde none but such as are within the Diocesse of Paris so it may not be saide that the determinations of the Latine Church binde none but those that are within the compasse of the same which he could not nor would not doe if he thought the infallible direction of all the rest to bee in the Romane Church alone and that all euery-where were bound to receiue as vndoubtedly true whatsoeuer it deliuereth as the Romanists at this day doe thinke Besides this it is to be obserued that by the name of the Romane Church the person of the Pope whom the Romanists name the Virtuall Church is not meant nor the Diocesse or Prouince of Rome alone but the whole Latine or West Church subiect to the Bishop of Rome as Patriarch of the West which wee are perswaded neuer yet erred from the Faith but had alwayes in it many worthy men professing and maintaining the trueth of Religion howsoeuer some erred damnably in the midst of it and a separation be now growne betweene the true members of that Church and such as were but a faction in the same So that that which Gerson hath of fetching the certainty of our faith from the Church of Rome proueth not that hee would haue beene an enemy to the Protestanticall reformation for he speaketh not of our fetching the certaintie of our Faith from the Pope or Court or Diocesse of Rome but of the Indians fetching the certainty of their Faith from the Roman that is the Westerne Church But that he neuer thought that all Christians and Churches of the West are to fetch the certainty of their Faith from the Pope or Court of Rome it is evident In that he commendeth the French King that condemned the heresie of Iohn the two and twentieth touching the soules not seeing God till the Resurrection with sound of trumpets the Nobles and Prelats of France being present and beleeued rather the Vniuersitie of Paris then the Court of Rome Neither is the next proofe of Gersons preaching against the Articles of Wickliff and the Bohemians any better then this for hee preached against such Articles as were brought to the Councell of Constance by the English and Bohemians now those Articles were many of them impious and hereticall nay hellish and blasphemous in such sort as they were proposed by them that brought them as that God must obey the Diuel that Kings or Bishops if they be reprobates or if they fall into mortall sinne cease to be Kings or Bishops any longer and that all they doe is meerely voide whereas Wickliffe neuer deliuered any such thing nor had any such impious conceipt as they sought to fasten on him neither is it to be maruailed at that impious things were falsly slanderously imputed to him seeing we are wronged in like sort at this day For there are who shame not to write that we affirme God to be the author of fin that we teach that God doth sin that man sinneth not that God onely sinneth and that God is worse then the diuell with many other like
parts of this Church and Catholiques that thinke the Pope may iudicially erre vnlesse a generall Councell concurre with him which in their opinion is an error and neare to heresie Yea the same Bellarmine sayth that the particular Romane Church that is the cleargy and people of Rome subiect to the Pope cannot erre because though some of them may yet all cannot It is true therefore which I haue deliuered not withstanding any thinge the Treatiser can say to the contrary that the Church including all the faithfull that are and haue beene since the Apostles may be sayd to bee free from error because in respect of her totall vniuersality she is so it being impossible that any errour should bee found in all her parts at all times though in respect of her seuerall parts shee be not For sometimes and in some parts she hath erred and in this sense can no more be sayd to be free from error then a man may be sayd to bee free from sicknesse that in some parts is ill affected But as a man that hath not beene alwaies nor in all parts ill may bee said to be free from perpetuall and vniuersall sicknesse so the Church is free from perpetuall and vniuersall error This the Treatiser saith is a weake priuiledge and not answerable to the great and ample promises made by Christ whereas the Fathers knew no other whatsoeuer this good man imagineth For Vincentius Lyrinensis confesseth that error may infect some parts of the Church yea that it may sometimes infect almost the whole Church so that he freeth it only from vniuersall perpetuall error But sayth the Treatiser what are poore Christians the nearer for this priuiledge how shall such a Church be the director of their faith and how shall they know what faith was preached by the Apostles what parts taught true doctrine and when and which erred in subsequent ages Surely this question is easily answered For they may know what the Apostles taught by their writings and they may know what parts of the Church teach true doctrine by comparing the doctrine each part teacheth with the written word of God and by obseruing who they are that bring in priuate and strange opinions contrary to the resolution of the rest But if happily some new contagion endeauour to commaculate the whole Church together they must looke vp into Antiquity and if in Antiquity they finde that some followed priuate and strange opinions they must carefully obserue what all not noted for singularity or heresie in diuerse places and times constantly deliuered as vndoubtedly true and receiued from such as went before them This course Vincentius Lyrinensis prescribeth But the Treatiser disclaimeth it not liking that all should be brought to the letter of holy Scripture and the workes of Antiquity which setting aside the authority of the present Church he thinketh yeeld no certaine and diuine argument So that according to his conceipt wee must rest on the bare censure and iudgement of the Pope for he is the present Church Antiquity is to be contēued as little or nothing worth Hauing iustified the distinctiō of the diuerse cōsiderations of the Church impugned by the Treatiser that which he hath touching the two assertions annexed to it will easily bee answered For the one of them is most true his addition of not erring being taken away and the other is but his idle imagination for wee neuer deliuered any such thing §. 3. IN the third place he excepteth against Mee because I say the words of the Apostle in the Epistle to Timothy touching the house and Church of God are originally vnderstood of the Church of Ephesus wherein Paul directeth Tymothy how to demeane and behaue himselfe but because I haue cleared this exception in my answere to Higgons I will say nothing to him in this place but referre him thither §. 4. FRom the Apostle the Treatiser passeth to Saint Augustine and chargeth Me th I wrest his words when he sayth he would not beleeue the Gospell if the authority of the Church did not moue him to a sense neuer meant by him These words of S. Augustin are vsually alleadged by the Papists to proue that the authority of the Church is the ground of our faith reason of beleeuing in answere whereunto I shew that the Diuines giue two explications of them For Ockam and some other vnderstand them not of the multitude of beleeuers that now are in the world but of the whole number of them that are and haue beene since Christ appeared in the flesh so including the Apostles and in this sense they confesse that the Church because it includeth the writers of the bookes of the new Testament is of greater authority then the books themselues Other vnderstand by the name of the Church onely the multitude of beleeuers liuing in the world at one time and thinke the meaning of Augustine is that the authority of this Church was an introduction vnto him but not the ground of his faith and principall or sole reason of beleeuing The former of these explications this graue censurer pronounceth to be friuolous First because if wee may beleeue him Saint Augustine neuer vsed these words Catholique Church after this sort in that sense Secondly because he speaketh of that Church which commanded him not to beleeue Manicheus which vndoubtedly was the present Church Thirdly because as he supposeth I can alleadge no Diuine that so interpreted the words of Augustine that which I cite out of Ockam being impertinent To euery of these reasons I will briefly answere And first that Augustine doth vse the words Catholique Church in the sense specified by Me it is euident For writing against Manicheus he hath these words Palám est quantū in re dubia ad fidem certitudinem valent Catholicae Ecclesiae authoritas quae ab ipsis fundatissimis sedibus Apostolorū vsque ad hodiernū diem succedētibus sibimet Episcopis tot populorū cōsensione firmatur that is it is apparant what great force the authority of that Church hath to settle the perswasion of faith cause certainty in things doubtfull that from the most surely established seats of the Apostles by succession of Bishops euen till this present cōsent of people is most firmely setled To the second reason wee answere that the Church including the Apostles and all faithfull ones that haue beene since comprehendeth in it the present Church and so might commaund Augustine not to listen to Manicheus So that this commaunding proueth not that he speaketh precisely of the present Church To the third I say that the Treatiser is either strangely ignorant or strangely impudent when hee affirmeth that I can alledge no Diuine that vnderstandeth the words of Augustine of the Church including in it the Apostles such as liued in their times For first Durandus vnderstandeth them of the Primitiue Church including the Apostles Secondly Gerson will tell him that when
heart that they may discerne see the light of heauenly truth it is evident that in Augustines judgment the authority of the Church serueth but as an introduction that the thing which right beleeuers rest vpon is of a higher nature to wit the discerning of heauenly truth Wherefore finding himselfe too weak to giue any substantiall answer he betaketh himselfe to a most silly exception pretending that I haue not truly translated these words of Augustin praesto est authoritas quā partim miraculis partim multitudine valere nemo ambigit authoritie is ready at handwhich standeth vpō 2 things the one the greatnes of miracles done the other multitude Is this a false translatiō hath the authority of the church that force which it hath to moue mē to beleeue partly by reasō of miracles partly by reasō of multitude may it not be truly said that it standeth partly vpon the greatnes of miracles wrought partly vpō multitudes but valere doth not signifie to stād vpō it is true it doth not yet what boy in the Grāmer School will not laugh at him for thus childishly demeaning himself for what man of vnderstāding would cal men to cōster euery word precisely as it importeth by it selfe without consideration of the coherence it hath with other in the same sentence Besides this place of Aug. there is another cited by Me out of Hugo where he maketh 3 sorts of beleeuers whereof the first are such as are moued out of piety to beleeue which yet discerne not by reason whether the things they beleeue are to bee beleeued or not The second such who by reason approue that which by faith they beleeue The third sort are such as by reason of the purity of their heart conscience begin inwardly to taste what by faith they beleeue This place maketh strongly for the confirmation of that I say that the evidence of sundry things in the light of faith and grace is that formall reason which assureth vs of the truth of them For heere Hugo affirmeth that the best sort of beleeuers doe approue by reason or by taste invvardly discerne the things they beleeue to be true So that such approbation or spiritual taste is the reason of their perswasion of the truth of these things To this authoritie the Treatiser hath nothing to say but that it maketh nothing to the purpose and that if I meant to translate the vvords of Hugo I haue not exactly translated thē Whether the saying of Hugo be to the purpose or not I vvill leaue it to the iudgment of the Reader but as for his other exception I vvould haue him knovv and any sensible Reader vvill very easilie discerne that I meant not exactlie to translate his vvordes but at large to set downe the intent driftes of them which I haue most truely performed and therefore hee doth Me wrong when hee saith I deale corruptly vntruly In the third place hee endeauoureth to make his Reader beleeue there is a contrariety betweene Me and Luther Brentius in that Luther with whom Brentius seemeth to agree maketh the Scripture to be of it self a most certaine most easie and most manifest interpreter of it selfe prouing judging and enlightning all things I acknowledge many difficulties in it But if the Treatiser had beene pleased to haue taken thinges aright he could not but haue seene that Luther also acknowledgeth manifold difficulties in the Scripture yea hee doth see it and acknowledge it and yet will not see it and therefore that he bee not contrary to himselfe when he affirmeth that the Scriptures are easie interpret themselues and judge and enlighten all thinges he must bee vnderstood to meane that notwithstanding some difficulties they are not so obscure and hard as that Heretiques may wrest and abuse them at their pleasure and noe man bee able to conuince them out of the euidence of those sacred writings as the Romanistes imagine but that wee may bee so assured out of the Scripture it selfe and the nature of the thinges therein contained that wee haue the true meaning of it that wee neede not altogether to rest in the authority of Church which explication of Luthers words the Treatiser might haue found in the place cited by him if hee had beene pleased and so haue omitted the vrging of this imagined contradiction §. 3. The 4. thing that he proposeth which cōcerneth me is that I mentiō a rule of faith according to which the Scriptures are to be interpreted which if we neglect al other considerations are insufficient the like he alleageth out of the Harmony of confessions whence he inferreth that we admit another guide in interpreting the Scripture besides the letter of the Scripture But hee should knowe that the rule of faith mentioned by me deliuered to vs from hand to hand by the guides of Gods Church containeth nothing in it but that which is found in Scripture either expressely or by necessary implication so that though wee admitte another guide in the interpretation of of Scripture besides the bare letter yet wee admitte noe other but that forme of Christian doctrine which all right beleeuing Christians taught by the Apostles and Apostolique men haue euer receiued as contained in the Scripture and thence collected To this hee addeth an excellent obseruation which is that I seeme to confesse that Saint Paul sometimes by the workes of the Law vnderstandeth the workes of the Law of Moses in that I say that that Apostle pronounceth that the Galathians were bewitched and that if they still persisted to joyne circumcision and the workes of the Law with Christ they were fallen from grace and Christ could profit them nothing But hee needed not thus to mince the matter for I willingly confesse that Paul not sometimes onely but euer vnderstandeth by the workes of the Lawe the workes of Moses Law Neither can there any thing be inferred thence for the Papists or against vs. For whereas by the workes of the Lawe some vnderstand those workes which the ceremoniall Lawe prescribed other such as the morall Lawe requireth and and a third sort such as by terror it worketh in men or causeth them to worke without any chaunge of the heart which cannot be wrought but only by grace the Papists think that whē the Apostle sayth we are iustified by faith without workes he excludeth not such works as the Morall Law requireth but such as the ceremoniall Law prescribeth and the morall Law worketh in men we teach that he excludeth all these So that a man repenting and beleeuing may bee saued though hauing neuer done any good worke he be taken out of this world before he can do any It is true indeede that good workes do necessarily follow iustification if time do serue and opportunity bee offered yet are they no meritorious causes of saluation But the Treatiser will proue out of that which I haue written that they are meritorious that
Faith and Religion His meaning it seemeth is that all Protestantes acknowledging Puritanes to bee of one Church with them are Puritanes and therefore hee would haue all to know that howsoeuer hee make shew of blaming Puritanes onely or principally yet in truth hee equally condemneth all and that therefore hee doth but dissemble or say hee knoweth not what But do all these Protestant writers named by him teach that there is no materiall difference betweene protestants and Puritanes Surely no. For touching my selfe I neuer wrote any such thing neither in the place cited by him nor any where else so that hee beginneth with a manifest and shamelesse vntruth But I doe the more willingly pardon him this fault for that it seemeth hee doth not consider what he writeth For in the title of his booke hee professeth that hee will take the proofes of his Catholique religion and Recusancy onely from the writings of such Protestant Diuines as haue beene published since the raigne of his Maiesty ouer this kingdome for that as hee sayth they often change their opinions at the least at the comming of euery new Prince And yet page 30. hee citeth the Bishop of Winchesters booke written many yeares agoe and Doctor Couell his booke in defence of Master Hooker as often as any other which yet was written in her late Maiesties time But what if I had written that howsoeuer there are some materiall differences betweene Protestants and Puritanes as it pleaseth him to stile them yet not so essentiall or substantiall but that they may bee of one Church faith and religion What absurdity would haue followed Would it be consequent from hence as he inferreth that it is not materiall with vs whether men be of a true or false religion of any or none at all Haue there not beene nay are there not greater differences betwixt Papists who yet will be angry if they be not esteemed to be all of one Church faith and religion Did not Pope Iohn the two and twentith thinke that the soules of the just shall not see God till the generall resurrection and did not the French King that then was with the whole vniuersity of Paris condemne the same opinion as hereticall with sound of trumpet Did not Ambrosius Catharinus teach that a man may be certaine with the certainty of faith that he is in state of grace and Soto the contrary Did not Pighius Contarenus and the Authors of the booke called Antididagma Coloniense defend imputatiue justice and other Papists reiect it Did not some amongst them teach the merit of condignity doe not others moued with a sober moderation thinke there is no such merit Doe not some thinke the Pope is vniuersall Bishop others that he is not but prime Bishop onely Doe not some teach that all Bishops receiue their jurisdiction from the Pope others the contrary Doe not some thinke the Pope may papally erre and others that he cannot Doe not some of them thinke he is temporall Lord of all the world and others the contrary Doe not so 〈◊〉 them thinke he may depose Princes and others that he may not is there not a very materiall point of difference amongst Papists touching predestination Let them shew vs if they can so many and materiall differences betweene Protestants and Puritanes And yet these were all of one Church in their judgement yea Pope Stephen who reuersed all the actes of Formosus his predecessour pronounced the ordinations of all those to bee voide whom he had ordained brought his dead body out of the graue into the Councell stript it out of the Papall vesture put vpon it a lay habit and cutting off two fingers of his right hand cast it into Tyber Pope Iohn his successour who called a Councell of 74. Bishops to confirme the ordinations of Formosus the Arch-bishoppes of France and the King being present at Rauenna burned the acts of the Synod which Stephen had called to condemne Formosus and Sergius who againe condemned Formosus and pronounced all his ordinations to be voide reuersing the acts of Pope Iohn and his Synode were all of one Church of one communion faith and religion Nay which is more strange when there were three Anti-popes sitting in diuerse places accursing one another with all their Adherents and that for many yeares yet still they were of one Church of one communion faith and religion Yet may not wee inferre from hence against them as they doe against vs that it is not materiall with them whether men be of a true or false religion of any or none at all Surely they are more priuiledged then other men for some of them may take the Oath of Allegeance disclaime the Popes power and right to intermeddle with Princes states and other refuse it and yet still be Catholicke brethren in the communion of the same Church Yea a Priest may like of this Oath and perswade others to take it and afterwards goe ouer the Sea and alter his iudgement and returning choose rather to suffer death then to take it againe yet no man must take notice of it But if a Minister subscribe and afterwards vpon ill aduice refuse to doe the same againe then all the courses of our Religion are such that by no outward signes communion profession protestation or subscription a man can tell who is of what religion amongst vs. But let vs passe from the Epistle to the booke it selfe CHAP. I. IN the first chapter which is of the supreame and most preeminent authority of the true church and how necessary it is to finde it follow the directions and rest in the iudgement of it he hath these words Doctor Field a late Protestant writer beginneth his Dedicatory Epistle to the Lord Archbishop of Canterburie before his Bookes of the church in this manner There is no part of heauenly doctrine more necessary in these dayes of so many intricate controversies of Religion then diligently to search out which amongst all the societies of men in the world is that blessed company of holy ones that household of Faith that spouse of Christ and church of the liuing God which is the pillar and ground of truth that so we may embrace her communion follow her directions and rest in her iudgement And after some other things cited out of others he addeth the ioyning with the true church is so needfull a thing that D. Field concludeth There is no saluation remission of sinnes or hope of eternall life out of the church To what purpose this allegation serueth I cannot conceiue for there is nothing in any of these speeches of mine that euer any protestant doubted of or from which any thing may bee concluded against vs or for the papists The church of God saith Master Caluine is named the Mother of the Faithfull neither is there any entrance into eternall life vnlesse shee conceiue vs in her wombe vnlesse shee
that the errours condemned by vs were not the doctrines of that auncient Roman church wherein our Fathers liued died we must obserue that the doctrines taught in that Church were of three sorts The first such as were deliuered with so full consent of all that liued in the same that whosoeuer offered to teach otherwise was rejected as a damnable hereticke such was the doctrine of the Triuity the creation fall originall sinne incarnation of the Sonne of God the vnity of his person diuersity of the natures subsisting in the same The second such errours as were taught by many in the midst of the same Church as that the Pope cannot erre and the like The third such contrary true assertions as were by other opposed against those errours The first were absolutely the doctrines of that Church The third may bee sayd to haue beene the doctrines of the Church though al receiued them not because they were the doctrines of such as were so in the church that they were the Church according to that of Augustine Some are in such sort in the house of God that they also are the house of GOD and some are so in the house that they pertaine not to the frame and fabricke of it nor to the society and fellowship of fruitfull and peaceable righteousnesse The second kinde of doctrines were not at all the doctrines of that church because they neither were taught with full consent of all that liued in it nor by them that were so in the church and house of God that they were the church and house of God but by such as though they pertained to the church in respect of the profession of some parts of heauenly truth yet in respect of many other wherein they were departed from the same seeking to subuert the faith once deliuered were but a faction in it Hence it followeth which is the third thing I promised to shew that howsoeuer wee haue forsaken the communion of the Romane Diocesse yet wee haue not departed from the Romane Church in the later sense before expressed wherein our Fathers liued died but onely from the faction that was in it First because wee haue brought in no doctrine then generally and constantly condemned nor reiected any thing then generally and constantly consented on Secondly because wee haue done nothing in that alteration of thinges that now appeareth but remoued abuses then disliked and shaken off the yoake of tyranny which that Church in her best parts did euer desire to bee freed from howsoeuer shee had brought forth and nourished other children that conspired against her that taught otherwise then we now doe would willingly for their aduantage haue retayned many things which wee haue remoued Thus then I hope it doth appeare that howsoeuer I confesse that the Latine or West Churches oppressed with Romish tyrāny cōtinued the true Churches of God held a sauing profession of heauenly truth turned many to God and had many Saints that died in their communion euen till the time that Luther began yet I neither dissent from Luther Caluine Beza or any other Protestant of iudgement nor any way acknowledge the present Romish Church to be that true Church of God whose communion wee must embrace whose directions wee must follow and in whose judgement we must rest But will some man say is the Romane Church at this day no part of the Church of God Surely as Augustine noteth that the societies of heretickes in that they retaine the profession of many parts of heauenly truth and the ministration of the Sacrament of Baptisme are so farre forth still conjoyned with the Catholicke Church of God and the Catholick Church in and by them bringeth forth children vnto God so the present Romane church is still in some sort a part of the visible Church of God but no otherwise then other societies of heretickes are in that it retayneth the profession of some parts of heauenly trueth and ministreth the true Sacrament of Baptisme to the saluation of the soules of many thousand infants that die after they are baptized before shee haue poysoned them with her errours Thus having spoken sufficiently for the cleering of my selfe touching this point I will passe from this chapter to the next CHAP. 3. IN the third chapter he endeauoureth to shew that the Protestants doe now teach the necessity of one supreame Spirituall head and commaunder in the Church of Christ. His words are these Whereas heretofore some vnchristian Sermons and Bookes haue termed the Bishop of Rome to bee the great Antichrist wee shall now receiue a better doctrine and more religious answere That there euer was and must bee one chiefe and supreame spirituall Head and Commander of the Church of Christ on earth c. D Field citeth and approueth this as a generall and infallible rule Ecclesiae salus in summi sacerdotis dignitate pendet c. The health of the Church dependeth on the dignity of the high Priest whose eminent authority if it be denyed there will be as many schismes in the Church as there be Priests Then of necessity one chiefe supreme and high Priest must be assigned in his iudgement These are his words The place he meaneth is not page one hundred thirty eight as he quoteth it but page 80. Let the Reader how partiall soeuer peruse it and if he finde that I haue written any thing whence it may be concluded that I acknowledge there euer was and must bee one chiefe and supreme spirituall Head and Commaunder of the whole Church of Christ in earth I will fall prostrate at the Popes feete and be of the Romish religion for euer But if it appeare vnto him that the author of these pretended proofes hath cited this place to proue that which in his conscience he knew it did not let him beware of such false cozening companions My words are The vnity of each particvlar Church depends on the vnity of the Pastor who is one to whom an eminent and particular power is giuen and whom all must obey Heere is no word of one chiefe Pastor of the whole vniuersall church of Christ vpon earth but of one chiefe Pastor in each particular Church VVho would not detest the impudencie false dealing of these Romish writers But he saith I approue the saying of Hierome before mentioned therefore I must assigne one chiefe Pastour of the whole Church of Christ on earth How will he make good this consequence Doth Hierome speake in that place cited approued by mee of one supreame Pastor of the whole Church of Christ on earth Surely this Pamphletter knoweth he doth not but of the Bishop of each particular Church or Diocesse If saith Hierome thou shalt aske why he that is baptized in the church doth not receiue the Holy Ghost but by the hands of the Bishop which we say is giuen in baptisme know that this obseruation commeth from that authority that the Spirit descended vpon the
truth whose communion we must embrace follow her directions rest in her iudgement liuing and dying therein to haue eternall life men might here by my censure and advice confine themselues and wade no further in so many intricate controversies of religion the second that I am or must bee of opinion that all those bookes which the church of Rome receiued for canonicall are indeede canonicall For answere to the former of these allegations First I professe before God men and Angels that I neither do nor euer did thinke the present Romane church to be the true church whose communion wee are bound to embrace but an hereticall church with which we may not communicate Secondly I professe in like sort that though I did and doe acknowledge the church wherein our Fathers liued before Luthers time to haue beene the true church of God in respect of the best and indeede the principall parts thereof which held a sauing profession of the truth in Christ howsoeuer many and they greatly prevailing erred damnably yet I neuer thought it to be that church in whose iudgement we are to rest without any farther doubt or question nor that it was safe to follow the greater part of the guides and rulers of it but the church in whose iudgement wee must absolutely and finally rest is that whole and entire societie of Holy ones which beginning at Hierusalem and filling the world continueth vnto this day To refuse the iudgement of this church or to resist against any thing deliuered ab omnibus ubique semper in all places at all times by all Christian pastors and people not noted for heresie or singularitie were extreame folly and madnesse so that as I noted in answer to the first chapter out of Waldensis it is not any particular church as the church of Africa nor the particular Romane church but the vniuersall church not gathered together in a generall councell which hath sometimes erred but the whole catholique church dispersed through the world from the baptisme of Christ vnto our times which doth vndoubtedly holde the true faith and faithfull testimony of IESVS and in whose iudgement we must absolutely rest without any farther question oâ—… doubting and hereunto agreeth t Vincentius Lirinensis prescribing this course to bee followed in matters questioned touching faith and religion If errour creepe into one part of the Church we must looke vnto other that still are sound and pure if into almost the whole present church we must looke vp higher into former times and the resolutions of them that haue beene since the Apostles times Thus I hope the Reader will easily perceiue that this first allegation is friuolous For I doe not thinke the present Church of Rome to be the true church of God whose communion we must embrace nor that the particular Romane church when it was at the best was that church in the judgement whereof we are absolutely to rest and therefore let no man confine himselfe here without farther wading into particular controuersies but let euery man as he tendreth the saluation of his owne soule looke to the judgement of other churches also and to the resolutions of former times Now let vs proceede to his second allegation concerning canonicall and apocryphall bookes of Scripture His words are The Protestant surueyor of the Communion-booke affirmeth plainely that the Protestants of England must approue for Canonicall all those bookes which the Romane Church doth and Doctour Field is of the same opinion or must be for thus he writeth The ancient and true-beleeuing Iewes before the comming of Christ especially such as liued in Greece and nations out of Iury commonly called Hellenists receiued those bookes for canonicall Scripture It is well hee saith not absolutely that I am of that opinion but that I am or must be for he is well assured I am not but he knoweth how to force me to bee whether I will or not by falsly reporting my wordes and making me say that I neuer thought nor said For doe I any where say the ancient and true â—…euing Iewes before the comming of Christ receiued those bookes for canonicall especially such as were dispersed among the Gentiles No surely but the contrary namely that the ancient church of the Iewes did receiue those only as diuine and canonicall which we doe and not those other in question I am verily perswaded these men thinke lying to be no sinne for otherwise it were not likely that bragging so much of their good workes and trusting to the merit thereof they would wittingly runne so often into such a sinne as we silly men thinke it to be and as the spirit of God assureth vs it is being of the number of those that shut men out of the kingdome of God and Christ according to that in the Reuelation Without shall be dogges and inchanters and whore-mongers and murtherers idolaters and whosoeuer loueth or maketh lies But let vs see if hee deale not better in that which followeth Surely no hee is constant and euer like himselfe for hee saith Doctour Field writeth thus The ancient and true-beleeuing Iewes before the comming of Christ especially such as liued in Greece and nations out of Iury commonly called Hellenists receiued those bookes for canonicall Scripture and to vse his owne wordes Hence it came that the Iewes deliuered a double canon of Scripture to the Christian Churches Surely this is not to vse but to abuse my words For I was not so senselesse as to say the auncient and true-beleeuing Iewes receiued the bookes in question for Canonicall and that thence it came that they deliuered a double Canon of Scripture to the Christian Churches For if the Iewes generally had receiued all these bookes for canonicall but especially the Hellenists then they could not haue deliuered a double canon of Scripture but one onely Wherefore my words are not as hee reporteth them but hauing spoken of the 22 bookes of the old Testament I adde These onely did the auncient Church of the Iewes receiue as diuine Canonicall and that other bookes were added vnto these whose authoritie not being certaine and knowne are named Apocryphall fèll out in this sort The Iewes in their latter times before and at the comming of Christ were of two sorts some properly named Hebrewes commorant at Hierusalem in the holy land other named Hellenists Iewes of the dispersion mingled with the Grecians these had written sundry bookes in Greeke which they made vse of together with other parts of the old Testament which they had of the translation of the Septuagint but the Hebrewes receiued onely the 22 bookes before mentioned Hence it came that the Iewes deliuered a double Canon of the Scripture to the Christian Church the one pure indubitate diuine which is the Hebrew Canon the other in Greeke inriched with or rather adulterated by the addition of certaine other bookes written in those dayes when God raised vp no more Prophets among his people So that the
ever after restore them againe Hoc est Angelis casus quod hominibus mors saith Damascene The reason why God limited so short a time to them and assigned so long a time to men was because they were spirituall substances all created at once and that in the empyreall heauens and so both in respect of nature condition and place were most readily prepared disposed and fitted for their immediate everlasting glorification so that it was fit there should be set vnto them a short time to make choice of their future state never after to be altered againe to wit till their first deliberate conuersion vnto him or auersion from him But man being created in a naturall body to fill the world with inhabitants by procreation being set in a place farre remooued even in an earthly paradise had a longer time set him before he should be in finall stay or haue his last judgement passe vpon him to wit till death for particular and till the end of the world for generall judgement when the number of mankind shall bee full These are the reasons that mooued Almighty God that spared not the Angels to shew mercie vnto the sonnes of men So that as god in the day of the creation called foorth all both men and Angels from among the rest of his creatures to whom he denied the knowledge enjoying of himselfe that these onely might know feare and worship him in his glorious Temple of the world and be vnto him a selected multitude and holy Church so when there was found amongst these a dangerous Apostasie and departure from him he held of the Angels so many as hee was pleased and suffered them not to decline or goe aside with the rest and raised vp and severed out of the masse of perdition whom hee would among the sonnes of men The Angels now confirmed in grace and those men whom in the multitude of his mercies he deliuereth out of the state of condemnation and reconcileth to himselfe doe make that happie society of blessed ones whom God hath loved with an everlasting loue This society is more properly named the Church of God than the former consisting of men and Angels in the state of that integrity wherein they were created in that they which pertaine to this happie company are called to the participation of eternall happinesse with the calling of a more mighty potent and prevailing grace then the other For whereas they were partakers onely of that grace which gaue them power to attaine vnto and continue in the perfection of all happie good if they would and then In tanta felicitate non peccandi facilitate in so great felicitie and facilitie of not offending left to themselues to doe what they would and to make their choice at their owne perill These are partakers of that grace which winneth infallibly holdeth inseparably and leadeth indeclinably in the wayes of eternall blessednesse CHAP. 4. Of the Church of the Redeemed ALl these aswell Angels that stood by force of grace vpholding them as men restored by renewing mercy haue a most happie fellowship among themselues and therefore make one Church of God yet for that the sonnes of men haue a more full communion and perfect fellowship being all delivered out of the same miseries by the same benefit of gracious mercie Therefore they make that more speciall society which may rightly be named the Church of the redeemed of God This Church began in him in whom sinne beganne euen in Adam the father of all the liuing repenting after his fall and returning to God For we must not thinke that God was without a Church among men at any time but so soone as Adam had offended and was called to giue an account of that he had done hearing that voice of his displeased Lord and Creator Adam where art thou that so he might know in what estate he was by reason of his offence the promise was made vnto him that the seede of the woman should breake the serpents head Yet for that Abel was the first that the Scripture reporteth to haue worshipped God with sacrifice and to haue beene divided from the wicked in whom GOD had no pleasure euen cursed Cain that afterward shed his innocent blood therefore we vsually say the Church or chosē company of the redeemed of the Lord began in Abel who being slaine by Cain God restored his Church again in Seth in whose race and posterity he continued his true worship till Noe. In whose time the wickednesse of men being full hee brought in the flood destroyed the whole world Noe onely and his family excepted whom he made a preacher of righteousnesse to the world before and after the flood and chose from among his children Sem his eldest sonne in whose race hee would continue the pure and sincere knowledge of himselfe and the expectation of that promised seede that should breake the serpents head This Sem was the father of all the sonnes of Heber of whom the people of god were afterwards named Hebrewes who was also as some thinke Melchisedech in whose posterity the true Church continued so that God vouchsafed to be called the God of Sem till the dayes of Abraham in whose time there being a great declining to Idolatry after the flood as there was in the dayes of Noe before the flood so that the defection was found not onely amongst those that descended of Cham and Iaphet but euen among the children of Sem and the sonnes of Heber also of whom Abraham was God called him out from his fathers house and gaue him the promise that he would make his seede as the starres of heaven in number that in his seede all the nations of the world should bee blessed and gaue him the seale of circumcision so that all posterities haue ever honoured him with the name and title of the father of the faithfull This man obtayned a sonne by promise in his old age when Sara his wife was likewise old and it ceased to bee with her after the manner of women and named his name Isaac of whom came Esau and Iacob concerning whom GOD pronounced ere they were yet borne or had done good or euill The Elder shall serue the yonger I haue loued Iacob and hated Esau. Iacob therefore prevailed with God and was named Israel the father of the twelue Patriarches of whom came the twelue Tribes of Israel and that chosen Nation of holy Hebrewes who were also named Iewes of Iudah the Patriarch to whom the Scepter and kingly dignity pertained to whom his fathers sonnes bowed according to the tenour of Iacobs blessing concerning whom the Lord did promise that the Scepter should not depart from Iudah nor a law giuer from betweene his feete till the Shilo were come Great was the honour of this people aboue all the Nations of the World for vnto them were committed the
it selfe the note of Antiquitie because it hath long continued and beene before others in the profession of Christianitie but besides it is required that it haue aunciently and ever holden the doctrine of trueth This is specially to be noted against old heresies whereof some began in the Apostles times And hee saith of the Churches of Greece Aethiopia and Armenia that though their Antiquitie did reach as high as the Apostles times yet notwithstanding propter doctrinae novitates postea inuentas veram antiquitatem non habent because they haue brought in newe doctrine they haue no true Antiquitie CHAP. 6 Of Succession HItherto we haue spoken of Antiquitie which they make the first note of the Church It followeth in the next place that wee speake of Succession The ministerie of pastours and teachers is absolutely and essentially necessary to the being of the Church For how should there be a Church gathered guided and gouerned without a ministerie Therefore the ministery of those whom God sanctified to himselfe to teach instruct and gouerne his people is an essentiall marke and note of the Church as wee haue already shewed Now because the Church is not to last onely for some short time so to cease but to continue to the end of the world this ministery must continue likewise which because it cannot continue in the same persons all being subiect to death it is necessary that when some faile others possesse the places they formerly held which is to Succeede Neither is this Succeeding of one into the place of another necessary onely by reason of that failing which is by death but because the places of sacred ministery must not be vnfurnished if either the wickednesse of them that are in place cast them out or their weakenesse cause a voluntary relinquishment of their office and standing others must succeede Lawfull and holy ministery therefore is an inseparable and perpetuall note of a true Church for no Church can be without it but Succession not so For the Churches in the first establishment in the Apostles time had it not and many Churches which in sundry ages since haue beene founded had none their Bishops being the first and succeeding none in those episcopall chaires wherein they sate If therefore we should cauill against them as they doe against vs wee might deny Succession to bee a note of the Church because there haue beene and may be true Churches without it as all at the first in the beginning of Christianity and all others since newly founded in their first beginnings But because wee knowe they make not Succession of pastours and Bishoppes a note of the Church absolutely considered but of that which being formerly established is still to bee continued by multitudes of men and people continually succeeding and comming into the places of others that went before them in the same profession of Christianity Let vs see whether Succession of Bishops and pastours may truely be sayd to be a note of the Church Absolutely and without limitation doubtlesse it is not For there may bee a continued Succession of Bishoppes where there is no true Church as at this day amongst the Grecians Armenians and Aethiopians which yet are not the true Churches of GOD in the opinion of them that plead for succession Bellarmine therefore sayth that Succession is inseparable so that there can bee no Church without it but that it is not proper so that wheresoeuer it is found we may assure our selues that there is the Church so forgetting himselfe who requireth in the notes that they be proper and rejecteth our note of purity of doctrine free from pertinacious errour because it may be found among schismatickes though it be inseparable and the true Church cannot be without it But Stapleton handleth this point of Succession much better For hee saith that Succession is an inseparable and proper note of the true Church but not euery Succession but that which is true and lawfull Let vs therefore see what hee requireth to make a true and lawfull Succession First there must be a place voide by resignation deprivation or death Secondly they that succeede must haue election and ordination from them to whom it appertaineth to elect and ordaine Thirdly they must not depart from the faith that was formerly holden by them that went before vnlesse any of them did first decline and goe aside from the way of the first and most auncient that held those places before and therefore in the catalogue of Bishops succeeding one another in each seuerall See wheresoeuer any first began to teach any new and strange doctrine different from that which was formerly deliuered the thread and line of succession was by him either wholly broken or some-what endaungered according to the quality of the errour and the manner of defending and maintaining the same So that this is all which Stapleton saith that wheresoeuer wee finde a Church once established vnder a lawfull ministery in the vndoubted profession of the trueth if afterwards there be a Succession of Pastours and Bishoppes in the same place and that none of them depart from the faith of the former that so it may be evident that what faith was first holden is still holden by them that presently are in place there wee may assure our selues to find the true Church Thus still wee see that truth of doctrine is a necessary note whereby the Church must be knowen and discerned and not ministery or Succession or any thing else without it But saith he the people must not judge which is true doctrine and which is false by the particular consideration of the things themselues but onely by the newnesse strangenesse contrarietie it hath with that which they haue learned of their pastours guides forefathers He alloweth then a kind of judgement to the vulgar sort who must discerne which is the true doctrine which is the false though not by particular consideration of the things themselues that are taught yet by the newnesse strangenesse of them Touching the judgement the people of God ought to haue of the doctrine of Christianity I will speake when I come to the fourth part of my first and generall diuision In the meane while it sufficeth that not bare naked Succession but true lawfull wherein no new or strange doctrine is brought into the Church but the auncient religiously preserved is a marke note or character of the true Church CHAP. 7. Of the third note assigned by them which is Vnitie THe third note of the Church assigned by them is Vnity There are many sorts degrees of Vnity found in the Church The first in respect of the same beginning and originall cause which is GOD that hath called vs to the fellowshippe of his Sonne and to the hope of eternall life 10. 6. No man commeth vnto me vnlesse my father draw him The 2d in respect of the same last end wherevnto all they that are of the Church doe
we should haue no greater certainty of things Diuine and revealed then such as humane meanes and causes can yeeld And so seeing wee can neuer bee so well perswaded of any man or multitude of men but that we may justly feare either they are deceiued or will deceiue if our faith depend vpon such grounds we cannot firmely vndoubtedly beleeue Nay it is consequent vpon this absurd opinion that the Children of the Church and they of the houshold of faith haue no infused or Diuine faith at all for that whatsoeuer is revealed by the God of truth is true the Heathens make no doubt but doubt whether any thing were so revealed and that any thing was so revealed if these men say true we haue no assurance but by humane meanes and causes But the absurdity hereof the same Canus out of Calvin doth very learnedly demonstrate reasoning in this sort If all they that haue beene our teachers nay if all the Angels in Heauen shall teach vs any other or contrary doctrine to that we haue receiued we must holde them accursed and not suffer our faith to bee shaken by them as the Apostle chargeth vs in the Epistle to the Galatians therefore our faith doth not rely vpon humane causes or grounds of assurance Ne mens nostra vacillet altius petenda quà m ab hominum vel ratione vel auctoritate scripturae authoritas Besides our faith and that of the Apostles and Prophets being the same it must needes haue the same object the same ground and stay to rest vpon in both but they builded themselues vpon the sure and vnmooueable rocke of Diuine truth and authority therefore we must doe so likewise If any man desire farther satisfaction herein let him reade Canus and Calvin to whom in these things Canus is much beholding Others therefore to avoide this absurdity run into that other before mentioned that we beleeue the things that are diuine by the meere and absolute command of our will not finding any sufficient motiues reasons of perswasion hereupon they define faith in this sort Fides est assensus firmus ineuideÌ„s that is faith is a firme certaine ful assent of the mind beleeuing those things the truth whereof no way appeareth vnto vs. For father explication and better clearing of this definition of faith they make two kindes of certainty for there is as they say certitudo evidentiae and certitudo adhaerentiae that is there is a certainty of evidence which is of those things the truth whereof appeareth vnto vs and another of adherence and firme cleauing to that the trueth whereof appeareth not vnto vs. This later they suppose to bee the certainty that is found in fayth and there vpon they hold that a man may beleeue a thing meerely because hee will without any motiues or reason of perswasion at all the contrary whereof when Picus Mirandula proposed among other his conclusions to bee disputed in Rome hee was charged with heresie for it But hee sufficiently cleared himselfe from all such imputation and improued their fantasie that so thinke by vnanswerable reasons which I haue thought good to lay downe in this place It is not sayth hee in the power of a man to thinke a thing to bee or not to bee meerely because hee will therefore much lesse firmely to beleeue it The trueth of the antecedent wee finde by experience and it evidently appeareth vnto vs because if a doubtfull proposition bee proposed concerning which the vnderstanding and minde of man resolueth nothing seeing no reason to leade to resolue one way or other the minde thus doubtfull cannot incline any way till there bee some inducement either of reason sight of the eye or testimony or authority of them wee are well conceipted of to settle our perswasion Secondly a man cannot assent to any thing or judge it to bee true vnlesse it so appeare vnto him but the sole acte of a mans will cannot make a thing to appeare and seeme true or false but either the euidence of the thing or the testimony and authority of some one of whose judgement he is well perswaded Thirdly though the action of vnderstanding quoad exercitium as to consider of a thing and thinke vpon it or to turne away such consideration from it depend on the will yet not quoad specificationem as to assent or dissent for these opposite and contrary kinds of the vnderstandings actions are from the contrary and different appearing of things vnto vs. Fourthly the sole command of the will cannot make a man to beleeue that which being demanded why hee beleeueth he giueth reasons and alledgeth inducements but so it is that in matters of our Christian faith we alledge sundry reasons mouing vs to beleeue as Christians doe as appeareth by the course of all Diuines who lay downe eight principall reasons moouing men to beleeue the Gospell namely the light of propheticall prediction the harmony and agreement of the Scriptures the diligence of them that receiued them carefully seeking to discerne betweene truth and errour the authority grauitie of the writers the reasonablenesse of the things written the vnreasonablenes of all contrary errours the stability of the Church and the miracles that haue beene done for the confirmation of the faith it professeth Fiftly if there be two whereof one beleeueth precisely because he will and another onely because hee will not beleeue refuseth to beleeue the same thing the acte of neither of these is more reasonable then the other being like vnto the will of a Tyrant that is not guided at all by reason but makes his owne liking the rule of his actions Now who is so impious to say The Christians that beleeue the Gospell haue no more reason to leade them so to doe then the Infidels that refuse to beleeue With Picus in the confutation of this senselesse conceipt wee may joyne Cardinall Cameracensis who farther sheweth that as a man cannot perswade himselfe of a thing meerely because hee will without any reason at all so hauing reason hee cannot perswade himselfe more strongly and assuredly of it then the reason hee hath will afforde for if hee doe it is so farre an vnreasonable acte like that of a Tyrant before mentioned Durandus likewise is of the same opinion Assentiri nullus potest nisi ei quod apparet verum igitur oportâ—…t quèd illud quòd creditur appareat rationi verum vel in se vel ratione mâ—…dij per quod assentitur si non in se sed tantùm ratione medij illud medium apparebit verum vel in se vel per aliud medium si non est processus in infinitum oportet quòd deueniatur ad primum quod apparet rationi esse verum in se secundum se That is No man can yeeld assent to any thing but that which appeareth to him to be true therefore whatsoeuer a man beleeueth must seeme and appeare vnto him to bee
of Canonicall bookes a tradition must necessarily receiue it from a certaine and constant report of the ancient But hereof no more in this place because the exact handling of it pertaineth to another place to wit touching the Scriptures CHAP. 13 Of the Churches authority to iudge of the differences that arise touching matters of faith THus hauing spoken of the Churches assured possession of diuine truth and her office of teaching testifying and proposing the same the next thing that followeth is her authority to judge of the differences that may arise touching matters of the faith taught by her or any part thereof and more specially touching the interpretation of the Scriptures and word of God Iudgement is an acte of reason discerning whether a thing be or not and whether it be that it seemeth to be and is thought or said to be This judgment is of two sortes The first of definitiue and authenticall power The second of Recognition The judgement of authenticall power defining what is to bee thought of each thing and prescribing to mens consciences so to thinke is proper to God being originally found in the father who by his sonne as by the immediate and prime messenger and Angell of his secret Counsell and by the holy Ghost as the spirit of illumination maketh knowne vnto men what they must thinke and perswadeth them so to thinke So that the supreame judgement wherein the conscience of men doeth rest in the things of GOD is proper to GOD who onely by his spirit teacheth the conscience and giueth vnto it assurance of truth Neither is God the supreme Iudge onely inrespect of the godly who stay not till they resolue their perswasions into the certainty of his diuine testimony and vndoubted authority but also in respect of the wicked who in their erronious conceipts are judged by him and of whose sinister and vile courses he sitteth in judgement while he confoundeth their tongues diuideth them one from another maketh them crosse themselues and bringeth all they doe to nothing This judgement all are forced to stand vnto and this is that that maketh a finall end of all controversies according to that of Gamaliel If this thing be of God it will prosper and prevaile and wee inresisting it shall be found fighters against God if not it will come to naught Thus then the judgement of God the father as supreme the judgement of the sonne as the eternall word of God of the spirit as the fountaine of all illumination making vs discerne what is true is that in which wee finally rest The judgement or determination of the word of God is that wherein wee rest as the rule of our faith and the light of Diuine vnderstanding as that whereby we iudge of all things The judgement of Recognition is of three sorts For there is a judgement of discretion common to all Christian men a judgement of direction proper to the guides of the Church and a judgement of jurisdiction proper to them that are in cheife places of authority The first of these is nothing else but an acte of vnderstanding discerning whether things be or not and whether also they bee that which they seeme to bee The second endeuoureth to make others discerne likewise and the third by authority suppresseth all those that shall thinke and pronounce otherwise then they judge that haue the judgement of Iurisdiction Touching the judgement of Recognition wee acknowledge the judgement of the vniuersall Church comprehending the faithfull that are and haue beene to be infallible In the Church that comprehendeth onely the beleeuers that liue at one time in the world there is alwayes found a right judgement of discretion and right pronouncing of each thing necessary all neuer falling into damnable errour nor into any error pertinaciously but a right judgement of men by their power of jurisdiction mantayning the truth and suppressing errour is not alwayes found So that sometimes almost all may conspire agaâ—…nst the truth or consent to betray the sincerity of the Christian profession as they did in the Councells of Ariminium Seleucia in which case as Occam aptly obserueth out of Hierome men haue nothing left vnto them but with sorrowfull hearts to referre all vnto God If sayth Hierome iniquity prevaile in the Church which is the house of God if iustice be oppressed if the madnes of them that should teach guide others proceed so farre as to pervert all the straight wayes of God to receiue rewards to doe wrong to treade downe the poore in the gates and to refuse to heare their complaynts let good men in such times hold their peace let them not giue that which is holy vnto dogges let them not cast pearles before swine least they turne againe and trample them vnder â—…eete let them imitate Ieremie the Prophet who speaketh of himselfe in this sort I sate alone because I was full of bitternesse Euen so sayth Occam when heresies prevaile in the Christian world when truth is trampled vnder feete in the streetes and Prelates Princes being enemies to it endevour with all their power to destroy it when they shall condemne the doctrine of the Fathers molest disquiet and murder the true professours let good men in such times hold their peace keepe silence and be still let them not giue holy things to dogges nor cast pearles before swine least they turne and tread them vnder feete least they wrest and abuse the Scriptures to their owne perdition and the scandall of others but let them with the Prophet sit alone and complaine that their soules are full of bitter heavinesse CHAP. 14. Of the rule of the Churches judgment THus hauing set downe the diuerse kinds of iudgment which must determine and end all controuersies in matter of faith and religion it remaineth to shewe what is the rule of that iudgment whereby the Church discerneth betweene truth and falsehood the faith and heresie and to whom it properly pertaineth to interpret those things which touching this rule are doubtfull As the measure of each thing is that by vertue whereof wee know what it is and the quantity of it so the rule is that by application whereof wee know whether it be that which it should be and be so as it should be The rule of action is that whereby we know whether it be right and performed as it should be or not The rule of doctrine is that whereby wee know whether it be true or false The rule of our faith in generall whereby we know it to be true is the infinite excellencie of God who in eminent sort possesseth all those perfections which in the creatures are diuided and found in an inferiour sort in the full perfect vnion with whom and inioying of whom consisteth all happinesse For by this rule we know that the doctrine of faith which only professeth to bring vs backe to God to possesse and enioy him not as he is participated of vs but as he
mâ—…ch with many declamations against priuate interpretations and interpretations of private spirits and make the world beleeue that wee follow no other rule of interpretation but each mans private fancie For answere herevnto we say with Stapleton that interpretations of Scripture may be sayd to be private and the spirits whence they proceede named priuate either Ratione personae modi or finis That is in respect of the person who interpreteth the manner of his proceeding in interpreting or the end of his interpretation A priuate interpretation proceeding from a priuate spirit in the first sense is euery interpretation deliuered by men of priuate condition In the second sense is that which men of what condition soeuer deliuer contemning and neglecting those publike meanes which are knowen to all and are to be vsed by all that desire to finde the trueth In the third sense that which proceeding from men of priuate condition is not so proposed and vrged by them as if they would binde all other to receiue and imbrace it but is intended onely to their owne satisfaction The first kind of interpretation proceeding from a private spirit is not to be disliked if the parties so interpreting neither neglect the common rules meanes of attayning the right sense of that they interpret contemne the judgement of other men nor presumptuously take vpon them to teach others and enforce them to beleeue that which they apprehend for trueth without any authority so to doe But priuate spirits in the second sense that is men of such dispositions as will follow their owne fancies and neglect the common rules of direction as Enthusiasts and trust to their owne sense without conference and due respect to other mens judgements wee accurse This is all we say touching this matter wherein I would faine know what our aduersaries dislike Surely nothing at all as it will appeare to euery one that shall but looke into the place aboue alledged out of Stapleton But say they there must bee some authenticall interpretation of Scripture which euery one must bee bound to stand vnto or else there will be no end of quarrels and contentions The interpretation of Scripture is nothing else but the explication and clearing of the meaning of it This is either true or false The true interpretation of the Scripture is of two sorts For there is an interpretation which deliuereth that which is true and contayned in the Scripture or from thence to bee concluded though not meant in that place which is expounded This is not absolutely and perfectly a true interpretation because though it truely deliuereth such doctrine as is contayned in the Scripture and nothing contrarie to the place interpreted yet it doth not expresse that that is particularly meant in the place expounded There is therefore another kind of true interpretations when not onely that is deliuered which is contayned in the Scripture but that which is meant in the particular places expounded Likewise false interpretations are of two sorts some deliuering that which is vtterly false and contrary to the Scripture some others onely fayling in this that they attaine not the true sense of the particular places expounded An example of the former is that interpretation of that place of Genesis The sonnes of God saw the daughters of men c. which some of the Fathers haue deliuered vnderstanding by the sonnes of God the Angels of Heauen whose fall they suppose proceeded from the loue of women Which errour they confirme by that of the Apostle that women must come vayled into the Church for the Angels that is as they interpret least the Angels should fall in loue with them A false interpretation of the later kind Andradius sheweth some thinke that exposition of the wordes of the Prophet Esaie Quis enarrabit generationem eius Who shall declare his generation deliuered by many of the Fathers vnderstanding thereby the eternall generation of the son of God which no man shall declare Whereas by the name of generation the Prophet meaneth that multitude that shall beleeue in Christ which shall be so great as cannot be expressed An authenticall interpretation is that which is not only true but so clearely and in such sort that euery one is bound to imbrace and to receiue it As before we made 3 kinds of judgment the one of discretion common to all the other of direction common to the Pastors of the Church and a third of jurisdiction proper to them that haue supreame power in the Church so likewise wee make three kindes of interpretation the first private and so euery one may interpret the Scripture that is privately with himselfe conceiue or deliuer to other what hee thinketh the meaning of it to bee the second of publike direction and so the Pastors of the Church may publikely propose what they conceiue of it and the third of jurisdiction and so they that haue supreme power that is the Bishops assembled in a generall Councell may interpret the Scripture and by their authority suppresse all them that shall gainesay such interpretations and subject euery man that shall disobey such determinations as they consent vpon to excommunication and censures of like nature But for authenticall interpretation of Scriptures which every mans conscience is bound to yeeld vnto it is of an higher nature neither doe wee thinke any of these to be such as proceeding from any of those before named specified to whom wee graunt a power of interpretation Touching the interpretations which the Fathers haue deliuered we receiue them as vndoubtedly true in the generall doctrine they consent in and so farre forth esteeme them as authenticall yet doe wee thinke that holding the faith of the Fathers it is lawfull to dissent from that interpretation of some particular places which the greater part of them haue deliuered or perhaps all that haue written of them and to find out some other not mentioned by any of the Auncient CHAP. 17. Of the interpretation of the Fathers and how farre wee are bound to admit it THe Fathers sayth Andradius especially they of the Greeke Church being ignorant of the Hebrew tongue following Origen did rather striue with all their wit and learning to devise Allegories and to frame the manners of men then to cleare the hard places of the law and the Prophets Nay euen Hierome himselfe who more diligently then any of the rest sought out the meaning and sense of the Propheticall and diuine Oracles yet often to avoyde the obscurities of their words betaketh himselfe to Allegories In this sense it is that Cardinall Caietan saith hee will not feare to goe against the torrent of all the Doctors for which saying Andradius sheweth that Canus and others doe vnjustly blame him For though wee may not goe from the faith of the Fathers nor from the maine trueth of doctrine which they deliuer in different interpretations yet may wee interpret some parts of the Scripture otherwise then any
diuided into these two factions the nobles and great ones enclining for the most part to the Sadduces and the common people to the Pharisees whereupon wee reade in the acts of the Apostles that Paul standing before Ananias the high Priest and the rest of the chiefe Priests and Rulers of the people to be judged knowing that the one part of them were Sadduces and the other part Pharisees cried aloud I am a Pharisee and the sonne of a Pharisee I am accused of the hope and resurrection of the dead and that vpon the hearing of these words there was a dissention betweene the Pharisees and Sadduces so that the whole multitude was diuided that there was a great cry and that the Scribes of the Pharisees part arose vp and stroue saying Wee finde no euill in the man But if a Spirit or an Angell hath spoken vnto him let vs not fight against God CHAP. 8. Of Prophets and Nazarites BEsides the Priests and Levites whom God chose to attend his Seruice Sanctuary rent and divided in latter times into the manifold factions and Heresies aboue-mentioned there were other who medled not with the Ministery of holy things and yet were specially dedicated and sanctified vnto God These were either such as dedicated their bodies and persons vnto God as the Nazarites or such as God raised vp extraordinarily to fore-shew future things and to reforme abuses and errours as were the Prophets The vow of the Nazarits is described in the book of Numbers where the Lord God spake vnto Moses saying Speake vnto the children of Israel and say vnto them When a man or woman doth separate themselues to vow a vow of a Nazarite to separate himselfe vnto the Lord he shall abstaine from wine and strong drinke no razorshall come vpon his head but he shall let the lockes of the haire of hishead to grow during the time that he separateth himselfe vnto the Lord He shall come at no dead body hee shall not make himselfe vncleane at the death of his father or mother brother or sister for the consecration of the Lord is vpon his head The Nazarites were of two sorts for some did separate themselues vnto the Lord but for a time and others perpetually Nazarites of the former sort they were of whō Iames and the Elders doe speake in the Acts saying vnto Paul Wee haue foure men which haue made a vow them take and purifie thy selfe with them and contribute with them that they may shaue their heads and all shall know that those things whereof they haue beene informed concerning thee are nothing but that thou thy selfe also walkest and keepest the Law Of the latter sort the Scripture mentioneth onely two Sampson and Samuel Concerning Sampson we reade that the Angell of God appeared vnto the wife of Manoah his mother and said vnto her Behold now thou art barren and bearest not but thou shalt conceiue and beare a sonne and now therefore beware that thou drinke no wine nor strong drinke neither eate any vncleane thing For loe thou shalt conceiue and beare a sonne and no razor shall come on his head For the Childe shall be a Nazarite vnto God from his birth and he shall begin to saue Israel out of the hands of the Philistines And of Samuel his mother sayd before he was borne I will giue him to the Lord all the dayes of his life and no razor shall come vpon his head To these Hierome addeth out of Egesippus Iames the just the brother of our Lord. Prophets properly are such as fore-know and fore-tell things that are to come but because as Gregory fitly noteth it is as hard to know the things that are past whereof there is no report and the things that are done a farre off or in secret or that are but contriued and resolued on in the purposes of the heart as to fore-see what shall come to passe hereafter the knowledge of all these things pertaineth to propheticall grace and illumination and it was no lesse a propheticall spirit that directed Moses in writing the storie of the Creation fall and propagation of mankind nor no lesse a Propheticall illumination that made Elizeus know what was done in the King of Arams privie chamber then it was in Esay and the rest that enabled them to foretell and fore-shew the things that were to come And therefore the Diuines make diuerse sorts of Prophets some to whom principally things past were reuealed or hidden things then being and some to whom things that were after to come to passe were more specially manifested or made knowne Some that were Prophets both in grace and mission some in grace onely In grace and mission as they that were specially sent to foreshew the people of God what was to come to passe to tell them of their transgressions and the judgments that were to follow In grace onely as were all such as were not specially imployed to this purpose and yet had the knowledge of secret things as Daniel and some other CHAP. 9. Of Assemblies vpon extraordinary occasions THVS hauing spoken sufficiently of the persons that God sanctified to serue him in the Temple and to teach direct and instruct his people as also of such as voluntarily dedicated themselues vnto him or were extraordinarily raised vp by him Let us see what the gouernement of the Church and people of God was vnder them during the time of the law vntill the comming of Christ. The Scriptures shew vs that God appointed for the gouernement of his people extraordinary Assemblies and set judgments Whereunto the Prophet Dauid seemeth to allude when he sayth The wicked shall not rise vp in judgment nor Sinners in the assembly of the righteous In assemblies were handled things concerning the state of the whole common-wealth In the set Courts things concerning particular parts of it Assemblies were of two sorts either of the whole people or of the Elders and Rulers only Assemblies of the whole people were gathered together to heare the commandements of God to make publike praiers vnto him or to performe and doe some extraordinary thing as to appoint a King a Iudge or a Prince to proclaime or wage warre or the like These Assemblies were either of the whole people of Israel or onely of the whole people of one tribe or citie For the calling of these assemblies God commanded two trumpets of siluer to be made and to be in the custodie of Moses and his successours with this direction that when they blowed with them both all the congregation should assemble vnto them but when they blowed but with one the Princes or Heads ouer the thousands of Israel onely should come The set Courts and Tribunals were of two sorts the one in the gates of euery Citty called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Iudgment the other at Hierusalem called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a Councell wherevnto Christ seemeth to haue alluded when he sayd
Whosoeuer is angry with his brother vnaduisedly shall be guilty of judgment but whosoeuer sayth Racha shall be guiltie of a Councell and he that saith Thou foole shall be worthy to be punished with Gehenna of fire or the fierie Gehenna Thereby shewing vs that one of these offences and faults is more grieuous and worthy of greater punishment then the other for the Councell or Sanedrim did handle weightier causes and might inflict more grieuous punishments theÌ„ the set Courts of Iustice in the gates of euery city So that this is it he meant to say He that is angry with his brother vnaduisedly shall be guilty of judgment that is of some lighter punishment and he that sayth Racha shall be subject to the councell that is punished more grieuously but he that sayth Thou foole shall be punished with all extremity answering in proportion to the cruell and mercilesse burning of of men in the valley of Hinnon or the fiery Gehenna S. Augustine in his first booke De Sermone Domini in monte doth somewhat otherwise but very excellently expresse the meaning of Christs words in this sort There are sayth he degrees of sinne in this kind mentioned by Christ itaque in primo vnum est id est ira sola in secundo duo ira vox quae iram significat in tertio tria ira vox quae iram significat in voce ipsa certae vituperationis expressio Vide nunc etiam tres reatus Iudicij Concilij Gehennae ignis Nam in Iudicio adhuc defensioni datur locus ad Concilium pertinet sententiae prolatio quando non jam cum reo agitur vtrum damnandus sit sed inter se qui iudicant conferunt quo supplicio damnari oporteat quem constat esse damnandum Gehenna vero ignis nec damnationem habet dubiaÌ„ sicut Iudicium nec damnati poenam sicut ConciliuÌ„ in Gehenná quippe ignis certa est daÌ„natio poena damnati That is In the first degree there is but one thing that is anger only In the 2d two anger a voyce expressing anger In the third three anger the voyce that giueth signification of it and in the voyce it selfe an expressing of some certaine reproach See now also three guilts of judgment of Councell and the Gehenna of fire For in Iudgment there is yet place left for defence to Councell pertaineth the pronouncing of the sentence when there is no more to bee done with the partie guilty nor no further doubt whether he be to be condemned or not but they that iudge take counsell and conferre amongst themselues to what punishment they shall condemne him of whose condemnation they are already resolued but in the Gehenna of fire there is neither doubtfulnesse of condemnation as in Iudgement nor of the punishment of the condemned as in Councell For there both the condemnation is certaine and the punishment also The Papists alledge the words of Christ for proofe of veniall sinnes because onely the last degree of vnaduised and causelesse anger is pronounced worthy to be punished with Gehenna of fire or hell fire Whence they thinke it may be concluded that other degrees of causelesse anger though sinfull yet do not subiect men to any punishment in hell and consequently are by nature veniall But if we vnderstand that Christ alluded to the different courts of justice amongst the Iewes their proceedings in the same and the diuersity of punishments which they inflicted more or lesse grieuous as Sigonius in his booke Derepub Hebraeorum and other excellently learned doe then by Gehenna of fire is not simply meant hell fire which is the generall punishment of damned sinners but the greatest extremity of punishment in hell expressed by comparison with the cruell torments which they indured that were consumed in fire in Gehenna or the valley of Hinnon farre more intollerable then were the punishments inflicted by the Iudgement or Councell to which the lighter and lesser punishments in hell due to lesser and lighter sinnes may be resembled And though wee vnderstand the words as Augustine doth yet is not their errour confirmed by this place for as he fitly noteth whereas to kill is more greeuous then to wrong by contumelious and railing speeches amongst the Pharisees onely killing was thought to make a man guilty of judgement But heere anger the least of all the sinnes mentioned by Christ is by him pronounced guilty of judgement and whereas amongst them the question of murther was brought before the iudgement seate of men here all things are left to the judgement of God where the end of the condemned and guilty is hell fire And for farther cleering of this point he addeth that if any man shall say that murther as more greiuous is to be punished more grieuously according to the rule of iustice then with hell fire if rayling speeches be punishable with hell fire hee will force vs to acknowledge diuerse hells or kindes and degrees of punishments in hell So farre was Augustine from imagining any such difference of sinnes whereof some should be worthy to be punished in hell and some not to be proued out of this place as our aduersaries would enforce and vrge CHAP. 10. Of the sâ—…t Courts amongst the Iewes their authority and continuance TOuching the Tribunals and iudgements that were in euery city God sayd vnto Moses Thou shalt appoint thee Iudges and Magistrates in all thy cityes and againe They shall goe vp to the Iudges that sit in the gates of the city But the Sanedrim or great Councell of State consisted of the King the twelue Princes of the people the seaventy Elders the high Priest the chiefe Priests and the Scribes And this Councell was first in Siloh afterwards at Hierusalem first in the tribe of Ephraim and after in the tribe of Iudah and after the rent of the tenne tribes none but the elders of Iudah and Beniamin and the Priests and Leuites entred into this Councell This Councell either the King or high Priest called according as the matter to bee heard touched Religion or the common-wealth But after the returne from Babylon the high Priest was alwayes chiefe and gouerned with the Elders and chiefe Priests For there were no more kings of Iudah after that time but the kings of Persia Aegypt and Syria had the command ouer Iudaea and made the Iewes pay tribute vnto them Of this Councell almighty God did speake when he said If there arise a matter too hard for thee in iudgement between bloud and bloud between plea plea betweene plague and plague in matters of controversie within thy gates then shalt thou arise goe vp to the place which the Lord thy God shall chuse and thou shalt come vnto the Priests of the Leuites vnto the Iudge that shall be in those dayes aske they shall shew thee the sentence of iudgment thou shalt doe according vnto that thing which they of
damage It were impious to thinke that Christ suffered the former kinde but that hee suffered this latter kinde of punishment of losse damage many great Diuines are of opinion For though as hee was ioyned to God affectione iustitiae that is by the affection of vertue or justice hee could not be diuided or separated from him no not for a moment because he could not but loue him feare him trust in him giue him the praise and glory that belongeth to him yet as he was to be joyned to him affectione commodi that is by that affection that seeketh pleasing content in enjoying those ineffable delights pleasures that are found in him hee might bee and was for a time diuided from him For as very great graue Diuines do thinke he was destitutus omni solatio that is destitute void of all that solace he was wont to find in God in that fearefull houre of darknesse of his dolefull passion As saith Melchior Canus Christ in the time of his life miraculously restrained kept within the closet of his secret Spirit the happines that he injoyed in seeing God that it should not spread farther communicate it self to the inferior faculties of his Soule or impart the brightnes of it to the body so in the houre of his passion his very Spirit was with-holden from any pleasure it might take in so pleasing an object as is the Essence Majesty and glory of God which euen then he clearely beheld So that Christ neuer wanted the vision of that object which naturally maketh all them happy that beholde it and filleth them with such joy as no heart of mortall man can conceiue or tongue expresse But as it was strange and yet most true in the time of his life that his Soule enjoyed Heauen-happines and that yet neither the inferiour faculties thereof were admitted into any fellowship of the same nor his Body glorified but subject to misery and passion so it fell out by the speciall dispensation of Almighty God in the time of his death and in that fearefull houre of darknes that his Soule seeing God the pleasure delight that naturally commeth from so pleasing an object stayed with-held communicated not it selfe vnto it as a man in great distresse taketh no pleasure in those things that otherwise exceedingly affect him This his conceipt he saith he communicated to very great and worthy Diuines while he was yet but a young man and that they were so farre from disliking it that they approued it exceedingly But some man will say it is not possible in this life to feele extremity of paines answereable to the paines of hell more then on earth to enjoy the happines of Heauen and that therefore it is absurd to grant that Christ in the dayes of his flesh suffered in this World extremity of paine answerable to the paines of hell Hereunto it is answered that in ordinary course it is impossible for any man liuing in this World either to enjoy the happines of Heauen or feele the paines of Hell but that as Christ was at the same time both Viator and Comprehensor that is a manlike vnto vs that journey here in this World towards Heauen-happines and yet happy with that happines that ordinarily is found no where but in Heauen so hee might suffer that extremity of paine haue that apprehension of afflictiue euils that ordinarily is no where to bee found in this World euen while he liued here on earth Luther saith truely that if a man could perfectly see his owne euils the sight thereof would bee a perfect hell vnto him now it is certaine that Christ saw all the euils of punishment before expressed to which he voluntarily subjected himselfe to satisfie diuine Iustice comming fierce and violently vpon him with as cleare a sight and as perfect an apprehension of them as is to be had in the other World CHAP. 18. Of the nature and qualitie of the passion and suffering of Christ. HItherto we haue spoken of the punishments that Christ sustained and suffered to satisfie the justice and pacifie the wrath of his Father Now it remaineth that we come to take a view of the nature and qualitie of his passion and suffering consisting partly in his feare and agonie before and pardy in his bitter sorrow and distresse in the very act of that dolefull tragedy Touching the first the Scripture testifieth that he feared exceedingly and desired the cuppe might passe from him Touching the second that he was beset with sorrowes euen vnto the death and that in his extremitie he cried aloud My God my God why hast thou forsaken me But touching both these passions of feare sorrow it is noted that whereas there are three kindes of faults found in the passions of mens mindes the first that they arise before reason be consulted or giue direction the second that they proceed farther then they should and stay not when they are required and the third that they transport reason judgement it selfe Christ had these passions but in a sort free from all these euils For neither did they arise in him before reason gaue direction wherevpon he is said to haue troubled or moued himselfe in the case of Lazarus for whom he greatly sorrowed neither did they proceede any farther if once reason judgement commanded a stay and retrait wherevpon they are called Propassions rather then Passions not because as Kellison ignorantly supposeth reason preuenteth them and causeth them to arise though it bee true it doth so but because they are but fore-runners to passions at liberty and beginnings of passions to be staied at pleasure rather then full and perfect passions and therefore much lesse had they any power to transport judgement reason it selfe From these generall considerations of the passions of Christ let vs proceede to take a more particular view of the chiefe particulars of his passions to wit Feare Sorrow Feare is described to bee a retiring or flying backe from a thing if it be good because it is too high and excellent aboue the reach and without the extent of our condition power if it be euill because it is hard to bee escaped So that the proper and adequate obiect of feare is not as some suppose future euill but difficulty greatnesse excellency which found in things good makes vs know wee cannot at all attaine them or at least that wee cannot attaine them but with too great difficultie labour in euill that they will not easily be ouer mastered or escaped The difficultie greatnesse and excellency found in things that are good causeth feare of reuerence which maketh vs steppe backe and not to meddle at all with thinges that are too high excellent for vs nor with things hard without good advice and causeth vs to giue place to those of better condition and to acknowledge and professe by all significations of body and
diminished much lesse tooke away the liberty of other inferiour Sees but that they might resist and gainesay till they were satisfied and made to see the equity of the iudgement of the first See accordingly as we finde they did in the Councell of Chalcedon reiecting him as an Heretique whom the Bishop of Rome had receiued till vpon more full particular examination they found him to be catholicke and acquited him in their owne iudgement So that here we see there is nothing to proue the Pope to bee an absolute supreme iudge of all as Bellarmine vntruly alledgeth But happily hee will say that Theodoret intreateth Renatus to perswade Leo to vse his authority and to require the Bishoppes that had proceeded against him to come to his Synode in the West seeing the See of Rome hath a direction of all Churches and that therefore hee seemeth to acknowledge an absolute supreme power in the Pope For answere herevnto we say that the circumstances of this Epistle doe clearely conuince and proue he had no such conceipt For first he speaketh not of Leo alone as if of himselfe hee could determine the matter of difference betweene him and his Aduersaries but of him and his Westerne Councell Secondly hee doth not say that he his Councell alone may determine the matter but that his See being the first See hee and his Bishops may call all other Bishops to their Councell and this is that direction or government which he saith the first See or Westerne Church hath of other Churches namely in going before them and inuiting and calling them to publique deliberations not in peremptory and absolute commanding without them and ouer them The tenth witnesse produced out of the Greeke church is Sozomene out of whom two things are alledged The first is that he saith Iulius Bishop of Rome restored Athanasius Bishop of Alexandria and Paulus Bishop of Constantinople to their churches from which they were violently and vniustly expulsed by certaine Orientall Bishops The second that he did this because the care of all pertained to him in respect of the dignity of his See How the words of Sozomene reporting that Iulius restored these Bishops to their churches are to bee vnderstood we may learne of Iulius himselfe who in his Epistle mentioned by Athanasius in his second Apologie hauing blamed the Orientall Bishoppes for proceeding in a matter of so great consequence concerning the faith and the Bishops of the principall Churches of the world without him and his Bishops and as he vnderstood very irregularly telleth them that he durst not confirme that they had done that he communicated still with Athanasius and Paulus not foreiudging any thing but desirâ—…ng them to come to a Synode where thinges might bee fully debated and determined and that though hee alone wrote for them yet he wrote in the name and with the consent of all the Bishops of the West Vpon which his letter they were so farre from restoring them to their places that they tooke it in ill part that hee did write vnto them telling him that when hee proceeded against certaine Nouatians they intermedled not and that therefore hee should not meddle with their proceedings seeing the greatnesse of citties maketh not the power of one Bishop greater then the power of another By which their peremptory reiecting of his motion it appeareth that hee neither did nor could put the expulsed Bishops into their places againe which thing Sozomene himselfe testifieth also telling vs that they could neuer recouer their places till the Emperour by his mandatory letters preuailed So that when he saith Iulius restored them his meaning is that hee restored them as much as lay in him as likewise it may be said of Cyrill and Iohn of Antioche that after many and bitter contentions they were in the end reconciled and restored each to other their Churches from which yet they were neuer driuen indeed but in the censures of the one of them passed against the other But Sozomene saith the care of all Churches pertained to the Bishop of Rome therefore he acknowledgeth that hee had an vniversalitie of power ouer all Surely this consequence will neuer be made good For the Metropolitane or he that is Bishop of the first See in each Province in respect of the dignitie of his See hath the care of the whole Province yet can he doe nothing but as hee is directed by the maior part of the Bishops So that the care of all is said to pertaine to him not because he hath power to dispose of all things by himself but because all publike proceedings concerning the whole Province must take their beginning from him nothing of that nature may be taken in hand without consulting him In like sort and in the same sense and meaning Sozomene saith that for the dignity of his See the care of all pertained to the Bishop of Rome not as if the absolute disposing of all things did rest in him but for that he as prime Bishop of the world was first to be consulted before any thing concerning the common faith and the whole state of the Christian Church were determined and for that by the assistance and concurrence of other Bishops he as first in order and honour amongst them was to beginne and set forward allthings of greatest consequence tending to the common good Three more witnesses Bellarmine hath yet behinde Acatius the Bishop of Patara and Iustinian the Emperour out of whom three things are alledged The first that the Bishop of Rome beareth about with him the care of all Churches The second that the Pope is ouer the Church of the whole world The third that the Pope is the Head of all holy Churches To the first of these allegations taken out of Acatius his Epistle to Simplicius Bishop of Rome I haue answered before as likewise in what sense the Pope may be said to be ouer the Church of the whole world to wit in respect of a primacie of order and honour but not of power in which sense also Iustinian the elder writing to Iohn the second saith his See is the Head of all Churches And thus hauing examined the testimonies of the Greeke Fathers we are now to proceed to the authorities of the Latine Church CHAP. 36. Of the pretended proofes of the Popes supremacie taken out of the writings of the Latine Fathers THe first among the Latine Fathers that Bellarmine produceth is Cyprian who of all other most clearely ouerthroweth the error of the Romanists touching the Papacie therefore is very vnadvisedly produced by them in the first place and appointed to marshall and conduct the rest of their witnesses yet let vs heare what he will say Out of Cyprian foure places are alledged The first is in his booke de vnitate Ecclesiae The second in the third Epistle of his first book written to Cornelius The third in the tenth Epistle of his second booke to the same
will in the administration of the Church being to giue an account of his actions vnto the Lord. Here wee see Cyprian speaketh in the very same sort in the case between him and Stephen as he did in the Councell of Carthage and that generally hee maketh all Bishops equall and no one subject to the judgment of another but to the judgement of God only and the company of their fellow Bishops And that he did not thinke the Bishop of Rome to haue an infallibility of judgment or a commanding authority ouer other Bishops it appeareth in that writing to Pompeius of Stephens answere to his letters and sending him a copy of the same answere he telleth him that by reading it hee may more and more note his errour in maintaining the cause of heretiques against Christians and the Church of God and feareth not to pronounce of him that he writeth many things proudly impertinently vnskilfully improuidently and contrary to himselfe and which more is contemning his prescription that heretiques should not be rebaptized but bee receiued with the imposition of hands onely hee chargeth him with hard stiffe and inflexible obstinacie Firmilianus with the Bishops of Phrygia Galatia Cilicia and other regions neere adioyning assembled in a Synode at Iconium consented with Cyprian and Firmilianus writing to him telleth him of their resolution and chargeth Stephen with folly who bragging of the place of his Bishoprique and pretending to succeed Peter on whom the Church was founded yet bringeth in many other rockes and new buildings of many Churches in that hee supposed heretiques to be truly baptized who are out of the communion of the true Church whereas the Church was specially promised to be builded on Peter to shew that it must be but one And in great dislike and reprehension of Stephen he saith he was not ashamed in fauour of heretiques to deuide the brotherhood and to call Cyprian the worthy seruant of God a false Christ a false Apostle and a deceiptfull and guilefull workeman whereas all these things might much more truly bee sayd of him and therefore guilty to himselfe Praeuenit vt alteri ea per mendacium objiceret quae ipse ex merito audire deberet that is By way of preuention hee falsely and lyingly obiected those things to another which himselfe truly and deseruedly might haue had objected to him by others Such and so great were the oppositions of Cyprian and his consorts against Stephen and his adherents in the matter of rebaptization whereupon Bellarmine saith it seemeth that Cyprian sinned mortally in that hee obeyed not the commandement of Stephen nor submitted his judgement to the judgement of his superiour That hee erred in the matter of rebaptization we willingly confesse but that he knew not the power authority and commission of the Bishoppe of Rome or that he would euer haue dissented from him or opposed himselfe against him in a question of faith if hee had thought his power to bee vniuersall and his iudgment infallible we vtterly deny For then hee should not onely haue erred in the matter of rebaptization but haue beene a damnable heretique and and haue perished euerlastingly whereas yet the Church of God hath euer reputed him a holy Bishop and a blessed Martyr Thus hauing examined the testimonies of Cyprian vsually alleaged for and against the supremacy of the Pope let vs proceed to the rest of Bellarmines witnesses The next that followeth is Optatus out of whom it is alleaged that there was one Episcopall Chaire in the whole Church appointed by Christ. But because this is the same which was formerly alleaged out of Cyprian already answered in the answers to the allegations brought out of him therefore without farther troubling of the Reader I referre him to that which went before The next vnto Optatus is Ambrose out of whom three seuerall places are produced in the first his words are these as Bellarmine citeth them Though the whole world bee Gods yet the Church onely is called his house the Gouernour whereof at this day is Damasus For answer hereunto we say that this testimony rather witnesseth their forgery then confirmeth their errour For the Commentaries attributed to Ambrose wherein these words are are not his and besides this addition the gouernour whereof at this day is Damasus may be thought to haue beene put in in fauour of their fancie touching the Papall vniversalitie of jurisdiction it is so sudden causelesse and abrupt In the second place Ambrose reporteth of Satyrus that before he would receiue the Sacrament of the Lords body he asked of the Bishop by whose hands hee was to receiue it whether he held communion with the Catholick Bishops and namely with the Romane Church To the inference of our Adversaries and the conclusion they seek to deriue draw from these words in fauour of the Papacie I haue answered elsewhere whither I referre the Reader Wherefore let vs come to the third and last place of Ambrose His words are Wee follow the type and forme of the Romane Church in all things and againe I desire to follow the Romane Church in all things Surely this place of all other most clearely confuteth the errour of the Romanists touching the infallibility of the judgement of the Roman Church and Bishop and the necessitie of absolute conformity with the same For in this place Saint Ambrose sheweth that in the Church of Millaine whereof he was Bishop the manner in his time was that the Bishop girding himselfe about with a towell in imitation of Christ did wash the feete of such as were newly baptized and after great commendation of the same custome objecting to himselfe that the Romane Church had it not first he saith that perhaps the Church of Rome omitted this washing because of the difficultie and great labour in performing it by reason of the multitude of those that were baptized Secondly whereas some said in defence and excuse of the omission of this washing in the Romane Church that it is not to be vsed as a mysticall right in the regeneration of them that are new borne in Christ but in the ciuill entertainment of strangers the offices of humilitie and ciuill courtesie being very farre different from the mysteries and sacred rights of sanctification he reproueth them for so saying and endeauoureth to shew that this kinde of washing is a sacred and mysticall right tending to the sanctification of them that are newly baptized and that out of the words of Christ to Peter Vnlesse I wash thee thou shalt haue no part in me and then addeth the wordes alleaged by Bellarmine I desire in all things to follow the Romane Church but notwithstanding we also are men and haue our sense and iudgment and therefore what we finde to be rightly obserued any where else we also rightly obserue keepe we follow the Apostle Peter wee cleaue fast vnto his devotion and hereunto what can the Church of Rome answer Whereby wee
not absolutely disposing thinges according to his owne liking Neither is it to be doubted but that very many followed this latter opinion consequently neuer gaue that fulnesse of power to the Pope that is now claimed howsoeuer they attributed that vnto him as president of Ecclesiasticall meetings which rested not in him alone but in the whole meetings and Assemblies as it is an ordinary thing to attribute that to the president of any company that is done by the whole company and as all the great actions of State are attributed to the Duke of Venice whereas yet he can do nothing but as he is swayed directed by the noble Senatours of that State CHAP. 37. Of the pretended proofes of the Popes vniuersall power taken from his intermedling in auncient times in confirming deposing or restoring Bishops deposed HAuing examined the testimonies of Councels Popes and Fathers Greeke and Latine brought to proue the vniuersality of Ecclesiasticall power claimed by the Pope and found their insufficiencie and weakenesse let vs proceed to see by what other proofes our Aduersaries endeavour to demonstrate and confirme the same The absolute supreme power of Popes they labour to proue by the authority they exercised ouer other Bishops by their lawes dispensations and censures by their Vicegerents which they appointed in places farre remote from them by Appeales brought vnto them by their exemption from beeing subiect to any judgement and by the names and titles that are giuen vnto them Of all these I will entreat in order and first of the authority the Bishoppes of Rome are supposed to haue exercised ouer other Bishops in confirming deposing or restoring them Of confirmation Bellarmine bringeth some few examples but such as will neuer confirme the thing he desireth to proue For touching the confirmation of Maximus in the Bishopricke of Antioch which is the first example that hee bringeth first it was not any confirmation of himselfe in his Bishoply office but onely the determining of certaine differences betweene him and Iuvenall about their limits and the confirmation of the same end and conclusion Secondly this end was not made by Leo alone but by the whole Councell of Chalcedon Neither is the second proofe that the confirmation of the chiefe Bishoppes of the world pertained aunciently to the Pope any better then this For these are the circumstances of that Leo writeth whom Bellarmine citeth in the second place as challenging the right of confirming the Bishop of Constantinople Anatolius the Bishop of Constatinople ambitiously aspâ—…red to be greater then was fit as Leo thought Leo writeth to the Emperour in reprehension of his presumption and saith that he might haue forbornethus ambitiously to aspire higher seeing hee obtained the Bishopricke of Constantinople by the Emperours helpe and his favourable assent The favour that Leo speaketh of was in that Anatolius not hauing passed through the lower degrees of Ecclesiasticall Ministery was somewhat irregularly preferred to bee Bishop of so great a city which he was content to winke at at the Emperours entreaty And as the manner was that the foure Patriarches should vpon notice giuen of their due ordination and Synodall letters containing a profession of their faith mutually giue assent one to another before they were accounted Patriarches and fully possessed of their places by his allowance in the same sort as others were to allow of him as much as in him lay he was content to confirme and make good his ordination though somewhat irregular and defectiue which no way proueth that the confirming of the great Bishops of the world pertained any otherwise to the Bishop of Rome then the right of confirming him pertained vnto them Yet this is in effect all they can say For that Leo willeth the Bishop of Thessalonica to take knowledge of the Metropolitanes chosen in the Provinces subject to him as Vicegerent to the Patriarch of Rome and by his assent to confirme their ordination as likewise that writing to the Bishops of Africa subject to him as Patriarch he telleth them hee is content the Bishop of Salicen turned from Novatianisme shall keepe his place if hee send vnto him the confession of his faith and that Gregory complaineth that the Bishop of Salona within his Patriarchship was ordained without his privity and consent doth no more proue the Pope to be vniversall Bishop then the other Patriarches without whose assent none of the Metropolitanes subject to them might be ordained And this was it that so much grieued Gregory namely that his Bishops thereby putting a difference betweene such as were subject to him in that he was Patriarch of the West and others should so despise and contemne him But let our Aduersaries proue that either Gregory or any of his predecessours euer challenged the confirmarion of Metropolitanes subject to any of the other Patriarches and we will confesse they say something Otherwise all that they bring is idle and to no purpose prouing nothing that wee euer doubted of For we know the Bishop of Rome had the right of confirming the Metropolitanes within the precincts of his owne Patriarchship as likewise euery other Patriarch had and that therefore hee might send the Pall to sundry parts of Greece France and Spaine as Bellarmine alleadgeth being all within the compasse of his Patriarchship and yet not bee vniversall Bishop as Bellarmine would willingly from hence inferre Wherefore seeing our adversaries haue so little to say for the Popes right of confirming Bishops let vs proceede to see what proofes they can produce of his power and authority in deposing them Their first allegation is touching Stephen Bishop of Rome deposing as they suppose Martianus Bishop of Arle in France who had joined himselfe with Novatianus denying reconciliation and the Churches peace to such as hauing fallen and denyed the faith afterwardes repented and turned againe vnto God This allegation is too weake to proue their intended conclusion For it is most certaine by all circumstances of the Epistle of Cyprian cited by Bellarmine that Stephen the Bishop of Rome did not depose Martianus by himselfe alone and therefore Cyprian doth not say to Stephen therefore hath God appointed thee to bee ouer all Bishops that if they fall into heresie or faile in the performance of their duty thou mightst set all right againe but therefore hath God appointed a great number of Bishops that if any one of that company and society fall into here sie and beginne to teare rent and waste the flocke of Christ the rest may helpe and as good and pittifull Pastours gather the scattered sheepe of Christ into the fold againe Neither doth he say to Stephen that hee should suspend Martianus but that he should write to the Bishops of France to doe it and not to suffer him any longer to insult vpon the company of Catholique Bishoppes for that hee was not yet suspended and rejected from their communion But some man perhaps will aske why Cyprian desireth
thereby ceasing to be members of it and consequently losing all authority commaund they formerly had For the clearing of this point wee are to obserue that there are some who runne into errours so directly contrary to all Christianity the sense and judgment of all Christians that by the very proposing thereof they abandon and driue from them all such as dissent and are abandoned of all Secondly there are some that runne not into errours so directly contrary to the sense and judgement of all Christians as the former but with such fury madnes pertinacy that they vtterly reject forsake and depart from all such as doe dissent or are otherwise minded Thirdly there are some who though they be not carried with such violent fury into errour as to condemne reject and depart from all that dissent yet they runne into olde heresies formerly condemned and so by force of the former condemnation are rejected put out of the lap and bosome of the Church Fourthly there are some who fall into hereticall and dangerous errours but neither directly contrary to the common sense of all right beleeuing Christians nor formerly condemned by the consenting voice of the whole Church of God nor with such pertinacy as either to refuse to communicate with them that think otherwise or to seeke to depriue depose degrade or otherwise violently vexe and molest them that are vnder them for not consenting to them in their errour The three former sorts of men falling into errour and heresie voluntarily cut themselues off from the vnity of the Body of the Church depart from the fellowship of Gods people and ipso facto cease to bee members of the Church and lose all authority and commaund they formerly had So that they neede not the Churches censure or sentence to cast them out departing of themselues but it sufficeth that their breaches and divisions from the maine body of the Christian Church be published and made knowne that so they may be avoided So Caelestinus in his Epistle to Iohn of Antioch saith that if any one haue beene excommunicated or depriued by Nestorius or any of his adherents since the time they first began to publish their impieties he still continueth in the cōmunion of his Churches neither doth he judge him to be remoued from his place and the like hee hath in his Epistle to the Clergy of Constantinople But the fourth sort of men erring doe not cease to be members of the Church nor lose their places by so erring till both the point of doctrine wherein they are deceiued be tryed and examined and by lawfull highest authority be found faultie and their pertinacie such as rather to suffer themselues to be rejected and put from the communion of all that are otherwise minded then to alter their judgements Cyprian fell into an hereticall opinion that the Baptisme of Heretiques is voyde and that all that haue beene baptized by Heretiques are to be rebaptized Yet because this point was not examined and condemned in a generall Councell nor his pertinacie therein vpon such examination and condemnation found such as rather to suffer himselfe to bee reiected from the communion of all them that thought otherwise then to giue way and alter his iudgment hee was no hereticke neither did he lose his place of ministery in the Church of God The question therefore is whether if the Pope fell into such an errour as that of Cyprian by which he doth not actually and ipso facto divide and cut off himselfe the Church may examine it and judge him to be rejected and put from the communion if he alter not his iudgement If they say it may then hath the Church power to iudge a Pope that is not an Heretique For he is not an Hereticke till after such determination he chooseth rather to be reiected from the cōmunion of the faithfull then to alter his iudgement If it may not iudge the Pope so erring then might the Popes in former times haue taught rebaptization with Cyprian the errour of the Chiliastes with sundry of the Fathers that all right beleeuers how wickedly soeuer they liue shall in the end be saued with some of the Ancient that the just shall not see God till the resurrection and the like and yet the Church haue had noe power to force them to forsake and condemne such errours or to cease from perswading and inducing men both by doctrine example to erre in like sort And then we may runne into their errour who thinke that though the Pope be an hereticke yet hee is neither deposed ipso facto nor may be deposed but that the Church must acknowledge a deuouring wolfe making hauock of the flocke of Christ to be her Pastor which Bellarmine himselfe thinketh to be very absurd Thus then we see that all who fall into heresies do not cut off themselues from the vnity of the body of the Church nor lose the iurisdiction and authority they formerly had ipso facto as the Papists to auoid the deposing of Popes by the authority of the Church seeme to imagine but that many doe soe fall into heresies that they goe not out of themselues till they be rejected and cast out But howsoeuer our Aduersaries must not defend that Popes falling into heresies are deposed ipso facto for if they do they ouerthrow the whole building and fabricke of Popery The constant opinion of almost all later Papists is that howsoeuer the Pope may personally erre and fall into heresie or become an Hereticke yet the prouidence of God ouer him is such because he is Christs Vicar Peters Successour heire of the Apostles and head of the vniuersall Church that hee cannot define or decree any heresie or prescribe vnto all Christians to belieue amisse Which conceipt cannot stand but falleth to the ground is clearely ouerthrowne if the Pope by becōming an hereticke be deposed ipso facto For doubtlesse if the Pope becomming an hereticke ipso facto cease to bee Pope and to be soe much as a member of the Church then doth not the prayer of Christ for the not failing of Peters faith extend to him any longer neither is hee any longer any way priuiledged by vertue of his succeeding blessed Peter but that hee may runne into all extremities in most damnable sort seeke to subuert the faith to force all to belieue as he doth and define and determine that all shall professe the same doctrine of Diuels that himselfe doth seeing when God forsaketh him and putteth him out of his protection the Diuell entreth into him as he did into Iudas the traytor And how violent and strange the mouings of the euill spirit are wee are not ignorant for sometimes he casteth them that are possessed by him into the fire and sometimes into the water sometimes into one extremity and sometimes into another Wherefore either the Papists must confesse that the Pope may define for heresie then all their religion is ouerthrown
Paulus Andreas Iacobus quid aliud quà m singularum plebium sunt capita omnes tamen sub uno capite membra Ecclesiae sunt that is Peter is the first and in honour the chiefest member of the holy and vniversall Church Paul Andrew Iames what other thing are they then heads of seuerall parts of Gods people Yet so that all notwithstanding are members of the Church vnder one Head So that a Head of the Church besides Christ must not be acknowledged because no one hath an vniversall commaunding power ouer all but hee onely Yet in a certaine sense the Romane Church is named the Head of all Churches that is the first and chiefest of all Churches as the city of London may bee named the Head of all cities in this state kingdome though it hath not a commaunding authority ouer them neither is the chiefe Magistrate thereof head ouer all other Magistrates in the kingdome The authority of the Florentine Councell naming the Bishop of Rome Father and teacher of all Christians and the Councell of Lyons naming him the bridegroome of the Church is not so great that wee should neede much to insist vpon any thing that is alleadged out of them And touching the latter title wee know Saint Bernard in his Epistles wisheth the Pope not to take it on him as being proper to Christ but to thinke it honour enough to be a friend of the bridegroome And yet if we should yeelde it vnto him wee know what Gerson hath written to shew how this bridegroome may bee taken away from the Church the spouse of Christ and yet the Church remaine entire and perfect The next glorious title of the Romane Bishop is Bishop of an Apostolique See But this is common to him with many others as some of the rest also are For as not only the Romane Church but the Churches of Ephesus Antioch Hierusalem and Alexandria which the Apostles founded and in which they sate as Bishops are named Apostolicall Churches so the Bishoppes of all these are named Bishops of Apostolique Sees Neither doe men know which of the Apostolicke Churches is expressed by the name of the Apostolique See or which of the Bishops by the name of the Bishop of the Apostolique See vnlesse by some circumstance the same be specified As when Augustine said there were relations made from the Councell of Carthage and Mileuis to the Apostolique See all men vnderstood what Apostolique See he meant because it was knowne to what Apostolique Church they vsed to make such relations Neither doth the principalitie of the Apostolique chaire which Augustine affirmeth to haue euer flourished in Rome argue the supremacie of the Pope seeing the principality or chieftie of the Apostolique chaire mentioned by Saint Augustine may seeme to import the chieftie that the Apostolike chaire hath aboue those that are not Apostolique or in which blessed Peter the chiefe of the Apostles did not sit For though the chaires of the Apostles were in diverse places yet Peters chaire was esteemed the principall of all the rest which being the See and chaire of one yet was in three places and three Bishops did sit in it Namely the Bishops of Rome Alexandria and Antioche as I haue shewed before out of Gregory yet was the principalitie or chieftie of this chaire of Peter more specially in Rome then in the other places and the Bishop of Rome in order and honour the first and greatest of the three The last title brought to proue the supremacie of the Pope is that of Vniuersall Bishoâ—… which though it be not giuen to Leo Bishop of Rome by the whole Councell of Câ—…alcedon yet is it giuen to him in the Epistles of three seuerall Grecians writing to hâ—… as wee may read in the third action of that Councell and Saint Gregory saith it â—…s offered to his predecessours in that Councell and that they refused it This title â—…ill proue the supremacy of the Pope no better then the rest being common vnto oâ—…er with him and therefore no way arguing any thing peculiarly found in him alone â—…or wee shall finde that the Bishops of Constantinople are named vniuersall Bishops â—…nd Oecumenicall Patriarches as well as the Bishoppe of Rome and that not by one or two particular men but by whole Councels by Emperours and Popes and though Saint Gregorie justly disliked this name or title as profane and prejudiciall to the dignitie of all other Bishoppes and Patriarches when it importeth an vniuersalitie of jurisdiction and generall commanding authoritie ouer all yet might any one of the Patriarches be named an vniversall Bishoppe as being one of those fiue principall Bishoppes to whom all the Bishops and Metropolitanes in the world were subject CHAP. 42. Of the second supposed priuiledge of the Romane Bishops which is infallibilitie of judgment SEEING our Aduersaries cannot proue the vniversall and illimitted power and jurisdiction of their Popes but the contrary is most clearely deposed by those witnesses which they produce to speake for them affirmed by those Diuines whom they cannot but acknowledge to be Catholique and inferred out of their owne principles let vs proceed to see whether they haue any better proofes of the infallibility of their judgment which is the next supposed priuiledge of the Romane Bishops Touching this point I finde foure opinions in the Church of Rome The first is that the Pope is so led into all truth that hee cannot erre in such sort as to become an hereticke And of this opinion was Albertus Pighius The second leaueth it doubtfull whether he may be an hereticke or not but pronounceth confidently that whether hee may or not yet hee cannot define and decree any thing that is hereticall And this is the opinion of almost all Papists at this day The third that the Pope not onely as a particular Doctour but euen as Pope may bee an heretique and teach heresie if he define without a generall Councell This was the opinion of Gerson Almayne and other Parisians of Alfonsus à Castro Pope Adrian the sixth Cardinall Cameracensis Cusanus Occam Durandus the Fathers of the Councels of Constance and Basill and many moe The fourth that hee may erre and define for heresie though he be assisted with a generall Councell Of this opinion was Waldensis and sundry other as appeareth by Picus Mirandula in his Theorems So that it is not true that Bellarmine saith that all Catholiques consent that the Pope with a generall Councell cannot erre For these teach that onely the resolutions of the vniuersall Church which is the multitude of beleeuers that are and haue beene are to be receiued without any farther question or examination as vndoubtedly true These are the differences of opinions found among them that brag so much of vnity and make the ground thereof to be the submitting of their iudgments to the Pope But because in so great vncertainty and contrariety of judgments almost
vttered many things in your leters concerning Peters chaire saying that he yet sitteth in it in his successours I truely doe acknowledge my selfe to be vnworthy not onely to be in the number of those that sit as rulers but of them that stand to bee ruled But I therefore willingly accept whatsoeuer you say because he hath spoken to me of Peters chaire that sitteth in Peters chaire and although it no way pleaseth or delighteth me to be specially honoured yet I greatly reioyced because what you attributed to me you gaue to your selues For who knoweth not that the holy Church is firmely established in the soundnesse of the Prince of the Apostles whose firmenesse his name doth shew for he is named Peter of Petra a Rocke to whom the voyce of Verity saith I will giue to thee the Keyes of the Kingdome of Heauen and thou being converted confirme thy brethren and againe Simon Ioanna Louest thou mee feede my sheepe Wherefore though there were many Apostles yet in respect of the chiefty he had the chaire of Peter chiefe of the Apostles grew to be in greater authority then the rest which is the chaire of one Apostle in three places For he exalted the See in which he was pleased to rest and to end this present life he beautified that See wherein he left the Evangelist his Disciple and he firmely established that See in which he sate seuen yeares though with purpose in the end to leaue it and to depart from it Whereas therefore there is the See of one and that but one wherein three Bishops by Gods appointment doe sit to rule whatsoeuer good I heare of you I account it mine owne and what you perswade your selues of mee thinke that you also are worthy of the same If this Epistle proue that the Pope cannot erre it proueth likewise that the Bishoppes of Alexandria and Antioche are free from errour For all these succeede that great Apostle Saint Peter to whom Christ saide To thee will I giue the Keyes of the Kingdome of Heauen and thou being turned confirme thy brethren And againe Louest thou me feede my sheepe as well as the Pope All these sit in Peters chaire Peters chaire is in Alexandria and at Antioche as well as at Rome and whatsoeuer they that are Bishops of Alexandria and Antioche attribute to the Bishop of Rome they may lawfully assume to themselues seeing they are worthy of the same as Gregory in this place telleth vs. Wherefore seeing not onely Fathers and Councels but euen Popes also in whose defence he writeth faile him the Cardinall flieth for helpe to the Priests of Aarons order and goeth about to proue that the Pope cannot erre because the high Priest had in his brest-plate Vrim and Thummim light and perfection or doctrine and trueth as hee will haue the Hebrew word translated importing as hee supposeth that he could not erre in the vnderstanding of the Law of God Whereupon as he thinketh God commaunded all those that any way doubted of the meaning of his Law to goe vp to the high Priest and to seeke to bee satisfied by him saying They shall iudge true iudgment vnto thee Lyra in his Annotations vpon this place reporteth that there was a certaine Glosse of the Hebrewes that if the High Priest should tell them that their right hand were their left or their left their right they were to hold it good and right The like opinion it seemeth the Romanists haue of the Pope But Lyra in that place condemneth the folly of those Iewes that so thought because the sentence of no man of what authoritie soeuer hee bee is to bee admitted if it containe a manifest vntruth and errour which hee saith is euident out of the very text it selfe in that it is said They shall iudge vnto thee true iudgement and thou shalt doe whatsoeuer they shall say vnto thee that are ouer the place that the Lord hath chosen and whatsoeuer they shall teach thee according to his lawes Whereby it appeareth that if they speake that which is vntrue or manifestly depart from the law they are not to be heard The Author of the ordinary Glosse agreeth with Lyra saying Note that the Lord requireth thee to doe whatsoeuer the Priests doe teach thee according to the Law because otherwise thou art not to obey them vnlesse they teach thee according to the Law Whereupon Christ saith the Scribes and Pharisees sit vpon Moses chaire who yet as the Author of the Interlineall Glosse noteth are not generally without exception to be hearkned vnto but then onely when they vtter and deliuer pertinentia ad Cathedram that is such things as beseeme him to vtter that sitteth in Moses chaire So that to conclude this point neither the Vrim and Thummim in Aarons breast-plate nor the Mandate of Almighty God to goe vp to the sonnes of Aaron to secke iudgement iustice proue that they could not erre and therefore the Pope is still in as bad case as euer he was Wherefore finding no helpe in the Tribe of Leui nor in the house of Aaron they betake themselues to experience and are in good hope to proue out of the experience of former times that the Pope cannot erre First because as they say whatsoever the Pope condemned at any time as hereticall was euer holden to bee so by the whole Church and many heresies were neuer condemned any otherwise but by his iudgement onely Secondly because neuer any Pope was an Heretique whereas all other principall Sees and Churches haue had Bishoppes not onely erring but teaching and professing heresie The instances that Bellarmine giueth of heresies and heretiques condemned by the Pope and reiected for such by the Church onely because hee condemned them are the Pelagians Priscillianists Iouinian and Vigilantius and their heresies It is hard I see for a Blackamoore to change his skinne for a Leopard to put away his spots or for a man that hath long acquainted himselfe with false and vnfaithfull dealing to learne to deale sincerely and truely For touching the heretickes mentioned by the Cardinall all the world knoweth they were condemned in Synodes by many Bishops and not by the priuate censure of the Bishoppe of Rome alone Nay it is most certaine that others shewed more care diligence in suppressing some of these heretickes and their errours then euer the Romane Bishop did which I will make to appeare in the particulars beginning with the Pelagians Pelagius the founder of these hereticks was borne in great Britaine and becomming a Monke in the East parts of the world after hee had sparsed his errours in other places abroad returned home into his owne countrey and infected it almost wholly with his heresie Heereupon the Britaines sought helpe and direction of the French Bishoppes because learning at that time flourished more among them then it did among the Britaines who willing to reach forth their helping hands to their neighbours and brethren in this time of their
earnest and promised confidently to pacifie Ambrose he bade him goe with speede and himselfe followed after in hope of reconciliation trusting vpon the promises of Ruffinus But when Ambrose saw Ruffinus he sayd vnto him O Ruffinus thou doest imitate the impudencie of shamelesse dogges for hauing beene the aduiser and counsellor to so vile murthers thou hast hardned thy forehead and hauing cast away all shame blushest not after the committing of so great and horrible outrages against men made after the image of God And when he was importunate with him and told him the Emperour was comming full of fierie zeale he brake forth into these words I tell thee Ruffinus I will not suffer him to passe the thresholds of Gods house and if of an Emperour he become a tyrant I will ioyfully suffer death Whereupon Ruffinus caused one to runne to the Emperour to desire him to stay within the Court But the Emperour being on the way when the messenger met him resolued to come forward and to endure the reproof of the Bishop So hee came to the sacred railes but entred not into the Temple and comming to the Bishoppe besought him to vnloose him from the bands wherewith hee was bound The Bishop somewhat offended with his comming told him the manner of his comming was tyrant-like and that being mad against God he trampled vnder his feete the lawes of God Not so said the Emperour I presse not hither in despite of order neither doe I vniustly striue to enter into the house of God But I beseech thee to vnloose me to remember the mercifull disposition of our common Lord and not to shut the doore against me that hee would haue opened to all that repent What repentance therefore saith the Bishoppe hast thou shewed after so grieuous an offence what medicines hast thou applied to cure thy wounds It pertaineth to thee sayth the Emperour to prepare the medicines that should heale mee and to cure my wounds and to me to vse that thou prescribest Then sayd Ambrose seeing thou makest thy displeasure iudge and it is not reason that giueth sentence when thou sittest vpon the throne to doe right but thy furious proceedings make a law that when sentence of death and confiscation of goods shall bee passed there may passe thirty dayes before the execution of the same that so if within that space it be found vniust it may be reuersed or otherwise it may proceede This law the Emperour most willingly consented to make and thereupon Ambrose vnloosed him from his bands and he entred into the Temple and prayed vnto God not standing nor kneeling but prostrate vpon the earth and passionately vttering these words of Dauid My soule cleaueth to the pauement Lord quicken me according to thy word Here we see an excellent patterne of a good Bishoppe and a good Emperour and it is hard to say whether Ambrose were more to be commended for his zeale magnanimous resolution and constancie or the Emperour for his willing and submissiue obedience But of deposing Princes here is nothing Ambrose being so farre from any thought of lifting vp his hand against the Emperour that he resolued to subiect himselfe vnto him euen to the suffering of martyrdome if neede should require But saith Bellarmine Ambrose exercised ciuill authority in that hee tooke notice of this murther of the Emperour beeing a criminall cause and forced him to make a ciuill law for the preuenting of furious and bloodie proceedings in iudgment This surely is a weake collection for the Church hath power by vertue of her Ecclesiasticall iurisdiction to take notice of such horrible crimes as murther to punish them with spirituall punishments Neither was the inducing of Theodosius to make a ciuill law for the preuenting of such like euils as he was now censured for before he would reconcile him to the Church an act of ciuill authoritie But such testimonies as this is they that haue no better must be forced to vse That which followeth of Gregories confirming the priviledges graunted to the Abbey of Saint Medardus in such sort that whatsoeuer Kings Iudges or secular persons should go about to violate them should be depriued of their honour proueth not the thing in question For it is evident that the confirmation of these priviledges was passed not by S. Gregory alone but by a whole Councell and more specially by Theodoricus the King and Brunichildis the Queene who might binde their successours and other inferiour secular Rulers vnder paine of deprivation though neither Gregory of himselfe nor yet a councell of Bishops could doe any such thing by their authoritie alone Wherefore let vs proceede to the next example Gregory the second saith Bellarmine excommunicated the Emperour Leo the third who was an enemy to Images he forbade any tribute to be payde him out of Italy and consequently depriued him of part of his Empire Surely if Greg. the second of himself alone had had such power as to forbid all Italy vpon his dislike to pay any more tribute to the Emperour there were some good shew of proofe in this allegation But if wee examine the stories we shall finde the case to haue beene farre otherwise then Bellarmine would beare vs in hand it was For first Gregory did not excommunicate Leo of himselfe but called a Synode to doe it Secondly he did not forbid the paying of tribute out of Italy to the Emperour but the circumstances of the History are these Leo seeking to win the Bishop of Rome and the people of Italy to the casting downe of Images in the West as he had done in the East Gregory the Bishop did not onely refuse to obey him but admonished all other to take heed they did no such thing for feare of any Edict of the Emperour By which exhortation the people of Italy already mis-conceited of the Emperours governement were so animated that they were likely to haue proceeded to the election of a new Emperour and Nauclerus sheweth that the decrees of the Bishop of Rome disswading the people of the West from obeying the Emperour in casting downe of Images were of so great authoritie that the people and souldiers of Ravenna first and then of Venice beganne to make shew of rebellion against the Emperour and his Exarche or Lieutenant and to inforce the Bishop of Rome and the other people of Italy to disclaime the Emperour of Constantinople and to chuse another in Italy And that this rebellion proceeded so farre that euery city putting downe the Magistrates of the Exarch set vp Magistrates of their owne whō they named Dukes but that the Bishop of Rome at that time pacified thē and by his perswasions stayed them from chusing any new Emperour in hope that he would amend So that we see the Bishop of Rome with his Bishops by their authority did nothing but stay the people from obeying the Emperours vnlawfull Decrees as they iudged them but no way went about to depose the
be present in Generall Councels and who they are of whom generall Councels do consist HAuing spoken of the necessity profit and vse of Generall Councels it remaineth that wee proceede to see who they are that may bee present in such Councels and of whom they do consist The persons that may be present are of diuerse sorts For some are there with authority to teach define prescribe and to direct others are there to heare set forward and consent vnto that which is there to be done In the former sort none but only Ministers of the word and sacraments are present in Councels and they onely haue deciding and defining voyces but in the latter sort * Lay-men also may be present whereupon we shall find that Bishops and Presbyters subscribe in this sort Ego N. definiens subscrips◅ that is I as hauing power to define and decree haue subscribed But the Emperour or any other Lay-person Ego N. consentiens subscripsi that is I as one giuing consent to that which is agreed on by the spirituall Pastors haue subscribed That the Emperor and other Lay-men of place and sort may be present in Generall Councels no man maketh doubt For though Pope Nicholas seeme to deny that the Emperours may be presēt in other Councels where matters of faith are not handled yet he cōfesseth they may be presēt in general Conncels where the faith which is cōmon to all pertaineth not to Clergy-men alone but to Lay-men and all Christians generally is treated of it being a rule in nature reason Quod omnes tangit ab omnibus tractari debere that is that that which concerneth all may be handled and medled with by all so farre forth as conueniently it may and as there is no manifest reason in respect of the disturbance and hinderance of the deliberation to repell them from such intermedling for in such cases there may bee a repelling of men hauing interest in such businesses and affaires and therefore Pulcheria the Empresse Commanded the Captaine of Bythinia with violence to driue out of the Councell of Chalcedon such Monkes Clerkes and Lay-men as being of no vse did but pester the Councell and to leaue none there but such as the Bishops brought with them But our aduersaries say the Protestants affirme that Lay-men ought not only to be present in generall Councels but also to haue decisiue yoyces as well as they of the Cleargy and thereupon charge vs with great absurdity Wherefore for the answering of this obiection wee must obserue that there is a threefold decision of things doubtfull and questionable The one such as euery one vpon the knowledge of it must yeeld vnto vpon perill of damnation vpon the bare word of him that decideth The second to which euery one must yeeld vpon like perill not vpon the bare word of him that decideth but vpon the euidence of proofe he bringeth The third such as euery one must yeeld vnto not vpon perill of damnation but of excommunication and the like censure Ecclesiasticall In the first sort the Protestants say that onely Christ the sonne of God hath a decisiue voyce In the second sort that any Lay-men as well as Clergy-men for whosoeuer it is that bringeth conuincing proofes decideth a doubt in such sort as that no man ought to resist against it Whereupon Panormitan sayth that the iudgment of one priuate man is to be preferred before the sentence of the Pope if hee haue better authorities of the Old and New Testament to confirme his iudgment And Gerson saith that any learned man may and ought to resist against a whole Councell if hee discerne it to erre of malice or ignorance and whatsoeuer Bishops determine their determinations binde not the conscience further then they approue that they propose some other way then by their authoritie onely Soe that in this sence the Protestants truely say that Bishoppes must not proceede Praetor-like but that all that they doe must bee but in the nature of an inquiry and their Decrees no farther of force then reason doth warrant them For howsoeuer the Son of God hath promised to be with his Church to the end of the world which shall bee fulfilled in respect of his elect and chosen who cannot erre damnably and finally yet hath he not tyed himselfe to any one sort or company of men neither is it certainely knowne but that all they that meete in a Councell may erre notwithstanding Christes promise To which purpose it is that Brentius and other say We cannot be certaine of the determination of Councells because euery company of men professing CHRIST is not the true Church seeing all that so professe are not Elect neither doe they deny all authority and iurisdiction to such as are not knowne to be Elect nor giue it all to such as no man canne knowe who they be as Bellarmine vntruly saith they doe for in the third sort they willingly acknowledge that Bishops haue deciding voyces power so to iudge of things as to subiect all those that shall thinke and teach otherwise then they doe to excommunication and censures of like nature And that therefore they are properly Iudges that their course of proceeding is not a bare Inquiry and search but a binding determination and that they haue a Pretorlike power to binde men to stand to that they propose decree and in this sort we all teach that Lay-men haue no voyce decisiue but Bishops Pastors onely which may be confirmed by many reasons First because when the question is in what pastures it is fitte the sheepe of CHRIST should feede in what pastures they may feede without danger the duty of consulting is principally and the power of prescribing wholy in the Pastours though the sheepe of CHRIST being reasonable haue and must haue a kinde of discerning whether they bee directed into wholesome pleasant pastures or not Secondly none but they whom Paul saith CHRIST going vp into heauen gaue for the gathering together of the Saintes for the worke of the Ministery haue authority to teach and to prescribe vnto others what they shall professe beleeue of whom the LORD said by Ieremy the Prophet I will giue you Pastors that shall feede you with knowledge and doctrine Thirdly because in all Councels Bishops Pastors onely are found to haue subscribed to the decrees made in them as defining decreeing howsoeuer other men testified their consent by subscription and Princes and Emperours by their royall authority confirmed the same and subiected the contemners and violaters thereof to imprisonment banishment confiscation of goods and the like ciuill punishments as the Bishops did to excommunication and censures Spirituall So that it is agreed on that Bishoppes and Ministers onely haue decisiue voyces in Councels in sort before expressed but the question is onely whether all Ministers of the Word and Sacraments haue such decisiue voyces or none but Bishops The Papists
Councell as Iudges may decree and determine and yet the power of re-examining and reuersing all if neede be may rest in the Pope as superiour Iudge vnto them which yet no way cleareth the doubt For howsoeuer it be true in Iudges and Iudgements distinct separate and subordinate one to another that one may dash that the other doth and doe the contrary without the consent of the other yet of Iudges ioyned in one Commission and of the same iudgment it cannot be so conceiued Now the Iudgement of the Generall Councell includeth in it the Iudgement of the Pope the Pope and Councell make one Iudge and are not separate distinct and subordinate Iudges and therefore no such thing can bee said of them If it be said that he who is joyned in commission with others in some inferiour Court and hath a Negatiue voyce in it onely and no absolute affirmatiue may in a superiour Court haue both and that therefore the Pope who hath no absolute voyce affirmatiue and negatiue in a Generall Councell may haue such a voyce in some higher Court it will be found to be too shamelesse a saying For there neither is nor can be any higher Court then that of a Generall Councell consisting of the Bishop of Rome and all the other Bishops of the World So that all answers failing wee may safely conclude that if Bishops bee Iudges Ecclesiasticall truely and properly as wee haue proued them to bee by vnanswerable reasons and our Adversaries confesse the Pope hath no absolute voyce affirmatiue and negatiue in Generall Councels that is to dash what the Maior part would doe and to doe that they by no meanes like of This Andradius saw and therefore hee disclaimeth the position of Bellarmine that all the assurance the Councell hath of finding out the truth is Originally in the Pope and from him cōmunicated to the Councell and holdeth that the Councell hath as good assurance of finding out the trueth and better then the Pope himselfe And therefore hee saith that though he thinketh it impossible the Pope should dissent frō the councell so as to define contrary to it yet if it should so fall out as hee thinketh it not impossible that the Bishop of Rome should altogether dislike in his opinion that which the Councell resolueth on and which hee should consent vnto and though he define not the contrary yet despise the Decrees of the Councell and in his priuate opinion gainsay them he thinketh in such a case men were to conceiue none otherwise of him then if hee should depart from the faith and profession of the ancient Councels which the consent of all ages hath confirmed and Gregory professeth to honour and esteeme as the foure Gospels seeing the power and authority is as great in all Councels as in those which the same Gregory saith that whosoeuer holdeth not their certaine resolutions though he seeme to be a stone elect and precious yet he lyeth besides the foundation And because the authority of Cardinall Turrecremata is great with all those that defend the dignity of the Pope against the Bishops that were assembled in the Councell of Basil such as are of their judgement therefore he produceth his opinion in these words If such a case should fall out saith Cardinall Turrecremata that all the Fathers assembled in a Generall Councell with vnanimous consent should make a decree concerning the faith which the person of the Pope alone should contradict I would say according to my judgement that men were bound to stand to the judgement of the Synode and not to listen to the gainsaying of the person of the Pope for the judgment of so many and so great Fathers in a Generall Councell seemeth worthily to bee preferred before the judgement of one man In which case that Glosse vpon the Decrees is most excellent that when the faith is treated of the Pope is bound to require the Counsell of Bishops which is to bee vnderstood to bee necessary to bee done as often as the case is very doubtfull and a Synode may be called and then the Synode is greater then the Pope not truely in the power of jurisdiction but in the authority of discerning judgment and the amplitude of knowledge This is the opinion of this great champion who so mainely in defence of the Popes vniversall jurisdictiō impugned the Fathers that were assembled in the Councell of Basil. Whereby it is evident that the pope may not go against the consent of a Generall Councell that he may not dissent from it being greater in the authority of discerning and judgement then hee is and consequently that hee hath no negatiue voyce in Councels Which may further bee proued for that if he had a negatiue voyce as the Councell hath then were there two absolute negatiues but where there are two absolute negatiues it is vncertaine whether any thing shall be resolued on or not whereas yet the state of the Church requireth resolution and certain concluding of matters that men may know what they are to beleeue Therefore the Pope hath none but the onely negatiue is that of the Councell a part whereof the Pope is giuing a voyce as others doe And this the manner of other Synodes confirmeth For in Provinciall Nationall and Patriarchicall Councels the Metropolitanes Primates and Patriarches haue no absolute negatiue but giue only a single voyce and the absolute negatiue as also the affirmatiue is onely in the Maior part and as Cardinall Turrecremata learnedly and rightly maketh the authority of the Generall Councell in discerning and defining what is to be belieued greater then the authority of the Pope and that the Councel is ratherto be listened vnto then the Pope dissenting from the Councell so there is no doubt but that the authority of Councels being as great in making necessary lawes for the good of the Church as in resoluing doubtes and clearing controuersies the Councell is greater then the Pope in the power of making lawes and consequently in the power of jurisdiction which he denieth and they of Basil affirme The greatest allegation on the contrary side is the confirmation that ancient Councels sought of the Bishop of Rome for that may seeme to import that their decrees are of no force vnlesse they be strengthened by his authority whereunto Andradius answereth out of Alfonsus á Castro and others that Generall Councels carefully sought to be confirmed by the Bishop of Rome not as if in themselues without his confirmation they were weake and might erre nor for that they thought him to haue as much or more assurance of not erring then they but that it might appeare that he that hath the first place in the Church of God and the rest did consent and conspire together in the deliuery and the defence of the trueth But because happily this answer may seeme too weake therefore for the clearing of this doubt we must obserue that all the ancient Councels
Canon of the Church that without the liking iudgment and will of the Bishop of Rome no Councell may be holden mentioned by Socrates and Zozomen For first the Canon is not to be vnderstood of the person of the Bishop of Rome but of him and his Westerne Bishops Secondly it is not so to be vnderstood as if simply without him and his Bishops no Generall Councell could bee holden but that without consulting him and first seeking to him and his no such Councell may bee holden as I haue largely shewed before For otherwise wee know that Vigilius Bishoppe of Rome refused to haue any part in the deliberations of the Fifth Generall Councell or to confirme the Actes of it when it ended Yet was is euer holden to be a lawfull Generall Couucell hee and his being sufficiently sought vnto and their presence desired As likewiso Leo consented to the calling of the Councell of Chalcedon only for the determination of that question of faith that was then debated gaue no consent to the Decree therein passed touching the see of Constantinople yet did this Councell preuaile and the succeeding Bishops of Rome were forced to giue way to that Canon their predecessors so much disliked And therefore whereas the Bishop of Romes Legates in the Councell of Chalcedon do except against Dioscorus for presuming to hold a Synode without the authority of the Apostolicke See wich they say neuer was lawful nor neuer was don their meaning is not that in no case a Councell may be holden without the Bishop of Rome the Bishops of the West but that there neuer was any such Synod holden without requiring admitting the concurrence of the Bishop of Rome the Bishops of the West And that therefore Dioscorus was iustly to be condemned who not onely tooke vpon him by the fauour of one neere about the Emperour to bee President of the Second Councell of Ephesus whereof they speake and sit before the Bishoppe of Romes Legates being but Bishop of the Second See but also reiected the Synodall letters of Leo and the Bishops of the West not suffering them to be read and as if all the power had beene in him alone depriued the Bishoppes of Constantinople and Antioch notwithstanding the Protestation of the Romane Legates against such proceedings and their appeale from the same and still carried on with his furious passions rested not till hee had pronounced sentence of excommunication against blessed Leo and all the Bishoppes of the West The next testimony which Bellarmine bringeth no way proueth that for proofe whereof it is brought for it is not sayd in the place cited by him that the Councell holden at Constantinople against the painting of those things that are reported in the story of the Bible and for the defacing of such pictures made for Historicall vse was therefore voyd because it was called without the consent of the Romane Bishoppe as hee vntruely reporteth but that it was no Generall Councell seeing many that were present consented not but disliked the proceedings of it and besides it neither had the Bishoppe of Rome to concurre nor his Bishoppes neither by their Vicegerents nor by Prouinciall letters neither yet the Patriarches of the East to wit Alexandria Antioch and Hierusalem nor their Bishoppes It is true indeede that the Bishoppes assembled at Rome by the command of Theodoricus to examine the matters obiected to Symmachus the Pope told him the Councell should haue beene called by the Pope and not by him but they spake of particular Councels which oftentimes by the permission of Princes were wont to be called by Metropolitans Primates or Patriarches and not of generall whereof our question is and yet I haue shewed before by many testimonies that Princes when they saw cause did call Councels of this sort also So that the speech of these Bishops affected to their Patriarche and vnwilling to come to any scanning of his actions is not much to be esteemed The next testimony out of the Epistles of Leo testifieth the Cardinall careth not what he saith so he say something for it is true indeed that Leo saith Hee directed his Letters to his Brethren and fellow-bishops and summoned them to a Generall Councell but meaneth not a Councel absolutely General consisting of all the Bishops of the world of which our question is but of all the Bishops of those parts to which hee writeth being subiect to him as Patriarch of the West as appeareth by the circumstances of the Epistle cited But Pelagius the Second in his Epistle to those that Iohn of Constantinople called to his Synode as Generall saith The authority of calling general Coūcels was by singular priuiledge of blessed Peter giuen to the Apostolicke See that no Synode was euer reputed lawfull that was not strengthened by the authority of the See Apostolicke and againe that Councels may not be holden without the iudgement and liking of the Bishop of Rome therefore all is true that the Cardinall hath hitherto alleadged Hereunto though Pelagius may seeme somewhat partiall in his owne cause wee answere first with Bellarmine himselfe that the calling of Generall Councels is not so proper to the Bishop of Rome but that another may do it if he cōsent or if he ratifie the indiction Secondly that though he refuse to ratifie it if his resence concurrence be sufficiently sought and desired it may be lawfull and of orce as it appeareth by the Fift Generall Councel which Vigilius refused to haue any part in The last testimony that Bell. produceth to proue that the power of calling Councels doth not properly belong to the Emperours is a saying of Valentinius reported by Zozomen but it maketh clearely against himselfe The circumstances of Zozomens report are these The Bishops of Hellespont Bithynia and some other professing to beleeue that CHRIST the Son of GOD is con-substantial with his Father sent a Legate to Valentinian the Emperour and desired him to giue them leaue to meete about matters concerning the Faith To whom the Emperour answered that it was not lawfull for him being one of the Laity to intermeddle in these Businesses but willed that the Priests and Bishoppes to whom the care of these things pertayneth should meete in one place where-soeuer it should please them for heere wee see that the Bishops durst not presume to assemble themselues without the Emperors leaue which mainely crosseth the conceit of the cardinall neither doth the Emperour say the calling of councels pertaineth nothing to him but the intermeddling with the matters that are brought in question in them and therefore biddeth them meete by themselues not intending to bee present among them not meaning that it was not lawfull for him to be present for then he should condemne Constantine and other that were present either in person or by Deputies nor that it was simply vnlawfull for him to intermeddle for they intermeddled as I will shew in that
God shall in the end find mercy and that no torments shall be eternall he concludeth in this sort ◠As we beleeue that the torments of the diuel of such as deny God and of impious men which haue said in their hearts there is no God are eternall so we thinke that the sentence of the Iudge that shall be pronounced vpon sinners vngodly men who yet are Christians whose workes are to bee tryed and purged in the fire shall be moderate and mixed with clemency Where we see againe he maketh not the difference betweene the degrees of sinne as the Romanists doe but betweene impious men that say in their hearts there is no God that deny God and his truth and Christians that are vnrighteous and sinners Neither are those words whose workes are to be tryed and purged in the fire to bee taken distinctiuely to note forth vnto vs one certain degree of Christians who shall suffer a temporall punishment in fire as M. Higgons would haue them but explicatiuely to signifie the condition of all Christians Which appeareth because otherwise he would not haue said of sinners yet Christians but of sinners yet such Christians whose works are to be tryed in the fire This explicatiō is added to put a difference between Christians such as are no Christians because the works of Christians only of all Christians shall come to be tryed in the fire of Gods judgment others being judged already as Hierome speaketh adjudged to eternall perdition These circūstances of the words of Hierome considered I thinke there is no indifferent reader but wil cōceiue his opiniō to haue bin as I haue deliuered it that I haue no way wronged him but that Higgons hath causelesly wronged Me. Some places there are in Hierome that are brought to proue that he was of another opinion but they proue nothing The first is out of his Commentaries vpon Hosea where he saith When heretickes see men offend against God they say God seeketh nothing of them but the verity of faith for this cause the people are not humbled but they reioyce in their sinnes and goe forward with a stiffe necke wherefore the People and Priest Master and Schollers are bound vp in the same judgment This place is alledged to no purpose For here Hierome sheweth onely that Heretickes teaching falsely that God requireth not good works and such as beleeuing them shall rejoyce in euill doing shall perish which is no way contrary to the other conceipt that right beleeuing Christians liuing ill shall in the end be saued The next place they bring is out of his Commentaries vpon Mathew the words are these Marke prudent Reader that both punishments are eternall and that euerlasting life hath no more feare of any fallings away which no way contraryeth the opinion of Hierome before-mentioned For hee is resolued that the punishments of the Diuell his Angells and all impious ones are eternall but thinketh right beleeuers though liuing wickedly shall bee punished but for a time That out of his Commentaries vpon the Galathians That enmity contention wrath brawling dissention drunkennesse and other-like which wee esteeme to bee but small euills exclude vs from the Kingdome of GOD If it bee vnderstood of right beleeuers accorcording to Hieromes opinion sheweth onely what these deserue namely exclusion from the Kingdome of God but preiudice not the riches of his mercy towardes them that doe such things Heere by the way I would haue the reader to obserue a grosse ouersight in M. Higgons who saith it may as well be inferred out of the writings of Hierome that he thought all Christians shall in the end be saued how damnably soeuer erring in matters of faith as right beleeuers Whereas distinguishing the godlesse or impious man that neuer knew God or corrupteth the knowledge hee had of God as heretickes from a sinner or vnrighteous man he expresly pronounceth the one to perish euerlastingly and not the other Hauing thus cleared my selfe from the suspition of wrong offered to Hierome which M. Higgons would willingly fasten on me I will perswade my selfe to contemne the wrongs he doth me As namely that I vse the testimonies of this Saint at my pleasure that I vainely elude the truth and vnconscionably intreat the Fathers that I craftily conuay wordes into Saint Augustin that I sort my termes wisely for my aduantage and that I seeke to dazle the vnderstanding of my readers If Master Higgons were a man of any worth and should entreat mee thus ill without all cause as hee doth I would lette him knowe more of my minde but I haue resolued not to turne backe to euery Curre that barketh at mee SECT 4. WHerefore from Hierome I will passe to Ambrose whom this prophane Esau who hath sold his birth-right for a messe of pottage for more I thinke hee will not haue for it bringeth in as hee saith to make vp the messe In this idle discourse touching Ambrose the poore fellow is to bee pittied or laughed at accordingly as men are disposed so ridiculously doth hee behaue himselfe The circumstances of the matter are these In the place cited by him first I shew in what sort men prayed lawfully for the dead without any conceit of Purgatory namely respectiuely to their passage hence and enterance into the other world and for their resurrection publicke acquitall in the day of iudgement and perfit consummation blisse Secondly I shew first what erroneous conceits some particular men in former times had touching the possibility of helping men dying in mortall sinne whereupon they prayed for the dead in such sort as the Romanistes dare not doe as for the deliuerance of men out of hell or at least the suspension or mitigation of their paines secondly that they thought that there is no iudgement to passe vpon men till the last day that in the meane while all men are holden either in some place vnder the earth or else in some other place appointed for that purpose so that they come not into heauen nor receiue the reward of their labours till the generall iudgement and that out of this conceit that prayer in Iames his Liturgie grew that God would remember all the faithfull that are fallen asleepe in the sleepe of death since Abell the iust till this present day and that hee would place them in the land of the liuing as also many other like Of this opinion I report Iustine Martyr Tertullian Clemens Romanus Lactantius Victorinus Martyr Pope Iohn the two and twentith and Ambrose to haue been besides sundry other All that which I haue said touching the lawfull and vnlawfull formes of praying for the dead vsed amongst the Auncient no way importing any conceit in them of Purgatory hee passeth ouer in silence as no way able to refute any part of it likewise by his silence yeeldeth that Iustine Martyr Tertullian Clement Bishop of Rome Lactantius Victorinus Martyr and Pope Iohn
it Thirdly whatsoeuer the most famous in euery age haue constantly delivered as matter of faith receiued from them that went before them in such sort that the gain-sayers were in their beginnings noted for singularity nouelty and diuision and in processe of time if they persisted in such contradiction charged with heresie which is as much as any Papist doth say And then insteed of shewing that I attribute not soe much to the Fathers as I should do or as Papists doe hee turneth himselfe to shew that such consent of Fathers as I speake of is no sure direction for the finding out of the trueth Soe ouer-throwing all that which his owne Diuines haue deliuered touching this point But yet that he may seeme to say something to the purpose he goeth about to proue that I bereaue the Fathers almost of all authority First in that I reiect their testimonies touching all other matters but onely certaine principall and substantiall points Secondly in that I require such a generall consent as can hardly be found touching such principall points Thirdly in that I make the whole Church subiect to error For answere vnto these Allegations I say The first is a shamelesse vntruth For I do not limitte or restraine the consent of the Fathers to certaine principall or substantiall points as hee mis-reporteth Mee but make the same to bee a direction in all thinges that may be cleerely deduced from the rule of faith and word of diuine and heauenly trueth answerably to that of Vincentius Lyrinensis that the consent of holy Fathers is with great studie and care to be sought out and followed by vs not in all petite questions that may bee moued concerning the Diuine law but onely or at the least specially in thinges pertaining to the rule of Faith with whom Pererius agreeth To the second I say that I require no other consent of Fathers then Vincentius Lyrinensis doth who will haue vs onely to followe that doctrine of the Fathers as certaine which all with one consent haue holden written and taught that haue written of such thinges Neither doth this worthy Treatiser admitte any other consent then I require for in this same chapter hee hath these wordes They will obiect that euery one of the Fathers was subiect to errour I confesse it but yet God according to his promise as I haue aboue declared was so to direct and gouerne them that they should not all erre This consent of the Fathers wee make to be a Rule of direction but yet not so generally and absolutely as if truth could not at any time be found out without it but so that wee must not neglect the knowledge of it nor goe against it when wee know it Neither is it necessary for the knowledge hereof as the Treatiser obiecteth to read ouer all the Fathers for the constant concurrence of the principall in all ages without noted contradiction doth suffice to assure vs of such consent The third allegation is partly vntrue and partly inconsequent it is vntrue in that hee sayth I thinke all the Pastours of the present Church may erre in matters of greatest momeÌ„t It is incoÌ„sequeÌ„t because though the whole preseÌ„t Church may erre in some things not pertaining to the rule of faith and Generall Councels in matters of greatest consequence yet it followeth not that the Fathers of all times and places may be thought to haue erred seeing this succession of Fathers is of greater authority then the company of Pastors that now are Neither is it consequent that if error may possesse the greatest part or almost all the present Church that it may bee Catholike also and so found euery where and euer The former Vincentius Lyrinensis yeeldeth to bee possible but disclaimeth the latter and therefore prescribeth that if error creepe into one part of the Church wee should looke vnto other that if it endeauour to staine and defile all we should looke vp higher vnto antiquity and that if some haue erred amongst the Auncient we should looke what all not noâ—…d for singularity did teach §. 2. WHerefore let vs proceed to that which followeth in the next place first hee reporteth what I haue written touching the ground of that perswasion which we haue of the trueth of thinges contayned in Scripture and then taketh exceptions to it In the report first he sayth that I make the principall cause of our beleefe of thinges contained in the bookes of holy Scripture to be the habit or light of faith Secondly that besides the habit or light of faith I require reasons or motiues by force whereof the spirit of God may settle the mind of a man in the perswasion of the trueth of things contained in Scripture that might otherwise be doubted of Thirdly that I make this motiue or reason in some things to bee the evidence of the things themselues in the light of grace in other not so evident vnto vs the authority of God himselfe whom we doe most certainely discerne to speake in the word of Faith preached vnto vs. These things I confesse are deliuered by Mee and rightly collected by him out of that which I haue written Yet doth hee wrong some other of the same iudgment with Me touching this point in that he saith vntruly they reject all supernaturall habits so goeth about to make a difference betweene them and Mee in this respect whereas in truth and in deede there is none But what is that the good man doth or can dislike in this my discourse First hee vndertaketh to proue that neither the evidence of the things contained in Scriptures in themselues presupposing the light of grace nor the authoritie of God himselfe discerned to speake can be sufficient motiues whereby the spirit of God may settle vs in the perswasioÌ„ of the truth of such things as are therein coÌ„tained Whereas yet I think if he were asked what the motiues are by force whereof the spirit doth effect this work if these be not he would not easily giue any answer but how doth he demoÌ„strate the insufficiencie of these motiues Surely very weakly insufficiently For first thus he reasoneth against them if these motiues were of sufficiencie euery one enlightned by the light of grace should by vertue of them bee perswaded of the Heauenly Trueth of all such things as are contained in the books of God which is a very bad inference For by the like kinde of reasoning it may bee prooued that the evidence of things in the light of nature is not the motiue or inducement that causeth our perswasion touching such things as are knowne in naturall knowledge because all that haue the light of naturall reason are not rightly perswaded concerning all such things which no wise man will allow So that as it is not to be imputed to the defect of evidence in the things that are to be knowne in naturall knowledge which should settle the perswasion that all men are not rightly perswaded of
done by euery one Wherevnto we answere according to their owne groundes that those partes of divine and canonicall Scripture which particularly wee haue not read or considered are onely implicitè and vertually beleeued of vs as likewise the thinges that are contayned in them neither should this seeme strange to the Romanists for they thinke it pertayneth to the faith of each Christian man to beleeue all the bookes of holy Scripture to bee vndoubtedly true and indited by the Spirit of God Yet are there many amongst them that neyther know how many nor which these bookes are but beleeue them vertually onely as it appertayneth to the fayth to beleeue that Iesus Mary Ioseph fledde into Aegypt and that Paul mediated for the reconciling of Onesimus to Philemon but it is sufficient for men that neuer read or considered these particulars to beleeue them vertually Thirdly he chargeth vs with contrariety in our sayings in that we make the Scripture to bee the ground and rule of our fayth and yet make the light of faith a meane whereby we come to the knowledge of Scripture because as hee thinketh the Scripture cannot bee a rule of our fayth vnlesse it bee certainely knowne to bee diuine before we beleeue But the good man should knowe that the Scripture may bee the rule of our fayth directing vs touching such particular things as wee are to beleeue though it be not knowne to bee diuine before we beleeue For first God giueth vs the eyes of fayth and openeth our vnderstandings that wee may see and discerne in generall heauenly trueth to bee contayned in Scripture then it becommeth a rule of direction in all particular poynts of faith Fourthly he imputeth to vs that wee relie vpon illuminations and inspirations in the things wee beleeue as if wee beleeued them without any other proofe or demonstration vpon bare imagined inspirations whereas wee beleeue nothing without such proofes and motiues as all men may take notice of and yet knowe right well that none doe make right vse thereof but such as haue their vnderstandings enlightned So that his reasoning against the certainty of this illumination is idle seeing we doe not make illumination or inspiration the ground of our perswasion touching things to be beleeved but a disposition of the mind making vs capable of the apprehension of thinges that are diuine and heauenly This illumination is in some more and in some lesse but in all the chosen seruants of God such as sufficeth for the discerning of all sauing trueth necessary to bee knowne of each man according to his estate and condition Fiftly besides idle repetition of thinges going before to which hee referreth himself and some vntruths mingled with the same First he chargeth Me that I am contrary to my selfe in deliuering the opinions of Papists The first supposed contradiction is in that I affirme that it is the ordinary opinion of Papists that the articles of faith are beleeued because God reuealeth them and yet say in another place that they make the authority of the Church the rule of our fayth and reason why we beleeue The second in that I charge the Papistes in one place that they giue authority to the Church to make new articles of faith and in another place free them from the same This latter supposed contrariety I shewed before to bee none at all but in the Treatisers imagination onely and touching the first if hee were a man of any common vnderstanding or knew what contrariety is hee vvould not charge Mee with any such thing For it is true that all Papists thinke the articles of faith are to be beleeued because reuealed but they thinke also that wee knowe not that they are reuealed but beleeue so onely and that not by reason of any diuine reuelation testimony or authority but because the Church so telleth vs and wee haue many humane inducements mouing vs so to perswade our selues So that they make the authority of the Church and humane inducements the last and finall reason of beleeuing whatsoeuer they beleeue This the Treatiser knew well enough and therefore hee requireth Mee to shew how I know that God reuealeth the things beleeued by Christians If I will not fall into the same fault for which I blame them Whereunto I answere that I know the Scriptures to bee inspired of God by the diuine force and majesty that sheweth it selfe in them in which sence I say the bookes of Scripture win credit of themselues and yeeld sufficient satisfaction to all men of their diuine truth For as the colour in each thing maketh it visible and to be seene so the diuine power vertue that sheweth it selfe in the Scripture maketh vs to beleeue that it is of God But the Treatiser will not thus leaue Mee but still goeth on adding one vniust imputation to another For whereas we say only the Scriptures are not discerned to be diuine and inspired of God vnlesse we be inlightned by grace and not that they are proued to bee diuine by the certaintie of that illumination he maketh vs whether we wil or not to proue the Scriptures by our inspirations and that we are inspired by the Scriptures whereas we proue neither the one nor the other of these things in any such sort For touching the Scripture I haue sufficiently shewed before how we know it to be diuine and for the other the Treatiser should know that we doe not proue by Scripture that we are divinely inlightned and inspired but that as naturall reason hath a direct act whereby she apprehendeth things without a reflexed act whereby taking a view of the former direct acts she findeth out her selfe so the light of Faith first discouereth Heauenly verities in the Scripture such as naturall reason could neuer find out then by reflexion findeth it selfe to be of another nature kind then that rationall vnderstanding that was before Wherefore let vs goe forward Did not mine eyes see and my hands handle the palpable absurdities of this Treatiser I would not beleeue any mans report that one so voide of all sense reason as he euery way sheweth himselfe to be should be permitted to write For whereas I bring a most cleare sentence out of Augustine to proue that howsoeuer the authoritie of the Church serue as an introduction to bring vs to the spirituall discerning of diuine things yet men rest not in it hee answereth that Augustine in the chapter cited by Me affirmeth onely that because all men are not capable at first to vnderstād the sincere wisdome truth taught in the church God hath ordained in it a motiue which may first moue them to seeke it to wit the authority of the Church which partly through miracles partly through multitudes is of force to moue which no way taketh any thing from but rather addeth strength to my proofes for if these motiues be necessary onely at the first before men bee purged made pure in
and so much to be desired yet if they cannot bee had the truth may be found out by other meanes yea haue not the Fathers in factious times complained that they neuer saw good end of any councell and yet were resolued in matters of the faith and able to settle others also CHAP. 7. IN this chapter wherein he indeauoureth to shew that traditions are of equall authoritie with Scripture and yet proue the Romane Religion he hath these wordes The dignity and authority of vnwritten and Apostolicall traditions being lawfully proued was euer esteemed such that M. Wootton affirmeth out of all question we are bound to keep them and telleth that M. Perkins was of the same minde This is an ill beginning for whereas he should proue that the Apostles deliuered some matters of faith by bare tradition without writing hee bringeth forth some that say if it could be proued that any thing was so deliuered it were to bee receiued with no lesse regard then if it had beene written which is as if a man should vndertake to proue out of Paules Epistles that the Angels in Heauen and the Apostles of CHRIST are to bee anathematized and accursed because hee saith If wee or an Angell from heauen preach any other doctrine then that yee haue receiued holde him accursed Wherefore to helpe the matter and to make some shew at the least whereas wee say If any thing could bee proued to haue beene deliuered by the Apostles by tradition it were no lesse to be esteemed then things of the same nature written by them hee citeth our words as if we confessed there were certaine vnwritten Apostolicall traditions which were euer esteemed equall with the Scripture but not before they were proued to bee such D. Field saith he speaketh of such traditions in these words There is no reason but these should be equall with Scripture for it is not the writing that giueth these things their authoritie but the worth and credite of him that deliuereth thē though but by word and liuely voice onely In this allegation he wrongeth me no lesse then in other before for these are not my words as he vntruely affirmeth against his owne knowledge but speaking of the diuerse kindes of vnwritten traditions imagined by the Papists I say All these in their seuerall kindes they make equal with the words precepts doctrines of Christ the Apostles and Pastors of the Church left vnto vs in writing neither is there any reason why they should not doe so if they could proue any such vnwritten verities for it is not the writing that giueth things their authoritie but the worth and credite of him that deliuereth them The onely doubt is whether there be any such traditions or not Is this to acknowledge that there are vnwritten traditions of equall authoritie with the Scriptures If one of his fellowes should tell him if he were Pope he could not erre would he inferre his fellow were so mad to thinke he could not erre that doth nothing else but erre and mistake all that he citeth But he saith I adde that the perpetuall virginity of our Lady was a tradition only receiued by such authority so do other Protestants that both they I acknowledge Heluidius was condemned of heresie iustly for denyall thereof which could not be except to deny the doctrine of true traditions were to deny the word of God in their iudgements This is an other notable and shamelesse falsification For I neither say the perpetuall virginity of our Lady was a tradition nor that Heluidius was condemned and that iustly for the deniall thereof but my wordes are The Canon of Scripture being admitted as deliuered by tradition though the Diuine trueth of it bee in it selfe cleare not depending of the Churches authority there is no matter of Faith deliuered by bare and onely tradition as the Romanists imagine The onely cleare instance they seeme to giue is touching the perpetuall virginity of Mary which they say cannot be proued by Scripture and yet is necessary to bee beleeued But they should knowe that this is no poynt of Christian faith That shee was a virgine before in and after the birth of Christ wee are bound to beleeue as an article of our faith and so much is deliuered in Scripture and in the Apostles Creede but that shee continued so euer after is a seemely trueth fitting the sanctitie of the blessed virgine and is de pietate but not de necessitate fidei Neither was Heluidius condemned of heresie for the deniall hereof but by such as thought it might bee proued out of Scripture or by such as detested and condemned his madnesse and desperate singularity in pertinaciously vrging the deniall of it vpon mis-construction of Scripture as if the deniall of it had beene a matter of faith And surely whatsoeuer this man thinke to the contrary Melchior Canus is of opinion that the perpetuall virginity of Marie the mother of our Lord is not beleeued onely or principally as deliuered by tradition but that the very consideration of the respect that was due to so sanctified a vessell of the incarnation of the Sonne of God as was her body would make vs perswade our selues shee neuer knew man after she was so much honoured as to be the mother of God This consideration no doubt moued the Fathers to be of this opinion rather then any tradition In the next place hee setteth downe my discourse and diuision of traditions approued by Protestants in the twentieth chapter of my fourth booke of the Church leaving out diuerse thinges in setting downe the same for his most aduantage as the Reader will easily perceiue if hee peruse the place But to what purpose hee produceth this discourse diuision of mine I know not For first if he thinke that I now yeeld more vnto thē in the matter of traditions thē our Diuines heretofore haue done as he seemeth to doe in that he saith though vntruly that I preuent and confute the vsuall objections of Protestants about the doctrine of traditions he is greatly deceiued For Chemnitius in his Examen of the Tridentine Councell admitteth all those kinds of traditions which I haue deliuered I will set down his discourse in his own words that the reader may see he saith fully as much as I haue done Primum genus traditionum est quòd Apostoli tradiderunt doctrinam viuâ voce sed illa postea in scriptura literis consignata est Secundum genus traditionum est quòd Libri Scripturae sacrae non interrupt â serie temporum sicut Augustinus loquitur certa connexionis successione ab Ecclesia custoditi fideliter ad posteros transmissi nobisque quasi per manus traditi sunt Tertium genus traditionum constituimus illud de quo loquuntur Irenaeus lib. 3. Tertullianus de Praescript Recitant autem quid sit illud quod ex traditione probant sunt illi ipsi articuli fidei
lib. Canonicis l. 3. pap 289. c Praefatio in lib. Solom Ep. Chromatium Heliodorum d In praefat in lib. Iudeth e Ponopliae li 3. cap. 3. Si Nicena Synodus olim hunc ludeth libr. cum alijs in Canonem redegerat cur annis 80. post cam non recenset Laodicena cur Nazianz eius non meminit sed legitur computasse ait Hier. quod mihi dubitantis suspicionem subindicaâ—…e videtur f Laodicense Conc lium manifestè confirmatum est à Synodo Trullanâ—… Canus lib. 2. cap 9. g Lib. 2. cap. 9. h Quod acta 6 Synodi parengrapha sint Alberti Pighij Diatribae i Moral lib. 19. in cap 29. Iobi 1. 17. k Lib. 4. cap. 18 Orthodoxae fidei l Eruditionis Didascalicae lib. 4. cap. 2. m Exceptionum lib. 2. cap. 9. n De auctoritate veteris Testamenti folio 25. o In praefat in lib. Tobiae p Prolog in Ecclesiasticum q In prolog in Ecclesiasticum r In summa theologica 1 part quaest 89 art 8. ad 2. s Dialog lib. 3. 1. tractatus part 3. cap. 16. t Theoremat 5. u Doctrinal fidei lib. 2. art 2 cap. 22. x Lib. 19. cap. 19. in quaest Armeniorum y De Eccles. dog lib. 1. cap. vlt. a Li. 2. c 9. b Lib. 12. cap. 6. c In catal scriptur l. r. c 4. d Biblioth l. 〈◊〉 p. 19 e In cat scriptur lib. r. c. ult f Lib. 2. cap. 32. g Lib. 2. cap. 9. h In epist. ad Dardanum de terra promissionis i Aug. li 2. cont epist. Gaudentij c. 23. scripturam quam appellant Maccabaeorum non habent Iudaei sicut Legem Prophetas Psalmos quibus Dominus testimonium perhibet taâ—…quam testibus suis Lucae 24. 4â—… Sixtus Bibliothecae Sanctae li. 1. de varia partitione librorum canonicorum k Euseb l. 7. c 24 l Heresi 51 75. m De praescriptionibus n Lib. 4. o Lib. 1. cap. vlt. p Dialog cum Triphone q Conc. Anci ran cap vlt. r Graecos qui Hier. teste Apocalypsin non recipiebant paucos obscuros fuisse necesse est Bellar de vet bo Dei l 1. c. 19. s Canones Apostolorum can 84. Tobiam Iudeth Eâ—…clesiasticum inter canonicos non numerant Gelasius Papa cum concilio 70 Episcoporum nullam 2. Maccabaeoâ—…um mentionem facit Genebrard in Chronolog pag. 9 4. Esdrae ad canonem pertinere vult Bellar. de verbo Dei lib. 1. c. 20. vbi ostendit dubium esse quiâ—… multi senâ—…erint de Es â—…rae t Caietâ—…n Luther a Iunius in Bellar contro 1. li. 2. art 9. b In epist ad Chilonem ep 181. in monte Carmelo secessu facto Esdras omnes diuinos libros ex mandato Dei eructauit c Bellar. l. 2. c. 1. de verbo dei d In prolog Galeato e In 9. Ezechiclis f Epist. ignoto amico 5. d. g Hugo de S. Victore erudit theologicae in speculum ecclesiae de celebratione missae cap. 7. h In Catal. Script Eccles. de Matthaeo verba faciens i In praef Novi Test. Syriaci Trans k Bellarm. l. 2. de verbo dei c. 4. Andrad de lib. canon l. 3. fol 320. l Euseb. l. 6. c. 13 l. 3. c 33. m Guido Fabritius in praef praedicta The originall latine text of Marke is said to be kept at Venice till this day n Eadem praef o Bellar. l. 2. de verb. Dei c. 4. a Bellar. l. 2. de verbo Dei c. 5 ostendit aliquos ita sensisse b Epiphanius de mensuris ponderibus f De doctrina Christiana l. 2. c. 15. c Bellar de verbo Dei l. 2. c. 6. d Iunius in Bellar contro 1. lib. 2. cap. 6. e Hiero in Pentateuchum Mosis praefat h Epiphanius de mensuris ponderibus g Aug. saepe ac saepius 72 prophetas appellat et eodem quo prophetae spiritu incitatos illa etiam scripsisse in quibus ab Hebraea oratione dissentiunt confirmat Andrad de vulgatae editionis auctoritate l. 4. fol. 355. i Hiero ad Aug. ep praefat lib. Iob. k Epiphanius de mensuris ponderibus l Eusebius lib. 9. cap 6 Hiero in li. 16. comment Esaiae ad Eustochium prooem de illis verbis sepulchrum pateâ—…s est guâ—…ur eorum ait non haberi in Hebraico nec esse in 70 interpretibus sed in editione vulgata quae communis dicitur in toto orbe diuersa est m Hiero. in Epist ad Suniam Fretellam n Epiphanius de mensuris ponderibus Eusebius lib. 6. cap 16. a De doctrina Christiana lib. 2. cap. 11. b Ad Leandrum episcopum in expositionem beati Iob. epist. cap. 5. nouam translationem dissero sed vt comprobationis causa exigit nunc nouam nunc veterem per testimonia assumo Sedes apostolica vtraque vtitur c In Esaiae cap. 49. d In a place aboue cited e Bellar. li. 2. ca. 9. de verbo dei f L. 2. c. 13. g Arrias Montanus de varia in Hebraicis lib. lectione ac de Mazzoreth ratione et usu in Regiis Bibliis h Andrad in his 4. booke intreating of the authority of the vulgar translation sheweth his owne opinion as also the iudgement of Iohn Isaack and Driedo for the iuâ—…ification of the originalls i Praefat. in Paralip c. scribit Si versio 70 integra haberetur ut ab iis edita fuit se frustra laboraturum in Bibliis transferendis k In 2. 8. cap. Esaiae 17 Ieremiae aliaquia ante Christi adventum interpretati sunt nequaquam percepisse alia ne gentis suae gloriam obscurarent noluisse sub Egyptiorum oculos subiicere Andrad l. 4. defens fid Trid. Ibidem a Aug. lib. 15. de ciuitate Dei cap 13. b Ipsa prophetia quid aliud nisi â nostris putaretur conficta si non inimicorum codicibus probaretur I deo ne occideris eos ne ipsius entis nomen extinxeris ne quando obliuiscantur legis tuae disperge illos in virtute tua Si enim in vno loco essent terrarum non adiuvarent testimon o praedicationem evangelij quae fructificat in toto orbe terrarum ideo disperge illos in virtute tua vt eius ipsius cuius fuerunt negatores persecutores interfectores vbique sint testes per legem c. Aug. Paulino epist. 59. c Lib. 4. desensionis fidei Tridentinae d Lib. 2. de verbo Dei cap. 2. a Bibliothecae li 7. haeres 1. b Ad Suniam Fritellam c Lib. 2. cap. 7. de verbo dei d Lib. 5. contra Marcionem e In 1. Cor. 15. f In eundem locum g De Orthodoxa fide l. 3. c. 12 h Contra Iudaeos lib. 2. c. 8. Li. 7. 32 i Exposi in ep Iohan tractatu 6. k Lib. 1 loquitur de latinis codicibus in illis ait legi